State of emergency declared at Japan nuclear plant

[FBaggins]

KYO — The Japanese government issued a state of emergency at a nuclear power plant Friday after a cooling system failure in the wake of the giant earthquake and tsunami off the east coast of the Pacific nation.

An administrator at the Tohoku Electric Power Co's Onagawa facility said the process for the cooling reactor is "not going as planned," adding that "nuclear emergency situation" has been declared. The company asked people nearby to stay calm, the official TV news channel NHK reported.

A fire broke out at the plant following the quake, the Kyodo news agency said. Prior to the Kyodo report, the company had said it had not received information on whether there had been any problems at the plant after the disaster.
Separately, Fukushima Prefecture, the site of a Tokyo Electric Power nuclear power plant, said on Friday that the plant's reactor cooling system was functioning, denying an earlier report that it was malfunctioning.

It was not immediately clear if there was a risk of a radioactive leak as a result of the fire at the plant operated by Tohoku Electric Power. Miyagi prefecture, where it is located, was one of the areas worst hit by the tsunami.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42025882/ns/world_news-asiapacific/

[FBaggins]

1. Japan invokes special law for nuclear emergencies

HONG KONG (MarketWatch) - Japanese authorities declared a state of nuclear emergency late Friday, following a record earthquake earlier in the day that triggered emergency shutdowns at a number of nuclear plants near the quake's epicenter. The government said no radioactive leaks had been reported and residents living near nuclear power plants were not under any immediate threat. The four nuclear power plants nearest to the quake's epicenter had been safely shut down, while 11 others that were affected by the shaking also had their shut-down systems triggered, according to a Kyodo report Friday. Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano told reporters that there the declaration was made so that authorities could establish an emergency task force to deal with the situation. Tokyo Electric Power said reactors at its Fukushima Daiichi plant had been shutdown, as they were designed to do during emergencies. It also said electrical systems that provide power to the cooling systems were disabled by the quake, and diesel-powered generators that provide back up power were also out, leaving the utility short of coolant to keep the core at a safe temperature, according to reports. Tohoku Electric Power Co.'s reported smoke coming from a building housing a reactor at its Onagawa plant in Miyagi, according to reports. The company said there have been no radioactive leaks and that it is checking the safety of the reactor.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/japan-invokes-special-law-for-nuclear-emergencies-2011-03-11?reflink=MW_news_stmp

[GliderGuider]

2. 2800 residents being evacuated

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/952326--japan-issues-evacuation-order-to-resident-near-nuclear-power-plant

TOKYO—Japan is issuing an evacuation order to thousands of residents near a nuclear power plant.

Japan's nuclear safety agency says the evacuation order to more than 2,800 people followed the government's emergency declaration at a nuclear power plant after its cooling system failed following a massive earthquake Friday.

The agency says plant workers are currently scrambling to restore cooling water supply at the Fukushima No. 1 power plant. There was no prospect for an immediate success.

The plant experienced a mechanical failure in the backup power generation system to supply water needed to cool the reactor. The reactor core remains hot even after a shutdown.

[AtheistCrusader]

56. That reported smoke from reactor building at Onagawa

was widely reported to be a turbine, not reactor.

http://www.sify.com/news/fire-breaks-out-at-japan-s-n-power-plant-after-quake-news-international-ldlr4jbidgh.html
etc

I'm actually surprised a lot more of the turbines didn't explode. Balanced to micrograms, spinning at many thousand RPM, weigh several tons... add earthquake and mix...

[madokie]

3. Do you honestly believe that the nuke industry will tell us the truth

concerning radioactive releases? I don't

[Dogmudgeon]

4. They don't have to

Even small releases can be detected around the world. That's how the first news about Chernobyl was found: monitoring stations all around the world detected abnormally high levels of radioactive cesium -- which is still an incredibly small amount. But the point is: ionizing radiation can't be easily hidden.

Ironically, water will help hide radiation's tell-tale signals.

But if someone is convinced there is a conspiracy to keep everyone unaware of all things nuclear, I'd hope they would avoid x-rays, smoke detectors, and sunlight. That, or get educated.

--d!

[kristopher]

5. Yes, Chernobyl was such an open book it only took 35 years...

...to prove that the 70 deaths attributed to the accident by Russia and the global nuclear industry is actually about a quarter million and rising.

A real open book.

[madokie]

6. But they don't want to talk about Chernobyl

cause it blows all their shit right out of the water. Fools and stupid people embrace nukes, period. IMHO

[AtheistCrusader]

57. Sure, yeah a reactor with NO CONTAINMENT, disabled safety systems

built under soviet corruption and crappy materials/work

oh yeah, I see tons of parallels to Japan. Just tons.

[FBaggins]

81. They're both reactors

That's all that matters to some people.

[madokie]

84. See what happening in Japan right now

Pay fucking attention man!

[FBaggins]

9. Right... because Japan and the old Soviet Union are really the same thing.

to prove that the 70 deaths attributed to the accident by Russia and the global nuclear industry is actually about a quarter million and rising.

Lol... there's that quarter million BS again. What a crock.

Do us all a favor. Wait to see what actually happens before you start making up stories on this one, ok?

[madokie]

11. The common denominator here is THE NUKE INDUSTRY as a whole

no matter the country. They're who I watch closely

If I was a betting person I'd bet that they'll lie to us about this too. In time we'll get the truth but it won't be from the nukies you can bet your ass on that too. If the past is an indication of how it is anyway.

[FBaggins]

13. There is no such animal.

There is no illuminati-like consortium of all things nuclear that do nothing but lie to you.

OTOH, it's hardly a surprise that people who suffer from the irrational paranoia of nuclear power would have other forms of irrational paranoia. Right?

[madokie]

23. No irrational paranoia here big boy

I've been around this game a long time and its always the same, first they lie to you then when you don't believe them they start the personal bullshit such as you just did
:grr:

I'm an easy guy to find btw

[FBaggins]

30. You're an "easy guy to find"?

Like... I'm looking to sneak up behind you?

Not the best way to demonstrate a lack of paranoia, is it? :)


And I'm sorry... where did I "make it personal"?

I need to accept your fear that everything is always worse than "they" tell you or I'm insulting you?

[madokie]

44. We're talking about the lack of honesty coming from the nuclear industry as a whole

pay attention man

[AtheistCrusader]

58. There is no 'nuclear industry as a whole'.

It isn't some giant octopus or something. I'm sure US nuclear companies would LOVE to sell Japan some modern BW reactors.

"Yeah man look how unsafe those GE Mark I's are! You should upgrade!"

[FBaggins]

59. The easy sale right now would be the Westinghouse AP1000s

"Don't you wish you had a big tank of water sitting on top of this baby that didn't need pumps or power?

10% off if you order now."

And hey! They're owned by a Japanese company anyway.

[AtheistCrusader]

60. I hate to be making light of any aspect of this situation, but yep. Exactly right.

[abqmufc]

34. The academic term is "Iron Triangle"...(link)

"Environmental Risk And The Iron Triangle: The Case of Yucca Mountain."

Abstract – Despite significant scientific uncertainties and strong public opposition, there appears to be an “iron triangle” of industry, government, and consultants/contactors promoting the siting of the world’s first permanent geological repository for high-level nuclear waste and spent fuel, proposed for Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Arguing that representatives of the iron triangle have ignored important epistemological and ethical difficulties with the proposed facility, I conclude that the business climate surrounding this triangle appears to leave little room for consideration of ethical issues related to public safety, environmental welfare, and citizen consent to risk. If my analysis of Yucca Mountain case is correct and typicial, then some of the pressing questions of business ethics may concern how to break the iron triangle or, at least, how to expand it into a quadrilateral that includes the public.

http://www.jstor.org/pss/3857413

The iron triangle described here and in numerous other articles/books (be it on nuclear or not) is the NUCLEAR INDUSTRY.

[FBaggins]

35. That's not actually the normal use for "iron triangle"

and the term doesn't refer specifically to the nuclear industry.

It refers to the interrelated bonds of power between a given industry, the federal agency that oversees it, and the legislative powers that write the relevant laws (sometimes congress, sometimes just the relevant committees).

With nuclear power, the NRC is one leg of the triangle, but the term applies to other industries as well.

[kristopher]

40. Not normal *within* the nuclear industry perhaps

But in the reality based community it is recognized as a prime example of the structure. As abqmufc wrote: "The iron triangle described here and in numerous other articles/books (be it on nuclear or not) is the NUCLEAR INDUSTRY."

[FBaggins]

43. Nope. Everywhere but your imagination.

The term refers to far more than just one industry. It refers to the incestuous relationship between government and industry in general. It's used FAR more frequently to refer to the military industrial complex than to the nuclear industry.

[kristopher]

47. Perhaps you should learn to read.

The quote I used in the prior post says that the term is used for other industries but that the OP was specifically about the nuclear industry.

Your appeal to the MIC is interesting in that the nuclear industry is an integral part of the /I/ in /MIC/.

[FBaggins]

48. You're going to try to pretend that you weren't disagreeing?

Now you're saying "that's what I said all along"?

If so... why (apart from your ornery nature) would cause you to argue the point?

[kristopher]

49. Like I said, perhaps you should learn to read.

The initial statement by abqmufc was that this wss an instance of the use. You said it wasn't a (and I quote) "normal use". I pointed out that the nuclear industry IS a "prime example" of normal use and that the only place that would be denied was *within* the ranks of the nuclear industry. I ended by giving you the quote where abqmufc specified the nuclear industry was not the only relationship that commanded the use of the term.

Your not so brilliant reply was that "The term refers to far more than just one industry" - a rather oblivious statement in light of the actual content of the thread. You then show your lack of understanding of the global economic structure by trying to portray the nuclear industry as not being part of the MIC - a totally absurd claim that requires a complete redefinition of what the MIC is.

I'm not going to go blow by blow with the rest but suffice to say you are, as is your habit, talking at right angles to reality.

[FBaggins]

52. You might try taking your own advice. There were TWO errors that I corrected in his post.

You're acting as if the second statement refers to the first error.

The first was that the term was described in the quoted source as refering to "industry, government, and consultants/contactors" when "consultant/contractors" are really part of "industry" and "government" is usually split into the legislature and the regulatory agencies.

The second error was that the poster felt that the term was primarily refering to the nuclear industry. That's wrong on two counts, because the industry is, in fact, one leg of that triangle, not the triangle itself... AND the nuclear industry isn't the primary referent for the term.

I ended by giving you the quote where abqmufc specified the nuclear industry was not the only relationship that commanded the use of the term.

And that isn't what the quote says. It says that the iron triangle is the nuclear industry and that it is so described in multiple books/articles including those that are not nuclear in nature. The quote does NOT say that other industries use the term to refer to something other than nuclear.

Try again?

[abqmufc]

67. yeah and Ted Lowi first wrote about it....

when describing the need for interest group liberalism. Again most people get all this. Are you saying just b/c an author borrowed a term and demonstrated how it can be adapted to describe the phenomena of the nuclear industry? So in order to characterize a phenomena we must always use a new term? Really?

You ask for proof of the nuclear industry, I gave it, and now you don't accept it b/c the term used to describe was previously used by Lowi and others to describe other situations of similar characteristics? Wow.

While I suspect you don't agree the same cannon of literature which used Iron Triangle to describe the nuclear industry also argues the nuclear industry IS part of the military industrial complex. Thus they didn't even "borrow the term" they've incorporated your nuclear power into the military complex where iron triangle was first used.

Having read a lot of Lowi, I'll argue he'd also include nuclear power into the military industrial complex label.

[abqmufc]

65. Thanks...

[GliderGuider]

45. The canonical example of an "Iron Triangle" is the defense industry.

The arms companies, the Pentagon and Congress are its three legs.

I've never heard it applied to the nuclear industry before, but it makes sense.

[abqmufc]

66. Link between nuclear power and nuclear weapons

The link between nuclear power and nuclear weapons is well documented in many books/journals. Here is an article found on Greepeace's website.


"From the dawn of the nuclear age, it has been recognized that nuclear power and nuclear weapons are inextricably linked. The 1946 Acheson-Lillienthal report on the control of atomic energy recognized that, "the development of atomic energy for peaceful purposes and the development of atomic energy for bombs are in much of their course interchangeable and interdependent." It is no coincidence that the United States, the Soviet Union, France and Great Britain all developed commercial programs in conjunction with their bomb building efforts. Civilian programs sprang from the perceived need to produce plutonium.

Civilian nuclear programs have led to the proliferation of nuclear weapons in India, Pakistan, Israel and South Africa. India's nuclear program began in 1960 with a research reactor provided by Canada and run with heavy water supplied by the United States. According to the New York Times, American technicians trained Indian scientists to reprocess plutonium from the radioactive fuel. Indians then used the plutonium for a nuclear bomb in 1974. The Indian government called the use of this nuclear device "a peaceful nuclear explosion.""
http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/nuclear/safety-and-security/the-link-between-nuclear-power/

I also first heard of Iron Triangle in grad school via military matters (as you stated), but once I got into looking at the mining and milling of uranium on the Colorado Plateau it all sort of fell together. Nuclear Power is a byproduct of the nuclear weapons industry.

[GliderGuider]

80. What I've always found interesting about that linkage

Out of the 31 countries with civilian nuclear power programs, only 7 have developed nuclear weapons. Five of those are NPT signatories (US, UK, Russia, France and China), while two (India and Pakistan) are not. Two nations (Israel and NK) have nuclear weapons, but no civilian nuclear program. I'm not sure what to make of this except that it doesn't seem as simple as it is in most people's minds (i.e. power reactors -->> bombs).

The standard linkage argument looks to me a lot like the "gateway drug" argument applied to marijuana vis a vis heroin use, and suffers from the same shortcomings. We can deal with the spread of nuclear weapons through diplomacy and direct action without impeding the use of nuclear power by the nations who just want electricity.

[abqmufc]

64. Wow just keep your blinders on then....

You are right the term Iron Triangle was not coined JUST to describe the nuclear industry....I never said it was. I did say it the "academic term" used to describe the phenomenon early described as the "nuclear industry". You asked for proof, rather than list 1,000 page books, I thought it wise wide to provide you a link on of the best accepted (within academia) articles on the phenomina known as the nuclear industry and its control on debate, dialogue, information, decision making, and releasing info related to threat from nuclear spills/accidents.

FYI, my MA and PhD in Political Science came from Northern Arizona University in the 90s, so don't treat me like a high school kid here. I could spend hours typing out my thesis or some grand argument...but I have a life and still need to find work (after being unemployed for 7 months), and so I cut corners figuring I didn't need to spell everything out. Besides it seems you like your nuclear power blinders on....

You seem to love to pick an argument about things I never even claim rather than taking ten minutes to read the article and see what is actually being discussed.

[FBaggins]

8. Do you honestly believe that the "nuke insustry" is the only one with the ability to tell?

They aren't.

[madokie]

10. Not at all

but you'd think they'd be the first to let us know, wouldn't ya?

[FBaggins]

12. You miss out that your paranoia is impacting your impression of reality.

If there's a leak, there's the possibility that they might tell us the truth and they might lie to us. If there's NO leak, there's the liklihood that they would tell us that too.

You assume that they'll lie... but you aren't accounting for whether or not there actually IS a leak.

I've been in meetings most of the morning so I don't know what's going on, and I expect the bulk of the reporting to be on the earthquake and tsunami (as it should be)... but I presume that they've said that there have been no significant leaks. You can't assume that there ARE leaks just because you don't trust them to tell you the truth if one happened.

[madokie]

24. We still don't know the whole of it concerning TMI, Davis-Besse

and it took 30 some odd years to get the truth about Chernobyl.
Take your bullshit and peddle it somewhere else, I'm not buying

[FBaggins]

32. And how would I differentiate that from paranoia?

I'm just asking how we would know the difference. Wouldn't you expect an irrational fear to manifest itself in claims that things are really much worse than most people know about and we "still don't know" how bad things were at, say, TMI?

In reality, they've got a pretty good grasp on what the results of TMI were. You just think they're lying to you.

Again... that's fine if you want to believe it. But how would it provide any additional evidence for people you're trying to convince that it isn't misplaced fear?

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

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

[kristopher]

50. That entire attack sounds like something straight from "the nuclear industry"

There is no one that questions the existence of "the fossil fuel industry" or "the coal industry" or "the petroleum industry" but you assert that it is paranoia to think there is a similar "nuclear industry". This in spite of the obvious indicators such as "industry associations" like the WORLD NUCLEAR ASSOCIATION or the "AMERICAN NUCLEAR SOCIETY" or the "NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE".
Hell, the nuclear industry even has their own marketing agency within our government (DOE). As the New York Times put it today: "The Energy Department, which by charter is supposed to promote nuclear power..."

Your position has some pretty obvious weaknesses.

[FBaggins]

53. Lots of things sound like that to you.

In fact... just about anything that doesn't buy into your predetermined philosophy sounds like something straight from the nuclear industry.

That's what you get when you expand "the nuclear industry" to "everyone who disagrees with me".

Makes it REALLY easy to dismiss anything you don't want to believe.

There is no one that questions the existence of "the fossil fuel industry" or "the coal industry" or "the petroleum industry"

Um... didn't I already respond to this nonsense? I don't question the existence of any of those... OR the "nuclear industry". I just don't expand that industry as you do into everyone who disagrees with you. I don't see them hiding behind every tree either.

[PamW]

78. We know the truth behind TMI quite well...

We still don't know the whole of it concerning TMI,
===================

We understand the truth behind TMI quite well.

The Kemeny and Rogovin reports among others; were quite complete.

What do you think we are still in the dark about?

Kemeny covered the cause quite well - a stuck relief valve complicated
by operators that didn't realize the gravity of the situation they faced,
and same operators over-rode the safety systems without a clear understanding
of the plant's condition. Like an airline pilot that over-rides the auto pilot
and warning horns and doesn't realize the plane is in a gentle dive.

Rogovin detailed the release of a large amount of non-biologically active noble gases
( your body can't absorb the noble gases which limits damage ) plus about 15 Curies
of Iodine-131, which is just under 4 millionths of an ounce in everyday units.

Absorbed radiation dose at the site boundary was about 1 mrem for the week - for the
week one got one additional day of natural background exposure.

PamW

[madokie]

83. From the officials we got a white wash and not much more

Studies where done following TMI and they showed that the cancers rates down wind went up, quite a bit too.

[abqmufc]

16. Yes as the truth of Hanford are still not fully known.

and someone is withholding that information. Neither is the spill into the Rio Puerco River after the Church Rock (Navajo Nation) spill really is not known as someone is withholding that informaton. The Church Rock spill was in the sparsely populated portion of the Southwest and nobody heard about it, yet it is the largest nuclear accident in the country.

So yes, there is a nuclear industry and it's the incestual relationship between the DOE, NRC, and the DOD. Please look at the proven historical accounts of releases at Hanford, the forced relocation of a Native American Tribe in order to build Hanford. The actions of the nuclear industry are sinister and the impact of the nuclear industry is still felt in Northern New Mexico and Northern Arizona where live with the impacts daily.


We don't even need to talk about what has happened half way around the world we only need to look at the botched dealing of the nuclear industry in New Mexico, Arizona, and Washington to see what we will be dealing with again.

Personally I don't want to see Navajo livestock rotting from the inside out b/c they drank tainted water b/c the feds have failed to clean up over 150 uranium tailings piles left since as early as 1955. I am tired of having radioactive dirt flying over places like Grants, Shiprock, Gallup, and even Albuquerque.

So if you think nuclear is safe, do your best to ensure the mining, milling, power production and long term storage is done in your backyard and not mine, we in New Mexico are against such movements, but since energy is now a national security issue we no longer have a say, the government is the only one who has a say.

[FBaggins]

18. You seem to misunderstand some issues of scale here.

If a reactor in Japan has a serious core incident... you're going to know about it.

This is really on a very different scale (many orders of magnitude) from a leak or improper disposal of old equipment.

[abqmufc]

20. Your point is true-Risk model v. precautionary principle.

Yes, there is a scale difference, no denying that...but you also look at what could happen in Japan as a worse case scenario. A nuclear incident impacting human health, non-human life, and ecological health does not have to be a core meltdown. It could be releases due to cracks. Its impact may not even be known for decades as the contamination spreads into the food chain. You also seem to think that Japan's infrastructure is working and thus air monitors are working to detect leaks. I wonder how true this can be with such devastation.

I suspect you look at incidents via a traditional risk assessment model. I look at such "risks" via a precautionary principle. Through the lens of a precautionary principle nuclear power and the nuclear industry has no place being on the table for discussion. Traditional risk assessment models will not look at the long term storage of nuclear waste, the transport of nuclear waste, the milling of uranium and the mining of uranium. Risk assessment models view each step towards nuclear power (and waste disposal) as sepearate, "stove piped", issues. However, the precautionary principle will look at the entire cycle of nuclear power and deem it is not viable.

From a personal experience I've seen the flaws in the mining of uranium, milling uranium, transport of nuclear materials, and storage of waste in the American Southwest and the Hanford Reach. I've also worked for years on the longterm legacy seen in places like the Savannah River Site, the outlying area of St. Louis (used for early Manhattan Project tests), and the Chicago Forest Preserves (the reason those trees are still standing is b/c they are a legacy of early Manhattan Project tests and the area is essentially a low level nuclear waste site.

I doubt we will ever agree on whether nuclear power is an option. I also doubt we will ever agree whether or not an incident can be kept secret from the masses despite all the social media and technology available to get the story out. I do believe any government or industry with as much power as big oil or the nuclear industry can keep info from us. It took nearly 35 years for the US federal government to admit their was problems at Hanford. To me it is never a matter of scale, it is whether or not it can be done...if hidden the truth can be done on a small scale, it can be done on a large scale.

[wtmusic]

21. 25,000 deaths annually in the US from burning coal, not one from nuclear.

Where's the outrage? Where's the scale? :shrug:

[abqmufc]

25. Coal industry keep blue collar employed is the story

I don't disagree with you. Living in NM I live very close to some the dirtiest coal fired EGUs in the nation. All that power leaves NM (and Navajo Nation) and goes to L.A. and Vegas. It is a shame, and the solution of carbon capture is disgusting. The said fact is CCS is moving forward, I sat on those federal decision making panels a few years ago. Univ. of Illinois has most research grants on this and thus you see the Prez backing this...CCS means IL can mine coal again (high sulfur content). It is sad for me to see the blueprints go from something I saw on a powerpoint 3 - 4 years ago to actual pilot projects. And I won't even start my rant with Peabody Coal and the Black Mesa mine (largest open pit coal mine in the world) found on the HPL land between Navajo and Hopi lands.

Again I agree with you, but I will argue we do have deaths from the nuclear industry annually. A book called "If You Poison Us: Uranium and Native Americans" talks about the longterm health (and death) found in NM and AZ, I used it as a major source for my thesis work on the subject matter. While people have not necessarily died directly from nuclear power, there are entire clusters of men and women dead in places like Laguna Pueblo, Acoma Pueblo, and Nez Perce Reservation, all from cancer that is directly related to exposure.

Nuclear is a hot issue in the Southwest (along with all negative, fossil fuel extraction) b/c the mines are starting to open up after being shut down for 25 years. The mills are opening up. Most people don't hear about this, but Bruce Babbitt's uranium claims are about to be used...they are on the border of the Grand Canyon National Park! While Sec of DOI Babbitt did a lot to support his personal interest in mining rights and grazing rights. In short, DOI allowed him to create a nice retirement in N, AZ. Despite the Navajo Nation and Acoma Pueblo having banned uranium mining and milling they are left powerless for two reasons. One, federal government supremacy of law, as the past two Presidents have said, "energy is a national security issue", b/c of that the government can forgo all public comment, environmental laws, and local (state, county, Tribal) laws which prohibit mining. Besides the federal government having the framework to do what ever they want to with respect to "securing our nation's energy needs", we have the issue of checker board reservations. When the government realized what resources existed on reservation lands, they decided communial landownership was not acceptable. This is a reason for the Dawes Act not discussed on Wikipeida or in general American hisotry. The Dawes Act allowed non-tribal people and industry the ability to buy and own land on Tribal reservations. The result for the Nez Perce Tribe is 90% of their reservation is now owned by non-tribal members (b/c it was good farming land) and for Navajo Nation it is the land where the oil, gas, coal, and uranium is mined despite the Tribal governments and its peoples' protest.

Wave, wind, solar, and possibly geothermal are the only options.

[kristopher]

37. Apparently there is no coal industy, you are just being paranoid.

:sarcasm:

[Confusious]

51. Not very good ones considering

There isn't much that can replace oil, and renewables aren't going to cut it. They may in the future, but we have problems now.

[abqmufc]

69. Hemp oil can replace all uses of petroleum

If you care to investigate I'll allow you the free range of the internet, a search should show you many sites, studies showing Hemp Oil can replace crude oil for all its uses (from fuel to plastics) are bountiful.

Hence, why hemp has been banned in the States.

As for renewables (for me that is only wind, solar, wave) CAN solve the problem today. The issue is R&D is not going at full steam ahead and in fact federal agencies which led this R&D in the 70s no longer are as active (NASA for one) and thus R&D has fallen behind. Instead we spend more on carbon offsets and carbon capture, both tools to allow business as usual while we take over indigenous peoples lands in Africa for commercial farms which will "offset" our pollution.

Here is all that has to happen, make the commitment to be off of fossil fuels and nuclear power in 10 years and watch the R&D catch up to our current needs. It was that sort of challenge that won the space race. We have millions (including myself) out of work, who would jump at the chance to rebuild our power grid for sustainable power.

And if you are ready to put your tin hat on, call Congress and demand Congressional hearings for the Disclosure Project. What do we have to lose on this one? If they are right, they will prove contact with E.T.'s and that we do have their technology to develop energy which would solve all energy woes globally. They claim that info being used solely for military development and world domination. If they are wrong then we hold a 2 day hearing on whether or not UFOs exist...I mean if they can hold talks on MLB and steriroids why not hold a hearing the possibilities which the Disclosure Project claim?

We keep buying into the myth we can't do it, but yet I know countless people who live off the grid now. Yeah we may need to drop the power usage of our TV, xbox, and computers...but then don't we already use such things too much?

[Confusious]

70. Is hemp legal in the US?

no.

Hence, why hemp has been banned in the States.

Please, why not look a little deeper into why. Your reason is a joke.

As for renewables (for me that is only wind, solar, wave) CAN solve the problem today. The issue is R&D is not going at full steam ahead and in fact federal agencies which led this R&D in the 70s no longer are as active (NASA for one) and thus R&D has fallen behind. Instead we spend more on carbon offsets and carbon capture, both tools to allow business as usual while we take over indigenous peoples lands in Africa for commercial farms which will "offset" our pollution.

Here is all that has to happen, make the commitment to be off of fossil fuels and nuclear power in 10 years and watch the R&D catch up to our current needs. It was that sort of challenge that won the space race. We have millions (including myself) out of work, who would jump at the chance to rebuild our power grid for sustainable power.

Dreaming. I could make a solar collector that was really, really efficient, Thing is, it would cadmium Telluride. Cadmium is highly toxic, and telluride is worth it's weight in gold.

keep dreaming.

And if you are ready to put your tin hat on, call Congress and demand Congressional hearings for the Disclosure Project. What do we have to lose on this one? If they are right, they will prove contact with E.T.'s and that we do have their technology to develop energy which would solve all energy woes globally

Oops, loony bin. IGNORE.

[abqmufc]

74. narrow minded much?

Sure you believe what you believe, yet to judge w/o any knowledge of a persons education, background, experience is pretty lame....but then your actions just prove how far humanity has fallen, we no longer can accept anyones' view but our own.

If you read what I said is that we can make it happen if we commit. I never said we had the technology to switch off coal today..but I do believe we could achieve it in 10 years. We saw it done with NASA committing to getting a man on the moon. If we had that kind of commitment we could achieve. Yet the motivation is not their, mostly b/c industry is not motivated while they make record profits in oil and gas and we create reduction tools that only prolong the use of fossil fuels (CCS and carbon offsets).

As for dreaming, yes, every idea started as a dream, even the coal fired EGU. Be it the car, the plane, putting a man on the moon or zero fossil fuel use in 10 years all started as a dream. I'll spend the rest of my life fighting to stop the use of coal, natural gas, nuclear for power. Because I believe in that dream.

As for Disclosure Project, yes most write me off at this point and that is fine. My father worked for NASA for 30 years, stationed at Wright-Patterson and Lewis Research Center. I believe based on conservations I've had with people whose names who'd know and things I've seen. I don't expect you to believe, but I ask if we give MLB its Congressional hearing on steroids in baseball, i think congress can waste a day to either debunked once and for all UFOs....or....
good day.

[Confusious]

75. Want to join me on a unicorn and fairy hunt?

We'll take pictures and have a grand old time.

If you don't I'll call you narrow minded and unable to accept anyone's view but your own.

Even if it's all bullshit.

[abqmufc]

76. yep let's go

But where I live it is the Yeti, Chubacabra, or of course those E.T.s around Roswell that we "hunt".

[GliderGuider]

22. Humans violate the PP all the time. We believe we can out-think Mother Nature.

I'd include all genetic engineering, geo-engineering and the continued use of fossil fuels for any purpose in this category.

[jpak]

7. Update 1

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/11/japan-quake-reactor-idUSL3E7EB1K020110311

Reuters) - A cooling system for a nuclear reactor was not working after a powerful earthquake in Japan, prompting the government to declare an emergency situation as a precaution although it said there was no radioactive leakage at present.

Residents that live within a 3 km radius of Tokyo Electric Power's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant have been told to evacuate, Japan's Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano told a news conference.

TEPCO confirmed that water levels inside the reactors at its Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear plant were on a falling trend, but added it was working to maintain water levels to avert the exposure of nuclear fuel rods.

not much more

[Javaman]

14. Regardless of whether you support nuke energy or not...

those are some fucking brave people in there trying to save this thing from melting down.

My prayers go out to them.

[FBaggins]

15. Yep. Brave whether there's a real danger or not.

Protocol's for potential nuclear incidents involve a bunch of people running around in hazmat suits even if nothing really happens. Even if you KNOW that there is little danger, it's going to get to you subconsciously.

Just think of getting dental xrays. There's really no danger, but when the tech runs around behind a shield wall each time, something in your head makes you a little concerned. "Why am I out here with this thing in my mouth if she needs to get behind that lead wall???"

It's not rational, but it's entirely understandable. People get afraid of invisible things that might or might not be dangerous. Heck... my parents get a little paranoid about visiting us because we have gas heat.

But there's a real reason for concern here. If a serious reactor incident is going to occur, a dozen things have to go wrong that each have a 1:1000 chance of occurring (obviously a dramatic oversimplification). That adds up to a really big number, but if ten of those twelve things go wrong, you start to worry even if you intellectually know that there's still only a one-in-a-million chance of catastrophe... you also know that the chance is billions of times more likely than it was yesterday.

Yes, prayers are certainly in order.

[One_Life_To_Give]

42. +1

[FBaggins]

17. Fukushima reactor is a plutothermal (MOX) facility

Or at least... one of the six at that facility is. I'm pretty sure that it's that #1 reactor that received MOX fuel last year.

Should add an interesting twist for some of the usual suspects.

[PamW]

79. Not really a big deal

Fukushima reactor is a plutothermal (MOX) facility
===========================

All commercial power reactors have / burn plutonium.

About 40% of the energy you get out of a nuclear power plant is due to
plutonium that was created and burned in situ.

Look at it this way. How much difference is there between spent fuel,
and the fuel the reactor was running on the week before it shut down to
refuel?

The only thing that's really different about MOX vis-a-vis the spent fuel
is that the MOX has had the fission products removed. As far as fissile
material aka "fuel" is concerned - there's not that much difference from
what the reactor is doing normally.

However, rather than trying to jump through hoops to develop a long term
storage option for long lived radioisotopes like plutonium, one just recycles
it back to the reactor via MOX and burn it as fuel.

Plutonium should not be in the waste stream - it's a fuel.

PamW

[FBaggins]

82. No doubt.

But it's something that some opposed/feared and it adds a level in interest to what's going on.

I think that this was one of the first to switch to MOX.

[FBaggins]

19. Reportedly under control now.

The backup power system has (reportedly) been restored and water is flowing again.

Not that there's any reason to believe any of this of course. They're probably lying to keep people off the roads so the nuke executives don't get caught in traffic as they try to escape the doom they know is coming.

[abqmufc]

27. Neither CNN nor MSNBC have stated...what source? 10:15 AM MST

From the media I've seen there is nothing to back this up. I've seen local Santa Monica, CA news state threat exist, I've seen local Albuquerque new say threat exists, I've seen CNN and MSNBC report as of 10:15 AM MST that threat exists.

[FBaggins]

31. Sorry I only read that some power had been restored

and that pumps were starting to send water in again.

Since I've returned from lunch, I've read of additional concerns... so it's certainly not "under control" at this point.

[FBaggins]

46. More.

It appears that the earlier report was referencing the fact that they were able to get the battery backups to operate to get some water flowing. But they only have eight hours of battery power available and need to cool for 24-48 hours.

[jpak]

26. TEPCO says pressure rises inside nuclear reactor -

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/11/japan-quake-tepco-pressure-idUSLHE7EB00720110311

Tokyo Electric Power Co said pressure inside the No.1 reactor at its Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear plant has been rising, with the risk of a radiation leak, Jiji News reported on Saturday.

TEPCO plans to take measures to release the pressure, the report added. No comment was immediately available from TEPCO.

[abqmufc]

"release pressure"= release radioactive materials in the air.

In order to avoid melt down we will release radioactive and non-radioactive materials into the atmosphere. SAFE nuclear power at work for you.

[Confusious]

39. What do you think the containment building is for? nt

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[abqmufc]

62. Yeah and they said that about Hanford....N/T yourself.

Here a site for the data of Hanford releases......yeah all those people left for dead with cancer had NOTHING to worry about?

Please....
"Two grim facts underlie all the sobering information about the actual and potential harm Hanford poses to the environment.

Radioactive and chemical contamination has not and will not stay inside Hanford's boundaries.
Contamination will remain for hundreds of thousands of years beyond any memory of a place called Hanford.
What are the present threats?
1) Water Contamination
At least one third of Hanford's 177 huge high-level nuclear waste tanks, many as big as the capitol dome in Olympia, have leaked. In some areas technology from the 1950s is still being used to detect leaks, probably underestimating the extent of contamination. Almost all of the single-shell tanks are well beyond their design life, so more leaks are likely. Radioactive contaminants have reached the groundwater 200 feet below the surface and are on their way or have already reached the Columbia River (see map). In the last free-flowing US stretch of the Columbia flowing through Hanford, now the Hanford Reach National Monument, 70% of the fall chinook spawn each year. Over 300 miles of the Columbia River downstream from Hanford are threatened by the leaking tanks. The WA Department of Ecology notes that "aside from the environmental damage and health risk, the perception of the river being contaminated could devastate the market for northwest agricultural products."1

2) Atmospheric Contamination
Newspaper headlines in 1999, "Nuclear Blob Grows at Hanford,2 described a bulge in the radioactive crust on one of the huge waste tanks caused by a buildup of dangerously explosive hydrogen. While this threat was resolved, it is one of a variety of safety issues that have plagued Hanford tanks. These include flammable gasses, nuclear materials, and explosive chemicals. In 1957 in Siberia a high-level waste tank exploded, spreading a radioactive plume of 20 million curies 180 miles long, giving people estimated doses of .7 to 80 REM, and necessitating the relocation of well over 10,000 people.3 Collapsing tank domes or tank explosions that could spread radioactivity far beyond Hanford remain a genuine threat.

Fires at Hanford pose another real danger. In August 1984 and July 2000 raging sagebrush fires burned three-fifths of the Hanford area. The July 2000 fire burned three radioactive waste sites and stopped just short of some major waste sites.4 Afterwards plutonium was detected in nearby communities.

Earthquakes are an additional concern. Just a quarter mile from the Columbia River, two large swimming pool-like structures, the K-Basins, hold 80% of the DOE's stockpile of spent fuel rods. These storage basins have leaked in the past. If earthquakes cracked these structures, draining off the cooling water, the spent rods could spontaneously ignite, seriously polluting the atmosphere."

http://www.psr.org/chapters/washington/hanford/

When you consider tests on impacts where based on a white persons lifestyle and NOT the lifestyle of the 15 Tribes who used the Hanford Reach (and still today) as traditional hunting and fishing grounds, as well as gathering of herbs and medicine. Fish consumption tests were done on the average of a white person's consumption of fish....5 to 10 times less than that of a Tribal diet. Thus even the health impacts listed only look at the lower threshold and NOT the impact of Tribal peoples.......

[Confusious]

72. I think you should blame the United States Government for that

Not the commercial nuclear industry. One != the other.

It's like blaming GM for the Sherman tank. Look it up and you'll understand.

[abqmufc]

68. How's the building gone to address cooling ponds?????

The storage pool for nuclear fuel rods that is also not circulating, which means, according to the article, that the fuel rods will boil off the water in a day or so, then burst into flames. The pool is OUTSIDE the plant and has no containment dome.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...


NEXT.......

[Confusious]

71. What???

Please, make more sense.

[abqmufc]

77. Sure, here you are (article)

Thank you for asking for clarification and not allowing confusion to be a springboard for calling me an idiot (like most on DU).


TITLE: Risk of Nuclear Catastrophe Escalates in Japan – ‘Worse than Chernobyl’
By: William Pentland



"“In addition to the reactor cores, the storage pool for highly radioactive irradiated nuclear fuel is also at risk. The pool cooling water must be continuously circulated. Without circulation, the still thermally hot irradiated nuclear fuel in the storage pools will begin to boil off the cooling water. Within a day or two, the pool’s water could completely boil away. Without cooling water, the irradiated nuclear fuel could spontaneously combust in an exothermic reaction. Since the storage pools are not located within containment, a catastrophic radioactivity release to the environment could occur. Up to 100 percent of the volatile radioactive Cesium-137 content of the pools could go up in flames and smoke, to blow downwind over large distances. Given the large quantity of irradiated nuclear fuel in the pool, the radioactivity release could be worse than the Chernobyl nuclear reactor catastrophe of 25 years ago.”"


http://blogs.forbes.com/williampentland/2011/03/11/risk-of-nuclear-catastrophe-escalates-in-japan-worse-than-chernobyl/

______

If you are not familiar to these ponds, maybe you've heard of them in relation to coal fired power plants and coal mines. A similar pond is what ruptured and poisoned parts of Kentucky (the Kingston Fossil Plant coal fly ash slurry spill on December 22, 2008). Personally I wonder if that explosion wasn't one of these pools combusting and shooting water vapor (white smoke) airborne, and possible damaging some structures? Maybe not.

[jpak]

28. CNN reports radioactive vapor to be released in response to pressure build up

n/t

[jpak]

29. Two reactors have problems with cooling systems

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/03/11/earthquakes-japans-nuclear-reactors-red-alert/

The 8.9-magnitude earthquake that shook Japan early March 11 blew out the cooling systems of two nuclear reactors there. An inability to cool the reactors could cause radiation leaks, and both power plants are "bracing for the worst,” according to government officials.

"At present we have no reports of any radioactive materials or otherwise affecting the surrounding areas," Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan told the press. The malfunctions are occuring at the Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s Fukushima Daiichi power plant near Tokyo and the Tohoku Electric Power Co. facility in Onagawa. Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano said that all the necessary precautions are being taken to prepare for radiation leaks, including evacuating thousands of residents within a 3-mile radius of the Fukushima facility.

[Terry in Austin]

33. Well, well, well...

'Nuff said.

:nuke:

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

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

[Merchant Marine]

54. This was posted on reddit.com by a nuclear engineer

After scram (complete shutdown), about 5% is still there and that level reduces in half every 15 minutes. So for a 3000MW thermal reactor (like this one), 600MW is still there after immediate shutdown, 300MW 15 minutes later, 150MW 30 minutes later, and so forth.
In a Boiling water reactor of that model, there are 3 cooling pumps in series (one for the cold feed and two after each hot feed loop). During a scram, those pumps must be shut off so that you don't get vibrational feedback (which could break a pipe). However, in the core is designed such that there are jet pumps (16 in parallel on the standard design) on the wet stream loop. This jet pump has no moving parts but can circulate the some water regardless of what the pumps are doing. Further, there is an single emergency main pump on the main loop that can push the full coolant load. This pump can be driven by any one of several diesel systems or a battery backup.
If all of this fails, you then start to depend on the cold water back up re-condenser. In a BWR, underneath the first reactor containment, there is a large torus shaped area that is filled with a large amount of water. You can drop the steam from the reactor into this ring. The steam recondenses and reduces pressure. With the jet pumps, you can push the cold water into the reactor. This system can prevent first containment failure but doesn't prevent core damage.
Then there is a second level containment. The design based accident for this reactor is assume a main coolant pipe dissappears (double guillotine break), all of the coolant flushes out and there is no way to cool down the reactor. In this case, 600MW post scram level will melt the reactor and possibly damage first containment, but second containment can hold the total heat produced post scram. You also have a coreium (term for molten core) catcher that catch the core, mix in a huge amount of radiation shield, and reduce the temperature.
What is happening: Earthquake happens, core is scrammed because something might break. When the scram happens, main pumps turned off, emergency main pump turned on. However, the diesel generator doesn't work, maybe damage in earthquake, maybe something else. They turn on the battery system. It can last 4 hours, which is enough to reduce core power to 10kW. However, it is hot in there and 10kW is still enough to continue to make steam. So the water level (which tells you how much steam has been made) is dropping. They can go to the recondenser if they need to, but the recondenser doesn't rule out core damage (not melting, but material warping and oxidation) which would be expensive or impossible to repair. So for now, they are bringing in new coolant so they can prevent expensive core damage.
They are NOWHERE close to the design based accident, and there is very little worry about containment failures. They are doing the evacuation because there isn't the safety factor they want, not because they are anywhere close to a radiation leak.

[jpak]

55. Radiation 1000 times normal at one Japan nuke plant; pressure release ordered

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2011/03/radiation-1000-times-normal-detected-around-crippled-japanese-plant/1

Update at 6:25 p.m. ET: Japan's nuclear safety agency is preparing to issue what Kyodo News called "an unprecedented order" directing the Tokyo Electric Power Co. to open a valve at the earthquake-crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant to release pressure from a reactor that is in danger of overheating.

Original post: Radiation 1,000 times normal has been detected inside a crippled nuclear plant in northeastern Japan where utility managers have released potentially radioactive steam to reduce mounting reactor pressure, the Kyodo News service is reporting, citing the government's safety agency.

That suggests radioactivity could spread around Tokyo Electric Power's Fukushima No. 1 plant, where thousands of residents within a 6-miles were ordered to leave before dawn Saturday.

A state of emergency has been declared at the plant, one of the world's largest. Its primary cooling system was damaged by Friday's magnitude 8.9 earthquake.

<more>

[AtheistCrusader]

61. Let's do the time warp agaaaaaain

[Nederland]

63. What a deceptive post title

People are actually dead from this natural disaster, and all you anti-nukes can do is make up lies about what might happen.

Sad.

[Confusious]

73. Fear

You know what I'm saying?

Republicans and others. That's what they sell.