View Full Version : Uh-oh, Japan, this is bad
http://www.powned.tv/nieuws/buitenland/2011/03/ramp_japan_in_beeld.html
This is horrible. Good luck there
Sarmatian
03-11-2011, 11:36
8.9 earthquake, tsunami alert...
We had a ton of snow yesterday and then a whack of rain right after. I was all happy because I got my roof done in time. Then I wake up and see the news. I almost feel guilty.
Bad stuff. Hope they're okay.
I hope Beefy187 is alright, and the other Orgahs from the area.
I hope Beefy187 is alright, and the other Orgahs from the area.
I spoke with him this morning, and he and his immediate family are fine.
Beefy187
03-11-2011, 14:01
Tokyo is fine. Couple people have trouble getting home though.
My family in the country side are fine too. Apparently my grandmothers room is wrecked but shes ok.
Getting weak earth quakes every 5 or 10 min
It must be hell living up north though. Getting magnitude 5s when we only get 1s.
New threat right now is nuclear reactor. Theres a leak and everyone is evacuating.
Glad to see you and yours are ok.
New threat right now is nuclear reactor. Theres a leak and everyone is evacuating.
Horrible.
Kagemusha
03-11-2011, 14:18
Tokyo is fine. Couple people have trouble getting home though.
My family in the country side are fine too. Apparently my grandmothers room is wrecked but shes ok.
Getting weak earth quakes every 5 or 10 min
It must be hell living up north though. Getting magnitude 5s when we only get 1s.
New threat right now is nuclear reactor. Theres a leak and everyone is evacuating.
Im glad to hear that you and your family are fine! My condolences to the families of the victims of this disaster. I sure hope that Nuclear plant doesnt blow up.
Looks like a smallish tsunami is hitting Hawaii at the moment (http://hitsunami.info/).
Prince Cobra
03-11-2011, 15:41
New threat right now is nuclear reactor. Theres a leak and everyone is evacuating.
Is it for sure there is a leak in Fukushima or it is a precautionary measure? I really hope it's the second. Take care, Beefy!
Populus Romanus
03-11-2011, 15:52
My thoughts and prayers go out to the Japanese people.
On an interesting note, Seattle has a Tsunami warning.:shocked:
Is it for sure there is a leak in Fukushima or it is a precautionary measure? I really hope it's the first. Take care, Beefy!
Don't you mean the second? As a 'nuclear leak' is far worse than a 'precautionary measure'.
Prince Cobra
03-11-2011, 16:10
Don't you mean the second? As a 'nuclear leak' is far worse than a 'precautionary measure'.
:wall: :wall:
Thanks, Beskar. My mistake.
And let's hope the reactors will be cooled down.
edyzmedieval
03-11-2011, 16:32
Glad to hear you're ok Beefy.
The reactor leak supposedly has been contained - there was a slight leak but it is in control right now. Check the main Yahoo article.
Reenk Roink
03-11-2011, 16:50
Good to see you and your family/friends are fine Beefy. Does taka have family in Japan?
Shaka_Khan
03-11-2011, 19:33
My condolences for the Japanese people.
I''m looking at the news now. I think CNN just reported that the tsunami hit California. The title is vague though.
We had a ton of snow yesterday and then a whack of rain right after. I was all happy because I got my roof done in time. Then I wake up and see the news. I almost feel guilty.
Bad stuff. Hope they're okay.
Which I'll be getting tonight, only it's all rain. Also we have no reason to feel guilty. It's not like we performed a ceremony of great darkness to curry the favour of some Eldritch Abomination to make Japan suffer. Well at least I didn't. :antlers:
HoreTore
03-11-2011, 20:58
This is horrendous. And its making me very guilty.
You see, I am sort of biased towards things i nature that goes "boom" or otherwise wrecks something. My earliest childhood memories are exclusively from the times I played with speed or set up things to go boom. For example, every time it rained, I ran to the unpaved road near my house(I liv near the forest line), and played "let's make rivers, dam them and then watch 'em collapse".
So, when I see the footage from Japan, all that water pouring over stuff... I feel bad for all the people there, but at the same time.... I can't help myself, I find it fascinating to see the raw power i nature.
Does this make me an awful person? Am I the only one seeing it this way? I hope this doesn't offend you beefy, or anyone else who are affected by this catastrophe..
Not at all, horetore. I stand in total awe in the power of nature. Seeing things like this happen remind us of how vulnerable we are and what we can do to prevent or counteract it.
Feeling intrigued or fascinated by fierce displays of nature is not something to be ashamed of. It's quite natural(!) and actually good for us.
ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
03-11-2011, 21:48
Very tragic for Japan.
Does taka have family in Japan?
Taka is chinese (or from Hong Kong), I believe. I know he is fine though, he is currently down the road from me (well, the M61).
Beefy187
03-11-2011, 23:53
Unfortunately we still have the nuclear reactor problem.
Evacuation range has been raised from 3km radius to 10km.
EDIT: Emergency announced. Radiation level is 1000 times the normal in the central control room. Temperature is 100 degrees in the pressure control room where as normally its 30.
In total, 350 dead and over 700 missing so far.
Rhyfelwyr
03-12-2011, 01:57
This is horrendous. And its making me very guilty.
You see, I am sort of biased towards things i nature that goes "boom" or otherwise wrecks something. My earliest childhood memories are exclusively from the times I played with speed or set up things to go boom. For example, every time it rained, I ran to the unpaved road near my house(I liv near the forest line), and played "let's make rivers, dam them and then watch 'em collapse".
So, when I see the footage from Japan, all that water pouring over stuff... I feel bad for all the people there, but at the same time.... I can't help myself, I find it fascinating to see the raw power i nature.
Does this make me an awful person? Am I the only one seeing it this way? I hope this doesn't offend you beefy, or anyone else who are affected by this catastrophe..
I have to admit I'm kind of the same. Heh, whenever I used to be on holiday, whenever I saw a little stream I absolutely had to try to make a dam.
Prince Cobra
03-12-2011, 08:30
In case the worst happens, it does not mean death sentence. There are certain precautionary measures that could be taken. Not all who are exposed to radiation die of cancer (it depends on the quantity of course) and some of them have entirely normal life afterwards. For example, Chernobyl is 134 from Kiev and Kiev is still a very populated area.
Yet, I hope things won't go that bad.
Kagemusha
03-12-2011, 09:19
Oh my God! Apparently the worse apparently just happened at Fukushima.The reactor core has melted.Hopefully we know more about this soon.
Beefy187
03-12-2011, 09:52
Explosion at 15:30 Japan time at Fukushima.
Awaiting explanation of what actually happened.
Four injured from it.
Kagemusha
03-12-2011, 10:43
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pg4uogOEUrU&feature=player_embedded
Prince Cobra
03-12-2011, 11:11
If this could be a comfort in the current situation, the Fukushima power plant is different than that in Chernobyl, which mitigates the effect of the catastrophy (or at least these are the words of a Bulgarian engineer). ANd yet, situation is dangerous becuse there is radioactive contamination and one of the walls of the reactor building is gone.
Kagemusha
03-12-2011, 11:13
Good news is that apparently the winds are blowing towards the Sea and the cloud is heading to Pacific.
Hosakawa Tito
03-12-2011, 14:19
Japan is well known for disaster preparedness and it's strict building codes. They've spent billions over the years to develop and use technologies to limit the damage from earthquakes & tsunamis. The death toll will probably be lower because of this effort and foresight, but it really is shocking how puny our efforts can be compared to the natural forces that drive this planet.
I wonder why the reactors weren't SCRAM'ed once the quake hit?
I wonder why the reactors weren't SCRAM'ed once the quake hit?
The quake damaged the equipment to do that.
Cute Wolf
03-13-2011, 07:39
a very tragic event, I just hope everything will be ok and not much damage is done. My pray for you as well
Louis VI the Fat
03-13-2011, 13:48
My condolences to all.
As Japan braces itself for a second quake, another nuclear plant has lost its cooling system.
This does little to promote nuclear energy. We may have to rethink its proliferation. You can build them with the latest safety measures, with the physics guaranteeing thast these new reactors are 100% safe, guaranteed!, but apparantly nuclear plants simply have a tendency to blow up.
gaelic cowboy
03-13-2011, 15:46
This does little to promote nuclear energy. We may have to rethink its proliferation. You can build them with the latest safety measures, with the physics guaranteeing thast these new reactors are 100% safe, guaranteed!, but apparantly nuclear plants simply have a tendency to blow up.
Yea I suppose we should ban Nuke power due to all the 8.9 earthquakes we get in France every year.
rory_20_uk
03-13-2011, 15:52
Look at the number of explosions of nuclear plants.
Look at the number of explosions at oil refineries - without 8.9 quakes causing them.
Nothing is 100% safe. As yet there has been little more than a minor leak and no one has died. Compared to other causes of deaths in the world there are more important things to be worrying about banning.
~:smoking:
gaelic cowboy
03-13-2011, 16:22
To be honest I be more worried about the long term environmental damage caused by all the fires especially the one at the big refinery.
Tellos Athenaios
03-13-2011, 17:21
Well to be fair this is a General Electric BWR type reactor. The GE design is apparently controversial and not all that modern. BWR's are generally somewhat behind the technology curve of safe reactors. Molten salt reactors are better, thorium even better.
My condolences to all.
As Japan braces itself for a second quake, another nuclear plant has lost its cooling system.
This does little to promote nuclear energy. We may have to rethink its proliferation. You can build them with the latest safety measures, with the physics guaranteeing that these new reactors are 100% safe, guaranteed!, but apparently nuclear plants simply have a tendency to blow up.
Yes when they are hammered by 2 big earthquakes within a day of each other and the resultant tsunami. You have to realize that all large scale electrical generation not using moving water uses steam. A nuclear reactor replaces burning fossil fuels with Uranium/plutonium to heat the water into steam. Thing about steam is that it has a tendency to cause explosions when it goes uncontrolled.
Also the Fukushima I facility has 6 reactors. Unit 1 is what blew, unit 3 was/is in danger of going the same way. Those are the ones being filled with sea water and boric acid. Fukushima II SCRAM'ed as soon as the power went out.
Tellos Athenaios
03-13-2011, 20:34
This isn't a steam pressure problem. This is an energy transfer from the reactor into steam which isn't kept moving which means that locally so much energy is “stored” in the steam that the bonds of the atoms from the water molecules in the steam are dissolved and the elements separated. This creates hydrogen and oxygen, which rises to the top of the structure (having a lesser density than steam). Away from this energy source (heat emitted from the core) these elements react into water again, i.e. ignition of the hydrogen gas. The energy required to split the water molecules is released as it were, and since nearly all hydrogen will react with the oxygen within the smallest timeframe, the resulting explosion is very powerful.
Now this danger is fairly unique to BWR reactors, because the temperature and the pressure required to make the steam absorb so much energy and then this energy to make the molecules disintegrate into their component elements is a combination of factors that you don't get much elsewhere. In fact to produce hydrogen you typically need to resort to electrolyse, but this is a much more controlled reaction (and once the power is cut the reaction stops). Since hydrogen is most often undesired (because it is so dangerous in the presence of oxygen) research goes into substitutes for hydrogen producing solutions to avoid it entirely.
The quake damaged the equipment to do that.
In any reactor, a SCRAM is achieved by a large insertion of negative reactivity. In light water reactors, this is achieved by inserting neutron-absorbing control rods into the core, although the mechanism by which rods are inserted depends on the type of reactor. In PWRs, the control rods are held above a reactor's core by electric motors against both their own weight and a powerful spring. Any cutting of the electric current releases the rods. Another design uses electromagnets to hold the rods suspended, with any cut to electric current resulting in an immediate and automatic control rod insertion. A SCRAM rapidly (less than four seconds, by test on many reactors) releases the control rods from those motors and allows their weight and the spring to drive them into the reactor core, thus halting the nuclear reaction (by absorbing neutrons) as rapidly as possible. In BWRs, the control rods are inserted up from underneath the reactor vessel. In this case a hydraulic control unit with a pressurized storage tank provides the force to rapidly insert the control rods upon any interruption of the electric current, again within four seconds. A typical large BWR will have 185 of these control rods. In both the PWR and the BWR there are secondary systems (and often even tertiary systems) that will insert control rods in the event that primary rapid insertion does not promptly and fully actuate.
Seems pretty weird, guess the spring from above method is better than the pressure tank from below method then?
I also wonder why noone on any news I've seen mentioned that the mechanics for the control rods had failed, they all sound like the cooling system was/is the only problem here with no other way to keep the reactors cool.
Then there is the issue of the batteries and the emergency generators being apparently the only way to power the cooling system, one expert mentioned that our reactors here have those, plus a way to attach external generators that can be brought in from elsewhere, which makes a lot of sense.
I don't think this shows why nuclear energy is bad and shouldn't be used at all as some are screaming, I think it shows why more money should be invested into it to think about how we can use it safely, and yes, that means it should be possible to replace a lot of the vital parts with ones brought in from outside and why the emergency systems should be kept very simple or at least have very simple, manual secondary controls. Oh and perhaps why BWRs should actually be phased out ASAP.
That said it's a really tragic event that seems to have spawned more tragic events, I'm sorry for the Japanese and wish them the best for their way through and out of this. :bow:
Some perspective from a physicist:
why i am not worried about japans nuclear reactors/ (http://morgsatlarge.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/why-i-am-not-worried-about-japans-nuclear-reactors/)
He posits that the explosion at Fukushima I unit I was caused by super heated and irradiated steam being pumped into the reactor building, but fully outside the reactors outer concrete layer, to relieve pressure inside the reactor. But that it was so hot that it actually broke the hydrogen bonds* in the water and it separated into pure hydrogen and oxygen. And both being highly volatile and explosive gases, they went up.
*Having taken chemistry in high school I know that to be no mean feat. Hydrogen bonds are among the strongest in nature.
Banquo's Ghost
03-14-2011, 08:56
I've been watching the news of this disaster with increasing horror as we see more and more of the devastation revealed. The scenes from Minami Sanriki are cataclysmic - reminiscent of the photographs of Hiroshima after the bomb. Nothing stands. A town of 17,000 people is mud and sticks. Perhaps 10,000 of those people have also been obliterated.
There is a film taken of the wave - a black, roiling creature of demonic power that simply arrives and overwhelms the things of Man, unstoppably brutal. And I am reduced to tears by the pictures of a tired man staggering into yet another shelter on his seemingly endless search for his family, shoulders slumped under the increasing weight of his hopelessness, only for a shriek of recognition to herald his wife grabbing him in a hug. The happiness and relief was so poignant that I could no longer watch the screen - and how many will not find joy, but only the scant consolation of a mortuary slab, or worse, nothing but memories.
Togakure
03-14-2011, 23:19
Here is a link to a series of before-and after photos of areas hit by the tsunami. Draw your mouse across the "before" images from left to right to see the "after" image. Hard to imagine being in the middle of something like this.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/events/japan-quake-2011/beforeafter.htm
edyzmedieval
03-14-2011, 23:32
Here is a link to a series of before-and after photos of areas hit by the tsunami. Draw your mouse across the "before" images from left to right to see the "after" image. Hard to imagine being in the middle of something like this.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/events/japan-quake-2011/beforeafter.htm
Wow. It's like a huge hand flattened everything there.
Shaka_Khan
03-15-2011, 03:04
Look at the size of the splash when it hit a wall (in the first video)! Compare it to the car that was moving by. Fortunately, the video doesn't show anyone suffering. I'm appalled by this force of nature.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjorLr5MUvc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRDpTEjumdo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3jA1RKjriA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBt5VlZkdyY
seireikhaan
03-15-2011, 03:12
How insignificant we are to the grand machinations of the planet. My condolences to all affected- I hope comfort can be found, somehow.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-15-2011, 11:34
That's it, the plant has basically lost containment: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-12740843
This is bad for a country like Japan with such a dense population, and it is going to kill nuclear energy.
More to the point, all those people have to go somewhere, but the Japanese infastructure is in pieces.
edyzmedieval
03-15-2011, 13:25
http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/13/fukushima-simple-explanation/
A very good explanation of what happened at Fukushima.
Unfortunately recent developments have rendered useless some of the facts.
For those who, like me, are tired of the breathless apocalyptic reporting on the incidents at the damaged reactors, I'd recommend keeping abreast of it via the IAEA website (http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/tsunamiupdate01.html).
It's serious, but it's not Chernobyl and it's not going to be.
LeftEyeNine
03-15-2011, 16:27
I'm so sorry for my cousins living far far east of here. Condolences. :shame:
Reading from the link Xiahou provided, the situation looks more like a wait-and-see kind rather than run-for-your-lives one. And I hope it goes along that route to being eventually totally contained.
:japan:
Furunculus
03-15-2011, 16:45
i note that the anti-nuclear lobby is going bananas at the 'opportunity' they have been presented, particularly in germany.
Tellos Athenaios
03-15-2011, 17:03
Well I think I would evacuate rather than wait for my fridge to run out of food and all services to be cut (power, running water) as the “stay in or evacuate” stage prolongs.
That's it, the plant has basically lost containment: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-12740843
This is bad for a country like Japan with such a dense population, and it is going to kill nuclear energy.
More to the point, all those people have to go somewhere, but the Japanese infastructure is in pieces.
You need to calm down. This isn't some 50's era poorly though out soviet reactor. It's a western one, with 3 or 4 layers of protection between the outside world and the nuclear fuel. Including a metre thick box of concrete.
i note that the anti-nuclear lobby is going bananas at the 'opportunity' they have been presented, particularly in germany.
Well, yeah, the panic is a bit much, but if something should ever go wrong with our reactors I wouldn't want them to say "Oh, sorry, that area is contaminated now because when we brought in some external diesel generators, the plugs didn't fit..." so the security checks on the reactors can't hurt.
The whole "Shut them all down right now!" thing is quite a bit too much though. I had to laugh a bit when I read people are buying iodine pills here.
Also the sooner we switch to renewables the better, so a bit of outrage doesn't hurt for now, it's also nice to see how quickly something can be done by the politicians once there is enough outrage. ~D
edyzmedieval
03-16-2011, 01:22
Well, yeah, the panic is a bit much, but if something should ever go wrong with our reactors I wouldn't want them to say "Oh, sorry, that area is contaminated now because when we brought in some external diesel generators, the plugs didn't fit..." so the security checks on the reactors can't hurt.
The whole "Shut them all down right now!" thing is quite a bit too much though. I had to laugh a bit when I read people are buying iodine pills here.
Also the sooner we switch to renewables the better, so a bit of outrage doesn't hurt for now, it's also nice to see how quickly something can be done by the politicians once there is enough outrage. ~D
I find this whole "shut them all down" rage completely stupid. Nuclear energy is one of the cleanest and safest around and just because a 9 grade earthquake and a devastating tsunami destroyed a power plant and yet it still fights back, we decide to scrap every damn plan for them!
Sweet idea.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-16-2011, 01:58
You need to calm down. This isn't some 50's era poorly though out soviet reactor. It's a western one, with 3 or 4 layers of protection between the outside world and the nuclear fuel. Including a metre thick box of concrete.
Who said I was anything other than calm.
Fact: Despite being one of the most meticulous and safety concious people in the world the Jananese have thus far been unable to contain the problem, at one point radiation reached potentially lethal levels around the plant, and there has just been another explosion. Also, all those safety features failed, it's a good thing the main containment unit thus far appears to be holding, is all I can say.
Nuclear Power is a false dawn, it won't solve out energy problems, or save the environment, it will just further stall the introduction of sustainable power, and it can cause serious and irreperable damage if there is an accident.
gaelic cowboy
03-16-2011, 02:10
Nuclear Power is a false dawn, it won't solve out energy problems, or save the environment, it will just further stall the introduction of sustainable power, and it can cause serious and irreperable damage if there is an accident.
The Laws of Thermodynamics say otherwise.
All energy even solar is essentially nonrenewable on a long enough scale.
Also the energy we use everyday is limited by its scarcest resource/material, renewable energy is highly dependent on particular rare materials and is therefore limited by them.
Nuclear energy is also limited but it is far far more efficient and likely to last far longer than any quasi-sustainable energy source.
Edit: also I see a good news story that two people were found alive thats good some good news at least
Don Corleone
03-16-2011, 02:47
Before we all sign on to bury our reactors in concrete, you all should figure out what it takes on an economy of scale magnitude to keep your Prius charged up and your Ipad glowing.
Do some order of magnitude calculations on the generation/liberation of energy. Ask yourself... would you rather live with broken mountains & sooty skies (coal), oil slicks and sooty skies (oil), an area the size of Texas covered in solar panels to power just Dallas (solar)... or show me how you would balance the demand/supply equation, and what you would do with the waste.
Nuclear power does a great job at much energy for little integrated negative effect. The problem is that the negative effects are highly concentrated. I'm not saying that's the answer, but tiling 2/3 of our land mass with cadmium isn't either (solar) me-thinks.
Louis VI the Fat
03-16-2011, 03:18
show me how you would balance the demand/supply equationWe must invade and conquer Algeria. Then we turn the coastal north into French départements and build a solar plant the size of Spain in its southern Sahara regions. :book:
johnhughthom
03-16-2011, 04:09
Seems to have taken a turn for the worse. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12755739)
Before we all sign on to bury our reactors in concrete, you all should figure out what it takes on an economy of scale magnitude to keep your Prius charged up and your Ipad glowing.
Do some order of magnitude calculations on the generation/liberation of energy. Ask yourself... would you rather live with broken mountains & sooty skies (coal), oil slicks and sooty skies (oil), an area the size of Texas covered in solar panels to power just Dallas (solar)... or show me how you would balance the demand/supply equation, and what you would do with the waste.
Nuclear power does a great job at much energy for little integrated negative effect. The problem is that the negative effects are highly concentrated. I'm not saying that's the answer, but tiling 2/3 of our land mass with cadmium isn't either (solar) me-thinks.
I've always though people were far, far, far, more scared of nuclear power then they should be. Many posts here (and the attitude that underlies it) are evidence enough of that. The problem with renewable energy sources is that they can't practically replace any of the fossil or nuclear energy generation. The wind and the waves will never be able to match the sundering of uranium for sheer Mega Wattage.
Nuclear Power is a false dawn, it won't solve out energy problems, or save the environment, it will just further stall the introduction of sustainable power, and it can cause serious and irreperable damage if there is an accident.
Indeed, this is why we need to get those Fusion (http://www.iter.org/) reactors up and running.
Also the energy we use everyday is limited by its scarcest resource/material, renewable energy is highly dependent on particular rare materials and is therefore limited by them.
There is enough fuel in Lake Guevara to power a the city of Las Vegas for a stupid amount (either billion or trillion years). There isn't much of an issue as it can simply just use sea water.
[Yes, I have been a strong advocate of nuclear fusion for many years.]
Samurai Waki
03-16-2011, 07:34
The scramble for Fusion seems to be the way forward, CIT has demonstrated their ability to hold a fusion charge together (a major leap forward) with the use of high powered 'laser' technology. This still leaves us with a thirty-sixty year gap without any sort of fusion technology. Actually, Louis brings a good point forward, even if solar power were to be a 'next gen' source of energy the major suppliers would still be the same people we're trying to get away from.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-16-2011, 12:14
The Emperor is worried: http://www.wootly.com/2a1rj9nnwwo6
aimlesswanderer
03-16-2011, 12:45
Once the shock had worn off, what struck me is how many of the houses were made of wood. Seems like they were traditional wooden houses topped with tiles - not good in earthquakes, and presumably not for tsunamis either. I wonder if more solid structures would have made much of a difference? The town where the only building not washed away was the hospital (made presumably of concrete and or bricks) made me wonder.
Well in California it's perfectly fine to have a building made from wood. You just have to build with sheer in mind. And in deed the building codes in California require that any material used have an official sheer rating. And that the timber framed building be put together a certain way. I'm sure Kukri would be able to elaborate further. But against a Tsunami it wouldn't matter what you built out of, total mass it what matter then.
The Emperor is worried: http://www.wootly.com/2a1rj9nnwwo6
The Emperor should be. It's his job to worry about the Japanese nation.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-16-2011, 13:02
I've always though people were far, far, far, more scared of nuclear power then they should be. Many posts here (and the attitude that underlies it) are evidence enough of that. The problem with renewable energy sources is that they can't practically replace any of the fossil or nuclear energy generation. The wind and the waves will never be able to match the sundering of uranium for sheer Mega Wattage.
The problem with Nuclear is when it goes wrong - Coal-fired or other fired plants are much safer. The issue with those is waste products (which it should be possible to burn off with greater efficiency or some for of catalitic converter, I would have thought, and CO2. The CO2 itself is perfectly harmless, it just happens to be a "Green House Gas". I would have thought more energy would go into clean-burning and carbon offsetting, personally.
*shrug*
Tellos Athenaios
03-16-2011, 15:32
The scramble for Fusion seems to be the way forward, CIT has demonstrated their ability to hold a fusion charge together (a major leap forward) with the use of high powered 'laser' technology. This still leaves us with a thirty-sixty year gap without any sort of fusion technology. Actually, Louis brings a good point forward, even if solar power were to be a 'next gen' source of energy the major suppliers would still be the same people we're trying to get away from.
Like Spain, Australia, the USA and (southern) France?
gaelic cowboy
03-16-2011, 15:41
Once the shock had worn off, what struck me is how many of the houses were made of wood. Seems like they were traditional wooden houses topped with tiles - not good in earthquakes, and presumably not for tsunamis either. I wonder if more solid structures would have made much of a difference? The town where the only building not washed away was the hospital (made presumably of concrete and or bricks) made me wonder.
Looking at the pictures to be honest it looked to me like a lot or most the buildings survived the quake but were demolished by the wave instead.
Greyblades
03-16-2011, 18:06
The problem with Nuclear is when it goes wrong - Coal-fired or other fired plants are much safer. The issue with those is waste products (which it should be possible to burn off with greater efficiency or some for of catalitic converter, I would have thought, and CO2. The CO2 itself is perfectly harmless, it just happens to be a "Green House Gas". I would have thought more energy would go into clean-burning and carbon offsetting, personally.
*shrug*
The reason is that nuclear fuel isn't going to run out any time soon; all of the easily available coal, gas and oil are likely to be gone in a century.
LeftEyeNine
03-17-2011, 00:21
I have read somewhere -some other internet user's claim from a source I guess so linking to it would be meaningless- that there are 50 technicians already fatally dosed by radiation in that Fukushima facility, called Fukushima 50, sacrificing their lives to save the rest.
How true is that ? Could anybody confirm ?
Shaka_Khan
03-17-2011, 02:38
That news came out on CNN too.
I think we could solve the unemployment problem by having millions of labourers use those exercise bikes to produce energy for the upper class. It'll be good excercise for a lot of people too. The middle class and below should move to warmer regions for warmth. Reintroduce widespread horseback riding.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-17-2011, 02:48
BBC doesn't have this yet.
It does have this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12766930
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12762608
Yeah.... worse than Three Mile Island.
It's been said in the news here, some think they're heroes, one expert said their lives are "wasted"* and they should be evacuated immediately though because there is apparently not much they can do anymore(or that's what he thinks).
*not a quote, it's hard to translate from german
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-17-2011, 03:03
Torygraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/8387051/Japan-nuclear-plant-Just-48-hours-to-avoid-another-Chernobyl.html most bleak, naturally.
So, I hate to say I told you so in this case, but I think it's fair to say at this point they've probably lost it.
Everything I am reading says there is a rotating 180 man team.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-17-2011, 03:10
Ah, looks like they are not actually 50, but 50 per shift. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/8386413/Japan-earthquake-the-Fukushima-50-fight-to-stave-off-disaster.html
Media hyp there, though 180 cancer victims is of course worse.
Well, now I read that they have already flown over the plant with helicopters to drop tons of water onto the plant and have positioned water cannons as well to cool the reactors and spent fuel down, next up is a power line to a generator that they want to connect today to get the cooling systems up and running again.
Sounds like a very close call that could end either way. :shrug:
Greyblades
03-17-2011, 12:25
Maybe we should be hoping for another tsunami, 'should easily cool it down. Allthough isnt the main fear that it will get to a point where pouring water will just make it worse; water turned to steam so fast that it explodes, etc?
Well, now I read that they have already flown over the plant with helicopters to drop tons of water onto the plant and have positioned water cannons as well to cool the reactors and spent fuel down, next up is a power line to a generator that they want to connect today to get the cooling systems up and running again.
Sounds like a very close call that could end either way. :shrug:
They needed about 200 airdrops, 2 have been successful. Radiation has made the rest fail.
Firetrucks are held back because of radiation.
The skeleton crew are as-we-speak trying to clear a road for the fire engines.
Might come to the point where people get more or less ordered to sacrifice their lives.
<- This just in Swedish media.
**** me.
Shaka_Khan
03-17-2011, 12:44
https://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w298/eesang1988/motion/tsunami.gif
I must say I have the deepest respect for the skeleton crew remaining.
I have donned a NBC suit myself, and let me tell you - it is not very pleasant. It weights down on you and the easiest task becomes a heavy burden. The goggles fogs up as you start to sweat and since the sweat has nowhere to go you will bath in it inside the suit within minutes.
Now add complete darkness and heavy radiation. Fires and hard labour.
That is seriously living hell.
If you believe in some God, pray. If not, let your thoughts go out to these heroes. And if you happen to have a chance to help - do not hesitate.
Scienter
03-17-2011, 16:00
Might come to the point where people get more or less ordered to sacrifice their lives.
I thought exactly that when I was reading BBC News this morning.
It makes me so sad that some people may have to knowingly walk to their deaths. I don't have that kind of bravery.
An interesting contrast from those cable news shows I don't watch. MSNBC's pet lesbian does a pretty good job of explaining nuclear reactors for dummies:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEttne65w6Y
Contrast and compare with the crazy fellow on Fox using M&Ms:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ps4285oykWg
HoreTore
03-17-2011, 22:03
Energy conservation and networking is the way forward.
A passive house can be heated just by turning on the telly, even if its freezing outside.
And no, electric cars and such do not pose an energy problem, as it will reduce the total ammount of energy required. The combustion engine in a car only utilizes around 15% of the energy in gas, the rest is simply wasted. A power plant, on the other hand, utilizes around 95% of the energy in that very same gas.
If we were to switch all cars to electric cars now, the energy savings would be a number bigger than what I can write.
But try getting North Americans to give up a go anywhere anytime vehicle. I think hybrids will be the better solution short term. And if/when electric car tech evolves to a point where it can be go anywhere anytime use them exclusively. I do agree about the rest, using less energy can be as good as switching to less polluting ways of producing said energy.
If we were to switch all cars to electric cars now, the energy savings would be a number bigger than what I can write.
Surely a joke, with battery technology where it is right now. I believe there's a serious question as to whether or not there is enough lithium on the planet to accomplish your wish.
Greyblades
03-18-2011, 02:07
Also the cost to pay for the amount of fossil fuel we'd have to burn to create the neccissary electricity for those cars would make up for those savings, seeing as there's no way nuclear energy will ever be trusted again.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-18-2011, 13:01
Surely a joke, with battery technology where it is right now. I believe there's a serious question as to whether or not there is enough lithium on the planet to accomplish your wish.
Not to mention the environmental damage from extracting all those minerals, and the toxic by-products.
Prince Cobra
03-18-2011, 16:26
A recent development. No reason to panic so far.
"Diplomatic sources" have told Reuters that very low concentrations of radioactive particles - believed to have come from Japan's Fukushima nuclear plant have been detected on the US west coast.
The level of radiation was far too low to cause any harm to humans, they said.
One diplomat, citing information from a network of international monitoring stations, described the material as
"ever so slight" and consisting of only a few particles.
"It is very low level," another source in Vienna said.
Source: Al Jazeera (http://blogs.aljazeera.net/live/asia/disaster-japan-live-blog-march-18)
I stumbled upon the blogs of Al Jazeera while searching for some information. They are quite good at updating the recent events, esp. the Libyan conflict.
Well, my personal opinion is that nuclear power plants are far from harmless. Of course, it is practically impossible to shut down all the nuclear power plants but this does not mean you should not work towards a more sustainable solution and try to reduce to use of NPP as much as possible. In a long term, nuclear energy is anything but not sustainable. I don't only mean the cases when things go wrong (and it is normal for things to get broken), I also mean the process of storing the radioactive materials. Taking care of a monster in your soil for thousands for years is not really a very good idea. Economically speaking, the long term profits of the nuclear energy are quite questionable.
Well, I give them credit for producing one of the few peices I've seen on the incident not to include the terms "desperate" and "frantic".
This is still being pegged at a level 5 (http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/tsunamiupdate01.html) on the INES scale- which is roughly the equivalent of Three Mile Island.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.