ScribbleLive

@Nancy Do we have any idea where they were with the shroud replacement? I assume the first order would be cutting up the old one? If that curved piece has something to do with the shroud, it sure looks like it would be the old one. But I'm still not liking shroud parts as explanation for the curved piece. How thick is the shroud metal?

@fitter Agree. But I'd still rather be informed :) @talisker Often there are local groups who've been documenting the known historic troubles of, and campaigning against, the various toxic plants in our back yards. Frequently, and sadly, the potential dangers have been long known, and these peeps are crying out to be heard.

Probably in 10 years Entergy will have morphed into some new version of Enron and go bankrupt, having been looted first by Goldman, and Vermont citiznes will be left holding the bag. Greaaat!

Do we have any good images of the lowest levels of North wall of #4 reactor building? That section is missing in the Air Photo Services pics.

@General Armchair Very true about GE

@elainekirk My guess is that under this amendment, Fukushima Daichi would have been in full compliance pre-March 11th? In other words, it's meaningless?

@talisker It sure does. Lest we forget.

Having looked and looked and looked at that derned curved piece on roof of #4 I have decided to emulate NISA's Nishiyama.

It's from outer space.

then when I read crap like this, it raises blood pressure

www.npr.org
03/15/134568574/assessing-the-future-of-nuclear-power-in-the-u-s

quite long, near the end...
"CONAN: And Gwyneth Cravens, one argument that's particularly difficult to respond to is: What do you do with the nuclear waste?"
"Ms. CRAVENS:...So the important thing about nuclear power is it always isolates and shields its waste. It's very well known how to protect the public from it. And yes, things can be done much better than in Japan. "

@General Armchair @Bobby1 - This is not the unmodderated board. Move the BS to the other blog please.

@elainekirk lol

don't know if I should laugh or cry, it has a better one in there...

"CONAN: And I wonder, is what's happening now in Japan, is that making you rethink?
Ms. CRAVENS: No. The - it's important to know that the reactors function correctly. They were designed to withstand an earthquake, and they did. They automatically shut down, which all of our American reactors are programmed to do also. As soon as the first jolt appeared, they shut down. The control rods were inserted into the core and stopped the chain reaction.
So what we're dealing with now - or what they're dealing with, rather, is decay heat that's left over from the chain reaction.
The tsunami was the problem. The earthquake would not have caused the problems they're dealing with now. But their backup systems of electricity failed, and so they couldn't pump water into the reactor and so on. So it was a problem of the tsunami, not the design of the reactors.
Since - but, as Rebecca Smith points out, since those reactors were built, there are a lot of new features in the reactors we have in the United States. For example, gravity-feed water tanks that don't require electricity. You can -if you don't have electricity and your backup systems fail, you can turn a valve and keep the reactor and the spent fuel...
CONAN: Cool.
Ms. CRAVENS: ...underwater - cool, yeah. "

@es all he needs to do now is take a walk down at Fukushima and "change their view of nuclear power" too...without getting skinned

I hope this won't be considered "BS," but having looked as carefully as possible at the Digital Globe pic taken 3 minutes after unit #3 explosion, I am starting to think there may have been a change between that pic and the Air Photo Service pic. I blew up the Digital Globe pic as much as possible (the final pic on the link below). Going by the roof girder structure, and from north to south along the west edge, I think the first girder you can see is about 140 degrees from the big orange dot, sloping up from near a brightish spot. I think this is between post #2 and #3, in other words, corresponding to the second wall panel (going from north to south). Compare that with the Air Photo Services pic (the 5th one down provides maybe the best way to see this?).

One of the X's meets that point, and that allows you to count as you continue to move north to south.

The next girder, between post #3 and #4 (the E-W centerline) slopes up a bit. This matches in both pics. However, the NEXT girder, between centerline #4 and #5, definitely slopes down in the Air Photo Services pic, but if anything seems to continue at least flat if not actually rising in the Digital Globe pic (which was taken first).

VERY TENTATIVE CONCLUSION: There is a possibility there was a change in #3 between 3 minutes after the explosioin (Digital Glove) and the Air Photo Services pic taken at least several days later (and after #4 had exploded, etc.)

www.digitalglobe.com

(Air Photo Services) cryptome.org

@General Armchair I think I see what you are saying, but the Digital Globe photo is fuzzy to my bad eyesight. Are there other pre-#4 explosion photos of #3?

@elainekirk Gosh. Hopefully they prioritise checking those fuse terminals for oxidation, now they know of their weakness, and that they rushed to incorporate such examinations into their regular safety controls. Hmm.

The Mark I containment has a proven track record of safety and reliability for over 40 years and there are 32 BWR Mark I reactors operating as designed worldwide.

While the technology was commercialized 40 years ago, it has continued to evolve. Over the last four decades, the Mark I has been modified in the form of retrofits to address technology improvements and changing regulatory requirements.

All of the modifications were made in accordance with regulatory requirements. In the United States, for example, the NRC issued a generic industry requirement in 1980 for the Mark I containment that the industry used to make modifications.

We understand that all of the BWR Mark I containment units at Fukushima Daiichi also addressed these issues and implemented modifications in accordance with Japanese regulatory requirements.

The modifications made to Mark I containments include...
www.gereports.com

Page 900! 100 to go until the big party!

@General Armchair Thanks for looking so closely. I tend to agree, but it's still good to examine any data, and not completely rule out the possibility of further unreported explosions. At least not until we have a better idea of what has actually occured at Daiichi, and specifically at neighbouring #4.

@General Armchair It would appear that way, but I've read much elsewhere that our US standards are stricter and hence have resulted in more safety modifications. Consider the source, that's GE defending themselves right after the incident. And they're talking about changes in 1980, and they say, "We understand that Fukushima..."