Fukushima upgraded to Cat 7 TEPCO: Radiation leak may have topped Chernobyl release

[chucky2]

is this sarcasm?

No.

I guess you could say I am very worried. I come from an engineering background (maybe that's an understatement) and this nuclear disaster scares the living crap out of me. My worry is that, nuclear power is supposed to be almost 100% safe. The heavier elements that are radioactive stays around for a long time. Was it outside of the realm of possibility that this 8.9 quake combined with a tsunami would cause what's happening now to happen? Apparently not.

Just because this isn't going to be Cheynobyl doesn't make it acceptable, honestly. I know very well that newer nuke plants will be even safer, but let's stop pretending that humans can really beat nature.

I hope the situation will get contained and it won't get any worse.

Oh, I know nothing is ever guaranteed, absolutely nothing is. The problem as I understand it is our current nuke plants have already hit designed life and/or will reach designed life soon. There is no "green" solution for energy generation that will meet the availability and load requirements for the population densities and power needs not only that we have now, but for the next few decades; presumably while "green" tech actually matures to the point of being truly viable. This leaves, for most of the US, nuke and coal as the only two real options.

Building a new nuke plant lets say takes 10 years.

Coal to me is a non-starter given how much the environment needs to be absolutely - not possibly (and a very small possibly at that) - raped to feed it, and then how much it spews into the atmosphere.

The way I see it, we need to get the best designs we have now approved, leverage them to the locales they're best suited for, and get going.

When they've used up their useful life in 50 years, we ought to have sunk the money and backing into much greener solutions that are actual realistic and viable solutions, rather than the theory/pipedreams/wholefully inadequate solutions they are now.

I recognize the disaster potential of a nuke plant, I just don't see the Risk it brings not able to be mitigated given our new designs, knowledge, and geographical situation in the US. Out of all the options, save for maybe someplace like NV and Southern Kalifornia, where they could actually employ a solar based solution (providing it didn't wipe out the Liberal Whining Beetle), a modern nuke design is about the only realistic option*.

*: I believe in previous threads, this is what the links and discussion had arrived at before, discounting the loons that want wave action to power all of Kansas or some other such BS.

Chuck

 

[chucky2]

snip

I don't (and wouldn't) argue with what you wrote, however, the point that can't be discounted in regards to your post is that if a solar array crashed down, we'd simply clean it up, rebuild, and be done with it: The site wouldn't be contaminated for 10,000 years. The groundwater wouldn't be undrinkable for 100,000 years.

Japan may well use something like wave action and wind to replace these nuke plants, and that may work just fine for Japan and even some parts of the US. For many parts of the US though, it's nuke or coal, and we need to pick the best one for the next 50 years or so, and move forward.

I'd pick nuke, and Yes, I'd let it be in my backyard, no problem (but I like the country, so it'd not have to be visible, just my choice if I had one).

Chuck

 

[CLite]

I guess I trust the nuclear engineer over you. No offense I hope.

I got my master's in nuclear engineering. This is far worse than TMI based on multiple factors.

TMI released an extremely small amount of radiation to the environment, it did not result in any injuries, it's peripheral equipment was not blowing up, the primary coolant loops were successfully restarted in less than a day, and plant staff were not evacuated.

This disaster has already injured dozens of people, the plant has been evacuated, it has released far more radiation than TMI, and it is using an honest to god last ditch method to cool the reactor. Perhaps the core hasn't melted as did TMI's but ultimately TMI withstood the partial meltdown without any calamities and I would not confidently say Japan will escape this without at least a partial meltdown.

 

[alphatarget1]

No.

When they've used up their useful life in 50 years, we ought to have sunk the money and backing into much greener solutions that are actual realistic and viable solutions, rather than the theory/pipedreams/wholefully inadequate solutions they are now.

I recognize the disaster potential of a nuke plant, I just don't see the Risk it brings not able to be mitigated given our new designs, knowledge, and geographical situation in the US. Out of all the options, save for maybe someplace like NV and Southern Kalifornia, where they could actually employ a solar based solution (providing it didn't wipe out the Liberal Whining Beetle), a modern nuke design is about the only realistic option*.

*: I believe in previous threads, this is what the links and discussion had arrived at before, discounting the loons that want wave action to power all of Kansas or some other such BS.

Chuck

I think the logical thing to do would have been to start building nuke plants with newer designs and force decommissioning with older reactors. After TMI I guess little to no nuke plants were built...

If it takes a 1000-year design to make nuclear safe, then that should be taken that into account when we decide whether or not to build the plant.

 

[alphatarget1]

I got my master's in nuclear engineering. This is far worse than TMI based on multiple factors.

TMI released an extremely small amount of radiation to the environment, it did not result in any injuries, it's peripheral equipment was not blowing up, the primary coolant loops were successfully restarted in less than a day, and plant staff were not evacuated.

This disaster has already injured dozens of people, the plant has been evacuated, it has released far more radiation than TMI, and it is using an honest to god last ditch method to cool the reactor. Perhaps the core hasn't melted as did TMI's but ultimately TMI withstood the partial meltdown without any calamities and I would not confidently say Japan will escape this without at least a partial meltdown.

I'm not sure if I understand this correctly- what's the worst case scenario now if we assume a partial meltdown? Is the containment to the reactor breached?

 

[chucky2]

Yep, agree completely.

Once they realized that these generators could be swamped by a tsunami (and, come on, this is Japan, they know there's a real tsunami risk at some point in this facility having nuke material at it), then they should have taken the appropriate steps to ensure the diesels were secured against a true worst case tsunami.

I'd expect the same for any new design we'd have implemented here that was along a coast, whether or not any relative history of tsunami existed or not: Because this is Earth, an earthquake can always happen and generate a tsunami along any coast I'd think, so if that coast is going to have nuke plant, then, it should be protected against one.

Chuck

 

[Jaskalas]

I'm not sure if I understand this correctly- what's the worst case scenario now if we assume a partial meltdown? Is the containment to the reactor breached?

Worst case? Well... let's begin with what we do know.

TOKYO WIND : Radiation From Latest Blast Could Reach Capital by Nightfall...

 

[irishScott]

Yep, agree completely.

Once they realized that these generators could be swamped by a tsunami (and, come on, this is Japan, they know there's a real tsunami risk at some point in this facility having nuke material at it), then they should have taken the appropriate steps to ensure the diesels were secured against a true worst case tsunami.

I'd expect the same for any new design we'd have implemented here that was along a coast, whether or not any relative history of tsunami existed or not: Because this is Earth, an earthquake can always happen and generate a tsunami along any coast I'd think, so if that coast is going to have nuke plant, then, it should be protected against one.

Chuck

From what I've read they counted on the Tsunami wall already in place, kinda like the Katrina victims were counting on levies.

 

[chucky2]

Then they really didn't plan for that much of a tsunami. I'd be thinking more along the lines of elevated diesels (engine + gravity feed tank) 40 or so feet in the air, along with the ones they had on the ground (in case the ones in the air fall). You can see that the major bridges held up (at least it looks like they did on the videos I've seen), now imagine a diesel engine and its tank up in the air like that, with the tsunami rushing below. And Yes, these elevated diesel platforms would also need to be able to take a 9.5 direct hit earthquake and still have a high probability of survival.

This tsunami doesn't even seem to be that large, I'd think even larger ones could be expected to hit Japan, hence the need for a better design. They just didn't do it.

Chuck

 

[thescreensavers]

I thought the steam that could be released only had fast decaying radiation, like 1 sec and its decayed.

 

[Acanthus]

I thought the steam that could be released only had fast decaying radiation, like 1 sec and its decayed.

There will be some slower long lived elements in the steam, but it will be trace amounts.

This is why we are seeing huge swings in radiation levels. The leaks contain large amounts of short-lived elements.

It is also why the radiation is less dangerous as both time and distance increase.

The fire at the 4th offline reactor is troubling, because it was supposed to be completely offline when the quake occurred. Someone at Dai Ichi is lying.

 

[The-Noid]

I got my master's in nuclear engineering. This is far worse than TMI based on multiple factors.

TMI released an extremely small amount of radiation to the environment, it did not result in any injuries, it's peripheral equipment was not blowing up, the primary coolant loops were successfully restarted in less than a day, and plant staff were not evacuated.

This disaster has already injured dozens of people, the plant has been evacuated, it has released far more radiation than TMI, and it is using an honest to god last ditch method to cool the reactor. Perhaps the core hasn't melted as did TMI's but ultimately TMI withstood the partial meltdown without any calamities and I would not confidently say Japan will escape this without at least a partial meltdown.

Obviously the situation has intensified quickly, at the time of that post was a lull in newsflow and the situation appeared improving. Reactor 2 was not an issue.

The actual response by TEPCO and the government borders on treason to its people. I somewhat understand the Japanese culture and lack of transparency, however with a nuclear disaster transparency would have been something that should have been striven for. Many moons will go by with the world dissecting the problems, similar to Chernobyl, it will be interesting to see how many things TEPCO got wrong and what could have been done.

 

[alphatarget1]

Obviously the situation has intensified quickly, at the time of that post was a lull in newsflow and the situation appeared improving. Reactor 2 was not an issue.

The actual response by TEPCO and the government borders on treason to its people. I somewhat understand the Japanese culture and lack of transparency, however with a nuclear disaster transparency would have been something that should have been striven for. Many moons will go by with the world dissecting the problems, similar to Chernobyl, it will be interesting to see how many things TEPCO got wrong and what could have been done.

I don't know, there are people working their butts off to try to get things under the control. Should there be a bunch of reporters nagging on the workers/engineers to try to see what's really going on? It's not like the government is intentionally covering up like what the Soviets did. What more do you expect?

 

[chucky2]

I know one thing for certain:

Those 50 poor bastards left on-site working to control/limit this sure aren't worrying about what dress maker the Prince's fiance is going to choose...

Chuck

 

[The-Noid]

I don't know, there are people working their butts off to try to get things under the control. Should there be a bunch of reporters nagging on the workers/engineers to try to see what's really going on? It's not like the government is intentionally covering up like what the Soviets did. What more do you expect?

Prime Minister Naoto Kan on Tuesday strongly criticized Tokyo Electric Power Co. for its handling of the earthquake-stricken Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant.

''The TV reported an explosion. But nothing was said to the premier's office for about an hour,'' a Kyodo News reporter overheard Kan saying during a meeting with executives of the power company at its head office. ''What the hell is going on?''

Kan strongly ordered the company not to withdraw its employees from the power plant, which has been facing a series of problems since Friday's massive quake, ranging from explosions to radiation leaks.

''In the event of withdrawal from there, I'm 100 percent certain that the company will collapse,'' Kan said. ''I want you all to be determined.''

The government, as well as the public, has been dissatisfied with the company's way of releasing information regarding the crippled nuclear plant.

In an attempt to work more closely together, the government and the company launched Tuesday a joint headquarters of the crisis involving the Fukushima No. 1 plant.

The headquarters set up at the company's head office is headed by Kan, with industry minister Banri Kaieda and TEPCO President Masataka Shimizu serving as its deputy chiefs.

==Kyodo

 

[quikah]

IAEA has pretty terse updates without the sensationalism http://iaea.org/newscenter/news/tsunamiupdate01.html Supposedly 1, 2 &3 of Daini are in cold shutdown. Explosion at #2 and Fire at #4 spent fuel pool of Daichi.

 

[Steeplerot]

"The threat of a fission explosion at the Fukushima power facility emerged today when the roof of the number three reactor exploded and fears that a spent fuel pool, located over the reactor, has been compromised. The pool, designed to allow reactor fuel to cool off for several years, was constructed on top of the Fukushima reactors instead of underground. As of 2010, there were 3450 fuel assemblies in the pool at the number three reactor. The destruction of the number three reactor building has experts concerned about whether the spent fuel storage pool, which sits just below the roof, could have survived intact the hydrogen explosion."Fukushima has 10,149 spent fuel assemblies on-site

This TEPCO document from November of 2010 looks really bad, they have 14 yers of spent rods, sure the older ones are cooler, but many can catch fire in open air pools if they run dry as at #4 seems to have happened. Thats REALLY dirty stuff.

http://www.nirs.org/reactorwatch/accidents/6-1_powerpoint.pdf

 

[rcpratt]

I thought the steam that could be released only had fast decaying radiation, like 1 sec and its decayed.

That was before we had non-pure water being used as coolant in the reactor and potential fuel compromise.

But yes, my last post regarding TMI was before pretty much anything at units 2 and 4 had gone down, and before the (relatively) large radiation release was reported. I'll withhold judgment for now until we get more details.

 

[CLite]

Your post was after the very first explosion. The very first explosion made this worst than TMI because it had already released more radiation than the incredibly small amount at TMI, it also indicated they were having problems re-establishing the primary coolant loop, and of course it was an explosion which is something TMI avoided.

 

[The-Noid]

Your post was after the very first explosion. The very first explosion made this worst than TMI because it had already released more radiation than the incredibly small amount at TMI, it also indicated they were having problems re-establishing the primary coolant loop, and of course it was an explosion which is something TMI avoided.

The term was de minimis for the amount of radiation released at that time and the analysts at the MSM were still rating it less severe then TMI. Obviously, looking backwards it is easy to say it is more severe. At that point the consensus, including two professors of Nuclear Engineering from MIT had still declared TMI to be a 5 where this was a 4 and that a partial meltdown was more severe than exploding hydrogen.

Explosion in 2 and the subsequent fire in 4 have worsened the situation significantly.

Easier to look back in life then to look ahead. Having said all that. I don't really believe anything coming out of TEPCO at this point and the lull of news over the last 8 hours is surprising.

 

[William Gaatjes]

"The threat of a fission explosion at the Fukushima power facility emerged today when the roof of the number three reactor exploded and fears that a spent fuel pool, located over the reactor, has been compromised. The pool, designed to allow reactor fuel to cool off for several years, was constructed on top of the Fukushima reactors instead of underground. As of 2010, there were 3450 fuel assemblies in the pool at the number three reactor. The destruction of the number three reactor building has experts concerned about whether the spent fuel storage pool, which sits just below the roof, could have survived intact the hydrogen explosion."Fukushima has 10,149 spent fuel assemblies on-site

This TEPCO document from November of 2010 looks really bad, they have 14 yers of spent rods, sure the older ones are cooler, but many can catch fire in open air pools if they run dry as at #4 seems to have happened. Thats REALLY dirty stuff.

http://www.nirs.org/reactorwatch/accidents/6-1_powerpoint.pdf

Sigh...

This is horrible if true.
I can understand the decision to store the waste close to the reactor because of the desire to keep all radioactive materials close to each other and to minimize the risk of polluting the environment, if an accident would occur during transport.

But to keep the waste that close to a reactor...
Probably they wanted to reuse the fuel after re-processing ?

It is decisions based on practical and economic reasons.

The problem is how to keep a reactor cool. For example use gravity and place the reactor a 300 feet below the surface. However in Japan this would not work with all the earthquakes the reactor would sustain damage. In other countries less prone to earthquakes this would work however. Then gravity can be used to cool the reactor when a problem occurs and thermal convection would help. Of course the water and the surrounding ground would get polluted. But there fungi could help break down uranium for the following decades... And waste could be stored there too while fungi slowly change the material. For as far as i know it is possible to incinerate nuclear waste but it is highly expensive because it would need accelerator like technologies we do not have yet.

I will post later more.

 

[wuliheron]

In 2002 this particular plant had a scandal concerning cover ups of safety violations that ended with the president, vice president, and others resigning in disgrace. It's not just a cultural problem, but one American's are altogether too familiar with when it comes to the wealthy and corporations.

For a brief time land prices in downtown Tokyo reached a million dollars a square foot. These are people who are so crowded they filled in parts of Tokyo bay to create habitable land and invented coffin-like hotel rooms. Putting the spent fuel rods so close to the reactors is probably just another way of cutting corners to save costs.

 

[CLite]

The term was de minimis for the amount of radiation released at that time and the analysts at the MSM were still rating it less severe then TMI. Obviously, looking backwards it is easy to say it is more severe. At that point the consensus, including two professors of Nuclear Engineering from MIT had still declared TMI to be a 5 where this was a 4 and that a partial meltdown was more severe than exploding hydrogen.

Explosion in 2 and the subsequent fire in 4 have worsened the situation significantly.

Easier to look back in life then to look ahead. Having said all that. I don't really believe anything coming out of TEPCO at this point and the lull of news over the last 8 hours is surprising.

That exact same reasoning applies to TMI because we were unaware of how extensive the meltdown was at the time of the event. It was only afterward did they realize how serious it was.

In this situation with explosions occuring and a similar lack of information on the core I don't see how you can compare the two and say TMI was still worse after the first explosion. Despite what some professors might theorize about, the practical fact is that people were already hurt after the first explosion whereas no one was hurt by TMI.

 

[wuliheron]

CNN analyst James Walsh said:

"The Japanese plants and all modern plants have a containment vessel. Essentially the reactor is inside of a vault. And that vault is made of thick concrete and steel. The million-dollar question is whether that melting will be contained. ... We'll know within 24 hours. That's the key thing people should be paying attention to."

Pray to God if you believe in him or keep your fingers crossed if you don't. Either way people are risking their lives to keep this thing contained and you can bet your ass it isn't the stock holders or executives.

 

[William Gaatjes]

CNN analyst James Walsh said:

"The Japanese plants and all modern plants have a containment vessel. Essentially the reactor is inside of a vault. And that vault is made of thick concrete and steel. The million-dollar question is whether that melting will be contained. ... We'll know within 24 hours. That's the key thing people should be paying attention to."

Pray to God if you believe in him or keep your fingers crossed if you don't. Either way people are risking their lives to keep this thing contained and you can bet your ass it isn't the stock holders or executives.

I sure hope the vessels will hold. A technology can be still so very advanced but without proper use and guidelines is not safe. To be honest, i have to admit that nuclear reactors are dangerous at fault lines and locations on the earth where volcanic activity is very active and present. If Japan is prone to that much earthquakes every day, then cutting costs when it comes to nuclear facilities is not an option.