Fukushima Follies

[Taichiliberal]

And since American news media takes an "out of sight, out of mind" attitude to a LOT of important news, let's check in on what's going down in Japan.


Fukushima Nuclear Crisis Update for May 31st to June 4th, 2013

http://www.greenpeace.org/internati...clear-crisis-update-for-may-31st-/blog/45412/


This past weekend, tens of thousands of protesters gathered in Tokyo to demonstrate against nuclear power in Japan, highlighting ongoing and widespread public opposition to the issue. The rally, which was sponsored by the Metropolitan Coalition Against Nukes and included Nobel-laureate and anti-nuclear activist Kenzaburo Oe, was designed to protest the restart of nuclear reactors. Kyodo News reported that Tokyo’s Metropolitan Police Department estimated crowds at between 20,000 and 30,000 attendees.

Despite the ongoing public opposition to nuclear power, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is moving ahead with plans to restart reactors, although analysts believe that he is treading lightly until elections for the Upper House of Parliament take place in July. A newly obtained draft of the country’s economic-growth strategy, obtained by the Asahi Shimbun, shows that Abe plans to push hard for nuclear power, and says that the government will restart reactors as soon as the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) declares them safe. Although Japan has a long-standing tradition whereby utilities obtain permission from local government authorities before restarting reactors, that requirement has never been codified into law. Now, the language in the new draft is far more vague, saying only that the government “will make utmost efforts” to gain local understanding—but does not say what will happen if those approvals are not obtained.

Meanwhile, an increasing number of earthquakes in Japan since 2011 have led researchers from Tohoku University to state that a major earthquake is two-and-a-half times more likely to strike Tokyo, Kanagawa, and Chiba Prefectures within the next five years than it was before the Great East earthquake of March 2011. They believe that the increased seismic activity they have been recording is more than just aftershocks from the 2011 event. If such a quake were to occur, the nation’s nuclear plants could be at risk. Although TEPCO insists that all damage at the Fukushima plant was caused by a tsunami and not the earthquake, many experts doubt that claim. Exceedingly high radiation levels at the plant have thus far prevented further study, although an NRA team planned to take a ten-minute tour of the fourth floor of reactor #1 this week in order to inspect for damage.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

Thanks Taichi, I never would have seen that.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

A bunch of people protesting and afraid of something they don't understand. What a surprise. Unlike those proles however, we're building a NEW reactor (fucking finally) here in Detroit.

 

[Howey]

That would make a great name for a porno flick.

 

[cancel2 2022]

A bunch of people protesting and afraid of something they don't understand. What a surprise. Unlike those proles however, we're building a NEW reactor (fucking finally) here in Detroit.

It doesn't matter how many times you tell people that the accident was so far off the normal scale they still treat it as if every reactor around the world is going to swamped by a 14 metre tsunami and shaken by a 9.0 earthquake. Then when you tell them that third generation reactors do not need standby power supplies to shut down they don't believe you. China seems to have little qualms about building new reactors.

• Mainland China has 17 nuclear power reactors in operation, 28 under construction, and more about to start construction.
• Additional reactors are planned, including some of the world's most advanced, to give a five- or six-fold increase in nuclear capacity to at least 58 GWe by 2020, then possibly 200 GWe by 2030, and 400 GWe by 2050.
• China has become largely self-sufficient in reactor design and construction, as well as other aspects of the fuel cycle.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Unlike those proles however, we're building a NEW reactor (fucking finally) here in Detroit.

seriously?.....I've not seen anything on the news about that outstate......

 

[tekkychick]

One main problem with nuclear reactors is that they are built and operated by people. Why is this a problem? Because people aren't perfect.

Minor example: bike path along the bay bridge .... someone went through and welded all the bolts on the railing, which apparently is normal - makes them stronger. Unfortunately the bike path was built to "flex" and with the bolts welded, it can't do that. They all have to be replaced.

For a bike path along a bridge - a minor "oops".

But when a nuclear plant has an accident - the consequences are huge. Look at Chernobyl.

So if we build nuclear reactors - we have to build them with such a high degree of safety standards - and operate them at such a high level - to avoid the immense consequences if they do fail.

And we just aren't that good.

ps - if we do build reactors, we should do the "fast reaction" kind as they can actually use the spent fuel from the reactors we've built in the past. But I don't think we should build them. Even putting aside intentional corruption, too many mistakes can happen.

 

[cancel2 2022]

One main problem with nuclear reactors is that they are built and operated by people. Why is this a problem? Because people aren't perfect.

Minor example: bike path along the bay bridge .... someone went through and welded all the bolts on the railing, which apparently is normal - makes them stronger. Unfortunately the bike path was built to "flex" and with the bolts welded, it can't do that. They all have to be replaced.

For a bike path along a bridge - a minor "oops".

But when a nuclear plant has an accident - the consequences are huge. Look at Chernobyl.

So if we build nuclear reactors - we have to build them with such a high degree of safety standards - and operate them at such a high level - to avoid the immense consequences if they do fail.

And we just aren't that good.

ps - if we do build reactors, we should do the "fast reaction" kind as they can actually use the spent fuel from the reactors we've built in the past. But I don't think we should build them. Even putting aside intentional corruption, too many mistakes can happen.

Oh dear Chernobyl again, that was a first generation Soviet reactor with no containment dome. Comparing that to a 3rd generation reactor like a Westinghouse AP1000 is akin to comparing a biplane with an Airbus 380.

[SIZE=-1]What really happened at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Station on April 26, 1986?
[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Located on the banks of the Pripyat River, sixty miles north of the Ukraine capital of Kiev, Chernobyl was a major civilian nuclear power station for the Soviet Union. The Soviets designed the Chernobyl reactors according to the RBMK model, which included natural uranium reactor fuel, a water-based cooling system and control rods and a reactor core casing made of graphite. This reactor model had one significant advantage over other models: It produced on average ten percent more power. Unfortunately, it had one significant disadvantage: On failure the reactor core would go "supercritical." In event of a mishap involving the control system, the reactor would heat up to the point where its fuel would melt down into a heap of slag. Unrelated to the basic design problem, these reactors had no containment buildings. Although they were shielded by heavy, reinforced concrete, the units were not surrounded by buildings designed to withstand a reactor core explosion.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]So why did the Soviets employ this risky design? In the old Soviet Union, like everywhere else it was all about money. To the managers of their centrally-controlled economy, the ten percent additional power production glittered brightly against a backdrop of what turned out to be inferior Soviet technology and engineering. They took a chance, a calculated risk. Sure it was a stupid thing to do, but they did it. I met with three of the investigating Hanford engineers after they returned from Chernobyl.[/SIZE] [SIZE=-1]They told of a Deputy Chief Engineer who had the previous year convinced Moscow to let him run an experiment that had the potential for allowing power to be drawn from the spinning turbine of a reactor that had just shut down, emergency power that could be used to run emergency coolant pumps during the interim while the emergency diesel generators were coming on line. Although this engineer was not nuclear trained and really knew nothing about nuclear reactors, the idea seemed to have merit, and a successful prosecution of this concept would elevate this Deputy Chief Engineer to the top of his peer group. He eventually received permission and some time before the accident attempted to run the experiment. Unexpected problems caused the reactor safety systems to shut it down before he could run the experiment. Although red-faced with embarrassment, he petitioned for, and eventually received a second chance, but apparently was also told about dire consequences should he fail again.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]When the time came, and in order to prevent the reactor from shutting down during the second run, he ordered all five safety systems bypassed, and he also had all the backup electrical systems shut down, including the emergency diesel generators that could have powered the reactor controls in an emergency. He probably felt safe doing this because he did not intend on running the reactor for more than a few minutes under load. After all, what could possibly happen in a few short minutes? And, not being nuclear-trained, he had no idea of what unintended consequences could result from disconnecting these systems. Although we will never know for sure, he may have been thinking that the worst-case scenario would be a complete shutdown of the reactor as would happen if the fuel supply were cut off from a conventional boiler.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]As luck would have it, unexpected power demand that afternoon delayed the onset of the experiment until late in the evening. In order to get the experiment underway, the engineers needed to reduce reactor power to minimum, and because they were behind schedule, they reduced the power level more rapidly than this reactor design could handle. This caused a buildup of neutron-absorbing fission byproducts which poisoned the reaction process and threatened to shut it down altogether.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Since that would have spoiled the experiment a second time (Hello Siberia), to compensate, they withdrew most of the control rods. Because of the poisoning, this allowed a power increase to barely 30 megawatts, which was just sufficient to bring the reactor into its most unstable range. Something had to be done immediately. There were only two choices: do absolutely nothing, and wait twenty-four hours for the poisoning to dissipate, or increase the power immediately. With the threat of exile to Siberia in the wings, we know what choice they made.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]The engineers finally marginally stabilized reactor power at 200 megawatts - one fifth of the unit's design power. But because the reaction was still poisoned, they had pulled all but six control rods from the core. The absolute design minimum for this reactor was thirty rods kept in the core at all times, so the immediate situation was dire.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]About a half hour later they decided to commence the actual experiment and shut down the turbine generator. Their intent was to see if the turbine could still supply coolant pump power even though it was only coasting - no longer being driven by the reactor. A successful outcome would prove that they did not need to obtain outside power to maintain proper cooling levels when they decoupled a reactor and its turbine. An engineer with nuclear training could have told them the answer without conducting the experiment. But these guys weren't nukes. With reduced electrical power, the pumps slowed, reducing the flow of cooling water.
[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Modern nuclear reactors used in the United States and the rest of the world control neutron level by absorbing them with Boron or Cadmium control rods. The primary coolant acts as a moderator by slowing the neutrons. The RMBK model, however, works in reverse, using graphite rods to moderate the neutrons, and the primary coolant to absorb them.
[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]At this critical juncture on April 26, 1986, we had a reactor operating at a significant power level with almost all the moderating control rods pulled out. The reactor was still stable - although barely - because the primary coolant was absorbing neutrons as fast as they were being produced. At this point, disaster struck: The coolant pumps slowed as a result of reduced electrical power from the shut down turbine, so the cooling water moved more slowly through the system. It stayed in the reactor core longer, getting hotter, and finally began to boil. But steam cannot absorb neutrons: Suddenly the neutron flux - the total emission of neutrons from the reactor fuel skyrocketed. The reactor operators immediately hit the emergency button designed to drive all the control rods back into the fuel core, but since all backup power had been shut down, even the emergency diesel generators, the only available electrical power came from the slowing turbine. This meant that the already slow primary coolant pumps had even less power, and so the skyrocketing neutron flux increased even more.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]This is when another design problem of the RMBK became evident. The control rods had graphite tips followed by a one meter hollow segment (I don't know why, they just did), followed by a five-meter graphite section. As soon as the rods penetrated the core, they displaced more coolant without themselves absorbing any neutrons, because of the hollow section. The already skyrocketing neutron flux went ballistic and all hell broke loose. The reactor container exploded - not a nuclear explosion, just a plain, old-fashioned steam boiler explosion. But it was a doozy: Red-hot chunks of highly radioactive reactor fuel and graphite fell everywhere. Fifty tons of nuclear fuel evaporated in the blast and were ejected high into the atmosphere. Another seventy tons of fuel were ejected sideways into the surrounding area. An additional fifty tons of fuel and eight hundred tons of graphite remained in the reactor vault smoldering for days. Experts have placed the release of radioactivity at about ten times the amount generated by the atomic bomb that destroyed Hiroshima. A plume of radioactive fallout swept across Europe, leaving measurable contamination as far away as Finland. There was a veritable continent-wide panic reminiscent of the response to the Three Mile Island incident seven years earlier.

In the final analysis, however, the health consequences were relatively small. According to the Nuclear Energy Agency (a specialized agency within the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, an intergovernmental organization of industrialized countries based in Paris) only 31 persons as of April 2001 had died as a direct consequence of the accident. They were all either plant personnel or directly involved in fighting the fire following the explosion. Another 140 individuals from these same groups suffered varying degrees of radiation sickness and health impairment, but all had recovered fully with no permanent consequences. During the period between 1990 and 1998, in the regions affected by the explosion and subsequent fallout, officials diagnosed 1,791 cases of thyroid cancer that were assumed to have been caused by the radiation release. The deaths and the injuries are tragic, of course. But this is a far cry from the misinformation contained in a Greenpeace website commemorating the tenth anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster, where they state flatly that 2,500 people were killed, millions were affected, and hundreds of thousands displaced.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]A careful examination of the Chernobyl incident reveals that it was a stupid, completely unnecessary accident resulting from gross criminal negligence and total managerial incompetence. This problem could only have happened within a political system that was completely out of contact with the real world. Moreover, the entire tragedy stemmed from what experts call a unique "accident chain" - a series of missteps that as a whole led to a particular breakdown. Chernobyl hinged upon the reactor becoming unstable when the coolant flow slowed, but this can only happen in the RMBK reactor design. All other reactors in use would have shut themselves down.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Those who have waved the banner of Chernobyl in a campaign to ban nuclear power worldwide have ignored the facts of this incident, in particular the reality that such an explosion is impossible in other reactor designs.[/SIZE]

http://www.argee.net/DefenseWatch/Chernobyl Reality and Myth.htm

 

[Taichiliberal]

A bunch of people protesting and afraid of something they don't understand. What a surprise. Unlike those proles however, we're building a NEW reactor (fucking finally) here in Detroit.

No matter how many screen names you use, your willful ignorance and arrogant stupidity comes through....I seriously doubt you even understand how incorrect your use of the term "proles" is, as you attach it to any and every post that has a position you just don't like.

Why don't you get off your brains and READ CAREFULLY AND COMPREHENSIVELY what was posted....ESPECIALLY the last paragraph. Then get back to me with something other than your blind trust steeped in corporate ass kissing.

 

[Taichiliberal]

It doesn't matter how many times you tell people that the accident was so far off the normal scale they still treat it as if every reactor around the world is going to swamped by a 14 metre tsunami and shaken by a 9.0 earthquake. Then when you tell them that third generation reactors do not need standby power supplies to shut down they don't believe you. China seems to have little qualms about building new reactors.

• Mainland China has 17 nuclear power reactors in operation, 28 under construction, and more about to start construction.
• Additional reactors are planned, including some of the world's most advanced, to give a five- or six-fold increase in nuclear capacity to at least 58 GWe by 2020, then possibly 200 GWe by 2030, and 400 GWe by 2050.
• China has become largely self-sufficient in reactor design and construction, as well as other aspects of the fuel cycle.

First off you need to stop lying.....people react to EVERY nuke power plant fuck up SPECIFICALLY to the incident....which previously according to expert company wonks and parrots could NOT have happened!

And since when the hell is China to be trusted with public safety? Check out what they've done regarding just building a new damn for hydro electric power, or their insane rush to increase "clean coal" production. Come on man, you're just stretching reality to the point of breaking for the sake of your worship of technological progress regarding nuke power.

 

[Taichiliberal]

And the level of denial among the nuke power parrots increases as more facts come out:


Reuters) - The operator of the wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant said it had found another leak of contaminated water on Wednesday, piling pressure on the utility to curb the problem as it seeks permission to release water to the sea.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/05/us-japan-nuclear-leaks-idUSBRE95409V20130605

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

No matter how many screen names you use, your willful ignorance and arrogant stupidity comes through....I seriously doubt you even understand how incorrect your use of the term "proles" is, as you attach it to any and every post that has a position you just don't like

Being needlessly afraid based on nothing is prolish behavior, it is no better than the behavior of shit chucking apes.

Why don't you get off your brains and READ CAREFULLY AND COMPREHENSIVELY what was posted....ESPECIALLY the last paragraph. Then get back to me with something other than your blind trust steeped in corporate ass kissing.

Nothing in the last paragraph, or anything you ever have or ever will post, changes the FACT that nuclear power is not only the cleanest and most efficient form of power, but also the safest. And unlike those fearful chimps in Japan, we here in Detroit are moving forward like the human race should.

 

[cancel2 2022]

First off you need to stop lying.....people react to EVERY nuke power plant fuck up SPECIFICALLY to the incident....which previously according to expert company wonks and parrots could NOT have happened!

And since when the hell is China to be trusted with public safety? Check out what they've done regarding just building a new damn for hydro electric power, or their insane rush to increase "clean coal" production. Come on man, you're just stretching reality to the point of breaking for the sake of your worship of technological progress regarding nuke power.

Westinghouse Electric Company and its consortium are currently building four AP1000 in China. Additionally, five U.S. utilities have chosen the AP1000 for possible nuclear plant construction.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Being needlessly afraid based on nothing is prolish behavior, it is no better than the behavior of shit chucking apes.

Nothing in the last paragraph, or anything you ever have or ever will post, changes the FACT that nuclear power is not only the cleanest and most efficient form of power, but also the safest. And unlike those fearful chimps in Japan, we here in Detroit are moving forward like the human race should.

See folks, this is the type of crank/idiot that votes to support a system that is not always working in the best interest of the people they allegedly serve. He just parrots dogma, and turns a blind eye to everything else....so much more to pity him.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

See folks, this is the type of crank/idiot that votes to support a system that is not always working in the best interest of the people they allegedly serve. He just parrots dogma, and turns a blind eye to everything else....so much more to pity him.

So cheap clean safe energy isn't in the best interest of people? Maybe not china or coal miners, but other than them who is not served best by cleaner, cheaper, safer energy?

 

[NOVA]

See folks, this is the type of crank/idiot that votes to support a system that is not always working in the best interest of the people they allegedly serve. He just parrots dogma, and turns a blind eye to everything else....so much more to pity him.

TC, you're so full of bullshit you must sound like high tide breaking on the shore when you walk....

 

[Taichiliberal]

TC, you're so full of bullshit you must sound like high tide breaking on the shore when you walk....

Wow....with such a brilliant and scintillating retort from Nova, how can I possibly go on?

 

[Phantasmal]

TC, you're so full of bullshit you must sound like high tide breaking on the shore when you walk....

I have never heard a high tide breaking that sounded like farts, you talk about my reality, one thing, I am glad it isn't like yours.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Westinghouse Electric Company and its consortium are currently building four AP1000 in China. Additionally, five U.S. utilities have chosen the AP1000 for possible nuclear plant construction.

And your point? Because that sure as hell doesn't mean much to the residents of Fukushima. And quite frankly I don't trust the Chinese gov't with nuke power anymore than any Western or European. Case in point:

China's nuclear power plant review: 'problems in 14 areas' found

Should we be concerned? A nuclear official said in passing this weekend that problems in 14 areas need to be resolved. In the wake of Fukushima, a shade more transparency would be welcome.
By Peter Ford, Staff writer / March 12, 2012


http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Glob...power-plant-review-problems-in-14-areas-found

Here's the thing: Parroting the line that Fukushima was a "freak occurrence" doesn't cut it....because NATURE DOES NOT ALWAYS PLAY BY THE RULES MANKIND ENVISIONS!

And then there's all the stuff regarding waste disposal, long term impact on surrounding ecology, etc., etc.

Just to note: here in America we just had TWO major hurricanes that caused serious damage in the last two years. Had we here in New York received the full brunt of one of those hurricanes, the power grid would have been shot to hell for a an indefinite period of time...and that means that the water pumps to cool down the spent fuel rods storage tanks (and the active power plant itself) wouldn't work....and in about 30 days or less you could kiss goodbye any population downwind of that fiasco. So pardon me if I don't blow off any accident or near accident because it didn't immediately result in the China Syndrome.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

And your point? Because that sure as hell doesn't mean much to the residents of Fukushima. And quite frankly I don't trust the Chinese gov't with nuke power anymore than any Western or European. Case in point:

China's nuclear power plant review: 'problems in 14 areas' found

Should we be concerned? A nuclear official said in passing this weekend that problems in 14 areas need to be resolved. In the wake of Fukushima, a shade more transparency would be welcome.
By Peter Ford, Staff writer / March 12, 2012


http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Glob...power-plant-review-problems-in-14-areas-found

Here's the thing: Parroting the line that Fukushima was a "freak occurrence" doesn't cut it....because NATURE DOES NOT ALWAYS PLAY BY THE RULES MANKIND ENVISIONS!

And then there's all the stuff regarding waste disposal, long term impact on surrounding ecology, etc., etc.

Just to note: here in America we just had TWO major hurricanes that caused serious damage in the last two years. Had we here in New York received the full brunt of one of those hurricanes, the power grid would have been shot to hell for a an indefinite period of time...and that means that the water pumps to cool down the spent fuel rods storage tanks (and the active power plant itself) wouldn't work....and in about 30 days or less you could kiss goodbye any population downwind of that fiasco. So pardon me if I don't blow off any accident or near accident because it didn't immediately result in the China Syndrome.

I can't "me too" your last paragraph enough taichi. I live in ny as well, on LI, and you are so right. It was very downplayed in the media right after Sandy, but if you were looking, you saw it. It seems a matter of when.