Japan Earthquake | Page 5

  • He has offers of help. Yours truly included.
    by Jim Carver 3/26/2011 3:07:15 AM

  • Thanks @jim and @RalphI am only a layperson so forgive me asking but the Chernobyl accident caused genetic defects in children would sealife see the same happen
    by ElaineK 3/26/2011 3:07:28 AM

  • @Hermine the date on that photo was the 234d.
    by Beverly Mott 3/26/2011 3:08:41 AM

  • No creature is spared. Some do better than others, though. Not us.
    by Jim Carver 3/26/2011 3:08:53 AM

  • I just can't stand facebook. It feels like an invasion of privacy even though my facebook name is a pseudonym. I appreciate all of you folks standing side by side with me and watching this disaster unfold and trying to make sense of all the contradictory and incomplete data and reports and upgrading our personal knowledge base together so we can reason about these important events for ourselves.
    by Sky 3/26/2011 3:09:14 AM

  • yes - my point is why checking instruments when there is obviously no power. I think the pictures make on focus at a wrong direction 'all is ok'. THAT is my point.
    by Hermine 3/26/2011 3:10:24 AM

  • I was talking to someone re: seafood today. The question came up if you have fish or other seafood/life swimming through the concentrated radioactive water and those fish etc. move on and are caught in other areas, does this make pacific seafood russian roulette. What would plutonium do to fish? Would this create a situation of possible highly radioactive seafood randomly showing up?
    by Nancy 3/26/2011 3:10:29 AM

  • Forgive me if this has already been posted. The 12pm Tepco webcam shot:
    by Beverly Mott 3/26/2011 3:10:47 AM

  • 12 pm Tepco webcam shot. pointscope01.jp

    by Beverly Mott via Pointscope01.jp 3/26/2011 3:10:59 AM

  • Levels show signs of climbing, Hidehiko Nishiyama, a spokesman at the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, said in Tokyo today. Readings of between 200-300 millisieverts per hour were found in water at the No. 2 reactor, he said, equivalent to the maximum-permitted exposure for workers during the crisis. www.bloomberg.com
    by Karen Warren 3/26/2011 3:11:41 AM

  • www3.nhk.or.jp TEMPCO forced to change strategy at plant
    by Tenzing 3/26/2011 3:12:20 AM

  • @Sky I have issues with facebook myself.
    by George Gibb 3/26/2011 3:12:35 AM

  • @Beverly Mott Looks like the steam has stopped... I've noticed that there is more steam in the morning, I guess when the air temperatures are lower.
    by Diane 3/26/2011 3:12:40 AM

  • @Sky - I agree, this group has been a great comfort as we sift through all the information.
    by dyan 3/26/2011 3:15:04 AM

  • Interesting study involving fish done back in 2006. news.sciencemag.org
    by Stormy 3/26/2011 3:15:30 AM

  • Does anybody besides me get the feeling we keep looking at fake webcam shots?
    by Beverly Mott 3/26/2011 3:16:03 AM

  • Another slow update on radiation at main gate. The cam updates only every hour.
    by Ralph Unger 3/26/2011 3:16:42 AM

  • @Nancy I think the mixing of ocean waters through currents makes that pretty unlikely. Not impossible.
    by Jim Carver 3/26/2011 3:16:53 AM

  • www3.nhk.or.jp Tempco challenge to remove water from reactors
    by Tenzing 3/26/2011 3:16:57 AM

  • Here is a link about Chernobyl wildlife 20 years later. There is a concern about negative effects on the DNA of migrating birds affecting the total population. I imagine a similar effect upon marine life is possible. news.nationalgeographic.com
    by Sinthia Domina 3/26/2011 3:17:33 AM

  • thanks @sinthia I have b'marked it @Beverly You are not alone very tacky photoshop job. I must to my bed g'night all
    by ElaineK 3/26/2011 3:18:37 AM

  • @ElaineK night :)
    by George Gibb 3/26/2011 3:19:06 AM

  • www.ustream.tv In this talk, Masashi Goto said the amount of radioactivity released has been "huge", in response to a questioner comparing this event to Chernobyl.
    by Bobby1 3/26/2011 3:19:42 AM

  • @Tenzing From the article you posted, "
    With this strategy in mind, the company first intended to use the reactors' water pumps. But they were forced to use pump trucks instead from a distance, after high radiation levels were detected near the reactors' pumps." It sounds as if it's going to be difficult or impossible to repair the pumps to restore normal functions even as power is made available. Not good news.
    by Beverly Mott 3/26/2011 3:20:46 AM

  • I really like the CNIC's upstream videos. They seem to have the most concise information. Thanks Bobby.
    by Sinthia Domina 3/26/2011 3:22:33 AM

  • What about the cerium 144 that NHK said was in the water? Any thoughts?
    by Sinthia Domina 3/26/2011 3:23:53 AM

  • This maybe little off topic, but, the tragic story of an accident in Brazil involving Cesium-137. en.wikipedia.org
    by Jim Carver 3/26/2011 3:23:54 AM

  • Sinthia, Chihiro Kamisawa had a drawing where there was a containment vessel leak at a flange, and also where the electrical wires go in. They need to keep the temperature below 300 C and the pressure down, to stop the leak. I think they meant reactor #3.
    by Bobby1 3/26/2011 3:27:48 AM

  • @Sinthia Domina Cesium-134 decays beta particle to Barium. Half-life only two years,
    by Jim Carver 3/26/2011 3:28:32 AM

  • I think if the integrity of the vessel has already been compromised, the leaking will continue.
    by Sinthia Domina 3/26/2011 3:31:36 AM

  • I'm curious about the pressure differences that have been consistent between units 1, and 2&3. Unit 1 has been in the .3 positive range while #2&3 have been in the -.02 range for days now. (Both RPV & CV) I understand readings are difficult, or "murky" to quote the IAEA, but am curious if the pressure difference between them could be an indicator of building integrity.
    by Beverly Mott 3/26/2011 3:32:22 AM

  • Doing a live translation from tepco yokosonews.com
    by Sinthia Domina 3/26/2011 3:36:12 AM

  • The water in the basement is more radioactive then the water in the reactor would be. I would say that the storage pools are more of a problem then the reactors.
    by Ralph Unger 3/26/2011 3:40:37 AM

  • Ralph what is your line of reasoning for that? The storage pools are located high up in the structure as is the reactor containment vessel itself, as I understand it. There are probably pipes and plumbing all over the place. One person said he felt there was a good chance some of that plumbing had leaked. But not from the SFP necessarily. Explain your reasoning, please.
    by Sky 3/26/2011 3:42:03 AM

  • Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant No. 3 in the 24th, in the basement of a building adjacent to the turbine building containing the reactor, the exposure of flooded three inches deep and 15 workers from the atoms in the water operation detected high levels of radioactive materials about 10,000 times that of water in the furnace. That is the machine translation. Water overflowing would end up in the basement.
    by Ralph Unger 3/26/2011 3:42:58 AM

  • by Ralph Unger 3/26/2011 3:43:22 AM

  • Yes so what makes you assert that the SFP would be the source of that water?
    by Sky 3/26/2011 3:43:49 AM

  • The large amount of fuel stored there.
    by Ralph Unger 3/26/2011 3:44:35 AM

  • I think that that have both been compromised, and rod melting in reactor and pool has occurred. The reactor containment vessel is half in the basement. If this is true, the water from the reactor would have higher levels of radiation because those rods are "hotter", however, the spent fuel pools do contain more rods and are open to the air at this point, or have a roof lying in it depending on which one.
    by Sinthia Domina 3/26/2011 3:46:51 AM

  • They have basically flooded the pools to keep them cool. They water has to go somewhere unless they have added just the amount needed and kept it from overflowing. I don't think they have the ability to judge the proper amount.
    by Ralph Unger 3/26/2011 3:47:13 AM

  • You are assuming that the concentration of radioactive materials in the water indicates stored spent fuel was the source. But another article I saw today (sorry, cannot find links fast enough) suggested the source could have been direct contact with the fuel inside the reactor. I'm not sure my inference from the article was right but that's what I think it said. I leave that open as a possibilitiy, given the anonymous statement in the NY Times today by one "industry exec" who asserted there is a vertical crack in the reactor vessel of (I think) #2.
    by Sky 3/26/2011 3:47:37 AM

  • Sky, that might be the case, but we do not know if the reactor is cracked, we do know that the fuel storage pools are exposed.
    by Ralph Unger 3/26/2011 3:49:08 AM

  • OK
    by Sky 3/26/2011 3:49:27 AM

  • I just dont know what figures to believe is accurate and the flucuations seem to be erratic. We just don't have enough details to do anything more than speculate.
    by Sinthia Domina 3/26/2011 3:49:29 AM

  • Goto mentioned that the main part of the radioactivity released since the explosions has been from the fuel rods.
    by Bobby1 3/26/2011 3:51:03 AM

Japan Earthquake | Page 5

Who's Blogging
  • hudebnikhudebnik
  • albleealblee
  • UKValUKVal
  • Oliver (ScribbleLive)Oliver (ScribbleLive)
  • Jonathan KeeblerJonathan Keebler
  • kaykodhkaykodh
  • PKelleyPKelley
  • MarkfmMarkfm
  • AngieAngie
  • DebDeb
  • Mid ValleyMid Valley
  • Pedro Jesus
  • Matt (ScribbleLive)Matt (ScribbleLive)
  • George GibbGeorge Gibb
  • elainekirkelainekirk
  • lillymunsterlillymunster
  • deandean
  • bobo
  • EdanoEdano
  • IanGoddardIanGoddard