Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,586
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    23Yankee
    Newest Member
    23Yankee
    Joined

Reactor meltdown possible in Japan.


Recommended Posts

fox news live report from japan

situation under control at the Taigio(??) plant now

but new trouble at Fukushima plant 2(not the plant where the reactor exploded) with three reactors that are now overheating

Posted this twenty minutes ago -

The Japan Atomic Power Co. says the cooling process is working at its Tokai No. 2 Nuclear Power Plant

Japan Atomic Power says 2 of 3 diesel generators for the Tokai No. 2 plant are down, but the remaining generator is sufficiently cooling the reactor

And there were reports much earlier this morning that they had started pumping seawater into the #2 reactor.

Might be time to not look at Fox for some decent info or most of the msm outlets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Posted this twenty minutes ago -

The Japan Atomic Power Co. says the cooling process is working at its Tokai No. 2 Nuclear Power Plant

Japan Atomic Power says 2 of 3 diesel generators for the Tokai No. 2 plant are down, but the remaining generator is sufficiently cooling the reactor

And there were reports much earlier this morning that they had started pumping seawater into the #2 reactor.

Might be time to not look at Fox for some decent info or most of the msm outlets.

the fox reporter live from Japan is listening to live local media and they reported that new info a few minutes before his report

the past few hours he is reporting live from Japan at the top of the hour and is repeating new info local media is reporting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Partially agreed I think......it's easy to say don't build these things cuz 8.9 earthquakes might occur....the problem is they happen so rare that the cost benefit analysis to build it elsewhere may kill it......it always comes down to dollars.......no way around it...just like that other post about why wouldn't they build it higher than the 500-year or even 1000-year flood elevation......well that may also be cost prohibitive and kill it from the start......and anyway the flood height of a tsunami in no way correlates to a 500-year or 1000-year flood elevation....how do you even put a number on that for design....you can't and wouldn't......nothing would ever get built with these restrictions.....

The point I was kinda trying to make is that its silly to halt nuclear construction in the US based on what a megathrust earthquake did to plants in Japan. Most of the US is not prone to megathrust earthquakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not hard to understand. Don't build nukes in areas prone to megathrust earthquakes.

Agreed. I really hope this event doesn't impede the construction of nuclear power plants in less earthquake prone areas. They have an exceptional safety record (I'd rather live next door to a nuclear plant than to any fossil fuel power plant). There are plans to build two new nuclear power plants in east central Georgia and I'm worried that regulators will overreact and delay/cancel the plans.

Looks like some news outlets are laying off the hype. CNN had a big banner basically saying that a meltdown isn't imminent earlier this morning, and it seems that things aren't exactly under control but the authorities are handling it so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. I really hope this event doesn't impede the construction of nuclear power plants in less earthquake prone areas. They have an exceptional safety record (I'd rather live next door to a nuclear plant than to any fossil fuel power plant). There are plans to build two new nuclear power plants in east central Georgia and I'm worried that regulators will overreact and delay/cancel the plans.

Looks like some news outlets are laying off the hype. CNN had a big banner basically saying that a meltdown isn't imminent earlier this morning, and it seems that things aren't exactly under control but the authorities are handling it so far.

Still though, even in less earthquake prone areas, I would much rather live next to a solar or wind farm than a nuclear power plant. Yes, the risks are very low, but the risks are nil with the former two renewable energy options. With that said, I agree about the preferrence of nuclear over fossil fuels for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like some news outlets are laying off the hype. CNN had a big banner basically saying that a meltdown isn't imminent earlier this morning, and it seems that things aren't exactly under control but the authorities are handling it so far.

ABC is still screaming:

Nuclear Emergency Spreads in Japan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still though, even in less earthquake prone areas, I would much rather live next to a solar or wind farm than a nuclear power plant. Yes, the risks are very low, but the risks are nil with the former two renewable energy options. With that said, I agree about the preferrence of nuclear over fossil fuels for sure.

Solar I can live with, but man those turbines are ugly. Not sure I want to live in a place where that's what I get to stare at all the time. Unless I can block the view with lots and lots of trees.

Probably much nicer to live next to a nuke plant than a coal one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Solar I can live with, but man those turbines are ugly. Not sure I want to live in a place where that's what I get to stare at all the time. Unless I can block the view with lots and lots of trees.

Probably much nicer to live next to a nuke plant than a coal one.

Safer too.

Koal Kills

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These plants are little like the "too big to fail" banks they impose large risks on society that are not needed. The US doesn't need any additional nuclear plants at present. We have plenty of coal, our natural gas reserves have increased substantially in past few years and wind+solar are starting to become viable. At current natural gas prices, new nuclear plant construction is not economic. The financial risk of nuclear power is much larger than alternatives.These plants cost billions and take 10 years to permit and build. US utilities are asking for federal loan guarantees to mitigate the financial risks. This incident will leave Japan short of electricity and reliant on costly substitutes. The replacement cost is multi-billion. The financial impact on Tokyo Electric the largest utility in Japan will be severe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Solar I can live with, but man those turbines are ugly. Not sure I want to live in a place where that's what I get to stare at all the time. Unless I can block the view with lots and lots of trees.

Probably much nicer to live next to a nuke plant than a coal one.

I want one in my yard... a 400 footer would be nice, as long as I get free electricity... whoosh whoosh! (splat now and then - bird)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Solar I can live with, but man those turbines are ugly. Not sure I want to live in a place where that's what I get to stare at all the time. Unless I can block the view with lots and lots of trees.

Probably much nicer to live next to a nuke plant than a coal one.

We have a number of coal fired electric plants here in Indiana. Always concerns with high sulfur coal and scrubber issues. Neighboring Illinois has nuclear plants that have operated safely during my 60 year lifetime. Being at the relative center of the North American plate must help unless you have New Madrid failed rift zone issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point I was kinda trying to make is that its silly to halt nuclear construction in the US based on what a megathrust earthquake did to plants in Japan. Most of the US is not prone to megathrust earthquakes.

Yeah I get what your saying......I guess my point was that planners should probably site these things away from earthquake prone areas period but sometimes you can't and that even if you are forced to build one close to megathrust faults so what......when your dealing with an 8.9 all bets are off......I'm waiting for the media to start asking what could have been done to stop the tsunami......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I get what your saying......I guess my point was that planners should probably site these things away from earthquake prone areas period but sometimes you can't and that even if you are forced to build one close to megathrust faults so what......when your dealing with an 8.9 all bets are off......I'm waiting for the media to start asking what could have been done to stop the tsunami......

someone on msnbc just did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like some news outlets are laying off the hype. CNN had a big banner basically saying that a meltdown isn't imminent earlier this morning, and it seems that things aren't exactly under control but the authorities are handling it so far.

Looks like the ratings race is back on.

FOX

Japan Fights to Prevent Multiple Nuclear Reactor Meltdowns as 180,000 Flee

MSNBC

Tens of thousands flee as

Japan's nuclear crisis intensifies

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These plants are little like the "too big to fail" banks they impose large risks on society that are not needed. The US doesn't need any additional nuclear plants at present. We have plenty of coal, our natural gas reserves have increased substantially in past few years and wind+solar are starting to become viable. At current natural gas prices, new nuclear plant construction is not economic. The financial risk of nuclear power is much larger than alternatives.These plants cost billions and take 10 years to permit and build. US utilities are asking for federal loan guarantees to mitigate the financial risks. This incident will leave Japan short of electricity and reliant on costly substitutes. The replacement cost is multi-billion. The financial impact on Tokyo Electric the largest utility in Japan will be severe.

STFU :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/world/asia/japan-fukushima-nuclear-reactor.html?_r=1

U.S. Detects Radiation 60 Miles From Stricken Plant

WASHINGTON — As the scale of Japan’s nuclear crisis begins to come to light, experts in Japan and the United States say the country is now facing a cascade of accumulating problems that suggest that radioactive releases of steam from the crippled plants could go on for weeks or even months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/world/asia/japan-fukushima-nuclear-reactor.html?_r=1

But Pentagon officials reported Sunday that helicopters flying 60 miles from the plant picked up small amounts of radioactive particulates — still being analyzed, but presumed to include Cesium-137 and Iodine-121 — suggesting widening environmental contamination. In a country where memories of a nuclear horror of a different sort in the last days of World War II weigh heavily on the national psyche and national politics, the impact of continued venting of long-lasting radioactivity from the plants is hard to overstate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...