Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant

[Fatmas]

Fukushima is a triumph for nuke power: Build more reactors now! ? The Register

 

 

Very good analysis of how safe the power plant actually is.

 

*Ninja Edit: Unless something else happens

Edited March 14, 2011 by Fatmas

[MK-2]

if it all goes t*ts up, i'm blaming you personally

 

a very good read, and something the BBC should be forwarded. with their reporting you'd think 99% of the Japanese population were sprouting third arms and wings!

[LeMarchand]

you'd think 99% of the Japanese population were sprouting third arms and wings!

 

If their anime is anything to go by...

[mattx]

Excellent article and one the media should really try and inform the people of instead of the scare mongering clap trap they are festering to the public at the moment.

[JJonas]

Fuel rods exposed again according to AP Agency and Sky News

[Martin]

The BBC reporting is a disgrace

 

Richard Black (Environment correspondent) says at Meltdown alert at Japan reactor

 

Without coolant around the rods, temperatures can rise to hundreds of degrees Celsius, almost certainly resulting in some melting.

 

This opens the possibility of a serious meltdown - where molten, highly radioactive reactor core falls through the floor of the containment vessel and into the ground underneath.

 

...and yet reading Fukushima Nuclear Accident – a simple and accurate explanation by Dr Josef Oehmen, from which the El Reg article was based...

 

The Zircaloy tubes (the first level of "containment") have a melting point of 2200 °C and Uranium oxide has a very high melting point of about 3000 °C - somewhat more than a few hundred degrees.

 

Also, the Dr Josef Oehmenk article states that "The third containment is designed, built and tested for one single purpose: To contain, indefinitely, a complete core meltdown.", so no molten core dripping out onto the soil as Black suggests

 

mb

[Arthur]

Here are some more really interesting articles. Basically, there's nothing to worry about.

 

http://www.kalzumeus.com/2011/03/13/some-perspective-on-the-japan-earthquake/

https://morgsatlarge.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/why-i-am-not-worried-about-japans-nuclear-reactors/

[srochford]

This BBC article BBC News - Japan nuclear alert at Fukushima - Q&A is better; see the section headed "Has there been a meltdown?" which is a bit more reasoned.

[mattx]

Anyone else seen this ?

 

Still cheaper than toilet paper.....

 

http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg615/scaled.php?tn=0&server=615&filename=z17vz.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640

[plexer]

Read on a news site about it, they got back to the uss ronald raegen scrubbed themselves with soap and were then de-contaminated.

 

Ben

[mattx]

Good read.

 

Some Perspective On The Japan Earthquake: MicroISV on a Shoestring

[Gatt]

Do you think the Mushroom cloud was added after with PhotoShop?

[Theblacksheep]

Speaking of 'Depth of Defense' they built the first backup generators at Dungeness below sea level, the built the second when they realised it might be a problem.

 

 

The part of the BBC quote about rising a few hundred degrees is still a problem. Its just not explained in any way other than black (meltdown) and white (on you were lads). The pure (heavy) water is over 1000psi with a boiling point past 250c, if this is not under pressure or moving the boiling point it lower. Despite the reactor being off, its still cooling down. If rods are exposed water has boiled off and and pressure increased then hydrogen buildup is a massive, massive risk, hence venting to outer room which limits the explosion to outside of the reactor core. Sea water has a much lower boiling point and will soak up radioactive particles, its very crude to put sea water into the reactor cooling loop and I don't think this action can be underestimated.

 

 

http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_Loss_of_coolant_at_Fukushima_Daiichi_2_1403113.html

 

This article says venting of pressure and injection of seawater is not seeing the water level increase and despite massive reduction of heat to only a few % of its operating temp, water is still required to get rid of this heat.

Edited March 14, 2011 by Theblacksheep

[somabc]

No the explosion did actually look like a mushroom cloud, if you watch the video. (It's not a mushroom cloud obviously)

[JJonas]

@Fatmas you talked that one up. Reactor 4 on fire.

 

????????????????????... on Twitpic

 

Im going back to bed.

[JJonas]

Putting the radiation levels at Fukushima into perspective on Twitpic

 

They are saying 400 mSv around plant

[SYNACK]

I'm hopeing that the exposure is less and the get it contained. Even our news agencies in NZ have nuclear scientists on stating that the progression of events and the explainations given don't quite add up. Edited March 15, 2011 by SYNACK

[sonofsanta]

That was a fascinating read. And terrifying, for showing how distorted every media source has been up till now. Which will prevent us building nuclear, which is our only option to prevent a power shortfall in the near future, and the media will once again cry off of all responsibility and hide behind excuses of "reporting what people want to hear", except people don't know what they want to hear, because you never damn well tell them the alternative.

 

 

Grrrr big media.

[Martin]

Compare the BBC who say...

 

An American warship, the USS Ronald Reagan, has detected low levels of radiation at a distance of 100 miles (161km) from the Fukushima plant.

 

With the LA Times who say...

 

Low levels of radiation were detected among 17 crew members of helicopters ferrying supplies to the island. The contamination was "easily removed by washing with soap and water," officials said.

 

...so by "conveniently" failing to inform readers that the contamination was on helicopters flying to and from the plant, they give the impression that the fallout has already travelled 100 miles

 

mb

[SYNACK]

That was a fascinating read. And terrifying, for showing how distorted every media source has been up till now. Which will prevent us building nuclear, which is our only option to prevent a power shortfall in the near future, and the media will once again cry off of all responsibility and hide behind excuses of "reporting what people want to hear", except people don't know what they want to hear, because you never damn well tell them the alternative.

 

 

Grrrr big media.

 

This is an unfortunate sideffect, the reactors that are breaking are all old designs, there are newer liquid salt and micro reactors that are exponentially safer and more environmentally freindly when it comes to nuclear waste. The problem is that this technology has been hampered by mostly unfounded concerns.

 

Sure in this instance there are some very real and horrible conciquences related to the technology when it is exposed to an epic disaster and hopefully there will be more lessons learned from it and the disaster can be contained as much as possible.

 

Running away from the technology all together is not the answer though and this disaster should not be used as a tool to discredit the merits of nuclear power. This is a horrible situation and has the potential to get much worse but it should not be used to slow development of the technology again or things like this will happen again because it is too unpopular to further the research and find the solution.

[CHR1S]

Other countries are now looking to shut down their oldest plants and assess if atomic energy is the future based on the events in Japan... wow that's a massive over reaction! Yes assess and make it safer but stop using it altogether? Edited March 15, 2011 by CHR1S
should be assess not asses oops

[srochford]

Other countries are now looking to shut down their oldest plants and assess if atomic energy is the future based on the events in Japan... wow that's a massive over reaction! Yes assess and make it safer but stop using it altogether?

 

Disagree with your last point - I think you're doing a tabloid style misreading of "assess if atomic energy is the future" and assuming that there's only 1 possible outcome of that assessment (ie give up on nuclear) when there are obviously multiple possible outcomes of the assessment ("carry on as we are; current systems are fine", "carry on but add an extra level of containment", etc, etc)

[CHR1S]

Disagree with your last point - I think you're doing a tabloid style misreading of "assess if atomic energy is the future" and assuming that there's only 1 possible outcome of that assessment (ie give up on nuclear) when there are obviously multiple possible outcomes of the assessment ("carry on as we are; current systems are fine", "carry on but add an extra level of containment", etc, etc)

 

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has ordered Russia's nuclear agency to carry out a review of the future of the atomic energy sector in the country in the wake of the Japanese earthquake, AFP news agency reports.

 

Germany is moving to shut down its oldest nuclear reactors as Chancellor Angela Merkel convenes crisis talks on the future of atomic energy in light of events in Japan, Reuters said.

 

Meanwhile Roland Nelles says in Der Spiegel that nuclear power in Germany is finished.

 

Im only taking it as I read it...

[sonofsanta]

BBC News - The fear of nuclear

 

Is the BBC discussing what we're discussing, although it still strikes as a little uneven.

[RabbieBurns]

William Tucker: Japan Does Not Face Another Chernobyl - WSJ.com