8.9 earthquake Sendai, Honshu, Japan _Tsunami

[dcb]

That thing has been erupting all year.

[gone-ot]

...it's been upped to a 9.0 Ricter Scale earthquake.

[TheMarkofPolo]

Another reactor on fire...
The radiation levels should not be downplayed...

All I know is I'm minimizing my time out of doors for awhile in case that stuff hits the jet stream. A Public Health Service friend agrees.

Praying for the people in Japan.

[roflwaffle]

Originally Posted by cfg83

roflwaffle -

From what I hear (which may be wrong!), there are lots of things that could have been done in hindsight :

1 - House the backup generators in a tsunami-proof location nearby. They were in the basement, became flooded, and therefore useless.

2 - The power connections from the backup generators to the cooling systems were also (obviously) in the flooded basement. The building design could have incorporated multiple power connections from different locations around and above the building.

3 - They did transport new power generators into the site, but I don't know if this was part of an existing Plan-B or just improvisation. You could have heavy lift choppers for generators and diesel fuel on standby for just this scenario. The only requirement would be a high-ground heliport (aka tsunami-proof) that could get the generators and diesel-fuel to the reactor *and* installed before the backup batteries went dead. This does not address the possibility that the helicopters and/or backup-backup generators would *also* be damaged in the initial earthquake.

CarloSW2

That seems right. To a large degree anyone who needs an active source of electricity to keep the pumps running are constrained by having electrical connections that can be severed or electricity sources that can break down. I think that they should have at the very least water-proofed their diesel gensets ala the military, which would only require a water proof route for the electrical, intake, and exhaust, but hindsight is always 20/20, especially with 1,00+ year events.

I think some of the newer "passive" designs are the best bet, maybe w/ a greater time interval between when the water tank needs to be refilled since those are pretty much bullet proof provided they're water proof. The biggest challenge IMO is building a plant that will maintain enough structural integrity for it's passive systems to work, which is really hard given a 9.0 earthquake. I can only see designs that aren't quite as structurally robust being used with a large buffer between the population and the plant.

[cfg83]

roflwaffle -

There is an LA Times article that claims that the California nuclear power plants are safer because of 3-Mile Island. The San Onofre nuclear power plant is pretty much at sea level, just like Fukushima. They claim to have a 30 foot "tsunami-wall", but I can't see it from the freeway when I am driving to/from San Diego.

... googling ...

Okay, the San Onofre is on a bluff, so it's not at sea level. Sea water cooling is also a part of the San Onofre design :

San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Unlike many pressurized water reactors, but like some other seaside facilities in Southern California, the San Onofre plant uses seawater for cooling, and thus lacks the iconic large cooling towers typically associated with nuclear generating stations. However, changes to water-use regulations may require construction of such cooling towers in the future to avoid further direct use of seawater. Limited available land next to the reactor would likely require the towers to be built on the opposite side of the Interstate 5 highway.

CarloSW2

[NeilBlanchard]

Very detailed account of the nuclear events:

MIT NSE Nuclear Information Hub (http://web.mit.edu/nse/) | Information about the incident at the Fukushima Nuclear Plants in Japan hosted by http://web.mit.edu/nse/ :: Maintained by the students of the Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering a

[MGB=MPG]

CDC Radiation Emergencies | Radiation Measurement

CDC Radiation Emergencies | Radioactive Contamination and Radiation Exposure

the only reading reported was 400 mSv [ milliSievert] or 4 / 10 of a sievert.
this is confusing to me since i learned traditional units RAD s[radiation absorbed dose]and REMs [Radiation Equivalent Man]

it says on link that One Sv is equal to 100 rem.

from my cold war days when we were well aware of Radiation doses i recall one can expect a percentage of effects at 100 Rem = one Sv
and that the MLD [Mean Lethal Dose ] is 500 REM

so if the dose rate at the gate is 400 mSv then in ten hours exposure expect fatalities.. ]
of a percentage and that the MLD is 5 Sieverts.. remember the measures mentioned are milli sieverts,, ie: one thousandths


i just saw Chicken Little run by here and he said the Sky was Falling

i am not against Atomic Power Plants , just old poorly engineered ones ..
after all one needs to charge up all those electric car batteries some way..

[roflwaffle]

Originally Posted by cfg83

roflwaffle -

There is an LA Times article that claims that the California nuclear power plants are safer because of 3-Mile Island. The San Onofre nuclear power plant is pretty much at sea level, just like Fukushima. They claim to have a 30 foot "tsunami-wall", but I can't see it from the freeway when I am driving to/from San Diego.

... googling ...

Okay, the San Onofre is on a bluff, so it's not at sea level. Sea water cooling is also a part of the San Onofre design :

San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


CarloSW2

Odds are SO will be fine, but the problem is getting unlucky like Japan did. Geophysicists have speculated that a magnitude 7.6 quake is possible right next to SO, so in that context being able to withstand a 7.0 may not be good enough, especially since the cost of upgrading is probably much smaller than the cost of an accident. The same goes for Diablo Canyon if I remember right. Even if SO can withstand a 9.0 and a 30ft Tsunami, do they have something in place that can insure the sea-water intakes don't get clogged with mud/debris? While it's unlikely to ever happen, there are huge risks associated with not upgrading reactors.

[vacationtime247]

Looks like they've abandoned efforts at the facility due to dangerous radiation levels. Not saying the sky is falling, but this whole situation is going from bad to worse fast.
VT247

Japan Nuclear Workers Abandon Stricken Plant

[Joenavy85]

they should have just flooded the building with saltwater when they first had the overheating issue