Barking_Mad
Non sibi sed omnibus
From BBC
Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster
- Thread starter Barking_Mad
- Start date
Barking_Mad
Non sibi sed omnibus
Im not sure it has any bearing but the plant itself is 40 years old.
elbows
Well-Known Member
There has been 'reassuring bullshit' flying around for many hours now, but it was clear last night (uk time) that the situation was very bad and so Im afraid I am not that shocked to wake up and see that reactor number one appears to have exploded.
Yesterday I said that I had read that the 40 year old reactor was due to close in mere weeks, but before I went to bed I read the opposite, that the Japanese government decided to extend its life by another 10 years back in February.
The weather now becomes as important as any nuclear science in determining the implications for the region. The larger ramifications for humanity, at this delicate moment in our history of energy, may also be profound. Was not many years ago that I remember arguing on this forum with someone about the nuclear accident risk, and only yesterday the BBC had an 'expert' who was pretty much mocking the idea that another chernobyl scale disaster was highly improbably. Well Im sorry, but my chief problem with nuclear safety is that if we think about our own lives, we know there are days where everything goes wrong, where problems all come along at once, and where sods law is in effect. Once in a while a similar collection of fail is bound to affect a nuclear installation, and the stakes are stupidly high.
In this case we have to wait to see not only the extent of the damage & contamination from reactor 1, but also still have to hope that nothing happens to the other 4 or 5 reactors that seem to have been mentioned at the 2 sites in the worrying news of the last day.
Yesterday I said that I had read that the 40 year old reactor was due to close in mere weeks, but before I went to bed I read the opposite, that the Japanese government decided to extend its life by another 10 years back in February.
The weather now becomes as important as any nuclear science in determining the implications for the region. The larger ramifications for humanity, at this delicate moment in our history of energy, may also be profound. Was not many years ago that I remember arguing on this forum with someone about the nuclear accident risk, and only yesterday the BBC had an 'expert' who was pretty much mocking the idea that another chernobyl scale disaster was highly improbably. Well Im sorry, but my chief problem with nuclear safety is that if we think about our own lives, we know there are days where everything goes wrong, where problems all come along at once, and where sods law is in effect. Once in a while a similar collection of fail is bound to affect a nuclear installation, and the stakes are stupidly high.
In this case we have to wait to see not only the extent of the damage & contamination from reactor 1, but also still have to hope that nothing happens to the other 4 or 5 reactors that seem to have been mentioned at the 2 sites in the worrying news of the last day.
Barking_Mad
Non sibi sed omnibus
i cant vouch for the map, but here you go
two sheds
Least noticed poster 2007
I've just recently been reading that the only reason nuclear power looks so cheap is because of all the subsidies they get. That includes all the research done by governments over the years and turned over to private companies, as well as ongoing insurance against nuclear accidents.
Open Sauce
Active Member
Does anyone know any online resources reporting background radiation - google fails me
Whoa. If true.
Undermined by quoting dose in rads: current sources use sieverts (100 rads = 1 sievert). 7.5 sievert is well into radiation sickness territory - see table here (but not inevitable immediate death).
Open Sauce
Active Member
i cant vouch for the map, but here you go
Generally accepted to be fake. 750 rads == mostly fatal btw
Fedayn
Well-Known Member
Open Sauce
Active Member
This is a fallout map for Chernobyl, to give an idea of spread of radiation.
Does anyone know how the size of this reactor compares to the one at Chernobyl?
Chernobyl had a graphite core which burned for a few days leaking radioactive smoke, I think that was one of the reasons for the extent of the fallout
London_Calling
Pleasant and unpatronising
Presumably a back up power generator.
lopsidedbunny
Active Member
lopsidedbunny
Active Member
Wall s and roof of number one been destroyed...
I may be talking complete bollocks here as I've very little knowledge,so anyway isn't the reactor itself suspended from a multi thousand ton steel floor below ground level?The building itself is a containment area where maintenance equipment etc are based and where the hydrogen/oxygen explosion took place.That doesn't mean the reactor itself is seriously damaged although the presence of Caesium suggests it has suffered some damage.
What we're all hoping is that the building isn't a containment area - just a shed on top of the containment area (the top of which is said steel floor) to keep the machinery in it dry.
But if the explosion's as big as reported, something unpleasant is happening inside the containment area. Will that be, er, contained?
lopsidedbunny
Active Member
It said that the reactor is secure...
Open Sauce
Active Member
Thanks.
lopsidedbunny
Active Member
I am looking on Google Map and I can't see what has blown... The image on t.v. of the explosion and the later diagram showing the building being shown blown... the two don't match.. the explosion is near the sea and yet they show a small brown building some way from the sea.. Am I missing something?
I think looking at the google map to me it looks like it the long rectangle building attaching itself to one of the cube type building.. what do you lot think???
Argh.. just seen on t.v. the brown building is the same one as the blown building it's a trick of the light...
turning white building into a brown building and together with the explosion...
Not looking good...
I think looking at the google map to me it looks like it the long rectangle building attaching itself to one of the cube type building.. what do you lot think???
Argh.. just seen on t.v. the brown building is the same one as the blown building it's a trick of the light...
turning white building into a brown building and together with the explosion... Not looking good...
miss minnie
Well-Known Member
.
What amazed me was the shockwave from the explosion. That was one hell of a bang.
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
Similar threads
