LovintheWhiteFluff Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 almost 46 feet....wow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallow Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Yeah, you're correct. I just found out that number from Kyodo News. However, 161 µSv per hour still yields to an annual dose of around 1.4 Sv; so that's way higher than the 100 mSv annual threshold for an increased risk of cancer. That's assuming levels stay that elevated for the full year. I would imagine that that's extremely unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAG5035 Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 A bit old but one of the better sites when it comes to updating the current progress at the nuclear plant. Haven't seen anything recently that confirms the workers are back on site. Latest image still show plenty of steam/smoke coming from the plant. http://nei.org/newsa...in-that-region/ Japan’s NHK broadcasting network reported that Tokyo Electric Power Co. confirmed that the March 11 earthquake and tsunami were beyond the Fukushima Daiichi plant’s design standards. TEPCO believes the tsunami that inundated the Fukushima Daiichi site was 14 meters high, the network said. The design basis tsunami for the site was 5.7 meters, and the reactors and backup power sources were located 10 to 13 meters above sea level. The company reported that the maximum earthquake for which the Fukushima Daiichi plants were designed was magnitude 8. The quake that struck March 11 was magnitude 9. Smoke seen from Fukushima Daiichi reactor 3 on Monday subsided after about two hours. Water pressure and levels at the reactor were unchanged through the episode, as were radiation levels, the company said. The site was temporarily cleared of workers after smoke rose from at the secondary containment buildings that house reactors 2 and 3. The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency said the smoke from reactor 2 caused radiation levels downwind to rise for about three and a half hours. TEPCO continues work to reconnect external power to all six reactors. Connections were made to the distribution line at reactor 1 and 2, and components and circuits at those reactors are being checked. Similar power connections have been made to reactors 5 and 6 and a diesel generator is providing power to a cooling pump for the used fuel pools. Power cable is being laid to reactor 4, and power is expected to be restored to reactors 3 and 4 by Tuesday. Japan’s Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano announced that Prime Minister Kan has ordered the governors of four prefectures near Fukushima to restrict the shipment of spinach and “kakina,” another leafy vegetable. The shipment of milk from Fukushima prefectures was also restricted. Edano said the order was a precautionary emergency measure. Finally some hard numbers on the tsunami and what magnitude of tsunami/earthquake was incorporated in the design of the plant. One must remember that the plant did what it was supposed to with respect to the earthquake itself. Not to mention since the epicenter was some distance offshore, the earthquake magnitude was likely more of the moderately strong variety (in the 7s perhaps). The believed tsunami height at the Daiichi site is insane. 14m = 46 feet vs the projected design basis tsunami of 5.7 m (18 feet) and the elevation of 10-13 meters for the reactors/power sources. Considering that this site is right along the coast, 10-13 meters above sea level is quite high. An 18 foot tsunami is nothing to sneeze at.. and is a pretty solid figure in incorporating potential tsunamis into that plants design. It's likely that they determined that a tsunami would reach that height at that particular location based off the max designed 8.0 earthquake scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkman Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 That's assuming levels stay that elevated for the full year. I would imagine that that's extremely unlikely. Well... at the current rate things are progressing... Finally some hard numbers on the tsunami and what magnitude of tsunami/earthquake was incorporated in the design of the plant. One must remember that the plant did what it was supposed to with respect to the earthquake itself. Not to mention since the epicenter was some distance offshore, the earthquake magnitude was likely more of the moderately strong variety (in the 7s perhaps). The believed tsunami height at the Daiichi site is insane. 14m = 46 feet vs the projected design basis tsunami of 5.7 m (18 feet) and the elevation of 10-13 meters for the reactors/power sources. Considering that this site is right along the coast, 10-13 meters above sea level is quite high. An 18 foot tsunami is nothing to sneeze at.. and is a pretty solid figure in incorporating potential tsunamis into that plants design. It's likely that they determined that a tsunami would reach that height at that particular location based off the max designed 8.0 earthquake scenario. As difficult as it is for me to doubt any figures from TEPCO, I can't help but believe the 14m number is a misprint or something. Soma -- about 40km north -- recorded a 7.3m tsunami. I guess there could be variations in tsunami depth due to differences in the coastline but at 14m I would think the entire plant would be washed 5 miles inland with all on-site workers dead. There would at least be some fish on the roofs or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 The infrared image is interesting. I guess #2 looks warmish because of the black rooftop absorbing the sun's energy. Not much to know there. #1's heat seems to be in the center of the building... reactor core maybe? #4 looks somewhat benign unless the hottest spot is covered by one of the roof's beams. And #3's heat is concentrated on the side of the building... spent fuel pool? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaleighWx Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110322/ap_on_re_as/as_japan_earthquake TOKYO – A Japanese nuclear safety official says a pool for storing spent fuel at the crippled nuclear plant is heating up, with temperatures around the boiling point. Nuclear safety agency official Hidehiko Nishiyama told reporters Tuesday that the high temperatures in the spent fuel pool are believed to be the cause of steam that has wafted from Fukushima Dai-ichi's Unit 2 since Monday. The hot storage pool is another complication in bringing the plant under control and ending a nuclear crisis that followed the March 11 earthquake and tsunami that devastated the northeast coast. If water in the pool bubbles away and exposes fuel rods, more radiation would be thrown off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mt.Zoniac Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Japan just had another aftershock a few minutes ago...R6.4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LovintheWhiteFluff Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Japan just had another aftershock a few minutes ago...R6.4 make that three in a row...lets hope no damage to the reactors with the building integrity the way it is.... MAP 6.6 2011/03/22 09:44:30 39.863 143.436 15.5 OFF THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN MAP 6.4 2011/03/22 09:19:06 37.334 141.861 27.0 NEAR THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN MAP 6.6 2011/03/22 07:18:48 37.249 143.956 26.5 OFF THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mt.Zoniac Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 make that three in a row...lets hope no damage to the reactors with the building integrity the way it is.... MAP 6.6 2011/03/22 09:44:30 39.863 143.436 15.5 OFF THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN MAP 6.4 2011/03/22 09:19:06 37.334 141.861 27.0 NEAR THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN MAP 6.6 2011/03/22 07:18:48 37.249 143.956 26.5 OFF THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN These poor people just can't catch a break. Most missing people haven't been even found (lest rescued), the hit areas are disaster zones, everyone's still freaked out, their food and water show contamination damage, the plants are still spewing radiation and the aftershocks continue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott747 Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 http://news.yahoo.co...apan_earthquake TOKYO – A Japanese nuclear safety official says a pool for storing spent fuel at the crippled nuclear plant is heating up, with temperatures around the boiling point. Nuclear safety agency official Hidehiko Nishiyama told reporters Tuesday that the high temperatures in the spent fuel pool are believed to be the cause of steam that has wafted from Fukushima Dai-ichi's Unit 2 since Monday. The hot storage pool is another complication in bringing the plant under control and ending a nuclear crisis that followed the March 11 earthquake and tsunami that devastated the northeast coast. If water in the pool bubbles away and exposes fuel rods, more radiation would be thrown off. At least he passed along some positive news.... Per Reuters - Hidehiko Nishiyama, the NISA deputy director general, says there is an extremely low possibility that the spend fueld ponds and rods will reach re-criticalitity. Then the VP of TEPCO has to go negative - TEPCO's vice president says it is too early to say reactors 1, 2 and 3 are fully stabilised. He adds that more water injections are needed to cool down those three units, and that data showing a rise in temperatures around the core of reactor 1 is a concern. The temperature rise in the #1 reactor is new along with the fuel pool issue in #2 if the latest comments are correct. They just started pouring water on the #4 unit late in the afternoon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SP Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 almost 46 feet....wow there must be video of this.....surveillance system is obviously in place.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Lizard Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 there must be video of this.....surveillance system is obviously in place.... Not near 14 meters, but I have seen videos of the tsunami spilling over the top of sea walls obviously built as a tsunami barrier. I'm thinking the one with the boat that washes over the wall and hits a bridge. I think much of the Japanese coast has tsunami walls, with gates normally open for coastal access that are closed after a quake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SP Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 based on the radiation levels.....power being available to the plant is the most positive news.....whether it can be effectively used still remains to be seen. You have a pool at 100c+ in reactor 2......a core in reactor 1 showing high levels of heat (suspected partial melt per previous updates). In the future it would be cool to have some kind of steel framed sprinkler structure that could be dropped in by hvy lift helo. Imagine being able to place a frame which would provide water with even direct-able outlets (remote controlled). You could size it to fit height and width.....utilize various water sources/pump options....but essentially create a temporary platform to direct water into the pool or vessel. I ready that even cooling the outer vessel would help prevent a catastrophe. Anyway....I am sure many changes and ideas will be forthcoming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SP Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Not near 14 meters, but I have seen videos of the tsunami spilling over the top of sea walls obviously built as a tsunami barrier. I'm thinking the one with the boat that washes over the wall and hits a bridge. I think much of the Japanese coast has tsunami walls, with gates normally open for coastal access that are closed after a quake. There is the large boat which was tossed up over a sea wall and up hill.......they estimated the wave to be 50-56ft...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SP Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 A few days back I mentioned using a boom similar to how they deliver cement.......to direct water http://www3.nhk.or.j...lish/22_42.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poimen Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 I don't know if this video has been posted yet but I wanted to say that as someone who has spent many years on the ocean, I have no doubt that a wave on the open ocean like the one in this video could easily be 30-40 ft when it reaches shallow water. Check it out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fqyOpqnJyw&feature=topvideos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacindc Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 I don't know if this video has been posted yet but I wanted to say that as someone who has spent many years on the ocean, I have no doubt that a wave on the open ocean like the one in this video could easily be 30-40 ft when it reaches shallow water. Check it out: *Leslie Nielsen in The Poseidon Adventure*: Oh, my God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 So the power has been restored to building 3 and they have lights in the control room. They're going to attempt to start the cooling mechanisms on Wednesday (today). This from NHK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LakeEffectKing Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 So the power has been restored to building 3 and they have lights in the control room. They're going to attempt to start the cooling mechanisms on Wednesday (today). This from NHK. I'm gonna make a guess.................................. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 I'm gonna make a guess.................................. Let's just say that if I was the lucky one to flip the switch, I wouldn't want to be standing in any water at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastCoastLow Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 The only real way to find out what's leaking and what needs repairs is to start it all up. You can all theorise about how you would have done it better, but at the end of the day the Japanese have handled this well and still have a very good chance of coming out of the end of this with six reactors they can decomission in a fairly normal way. I sense a lot of people are posting in this forum so they can hopefully get an "I told you so" in at the end.....but it looks like that won't be happening. It's easy to make comments about what you would do about it etc, but most all the comments I've read completely ignore this plant is in area that has had all of it's infrastructure completely destroyed. There is no way known the US would've fared any better in a situation like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jebman Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 The only real way to find out what's leaking and what needs repairs is to start it all up. You can all theorise about how you would have done it better, but at the end of the day the Japanese have handled this well and still have a very good chance of coming out of the end of this with six reactors they can decomission in a fairly normal way. I sense a lot of people are posting in this forum so they can hopefully get an "I told you so" in at the end.....but it looks like that won't be happening. It's easy to make comments about what you would do about it etc, but most all the comments I've read completely ignore this plant is in area that has had all of it's infrastructure completely destroyed. There is no way known the US would've fared any better in a situation like this. If this scenario happened here in the US - Information would be strictly controlled. Govt would say there is lots of radiation - we'd stay far away. Just look at last summer's BP oil disaster. We ordinary citizens would not know nada Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LithiaWx Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 The only real way to find out what's leaking and what needs repairs is to start it all up. You can all theorise about how you would have done it better, but at the end of the day the Japanese have handled this well and still have a very good chance of coming out of the end of this with six reactors they can decomission in a fairly normal way. I sense a lot of people are posting in this forum so they can hopefully get an "I told you so" in at the end.....but it looks like that won't be happening. It's easy to make comments about what you would do about it etc, but most all the comments I've read completely ignore this plant is in area that has had all of it's infrastructure completely destroyed. There is no way known the US would've fared any better in a situation like this. I think that could not be farther from the actual reality of the situation. Nothing normal about these plants anymore. That area will be radioactive for decades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Another earthquake / aftershock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkman Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Watching NHK world, they said the epicenter of the first quake was "near the Fukushima Daiichi NPP." Second one was apparently close to there as well. Those guys just can't catch a break. They had the quakes at M6.0 and M5.8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Now did I hear that the exterior of reactor 1 containment vessel is 394C and #3 is 366C? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SP Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Now did I hear that the exterior of reactor 1 containment vessel is 394C and #3 is 366C? correct .....C That's 741F and 691F on the outer surface of the vessel......which is what...4-5 inches thick? internal temps have to be much higher........and in need of agua... They likely new these temps via thermal readings..... remember the picture from days ago.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 correct .....C That's 741F and 691F on the outer surface of the vessel......which is what...4-5 inches thick? internal temps have to be much higher........and in need of agua... They likely new these temps via thermal readings..... remember the picture from days ago.... PWR's are geneally about 325 at the outlet...so although probably high it's tough to say how high without an accurate description of where. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSUmetstud Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 PWR's are geneally about 325 at the outlet...so although probably high it's tough to say how high without an accurate description of where. that's at normal operating temp though...this reactor is scrammed...pretty crazy it's that high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.