Japan Earthquake

Japan Earthquake | Page 1665

@Veenie I am guessing 30 days as long as you send in your warranty card. :-)
Not sure how to find something that old. It might be part of private business documents but will do some digging. All of these units are past their life span.
by lillymunster 6/17/2011 3:38:13 AM

@lillymunster Right, so you cannot possibly tell me, if they were no longer under warranty, that the JPN DID nothing despite their knowledge ?.this is TEPCO all the way.they did not follow the advisement of their own oversight comitte to build the higher walls.... they were careless and did nothing to solve a known problem.
by Veenie 6/17/2011 3:40:37 AM

@lillymunster , but they deviated from the original design with the numerous upgrades over the years. What about the retrofit with hardened vents? Or the modifications for the use of MOX? Was that approved by GE?
by Peter Melzer 6/17/2011 3:42:43 AM

@Veenie , look at my post below on the seismic assessments. A lot of hand waving and cosmetics. A TOTAL MAKEOVER was never in the works.
That would be actually funny, a total makeover for a nuke plant while the crew gets a paid vacation at Disney World, all provided by your local tv station.
by Peter Melzer 6/17/2011 3:46:54 AM

@Peter Melzer I'm not agreeing with TEPCO, I don't think they have enough to make a case. The original design sure, many of these changes were made on US reactors but not the ones in Japan, like the proper venting changes. They were optional in Japan and there were questions if the piping was tough enough.
by lillymunster 6/17/2011 3:47:57 AM

@Peter Melzer Oh that so needs a photoshop. :-)
From what we found the upgrades were superficial. TEPCO never did upgrades that other power companies did to their Mark 1 units. That raises questions about Tepco's claim on GE.
by lillymunster 6/17/2011 3:49:41 AM

@lillymunster , yup, they must have implemented some retrofits though which did not work too well as the hydrogen built up drastically showed.
by Peter Melzer 6/17/2011 3:50:30 AM

@veenie, TEPCO knew full well there were changes that should be made and were made at other Mark 1 units. They have a track record of not upgrading or fixing unless forced to. There is equipment we have seen that various people who work with that kind of industrial equipment have tagged as antique.
by lillymunster 6/17/2011 3:52:31 AM

@Peter Melzer There was something about the hydrogen venting back in the building. Can't remember if it was on purpose or due to a failure in the pipe system.
by lillymunster 6/17/2011 3:55:37 AM

@lillymunster Antique, or criminal, like the Tyvek "radiation suits" and baggies for the feet.
by radioguy 6/17/2011 4:00:36 AM

@radioguy a little of both. When people start having old timey remember when over your NPP equipment you might need to do some upgrades. Makes me wonder how much some of these old US Mark 1's are running on Star Trek technology. Kirk, not Picard.
by lillymunster 6/17/2011 4:07:34 AM

@lillymunster I am still filling in blanks in our MOX details, and found these that can be used to update on Simplyinfo: June 28, 2010 delivery to Genkai-3 was 20 assemblies; June 30, 2010 Takahama-4 recieved a delivery of 4 assemblies ***The fuel for Genkai-3 was to be used in it's second loading of MOX to core.*** cnic.jp
by smoss 6/17/2011 4:12:02 AM

@smoss Thanks, grabbed it. I have some more to do on the fuel manufacture and need to write up notes on that also. Anything on those monthly fuel inspections?
by lillymunster 6/17/2011 4:14:08 AM

@lillymunster Have found nothing :-(
by smoss 6/17/2011 4:16:35 AM

@smoss I will check with elaine tomorrow. There may be some places to check.
by lillymunster 6/17/2011 4:17:33 AM

Ok, look EEnews made this their own article however, this is the original story.with a FOX NEWS video showing the guy who says possibility of radiation from Japan is or could cause the 48% rise in infant death's.........this is a potential bombshell
www.myfoxphilly.com
by Veenie 6/17/2011 4:17:41 AM

@lillymunster That would be great...must say "Bye" for now...
by smoss 6/17/2011 4:20:43 AM

@Veenie
Odd, their study did west coast cities. BTW, that research company has lots of sketicism in their research methods. My $02 is to tread carefully on this one or try to find out what data they used. This is such a major issue. If these guys are right it is a huge problem. If they are wrong they are panic mongering to a large extent. I wish some other groups would verify the findings and data.
by lillymunster 6/17/2011 4:24:13 AM

I think it was 35% on the west coast.
by radioguy 6/17/2011 4:24:59 AM

@lillymunster Yeah, well i was uprahansive even posting this here, i know how touchy this one is....thinking further ahead or basck........wouldn't this definetly be an issue in JPN itself ?...would we ever see something along the lines from within it ?
by Veenie 6/17/2011 4:26:10 AM

@Veenie @lillymunster Independent corroboration would be good. That's monumental if true. That's almost instantaneous.
by radioguy 6/17/2011 4:27:01 AM

@lillymunster , they had this theory for the explosion in unit 1 for a while. They thought a valve that was to prevent backflow int the building was not closed. But then they reneged on this. They also had to sent crew several times into the other buildings to crank the valves for the hardened vents. Such missions I suspect may explain the high internal exposures of some workers.
by Peter Melzer 6/17/2011 4:27:07 AM

@Veenie that's what I am wondering. I have several friends here in Hiroshima who had kids either a few weeks before or a few weeks after the quake.
by bo 6/17/2011 4:27:14 AM

@radioguy That was what I remember seeing. They did a small time frame and number so it could mess up the study by not enough time & people. That is a good idea to look for similar in Japan.
by lillymunster 6/17/2011 4:27:29 AM

I would also point out that they have been making this same claim for a decade. They did a study which claimed that infant deaths declined quickly as soon as a nuclear plant closed in the nearby communities.
by bo 6/17/2011 4:28:16 AM

@ all. Remember radiation can be up to 5,000 times more damaging to a fetus than to an adult according to Dr. Helen Caldicott.
by NorthernCali 6/17/2011 4:30:05 AM

@bo I actually buy that due to Frequencies over exposure sonar subwaves etc.........IF this wasn't a FOX Video, i would not have touched this........
by Veenie 6/17/2011 4:30:09 AM

I don't know what the exact levels in Philly were, but they had to have been several orders of magnitude higher in Northern Japan, so it seems the infant death rates there would have to have risen hundreds of percent.
by bo 6/17/2011 4:34:40 AM

@radioguy Nicde job on the designed to fail article, it just got published !!
by Veenie 6/17/2011 4:36:03 AM

www.bt.cdc.gov Radiation and Pregnancy I came across this the other day doing Uni.......dont know if this helps regarding this convo.....
by Angie 6/17/2011 4:36:26 AM

@bo I agree and am wondering, have we heard anything simular to that effect? Is there a Hospital Morgue gag order ?
by Veenie 6/17/2011 4:37:09 AM

@Veenie well given the increasing activism of the mothers in the area, it seems that if there were a sense in those communities that this was happening, we would hear about it
by bo 6/17/2011 4:38:14 AM

@bo I guess time will tell, the wheels are grinding ever so slowly in their cukture, going against it is too risky, so it has to build up.
by Veenie 6/17/2011 4:42:40 AM

@Veenie agreed.
by bo 6/17/2011 4:44:02 AM

Ok, someone tell me how this Fukushima had 20 Cores comes about pplease?.....I see that number everywhere now and it doesn't make sense.
by Veenie 6/17/2011 4:46:48 AM

I believe that is counting the number of "cores" in all of the sfp's as well as the cores that were in the reactors at the time. So the total fuel load at risk equals 20 cores.
by bo 6/17/2011 4:51:50 AM

@bo Thank you, so this is than definetly worse or not ?, is it still not comparible to overall Chernobyl # ?
by Veenie 6/17/2011 4:53:49 AM

@Veenie Chernobyl involved only 1 core. The numbers relating the radiation release to the release at Chernobyl all come from TEPCO or the GOJ. And I believe that their numbers only refer to airborne releases and not those into the sea or groundwater.
by bo 6/17/2011 4:55:20 AM

@Veenie the problem at Chernobyl is that the explosion placed a great deal of the radioactive material into the upper atmosphere, allowing it to affect a larger and further downwind area with the remnants of the core.
by bo 6/17/2011 4:56:19 AM

@bo Understood but i am wondering with the prolonged and ongoing many times excessive steam from daiichi, has anyone been able to messure the actual release since it's monmth's worth ?
by Veenie 6/17/2011 4:58:09 AM

@Veenie, I'm no techie, so I'm sure someone else can answer this better. But my sense is that they don't really know how much is being released with the steam releases or with the venting. It can be estimated, but as we have seen that is both incomplete and also easily manipulated.
by bo 6/17/2011 5:00:17 AM

@bo I understand, thanks...So all we have is people with independant readings world wide with elevated backround readings.... too big of a project to handle.........ok so all falls back on GoJ...... i guess, only proven fatalities will force the rest of the world to push..
I am amazed, that you know all this and do you not feel restless?..what do you do to take your mind off >?
by Veenie 6/17/2011 5:04:37 AM

I'm afraid if we had more independent monitoring, we'd find more hotspots like Philly where the combination of jet-stream, Fukushima timing and downpours cleaned an entire thunderhead out onto the trailing edge. It's Fuku Roulette. Watch out for the 00.
by radioguy 6/17/2011 5:35:26 AM

@Veenie, sorry, had a visitor in my office. In these events information is always slow and has to be reconstructed later. When they assess the melted cores and rods in the fuel pools after they are all cool, they can begin to assess how much radiation left the site. As for myself, I do spend almost half of my time away from Japan, so that is helpful. Plus, I live 500 miles away and the winds almost never blow this way, so our surface exposures were not so high. The main concern we have in Hiroshima is the food supply. In general I try to eat low on the food chain where there is less concentration. But I have been studying this stuff (the social/cultural aspects) for a long time, and I have developed good skills at learning to be happy regardless of the horrors that I am aware of.
by bo 6/17/2011 5:37:19 AM