• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Fukushima - It's Not Over

This is The End

Penultimate Amazing
Joined
Sep 14, 2007
Messages
10,925
Apparently there has been some ineptitude in the containment of this disaster.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/21/us-japan-fukushima-severity-idUSBRE97K02B20130821

"This certainly exceeds Tokyo Electric's ability in some respects," NRA chairman Shunichi Tanaka told a media briefing after a regular meeting of the NRA commission. He had been asked whether the operator could handle the crisis.


Water in the latest leak is so contaminated that a person standing close to it for an hour would receive five times the annual recommended limit for nuclear workers in a year.

Tepco has been criticized for its failure to prepare for the disaster and been accused of covering up the extent of the problems at the plant.

The leak is so contaminated that a person standing 50 cm (1.6 feet) away that, after 10 hours, a worker in that proximity to the leak would develop radiation sickness with symptoms including nausea and a drop in white blood cells.


A spokesman for the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) said earlier on Wednesday the agency plans to upgrade the severity of the crisis from a level 1 "anomaly" to a level three "serious incident" on an international scale for radiological releases.


"Any way you look at it, this is deplorable," Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga said at a regular news conference on Wednesday. "The government will make every effort to halt the leak of contaminated water as soon as possible."
 
The latest leak was 300 tonnes of highly radioactive water.
Masayuki Ono, general manager of Tepco, told Reuters news agency: "One hundred millisieverts per hour is equivalent to the limit for accumulated exposure over five years for nuclear workers; so it can be said that we found a radiation level strong enough to give someone a five-year dose of radiation within one hour." (BBC)
 
And "incident" still fails to reach the level of "accident" on that international scale you're referencing.
 
Just how long does it take to cool down one of these reactors? Forever? Can't they keep reusing the water once it's cooled. My very limited understanding is they are using 300 or so tonnes a day and then having to store that and use another 300 tonnes the next day. By my calculations an olympic swimming pool contains water weighing about 8 times as much. So, every 8 days they need to set aside storage for an olympic swimming pool-size amount of water. How long have they been doing that and how much longer must they keep doing it? And is that possible anyway.
 
What happens when you dilute 300 tonnes of "highly radioactive" water in the Pacific Ocean?

If the public paranoia reaches an adequate threshold I'll enjoy the resulting drop in the price of sushi and crab meat.
 
What happens when you dilute 300 tonnes of "highly radioactive" water in the Pacific Ocean?

The BBC article suggests it's spilled onto the ground and is soaking in:
BBC said:
Teams of workers at the plant have surrounded the leaking tank with sandbags and have been attempting to suck up large puddles of radioactive water.
 
Just how long does it take to cool down one of these reactors? Forever? Can't they keep reusing the water once it's cooled. My very limited understanding is they are using 300 or so tonnes a day and then having to store that and use another 300 tonnes the next day. By my calculations an olympic swimming pool contains water weighing about 8 times as much. So, every 8 days they need to set aside storage for an olympic swimming pool-size amount of water. How long have they been doing that and how much longer must they keep doing it? And is that possible anyway.

So long as you can get water circulating through the core and have a heat sink for it then, yes, you reuse the water. My expertise was with pressurized water reactors rather than boiling core reactors (which are the type at Fukushima) but the general principles are the same. Decay heat will continue to be generated for years though this is much less heat than when the reactors are critical, of course. The wikipedia article looks like a pretty reasonable overview of what happened.
 
So long as you can get water circulating through the core and have a heat sink for it then, yes, you reuse the water. My expertise was with pressurized water reactors rather than boiling core reactors (which are the type at Fukushima) but the general principles are the same. Decay heat will continue to be generated for years though this is much less heat than when the reactors are critical, of course. The wikipedia article looks like a pretty reasonable overview of what happened.

Interesting so far as comprehensible. Thanks for the info and the link.
 
What happens when you dilute 300 tonnes of "highly radioactive" water in the Pacific Ocean?

it gets more effective, the more you dilute it?
and it will cure all illnes that have the same symtoms like radiation has on your body? :boxedin:
 
an ongoing very minor problem for the forseeable future....the biggest risk from this sort of thing is
the fear.

I don't know, lots of localized environmental damage from the decades of unregulated nuclear waste...I'm just going to ballpark has a much higher activity level than Fukushima will ever manage. Direct fission product lost to the environment...just makes my previously nuke-qual'd self cringe a bit.

ETA: Though you could be completely correct. I haven't seen numbers.
 
Last edited:
Is the most popular comment (or perhaps it was just the first) from the OP article 100% hog wash?

BraveNewWrld said:
The situation at Fukushima seems dire if even Reuters started portioning bad news. What upsets me most is that 1.5 year after the accident there is no permanent solution – not even proposed, let alone implemented like it was done in the case of Chernobyl. They continue holding onto the stop-gap measures, pumping the cooling water into the nuclear fuel melt and filling new and new tanks with that used water at a rate where they barely keep up assembling these tanks. Which then leak…I wonder, has Japanese Government asked assistance from Russians? Remember, they are the only nation that has experience of managing a nuclear crisis of similar scale. And events on the ground show, russians dealt with Chernobyl better than Japanese are doing with Fukushima… Of course, a complication is that Fukushima has 400 tons of nuclear fuel to take care of – ten times the amount Chernobyl had… Nevertheless, in the wake of Chernobyl Russians have incorporated the “controlled meltdown” option in the design of their water moderated reactors. If I understand this correctly, they simply fill a vessel unnderneath the reactor with some kind of steel shot, probably mixed with cadmium, so that if nothing else works fuel melts into this metal, they mix together and nuclear reaction stops. I wonder, perhaps they could design something to do similar controlled meltdowns at Fukushima?


Also, if it is, you probably don't want to read any of the popular comments on that article!

Only click this link if you have free time and appropriate nerve:

http://www.reuters.com/article/comments/idUSBRE97K02B20130821
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom