• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Edit:22 Update 2: Experts warned Fukushima of tsunami threat 2 years ago.

Page 47 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
bignateyk said:
Not really. The grid is set up with transmission lines pushing a thousand miles. Your power can come from any point of generation on the grid.
Click to expand...

Technically you can, but the transmission losses become bigger the further the juice goes. In a green-hippie's world, power would be generated on-site or a block away. Obviously a bit difficult...
 
NEI
UPDATE AS OF 1:30 P.M. EDT, MARCH 24

In a sign of progress, Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) is working to switch from seawater to borated freshwater to cool uranium fuel at three reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.

All reactors now have access to off-site power, and work is under way to inspect, repair and connect equipment needed to cool the reactors. Testing by TEPCO indicates that many pumps are inoperable because of flood damage.

Restoring regular cooling to the used fuel pools at Fukushima Daiichi remains a high priority. The used fuel pools at reactors 5 and 6 are being cooled using heat removal systems with electric power. Workers continue to spray seawater on the reactor buildings and spent fuel pools at reactors 1, 3 and 4. Additional cooling water to the spent fuel pool is being supplied by a fire hose connection.
Click to expand...
 
So I guess the Japanese missed the 20 year destruction of their economy and huge swathes of their country irradiated, including Tokyo, by the skin of their teeth.
 
if i understand correctly, the facilities had no power, which obviously killed the cooling system, hydraulic and electrical machinery needed to operate, and computer c+c. were the lights and sensors out as well? i would think sensor data would have passive redundancy and be remotely readable.
 
Light and everything in the control room were out, I believe. Obviously there are some sensors/gauges/etc. that can be read manually.
 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_japan_earthquake

Breach suspected at troubled Japanese power plant

"TOKYO – Two weeks after an earthquake and tsunami triggered a crisis at a nuclear plant, the facility is still not under control, and the government said Friday there is a suspected breach at a reactor. That means radioactive contamination at the plant is more serious than once thought.

Japanese leaders defended their decision not to evacuate people from a wider area around the plant, insisting they are safe if they stay indoors. But officials also said residents may want to voluntarily move to areas with better facilities, since supplies in the tsunami-devastated region are running short.

The escalation in the nuclear plant crisis came as the death toll from the quake and tsunami passed the grim milestone of 10,000 on Friday. Across the battered northeast coast, hundreds of thousands of people whose homes were destroyed still have no power, no hot meals and, in many cases, no showers for 14 days.

The uncertain nuclear situation halted work at the Fukushima Dai-ichi complex, where authorities have been scrambling to stop the overheated facility from leaking dangerous radiation. Low levels of radiation have been seeping out since the March 11 quake and tsunami knocked out the plant's cooling system, but a breach could mean a much larger release of contaminants. The most likely consequence would be contamination of the groundwater.

"The situation today at the Fukushima Dai-ichi power plant is still very grave and serious. We must remain vigilant," a somber Prime Minister Naoto Kan said. "We are not in a position where we can be optimistic. We must treat every development with the utmost care."

The possible breach in the plant's Unit 3 might be a crack or a hole in the stainless steel chamber of the reactor core or in the spent fuel pool that's lined with several feet of reinforced concrete. The temperature and pressure inside the core, which holds the fuel rods, remained stable and was far lower than what would further melt the core.

Suspicions of a possible breach were raised when two workers suffered skin burns after wading into water 10,000 times more radioactive than levels normally found in water in or around a reactor, the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency said.

Water with equally high radiation levels was found in the Unit 1 reactor building, Tokyo Electric officials said. Water was also discovered in Units 2 and 4, and the company said it suspects that, too, is radioactive. It was not clear whether the water in each unit came from the same source, officials said, but acknowledged the discovery would delay work inside the plant."
 
There is so much back and forth I stopped paying attention. Yesterday or Wednesday they released a statement that there was no damage to #3 reactor as previously thought, then someone steps in radioactive water and now they release a statement that there is a breach like they estimated last week.
 
BoomerD said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_japan_earthquake

Breach suspected at troubled Japanese power plant

"TOKYO – Two weeks after an earthquake and tsunami triggered a crisis at a nuclear plant, the facility is still not under control, and the government said Friday there is a suspected breach at a reactor. That means radioactive contamination at the plant is more serious than once thought.

Japanese leaders defended their decision not to evacuate people from a wider area around the plant, insisting they are safe if they stay indoors. But officials also said residents may want to voluntarily move to areas with better facilities, since supplies in the tsunami-devastated region are running short.

The escalation in the nuclear plant crisis came as the death toll from the quake and tsunami passed the grim milestone of 10,000 on Friday. Across the battered northeast coast, hundreds of thousands of people whose homes were destroyed still have no power, no hot meals and, in many cases, no showers for 14 days.

The uncertain nuclear situation halted work at the Fukushima Dai-ichi complex, where authorities have been scrambling to stop the overheated facility from leaking dangerous radiation. Low levels of radiation have been seeping out since the March 11 quake and tsunami knocked out the plant's cooling system, but a breach could mean a much larger release of contaminants. The most likely consequence would be contamination of the groundwater.

"The situation today at the Fukushima Dai-ichi power plant is still very grave and serious. We must remain vigilant," a somber Prime Minister Naoto Kan said. "We are not in a position where we can be optimistic. We must treat every development with the utmost care."

The possible breach in the plant's Unit 3 might be a crack or a hole in the stainless steel chamber of the reactor core or in the spent fuel pool that's lined with several feet of reinforced concrete. The temperature and pressure inside the core, which holds the fuel rods, remained stable and was far lower than what would further melt the core.

Suspicions of a possible breach were raised when two workers suffered skin burns after wading into water 10,000 times more radioactive than levels normally found in water in or around a reactor, the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency said.

Water with equally high radiation levels was found in the Unit 1 reactor building, Tokyo Electric officials said. Water was also discovered in Units 2 and 4, and the company said it suspects that, too, is radioactive. It was not clear whether the water in each unit came from the same source, officials said, but acknowledged the discovery would delay work inside the plant."
Click to expand...

but, but rcpratt said everything is fine. nothing to see here. there never was any danger. it was just wild eyed hippie radicals who wanted rcpratt to be unemployed.
















/not
 
techs said:
but, but rcpratt said everything is fine. nothing to see here. there never was any danger. it was just wild eyed hippie radicals who wanted rcpratt to be unemployed.


/not
Click to expand...

Dude seriously, give it up. This whole thing has been overhyped by the media, and you just can't let it die. You're even worse than the media. You look for any little thing the media says then hype it up even more like it's gonna be the next Chernobyl.

OMG !@#*^^* workers being exposed to radiation 10x that of a banana !@(*#*$$. Details at 11.
 
Imp said:
Technically you can, but the transmission losses become bigger the further the juice goes. In a green-hippie's world, power would be generated on-site or a block away. Obviously a bit difficult...
Click to expand...

With transmission line voltages pushing a million volts you really don't have very big I^2*R losses. Almost all long distance transmission lines use >750,000 volts.
 
I think we're dead. Radiation has spread all over America and the world. Deathclaws are ravaging western california, Dolphins have grown legs and are invading Japan with Gundams, the end is nigh.
 
So I know it's wrong but I have to share this...the restaurant opened up a couple months ago...
IMG00336-20110323-0811.jpg
 
the bbc's handling of this has been spotty andsensational, but fwiw:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12869184

Radioactive levels in sea by nuclear plant much higher

Levels of radioactive iodine in the sea near the tsunami-stricken Fukushima nuclear plant are 1,250 times higher than the safety limit, officials say.

The readings were taken about 300m (984ft) offshore. It is feared the radiation could be seeping into groundwater from one of the reactors.

But the radiation will no longer be a risk after eight days, officials say.
Click to expand...

my intuition says it hasn't seeped through the ground into the ocean - they're pumping the spent seawater out directly. i'm ok with this, as it's necessary and not very harmful regardless of the discharged material.
 
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0...er-in-Japan-raises-new-fears-of-reactor-crack

Radioactive seawater in Japan raises new fears of reactor crack


Levels of radioactive iodine reached 1,250 times above normal in seawater off the coast of Japan's stricken Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, raising concerns about a containment crack.


Still working under the looming shadow of a complete meltdown, officials at Japan's tsunami-stricken Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant saw recent encouraging news buffered Friday by another troubling development: radioactive water seeping out of reactors and directly into the Pacific, Japan's critical protein lifeline.

Tests done 330 meters from one of the plant's coolant water outlets showed radioactive iodine levels at 1,250 times normal, raising new concerns that one of the three hardest-struck reactors may be allowing radioactive materials to leak directly into the environment. Officials fought back against that assessment Friday. "There is no data suggesting a crack," said Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency spokesman Hidehiko Nishiyama.

Nevertheless, "the situation today at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant is still very grave and serious. We must remain vigilant," Prime Minister Naoto Kan said.




He said, she said.

The problem is the Japanese government and the industry lobbying groups have been consistently wrong in their announcements. On the other hand, groups like Greenpeace also have an agenda.
 
Imp said:
Technically you can, but the transmission losses become bigger the further the juice goes. In a green-hippie's world, power would be generated on-site or a block away. Obviously a bit difficult...
Click to expand...

True, but long-distance transmission lines are stunningly efficient.

The 80% of transmission losses occur in the last 5 miles (of which about 50% is in the last 1 mile).

The problem with long-distance lines is their cost. Maintaining a 1000 mile line is incredibly expensive.

The other issue with generating power locally, is that you don't get the economies of scale. Bigger power generators are more efficient than smaller ones, and are easier to control pollution with.

Further, adding power generators adds to stress on the electrical grid - as the grid has to haul the power away, not just deliver it. Unfortunately, the problems generators can cause can only be addressed by wholesale upgrade of cabling/transformers (this is counter intuitive, as this may still be required even in areas where the new generator may be reducing peak electricty inflows). This upgrading of 'prospective short circuit current' is phenomenally expensive. It is better to do it, at a few sites, where maximum power is handled - than in an inefficient and expensive way at a number of smaller sites.
 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110326/ap_on_bi_ge/as_japan_earthquake

Japan's government criticizes nuke plant operator

"SENDAI, Japan – Japan's government revealed a series of missteps by the operator of a radiation-leaking nuclear plant on Saturday, including sending workers in without protective footwear in its faltering efforts to control a monumental crisis. The U.S. Navy, meanwhile, rushed to deliver fresh water to replace corrosive saltwater now being used in a desperate bid to cool the plant's overheated reactors.

Government spokesman Yukio Edano urged Tokyo Electric Power Co. to be more transparent, two days after two workers at the tsunami-damaged Fukushima Dai-ichi plant suffered skin burns when they stepped in water that was 10,000 times more radioactive than levels normally found near the reactors.

"We strongly urge TEPCO to provide information to the government more promptly," Edano said.

The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, or NISA, said TEPCO was aware there was high radiation in the air at one of the plant's six units several days before the accident. And the two workers injured were wearing boots that only came up to their ankles — hardly high enough to protect their legs, agency spokesman Hidehiko Nishiyama said.

"Regardless of whether there was an awareness of high radioactivity in the stagnant water, there were problems in the way work was conducted," Nishiyama said.

NISA warned TEPCO to improve and ensure workers' safety, and TEPCO has taken measures to that effect, Nishiyama said, without elaborating.

TEPCO spokesman Hajime Motojuku declined to comment."
 
BoomerD said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110326/ap_on_bi_ge/as_japan_earthquake

Japan's government criticizes nuke plant operator

"SENDAI, Japan – Japan's government revealed a series of missteps by the operator of a radiation-leaking nuclear plant on Saturday, including sending workers in without protective footwear in its faltering efforts to control a monumental crisis. The U.S. Navy, meanwhile, rushed to deliver fresh water to replace corrosive saltwater now being used in a desperate bid to cool the plant's overheated reactors.

Government spokesman Yukio Edano urged Tokyo Electric Power Co. to be more transparent, two days after two workers at the tsunami-damaged Fukushima Dai-ichi plant suffered skin burns when they stepped in water that was 10,000 times more radioactive than levels normally found near the reactors.

"We strongly urge TEPCO to provide information to the government more promptly," Edano said.

The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, or NISA, said TEPCO was aware there was high radiation in the air at one of the plant's six units several days before the accident. And the two workers injured were wearing boots that only came up to their ankles — hardly high enough to protect their legs, agency spokesman Hidehiko Nishiyama said.

"Regardless of whether there was an awareness of high radioactivity in the stagnant water, there were problems in the way work was conducted," Nishiyama said.

NISA warned TEPCO to improve and ensure workers' safety, and TEPCO has taken measures to that effect, Nishiyama said, without elaborating.

TEPCO spokesman Hajime Motojuku declined to comment."
Click to expand...

There's going to be EPIC finger pointing when this thing is over.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/27/world/asia/27nuke.html?src=twrhp

Nuclear Rules in Japan Relied on Old Science

TOKYO — In the country that gave the world the word tsunami, the Japanese nuclear establishment largely disregarded the potentially destructive force of the walls of water. The word did not even appear in government guidelines until 2006, decades after plants — including the Fukushima Daiichi facility that firefighters are still struggling to get under control — began dotting the Japanese coastline.

The lack of attention may help explain how, on an island nation surrounded by clashing tectonic plates that commonly produce tsunamis, the protections were so tragically minuscule compared with the nearly 46-foot tsunami that overwhelmed the Fukushima plant on March 11. Offshore breakwaters, designed to guard against typhoons but not tsunamis, succumbed quickly as a first line of defense. The wave grew three times as tall as the bluff on which the plant had been built.

Japanese government and utility officials have repeatedly said that engineers could never have anticipated the magnitude 9.0 earthquake — by far the largest in Japanese history — that caused the sea bottom to shudder and generated the huge tsunami. Even so, seismologists and tsunami experts say that according to readily available data, an earthquake with a magnitude as low as 7.5 — almost garden variety around the Pacific Rim — could have created a tsunami large enough to top the bluff at Fukushima.

After an advisory group issued nonbinding recommendations in 2002, Tokyo Electric Power Company, the plant owner and Japan’s biggest utility, raised its maximum projected tsunami at Fukushima Daiichi to between 17.7 and 18.7 feet — considerably higher than the 13-foot-high bluff. Yet the company appeared to respond only by raising the level of an electric pump near the coast by 8 inches, presumably to protect it from high water, regulators said.

“We can only work on precedent, and there was no precedent,” said Tsuneo Futami, a former Tokyo Electric nuclear engineer who was the director of Fukushima Daiichi in the late 1990s. “When I headed the plant, the thought of a tsunami never crossed my mind.”

The intensity with which the earthquake shook the ground at Fukushima also exceeded the criteria used in the plant’s design, though by a less significant factor than the tsunami, according to data Tokyo Electric has given the Japan Atomic Industrial Forum, a professional group. Based on what is known now, the tsunami set off the nuclear crisis by flooding the backup generators needed to power the reactor cooling system.

Japan is known for its technical expertise. For decades, though, Japanese officialdom and even parts of its engineering establishment clung to older scientific precepts for protecting nuclear plants, relying heavily on records of earthquakes and tsunamis, and failing to make use of advances in seismology and risk assessment since the 1970s.

For some experts, the underestimate of the tsunami threat at Fukushima is frustratingly reminiscent of the earthquake — this time with no tsunami — in July 2007 that struck Kashiwazaki, a Tokyo Electric nuclear plant on Japan’s western coast.. The ground at Kashiwazaki shook as much as two and a half times the maximum intensity envisioned in the plant’s design, prompting upgrades at the plant.

“They had years to prepare at that point, after Kashiwazaki, and I am seeing the same thing at Fukushima,” said Peter Yanev, an expert in seismic risk assessment based in California, who has studied Fukushima for the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Energy Department.

There is no doubt that when Fukushima was designed, seismology and its intersection with the structural engineering of nuclear power plants was in its infancy, said Hiroyuki Aoyama, 78, an expert on the quake resistance of nuclear plants who has served on Japanese government panels. Engineers employed a lot of guesswork, adopting a standard that structures inside nuclear plants should have three times the quake resistance of general buildings.

“There was no basis in deciding on three times,” said Mr. Aoyama, an emeritus professor of structural engineering at the University of Tokyo. “They were shooting from the hip,” he added, making a sign of a pistol with his right thumb and index finger. “There was a vague target.”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top