I'm having troubles finding current numbers, but for the most part the release of I-131 seems to be estimated at a tenth of what Chernobyl released. Do you have different sources, or are you just making future projections assuming that the won't entomb the cores and just keep pumping in water that will just leak out into the environment for another 10 months?MSimon wrote:Total radiation release. You have 7 or more cores spewing: 3 reactors and 4 spent fuel pools.bcglorf wrote:Worse than Chernobyl.
Now, I admit I haven't been following that closely lately, but really?
By what measure? Overall release of radioactivity? Immediate or projected deaths? Financial cleanup costs?
It sounded like the current assessment was core breach, quite likely on all 3 damaged reactors. That has corresponded to massive coolant leakage contaminating the area, but still more localized than Chernobyl and entombment an easier feat than it was for Chernobyl. At least not requiring suicidal missions to avoid further catastrophic disaster.
Let me point out again that I'm not anti-nuke. I'm anti-bad design.
Nuclear Reactors Hit By Earthquake In Japan
NBF reports a TEPCO plan to cover the site in polyester sheeting.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/industries/2 ... buildings/
No time frame given that I've seen.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/industries/2 ... buildings/
No time frame given that I've seen.
And then there is the groundwater problem. The aquifer for Northern Japan could be contaminated. I will probably have more on that in my next report.
I might also mention that the people of Japan are turning decisively against nuclear power. And up 'til now Japan was a bright spot for the nuclear industry. They have the only forging plant in the world (that I am aware of) capable of providing reactor pressure vessels and as of a year ago they were backlogged. Three to five years backlogged.
====
What the nuclear industry never learned (how stupid can you be after TMI?) is that it is not their perception of safety that counts but the perception of citizens. We see that in the aircraft industry.
Safety levels acceptable for auto travel are unacceptable for aircraft.
Did the aircraft industry say that "the people are stupid?" or did they get the safety levels up to the point where they could get enough paying customers?
====
It wonders me that so many fans of nuke power don't get the perception problem.
Part of that problem is that the cost of Fukushima is expected to be well North of $100 bn. And of course Japan's electrical supply is further stressed due to so many nukes shut down - not just those in Fukushima.
Already industry and agriculture in the Fukushima area are complaining that they can't sell their products due to radiation fears. Add that into the costs. That one is definitely in the next report.
I might also mention that the people of Japan are turning decisively against nuclear power. And up 'til now Japan was a bright spot for the nuclear industry. They have the only forging plant in the world (that I am aware of) capable of providing reactor pressure vessels and as of a year ago they were backlogged. Three to five years backlogged.
====
What the nuclear industry never learned (how stupid can you be after TMI?) is that it is not their perception of safety that counts but the perception of citizens. We see that in the aircraft industry.
Safety levels acceptable for auto travel are unacceptable for aircraft.
Did the aircraft industry say that "the people are stupid?" or did they get the safety levels up to the point where they could get enough paying customers?
====
It wonders me that so many fans of nuke power don't get the perception problem.
Part of that problem is that the cost of Fukushima is expected to be well North of $100 bn. And of course Japan's electrical supply is further stressed due to so many nukes shut down - not just those in Fukushima.
Already industry and agriculture in the Fukushima area are complaining that they can't sell their products due to radiation fears. Add that into the costs. That one is definitely in the next report.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Yep. Right now the workers have the advantage of cool weather which makes the work in rad hazard suits tolerable. And even with that workers can only put in 2 or 3 hour days. Even so heat stroke is a serious concern.I'm having troubles finding current numbers, but for the most part the release of I-131 seems to be estimated at a tenth of what Chernobyl released. Do you have different sources, or are you just making future projections assuming that the won't entomb the cores and just keep pumping in water that will just leak out into the environment for another 10 months?
As the weather heats up work time will be reduced.
BTW TEPCO is supposed to announce a new plan today because water cooling is not working. I can't imagine what they will propose because air cooling is not a real option.
As to I-131. Levels are rather high for reactors that have been shut down for 60+ days. That indicates that the slag may be critical at least from time to time. Very bad news.
Also you need to factor in that the really bad news is being delayed by 60 to 90 days. TEPCO KNEW of the core meltdowns within 24 hours of the event. Official news of that is just trickling out. Despite the fact that it was suspected by quite a number of folks a few days after it happened.
Just go back and read this thread from about 14 March. Lots of "not so bad". Evidently you are still in that camp.
I'm going with "much worse than reported" which seems to be closer to reality.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Well, if not yet as bad as Chernobyl counts as the "not so bad camp", I guess I'm still there...MSimon wrote:Yep. Right now the workers have the advantage of cool weather which makes the work in rad hazard suits tolerable. And even with that workers can only put in 2 or 3 hour days. Even so heat stroke is a serious concern.I'm having troubles finding current numbers, but for the most part the release of I-131 seems to be estimated at a tenth of what Chernobyl released. Do you have different sources, or are you just making future projections assuming that the won't entomb the cores and just keep pumping in water that will just leak out into the environment for another 10 months?
As the weather heats up work time will be reduced.
BTW TEPCO is supposed to announce a new plan today because water cooling is not working. I can't imagine what they will propose because air cooling is not a real option.
As to I-131. Levels are rather high for reactors that have been shut down for 60+ days. That indicates that the slag may be critical at least from time to time. Very bad news.
Also you need to factor in that the really bad news is being delayed by 60 to 90 days. TEPCO KNEW of the core meltdowns within 24 hours of the event. Official news of that is just trickling out. Despite the fact that it was suspected by quite a number of folks a few days after it happened.
Just go back and read this thread from about 14 March. Lots of "not so bad". Evidently you are still in that camp.
I'm going with "much worse than reported" which seems to be closer to reality.
I am strongly on side with the camp that doesn't count cores that require active cooling after shutdown as 'inherently' safe. Multiple times as much for fuel pools that require active cooling to prevent criticality accidents...
As my reference I think made clear, I'd gladly take them in exchange for a slightly harder used reactor during 80's. Under pretty much any other condition, I very heartily don't want them.MSimon wrote:According to official reports. If you trust those I have 3 slightly used nuclear reactors on offer.Well, if not yet as bad as Chernobyl
-
paperburn1
- Posts: 2488
- Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
- Location: Third rock from the sun.
Re: Nuclear Reactors Hit By Earthquake In Japan
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.