2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

[Amber G.]

^^^ The way I feel, better a nuke plant (gherao), than posts that put some math in perspective.

[Theo_Fidel]

As long as as the principle victims in a nuclear disaster remain the locals and the resident population perception will be more important than reality. Sighing and moaning about the numbers and facts will do nothing to change perception. All the condescending comments by 'experts' over time have only damaged their credibility long term. It just means you don't care what the locals think. The same experts thought Japan was 'fail safe' remember.

I've said this before. We have not seen the worst possible nuclear disaster yet. Something close to a city and possibly much worse than Chernobyl (yes this is possible). All the technology we have is focused on preventing this but the underlying instability remains. As long as that remains the reality perception will matter more than scientific studies. We are right to fear this technology even as we use it.

[Amber G.]

The same experts thought Japan was 'fail safe' remember.

Same experts? really? Would you name that/those expert(s) who said 'Japan is fail safe' and now saying the things which you say they are saying? Link and exact quote.

Why let the facts get in the the way or a narrative?

[Amber G.]

Interesting contrast between Fukushima Chernobyl.. worth reading in full.. (only some excerpts posted below)
IPhone Apps Versus Soviet Subterfuge

Tamara Kruglikova waited days for Soviet officials to announce the Chernobyl nuclear disaster about 140 kilometers (87 miles) from her home. Hiroshi Ishikawa posts radiation levels every 30 seconds online to supplement Japanese government reports on the fallout from Fukushima.

On April 26, 1986, as Chernobyl’s ruptured reactor spewed radiation into the air, children in Kruglikova’s city of Gomel played outdoors and adults prepared for May 1 rallies. The one curiosity was why the mud turned an orange-yellow color after it drizzled, she said in a telephone interview from Gomel.

<snip>


The United Nation’s International Atomic Energy Agency measured the disaster at 5 out of 7. Chernobyl was the only accident to be ranked a 7 as 1,200 tons of graphite and radioactive matter were ejected into the air, polluting land and increasing cancer rates, according to the World Nuclear Association.

Unlike their Soviet counterparts, Japanese residents have followed the drama via non-stop media coverage including briefings by the government, plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. and nuclear agency. Officials are pushed to publish everything from the status of each reactor to the level of radiation found in local spinach.

The words “millisievert” and “Becquerel” -- measurements of radiation -- have entered the daily vernacular, and the anonymous 50 nuclear workers who initially tackled the disaster became a blog phenomenon.




Kruglikova said she heard news of an accident at Chernobyl by word of mouth and from reports on Radio Liberty, a U.S. station set up to broadcast into communist countries. Even after the Soviet government acknowledged the accident, the propaganda machine downplayed the radiation impact, she said.

T
Kruglikova’s school had no Geiger counters and little idea what effects radiation could have. Speculation that iodine might be an antidote resulted in several poisonings as people mixed it with milk without caring for the dose, she said.

More than 60 Japanese sites post radiation levels from around the country, while private companies have set up their own monitoring to keep employees and the public updated. ..


“Yurekuru Call for iPhone,” an early warning earthquake notification service, “Flashlight-4,” which uses the screen as a light source, and a location app for the nearest hospitals and convenience stores, were among the top downloads, it said.

“It increases the amount of noise, false, ungrounded and manipulative information that may cause panic.”

[Amber G.]

Wall Street Journal Article: About Media Overreaction...

Nuclear Overreactions

After a once-in-300-years earthquake, the Japanese have been keeping cool amid the chaos, organizing an enormous relief and rescue operation, and generally earning the world's admiration. We wish we could say the same for the reaction in the U.S., where the troubles at Japan's nuclear reactors have produced an overreaction about the risks of modern life and technology.

Part of the problem is the lack of media proportion about the disaster itself. The quake and tsunami have killed hundreds, and probably thousands, with tens of billions of dollars in damage. ....

Yet the bulk of U.S. media coverage has focused on a nuclear accident whose damage has so far been limited and contained to the plant sites. In simple human terms, the natural destruction of Earth and sea have far surpassed any errors committed by man.

Given the incomplete news reports, it is impossible to say how much worse the nuclear damage will be. Unlike the Soviets at Chernobyl, the Japanese have been taking sensible precautions like evacuating people near the plants and handing out iodine pills even if they may never be needed. These precautions increase public worry, but better to take them even if they prove to be unnecessary.
<snip>


But more than other energy sources, nuclear plants have had their costs increased by artificial political obstacles and delay. The U.S. hasn't built a new nuclear plant since 1979, ....
T
Our larger point is less about nuclear power than how we react as a society to inevitable disasters, both natural and man-made. Because a plane crashes, we don't stop flying. Because an oil rig explodes in the Gulf, we don't (or at least we shouldn't) stop drilling for oil. And because the Challenger space shuttle blew up, we didn't stop shuttle flights—though we do seem to have lost much of our national will for further manned space exploration. We should learn from the Japanese nuclear crisis, not let it feed a political panic over nuclear power in general.

***
The paradox of material and technological progress is that we seem to become more risk-averse the safer it makes us. The more comfortable we become, the less eager we are to take the risks that are the only route to future progress. The irony is that one reason Japan has survived this catastrophic event as well as it has is its great material development and wealth.

Modern civilization is in the daily business of measuring and mitigating risk, but its advance requires that we continue to take risk. It would compound Japan's tragedy if the lesson America learns is that we should pursue the illusory and counterproductive goal of eliminating all risk.

[vina]

It would compound Japan's tragedy if the lesson America learns is that we should pursue the illusory and counterproductive goal of eliminating all risk.

The sanest comment so far.

However, no one wants to buy my "India Tsunami Protection Option" in this thread yet . Come on folks, dont you buy insurance? Dont you want to be covered against Tsunamis ?

[negi]

^ Boss no one buys insurance in desh.

[Pratyush]

^ Boss no one buys insurance in desh.

Correction, they take insurance to collect fraudulent claims onlee .

On a serious note, the crisis is assuming alarming proportions, but that means we learn the right lessons from it. It would be a folly to condem Nuke power, just on the basis of this double whammy that the plant has suffered.

The best out come would for all concerned would be to learn from this and design plants ( Incorporate features ) that are capable of surviving the effects of such an event.

JMTs

[Sanku]

Interesting discussions.

Meanwhile in reality

http://www.eyewitnessnews.co.za/article ... um=twitter

Disaster-hit Japan faces protracted nuclear crisis
Reuters | 9 Minutes Ago

Radiation at the nuclear plant has soared in recent days. Latest readings on Sunday showed contamination 100,000 times normal in water at reactor No. 2 and 1,850 times normal in the nearby sea.

Those were the most alarming levels since the crisis began.

"I think maybe the situation is much more serious than we were led to believe," {really now} said one expert, Najmedin Meshkati, of the University of Southern California, adding it may take weeks to stabilise the situation and the United Nations should step in.

[vera_k]

Plus, medical, disability and property claims are the ones likely to bust the insurer, and therefore be uninsurable. Life is not much of a problem.

[Sanku]

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/ ... 327a4.html

Since the crisis at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant began, 17 workers have suffered radiation of more than 100 millisieverts, the maximum annual exposure for nuclear plant workers until the level was raised amid the emergency.

In contrast, Mitsuhiko Tanaka, a former engineer in nuclear plant designs, said, "I would think it is a terrible job, but if you are an employee of a subcontractor, you will probably be unable to decline, thinking about future (work for their employer)."

Each day, several hundred workers enter nuclear plants, wearing in total 500 to 1,000 suits that are discarded after use, according to Tepco.

This a full fledged disaster of worst possible magnitude possible.

[Sanku]

http://www.thehindu.com/news/internatio ... 576837.ece

Continuous leak at Japanese plant
P. S. Suryanarayana

Japan's nuclear safety regulators expressed the view that “there is a continuous leakage” of radioactive substances.

[chaanakya]

Do you think it was appropriate to design for 6 mts when record was at least for 38 mts?

A general comment, that record height measured was for another location, isn't it ? Tsunami height will vary from location to location, depending on local bathymetry and coastal features. Besides, all this can be done only with good model runs for various types of water column dislocations due to an earthquake. It is a relatively new applied science and very likely such numbers have got better and with good predictability only in recent years.

Yep! The (measured) height at the plants were (per what I heard/read) was 10-12 m.

And you are so ill informed here. You base it on what you hear/read and when others do it you quote your scientific wisdom and try to divert by taking recourse to internal energy vs heat capacity.

[vina]

Yep! The (measured) height at the plants were (per what I heard/read) was 10-12 m.

And you are so ill informed here. You base it on what you hear/read and when others do it you quote your scientific wisdom and try to divert by taking recourse to internal energy vs heat capacity.

.

The measured wave height due to the Tsunami at Fukushima was around 12 m from what has been published. Yes, the Fukushima reactors were situated on a cliff some 13ft high and they thought it was a natural sea wall/cliff to keep off any flooding. But the Tsunami waves crested that.

Surely you don't suggest that you were there during the Tsunami and actually measured it at 38m!

[chaanakya]

/sigh/ It seems that one poster has missed the point of my post by a light year and at the same time entropy of this dhaga has increased by leaps and bounds.

The question was not to comment on, who ought to be "bothered", it was rather, if you were a Neta to protect your community, what principle will guide you to do the best for your janata.

It was, to repeat it, why the same scientists who recommend the 20K evacuation (and monitor radiation doses, iodine etc) also tells us why media hysteria is bad.

A poster may miss the whole point but I was asking, why, looking at the same data, the same scientists, support a) close monitoring of radiation, and avoiding it (even low dose) and b) support the data of low risk due to low radiation.

The answer to this is not trivial.

Experts are likely to miss the point as they are more concerned with educating how radioactivity is good or not.
When everyone concerned directly with likely fallout, unlike the experts who may be more interested in technicalities, it would become their collective concern.That is why before clearing any project EIA and local consultations are provided for. Lobbies may try hard to skirt these processes but "Neta" would be the last person to take that risk on the FWIW.

And when you ask the question from other about the same scientists, you should also not use the same word as seen here. Are they neo converts to the religion or newly discovered some facts to change their views when regulatory bodies constantly revise the upper limit based on the studies by "same" scientists?

When life and its quality is of concern these issues are not trivial and I can see the hand wringing by nuk lobby.

In case you missed it completely

I quoted report earlier

This month, Finland's Olkiluoto 3 nuclear reactor was supposed to begin generating power, a tangible sign of the revival of the nuclear industry outside of Asia after nearly 30 years of no new construction because of accidents, cost-overruns and other issues. Instead, the reactor won't be completed for more than three more years, its price is nearly 60 percent more than anticipated, and it is mired in costly legal squabbles between the builder, Areva, and the Finnish utility, Pohjolan Voima.

In the U.S., since 2003, 17 applications for 26 new reactors have been filed with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, but not one is yet under construction.

Despite dozens of new nuclear plants ordered or built in Asia in recent years, "increased deployment of nuclear power has been slow both in the United States and globally," wrote the authors of a new Massachusetts Institute of Technology review of the state of nuclear power.

Those figures, say the authors of the report, an update on a similar report in 2003, mean that "even if all the announced plans for new nuclear power plant construction are realized, the total will be well behind that needed for reaching a thousand gigawatts of new capacity worldwide by 2050."

One thousand gigawatts is the number the M.I.T. professors estimated would be needed to ensure that nuclear power provided 20 percent of global electricity needs as well as cut emissions of greenhouse gases from power plants. In the U.S., the number would be jumping from 100 to 300 gigawatts of nuclear-sourced electricity by 2050.

After all, once operating, nuclear power plants burn nothing and therefore emit no carbon dioxide as fossil fuel–burning power plants do. (There are, of course, significant greenhouse gas emissions associated with building and fueling nuclear facilities).

But the price of new nuclear power has "escalated dramatically," according to the report, jumping by 15 percent a year to reach as much as $4,000 per kilowatt compared with $2,300 for coal-fired generation and just $850 for natural gas. And the industry is asking for at least $100 billion in federal tax subsidies and loan guarantees for the 26 reactors currently planned.

The situation is no better in Europe, according to Steven Thomas, a professor of energy studies at the University of Greenwich in London: Finland cannot complete its new reactor; the U.K. has yet to get started on any projects; and a new nuclear reactor in France, after 18 months of construction, is 20 percent overbudget and requires complete subsidy by the French government.

"The nuclear power industry in Europe is in the midst of the same kind of regulatory and financial uncertainty that makes the future of the industry murky at best in this country," Thomas said during a conference call with reporters. "We've been waiting for the renaissance for 10 years."

Nor has there been a solution to the issue of nuclear waste. In the U.S., the plan to use Yucca Mountain in the Nevada desert as a repository for spent nuclear fuel rods is in limbo, opposed by the Obama administration. Reprocessing nuclear fuel, currently underway only in France, has proved prohibitively expensive, and it raises concerns about the proliferation of plutonium for nuclear weapons.

oday, there are about 44 plants under construction around the world in 12 countries, principally China, India, Korea, and Russia. There are no new plants under construction in the United States.

This was the current state of Nuclear industry and its revival was seen in KRIC countries. That is how netas would decide after fukushima.
And one last point, when you quote random equation in an effort to digress the point (Internal energy vs heat capacity) or boltzmann equation (which he clearly not mentioned but linked) that is acceptable and when I give a equation it becomes silly.I am yet to see that is is wrong.

The way I see it is that there is a tendency to divert the attention away from the real issues. Interestingly, caveats are applicable to you only and not to others who are required to give you precise answers. I read in one report when it was pointed out that there is increased incidence on cancer etc that it would be result of better reporting rather than radiation (as radiation is supposedly good.) Talk of circular logic.

Anyway I request you to ignore my posts and let moderators decide if I should post any thing about tsunami quake and radiations.

[chaanakya]

Yep! The (measured) height at the plants were (per what I heard/read) was 10-12 m.

And you are so ill informed here. You base it on what you hear/read and when others do it you quote your scientific wisdom and try to divert by taking recourse to internal energy vs heat capacity.

The measured wave height due to the Tsunami at Fukushima was around 12 m from what has been published. Yes, the Fukushima reactors were situated on a cliff some 13ft high and they thought it was a natural sea wall/cliff to keep off any flooding. But the Tsunami waves crested that.

Surely you don't suggest that you were there during the Tsunami and actually measured it at 38m!

Again obfuscation, but then were you there. Read my statement about height of tsunami at fukushima and lt me know where did I tell that it was 38 mts on 11.3.2011.

Stop misquoting me.

And do tell me that you or any of the worthies are there directly reporting and vouching for radiation reports and designing insurance rip offs.
.

[chaanakya]

Interesting discussions.

Meanwhile in reality

http://www.eyewitnessnews.co.za/article ... um=twitter

Disaster-hit Japan faces protracted nuclear crisis
Reuters | 9 Minutes Ago

Radiation at the nuclear plant has soared in recent days. Latest readings on Sunday showed contamination 100,000 times normal in water at reactor No. 2 and 1,850 times normal in the nearby sea.

Those were the most alarming levels since the crisis began.

"I think maybe the situation is much more serious than we were led to believe," {really now} said one expert, Najmedin Meshkati, of the University of Southern California, adding it may take weeks to stabilise the situation and the United Nations should step in.

We are yet to hear last of it, sanku san. And when final reports come in experts might blame it on better reporting./smile/

[chaanakya]

For the first time , after a very long time probably, I saw people coming on the street in Japan (Tokyo) against nuk power plant. Normally they are the last one to voice dissent on the street.

http://www.mid-day.com/news/2011/mar/28 ... -Tokyo.htm
http://photos.world.yes.my/gallery/Deva ... g3yq9cz4zb

At least I never saw a single mass protest when I was there. That shows how much people are worried.

[vina]

A general comment, that record height measured was for another location, isn't it ? Tsunami height will vary from location to location, depending on local bathymetry and coastal features. Besides, all this can be done only with good model runs for various types of water column dislocations due to an earthquake. It is a relatively new applied science and very likely such numbers have got better and with good predictability only in recent years.

You can get a pretty good approximation with a paper and pencil and applying standard models . There is nothing special about Tsunami waves per se. They are the standard gravity waves (just like the ones generated in the oceans in general due to wind action). Water gets piled up and acts under the influence of gravity.

The standard model like Orbital wave theory (pls note how after I posted the theory and madrassa math behind this, all and sundry including those who come up with brilliances like 1.25 cups = 1 bucket and have the gumption and chutzpah to call others "ill-informed" will now become "egg spurts" on this, even if they can make next to nothing of it) explains the dynamics pretty well.

All you need to keep in mind is that Tsunami waves are very low frequency, ultra large wavelength (upto say 200 KM) waves. The point is, with that kind of wavelength , they travel thousands of kilometers in the space of a few oscillations with little attenuation (low freq) , nearly the speed of a jet plane (the good news is Chennai-Singapore is 3.5 hrs, so you do get atleast 3 hrs warning after the event at say Java /Sumatra ).

So now, when such a wave approaches a shallow shelf like typically found in India, just like a open ocean wave when it approaches shore starts cresting (ie height/wave length beyond a point where the wave itself is stable), the tsunami wave too starts cresting and rises in height and slams as an extra large wave! There is really no difference between a 3 m Tsunami wave vs a 3m Tyhoon wave in terms of effects, the difference being that you dont have warning in a Tsunami wave while there are several hours of warning (sky darkening, rails,squalls etc in a Typhoon) and that is what creates more damage in life and property.

For a particular feature like a cove etc, that can be added on to the model and a pretty good approxmition /first cut got. For final confirmation, they would build a sub scale model of the location with all the features, put it in a wave basin and you can get the heights and effects in every scenario pretty accurately to confirm the first cut estimates.

All this stuff is something which you do in Madrassas since atleast the 80s on a routine basis.

Okay , since this is BRF after all, lets have a quick jingo quiz.

Now given that there is a Category 5 hurricane in the Arabian sea some 500 kms off the coast of Karachi, you have the carriers VikAd and Vikrant (the new ADS ) fighting through gales with 30m waves and INS Arihant and other 2 subs of their class running underwater at 100m depth, in relation to the carriers on the surface, what percentage in terms of max roll and other motions , heave , pitch etc, will the subs experience ?

Folks with deep background in fluid mech from (Aero, Naval Arch, Engg Mech, Engg Fyzzics,Mech, Civil/Evil etc) pliss to excuse. Now that the fundamental theory has been posted, it should be easy enough for mango people to get it.

[Sanku]

The below incestuous relationships between the watchdog and the watched lead to disasters, always, everywhere.

===============
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... lenews_wsj

Nuclear Regulator Tied to Industry

Bucking the global standard, Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry has two distinct and often competing roles: regulating the nuclear power industry, and promoting Japanese nuclear technology at home and abroad.

The setup recalls U.S. regulation of offshore drilling before last year's oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, in which the same agency regulated the industry and promoted offshore oil-and- gas development. One of the Obama administration's first post-spill actions was to break up the agency.

..............................

A 2007 earthquake in a different part of Japan crippled another Tepco nuclear plant. Japan's main bar association, which investigated the problems, said regulators failed to catch errors in the power company's evaluation of a newly discovered seismic fault, which led to the plant having insufficient protection against earthquakes.

"METI has unabashedly sent retired officials to the power industry, and politicians have received campaign funds [from companies]. In exchange, power companies were allowed to hold on to their regional monopolies," said Taro Kono, a lawmaker with the opposition Liberal Democratic Partywho has been among the few open critics of the industry in parliament.

What a sordid saga....

[chaanakya]

Here is the "Cliff" on which Unit 1 is built, three mts + height and with tsunami barrier clearly visible.
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/news/gallery/ ... 560-e.html

And this is what one report says

http://newsonjapan.com/html/newsdesk/article/88365.php

Japan's cash-strapped government has moved away in recent years from costly projects such as increasing the height of sea walls to budget measures like producing maps that show which areas are at lower sea levels, he said.

"We cooperate with the government on tsunami counter-measures, but there has been less financing and sometimes there isn't enough for the construction of structural measures," Imamura said in an interview on Sunday.

"Now, the government's focus has shifted to non-structural measures, because they are cheaper."

And please don't ask me if I heard Imamura in person.

[vina]

Read my statement about height of tsunami at fukushima and lt me know where did I tell that it was 38 mts on 11.3.2011.

Okay, Please do enlighten us as when and at what day was a 38m wave recorded AT Fukushima, if you were talking about some other day?

Clean bowled eh, wot? Spinning can only get you that far.

[Lalmohan]

amartya sen's postulation is alive and well and on steroids on this thread

[vina]

^ Boss no one buys insurance in desh.

This aint no piddly insurance. It is a pot of gold ! Think of it, for just 5 bucks a year, you are rather sure to collect Rs 100 ! This isn't even a lottery , it is like shooting fish in a barrel!

All the worries disappear, life is fine, Don't worry, Be Happy, Dr Vina helps you soothe your frowns and all that.. (a nice jingle playing in the background).

Go on, dont think, just buy em!

[Lalmohan]

its not an insurance scam, its a CDS analogue! You can trade it on BRFEX

[vina]

its not an insurance scam, its a CDS analogue! You can trade it on BRFEX

CDS !! . This is a Phamily Phorum. We don't want to scare the genteel people by using scary words which recall the Financial Meltdown, so we only use innocuous sounding , nice wholesome and "halaal" words (suitably dumbed down, crushed, pulped and canned , so that it can be downed in a one liner as per popular demand) like "India Protection Option" . Nice na ?

[Lalmohan]

Financial meltdown, reactor meltdown... same to same onlee, no?

[vina]

Financial meltdown, reactor meltdown... same to same onlee, no?

Indeed! Nookelear, Phynancial and also Lal Masjid meltdowns same-same onree. Fallouts also same-same toxic .. Iodine/Cs, MBS/CDS and LalChix with Stix/ IED Mubaraks respectively

[somnath]

amartya sen's postulation is alive and well and on steroids on this thread

Lalmohan-ji, which one?

BTW, from IAEA's fine daily updates - here's for 27th Mar...
http://www.iaea.or.at/newscenter/news/t ... ate01.html

Dose rates at the Fukushima site continue to trend downwards

Details follow in the update...

[Sanku]

Guys, don't you find it embarrassing to yourself to indulge in such small minded inanity on critical issues? Forget the people of Japan, forget BRF, dont you guys owe it yourself to get out of the monkey bizness and focus on whats REALLY happening in the world?

[Sanku]

Congrats Chaankya; the mainstream media is picking up on what was being said here by Shiv, You and others since day 1-2.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110327/ap_ ... unami_risk

AP IMPACT: Nuclear plant downplayed tsunami risk

And while TEPCO and government officials have said no one could have anticipated such a massive tsunami, there is ample evidence that such waves have struck the northeast coast of Japan before — and that it could happen again along the culprit fault line, which runs roughly north to south, offshore, about 220 miles (350 kilometers) east of the plant.

On top of that, TEPCO modeled the worst-case tsunami using its own computer program instead of an internationally accepted prediction method.

Read it all, to see how science can be blatantly manipulated to serve the intrests of unscrupulous experts, who, by carefully rigging the "models" deny reality.

(not that I am not familiar with the above in my own line of work as a engineer, but then, some things apparently need to be told often and repeatedly)

[chaanakya]

^^The situation will get attention from concerned people and as you said it would get worse before it gets better.

Here is something more to think about .
More radioactive substances found in seawater

More high levels of radioactive material have been found in seawater near the troubled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.

Tokyo Electric Power Company says samples collected 30 meters from one of the plant's water outlets on Sunday contained 46 becquerels per cubic centimeter of iodine-131. That's 1,150 times higher than the regulated standard level.

On Friday and Saturday, water samples collected 330 meters south of another outlet showed levels of iodine-131 that were higher than 1,000 times the standard level. However, on Sunday the levels had dropped to 250 times the standard level.

The government's nuclear safety agency says radioactive materials may have leaked from the plant and drifted with the current from south to north.

TEPCO is struggling to remove highly radioactive water from the turbine buildings of 3 reactors before work to restore their cooling systems can begin.

On Tuesday, the company intends to pump fresh water, instead of sea water, into spent fuel storage pools of 2 reactors.

Fresh water was pumped into the reactors by Saturday, to prevent the salt water from corroding the cooling system.

Radioactive levels in the air are decreasing at most observation points in the surrounding areas on Monday.

The reading in Fukushima City, 65 kilometers northwest of the nuclear power plant, was 3.84 microsieverts per hour at 1 AM.

The annual total limit of radiation exposure considered safe for humans is 1,000 microsieverts based on standards set by the International Commission

http://www.asahi.com/english/TKY201103280144.html

And another

Tokyo Electric Power Co. acknowledged for the first time possible damage to core pressure containers at the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant--the last line of defense in preventing radioactive materials from spewing out.

TEPCO officials told reporters Monday morning that despite the continuous pumping in of water to cool down the No. 1, No. 2 and No. 3 reactor cores, water levels were not rising as expected, meaning the pressure containers may not be completely sealed off.

The water, which is believed to be mixing with radioactive materials from the fuel rods within, is likely leaking from the pressure containers, they said.

The tsunami that hit the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant after the March 11 Great East Japan Earthquake knocked out the emergency generators at the three reactors. The systems that circulate water within the pressure containers to cool the fuel rods also stopped working.

Workers have been pumping in water through pipes to the pressure container to submerge the fuel rods and directly cool the decay heat that continues to be emitted even after the reactors were stopped.

But the water level meters for the three reactors have not risen as expected.

TEPCO officials said a possible reason the water levels were not rising sufficiently were breaches in the lower part of the pressure containers. They said they did not know what caused the possible damage. ( looks like breach and damage is being used without much clarity)

A pressure container holds nuclear fuel pellets placed in metal rods that have been bundled together. A containment vessel, located within the building housing the reactor, surrounds the pressure container.

The pressure containers at the Fukushima plant are made of steel 16 centimeters thick. The lower part of the containers have openings for measuring and other equipment. Water may be leaking from around those parts, the officials said.

TEPCO has cited the possibility that fuel rods may have been damaged due to overheating after being exposed above the water's surface in the core.

Here is the height of tsunami

The March 11th tsunami that hit Japan's northeastern coast was as high as 13 meters in the city of Rikuzentakata, Iwate Prefecture.

Researchers from the University of Tokyo and the Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology said on Sunday that the tsunami reached a gymnasium one kilometer from the shoreline and climbed as high as 13 meters.

Safe annual radiation absorbed limit in mSv is 1000 mSv as repeatedly dinned to brf members

At Fukushima 65 km away from afflicted NPP was 3.84 mSv per hour

So a person not voluntarily evacuating outside the 30 km evacuation zone would be receiving , lets see

3.84 * 24 hrs =92.6 mSv per day

since 16 days into crisis

he would have received

92.6mSv * 16 days=1474.56 mSv

If caesium 137 ityadi ityadi are found to have its way then

hypothetically he would be getting

92.6 mSv * 365 days=33638 mSv /annum.

So actually a dose of 3.84 mSv per hour translate into 33638 mSv per annum( subject to rise or fall in radiation level.) FWIW

Madarssa maths only.Could be wrong. Some catch has to be there .

In case I am egg plastered

http://hps.org/publicinformation/radter ... act49.html
Cumulative dose
The total dose resulting from repeated exposures of ionizing radiation to the same portion of the body, or to the whole body, over a period of time.

But I only remember those leh boys in wangdoo's school who were more concerned with the fun part as opposed to the concerns of chatur about ampere part which he could have worked out himself if not in pain. Sorry OT only.

I only wish we could stop snipping.

[Lalmohan]

sanku, believe me we are all highly concerned about what is going on at fukushima, hence the analysis. a number of posters however are questioning your abilities of comprehension

[Sanku]

sanku, believe me we are all highly concerned about what is going on at fukushima, hence the analysis. a number of posters however are questioning your abilities of comprehension

All I see is a bunch of people who show a sheer inability to engage in a civil discourse when they can not shape it the way they want based on facts.

I think that is a deeper malaise than comprehension issues don't you think?

[Lalmohan]

no i don't
and ask yourself the same question

[Sanku]

no i don't
and ask yourself the same question

Well as I see, the contribution of some posters to this thread has been name calling, questioning other posters or media intelligence and such like stellar behavior.

As opposed to, a critical observation of what is happening, collating various news reports, posting significant calculations (no banana's dont qualify) and discussing what is the prognosis.

Its actually a open and shut case, but will require some amount of courage by all to see what is what.

Many thanks.

[Lalmohan]

[Sanku]

Briasphati -- the media is calling the recent loss of Merkel's party as fallout from Fukushima.

Would you consider that a accurate portrayal of whats happening?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/wor ... 76,00.html

'The Political Fallout from Fukushima Has Already Reached Germany'

[Sanku]

As I said.

The contribution of some posters to this thread has been name calling, questioning other posters or media intelligence and such like stellar behavior.

I am truly disappointed Lalbrof.

[somnath]

Its truly amazing how some people can use such definitive expressions as "open and shut case" et al when we dont even have access to full data, forget analysis of the same...It will take months for the real "experts" to study and come up with even half-credible conclusions...and here we already have conclusions