national

TEPCO starts freezing last section of ice wall around Fukushima reactor

33 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2017 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

33 Comments
Login to comment

If the Japanese can't make nuclear power safe, no one can.

Conclusion: no one can.

0 ( +10 / -10 )

Black Sabaath

My dislike for nuclear plants aside, hasn't everything since Fukushima gone to show how lax and inept they were? Hardly the World Standard.

12 ( +15 / -3 )

The 30-meter-deep wall is designed to block underground water from nearby mountains from flowing into the shattered complex and then seeping into the Pacific.

So basically contaminated water this has been seeping (unreported to the public) for the past 6 and a half years. Beaches opened, people swimming, fishing industry as usual, etc. If all is well, then why spend billions of yen to build a wall? They just reported what they have been keeping quiet about all these years.

7 ( +10 / -3 )

The huge utility has been building the barrier since March 2016 with the government picking up its price tag.

That should read, "with the 'people' picking up its price tag."

14 ( +16 / -2 )

This isn't going to go away.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

What I don't get though, is if the seeping water itself isn't contained or fixed how long before something like;

Water starts coming out through the top of the ground..

or is forced into the Water table..

The, unfortunately seeping, but cooling water stops moving and the fuel starts heating up..

You would hope all of these types of things have been thought of but given the massive mistakes throughout this man made disaster I can't really be confident.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Landslides, Earthquakes, Volcanoes, Tsunamis and Typhoons really makes Japan a poor choice for Nuclear energy.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

designed to cut down on vast amounts of contaminated water

cut down means there is no control.

Fukushima Combined Releases To Sea & Air

Combined high: 17846 Pbq (74.5% of total inventory at the plant)

Combined low:    1420 Pbq (5.9% of total inventory at the plant)

Chernobyl Release Estimates

The release estimates provided by UNSCEAR were used for comparison.

Air:              8385 Pbq

Sea:                20 Pbq

Combined: 8405 Pbq

Ice wall is a joke. Concrete is much better as the problem will last for 1000 years. Ice wall needs too much maintenance. Chernobyl is just reached the period of refurbishment. I can't believe an ice wall will last 30 years. In 30 years, maybe technology will exist to deal with the uncontrolled iodising radionuclides.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

140ton to 100tonnes (~110ton) isn't much difference for the money it will cost. Seems TEPCO are really out of options.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Surely I'm not the only one to instantly think of GoT and its wall in the north, when I hear Ice wall.. (I know its not made of Ice in GoT, but can't help but think that way)

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

That is a huge amount of money, being paid for by.... the good old tax payer. Filling the pockets of......

4 ( +5 / -1 )

So for this huge price tag, they hope to cut the ground water by only 40 tons! I was hoping the number would be almost zero, but for $320 million, it doesn't seem to be worth it.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

The former president Shimizu and other former executives who brushed off advice on putting the backup generators above should be in prison--plain and simple.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Black Sabbath, you gotta be kidding.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The ice wall is unproven technology and TEPCO is 'hoping' it lasts 30 years. However, the refrigeration is susceptible to all the common mechanical failures of refrigeration and when it fails (not 'if') it will release any and all of the water built up behind it into the pacific after it flows through the plant and picks up all the isotopic particles. Nice! Even if it does work flawlessly, it will only stop 60-80% of the ground water flowing into the plant. This ice wall goes down 30 meters (100ft), but the water table is much lower. It would have been cheaper, easier and much more reliable to dig a huge mote around the plant, fill it with cement and divert the water away from the plant. This ice wall will only act as a dam, which is destined to fail. Furthermore, they have no idea how far into the ground the melted rods went. They know it melted through the base of the containment vessel, but not how far. Around 50% of the water they are pumping into the reactor is disappearing. This means it is going into the ground and possibly, into the water table. If it's not going into the water table it is seeping into the ocean. If this ice wall does work, it will create a dam for the water leaking from the reactor. However, it will eventually fill up creating an even bigger potential disaster when the dam fails. Perfect!

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Looks like Fukushima power plant has become much more profitable for TEPCO than it used to be before the disaster, because now they can suck all the money directly from the taxpayers for unlimited amount of time and with almost zero responsibility.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

It seems that TEPCO would not make it unless freezing the whole eatern lands of Fukushima because of too much groundwater all over the reactors site and besides everywhere.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

In addition to being in a major earthquake, typhoon, flood, landslide, tsunami region, Japan is highly likely in the near future to be in a major war zone. If ever a country shouldn't have nuclear power stations...

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Nice work by Tepco at stopping horizontal currentS

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@since1981

The water does not flow directly into the ocean, it is pumped before reaching the sea around the reactors. They have released into the ocean when she storage capacity is full.

@Disillusioned

Freezing wall is a proven technology. It has been used for years in mining to prevent any water inflow into some underground mines

2 ( +3 / -1 )

@bruinfan. shimazu and his criminal group got cleared in court and a big bonus. he got 500million yen i believe.

the abe govt gave tepco permission to release the radioactive water from the storage tanks into the ocean, because they only have a five year life and there is more and more and more water every day.

they cut costs when building Daiichi. there is a history of earthquakes and tsunamis. it was supposed to be built on the mountain on hard rock, but cheaper on the sea level as material for construction came by ship. the building designs were supposed to be bigger and the back-up generators should have be protected. also there is evidence that the earthquake caused the melt downs.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

What happens to the "ice wall" during the next Earthquake ? How do they determine if there are any leaks ?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

So basically contaminated water this has been seeping (unreported to the public) for the past 6 and a half years

Nope it has been well reported and monitored.

What I don't get though, is if the seeping water itself isn't contained or fixed how long before something like;

They collect/pump out the water. That is why there are all those water tanks on the site.

Ice wall is a joke. Concrete is much better as the problem will last for 1000 years.

And a 30 meter deep underground concrete wall is immensely harder to build. Also it doesn't need to last 1000 years.

140ton to 100tonnes (~110ton) isn't much difference for the money it will cost.

Compared to the original 400 tonnes, it IS a big difference. And if they run out of space for more tanks then no on will be worried about how much it cost.

So for this huge price tag, they hope to cut the ground water by only 40 tons!

No, by about 300 toones PER DAY.

The ice wall is unproven technology

Ice walls have been used for decades and so far in this case it has done exactly what it was designed to do.

the abe govt gave tepco permission to release the radioactive water from the storage tanks into the ocean

No they haven't.

 it was supposed to be built on the mountain on hard rock, but cheaper on the sea level as material for construction came by ship

No it wasn't. Reactors have to be built near water supplies to provide cooling.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

If all is well, then why spend billions of yen to build a wall?

Because the price of the wall is decided by the TEPCO and alike, picture it as a continuous money diversion pipe open, they will certainly not close the flow by themselves...

0 ( +1 / -1 )

So, how do I reduce my Electricity Bill to avoid paying for TEPCO/J.Gov's mistakes ?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

thepersoniamnow

I am unaware of any people or nation who are as kachinto, or consequent as the Germans say, as the Japanese or Japan.

There are some that are as much, but not more.

So, yeah, Japan is the standard. And they are human. And we humans are fallible.

And that is why Soviet style communism fails. And that is why fission based nuclear power cannot work.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

So, how do I reduce my Electricity Bill to avoid paying for TEPCO/J.Gov's mistakes ?

Use less electricity. Get some solar panels. Get more energy efficient appliances. Raise the temp on your thermostat in summer and lower it in winter. Turn down the temp on your hot water heater. Get lower wattage light bulbs.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

for sale: very large refrigerator. only used once. nothing wrong with it that we know of. nothing wrong at all.

pick up only, located in fukushima. first come first served.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

nuclear power is safe. the number of people who die each year due to coal mining, pollution, etc related issues is staggeringly higher than the number of deaths caused by nuclear power.

the problem is when stupid people (japanese government) get involved in the design and location process. putting nuclear plants beside oceans known for throwing tsunamis this way every few decades, building them on active faults, or near volcanoes. stupid stupid stupid.

nuclear power plants built in a flat place with a large source of water that is never at risk of extreme flooding are likely the safest way to generate the amount of power we need.

of course solar and wind are better, but until the world decides to actually accept those as the primary energy source, nuclear is a good choice. there are reactor designs which have been shelved due to politics, which are able to produce electricity using spent fuel from other nuclear reactors. their toxic waste output is minimal, and some day i think humans will be able to find a way to use those radioactive waste elements for something.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Why not try freezing the spent fuel pools while they are at it..... or is it too hot to trot just like the water is for the ice wall.....

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Why not try freezing the spent fuel pools while they are at it

Why would they do that? Talk about wasting time and money. The spent fuel pools are fine just the way they are.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Black Sabbath, remember the nuclear accident in Mito where a number of workers died because they were mixing plutonium in a bucket? If this lot is the gold standard god help us.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

come to think of it, japan probably should not have nuclear power at all. too incompetent.

if we discount chernobyl, japan's death count from nuclear power accidents in the last 20 years is higher than the worldwide death count since the beginning of nuclear power in the 40's and 50's. that ought to tell you something.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites