More BS out of Japan 5/24
TEPCO says Fukushima plant suffered no major damage from quake
The inside of the No. 2 reactor building at the Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant on May 18. (Photo courtesy of TEPCO)
The inside of the No. 2 reactor building at the Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant on May 18. (Photo courtesy of TEPCO)
The Great East Japan Earthquake on March 11 "inflicted no damage on main equipment" at the Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant, said the Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) in a report submitted May 23 based on data taken soon after the earthquake.
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/national/archive/news/2011/05/24/20110524...
==========>>> the headline contradicts earlier stories, and we know many just read the headlines....
http://enenews.com/tepco-quake-not-tsunami-may-have-caused-damage-that-l...
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/T110517005443.htm
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-19/fukushima-may-have-leaked-radia...
*****************
*****************
KyodoNews
Japan ends projections of radioactive substance spread from nuke plant
==========>>> Maybe they just don't want to folks to know the full devastation? More and more info keeps coming out, these are older:
http://enenews.com/japan-govt-expert-1300-sq-kilometers-japan-above-cher...
http://enenews.com/additional-70000-evacuate-around-fukushima-contaminat...
http://enenews.com/one-thousand-nuclear-plant-workers-internal-radiation...
http://enenews.com/lab-contamination-fukushima-meltdown-very-large-compa...
http://enenews.com/outside-pressure-on-university-professors-not-to-rele...
http://enenews.com/high-levels-of-radioactive-material-found-in-tokyo-17...
http://enenews.com/experts-detect-5-times-more-radiation-levels-in-tokyo...
*****************
*****************
So tired of the games...
why it's important to know about that quake and the temblor:
...But if the temblor had actually damaged the High-Pressure Core Flooder system — which is used to supply coolant water to a reactor core in emergencies to keep nuclear fuel from overheating — power suppliers across the country might be forced to reconsider the quake resistance designs for their reactors....
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20110526a1.html
Not to quibble, but...
...I THINK you may be missing the (intended) point, here, Anonymous.
The search for answers at Fukushima has now focused, necessarily, on the "hows" and "whys", and has begun to move beyond the "whats" and "whens". At issue now, and of principal importance to ascertain safety and nail down effective emergency procedures going forward at ALL nuclear facilities, is whether or not human error, and not (relatively) unstoppable natural forces, were behind the catastrophic, cascading failure at Fukushima that resulted in multiple meltdowns.
Contradicting data and conclusions made public only last week, it NOW seems that Fukushima I escaped the monster 9.0 Great East Japan Earthquake relatively unscathed, with no major structural damage and no associated identifiable radiological emissions or systemic failures. At this time it APPEARS that the resultant tsunami was the trigger mechanism for the loss of primary and secondary cooling systems and the poqer to maintain thes critical functions -- and that a series of human errors and inexplicable management decisions, including flagrant violations of the plant's well-established emergency protocols and procedures, compounded the dangers and in fact may have resulted in an acceleration, if not wholesale responsibility for, the ultimate situation comprising three breached reactor vessels, substantial-to-total meltdowns of three separate cores, up to three compromised containment vessels, four shattered buildings, several damaged spent fuel pools, an unknown amount of radioactive contamination of air and sea, and potentially an area the size of southern New England rendered more or less permanently uninhabitable. To say nothing or the consequences for health, or Japanese society, or the energy industry worldwide.
The accurate assessment of responsibility here -- what screwed up, and why -- is perhaps of even greater importance than the search for medical answers, since there are some four hundred other nuclear power facilities on six continents, and we tempt fate even more if we fail to learn the hard lessons from Fukushima. Could this have been prevented, or was it inevitable? Can humanity mitigate the disastrous effects of natural disasters on nuclear plants, or are we powerless before the threat of rare but predictable geological events? These are questions that must be asked, and the answers, the details, the minutiae, MATTER. IF plants can be fortified to withstand the most powerful temblors, but are naked before the inexorable fury of tidal waves, then maybe we continue to embrace nuclear power, but far from vulnerable coastlines. If this can be classified, ultimately, as primarily a "man-made disaster" -- which, right or wrong, I rather suspect it will wind up being declared: the nuclear power industry CANNOT allow every plant on every coast and low-lying plain the world over tp ne considered a potential species-ender -- then perhaps future Fukushimas may be avoided, or at least rendered less likely, by enhanced training and better, ironclad emergency procedures. There is much to be learned.
I'm all ears these days when it comes to talk of conspiracy, and I'd like nothing better than to roast certain TEPCO management personnel over a barbeqcue pit, but fair is fair, and it's possible to parse statements TOO sharply. There's no cover-up to be found here, at least: Just the growing suspicion that, bad as the quake and the water were, the GREATEST danger to the plant, to northern Japan, and to the world at-large wasn't the roiling of the earth, nor the rolling of the seas; it was the PEOPLE that were entrusted with running the damn thing, that drove it off a cliff and into a watery, radioactive grave.
Rick Cromack.
Allen, Texas
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/h
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3145874/Solar-flare-to-paralys...
Fukushima Withstand a 9.0 c'mon man!
Japan earthquake: Japan warned over nuclear plants, WikiLeaks cables show
Japan was warned more than two years ago by the international nuclear watchdog that its nuclear power plants were not capable of withstanding powerful earthquakes, leaked diplomatic cables reveal.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8384059/Japan-earthq...
Rick while I enjoy some of your posts u are wrong on this one and the only reason I care is I live in seismic active California where our plants are not ready to withstand the big one.
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/state&id=8025115
"Contradicting data and
"Contradicting data and conclusions made public only last week, it NOW seems that Fukushima I escaped the monster 9.0 Great East Japan Earthquake relatively unscathed, with no major structural damage and no associated identifiable radiological emissions or systemic failures. At this time it APPEARS that the resultant tsunami was the trigger mechanism for the loss of primary and secondary cooling systems and the poqer to maintain thes critical functions "
Rick you really these plants are built to withstand a 9.0 earthquake lol maybe a seven ..here's the data that's coming to light
Quake may have damaged key piping at No.3 reactor
Tokyo Electric Power Company has released data which suggests the March 11th earthquake damaged a critical piping system in the No. 3 reactor at its Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant.
The utility said that analysis of pressure and temperature data from the days after the quake shows that the No.3 reactor lost its cooling system on March 13th. Much of its nuclear fuel likely melted down and collected at the bottom of the pressure vessel over the next 24 hours.
The analysis also shows that piping in an emergency cooling mechanism, known as a high-pressure coolant injection system, may have been damaged by the earthquake. The system is designed to maintain the water level inside the reactor vessel during an emergency.
The system is known to have automatically switched on shortly after noon march 12.
http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/25_30.html#
This is the crux of our problem in California can our nuclear plants withstand a major seismic event, nope .
Are California's nuclear plants vulnerable to big earthquakes?
202
The Japan earthquake and aftermath is particularly scary for Californians. It's hard not to wonder if it could happen to us.
Doc Searls via Wikimedia Commons
Diablo Canyon Power Plant
The most terrifying issue is the prospect of a nuclear meltdown.
What went wrong at Japan's nuclear plants? As I understand it after reading the New York Times' excellent coverage, after the 9.0 earthquake, control rods at Japan's nuclear plants deployed correctly to halt nuclear reactions. However, the cooling mechanism requires electricity to work properly and the plants had none, probably because backup generators were destroyed by the tsunami. Efforts to keep the reactor cool by adding water manually could not keep up with the reactor's boiling the water off. Additionally, vents that release pressure and thus allow water to enter had stopped working properly at the reactor in most trouble, Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station's number 2.
Some of the fuel rods are now believed to have been exposed to air, releasing some radiation. The longer they are exposed, the greater the likelihood that they will fall to the bottom of the reactor and cause a full meltdown, burning through the reactor's protective casing and releasing a massive amount of radiation.
Could it happen in California? Well, apparently it could. California currently has two operational nuclear plants. PG&E's Diablo Canyon Power Plant in San Luis Obispo County sits near several fault lines, including the San Andreas. It's designed to withstand a 7.5-magnitude earthquake. The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station in San Diego County, run by Southern California Edison, isn't as close to active faults and is designed to withstand just a 7.0-magnitude quake.
Both of the state's nuclear plants sit right on the coast, but its designers note that Diablo Canyon is perched atop a seaside cliff and features pools close enough to the plant to cool the reactors by gravity.
But it is certainly possible that California's famed Big One would exceed a 7.5 on the Richter Scale. And California is at risk for tsunamis, as a 2005 report by the California Seismic Safety Commission noted.
"California is at risk from both local and distant tsunamis. Eighty-two possible or confirmed tsunamis have been observed or recorded in California during historic times," the report says. The biggest tsunami would stem from an earthquake in the Cascadian Subduction Zone off the coast of British Columbia, Washington, Orgeon and the northernmost part of California. A 1700 quake there produced a massive tsunami that left its mark on the geological record in Humboldt County.
A local temblor could also generate a huge wave. However, according to the CSSC report, "The largest historic local-source tsunami on the west coast was caused by the 1927 Point Arguello, California, earthquake that produced waves of about 7 feet in the nearby coastal area."
Anthony R. Pietrangelo, a senior vice president at the Nuclear Energy Institute, a trade group representing the nuclear power industry, emphasized in an interview with the Times that "the combination of an enormous earthquake and immense tsunami" in Japan was an historically freakish event that was unlikely to happen here.
But even Pietrangelo admitted that "It's not impossible" that the U.S. — most likely California — could be hit with the same one-two punch that Japan endured. With sea levels rising and some scientists beginning to consider that seismic activity could be triggered by the planetary changes brought by climate change, it may be time to plan for such unlikely but potentially catastrophic events.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/green/detail?entry_id=84967
and I've got a bridge to sell????
"Contradicting data and conclusions made public only last week, it NOW seems that Fukushima I escaped the monster 9.0 Great East Japan Earthquake relatively unscathed, with no major structural damage and no associated identifiable radiological emissions or systemic failures."
Sounds to me like they are trying to make a case that these beasts are safe.....too much at stake with the nuclear renaissance.
While there was undoubtedly human error, I'll hate to see that be the scapegoat here.
The problem for the nuclear
The problem for the nuclear industry with making the operators scapegoats is that if it was human error the same meltdown disasters can therefore easily happen in the USA to any reactor of similar type, at any time. Running the risk of large chunks of the USA 'homeland' being made permanently uninhabitable from an operator error is a ridiculous situation. Who needs terrorists? The dirty bombs are vast, made by companies like GE, and already installed all over the USA and at all times just a few hours away from meltdown disaster. Why aren't the US population more concerned about this situation?
Most of the sources you are
Most of the sources you are using are Japanese.
Not a whole lot of
Not a whole lot of information coming out from anywhere else. Where do you think all the articles in the MSM are getting their info from?
Basically from NHK, Yomiuri,
Basically from NHK, Yomiuri, Asahi or Kyodo. That is, Japanese mass media. What I find a bit strange is that you consider the same sources to be BS now but accurate last week.
Anyway, we are going to find conflicting reports, different analyses of the same data, debates about the political or corporate responsibility, etc... Is the role of the media to bring all this to the public and our responsibility to exercise our reading comprehension and critical thinking to reach our own conclusions.
Unless you expect someone to give you "the truth" about what happened, which would be kind of adorable.
adorable or naive??
I guess I can always hope for the truth, but expect the reality of not getting it.