Fukushima Japan Earthquake: nuclear plants Fukushima part 2

Click For Summary
A magnitude-5.3 earthquake struck Fukushima, Japan, prompting concerns due to its proximity to the damaged nuclear power plant from the 2011 disaster. The U.S. Geological Survey reported the quake occurred at a depth of about 13 miles, but no tsunami warning was issued. Discussions in the forum highlighted ongoing issues with tank leaks at the plant, with TEPCO discovering loosened bolts and corrosion, complicating monitoring efforts. There are plans for fuel removal from Unit 4, but similar structures will be needed for Units 1 and 3 to ensure safe decontamination. The forum also addressed the need for improved groundwater management and the establishment of a specialist team to tackle contamination risks.
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #302
LabratSR said:
Bits and pieces of the main, big report referenced above are being released in English.

http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/2013/1233101_5130.html

Started to read it. They are listing (on page 9,"event tree") the earthquake as a direct cause of failures. And further on:
Investigations in detail thereafter by
trench surveys and others in Yunodake Fault
revealed seismic activity marks at several loca
tions, resulting in the judgment that the
Yunodake Fault had been a fault which should
have been considered in seismic design.
 
  • #303
Not sure if this has much significance, but here’s a little info regarding a damaged fuel assembly from SFP at Unit 4 (the documents published by TEPCO are only in Japanese):- On Dec 18 TEPCO posted a report regarding a damaged (bent) fuel assembly that was sitting in the SFP at unit 4.
http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/fukushima-np/handouts/2013/images/handouts_131218_07-j.pdf
The assembly has apparently been damaged in a mishandling incident in April 1982 (which has been duly reported at the time).
This document shows how they plan to investigate the degree of damage of this assembly, sometimes around Dec 20-21, in view of its safe manipulation at the time of removal from the SFP.

- On Dec 27, a single page PDF report has been published at
http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/fukushima-np/handouts/2013/images/handouts_131227_04-j.pdf“Regarding the identification of cracks on the surface of a damaged fuel assembly from the spent fuel pool of Reactor 4”

They found cracks in the “channel box” (which, I learned from Japanese wikipedia, designates the metallic sheet/cover which wraps the fuel bundle at the exterior). It is believed that the cracks appeared at the time when the assembly was mishandled.

No changes in radiation values were observed in the pool water on the occasion of this check.
 
  • #304
A lot of the December 13th documents that still say 'to be translated' on the TEPCO page have actually been translated already, and are available in english by clicking the links. There are only a few exceptions.
 
  • #306
If you make your way back to the source material you see the steam is generated between 7 and 8 AM every few days.

It also appears that the sentence regarding the steam is after a sentance regarding waste transfers.

I think some anti nuclear organizations or fear / sensationalism groups used google translate on a plant daily status report and took it out of context.
 
  • #308
Quietly, they moved...

The doomsters were tricked this time, but I'm not happy either.
I think this is the most dangerous op. till now.
 
  • #310
I think this is the appropriate thread.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asiapacific/scientists-to-create/948474.html
How does this add anything of value? Also, I couldn't help but shudder when I read "very rapid fission process" in the article... I suppose they are going to use reflectors and/or an external neutron source?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #311
What I read, and I can't find the link now, is they have a test reactor which will act as an external neutron source. They will put a BWR fuel cutout into a sealed capsule with no cooling flow and put it under a neutron flux to heat it past 2200 deg C to cause melting in a controlled fashion. Then they will shut down the reactor and pull the capsule out.

Should be low/no decay heat if they do it this way, so it would be a representative way to see how these things combine and behave when they melt.
 
  • #312
Did not the US run a somewhat more extensive experiment at INEL?
There was a Loss of Fluids test reactor built to assess these issues, although how far is not clear.
Presumably the Japanese believe that they can learn something more.
 
  • #313
From yesterday's (January 11th) Tokyo Shimbun. Thought it might be germane to the subject of whether or not the core material has solidified, and the necessity of keeping water poured into them.

"...In order to reduce the amount of contaminated water that needs to be treated, Tepco reduced the flow of water into Unit 2 by 0.5 tons every hour. They will further reduce the water in stages, eventually reducing the water by 1 ton per hour.
Unit 3 will also be reduced by 1 ton per hour, and together the amount of water used for cooling both units will be reduced by approximately 50 tons per day. They are not considering reducing the volume of water flowing into Unit 1, which in the past has had temperature increases after slight changes to the environment inside containment."
 
  • #314
Monitoring air dose rates from a series of
aircraft surveys 30 months after the
Fukushima Daiichi NPS accident
http://www.nsr.go.jp/english/library/data/special-report_0114.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #315
plume's laid down to the northwest if I'm reading the map right
would be interesting to correlate with weather at the time of the accident, iirc most of the time the wind was blowing east or south east, out to sea? but then my memory is very bad.
 
  • #316
a.ua. said:
Monitoring air dose rates from a series of
aircraft surveys 30 months after the
Fukushima Daiichi NPS accident
http://www.nsr.go.jp/english/library/data/special-report_0114.pdf

Looks like gamma levels are decreasing slower now, as expected: the difference in last 10 monts is not that striking anymore.
We'll need to wait 30 years for levels to decrease by about 3-4 times...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #317
http://ex-skf.blogspot.ro/2014/01/fukushima-i-npp-reactor-3-water-leak_19.html

What do the specialists in this forum think of this?
Is this report likely to be true? Do we really have water being poured in the reactor vessel, coming into contact with the fuel/corium and then spilling out through some crack or valve opening? (Aren't the measured radiation/radionuclides readings in this water a bit low for such an hypothesis?) Is it as serious as implied in this link, as in causing urgent need for analysis of all MSIV's in other plants?
 
  • #318
Sotan said:
Do we really have water being poured in the reactor vessel, coming into contact with the fuel/corium and then spilling out through some crack or valve opening? (Aren't the measured radiation/radionuclides readings in this water a bit low for such an hypothesis?)

Non-specialist view: the readings are OK. The water in the basements are contaminated in the very first day, and till that it works as a reservoir: as water pumped in the density slowly decreases, but the amount of the water there and the amount of water pumped in limits the speed of this decrease.

The corium itself is directly washed with ('clear') water for years now: most of its soluble parts are already moved to the basements. The Cs level of its (water accessible) parts should be really low (in relative terms, of course).
 
  • #319
The discussion on Ex-SKF is more about the status of the MSIV. It really should be closed. Generally speaking the steam circuit should be intact and it maybe isn't.
 
  • #320
Actually, what is the vertical position of these valves?

If there is a leak there, with water which had contact with the core debris, then the water level inside the RPV (or PCV?) should be higher than the vertical position of the valves... ??
 
  • #321
The leaking water is somewhat contaminated and is 20 C, versus the 7C temperature of the injected water.
So it is flushing past something warm and radioactive or getting mixed with much warmer and more contaminated water from somewhere higher.
An experienced operator might be able to draw useful inferences from that.
 
  • #322
Hey yall.

The "MSIV Room" is often known as the "Steam Tunnel". The steam tunnel contains a LOT of stuff, including shut down cooling (RHR) return, feedwater injection, reactor water cleanup return/injection, the main steam lines, and most of the piping for non-safety interfacing systems to interface with the reactor building/drywell/containment.

Whether or not the MSIVs are leaking is a good question. I know the containment drywell has a relatively high temperature right now (which is why there are occasional reports of steam). Now the main steam lines are above everything else in the reactor vessel. I have a lot of doubts that the leakage is from water inside the vessel or drywell. For one, all of the injection lines in the vessel are below the steam lines. Another important thing to realize, is that it is nearly impossible to flood up the containment high enough to flood the steam lines with a breached vessel.

Obviously if the MSIVs failed that's a big issue, but the MSIVs are responsible for interfacing the vessel with the steam lines leaving containment, not the outside environment. If an MSIV fails, that just means water/steam from the steam lines can make its way out of the reactor building, it doesn't mean a direct to environment leak (you would need another failure or a pipe break). If the leak is somehow from the reactor vessel itself, that would mean the piping in the MSIV room failed. And even if an MSIV failed in some way, it doesn't necessarily mean it has long term safety implications. Safety grade equipment like the MSIVs has a 30 days mission time, and a quantitative goal for the entire containment/isolation system as a whole to prevent leakage beyond a small percentage (between .25% and .5%) of drywell volume per day. One would have to prove a design defect that lead to the MSIVs not functioning during the event.

Anyways, the water temp is 20C (around 70F). The SFPs are probably in this range, so that is one possible leak location, although I'm not sure how it would get down into the steam tunnel. The reactor building closed cooling system may be a potential leak source. This provides cooling for the SFP heat exchangers and other heat carrying components in the reactor building, although this system may have been destroyed or not in use. We simply don't have enough information to draw good conclusions.
 
  • #323
Thank you all who replied to my earlier post.

Here's an excerpt from a regular report regarding the state of the plant - in my (loose) translation.
http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/fukushima-np/handouts/2014/images/handouts_140121_04-j.pdf

・H26/1/21 H25/12/9 から2号機原子炉建屋内において、3Dレーザスキャンを実施しているが、ト
ーラス室における計測作業終了後、遠隔操作装置のクローラに不具合が確認されたため、
安全を考慮し、装置をトーラス室の階段の手前に置いている。1/22 に装置を回収し、原
因を調査する予定。

21 Jan 2014
Since 9 December 2013 they have been doing a 3D laser scan of the Reactor 2 building.
After finishing the scan of the torus room, a problem was discovered with the "chain tracks" of the robot used to perform this operation. The robot has been parked for safety in front of the stairs leading to the torus room and is to be recovered on 22 Jan for inspection and determination of the cause of the fault.

--------
Also from this Japanese report:
http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/fukushima-np/handouts/2014/images/handouts_140121_05-j.pdf
Looks like they have been measuring the water level in the suppression chamber of Reactor 2.
I do not know the significance of this subject, but if they measured and report it, it must be important (perhaps some people could comment).
Results of measurements on 14, 15 and 16th of January suggest that the water level in the S/C changes to reflect the variations of the water level in the torus room. They think these measurements may prove useful for the planned works aimed to make the PCV water tight. (I hope I translated correctly the last phrase...)

----
Also in this Japanese report:
http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/fukushima-np/handouts/2014/images/handouts_140120_06-j.pdf
You can see some images from the trench in which sea water pipes are installed at Reactor 2.
Again, I do not really understand the significance of these inspections and measurements, perhaps somebody could comment. (Was it done just to check the level of accumulated water?)
 
Last edited:
  • #324
I'd surmise this is all done to get an idea of the various water flows. Interesting about the laser scan. I wonder what they will use it for? Maybe they will plan future robot expeditions using this 3d model of the building. There are iirc LIDAR scans of the exteriors of the plants, too, but the data has not been released, just some ugly and useless snapshots...
 
  • #325
Regarding the video inspection of the trenches: I just saw a piece of news on NHK which explained that the video inspection of the trenches has shown that there is no significant damage or obstacles in those areas as a result of the earthquake/tsunami. Therefore, starting at the beginning of March they plan to begin treating the highly radioactive water that has been sitting there since the accident, in the hope that this will drastically reduce the radioactive contamination of the sea (the trenches being thought to be one of the main sources of contamination).
 
  • #326
A brief note regarding this report:
http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/fukushima-np/handouts/2014/images/handouts_140122_05-j.pdf
(Japanese only)

It is about the flow of water discovered at first floor of Reactor 3 building, in the vicinity of MSIV.

- Water flow was discovered on Jan 18 by reviewing video from robot. Water coming from the direction of the door of MSIV room was flowing into a floor funnel (drain).
- On Jan 20 they removed some garbage from that funnel.
- On Jan 21 they directed the robot to take images of the same area and discovered that the flow of water diminished considerably.
- The images and drawing attached show the position of the funnel (dotted white circle in photo) and the direction of the water flow (blue dotted arrow in the drawing).
- Analysis of the water indicated relatively high concentrations of Cesium, close to values recorded for the contaminated water accumulated in the basement. Temperature (about 20 degrees Celsius) was close to the that of water in the containment vessel. The water flow was approximated at about 1.5 cubic meters per hour.
Objectives for further investigation:
- Investigation of the interior of the MSIV room, by means which are now under consideration. Possibly try to insert a camera in that room.

The next pages of the report show results of analysis of radioactive content of various samples of water (page 5), results of temperature measurements in various places of Reactor 3 building (page 6), considerations of the areas where pipes exit from the PCV (through the MSIV) and which are suspected to be possible places for the location of the leak, seeing that they are located under the calculated level of water in the PCV (page 7 and 8). Page 9 shows a detail drawing of the “bellows type expansion” penetrations where pipes come out of the PCV.
 
  • #327
zapperzero said:
plume's laid down to the northwest if I'm reading the map right
would be interesting to correlate with weather at the time of the accident, iirc most of the time the wind was blowing east or south east, out to sea? but then my memory is very bad.

Well as radiation survey maps from previous years showed the same pattern, this stuff has been discussed before.

I don't have the most detailed studies to hand, but here is a rough description of relevant info:

Wind direction was out to sea at several stages, including the explosion of reactor 3 building. Thats probably what you are remembering. It often came up when issues such as whether reactor 2 was really responsible for most environmental contamination came up. For example there were people who attached much significance to the reactor 3 explosion, and it was not possible to prove to their satisfaction that it was a minor event in terms of radioactive releases to the environment compared to reactor 2, because the wind direction at the time prevented a strong record of the event showing up in land contamination readings.

The bulk of land contamination is usually put down to events of March 15th 2011, due to a combination of the vigorous emissions seen leaving the reactor 2 building, and the wind & other weather factors. Initially the wind was blowing approximately south, but during the period it gradually moved further clockwise, so that at some later point there was a plume to the north-west. Some of this hit a band of rain in the area (or according to some reports, snow) which greatly enhanced land contamination to the north-west.

There could have been some land contamination to the north from the reactor 1 vent and/or explosion, but again this tended to be overshadowed by the much higher levels of contamination on the 15th.

The rather poor state of narratives and accurate emission details for the period later in the month mean that further possible significant emissions, including from reactor 3, are not well described. There has been some attention to emissions around the 20th-21st March, because the wind was again blowing south and causing some radiation to show up in locations well south of Fukushima, such as Tokyo. Again I believe rain may have been involved in some places, and this episode was also of interest due to recurring 'white or black' smoke events at reactor 3, and indeed the general problems they had achieving anything resembling stable temperatures in March, well after the first few days of meltdowns.

The failure of company & government officials to swiftly admit and discuss containment failures at the reactors hampered the ability to generate a useful mainstream narrative that could be combined with weather and radioactive contamination data at various points to build a detailed picture in terms of the radioactive ground contamination and what reactor events it related to. Even when we could see for ourselves in photos and video steam/smoke escaping from reactor 3, and when much later there were photos published showing the vigorous nature of the emissions from reactor 2 on the morning of March 15th, attention still tended to linger on explosions, fuel pools and venting. So the weather on March 15th didn't get as much attention as it deserved, although it is featured in several reports which include rain radar images from pertinent moments. If I find them I will post a link.

edit - I'm not sure these are all the weather-related reports I've seen in the past but between them they describe fairly well the weather-contamination events and attempts at analysis.

http://www.nsr.go.jp/archive/nisa/shingikai/700/14/240723/AM-3-2.pdf Pages 14-16.

http://www.vic.jp/fukushima/global/global-e.html

http://www.irsn.fr/FR/Larecherche/p...Abstract_intervention_Anne-Mathieu_TS12a1.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #328
According to the regular report on the state of the plant of 24 Jan
http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/fukushima-np/handouts/2014/images/handouts_140124_07-j.pdf (in Japanese)
they will start inspecting the operating floor of Unit 2, aiming to progress with the plan for fuel extraction.

The operation is further detailed in this report:
http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/fukushima-np/handouts/2014/images/handouts_140124_08-j.pdf (in Japanese)
where, among others, you can see two small pics with the present state of the operating floor.

They have 3 variants of plan to proceed towards extraction: one is to use the present building and installations as they are, after repair; the other two involve different amounts of work and construction of a container on top of the present operation floor, or even a full container of the present building. They are trying to decide which one to pick.

The report from the second link has a lot more content.

The inspection of the operating floor might be made by two methods: lowering lighting fixtures, gamma and normal light camera, radiation measuring devices from the top of the building; and entering a rather large robot (which later might even be used to take a core sample) through a "sliding door" (existing? or cut in the blow-out panels) on the lateral side of the building. They make some calculations regarding the amount of additional radiation and radioactive substances that might escape through the various holes that must be cut for these purposes. They conclude that this amount of radiation/radioactive substances does not pose a significant additional risk.
 
  • #329
To my surprise, "core sample" above apparently means a sample of the concrete in walls and floors.
 
  • #330
http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/fukushima-np/handouts/2014/images/handouts_140212_05-j.pdf
(in Japanese)

Two cracks (I'd say rather large: 8m, 12m long) have been found in the concrete foundation of storing tanks in H4 and H4-East areas.

They have been spotted initially in December last year, when they were like very thin lines in the concrete. They added some epoxy resin to try and stop any water infiltration that might occur through them.

As they were cleaning the concrete surface for a new operation (adding a layer of urethane-based paint to improve water insulation), the cracks became very much apparent again. (You can see them in photos in the link above.)

They don't seem too worried, they will asses the situation thoroughly but they think the main thing to do is to hurry up the application of that urethane-based paint throughout the area.

----------------
http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/fukushima-np/handouts/2014/images/handouts_140212_04-j.pdf

In July 2013 some samples displaying high radioactivity were gathered from Naraha-machi, Futaba-gun, Fukushima-prefecture. Tepco has received those samples (4 of them) and had them analyzed by JAEA and are reporting those results.

While I cannot say much about the numbers given in those tables, I notice from page 6 that the radiation levels (Cs-137, Co-60) measured from these samples are clearly higher than those recorded for debris picked from around Reactor 3 or from other places outside of the plant.

The conclusions on the last page:
- most of the radiation is attributed to Cs-134 and Cs-137;
- due to the high level of radioactivity and to the detection of Cobalt (absent normally in samples from outside the plant), the conclusions is that these samples probably originate from the plant;
- the first two samples appear to be poliethylene, the third one a polymer of "poliolefin" and the fourth one a piece of wood (sorry if I misspelled some of these materials);
- it was not possible to determine the route (by sea? by land?) by which these samples landed in the places where they were found.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14K ·
473
Replies
14K
Views
4M
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
49K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
16K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 763 ·
26
Replies
763
Views
274K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K