I’m sure the rolling updates here at FDL will continue on the Japanese disaster and in particular the nuclear crisis, but so much has occurred overnight that I thought I’d take a stab at it. Here’s what we know at the moment:
• This New York Times story gave a lot of people nightmares before they went to bed. The explosion and fire at Reactor No. 4 of the Fukushima Daiichi plant, which was offline at the time of the earthquake and tsunami, sent a good deal of radioactive material into the air. Readings were highly elevated and above safe levels for humans, according to All Things Nuclear. Prime Minister Naoto Kan went on television and said anyone within 18 miles of the plant needed to stay indoors, and that teams were working to avoid “further radiation leakage.” Prior to the fire at Reactor No. 4, radiation release had been relatively low.
What got everyone so upset from that NYT story was the belief that all workers abandoned the Fukushima Daiichi plant. But they revised the story by morning to say that 50 or so workers remained:
It diminished hopes earlier in the day that engineers at the plant, working at tremendous personal risk, might yet succeed in cooling down the most damaged of the reactors, No. 2, by pumping in sea water. According to government statements, most of the 800 workers at the plant had been withdrawn, leaving 50 or so workers in a desperate effort to keep the cores of three stricken reactors cooled with seawater pumped by firefighting equipment, while the same crews battled to put out the fire at the No. 4 reactor, which they claimed to have done just after noon on Tuesday.
Indeed, reports show that the US military was brought in to help put out the fire at the No. 4 reactor. The hope is that radiation levels will fall now that the fire has been put out. Reactors No. 1 and 3 have exposed roofs due to hydrogen explosions blowing off the top of the building, Reactor No. 2 could have an exposed containment core and could be leaking radioactive water as seawater gets pumped in, and Reactor No. 4′s fire could have exposed spent fuel rods and an elevated level of radiation. Because of the design of the plant, the spent fuel rods may be a bigger problem than the exposed reactors. The Japanese government put a no-fly zone over a 30km radius around the plant.
So while the situation doesn’t appear quite as dire as when Prime Minister Kan appeared on television, the mood of the country reflects, to put it mildly, total panic. Residents are leaving Tokyo in droves and stocking up on survival gear, as radioactive wind headed for the capital and radiation readings were elevated about 9 times above normal. And the Nikkei stock average, which fell 6% yesterday, was down around 11% today, the biggest drop since the 1987 crash. The Bank of Japan put another $98 billion into the banking system today, after nearly twice that yesterday.
Crisis doesn’t even begin to cover what’s going on right now. And I don’t want to harp on the impact for the broader nuclear industry, but Germany and Switzerland are suspending their own plans until they get a handle on how this could have happened and tests can be administered. When the President touted Japanese nuclear safety, an eerie corollary to his now-famous remark that offshore drilling was quite safe, he wasn’t entirely wrong. But he was viewing it in the prism of how we look at these things under normal circumstances, not in the event of a catastrophe. The events of the Deepwater Horizon should have ended such a charade, and now Fukushima Daiichi must completely eliminate such a stance.
I have a nuclear reactor relatively close to my home, in San Onofre in Orange County. It sits off the coast in a highly combustible earthquake zone. The plant says they can handle up to a 7.0 earthquake, and seismologists assure that nothing Japan-sized could hit that particular area. It’s hard to feel that comforted by such admonitions. Nor am I particularly relieved by claims that oil and coal cause plenty of human suffering in their own right, as if those are the only three items on the menu. Believe it or not, we can generate energy without radioactive waste, toxic asthma-causing greenhouse gases or global warming-based pollution. The price of that generation is high but gets lower every day. Particularly when you factor in all the external costs borne by dirty energy.



178 Comments



Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
David
Where are you in Socal? I’m in the OC.
We may be moving beyond Panic.
On a scale from 1 to 7, situation in Japan is now a 6
“The incident has taken on a completely different dimension compared to Monday. It is clear that we are at level six,” Andre-Claude Lacoste, head of France’s Nuclear Safety Authority, said last night.
“The order of gravity has changed.”
The 1986 Chernobyl disaster in the Ukraine registered as a maximum seven on the international scale.
The 1979 Three Mile Island disaster in Pennsylvania, US, registered as five.
Japan’s nuclear watchdog previously rated the situation at Fukushima as four.”
Read more: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/special-reports/japan-...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102×4771621
Someone is lying?
Does anyone know what is going on here?
I don’t believe it. But I did send a rough plan for changing the energy landscape to my congressman 4 years ago, in the interest of really doing something about it. It was handled politely. I put it before venture capital. It was rejected. Funny. Every time I sent it to someone outside the U.S. they told me I had better protect it, it was a bombshell. But here? Nobody interested. Not even in the industries that were supposedly going to fix the energy problem.
No. If you add up the concentrations of energy needed and the populations we continue to fill the planet with, it doesn’t work out. But, as you say, neither does the stuff that warms the planet or is susceptible to tsunamis. Oh well.
Radiation riding on the Wind to the USA – the short summary is that we are likely to get higher radiation readings – but no danger for the US:
Forward Trajectory Maps over the Pacific (Dr. Jeff Masters at http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=1763)
“… However, given the highly chaotic nature of the atmosphere’s winds, trajectories beyond about 3 days have huge uncertainties.One can get only a general idea of where a plume is headed beyond 3 days. I’ve been performing a number of runs of HYSPLIT over past few days, and so far great majority of these runs have taken plumes of radioactivity emitted from Japan’s east coast eastwards over the Pacific, with the plumes staying over water for at least 5 days. Some of the plumes move over eastern Siberia, Alaska, Canada, the U.S., and Mexico in 5 – 7 days. Such a long time spent over water will mean that the vast majority of the radioactive particles will settle out of the atmosphere or get caught up in precipitation and rained out. It is highly unlikely that any radiation capable of causing harm to people will be left in atmosphere after seven days and 2000+ miles of travel distance. Even the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, which had a far more serious release of radioactivity, was unable to spread significant contamination more than about 1000 miles.”
Thansk David.
so is the no fly zone out of concern for individual safety or is it to put a blackout on the area so that no one can see how bad it really is?
burning algae farm output – bio-engineered whatever or just the algae, or nat gas, or wind, or solar, or geo-thermal (via tides or surface/sub-surface heat differences) all seem so possible – but the fact is that nuke is 70% of all current non global warming energy use in the US – and needs to get larger in the near term if we are to slow global warming.
Curious as to what your idea is (I promoted one idea for a few years – just a 3% increase in power plant efficiency via a simple retrofit that most plants could do – but getting streets torn up, etc. – despite the great return on the investment – was impossible to accomplished – People do not want their lives disrupted for 5 years during the build out in an urban area). Seems academic establishment review and approval and backing gets one nowhere in the US. My friend did get his patent for the process so that something was accomplished! :-)
Nano film coverings on solar cells may make that finally economical without subsidy. But it seems 5 to 10 years from demonstration project.
Stock Market is in free fall over this. I guess taxpayers will be bailing out more rich people…..
“Someone is lying”…
Like a rug, I’d say.
But we knew that was coming. Too much money and power involved. Nuke power is one of the flagships of the corporate-techies-shall-lead-us agenda; if it goes down, the high priesthood has chancres on their… asses…the result of which we’re seeing in the Tokyo stock market, and the ripple effects elsewhere.
I’m glad that Joe and Jane Sixpak in Japan, are voting with their feet and trying to get away from this misery, and the attendant bullshit.
I’d be doing exactly the same thing.
Lesseee…WE are talking about the exodus, but is the MSM discussing it?
Any MSM clips of traffic jams on highways leading out of the plume path?
Good morning all.
According to snippits I picked up by nuke exec building a plant in SC or Georgia, all is just fine. No problems. U.S. does it better.
I’m a long time FDL pup who only comments sporadically; I am not a pro-nuke shill. Having said that, IMHO, FWIW, and in the spirit of truth and trying to calm unnecessary hysteria:
- The best 3 minute read I’ve found is http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/15/thinkclimate-nuclear/, posted today (3/15).
- The corporate media is in hyperventilation mode. Very little they are reporting on Fukushima is accurate or useful, and much is unnecessarily damaging, panic inducing, and grossly irresponsible.
- The impact to human health from the Fukushima nuclear incidents are, at this time, very minor. Strip the political agendas aside and drill through the hysteria, this is the fact of the matter.
- The impact to Japan from the earthquake and the tsunami independent of the Fukushima nuclear complex is the real human impact story here.
- Before Fukushima my political persuasion was pro-utility-scale renewable and anti-nuke, but for cost reasons, not safety reasons. (When assessed rationally and unemotionally, based on facts, nuclear has a pretty impressive safety record over the past 40 years, relative to any other historical power source of this scale. Unfortunately, the seemingly-inherent FUD around anything nuclear and radioactive in the US has cost implications which make a nuclear renaissance in the US cost-prohibitive.)
- So far, nothing at Fukushima has shaken this persuasion, only reinforced it.
- The best information on Fukushima I have found is at http://bravenewclimate.com/, but, and this is a big qualifier, you have to wade through and ignore a lot of vitriol and political agenda bias on both sides in the comment threads.
It’s like air travel vs. auto travel.
Statistically planes are much safer than cars, but when there’s a problem, it tends to be a BIG problem.
AKA low probability, high consequence problem.
The consequences of nuke failure, however, are catastrophic. And we know that we absolutely cannot rely on either nuke corp or govt to take any precautions to prevent the catastrophe, given corps’ record of cost cutting & both’s record of lying.
“So, is the no-fly zone out of concern for individual safety or is it to put a blackout on the area so no one can see how bad it really is?”
Surely, the latter. I can’t imagine very many people who’d want to be rubbernecking in the middle of that plume.
And, with those clips of one reactor after another going up like an ammo dump, going all over the world, I’m thinking that the authorities have decided that keeping shit like that off the news is every bit as important as keeping those nuclear campfires cooled down. I’ll bet they’ve figured out just where the cameras taking those clips were positioned, and have put that place into lockdown. Doubt we’ll see any more of that reality-news.
I agree that the media is hyperventilating a bit. That’s what they do and lacking any basic science education, they tend to get things wrong more often than they get them right. That being said, bravenewclimate.com is an advocacy rag for the nuclear industry. I am not anti nuclear because of the word “nuclear”. I am anti nuclear because there is always a board of directors or a CEO who will decide something is an “acceptable risk”, like placing emergency generators on the ground level in a country prone to earthquakes and that coined the word “tsunami”, right next to the ocean with the Japan trench subduction zone within a few kilometers of the beach. As long as there are executives who will risk the public in order to maximize their profits, I’ll be anti anything that needlessly exposes the people so a few greedy rich people can get a bigger bonus.
Air travel is only safer than auto where passenger miles/death are the measure.
If trips are the measure, not miles, air travel is less safe than auto travel, because of the different death to injury ratio of air and auto accidents.
Figures lie and liars figure.
Please ensure you understand “the facts,” their source and the benefits to what party of the measurements quoted.
Bobash, I have a little question for you:
Why would the corporate media want to exaggerate the situation in Japan and cause fear and loathing about nuclear power?
Can you explain that?
Eyeballs and then money. If it bleeds it leads.
I guess that’s true, but I don’t take a plane to work every day and to the store to get milk, so I guess # of trips is irrelevent.
BTW, Bobash, you should translate your ideas and post your thoughtful call for calm and judicious behaviour on some Tokyo sites. I’m sure the people fleeing a radioactive plume will probably give out a collective sigh of relief and turn right around and head back home.
Hear, hear. It just doesn’t get any more careless than that. But then that’s often the problem, “they” don’t care.
As for me, I think I am anti-nuclear because it has the word nuclear in it. No one needs nuclear power. I bet the Kiwi’s are feeling pretty good about their view on it at the moment.
Do you know why there is panic? It’s because there have been deliberate cover-up’s of accidents in the past not only by TEPCO but by the government as well.
Corp execs we know do not even take safety measures to prevent disasters that have a significant probability of occurring during their tenure. So we can be absolutely certain they won’t spend a single $ on safety measure for catastrophes that might never occur.
But one thing we have learned from this event is that nuke execs need to get higher compensation. It’s HARD WORK going on the media & defending their corps.
Number of trips is very relevant. Also, the number of auto accidents, while much, much higher in number than aircraft accidents, they are fatal much, much less of the time. Everything that impacts on the overall “safety” picture is relevant. Number of trips, number of miles traveled, percentage of time spent traveling in various conveyances, risk of accident, risk of fatal accident, (there aren’t many aircraft fender benders), risk of accident which causes serious injury, etc. You have a greater risk of having an accident while you are on that trip to get milk than you do on that business trip across the country but you are far more likely to die as a result of the much less likely accident that happens on your business flight than on your trip to the 7-11.
Yep. And another thing we’ve learned: We can “take these lesson”s and be safe so it will never, ever, ever, ever in a million, billion, trillion years (infinity) happen again.
To increase their profits via ratings. It’s what they do. I refer you to Chomsky’s “propaganda model”.
While I in general agree with the wisdom coming from Adelaide, Australia, It is info that is a bit behind the curve. There are now at least 3 workers in serious condition from radiation poisoning, so the implied thought of no harm to date is not quite true. Two hours at the perimeter unprotected are enough to start radiation sickness. I would – with all due respect to the great work a prepared trained staff can do – therefore not put down passive safety design the way the site you referenced did. I suggest concrete that is 50 years old can leak, as have spent rod holding pools in the US, and indeed this true of the structure in general – so replacement with newer plants – despite the pain of getting new permitting – is needed.
That’s because “they” inevitably live far away from their risky ventures. Just like
warchickenhawks: They don’t mind putting other people and their families at risk. They won’t feel a thing.It has to do with revisiting manufacturing and developing processes that artificially ‘grow’ rather than exothermically manufacture goods. It shifts a lot of balances and energy needs. It’s long-term, though and wreaks havoc with the notion of a “consumer society”.
Check. Since these are rare events, and one has just occurred, then the next one must be very very very far away. /s
thank you ! and Welcome
was reading up on that last night – never having been able to shake those haunting images from the Minamata Horror – (I was completely unaware of the Cadmium and Sulfur Dioxide catastrophes – Link)
and look what just a little digging produced – Nuclear ‘Events’ in Japan
it’s been over 30 years since I spent any time in Japan and I don’t have any personal contacts there now so difficult to gauge how much of the past is weighing on the hearts and minds of the Japanese people in the horrific present
Great Point!
Boobash why is the corporate MSM making the situation worse in Japan?
People are reporting higher levels of radiation around Tokyo
the PM of Japan says we have a radiation leak
Me thinks, this is not good news, and it is time to get out of dodge
TEPCO Nuclear Power Co. of Japan is very shady, base on reports out of Japan.
Boobash with all of this info, do you think it is a time to stay calm and have a beer? Not
Yep. It’s always about statistics and probabilities and when they happen and people find out that it’s about real people and real death, they feign shock and say stupid shit like “Nobody coulda predicted”, despite the obvious lie that is.
Margaret, I agree with your general political sentiment–corporations will privatize the profits of nuclear energy and socialize any big tail losses (this seems indisputable since the nuclear energy can’t get anyone in the private sector to underwrite insurance for them)–but I have one minor correction. I concede bravenewclimate is pro-nuke, but it is not “an advocacy rag for the nuclear industry” in the sense that it is an industry-funded advocacy site. I believe it to be run by an academic who does not receive funding from the industry.
I qualified my recommendation of the site–folks who can’t wade through political agendas and focus on the engineering shouldn’t waste their time there–they’ll get very frustrated very fast.
Agreed. Can you cite the most authoritative source you’ve seen of the 3 workers in serious condition due to radiation poisoning?
Just sit in traffic during rush hour in any decent sized city in the US. The amount of energy devoted to running all those engines and converting all that petrol into heat and combustion by-products for NOTHING has got to be on par with the total amount of energy each of those people needs to live a comfortable life. To say we NEED nukes to maintain civilization while we toss butt loads of energy into the atmosphere without any kind of plan to improve this perversion is obscene.
I didn’t mean to imply it was funded or run by the nuclear industry, nor did I make that claim. Sorry if I was unclear.
Got any links to document that?
Not so much when corporate bucks, and the attendant bullshit that protects them, are at risk.
Again, nuke power is one of the cornerstones of techie influence over us. That we put the brakes on it, some, after Chernobyl and TMI, was immensely aggravating.
Also, we saw, in spades, the MSM’s willingness (led by one Barack Obama) to pimp for lowballing the GOM disaster, and to shave points for BP like a crooked NBA ref working the playoffs.
But let’s get to the bottom line: what wild-eyed and irrational headlines are being seen? The one by the NYTimes, that the Japan was facing a “potential nuclear catastrophe”? I mean, Bobash is lamenting the media alarmism. I’m sorry, guys, but I haven’t seen the first paragraph from the MSM, print or electronic, that pumped up the irrational fear machine. Can you show us some?
With hundreds of thousands of people already evacuated, and with a lot more bailing out of Tokyo, you could make a decent case that they’ve already got a catastrophe. I mean, they’re reduced to the idea of trying to use helicopters to dump water on this misery. How efficient can that be? Do you know how heavy water is? And how small an amount of it even the largest chopper can carry relative to what is needed at all those fuel ponds.
I mean, if bringing in seawater was a “hail Mary pass”, then choppering in enough water to save this, is pissing in the wind…almost literally.
No. I’m sorry, the idea that the media is overstating how serious this is, just won’t wash. All that’s happened is that they’ve gone from serving as handmaidens for low-ball pressers, to having some honest (and long overdue) journalistic concerns about pimping the corporate line.
No need for personal attacks. I’m not defending corporate MSM, or TEPCO, or disagreeing with the Japanese government’s prudent warnings to preclude exposure to potential radiation. I’m simply trying to stay factual with respect to the reports of “radioactive plumes”, and am trying to place them in the most truthful context. Suggestions that there have been radioactive releases of the Chernobyl variety are as best I can tell simply not true.
Yeah, fossil fuels have an efficiency percentage in the low single digits. I’m all for changing the way we use energy than I am just dumping more into a wasteful system. That’s like throwing money at the health insurance industry: it solves nothing but a few peoples’ cash flow problem. Now than can get the yacht and the summer mansion!
the us’s energy policy is to stay the course as long as possible. they don’t care about transitioning to sustainability. we’ve only got a couple decades or less until the shit hits the fan
better get used to growing food in your backyard and not having electricity if you want to adapt
Where did you see a “personal attack” in that? Jedimsnbcko19 didn’t call you names, didn’t accuse you of anything nefarious, just suggested it may not be the right time to be so blase about the situation.
No 4000 sq ft McMansion an hour’s commute from work for you? You commie bastard! /s
And I refer you to the MSM swilling BP’s (and the U.S. government’s) outrageous lowballing of the catastrophe in the GOM, like it was their mother’s milk.
I ask you again, give us examples of the media over-reacting to the events at Fukushima.
Repeatedly, the TEPCO people have reassured everyone that they were on top of things, and that no widespread disaster was possible nor likely. The press has largely gone along, and when they did start to ask the tough questions, then, as Scarecrow noted, TEPCO has basically stonewalled them. Have you heard any MSM info that stated that as happening? I sure haven’t.
So, just give us the examples of the media going overboard on the dangers of this. If they exist, let’s read them and talk about them.
Umm … “Boobash” isn’t calling names?
What can I say? I’m an underachiever. Dirty fucking hippie I guess.
from the comment thread of http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/15/fukushima-15-march-summary/:
(I can’t figure out how to link to the comment.)
I was not attacking you personally. Sorry about that
the issue I have is one group says this event in Japan is worse than Chernobyl
you are saying it is not
people are being told to stay inside.
I am a lay person, just seeking the facts,
Re-read my comment. I didn’t say that. I said jedimsnbc19 isn’t calling names.
Where have you read that Chernobyl-level releases have occurred? I haven’t even seen that on the blogs like FDL, and if you can show us ABC, or CNN saying that, I will be very, very, surprised.
Got a link?
Sounds like you agree with me completely.
Problems with nuke plants make big news just like plane wrecks.
Germany has taken another step and closed down its oldest plants, for at least three months, and not clear if they’ll ever reopen.
It’s time to put the pressure on here at home too. The level of denial concerning nuclear energy may be on vacation, but unless the unthinkable happens in Japan, that denial will come rushing back.
his site is where the “best minds” share their expertise with us at little cost(Founding member-Yay!)
This is some serious crap going down and most at this site have been rational, realistic, and way ahead of the MSM.
MSM does what it does best. Shallow, stupid, emotional, and misleading.
Which is why I have been an advocate for this community since Redd and blogspot days.
Margaret, I’m not at all blase about the situation in Japan. Just trying to keep the risk of a nuclear catastrophe in the context of the other human impact of the earthquake and tsunami.
I’ve read in some places that this could be the worst disaster since Chernobyl but you’re right, I can’t find a single example of even the most breathless in the media claiming this is a Chernobyl level event, (so far).
Does what better? Denial? Obfuscation? Propaganda?
About probabilities maybe. Ideologically? Never.
Well … calling bobash “boobash” sure looks like calling him names to me.
Opinions differ, I guess.
Margaret is right about the obvious lie “nobody could have predicted.”
Which is why I have this to say to that two-faced Barack Obama:
Dear Barack, please do not expect me or other liberals to “thank you” once again for your actions against the democratic party and liberals by rolling out your criminal support for the lying, corporate-welfare nuclear industry yesterday. Barack, you think its so safe for others to live in the shadow of a perfectly safe nuclear plant. So until such time as you and your family join all the nuclear industry CEOs and all so-called nuclear industry scientists in living full-time on the grounds of these perfectly safe nuclear plants, I know that you are a liar responsible for obvious and serious crimes against both humanity and the environment.
I will never forgive you Barack, or Chuck Shermer, the traitors in the democratic party, GE and the rest of the greedy, lying nuclear industry, none of you possess the intelligence or morals or humanity to be in charge of a toaster, let alone decide for Americans who don’t want your nukes.
Barack don’t ask me to “thank you” again, jerk.
I missed that. Maybe it was a typo. Jedimsnbcko19 did apologize so I think it could be.
Check out the front page of HuffPo. I’m not spending a lot of time in front of ABC, CNN, etc. just now. Instead perusing independent media. But take a look at the stock market in Japan and US if you don’t think the media has the world in a panic. The markets didn’t react this way Monday when we knew entire towns had been killed. They are reacting to the panic from the radiation scare. MHO.
I’d like to hear your plan. Non-fossil energy is my bailiwick.
VC is poorly suited for many energy opportunities. High capital cost and lack of breakout profit potential don’t fit their model. Works nicely for software and other businesses that don’t have significant marginal costs to produce, but many have lost lots of money thinking their model works everywhere (eg Vinod Khosla…)
There are other channels though.
My gmail addy is speakatus.sparkatus if you want to discuss more privately.
in fact, bobbleheads keep telling us what happened at Three Mile Island (only in this case on steroids) is a more apt analogy
p.s. apropos of nothing – will never forget the Heritage Foundation guy on MSNBC shitting his pants in fear over the implications of Fukushima last saturday – haven’t seen him since, probably on a regular Soma regimen by now :D
There IS a readioactive plume. The wind change makes it a threat to Japanese land areas. At this point, it is not at the level of the one that was released from Chernobyl…but again, I haven’t heard anyone, even on the blogs, claiming that it is.
I think Bobash is red-herring dragging, to be talking about media exaggeration of the dangers of what’s going on at Fukushima, and i KNOW, that usually, the MSM, at least in america, is perfectly willing to parrot whatever the advocates of disaster capitalism are telling them, in their pressers.
Nothing personal, Bobash, but you’re saying that the media is exaggerating the situation in Japan, and I think that, demonstrably, you are very, very, mistaken.
Gotta get a move on. Thanks for the conversation.
LMAO!
O.T. Get your email problem sorted?
I type “bobash” a lot and I’ve never mistyped it “boobash” once, much less twice. LOL. Peace.
Thanks. That may well be true, but just bc he says it doesn’t make it so.
I can’t answer for that. I didn’t write it.
“I can’t find a single example…”
Thanks, Margaret; as usual you cut to the chase. :o)
It aint happened, and, like it or not, claiming that it IS happening is flacking for the nuclear power industry.
no, have no idea of what I should be doing about it
your heads up was very much appreciated if you haven’t seen my response by now
I saw it and have responded. :)
You are making my point for me, regardless of literal references to Chernobyl or not. The “radioactive plume” you have read about thus far is not a threat to human health. If you listen to health physicists discuss what has been released so far.
weak ass sigh putting on hazmat suit and slogging over there now – thanks !
I rarely watch tv but I did watch some bits of news about Japan on various stations – some local news, some CNN, some Dateline – and from what I saw, none of them *seemed* to be hyperventilating or overstating the case. That said, I watch *very little* tv, so I have no idea what else has been “reported” or shown.
The local “nooz” paper, which leans rightwing, has seemed reasonably balanced in its reporting on Japan, albeit the past few days have featured GIANT photos on the front page of the disaster. Guess that could be called “pushing the fear button” or whatever. But: the photos are accurate and not fake. So… they do show what’s going on.
I think US citizens really must be made aware of the explosions at the nuclear reactors, in order to (dare I hope?) *really think* about what this means, not only for the Japanese but for us.
I did see in my right leaning “nooz” paper this am what I consider to be lies extolling how we are “safe” from such a nuclear disaster here in CA, despite such nuclear facilities like San Onofre, which was built next to the ocean on a *known* fault line & is ONLY rated for a 7.0 earthquake.
http://www.sacbee.com/2011/03/14/3475165/utilities-calif-nuclear-plants.html
From my admittedly limited perspective, it seems to me that US media is engaging in its usual mixture of lies & some truth-telling insofar as they can do it.
Boobash
the US Navy reported higher levels of Radiation at their base in Japan
the PM of Japan said Radiation was leaking
I hear what you are trying to say,
But being a lay person, if I hear radiation leaking, and may come toward my city, I am going to get out of dodge ASAP.
Bobash someone on this thread says TEPCO has lied before, so I think people want to be safe, rather than sorry.
HuffPost has a headline saying on a scale from 1 to 7 this is a 6
most of us are not nuclear experts, you hear and see this, you must leave.
Also like Tanbark said, the elites own most of the media, pushing information that wipes out their fortunes is not what they do.
last night the Australian Market crashed when the Japan PM said radiation leak, so what is happening today on Wall Street is not shocking to anyone.
Bobash: there are significant problems with nuclear plants that mitigate any benefits from the power. They are very difficult to site, they’re unbelieveably costly and they take decades to build. You can’t get ‘em built and online fast enough to meet expanding need. They require huge public subsidies to build, and more huge public subsidies to insure. No public insurance corp would touch them with a gieger counter. In the face of that, and the obvious dead end (they have lifespans of only about fourty years, then need to be very expensively de-commissioned) they represent, only someone ill informed or directly benefiting from them could advocate them.
It would be “nice” if this horrid disaster actually resulted in some efforts towards green energy or green technologies, but I sure won’t hold my breath.
Most citizens that I’ve talked to lately – such as at work, at the store, at the office, at the gym – seem to be rather placidly accepting the ultimate doomsday scenario – meaning, that most I’ve talked to (a small sampling) are saying: the earth is over-populated & we humans simply aren not “managing” things well at all. I *expect* the planet to “blow up” at some point.
Interesting… but no real “talk” about any solutions. Just acceptance of what appears to be the “status quo” that we are EFFED.
I am no expert, but I have heard what you say about building nuclear reactors. I just don’t think that this is a viable solution, for numerous reasons, going into the future.
The planet cannot be sustained with our current crop of energy “solutions.” It is *insanely* short-sighted not to pursue alternatives othat the current “solutions” we have in place… yet the elites mightily resist new solutions. I guess the uber wealthy don’t see financial gain for themselves, so that’s the end of it.
Must disagree.
it is not rational, based on history and observation, to believe anything the media or the Japanese government or the US government or the US military or the nuclear industry says.
They said this could not happen in the first place, correct? Therefore they are all liars or fools. Either way, in this case, there is no reason believe what they are saying today, either.
If you believed what the USSR said about how “harmless” Chernobyl was in the weeks after that accident, I can’t help your gullibility. None of these authorities have any shred of credibility whatsoever.
I think there will be diminished returns on green energy backlash from this disaster because of the BP spill. If a disaster like that off the coast of the United States wasn’t enough to seriously hinder the offshore drilling industry here, then people will accept that this ‘foreign’ disaster will have little effect on US energy policy, nuclear or not.
This is just up on the DellNewsPage:
http://apnews.myway.com//article/20110315/D9LVONBG2.html
I think that telling people to stay indoors, instead of, in this case, evacuating them, does not qualify as fear-mongering; instead, it’s low-balling the danger, and I would have already left. I expect that there are a lot of Japanese people who feel the same way. We’ll see.
Here’s a good question: what are the Germans going to do about all the French plants so strategically placed on the German borders?
Where have I said anything that disagreed with what you posted?
I don’t trust either TEPCO, or the Government, in their statements.
And I damn sure don’t believe that the MSM is exaggerating the seriousness of the situation. I think they’ve been going the other direction by accepting on face value the statements of the authorities, and generally, not asking the tough questions.
Righto.
This issue is not about science, but rather about all the built in incentives for corruption & lying. Pols & industry lie even when it’s possible to find more accurate info. When they can hide their malfeasance for decades, there is no reason to tell the truth.
Nuclear apologists and “experts” and pundits out in force this morning nearly everywhere, TeeVee and newspaper.
Expect they’ve got their talking points and marching orders and will be full-court press for the rest of the week…probably around here a lot too…provided the news doesn’t turn undeniably catastrophic again.
I’m guessing they figured out overnight that if it doesn’t get worse, they can question the “panic” and the “media hyper-ventilating” and continue to promote “our” higher safety record.
Where did I advocate for nukes? Please refer to my original comment #12, in which I say much of what you say. As for bravenewclimate, I tried to explicitly qualify my recommendation of the their site by warning of the political advocacy, some of which I do not agree. But their grasp of the engineering and the physics and the hard facts re Fukushima is far beyond anything else I’ve found in any media.
I stand by my main point: the threat to humans from the Fukushima nuclear incident is small; exceedingly so relative to the tens of thousands of lives lost due to the tsunami; panic is not appropriate, even as prudent measures are.
Sorry, I and many others are beyond very upset about all this. Please accept my apology as my comments were not directed to you personally and I wasn’t reading your post closely enough.
you are not paying attention. The level of rediation released at #2, and possibly, at #4 (Things are cascading so fast it’s hard to keep track) by the admission of the Japanese government (if not TEPCO) are well above “safe” levels.
And, I’m still asking: You got a link for MSM fear-mongering?
Speculating here, but my guess closing airspace is to facilitate air lifting in more equipment and personnel via helicopter. Controlling air space is an important aspect of such an effort. With only 50 workers they will need to rotate shifts and with higher radiation levels they won’t want the workers pulled from the facility to be anywhere near the radiation source for any longer than absolutely necessary. Proper procedures dictate not needlessly overexposing workers.
It is bad, but I think they still have a chance to contain this. Chernobyl was terrible, but they did finally get even that under control.
No problem. We’re all…exercised…and damn well should be. :o)
Thanks to bobash for your comments as well. You make a lot of sense.
Perhaps at least some of us – me anyway are getting a touch overheated. But where there is smoke there often is fire. And think about the worry of the people in Japan. And there is clear reason to be very angry and concerned to the point of distraction with issues like this.
Here’s that link about dangerous levels of radiation leaking at Fukushima, again:
http://apnews.myway.com//article/20110315/D9LVONBG2.html
And, if you’ll read it, they’re not talking about radiation coming out of any specific reactor, but have combined them as a source for the radiation..which makes sense to me, given that every one of them has suffered a major explosion.
Certainly got the nuke apologists out in force on cnbc.
I had a professor that was into growing crystals into various shapes – programed DNA is of course both a potential horror story out of the SciFi of the 60′s – and a research project now going on. Growing human body parts on various animals has been done – but I don’t see the next Iphone being grown – so I suspect consumer products will not be possible.
Sort of a tangent, but did anyone else see the nuclear expert on PBS last night and think he was grossly underestimating the problem? He really downplayed 3 Mile Island and made at least one claim that seemed unsupported by facts.
In the same article, Steve Crossley, an Australian radiation physicist, says: “It’s not good, but it’s not a disaster.”
Which raises the question of: with hundreds of thousands of people already evacuated, and with more leaving one of the largest cities in the world, what does Mr. Crossley consider “a disaster”?
Another relevant question: Who signs his paychecks? If it’s an Aussie energy company with a stake in nuclear power, then I think it’s fair to point that out.
Disclaimer: I own no stock in any coal, solar, or wind-energy company.
:o)
Source of radiation poisoning info has been (via Lexis/Nexis search):
Japan’s government broadcaster, NHK.
NBC/MSNBC
AP
with you tube videos of broadcasts (which I have not viewed) listed on a Google search)
for the last time, with respect:
HuffPo front page headline: Radiation Leak Threatens 140,000
I call that fear-mongering.
Our disagreement seems to be over the threat to human health of the radiation leaks. I’m not a health physicist (I do have a physics degree) but from what I’ve read scattered in the comments at bravenewclimate posted over the past three days by posters who do appear to be professional health physicists, the radiation releases to date are not longlasting, nor significantly harmful outside of the perimeter of the complex. And prospects of radioactive dust being thrown into the jetstream and spreading all over Japan or the US west coast due to an explosion similar to Chernobyl or any other such scenario are simply not fact-based risks.
Peace.
I was hoping for a link specifically to discussion of injuries sustained thus far to workers on site. Thanks for the general sources though.
the actions of the Govt. are clearly not matching their words
you don’t tell a 140,000 people to evacuate, and then say hey it is not that bad.
something is just not adding up here
Sometimes it is hard to convey tone – but based on the tone I read into your post – I tend to agree with you. The mine worker deaths for coal during mining, after miners retiring, and for those around plant from effect of burning, make nukes seem very safe.
These GE/Westinghouse designs of the 50′s were rushed so as to suck up the welfare checks that IKE – and later folks – gave out under the Atoms for Peace program. Any nuke trade was good, even if it required government subsidies, as long as it made other governments friendly to us.
But the safety of spent rod ponds – which your reference site touts – is now blown apart. Likewise radiation sickness deaths may not make headlines (Chernobyl disaster had only 31 dead from radiation after a month – but the cancer increase appears to have occurred in 4000 of the 6000 after 20 years that were the closest to the effort to shut it down), and this is not going to be as bad as Chernobyl.
One of the many things that has me perplexed is, why did the operators allow the explosion inside the building of Unit 3? They knew the consequences of allowing hydrogen to build up inside the building because of their previous experience with Unit 1. Common sense would dictate that they vent #3 to open air instead of inside the building, and yet, not only did they vent into the building interior they allowed the explosive concentration to exceed that of Unit 1 (which is obvious from the force of the blast). Because it was done, and it blew, the fire in Unit 4 was started which compounded their problems. I worked in power production for 35 years and I can’t come up with a reasonable explanation for this.
“This issue is not about science…”
Spot. Fucking. On.
One of the most aggravating things about this debate is that the pro-nuclear side retreats into their Alpine Redoubt of tecnnological bullshit…
where NO amount of reality or common sense, is allowed to penetrate.
It’s all about millirems and melting points for stainless steel containers and one layer of snarf, followed by another slathering of goorple…and “you can’t argue with us, because we got the mumbo-jumbo, and you can’t have it.”
Well, for several days now, I’ve been looking at reactors blowing up, and listening to the high priests explain that that was really OK, because if they DIDN’T do that, something worse might happen…and that despite all of the failures, things really weren’t so bad, and gosharootie, no serious amounts of radiation have been released, and the movement of that U.S. Carrier Group further offshore from the 100 miles they WERE at, was really just a meaningless precaution (buncha fear-mongering pussies, are the Navy…) and they are telling people to stay indoors, instead of “get the fuck out, now!” because they don’t want to deal with traffic jams.
I’m not interested in hearing all of the minutiae sand-bagging for the nuke industry. That went down the tube a long time ago. If they want to build the damn things that several things should happen.
First: the NRC is no longer packed with industry-friendly “priests”.
Second: The corporations profiting from the plants, PAY FOR THEM, THEMSELVES!
Third: Instead of hammering on the congress to set caps on their liability for possibly turning swathes of america into uninhabitable dystopias, they, UP-FRONT, post billions of dollars in bond, to cover something like is happening at Fukushima, and as compensation; GENEROUS compensation, for the people who will suffer from a nuclear accident.
(Give me a little time, and I’ll think of some more things that should help achieve the result of ending this flirting with practically irreversible situation, and which will put a dent in the rush to disaster capitalism.”)
Do you not think that the radiation leaks going on threaten large numbers of people?
If you think that, just say so.
BTW, since more people than the 140K in the HuffPo headline were subsequently evacuated, it would seem that the authorties were perfectly willing to listen to the “alarmist” news…as well as their own information.
And, just to pick up on Allison’s thread yesterday: I’m not interested in “peace”;
we need pissed off and outraged people, to help make the changes in the status quo that Barack Obama (and the Nuclear Power Industry, among others…) is so diligently defending.
I agree with Margaret’s point that profit driven corporations in the energy business have proven that they will never place safety ahead of profits. Moreover, they also have proven that they are engines of incredibly vast power and corruption that will purchase favorable political influence, media influence, and legislation, as well as lie, cheat, steal, and murder suspected whistleblowers. Add to that the morally, ethically, and legally bankrupt neoliberal ideology currently in vogue in the federal government (and coming to a state government near you) that aggressively eliminates labor unions and regulatory oversight as it eviscerates and eliminates laws and regulatory agencies while the President and the Department of Justice always look forward, not backward, so that everyone who pays to play has, in effect, a license to commit any crime without fear of investigation or prosecution, and you have a culture of corruption that guarantees mega disasters beyond imagining.
Nevertheless, even if it were possible to eliminate all of that corruption and replace the profit motive with a safety-first motive, there still would remain the most compelling reason of all against nuclear power. I refer, of course to the nuclear-waste-disposal problem.
Where the fuck do you safely stash spent nuclear fuel rods, and other radioactive waste with half lives of hundreds, thousands, and in some cases hundreds of thousands of years, for example, as is true with plutonium?
No one has a satisfactory answer to that question and I don’t give a damn what reasons exist to use it, I am unalterably opposed to nuclear power. We are just going to have to learn how to manage without it. End of story.
The problem I have with bravenewclimate is that they have been completely wrong on so many engineering details. For instance:
Wrong, cold shutdown can take months.
Wrong, in a meltdown the reaction can re-ignite. Also nobody knows if the rods were in fact grounded.
Wrong, and related to the misunderstanding in the first quote. None of the three reactors have stabilized.
The author has yet to address the risk posed by the spent fuel rods stored at each reactor. Those are the likely source of the radioactive contamination spreading over the area. Nor has he addressed the structural weaknesses in the reactors at risk of meltdown.
In case after case he edits out engineering information that would give you a more accurate picture of the risk, and so anyone believing his blog would be constantly surprised at developments in Japan.
I don’t mean to be picky, but I’ve driven past it a number of times on the way to San Diego, and unless there’s some sort of lagoon you can’t see from I-5, the plant isn’t off the coast, it’s on the coast.
This time the people hunt down the banksters and the plutocrats that represent them and finally hold them accountable for their crimes against the working and middle class.
Coal is by far the nastiest and deadliest source of energy we have, pick any metric.
My conclusion, FWIW, is that inherently there is no risk of Chernobyl-like explosion that sends radioactive dust high enough to enter winds that spread it miles, and thus the potential radiation exposure here is inherently orders of magnitude less. Is the site a mess? You bet, particularly the spent rod ponds. Would I want to go anywhere near it? No. But the reactor piles were shut down after the earthquake and before the tsunami, ruling out a Chernobyl-like explosion (aside from the fact Chernobyl had ridiculously insufficient containment structures around the reactor-vessel).
This just in:
Austria has moved it’s embassy from Tokyo to Osaka.
(There’s a “metric” for you, Bobash.)
http://apnews.myway.com//article/20110315/D9LVPDDO0.html
Those cowards! Adding to the panic!
(but, I have to admit, I’ve always liked the idea of voting with your feet…it’s kind of hard to argue with it.)
I’m going to post my comment as a diary to open a discussion on the nuclear-waste-disposal problem.
Reasonable people take reasonable precautions when something that could kill them may be approaching. If that means leaving as soon as possible and hurrying to get out, good for them. They have a great sense of self preservation. Your making it seem like you think people are reacting unreasonably to a potential threat to life and limb that could be huge.
For dog lovers – please consider a donation to help the injured and displaced animals in Japan – a memorable video -
http://www.lifewithdogs.tv/2011/03/lessons-in-loyalty-japanese-dog-refuses-to-leave-injured-friend-behind/
Based on everything I’ve seen, no, I do not think the radiation leaks threaten or will threaten large numbers of people.
Having said that, given the trauma the Japanese people went thru in WWII and are going through this week, I also do not take issue with the Japanese government “erring” on the safe side and evacuating the area. I think that was the prudent and most appropriate public policy. I.e., better safe than sorry.
thanks for the info.
Austria must know something, the rest of us don’t
Has anyone been to the Tokyo Airport to see how many private jets have left?
Me Thinks the elites left Tokyo over the weekend, under the cover of night.
I don’t mind your passion, I just don’t think it’s best directed at folks with similar views sincerely trying to engage you in civil discourse. I’m disgusted with our oligarchy and disappointed in Obama’s deceit too.
“I do not think the radiation leaks threaten, or will threaten large numbers of people.”
So, you think that the 140,000 being told to stay inside in areas adjacent to Fukushima don’t constitute a “large number”?
Just askin…
Sigh… Alternative energy is my field when I am not writing political commentary, so I have a large bucket of cold water to drop on this.
1. We have a lot of very good alternative energy research and technology, but we do not yet know how to run a modern economy on alternative energy alone. To attempt to immediately shift from coal, oil, and nuclear power to sustainable sources would be very risky and cause much hardship.
At the same time, it is necessary in the long term.
2. The “production” of energy from fossil and nuclear fuels is really the release of stored fossil and nuclear energy. Therefore, to expect that alternative energy will ever be less expensive than fossil and nuclear energy without regulation is to pursue a chimera. This is a problem of governance, as well as a technical problem, however little we like that. (I don’t like it at all. It’s my field. We may have our budget cut again.)
We still need to start on Al Gore’s crash project, proposed now 20 years ago.
Nope, not taking issue with the evacuations, just the media’s inability to get to the relevant truth.
I agree with most of what you say except the “end of story” part. If you haven’t been paying attention, what the little people want in this country doesn’t amount to a hill of beans.
I am sampling reports from all sorts of places and my wife (Japanese) does sampling of Japanese-language sites. I infer that the Japanese sources are very measured reports in part because they have a whole lot of problems on their hands and from their perspective electrical power shortage, the loss of lives and property, the lack of water and food, the isolation of a large segment of the population–all of this is almost as sensitive a topic as “radiation”. I think I too would be choosing my words carefully. The IAEA, the Union of Concerned Scientists, nuclear industry owners/workers, and utility owners and operators all seem (to me) to be qualifying what they say–it’s just the daily tutorial on how to read the cut-away view of a GE Mark 1 reactor gets more detailed, and the science of radioactive “harm” gets garbled. Sieverts and Roentgens. Milli and Micro. Spent fuel storage pools. Zirconium tubes with radioactive fuel pellets. I am struck with how incomplete the listening audience’s understanding is, and also how incomplete the presentations to them are—and I am certainly no expert in nuclear physics or engineering, just a garden variety architect. There is certainly panic and there is certainly fear, and most of it is where it should be: near the Daichi reactors. I think for most of the rest of us, anxiety is what we should be feeling because it guides a search of our souls–a luxury given our distance from the real problems. Fear and panic do not serve us well at all.
“I don’t mind your passion.”
Actually, I’m prouder of my common sense (as un-technical as it is) than of my passion, and with a substantial part of one of the world’s largest cities starting to shit their pants because of a situation which you complain is being exaggerated in the media, I think we’re going to be treated to the pleasure of watching you (I would hope…) become a little passionate, yourself. :o)
There is no reason to trust the professionals or nuclear scientists at this point. They are liars and traitors against humanity
G.E…..
You’ve misinterpreted me. Or I you.
I do not see a contradiction between saying “I do not think the radiation leaks threaten, or will threaten large numbers of people,” and telling the Japanese around Fukushima to take the simple precaution of staying inside.
I’m not splitting words. Based on the best engineering data I’ve seen, I don’t think there is a real exposure risk to the 140,000. But given how traumatic and fast changing events have been over the last 72 hours, I also think it’s prudent to accept the possibility the best engineering judgement is wrong and err on the side of caution.
I understand how some might see these as mutually exclusive. I don’t.
Yesterday, walking in a group of people, I happened to wind up next to a consultant to the electrical power industry. His point about nuclear waste was that it HAS been safely stored all these years since we started building the first nuclear reactors. Naturally, that didn’t address the the thousands of years to come. My frustration level talking with pro nuclear folks has the very shortest of fuses. Somehow we stayed polite with each other, but I truly am mystified how people can consider nuclear anything but a disaster waiting to happen.
It is perhaps worth adding that being anti-nuclear without being for some sustainable alternative is very much the energy equivalent of the conservative “starving the beast” in budgetary policy, and has led to increased dependence on fossil fuels, especially the very dirty fuel of coal.
Can you try to have it as a regular post with the ptb here at fdl so we don’t have to deal with the impediment of nested comments?
Here’s a sustainable alternative: don’t use so much.
That’s how scientists and engineers talk. Reality is uncertain. If you hear caution and uncertainty, it means they are knowledgeable and honest; voluble confidence is for politicians and pitchmen.
As a skeptic I don’t make a habit of blindly “trusting” testimonials from anyone. I seek out facts, opinions, “testimonials”, etc. and then try to make coherent sense of it myself.
I concede the point that pro-nuke advocates (and govt. officials, and corporate shills) have agendas and their fair share of credibility issues. Nonetheless, you’re using a pretty broad brush dismissing an entire branch of engineers and physicists.
It’s pretty hard to drill down to the facts concerning technology issues without listening to any one who has spent time working in the respective technology.
Cross-posted from Bill’s thread.
If the information coming from the Japanese government seems late or incomplete at times, it is because they are not receiving timely information from TEPCO, according to Prime Minister Kan. I thought it was interesting that he insisted that TEPCO not remove workers from the plant – something they did anyway:
Kan also strongly criticized TEPCO for its handling of the stricken Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant.
‘‘The TV reported an explosion. But nothing was said to the premier’s office for about an hour,’’ a reporter overheard Kan saying during a meeting with executives of the power company at its head office. ‘‘What is going on?’‘
Kan strongly ordered the company not to withdraw its employees from the power plant, which has been facing a series of problems since Friday’s massive quake, ranging from explosions to radiation leaks.
‘‘In the event of withdrawal from there, I’m 100% certain that the company will collapse,’’ Kan said. ‘‘I want you all to be determined.’‘
The government, as well as the public, has been dissatisfied with the company’s way of releasing information regarding the crippled nuclear plant.
In an attempt to work more closely together, the government and the company launched Tuesday a joint headquarters of the crisis involving the Fukushima No. 1 plant.
The headquarters set up at the company’s head office is headed by Kan, with industry minister Banri Kaieda and TEPCO President Masataka Shimizu serving as its deputy chiefs.
http://www.japantoday.com/category/national/view/work-resumes-to-pump-seawater-into-troubled-nuclear-reactor-unit
x2
So who gets to freeze in the winter? Who starves? Who is out of work because they can no longer afford their daily commute?
Those words as dangerous, foolish, and irresponsible as any tea party rhetoric.
==modnote: please provide links to quoted material, thank you.==
Yes, and having tried to explain “design” to public authorities who believe they must provide “certainty” to their constituents,I know exactly what you mean. The discussion of what is happening in the reactors now is really a discussion about the dynamics of a process, and the kinds of engineering put in place to manage that process. Explaining anything dynamic beyond two or three variables is hard; however, that is what needs to be done. The Japanese are among the most highly educated populations in the world; that may be one reason you don’t see a lot of panic. I also think the rather focused, limited explanations the government is giving its own people go much further to inform the average Japanese layman than to you or me.
Yep, On The Beach …. (obscure nuclear novel reference)
Nice little beach there (San Onofre State Beach). We used to joke about what color your tan would be after a stay there – deep brown, or day-glo green…
From wiki:
btw, the Rose Canyon Fault runs up through coastal San Diego, toward the plant. Couldn’t be a worse placement, in my opinion, except maybe Diablo Canyon.
“…just the media’s inability to get the relevant truth.”
Actually, in fairness, I think they haven’t done all that badly, and they’re getting better. :o)
I mean:
they (belatedly, for some of them..) put up the clips of the reactors blowing up. (I believe that qualifies as “relevant truth”…your mileage may vary.)
They reported that the initial evacuation zone had about a 12 mile radius and that some 180,000 people were involved in the first evacuation. It’s now out to about 20 miles, last I heard.
They (finally) got onto the fact (completely unmentioned by the “truth-providers” at TEPCO) that the stored rods might be as much of a problem as the much-feared meltdown.
They (again, finally) disseminated the news that the Japanese PM was admitting that serious radiation leaks were occurring.
They seem to be up-front in talking about the fact that a great city is in a state of near-panic, with, increasingly, evidence that word is spreading of the increasing risk of a radiation plume making it across the relatively modest distance between Fukushima and Tokyo.
They reported, accurately, it seems, that using seawater as coolant was a desperate measure because it meant that the cooling infrastructure was essentially going to be reduced to the status of expensive junk.
They have just reported that TEPCO and the government were considering the use of American helicopters to dump water directly into the reactor ponds and other problem areas. (To me, that is REALLY getting desperate…going after Godzilla with a popgun…if they really want to do this, they should be asking the Russians: they’ve got some huge helicopters…)
I’m looking forward to seeing, as Jed asked, more news of people leaving Tokyo. It’s fair to assume that the more “important” people will get word of risks, sooner than the cottage folks. In fact, I expect that that might well become controversial, if the government allows the warnings to get out to the Japanese equivalent of the Fortune 500, before it makes them generally public. If that happens, it will be another litmus test for OUR media, to see if they’re willing to focus on it.
All in all, I’d give our media a gentleman’s “C”, working on a “B-minus”.
“You’ve mis-interpreted me, or I, you.”
How strange…
I assure you, that if I, along with 140,000 other people, were living in the vicinity of Fukushima, with all that has already happened, and I was told to stay indoors because of an increase in the radiation being leaked from the wreckage of several nuclear plants, I would interpret it as threatening to “large numbers of people.”
That you do not, is, I think, due more to a bias on your part in favor of the nuclear industry than to any lexicographical disjuncts occurring between us.
No, it is pretty much possible for some things, and for other things requires a lot of research. It isn’t a DNA thing, it’s a biotech/nanotech thing, and a lot more basic and more polymer engineering than some kind of sci-fi artificial life. I had it checked out with some biochemists before I sent it off. Principle difficulties are with certain compounds, and in structures, but the overall idea is quite sound: build polymer compounds from atmospheric carbon to order, and do manufacturing by controlled growth along structures. You have to do a lot of rewriting of how to design electronics circuitry. You have to solve some problems in how to get strength of materials out of essentially grown fiberglass like structures. You have to rethink a lot of things, but you put industry on an ecology-like basis so it is in balance with itself.
But it’s totally at odds with the “We can do this and it won’t cost a cent or make anyone change their lifestyle one bit” crap that’s been touted. Which I don’t happen to believe. Solving the climate change problem is going to cost a lot in changes. My solution was one possible way to do it. It required that all man-made systems adopt the same ecological balance structure that all natural systems adopt as axiomatic, and then work out what needs to be done to achieve that based on what we probably know how to do if we re-purpose what we’ve got. That’s almost tautologically ‘sustainability,’ but nobody wants to hear that.
Okay, I agree to disagree. You think the media is doing okay and I think they are regurgitating what they are fed with added hyperventilating volume. You think panic is in order and I’m a biased pro-nuke and I think the threat of health consequences from Fukushima is being overblown.
We should have a clear verdict before the end of the week.
You’re off your rocker.
Well, the verdict is in, on the nuclear plant at Fukujima: it’s a disaster, and if you want to wait to see if that’s true: if you want to wait to see if they can get control of this, and then chortle about the triumph of nuclear technology IF they do, then, I really believe that you’ve made my case for me.
In response to hotdog’s recommendation that a sustainable solution to not using nuclear power would be for people to reduce their consumption of electricity, you said you regarded:
Well, put this in your pipe and smoke it.
I think your answer is absolutely fucking crazy!
But they reflect a fundamental problem with dealing with energy issues. The issue is always framed as “we have to provide a plug-in replacement for big, centralized, base-load power plants so that the system can continue as always, and we have to compete on price”.
I’ve lived off-grid (this post made with solar electrons!) for 13 years. The very first thing you do with renewables is to transform your life to require radically less energy. You adapt to not having unlimited energy at arbitrary times just because the power is “on”. No electrical heating elements in the dead middle of winter. No running the vacuum when it’s been cloudy for a week. You adapt to the weather. This is not hardship, this is life.
Much of modern infrastructure is in place so that people can perform tasks at particular times by the clock and calendar, without regard to conditions. It doesn’t have to be that way, and in the near future it won’t be. Our current path is unsustainable, which means that it won’t be sustained.
On a national level, this means we target energy efficiency – not sitting in the dark, but using less electricity for the light we need. Turn off the damned street lights that keep you from seeing the stars. Build cities that don’t require automobiles.
Then you declare moratoriums on expansion of devastatingly poor base load choices – coal and nuclear. You add renewables and upgrade the grid as quickly as it can be done (which is slow) regardless of cost and rely on that plus conservation to maintain reasonable (not current) per-capita energy supply. Then you phase out the existing coal capacity. Then you phase out the nuclear.
Once you have framed the issue as “our way of life is non-negotiable” (thanks, Dick), you have just guaranteed our extinction. There is no solution that does not transform society. We can do it with our eyes open, or it gets done to us.
We do have a problem when people as obviously intelligent as raven333 infer that even though this country throws more energy out the window than it will ever be possible to generate with new facilities built over the next two decades, nuclear, coal-fired, solar, or petroleum based, acceptance of that fact and a plan to alter our behavior is foolish and irresponsible.
Indeed.
Bozhe moi!
Chu to US House
How about this, Sec. Chu – either learn not to build the damn things, or build them for the WORST POSSIBLE SCENARIO! The accidents at Fukushima are “beyond design-basis accidents,” meaning that when the plants were built, the perceived likelihood of a massive earthquake followed by a massive tsunami followed by a total loss of power was considered so insignificant as to be safely ignored.
I guess to me a safe design would be able to withstand a 9.9 quake, a 1 km high tsunami and obviously the backup power supply and fuel storage (both spent and new) would be equally hardened. So, yeah, I expect the damn thing to survive anything short of a direct nuclear or major meteor strike. Greatly expensive? Perhaps, but maybe not as great as the potential for disaster.
I don’t know whether to weep, scream or throw up. Perhaps all three are advisable here…
I try to follow what the kids (the under 50 types) are doing but my once wide background is not adequate in our world of very specialized research (one of my eldest kid’s degrees is a BS in Physics – very proud Dad – :-) – but the job market was nil – one needed post PHD to get research scientist hire in a US corporation – so there was extra degrees and learning of that for which there was hiring).
I’d love to (try) to read any papers on the general area of material “growth” that is underlying your concept – but that may be wishful thinking as I have a hard time with the “popular” write-ups that MIT does for simple bio/nano engineering. But I’d still like to try. When I first got out into the real world, so to speak, I ordered up the Bell Labs Journal so as to keep current – but within 5 years I could only understand the summaries – and 10 years out those were a stretch, as I had only time to learn the world of finance and taxes and economics as applied to finance objectives. But I can’t help trying to remain in “student mode” – trying to forget that age thing.
Yes. The late great Buckminster Fuller used to go on and on about waste and inefficiency–the first step is to use engineering and logistical solutions to offset the massive waste of the current energy infrastructure. Alternative energy sources can come later. But there is too much resistance even to step #1.
Well thought out commentary 4cdave…
I agree with all points made…and the logical way you elicit them. Especially:
Hey, waste is money. Got to keep it flowing./s
I once had an argument with a conservative colleague about why we were in Iraq. I asked him why he thought we shouldn’t try to conserve oil (you know, him calling himself a conservative, I tried to point out the irony). Why should we waste so much? His answer: “Because we can.” I kid you not. Made me think of the Spanish invading the Aztecs and their agricultural world of plenty, gorging themselves and slaughtering the “primitives.” Made me want to throw up.
You haven’t answered my questions.
Yes, in the long term, reduce the consumption of energy and develop a sustainable economy. In the next decade, what and how? I am very worried about panic and the harm that panic will bring.
I’m off to a seminar on energy conservation technologies. I hope I see more sense when I get back.
Why would you conflate starving with conserving? Changing one’s lifestyle to reduce energy consumption by even 25% is not life-threatening. It can even be life-invigorating. Not talking about how we waste too much and refusing to promote conservation is criminal, in my opinion.
Peak oil was five years ago. Peak per-capita electric generation was about 40 years ago. This is not a supply issue anymore, supply is going to go in one direction, down. This is a demand issue.
Who freezes/starves/is out of work? Everyone, if we fail to transform society to fit within the energy stream available. And no-one if we power down correctly.
The amount of energy the Japanese and Europeans consume (a lot of it is Nuclear, but that is beside the point) per capita is about 1/2 what we use. Are they starving, freezing, out of work? How do they do it? I hope I see a little more humility and grace when you get back.
Lived in Stockholm and in a few other Euro cities in the early part of this decade. The efficiency is amazing. Everything is smaller, including refrigerators. Mass transit is a given. Light efficiency is pushed to everyone. Cars and trucks are required to be more efficient. It’s a social as well as a government thing; people understand and work to gain even more savings. Now Sweden has higher employment and the Kroner is strongish. Germany is doing OK. So…
This quote haunts me a little. What type of harm are you talking about? You don’t have a lot invested in KBR and Bechtel do you, because I’m sure they’ll do just fine, maybe not as fine but fine nonetheless, even without subsidies from the American taxpayer.
Not to mention the people there are a little more conscious of their energy foot-print, don’t tolerate waste, and recycle religiously.
Lessons from Three Mile Island:
1. IF the governments says the radiation is “X”, multiply by two.
2. IF the governments says to shelter in place, get the hell out.
Raven, which worries you more; the exploding nuclear power plants and radiation releases, or the possibilty of panic on the part of the Japanese?
Just askin….
here ya are TTP:http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/15/us-chernobyl-clean-up-expert-slams-japan-idUSTRE72E7AL20110315
exactly, not long ago I heard people almost bragging how long they leave their Xmas lights up. Seemed kinda wasteful to me but that’s just me
Did you know they air-condition the open streets in Las Vegas? I think the only countries that top us in per capita consumption are the ones located in deserts who build indoor ski slopes.
Didn’t know that, amazing. To bad America isn’t the least interested in a sensible energy policy. I’m usually an optimist but the older I get the less hope I see for this country. F–king greed trumps all.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/15/nuclear-usa-idUSN1526586520110315 Gee just what I need for my depression, couldn’t get past the 1st page.
Oh, then you missed the best part:
“Considerably.” Now there’s a hand-waving word for you.
that does it I’m joining the winos under the bridge.
San Onofre is not built “considerably above that”. It’s just barely at the level that can be predicted. I read two articles about the plant in the last 24 hrs, and both claim that they designed it to fit the projected possibilities of the local off-shore faults. But wait…according to an LA Times article Monday,
So it ISN’T built “considerably above that” is it? Again, the LA Times:
The chance of a 9.0 quake on the fault off the Northern Japanese coast, in the Japanese Trench (meeting point of the Pacific Plate and the North American Plate) was considered remote as well, which is why the nuclear plants were not designed for a quake that substantial. And they didn’t plan on a 10m tidal surge either. (Cool science article here, BTW.)
Plus the San Onofre plant is about 60 miles away from the San Andreas fault, a section that’s been “locked up” since a huge quake in SoCal in 1857, which literature identifies as about the same magnitude as the San Francisco earthquake of 1906, 8.3.
That’s 8.3, 60 miles away.
So I’m calling bullshit on this claim.
And don’t get me started on the supposed “30-foot-high, reinforced concrete tsunami wall,” it’s a joke. I’ve surfed that beach. There are better walls keeping the riff-raff off Malibu beaches.
Dude, don’t go the wino-under-the-bridge route.
A customer of mine just came by for another two tanks of CO2 for his grow operation.
For some reason he always seems relaxed and happy.
Heh.
The Union for Concerned Scientists released a transcript of yesterday’s conference call and Q&A. The call was conducted in the morning, US time, which would be before news releases about the subsequent problems in #2 and #4. This section on spent fuel offered some attempt at quantification:
QUESTION: Hi. I was just on another briefing call where there was quite a bit of concern expressed about the — not just the reactor vessel, but the adjacent pools which contain the spent fuel. I want to get your assessment of that situation, whether you think that’s a great risk as well.
DR. LYMAN: This is Ed Lyman. I can start, and Dave should cut in if he wants to add something. In these reactors, the spent fuel pools are actually on the upper level of the building, and in the case of Number 1 and Number 3, where the roofs were blown off, they may have suffered some structural integrity damage. The good news, if there is any, is that from the numbers I’ve seen, the inventory of spent fuel in these pools was relatively small. They were well below capacity. That could limit the potential impact if there were a loss of coolant to the pools, but TEPCO has made statements, at least with regard to one, that they were concerned about the ability to provide long-term coolant to the pool and should that be interrupted, there is a possibility of fuel damage in the pool that could lead to additional fission product release. But from the numbers I’ve seen, the inventories are comparable to or smaller than the — what’s in the reactor core. So, maybe Dave would like to add something.
MR. LOCHBAUM: I think the only thing I could add to that, Ed, is that if there is a release of radioactivity from a spent fuel pool, particularly on Units 1 and 3, where the explosion earlier, a few days ago, knocked out the walls and the roof of the building, if there’s any radiation released, it’s got to get to the environment,
http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_power/nuclear_power_risk/safety/nuclear-crisis-japan-telepress-transcript-03-14-11.html
The recording for today’s call is available, but not the transcript.
energy austerity
The rhetoric of austerity concerns me in energy as much as it does government budgets. One of the simplest ways to reduce energy consumption is to raise the price of fossil fuels. It would hammer what remains of the middle class and, especially, the poor. The Koch brothers would love it, if they got a cut of the revenues.
You were asking about starving: energy derived from petroleum is a huge input to agriculture, both directly to run farm machinery and indirectly in the production of synthetic fertilizer (petroleum refining byproducts are, IIRC, a production input for those fertilizers as well.) Yes, it doesn’t have to be that way. But we aren’t going to make those changes in a year, and probably not even in ten.
The “lifestyle” changes you are talking about are not available to everyone. We are an urban people; if all of us try to go off-grid, most of us will starve. The efficiencies of mass transportation are not available to some huge fraction of our public. Retrofitting housing for better energy efficiency is short-term costly and we are mostly cash-strapped. Renters cannot control the energy efficiency of their housing at all. And so on, and so on.
We can make changes, sure. But not overnight. You seem to want to pull the plug on fossil fuel and nuclear power tomorrow. That can only be done with enormous amounts of hardship and, yes, death. Yes, we can be more efficient. We need to have alternatives to offer and a real plan, one that does not leave people, literally, in the cold; we cannot just say “consume less.”
It would be a waste of time to tell folks to “consume less” but we could quit rewarding wasteful consumption as our market and tax laws do now, for starters.