Page 1 of 24 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 577

Thread: Japan: 9.0 Earthquake-Tsunami-Nuclear Reactor Developments #3

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,612

    Japan: 9.0 Earthquake-Tsunami-Nuclear Reactor Developments #3

    Elite Japan nuclear workers race to stop meltdown

    FUKUSHIMA, Japan – They risk explosions, fire and an invisible enemy — radiation that could kill quickly or decades later — as they race to avert disaster inside a dark, overheated nuclear plant.

    The 180 emergency workers at Japan's crippled Fukushima Dai-ichi complex are emerging as public heroes in the wake of a disaster spawned by an earthquake and a tsunami.

    Dubbed by some as modern-day samurai, the technicians were ordered back to work late Wednesday after a surge of radiation forced them to leave their posts for hours.

    "I don't know any other way to say it, but this is like suicide fighters in a war," said Keiichi Nakagawa, associate professor of the Department of Radiology at the University of Tokyo Hospital.

    http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/03...own-739745804/



    [ame="http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=130814"]THREAD #2[/ame]


    [ame=http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=130582]THREAD #1[/ame]
    Last edited by JBean; 03-16-2011 at 05:37 PM. Reason: Insert previous thread links

  2. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Dr. Know? For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by ScorpRising View Post
    There are no more than 3 units in one location in the US and they are not in danger of tsunami.
    you don't think the one in San Onofre could be hit by a Tsunami? The ocean and the plant arethisclose to each other, it is set just like the one in Japan

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to j.r.k. For This Useful Post:


  5. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Around here somewhere
    Posts
    12,732
    WASHINGTON — The chairman of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission gave a significantly bleaker appraisal of the threat posed by Japan’s nuclear crisis than the Japanese government, saying on Wednesday that the damage at one crippled reactor was much more serious than Japanese officials had acknowledged and advising to Americans to evacuate a wider area around the plant than the perimeter established by Japan.

    and

    The Japanese authorities have never been as specific as Mr. Jascko was in his testimony about the situation at reactor No. 4, where they have been battling fires for more than 24 hours. It is possible the authorities there disagree with Mr. Jascko’s conclusion about the exposure of the spent fuel, or that they have chosen not to discuss the matter for fear of panicking people.

    Experts say workers at the plant probably could not approach a fuel pool that was dry, because radiation levels would be so high. In a normally operating pool, the water provides not only cooling but also shields workers from gamma radiation. A plan to dump water into the pool, and others like it, from helicopters was suspended because the crews would be flying right into a radioactive plume.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/17/wo...r.html?_r=1&hp

    Much more worth reading at link...
    JMO. Unless there's a link, I can't prove it.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to not_my_kids For This Useful Post:


  7. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Out there
    Posts
    3,145
    Quote Originally Posted by Zoe Bogart View Post
    Yes, we know that. (bold) My beef is with the US peeps saying "we're safe for any contingency". It's their blase' attitude that's disturbing. My point is Japan thought they were safe against "any contingency", too. No one is ever completely safe against unforeseen odds.
    I know what you are saying, and they are being quite brash. "We are safe. We have played out many possible scenarios. We know the we can withstand hurricanes and tornados and widespread flooding. We can withstand an earthquake." would have been better.

    "Our seawalls are X feet tall. We don't forsee a 300 ft wall of water whacking into the plants, thus we have not played with that contingency."

    The seawall at this plant was 11 ft. The wave that took it out was much larger than that.

    Please understand, I'm not trying to be snarky. I just can not see the point of condemning all nuclear power because of this incident. Why did they allow 6 reactors at one spot, and 4 more less than 10 miles away? I don't have those answers.
    “The essence of the Liberal outlook lies not in what opinions are held, but in how they are held: instead of being held dogmatically, they are held tentatively, and with a consciousness that new evidence may at any moment lead to their abandonment.” ~Bertrand Russell

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ScorpRising For This Useful Post:


  9. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Out there
    Posts
    3,145
    “The essence of the Liberal outlook lies not in what opinions are held, but in how they are held: instead of being held dogmatically, they are held tentatively, and with a consciousness that new evidence may at any moment lead to their abandonment.” ~Bertrand Russell

  10. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    168
    Scary question. If one reactor explodes, would they all explode?

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to UFO For This Useful Post:


  12. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Out there
    Posts
    3,145
    Quote Originally Posted by j.r.k. View Post
    you don't think the one in San Onofre could be hit by a Tsunami? The ocean and the plant arethisclose to each other, it is set just like the one in Japan
    Quote Originally Posted by tehcloser View Post
    Wonder if they ever had the mock scenario of 6 or more reactors going bad at once, all in one location? (In a location where a 9.0 earthquake and a tsunami just ripped the hello outta the infrastructure?)
    j.r.k.,

    The response you quoted was in relation to a 9.0 earthquake, tsunami and 6 reactors scenario.

    San Onofre is 2 of 4 reactors along the entire west coast.
    “The essence of the Liberal outlook lies not in what opinions are held, but in how they are held: instead of being held dogmatically, they are held tentatively, and with a consciousness that new evidence may at any moment lead to their abandonment.” ~Bertrand Russell

  13. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Out there
    Posts
    3,145
    Quote Originally Posted by UFO View Post
    Scary question. If one reactor explodes, would they all explode?
    No, but it is possible.
    “The essence of the Liberal outlook lies not in what opinions are held, but in how they are held: instead of being held dogmatically, they are held tentatively, and with a consciousness that new evidence may at any moment lead to their abandonment.” ~Bertrand Russell

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to ScorpRising For This Useful Post:


  15. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    6,082
    Quote Originally Posted by UFO View Post
    Scary question. If one reactor explodes, would they all explode?
    I don't think anyone knows

    Unchartered waters and all

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to peeples For This Useful Post:


  17. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Hinky Hollow
    Posts
    14,702
    Yeah.......right, OK. lol.


    2046: Japan's foreign ministry has asked foreign diplomats and government officials to remain calm and "accurately convey information provided by Japanese authorities concerning the plant", according to NHK television.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12307698
    If there's hink....there must be stink.

  18. #11
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by ScorpRising View Post
    j.r.k.,

    The response you quoted was in relation to a 9.0 earthquake, tsunami and 6 reactors scenario.

    San Onofre is 2 of 4 reactors along the entire west coast.
    OK, but I'm not concerned about how many reactors there are, what I'm concerned about a similair scenario (EQ, Tsunami) I understand none of our (U.S.) plants have as many reactors so it could never be as dire BUT COULD the same thing happen here?

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to j.r.k. For This Useful Post:


  20. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    6,082
    all we have is the guardian now

    8.21pm: More on the comments on the Fukushima nuclear plant by Greg Jaczko, chairman of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, to a congressional committee in Washington:

    We believe at this point that Unit 4 may have lost a significant inventory, if not lost all, of its water.... There is no water in the spent fuel pool and we believe that radiation levels are extremely high, which could possibly impact the ability to take corrective measures.

    Jaczko also said there was the possibility of a leak in the spent fuel pool in reactor No 3, "which could lead to a loss of water in that pool", as well as a falling water level in the spent fuel level at the No 2 reactor.

    According to Reuters, Jaczko said radiation levels around the site could give emergency workers "lethal doses" of radiation, forcing them to stay away:

    "We believe that around the reactor site there are high levels of radiation," Jaczko said. "It would be very difficult for emergency workers to get near the reactors. The doses they could experience would potentially be lethal doses in a very short period of time."

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog...aftermath-live

  21. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to peeples For This Useful Post:


  22. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Out there
    Posts
    3,145
    Quote Originally Posted by j.r.k. View Post
    OK, but I'm not concerned about how many reactors there are, what I'm concerned about a similair scenario (EQ, Tsunami) I understand none of our (U.S.) plants have as many reactors so it could never be as dire BUT COULD the same thing happen here?
    Please, please, please remember I have NO qualifications to answer this question. It depends on the height of the seawall at the plant and the location of the back-up generators and back-up batteries. Hopefully they are in a better location than directly behind the seawall at sea level...
    “The essence of the Liberal outlook lies not in what opinions are held, but in how they are held: instead of being held dogmatically, they are held tentatively, and with a consciousness that new evidence may at any moment lead to their abandonment.” ~Bertrand Russell

  23. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Hinky Hollow
    Posts
    14,702
    2110: Stuart Blackburn from Osaka writes: "Today, I and other Britons were contacted by the foreign office, and asked to refer to a report from the government's Chief Science Officer for advice. His conclusion was plain; even if the reactors meltdown, we would be in no danger. There is no reason to leave. For me, this was the clear, expert opinion I had been waiting for. I shall not leave Japan. I began to spread the word to friends. Until, that is, I read an article from the New York Times. The reactor blasts have exposed storage pools of spent fuel to the outside. With the cooling systems down, the water covering the fuel is boiling away, and engineers are unable to conduct repairs. Should the water evaporate away, the spent rods could ignite, sending huge volumes of radioisotopes into the air. 100 rapid deaths within 500 miles. Over 100,000 deaths over time. Of course, this is a worse-case scenario. But the once quenched debate is re-ignited. Should we stay? For now, we can only wait, and talk." Have Your Say

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12307698
    If there's hink....there must be stink.

  24. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Hinky Hollow
    Posts
    14,702
    Is anyone finding ANY up to date news coming from over there, or from here either as to the actual situation?
    If there's hink....there must be stink.

  25. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    4,130
    Quote Originally Posted by tehcloser View Post
    Is anyone finding ANY up to date news coming from over there, or from here either as to the actual situation?
    Nope, I'm not..it says breaking news but from when?
    Here.

  26. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    6,082
    cnn was just reporting live TEH

  27. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    33,940
    Quote Originally Posted by tehcloser View Post
    Yeah.......right, OK. lol.


    2046: Japan's foreign ministry has asked foreign diplomats and government officials to remain calm and "accurately convey information provided by Japanese authorities concerning the plant", according to NHK television.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12307698
    But the Japanese authorities are getting their info from "The Company".

    Typing "The Company" makes me feel like I'm talking about the show "24" or something.

  28. The Following User Says Thank You to SuziQ For This Useful Post:


  29. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Out there
    Posts
    3,145
    I understand we will have to agree to disagree on nuclear power. Please forgive me as I had one of those "need to defend my stance" times. I didn't mean to offend anyone who disagrees with me and if I did I am truly sorry.

    I watch in horror what is happening in Japan, just as all of you do and hope nothing like this happens here. I keep hoping for a saving grace, knowing all too well that it's too far gone.

    If those SNF pools are empty or low there's no one able to go in there to do anything.

    This is all MOO, IMO, JMO...
    “The essence of the Liberal outlook lies not in what opinions are held, but in how they are held: instead of being held dogmatically, they are held tentatively, and with a consciousness that new evidence may at any moment lead to their abandonment.” ~Bertrand Russell

  30. The Following User Says Thank You to ScorpRising For This Useful Post:


  31. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Rowlett, TX
    Posts
    2,285
    The Dow Jones industrial average ended the day's trading session 242 points lower amid concerns over the US economy and the disaster in Japan.

  32. The Following User Says Thank You to PassTheMotrin For This Useful Post:


  33. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    3,769
    Quote Originally Posted by ScorpRising View Post
    I understand we will have to agree to disagree on nuclear power. Please forgive me as I had one of those "need to defend my stance" times. I didn't mean to offend anyone who disagrees with me and if I did I am truly sorry.

    I watch in horror what is happening in Japan, just as all of you do and hope nothing like this happens here. I keep hoping for a saving grace, knowing all too well that it's too far gone.

    If those SNF pools are empty or low there's no one able to go in there to do anything.

    This is all MOO, IMO, JMO...
    I appreciate your posts, the information you share, and the fact that you are careful to say you're not an expert. Keep the posts coming - all any of us have right now are our own opinions.

  34. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Trident For This Useful Post:


  35. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    9,084
    Nuclear Information Gap Spreads Doubt, Fear

    Excerpt:
    The uncertainty that has gripped Japan in the days since its nuclear crisis began is erupting into public and official anger over the lack of reliable safety information.

    Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan seemed to be speaking for his entire country Tuesday when he met with executives from the Tokyo Electric Power Co. "What the hell is going on?" Kan demanded, according to a report from Japan's Kyodo news agency.


    http://www.npr.org/2011/03/16/134573...ads-doubt-fear

  36. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Quiche For This Useful Post:


  37. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Hinky Hollow
    Posts
    14,702
    2130: The BBC's Tim Wilcox tweets: "Just come off air - latest tremor shaking buildings around us - like sinister fairground ride - nothing compared to what last fri #japan"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12307698
    If there's hink....there must be stink.

  38. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to tehcloser For This Useful Post:


  39. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Dana Point,CA
    Posts
    20,222
    Quote Originally Posted by j.r.k. View Post
    you don't think the one in San Onofre could be hit by a Tsunami? The ocean and the plant arethisclose to each other, it is set just like the one in Japan
    SONGS has been tsunamified.

    http://www.ocregister.com/news/san-2...e-nuclear.html
    Last edited by JBean; 03-16-2011 at 05:56 PM.

  40. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to JBean For This Useful Post:


  41. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    clifton park,ny
    Posts
    8,105
    Supposing an extreme explosion occurs from the reactors blowing up. Could that in itself cause more seismic activity? In addition to spewing radiation through the air,would it affect whats underneath the ground?

  42. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to hockeymom For This Useful Post:


Page 1 of 24 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Japan: 9.0 Earthquake-Tsunami-Nuclear Reactor Developments #2
    By nursebeeme in forum Up to the Minute
    Replies: 1457
    Last Post: 03-16-2011, 05:32 PM
  2. Japan: Upgraded 8.8 earthquake - tsunami warning
    By Peliman in forum Up to the Minute
    Replies: 1124
    Last Post: 03-14-2011, 09:27 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •