Register to reply

Japan earthquake - contamination & consequences outside Fukushima NPP

Share this thread:
clancy688
#289
Sep8-11, 04:24 PM
P: 546
Quote Quote by tsutsuji View Post
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/...dm109000c.html A 15,000 terabecquerel sea release estimate calculated by researchers doesn't match Tepco's estimate for the unit 2 inlet leak last April. "The big gap indicates radioactive substances could have leaked through other channels"
It would be nice to know how much of that stuff was C137/134
Caniche
#290
Sep8-11, 05:23 PM
P: 106
Quote Quote by zapperzero View Post
Some of it is simply airborne contamination that fell to the water surface, no?
True, but concrete is porous. Also what are the chances of a single leak occuring in a plant of this size after an earthquake of that magnitude with multiple aftershocks combined with the pressure of 100,000 tons of radioactive effluent that was never designed for?
Some relevant groundwater analysis might prove enlightening
zapperzero
#291
Sep8-11, 05:42 PM
P: 1,042
Quote Quote by Caniche View Post
True, but concrete is porous. Also what are the chances of a single leak occuring in a plant of this size after an earthquake of that magnitude with multiple aftershocks combined with the pressure of 100,000 tons of radioactive effluent that was never designed for?
Some relevant groundwater analysis might prove enlightening
There was a lot of talk re site geology in the main thread.
tsutsuji
#292
Sep9-11, 02:40 AM
PF Gold
P: 1,220
Quote Quote by clancy688 View Post
It would be nice to know how much of that stuff was C137/134
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/science/new...OYT1T00890.htm "The [15000 TBq] estimate does not comprise Cs-134, so the total is even greater".

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/genpatsu-...909/index.html Internal contamination checks are not progressing fast enough. NHK interviewed local governments and found that 5400, mostly children and pregnant women, or 0.3% of Fukushima population have been tested so far (as of 1 September). The number of whole body counters is not sufficient. The cost of the transportation fees of each person from home to an hospital equipped with a whole body counter is also a problem.

http://mainichi.jp/select/jiken/news...40089000c.html The number of refugees is 101,931 as of the end of August.
Borek
#293
Sep9-11, 03:18 AM
Admin
Borek's Avatar
P: 23,363
Quote Quote by tsutsuji View Post
http://mainichi.jp/select/jiken/news...40089000c.html The number of refugees is 101,931 as of the end of August.
Can you clarify - are these just NPP disaster victims, or all earthquake victims?
tsutsuji
#294
Sep9-11, 06:07 AM
PF Gold
P: 1,220
Quote Quote by Borek View Post
Can you clarify - are these just NPP disaster victims, or all earthquake victims?
The article title is "Fukushima Daiichi NPP: 100,000 refugees outside local government bodies - no prospect of return", so the intention of journalists is to talk about nuclear refugees. Apparently they asked each local government body (city, town or village) in the restricted zone, planned evacuation zone, and evacuation-prepared zone, for the number of inhabitants from their territory who are living outside that territory, and they calculated the total. See the figures for each local government body in the map attached to the article. The name between brackets is the name of the place where each town hall was relocated. Futaba town hall is relocated in Kazo, Saitama prefecture. The question is whether earthquake or tsunami refugees who decided not to come back home although their house is not in a restricted area (like the northern part of Miniamisoma) are included or not. If the map horizontal caption "原発事故で避難している住民の数/number of inhabitants refuging from the nuclear accident" is correct, they should not be included. If the vertical caption "人数は自治体外で生活している住民数/number of inhabitants living outside local government body" means strictly that, then they are. On the other hand, inhabitants of Minamisoma's restricted southern part who took refuge in Minamisoma's northern part are probably not included.
clancy688
#295
Sep9-11, 07:01 AM
P: 546
So all in all 0.5 - 1 % of the whole japanese population has been displaced?

What's the meaning of the "25184"-number in the upper corner of the picture, at the location of Minamisoma?
tsutsuji
#296
Sep9-11, 08:42 AM
PF Gold
P: 1,220
Quote Quote by clancy688 View Post
What's the meaning of the "25184"-number in the upper corner of the picture, at the location of Minamisoma?
My understanding is that 25,184 Miniamisoma citizens have left the Minamisoma territory and are currently living elsewhere in Japan.

Blog page http://hiroko-abe.at.webry.info/201107/article_8.html provides the following data for Minamisoma

11 March population: 71,635
25 June population: 34,503
Killed: 580
Missing: 109
households whose homes were damaged by tsunami: 1509
clancy688
#297
Sep9-11, 08:56 AM
P: 546
Thanks for your answer.

So those citizens are probably from the voluntary evacuation zone or even from locations outside the voluntary evacuation zone.
Do you know how or if they're getting compensated for moving away? Because the government could always argue that they're outside all of the declared zones...
tsutsuji
#298
Sep9-11, 09:30 AM
PF Gold
P: 1,220
Quote Quote by clancy688 View Post
So all in all 0.5 - 1 % of the whole japanese population has been displaced?
According to http://www.stat.go.jp/english/data/j...suki/index.htm , Japan's population estimate for August 2011 is 127,920,000.

101,931 / 127,920,000 = 0.0007968 (0.08 %)

Quote Quote by clancy688 View Post
So those citizens are probably from the voluntary evacuation zone or even from locations outside the voluntary evacuation zone.
As is shown with the colors on the map, the Minamisoma territory is divided into 4 parts. The Southern part is in the restricted (forbidden) red zone. The Northern part is in the normal, unrestricted, white zone. The Middle part is in the evacuation-prepared blue zone. The Western part is in the planned-evacuation yellow zone.

Quote Quote by clancy688 View Post
Do you know how or if they're getting compensated for moving away? Because the government could always argue that they're outside all of the declared zones...
According to Tepco's website:

What is temporary compensation (with regard to the evacuation)?

It is payment of temporary compensation, that is, for those who live in the areas, due to the accident of out nuclear power station, of "Evacuation" or "Shelter in Place", or "Planned Evacuation" or "Emergency Evacuation Preparation" , designated by the Prime Minister pursuant to Act on Special Measures Concerning Nuclear Emergency Preparedness, we pay 1,000,000 yen per multi-person household (750,000 yen per single-person household) that will be appropriated to the damages that result from the evacuation, as a part of compensation money.
(...)
With regard to the final compensation, we will announce officially after the accident caused by the nuclear power station is settled and the final version of the above-mentioned policy is established.
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushi...you/faq-e.html
The Article's text is fully translated into English at http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/...na014000c.html (but the map is not available in the English version)
clancy688
#299
Sep9-11, 10:14 AM
P: 546
Quote Quote by tsutsuji View Post
According to http://www.stat.go.jp/english/data/j...suki/index.htm , Japan's population estimate for August 2011 is 127,920,000.

101,931 / 127,920,000 = 0.0007968 (0.08 %)
Ouch... my mistake, thx for correction. Mental math isn't my strong suit.
zapperzero
#300
Sep15-11, 03:22 AM
P: 1,042
I'll just leave this here. Citizens decon a school yard, with small child(ren?) in tow.
http://ow.ly/i/hkag
via ex-skf.
rowmag
#301
Sep15-11, 08:09 AM
P: 209
From this morning's paper:

Tests show that sunflowers turn out to be quite ineffective at decontaminating soil. Reasons:
1) the cesium is mostly in the top couple of cm of soil, and the sunflower roots are below that; and
2) cesium in the soil quickly binds to clays, and cannot then be sucked out by plants.
The only thing that really works is scraping off the top few cm of soil.
http://www.asahi.com/special/10005/TKY201109140656.html

Up to 1/7th of Fukushima prefecture needs to be decontaminated.
http://www.asahi.com/special/10005/TKY201109140739.html
zapperzero
#302
Sep16-11, 08:48 AM
P: 1,042
More political/economic fallout. Edano says Fukushima Dai-ni to be decomissioned.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...ichi-says.html
Jim Lagerfeld
#303
Sep17-11, 07:48 PM
P: 42
Quote Quote by rowmag View Post
Yes, I had noticed this in another location which was also downwind of Fukushima Daiichi and raining heavily that day. Two questions, for anyone who knows:

1) Why did the levels drop again after the rain stopped? If it was Cesium being brought down, should it not have remained on the ground and raised the background level permanently afterwards (as happened in the March bursts in several places)? But it doesn't, it drops back to the previous level after the rain stops. Why the difference this time from the spikes in March?

2) What does this imply about the ongoing level of atmospheric emissions from the plant?
According to a post made today at the ex-skf blog, we were not the only people to notice that spike - the blog has translated an article from Playboy which postulates a fresh release of radioactive isotopes around the time:

http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/2011/09/j...cality-in.html

A couple of personal observations. Firstly, I have been watching these graphs since March 15th, and that radioactive rainstorm is unique as far as I am concerned - I do not think the 'radon daughter theory' explains it adequately. Wouldn't we be able to see this pattern repeated if the radiation was attributable to natural causes? Also, the peak occurred over a a large geographic area.

Secondly, should we take an article in 'Playboy' seriously? The story cites Yoyo Hinuma, currently at University of California San Diego, so it is not just a 'baseless rumour'. I think the theory should at least be considered on its scientific merits. I'm not a scientist, however I do know a bit about the structure of the media establishment in Japan.

Self-censorship in the Japanese media is a well understood phenomenon amongst Japanese media scholars, and almost all big stories are broken through the 'weekly' tabloids. The Neptunium contamination story is a good example - based on solid University of Tokyo research but only reported by 'SPA!'.

So, all that said, why DID the radiation stop after the rain storm on August 19th? And why was there no iodine or cesium detected in the daily municipal fallout figures, yet iodine suddenly reappears in the sewage sludge in Tokyo, Iwate, Niigata, Nagano and the Sub-drain at Fukushima Unit 1? If we consider Dr Hinuma's theory about re-criticality, could other short-lived fission products explain the radioactive rain we experienced on the 19th of August?

http://i55.tinypic.com/2lavqee.jpg
tsutsuji
#304
Sep18-11, 06:28 AM
PF Gold
P: 1,220
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1rHgl8mq2s (NHK) & http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/genpatsu-...130_chizu.html The Osaka University research centre for nuclear physics will release on 19 September on its internet homepage a map displaying radiation estimates in 5 years' time in the Fukushima area. The source data are those measured by the ministry of education and science. [At present only a bar graph radiation display with some undated data (the last available ones ?) is available on the following google earth application: http://www.rcnp.osaka-u.ac.jp/dojo/GE_dose.php ]
tsutsuji
#305
Sep18-11, 07:51 AM
PF Gold
P: 1,220
Quote Quote by Jim Lagerfeld View Post
According to a post made today at the ex-skf blog, we were not the only people to notice that spike - the blog has translated an article from Playboy which postulates a fresh release of radioactive isotopes around the time:

http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/2011/09/j...cality-in.html
Here are the graphs for Kawasaki-shi Kawasaki-ku Chidori district (Kanagawa prefecture)

22 May ~ 20 August:

29-30 July:

19 August:


source: http://www.bousai.ne.jp/vis/tgraph.p..._id=1140000001

I think the peaks on 29-30 July and 19 August are created by the rain, because their maximum is reached shortly after the rain starts pouring. However what is strange is that some peaks in July and August are higher than those in May and June.
Attached Thumbnails
Kawasaki-shi Kawasaki-ku Chidori 2011-07-29 ~ 2011-07-30.jpg   Kawasaki-shi Kawasaki-ku Chidori 2011-08-19.jpg   Kawasaki-shi Kawasaki-ku Chidori 2011-05-22 ~ 2011-08-20.jpg  
tsutsuji
#306
Sep18-11, 08:07 AM
PF Gold
P: 1,220
For example, here is the smaller peak on 22 May (Kanagawa prefecture, Kawasaki-shi Kawasaki-ku Chidori district):

source: http://www.bousai.ne.jp/vis/tgraph.p..._id=1140000001

However, one should keep in mind that with less than 80 nGy/h, the July and August peaks are smaller than the levels reached in March (222 nGy/h on 15 March at Chidori, Kawasaki):

Here is the 12 March - 11 June trend:

source: http://www.bousai.ne.jp/vis/tgraph.p..._id=1140000001
Attached Thumbnails
Kawasaki-shi Kawasaki-ku Chidori 2011-05-22.jpg   Kawasaki-shi Kawasaki-ku Chidori 2011-03-12 ~ 2011-06-11.jpg  


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Japan Earthquake: nuclear plants Nuclear Engineering 14198
8.9 earthquake in Japan: tsunami warnings Current Events 671
Fukushima, Japan – Constructing an Effective First Response Nuclear Engineering 21
Radiation Contamination Thread re Fukushima Nuclear Engineering 19
Fukushima plant - should I leave Japan? Nuclear Engineering 10