national

Tainted water leaking into sea from roof of Fukushima plant

65 Comments

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

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2015.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

65 Comments
Login to comment

On the roof? The only way water on the roof can become so contaminated is if there is a massive radiation leak. But, the great leader Abe said, "It's under control!"

6 ( +11 / -5 )

Leaking everywhere but tepco still won't admit there is a problem. How come there are leakages but there is no problem. Isn't it, recognizing a problem the first step to fix it?

7 ( +10 / -3 )

... The electric utility believes gravel and blocks laid on the roof of the building are the source of contamination ... Sample rainwater collected at one corner of the rooftop contained 23,000 becquerels per liter of cesium 137, more than 10 times as high as radiation levels in sample water taken from other parts of the roof ...

So they just took the gravel and blocks they had laying around the site, already radiated by cesium ejected from the core, and tossed it up on the roof where it'd be safe?

Or something else?

What the hell's going on over there?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Don't be childish... When he says "Its under Control!", then he does not say everything is fine. The question is, if there is a real disaster coming... You might see it realistically instead politically correct.

Tell me. What kind of problems has Fukushima caused for YOU in the last two or three years?

They removed the rods from the fourth floor, do you guys have any idea, what would have happened if one of these rods would have dropped to the floor????

Of course there are tons of problems, besides the contaminated water Problem, they still have not the slightest idea how to get to the Corium and once they actually do, what to do then! If what Abe says its true, the at least we will not have an explosion like Chernobyl. Because then they will really have to evacuate a huge area.... You might all spend a little moire time and do some research, understand what goes on up there. Endless repeats of politically correct phrases will not help at all. If you have an idea how to change Abe and the Tepco people against more competent managers of such a problem, then tell us. There is NO ONE in the whole world, who has any experience for this work.

-16 ( +4 / -20 )

Volland - I beg your pardon! How is it childish to quote Abe's statement he used to gain the Olympics? And, if you must know, the Fukushima disaster has caused me direct problems. For starters, I am paying an extra 10% for electricity. I also used to do a lot of surfing in ibaraki and Fukushima, but after checking radiation levels in the sand I refuse to go back there. We checked radiation levels on beaches between Kashima and into southern Fukushima and found there is a lot of radiation in the sand on the foreshore. Childish? Really?

17 ( +19 / -2 )

If you really want to know how little this leakage in total has effected the Pacific there are some great articles out there about it. The ocean is huge and can easily handle it.

-12 ( +5 / -17 )

The operator of the tsunami-crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant said on Tuesday it had found a pool of highly contaminated water on the roof of a plant building and that it had probably leaked into the sea through a gutter when it rained.

Wow, with incredible powers of deduction like this, you can rest assured that the clean-up of Fukushima is being handled by Japan's "best and brightest". Ya, right!

If you really want to know how little this leakage in total has effected the Pacific there are some great articles out there about it. The ocean is huge and can easily handle it.

Yelnats -- so that makes Japan's and TEPCO's clear incompetence in handling this cleanpup OK? Just because "the ocean is "huge"?

9 ( +12 / -3 )

volland - I think it's entirely appropriate to comment on a subject even if we have not been directly affected.

It's called "taking an interest in our wider community".

Heaven forbid if we can't offer opiniions on Fukushima because we were / are not there or impacted directly.

And as citizens living here we have a right to comment and as lay-persons or interested observers we don't have any obligation to solve the problem - as opposed to the govt & tepco inc.

8 ( +11 / -3 )

Seriously, by now, what's the point? Just put your nuclear fuel rods into the ocean and turn the Pacific into Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Version 2.0. .

I mean, actually, I would believe TEPCO and the government more if they just said, Yeah, this place is toxic. What are you gonna do about?

3 ( +5 / -2 )

the outflow of radiation from the plant is controlled by monitoring radiation levels in sea water, a Nuclear Regulation Agency official said.

The quote above is obviously a direct translation of what the official said in Japanese, but it makes no sense neither in English nor in Japanese. Blatant obfuscation.

I'd like to know how "monitoring radiation levels in sea water" is supposed to "control" the radiation outflow — I can monitor the heat of the sun all I want, but by monitoring it I am in no way controlling it.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

TEPCO said it has been aware since last spring that radiation levels in water running in one of the plant gutters rise when it rains but had confirmed the source of the contamination only on Tuesday.

This is the one I find amazing. It took almost a year for someone to get up on the roof and check to see what was happening. That leak would have taken, say, 3 minutes with a geiger counter to find, so nobody even looked for it. A more proactive approach would be nice.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Sorry about the Leakage. It will happene again . Sorry about that.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

DisillusionedFeb. 25, 2015 - 07:00AM JST

On the roof? The only way water on the roof can become so contaminated is if there is a massive radiation leak.

Oh, my. It is just surprising that there still is a man on earth who does not know what happened in Fukushima four years ago. There was a MASSIVE radiation leak, which the government rated level 7. There is no 'IF' here.

SauloJpnFeb. 25, 2015 - 07:26AM JST

Leaking everywhere but tepco still won't admit there is a problem.

TEPCO admitted serious problems from the day one.

Why there are so many uninformed foreigners here? Do not they realise they are earning bad reputation for the foreigners in Japan?

-11 ( +2 / -13 )

Tepco new there were mistakes made right after the tsunami, so leave them alone and let them get on with their work.

Putting contaminated water in big tanks is just for show. They are not necessary. The water can be dumped and will be totally diluted.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Leakage of contaminated water into the sea in and of itself does not violate regulations because the outflow of radiation from the plant is controlled by monitoring radiation levels in sea water, a Nuclear Regulation Agency official said.

What? Does this make any logical sense to anyone?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Amazing that they are unable to fix this. The catalog of errors just goes on and on.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@volland

Tell me. What kind of problems has Fukushima caused for YOU in the last two or three years?

Just like many other concerned citizens here, may we be allowed to worry about the situation in general ? Not to mention that I personally had a problem... TEPCO's contaminated water killed my dog - we don't know how much contamination we also receive(d)...

2 ( +4 / -2 )

All those surprised, raise your hands!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

ifd66Feb. 25, 2015 - 11:15AM JST

Leakage of contaminated water into the sea in and of itself does not violate regulations because the outflow of radiation from the plant is controlled by monitoring radiation levels in sea water, a Nuclear Regulation Agency official said.

What? Does this make any logical sense to anyone?

You might as well read the next paragraph of the article.

There have been no meaningful changes in radiation levels in sea water nearby, Tokyo Electric said.

There is a separated body of sea water surrounded by concrete walls attached to the NPP site in the port area of the plant. The contaminated water ran into the separated water area, and the radiation level in the area did not change. So, no violation, says the NRA.

klausdorthFeb. 25, 2015 - 07:42AM JST

yes, everything under control, no problem and no worries.

Saying the problem is under control is not same as saying there is no problem. Can you see the difference?

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

TEPCO said it has been aware since last spring that radiation levels in water running in one of the plant gutters rise when it rains but had confirmed the source of the contamination only on Tuesday.

Well, that inspires confidence.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I still don't know enough about nuclear power plants, radiation, how to solve the problem.

But the best and brightest should be working on this, and all the labourers should be getting great salaries and benefits.

Tepco should not be in charge.

Get someone independent and capable in charge - there should be no middle men cheating the laborers out of the wages. If the same thing were happening in most 1st world countries the media would be all over it.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

"The Roof , the roof , the roof is on fire....Burn!! " .if I had one 500 coin every time I hear TEPCO excuses

1 ( +2 / -1 )

. For starters, I am paying an extra 10% for electricity.

That would be because they've turned off the nuclear plants wouldn't it. Of course had Japan never had nuclear you'd have been paying that extra 10% for years...

We checked radiation levels on beaches between Kashima and into southern Fukushima and found there is a lot of radiation in the sand on the foreshore.

Define 'lots'. And I presume that you were measuring the radiation at the regular height of 1 m off the ground?

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

klausdorthFeb. 25, 2015 - 03:27PM JST

And that was what "they" said, if I am not all wrong.

Would you quote what they said?

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

And I presume that you were measuring the radiation at the regular height of 1 m off the ground?

People enjoying the beach do so one meter up in the air?

1 ( +6 / -5 )

TEPCO, it's laughable how they have been dealing with all their blunders. It's a never ending train of lies and mistrust. The problem I have is, it's not funny, and things are not being dealt with. And why aren't the board of directors under indictment for crimes against the environment and humanity, since we'll end up eating fish and other foods that glow in the dark. Timd to put these indaviguals in prison!!

4 ( +5 / -1 )

TEPCO are doing a fine job of fixing this mess and keeping us all safe. And they have been absolutely fair and compassionate to all of the displaced locals........ Why the public continue to whine about this unfortunate accident is beyond me.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Kaerishita: TEPCO are doing a fine job of fixing this mess and keeping us safe. And they have been absolutely fair and compassionate to all of the displaced locals...... Why the public continue to whine about this unfortunate accident is beyond me.

While I will agree that TEPCO's subcontracted low paid workers have made amazing progress, TEPCO continues to make one mistake after another and we usually don't here about it until way after it happened, (like this incident).

Absolutely fair and compassionate?? Wow, it to a court order to forse TEPCO to compansate those locals and the little compansasion they gave is nothing compared to what they lost. Please deiscribe how TEPCO has treated them with compassion?

Why does the public whine about this unfortunate acident? Because TEPCO was warned and fined multiple times, about existing problems and failed to correct them. By the way, how is that silly EXPENSIVE ice wall working out? How many local are still displaced? Meanwhile TEPCO continues to gain record profits.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

We checked radiation levels on beaches between Kashima and into southern Fukushima and found there is a lot of radiation in the sand on the foreshore.

And do you have the readings from before 2011? Lots of beaches have naturally high levels of radiation. In fact there are beaches in Brazil and India that based on Japan's current radiationphobic regulations would be exclusion zones, yet people are swimming and sunbathing on those beaches just about every day.

By the way, how is that silly EXPENSIVE ice wall working out?

I know of no silly ice wall. But the ice wall based on well understood science and engineering that has been used successfully many times over the last few decades, hasn't even been built yet so can't tell how it is working out. Now what is your better solution to keep water from leaking into the building basements?

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Nuclear power is not an inevitable feature of energy supply systems. It has many attractive characteristics, but also a unique combination of problems, including military connections, problems of civil liberties, of safety and environment, of regard for future generations and, above all, of deteriorating economy. It's the most expensive, dangerous and damn right stupidest thing the baby-boomers got excited about.

Then, added into the mix are the lies, deceit, obfuscation and the Apologist Clowns, its the funniest circus in town.

4 years and counting, nuclear free and fancy... safe.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Cleo - neither acceptable nor unacceptable levels are calculated at ground level. if you disagree with that then perhaps you should complain to your local scientific community and explain why they are wrong.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Decontaminating Fukushima propaganda is number one step to ensure people health is not in danger from residual radiation.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

neither acceptable nor unacceptable levels are calculated at ground level. if you disagree with that then perhaps you should complain to your local scientific community and explain why they are wrong.

The 'scientific community' can make its own rules. If I'm lying on a beach, I want to know that the sand isn't going to give me cancer or worse. If kids are making sandcastles, their parents need to know the sand is safe and that neither the sandcastles nor the kids are going to start glowing in the dark.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Leaking everywhere but tepco still won't admit there is a problem. How come there are leakages but there is no problem. Isn't it, recognizing a problem the first step to fix it?

Ehh... the fact that they're reporting the issue to the press means that they think it's "a problem". TEPCO doesn't report the normal daily events to the press.

So they just took the gravel and blocks they had laying around the site, already radiated by cesium ejected from the core, and tossed it up on the roof where it'd be safe?

The article makes no such claim.

Volland - I beg your pardon! How is it childish to quote Abe's statement he used to gain the Olympics? And, if you must know, the Fukushima disaster has caused me direct problems. For starters, I am paying an extra 10% for electricity. I also used to do a lot of surfing in ibaraki and Fukushima, but after checking radiation levels in the sand I refuse to go back there. We checked radiation levels on beaches between Kashima and into southern Fukushima and found there is a lot of radiation in the sand on the foreshore. Childish? Really?

Volland's point is valid, though. "Under control" has NEVER meant "No problem". The fact that it needs to be controlled at all means there is a problem. The paraphrasing that goes on here in the JT comments is what created the "No problem" myth. As far as the radiation in the sand, what was the reading in the sand prior to 3/11? I ask because no matter WHAT beach you go to on the face of the Earth, you will get radiation readings from the sand.

Yelnats -- so that makes Japan's and TEPCO's clear incompetence in handling this cleanpup OK? Just because "the ocean is "huge"?

I see this claim of "clear incompetence" used a lot... by people who haven't the faintest clue on how to clean up a partial nuclear meltdown. And Yelnats said nothing about how "OK" the job the people conducting the clean-up were doing. His/her comment was on how much damage the ocean was taking from the partial meltdown and clean-up.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

They gonna check to see if they used the right instruments this time? Or is it in reality 16 times higher than what they measured again?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-23918882

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Tell me. What kind of problems has Fukushima caused for YOU in the last two or three years?

I'm sure a lot of us would love to be able to answer that. However since we're relying on TEPCO and the government here for information they learn the previous spring and wait almost an entire year to release, we're kind of in the dark over the whole thing. Which is part of the problem.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Cleo... if the scientific community deem it safe then it is safe.

what is regarded as the acceptable level is measured at approximately one metre above the ground. Which means that the ground is safe.

Where the issues occur is when someone shoves their geiger counter into the dirt has a higher reading and claims it's dangerous.

A bit like if you stand in a river after it's just rained and claim that 4 meters of rain fell.

Now you can choose to ignore what the experts deem to be safe all you like. I would presume that your life is spent in a protective bubble. Because everything you do has risks. Every thing you eat has risks.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Heda: Cleo... if the scientific community deem it safe then it is safe.

Hahaha, hopefully you are not proposing that as a general principle.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Mike O' Brian: I know of no silly Icewall. But the Icewall was based on well understood science and engineering that has been used many times successfully over the last few decades, hasn't even been built yet so can't tell how it's working out. Now what is your better solution to keep water from leaking into the building basement?

The Icewall concept may have been used successfully many times but NEVER by TEPCO. it's true the official Icewall has not been built but TEPCO's attempt at building a simple ice trench was a complete fail. TEPCO claims that the Icetrench is in no way related to the Icewall, then I have to ask, why did they build it in the first place? If they had built a successful ice trench, I'm sure they would have used it as a example of great success towards building the "Icewall". What's my solution? Lol, I didn't create the problem but I can see that fixing the "root problem" before the "symptom" should be priority. The remaining spent fuel rods need to be removed so that the natural water flow doesn't compound the existing root problem.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

If the cores have melted through to 30-40 feet below the facility's level, and are possibly still molten, how deep would an uphill ice wall or bare trench have to go to prevent groundwater picking up contamination? And wouldn't it have to completely circle the reactors to prevent seawater getting in?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

klausdorthFeb. 26, 2015 - 10:03AM JST

Let us see what he really said. http://japan.kantei.go.jp/96_abe/statement/201309/07ioc_presentation_e.html

Some may have concerns about Fukushima. Let me assure you, the situation is under control. It has never done and will never do any damage to Tokyo.

So, he was saying that the situation is contained in Fukushima and Tokyo is OK.

Everyone understands there is a big problem in Fukushima. That is why the government is spending tens of trillions of yen into Fukushima. Yet you keep ridiculing Japanese Prime Minister and the Japanese based on the false claim that they do not recognize the problem.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

CH3CHO: The situation is under control?? That comforting to know that you and Abe feel that continuos, highly radioactive water leaks, equates to "under control"

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Stuart haywardFeb. 26, 2015 - 05:15PM JST

Do you want to split the hairs? First we have to agree on the definition of "under control". I would say if the situation is not out of control, it is under control.

But my point is, as you can see if you read my comments to this article, there are a lot of problems in Fukushima clean up.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

but TEPCO's attempt at building a simple ice trench was a complete fail

And the trench is a completely different situation.

why did they build it in the first place?

Well because there is an issue with water flowing through the trench. Or are you not concerned with that water?

The remaining spent fuel rods need to be removed so that the natural water flow doesn't compound the existing root problem.

What fuel rods are you talking about and what natural water flow has anything to do with any spent fuel rods?

Lol, I didn't create the problem but I can see that fixing the "root problem" before the "symptom" should be priority.

Lol, I didn't say you created the problem. But fine then what is the "root problem" that needs to be fixed?

and are possibly still molten

They aren't possibly still molten

And wouldn't it have to completely circle the reactors to prevent seawater getting in?

It is planned to completely encircle the reactors.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

turbotsatFeb. 26, 2015 - 10:23AM JST

If the cores have melted through to 30-40 feet below the facility's level, and are possibly still molten, how deep would an uphill ice wall or bare trench have to go to prevent groundwater picking up contamination?

The "ice wall" or frozen soil wall TEPCO is making is 30 m deep, at which level there is bedrock that does not let go water. http://kenplatz.nikkeibp.co.jp/article/const/news/20140325/656430/

And wouldn't it have to completely circle the reactors to prevent seawater getting in?

Yes, that is what TEPCO is doing. See the map in the link.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

CH3CHO: spitting hairs? Are you saying that this continues leakage of highly radioactive water is "under control"? Even by your defintion, It's out of control. TEPCO is UNABLE to stop or contain the water from running into the sea.

Mike O' Brian: The trench is a COMPLETLY different situation? No, it's a separate problem with the same situation, water flowing through highly radioactive contaminated areas, then spreading into the environment or running into the sea.

Am I not concerned about radio active water flowing through the trench? It's obvious I am! That's why I brought up TEPCO's failure on that project, if they can't freeze the trench, what makes you think they'll be successful with this larger scale "Icewall"?

What rods am I talking about? Lol, the remaining SPENT FUEL RODS! What natural water? The water being talked about in this and many other articles. It's not just about the water being used to cool these spent fuel rods but also natural water flowing past these highly contaminated areas.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

There have been no meaningful changes in radiation levels in sea water nearby, Tokyo Electric said.

Of course there has been no changes of radiation in the seawater. If you put a teaspoon full of salt in a bucket of water you can't taste it, but if you let the water evaporate the salt is still there. This radiation is spreading all over the east coast of Japan and across the pacific. They are getting radiation reading in the sand on the beaches of Oregon in the US, which originated at Fukushima.

Yeah Abe! It's all under control! The only thing that is under control is the press releases!

3 ( +4 / -1 )

They are getting radiation reading in the sand on the beaches of Oregon in the US, which originated at Fukushima.

Source please.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

"Trust me." "It is under control." Words of assurance from Japanese prime ministers should be taken at face value should they not?

Let us review the situation at Fukushima. Units 5 and 6 are located on a small hillock separate from the other four; they are shut down normally and can be decommissioned. Of the remaining four, all were very badly damaged (to the stage 7, indicating the highest level of nuclear accident). Three suffered and continue to be in stages of meltdown, attenuated by continuing emergency measures. Unit 3 is not only in meltdown but uses MOX nuclear fuel, making it the most serious long term, and I mean super long term, problem.

The Secrecy Law is aimed at part in hiding the full extent of the problems at Fukushima, and in denying Japanese citizens the right to understand and determine what to do or how to cope. This beautiful country is unfortunately also saddled with ugly lies and despicable liars.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

No, it's a separate problem with the same situation, water flowing through highly radioactive contaminated areas, then spreading into the environment or running into the sea.

No it is a different situation. The trench is an open system with free flowing water. The groundwater in-leakage (as the name implies) is in the ground. In the trench you have to get flowing water ONLY to freeze and form a blockage. While in the ground you freeze the ground which then traps and blocks the water.

if they can't freeze the trench, what makes you think they'll be successful with this larger scale "Icewall"?

Because the "Icewall" is a different situation.

The remaining spent fuel rods need to be removed so that the natural water flow doesn't compound the existing root problem

What rods am I talking about? Lol, the remaining SPENT FUEL RODS! What natural water? The water being talked about in this and many other articles.

But that natural water isn't in any way coming in contact with the spent fuel rods. LOL! So your statement that I was responding to made no sense. And you "explanation" doesn't change that.

Unit 3 is not only in meltdown but uses MOX nuclear fuel, making it the most serious long term, and I mean super long term, problem.

No actually it is no more of a problem than Units 1 & 2.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Mike O'Brien: They aren't possibly still molten

http://www.macleans.ca/economy/business/the-real-nuclear-meltdown/

September 16, 2013 ... Water being used to cool the still-molten cores is leaking into the Pacific from giant tanks at the rate of 300 tonnes a day.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Water being used to cool the still-molten cores is leaking into the Pacific from giant tanks at the rate of 300 tonnes a day.

300 tons a day is the amount of underground water that is estimated to be flowing under the NPP area. The water is basically clean, but could contact the contaminated water in the NPP, so the government and TEPCO are working to block the underground water. 300 tons is not "leaking from giant tanks." Western press is as reliable as such.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The Pacific Ocean is Dying - Fukushima nuclear plant Causing Horrific Mutations:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9Z2wX6avGs&list=PLYpTsIFcT9z3xr4C9LVttUQUih6CUfGW-

WARNING FUKUSHIMA PACIFIC OCEAN SEAFOOD TOXIC:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gc-2ce7qCdo&index=2&list=PLYpTsIFcT9z3xr4C9LVttUQUih6CUfGW-

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

turbsat. Sorry but an unsourced claimed in a 1.5 year old story in the economy and business section of a magazine just doesn't trump simple physics.

Water being used to cool the still-molten cores is leaking into the Pacific from giant tanks at the rate of 300 tonnes a day.

And when that article claims that 300 tonnes of water a day is leaking from the TANKS, it just shows the abysmal level of knowledge and research that goes into their stories.

To still be molten the material would need a source of energy capable of keeping it's temperature above at least 1100 degrees celsius. There is no place for the kind of energy to maintain that temperature to be coming from. Add to this the fact that if the material were still molten any water that contacted it would result in an immediate steam explosion. Since no geysers of steam are rising from the plant it is pretty conclusive that the cores aren't molten.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

If it's all under control why is cancer on the rise in Fukushima?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

If it's all under control why is cancer on the rise in Fukushima?

Because it is not.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Googling around finds some quotes that "they" "think" the core "may have solidified" or "may be partially solidified" or is possibly still "oozing corium".

I guess they're having to keep dumping water on the core and cooling it further to keep it from melting any more than it is already and losing whatever control they have if it heats up and melts its way deeper. Maybe it is like the lava you see oozing in Hawaii videos, liquid on inside, oozing or hardened on outside.

"There’s been some new video released of what could be the molten – some of the corium – that has leeched out. We talked a long time ago that some of it is not solid and still oozing in that respect. And this video showed something, that if it weren’t just metal melted, but it sure looked like if it was corium, then it would be oozing. " - quote from Feb. 15, 2015: http://enenews.com/nuclear-engineer-new-video-appears-show-molten-corium-melted-fukushima-reactor-oozing-weve-talking-about-criticalities-going-causing-continued-heat-long-time-audio-video

"They’re putting on 100s of tons of water a day to cool those reactors and only recovering about half of that water" - quote from Sept. 12, 2014: http://enenews.com/video-fukushima-corium-found-pacific-hydrogen-dissolving-nuclear-fuel-plutonium-detected-surface-ocean-water

"Groundwater entering the facility becomes tainted when it mixes with melted fuel inside the reactor containers. Tepco engineers believe some of the fuel has cooled down and turned into solid debris. But they don’t know the exact situation, so they’re hoping to take a look inside" - NHK Jan 27, 2015 broadcast quoted : http://enenews.com/tv-only-fukushimas-melted-fuel-solid-nuclear-expert-molten-core-will-melt-enough-cooling-water-japan-engineer-fukushima-accident-first-kind-video

In general, recent Fukushima news can be found collated here: http://enenews.com/category/location/japan

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

No turbostat, nobody with even a small clue believes any part of the cores is still molten.

To still be molten would require something to be continually adding enough energy to maintain the temperature above about 1100 degrees Celsius, and there just isn't any plausible source of that much energy.

In general, enenews is full of half-truths, lies and inane conspiracy theories. The only thing the site is good for is an occasional laugh.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

All the quotes are not from ENE, but are from sources ENE picked up elsewhere, such as NHK, TEPCO, former TEPCO architects, nuclear engineers at conferences, etc. And with TEPCO still hiding important information, such as having just admitted to a large amount of radiation from the roof pouring into the ocean, that they've known about since April but only admitted to now, how can you trust their status?

And these are NUCLEAR cores. All melted together, what hasn't exploded out. Not arranged in nice arrays of rods with control rods interspersed. If the cores don't generate energy on their own, why do you think they're used in NUCLEAR plants to generate power? If they're not still heating themselves, why do they still 5 years later need to be flushed with '100s of tons of water a day'? And if TEPCO has zero control over the cores other than the ability to flush them with '100s of tons of water' a day and get back half of it, that is, less than the ability of the average householder to control the temperature in his house, and with observability limited to a few temperature sensors in areas TEPCO's not even sure still contain the cores, what is the quality of your supposition that no part of the cores are still molten? I did lots of googling but only found quotes that the cores may not have solidified yet or may have parts that are not solidified yet or 'we think they're probably solidified'.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

how can you trust their status?

Where did I ever say I did? I trust in 80 years of nuclear physics research.

Not arranged in nice arrays of rods with control rods interspersed.

And that is part of why they aren't producing enough energy to stay molten. When the material isn't arranged in nice arrays it WON'T support fission.

but only found quotes that the cores may not have solidified yet or may have parts that are not solidified yet

Then you need to get better at googling. That fact that the media likes fear-mongers (as it appears you do too) means the top things found in a search are those same fear-mongers.

But you want the simplified science explanation why the cores can't be molten any more? Fine.

They can't have retained enough heat after 4 years of cooling to still be molten, so if they are still molten it must be because more heat is constantly being added. The only quasi-logical source of that heat would be that the cores continue to undergo fission.

Is that possible? Scientifically, no it isn't.

To get fuel in a reactor to fission requires specific design and construction. One of the major things needed is water around all the fuel, like within less than an inch. This is because the water absorbs energy from the neutrons that are released in fission, slowing them down. These slow neutrons can then cause other uranium atoms to undergo fission. The fast neutrons that initially come from fission don't cause the fuel to undergo fission, it requires slow neutrons. A molten mass of fuel, control rods, steel, and concrete leaves no place for water. No water, no slow neutrons, no fission.

But could something else be slowing the neutrons? No, not really.

But what if there is something else? OK, there is still a problem. When fission occurs a lot of different radioactive isotopes are formed, these isotopes stop being formed when fission stops. So after fission stops the amount of these isotopes decreases as they decay away. Lets look at 3 of these isotopes: I-131, Cs-134 and Cs-137. I-131 has a half-life of only 8 days, that means 8 day after fission stops the amount of I-131 is down to 50% of where it started. After 16 days it is down to 25%, after 24 days 12.5% and so on. So after almost 4 years, if fission has stopped, essentially all the I-131 would be gone. And guess what? Analysis of the water shows I-131 levels dropped over time and the level is now zero. Cs-134 does the same thing except its half-life is about 2 years. So 4 years without fission would predict that Cs-134 levels would be about 25% of the original levels. And water analysis shows this predicted decrease in Cs-134.

But couldn't something be blocking all the I-131 and some of the Cs-134 from getting into the water? No, not really. But if there was something blocking them then the Cs-137 would be block just the same as the Cs-134. Yet the levels of Cs-137 in the water have only gone down to about 10% of the level 4 years ago. Cs-137 has a half-life of about 30 years, so the prediction from decay would say Cs-137 should be down to about 90% of its original level if fission has stopped. Neat, the prediction matches reality!

The lack of I-131, the 75% drop in Cs-134 and the 10% drop in Cs-137 mean the fission chain reaction has stopped in the cores. Without fission there is no source of energy sufficient to keep the cores molten after this long. It is plain science, logic and common sense.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

When you say "can't have retained enough heat after 4 years of cooling to still be molten" and "They aren't possibly still molten" that indicates there is not even a worst case under which the cores could still be melted.

But decay heat accumulates to the extent that it is not transferred away from the core! Consult the curve from the 1967 report by the US Atomic Energy Commission titled 'Emergency Core Cooling', page 167, supporting text pages 166-168, "Appendix A - Thermal Considerations, Section 1 - Size of molten sphere in various soils". Their nominal case indicates a large MOLTEN sphere remaining after 10 years!

On page 167, theoretical radius of molten sphere resulting from decay heat (NOT fission) from a 3.2 GW core, with "one-hour-aged fission products", melted into adiabatic (non-conducting) dry sand, dry sand, or limestone (three curves) is plotted over time. The PEAK radius is at 5 years after meltdown! 10 years after meltdown, the molten sphere radius is approximately 20 feet in limestone and 35 feet in (non-adiabatic) dry sand.

The core builds up crust around it while in the pressure vessel, this inhibits heat transfer and heat builds up, resulting in meltdown. A core is a HEAT generating source due to decay heat, even without fission! Graphs of decay heat for the Fukushima cores indicate 1 MW output well after the meltdown, as in months to years. If that heat is prevented from leaving the core it is going to build up.

This is without water pouring over the core, but various Fukushima news reports and discussions indicate various problems, such as: much of the water immediately after and months after was not getting to the cores due to bypasses (a graphic of fire engines pumping water into the reactors show bypass valves were not shut off and much of the water escaped), steam outside the core boundary can prevent water from reaching the core, endoscopes indicated the cores are no longer in the pressure vessels, cores develop crusts on the top that prevent heat transfer, core byproducts that reflect neutrons can collect on the bottom of the top crust reflecting the neutrons back to the core and causing heat buildup, only half the 100s of tons of flush water per day is getting back to the tanks, TEPCO continues to build storage tanks and flush the cores even NOW four years on, radioactive materials are making it to the seabed into groundwater, etc. etc.

The "Emergency Core Cooling" document is available for view at various public libraries (according to Worldcat), if you distrust the linked site's scan of it. This document was released the same year construction started on Fukushima Daiichi NPP, 1967.

https://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2013/11/22/the-ergen-report-1967-eccs-meltdown-studies/, pp. 166-168.

More math and discussion re insulation and heat transfer of meltdown cores available at a more recent source (the first reference link at wikipedia's page on Corium): Multiphase Flow Dynamics 4: Nuclear Thermal Hydraulics (2009) http://books.google.com/books?id=aChOvkuxTMkC&pg=PA501&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

****Why is it not possible to place a cofferdam of freezing brine around the leak as we as the soil and then inside this place plug leak with cement?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

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