• Advertisement

Expedient shelters (for nuke or RDD incident)

Long Term/Short Term Survival Shelters. Constructions tips and ideas.

Moderators: Whisper, medic72

Re: Expedient shelters (for nuke or RDD incident)

Postby Jericho Montana » Tue Jun 01, 2010 10:24 pm

Well, getting in late to the discussion and after reviewing the posts it would seem the topic has moved from digging a slit trench, parking your car over it, then filling the floorboards with dirt, to more longer term efforts involving advance preparation.

There are many handbooks from the 1950s and 60s discussing "expedient shelters," however, it would never be my choice to intentionally rely on any such. For they are called expedient for a reason because they're designed for only very short term use to avoid the initial radiation, thermal pulse, and blast. After that it better be a case of "come on feet don't fail me now" and get yourself out of the beaten zone very quickly. Especially since you do not know what level the immediate fallout will be, but you can bet the farm it will be the highest generated by each respective NUDET.

At this point, I would strongly suggest your getting copies of the following early materials:

1. War Survival in Soviet Strategy: USSR Civil Defense, Leon Goure', Center for Advanced International Studies, Univ. of Miami, 1976

2. Shelters in Soviet War Survival Strategy, Leon Goure', Advanced International Studies Institute (AISI), 1978

Dr. Goure' published many books and reports on these specific issues, but I suggest these to start. You'll also want to get a copy of his documentary released 6 April 1980 by the AISI entitled "Soviet Civil Defense and US Security."

I reference these specific sources because they provided information and details I never would have known about otherwise. The most important being the instalation of a "heat sink" as part of your air intake system. A device made out of a form of concrete, iron or steel grids, and varying levels and size of stone. Basically, whether you're in an urban or rural environment, you can pretty much guess the outside world is more than likely to disappear in some kind of fire storm or wild fire generating tremendous amounts of heat in the thousands of degree temperature range.

Granted, for a very short period of time, possibly hours in duration, but a time when any normal air intake system will simply draw the super heated air directly into your shelter unless forward protected by a heat sink. Since no expedient shelter can ever hope to contain such a device, should there be a concern of fire generated outside air temperature, you had better plan on getting out fast and not sheltering in place.

My research indicates the Soviet pulled this lesson learned from the allied fire bombings of Hamburg, Dresden, and Tokyo to name a few. Locations where people had sought adequate shelters until the resulting fire storms swept over them with heat so intense it sucked out all of the oxygen and they fortunately suffocated before the 2,000 heat caught them.

Since this comment is going to be too long otherwise, I will provide more detailed information on heat sinks if any are interested.

Next, comes the issue of what old DCPA called "Entry Time-Stay Time" for each shelter. In effect, the number of days to weeks the occupants would be expected to remain under shelter conditions. Depending on the downrange warhead yield, this time period could be a minimum of three weeks to a maximum 2 months.

As an example, the radiation plume threatening the Cincinnati area came from potential Soviet strikes on the old Titan missile fields in Missouri. Depending on weapon yield, this plume was forecast to arrive 8-12 hours after NUDET and drop an intensity of at least 1,000 RADS. While this level could be monitored as it half-lifed down to mili-rad levels over a two week period, one never knew when another NUDET several days (weeks) later would send another plume to the area, once more raising the intensity level back up to 1,000 RADS and the clock starts all over again.

The Entry Time-Stay Time calcuation acutally exists as a nomigram, combined with a tuned CDV-715/700, and is the only thing allowing you to know when its safe to come out and how long you can safely remain out. A process also requiring a charged dosimeter to record your whole body dose reading. Remembering of course, that radiation exposure is a life long detriment and if you get ten RADs today and ten RADs next year, you have received a life long radiation exposure of 20 RADs. Since an exposure of 100 RADs to a normal, healthy adult can result in 25% of the group having bad things happen to them, it should become clear why whole body total accumulation is so vital to track.

This issue significantly effects expedient shelters. The best way to consider this is take a hard look at where you'll be staying. Then calculate the number of occupants, the type of sanitation facilities available, heat index inside the shelter, potable water, cooking, air purity, medical emergencies, power generation sources, sleep depredation, security watch - the list is quite long. Then think of what it will be like to be stuck in this enviroment for at least three weeks, perhaps longer and you most likely have no equipment to let you know when its safe to go out nor how long you can stay out once you do.

It should become obvious very quickly as to whether or not your expedient shelter and its planned occupants are up to the task at hand.

Enough for now. Let me know if any are so interested. At one time I was not only a certified Radiological Defense Officer, but also a rated Radiological Instructor.

JM
Jericho Montana
 
Posts: 850
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 10:52 pm
Karma: 29

Re: Expedient shelters (for nuke or RDD incident)

Postby Who is John Gall » Thu Jun 03, 2010 9:48 am

Good post, JM. I read about the use of rubble filled ventilation systems by the Soviets in Dean Ing's book Chernobyl Syndrome. The way he described it the ventilation shafts were built the serve as escape shoots, big enough for a person to climb out of. Then they were filled with rubble of varying sizes. The rubble would dampen any near by blast that might otherwise be channeled down the shafts and would act as a heat sink in the event of a fire storm...the rubble would help to cool the air so that super heated air would not be drawn into the shelter. In the event that the vents need to be used as escape shafts, the rubble could be pulled out by hand.

Whenever I move, I want to get some place where I can construct a decent shelter. I figure that it would be great for not only nuke scenarios, but also as a storm shelter, a place to store preps, and someplace to shelter from the in-laws and such. I would like to set up a ventilation system like this, but think that I would use cinder blocks for the bunk of the fill. After a nuke attack rubble would probably be plentiful, but having some extra building material might be very nice.
User avatar
Who is John Gall
 
Posts: 950
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:05 am
Location: Louisiana
Karma: 46

Re: Expedient shelters (for nuke or RDD incident)

Postby Jericho Montana » Thu Jun 03, 2010 9:46 pm

Thanks Sir

To post a lot of this information I must draft in Word then copy to here. That is, when others are interested in such.

My greatest frustration in building my first shelter 30 years ago, was it seemed the more I learned about the problem set the more problems I found, as in your example of Chernobyl. When taking training to be a first responder to a local nuclear reactor event, I soon discovered the threat from this, while similar, was also far removed from standard nuclear war preps.

The big threat from a meltdown being the down range plume contamination from normally inert atmospheric gases. Gas like argon, neon, freon etc that are minute quantities when inhaled, however, these compounds naturally collect in different organs of the body, which is not a problem until the gas carries radioactive subparticles with it.

Most people have been led to believe the "nuclear pill" will protect from this. Unfortunately, that pill only saturates the petutiary (SP) gland to protect against one of many radioactive elements - iodine. It does nothging to protect other organs from the various other elements that carry lethal radiation.

In fact, only specialized ultra expensive filters, oxygen rebreather or overpressure systems are the only thing that prevents you from inhaling such. No standard "nuclear" shelter filter will do it, just like a standard military or police gas mask is no good, for these type protective devices only filter out various sizes of dust/smoke like particles not gases. Since the meltdown, in effect, turns sub-micron parts of very air itself radioactive, any filter device letting oxygen through also lets the bad stuff through.

And this is where I fear many people forget about the nuclear reactor as a threat. For during most of the civilization ending events that can come along, the fact remains the workers must stay to ensure the systems do not Chernobyl. If the workers have time to power down their respective reactors, then things will mostly be OK. However, if, oh say a solar flare kills all the electricity and there's no way to conduct a controlled shutdown, then think of all the reactors across America that would have a major failure of their core containment buildings. In fact, there are several web sites showing the locations of all these plants across North America and basically during a worst case scenario, there's only a few spots in the NW United States that will not have direct/indirect threats from the plumes generated by each successive core failure.

This is why any shelter against a nuclear reactor meltdown is either built by the utra rich or you plan to leave and leave quickly once the sirens sound. Just like they did in Chernobyl. Which means you go downwind and to high ground, especially since the plume is heavier than air and hugs the ground as it flows downhill or gets shoved around by dominate low level winds. You sure don't want to end up in that plume for certain sure.

The last point on all this is many plants, especially the food crops, will absorb some of these radioactive gases as part of their normal photosynthesis with the elements stored in parts of the plant just like in people and animals. The threat being, just like strontium 90 and cesisum 137 that collect in the food chain from nuclear fallout, these radioactive elements are all injested by people/animals when they eat the plant. Big problem.

I won't go on much more, but since these radioactive elements also collect in the soil to later be absorbed by future plant roots up into the plant itself next growing season, this becomes a tremendous long term survival problem in the basic food chain. The only way I know to solve the problem, since strontium has a half life approaching hundreds of years, is to do one of two things: first, remove the top 12-18 inches of top soil, although what you replace this soil with is beyond me. Second, have prestored dirt that is protected from fallout and direct exposure to any potential meltdown plume. Then once it is safe to do so, in about 1-2 years, use this dirt in elevated growing beds and make every effort to ensure no outside contaminents get into the box.

That's enough for now.
Jericho Montana
 
Posts: 850
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 10:52 pm
Karma: 29

Re: Expedient shelters (for nuke or RDD incident)

Postby Burbmom » Thu Jun 03, 2010 11:47 pm

There are so many problems with building a true shelter. The ceiling is a very exposed area and how to get fresh air into the shelter. I wish I had the money to build or buy a shelter!!!
Burbmom
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 9:36 pm
Karma: 0

Re: Expedient shelters (for nuke or RDD incident)

Postby Who is John Gall » Fri Jun 04, 2010 1:29 am

More good information, JM, thanks. The book that I was talking about was named The Chernobyl Syndrome, by Dean Ing, but it actually had little do with the Chernobyl. Most of the book was about the nuclear war survival skills, a random assortment of survival skills, and various musings. Sort of a weird read, but not really that bad.

Radioactive gas plume? I had not really considered that, I guess that so much has been written about fallout...had not thought about radioactive gases from a reactor accident as much as I have about fallout from a nuclear device. Fallout is comparatively heavy, from what I understand, and would last for perhaps weeks, longer at lesser levels of radioactivity. How long would a radioactive gas plume persists for? How long should someone reasonably expect to have to shelter for, if they opt to shelter in place and recognizing that once the radioactive gases have passed you may still be faced with larger radioactive material, such as the fallout as was seen after Chernobyl?

If you could expect to only have to shelter in place for a matter of hours while the plume passes, perhaps a twist on the Homeland Security recommended sealing of a room with duct tape and plastic sheeting would work. One could pile extra shielding material (frig? books? boxes of dirt?), as available and practical, around the outside of an interior room and then seal it off from the inside. Homeland Security says that with about 10 square feet of floor space per person you should be able to last for at least 5 hours. Something else that Ing mentioned in the Chernobyl Syndrome was Soviet inclusion of compressed air tanks in some of their shelters, and maintaining a positive pressure inside of your shelter. I would think that both of these might be useful in such a scenario. Ing described making a pressure valve/ball valve to regulate the pressure in the shelter and prevent overpressure that could damage the seals. He described a simple, sealed box with two PVC pipes coming out of it's bottom. One led out of the shelter and the second led to the shelter and had a ping pong ball sitting on top of it. The ball sealed the end of the pipe until the positive pressure from the shelter forced it up. Once the pressure somewhat equalized, the ball falls back into place. He suggested creating a sealed window in the box, so that you could see that the ball was moving...otherwise there may be a leak in your shelter. Perhaps you could remove the door knob and pass the outlet pipe from the pressure valve (and also run the cable for your CD V-717) through the hole for the door knob. Isn't CO2 heavier than most other atmospheric gases? Keeping the pressure valve near the floor might help relieve the shelter of some excess CO2, albeit not much. Ing had positive pressure being generated in the fallout shelter by means of an air pump pulling outside air in through a filter. If you are worried about gases and hope that they pass within a matter of hours, couldn't you produce a positive pressure environment with compressed air cylinders? I am thinking of my SCUBA tanks, 80 cu ft each. Could breathe through the regulators every now and then to maintain the positive pressure and to provide some fresher air.

I am pretty interested in this. As of right now I live about 30 miles south of one nuclear reactor and about 30 miles north of another. Personally, I am very much for nuclear energy and think that it definitely one way to go to meet our energy needs. However, in the event of an accident... I consider sheltering in place to be just about the only viable option. If I bug out to the west I am looking at the Mississippi river and a few bridges/ferries and I know that everybody will be going for those. If I go for the east I will be heading downwind from both facilities and there are only a few routes that I could take (all of which funnel me either to the north or south...yippee).

I think that KI/potassium iodide protects only the thyroid gland. The pituitary gland does not readily take up iodine, so KI has no effects on it (just like the rest of the body, like you said. KI only protects against thyroid cancer).

When I get to build my dream house, with dream shelter (man cave) I would like to have several layers of shielding incorporated into it (the shelter, not the house...ok, I would love to have a sheltered house but I don't think that the little lady would go for it). One layer would be sealed bags of garden soil on top of the shelter, covered by tin sheeting so that plant roots will not grow into the bags (more dirt on top of the tin, and then maybe some sod or decorative plants for erosion control and aesthetics). Another layer will be 5 gallon buckets filled with fertilizer (and perhaps other garden chemicals like pesticides and weed killer) and well sealed and buried alongside the shelter. I figure that if the worst ever comes, then I will have a supply of good dirt available.
User avatar
Who is John Gall
 
Posts: 950
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:05 am
Location: Louisiana
Karma: 46

Re: Expedient shelters (for nuke or RDD incident)

Postby TheLight » Fri Jun 04, 2010 12:49 pm

JM: I can find no references to radioactive gasses after a nuclear event, only aerosolized radioactive particles, with the exception of certain radioactive noble gasses like radon, which exist normally and aren't produced in most nuclear events. Could you cite some sources so I can educate myself?
"Where did I leave that clue-by-four?" -Me
"TheLight is a pot-kicking man-ape gone wrong. But we still love him and his ability to carry entire trees at once." -Rush2112
"All the great things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." ~Winston Churchill

Image
Image http://www.theendofthetunnel.org/
User avatar
TheLight
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1594
Images: 0
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 9:51 pm
Location: Hatfield, PA
Karma: 47

Re: Expedient shelters (for nuke or RDD incident)

Postby Jericho Montana » Fri Jun 04, 2010 10:54 pm

I had typed a reply for the last hour, only to discover once I hit the submit button the danged system had timed out. Signing off now, will rekey tomorrow and hope not to loose all the work.
Jericho Montana
 
Posts: 850
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 10:52 pm
Karma: 29

Re: Expedient shelters (for nuke or RDD incident)

Postby itsadisaster » Sat Jun 05, 2010 12:01 am

oh JM .. I've had that happen a few times cuz get pulled off on calls, etc (so frustrating) .. so I now I always highlight then right click & copy full text of post before I click submit .. just in case!
Be Aware... Be Prepared... and Have a Plan! Download a free 58-pg ebook portion of IT'S A DISASTER! ...and what are YOU gonna do about it? with tips about hurricanes, floods, evacuations, wildfires, kits + more
User avatar
itsadisaster
Arizona State Moderator
Arizona State Moderator
 
Posts: 3764
Images: 0
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 5:46 pm
Location: USA

Re: Expedient shelters (for nuke or RDD incident)

Postby Muzhik » Sat Jun 05, 2010 12:54 pm

I've found that if I use the screen that pops up to log in again, then press CTRL-Left Arrow a couple of times. That should bring up the text that you entered.
Everyone throws stones at the prophet ....
But when the crisis appears everyone says "Why did you not warn us?"
User avatar
Muzhik
Iowa Preppers Network
Iowa Preppers Network
 
Posts: 698
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:30 pm
Location: Iowa
Karma: 6

Re: Expedient shelters (for nuke or RDD incident)

Postby IceFire » Sat Jun 05, 2010 7:12 pm

THAT'S good to know, because I've "lost" a few posts, too. Thanks, Muzhik!
"Guns are like shoes...a woman should have one in EVERY caliber!"
User avatar
IceFire
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 10139
Images: 0
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 10:12 am
Location: Baja Arizona
Karma: 148

Re: Expedient shelters (for nuke or RDD incident)

Postby Jericho Montana » Sat Jun 05, 2010 11:22 pm

Thanks for the info all. I just got back from working other issues and turning in, but WILL post reply to Light and John tomorrow morning.

Take care.

JM
Jericho Montana
 
Posts: 850
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 10:52 pm
Karma: 29

Re: Expedient shelters (for nuke or RDD incident)

Postby Jericho Montana » Sun Jun 06, 2010 9:36 am

TheLight wrote:JM: I can find no references to radioactive gasses after a nuclear event, only aerosolized radioactive particles, with the exception of certain radioactive noble gasses like radon, which exist normally and aren't produced in most nuclear events. Could you cite some sources so I can educate myself?


All
I first wish to apologize. My nature is to reply immediately to requests, unfortunately, I began participating in this group at a time when life events are pulling me in several directions. That said, my being here is intentionally one of them so I request your indulgence when a couple days pass before I reply.
Light , you asked about sources I might have on gas release during a nuclear reactor event. Some are provided below. If you do nothing else, please read this intro and my conclusion at the very end. For it covers my concerns during the worst case scenarios discussed in this group.

Only understand in this and any of my future postings I am not a scientist nor even scientific trained. My expertise and professional training is in the analytic descriptive side of research and analysis – not the quantitative. Consequently, or unfortunately depending on how one views it, I cannot provide hard scientific data or theory for rigorous testing.

While the techie side of the house, in a friendly kind of way, likes to call this skill as nothing more than alchemy, I can provide a solid evidentiary base on specific points, some of which I will have an educated opinion on, for those of you quantitative minded to continue the investigation beyond my simple skills.

For a small fee, I can also provide the answer to turning lead into gold….just kidding.

OK, here we go.

The gas to which I referred in my first post on this issue, is more accurately called “radioactive fission gasses” (RFG hereafter) that are produced as a natural by-product of the nuclear reactor process and encompass a significant part of what makes up the air around us. In some, and this is where the hard science eludes me, the water is used not only for cooling the rods, but also to trap these gases to hold until their associated radioactive half life reduces their danger for release into the atmosphere. Yes, these things appear to be released on a regular basis through venting. Then the “containment dome,” which appears designed to intentionally trap these gases should problems occur, is involved as well. I might have some of this incorrect as to process and procedure, but that is my brief understanding for now.

The problems that can arise are two: first a water shut off to the cooling pond that generates increasing amounts of RFG levels that are directed into the containment dome, ergo the Chernobyl test, and second the full core meltdown of the reactor itself generating a tremendous release of RFGs and if the plant does a Chernobyl, smoke and ash fallout as well.

Please understand all sources say there are no Soviet designed reactors in North America and that type of event cannot happen here. To the first part, they are correct, but to the second – I leave that debate up to the techies . The Three Mile Island problem appears to have been a low level “venting” of harmful RFGs, but I have not studied that event in detail.

So, for purposes of this discussion, I am bounding the problem set to situations far from normal i.e solar flare EMP, super volcanic eruption, asteroid deep impact, mega shift of the New Madrid fault – choose your demon - or other minor events already experienced in human history; but happening far enough apart that present generations have no collective memory of them.

Events that most likely would force, some more quickly than others, the workers at North American nuclear reactors to flee their posts regardless of consequences. A fact, I believe, that is all too often left out of personal disaster response planning .

Note here I said reactors and not power stations. This is important for it is easy to focus on the big cooling towers and ignore the smaller types at universities and research facilities across the land. Granted, they are not large in number, but if abandoned to their own devices can produce small localized events when combined with the total mix, are no small factor to deal with.

That said, I would also suggest considering the result had a major reactor been located in the Orleans stew pot when the levees failed. It does not take a civilization ending disaster to generate an extreme RFG event in America, just the right set of circumstances.
The last of my non-sourced information is this. When I first underwent training in a response team for a major RFG release, we were provided three specialized devices – an extremely modified Geiger Mueller Device (GMD), a High Volume Air Sampler (HVAS), and a Darth Vader looking mask. Our mission was pretty simple, get in your personal vehicle (I had a brand new 1978 Ford Bronco) and use the GMD to physically track the edge of the RFG plume as it flowed across the land.
In a pre-Chernobyl world the plume was considered heavier than air and its path could be predicted by terrain and local weather analysis. Heh, were the techies ever wrong on that one. At select points and locations, we would stop, lower the HVAS to the ground letting it draw air through it, then retrieve to extract the filter into special container, replace new filter, and on to the next site.

Yes, all this was simulated and conducted at night to not upset civilians at their breakfast. Oh, they did tell us if we ever once got inside the plume in a real world event to forget everything else and drive like hell itself was on our arse until out of the area. At which point, we had to return to decon station for ourselves and POV. The reason being simple – our mask filters in a high contamination environment, would only last five minutes before reaching saturation ergo end game.

Someone please remind me I have a funny story to tell from the first of these drills. One showing the outright stupidity of things.

OK, that’s my best short take. Here’s the few sources I have, please understand a web search using multiples of the terms involved will produce the equivalent of a multiple techie PhDs on the subject.

1. First read the following four older references. Note they talk about RFGs as gases, vapors, aerosols, and particulants. Expect these to have quantum physics type stuff throughout, but after the second or third read, the layman can gather a general understanding. Personally, I cannot really tell the difference other than the type involved determines roughly when and where said element falls to earth taking its radioactive component with it. Since these components include, but may not be limited to, Strontium-90, Cesium-137, Coblat-60, Iodine-31, and Plutonium – one can see the immediacy of the problem.
To best see this demonstrated examine the following document. It is written in English, Russian, and Ukrainian.

(A). Atlas of Chernobyl Exclusion Zone, National Academy of Sciences Ukraine, Inventive Team, Professor V. M. Shestopalov, 1996

“…Surface radioactive contamination of the exclusion zone territory, that is predominantly concentrated in the upper 5 cm – thick soil layer, equals 110,000 Curie for cesium-137 and 127,000 Ci of strontium-90, 800 Curie for plutonium isotopes. …”
Although 15 years have passed since this document was published, not much has changed, for as one Japanese scientist supposedly stated “Not in God’s lifetime will man ever return to this area.”

I should point out the zone identified in this source on a 1:200,000 scale Russian map takes two full sheets to display.

Next, for a non-specific grasp of RFGs see:

(B.) Containment of Radioactive Fission Gases by Dynamic Adsorption
Robert Adams, William Browning, Robert Ackley
Ind. Eng. Chem., 1959, 51 (12), pp 1467–1470
DOI: 10.1021/ie50600a032
Publication Date: December 1959

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

(C.) Nuclear Science
Fission Gas Behaviour in Water Reactor Fuels
Seminar Proceedings, Cadarache, France, 26-29 September 2000
OECD, Nuclear Energy Agency. Published by : OECD Publishing

Imprint: Nuclear Energy Agency Availability: Available Publication date: 14 Feb 2002 Language: English Pages: 564 Tables: 51 Charts: 340 ISBN: 9789264197152 OECD Code: 662002021P1

_______________________________________
During irradiation, nuclear fuel changes volume, primarily through swelling. This swelling is caused by the fission products and in particular by the volatile ones such as krypton and xenon, called fission gas. Fission gas behaviour needs to be reliably predicted in order to make better use of nuclear fuel, a factor which can help to achieve the economic competitiveness required by today's markets. These proceedings communicate the results of an international seminar which reviewed recent progress in the field of fission gas behaviour in light water reactor fuel and sought to improve the models used in computer codes predicting fission gas release. State-of-the-art knowledge is presented for both uranium-oxide and mixed-oxide fuels loaded in water reactors.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

(D.) EXHAUST GAS CLEANING SYSTEM FOR HANDLING RADIOACTIVE FISSION AND ACTIVATION GASES
United States Patent 3871842

Carbon Dioxide Emissions

An exhaust gas cleaning system utilizing the principle of delaying radioactive gases to permit their radioactive decay to a level acceptable for release to the atmosphere, comprising an adsorbent for adsorbing radioactive gas and a container for containing the adsorbent and for constraining gas to flow through the adsorbent, the adsorbent and the container forming simultaneously an adsorptive delay section and a mechanical delay section, by means of a predetermined ratio of volume of voids in the adsorbent to total volume of the container containing the adsorbent, for delaying radioactive gas to permit its radioactive decay to a level acceptable for release to the atmosphere. A method of using an adsorbent for cleaning a radioactive gas containing an isotope which is adsorbed by the adsorbent and containing an isotope whose adsorption by the adsorbent is low as compared to the isotope which is adsorbed and which is short-lived as compared to the isotope which is adsorbed, comprising constraining the gas to flow through the adsorbent with the retention time for the isotope which is adsorbed being at least the minimum for permitting radioactive decay to a level acceptable for release to the atmosphere and with the retention time for the isotope of relatively low adsorption and relatively short life being at least the minimum for permitting radioactive decay to a level acceptable for release to the atmosphere.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

2. The research then goes to this US Government source:

Nuclear Power Plant Emergency http://www.fema.gov/hazard/nuclear/index.shtm

The potential danger from an accident at a nuclear power plant is exposure to radiation. This exposure could come from the release of radioactive material from the plant into the environment, usually characterized by a plume (cloud-like formation) of radioactive gases and particles. The major hazards to people in the vicinity of the plume are radiation exposure to the body from the cloud and particles deposited on the ground, inhalation of radioactive materials, and ingestion of radioactive materials.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

2. Then to this.

Excerpts from:
Nuclear Policy Review
Background Papers
Report ER81-2E
Cat. No. M23-14/81-2E
Department of
Energy Mines and Resources
Government of Canada
Ottawa, 1982.

from Nuclear Policy Review: Background Papers
LOSS OF COOLANT ACCIDENTS [WITHOUT FUEL MELTING]

The major concerns in considering a LOCA [LOSS-OF-COOLANT ACCIDENT] are the radiation doses which would be received by an individual living near the plant boundary and the total radiation dose to all the people in the vicinity of the plant. The predicted consequences are subject to uncertainties in many areas. Three of the major areas of uncertainty are:

i) the quantity of radioactive gases and vapours which escape from the fuel and into the reactor containment building;
ii) the quantity of radioactive gases which escape containment;
iii) the weather conditions which prevail at the time of the accident.

The uncertainties in the quantity of radioactive gases and vapours which escape from the fuel include the uncertainties about the effectiveness of any ECCS [EMERGENCY CORE COOLING SYSTEM] .

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

3. Finally, this

http://www.state.nj.us/dep/rpp/nes/nuclear.htm
Nuclear Power Plants in New Jersey

A byproduct of the fission process is the production of radioactive gases in the fuel. These are called fission gases. Nuclear particles (neutrons) are also absorbed by the water coolant and structural materials producing radioactive activation products. A typical power reactor may experience a small number of pinhole leaks in the fuel over its operating life. Radioactive gases may escape the fuel rod through these leaks and enter the water coolant. As a result, radioactive fission gases are present to some extent in the water coolant of the reactor at all times.

New Jersey Nuclear Generating Stations

Oyster Creek and Hope Creek use "Boiling Water Reactors" (BWR) to convert the water into steam. Salem 1 and Salem 2 use "Pressurized Water Reactors" (PWR) to convert the water into steam. While there are many differences between BWRs and PWRs, for the purposes of this document, the most important characteristic is the radioactivity released from the plant to the environment. These releases are in the form of gaseous and liquid effluents, consisting of predominantly short lived, inert noble gases and lesser amounts of tritium and fission products.

The radiation released to the air or water disperses and decays. The decay of radioactive elements is measured in terms of half life. Half lives vary depending on the particular radionuclide involved and can be on the order of seconds, minutes, hours, days, or years. Less than one percent of the radioactive material initially present remains after seven half lives have passed.

Laboratory analyses of the radioactive pollutants discharged from the nuclear power stations have demonstrated that Cesium-137, Iodine-131 and Cobalt-60 are the dominant radionuclides that may have an impact on the general population. Dominant in this context means that either they have relatively longer half lives and therefore may be present in trace amounts in the environment as in the case of Cesium-137 and Cobalt-60 or they represent potentially significant exposure pathway as in the case of Iodine-131.

Traces of radionuclides dispersed into the environment during the normal operation of nuclear facilities may contribute some radiation exposure to the population. The technical data collected through the ESMP define the quantities and characteristics of the radioactive discharges released and identify the critical pathways which have the potential for radiation doses received by the population.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

CONCLUSION:

Light, if you’re still with me, as you can see the RFG problem set is legion for peace time consideration alone. In fact, the mandatory evacuation range ring for the Lake Anna nuclear power station in northern Virginia is 100 nautical miles from center point and that’s only for a coolant reduction event. If you’re curious, get a map and see what this means for the approximately 7 million souls living and working in and near this facility. And Lake Anna is tiny compared to other stations across the land.

Then in the disaster/war time scenarios we’re discussing, take this times every nuclear reactor/ power plant and facility across the country, draw those fans and tell me what you see. The wild card being how the various reactors go critical under our scenarios and how far out the danger ring expands, given prevailing weather patterns at the time, should some of them go kinetic.

To quote once more from the exclusion zone report:

“…the harm to human health and environment depend not only on the amount of the radioactive material thrown out due to the explosion and burning of the reactor, but on the weather conditions during that time. Radioactive gases and aerosol particles entered atmosphere as the part of the hot turbulent jet that could reach 1-2 kilometers height. The jet followed approximately wind direction at height and after some time turned into the flow of radioactive air, due to the entrainment of environmental air. The further spreading of radioactivity obeyed the nature of air motion and turbulent diffusion. Atmospheric pressure, which governed the wind direction and velocity, could change with time and therefore the path along which moved every portion of contaminated air might be very complicated. To observe the trajectories of contaminated plume using conventional means such as airplanes, satelilites or radar is practically impossible, hence they are calculated using the atmospheric pressure data alone.” (page 6)

Basically, since the North American dominate weather patterns, driven by the jet stream, follow an east by southeasterly direction; apply this projection to your fixed evac rings per reactor grouping as they morph with the mid- to high-altitude winds and tell me again what you see. My analysis, rough at this time, shows there’s not much permanently safe east to southeast of a small regional cluster between western Montana, eastern Idaho, and northern Wyoming. Granted, there will be numerous pools of safety, as pointed out by the zone report, however, predicting where they’ll be is near impossible.
May God help us all if Yellowstone or Long Valley is the trigger event for all this nuclear concern.

The experts say our plants cannot go critical or kinetic like this, but I do not know of one professional example that considers all the plant workers running away from their stations more or less at the same time and never coming back.

We do.

In the end, Light, each must decide for themselves as to whether I am applying alchemy or hard analysis to be used for more detailed scientific debate.

JM
Jericho Montana
 
Posts: 850
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 10:52 pm
Karma: 29

Re: Expedient shelters (for nuke or RDD incident)

Postby TheLight » Sun Jun 06, 2010 9:43 am

Jm, Nice! Thank you. Now to read the whole thing. Ah, science. Gotta love it!
"Where did I leave that clue-by-four?" -Me
"TheLight is a pot-kicking man-ape gone wrong. But we still love him and his ability to carry entire trees at once." -Rush2112
"All the great things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." ~Winston Churchill

Image
Image http://www.theendofthetunnel.org/
User avatar
TheLight
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1594
Images: 0
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 9:51 pm
Location: Hatfield, PA
Karma: 47

Re: Expedient shelters (for nuke or RDD incident)

Postby Jericho Montana » Sun Jun 06, 2010 9:56 am

[quote="Muzhik"] The problem isn't that we shot ourselves in the foot. The problem is how quickly we reloaded and fired again.

Muzhik

To apply your quote to today's problems - only to discover it was set on full automatic!
Jericho Montana
 
Posts: 850
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 10:52 pm
Karma: 29

Re: Expedient shelters (for nuke or RDD incident)

Postby Jericho Montana » Sun Jun 06, 2010 1:34 pm

[quote="Who is John Gall"]

John

I have relied to each of your questions by section.

--More good information, JM, thanks. The book that I was talking about was named The Chernobyl Syndrome, by Dean Ing, but it actually had little do with the Chernobyl. Most of the book was about the nuclear war survival skills, a random assortment of survival skills, and various musings. Sort of a weird read, but not really that bad.

No, I had not read this book, but will add it to my list. The best one I’ve found so far on the topic in English is - Chernobyl: The Forbidden Truth, Alla Yaroshinskaya, University of Nebraska Press, 1995.

--Radioactive gas plume? I had not really considered that, I guess that so much has been written about fallout...had not thought about radioactive gases from a reactor accident as much as I have about fallout from a nuclear device.

See my earlier and lengthy reply to Light on this topic.

--Fallout is comparatively heavy, from what I understand, and would last for perhaps weeks, longer at lesser levels of radioactivity.

Fallout comes in many physical forms from heavy particles like sand to micro particles you can neither see nor feel. There are two types – immediate and downrange.

The immediate is simple. Close-in to the ground based NUDET and within several kilometres depending on warhead yield. This fallout can produce RAD counts in the high thousands range and something no normal shelter can protect against.

The downrange is more complex, but basically means a plume that can extend out thousands of miles again depending on warhead yield. As I said before, that is why Cincinnati’s old fallout prediction timelines came from the Titan fields in Missouri. It required 8-12 hours for the plume to reach Cincy and the radiation levels were expected to be above 1,000 RADs.

Also, recognize the base radiation threat, all types, comes from three things: : Alpha, Beta, and Gamma. You must injest the fallout particles for alpha rays to due harm. The Beta rays penetrates some small layers of protection, but you almost have to get the fallout into a cut or your eye to do any damage. Its the gamma rays coming off all fallout particles that’s the big killer. For that you have to have distance, mass, and time for protection, with emphasis on mass and time.

--How long would a radioactive gas plume persists for? How long should someone reasonably expect to have to shelter for, if they opt to shelter in place and recognizing that once the radioactive gases have passed you may still be faced with larger radioactive material, such as the fallout as was seen after Chernobyl?

Again, see my other post, but recognize an event like Chernobyl will keep generating the plume until it is somehow contained or source runs out of fissionable material. Same applies to a water shutoff event, but is much easier to deal with generally speaking. Regards long range threats – as I said in my other post, the hundreds of square kilometres around Chernobyl are still not habitable and that event happened in 1986.

You should also be aware of a similar situation on Bikini Atol, site of our ground based testing. For the very same reasons as Chernobyl, humans and animals cannot live on any of the islands, even 65 years later, because all the radioisotopes are being drawn up into the plants. Which are then passed on to humans and animals, the result being very grim for all concerned.

I’m afraid the answer to your question is not good, for any territory so effected by radiation at these levels either NUDET or reactor produced, means no one can live in that area for at least the third to fourth half life of the plutonium, cobalt and other isotopes involved. Things that take a minimum several hundred years to reduce to safe levels, that’s just the facts as they are.

As I said earlier, there are ways to mitigate like removing the top 12-18 inches of soil and replacing it with what no one knows. You can also work elevated crop beds with pre-bagged soil and hydroponic, but must be extremely sensitive to never let the plant roots come in contact with any exterior soil or rain water run off.

Possible for small individual groups IF they have prestocked the necessary green house items, but impossible for larger groups and the unprepared.

--If you could expect to only have to shelter in place for a matter of hours while the plume passes, perhaps a twist on the Homeland Security recommended sealing of a room with duct tape and plastic sheeting would work. One could pile extra shielding material (frig? books? boxes of dirt?), as available and practical, around the outside of an interior room and then seal it off from the inside. Homeland Security says that with about 10 square feet of floor space per person you should be able to last for at least 5 hours.

--Something else that Ing mentioned in the Chernobyl Syndrome was Soviet inclusion of compressed air tanks in some of their shelters, and maintaining a positive pressure inside of your shelter.

In my opinion, one would be better off producing a sealed container inside a room, and there are numerous factory produced ones for sale. I especially like the smaller ones for infants and pets, but there is an endemic problem to any of these. The primary one you already touched being stay time duration, for once you seal out the air, you either live for a very short period of time on the oxygen trapped inside or you have bottled oxygen with you. However, unless you have unlimited funding, you are only buying small amounts of time like an underwater diver with a couple extra tanks.

Even then unless you have accurately measured for release valves, the carbon monoxide from your breath will be increasing by the hour. Eventually, you either leave the sealed container or pass out from oxygen starvation and die quietly.

Lastly, be aware you cannot use welding oxygen without having the necessary scrubbing filter to remove all the dangerous impurities. You can use these tanks and they do provide basic over-pressure protection against extreme heated air for a standard survival shelter, but the oxygen coming out must be scrubbed as it leaves the tank.

--I would think that both of these might be useful in such a scenario. Ing described making a pressure valve/ball valve to regulate the pressure in the shelter and prevent overpressure that could damage the seals. He described a simple, sealed box with two PVC pipes coming out of it's bottom. One led out of the shelter and the second led to the shelter and had a ping pong ball sitting on top of it. The ball sealed the end of the pipe until the positive pressure from the shelter forced it up. Once the pressure somewhat equalized, the ball falls back into place. He suggested creating a sealed window in the box, so that you could see that the ball was moving...otherwise there may be a leak in your shelter. Perhaps you could remove the door knob and pass the outlet pipe from the pressure valve (and also run the cable for your CD V-717) through the hole for the door knob.

Yes, basic Soviet (anyone else for that matter) blast overpressure protection, although I’m not certain I’d trust my life to ping pong balls, but necessity is the mother of invention. Again, see my warnings regards sealed rooms, but for a non NUDET scenario, this just might work.

IF you can afford them, and shucks it sounds like you’ve already got the diving tanks, look to land based oxygen rebreather devices used specifically for deep mine survival and rescue. They are available in both the individual and small survival pod style. The only thing you must be careful with is some older types burn a flame while the others use a high heat chemical reaction to produce the oxygen. Don’t have any combustible gas vapours present or you’ll most likely be the first Prepper in outer space.

--Isn't CO2 heavier than most other atmospheric gases? Keeping the pressure valve near the floor might help relieve the shelter of some excess CO2, albeit not much. Ing had positive pressure being generated in the fallout shelter by means of an air pump pulling outside air in through a filter. If you are worried about gases and hope that they pass within a matter of hours, couldn't you produce a positive pressure environment with compressed air cylinders? I am thinking of my SCUBA tanks, 80 cu ft each. Could breathe through the regulators every now and then to maintain the positive pressure and to provide some fresher air.

Yes, depending on temperature variant between outside and inside the shelter. Something to do with the boiling point of gas, but that’s one of the scientific things that escapes me.

--I think that KI/potassium iodide protects only the thyroid gland. The pituitary gland does not readily take up iodine, so KI has no effects on it (just like the rest of the body, like you said. KI only protects against thyroid cancer).

Heh, ya have me there. I got my glands mixed up. Thyroid it is.

--When I get to build my dream house, with dream shelter (man cave) I would like to have several layers of shielding incorporated into it (the shelter, not the house...ok, I would love to have a sheltered house but I don't think that the little lady would go for it). One layer would be sealed bags of garden soil on top of the shelter, covered by tin sheeting so that plant roots will not grow into the bags (more dirt on top of the tin, and then maybe some sod or decorative plants for erosion control and aesthetics). Another layer will be 5 gallon buckets filled with fertilizer (and perhaps other garden chemicals like pesticides and weed killer) and well sealed and buried alongside the shelter. I figure that if the worst ever comes, then I will have a supply of good dirt available.

I know the feeling, after I built our first shelter 32 years ago, which worked but was, shall we say not too modern. I determined to never make that mistake again. Consequently, as I’ve approached retirement I began casting around for what might become the “ultimate man cave” and discovered something quite interesting.

Check out a company called Formworks at http://www.formworksbuilding.com/ I won’t build the clock when their web site speaks volumes, but suffice to say you’re looking at a total dome and structure made out of 4-6 inches of steel reinforced “Flowcrete” (basically high tensil concrete shot into the forms under pressure) with ten feet of dirt on top and not one bit below ground all for the finished construction price of $33.00 per square foot.

Cheaper than any other prefab design out there. It also beats the cost of converting a CONEX or even steel culvert pipe.

I should add, per the company owner, this was the only civilian structure out of dozens that was not collapsed during the military’s White Sands simulated NUDET test of the late 1980s. Seems he even place a four legged wooden table inside with a glass of water near its edge. After the blast, I believe simulating 500 tons of conventional explosive, not only was his shelter still intact, the table and water were still upright with only partial spillage onto the table top. And here’s the hair raising part, he said his site was close enough to the blast site a bottom portion was exposed into the crater rim and there was no evident cracking, spalling or other such that outright crushed the other competitors.

Anyway, he or his daughter will tell you all this on the phone. Give em a call. The Boss and I are pretty excited about it, and it takes something to get that woman interested. We hopefully will be able to fly out and take a look at finished examples this fall or next spring.

The best part, you can order these things designed and built from as small to as large as you want. We are considering a finished dome and arch structure with two wings at no more than 2,500 sq foot living space, which is tiny compared to others built. But this would be our home, not a smaller supporting structure associated with existing dwelling. We’re still kicking around base design and the Boss wants to have log room structure facing to the front, so final decisions not yet in.

In conversation with the company owner/designer, I came to find out the 30 years he’s been in business he has designed “specialised storm shelters” into many of his finished homes. So, you get what you build.

Oh, this type structure, the entire structure, also applies for all the current “green construction” grants, tax incentives, rebates etc. If you include solar and other such, so much the better

Anyway, check it out. He says time for completion once your building site is prepped, takes no more than three weeks from start to finish. I’ll post what I find as time progresses. To me this is the best kept secret for home/shelter preps out there. I tried to post hotos from his web site from a word file, but no can do.

My brain hurts, so I’m going to end now.

JM
Jericho Montana
 
Posts: 850
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 10:52 pm
Karma: 29

PreviousNext

Return to Survival Shelters

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for the APN Email Newsletter - Enter your e-mail address below


  Links and Resources
  -Links
  -Podcasts
  -Free Ebooks



Trusted Sponsors











Copyright
For Notices of Copyright infringement and to contact our DMCA Agent please follow the link below:
Copyright Policy

For terms of use, rules, and policies please read our Disclaimer