Huge 8.9 quake plus tsunami - Japan

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List

This thread has been locked

Messages 1461 - 1480 of total 1947 in this topic

<< First | < Previous | Show All | Next > | Last >>

rrrADAM

Trad climber

LBMF

Apr 14, 2011 - 07:57am PT

Adam, where did you find these pictures? Were they just released?
I have not seen any pics of the tsunami hitting Fukushima in the media so far...

A colleague emailed them to me.

Oh and one more question: if the diesel tanks are underground, what do they store in those large white tanks that can be seen next to the reactor buildings? Water?

Assumeing you are talking about the large white tanks on the ocean side of the Turbine Building [not the Reactor Buildings]... There are many tanks onsite, they could be dimineralized water, efluent water, or any number of things. I can't tell you what they are from just those pictures, which is why I'm looking for pictures from 'before', or a detailed plant layout... To assume or speculate would do no good, as too much of that has been done thus far. We use a term in nuclear: "Trust but verify"

As for your theory about water coming into the tanks and being pumped into the generators: What about the idea that they just got drowned in the flood and malfunctioned? Or are they located high off the ground?

It's not MY theory, it is what an SRO understood to have happened... I had initially thought the same thing as you, that they flooded, but this does make better sense, given our EDG in the US, which is WHY I'm trying to get a better understanding of their plant layout, so I can 'verify' if that may be the case. If they are anything like our EDGs, they are at a higher level, behind extra sturdy watertight doors. Again, I need better pics or a plant layout to answer whether or not those were higher up... See above regarding speculation.

Edit: just read that you said they are (or at least should be) behind watertight doors. Considering the pressure and force of the tsunami wave I wonder if those doors held...

Here in the US, they are the same as watertight doors on US Battleships... They will hold, as they are also built to contain or withstand explosive force.

rrrADAM

Trad climber

LBMF

Apr 14, 2011 - 08:10am PT

So Golsen, How many guys with machine guns would it take to break in to where that highly radioactive waste is stored and put a bomb there to spread it everywhere? Wouldn't it be WAY easier than the 9-11 plot?

Just sayin'

I won't go into any details regarding security, other than...

The security force is likely the same size a normal county sherrif's department, but MUCH better armed and trained.

Navy Seals, and other US Special Ops Forces, regularly test the security at all US sites.

If you search the net, or nrc.org, you can get more details concerning the requirements, especially post 9/11.

A few years ago some college girls got entrance to spent fuel pool with backpacks on just by smiling and asking.

Source please? This would be very newsworthy, so if this happened, it should be easy to post a link to verify. While they used to give tours of plants before 9/11, even then, ALL people (100%) who go into the protected area are searched, including their belongings. And by searched, I mean more so that to get on a plane.

Edit... I see you linked something about "campus research reactors", and I cannot speak for those, as I work at commercial nukes, and if 13 terrorists attacked a nuke in the US, they would be dead very quickly. They would much rather attack a soft target, like a busy mall or elementary school, creating TERROR, rather than dying trying to attack a hard target. What happened at those campus reactors is really bad, and they answer to the NRC just as we do, so I seriously doubt that is still the case, and they likely were fined heavily for the 'findings'.

Some info, you likely won't read, yet addresses everything you are asking about security:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part073/

And, again, what I do:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part050/
-Specifically:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part050/part050-appb.html

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber

Livermore, CA

Apr 14, 2011 - 10:42am PT

security at every location that contains fissile material, and "special nuclear material" has been substantially upgraded since 2005, and the various security "exercises" have benefited those upgrades.

It is a mistake to quote those old reports as indicative of what the situation is right now.

I think it is also true that eternal vigilance is difficult to maintain, and that the tendency to believe that you would not lose the last "war" you fought indicates that you would do well in future "wars" should give us all pause. It is common sense to secure these materials in a place which is defendable against a force whose objective is to take control of them.

The program of securing nuclear materials world wide has also progressed greatly since 2005, though this statement can only be taken in a relative way, that is, we have to be prepared for the possibility that not all of the material has been secured. In our favor is the fact that most national entities see it in their interest to maintain control, and verifiably, so there is much international cooperation on this front.

Karl Baba

Trad climber

Yosemite, Ca

Apr 14, 2011 - 11:59am PT

Adam, I see by your edit that you found my source

Ed writes

2005 is an "Old" report? Here's where the nuke industry gets my goat sometimes. Some ugly thing happens and everybody says, "that's the Old way we used to build things, it's better and smarter and foolproof now."

But 2005 is not very long ago and if security was lax then (and don't forget Jan's story about the military testing the "highly secure site" by digging under the fence and finding the guys sleeping at the console) YEARS after 9-11, then....???? I just don't think humans are smart enough to anticipate the future enough to be responsible for this technology.

Because it's 2011 now and the Japanese are among the smartest and most prosperous people on the planet and the biggest users of nukes and if this can happen to them, then i have to wonder in which year we can breath a sign of relief and say "No worries now, this technology is finally foolproof and no disaster can happen which will make some town a no live zone for hundreds of years"

I think when we're that smart, we'll have figured out new energy technology.

Which we'd need to anyway cause uranium is a very limited resource which will run out, leaving old reactors which take big bucks and time to decommission. This can be extended by reprocessing fuel, the ultimate proliferation risk, which can be used to make weapons that could destroy the whole world (the only way we can really cut proliferation is by abandoning this tech everywhere)

Sort of reminds me that it's been a pretty darn recent proposal by our own high level politicians (like Cheney) to bomb Iranian nuclear sites for doing what they are allowed under the NPT. Hopefully their sites are protected from bombs too or what sort of environmental crisis would unfold if we did that?

PEace

karl

Studly

Trad climber

Apr 14, 2011 - 12:16pm PT

current snapshot of the Fukushima nuclear fallout. There is nothing to worry about as far as you know, because really its just a fawking crapshoot and there is a sh#t load of nuclear waste falling out of the sky on your head, and anyone that portends to know that we are perfectly safe and in no danger, your children are fine, blah blah blah, is full of sh#t. Stay out of the rain and keep your kids out of it.

rrrADAM

Trad climber

LBMF

Apr 14, 2011 - 12:40pm PT

But 2005 is not very long ago and if security was lax then (and don't forget Jan's story about the military testing the "highly secure site" by digging under the fence and finding the guys sleeping at the console) YEARS after 9-11, then....????

You are assuming that security was 'lax' at US commercial nukes prior to 2005, it was not. It has just gotten substantially better since then, just as it had gotten substantially better after 9/11, and prior to that it had continuously gotten better. NOTHING is static, but is dynamic, and always improving. I was working at a nuke when 9/11 happened, and was very surprised at the response of security already onsite... It was intense*! I had initially thought it was the National Guard.

I started inspecting nukes in '96, and it was VERY secure then. In fact, I cannot see the story Jan told happening from my time in nukes on, as even digging near the "double fences" would be remotely detected... Well armed security often responds to wildlife setting off such sensors. I won't go into other details about trying to get to 'vital' areas within the plant, of which the control room is one, other than saying, it is IMPOSSIBLE to get there undetected, if even alive. I can't speak for security in the 80's, but will caution that stories often get exagerated and have elements added when speaking amongst friends over a beer or 12... Kinda like 'chicks getting to the secure areas on just a smile'.

Edit...
* A friend I was working with at the nuke we were at during 9/11 looked Lebanese (we called him Omar, jokingly), but was really Latino... On night, he was coming in to work and had his girlfriend driving. There was a checkpoint out in the forest, long before one can see the plant, and it would be a pain for her to have to make a u-turn in their crappy old Caddie after she dropped him off, so he told her to just let him out about 25 yards from the checkpoint... He got out, went to the trunk to get his dufflebag, and started walking to the gate. At about 20 feet from the guard-shack, the guard came out with gun drawn and said, "FREEZE!!!! Drop the bag, and put your hands in the air!" He dropped the bag, and put his hands in the air, just someone came out of the forest in face paint and ghillie suit and pressed an AR-15 to his head. He started shaking, and almost peed himself.

When he got into work, and told me the story... I asked him, "Where his sense of humor was? And that he should have reached in the bag and yelled 'Praise Allah'!" He didn't think that was funny. On my way out, as he was relieving me, I talked to the same guard who drew down on him, and told him what I'd said, and he said, "Man... We would have made a mistake of that boy if he had joked like that."

Note - I never was serious about him saying that, but was trying to make light of an intense situation.

Karl Baba

Trad climber

Yosemite, Ca

Apr 14, 2011 - 01:01pm PT

Kinda like 'chicks getting to the secure areas on just a smile'.

actually, that was ABC news telling that story, documenting it, and the NRC investigated.

I wasn't "assuming" anything about commercial nuke sites, as even university easy-bake oven reactors could cause a plenty nasty disaster, particularly since they tend to be in urban areas.

As for the alleged high security now, that's great but comes nowhere near solving the myriad of deadly problems we have around nuclear energy, the main technology which is the source of weapons with the power to destroy all life on this planet and the source of electricity technology that could make whole areas uninhabitable if it goes wrong. Those are pretty large demerits so when DMT believes I have a chip on my shoulder about nukes, it's because there are rational reasons for that and I've amply cited them here.

After all those hijackings to Cuba, airport security was totally beefed up and yet 9-11 happened. The twin towers were designed to withstand an airliner hitting them but they still went down. Some other nuke plant in Japan was designed to have no issues with a 7.1 earthquake but the 7.1 aftershock they had still messed with it because the quake rocked things more than anticipated.

Moral? We think we know more than we do. We think was can protect more than we can, and there's always something we didn't plan for. Thus, best not to play with fire than can't be put out with a fire truck

Peace

karl

rrrADAM

Trad climber

LBMF

Apr 14, 2011 - 01:06pm PT

Karl...

...I have a chip on my shoulder about nukes, it's because there are rational reasons for that and I've amply cited them here.

Much of what you have cited here is either old, misleading, or just plain wrong... But, even when this is pointed out, you still hold on to it, using it to shore up your 'chip' and to make erroneous extrapolations... Which does not really equal 'rational reasons', my friend. In fact, it can be considered the antithesis of it.

I'm not going to bother picking apart the rest of your post, as it would do no good, and I just get frustrated.

My point is that, you are on the other extreme that you accuse me of being on... BUT, I am not merely speculating or cherry picking info, what you call 'happy talk'.

Oh, and I was editting in some humor to my post above when you were posting, so you may wish to reread... It may lighten the load of that 'heavy' chip, my friend. ;-)

See... In the end, you and I are still more alike than different... We both care about our environment, and our fellow man, A LOT! We don't inherit the Earth from our parents, but instead borrow it from our grandchildren, and we both want to return it to them in the future in better condition that we got it. I pack out trash left by others, just like I assume you do, Karl.

~Adam

rrrADAM

Trad climber

LBMF

Apr 14, 2011 - 02:11pm PT

And, Karl...

I'm with you on renewables and green energy, as are the utilities:

Progress Energy to build NC's first poultry waste-to-biogas plant

RALEIGH — From farm waste to fuel, poultry litter in southeastern North Carolina has found a new purpose. Progress Energy Carolinas has signed a contract with Poultry Power USA to purchase the output of a poultry waste-to-biogas energy plant to be located in Montgomery County, N.C. Poultry Power USA will build, own and operate the 36-megawatt (MW) power plant and sell the electricity to the utility for use with its customers.

“Turning poultry litter into power is an important milestone in the development of bio-waste energy resources in our state,” said Lloyd Yates, president and chief executive officer of Progress Energy Carolinas. “Innovative renewable energy technologies, aggressive energy efficiency programs and a state-of-the-art power system are important parts of a balanced approach to meeting our region’s future energy demands.”

http://www.citizen-times.com/article/20110413/NEWS/304130047/Progress-Energy-build-NC-s-first-poultry-waste-biogas-plant?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7CFrontpage%7Cp

From chicken poop, brutha. And this technology IS used all over the country to use methane produced by waste products to power plants. And the plus is that methane is ~20 times more of a green-house gas than is carbon dioxide, so it is being used and burned (into CO2 and CO, again less of a GH gas), rather than just escaping to the environment.

In my neighborhood, just 3 miles from the plant, there is a PhD who does a lot of work on biodiesel from algae, and she even had a special on Discovery or History about it some years ago... She does a lot of this from her house, where she has a lab, and we often see her experiments in her yard. She worked out at the nuke as well a while ago, I believe as a chemist.

Karl Baba

Trad climber

Yosemite, Ca

Apr 14, 2011 - 02:28pm PT

Adam writes

I'd like to point out that I'm not against YOU at all. I'm criticizing the technology and taking issue with statements regarding the gravity of the situation. I think your educated statement of the worst reasonable case scenario is almost certainly already the case and will be found to be worse when the facts are uncovered.

I've cited sources for my statements and you've done little to debunk them. You can say some are old or whatever but the basic fact is, one of the very worst accidents is unfolding RIGHT NOW, in one of the smartest, richest, industrial nations of the world, and if they didn't have four full-on meltdowns, it's partly or fully due to LUCK!

And that alone should point to all the reassuring statements as happy talk.

So it's nothing personal, but I do not accept your criticism that my qualms about the nuclear situation are fearful and irrational because the unfolding of events keep bolstering my case and keeps showing the statements from the industry to be downplaying and inaccurate. Something the Japanese people are realizing as well.

Those folks aren't going back home within a few months as you say. They increased the evacuation zone and noted that it wasn't because of immediate danger but long term exposure that the risk came from. That means, months from now, it's still going to be empty houses kilometers from the plant

But don't take it personally. I totally believe you when you say you mean well, but it's sort of like we all love our country and yet don't seem to notice we're the biggest war mongers on the planet. We have to lead in a good way because we're facing a squeeze economically and in resources.

Peace

Karl

TGT

Social climber

So Cal

Apr 14, 2011 - 02:37pm PT

36MW?

That's a lot of chickenshit!

Many of the larger sewage treatment plants burn methane from the primary digesters in large stationary generators.

There are some large scale algae farms getting underway in the Imperial valley. A long way from being comercially viable yet though. Don't know what their CO2 source will be.

A large Calif cement plant was seriously researching an algae farm for carbon sequestration a couple of years ago but CARB has made it impossible to stay in the state. They are leaving for Mexico and Texas.

golsen

Social climber

kennewick, wa

Apr 14, 2011 - 03:09pm PT

I was responding to Golsons continued complaint about all the fear. Its difficult to have hope that the nuclear industry can do a good job as a whole with such a dangerous material.

His fear seems to be that we wont allow nuclear energy to continue.

John, my fear is that nuclear energy won't continue due to irrational public lynchings without a full analysis and understanding of the alternatives. From the persepctive of protection of human health and the environment, I still believe that Nuclear is better than Coal.

rrrADAM

Trad climber

LBMF

Apr 14, 2011 - 03:13pm PT

I know you have no issues with me, Karl, and I don't take any of your replies to me personally.

I think your educated statement of the worst reasonable case scenario is almost certainly already the case and will be found to be worse when the facts are uncovered.
. . .
Those folks aren't going back home within a few months as you say.

Actually, my friend... I think you are CONVINCED of this! To the point that you passionately feel it in your bones... And since you feel it so profoundly, and are thus convinced of it, anything that suggests otherwise you hold in contept and distrust. IF, months from now, my less than worst case scenario is realized, will you not be convinced of a cover-up? That it is still being downplayed?

Also, you are misrepresenting or misunderstanding what I said, as my 'worst case scenario' did NOT say within a few months, so you are changing what I said to suit you...
(Note that this is what I am talking about when I say that your info is often old, misleading, or just plain wrong... But then you run with it.)

So, to give a reasonable prediction of how I think things will unfold... I believe that after events are brought under control, and many surveys and samples of areas around the plant, within a few months people will be allowed to return with no restrictions on anything. The effected units will be multi-billion dollar paperweights, that require monitoring and maintainance, costing more money. While possible, I doubt units 5 or 6 will come back online like the other unit at TMI did, and is still operating to this day. But I may be wrong there, as they still can produce electricity, so there will be considerable reason to get those newer units back online... But I doubt politics and the public will allow it.

Worst reasonable case scenerio... All of the above, BUT delays in people returning to the surrounding areas due to the surveys and samples showing high levels of contamination, then having to clean up the contamination costing additional billions of dollars. Time frame? No idea... Depends on how much and how they have to decontaminate.

Anything outside the 'fence' (current Owner Controlled Property), from what I gather a mile from the units, being uninhabitable for a lifetime(s), or even decades? Slim to nil!

ZERO health effects on anybody from the 'general public', just like TMI, despite what some people believe... As not 1 person died as a result of TMI, NOT ONE! And the vast majority of experts agree that the negligiable amounts released during the TMI accident have shown ZERO effects attributable to it, other than psychological and political.

golsen

Social climber

kennewick, wa

Apr 14, 2011 - 03:19pm PT

ZERO health effects on anybody from the 'general public', just like TMI, despite what some people believe... As not 1 person died as a result of TMI, NOT ONE! And the vast majority of experts agree that the negligiable amounts released during the TMI accident have shown ZERO effects attributable to it, other than psychological and political.

Adam,

once the press has it's way with an issue (an intentionally dirty phrase) it is very difficult to go back and repair the public perception.

I even heard on NPR this week that they over did it with TMI. But that falls on deaf ears.

Karl Baba

Trad climber

Yosemite, Ca

Apr 14, 2011 - 03:21pm PT

Just to clarify Adam. my references to your worst case scenario and my references to your saying they would be back in a few months were in different parts of my post. Thank you for quoting the relevant sections above where you write

I'm saying your reasonable prediction is already wrong due to the state long term reasons for the increased evacuation.

Then you write

Worst reasonable case scenerio... All of the above, BUT delays in people returning to the surrounding areas due to the surveys and samples showing high levels of contamination, then having to clean up the contamination costing additional billions of dollars. Time frame? No idea... Depends on how much and how they have to decontaminate.

Anything outside the 'fence' (current Owner Controlled Property), from what I gather a mile from the units, being uninhabitable for a lifetime(s), or even decades? Slim to nil!

ZERO health effects on anybody from the 'general public', just like TMI, despite what some people believe... As not 1 person died as a result of TMI, NOT ONE! And the vast majority of experts agree that the negligiable amounts released during the TMI accident have shown ZERO effects attributable to it, other than psychological and political

.

Zero health effects to the public, even with your worst case? The classification to a 7 already belies that and studies of radiation health effects tell me that with all the contamination that's already spread in to sea, land and air, that more cancers are bound to happen and, years from now happy talkers will deny this while statisticians will confirm it, just like at Chernobyl where dignified scientists guess in the range of 4,000 to a million casualties from it.

Peace

Karl

rrrADAM

Trad climber

LBMF

Apr 14, 2011 - 03:22pm PT

I know... Just like vaccines can cause autism. Just ask anybody, in the know.

TGT

Social climber

So Cal

Apr 14, 2011 - 03:25pm PT

The China Syndrome hit the screen on March 16th 1979

TMI happened on March 28th

Most of America can't differentiate between celluloid fantasy and history.

rrrADAM

Trad climber

LBMF

Apr 14, 2011 - 03:38pm PT

More jibberish that Adam will have to go back and edit and delete again...

The only things I edited/deleted were where I posted, when asked, too detailed information of where and who I work for (even though it can be gotten from elsewhere), as it can appear that I speak for my company, which I do not. That would be a code of ethics violation... And where I shared public pics taken at my plant, and a couple non-private emails sent to all personnel, that also can be viewed as a code of ethics violations.

In an effort to be 'transparrent' I posted a little too much info, and I don't feel like skating close to a line that can cause me to lose my job, especially when I get rotten vegetables thrown at me for my effort.

If you feel I deleted more than that, please post, as you said pages back:

That is why I copied all that ridiculous crap almost four weeks ago now.
When I have time I will take a look at what he thought it was necessary to delete and repost it...

http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.php?topic_id=1436585&msg=1461414#msg1461414

So... I'm 'all in', Riley. You gonna 'call', or 'fold'?

Karl Baba

Trad climber

Yosemite, Ca

Apr 14, 2011 - 04:01pm PT

I think the discussion would be healthier if radical refrained from attacks, particularly personal.

I know you can do better bro and nobody wins attacks

Peace

karl