
This cutaway diagram shows the central reactor vessel and thick concrete containment in a typical boiling water reactor of the same era as Fukushima Daiichi 1 (image: www.world-nuclear-news.org)
Japanese responders continue to battle rising heat and pressure and falling water levels in the damaged reactors, Units 1 and 3, at Fukushima I (Daiichi) Nuclear Power Station.
But the big news is that Unit 2 lost cooling and the core was left uncovered, allowing a likely partial meltdown. There has not yet been an explosion at Unit 2, and they’re trying to relieve pressure to prevent that. More on that below.
And there is concern about the condition of spent fuel rods in pools located above the reactor. They too must be continuously cooled, but the cooling systems are also disabled.
The New York Times interviewed US industry and regulatory officials who had been briefed on the Japanese efforts and reports several interesting facts mentioned in FDL threads here but not previously summarized. Also note the photo at the top of the Times’ article, showing the damage to the Unit 3 reactor building from yesterday’s explosion.
– In addition to the reactors themselves, they’re worried about the condition of the spent fuel holding ponds, which are inside the reactor buildings. The spent fuel has ceased fission reactions, but residual radioactive decay continues and must be continuously cooled.
. . . there was deep concern that spent nuclear fuel that was kept in a “cooling pond” inside one of the plants had been exposed and begun letting off potentially deadly gamma radiation.
– The reason they not only lost the back-up generators when the tsunami hit, but can’t easily replace them with portable generators brought to the site is because the connection points, with the generators, were completely flooded by the tsunami.
[The tsunami] easily overcame the sea walls surrounding the Fukushima plant. It swamped the diesel generators, which were placed in a low-lying area, apparently because of misplaced confidence that the sea walls would protect them.
– The core in Daiichi Unit 1 suffered significant exposure when water levels fell:
While estimates vary, several officials and industry experts said Sunday that the top four to nine feet of the nuclear fuel in the core and control rods appear to have been exposed to the air — a condition that that can quickly lead to melting, and ultimately to full meltdown.
– Official reports of pressure readings inside the reactors are, as we’ve suspected, not necessarily reliable.
Workers inside the reactors saw that levels of coolant water were dropping. They did not know how severely. “The gauges that measure the water level don’t appear to be giving accurate readings,” one American official said.
– With all the normal/backup water cooling systems inoperable, the responders where attempting to inject sea water using fire-fighting equipment, but with limited success.
To pump in the water, the Japanese have apparently tried used firefighting equipment — hardly the usual procedure. But forcing the seawater inside the containment vessel has been difficult because the pressure in the vessel has become so great. . . . it was “not clear how much water they are getting in, or whether they are covering the cores.”
– The outer structure of the Daiichi units was reportedly designed to be blown away in an explosion, to relieve pressure but preserve the reactor vessel and containment structure inside.
The walls of the outer building blew apart, as they are designed to do, rather than allow a buildup of pressure that could damage the reactor vessel.
We’ll be updating as needed.
Update I: (h/t lobster) Last night (our time) the core at Unit 2 became uncovered when sea water cooling efforts failed for a time, so we’ve got another meltdown in the works:
Kyodo (22:15) reporting Unit 2 fuel rods were fully exposed for about 2.5 hours.
This would be Fukushima Daiichi Unit 2, where the fuel rods were completely exposed for a time when the fire equipment pumping sea water into the reactor ran out of fuel. (h/t lobster)
Fuel rods at the quake-hit Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant’s No. 2 reactor were fully exposed at one point after its cooling functions failed, the plant operator said Monday, indicating the critical situation of the reactor’s core beginning to melt due to overheating. . . .
The seawater injection operation started at 4:34 p.m., but water levels in the No. 2 reactor have since fallen sharply with only one out of five fire pumps working. The other four were feared to have been damaged by a blast that occurred in the morning at the nearby No. 3 reactor.
The utility firm said a hydrogen explosion at the nearby No. 3 reactor that occurred Monday morning may have caused a glitch in the cooling system of the No. 2 reactor.
. . . To prevent a possible hydrogen explosion at the No. 2 reactor, TEPCO said it will look into opening a hole in the wall of the building that houses the reactor to release hydrogen.
Apparently they only have one operable fire pump available to pump sea water at Daiichi, so they’re focused now on Unit 2, even though Units 1 and 2 also need sea water.
Update 2, 12:00 p.m. EDT: Reports now indicate that despite efforts to inject sea water into Unit 2′s reactor, the core became exposed again. Officials are now conceding that partial meltdowns of exposed fuel are likely occurring at all three units at Fukushima Daiichi.



169 Comments

Sorry to go OT, but here’s Monday morning’s lesson in hypocrisy, children.
WI Repub lives outside district with mistress, says wife
You should write a diary about it instead of going off-topic in the first comment. Just my opinion anyway.
Kyodo (22:15) reporting Unit 2 fuel rods were fully exposed for about 2.5 hours.
[Comment: Units 1 and 3 suffered hydrogen explosions a few hours after similar reports. The explosions have not resulted in obvious containment failure.]
NHK reports that Korean TV now devoted to full-time coverage of situations in Japan.
NHK reports Korean Parliament had emergency meeting. Redirecting LNG shipments for Korea to Japan at request of Japan.
NHK reports Korean radiation monitoring is extensive (70 independent stations).
11,000 South Korean exchange students were living in the affected area (Sendai specifically mentioned)
Extensive Korean praise for calm and orderly response in Japan.
LNG == liquified natural gas.
This is going to get real fucking serious, pups.
Rain and snow forecast in the Sendai area over the next 24 hours. The survivors must be having a tough time. Temperatures < freezing at night from Wed-Sat.
Comment: Full exposure of the rods for 2.5 hours would lead to at least partial meltdown of the core.
They are not actually sure that the rods were fully exposed because of possible problems with the water level gauge.
NHK: Fukushima reactor designer and current official Akira Omoto believes pressure vessel in Unit 1 must be leaking.
Discussion of how fuel rods came to be uncovered in unit 2: (emphasis added)
dangerous technology.
and should not be built again.
I agree with twolf1. Please don’t go OT in the first comment. And that report is old news anyway. I saw it a couple of days ago.
Geez, this nuclear reactor stuff is truly terrifying.
Thanks, lobster, for the translation, and for your input to these posts.
Thank you, Scarecrow.
Details on post-blast @ Unit 2 from WNN (indicates pressure vessel still has integrity among other things):
thanks, I’ll add that.
I’ve pointed this out before and I’m glad somebody with an actual platform is bringing it up. This was a foreseeable situation in the country that made the word “tsunami” and is little different from BP installing a broken blow-out preventer, knowing that it wouldn’t work if needed. Similarly, somebody decided that a tsunami of that magnitude was unlikely enough to make spending a few extra pennies to put the generators on towers or concrete pads wasn’t economical. Using the US model like they do though will certainly mean that an architect will be scapegoated while the people on the board of directors who insisted on ground level emergency generators as a cost savings will get off scot free.
Well, I’m going to have to do some work soon! The whole situation is riveting.
This reads like a cascading series of failures and there seems to be no effective (yet) means to arrest the cascading failures.
All the safety interventions seem to be not cutting it. I don’t know how much dangerous radiation would be released in the worst case scenario ie complete inability to arrest the degradation of the reactor, but we certainly need to be hearing what that is and the implications for the local area and the down wind area.
Why are we not hearing that?
New reactor designs are much safer.
If you’re truly sorry to go ot, it occurs to me that you wouldn’t go off topic on the very first comment on thread, after thread, after thread. Just sayin’.
Thanks, I was going to say this but did not feel qualified. What is the status of the rods?
I suspect that those obvious failures will be treated differently in Japan than they were in this country. Some heads may roll — literally.
Nope. It already is but it’s probably going to get catastrophic or even apocalyptic in the near future.
Exactly. I think the Gipper would call it “the magic of the marketplace”.
This was a once-in-a-thousand-year event, which was considered too rare to plan for. As was pointed out in a previous thread, only 40 years after construction, the once-in-a-thousand-year earthquake happened.
As we come to terms with what these kinds of odds imply for nuclear systems in the US, there will be a very complicated discussion.
As pointed out in a Scientific American blog linked in a previous thread, one is certainly led to wonder about the thousands of nuclear weapons which remain on a hair-trigger alert even today. 1000:1 odds against accidents and mistakes are not very comforting today.
This keeps reminding me that a recent job loss by a preparer of environmental impact statements surprised me less after she wanted to catch water by setting a pail at the end of the carport, where it would have had to run sideways actually to fall into the pail.
It seems to me that the notional of “containment” is a somewhat a inaccurate to say the least. They like to discuss “closed loop” systems and so forth meaning that the circulating water does not come in contact with anything dangerous though the use of heat exchangers.
However all the devices are mechanical and have piping which PENETRATES these “containments”. All of them have conduits for wiring and so forth. All penetrations, reinforced and strong as they may be are potential fail points where contaminates can escape.
I think containment is more a term of art here and not to be taken too literally.
The reactor isn’t the problem Mr. Science. When the plant went off the grid, the (ground level) emergency generators kicked in to provide water circulation for cooling, until they were swamped by the tsunami. And it doesn’t matter how “safe” the design is, how are you going to prevent overheated reactors from producing hydrogen? Going to legislate a change in the laws of physics Bobby (Jindal)?
You got that right.
Ah, not surprised; we’ve all been wondering about how accurate/effective the pressure and other gauges would be after the quakes, and especially in the Daiiche units after the explosions.
This is really nonsense… 1 in a 1000. You don’t know if this will happen today of in 1000 days or 1000 years or whatever the metric is.
The facts of plate tectonics is 100% certain and the siting and construction of the plants was ill advised and not adequate for what would have and likely will happen again… on the ring of fire.
MSNBC and CNN reporting about the Ronald Reagan sailing through a radiation cloud and being moved further away from the coast and receiving a month’s radiation in one hour. Also, they are now running crawlers regarding the possibility of radiation sickness..Last night, Anderson Cooper asked producer on the phone if they could get he and his crew out of their location due to circumstances of reactors….he was scared. Just updating what MSM is saying. Sorry if all of this is already up in the links or on another post.
I am not aware of any prepared reports which describe the consequences of three or more simultaneous reactor meltdowns. The people on the ground are buying a lot of time while other people try to figure out how to respond to what is going to happen tomorrow, next week and next month.
It is possible to calculate the total radiation release that is possible using the links from Argonne National Lab that I posted very early — maybe the first thread. That number would be big and scary. What more do you need to know? What is the value of explicitly talking about those numbers in this forum? I’m not against doing the calculation — I posted the links. However, there are many ways to die, and these include hyper-panicked reactions to potential threats.
FYI: Pentagon spokesman said to Chuck Todd that Bradley Manning is not sleeping naked anymore, and Todd asked him if he is still being treated the same way, and he said that he is not. Hmmm, I thought that pretty interesting…Jane’s gettin’ to ‘em.
It is not nonsense. It is a rational, mathematical observation.
Of course, tomorrow cannot be predicted. Everyone knows that. We look at the past, understand the details as best we can, and plan for tomorrow. I’d rather people who are designing large-scale engineering projects proceed that way than by just praying.
There are a lot of people on this planet, and the number is growing. Would you prefer to starve, freeze or kill them in some other way? No? Then you have to try to predict what is going to happen next.
I am not defending the placement of the reactor, the design of the reactor, etc. But I also do not agree with the idea that rational thought is to be abandoned exactly when we need it most.
Jane and Glenn Greenwald, who has been all over the Bradley Manning story, with post after post. Kudos to both.
And now back to this morning’s terrifying news.
Egg on Obama’s face:
Obama started to push for off shore drilling and bam… BP disaster.
On Feb 16th, Obama says nuclear power is safe and we need to invest in it …. bam … we may have the worst disaster ever.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/02/obama-says-safe-nuclear-power-plants-are-a-necessary-investment.html
Was there a third explosion (at #2 ?)?
To be fair, the reactors that are failing were some of the first built. They are less safe than new designs.
Whether new designs are safe enough is a different question. I do not know the answer, and I have spent my career NOT working on fission.
that report also says that at the Daiichi station, they’ve only got one operable fire pump, so they’re focused on getting sea water into Unit 2, even though Units 1 and 2 also need it. Wow. My kingdom for a fire pump.
Post above about the House of Saud crushing opponents that threaten the financial sacred cause.
Obama simply doesn’t have the scientific knowledge or moral courage to make such decisions. That ought to be obvious by now. He would trade away the height of a protective wall for campaign contributions in the blink of an eye.
Unknown. Presumed to have at least partially melted.
I have seen no report of that. I have four live screens from Japan open right now…
Nothing is “safe” when the ground underneath drops away.
Talk about building your house on sand!
Besides, with the “regulatory” environment is the US now, who even knows what the gov says is true or just more lies until something like this occurs?
You’re missing the point I think. The reactors survived, it was poor placement of the emergency generators that caused the failure. But you’re right, this is dangerous technology and shouldn’t be pursued again but not for the reason you think, if I understand you. It shouldn’t be pursued because the next board of directors will decide that a safeguard is cost prohibitive or that the scenario that can overcome the cheaper system is so vanishingly unlikely that it’s not work the extra money that they could after all, be using for that new mansion. The problem is that whenever you are involved in something that has such an enormous potential for catastrophe, no safeguard is too expensive. But buy a few politicians, bribe a couple of regulators and then, presto! More profit for you! And look at it this way: If any member of that board of directors lives within 100 miles of that plant, then I’m Amelia Earhardt.
I do not know if this has occurred yet, but the TEPCO response to hydrogen explosion possibility at unit 2 is reasonable enough since these explosions are surely making things harder for the people on the ground:
Link from my 6:11 post here.
So much for containment
No explosion at Unit 2 yet. From the link in the update, we learn that the core was exposed for a while, they’ve resumed using a fire pump to get sea water into the core at Unit 2, and that they may create a hole in the outer reactor building to just let pressure have a steady escape. Literally drilling holes in the walls. High tech.
I put up a post this morning with details on some of the scandals in TEPCO’s past, as they directly relate to the current crisis. They have a history of falsifying data on cracks in containment vessels, and some of that history may have been on Daiichi Unit 3. Also, it appears that there may have been faulty gauges supplied by Toshiba to TEPCO which were used to monitor the coolant water. See above where Scarecrow points out that the Times reports that coolant water gauges are not working properly now.
Post: http://my.firedoglake.com/jimwhite/2011/03/14/tepco-has-scandal-plagued-past/
Okay, granted and I’m not denying it but once again, the reactors survived the quakes and resulting tsunami. It was poor placement of the emergency systems that failed. Those are the facts. I’m not pro nuclear for one reason: Because every board of directors, every CEO, every stockholder is much more interested in maximizing profit than safety.
“Before 2004, most geophysicists taught that only limited parts of the Ring of Fire could be capable of generating really giant earthquakes,” Antonio Piersanti, head researcher of the Rome-based Italian Institute of Geology and Vulcanology, said in an e-mailed statement. “After the Sumatra event and especially after this last event maybe we should seriously consider the possibility that any part of the Ring of Fire could generate a 9-plus earthquake,” Piersanti said.
Experts Say Radioactive Releases From Japanese Plants Could Last Weeks or Months
As the scale of Japan’s nuclear crisis begins to come to
light, experts in Japan and the United States say the country
is now facing a cascade of accumulating problems that suggest
that radioactive releases of steam from the crippled plants
could go on for weeks or even months.
The emergency flooding of two stricken reactors with seawater
and the resulting steam releases are a desperate step
intended to avoid a much bigger problem: a full meltdown of
the nuclear cores in two reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi
Nuclear Power Station. So far, Japanese officials have said
the melting of the nuclear cores in the two plants is assumed
to be “partial,” and the amount of radioactivity measured
outside the plants, though twice the level Japan considers
safe, has been relatively modest.
Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/world/asia/japan-fukushima-nuclear-reactor.html?emc=na
This is a hole in the wall of the building, not in the containment structure.
During the Gulf/BP disaster Oil Drum was the place to get commentary from industry insiders.
Is there a similar place for nuclear energy?
Thanks for the link. Also, the measurement gauges/equipment may have been damaged by the quakes and the explosions. There’s no way to know at this point.
The “containment structure” is fast becoming anything and everything that stands between the core and humanity.
Well, it ain’t the administration now, is it?
I have not found it. The WNN site does not have comments.
I am truly amazed at these reporters going over there at this time. I saw one walking thru a like of debris that looked like pick-up sticks with a smile on his face.
Cooper seems a bit saner if he wants to get the hell out of there
Crowley probably helped more than anybody
fast becoming
Shoot, I tried the “strikethrough” tag. Meant to say:
The “containment structure” is everything that stands between the core and humanity.
Was that necessary? Did it make you feel better?
I don’t want to argue, because I agree with the thrust of your argument.
However, the design I linked to does not require any secondary generators to remain cool in an event like this. It could still fail in other ways, but what we are seeing here would not have happened with that specific newer design.
They almost certainly live within 200 miles b/c Tokyo central is something like 150-170 miles away. Japan isn’t very big.
I’ve been watching The Union of Concerned Scientists, they don;t update on the weekends however, but they’ve got some stuff up now
http://www.ucsusa.org/
Meet the new boss …
Not meant in an argumentative way:
What should we do for energy right now? China is building many new coal plants every month. Coal with current technology -> global warming. Solar -> does not work well enough yet. Oil -> See: Deepwater Horizon. Nuclear fission -> Fukushima, Chernobyl, TMI. Nuclear fusion -> doesn’t work yet.
We need new ideas — ideas that work. Personally, I would like to see dramatic changes in consumption.
It’s not the design that failed it was the design specs. These reactors were designed to withstand a 7.9 earthquake, but were hit with a 8.9. It was a human failure to anticipate what may happen in the future and that does not seem to have improved since the 70s.
I said within 100 miles, very clearly, as I’m familiar with Nihon, it’s geography and it’s infrastructure.
As for the “new” reactors, the point is moot and irrelevant because A) new reactors were not in place, old ones were and B) there would just be some other safety feature that is found by the board of directors to be cost prohibitive in the quest to maximize profit. As I said, the reason I am anti nuclear power and the only reason I am is because people will reliably and consistently cut corners to save pennies.
Sorry… but…DUH
Not to you, but these “Big Brains”
Well, I’m still for dumping the money we waste on wars into fusion research and development but there are many people around here who have decided that’s a non starter, (presumably because we aren’t clever enough to overcome the engineering challenges) and solar power. Both of which would undeniably be much further along than they are had they, rather than slaughter, been funded.
Oh yeah, and I agree about dramatic changes in consumption. I try to do my part every day.
I’m liking solar more and more. Lower power density -> less potential for catastrophe and less likely to be dominated by one super-corporation.
Now a volcano has erupted in southern Japan:
http://www.ecanadanow.com/world/2011/03/14/japan-earthquake-possible-cause-of-volcano-eruption/
Worser and worser. What next?
From Kassandra’s link I noticed this pamphlet of two radioactive isotopes likely to be released from the Japanese nuclear power plants (not sure if this indicates there are not other isotopes).
The time for them to clear from the environment is weeks (in the case of radioactive Iodine-131 and 100 years for cesium.
http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/nuclear_power/explaining-japan-nuclear-reactor-disaster.pdf
“Iodine-131 has a half-life of 8 days meaning half of it will
have decayed after 8 days, and half of that in another 8 days, etc.
It is also volatile so will spread easily.”
Children, more so than adults, are at increased risk of thyroid cancer from absorbing the radioactive iodine which becomes concentrated in the thyroid gland. Taking potassium iodine tablets now can saturate the thyroid gland and help to prevent the radioactive iodine from being absorbed in the thyroid gland.
And leaving the area so that there is no additional exposure to radioactive iodine which can still damage DNA even if it is not being absorbed in the thyroid.
“Cesium-137 has a half-life of about 30 years, so will take
more than a century to decay by a significant amount.
Living organisms treat cesium-137 as if it was potassium,
and it becomes part of the fluid electrolytes and is
eventually excreted. Cesium-137 is passed up the food
chain. It can cause many different types of cancer.”
Cesium is not common in nature, and potassium is necessary for life, so there is no way to block potassium channels in the body in an effort to prevent cesium uptake. Not sure how effective this is as an antidote, but Prussian blue can be prescribed. The body excretes the cesium in the stool.
Locusts!
The volcano on Kyoto has been erupting off and on since January and isn’t associated with the earthquake,
Would you be pro-nuclear in a non-capitalist world? Or can I rephrase your concern to be “because every [body involved in the critical decisions] is much more interested in maximizing _personal gain_ than safety. I would agree with that. Adults are generally more selfish than I expect.
I think the answer has to be plentiful and highly decentralized energy sources + a more modest lifestyle than is currently the aim of most.
While I agree you have to pick a spot to design for, once-in-a-thousand-year event seems like a low threshold for something that could potentially kill hundreds of thousands.
Nighttime in Japan. I’ll come back later.
This Delaware pdf is not helpful, or at least agnostic, wrt cesium poisoning. Is/was Delaware thinking about installing nuclear power plants?
http://www.dhss.delaware.gov/dph/files/cesiumfaq.pdf
“Technical information for cesium
CAS Number: 7440-46-2
Chemical Formula: Cs
Carcinogenicity (EPA): Stable cesium – no information. There are no human studies that specifically associate exposure to radioactive cesium with increased cancer risk.
EPA: All radionuclides: 4 millirem per year
MCL (Drinking Water): No information.
OSHA Standards: None listed.”
I found this site. It seems to have posters and commneters that are in the know. It is clearly pro nuke, but it seems to have some useful information.
http://bravenewclimate.com/
Reading through the comments, I begin to suspect lobster of being a pro Tokyo Power trojan. This person is here to propagandize I think.
I haven’t gotten that impression, but I haven’t been following the comments real close.
So assuming you have some expertise, when did they become safer and what units should be shutdown and replaced? I’m assuming all units prior to 1990 should be replaced or should it be 2010? Also, how do you dismantle the old units safely?
If the new design is safer, shouldn’t we dismantle the old units?
Obama is just bad news.
I didn’t get it until this:
Note the careful pushing away of concerns about the greed of CEOs and boards of directors and making “all adults” responsible. And the next line sounds like it came straight out of brochures I get with my electric bill.
Say it with me: The. Plant. And. It’s. Reactors. Survived. The. Earthquake. Intact. It. Was. The. Tsunami. That. Caused. The. Damage.
Solar: if (big IF) we invested significant money in putting photovoltaics on every possible roof, if we invested in a smart and low-loss grid, if we fast-tracked large solar plants in compatible areas, we would see a fairly significant impact within a decade, maybe less.
Yes the technology is going to get better, more efficient, but get this ball rolling now.
Same with wind.
Several intriguing localized and centralized geothermal systems were proposed and researched back in the 70′s and then dropped like hot potatoes when oil went back down. Kick that off again.
We as a country need to get over the fear/revulsion of investing money into newer non-traditional energy systems.
How many times do we have to get hit in the head before we change where we stand? Sheesh!
I work in a chemical plant. You never trust a pressure gauge. They are all crap. You always need a redundant indicator.
“We need new ideas — ideas that work. Personally, I would like to see dramatic changes in consumption.”
I agree.
I wrote a paper in 1992 arguing that there would have to be something like 40-50 US plants closed by 2010 because of age-related issues. I was obviously underestimating the inertia in the system. Dismantling is not particularly unsafe. Long-term storage of the waste is a hard problem that has not been solved. There are no reactors operating in the US designed to shutdown without emergency backup power.
I disagree, but even if he were, he’s bringing very high quality, accurate, and accessible information.
If he were a “Tokyo Power trojan,” he wouldn’t be talking about “conservation,” or “decentralization and diversification.” Those are anti-nuke code words. Nukes, like coal are extremely high centralization of base load power generation.
Among other challenges, until battery technology improves, solar and wind will not imho be true base load replacements for coal and nuclear generation. As someone who hates coal, nukes, and natural gas, I hate saying that.
Enhanced geo thermal might be an option, but it’s a ways away and there are safety concerns about it too.
Apologies to you, if I was not sufficiently tactful. I value your comments.
I’m no such thing, Margaret. By plentiful and highly decentralized, I mean solar/renewable.
The point I was trying to make (rather badly, obviously) is that is the centralization of power in the hands of a few that makes this technology dangerous. You nailed the capitalist version of the problem, but the first and worst nuclear disaster so far was in the non-capitalist Soviet Union. That accident was not about profits. It was the result of concentration of power into the hands of a few.
Margaret, I don’t think Lobster is a trojan…the information provided has often been valuable and while the tone is sometimes moderate, I don’t get a troll vibe.
Thank goodness, we don’t need trolls in these threads. I noted one late in the last thread but it went back to it’s bridge I guess…
If there is any way to check how long I’ve been here, you’ll find I’ve been a contributing (financially) member since 2005. I just don’t post unless I have something to contribute and most people around here know a lot more about the topics we discuss than I do. I happen to know some physics.
Then it was the pinnacle of stupidity to build them without solving those problems first. Was it just assumed that they would be solved in a nebulous and always “somebody else’s problem” future?
The combination of monitoring Twitter, posting updates here, and discussing them is “state of the art” for this ongoing catastrophe. By posting tweets about what we are doing here, we may be able to draw a wider base for discussions, although I’m not sure that’s necessary or desirable since we are doing pretty well. We’ve got some legit people here.
One way we might improve the discussion here would be to initiate a series of diaries where each is devoted to a separate subject or issue. For example, last night before I signed off, I asked a question regarding the location and storage of the spent fuel rods, which have been described as being located above the reactor core. I wanted to know if they were inside or outside the steel alloy structure that contains the reactor core. Seems to me that where they are stored, how they are stored, and how they are cooled is an extremely important issue and it’s probably an appropriate subject for it’s own diary, as opposed to being addressed in a helter-skelter manner scattered throughout several threads without reaching a consensus of any sort.
It also may serve as a basis to segue into the g-normous subject of handling nuclear waste.
A very interesting link.
Okay, I never accused him of being a “troll” so let’s get past that right now.
Wrong:
Idaho Falls, Idaho January 1961 was the first and three mile island predates Chernobyl by 7 years. I;m sure you’ll agree that a melted reactor core constitutes an “accident”. Did you “forget” those?
“Worst” I’ll grant, (so far) but it’s way down chronologically on a long list of nuclear accidents.
Nah. Frogs, old chap.
Japanese nuclear plant designer sees meltdown occurring; plants never designed for these kinds of pressures. Says exclusions zones way too small.
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/world/Japan-Crippled-nation-on-nuclear.6733523.jp
If we used corn for fuel, and actually farmed it in this country, maybe I could get a job.
Understood Margaret, sorry if I implied that! I think I jumped from one to the other. Reviewing the end of the last thread this morning I was shocked to see one there, when this series of threads is so serious and vital.
Off to work. Thanks to everyone here for all the information this weekend through this horrible situation.
Steve Herman tweets:
# TEPCO: Radiation 2x max seen so far detected at Fukushima nuke plant. less than 10 seconds ago via TweetDeck
# TEPCO: Fuel rods fully exposed again at No. 2 reactor of Fukushima-1 nuke plant. 19 minutes ago via TweetDeck
If the walls of the outer containment building were designed to blow away, then TEPCO would have smart to predict that: “Soon our cameras will show….” Since no one predicted that, in fact the opposite, I have a difficult time believing their new statement that the building is, essentially, behaving as designed.
All governments lie. So do nuke operators.
If that spox was Geoff Morrell, he is a liar, especially on this topic.
Margaret, I think you are way off base accusing lobster “of being a pro Tokyo Power trojan.”
That’s a nasty, outrageous and unjustified insult for which you should apologize and I’m calling you out on it.
I have been following all of his remarks. His comments have been invaluable along with Professor Foland’s and nothing he has said warrants the insult you hurled at him.
He strikes me as a scientist who proceeds in a very rational manner identifying what is known and unknown and what conclusions are warranted and unwarranted from the few facts that we know. He exercises extreme care to avoid expressing personal opinions and biases that are unsupported by the evidence we have. As such, he is one of the few people here who really knows what he’s talking about. Our understanding of this calamity would be immeasurably impoverished without his grounded observations and opinions.
It seems a real shame that they didn’t read about that hospital in New Orleans that survived the hurricane just fine but was undone because its diesel generators, located in the basement, were rendered inoperable by subsequent flooding.
There are tail risks that probably can’t be anticipated; then there is a tragic inability to learn from other disasters and those are totally different things.
The tsunami caused damage because the building housing the diesel generators was in a low-lying area because operators believed sea walls would prevent the incursion of water.
This underestimation of the risk of the occurrence and co-occurence of extreme events is a classic human failing. It is the same failure that led to the making of dangerously risky lending and investment bets that brought about the financial crisis we’re still struggling to overcome.
Add update:
Update 2, 12:00 p.m. EDT: Reports now indicate that despite efforts to inject sea water into Unit 2′s reactor, the core became exposed again. Officials are now conceding that partial meltdowns of exposed fuel are occurring at all three units at Fukushima
Raised the question about fuel rods and their location in this post: feel free to use it as a site for the discussion if that would be useful.
http://my.firedoglake.com/kirkmurphy/2011/03/14/nuke-engineer-fuel-rod-fire-at-stricken-reactor-would-be-like-chernobyl-on-steroids/
“Then it was the pinnacle of stupidity to build them without solving those problems first.”
And hubris.
“Was it just assumed that they would be solved in a nebulous and somebody else’s problem future?”
I don’t know, I wasn’t born yet when those decisions were made.
Watch this continuing live coverage, but about every hour they repeat current stories on the nukes:
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/nhk-world-tv
You are right; Chernobyl was not the first. I was thinking of the economics expression “first best” and trying for the opposite “first worst”.
Chernobyl is by far the most significant disaster to date. My point was primarily that it isn’t always the lust for money that drives bad outcomes. I think it is more correct to focus on power than money. Not everyone is a capitalist…
Scare,
Is bringing in heavy-lift helicopters and carefully dumping liquid concrete on top of the reactors a reasonable containment option?
Thank you for noting, Lobster.
Good morning Teddy.
They may not have predicted it the first time, but they did predict the second explosion. Links in previous threads. They are saying there will not be a similar explosion at Unit 2, but only because they drilled a hole in the wall to let the hydrogen out. (So if there is an explosion at Unit 2, it is likely very bad news.)
Overall, while TEPCO has a dreadful history and likely will not survive the current disaster (good riddance), I have been mostly surprised and impressed with the quality and frequency of the public updates from the Japanese government. Much better than we would get here IMO, presumably because of the unique Japanese history with Hiroshima and Nagasaki. For example, I don’t think we would ever hear US officials talking about “massive radiation spills” in such open terms as the Japanese officials have been using since yesterday. Maybe their hand has been forced, but I think they are actually in front (for now). I decided to contribute over the weekend mainly because I thought that the official story was going to be useless. We may find out that it has been, but so far, the discernible facts are not out of line with the government statements. Unfortunately, the government statements are extraordinarily grim — this still has the potential to be much worse, and soon.
Curious about the 1-in-1000 projection. If you limit the earthquake to “within 100 miles of Daiichi reactors”, then maybe. But this is the second “ring-of-fire” earthquake of this size in 47 years. I felt the Good Friday earthquake in Alaska (magnitude 9.2). There are numerous reactors on the Pacific rim, from San Onofre (the Rose Canyon fault), up through California to Diablo Canyon (multiple faults), throw in the Columbia plant (inland 200 miles). I don’t know how many are on the western Pacific portion of the rim. Probably events like Japan are much more likely somewhere around the Pacific, than once every 1,000 years. Maybe once every 50.
Hi Boo. The problem with that strategy is gravity. Any molten fuel is dripping/sliding *down* and we can’t use helicopters to stop that. We need to send someone back in time to redesign the plant… (just watched Terminator 2 with my daughter last night).
My understanding is that those outer, thick concrete walls *were* the last defense against an uncontrolled spread of radiation. Negative pressure was carefully maintained inside the walls so leaks from the vessel itself would not seep out through tiny cracks or fissures.
Obviously, you can’t maintain negative pressure in a buildng whose roof and walls have been blown to smithereens.
Assuming there hasn’t yet been an explosion at unit 2, at the plant where there have been explosions at units 1 & 3, one reason may be the lack of water. The other two explosions were apparently the result of venting hydrogen gas, which rapidly oxidized with oxygen. The gas resulted from the cooking off of coolant water. No coolant water, no superheated water that breaks down into H2 and O2. If so, that’s not a good sign for preventing or limiting meltdown.
Another point is that the decisions to inject corrosive sea water was reportedly ordered by the government, not made by the company and reported to the government. This is a clear case of eminent domain, where the public interest had to take precedence over the private, and the total loss of the plant for future rehabilitation was shoved aside.
You have to wonder if that would have happened here. Think bank bailout, or BP/Gulf disaster.
This is that place
Lunchtime deep thought.
There has never been a simultaneous failure of multiple reactors anywhere. Thism orning, there are three on one site for which all planned “failsafes” have failed and the local engineers are winging it with fire hoses and sea water. Some have already died in the effort.
There are five more (two only about 10 km away, and therefore too close) that are or have been at the last planned line of defense.
This is once-in-a-lifetime stuff. I hope.
Agreed.
If we “burn” anything for power, it better be ethanol, it’s the only potentially carbon neutral combustible we have.
If high volumes of coolant water are superheated and producing H2 and O2 at sufficient pressures to need release, you have an atmosphere with high ambient temperatures and extremely volatile gases. Explosions would be hard to prevent.
Over the last six years I’ve learned more from FDL than any other website. I’m happy to finally have some way to give back, however small.
Moral of the story: Don’t keep all yer cattle in the same pen.
Our hearts go out to the crews working on this. Exhaustion and personal loss and fears of disease or death must make it hard to concentrate, and harder on their families, many of whom may have directly been affected by the quake or tsunami. We all should be thanking them for containing this disaster as much as possible. Fault is something we can later assign where appropriate to policymakers.
Appreciate the response and all the terrific information you provide.
I understood the water table in Japan is in deep trouble and agriculture in this area is now impossible.
I was more concerned (selfishly) about stuff getting into the atmosphere.
x2
We seem to be witnessing a lot of “once in a lifetime” events, only more often lately. It’s like being on the wrong end of an increasingly upward sloping curve, so that every increment has increasingly larger consequences.
Fortunately, our Congress is totally focused on all the things that matter. /snark
Lobster. The vagaries of probability will bite you every time. This event was a thousand year occurrence, and yes, once in your lifetime. But the next “thousand year occurrence” will be something completely different, in a different place, with a different etiology. And it’s just around the corner. It won’t be a thousand years from now. It’ll be next week, next month, next year.
If you’re gonna build something like this (nuclear power stations) you better acknowledge two things: 1) If the event is foreseeable it needs to be planned for. 2) extra planning better go in because you can’t foresee everything.
Statistics aren’t math, there pseudo-math. They attempt the impossible, to quantify uncertainty. Think about that…
White house briefing right now.
NPR
Given the high temperature inside the steel-alloy containment unit at Fukushima Daiichi #2; the failure of the redundant cooling mechanisms to pump water into the unit to cool it down; the evaporation of most of the water in the unit and exposure of the rods; the climbing temperature and increasing pressure inside the unit; and the inability to pump seawater into the unit because the pressure inside it is too high; I believe they have reached the question that I described in a comment yesterday. Will the 30-40 year-old steel-alloy containment structure do what it’s supposed to do; to whit, contain a fucking meltdown?
If the answer is “yes”, we can breathe a sigh of relief, but if the answer is “no”, we have a FUBAR situation. That would be Fucked Up Beyond All Recognition.
Yellowsnapdragon joked yesterday or the day before that with her luck, a meltdown would burn itself through the earth, emerge on the other side in a reverse China Syndrome effect, and engulf her home. I kidded her back commenting that we could call it the “Yellowsnapdragon Syndrome.”
All kidding aside, what are we looking at if the steel-alloy containment vessel fails?
Would it be possible to construct a catch-basin, tunnel beneath the structure, and install the basin below the reactor so that the molten core would be passively collected in the catch-basin?
Weather forecast from weatherunderground for Tokyo
Thursday: Wind NNE 8 – 15 mph
If there are any releases that day, it could drive them over Tokyo.
Again Scarecrow, thanx for a great update and to lobster for clear exposition and sifting and prioritizing of evidence as it comes available. You folks are godsends and in answering so soberly everyones’ questions and fears.
This is a greater than once-in-a-lifetime disaster. Clear heads need to prevail so that good information can run plainly.
Part of that is simply awareness – today if you have a 1000 year flood somewhere, we hear about it. 500 years ago, nobody would have known except those directly affected.
Part of it is that there simply are a lot of categories of 1000 year events – tsunamis, earthquakes, floods, droughts – and any of them may strike at any time. Over the globe, they happen, somewhere, with some regularity.
In an interconnected, globalized, internet-connected world a 1000 year event anywhere may not only become known to you, but may affect you, perhaps your portfolio, perhaps your job, perhaps your food supply, perhaps catching a disease.
A complex, interconnected system is not a robust system.
In the current political-corporate environment, I wouldn’t trust them to design a wood burning stove let alone a power plant of any kind.
You nailed it.
Expensive as hell, but absolutely, they can dig a shaft and create a “catch basin.”
How fast does that stuff move?
You’re in a radio-active earthquake zone with a structure above you. Keeping workers safe is a huge issue. Not de-stabilizing the concrete slab on which the contaninment vessel rests is another huge challenge.
Extra-shoring for more earthquakes, aftershocks is another really serious worry.
Ultimately, it comes down to how many resources Japan is willing to devote, but it’s possible.
The water table is another reason a catchbasin makes so much sense. You won’t get all of it, but whatever you do excavate, doesn’t get into the watertable.
The black swans are taking over the world.
There are many kinds of events that have probabilities attached to them that we are unable to calculate. Or that we calculate poorly.
We’re watching one of those events in Japan right now. The designers of the nuclear plant that is in trouble assumed that an 8.9 earthquake was highly unlikely (improbable) so they assumed a max of 7.9 in their design specs.
They assumed that there was little to no probability that a tsunami would breach their sea walls so they located the back-up diesel generators in a low-lying area.
Their staffing, training, supply and contingency procedures failed to contemplate that they would suffer core melting in three units simultaneously.
There are almost certainly other risk probabilities that they estimated poorly, but those are the ones that I’ve seen reported in the news.
So, were the Japanese nuclear engineers terribly unlucky or did they help bring this situation about due to poor estimation of the attendant risk elements?
The Three Mile Island reactor vessel held together despite not being designed to do so:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corium_(nuclear_reactor)
Dunno about this vessels design but I certainly wouldn’t assume that it was designed to be melt-proof vs corium.
Isn’t there thick concrete below the vessel already?
I have to differ with this statement:
“they assumed a max of 7.9 in their design specs”
They were directed to design to a max earthquake of 7.9 because of the costs estimates.
It was not the engineers who made assumptions. The management made a calculated decision, based on costs.
Not in the time required.
And I personally would not be mining under a structure that could rain radioactive material on my head at any moment.
Mining is risky in the best of circumstances. These are not the best of circumstances.
There are too many once-in-a lifetime disasters in my life for me to believe they are once-in-a lifetime.
- Chernobyl
- Shuttles destroyed on takeoff
- 9/11
- Katrina
- I35 Bridge collapse
- BP & The Gulf
- Fukushima
Decision making which deliberately favors cost over risk?
This is concerning. Do our nuclear scientists really know more than their nuclear scientists?
Today 11:47 AM Japan Asks U.S. For Nuclear Help
Reports Reuters:
Reuters @ Reuters : FLASH: U.S. nuclear regulatory commission says Japanese government formally asks U.S. for help with cooling nuclear reactors
Very likely.
It may also be an essential element of human nature. Psychologically, we seem to be pretty bad at both estimating the probability of outlier events and estimating the impact of outlier events should they occur.
Japan Raises Nuclear Event Alert Level to 5
Mon Mar-14-11 03:17 PM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439×642969
NOTE: I haven’t seen that report confirmed in any of the mainstream media.
Satellite phote of damage to Units 1 and 3:
http://www.digitalglobe.com/downloads/featured_images/japan_earthquaketsu_fukushima_daiichi_march14_2011_dg.jpg
It’s probably not a question of knowing “more” – it’s just that the guys over there have been battling this mess for over three days. They are exhausted, some of them may be physically ill from radiation exposure, and a bunch are either dead, missing or injured as a result of the explosions.
They need new ideas to try to stop further meltdowns, more ideas to prevent more explosions, thinking on what to do about all the spent fuel (and where it is exactly in the two buildings that have already blown up), they need equipment: more backup generators and batteries, more of the correct types of connectors and things to help them get water into the containment vessels, and so on.
They should have asked sooner – but I’m glad they are now in any case.
There’some pretty alarming language coming from the normally sedate Grey Lady:
Workers were having difficulty injecting seawater into the reactor because its vents — necessary to release pressure in the containment vessel by allowing radioactive steam to escape — had stopped working properly, they said.
“They’re basically in a full-scale panic” among Japanese power industry managers, said a senior nuclear industry executive late Monday night. The executive is not involved in managing the response to the reactors’ difficulties but has many contacts in Japan. “They’re in total disarray, they don’t know what to do.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/15/world/asia/15nuclear.html?hp
Here is a disturbing article by Greg Palast that involves Tokyo Electric, plans for some new Texas nukes, and previous failed testing of backup generator systems at existing US and Japanese nukes. Very Scary.
http://www.gregpalast.com/no-bs-info-on-japan-nuclearobama-invites-tokyo-electric-to-build-us-nukes-with-taxpayer-funds/#more-4497
Those are all good points. I genuinely hope that our guys are able to offer some new ideas.
They appear to be reaching out in other ways, too, like the request for liquid nitroget from Korea.
The shortest way up is down, in this case. I.e., if there is a meltdown + breach then the corium (melted core) could continue to sink until it hits the water table. If it makes it that far, then it would probably capable of flash-heating the water in the water table. It would then be lofted. This is the “China Syndrome” scenario.
FYI (also just posted in Scarecrow’s preceding thread):
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, which contains hard data about the measurements taken 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 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 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 (in microsieverts per hour) 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.
It’s now about 6 a.m., on Tuesday, March 15th, in Japan.
I’m not going to defend the industry that put these reactors in this place, with the generators in a location that would flood under exactly the same circumstances (large earthquake) that would lead (via the large tsunami) to the need for the generators. Obviously, there was not enough planning in this case — and in many others.
I prefer technology that does not have known catastrophic failure modes.
Wow — outstanding find! Among all the good things powwow already noted, these documents indicate that the Onagawa and Daini stations are essentially in safe mode now (should be all the way in safe mode soon). I’m crossing all those other reactors off of my worry list and focusing on Daiichi, units 1, 2 and 3.
I do not know for sure what “Downscale” means, but I suspect from other sources I’ve seen that it means that the level was too low to measure with the available gauge. Could easily be wrong.