Japan's Fukushima plant dismantling needs over 30 yrs

[Octafish]

Source: Reuters

TOKYO Oct 28 (Reuters) - Japan will likely need more than 30 years to dismantle the tsunami-crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant, the Atomic Energy Commission said on Friday, underscoring its prolonged challenges after the world's worst nuclear accident since Chernobyl.

SNIP...

A subcommittee of the Atomic Energy Commission, comprising nuclear and other experts who recommend the direction of nuclear policy to the government, called for the removal of melted nuclear fuel rods to start within 10 years.

At the Three Mile Island plant in the United States, fuel removal started six and a half years after the meltdown accident in 1979, but it will likely take longer at the Fukushima complex since it suffered a severer accident, the subcommittee said in a draft report.

The subcommittee estimated it would take more than three decades to complete the process of taking out melted fuel rods from damaged reactors and dismantling the plant, where workers still face high levels of radioactive water and debris.



Read more: http://af.reuters.com/article/energyOilNews/idAFL4E7LS1DA20111028

---

Not "since." Worst "ever."

[defendandprotect]

1. Fukushima government had wanted to close these reactors down 5-6 years ago ...

W Bush intervened to save the industry, evidently.

Would have taken one year to properly shut down each of these reactors given the

design -- but don't know if that includes disposal of the waste???


Meanwhile, our own nuclear reactors -- 103/106 across the states -- would take 6 months

each to close down properly. And, again, don't know if that includes waste disposal???


Global Warming -- the melting of the glaciers -- is creating shifting of the pressures

on the tectonic plates which will bring more earthquakes -- of greater severity.


Imagine how much suffering would have been avoided had Fukushima been shut down when they

wanted to do it -- !! Given the age of the reactors and the fact that they were only

built to withstand a 7.1 earthquake on this earthquake-prone island -- and the fact that

Japanese scientists were reporting to government increasing seismic activity, it would have

been the sane thing to do.

Time for US to be thinking of shutting down our reactors. Global Warming overall is a threat

to the stability of the reactors even without increasing numbers of earthquakes.

Could make the difference between "a whimper and a bang" -- !!

[Octafish]

2. Nuclear plants create the deadliest waste ever to boil water.

Why not try sunlight? A magnifying glass can focus it and it'll heat up anything. Little George Bush probably fried ants on the sidewalk that way, back in the day.

Jimmy Carter saw energy independence as a threat to national security and started the nation on developing alternative forms of power, including solar.

His successor -- cough October Surprise -- was a captive of Big Oil and its petrodollar-fueled corruptions, however, and did all he could to return the nation to its noxious addiction, repealing the 55 mph speed limit and taking down the solar panels from the White House roof.

It's been a pretty steady and continuous downward spiral ever since. Of course, we've also enjoyed the many cultural benefits through all the glorious wars for oil.

[defendandprotect]

3. Agree -- but unfortunately Obama is trying for a new generation of nuclear plants in US -- !!

Just to top off his support for more oil drilling -- !!

Obama may turn out to be the worst thing that has ever happened to our nation given

the environmental destruction he's adding to his long list of corporate-decision making!!


No oil -- No War -- "3 Days of the Condor" --

It's all a national security issue now -- thus BP/Gulf, imo!


Oil should have been nationalized 125 years ago!



:nuke:

[Octafish]

5. Agree totally.

The president's friends with EXELON.

From Harper's in 2006:

In the magazine article, I asserted that Obama is not a mouthpiece for his donors; neither does his voting record mirror the wishes of his contributor list. But, as I suggested, it's naïve to think that he's completely unaware of who's footing the bills. Exelon, a leading nuclear-plant operator based in Illinois, is a big donor to Obama, and its executive and employees have given him more than $70,000 since 2004. The Obama staffer pointed out that the senator pushed for legislation that would require nuclear companies to “inform state and local officials if there is an accidental or unintentional leak of a radioactive substance,” according to an office press release. Obama took a stand on that issue following reports that a plant operated by Exelon had leaked tritium several times over the past decade.

But Exelon is probably not entirely unhappy with Obama. At a 2005 hearing at the Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works, of which Obama is a member, the senator—echoing the nuclear industry's current campaign to promotes nuclear energy as “green”—said that since Congress was debating “policies to address air quality and the deleterious effects of carbon emissions on the global ecosystem, it is reasonable—and realistic—for nuclear power to remain on the table for consideration.” He was immediately lauded by the industry publication Nuclear Notes, which said, “Back during his campaign for the U.S. Senate in 2004, said that he rejected both liberal and conservative labels in favor of ‘common sense solutions.’ And when it comes to nuclear energy, it seems like the Senator is keeping an open mind.”

---------------

Prey-ers

“...anointed with oil
on troubled waters?
Oh Heavenly Grid,
help us bear up thy Standard,
our Chevron flashing bright
across the Gulf of Compromise,
standing Humble
on the Rich Field
of Mobile American Thinking
Here in this Shell,
we call Life...”

-- Firesign Theatre

[valerief]

9. In a way, oil is. It's multinationalized. Multinationals = Government.

There's no "Citizens" government.

[defendandprotect]

12. Yes, that's even more general ... but specifically BP had protection of Obama .....

and very strong -- almost military like -- enforcement of blocking of info of what

was going on in the GULF -- plus the EPA cave on COREXIT!!

And, very little info now about what the conditions really are -- at least very little

trustworthy info!!

PLUS ... it is OBAMA pushing a new generation of nuclear reactors here -- and we have

to deal with that. In fact, it was W Bush who more than likely prevented the government

in Fukushima from shuttingdown their nuclear reactors given their concerns for their age --

for their having been built to withstand only 7.1 earthquakes -- and the increasing reports

by Japanese scientists of increasing seismic activity threatening that earthquake-prone

island!

Imagine how much suffering and pain could have been saved for the citizens of Japan and

the world -- and nature!

Global Warming is bringing more earthquakes -- and earthquakes of greater severity.

We need to begin to deal with shutting down our own 103/106 nuclear reactors here --


May make the difference between "a whimper or a bang" -- !!

[dtexdem]

4. Or, in a complete sense, over 30,000 years.

[Octafish]

7. TEPCO's press guy said everything was cool.

From Financial Times in May:

How Fukushima failed

Now that takes a somewhat sympathetic view. What we've learned since is that the reactors may have started to go critical before the tsunami arrived.

Dayum.

[defendandprotect]

13. EVERYONE should read this -- !! K/R for the info --

This is beyond corporate criminal behavior -- it's crimes against humanity --

and treason by governments --

and further proof of how suicidal capitalism/corporatism are -- !!

EXCERPTS --

On 2 March, nine days before the meltdown, government watchdog the Nuclear Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) warned Tepco on its failure to inspect critical pieces of equipment at the plant, including recirculation pumps. Tepco was ordered to make the inspections, perform repairs if needed and report to NISA on 2 June. It does not appear, as of now, that the report has been filed.


Throughout the months of lies and misinformation, one story has stuck: it was the earthquake that knocked out the plant's electric power, halting cooling to its six reactors. The tsunami then washed out the plant's back-up generators 40 minutes later, shutting down all cooling and starting the chain of events that would cause the world's first triple meltdown.

But what if recirculation pipes and cooling pipes burst after the earthquake – before the tidal wave reached the facilities; before the electricity went out? This would surprise few people familiar with the 40-year-old reactor one, the grandfather of the nuclear reactors still operating in Japan.

Problems with the fractured, deteriorating, poorly repaired pipes and the cooling system had been pointed out for years. In September 2002, Tepco admitted covering up data about cracks in critical circulation pipes. In their analysis of the cover-up, The Citizen's Nuclear Information Centre writes: "The records that were covered up had to do with cracks in parts of the reactor known as recirculation pipes. These pipes are there to siphon off heat from the reactor. If these pipes were to fracture, it would result in a serious accident in which coolant leaks out."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/the-explosive-truth-behind-fukushimas-meltdown-2338819.html


I'd recommend reading or scanning the article -- but for those who don't have time . . .

There are 54 reactors like this in Japan --

Almost all their reactors are now offline -- with 35 to be shut down by April

TEPCO has covered up "cracks in parts of the reactor - recirculation pipes" --

Plant workers tell of "serious damage" to pipies and one reactor BEFORE THE TSUNAMI HIT.

Pipes that had cracked open were visible -- including what one plant observer believed to be

"cold water supply pipes" which would have prevented coolant from reaching the reactor core.

Earthquake caused radiation leaks minutes after/Bloomberg News Agency/before Tsunami.

TEPCO's own data made public shows "huge loss of coolant" within the first few hours of the

earthquake - enough damage to make a meltdown inevitable long before tsunami.


How about engineers relating that "often pipes had to be pulled close enough together to weld

them shut by using heavy machinery" because piping didn't match blueprints!

Since no one wants to be exposed to radiation, inspections are often insufficient and repairs

rushed.


By 11pm, radiation levels showed meltdown was already undereway.



Reference:
Katsunobu Onda, author of Tepco: The Dark Empire, explains it this way: A government or industry admission "raises suspicions about the safety of every reactor they run. They are using a number of antiquated reactors that have the same systematic problems, the same wear and tear on the piping." Earthquakes, of course, are commonplace in Japan.

Obviously, where we have government officials pushing nuclear reactors and subsidizing them

we have collusion between government and private companies.

[AtheistCrusader]

6. Worst ever? Nevermind Chernobyl. Nevermind Chelyabinsk. Never mind the East Urals Radioactive Trace.

How quickly we forget our history.

[Octafish]

8. True. Those all were ghastly and deadly events.

The thing is, they didn't happen near one of the most densely packed regions of the planet. Remember?

[AtheistCrusader]

10. Depends on your definition of 'worst'.

Didn't happen close to densely inhabited cities like Tokyo, but it did happen close to densely inhabited countries. That's the scope/scale of how bad Chernobyl was. Fukushima Dai-ichi 1-4 have certainly vented radionuclides in large quantities, but at the end of the day, the containments are only leaking. Chernobyl's core went from normal operating output around 1.5gw to over 33 gigawatts equivalent thermal output, blew wide open, entirely vented to the outside world, and between 50-80% of it's radioactive core was thrown, burning, into the sky.

I don't mean to over-dramatize, it's just that Chernobyl was actually THAT BAD. It's difficult to comprehend exactly how bad it was. It undoubtably killed people all across Europe. Even though Fukushima has what seems like a lot more stuff involved, with thee reactors and four fuel pools involved, the scale between the two disasters is still very, very different. The vast majority of the radiation and radioactive material, is still safely inside the Fukushima containments. It's bad, but it could be a LOT worse. If Fukushima went up like Chernobyl did, Tokoyo would be a ghost town today.

If I could snap my fingers and un-do one, and only one of the two disasters, I would un-do Chernobyl in a heartbeat.

Edit: I will certainly grant that Fukushima was worse than expected, and had the potential to make most of Japan uninhabitable, just the worst didn't happen. (Yet) So from an immediate risk standpoint, Fukushima was actually a larger risk.

[SoapBox]

11. wow...there is a job "generator" for ya...

even though it's gonna kill the workers.

NO more nuclear.