Japan Earthquake: Nuclear Plants at Fukushima Daiichi

Click For Summary
The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant is facing significant challenges following the earthquake, with reports indicating that reactor pressure has reached dangerous levels, potentially 2.1 times capacity. TEPCO has lost control of pressure at a second unit, raising concerns about safety and management accountability. The reactor is currently off but continues to produce decay heat, necessitating cooling to prevent a meltdown. There are conflicting reports about an explosion, with indications that it may have originated from a buildup of hydrogen around the containment vessel. The situation remains serious, and TEPCO plans to flood the containment vessel with seawater as a cooling measure.
  • #9,511
ManuBZH said:
Well, the one of the right is clearly unit 4, but I see the one on the left as coming from unit 3.
Isn't all this fog weather related? And the plume is simply visible because of the fog... I'm no weather expert but I'm not sure there is something suspicious here (even if it looks so).


I would have to agree that it seems quite possible. now most of the site is shrouded in a fog, but it was definately coming from just the buildings to begin with, maybe the temperature change brought the dew point down enough, water evaporated etc.

also, am I the only one that notices the bright flecks now and then on the image sensor? leads me to believe that radioactive particles are still being released. if it starts to look like snow on an analog broadcast they are pretty much done with any work there.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #9,512
ManuBZH said:
Well, the one of the right is clearly unit 4, but I see the one on the left as coming from unit 3.
Isn't all this fog weather related? And the plume is simply visible because of the fog... I'm no weather expert but I'm not sure there is something suspicious here (even if it looks so).

well, from the standpoint of the dewpoint and the temperature and the humidity,
yes, there is fog about at Fukushima Daiichi. but, the "extra thick fog" around
Bdg. #3 and Bdg. #4 is being caused by the excessive steam coming out of Bdg #4
 
  • #9,513
ManuBZH said:
...Isn't all this fog weather related? And the plume is simply visible because of the fog... I'm no weather expert but I'm not sure there is something suspicious here (even if it looks so).
I was about to post the same thing. Looks to me like this is all related to the marine fog layer that was rolling in. Take a look now:
http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/f1-np/camera/index-j.html
all fogged in.
Side note: I see a much higher quality image at the url than what has been posted recently...?

It's very hard to separate the weather related water condensates versus what the units are putting out. There have been way too many "fire at #3!11!" followed by "oops, not so much" All the units are constantly generating steam. I don't understand the variances we see.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #9,514
StrangeBeauty said:
I was about to post the same thing. Looks to me like this is all related to the marine fog layer that was rolling in. Take a look now:
http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/f1-np/camera/index-j.html
all fogged in.
Side note: I see a much higher quality image at the url than what has been posted recently...?

It's very hard to separate the weather related water condensates versus what the units are putting out. There have been way too many "fire at #3!11!" followed by "oops, not so much" All the units are constantly generating steam. I don't understand the variances we see.

oh contraire. 45 minutes ago there was a very clearly delineated steam event happening
around Bdg. #4 (see previous posts)
at this time however, it is daybreak in Fukushima and the event has now been
swamped by the usual fog formation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #9,515
causeceleb said:
none of the information put out by TEPCO is to be trusted.
There is no Fuel in the Reaktor. The fuel is unloaded because the shroud was change during the Accident
 
  • #9,516
Pu239 said:
...What actually happens if the #4 spent fuel pool collapses?
Well it would be very bad. Beyond that, it seems to me that there are way too many variables for any speculation to be meaningful. They are desperately trying to keep the site so that humans can work there. The collapse of SPF4 would likely compromise that (radiation levels) for part of the site. They are actively working in RB4 to reinforce SPF4. See previous posts on this thread (a few pages back, or on the tepco site).

Pu239 said:
...What causes this steam?

It must be SFP-related since there is no active core.
"Steam" can be generated by 50C water (or lower). SPF4 temps are 86-89℃ (6/8 19:50)
http://www.jaif.or.jp/english/news_images/pdf/ENGNEWS01_1307676246P.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #9,517
Bandit127 said:
Possibly a gun barrel length to width ratio might be ideal - I am not an expert.

But things designed to 'shape' (i.e. vector) explosions commonly have a L/W ratio of 1:1 or 2:1
True and true, this may explain the observations of Jorge with regards to the lack of upward speed of the wave at the explosion, a 1:1 ratio will create a very wide wave that will be vectored but may not get the speed that you would with a true gun barrel.
 
  • #9,518
causeceleb said:
well, you are certainly entitled to your opinion.

Page 90
http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/kan/topics/201106/pdf/chapter_iv_all.pdf

and.. when the shroud is changing, there is no water in the Reactor
 
  • #9,519
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #9,520
causeceleb said:
do you really believe anything that TEPCO says?
hahahahahahahahaha ha!

Tepco?...

http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/kan/topics/201106/iaea_houkokusho_e.html
 
  • #9,521
Bioengineer01 said:
ONLY smoke/fog/vapor can be seen, nothing else...

Looks to me like a thick fog bank rolled in.
 
  • #9,522
elektrownik said:
I never saw so much steam from unit 4
Last temperature readings we got yesterday from SFP unit 4 were close to 90 C... That is darn too close to boiling...
 
  • #9,523
causeceleb said:
do you really believe anything that TEPCO says?
hahahahahahahahaha ha!

Even if you disbelieve anything TEPCO says, it makes no sense to leave fuel in a dry reactor vessel, particularly if the fuel has been run for 6 months. It would be at best a messy workaround for the people maintaining the facility., for no plausible gain.
 
  • #9,524
causeceleb said:
this is about the 3rd time I've seen it. i think it happens whenever they water
the corium in the reactor at the same time they water the SFP.
This means that the suspicion that there was fuel in RPV 4 was correct. We have speculated till hell froze over in other forums about this topic...
 
  • #9,525
causeceleb said:
oh contraire. 45 minutes ago there was a very clearly delineated steam event happening
around Bdg. #4 (see previous posts)
at this time however, it is daybreak in Fukushima and the event has now been
swamped by the usual fog formation.

Exactly. The steam observed this morning was an unusual event (a larger than normal release) from Unit 4 (mainly) - and clearly distinguishable from fog. Also clearly different than the usual slow vapour release.
 
  • #9,526
Bioengineer01 said:
Last temperature readings we got yesterday from SFP unit 4 were close to 90 C... That is darn too close to boiling...

The closed circuit cooling system is supposed to be installed in July..
Meanwhile, my guess is that they will let the pool boil, because they cannot shore up the pool while it is overflowing radioactive water because new water is getting injected. Once they have that work done, it is likely that they will flush the pool with colder water.
 
  • #9,527
Thanks very much to everyone who posted about the issue of total radiation estimates and the water. It was very helpful and I shall digest this information over the weekend.

Im surprised it took this long for visible steam on the camera to create a fresh mini hysteria on the internet, given how long that particular camera has now been up and running, and that this is not the first time that impressive quantities have been visible. I shall go and review footage from earlier today but I don't expect to see anything too interesting.

One thing the webcam is actually good for is observing at least some of the earthquakes that can be felt on site. On several occasions I have been able to link the time of slight camera shaking with an earthquake that is reported online.

For example, the 19:39 point according to the TEPCO top banner timestamp of this video, which corresponds to roughly the 9 mins 44 point of actual youtube time of this video, seems like a good fit for the earthquake I am linking to below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eac5zIZNwtc&feature=channel_video_title

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/usc00043ab.php
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #9,528
etudiant said:
The closed circuit cooling system is supposed to be installed in July..
Meanwhile, my guess is that they will let the pool boil, because they cannot shore up the pool while it is overflowing radioactive water because new water is getting injected. Once they have that work done, it is likely that they will flush the pool with colder water.
Makes sense as a heat extraction mechanism, what about contamination of the site, will all that vapor carry out any more contaminants or "radioactive flies"?
 
Last edited:
  • #9,529
Ex-skf posted a building plan and a photo with explosion damage of Unit 3:

http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/2011/06/fukushima-i-nuke-plant-reactor-3-bldg_10.html

fukushimareactor36-10-11-3.JPG


Looks burned...
 
  • #9,531
SteveElbows said:
Thanks very much to everyone who posted about the issue of total radiation estimates and the water. It was very helpful and I shall digest this information over the weekend.

Im surprised it took this long for visible steam on the camera to create a fresh mini hysteria on the internet, given how long that particular camera has now been up and running, and that this is not the first time that impressive quantities have been visible. I shall go and review footage from earlier today but I don't expect to see anything too interesting.

One thing the webcam is actually good for is observing at least some of the earthquakes that can be felt on site. On several occasions I have been able to link the time of slight camera shaking with an earthquake that is reported online.

For example, the 19:39 point according to the TEPCO top banner timestamp of this video, which corresponds to roughly the 9 mins 44 point of actual youtube time of this video, seems like a good fit for the earthquake I am linking to below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eac5zIZNwtc&feature=channel_video_title

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/usc00043ab.php

Very clever!
While the closed circuit shot says "Live", there is no way to prove that it is not put through an edit loop, to censor undesirable images before they get broadcast. An earthquake is hard to plan for, however, so it should show whether the video is real time or not.
Unfortunately, I could not reconcile the time lines in your videos, so the status is till up in the air, whether it is real time or not. Have you come to a conclusion on this issue?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #9,532
Bioengineer01 said:
Makes sense as a heat extraction mechanism, what about contamination of the site, will all that vapor carry out any more contaminants or "radioactive flies"?

Good question!
We must defer to those on this site with real nuclear expertise to estimate what the emissions from a full load of 6 month old fuel aged three months would be. Way above my pay grade.
 
  • #9,533
Bioengineer01 said:
This means that the suspicion that there was fuel in RPV 4 was correct. We have speculated till hell froze over in other forums about this topic...
Why are you thinking that there was fuel in RPV 4? Would this explain something?
 
  • #9,534
Regarding the live feed:

I just realized that the west side of Unit 1 has been sprayed or painted with a yellow or brown substance. Is that probably the glue they're using to keep particles from being carried away by winds? But why are they only treating the east side of Unit 1 and nothing else?

I searched for the process, it can be seen on this video:



It starts at minute 1. 2006-06-09, 10:00.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #9,535
etudiant said:
Good question!
We must defer to those on this site with real nuclear expertise to estimate what the emissions from a full load of 6 month old fuel aged three months would be. Way above my pay grade.

NUCENG posted some documents regarding the fission products in spent fuel. I think it was back in April. He also calculated the I131 inventory of a six month old core. You should find it with the search function.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3255998&postcount=4302

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=493058 And maybe you get a few ideas out of this thread.
 
Last edited:
  • #9,536
htf said:
Why are you thinking that there was fuel in RPV 4? Would this explain something?

This ? If (as we seen on underwater sfp 4 video) gate is undamaged, there is no other explanation...
[PLAIN]http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/3165/gggss.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #9,537
clancy688 said:
You're right when you talk about radiation data. Radiation releases, nuclides in the air, the sea, the food...

But you're wrong if it's about NPP status. Nobody except TEPCO has data about the actual reactor status. What are the sensors telling? What's the load of the SFPs and the reactors? What are the radioactivity levels of the water in the basement? NRC can't answer these questions. US officials and Greenpeace can't either.

We have dozens of sources regarding anything what happens OUTSIDE the Fukushima Daiichi fence. We have only ONE for anything what happens inside.

We were getting so much faulty data from TEPCO, I do not blame anybody for venting a little about it. After the massive explosion in Reactor Three TEPCO was still saying that they had pressure inside the reactor and finally on March Sixteenth told us that the reactor was at atmospheric pressure.

Reactor One was listed for weeks as having increasing pressure and temperature. Now, we know that was fiction as the Japanese have finally admitted that they had a melt down and a holy reactor vessel two to three days after the tsunami.

If we believed TEPCO they were going to get a firm Cold Shutdown in Six months at Fukushima. Ha!

They had to have known that they had three melted cores and damaged reactor vessels 72 hours after they were douched. Talking about cold shutdown was just for public consumption.

I don't know one reactor operator that I had contact with who believed that the cores were still intact one day after the accident. Total heat generated at five percent power as opposed to total heat dissipated said meltdown. Not just meltdown, but rapid meltdown.
 
  • #9,538
Watch the youtube video from 02:30 JST:

http://news.lucaswhitefieldhixson.com/2011/06/tepco-cam-blocked-out-by-vapor-event.html

Lots of smoke and steam, then fog?

EDIT: where is the best place to find up to date rad readings for the NPP?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #9,539
clancy688 said:
Regarding the live feed:

I just realized that the east side of Unit 1 has been sprayed or painted with a yellow or brown substance. Is that probably the glue they're using to keep particles from being carried away by winds? But why are they only treating the east side of Unit 1 and nothing else?

I searched for the process, it can be seen on this video:



It starts at minute 1. 2006-06-09, 10:00.


Actually, this has already been reported by SteveElbows on post #9406. With a more interesting fact that the previous video which holds an "action scene" showing some workers wandering in front of the camera.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #9,540
ManuBZH said:
Actually, this has already been reported by SteveElbows on post #9406. With a more interesting fact that the previous video which holds an "action scene" showing some workers wandering in front of the camera.

Oh, I guess I missed that post. So, any idea what it is?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
49K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2K ·
60
Replies
2K
Views
451K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
20K
  • · Replies 763 ·
26
Replies
763
Views
274K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
16K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
11K