Nuke Crisis : Level 7 on overall impact

[evnow]

Update 15: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_Fukushima_moved_to_Level_7_1204111.html

These have now been supplemented by an additional rating at the top Level 7, 'a major accident'. Japanese authorities notified the International Atomic Energy Agency of their decision to up the rating: "As a result of re-evaluation, total amount of discharged iodine-131 is estimated at 1.3x1017 becquerels, and caesium-137 is estimated at 6.1x1015 becquerels. Hence the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency has concluded that the rating of the accident would be equivalent of Level 7."

Update 14:"There is currently a highly unclear picture of water travel around the site, including how some radionuclides travelled from reactor cores or used fuel ponds to current locations."

http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_Trench_water_under_investigation_2903111.html

Trench water under investigation

Meanwhile, water with contamination enough to cause dose rates of up to 1000 millisieverts per hour at the surface has been discovered in a trench for power cables and pipes alongside unit 2's turbine building, which is connected to the bottom of the turbine building via a tunnel. The concrete trench is 76 metres long, four metres high and three metres wide. At each end is a vertical shaft of over 16 metres and the entire system is full with water to within one metre of the top.

Update 13: Workers evacuated as radiation soars

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12872707

Radioactivity in water at reactor 2 at the quake-damaged Fukushima nuclear plant has reached 10 million times the usual level, company officials say.

Workers trying to cool the reactor core to avoid a meltdown have been evacuated.

Earlier, Japan's nuclear agency said that levels of radioactive iodine in the sea near the plant had risen to 1,850 times the usual level.

The UN's nuclear agency has warned the crisis could go on for months.

It is believed the radiation at Fukushima is coming from one of the reactors, but a specific leak has not been identified.

Leaking water at reactor 2 has been measured at 1,000 millisieverts/hour - 10 million times higher than when the plant is operating normally.

Update 12: A good "Insight to Fukushima engineering challenges".

http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_Insight_to_Fukushima_engineering_challenges_1803112.html

Update 11: http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110317/full/news.2011.168.html

Nature has also learned that initial CTBTO data suggest that a large meltdown at the Fukushima power plant has not yet occurred, although that assessment may change as more data flow in during the coming days.

Update 10: Viewers reporting seeing water being dumped using Helicopters on #3, #4.

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/

Update 9: All 3 reactors have the rods exposed.

* Fukushima Daiichi Unit 1 reactor
o At 6:55AM on March 16, the pressure inside the reactor core was measured at 0.17 MPa. The water level inside the reactor core was measured at 1.8 meters below the top of the fuel rods.
* Fukushima Daiichi Unit 2 reactor
o At 6:55 AM on March 16, the pressure inside the reactor core was measured at 0.043 MPa. The water level inside the reactor core was measured at 1.4 meters below the top of the fuel rods.
* Fukushima Daiichi Unit 3 reactor
o At 8:37AM on March 16, white smoke was observed emanating from the vicinity of the secondary containment building.
o At 9:55AM on March 16, the pressure inside the reactor core was measured at 0.088 MPa. The water level inside the reactor core was measured at 1.9 meters below the top of the fuel rods.

Now you can do some calculations.

o At 10:40AM on March 16, a radiation level of 10 milli sievert per hour was recorded at the main gate of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station.
o At 4:10PM on March 16, a radiation level of 1530 micro sievert per hour was recorded at the main gate of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station.
o For comparison, a human receives 2400 micro sievert per year from natural radiation in the form of sunlight, radon, and other sources. One chest CT scan generates 6900 micro sievert per scan.

Update 8: Japan has raised the maximum radiation dose allowed for nuclear workers, citing the urgent need to prevent a crisis at a tsunami-stricken power plant from worsening.

Update 7: Workers are now back.

Update 6: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12755739

A rise in radiation levels at Japan's stricken Fukushima nuclear plant has forced workers to suspend operations, a government spokesman says.

Update 5: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_Possible_damage_at_Fukushima_Daiichi_2_1503111.html

Japanese authorities told the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that radiation levels at the plant site between units 3 and 4 reached a peak of some 400 millisieverts per hour. "This is a high dose-level value," said the body, "but it is a local value at a single location and at a certain point in time."

Later readings were 11.9 millisieverts per hour, followed six hours later by 0.6 millisieverts, which the IAEA said "indicate the level of radioactivity has been decreasing."

...
JAIF reported that temperatures in the cooling ponds at units 5 and 6 are increasing, but the reason for this is not yet available.

Update 4 : The Prime Minister said in a live broadcast to the nation that everyone within 20 km should evacuate - and within 30 should stay indoors. The radition is increasing - so there is some breach somewhere ...

Also, there is fire in unit #4.

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/nhk-world-tv

http://www.cnn.com/video/flashLive/live.html?stream=stream3&hpt=T1

NHK in English for live coverage.

update 3 : Very bad news. Explosion has occurred within the containment vessel. This means possible rediation leakage.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42066534/ns/world_news-asiapacific/

update 2 : #2 is in serious trouble. There was loss of coolant and some of the rods are presumed broken.

update 1 : Second explosion from the Daichi plant - unit #3 explodes because of Hydrogen.


This thread is to track the environmental impact of the Japanese Nuclear Plants Mishap due to earthquake/Tsunami. Use this thread to also talk about nuclear safety issues etc.

Here is a good news source : http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_Battle_to_stabilise_earthquake_reactors_1203111.html

Here is the official TEPCO news releases : http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/index-e.html

 

[evnow]

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/japan-nuclear-mishap-among-worst-ever-20110313-1bsh1.html

Cirincione faulted Japanese authorities for providing partial and conflicting information about what was happening at the plant, located about 250km northeast of Tokyo.

"The big unanswered question here is whether there's structural damage to this facility now. We saw the explosion early this morning. Are there other structural damages that may make a meltdown all but inevitable? We don't have any information from the power company on that. That's what we need."

http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=201103112212dowjonesdjonline000639&title=japan-nuclear-closures-could-have-oilgas-price-fallout-barcap

The Japan earthquake has shut an estimated 6,800 megawatts of nuclear power generation, or 15%-20% of Japan's capacity, and while it isn't clear how long outages will last, there could be considerable fuel substitution, which in turn could drive up prices of alternative fuels, according to a Barclay Capital analysis published Saturday.

If the shuttered nuclear capacity was replaced only by additional fuel oil consumption, it would require an additional 238,000 barrels a day, it said.

 

[evnow]

Just as with the Gulf Oil rig disaster, rather than immidiate injuries, concern is the serious dislocation and long term effects.

A ten kilometre evacuation order is in effect and some 200,000 people have been moved from their homes so far.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42044156/ns/world_news-asiapacific/

http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_Venting_at_Fukushima_Daiichi_3_1303111.html

Reactors 1, 2 and 3 were in operation at Tokyo Electric Power Company's (Tepco's) east coast power station when the earthquake struck. Three other reactors were already shut for inspection and all three operating units underwent automatic shutdown as expected. Because plant power and grid power were unavailable during the earthquake, diesel generators started automatically to supply power for decay heat removal.
...
This situation continued for one hour until the plant was hit by the tsunami wave, which stopped the generators and left the plant in black-out conditions. The loss of power meant inevitable rises in temperature within the reactor system as well increases in pressure. Engineers fought for many hours to install mobile power units to replace the diesels and managed to stabilise conditions at units 2 and 3.
...
Prime minister Naoto Kan ordered the situation brought under control by the injection of seawater to the reactor vessel.
...
Now Tepco has reported it has not been able to restart unit 3's high pressure injection system after an automatic stop. This has left the reactor without sufficient coolant and obligated Tepco to notify government of an emergency situation.

 

[evnow]

Prof Barry Brook's interview with ABC.

http://video.au.msn.com/watch/video/explosion-fear/xqk4in1

Interesting thing is the oil refinery fire claimed about 100 lives ... but nuclear radiation ofcource sounds more scary.

 

[walterbays]

It's amazing how many web pages today which mention Thorium reactors, talk about Fukushima. Here's one of the old articles: http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/348

I pray the reactors do not melt down. But this may be the impetus for the commercialization of Thorium reactors. Japan has the technical ability to do it, without the political paralysis of bitter factions that stops the US from a "Manhattan Project" for major improvements in nuclear, solar, wind, tidal energy production.

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

This is why we need to push for LFTRs, Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors. They operate at atmospheric pressure, so no high pressure systems to fail, they are self regulating, and when power is lost the reaction shuts itself down. They also produce very little waste that with very short half lives. Many other good reasons to use this system, probably the only reason we don't is because of the legacy of the cold war. LFTR's don't produce bomb grade products.

One of life's great ironies is environmentalist resistance to construction of new nuclear plants that would be built with safer technologies. Maybe older plants wouldn't be retired one for one as new plants are built, but replacements out of the question you have to hold on to the old ones you have.

 

[Desertstraw]

This is why we need to push for LFTRs, Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors. They operate at atmospheric pressure, so no high pressure systems to fail, they are self regulating, and when power is lost the reaction shuts itself down. They also produce very little waste that with very short half lives. Many other good reasons to use this system, probably the only reason we don't is because of the legacy of the cold war. LFTR's don't produce bomb grade products.

One of life's great ironies is environmentalist resistance to construction of new nuclear plants that would be built with safer technologies. Maybe older plants wouldn't be retired one for one as new plants are built, but replacements out of the question you have to hold on to the old ones you have.

Same right-wing theme, it is all the fault of those nasty environmentalists. Wake up. Renewable energy, especially solar power, is safe, good for the environment and economy, and cost competitive today if all costs are included. A square 100 miles on a side in the Arizona desert could provide all the energy needs of the United States.

 

[Adrian]

This is why we need to push for LFTRs, Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors. They operate at atmospheric pressure, so no high pressure systems to fail, they are self regulating, and when power is lost the reaction shuts itself down. They also produce very little waste that with very short half lives. Many other good reasons to use this system, probably the only reason we don't is because of the legacy of the cold war. LFTR's don't produce bomb grade products.

One of life's great ironies is environmentalist resistance to construction of new nuclear plants that would be built with safer technologies. Maybe older plants wouldn't be retired one for one as new plants are built, but replacements out of the question you have to hold on to the old ones you have.

Same right-wing theme, it is all the fault of those nasty environmentalists. Wake up. Renewable energy, especially solar power, is safe, good for the environment and economy, and cost competitive today if all costs are included. A square 100 miles on a side in the Arizona desert could provide all the energy needs of the United States.

Not if some endangered mouse lives there! Then there are those that oppose Wind Energy for various reasons. Everything is a trade-off, regardless of what anyone will claim. Both sides of the political spectrum exploit this simple fact. I think the only place where it's clear we can harness the sun's power is our roofs using PV. Large PV arrays in the desert are being opposed using the CEQA Environmental review process in CA. Can't say I support Schwarzenegger in general, but here's a quote I agree with.
Excerpt from: http://www.newsweek.com/2010/01/12/not-in-anyone-s-backyard.html
Speaking at Yale in 2008, Schwarzenegger was more blunt: "They say that we want renewable energy, but we don't want you to put it anywhere.I mean, if we cannot put solar power plants in the Mojave Desert, I don't know where the hell we can put them."
I'm sure if I look hard enough I'll find the same thing for Wind turbines. Opposing change that is better than status quo is a support of status quo. I know that's hard to swallow, but yes, it is that simple. Another example is CNG vehicles and their certification process by CARB and EPA. These cars are basically much cleaner than gasoline and diesel, yet the emission certification process can easily cost over $250k for EPA and CARB combined per year per engine family. As a result of these regs, there is a support for status quo; ie gasoline and diesel.

 

[thankyouOB]

This is why we need to push for LFTRs, Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors. They operate at atmospheric pressure, so no high pressure systems to fail, they are self regulating, and when power is lost the reaction shuts itself down. They also produce very little waste that with very short half lives. Many other good reasons to use this system, probably the only reason we don't is because of the legacy of the cold war. LFTR's don't produce bomb grade products.

One of life's great ironies is environmentalist resistance to construction of new nuclear plants that would be built with safer technologies. Maybe older plants wouldn't be retired one for one as new plants are built, but replacements out of the question you have to hold on to the old ones you have.

Same right-wing theme, it is all the fault of those nasty environmentalists. Wake up. Renewable energy, especially solar power, is safe, good for the environment and economy, and cost competitive today if all costs are included. A square 100 miles on a side in the Arizona desert could provide all the energy needs of the United States.

thank you, desertstraw.
it reminds me of a faux-environmentalist in my town. I asked this guy, who has a 150k pension, why he doesnt have solar. "doenst pencil out," he says. He spends his money on vacations to Europe.
either you care about air pollution, greenhouse gases, blood-for-oil, or you dont.

as to the more-better-nukes gang, they never can answer the waste question. Never. there is no safe nuclear power that is cost-effective and provides for safe waste disposal.

Holding up Arnold's quote where he sings the "they"-oppose-it song is just rhetoric. You need to identify they, and then realize that it is a minority. There are trade offs. But we need to make rooftop solar abundant. In my upper middle-class neighborhood in SoCal, there are three installations on several thousand homes.

 

[Desertstraw]

Adrian wrote: "I think the only place where it's clear we can harness the sun's power is our roofs using PV."

I guess that all those solar plants under construction and permitted are figments of my imagination.

From Wikipedia:
Operating

Capacity
(MW)
Name
Country
Location
Technology type
Notes
354
Solar Energy Generating Systems
 USA
Mojave DesertCalifornia
parabolic trough



75
Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center
 USA
Florida
ISCC
steam input into a combined cycle[14]
64
Nevada Solar One
 USA
Boulder City, Nevada
parabolic trough


Under Construction

370
Ivanpah Solar Power Facility
 USA
San Bernardino County, California
power tower

Announced — USA

Solar Thermal Power Stations Announced in the USA
MW
Name
State
Location
Technology

968
Blythe Solar Power Project
California
Riverside County
solar trough
Solar Millennium, Chevron [35]
553
Mojave Solar Park
California
San Bernardino County
parabolic trough
[51]
500
Fort Irwin
California
San Bernardino County
unnamed solar thermal
technology, military
[52]
500
Amargosa Solar Power Project
Nevada
Amargosa Desert, Nye County
parabolic trough
[53]
484
Palen Solar Power Project
California
Riverside County
solar trough
Solar Millennium, Chevron [35]
350
Sonoran Solar Project
Arizona
Maricopa County
parabolic trough
[54]
340
Hualapai Valley Solar Project
Arizona
Mohave County
parabolic trough
[55][56]
300
Unnamed
Florida

fresnel reflector
[57]
290
Agua Caliente Solar Project
Arizona
Yuma County
parabolic trough
[58][59]
280
Solana Generating Station
Arizona
West of Gila Bend, AZ
parabolic trough
with 6h heat storage[60]
250
Beacon Solar Energy Project
California
Kern County
parabolic trough
[35]
250
Harper Lake Solar
California
San Bernardino County
solar trough
[35]
250
Genesis Solar Energy Project
California
Riverside County
solar trough
[35]
200
Unnamed Kingmansolar project
Arizona
Mohave County
parabolic trough
[61]
200
EnviromissionAustralia
Arizona

solar tower
[62]
200
BrightSource PPA5
California
Mojave
power tower
[35]
200
BrightSource PPA6
California
Mojave
power tower
[35]
200
BrightSource PPA7
California
Mojave
power tower
[35]
150
Rice Solar Energy Project
California
Riverside County
power tower
with 7h heat storage [35]
150
Crossroads Solar Energy Project
Arizona
Maricopa County
power tower
with 10h heat storage[63][64]
107
San Joaquin Solar 1&2
California
Fresno County
parabolic trough hybrid
with biomass
[65][66]
100
Crescent Dunes Solar Energy Project
Nevada
Nye County
power tower
with 12h heat storage[67]
100
Calico Solar Energy Project
(SES Solar One)
California
San Bernardino 

 

[Adrian]

I haven't followed the debate after that initial opposition in 2009 to PV power plants in the desert. If the plants listed by you are permitted, it is great news. It shows me that we can pursue a rational option as a society instead of getting bogged down in only accepting the elusive perfect solution. I hope this is a trend that continues and maybe spreads to other areas related to energy policy.

I guess that all those solar plants under construction and permitted are figments of my imagination.

 

[ENIAC]

Same right-wing theme, it is all the fault of those nasty environmentalists. Wake up. Renewable energy, especially solar power, is safe, good for the environment and economy, and cost competitive today if all costs are included. A square 100 miles on a side in the Arizona desert could provide all the energy needs of the United States.

thank you, desertstraw.
it reminds me of a faux-environmentalist in my town. I asked this guy, who has a 150k pension, why he doesnt have solar. "doenst pencil out," he says. He spends his money on vacations to Europe.
either you care about air pollution, greenhouse gases, blood-for-oil, or you dont.

as to the more-better-nukes gang, they never can answer the waste question. Never. there is no safe nuclear power that is cost-effective and provides for safe waste disposal.

Holding up Arnold's quote where he sings the "they"-oppose-it song is just rhetoric. You need to identify they, and then realize that it is a minority. There are trade offs. But we need to make rooftop solar abundant. In my upper middle-class neighborhood in SoCal, there are three installations on several thousand homes.

There is work being done on traveling-wave reactor technology which uses existing nuclear waste as a fuel. We'll see. Bill Gates is backing an outfit named TerraPower. I think they are decades away from deployment.

Those faux-environmentalist make me sick to my stomach. I believe there was one of those types running CARB when the EV program was killed a decade ago. Having said that, I actually don't have solar (yet) and I'm certainly not a faux-environmentalist. I've been spending my time and effort getting efficiencies first. I have recently completed that process and have begun researching PV systems once again. This time we are looking at systems which are actually 40% smaller than we were previously (due to our conservation efforts). Also the technology is improved and less expensive than it was a few years ago. Labor and installation have gone up however. (Let's hear the right wing chorus.... "GD unions" :lol: )

 

[evnow]

One of life's great ironies is environmentalist resistance to construction of new nuclear plants that would be built with safer technologies. Maybe older plants wouldn't be retired one for one as new plants are built, but replacements out of the question you have to hold on to the old ones you have.

BS. Nuke lobby doesn't want to spend a penny on LFTR - they just want to use Gen 3 technology and make money. There has been no attempt to do any work in the US on LFTR. I'm not surprised though that they conservatives want to blame "environmentalists" ... afterall when do they ever blame anything on people who control the purse strings ?

 

[evnow]

Fukushima Nuclear Accident – a simple and accurate explanation

http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/13/fukushima-simple-explanation/

 

[evnow]

There is some problem at another plant.

State Of Emergency Declared At Onagawa Nuclear Power Plant

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/13/japan-onagawa-nuclear-plant-state-of-emergency_n_835059.html

KORIYAMA, Japan (AP) — The U.N. nuclear agency says Japan has declared a state of emergency at another earthquake-affected nuclear plant where higher-than-permitted levels of radioactivity were measured.

The International Atomic Energy Agency says Japan informed it that the source of the radioactivity at the Onagawa power plant is being investigated. It said all three reactors at the plant are under control.

 

[evnow]

Agency tweet.

Japan nuclear safety agency - Hydrogen explosion at Fukushima Daiichi No. 3 reactor, cannot confirm whether blast caused radioactive leak.

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

Fukushima Nuclear Accident – a simple and accurate explanation

http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/13/fukushima-simple-explanation/

That article makes it sound like everything is under control. So the media is just sensationalizing the situation?

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

A square 100 miles on a side in the Arizona desert could provide all the energy needs of the United States.

Even at night? :lol:

So all we need is 10,000 square miles of mirrors or solar panels? And transmission capacity to deliver that power across the country? Should be easy, and highly profitable even without subsidies. Maybe you should put your whole 401k into it!

 

[thankyouOB]

A square 100 miles on a side in the Arizona desert could provide all the energy needs of the United States.

Even at night? :lol:

So all we need is 10,000 square miles of mirrors or solar panels? And transmission capacity to deliver that power across the country? Should be easy, and highly profitable even without subsidies. Maybe you should put your whole 401k into it!

EVNOW.
I never wrote that.
Someone is namestealing.

 

[thankyouOB]

I went back over the posts and either LTLFT manufactured the screen reply that put that quote on my tag, or there was a technical glitch, and he/she didnt care or read what he posted.
I did NOT say that. It was someone else.
Please apologize.

that is WRONG.