Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Just In: Blackout at Fukushima Daiichi — Cooling at fuel pools stopped, all power’s been down 3h

page: 7
128
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by CommanderCraCra
 


You obviously don't understand the level of havoc nuclear radiation causes throughout the generations of those directly affected.

Telling me to go elsewhere and talk about the other things causing birth defects is poor debating skills.
This is a thread about Fukushima, not Iraq or other places where chemical weapons are causing birth defects. I'm well aware of those threads by the way, but I'd like to stay focused on Fukushima and what may result -- if you don't mind.




posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Afterthought
 


You obviously like to assume rubbish, and don't like to directly debate people, so choose to take their words out of context, and act like this somehow makes you win...

How about we keep the topic within perspective, and realize that CONTEXT is KEY when dealing with any information.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by MariaLida
 


Are you telling me that Japan is still running nuclear power plants???? Are they insane!!!!!!! Are we insane for letting them????? This is nuts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

JEEZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:26 PM
link   
[Analysis]
The sudden blackout revealed the weakness of Fukushima plant, “Reactor4 has 4 days to go”


What exactly happened ?

At 18:57, the plant lost power. Even the seismic isolation building, where is the managing office of the entire plant lost power temporarily. The reason of the blackout is not identified yet. Tepco is receives the power from Tohoku-epco, but they can’t send it to the spent fuel pools.

■ Systems out of power Kurion -a cesium adsorption system Coolant system of the spent fuel pool in reactor1, 3, 4 Coolant system of the common spent fuel pool

■ Systems not out of power Reactor coolant system for reactor1, 2 and 3 Monitoring posts Gas monitoring systems for reactor1, 2 and 3 Coolant system of the spent fuel pool in reactor2

At 5AM in JST, the power is not back on yet.


fukushima-diary.com...
edit on 18-3-2013 by MariaLida because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Iwinder
 


You mean like after Chernobyl, which had 6 times the initial release of Fukushima?



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by CommanderCraCra
 


Maybe you should go and ban automobiles because people are much more likely to die from driving one than they are from eating "radioactive" milk on the east coast. Your scales are very out of proportion. Better yet, why don't you start some threads about all the DU which has been spread all over the middle east and parts of Africa over the last 15 years? Freaking ridiculous how people are acting like this is anything more than a slight scratch on the surface of the earth.

You're right. I'll quote you from now on so you and others don't think I'm taking what you said out of context.
Rubbish is what I was commenting on. I won't fail to quote you again since I don't want it to appear as though I'm off topic or making things up to act like I win or something like that.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by CommanderCraCra

Originally posted by Iwinder



TEPCO planned for an earthquake, and a tsunami at Fukushima. Everything worked just fine, but the tsunami was much larger than predicted
reply to post by Zaphod58
 

First off you cannot predict a tsunami as you stated second you cannot predict the size of the said tsunami.
You are really really stretching it here tonight.

Regards, Iwinder


What an absurd statement. If a large enough earthquake goes off in the ocean close enough to a land mass, we can predict a tsunami with great accuracy. You can also predict the size of the tsunami. You can also predict the frequency of tsunamis over a given period of time, and by range of size, though the prediction will be less accurate than the first two.

What was said is truth. They planned the site to take the hit of an earthquake, and tsunami. They simply didn't build it to last centuries, ie to withstand a large enough earthquake and/or tsunami. It was stupid. You don't put something that can potentially cause so much damage, and design it to be safe from the standpoint of tens of years, with a somewhat high degree of certainty, rather than hundreds of years minimum. It means they cut corners when designing these things.


Obviously my statement was not absurd as I agree with your last paragraph in your above quote.

Nobody saw this coming and nobody predicted/nor planned for this which they should have.

A nuclear power plant built on a major fault just 50 meters from the sea?

We are all doomed.
Regards, Iwinder



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Afterthought
 


There were at least two videos posted in this thread (sorry, I'm not going to go hunting through the previous pages) used as evidence that it would cause massive damage worldwide if there was an accident with the cooling pool.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Iwinder
 


Really? You're telling me that you can't tell that if there is a major earthquake there isn't going to be a tsunami? You can't predict if a specific earthquake is going to happen, but you KNOW that a tsunami is generated by an earthquake, therefore if there is an earthquake that falls in a certain range of parameters, there is the possibility of a tsunami. So you prepare for one.

They modeled previous earthquake activity, and the size of tsunami waves generated by them. If you see 5 tsunami events from 7 earthquakes, and the biggest tsunami is 5 meters, then you prepare for a 5-6 meter tsunami. The tsunami that was generated was larger than estimated based on previous tsunami events.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Afterthought
 


There were at least two videos posted in this thread (sorry, I'm not going to go hunting through the previous pages) used as evidence that it would cause massive damage worldwide if there was an accident with the cooling pool.


OK. So what makes you believe that there hasn't been an accident, or rather a worse accident, with the cooling pool already? Why are you so sure we're getting the full and complete story?
For the record, I believe dire info is being kept from the public.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Calif. nuke plant could breakdown at full power

By MICHAEL R. BLOOD Associated Press
Posted: 03/18/2013 12:49:27 PM PDT
Updated: 03/18/2013 02:51:30 PM PDT


LOS ANGELES—The troubled San Onofre nuclear power plant in California could be restarted safely and run at full power, but the risk of a breakdown would increase to vexing levels after 11 months, a report concluded Monday.

The seaside plant between San Diego and Los Angeles hasn't produced electricity since January 2012, when a tiny radiation leak led to the discovery of unusual damage to hundreds of steam generator tubes that carry radioactive water.

A consultant's study prepared for operator Southern California Edison represented an attempt to answer federal regulators who are considering Edison's proposal to restart one reactor, Unit 2.

The restart blueprint calls for a trial run at reduced power, but Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff wanted Edison to show generator tubes don't break during "the full range" of conditions, including at full power.

That appeared to raise an obstacle to the proposed restart. The NRC said it wanted the company to demonstrate that Unit 2 could meet that threshold, or explain how generator tubes would interact with each other if the plant is operating at maximum capacity.


www.times-standard.com...
edit on 18-3-2013 by MariaLida because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Iwinder
 


Really? You're telling me that you can't tell that if there is a major earthquake there isn't going to be a tsunami? You can't predict if a specific earthquake is going to happen, but you KNOW that a tsunami is generated by an earthquake, therefore if there is an earthquake that falls in a certain range of parameters, there is the possibility of a tsunami. So you prepare for one.

They modeled previous earthquake activity, and the size of tsunami waves generated by them. If you see 5 tsunami events from 7 earthquakes, and the biggest tsunami is 5 meters, then you prepare for a 5-6 meter tsunami. The tsunami that was generated was larger than estimated based on previous tsunami events.


You said it all for me and I thank you very much.
Read your own post and it is obvious that you cannot predict a tsunami or this sh#t would not have happened.
This is the fault of people not nature, this whole release should never ever have happened in a million years.
It reads like a bad novel or a movie called the perfect storm. Which it was and the storm was total incompetence and nothing less.

Regards, Iwinder



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Iwinder
 


And yet it's amazing that the only warnings about power grids are from solar flares, and cosmic rays. After Fukushima, when so much radiation was being pumped out, there weren't any warnings in Tokyo about a risk to the power grid, or blackouts. After Chernobyl there weren't any warnings about damage to power grids hundreds of miles away. We hear a lot about how a solar flare can cause damage to the power grids, but nothing about how a nuclear plant can. Why is that?


Geomagnetic storms are measured by ground-based instruments that observe how much the horizontal component of Earth's magnetic field varies. Based on this measurement, the storms are categorized from G1 (minor) to G5 (extreme). In the most extreme cases transformers in power grids may be damaged, spacecraft operation and satellite tracking can be hindered, high frequency radio propagation and satellite navigation systems can be blocked, and auroras may appear much further south than normal.



Solar radiation storms are rated on a scale from S1 (minor) to S5 (extreme), determined by how many very energetic, fast solar particles move through a given space in the atmosphere. At their most extreme, solar radiation storms can cause complete high frequency radio blackouts, damage to electronics, memory and imaging systems on satellites, and radiation poisoning to astronauts outside of Earth's magnetosphere.

www.nasa.gov...

Radiation on earth isn't energetic enough to cause damage to the power grid. Damage to the power grid is caused by fast moving, highly energetic particles causing a type of feedback loop IIRC that overloads the power grid, and causes damage.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:47 PM
link   
Wait, so whats happening anything? Just read a bunch of nonsense...



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:49 PM
link   
Japan’s Anti-Nuclear Activists Losing Ground Since Fukushima Disaster


Last July about 170,000 people thronged an anti-nuke rally in Tokyo’s Yoyogi Park to demand that Japan spurn nuclear power in the wake of the Fukushima meltdown.

This year, in the two days leading up to the second anniversary of the March 11, 2011, earthquake and tsunami that triggered the accident, demonstrations averaged perhaps one tenth that number. Ongoing weekly protests top out at 5,000 or so, with some events drawing only a few hundred protesters.


www.thedailybeast.com...


Rules of cyberwar: don't target nuclear plants or hospitals, says Nato manual

www.guardian.co.uk...



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Afterthought
 


Because if there was, there would have been a bigger release, which could have been seen by sources other than TEPCO or the Japanese government. There are multiple non-governmental sources, including Greenpeace that have monitored radiation levels around Fukushima. So far nothing has been done to cover or seal the pool holding the spent fuel rods. If there had been another accident involving that pool, one of those sources would have monitored the radiation spike already.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Iwinder
 


And yet it's amazing that the only warnings about power grids are from solar flares, and cosmic rays. After Fukushima, when so much radiation was being pumped out, there weren't any warnings in Tokyo about a risk to the power grid, or blackouts. After Chernobyl there weren't any warnings about damage to power grids hundreds of miles away. We hear a lot about how a solar flare can cause damage to the power grids, but nothing about how a nuclear plant can. Why is that?


Geomagnetic storms are measured by ground-based instruments that observe how much the horizontal component of Earth's magnetic field varies. Based on this measurement, the storms are categorized from G1 (minor) to G5 (extreme). In the most extreme cases transformers in power grids may be damaged, spacecraft operation and satellite tracking can be hindered, high frequency radio propagation and satellite navigation systems can be blocked, and auroras may appear much further south than normal.



Solar radiation storms are rated on a scale from S1 (minor) to S5 (extreme), determined by how many very energetic, fast solar particles move through a given space in the atmosphere. At their most extreme, solar radiation storms can cause complete high frequency radio blackouts, damage to electronics, memory and imaging systems on satellites, and radiation poisoning to astronauts outside of Earth's magnetosphere.

www.nasa.gov...

Radiation on earth isn't energetic enough to cause damage to the power grid. Damage to the power grid is caused by fast moving, highly energetic particles causing a type of feedback loop IIRC that overloads the power grid, and causes damage.

Are we discussing the same topic as in the OP?

Just asking as I thought the topic was a possible major melt down and not about the power grids?
If the Japan situation comes to fruit the last worry I have is about power grids failing.
Regards, Iwinder



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 

That's not the only threat though. Human stupidity and a lackadaisical attitude also contribute.
Just look at how the nuclear power plant in Louisa, VA had its earthquake sensors removed to "save money". The geniuses figured that since they hadn't had an earthquake in that area for several decades, they didn't need the sensors anymore and removed them. We all know how this area has gotten a lot of earthquake activity recently, but it's rarely reported on the damage and repairs that are going on with the power plant.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Iwinder
 


Again, it's well known that certain types of earthquakes, at a certain depth are going to cause a tsunami. The question is, how big is it going to be. A subduction earthquake over a certain size, is almost certainly going to cause a tsunami. This is an established fact. Japan has a history of being hit by tsunami events. I found a list in Wiki that shows something like 24 tsunami events in Japan dating back to 684AD. Now why would they NOT expect a tsunami after an earthquake? And why would they NOT be prepared for a tsunami?



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by onequestion
 


Amen to that! What's happening now?





new topics

top topics



 
128
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join