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.

 

More volunteers 'prepared for death' at Fukushima

page: 1
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:11 AM
link   
First we had the heroic 50, who stayed behind to fight the Fukushima Dai-ichi reators from disasterous meltdown. Later, They were evaced... probably in bad condition. Now, Japan has new volunteers, who understand that thier mission to secure the radiation leaks at Fukushima will cost them thier lives...

More volunteers 'prepared for death' at Fukushima


In the scramble to avert catastrophe at the stricken Fukushima nuclear plant, selfless workers are volunteering to repeatedly endure high doses of radiation for the sake of millions of people.
Even if the engineers succeed in restoring power to the plant, crippled by a giant earthquake and tsunami, they have risked permanent health damage. On Friday, Prime Minister Naoto Kan said the workers were "prepared for death".

But they have nevertheless raised their hands to return into a hellish, toxic environment to hook up power cables, inspect machinery and identify where firefighters should aim powerful hoses to cool reactors.


Japan's demonstation of human selflessness after suffering such massive losses is beyond words. All I can do is admire people built of this morality... the courageous people of Japan!




posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Heyyo_yoyo
 


Great people, great culture. Here in the western society, most of the people would just run away!



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by extmai
reply to post by Heyyo_yoyo
 


Great people, great culture. Here in the western society, most of the people would just run away!



That's a bit of a blanket statement isn't it? What about 9/11?



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:27 AM
link   
reply to post by extmai
 


I wouldnt be so sure if we were faced with the same catastrophe i bet there would be a few that step up to tyhe plate,like people in huge debt, alcoholics, the divorced and those crazy extreme adrenaline junkies. cause here in the west we dont have heroes just idiots.....lol jk(exception to ever rule)
edit on 22-3-2011 by gmac10001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by extmai
reply to post by Heyyo_yoyo
 


Great people, great culture. Here in the western society, most of the people would just run away!



I disagree with that statement. We have brave men and women in our country too, who rush into the jaws of death to save people every day. Just because this seems like a terrible way to die, and it's televised, does not mean bravery doesn't exist elsewhere. I just want people to be careful not to elevate Japan to such a lofty level as to berate our own people in the process. There is good and bad everywhere, and had the Japanese businessmen thought first of safety, they would have never built those reactors on the coast in the first place, nor would they have failed safety inspections.

But I do agree that they are a great culture, for the most part. Their work ethic is amazing...much to the suffering of the family unit though, and suicides are high in Japan. Here's the thing....most of the workers chose to stay because if they had failed and lived while others died, they most likely would have committed suicide. To them, there was no other choice....die with failure or die with honor. Keeping their honor is still very prominent, even in modern Japan, and failure to them is unbearable. So while we look at them and see heroes with bravery, they don't see it that way. They see themselves as failures, trying to make it right. The fact that we have seen weeping on television is a testament to how much this is affecting them...they don't show emotion in public like that, much less in front of television cameras. Seeing them admit failure is even more upsetting.

Mark my words....after all is said and done with the reactors, I feel certain we will see reports of suicides coming out of this.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:31 AM
link   
Is there really no other course than to keep trying to keep it cool?

Is it not false hope that they can save the place?

Isn't the best bet to cover and smother the wrecked reactors with boron 10, concrete, lead and steel?

I don't know - that's why I'm asking.

...

Are the men dying for a lost cause? Can they realistically stop the radiation danger from reactors 1,2,3 & 4?

Radiation is now spoken on the media as our friend and not so dangerous. Government-imposed safe limits have been doubled and more.

The workers at Fukushima trying to do ... something ... are actually bringing the situation under control? Or are they actors in a movie made by big money who want to keep building their nukes for the time being?

I always wondered why they didn't start making arrangements for the Fukushima nuclear plants to be entombed from the outset. I am still now under the impression that there really isn't anything that can be done. Or if something can be done then the cost in terms of dead and sick people and the ecological aspect would render such a fix worse than just concreting it over.

The Japanese around me seem to really believe the teams in Fukushima are making progress and think the problem is soon going to be in the past. News reports like to mention rebuilding of houses has already begun.

I feel a part of an extemely small (and despised) minority who do not hold out much optimism of any success with the reactors which have been breached.

Though I do feel that if the clowns in charge up there stop making mistakes then it should be possible to move the radioactive material from reactors and storage tanks which haven't been too damaged to a less risky location.

There's recently been a 6.1 and a 6.6M quake in the past hour or so ... all work stops when the quakes come, especially larger ones like the recent ones.

Somewhat confused ... .

edit on 22-3-2011 by richaado because: got ahead of myself. Forgot a few bits I should have written.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Heyyo_yoyo
 
Well if the plant explodes while they're working on it, no doubt they need to be prepared to die because the explosion will kill them as might a sudden unexpected large release of radiation.

And while I still think they are heroic for their bravery, it's less than certain any of them will die, though they do face a higher risk of developing cancer than the general population. According to another article, they are still abiding by emergency maximum exposure levels:

Fukushima: Situation improving all the time


Latest readings there indicate levels of 2.75 millisievert/hr, indicating that workers need to carefully manage their time spent close to the two units: they can sustain a total annual dose of 250 millisievert under emergency rules before being withdrawn from the operation.
That implies they aren't letting any workers exceed a total annual dose of 250 millisieverts if they can help it.

That makes this situation significantly different from Chernobyl where the heroes were facing certain death.

Chernobyl


The radiation levels in the worst-hit areas of the reactor building have been estimated to be ... more than 20,000 roentgens per hour. A lethal dose is around 500 roentgens (0.13 coulombs per kilogram) over 5 hours, so in some areas, unprotected workers received fatal doses within minutes.
Nothing like that has been reported at Fukushima so I'm not sure why you said:


Originally posted by Heyyo_yoyo
First we had the heroic 50, who stayed behind to fight the Fukushima Dai-ichi reators from disasterous meltdown. Later, They were evaced... probably in bad condition. Now, Japan has new volunteers, who understand that thier mission to secure the radiation leaks at Fukushima will cost them thier lives...
I doubt it will cost them their lives unless there's an explosion and a sudden unexpected radiation release. So I think you should have said "may cost them their lives" instead of "will cost them their lives".

It's not a Chernobyl.....yet.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gseven
I disagree with that statement. We have brave men and women in our country too, who rush into the jaws of death to save people every day. Just because this seems like a terrible way to die, and it's televised, does not mean bravery doesn't exist elsewhere. I just want people to be careful not to elevate Japan to such a lofty level as to berate our own people in the process. There is good and bad everywhere, and had the Japanese businessmen thought first of safety, they would have never built those reactors on the coast in the first place, nor would they have failed safety inspections.

But I do agree that they are a great culture, for the most part. Their work ethic is amazing...much to the suffering of the family unit though, and suicides are high in Japan. Here's the thing....most of the workers chose to stay because if they had failed and lived while others died, they most likely would have committed suicide. To them, there was no other choice....die with failure or die with honor. Keeping their honor is still very prominent, even in modern Japan, and failure to them is unbearable. So while we look at them and see heroes with bravery, they don't see it that way. They see themselves as failures, trying to make it right. The fact that we have seen weeping on television is a testament to how much this is affecting them...they don't show emotion in public like that, much less in front of television cameras. Seeing them admit failure is even more upsetting.

Mark my words....after all is said and done with the reactors, I feel certain we will see reports of suicides coming out of this.



Excellent post. I wanted to make a similar one like it the other day when I was seeing all the threads about people being impressed with the 'stoic' and 'calm' Japanese. There's still a strong collectivist mentality in Japan, which at first glance may appear very commendable, and free of criticism. But that same mentality contributes to the high suicide rate, as you mentioned. It also contributes to xenophobia in the country. There is a lack of flexibility, too; everything is rigid and ordered sometimes to an uncomfortable degree. It's a nice place to visit, but living there is a completely different issue.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by richaado
Is there really no other course than to keep trying to keep it cool?

Is it not false hope that they can save the place?

Isn't the best bet to cover and smother the wrecked reactors with boron 10, concrete, lead and steel?

I don't know - that's why I'm asking.
If it's going to melt down, covering the top won't stop the meltdown from melting a hole right through the bottom of the containment structure, nothing will stop it, that's how the movie "The China Syndrome" got its name.

As for saving the place, preventing a meltdown is the objective. I don't think anyone thinks these reactors will ever operate again. It took about a month to get the three mile island reactor under control and it was also a partial meltdown similar to he Japan incident.

And it's all about keeping it cool enough to prevent a meltdown, yes that's the name of the game. Once they get it under control I suspect it will be decommissioned or entombed depending on the state it's in. They never had to entomb the three mile island reactor.
edit on 22-3-2011 by Arbitrageur because: fix typo



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 08:36 AM
link   
Originally posted by Arbitrageur

"If it's going to melt down, covering the top won't stop the meltdown from melting a hole right through the bottom of the containment structure, nothing will stop it, that's how the movie "The China Syndrome" got its name."

* I know that. Chernobyl melted down and so did TMI. Chernobyl's containment system was incapable of containment and that's why they made a space below the reactor and filled it with extra concrete.

* TMI melted down and they were not sure if the containment was going to do its job, and fortunately it did.

* Fukushima's reactors and containments are damaged and leaking, but wouldn't the chances be high that the concrete base at the Fukushima plants would maintain integrity as in the case of TMI? Or rather isn't it better to hope that they do (maintain integrity) and use the time to think of some means of stopping it melting through the floor while they have a bit of breathing space and time to think?

* To my mind, with my limited knowledge of nuclear power plants, what is happening in Fukushima is a cross between Chernobyl and TMI. I mean it's half blown up already so we've lost the chance of containing it in its present structure. If the stricken plants at Fukushima are to be continuously doused with water, the steam and water will continue to pollute the surrounding area and much more when the wind blows. - Continuous dousing until they can fix the leaks and rig the cooling pipes back again? Weeks? Months? Years? How many 'suicides to see that done? And is it realistically possible?

"As for saving the place, preventing a meltdown is the objective. I don't think anyone thinks these reactors will ever operate again. It took about a month to get the three mile island reactor under control and it was also a partial meltdown similar to he Japan incident."

* But isn't there already a meltdown at at least two of the reactors? This means there's no control rods to stop the reaction, doesn't it? Pouring water or boron or lead on top of the molten pile is going to work? I've seen reports from the Japanese government showing TEPCO believes there have been meltdowns in some of the assemblies of between 33% and 70% - and those figures were a few days after the reactor rooves took off.

* Reading through the reports issued by the officials teaches one that in actual fact the only cooling which has ever taken place since the cooling systems failed and the containments began to fail - has been from water cannons, helicopters and fire trucks. This surely means that very little or no effective cooling of any rods could have taken place except the reactors which had opened up and allowed water to flow directly onto the radiactive cores. (Unless they are very good shots with a hosepipe and can hit a hole in a wall three stories up from ............. 50 metres away).

* One or maybe two of the four reactors in a line which failed have containment vessels which can hold water, but as the pumps have not been operated even once there since the tsunami, they've boiled dry enough to begin melting down or are already too far into the process of melting down for anything the men can throw at it to do any good. (I'd like to know).

* I can appreciate they might be able to remove the remains of the rods if there is something to grab a hold of, but a partial meltdown indicates its already out of control. Or am I to understand that a partial meltdown can be stopped in its tracks and cooled down? (I don't know).

"And it's all about keeping it cool enough to prevent a meltdown, yes that's the name of the game. Once they get it under control I suspect it will be decommissioned or entombed depending on the state it's in. They never had to entomb the three mile island reactor. "

* I'd love to believe it can be got under control. I remain to be convinced it is possible.

* Do you think this open pyre can be tamed with what is available?
edit on 22-3-2011 by richaado because: Cleaned it up a bit - still some typos - Have to go.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 08:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Heyyo_yoyo
 


Powerful souls indeed. In the face of death they remain fearless, and I can respect that 100%. In many ways they are not only supporting the Japanese culture but their species. So they def. got my supports & love.
edit on 3/22/11 by Ophiuchus 13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 08:42 AM
link   
reply to post by richaado
 


I'm pretty sure they're trying to cool things down so they can entomb it. If its too hot it's not going to do any good to cover it



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 08:42 AM
link   
[color=deepskyblue]
Braver than I.

S&F



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by onyx718
reply to post by richaado
 


I'm pretty sure they're trying to cool things down so they can entomb it. If its too hot it's not going to do any good to cover it


* Well we know that cooling it down is only going to be a temporary situation because if it is entombed then the temperature is just going to rise again. - Unless they are planning to entomb it with a cooling system of some few megawatts - which will require another nuclear power plant just to cool it?


* Entombing the reactors with some neutron-absorbing substance such as boron-10 and then burying it with XYZ and then concrete is how I would have expected the job of burying it would occur. When I spoke of using concrete I took it for granted what I said would include the necessary layers which have to be put there before the final coat of concrete.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 09:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Noscible

Originally posted by extmai
reply to post by Heyyo_yoyo
 


Great people, great culture. Here in the western society, most of the people would just run away!



That's a bit of a blanket statement isn't it? What about 9/11?


im not even from the states..i love your post man



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 09:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by richaado
* But isn't there already a meltdown at at least two of the reactors?
It depends on how you define meltdown.

The definitions that people seem to be using are as follows:
"partial meltdown" there is some melting, but it hasn't melted through the bottom of the containment. At three mile island this translated to a temperature above 4000 degrees but below 5000 degrees.

"meltdown", or "complete meltdown" which would burn a hole through the bottom of the containment and nothing would stop it. At three mile island this critical temperature was about 5000 degrees.

en.wikipedia.org...

If the primary pressure boundary is not substantially breached by corium, the accident is described as a "partial meltdown", and the chain of events stops when satisfactory cooling of the remaining fuel, corium, and the RPV is restored. A partial meltdown is an INES Level 4 or 5 accident, depending on the degree of damage. If the primary pressure boundary is substantially breached by corium, the accident is described as a "full meltdown", which is an INES Level 5 accident and can escalate to INES Level 6 if events progress in a highly prejudicial fashion.


So preventing that 5000 degrees from being reached was an extremely important objective at three mile island, according to a natgeo documentary. It's all about cooling. Once it gets over 5000 degrees, I don't think putting something under the containment structure will stop it, it might not stop until it hits groundwater:


Some believe a molten reactor core could actually penetrate the reactor pressure vessel and containment structure and burn downwards into the earth beneath, to the level of the groundwater.
That's more or less what the NatGeo documentary said would have happened at three mile island had the temperature gotten just a few hundred degrees hotter than it did (like 5000 degrees rather than 4500 degrees, for example).

Regarding how long it will take to cool it, it depends, but at three mile island it took about 1 month.


edit on 22-3-2011 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 09:58 AM
link   
This will: a) make japan rethink using nuclear power b) if they use it, increase the standards. This will leave them better prepared for future problems. But what about america?

They say that working in the outdoors makes you tough and thickens your skin. It weatherproofs you. So this should make japan tougher and more prepared just like it would to a person that works outdoors. But I must ask what about the rest of us? Can we learn from what's happening in japan or do we need our own disasters to thicken our skin?
edit on 22-3-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gseven

Originally posted by extmai
reply to post by Heyyo_yoyo
 


Great people, great culture. Here in the western society, most of the people would just run away!



I disagree with that statement. We have brave men and women in our country too, who rush into the jaws of death to save people every day. Just because this seems like a terrible way to die, and it's televised, does not mean bravery doesn't exist elsewhere. I just want people to be careful not to elevate Japan to such a lofty level as to berate our own people in the process. There is good and bad everywhere, and had the Japanese businessmen thought first of safety, they would have never built those reactors on the coast in the first place, nor would they have failed safety inspections.

But I do agree that they are a great culture, for the most part. Their work ethic is amazing...much to the suffering of the family unit though, and suicides are high in Japan. Here's the thing....most of the workers chose to stay because if they had failed and lived while others died, they most likely would have committed suicide. To them, there was no other choice....die with failure or die with honor. Keeping their honor is still very prominent, even in modern Japan, and failure to them is unbearable. So while we look at them and see heroes with bravery, they don't see it that way. They see themselves as failures, trying to make it right. The fact that we have seen weeping on television is a testament to how much this is affecting them...they don't show emotion in public like that, much less in front of television cameras. Seeing them admit failure is even more upsetting.

Mark my words....after all is said and done with the reactors, I feel certain we will see reports of suicides coming out of this.


you are trying very hard to belittle their actions in as a polite way as possible. Thats sad even though you'll be fast to disagree.

You talk like you are an expert, and know the reason behind their actions, but you clearly don't. "They see themselves as failures", that right there renders your post invalid, because these men are simply enginners, if they had any power that rose above the executives that run the show, then I see how the "failure" arguement might be taken seriously.

Your post reeks of stored jealously.

"most of the workers chose to stay because if they had failed and lived while others died, they most likely would have committed suicide. To them, there was no other choice....die with failure or die with honor"
----Yeah I would too. I don't think you accounted for the severity of this situation. It's a nuclear power plant for god's sake. It changes the whole ball game. It's not some hold up at a bank, where you as a security quard must do your duty. I like how you "know" the mentality of everyone of these men.

"They see themselves as failures, trying to make it right"
----I think you read too many post WW2 articles regarding Japanese culture. First they didn't cause this. I don't see how they would think of themselves as failures. An earthquake, and a tsunami caused it. They are enginners,soldiers, workers etc trained to run the plant. They are not executives who may or may not have skipped out on safety precautions. They are also valunteers.Your comment made no sense at all.
There is no failure in the ordeal these men are in. They are going beyond their duty. There job title does not constitute staying in a place that might get them killed through an explosion, or health effects in the near future.



edit on 22-3-2011 by Redneck from Hell because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-3-2011 by Redneck from Hell because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Heyyo_yoyo
 


I am thoroughly humbled by the sacrifice they make.

I am nothing measured against such sacrifice.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   
See! I don't know what a 'meltdown' means.

My interpretation of meltdown so far is that it means the fuel rods have melted.

If the fuel rods have melted it also means the control rods which should be shutting the reaction down are not in the right place so uncontrolled reaction will happen.

If the fuel rods have melted or partially melted it would mean they could drop the molten fuel rods to the bottom of the reactor where they COULD possibly burn through and into the ground below.

So in my dictionary a meltdown was when the fuel rods had become either partially or completely a molten lump and may or may not melt through the foundations.

And I also thought that if a partial meltdown had taken place then it meant that some of the fuel rods had melted in a clump and some would have dropped to the bottom and other rods would still be intact.

- And also that if the amount of material which had melted and was sitting in the bottom was in an arbitrarily small amount then the reaction producing heat would be limited due to the arbitrarily lower level of radiation. - Though I didn't thinhk it would make much difference to the maximum heat generated if natural convection currents didn't apply - such as in the case of it being encased in a substance which was not absorbing the emmissions.

Am I wrong? Please educate me if I am.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join