Slashdot Mirror
Further Updates On Post-Tsumami Japan
DarkStarZumaBeach points out a frequently updated page from the International Atomic Energy Agency with updates on the situation at Japan's Fukushima nuclear plant, which reports in terse but readable form details of the dangers and progress there. The most recent update says that the plant's Unit 2 has been re-wired for power, and engineers 'plan to reconnect power to unit 2 once the spraying of water on the unit 3 reactor building is completed.' Read on for more on the tsunami aftermath.
Reader srwellman writes "A large plume of radioactive smoke is heading from Japan to the West Coast of the US. Officials claim the plume is not dangerous."
dooms13 suggests (by way of The Register) that the disaster in Fukushima is nonetheless a demonstrated triumph for nuclear safety: "If nuclear powerplants were merely as safe as they are advertised to be, there should have been a major failure right then. As the hot cores ceased to be cooled by the water which is used to extract power from them, control rods would have remained withdrawn and a runaway chain reaction could have ensued – probably resulting in the worst thing that can happen to a properly designed nuclear reactor: a core meltdown in which the superhot fuel rods actually melt and slag down the whole core into a blob of molten metal. In this case the only thing to do is seal up the containment and wait: no radiation disaster will take place, but the reactor is a total writeoff and cooling the core off will be difficult and take a long time. Eventual cleanup will be protracted and expensive."
Something to contemplate while the rescue effort continues: imscarr writes "The coastline of Japan has drastically changed since the earthquake & tsunami. New bays have formed and many areas are completely flooded. These interactive before-and-after images show you the magnitude of devastation. Other photos here."
Adds reader madcarrots: "The Laboratory of Applied Bioacoustics (LAB), a unit of the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC), directed by Professor Michel Andre, has recorded the sound of the earthquake that shook Japan on Friday, March 11. The recording, now available online, was provided by a network of underwater observatories belonging to the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC) and located on either side of the earthquake epicenter, close to the Japanese island of Hatsushima."
dooms13 suggests (by way of The Register) that the disaster in Fukushima is nonetheless a demonstrated triumph for nuclear safety: "If nuclear powerplants were merely as safe as they are advertised to be, there should have been a major failure right then. As the hot cores ceased to be cooled by the water which is used to extract power from them, control rods would have remained withdrawn and a runaway chain reaction could have ensued – probably resulting in the worst thing that can happen to a properly designed nuclear reactor: a core meltdown in which the superhot fuel rods actually melt and slag down the whole core into a blob of molten metal. In this case the only thing to do is seal up the containment and wait: no radiation disaster will take place, but the reactor is a total writeoff and cooling the core off will be difficult and take a long time. Eventual cleanup will be protracted and expensive."
Something to contemplate while the rescue effort continues: imscarr writes "The coastline of Japan has drastically changed since the earthquake & tsunami. New bays have formed and many areas are completely flooded. These interactive before-and-after images show you the magnitude of devastation. Other photos here."
Adds reader madcarrots: "The Laboratory of Applied Bioacoustics (LAB), a unit of the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC), directed by Professor Michel Andre, has recorded the sound of the earthquake that shook Japan on Friday, March 11. The recording, now available online, was provided by a network of underwater observatories belonging to the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC) and located on either side of the earthquake epicenter, close to the Japanese island of Hatsushima."
Is that like a tsunami mommy?
Of the technological terror you've created.
Above all, don't pat yourselves on your (so far) only minimally irradiated backs. It's not over yet, not by a long shot. And while defense in depth has worked to a significant degree I will be you those engineers responsible for siting ALL the backup generators seaward of the reactors are having second thoughts. As are the geologists who suggested that a 5 meter tsunami was as large as need be covered for, despite pretty clear geological evidence of 30 meter waves in the past and the longstanding knowledge that specific wave heights vary with a large number of variables.
Why the hell nobody thought of putting a 30 meter wall in front of a reactor complex is beyond me. No, you don't have to seal the whole coast - just in front of those glowing things.
Nature will yet throw us something unexpected. Bet on it.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Tsumami as opposed to tsusweet, tsusalty, tsusour, and tsubitter.
Reader srwellman writes "A large plume of radioactive smoke is heading from Japan to the West Coast of the US. Officials claim the plume is not dangerous."
The linked source does NOT validate that assertion whatsoever. The 'plume' is a forecast of the way a plume would take shape across the pacific, if it were to exist. No-one is saying that there is a radioactive smoke plume of any magnitude, including undetectable. It is a weather forecast, meant for internal consumption by various national nuclear agencies for contingency planning and leaked to the NYT, nothing more.
This is a substitute for a clever sig that fits within the maximum number of characters.
From New York to Germany, politicians are proposing shutting-down nuclear plants.
Talk about jumping to rash conclusions. What are we supposed to use for power once the oil/coal becomes scarce and as expensive as silver? We need nuclear power as a replacement fuel (and supplemented by solar).
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
the whole thing has been flooded and douched with salt water, better not stand too close to the fuse box when they fire that thing back up ..
This link:
Bad Oehmen: Confirmation Bias, Sources & Astroturfing
Describes the curious case of how a reassuring first time web post ("Why I am not worried about Japans nuclear reactors") from a guy working on a liason project at MIT in a non-nuclear engineering or physicist role somehow got reposted 30,000 times in one day.
Just something to keep in mind when you see crap like "If nuclear powerplants were merely as safe as they are advertised to be, there should have been a major failure right then". Hey clueless, the cores haven't melted. Yet. They are losing their heat removal capacity over time as less and less water surrounds them. When they do get hot enough, they will melt their containers, and we will have a chernobyl-style release. Not exactly the same as chernobyl, because there's no graphite to burn. Instead the particulate radioactive isotopes and actinides (and plutonium, yay!) will be propelled into the atmosphere via hydrogren explosions. There's also a hell of a lot more uranium and plutonium on site since some clever laddie beancounter got the used fuel rods containment pools located above the reactors.
Fukushima hasn't completely melted down, yet. If it doesn't it will because we (the planet) threw everything we have at it.
Remain calm! All is well!
The MIT Department of Nuclear Engineering has a web site, updated regularly, which acts as a hub for information about the nuclear crisis, including helpful background information.
See it at: http://mitnse.com/
---- It won't be as bad as you fear or as good as you hope, but it will take twice as long as you plan.
That tsumami taste is extra savory. (typo in title)
Welcome to media hype and the anti-nuclear nuts run amok.
They are not running amok so much as running away from the industry shills and misguided nuclear enthusiasts, who, when each new batch of egg hits their face, remind us that raw egg can be very good for the skin.
What I would like to know is if they could have prevented any of these problems by not shutting down all the plants right away.. What kind of problems would have resulted if a few of the reactors were left Online?
It's taken them nearly a week to get a police truck with a water cannon there (and it didn't work).
Why the fuck wasn't there a way to fly in a pumper truck, a generator, a long hose, and a ladder, to flood that building on Saturday or Sunday?
Are they so married to their procedures that they have no clue at all when thinking outside the box will save their asses? Do they have no foresight to try something preventive instead of waiting for the same sequence of disastrous results to occur in every reactor building?
The most impressive thing to me is the creation of new inlets, and the loss of sand. I wonder how long (if ever) before the sand bars will reform.
BTW, they landed a plane at Sendai Airport. I imagine it will be a long time before normal operations are established there though. AFAIK, those military transports can take off and land on anything that's flat and not too muddy.
I was online this morning with a few people from Japan.
I found out that American schooled people are being evacuated, and that all of the "Military kids" of the higher echelons have already been moved out of the area.
Of course, these could just be rumors, but one guy was pretty convinced he was being evacuated today.
10.000 years after the accident, Fukushima habitable again ?
A lot of comments here seem to focus on what could have been done differently. Obviously, hindsight is 20/20. That being said, I have a question that I haven't seen asked or answered yet. Why are the spent fuel rods stored in the same buildings as the reactors?
In the event of losing power, not only do the active rods need to be dealt with, but the spent rods have to be monitored and maintained in the same facility. Wouldn't transporting the spent rods to a less densely populated area that was specifically designed to handle their storage make more sense? It seems that the problems right now getting the reactors under control is being hampered by the severe risks of those containment pools for the spent rods draining.
We have undersea robots to attempt to plug oil leaks. Where are the robots workers can man from a safe distance to wade into the radiation and deal with the physical aspect of getting water where water is needed?
Oops. Maybe posting such an important link on /. wasn't a good idea.
Proverbs 21:19
Yeah, sure, most of the problems were financial or political, not engineering. But we can fix those, too.
When I first came here, this was all swamp. Everyone said I was daft to build a castle on a swamp, but I built in all the same, just to show them.
It sank into the swamp.
So I built a second one. That sank into the swamp.
So I built a third. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp.
But the fourth one stayed up. And that's what you're going to get, Lad, the strongest castle in all of England.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Why are we hoisting in a bucket at a time by helicopter when we could use the same flight to lift in an drop a weighted firehose which would provide a stream of water? Would require less exposure to radiation by the flight crews. Also drop one on each of the reactors now while you still have access, don't wait till they blow.
Port Royal, Jamaica had a huge earthquake in 1692 pretty much dropping a fair portion of that city under the ocean. It is still there, flooded and under water. Protected as a historical site, divers frequently dive on it. In some places entire buildings are still there, intact as if they were built under the water.. The reason I'm asking is, has the land that is flooded in Japan actually subsided to below sea level due to the earthquake, or is it simply still flooded? It looks to me as if most of the land in Japan that was affected is still at the same height above sea level as pre-quake, however there may be areas that are now below the ocean... in any event Port Royal was pretty much destroyed again in 1909, and has been hit and hit hard by Hurricanes and probably is due for another temblor in 200 odd years.... I sure hope they don't build a nuke plant there, and I hope that Japan and every other country planning a new nuclear plant try their hardest to site them in areas that
(A): Don't have a history of earthquakes.
and
(B) don't have a history of storm surges from Hurricanes/Cyclones/Tsunami's...
Hmmm. Having seen their unsuccessful attempts to deliver water to the reactor basins(?), I armed myself with (digital) crayons and (authentic) nativity:
http://androidarts.com/cooling.jpg
The thing makes power -- why can't it use its own power to run the pumps to keep it cool enough to work?
I can see the need for outside power in a start-up mode. But after that you should be able to cut the umbilical cord.
Would we be having this conversation (or this nuclear disaster) if it was self-powered?
What am I missing or don't know?
Generally speaking, power plant generators don't generate at voltages usable by the control systems in the plant itself. They need to feed power to the grid, which is designed to distribute power at voltage that is usable by the control systems. If they had a purpose built transformer on site to take generator output and convert it to the proper voltage for pumps, computers, etc. it would work like you expected. However, those kinds of transformers are costly and built to order. It is much cheaper to tap the distribution grid (which would have to be extended to the plant during construction anyway) for the lights, pumps, and such, then back up that power with generators.
Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
In the case of Germany it's not fear. As far as I know, Angela Merkel was and is against nuclear power (she has a doctorate in quantum chemistry BTW), her party (which is conservative) also favours the nuclear phase-out, they only differ with the left in the transition period. They recently extended the nuclear phase-out period (longer than they wanted, because the FDP forced them), but they weren't going to allow to build new nuclear plants anyway.
Overall, Germany is a very anti-nuclear country. They think that nuclear power is not sustainable long-term, they don't have control over the nuclear raw materials like others countries have. They seem to think that in order to be competitive Germany must lead the next big technological change (which is why they bet so much on renewables)
I have noticed that there are no large planes at the flooded Sendai airport. Was there just none there, or did they get them all off the ground before the tsunami hit?
The pumps need to run when the plant is not operating. Even when the reactor is scrammed, decay heat is generated at say .01 % of operating levels for a month (and lowering). For this type of reactor that is still on the order of MW(th). Also it is standard practice to isolate systems in case of failure. As an example, one of causes of Chernobyl was a test in which energy of the turbines as they wound down from the operating regime to shutoff was transferred to the circulation pumps to give time for the backups to kick on. While this does not directly relate, it does illustrate that a reactor being self-sustaining in a low-power or scram condition would be dangerous.
The plans to "rewire" the power plants were from yesterday and, at the moment, they are just that, plans. This morning Toden announced that the construction of the electric cable that was supposed to be complete yesterday will be delayed until at least tomorrow. At the very end, they said also, in a markedly small voice, that they hope restoring the electricity will go smoothly, but there are worries that the equipment on the ground - pumps and transformers - may be out of order (maybe - after those explosions and all that water dumped on them from the air?), and that could probably hamper the effort.
In reality, there is no staff (except the firefighters, Chernobyl style) on the ground since Saturday - a relative and a former colleague worked at the plant and are already in Osaka since Tuesday - all measurements are taking place from the helos and from an observation points 30km away, and radiation in excess of 150 microgreys is being reported 30-40 km away upwind from the reactor by the local authorities.
So, there is only stalling, spinning, and no information.
Incidentally, here are the radiation reports by the ministry of science and bullshit (japanese, sorry, all data is in microsieverts, and if the last column is without dates, it has the long-term averages) : http://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/saigaijohou/syousai/1303723.htm
I feel very strongly that the press have behaved very irresponsibly throughout this and gov'ts around the world should take them to task.
Nothing wrong with nuclear power if its done correctly. I seem to remember liquid sodium cooled reactors that are safer than any of the water reactors, yet you anti-nuclear people wont allow these safe reactors to be built to replace the less safe water reactors. Good work, you basically made a self fulfilling prophecy.
No "true" nuclear reactor is dangerous. Its just the bad old ones that are a problem (and that's the fault of people who don't trust nuclear reactors in general). Note that these "less safe" reactors were once considered safe.
BTW, when the cooling system is rendered inoperable, what difference does it make what kind of coolant it uses?
Everyone is panicking now and buying iodine tablets.
What a pack of pussies the world has become.
In the 1950s, people used to watch above ground atom bomb tests in between shows and gambling in Vegas while sipping martinis.
Our current president had to be roused from his busy schedule of vacation or golf or whatever to make a comment. Former President Teddy Roosevelt once killed a Kodiak bear with his mind, and personally dug the final mile of the Panama Canal.
Send in Chuck Norris in a lead apron. He'll kill the fuel rods with one punch.
They have the transformers needed, but they are in the switchyard that connects the plant to the power grid. The combination of the quake and tsunami damaged that. (Think. They both have to be able to change generated power to grid form to deliver it, and to take power from the grid to convert to the voltages and phase used by the plant when they are shut down but not on backup generators.)
In any case, they have to close the reactor steam connections to the turbines when they SCRAM the reactor as they often don't know yet just what sort of malfunction it is. There are quite a number of possibilities that could damage the turbines or piping and release steam that is contaminated with radioisotopes into area of the plant not made to handle it.
How long did they have? Half an hour, I think. I seem to recall that under ordinary circumstances you need about 2 minutes between planes. That'd get 15 planes out. Maybe they were able to push it and get 30 out, using different runways. Any plane that didn't get out probably washed away. I haven't seen any large jets in wreckage photos.
I'm sure a lot of people have stories that will come out later. Imagine taking off, looking out the window and seeing the coastline appear to change before your eyes.
I believe it can do it. Normally. That's what's called house load operation. Where the reactor is producing power just for itself when it's disconnected from the grid for some reason. It may be very temporary while it syncs itself back to the grid so it can reconnect.
The problem is, that the transformers needed to do that are in the switchyard of the plant (big oil coiled transformers). The quake and tsunami damaged that as well as the backup generators and took out the power lines to the plant as well. So, no self powering, no power from the grid, and no power from the emergency generators.
That left them with the steam powered RCIC cooling system that needs batteries for the controls. That failed. (I'm not clear if they failed due to batteries running down, malfunction or combinations. There are separate ones for each reactor so it could be any of them. There was word they were flying in batteries to power them at one point.)
I'm seeing a lot of stuff on slashdot that sure sounds like industry spin to me. I'm not a doom sayer by any means, but it's my observation that industry and government big whigs never tell the whole truth about anything. They told us the NYC air after 911 was safe too. I think this guy puts it well:
"Look, if you think any American official is going to tell you the truth, then you're stupid. Did you hear that? Stupid." - Arthur Sylvester, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs, 1965
This snippit from whatreallyhappend.com:
Be aware that General Electric, which designed these reactors and is staring at trillions of dollars on losses from lawsuits and loss of future sales of this design, have launched a huge PR campaign in the mainstream media and here online (as you can see) to downplay this disaster.
Couple of problems
- The generators/switch gear are designed to produce transmission voltages. Industrial voltages for the plant are probably taken from a normal power substation, not directly from the high voltage transmission lines. It's likely the sub-station servicing the plant was wiped out.
- Strangely enough, generators don't work properly if there isn't *enough* load. It's unlikely that the needs of the plant are high enough to keep the generators online.
> Your entire spiel on Banqiao is an elaborate straw man. China has been subject to catastrophic floods for millennia. It has a lot to do with geography, but basically China is flat as a pancake and its major rivers have enormous watersheds. The dam is only part of the problem.
Japan has been subject to earthquakes and tsunamis for the same amount of time. The present earthquake and tsunami killed ~5k. Compared to two people missing at Fukushima Dai-ichi and a few exposed to radiation or otherwise injured.
The nuclear plant is only part of the problem.
. . .and declare that nuclear-is-never-dangerous skeptics hate us for our freedoms(tm).
Let's just nuke them!
I doubt editors will correct this, given they didn't even notice they misspelled "Tsunami" (as "Tsumami") in the headline.
This probably does not include the extensive amount of fossil fuel used to excavate and process nuclear fuel, build the actual plants, nor to deal with the resulting waste.
Of course, you'd have to factor similar considerations in when comparing nuclear to other power sources.
The reactor designs are flawed, the reactors should have been designed to automatically and manually shut down, with rapid drop in control rods, operated by big old basic "Lever and Rod" Frankenstein style off switches - with NO reliance on weak external links such as electrically driven pumps - to keep them cooled.
.
External links, are always the weakest link - because they are attached under the assumption that the sources of power to drive them, the pumps capacity to operate and the piping that carries the coolant to and from the reactor core; will always be operational, able to drive and able to carry the cooling operation out.
.
The only "almost total disaster" resistant method to shut down the reactors ARE a huge bunch of moderator rods and gravity - and a simple pull operated release pin.
.
Anything else is just bullshit.
I just read somewhere (I forget the source) that along some parts of the affected Japan coast, the tides look like they are running about 0.5 m higher than they did before the quake. So maybe about 18 or 20 inches of downward land level shift in places.
Typos are not something I would normally comment about, but in this case "tsumami" actually means something (namely "nibblies" which you get with your drink in a bar). Please fix the title.