It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Japan Nuclear Plant: No Chernobyl Possibility

page: 5
14
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by duality90
 


what about the fact the roof and walls where blown off by explosion and they are saying there is a breach in the containmnet vessel. then is it possible? or is it very possible from day one. also would like to point out that i dont believe chernobyl had 6.0 aftershocks happening and devastation from a tsunami. this is way worse. and we are no where near these reactors being under control. how can you be so sure everything is better than chernobyl when even the experts arent sure. you do know what unprecedented means right?




posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 11:34 AM
link   
reply to post by letscit
 

Yes they should of gone to plan B from the time they saw they can't contain it, bury the damn reactors as the rusians did. Bury them undergroud cover them in whatever is needed, sand , dirt, concrete.
It's time to cover the reactors, let them melt deep down into the ground, then cover them.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Originally posted by SLAYER69
The question then becomes what to do next?

Will the Japanese finally admit straight out it's a freaking disaster and start dumping graphite and whatever else is needed on the core and buildings? The Russians [After a few days of farting around] started dumping ton after ton and entombed the reactor.

Maybe it's time for the Japanese to admit defeat and get on with it already?


One of the big problems facing the Japanese is they are actually dependent on those reactors for their electricity.

They are already having to ration power through planned staged rolling black outs and that's with 1/10th of the Grid that's destroyed not even requesting power.

Economically the impact to industry could be huge if these reactors can't be got up and running as it could be months or years until replacement plants nuclear, coal, oil or otherwise can be brought online.

If they lose this plant completely and any one or more of the others, Japan is probably looking at rolling brown outs for months if not years as power is rationed. Considering the extent of the destruction to the infrastructure and homes the power situation could also impact and significantly slow recovery.

Right now they are gambling that they can save these plants and get them back up and running somehow sometimes soon, failure to do so, represents another disaster in it's own right, when it comes to supplying the nation's power grid.

Let's just hope for everyone's sake they have a way to pull this off, and the gamble doesn't end with the complete meltdown of the reactors and yet another catostrophe for the people of Japan.

As far as I understand it the moment they decided to pump them with seawater the plants themselves are indefinitely offline. The seawater does something that makes em unrecoverable.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   
if you dont think this can get to chernobyl levels. look at this post.www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   
cnn just mentioned something about the Japanese government starting to evacuate citizens because of the radiation being too bad and reactors out of control. has anyone else heard of this? this will pretty much tell what the situation is, no doubt. time to get the coast line sensors up and sniffing. maybe we can get some leaders around here worried about their citizens too. instead of the next damn election.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by Alina
 

.................

The new data, based on Belarus national cancer statistics, predicts approximately 270,000 cancers and 93,000 fatal cancer cases caused by Chernobyl. The report also concludes that on the basis of demographic data, during the last 15 years, 60,000 people have additionally died in Russia because of the Chernobyl accident, and estimates of the total death toll for the Ukraine and Belarus could reach another 140,000.

Chernobyl death toll grossly underestimated

They haven't contained the Japanese Nuclear disaster,and its obviously getting worse.

Just recently a report was released that studied coal power in the US and tis death toll. Every year it was estimated that 13,000 people die as a result of the pollutants. This is a conservative figure and it was constructed AFTER they installed about 130 coal scrubbers after 2000. The earlier study in 2001 estimated about 25,000 deaths per year. So just between 1995 and 2005 in the US alone we're probably in the neighborhood of 220,000 deaths due to coal power pollutants. Keep in mind this is probably conservative. Another thing to consider is that the radioactive emissions from coal power is magnitudes higher than from nuclear power. Some numbers I've heard are 100 to 1. This is during normal operation for those living in vicinity of the plant. Coal is very dirty!

I'm not overlooking deaths due to nuclear accidents, but coal power gets away with murder.

To do this ethically we have to regulate coal and nuclear on a massive scale and since no one wants to pay what's necessary then we end up with these disasters and high death counts.

And you know the funny thing is we end up paying anyway.. and a lot more too. Our energy infrastructure is more expensive than we're willing to accept responsibility for. The reality is death and misery is the current watchdog, the karma, the control mechanism. It's a sloppy way to control our behavior and since ti's not in our control it's probably a lot worse as well.

We think we're gaining by just letting nature be our watchdog, but the ignorance is killing us.
edit on 16-3-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 11:56 AM
link   
Alright, lets try this again.

Chernobyl used carbon rods, Carbon rods create a gas which carried the radiation much further than Fukishima is actually able too.

Fukishima uses boron control rods, they do not turn into a gas or carry radiation like Carbon/graphite, so Fukishima will not have this cauldron (that was a good choice of words) affect that Chernobyl had.

This means that the ability to spread radiation through the air is significantly less then that of Chernobyl.

Fukishima also has significantly better cooling, in fact the cooling being flooded is the main reason for the majority of these problems, and by pumping in seawater they cool the rods while releasing only small amounts of radiation instead of risking a meltdown.

If the plant did melt down, the containment would help contain it better than Chernobyl, which had nothing, and just let it openly spread all over the place, the plum from this radioactive pool will be less, as it has no gases such as carbon to travel on, and will dissipate faster and travel in lower quantities.

So if Fukishima melts down you will be left with a radioactive pool of goo, instead of a toxic cloud of horrible death.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 12:02 PM
link   
@Alina

What abot the spent fuel rods? What will happen to them?

Thanx.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by jonnywhite
 


People really are just taking this out of proportion, I mean even common sense would tell you safety measures would be increased after Chernobyl. Like i said earlier far more people die of car accidents then have ever died from radiation, do we stop using cars? What about gun laws in America?

People fear radiation, so when it's involved they exaggerate it and make it sound worse than it really is instead of just looking at the data alone, I mean the plant is not built like Chernobyl and it has counter measures in place BECAUSE of Chernobyl. There really is no point treating them the same or completely ignoring the safety changes made.

reply to post by MoonandStar
 


There would need to be a complete meltdown for the fuel rods to even be considered an issue, a complete meltdown would be an issue regardless however i don't believe the spent fuel rods are in containment, and if containment completely failed and the pool of melted core "somehow" reaches the spent fuel rods, which have probly been moved by now anyway, they will melt and cause radioactive omg death, in a semi controlled area.

Bad situation, still not the cloud of death Chernobyl was.

The thing is, there will be major radiation spikes the closer it is to a meltdown, but the radiation has no real way to spread, as it has no gasses like Chernobyl to spread the radiation. The radiation will dissipate the further it gets from Fukishima, where Chernobyl just kept it going because it was mixed with a gas.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 12:19 PM
link   
Fukushima's Spent Fuel Rods Pose Grave Danger The Nation

If the spent rods start to burn, huge amounts of radioactive material would be released into the atmosphere and would disperse across the Northern Hemisphere.

Unlike the reactors, spent fuel pools are not—repeat not—housed in any sort of hardened or sealed containment structures. Rather, the fuel rods are packed tightly together in pools of water that are often several stories above ground.


If up to 600,000 spent fuel rods catch fire at Fukushima, you'll wish it was only Chernobyl.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Alina
 


My point is that NO ONE on this thread,believes your argument,or your statement. If this isnt as bad,why have they ALREADY upgraded this to a 6,and THEY still haven't got containment in multiple plants? You do realize its a fluid situation? I just dont get how people wish to believe,or can spread disinfo,that this ISNT going to be worse then ANY other Nuclear disaster,ever since? Thats Ignorance. DENY IGNORANCE.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


Dr. Michio Kaku weighed in on the situation here: abcnews.go.com...

Right at the top of the article he says this:

"We're very close now to the point of no return," Dr. Michio Kaku, a theoretical physicist, said. "It's gotten worse. We're talking about workers coming into the reactor perhaps as a suicide mission and we may have to abandon ship."

At the very bottom of it he chimes in that:

"We have cracks now, cracks in the containment vessels...and if those cracks grow or if there's an explosion, we're talking a full blown Chernobyl, something beyond Chernobyl," Kaku said.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by Alina
 


My point is that NO ONE on this thread,believes your argument,or your statement. If this isnt as bad,why have they ALREADY upgraded this to a 6,and THEY still haven't got containment in multiple plants? You do realize its a fluid situation? I just dont get how people wish to believe,or can spread disinfo,that this ISNT going to be worse then ANY other Nuclear disaster,ever since? Thats Ignorance. DENY IGNORANCE.


You have an interesting perspective of no one.

Luckily for us, The peoples exaggerations and disinfo doesn't change the physical properties of the plants.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 02:57 PM
link   
Not as bad as Chernobyl? at first they were saying its "just a bit of steam" and not to panic, france have just recently come forward and said that its much worse than the japanese are saying and all people should evacuate the surrounding area and tokyo immediately, Experts are also now saying that this is heading in the direction of chernobyl and could be alot worse due to reactor 3 using MOX fuel which is an experimental fuel which is much more dangerous than standard nuclear fuel, high levels of radiation have already been detected in the air, one reason why they had to abandon the helis dropping water on the towers is because of this, dont believe everything you read on the news websites, this was downplayed by the japanese government right from the start and just like the french are now saying "the situation is completely out of control, evacuate the place immediately, also you may have heard that the US government are also urging the japanese government to increase the evacuation radius to 50 miles!



what do you think is going up in all that cloud and steam from the reactors???...... RADIATION!

edit on 16-3-2011 by Itop1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Itop1
 


France says it's a death trap England says it's perfectly fine, Australia says it's perfectly fine, Germany are double checking all their reactors.

Even if radiation increases on site, unlike Chernobyl that does not mean the spread of the radiation has increased equally.

Go by the plants specifications and what is physically actually possible to happen, not what the media decides it wants us to think, which is changing hourly based on location and who you talk too.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Alina
 


I live in England and they are saying the same as France, what TV channel do you watch, you seem to be behind on times, things have got a lot more serious since the UK said "everything was fine".... which i admit they did, and so did the japanese government, but even now they are admiting its getting to a critical stage now where the radiation levels at one of the reactor is so high workers are in too high of a danger to do anything more.

your theory of radioactive particles not being in the atmosphere are totally untrue, this has been proved time and time again that radioactive particles are already airborne.... but its not too serious yet unless they totally lose control which the governments around the world are now fearing, at the start it was 1 reactor which did NOT use MOX.... and then it was in no danger of being on a chernobyl scale or worse, but since then things have become a lot lot worse.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Alina
 


What are you talking about, there is already radiation off the chart near the plant, they can't even get in, and the molten pool of burned out rods can get in the jet stream, they just have to be exposed to the outside and it's done.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Itop1
reply to post by Alina
 


I live in England and they are saying the same as France, what TV channel do you watch, you seem to be behind on times, things have got a lot more serious since the UK said "everything was fine".... which i admit they did, and so did the japanese government, but even now they are admiting its getting to a critical stage now where the radiation levels at one of the reactor is so high workers are in too high of a danger to do anything more.

your theory of radioactive particles not being in the atmosphere are totally untrue, this has been proved time and time again that radioactive particles are already airborne.... but its not too serious yet unless they totally lose control which the governments around the world are now fearing, at the start it was 1 reactor which did NOT use MOX.... and then it was in no danger of being on a chernobyl scale or worse, but since then things have become a lot lot worse.


I usually watch ABC news on Australian TV, England changing their public approach is news to me.

It's not that the radiation isn't airborne, it's that the radiation isn't being ferried by carbon gas and being burned into the air like a cauldron.

I'm not saying that this situation is not very bad, I just don't think people realise quite how bad Chernobyl actually was, and the differences between then and now.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 03:21 PM
link   
Here are some quotes you might be interested in reading if you are a believer in "it cant get in the air"....

"But just how serious is the exposure of these six spent fuel reactors as they lose their water sources for their cooling pools and overheat?

A 1997 study by Brookhaven National Laboratory on Long Island described a worst-case disaster from uncovered spent fuel in one reactor cooling pool. It estimated 100 quick deaths would occur within a range of 500 miles and 138,000 eventual deaths. The study also found that land over 2,170 miles would be contaminated and damages would hit $546 billion. This is the damage from one uncovered spent fuel cooling pool. There are six pools at Fukushima that have been abandoned with at least two burning and leaking radiation"

and...

"In a worst-case scenario, a large region of northeast Japan will become so contaminate that rebuilding the area would be abandoned for decades until radiation levels subside, similar to the exodus from the region surrounding Chernobyl.

Even the most optimistic estimate without long-term radiation effects would put the timetable for any return to normalcy in the region at several years."



Just to compare... deaths from chernobyl is estimated to top quarter of a million...... so id say fukashima could potentially become a lot worse...
edit on 16-3-2011 by Itop1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 03:25 PM
link   


It's not that the radiation isn't airborne, it's that the radiation isn't being ferried by carbon gas and being burned into the air like a cauldron.

Alfa and Beta particles can float easy on the low winds, never mind Gamma rays that are EM , they will just travel in any direction, you don't need carbon gas, just exposure and a little wind, for EM radiation no wind at all is needed. Lower winds can blow in a vertical way carrying the radioactive particles in the jet stream.

I have been saying this, the winds over japan, over the ocean are stronger than cernobyl, radiation will get carried faster than at the cernobyl incident.

edit on 16-3-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join