Japan Battles Partial Nuclear Meltdown
Hugh Pickens writes "Japanese nuclear experts are working to contain a partial meltdown at an earthquake-stricken nuclear power plant north of Tokyo, as fears grow that the death toll from Friday's massive quake and tsunami could reach the tens of thousands. A partial meltdown, experts said, would likely mean that some portion of the reactors' uranium fuel rods had cracked or warped from overheating, releasing radioactive particles into the reactors' containment vessels. Some of those particles would have escaped into the air outside when engineers vented steam from the vessels to relieve pressure building up inside. Adding to problems at the site, hydrogen was building up inside the Number Three reactor's outer building, threatening an explosion like the one that blew apart the Number One reactor building's roof and outer walls on Saturday. However, it remains unclear how far radiation has spread from the facility. Some local residents and health workers were diagnosed with radiation poisoning in precautionary tests, but they show no outward symptoms of distress. 'Even if you have a radiation release, although that's not a good thing, it's not automatically a harmful thing. It depends on what the level turns out to be,' says Steve Kerekes, a spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute, a US industry group, adding that a person exposed to the highest radiation levels measured at the Fukushima site would absorb in two to three hours the same amount of radiation that he would normally absorb in 12 months – a significant but not necessarily injurious amount, especially if exposure time was short."
I think it's incredible how safe their reactors are and when you consider what has happened, I think this should calm many people's fear of nuclear energy.
Now, the disposal of the waste ....
Just what we need to speed along nuclear adoption here in the US.
Where's Jane Fonda when you need her?
If we're lucky, this will only set us back another 30 years.
'Even if you have a radiation release, although that's not a good thing, it's not automatically a harmful thing. It depends on what the level turns out to be,' says Steve Kerekes, a spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute
To repeat myself from yesterday, the public should trust the pronouncements about things that can kill you for thousands of years from industry shills why, exactly?
I mainly read and watch Deutsche Welle for my news. AJ/BBC are usually decent though. How sad is it that we have ZERO real news in America? Not even NPR which is as close as we come. We need a real news channel and outlet, not political or sensational bullshit. Just news.
http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
Much, much cleaner than Coal, Gas and Oil and more easily implemented at large scales than Wind and Solar, not to mention considerably cheaper than the latter.
No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
Sorry if that sounds eilitist, but its true. Just because radiation is involved does not mean it is evil.
Because it it did, the Sun would be the most evil entity in the Solar System.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Your metaphor lacks one detail: all the bridges are toll bridges, and the Gen I bridges are still making money for their owners. As a result, they're reasonably happy to keep charging people to cross while they pay PR companies to promote newer, more exciting bridges which they aren't choosing to build (but could be persuaded to do so if Government helped them to pay for these spanky new bridges).
... (BTW those wind farms kill bats and birds).
For the last time, your cat, and tall fucking buildings are killing birds much more effectively than windmills.
A chart of bird deaths by cause.
"Educate the mind but never at the expense of the soul."~Blessed Basil Moreau
All non-fossil power generation is "hooked on subsidies" -- until we internalize the environmental costs of fossil fuels, nothing else is competitive and so everything else has to be subsidized.
Part of the problem the nuclear industry has is people just like Dr. Oehmen who seem to have a extreme confidence but then say things that don't make sense.
For example, at one point he says that the cooling system failed because onsite generators were flooded, so they operated on battery power till they could get some portable generators moved to the site and operating. OK so far. Then he says that once they got the portable generators there, they couldn't use them because they came with the wrong plugs. (!) WTF -- chop the plugs and receptacles off and wire the damn things together directly.
After that he says stuff like only radioactive nitrogen was in the steam and it decays in seconds. OK -- so why are people being admitted to the hospital with radiation sickness? Maybe because there was a release of cesium?
He concludes that the system is totally safe and nothing bad can possibly happen.
It is people like this who cause our problems because they allow confidence to overcome foresight.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
The step you are missing is the bit, just after paragraph 1, where you advertise your new bridge as providing "safe and limitless river crossing for generations; so cheap nobody will even think to impose tolls". Then, when people start getting washed away you build fences to make sure that only one person crosses at a time so nobody can tell who the washed away people are. Later, you publish studies showing that due to the unavoidable risk of waterfalls all river ferries are incredibly dangerous and much more expensive than anybody ever knew. Finally you start accusing everybody who ever claimed your version 1 bridge was unsafe of knowing nothing about water and that if only they all learned about the theory of swimming they would know that nobody will be killed by water in future.
perhaps you are right and nuclear is now safe. It's just very difficult to believe it just because the nuclear industry says it's true.
=~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();