Slashdot Mirror


Fukushima's Radiation Is Contained By a Mile-Long Wall of Ice (cnet.com)

CNET reports on the massive ice wall created by an "intricate network of small metal pipes, capped off by six-foot-high metal scaffolding." It turns out, coolant is running through the pipes, freezing the soil below and creating an impermeable ice wall that's nearly 100 feet deep and a mile long, encircling the reactors. It's like a smaller-scale subterranean version of the Wall in Game of Thrones, but instead of keeping out White Walkers and wights, this line of defense keeps in a far more realistic danger: radioactive contaminants from melted-down reactors that threaten to spill into the water by Fukushima Daiichi....

The structure, which cost roughly $300 million, paid for by public funds, serves as critical protection, defending the Fukushima area from one of the most radioactive hotspots in the world. While Tokyo Electric Power Co., also known as Tepco, struggles to find a way to remove radioactive material from the facility -- a process the government estimates could take more than four decades -- the more immediate concern is what to do with the contaminated water leaking out from the facility. One of the solutions has been to put up (down?) this underground ice wall, which prevents much of the surrounding groundwater from getting in.

18 of 121 comments (clear)

  1. Re:$300 million, paid for by public funds! the res by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What's with the socialism remarks all over, do you even know what that word means? Obviously it's just some boogieman word for you, but morons, learn the meaning and use it right.

  2. TLDR; version - no by Cyberax · · Score: 2

    Nope. The wall does exactly nothing. It's basically a part of Kabuki theater that is the whole Fukushima cleanup operation. The reactor is still leaking, but the amount of released radiation is now below the dangerous levels - the hottest isotopes have decayed by now.

    1. Re:TLDR; version - no by mysidia · · Score: 4, Informative

      The "hottest" isotopes are of the LEAST concern at this point -- the ones that remain are still dangerous. The Ice wall is Not even perfectly watertight. The corium will have radioactivity hazardous to humans and the environment for hundreds of years... the water will contact it and become contaminated, and that contamination will spread into the soil and into the oceans and cause massive long-term damage.

    2. Re:TLDR; version - no by MrKaos · · Score: 4, Informative

      incorrect - it will be diluted at that point to the extent it can be detected but does not cause any permanent damage (except idiots who panic about nothing causing alarm to the rest of the population)

      Radio-isotopes bio-accumulate in the environment, they do not dilute. They accumulate in the food chain because radio-isotopes appears as micro-nutrients to metabolisms. For example, plutonium chloride is highly soluble and appears like iron to metabolisms, which would be absorbed into blood, for example. Radio-cesium and strontium also have these characteristics.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    3. Re:TLDR; version - no by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Radio-isotopes bio-accumulate in the environment, they do not dilute.

      Either you don't know the meaning of bio-accumulate, the meaning of the word dilute, or the size of the environment.

      Just because something can bio-accumulate doesn't mean it isn't also diluted when released into a large environment.

      The GP was right, the original assertion that "massive long term damage" is done, used in the same sentence as "soil and ocean" is sensationalist. The only massive long term damage will be in the immediate vicinity of the reactor.

    4. Re:TLDR; version - no by Killall+-9+Bash · · Score: 2

      The ice wall is meant to keep ground water from flowing through the facility, out to sea. ASSUMING it works 100%, this is still only a partial solution to the water problem. There is still rainfall, and there is still cooling water being dumped into the gaping holes where reactors and spent-fuel pools used to be.

      The only reason they've even bothered with the ice wall is because it's something that improves the situation, and is technically possible to do. Not too many things available that meet those two criteria.

      --
      "Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
    5. Re:TLDR; version - no by GuB-42 · · Score: 2

      Plutonium is an alpha radiator, alpha radiation is blocked by a thin sheet of paper, dead skin or a few cm of air. You can hold a chunk of plutonium in your bare hands with no ill effect. The risk is if you ingest or inhale plutonium: it may stay inside you, dumping all of its radioactive energy into your body.

      It means that plutonium is not that easy to detect. You may have better luck with cesium and strontium but a cheap sensor probably won't help you unless your food is literally hot with radiation.

    6. Re:TLDR; version - no by Cyberax · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, most radioisotopes do not bioaccumulate: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1... . So the health-related consequences of the Fukushima reactor meltdown are basically nil. Also the ocean is LARGE - there's plenty of water there to dilute the few hundred kilograms of dangerous isotopes that have leaked so far.

    7. Re:TLDR; version - no by TRRosen · · Score: 2

      Actually "dump it in the bottom of the ocean" was the normal procedure for a long time. 100ft of water is plenty to render just about any material safe. That's exactly how they store spent fuel.

    8. Re:TLDR; version - no by sjames · · Score: 2

      Actually, those tests weren't all that controlled. More than one ended in fallout landing on civilians. They had no plan at all to contain or clean up after the blasts. In fact, very little cleanup was done. You can still distinguish wine produced before and after the tests based on analysis of isotopes.

  3. interesting by Tom · · Score: 2, Informative

    so much of the info about Fukushima is clearly tainted by the preferences of those writing.

    I've now read, within 2 days, articles about the current cleanup efforts that

    a) claim they mostly don't work, the area is still dangerous and it will take decades to complete everything.
    b) claim they are a demonstration of 1st world technology keeping things under control, people returning to the area, much of the radiation being cleaned up and the Japanese making impressive progress with robots in the reactor cores as well as completing a total overhaul of all their nuclear reactors to incorporate the lessons learnt from Fukushima.

    So what is true? Probably some of both. But which?

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    1. Re:interesting by TRRosen · · Score: 2

      The area is not dangerous and never was. While background radiation is now elevated higher than previous levels it is still well below levels that would effect humans at all. unless you go to the reactor itself this is the crisis that never was.

  4. Official Fukushima Report by MrKaos · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's been eight years since this disaster occurred.

    The official report of The Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission contains a wealth of information for anyone interested in the facts regarding this disaster.

    The report is scathing and contains lines such as a multitude of errors and willful negligence that left the Fukushima plant unprepared for the events of March 11 and describes the mindset that supported the negligence behind this disaster.

    It is very difficult to believe that the company that got the world into this situation is the one that will get us out of it. Chernobyl's New Safe Confinement took the combined resources of the European Union to fund and was designed by the British.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    1. Re:Official Fukushima Report by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      One of the most damning lines is this:

      "It is thought that the ground motion from the earthquake was strong enough to cause damage to some key safety features"

      Also there is evidence that some of the power loss that was a critical factor in the disaster was not due to the tsunami either:

      "This suggests that at least the loss of emergency power supply A at Unit 1 might not have been caused by flooding."

      In other words there are serious questions about all the other nuclear plants in Japan and anywhere else that might experience seismic shocks. In fact we have to also question terrorism-proofing measures to defend against things like aircraft hitting the reactors, which cause shocks too.

      The report also laments the poor response and clean-up by the government, and how the former residents have been treated.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  5. Re:What is an underground wall of ice? by Headw1nd · · Score: 2

    It's not meant to contain radioactive material, it's meant to keep groundwater out while they clean up to lessen the amount of contaminated water they have to deal with. When the cleanup is mostly finished they will turn it off.

  6. Fukushima status by doom · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The short answer: the "ice wall" is helping to reduce water flow, but isn't perfect, and if you want to spin that in a positive way, you can say "look, it's working!", and if you want to go the other way you can say "it's not working!"-- because anything short of perfection is obviously useless.

    A better question would be "how well is it working?" but even better would be "how well does it need to work?".

    I'm inclined to agree with our anti-nuclear friends that this is all a bunch of theater to reassure people (much like that that other "wall" we've been hearing so much about). It would be nice if they were just reassured by declining levels of leakage, and little evidence of health impacts, but that kind of message gets lost in the weeds of statistical chatter and "activist" shouting.

    Fukushimas Ice Wall Not Working:

    A government-commissioned group of experts concluded Wednesday that a costly underground ice wall is only partially effective in reducing the ever-growing amount of contaminated water at Japan's destroyed Fukushima nuclear plant, and said other measures are needed as well.

    The panel agreed that the ice wall helps, but said it doesn't completely solve the problem. Panel members suggested that additional measures be taken to minimize the inflow of rainwater and groundwater, such as repairing roofs and other damaged parts of buildings.

    Martin Fackler at the NYT commented:

    Since the start, the project has attracted its share of skeptics. Some say buried obstacles at the plant, including tunnels that linked the reactor buildings to other structures, will leave holes in the ice wall, making it more like a sieve. Others question why such an exotic solution is necessary when a traditional steel or concrete wall might perform better.

    From the World Health Organization faq:

    What are the health implications of the Fukushima Daiichi NPS (FDNPS) nuclear accident?

    [...] UNSCEAR published a report on the levels and effects of radiation exposure due to the accident. In 2015, UNSCEAR released a white paper that evaluates new information in the peer-reviewed literature.

    There were no acute radiation injuries or deaths among the workers or the public due to exposure to radiation resulting from the FDNPS accident.

    Considering the level of estimated doses, the lifetime radiation-induced cancer risks other than thyroid are small and much smaller than the lifetime baseline cancer risks. [...] There have been recent reports about thyroid cancer cases being diagnosed among children exposed to low doses of radioactive iodine as a result of the Fukushima accident. These reports should be interpreted with caution. [...] The substantial number of cases that have already been observed in the Fukushima Health Management Survey have been considered likely due to the sensitivity of the screening rather than to radiation exposure.

    From a global health perspective, the health risks directly related to radiation exposure are low in Japan and extremely low in neighbouring countries and the rest of the world.

    "Bio-concentration" is essentially not happening: Insignificant Environmental and Public Health Risk from Fukushima in North America 8 Years On

  7. Re:$300 million, paid for by public funds! the res by Darinbob · · Score: 2

    It comes from the big takeover of the Republican party starting with Gingrich, who started labeling all Democrats as McGovern democrats, then soon all Democrats were labeled as liberals, and pretty much created the modern day negative campaign style of win-by-any-means.

  8. Re: $300 million, paid for by public funds! the re by Darinbob · · Score: 2

    Hitler was a fascist, which is neither left nor right in outlook, but is a strict authoritarian movement with state control of both the economy and social life, usually a dictatorship and oppression of the opposition. Generally it's considered far right, however I think it doesn't really fit into the traditional left-right model because fascists didn't really express a coherent political ideology beyond an us-versus-them style of thinking. The modern guys on the right are only labeling it socialist as a distraction and part of the "please repeat these talking points endlessly" style of political debate.