Rough Day In Japan

[BigTruck]

Remember that Chernobyl did not have a protective containment layer like Japan/US facilities.  It was a partial meltdown that went straight from reactor to atmosphere after the meltdown/explosion. 

[patchz]

The waste pools they are having problems with don't either. Hence the problems. And the US experts have said that 20% of our facilities are exactly the same.

The US Nuclear experts have told US citizens to move outside a 50 mile radius while Japanese officials are still sticking with 12 miles. I've been watching it off and

on a lot today, and they keep saying Japanese government officials are getting their information from power company officials and it is erroneous information,

worse than they are being told. I'm keeping in mind that you can't always believe reporters either, but in any event, it does appear to be worse than they

first thought. I just feel sorry for all the people there.

[Steve M]

There are so many news articles flooding the net and the newspapers I can't sort reality from rumour. Here is my take on the actual cause. Yes a tsunomi hit the reactors and the end result was that nine backup generators were flooded and rendered useless. The backup generators are there to provide cooling during an emergency shutdown. If these generators had been built uphill or on towers we would not be having these discussions. I really feel bad for the people within the area, but I feel the reactor failures were human error in the planning and budgeting stages. A lesson can be learned here, I suppose.

[Slotback]

If the reactors were brand new AP1000s they would be fine.

http://www.atomeromu.hu/download/1676/A ... eaktor.pdf

[JBaymore]

Becasue of my intimate involvement with Japan, I have been spending a lot of time talking to friends and checking into what the JAPANESE are discussing and feeling and what is really happening over there. 

I'm listening/reading in Japanese too.  It is very interesting when you speak the language a bit to listen to the English news voice overs ... and hear what is ACTUALLY being said in the background.  And what is NOT being translated.  Or accurately translated.

Don't believe everything that you are seeing in the western press; they are LOVING this disaster.

[beaky]

There are so many news articles flooding the net and the newspapers I can't sort reality from rumour. Here is my take on the actual cause. Yes a tsunomi hit the reactors and the end result was that nine backup generators were flooded and rendered useless. The backup generators are there to provide cooling during an emergency shutdown. If these generators had been built uphill or on towers we would not be having these discussions. I really feel bad for the people within the area, but I feel the reactor failures were human error in the planning and budgeting stages. A lesson can be learned here, I suppose.

I've seen reports to that effect, and it's the most likely scenario, IMHO. Eerily similar to what happened with the reactor at Chernobyl: they shut down the main cooling system to test the backup system, but the backup system was not up to it (having not been checked separately).

[ViperPilot]

A couple of points:

1) One thing to keep in mind is that the earthquake and resulting tsunami was an unprecedented event; the 4th strongest earthquake ever recorded. I think the Japanese took every precaution about earthquake proof construction that they could when they built Fukushima; it was just the intensity of the earthquake and the tsunami was above expectations. How to handle and contain something this severe, and not having any historical reference to work from, makes this a learning process for everyone handling this crisis.

2) JBaymore makes a good point; when the translator's voice seems to hesitate for a second, or the inflection of the words being translated sounds unsure, it may look as if what's being translated isn't really what's being said. People watching the NHK World feed and listening to all of the sound bytes from the "Talking Heads" can get the feeling that the Japanese Gov't. and TEPCO are not being forthcoming about what's really happening.
Of course, this story is a gold mine to the Media!

I just hope they can get supplies, mainly kerosene, gasoline, food and medical supplies to the smaller, rural areas SOON; those elderly folks really need the assistance! 

Alan

[Steve M]

If the reactors were brand new AP1000s they would be fine.

http://www.atomeromu.hu/download/1676/A ... eaktor.pdf

Interesting, Canada uses for the most part Candu reactors that do not use 'enriched' uranium rods and will melt down at at much lower temperatures. I couldn't really find the fuel source of the AP1000 although I only spent a few minutes reading the link you provided.

[Steve M]

[quote]Becasue of my intimate involvement with Japan, I have been spending a lot of time talking to friends and checking into what the JAPANESE are discussing and feeling and what is really happening over there.

[Steve M]

There are so many news articles flooding the net and the newspapers I can't sort reality from rumour. Here is my take on the actual cause. Yes a tsunomi hit the reactors and the end result was that nine backup generators were flooded and rendered useless. The backup generators are there to provide cooling during an emergency shutdown. If these generators had been built uphill or on towers we would not be having these discussions. I really feel bad for the people within the area, but I feel the reactor failures were human error in the planning and budgeting stages. A lesson can be learned here, I suppose.

I've seen reports to that effect, and it's the most likely scenario, IMHO. Eerily similar to what happened with the reactor at Chernobyl: they shut down the main cooling system to test the backup system, but the backup system was not up to it (having not been checked separately).

[ViperPilot]

[quote]
Remember........

[color=#0000ff]"I just have to look good, I don't have to be clear.

[Steve M]

[quote]A couple of points:

1) One thing to keep in mind is that the earthquake and resulting tsunami was an unprecedented event; the 4th strongest earthquake ever recorded. I think the Japanese took every precaution about earthquake proof construction that they could when they built Fukushima; it was just the intensity of the earthquake and the tsunami was above expectations. How to handle and contain something this severe, and not having any historical reference to work from, makes this a learning process for everyone handling this crisis.

2) JBaymore makes a good point; when the translator's voice seems to hesitate for a second, or the inflection of the words being translated sounds unsure, it may look as if what's being translated isn't really what's being said. People watching the NHK World feed and listening to all of the sound bytes from the "Talking Heads" can get the feeling that the Japanese Gov't. and TEPCO are not being forthcoming about what's really happening.
Of course, this story is a gold mine to the Media!

I just hope they can get supplies, mainly kerosene, gasoline, food and medical supplies to the smaller, rural areas SOON; those elderly folks really need the assistance!

[ViperPilot]

[quote]

Agreed Allen,

[BigTruck]

[quote]
Remember........

[color=#0000ff]"I just have to look good, I don't have to be clear.

[Slotback]

The plant was designed for a specific amount of actual acceleration. According to world-nuclear it was 0.6g (or 600gal). The amount of shaking that actually occurs depends on how far the epicenter was away from the plant, and the depth etc. From what I've heard, the plant survived the earthquake and the reactor was shut down.

All sources of power (except battery) were lost after the tsunami that was apparently >10 meters high whereas the plant was designed for a 5.7 meter tsunami. The batteries ran out. All systems that were designed to take away decay heat were without power. Then the fuel rods got hot, evolved hydrogen gas that later exploded. Apparently the inner containment is intact or partially intact, whereas the secondary containment is destroyed as shown in the photos. They're still pumping sea-water into the reactors.

Chernobyl was somewhat different, as the reactor design allowed the reaction to go out of control during certain situations, which lead to a steam explosion and then a criticality incident, and had no containment during all of this. A large portion of the core was then scattered around the landscape, and the graphite moderator burned for days.

If the reactors were brand new AP1000s they would be fine.

http://www.atomeromu.hu/download/1676/A ... eaktor.pdf

Interesting, Canada uses for the most part Candu reactors that do not use 'enriched' uranium rods and will melt down at at much lower temperatures. I couldn't really find the fuel source of the AP1000 although I only spent a few minutes reading the link you provided.

AP1000 is very similar to existing PWR plants. It uses lightly enriched (approx 5%, but it varies) uranium dioxide pellets cladded with zircalloy.