8.8 earthquake hits japan, followed by tsunamis

Gargantou said:
Ugh, friend linked me to Alex Jones ranting about this, he had a so-called "expert" on the show that decided to use the culturally quite offensive term "kamikaze-mission" to refer to the work the employees are doing at the plant.
Click to expand...

I'm offended more by the poor phrasing of it. Kamakazi Mission? Thats like saying "shooting mission" or "punching mission." Kamakazi is an attack type, not an objective. I won't get upset over his troll attempt though.
 
15357 said:
Kamikaze is culturally offensive?

Never knew... Of course, it sounds stupid and I'd rather use the term suicide-mission.
Click to expand...
I dunno if culturally insensitive is the right word, but I doubt this so-called expert would have used it if it was an incident in Europe for example or the US, and as Stigmata himself states, kamikaze implies destructive suicide as in with the intent to cause destruction/death.

I am usually not overly sensitive but it was just the whole conversation and the way they were talking about the "Japanese", as if Alex Jones was still living in WW2 with the Japanese government being the enemy of the US people, it was just really disturbing and maybe I got a bit overly bitchy about that kamikaze stuff because I got so riled up by all the other BS they were spouting.
 
article-1366920-0B366A6E00000578-705_964x663.jpg


Eventhough the NYT is minimizing the amount of radiation it's a bit scary to see how it will come straight over here. I think the graphic assumes this isn't a major meltdown, if it was the levels would probably be much worse while still keeping the same path.
 
Well, guess those guys living in California were right when they started stocking up on iodide pills.
 
This is silly, once again, as the picture itself said, the radiation actually reaching the US would be so minimal you most certainly wouldn't really need to stock up on iodide pills.

At least if Chernobyl was any indication which is the absolute worst case scenario, given that radioactive rain from Chernobyl rained down on my country very shortly after the disaster and before we knew it even had happened (actually from what I remember before the Soviet top officials knew it had happened too since Ukrainian SSR wasn't sending them correct info from the start.)

Of course, I am no expert, but every single expert on the subject that I've heard discuss the spread of the radiation from Fukushima, even in a 7 point event have said that Americans generally shouldn't need to worry at all even if some of the radioactivity reaches them because it will be so minimal.

In fact, I recall one of the experts saying you should be more worried if you've taken a longer airplane trip such as from Washington to Brussels about the radiation exposure you've gotten in that case, of course this expert might have been underblowing things for all I know, but if Chernobyl was any indicator Americans don't really have a big reason to worry.

And again, we have to keep in mind that the spread will depend on how high up into the air any explosion will throw the particles, as well as which way the wind is blowing at that exact moment.

But yeah, if I was an American I wouldn't be particularly worried. Unless I was someone who blindly swallowed Alex Jones's propaganda and thought this was gonna greatly contaminate all of the West Coast.:p
 
Gargantou said:
...
Click to expand...

Doesn't this site have around 4 to 5 times more nuclear fuel in total than Chernobyl did? Here is a link:

http://www.casavaria.com/hotspring/...ve-material-at-daiichi-far-exceeds-chernobyl/

Reports from Japan’s NHK television find Fukushima Daiichi reactors contain 560 tons of reactor fuel —70 tons at reactor #1, 90 tons each at reactors 2-5, and 130 tons at reactor #6— and 680 tons of spent fuel rods —50 tons, 100 tons, 90 tons, 130 tons, 160 tons and 150 tons, at reactors 1-6 respectively.

American nuclear inspectors reportedly expressed concern today that the spent fuel rod cooling pools at reactors 3 and 4 were dry or close to dry and at risk of meltdown. For comparison, the amount of radioactive material involved in the Chernobyl fire, meltdown and radiation release, was 180 tons.
Click to expand...

Also, I think a total meltdown in Japan would be far more deadly than what happened in Chernobyl since Chernobyl didn't have nearly as many people in it's area as Okuma does.
 
No Limit said:
Doesn't this site have around 4 to 5 times more nuclear fuel in total than Chernobyl did? Here is a link:

http://www.casavaria.com/hotspring/...ve-material-at-daiichi-far-exceeds-chernobyl/



Also, I think a total meltdown in Japan would be far more deadly than what happened in Chernobyl since Chernobyl didn't have nearly as many people in it's area as Okuma does.
Click to expand...

You do have a valid point, and as I wrote I am no expert myself and am mainly just re-iterating what I've seen various experts from various nations say.

I doubt they'd take it lightly, but they've all seemed fairly confident that the danger posed to the American continents and the European ones are quite minimal, the biggest danger being to Japan and nearby Asian nations depending on how the wind blows.

And worth noting is that the Fukushima has a far stronger containment system in case of a total meltdown than Chernobyl did.

Chernobyl was also extra bad because the plant itself had several major design flaws, including the roof of the reactor itself being built with combustible materials when it was supposed to be built with fireproof materials, I guess you can imagine that this has a quite substantial effect when an event like the one at Chernobyl occurs.
 
Yeah, that's a good point too. Chernobyl was a really outdated design. But even with that I don't think anyone can claim to know what is currently happening or what will happen. I think half of these "experts" are talking out of their ass. It's also clear that alot of what the government is saying is simply not true.

Just as with Chernobyl we won't have any grasp on the significance of this for decades.
 
No doubt, but I've also been under the impression that when it comes to Chernobyl, the 50 tonnes of radioactive fuel sent up into the atmosphere wasn't the biggest immediate contaminator, rather it was the 700 tonnes of radioactive graphite that was blown around the plant and the city.

I could be wrong though.
 
Chernobyl was (so far) a much, much more severe incident. The initial steam explosion at Chernobyl blew the lid off the reactor. So far, at Fukushima, all the primary containment is intact. Secondly, at Chernobyl, there was a major nuclear excursion, and lumps of flaming granite (used as a moderator) landed on various tar-covered roofs. It was the subsequent fires that carried the nuclear material high into the sky where the weather system could then deposit it all over Europe. No such incident has occurred at Fukushima yet.
The primary concern at Fukushima currently is the used fuel pools in reactors 3 and 4. This is where the "spent" fuel rods are stored in 5m of water. If the water has gone, then there is a chance that the rods could go critical. However, even that wouldn't cause a Chernobyl-style event - it would just severely **** up the local area.
Teams at Fukushima have spent the day trying to get water into the pools, first by helicopter, then by using airport-style fire engines with water cannon. Later today, they are hoping to reconnect power to the pumping stations (the failure of which after the tsunami swamped the generators caused the current issues) and get the cooling underway again.

So basically, could there be a nuclear incident at Fukushima? Yes.
Could it be like Chernobyl? No, not really.
Is it going to affect the US? No. Even if a Chernobyl clone incident occurred, the radioactivity would have dissipated before it reached the US.
 
Thanks for the post, Pi. You explained it far better than I could and in a far shorter way too.

That's basically what I've been saying to the US folks I talk to that seem to be panicking now, that there's no reason to.
 
Pi Mu Rho said:
Chernobyl was (so far) a much, much more severe incident. The initial steam explosion at Chernobyl blew the lid off the reactor. So far, at Fukushima, all the primary containment is intact. Secondly, at Chernobyl, there was a major nuclear excursion, and lumps of flaming granite (used as a moderator) landed on various tar-covered roofs. It was the subsequent fires that carried the nuclear material high into the sky where the weather system could then deposit it all over Europe. No such incident has occurred at Fukushima yet.
The primary concern at Fukushima currently is the used fuel pools in reactors 3 and 4. This is where the "spent" fuel rods are stored in 5m of water. If the water has gone, then there is a chance that the rods could go critical. However, even that wouldn't cause a Chernobyl-style event - it would just severely **** up the local area.
Teams at Fukushima have spent the day trying to get water into the pools, first by helicopter, then by using airport-style fire engines with water cannon. Later today, they are hoping to reconnect power to the pumping stations (the failure of which after the tsunami swamped the generators caused the current issues) and get the cooling underway again.

So basically, could there be a nuclear incident at Fukushima? Yes.
Could it be like Chernobyl? No, not really.
Is it going to affect the US? No. Even if a Chernobyl clone incident occurred, the radioactivity would have dissipated before it reached the US.
Click to expand...

hypothetically if water doesn't stay in the chamber, and is draining out each time when they keep adding more, couldn't they use some sort of jelly material to plaster the containment closed? I know little to nothing about nuclear power, but I'm just thinking that if its possible to just seal the damn thing somehow. Also I'm sure these guys putting themselves at harms way know what the **** their doing. I feel so bad for them though and their families. Those guys are heroes in my eyes
 
Adding water to the spent fuel rod pools might be a very bad idea.To keep things simple, water is intended to serve a very different purpose in a reactor core than in the spent fuel pool.

Water is pretty good at absorbing dangerous gamma radiation, so by keeping the used fuel rods under many feet of water, workers in the plant are shielded from the gamma radiation they are emitting. The water of course also keeps the rods from getting too hot.

In the reactor core, water actually serves to make the nuclear reaction go critical. I won't go into all the technical details, but water serves to make the fuel rods go into critical reaction. Without the water in most (maybe all) modern reactor designs, criticality simply won't happen (the rods might still get hot enough to melt down without water, of course).

The water does this by slowing down neutrons emitted as the nuclear fuel undergoes its normal radioactive decay. Because of some very complex quantum mechanics, these slower moving neutrons are more likely to interact/collide with other radioactive atoms in adjacent fuel rods, as opposed to just "flying through" adjacent fuel rods. This collision/interaction causes radioactive decay that results in more neutrons being emitted. Because these new neutrons are also slowed by the water, they are also more likely to result in additional fission, etc, etc. This is what is referred to as the chain reaction of nuclear fission. Because of this phenomenon of slowing the neutrons, water in the reactor is necessary in order for the fuel to reach criticality, where the fission reaction is stable at a certain level.

Now we get to the problem that might be happening now that the spent fuel pool has gone dry.

In addition to slowing down neutrons and hence making them more likely to cause fission, water also absorbs/blocks neutrons. These two things result in the opposite effect. In the reactor core, the fuel rods are configured to be very close together that few neutrons get absorbed by the water before reaching a neighboring fuel rod. This makes the effect of slowing the neutrons outweigh the effect of absorbing them, and hence we get criticality and a nice chain reaction of fission.

Normally in the pool, the spent rods are stored far enough apart so that the effect from slowing down the neutrons is far outweighed by the amount of neutrons that are absorbed before they reach a neighboring used fuel rod, since the neutrons have to travel so far to reach a neighboring rod.

With no water in the pool, the outside casing of the fuel rods will have begun to burn and also to oxidize with the air. This can cause it to become very brittle and crack, and the fuel pellets might be falling out and collecting on the bottom of the pool. A bunch of pellets might be collecting in piles which are geometrically more favorable for criticality. There could also be puddles of molten fuel collecting, which might have a geometry more favorable for criticality. Additionally, the force of the explosions likely knocked the fuel rods around, and some might have been knocked closer together. In this case, if water is added back to the pool it could cause things to go into a critical reaction that would generate huge amounts of heat and radiation and be extremely, extremely bad.

So, I'm afraid that we might have a chicken-and-egg problem on our hands. Without adding water the used fuel will burn and melt, and release insane amounts of radioactive material into the atmosphere. Adding water could cause the fuel to go critical - which would be a whole other level of badness.

The extreme and sudden radiation spike that forced all workers to temporarily evaporate may have been due to used fuel that was submerged under the last of the water in the pool going critical. The heat of the critical reaction would have very quickly turned the last of the water to steam, and then the chain reaction would have ended without the presence of water. So, that spike seems like evidence that my above theory is correct.
 
i these moments I like to imaginate that a big humanoid robot will walk to the reactor where the core was sealed on site by a quick improvised build up and them the robot grap the capsule and carry it to some big container filled whit cooling material that was transported by a fleet of cargo helicopters,and them is placed inside and sealed and transfered cautiously to a secure facility...

or something like that
 
That guy is very presumptuous. Maybe some people DO want a tv show with pizza and smiling people.
 
Shit, seeing that picture of him is depressing. What a terrible thing to have to admit.
 
Stigmata said:
Double post, I hope I'm forgiven.

Chief of Fukushima plants openly weeps, admitting the radiation is now severe enough to kill. They are considering burying everything in concrete as in Chernobyl. Further radioactive fallout to hit California on Monday.
Click to expand...

You just cited The Daily Mail as a source. Seriously?

Upgrading to a category 5 incident just involved them re-evaluating the incident from when it started. Don't forget - the only reported casualty to date is the guy who broke both his legs when a crane collapsed. Radiation levels in the immediate vicinity of the reactor buildings are higher than previously, but "enough to kill" is somewhat misleading. Burying the reactors in concrete is an option, but it's not the only way forward at the moment. As for the "radioactive fallout" due to hit California, it's a bit above normal background radiation and won't actually harm anything. It's also taken about a week to get there, so it's just gross sensationalism from one of the worst newspapers in existence.
 
What are you talking about, Pi? I can already see the mutants spawning. I think I'm glowing, too.
 
Pi Mu Rho said:
You just cited The Daily Mail as a source. Seriously?

Upgrading to a category 5 incident just involved them re-evaluating the incident from when it started. Don't forget - the only reported casualty to date is the guy who broke both his legs when a crane collapsed. Radiation levels in the immediate vicinity of the reactor buildings are higher than previously, but "enough to kill" is somewhat misleading. Burying the reactors in concrete is an option, but it's not the only way forward at the moment. As for the "radioactive fallout" due to hit California, it's a bit above normal background radiation and won't actually harm anything. It's also taken about a week to get there, so it's just gross sensationalism from one of the worst newspapers in existence.
Click to expand...

Yes, the radiation is no cause for concern. Back to the NCAA tournament.
 
<RJMC> said:
i these moments I like to imaginate that a big humanoid robot will walk to the reactor where the core was sealed on site by a quick improvised build up and them the robot grap the capsule and carry it to some big container filled whit cooling material that was transported by a fleet of cargo helicopters,and them is placed inside and sealed and transfered cautiously to a secure facility...

or something like that
Click to expand...

I think it would be even cooler of the giant robot simply walked into the area and hugged the radiation into his sponge like anti-radioactive body and absorbed all the radiation and rods. It would then fly off planet and head towards Jupiter to be disintegrated in its atmosphere.
 
They said they can handle the situation and refused any help from foreign experts in the beginning.

The jap. government literally dropped the balls on handing the situation.
 
^moran post of the day. You think this event will only have an effect on the japanese? GTFO
 
Vegeta, how do they feel about being called Jappies?
 
Not sure, but I'll bring it up at my next meeting with them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Marc Laidlaw releases Half-Life 2: Episode Three's plot
Replies
32
Views
39K
BabyHeadCrab
BabyHeadCrab
Sectorial
Half-Life 2 Canon (Theory)
Replies
6
Views
3K
1marcos6
1marcos6
Krynn72
"I didn't bring my son up to be killed by a falling cow"
Replies
21
Views
3K
YROC
YROC
CptStern
Your A-HOLE is surprisingly flexible
Replies
15
Views
863
GreatEmperor
GreatEmperor
<RJMC>
do you have enough BALLS to do train surfing in indonesia?
Replies
12
Views
1K
JUL3
JUL3
Back
Top