One possible "beneficial" outcome re: nuclear situation in Japan:

[nickyt]

Scientifically-challenged people like myself, who only know that nuclear power plants are big and powerful and lethal and scary beyond description - well, I'm not the only person in the world now taking a crash course on how nuclear reactors work, and what happened at Chernobyl, etc.

- I'm cross-eyed about now after reading and learning all I can the last couple of days...(sorry for hyper-yammering here)- - -

My point is, the dreadful status of the reactors in Japan has compelled many of us to get EDUCATED on the subject, and I am hoping the ignorance of people like me (in large numbers) will be dissipated by a new understanding of "how this works", what the realities are, etc etc. SO that better decisions about nuclear power can be made for both ourselves and, of course, all future living things.

(examples of how I know I'm not the only one:

http://science.howstuffworks.com/nuclear-power3.htm

http://www.boingboing.net/2011/03/12/nuclear-energy-insid.html

- - at bottom of articles are comments by others trying to quickly learn things I should have known a few decades ago) -

With kindest regards to you in particular and DU "in general" -
- Sandy

[hlthe2b]

1. As you seek to be discriminating in choosing sources..

Just be aware that the nuclear industry lobby is out in droves and are passing themselves off as "independent experts" on corporatist news channels. Case in point: "Nuke industry spin: Be "reassured" by Japan" http://www.salon.com/news/japan_earthquake/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2011/03/13/nuclear_industry_response

It is certainly likely they have paid ringers visiting blogs, message boards, and other web presence, attempting to confuse the issues to their favor. Reader beware.

[nickyt]

2. Copy that, hlthe2b - I'm just "catching up" on the actual science of it all, which,

even for a numbskull like me, is just not all that difficult to grok, really (ie, the whole process appears much less complicated than, say, "how your car engine works" - eek!)

Many thanks for your reply!
- S

[TheMadMonk]

4. Can't possibly be worse than the self appointed "opposition" experts who demostrate...

...their almost complete ignorance on the subject every time they get up on their soapboxes.

The truth is these things stood up to an earthquake five times more powerful than they were ever expected to withstand. They then stood up to a tsunami more powerful than the defenses were designed to cope with. And they did it with forty years of metal fatigue on the clock.

(On that factor of five, I suspect we may have the engineers to thank for that. I believe the rule of thumb for engineers, when they are less than perfectly sure of their calculations, is to overbuild everything of importance by a factor of three, (this is where dodgy contractors get away with making their margin) Given that this was a nuclear facility, the engineers quite possibly figured x5 was a good idea and the dodgys weren't stupid enough to tender.)


If public fears were not so ridiculously overblown there is every chance the hydrogen explosions (and much of everything since) would never have occured. When it became necessary to vent steam from the overheating cores, that steam (well mixed with hydrogen formed by the thermal disosciation of steam) was vented into the outer containment vessel where it then condensed leaving behind a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen enriched air. Eventually enough hydrogen accumulated to be touched off by an ignition source and kablooie.

If that steam HAD been vented directly into the atmosphere, then yes there would have been a small but significant increase in radiation levels around and downwind of the reactors. HOWEVER, the reactors would have remained intact, and the subsequent uncontrolled releases of radioactive materials would not have happened.

Furthermore, if they had not been forced to limit the quantity of steam (and the release rate) to what the outer containment could withstand, the operators could quite possibly have taken the oportunity to "let it roar" (with proper evacuation precautions and yes I am fully aware that lifting the lid on that much supercritical water makes it a little more complex than just "letting it roar") and take the opportunity of a reduced "head" of steam to refil the upper part of the reactor with water. (A major part of the problem is that the upper part of the reactor vessels have become filled with steam that prevents water from refilling the reactor vessel. (Much like pushing an inverted glass into water.))

Ultimately it may have become possible to commence flushing water straight through the reactor and into the ocean for long enough to re-establish a closed cooling loop in a safe and stable environment.

A controlled deliberate release of fairly mildly radioactive steam much earlier in the piece would almost certainly have averted the catastrophe which occured. Caveat: The steam is highly radioactive in the first few minutes after its release, this is what causes the brief very intense spikes in background radiation in and around the plant that have been reported, but it very quickly decays to almost nothing which is why those spike ARE brief. The 20-30km exclusion zones would be roughly how far huricane force winds could carry the steam while it remained a palpable radiological threat.

Unfortunately the idea of DELIBERATELY releasing radiation is anathema to far too many people for it to be taken seriously by those people until every other conceivable avenue gets explored. They quite correctly feel that the public would crucify them if they did anything so "reckless".

And with the gleeful help of a sensasionalistic, scandal mongering media, the anti's gin the public up with tales of global catastrophe, until nothing short of keeping a total lid on "The Monster" is acceptable while any chance to do so remains. An uninformed public got EXACTLY what it was primed to asked for, the operators were forced to try to give it to them and now everyone is unfortunately reaping the rewards.

So instead of a controlled mildly dirty release for a short while and a relatively easy cleanup afterwards, we now have had several uncontrolled releases of even more radiation and in far more toxic forms, a considerable likelihood of more such releases (and hopefully not worse) and a cleanup job of Agetean proportions.

There are any number of other industries permitted to pollute, without sanction, at a rate which allows them an incidental ongoing death rate which is only ever surpassed in a catagory 7 nuclear emergency.

FFS the Toyota accelerator fiasco probably represents a statistically greater threat to any given individual (including those evacuated) than this disaster.

[PATRICK]

3. One simple astounding fact

is THE most fearful and knowing all about the intricacies of nuclear isn't too necessary. Factoring out the probabilities of the inevitable for short term goals to cook the safety statistics and the precautions. The argument against the "I told you so" is absolutely destructive and insane and motivated by money and the inherent limitations of dangerous technology.

This is not true only of nuclear reactors, but there goes another big easy one nature hit out of the park. In fact, living in rosy times is being wasted since, as the only shamefully stupid intelligent life on the planet we have an inherent first goal to protect the world again inevitable extinction events- not create more of them.