Japan Earthquake: Nuclear Plants at Fukushima Daiichi

[razzz]

"Must be a nuclear fission explosion", comparing #1 to #3, not mentioning the different containment etc, comparing the hot, rising gases to a nuke. Facepalm.

That "expert" should go write novels.

The only conformation to such an event is the readings from the blast which have not been forthcoming, only hints, such as from the harden bunker control room, of course ignoring all the other fallout in the no-go zone, worldwide and the seawater. I think it was Washington State University reported their filters picked up fallout days after the Unit 1 explosion and they analyzed the contaminates after sorting out background noise and Chernobyl signatures and concluded the Unit 1 was in a state of shutdown at the time of the blast...Haven't heard much from them lately. Also, never heard the conclusion why a reactor in Virgina shut itself down, shades of Sweden's sensor alarm going off after the Chernobyl event where the Russian's failed to give notice.

We'll just throw that "expert" under the bus.

 

[MadderDoc]

"Must be a nuclear fission explosion", comparing #1 to #3, not mentioning the different containment etc, comparing the hot, rising gases to a nuke. Facepalm.

That "expert" should go write novels.

Yes, thanks for the laugh :-) Ignoring the different building technique of unit 1 and 2, comparing them as if they were equal. Ignoring that a mushrooming cloud, is indicator for high buoyancy airmasses, but is not a hallmark of nuclear fission. Seeking evidence to support his hypothesis, rather than trying to weaken it.. And the last thing I heard him say was so pitiful so I had to let him go: (paraphrasing) 'Unfortunately Tepco sits on the evidence that could prove me right'.

 

[NUCENG]

Yes, thanks for the laugh :-) Ignoring the different building technique of unit 1 and 2, comparing them as if they were equal. Ignoring that a mushrooming cloud, is indicator for high buoyancy airmasses, but is not a hallmark of nuclear fission. Seeking evidence to support his hypothesis, rather than trying to weaken it.. And the last thing I heard him say was so pitiful so I had to let him go: (paraphrasing) 'Unfortunately Tepco sits on the evidence that could prove me right'.

The truth will come out, The Japanese in collusion with the United States and the Aliens planted four missuing suitcase nucs stolen from Russia. There is a massive coverup including Bigfoot, Godzilla and a Yeti for good measure. The man with the umbrella on the grassy knoll is somehow involved. Bush lied and people died. It is the oil companies who are behind it all and the bankers are aiding and abetting. But Elvis will return in December of 2012 to release his new Album Armageddon, chapter 1). There is nothing we can do except head for the nearest crop circle and sing Kumbaya.

 

[NUCENG]

The truth will come out, The Japanese in collusion with the United States and the Aliens planted four missuing suitcase nucs stolen from Russia. There is a massive coverup including Bigfoot, Godzilla and a Yeti for good measure. The man with the umbrella on the grassy knoll is somehow involved. Bush lied and people died. It is the oil companies who are behind it all and the bankers are aiding and abetting. But Elvis will return in December of 2012 to release his new Album Armageddon, chapter 1). There is nothing we can do except head for the nearest crop circle and sing Kumbaya.

I shouldn't have said that, Now they will quote me as proof!

 

[Uagrepus]

Hello at all,

not my language, so I keep it short. My guess is, they opened the wall of No.4 in the past ("the green plug") and removed the staircase later:

http://img717.imageshack.us/i/holestairway.jpg

I have to correct myself, the stairway of No.4 was in place two hours after the earthquake:

http://cryptome.org/eyeball/daiichi-npp3/pict53.jpg

found here: http://cryptome.org/eyeball/daiichi-npp3/daiichi-photos3.htm

 

[htf]

The only conformation to such an event is the readings from the blast which have not been forthcoming

If the Japanese had disclosed their all their data there wouldn't be so much speculation.

I have the growing feeling that TEPCO has a lot to hide. It has been explained with cultural differences that TEPCO has rejected any help by foreign expert. Maybe so. But maybe they have to hide some "special industrial secrets" like the extra cooling system for SFP#4 that Jorge Stolfi may have discovered.

The explosions have been discussed here back and forth - I didn't follow this discussion in detail. Are there any estimations how much energy during explosion of unit #3 has been released?

 

[~kujala~]

When looking at these graphs it is quite clear that there is only a short correlation between the radioactive concentration of the sea water and the outflow of pit water:

http://varasto.kerrostalo.huone.net/leak_1.png
http://varasto.kerrostalo.huone.net/leak_2.png

And the other problem is that we have no data for the radioactive concentration of the sea water between 11th and 20th of March. The first data TEPCO gave was detected on 21st of March, taken around the south discharge canal:
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/11032201-e.html

So their calculations concerning the amount of radioactive leak into the sea are far too low, there is no doubt about it.

The source of the graphs:
http://www.nisa.meti.go.jp/english/files/en20110425-3-2.pdf

 

[clancy688]

The truth will come out, The Japanese in collusion with the United States and the Aliens planted four missuing suitcase nucs stolen from Russia. There is a massive coverup including Bigfoot, Godzilla and a Yeti for good measure. The man with the umbrella on the grassy knoll is somehow involved. Bush lied and people died. It is the oil companies who are behind it all and the bankers are aiding and abetting. But Elvis will return in December of 2012 to release his new Album Armageddon, chapter 1). There is nothing we can do except head for the nearest crop circle and sing Kumbaya.

Interesting: Radioactivity in the air is going up...

[PLAIN]http://www.bfs.de/de/ion/imis/ctbto_aktivitaetskonzentrationen_caesium.gif

[PLAIN]http://www.bfs.de/de/ion/imis/ctbto_aktivitaetskonzentrationen_jod.gif

 

[MiceAndMen]

Here are a few. Say if you want more.

Thanks, rowmag. What about "blueprint", "drawing" and maybe "technical drawing"?

 

[MadderDoc]

<..> I am not sure why I care that much about this though, given that it still looks a bit like a shadow to me, and that even if we do confirm it as being something, so what, what does it tell us?

Er, it would tell us something we didn't know before. Knowledge is good.

Of the possibilities i have pondered to explain this foobar there are two, which I have conclusively excluded.

1) that there isn't really something there.
On the grounds that there are way too many independently taken photos that shows the phenomenon for it to be fluke.

2) that it is a shadow.
On the grounds that we have visuals of the phenomenon under weather conditions that do not allow sunlight to produce a shadow. However much something may look like a shadow, if you can see it on an overcast day then a shadow it is not.

Other possibilities, I have pondered:

4) A stain on the wall.
This appears to be in some conflict with a photo taken right along the east wall. Then we cannot see the wall, but we still see a bright thing hanging a meter or more out from the wall at the spot. Stains are flatter than that.

5) An open door. This is a special case of 'a hole'. This is in some conflict with the apparent irregular shape of the upper boundary of the phenomenon.

6) Some wreckage from the tsunami plastered to the wall. This cannot be excluded, however improbably high this wreckage would have to have been thrown seen in relation to the measured inundation height. Waves of water is quite able to do improbable feats with things when splashing between buildings.

Do we have any idea when humans last entered the service floor of reactor 2? We hear that humans arent going inside the main reactor buildings, but I am not sure if they count the service floor as slightly different?

My idea is that no human has set foot in unit 2 since it blew. The service floor appears to be an inhospitable sauna, filled with radioactive steam.

Would they have had to remove the blast panel from the inside? And how did they obtain the spent fuel pool/skimmer surge pool water sample from unit 2 without entering some part of the building? This leads me to wonder if humans still have access to that area.

Good questions. I am not qualified to do the second question. As to the first, judging from satellite photos, the unit2 blast panel was removed or fell off at some time between 10:38 JST on March the 12th, and 9:52 JST on March 13th. (This can be known from satellite photos). I have looked for but not found any announcement from Tepco saying they removed the panel from unit 2, whereas they did announce the later deliberately made holes in unit 5/6. It might seem a bit strange if they did a precautionary removal of the unit 2 blast panel, after seeing what happened to unit 1, while not giving unit 3 the same treatment at the same occasion. I'd put my money on that it fell, rather than was removed. Within the time-frame in which the blast panel got off the building, unit 1 exploded closeby (15:36 on March the 12th) and a strong aftershock hit (22:15 on March 12th). I think it fell off, rather than was removed, but if it was removed, I think one would need to access the service floor to do it.

 

[Astronuc]

That's a good idea. I wonder if there is a way to do that so it is avilable for reference without searching through over 5000 posts. Maybe Borek or Astronuc can help us find a way to do it.

This is tricky. The only way I can think about is to edit the very first post in the thread so that it contains kind of "executive summary" for the current situation/state of knowledge/list of known problems. That has to be done by one of the Mentors, as there is a limit to how long posts can be edited by their own authors.

I have no problems with doing the editing every few days, but the text has to be prepared by someone else. If anyone is ready and willing to do it, please contact me by PM.

Alternatively, it may be better for someone to initiate a new thread concerning "unresolved questions about the Fukushima event", and that thread can be stickied in the forum. We could divide the thread into groups of 30 or so pages (1-30, 31-60, . . ) or groups of 25, and ask folks to browse the pages for unresolved questions. We could then link back to the thread/posts. Alternatively, it may be better for those asking questions to determine if their particularly question remains unresolved.

 

[default.user]

I found this video on youtube.

http://youtu.be/1Q3ljfLvHww

It is a interesting view on the second explosion.

ps: i think the are a lot of differences between both explosions. the colour, the size and the power.

sorry my bad english.

thank you for your work on physics forum

 

[Dmytry]

I found this video on youtube.

http://youtu.be/1Q3ljfLvHww

It is a interesting view on the second explosion.

ps: i think the are a lot of differences between both explosions. the colour, the size and the power.

sorry my bad english.

thank you for your work on physics forum

I've posted some explanation. Didn't really estimate the explosion energy though... not enough data, don't know the weight of dust in cloud etc.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3251659&postcount=3998

 

[default.user]

about the second explosion:

it wasnt eally a beautyfull nuclear explosion.
why:

the materials from the building makes a imperfect or unperfect explosion.
we have a lot of stell and concret. this materials make a "beautyfull explosion impossible.

yes, my english is#nt good. i hope, you can understand my opinion. ;=))

 

[bytepirate]

Before someone blows away my neat explanation for the "hole", let me build further castles on top of it:

With the recent re-racking, the unloading of the reactor, and the arrival of new fuel, the heat generated in the #4 SFP overloaded the existing coolers. So TEPCO installed a temporary extra SFP cooler outside the building (the green box). The earthquake knocked loose the cooler, and the water from the SFP started leaking out through the broken pipes. That is the "missing leak" in #4's SFP.

tempting theory.
however, full core dumps has been done before (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Galatis). if there has been a problem with the heat removal, it should not have lasted more than a few days.

the core dump was in november, the 'green something' is visible on photos taken in september.

but maybe you are right. a full core dump takes the cooling capacities to their limits:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/gen-comm/info-notices/1995/in95054.html

so maybe they have installed an additional backup system?

interesting:
'The spent fuel pool cooling system is not a safety-related system and is not required to operate following events such as earthquake, fire, passive failures or multiple active failures.' (from http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/design-cert/ap1000/dcd/Tier 2/Chapter 9/9-1_r15.pdf)

 

[default.user]

I've posted some explanation. Didn't really estimate the explosion energy though... not enough data, don't know the weight of dust in cloud etc.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3251659&postcount=3998

Sorry for crosspost.

 

[SteveElbows]

Er, it would tell us something we didn't know before. Knowledge is good.

I guess I just get easily frustrated by how much we are still left to speculation at this point, and I fear people have been trying too hard to learn something new from photos that may not have all that much more to give us. I crave new images etc.

Good questions. I am not qualified to do the second question. As to the first, judging from satellite photos, the unit2 blast panel was removed or fell off at some time between 10:38 JST on March the 12th, and 9:52 JST on March 13th. (This can be known from satellite photos). I have looked for but not found any announcement from Tepco saying they removed the panel from unit 2, whereas they did announce the later deliberately made holes in unit 5/6. It might seem a bit strange if they did a precautionary removal of the unit 2 blast panel, after seeing what happened to unit 1, while not giving unit 3 the same treatment at the same occasion. I'd put my money on that it fell, rather than was removed. Within the time-frame in which the blast panel got off the building, unit 1 exploded closeby (15:36 on March the 12th) and a strong aftershock hit (22:15 on March 12th). I think it fell off, rather than was removed, but if it was removed, I think one would need to access the service floor to do it.

I seem to recall at least one news story that made it sound like they actively removed the blast panel at 2, talking about brave workers facing tough conditions, but it could have been wrong given how many mistakes have been made in reporting of this disaster.

As for my question about how they got the skimmer surge tank sample from reactor building 2, I can answer my own question, and I should already have known this as I had seen the detail before but forgot. These diagrams were issued by TEPCO along with the results of the water sampling, and it shows how they were able to take a sample from the skimmer surge tank without needing to be in the reactor building:

http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/betu11_e/images/110418e5.pdf

 

[bytepirate]

something to be added to the open questions list:

#4: 'At approximately 6:00 am on March 15th, we confirmed the explosive sound
and the sustained damage around the 5th floor rooftop area of the Nuclear
Reactor Building.'

#2: 'At approximately 6:00 am on March 15th, an abnormal noise began emanating
from nearby Pressure Suppression Chamber and the pressure within the
chamber decreased.'

two completely independent events at exactly the same time? hard to believe, but i can not find an explanation how these events could be related. i have checked: no earthquake recorded at that time (used: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqarchives/epic/epic_circ.php 6:00AM JST-> 21:00PM on 14th UTC. location of plant roughly 37.25N 141.0E).

 

[rowmag]

Thanks, rowmag. What about "blueprint", "drawing" and maybe "technical drawing"?

Drawing, diagram: 図面
Design diagram: 設計図
Construction diagram: 施工図
Cross-sectional diagram: 断面図
Elevation plan: 立面図

Speaking of which, Tokyo Electric is not happy about the building diagrams for Unit 1 that have been circulating on "physics-related website(s)," citing regulations on nuclear materials protection:
http://www.asahi.com/special/10005/TKY201104250626.html
They have also previously refused to release drawings in order to protect trade secrets.

 

[SteveElbows]

Anyway for those that want to continue the somewhat maddening quest to squeeze fresh speculation out of existing photos, I really do recommend those Oyster Creek plans that were linked to on this thread in the past.

Specifically as it relates to the present unit 4 speculation, try page 23 of the following document:

http://adamswebsearch2.nrc.gov/IDMWS/ViewDocByAccession.asp?AccessionNumber=ML011270300

Using the spent fuel pool & reactor locations to orientate ourselves with this plan of another plant and unit 4 at fukushima, the area at the top right of this drawing is the area of interest. Note 'personnel access enclosure', and cable tray bridges that are also said to be in this area. Also see location of spent fuel pool pumps, and further to the left some fuel pool heat exchangers. Also round the corner on the next side of the reactor building there are augmented pumps and heat exchangers for the fuel pool.

Now clearly there are dangers with using the plans for a different reactor but many of the things that are likely the same or different compared to Fukushima are fairly easy to identify. The most noticeable differences are that at oyster creek the dryer separator pool is oriented differently, and the equipment hatch & truck entry tunnel is on the left rather than the right side of the building. But many other features seem very similar, crucially the location of the reactor and spent fuel pool seeming like a good match, make it far too tempting for me to resist using these docs.

Anyway based on these docs Id say we could easily be seeing 2 different things going on at that location at reactor 4. A door. A shadow cast by the cable tray bridges. And maybe a 3rd option, green tarpaulin covering some sort of equipment at some point.

At this point the vehicle that is shown some way inside the unit 4 vehicle tunnel on some photos but is missing from other pictures interests me as much if not more.

And its the fuel pool itself that still interests me most. I wonder things like 'does the skimmer surge tank still exist at unit 4?'. And whether the pools got more damaged by subsequent quakes, whether there has been a change in leak rate or boil rate. When TEPCOs roadmap was published and included mention of putting a supporting structure under unit 4's pool, I felt reporters have failed us by not dwelling on this or asking more questions. And it was certainly interesting that news that they were going to spray water in more cautiously came out days later, but collided badly with events on the ground which were taking quite the opposite turn, with far more water having been sprayed of late, not less, to deal with high temperature they measured and then acted almost surprised about (surprised, really?) Any of the other pools could yet tell a story too.

 

[MadderDoc]

A very decent satellite photo from Geoeye, from April 12th, can be seen at:
http://geoeyemediaportal.s3.amazonaws.com/assets/images/gallery/ge1/hires/fukushima_daiichi_okuma_japan_04_12_11.jpg

Among other changes compared to earlier photos, one is struck by the green coloration of those areas which had already been subjected to antidust sprayings by April 12th.

(Would like to see how much greener Daiichi has become now, 14 days later on. After finishing those slopes at unit 2 and 3, 4, they did sizeable areas at the Centralized Radwaste treatment facility, and more recently they did large tracts over at unit 5. Spraying is now being done at the seaside of unit 1 to 4, by, quote Tepco press release, an 'unmanned crawler dump truck in full swing'. Would like to see that too.)

 

[MadderDoc]

I guess I just get easily frustrated by how much we are still left to speculation at this point, and I fear people have been trying too hard to learn something new from photos that may not have all that much more to give us. I crave new images etc.

I can understand that, one cannot and should not try to 'make bricks without straw'. Otoh old evidence may sometimes yield more on reviewing, as time passes and it can be seen in the light of newer evidence. Also I have been startled by how much I can have been blind to in a video, even when I think I have rehashed it to staleness.

I found and posted a link to a quite decent, and rather more recent (mid April) satellite photo. If you like I haven't seen it before it might still your craving. For a little while :-)

 

[MiceAndMen]

Good questions. I am not qualified to do the second question. As to the first, judging from satellite photos, the unit2 blast panel was removed or fell off at some time between 10:38 JST on March the 12th, and 9:52 JST on March 13th. (This can be known from satellite photos). I have looked for but not found any announcement from Tepco saying they removed the panel from unit 2, whereas they did announce the later deliberately made holes in unit 5/6. It might seem a bit strange if they did a precautionary removal of the unit 2 blast panel, after seeing what happened to unit 1, while not giving unit 3 the same treatment at the same occasion. I'd put my money on that it fell, rather than was removed. Within the time-frame in which the blast panel got off the building, unit 1 exploded closeby (15:36 on March the 12th) and a strong aftershock hit (22:15 on March 12th). I think it fell off, rather than was removed, but if it was removed, I think one would need to access the service floor to do it.

I recall there was a report that workers opened the hole in the side of Unit 2 at great hazard to themselves. I'll have to search for a link. As time goes on we will see many of the original news reports disappearing from the web. I already have a bunch of links to news media sources' articles that are now invalid.

 

[rowmag]

Anyway based on these docs Id say we could easily be seeing 2 different things going on at that location at reactor 4. A door. A shadow cast by the cable tray bridges. And maybe a 3rd option, green tarpaulin covering some sort of equipment at some point.

Polyethylene tarp?
(This one is flame-retardant):
http://www.shizaiya.com/products/547/

 

[MadderDoc]

<..>
the vehicle that is shown some way inside the unit 4 vehicle tunnel on some photos but is missing from other pictures interests me as much if not more.<..>

What about it Steve? What I see from looking at photos I get the clear impression that the vehicle (a huge truck) was in the vehicle tunnel behind closed doors when an explosion in unit 4 smacked the vehicle tunnel real hard, blew the vehicle right out through the doors, and in the process unloaded some of its cargo on the ground.

 

[Sirius (b)]

The Twelfth hour cometh:

http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/f1/images/f1-sv-20110423-e.pdf

I've seen the prototype of this map weeks ago. Do continue your discussion of ventilation shafts of secondary containment of Unit 4, while the personnel at the plant gets irradiated to the bone, while you grasp at straws.

Enjoy

 

[MiceAndMen]

The Twelfth hour cometh:

http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/f1/images/f1-sv-20110423-e.pdf

I've seen the prototype of this map weeks ago. Do continue your discussion of ventilation shafts of secondary containment of Unit 4, while the personnel at the plant gets irradiated to the bone, while you grasp at straws.

Enjoy

That map and several previous versions are all available here
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/f1/index3-e.html

Tell us, oh Oracle of Secret Knowledge, do you still maintain the the SFP runs the entire width of the Unit 4 containment building? https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=3235856#post3235856

Perhaps you would share with us the source of your claim that the vent stacks are 130 meters high? https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=3234835#post3234835

Or maybe you might descend from your pompous throne long enough to share with us a drawing of the refueling floor for Unit 3 and/or 4 from your treasure trove of knowledge? Pretty please?

 

[dh87]

I seem to recall at least one news story that made it sound like they actively removed the blast panel at 2, talking about brave workers facing tough conditions, but it could have been wrong given how many mistakes have been made in reporting of this disaster.

Here (http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2011/03/25/25climatewire-us-experts-blame-fukushima-1-explosions-and-19903.html):

Some source ignited the explosive mixture, blasting away the sheet metal roofs and sides of the top section of the outer secondary containment building in units 1 and 3, he said. Braving dangerous conditions, workers had time to remove a wall panel at the top of the unit 2 reactor building providing an exit for hydrogen, avoiding a similar roof-level explosion, he said. The damage to the buildings 1 and 3 and the opening in 2 created an exit route for radioactive releases from the spent fuel pools at the top of the reactor pools.

This does not appear to rely on primary sources, however.

 

[MiceAndMen]

I seem to recall at least one news story that made it sound like they actively removed the blast panel at 2, talking about brave workers facing tough conditions, but it could have been wrong given how many mistakes have been made in reporting of this disaster.

I remember something similar. Here's a TEPCO press release from 14 March that says they were considering venting hydrogen from Unit 2 through the wall.
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/11031405-e.html

The only thing I can find right now that says they actually did cut a hole in the wall (on 14 March) is this summary written by David Biello, an associate editor at Scientific American:
http://e360.yale.edu/mobile/feature.msp?id=2385

 

[Sirius (b)]

That map and several previous versions are all available here
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/f1/index3-e.html

Tell us, oh Oracle of Secret Knowledge, do you still maintain the the SFP runs the entire width of the Unit 4 containment building? https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=3235856#post3235856

Which part of,

The pool runs the whole length and does cover the damaged area

Is subject to interpretation? Do read up on the preceding discussion to that point.

Perhaps you would share with us the source of your claim that the vent stacks are 130 meters high? https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=3234835#post3234835

You need a ruler?

Or maybe you might descend from your pompous throne long enough to share with us a drawing of the refueling floor for Unit 3 and/or 4 from your treasure trove of knowledge? Pretty please?

I would rather be shorting US treasury bonds, since Japan is about to unload some, than to educate a forum full of people like Fred, which engage in fraud:

The pool runs the whole length and does cover the damaged area, and it just shows how much you know, or pretend to know.

And now, as quoted by |Fred,

The pool runs the whole length, you stupid ignorant.

Assessment (that the pool did not run the whole length) was based on available literature,diagrams and photo.

Enjoy.

 

[Danuta]

Has this been posted somewhere already? TEPCO'S Reactor No.1's blueprints? They look real enough.http://www.houseoffoust.com/fukushima/blueprint.html"

 

[MiceAndMen]

Which part of,

The pool runs the whole length and does cover the damaged area

Is subject to interpretation? Do read up on the preceding discussion to that point.

Your use of the word "length" requires interpretation since width and length are different measurements. Your definition of "length" seems to be at odds with the rest of the English-speaking world. Were you referring to the N-S length or the E-W length? Regardless, it would be an interesting design if the SF pool extended from one wall clear across (in any direction) the building to the wall on the opposite side. Maybe a design that's used on some alien world? Now that I think about it, that could explain the whole length = width thing.

 

[NUCENG]

Interesting: Radioactivity in the air is going up...

[PLAIN]http://www.bfs.de/de/ion/imis/ctbto_aktivitaetskonzentrationen_caesium.gif

[PLAIN]http://www.bfs.de/de/ion/imis/ctbto_aktivitaetskonzentrationen_jod.gif[/QUOTE]

Where were the Japan samples taken?
nicht sprechen

 

[MJRacer]

Perhaps you would share with us the source of your claim that the vent stacks are 130 meters high? https://www.physicsforums.com/showthr...35#post3234835

You need a ruler?

From: http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/outline_f2/index-e.html

Exhaust Stack...Ground height approx.120m, above sea level approx.150m

Edit: This is the closest I've been able to find. As can be seen, it is for Dai-Ni. The corresponding page for Dai-Ichi does not have a measurement for the stacks.

 

[I_P]

Questions: in addition to a generally more complete accident history (how many explosions of what material [all H2?], timing of all large aerial releases and their source, better estimates of quantities released to the air and sea, nature of the damage to each unit, condition of all fuel storage pools and degree of damage - if any - to the fuel stored in each, sources of contaminated water, state of units 5 and 6, etc.) I would specifically like to know how the radiation spike on march 21st relates to the problems at unit 3.

[I was going to post an image of the measured spike at Ibaraki and the few days after as well as a weather related bump that occurred recently but I will need to find a way to host the images first. You can see the general picture here: http://public.tableausoftware.com/views/JapanRadiationLevels/JapanRadiationLevelsDashboard". The measured level has only recently returned to the the pre-21st range after a slow, steady decline. Current trend is slightly increasing, but the level is relatively low]

 

[rowmag]

Where were the Japan samples taken?

They seem to have been taken in Takasaki, about 200 km SW of Fukushima Daiichi.

Note that it is a log plot, though, so the recent rise is not so big in absolute terms.

 

[NUCENG]

They seem to have been taken in Takasaki, about 200 km SW of Fukushima Daiichi.

Note that it is a log plot, though, so the recent rise is not so big in absolute terms.

That means that it is unlikely that this is due to mechanical disturbance during site cleanup. Samples at the site could show variations from moving debris around.

 

[AntonL]

Tepco released a new video of taken by T-Hawk on 21.4.2011 flying between the reactors and turbine buildings from unit 1 to unit 4, can be downloaded here http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/news/110311/images/110427_thawk.zipand new photos released of Site observation by the packbot in the nuclear reactor building of Unit 1
(pictured on April 26, 2011)

Nearby the entrance of SHC pump room
[URL]http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/news/110311/images/110427_packbot_1.jpg[/URL]

Observation of the pressure gauge of the primary containment vessel
[URL]http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/news/110311/images/110427_packbot_2.jpg[/URL]

Check of the leakage from the electrical penetration
[URL]http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/news/110311/images/110427_packbot_3.jpg[/URL]

Check of the leakage from the equipment hatch
[URL]http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/news/110311/images/110427_packbot_4.jpg[/URL]

note the guy at the left he is radiation hardened,
picture released 26.04.2011 of Remote-controlled crawler dump (pictured on April 15, 2011)
[PLAIN]http://k.min.us/ilrN2q.JPG

all above and earlier released photos and videos are here http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/news/110311/index-e.html

 

[sp2]

Anybody see this?

http://www.asahi.com/national/gallery_e/view_photo.html?national-pg/0426/TKY201104260415.jpg

If this is legit, it looks like confirmation of a lot of worst fears.
We're going to end up with a very big exclusion zone --even if they're lucky, and nothing goes horribly wrong in the next year or so (in spite of the fact that neither the Media nor the Markets seem to give a rat's rear.)

Anyone?

 

[dh87]

Anybody see this?

http://www.asahi.com/national/gallery_e/view_photo.html?national-pg/0426/TKY201104260415.jpg

If this is legit, it looks like confirmation of a lot of worst fears.
We're going to end up with a very big exclusion zone --even if they're lucky, and nothing goes horribly wrong in the next year or so (in spite of the fact that neither the Media nor the Markets seem to give a rat's rear.)

Anyone?

NHK has a description: http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/27_10.html

 

[Danuta]

Anybody see this?

http://www.asahi.com/national/gallery_e/view_photo.html?national-pg/0426/TKY201104260415.jpg

If this is legit, it looks like confirmation of a lot of worst fears.
We're going to end up with a very big exclusion zone --even if they're lucky, and nothing goes horribly wrong in the next year or so (in spite of the fact that neither the Media nor the Markets seem to give a rat's rear.)

Anyone?

Can't say I am surprised. Persistent inland winds haven't even started. Taifun season coming. Doesn't bode well at all.

 

[AntonL]

(April 23) To any physicist or engineer it is obvious that SFP4 with an estimated heat load of 2 to 2.4MW is boiling at a rate of about 60-80 tonnes a day - why the bleep tepco cannot say the same, instead they measure the temperature in the furthest corner as close as possible to the wall to show it is 91 degrees and prove that it is not boiling and to state water is lost to evaporation due to the high temperature. I can only think that a boiling radioactive soup is bad PR as it is obvious the amount of contamination carried into the atmosphere is very high. If Tepco really did their job properly then the minimum amount of water would be injected into the pool and have one headache less of what to do with the many tonnes of water spilled every day that needs to stored and decontaminated at high cost. It has been boiling since March the 13th. (https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=3244793&highlight=boil#post3244793")

To loose 140 to 200 tonnes of water per day either means that heat load is higher than estimated or the pool has a leak.

(April 27) http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/27_09.html"

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/27_09.html]The[/PLAIN] operator of the troubled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant says water may be leaking from the spent fuel pool of the No. 4 reactor.

We said it earlier

and below confirms my calculation

http://www.asahi.com/national/update/0427/TKY201104270199.html;]Evaporation[/URL] is estimated at 70 tons of fuel a day

 

[sp2]

It's really quite surreal.

The Media, the Markets, and the general Populace seem to have decided this is all a minor nuisance.

And to those of us (precious few of us, apparently) who have eyes and a functioning cortex, and can read, the facts on the ground just look worse and worse as each day goes by.

It's like living in a Max Frisch book, or something. Incredible.

 

[Drakkith]

It's really quite surreal.

The Media, the Markets, and the general Populace seem to have decided this is all a minor nuisance.

And to those of us (precious few of us, apparently) who have eyes and a functioning cortex, and can read, the facts on the ground just look worse and worse as each day goes by.

It's like living in a Max Frisch book, or something. Incredible.

That all depends on what you consider a "minor nuisance".

In the grand scale of the whole world, it IS just a minor nuisance. For someone who is injured due to the incident it is a major ordeal.

Just because some people disagree with your outlook doesn't make your view the correct one.

 

[razzz]

If the Japanese had disclosed their all their data there wouldn't be so much speculation.

I have the growing feeling that TEPCO has a lot to hide. It has been explained with cultural differences that TEPCO has rejected any help by foreign expert. Maybe so. But maybe they have to hide some "special industrial secrets" like the extra cooling system for SFP#4 that Jorge Stolfi may have discovered.

The explosions have been discussed here back and forth - I didn't follow this discussion in detail. Are there any estimations how much energy during explosion of unit #3 has been released?

In early posts in this thread and forum there were the calculations of the amount of heat available in the single fuels but that is all Greek to me besides results having to be multiplied by thousands of tons of fuel involved. I read the common spent fuel pond (long term solution because there is nowhere else for storing) is holding more fuel than all the Units 1 thru 6 combined albeit less potent relatively speaking but apparently has avoided any debris hits or water loss.

From http://www.theoildrum.com/node/7706#comment-783191"

Seraph on March 26, 2011 - 2:17pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Parent subthread | Comments top


Taking your calculation a little farther.

[A yield of 2.878% would amount to a related fission of 1.31 Kg of uranium 235]

If fuel rods are enriched apprx 3% U235. Then 1.31 Kg U235 becomes apprx 43 Kg of fuel pellets (or apprx 100 lb)

Assume shore current is conservatively 2 mi/hr then the isotopic product of the fuel pellets passing the collection point would have to be replaced 10 times per hour.

This would mean that the fission products of half a ton of fuel pellets/hr (1000 lb/hr) are being swept past that collection point.

That translates into the product of 12 tons of fuel pellets/day flushing into the sea.

*Please excuse the rounding errors - I didn't use a conversion table

To the listing of all the unknowns, the only thing really unknown is the severity of the tragedy.

 

[|Fred]

It's really quite surreal. The Media, the Markets, and the general Populace seem to have decided this is all a minor nuisance. And to those of us (precious few of us, apparently) who have eyes and a functioning cortex, and can read, the facts on the ground just look worse and worse as each day goes by. It's like living in a Max Frisch book, or something. Incredible.

I think Asahi is using a NNSA's document released a week ago about. (available a few pages back)it's a year dose, estimate, refer to the document for full details.
Accumulation make radiation dose more dangerous but are somewhat predictable, new event/failure may as well and are less predictable. I prefer a situation getting predictably worse than one unpredictably worse as it has been the case for the past two/three weeks.It is in my opinion easier to manage as far as public safety is concerned.

 

[ascot317]

Tepco released a new video of taken by T-Hawk on 21.4.2011 flying between the reactors and turbine buildings from unit 1 to unit 4, can be downloaded here http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/news/110311/images/110427_thawk.zip


and new photos released of Site observation by the packbot in the nuclear reactor building of Unit 1
(pictured on April 26, 2011)

Nearby the entrance of SHC pump room
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/news/110311/images/110427_packbot_1.jpg

Observation of the pressure gauge of the primary containment vessel
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/news/110311/images/110427_packbot_2.jpg

Check of the leakage from the electrical penetration
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/news/110311/images/110427_packbot_3.jpg

Check of the leakage from the equipment hatch
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/news/110311/images/110427_packbot_4.jpg

note the guy at the left he is radiation hardened,
picture released 26.04.2011 of Remote-controlled crawler dump (pictured on April 15, 2011)
http://k.min.us/ilrN2q.JPG
all above and earlier released photos and videos are here http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/news/110311/index-e.html

They're continuing to release material of low value and quality. That T-Hawk video is a joke. They're probably using the T-Hawk everyday and use its IR-camera, too. Getting to see a few more details of the east side of the buildings is okay, but there's not much to see there, really. And it's stuttering. Similarly with these tiny packbot pictures. It's as if they release it so the press has something to show. From media perspective, the released material doesn't differ from previously released material and thus is of low value (in addition to being low quality!). It's as if they want to bore the media into not showing more about Fukushima.

I'd like to see the SFPs up close, same with the inside of #4's service floor, and if they can manage, the drywell lid over #3. They have bots to do that, what's the issue?

 

[MadderDoc]

I remember something similar. Here's a TEPCO press release from 14 March that says they were considering venting hydrogen from Unit 2 through the wall.
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/11031405-e.html

The only thing I can find right now that says they actually did cut a hole in the wall (on 14 March) is this summary written by David Biello, an associate editor at Scientific American:
http://e360.yale.edu/mobile/feature.msp?id=2385

Biello says, that they removed the panel on March 14th -- Tepco says, that -- in the light of the explosion on the 12th and 14th in unit 1 and 2 -- they considered doing it on March the 14th. Both statements are false.
Photograps taken by Digitalglobe at about noon March 13th clearly shows the panel missing on the building, and its lying at the foot of the east face of the building.

 

[MiceAndMen]

Biello says, that they removed the panel on March 14th -- Tepco says, that -- in the light of the explosion on the 12th and 14th in unit 1 and 2 -- they considered doing it on March the 14th. Both statements are false.
Photograps taken by Digitalglobe at about noon March 13th clearly shows the panel missing on the building, and its lying at the foot of the east face of the building.

You are, of course, correct. They will say, "We meant another kind of venting through the wall."

Someone should ping Biello about this fact. Especially since this site is part of the Scientific American Partner Network.

 

[clancy688]

Anybody see this?

http://www.asahi.com/national/gallery_e/view_photo.html?national-pg/0426/TKY201104260415.jpg

If this is legit, it looks like confirmation of a lot of worst fears.

Hm... please don't beat me now, but for me it looks like the contrary. First, half of the 20km zone and over two thirds of the 30km zone are below 20 mSv/a.
And the "hotspot zones" are at a maximum of 100-200 mSv/a. That's not a "death zone" (as depicted in german media) but an "increased cancer disease zone".
That's still bad, but not as worse as I would've thought... recovering of personal items should be possible and there's no haste with an evacuation.

Here are some numbers I found in a german study regarding a catastrophic nuclear accident. There are always two numbers. The first one is a recommendation, the second one is obligatory:

Measures in case of radioactive clouds immeadiatly after the accident:

Stay indoors: 5 mSv / 50 mSv
Evacuation: 100 mSv / 500 mSvRelocation (ground radiation accumulation during one year):

Relocation: 50 mSv / 250 mSvhttp://www.biu-hannover.de/atom/unsicher/teil2.htmSo you could say that the japanese government is playing on the safe side with its evacuations. Which is, of course, not the worst thing they could do.

Just to compare: In Gurapari (Brazil) at the beach you have natural radiation of up to 90 mSv/a, in Ramsar (Iran) at certain hot springs there's a natural radiation of up to 260 mSv/a.

The Fukushima accident could have been much, much worse. Believe it or not, but the japanese have been lucky. Only a tiny fraction of the cores escaped. And only a tiny fraction of this tiny fraction landed on japanese territory, most of it diluted over the pacific.
Imagine what would've happened if we were in the taifun season, as already mentioned before...
No chance to repair anything in those violent winds and the radioactivity would've been distributed all over japan.Btw, has anyone the original map from the ministry of science? Thanks.