Japan Earthquake

Japan Earthquake | Page 618

Baffled and hoping for some expert opinion on the numbers I posted.
by Ralph Unger 4/10/2011 11:51:02 AM

Fukushima gov. slams TEPCO, govt for 'betrayal' Fukushima Gov. Yuhei Sato has expressed anger at the central government and Tokyo Electric Power Co., saying both "betrayed" the people of Fukushima Prefecture with repeated assurances about the safety of nuclear power plants.

"We feel we were betrayed [by the central government and TEPCO]," Sato said during an interview with The Yomiuri Shimbun on Thursday, nearly a month after the March 11 earthquake and tsunami and the outbreak of a series of accidents at the Fukushima No.1 nuclear power plant.

"The central government and TEPCO repeatedly told us, 'Nuclear power plants are safe because they've got multiple protection systems,' and, 'Earthquake-proof measures have been taken,'" Sato said.

"TEPCO used the term 'beyond our expectations' [to describe the natural disaster], but they can't establish effective policies for nuclear energy safety unless they take into account things that are beyond their expectations," Sato said. www.yomiuri.co.jp
by Rob in SF 4/10/2011 11:51:09 AM

@Ralph Unger "I wonder why they use different measurements for everything?" Obfuscation?
by Rob in SF 4/10/2011 11:52:37 AM

@Ralph Unger, Ponder this: why was the generators never restarted at unit #1-4 ? lack of fuel ? why did they desperately need off site power ? roads were cleared long before off site power were available. Also SOP after power failure is switch to battery banks and inverters until generators kick in, then run on generators, if generators fail fallback on battery banks. I do not work at a nuclear facility, but i do service emergency power generator units and battery backups as part of my job (i am a electrician, and former mechanic)
by WolfDK 4/10/2011 11:53:32 AM

If ya dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull^&t
by Ralph Unger 4/10/2011 11:53:47 AM

'We must move highly contaminated water at the No. 2 reactor and elsewhere to a radioactive waste processing facility as soon as possible without leaking it into the sea,'' Kaieda told reporters back in Tokyo after the visit. ''The plant chief said it must be given the priority right now and I agree with him.''

To free up room to pool highly contaminated water that has flooded the No. 2 reactor's turbine building and prevented the stabilization efforts, the company has dumped about 8,300 tons of low-level radioactive water into the sea from the plant's waste processing facility, with an estimated 800 tons of water left to be discharged.

It also pumped out into the sea 1,300 of the 1,500 tons of low-level contaminated groundwater from the Nos. 5 and 6 reactors, expecting to complete the work on Sunday.

For the tainted water filling a tunnel near the No. 2 reactor, the utility will begin channeling it to a 3,000-cubic-meter container inside the turbine building on Sunday to reduce the risk of it seeping into the sea, the government's nuclear safety agency said. english.kyodonews.jp
by Rob in SF 4/10/2011 11:55:19 AM

Wolf I do stagecraft, and as our hall we must have power and a safe way to get people out in case of emergency, kinda in the same boat. They had power to 5 & 6 , if you have ever run big cables. they are heaevy and hard to buy.
by Ralph Unger 4/10/2011 11:57:42 AM

Buy or find...
by Ralph Unger 4/10/2011 11:58:13 AM

@Rob in SF/Ralph Unger Bq/kg is for measurements in soil.. Bq/m3 is for measurements in air
by sims 4/10/2011 11:58:23 AM

3 phase is about 1 lb per foot and ya need 3 runs and a neutral and a ground, thats 5, drag that 300 yards?
by Ralph Unger 4/10/2011 11:59:58 AM

Toxic water has been found in the basements of the Nos. 1 to 3 reactor turbine buildings, as well as in nearby underground trenches connected to them. The water inside the basement of the No. 2 reactor turbine building and the trench connected to it is highly contaminated because it is believed to be originating from the No. 2 reactor core, the most dangerous of the three reactors where fuel rods have partially melted.

''As contaminated water with high concentration (of radioactive substances) will be moved, we would like to confirm the safety of the process,'' Hidehiko Nishiyama, a spokesman for the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, said at a press conference in the morning.

A worker in his 30s was taken to a hospital as he complained of feeling sick around 11:10 a.m. after laying a hose pipe for the work from 9:30 a.m., but is conscious and was found to have no radioactive materials on him, plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. said.

Wearing a full-face mask, outerwear upon protective clothing, rubber gloves and high boots, the worker was exposed in the work to 4.84 millisieverts of radiation, which is below the limit of 5 millisieverts set for Sunday's work, said the utility known as TEPCO.

The water in the trench was to be transferred to a ''condenser'' inside the No. 2 reactor turbine building, where in normal operations steam created from the reactor is converted into water.

The condenser has a capacity to store 3,000 tons of liquid and work to empty the condenser finished Saturday. english.kyodonews.jp
by Rob in SF 4/10/2011 12:02:37 PM

@markfm I will pin your link .
by elainekirk 4/10/2011 12:03:24 PM

It is no wonder that it took a long time to do that in a high radiation environment.
by Ralph Unger 4/10/2011 12:03:31 PM

@Ralph Unger, i agree on the cables. Regarding unit #5 and 6 as far as i can see from the images they are at a higher elevation, that would explain my theory. Anyway this generator damaged or not topic is of less importance now, its just details that would explain some of the earlier problems they faced at Fukushima Daiichi.
by WolfDK 4/10/2011 12:07:32 PM

@WolfDK But it's relevant in that other nuclear plants clearly do need to be better prepared in terms of contingency planning for events such as these.
by es 4/10/2011 12:10:27 PM

I never did get an answer about this odd data ,Looking at #1 or course. atmc.jp chart.googleapis.com|1,0,100&chls=2,2,3|3,2,0|3,2,0&chm=o,FF0000,1,0:-1,8|o,FF9900,2,0:-1,8&chxt=x,y&chxt=x,y&chxl=0:%7C4/05%7C4/06%7C4/07%7C4/08%7C4/09%7C4/10&chs=250x160&chd=t:0,0|31.5,31.1,31.7,100,_,_|10.2,8.79,12.9,12.7,12.2,11.6&chg=20,20&chf=bg,ls,0,DDDDDD,0.15,FFFFFF,0.1
by Ralph Unger edited by elainekirk 4/10/2011 12:10:35 PM

@Ralph Unger: try tinyurl.com
by ifz edited by elainekirk 4/10/2011 12:12:46 PM

I know that no one should ever get near the D/W but is not infinity kinda a high reading? 100sV is instant death in 15 seconds but no one should be in there anyways.No readings for 2 days?
by Ralph Unger 4/10/2011 12:15:06 PM

atmc.jp
by Ralph Unger 4/10/2011 12:16:01 PM

Talph, if you mean the 100 sv reading, which was followed by a 67 sv, must have had something leak from the core, what I have been calling a burp.
by Markfm 4/10/2011 12:17:49 PM

@Ralph this is the reactor pressure in #1
by elainekirk 4/10/2011 12:18:31 PM

Please link the 57 sV reading from #1,
by Ralph Unger 4/10/2011 12:18:42 PM

@es, this is precisely the reason I sort of hung on with this thread a bit earlier. Good point you made.
> But it's relevant in that other nuclear plants clearly do need to be better prepared in terms of
> contingency planning for events such as these.
by alblee 4/10/2011 12:19:03 PM

@Ralph Unger There was one graph I saw somewhere that indicated, after the 100Sv reading, there was a drop and it was indicated that there was a sensor malfuncation at that point. I don't have the link offhand, but it was something from here posted yesterday.
by pj 4/10/2011 12:19:03 PM

Since they did get that later reading, I am surprised that the instrument then was declared failed. Maybe it got another big spike.
by Markfm 4/10/2011 12:19:47 PM

Yes, the later reading was in a meti report.
by Markfm 4/10/2011 12:20:41 PM

@Ralph Unger Found the link...http://dgr4quake.wordpress.com/fukushima-npp1-parameters/
by pj 4/10/2011 12:20:52 PM

@Ralph Unger www.meti.go.jp 68.3 Sv/h actually, this is 8h after the 100 Sv/h one. But there is some japanese text after the number, so maybe that's the infamous 'under survey'.
by sims 4/10/2011 12:20:53 PM

I do, it was burned into dust, that is why there are no more readings lol. Now all rwadings are extrapolated.
by Ralph Unger 4/10/2011 12:20:53 PM

@Ralph Unger Toasty, toasty, to be sure...
by pj 4/10/2011 12:21:38 PM

OK, guys, I have to get up now. Please keep on, most of you are in the Western hemisphere anyway. Enjoy what's left of your Sunday. Mine is coming near the homestretch. Cheers.
by Alblee 4/10/2011 12:22:47 PM

#1#2#3 @Ralph does it help like this to show why you are concerned about #1
by elainekirk 4/10/2011 12:23:48 PM

@alblee sleep well

[Thanks, @Elaine. LOL. Truth to tell, still have one wash load and dishes to do before anything else. Ciao! - Alblee]
by elainekirk edited by alblee 4/10/2011 12:24:11 PM

@Ralph Unger So what is your problem now? I translated the page you linked and there is nothing surprising. So what?
by Salvador 4/10/2011 12:24:52 PM

My only concerns are for those who live in Japan. The numbers are confusing. 500 bq/kg is bad but most of the numbers I see are bq/m3 which is 1/1700 by by lazy math.
by Ralph Unger 4/10/2011 12:25:11 PM

So many numbers that look bad are nothing, but still some numbers say that they do have 500 bq/kg in the soil.
by Ralph Unger 4/10/2011 12:26:34 PM

where are you getting 1/1700 from? Bq/m3 is only quoted for air measurements, where 1m3 is roughly 1kg - not sure how to compare air measurements to soil measurements anyhow though
by sims 4/10/2011 12:27:19 PM

@Ralph Unger I have never seen battery backup power for anything but control systems and instrumentation. Can't even imagine a battery bank and inverter large enough to run a 150hp pump motor. (Power & Control Specialist 39yrs.)
by DonnerT 4/10/2011 12:27:32 PM