Third Reactor at Fukushima Nuclear Plant Explodes

ABC ^ | March 14, 2011 | DAVID MUIR AND JESSICA HOPPER

[gandalftb]

There was a new explosion Tuesday morning at a reactor the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, and the company that runs the plant said water may be leaking from the reactor.

Half of the rods inside the reactor were not immersed in water and the suppression pool, which holds the water used to keep the rods cool, seemed to be damaged, according to Tokyo Electric Co. and government officials.

The level of radiation also rose around the reactor, but a government official said there was no danger.

"The radioactive level near unit 2 has gone up, but at this juncture, the level is not judged to be immediately harmful to human bodies," said Noriyuki Shikata, a spokesman in the prime minister's office.

The blast is the third at the plant in the three days since a powerful earthquake struck Japan on Friday.

[ArmstedFragg]

I usually figure in the delay between the P wave and the S waves. For some bizarre reason, most of the seismic activiity I’ve been exposed to is happens when I’m asleep, so it works out to the time between suddenly waking up (from the P wave) and the shaking starting. In the San Fernando quake they were very close together.

[lonevoice]

I'm attempting to put reason back into the equation.

Good luck with that. :-)

Some people's internal clock is just permanently stopped on "doomsday". You know the idiom about how even a stopped clock is right twice a day? For the doomsday clock, it's only right once ever. Maybe some people hope that this is that one time they get to be right?

[bvw]

Well, if there’s only 50 men left at the site, that’s really no good. You are right, the reporting and statements are terrible. Bad PR feeds back onto the personnel making decisions. The situation, the national catastrophe w/o the nuke situation is a hard enough psychological situation for those trying to manage the nearly unmanageable.

[PeteCat]

“So news from TEPCO is mere rumors and speculation?”

TEPCO isn’t reporting it here.

http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/

[jwalsh07]

Cardiac Cath: up to 1500R(1,500,000mR)

[ArmstedFragg]

The design process here was a bit more horizontal than some other kinds might be. The primary question related to history of threat, the rest of them were along the lines of “okay, so if this fails, then what?”. Same kind of practicality limitations you mentioned. After four or five “then what’s” then, as you said, somebody has to conclude the probability is low enough or the design never gets built. “Then what” is potentially an infinite number otherwise.

[Matchett-PI]

" All those that proclaim it is all no big deal wouldn’t buy a home anywhere near a nuclear reactor. This may not be a reason to panic, but it sure is a turnoff to a normal person."

"Normal person? I'd use the word, UNINFORMED person.

I lived within 25 miles of Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania when it had a TOTAL meltdown. The redundant fail-safe mechanisms (containers within containers) CONTAINED the meltdown of ALL the rods.Not a single person was harmed in any way.

PS: Chernobyl had no such containers.

I suggest that if you didn't see Hannity's show this evening on FNC between 9:15 and 9:30, that you watch the re-run of the show later tonight.

MORE:

Mar. 13, 2011, 4:55 PM
You Can STOP WORRYING ABOUT A RADIATION DISASTER IN JAPAN -- Here's Why - by Dr. Josef Oehmen, a research scientist at MIT.

bttt

[ScreamingFist]

Well if you get 750 rems you will have just enough time to put your head between your legs and a$$ goodbye.

You're correct! Then we'll actually have to understand the difference between Rems and exposure to radiation! I'll type here to the last, but apparently, we're screwed.....

[aruanan]

1,000 Microseiverts is considered the maximum safe exposure dosage for one year.

Not exactly. 1,000 microseiverts is one milliseivert. One mSv is the average yearly exposure experienced by someone living in the vicinity of Chernobyl between 1986 and 1995. The global average is 2.4 mSv. Normal ranges are between 1 and 10, even though the currently accepted doses are 1mSv for general population and 20mSv for occupationally exposed workers. Outside of the firefighters that died at Chernobyl from radiation, the highest exposures were about 40mSv. There are places in the world such as Iran, France, Brazil, that have yearly exposures between 250 and 800 milliseiverts with no epidemiological evidence of any increased cancers.

And it's interesting that in the region of Chernobyl there is a deficit of cancer among the inhabitants following the incident, not an increase. As far as childhood thyroid cancer goes, the figure following screening in that area was 1800, not 6000 as you, Freddd, stated earlier. And they didn't all die, either. And funny, isn't it, that the most thyroid cancers were found in the areas with the least radiation exposure? Furthermore, the UNSCEAR report makes clear what was and what was not going on:

The Thyroid Cancer Hoax

In its final conclusions on the health effects of the Chernobyl accident, the UNSCEAR report stated the following:

"The number of thyroid cancers (about 1,800) in individuals exposed in childhood, in particular in the severely contaminated areas of the three affected countries, is considerably greater than expected based on previous knowledge. The high incidence and the short induction period are unusual. Other factors may be influencing the risk."

One of these factors are what are called "occult" thyroid cancers, those detected at autopsies by histological studies, and which do not cause visible clinical disturbances during the person's lifetime. These occult thyroid cancers occur en masse all over the world. For example, in Canada their incidence is 6,000 per 100,000 population; in Poland it is 9,000; in the United States 13,000; and in Finland 35,000. The highest incidence of thyroid cancers in children found in Russia, before the Chernobyl accident, was 26.6 per 100,000; in Belarus, 17.9; and in Ukraine, 4.9. Thus, the potential for the discovery of "excess" thyroid cancers, after the intense health screening that took place after the accident, is enormous.

According to UNSCEAR data, the increase in thyroid cancers diagnosed in children under 15 years old, began to be seen as early as 1987 in Russia, and in 1990 in Belarus—that is, only one year and four years after the accident. However, the latency time for radiation-induced solid cancers, such as thyroid cancer, is about 10 years. According the data presented in the UNSCEAR 2000 report, there is no relationship (or rather there is an inverse one) between the registered incidence of thyroid cancers in children, and thyroid radiation doses to the population in contaminated areas (Figure 1).



Figure 1 MAXIMUM THYROID CANCER INCIDENCE RATES IN CHILDREN IN HIGHLY CONTAMINATED REGIONS, COMPARED WITH RADIATION DOSE Shown are the maximum thyroid cancer incidence rates in children in highly contaminated regions of Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine, who were under 15 years old at the time of diagnosis, compared with average thyroid radiation doses. As can be seen, the area with the lowest radiation dose has the highest incidence of thyroid cancer.

Thyroid cancers are 90 percent curable. As of this writing, only one of these children has died.

Source: Adapted from UNSCEAR 2000, Annex J, Tables 40 and 57

[trumandogz]

With Chernobyl we could blame it on Commie Engineering with Japan, we can’t.
Furthermore, the US nuclear industry likes to point to Japan as an example of nuke power done safely.

[Palladin]

Of interest...US companies are selling out of potassium iodide.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2688869/posts?page=7#7

[ArmstedFragg]

You may have your micros and your millis mixed up.

[Matchett-PI]

bttt

[meyer]

After four or five “then what’s” then, as you said, somebody has to conclude the probability is low enough or the design never gets built.

Absolutely. There is a cost/benefit comparison to be made for every "what-if", and at some point, you will have to decide what level of fail-safe construction your customers will be willing or able to afford. After all, it is the customers that are paying for the plant.

[tcrlaf]

Not sure, but the average dosage to civilians in the most severe exposure areas was an average of 33,000MS. Some more some less.

[GonzoGOP]

Then we'll actually have to understand the difference between Rems and exposure to radiation!

Look all i know is if I have to listen to Man on the Moon 750 times I'm going to stick my head in the microwave.

[aruanan]

After all, it is the customers that are paying for the plant.

And they have to pay for it in the context of the governmental regulations. They can't pick them a la carte as it suits their budgets.

[meyer]

Greta just mentioned a fire “possibly” on Unit 4 at Fukushima. Unit 4 was in cold shutdown. Waiting for more reliable word on that one.

[jwalsh07]

Not likely, I'm an engineer in the Xray Industry who has installed over 100 cath labs and been cathed 3 times.

Radiation Tracking In The Cardiac Cath Lab

"Patient safety is always a primary goal in any hospital and radiation safety ranks high on the list of safety items for a catheterization laboratory. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NCR) and the Food and Drug Association (FDA) regulate the use of radioactive materials in medicine and the manufacture of devices that emit radiation, respectively. The Joint Commission (TJC), more commonly referred to as the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO), also regulates safety through its accreditation process. JCAHO has made the statement that prolonged fluoroscopy with cumulative dose >1500 rads to a single field or any delivery of radiotherapy to the wrong region or >25% above the planned dose1 constitutes a reviewable sentinel event. Since that recommendation, medical facilities have been under intense pressure to provide the safest possible environment for radiation safety for their patients."

Note: 1R=1000mR

[Springfield Reformer]

I’d be really surprised if a bunch of Obamaites don’t show up and post a bunch of nonsense about how safe all this stuff is, shortly...

Y'know, Freddd, you could hardly be more Orwellian. Obamaites, as you call them, would be greenie weenies deathly opposed to evil nuke power, not pro-nuke free market types. So you're inverting the truth. It’s really a breathtaking example of doublespeak.

For example, I am vehemently opposed to Obama, but I actually work with nuke power, have for decades (on and off), and do find nukes to be far safer than Obama's green brigade would have us believe. If anything, the Obama message is exactly the one you are spewing, as an irrational fear and rejection of nuclear power, combined with a lockout on domestic drilling, contributes directly to increasing our dependence on foreign oil, which is necessary to the agenda of the left, the calculated use of pseudo-environmentalism as a way to leverage totalitarian socialist control.

So who's payroll are you really on? Sincere question.