Explosion at Fukushima Nuclear power station

[ESokoloff]

 

I have not read it, but my friend assures me that it is good.

 

Im haveing a hard time with

The external power generators could not be connected to the power plant. (the plugs did not fit).

I lack the expertize to comment on the rest of the article.

 

No doubt the different systems that make these plant function will be modified as of a result of this event.

I have to wonder why the power company or government did (does) not have a large fast ocean capably boat that is set up with generators & water pumps enabling it to respond to such emergences as this.

[Twisties]

Seems like one can get overly paranoid here.

 

The article below also corroborates the fact that once the control rods have been inserted, even a complete meltdown of all the fuel rods will not get hot enough to breach the containment vessel. A Chernobyl type meltdown is not possible.

WSJ Tucker article

 

As far as the contaminated ship, my understanding is the contamination was the result of up to 3 helicopters/crews returning from the immediate area of the damaged reactor had above normal levels of radiation detected after landing back aboard ship.

Levels were so severe that treatment was soap and water for the crew. All crew and equipment still in service.

 

There are several very serious scenarios. One or two: If the fuel melts, and sinks to the floor, and the control rods do not melt and sink, or are not intermixed well with the fuel, the reaction can regain criticality on the floor. Who knows then what happens.

 

There is probably water on the floor of the reactor, if melting core material hits it, explosive steam damage can result.

 

The site was proximal to a powerful earthquake, an 8.9 or 9.0 on the Richter scale. As indicated in the article, the plant was not designed to withstand an earthquake of that magnitude. Who knows what the condition of the concrete final containment floor and surrounding concrete superstructure is after that, and all the aftershocks?

 

I don't see a catastrophic situation as likely, but to say there is absolutely no possibility, in an article that contains a number of other errors, gives me little comfort.

 

Incidentally, another point that bothered me was the assertion that thermal decomposition of water resulted in the explosion before core damage occurred. In fact, he seems to imply that uncovery had not yet occurred at this point. Yet temperature required for thermal decomposition of water are actually very high. Well above the temperatures that are needed for zircalloy to melt and oxidize (producing more heat, and lots of hydrogen), and about at the temperature that the uranium fuel would melt. That can not occur before uncovery, and even when it does happen, very small amounts of hydrogen are generated. The zircalloy oxidation process is the accepted process for hydrogen generation and the attempt to suggest that the fuel wasn't damaged yet, and the releases at this point were harmless is falling flat in my ears.

 

I don't think I am "overly paranoid." I am concerned with scientific accuracy. This paper seems to have a lack thereof, and is one guy's speculation, presented as fact. It's my duty as a scientist to respond to that.

[ESokoloff]

Seems like one can get overly paranoid here.

 

Thats what I'm thinking.

Only time will tell for sure.

 

Hoping that this much ado about nothing & will prove how safe a modern design nuclear plant can be.

Again only time will tell.

[Selden]

There's the rub. No matter how "over-engineered" something is, there is always the possibility, however remote, that an event will occur that exceeds the design parameters. Nuclear engineers around the world are going to learn a lot from this one.

 

[yabadabapal]

One of the reactors steal containment dome suffered a breach as a result of an explosion. The warnings have been broadcast and as such have instructed anyone within 20 miles of the site to stay indoors, shut off all airconditioning, heatng etc and do not hang any clothes outside. The levels within that area are now very high. I crossed reference this info between a few credible news sources and its consistant for the most part.

San Francisco has turned on a radiation detector devise to presumably monitor incoming winds. Im exhausted and hitting the sack.

[Francois_Dumas]

I haven't been on the forums for a while an found this thread now. I've been following the events in Japan closely (have some friends there) and also reported (forwarded) a lot of what I found.

 

If anybody is still saying this would NOT be another Chernobyl, I'd question him/her strongly. I haven't believed one word of what has been officially said, and the current situation is starting to prove me right I'm afraid. That thing is going to be out of control pretty soon.

[Francois_Dumas]

Seems like one can get overly paranoid here.

 

Thats what I'm thinking.

Only time will tell for sure.

 

Hoping that this much ado about nothing & will prove how safe a modern design nuclear plant can be.

Again only time will tell.

 

Problem is, they (and we) have run out of time ;-)

[philbytx]

Purported good news?????

AND HERE IS ....the not so good .

 

 

[ESokoloff]

Find several info links here.

[John Ranalletta]

U.S. banking giant Citigroup said it was keeping workers in Tokyo informed but there were no evacuation orders, said a spokesman, adding the bank was closely following guidance by the U.S. Embassy, which has not urged nationals to leave.

Supposedly, during the 911 disaster, people got to the lobby before the crash and were directed to go back to their offices and wait for rescue.

 

If you have a choice, always panic early.

[g_frey]

Does anybody else remember that: "It is impossible for a nuclear accident to occure due to the number of backup systems designed into the structure". 1970's AEC I believe.

[Twisties]

Purported good news?????

AND HERE IS ....the not so good .

 

 

Whatever has happened so far I think is accurately summarized in your first link. I wouldn't call it good news, but we have not yet seen anything even close to a worst case scenario, based on data so far available. It is very disturbing that background is going up in distant cities, but the levels they are describing are still minimal.

 

If this is all, then we will have dodged a bullet.

 

However, as was officially stated and reported in the link, further releases are highly likely.

 

The workers who have stayed at the plant are heroes.

[Selden]

It looks like the Fukushima situation has escalated from "of concern" to "alarming" in the past 12 hours:

 

We are on the brink,” said Hiroaki Koide, a senior reactor engineering specialist at the Research Reactor Institute of Kyoto University. “We are now facing the worst-case scenario. We can assume that the containment vessel at Reactor No. 2 is already breached. If there is heavy melting inside the reactor, large amounts of radiation will most definitely be released.

Totally agree with Jan's comment about the workers at the plant being heroes. Even though it's their job, they don't have to be there -- these people are literally risking their lives.

 

Not as bad as Chernobyl, but much worse than 3-Mile Island.

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

It was not the Chernobyl incident, it was prior to it.

Chernobyl was a meltdown. This was a different screw up.

 

Found it: The Kyshtym Disaster

[SuperG]

that is the one, thank you.

 

I guess what nobody is saying at this point. What is the chance that if things go to level 7 in Japan and particles get released into the air, and because of trade wind, US CANada Mexico can get a nasty dose of radioactive particle shower, contaminating crops , animal/ food and people?

[philbytx]

Jan,

 

 

Sorry, evidently, that early link I posted gets constantly updated.

I was being a little facetious because that link to an early post stated "officially" that the radiation levels were dropping in Tokyo.

 

From what I can ascertain, I believe the Japanese government is up to their usual tricks here. And I'm not the only observer to have noted it either!!!

 

[Twisties]

Jan,

 

 

Sorry, evidently, that early link I posted gets constantly updated.

I was being a little facetious because that link to an early post stated "officially" that the radiation levels were dropping in Tokyo.

 

From what I can ascertain, I believe the Japanese government is up to their usual tricks here. And I'm not the only observer to have noted it either!!!

 

Ah yes, the constantly changing link trick... BTDT.

 

 

[SuperG]

To answer my own question two post above,

On MSNBC Whitehouse press secretary just announced (at 1:20PM CT) that experts stated that because of large distance between the continent (Asia and Americas) there is no risk of radioactive particulate contamination.

 

But to contradict this statement recalling it from my US history lectures that back in the US dustbowl era (1930s) dirt/sand was blown across the Atlantic.

 

Now, either the history books or the "experts" are up to no good.

[Twisties]

To answer my own question two post above,

On MSNBC Whitehouse press secretary just announced (at 1:20PM CT) that experts stated that because of large distance between the continent (Asia and Americas) there is no risk of radioactive particulate contamination.

 

But to contradict this statement recalling it from my US history lectures that back in the US dustbowl era (1930s) dirt/sand was blown across the Atlantic.

 

Now, either the history books or the "experts" are up to no good.

 

The fallout can most certainly cross the ocean. Stuff like that routinely crosses. The issue is how much and how spread out. There is absolutely no doubt from a science point of view that it can cross. None.

 

On the other hand, some of it may go into the upper atmosphere and stay there a while, some (most, most likely) may fall into the ocean, and the rest will get dispersed and diluted in passage. So amounts reaching the US will be much less than closer locales. Once here, it isn't all going to one spot, but will get spread with weather.

 

IMHO it is far too early to say for sure what will happen down the road, but the kinds of releases we are hearing of so far will not be a threat to the US. If there is a large catastrophic release, or if these current level releases continue for a long time or get much worse, things may change. But as for what has been released so far, I don't see it as a threat.

 

 

[RonStewart]

What's your scientific background, Jan?

 

(Not setting a trap. Just wondering.)

[Twisties]

What's your scientific background, Jan?

 

(Not setting a trap. Just wondering.)

 

Environmental chemist.

[RonStewart]

I used to work among environmental chemists. I remember one fellow in a private water lab in North Vancouver who was brought in on a Saturday to check the reservoir for any fallout from Chernobyl. Poor fellow had to dodge tv cameras on the way in and out of the lab that day. Of course, he found nothing since there was nothing to find, but he had been told not to tell reporters anything, so he found the situation unnerving.

[Boffin]

To answer my own question two post above,

On MSNBC Whitehouse press secretary just announced (at 1:20PM CT) that experts stated that because of large distance between the continent (Asia and Americas) there is no risk of radioactive particulate contamination.

 

But to contradict this statement recalling it from my US history lectures that back in the US dustbowl era (1930s) dirt/sand was blown across the Atlantic.

 

Now, either the history books or the "experts" are up to no good.

 

The important missing fact is which radio-nuclides are involved. Whereas uranium has a half life of thousands of years, Nitrogen 16 - associated with Boiling Water Reactors such as is used at Fukushima - has a half-life of 7.1 seconds, but is a strong gamma emitter. If most of the measured radiation is from released Nitrogen 16 then pretty much none of it will reach the USA. If however, the radiation comes from uranium dust of releases from burning core material, then it is a whole different ball game. The fact that the radiation peaked quickly then dropped again points to the main source being Nitrogen 16.

 

Andy

[Twisties]

Andy, you may be correct, and I hope so, but doubt it on several basis:

 

1. Presumably these measurements are preliminary air measurements, not fallout measurements. Therefore as soon as any airborne particles have moved on, or fallen out, whatever, the air will clear and readings will drop. I don't think you can actually infer the half-life or radionuclide identity from this information. Only that the source of the material has been reduced.

 

2. If it were limited only to N16, it could not possibly have reached distant sites, such as Tokyo or the Mainland, and it has done so. Generally we assume all measurable radioactivity is gone in 10 half-lives. That's a little over a minute for N16.

 

3. There have been reports of iodine and cesium detected. these are fission by-products from the spent (partially spent) fuel.

 

4. The explosions from hydrogen gas indicate core sheathing damage, and correlate with the iodine and cesium detections to indicate that material has volatilized from the fuel and been carried in the steam.

 

5. The big release seems to have been from the fire in waste fuel storage, or from the #2 reactor, or both, it is not clear. In any event, both events have been associated with reports of releases. N16 is from neutrons colliding with nitrogen in air, not any direct release of nuclear material. These two events, and the other lesser events before them seem based on all the evidence to be actual releases of nuclear materials (or at least vapors from them when they are high temperatures, and mixing with steam).

 

 

[SuperG]

It is interesting that all of a sudden meteorologist now explain/show wind pattern in and from Japan, including next days forecast.

[ESokoloff]

In depth and presumably accurate/timely info here.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_I_nuclear_accidents

[John Ranalletta]

here

[Twisties]

 

Sorry, no such animal! And when will man stop being so damn arrogant when it comes to them taming nature and this planet !

 

 

I don't see where developing procedures and building structures to deal with nature is being arrogant. Seems more likely a recognition that nature is a force we have to learn to live with, we aren't trying to defeat it. Arrogant would be ignoring the risk entirely. The biggest problem is that in our very short stay here on earth we haven't found live video of what nature has been doing for 1000s of years and until a couple of hundred years ago, we in this part of the world wouldn't even know about tsunamis and earthquakes in the other half.

 

Striving isn't arrogant, thinking that you can, completely and with confidence may be arrogant. When applied to the decision to build a moderate risk structure, fine. When applied to the decision to build a high risk structure, such as nuclear facility, perhaps a different risk analysis is appropriate.

 

If I can be 90% confident of surviving a 100 year earthquake, maybe that is fine for a house. If I can be 90% confident of surviving a 100 year earthquake maybe that is not acceptable for a nuclear power plant. Building in the face of such odds might be viewed as reckless. When are the odds good enough for something capable of wreaking the havoc a nuclear power plant might wreak?

 

First I suppose we must identify the specific risks of the plant in question (failure modes, worst case scenarios, estimates of impacts to people and environment, etc). Then maybe we could begin to formulate tolerance statement.

 

US Reactor Earthquake Vulnerability Rankings

 

Average 1:74000 chance of core damage each year, worst, 1:10000 chance. Considers likelihood of earthquake, and reactor design strength.

 

Evidently the regulators view 1:10000 with a bit of concern.

[Twisties]

 

Sorry, no such animal! And when will man stop being so damn arrogant when it comes to them taming nature and this planet !

 

 

I don't see where developing procedures and building structures to deal with nature is being arrogant. Seems more likely a recognition that nature is a force we have to learn to live with, we aren't trying to defeat it. Arrogant would be ignoring the risk entirely. The biggest problem is that in our very short stay here on earth we haven't found live video of what nature has been doing for 1000s of years and until a couple of hundred years ago, we in this part of the world wouldn't even know about tsunamis and earthquakes in the other half.

 

Striving isn't arrogant, thinking that you can, completely and with confidence may be arrogant. When applied to the decision to build a moderate risk structure, fine. When applied to the decision to build a high risk structure, such as nuclear facility, perhaps a different risk analysis is appropriate.

 

If I can be 90% confident of surviving a 100 year earthquake, maybe that is fine for a house. If I can be 90% confident of surviving a 100 year earthquake maybe that is not acceptable for a nuclear power plant. Building in the face of such odds might be viewed as reckless. When are the odds good enough for something capable of wreaking the havoc a nuclear power plant might wreak?

 

First I suppose we must identify the specific risks of the plant in question (failure modes, worst case scenarios, estimates of impacts to people and environment, etc). Then maybe we could begin to formulate tolerance statement.

 

US Reactor Earthquake Vulnerability Rankings

 

Average 1:74000 chance of core damage each year, worst, 1:10000 chance. Considers likelihood of earthquake, and reactor design strength.

 

Evidently the regulators view 1:10000 with a bit of concern.

 

So with 104 civilian reactors in the US, and assuming a lifetime of 50 years, and an annual average risk from earthquake of 1:74000... I'm not a statistician... but 74000/104/50 is 14, or 1:14 for the overall program average risk over the lifetime of our existing plants... for an earthquake causing core damage.

 

Does someone know stats well? Did I do that right? I'm thinking I've got to be wrong...

[yabadabapal]

I was at a supermarket last night having some Chocolate Mint Gellato and an acquanintance of mine who owns the place sat down with me. I asked him how business was. He said he was amazed at the one thing that has sold out in all his stores. Whats that I asked.

Potassium iodide, he replied! Im sticking with the chocolate mint Gellato.

[Twisties]

Increasingly I am wondering what the story at these plants really is. I can imagine that this is the stuff of movies. The wiki link that Eric posted says that they couldn't hook up power supplies because the room with the hook ups was flooded by the tsunami. They couldn't get anything in by boat or helicopter also due to tsunami damage. Yet I can't help but wonder, as I see headlines now beginning to emerge questioning Japanese leadership, how much have cultural norms played a role in the failure to supply adequate water to the nuclear materials in the reactors and storage ponds?

 

As I mentioned earlier, I think the entire world's militaries were at their disposal. But one doesn't hear of any attempts to bring aid. Well, maybe we just aren't hearing about them... but I doubt it. Military engineers are expert at field logistics and dealing with this sort of problem, but could it really be that the Japanese culture resulted in a failure to ask, or a refusal of aid, even as they labored heroically and stoically to right the problems themselves?

 

Did they overestimate their abilities to control the problems, or underestimate the severity of the problems (more on that in a moment)? Did exhaustion and stress play a role? What are the organizational and structural roles that affected decision making and the flow of information?

 

These are honest questions, and I don't have answers, or intend the questions as criticism, but just see the issue as a potentially fascinating example of how culture affects outcomes.

 

As to the severity, in the end, if it gets no worse, from scientific and engineering pov, they may have been quite justified in maintaining an insular response, if that is what they have done. Releases are still relatively minor to the extent that data has been released. Although clearly there is worry. That worry however, and it's play in the real world, is now having a global economic impact, with likely rolling effects to surface in ways we have not even begun to foresee. But for the moment, we know that Phil (1bmwfan) and David's (dhanson) new Yamaha Super Tenere's delivery dates are likely to be impacted, as most major manufacturers in Japan are announcing production moratoriums. Foreigners are fleeing, and business on the streets is certainly not as usual, even in areas not directly impacted by the disaster.

 

So even if no health effect are ever found from this catastrophe, it's impact will be huge.

[Rocer]

"But one doesn't hear of any attempts to bring aid."

 

I'm not sure if you mean aid to the campaign to deal with the reactors or to assist the general population. In one newscast I heard that Doctor's Without Borders, another similar medical team as well as the Canadian DART team was there (although that may be a scout team). The Red Cross was mentioned but I'm not sure if that's a Japanese branch or a group from outside the country. The Japanese embassador to Canada has stated that any aide group would have to be completely self sufficient before it would be accepted into the country.

 

We tend to watch BBC or our own CBC.

[Twisties]

"But one doesn't hear of any attempts to bring aid."

 

I'm not sure if you mean aid to the campaign to deal with the reactors or to assist the general population. In one newscast I heard that Doctor's Without Borders, another similar medical team as well as the Canadian DART team was there (although that may be a scout team). The Red Cross was mentioned but I'm not sure if that's a Japanese branch or a group from outside the country. The Japanese embassador to Canada has stated that any aide group would have to be completely self sufficient before it would be accepted into the country.

 

We tend to watch BBC or our own CBC.

 

 

Hi Paul,

 

This being the reactor explosion thread I meant regards the reactors, solely. I mean, I have a real hard time with the idea that the US or Canadian military couldn't have pumped out their flooded room and dried in a day or less.

[ghaverkamp]

As I mentioned earlier, I think the entire world's militaries were at their disposal. But one doesn't hear of any attempts to bring aid. Well, maybe we just aren't hearing about them... but I doubt it. Military engineers are expert at field logistics and dealing with this sort of problem, but could it really be that the Japanese culture resulted in a failure to ask, or a refusal of aid, even as they labored heroically and stoically to right the problems themselves?

 

Did they overestimate their abilities to control the problems, or underestimate the severity of the problems (more on that in a moment)? Did exhaustion and stress play a role? What are the organizational and structural roles that affected decision making and the flow of information?

 

Why should we assume that: a) enough of the story is being told or has been told to know anything about this; b) that aid in the form of engineering is needed and isn't there; or c) that the Japanese, a technically sophisticated nation with excellent logistical capabilities and long experience with nuclear power need anyone else's help?

 

Regardless, I've read several stories that have cited personnel from the IAEA and even the NRC being in Japan. What's more, GE has stated (in the article linked by David earlier) that it had people at the reactors themselves.

 

These are honest questions, and I don't have answers, or intend the questions as criticism, but just see the issue as a potentially fascinating example of how culture affects outcomes.

 

Yet, it appears that you're assuming that culture is affecting the outcome.

 

I imagine that it's just as likely that Japan is doing as much as anyone else could or would do under the circumstances.

 

Not that there aren't cultural differences. So far, there haven't been reports of mass looting or rioting.

[Twisties]

As I mentioned earlier, I think the entire world's militaries were at their disposal. But one doesn't hear of any attempts to bring aid. Well, maybe we just aren't hearing about them... but I doubt it. Military engineers are expert at field logistics and dealing with this sort of problem, but could it really be that the Japanese culture resulted in a failure to ask, or a refusal of aid, even as they labored heroically and stoically to right the problems themselves?

 

Did they overestimate their abilities to control the problems, or underestimate the severity of the problems (more on that in a moment)? Did exhaustion and stress play a role? What are the organizational and structural roles that affected decision making and the flow of information?

 

Why should we assume that: a) enough of the story is being told or has been told to know anything about this; b) that aid in the form of engineering is needed and isn't there; or c) that the Japanese, a technically sophisticated nation with excellent logistical capabilities and long experience with nuclear power need anyone else's help?

 

Regardless, I've read several stories that have cited personnel from the IAEA and even the NRC being in Japan. What's more, GE has stated (in the article linked by David earlier) that it had people at the reactors themselves.

 

These are honest questions, and I don't have answers, or intend the questions as criticism, but just see the issue as a potentially fascinating example of how culture affects outcomes.

 

Yet, it appears that you're assuming that culture is affecting the outcome.

 

I imagine that it's just as likely that Japan is doing as much as anyone else could or would do under the circumstances.

 

Not that there aren't cultural differences. So far, there haven't been reports of mass looting or rioting.

 

I'm not assuming we know enough of the story. I took care to express doubt at several junctures. However, such efforts have not been reported, and reports of foreign presence only began to emerge late today. No mention what they are doing. Several complaints from some about continued lack of information.

 

Yes, I do most certainly assume that culture will affect the approach, and in this case I am wondering if it is affecting the outcome. There is more than plenty of reason to wonder at this point. Not only are there different values and norms, but also different institutions and institutional structures. I am quite certain that when the story does come out, and it will eventually, these will present a fascinating insight.

 

Certainly they are working heroically.

[SuperG]

It is interesting that you guys mentioning the culture.

My friend and I were just talking about the same topic.

 

Comparing hurricane Katrina (in the US)the looting, burglary and gangs of people terrorizing others, the chaos - compare to the Japanese we see on TV patently waiting (in line!) outside stores (4+ hours was mentioned) for food, water and gasoline.

 

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

 

In Japanese, with English subtitles. If you're trying to explain the situation to someone who lacks any technical background whatsoever (e.g. a little kid), this might be helpful. In any event, it's an entertaining analogy.

[Ken H.]

It is interesting that you guys mentioning the culture.

My friend and I were just talking about the same topic.

 

Comparing hurricane Katrina (in the US)the looting, burglary and gangs of people terrorizing others, the chaos - compare to the Japanese we see on TV patently waiting (in line!) outside stores (4+ hours was mentioned) for food, water and gasoline.

I think it is also an interesting observation that at the various refuge centres they have already set up a makeshift recycling collection system.

[upflying]

Japanese culture requires you to consider how your actions will affect others. American culture means you consider how your actions will benefit you.

Sad but true.

[yabadabapal]

I have a thoughtful question. If we take the quantifiable sum of the amount of radiation resulting form the 2 atomic explosions in Japan during WW2, how would that compare with total sum of radiation resulting from these Nuke plants melting down in Japan today. Any thoughts?

[4wheeldog]

I have a thoughtful question. If we take the quantifiable sum of the amount of radiation resulting form the 2 atomic explosions in Japan during WW2, how would that compare with total sum of radiation resulting from these Nuke plants melting down in Japan today. Any thoughts?

 

I can't tell you how bad this one is, but Chernobyl was about 200 times both Nagasaki and Hiroshima.......

 

From here: http://library.thinkquest.org/17940/texts/nuclear_disasters/nuclear_disasters.html

 

"The effects of the disaster at Chernobyl were very widespread. The World Health Organization (WHO) found that the radiation release from the Chernobyl accident was 200 times that of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombs combined. The fallout was also far-reaching. For a time, radiation levels in a Scotland were 10,000 times the norm. 30 lives were directly lost during the accident or within a few months after it."

[Twisties]

I have a thoughtful question. If we take the quantifiable sum of the amount of radiation resulting form the 2 atomic explosions in Japan during WW2, how would that compare with total sum of radiation resulting from these Nuke plants melting down in Japan today. Any thoughts?

 

Right now Bobby I think the plant area is high in radiation, particularly gamma rays generated from materials in situ. These radiations attenuate rapidly (radius cubed (to the third power)) with distance, so there is no harm from this to the general public, only those in or near the plant.

 

When a bomb goes off on the other hand radioactive materials themselves are spread as fine particles that can remain airborne. Clearly some of this has happened now from fires and explosions, but if reports are correct, it is relatively small amounts, so far. There really hasn't been any firm data on the amounts of releases of this type, but obviously this spreading of radioactive materials, which can then irradiate from a distance, or get into the body through ingestion, inhalation, or possibly even dermal absorption is of more concern than reports of high levels of radioactivity at the plant.

 

My best guess is that amounts of dispersed radioactive materials remains much lower than at Chernobyl, or from the bombs. When considered against the entire era of open air atomic testing, it must surely be much lower. Yeah, it's a guess.

 

The issue is that the potential for a large and catastrophic release of radioactive materials seems to be at least a possibility. I think these reactors may hold as much 20,000 lbs of fuel each. I think less than 200 lbs went into the two bombs together. In any event, if a reactor were to experience a truly catastrophic event with a good portion of it's fuel atmospherically dispersed then I think those in the immediate area, and maybe up to a few hundred miles would experience health effects ranging from fairly immediate death (within days to weeks) to slightly elevated risks of cancer in the future. If plutonium is dispersed there are more concerns. Depending on the mechanism of release, e.g. fire, explosion, degree of containment, prevailing weather conditions, wind speed and direction outcomes could vary a lot. Amount may be less important than how high it is injected into the atmosphere, how small or large the particles are, which way the wind is blowing, how long the release goes on for, and whether it is raining or not.

 

When you look at a single 20,000 lbs reactor against the entire period of open air testing and use, I suspect it starts to seem pretty small. If you live nearby it probably looks huge.

 

 

[Twisties]

When a bomb goes off, there is as well, obviously, an intense, but brief, flash of radiation. But the effects of this are limited to a few miles, while the spread of fallout is of most concern at distance. I focused on the fallout issue more because I don't think we're as concerned with the flash of radiation given the state of evacuation, and the fact this is not a bomb.

[yabadabapal]

Great info from you guys, and thanks.

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

Gotta love a lady who lets her actions speak for her:

 

Sandra Bullock Donates $1M For Tsunami Relief

[Twisties]

Now, with this morning's reporting that high levels of radiation are found as distant as 18 miles from the plant, and the US beginning to assert that their monitoring suggests even worse than Japan's, we are beginning to see evidence that widespread dispersion of radioactive materials is taking place.

 

Earlier reports, had indicated very low levels as far a Tokyo, but these seemed to be from isolated release incidents, such as the explosive events, and not indicative of serious long-term problems at distant locales.

 

Now, with reports of ongoing fires and smoke emissions, we may be starting to see evidence of ongoing release of radioactive materials. This is the game changer, and what we hoped would not happen. Now we are beginning to have concern for the Japanese people in terms of acute exposure, long-term risks, need for long-term clean-up or mitigation, and significant regional spread as time goes on and conditions change. Likely this has been going on for a few days, as reports of emissions at the plant were high, indicating uncovered materials, and smoke was visible. However, until now no data had been released to support a conclusion.

 

They can ill afford to lose usable land. The costs of cleaning up large land areas are astronomical. Clearly they need to broaden the evacuation zone. The situation goes from worrisome and potentially dire, to dire and even more worrisome.

[ESokoloff]

Seems like one can get overly paranoid here.

 

Thats what I'm thinking.

Only time will tell for sure.

 

Hoping that this much ado about nothing & will prove how safe a modern design nuclear plant can be.

Again only time will tell.

 

About the time I wrote that, the situation had begun to manifest into much to do about everything.

 

Edit: Oh & for the record, these were not exactly modern units.

 

[ESokoloff]

A bit of info on the reactors.

[John Ranalletta]

A tv commentator said it best:

 

"When you have the fires of hell in front of you, what do you do?"

 

Makes everything else going on in the world like re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

[OoPEZoO]

A tv commentator said it best:

 

"When you have the fires of hell in front of you, what do you do?"

 

Makes everything else going on in the world like re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

 

Good quotes John......both of them.