Posted on 08/10/2013 9:22:02 AM PDT by Mr Radical
Contaminated groundwater accumulating under the crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant has risen 60cm above the protective barrier, and is now freely leaking into the Pacific Ocean, the plant’s operator TEPCO has admitted. The Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), which is responsible for decommissioning the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, on Saturday said the protective barriers that were installed to prevent the flow of toxic water into the ocean are no longer coping with the groundwater levels, Itar-Tass reports.
The contaminated groundwater, which mixes with radioactive leaks seeping out of the plant, has already risen to 60cm above the barriers – the fact which TEPCO calls a major cause of the massive daily leak of toxic substances.
Earlier on Friday, the company announced it started pumping out contaminated groundwater from under Fukushima, and managed to pump out 13 tons of water in six hours on Friday. TEPCO also said it plans to boost the pumped-out amount to some 100 tons a day with the help of a special system, which will be completed by mid-August. This will be enough to seal off most of the ongoing ocean contamination, according to TEPCO’s estimates.
However, Japan’s Ministry of Industry has recently estimated that some 300 tons of contaminated groundwater have been flowing into the ocean daily ever since the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami that triggered the disaster.
TEPCO also promised it will urgently reinforce the protective shields to keep radioactive leaks at bay. The company has repeatedly complained it is running out of space and has had to resort to pumping water into hastily-built tanks of questionable reliability, as more than 20,000 tons of water with high levels of radioactive substances has accumulated in the plant’s drainage system.
Water samples recently taken at an underground passage below the Fukushima nuclear plant showed extreme levels of radiation comparable to those taken immediately after the March 2011 catastrophe. The tested water, which had been mixing with ground water and flowing into the ocean, contained 2.35 billion Becquerels of cesium per liter – some 16 million times above the limit.
And of the dozens or hundreds of predicted deaths; how many have happened?
Read the following:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444772404577589270444059332.html
I still argue that the amount introduced to the larger environment is much lower than from the above ground tests.
The explosions at Fukishima were chemical explosions, mostly hydrogen gas burning to water. They simply weren't hot enough to vaporize any significant amounts of the metals and concrete in the reactor.
By contrast the nuclear explosions happen at such very high temperatures they directly vaporized anything within hundreds of yards, then heavily irradiated that vapor rendering it highly radioactive and and spreading it far and wide. To get an approximate idea of the mass involved, lets assume the average fire ball was 600 meters in diameter (a W-88 at 350kt yield), and it was on rock and soil. That gives a fireball volume of about 375,000 m3. Let's say half the fireball was "wasted" on the air, i.e. a surface blast. That gives a vaporized crater volume of about 185,000m3. Let's further say that the bomb is only about 55% efficient at vaporizing rock, and further de-rate the initial volume vaporized down to 100,000 m3, just for easy math...
Picking an average rock density of 2.5 g/cm3 gives us 2,500,000 g/m3 or 2500 kg or 2.5 metric tons/m3
Times 100,000m3 gives us 250,000 tons of intensely radioactive fallout per blast. Roughly 450 blasts before the test ban treaty in 1962 gives us a billion tons or so.
That's not counting anything sucked in from the surrounding countryside, nor any seawater pouring into the craters, nor any gasses "vented" from numerous underground tests.
That sounds like a lot.
It IS a lot, but we're still here, aren't we?
Thanks for bringing a voice of sanity to the hype. And lets not even begin to discuss the natural sources of radioactivity in ocean beds. Oh and that big nuclear explosion happening continuously 93 million miles or so from here. Of course I will not live long enough to appreciate the danger from the Fukashima fallout because I live in Denver - so the daily radioactivity I get from the altitude and the natural radioactive sources around me will get me long before anything else..
Whether hysterical hype or truth, I hope that this diverts more funds to thorium energy research.
Well, Hairyape, I have to say that Japan has surprised me after I thought I was past that.
They are exploring the possibility to turn Fukushima into a tourist destination: http://www.japantoday.com/category/kuchikomi/view/will-no-1-reactor-at-fukushima-become-a-future-tourist-spot
The illnesses and deaths are yet unfolding. Cancers take a while to develop and interim deaths will not be reported as such. Radioactive waste suppresses immune functioning so it will look like other unexplained illnesses have risen in the population in the short term.
Russia is shocked that Japan has decided not to relocate citizens living in contaminated zones which, at comparable levels in Russia, were declared permanent evacuation zones. I wish it were possible for Japan to escape the hardships of debility and death but they are human like those studied in Chernobyl and the National Academy of Sciences BEIR VII report. What nuke apologists do is set the bar at ARS (acute radiation sickness - a short term intense illness) and then if people don’t have ARS, declare no harm to human health regardless of how many suffer the host of illnesses that develop over time.
You note we are still here - those who died off are indeed not present.
The first time I encountered comparisons between Nagasaki/Hiroshima and Fukukshima, it was in a point for point comparison between the radiation remaining on site after time elapsed. Much more radiation over a larger area is currently present at Fukushima at this point in time compared with nuclear blasts. Some went into the atmosphere to contribute to harmful radiation exposure world wide. But Fukushima has been contributing to atmospheric, land and water contamination freely for over two years now - compare that with the total duration of atomic blasts. Fukushima is worse, unfortunately. Based on medical evidence (e.g., BEIR VII and other studies), we can assume that the overall cancer rate has increased by some degree as a result of loading radioactive contaminates into the atmosphere, land and water.
I don’t know whom to hope will lead any Thorium effort because the Nuclear establishment has embedded cultural issues regardless of where it is located. We will never see anyone accept responsibility for incompetence and mismanagement and the ongoing failure to manage the Fukushima disaster. Whom should we promote as a result of epic deception and failure?
We do get skin cancer from the sun but it’s a trade off because we also get heat and light that form the basis of life on earth. Incompetent mismanagement and contempt for public safety inherent in the nuclear power industry are not the basis of life on earth - we can do without them.
Natural sources of radiation in the ocean beds are generally not a problem because of their distance from us. Natural sources do contribute minute amounts of risk to human health but they are unavoidable and accepted. Naturally occurring sources of radiation do not excuse the gross incompetence, lies and harm caused by the nuclear power industry and the government propping it up.
Children have been photographed playing on the beaches near Fukushima because the government keeps insisting that all is well - the power company and government are anxious to make it seem like everything is ok. This reminds me of the photos of the smouldering tower of the Chernobyl nuke plant that showed children playing sports in a grassy field in the foreground.
At present, the situation at Fukushima is so bad that even TEPCO is calling it an emergency.
I have to wonder if people realize that a massive amount of radioactive fuel is sitting in pools on the upper floors of explosion damaged buildings which rest on land that is in danger of liquifying because of the rise of the radioactive water resulting from containment attempts. People must be able to get to those buildings in order to maintain the flow of cooling water over massive stores of radioactive fuel. If the workers can’t walk through radioactive waste softened ground, if the ground liquifies under the foundations of the damaged buildings holding fuel, if an earthquake damages those pools or shifts the stability of the buildings which rest on softened ground....so much hangs in the balance. Without coolant, those fuel rods will overheat, evaporate and some will melt through the structure - these actions will liberate massive quantities of radioactive fuel. Not only is Fukushima not “over”, but so much more damage hangs in the balance while people sneer about the sun in our solar system being nuclear and everything is just fine...
Where is all the water coming from? This says it is groundwater.
The water is 60 cm above the dikes, so a wall of water 2 ft high is cascading over the top of the dikes. That is a lot of water, the dike must be pretty short to get only 300 tons per day.
It sounds like they built the plant of top of a large spring, or is the upwelling of water an aftereffect of the earthquake? Or simply bad reporting?
You say, in answer to my research and links: “ I have more important things to do, like interceding for people like you.”
well, gee thanks - but I prefer to bank on Jesus directly - and what he says:”No one comes to the Father except through me...”
He is the one and true ‘interceder” for each of us as indivduals...
and God, the Father, gave us a brain for a reason - to use. I wouldn’t sent my little kids out to play in the middle of the highway figguring - God will take care of them”
I work at a nuclear power plant much closer to sea level than most of the nuclear plants in the United States. We have sealed vaults to protect some of the important pumps closer to sea level. The majority of the plant is clear of 70' above sea level. If we had a tsunami that high, then we there would be SUCH great death and destruction that our shutdown nuclear power plant would be a drop in a huge bucket. In fact, the same thing is true of Fukushima. (Did you actually read the WSJ article? If so, then you know that the deaths due to radiation exposure is far less than 10 percent of the deaths due to the tsunami itself.)
I don't have blinders on, I am not "bought and paid for" or a "corporate sellout". In fact I am a technician making hourly wages. I have to study all kinds of changes in power plant design and construction over the years, most of them due to problems that have occurred in power plants both in the US and in other countries (dozens of incidents contribute to improvements, not just three mile island). Thus we have redundancies in safety pumps, electrical buses, diesel generators, etc. The goal is that multiple failures will not result in catastrophe during a "design basis accident" (a kind of worse-case scenario).
All that being said, Fukushima was an eye-opening catastrophe. And TEPCO's response was deplorable. The American nuclear power industry is required to change available equipment and facilities and re-evaluate how emergency plans would be implemented in the case of an extended loss of off-site power (along with multiple failures of redundant diesel generators). And lack of plant access due to a natural disaster is now a part of our worst-case scenario planning. Just as security has responded (to the nth degree!) to possible terrorist threats, Emergency Planning is responding to possible natural disasters on the scale of Fukushima.
I don't think I will reassure those who say "We don't know or cannot measure the full effects of the leakage". I can say that controversy and conflict are much more interesting, exciting, newsworthy, and dramatic than realism and facts. And I know that outrage and adrenaline can be addictive.
I just gotta say there are people who fall down a flight of stairs to avoid something with a radioactive material sticker on it (this happened in the Navy, where the stairs are more like ladders). The guy was lucky he survived, no kidding. And the radioactive material was in transit and contained less curie content than a bag of fertilizer.
So, just in case you are still interested in the truth, then here it is, paraphrased and simplified: Other factors being equal, airline pilots are more likely to have occupational-related cancer than nuclear power plant workers. People who live in Denver (the mile-high city) receive a higher annual whole-body dose than the average US nuclear power plant worker. Smokers -- well do I really have to say it??
Groundwater contamination is a problem, radioactive waste leakage into the ocean is a problem, the cancellation of Yucca Mountain waste repository is a problem. (Utilities who contributed millions of dollars for the construction of Yucca Mountain are now having to arrange storage of used fuel on their own plantsites at great expense, and requiring increased security measures).
But if you want a little perspective, then consider the role of alcohol in murders, suicides, and accidental deaths. Less widespread --I mean less pervasive than the role of alcohol in all sorts of deaths-- and relatively less risky would be auto accidents in general. Somewhere around here (maybe more risky than auto accidents) would be lifestyle choices that lead to heart disease and obesity. (I am avoiding any introspection at this point). The agricultural, mining, and oil supply and refinery industries are the biggest occupational hazards (as I understand it). Demographically, some urban residents are quite likely to die of a gunshot wound.... I think that would be somewhere around here. Then as the relative risk continues to go down, we have accidental deaths at the home, infections contracted at hospitals, encounters with animals and snakes, recreational activities (this might be variable depending on the type of activity, eh?), choking and drowning, contracting a disease from an illegal immigrant -- oops did I really write that??? -- and then maybe something like being struck by lightning. Finally (deal with it, liberals) accidental gun deaths. Yes, they are indeed more rare than dying of being struck by lightning, no kidding.
So.... not that I am getting ready to go to the gym ... if you want to worry maybe we should all consider worrying about something we have control over!
The human performance standards, licensing and procedures, regulatory oversight, continuous "operating experience" lessons learned, security measures and screening of personnel, multiple and redundant control and safety systems including automatic shutdown designs, and a comprehensive plan for emergencies that includes power plant corporate leadership as well as local, state, and federal authorities, are all part of making a nuclear power plant safe -- YES, safe enough to live next to!
I will tell you what I tell my wife: if an emergency evacuation is declared due to the nuclear power plant 10 miles away, lock the doors and STAY INSIDE!! Windows can be open if you wish, but you might want to lock them due to possible looters. Do not get in the car and do not travel on the roads. The nuclear power plant is NOT a threat compared to the evacuation chaos, panic, and stupidity.
You life could depend on understanding relative risks, and knowing what an appropriate response would be in various circumstances.
"Careful with that axe, Eugene."
“Skyrocket”. Hmph. A 1000% increase of 1 death per 100K people is 10 deaths per 100K people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.