Homebrewers Association | AHA Forum

Other than Brewing => The Pub => Topic started by: tschmidlin on March 11, 2011, 07:28:41 AM

Title: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 11, 2011, 07:28:41 AM
 :o

Conflicting reports of 8.4 - 8.9 magnitude.  Live coverage of the tsunami on the news, moving cars being swept away . . . fires burning everywhere.  Bad bad bad.

<edit> Are you hearing the tsunami sirens yet punatic?

<edit2> Wat's worse than a tsunami?  A tsunami filled with flaming debris . . .
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on March 11, 2011, 08:14:10 AM
I just flicked it over to watch Piers Morgan. Holy Cow! Buildings swept away...
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 11, 2011, 08:19:06 AM
Neighborhoods swept away, entire towns it looks like.  A boat on the leading edge drifting across farmland, it had to be more than a mile inland.  They're saying 8.9 now.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 11, 2011, 08:43:20 AM
Life in Hawaii is never dull!

Eruptions to the left of me, tsunamis to the right...  Not meaning to jinx it, but what next... a major earthquake?

Sorry for the delayed response.  Been calling all of my nearshore friends. Tsunami party at Punatic's house tonight. We are 5 miles inland at 375ft. msl and have lots of spare beds and bedrolls.

The tsunami sirens are erie. Robo-calls coming from Hawaii County Civil Defense.  The mid-ocean buoys are registering a harbor wave coming this way.  Everyone is being evacuated from the tsunami zones.  ETA Puna 3:35AM HST (13:35 UTC)

No worries.  It's all good here.  

Pray for the people in Japan.  Serious s*** happened there.  
8.9 magnitude is monster.

Did I mention the sirens are really creepy?  Chicken skin kine stuffs...
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on March 11, 2011, 09:05:34 AM
Those tsunami's are wild looking from the air. I'd hate to be caught up in all of that crushing mass of debri. Three story walls of water. Hope the casualties remain low.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 11, 2011, 09:13:34 AM
Glad you're at elevation punatic - I just hope your homebrew supply holds out :)

I hope this one turns out to be as much of a non-event in HI as last year's.  They've already issued tsunami watches for the OR and WA coasts.

Looking at the devastation, I can't believe there are only 5 deaths reported so far.  It's fortunate the Japanese build to withstand these things.  Crossing fingers . . .
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on March 11, 2011, 09:28:58 AM
Just think... There's gonna be other places impacted this time. By the time we wake up it'll have happened in places like the Philippines.

Soon in fact!
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 11, 2011, 09:33:21 AM
Tsunami warnings up for US mainland west coast.  

Cowabunga - surf's up!
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 11, 2011, 09:51:22 AM
Yeah, I saw that, they keep saying the warning extends "North to Seattle" but Seattle is really sheltered.  I have minor concerns (enough to make sure my inlaws are in Portland and not Manzanita) but it's wait and see.  It looks like the conference hotel is 5 miles inland, so that should be ok, right? :)  I guess we'll know more when it passes Hawaii.

By the way, I heard a 4.6 hit the south flank of Kilauea . . .

Going to bed shortly, enjoy your house guests :)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: phillamb168 on March 11, 2011, 10:03:27 AM
I made a bit of a Godzilla joke earlier and am feeling bad about tweeting it now. But oh well. Watched the waves roll in this morning, how crazy is that.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: Mark G on March 11, 2011, 01:00:30 PM
Life in Hawaii is never dull!

Eruptions to the left of me, tsunamis to the right...  Not meaning to jinx it, but what next... a major earthquake?

Sorry for the delayed response.  Been calling all of my nearshore friends. Tsunami party at Punatic's house tonight. We are 5 miles inland at 375ft. msl and have lots of spare beds and bedrolls.

The tsunami sirens are erie. Robo-calls coming from Hawaii County Civil Defense.  The mid-ocean buoys are registering a harbor wave coming this way.  Everyone is being evacuated from the tsunami zones.  ETA Puna 3:35AM HST (13:35 UTC)

No worries.  It's all good here.  

Pray for the people in Japan.  Serious s*** happened there.  
8.9 magnitude is monster.

Did I mention the sirens are really creepy?  Chicken skin kine stuffs...
Good thing you're at some elevation. 8.9... that's a big one. The footage is pretty scary from what I've seen.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 11, 2011, 01:12:12 PM
Waxing up the longboard...  
Outside!

Seriuosly though, got a huse full of refugees.  Sirens going off.  Yes, I did jinx it too.  There's been a series of small earthquakes center in Kalapana on the east rift of Kilauea.  The biggest bump so far was a 4.6 magnitude.  Four orders of magnitude smaller than what just hit Japan.  Could mean the lava is moving down rift from the Kamoamoa eruption towards Kapoho and Kumukahi.  No sign of any lava in any of the eruption web cams.  Pele's gone underground.  Let's hope she's hiding from the tsunami; not heading for Kapoho...

The tsunami should be reaching Ni'ihau and Kauai right about now.  It is due here in about a half hour.

Those tsunami sirens are very creepy.  Remind me of the nuclear war drills when I was little.

My mead and Very Old Dark Kilauea Ale are very popular at the party here tonight.  The sirens are really working on everybody's nerves.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: 1vertical on March 11, 2011, 03:44:34 PM
I just saw the news ....  hang on Punatic!
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: weithman5 on March 11, 2011, 04:13:37 PM
my wife has lost contact with a good friend in japan.
when i lived in hawaii, we were always kind of hoping (sick right) for this so we could take the submarine out to sea without the captain on board.
God bless everyone in harm's way
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: dbeechum on March 11, 2011, 05:45:06 PM
Looking at the devastation, I can't believe there are only 5 deaths reported so far.  It's fortunate the Japanese build to withstand these things.

The one headline we won't see out of alll of this mess is "Millions saved by engineering and government building codes". It's amazing what can be done when you combine resources with actual legal enforcement of things. Think about it, here in LA where we have a bunch of old buildings that were exempted from standards or improperly retrofitted, we got hit by a 6.7 in 94 and loss ~33 people. There are still places being retrofitted from that damn quake.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: denny on March 11, 2011, 05:54:37 PM
Tsunami warnings our for the coast here.  Don't think anything's hit yet, but I've heard reports the draw back is starting.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bluesman on March 11, 2011, 06:25:00 PM
Wow...glad to hear your okay punatic. I was thinking about you as soon as I heard of all of this terrible news. What a tragedy for the Japanese. I was looking at the photos of all the devestation and I'm awestruck by it all.

One of the major concerns right now is a nuclear plant in Japan that is continuing to heat up and they can't get it to cool down. If it continues to heat up there will be a meltdown which will be a catastrophe.

They're also concerned about the aftershocks, as much of their highway system is raised above ground and the aftershocks could jeopardize their structural integrity cuasing collapse.

Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 11, 2011, 08:11:02 PM
All is OK here on Hawaii Island.  We had some inundation in coastal areas.  The Kona Brewfest is scheduled for tomorrow and the fest site is in one of those areas.  Haven't heard if that is still on. 

Just heard the news that the hotel where the fest is held was damaged.

Pele has gone missing.  No red lava visible anywhere on the volcano.

Pray for the people in Japan.  Japan is probably the most prepared place in the world when it comes to eartquakes and tsunamis, but there is no way to prepare for magnatude 8.9 or a 30 foot high wall of water that followed.  The video coming out of Japan is stunning.  We are only just beginning to hear some estimates of fatalities.  I'm afraid it's going to be awful.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: denny on March 11, 2011, 08:51:08 PM
The Kona Brewfest is scheduled for tomorrow and the fest site is in one of those areas.  Haven't heard if that is still on. 

I hope so.  My bro in law is entered in that with one of my recipes.  His first AG batch.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 11, 2011, 09:03:30 PM
All is OK here on Hawaii Island.  We had some inundation in coastal areas.  The Kona Brewfest is scheduled for tomorrow and the fest site is in one of those areas.  Haven't heard if that is still on.  
We are pleased to announce that the Kona Brewfest will be taking place in/near Pahoa, approximately 5 miles inland and at 375 ft above sea level ;D

I heard someone in northern California was swept out to sea after going to "watch the waves".   Dumas.

I have to say, it's hilarious to see the video of Japanese news anchors wearing hard hats on air, while no one in the background is wearing one. :)

The one headline we won't see out of alll of this mess is "Millions saved by engineering and government building codes". It's amazing what can be done when you combine resources with actual legal enforcement of things.
No one ever credits the engineers or regulations, they only ever get blamed.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: Rhoobarb on March 11, 2011, 10:06:12 PM
I work for a Japanese company and things were very quiet here this morning. Managers were in emergency meetings all morning.  Some have family in Japan that they still cannot reach. We learned later in the morning that all employees at our HQ in Tokyo are safe. Now they are just trying to assess the damage to our manufacturing and shipping facilities there. All airports have been shut down for a minimum of 48 hours.

After lunch it was like a beehive, contacting customers with open orders for items arriving from Japan letting them know that they would be delayed. While a lot of our items are made here in the States, there are some items that come from our home offices.  This is going to be rough on the global economy.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 11, 2011, 11:25:59 PM
Two nuclear reactors in danger of melting down . . . I hope they get them under control soon. 
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tubercle on March 11, 2011, 11:56:30 PM
Two nuclear reactors in danger of melting down . . . I hope they get them under control soon. 

 Until they get this get under control it ain't over. The worst may be yet to come
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bluesman on March 12, 2011, 12:26:26 AM
Two nuclear reactors in danger of melting down . . . I hope they get them under control soon. 

 Until they get this get under control it ain't over. The worst may be yet to come

It ain't over yet ...that's for sure. I am hoping they can somehow get the reactors under control. They have measured 8 times the normal radiation levels at one site. This is scary.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 12, 2011, 12:32:31 AM
I don't know how much power they need to run the coolant pumps, but hopefully they're flying in every generator they can find . . .
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tubercle on March 12, 2011, 12:34:45 AM
U.S. Navy is on the way. I'm sure this will be one of the top priorities.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: oscarvan on March 12, 2011, 02:28:38 AM
The one headline we won't see out of alll of this mess is "Millions saved by engineering and government building codes". It's amazing what can be done when you combine resources with actual legal enforcement of things.

RIght on....

Just heard from a colleague that was in NRT when it hit. Worked his way down an emergency stairwell in a hotel. Said it was "nicely flexible....." and held up.
 :o :o :o
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: akr71 on March 12, 2011, 03:31:56 AM
Damn!  I don't know what else to say for fear of sounding flippant or uncaring.  This morning I thought if anyone was prepared for earthquakes or tsunamis, its the Japanese.  Lets hope they get those reactors under control before it becomes a Chernobyl.

A co-worker's son teaches in that area - needless to say she way a wreck today.  Somehow he managed to call home and say he is safe.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tygo on March 12, 2011, 04:05:20 AM
This morning I thought if anyone was prepared for earthquakes or tsunamis, its the Japanese. 

Those skycrapers swaying back and forth without collapsing was some pretty good engineering in action.  It could have been worse had they not planned ahead at least for that.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: dbeechum on March 12, 2011, 04:30:31 AM
Yeah, the earthquake is one thing.

There's just not a damn thing you can really do for a tsunami though. Watching some of those videos, it's frightening just the sheer power of the water.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bluesman on March 12, 2011, 04:32:55 AM
This morning I thought if anyone was prepared for earthquakes or tsunamis, its the Japanese. 

Those skycrapers swaying back and forth without collapsing was some pretty good engineering in action.  It could have been worse had they not planned ahead at least for that.

Yes...most structures could be affected by this massive quake. Every structure should be inspected for structural integrity when the dust settles. This is a massive event in Japan. Those poor people. 

The world needs to come together to help support them. They will need all the help they can get.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 12, 2011, 11:03:33 AM
The Kona Brewfest is scheduled for tomorrow and the fest site is in one of those areas.  Haven't heard if that is still on. 

I hope so.  My bro in law is entered in that with one of my recipes.  His first AG batch.

Kona Brewers Festival (http://www.konabrewersfestival.com/)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 12, 2011, 11:15:11 AM
I'm glad it's still going to happen punatic.  I imagine the new venue is quite a bit smaller than the original, but with good weather it can probably be outdoors :)  I still like my idea best (holding it at your house). ;D

Enjoy the beers.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: hopfenundmalz on March 12, 2011, 01:11:21 PM
I don't know how much power they need to run the coolant pumps, but hopefully they're flying in every generator they can find . . .

The nuclear power standby cooling units I saw were 20 cylinder EMD locomotive diesels, probably >4000 HP back in the day (1984).  They were set to start on a electrical power outage, and were started with airmotors, and were heated so everything was at operating temp.  They would spin up in 10 seconds and be at full power with load applied.  They would power a 3000 GPS pump.  Yes that is Gallons per Second.   
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: 1vertical on March 12, 2011, 02:56:29 PM
I don't know how much power they need to run the coolant pumps, but hopefully they're flying in every generator they can find . . .

The nuclear power standby cooling units I saw were 20 cylinder EMD locomotive diesels, probably >4000 HP back in the day (1984).  They were set to start on a electrical power outage, and were started with airmotors, and were heated so everything was at operating temp.  They would spin up in 10 seconds and be at full power with load applied.  They would power a 3000 GPS pump.  Yes that is Gallons per Second.  

We had units like this at the underground mine for back up power.  Their main function was to de-water.
Now I am watching live streaming broadcast form Japan http://www.ustream.tv/channel/annnews
  (http://www.ustream.tv/channel/annnews)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: 1vertical on March 12, 2011, 04:03:09 PM
Those images of the Power Plants are eeriely familiar to Chernoble footage....
From those live streaming images, they are in a pretty bad condition. How
can that be turned around and made better....prolly have to run it's course.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bluesman on March 12, 2011, 04:04:56 PM
The Kona Brewfest is scheduled for tomorrow and the fest site is in one of those areas.  Haven't heard if that is still on. 

I hope so.  My bro in law is entered in that with one of my recipes.  His first AG batch.

Kona Brewers Festival (http://www.konabrewersfestival.com/)

Glad to hear some good news punatic!

I just read a report of 9500 missing in one town in Japan. This does not sound good. They are going to need alot of help through this catastrophe.

I'm hearing that the reactor where the pumps failed was filled with sea water to help reduce the temperature. It is apparently working but the government was also preparing to distribute iodine tablets to residents.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: maxieboy on March 12, 2011, 04:13:15 PM
Footage of explosion at one of the nuclear plants: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12721498 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12721498)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: a10t2 on March 12, 2011, 04:51:14 PM
It ain't over yet ...that's for sure. I am hoping they can somehow get the reactors under control. They have measured 8 times the normal radiation levels at one site. This is scary.

It's worth noting that 8 times background (or 8 times the regulatory standard - I've seen stories citing both) is a tiny amount of radiation. A meltdown in a modern reactor is still terrible and would take years to clean up, but I haven't heard anything to suggest that the pressure vessels have been breached, so any releases to the atmosphere should be negligible.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bluesman on March 12, 2011, 04:57:59 PM
It ain't over yet ...that's for sure. I am hoping they can somehow get the reactors under control. They have measured 8 times the normal radiation levels at one site. This is scary.

It's worth noting that 8 times background (or 8 times the regulatory standard - I've seen stories citing both) is a tiny amount of radiation. A meltdown in a modern reactor is still terrible and would take years to clean up, but I haven't heard anything to suggest that the pressure vessels have been breached, so any releases to the atmosphere should be negligible.

There were some other reports soon after that indicated as much as 1000x the normal level. Who know but it's still a scary situation. I hope they can get it under control.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: phillamb168 on March 14, 2011, 10:16:15 AM
Reactor Numbers 1 and 3 have both had explosions at Fukushima Daiichi and the coolant pumps for number 2 are supposedly starting to go. At least 1 and 3 still have containment. I used to live about 10 miles from Arkansas Nuclear One and we would have scram drills every now and then. The thing to worry about isn't the meltdown itself (this ain't a nuclear bomb) but rather the radioactive particulate that'll hover around afterwards.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 14, 2011, 10:51:07 AM
I heard on the radio that the USS Ronald Reagan Carrier Strike Group passed through a radioactive cloud enroute to providing aid to Japan.  Kind of makes you wonder about what's being reported about what's already happened at Fukushima.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: phillamb168 on March 14, 2011, 12:40:12 PM
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/03/despite-contamination-navy-copters-keep-aiding-japan/

Despite rolling through the radioactivity with each mission they're still doing them.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 14, 2011, 05:53:46 PM
The one headline we won't see out of alll of this mess is "Millions saved by engineering and government building codes". It's amazing what can be done when you combine resources with actual legal enforcement of things.
No one ever credits the engineers or regulations, they only ever get blamed.
I was wrong - I just heard a guy on the news, an American who's been in Japan for just over a week:
"I feel like I owe my life to the engineers who designed the building"
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on March 14, 2011, 11:23:41 PM
I heard on the radio that the USS Ronald Reagan Carrier Strike Group passed through a radioactive cloud enroute to providing aid to Japan.  Kind of makes you wonder about what's being reported about what's already happened at Fukushima.

Which is why I prefer BBC for my international news. We get extremely sanitized versions of what happens around the globe spoon fed to us. It's not censorship if it is just simply ommited is it?

Hopefully any "fallout" will end up in the Pacific before it blows over the US mainland or any islands. I'm more fearful of alpha and beta than gamma so would like to see that stuff in the ocean than on human skin, crops or living enviromments.

I was reviewing some vids of the one of the villages that got swept away. There were people walking away- yes walking away from the deluge approaching them. And they got swept under. I'd have my track shoes on...

Possibly they were geriatric and couldn't move very fast. 
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 15, 2011, 02:43:09 AM
I was reviewing some vids of the one of the villages that got swept away. There were people walking away- yes walking away from the deluge approaching them. And they got swept under. I'd have my track shoes on...

Reminds me of a conversation I had with a friend who works for the USGS at the Hawaii Volcanoes Observatory.  Our island is divided into volcanic hazard zones - zone 5 is safe - zone 1 has a high probability of being covered by new lava in the near future.

Says I, "Would you live in a zone 1 area?"
"No I would not."
"Would you recommend anyone living in a zone 1 area move out of that area?"
"No, but I would recommend that they keep their car running."


I live in zone 3.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: pinnah on March 15, 2011, 03:07:10 AM
yes walking away from the deluge approaching them.

Very sad. 

Check out these   before and after (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/03/13/world/asia/satellite-photos-japan-before-and-after-tsunami.html) photos:  Be sure and use the slider between the photos.

Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on March 15, 2011, 06:48:38 AM
That's really telling isn't it?
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: phillamb168 on March 15, 2011, 10:00:06 AM
I heard on the radio that the USS Ronald Reagan Carrier Strike Group passed through a radioactive cloud enroute to providing aid to Japan.  Kind of makes you wonder about what's being reported about what's already happened at Fukushima.

Which is why I prefer BBC for my international news. We get extremely sanitized versions of what happens around the globe spoon fed to us. It's not censorship if it is just simply ommited is it?


http://english.aljazeera.net/ I have been continuously impressed by what Al Jazeera has been producing these days. And I work for a Cable news network! Of course we're not that bad either, just not as in-the-weeds: http://www.france24.com/en

In the mornings though, I listen to The World Today from the BBC. That's a great source.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bluesman on March 15, 2011, 11:34:17 AM
yes walking away from the deluge approaching them.

Very sad.  

Check out these   before and after (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/03/13/world/asia/satellite-photos-japan-before-and-after-tsunami.html) photos:  Be sure and use the slider between the photos.



These slides tell all.

What a sad, sad, sad time for the Japanese.

My heart goes out to them.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: pinnah on March 15, 2011, 12:23:17 PM

What a sad, sad, sad time for the Japanese.

Truly the reverberations from these events
will be felt by the people and culture of Japan for generations to come.

WOW, the first picture of Fukushima Daiichi has been updated...yesterday reactor Number 1 was intact. :o
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: uthristy on March 15, 2011, 01:25:44 PM
  Kind of makes you wonder about what's being reported about what's already happened at Fukushima.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/175295
In a newly released diplomatic cable obtained by WikiLeaks, politician Taro Kono, a high-profile member of Japan's lower house, tells US diplomats that the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry – the Japanese government department responsible for nuclear energy – has been "covering up nuclear accidents and obscuring the true costs and problems associated with the nuclear industry".

[...] "What we are seeing follows a clear pattern of secrecy and denial," said Paul Dorfman, co-secretary to the Committee Examining Radiation Risks from Internal Emitters, a UK government advisory committee disbanded in 2004.

"The Japanese government has always tended to underplay accidents. At the moment the Japanese claims of safety are not to be believed by anyone. The health effects of what has happened so far are imponderable. The reality is we just do not know. There is profound uncertainty about the impact of the accident."
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: Hokerer on March 15, 2011, 01:39:28 PM
http://english.aljazeera.net/ I have been continuously impressed by what Al Jazeera has been producing these days. And I work for a Cable news network! Of course we're not that bad either, just not as in-the-weeds: http://www.france24.com/en

Does that mean you work with that ultra-hot French news woman?  Melissa something?
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: phillamb168 on March 15, 2011, 02:36:50 PM
http://english.aljazeera.net/ I have been continuously impressed by what Al Jazeera has been producing these days. And I work for a Cable news network! Of course we're not that bad either, just not as in-the-weeds: http://www.france24.com/en

Does that mean you work with that ultra-hot French news woman?  Melissa something?

Mélissa Theuriau? No, she works for M6 I think. My desk is in a corner next to the Arabic studio so I don't see the Anglo/Francophone presentatrices, but during lunchtime I get plenty of eye candy.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: denny on March 15, 2011, 03:19:46 PM
In the mornings though, I listen to The World Today from the BBC. That's a great source.

+1.  We get that via Oregon Public Broadcasting.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 15, 2011, 03:49:19 PM
"The Japanese government has always tended to underplay accidents. At the moment the Japanese claims of safety are not to be believed by anyone. The health effects of what has happened so far are imponderable. The reality is we just do not know. There is profound uncertainty about the impact of the accident."
This assumes the accidents were even reported . . .

"And Japan has a record of cover-ups when it comes to nuclear accidents. In 2007, the operators of the Shika plant acknowledged they had failed to report a 15-minute uncontrollable nuclear chain reaction eight years earlier. Another operator was forced to close 17 plants temporarily in 2003 after admitting it falsified safety inspection reports." (http://articles.latimes.com/2011/mar/12/world/la-fgw-japan-quake-20110313)\

It's not exactly inspiring to know that Japan has a great safety record, and a history of falsifying those records.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: a10t2 on March 15, 2011, 04:19:30 PM
Hopefully any "fallout" will end up in the Pacific before it blows over the US mainland or any islands. I'm more fearful of alpha and beta than gamma so would like to see that stuff in the ocean than on human skin, crops or living enviromments.

That's pretty much backwards, actually. Alphas are high-energy, but most of that is tied up in their mass (~4 amu). They can't even penetrate skin. Plus most of the major alpha emitters are transuranics, so there's limited potential for uptake into the ecosystem. Betas are a little bit more of a concern, but most of the emitters (with the notable exception of Sr-90) are prompt sources, so by this point they've already been through a couple half-lives and are falling off. The major sources of radiation in nuclear fuel are the long-lived fission products like Cs-137, which tend to be gamma emitters. They have half-lives of a few decades, and limited potential for chemical toxicity, so they tend to wind up in the environment.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: maxieboy on March 15, 2011, 04:22:13 PM
Hopefully any "fallout" will end up in the Pacific before it blows over the US mainland or any islands. I'm more fearful of alpha and beta than gamma so would like to see that stuff in the ocean than on human skin, crops or living enviromments.

That's pretty much backwards, actually. Alphas are high-energy, but most of that is tied up in their mass (~4 amu). They can't even penetrate skin. Plus most of the major alpha emitters are transuranics, so there's limited potential for uptake into the ecosystem. Betas are a little bit more of a concern, but most of the emitters (with the notable exception of Sr-90) are prompt sources, so by this point they've already been through a couple half-lives and are falling off. The major sources of radiation in nuclear fuel are the long-lived fission products like Cs-137, which tend to be gamma emitters. They have half-lives of a few decades, and limited potential for chemical toxicity, so they tend to wind up in the environment.


I'll take your word for it...  ;D
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 15, 2011, 04:39:36 PM
The major sources of radiation in nuclear fuel are the long-lived fission products like Cs-137, which tend to be gamma emitters. They have half-lives of a few decades, and limited potential for chemical toxicity, so they tend to wind up in the environment.
Yes, but which ones turn you into the Hulk?  Gamma.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: a10t2 on March 15, 2011, 04:45:03 PM
Yes, but which ones turn you into the Hulk?  Gamma.

See? It's win-win. SEAN SMASH!
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on March 15, 2011, 05:39:50 PM
Hopefully any "fallout" will end up in the Pacific before it blows over the US mainland or any islands. I'm more fearful of alpha and beta than gamma so would like to see that stuff in the ocean than on human skin, crops or living enviromments.

That's pretty much backwards, actually. Alphas are high-energy, but most of that is tied up in their mass (~4 amu). They can't even penetrate skin. Plus most of the major alpha emitters are transuranics, so there's limited potential for uptake into the ecosystem. Betas are a little bit more of a concern, but most of the emitters (with the notable exception of Sr-90) are prompt sources, so by this point they've already been through a couple half-lives and are falling off. The major sources of radiation in nuclear fuel are the long-lived fission products like Cs-137, which tend to be gamma emitters. They have half-lives of a few decades, and limited potential for chemical toxicity, so they tend to wind up in the environment.


I'll take your word for it...  ;D

Alpha and beta particles will deposit more energy directly into your body with alpha's being far the worse of the two, especially if they are ingested. Gamma rays are also very dangerous but they range in energy and (mostly) will pass through the body depending on energy level. Hopefully the source isn't inside the body from ingested isotopes. The main thing is of course, that that they all are forms of ionizing radiation, and exposure to be avoided if possible. Gamma is something all humans deal with on a daily basis. Personally, I think they are a factor in aging.

Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: phillamb168 on March 15, 2011, 06:26:50 PM
Alpha and beta particles will deposit more energy directly into your body with alpha's being far the worse of the two, especially if they are ingested. Gamma rays are also very dangerous but they range in energy and (mostly) will pass through the body depending on energy level. Hopefully the source isn't inside the body from ingested isotopes. The main thing is of course, that that they all are forms of ionizing radiation, and exposure to be avoided if possible. Gamma is something all humans deal with on a daily basis. Personally, I think they are a factor in aging.

It's all dangerous. Alpha is "more dangerous" because it can land on crops and be ingested. My understanding (theoretical physics background) is that gamma, because they're of such a higher energy they're much more likely to just pass through something, and therefore are an external cause of radiation sickness. Alpha is internal, but can also be a problem externally - see the recent hubub about the new full-body x-ray scanners in airports. But still - if there happens to be a gamma ray burst in our stellar neighborhood, we're all toast.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on March 15, 2011, 06:34:34 PM
Yes, primarily it'd be in the atom-splitting range (see Pair Production) and we'd most likely receive full body doses. Be dead in a few days if not sooner.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 15, 2011, 07:02:59 PM
But still - if there happens to be a gamma ray burst in our stellar neighborhood, we're all toast.
Or we're all Hulk.

Yes, primarily it'd be in the atom-splitting range (see Pair Production) and we'd most likely receive full body doses. Be dead in a few days if not sooner.
Pessimist.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: weithman5 on March 15, 2011, 07:06:16 PM
alpha particles (think doubly ionized helium atoms) do carry a fair amount of energy but in general unless they are inhaled or ingested they are not a concern. they won't penetrate a piece of paper.  now if you ingest or have trapped in your lungs etc a particle that as it decays emits alpha, that would suck, however, alpha emitters are not likely to be throughout environment. yeah gamma particles have high energy and pass through the body very little you can do to shield and this represents most of the radiation that reactor operators on operating plants are exposed to from a reactor itself.  though they pass through the body their high energy rips the hell out of your cells. i was a former nuclear submarine officer and worked in the civilian nuclear industry before getting tired of it and changing careers.  i don't think the physics changed when i left.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on March 15, 2011, 07:09:14 PM
But still - if there happens to be a gamma ray burst in our stellar neighborhood, we're all toast.
Or we're all Hulk.

Yes, primarily it'd be in the atom-splitting range (see Pair Production) and we'd most likely receive full body doses. Be dead in a few days if not sooner.
Pessimist.

As I tell my colleagues: I'm not a pessimist- I just see the negative possibilities... ;D
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 15, 2011, 07:23:03 PM
But still - if there happens to be a gamma ray burst in our stellar neighborhood, we're all toast.
Or we're all Hulk.

Yes, primarily it'd be in the atom-splitting range (see Pair Production) and we'd most likely receive full body doses. Be dead in a few days if not sooner.
Pessimist.

As I tell my colleagues: I'm not a pessimist- I just see the negative possibilities... ;D
;D I actually laughed out loud at that one.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on March 15, 2011, 07:28:22 PM
You should see them squint at me when I say that. LOL.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tumarkin on March 15, 2011, 08:17:05 PM
pessimist, optomist..... I've had enough of this glass half full/glass half empty nonsense. the real question is..... is that beer in the glass?
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: maxieboy on March 15, 2011, 08:47:26 PM
You should see them squint at me when I say that. LOL.

Now would that be eyes half closed or half open?  :D
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 15, 2011, 09:20:21 PM
But still - if there happens to be a gamma ray burst in our stellar neighborhood, we're all toast.
Or we're all Hulk.

Yes, primarily it'd be in the atom-splitting range (see Pair Production) and we'd most likely receive full body doses. Be dead in a few days if not sooner.
Pessimist.

As I tell my colleagues: I'm not a pessimist- I just see the negative possibilities... ;D


So, would a pessimist made out of antimatter actually be an optimist?

An optometrist should be able to take care of that squint… (reading too many x-rays?)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bluesman on March 15, 2011, 09:38:04 PM
You should see them squint at me when I say that. LOL.

Actually Euge you're what I call a realist. Seeing all possibilities and taking them for what they're worth.

The latest report indicated that there's a small group of technicians still at the facility trying to get things under control as most employees have abandoned the site. I just hope that the remaining techs don't abandon ship. This would present a dire situation.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 15, 2011, 10:19:46 PM
pessimist, optomist..... I've had enough of this glass half full/glass half empty nonsense. the real question is..... is that beer in the glass?
Some would say the glass is half full while other would say it's half empty.  An engineer says the glass is twice as big as it needs to be. :)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 15, 2011, 10:27:06 PM
It looks like nuclear power is pretty dangerous.  I've been thinking and came up with an idea:

Make a really long pipe.  One that stretches from the ground up into outer space.  At one end you have a vacuum, at the other end you've got 1 atmosphere of pressure.  A 14.7 psi of pressure differential... Voila!  instant vacuum cleaner.

Now you will have wind inside the pipe so you can install wind turbines in there to generate electricity.  Put the 1 atmosphere end next to the leaking reactors and you can suck all of the radioactive compounds right out into space while at the same time generating power to make up for the lost generation capacity from the nuclear reactors!
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: capozzoli on March 15, 2011, 10:51:49 PM
Yeah, but then Klatu will send down Gort with instructions to wipe us out for contaminating space with our radiation.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: a10t2 on March 15, 2011, 10:54:12 PM
Make a really long pipe.  One that stretches from the ground up into outer space.  At one end you have a vacuum, at the other end you've got 1 atmosphere of pressure.  A 14.7 psi of pressure differential... Voila!  instant vacuum cleaner.

Unless you've figured out a way to turn off the gravity inside the pipe, I don't think you've cracked that nut yet. ;)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: morticaixavier on March 15, 2011, 10:59:46 PM
pessimist, optomist..... I've had enough of this glass half full/glass half empty nonsense. the real question is..... is that beer in the glass?
Some would say the glass is half full while other would say it's half empty.  An engineer says the glass is twice as big as it needs to be. :)

Nah it just includes 50 percent unused capacity
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 15, 2011, 11:12:03 PM
Make a really long pipe.  One that stretches from the ground up into outer space.  At one end you have a vacuum, at the other end you've got 1 atmosphere of pressure.  A 14.7 psi of pressure differential... Voila!  instant vacuum cleaner.

Unless you've figured out a way to turn off the gravity inside the pipe, I don't think you've cracked that nut yet. ;)
Exactly what I was thinking :)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bluesman on March 15, 2011, 11:15:35 PM
Make a really long pipe.  One that stretches from the ground up into outer space.  At one end you have a vacuum, at the other end you've got 1 atmosphere of pressure.  A 14.7 psi of pressure differential... Voila!  instant vacuum cleaner.

Unless you've figured out a way to turn off the gravity inside the pipe, I don't think you've cracked that nut yet. ;)
Exactly what I was thinking :)

Interesting idea though.  :-\
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 16, 2011, 03:50:07 AM
Yeah, but then Klatu will send down Gort with instructions to wipe us out for contaminating space with our radiation.

Welcome back Cap!
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: 1vertical on March 16, 2011, 05:35:10 AM
I have got a LOT of plastic gallon water jugs that I could envision filled with water
and sent to Japan....even empty jugs shipped empty and filled somewhere...
come ole clothing that is uncontaminated, other things I am not requiring for
my life....how to get it to those people...I could stand the use of a C-130 etc... :-\
I think I signed up for some potassium iodide but not sure where it is kept at or
when the storage gates will open.
Edit: from Wikipedia
Quote
Thyroid protection due to nuclear accidents and emergenciesSSKI may be used in radioiodine-contamination emergencies (i.e., nuclear accidents) to "block" the thyroid's uptake of radioiodine (this is not the same as blocking the thyroid's release of thyroid hormone).

Potassium iodide was approved in 1982 by the US FDA to protect the thyroid glands from radioactive iodine from accidents or fission emergencies. In the event of an accident or attack at a nuclear power plant, or fallout from a nuclear bomb, volatile fission product radionuclides may be released, of which 131I is one of the most common by-products and a particularly dangerous one due to thyroid gland concentration of it, which may lead to thyroid cancer. By saturating the body with a source of stable iodide prior to exposure, inhaled or ingested 131I tends to be excreted.

Potassium iodide cannot protect against any other causes of radiation poisoning, nor can it provide any degree of protection against dirty bombs that produce radionuclides other than isotopes of iodine. See fission products and the external links for more details concerning radionuclides.

 
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: gsandel on March 16, 2011, 05:49:21 AM
the problem with Americans....is that 1. we like cheap and profitable, and 2. We don't like government telling us what to do.  Land of McDonald's and Walmart also likes Arrogant Bastard and has a puritanical rave about distribution and consumption of certain beverages....and has a obesity problem.

go figure.  I can't decide about America....and I was born here.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on March 16, 2011, 05:50:53 AM
I have got a LOT of plastic gallon water jugs that I could envision filled with water
and sent to Japan....even empty jugs shipped empty and filled somewhere...
come ole clothing that is uncontaminated, other things I am not requiring for
my life....how to get it to those people...I could stand the use of a C-130 etc... :-\
I think I signed up for some potassium iodide but not sure where it is kept at or
when the storage gates will open.

Make sure you bring plenty of miso along. Supposed to help with the radiation sickness.

The workers have fled (supposedly) due to the radiation. :o I got a bad feeling about this. Not so much for us but or fellow Japanese.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: phillamb168 on March 16, 2011, 08:25:10 AM
Yeah, but then Klatu will send down Gort with instructions to wipe us out for contaminating space with our radiation.

KLATU BARATA NIKTO

There, we should be fine now.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 16, 2011, 12:40:22 PM
Yeah, but then Klatu will send down Gort with instructions to wipe us out for contaminating space with our radiation.

KLATU BARATA NIKTO

There, we should be fine now.

Ya gotta be sure to give him the secret flashlight signal too...
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 16, 2011, 12:48:46 PM
Make a really long pipe.  One that stretches from the ground up into outer space.  At one end you have a vacuum, at the other end you've got 1 atmosphere of pressure.  A 14.7 psi of pressure differential... Voila!  instant vacuum cleaner.

Unless you've figured out a way to turn off the gravity inside the pipe, I don't think you've cracked that nut yet. ;)
Exactly what I was thinking :)

I was saving that one for 4/1/11, but it got out a little early.  Sheesh, you guys are so serious...   ;)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: a10t2 on March 16, 2011, 01:19:09 PM
The workers have fled (supposedly) due to the radiation.
The utility evacuated non-essential personnel after a radiation monitor at the gatehouse spiked to 6 mSv/hr, with consistent readings over 2 mSv/hr. There are still about 50 people working inside the perimeter.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: uthristy on March 16, 2011, 02:28:10 PM
There are still about 50 people working inside the perimeter.


These workers are just like the guys in the racing pits who rush into the fires to turn off the fuel, big attachments indeed!

(http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1175188900l/489823.jpg)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 16, 2011, 03:41:47 PM
Make a really long pipe.  One that stretches from the ground up into outer space.  At one end you have a vacuum, at the other end you've got 1 atmosphere of pressure.  A 14.7 psi of pressure differential... Voila!  instant vacuum cleaner.

Unless you've figured out a way to turn off the gravity inside the pipe, I don't think you've cracked that nut yet. ;)
Exactly what I was thinking :)

I was saving that one for 4/1/11, but it got out a little early.  Sheesh, you guys are so serious...   ;)
I know! ;D

There's not just the problem of gravity keeping the air in, but the gravity pulling on the pipe, it would have to be pretty stout.  There's probably a way to calculate what the velocity of the wind would be, and from that calculate the friction along the inside of the pipe and see how much it would heat up.  I wonder how long it would take to suck all of the air off of the planet with a vacuum like that . . .

(http://www.ladyofthecake.com/mel/space/images/megamaid.jpg)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: phillamb168 on March 16, 2011, 04:17:11 PM
She's gone from suck... to blow!
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 16, 2011, 04:59:59 PM
See The Fountains of Paradise by Arthur C. Clarke
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 16, 2011, 05:26:33 PM
See The Fountains of Paradise by Arthur C. Clarke
Yeah, but wouldn't you want to build a space elevator from the top down instead of the bottom up?

See Red Mars, Green Mars, and Blue Mars by Kim Stanley Robinson ;)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: a10t2 on March 16, 2011, 06:31:56 PM
She's gone from suck... to blow!

Now that's just silly. I'm warning this thread not to get silly again.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 16, 2011, 08:32:30 PM
She's gone from suck... to blow!

Now that's just silly. I'm warning this thread not to get silly again.

Space Balls is silly?  I thought it was a documentary.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: weithman5 on March 16, 2011, 08:40:12 PM
of course space balls is a documentary.  just like super troopers ;D
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: ccarlson on March 17, 2011, 03:48:42 AM
Been lurking for a while and just now posting, but personally I don't think jokes should be made or implied about this catastrophe. The Japanese are really hurting right now, but in all of this turmoil, they are acting much better than we ever have, given the same situation.

My heart goes out to all of the hundreds of thousands of people that have lost loved ones and are trying to get by. I salute you and may God bless.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on March 17, 2011, 05:25:46 AM
Having been posting on this forum and others for quite a while I don't believe anyone is being intentionally flippant about the catastrophe. It's just our way of injecting a bit of levity into something we all feel deeply about. Really, it's fairly natural to counterbalance seriousness with a bit of humor. Shakespeare was a master at it.

I'm following this situation as it unfolds with growing horror. My dreaded anticipation is that the Japanese will hold the dubious honor of being the only people to suffer atomic strikes and inadvertently fock themselves up with a major nuclear accident years later.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: 1vertical on March 17, 2011, 05:38:41 AM
See The Fountains of Paradise
Is that what you get when you have blow off when making a brew with grains of paradise ?
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: capozzoli on March 17, 2011, 05:45:45 AM
No one joked about the catastrophe in Japan. Only joked about the disposal of radioactive waste and fallout.

As far as the catastrophe it is a horrible nightmare that is going to get worse. I look at it with sadness and shock. But we (mankind) have brought it upon ourselves and it was only a matter of time.

If im not mistaken the plants lost power and there was no other way to pump water to the cooling towers setting up a chain of events that either may or will lead to a full out meltdown. Why wasn't there an independent back up power generator to serve as a power source for the pumps? Seems like common sense to me.  

Everyone always asked "what if an earthquake hit a nuclear power plant?" and no one did anything about it. Well, now we know.

Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 17, 2011, 05:58:59 AM
Here in Hawaii we have a strong connection to Japan.  It is with overwhelming disbelief, shock and a sense of helplessness that we watch events unfold.

Like Euge said, the humor here amongst friends is a way to assuage some of the pain we are all feeling in empathy for the Japanese.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: 1vertical on March 17, 2011, 06:20:35 AM
Quote
New York Times
A United Nations forecast of the possible movement of the radioactive plume coming from crippled Japanese reactors shows it churning across the Pacific, and touching the Aleutian Islands on Thursday before hitting Southern California late Friday.
 
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 17, 2011, 07:07:00 AM
We have a really strong connection to Japan here in Seattle too, although not as much as Hawaii I'm sure.  But besides the nameless victims who are suffering, I have friends who have been living in Tokyo with their kids for the last couple of years (they are fine, staying put for the time being).  I make no apologies, Rosie has a great sense of humor and he thinks Spaceballs was hilarious.

That aside, I think you're right, we could probably expect different behavior from the typical American if it had happened here.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: phillamb168 on March 17, 2011, 07:49:19 AM
I don't think anybody's joking about this stuff, just trying to bring some humor to an otherwise somber period. I made a wisecrack immediately after the earthquake, before anybody knew the full impact, but I think that's about it. If you want an apology you've got it.

My best friend's wife is Japanese, and her father is a judge in Tokyo. They've had him and others go out to all of those tiny coastal towns to begin setting up a government presence. I don't know how close he is to the reactors, but he's closer than he was in Tokyo.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: a10t2 on March 17, 2011, 08:44:09 AM
If im not mistaken the plants lost power and there was no other way to pump water to the cooling towers setting up a chain of events that either may or will lead to a full out meltdown.

That's not entirely correct. This was a triple failure. The earthquake severed the power lines operating the pumps, as a result of which the backup generators kicked on. Minutes later, the tsunami washed through and destroyed the backup generators. In the following days, with grid power still not available, hydrogen explosions and fires pretty much destroyed the rest of the plants' systems, and ensured that any containment measures taken would be irreversible. That's worth repeating: as soon as they had the opportunity to do so, the operator junked all four reactors, including the two that were apparently under control. None of them will ever operate again, and the capital cost alone of that will certainly exceed a billion US dollars.

All that aside, these reactors were designed to survive a 7-8 Richter earthquake (depending on whose scale, and whose reports you choose to believe). To anticipate the reactor cores surviving a magnitude 8.9 quake is like expecting a car that's certified safe in a head-on collision at 60 mph to also survive a collision at 118 mph. The fact that (apparently) only one of the four pressure vessels has suffered a breach is a testament to how over-engineered they are.

This is an accident of almost incomprehensible scope, for the nuclear industry, and a radiation release of unforgivable scale. That still doesn't make it dangerous. Why we play by different rules than other power plants, I don't know, but there you have it. Every story about this will use the word "Chernobyl", but the phrase "Deepwater Horizon" will fade from memory within a few years. I don't think there's anything funny about the situation. But I also won't stand silent in the face of that kind of hypocrisy.

If anyone has factual questions about nuclear power, or the dangers of radiation exposure, I'll answer them to the best of my abilities.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: phillamb168 on March 17, 2011, 09:56:18 AM
If im not mistaken the plants lost power and there was no other way to pump water to the cooling towers setting up a chain of events that either may or will lead to a full out meltdown.

That's not entirely correct. This was a triple failure. The earthquake severed the power lines operating the pumps, as a result of which the backup generators kicked on. Minutes later, the tsunami washed through and destroyed the backup generators. In the following days, with grid power still not available, hydrogen explosions and fires pretty much destroyed the rest of the plants' systems, and ensured that any containment measures taken would be irreversible. That's worth repeating: as soon as they had the opportunity to do so, the operator junked all four reactors, including the two that were apparently under control. None of them will ever operate again, and the capital cost alone of that will certainly exceed a billion US dollars.

All that aside, these reactors were designed to survive a 7-8 Richter earthquake (depending on whose scale, and whose reports you choose to believe). To anticipate the reactor cores surviving a magnitude 8.9 quake is like expecting a car that's certified safe in a head-on collision at 60 mph to also survive a collision at 118 mph. The fact that (apparently) only one of the four pressure vessels has suffered a breach is a testament to how over-engineered they are.

This is an accident of almost incomprehensible scope, for the nuclear industry, and a radiation release of unforgivable scale. That still doesn't make it dangerous. Why we play by different rules than other power plants, I don't know, but there you have it. Every story about this will use the word "Chernobyl", but the phrase "Deepwater Horizon" will fade from memory within a few years. I don't think there's anything funny about the situation. But I also won't stand silent in the face of that kind of hypocrisy.

If anyone has factual questions about nuclear power, or the dangers of radiation exposure, I'll answer them to the best of my abilities.

The worst outcome of all of this, IMO, is the anti-nuclear backlash that's going on now. Of course like you said, Deepwater Horizon is almost forgotten, but Chernobyl (or Three Mile Island) has been in the vernacular for years. Here's another example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centralia,_Pennsylvania

Coal and oil are just bad, bad, bad. They're also unfortunately very excellent energy producers. Wind, Solar, etc pale in comparison to them (for the time being), but nuclear fission can take their place easily. The problem now is the backlash we're seeing. China has halted production on 57 reactors, Germany is making this a big election year issue with promises to shift from nuclear, and Australia and other countries are following suit. The problem is, there's nothing to replace it, so that means either more coal (and China and the world DO NOT NEED more coal plants) or find something else.

I've believed for a very long time that that something else is fusion, and not the useless tokamok style that ITER has been trying to cobble together for two decades. The solution is IEC, and the Navy has been funding a project formerly lead by Dr. Bussard, and there's a lot of promise there. I hope to see them succeed soon. But until that happens, fission is the cleanest, safest bet.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on March 17, 2011, 10:30:29 AM
My understanding is that France has successfully harnessed NP and it supplies about 75% of their electricity.

Sean, as you have a directly related education/experience background I do have a question. If radiation weighting factors for xray or gamma photons or electrons of any energy are 1 and alpha particles possess a factor of 20 why wouldn't it be preferable to be exposed by gamma rays? As I understand it the probability of an interaction decreases as the energy increases, though those interactions that do occur have the increasing ability to result in ionization. So holding up for comparison the various weighting factors in calculating Dose Equivalent what is your opinion?

I am truly curious. Radiation safety is a daily goal of mine.





Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bluesman on March 17, 2011, 11:51:47 AM
Been lurking for a while and just now posting, but personally I don't think jokes should be made or implied about this catastrophe. The Japanese are really hurting right now, but in all of this turmoil, they are acting much better than we ever have, given the same situation.

My heart goes out to all of the hundreds of thousands of people that have lost loved ones and are trying to get by. I salute you and may God bless.

This forum is for the most part a tight nit group of homebrewers whom interact regularly for the betterment of our craft. I can understand how the perception of the comments in this thread can be misconstrued and viewed as negative in nature but as was previosly indicated I can assure you that the comments made are not intentionally flippant or misguided they are only meant to help relieve the sheer reality of this great loss and misfortune that has been imposed upon the Japanese.

Our hearts go out to the people of Japan and all of the people who have lost loved ones.

Welcome to the AHA Forum.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: akr71 on March 17, 2011, 12:33:08 PM
If im not mistaken the plants lost power and there was no other way to pump water to the cooling towers setting up a chain of events that either may or will lead to a full out meltdown. Why wasn't there an independent back up power generator to serve as a power source for the pumps? Seems like common sense to me.

From what I read, the backup generators and pumps were located outside and got knocked out by the tsunami.  Things were designed and built to withstand a 2-4 meter tsunami, not the 10 meters they got.

Edit:  Ever watched one of those badly made disaster movies ("Dante's Peak" and "Armageddon" come to mind) where a series of unfortunate coincidences leads the characters into what seams like unavoidable anhilation?  That's how this feels, except its happening to real people.  Here (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/asia-pacific/tsunami-preparation-leads-citizens-into-low-lying-death-traps/article1943381/) is an article about a town north of Sendai where the citizens followed the tsunami evacuation plan only to find out that the rendez-vous points were at poorly choosen low lying points.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: capozzoli on March 17, 2011, 12:44:10 PM
Right, I dont mean to be a hypocrite and I dont completly understand NP.

But in retrospect wasnt it a mistake to  build a NP  in the "ring of fire" constructed to withstand only a 7 earthquake? Also to build it right at sea level?

Just seems to me a bit short sited. Just like all of the shortsightedness that lead to Deep Horizon. 

Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: hopfenundmalz on March 17, 2011, 12:48:04 PM
If im not mistaken the plants lost power and there was no other way to pump water to the cooling towers setting up a chain of events that either may or will lead to a full out meltdown. Why wasn't there an independent back up power generator to serve as a power source for the pumps? Seems like common sense to me.

From what I read, the backup generators and pumps were located outside and got knocked out by the tsunami.  Things were designed and built to withstand a 2-4 meter tsunami, not the 10 meters they got.
There were also battery backups from what I have read, but batteries have limited energy density, and those ran out of juice.

I saw a sat. picture of the plant before and after.  What were highlighed as the backup generator buildings in the before were missing in the after. 
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tumarkin on March 17, 2011, 12:51:41 PM
a different perspective.....
http://www.npr.org/2011/03/16/134567692/nuke-o-noia-the-worst-threat-to-japan
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: a10t2 on March 17, 2011, 01:28:44 PM
If radiation weighting factors for xray or gamma photons or electrons of any energy are 1 and alpha particles possess a factor of 20 why wouldn't it be preferable to be exposed by gamma rays?

Alphas are little trickier in that they are very high-energy, but also very massive. The median stopping distance for an alpha in air is about 20 cm IIRC. So the thing you have to remember with the quality factor tables is that they're for radiation that's already in the body. Alpha emitters that aren't ingested are essentially harmless; they have a quality factor of 0. And like I said earlier, most alpha emitters (and all the long-lived ones) are transuranics. There are chemical toxicities associated with them as well, and they don't play any role in any biological systems I'm aware of. So alpha exposure is only an issue with fallout - if there's radioactive dust in the air and you breathe it or it ends up on crops and you eat it, there could be major health issues. But even in a worst case scenario, Chernobyl-type release (which would be physically impossible in the Japanese BWRs anyway), all you have to do is wear a mask and rinse your food with water, and your alpha dosage drops to zero.

BTW, I forgot to post the link to the *only* news source I've been able to follow that has up-to-date, factual information specifically about the nuclear issues. It's the IAEA's facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/iaeaorg The times, they are a-changin'...
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 17, 2011, 02:03:00 PM
As far as I can tell from the news being reported from Fukushima none of the four troubled units have suffered core containment breach.

Each unit represents a capital loss of  $1billion US.  I suspect cleanup and reparation costs could match or exceed that amount.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: maxieboy on March 17, 2011, 04:15:30 PM
It's time to "over engineer" new nuclear power plants to withstand 9++, my understanding being that after 10+, radiation would be the least of our worries.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on March 17, 2011, 05:41:16 PM
Thanks Sean. It's what I suspected after doing more reading. And more, been busting out and dusting off old textbooks...
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: 1vertical on March 17, 2011, 06:04:13 PM
I find it interesting to watch the approaching Plume
http://laist.com/2011/03/17/post_123.php (http://laist.com/2011/03/17/post_123.php)

Ok Gurus, The fallout from the path of that plume is leaving a
deposit of material on / thereby in the pacific. What is the
effect of that, dead or sickly floura and fauna?
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on March 17, 2011, 06:15:24 PM
I find it interesting to watch the approaching Plume
http://laist.com/2011/03/17/post_123.php (http://laist.com/2011/03/17/post_123.php)

Ok Gurus, The fallout from the path of that plume is leaving a
deposit of material on / thereby in the pacific. What is the
effect of that, dead or sickly floura and fauna?

My hope is that it doesn't end up in the food chain supply but gets diluted in the Pacific. Though when seafood is affected I guess the Japanese need to be very concerned since they consume the bulk of it.

Supposedly the flora and fauna wasn't affected that much with Chernobyl but Humans were- developing leukemia and lymphoma as the years passed.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: a10t2 on March 17, 2011, 06:17:24 PM
Ok Gurus, The fallout from the path of that plume is leaving a deposit of material on / thereby in the pacific. What is the effect of that, dead or sickly floura and fauna?

Probably not. The highest number I've seen reported is 400 mSv/hr, which by the time it's dispersed in the atmosphere isn't going to be enough to be noticeable. (To put things in perspective, 1 mSv is about the dose you'd get by eating 1,000 bananas.)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: weithman5 on March 17, 2011, 06:34:54 PM
i was going through nuclear prototype in idaho when chernobyl happened.  i had been out at the site for a week prior to my final boards.  i had heard no news about chernobyl.  the first question i was asked was to describe chernobyl and discuss the safety benefits of our (navy) design.  my answer "what is chernobyl?"   the inherent safety of general electric and westinghouse designs. look at what that plant has gone through, and yes it is a disaster, but i think people will marvel at how small the health impact really turns out to be.  biggest deal imho is the loss of generating capacity to a people who are going to need all the help they can get.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 17, 2011, 07:17:15 PM
Not all of the stories coming out of Japan are about human tragedy.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/dog-in-japan-stays-by-the-side-of-its-ailing-friend-in-the-rubble
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 17, 2011, 07:18:59 PM
i was going through nuclear prototype in idaho when chernobyl happened.  i had been out at the site for a week prior to my final boards.  i had heard no news about chernobyl.  the first question i was asked was to describe chernobyl and discuss the safety benefits of our (navy) design.  my answer "what is chernobyl?"
And?!  You left out the best part, their response!
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bluesman on March 17, 2011, 07:33:58 PM
Not all of the stories coming out of Japan are about human tragedy.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/dog-in-japan-stays-by-the-side-of-its-ailing-friend-in-the-rubble

Being a dog owner/lover...that's an amazing video. I hope those dogs were taken care of...

Thanks for posting that...
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 17, 2011, 07:44:19 PM
Not all of the stories coming out of Japan are about human tragedy.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/dog-in-japan-stays-by-the-side-of-its-ailing-friend-in-the-rubble

Being a dog owner/lover...that's an amazing video. I hope those dogs were taken care of...

Thanks for posting that...


If you read down there is an update telling that they were rescued and how they are doing. 

Love of dogs is a universal thing I think
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: 1vertical on March 18, 2011, 04:41:06 AM
Sean,
I used to mine Uranium underground. I worked in quite a lot of radon, and had to be put on the
surface a couple times to "cool" off.  What irks me is that we used RADs and now we are using
a total different scale and that just keeps me learning I guess.....just when I thought I could
shift part of my brain into neutral....(yeah right).  Then last year I recieved a week of elective
(yes I asked for it)  IMRT  treatment for Dupuytren's contracture, I have had my fair share of
exposure and just want to keep up with these current events.  I make all my x-ray doctors dig
out the thyroid collar now even the Dentist.  

Oh the things we did underground in that mine.... ::)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on March 18, 2011, 05:09:45 AM
Radiation has gone metric I'm afraid...
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: 1vertical on March 18, 2011, 05:26:32 AM
Euge,
A lot of those guys I worked with are not around now....It does not matter how you go,
metric, SAE, you do just Go .....
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on March 18, 2011, 05:45:35 AM
Euge,
A lot of those guys I worked with are not around now....It does not matter how you go,
metric, SAE, you do just Go .....

Yup and a old tech told me we live 10 years shorter on average- usually to cancer. I put that thyroid shield on at a minimum and sometime I wear lead the entire shift. Have leaded glasses for intensive cases where my face will be in a high scatter zone. The scary thing is one doesn't feel anything at the time.

Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: dbeechum on March 18, 2011, 06:00:28 AM
The scary thing is one doesn't feel anything at the time.

When I was 17 I worked in a university lab trying to study how to improve the survivability of robotic mechanisms in a meltdown situation. Lots of Cobalt and  Cesium testing. The one thing that wigged me out was having to put on my tags every morning and knowing that due to the reduced exposure level allowed for those under 18 there was one room in the lab that I wasn't allowed to walk by if the doors were open.

Radiation is spooky.

Of course, the thing that cracked me up was the fact that the research reactor was less than 100 yards from the massive student union. :)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 18, 2011, 08:49:03 AM
This is interesting:

        Ex-rad (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/03/16/ex-rad-militarys-radiation-wonder-drug/)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: phillamb168 on March 18, 2011, 09:13:26 AM
This is interesting:

        Ex-rad (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/03/16/ex-rad-militarys-radiation-wonder-drug/)

I didn't see anything in there talking about what it actually does and I'm always a bit skeptical of write-ups like that.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on March 18, 2011, 09:49:23 AM
This is interesting:

        Ex-rad (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/03/16/ex-rad-militarys-radiation-wonder-drug/)

I didn't see anything in there talking about what it actually does and I'm always a bit skeptical of write-ups like that.
Me too.

Here are some articles:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=ex-rad

I have access to at least one full paper, but haven't read it.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: jeffy on March 18, 2011, 01:06:13 PM
Sean,
I used to mine Uranium underground. I worked in quite a lot of radon, and had to be put on the
surface a couple times to "cool" off.  What irks me is that we used RADs and now we are using
a total different scale and that just keeps me learning I guess.....just when I thought I could
shift part of my brain into neutral....(yeah right).  Then last year I recieved a week of elective
(yes I asked for it)  IMRT  treatment for Dupuytren's contracture, I have had my fair share of
exposure and just want to keep up with these current events.  I make all my x-ray doctors dig
out the thyroid collar now even the Dentist.  

Oh the things we did underground in that mine.... ::)

I have Dupuytran's contracture.  I can't straighten my left pinky past about 110 degrees, but I've been lead to believe it's genetic, something about Norwegian ancestry. 
What did IMRT do for it?
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bluesman on March 18, 2011, 02:02:05 PM
Japan today raised the threat level for the crisis at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant from a 4 to 5 -- putting it on par with the 1979 crisis at Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island.

Which doesn't surprise me from all the reports that we've been getting.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: a10t2 on March 18, 2011, 02:25:32 PM
I used to mine Uranium underground. I worked in quite a lot of radon, and had to be put on the surface a couple times to "cool" off.  What irks me is that we used RADs and now we are using a total different scale and that just keeps me learning I guess...

Yeah, I don't have much of an intuitive sense for sieverts either. Fortunately the conversion factor's easy: 1 Sv = 100 rem. AFAIK the industry in the US has gone metric on everything else, but for some reason we're stuck on rem.

I have immense respect for you guys who knowingly dosed yourselves day after day. I've had to take exactly one decon shower (my lab partner dropped a sealed source and it broke open) and even through my dosimeter only picked up 20-25 mrem it was absolutely terrifying.

Japan today raised the threat level for the crisis at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant from a 4 to 5 -- putting it on par with the 1979 crisis at Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island.

Which doesn't surprise me from all the reports that we've been getting.

Me neither. The problem with the INES scale is that it stipulates "at least one death" for a level 4 accident and "multiple deaths" for a level 5. So while the radiation releases from this accident are many orders of magnitude higher than at TMI, it doesn't really fit neatly into the criteria. They're being very conservative with both the public evacuations and the worker dosage limits, and at this point I'm optimistic that once it's all said and done there won't be any radiation deaths.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bluesman on March 18, 2011, 02:32:25 PM
Japan today raised the threat level for the crisis at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant from a 4 to 5 -- putting it on par with the 1979 crisis at Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island.

Which doesn't surprise me from all the reports that we've been getting.

Me neither. The problem with the INES scale is that it stipulates "at least one death" for a level 4 accident and "multiple deaths" for a level 5. So while the radiation releases from this accident are many orders of magnitude higher than at TMI, it doesn't really fit neatly into the criteria. They're being very conservative with both the public evacuations and the worker dosage limits, and at this point I'm optimistic that once it's all said and done there won't be any radiation deaths.

The scale is out of seven...right?

I am hoping you're right about the radiation deaths but then the concern becomes the after affects of all the exposure to radiation. (i.e. cancer, long term effects and the like).
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: weithman5 on March 18, 2011, 02:52:33 PM
[
And?!  You left out the best part, their response!

the captain asked if i hadn't been paying any attention to the news.  i said sir I have been out at this site for over 7 days studying for this board i have no idea what you are talking about.  I think that little bit of "dedication" kind of satisfied them a bit and proceeded to discuss and describe what was going on.  then they went on to grill me for 3 or 4 hours and eventually passed me.  Not before saying i was one of the most f__ked up individuals they had ever met ::)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bluefoxicy on March 18, 2011, 04:47:35 PM
Looking at the devastation, I can't believe there are only 5 deaths reported so far.  It's fortunate the Japanese build to withstand these things.

The one headline we won't see out of alll of this mess is "Millions saved by engineering and government building codes". It's amazing what can be done when you combine resources with actual legal enforcement of things. Think about it, here in LA where we have a bunch of old buildings that were exempted from standards or improperly retrofitted, we got hit by a 6.7 in 94 and loss ~33 people. There are still places being retrofitted from that damn quake.

I was looking for exactly this.  Japan is really just about fine; the reactor problem is an emergency situation, but not yet a disaster.  Some disasters did occur--massive radiation spiking for a few hours around the 400,000uSv per hour mark (note that 1Sv makes you radiation sick, and that's 40% there; radiation sickness isn't "starting to get bad," it's well past significant damage).  I was hoping the high radiation would stay under the 10,000uSv/hr mark, up to which I'd stay indoors but largely not be happy about... but that's not a lot of radiation really, health effects are minimal.  It came back to under 1uSv eventually, like after several hours eventually, so 10,000uSv for a few hours would have been okay, unlike the 400,000uSv they got.

Even then, though, Japan has had incredibly bad luck:  three reactors failed, then the overbuilt and over-elevated generators got hit with a wave twice as high as they thought was possible ever.  Cascading failure occurred:  reactors failed, backup generators failed, no power to the cooling system means the reactors went into critical condition, cooled by seawater, but without the pumps the spent fuel rods boiled off their cooling pool and started to smolder (risk of fire, explosion, release of even more radiation and toxic compounds)... this is because a giant wave that they planned for was twice as big as they thought possible--they actually planned for well beyond what should have ever happened, with breakwaters and elevation above what could reach shore even without the breakwaters.  Bad luck.

But the people are not panicked.  Japan is a strong people, and they are working through it.  Most of the country hit with the earthquake roughly does not care; daily life goes on, most buildings shook a bit, in-construction buildings in Tokyo didn't even come down.  Japan is mainly just fine; in fact, if they had gotten the nuclear cooling systems back up immediately, they would be roughly "not in a state of emergency" and just busy getting everyone running water.

Compare to Haiti.  One little earthquake and everything falls apart, everybody dies.  What was that, an 8.0?  A 9.0 is an order of magnitude bigger.

I'm very much glad this happened to Japan and not any other country in the world, where it would quickly turn into a nuclear holocaust with 800,000 people dead in a country that's incapable of doing anything at all about the rapidly worsening nuclear plant problem because that entire half of the country is leveled into rubble and the roads are impassable and supplies and people cannot be brought there.  Imagine if this happened in the US ... it'd be like Katrina, but with a nuclear power plant melting down, catching fire, and spewing ten thousand tons of uranium and plutonium smoke into the atmosphere.  In the end, half of the US would be sterile or dead.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bluesman on March 18, 2011, 06:31:31 PM
I have to agree with you blue.

They were prepared in alot of ways but bad luck got in the way, yet they are fighting against all odds and ultimately I think they will weather the storm if you will. The nuclear reactor situation is their biggest concern going forward and I think if they can harness this problem they will minimize much of the potential for a nuclear catastrophe.

There is a tremendous amount of damage and loss of life which will scar those people for years to come but they have held up beyond my expectations to date.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on March 18, 2011, 06:40:36 PM
I have to agree with you blue.

They were prepared in alot of ways but bad luck got in the way, yet they are fighting against all odds and ultimately I think they will weather the storm if you will. The nuclear reactor situation is their biggest concern going forward and I think if they can harness this problem they will minimize much of the potential for a nuclear catastrophe.

There is a tremendous amount of damage and loss of life which will scar those people for years to come but they have held up beyond my expectations to date.

An opportunity to learn and improve on procedure and practice. Hopefully, we'll all end up benefiting from this- better designs, proactive policies and swifter emergency responses. Like it or not we will eventually have to rely on NP for more of our energy. These events haven't discouraged me from supporting NP, but the world should take notice and learn- not let politics and finances cloud our judgment.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 18, 2011, 08:40:49 PM
The Haiti earthquake was magnitude 6.9.  At magnitude 9.0 the Japan earthquake was 125 times (12,500%) more powerful.  (10^9/10^6.9).

It's intersting to compare the 2010 Haiti earthquake to the 2010 Chile earthquake that occurred 35 days later.  At magnitude 8.8 the Chile earthquake was about 80 times more powerful than the Haiti earthquake.  Comparing the aftermath of Haiti, Chile and Japan speaks volumes in support of the effectiveness of earthquake resistant engineering and civil defense preparedness

I find it amusing that it is being reported that "TONS!" of water are being applied to the Dai-ichi reactors to cool them.  Sounds impressive until you realize that a ton of water is about 240 gallons.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: hopfenundmalz on March 18, 2011, 08:46:10 PM
The Haiti earthquake was magnitude 6.9.  At magnitude 9.0 the Japan earthquake was 125 times (12,500%) more powerful.  (10^9/10^6.9).

It's intersting to compare the 2010 Haiti earthquake to the 2010 Chile earthquake that occurred 35 days later.  At magnitude 8.8 the Chile earthquake was about 80 times more powerful than the Haiti earthquake.  Comparing the aftermath of Haiti, Chile and Japan speaks volumes in support of the effectiveness of earthquake resistant engineering and civil defense preparedness

I find it amusing that it is being reported that "TONS!" of water are being applied to the Dai-ichi reactors to cool them.  Sounds impressive until you realize that a ton of water is about 240 gallons.
On a scale for preparedness, one expert rated Japan an 8, and Haiti a 0.  He gave the US a 6.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: a10t2 on March 18, 2011, 10:18:18 PM
On a scale for preparedness, one expert rated Japan an 8, and Haiti a 0.  He gave the US a 6.

Is that a national average? Because if so, it's pretty good. Being more or less on top of the New Madrid fault growing up, we had an earthquake plan. But I would assume that's not the case for 90% of Americans.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: a10t2 on March 19, 2011, 01:20:46 AM
The scale is out of seven...right?

Right. I don't remember the wording off the top of my head, but a level 7 accident involves a large, uncontrolled release of radiation into the environment, multiple radiation deaths, and a long-term impact on the public. Chernobyl, essentially.

I am hoping you're right about the radiation deaths but then the concern becomes the after affects of all the exposure to radiation. (i.e. cancer, long term effects and the like).

As of now, they're enforcing a hard limit of 250 mSv for workers at the site, and requiring everyone to wear full-body protective gear. Between that, the overall low levels of radiation being released (or at least reported), and the fact that the prevailing winds are carrying it out to sea, I don't think it's inconceivable that there would be no long-term cancer deaths either. Of course, IAEA is saying there are now 300+ workers at the site, so if this gets bad it could get really bad.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: elauren on March 19, 2011, 02:16:19 AM
Did you guys see the car that was speeding when the flood was coming? That is something i would only picture in a movie but it has come to life.  Not that it was a pleasant view  and my heart goes to those who were affected but my point being, the movie 2012 is not as far from reality as what we initially thought, though i would not want buildings falling down while the road opens up.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bluefoxicy on March 21, 2011, 07:11:00 PM
As of now, they're enforcing a hard limit of 250 mSv for workers at the site, and requiring everyone to wear full-body protective gear. Between that, the overall low levels of radiation being released (or at least reported), and the fact that the prevailing winds are carrying it out to sea, I don't think it's inconceivable that there would be no long-term cancer deaths either. Of course, IAEA is saying there are now 300+ workers at the site, so if this gets bad it could get really bad.

(http://imgs.xkcd.com/blag/radiation.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/blag/radiation.png)

Try this chart.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on March 21, 2011, 09:39:50 PM
+1 Thank you bfi. It's my desktop now. ;D
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: 1vertical on March 22, 2011, 04:57:10 AM
That was a great chart BFI, and why oh why did I desire to play a game of tetris when I got
done looking at it    :o
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 27, 2011, 08:20:51 AM
(http://a57.foxnews.com/static/managed/img/U.S./397/224/Japan%20Earthquake_Norm(46).jpg)

This is a picture of part of the control board on one of the Dai-ichi units.  Those controls are circa 1970.  Astounding that the controls have not been retrofitted with HIACS.  There have been several generations of upgrades since those analog controls were installed.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: ccarlson on March 28, 2011, 02:33:53 AM
Technology has obviously improved, but I used to work for a company that likely produced many of those chart recorders. To be nuclear rated meant that everything had to be specifically rated and kept separate from other products. That included raw inventory. Those devices were well tested and built like tanks. Digital may have more features, but it doesn't guarantee better quality. In fact, many times it means a higher failure rate.   
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 28, 2011, 03:36:04 AM
Hmm... 40+ year old technology is better?   If that were the case, why isn't it still being used on new construction? 

The first unit to go online at the power plant where I worked went through two control retrofits in twenty years.  The new technology was superior to the previous both times.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: ccarlson on March 28, 2011, 01:06:15 PM
Didn't say it was better, but that age doesn't necessarily mean it's inferior. Analog devices have some advantages. Digital devices have a tendency to lock up with power surges, but analog devices will normally recover quickly.

That said, digital devices offer far more features, so yes, they are definitely a better technology. I doubt either technology would have prevented what happened in Japan.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bluesman on March 28, 2011, 01:42:15 PM
Didn't say it was better, but that age doesn't necessarily mean it's inferior. Analog devices have some advantages. Digital devices have a tendency to lock up with power surges, but analog devices will normally recover quickly.

That said, digital device offer far more features, so yes, they are definitely a better technology. I doubt either technology would have prevented what happened in Japan.

If anything we can chalk this up as a real eye opening experience and hopefully we can learn from it.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: phillamb168 on April 07, 2011, 03:05:04 PM
Bof. http://www.jma.go.jp/jp/quake/2/20110407233752391-072332.html Another quake, and another Tsunami.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bluefoxicy on April 07, 2011, 06:49:33 PM
Didn't say it was better, but that age doesn't necessarily mean it's inferior. Analog devices have some advantages. Digital devices have a tendency to lock up with power surges, but analog devices will normally recover quickly.

Analog devices tend to be superior in pretty much all settings except for cost-wise and inherently digital applications.  Computers MUST be digital, they COMPUTE s***.  Your car stereo?  You'd be far better off exchanging that DSP for a real volume and tone stack, complete with pots and capacitors and all; though a 20-bit DAC instead of a 1-bit DAC would improve sound quality dramatically.

The big thing about digital devices is they rely on absolute precision, on programmatically predictable cases, and on stable and consistent internal states.  Digital devices in mechanical systems attempt to emulate analog devices without analog loss:  they measure a temperature or voltage or pressure at a source, encode it, then transmit it; while the analog device produces a voltage anomaly which decays in transmission (longer line, electromagnetic interference, etc affects the precise signal).

Let's take a car for an example, and let's take something simple:  a viscous coupling all-wheel differential system (the general design of a torsen works the same way, but with different mechanical basis).  This involves two axial differentials (front and rear) and a center differential. There's a lot of ways to do this, and depending on topology both analog and digital systems can do axle-first (rear left slips, rear right gets the power) or can do opposite-wheel (i.e. rear left slips, front right gets the power) power transfer.

In an analog system, you have a viscous coupling fluid which resists deformation.  Under light stress it flows, and under heavy stress it solidifies--think silly putty, which flows when under weak force (even under gravity pressure) yet bounces like a set elastic (or in some formulations, shatters like a hard ceramic) under sudden impulse.

When all four wheels are on the ground, the front and rear differentials each have internal connectors churning this fluid at the same rate, so no energy goes into deformation, and no solidification happens; similarly, the front and rear wheels turn at the same rate, and the center differential doesn't experience anything either.  Simple so far, right?

If the rear right wheel slips, though, the increase in power there puts more load on the visco-elastic fluid in the differential, which causes it to react by partially solidifying.  Because it's now somewhat solid, it cranks against the other wheel's drive shaft, transferring the power from the rear right wheel to the rear left.

So far, we're getting 100% power to the rear wheels, and 0% to the front.  What if both rear wheels slip?  Well then the power going to the rear spins them, and as they start to slip, power goes to the center differential (as its input shaft--from the rear input shaft--is no longer sending power directly to ground).  The rear wheels are limited from spin by the resistance encountered by the center differential, which starts to solidify from the force applied, turning the front wheels--power goes up front, and your car is now partially front wheel drive.  Only enough power will reach the rear wheels to drive them without slip; if they slip at all, then their power is not being transferred to the ground (no load on the system), and instead goes into the center diff, which transfers the load to the front wheels, which of course takes the power that is spinning the rear wheels into slipping off the rear wheels.

This system works.  It is 100% reliable as long as nothing outright breaks.  Even when it is unmaintained and starting to fail, it does what it's supposed to do.  When a sudden shock occurs (complete loss of traction to the rear wheels, etc), it quickly reacts because the laws of physics demand a certain mode of operation.

It is also not exactly 100% efficient.  Torsen is more efficient (and somewhat better, as it always transfers power:  25% of the power goes to each wheel by default, rather than being 100% RWD until the rear slips, meaning you can shove about twice as much power against the ground BEFORE any loss from slipping wheels occur).

Even more efficient:  slap slip sensors onto each wheel.  When a wheel is detected to be moving faster than another wheel while it's moving, it's slipping (and when it's detected to be moving slower when brakes are applied, it's slipping and your anti-lock brakes kick in and release the brake on that wheel).  Then the computer manipulates a differential to adjust how much power goes this way or that.

Obviously, the computer is trying to remove the "deformation of fluid" or "heat lost in gear system" part of the equation and instead use a less lossy gear system on a computer control to provide a more efficient differential.  Rather than laws of physics, just a bunch of calculations go into deciding how to shift the power and to what wheel.  This takes, in the end, actually less energy than using a viscous or even a Torsen system; and in fact, a profile can be produced that starts off with a more efficient layout (Torsen starts 25% to all wheels and redirects it when a wheel slips; but putting about 95% to the rear wheels is more efficient at launch) and even selects different layouts depending on vehicle dynamic rather than on "which wheel is slipping right now?"

The downside is, of course, if the digital electronics experience any minor flaw--decaying chips, decaying solder joints, localized static build-up, electromagnetic interference, anything--that changes a bit inside a chip, weird s*** happens.  If the computer detects input that doesn't make sense within its algorithms, weird s*** happens.  The system is not durable.  It can respond faster based on known data rather than natural physical consequences of physical events; it can make predictions and pre-adjustments and such; but it can't handle something going vaguely out of spec.

Analog devices are quite functionally superior.  They also quite often drain a decent amount of extra power out of the system, and use more costly or bulky components.  Don't take that to mean that analog is the answer to everything, though:  some things can [em]only[/em] be done digitally.  Analog computers include the Japanese Soroban--lies, it's digital!  Beads are set and cleared, and if they're dangling in between then you have a nonsense state (unless you assign a separate meaning to a "hanging bead" or whatnot).  Hand-written word is digital:  the letter "a" is an "a," and the vague variations in handwriting style and shape are meaningless (this is OTHER information, which is analog).

Plenty of systems to control nuclear reactors and the like are digital because they are computers, they compute things, and they are not a digital analog to an analog system that does something else.  It's not a simulation of an oil-filled chamber that's heated by the flow of pumped coolant and somehow measures whatever by expanding and flowing up a graduated tube or whatnot; servos are controlled by systems where we say, "Put this here," and we are sure as hell not going into the nuclear reactor core and pulling a lever to do it.  Lots of the automation is logic, not consequence (and thus, on a computer, logic implementing consequence).

If you really want to, maybe you can design systems for that; but are they academic "analog computers" or are they actually systems that are self-stabilizing?  Pebble bed reactors are self-stabilizing:  when they get hot, they become self-limiting, squelching the rate at which fission can even occur.  You take away all coolant and all safety systems and dump the raw fuel into a big, uncontrolled, exposed pile and it will get hot and stay that way; it will not experience runaway fission past its design specifications, and there aren't even any moving parts to control this.

Can you create a system around a BWR that does the exact same thing?  No computers, and when something is quite wrong it's okay because the entire design reacts to failure by shutting off elsewhere not because of fuses and triggers, but because some fluid was expanded or some metal flexed or whatever simply because everything was in proper operation, and when that went out of spec those things moved into a different, safe state by design as dictated by the laws of physics?  It would be a system where the computer controls activate something, but that something relies on pushing i.e. a fluid around that's only in place because the reactor is i.e. getting proper coolant flow, and when that flow fails something deforms from the heat (temporarily, like a metal that flexes and shifts hydraulic fluid around) and drops the coolant rods into the fuel even though the computer says to raise them and go full-on hot?  "Analog safety system" (with a manual override, an actual lever that requires a human to crank it over to supply the torque to undo what it's done)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: maxieboy on April 07, 2011, 08:19:00 PM
Didn't say it was better, but that age doesn't necessarily mean it's inferior. Analog devices have some advantages. Digital devices have a tendency to lock up with power surges, but analog devices will normally recover quickly.

Analog devices tend to be superior in pretty much all settings except for cost-wise and inherently digital applications.  Computers MUST be digital, they COMPUTE s***.  Your car stereo?  You'd be far better off exchanging that DSP for a real volume and tone stack, complete with pots and capacitors and all; though a 20-bit DAC instead of a 1-bit DAC would improve sound quality dramatically.

The big thing about digital devices is they rely on absolute precision, on programmatically predictable cases, and on stable and consistent internal states.  Digital devices in mechanical systems attempt to emulate analog devices without analog loss:  they measure a temperature or voltage or pressure at a source, encode it, then transmit it; while the analog device produces a voltage anomaly which decays in transmission (longer line, electromagnetic interference, etc affects the precise signal).

Let's take a car for an example, and let's take something simple:  a viscous coupling all-wheel differential system (the general design of a torsen works the same way, but with different mechanical basis).  This involves two axial differentials (front and rear) and a center differential. There's a lot of ways to do this, and depending on topology both analog and digital systems can do axle-first (rear left slips, rear right gets the power) or can do opposite-wheel (i.e. rear left slips, front right gets the power) power transfer.

In an analog system, you have a viscous coupling fluid which resists deformation.  Under light stress it flows, and under heavy stress it solidifies--think silly putty, which flows when under weak force (even under gravity pressure) yet bounces like a set elastic (or in some formulations, shatters like a hard ceramic) under sudden impulse.

When all four wheels are on the ground, the front and rear differentials each have internal connectors churning this fluid at the same rate, so no energy goes into deformation, and no solidification happens; similarly, the front and rear wheels turn at the same rate, and the center differential doesn't experience anything either.  Simple so far, right?

If the rear right wheel slips, though, the increase in power there puts more load on the visco-elastic fluid in the differential, which causes it to react by partially solidifying.  Because it's now somewhat solid, it cranks against the other wheel's drive shaft, transferring the power from the rear right wheel to the rear left.

So far, we're getting 100% power to the rear wheels, and 0% to the front.  What if both rear wheels slip?  Well then the power going to the rear spins them, and as they start to slip, power goes to the center differential (as its input shaft--from the rear input shaft--is no longer sending power directly to ground).  The rear wheels are limited from spin by the resistance encountered by the center differential, which starts to solidify from the force applied, turning the front wheels--power goes up front, and your car is now partially front wheel drive.  Only enough power will reach the rear wheels to drive them without slip; if they slip at all, then their power is not being transferred to the ground (no load on the system), and instead goes into the center diff, which transfers the load to the front wheels, which of course takes the power that is spinning the rear wheels into slipping off the rear wheels.

This system works.  It is 100% reliable as long as nothing outright breaks.  Even when it is unmaintained and starting to fail, it does what it's supposed to do.  When a sudden shock occurs (complete loss of traction to the rear wheels, etc), it quickly reacts because the laws of physics demand a certain mode of operation.

It is also not exactly 100% efficient.  Torsen is more efficient (and somewhat better, as it always transfers power:  25% of the power goes to each wheel by default, rather than being 100% RWD until the rear slips, meaning you can shove about twice as much power against the ground BEFORE any loss from slipping wheels occur).

Even more efficient:  slap slip sensors onto each wheel.  When a wheel is detected to be moving faster than another wheel while it's moving, it's slipping (and when it's detected to be moving slower when brakes are applied, it's slipping and your anti-lock brakes kick in and release the brake on that wheel).  Then the computer manipulates a differential to adjust how much power goes this way or that.

Obviously, the computer is trying to remove the "deformation of fluid" or "heat lost in gear system" part of the equation and instead use a less lossy gear system on a computer control to provide a more efficient differential.  Rather than laws of physics, just a bunch of calculations go into deciding how to shift the power and to what wheel.  This takes, in the end, actually less energy than using a viscous or even a Torsen system; and in fact, a profile can be produced that starts off with a more efficient layout (Torsen starts 25% to all wheels and redirects it when a wheel slips; but putting about 95% to the rear wheels is more efficient at launch) and even selects different layouts depending on vehicle dynamic rather than on "which wheel is slipping right now?"

The downside is, of course, if the digital electronics experience any minor flaw--decaying chips, decaying solder joints, localized static build-up, electromagnetic interference, anything--that changes a bit inside a chip, weird s*** happens.  If the computer detects input that doesn't make sense within its algorithms, weird s*** happens.  The system is not durable.  It can respond faster based on known data rather than natural physical consequences of physical events; it can make predictions and pre-adjustments and such; but it can't handle something going vaguely out of spec.

Analog devices are quite functionally superior.  They also quite often drain a decent amount of extra power out of the system, and use more costly or bulky components.  Don't take that to mean that analog is the answer to everything, though:  some things can [em]only[/em] be done digitally.  Analog computers include the Japanese Soroban--lies, it's digital!  Beads are set and cleared, and if they're dangling in between then you have a nonsense state (unless you assign a separate meaning to a "hanging bead" or whatnot).  Hand-written word is digital:  the letter "a" is an "a," and the vague variations in handwriting style and shape are meaningless (this is OTHER information, which is analog).

Plenty of systems to control nuclear reactors and the like are digital because they are computers, they compute things, and they are not a digital analog to an analog system that does something else.  It's not a simulation of an oil-filled chamber that's heated by the flow of pumped coolant and somehow measures whatever by expanding and flowing up a graduated tube or whatnot; servos are controlled by systems where we say, "Put this here," and we are sure as hell not going into the nuclear reactor core and pulling a lever to do it.  Lots of the automation is logic, not consequence (and thus, on a computer, logic implementing consequence).

If you really want to, maybe you can design systems for that; but are they academic "analog computers" or are they actually systems that are self-stabilizing?  Pebble bed reactors are self-stabilizing:  when they get hot, they become self-limiting, squelching the rate at which fission can even occur.  You take away all coolant and all safety systems and dump the raw fuel into a big, uncontrolled, exposed pile and it will get hot and stay that way; it will not experience runaway fission past its design specifications, and there aren't even any moving parts to control this.

Can you create a system around a BWR that does the exact same thing?  No computers, and when something is quite wrong it's okay because the entire design reacts to failure by shutting off elsewhere not because of fuses and triggers, but because some fluid was expanded or some metal flexed or whatever simply because everything was in proper operation, and when that went out of spec those things moved into a different, safe state by design as dictated by the laws of physics?  It would be a system where the computer controls activate something, but that something relies on pushing i.e. a fluid around that's only in place because the reactor is i.e. getting proper coolant flow, and when that flow fails something deforms from the heat (temporarily, like a metal that flexes and shifts hydraulic fluid around) and drops the coolant rods into the fuel even though the computer says to raise them and go full-on hot?  "Analog safety system" (with a manual override, an actual lever that requires a human to crank it over to supply the torque to undo what it's done)

Pretty much what I was thinking...
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: Bret on April 07, 2011, 08:27:16 PM
 ;D
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: gordonstrong on April 07, 2011, 08:31:04 PM
"Brevity is the soul of wit." -- Shakespeare

(And here I thought it was coriander)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: maxieboy on April 07, 2011, 08:42:45 PM
"Brevity is the soul of wit." -- Shakespeare

(And here I thought it was coriander)

 ;D
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: hopfenundmalz on April 08, 2011, 01:22:16 AM
Way back when, I learned to solve DEQ's on Philbrick Analog computers.  Those were all analog.  Really, they were.

Not so long ago, a very good engineer was talking about doing somethign in Matlab/Simulink.  I said here is how you set up the equations, that is easy.  He looked at me and said where did you learn this?  I said, "Well, this was how we learned it back in the day.  The equations have not changed much." He had worked with me often, said OK, and went with it.  Then others were asking him how he got the answer so quick.   ;)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bluesman on April 08, 2011, 01:37:15 AM
Didn't say it was better, but that age doesn't necessarily mean it's inferior. Analog devices have some advantages. Digital devices have a tendency to lock up with power surges, but analog devices will normally recover quickly.

Analog devices tend to be superior in pretty much all settings except for cost-wise and inherently digital applications.  Computers MUST be digital, they COMPUTE s***.  Your car stereo?  You'd be far better off exchanging that DSP for a real volume and tone stack, complete with pots and capacitors and all; though a 20-bit DAC instead of a 1-bit DAC would improve sound quality dramatically.

The big thing about digital devices is they rely on absolute precision, on programmatically predictable cases, and on stable and consistent internal states.  Digital devices in mechanical systems attempt to emulate analog devices without analog loss:  they measure a temperature or voltage or pressure at a source, encode it, then transmit it; while the analog device produces a voltage anomaly which decays in transmission (longer line, electromagnetic interference, etc affects the precise signal).

Let's take a car for an example, and let's take something simple:  a viscous coupling all-wheel differential system (the general design of a torsen works the same way, but with different mechanical basis).  This involves two axial differentials (front and rear) and a center differential. There's a lot of ways to do this, and depending on topology both analog and digital systems can do axle-first (rear left slips, rear right gets the power) or can do opposite-wheel (i.e. rear left slips, front right gets the power) power transfer.

In an analog system, you have a viscous coupling fluid which resists deformation.  Under light stress it flows, and under heavy stress it solidifies--think silly putty, which flows when under weak force (even under gravity pressure) yet bounces like a set elastic (or in some formulations, shatters like a hard ceramic) under sudden impulse.

When all four wheels are on the ground, the front and rear differentials each have internal connectors churning this fluid at the same rate, so no energy goes into deformation, and no solidification happens; similarly, the front and rear wheels turn at the same rate, and the center differential doesn't experience anything either.  Simple so far, right?

If the rear right wheel slips, though, the increase in power there puts more load on the visco-elastic fluid in the differential, which causes it to react by partially solidifying.  Because it's now somewhat solid, it cranks against the other wheel's drive shaft, transferring the power from the rear right wheel to the rear left.

So far, we're getting 100% power to the rear wheels, and 0% to the front.  What if both rear wheels slip?  Well then the power going to the rear spins them, and as they start to slip, power goes to the center differential (as its input shaft--from the rear input shaft--is no longer sending power directly to ground).  The rear wheels are limited from spin by the resistance encountered by the center differential, which starts to solidify from the force applied, turning the front wheels--power goes up front, and your car is now partially front wheel drive.  Only enough power will reach the rear wheels to drive them without slip; if they slip at all, then their power is not being transferred to the ground (no load on the system), and instead goes into the center diff, which transfers the load to the front wheels, which of course takes the power that is spinning the rear wheels into slipping off the rear wheels.

This system works.  It is 100% reliable as long as nothing outright breaks.  Even when it is unmaintained and starting to fail, it does what it's supposed to do.  When a sudden shock occurs (complete loss of traction to the rear wheels, etc), it quickly reacts because the laws of physics demand a certain mode of operation.

It is also not exactly 100% efficient.  Torsen is more efficient (and somewhat better, as it always transfers power:  25% of the power goes to each wheel by default, rather than being 100% RWD until the rear slips, meaning you can shove about twice as much power against the ground BEFORE any loss from slipping wheels occur).

Even more efficient:  slap slip sensors onto each wheel.  When a wheel is detected to be moving faster than another wheel while it's moving, it's slipping (and when it's detected to be moving slower when brakes are applied, it's slipping and your anti-lock brakes kick in and release the brake on that wheel).  Then the computer manipulates a differential to adjust how much power goes this way or that.

Obviously, the computer is trying to remove the "deformation of fluid" or "heat lost in gear system" part of the equation and instead use a less lossy gear system on a computer control to provide a more efficient differential.  Rather than laws of physics, just a bunch of calculations go into deciding how to shift the power and to what wheel.  This takes, in the end, actually less energy than using a viscous or even a Torsen system; and in fact, a profile can be produced that starts off with a more efficient layout (Torsen starts 25% to all wheels and redirects it when a wheel slips; but putting about 95% to the rear wheels is more efficient at launch) and even selects different layouts depending on vehicle dynamic rather than on "which wheel is slipping right now?"

The downside is, of course, if the digital electronics experience any minor flaw--decaying chips, decaying solder joints, localized static build-up, electromagnetic interference, anything--that changes a bit inside a chip, weird s*** happens.  If the computer detects input that doesn't make sense within its algorithms, weird s*** happens.  The system is not durable.  It can respond faster based on known data rather than natural physical consequences of physical events; it can make predictions and pre-adjustments and such; but it can't handle something going vaguely out of spec.

Analog devices are quite functionally superior.  They also quite often drain a decent amount of extra power out of the system, and use more costly or bulky components.  Don't take that to mean that analog is the answer to everything, though:  some things can [em]only[/em] be done digitally.  Analog computers include the Japanese Soroban--lies, it's digital!  Beads are set and cleared, and if they're dangling in between then you have a nonsense state (unless you assign a separate meaning to a "hanging bead" or whatnot).  Hand-written word is digital:  the letter "a" is an "a," and the vague variations in handwriting style and shape are meaningless (this is OTHER information, which is analog).

Plenty of systems to control nuclear reactors and the like are digital because they are computers, they compute things, and they are not a digital analog to an analog system that does something else.  It's not a simulation of an oil-filled chamber that's heated by the flow of pumped coolant and somehow measures whatever by expanding and flowing up a graduated tube or whatnot; servos are controlled by systems where we say, "Put this here," and we are sure as hell not going into the nuclear reactor core and pulling a lever to do it.  Lots of the automation is logic, not consequence (and thus, on a computer, logic implementing consequence).

If you really want to, maybe you can design systems for that; but are they academic "analog computers" or are they actually systems that are self-stabilizing?  Pebble bed reactors are self-stabilizing:  when they get hot, they become self-limiting, squelching the rate at which fission can even occur.  You take away all coolant and all safety systems and dump the raw fuel into a big, uncontrolled, exposed pile and it will get hot and stay that way; it will not experience runaway fission past its design specifications, and there aren't even any moving parts to control this.

Can you create a system around a BWR that does the exact same thing?  No computers, and when something is quite wrong it's okay because the entire design reacts to failure by shutting off elsewhere not because of fuses and triggers, but because some fluid was expanded or some metal flexed or whatever simply because everything was in proper operation, and when that went out of spec those things moved into a different, safe state by design as dictated by the laws of physics?  It would be a system where the computer controls activate something, but that something relies on pushing i.e. a fluid around that's only in place because the reactor is i.e. getting proper coolant flow, and when that flow fails something deforms from the heat (temporarily, like a metal that flexes and shifts hydraulic fluid around) and drops the coolant rods into the fuel even though the computer says to raise them and go full-on hot?  "Analog safety system" (with a manual override, an actual lever that requires a human to crank it over to supply the torque to undo what it's done)

There's only one thing I can say about all of this....

you get the AHA Forum award for the longest post ever on this forum.  ;)

but we still love you.  ;D
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: beveragebob on April 08, 2011, 04:08:25 AM
I was wondering when the movie is coming out.  ;)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on April 08, 2011, 05:49:54 AM
All I know is, at the power plant where I worked, the ease of operation and operational awareness went way up and forced outage rates went down with each control upgrade.  This was most pronounced when we retrofitted from analog - pneumatic controls to digital - electronic controls.  It was very handy and efficient to have the ability to bring up any system control screen at any control console throughout the power plant site.

Now I direct the operations of several well fields, RO water treatment plants, and distribution systems.  I can access the controls to these systems from anywhere I have broadband access for a laptop via SCADA.  Remote operation certainly has its hazards, but SCADA allows me to monitor operations and help my operators operate when they are onsite.  They are there to see if the equipment is actually doing what the controls indicate it is doing. This was not be possible with analog controls and the tone-telemetry systems that we upgraded from.   Unfortunately It also sometimes makes for working vacations.

Theory is fine, but operation-wise I'll take digital controls over analog any time.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on April 08, 2011, 06:00:22 AM
Wasn't there another quake and tsunami? Not a peep from the news I follow.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on April 08, 2011, 06:04:27 AM
Wasn't there another quake and tsunami? Not a peep from the news I follow.
A 7.5, no real tsunami.  I think there was a warning briefly and some areas were evacuated, but nothing materialized.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: Hokerer on April 08, 2011, 04:30:46 PM
Wasn't there another quake and tsunami? Not a peep from the news I follow.
A 7.5, no real tsunami.  I think there was a warning briefly and some areas were evacuated, but nothing materialized.

They're blaming three deaths on it so something must have materialized...

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/04/08/japan.quake/index.html?hpt=T2 (http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/04/08/japan.quake/index.html?hpt=T2)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: tschmidlin on April 08, 2011, 04:33:33 PM
Wasn't there another quake and tsunami? Not a peep from the news I follow.
A 7.5, no real tsunami.  I think there was a warning briefly and some areas were evacuated, but nothing materialized.

They're blaming three deaths on it so something must have materialized...

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/04/08/japan.quake/index.html?hpt=T2 (http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/04/08/japan.quake/index.html?hpt=T2)
Sorry, I should have been more explicit - apparently no tsunami materialized, those deaths were caused by / coincided with the shaking.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: beveragebob on April 23, 2011, 03:35:49 AM
I wonder how many radiation deaths they'll cover up and group together with the quake/tsunami.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: 1vertical on November 21, 2011, 01:33:46 AM
This sure has gotten much quieter than the half life of decaying fuel  :-\
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: morticaixavier on November 21, 2011, 07:53:59 PM
This sure has gotten much quieter than the half life of decaying fuel  :-\

Just heard a quick blurb on NPR saying the authorities have removed rice from surrounding patties from the market. apparently this baby is still spewing radioactive matierials all over the place. bleh. This is the problem with living on the west coast, you get all of asia's crap on the wind.

course on the east coast you get all of america's crap so...
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: 1vertical on November 22, 2011, 05:41:09 AM
That is what I was getting at.  Keep pouring water on the hot stuff....that plume has
not been contained and something is downwind from that location....this is not pretty.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: euge on November 22, 2011, 07:44:07 AM
That is what I was getting at.  Keep pouring water on the hot stuff....that plume has
not been contained and something is downwind from that location....this is not pretty.

Yeah I even heard they were "repairing" the facility. What a load of crock. They need to take the whole place up into ships and drop it in the Marianas trench. Of course then Godzilla might actually be a reality...

That's my lame attempt at humor- anyway how do you fix a problem like that? Chernobyl is still sitting there leaking.

Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: hopfenundmalz on November 22, 2011, 01:38:08 PM
This sure has gotten much quieter than the half life of decaying fuel  :-\

course on the east coast you get all of america's crap so...

Are you familiar with the term "Downwinder"?  Used for those east of Nevada.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: morticaixavier on November 22, 2011, 04:56:34 PM
This sure has gotten much quieter than the half life of decaying fuel  :-\

course on the east coast you get all of america's crap so...

Are you familiar with the term "Downwinder"?  Used for those east of Nevada.

so does that mean that western nevada is the only safe place to live? maybe we should all move to poca-hell-hole with weaze. Then we wouldn't have to brew, we could just fill our growlers at his outdoor taps!
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: hopfenundmalz on November 22, 2011, 05:45:13 PM
This sure has gotten much quieter than the half life of decaying fuel  :-\

course on the east coast you get all of america's crap so...

Are you familiar with the term "Downwinder"?  Used for those east of Nevada.

so does that mean that western nevada is the only safe place to live? maybe we should all move to poca-hell-hole with weaze. Then we wouldn't have to brew, we could just fill our growlers at his outdoor taps!

That was a reference and term for when above ground tests were done at the Nevada Test Site.  We got plenty of domesticly produced fallout from those tests.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on November 24, 2011, 07:35:06 AM
Hmmm...  Where do you suppose Bikinis came from then?
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: 1vertical on November 24, 2011, 02:59:52 PM
so does that mean that western nevada is the only safe place to live? maybe we should all move to poca-hell-hole with weaze. Then we wouldn't have to brew, we could just fill our growlers at his outdoor taps!

Read about the 1st ever fatal reactor accident that happened near weazletoe....
http://www.radiationworks.com/accidents.htm  (http://www.radiationworks.com/accidents.htm)

http://www.radiationworks.com/photos/sl1reactor10.htm  (http://www.radiationworks.com/photos/sl1reactor10.htm)

Ya might want to re-think that
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: bo on November 24, 2011, 03:16:09 PM
Hmmm...  Where do you suppose Bikinis came from then?

Bikinis came from nuclear fallout??? I didn't know that.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on November 24, 2011, 05:10:28 PM
Hmmm...  Where do you suppose Bikinis came from then?

Bikinis came from nuclear fallout??? I didn't know that.

Bikini became nuclear fallout.

Bikini Atoll (http://bikiniatoll.com)
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: rabid_dingo on November 25, 2011, 07:15:35 AM
That is what I was getting at.  Keep pouring water on the hot stuff....that plume has
not been contained and something is downwind from that location....this is not pretty.

Yeah I even heard they were "repairing" the facility. What a load of crock. They need to take the whole place up into ships and drop it in the Marianas trench. Of course then Godzilla might actually be a reality...

That's my lame attempt at humor- anyway how do you fix a problem like that? Chernobyl is still sitting there leaking.


Oddly enough, my BIL, is tied directly with the clean-up design of the Daiichi(sp) plant. I find it interesting that I happen to catch up on the AHA forum the night that I ask him about the progress. He does some design work for the process and what needs to be done. There is a lot of truth to slow, bureaucratic progress. But there is a significant difference to the "fuel rods" used in Chernobyl vs. Dai ichi. Primarily, Chernobyl used a peletized form of fuel, when it blew it spewed pellets all over the USSR and what not. Japan on the other hand used more clay-rod technology. Less spewed up and about.

*** This is not an argument against a leak***

Just that there was less containment in the USSR vs. Japan...

But Chernobyl aside, I asked and the most damaged reactors do have a superstructure like Chernobyl. But they are still looking at cleaning up more than that and "cleaning up" a potential "eye-sore"

Just sayin...
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on November 25, 2011, 08:40:29 AM
Isn't the main difference between the two being the Soviet designed reactor is a graphite moderated reactor and the Japanese (American) designed reactor is a light water moderated reactor?

Not to mention the substantially more robust containment on the Japanese reactors...

Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: 1vertical on November 25, 2011, 03:16:07 PM
Thanks rabid_dingo coming from you, I consider that sound secondhand info.
Still, just to fix an eye sore and not contain the source seems weird.  Rebuild
and repair in the same location seems ludicrous. But then we just had
earthquakes in Oklahoma.... :-\
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: a10t2 on November 25, 2011, 04:09:54 PM
Japan on the other hand used more clay-rod technology. Less spewed up and about.

Never heard of it. Maybe "clad-rod"? The uranium oxide pellets are ceramic (the same as the RBMK/Chernobyl fuel pellets), but clays are organic.

Not that it's really essential to the point. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't further out of touch with the industry than I thought.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: 1vertical on November 25, 2011, 04:21:13 PM
Japan on the other hand used more clay-rod technology. Less spewed up and about.

Never heard of it. Maybe "clad-rod"? The uranium oxide pellets are ceramic (the same as the RBMK/Chernobyl fuel pellets), but clays are organic.

Not that it's really essential to the point. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't further out of touch with the industry than I thought.
Right at the edge of my ability to comprehend was a bit of good reading on Wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_reactor  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_reactor)
More than I ever needed to know about the subject.......
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: rabid_dingo on November 26, 2011, 04:46:31 AM
Thanks rabid_dingo coming from you, I consider that sound secondhand info.
Still, just to fix an eye sore and not contain the source seems weird.  Rebuild
and repair in the same location seems ludicrous. But then we just had
earthquakes in Oklahoma.... :-\

What I meant was fixing the containment that has become the eye sore not fixing a broken plant. Does that
make sense? They want to clean, fix and contain. Not just create a concrete encasement eyesore...
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on November 26, 2011, 06:36:42 AM
Thanks rabid_dingo coming from you, I consider that sound secondhand info.
Still, just to fix an eye sore and not contain the source seems weird.  Rebuild
and repair in the same location seems ludicrous. But then we just had
earthquakes in Oklahoma.... :-\

What I meant was fixing the containment that has become the eye sore not fixing a broken plant. Does that
make sense? They want to clean, fix and contain. Not just create a concrete encasement eyesore...

They are Japanese.
Title: Re: Japan quake
Post by: punatic on March 11, 2012, 08:38:24 AM
A year ago this was happening.   (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-s9DasYkxSQ)

Can you imagine experiencing a magnitude 9 earthquake and then watching this happen (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovGtbp9upz0) to your home town?