8.8 earthquake hits Japan

@High Seas,

As you know Price Anderson limits the libility for first insurers andthe TOTAL liability for a nuke disaster. So in US , its a false sense of businesss security based upon the concpet of "The Friendly ATom". I think Price ANderson goes back to the late 50's.

HOWEVER, the siting issues will dictate the excess insurance pool that is required as a "self insurance" by the plant owners themselves.Thats why in the US, the siting issues are a potential show stopper. Not so in Japan obviously

The problem with self insurance and excess coverage policies is that it would take an army of lawyers to try to pry any money loose to pay real and punitive casualty damages. (AS happened in Three Mile ISland) Gov Thornburg, with the insurance commissioner,went to work on GPU and the designebuilders of the plant at Middletown.

1 Reply

@High Seas,

Yes, it is a good paper.I have a standing order from GSA for Engineering Goology papers and symposia proceedings on "geohazards". There are several others and the Las PAlmas "ridge volcano" is one of these. There are also several papers on the 5 "supercalderas" that are either active or dormant in US.

Quote:

I can't find any math modelers worrying about tsunamis in Miami,

Thatd be like a dentist worrying about your car engine. Math modelers dont often get out in the field. Structural and Engineering geologists have warned about Las Palmas since the 1940's. Its not an "If" .
The only determinant is the amount of downslope wasteage and the resultant tsunami.
In geo, the math modelers (GW , nuclides and chemical advection and diffusion, hazards prediction, sinkhole development, seismic risk)
ALWAYS go into the field and collect their elementary data.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:50am EDT

TOKYO, March 21 (Reuters) - Firefighters postponed spraying Japan's badly damaged nuclear reactor No. 3 with seawater on Monday after a plume of grey smoke was seen over the structure, the government said.

Smoke began to rise from the plant's No.2 and No.3 reactors on Monday, just as authorities had begun to show signs of progress in its efforts to avert nuclear disaster at the site. Japan's nuclear safety agency later said the smoke had stopped rising over the reactor.

The plant operator said it did know what caused the smoke.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/21/japan-smoke-firefighters-idUSWNAS153520110321

Tue Mar 22, 2011 2:46am EDT

TOKYO (Reuters) - White smoke rising on Tuesday from reactor No. 2 at Japan's stricken nuclear power plant is likely to be steam from the spent nuclear fuel pool, Japan's nuclear safety agency said.

Earlier on Tuesday, steam appeared to rise from reactor No. 2 and white haze was detected above reactor No. 3.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/22/us-japan-nuclear-steam-idUSTRE72L12G20110322

----

Tue Mar 22, 2011 6:50am EDT

TOKYO, March 22 (Reuters) - The operator of Japan's stricken nuclear power plant said on Tuesday more water injections were needed to cool down units 1, 2 and 3.

Tokyo Electric Power also said data showing a rise in temperatures around the reactor core of the No. 1 unit is a concern and it was considering a way to further cool it down.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/22/japan-reactors-water-idUSTKG00710120110322

0 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

A bit more good news:

Mon Mar 21, 2011 3:44am EDT

TOKYO, March 21 (Reuters) - Power cables have now been connected to all six nuclear reactors at Japan's tsunami-damaged Fukushima Daiichi power plant, operator Tokyo Electric Power said on Monday.

The last two reactors to be hooked up to power from the main grid on Monday were reactors No.3 and No.4, the two most badly damaged units, company officials told a briefing.

The company, though, is checking for damage to the plant's reactor cooling systems and other plant machinery before attempting to power them up. It is operating equipment using grid power at reactor No.5 only, one of the least damaged reactors, the officials said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/21/japan-power-idUSWNAS151020110321

Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:21pm EDT

TOKYO, March 22 (Reuters) - - The No. 1 reactor at the quake-stricken Japanese nuclear power plant in Fukushima is now able to receive power from the grid, Kyodo news agency reported on Tuesday, citing the plant's operator.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/22/japan-reactor-idUSDYE7DH02520110322

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Tue Mar 22, 2011 8:08am EDT

TOKYO, March 22 (Reuters) - The spent fuel pond at the No. 2 reactor of Japan's crippled nuclear plant has been filled with water, Hidehiko Nishiyama, the deputy-director general of the government's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, said on Tuesday.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/22/japan-pond-idUSTKG00710220110322

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

I think Price ANderson goes back to the late 50's.....Thats why in the US, the siting issues are a potential show stopper. Not so in Japan obviously...

1957. Siting isn't an issue in most other countries - how many tsunamis do they get in Germany? The Russians have been selling their latest reactors, equipped with a new metallic alloy containment bottom supposed to liquefy if corium melts through steel and concrete layers, claiming it's safe for highly seismic zones; the advertising slogan appears to be "From those wonderful people who brought you Chernobyl", but they're selling $50 billion /yr.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/03/23/business/energy-environment/23chernobyl-span/23chernobyl-span-articleLarge.jpg

They're taking people to tours of the control room of reactor 4 in order to familiarize them with what went wrong then and explaining how they fixed all the problems. And that, it turns out, is a brilliant approach - it's the thing to do in all the irrational fears and phobias, gradually expose people to the object of the fear so that, ultimately, familiarity will breed if not contempt, at least indifference. In looking how we may combat the irrational fear now stalking the land I came across an interview with a psychiatrist, specialist in treating both phobias and addictions, worth reading in its entirety - he advocates building mini nuclear plants in downtown areas of cities and organizing tours for all city residents, starting with schoolchildren; he also thinks we should change the name:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/interviews/dupont.html

Quote:

Q: What kind of a job has the media done in covering nuclear power?

A: Terrible. Terrible. The media is attracted to fear, the way a moth is attracted to a light. It becomes the story. And many reporters are in awe of the intellectual side of the anti-nuclear movement, and perhaps its political dimensions also. So they have trouble trusting facts. They have trouble trusting their own judgment. And they exaggerate these arguments against nuclear power, and they constantly "balance" the story by giving a lot of opinion, a lot of air time to the fear-generating ideas. And those catch hold in a large segment of the population, and the problem goes forward.

I think the media really needs to be responsible for thinking about where the risks are, and how you figure that out.

1 Reply

@High Seas,

SIting has to be an issue in most countries. There are many areas in US where nuke plants could be built, but there are areas wher they should NOT be. That goes for any country with a coast or rivers. We had a periodic river rise on our Peach Bottom plant in 1996 . The ice dam was so high that the berms around the containment area were scoured.
Its ok, the nuke industry would have been indemnified.
Any nuke plant as poorly sited as Fukushima (I found out its pronounced Foo-Koosh'-Ma) will have to recognize that it will be in big trouble during its life. LAs PAlmas has always been a pet worry of mine. I live at 750 ft AMSL. The tsunami predicted by Las PAlmas would lap onto the pA Md State line. The entire eastern shore, New Jersey amd the philadelp[hia area would be under a hundred feet of water.

Thats done by a hydrodynamic math modeler with a structural geology background.

Everybody thought Wegener a fool also.

Look at all the nuke plants on the eastern flank of the Appalachian Coastal plain and Piedmont.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman, It sounds like it's spelled; fu ku shi ma. I know how to write it in katagana, but I'm not able to get the Japanese alphabet on the net.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Any nuke plant as poorly sited as Fukushima (I found out its pronounced Foo-Koosh'-Ma) will have to recognize that it will be in big trouble during its life. LAs PAlmas has always been a pet worry of mine. I live at 750 ft AMSL. The tsunami predicted by Las PAlmas would lap onto the pA Md State line. The entire eastern shore, New Jersey amd the philadelp[hia area would be under a hundred feet of water.

Thats done by a hydrodynamic math modeler with a structural geology background.

I suspect that if Maryland's Eastern Shore, the State of New Jersey and Philadelphia were all under a hundred feet of water, we would have much more to worry about than merely a nuclear powerplant that was itself underwater. These are rare events whose occurrence interval is a lot greater than the life of a nuclear powerplant. You are in fact arguing for the abandonment of a large number of American cities, but without honestly acknowledging it. I think you would be laughed out of the room if you tried to advance that conclusion. Why do you assume directing it only at nuclear powerplants is any less absurd?

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Its because of the major consequences that could render land unusable for quite a while . I think that all nuke plants on the E coat piedmont and coastal plain were irresponsibly sited at a time when it was being marketed with the "friendly atom" moniker.

Yes, its true that a LAs PAlmas style tidal wave would be a a rare event, but its calculable, and it was never factored into the siting equations.When it hits it will probablt focus on some single area of the coastal plain which would be "cleaned off" for about 75 mi inland.
Your argument that other things would be destroyed too, is kind of like the cigarrette industry saying that"Yeh but your chances of getting hit by a train are equivalent" Siting, like smoking is a conscious effort to LIMIT POTENTIAL disasters by not consciously locating a dangerous facility like a nuke plant in a place that has a calculable return frequency of a specific event , not to mke excuses for when it cpomes or to have strategic planning that includes "indemnification".
Las PAlmas is much greater eventuality than any quake zone in the ALgermissen maps for Seismic risk zones 2 or greater.,

We also have nuke plants located right ON the the NEW MADRID seismic zone. The style of event that could be expected at that area are different than expwerienced at Fukushima. It would be all thixatropic sinking and sand blows and major foundational failure.

1 Reply

Wed Mar 23, 2011 3:08am EDT

TOKYO (Reuters) - Radiation danger from Japan's tsunami-smashed nuclear plant loomed on Wednesday with water in Tokyo showing hazardous levels for infants and the United States becoming the first nation to block food imports.

Tokyo authorities said water at a purification plant for the capital of 13 million people had 210 becquerels of radioactive iodine -- more than twice the safety level for infants.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/23/uk-japan-idUSLNE72M01220110323

1 Reply

@oralloy,

I haven't read through today's posts, but San Francisco now show small amounts of radiation from Japan showing up, but not at dangerous levels.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

The radiation crossed over the continental US and is now over the Atlantic. These are estimates based on NOAA's HYSLIP model. Trace amounts only - barely detectable on instruments and no danger to anybody beyond Japan. Estimates updated daily here: http://www.atmos.umd.edu/~tcanty/hysplit/

http://www.atmos.umd.edu/~tcanty/hysplit/today/plume_traj_110321_12Z.jpg

1 Reply

@High Seas,

Would you know or have a ref for the difference between sunlight radiation and nuclear bomb/meltdown radiation ?

3 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Yes, its true that a LAs PAlmas style tidal wave would be a a rare event, but its calculable, and it was never factored into the siting equations.When it hits it will probablt focus on some single area of the coastal plain which would be "cleaned off" for about 75 mi inland.
.....................
We also have nuke plants located right ON the the NEW MADRID seismic zone. The style of event that could be expected at that area are different than expwerienced at Fukushima. It would be all thixatropic sinking and sand blows and major foundational failure.

The probability of La Palma in the Canary Islands breaking up and sliding into the Atlantic is currently set in the models I've seen - and as you know I'm no geologist, so must defer to whatever models you're using - to cross 50% sometime in the next 10,000 years. Comparing with metropolitan Tokyo, where probability of Richter 7.3 or higher crosses 50% in just over 50 years, it's just not high enough to worry about. Anyway the East Coast would get between 8 and 9 hours' notice - plenty of time to shut down nuclear plants. Building on earthquake-prone areas is a different issue, so again I'd like to ask if you have an opinion on the new Russian designs - this is from their 2006 descriptive brochure - already under construction on a major fault in Turkey (bold added):

Quote:

In terms of safety, the design meets all modern Russian requirements and principal recommendations of IAEA. The main feature of the plant is the use of additional passive safety systems together with traditional active systems. The plant will be well protected against earthquakes, tsunami, storms and aircraft crash. Its innovative features are double reactor containment; corium catcher located underneath the reactor pressure vessel; passive residual heat removal system.

2 Replies

@Ionus,

Problem with data right now is that not all of it is public so the models like the graph I just linked merely represent best estimates. Any of the university sites and Sandia in Los Alamos do publish analyses of trace elements so I'll look later today. For some reason the French media reporting is better than US media:

http://htmlimg3.scribdassets.com/11l6jayy68w1ols/images/1-2121aec694.jpg

Sorry for bad picture - Le Monde site doesn't seem to allow links except in this format; these are the Fukushima area evacuees getting moved on March 16.

2 Replies

@Ionus,

P.S. seawater measurements in the plant's vicinity aren't really reported on US media, but they are on the French sites, and, to the extent they write in English, also on the Japanese sites; maybe CI can help with Japanese. Fish and seaweed are more important in Japan than widely reported milk, or spinach:
http://www.goodplanet.info/Contenu/Depeche/Radioactivite-dans-l-eau-de-mer-appels-a-des-controles-sur-le-poisson/%28theme%29/3105

0 Replies

@High Seas,

Quote:

The probability of La Palma in the Canary Islands breaking up and sliding into the Atlantic is currently set in the models I've seen - - to cross 50% sometime in the next 10,000 years

Thats fairly low because we have several areas of evidence of subocean and ridge decollment detachmenst and tsunamis that have occured several times in the last 2 millenia. I always thought that we operate on return frequencies for events and the ALgermissen maps merely get rejiggered as newer earthquake data refies the seismic zones.

___________________________________________________________

George, cities were founded as convenient locations for commerce , transportation, and topography breaks for water power, hence their "Siting" has been l;ost in history. A nuke plant, in my thinking, is a facility in which the safety issue of its siting should be paramount. We can rebuild all the infrastructure after a disaster (In most cases, as in Calif, its always been factored into the economy). BUT, a nuke plant has the capability of renering a neighboirhood unusable for many thousand years if the goods get spilt.

0 Replies

@High Seas,

Quote:

the design meets all modern Russian requirements

I think even George ob would say"Let us see some spwecs, details, and some design calcs". I have no idea from reading the ad copy.

"Russian safety standards" has , in the past, always been sort of an oxymoron no?

1 Reply

@farmerman,

True about past Russian safety standards - but on the Chernobyl reactor design, their specs did clearly indicate (as per Prof. Bethe's report) that to avoid severe instability a minimum of 20 control rods must be inserted at all times; the Ukrainians at the time of the explosion only had 7, but probably the 20 was classified, so they didn't know. They're certainly angling to promote their new reactors with trumpeting their new-found caution with radioactivity. This from today; the ship had delivered lumber to Japan and was returning to port - apparently it sailed close to Fukushima prefecture on its way back:

Quote:

On Thursday, Russian authorities in the Khabarovsk region placed a Panama-flagged vessel in quarantine off the coast, after radiation levels three times normal were detected in its engine room. The 19-member crew has been placed under medical supervision, Gennady Onishchenko, an official with the Russian consumer protection agency told the Interfax news agency.

0 Replies

8.8 earthquake hits Japan

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know