I’ve said many times, the reports of deaths and radiation burns were not true. Nobody has died, nobody is in a hospital, there have been no signs of radiation exposure, everybody is just fine. The Fukushima 50, those brave men who stayed behind, not a single one was hurt.
How many times do you need to hear this?
The two workers who are missing? For the last 11 days? They are probably sipping tea in a secret location. Who knows?
There are now 1000 people working at the plants in one form or other so we can assume the radiation danger to them has been significantly abated. Now it’s a matter of replacing critical pumps and valves that were damaged so that they can wrap up their cold shut down procedures. After that… everything around them is a sea of misery sprinkled with a little radioactive love. 250,000 people have left the 20 km zone around the plant.
Whether any of the plants have anything that is salvageable is to be determined but there is still plant’s 7 and 8 that need to be prioritized into completion to compensate for the loss of power. Summer is coming up and they will need to build a considerable number of peak-use generators to get them through the day. That means liquefied natural gas is brought in or maybe coal or diesel.
[QUOTE=FXMastermind]
The two workers who are missing? For the last 11 days? They are probably sipping tea in a secret location. Who knows?
[/QUOTE]
You don’t. You also seem unable to grasp the fact that 10’s of thousands of Japanese ARE dead…dead from the earthquake, tsunami, fire, exposure and the gods know what else. Even if we assume that these two ‘missing’ workers are dead from radiation it’s not even a drop in the bucket besides the thousands dead and who knows how many injured from non-radiation related injuries.
Look man…there is no doubt that some folks are going to get sick from working there. Some are probably going to die as well. While there isn’t a lot of hard evidence, it’s certainly a probable outcome considering what’s going on there. But workers are going to get sick, injured and killed doing a lot of other stuff in Japan right now too. Fighting fires. Trying to rescue people in what are now highly toxic and probably disease ridden areas of nearly total destruction. They are going to be exposed to nasty toxic chemicals the same as workers after Katrina were exposed. They are going to fall into holes, or have debris fall on them. They will be burned. All manner of non-nuclear hazards are impacting them right now and they are overwhelmed with trying to help. You are focused on one aspect of this disaster, and it’s the aspect that’s least likely to kill or harm people. That’s not to say that it’s safe, or that no one will be killed or harmed…just that, of all the nasty things happening right now in Japan, the nuclear ‘disaster’ is pretty small potatoes, deaths or injuries wise.
-XT
I think all reactors, even 5 and 6, will have to be written off if they have seawater in them. Hot salty water is hell on stainless steels and monels which will be pretty much everything in the water loops. Since they’ve been boiling off steam, the salt concentration will be going up and dissolved solids will be precipitating out. When (if?) they restore cooling circulation they’re going to have to deal with the problem of removing that contaminated seawater, flushing the solids and replacing it with clean water, before pitting/crevice corrosion or even worse, stress-corrosion cracking, takes everything apart. Those corrosion mechanisms are FAST in hot water. I’ve seen 1mm deep pits develop in stainless steel in a 24 hour corrosion test (ASTM G48). They should be worrying about that NOW but I’m fearful that they haven’t got any materials guys in the crisis room, or they’re just too busy dealing with today’s problems to worry about pre-empting tomorrow’s.
Japan signals nuclear plant to be scrapped
Hm, not exactly, but if the press says they’re scrapping it, then I guess they are. I wonder what the bill for this is going to be?
[QUOTE=levdrakon]
Hm, not exactly, but if the press says they’re scrapping it, then I guess they are. I wonder what the bill for this is going to be?
[/QUOTE]
Billions, no doubt. Do you wonder what the bill for the rest of the disaster might be??
-XT
I heard some pretty big numbers, but then I live in a country that throws trillions at big businesses grown so large they can’t be allowed to fail, so I don’t know anymore. I still think nuclear energy is about our most expensive energy option, short term and long term.
[QUOTE=levdrakon]
I heard some pretty big numbers, but then I live in a country that throws trillions at big businesses grown so large they can’t be allowed to fail, so I don’t know anymore
[/QUOTE]
Do you think that the clean up from the reactors will cost more or less than the clean up from the earthquake and tsunami? Seems like an easy enough question, even leaving aside living in a country that ‘throws trillions at big businesses grown so large they can’t be allowed to fail’? Just your opinion is fine.
And I think that the prettiest, most sexy women find fat, balding older Hispanic males to be practically irresistible. What do you base your own thoughts on?
-XT
Both of you need to dial it back. You will not insult other posters in this forum.
FXMastermind, you have been pushing other posters with snide remarks, (and pretty much nothing but snide remarks), since you got into this. You are about to start picking up Warnings for being a jerk.
[ /Moderating ]
This is crap. Reeling off a string of obviously sarcastic statements implying their own opposites and then claiming that one of the statements wasn’t in fact sarcastic, is blatant evasion, and pretty rich from someone who claimed that linking cites to back up a statement was an evasion.
FXMastermind has retracted his claim about images of radation deaths, billions have already died in Japan from radiation, the government knows the sea is full of plutonium now and we’re all going to die but they’re covering it up, satellite images show California glows in the dark.
See how that works?
After seeing the before and after pictures, I’m astounded that the nuclear situation has been mitigated at all. I feel better about nuclear power than I ever have.
Anonymous coward is the generic term for anyone on slashdot who posts with out logging in. The software auto inserts “anonymous coward” in place of a user name. It’s not an insult, it’s slang.
But I apologize, I let the tone of the Godzilla thread color my responses, and then got annoyed by people who wouldn’t support their wild claims. It won’t happen no more.
If you have serious power shortage now then tomorrow became today for completion of 7 & 8.
Considering it was never the best design to begin with there is something to what you’ve said. If our crapiest museum piece of a nuclear plant could be corralled after a 9.0 earthquake and poorly planned for tsunami then we should have good luck with the newer stuff.
On a land area basis? The nuke plant, hands down. I don’t think there are very many places in the entire world more expensive to clean up than nuke plants. Maybe biological and chemical weapons testing facilities or something?
If it weren’t right on the ocean, I’d say start thinking about burying it, but I think we’re in a position where we are really damned if we do, and damned if we don’t. We can’t bury it so close to the ocean, so we have to save it. But, we’re saving toxic garbage just so it won’t become even more toxic garbage. They have to replace extremely expensive pieces of equipment just to get it safe enough to tear down.
I’ve already cited reasons for why I feel nuclear is, and will remain too expensive for the foreseeable future. They’re too expensive and too complex for mass, commercial use. The world has almost 450 nuke plants. How many accidents are we going to have when we have 45,000 nuke plants worldwide? You nukers are pinning all your hopes on nuke, right? 45k is probably a low estimate. I just made the number up though, so I’m not citing it.
I’m on board with this x3.
The designs are over half a century old and were said to be not particularly good way back in the 70s. The reactors have been in operation for more than 40 years.
The plant was hit by one of the largest earthquakes in recorded history, then a tsunami that is something like twice the size of what was provided for in the design parameters.
On top of this it appears that they were less then ideally prepared to deal with such an emergency.
Yet despite of all this there is still not a significant release of radiation, or broad swathes of land made uninhabitable, or people dropping like flies.
The question is - are people going to look at this disaster and see “wow, nuclear is just too dangerous, we cannot go there” or are they going to see “despite multiple things going wrong, disaster after disaster we still managed to get out of this with really quite minimal effects - perhaps nuclear is pretty safe and can be trusted after all”.
I really really hope that it is the latter, but I suspect that it will be the former.
And just to state the obvious. When the post disaster analysis is done there will be a lot learned from this that will make nuclear even safer in the future.
Yep…the Japanese have them. They look a little like WALL-E.
I am aware of the etymology of the phrase. This is not slashdot; lots of posters here are unaware of slashdot; here it is an insult.