Japan Nuclear Plant: No Chernobyl Possibility

page: 1
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 06:44 AM
link   

Japan Nuclear Plant: No Chernobyl Possibility


www.jorbit.com

Koichiro Genba spoke after a new explosion hit one of the earthquake-hit nuclear plants, sparking fresh fears of a catastrophic reactor meltdown.Scientists and technicians have been battling to control two overheating reactors at the 40-year-old Fukushima Daiichi facility after cooling systems were knocked out by Fridays quake
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.jorbit.com




posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 06:44 AM
link   
Japan's government sought to play down fears of a dangerous radiation leak, saying the No. 3 reactor's inner containment vessel, which holds the nuclear fuel rods, was still intact following the blast, which was caused by a hydrogen build up.
Koichiro Genba, the national strategy minister, said at No.1, which is the main priority, there is "absolutely no possibility of a Chernobyl".

www.jorbit.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 06:47 AM
link   
Well that is 100% acurate only because they are in Japan... You see how easy it is to lie with the truth?



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 06:54 AM
link   
No Chernobyl possible huh ???
yea right

and I got some ocean front property
in Kansas I wanna sell ya too.

there are already confirmations by the US Navy
that there is a leak. And other Japanese news
agencies reporting fuel rods exposed and pumping
in sea water to keep it cool.

How much more garbage disinfo are we suppose
to believe ???



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint
No Chernobyl possible huh ???
yea right

and I got some ocean front property
in Kansas I wanna sell ya too.

there are already confirmations by the US Navy
that there is a leak. And other Japanese news
agencies reporting fuel rods exposed and pumping
in sea water to keep it cool.

How much more garbage disinfo are we suppose
to believe ???


Radioactive leak does not equal Chernobyl.

If the actual containment chamber explodes spewing chunks of hot nuclear fuel kilometers away, we can start talking about Chernobyl.

As it is now, it's more equivalent to the Three Mile Island incident.



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 07:34 AM
link   
The very fact that it even has containment at all means it likely wont be possible to deal the same kind of damage or dosage that Chernobyl had. Chernobyl had no containment and less cooling ability.

Don't get me wrong, it is still horrible, but it's nothing in comparison, and more people have died from coal plants and mining that coal compared to radiation from power plants.

I mean there was 65 direct deaths from Chernobyl? Obviously a lot more that is not measurable? Still nothing compared to the amount of people that die from guns and cars possibly even daily. Do we ban those as well?



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 07:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint
No Chernobyl possible huh ???
yea right

and I got some ocean front property
in Kansas I wanna sell ya too.

there are already confirmations by the US Navy
that there is a leak. And other Japanese news
agencies reporting fuel rods exposed and pumping
in sea water to keep it cool.

How much more garbage disinfo are we suppose
to believe ???


Apparently some people cant see the truth through the radioactive fallout dust.
Only when they glow green at night will they enlighten to the idea.



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 07:41 AM
link   
Look we have a REAL Fallout Event developing here today right now.

We do not know anything ok. NOTHING. ZERO INFO. All we know is that we had a meltdown at Fukushima. Maybe 2...or 3? UNKNOWN.

What do we do when we know NOTHING??? We prepare for the worst, and hope for the best.
Common sense people!!

If you do not know what to do to prepare for a nuclear fallout event, please review this thread I just posted giving a detailed list of steps you need to take. Fallout preparation is simple, if you stay calm and think it through logically.

How to Survive Nuclear Fallout, a Guide.

It only takes 5 minutes of reading to find out ALL you need to know about surviving this potential fallout.
It's extremely straight forward and simple to follow.

Prepare for the Worst, Hope for the Best!
We can find out how bad this situation is tomorrow, but today we must prepare!
edit on 14-3-2011 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 07:57 AM
link   
No cherynoble possibility? well its only manmade stuff, its gunna fail at one point or another in time or sooner ya know? the quake tok out its cooling system correct? well the plant is 100% fullproof then is it*
cherynoble did circle close to 85% of the globe ya know* the radiaiton. it was jsut more concentrated in that area, of course. but ti ddi travel in minute amounts as afar as scotland, and as far as nevada and NM eastward,. jsut in minute amounts*
Makes me think of a nuclear bomb documentary i saw on histoary channel a few times, abots some island int eh 50's? US navy basically moved the imhabitant off the island, to do nuclear testing. the poeple moved back eventually, but its still contaminanted and unsafe to eat vegetaiton thier.
in the documentary, they were talking about how much of the radioactive particles were simply picked up and swept out to see. something about chlorine binding with the radiation and simply carrying it out.
so dosnt matter where you today* in my mind. what ahppens nuclear,a bomb, reactor or test, especially near or in the water..those radioactive particles are probably a aprt of us all, well most of us*



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 08:04 AM
link   
reply to post by MacAnkka
 



As it is now, it's more equivalent to the Three Mile Island incident.

True.

I think they should move it past the TMI level, TMI never had a hydrogen explosion. They had a bubble, but never an explosion.



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 08:07 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 
Thank you muzzleflash. The link will help people that care about it, if they end up needing it.

A lot of people on different threads have been complaining about too many posters overreacting and fearmongering.

I don't see it that way. What ever happened to the Boy Scout motto?
Be prepared.



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 08:11 AM
link   
I was looking up how thick the containment walls are, and I found this. I know this is a bit long, and I apologize for that but it all seems rather relevant.



TOKYO, March 14 (Reuters) - The key to averting a nuclear disaster at the quake-stricken Fukushima power complex in Japan is ensuring the thick protective walls around the reactor cores remain intact.

So far that is the case.

* A hydrogen explosion on Monday at the number 3 reactor raised concern that the crisis is escalating, but experts insist a Chernobyl-style nuclear disaster can be averted.

* Three units at the Fukushima Daiichi plant suffered loss of coolant to their reactors following Friday's 8.9 magnitude earthquake and the tsunami it triggered.

* So long as the thick containment walls shielding the reactor cores remain intact, even a meltdown of the nuclear fuel would not lead to a major escape of potentially dangerous radioactive clouds into the air.

"Everything I've seen says that the containment structure is operating as it's designed to operate. It's keeping the radiation in and it's holding everything in, which is the good news," said Murray Jennex, of San Diego State University.

"This is nothing like a Chernobyl... At Chernobyl (in the Ukraine in 1986) you had no containment structure -- when it blew, it blew everything straight out into the atmosphere."

* Low-level radiation has been detected outside the plant but at very low levels. These levels would need to rise something like a thousand times before real fears are justified, experts say.

* Every day without a major release of radiation increases the odds of a good outcome. Once a reactor is shut down, there is a lot of decayed heat that needs to be gotten rid of, with the first four-to-seven days critical.
Jennex says Japan, at three days out from the quake and shutdown, would likely "be OK" if another day goes by without a major radiation release.

* Some of the fuel rods in the Fukushima Daiichi power plant's reactors are exposed, so raising water levels around the rods is critical and will help cool them down. Pumping seawater into the reactors is a last-ditch measure, because the reactor may not be able to be used again, but it can be effective. Again, the key is keeping the reactor container intact.

* A release of plutonium at the number 3 reactor would be a real sign of trouble because it is the only one using plutonium as a fuel. This would signal that the fuel cladding had melted and ruptured, and that a meltdown was in progress, experts say.

Similar signs from the other two reactors would be a release of uranium-235 or maybe cesium. Cesium was detected on Saturday, but the level remained low. The cesium released could also have been due to contamination from old fuel issues, not a meltdown.

* If the containment wall is breached, the level of radiation would rise sharply. * At one point on Monday, levels at the stricken plant were around 751 microsieverts, a dosage similar to a stomach x-ray, Japans' nuclear authorities said. A fatal does of radiation would be more than 7 million microsieverts.

* A sharp rise in radiation would be measured in millisieverts, rather than microsieverts, as it has been up to now, which would be potentially a thousand times higher.

* An explosion within the reactor vessel itself could damage the container, but no signs of that have been detected yet. The containment vessel also is designed to channel any melted fuel to separate areas, which will help keep heat from building up.

* Additional warning signs would be a total evacuation of the plant area or the wind dispersion area. (Reporting by Elaine Lies; Editing by Mark Bendeich)


Link

Also, even if there actually is a meltdown, it still could not deal the same damage as Chernobyl.
edit on 14-3-2011 by Alina because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 08:15 AM
link   
Meltdown alert at Japan reactor

The Fukushima Daiichi plant's operators said they could not rule out a fuel rod meltdown, after a cooling system broke.

www.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 08:17 AM
link   
The situation is still very alarming. In the worst case scenario the inner core will melt through the protective shell and then it will detonate in contact with water and release very much radioactivity. If this happens, it is much worse than the Three Mile Island accident.

According to some experts it is important to cool the reactors at least 20-30 hours after shutdown. So the worst case scenario will probably not happen I guess.
edit on 14-3-2011 by Fenrin because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 08:20 AM
link   
Chernobyl was a graphite moderated reactor without a containment structure. When hot graphite is exposed to the air it burns. The graphite fires at Chernobyl spread radioactive combustion products thousands of miles.

Fukushima, on the other hand, is a light water reactor with multiple layers of containment. The only transportable contaminant is lightly radioactive steam.

There is no comparison between the two.



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 08:21 AM
link   
The scope of disasters in Japan is unprecedented and US military personnel are already confirming that they have tested positive for radiation exposure flying in and out of the affected areas on rescue and supply missions.

Aircraft are coming up positive for radiation exposure too.

Currently they are claiming this is the result from small amounts of radioactive steam being released into the atmosphere to keep the pressure from blowing the reactors up.

Clearly they have a huge problem, clearly they have no solution as of yet, clearly the next few days are going to be critical in whether they can contain these problems or they aren't.

Hint: There was one plant at Chernobyl and yes while it lacked the safety features that the Japanese plants do, the Japanese are struggling with difficulties at multiple plants and multiple reactors and I am sure that what we are hearing in regards to these challenges is designed more at keeping the earthquake and tsunami ravaged Japanese people from going into a full state of panic at a time the Government(s) are stretched thin to the max to logistically rise to the challenge of such huge and so many tragedies occuring all at one time.

It's rather sad and ironic that the one nation who has witnessed the horror of atomic weapons first hand is now facing yet another possible round of radiation poisoning at their own.

Wood fire, cooks a steak just perfect.

What were people thinking?



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alina
Also, even if there actually is a meltdown, it still could not deal the same damage as Chernobyl.
edit on 14-3-2011 by Alina because: (no reason given)


Personally the issue for me if it's not a Chernobyl (spelling that word is really irritating.) is the people of Japan, who are right next to it and populating the island so densely that it could cause massive problems to so many people for decades. So even if it's not a Chernobyl it's still a huge problem. It's fine people in America calming others down about the chances of fallout clouds reaching them, and I can get that, but the people of Japan, even China, N/S Korea, part of Russia and probably other countries I've not checked, are right next to it.



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 08:33 AM
link   
Of course it's not another chernobyl. That one was totally different kind of reactor. It managed to spew up radioactive core parts around when it exploded. That cant happen with this type of reactor. That's what the experts here say and I have no reason to doubt them. Any resident experts on ATS could shed some light to this.

[Edit to add] Yeah sirmike puts it nicely
edit on 14/3/2011 by PsykoOps because: added



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 08:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Hitoshura
 


I'm in no way saying that it is not a problem, and a big one at that.

I am saying that it is not comparable to Chernobyl, It's ability to cause that much radioactive damage is not as high, even with more than one plant.

Even with a meltdown, although horrible and a tragedy on it's own, still can not cause as much damage.

It's just not really possible, as SirMike explained.

It's like putting a wall between you and an explosion instead of sitting right on top of the bomb like at Chernobyl.



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 08:44 AM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Gday,
Good to hear your thoughts on this Proto.
Im going to sit back now to see what extra knowledge you can provide for us all.


Cheers,
Meathed





new topics
top topics
 
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join