Interesting calming essay about nuclear power plan situation in Japan

[mouser]

I thought this was well written:
http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/13/fukushima-simple-explanation/

Follow-up story on people disagreeing with this explanation: http://www.salon.com/news/japan_earthquake/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2011/03/15/josef_oehmen_nuclear_not_worried_viral


Which led to a modification of the original post: http://mitnse.com/2011/03/13/why-i-am-not-worried-about-japans-nuclear-reactors/

[Ath]

I fully agree. A clear and concise write-up of how and why things happened.

Didn't get to read it completely yet, but I'll continue later.

[Eóin]

Excellent read.

[tomos]

On the one hand it IS calming -
journalists here have been pretty open about not having a clue, so it's good to read about what IS happening.

But it makes me angry too:
1)

The earthquake destroyed the external power supply of the nuclear reactor. [...]
Things were going well for an hour. One set of multiple sets of emergency Diesel power generators kicked in and provided the electricity that was needed. Then the Tsunami came, much bigger than people had expected when building the power plant (see above, factor 7 [earthquake 7 times stronger then what the power plant was built for]). The tsunami took out all multiple sets of backup Diesel generators.

When designing a nuclear power plant, engineers follow a philosophy called “Defense of Depth”. That means that you first build everything to withstand the worst catastrophe you can imagine, and then design the plant in such a way that it can still handle one system failure (that you thought could never happen) after the other. A tsunami taking out all backup power in one swift strike is such a scenario.

(my emphasis and additional text in square brackets)
-
the builders dont seem to have had much of an imagination -
how about the plant should never have been in an earthquake zone where one of the earth's plates is moving under another at the rate of 8 centimetres per year - I heard on the radio (also from a journalist, so...) that that is the most movement that way anywhere in the world.

2) the first illustration does not equate with what is said in the text - if the author want to inspire confidence, this is not a helpful start (I know this is nit-picking - but I'm an illustrator, these things bother me :p)

3) a smiley "Nuclear Power / Yes Please" like one of the anti-nuclear stickers on the left-hand-side of the page - this is crass, really crass in this situation. (And I would add to that: if I go to a site that's plastered with anti-nuclear "stickers" - I would also not feel that I'm in a place where I can trust the info for objectivity.) BTW I realise this paper is simply quoted there.

[tomos]

There's so much speculation going on that it's probably best just wait and see - I've only been looking at the sites linked to from mouser's link, but the news from those sites is still mixed

14th 8:50PM (what timezone?)

At 8.50pm Tepco told NISA that it presumed some of the fuel rods were broken, based on radiation detected in the environment.

home site with most recent updates:
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/default.aspx

the site mouser links to - here's the most recent updates/homepage:
http://bravenewclimate.com/
This site does seem dependable, but the pro-nuclear-agenda comments within the articles really bother me, e.g. "Please also take the time to read this: An informed public is key to acceptance of nuclear energy — it was never more relevant than now". This is not the time or the place for comments/articles like that. It really takes away from what the guy has to say...

here's an interesting read from someone living in Japan, about their highly evolved emergency responses:
http://www.kalzumeus.com/2011/03/13/some-perspective-on-the-japan-earthquake/
(posted by Renegade on FB)

EDIT/
Another, the International Atomic Energy Agency; 14 March, 15:35 CET (also linked from bravenewclimate)
http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/tsunamiupdate01.html

Japanese authorities have reported to the IAEA that Fukushima Daiichi Unit 2 has experienced decreasing coolant levels in the reactor core. Officials have begun to inject sea water into the reactor to maintain cooling of the reactor core.

Sea water injections into Units 1 and 3 were interrupted yesterday due to a low level in a sea water supply reservoir, but sea water injections have now been restored at both units.

[mahesh2k]

We humans are multiplying like virus and if not kept busy in some shells, inconvenience is going to kill us all anyway. We die here with nuclear waste or die killing each other with less facilities and more social stuff-sounds like just issue of choice to me. Energy problems were never solved to cut the needs of large population and hence the nuclear power. People who waste fuel on nascar/f1 and enjoy watching them least bother about environment and sooner or later we're going to worry about power anyway. Opposing nuclear power is just another rant from environmentalist who solve no real world problem on large scale.

[40hz]

To hear the way some people have been talking (on the news and on the web) I get the feeling a certain group of people are highly disappointed that a global nuclear catastrophe hasn't occurred yet.



@Mouser - thx for the link. The article was a very good introduction to the science and engineering behind what's going on in with that plant in Japan right now.

[Renegade]

While I'm far from an expert on the subject, it seems that nuclear power IS cleaner than many other forms of power, but this is really doing a lot of damage in the public eye.

People want clean energy, but... What's cleaner? Coal? Hardly. Hydro-electric is pretty good, but has problems too. At some point all energy sources have issues. Bio-mass? Perhaps.

I have been reading every news release on the incident since the earthquake. There has not been one single (!) report that was accurate and free of errors (and part of that problem is also a weakness in the Japanese crisis communication). By “not free of errors” I do not refer to tendentious anti-nuclear journalism – that is quite normal these days. By “not free of errors” I mean blatant errors regarding physics and natural law, as well as gross misinterpretation of facts, due to an obvious lack of fundamental and basic understanding of the way nuclear reactors are build and operated. I have read a 3 page report on CNN where every single paragraph contained an error.

Sadly, news isn't about reporting events. It's about entertainment for people in denial of their sadism...

[rgdot]

My impression is slightly different, nuclear gets a bad rap for a simple reason...when it happens it can be catastrophic and long lastingly so. Of course reactors have many safe guards, magnitudes more than Chernobyl for example but that's secondary because things can and do happen, it's pretty much a law of nature.

In this thread, the other recent one (England Is Grinding To A Halt) and elsewhere on the net I get the impression that people think that those who advocate green or cleaner technologies are saying that green is guaranteed and perfect in every sense. Nobody that I know says that. This is what is true...has the potential to be a lot better and as days pass is more desirable because existing, traditional technologies are often more dangerous.

[Renegade]

Long ago when I lived in Canada, there were gas stations that had hybrid fuels for cars that contained, I believe, ethanol. I've not seen anything like them since.

[4wd]

Long ago when I lived in Canada, there were gas stations that had hybrid fuels for cars that contained, I believe, ethanol. I've not seen anything like them since.

A few years ago here in Australia when Johnny Thicko ran the country, there was much outcry that the petrol found at a lot of outlets contained ethanol.  Ethanol, being cheaper than petrol, enabled the fuel companies to turn a bigger profit on sales because they never told anyone they were putting ethanol in it nor did they drop the price at the pump to reflect the cheaper cost.

Guess who the ethanol manufacturers were friends with?  (Hint: Our dipsh!t PM at the time.)

Nowadays you can get E10 fuel at quite a few outlets, (mostly independent), and it usually costs a few cents less.  What I'd like to see is more availability of Bio-Diesel but unfortunately our stupid Government has nobbled that using increased taxes.  Also the flexi-fuel vehicles that Brazil has bought into considering our rather large reserves of natural gas.

[phitsc]

Seems like not all experts agree though that the control rods were really put back in to stop the nuclear chain reaction. Or is that confirmed?

[tomos]

Seems like not all experts agree though that the control rods were really put back in to stop the nuclear chain reaction. Or is that confirmed?

I missed that -
anything I've read above says that this was done.
__________________

Ironically part of the "problem" here seems to be the mainstream news reporting - of which I've heard next to none (I dont have a telly and dont read newspapers or online equivalents). The first two days I listened a lot to the radio here which reported quite honestly - saying they just didnt know. They did have people from greenpeace interviewed but also non-political experts.
I also think it's clear I'm not a fan of nuclear power, but I'm looking for news where people are NOT reacting against anything, or dont have an obvious agenda, be it for or against.

News is still mixed from those sources above, btw.


[edit] looking back over the thread I see I was reacting [no puns intended btw] pretty strongly to the pro-nuclear 'stickers' on the site in my first post - there you go, I'm a good example of what I'm moaning about [/edit]

[phitsc]

Seems like not all experts agree though that the control rods were really put back in to stop the nuclear chain reaction. Or is that confirmed?

I missed that -
anything I've read above says that this was done.

To be honest, it's an interpretation. Most 'experts' I've heard still don't rule out a complete core meltdown with radioactive material leaking out of the reactor. I was just wondering if that was possible from the residual heat alone.

[tomos]

the IAEA say that

(15 March 2011, 03:35 CET)

Japanese authorities yesterday reported to the IAEA at 21:05 CET that the reactors Units 1, 2 and 3 of the Fukushima Daini nuclear power plant are in cold shutdown status. This means that the pressure of the water coolant is at around atmospheric level and the temperature is below 100 degrees Celsius. Under these conditions, the reactors are considered to be safely under control.

but a later report from them says:

(15 March 2011, 06:15 CET)

Japanese authorities informed the IAEA that there has been an explosion at the Unit 2 reactor at the Fukushima Daiichi plant. The explosion occurred at around 06:20 on 15 March local Japan time.

there is a bit more info about that on the WNN site:
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_Possible_damage_at_Fukushima_Daiichi_2_1503111.html

[techidave]

Long ago when I lived in Canada, there were gas stations that had hybrid fuels for cars that contained, I believe, ethanol. I've not seen anything like them since.

I cannot speak for all of the USA but here in central US, our fuel is 10% Ethanol.  And regular cars, small engines, they all use it.

I am attaching a screenshot taken from our local farmers coop showing fuel (and some other) prices for your enjoyment. 

Dave

[40hz]

If I understand correctly, 10% ethanol mix is mandated by federal law (in the US) during the winter driving season. Something like between November through March?

Interestingly, the price always jumps up right about the time it switches over too. So much for consumer savings. 

P.S. CT is running about $3.89/gal for regular octane gas. Diesel just topped $4.00/gal

[mouser]

Follow-up story on people disagreeing with this explanation: http://www.salon.com/news/japan_earthquake/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2011/03/15/josef_oehmen_nuclear_not_worried_viral

Which led to a modification of the original post: http://mitnse.com/2011/03/13/why-i-am-not-worried-about-japans-nuclear-reactors/

[phitsc]

Thanks for posting this mouser.

[worstje]

You people probably already saw this, but I feel the need to point it out nevertheless: Does your donation truly help the victims?

[tomos]

of the sites I've visited I like the one mouser posted best - in spite of my former objections.
Today post is good . . . well, not necessarily good news, but informative:
http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/17/fukushima-17-march-summary/#more-4112

in the comments the other day someone said (and I agree, and, it seems to be the route he's going):

At this point then what I at least would regard as the smartest commentary would concentrate on just telling us the parameters of the possible: What’s the best possible theoretical outcome, and what’s the worst?

Now *that’s* something that would seem to have some credibility. In my opinion at least everything else has just been proven to pretty much be baloney, within hours if not minutes.

(This said, still gotta say I love this site and have great respect for the host and the great majority of commentators. I have no problem with speculation; it’s over-confidence in projections that make me wince.)