Tweet
roadmap (photo: mitsukuni)
Today’s news from Fukushima: TEPCO and the government have produced a roadmap for the next 6-9 months, ending with all reactors in cold shutdown and all spent fuel pools under full control. Phase 1 (three months) consists of achieving a “steady reduction” of radiation. In Phase 2 (three-six months), the plan calls for first getting radiation releases under control and then substantially curbed. At the end of Phase 2, there is a decision point for the government. At that point (between November and January) evacuation orders will be reviewed. Evacuees will either be allowed to return to their homes to live or not. Today’s announcement is fundamentally a message to evacuees, signaling a timeframe of at least months. This will necessarily trigger a lot of decisions on the ground, as people realize they really need to move out of high school gymnasiums and other provisional arrangements.
One imagines that Phase 1 is about reducing the reactivity of the fuel assemblies in Units 1-4 by any means possible, both known and unknown. Phase 2 is presumably about constructing and bringing online new, closed cooling circuits, so that the direct spillage of highly radioactive cooling water can be ended. The difference between a roadmap and a blueprint is critical to today’s announcements. A blueprint describes a detailed plan. There is no blueprint at this time. A roadmap describes periods of action and key decision points. There is now a roadmap, but without details, it will necessarily be subject to continuous revision.
Meanwhile, there remains a serious tension between USG evacuation orders for Americans (80 km zone) and JG orders for Japanese (30 km zone). The much larger American evacuation zone includes Fukushima City (pop. 300,000 + evacuees). Why are the recommendations from the two governments so different? Because the two governments are responding to different political pressures (details in the next paragraphs). To the extent that hundreds of thousands of Japanese citizens are living in a state of great stress and uncertainty, it is critical that the evacuation orders be harmonized soon. Either there is a continuing and serious threat of further explosive releases or there is not.
The view from Tokyo: There is a good understanding by now of the radiation on the ground, both in terms of amount and kind. Iodine-131 that was released in mid-March in large amounts has largely decayed into ordinary iodine by this time, but cesium-137 will be present in some areas for decades. In some areas, there is enough cesium-137 on the ground to require long-term exclusion zones. These areas, by all published accounts, are not highly populated. Radiation releases (to the air) over the last two weeks have been steadily declining and are not large. It is likely that the Japanese government will begin to define some unpopulated, long-term exclusion zones in the coming days or weeks — a very, very difficult thing to do for any government. For Tokyo, the evacuation crisis is perceived to be primarily a political and public health question, not a reflection of continuing concern about new large releases. Tokyo needs to reestablish trust at home. Already, there are calls for the Prime Minister to resign, etc. The disaster grace period is over.
The view from K Street: The 80 km evacuation zone was recommended by the USG when the threat of catastrophic atmospheric releases was high. As long as the USG continues to recommend an 80 km evacuation zone, the implication is clearly that there is continuing American concern that there will be new onsite fireworks. Unless this is true (and it is not being communicated as true by the USG), why is the 80 km recommendation still there? Industry lobbyists in the US must be arguing for the relatively painless (for Americans) extension of the wider evacuation as a CYA contingency. I.e., it costs them nothing to recommend the wider zone and it insulates the industry from looking complacent should there be further explosive releases of the 800-ton onsite radioactive inventory.
Known risks While there will remain serious risks onsite for months, there is now a steady-state situation that is terrible but not catastrophic. Because the decay heat is now modest in all reactor cores and all spent fuel ponds but one (the SFP at Unit 4 is still problematic) the primary risks are associated with new external events, such as aftershocks, tsunami or typhoons, or with new facility failures (e.g., RPV, piping or valve failures). The cooling load in the Unit 4 spent fuel pond is around 2 MW steady-state. Access to the pool is limited and the integrity of the pool itself is questionable. An appropriate framework for thinking of the worst-case scenarios from now going forward is to realize that the situations in Units 1-4 are each characterized by fuel rod disintegration and melt (to various unknown degrees), which forces the operators to guard against unlikely but dangerous recriticality while always keeping the cooling water circulating to prevent further melting, even if that means environmental releases. Unit 4 is the only unit for which this problem must be solved while fully outside containment. In the other units, there are containment failures, instrumentation failures, salt build-up and corrosion, leaking water, etc — but the cores are at least still inside the main containment.
So, what comes next? We’ll see.
54 Comments
More details from TEPCO:
STEP 1 (In roughly three months)
– Fill containment vessels of Nos. 1, 3 reactors with water.
– Seal with sticky cement the part in No. 2 reactor’s containment vessel believed breached.
– Inject nitrogen into Nos. 2, 3 reactors to avoid possible hydrogen explosion.
– Restore circulatory cooling system for spent fuel pools.
– Install facility to decontaminate highly tainted water and purify seawater.
STEP 2 (In roughly six to nine months)
– Bring reactors into stable condition known as ‘cold shutdown.’
– Blanket buildings housing Nos. 1, 3, 4 reactors with covering.
MIDTERM GOALS
– Extract fuel assemblies from pools holding spent fuel.
– Cover reactor buildings with containers, such as those using concrete.
————————–
Question to find out more about: Will they remove contents of Unit 4 spent fuel pond? That would be terrific.
Link for plan details.
I see the principle of “better safe than sorry” is still nowhere in evidence at the Japanese govt.
More details (including pictures) can be found here.
Thank You lobster!
This is a really good summary. Thank you.
Let me add my thanks to lobster. I’ve been wondering about the developments.
Thanks for the great update.
Wonderfully clear for people like me who are completely ignorant in nuclear engineering. My niece`s husband is a nuclear engineer for the Navy. Next time we get together (months from now), I am going to have him explain to me exactly how this stuff works. But until then, this site is just amazing. Thanks again.
The US offered a remote controlled helicopter or two to help with construction. I was fairly interested in this development until I saw that the max load they can handle is 1.5 tons. It may be useful to have this capability, but the job is pretty big and that seems a bit on the puny side.
Another detail of interest: The roadmap calls for reinforcing the supports for the spent fuel pond @ Unit 4. There are also plans to put some of the spent fuel (from which ponds, I do not know) into dry casks. The dry casks are terrific, but they are very heavy. A specific failure mode described here (PDF) would be triggered by dropping a dry cask onto/into a spent fuel pond. That would seem to be more risky than usual, given the state of the service floors at each unit.
Not out of the woods yet.
I’m pleased to do my part here.
Let me add my thanks. I became an FDL member when I realized the FDL site was the best place I could find for coverage of this crisis on the internet.
Thanks lobster.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel ran a story about the three nukes around Lake Michigan. Two trolls, one claiming to be an electrician from Bechtel were claiming in the comments that nukes were very safe. Using just the info, I learned from you, Scarecrow, Prof. Foland, and so many others here, I kept asking them questions. They denied re-criticality could still happen. I posted a link that showed nuke scientists remained very concerned about it. They insisted those stainless steel welds were fine and that i knew nothing about nuclear power. Unfortunately for them (and whoever was paying them) they couldn’t answer my questions or provide links to support their claims.
*Heh* If I wasn’t already a firepup, I would have signed up for lobster’s posts too. (And all other commenters and diarists.) Thanks lobster!
That sounds like a diary get your comments and theirs then post them. We must keep track of what the Nuclear Public Relations people are doing to spin this.
BooRadley, I hope you will consider posting that as a diary.
I’ve posted this story before, so excuse me if you’ve read it before, but in a nut-shell;
I had the same sort of conversation as you, a certified welder who was licensed to work on nuclear reactors told me how much training he had, and how much pride he took in his work. He told me about how seriously his workmates and he took the job they did…
… I told him that no matter how good and responsible his behavior was, I feared that the day that he had to call his boss and report a major failure that should trigger an immediate evacuation of people close to the reactor, that his boss might not do the right thing because of the possible economic impact of that evacuation on the power company.
The guy told me that he had that same concern, and that I was basically right.
There was a brief but uncomfortable moment after that exchange.
Thanks lobster, as always, the news, without the noise.
Thanks Lobster for the updates… Here is link to some great pictures of the Nuke Plant: http://cryptome.org/eyeball/daiichi-npp/daiichi-photos.htm
WOW WOW !! GERMANY IS CLOSING ALL THEIR NUCLEAR PLANTS!!! PAY ATTENTION USA WITH 45
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsF9lE9tjT4&feature=feedu
Any engineering plan is a optimistic view of realty. Look at the activities in the first three month (which is probable more like two years).
This plan reads like a power point marketing presentation of a product development plan, absent the engineering groups estimates. Or, telling management what it wants to hear, instead of addressing the reality of the issues.
“We just have to write a few lines of code to deliver Microsoft Vista, which will be delivered error free in a couple of months, and customers will flock to buy the product.”
Let’s discuss this “plan” (a set of milestones without detail and estimates)
STEP 1 (In roughly three months)
1. Fill containment vessels of Nos. 1, 3 reactors with water.
Feasible. All we need is radiation proof workers to fix the pumps.
2 Seal with sticky cement the part in No. 2 reactor’s containment vessel believed breached.
Err, no. That’s grouting the leak area, which is a close up and hands on job. All we need is radiation proof workers to place the grout.
3 Inject nitrogen into Nos. 2, 3 reactors to avoid possible hydrogen explosion.
Umm, difficult. I believe it could mean fill the reactor buildings with nitrogen, because in (1) the reactors were filled with water, leaving little room for nitrogen. Good luck with the leak proof concrete shell. Nitrogen (oxygen free air actually, is make by burning fuel and collecting the combustion gases), and requires large furnaces. Which have to be built on site. All we need is radiation proof workers to build and install the furnaces on site.
3 Restore circulatory cooling system for spent fuel pools.
See (1)
4 Install facility to decontaminate highly tainted water and purify seawater.
Which is de-inization of water ( or boiling the water to make a solid, but we already know that boiling the water is not successful at containing the radioactivity). Mach nines, which have to be built on site. All we need is radiation proof workers to build and install the water purification machines and connect them to the radioactive water storage.
STEP 2 (In roughly six to nine months)
1 Bring reactors into stable condition known as ‘cold shutdown.’
Read like a wish. As in business plans were there is a cognitive gap, aka: “Then A Miracle Occurs.” This needs detail. Much detail.
2 Blanket buildings housing Nos. 1, 3, 4 reactors with covering.
What happened to the water, nitrogen and machinery required for continual cooling? Does that also get buried under the concrete?
MIDTERM GOALS
What’s the specific timeline for this? With manpower estimates and milestones?
1 Extract fuel assemblies from pools holding spent fuel.
Oh really? How to do this with the “blanket’s” and nitrogen atmosphere in place?
Cover reactor buildings with containers, such as those using concrete.
What’s the difference between “blankets” and “concrete” and what happens to the cooling required?
FINALLY (Unmentioned)
What’s the plan to guard the site and the contaminated area for the next millennium or so?
Who pays for this?
How is it governed?
Someone on the oil drum found this great old SNL sketch from 1984 with Ed Asner and Julia Louis Dreyfus. Ed is retiring from his job as the guy at the nuclear plant who knew how things worked.
“Remember, you can’t put too much water in a nuclear reactor.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JrIYR8jArk
This is more correct.Where is edit when it’s need? Which for me is always.
STEP 1 (In roughly three months)
1. Fill containment vessels of Nos. 1, 3 reactors with water.
Feasible. All we need is radiation proof workers to fix the pumps.
2 Seal with sticky cement the part in No. 2 reactor’s containment vessel believed breached.
Err, no. That’s grouting the leak area, which is a close up and hands on job. All we need is radiation proof workers to place the grout.
3 Inject nitrogen into Nos. 2, 3 reactors to avoid possible hydrogen explosion.
Umm, difficult. I believe it could mean fill the reactor buildings with nitrogen, because in (1) the reactors were filled with water, leaving little room for nitrogen. Good luck with the leak proof concrete shell. Nitrogen (oxygen free air actually, is make by burning fuel and collecting the combustion gases), and requires large furnaces. Which have to be built on site. All we need is radiation proof workers to build and install the furnaces on site.
3 Restore circulatory cooling system for spent fuel pools.
See (1)
4 Install facility to decontaminate highly tainted water and purify seawater.
Which is de-ioinazation of water ( or boiling the water to make a solid, but we already know that boiling the water is not successful at containing the radioactivity). Machines, which have to be built on site. All we need is radiation proof workers to build and install the water purification machines and connect them to the radioactive water storage.
STEP 2 (In roughly six to nine months)
1 Bring reactors into stable condition known as ‘cold shutdown.’
Read like a wish. As in business plans were there is a cognitive gap, aka: “Then A Miracle Occurs.” This needs detail. Much detail.
2 Blanket buildings housing Nos. 1, 3, 4 reactors with covering.
What happened to the water, nitrogen and machinery required for continual cooling? Does that also get buried under the concrete?
MIDTERM GOALS
What’s the specific timeline for this? With manpower estimates and milestones?
1 Extract fuel assemblies from pools holding spent fuel.
Oh really? How to do this with the “blanket’s” and nitrogen atmosphere in place?
Cover reactor buildings with containers, such as those using concrete.
What’s the difference between “blankets” and “concrete” and what happens to the cooling required?
FINALLY (Unmentioned)
What’s the plan to guard the site and the contaminated area for the next millennium or so?
Who pays for this?
How is it governed?
Pretty funny!
Advice from H Paulson to G W Bush in fall, 2008: “You can’t give too much money to the banks.”
Advice from Clinton to Obama in Jan, 2009: “You can’t give too much ground away in negotiations with Republicans.”
Rahm’s view of liberals: “You can’t f%*k with the base of our party too much.”
Any more?
Speaking of blueprints:
Same story continues:
A little insight from here.
The likelihood that the materials in the Unit 4 spent fuel pond (SFP) were the source of much (even most) of the radiation released to the atmosphere so far is high. Thus, I was really baffled by the recent finding (by direct measurement, for the first time) that the water in SFP 4 was at 90 C. That is way too hot — nearly boiling.
How could such an obvious problem be allowed to develop? I conjectured that it might mean that SFP 4 is damaged and cannot hold much water. That would lead to consistently high temperatures, but would not explain why the operators would have stopped supplying cold water.
The linked article says that the filling was stopped on Wednesday because surviving instrumentation said it was full when it was not. Without enough water in the pool, it heated up quite a bit, and more quickly than expected.
[The mistake has to do with the fact that a spent fuel pond is more complicated than a big pool of water with hot stuff in it.]
The point is: now that they understand the possibility of this mode of instrumentation confusion, it is unlikely that they will let the water get so hot again.
Unless there are multiple structural problems, of course.
Is the #4 spent fuel pond full or over full of fuel?
Notes from an “Official Use Only” memo from the NRC on 26 March that is circulating on other sites. I read it and you can, too, but I see no reason to link to it directly from FDL. Jane doesn’t need the headache. Anyway, nearly everything in it has already been reported by the NYT (and linked from FDL at that point).
o As of 26 March, the NRC regarded the SFP @ Unit 4 to have been a candidate major source of radiation release to the atmosphere. That jibes with arguments presented here at FDL.
o Also on 26 March, the NRC recommended that SFP 4 be continuously refilled with borated water. Again, that jibes with our thinking. It would be nice to know that the NRC thinks of the SFP 4 water assay from late last week, but I do not have access to that information.
From the Sydney Morning Herald, an item especially for Margaret @ FDL.
The headline for that story is “Nuclear firm says it has no blueprint to resolve crisis.”
It has more than normal. I’m not sure what would constitute “overfull”. It also has a mix of spent fuel, fresh fuel rods and incompletely spent rods — the full inventory of fuel rods from unit 4, which was under maintenance since November.
The length of time for this road map implies the terrain, or most of it, can be covered within that time line. What seems true is that clean up and shut down would take years and an evacuation zone of some size will be needed for decades.
Separately, have there been updates about the extent to which saltwater has corroded the stainless steel containment vessels and coolant pipes?
This sort of headline, from an AP article reprinted at Salon, seems definitive and more helpful to TEPCO than its customers.
Good answer. Extra rods = extra heat = 90 deg c?
I wonder at the pond’s temperature before the earthquake.
Good question — I’ve seen no reporting on the condition of the piping. It is acknowledged widely but represents a big unknown.
They had the temperature feedback-controlled before the tsunami wiped out backup power. There is a lot in the pool but there is that much in many pools. It is only a problem when the circulation/cooling fails.
More details for the English-speaking world from TEPCO.
They have noticed structural problems with the #4 pool support and are now scrambling/planning to erect supports.
They have also found to their dismay significant standing water in both the reactor bldg and turbine bldg basements, this in an inactive reactor facility.
I read an item by a Japanese blogger/independent reporter, who in interview of a Tepco worker found him to say that the facility has always had problems in the basement areas of water seeping in at high tide. Since all the groundwater pits show radioactive water, it is quite obvious that the place leaks in and out. So closing off of the seawater access areas with steel barriers and shutting off the obvious area of spew will not keep hot water from seeping out.
I’m beginning to wonder how isolated the various facilities were (especially the turbine rooms) not just for water but in terms of gas or ventilation prior to their lids being blown off the reactor buildings.
Maybe interesting?
The pressure in the RPV @ Unit 1 has been rising for days. (NISA data)
It appears that the pressure in the RPV is now high enough that some of the steam in the RPV should now be condensing back into water. At the same time, the water level in the RPV is rising for the first time in a long time. The rise is 10 cm so far. The nominal level of the top of the fuel rods is about 1.5 meters more. It is likely that whatever the water is encountering will affect and be affected by the presence of water.
The rise in water is good (more cooling/heat transfer), but the moment to watch for new developments is the moment when important internal parameters like this begin to change after several days (or weeks).
Sorry to go so deep into the weeds. Probably a waste of time but I’m awake and looking for a distraction.
To give you an idea of what I’m talking about, the water has not been this high in the Unit 1 Reactor Pressure Vessel since before 13 March. New territory.
Last note on this topic: the data for the water that I was looking at wasn’t the latest. The level subsequently went back down by 10 cm and is currently sitting at the value it has been more or less stuck at for a long time.
Here are more up-to-date numbers for the water levels and more.
Well I think I was probably prescient again, (that’s in my post, Bomb the Reactor, a last ditch )
Since nuc power, especially in bombs happens from the criticality that is when the refined fuels are pushed into proximity, and then they just have to react.
The main thing is to bring a close to the out of control reactions
The adjescent area should be made ready first by leveling with massive explosives, The air force knows what kind of bombs to use for that, then when leveled a several hundred foot flattened field, will be a place to disperse the fuel rods. Either the demo guys that take down the big buildings, or other explosives engineering like special bombs that the air force can get, to put the cores out onto the field and disburse there.
The fuel, should be scattered over an adjecent area by any means available, explosives would be available.
Disbursal with intstitial space, stops most of the reacting, then that debris field can be paved with as much borate and concrete as you need.
In addition this will enable some access in a shorter time to any part of the area, as will be needed. It will spread it out.
Since I don’t know what I’m talking about, I won’t be insulted by informed criticism of this idea, though nobody has spoken to the basic problem of the critical mass of fuel and the need to disburse to stop much more on going pollution.
It would be analogous to a huge camp fire that a camper would rake out over a bit of ground, and then shovel dirt over it to extinquish.
You still are ignoring the fact that blowing up the reactors is exactly what everyone does not want to do. You would be purposely dispersing huge amounts of radiation into the atmosphere. In effect simulating the bad part of Chernobyl.
What you have is a layman’s theory with no actual science behind your theory. You havent laid out exactly how blowing up an reactor would stop the Nuclear reactions. Yes you have stated that the explosion would disperse the fuel rods. But to what extent? And how big of an explosion would be needed to blow them to pieces? What types of fuel rods are in the reactors?
There is also a common pool storage at Fukushima #1 of spent fuel from units 1 to 6. There are apparently some 6,375 rods in storage for over 4 years with cooling water circulation in this pool. On the 17th they lost power to the pumps for about 3 hours due to a short causing breaker to open. It it not clear from the reports that this was in fact noticed at the time. 3 hours is an awful long time to reset a breaker.
This pool keeps getting forgotten, but it is probably a good idea and an easy one to do (except for people freaking out when it is transported), to transfer this fuel off site.
This is probably true for all nuclear facilities everywhere that they tend to keep spent fuel at the facilities for ever, in absence of politically and economically acceptable places for further storage. It’s called putting all your eggs in one basket and is high risk.
the meltdown should be stopped and the fuel should be layed out so it doesn’t leak out allover, I don’t think the authorities are thinking large scale, in the way needed to effect those end results.
Burying would be part of it, but first make a perimeter and spread out the pollution sources including live and spent fuel, and other contaminated refuse, some of it is going in the sea, like most of the plant itself, but the rods need to be separated and moved away from each other so they won’t achieve the critical mass, that causes reaction, and decay and a long messy life of pollution worst than what is there on the premises now, if they let it go on.
maybe not.
I agree that it seems that there isn’t enough being done. But then I really don’t have clear picture of what is being done.
I believe the biggest problem with bringing in American design as is was that the DG’s were not standard voltages for the industry (construction and whatnut) for Japan, but rather for the USA. This caused quite a large problem when trying to find replacement.
And it appears that the reactor bldg #4 first reported to have 20cm depth of water ignored the floor beneath the one step that someone was talking about so is now 5 meters of water of indeterminate origin.
Monday follow-up info to the main post:
UK reduce its precautionary zone around Fukushima Daiichi from 80 km to 60 km today.
NYT report on robots in Units 1 and 3 says:
From the same article, some bad news that is now being walked back a bit (we’ll see where it ends up):
And finally, evacuees are on the move, as expected:
Inns at hot springs? Sounds a heckuva lot better than a trailer filled with formaldehyde.
Excellent assessment of the situation. Always look forward to the updates on FDL. I think you hit the nail on the head with regard to the political realities of the evacuation zones. It continues to be a hot topic here in Japan.
Also, with regard reduction of level of precautionary instructions, the US Embassy, which had advised US citizens to avoid unnecessary travel to Tokyo, has now stepped that back and no longer advises against travel to Tokyo. (The 80km evacuation zone is still in place).
http://japan.usembassy.gov/e/acs/tacs-alert20110415.html
First and foremost, like many of us here I am compelled to thank our brilliant teachers who have taken an enormously complicated situation and made it comprehendible for us lay folks. Thank you so much!
Please do not abandon us – interested parties need each of you!
Wise ones please correct any errors that follow!
As Japans horror continues it suddenly occurred to me — is it not to fair to conclude that mankind has only two choices here – do we have a contaminated atmosphere or ocean?
By that I mean do we abandon the current intervention strategy and hit criticality or meltdown, or do we continue to inundate and drench the groundwater and the ocean with contaminated water. (tons of it).
It seems to me, sadly that those are the only two options.
It is so hard to wrap my head around the tons of water being used daily in the strategy currently being utilized. Gravity is in play here no?
With the quantities of water being needed the groundwater contamination (with no end in sight) cannot help but be nothing other than planet altering for eternity. No?
Anyone here that did not see the 12 minute video Of the two reporters who taped their excursion into the evacuated areas ought to do so. There was a shot with cows grazing with several meters blaring loudly in the reporters’ vehicle. (http://www.projectworldawareness.com/2011/04/inside-fukushima-evacuation-zone-1/
It occurred to me that soon cows, dogs, rats, squirrels mice (you all are with me) are going to start dying and decomposing. The groundwater lethality with that scenario (as it relates to the numbers of decomposing animals in and of itself seems scary all on its own).
Can any of you offer me a suggestion – for months the American media led with BP. The silliness that Japan has no “visuals “is flat out moronic. I could come up with nothing duller than the static shot, for a half a year, of oil gushing out of the ocean floor that our media found so amazing night after night after night.
Even if we did not have the nuclear nightmare how has main stream media been able to ignore the human suffering as a result of the tsunami and earthquake in and of itself? Maybe American media need to go back for some job training.
Might it be that for Americans (in BP) we had a corporation to be mad at wherein here we have Mother Nature who certainly puts each of us in our place whenever she feels like it.
Maybe it is the utter powerless of nature vs. the notion that we can control (legislate –if we has someone intelligent to do so) evil cooperate greed so we felt, (delusional considering the state of the congress here) more invested in the BP mess. Maybe the real difference here is anger vs. powerlessness or perceptions of control over powerlessness.
All this “safe level” of contamination is a bunch of silly hog wash. It is impossible. Mankind and isotopes just don’t “hang” very well together – never have never will.
The food chain globally has to be –through time- markedly impacted. I am confident our wise leaders here know for a fact that all the propaganda as it relates to the Chernobyl impact –in all domains- in that region – are indisputable and supported by a “preponderance of the evidence”.
Bottom line – our wise leaders – overall what is worse – a contaminated atmosphere or the planets oceans – those are the only authentic choices no?
Footnotes!
*When this happens in America we all know that within 72 hours our nuclear operators are fleeing without a second thought!
*Is this accurate: each unit goes through 70 tons of water per day?
*And this is old but I just stumbled across it (aftershock time lapse recording – pretty amazing)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42037498/ns/world_news-asia-pacific/
*I read today that the European ports are checking incoming tankers and if they come up contaminated they give the contents a good ole scrubbing bath? Hello?
Regrettably, political and corporate machinations have been very much in play when it comes to managing perceptions of the Fukushima nuclear crisis; ranking its severity; and establishing appropriate evacuation zones.
Witness TEPCO’s recently announced schedule for Fukushima Daiichi, which has been widely touted in the media as a “blueprint” and a “road map” to “end” the crisis. Never mind that it bears more resemblance to a wilderness cairn.
Of all the major news rags, the Guardian got it about right in their coverage of the subject on April 17th (via CommonDreams), No End in Sight for Nuclear Catastrophe in Japan; Japan nuclear firm aims to end crisis within nine months, but no word when – if ever – evacuees will be able to return.
To recap — Japan’s nuclear authorities waited till April 12th to finally confer an INES Level 7 rating on the reactor complex. No worries. A mere two days later the US Embassy obligingly changed its original “Travel Warning” on Japan to a “Travel Alert” which gave a thumbs-up “particularly to Tokyo, U.S. military facilities and [other areas] outside a 50 mile radius of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant”.
And now, as of April 17th, we have US Secretary of State Clinton in Tokyo — expressing solidarity while drumming up business for disaster capitalism; aka “reconstruction”, with TEPCO providing an absurdly optimistic “road map” for Japan. From the Guardian:
On April 18th, the UK Embassy also followed suite and changed its “Travel Summary”, reassuring British nationals that: the “precautionary zone around the Fukushima nuclear facility was reduced [from 80km] to 60km…and we are no longer distributing iodine tablets. Paradoxically, we are all meant to believe that the situation on the ground is increasingly controllable — especially since announcement of the INES Level 7 ranking.
Business as usual, indeed.
Is Japan’s Elite Hiding a Weapons Program Inside Nuclear Plants?
http://en.m4.cn/archives/7235.html
Yoichi Shimatzu, The 4th Media, April 7, 2011
EverNewEcoN: It is not impossible there are opinion
influencers from (official) Beijing or Pyongyang in one place or another on the internet.
http://sites.google.com/site/evernewecon
Note: As to Mr.
Shimatzu, I only venture gratitude and admiration for his
honest curiosity are deserved.
(quoting the N.Y. Times:)
“‘…Levels of iodine 131 entering the air can be very diluted, but if the iodine is deposited on grass eaten by cows, the cows will reconcentrate it in their milk by a factor of 1,000.
This is mainly a concern with fresh milk, not for dairy products that are stored before consumption….’”
from Fukushima Fallout: Low Levels of Radiation in U.S. Milk,
Contaminated Marine Life in Japan
Kristina Chew, Care2.com, April 1, 2011
Sorry, but this registers pretty high on my silly-meter. YMMV.