peterms Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 This is claiming that the Japanese nuclear staff in charge of the reactors are in panic and don't know what to do. Arrogant and condescending US imperialism, or honest comment on what they have observed? I see they have requested international assistance in managing the nuclear situation. That's some sort of clue, I can't hep feeling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Monitoring posts to the northwest of the power station recorded radiation levels of 680 microsieverts per hour on Monday, a dose roughly equivalent to four months of natural background radiation. Shock horror, steam released to reduce pressure has trace amount of radioactivity. Tepco said nuclear fuel rods at the reactor are exposed and overheating, raising the risk of them melting. Up to 190 people are suspected of being exposed to radiation, according to officials. In the second quote, I'm assuming "exposed to radiation" means exposed at a higher level than they would be in ordinary life, or else the sentence is without any useful meaning. Yeah, but the radiation they've been exposed to is barely harmful with an extremely short decay time. No significant nuclear material has been released. This is claiming that the Japanese nuclear staff in charge of the reactors are in panic and don't know what to do. They know exactly what to do. They're trained for exactly this scenario. There, a series of problems thwarted efforts to keep the core of the reactor covered with water — a step considered crucial to preventing the reactor’s containment vessel from exploding and preventing the fuel inside it from melting down. Is complete crap. The reactor containment vessel won't explode from lack of water. There's nothing there that can cause an explosion except for hydrogen, which is vented away. An explosion within the containment vessel would require those vents to be shut, but again that wouldn't compromise the inner containment vessel. These reactors are designed so hydrogen can't gather near the cores. Yes no water = meltdown, but a meltdown isn't a horror ending, it's entirely contained. There's just a whole lot of bad science in that article that's just taking quotes from people completely out of context and drawing huge sweeping conclusions from them. They could just stop pumping in water, vent the steam, seal the vents, and let the thing meltdown with no issue if they wanted to. The only panic is in preventing a meltdown because it's a bitch to clean up and dispose of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 9.43pm: Despite the insistence of the Japanese government that the crisis at the Fukushima nuclear power plant is unlikely to turn into another Chernobyl, nuclear experts are beginning to throw doubt on the accuracy of official information being issued. They claim that it follows a pattern of secrecy and cover-ups employed in other nuclear accidents, report John Vidal and Damian Carrington of the Guardian. "It's impossible to get any radiation readings," they were told John Large, an independent nuclear engineer who has worked for the UK government and has been commissioned to report on the accident for Greenpeace International. The Guardian has also posted a newly released diplomatic cable obtained by WikiLeaks, which records that a high profile Japanese politician told US diplomats that the Japanese government department responsible for nuclear energy – has been "covering up nuclear accidents and obscuring the true costs and problems associated with the nuclear industry". It is indisputably the case that the Japanese nuclear industry has covered up previous safety incidents, or should I say danger incidents. It makes it a little harder to accept their statements this time round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 So I see they knew the risks 40 years ago. 40 years. Is that a long time, in relation to the movements of my shares on the stock market, a medium time in relation to the lives of my immediate family, or nothing at all in relation to the danger period of spent nuclear fuels, which I believe we have yet to find a safe home for? Government regulators knew of a heightened risk of explosion in the type of nuclear reactors used at the Fukushima plant in Japan from the moment they went into operation. Safety inspectors at America's Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) warned as early as 1972 that the General Electric reactors, which did away with the traditional large containment domes, were more vulnerable to explosion and more vulnerable to the release of radiation if a meltdown occurred. Michael Mariotte, director of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, said: "The concern has been there all along that this containment building was not strong enough and the pressure containment system was not robust enough to prevent an explosion." The ageing GE reactors are regarded as less resilient then newer models. Dr Arjun Makhijani, president of the Institute for Energy and Environment Research, said: "They are not designed to contain these explosions. They are not designed to contain an aircraft crashing into it. Modern reactors are significantly different. Designs built from the 1980s onwards don't have the vulnerabilities of mark one reactors." All six of the reactors at the Fukushima Two plant, which has suffered two explosions, are GE-designed boiling water reactors. Five are the original mark one design and went on line from 1971 to 1979. Mariotte's group has made public a 1972 letter from an AEC inspector, Stephen Hanauer, recommending the design be discontinued. Environmental campaign groups say that the boiling water reactors are more vulnerable to explosion because human intervention is needed to vent radioactive steam in the event of a core meltdown. They are also now reaching the end of their operational life. Mariotte said damage to the containment structures in the explosion raised an additional risk of a radiation leak from the spent fuel pools, a part of the facility where spent fuel rods are stored under liquid. Like the reactor cores, the pools require constant cooling. Robert Alvarez, a senior policy expert at the institute of Policy Studies, said satellite pictures of the Fukushima plant showed evidence of damage to the spent fuel pool. "There is clear evidence that the fuel cask cranes that haul spent fuels to and from the reactor to the pool both fell. They are gone," he said. "There appears to be copious amounts of steam pouring of the area where the pools is located." He said there was no evidence of fire but described the situation as "worrisome". "What we don't know is whether or not explosions or the quake or the tsuanmi or a combination of things might have damaged support structures or compromised the pool," Alvarez said. He warned that it could take years to repair the damage to the upper decks of the reactor and to move the discharged fuel into a safer area of storage. The early warning about the reactor design was reinforced in 1986 when Harold Denton, then the top safety official at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), warned of a high risk of failure of the mark one containment system. "Mark one containment, especially being smaller with lower design pressure, in spite of the suppression pool... you'll find something like a 90% probability of that containment failing," he told an industry trade group at the time. "Any reactor in this situation would be in a world of hurt. These designs are even more problematic because should you get core melt according to the nuclear regulatory commission the containment is 90% likely to fail," said Jim Riccio, a nuclear expert at Greenpeace. "In essence, the public's last line of defence in case of a meltdown really doesn't exist at all." Mariotte said damage to the containment structures in the explosion raised an additional risk of a radiation leak from the spent fuel pools, which are sited above each reactor. There is growing concern about the status of irradiated fuel pools at all of the Fukushima reactors. The pools are located inside the outer containment building above the core and, like the reactor cores, require constant cooling. Pictures from the site show that at least the top third of two containment buildings have been blown off, so the integrity of the fuel pools is unclear. Japanese campaign groups have also warned of problems at the Fukushima 2 plant including a failure of the generator when the plant lost power in June last year. In addition to the Fukushima 2 plant, eight reactors of the same design are in use in Japan at nuclear facilities at Tsuruga, Hamaoke and Shimane. Like the Fukushima plants, all three are also on Japan's main Honshu island. Nuclear reactors of the same design are in widespread use in America.Of the 104 reactors currently in use, 23 are of the same GE mark two design, according to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Twelve more are a modified version of the boiling water reactor. A number of those reactors are now reaching the end of their original 40-year lifsepan, and campaigners have been fighting attempts by the nuclear industry to extend their operation. One such GE mark one plant in contention is the Vermont Yankee. The NRC renewed the plant's lease for 20 years last week. However, the state government has moved to shut down the plant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewiek2 Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Well Sky News in all their glory on the 10 o'clock news had Colin Brazier giving a voice-over to footage of the tsunami hitting the Japanese shores. Fine you think, as really it's something the world should see to understand. However, the sick f**ks highlighted an area in the bottom left hand corner of the screen with ar Colin overdubbing "Take a look in the botom left hand corner. Keep looking and you'll see people trying to runaway from the waves coming in." What?!?! He is encouraging us all, in an almost 'You've been framed way' to watch people forlornly meet their death!? Utter shoddy gutter journalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Its the footage when going to and from breaks with added sound effects that piss me off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Sky piss me off, the way they show the videos of the tragedy as they go to adverts, I am sure the next thing they will do is have that **** go compare man pop up singing. I know exactly what you mean, it's what makes me love song so much... Hang the DJ... and the Sky Television producer 8) Definitely in need of hanging! does my head in! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JulieB Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Blast at Reactor No 2 at Dalichi Plant just being reported. (BTW I'm with BOF in any lifeboat situation!..... I know he'd be in the very first one.. just in case!!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 My brain is frazzled after a long day, what exactly is the update? More aftershocks? More problems with reactors, more or less serious since we discussed this yesterday? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JulieB Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 My brain is frazzled after a long day, what exactly is the update? More aftershocks? More problems with reactors, more or less serious since we discussed this yesterday? I don't think there's anything new. I think the main problem is that once the power failed.... diesel back up generators won't work when they're filled with sea water. (Begs the question, why place the reactor's right by the sea?!) Back up plan in all the effected reactors has been to pump in sea water into the reactor chambers to cool the rods down. This created steam containing hydrogen gas which is potentially combustible when it comes into contact with Oxygen. In 3 cases reading between the lines... it would seem that the steam has indeed come into contact with the outside air & caboom! The nuclear authorities had to do something though to stop complete meltdown of the nuclear rods, which could then literally burn their way through the casing of the reactor leaving radioactive material to make it's way into the water table below the plant. If this happened it could have devastating effects on the environment around each of the plants. What I'd like to know is that once there has been an explosion in said reactor, what substance is now supposed to be cooling the nuclear rods down now? Surely ANY cooling process has ceased & won't the rods now overheat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Thanks Julie, will be keeping an eye on this as much as I can I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 My brain is frazzled after a long day, what exactly is the update? More aftershocks? More problems with reactors, more or less serious since we discussed this yesterday? I don't think there's anything new. I think the main problem is that once the power failed.... diesel back up generators won't work when they're filled with sea water. (Begs the question, why place the reactor's right by the sea?!) Back up plan in all the effected reactors has been to pump in sea water into the reactor chambers to cool the rods down. This created steam containing hydrogen gas which is potentially combustible when it comes into contact with Oxygen. In 3 cases reading between the lines... it would seem that the steam has indeed come into contact with the outside air & caboom! The nuclear authorities had to do something though to stop complete meltdown of the nuclear rods, which could then literally burn their way through the casing of the reactor leaving radioactive material to make it's way into the water table below the plant. If this happened it could have devastating effects on the environment around each of the plants. What I'd like to know is that once there has been an explosion in said reactor, what substance is now supposed to be cooling the nuclear rods down now? Surely ANY cooling process has ceased & won't the rods now overheat? The explosions happened after the steam was vented away from the containment structure (which is air tight). The cooling chamber is still in tact. Because of that they can continue to pump in more water to cool it, because the containment chamber and the reactor are still in tact. The reactors are also designed so the rods CAN melt through the bottom of the reactor, under neath the reactor is a containment chamber designed to hold the molten core, there should be no chance of it entering the water table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Scratch the last bit, it's in doubt if the reactors do have core catchers, but still not a problem as they can still get water in there to cool the core and it'll take them a fair few days to melt though the reactor anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cracker1234 Posted March 15, 2011 Author Share Posted March 15, 2011 Few more vids of the Tsunami Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 If this nuke reactor goes boom will it create a mushroom cloud? will it be a big blast as well similar to the one when the yanks dropped a nuke on them? or not as big. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 If this nuke reactor goes boom will it create a mushroom cloud? will it be a big blast as well similar to the one when the yanks dropped a nuke on them? or not as big. From what I can gather, there is a continuing risk of more explosions, but not nuclear explosions - in other words the core remains intact and is likely to do so. However, there is an escape of radioactivity, to the extent that the level in the immediate vicinity of the plant is highly dangerous, people outside the immediate evacuation zone have been told not to bring in any washing that may be drying outside, there's a 19-mile no-fly zone, and the prime minister has been on tv to say "There's still a very high risk of further radioactive material coming out." The accounts we heard yesterday of there being no chance of the release of more radiation than you would get from a long flight are clearly false. The radiation level in Tokyo has increased, though nowhere near danger level, but the prevailing wind has changed so it is now taking any released material towards Tokyo rather than towards the sea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted March 15, 2011 VT Supporter Share Posted March 15, 2011 I can see Tokyo becoming even more "Blade Runner"-like over the next 10 to 20 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 If this nuke reactor goes boom will it create a mushroom cloud? will it be a big blast as well similar to the one when the yanks dropped a nuke on them? or not as big. Zero chance at all. Even Chernobyl didn't do that. It'd essentially be like a dirty bomb, no nuclear explosion, but the nuclear material would get spread out across the area by the force of any explosion, or carried away in the smoke of an fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cracker1234 Posted March 15, 2011 Author Share Posted March 15, 2011 SkyNewsBreak Sky News Newsdesk Reuters: U.S. Navy detects very low level radiation at base 175 miles from nuclear plant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danwichmann Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 A US aircraft carrier has abandoned its assistance mission to Japan in the aftermath of the recent quake due to concerns over radiation leaks from damaged power plants. An earlier report in US media said the USS Ronald Reagan had already sailed through a patch of radioactivity apparently released from the quake-stricken Fukushima power plants, around 250 kilometres north-east of Tokyo. Had this from Defence Contracts International this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts