In subduction zones like near Japan or the Aleutians, 9.0+ quakes are not uncommon. Japan hasn't been known to have one before, but magnitudes of earthquakes before 1500AD are rough estimates at best. On the other hand, tsunami happen all the time in Japan. I'm pretty sure this one was only 15m at Fukushima, rather than 50. A tsunami greater than the height of the tsunami wall probably was predictable.
I didn't realise a HEPA filter could filter out atoms. Actually, I know it can't. HEPA filters work on sub-micron scales, not on sub-nanometer scales. If they actually do such filtering it would have to be to stop radioactive dust or smoke, because it won't stop radioactive gas.
That depends upon what you're trying to remove. Radioactive materials released as small particles or stuck to small particles are far more dangerous to humans than the gaseous forms. Under normal conditions, the gaseous elements will tend to disperse throughout the air column without falling out. The particulates, can carry a large dose, and will fall to the surface somewhere. Worse, they can end up in your lungs. Breathing a lungful of air with radioactive iodine in it is bad, but you're going to breathe most of it back out. Put the same about of radioactive iodine in a particle and let it lodge in your lungs, much worse. So in the past when a nuclear plant has said it released radioactive gasses, it probably went through a HEPA filter bank and out a high smokestack to catch any particles.
The design should either have an expanding bag to contain the gas (it'd have to be gigantic) or a fail-open set of vents.
Because if you let the gas just build up and (inevitably) ignite, it's going to be vented the hard way, and mess up your other efforts to get the situation under control.
I agree. There was a major lack of imagination on the part of the designers. They apparently didn't think extended power failures were possible. There needed to be a way to open the building without power and without endangering workers. Spring loaded doors on the top that could be tripped open with lanyards? Still might generate a spark, but at least there'd be pressure release for the fire/explosion.
The hydrogen was vented inside the containment on purpose, to allow activation products to decay. It could be vented outside the containment, but this would increase the radiation emissions, which the operators desperately wanted to minimize at that point.
I don't think its true that it could be vented outside, because there was no power to run the ventilation system. The ventilation system pumps the air through HEPA filters to remove any radioactive particles, and that can't be done without power. The only way to vent would have been to cut through or remove the containment walls, either of which could have triggered a hydrogen explosion, probably killing the workers attempting it.
If there had been a way to do it, they probably would have done so on Unit 3.
And, as was asked, what could anyone have done to prevent that, especially when there was no reason to suspect hydrogen build up there? That's not where hydrogen would vent. The Unit 2 explosion was entirely different from the Unit 1 and 3 explosions.
Fortunately the California quakes come from slip-strike faults that are unlikely to generate anything larger than an 8.3 or so. They're also on land for most of their distance, so tsunamis are unlikely. Of course the plants should be forced to revalidate their ability to withstand earthquake and tsunami. And every plant in the country should be forced to put containment around spent fuel pools or pack their spent fuel rods and move them to a storage site. (The president should be making an emergency declaration opening Yucca Mountain for this purpose.)
In the US, at least, you have constitutional protection from being retroactively tried and convicted under what would be called an ex-post facto law. It's one of the few restrictions that is without exception placed on state and federal legislatures.
TSA has become an even bigger clusterfuck ("hey! free porn on this here monitor thingie!).
You didn't notice that Cheney and Rumsfeld own big chunks of the companies that make those scanners? I wonder which administration was in power when they were ordered.
We have a law called the War Powers Act that allows the President to use military force for up to 60 days without getting Congressional approval. It's constitutionality has been argued (usually by the opposite party of the President) every since it was passed. I don't believe it has ever been before the Supreme Court.
Except that "separate group" was effectively one and the same as the Government. That "separate group" provided many of the troops used by that Government, was there at the invitation of that Government and was provided with safe harbor from that Government.
Yes, apart from the fact that it's not true. The Taliban may have had some common interests with al Qaeda, but al Qaeda (pre-9/11) was tiny compared to the Taliban. There was no reason for al Qaeda to provide troops for the Taliban because it wouldn't even be noticed.
There's a tendency for people not to distinguish between the two, primarily because that was a deliberate ploy on the part of the Bush administration. Pre-9/11 al Qaeda main armed force was less than 500 with about 10,000 auxiliaries, most in Afghanistan and Pakistan, but some in other Islamic countries. Some of those 10,000 might have been part of the Afghan army (that's a good way to get arms), but they we provided by al Qaeda. Of course, following the invasion, a lot of former Taliban joined al Qaeda to the point where they may have merged as a fighting force. Rest assured that they are still separate entities in Pakistan for what should be obvious reasons.
Anyway, there were better ways to handle it than an invasion of only a portion of the area the Taliban and al Qaeda occupy. Those other ways might have gotten Bin Laden as well. And they would have cost a fraction of what we're spending now in lives and dollars.
Obama had a UN resolution against Libya, in contrast with the mere 17 UN resolutions against Sadam Hussein.
Yeah, 17 UN resolutions he wasn't violating and for which the UN didn't authorize force even after Powell lied his ass off in front of the general assembly. You know why they didn't? Because everyone with a brain (including Powell) knew he was lying. Of course, we had to have the war because starving his people was costing us some real money? Nope, we had to have Iraq because after we killed a few hundred thousand civilians and destroyed any means they had of maintaining social order, the Iraqis were going to magically forget their sectarian history and form a democracy over the course of a couple weeks. Then they would greet us as liberators and shower us with flowers and oil.
I'm hoping that on his deathbed, W will tell the truth and we will finally know that we went into Iraq because W wanted to do something that daddy didn't. Couldn't he have settled for learning to play the guitar?
I think what we're doing in Libya is stupid for strategic reasons, but the UN did authorize it and people on the right were demanding it. Until he did it that is. And somehow you think that Iraq and Afghanistan aren't meddling with the affairs of a sovereign state and breeches of international conventions?
they'd have made it a jailable offense to not have a job.
Nah, they'd have to feed you in jail. It's cheaper to let the jobless fend for themselves on the streets. The 1% can't see those streets from where they live.
The way the reactor was designed the hydrogen would vent into secondary containment which operates under negative pressure. In normal conditions it would be pumped out of the secondary containment through filters to remove radioactive particles. But without power, that's difficult
You could argue that they could have used small explosion to blow holes in the secondary containment and avoid a larger explosion. Of course, that could have triggered a larger explosion. I doubt they would have been authorized to do it in time to prevent the explosions.
If wikipedia wants academics they'll need a nice clean slate for only academics to play in.
That's totally untrue. I certainly have contributed to Wikipedia and corrected several problems with articles there. Sure there are always problems with people who think they understand a subject better than they do, but there's always the talk page to sort things out.
The larger problem is that Wikipedia actively discourages academics from editing articles about subjects where they have their expertise, especially when the number of experts in that subject is small. They certainly don't want you citing your own publications.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll tell General O'Neil that you're volunteering to go to Venus to dial the Venus gate.
In subduction zones like near Japan or the Aleutians, 9.0+ quakes are not uncommon. Japan hasn't been known to have one before, but magnitudes of earthquakes before 1500AD are rough estimates at best. On the other hand, tsunami happen all the time in Japan. I'm pretty sure this one was only 15m at Fukushima, rather than 50. A tsunami greater than the height of the tsunami wall probably was predictable.
I didn't realise a HEPA filter could filter out atoms. Actually, I know it can't. HEPA filters work on sub-micron scales, not on sub-nanometer scales. If they actually do such filtering it would have to be to stop radioactive dust or smoke, because it won't stop radioactive gas.
That depends upon what you're trying to remove. Radioactive materials released as small particles or stuck to small particles are far more dangerous to humans than the gaseous forms. Under normal conditions, the gaseous elements will tend to disperse throughout the air column without falling out. The particulates, can carry a large dose, and will fall to the surface somewhere. Worse, they can end up in your lungs. Breathing a lungful of air with radioactive iodine in it is bad, but you're going to breathe most of it back out. Put the same about of radioactive iodine in a particle and let it lodge in your lungs, much worse. So in the past when a nuclear plant has said it released radioactive gasses, it probably went through a HEPA filter bank and out a high smokestack to catch any particles.
The design should either have an expanding bag to contain the gas (it'd have to be gigantic) or a fail-open set of vents.
Because if you let the gas just build up and (inevitably) ignite, it's going to be vented the hard way, and mess up your other efforts to get the situation under control.
I agree. There was a major lack of imagination on the part of the designers. They apparently didn't think extended power failures were possible. There needed to be a way to open the building without power and without endangering workers. Spring loaded doors on the top that could be tripped open with lanyards? Still might generate a spark, but at least there'd be pressure release for the fire/explosion.
I've never seen a pro-nuclear activist claim any of these things.
The hydrogen was vented inside the containment on purpose, to allow activation products to decay. It could be vented outside the containment, but this would increase the radiation emissions, which the operators desperately wanted to minimize at that point.
I don't think its true that it could be vented outside, because there was no power to run the ventilation system. The ventilation system pumps the air through HEPA filters to remove any radioactive particles, and that can't be done without power. The only way to vent would have been to cut through or remove the containment walls, either of which could have triggered a hydrogen explosion, probably killing the workers attempting it.
If there had been a way to do it, they probably would have done so on Unit 3.
And, as was asked, what could anyone have done to prevent that, especially when there was no reason to suspect hydrogen build up there? That's not where hydrogen would vent. The Unit 2 explosion was entirely different from the Unit 1 and 3 explosions.
Fortunately the California quakes come from slip-strike faults that are unlikely to generate anything larger than an 8.3 or so. They're also on land for most of their distance, so tsunamis are unlikely. Of course the plants should be forced to revalidate their ability to withstand earthquake and tsunami. And every plant in the country should be forced to put containment around spent fuel pools or pack their spent fuel rods and move them to a storage site. (The president should be making an emergency declaration opening Yucca Mountain for this purpose.)
Why does this situation remind me of the decline of the empire in the Foundation series?
Perhaps because we happen to be witnessing the decline and fall on an empire?
That's also a great way to teraform Mars. Just hold the stargate open until the pressures equalize.
Also, the license plate is not yours, it is the state's.
That depends upon the state.
In the US, at least, you have constitutional protection from being retroactively tried and convicted under what would be called an ex-post facto law. It's one of the few restrictions that is without exception placed on state and federal legislatures.
They used to say that about habeas corpus.
Probably not. Being in the area wouldn't be enough evidence to justify trying to prosecute you since the case would be thrown out.
Unless you happen to be the only black or Hispanic person in the area. That's enough to convict in many cities.
Anyway, think of it as another great reason to take public transport.
With your new bar coded RFID tagged bus pass?
TSA has become an even bigger clusterfuck ("hey! free porn on this here monitor thingie!).
You didn't notice that Cheney and Rumsfeld own big chunks of the companies that make those scanners? I wonder which administration was in power when they were ordered.
'll admit to not being well enough informed on the current US economic situation to comment with confidence
Yeah, I've noticed most fans of Obama say things like this.
Yeah, I've noticed how people who can't recognize when they're speaking to someone from another country say things like that.
We have a law called the War Powers Act that allows the President to use military force for up to 60 days without getting Congressional approval. It's constitutionality has been argued (usually by the opposite party of the President) every since it was passed. I don't believe it has ever been before the Supreme Court.
Except that "separate group" was effectively one and the same as the Government. That "separate group" provided many of the troops used by that Government, was there at the invitation of that Government and was provided with safe harbor from that Government.
Yes, apart from the fact that it's not true. The Taliban may have had some common interests with al Qaeda, but al Qaeda (pre-9/11) was tiny compared to the Taliban. There was no reason for al Qaeda to provide troops for the Taliban because it wouldn't even be noticed.
There's a tendency for people not to distinguish between the two, primarily because that was a deliberate ploy on the part of the Bush administration. Pre-9/11 al Qaeda main armed force was less than 500 with about 10,000 auxiliaries, most in Afghanistan and Pakistan, but some in other Islamic countries. Some of those 10,000 might have been part of the Afghan army (that's a good way to get arms), but they we provided by al Qaeda. Of course, following the invasion, a lot of former Taliban joined al Qaeda to the point where they may have merged as a fighting force. Rest assured that they are still separate entities in Pakistan for what should be obvious reasons.
Anyway, there were better ways to handle it than an invasion of only a portion of the area the Taliban and al Qaeda occupy. Those other ways might have gotten Bin Laden as well. And they would have cost a fraction of what we're spending now in lives and dollars.
Obama had a UN resolution against Libya, in contrast with the mere 17 UN resolutions against Sadam Hussein.
Yeah, 17 UN resolutions he wasn't violating and for which the UN didn't authorize force even after Powell lied his ass off in front of the general assembly. You know why they didn't? Because everyone with a brain (including Powell) knew he was lying. Of course, we had to have the war because starving his people was costing us some real money? Nope, we had to have Iraq because after we killed a few hundred thousand civilians and destroyed any means they had of maintaining social order, the Iraqis were going to magically forget their sectarian history and form a democracy over the course of a couple weeks. Then they would greet us as liberators and shower us with flowers and oil.
I'm hoping that on his deathbed, W will tell the truth and we will finally know that we went into Iraq because W wanted to do something that daddy didn't. Couldn't he have settled for learning to play the guitar?
I think what we're doing in Libya is stupid for strategic reasons, but the UN did authorize it and people on the right were demanding it. Until he did it that is. And somehow you think that Iraq and Afghanistan aren't meddling with the affairs of a sovereign state and breeches of international conventions?
Maybe if he had won either of those elections, I'd agree with you.
they'd have made it a jailable offense to not have a job.
Nah, they'd have to feed you in jail. It's cheaper to let the jobless fend for themselves on the streets. The 1% can't see those streets from where they live.
Wow, if you were going to splurge on a 286 why did you cripple yourself with 300 baud? I had a 1200 baud modem in my XT clone.
The way the reactor was designed the hydrogen would vent into secondary containment which operates under negative pressure. In normal conditions it would be pumped out of the secondary containment through filters to remove radioactive particles. But without power, that's difficult
You could argue that they could have used small explosion to blow holes in the secondary containment and avoid a larger explosion. Of course, that could have triggered a larger explosion. I doubt they would have been authorized to do it in time to prevent the explosions.
If wikipedia wants academics they'll need a nice clean slate for only academics to play in.
That's totally untrue. I certainly have contributed to Wikipedia and corrected several problems with articles there. Sure there are always problems with people who think they understand a subject better than they do, but there's always the talk page to sort things out.
The larger problem is that Wikipedia actively discourages academics from editing articles about subjects where they have their expertise, especially when the number of experts in that subject is small. They certainly don't want you citing your own publications.
I'll trust Rutan's opinion of NASA when one of his spacecraft puts people into orbit and returns safely.