Reports from various sources and the video above indicate there has been another explosion at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Station, this time at Unit 3. The video shows a dark plume rising hundreds of feet in the air, a bad sign if there is significant radiation involved.
An earlier report from Tokyo Electric indicated the water level in the reactor dropped 3 meters, exposing the core. The most ominous news, as reported by Union of Concerned Scientists (h/t commenter 4cdave):
… after multiple cooling system failures, the water level in the Unit 3 reactor vessel dropped 3 meters (nearly 10 feet), uncovering approximately 90 percent of the fuel in the reactor core. Authorities were able to inject cooling water with a fire pump after reducing the containment pressure by a controlled venting of radioactive gas. As they did with Unit 1, they began pumping sea water into Unit 3 … the water level in the Unit 3 reactor still remains more than 2 meters (6 feet) below the top of the fuel, exposing about half the fuel to air, and they believe that water may be leaking from the reactor vessel. … In September 2010, 32 fuel assemblies containing MOX fuel were loaded into this reactor. This is about 6% of the core.
The use of MOX generally increases the consequences of severe accidents in which large amounts of radioactive gas and aerosol are released compared to the same accident in a reactor using non-MOX fuel, because MOX fuel contains greater amounts of plutonium and other actinides, such as americium and curium, which have high radio-toxicities.
The utility, Tokyo Electric is reporting there are three persons injured and seven person missing. [Update: they've reportedly been found] BBC says there may be 11 persons missing.
Unit 3 is at the same Station as Unit 1 where the earlier hydrogen explosion occurred two days ago. There are also reports of smoke rising from Unit 1, but this may be from the same blast.
The earlier explosion blew the roof and upper walls off of the reactor building at Unit 1. At this point, we don’t have any indication of the damage done to Unit 3 reactor, but utility/govt officials are claiming the reactor vessel was not damaged. As for the building housing the reactor, before/after images captured by Jim White indicate this latest explosion blew the roof and walls off the reactor building. See below.
The plant operators have been struggling with the loss of the cooling system and a resulting rise in pressure in the reactor. They have been injecting sea water, using fire pumps, to sustain at least some cooling and may have attempted another controlled release to relieve the rising pressure. That procedure was also presumably involved in the first explosion at Unit 1.
We’ve captured a screen grab, below, that shows before/after. This new explosion appears to have caused substantially more external damage to the outer building than the first explosion. The NYT also reports the same thing.
We will update as we get more details and confirmation.




158 Comments

Just posted link to this on previous thread. Lobster and the prof are there.
that smoke is much darker than the first explosion at unit #1 and is sorta mini-mushroom kinda looking. does not look good at all
recommended and thanks for all your posts on this ongoing tragedy scarecrow
CNN just reported explosion, FWIW.
The strangest thing going on right now is that there are tsunami warnings, then they are called off, then they are back on….seems like bedlam? USGS earthquake reporting service does not see new large earthquakes in the area.
Now TEPCO says there are injuries in the Unit 3 explosion (11:59).
That is not a mushroom cloud, Suzanne; not a nuclear explosion. Still bad, but not a nuclear explosion.
Cross-posted from old thread:
The New York Times is reporting:
“Pentagon officials reported on Sunday that helicopters flying 60 miles from the plant picked up small amounts of radioactive particulates — still being analyzed, but presumed to include Cesium-137 and Iodine-121 — suggesting widening environmental contamination.”
In another story the Pentagon said the Aircraft Carrier Ronald Reagan passed through a plume that gave the sailors a year’s worth of radiation in an hour.
Looks like another classic example of the dangers of underestimating tail risk.
Do you have the link for the Pentagon report?
it went straight up instead of the multi-directional cloud when unit 1 blew — i should have phrased that better.
A mushroom-shaped cloud of dust merely means that the explosion is large; it is not in itself an indicator that the explosion is nuclear. Large conventional explosions, or large hydrogen explosions, also generate mushroom-shaped clouds.
What’s shown here is not a classic “nuclear mushroom cloud”, it’s just a big explosion.
NYT:
I’ve seen conflicting reports on the tsunami, the last saying, “false alarm.” What’s the latest credible, and prediction of how soon?
Agreed — and I also agree with Suzanne that this one looked different. Just watching too many screens here, I guess.
No, sorry, just the NY Times story.
Here’s the link for the report on the helicopter readings. Let me look to find the link re: the Ronald Reagan.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/world/asia/japan-fukushima-nuclear-reactor.html?hp
The Kyodo crawler is still talking about a predicted tsunami in the Fukushima area, but I do not believe it. There is no confirmation in other local reporting and USGS does not show a recent earthquake in the area.
So now the Kyodo crawler says the tsunami warning is dismissed and is not saying anything else about tsunamis. I think we can set this aside as an immediate concern.
MY APOLOGIES -
It was a MONTH’s dose of radiation in an hour:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/world/asia/14plume.html
Bloomberg reporting that BoJ has dumped 12 trillion yen ($146 billion) “into the economy” (by whatever mechanism) today.
There’s also mention of the fuel storage ponds…
I’d quite skeptical that anyone on the scene is actually able to assess the structural integrity of the reactor container, and even more skeptical that any instrumentation that could provide info would have survived the explosion in working order. Even a visual assessment via helicopter revealing a grossly intact reactor container couldn’t rule out smaller breaches not visible from aerial inspection.
How can Japanese officials possibly have access to information that would provide empirical support for their most recent blithe assurance?
Tokyo Electric Power Co. saying that there are 3 injured and 7 missing after the explosion
DailyYomiuri on twitter breaks it down further:
6 Self Defense Force personnel and one nuclear power plant worker are unaccounted for after this morning’s explosions at the Fukushima plant
They would get that information almost exclusively from the radiation readings + pressure gauges.
The radiation readings that they are not reporting to us are basically encoded in their estimate of the containment integrity.
This, from earlier in the evening, could be key assuming it is even close to accurate:
90% of the plutonium MOX core exposed??? Holy fucking shit. Yeah, there was an explosion. And I don’t know how much seawater, with or without the boron additive, is gonna slow this train down if this is all true. This could be much more of a full on oh shit deal than the last explosion. And the video sure looks more scary to me.
AFAIK the largest excursion above background we’ve heard to date outside the complex was about 8 fold at the boundary of the complex. If, far afield, there are regions 700+ times above background, I think that raises the stakes a lot. This is where I’m really hoping someone’s going to correct me as being quite wrong.
The aircraft carrier is conducting aid operations off the coast of Japan but I can’t find any more precise location than that.
This does NOT mean there’s a significant threat to anything or anyone this side of the Pacific, only that it seems like a step upwards for those in Japan.
Repost from previous thread:
From Union of Concerned Scientists
… after multiple cooling system failures, the water level in the Unit 3 reactor vessel dropped 3 meters (nearly 10 feet), uncovering approximately 90 percent of the fuel in the reactor core. Authorities were able to inject cooling water with a fire pump after reducing the containment pressure by a controlled venting of radioactive gas. As they did with Unit 1, they began pumping sea water into Unit 3 … the water level in the Unit 3 reactor still remains more than 2 meters (6 feet) below the top of the fuel, exposing about half the fuel to air, and they believe that water may be leaking from the reactor vessel. … In September 2010, 32 fuel assemblies containing MOX fuel were loaded into this reactor. This is about 6% of the core.
The use of MOX generally increases the consequences of severe accidents in which large amounts of radioactive gas and aerosol are released compared to the same accident in a reactor using non-MOX fuel, because MOX fuel contains greater amounts of plutonium and other actinides, such as americium and curium, which have high radio-toxicities.
…
Because of this, the number of latent cancer fatalities resulting from an accident could increase by as much as a factor of five for a full core of MOX fuel compared to the same accident with no MOX. Fortunately, as noted above, the fraction of the fuel in this reactor that is MOX is small. Even so, I would estimate this could cause a roughly 10% increase in latent cancer fatalities if there were a severe accident with core melt and containment breach, which has not happened at this point and hopefully will not.
…
Units 1, 2, and 3 are boiling water reactors with Mark I containments. The Mark I is unusually vulnerable to containment failure in the event of a core-melt accident. A recent study by Sandia National Laboratories shows that the likelihood of containment failure in this case is nearly 42% (see Table 4-7 on page 97). The most likely failure scenario involves the molten fuel burning through the reactor vessel, spilling onto the containment floor, and spreading until it contacts and breeches the steel containment-vessel wall.
Now *that* is scary.
Further encoded reporting (in my opinion): the NYT article asserts that the radiation plume measured by the Pentagon “presumably” contains Cs-137 and I-131.
There is no doubt in the mind of the person taking the readings. That the paper of record is going that far with a front page story tells me that the reporter is being told off the record that those elements are present.
As noted in earlier threads, the amount of cesium and iodine in the air tells us how bad things are. The Pentagon knows a lot more than we do right now, but we are getting hints.
Pictures of the disaster in general in Japan. Sorry about the unfortunate URL.
http://totallycoolpix.com/2011/03/the-japan-earthquake-and-tsunami-aftermath/
Speaking of those radiation readings, see my comment above about the carrier…
Downthread (and up), 4cdave found a reliable source saying the MOX component is only 6% of the total fuel inventory. That is a good thing. 0% would have been better, of course.
The conclusion to Lyman’s piece is even more alarming – if that’s possible:
I have done considerable analysis on the safety risks associated with using MOX fuel in light-water reactors. The use of MOX generally increases the consequences of severe accidents in which large amounts of radioactive gas and aerosol are released compared to the same accident in a reactor using non-MOX fuel, because MOX fuel contains greater amounts of plutonium and other actinides, such as americium and curium, which have high radio-toxicities.
Because of this, the number of latent cancer fatalities resulting from an accident could increase by as much as a factor of five for a full core of MOX fuel compared to the same accident with no MOX. Fortunately, as noted above, the fraction of the fuel in this reactor that is MOX is small. Even so, I would estimate this could cause a roughly 10% increase in latent cancer fatalities if there were a severe accident with core melt and containment breach, which has not happened at this point and hopefully will not.
While the authorities continue playing down the possibility of a breach of the primary containment at these reactors, I remain concerned. Fukushima Dai-Ichi reactor Units 1, 2, and 3 are boiling water reactors with Mark I containments. The Mark I is unusually vulnerable to containment failure in the event of a core-melt accident. A recent study by Sandia National Laboratories shows that the likelihood of containment failure in this case is nearly 42% (see Table 4-7 on page 97). The most likely failure scenario involves the molten fuel burning through the reactor vessel, spilling onto the containment floor, and spreading until it contacts and breeches the steel containment-vessel wall.
The Sandia report characterizes these probabilities as “quite high.” It’s not straightforward to interpret these results in the context of the very complicated and uncertain situation at Fukushima. But they are a clear indication of a worrisome vulnerability of the Mark I containment should the core completely melt and escape the reactor vessel.
CNN reporting that the No. 3 reactor was not damaged in the explosion, FWIW.
In case anyone was getting bored:
Bird Flu
BBC just updated to eleven missing.
Is the smoke plume that dark because more debris was involved?
Wow, nice catch. Link to the study:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/contract/cr6920/cr6920.pdf
Wow, Prof Foland is right. Good catch, Irish Red.
A *big* step upwards for those in Japan.
Thanks to you both for sharing your expertise, and for your time.
I’ve been updating the post as we go. From 7 to 11 people missing; added Jim White’s before-after screen shots, and we’ve substituted a different video. More: missing people found? Added UCS analysis from comments; officials claiming reactor not damaged by the blast — but of course, the core may still be partially uncovered.
BBC at 830 PM Pacific:
“Japan’s Cabinet Minister says there is a low risk the explosion may have led to an uncontrolled release of radiation.”
From the twitters:
Really? The largest earthquake to hit Japan in more than a thousand years; a tsunami that has killed tens of thousands and wiped out huge amounts of critical infrastructure in the world’s third largest economy; 8 nuclear reactors in trouble, with two having already suffered explosions; hundreds of thousands of people evacuated; radiation levels rising; and now…highly pathogenic bird flu?
Wow.
At approx 749 PM Pacific BBC’s simultaneous translation of the Cabinet Minister’s live presser was:
“There is a low possibility that massive amounts of radiation have been leaked”
Meh, they spewed that bunk before too.
Edano (spokesperson) at 12:45 says pressure in vessel is stable and containment not damaged by explosion.
Over the last couple of days, Edano has not been caught out saying anything obviously wrong.
The color of smoke depends on a lot of things. It depends on the materials begin burned, their water vapor content, temperature, and completeness of combustion, among other things. Plus, the lighting and camera will affect the color in a video.
I would not draw any particular conclusions from the color.
I am not a particularly religious guy, but it would seem the Japanese have gone and pissed someone off pretty completely. Jeebus.
Dang it, I miss edit.
That should say, “water content”, the vaporization of that water then leads to water vapor in the smoke plume.
Did they also provide a translation from Executive-Speak to Reality-Speak?
How are they measuring the pressure? Where are the sensors, and why aren’t they damaged when the outer building gets blown off?
But do they even think about including the phrase “massive amounts of radiation” if they don’t really think there is a pretty good, if not total, chance that is exactly what happened? Seriously, if I was them, I am not sure I would immediately if I didn’t think that was the case.
I’m seeing it translated as “Regarding the blast at Unit 3, there is little possibility that a large amount of radioactive materials are released to the air”, which sounds a little better.
Cetaceans?
I think we just got our Executive-Speak translation.
“low probability” = “I’ve been told”
Not enough mention of them. I’m worried about their status.
Really terrible series of tweets regarding the threat of tsunami this morning (Japan time). Must have been truly scary for an hour or so because this was happening right when the explosion happened.
Quotes:
“Another tsunami is expected to reach the northern Pacific coast of Japan in the next few minutes.”
“NHK: SEA RECEDING IN AOMORI, TSUNAMI COULD BE COMING. RESIDENTS OF HACHINOHE TOLD TO EVACUATE.”
” NHK: TSUNAMI SPOTTED OFF COASTS OF IWATE, FUKUSHIMA. GET AWAY FROM THE COAST, HEAD TO HIGH GROUND.”
“Radio reports Tsunami is coming to the costal areas in Iwate, Aomori, Fukushima, etc. Run! Run!”
“Expert advice on tsunami survival given in this article: http://bit.ly/eoteYR But near Iwate coast now, you should be moving, not reading.”
“The Meteorological Agency says it does not anticipate a tsunami in northern Japan.”
Harrowing.
“To repeat: Expert says to “escape vertically.” Climb something — building, pedestrian bridge, even a car. But get UP.”
During a melt down there is a tipping point, after which you can no longer stop it.
If 90% of the core was exposed of any significant amount of time…
I don’t think it is possible to halt it.
Thanks phred.
Heh, doesn’t sound that much better; they are still using that key phrase that you just don’t use unless there is some reason to think you need to. Hope I’m wrong on that, and I probably am, but just saying….
Twitter 14 minutes ago:
TheBradBlog Brad Friedman
RT @norishikata: At Unit 3 of Fukushima Power Plant I, after the blast, Central Control Room is now confirmed to continue to function fine.
Translations appearing at Kyodo are consistent with translations from Kirk and 4cdave.
“Prospect of spread of mass amounts of radioactive substances is small”
or something like that.
Sensors seem to be a problem. I’ve seen several reports now which indicate that pressure and water level sensors in the reactor are unreliable/not working. These reports were in reference to #3, if I remember correctly.
Twitter 3 minutes ago:
TheBradBlog Brad Friedman
“AP journalists felt the explosion 25 miles (40 kilometers) away.” http://wapo.st/ghc96E #Fukushima #JPQuake
Specific radiation level reports from the Fukushima plant:
“On Monday, radiation at the plant’s premises rose over the benchmark limit of 500 micro sievert per hour at two locations, measuring 751 micro sievert at the first location at 2:20 a.m. and 650 at the second at 2:40 a.m., according to the report.
The hourly amounts are more than half the 1,000 micro sievert to which people are usually exposed in one year.
The maximum level detected so far around the plant is 1,557.5 micro sievert logged Sunday.”
Not to worry. Every time I talk with people, I assure them there is little possibility gravity will be suspended.
Helps break the ice.
Twitter 6 minutes ago:
Japanese spokesman says no marked change in radiation level after reactor blast; control room remains intact – Kyodo http://bit.ly/f3aJP6
This is the one with radiation levels 1,000 times background, I’m assuming.
Are there separate control rooms for each reactor unit at Fukushima?
DStraussTheHill Daniel Strauss
by kate_sheppard
Wow, a survivor of the Tsunami was found floating nine miles from the coast but his wife was swept away by the storm. See video http://bit.ly/eQOOGT
lobster…
as I had said in the former post:
I think the key phrase for me from the llrc site was:
“reassurances being issued now by official sources and by apologists for the nuclear industry are exactly the same as those issued 25 years ago, at the time of Chernobyl. RISKS WERE UNDERSTATED, as shown by subsequent epidemiological studies.”
How else can we understand the conflicting messages coming out from various sources beside the very significant fact that it must be absolute chaos considering all that has happened there!
I don’t know.
Following 4cdave’s trail, I found this, NUREG 1150:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1150/v1/sr1150v1part-2.pdf
which describes in some detail modeling of the failure of a BWR core. The 42% chance of failure is averaged over all possible core-damage scenarios. However, in principle we know which one we’re in: seismic damage coupled with total loss of cooling and power. The probability of containment failure could be higher or lower than 42%, and NUREG 1150 gives some insight into that.
Two notes in particular:
“Loss of offsite power occurs followed by a
subsequent failure of all onsite ac power. The
diesel generators fail to start because of failure
of all the vital batteries. Without ac and
dc power, all core cooling systems (including
HPCI and RCIC) and all containment heat
removal systems fail. Core damage begins in
approximately 1 hour as a result of coolant
boiloff.”
And from the conclusion:
“Also presented in these displays of containment failure information
is evidence that there is a high probability of early
containment failure during external events such as
fire and earthquakes. Specifically, the seismic
analysis indicates that the conditional probability
of early containment failure from all causes, i.e.,
direct containment structural failure or related
failure from the effects of a core damage event,
could be as high as 0.9.”
0.9 means 90%.
Lots of reasons to wonder about this. What would the impact on units 1 and 2 be if unit 3 gets worse?
Units 1 and 2 need a great deal of human attention for the next few weeks. If one unit goes, do the chances that all three will go increase dramatically? Or (and I say this with deep respect for the onsite personnel) does the number of worker casualties go up instead?
O/T: Greg Mitchell at the Nation tweets that Anonymous has released the first set of BoA documents as promised.
GregMitch Greg Mitchell
by CraneStation
Anonymous-linked group just released Part I of its promised BOA leak. http://bit.ly/hBan6Z
Ooof.
Does the analysis adjust the probabilities over time. E.g., given the number of hours/days we’re into this, does it become more/less likely?
They have millions of citizens scared, hungry, injured, tired, emotionally spent…
I doubt if they are going to tell the truth, just the WHOLE truth…it would cause more widespread panic and fear
at some point that fact is going to unfortunately come home to roost…
we know that routine here in the States…just not as significant as the sadness and magnitude of the events that the Japanese people are now facing!
Disquieting.
So, it’s been a long time since I took statistics.
2 reactors, 90% chance of failure, each.
1-((1-0.9)**2) = 99% chance of at least one containment failure?
Miscellaneous data I’ve gathered via Japan’s NHK TV broadcast since the 11:01 a.m. (Japan time) Unit 3 explosion at the Fukushima Daiichi plant:
From TEPCo (owner/operator): Water level in Unit 3 at 11:35 a.m., Japan time, was at 1800 millimeters (per hesitant voiceover translation to English); possibly given as “minus” 1800 mm.
Within first hour after the explosion, NISA spokesman gave radiation level (somewhere at plant) as 20 microsieverts per hour at 11:44 a.m., Japan time. [Or "1/50th of a person's normal annual exposure."]
Chief Cabinet Secretary Edano subsequently reported the following numbers about F. Daiichi’s Unit 3, post-explosion.
The internal pressure of (I assume) the concrete containment structure (around the metal reactor vessel) was at 380 kilopascals at (about) 11:18 a.m., Japan time, and was at 360 kilopascals at 11:55 a.m.
And Edano reported that inside Unit 3 (he mentioned a specific location for both, but I didn’t note it for the first measurement), at 11:37 a.m. the radiation level was at 50 microsieverts. At the entranceway to Unit 3 at 11:44 a.m., the radiation level was at 20 microsieverts.
Hence the importance of the seawater gambit.
The report doesn’t go into that level of detail; the answer to that question is sitting in someone’s logbook (and have been for the last 20 years.)
I understand the 90% to be an overall, “if you find yourself in this situation, by the time all is said and done, 90% is the chance that you find the containment fails somewhere along the way.”
If the failure probabilities are uncorrelated, yes.
They are likely to be somewhat correlated, as they both went through the same seismic events. That actually keeps it closer to the 90%.
Yeah. looks right to me. Lovely.
Here’s another video, closer view.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_N-wNFSGyQ
the sound effects appear to be added.
Pressure data!!!!!!!!!!!
360 is really, really good news, it’s about 3.6 atmospheres. A catastrophic rupture would have meant it would be at 1.0 atmospheres. This is why they think things are intact.
Why did you assume it was the outer containment and not the reactor vessel?
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/nhk-world-tv
Russia Today tweets 12 minutes ago:
RT_com RT
At least 11 people reported injured in blast at Japan’s Fukushima nuke plant – TEPCO #fukushima #japan #tsunami
Russia Today tweets 3 minutes ago:
RT_com RT
Tokyo Electric Power Co. confirms that new blast at Fukushima did not damage container of No. 3 reactor #fukushima #japan #tsunami
Wow. They’re venting steam when the pressures are under 4 atmospheres? Or that’s what they let it drop down to after venting?
Based on the correct math. You still have two independent events, even though correlated. If you buy three chances in the same lottery, your odds of winning any individual # remain identical. You’ve just played the exact same odds three times. Pretty sure, but statistics of probability are weird. After all, we have an event here that only a few days ago was a vanishing possibility, a “thousand year event”, occurring a mere forty years after commissioning this plant…
Not sure if this was already planned or a result of the quake:
PleasureEllis Pleasure Ellis
by TurtleWoman777
Japans evacuates space station control center: NASA has taken over control of Japan’s portion of the Internation… http://bit.ly/gM1ad0
Yes, it is. So the control room might be functioning fine but one has to wonder what kind of shape the people working there are in after some 70 hours since the cooling system failure.
They just reported Tokyo stock markets down 6-7% at opening.
The 90% seems to include failure due to containment structural damage – that does not seem to have occurred here so the probability would have to have that piece backed out.
The reactor is at extremely high temperature/pressure.
They wouldn’t need a gauge to detect a rupture.
First, let me say, 750 uS / hr is a lot, and I wouldn’t stay in such a region any longer than necessary.
For perspective, 750 uS/hr means basically you’re taking a CT scan every day you work there(assuming guys there are working 16 hour days.) It’s a substantial amount, but it’s not “OMG everyone in the control room is about to die”
Anyone exposed directly to any of the releases or explosions would be the ones to worry most about.
I assumed that Edano meant the containment structure (without noting the specific language he used), because I’ve vaguely grasped (from reading arclight’s tweets about how the “suppression chamber,” etc., works in this type of reactor) that the reactor vessel itself automatically vents its excess pressure into the containment structure (or into water for that purpose perhaps segregated inside that structure), and that a manual venting of the surrounding containment structure is/has been the challenge and a necesssary step when its pressures have mounted too high, causing the shut-down of various automatic cooling systems, and, in the worst case, risking the concrete containment’s structural integrity.
But those assumptions aside, I don’t in fact know whether Edano was referring to the reactor vessel itself or to the surrounding concrete containment strucuture, when he reported those “internal pressure” measurements (I believe he reported only that one set of pressure numbers).
Presumably, you mean they wouldn’t need a gauge because there would be a very loud noise and lots of belching, rumbling and shaking with radioactive gases released in a massive explosion. Exactly as has happened twice now.
The pressure data says that the explosions happened somewhere that could be valved off. To me, at least, that is new (and important) information.
At what level of pressure does the pumping become too difficult? It was said this is a “bleed and feed” operation where they periodically need to lower the pressure in order to be able to pump in more seawater. Could periodic bleeds of vapor be what’s causing the variation in reported radiation measures?
Cold weather coming there from north through to the south
Bad news for all those people without shelter, food, heat…
Just round after round of terrible news for this nation!
Ahhh, good question I think.
Today the NYT stated:
“Blogs were churning with alarm. But officials insisted that unless the quake-damaged nuclear plants deteriorated into full meltdown, any radiation that reached the United States would be too weak to do any harm.”
I’d love to share your findings with them, but I fear they’d be dismissed as “churning”.
I am amazed at the quality of comments/posts here. Feels like I am in graduate school.
France advised French nationals to leave Tokyo because of the radiation risk a few hours ago. I thought that was an unnecessary step. However, France has a greater percentage of its energy supply from nuclear than any other major country in the world. I’ve been off reading NUREG documents like the ones linked above and I’m going to keep doing that for a while, but the gist of the story seems to be clear at this point. The odds are clearly against successful containment across all the distressed reactors. What an awful, slow-motion drama this is. Good night ‘pups.
These folks offer a revealing perspective which I feel is as truthful and close to reality as can be!
http://en.m4.cn/archives/5789.html
It seems to me the alarm level around here is pretty low in terms of “OMG we’re all gonna die.” I think we’ve established a pretty clear belief that effects in the US are likely to be minimal to none. And speaking for myself, I expect the effects in Japan to be sub-Chernobyl. That’s not good, it’s not even acceptable, but real panic-churners could surely raise much scarier specters.
Uh … winds from the north will take any releases to the south, over Tokyo.
Sadly, I’m afraid the staff there will suffer lethal exposure. As lobster and others have pointed out, they are true heroes.
Unfortunately the slow motion drama that is playing out there does not make it any less painful. The Japanese people really need our heartfelt concern and prayers.
Completely agree with your assessment re FDL’s coverage.
Nighty night, Lobster.
I think we have to realize that we already have containment failure at these reactors. The containment structures may not be damaged but the operators are not able to contain the contaminated gases or control when they must be released.
This is a runaway situation where the operators are responding to the damaged reactor not controlling the situation. Their choices are limited to releasing gases when the pressure rises too high or face real damage to the containment structure.
It appears that the attempts to cool the severly damaged reactors are showing little success and the venting may continue for an extended time.
Here’s and interesting consequence of the ongoing nuclear plant difficulties. Russia Today tweets 14 minutes ago:
RT_com RT
Philippines to suspend plans of completing country’s 1st nuke plant after Japan nuclear crisis at Fukushima – official #fukushima #japan
Germany and Switzerland are advising their nationals to leave. Germany places special emphasis on small children (WSJ).
As we wait for more news, here’s part of a report from Al Arabiya:
“The police chief in badly hit Miyagi prefecture said the death toll was certain to exceed 10,000 in his region.
In the Miyagi port town of Minamisanriku alone some 10,000 people were unaccounted for — more than half the population.
The national police agency said the confirmed death toll now stood at 1,597, but groups of hundreds of bodies were being found along the shattered coastline.
Many survivors were left without water, electricity, fuel or enough food, as authorities appeared overwhelmed by the monumental scale of the disaster.”
Read the rest at
http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2011/03/14/141405.html
The Washington Post has some discussion of the pools of spent fuel in the units. They are put at risk by the same difficulties with cooling that are affecting the live fuel:
“While Tokyo Electric said it also continued to deal with cooling system failures and high pressures at half a dozen of its 10 reactors in the two Fukushima complexes, fears mounted about the threat posed by the pools of water where years of spent fuel rods are stored.
At the 40-year-old Fukushima Daiichi unit 1, where an explosion Saturday destroyed a building housing the reactor, the spent fuel pool, in accordance with General Electric’s design, is placed above the reactor. Tokyo Electric said it was trying to figure out how to maintain water levels in the pools, indicating that the normal safety systems there had failed, too. Failure to keep adequate water levels in a pool would lead to a catastrophic fire, said nuclear experts, some of whom think that unit 1’s pool may now be outside.
“That would be like Chernobyl on steroids,” said Arnie Gundersen, a nuclear engineer at Fairewinds Associates and a member of the public oversight panel for the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant, which is identical to the Fukushima Daiichi unit 1.
People familiar with the plant said there are seven spent fuel pools at Fukushima Daiichi, many of them densely packed.
Gundersen said the unit 1 pool could have as much as 20 years of spent fuel rods, which are still radioactive.”
There was also discussion in the article that is confirmation of other reports that some of the units appear to be losing water:
“Japanese officials were also trying to figure out whether Friday’s earthquake, or the subsequent high pressures and temperatures in the reactors, had caused other cracks or leaks in reactors in the region. So far officials have not said that they have found any, though they have noted still unexplained losses of water in some reactor vessels.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/at-two-reactors-a-race-to-contain-meltdowns/2011/03/13/ABtdVDU_story_1.html
The following quote is taken from your link:
“A specialist medical team from the National Radiology Health Institute, flown by helicopter from Chiba to a field center 5 km from the No.1 Nuclear Plant, found radiation illness in 3 residents out of a sample group of 90. Overnight that number of civilian-nuclear “hibakusha” shot up to 19, but in other counts to 160. The evacuation zone has been further widened from 10 km to 20 km.”
160 people with radiation illness is a fact I had not read before and carries disturbing implications.
Per ABC, the carrier was 100 (nautical?) mi NE of Fukushima:
“Detectors aboard the USS Ronald Reagan also sounded while it was located 100 miles north east of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. Low amounts of radioactive materials have been released into the atmosphere as plant officials desperately try to prevent a meltdown of the nuclear cores at two of the plant’s reactors. ”
http://abcnews.go.com/International/uss-carrier-ronald-reagan-moved-detecting-radioactive-plume/story?id=13129409
I have a question. When they say twenty years of spent fuel rods are stored above the reactor, does that mean they are stored inside the steel alloy structure that contains the reactor core, or outside?
If outside, did they get blown up in the explosions?
Night all.
Exactly. The choice of words is built around emotional, political, legal and business containment, not conveying accurately and in real time events as they occur. Imagine Bill Daley as spokesman about a financial meltdown and you get the picture.
One phrase I heard this evening was that there was no “massive uncontrolled release” of radiation. As the list of Clintonesque qualifiers expands, it indicates they’re hiding true events.
Good question. One of the most common graphics shows a cutaway of the reactor building, the outer or dry shell, the concrete containment vessel, and the steel reactor vessel. It also shows a kind of gantry suspended from the ceiling of the reactor building, on the top right, used for moving materiele and fuel. It shows also at the top right a fuel storage area. It’s inside the reactor building, but outside the other structures. If that indeed contains fuel, it would have been directly affected by these two explosions.
I think the team here has combed much of the English media coverage and filtered it for obvious inconsistencies, factual errors and incorrect use of jargon. It’s also corrected for the intentional understatements of political, business or industry officials who have an interest in downplaying risks or the scope of damage. And they’ve been sensitive about the concerns of people directly affected by these events. Great job.
As Jonathan Hari at the Independent tweeted yesterday, kudos to these plant and emergency service workers. They continue to go in and fight fires, rescue others, and operate machinery amid chaos, exhaustion, personal loss. They face possible and sometimes certain death. Our thoughts and thanks go out to them and their families.
On a replay, I heard more:
Cabinet Secretary Edano, according to the English translation voiceover, said he was relaying the “container vessel’s pressure”, and after giving the numbers (the first one was taken at 11:13 a.m.) concluded by saying “so the internal pressure is stabilized.”
Also, the first radiation measurement he gave was from the “service hall,” and I believe the second, 11:44 a.m., measurement may actually have been from the outside entrance to the plant, at Monitoring Post #6 (based on a TEPCo press release).
Very unfortunately, a serious loss of cooling seems to have just developed in Unit #2 of the F. Daiichi plant, to add to the problems in Units 1 & 3. Water loss is apparently now occurring in the core of Unit 2, per breaking news in Japan reported by the BBC.
Scarecrow you are certainly living up to your username.
My understanding (I’m not a nuker pro) is that the amount of DISTANCE between Japan and USA is a diffusion method for the radiation, be it Uranium or Plutonium.
Aside from many recent threads worried about us being poisoned here on left coast . . . . . it’s NOT being presented or documented for Japan’s failures to amount to CHernobyl’s failures and ITS winds over Europe.
I wonder why many FDL’ers are spinning this that a ways.
N I’m anti nuker too . . . not another one till they are proven safer . . .
But i don’t think we is gonna die here in USA from Japanese melts . . .
I AM open to ideas, though . . . most I’ve read are rather, frightened.
Lack of good science education or not paying attention in school/college plus being exposed/indoctrinated in a victim mentality like the government is supposed to take care of you and protect you from big evil corporations.
From ABC News:
“The aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan and other US Navy ships in the waters off the quake zone in eastern Japan were repositioned after the detection of a low-level radiation plume from the troubled Fukushima nuclear plant located 100 miles away.”
Hell, the “experts” were saying the half-life of the secondary radioactivity was short. What’s causing the reaction?
Based on their comments, I wouldn’t trust a fission reactor within 25,000 miles of me.
The government is supposed to protect us from the corporations. That is not a victim mentality, it part of their job.
I’m not really here, I’m asleep, or will be in a minute. Fresh off the tweets:
Kyodo: Fuel rods at No. 2 reactor of Fukushima No. 1 nuke plant now fully exposed.
Apparently, the explosion at #3 knocked out the cooling system at #2.
19 minutes later, Kyodo reports: “water level of 30 centimeters recovered at #2″
Kyodo
It is my understanding that all these reactors were scheduled for decommissioning in the very very near future – the Daiichi #1 in just two weeks. So this is even more tragic that the scheduled shut-down of these archaic plants did not get to proceed as scheduled.
That is why the other three reactors at Daiichi were already off line, and the #4 at Daini too. Another 4 months and they all would have been shut down.
It is also too bad that the safer double loop cooling design was not put into these plants after TMI. But of course, that would mean admitting that the single-loop design these plants have is “unsafe”. Which it obviously is.
Seems like a lot of stuff happens this way and we need to figure out a way to talk about this and find a way to deal with it also. The design was upgraded when it was realized that there was a better way to do it – after an accident. But you can’t go back and fix the older one because then you “admit liability” and get sued. So the bad old design stays out there and another “accident” happens. People die. This is the same crap that happened with the Ford Explorer. The engineers knew it had a design flaw that caused it to roll-over. But fixing it would “admit liability” so the lawyers told them not to do anything. More people died. Hospitals and doctors do this all the time too. Cover up mistakes instead of learn from them because of the “admitting liability” thing.
We’ve go to get past this!
I’m not saying it would have helped here – this was a perfect storm of a 9.1 earthquake, a huge tsunami, the age of the plants, maybe it was just too much for any design to have made it through this catastrophe.
But what if? What if at some time in the last 20 years, GE and the Utility that owns the plants had changed the cooling system to a double-loop system? What if? The changes would have all been exterior to the containment vessel, – mostly piping, a few more pumps, a few more valves, a lot more safety.
What if?
Poor Japs can’t get a break. We nuked ‘em in WWII and now we’re nuking them again with that GE designed crap.
“short half-life” is a relative term when discussing radioactive elements. If the primary element has a half-life of say 4.5 billion years (actual half-life of U-238), and the secondary element has one of just 234,000 years (actual half-life of U-234), that is quite short now isn’t it?
There are certain decay products of U-238 that have very short half-life numbers – some of them as short as 1 minute or less (Proactinium 234 – 1 minute, Polonium 214 – 160 microseconds) and a few that are measured in a few days or weeks so the author of the paper was making a true statement.
Context is everything however, and it would be interesting to see just what elements the author was discussing since there are quite a few decay products that result from U-238.
Skepticdog, you really need to also read all the comments on this thread and the previous one – the explanation for the heat/reaction that you are questioning has been explained multiple times. The fuel rods, while the reaction has been “shut down” but the insertion of the control rods, take time to “cool down”. Water – lots and lots of it is required to get this cooling process under way and to keep it underway. If there is no water and the fuel rods are exposed to the air – they heat up again. This is not “secondary radioactivity” it is the primary element decaying. It takes several days to get the fuel rods cooled down enough, but even then – the control rods must remain in place – and the fuel rods must be submerged in water. Even “spent” fuel rods must remain in pools of water – otherwise they start heating up and fires and explosions can result.
And that is something that we are worrying about now also since the storage ponds at these facilities are above the containment vessels near the roofs of the buildings. Two of those buildings have now exploded. The whereabouts of the spent fuel rods are unknown and whether they are still in water or not.
The radiation levels that have been reported in the control room on site are not enough to have caused radiation sickness to anyone yet even if they’ve been on site continuously since the earthquake.
Extrapolate that to the surrounding areas, and I don’t see that it’s consistent that civilians afield are getting radiation sickness. I believe that even with Chernobyl, nobody offsite had radiation sickness.
So it’s likely this report is somehow wrong. If it’s actually right, disturbing is an understatement.
The reports describing secondary radioactivity emissions with short half-lives were talking about nitrogen effluent in the early stages of the accident. Radioactive nitrogen has a half life of a few seconds and thus is not a health concern.
The elements that are health problems are cesium, iodine and any actinides.
I just want to flag again that the radiation levels reported onsite at the reactors, on the USS Ronald Reagan, and the reports of civilians with radiation sickness, are essentially impossible to reconcile with each other. I don’t see how they can all be right.
Good morning Prof Foland.
This morning I’m looking for reports any of:
* cesium, iodine and actinide detection
* specific radiation levels
* whether unit #2 reactor building explodes (I expect it will based on reports of exposed fuel rods this morning + ongoing seawater injection)
* interaction effects of trying to control problems at units 1, 2 and 3
* reports from Fukushima Daini (has external power, but had early cooling problems), Onagawa (had turbine fire + radiation detection yesterday), Tokai (cooling problems, 1/3 cooling generators functioning)
* changes to evacuation orders issued by Japanese government
If the leaks from the containment are still small (on the order of 1% as reported by UCS over the weekend) then a local random puff of air could be quite a bit more radioactive than most of the air. This could contribute to highly intermittent radiation measurements.
NHK TV reporting some areas had tsunami waves of 15 meters. Wow — could be a mistranslation, I guess.
Live feed via TPM.
Live-blogging report from NHK report on Unit 2:
* Coolant devices have failed (old news)
* Emergency situation declared (old news)
* At 5:16 water level had fallen so tops of fuel rods were exposed
* At 6:06 PM safety relief valve (SR valve) at top of pressure vessel was opened, lowering pressure in reactor
* Reason to lower pressure: would facilitate introduction of seawater
* At 8:05 PM reinjection of sea water began
They showed figures and schematics during that press conference which made it clear that they are injecting sea water into the pressure vessel. That is what the official indicated.
I have been wondering if the seawater was being injected into the concrete containment or the pressure vessel itself. This spokesman pointed directly to the pressure vessel and said they were injected sea water into it.
Assuming this is true, this is actually going to confuse matters, because if this is going on, then the steam will contain cesium and iodine and so forth (in small amounts) even if the containment has not been breached. So we (out here on the interweb) can infer less from radiation reports than I had hoped. This forces a reinterpretation, for example, of the NYT reports that the plume measured by the US military “presumably” has Cs-137 and I-131. This would in fact be expected under the circumstances described in the press conference whether or not the containment was breached. Now what we have to watch for is more quantified assessments of the radiation measurements.
Post-conference discussion: fuel rods may or may not be getting fully covered.
Edano now (recorded statement): stabilization will occur if the sea water is getting in and fuel rods are covered.
NHK report:
Russia reporting (from the west, upwind) hourly radiation tests of the atmosphere. As expected, all are negative (no radiation detected from Japan).
Kyodo (21:53): Two meters of water successfully added to Unit #2.
This is good news/bad news. It is good to have the water in there of course, but this means that the water was too low for some period of time and (in my opinion) one should therefore expect hydrogen release and an explosion at Unit 2. Official position from Edano is that this is unlikely.
Scarecrow has a Monday AM update…
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, two of the greatest acts of terrorism in human history.
Radiation could, might be blown across the ocean and somehow harm us.
Yes, the awkward dance the corporate media is engaged in: how does one talk about radiation and Japan while evading the fact that we dropped not one but two Atomic bombs on these people!
I know, “it was war”; any and all acts of terrorism commented while wearing official state uniforms do not count. But this act of being the first and only country in human history to unleash the destructive power of a mini sun on men women and children
Puts us a apart from all others. So, when you cold technocrats talk of ration possiblly being blown across the ocean to harm us remember that cold hearted bitch Enola Gay.
Paul Tibbets named the plane after his dear mother: to his dieing day (a few years back) Tibbets had “no” regrets!
Oh, not knocking new information. It’s useful for many reasons.
Does a hydrogen explosion look the same as the rupture/explosion of a high pressure vessel?
And if hydrogen outside the vessel exploded in both cases, wouldn’t a rupture due to that explosion produce a second subsequent explosion?
Yeah, I can see that as being a good idea for many reasons. The overall disaster has left Japan incredibly resource strapped(food, water, electric, hospital space).
They have to vent the gases, but each time they risk another hydrogen explosion that takes out more nuclear workers. How long will it be before they run out of nuclear workers willing to risk their lives to do the job? It’s doubtful they can expect much help from foreign workers because few will have Japanese language skills.
Each time another plant loses cooling ability, it means even more replacement workers will be needed.
In the second clip shown here, one sees a bright flash, then the dark cloud rising straight up. After that, one sees a gray cloud close to the ground.
In the first explosion (at Unit 1), something shoots straight up (a metal fragment?), penetrating the top of the structure. Then, one sees a gray cloud (pulverized concrete, most likely) spread horizontally along the ground. There is no bright flash in the video of this explosion. That could be due to the vantage point (it’s not visible in the first clip of the later explosion, either); however, the lack of a black cloud suggests there was no ignition.
There’s an interesting article at The Scotsman wherein a Japanese nuclear plant designer says the plant was not designed for anything close to the current pressures. He also says the exclusion zone is far too small.
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/world/Japan-Crippled-nation-on-nuclear.6733523.jp
In what world? The government in this country protects the corporations from the citizens.
No kidding. If you read very, very carefully you’ll see the words chosen were ‘is supposed to’.
Blah.
Thanks, lobster.
While we keep our fingers crossed, as plant workers struggle through the night to get seawater into/around the core of Unit 2 of F. Daiichi, despite misleading gauges, unexpectedly closed vents, no off-site power, concusive explosions, 4 (of 5) malfunctioning/damaged pumps, extreme exhaustion, etc., etc., here’s an excellent English-language technical report from NISA that I just found through a twitter link, that contains hard data about the measurements taken and developments inside Units 1-3, as of 7:30 p.m. last evening, Japan time (or about ten hours ago), Monday night, March 14th:
http://www.nisa.meti.go.jp/english/files/en20110315-1.pdf
Hopefully Professor Foland and others will see this, and can better interpret it for us, but the information in that document (see Page 2, “Major Plant Parameters”) seems to confirm that the “internal pressure” reading (in kilopascals) that I gave in an earlier comment above was for the “Pressure(?) Containment Vessel” (PCV) of Unit 3, and was not the “Reactor Pressure,” which is also listed there (in MPa, not KPa, units).
Also, the “1800 mm” water level measurement I noted above probably was “minus 1800 mm” and this document seems to indicate that the measurement reveals the distance from “the top pellet” (of the fuel rods) to the top of the coolant water. [If 1800 mm equals six feet, that would be a water level covering about half the length of the 12-foot fuel rods.] At 7:30 p.m. Monday in Japan, this document states that the core water level in Unit 3 was minus 1900 mm, and also minus 2300 mm. [There are both (A) and (B) entries listed, whose difference I don't grasp.] The coolant water levels in the cores of Units 1 and 2 as of 7:30 p.m. Monday evening are simply stated to be “Downscale” twice – (A) and (B) – which I can’t interpret.
The website at which this document, among others, is posted, and where future updates should appear, is here:
http://www.nisa.meti.go.jp/english/
Here’s hoping that the hole created in the reactor building wall of Unit 2, by Monday’s explosion in Unit 3, does help to vent into the atmosphere the hydrogen gas released by the manual venting of Unit 2′s concrete containment structure, explosion-free (hydrogen gas which, I assume, operations with off-site power would be able to use electricity to send through filters and up the exhaust stack, instead of allowing to pool atop/inside the building).
The linked document also gives precise radiation measurements around the F. Daiichi plant, listing the location of monitoring posts and wind speeds, etc., and has quite a bit of related information about sustained injuries and radiation exposure in and out of both Fukushima nuclear plants.
LOL. Very true.