Originally posted by Logiciel
Don't want to crash the party but I thought a bit of "mainstream news" on the topic wouldn't hurt.
I see a lot of "what if" and "imagine that" on this thread and my humble advice is whatever your opinion/fantasy/mental imbalance is, always try to seek info from diverse sources. Otherwise you'll go mad and end up in a cult.
Just fooling around...
Nevertheless in this article from the Guardian you will be able to haver some fresh decent news about the plant.
The article is factual and overlooks possible outcomes.
The Fukushima nuclear plant's slow recovery offers lessons to the US
For example it talks of a possible release of 10 times Chernobyl opposed to 85 times stated in the OP if the reactor 4 collapsed... there's no winner here. Not trying to have a go at the OP.
Keap your head cool people!
All the best
First off we need to talk about the actual structural design of these buildings.
The "floors" in the GE Mark I and Mark II containment are primarily supported by the containment vessel, not the outer wall. The containment has minimal structural damage compared to the outer part of the reactor building which consists of blowout panels and a frame only designed to carry a small amount of building load under normal conditions.
The site has already had structural support added to the #4 spent fuel pool and additional supports are going to be added. There definitely is a degradation of total structural integrity, however with supports installed the only way the spent fuel pool would have a catastrophic failure was if the entire reactor building had a catastrophic failure, which is unlikely given that the containment structure (which holds the majority of the structural load) is intact and was not put under the same tensile stresses that units 1-3 containments were. (The tensile stress was caused by units 1 through 3 reaching up to double their design pressure). This gives a level of assurance that the containment is structurally intact, as tensile stress is primarily what causes cracking in concrete.
Back to the point, you would need an earthquake capable of damaging the entire containment structure JUST to have a potential failure of the pool integrity, which is unlikely. Assuming this did happen, and the pools fell, the site would be evacuated. The only recourse then is to somehow get shielding over the fuel (>6ft of water or equivalent), as even a single unexposed spent nuclear fuel bundle can kill someone in minutes, and the radiation dose rates shining off the sky will be on the order of 10 mSv/hr at the site boundary up to >1000 Sv/Hr near the fuel. Covering the fuel with concrete may be a temporary stopgap, but it would have to be done from the air and would be incredibly dangerous. People say the fukushima 50 risked their lives, but what they did was a slight increase in risk compared to what you would have to do to handle this situation.
Assuming an abandonment of the site you would have the eventual loss and breakdown of cooling at all 6 units, boildown, meltdown, and uncontrolled release of radioactivity. It would not have a significant global impact, however a much larger radius of Japan would become contaminated to various degrees. It is a not a good outcome, however it is a worst case outcome and likely not a realistic one.
You also mention :
te total spent reactor fuel inventory at the Fukushima-Daichi site contains nearly half of the total amount of Cs-137 estimated by the NCRP to have been released by all atmospheric nuclear weapons testing,Chernobyl, and world-wide reprocessing plants (~270 million curies or ~9.9 E+18 Becquerel).
If the amount of radioactive product is 1/2 of what has already been released, there really isnt a global concern. The material which has already been released is of relatively low impact to our health, and adding another 50% of that is still on the same relative order of magnitude. You would need several orders of magnitude greater the amount that has been released to have a strong meaningful impact on human health. As I said above the localized impacts to health and habitation would be great, but globally, while it would not be a good situation, would not significantly impact human life across the planet. A lot of people dont realize when it comes to the total planet, 1018 is relatively small compared to the total atmosphere's volume, and dispersal has a strong affect on actual global activity.
As for unit 4 itself, TEPCO knows there is potentially compromised structural integrity, and steel supports have already been added, with more supports to be installed. The vulnerability itself appears to have been mitigated. To what extent it has been mitigated we dont know, however the way nuclear power works I can tell you that someone has calculated what the effects of a maximum peak ground acceleration event would be on the site and determined the structural supports required to restore margin to seismic integrity. It was likely done within hours to days after the explosion........
continue reading at reddit blog/discussion site
The guy I've quoted is 2nd up on the page
Originally posted by reclaimed
i know this is a conspiracy site
but really,do aliens have to be brought up in every topic
Originally posted by Xaphan
Still doesn't really answer my question. Why would the government want to keep the story tied up? The only conclusion I can come to is fear of global panic.
Originally posted by TruthxIsxInxThexMist
reply to post by Ben81
I'm not being funny but that site you linked to looks like it is designed to scare people but having said that i'm pretty sure this disaster is much worse than the MSM are reporting or should i say 'not reporting' as i've not heard anything about it for a good while from the MSM!!