2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Locked
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by abhishek_sharma »

Japan to Widen Evacuation Zone

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsid ... -zone.html
TOKYO—Japan's government will move people out of some areas outside of the current evacuation and sheltering zones because radiation doses could accumulate to high levels over the coming year.

The government, the International Atomic Energy Agency, a Kyoto University group, and Greenpeace have all found elevated levels of radiation beyond the 20-kilometer evacuation zone and even the 30-kilometer zone within which people are urged to minimize time outdoors. Japan's Nuclear Regulatory Commission is now recommending that those living in areas where the annual accumulated dose will reach 20 millisieverts over the next year move to safer areas, Masanori Shinano told reporters. Prior to the current emergency, nuclear power plant workers in Japan were limited to annual doses of 100 millisieverts. Protecting ordinary citizens is not an emergency situation but rather a "deliberate evacuation" that will be carried out over the next month after consultations with the affected communities, according to government spokesman Noriyuki Shikata, speaking at a press conference.

The areas with elevated radiation levels are northwest of the stricken Fukushima nuclear power plant and apparently got the worst of a radioactive plume blown in that direction by weather patterns in the early days of the crisis.

Towns south of the plant seem to be much safer. Radiation levels throughout the entire region have dropped significantly over the past month. But the downward curve has been flattening out, indicating that iodine, with a half-life of 8 days, is decaying but that cesium-134 and cesium-137 "account for the majority of radiation you can measure today; that is very bad news," said Greenpeace radiation expert Jan Vande Putte at a briefing today. The half-life of cesium-134 is 2 years; that of cesium-137 is 30 years. This means dangerous levels of radiation could persist for years if not decades.

Government officials could not immediately say how many people will need to move under the new evacuation policy or how long they will need to stay away from their homes. "There has to be more intensive monitoring to answer such questions," Shinano said. In a related development, the Ministry of Agriculture on Friday banned the planting of rice in soil found to contain more than 5000 becquerels per kilogram of cesium. Several of the handful of locations sampled by Greenpeace exceed those limits, said Rianne Teule, another Greenpeace radiation expert. The agricultural ministry said that it will take more extensive test to determine which fields are off limits. The ministry also intends to boost testing of harvested rice.

Fukushima set for epic clean-up: Latest data suggest a Chernobyl-like effort will be needed.

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110411/ ... 2146a.html
As the immediate threat from Fukushima Daiichi's damaged nuclear reactors recedes, engineers and scientists are facing up to a clean-up process that could last for many decades, or even a century.

Experts on previous nuclear accidents say that the sheer quantity of nuclear material that needs to be removed from the site, together with the extent of the damage, makes Fukushima a unique challenge. The plant is home to just under 1,000 tonnes of nuclear fuel and thousands of tonnes of radioactive water.

Last week, the Toshiba Corporation floated a rough proposal to clean up the site in a decade, according to Japanese media. But veterans of clean-up operations at sites such as Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania say that it will probably take much longer. The removal of the radioactive material will require a carefully planned and technologically sophisticated programme, made all the more challenging by the devastation left after partial core meltdowns and explosions.

No clean-up can begin until the reactors are stabilized. Radiation around the plant is beginning to wane, but the threat of further releases has not yet passed. On 7 and 11 April, severe aftershocks struck nearby, raising fears that the three crippled reactors could be damaged further. The Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), which manages the plant, says that no additional damage has been detected.

A 26 March report from the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), leaked to The New York Times, says that massive explosions at the plant in March scattered fuel from the reactors' spent-fuel pools around the site. NRC officials also believe that a portion of the uranium fuel inside the unit 2 reactor may have escaped its stainless steel containment vessel and fallen onto the concrete floor below, although the Japanese government has yet to confirm this. In addition, the document indicates that water is not circulating properly through the cores of the damaged reactors, so it will be necessary to continue to flood them, says Richard Lahey, an emeritus professor of nuclear engineering at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, New York.

This strategy creates its own problems. The reactors' cooling systems are normally a closed circuit. Flooding the cores means that water contaminated with radioisotopes will continue to spill out into the environment. TEPCO has already reported highly radioactive water in buildings and trenches around the site.

Dealing with the water will be a pressing priority for any clean-up operation, according to Jack DeVine, an independent nuclear consultant who spent six years dismantling the unit 2 reactor at Three Mile Island after it partially melted down in 1979. The accident left thousands of tonnes of water laced with radioactive caesium-137 swilling around in the reactor's basement. Over the course of months, the US team built a system that could suck the water out and pass it through radiation-resistant zeolite filters. The zeolite removed the caesium and other radioisotopes, leaving almost pristine water, which was eventually evaporated at a facility on the site. A similar system could work at Fukushima, says DeVine, although the constant leakage from the damaged cores means that any clean-up is a race against time. More than 10,000 tonnes of low-level radioactive water has already had to be dumped from storage tanks into the Pacific Ocean to make way for more-radioactive cooling water.

Cleaning up the reactors themselves presents an even greater challenge. Debris and high radiation levels are making it impossible to conduct proper surveys of the damage. In the near term, robots will need to explore the reactor buildings and map the radiation inside, says Red Whittaker, a robotics expert at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, who has developed systems for other nuclear accidents.

It could be years before anyone can look inside the cores themselves. At Three Mile Island, engineers had to wait three years before radiation levels had fallen sufficiently to allow them to lower a camera through a control rod drive shaft into the heart of the reactor. At Fukushima, it could take longer still. The boiling water reactor (BWR) design used there is sealed with a solid stainless-steel cap that can only be removed by a heavy, fuel-loading crane located above the reactor. Explosions at three of the units with fuel in their cores mean that "their cranes are clearly toast", says DeVine. Plant operators will have to find another way in.

The reactor's design also presents other problems. "The BWR is just a rat's nest of tight spaces, pipes and valves," says DeVine. To effectively remove the fuel, DeVine thinks that one or more new buildings with dedicated cranes must be built around each reactor. "It's not something that will be up in a month or two," he says. Whittaker adds that robots and humans will need to share the work in a methodical, coordinated way. "The nature of these operations is that they are patient and persistent," he says.

Indeed, the effort required seems likely to be more akin to the clean-up strategy at Chernobyl in the Ukraine than that of Three Mile Island. Engineers at Chernobyl are beginning to lay the foundations for a massive €1-billion (US$1.4-billion) enclosure, complete with automated cranes, that will eventually lift apart the sarcophagus of steel and concrete hastily thrown up around the stricken unit 4 reactor in the months after it exploded in 1986. The new building, which is intended to last a century, was agreed in principle in 2001, but will not be completed until at least 2015. Clean-up of the site is scheduled to last until 2065 — almost 80 years after the accident.

TEPCO almost certainly cannot afford a clean-up on this scale. "I think that, ultimately, the government is going to have to pay for it," says Robert Alvarez at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington DC, who oversaw clean-up of former US nuclear weapons plants during the administration of President Bill Clinton. The government already seems to be mulling whether to take over the utility, shares in which have plunged since the accident.

Given the complexity of the task ahead, some think it may be better to abandon Fukushima entirely — at least for the time being. "My bet would be: you seal it and wait a hundred years," says Alan Johnson, a retired reactor physicist who was head of Britain's Sella­field nuclear processing site in the late 1980s.

Sellafield, once known as Windscale, was in 1957 the site of the United Kingdom's worst nuclear accident, when a reactor's graphite core caught fire. Final decommissioning of the reactor is still at least 20 years away, but the hiatus has allowed radioactive materials to decay and given engineers time to develop the best clean-up strategies possible. "What's the rush in doing it quicker?" asks Johnson.

But natural disasters are rare in England. Given the threat of major earthquakes, tsunamis and typhoons that could strike Japan in the decades to come, DeVine has his doubts about applying the same strategy. "Bottling it up and leaving it seems to me to be a really bad choice," he says.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11170
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by Amber G. »

Now close to home ( Mid-west, Ohio, USA) we can see I-131 from Fukushima in our water (after some rain)

The I-131 levels were measured about 15 picocuries/L (0.6 Bq per liter) .. the readings are similar to what EPA reported in, Oak Ridge TN, Atlanta etc.. but much lower than Washington state (8x) or Idaho.(15x) (From various news sources with qualifier IIRC)

IIRC this is about 1/5th of the level seen from Chernobyl (I was on East Coast then)


Yep, lot of I-131 but I am still staying in my home :)
(Just to give some perspective on how sensitive radiation meters can be, and why it is all but impossible for Japan/Tepco to cover up radiation)
JwalaMukhi
BRFite
Posts: 1635
Joined: 28 Mar 2007 18:27

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by JwalaMukhi »

Slowly, the level has been raised to 7. The concrete pump (modified to pump water) but can also be used in case of other options is probably now in place. So, if the saga continues, maybe entombment will be the price to the Faustian bargain as Michio Kaku says
http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo ... _Reactors/

Clearly, note that one of the arguably very vocal Physicists says there is no need for US to do a Faustian bargain, as they have plenty of other bargains to be had, including coal. Maybe, India has some lessons here. For all those worried about environment from coal, maybe it is time to ask US to increase its energy mix to have nuclear power to france levels and relieve the coal burning.
JwalaMukhi
BRFite
Posts: 1635
Joined: 28 Mar 2007 18:27

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by JwalaMukhi »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DkCD5IInMY
Please see from 3.48 for how to do faustian bargain.
Theo_Fidel

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by Theo_Fidel »

I have to say I never thought this thing could hit the Chernobyl level. I even made fun of people who said so.

Forced to eat my words now. I will never underestimate how bad a nuclear situation can get in future.
arnab
BRFite
Posts: 1136
Joined: 13 Dec 2005 09:08

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by arnab »

Theo_Fidel wrote:I have to say I never thought this thing could hit the Chernobyl level. I even made fun of people who said so.

Forced to eat my words now. I will never underestimate how bad a nuclear situation can get in future.
Don't worry Theo ji :)
The only other accident ever put at this level was the explosion and sustained fire at Chernobyl 4 in April 1986. This, however, was made far worse in terms of health impact by the instantaneous nature of the release, the failure of authorities in the Soviet Union to evacuate nearby people and restrict the consumption of milk and finally by some people's refusal to take potassium iodide tablets due to mistrust of the government.

By comparison at Fukushima the situation developed over a number of days giving Japanese authorities ample time to evacuate residents living within 20 kilometres and warn those in a further ten kilometre radius to stay indoors. Milk, drinking water and many other foodstuffs have been routinely monitored and their consumption controlled. Potassium iodide tablets were distributed early and consumed at the right time.
So far, three workers have been killed by the immediate effects of the earthquake and tsunami and none by the effects of radiation. No measurable effect on the general public is expected.
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_Fu ... 04111.html

The INES scale is a relative scale. It just says 7 is a 'major accident'. One of the first thing that the INES user manual (2008) says is that INES must not be used to compare with other nuclear accidents in other countries because the contexts are different. So your original statement stands - Fukishima is no Chernobyl.

People have learnt from that disaster, just as they will learn from this one.
arnab
BRFite
Posts: 1136
Joined: 13 Dec 2005 09:08

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by arnab »

Just to add to the above:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/4e30b860-64ae-1 ... z1JHDxwL9i
While the new assessment puts the Fukushima Daiichi incident on a par with Chernobyl, the nuclear regulator said the amount of radioactive contamination that has escaped from the plant since it was damaged by Japan’s March 11 earthquake and tsunami was around one tenth of the radiation that escaped from the plant in the former Soviet Union
Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10372
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by Mort Walker »

Amber G. wrote:Now close to home ( Mid-west, Ohio, USA) we can see I-131 from Fukushima in our water (after some rain)

The I-131 levels were measured about 15 picocuries/L (0.6 Bq per liter) .. the readings are similar to what EPA reported in, Oak Ridge TN, Atlanta etc.. but much lower than Washington state (8x) or Idaho.(15x) (From various news sources with qualifier IIRC)

IIRC this is about 1/5th of the level seen from Chernobyl (I was on East Coast then)


Yep, lot of I-131 but I am still staying in my home :)
(Just to give some perspective on how sensitive radiation meters can be, and why it is all but impossible for Japan/Tepco to cover up radiation)
Just don't spend much time on the thorium laced sandy beaches of TN and Kerala, you may be exposed to 50 mSv/year. :)

What's nice is that these isotopes can be measured. Just think about the hormones and anti-biotics in our water supply which are not measurable and are an equal if not worse cause of cancer.
arnab
BRFite
Posts: 1136
Joined: 13 Dec 2005 09:08

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by arnab »

Marten wrote:So the central message coming out of this is that while human losses will thankfully be less owing to lesser radiation being spread into the atmosphere, Fukushima is considered technically at the same level of "disruption" as Chernobyl.

Is this a correct observation at the present moment?
Well I don't claim to be a nuke literate but yes that is my understanding :)

To qualify that: The Japanese authorities believe that the Fukishima accident merits to be rated as a 'major accident' (INES scale 7) in the context of their assessment of escape of radioactive materials, disruption of lives of people and the nature of monitoring required. (Whether the Soviet Union / Russia would have rated a Fukishima like disaster on their territory at 7 when compared with Chernobyl is obviously debatable).
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by chaanakya »

Mort Walker wrote:
chaanakya wrote:
I suppose that was already covered, Sv mSv and muSv or what is called micro. Point was not the difference in milli and micro. That is why that sentence was in red. 1mSv is legal limit over and above background radiation and medical exposure. While Japan has just increased limit for emergency worker to 250mSV.
Don't know where you got your 20mSv limit btw. but never mind.Radiation is good onlee.
The 20 mSv was what what recommended to change to from the 1 mSv for the general public. NPP workers, in non-emergency situations, are suggested to an annual exposure of no more than 20 mSv. The 14,480 microSv (14.5 mSv) measured is high, but not life threatening.
Thanx. I think 20 mSV is the limit set for evacuation zone for civilians.
http://www.asahi.com/english/TKY201104110139.html
The new evacuation zone, called a planned evacuation area, covers areas projected to suffer an accumulated radiation of 20 millisieverts or more annually.
he government said Monday it will issue new evacuation orders for areas with high levels of accumulated radiation that lie beyond the 20-kilometer radius of the stricken Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant, despite complaints from two local mayors.

The orders will cover certain areas within the 20- to 30-kilometer radius in which residents have been instructed to remain indoors. It will also include some areas that lie beyond the 30-km radius.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by chaanakya »

lookslike already posted and has generated enough heat/radiation here. But link from NHK eqv of our DD for Japan would be in order. Not sure why they choose to apply Level 7 when cumulative release of I-131 is somewhat less than Cher and they have not yet give their estimates. One more thing I have noticed is that Radiation Monitoring webpage indicates all other sites except Fukushima I and II which it declares as under survey. Area larger than 30 Km is also covered because of prevailing wind condition which is North West.

Japan to raise Fukushima crisis level to worst
The Japanese government's nuclear safety agency has decided to raise the crisis level of the Fukushima Daiichi power plant accident from 5 to 7, the worst on the international scale.

The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency made the decision on Monday. It says the damaged facilities have been releasing a massive amount of radioactive substances, which are posing a threat to human health and the environment over a wide area.

The agency used the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale, or INES, to gauge the level. The scale was designed by an international group of experts to indicate the significance of nuclear events with ratings of 0 to 7.

On March 18th, one week after the massive quake, the agency declared the Fukushima trouble a level 5 incident, the same as the accident at Three Mile Island in the United States in 1979.

Level 7 has formerly only been applied to the Chernobyl accident in the former Soviet Union in 1986 when hundreds of thousands of terabecquerels of radioactive iodine-131 were released into the air. One terabecquerel is one trillion becquerels.

The agency believes the cumulative amount from the Fukushima plant is less than that from Chernobyl.


Officials from the agency and the Nuclear Safety Commission will hold a news conference on Tuesday morning to explain the change of evaluation.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 05:47 +0900 (JST)
http://www.asahi.com/english/TKY201104110139.html
Most of Iitate and Kawamata are outside the 30-kilometer radius.

Speaking about the new evacuation zone, Fukuyama said on a Fuji Television Network Inc. program on Sunday that Prime Minister Naoto Kan has told government officials to put the safety of residents above anything else.

The amounts of accumulated radiation have been rising in northern Fukushima Prefecture and other places due to the wind direction.
/speculation/Apparently not enough data is being released. Had such accident occurred in India , Indian Govt and Nuclear Est would have been butchered by International agencies and media. Same experts who are preaching would have conjured up dire future for India/end speculation/
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by chaanakya »

http://www.asahi.com/english/TKY201104110137.html
A month has passed in the dangerous and lonely efforts to resolve the crisis at the nuclear plant, and still, there is no end in sight. There are many tales emerging of the unselfishness and bravery of these workers, while others take a more realistic view of why they are risking their lives amid high radiation levels to cool down the plant's overheating fuel rods.

A man in his 40s, who was dispatched to Fukushima No. 1 from a partner of the plant's operator, Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO), said, "I did not want to go there. But if I reject the request, I will lose my job."

The daily pay is less than 20,000 yen ($236).
What workers found at Fukushima No. 1 in the beginning was a lack of adequate safety equipment and spartan living conditions.

At the start of the nuclear crisis, there was an insufficient number of dosimeters to measure radiation levels. Because of that, about 180 workers were engaged in the recovery work without them.

An employee of a company that has dispatched its workers to the Fukushima plant added, "We want to make the dispatched workers wear lead-lined suits."

The Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant had "whole body counters," which measures "internal exposure," or level of radiation in the human body. However, those counters were rendered useless due to damage from the earthquake and subsequent tsunami. The internal exposure is now measured by inspection vehicles.

Despite the precautions for worker safety at Fukushima No. 1, there is concern.

"Some workers may have radiation-caused symptoms after several years," said Atsushi Suzuki, a lawyer who previously handled a labor disaster compensation issue for a nuclear power plant worker.

Suzuki represented a man who worked at the Fukushima No. 1 plant from 1977 to 1982 as a plumber and on other jobs.

After he left the workplace, he was diagnosed as suffering from multiple myeloma, a deadly bone marrow cancer. He died in 2007.

The man was recognized to have died from exposure to radiation. In a suit seeking compensation, however, TEPCO did not acknowledge its responsibility. As a result, his demand for compensation was rejected.

"It is extremely difficult to prove scientifically the cause-and-effect-relationship between exposure to radiation and a disease that broke out later," Suzuki said. "I think that people currently engaged in recovery work (at the Fukushima No. 1 plant) do not have the leeway to prevent exposure to radiation by themselves. It is necessary for the government and TEPCO to fully consider sufficient prevention measures and compensation (to those who suffered radiation-caused diseases)."
Theo_Fidel

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by Theo_Fidel »

Does this trigger a need for longer term evacuation till the dose levels drop as in Chernobyl. It is odd that the plant continues to release so much radiation even now. It is probably from the reactor steam which might be months to years type continuing process.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by chaanakya »

Theo_Fidel wrote:Does this trigger a need for longer term evacuation till the dose levels drop as in Chernobyl. It is odd that the plant continues to release so much radiation even now. It is probably from the reactor steam which might be months to years type continuing process.
This is what NISA report says about Reactor 1 and 2 at Fukushima Daiichi
White smoke was confirmed to generate continuously as of 6:30am April 8th.
whether it is steam or something else is not yet confirmed even after reading all the reports. But this is one which may be causing radiation leak.

There was report that Radiation in control room had increased at one point of time which forced TEPCO to line up windows with lead covered glasses. Link in previous post.

http://www.bousai.ne.jp/eng/

This link give latest data. Please note that Fukushima 1 & 2 and Miyagi are still under survey and no real time data is posted even after one month of disaster at the crippled or ruined plant. Is it lack of transparency or no data being available?
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by chaanakya »

Latest condition from IAEA website for reactor 1 - 4 at Fukushima Daiichi
Please note that core integrity and fuel integrity is damaged or severe damaged
While containment integrity shows no information for 1 and damage suspected for 2 &3

Image
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by Sanku »

Shouldn't Japan be placed under sanctions as a irresponsible Nuclear power considering how they have been dumping radioactivity in environment?
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by chaanakya »

TEPCO tardy on N-plant emergency
The Yomiuri Shimbun
Prime Minister Naoto Kan's blood must have run cold around 10 p.m. on March 11, the day of the Great East Japan Earthquake, when he received the first report on the terrible situation at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant.

The report from the Nuclear and Industry Safety Agency of the Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry predicted reactor cores at the nuclear power plant--where power and all functions to cool the reactors were lost in the quake and tsunami--would be exposed to air, and that extreme heat generated by fuel rods would damage their encasing tubes later that night.

Fuel rods would melt down, and the following morning the pressure inside the reactors' containment vessels would reach the maximum allowed for by the facilities' designers, the report predicted.

Kan and everyone at the Prime Minister's Office understood the seriousness of the situation described by the report.

There were only two options that might prevent a meltdown of the reactors--either restore the plant's power supply and cooling functions immediately, or pour water directly into the reactors. If neither course of action could be taken, the pressure inside the reactors would become so great that they would be destroyed.

The report concluded that valves in the containment vessels would have to be opened, to release radioactive steam and reduce the pressure inside.

However, opening the valves was considered a last resort. Although it could prevent the reactors from breaking apart, it would release steam with high levels of radioactive materials into the atmosphere.

Such a step had never been taken at a nuclear power plant in Japan.

===

Countdown to power loss

The Prime Minister's Office, the nuclear safety agency and even Tokyo Electric Power Co., the operator of the Fukushima plant, were filled with relief immediately after the earthquake. They had been told backup diesel generators would provide sufficient support to stabilize the Nos. 1 to 3 reactors, which were in operation when the quake hit.

However, subsequent tsunami destroyed 12 of the 13 emergency generators.

"Round up all the power-supply cars and send them to the plant right now!" shouted a TEPCO supervisor at the utility's head office in Tokyo.

Nuclear reactors have emergency cooling systems that channel water into the reactor, using a turbine that can be powered by residual heat. However, the systems rely on emergency batteries to power the water intake valves.

The emergency batteries at the Fukushima plant were expected to run out of power around midnight.

===

Options exhausted

TEPCO dispatched power-supply vehicles from various power stations around the country to the crippled nuclear plant. However, the vehicles had to travel very slowly because of damage to roads in northeastern Japan. The first power-supply car did not reach the plant until 9 p.m. on March 11.

Once at the site, the lack of preparation became apparent. Cables needed to connect the vehicles' high-voltage electricity to plant facilities were not long enough. TEPCO immediately ordered additional cables, but precious time had been wasted. Power would not be restored at the plant by midnight.

The pressure inside the containment vessels rose above the maximum allowed for by the facilities' design, and radiation levels at the plant increased sharply. No option was left but to open the valves.

===

Anger rose as TEPCO dithered

TEPCO began preparations for opening the valves around 7 p.m. on March 11. Pressure inside the No. 1 reactor was particularly high.

"Soon, the reactor won't be able to withstand the pressure," said an official of the accident headquarters at the plant, which was keeping in touch with TEPCO's head office via video phone. "We have to vent the pressure immediately."

"Pressure inside the containment vessel of the No. 1 reactor has gone up dramatically," the agency told Banri Kaieda, economy, trade and industry minister, at 12:45 a.m. on March 12. In fact, it had reached 1.5 times the designed maximum, meaning the condition of the reactor was critical.

"To get things under control, we have to pour water into the reactors and then vent the steam that is generated," Haruki Madarame, chairman of the Cabinet Office's Nuclear Safety Commission, told Kaieda.

At 1:30 a.m. on March 12, Kan, Kaieda and Madarame gathered at the crisis management center in the basement of the Prime Minister's Office.

The three urged TEPCO officials to vent the steam as soon as possible. But TEPCO officials said there was no way of opening the valves because there was no power supply.

Exasperated, Kaieda called the utility's head office in Tokyo and the accident headquarters at the plant every hour, pressuring them to open the valves immediately.

TEPCO workers tried to open the valves by manually overriding the automatic system, but struggled to make progress because they had to work in darkness.

At dawn, pressure inside the No. 1 reactor was more than twice the designed maximum.

Eventually, at 6:50 a.m., the government ordered the utility to open the valves under the Nuclear Reactor Regulation Law.

When Kan visited the accident site shortly after 7 a.m. and found TEPCO had not opened the valves yet, he reprimanded company officials. The officials replied they would like to have another hour to make a decision on what to do.

Kan blew his stack.

"Now's not the time to make such lackadaisical comments!" the prime minister told the TEPCO officials.

Yet even still, the utility spent three more hours discussing the matter before finally opening the valves at 10:17 a.m.

Five hours after that, a hydrogen explosion occurred at the No. 1 reactor, blowing apart its outer building.

(Apr. 12, 2011)
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13257
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by Lalmohan »

Looking at the different evacuation news reports and coupled with the regional economic analysis - the newly notified areas have one month to move out of their homes; this feels much more like a public opinion driven precaution-evacuation rather than an emergency, with possible compensation as being one of the drivers. that's fine - but a political issue for the Japanese government.

What we have been told is that the normal cooling circuit is not yet operational in 1, 2 & 3. So water is being injected and steam is being created, and probably released - with attendant radiation - although as the waste heat reduces, this is likely to be coming down. Also, the spent fuel ponds continue to bubble away, which is probably where the real danger is coming from. I expect that a worst case scenario for this has been projected forward and the evacuation ordered as a precaution.

without rehashing the discussion on cooling systems for the reactor - where we understand the faults and mistakes, its time to start thinking harder about fuel rod management

it seems to me that with so much heat potential in the spent fuel, there should be some sort of secondary 'burn' process which extracts this heat and puts it to use...
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by chaanakya »

From Tepco report issued by NISA

High tech solution to fight nuclear disaster

1. Police water canon vehicle
2. Fire tenders
3. Helicopter based water spraying
4. Sand and sand bags to check radioactive water from leaking to ocean
5. Coagulants/sodium silicate
6. News paper cuttings
7.saw dust
8.polymer absorbent
9. rubber boards
10.jig( prop)
11.concrete in the pit
12.concrete pumps modified as water pump.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by chaanakya »

Lalmohan wrote:Looking at the different evacuation news reports and coupled with the regional economic analysis - the newly notified areas have one month to move out of their homes; this feels much more like a public opinion driven precaution-evacuation rather than an emergency, with possible compensation as being one of the drivers. that's fine - but a political issue for the Japanese government.

What we have been told is that the normal cooling circuit is not yet operational in 1, 2 & 3. So water is being injected and steam is being created, and probably released - with attendant radiation - although as the waste heat reduces, this is likely to be coming down. Also, the spent fuel ponds continue to bubble away, which is probably where the real danger is coming from. I expect that a worst case scenario for this has been projected forward and the evacuation ordered as a precaution.

without rehashing the discussion on cooling systems for the reactor - where we understand the faults and mistakes, its time to start thinking harder about fuel rod management

it seems to me that with so much heat potential in the spent fuel, there should be some sort of secondary 'burn' process which extracts this heat and puts it to use
...
Thats a fair assessment.

Bold part is a good idea. Why they have not thought of this. Waste hear recovery from secondary "burn" and low pressure turbines could generate enough electricity to power auxiliary systems onsite. JMT.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13257
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by Lalmohan »

i expect its not enough heat to drive turbines, but just the heat could be used for district heating or heat pumps (via heat exchangers of course)
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by chaanakya »

Sanku wrote:It would be good to compare the total amount of radioactive isotopes which were released in Chernobyl and Fukushima, if that data is available (when it becomes available)

We may end up needing to revise the scale from 7 onwards and higher to account for scales of very big disasters. After all not all big disasters are same and there is no particular sense in stopping at 7.

http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/201 ... 4000c.html
The new ranking signifies a "major accident" with "wider consequences" than the previous level, according to the Vienna-based IAEA.

"We have upgraded the severity level to 7 as the impact of radiation leaks has been widespread from the air, vegetables, tap water and the ocean," said Minoru Oogoda of Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency.

NISA officials said one of the factors behind the decision was that the cumulative amount of radioactive particles released into the atmosphere since the incident had reached levels that apply to a Level 7 incident.
The revision was based on cross-checking and assessments of data on leaks of radioactive iodine-131 and cesium-137, said NISA spokesman Hidehiko Nishiyama.


This Sunday, April 10 image taken by T-Hawk drone aircraft and released by Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) shows the damaged reactor building of Unit 3 of the tsunami-crippled Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant in Okuma town, Fukushima Prefecture, northeastern Japan. (AP Photo/Tokyo Electric Power Co.)
"We have refrained from making announcements until we have reliable data," Nishiyama said.

"The announcement is being made now because it became possible to look at and check the accumulated data assessed in two different ways," he said, referring to measurements from NISA and the Nuclear Security Council.

Nishiyama noted that unlike in Chernobyl there have been no explosions of reactor cores at the Fukushima Dai-ichi plant, although there were hydrogen explosions.

"In that sense, this situation is totally different from Chernobyl," he said.

He said the amount of radiation leaking from the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant was around 10 percent of the Chernobyl accident.

Tokyo Electric Power Co., the operator of the plant, is still estimating the total amount of radioactive material that might be released by the accident, said company spokesman Junichi Matsumoto.

He acknowledged the amount of radioactivity released might even exceed the amount emitted by Chernobyl.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by chaanakya »

Lalmohan wrote:i expect its not enough heat to drive turbines, but just the heat could be used for district heating or heat pumps (via heat exchangers of course)
If you get temp upto 80 deg C that's good for turbines. I am not sure how heated spent fuel would get. Will check though.
NAL has such tech, btw
amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by amit »

Sanku wrote:It would be good to compare the total amount of radioactive isotopes which were released in Chernobyl and Fukushima, if that data is available (when it becomes available)

We may end up needing to revise the scale from 7 onwards and higher to account for scales of very big disasters. After all not all big disasters are same and there is no particular sense in stopping at 7.
Here's an assessment on amount of radioactivity.
The decision was made after Japan's nuclear safety body determined that at one point after the March 11 earthquake, the plant was releasing 10,000 terabecquerels of iodine-131 for several hours; level 7 accidents are defined as releasing tens of thousands of terabecquerels. "The INES rating itself is not an indicator of a daily phenomena, but the assessment after careful consideration and calculation on the event that happened in the past," Ken Morita of NISA told TIME on Tuesday morning.
NISA has also noted, however, that the amount of radioactive material being released at Fukushima today is less than 1 terabecquerel. The agency says that, to date, Fukushima has only released about 10% of total radiation released 25 years ago in Chernobyl, or about 1.8 million terabecquerels. About 30 people, mostly workers, died in the immediate aftermath of Chernobyl, though the UN has estimated that the long-term death toll due to exposure could eventually be as high as 4000.
It's worth remembering that all the radiation released in Chernobyl happened over a few days. At Fukushima, we've just crossed a month and it's still at 10 per cent. It's no wonder 30 people died in Chernobyl but no fatalities have been reported yet from Fukushima, in fact no radiation sickness also.
Though raising Fukushima's level to 7 may not herald any immediate worsening of events, it is sure to add to many residents' growing concern — and feelings of helplessness — over what could happen at dozens of other nuclear reactors spread across this seismic archipelago.
You know, earlier some of the Green warriors here - one in particular - was accusing Japan of cover-up, subterfuge and what not. Well now it seems that the Japanese are too transparent for their own good. That's because the frankness and hyper precautionary position results in gems like this:
Sanku wrote:Shouldn't Japan be placed under sanctions as a irresponsible Nuclear power considering how they have been dumping radioactivity in environment?
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13257
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by Lalmohan »

so the spent fuel rods would go into a special heat extraction plant with attendant containment and live there for x years whilst they cooled further and produced workable heat. As you say, even if the levels are lower, it could be concentrated with heat pumps.

the drawback for district heating/cooling is that the plant has to be close to an urban centre, which most NPP's will not be. However, other industrial units might be nearby and could use heat
vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by vina »

Thats a fair assessment.

Bold part is a good idea. Why they have not thought of this. Waste hear recovery from secondary "burn" and low pressure turbines could generate enough electricity to power auxiliary systems onsite. JMT
Yawn.. Obviously didn't attend a Madrassa where they taught about heat and stuff like that.

Anyways. Google for something called "Sensible Heat" and come back later and lets see if what you said made any "sense".

As always a one liner to crush, pulp and gulp it down.

"Yeh Sensible hai , bahut Sensible,jah Garmi Hai Sensible !" (ref the Voltas "Sensible Cooling" ad on the TV jingle....BRRRRRRRRRRR

Or, if ask the Fatwa-e-Kammandment phrom thee Doosra Kanoon Oph Dharam-o-Dyna-Mix .

"Thou cannot extract work by cooling a body , cooler than it's surroundings" .. Bhery Shenshible Onree na ?

As Swargiya Chaudary Devi Lal himself said.
"When we become Prime Minister, we will give water to the farmers without taking the "Bijli" out of it" . That is as per the Djinn Kanoon Oph Dharam-O-Dyna-Mix. :P
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by chaanakya »

Offshore windmills weather crisis
Expansion eyed for plant off Ibaraki running at full capacity

By MINORU MATSUTANI
Staff writer
A cheap and simply structured wind-power plant proved more resistant to natural disasters than nuclear plants.

The wind plant 50 meters off the coast of Kamisu, Ibaraki Prefecture, survived the massive March 11 tsunami and is now running at full capacity supplying electricity to Tokyo Electric Power Co., which was greatly compromised when the waves crippled the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant.

The wind plant owned and operated by Fukui Prefecture-based Mitani Corp., one of Japan's two offshore wind-power plants, has seven power generators. Each generator is attached to three propeller blades sitting atop a mast that, when turning, transforms wind into electricity.

"All the windmills and transformer stations were safe. Our facilities proved resistant to tsunami," Mitani Managing Director Yoshitaka Yamamoto said.

Each mast, sunk into the seabed at a depth of 25 meters, stands roughly 70 meters above the water. The March 11 tsunami reached 5 meters, Yamamoto said. Each transformer is located on a jetty dozens of meters away from the masts and is enclosed in fiber-reinforced plastic measuring 8.3 meters x 4.3 meters and 4 meters high, he said.

The machine stayed dry amid the tsunami because the jetty, connected to a coastal road, is 9.6 meters above sea level and the walls and ceiling kept water from splashing onto the machine, he said.

Although clean and relatively cheap, wind power plant output is far below total electricity demand.

Mitani's wind plants generate 2,000 kw each, thus the company's total output is just 14,000 kw. That is about 0.04 percent of Tepco's current capacity after the largest utility's Fukushima No. 1 and 2 nuclear plants shut down.

Desperate to avoid blackouts, Tepco has asked Mitani Corp. to run its plant at full capacity, Yamamoto said.

Besides Mitani's, the Setana Municipal Government has a facility off the coast of Setana, Hokkaido Prefecture, with two wind-power generators. However, each generator's capacity is only 600 kw.

Wind power accounted for less than 1 percent of Japan's entire electricity supply in 2007, whereas coal accounted for 27.7 percent, natural gas for 25.8 percent, nuclear energy for 23.5 percent, oil for 13.9 percent and hydraulic power for 6.6 percent, according to Tepco and the New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization, or NEDO.

Profitability may be a problem with wind power plants. Yamamoto said his company's plant's profit is "not so big."

"The plant does not need strong wind. Normal wind lets the plant produce the maximum 2,000 kw," he said.

The government is expected to support promotion of wind power generation at sea as it aims to increase such capacity to an ambitious 10 million kw, equivalent to 10 nuclear reactors, by 2020 from 2.19 million kw in the fiscal 2009, as was stipulated in the strategy on marine renewable energy last May.

Japan had 1,683 inland wind power generators in fiscal 2009, according to NEDO. But residents generally don't welcome them because of noise and sonic waves that can make people feel ill.

Mitani is planning to add eight more generators to the seven already at the windmill offshore farm, Yamamoto said, hoping the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear crisis will boost the public support for the clean energy.

A wind generator system costs about ¥600 million, Yamamoto said. That compares with hundreds of billions yen for a cutting-edge nuclear reactor. "Still, profitability of nuclear plants is much higher, assuming there is no crisis like the ongoing one with the Fukushima No. 1 plant," he said.
.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by chaanakya »

Lalmohan wrote:so the spent fuel rods would go into a special heat extraction plant with attendant containment and live there for x years whilst they cooled further and produced workable heat. As you say, even if the levels are lower, it could be concentrated with heat pumps.

the drawback for district heating/cooling is that the plant has to be close to an urban centre, which most NPP's will not be. However, other industrial units might be nearby and could use heat
Not that, you use that heat to directly drive turbines to generate power. Just a 6 deg temp change takes place. say water going in at 80 deg and coming out at 74 deg Celsius would do the job. But all other containment functions etc need to be there which I am not sure for NPP. But it could be done. There is special type of heat exchanger fluid. USA has one, Isreal has one and may be Australia. India , too has one. Though can't name the Indian fluid. USA and Israel won't give it to us. A totally closed exchanger with turbine with hot water inlet and outlet attached. Can give you some details if you need.

veena , please don't write crap as you would be blaming madrassa only for your uncivil language.
vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by vina »

chaanakya wrote:Not that, you use that heat to directly drive turbines to generate power.
:rotfl: :rotfl: . Kyon, Googal Unkal se poochna tak nahi aata hai kya ? Like I told you "Sensible Heat" saar. The answer is there. Ja, pooch le.
Yeh Sensible Hai ,Tab Sensible Hai ! Jab Garmiiii Kaafi Sensible Hai!
:mrgreen: :mrgreen: vina TM. I just love that Jingle. I think I will copyright it like the Clausius or Kelvin Statement oph Doosra Kanoon oph Dharm-o-Dynamix.
Just a 6 deg temp change takes place
Chehh!! How did SIX come about ? Like in Draupadi vastraharan ? Mamaji.. Ab mujhe chahiye Chehh!. Yeh lo Bhanje! Chehh!! Waah. Wahh. Ab Draupadi tumhari hai !
But it could be done. There is special type of heat exchanger fluid. USA has one, Isreal has one and may be Australia. India , too has one.
Whatever Ishbeshul Heat Yexxchanger joo hab, it musht be senshible onree.. Hic! Hic!
Though can't name the Indian fluid.USA and Israel won't give it to us.

Ah! I see. Indian Paani.. Hindoo Pani. Moslem Paani. Indian Paani , Yamreeki Paani, Yahoodi Paani.
Or is it something like Toddy, Kallu, "Sharaab", "Feni" , Bourbon, Le Vin.. Zis is not vin, zis iz VINEGAH! Hic. Hic.. Yeh Sensible Hai, Sensible Hai!
veena , please don't write crap as you would be blaming madrassa only for your uncivil language.
Kerraapp!. That jingle was sheer Boetry and you call it Keraap! :(( :(( :(( :cry: :cry: . It has so much Knaalij and Deep "Thought" in it and you see Keraaap! :-? :-?

And bhat civil /vivil saar . This is just Garmi Yin-Jin-Ear Ring. So "thandi" language might me more appropriate onree no ?
Last edited by archan on 13 Apr 2011 09:03, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: sadly old members don't follow simple rules. No pinglish means no pinglish. And what's with that attitude?
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by chaanakya »

Aftershocks interrupt work at Fukushima plant

Work to put the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant under control has been repeatedly interrupted by a series of earthquakes since Monday.

On Tuesday, a quake with an intensity of six-minus on the Japanese scale of zero to 7 hit near the plant shortly after 2:00 PM local time.

External power supply to the plant remained intact, and injection of water to cool the Number 1, 2 and 3 reactors continued.


The plant's operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company, was due to use a hose to remove radiation-contaminated wastewater from a tunnel outside the Number 2 reactor to a turbine condenser on Monday.

But workers were unable to begin the process as of Tuesday afternoon, pending inspection of the hose for possible leaks.

Injection of nitrogen gas into the Number 1 reactor containment vessel to prevent a hydrogen blast has been continuing without any interruptions.


But the pressure level inside the container has remained largely flat over the past few days, suggesting that injected gas may be leaking out of the vessel.


The power company says there has been no significant change in radiation levels around the plant, and is continuing the procedure with caution.


On Tuesday morning, a fire broke out in a seawater sampling facility, but was put out about 7 minutes later.
The plant operator believes a battery short-circuited, and is looking for other possible fire hazards.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 19:04 +0900 (JST)
JwalaMukhi
BRFite
Posts: 1635
Joined: 28 Mar 2007 18:27

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by JwalaMukhi »

Sanku wrote:Shouldn't Japan be placed under sanctions as a irresponsible Nuclear power considering how they have been dumping radioactivity in environment?
Not necessarily for that act. However, it is easy to see how the nuclear proponents (not on this board) loose sight. The Tepco had chutzpah to propose two more new clear projects, while the Fukushima was still unstable. That's where they need to be pulled into dock. Because, in their unmindful embrace of new clear, they do not pause to think what is going on around.

But if it were to be turd world country, sanctions would have been already applied, and all the first worlders would possibly demand dismantle of other nuclear facilities and probing inspections of everything from coffee/tea stall. If one watches carefully, in Michio kaku's interview, he is advocating entombment in earlier stages because it could threaten Japan's integrity. If north of Japan were to be severely affected, Japan's integrity would be in serious jeopardy.

Well, a turd world country, would have its integrity as intact as pakis have it today in such a situation.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13257
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by Lalmohan »

^^^ to that point, which water body does kahuta (and other pak plants) use for cooling purposes? (and therefore radiation discharge purposes? what will the downstream impact be?)
GuruPrabhu
BRFite
Posts: 1169
Joined: 01 Apr 2008 03:32
Location: Thrissur, Kerala 59.93.8.169

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by GuruPrabhu »

Vina-ji,

Sensible heat has been known to this forum from the day "Q=mcT" was introduced into the mix. However, the problem being glossed over is latent heat. Water at 80C has no thermal potential energy to drive a turbine on its own. A minor flaw but why should that stop anyone from designing mega power plants based on 80C water. All the (dj)inn-ji-niyars have been wasting time converting water to steam. Should have contacted a (dj)inn-see-niyar.
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by Sanku »

Lalmohan wrote:^^^ to that point, which water body does kahuta (and other pak plants) use for cooling purposes? (and therefore radiation discharge purposes? what will the downstream impact be?)
Great Question -- any one knows?
Theo_Fidel

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by Theo_Fidel »

Channakya,

I think you are talking about an Ammonia turbine. They are most efficient when they have access to a really cold heat sink. They are popular in the Arctic circle areas and near ski resorts in the Lower 48, esp. when they can tap into low grade geothermal springs, in the 80C-100C range. They extremely reliable and low maintenance though should be handled with caution as liquid ammonia can be toxic and dangerous.

Cold heat sink, -20C or so is essential for efficiency. I don't think it gets that cold in Fukushima and certainly does not in most of India.
Last edited by Theo_Fidel on 12 Apr 2011 20:44, edited 3 times in total.
vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by vina »

GuruPrabhu wrote:Vina-ji,

Sensible heat has been known to this forum from the day "Q=mcT" was introduced into the mix. However, the problem being glossed over is latent heat. Water at 80C has no thermal potential energy to drive a turbine on its own. A minor flaw but why should that stop anyone from designing mega power plants based on 80C water.
The Pharmoola is actually Q = mc Delta(T) . That is bhery bhery important.

See, I dropped hints all along for Chanakyaa ji including Clausius's statement on the doosra Kanoon, including how you cant extract work by cooling it cooler than the surroundings! But he thinks it is "keraap" what to do sir ji.

In Yin Jin Ear Ring , sensible heat is to the amount of heat you can realistically extract. Sure, if you have a sink at 0 deg K, you an extract some 40000000000000 joules of heat, but unfortunately, the sink is usually at ambient temperature, so in desh that means something like 25c to 40c ,even 50c in places!. So , plugging into the Pharmoola, the sensible heat you can extract, if your source is 80C , is around c*30 to c*55 for unit mass , which is a far cry from c*(80 + 273) = c* 353 ! Ya Allah! That is close to just a 6th to a 10th or worse of what you can theoretically extract ! :(( :(( . And so Thermodynamics Murdabad! We want 100% extraction onree. :(( :(( YinJinEars are Useless. What a waste I tell ya!

So yeah, if you wait until the cows come home, with 80c source, you can heat water to 80C, or use the energy from to boil a very small quantity of water so that the working fluid has enough thermal potential to drive a very very tinku sa turbine , that will rival the power output of a hamster in a wheel! :mrgreen:
All the (dj)inn-ji-niyars have been wasting time converting water to steam. Should have contacted a (dj)inn-see-niyar.
Indeed. Even waste heat recovery systems are usually run on the exhaust side which has usually flue/ outlet gases at pretty high temperatures if you want to do stuff like running turbines.

Stuff like water at 80C is usually used to just heat up the feed water before it gets into the boiler via a heat exchanger and passes out at something close to ambient. That kind of process heat (low temps , less than boiling ) is all it can be used for.

Another problem with the proposal of using decay heat from the pool to drive a critical system like emergency pumps etc is this. The decay heat is an exponential decay. The heat value goes down faster than a Paki skiing downhill at Kargil! So , what will you size the boilers and stuff for. After all, unlike in a coal powered railway engine, where you replenish the fuel when it burns, no one is going to be shoveling in fresh spent fuel at the exponential rate at which it decays.

That is why I asked Chaanakya to do some bit of thinking on "Sensible Heat" and come back if it made any "Sense" (pun intended). But unfortunately, it became "keraap" and "uncivil" language. Yawn.. Such is life.

But you gotta hand it. I am really proud of that rip off from that Voltas Ad. Actually that Voltas Ad is spot on. HVAC engineers know their sensible heats. It is their bread and butter and that Ad was definitely signed off by a Nerd who knew what the efficiency issues were about.
Last edited by vina on 12 Apr 2011 20:46, edited 1 time in total.
vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by vina »

Theo_Fidel wrote:Channakya,

I think you are talking about an Ammonia turbine. They are most efficient when they have access to a really cold heat sink. There are popular in the Arctic circle areas and near ski resorts in the Lower 48, esp.
The working fluid (Ammonia, or Hindu Paani or Muslim Paani or Yamreeki Paani or Yahoodi Pani )is immaterial. The Carnot (ideal efficiency) is 1 - (sink temp/source temp) . Get that sink to source ratio as small as possible and your efficiency starts approaching 100%.

Hire a LMU Yin Djinn Ear and you can get upto 400% efficiency by Djinn Takneeki.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13257
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by Lalmohan »

so, if i understand correctly, the heat in the spent rod pool is exponentially decaying and apart from some short term heat exchange, is not of much use? however, the heat from the main cooling circuits, post turbine work, i assume can still be used via heat exchanger for district heating type applications?
GuruPrabhu
BRFite
Posts: 1169
Joined: 01 Apr 2008 03:32
Location: Thrissur, Kerala 59.93.8.169

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by GuruPrabhu »

vina wrote:
GuruPrabhu wrote:Sensible heat has been known to this forum from the day "Q=mcT" was introduced into the mix.
The Pharmoola is actually Q = mc Delta(T) . That is bhery bhery important.
Sir-ji, you missed my strat-e-gic use of quot-e-shun marks.
GuruPrabhu
BRFite
Posts: 1169
Joined: 01 Apr 2008 03:32
Location: Thrissur, Kerala 59.93.8.169

Re: 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami - News and Analysis

Post by GuruPrabhu »

Lalmohan wrote:so, if i understand correctly, the heat in the spent rod pool is exponentially decaying and apart from some short term heat exchange, is not of much use? however, the heat from the main cooling circuits, post turbine work, i assume can still be used via heat exchanger for district heating type applications?
Lalmohan,

In principle there must be exponential decay but given the long half-life of some of the isotopes in the spent fuel, it can be considered a steady state source of heat for time scales in question.

In general, your comments about utilization of exhaust heat are very important. Every technology wastes heat. I have seen plans to utilize the waste heat from the AHWR to de-salienate seawater. Waste heat from coal plants can be used to steam coals into gas (clean coal) and re-burn it -- by some accunts it raises thermal efficiency from ~33% to ~50%. Ityadi, ityadi. But believe you me, there are many many folks who spend all their time just devising ways to harness the wasted exhaust energy.
Locked