Slog
News & ArtsMonday, March 14, 2011
Panic / Boom Explosion Reported at Third Fukushima Reactor; "Radiation Tops Legal Limit"
Posted by Goldy on Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 5:02 PM
Sorry to alarm folks, but the BBC is reporting a third explosion at the crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan, this time at the previously intact, but failing Number 2 reactor.
The explosion is feared to have damaged the reactor's pressure-suppression system, Kyodo says. It adds that "radiation tops legal limit" after the explosion.
It was the Number 2 reactor whose fuel rods were twice exposed today, raising fears of a potential meltdown. A Tokyo Electric spokesperson says that the company has started to evacuate staff from the plant, but that 50 workers were staying on. More details as they come.
UPDATE: Initial reports seem bad. The BBC is reporting that "Radioactive materials are feared to be leaking at Fukushima," while Japan's Kyodo News agency says that Tokyo Electric detected "radiation of 8,217 micro sievert per hour, 8 times annual limit."
There are unconfirmed reports that the evacuation zone is about to be expanded to 75 kilometers.
UPDATE KYODO: "FLASH: Fukushima's No. 2 reactor container damaged, radiation leak feared"
UPDATE KYODO: "URGENT: Meltdown possible at Fukushima reactors: Tokyo Electric"
A critical situation called ''meltdown'' in which fuel rods melt and are destroyed is possible at the troubled nuclear plant in Fukushima Prefecture, Tokyo Electric Power Co. said Tuesday.
The cores of the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant's three reactors are believed to have partially melted following Friday's magnitude 9.0 earthquake that hit northeastern and eastern Japan.
I can't be sure, but this sounds like they're distinguishing between the "partial meltdown" believed to have happened and the total meltdown they now say is "possible."
1
Live news conference in Japan via CNN: http://www.cnn.com/video/flashLive/live.…
Japanese media are describing possible impending failure of the "suppression chamber".
Japanese media are describing possible impending failure of the "suppression chamber".
3
I've been pretty temperate so far, but this one is sounding pretty serious. No, it will never be Chernobyl. But it could get pretty bad.
6
The legal limit is pretty low. That is about one rem, and you need a dose of about 50 rems before you start having problems.
8
Nuclear apologists are working overtime!
"Nothing to see here! Don't panic! Move along! Fish that glow make great sushi and are perfectly safe to eat! Explosions are normal operating conditions!"
"Nothing to see here! Don't panic! Move along! Fish that glow make great sushi and are perfectly safe to eat! Explosions are normal operating conditions!"
9
@6 Ah, there we go. Legal limits are based on probabilities but do not constitute a real threshold.
Who says that was instantaneous exposure anyway? Do you not know that dose is proportional to time and that radioactive isotopes cling to other things like people and their clothes?
Who says that was instantaneous exposure anyway? Do you not know that dose is proportional to time and that radioactive isotopes cling to other things like people and their clothes?
10
Giffy @6: are you counting cancer risk? The U.S. National Academies' latest report on low-LET (e.g., gamma) radiation effects predicts excess cancer incidence of ~9 cases per 1000 males of mixed ages exposed to 100 rad, and about 14 cases per 1000 females (1 rad=1 rem for gamma radiation).
The risk is presumed to be roughly proportional to dose.
See Tables 12-6 and 12-7 in http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_i…
The risk is presumed to be roughly proportional to dose.
See Tables 12-6 and 12-7 in http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_i…
11
@7 Yes, please do educate yourself. I'll copy what I put in the other thread here:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collec…
According to this report, the probability of losing containment in these types of containers (Mark I) is about 42% in a core damage situation. Not exactly Six Sigma.
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collec…
According to this report, the probability of losing containment in these types of containers (Mark I) is about 42% in a core damage situation. Not exactly Six Sigma.
12
I for one, don't think Goldy's being alarmist, and neither is Golob. You think these officials are telling the truth? Yeah right---in JAPAN where saving face is what matters. This is the country, after all, that failed to protect its blood supply at the beginning of the AIDS epidemic. (Or have we forgotten all about that?)We will not know how bad this was for years.
I don't have the luxury of being snarky about this. I have a daughter, all of 20, in Tokyo right now and I am desperately trying to get her to leave. To say I am frantic is putting it mildly.
I don't have the luxury of being snarky about this. I have a daughter, all of 20, in Tokyo right now and I am desperately trying to get her to leave. To say I am frantic is putting it mildly.
13
There's no country on Earth better able to handle a disaster like this than Japan. This is about your best case scenario. If you want to sign others up for more of these plants, odds are their meltdown is going to be more chaotic. More mistakes will be made, the planning and evacuation will be more confused, more lives will be lost.
So if you think this thing in Japan sounds like fun, remember. Your meltdown may vary.
So if you think this thing in Japan sounds like fun, remember. Your meltdown may vary.
14
Am I the only one wondering why our State Department hasn't asked Americans to leave? The Brits have, the French and Germans too. Why not us?
15
@10 No. I don't think most of the nuke apologists here account for cancer risk or other illnesses that may be latent for years. They merely go to Wikipedia, look up the radiation exposure rates and proceed to lecture us on how if there's no immediate damage or if we've simply added to the dose of ambient radiation you already get not a big deal at all. Then they decry those who are genuinely concerned as being alarmist or ignorant.
It's probably because they think nukes are carbon neutral, they deify Technology (vs. science), or some other mixture of bullshit like that.
It's probably because they think nukes are carbon neutral, they deify Technology (vs. science), or some other mixture of bullshit like that.
16
Holy shit, AD, I had no idea. You must be freaked. Nevertheless, and despite the fact that we all know damned well that the Japanese government is lying through their teeth, if your daughter's in Tokyo, she's fine. Take a deep breath (or two or three) and relax.
17
Nuclear freakouts are working overtime!
"Everyone panic! Nobody's even measured anything in any fish yet, but they will, and the fish will eat your brains! Nobody's measured any radiation exposure higher than a couple of x-rays or a transatlantic flight yet, but we're all going to grow third arms with eight fingers! Facts are stupid, fear fear fear!"
"Everyone panic! Nobody's even measured anything in any fish yet, but they will, and the fish will eat your brains! Nobody's measured any radiation exposure higher than a couple of x-rays or a transatlantic flight yet, but we're all going to grow third arms with eight fingers! Facts are stupid, fear fear fear!"
20
Obviously we all need to just send some of our World Police over there to arrest them for going above the Radiation Legal Limit.
Or at least issue them a stern warning and a fine of 0.0001 percent of the costs involved.
Or at least issue them a stern warning and a fine of 0.0001 percent of the costs involved.
21
"Nobody's measured any radiation exposure higher than a couple of x-rays or a transatlantic flight yet"
So glad I predicted this bullshit earlier in the thread as it seems to be a favorite rhetorical device for you guys. Btw, flying from London to Japan is about 6 microsieverts per hour in one study. But separate measurements of ~3000 and ~8000 microsieverts per hour were purportedly measured outside of Fukushima recently.
So glad I predicted this bullshit earlier in the thread as it seems to be a favorite rhetorical device for you guys. Btw, flying from London to Japan is about 6 microsieverts per hour in one study. But separate measurements of ~3000 and ~8000 microsieverts per hour were purportedly measured outside of Fukushima recently.
22
@9 This was reported as per hour. There is also a difference between radiation escaping and radioactive material escaping.
@10 At these levels you would have to stay there for a while before that would be a real concern. I mean yeah, you should not go up the chamber and hang around, but there is no evidence yet of significant radiation beyond the immediate area.
@10 At these levels you would have to stay there for a while before that would be a real concern. I mean yeah, you should not go up the chamber and hang around, but there is no evidence yet of significant radiation beyond the immediate area.
23
@21 Those level give you in an hour about what you'd get from a decent length CT.
Over the course of a year you get about 3000 microsieverts just naturally if I remember correctly.
Over the course of a year you get about 3000 microsieverts just naturally if I remember correctly.
24
Thanks FTE, but I'm not so sure Tokyo's safe. They just had a 5.8 there, and supposedly the probability of a quake at 7 or higher in that area in the next few days is 70%. I just want her out until the dust (radioactive or not) has settled. THEN she go back to being an expat college student.
25
@22 We'll have to wait to see. We don't know the actual condition of the containment mechanism and won't know about the condition of the fuel for awhile. Cesium and iodine were detected by the Navy. These are radioactive isotopes--what I would consider to be radioactive fuel/material.
26
@22: I was referencing your statement @6 that effects don't occur until 50 rem. The poor workers left at that plant are currently getting 0.2-0.8 rem (2000-8000 uSv) per hour if you believe the TEPCO numbers. They likely face non-trivial cancer risks unless they can get out of there soon.
That fact and the hazard these workers face must be recognized...but unfortunately this sentiment is too-infrequently uttered by the nuclear power supporters on these blog postings.
That fact and the hazard these workers face must be recognized...but unfortunately this sentiment is too-infrequently uttered by the nuclear power supporters on these blog postings.
27
@23 Which is what I am trying to get through to you that this is not a measured instantaneous dose. It is also not concentrated on one part of the body (which may be advantageous). Your analogies just don't hold up. The dose increases over time with further exposure to the isotopes. This also ignores the fact that CT is not always desireable to have because of...the exposure to years' worth of radiation in a single sitting.
28
AD, I'd bet my life that Tokyo is safe. Those buildings are built to withstand 7. You're just being a Mom. That's cool, I can grok it, but you're worrying about nothing. You raised up a good kid who can take care of herself, and I'm sure she will. And boy, will she ever have some stories to tell your grand-children.
29
@23 I hate to have to do this, but use of CT has been linked to a significant increase in cancer risk years down the line, especially for those who were scanned as children.
http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content…
DNA damage is cumulative over ones lifetime. No reason to panic, but something to keep in mind.
http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content…
DNA damage is cumulative over ones lifetime. No reason to panic, but something to keep in mind.
30
FTE, I'm not so much worried about the buildings---I think the engineering of those is amazing. I just think the whole situation is incredibly unstable. But you're right, she's a smart kid and very resourceful. Thanks.
31
@26 I would hope the workers are wearing protection. Like I said, hanging around right around the reactor without protection would be a bad fucking idea. That is not inconsequential radiation.My only point is that so far it is not a huge amount of radiation, and once you get beyond the immediate area there is no evidence of any significant radiation.
I support nuclear power, but I know it ain't perfect. Like every fucking thing that exists its got its risks and downsides.
@27 What makes you think I don't understand that? Its a per hour dose.
I support nuclear power, but I know it ain't perfect. Like every fucking thing that exists its got its risks and downsides.
@27 What makes you think I don't understand that? Its a per hour dose.
32
@31 Because you make these lame comparisons and argue from improbability as if its valid to do so.
33
@3 Never say never. Mismanagement of this crisis has been on an epic scale. It's now getting to the point where on-site personnel won't be able to get near enough to anything to fix anything without dying from the effort.
34
The elevated spent fuel pools have also been compromised by the explosions.
Israeli dependents and non-essential embassy staff removed several days ago.
Israeli dependents and non-essential embassy staff removed several days ago.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Portland Voters Are Stoopid by Goldy
-
An I-5 Bridge Over the Skagit River Has Collapsed by Paul Constant
-
Why They Break Windows by Unpaid Intern
-
Usually When I'm Sent a Photoshopped Image of a Gun Pointed At Me... by Dan Savage
-
Did You Steal Our Unpaid Intern's Camera? by Goldy
-
Tornado Truthers by Dan Savage
-
The Only Thing More Tragic than a Bridge Collapse Would Be a 10 Cent a Gallon Increase in the Gas Tax by Goldy
-
Star Trek Releases Deleted Scene of Benedict Cumberbatch Showering to Counter Claims of Sexism by Cienna Madrid
-
Boy Scouts Lift Ban on Gay Members by Paul Constant
-
SL Letter of the Day: Not A Prude... And Not Just Not That... by Dan Savage
Stranger Personals
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (34) RSS