Japan Earthquake: Nuclear Plants at Fukushima Daiichi

AI Thread 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.
  • #2,551
M. Bachmeier said:
Challenge: Show me the TEPCO hard data. And, if you tell me it wasn't ported to an external server (run-time, which would be unthinkable) I'd say we've been chasing shadows... but shadows are evident.

A more knowledgeable analysis is in order.

I'm not looking for culpability, but can not escape a educated layman's perspective analysis of a percipient lack of hard data concerning initial conditions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/03/science/03meltdown.html

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/75223364/fukushima-areva <--the Areva slideshow
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2,552
This should be helpful to the workers dealing with the situation. QinetiQ North America today announced that the government of Japan has accepted its offer to provide unmanned vehicle equipment and associated training to aid in Japan’s natural disaster recovery efforts. QinetiQ North America’s technology and services will allow Japan’s response teams to accomplish critical and complex recovery tasks at a safer distance from hazardous debris and other dangerous conditions.

The equipment being staged in Japan for rapid, on-call deployment includes QinetiQ North America’s Robotic Appliqué Kits, which turn Bobcat loaders into unmanned vehicles in just 15 minutes. The kits permit remote operation of all 70 Bobcat vehicle attachments, such as shovels, buckets, grapples, tree cutters and tools to break through walls and doors. The unmanned Bobcat loaders include seven cameras, night vision, thermal imagers, microphones, two-way radio systems and radiation sensors, and can be operated from more than a mile away to safely remove rubble and debris, dig up buried objects and carry smaller equipment. http://www.qinetiq-na.com/a07ccafe-0488-4f5b-9121-969e8c8d356a/news-and-events-latest-news-detail.htm
 

Attachments

  • bobcat-with-kit2.jpg
    bobcat-with-kit2.jpg
    8.2 KB · Views: 425
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #2,553
shogun338 said:
Could this be melted spent fuel 2 flowing out of 1 in this pic of Reactor #4 ?

and defy gravity?
 
  • #2,554
REGARDING SECONDARY CONTAINMENT VENTILATION SYSTEMS

NUCENG said:
The reactor building in a BWR has a large open shaft from the refuel floor down to the ground floor. This shaft allows large loads including fuel shipping and storage casks to be lifted to the refuel floor. During outages this is widw open. During operation there may be tarps or safety nets on the openings at each floor, but it is not air-tight.

The secondary containment (reactor building) is designed to be kept at a negative pressure by normal ventilation during normal operations and by the Standby Gas Treatment System during accidents. The building is not compartmentalized like a submarine so take that for what i may mean during san explosion.

Negative pressure . . . interesting. Does the external venting and filtration ultimately exit through the tower between Units 3 and 4? But would the ventilation system and negative pressure be operational during complete loss of power? Hard to imagine that power would have been restored to the ventilation systems and yet not to the water cooling and circulation, although it takes a lot more power to run water pumps than fans, I suppose.
 
  • #2,555
shogun338 said:
Could this be melted spent fuel 2 flowing out of 1 in this pic of Reactor #4 ?
Boy, once you plant the thought in my mind, it does look like melted lead flowing over the debris.
 
  • #2,556
hoyrylollaaja said:
and defy gravity?
Fuel bundles blown up and around during explosion then super heats and melts, flows to the side . How would that defy gravity ?
 
  • #2,557
hoyrylollaaja said:
and defy gravity?

First I get a thought suggested and agree with it, and now with another comment, I can't find out which way is down. I think we are looking down at the debris, aren't we?
 
  • #2,558
In that photo, which way is up and which way is down?
 
  • #2,559
shogun338 said:
Fuel bundles blown up and around during explosion then super heats and melts, flows to the side . How would that defy gravity ?
Shogun, if that is the side of a wall, how come everything is stuck to it?
 
  • #2,560
Joe Neubarth said:
Boy, once you plant the thought in my mind, it does look like melted lead flowing over the debris.
Like the Chernobyl Elephants foot .
 

Attachments

  • Elephants foot.gif
    Elephants foot.gif
    62.5 KB · Views: 528
  • #2,561
Joe Neubarth said:
Shogun, if that is the side of a wall, how come everything is stuck to it?
What I'm saying is if a fuel bundle where laying there from the explosion and it melted it would flow across the floor of the room . Like when you spill a cup of water on a table.
 
  • #2,562
Joe Neubarth said:
First I get a thought suggested and agree with it, and now with another comment, I can't find out which way is down. I think we are looking down at the debris, aren't we?
Yes looking down on to one of the floors . Here is a video link of it. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=30c_1301689134
 
  • #2,563
shogun338 said:
Could this be melted spent fuel 2 flowing out of 1 in this pic of Reactor #4 ?

It's laying on top of the fire suppression piping that was on the roof. It's likely roof sheeting or a barrier material installed in the roof. You can see several sharp "folds" in the material and its laying very flat over top of a very uneven surface.

A melted material would not behave in this manner. You would have flow channels, depressions, hanging drips, etc.
 
  • #2,564
REGARDING THE NEW PHOTOS OF SFP4

There re significant new clues here regarding the direction and magnitude of the blast, the precise layout of the pool, what is probably in the pool, and to some extent, how the damage to the external south side of Bldg 4 occurred. The exercise this time is left for others. Don't forget to look back and reference other views. Have you made folders for photos of each of the Bldgs yet? Are you adding the links to the new videos as they become available?

PS: Low-lying smoke in a pool of stagnant air can look like melted flowing lead, I think.

Goodnight.
 
  • #2,565
Has anyone found a video of Unit 4 exploding ? With all the cameras around this thing I don't believe it was not filmed .
 
  • #2,566
shogun338 said:
Has anyone found a video of Unit 4 exploding ? With all the cameras around this thing I don't believe it was not filmed .

It probably was . . . in the IR spectrum by NSA satellites. It was dark at the time. Does the NSA have a website?
 
  • #2,567
Unit # 4 photo . Lower levels destroyed .
 

Attachments

  • #4 reactor shot.jpg
    #4 reactor shot.jpg
    79.9 KB · Views: 479
  • #2,568
Cire said:
It's laying on top of the fire suppression piping that was on the roof. It's likely roof sheeting or a barrier material installed in the roof. You can see several sharp "folds" in the material and its laying very flat over top of a very uneven surface.

A melted material would not behave in this manner. You would have flow channels, depressions, hanging drips, etc.

You obviously have never seen melted lead, have you?
 
  • #2,569
shogun338 said:
What I'm saying is if a fuel bundle where laying there from the explosion and it melted it would flow across the floor of the room . Like when you spill a cup of water on a table.

You should remember that UO2 melts above 2800ºC, so almost any other material in contact with it would likely melt before it does, and it would glow a brightly warm white.
 
  • #2,570
M. Bachmeier said:
You speak from, both a lack of data and desire for amortization, I don't advocate rash choices, but consider the human cost in decisions made. Precaution is both expensive and warranted in this case. Unknowns equal unacceptable risks for me and mine.

Sure, there is a human cost in decisions, that is precisely what I'm talking about. For instance, if I recall the numbers correctly, the number of voluntary abortions following Chernobyl accident due to fears of genetic abnormalities could be counted in the hundreds of thousands. However, no increase of such anomalies was detected among the children that did born after the accident. I'm not against abortion, but hundreds of thousand of wanted babies were prevented to come into this world just because of fear and misinformation. And today, those (mostly old people) who defied evacuation zones and ended returning to their homes around Chernobyl are more healthy than those still relocated, mainly due to social and psychological problems and their related health effects on the latter.

Sorry to insist on that, but this kind of comments seem to imply that some of us are not wishing and trying to do our best, within our modest capabilities, for those suffering these difficult circumstances. We may differ in opinions, but I feel that doubts about intentions could even be offensive.
 
  • #2,571
ZZR Puig said:
You should remember that UO2 melts above 2800ºC, so almost any other material in contact with it would likely melt before it does, and it would glow a brightly warm white.

That puddle of metal is most likely an amalgam of Zirc, Uranium, Plutonium and other metals Nickle, Iron, Cadmium, Silver) that melted into it. When the explosion happened it was thrown into the air in hundreds of blobs just like that one and came back down with the debris. Since it has other metals entrained it has cooled, just like the Elephant's Foot in the earlier photo, which seemed to have stopped in mid flow. It may have melted some aluminum conduit to add to its mass after it landed, but it sure looks like a blob of metal to me.
 
  • #2,572
Joe Neubarth said:
You obviously have never seen melted lead, have you?

I work with molten lead quite frequently actually. Try tossing it over a stack of randomly oriented pipe and try to come up with flat smooth sheets as seen in the image. (Don't actually attempt to do this.)
 
  • #2,573
shogun338 said:
Unit # 4 photo . Lower levels destroyed .

OK, Shogun338, good. And you are looking at which corner of the destroyed lower levels of Bldg 4?

Can you tell which way the forces of the blast were directed and what structural damage was caused because of it? Where did it come from?

Another exercise for you.

Ignore what anyone else has said and look at this portion of almost the last frame of the video of the overhead "fish eye" camera on the crane. I will attach a shot of it. If you don't know what something is in a photo, start looking for something you do know and use it to gain size, perspective and orientation. What is just above the arrow line? What is just below it? Once you know what is above the line, look for more of it. Check out the layout drawing of the top floor I provided, and think about how thick the wall has to be relative to the size of the pool. Go from there to figure out where the actual pool is, how big it is and what the position of the fuel handling machine is relative to the pool.

http://i306.photobucket.com/albums/nn270/tcups/aerial-floorplan.gif

http://i306.photobucket.com/albums/nn270/tcups/TopFloor-Floorplan.jpg

PS: leave the metallurgy to Joe to figure out from the photos, and concentrate on identifying structures you can name and place for sure.

Start here:
 

Attachments

  • Picture 14.png
    Picture 14.png
    64.1 KB · Views: 502
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #2,574
NUCENG said:
The latest IAEA updates on Chernobyl that I have read are still unable to demonstrate statistically an increase in latent cancers other than the thyroid cancers and acute dose cases early in the event. If you have later information I'll add it to the list of other new reports I have found while following this thread.

I've inadvertently openned a can of worms. It appears there is huge disagreement on the population health impacts of Chernobyl in the scientific literature.

A large Russian study from 2007 was translated and published in 2009 in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, a prestigious journal. It is available here:
http://www.strahlentelex.de/Yablokov%20Chernobyl%20book.pdf"

This Russian study reviews over 1,000 published research papers - most by Eastern European researchers written in Slavic languages - as well as a large number of internet and otherwise published documents on the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster. The authors claim that a large body of research literature from Eastern Europe has been downplayed or ignored by the IAEA.

Among other health and environmental consequences, the Russian study concludes, "...the overall mortality for the period from April 1986 to the end of 2004 from the Chernobyl catastrophe was estimated at 985,000 additional deaths."

In contrast, in 2005 the IAEA estimated about 4,000 Chernobyl-realted deaths.

The IAEA has been criticised (by Christopher Busby among others) as being biased by its pro-nuclear industry stance; whilst those supporting a higher estimate (eg. Busby) have been criticised as being biased by an ideology that opposes nuclear power.

See also:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/amory-lovins/nuclear-power-fukushima-_b_837643.html"

I am a statistician with research skills, so I could review the literature myself, but it's an enormous task. So I'll simply point out there are two strongly opposed views with substantial backing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #2,576
AtomicWombat said:
I've inadvertently openned a can of worms. It appears there is huge disagreement on the population health impacts of Chernobyl in the scientific literature.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/04/24/1050777345385.html

Worms find Chernobyl fallout a 'turn on'

April 24 2003

Kiev: The Chernobyl nuclear disaster has radically changed the lives of worms in the region, which now enjoy more sex, Ukrainian scientists said today.

Enough said.
 
  • #2,577
With news reporting like this, we will never know what's going on.

...Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO) said it had found a crack in a concrete pit that was leaking water at its No.2 reactor in Fukushima, measuring 1,000 millisieverts of radiation per hour.

"With radiation levels rising in the seawater near the plant, we have been trying to confirm the reason why, and in that context, this could be one source," said Hidehiko Nishiyama, deputy head of the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA).

He cautioned, however: "We can't really say for certain until we've studied the results."

TEPCO poured concrete into the pit to stop the leak, but water prevented it from hardening and the leak had yet to be stopped, public broadcaster NHK said...
From...http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/world/9124045/leak-found-in-reactor-pit-as-japan-pm-tours-disaster-zone/

Water is the catalyst for cement, so much for detailed details. And I take it the high reading means the contaminated water comes directly from core material or can one lone fuel rod (damaged/exposed) produce a similar reading (1,000 millisieverts of radiation per hour)?
 
Last edited:
  • #2,579
First Casualties

[URL said:
http://www.tepco.co.jp/cc/press/11040301-j.html[/URL] (machine translated)]

The impact of Tohoku region Pacific Ocean earthquake that occurred on March 11, 2011 Tokyo Electric Power Company on April 3, 2011, in the turbine building Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station Unit 4, two of our employees in the field study now missing. The Company will continue the work we have searched every effort so far, about 53 minutes and 25 minutes at around 3:00 pm and 3:00 pm on March 30 this year, said the two employees in the building basement was discovered, was confirmed dead by yesterday. We pray for your name along with two employees who died, and your family would like everyone's deepest sympathies. <Our people died> Kokubo Kazuhiko (National Kazuhiko com) like (age 24) Nozomi Terashima Shiyou first operation and management of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station (or the light of the assigned), like (21) of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station more than one operation control unitPress Releases
Despite President Katsumata Tsunehisa tsunami hit Tokyo Electric Power Company on April 3, 2011, the loss of two young employees who tried to protect the safety of the plant, and the height of contrition Dearimasu. For the deceased, pray for us as well as deep, Our condolences to his family respectfully represent. Our Ino Takashi deceased to death, and vow to never repeat such a tragedy, for the convergence Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accidents, heart and soul is willing to Katamuke. Please rest in peace please. And over

I am sure I speak for all members here that our condolences are extended to the families of the deceased
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #2,580
RIP.

Bit early for a cause of death i assume.
 
  • #2,581
Cire said:
I work with molten lead quite frequently actually. Try tossing it over a stack of randomly oriented pipe and try to come up with flat smooth sheets as seen in the image. (Don't actually attempt to do this.)
You tossed a five hundred pound blob of nearly solid amalgam of metal and it did not stick together? Or you tossed a few ounces of high temperature lead that pours freely like cream and you say there is a difference. In that case I would agree with you, but you have not made a point other than the fact that you want to belabor the issue ad infinitum. that looks like a melted but now solidified mass of metal to me.What does it look like to you again?
 
  • #2,582
Cause of death was probably tsunami - victims showed lots of blood loss. Although, I don't recall hearing of two missing workers throughout this time, so I'm kinda surprised.
 
  • #2,583
Godzilla1985 said:
Cause of death was probably tsunami - victims showed lots of blood loss. Although, I don't recall hearing of two missing workers throughout this time, so I'm kinda surprised.

Not much point in speculating on the cause but i heard they were doing duct work inside one of the reactors when they went missing.
 
  • #2,584
Godzilla1985 said:
Cause of death was probably tsunami - victims showed lots of blood loss. Although, I don't recall hearing of two missing workers throughout this time, so I'm kinda surprised.

correct
http://english.kyodonews.jp/news/2011/04/82827.html said:
The plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. said the same day that two workers in their 20s who had been missing since the March 11 killer quake and tsunami that crippled the power station were found dead in the basement of a reactor's building last Wednesday.
 
  • #2,585
Is it true that their dosimeters max out at 1,000 mSv?
 
  • #2,587
jensjakob said:
This picture worries me:
http://english.kyodonews.jp/photos/2011/04/82781.html

If the military takes these precautions - why do we still see workers on the ground in lot less protection?

---------------------------

Evidently you have not been on a boat on the water, with wind blowing. The boat is constantly taking in water and discharging it. BTW, the area they are traversing is in the release zone of the reactors in crisis.
 
  • #2,588
PROPOSED MECHANISM FOR BLAST AND DAMAGE AT BLDG 4

Please note that this diagram has been modified from the original.

http://i306.photobucket.com/albums/nn270/tcups/Picture30-4.png

Suppose that fuel was being loaded into a cask in the bottom of the small pool adjacent to the main SFP 4. Suppose also, that it was the smaller volume of water in the adjacent pool that boiled off long before the large pool. If that cask and the rods it contains overheat and lead to an explosion (maybe from just thermal damage to the concrete, or what ever), the bulk of the SFP4 is protected by its thick reinforced walls. So the smaller pool explosion goes instead straight up and somewhat to the east, through the transfer slot, and blows out the bottom, north, south and east walls of the small pool. When it does, the force of the explosion can be transmitted to the relatively weak outer walls of the upper floors along the lift shaft on the west and south sides of Bldg 4, out the tunnel door and into the lower floors of the building, around the heavy reinforced structure of the primary containment vessel.

Suppose also that perhaps not visible on the early satellite photos, the concussion wave from the earlier explosion at the southeast corner of Building 3 has done structural damage to the northeast corner of Bldg 4, perhaps cracking some of the concrete panels and weight bearing columns. The blast from inside the building would then tend to do more damage at the northeast corner as well.

Is the cask that would be in the bottom of that transfer cooling pool adjacent to the main SFP4 intended to be used as a temporary means to transfer older spent fuel rods over a very brief time to the larger SFP7 in back of the main facility? If so, and if there were a "fail in place" accident that left the cask, open or closed, in a very small pool that lost cooling water, what would the consequences be? Need to know more about those casks and procedures for transferring fuel rods.

Also, look back at the early photos before the large crane-like structure is brought into spray water on the SFP of 4 -- lots of debris on the ground. But when the crane has been put in place, it looks like a dozer has cleared the debris from the ground and perhaps metal plates have been laid on the ground before the large hose crane is brought in. Did high level waste on the ground delay placement of that crane and hose until it could be cleared:

http://i306.photobucket.com/albums/nn270/tcups/WestElevation.png

DID THIS HAPPEN AT UNIT 4?

http://i306.photobucket.com/albums/nn270/tcups/Picture31.png

Debunk it, please.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #2,590
Attached photos of >1Sv flowing into the ocean
 

Attachments

  • snap20110403020902.jpg
    snap20110403020902.jpg
    24.4 KB · Views: 503
  • snap20110403020805.jpg
    snap20110403020805.jpg
    13.8 KB · Views: 667
  • #2,591
That leak, more like a gusher, is doing them a favor. Stop the flow and do what with the pent-up water? Probably dangerous just standing around the mist from the outflow.
 
  • #2,592
Godzilla1985 said:
Is it true that their dosimeters max out at 1,000 mSv?

Source?

Even if, that's expected. Their bodies were there for three weeks, 2 mSv/h would be enough.
 
  • #2,593
AtomicWombat: Concerning your link at post number 2589 "Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment": In my non-scientific opinion: If even one percent of this long article is the truth: It is overwhelmingly unbelievable and unbelievably overwhelming.
 
  • #2,595
using the link to the video posted yesterday
I'll toke a few screen grab and amended the layout (still a few things missing though)
[PLAIN]http://k.min.us/imMBxC.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 2011-04-03_093554.jpg
    2011-04-03_093554.jpg
    20.7 KB · Views: 774
  • 2011-04-03_093302.jpg
    2011-04-03_093302.jpg
    23.3 KB · Views: 735
  • 2011-04-03_092912.jpg
    2011-04-03_092912.jpg
    21.2 KB · Views: 526
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #2,596
timeasterday said:
A couple of construction videos of Fukushima just popped up:





On the first video 11:45-12:15 some excellent shots of the reactor interior and the operation of the control rods (blades) sliding between the fuel assmblies.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #2,597
Sorry for the double post - but this time with better pictures of >1Sv leak
Water has found its way by cable ducts from the reactor building to the sea
There seems to quite a head for the water to be ejected that forcefully and also note the steam rising - so it is pretty hot

(In my opinion this looks like a drain hole for cable drawing pit and not a crack)

[URL]http://www.asahi.com/photonews/gallery/fukushimagenpatsu2/images/0402_plant2.jpg[/URL]

[URL]http://www.asahi.com/photonews/gallery/fukushimagenpatsu2/images/0402_plant1.jpg[/URL]

[URL]http://www.asahi.com/photonews/gallery/fukushimagenpatsu2/images/0402_cement.jpg[/URL]

But the leak continues and access blocked by a couple of tons of concrete


[URL]http://www.asahi.com/photonews/gallery/infographics3/images/0403_pit2.jpg[/URL]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #2,599
AntonL said:
Sorry for the double post - but this time with better pictures of >1Sv leak
Water has found its way by cable ducts from the reactor building to the sea
There seems to quite a head for the water to be ejected that forcefully and also note the steam rising - so it is pretty hot

(In my opinion this looks like a drain hole for cable drawing pit and not a crack)


Lol what a cock-up.


I wonder why they didn't first line the inside of the pit with some plastic or other flexible water-proof material and then pour gravel on it which would have slowed the leak down at least. On top of this they could have poured concrete which might have created a better seal.
 
  • #2,600

Similar threads

Fukushima Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster discussions
Replies
12
Views
49K
Ukraine nuclear power plant Zaporizhzhia on fire
Replies
41
Views
5K
Fukushima Japan Earthquake: nuclear plants Fukushima part 2
36
Replies
2K
Views
447K
Fukushima Are US Nuclear Power Plants Prepared for Earthquakes?
Replies
5
Views
6K
Fukushima Critiques of Fukushima Thyroid-Cancer Study
Replies
2
Views
2K
What if a nuclear power plant loses outside electricity?
Replies
6
Views
19K
Japan Earthquake: Political Aspects
16
Replies
763
Views
272K
Fukushima How will they end the Fukushima disaster?
Replies
38
Views
16K
Thoughts on nuclear power and disasters [long, rant/tangenty]
Replies
6
Views
4K
Fukushima The geological issues of the Fukushima Daiichi
Replies
4
Views
11K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top