Authorities to release "small amount" of radioactive vapor

[wtmusic]

Source: Reuters

Word is, Japanese authorities will release a small amount of radioactive vapor into the air to ease pressure.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/fukushima-nuclear-plant-2011-3#ixzz1GJmVbXbN

---

(Good site for updates)

[Vinnie From Indy]

1. Yikes!

I wonder if the amount is indeed "small" or are they hiding the extent of the damage as long as possible.

[OhioChick]

2. Japan orders people living near nuclear power plant to leave

Friday, March 11 2011

TOKYO (AP) — Authorities say the pressure is rising at a nuclear power plant in northeastern Japan after its cooling system failed.

Japan's nuclear safety agency says pressure inside the reactor at the Fukushima No. 1 power plant has risen to 1.5 times the level considered normal. To reduce the pressure, slightly radioactive vapor may be released.

The agency said the radioactive element in the vapor would not affect the environment or human health.

Japan has issued an evacuation order to about 3,000 residents living near the plant. The government also issued a state of emergency at the power plant.

http://www.paducahsun.com/component/content/article/202-update/438763-japan-orders-people-living-near-nuke-plant-to-leave

[JDPriestly]

12. Every once in a while we get some pro-nuclear activist on DU.

These reactors are dangerous. We have to find other sources of energy -- and not coal or carbon-based energy.

[defendandprotect]

16. +1000% -- and it takes 6 months to properly close down a nuclear plant --

We have 106 of them -- and Obama has now arranged new subsidies for the nuclear

indusry -- !!!

[wtmusic]

20. The place is crawling with 'em.

In fact, OP is one. There are quite a few in Environment/Energy, stop by for a visit.

Pretty much any practical source of energy is dangerous, but nuclear - for the amount of energy it delivers - is one of the safest.

[JDPriestly]

29. Let's see what you think tomorrow.

[boppers]

31. Avoid solar energy.

Huge nuke.

:evilgrin:

[deminks]

3. not good. My thoughts are with the Japanese people

and the workers at this plant.

[defendandprotect]

17. They think 1000 dead from the tsunami -- which also hit our West coast --

[meegbear]

4. And we all know what'll happen next ...

[Tikki]

5. OMG The Vapors...

Who knew...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEmJ-VWPDM4
"Turning Japanese"...
Apparently, they did...and years ago.



Tikki

[Poll_Blind]

6. What, by the way, is "small"? 1,000 cubic feet? 10,000 cubic feet? 100,000 cubic feet?

:shrug:

Or does "small" just mean "an amount we don't want you to get panicked about just yet"?

PB

[The Backlash Cometh]

7. A little bit. Like a little bit of oil was leaking in the Gulf.

[defendandprotect]

15. +1000% -- Capitalism is suicidal -- !!

[gkhouston]

33. But it's all gone now, and the radiation will magically disappear, too.

The unicorn hazardous waste collection crew can remove all ills. Just keep watching your TV when you're not busy shopping and all the icky stuff will disappear.

[AtheistCrusader]

9. By 'small' they probably mean in curies, not volume.

Probably a large volume of steam, but the amount of radiation within it would be measured in curies.

Important to get that pressure out before the core starts burning, if that's a risk. Much less radiation if it's just what is carried by the water, versus material from a very damaged core.

[Jackpine Radical]

8. Chill, people.

Nookyoolar ennigy is poifickly safe.

[PatSeg]

11. Yep

I guess it takes an earthquake to convince the pro-nuclear energy folks that nuclear energy might not be a good way to go. But then again, they probably won't change their minds.

[abqmufc]

13. Acceptable Risk is the term used.

It is amazing what is deemed acceptable risk in an industry driving Cost-Beneift Analysis. Since this is an "act of God" is might even be exempt from needing to be addressed.

[wtmusic]

19. Not right now, considering since the earthquake struck

34 Americans have been killed by coal. 25,100 every year.

Nuclear is still by far the best way to go.

[nyy1998]

10. Does anyone feel like this is eerily similar to the West Wing's own nuclear plant episodes?

I know the writers of the show don't have predictive powers or anything, but this is like "deja vu all over again"

[defendandprotect]

14. :"We are all downwinder's" -- always -- !!! Can't wait for Obama to give us more nuclear -- !!!

:nuke:

:nuke:

:nuke:

[jwirr]

18. A small amount - how many small amounts add up to a dangerous

amount?

[bongbong]

21. No insurance coverage

Private insurers have never insured nuke plants. The government has to back them up. I'm sure that's a sign of just how safe they are. :sarcasm:

The real reason that solar is not pushed is because it can easily be used as a de-centralized energy source. You can have your own "generator" at your house. Energy companies don't like that. If the trillions spent on oil & nukes had been used to research solar, we would have had super-cheap solar cells available decades ago.

[wtmusic]

22. Every one of them has insurance.

Private insurance completely footed the bill for Three Mile Island.

The real reason solar isn't pushed is you can't watch TV at night.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bongbong]

24. removed?

So it looks like you're having the moderators remove posts that refute your misinformation now. You must not be from around Democratic parts.

Regular private insurance companies have never insured nukes. A special insurance fund was set up to do it, backstopped by American taxpayers. It's a matter of simple fact. Sorry if reality doesn't agree with you.

[Confusious]

25. It doesn't agree with you

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/funds-fs.html

They pay for private insurance, and anything over that is paid by the government, which the operators MUST pay back.

Considering the premiums and the amount that has had to be paid out so far, insurers stumble over each other trying to get a plant to by their insurance.

[bongbong]

26. I learned something today

Insurance up to $300,000,000 is covered by the ANI. That is news to me. But ANI isn't really an insurance company, it is more like a reinsurance company. So I was *PARTIALLY* correct. No individual company would risk insuring a nuke plant, even though they have no problem insuring other large structures & engineering works.

There is still the Price-Anderson Act, so the taxpayers will be footing the bill when the statisically-certain-to-happen major nuke accident happens here.

Things would be so much simpler, cleaner, and more efficient if we concentrated on solar, but that is a no-no in the New World Order.

[Confusious]

27. statistics

There are lies, damn lies and statistics.

Nothing is certain.

BTW, the power industry has to pay the government BACK.

Solar isn't going to cut it alone. Nor are all the renewables going to cut it alone. Not one coal plant has been shut down in favor of renewables.

[bongbong]

28. One correction

"BTW, the power industry has to pay the government BACK."

Yeah, that always happens. Look at the trillions in TARP money. Nothing is Too Big To Fail. If a really, really big accident happened the liability might literally be in the trillions. :rofl:


"Solar isn't going to cut it alone."

No, that statement is completely false. It is the Talking Point repigs use to prevent any solar research. There is plenty of research indicating just the opposite. Here is one example of many.

http://www.isesco.org.ma/english/publications/Renewable%20Energy%20Technologies/Renewable.pdf

[Confusious]

30. TARP never said the government had to be paid back

The law says the government has to be paid back. Big difference.

And there are other studies which indicate that it will take an area the size of 1/4 of Arizona to supply all the electricity for the United States.

Of course, That's only a 1/3 of the power we use, including cars. So scale that up by 66%. Where are you going to find that land?

Already environmental groups are contesting plants in the Mohave desert. Another group says the land is sacred to American Indians.

[bongbong]

32. No sources

You provided no sources or evidence for your claims, so your post doesn't really prove anything except your ability to have an opinion.

[Confusious]

34. Sooo...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_of_the_United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_plants_in_the_Mojave_Desert

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_Energy_Generating_Systems

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nellis_Solar_Power_Plant

Sooo.... from these five sources....

Total installed power generation in the United states, 1,088GW, minus wind and Hydro ( solar and geo don't even make it ): 993GW

Convert to megawatt: 993,000MW

Average size of solar facility to generate 553 MW, 5750 acres~4000 acres

Capacity factor of typical solar plant: 21% ( how much it generates over a year vs theoretical capacity (how large they say the plant is i.e. 553MW only generates 117MW, those numbers are for the Mohave desert, with almost no cloudy days, sunshine 24/7/365 )

993,000MW to be replaced, divided by 117MW : 8487

Total acreage needed for 8,487 plants (8487 * 5750 acres ~ 8487 * 4000 acres): 48,800,250 acres ~ 33,948,000 acres

Total needed for plants 48,800,250 acres ~ 33,948,000 acres / Size of Arizona 72,930,000 acres * 100%= 67% ~ 47% of Arizona needed to provide all the electricity via solar to the united states.

[bongbong]

35. Kudos

I'm glad to see you went to the trouble of looking up the figures.

Of course those are for old-tech solar systems, which the newest designs outstrip in generating capacity. For example, this one will give 46 MW on 250 acres, or about 2600 acres for 500 MW. And these are the early versions of the helio-tracking solar plant technology. Expect it to get better.

http://www.esolar.com/our_solution

And of course you're still using the "big centralized" power system model, which is of course not the best way to do solar. Decentralized is the best way to do it. And most advocates for solar realize that solar is a partial solution; you would still have generating plants for uses that weren't covered by the solar systems. But of course that means less need for new giant expensive plants & new giant sources of pollution.

I have to say "of course" a lot since I thought most people that read about power systems were aware of these facts, but I guess I was wrong.

[Confusious]

36. No, The one at the military base was brand new

October 12, 2007. I thought you might say that, so I added it in there and did the calcs on it too. It comes in at 5500 square miles for 553MW.

As for decentralized, the infrastructure isn't there. That will have to built too, but by that time, we'll all be looking at a desert in the Midwest.

[bongbong]

37. Huh?

Decentralized infrastructure isn't there?

You'd better tell that to my friend who lives off the grid in California, or the guy on the next block with a roof full of solar cells. Once you tell them, they'll probably want to take down their solar systems because they're violating some law or something.

My facts stand. The system from esolar comes out to roughly 2600 acres for 500 MW. And they're getting better.


"October 12, 2007. I thought you might say that, so I added it in there and did the calcs on it too. It comes in at 5500 square miles for 553MW."

The only way it would take 5500 square miles to generate ~500 MW is if you were using millions of children holding magnifying glasses.

[Confusious]

38. Sorry, 5500 acres

If everyone is going to do that, where does that leave the city? There aren't enough rooftops to supply all the power this country uses.

Someone has to direct the power to where it needs to go and watch the load on the grid so it doesn't implode.

Power just doesn't go out into the ether and find someone who needs it.

Also, tell me how thats going to work north of the mason-dixon line, when they only get 20% capacity factor in the Mohave desert. Everywhere isn't California.

[bongbong]

39. Did you read my posts?

"If everyone is going to do that, where does that leave the city? There aren't enough rooftops to supply all the power this country uses."

I've only said that solar is a partial solution about 10 times so far. Until it gets as much federal support as oil & nuclear, it can only be a partial solution. But it will lessen the need, and cut down the amount of, big centralized power plants.

And I've already proven your "5500 acre" figure is wrong using latest technology.

If you're going to ignore the facts I post and the points I make multiple times, you're a troll. Have a nice day. Argue with yourself.

[Confusious]

40. Esolar is a big central plant

Thought you didn't want those.

2600 acres for 500 MW is still a quarter of Arizona.

So you proved my original point.

[bongbong]

41. bye bye

You're obviously a binary thinker - either all centralized or all de-centralized. What's the matter, can't handle a microscopic bit of complexity? I think you're in the wrong website.