Japan Earthquake

Japan Earthquake | Page 894

Opps it didi it already
by carabnr 4/29/2011 2:41:58 PM

the blue hue circle is back on teppycam. Really faint, I had to pull it into photoshop and raise the brightness to see it well but it is back.
by Nancy 4/29/2011 2:42:49 PM

Can you post your adjusted image?
by carabnr 4/29/2011 2:43:38 PM

Perhaps the statement belongs on the other page?
by Markfm 4/29/2011 2:44:35 PM

I liked the statement too, though if I had written it I might have added a final paragraph: Uh, and TEPCO, go pound sand why don'tcha!
by General Armchair 4/29/2011 2:44:44 PM

@carabnr have at the post from my site, borrow if you wish all or parts etc. Will post that image here in a sec.
by Nancy 4/29/2011 2:45:17 PM

thanks so mUch Nancy.... you rock
by carabnr 4/29/2011 2:46:07 PM

Here's something interesting:

atmc.jp

atmc.jp

Drywell radiation twice as high (and not declining) in Fukushima Daichi #5 as in #2?!?!?
by General Armchair 4/29/2011 2:48:36 PM

www.houseoffoust.com the oblong glow is back too.
by Nancy via Houseoffoust 4/29/2011 2:49:40 PM

I have to go, an hour behind schedule already! Will be back this afternoon.
by Nancy 4/29/2011 2:50:12 PM

@Nancy Probably my problem but I just see a black square?
by General Armchair 4/29/2011 2:50:22 PM

@All Before I head out, some thoughts and questions re: the new underwater SFP video & previous A. Gunderson analysis of earlier #4 SFP & Crane flyby footage…

Gunderson seemed to think that the earlier footage showed the exposed tops of at least some fuel racks amongst the clusters of debris, and while it was hard to sure if he was right, there were some box-like structures visible near and just below the green crane in those stills. (sorry, no link handy, most of you probably know which shots I mean) He indicated that the crane had clearly 'collapsed' onto the pool, (not submerged, but not supported above any longer). The steam, he noted, was coming from further down in the 'pile' than the video was able to show.

Was he wrong in believing he was seeing the tops of fuel racks at the time, or if not, how does that fit with the current and recent video(s)? I suppose the easy way to sort out the discrepancy is to say that Gunderson was just wrong , but was he? Could some of the spent fuel racks have been displaced *upwards* while others clearly remained in the 'pool proper'?

I am wondering what you all think of how the ***ulative SFP footage fits together...
by Askwhy 4/29/2011 2:51:34 PM

@Bobby1 Re: Rad spikes in mid-April -- Wasn't that when they almost let #4 SFP run dry?
by General Armchair 4/29/2011 2:52:39 PM

@General Armchair. I always only see black when others see glow. I'm on an iPad, could be why. Still, I get an emporer's new clothes sort of feeling.
by Scilla 4/29/2011 2:53:09 PM

@Nancy Love the reactor layout pages and explanation.
by carabnr 4/29/2011 2:54:22 PM

When stared at closely enough I can get some blue, but that really isn't telling me anything. Artifacts will appear in low-grade COTS cameras, nature of the beast.
by Markfm 4/29/2011 2:57:16 PM

@General Armchair Could be, but I'm looking at #2 and #3 too, here's the teppycam cache gyldengrisgaard.dk
by Bobby1 4/29/2011 2:58:06 PM

If I try to drag the Tepco image to the side, I can see the ghost image... it has a faint blue hue to the left.
by carabnr 4/29/2011 2:58:18 PM

driving myself nuts trying to get pic up I will send it to @Nancy to sort out
by elainekirk 4/29/2011 3:06:23 PM

@Askwhy I suspect Gundersen was wrong. I always had a hard time seeing what he was seeing. I doubt that any explosion moved racks around, or removed them completely from the pool, since there doesn't seem to be much damage to the other racks. My guess for the unorderly appearance of the pool is because they had to cram so much in due to the mainenance outage.

I wonder why the things on the right side of the first pic Nancy posted on houseoffoust are not in alignment? Almost looks like they could have been juggled or jostled, but without knowing what they are or their function, etc., hard to say. They don't appear to be fuel assemblies, and look like they fit into round holes, so there may not be any particular reason they should be aligned. (They are the things with single long line with two short crosses.)
by General Armchair 4/29/2011 3:08:01 PM

My problem with black pic Nancy posted was contrast on my monitor -- I adjusted that and now I see what she was saying -- I should have realized it would be nighttime over there!
by General Armchair 4/29/2011 3:08:56 PM

Nancy and Jim Carver: Have you seen this vid? Fukushima Daiichi Reactor 4 spent fuel pool
TEPCO has released a very short video clip of the spent fuel pool inside reactor 4. The camera seems to dip into the water for only a few seconds. It's all over quite fast, so I've posted a video grab too.

NHK broadcast the same video and pointed out debris sitting on top of the fuel rods.

Update: The video was shot on April 28. NHK has posted a story online [Japanese] and quotes TEPCO as saying the video shows there is no major damage visible to the fuel rods. martynwilliams.posterous.com
by Tenzing 4/29/2011 3:10:57 PM

@General switch off the lights or close the curtains... than you will probably see the glow, I do and I am on an htc
by andrea 4/29/2011 3:11:00 PM

@General Armchair, that makes sense. (re: Gundersen likely wrong about exposed fuel racks in #4 SFP) There was so much wreckage everywhere that identifying much of anything on a small scale was a task bordering on futility. Still, with so much visible debris in the earlier footage, and the knowledge that the SFP has no roof, I find it a bit puzzling that there is so *little* visible debris in the new underwater footage. Granted, we have only been shown a small portion of the pool, but in spite of the grid disruption the water is remarkably clear. I would have expected a comparable 'pile' of debris in the water to the one we can see above it...
by Askwhy 4/29/2011 3:14:51 PM

@general an argument against then being wrongly stored is that the pool is geared to having them orderly, they had started double stacking which would reduce water volume and also the second row wouldnt have been 'full' so maybe the second layer shifted >
@Askwhy is it possible that you are being shown an area underneath the overhead crane assembly ?
by elainekirk 4/29/2011 3:16:19 PM

@elainekirk By double stacking you mean on top of each other?
by General Armchair 4/29/2011 3:17:08 PM

@general yup they ran out of storage ! so double stacking
by elainekirk 4/29/2011 3:18:34 PM

@elainekirk Crazy! Were pools initially designed for double-stacking? I thought there was a certain amount of water needed over fuel rods for rad protection. Obviously if you're double-stacking the top level of rods is going to be a lot closer to the top of the water than you would have otherwise.

To your knowledge were all the SPF at Fukushima Daiichi double-stacked?
by General Armchair 4/29/2011 3:22:41 PM

(I know that #4 SFP
had many more assemblies than the other units.)
by General Armchair 4/29/2011 3:23:19 PM

@general I will try to find the doc
by elainekirk 4/29/2011 3:25:22 PM

@Askwhy I'd suspect TEPCO of being duplicitous, but given the crap that IS floating around in the water (which you'd hopefully never see in an undamaged SFP), it probably is #4. It is hard to see that (or the almost pristine condition of the crane as seen in the "water sampling" vid from a couple of weeks ago) and think it's the same pool as seen in the utter rack-and-ruin shots from outside the building. When I first saw the "water sample" video I was sure it had been mislabeled and was from some other location (though the steam in that one was indicative of a pool with problems).
by General Armchair 4/29/2011 3:28:32 PM

I wonder if the things in the "round" racks (seen on the right and left of the first pic Nancy posted) are perhaps fresh fuel assemblies? Perhaps that's how they travel? Total guesses here.
by General Armchair 4/29/2011 3:30:02 PM

TEPCO: Releasing 6 seconds of video capturing an extremely small area of the SFP for Unit 4 and stating there is no major damage visible to the fuel rods is beyond insulting to any thinking person.
by Tenzing 4/29/2011 3:30:37 PM

number of fuel rods in unit 4 as of 11Mar, acc'ding to Tepco: New assemblies; 204, spent fuel; 1331 Ttl; 1425 www.nisa.meti.go.jp
by marie rich 4/29/2011 3:34:59 PM

@Tenzing You're totally correct. No proof at all.

On the other hand (though again it's just TEPCO data) their samples from the pool don't show much radioactive contamination, or at least what you might expect if there had been as much damage as we thought.

I did read somewhere yesterday that the two fires that were reported after the #4 explosion were located in NW corner of the building, which is pretty much as far away from the SFP as possible. I hadn't run across that info before, had assumed the fires were in the SFP.
by General Armchair 4/29/2011 3:36:18 PM

@marie rich Do we know if any of the new assemblies in #4 SPF were MOX?
by General Armchair 4/29/2011 3:36:50 PM

Of course, all the rod assemblies are in the spf, none in core. @General; supposedly not
by marie rich 4/29/2011 3:37:27 PM

@marie rich Okay thanks.
by General Armchair 4/29/2011 3:38:41 PM

if you have to significantly adjust brightness or contrast you may just have imager artifacts.
by Markfm 4/29/2011 3:38:59 PM

If TEPCO or GoJ is stupid enough to go after Nancy, they'll have hurt themselves by handing out a big, fat newsworthy plum. At that point, the best defense is a good offense. Bet the NY Times would relish the scoop.
by marie rich 4/29/2011 3:42:02 PM

@Tenzing: You're right, even if it really is a shot of SFP4, and at Daichi, and recently. Not that I'd have any doubts about any of that of course. Tepco should know ;)
by Paul 4/29/2011 3:44:38 PM

This is a Daini doc and I cannot download it for some reason but I would like to hear the views of those who can understand it - had they or hadnt they complied with the 2010 orders ? www.tepco.co.jp
by elainekirk 4/29/2011 3:45:26 PM

#4 had two firse and an explosion- at least according to Tepco early releases: www.tepco.co.jp

Unit 4 (shut down due to regular inspection)-Reactor has been shut down. However, we have confirmed the sustained damage around the 5th floor rooftop area of the Nuclear Reactor Building.-Afterwards, we confirmed the outbreak of fire at the northwestern part of Nuclear Reactor Building. We immediately reported this matter to the fire department and the related authorities.-However, at approximately 11:00am, when TEPCO employee arrived at the seen to confirm, the fire had already died down. At 5:45AM on March 16th, we confirmed the outbreak of the fire again but could not confirm it at 6:15AM. We will continue to monitor the situation carefully. http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/11031504-e.html
www.tepco.co.jp
www.tepco.co.jp
www.tepco.co.jp
Unit 4At approximately 6:00 am, March 15th, an explosive sound occurred andthe damage in the 5th floor roof of Unit 4 reactor building was confirmed. At 9:38 am, the fire near the north-west part of 4th floor ofUnit 4 reactor building was confirmed. At approximately 11:00 am, TEPCO employee confirmed that the fire was off. At approximately 5:45 am, a TEPCO employee discovered a fire atthe northwest corner of the Nuclear Reactor Building. TEPCO immediatelyreported this incident to the fire department and the local governmentand proceeded with the extinction of fire. At approximately 6:15 am,TEPCO staff confirmed at the site that there are no signs
by marie rich 4/29/2011 3:47:05 PM

@marie rich I was just trying to confirm what I'd said about the two fires being in NW corner and ran across this:

www.oecd-nea.org
by General Armchair 4/29/2011 3:52:27 PM

It says in part:

"Wednesday, 16 March 2011 (Day 6)
A fire is again reported in the unit 4 reactor building in the area of the spent fuel pool. Evacuation of the 20 km zone surrounding the Fukushima Dai-ichi NPP is completed. Steam is observed coming from the unit 3 reactor building, indicating that the water in the spent fuel pool is likely boiling."
by General Armchair 4/29/2011 3:53:02 PM