Japanese earthquake / tsunami discussion

Turtwig

The Sparrow wrote: »

Since someone mentioned Michio Kaku, here is his latest post. What do we think?

Well the old adage is plan for the worst hope for the best. However, the worst Kaku is describing is still a few steps away. They need to get the Spent fuel ponds under control, while he's correct in that the spf's could also lead to a core meltdown like situation it is much harder to happen and much easier to prevent. They just need to get water on them.

gargleblaster

Overheal wrote: »

The source of the Guinea Pig quote was an alarmist. Fuel for Conspiracy Theorists. Or at least thats how they are going to see it.

what source would that be? it's not an alarmist statement, it is simply a fact. there is no way to know how this will go, it is new territory. there is no implication that anyone set the experiment up to observe the way it will pan out, but that doesn't make the situation any different. and people overreact to all kinds of things, that's neither here nor there.

Conversely if you want to review my contributions to this thread over the last few days you will see I'm the farthest thing from an alarmist.

never said you were an alarmist. but anyone who takes the observation that this is uncharted territory and that the japanese people are the guinea pigs in this situation and turns it into whatever you were saying about mutant babies, i'm not sure what to call that but it sure doesn't seem logical to me.

Nice try to what?

to downplay the significance of the warning to stay indoors and try to make homes airtight. like i said the iodine would be the best analogy to seatbelts. you do it once and you hope for the best. sealing yourself up in your home is rather more like not getting in your car to begin with, it seems to me.

I never said they shouldn't be occupied with the news?

then my post wasn't addressing anything you've said.

I thought about heading down to walgreens and grabbing Iodine a couple times but the radiation levels just arent that dire yet, and it is true I am very far away. It wouldn't be an unreasonable precaution on the West Coast though.

i lol'd

Saadyst

davyjose wrote: »

You used an important word there -- "threat". The tsunami and earthquake are horrible tragedies, but they've happened. As tragic as it is, it's not as newsworthy as the unfolding events in fukushima, because the looming spectre of nuclear devastation still hangs in the air. And nobody knows how severe it'll be.

My 2c is that this should really have been resolved by now; the longer it goes on, the more chance of disaster, IMO. And I'm starting to get properly frightened.

Not as newsworthy because the vast vast majority of people have no clue and no inclination about the science and safeguards involved in what's going on.

So they're hyping every little thing up because they can do so and get more viewers - and then you have disaster watcher freaks emerging now who are tuned into 5 different news sites and have the telly tuned in to the news channel while they post on their blog / forum / twitter / facebook spreading this uninformed crap.

Long Mile was nothing but a political and PR disaster. The effects on the populace and climate was negligible in the grand scheme of things. 30 years on and there is virtually no evidence to prove otherwise.

This will be similar. I think it's incredibly important that we find out about humanitarian relief efforts since I have close friends that are living in Tokyo - and by extension, people they know might be in incredible difficulty. Informing myself of the facts and not the búll**** is very important if I want to do service to them - regurgitating baseless shít and forgetting about the people that are now struggling to survive... that won't..

Pissing in the wind anyway at this point.

andrew

The Sparrow wrote: »

Since someone mentioned Michio Kaku, here


* Unit 3 uses MOX fuel, which contains some deadly plutonium, one of the most dangerous substances on earth.The utility keeps saying that things are stable, only to see things worsen. This "stability" is the stability of hanging by your fingernails.

Dunno why people keep going about the plutonium. Plutonium isn't that radioactive. It emits alpha particles. You can hold it in your hand safely (it stays luke warm apparently). It's only dangerous because of the idea that were it in dust form, then theoretically a very tiny 'hot particle' of Plutonium could be inhaled. It would then be imbedded in your lung and impossible to remove, and would cause lung cancer. And that's it. So unless the Plutonium somehow leaves the reactor in dust form, then it's not that big a deal. It's only a problem in that dealing with two substances with different characteristics is more difficult than dealing with one, homogeneous substance.

If I had the ear of the Prime Minister, I would recommend the "Chernobyl Option."

* Put the Japanese Air Force on alert
* Assemble a huge fleet of helicopters. Put shielding underneath them.
* Accumulate enough sand, boric acid, and concrete to smother these reactors, to entomb them forever.

This is what the Soviets did in 1986, calling out the Red Air Force and sandbagging the reactor with over 5,000 tons of concrete and sand.

The reason the Soviets did this was because the reactor core in Chernobyl was a) exposed and b) on fire. The idea was to dump sand on it until the fire went out. Then, it was entombed within the sarcophagus. So sand wasn't used to 'entomb' the reactor from the sky. If the Japanese did this now, they'd just be dumping sand onto a containment vessel with nuclear fuel inside...bit pointless.

maquiladora

Looks like the plan to use choppers to dump water into the spent fuel pool has been put on the back burner due to some concerns.

http://english.kyodonews.jp/news/2011/03/78308.html

Dempsey

The Sparrow wrote: »

Since someone mentioned Michio Kaku, here is his latest post. What do we think?

http://bigthink.com/ideas/31617

The situation in Japan, as of Tuesday morning, keeps getting worse. We are getting close to the point of no return (the point where we have uncontrolled releases of radiation due to breach of containment).

News & Developments

* 3 reactors have suffered partial meltdowns.
* These three reactors also suffered hydrogen gas explosions
* A fourth unit has a nuclear waste storage site on fire (which can in principle release more radiation than in a standard reactor core).
* Almost all workers, except for 50, have been evacuated. Once all the workers are evacuated, full scale melting is inevitable.
* Unit 2 actually had 100% of its core fully exposed, for about 2 hours. Worse, cracks seem to have formed in the containment vessel, which may be the source of the very high radiation levels.
* Unit 3 uses MOX fuel, which contains some deadly plutonium, one of the most dangerous substances on earth.The utility keeps saying that things are stable, only to see things worsen. This "stability" is the stability of hanging by your fingernails.

If I had the ear of the Prime Minister, I would recommend the "Chernobyl Option."

* Put the Japanese Air Force on alert
* Assemble a huge fleet of helicopters. Put shielding underneath them.
* Accumulate enough sand, boric acid, and concrete to smother these reactors, to entomb them forever.

This is what the Soviets did in 1986, calling out the Red Air Force and sandbagging the reactor with over 5,000 tons of concrete and sand.

We have not yet hit the point of no return. But when we do, I think the only option left is this one.

That actually caused problems at Chernobyl because it was pressing the remains of the reactor into the ground and they had to mine underground to the foundations to install heat exchangers pipes. By the time they got in place, the fire had burned itself out and many people had died for nothing.

davyjose

Overheal wrote: »

Meltdown situations can easily take days, weeks, and months to reach conclusion. Don't let the length of time in itself cause you to worry.

True, but after the last couple of explosions, my confidence that they are on top of the situation is on the wane. Also, how many Meltdown situations has the world been faced with for it to be an exact science? It feels to me that things are getting away from them a bit.

I'm not meaning to be alarmist, and I hope I'm wrong.

Overheal

gargleblaster wrote: »

to downplay the significance of the warning to stay indoors and try to make homes airtight. like i said the iodine would be the best analogy to seatbelts. you do it once and you hope for the best. sealing yourself up in your home is rather more like not getting in your car to begin with, it seems to me.

I think the airbag would be the more correct analogy. Or however else one might brace for a potential impact.

All the same "experiment" seems an inappropriate term. It's an unprecedented event for which there is no operating procedure for, but I would not call it an Experiment.

i lol'd

I fail to understand why. If multiple reactors undergo full meltdown I don't get the sense that the potential for radioactive materials leak is trivial. But perhaps you know better, in which case I wish you wouldn't keep it to yourself.

Thrill

Overheal wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Nuclear_Event_Scale

as it turns out I dont think there have been any deaths, yet. I believe they're coming. That still leaves it at a 5 if you ask me.

Level 5: Accident with wider consequences

Impact on People and Environment

Limited release of radioactive *material likely to require implementation of some planned countermeasures.
Several deaths from radiation.

Impact on Radiological Barriers and Control

Severe damage to reactor core.

Release of large quantities of radioactive material within an installation with a high probability of significant public exposure. This could arise from a major criticality accident or fire.

Level 4: Accident with local consequences

Impact on People and the Environment

Minor release of radioactive material unlikely to result in implementation of planned countermeasures other than local food controls.

At least one death from radiation.

Impact on Radiological Barriers and Control

Fuel melt or damage to fuel *resulting in more than 0.1% release of core inventory.

Release of significant quantities of radioactive material within an installation with a high *probability of significant public exposure.

I had to read up on the TMI accident.


Was there any deaths attributable to TMI? There was none that I can find, not even among the workers at the plant. I would also say, based on what little I've read, that it was an accident with local consequences and should, imo, be level 4.

That being said, I would agree that the fukushima accident is comparable with TMI.

The only question in my mind is whether they both meet the requirements of level 5.

gargleblaster

Overheal wrote: »

I think the airbag would be the more correct analogy. Or however else one might brace for a potential impact.

I fail to understand why. If multiple reactors undergo full meltdown I don't get the sense that the potential for radioactive materials leak is trivial. But perhaps you know better, in which case I wish you wouldn't keep it to yourself.

good point about the airbag.

and sorry, i honestly thought you were joking about iodine pills. the radioactive winds, should they become a theat, would almost certainly not endanger anyone in ireland.

Overheal

Wrong coastline: I live in the US. I was thinking of Radiation carrying to California and Canada and such on the wind. At this stage only trace amounts would make it to the East Coast where I'm at. We'll know in a couple weeks though I suppose. From there the Atlantic wind-streams will take it up along the North American coastline and towards Ireland like it does with our tropical storm systems in the summer and autumn but you're right in thinking the levels would probably be more or less negligible to Ireland by that point.

I thought you wouldve got the Walgreens hint

Thrill wrote: »

I had to read up on the TMI accident.


Was there any deaths attributable to TMI? There was none that I can find, not even among the workers at the plant. I would also say, based on what little I've read, that it was an accident with local consequences and should, imo, be level 4.

That being said, I would agree that the fukushima accident is comparable with TMI.

The only question in my mind is whether they both meet the requirements of level 5.

Interesting question. Either way I reckon they will notch it up the scale after more is known and the situation norms out - in the sense that situation is still fluctuating rapidly from "Good News Everyone" to "Chaos"

maquiladora

Regarding comparisons to this and TMI, this is from an article by Harvard Kennedy School Associate Professor Matthew Bunn :

At TMI, they managed to avoid a hydrogen explosion; in this case, Japan had hydrogen explosions that destroyed much of the buildings at two reactors (though not the steel pressure vessels around the reactors themselves). At TMI, there was only a very modest release of radiation. Here, you have at least one worker reportedly suffering from substantial radiation sickness and scores of people whose exposure is being carefully assessed and clear signs that there has been some significant release of radioactivity, including cesium and iodine (though reports seem to conflict as to how much). At TMI, one reactor’s core was destroyed. Here, it appears at least two have suffered fuel melting, a third reportedly has exposed fuel, and others are facing serious loss of cooling.

http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/power/2011/03/14/japans-nuclear-power-plant-crisis-some-context/

davyjose

Overheal wrote: »

I fail to understand why. If multiple reactors undergo full meltdown I don't get the sense that the potential for radioactive materials leak is trivial. But perhaps you know better, in which case I wish you wouldn't keep it to yourself.

Something to consider: Chernobyl was about as inland as it gets, meaning pretty much wherever the pollution falls, it lies. What impact would radioactive material falling into an ocean have on the planet?

Again, I'm looking 20 steps ahead, but it's a worry.

jackiebaron

seamus wrote: »

In a manner of speaking. They don't really have any other choice. It's a known risk of attempting to reduce the pressure in the core. It's an emergency situation, they do what they have to. You hardly think there are health and safety guys onsite doing a risk analysis.

WTF are you on about?

Hank Scorpio

davyjose wrote: »

What impact would radioactive material falling into an ocean have on the planet?

http://www.vanessarodrigues.com/image/Blinky.gif

Turtwig

Thrill wrote: »

I had to read up on the TMI accident.


Was there any deaths attributable to TMI? There was none that I can find, not even among the workers at the plant. I would also say, based on what little I've read, that it was an accident with local consequences and should, imo, be level 4.

That being said, I would agree that the fukushima accident is comparable with TMI.

The only question in my mind is whether they both meet the requirements of level 5.

Afaik 1 person is attributed to have died from TMI, though how this was proven is beyond me. Radiation levels after TMI were .8mSv. Radiation levels after a leak at Windscale (renamed afterwards to Sellafield) were 180 mSv. So even though TMI had more potential for serious harm, Sellafield actually leaked more radiation.:(

Fukushima is currently worse than TMI, but still bizarrely individual doses have yet to exceed those of Sellafield. Makes you wonder doesn't it?

maquiladora

According to TBS, TEPCO mgmt have said 70% of the fuel rods in No.1 are damaged, 30% damaged in No.2 and No.3

gargleblaster

Overheal wrote: »

Wrong coastline: I live in the US. I was thinking of Radiation carrying to California and Canada and such on the wind. At this stage only trace amounts would make it to the East Coast where I'm at. We'll know in a couple weeks though I suppose. From there the Atlantic wind-streams will take it up along the North American coastline and towards Ireland like it does with our tropical storm systems in the summer and autumn but you're right in thinking the levels would probably be more or less negligible to Ireland by that point.

ah sorry, missed your location there.

even so, california is very far away, and most radiation would dissipate within a few miles. things would have to get a whole lot worse for it to be an issue for the us.

andrew

Malty_T wrote: »

Fukushima is currently worse than TMI, but still bizarrely individual doses have yet to exceed those of Sellafield. Makes you wonder doesn't it?

Isn't there a worker reported to be suffering from radiation sickness?

Thirdfox

nuxxx wrote: »

http://www.vanessarodrigues.com/image/Blinky.gif

Godzilla you mean
To echo other's concerns, don't forget there is a large humanitarian crisis too, donations and aid is needed by the people right now, nevermind the nuclear problems

Turtwig

andrew wrote: »

Isn't there a worker reported to be suffering from radiation sickness?

Yep there is.
It's still unconfirmed but apparently his exposure level was 106mSv.

Overheal

nuxxx wrote: »

http://www.vanessarodrigues.com/image/Blinky.gif

I would be thinking smaller, but I hated biology in school and I hate it now. I don't know enough about this stuff.

Big animals and mammals like us, whales and such, I imagine we can tolerate the kind of radiation levels we're seeing. Smaller things I don't know, I don't know how their bodies work either. Don't know for instance if plankton would be harmed or boosted by an extra dose of radiation. Or what implications that has on the food chain.

If you want to know though I suggest prying into the archives from hundreds of sea-based nuclear tests.

I reckon though that if we did all of that **** to our oceans and we still arent dead and there are no three-eyed fish we'll probably be ok.

ART6

Before and after photos here

http://www.abc.net.au/news/events/japan-quake-2011/beforeafter.htm

God help those poor people.

davyjose

Overheal wrote: »

I would be thinking smaller, but I hated biology in school and I hate it now. I don't know enough about this stuff.

Big animals and mammals like us, whales and such, I imagine we can tolerate the kind of radiation levels we're seeing. Smaller things I don't know, I don't know how their bodies work either. Don't know for instance if plankton would be harmed or boosted by an extra dose of radiation. Or what implications that has on the food chain.

If you want to know though I suggest prying into the archives from hundreds of sea-based nuclear tests.

I reckon though that if we did all of that **** to our oceans and we still arent dead and there are no three-eyed fish we'll probably be ok.

I meant more the possible spread of radioactive materials, by currents, etc. I'm fairly sure some could drift towards Hawaii, The US mainland and Mexico?

Overheal

davyjose wrote: »

I meant more the possible spread of radioactive materials, by currents, etc. I'm fairly sure some could drift towards Hawaii, The US mainland and Mexico?

I don't pay attention to the pacific, frankly. I've almost always lived alongside the atlantic. I wager it would reach our shores though yes but would have to be really extreme amounts to post any threat I gather.

Turtwig

Overheal wrote: »

I don't pay attention to the pacific, frankly. I've almost always lived alongside the atlantic. I wager it would reach our shores though yes but would have to be really extreme amounts to post any threat I gather.

Shouldn't be any harm to the East Coast, or Hawaii for that matter.:)

andrew

Malty_T wrote: »

Yep there is.
It's still unconfirmed but apparently his exposure level was 106mSv.

Does that equate to 1.06Sv? or do you mean 1060mSV? From what i've heard, 1Sv (1,000mSv) is when people get sick

Overheal

andrew wrote: »

Does that equate to 1.06Sv? or do you mean 1060mSV? From what i've heard, 1Sv (1,000mSv) is when people get sick

.106 Sv

maquiladora

Kazuaki Nagata of The Japan Times :

Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry ordered TEPCO to pour water into Fukushima's No.4 reactor's spent fuel pool as quickly as possible.

The order was issued at 10pm on March 15, and it says the water needs to be poured to prevent potential disaster.

Thrill

Police say 3,373 dead, 6,746 missing from quake and tsunami in Japan.

Japans nuclear crisis "is an apocalypse", says EU Energy Commissioner adding that Tokyo had almost lost control of events at the Fukushima power plant, AFP report.

Radiation levels reported to have dropped since the explosion at Fukushima