8.9 Magnitude quake hits offshore Japan

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by TheCommodoreAfro

Not talking about that. We're dealing with a ####ing catastrophe without the constant nuclear bull#### going around. That's what I'm on about. Given me a break that I don't know it's serious. I've got family and friends here and was here for the worst part of it. Taking a single part of a sentence out of context to post this - thanks bud - that's what I was angling for.
My point, if you read beyond a single sentence was the mushroom cloud #### the media seems to have dying to have happen. The rest of the stuff outside of that is a catastrophe. Don't need a cynical take and some photo hosting skills for that.

To be fair, you also went after CNN for creating fear about another Tsunami too. They're not the ones creating fear, the sirens and loudspeakers do that.

That said, I won't try and tell you what to think, nor feel. I can't imagine what you're going through, and you have the right to vent about whatever you want, and if CP is an outlet for you to do that, go for it.

[RedMileDJ]

Originally Posted by TheCommodoreAfro

If you're going to be a messenger in times of crisis, make sure the message is right. Sensational #### that is patently untrue is not helpful, nor is it necessary. It's the equivalent of a Canucks fan registering just to crap all over a Flames loss in a PGT, in CP terms.

Ouch. I guess I've been shot. Well, since you're venting on me, it's my turn.

I never "sensationalized" the picture I posted. I never claimed it's authenticity. I don't have the time, or patience or know-how to go out and see "is this picture real." Why do you think I posted it? I am merely adding to the conversation.

Don't crap all over me and label me like some of the Canuck fan-trolls on here. I've been a member of CP since 2007. And yes, while I don't have a lot of posts, or maybe not everyone agrees with some of the things I have posted, I have still been a constructive member of this community. I value being part of this community.

I could continue to expand on that, but I'll just close with this: Good luck to you and your family, TheCommodoreAfro. My family and I are praying for you and the rest of the Japanese people.

As of today my family (everyone on both sides) has donated a total of $2500 to the Red Cross to help relief efforts.

Take care.

[kirant]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I have questions, wouldn't sea water ruin the reactors and prevent them from ever restarting?

If you have a runaway reaction where the temperature is heading to what 5000 degrees, and you sprayed it with sea water wouldn't you just be cooling the outside of the reactor pile, but the inside would continue to super heat?

Yup. Plans like this are only activated in emergancies, as they permanently ruin the components (much like the "Quench" option of an MRI scanner, where the MRI overloads itself, if that helps).

[BloodFetish]

Originally Posted by TheCommodoreAfro

If you're going to be a messenger in times of crisis, make sure the message is right. Sensational #### that is patently untrue is not helpful, nor is it necessary. It's the equivalent of a Canucks fan registering just to crap all over a Flames loss in a PGT, in CP terms.

I understand this is very personal to you, but posting the fallout image here was very helpful. The whole point of a forum is to share information, and then dissect, support, or discredit it.

Most people would see the image on a major news website and freak out. I am well within the image's fallout zone but thanks, in part, to your rebuttal I am not freaking out.

[Tinordi]

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/7638

To summarize, this is already the third most dangerous nuclear accident in history. It appears like this may be the beginning of the event not the end. Partial meltdown is already happening. Best case scenario is that the meltdown is contained within the reactor core. Worst case is that the containment unit is breached from an explosion or pressurization inside the unit.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by Flames89

A good description here of what is going on with the Japan reactors:
http://morgsatlarge.wordpress.com/20...lear-reactors/

Excellent, excellent article. Should be required reading for anyone who isn't familiar with nuclear reactors.

EDIT:

Originally Posted by Tinordi

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/7638

To summarize, this is already the third most dangerous nuclear accident in history. It appears like this may be the beginning of the event not the end. Partial meltdown is already happening. Best case scenario is that the meltdown is contained within the reactor core. Worst case is that the containment unit is breached from an explosion or pressurization inside the unit.

This one, while also well written, is much more technical and not as much in simple terms for the average person to fully comprehend. It's also from the other side of the nuclear debate; arguing that we should not rely on nuclear power, while the first article I quoted is definitely from someone who is pro-nuclear.

I guess overall it's important to note that as things stand, there will be no chernobyl...it's just not possible with these reactors and their design.

[Tinordi]

Problems have now spread to reactor unit 2.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/15/wo...r.html?_r=1&hp

With the cooling systems malfunctioning simultaneously at three separate reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station after the powerful earthquake and tsunami, the acute crisis developed late Monday at reactor No. 2 of the plant, where a series of problems thwarted efforts to keep the core of the reactor covered with water — a step considered crucial to preventing the reactor’s containment vessel from exploding and preventing the fuel inside it from melting down.

The plant’s operator, Tokyo Electric Power, said late Monday that repeated efforts to inject seawater into the reactor had failed, causing water levels inside the reactor’s containment vessel to fall and exposing its fuel rods. After what at first appeared to be a successful bid to refill the vessel, water levels again dwindled, this time to critical levels, exposing the rods almost completely, company executives said.

Workers were having difficulty injecting seawater into the reactor because its vents — necessary to release pressure in the containment vessel by allowing radioactive steam to escape — had stopped working properly, they said.

The more time that passes with fuel rods uncovered by water and the pressure inside the containment vessel unvented, the greater the risk that the containment vessel will crack or explode, creating a potentially catastrophic release of radioactive material into the atmosphere — an accident that would be by far the worst to confront the nuclear power industry since the explosion of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant 25 years ago.

[Knut]

^Oh... Pewp.

Hopefully they can find a way to flood it.

[Tinordi]

I don't like to consider myself a fear mongerer. I'm interested from the perspective of the future of the nuclear industry. I had believed that nuclear will factor greatly as we inevitably move to decarbonize our energy systems in light of climate change. But this is really concerning.

With that said, I think the lack of information coming out of this disaster is indicative that things are worse than what they're letting on. Good news would be released immediately the moment they had any. There has been no good news since the disaster started.

I think that these reactors are in the process of melting down. Hopefully meltdown will be contained within the containment unit.

[Superflyer]

Not sure if this has been posted but on this if you drag the line you can see a before and after picture and what devastation was caused.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...R_HP_LO_MST_FB

[TylerSVT]

If fallout happens i hope someone out there creates a Pep Boy so i can kill the mutants

[Oliwa]

http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/1...e-explanation/

It's worth a read

[Mazrim]

That's the same article that Flames89 posted earlier.

[Itse]

Pretty much sums up my thoughts about this.

Decades old reactors of obsolete technology with a poor maintenance history took this beating quite well.

This has so far been a triumph in nuclear safety.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03...iima_analysis/

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

That's the same article that Flames89 posted earlier.

Yup. Although they have moved the article to that new location, so worth posting again. And quoting...

There was and will *not* be any significant release of radioactivity.


By “significant” I mean a level of radiation of more than what you would receive on – say – a long distance flight, or drinking a glass of beer that comes from certain areas with high levels of natural background radiation.

But really, this is the part that's been getting me:

I have been reading every news release on the incident since the earthquake. There has not been one single (!) report that was accurate and free of errors (and part of that problem is also a weakness in the Japanese crisis communication). By “not free of errors” I do not refer to tendentious anti-nuclear journalism – that is quite normal these days. By “not free of errors” I mean blatant errors regarding physics and natural law, as well as gross misinterpretation of facts, due to an obvious lack of fundamental and basic understanding of the way nuclear reactors are build and operated. I have read a 3 page report on CNN where every single paragraph contained an error.

I'm not a physicists, but I do bother to check my basic facts before forming opinions, and with even that... Actually, scratch that.

Most of the time when I've read articles about this nuclear reactor issue, you only need to read the article itself to see that what the reporter is claiming as a possibility is clearly not based on anything, and the eye-catching headlines are more often than not directly contradicted by the actual content of the story.

The state of mass media saddens me, globally and locally (here in Finland).

[Tinordi]

The common theme seems to be that the problem will be contained so long as the containment unit holds. Even if a full meltdown happened in reactor 2 it would likely be contained.

The problem is an unforeseen breach. If the pressure in reactor unit 2 reaches critical then it could blast the reactor cap into the main containment shell. If that happens then all bets are off.

[HPLovecraft]

CNN's news coverage of this catastrophe is making me consider more and more the cessation of my watching that channel altogether, forever. American media is near an all time low in quality. What the hell happened?

[The Yen Man]

I'm not a physicist by any means, so everything I know about this nuclear incident is from reading various articles online and listening to the news. It seems to me like the media is fixated with this whole power plant thing that may not even affect anyone (if the radiation levels are indeed as low as the article that Oliwa posted above), and the real tragedy of thousands of bodies being washed up on shore from the tsunami is being reported as a "oh by the way..." type.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

If the pressure in reactor unit 2 reaches critical then it could blast the reactor cap into the main containment shell. If that happens then all bets are off.

Why do you think that could happen, and what do you base it on?

[photon]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

I don't like to consider myself a fear mongerer. I'm interested from the perspective of the future of the nuclear industry. I had believed that nuclear will factor greatly as we inevitably move to decarbonize our energy systems in light of climate change. But this is really concerning.

And it'll have an impact on the public opinion too, rightly or wrongly. Decisions about future reactors could be impacted based on fear, rather than a good evaluation of these reactors vs. planned reactors.

I still think nuclear is the only option we have right now.

And part of the problem too is it's so easy to fall into the nirvana fallacy. Yes these accidents are terrible, but when people say "no nuclear", people rarely mean "no nuclear instead of x", they just mean no nuclear vs some imaginary world where the electricity will still be there, without considering how many people die from coal, how much radioactive waste and toxic materials are released into the atmosphere burning coal and the impact of that, or forgetting about oil accidents, etc.

Every form of energy will have an impact, every industrial enterprise will cost lives, everything has waste byproducts. The question isn't how good something is compared to no impact, it's how good is it compared to the alternatives.