Nuclear fuel likely melted through Fukushima reactor vessel (China Syndrome alert)

Based on the "noise" in the images, the utility estimated that one area of the containment vessel was emitting radiation at a level of 530 sieverts per hour -- enough to kill a human in under a minute. Only emissions up to 73 Sv/hour had been detected before at the reactor, which was crippled by a March 2011 tsunami.

Tepco previously believed that most of the reactor's nuclear fuel had been contained in the pressure vessel, based on last year's muon tomography inspection -- a technique similar to X-rays but more powerful. But "it's highly possible that melted fuel leaked through," said Yuichi Okamura, a company spokesman for nuclear power.

Nuclear fuel likely melted through Fukushima reactor vessel

Many observers of the Fukushima disaster have believed that a China Syndrome was inevitable.

The China Syndrome refers to a scenario in which a molten nuclear reactor core could could fission its way through its containment vessel, melt through the basement of the power plant and down into the earth. While a molten reactor core wouldn’t burn “all the way through to China” it could enter the soil and water table and cause huge contamination in the crops and drinking water around the power plant. It’s a nightmare scenario,the stuff of movies. And it might just have happened at Fukushima.

Was Fukushima a China Syndrome?

I highly recommend watching the film The China Syndrome (1979) if you don't know about the concept. Back then it was considered scary enough to make a thriller about it. In 2017 we've reached the point where when it happens in real life most people just yawn.


www.youtube.com...

I think it's time to review what Michio Kaku said about a China Syndrome occurring at Fukushima Daiichi.


www.youtube.com...

This topic has been almost forgotten. And largely ignored.

You know that there is a forum dedicated to this? I think it's called the Japan forum.

Lots of useful info in there from the beginning.

Thank you for the update, thought this discussion died out.

a reply to: Profusion
I've seen the movie. I don't ever believe a word Tepco has to say. They have a 'saving face' thing similar to US corporations 'saving on fines' thing.

Whatever Tepco says, at least double it.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Profusion
I've seen the movie. I don't ever believe a word Tepco has to say. They have a 'saving face' thing similar to US corporations 'saving on fines' thing.

Whatever Tepco says, at least double it.

You're exactly right. TEPCO has admitted that very thing. I may have mentioned that if I felt like enough posters here were concerned about truth over the official lies.

TEPCO's Fukushima meltdown apology: "It was a cover-up"

Just look at the thread linked to above. Is this still a conspiracy forum? TEPCO admitted to a cover-up of a story that could harm most if not all of the world's population, but it only gets four flags and three replies? Where's the interest in conspiracies?

I have no nuclear engineering understanding whatsoever so please bear with my question.

When building a nuclear plant, does anyone do baseline readings of the proposed area for future reference in the event of something like this so they have a comparison? Or do they not do it on purpose just in case something happens so they can cover their asses better?

originally posted by: Profusion

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Profusion
I've seen the movie. I don't ever believe a word Tepco has to say. They have a 'saving face' thing similar to US corporations 'saving on fines' thing.

Whatever Tepco says, at least double it.

You're exactly right. TEPCO has admitted that very thing. I may have mentioned that if I felt like enough posters here were concerned about truth over the official lies.

TEPCO's Fukushima meltdown apology: "It was a cover-up"

Just look at the thread linked to above. Is this still a conspiracy forum? TEPCO admitted to a cover-up of a story that could harm most not all of the world's population, but it only gets four flags and three replies? Where's the interest in conspiracies?

They have and will continue to as they are under very strict government oversight for at least 3 years. They are trying to get out form under it.

originally posted by: Natas0114
I have no nuclear engineering understanding whatsoever so please bear with my question.

When building a nuclear plant, does anyone do baseline readings of the proposed area for future reference in the event of something like this so they have a comparison? Or do they not do it on purpose just in case something happens so they can cover their asses better?

Yes. And nuclear powerplants have been built in places they shouldn't have been. There is a risk ratio, and this plant seemed to lobby or bribe it's way into this location with promises of 'shoring up the sealine'.

Generally, though, nuclear accidents are the result of human error and not enough regulation. I won't go into the regulations about to be removed in the US.

Posted earlier here
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Please add further comments to the ongoing discussion in the above linked thread.
Thanks

**Thread Closed**