Japan earthquake + tsunami + nuclear problems

[manofthesea]

Three reactors at the power plant were in critical condition after Friday's quake, losing their ability to cool down and releasing some radiation. A fourth reactor that was unoperational caught fire on Tuesday and more radiation was released, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano said.

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/117932039.html

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

They're scared of radioactive Plutonium waste with a half-life of 24,000 years. They're scared of environmental contamination. They're scared of cancer that might take years to develop.

And so on.

All of these issues, environmental contamination, impact on human health and even radioactive waste release, are several times worse with coal than they are with nuclear.

If people were truly worried about these things, they would be building atom smashers.

 

[dudalb]

All of these issues, environmental contamination, impact on human health and even radioactive waste release, are several times worse with coal than they are with nuclear.

If people were truly worried about these things, they would be building atom smashers.

Well, there is always Jihad Jane's "Let Go Back To The Middle Ages" solution......

 

[portlandatheist]

They're scared of radioactive Plutonium waste with a half-life of 24,000 years. They're scared of environmental contamination. They're scared of cancer that might take years to develop.

And so on.

The longer the half life, the less radioactive

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Well, there is always Jihad Jane's "Let Go Back To The Middle Ages" solution......

Not a viable one for those of us who enjoy having our teeth past the age of thirty or walking down streets not slathered in horse poop.

It's always funny though to see people like JihadJane, Bikerdruid and TFian say these things over the internet.

 

[portlandatheist]

I think the more relevant question is: would alternative energy power plants be able to run a lightbulb?

Those solar powered calculators are pretty cool

 

[Bluespaceoddity]

Two things.
I thought reactor 1 was the only reactor without redundant cooling.
I would have expected Japan to have some sort of robotic apparatus to check on the containment vessels.

Whoever provided you with that information was not updating frequently enough based on development in the fluid situation. Some "latest summaries" were outdated by the time they were translated and posted online. (In spite of more recent info being provided live /petulance] )

Part of the measuring ability was lost when equipment in control rooms was damaged by the earthquake/tsunami.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

What would happen to nuclear energy infrastructure were advanced industrial civilization to become unsustainable and disintegrated?

That can't happen. Technological industrial civilization needs energy first and foremost. As has been pointed out numerous times before, there is sufficient nuclear fuel supplies on Earth to sustain modern civilization for tens of thousands of years at a minimum. Unconventional oceanic uranium can last us for millions of years.

And if there's a problem that gets in the way, you yourself have admitted:

having too much energy. It allows us to do too much work.

Except there is not such thing as being able to do too much work. Having an overabundance of energy allows us to choose less energy efficient solutions if other resources become strained.

 

[a_unique_person]

Two things.
I thought reactor 1 was the only reactor without redundant cooling.
I would have expected Japan to have some sort of robotic apparatus to check on the containment vessels.

The backup generators were redundant, apparently, but they were all placed together on low land near the sea behind a sea wall.

 

[MattusMaximus]

Here's the latest update from the World Nuclear News. Some points of note...

... Radiation levels on the edge of the plant compound briefly spiked at 8217 microsieverts per hour but later fell to about a third that.

In line with the theory that non-condensed gases in the torus will be released fairly promptly and not replenished at the same rate, it is possible that the radiation release - at least via this route - will dimininsh and stabilise.

And on the issue of containment:

A close watch is being kept on the radiation levels to ascertain the status of containment. As a precaution Tokyo Electric Power Company has evacuated all non-essential personnel from the unit. The company's engineers continue to pump seawater into the reactor pressure vessel in an effort to cool it.

A message recieved from Tepco at about 5pm said the primary containment vessel around the reactor and secondary containment provided by the reactor building "show no significant change."

And about that fire:

... Kan's spokesman Noriyuki Shikata said that there had been "a sign of leakage" while firefighters were at work, "but we have found out the fuel is not causing the fire." The fire is now reported extinguished. The International Atomic Energy Agency did confirm that the fire had taken place in the used fuel storage pool.

Concerning evacuation:

Kan has requested that evacuation from a 20 kilometer radius is completed and those between 20-30 kilometers should stay indoors. He said his advice related to the overall picture of safety developments at Fukushima Daiichi, rather than those at any individual reactor unit.

Shikata added that radiation levels near the reactors had reached levels that would affect human health. It is thought that the fire had been the major source of radiation.

Note that it says "radiation levels near the reactors had reached" (as in, past tense), and the fire is now out.

 

[JihadJane]

'How a Reactor Shuts Down and What Happens in a Meltdown'

Graphic explanation from New York Times for the hard of reading.

 

[r-j]

How can nuclear fuel rods burn? My paranoid brother thinks that the old fuel rods, which he is saying they store on top of the reactors, he says they caught fire?

First off, nobody can possibly be dumb enough to store hundreds of tons of highly radioactive fuel rods on top of working reactors.

Second, fuel rods don't actually burn, like a fire, they just get hot. Right? Even if the water boils away, they just get hot, not actually burn, like a wood fire. Right?

Because he is scaring me and I want him to shut up.

 

[bobdroege7]

How can nuclear fuel rods burn? My paranoid brother thinks that the old fuel rods, which he is saying they store on top of the reactors, he says they caught fire?

The metal the fuel rods are made of oxidizes in a water/steam environment before it melts.


http://commentarius-ioannis.blogspot.com/2011/03/zirconium-water-reaction.html

First off, nobody can possibly be dumb enough to store hundreds of tons of highly radioactive fuel rods on top of working reactors.

Once you remove the fuel rods from the reactor, they must be kept cool, and it is difficult to move them and keep them cool. This is why they keep them in pools on top of the reactor for a while.

Second, fuel rods don't actually burn, like a fire, they just get hot. Right? Even if the water boils away, they just get hot, not actually burn, like a wood fire. Right?

Burns like a metal fire, very difficult to extinguish once it starts burning.

Because he is scaring me and I want him to shut up.

You shouldn't be scared, but this is serious.

 

[ellindsey]

How can nuclear fuel rods burn? My paranoid brother thinks that the old fuel rods, which he is saying they store on top of the reactors, he says they caught fire?

First off, nobody can possibly be dumb enough to store hundreds of tons of highly radioactive fuel rods on top of working reactors.

Second, fuel rods don't actually burn, like a fire, they just get hot. Right? Even if the water boils away, they just get hot, not actually burn, like a wood fire. Right?

Because he is scaring me and I want him to shut up.

Used fuel rods are stored in a water tank which is part of the reactor building while they cool off. These did not catch fire. Apparently what did catch fire on reactor #4 was lubricating oil in the pumps which circulate water to cool the fuel rods. This fire has since been put out.

http://www.nei.org/newsandevents/information-on-the-japanese-earthquake-and-reactors-in-that-region/

 

[r-j]

CNN keeps saying it's possible fuel rods burned! Or rather, the Japanese have said that.

I find it unbelievable that they store the dangerous fuel rods on top of the reactors! Is that done in the US?

 

[andyandy]

I'm interested - what's the worst case scenario here (based on current reports/knowledge of the types of reactors etc)?

I've read that a Chernobyl style explosion is out due to the type of reactor and failsafes in place, so if everything that could go wrong did go wrong, what would the fallout be (literally....)?

 

[r-j]

Is there a risk of contamination spreading outside Japan?

At this stage there is no likelihood of serious radioactive contamination outside Japan, and no immediate danger to other countries. If the reactor cores in the Fukushima powerplants remain intact, the serious effects can be confined mainly to the 20-kilometre radius around the nuclear plant.


If one or more reactors melt down, this will change. It would then be possible that plumes of radioactive dust could move offshore and affect other countries around the North Pacific, including Russia, China, Canada and the US.

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/e...ar-will-the-danger-spread-20110315-1bw1e.html

That isn't very reassuring at all!

 

[MarkCorrigan]

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/e...ar-will-the-danger-spread-20110315-1bw1e.html

That isn't very reassuring at all!

But it assumes a severe containment breech and as far as I'm aware there hasn't been a breech at all.

 

[jbjr]

That isn't very reassuring at all!

You can be reassured by the fact that the article you quoted is filled with errors. To you point, even if the reactor went through a full meltdown, which is very ver unlikely, the fuel would still be contained by the containment vessel surrounding the reactor.

Some othe problem with the article just at first glance:

"Radiation exposure is measured in units called ''sieverts'' and people immediately around the power station were exposed to about 400 millisieverts in an hour yesterday."

Actually the reports said that these levels were detected, not that anyone wasa exposed to them. Also, that level was a temporary spike and has since dropped off.

"Trying to stay safe ... a one-year-old boy is rechecked for radiation at Nihonmatsu, Fukushima. Photo: AP Photo/Asahi Shimbun"

This is the caption below the fearmongering photo. the child is being checked for contamination. not radiation.

"Smoke from the fire at the fuel rod storage area is likely to be highly radioactive and some particles of smoke and ash could be transported for long distances in the wind."

This has not even been suggested by authorities, let alone confirmed. It seems even less likely now that reports have come in about the fire being an oil fire instead of a fuel fire.

 

[babycondor]

All of these issues, environmental contamination, impact on human health and even radioactive waste release, are several times worse with coal than they are with nuclear.

If people were truly worried about these things, they would be building atom smashers.

Drifting off topic, but I'd be interested in learning more about this issue and the aspects you've brought up, as well as the "we don't want to go back to the Middle Ages" argument. Can you suggest a pertinent JREF thread or other sources? Thanks.