The end of the empire of Japan

[Guest American Woman]

This is what is reported on Japanese language media too. But Post to the Left he also said about that tsunamis warnings is true. Many people likely made it to safety because of these warnings. It is possible that many of these people made it out, however, as each day goes by this possibility drops significantly.

No one is doubting that many people made it to safety because of the warnings. That's beside the point.

[Topaz]

Does anyone know how far inland the wave came in? There's under ground volcano off the African coast and if it goes, they say the east coast of North America could be as bad or worse than Japan.

Edited March 13, 2011 by Topaz

[TimG]

A good technical explaination for what is happening at in Japan

http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/13/fukushima-simple-explanation/

It explains how the explosion and the subsequent use of seawater.

Most interesting is the hypothesis that water containmination may have been a contributing factor.

It seems this was the “go signal” for a major plan B. The small amounts of Cesium that were measured told the operators that the first containment on one of the rods somewhere was about to give. The Plan A had been to restore one of the regular cooling systems to the core. Why that failed is unclear. One plausible explanation is that the tsunami also took away / polluted all the clean water needed for the regular cooling systems.

The water used in the cooling system is very clean, demineralized (like distilled) water. The reason to use pure water is the above mentioned activation by the neutrons from the Uranium: Pure water does not get activated much, so stays practically radioactive-free. Dirt or salt in the water will absorb the neutrons quicker, becoming more radioactive. This has no effect whatsoever on the core – it does not care what it is cooled by. But it makes life more difficult for the operators and mechanics when they have to deal with activated (i.e. slightly radioactive) water.

[waldo]

attaboy TimG, yes... that website you're choosing to draw from is one of my personal keepers - I trust you'll pay particular attention to this page that presumes to deal with, as stated, recycled denialism:

[GostHacked]

Does anyone know how far inland the wave came in? There's under ground volcano off the African coast and if it goes, they say the east coast of North America could be as bad or worse than Japan.

Some estimates I am hearing is 10 kms in some places. Some places had less than 30 mins after the 8.9 to leave the area.

[wyly]

Some estimates I am hearing is 10 kms in some places. Some places had less than 30 mins after the 8.9 to leave the area.

small roads suddenly congested with people all going the same direction at the same time, like a calgary rush hour...30 minutes does not leave enough time to cover that distance...plus if your a parent you're not going to leave without your kids so you'll be racing home from work first to save them, so even more minutes lost....

I saw one video today of cars on a road being overtaken by the oncoming tsunami...

[wyly]

attaboy TimG, yes... that website you're choosing to draw from is one of my personal keepers - I trust you'll pay particular attention to this page that presumes to deal with, as stated, recycled denialism:

a nuclear expert interviewed today on CTV stated the salt water cooling was a last ditch attempt to prevent a meltdown, that there weren't any other options left and that the use of seawater will mean the plant is no longer viable as sea water will damage the facility beyond repair...photos of the facility show much of the complex was washed away by the Tsunami, the expert said despite all the best planning possible there is no way to test for such a disaster and this case showed despite those worst case scenarios the plans failed...

and this wasn't even the biggest quake or Tsunami possible nor was the nuclear plant directly over the epicenter...

[TimG]

the plant is no longer viable as sea water will damage the facility beyond repair

So? Using seawater was part of the safety plan. The fact that they are using it to successfully cool the reactors means the safety plan worked.

photos of the facility show much of the complex was washed away by the Tsunami, the expert said despite all the best planning possible there is no way to test for such a disaster and this case showed despite those worst case scenarios the plans failed.

There is no evidence of failed plans at this point. All we have are a few minor radition leaks which pose no health risk.

BTW - I define a 'failure' as a major health or environmental problem. I do not count damage to the facility as a 'failure'.

Edited March 13, 2011 by TimG

[dre]

Japan will be just fine. Theyre actually better off than we would be if this happened in north america. We would be looting, killing, and raping each other, where as they seem to going about stuff in a pretty business like manner.

[Guest American Woman]

So? Using seawater was part of the safety plan. The fact that they are using it to successfully cool the reactors means the safety plan worked.

There is no evidence of failed plans at this point. All we have are a few minor radition leaks which pose no health risk.

They wouldn't be evacuating the area if it posed no risks so there are risks involved. As for health risks, only time will tell. You personally have no knowledge of whether there are health risks posed or not. How could you possibly know?

BTW - I define a 'failure' as a major health or environmental problem. I do not count damage to the facility as a 'failure'.

There could be a major health or environmental problem. Only time will tell. I'm not sure that constitutes a "failure" on their part. We can control many things -- Mother Nature is not one of them.

[jbg]

A good technical explaination for what is happening at in Japan

http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/13/fukushima-simple-explanation/

It explains how the explosion and the subsequent use of seawater.

Most interesting is the hypothesis that water containmination may have been a contributing factor.

If this is true it's very reassuring.

[TimG]

They wouldn't be evacuating the area if it posed no risks so there are risks involved.

The threshold to call an evacuation in these circumstances is pretty low. That is not evidence that there is a real likihood of a major event.

As for health risks, only time will tell. You personally have no knowledge of whether there are health risks posed or not. How could you possibly know?

Because we know the type of radiation released in the steam and we know it is not long lasting.

There could be a major health or environmental problem. Only time will tell.

Agreed. Yet the fact is that all of the reactors shut down as designed and that the problems are a result of the tsunami - not the earthquake. More importantly, another reactor with a newer design was closer to the epicenter and it has no major problems. If one looks at the big picture one must conclude that the safeguards placed on nukes in Japan have worked remarkably well. Obviously, they need improvement but it is rediculous to suggest that nuclear power should be abandoned because they had to resort to "Plan B" for a couple of the reactors.

[SF/PF]

They wouldn't be evacuating the area if it posed no risks so there are risks involved. As for health risks, only time will tell. You personally have no knowledge of whether there are health risks posed or not. How could you possibly know?

Evacuations are commonly used even in situations where the danger is incredibly remote. They do it because when that 1 in a billion chance finally manifests, the public outcry is always "Why didn't you even evacuate the people??"

There could be a major health or environmental problem. Only time will tell. I'm not sure that constitutes a "failure" on their part. We can control many things -- Mother Nature is not one of them.

I think TimG is correct in that anything short of a catastrophic failure is probably a large success. They'll learn from the events, and make the nuclear plants even safer in version 2.0.

[Post To The Left]

photos of the facility show much of the complex was washed away by the Tsunami, the expert said despite all the best planning possible there is no way to test for such a disaster and this case showed despite those worst case scenarios the plans failed

This is a lie. The nuclear plant where the non-nuclear explosion occurred as shown by the images on TV is structurally fine. It is unclear if water reached the generators but something knocked out the diesel generators that provide power to the cooling system. The actual cooling system is fine as shown that it ran on battery power for 8hrs until the batteries died.

...and this wasn't even the biggest quake or Tsunami possible nor was the nuclear plant directly over the epicenter...

The quake was pretty big. They updated it to 9.0 which is 8000+ more powerful than the New Zealand quake, in the top five biggest quakes EVER in history. Yet the death tool is surprisingly low.

Edited March 14, 2011 by Post To The Left

[Post To The Left]

This is what is reported on Japanese language media too. But Post to the Left he also said about that tsunamis warnings is true. Many people likely made it to safety because of these warnings. It is possible that many of these people made it out, however, as each day goes by this possibility drops significantly.

The 10,000 number was an offhand comment by a police spokesman, I'm pretty sure hours after the tsunami, that was giving a worst case scenario. It wasn't based on any sort of facts but it was a large round number so the media chose it. Then other media stations cited other media reporting of 10,000 and boom all of a sudden its a fact. Think back to 911 when the media was reporting 50,000 dead in the twin towers.

The official death tolls that are being shown on TV, in Japan, in the worst hit prefecture (what they call a province in Japan) is 500+ dead and 1500 missing. True that is one prefecture but the missing number will go down once people get in contact with each other in a place where there is no power, roads are disabled, etc. The other two hard hit states show around 200 dead each. Of course that number will go up.

Edited March 14, 2011 by Post To The Left

[wyly]

This is a lie. The nuclear plant where the non-nuclear explosion occurred as shown by the images on TV is structurally fine. It is unclear if water reached the generators but something knocked out the diesel generators that provide power to the cooling system. The actual cooling system is fine as shown that it ran on battery power for 8hrs until the batteries died.

STF up! the only liar here is you, I saw the before and after pictures and videos of the site, much of the complex is gone due to the Tsunami and it had nothing to do with the explosion afterward...

The quake was pretty big. They updated it to 9.0 which is 8000+ more powerful than the New Zealand quake, in the top five biggest quakes EVER in history. Yet the death tool is surprisingly low.

excuse us if no one takes your word for it, you lied about the the damage at the nuclear facility and your "expert" opinion conflicts with official death estimates on the site of the Tsunami...

and let's be clear on the size it's the fifth largest historical (recorded) quake, there is physical evidence far bigger quakes without historical record...

[wyly]

So? Using seawater was part of the safety plan. The fact that they are using it to successfully cool the reactors means the safety plan worked.

it was the last resort, if it fails there are no more fall backs, the official word is they have no idea if it has prevented a meltdown...

BTW - I define a 'failure' as a major health or environmental problem. I do not count damage to the facility as a 'failure'.

moving the goalposts breakwaters failed to protect the plant from Tsunami...100% fail...and this wasn't even a direct hit by the quake itself ... Edited March 14, 2011 by wyly

[TimG]

it was the last resort, if it fails there are no more fall backs, the official word is they have no idea if it has prevented a meltdown.

It has not failed. If it does you may have a point.

moving the goalposts

I did not move any goal posts. You are one who presumed that everyone accepts your criteria. There is no failure as far as public safety is concerned. Edited March 14, 2011 by TimG

[Post To The Left]

STF up! the only liar here is you, I saw the before and after pictures and videos of the site, much of the complex is gone due to the Tsunami and it had nothing to do with the explosion afterward...

As the before and after pictures clearly show your statement that "much of the complex was washed away by the Tsunami" is not true. A few buildings close to the water were damaged. But the complex was left standing and undamaged and as shown by reports that it continued operating until the battery power died. But I did make it personal by calling you a liar, my bad. You aren't are a liar or have ill intentions you're just misinformed.

Edited March 14, 2011 by Post To The Left

[bush_cheney2004]

It has not failed.

That's the spirit...cooler heads must prevail. Let the scared bunnies fear the worst.

[Post To The Left]

and let's be clear on the size it's the fifth largest historical (recorded) quake, there is physical evidence far bigger quakes without historical record...

I can agree with that. Although with the upgrade I believe it is now tied as fourth biggest earthquake, in recorded history.

[TimG]

That's the spirit...cooler heads must prevail. Let the scared bunnies fear the worst.

Some more rain for those prone to unnecessary panic:

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2011/0313/Japan-s-nuclear-crisis-and-Chernobyl-key-differences

Robert Engel, former IAEA inspector and Swiss nuclear engineer told Reuters Sunday that a partial meltdown of a reactor “is not a disaster” and that he doubted a complete meltdown is possible.

The Japanese reactors are a completely different design known as Boiling Water Reactors, which are old and tested, and have three quite elaborate systems of containment designed to constrain radioactive leakage, points out Josef Oehmen, a research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge, Mass. “The third containment is designed, built, and tested for one single purpose: To contain, indefinitely, a complete core meltdown,” he writes.

"What's clear, because of the incidental radiation being released at the moment, which is significant but not overwhelming, is that the structure of the core is probably still intact. So it's not as bad as Three Mile Island."

Japanese officials say the radioactivity emitted from the venting process is not significant enough to cause harm to humans, a point with which Mr. Oehmen appears to agree.

[Post To The Left]

There was another explosion at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power complex, the same plant of the explosion before. The Japanese news on TV is saying that it was another hydrogen explosion. The last explosion didn't damage the nuclear containment shield, looks like the same thing here.

Interesting thing they also said was that when you fly to New York from Japan you're exposed to 100-200 rads which is much higher than any of rads from steam that the power companies are purposely venting from the nuclear plants.

[Post To The Left]

Talking about the Three Mile Island accident, "that estimates of radiological exposure for the 2 million people in the area amounted to about one-sixth of what they might have received from a chest X-ray." The Japanese plants are no way as bad as the Three Mile Island accident, which didn't even release large amounts of radiation from the plant.

Edited March 14, 2011 by Post To The Left

[TimG]

There was another explosion at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power complex, the same plant of the explosion before. The Japanese news on TV is saying that it was another hydrogen explosion. The last explosion didn't damage the nuclear containment shield, looks like the same thing here.

The officals have been warning people that #3 was going to explode for 2 days now as a consequence of the gas getting released to maintain the pressure.