JREF Homepage Swift Blog Events Calendar $1 Million Paranormal Challenge The Amaz!ng Meeting Useful Links Support Us
James Randi Educational Foundation JREF Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   JREF Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
Click Here To Donate

Notices


Welcome to the JREF Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Tags Japan earthquake , Japan incidents , nuclear power issues

Reply
Old 14th March 2011, 07:12 AM   #241
Architect
Chief Punkah Wallah
 
Architect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 9,020
I was speaking to a former design engineer who was part of the team working on the British nuclear programme in the 1980s and he is resolute that this (i.e. the power stations) is a commercial rather than environmental disaster. I think his phrase was "expensive pile of slag".
__________________
When the men elected to make laws are but a small part of a foreign parliament, that is when all healthy national feeling dies.

James Keir Hardie (1856 - 1915): Politician, Founder of Scottish Labour Party
Architect is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:16 AM   #242
Soapy Sam
NLH
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 27,780
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
The emergency generators they brought in after the quake. They said they couldn't use them because the plug didn't fit.

Well, I've seen that happen often on rigs. It's usually fixable with a hacksaw and a new plug. Or ductape and rebar.
Remember the CO2 scrubbers on Apollo 13?

One question I have is why the square outer buildings can't be vented of hydrogen. It would seem that a simple skylight should do the job. Is it that they can't allow the associated and probably radioactive air to escape?
It would seem easy to fit an air exchange system - even with a negative pressure transfer to a vacuum storage vessel. I guess maybe such a vent system exists but is also not working? Waiting till the roof blows off doesn't seem the most elegant method possible.
Soapy Sam is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:19 AM   #243
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 13,402
Originally Posted by Corsair 115 View Post
It's been a long time since I saw the show, but from what I recall, I didn't take away that message from it. I just remember it being about a father trying to find out what really happened to his daughter, and Joe Don Baker's radioactive act of revenge towards the end. I also recall it being a very well-made program.
It is indeed great! Especially Bob Peck's acting, as Ronald Craven, and the character Darius Jedburg (I am guessing this is Joe Don Baker).

You're also right that it was about Bob Peck's uncovering of stranger and stranger circumstances behind his daughter's death but throughout the series he is "visited" by his daughter who was, in life, some kind of environmental activist for a group called "GAIA" who tells him some story about "black flowers" which somehow kill everyone off. I think at some point Jedburg says he saw the same flowers in Afghanistan and thinks there may be some truth to this. It is somewhat subtle and I probably wouldn't have noticed it had I not watched it recently but it is, I think, something of the moral message to the TV series.

I agree though, that the series was really well-made.

Looks like I'm not the only one who's been reminded of it either:

http://craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2...#idc-container
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:21 AM   #244
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
 
BenBurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 35,090
Exactly.
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system?
BenBurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:25 AM   #245
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 13,402
I'm sure this has come up already but could someone tell me, in a nutshell, what was so disastrous about Three Mile Island.

I've known the name for a while as the name of an extraordinarily bad event but I haven't found any references to casualties in my (albeit) cursory search.
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:25 AM   #246
Frank Newgent
Philosopher
 
Frank Newgent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 5,381
Originally Posted by Skwinty View Post
§ The plant is safe now and will stay safe.
§ Japan is looking at an INES Level 4 Accident: Nuclear accident with local consequences. That is bad for the company that owns the plant, but not for anyone else.
§ Some radiation was released when the pressure vessel was vented. All radioactive isotopes from the activated steam have gone (decayed). A very small amount of Cesium was released, as well as Iodine. If you were sitting on top of the plants’ chimney when they were venting, you should probably give up smoking to return to your former life expectancy. The Cesium and Iodine isotopes were carried out to the sea and will never be seen again.
§ There was some limited damage to the first containment. That means that some amounts of radioactive Cesium and Iodine will also be released into the cooling water, but no Uranium or other nasty stuff (the Uranium oxide does not “dissolve” in the water). There are facilities for treating the cooling water inside the third containment. The radioactive Cesium and Iodine will be removed there and eventually stored as radioactive waste in terminal storage.
§ The seawater used as cooling water will be activated to some degree. Because the control rods are fully inserted, the Uranium chain reaction is not happening. That means the “main” nuclear reaction is not happening, thus not contributing to the activation. The intermediate radioactive materials (Cesium and Iodine) are also almost gone at this stage, because the Uranium decay was stopped a long time ago. This further reduces the activation. The bottom line is that there will be some low level of activation of the seawater, which will also be removed by the treatment facilities.
§ The seawater will then be replaced over time with the “normal” cooling water
§ The reactor core will then be dismantled and transported to a processing facility, just like during a regular fuel change.
§ Fuel rods and the entire plant will be checked for potential damage. This will take about 4-5 years.
§ The safety systems on all Japanese plants will be upgraded to withstand a 9.0 earthquake and tsunami (or worse)

See these posts for some detailed pictures and explanations.





Skwinty... sounds as if the reactor cores are being directly flooded with seawater.

Reactor cores are not generally flooded with coolant I assume.

Is this seawater being circulated somehow do you know? Thanks.
__________________
Disturbances of the semantic reactions in connection with faulty education and ignorance must be considered as sub-microscopic colloidal lesions - Alfred O. Korzybski
Frank Newgent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:25 AM   #247
Alferd_Packer
Philosopher
 
Alferd_Packer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,470
Originally Posted by Bluespaceoddity View Post
Only this afternoon there was an item about the fact that many (petro-chemical) pollutants were washed over crop fields because of the debris carried by the tsunami.
Most forms of petro chemical polution of agricultural soils have a tendency to abate over time due to bio-degradation. It is even possible to remediate heavy metal polution through bio remidiation. Although, it is likely that most of these feilds will need to be taken out of production for a while.
__________________
No laws of physics were broken in the writing of this post
Alferd_Packer is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:26 AM   #248
Alferd_Packer
Philosopher
 
Alferd_Packer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,470
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
I'm sure this has come up already but could someone tell me, in a nutshell, what was so disastrous about Three Mile Island.

I've known the name for a while as the name of an extraordinarily bad event but I haven't found any references to casualties in my (albeit) cursory search.
The power plant itself was the only real casualty.
__________________
No laws of physics were broken in the writing of this post
Alferd_Packer is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:26 AM   #249
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details...
Posts: 36,545
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
I was listening to a harrowing account of an elderly women looking through the wreckage of her home for her husband's medal (he had died 100 days before) and one of the journalist's descriptions turned to the globules of tarry petrochemicals dripping from everywhere. The local refinery had exploded before catching fire, how much damage is that type of pollution going to cause?

Yes a nuclear reactor malfunctioning is very worrying - especially one so old - but I suspect that compared to the pollution caused by everything else as a result of the tsunami and earthquake it will be almost insignificant.
Ah, but it has the word "nuclear" in it !!!
__________________
End of line, man.

"Scientists have a poor understanding of science." - Justintime
Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:27 AM   #250
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Falconer, NY
Posts: 11,945
Originally Posted by MattusMaximus View Post
I made a blog post about this whole situation last night, for what it's worth:

Know Nukes: The Japanese Earthquake & Anti-Nuclear Hysteria

Cheers - MM
Well written.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:29 AM   #251
Java Man
Graduate Poster
 
Java Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by Sword_Of_Truth View Post
Not if your car costs a billion dollars, you won't.
Nope. On the other hand it doesn't make billions of dollars in revenue either. Remember nuclear power plants don't work for charity.

Originally Posted by Sword_Of_Truth View Post
You said that the people of Japan gambled on this reactor meeting fulfilling its design pourpose and meeting its projected lifetime and they lost. This is not true, they got exactly what they were hoping for out of it. It did its job for 40 years and is now permanently shut down (minus a few days). And it performed spectacularly well given the circumstances. The containment held against punishment that far exceeded it's design and no large scale releases of radiation occurred.

You seem to have missed several experts and people who have access to experts telling you in this thread that your doomsday scenario is not possible.
Point is that the backups failed. The core overheated and at some point the cores in some reactors were assumed to have gone into meltdown and hope was set on the containment structure. The reactor did not fulfill its design purpose. It failed. It is fortunate that no more radiation was released aside from the steam released to lower some core pressure. Which was radioactive BTW. It is fortunate that no more radiation has been released and that it is nothing like Chernobyl. I don't think anybody here is sadistic enough to cheer for more radiation. The Japanese lost the bet. Something came along that was more than it was planned for. Nobody here wants to see them lose everything but their underwear on the gamble. But the bet that they could keep 40 year old cores without incident was undoubtedly lost.

So the bottom line is that all the backup systems failed. And given the old design of the reactor it overheated. Had it been replaced with a newer model some ten years ago this risk would not have been taken. That would cost money and cut on profit though. But it would have replaced the core with one less prone to meltdown in case of a cooling failure. Had that money been spent this incident would have been a non issue. Under cooling failure the cores would not have overheated.


Originally Posted by Sword_Of_Truth View Post
Chernobyl is the Godwins law of nuclear debates. Comparing western reactors to Chernobyl constitutes automatic loss of debate.
Once again, is western radiation kinder on the skin than soviet radiation? Sure western reactors are safer and less people would be affected in case of an incident. Which is good, unless you're one of the affected. And if you die? Or a close relative? And you know that there were designs that prevented such an accident? Wouldn't it cut you to the bone to realize they didn't spend the money to save your life, but they'll still have to spend it now anyway?

In the capitalism thread I was commenting to BeAChooser that it is best to invest when you have the opportunity than to wait and procrastinate. You never know what the future brings. And the lesson is well seen here.

The money to upgrade those plants was not spent. It was not spent in a programmed and orderly way. Now it will need to be spent anyway. While at the same time requiring money for repairs. On top of that you have an energy shortage due to the failed reactors. So now it's spend on repairs, spend on new reactors, rationalize energy because there is a shortage and on top of that some radiation release and a few melted cores.

Had they spent the money over ten years to upgrade the then 30 year old reactors, they would have less problems. Of course those years the budget would have been tighter. There would have been pressure to know why money was being funneled to such projects. Bla bla bla, the typical line. But as Steve Jobs would say you can only connect the dots in retrospective and see that alternative as better. But it is too late now and we don't have a time machine to go back. So we blame it on the earthquake. But the earthquake was going to happen anyway and there was nothing we could do reduce its magnitude or the magnitude of the tsunami. But we can control our budget and how and when we spend it.
Java Man is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:38 AM   #252
MattusMaximus
Intellectual Gladiator
 
MattusMaximus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In the midst of a vast, beautiful & uncaring universe
Posts: 15,814
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio View Post
Can you help answer this?

"That is a sensible balanced kind of view of the situation, but I think the author is not up with the current data.

He says several times that the danger is not extreme because the primary containment has not been breached. This would be comforting if true.

Unfortunately the Japanese Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency say that they are detecting cesium and iodine isotopes outside the Fukushima reactor. "
Originally Posted by Bluespaceoddity View Post
It has been explained that these came out when some of the excess pressure inside the vessels was released. The detection doesn't necessarily mean the vessels in the various reactors of the plant have lost their integrity and based on current reports (NHK) they are still functioning as containment for the reactors' fuel elements.
Yes, this ^^^
__________________
Visit my blog: The Skeptical Teacher

Last edited by MattusMaximus; 14th March 2011 at 07:39 AM.
MattusMaximus is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:39 AM   #253
timhau
NWO Litter Technician
 
timhau's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: East of Sweeden
Posts: 10,709
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
I'm sure this has come up already but could someone tell me, in a nutshell, what was so disastrous about Three Mile Island.
It happened too soon after The China Syndrome premiered in movie theaters.
__________________
When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord, in his wisdom, doesn't work that way. I just stole one and asked Him to forgive me.
- Emo Philips
timhau is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:39 AM   #254
Thunder
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Queens
Posts: 34,948
i hope so.

Thunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:39 AM   #255
MattusMaximus
Intellectual Gladiator
 
MattusMaximus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In the midst of a vast, beautiful & uncaring universe
Posts: 15,814
Originally Posted by Aepervius View Post
And in the mean time the refinery leaking and the other infrastructure which released dangerous chemical in water are giving a free pass.
Yup, I'm willing to bet a fair amount of cash that these chemical plants and related infrastructure damage will have a far greater environmental effect than anything happening with the nuclear plants.
__________________
Visit my blog: The Skeptical Teacher
MattusMaximus is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:39 AM   #256
Aepervius
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Somewhere on earth
Posts: 9,585
Originally Posted by Rasmus View Post
Yes, yes, yes, I know all that.

But if you were to tell me that all food was absolutely safe I would no longer trust you nor would I trust your food.



Yes, I know that. But before they did that it was generally held to be impossible/unthinkable.

The old saying tells us that if you build something fool proof someone will come along with a better kind of fool. I want the people responsible for powerplants to both understand and admit that!



All of that I agree with.

It might be that it is the better way for dealing with the general public, but I feel like people try to fool me - and they shouldn't feel they have to try and fool me.
I have never heard *anybody* relevant saying that nuclear plant would be *absolutely* safe, except a few promoter of the pebble type reactor (which I don't know but I doubt are 100% absolutely safe). I always heard them to be described as *safe*, but not *absolutely safe* by nuclear engineer, PhD, and relevant governmental agency.
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:44 AM   #257
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 13,402
Not sure if anyone has put this up here yet:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03...iima_analysis/

Quote:
Fukushima is a triumph for nuke power: Build more reactors now!
Quote:
Analysis Japan's nuclear powerplants have performed magnificently in the face of a disaster hugely greater than they were designed to withstand, remaining entirely safe throughout and sustaining only minor damage. The unfolding Fukushima story has enormously strengthened the case for advanced nations – including Japan – to build more nuclear powerplants, in the knowledge that no imaginable disaster can result in serious problems.
Discuss...
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:47 AM   #258
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 17,842
Originally Posted by Alferd_Packer View Post
The power plant itself was the only real casualty.
I wouldn't say that. How many plants were built after that?

__________________
Join the team, Show us what your machine can do (or just contribute to a good cause)Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley
DGM is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:54 AM   #259
excaza
Illuminator
 
excaza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Boston
Posts: 3,632
Apparently the lesson Java wants everyone to take away is to plan for events that happen with millennial periods.
__________________
excaza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 07:57 AM   #260
Last of the Fraggles
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,690
Originally Posted by Java Man View Post
The money to upgrade those plants was not spent. It was not spent in a programmed and orderly way. Now it will need to be spent anyway. While at the same time requiring money for repairs. On top of that you have an energy shortage due to the failed reactors. So now it's spend on repairs, spend on new reactors, rationalize energy because there is a shortage and on top of that some radiation release and a few melted cores.

Had they spent the money over ten years to upgrade the then 30 year old reactors, they would have less problems. Of course those years the budget would have been tighter. There would have been pressure to know why money was being funneled to such projects. Bla bla bla, the typical line. But as Steve Jobs would say you can only connect the dots in retrospective and see that alternative as better. But it is too late now and we don't have a time machine to go back. So we blame it on the earthquake. But the earthquake was going to happen anyway and there was nothing we could do reduce its magnitude or the magnitude of the tsunami. But we can control our budget and how and when we spend it.
And as it turns out (assuming no further events at the plant) any money spent on upgrading those plants would not have saved any lives whereas spending however many millions on other areas may have.

How safe exactly do you want the plants to be and how often should we upgrade them to make them even safer?

And why specifically nuclear plants and not dams and oil refineries and chemical plants?
Last of the Fraggles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 08:02 AM   #261
Alferd_Packer
Philosopher
 
Alferd_Packer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,470
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
I wouldn't say that. How many plants were built after that?

I don't think that it is entirely fair to blame the stoppage of nuclear power plant construction in the U.S. on TMI.

I think economics was the biggest reason.

The last plants built wound up costing over 200% more than originally estimated.
__________________
No laws of physics were broken in the writing of this post

Last edited by Alferd_Packer; 14th March 2011 at 08:06 AM.
Alferd_Packer is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 08:11 AM   #262
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
 
BenBurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 35,090
You know that old phrase when somebody asks if something is safe; "Safe as houses."

I think we could make the argument that in this calamity, the nuclear plants were SAFER than houses.
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system?
BenBurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 08:14 AM   #263
bobdroege7
Graduate Poster
 
bobdroege7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,189
I'm still pro nuclear, but the events here have me concerned about what has happened.

I'm not familiar with the BWR-3 designs involved in Japan, but have experience and knowledge of the safety systems designed to prevent this kind of accident in a BWR-6 which is a more modern design but still some 30 years old.

I have seen brief descriptions of modern BWR designs that said to be 1000 times less likely to suffer these kinds of accidents due to such features as coolant pumps internal to the reactor vessel as well as natural circulation capabilities that would prevent loss of cooling type accidents under loss of off-site power with no operator action for hours.

In the case of the Fukushima plants that have experienced explosions, following the loss of cooling leads be to believe that the cores of the plants involved are piles of slag.

In my experience the safety systems that should be in place, should also be behind thick walls of concrete, if they are built that way in the great corn/bean desert of Illinois where there is no threat of a tsunami, why did all the safety systems fail?

Did they have hydrogen recombiners to deal with the hydrogen produced when the core becomes uncovered?

Why did the diesel generators fail? In my opinion, there should have been a dozen locomotive sized diesel generators on site, did they all fail and why?

If the nuclear plant I worked at were at the Fukushima site and there was a Tsunami coming, the safest place to be would be in the control room which is almost 100 ft above the water level of the lake used as ultimate heat sink. The diesel generators were inside 3 foot concrete walls and so are the rest of the safety systems, as well as the control room.

I also wonder what kind of regulatory environment exists in Japan. In the US at least at the last time I was working at a nuclear plant there were both the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Institute of Nuclear Plant Operators. The NRC being a government agency paid for by licensing fees and INPO being staffed by the operators of various plants in a self regulating style.

And in closing there is too much disinformation going on as well as misunderstanding of the historical events.

Cherenobyl was a prompt criticality event, as was PL-1 in Idaho, where the power level went up to hundreds or thousand times rated power causing an explosion.

At Three Mile Island, several failures resulted in the water level in the core dropping below a safe level resulting in overheating of the fuel rods. The fuel rods being made of a Zirconium alloy which burns in the presence of water at a lower temperature than the melting point, which is where the hydrogen comes from. Once this burning starts, there really is no stopping it, which is why there are no partial meltdowns.

This was probably TLR but there you go.
__________________
Un-american Jack-booted thug

Graduate of a liberal arts college!

Faster play faster faster play faster
bobdroege7 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 08:20 AM   #264
bobdroege7
Graduate Poster
 
bobdroege7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,189
Originally Posted by Alferd_Packer View Post
I don't think that it is entirely fair to blame the stoppage of nuclear power plant construction in the U.S. on TMI.

I think economics was the biggest reason.

The last plants built wound up costing over 200% more than originally estimated.

I don't either, and I think cheap natural gas had a lot more to do with it.

Cheap fuel, cheap construction, cheap financing, short build time, cheap regulatory hurdles etc.
__________________
Un-american Jack-booted thug

Graduate of a liberal arts college!

Faster play faster faster play faster
bobdroege7 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 08:23 AM   #265
Java Man
Graduate Poster
 
Java Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by Last of the Fraggles View Post
And as it turns out (assuming no further events at the plant) any money spent on upgrading those plants would not have saved any lives whereas spending however many millions on other areas may have.
Obviously everyone is happy no more life was lost to radiation. But those reactors will have to be replaced. In the meantime there is a power shortage. Had that money been spent on upgrading them ten years ago with newer technology then those cores could be powered up again. Providing the needed energy. The money now needed to repair things would not need to be subdivided into cleaning and repairing melted cores.

My "crisis" isn't a nuclear blowout. Which would be the most dire, extreme and undesired event. Nevertheless the current situation is quite a nightmare that could have been prevented if the cores were replaced with newer models. The Japanese are looking at quite an expense down the road and that's without a blowout.


Originally Posted by Last of the Fraggles View Post
How safe exactly do you want the plants to be and how often should we upgrade them to make them even safer?
Well it would be good to decommission designs that can cause a meltdown in case of a cooling failure. Given we already have designs that work that way.

And by safe I don't only mean a huge radioactive cloud. But safe in the knowledge that it's working ok, that it shutdown ok, that you can now reactivate it to power the grid in this crisis, etc etc etc. It retrospect it begins to look a lot cheaper and better to have gone through the expense of upgrading it.


Originally Posted by Last of the Fraggles View Post
And why specifically nuclear plants and not dams and oil refineries and chemical plants?
We can sure talk about that in another thread if you want to.
Java Man is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 08:32 AM   #266
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
 
Corsair 115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Tranquility Base
Posts: 10,352
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Human endeavour shouldn't be limited to things that are safe, if we want to get anywhere.

That reminds me of the science fiction novella With Folded Hands by Jack Williamson. It involves the invention of mechanicals (robots) which are programmed to serve humans and protect them from harm. Only the mechanicals execute their programming far too well, and soon begin to see virtually every human activity as being potentially harmful and thus must protect humans from these activities. (The story doesn't end well for humanity.)
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve
to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and
one which we intend to win."
Corsair 115 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 08:36 AM   #267
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details...
Posts: 36,545
Originally Posted by Rasmus View Post
Yes, but until Chernobyl that was also true for all the nuclear power plants, wasn't it? And until last week the Japanese plants were quake safe, too ...
That's weird logic.
__________________
End of line, man.

"Scientists have a poor understanding of science." - Justintime
Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 08:39 AM   #268
Aepervius
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Somewhere on earth
Posts: 9,585
@bobdroege7 you are speaking of rapidly zirconium cladding oxidation. That is a problem yes, but if the containment reactor stay integral, it would be a hassle, not the big danger the media are making it be.

Otherwise the same good question you asked, we all have, but no answer have been forthcoming on how exactly the backup generator failed, and why were they insufficiently protected agaisnt a tsunami. But then again that earthquake was special.
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 08:39 AM   #269
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details...
Posts: 36,545
Originally Posted by MattusMaximus View Post
Yup, I'm willing to bet a fair amount of cash that these chemical plants and related infrastructure damage will have a far greater environmental effect than anything happening with the nuclear plants.
That's a tragedy in itself. The perceived evil of nuclear radiation allows greater evils to continue to exist (coal plants, solar and wind, etc.)
__________________
End of line, man.

"Scientists have a poor understanding of science." - Justintime
Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 08:42 AM   #270
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
 
BenBurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 35,090
Bob,

As I understand it, the generators were not destroyed, but flooded.

As for hydrogen re-combiners; passive catalytic re-combiners have a problem when the amount of hydrogen is very large. The catalyst heats up and can become so hot that it ignites the hydrogen.

This may in fact be what happened here; I do not know if these plants had a passive catalytic system.
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system?
BenBurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 08:50 AM   #271
Skwinty
Philosopher
 
Skwinty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: The far side
Posts: 5,508
Originally Posted by Frank Newgent View Post
Skwinty... sounds as if the reactor cores are being directly flooded with seawater.
That seems to be the case. The entire containment is being flooded with sea water to remove residual heat.

Originally Posted by Frank Newgent View Post
Reactor cores are not generally flooded with coolant I assume..
When the reactor is operating, water must flow over the fuel elements in the core to remove the heat. This water is flashed to steam to drive the turbine.

Originally Posted by Frank Newgent View Post
Is this seawater being circulated somehow do you know? Thanks.
I think the only circulation taking place is natural circulation. ie from hot to cold areas.

The objective is to keep the reactor submerged with water to cool things down.

If you read the 03.pdf I linked to, you should get a better idea of the different types of cooling modes for normal operations.

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/basic-ref/teachers/03.pdf
__________________


What is reality? Nothing but a collective hunch.
--Lily Tomlin
Skwinty is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 09:04 AM   #272
Frank Newgent
Philosopher
 
Frank Newgent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 5,381
Originally Posted by Skwinty
Originally Posted by Frank Newgent View Post
Skwinty... sounds as if the reactor cores are being directly flooded with seawater.
That seems to be the case. The entire containment is being flooded with sea water to remove residual heat.

Originally Posted by Frank Newgent View Post
Reactor cores are not generally flooded with coolant I assume..
When the reactor is operating, water must flow over the fuel elements in the core to remove the heat. This water is flashed to steam to drive the turbine.

Originally Posted by Frank Newgent View Post
Is this seawater being circulated somehow do you know? Thanks.
I think the only circulation taking place is natural circulation. ie from hot to cold areas.

The objective is to keep the reactor submerged with water to cool things down.

If you read the 03.pdf I linked to, you should get a better idea of the different types of cooling modes for normal operations.

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/basic-ref/teachers/03.pdf

yeah, thanks... some reactor set-ups use the heated water to push the turbines and some have cooling systems removed from this process.

What I am asking is the seawater being used to cool the core just sitting there on the core? Is it being circulated to cool it down and then pumped back in? Is it being pumped out of the building and new seawater pumped in?

I am merely curious. Thought somebody might know around here.
__________________
Disturbances of the semantic reactions in connection with faulty education and ignorance must be considered as sub-microscopic colloidal lesions - Alfred O. Korzybski
Frank Newgent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 09:06 AM   #273
Thunder
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Queens
Posts: 34,948
is this seawater used to cool the rods..now radioactive?
Thunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 09:08 AM   #274
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
 
Corsair 115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Tranquility Base
Posts: 10,352
Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
is this seawater used to cool the rods..now radioactive?

From post #7:

Quote:
The seawater used as cooling water will be activated to some degree. Because the control rods are fully inserted, the Uranium chain reaction is not happening. That means the “main” nuclear reaction is not happening, thus not contributing to the activation. The intermediate radioactive materials (Cesium and Iodine) are also almost gone at this stage, because the Uranium decay was stopped a long time ago. This further reduces the activation. The bottom line is that there will be some low level of activation of the seawater, which will also be removed by the treatment facilities.
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve
to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and
one which we intend to win."
Corsair 115 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 09:10 AM   #275
Skwinty
Philosopher
 
Skwinty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: The far side
Posts: 5,508
Frank, it is not possible to state exactly what is being done other than flooding the entire containment.

I suspect that they are not using pumps to recirculate the water through heat exchangers, just pumping the water in and ensuring a constant level as the water boils off.

This of course is only an opinion and could be wrong. There is not enough specific detail available.
__________________


What is reality? Nothing but a collective hunch.
--Lily Tomlin
Skwinty is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 09:12 AM   #276
bobdroege7
Graduate Poster
 
bobdroege7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,189
If they are trying to flood with seawater, obviously they are not able to flood with fresh water, which means all emergency cooling systems are not functional.

Which means molten piles of slag giving off hydrogen which is exploding, which is bad.

I would go with a 5 rating, unless they find all the missing workers alive and well.

Skwinty, I wish you would specify which containment you are calling first, second and third.

In my understanding the containments are in order the fuel pellets, the zircaloy cladding, the reactor coolant, the pressure vessel, the drywell, the containment dome and the vapor shield.

Latest news is saying the core is completely uncovered in at least one of the plants and some are saying the core is burning. So the information coming out is a little better.
__________________
Un-american Jack-booted thug

Graduate of a liberal arts college!

Faster play faster faster play faster
bobdroege7 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 09:15 AM   #277
technoextreme
Illuminator
 
technoextreme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,788
Heh. I finally figured out the fallacy that has been really annoying the hell out of me. Its the nirvana fallacy which is a subset of the false dilemma category.
Quote:
We can sure talk about that in another thread if you want to.
Nope. Lets talk about it here because its the fundamental problem with your twisted warped logic. What makes nuclear power plants so special in their safety record that you single them out in terms of their safety as opposed to pretty much anything else. Dams can burst and break killing people. The electrical grid itself is woefully inadequate. Roads and bridges are can be quite dangerous.
__________________
It's amazing how many of these "paranormal" icons seem to merge together. There always seem to be theories about how they link together in some way. I'm sure someone has a very good explanation as to how Bigfoot killed JFK to help cover Roswell.-Mark Mekes
This isn't rocket surgery.-Bill Nye

Last edited by technoextreme; 14th March 2011 at 09:21 AM.
technoextreme is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 09:20 AM   #278
Alferd_Packer
Philosopher
 
Alferd_Packer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,470
Originally Posted by BenBurch View Post
The probable result is a mess inside of the containment that will cost millions Billions to clean up.
Fixed that
__________________
No laws of physics were broken in the writing of this post
Alferd_Packer is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 09:20 AM   #279
Skwinty
Philosopher
 
Skwinty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: The far side
Posts: 5,508
Originally Posted by bobdroege7 View Post
Skwinty, I wish you would specify which containment you are calling first, second and third.
Containment 1 is the Zircalloy cladding and you cannot flood inside that.

Containment 2 is the pressure vessel which you can flood.

Containment 3 is the concrete containment structure which can be directly flooded.

Look at the cutaway drawing in the pdf file page 16.

As far as I understand, fire trucks are pumping the sea water into containment and not recirculating this water.
__________________


What is reality? Nothing but a collective hunch.
--Lily Tomlin
Skwinty is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2011, 09:22 AM   #280
MarkCorrigan
Winter is Coming
 
MarkCorrigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Middle of nowhere, UK.
Posts: 8,021
Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
i hope so.

There's no "hope so" about it.

The reactor and power station it was contained in is about 40-50 years old, and it still has more than adequate safety measures. Unless someone totally screwed up the building of the plant (ludicrously unlikely) the containment area will lock down and no one will be hurt by the nuclear fuel.
__________________
Naturalism adjusts it's principles to fit with the observed data.
It's a god of the facts world view. -joobz

Now I lay me down to sleep, a bag of peanuts at my feet.
If I die before I wake, give them to my brother Jake.
MarkCorrigan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

JREF Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:09 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2001-2013, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.