Many experts have been saying it for years that all that water could eventually go only one way ,, and that is down the hill into the ocean . We all knew that there was no way of treating that water since the technology to remove all the radioactivity from the water does not exist . About removal of fuel rods; There is no way , no technology to do any work on units with coriums in them so it is a myth that anyone can remove those fuel rods on top of those buildings . They are only stretching the plan to gain time just to cool down the public response. That s all . A strong earthquake hitting the site is a very real danger and sooner or later it will happen , meaning those fuel rods may be left uncovered and burn in open air . That will make this disaster much , much worse unfortunately.
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
Zichi ; That s the best comment here , thanks . There is also another cost though ,, that s not in yen or in dolars ,, its in our genes ,, its the radioactive insult on living things ,, which keeps increasing . We are destroying life on this planet and its irreversible .
2 ( +2 / -0 )
I guess this was it ,, 3 years is long enough for the public response to fade away after a major disaster. Nothing to see here anymore ,, lets move on ,, until the next disaster .
7 ( +8 / -2 )
kurisupisu Thumbs up ,, great comment . Totally agreed.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
WilliB I dont think you understand how bad this disaster is . Just saying radiation is all around us is rather misleiding dont you think ? Do you claim that all radiation is the same ? Do you claim that you could even go and live next to fukushima ? It is a BIT misinforming dont you think ? Ofocurse , radiation is all around us ,, even if you would take a walk in the sun you get radiation ,, but that is not even comparable to what you get by a disaster like this . Just ask yourself what is all the worry about chernobyl , fukushima and try to understand what people are talking about . Belive me it is worse than takign a walk in the sune ,, much , much ,, much worse. Get informed . The world does not exist black and white. It is not as simple as saying there is radiation everywhere so all radiation is themsame . You would be totally missing the point . It would be like saying there is smoke everywhere ,, always has been ,, always will be ,, so why worry about smoking ? come on everyone , rerlax and smoke 2 packs a day ,, cant hurt you . Would i be wrong to say that ? do you see how dumb it is to make such a claim ? Get uinformed and stop misinforming . Peace .
-1 ( +1 / -2 )
Zichi That s correct ,, and it sounds stupid to me , as if there were no other ways to send data from those instruments , but hey if they need to spend that much money to be able to receive reading s from the instruments which are already on the ground ,, who am i to disagree,
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Star-viking Agreed. The readings can be done at ground level . This is just ^%#$^#% news,, i am sure there other other uses for that satelite than measuring radioactivity ,, if they are gpoing to do measurements at the ground level , what the use of sending the info up into a satelite and then back to earth ,, sounds stupid to me .
BBQDEMON ; But then everyone could panic and cause stress and we know how terrible stress related diseases are right ;) Smile ,, best solution to radiation .
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Zichi I think you are commenting someone with the nick bruinfan but i dont see him/her here ,,,
You are right , this disaster caused and still causing the suffering of many people ,,and they are saking us not to forget them . Imagine you would have to bring your kid for a thyroid scan to find out if he/she had cancer ,, imagine not being able to going back to your home ,, these are their realities they have to live with .
I have a problem with that last statement you made ,, about extensive monitoring ,, what do they mean by that ? Do they mean the monitoring techniques are causing the cancer because they use xray s ? do they mean , they find out more because they are looking for it ? I mean ,, its cancer we are talking about ,, whether you look for it or not ,, you will find out if you got it right ?? What has cnaged and how did that increase the cancer rates ,, it just doesnt sound right to me ,, it sounds more like another excuse from the big business not to pay for the victims of the disaster .
2 ( +2 / -0 )
Andrzej Feiks I find it difficult to understand everything you wrote but you make some good points. Ice will expand when they freeze it , if i understood you well , you are worried about the expansion of 10 % of 40 meters ,, but 40 meter deep and 10% of it is expansion in "'vertical "' direction , not horizontal , so basically it is not going to be a 40 meter wide wall ,, it will be much thinner than that , and it can expand uop and down much more before destabilizing the site , unlike if the expansion was in the horizontal direction ,,, which would most certainly damage the buildings ,, BUT ofcourse , the icewall can STILL destabilize the site ,, because first of all there is an underground river constantly feeding water to the site , and once you block it it will have definitely effect on how saturated the site / soil will become ,, never mind the consequences on the coria and the remains of fuel pieces underneath those plants ,, it CAN make everything much worse ,, can cause increase in leakages into the air ,, can cause sinking ,, destabilizing of the buildings ,, and more . Basically nobody knows what the result will be ,,its an open air experiemnt ,, and everybody is invited to take part in it ,, actually it is compulsory ;) ( thats a sarcasstic smiley )
1 ( +1 / -0 )
It can be spent fuel ,, non spent fuel ,, utility pool or whatever ,, just nuclear fuel , nuclear rwactor sitting on a fault line is not a good idea .
True , i am not living in japan , but it doesnt keep me worrying about the people suffering from this disaster ,, inside or outside japan . It is heart breaking to see all that .Not only people but environment , the ocean ( btw i am not living near the pacific ocean either ) and infact all life . But mostly i worry about the future , cause trying to make profits , being greedy , we are ruining our world and leaving a radioactive place for the future generations to live in ,, and we dont have the right to do that IMO .
Absolutely ,, in too many cases profit before safety ,, unfortunately . Some countries are beginning to realize what the actual damage is ,, but many others are still planning to build more nuke plants ,, trying to get into the elite group of "nuclear power's " and military industrial machine is pushing it with false info ,, down played statistics , hiding behind lies like secrecy , national security and so on . It sometimes seem like a lost battle to fight against the pronuke agenda.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
Yes they are safER when not working , but how safe is safer ? Safe is a relative issue ,, how safe is a fuel pool for example , full of thousands of fuel rods , sitting on an active fault line ? Sure safer than one which would be working , but still i wouldnt want to be living near one of those either ,, even though they are safER .
Call me crazy but if i was one of the decision makers , i wouldnt agree on buildimng ANY nuke plant near or on ANY fault line ,, maybe its just me :)
Profits ,, lossess ,, trillions and billions of yens ,, shows WHAT it is all about and it does not sound like it s about safety if you know what i mean .
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Disillusioned Great comment ,, its all a show . Yongyang I cant read japanese and when i click the english translation the whole site changes ,, map is different , etc . Could you explain what is that map showing ? Is that an earthquake and when was it ? thanks .
0 ( +1 / -1 )
Mike i think you need to relax a bit ,, i am not trying to harras you or anyone ,, i am just trying to inform you ,, so you can see that the truth about nuclear power is not exactly what they tell us it is . Everybody 'Believes"in some myths and lies about nuclear piower cause we have been fed all kinds of pronuke po=ropaganda for years from the main stream media . Nuclear power is not only about energy production ,, unit 3 had MOX fuel in it ,, many nuclear plants are facil;ities for research and development of nuclear missles ,, weapons ,, there is a lot people are not told ,, and just for saying its a national security issue makes most information secret . Most of us just get bits and pieces of SOME truth ,, and we get totally wrong impressions about the safety ,, the costs ,, the environmental impact of nuclear power and many aspects concerning it
I also need to tell you , and anyone reading my messages ,, when i use CAPITAL LETTERS ,, it does not mean i am angry or shouting or trying to harras anyone ,, i used capital letters in an old fashioned way ,, just to emphasize the important part of the sentence ,, thats pre-chat era usage ,, and does not mean i am shouting ,, i appologize if i gave you the impression that i am . Now back to our discussion ,
//Why do you keep harping on this? ///
Because thats how the discussion started about long lived vs short lived isotopes ,, meaning entombing of the site for a few decades does not cause much change to the long lived isotopes ,, meaning mostly the short lived isotopes are a concern for making thise plan ,, the whole discusion started with it ,, you may not started it ,, i did ,, does that matter ?
/// Yet you still cherry pick only the information that you (rightly or wrongly) believes supports your uniformed opinions and bias.///
I am not cherry picking anything and every statement i make , i try to explain several times ,, with exmaples etc ,, unlike you ,, who do not say much more than just saying that i am wrong . explain if i said anything wrong ,, why how ?? If you dont agree with anything i write make your point ,, make your discussion ,,and NO just saying you are wrong is not a discussion ,, you need to give some explanarion for the stuff you mention . You dont agree with what i wrote , why , how come ? Is there something you know that i dont ? Maybe i am misinformed about something and i need to learn it from you , so dont just say i am wrong ,, explain why ,, guve some examples . Thanks .
/// And I ABSOLUTELY did NOT say we should only worry about the short lived isotopes!!!////
No you do not say it directly bu with sentences like these : I am quoting from your previous comments ;///For example 1 kg of Cs-134 is over 3.5 Billion times as radioactive as 1 kg of U-238./// You are IMPLYING that Cs is much more important than Uranium ,, much more hazardous or something we should worry about while uranium is not . This is cherry picking ,, this is misinforming and it has only one goal ,, to down play the severity of the fukushima accident ,,Uranium is actually a huge environmental pollutant ,( google fallujah and congenital malformations , just the photos say enough ) and people reading your comments may think otherwise , that it s a mild radioactive substance so we dont have to worry about it , which is totally misinforming ,, and i guess you have noticed by now that i am really allergic to misinforming :)
///Really? Could you identify some of these isotopes?///
Tritium , period . Google Tritium leakage from nuclear plants .
///No it is not. It stopped doing so years ago, as plainly shown by the results of air sampling from around the plant.///
I suspected this answer exactly thus my sentence in the previous comment ''.( and i dont wish to get into a discussion of if TEPCO is doing good measurements etc etc , cause i stopped listening to those lies long time ago ) '''you can RE-Read it two comments above. There are 3 coria underground somewhere in the soil , directly in conatc with an underground river which keeps cooking and steaming and we need to be very naive to believe all that steam is not leaking from somewhere on that site and that the ground (just soil and rocks ) somehow just manages to seal it tight . I am sorry i cant believe that .
///Of course they didn't build them for nothing. They are cooling towers. Water ,,, ///
You do know all the nuclear plants release radioactivie isotopes into the environment dont you ?
There are two ways nuclear power plants release radioactivity into the environmenmt ,:
1:,some realease it in the form of gasses through the stacks high into the atmosphere ( thats why they are built so high ) so that higher they are the further the radioactivity will get carried with the wind ,, thus keeping the site safe ,,, well those isotopes released into high into the airwill not stay there forever ofcourse ,, they will be carried away for kilometers and land on some poor farmers land ,, but who cares ,, as long as we can claim the measurements on the nuclear plant are low everyone is happy :)
2; Many release it into some body of water ,, ever wondered why those nuke plants are mostly built by some lake or a river ?? ;) (thats a wink btw ) and no its not for using the water for cooilng ,, :) Just google sellafield pollution ,, or search for radioactvie pollution in US rivers ,, you may be amazed .
We really need to stop this discussion ,, i am not going to reply anymore ,, but i will be commenting on other subjects on this site . Maybe we continue there Peace .
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
mike FIrst of all you are only making my statement even stronger with these kinds of comments ,, basically claiming that short half life isotopes are much more important than long half life ones in their out put ,, thus making that "" entombing "" plan becomes even more plausible doesnt it ? If the short lived ones are more important lets just wait for a while it will be fine ,,,
Unfortunately you are cutting it too short through the corners, and you are giving the wrong impressisons about the short / long lived isotopes .,,it is not that simple ,,,again your information is half correct ,, you leave out some rather important bits :) its weird cause you seem to know a lot about nuclear energy but seem to cherry pick only the information that you like and leave out the rest , hmmm ,,
Short answer : You forgot the TIME factor ???? Short lived isotopes can have a higher output but long lived isotopes wiill stay around longer and will have much more time to do much more damage . Well tahts the short answer ,,
The long answer involves the sensitivity of different tissues to radiation ; the metabolism of the tissue / organism ; the similarity of the molecular structure of a certain isotope to a certain non radioactive metabolic or structural chemical ; the developmental stage of the cells / organism ; the concentration of other similar chemicals in the environment; the way it enters the body/ organism ; the properties of the daughter products etc etc etc ,, so its not just as simple as to say "short lived ones are more radioactive so more harmfull " On the contrary we should worry just as much as the long lived ones as the short lived ones . The only reason that idea of entombing and waiting for a few decades is considered is because it can make the site more workable , but it doesnt mean it will be all safe and fine . And it ABSOLUTELY does NOT mean we should ONLY worry about the short lived isotopes because theya re more harmfull ,, Absolutely NOT !!!
///And just like the 'steam' from your mouth on a cold day, the 'steam' seen at Fukushima on cold days is just water.//
That s not exactly true is it ?. You dont get JUST STEAM when you pour water on a corium ,, that s just false information ,,you get a highly raidoactive concoqtion of all kinds of isotopes in it as well . You shouldnt inhale it ;)
The smoke in those explosions was not just some smoke ,, and the steam coming from those coriums is not just steam ,, they are highly radioactive substances ,, . You are misinforming again .
Fukushima is leaking lots of radiation into the air , it is not talked about a lot but it still does . Infact every Nuclear plant in the world is leaking into its environment all the time . SOmetimes in huge amopunts . There is NO leak free nuke plant on the planet ,, thats just impossible ,, some isotpes are just not possible to contain . Besides they havent built those stacks by nuke plants for nothing . You dont think they have been pumping only water vapour through them i hope .
But before we get off topic here ,, i just want to say that i hope that icewall works ,i really do ,, and i hope they can find a way to entomb those plants ,,to seal them shut ,, cause anything other than that seems to be a loong road with lots of radiation pouring into the environment for many years to come , and it will have its impact on japan , on the ocean and countries around it .
I think its time for me to move to another discussion ,, maybe we can continue further there ,,
Bye for now Peace.
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
oops my mistake ,sorry :), you are right ,, if you have 100 kg s of xxxium with half life of 500,000 years . then you should have only half of it ,, so 50 kgs at the end of 500,000 years ,, my mistake sorry . Instead of taking the half of the weight i also took the half of the time period :) A big OOOOPSSS !!! :) That s what happens when you try to post comments in a short time . So basically its not 250,000 ,,, but 500,000 years ,, which actually makes my case even stronger but yes , it was my mistake and thank you for correcting me , i should have written 500,000 years .
So basically no matter what kind of isotope you have it will have half of the amount left at the end of its half life .(thats why its called a half life ). I think it s simple enough that everyone can understand .
In any case , the point is , that entombing the site to wait a few decades means mostly short lived isotopes would decrease in that time , ,, with other words if they would decide to go with that "entombing "plan , they would cover the whole site up ,or burry it , ( something similar to what they did in chernobyl ) and at the end of that period , mostly short lived isotopes would be decreased . If they would reopen it after a few decades and try to deal with it then , they would have much less amounts of short lived isotopes , then the long lived ones . . And that s what i mean by "mostly short lived ones would be gone " meaning in that waiting period of a few decades ,, you wouldnt expect much change in the amount of xxium with a half life of 500,000 years would you ? If it was 100 kg initially , may be it would go down a few miligrams or so ?? . SO even tough your claim is technically correct , in the practice its irrelelvant . the waiting period of a few decades is mostly done / planned mainly to decrease the amount of short lived isotopes . And that s why the plan of entombing the site could be reconsidered if the icewall works ofcourse (if it doesnt cause any other unexpected catastrophies ) .
So as a simple answer ,, YES ,, even the long half life radionuclides will decrease in that short time as well , but it will be at INSIGNIFICANT amounts which are IRRELEVANT to the entombing ,,unless we have such long time periods ( sometimes millions of years ) to wait these are negligible values . SO in that sense the highest decreases will be in short lived isotopes in such short periods like a few decades , that s what i mean by "mostly short lived ones will decrease " . The ones with huge half lives will not change much , maybe statistically / theoretically they will , but in the practice the amounts are so tiny that it doesnt make much difference, on the other hands the short half life isotopes can have major decreases . As an example: SO if we go back to the example before ,100 kg of iodine with 8 day half life ( or any other short lived isotope ) may decrease to milligrams/ micrograms / nanograms over a couple of decades ,, but on the other hand xxxium with half life of 500,000 years may decrease to 99,99xx kg s after a few decades ,, meaning its negligible . Yes theoretically correct but in real life situation doesnt mean much :)
///And I never suggested planning for such long periods. So I don't understand why it was brought up.///
The reason is that , the above mentioned plan (entombing the site for some decades ) is a real suggestion by some experts ,, and can be applied if the icewall works ,, but waiting for thousands of years for long lived isotopes to decrease is not part of the plan ,, yeah i know , even in a few decades the long lived ones will decresase as well but 100 kg or 99,999 kgs of some super toxic stuff doesnt mean much difference , does it ?.
We must not forget that just as fukushima is leaking into the groundwaters its also leaking into the atmosphere . It s mostly invisible and only at cold winter days they talk about STEAM coming at certain locations etc , but it doesnt mean STEAMING stops at hotter days ,, we just dont see it because the wetaher is just not cold . Compare it to running in cold winter weather when you have steam coming out of your breath than doing the same thing on a hot summer day , where you wont see anything . Similar thing is going on at fukushima .( and i dont wish to get into a discussion of if TEPCO is doing good measurements etc etc , cause i stopped listening to those lies long time ago ) In any case , Continuous leakage (steaming ) into the air has been going on and thats why most people are not satisfied with just an icewall , which could help against water pollution but would not do much against air pollution . Some even worry that icewall might cause more steaming than it does now , thus making the situation even worse by causing more air pollution . . Lets just hope they are wrong . It s a big experiemnt and we happen to be the guinea pigs ,, unwillingly ,, unfortunately ,, :(
0 ( +1 / -1 )
////No John the ALL decrease with time, the short lived and the long lived ones.////
1=You have to read carefully what i wrote ,, i said ""MOSTLY"" short lived ones ,, every isotope decreases to half of its mass at the end of its half life ,, if you have 100 kg of iodine with a half life of 8 days , at the end of 8 days you have 50 kg s of it left . If you have 100 kg of xxxxium with a half life of 500,000 years you will have 50 kg s of it after 250,000 year s. However , it can be practical to entomb the site and wait a few decades for the short lived ones to decrease , but i dont think we can wait 250,00 years ,, its not really practical . Thats why they suggested to burry the site and walk away from it for a few decades .
2=Well ofcourse TIME is relative isnt it . Wait long enough and all will be gone ,, there wont be any radioactivity at all ,, theoretically at least ,, even the long lived ones with millions of years of half lives will decrease to negligible levels ,, but then again millions of years is a long time to wait isnt it ? I dont think they can entomb the site and wait a few million years ,, by that time there wont be any fukushima ,, even japan itself will be long gone ,, so YES ,, even though over millions of years all radioactivity will decrease to negligible levels , it is not practical to plan for such long periods . But theoretically you are right ,, it all decreases in time ,,even the sun will go out one day .
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
Mike That s correct ,, the particles decrease in time ,, mostly short lived ones ,, as an example if you have lodine witjh a half life of 8 days ,, well more or less over 8 to 10 half lives the levels drop drastically . That s why some experts suggested to burry the whole site ,,, walk away for a few decades and come back later to try to find a solution when the levels are3 lower. The problem with fukushima is that its not only polluting upwards , into the air but also down into the water as well ,, so it makes it much harder than chernobyl to manage and most does not believe entombing it would solve much of the problems . Even thqugh icewall has been criticized by many ( well including me ) , IF they manage to make it work without causing much problems , and they manage to stop the leakage ,, or lets say pollution of underground waters maybe then they can still build something on top ,, like a sarchopage ,, and burry it / entomb it ,, at least for the while being . Some suggetsed burrying it under lead , boron , cement etc etc but they did not go along with the idea becaue of the water pollution issue ,, but If the icewall works , maybe those choices may come on the discussion table again .
In my opinion there s too little done about it ,, there should be much more international teams , experts , organisations ,, universities to deal with the problem and different teams should be working simultaneaoulsy on different units / aspects not to loose time . But somehow its not happening ,, This problem is too large for only TEPCO to deal with and even for Japan and it should concern other countries as well . A nuclear accident is not a national catastrophy but involves everyone on the planet . That is only my opinion ,,
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
zichi Well lets say i would prefer a simpler solution as they did in chernobyl or something , not saying entombing it would solve anything by fukushima , but something similar to that ,, in that simple form , not requiring all these machines , you know , the more complex the machine the higher the risk of something going wrong , and units 1 2 and 3 are perfect examples of that arent they ? I would be happier to see something to seal it , enclose it somehow , stop the pollution and leakage and walk away from it for a few decades . ( i think ARnie Gundersen had suggetsed something like that )
We rely on machines in our everyday lives , thats true , even now while using internet , chatting on my pc ,, but relying 3 nuclear units in meltdown , on a machine is a bit riskier than that , dont you think ? . I mean if my pc would break ,, well i might not be able to type this message in ,, but if that icewall doesnt work ,, or breaks down it can be a big mess .
I think our over confidence of thinking we could build fail proof nuclear reactors has brought us here ,, and still fueling the nuclear debate to this day ,, i think we need to be a bit more modest and realize that we cant build fail proof anything / machines or factories or what so ever. Every thing we build will fail sooner or later , but if the stakes are so high as in the case of a nuclear reactor , i prefer not to rely on these complex systems . Simpler the solution the more reliable it is .
0 ( +0 / -0 )
nandakandmanda Mike is misinforming , radioactive decay in coria is producing isotopes ( and lots of energy , thus the heat ) and that icewall is meant to prevent those isotopes leaking into underground water . That is the whole purpose of the icewall , to prevent / decrease further pollution of underground water and the ocean , otherwise they wouldnt build it in the first place . Its meant to form a barrier between coria ( isotopes ) and the clean underground water , to prevent ( or better said decrease ) the pollution of the undergraound water by the coria . Mike is just playing with woords to make everything sound much different ( milder) than how it actually is . The glass is half full, half empty story . Lets put it this way ( and see what he will come up with next ;) ) on one side you have clean underground water , on the other coriums and in between you have the icewall seperatiing them . Why you may ask ? to decrease the pollution of clean water with isotopes ( produced by the radioactive decay in coria ) . Now mike likes to call it , to prevent water coming into the basements ,, just to pretend its something else but the end result is the same ,, water comes in ,, gets polluted ,, leaves from the other end ,, now you can say clean water CAME in and got polluted ,, or you can say dirty water LEAKED OUT ,, in the end the same story ,, the function of the icewall is to PREVENT CLEAN WATER getting polluted . Whether you see it as a block from the hill side for coming in clean water or as a block from the ocean side for dirty water leaving ,, it is the SAME THING !!! Icewall is to block water pollution by the isotopes ,, no matter how you put it ,, its a shield between clean water on one side and isotopes on the other . That is its purpose ,, thats why its getting built . This is the very LAST TIME i am discussing it .
China syndrome is a myth , nobody thinks it can really happen . Its basically being used as a synonym for a meltdown .
Mike , radioactive decay produces 3 things ,, 1= HEAT ,,, 2= RADIATION ,, 3= ISOTOPES ( popularly called daughters or daughter nuclides ) ,,
Zichi Thanks for the link ,, it is very clear in the drawing ( in your link ) that ground water is coming in from the hill side , on the left where it says GROUNDWATER ,, gets contaminated (in the units 1 2 and 3 ,, ) and leaves on the ocean side ( right side in the drawing where it says divert into ocean ) . Now the icewall is to block that ,, whether you call it clean water coming in ''from left '' and getting contaminated or contaminated water leaking out '' from the right '' ,, it comes down to the same thing ,, icewall is to block clean water from getting contaminated .
In short they want to decrease the huge amounts of water getting contaminated by the isotopes produced by the coria , and NO it is not like there was some isotopes in that water and they are getting flushed out and it will end soon ,( as mike implies ) ) , absolutely not ,,If it was that simple it would have been cleaned out by now ,, they have been flushing it for three years ,,
There are many isotopes ( daughters ) produced by radioactive decay and depending on their half lives some may stay producing radioactivity for even thousands of years and keep polluitng far into the future after we are all gone .
All this chaos and word tricks are ( deliberately or not ) , creating confusion to make this disaster look milder than what it actually is . There seems to be a deliberate attempt by many to downplay the fukushima disaster in any way they can . These kinds of discussions will not yield any results and people will learn the truth sooner or later .
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
I just dont trust a man made machine to run so long without breaking down ,, whatever we build seem to break down or disintegrate ,, sooner or later .
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
nadakandamamda ( i wrote it correctly this time :) There is this forum called enenews dot com ,, i have seen a lot of knowledgable people there , maybe they can give better answers to these kinds of tehcnical questions . I personally think that it wouldnbt be much of a problem ,, in the core there would allways be enough hard ice-block ( wall ) to serves as a shield , and i would guess the amount of water coming in contact with the icewall would influence the thickness of the wall ,, some places it would be thicker than others but as long as they can keep a certain thickness totally frozen all the time it doesnt matter what will happen in the sorrounding where the temperature reaches the balance between cooling of the iocewall and warming of underground water . In other words there should be enough cooling to keep the inner core of the icewall frozen at a certain thickness at all times ,, and as long as it forms a continuous wall it should do its job . What happens in regions further away from the core wouldnt have much influence on it , and i think they have tested it for that , if it would leak etc . In my opinion main problems with the icewall are , that it would cost so much to build and maintain and it would still solve only a part of the problem . It is not THE solution , to radioactive pollution in fukushima but i am guessing ( hoping ) it would decrease the amount of leakgae into underground water ( which is a huge amount at the moment ,, daily hundreds of tons are leaking into the underground waters and into the ocean ) . Even so , whatever the amount , icewall should DECREASE it and thats a good thing but i am totally disappointed that all these nuclear experts and scientists cant come up with better solutions ,, Another problem is , nobody knows what will happen once the icewall starts working ,, how will that effect the site / buildings ,, in the best case the buikldings may sink 16 mm ,, and in the worse case ,, well lets say it can get much worse than it is now ,, so its an experiment ,, but why am i complaining ,, the whole nuclear industry has been / is a huge experiment on life on this planet ,, lets see how much radioactive abuse our genome can take ,, lets see where the tipping point is. I just hope we are not at the tipping point yet .
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
Absolutely ,, Totally agreed ,, i gave that example just because its so striking that even here on the same site there is mention of the kinds of manipulation going on in politics , and they are asking why we have lost the faith in them LOL :) ,, believe me japantoday is not my only source of information ,, infact most of the time i have been critising them for there censorship of comments and having a pronuke bias :) , but i have to admit , i have the impression that they ( japantoday ) are getting more and more tolerant and letting more and more people speak out lately,, which , under these circumstances , is a positive sign ,, i mean , while we criticizse the media ( which we should ) , we should also give them a thumbsplus when they do something right ,, :) So thanks japan today for letting everyone speak out , keep up the good work .
Back to the subject of further reading ,, thank god we got internet ( at least for now ) so we dont have to depend on just one source . Ofcourse the big question is how long will that last . Sometimes it feels like free information exchange on the net is a luxury we seem to enjoy for now but will not last for long ,, i hope i am wrong though .
0 ( +1 / -1 )
Zichi I am just quoting what japantoday has published ,, here is the link again :)http://www.japantoday.com/smartphone/view/national/govt-to-replace-anti-nuclear-members-on-industry-regulator ,,, its here on this site .
Thunderbird True that ,, but also many other people here want to stick their heads in the sand and pretend all is fine , nothing to see here , move on :) If we could keep our common sense and stop belieivng everything regurgidated at us by the main stream media we wouldnt have to deal with these kinds of disasters now .
Have a little faith , you say ??? In what/ whom ? TEPCO ? whoohahahahahaaaaa lol ,, best joke ever :)) A company that has been synonymous with the word FAILL !!! :))
But hey ,, dont takle my word for it ,, just give them a few weeks ,, i am sure they will come with another faill ,,, something in the range of ,, " the actuall levels of radiation in such and such was much higher than it was estimated before "" ,,, but we all got soo used to it that its the new normal .
0 ( +1 / -1 )
Oh you mean like this expert panel ? ///Gov't to replace anti-nuclear members on industry regulator///
As i said , if it wasnt about such a terrible catastrophy , this could be a very funny joke , and i would be loughing ,, but i am not laughing now .
0 ( +1 / -1 )
A few corrections ;
freezing the soil under broken reactors to slow the build-up of radioactive water, officials said.///
That s not correct , the icewall will freeze the soil AROUND the reactors ,, not UNDERNEATH them . Everything ( the coriums ,, the water pollution by the puimps etc ) will remain the same .
///sly been used to build tunnels near watercourses/// This has been used in the past to build tunnels wher there is unstable soil ,, where there has been risk of collapse ,, but it never head to be this large and never had to be leak proof like it would be by fukushima ,, it has only been used to freeze the top part of a tunnel while being built so they could strengthen it ,, for a short while ,, just a structural support .
wakawaka225 Whether it works or not ,, what other option are there ? no expert is coming with another idea it seems ,, its all in the hands of TEPCO ,, and we know their reputation .
YongYang Nobody is coming with another technology ,, another solution ,, its been three years and everything is almost the same as day one ,, all the experts in all the countries are quite ,,somehow ,,, It will require lots of electricty ,, like E ,, as in T '' E'' PCO ,, business is booming ;)
Zichi ; ///TEPCO have discovered an outside area near the reactor 1&2 stack where the radiation is 25 SIEVERTS per hour, which would kill a person in about 20 minutes. Probably being caused by melted nuclear fuel in the vent pipe but no one can go and take a look.///
Well said no one can even go and have look cause the radiation is so high , but everyone is believing that people will be working ON those units 1 2 and 3 , with CORIUMS in them and they will remove the fuel rods for years ... lol ,, what a joke ,, how do you make people work at a location for years while nobody can even take a peek at a tiny location because otherwise they would die,??,, lies they are selling is over the top ,,
///TEPCO are hoping that the ice wall will reduce or even stop the ground water reaching the reactor basements but it won't stop the leaking cooling water.///
That s exactly what i am trying to say at the beginning of this sentence ,, the wall will freeeze AROUND the reactors ,, not UNDER !!! all the water they pump in will still get polluted and leak and they will keep producing toxic water and will keep needing more tanks ( although in lerss amount s cause the ground water will not be adding extra amounts to that ) .
I think people shouldnt be mislead to believe that this project will solve the pollution issue 100% ,, that s the impression thats being created now and that s is far from the truth . Some facts 1= fukushima will keep polluting , with or without the icewall . 2= They cant keep building tank farms forever so all that p[olluted water will have to go somewhere and thats down the hill into the ocean . 3= Nobody can remove any fuel from units 1 2 and 3 cause radiation will kill anyone trying to work on them ,, never mind building the cranes and all that to remove them ,, 4= The longer it takes , the higher the risk of another big earth quake hitting the region , and with that all that fuel in all those fuel pools will burn in open air ,, which will make the situation much worse. Its not if but when it will happen , cause everything they say about removing fuel rods from those units are only lies ,, people have to realise that .
I am not against the icewall ,, if anyone has any better idea they should come out with that or shut up[ ... buti am against the propaganda it is being used , to make claims as if it is THE SOLUTION for fukushima ,, it IS NOT ,,it just decreases , some amount of radiation , into the water only ( not air ) and IF it works ,, thats what it is ,, not the golden solution they claim it to be .
2 ( +3 / -1 )
mike exactly , everything in your comment is wrong (well except from that one sentence i mentioned before :))) ,,
1; the icewall is not going to be built ONLY between the plants and the hill ,( i am not even going to explain that , i tried it several times before but you dont seem to get it ,,,please check ZIchi s comment above on that, he/ she even gave links to schematic drawings of the icewall hope it helps ) ,
2; the coriums keep producing radioactive isotopes since day one and that s excatly whats going into those tanks in the tank farm , they are filling up thoise tanks with water polluted by the isotopes which are !!!!PRODUCED BY THE CORIUMS !!!!you have no idea what you are talking about lol :).
3; The icewall IS intended as a shield ,, to prevent leakage of radioactive isotopes into the underground water/ environment ,,( the isotopes which are PRODUCED by the coriums !!!!) ,, their function is to prevent water from coming into contact with coriums ,,thus preventing the pollution of underground water from radioactive isotopes ,thus AS A SHIELD !!!! ,
4 ; quote // . No new radioactive material is being created//// which is also totally wrong . You have no idea what you are talking about ,, have no knowledge of nuclear chemistry ,,,you are just making things up as you go , and spreading misinformation . If you like i can send links to get better informed on all of the above mentioned issues but i am sure you can also search and find everything you want on internet . Either Get informed or stop commenting man,, you are making a big mess out of it lol :)) peace.
-3 ( +0 / -3 )
nadakandamanda I totally agree with your worries about the icewall ,, it is an experiment ,, nobody knows what s going to happen when its built , but on the other hand ,, i dont see any other solution proposals either ,,its like all the nuvclear experts in the world are gone extinct and TEPCO is the only company left ,,, where is everywone ??? what other solutions are there ? ??? where are all the experts ?? We dont hear anything anymore , why ?
Why they want to go with the plan seems to be more like a publicity stunt ,, as if saying "we have done something ,, its working ,, the problem is solved " an excuse to produce any lie about it , that s what i think about it .
I dont think it is possible to freeze the coriums , they will keep producing radiation and isotopes for a long time to come and nobody can do much about that . All they can do is put as much iso0lating material between the coria and the environmaent ,, mainly water ,, and with the icewall they are cutting off the major water supply as well ,, so what s going to happen next is a mystery .
Mike o brien Everything you claim in your comments are false / misinfo ,, except from this sentence '' There is nothing that can physically be done to reduce the amount of radiation the cores are emitting '' the only correct sentence in your comment ,, Get informed ,, peace .
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
here is an expert ,, a japanese doctor talking about fukushima and the REAL radiation levels and health risks ,,check out the link below.
,, get informed ,, dont believe everything you read / hear on main stream media ,, peace.
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
////So you are saying that Utrack is wrong?////
No that s not what i am saying ,, but thanks for trying to create conflict between us , the members of this site ,, i said what i wanted to say and it should be clear ,if you read above . , Meaning nobody knows EXACTLY ,,, PRECISELY , whats going on down there specially when they build an icewall , everybody is just guessing , that s why they call it an experiment .
///According to all the different groups that have and continue to conduct testing, not just Tepco.////
I dont know what groups you are talking about but there seems to exist groups ( experts ) who are even worried about the radioactivity influencing the west coast of USA ,, Well just to make it clear,,'' that is on the other side of the pacific ocean '' ,, all you have to do is type in radioactive plume ,, west coast ,, and you can get enough articles on that . I think even only THAT says enough .
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
Mike ////Then how do the ocean samples not show the effects of this ongoing LOSE of highly contaminated water?////
According to whom ? Tepco ? All is fine and dandy ;)
But nothing can stop you from getting informed on internet .
Dont believe everything you hear ,, do your research ,,or you can wait a few more years and hear them admit that the "the levels were actually much higher than previously thought ' but we all got used to these kinds of 'IN RETROSPECT MISCALCULATIONS "news from tepco right / :)
PS ; even tepco admitted they loose 300 tons a day ,, which probably is much higher than that ,, knowing how they deal with the info , nothing surprises me anymore.
About seawater salinity ;;; at the moment it is generally accepted that there is an underground flow of water from the hills behind the plant ,, going undernmeath the plant ,, mixing ( getting polluted with ) highly radioactive isotopes ( in contact with the coriums ) and continuing further into the ocean carrying the isotopes with it . So seawater is kept out ,, That is the situation NOW ,, what will happen when they stop the inflow of all that water ??? is anybodies guess. What will happen with the buildings and coriums underneath them ?? will they crack ,, will they sink ,, noone knows cause there has never been a case like this and now there are three of them ,,, units 1 2 and 3 .
Its a big mess and a big mistake to leave it all to Tepco to deal with ,, everyone knows it , and yet still they are in charge ,, unbelievable.
-3 ( +0 / -3 )