Gerben42 Posted March 30, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 Apparently, the soil contamination has been measured in the vicinity of the plant. The conclusions are: * Plutonium contamination is low enough to not be dangerous.* The 20km zone will be habitable again next year. This includes using the land for growing crops and things like that. Then there is the question about the contaminated water. The source of the highly contaminated water is the pressure suppression pool of block 2, which has a leak (see post #16). The water was piling up in the reactor building, and from there into the turbine building and now into the draining, thus leading towards the ocean. This water has very high dose levels so it will be hard to handle and it is not recommended to let it into the ocean. The main challenge for the engineers at the moment however is too much water in the containment. Water is pumped into the containment and released as vapor into the environment at containment depressurization. This would be a dynamic equilibrium if not the buildings would act as a heat sink, causing some water to condense inside the containment. This leads to higher and higher water levels. The solution would be to set up a circulation so that no more containment depressurization is needed. Another good idea that is followed is spraying the buildings with resin. This causes them to be sticky so aerosols will get away less and this lowers the release. Also it insulates the particles already deposited on surfaces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted April 5, 2011 Report Share Posted April 5, 2011 This is a weird idea, can you explain why gerben? why ain't the reactors built underground and in case of problems just buried under? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerben42 Posted April 10, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 10, 2011 I am sure it is a cost factor Gonzalo. But what can be done and is done in many German reactors, is that some emergency power supply is in bunkers so that flooding won't get to them. There are plans for underground mini nuclear reactors that don't need any personnel. Sounds like a good plan to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted April 10, 2011 Report Share Posted April 10, 2011 Shipstones. Just sayin'. B-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rain Posted April 28, 2011 Report Share Posted April 28, 2011 Bob Geller, the BBOer who's a seismologist in Japan recently sent me this. I thought you may be interested. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v472/n7344/full/nature10105.html Edit - argh sorry nevermind. No longer free. Bob was saying eq are not predictable, though there are some signs that can be heeded, iirc. Japanese version still free.http://www.natureasia.com/japan/nature/special/nature_comment_041411.php Google translation:http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.natureasia.com%2Fjapan%2Fnature%2Fspecial%2Fnature_comment_041411.php&sl=ja&tl=en&hl=&ie=UTF-8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxhong Posted April 28, 2011 Report Share Posted April 28, 2011 Those experts really ignored the success of the prediction of HaiCheng earthquake. IMHO, not all types of earthquakes are predictable, but some certain types of earthquakes are really predictable. http://baike.baidu.com/view/33629.htm Bob Geller, the BBOer who's a seismologist in Japan recently sent me this. I thought you may be interested. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v472/n7344/full/nature10105.html Edit - argh sorry nevermind. No longer free. Bob was saying eq are not predictable, though there are some signs that can be heeded, iirc. Japanese version still free.http://www.natureasia.com/japan/nature/special/nature_comment_041411.php Google translation:http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.natureasia.com%2Fjapan%2Fnature%2Fspecial%2Fnature_comment_041411.php&sl=ja&tl=en&hl=&ie=UTF-8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
y66 Posted May 31, 2011 Report Share Posted May 31, 2011 From today's Spiegel Online Angela Merkel's government has decided to phase out nuclear power by 2022, in a reversal of its previous policy. German commentators are split over the wisdom of the decision, with one newspaper comparing the move to the fall of the Berlin Wall and another saying it will harm future generations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted May 31, 2011 Report Share Posted May 31, 2011 From today's Spiegel Online This would be a really big deal if they do it. 11 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted May 31, 2011 Report Share Posted May 31, 2011 I guess Gerben ain't celebrating today, Merkel is getting crazy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted May 31, 2011 Report Share Posted May 31, 2011 Seems to me the German government's current position is likely to do more harm than good to Germany, in the short run, at least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotShot Posted May 31, 2011 Report Share Posted May 31, 2011 Perhaps some of you are not aware that the german government and agreed with the nuclear industry in the year 2000 to shut down the power plants within the next 20-25 years.Merkel's government changed that end of last year, just before the first plants would have been shut down. Merkel's decision now is going a little further than what had already been planed and prepared during the last 10 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aberlour10 Posted May 31, 2011 Report Share Posted May 31, 2011 I don't think the last word in this case is already spoken. Merkel is shocked at the moment due to losing several elections in Germany. Her current schedule for the nuclear phase out may change in any moment, the next finacial crisis will come for sure and then the question will be: Are we able to go offline and who will pay these billions for it? A majority of Germans oppose atomic energy but this can turn if the costs for energy will explode. The german energy giants like RWE plans already to build a new nuclear plant in Netherlands for ex. New and old reactors in Poland, Russia and France will remain for x decades, so this german solo run doesn't make much sense in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted May 31, 2011 Report Share Posted May 31, 2011 While we're on the subject... Stabilizing the crisis at the Fukushima No. 1 power plant by the end of the year may be impossible, senior officials at Tokyo Electric Power Co. said Sunday, throwing a monkey wrench into plans to let evacuees return to their homes near the plant. http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20110530a2.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
y66 Posted May 31, 2011 Report Share Posted May 31, 2011 Does it matter where the nuclear power plants are located? Is the cost of imported electricity so much higher than locally generated electricity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted May 31, 2011 Report Share Posted May 31, 2011 Does it matter where the nuclear power plants are located? Is the cost of imported electricity so much higher than locally generated electricity? http://www.stealth316.com/2-wire-resistance.htm 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.