Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!islenet!dhenson
From: dhenson@islenet.UUCP (Donald D. Henson)
Newsgroups: net.sci
Subject: Re: Request for info . . . "graphite fire"
Message-ID: <2404@islenet.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 4-May-86 15:19:34 EDT
Article-I.D.: islenet.2404
Posted: Sun May  4 15:19:34 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 7-May-86 02:10:17 EDT
References: <142@mcc-hi.UUCP>
Organization: Islenet Inc.,  Honolulu
Lines: 26

> What fuels a nuclear fire besides oxygen and heat? How does one
> fight such a fire? Are there dangers other than the contaminated
> exhaust put out by such a fire? Are there differences between a
> nuclear fire and a graphite fire?
> 
Wellllllll, in an attempt to put a course in nuclear physics into 25 lines
or so, here goes......

A nuclear fire is not really a fire in the normal sense.  In the case of the
Soviet Union problem, enough nuclear fuel is in close enough proximity that
the fission process is producing extreme heat as well as very large levels of
radiation.  This heat apparently melted thru the fuel containers and caused
the graphite to ignite.  The graphite burns in the normal sense, i.e., it
requires oxygen to continue burning and it burns at an extremely high
temperature. When the graphite burns, it gives off smoke particles that,
due to the fission reaction going on in the nuclear fuel, is radioactive.
This is what has caused all the alarm in the non-Soviet world.  The problem
in putting out the fire is that graphite reacts with water to generate more
heat.  Water will not only not put out the fire, it will generate tremendous
quantities of radioactive steam which is not a desireable product.

After reading this, I realize that it is not too clear, but maybe it will
help a little.  Good luck on understanding the problem.

Don Henson
Infosys Consulting