5 ms·

Fairwinds: Fukushima Groundwater Contamination Worst in Nuclear History "That (contaminated) water is seeping into the ground table, and there will be contamin

Fairwinds: Fukushima Groundwater Contamination Worst in Nuclear History "That (contaminated) water is seeping into the ground table, and there will be contamination on that site for a long time to come. It could also move inland. This is ground water, it doesn't have to move out into the ocean. It is clearly moving into the north" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CAeixB19d4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CAeixB19d4 I don't believe that TEPCO is actively monitoring plutonium and uranium, which is heavy and more likely to seep into ground water than to be blown into the air. I hope that people in Tokyo do have some independent monitoring stations setup. Anybody know any links?

yread 15y ago
Fukushima groundwater has been contaminated since at least 1st April http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/news/Blogs/makingwaves/daily-news-radiation-found-in-fukushima-groun/blog/34053 http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/news/Blogs/making...
ChuckMcM 15y ago
People will read the TEPCO report and they will process it in a variety of ways. According to TEPCO (and GE documentation) the containment vessel did in fact contain the core material. Looking at the measurements reported, (both from TEPCO and other agencies) there isn't an indication of either groundwater or watertable contamination. [update: The TEPCO folks early on said they did see some groundwater contamination with Iodine. They also point out that the plant is 'downstream' of the water table with any nuclides most likely being carried to the ocean rather than to either of the rivers higher in the water table. The engineers will know more when they open things up and start cleaning them out.] The 'news' is that cleanup will take longer because rather than pulling fuel pins out of the reactor and sending them off to be either re-processed or disposed, the core material at the bottom of the reactor will have to be removed piecemeal by what is probably custom equipment. This was the same procedure used at TMI to remove material that had migrated to the bottom of the reactor after having melted. I don't think anyone disputes that this was a tragic event and at seems nearly the worst possible accident (it could have been worse if all reactors were at full power) but it hasn't killed anyone yet, this incident is unlikely to be the principle cause of death for anyone in the forseeable future. And yet tens of thousands of people are dead because they couldn't flee the wall of water, so the tsunami was a disaster, the damage to the nuclear plant was not. When you see a head-on collision and the person in the car walks away because the airbags went off, we don't argue for banning driving because the car is destroyed, there is $50,000 worth of damage to the guardrail, and hundreds of people lost work because they were caught in the traffic jam. We say, "Isn't it amazing how safe cars are these days! That accident would have killed them even 10 years ago." We have had a head-on collision between a late model nuclear reactor and an incredibly and extremely unlikely large magnitude double disaster and so far, the safety systems that were built into the reactors and upgraded over the years have kept everyone safe. Slowly, steadily, and with good engineering practices. The results of that disaster are being addressed and will be cleaned up and repaired. I realize that someone walking away unhurt from what would have been a fatal collision might feel that it was a miracle, but it might just have been good engineering.
- eftpotrm 15y ago
  .... and, the incident at Fukushima was magnified by the safety features' reliance on active, powered cooling. Current reactor designs are capable of passive cooling, without external power, and would cause even less damage than this.
- marshray 15y ago
  And yet tens of thousands of people are dead because they couldn't flee the wall of water, so the tsunami was a disaster, the damage to the nuclear plant was not. And what about the 70,000+ people in the 20km evacuation radius who have no idea when or if they'll be able to return to their contaminated homes? (or even bury their dead) You're going to tell them Fukushima Daiichi is not a disaster? At least the people who fled the tsunami are able to rebuild on that land.
  - nasmorn 15y ago
    If the expectations of rising sealevels due to global warming prove correct at all people will laugh at the amounts we lost to nuclear power.
    - nitrogen 15y ago
      The nice thing about rising sea levels is that, apart from the occasional catastrophic flood, the rise will happen gradually enough that most of the affected areas can be evacuated decades in advance. There will be a tremendous loss of infrastructure if e.g. Manhattan is under water, but we'll see the water coming.
  - ars 15y ago
    They'll be able to come back within the year probably. The land is not contaminated at all, and no one died, so no, it's not much of a disaster as these things go.
    - uvdiv 15y ago
      The surrounding land is heavily contaminated with Cs-134 and Cs-137. http://i.imgur.com/xu0Pm.jpg http://i.imgur.com/xu0Pm.jpg http://www.mext.go.jp/component/english/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2011/05/10/1304797_0506.pdf http://www.mext.go.jp/component/english/__icsFiles/afieldfil... It will be a closed zone for decades. Almost all of the (external) dose in the area right now is from these two isotopes; the rest have decayed. (There's a model of this in [1]). These two will not decay away quickly; Cs-134 has a half life of 2 years, and Cs-137, 30 years. [1] http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/seminar/No110/Iitate-interim-report110404.pdf http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/seminar/No110/Iitate-inter...
jsprinkles 15y ago
I knew this comment looked familiar. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2543642 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2543642
marze 15y ago
There are bigger concerns than ground water contamination. This blog has info translated from Japanese, http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/2011/05/asahi-shinbun-core-meltdown-in-reactors.html http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/2011/05/asahi-shinbun-core-meltdo...

yread 15y ago

Fukushima groundwater has been contaminated since at least 1st April http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/news/Blogs/makingwaves/daily-news-radiation-found-in-fukushima-groun/blog/34053 http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/news/Blogs/making...

ChuckMcM 15y ago

People will read the TEPCO report and they will process it in a variety of ways. According to TEPCO (and GE documentation) the containment vessel did in fact contain the core material. Looking at the measurements reported, (both from TEPCO and other agencies) there isn't an indication of either groundwater or watertable contamination. [update: The TEPCO folks early on said they did see some groundwater contamination with Iodine. They also point out that the plant is 'downstream' of the water table with any nuclides most likely being carried to the ocean rather than to either of the rivers higher in the water table. The engineers will know more when they open things up and start cleaning them out.] The 'news' is that cleanup will take longer because rather than pulling fuel pins out of the reactor and sending them off to be either re-processed or disposed, the core material at the bottom of the reactor will have to be removed piecemeal by what is probably custom equipment. This was the same procedure used at TMI to remove material that had migrated to the bottom of the reactor after having melted. I don't think anyone disputes that this was a tragic event and at seems nearly the worst possible accident (it could have been worse if all reactors were at full power) but it hasn't killed anyone yet, this incident is unlikely to be the principle cause of death for anyone in the forseeable future. And yet tens of thousands of people are dead because they couldn't flee the wall of water, so the tsunami was a disaster, the damage to the nuclear plant was not. When you see a head-on collision and the person in the car walks away because the airbags went off, we don't argue for banning driving because the car is destroyed, there is $50,000 worth of damage to the guardrail, and hundreds of people lost work because they were caught in the traffic jam. We say, "Isn't it amazing how safe cars are these days! That accident would have killed them even 10 years ago." We have had a head-on collision between a late model nuclear reactor and an incredibly and extremely unlikely large magnitude double disaster and so far, the safety systems that were built into the reactors and upgraded over the years have kept everyone safe. Slowly, steadily, and with good engineering practices. The results of that disaster are being addressed and will be cleaned up and repaired. I realize that someone walking away unhurt from what would have been a fatal collision might feel that it was a miracle, but it might just have been good engineering.

eftpotrm 15y ago
.... and, the incident at Fukushima was magnified by the safety features' reliance on active, powered cooling. Current reactor designs are capable of passive cooling, without external power, and would cause even less damage than this.
marshray 15y ago
And yet tens of thousands of people are dead because they couldn't flee the wall of water, so the tsunami was a disaster, the damage to the nuclear plant was not. And what about the 70,000+ people in the 20km evacuation radius who have no idea when or if they'll be able to return to their contaminated homes? (or even bury their dead) You're going to tell them Fukushima Daiichi is not a disaster? At least the people who fled the tsunami are able to rebuild on that land.
- nasmorn 15y ago
  If the expectations of rising sealevels due to global warming prove correct at all people will laugh at the amounts we lost to nuclear power.
  - nitrogen 15y ago
    The nice thing about rising sea levels is that, apart from the occasional catastrophic flood, the rise will happen gradually enough that most of the affected areas can be evacuated decades in advance. There will be a tremendous loss of infrastructure if e.g. Manhattan is under water, but we'll see the water coming.
- ars 15y ago
  They'll be able to come back within the year probably. The land is not contaminated at all, and no one died, so no, it's not much of a disaster as these things go.
  - uvdiv 15y ago
    The surrounding land is heavily contaminated with Cs-134 and Cs-137. http://i.imgur.com/xu0Pm.jpg http://i.imgur.com/xu0Pm.jpg http://www.mext.go.jp/component/english/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2011/05/10/1304797_0506.pdf http://www.mext.go.jp/component/english/__icsFiles/afieldfil... It will be a closed zone for decades. Almost all of the (external) dose in the area right now is from these two isotopes; the rest have decayed. (There's a model of this in [1]). These two will not decay away quickly; Cs-134 has a half life of 2 years, and Cs-137, 30 years. [1] http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/seminar/No110/Iitate-interim-report110404.pdf http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/seminar/No110/Iitate-inter...

jsprinkles 15y ago

I knew this comment looked familiar. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2543642 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2543642

marze 15y ago

There are bigger concerns than ground water contamination. This blog has info translated from Japanese, http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/2011/05/asahi-shinbun-core-meltdown-in-reactors.html http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/2011/05/asahi-shinbun-core-meltdo...