Slashdot Mirror


US To Send Radiation-Hardened Robots To Japan

CWmike writes "The United States is sending specialized robots to Japan to help officials there get control of the Fukushima nuclear power plants damaged in this month's devastating earthquake and tsunami. Dr. Peter Lyons, an acting assistant secretary for nuclear energy with the DoE, said the robots, which could be sent into areas that would be dangerous for humans to enter because of high radiation levels, could begin to give officials readings on the environment inside the nuclear power plants. Lyons told the US Senate on Tuesday, 'We are moving expeditiously to ship not only the robots but also operators who perhaps will be used to train Japanese operators. We don't know yet how close the operators will need to be to the site.' Asked about getting information about the state of the damaged reactors, Lyons said the robots could provide some information. 'Certainly not all we need, but some,' he said."

183 comments

  1. Mark this one for the history books, folks. by FooAtWFU · · Score: 5, Funny

    How about that. The US is sending robots to Japan. For our next trick, we will sell coal to Newcastle.

    --
    The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    1. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by AndyAndyAndyAndy · · Score: 0

      And some time from now, they will begin selling their own robots to America, only with better efficiency and higher standards.
      Yes, I made a Detroit joke.

      What? It's not like there's anyone left there to feel bad!

      --
      It's always confirmation bias!
    2. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by ackthpt · · Score: 2

      But US robots can do more than just dance, they can sing badly, too !

      Just the thing for the next big craze from the Land of the Rising Fun - Roboioke!

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    3. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by gad_zuki! · · Score: 3, Informative

      These are radiation hardened industrial robots. Not grandma diaper changing, go playing, receptionist robots.

      The iRobot 710 Warrior isn't interested in managing your manga collection or cooking you ramen noodles.

      iRobot also sent a 510 packbot. In fact, the 710 can carry 510 packbots on its back and deploy they through openings (windows, holes, etc). A little Skynety, but fun.

    4. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The Tyrell Corporation is the only one that builds these.

      Seriously, if they'd had a reliable backup diesel generator we wouldn't have these problems in the first place.

    5. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by spopepro · · Score: 2

      When I was doing some stuff at Lawrence Livermore Labs in the mid 1990s there was a very active group working on radiation and harsh environment resistant robots. They were boring, but highly functional, which is why no one paid any attention from the outside. While I haven't kept up on their work, I am confident that there are few labs in the world that have robots for this job better and more advanced than the DOE devices. They do, of course, have to plan for not only power reactor problems but also our aging weapons stockpile.

    6. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by Abstrackt · · Score: 2

      Seriously, if they'd had a reliable backup diesel generator we wouldn't have these problems in the first place.

      Fry: "Oh, the fools! If only they'd built it with six thousand and one hulls! When will they learn?"

      It's pretty easy to sit back and do an armchair analysis of the situation after the shit has already hit the fan. The flooding caused by the tsunami knocked those generators offline. I live in an area that's prone to flooding and it's harder than you think to keep even a small generator out of harm's way when the water level starts rising.

      --
      They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
    7. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by scharkalvin · · Score: 1

      Osmau Tezuka would be rolling over in his grave if he heard this.....

    8. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by rbollinger · · Score: 1

      I don't have any experience with the 710 Warrior, but I have used the 510 packbot, and it’s quite neat. It is easy for just about anyone to control, and with a little bit of practice you can do some pretty cool maneuvers. The claw and arm are fairly strong (5-15lbs depending on how far the arm is extended), but they are designed more for probing than doing any heavy lifting. My biggest concern is that we always used these robots in pretty close proximity to the operator. They were made for handling hazardous materials and unexploded ordinance, so the operator was close but in a protected area. Radiation is a whole different beast. The 510 I used couldn't go too far beyond a hundred meters before you begin to lose control and video feed.

    9. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by rbollinger · · Score: 1

      Oh, and as an aside, the Control Units are linux based :)

    10. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Did they have no method of keeping a spare that's completely water tight? Obviously they couldn't run it like that, but it would've taken a lot less time to get one that was in a sealed container unpacked than what it took them to connect a cord to a different facility.

      When a component is that important it's foolhardy to have only one backup. Having three or four is better. I know the building I used to work security at had 3 generators each one was enough to power a small city for a several hours.

    11. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The iRobot 710 Warrior [irobot.com] isn't interested in managing your manga collection or cooking you ramen noodles.

      ...Is it interested in being a glorified RC car?

      Yeah, sorry. Japan still wins, by virtue of their creepy not-quite-human receptionist robots.

    12. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by RevWaldo · · Score: 1

      Dr. Tenma would be disappointed, definitely.

      .

    13. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by emo65170 · · Score: 1

      Why didn't they just turn on the main generator to run the pumps? I mean it is a power plant for crying out loud.

    14. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From the company that makes Roomba??? Interesting...

    15. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by Steauengeglase · · Score: 1
    16. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cute, but the one spec they don't seem to list is endurance (battery life). They need to be able to get in and do something and preferably get OUT again and far enough away from the danger that someone can swap their battery packs.

      Hmm, this would seem to be an ideal application for radioisotope generator "batteries". These guys should work with DoE to have someone make up some nuclear batteries for them to have available for this kind of event where you don't really care that your robot won't be recoverable and the environment is already so dangerous that a little extra radiation isn't going to be an issue.

      I find it rather shocking that this deployment is only happening now, almost a full month after the initial events. Since the beginning there seems to have been a serious amount of knowledge about what was going on inside each of the reactor facilities. I would have asked for every available robotic inspection capability within a day or so I think.

      G.

    17. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by Xiterion · · Score: 2

      Because the energy required to spin up the main generator(s) is by itself huge. A large power plant (of any sort, not just nuclear) requires a substantial fraction of their own output power to run cooling pumps, control systems, and the like. Also, there's the issue of spooling up whatever generator is used, which is generally done by feeding power from the grid back into the station. In a so called black start situation, some generating stations on the grid have diesel generators that can be started by a big bank of batteries or compressed air. Those are used to bootstrap that plant, which is in turn used to start other plants, and so on. Since this station tripped during the earthquake, it's only source of power was from the generators on site.

    18. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by emo65170 · · Score: 1

      Because the energy required to spin up the main generator(s) is by itself huge. A large power plant (of any sort, not just nuclear) requires a substantial fraction of their own output power to run cooling pumps, control systems, and the like. Also, there's the issue of spooling up whatever generator is used, which is generally done by feeding power from the grid back into the station. In a so called black start situation, some generating stations on the grid have diesel generators that can be started by a big bank of batteries or compressed air. Those are used to bootstrap that plant, which is in turn used to start other plants, and so on. Since this station tripped during the earthquake, it's only source of power was from the generators on site.

      Interesting.
      Thanks for clearly describing the issues in a well thought out and lucid response.
      Nicely done.

    19. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by Evi1M4chine · · Score: 1
      --
      I must be some kind of leader... Since Slashdot is following me to the grave. ;)
    20. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by Evi1M4chine · · Score: 1

      Put a hardened repeater-like device on a parachute, and drop it out of a helicopter. If you put it on a wire, and put some weight below it, you can fly pretty high without risking dropping it at the wrong place.
      Or wait just put the repeater right on the robot. I bet you can even connect it to its Ethernet port.

      --
      I must be some kind of leader... Since Slashdot is following me to the grave. ;)
    21. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by Evi1M4chine · · Score: 1

      Well, if you watched the actual NHK live feed, you would have seen that actually, the flooding knocked the tanks for the fuel over. Big standing-tube like white tanks. Two per reactor. They were completely gone after the wave.
      That’s the real actual cause of all the problems. The tanks were unprotected, since nobody assumed such a huge wave (7 meters!) with such a immense power (Remember that those waves, when on the open sea, are 1m high but 150 km long, going at 500-1000 km/h! This then "piles up" on the shore.)

      Of course, if the reactors hadn’t been shut down in the first place, the tanks would not have been needed. But who in his right mind would have let them continue running after a 9.0 quake and facing a huge tsunami?

      I would, learning from this, of course put another monster-tsunami-safe casing around the tanks, but separate from the reactor, in case the tanks catch fire. (I guess that’s why they weren’t inside the building.)
      But obviously, you can’t prepare for events that you don’t predict. So if something happens that can still wreck this, my change would still be moot.

      In the face of solar thermal power plants and pumped-storage hydroelectric systems (for 24 h all-season energy), which only need abundant materials, are cheap and easy to repair, and even are good for nature since the mirrors allow water to condense, which causes a whole ecosystem to develop in the previously dead desert below them, I don’t think nuclear power plants are that bad of an idea they have just become pointless. :)

      --
      I must be some kind of leader... Since Slashdot is following me to the grave. ;)
    22. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

      It's pretty easy to sit back and do an armchair analysis of...
      I live in an area that's prone to flooding and it's harder than you think...

      Yessit, it is. It is. But no sir, its still their job if not doing so means millions could die an agonising death of cancer.

      Your house flooding won't nuke your area.

      http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/fukushima-tsunami-data-over-10-meters.html
      They designed for a tsunami of height of between 5-6 meters and put the generators 10-13 meters above sea level. Historically Japan has tsunamis twice that height (10m). The wave that hit them was 14m. If they had catered for the historical tsunami heights, all would probably be well.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historic_tsunamis
      1605: Keich Nankaido, Japan
      On Feb 3 of the Keich era, a 8.1 Quake and tsunami hit 700 houses (41%) at Hiro, Wakayama Prefecture washed away. 3,600 drowned in Shishikui area. Awa, wave height 6-7m. 350 at Kannoura 60 at Sakihama drowned, wave height 5–6 m and 8–10 m, respectively

    23. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by Evi1M4chine · · Score: 1

      Sorry, /. ate my Unicode. It should have been: "I don’t think nuclear power plants are that bad of an idea... they have just become pointless. :)"

      --
      I must be some kind of leader... Since Slashdot is following me to the grave. ;)
    24. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      I live in an area that's prone to flooding and it's harder than you think to keep even a small generator out of harm's way when the water level starts rising.

      Two words: inflatable raft.

      Now, where do I go to collect my consultant's fee? ;)

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    25. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by cavreader · · Score: 1

      Can you site the source of your opinion about the efficiency and higher standards a Japanese built car has over US manufacturers. The last time I remember this coming up was back in the late 80's when Japan was beating US based companies in both categories but that only spurred the US automakers to radically improve their performance and products. Around this time I was looking to buy a new car and did not even look at the US brands at first because the last time I purchased a new car the US autos were of lower quality. When I did check out the US models I was surprised at the improved quality and ended up actually buying the US model. Everyone is always saying that the US manufacture nothing today and as a result has lost manufacturing jobs to other countries but the US is still the worlds leader in manufacturing.

    26. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by budgenator · · Score: 1

      How about fuel, the fuel pods washed away; enough fuel to run a generator big enough to put out 1,000 Amps at 11.8KV for a week, times 6 is what they needed. Fuel is a big problem now, they lost a lot of refinery capacity,

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    27. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by budgenator · · Score: 1

      The reactors scram automatically durring an Earthquake, using the generator to run the pumps is what started the Chernobyl disaster.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    28. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck off teamster. We don't like your kind.

    29. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by Codifex+Maximus · · Score: 1

      Why not take some of that steam generated by the primary and run a failsafe turbine that doesn't generate electricity. It should just run pumps to keep the secondary cooling system running in the event of electrical failure. This way, even if the system has been flooded, cooling continues AND the hotter the primary gets, the faster the turbine will turn and the more cooling should be effected.

      --
      Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
    30. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by Laser+Dan · · Score: 1

      I work in robotics research in Japan. The popular research topics are completely opposite to the US.

      In the US, if you want funding you use keywords like:
      terrorist, warfighter, IED, surveillance, combat

      In Japan you use keywords like:
      elderly, assistance, safety, entertainment

      So we need radiation hardened US robots. After the mess in Fukushima though, I propose to develop a robot to entertain radioactive elderly people while assisting them to drive safely.

    31. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by Kilrah_il · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but you are using facts to win over an argument. I urge you to stop it immediately, or we will have to use drastic measures to stop you.
      Please consider using alternate tools such as blind faith, empty rhetorics or just plain old FUD.

      Thank you for your cooperation.

      --
      Whenever in an argument, remember this.
    32. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by syousef · · Score: 1

      Cute, but the one spec they don't seem to list is endurance (battery life)

      Clearly we need a version with an RTG.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    33. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by Kilrah_il · · Score: 1

      Now, if they made the robot penguin-shaped, that would be something!

      --
      Whenever in an argument, remember this.
    34. Re:Mark this one for the history books, folks. by sodul · · Score: 1

      I hear you, my cars are korean and I never have to do anything to them besides regular maintenance. My Taurus had to get fixed every 3 months (I gave up after replacing the transmission).

  2. I think I speak for everyone when I say.. by wjlafrance · · Score: 0

    I welcome our robot overlords, if they can help keep us safe.

    1. Re:I think I speak for everyone when I say.. by rogueippacket · · Score: 0

      Someone famous once said "He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security."
      Just as relevant then as it is now.

  3. Here's a good question... by rsilvergun · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why wasn't this done sooner? And while I'm asking, how come we didn't fly in power generators to keep the pumps running before things started to melt?

    Oh wait, that would cost money, and the people with the money can just move. Didn't Marx write something about that? Oh well, all anybody can remember about him is that some dictator or another used his books for rhetoric + free advertising.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Here's a good question... by smelch · · Score: 1

      What the fuck is wrong with you? What on Earth does this have to do with money? I'm pretty sure nobody gives a shit about the money of sending robots over, unless you think they were just built now, in which case your "why not sooner" has an answer. Otherwise, it was probably because they didn't think they had a need for them. As a situation evolves, so do the potential solutions. But that doesn't back up your anti-capitalism.

      --
      If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
    2. Re:Here's a good question... by AndyAndyAndyAndy · · Score: 1

      I bet it had a lot less to do with class economics and much more to do with "trusting the Japanese to have a handle on things."
      Remember, we did send them something on the day-of, according to Sec. Clinton... who knows what it was, though.

      --
      It's always confirmation bias!
    3. Re:Here's a good question... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 4, Informative

      Other American robots were already sent, or it was at least reported, a week ago.

      http://articles.cnn.com/2011-03-23/tech/robots.japan.relief_1_packbot-irobot-ground-zero?_s=PM:TECH

      The reason why this or that wasn't done sooner is because the Japanese didn't ask for it, and despite what you may think about American foreign policy, the US isn't just going to muscle into an internal Japanese matter and tell a Japanese utility company what to do.

      Just flying power generators in wouldn't help once they ran out of fuel, thats part of the problem at Fukushima, the backup generators ran out of fuel.

    4. Re:Here's a good question... by bolthole · · Score: 1

      It wasnt so much us trusting them. as them being willing to accept help.

      They weren't willing to accept help, from what I read.
      Now they have have majorly crippled their own country, out of pride.

    5. Re:Here's a good question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Way not to make any research ? Hardened robots were proposed by France (and maybe the US) since the first few days of the accident. Japanese refused them officially because they weren't useful enough for their situation.

    6. Re:Here's a good question... by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      Why wasn't this done sooner?

      Because in the real world, things take time. I'm sure as soon as this happened balls were rolling and it has just now got to a point where the news is bothering to talk about it

      And while I'm asking, how come we didn't fly in power generators to keep the pumps running before things started to melt?

      If that's all it took, I'm sure we would have. Hell, they could have just flown them in from someplace in Japan. For that matter they did but their wasn't a way to patch them into the system because something capable of carrying that sort of voltage and current isn't something you just cut and crimp. Thing is that it was a lot more than just no power. They've got power now and still having issues. I don't think it was just a case of a swamped power plant and no grid. The tsunami basically took out a large part of the plant, pumps were damaged, pipes broken, electronics fried, valves bent, and the place seems to be generally shot to hell.

      Car analogy: This wasn't a case of getting a car that had run out of fuel more gas to keep the guys from having to push it to the shop, this a case of car that had just been totaled in a wreck in which the engine was ruined, the gas tank ruptured, and the electrical harness ripped out to the shop. At that point the analgy sort of breaks down because you just don't throw a nuclear power plant onto a flatbed.

    7. Re:Here's a good question... by countertrolling · · Score: 0

      Money is the precise answer to "why not sooner". Obviously these machines could have been built in anticipation of this. But they decided cocaine and hookers are a better investment.

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    8. Re:Here's a good question... by Marillion · · Score: 1

      My understanding, which could be quite flawed, is they had Diesel generators which failed to start due to the tsunami floodwaters flooding them out and then the battery backup failed once the charge depleted.

      --
      This is a boring sig
    9. Re:Here's a good question... by tonywong · · Score: 1

      Because the management of the power utility consistently underestimated the crisis and didn't want to 'needlessly' alarm people.

      Crisis management is the opposite of normal management and these guys don't understand that. Well, maybe not until now.

    10. Re:Here's a good question... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      I've read similar, diesels failed and all the battery backups failed over time.

      It really was the worst case scenario coupled with the transportation infrastructure failing from the 9.0 earthquake.

    11. Re:Here's a good question... by Steve+Blake · · Score: 1

      Time to send in Spock.

    12. Re:Here's a good question... by countertrolling · · Score: 1

      ...the US isn't just going to muscle into an internal Japanese matter and tell a Japanese utility company what to do..

      The radiation is no longer an "internal" matter. I would justify a robot airdrop (so to speak) here more than dropping bombs on Libya. Only one presents a real threat

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    13. Re:Here's a good question... by baldass_newbie · · Score: 1

      I so wish I had mod points.

      --
      The opposite of progress is congress
    14. Re:Here's a good question... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      When the Japanese radiation actually killed someone outside of Japan then maybe it's an international matter.

      But it hasn't.

      American units based in Japan were helping with the relief efforts, US intelligence assets were in play over Japan with U-2S and Global Hawk flights directly over Fukushima, but all of those were because the Japanese government asked for the assistance.

    15. Re:Here's a good question... by budgenator · · Score: 1

      The generators have been on site for quite a while now, long enough for them to have run out of fuel a couple times. I think you underestimate the enormity of the problems encountered. The Generators are on semi-trailers, three to a generator set, they don't fit into a normal cargo plane, you need something like a Lockheed C-5 Galaxy or a Antonov An-124 to do it, otherwise you have to ship them via cargo ship. If the Generators aren't sitting on the dock in Alaska, they take forever to get there. The generators suck fuel in monstrous amounts, Japan just doesn't have the infrastructure to keep them fueled in the area, their refineries which get most of their crude oil from near by Alaska are on the coast to facilitate receiving the crude and quite a few of them were smashed flat. Hi-ways are gone, bridges washed away, everybody that can help is helping, there are no spare resources to truck fuel in with.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    16. Re:Here's a good question... by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

      I hate to be a jerk, but citation? Seriously, I mean that. The stories I've read all say it wasn't a failure of pumps, it was the generators going offline when the water hit them. I don't remember reading anything about the pumps being smashed, but it could have happened. Otherwise, I still see TEPCO sitting on their hands hoping for the best and finding out too late it wasn't going to happen like that.

      As for the logistics, well, they're just logistics. And it took days for things to get really, really out of hand. That's why I mean when I say hoping for the best... Nuclear power is perfectly safe when enough money is invested in it. I'm frightened of it when there isn't enough money backing it up. I still think that's what happened here.

      --
      Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    17. Re:Here's a good question... by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

      Then you get a darned Lockheed C-5 if that's what it takes. In a crisis like this you expend any amount of resources necessary to contain it. You just described in your post how it all could have been done. All that was lacking was the will power to spend the money to pay everyone. Christ, if you have to you fly in fuel continuously.

      If all else really fails, you call in the US Army. And if you have to you PAY for them when it's all over. It could have been done. It would have been a nightmare of logistics and expense. But it could have been done.

      Incredibly expensive? Yes. But at least the children of Fukushima don't spend the next 100 years dying of leukemia.

      --
      Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    18. Re:Here's a good question... by MachDelta · · Score: 1

      One problem with GP's plan: Where do you land a Galaxy? Big planes need big runways. So you'd still have to tow the things across whatever ruins still count as a highway system.

      I think Fukushima is going to go down as one of those "perfect storm" type disasters where so much went wrong so quickly that no one had ever considered it could ever happen.

    19. Re:Here's a good question... by Kyusaku+Natsume · · Score: 1

      Why wasn't this done sooner? And while I'm asking, how come we didn't fly in power generators to keep the pumps running before things started to melt

      Because the generators needed to run those pumps are of a size that can't be sent by any helicopter in existence.

      --
      Mexico: 100% conservative's America now!
    20. Re:Here's a good question... by Kyusaku+Natsume · · Score: 1

      You can blame TEPCO in that they didn't upgrade the seawalls before. Maybe, you can blame them for protecting the diesel storage tanks with only firewalls, not with walls big enough to protect the fuel tanks against tsunami. They failed at prevention, not at their response at current events. After all, units 5 and 6 will be online in a few months if politics don't get in the way.

      But many heads need to roll inside TEPCO because you have proof in the very damaged site and in Onagawa NPS and Fukushima Daini that things could have been done much better. For saving a few million dollars they have lost now several billions, if not the whole company. That's why if power companies are not property of the State, they need to be firmly under the tumb of government regulators. Energy is too valuable to be left only to the market wishes.

      --
      Mexico: 100% conservative's America now!
    21. Re:Here's a good question... by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Well that's the whole point, the Japanese were running a race of a hundred heats and losing every one in a photo-finish, it's a testament to their fortitude that they hadn't given up in frustration along the way; and it's amazing that things aren't worse than they are.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  4. Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That did not take long at all. Not at all.

  5. Ice to Antarctica by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

    Sounds about like shipping ice to Antarctica. Surely all their robotics R&D didn't go to violin playing, grandma bathing, ramen making, Godzilla fighting bots? Am I missing something?

    --
    Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    1. Re:Ice to Antarctica by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yes, you are missing the 'radiation hardened' part, numbnuts.

    2. Re:Ice to Antarctica by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2

      So why doesn't Japan already have radiation hardened robots? They have a good number of nuclear power plants, an advanced robotics industry, why the hell didn't the Japanese build any of this type of robot?

      This is the second shipment of US robots to go over.

      http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9215346/U.S._to_send_radiation_hardened_robots_to_Japan?taxonomyId=12

    3. Re:Ice to Antarctica by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

      I am a bit surprised that Japan didn't have a more robust robotic response handy(yes, delicate digital circuitry does not mix well with radiation; but RF-controlled large scale model vehicles can be had in fairly large sizes with fairly primitive analog, and thus comparatively rad-hard, controllers), I assume that the general mayhem of earthquake and tsunami had something to do with it.

      On the other hand, though, it isn't a complete surprise that the US might have more radiation-specific robots: Since the US was among the earliest and largest-scale users of nuclear technology, they have a fair few "Christ, guys, what the hell were we thinking at the time?" sites and designs that need to be monitored(and, unlike the former USSR, who also has their share, didn't suffer a major economic contraction right about when they needed to start monitoring them). Plus, I suspect that rad-hard robotics control systems can borrow R&D and component economies of scale from the space program, which also has to send semi-autonomous systems into fairly energetic environments and have them not fail. Components designed for space use are not exactly cheap(BAE's RAD750 is essentially a $200,000 G3-era PPC board...); but cheaper than doing things in one-offs.

    4. Re:Ice to Antarctica by somersault · · Score: 1

      Why weren't the Godzilla fighting robots radiation hardened? That doesn't seem very clever.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    5. Re:Ice to Antarctica by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Rad hard electronics are made by countries with space programs and militaries; having a nuclear industry is not a big driver.

    6. Re:Ice to Antarctica by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surely all their robotics R&D didn't go to violin playing, grandma bathing, ramen making, Godzilla fighting bots? Am I missing something?

      actually, that's kinda their thing...

    7. Re:Ice to Antarctica by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 2

      Ah ha! I knew something was fishy about this story... Taisei set to introduce robots for N-cleanup. I knew my faith in Japanese robotics wasn't misplaced. This is just a PR stunt by a iRobot.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    8. Re:Ice to Antarctica by lysdexia · · Score: 1

      It's been done, MAN. This'll put lead in your pencil.

    9. Re:Ice to Antarctica by gad_zuki! · · Score: 2

      I think it has to do more with the war on terror. A lot of these iRobot bots are seeing service as IED disarming and cleaning paths. I'm not surprised to learn the US has radiation hardened ones too as disarming a dirty bomb probably will become a necessity some day.

    10. Re:Ice to Antarctica by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      I'm sure that that is the current buzzword for getting projects funded, and the item ticked on the brochure for these various devices(and I suspect that the majority of the iRobot chassis are being sold to bomb squad types with the occasional dose of hazmat) ; but the R&D for autonomy and radiation hardness definitely precedes 2001 by a fairly large margin. The "robots that can operate over rubble by means other than just making their treads bigger" thing, though seems to be more recent.

    11. Re:Ice to Antarctica by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because if they WERE, then they would've taken him down early in each movie and we wouldn't get to see the climactic Tokyo-leveling battles between him and whatever more eviler monster was stomping around at the time. Duh.

      (psst... I've got ten internets on someone zealously rushing in to correct me on Godzilla lore! Double-or-nothing that they insist on calling him Gojira!)

    12. Re:Ice to Antarctica by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      aaah, so Antarctica needs radiation hardened ice, I get it.

      Wait, why is he missing his numbnuts again?

    13. Re:Ice to Antarctica by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But now they learn the hard way such omission wasn't such a good idea. Experience is the best teacher, but not always a kind one.

      I'd be willing to bet in the not too distant future, Japan will be developing their own rad-hardened robots and electronics.

    14. Re:Ice to Antarctica by MachDelta · · Score: 1

      Why? It's not like nuclear meltdowns happen every day. This is only the fourth large scale commercial meltdown in the nearly 60 years of nuclear power's history. Odds are pretty good that this will be Japans only such incident for a long, long time.

  6. What, only robots? by or-switch · · Score: 0

    The US has a plethora of hardened death row inmates. Why not use them? Nothing could posibly go wrong (yes, I spelled it that way on purpose, Simpsons reference). It can be the basis of either a fictional or based-on-a-true-story type summer blockbuster movie in a couple years.

    1. Re:What, only robots? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Besides the "cruel and unusual" issue, I'm not sure that condemned prisoners who have the exciting prospect of an even more unpleasant death in front of them would necessarily be all that motivated to get the job done...

      Even if you were willing to offer them rewards sufficient to obtain their cooperation, you might run into some trouble getting them up to speed on what needs to be done in the time available.

    2. Re:What, only robots? by h4rr4r · · Score: 0

      Perhaps because that is immoral?
      That goes beyond death penalty and right into Dr.Mengele territory. The death penalty is barbarous enough, we have already proven that innocent folks are murdered by the state when we use it.

  7. what kind of world am i living in? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the US is giving Japan robots!!!

  8. Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robots by Animats · · Score: 1

    France, Germany, and the US are all sending over rugged robots designed to work in disaster areas, collapsed building sites, and war zones. Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have those.

    I'm amazed that TEPCO hadn't at least brought in a few hobby-type R/C quadrotors or helicopters with TV cameras to get a look at areas they couldn't reach, like the spent fuel pools. For days, they didn't even know the water levels in those pools. Attempts were made to peer through holes in the roof with high-altitude flyovers, but that produced results like "we see some water in the pools, but can't tell how much."

    The biggest problem with TEPCO has been eliminated. The CEO was just canned for "health reasons". He's been in hiding since the earthquake.

  9. Top that, Commies! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Why, yes, Billy, not only will we fly our cars to the moon for lunch, but we will have robots. Radiation-fighting American robots!

    1. Re:Top that, Commies! by cobrausn · · Score: 1

      I prefer the nuke-flinging American Robot from Fallout 3.

      --
      How does it feel to be a liar with pants constantly on fire?
  10. France already sent robots, Japanese rejected them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    France already sent hardened robots over a week ago. Apparently the Japanese got offended that someone dared to offer to help them. http://www.groupe-intra.com/pages2/intervention/moyens1.htm . I would not be surprised if they also reject the US ones.

  11. When did we get cool robots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess unless it's a receptionist, takes care of the elderly or allows you to have telepresence then it ain't in Japan.

  12. high radiation now outside the evac zone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Latest news is that things are progressively becoming worse. Radiation OUTSIDE the evac zone is now exceeding the safe limits in some towns.

    People in towns outside the evac region are being told to prepare to leave if conditions worsen.

    This disaster appears to unfold like many others, with repeated assurances that things are OK and will be contained at this point, followed by failure and progressively worse conditions.

    Radioactivity in the seawater outside the Fukushima plant continues to increase, and is now at the worst levels seen since the disaster. This is thought to be a sign that water is leaking into and back out of the core through cracks in the containment. Tepco is accused of covering up the worst problems.

    1. Re:high radiation now outside the evac zone by rubycodez · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You mean Greenpeace detecting the 50 times background in 25 miles NW of plant? *yawn*, I've glassware from my grandfather that gives off more than that, and it's totally safe and legal to ship through U.S. mail.

    2. Re:high radiation now outside the evac zone by mldi · · Score: 2

      Damnit! For the last time, people, stop throwing bananas into the seawater!

      --
      If you aren't suspicious of your government's actions, you aren't doing your job as a responsible citizen.
    3. Re:high radiation now outside the evac zone by khallow · · Score: 1

      This disaster appears to unfold like many others, with repeated assurances that things are OK and will be contained at this point, followed by things getting better.

      FIFY. I notice also how your language is vague, in terms of "worst levels" rather than a concrete measure. Seawater is considered to be radioactive here because they just dumped a bunch of it on melting cores and some of it came back out.

      Tepco is accused of covering up the worst problems.

      It fits the Narrative. Of course, they're accused. But there's a big gap between being accused of something and actually committing the deed.

    4. Re:high radiation now outside the evac zone by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      This disaster appears to unfold like many others, with repeated assurances that things are OK and will be contained at this point, followed by failure and progressively worse conditions.

      Yes, you are correct. When we look back on *DISASTERS*. Often they appear to be ok and then failures lead to worsening conditions.

      There's not reason to suggest that there is a cover up going on. The radiation levels were much lower before. The fact that things are getting worse only proves that attempts to end the crisis haven't been successful.

  13. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by countertrolling · · Score: 1

    A tragic lack of foresight here. All for the love of... There's no way to convince me this scenario wasn't anticipated, and dismissed as "absurd" or for "lack of funds". Damn people could have remote controlled bulldozers and back hoes to move the heavy shit, y'know, do actual work.

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
  14. Big, ugly robots most likely. by dstyle5 · · Score: 1

    The Japanese are focused on making more elegant, precise, nimble & human-like robots, where as the US is more focused on more bulky, industrial, people-killing robots, that can take a beating and still work. At least that is the arbitrary opinion I've formed from mass media consumption.

    1. Re:Big, ugly robots most likely. by hey! · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hey, I think I saw that one. That's the one where the ugly garbage cleaning robot and the elegant, nimble robot fall in love.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    2. Re:Big, ugly robots most likely. by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Sure, we can make robots to clean up nuclear waste... but can we make break dancing robots???

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    3. Re:Big, ugly robots most likely. by frosty_tsm · · Score: 1

      Hey, I think I saw that one. That's the one where the ugly garbage cleaning robot and the elegant, nimble robot fall in love.

      And there was not a word of English (except the occasional one spoken by fat people)?

    4. Re:Big, ugly robots most likely. by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      Hey, I think I saw that one. That's the one where the ugly garbage cleaning robot and the elegant, nimble robot fall in love.

      And there was not a word of English (except the occasional one spoken by fat people)?

      Yeah, but let's see that little garbage cleaning robot, or the cute little robot clean that mess up. This calls for robotic Caterpillar tractors, backhoes, graders and probably a cute little robotic coffee machine they can all hit on in the break room.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    5. Re:Big, ugly robots most likely. by multipartmixed · · Score: 1

      That's because American robots watch too much TV and eat french fries instead of rice.

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
    6. Re:Big, ugly robots most likely. by Abstrackt · · Score: 1

      That's because American robots watch too much TV and eat french fries instead of rice.

      Sumo wrestlers eat rice too.

      --
      They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
    7. Re:Big, ugly robots most likely. by metalgamer84 · · Score: 1

      That was easily the greatest thing I have seen on the Internet all week. Thank you for the awesome.

    8. Re:Big, ugly robots most likely. by countertrolling · · Score: 1
      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    9. Re:Big, ugly robots most likely. by Kilrah_il · · Score: 1

      All sumo wrestlers eat rice, ergo rice makes you fat!
      Sorry, gotta go. I got a science paper to write.

      --
      Whenever in an argument, remember this.
    10. Re:Big, ugly robots most likely. by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

      Meh.

      Not bad. But can it do the robot?

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
  15. Re:France already sent robots, Japanese rejected t by somersault · · Score: 2

    I think they're out of options by now. Man I hate groupthink .. err.. I mean "culture", sometimes.. there are many aspects of Japanese culture that I find interesting and enjoyable, but a lot of the "honour" stuff has always seemed a bit much. Especially if it causes nuclear materials to blow around the rest of the world.

    --
    which is totally what she said
  16. US to send robots to Japan? by jd2112 · · Score: 2

    Sounds like the plot of an Anime movie...

    --
    Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
    1. Re:US to send robots to Japan? by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      Sounds like the plot of an Anime movie...

      Sigh. If only Godzilla were real he could pop up right now, waggle a clawed finger at the Japanese, as if to say "See what you get playing around recklessly with the atom?", pick up the reactors and take them to the Moon (unless you're one of those fans who see Flying Godzilla as the greatest sin perpetrated by Toho.)

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:US to send robots to Japan? by fahlesr1 · · Score: 2

      My father works in the nuclear power industry. Back when I very young, I was still in elementary school because this took place before 9/11, the power plant my dad worked at had a "bring your son to work" day. I got to drive a robot around the power plant, that was really neat. They used them to work in hot rooms all the time, some tasks are easier to use a robot since there aren't any regulations on how long a robot can stay in a hot room.

      The nuclear industry loves robots. These will probably help with the cleanup effort enormously. Not that they couldn't use people, the gear exists to keep them safe, but even with that gear there are still lots and lots of regulations to follow, my father says its a headache even under normal operating conditions.

    3. Re:US to send robots to Japan? by ShooterNeo · · Score: 1

      Actually, no, the gear does not exist to keep people safe. Gamma rays go through anything but lots of lead, and there's a limit how heavy you can make a suit before it is unusable. The gear you see all the responders wearing does not protect against gamma at all.

    4. Re:US to send robots to Japan? by LoRdTAW · · Score: 1

      Actually Fukishima is the soon to be birthplace of Godzilla.

  17. Re:TEPCO effors... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck you. Go back to 4chan.

  18. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by rubycodez · · Score: 4, Informative

    They key here is "radiation hardened", the robots and cameras will both be so, they are from Idaho National Laboratory, the nation's Nuclear R&D facility. Your PC or typical hobby type remote controlled gear would go ape-shit in a high rad environment from charged particles being created in the silicon.

    The problems with TEPCO and the current crisis will continue with or without the former CEO, as they have for decades

  19. Goatse Warning! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Goatse Warning!

  20. what is Japan in a robot crisis? by WonderingAround · · Score: 2

    I heard France was even sending robots, the only question is are they to help aid or fight the malfunctioning Japanese robots?

    --
    It's like the mind going AWOL, it's there somewhere
    1. Re:what is Japan in a robot crisis? by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      I heard France was even sending robots, the only question is are they to help aid or fight the malfunctioning Japanese robots?

      I'm impressed France is that forward thinking and Japan is that unprepared. Not quite the image we expected, was it?

      Japan would be full of clever robots which could do almost everything and France wouldn't have any because the robotic robot assemblers trade union is on strike.

      So it turns out Japan has been trying to perfect a bunch of utterly useless, but highly marketable robots to beep, boop, dance and look cute, which France have been making industrial duty do-the-dirty-work jobs.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  21. Chernobyl Robots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I believe that the US sent similar robots to Chernobyl after the accident, although they failed due to the amount of debris and extreme radiation. Then the Soviets sent in human "bio-robots" in 40 second shifts to do the same jobs. Hopefully technology has improved since then (and the situation is not as dire).

    1. Re:Chernobyl Robots by cyrano.mac · · Score: 1

      I remember some of those industrial robots being replaced by cheap R/C toys with consumer level cams taped onto them. Those died too, but were a lot cheaper to replace.

  22. Obligatory by egamma · · Score: 2

    Domo Arigato, Mr. hardened-against-radiation Roboto!

  23. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    Eh? how is a remote controlled bulldozer or backhoe going to do anything useful as far as checking reactor vessel and spent fuel pools and turbine building? They don't climb ladders and stairs and fit in aisles between pipes Cranes and lifts are very useful at a nuke plant, the things you mentioned only come on site for new roads and buildings and security modifications.

  24. Re:France already sent robots, Japanese rejected t by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 0

    Japan turned away several French trade missions before the United States' Commodore Perry came along and said "trade or we'll blow your shit up."

    Even if things have come a long way since colonialism, I wouldn't be surprised if American diplomats were a little more forceful (and had more leverage) than French ones about insisting that aid be taken.

    --
    I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
  25. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But we have them http://www.groupe-intra.com/pages2/intervention/moyens4.htm.

  26. What the hell... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    where are all of Japan's robots? If there were a time to move the island and reveal the robot army underneath it would be now...

    Oh...oh dear. They have turned on their masters!

  27. Re:France already sent robots, Japanese rejected t by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    I've seen the news of Groupe-Intra sending rad-hardened robots (and a few companies from other countries), but where is your source saying they were rejected? Note japan doesn't have nuclear weapons program, but I strongly suspect that countries that have them are the ones with thriving rad-hardened robot industry (a mainly military-industrial complex thing with some civilian application)

  28. Big Dog by JackSpratts · · Score: 1

    Even Godzilla is a little nervous around that one.

  29. 19 days in by TopSpin · · Score: 2

    Yay for urgency. Fresh water is finally being hauled in by the US navy as well ... about two weeks after they ran out of coolant inventory.

    Will there be a reckoning for this foot dragging? No one responsible for Fukushima has acted with anything like the urgency we should expect of companies and governments that operate these reactors.

    Hardened robots mean we may soon learn how much spent fuel got lofted by the fires. Brace yourself; every power reactor incident in history has surprised the engineers when they finally got eyeballs on the problem. Credible and well meaning people denied major core melt at TMI-2 for six years until the first camera was lowered into the RPV.

    TEPCO officially announced they're scrapping reactors 1 through 4. This is a formality really; recovering those reactors is not feasible. The important thing to notice is that this omits 5 and 6. Those reactors will be put on-line again, just like TMI-1 and Chernobyl 1, 2, and 3. They know, however, that it is much too early to float that balloon.

    I am a nuclear advocate. I just don't defend incompetence, poor judgment or neglect. There just isn't any room for it if you're going to burn matter and expect the trust of the people that grant you the liberty.

    --
    Lurking at the bottom of the gravity well, getting old
    1. Re:19 days in by khallow · · Score: 1

      Will there be a reckoning for this foot dragging? No one responsible for Fukushima has acted with anything like the urgency we should expect of companies and governments that operate these reactors.

      What foot dragging? All backup power aside from batteries got knocked out. They had to do a hell of a lot just to restore cooling to six reactors and their fuel ponds. Also nuclear rods which come out of the reactor don't instantly cool off. The radioactive heating is going down over time, but it takes a little while. That's tough to deliver when your infrastructure outside of the plant has been wiped out. While it looked hairy for a while, things have been getting better since March 24.

      TEPCO officially announced they're scrapping reactors 1 through 4. This is a formality really; recovering those reactors is not feasible. The important thing to notice is that this omits 5 and 6. Those reactors will be put on-line again, just like TMI-1 and Chernobyl 1, 2, and 3. They know, however, that it is much too early to float that balloon.

      Why not keep reactors 5 and 6 running? They're relatively undamaged and are several years younger than the ones which were at one time planned to be decommissioned this month.

      I just don't defend incompetence, poor judgment or neglect. There just isn't any room for it if you're going to burn matter and expect the trust of the people that grant you the liberty.

      Then wait for evidence of incompetence, poor judgment, or neglect before you issue judgment.

    2. Re:19 days in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll tell you what foot dragging. There still isn't proper road access to the site and the logistics in general are so bad that the workers are subsisting on incredibly small rations.

      The accident started on the 11th. The linemen were gathered on the 14th, got to the site and started working on the 16th, at which date they completed the connection, whereupon they were promptly told that there was testing to do and they were to wait.

      In the meantime, TEPCO management was spouting pious bullshit on how they were doing their utmost and refusing help from the Japanese gov't and the US military.

    3. Re:19 days in by khallow · · Score: 1

      So you have anything to say that is relevant? First paragraph ignores that these workers probably had other sources of food and water, and that it probably was a bad idea for them to bring lunch into contaminated areas.

      Second paragraph indicates that the power plant was supposedly hooked up to the grid on the 16th. That's pretty good time and supports my assertion in my earlier post that these guys were moving fast.

      In the third paragraph, TEPCO management says stuff. I don't see it as relevant especially the unsubstantiated claims that they "refused help".

  30. hand that CEO a big sharp knife by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He ought to know what to do. Sepuku is mandatory. This being 2011, we expect it streamed on the Internet.

    If he's too much of a wimp, an acceptable alternative would be to drink water from the core.

  31. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by countertrolling · · Score: 1

    Then they should have been on the first plane out...

    This is still a pisser... Complete negligence on the part of those with the resources to mitigate this.

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
  32. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they'd make it easier to level the area, and pour a huge slab of concrete over it. which is what will likely happen anyway...

  33. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by countertrolling · · Score: 1

    I was using them as an example. Stay on topic here. The point is that we have machinery to deal with this (see AC's response below), and it's not being mobilized quickly enough due to negligent lack of preparation for mostly monetary purposes. It's completely inexcusable.

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
  34. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Correction, actually, http://www.groupe-intra.com/pages2/intervention/moyens5.htm are closer to bulldozers.

    Japanese refused french robots, don't know which ones (indoors, outdoors or civil engineering ones).

  35. robot boner by jpl · · Score: 1

    What is a "radiation-hardened" robot? Isn't anything that doesn't have mutation sensitive DNA "radiation-hardened"? In other words, any robot?

    Or maybe they mean the robot gets an erection from the radiation. Yeah, that's probably it.

    1. Re:robot boner by sconeu · · Score: 3, Informative

      I can't tell if you're serious or not, but here goes..

      IC are sensitive to external radiation. rad-hardened robots use circuitry and components that have been rad-hardened.

      That's why, for example, you can't just throw the latest Pentium Whatever into the Space Shuttle's avionics, because a stray alpha or beta particle, and ZAP -- the chip ain't working right.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    2. Re:robot boner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you trolling or stupid? just ignorant? what?

      Do you know what happens to plain ol wires and standard off the shelf semiconductor circuts when exposed to uncontrolled charged particles? LOTS of them.

      Time to learn something.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hardening

    3. Re:robot boner by jpl · · Score: 1

      Just stupid. Thanks for the link, now I'm less stupid.

  36. So you get some people off death row by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Find one that is skilled enough to be of any use in such a situation.

    People on death row are not generally known for their level of education. Most of them are poor, uneducated and probably recovering drug addicts.

    Now maybe you think you'll find something for them to do, anybody can tighten a bolt, right?

    Hah. Get some experience with mechanics and you'll realize that it's more trouble than it is worth to get completely unskilled people into a work site.

  37. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    That can be done old-school way, no robotics needed, just respirator and suit and watch the dosimeter.

  38. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by countertrolling · · Score: 1

    First link was okay... It gets the point across on just how bungled this whole mess is.

    Japanese refused french robots...

    For real?

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
  39. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    The topic is measuring radiation in high-rad areas, and remote viewing. It remains to be seen how useful such machinery will be or even if any use at all. Wasting tens of millions on something of no use is not what I would want my power company to do, just raise rates. Instead they could have spent mere hundreds of thousands to put half of their 13 gen sets up high and this would have been a non-event.

  40. Why so late? by johncandale · · Score: 1

    I don't get why these responses are so slow. Shouldn't they have been prepped to leave the moment nuke fears were announced, and sent over after the first explosion? It's not like radiation hardened robots have full time jobs here.

  41. Obligatory Futurama reference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So these robots will be powered by the new radioactive sake, not the old-fashioned regular one?

  42. Store backup generators off sites ... by perpenso · · Score: 2

    Seriously, if they'd had a reliable backup diesel generator we wouldn't have these problems in the first place.

    It's pretty easy to sit back and do an armchair analysis of the situation after the shit has already hit the fan.

    Its not quite armchair analysis when its standard operating procedure at other sites.

    The flooding caused by the tsunami knocked those generators offline. I live in an area that's prone to flooding and it's harder than you think to keep even a small generator out of harm's way when the water level starts rising.

    And in southern california a power plant on the coast has backup generators in storage farther inland on higher ground. I'm not saying the so cal plant is necessarily better designed or prepared, I'm am just arguing against the armchair claim on this particular backup generator point.

    1. Re:Store backup generators off sites ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not saying the so cal plant is necessarily better designed or prepared, I'm am just arguing against the armchair claim on this particular backup generator point.

      It does have looking like a giant pair of breasts going for it at least.
      https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/San_Onofre_Nuclear_Generating_Station

  43. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by hedwards · · Score: 1

    That makes sense, I was trying to figure out what aspect of them was in need of hardening.

  44. Err, so we're sending... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So we're sending T-800s to Japan?

  45. Red Whittaker and the robots that helped clean TMI by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

    I helped a tiny bit with the WorkHorse version a quarter century ago as a volunteer hanging out in his lab back then:
        http://www.new.ans.org/pubs/magazines/download/a_671

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  46. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you can read french
    http://www.smartplanet.fr/smart-technology/accident-nucleaire-les-robots-francais-recales-au-japon-1438/

    If you you can understand spoken french, listen the video is at 21mn58: "le japon n'a pas donné suite à l'offre française d'envoyer des robots":
    "Japan didn't follow up on french offer to send robots" (not a professional translator). The man speaking is the president of the ASN (nuclear security authority).
    This was on March 21st. The offer was on March 18th: http://medias.edf.com/communiques-de-presse/tous-les-communiques-de-presse/communiques-2011/le-gie-intra-envoie-des-robots-et-du-materiel-specialise-pour-assister-le-japon-83558.html (frennch also).

  47. Mod up parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah ha! I knew something was fishy about this story... Taisei set to introduce robots for N-cleanup. I knew my faith in Japanese robotics wasn't misplaced. This is just a PR stunt by a iRobot.

    Japan has plenty of radiation hardened robots. We need to stop feeding the PR plebes, it just encourages them. [Whats the term for mixed cliché?]

  48. OMG, I can see the plot unraveling... by gwolf · · Score: 1

    So, the rad-hardened robots will have a gap in their rad-hardening, and will slightly mutate. Then, they will start feeding from the radiation sources, and keep mutating. Three months from now, we will find a spontaneously-generated Mazinger. Which will be quite handy, FWIW, as lizards have already started mutating into little Godzillas by now.

    It had to happen in Japan. They don't have animators - They have prophets.

  49. Not a surprise... by MaWeiTao · · Score: 1

    Not particularly surprising when you consider that Japanese robot manufacturers have generally focused on manufacturing, healthcare or the consumer sector. And they produce legions of relatively worthless robots. I'm not sure why they haven't quite linked their prowess to more practical applications. At least they make them prettier than the robots Americans produce.

  50. Why now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One has to wonder why they didn't send those robots like a month ago.

    Seriously, how long has it been? How long has the media gone apeshit over this nuclear incident? How long has disaster been narrowly averted by an overworked skeleton-crew of plant-workers?

  51. It has to be said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I, for one, welcome our radiation hardened robotic overlords

  52. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did a ED-209 wipe out the former CEO?

  53. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by khallow · · Score: 1

    A "tragedy" that has yet to result in a single human death. Let's keep some perspective.

  54. damn.. by spirit_fingers · · Score: 1

    I'll racking my brain trying to figure out how to insert a quip about sharks and lasers, but I'm drawing a blank. Ah well.

  55. Oblig. Tripping the Rift by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    Gus: Banging... yuck! It amazes me that although I'm a robot, I am infinitely more evolved and refined than you are. I would never bang someone.

    Chode: Yeah, because you can't! You can't afford the banging attachment!

    Gus: [ Sighs ]

  56. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    oh yeah, robocop's comic relief foil. had to look that one up..thought you were referring to medical condition.

  57. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by jrumney · · Score: 1

    The French robots were ready to ship over 2 weeks ago, but were told that they would not be allowed to enter Japan without an official request from the government. That request came on Monday this week. The Japanese need to ask some serious questions of TEPCO, their government and their culture of bureaucracy relating to the handling of this disaster. Unfortunately, they will probably just lap up the face saving excuses, say "sho ga nai", and continue their lives as they were.

  58. And then there are the half million homeless: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Better dead here than deader in the Core. Ye gods, whatta meesa sayin'?

  59. Downplayed: Long term health implications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Assess the danger yourself. Tools and resources to help you make an informed decision about the true ramifications the Fukushima Plant Failure will have on the World's health and environment.

    http://www.adtorrent.com/2011/03/26/assess-the-fukushima-danger-for-your-self-tools-and-resources-for-an-informed-decision/

    1. Re:Downplayed: Long term health implications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      adtorrent link responds 'error establishing a database connection' - I am enlightened??

  60. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by countertrolling · · Score: 1

    What was was I thinking?! I always forget that part.. Somebody has to die first.. and of course it has to be statistically significant.. It looks like they're handling the homeless situation even worse, or about as well as FEMA. You know. after thousands of years of this kind of thing, you'd think we would learn something from it. This market ideology has us sacrificing robustness for brittle efficiency. We would be so much farther along in handling natural events if not for that.

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
  61. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by khallow · · Score: 1

    Somebody has to die first..

    Consider that several people on Slashdot have called the Fukushima accident the second worst nuclear accident, ignoring that the current second place is occupied by a Soviet accident which is thought to have killed 200 people directly. There are even several medical radiotherapy accidents which have killed people and hence, are worse in relevant ways than Fukushima. Perspective is needed.

    It looks like they're handling the homeless situation even worse, or about as well as FEMA

    We ignore, of course, that FEMA is pretty good at its job. The failure from the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina occurred because FEMA was pushed out of the primary disaster response position and nobody else put in, not because they are in any way incompetent. You're basically saying that Japan is performing about as well as the best disaster response organization on the planet.

    You know. after thousands of years of this kind of thing, you'd think we would learn something from it. This market ideology has us sacrificing robustness for brittle efficiency. We would be so much farther along in handling natural events if not for that.

    Now, if only there were evidence for your assertion. I wonder what you think proper disaster recovery for a magnitude 9 earthquake with tsunami that are known to have killed at least 10,000 people? It's not like leaves falling on your lawn. You don't just rake for a little while and it's done. It'll take years for some areas to recover, even if you have a so-called "robust" society.

  62. What took so long? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right after the quake and tsunami when the reactors were compromised I was wondering why Japan didn't immediately use robots in areas that were too dangerous for human workers. I understand that radiation hardened bots may not have been readily available, but even a bomb disposal bot must have had some use even if it fried after a short tiime. Every minute they could decrease the rad exposure to human workers would be well worth sacrificing a robot. It has been almost 3 weeks.

    What on earth took so long for Japan and/or aiding countries to do this?

  63. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Japan as a country is more worried about licking its earthquake and tsunami wounds, as well as the power rationing in the east, and the economy looking even worse for wear than prior to the disasters. I wouldn't be surprised if all that trouble is enough for the japanese to be unable to find their own robots right now and coordinate their attack, when they're grieving a lot worse than New York did for 9/11.

    I would say that even if they did have their robots [and said robots were radiation-ready], they would be property of private companies [not keen on lending them because they're being used for something private rather than sitting in some closet in powersave mode] and of the government (just like with the USA robots being sent).

    Japan also appears to have some quirks regarding technology. Their R&D is useless if we extrapolate from their lack of breakthroughs on anything other than "robots that serve tea", to "look female" "do small talk" and do other cute things normal for japan --to be fair, they can wing it because innovation must take bad turns to find good ones, and they're the Apple of the automotive, miniaturization and robot revolution. Regardless, it seems that rather than actual hard factory work, they're advancing little except for just trying to make them more human. On-looking countries don't suffer from Japan's loss, so it's easier for them to extend a hand and provide more practical bots.

    Regarding the CEO, I cannot be the only geek who in saw that in light that the whole world is tuned-in now they should not have used for HIM the same old excuse that a mere mangaka (a Japanese comics artist) pulls when he or she gets writers' block. This is surprising given that the Japanese work ethic is that they are about 5 years more loyal to a company in average, supposely have 6-day workweeks and similar school days and summer-long prep classes, and supposely they don't suffer from people going postal as much as in the USA. Maybe it's a cultural thing, but in outside Japan being "very sick from exhaustion" is grounds for a quick firing. Then again, the some of the above conditions would make a lot of us flinch when we're told they have larger suicide rates.

  64. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by greatpatton · · Score: 1

    Yeah and the French and German radiation hardened robots that were proposed to Japan are able to do more than just cary a camera... The management of this crisis is really bad as precious time has been lost to national pride.

  65. Re:France already sent robots, Japanese rejected t by chitokutai · · Score: 1

    What do you mean, out of options? They detail their options on a daily basis in every press conference they hold.

    Currently they are trying to remove the radioactive water from the trench connecting the reactor building to the combine room, and once that is done they will continue with power restoration to get cooling systems back online. Removing the water will also help them determine what kind of additional damage they are facing, if there are water leaks, and whether any circuit boards need to be replaced.

    They are also currently trying to decide on ways to minimize the spread of airborne radiation further, including a liquid material that will reduce dust in the area and a specialized tarp that will keep radiation from spreading from the damage reactor buildings.

    Seriously. Just visit some reputable news sources once in a while:

    http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/ http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/tsunamiupdate01.html

  66. Re:Strangely, Japan doesn't seem to have such robo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All. We're talking high neutron flux, high gamma radiation here. Stuck inside a reactor, regular steel grows as brittle as glass. Quartz windows grow milky and opaque. Glass eventually turns black. Yes, that includes the glass in the fiber optic link you were so cunningly planning to use to avoid having to rely on radio for control and data links while surrounded by broad-spectrum RF sources and rebar-reinforced concrete that's a couple meters thick. Oh, you'll go for plain old copper? Better watch that cable's electrical insulation, then, 'cause polymers tend to depolymerize in such an environment. Oh, and make sure your cable is also RF-shielded and properly grounded, 'cause otherwise the induced currents will fry your sensors (which have to be able to take the odd transient pulse in stride, regardless).

    All these issues are well known, but building useful robots to this kind of specs is non-trivial.

  67. Re:France already sent robots, Japanese rejected t by somersault · · Score: 1

    They are out of options of being able to approach the reactor site for any length of time without basically sentencing people to death.

    --
    which is totally what she said
  68. 100meters is ass shat! by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

    Look at cheap $60 parts for remote control planes , like flighttest on youtube does for hobbyking suppliers.

    You can get a 2.4ghz video feeds low power that work for 1000 meters easy.

    Seriously, who ever built a 100meter range video feed, is utterly lame.

    I expect 5 figure $$ robots to give me at least 25km range, (trappy got 24km range on his plane using $100 transmitters)

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  69. easy fix by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

    Give every building 100% cover of solar panels as first stage backups on the roof.

    2. Place 1000s of solar panels 5km away from the shore where they are safe.

    or place the gennys up on the hill dude. That didnt get wet.

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  70. Robots? by tarogue · · Score: 1

    To me, robots have to be at least semi-autonomous. These are really just really advanced remote controlled cars. Am I wrong?

    --
    Life sucks, but death doesn't put out at all. -- Thomas J. Kopp
  71. But isn't Japan the.... by GoodBuddy · · Score: 1

    .... world leader in robot technology? I am surprised they don't have the tools to do this.

  72. C'mon! Is Japan! by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

    Where are the Gundans, Valkyries, Patlabors, Wantzers and EVAs?

    --
    Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
  73. Sounds like a Truck commercial by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    It also comes when a HEMI and runs on diesel because our robots are build for the working man, who need to do work.

    Ya, its radiation hardened, hard like the folks they buy them, and it doesn't have time to namby pamby about.

    Available now at the robotics division of the good folks at Ford...

  74. jjyy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the Janpanese robots technology is advanced.
    I'm just curious how fast these robots can work.
    God bless Janpan and my sister.
    My sister has sent me a 3ds and acekard 2i before the earthquake

  75. Mod parent up! by Kyusaku+Natsume · · Score: 1

    From parent's link:

    These machines and control systems, using wireless local area networks and global positioning systems, were developed by the Unmanned Construction System Association in Tokyo, a consortium of 15 construction and related companies.

    As such unmanned machines can be used in places too dangerous for workers, they have been used at more than 100 sites including restoration work at the Mt. Fugen volcano in Nagasaki Prefecture, which erupted with large pyroclastic flows in 1991, and Hokkaido's Mt. Usu, where a volcanic eruption occurred in 2000.

    --
    Mexico: 100% conservative's America now!
  76. They have those by Kyusaku+Natsume · · Score: 1

    And will use precisely for what you are proposing
    http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/T110330005766.htm

    --
    Mexico: 100% conservative's America now!
  77. This is an obvious ruse! by Benfea · · Score: 1

    Since it's not likely that we have robotics-related technology that the Japanese don't already have, this is an obvious prelude to the Robot Rebellion that all those science fiction stories warned us about! ;)

  78. Chernobyl Didn't Kill anyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAEfJ5K51LU