Japan Earthquake

Japan Earthquake | Page 129

@Ralp Unger 0.517 megapascal = 74.984 510 55 pound/square inch This is dangerous pressure in #1!
by Salvador 3/28/2011 2:47:25 AM

GE had zero tax liability in the US for the past two years, GE followed all the tax laws, GE also wrote most of the tax laws concerning it operations. www.nytimes.com
by Ralph Unger 3/28/2011 2:47:33 AM

@Optim That's a big roll of the dice to trust TEPCO though. They clearly are not up to the task, though I'd imagine that they are helping TEPCO however they can w/o looking like they are.
by Jojo 3/28/2011 2:47:36 AM

@Jojo As someone I know said on the second day of this crisis, this is likely the end of the nuclear renaissance. As for being beyond the best minds...what has been done so far can't be undone. While I'm confident that things from here on out can be stabilized, it doesn't make the problems to date go away, obviously.
by pj 3/28/2011 2:47:54 AM

@pj I hope this helps its from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory "seismic induced failure of nuclear power plant spent fuel pools (SPF) may be ... The dry well shield wall bounds the spent fuel pool on the north side ..." this is for BWR and PWR www.iasmirt.org
by Tenzing 3/28/2011 2:47:54 AM

Japanese are caught between a rock and a hard place
by Optim 3/28/2011 2:48:13 AM

@Salvador IIRC it is rated for only 65 PSI.
by Ralph Unger 3/28/2011 2:48:25 AM

@jojo : Japanese are caught between a rock and a hard place
by Optim 3/28/2011 2:48:42 AM

They didn't evacuate the cows? well that figures.....
by Pat 3/28/2011 2:48:54 AM

@RadioGuy Think of it this way. A once in a thousand years event. Improbable yes. Now consider 900 nuclear plants. What is the probability that any of them will experience a 1-1000 years event in the next year. I am too lazy to do the math, but it is high.
by Bobby1 3/28/2011 2:49:06 AM

@Pat Have you ever tried to move a herd of cows? Well I have....and it's ridiculously hard especially in the open.
by borrrden 3/28/2011 2:49:31 AM

@Salvador: they should never go over 70Psi or 0.476Mpa or the Drywell head would vent the Hydrogen.
by Lethbridgean 3/28/2011 2:50:07 AM

Uh it's as easy as getting them to market isn't it?
by Pat 3/28/2011 2:50:14 AM

@Bobby1 That would be 900 events per thousand years, or 0.9 events per year.
by borrrden 3/28/2011 2:50:24 AM

the N&O from Raleigh NC reported today that fears are high but the reality is that there are limited risks. These guys are killing me....
by CaraBnr 3/28/2011 2:50:34 AM

@Jojo Many organizations are involved - providing assistance in many ways. Things are moving along albeit not as fast as everyone wants it to but the best scenario is stabilization and dismantle. The alternatives are not pretty in the longer term. This is TEPcos mess and has to clean it up.
by George Gibb 3/28/2011 2:50:47 AM

Conditions of Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Station Unit 1-6, March 27, 2011: www.nisa.meti.go.jp
by dtinla 3/28/2011 2:50:55 AM

@Bobby, to put it simply , if there is a 1 in a million chance that something will happen, then that means it will happen .Eventually.
by Ralph Unger 3/28/2011 2:50:58 AM

@Tenzing Thank you - I'll read it later...just skimmed it. Doesn't sound pretty thought if there is any damage to the SFP
by pj 3/28/2011 2:51:19 AM

@borrrden They should prepare for 1-in-10,000 years or 1-in-100,000 years.
by Bobby1 3/28/2011 2:51:22 AM

@Pat Dairy farms don't usually transport their cows. And they never transport them all at once. My dairy farm is a family farm and it alone has over 200.
by borrrden 3/28/2011 2:51:26 AM

@Bobby1 Understood. The problem is that we've had two once in a thousand environmental disaters at once. Maybe we'd better reevaluate how good our emergency plans are.
by RadioGuy 3/28/2011 2:51:31 AM

@Ralph Unger And that's really the problem with nuclear power. When "something" happens, it's an absolute catastrophe.
by Jojo 3/28/2011 2:51:38 AM

nhk saying that radioactive water leaking might have been 1 time.... Huh
by Optim 3/28/2011 2:51:56 AM

@Lethbridgean Well, the new data show that they are actually going over that pressure again in #1.
by Salvador 3/28/2011 2:52:14 AM

@Optim Then it was a s**tload! Seriously, the contamination levels in the sea are *how* high?!?
by pj 3/28/2011 2:52:45 AM

I'm wondering how they secure this one for the long haul. It's not Chernobyl. It's on a changing coastline with changing water levels.
by RadioGuy 3/28/2011 2:53:00 AM

Even though this forum focuses on the nuclear aspect of this disaster, I'd like to share this video with all of you. www.youtube.com
by Natalie 3/28/2011 2:53:07 AM

@pj also from the same LLNL document 3. "Parts of the cooling and makeup systems for spent fuel pools are not designed as seismic class 1 systems and as such failure of some components might be possible at relatively low seismic levels. However, the failure of cooling and makeup systems would not uncover the spent fuel assemblies for about 3 to 8 days; it is expected that some recovery action could be taken in this time period" www.iasmirt.org
by Tenzing 3/28/2011 2:53:26 AM

@Jojo when you consider that much of northern Japan might be toxic? Look at the numbers, no company can build a nuclear power plant, the insurance cost is too great, only with Gov support and liability coverage can plants be built.
by Ralph Unger 3/28/2011 2:53:34 AM

@RadioGuy True. There probably is no "bedrock" for a while.
by Jojo 3/28/2011 2:53:40 AM

@RadioGuy Thats why its going so slow - stabilize and dismantle
by George Gibb 3/28/2011 2:53:57 AM

The Gov accepts the liability, AKA taxpayers.
by Ralph Unger 3/28/2011 2:54:18 AM

@Tenzing Yeah, I caught that and sort of choked. Who knew those three to eight days would be so critical? Oh yeah, whoever at LL wrote that paper
by pj 3/28/2011 2:54:29 AM