Japan Earthquake

Japan Earthquake | Page 2933

bump
by elainekirk 2/1/2012 11:03:00 AM

"Abandoned animals in Fukushima"

"Authorities are trying to collect as many animals as possible." (video with no comments) videos.publico.pt
by Pedro Jesus 2/1/2012 11:04:44 AM

An off-topic for those who are interested in the subject:

"Julian Assange extradition appeal at supreme court - live blog" (updated every minute - ongoing) www.guardian.co.uk
by Pedro Jesus 2/1/2012 11:20:33 AM

Ladies and gentlemen - any comments on this:

No big Fukushima health impact seen: U.N. body chairman. (Rep. by Fredrik Dahl)
Chairman Wolfgang Weiss of the U.N. Scientific Committee on the effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR).
www.reuters.com

This is now widely repeated all over the net.
by VesaVA 2/1/2012 11:22:53 AM

May I call everyone's attention to a relevant fact that has just come to my attention: The Guardian's on-line news service removes certain articles from the website quite often, for yet unknown reasons. We should keep a backup of relevant articles to avoid the loss of data.
by Pedro Jesus 2/1/2012 11:31:42 AM

@VesaVA Well, nothing else would be expected, under the circumstances. Health impact from low radiation exposure are very seldom short term. So far we have seen very little health impact directly attributed to Fukushima emissions. Health impact on the long term will remain a mystery for a long time.
by Pedro Jesus 2/1/2012 11:38:29 AM

@Pedro. So it's much the same as was with tobacco. Nothing can be said for sure until it's too late.
by VesaVA 2/1/2012 11:55:29 AM

@VesaVA Well, I'd say research on tobacco is far more advanced. We can say for sure, without any risk of being wrong, that smoking heavily (an average of one pack a day) promotes several diseases some of which can be fatal and it reduces the life span of both active and passive smokers. It is also known to reduce lung capacity with all the inherent problems (cardiovascular, etc...). As to low dose ionizing radiation there are still a lot of grey areas. More research is needed. But we can say it's about the same now with ionizing radiation as it was with tobacco back in the early seventies.
by Pedro Jesus 2/1/2012 12:03:38 PM

@VesaVA some of the odd short term health problems people have cited like nosebleeds etc. "could" be radiation induced but we don't know until we know if they had an exposure and at what level. They did belch lots of other really nasty garbage into the air right after fukushima. They used considerable amounts of hydrazine in unit 3 when it was still smoking/steaming. This can be a respiratory irritant and is fairly nasty things. So some of those immediate health problems could possibly be connected but it wouldn't be a low dose radiation manifestation.

That said there are still some unknowns out of the disaster. The researchers that found the fuel could act differently due to the seawater added during cooling efforts showed we don't know everything yet.

Something else frequently done like that article is the "no IMMEDIATE" harm to human health. It is pure political. It is pretty established science that there is latency in most radiation exposure unless it was some severe acute exposure. I really don't think anyone has the technology today to predict who will develop cancer out of their exposures to Fukushima. Right now they don't even know for sure what the exposure levels are on many of the people from the area.
by lillymunster 2/1/2012 12:51:34 PM

This right here shows this article is a load of crap out of the IAEA:
Weiss said Japanese experts attending the meeting had told him that they were not aware of any acute health effects, in contrast to the 1986 Chernobyl disaster in Ukraine.

"What we have seen in Chernobyl - people were dying from huge, high exposures, some of the workers were dying very soon - nothing along these lines has been reported so far (in Japan)," he said. "Up to now there were no acute immediate effects observed."

They are talking about workers in Chernobyl. It is well known that many of the workers at the plant and conscripted military that were trying to control the disaster got huge doses. Chernobyl exploded part of the core out of the reactor vs. hydrogen explosions with cores in place. At Chernobyl they were sending guys onto the roof to hand shovel debris from the core back into the explosion hole. It was insanely high radiation and they were doing 30 second runs and then jumping back into the helicopter. By contrast the workers that got high doses at Fukushima (over 250 mSv) were the 2 control room guys and the guy that went into vent unit 3 (possibly the other unit vent attempt workers).
So comparing Chernobyl workers to Japan citizens and workers is horribly dishonest.
by lillymunster 2/1/2012 1:00:43 PM

Interesting detail I just noticed, there was a big aftershock apparently simultaneous with the Unit 1 explosion on March 12. The Tepco report for the Unit 1 explosion notes (bold added):

"Today at approximately 3:36PM, a big quake occurred and there
was a big sound around the Unit 1 and white smoke[the Unit 1 explosion]." www.tepco.co.jp

There's been evidence that Unit 1 suffered catastrophic damage due to the Mar 11 quake alone. And this is also curious given that Edano has previously noted changes in Unit 1 reactor parameters associated with quakes. And then especially after the Jan 1 quake www.youtube.com It's as if Unit 1's behavior seems uniquely associated with quakes.
by Ian 2/1/2012 1:06:17 PM

@Ian what is the time of that additional quake time and the explosion time?
by lillymunster 2/1/2012 1:07:56 PM

@lillymunster, the Tepco report seems to imply both at 3:36pm, Mar 12.
by Ian 2/1/2012 1:09:03 PM

@Ian hmm. One was hydrogen. Wondering what could have moved to trigger the explosion? Something changing the hydrogen mix to the right percentage to combust?
by lillymunster 2/1/2012 1:12:44 PM

@lillymunster, I don't know, maybe the quake triggered a spark?
by Ian 2/1/2012 1:21:36 PM

Oh Ian you may want to read this. Someone is saying unit 4 might have had fuel loaded before the quake fukushima-diary.com
by lillymunster 2/1/2012 1:21:57 PM

I quote from the NISA report to IAEA last June, p III-5: "
3) Occurrence of aftershocks and induced earthquakes
Cumulated numbers of aftershocks of M5 or greater, M6 or greater, and M7 or greater were 444, 76 and 5, respectively, as of May 6. The most powerful aftershock occurred at 15:15 on March 11, and the magnitude of the earthquake was M7.7. As for the other main aftershock, this occurred at 15:25 on the same day far from the coast of Miyagi Prefecture (the depth was approximately 34 km and M7.5), and the earthquake at 23:32 on April 7 off the coast of Miyagi Prefecture (depth was approximately 40 km and M7.0).The aftershock on April 7 occurred at approximately 40 km east from Ojika Peninsula, and large ground motion was observed in Onagawa NPS."
by Peter 2/1/2012 1:22:06 PM

@lillymunster, yes, someone just sent that to me. Is it credible? Recall I asked if fuel might have been put back into the core just a couple days ago!
by Ian 2/1/2012 1:23:45 PM

I do see a flaw in the logic in that post about fuel in 4. If it was new fuel with the reactor still open it couldn't melt down.
by lillymunster 2/1/2012 1:23:55 PM

@Ian I would take it with a big grain of salt. The flaws in the story question the credibility and it isn't directly from any of our known workers. But the idea of there being new fuel in the reactor would match close to the schedule we found.
by lillymunster 2/1/2012 1:25:13 PM

@lillymunster, would they put new fuel in, or replace the fuel they took out if it wasn't totally used up?
by Ian 2/1/2012 1:26:27 PM

@lillymunster, this potentially important article is what got me looking back at early Unit 1 reports when I noticed an aftershock was reported simultaneous to its explosion. Unit 1 was also being vented right before it exploded, but Unit 3 was probably vented about 24 hours before it blew.

"The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency under the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry disclosed during the experts hearing on December 27 on the cause of the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant accident that a possible cause of the hydrogen explosions in Reactors 1 and 3 may have been that the hydrogen that was vented from the Containment Vessel [to the exhaust stack] flowed back into the reactor building through a different pipe. As the power was lost due to tsunami, the valve of this different pipe remained open, and unable to prevent the reverse flow of hydrogen, according to the NISA." ex-skf.blogspot.com
by Ian 2/1/2012 1:31:12 PM

@Ian Dean may have a better idea about the fuel reloading when they do a complete unload for maintenance.
by lillymunster 2/1/2012 2:26:00 PM

@lillymunster, I'll be off line almost all day. Please point out to Edano if he logs on the detail I noticed that Tepco reported a quake simultaneous to the Unit 1 explosion. Thanks!
by Ian 2/1/2012 2:31:19 PM

@Ian will do. I will be in and out all day.
by lillymunster 2/1/2012 2:36:17 PM

@lillymunster Has that allegation by TEPCO Ian addressed been confirmed by independent earthquake stations around the world? And if so, can we conclude anything by comparing the exact time of the two events - earthquake and hydrogen explosion?
by Pedro Jesus 2/1/2012 2:45:00 PM

@Pedro Jesus I believe it is on record with the various agencies that monitor quakes. I think looking at the location of the quake vs. the plant would be good.
by lillymunster 2/1/2012 2:46:45 PM

@lillymunster If there was an earthquake (or an aftershock) it must be recorded, that's why I ask. Maybe Edano can help track that. He's always on top of earthquake information.
by Pedro Jesus 2/1/2012 2:48:58 PM

@lillymunster Are you following Julian Assange's extradition hearing?
by Pedro Jesus 2/1/2012 2:50:30 PM

This has date and time for all 7.0 or higher in Japan on 3.11 earthquake.usgs.gov
by lillymunster 2/1/2012 2:51:59 PM

@Pedro Jesus no I have not been following it today, did they decide anything yet?
by lillymunster 2/1/2012 2:52:19 PM

7. 2011 03 11 06:15:40 36.281 141.111 43 7.9 Near East Coast of Honshu, Japan
8. 2011 03 11 06:25:50 38.058 144.590 19 7.7 Near East Coast of Honshu, Japan

Time is UTC
by lillymunster 2/1/2012 2:52:48 PM

@lillymunster Defence is presenting their case against extradition. Seems strong enough to hold. I think it will take another couple of days for a final decision to be announced.
by Pedro Jesus 2/1/2012 2:53:25 PM

@Pedro Jesus is this extradition to Sweden?
by lillymunster 2/1/2012 2:53:45 PM

The quake at 6:25 was only 19 miles deep. It was out to sea straight out from Sendai, abt 250km from the plant. The other one was near Ibaraki out to sea
by lillymunster 2/1/2012 2:56:23 PM

greetings to all
by dean 2/1/2012 2:59:23 PM

hi Dean!
by lillymunster 2/1/2012 3:07:23 PM

@lillymunster Yes, a Swedish prosecutor appealed to UK Courts to extradite Mr. Assange to Sweden so he can face sex crimes allegations. Defence is arguing that European extradition agreements do not grant Swedish prosecutors legitimacy to file for extradition appeals in which case the EWA would be rendered void. It's all judicial technicalities, but which may have significant affect on future extradition appeals or EWAs.
by Pedro Jesus 2/1/2012 3:07:24 PM

Hello Dean. Doing good?
by Pedro Jesus 2/1/2012 3:09:00 PM

@Pedro. .yes indeed.. ty for asking...
by dean 2/1/2012 3:09:19 PM

@lilly. you know about the EQ that hit illinois
by dean 2/1/2012 3:09:36 PM

According to the Japan Meteorological Agency doc here: www.seisvol.kishou.go.jp , the agency recorded 16 aftershocks at 4 and one at 5lower on 3/12 (00:00 - 24:00). No time given.
by Peter 2/1/2012 3:12:35 PM