quote Originally posted by 8Ball: ...When they talk about how SAFE Nuclear power is, they completely disregard the entire first generation of Nuclear workers. Back then, safety was not such a concern. My grandparents were told, along with all the other workers, they did not need gloves.. The radiation would just wash off, so long as you scrubbed good at the end of your shift...

WTH did they do there? What were their jobs?
I'm trying to wrap my mind around that.

quote Originally posted by phonedawgz: You would rather have these 20 people spend their time at the destroyed nuclear plant? Maybe pitch a tent inside the exclusion zone?

Yes, you're 100% correct. Isn't that where they should be investigating? Or, did the melt down happen in Tokyo?

[This message has been edited by carnut122 (edited 05-24-2011).]

quote Originally posted by phonedawgz: So you are saying you think the 'melted blob' is fissioning at the bottom of the reactor vessel or you think it's fissioning outside of the reactor vessel?

If there really is 192 sv/h in the drywell which is outside of the containment vessel and obviously the pressure vessel, Then yes it seems fission is happening outside the pressure vessel. I question the 192 sv/h though. That is extremely high level radiation.

The term blob was because most people wouldn't know what I was talking about if I said corium.

quote Originally posted by 8Ball: Ok, so here we are almost 2.5 months later... And we still do not know for certain if the reactors are still cooking? And I am supposed to trust Nuclear power? A coal fire would have been out by now, same with gas, natural gas... Hydro.. Well a damn can burst.. That will be a LOT of damage.. But the worst will be over in moments. Solar? I guess a solar array could fall over and kill someone.... Wind... Same thing, guess a turbine could fall over.. flatten a house or two.. but nukes... We COULD build safer models.. but we consistently chose not to. Sure they RARELY have problems.. 3 Major ones to date.. But they are MAJOR!!! Entire chunks of land completely unusable for decades. Heck we still don't know how bad Fukishima will get! And they are saying at least 10 years to clean it up... That is under the assumption that it is done with all the nastiness... Which it seems it may not be. I have lived next to a few Nuke plants my whole life, I have watched my family DIE from Bone Cancer, Lung Cancer, Ovarian Cancer, Prostate Cancer..... I KNOW it is not safe. My grandfather right now is fighting Bone Cancer. He lost his wife to Bone Cancer a few years ago. Where did they get it? Same place everyone else around here did... X10. My grandparents worked at X10 in the beginning. When they talk about how SAFE Nuclear power is, they completely disregard the entire first generation of Nuclear workers. Back then, safety was not such a concern. My grandparents were told, along with all the other workers, they did not need gloves.. The radiation would just wash off, so long as you scrubbed good at the end of your shift. At least they learned a lesson from all the workers who have died.. and are still dieing. Far more care is taken to protect the workers, but still these deaths are not counted in their safety figures. What can I do about it? Nothing. But when I am asked if I want to build more Nukes... the answer will always be NO!

Yes the actual scientists have a good idea what is really happening. The fear mongers will tell you anything however.

So considering everyone by X10 is dieing from cancer there must be hundreds of accredited studies of this right? My quick google search turned up zero.

Here are two things that you should consider.

100% of the people who work in and live in a nuclear power plant WILL die.

People who don't live near or work in nuclear power plants somehow also do die of cancer.

Well for something that has never happened.. X10 has spent an AWFUL lot of money paying for medical treatments and giving everyone $200k who was affected... so long as they were full time employees. Contract workers got no settlement.

Where is the proof? I do not know what the lawsuit was or where a document on it is. The proof is in my dead relatives and the payments made to them. What did my grandparents do? I am not 100% certain, but I think they worked with or around Beryllium. My grandmother worked their during WWII and my grandfather worked their immediately following the war. When my grandfather gets back from Florida, I will try to remember to ask him.

Tell you what, you want proof it has happened.. Here, this is from our local paper..

http://blogs.knoxnews.com/m..._nuclear_worker.html

Do NOT tell me that my Grandmother AND my grandfather, who both worked at a nuclear plant.. just HAPPENED to contract the same form of Bone Cancer...
AND if that WAS the case, the government would not be paying out money left and right.

[This message has been edited by 8Ball (edited 05-24-2011).]

quote Originally posted by 8Ball: Well for something that has never happened.. X10 has spent an AWFUL lot of money paying for medical treatments and giving everyone $200k who was affected... so long as they were full time employees. Contract workers got no settlement. Where is the proof? I do not know what the lawsuit was or where a document on it is. The proof is in my dead relatives and the payments made to them. What did my grandparents do? I am not 100% certain, but I think they worked with or around Beryllium. My grandmother worked their during WWII and my grandfather worked their immediately following the war. When my grandfather gets back from Florida, I will try to remember to ask him. Tell you what, you want proof it has happened.. Here, this is from our local paper.. http://blogs.knoxnews.com/m..._nuclear_worker.html Do NOT tell me that my Grandmother AND my grandfather, who both worked at a nuclear plant.. just HAPPENED to contract the same form of Bone Cancer... AND if that WAS the case, the government would not be paying out money left and right.

Interesting link.
You may find this of interest.
http://www.nyu.edu/classes/jaeger/beryllium.htm

Beryllium's main health effect is with the respiratory system. Lung cancer was mentioned, but I believe that's the culmination of advanced respiratory disease caused by beryllium inhalation.
Your link mentioned a white dust. That sounds like beryllium. The oxide is pure white in color.
In my industry, it's used as an electrically non-conductive heat sink/insulator. Used for transistor amplifier substrates and transmitter tube base assemblies.

Of course, your grandparents could have been exposed to any number of other things in addition to Beryllium.

I would be interested in hearing what your grandfather has to say.

I talk to him about it from time to time, but he never talks much on it at a time. It is a very hard subject for him, since his wife died.
My grandfather I know held many different jobs over the years. He eventually became an electrician with TVA and in 1977, he was burned in an accident while working on 30k volt lines from a bucket truck. That accident burned him on 99% of his body and he spent almost 2 years in the hospital having skin grafts and breeching done. HE is a VERY strong man. After the accident, TVA gave him a job for life back at the X-10, Y-12 and K-25 facilities. He was in charge of one of the electrical shops and spent his last few years, mostly rewinding motors and writing the tests that they still give to electricians on site.

As for honesty, if My grandfather says something is so.. It is so. There is no reason to even doubt him. The man has never told anything other than a little white lie in his life. Something like.. does this dress make me look fat? No. My grandfather does not believe in being dishonest. In anything. I will try to take down some notes next time I talk to him for you guys.

quote Originally posted by phonedawgz: Yes the actual scientists have a good idea what is really happening. The fear mongers will tell you anything however.

So where's the information going wrong, the errors being introduced? The stories from TEPCO have been changing almost daily, does that mean that there aren't any scientists there? That the TEPCO execs and PR people are just making things up? Or does it mean the scientists are getting it wrong repeatedly? Their "good idea" seems to be evolving (or revolving, or devolving) fairly often these last 76 days.

If the scientists can't get a good idea what's happening with global warming, why should they suddenly get a good idea here? Both or neither.

The scientists have a good idea if the reactors are "still cooking".

Where this all goes wrong?

The number one thing is when a release comes out with wording like "we are acting on a worst case scenario" and people take that to mean there is a worst case scenario. When people repeat the stories they drop the maybes and the possibilities.

The second thing is having reporters who don't know anything about nuclear power generation translate technical information.

The third is scare mongering among reporters to make the story sound better. Reporting on radiation levels many times comes off as total scare mongering. "1,000 times normal readings" sounds terrible until you realize radiation is best understood using a logarithmic scale. "OMG people in Seattle have measured higher radiation levels" - Yes we have very sensitive measuring equipment.

The forth is the idea that somehow we have no idea how radiation affects the human body.

The difference between Fukushima and Global Warming is we have much more data on radiation and how it affects us. Global warming is based on extrapolations of existing data into uncharted territory.

quote If the scientists can't get a good idea what's happening with global warming, why should they suddenly get a good idea here? Both or neither.

Seriously Jazzman? I expect a better argument than this from you.

[This message has been edited by phonedawgz (edited 05-25-2011).]

Thanks Phonedawgz.
My Uncle Rudy Paluzelle, was one of the scientists responsible for the creation of the first Atom bomb. He was very torn by this fact, but he knew that he did what had to be done. As did the others.

quote Originally posted by 8Ball: I talk to him about it from time to time, but he never talks much on it at a time. It is a very hard subject for him, since his wife died. ...I will try to take down some notes next time I talk to him for you guys.

Don't press him. I certainly don't want to open old wounds.
Stuff like this (the nuclear industry and that part of our history, in general) fascinates me, but it's not worth dredging up stuff that still causes him pain.

quote Originally posted by phonedawgz: The scientists have a good idea if the reactors are "still cooking".

Hopefully. As I stated before, the information coming out of TEPCO seems to be in flux still.

quote Originally posted by phonedawgz: Where this all goes wrong? The number one thing is when a release comes out with wording like "we are acting on a worst case scenario" and people take that to mean there is a worst case scenario. When people repeat the stories they drop the maybes and the possibilities.

In the Fukushima disaster it has been 180 degrees exactly opposite of this. It took two months for TEPCO to finally acknowledge the worst case scenario of the cores at all three reactors fully melted down. It seems that over the last 76 days there have been repeated TEPCO releases saying things are worse than they originally thought.

Backwards...

quote Originally posted by phonedawgz: The second thing is having reporters who don't know anything about nuclear power generation translate technical information.

If everyone was a nuclear physisist we wouldn't need reporters. The job of a reporter is to find out the truth and report it in a manner that the generally public can understand. On the whole they do a pretty good job of it. Your particular political ideology has as one of its underpinnins that the media is somehow swayed or biased, and because of that you are unable to see that for the most part reporters are good decent people trying to get the real facts out to the public.

quote Originally posted by phonedawgz: The third is scare mongering among reporters to make the story sound better. Reporting on radiation levels many times comes off as total scare mongering. "1,000 times normal readings" sounds terrible until you realize radiation is best understood using a logarithmic scale. "OMG people in Seattle have measured higher radiation levels" - Yes we have very sensitive measuring equipment.

This doesn't make sense, can't tell how you're supporting your statement "... scare mongering among reporters to make the story sound better." A 1,000 times higher reading is still 1,000 times higher, no matter what scale you want to use, unless there's some new math I'm not aware of.

quote Originally posted by phonedawgz: The forth is the idea that somehow we have no idea how radiation affects the human body.

We have a lot of data on radiation effects on the body in the short to mid-term, but because wide-scale worst-case nuclear power accident results have only been around for 25 -50 years we're fairly limited in data in that context. Your claim that the "other side" (whatever that is) says "...somehow we have no idea how radiation affects the human body" is exaggeration, pure and simple.

quote Originally posted by phonedawgz: The difference between Fukushima and Global Warming is we have much more data on radiation and how it affects us. Global warming is based on extrapolations of existing data into uncharted territory.

That existing data encompasses millions of datapoints in the historical as well as geologic record. You can choose to ignore it or pretend it doesn't exist, but your opinion doesn't change the fact of its existence. We have less information about long-term radiation effects on humans than we have about the climate, if for no other reason than the climate has been studied using scientific methods for centuries longer than radiation effects have been. Heck, nobody even knew about the concept of radiation until 1896 when it was discovered by Becquerel (yes, that Becquerel).

quote Originally posted by phonedawgz: Seriously Jazzman? I expect a better argument than this from you.

I've been consistently presenting better arguments than you have, and given your ideology I actually understand that your ideas and concepts are fixed in stone and not subject to modification or alteration, or evolution. Stuck in the stone age, essentially. No matter, it's all academic for you and I as the 64,000 people in Fukushima are the ones living with the truth, with the radioactive facts on the ground, so to speak. Hopefully, for the next few thousand years there are no more nuclear accidents like Fukushima, Chernobyl, Kyshtym. Our 50 years of research, technological advancement, and perfection in engineering should have no problem ensuring that the nuclear industry will be 100% safe for a time period longer than the Roman Empire existed, for longer than Homo Sapiens has existed. Ri-i-i-g-h-t-t-t-t...

quote Originally posted by Raydar: Don't press him. I certainly don't want to open old wounds. Stuff like this (the nuclear industry and that part of our history, in general) fascinates me, but it's not worth dredging up stuff that still causes him pain.

I still have questions for him, trying to learn all I can while he is still here.
So when I find him in a good mood, I will ask him some more about it all. My Aunt may also know some of the details, so I can press her for info.

http://www.business-standar...te-graveyard/436912/
Fukushima set to become Nuclear waste graveyard
Bloomberg / Tokyo May 27, 2011, 0:01 IST

Japan’s atomic energy specialists are discussing a plan to make the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant a storage site for radioactive waste from the crippled station run by Tokyo Electric Power Co.

The Atomic Energy Society of Japan is studying the proposal, which would cost tens of billions of dollars, Muneo Morokuzu, a professor of energy and environmental public policy at the University of Tokyo, said in an interview yesterday. The society makes policy recommendations to the government.

Click here to visit SME Buzz


Also Read

Related Stories

News Now
- Radioactive leak into sea was 20,000 times above limit
- Japan makes 20-km no-go nuclear zone
- Sunita Narain: Wanted: New solutions to the energy puzzle
- Extremely high radiation reading at reactor was wrong: Operator
- Tepco picks company man to fix culture of complicity
- Japan's Tepco says shutdown plan on schedule

Also Read

Related Stories

News Now

- Markets end near day's high, oil & gas shares rally
- Sebi bars Kaleidoscope Films from dealing in stocks
- IITs get thumbs up from Microsoft's Steve Ballmer
- SBI to submit revised proposal on rights issue in June
- 2G case: Accused, relatives asked not to disturb proceedings
More
“We are involved in intense talks on the cleanup of the Daiichi plant and construction of nuclear waste storage facilities at the site is one option,” said Morokuzu.

Radiation leaks from the three reactor meltdowns at Fukushima rank the accident on the same scale as the Chernobyl disaster in 1986. The 20-kilometre exclusion zone around Fukushima has forced the evacuation of 50,000 households, extermination of livestock and disposal of crops, drawing comparisons with the Ukraine plant.

Areas up to 30 kilometres from Chernobyl remain “a dead zone,” Mykola Kulinich, Ukraine’s ambassador to Japan, said in Tokyo on April 26, the 25th anniversary of the disaster.

Waste Proposal
Tokyo Electric shares have plunged 85 per cent since the day before the March 11 earthquake and tsunami hit the Fukushima plant. The stock today rose 2.2 per cent to 322 yen in Tokyo.

Local authorities in Fukushima, 220 kilometres (137 miles) north of Tokyo, aren’t aware of a proposal to make the Daiichi station a nuclear waste storage site, said Hisashi Katayose, an official at the prefectural government’s disaster task force. He declined to comment.

Building storage for radioactive waste at Fukushima could take at least 10 years, said Morokuzu, one of 50 people on a cleanup panel that includes observers from Tokyo Electric and the Trade Ministry. Tokyo Electric would need five years to complete decontamination of the reactors, which includes removal of hydrogen to prevent explosions, he said.

Japan’s three storage facilities for highly radioactive waste are at Rokkasho, at the northern tip of the country’s largest island of Honshu, and a nearby site at Sekinehama. The third site is at Tokaimura in Ibaraki prefecture, near Tokyo.

Intermediary Use
As the sites are for intermediary use, the nation is still searching for a deep underground storage site for the waste, according to the World Nuclear Association. The selection is due to be completed by 2025 and become operational from 2035, the London-based association says.

About 90 per cent of the world’s 270,000 tons in used nuclear fuel is stored at reactor sites, mostly in ponds of seven metres deep, such as those exposed at the Fukushima site when hydrogen explosions blew the roofs off reactor buildings.

“Intensive discussion is needed before reaching any conclusion on what to do with the Fukushima site,” said Tetsuo Ito, the head of the Atomic Energy Research Institute at Kinki University in western Japan. “This is one that the government should take responsibility for and make the final decision.”

In the past two weeks, the utility known as Tepco has said fuel rods in reactors 1, 2 and 3 had almost complete meltdowns. That matches US assessments in the early days of the crisis that indicated damage to the station was more severe than Tepco officials suggested.

“Most of the fuel rods melted and damage to the cores is most severe in the Number 1 reactor, followed by the Number 3 and then Number 2,” spokesman Junichi Matsumoto said in Tokyo May 24.

The utility on April 17 set out a so-called road map to end the crisis in six to nine months. Tepco said it expects to achieve a sustained drop in radiation levels at the plant within three months, followed by a cold shutdown, where core reactor temperatures fall below 100 degrees Celsius.

They want to build a permanent nuclear waste storage facility on the shore of an island in a major earthquake zone with a history of volcanism and monster-class tsunamis?

This is becoming surreal...

[This message has been edited by JazzMan (edited 05-27-2011).]

Wolf Creek Nuclear Plant In 'Tornado Alley' Not Fully Twister-Proof

By DINA CAPPIELLO and MATTHEW DALY 05/26/11 06:50 PM ET AP
React
Inspiring
Enlightening
Infuriating
Scary
Helpful
Amazing
Innovative
Adorable
Follow
Energy , Nuclear Plant Tornado , Nuclear Tornado , Tornado Alley , Tornado Alley Nuclear , Tornado Alley Nuclear Plant , Tornado Alley Nuke Plant , Tornado Nuclear , Tornado Nuke Plant , Wolf Creek Nuclear , Wolf Creek Nuclear Plant , Wolf Creek Nuclear Tornado , Wolf Creek Tornado , Green News
share this story
74
33
22
37
Get Green Alerts
Sign Up
Submit this story

WASHINGTON -- The closest nuclear power plant to tornado-ravaged Joplin, Mo., was singled out weeks before the storm for being vulnerable to twisters.

Inspections triggered by Japan's nuclear crisis found that some emergency equipment and storage sites at the Wolf Creek nuclear plant in southeastern Kansas might not survive a tornado.

Specifically, plant operators and federal inspectors said Wolf Creek did not secure equipment and vehicles needed to fight fires, retrieve fuel for emergency generators and resupply water to keep nuclear fuel cool as it's being moved.

Despite these findings, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission concluded that the plant met requirements put in place after the Sept. 11 attacks that are designed to keep the nuclear fuel cool and containment structures intact during an emergency.

Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corp., which runs the facility about 150 miles northwest of Joplin, said it would take action to correct the problems.

"The issues affected only one of several (emergency) procedures, so we continue to conclude Wolf Creek meets requirements, the same conclusion we've reached for every U.S. plant," said Scott Burnell, a NRC spokesman.

Wolf Creek, until recently, was one of three nuclear plants placed on a federal watch list in March for safety-related issues.

David Lochbaum, a former nuclear plant engineer who now works on nuclear safety for the advocacy group Union of Concerned Scientists, said the equipment that a tornado could disable is the "backup of backups," but that potential should raise concern nonetheless.

"It's kind of nuclear safety 101," Lochbaum said. "It's kind of stupid for it to be there, where it could help with a tornado, and a tornado takes it out."

Already this year, tornadoes have knocked out power to nuclear power plants in Alabama and Virginia, exposing vulnerabilities.

At Browns Ferry in Alabama, storms disabled sirens, meaning that police and emergency personnel would have had to use telephones and loudspeakers in a crisis.

At the Surry Power Station in Virginia, documents obtained by The Associated Press show that a tornado badly damaged a fuel tanker used to refuel a backup generator.

Those instances, along with the situation at Wolf Creek, highlight a larger problem at the nation's 104 nuclear reactors: While reactors and safety systems are designed to withstand a worst-case earthquake, flood, or tornado, that doesn't necessarily mean all emergency equipment or the buildings that house such equipment are disaster proof.

Wolf Creek's location in Tornado Alley means that it was designed to handle the maximum tornadoes possible for the United States, with wind speeds up to 360 miles per hour and a maximum rotational speed of 290 miles per hour.

But its fire truck is parked in a sheet-metal building "not protected from seismic or severe weather events," according to the NRC inspection conducted after the Japanese disaster.

Jenny Hageman, a spokeswoman for the plant, said there are other options besides on-site equipment for dealing with fires.

"We are absolutely protected from a tornado," Hageman said. "Is everything protected from a tornado on this job site? No. But we protect the critical elements."

The NRC's post-Japan inspections found numerous other instances where U.S. nuclear plants kept equipment needed to fight fires or to cope with a loss of electrical power in places that a flood could overwhelm or an earthquake could damage.

What sets Wolf Creek apart is that it is at much greater risk of being struck by a tornado than other plants are from natural disasters.

Since 1985, when the Wolf Creek plant came on line, six tornadoes have touched down in Coffey County, where the plane is located, according to the National Climatic Data Center. All of those twisters were minor, and caused no injuries or deaths.

Over that same time period, the National Weather Service issued 23 tornado warnings in the county.

"Before Joplin, we had a tornado in the county next to us that ripped up the city of Redding," said Coffey County emergency management coordinator Russel Stukey. Stukey expressed skepticism about the NRC's findings, but acknowledged that "a nuclear plant in Kansas should be prepared for a tornado. I wouldn't go as far to say Wolf Creek is not."

Despite the close calls, including the recent series of deadly tornadoes in the South and Midwest, a twister never has struck Wolf Creek, Stukey said.

NRC records show that those nuclear plants hit by a tornado have emerged largely unscathed:

_In June 2010, a tornado ripped off siding off a building housing emergency equipment and knocked out one of two power sources at the Fermi nuclear plant in Michigan. An alert was declared, and the plant was stabilized.

_Tornadoes struck the Quad Cities nuclear power plant in northwestern Illinois in 1990 and 1996. In 1990, the plant's security fence was damaged and the roof of one building blew onto a duct that connects the radioactive waste processing area to a venting stack. No radioactive gas was released. Six years later, a tornado damaged one of the unit's secondary containment structures, leading to an alert and shutdown.

_In 1998, a tornado hit the Davis-Besse plant in Ohio, causing significant damage to electrical distribution systems, sirens and other "unfortified" structures, according to the NRC. There were no adverse effects to public health and safety.

Similar problems occurred more recently at nuclear power plants in Virginia and Alabama in the path of tornadoes. After the twister at the Surry plant damaged a tanker truck used to fuel a backup generator, state officials were unsure whether the generator it supplied was needed to run emergency systems.

The utility called state officials seeking help, and a contractor supplied the plant with a fuel tanker.

"I personally do not want to be that close to disaster again," said Harry Colestock, the director of operations for the Virginia Department of Emergency Management, in an email directing his staff to hold a follow-up meeting with the company, Dominion.

Dominon spokesman Jim Norvelle said an older fuel tanker was at the plant, but utility workers did not believe it could navigate the debris left by the tornado. The company is evaluating how it stores equipment and has agreed to supply a liaison to the state's emergency operations center upon request.

Just over a week later, tornadoes forced the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant near Athens, Ala., to shut down after severe weather wrecked transmission lines and created problems for a plant in Tennessee.

The storms also disrupted siren systems that alert residents living near nuclear power plants to trouble. The sirens, which are connected to the electrical grid, failed during a blackout. Tennessee Valley Authority officials said they are in the process of adding sirens that have battery backups, meaning they would work even during a power outage.

At one point, only 12 of 100 sirens in the communities surrounding Browns Ferry worked. A similar problem occurred in the region surrounding the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant in Soddy-Daisy, Tenn., which lost 36 of its 108 sirens. If there had been a crisis at either nuclear plant, emergency officials would have driven vehicles with loudspeakers through affected areas to alert residents.

___

Associated Press writer Ray Henry in Atlanta contributed to this report.

Typhoon Strengthens, May Hit Fukushima Nuke Plant
By Aaron Sheldrick and Tsuyoshi Inajima - May 27, 2011 1:56 AM CT

*
*
* inShare1
* More
o Business Exchange
o Buzz up!
o Digg
* Print
* Email

Typhoon Songda strengthened to a supertyphoon after battering the Philippines and headed for Japan on a track that may pass over the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant by May 30, a U.S. monitoring center said.

Songda’s winds increased to 241 kilometers (150 miles) per hour from 213 kph yesterday, the U.S. Navy Joint Typhoon Warning Center said on its website. The storm’s eye was about 240 kilometers east of Aparri in the Philippines at 8 a.m. today, the center said. Songda was moving northwest at 19 kph and is forecast to turn to the northeast and cross the island of Okinawa by 9 p.m. local time tomorrow before heading for Honshu.

The center’s forecast graphic includes a possible path over Fukushima Dai-Ichi plant, which has been spewing radiation since March 11 when an earthquake and tsunami knocked out cooling systems. Three of six reactor buildings have no roof after explosions blew them off, exposing spent fuel pools and containment chambers that are leaking.

“We are still considering typhoon measures and can’t announce detailed plans yet,” Takeo Iwamoto, a spokesman at Tokyo Electric Power Co., said by phone when asked about the storm. The utility known as Tepco plans to complete the installation of covers for the buildings by October, he said.

Japan is regularly buffeted by typhoons and tropical storms during the northwestern Pacific cyclone season. In 2004, eight cyclones passed over or skirted the country’s Tohoku region, where the Fukushima station is located, according to the Japan Meteorological Agency. The earliest was in May that year. The eyes of two storms passed within 300 kilometers of Tohoku last year, the agency’s data show.
Fourth Storm

Songda, the name of a branch of the Red River in Vietnam, is the fourth storm to form over northwest Pacific this year. The storm lashed the Philippines as it passed the eastern seaboard, leaving one person dead, according to the country’s disaster council. Songda prompted evacuations of coastal areas and caused flooding that jammed traffic and stranded travelers.

Damage to crops was “very minimal” as most had been harvested before the storm passed, Philippine Agriculture Secretary Proceso Alcala told reporters today.

The U.S. Navy Joint Typhoon Warning Center classifies storms as supertyphoons when their maximum sustain winds reach at least 150 miles per hour, according to the Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory.

To contact the reporters on this story: Tsuyoshi Inajima in Tokyo at tinajima@bloomberg.net; Aaron Sheldrick in Tokyo at asheldrick@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Amit Prakash at aprakash1@bloomberg.net

http://www.bloomberg.com/ne...hima-nuke-plant.html

Oh that's just great.

quote Originally posted by carnut122: I don't know that they have a choice. All of the other choices were given back aboard the USS Missouri in 1945.

At least build up on top of a mountain or somewhere a tsunami and rising ocean levels can't get to it. Geez, I'm not a nucular engineeer and even I kin figure that one out....

quote Originally posted by JazzMan: At least build up on top of a mountain or somewhere a tsunami and rising ocean levels can't get to it. Geez, I'm not a nucular engineeer and even I kin figure that one out....

I guess the logic is the fukushima site will be irradiated for a long time, so might as well use it, rather than contaminating two places.

http://www.reuters.com/arti...dUSTRE74T4KE20110530
By Kiyoshi Takenaka, Shinichi Saoshiro and Kevin Krolicki

TOKYO | Mon May 30, 2011 2:32pm EDT

TOKYO (Reuters) - Two workers at Japan's crippled nuclear power plant may have exceeded the government's radiation exposure limit, the plant operator said, adding to concerns about health risks for those fighting the world's worst nuclear disaster in 25 years.

If confirmed, it would mark the first cases of excess radiation exposure among the hundreds of emergency workers who have struggled to bring Tokyo Electric Power Co's Fukushima Daiichi plant under control after it was wrecked by a massive earthquake and tsunami two and half months ago.

Both the government and the utility, Tepco, have come under fire for not disclosing enough information about radiation doses and the risks. Some experts question whether workers have been fully informed of the potential dangers.

"The problem is that too much policy has been focused on protecting Tepco and not enough on the public," said Kiyoshi Kurakawa, a medical doctor who served as a science adviser to the government from 2006-2008.

Measurements of external exposure and radioactive iodine in their thyroid glands suggested that the two male workers, one in his 30s and the other in his 40s, had surpassed the maximum set by the government of 250 millisieverts over the life of the control and clean-up project.

Exposure to 250 millisieverts of radiation is equivalent to more than 400 stomach X-rays. That is below the level for acute radiation sickness. Experts are divided about the long term health effect but agree higher levels of exposure correspond to higher risk of cancers.

The government relaxed its upper limit for exposure for the Fukushima disaster, allowing 250 millisieverts for male emergency workers compared with the conventional maximum of 100 millisieverts for nuclear-related emergencies.

Health checks about a week ago did not reveal any abnormalities in the two workers. More detailed exams are planned, Tepco said.

Japan's nuclear regulator pressed Tokyo Electric for more information and said it would monitor the situation to ensure adherence to government guidelines.

The two worked in the central control room for the plant's No.3 and No.4 reactors and conducted inspections of the plant on March 11 after a magnitude 9.0 earthquake and tsunami disabled its cooling systems and triggered fuel meltdowns in three reactors. They had been stationed at the plant until recently.

quote Originally posted by dennis_6: I guess the logic is the fukushima site will be irradiated for a long time, so might as well use it, rather than contaminating two places.

I'm thinking that they should adopt a more long-term view. In that view, another earthquake this size is 100% likely, and a tsunami at least as powerful as this one is 100% likely. In that view, a very valid one, building/storing nuclear generating and waste facilities on the shore are not good ideas.

quote Originally posted by JazzMan: Regarding lifetime exposures: When a worker reaches the lifetime exposure limit, who pays their salary until their retirement? Do they get the kinds of raises in pay and benefits one would expect of any worker during their remaining career?

Does it also mean: no more x-rays, flying in airplanes, microwave cooking, etc? I know it's a totally ridiculous question, but lifetime exposure is also a ridiculous concept; as in how would you know at what point you crossed over into a malignancy?

Tropical Storm Songda Hits Japan Region Still Reeling From Earthquake and Tsunami

Heavy rains and strong winds battered the northeast coast of Japan Monday as Tropical Storm Songda touched down on a region still reeling from a massive earthquake and tsunami, triggering mudslides and widespread flooding that forced the operator of the crippled Fukushima nuclear reactor to suspend outdoor work.

The storm was downgraded from a typhoon Sunday afternoon but has still brought significant rain and winds. In the city of Ishinomaki in the Miyagi prefecture, the Japan Meteorological Agency said winds clocked in at more than 70 miles per hour.

For residents of the Tohoku region, the area hardest hit by the March 11 earthquake -- Japan's worst natural disaster -- there was an eerie sense of deja vu. The magnitude 9.0 quake -- and the tsunami that followed -- killed more than 240,000 people and triggered a nuclear crisis at the Fukushima Dai-ichi Power plant, where the reactors remain unstable nearly three months later. On Monday, powerful waves spilled onto the port of Miyako as people watched in awe. In the town of Minamisanriku, the Japanese Coast Guard was called in once again to airlift two men stranded at sea when the engine for their boat died.
PHOTO: People walk in heavy rains in Minamisanriku, Miyagi, Japan.
Sankei/Getty Images
People trek through heavy rains in ... View Full Size
PHOTO: People walk in heavy rains in Minamisanriku, Miyagi, Japan.
Sankei/Getty Images
People trek through heavy rains in Minamisanriku, Miyagi, Japan, May 29, 2011.
Japan Earthquake: A Look at Sendai Watch Video
Earthquake Hits Japanese Supermarket Watch Video
Japan Earthquake's Economic Impact Watch Video

East Japan Railway Co. suspended train services on the Tohoku line, prompting long queues for taxis outside train stations.

In neighborhoods throughout the region, heavy rain turned roads into rising rivers. High water levels stranded cars on the roads, and residents were seen banding together to push drivers to safety. For cities such as Ishinomaki and Sendai, flooding has been a constant occurrence since the March 11 earthquake, an earthquake so powerful, it pulled Japan out to the ocean and lowered it. The elevation in Ishinomaki alone dropped nearly 3 feet.

The result has been daily flooding at high tide. Residents had urged the city to build an embankment to keep the water out as the rainy season approached, but nearly three months after the disasters, resources have been stretched thin. Survivors with homes are considered the fortunate ones.

Monday afternoon, in the first major storm of the season, water washed out roads in Ishinomaki neighborhoods, adding to the misery.

"I feel like we're living in the middle of the ocean," an elderly woman told broadcaster NHK. "I wonder how much longer this will last."

Tropical Storm Songda forced Fukushima plant operator Tepco to suspend outside work for the day, amid worries about safety. Days earlier, the utility said it was not properly prepared for the impending storm. Workers sprayed "anti-scatterings," such as synthetic resin, around the crippled reactors to prevent the winds from spreading radioactive material, an increasing concern as Japan enters the height of the rainy season.

Rising levels of radioactive water is also a source of anxiety. Tepco said it would monitor water levels inside the reactors closely to make sure water doesn't spill out as a result of rainwater seeping in. Tepco said the water in the basement of one of the six reactor buildings rose by nearly 8 inches in 24 hours -- to nearly 20 feet.

http://abcnews.go.com/Inter...ma/story?id=13720225

Pretty sure the 240k death toll is a typo, previous reports list it at 24k.

quote Originally posted by JazzMan: Regarding lifetime exposures: When a worker reaches the lifetime exposure limit, who pays their salary until their retirement? Do they get the kinds of raises in pay and benefits one would expect of any worker during their remaining career?

They aren't disabled, they just have reached their government imposed limit of workplace radiation exposure.

First - it doesn't happen to the skilled people. They monitor their exposure closely

Second - The exposure limits are for this event, not lifetime limits.

quote Originally posted by phonedawgz: They aren't disabled, they just have reached their government imposed limit of workplace radiation exposure. First - it doesn't happen to the skilled people. They monitor their exposure closely Second - The exposure limits are for this event, not lifetime limits.

So there aren't any lifetime limits on radiation exposure then? Hmmm. For some reason I thought I remembered hearing that phrase somewhere or other...

Oh, it doesn't happen to the skilled people, what about the "unskilled" people?

If there's not a lifetime exposure limit, when the workers hit the limit set for this event what happens? Do they just keep working anyway? Getting a paycheck?

There are lifetime limits.

If a worker has been exposed to his workplace limit either annually or lifetime he can no longer work in the 'hot' areas of the plant. They could either reassign him to working in non-hot areas or he could possibly lose his job. It is both the employers and the workers responsibility to limit their exposure to radiation. Yes if you lose your job, you also lose your paycheck. No they can not just keep on working in the hot areas of the plant if they have reached the governmental limits.

A skilled worker at a nuclear plant knows this and limits his exposure. If an employee has been careless and has reached his exposure limits, that employee becomes much less useful to his employer.

Sometimes the plant will hire 'jumpers' to work in a higher radiation level area for shorter periods of time. They may receive their annual dose limit in just a relatively short period of time.

I know you like the idea of the employer being the bad guy, and the idea that the employee has no responsibility. In the real world, both have the responsibility of limiting the employee's exposure.

[This message has been edited by phonedawgz (edited 06-02-2011).]

quote Originally posted by phonedawgz: I know you like the idea of the employer being the bad guy, and the idea that the employee has no responsibility.

This statement about me is untrue.

Assuming an employee has some innate ability to sense his accumulative radiation exposure on a real-time basis (how do they tell, anyway? How does a dosimeter work?) does that employee have the legal right to refuse to be exposed to radiation (known or otherwise) with no career or employment repercussions? In a disaster like Fukushima where apparently many if not all radiation measuring instruments have been and may still be malfunctioning, how does an employee "take responsibility" for ensuring he (or she) isn't exposed? Since one of the aspects of a disaster like this is that knowledge of what is radiating and where is lacking, there will almost certainly be incidents of unaccounted-for irradiation of employees, especially if dosimeters are not available. How is that accounted for WRT lifetime and event exposure limits.

Wastewater rises, fears mount

The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant is struggling to remove pools of highly radioactive wastewater as fears of an overflow get more intense.

Tokyo Electric Power Company says wastewater levels rose around 6 centimeters inside the No.2 reactor turbine building, and in its utility tunnel, during the 24-hour period through Thursday morning.

Increases were also seen inside the No.3 and 4 reactor turbine buildings.

The water level in the utility tunnel is now just 28 centimeters from the surface outside the No.2 reactor, and 24 centimeters from the surface outside the No.3 reactor.
Tokyo Electric plans to start using a water purifier by the middle of this month. But as an emergency measure it's preparing to remove wastewater pooled inside the No.3 reactor turbine building to its turbine condenser.

The utility is also considering using 2 additional buildings inside the compound as storage.

The level of wastewater inside the No.1 reactor building dropped 8 centimeters on Thursday morning from Wednesday, unlike the other facilities.

Tokyo Electric is measuring the level of radiation in groundwater near the plant to check for possible wastewater leakage.

Thursday, June 02, 2011 13:03 +0900 (JST)

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/02_18.html

Water dilemma at damaged Japan nuke plant
http://www.upi.com/Science_.../UPI-45141307130984/

Fukushima's No. 1 reactor building radiation level rises

TOKYO, June 4, Kyodo

The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant said Saturday it has detected radiation of up to 4,000 millisieverts per hour at the building housing the troubled No. 1 reactor -- the highest reading taken in the air inside the complex.

Tokyo Electric Power Co. also suggested the possibility that the March 12 hydrogen explosion at the plant's No. 1 unit may have been caused by a reverse flow of steam intended to be sent into the air through the exhaust stack after radioactive gases were vented.

The high amount of radiation was observed at the southeast corner of the building during measurement taken using a robot Friday. Steam was seen rising from an opening in the floor for a pipe that runs through the building, but TEPCO said it found no damage to the pipe.
http://english.kyodonews.jp...s/2011/06/95241.html

4000 milisieverts = 400 rads, and that is pretty dangerous.

[This message has been edited by dennis_6 (edited 06-04-2011).]