PDA

View Full Version : Japan, Earthquakes, and Radiation.



NEOWatcher
2007-Jul-16, 03:21 PM
The developing situation in Japan does not sound very good, but there is one thing that really got on my nerves (CNN of course, so no big surprise)

Radioactive leak reported at nuke plant (http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/07/16/japan.quake.ap/index.html)
OMG:eek: run around in circles and panic.

Anyway, I'm sure there are major problems with the earthquake, and there are probably some aspects of the nuke plant issues that are cause for concern. But the presentation of this leak is way over the top... Or, at least, not presented well enough to know what the heck they are talking about.


The plant leaked about a half-gallon of water [...] Uchino said the water contained a tiny amount of radioactive material -- a billionth of the guideline under Japanese law -- and is believed to have flushed into the Sea of Japan.

A billionth of the guideline of what? Getting an x-ray? General exposure at the plant? A distance from the plant? Amount of leakage? Over what time period?

I think they can pick on some other aspects of this whole story.

In fact, when I saw the developing story banner about the second quake, I didn't hear about the first one, and couldn't find the story about it. So, I gave up, and read the nuke story, and found the earthquake.

Captain Kidd
2007-Jul-16, 04:52 PM
My guess would be they mean physical material that is radioactive. As in some flakes of metal or other particulates that was suspended in the water.

sts60
2007-Jul-16, 05:07 PM
We'll have to wait for the details, but the presentation is enormously irritating - paragraphs about the leaking nuclear plant!, emitting some tiny amount of radioactivity, before the coverage of seven people being killed by the earthquake, an unspecified larger number injured, and who knows how many homeless.

Of course, they did find someone to carp about the plant - since there was no damage to the reactor itself, they had to gripe about how long it took to put out a transformer fire.

Idiots.

Maksutov
2007-Jul-16, 05:17 PM
I know what really happened.

While idling about in the plant's press room, one of the reporters (while waiving hands) bumped against a smoke detector, causing it to fall to the floor, thus releasing <35 kBq of Americium 241, enough to be worthy of a panicky news story.

Radiation released!

One wonders about the impact of this story on those reading it while flying at 40,000 feet...

NEOWatcher
2007-Jul-16, 05:21 PM
We'll have to wait for the details, but the presentation is enormously irritating - paragraphs about the leaking nuclear plant!, emitting some tiny amount of radioactivity
And now, it is suddenly 315 gallons (but the same amount of radioactivity)

Hey; since it's now in the Sea of Japan...we can say billions of gallons of contaminated water.


, before the coverage of seven people being killed by the earthquake, an unspecified larger number injured, and who knows how many homeless.
Gee, no wonder "Prime Minister Shinzo Abe -- whose ruling party is trailing in the polls -- interrupted a campaign stop in southern Japan for upcoming parliamentary elections"


... they had to gripe about how long it took to put out a transformer fire.
Yep; it's not like the emergency crews had anything else to be concerned about. [he says sardonically]

Lurker
2007-Jul-16, 05:29 PM
Uchino said the water contained a tiny amount of radioactive material -- a billionth of the guideline under Japanese law -- and is believed to have flushed into the Sea of Japan.

Oh gods!!! Head for the hills!! Its the end of civilization as we know it!! :eek:

Demigrog
2007-Jul-16, 06:41 PM
The CNN article is saying 315 gallons, though that is the only place I've seen that number. 1.5L seems to be the real number.

Noclevername
2007-Jul-16, 07:19 PM
Hey; since it's now in the Sea of Japan...we can say billions of gallons of contaminated water.

Homeopathic radioactives.

NEOWatcher
2007-Jul-16, 07:52 PM
The CNN article is saying 315 gallons, though that is the only place I've seen that number. 1.5L seems to be the real number.
It appears to me that 315 gallons were spilled, but 1.5L made it out of the system while the rest was contained.

But; maybe they're not the same since it was a U.S. system spill, but a metric leak. :lol:

EricM407
2007-Jul-16, 08:15 PM
The developing situation in Japan does not sound very good, but there is one thing that really got on my nerves (CNN of course, so no big surprise)

It's actually an AP story and looks to be slightly edited to tone down the nuclear plant aspect, if anything. There's a link to the original at http://www.ap.org/.

Glom
2007-Jul-16, 08:25 PM
Using my trusty unit convertor, which I made myself, 1.5L equates to 0.4 US gal, 5% of a cubic foot and less than 1% of a barrel.

I shall note this on my blog.

Demigrog
2007-Jul-16, 08:31 PM
It appears to me that 315 gallons were spilled, but 1.5L made it out of the system while the rest was contained.

But; maybe they're not the same since it was a U.S. system spill, but a metric leak. :lol:

At this point I'm speculating wildly, but I think it was probably a leak between the condenser and the cooling water. I can't think of any other way that feedwater could have gotten out into the ocean in an ABWR. The 1.5L is probably the slightly radioactive feedwater that leaked into the cooling water, and 315 gallons is probably the volume of cooling water affected.

Alternately, it could have nothing to do with the actual reactor and instead be part of a Balance of Plant system or be a side effect of partial disassembly--the unit was down for maintenance at the time of the quake.

Neither number is really relevant when discussing the danger of the leak, but I'm not surprised CNN latched onto the bigger one. I'm sure the anti-nuclear lobby with milk this for all it is worth.

Glom
2007-Jul-16, 08:33 PM
Do we yet know where the water originated? Spent fuel storage pools? RCS loop?

Captain Kidd
2007-Jul-16, 09:08 PM
One article says a tank, mayhaps a Refueling Water Storage Tank.

matthewota
2007-Jul-17, 04:59 AM
The media's reaction to the radiation story is so typical. It is why I hold journalists in such low regard, as I do for actors and Hollywood people.

When journalists get stories wrong on a topic that you know a lot about, it makes you question the stories they write on topics that you are not familiar with. As a result, I view all journalists as suspect, especially the ones on Local TV news. I have been personally misrepresented and misquoted by the print media, too.

As for actors and actresses, why the general public holds them in such high regard is a real mystery to me. They are just talented at faking emotions, and are grossly overpaid for doing it.

Scientists and educators are much more respectable.

Matthew Ota

NEOWatcher
2007-Jul-17, 12:01 PM
It's actually an AP story and looks to be slightly edited to tone down the nuclear plant aspect, if anything. There's a link to the original at http://www.ap.org/.
Yes; I'm losing my respect for them also.
But; Although the story was mostly the nuke stuff, there was other information about the quake. The headline could have included the word "quake" even if they were concentrating on the radioctive spill. That's CNNs responsibility.
If you noticed in my OP, my original goal was to find quake information, and I couldn't find any reference to it until I read the article. That's what started my beef... CNN bad headline.

EricM407
2007-Jul-17, 01:09 PM
Yes; I'm losing my respect for them also.

Reuters headline: Japan quake stirs nuclear fears, displaces thousands
AFP headline: Fears rise over nuclear plant after Japan quake

I'm guessing those three pretty much account for all the original reporting. Everybody else I looked at was just carrying one of their feeds.


But; Although the story was mostly the nuke stuff, there was other information about the quake. The headline could have included the word "quake" even if they were concentrating on the radioctive spill. That's CNNs responsibility.
If you noticed in my OP, my original goal was to find quake information, and I couldn't find any reference to it until I read the article.

I believe the "breaking news" aspect of the article was the nuclear plant spill, because the utility company delayed reporting the leak for some time after the quake. The other general information about the quake was probably included from an earlier article, which you missed.


That's what started my beef... CNN bad headline.

Bad, why? Is there something unfactual in there? Did they do something to sensationalize things? It looks like they ran AP's headline to me, and the article wasn't even prominently featured at their site.

TBH, this entire thread seems like a big deal made out of nothing to me.

NEOWatcher
2007-Jul-17, 03:32 PM
Reuters headline: Japan quake stirs nuclear fears, displaces thousands
AFP headline: Fears rise over nuclear plant after Japan quake

Note the word quake and Japan in those...

I believe the "breaking news" aspect of the article was the nuclear plant spill
Yes; I agree, but...

The other general information about the quake was probably included from an earlier article, which you missed.
I searched for the article, it's possible I missed it, but I doubt it because the quake happened after most of the stories that were showing at the time.

Bad, why? Is there something unfactual in there?
No; but you can use facts in ways that are very misleading by changing the emphasis of a story.

Did they do something to sensationalize things?
Yes; from the article, it seemed like a minor incident compared with the entire story that was presented in the article.

It looks like they ran AP's headline to me, and the article wasn't even prominently featured at their site.

So, the cherry picking and organization of CNN are off the hook because thier source had it better organized or featured or whatever?
Sorry; But I don't care what AP did with the story, they were not the ones presenting it to me.

TBH, this entire thread seems like a big deal made out of nothing to me.
Not in itself, but the cumulative effects of the trend is.

Anyway; I was hoping to shed some light on what happened... Did you notice all the questions in the OP? I probably would not have posted if I didn't have these questions. Although; I do admit it did come out rather strongly opinionated.

Demigrog
2007-Jul-17, 04:03 PM
Part of the problem is the evolving nature of these online news articles. It is interesting to hit refresh on breaking news every now and then, and watch as the "facts" change.

Another part of the problem is the total lack of technical detail in news coverage. You'd think somebody might have at least asked what part of the reactor leaked, but I guess the details are not important. Details might accidentally alleviate people's fears, and that doesn't help ratings.

I'm also disgusted at the latest round of "new leak" stories about the containers that fell over. They fell over inside containment, so they did not leak. Grrr...

Argos
2007-Jul-17, 04:15 PM
This is bad news for countries planning further nuclear power plants. The media down here is making a fuzz, one week after the gubmintīs announcement of 8 new plants.

NEOWatcher
2007-Jul-17, 04:23 PM
I'm also disgusted at the latest round of "new leak" stories about the containers that fell over. They fell over inside containment, so they did not leak. Grrr...
Leaks? Gee, according to our local news (http://www.wkyc.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=71232), they are links. :rolleyes:

I wonder how many of these "minor" incidents occur on a daily basis.


Details might accidentally alleviate people's fears, and that doesn't help ratings.
And it's very difficult to blame somebody for missing details. You would have to show they intentionally left things out.

Kelfazin
2007-Jul-17, 04:27 PM
My first reaction when I read the article was "oh great, now the anti-nuke people are gonna go ballistic with their 'See!! we told you they were bad omg!!11!' stuff"

Stuart van Onselen
2007-Jul-17, 05:13 PM
Homeopathic radioactives.

OMG! Diluted by the entire Sea of Japan, that's at least 10,000x! Everyone within 100 miles of the SoJ has got but days to live!

:lol:

I actually laughed out loud when I read that. Thanks! :)

Noclevername
2007-Jul-17, 06:30 PM
I actually laughed out loud when I read that. Thanks! :)


:D

I figure, if the "news" media's into scaring their readers with poorly understood pseudoscience, might as well run with it!

novaderrik
2007-Jul-17, 07:16 PM
is there maybe a new Godzilla movie coming out over there pretty soon?
that would explain why they are latching onto the radioactive aspects of all of this. of course, the media is totally unbiased and would never, ever do anything like that, would they?

Maksutov
2007-Jul-17, 08:54 PM
Based on the dilution levels, it will be Homeopathic-Godzilla!

Maksutov
2007-Jul-17, 08:58 PM
Leaks? Gee, according to our local news (http://www.wkyc.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=71232), they are links. :rolleyes:

I wonder how many of these "minor" incidents occur on a daily basis.


And it's very difficult to blame somebody for missing details. You would have to show they intentionally left things out.Thanks for the leak to that "news story". That was hilarious.

I was really impressed by the way they segued from a discussion of the size of plant right into how many deaths there have been so far, without any mention of the causes of the deaths. Subtle, eh?

Sorry about all the misfortunes, but consider where Japan is tectonically.

Demigrog
2007-Jul-17, 09:36 PM
What would we do without translation software? :) TEPCO's japanese website has some useful information. Apparently the leak in unit #6 occurred on the third floor of the "machine reactor building", which is as close as the translator can get to English but doesn't tell me much. There was 0.6L leaked on the third floor at 2.8x10^2 Becquerel, and 0.9L leaked onto the "medium 3 floors" at 1.6x10^4 Becquerel. TEPCO is estimating 1.5 m^3 of water at 6x10^4 Becquerel as the total leak.

Without knowing the precise isotopes in the water I can't calculate an effective dose equivalent, but for Uranium 238 or Cobalt 60, it'd be about 0.2 rem, and most other isotopes are lower than that.

So, that would be about 0.2 rem exposure if you drank it all. Considering it is now in the Sea of Japan, I'm not particularly worried.

EricM407
2007-Jul-18, 01:43 AM
Note the word quake and Japan in those...

Okay. This is the CNN headline: Japanese nuke plant leaked after earthquake

So I'm sorry for being dense, but what exactly is your point? It looks like the same headline everybody ran with to me.


I searched for the article, it's possible I missed it, but I doubt it because the quake happened after most of the stories that were showing at the time.

I don't really know what you mean by that, but the spill was reported (by the utility and by the news organizations) several hours after the quake. That information is in the article you linked. If you had been looking for quake news shortly after the quake, you would've seen just what you expected in all of the articles. But once there was more news to put in the article, they updated/combined everything. I think most news organizations on the web operate this way.


No; but you can use facts in ways that are very misleading by changing the emphasis of a story.

And they did this how? They used an unedited article from the AP with essentially the same headline that every other news organization did.

I watched CNN for an hour or so yesterday and again this morning and saw nothing about this, so if they were trying to be sensational or strike nuclear fear into us, they did a poor job of it.


So, the cherry picking

Uh, what cherry picking?


Anyway; I was hoping to shed some light on what happened... Did you notice all the questions in the OP?

Did you notice that the statement you (and others here) had questions about came straight from a utility exec? If you have a problem with the lack of clarity or the constantly shifting story, maybe you should look at where the story is coming from. It's not like AP, or Reuters or anybody else was allowed to send their people into this nuke plant to check up on things first hand. They're depending on the people who run the thing to tell them what happened.

Glom
2007-Jul-18, 07:12 AM
So was this water leaked from LLW storage drums then?

Launch window
2007-Jul-18, 07:27 AM
It's not unusual for TEPCO they are a scandalous company, I worked over in that country some years ago when they basically poisoned the people of a community not to far from where I was working.

The incompetence and scandals aren't unique to TEPCO, a lot of other companies are cutting costs and safety. Thousands of people at Tokaimura in Ibaraki were forced indoors and in 97 the had some other bad incidents. The JCO plant at Tokai also has a bad record causes bad accidents has little regulation and never gets slapped authorities. Shika hatsudensho also had a number of accidents but the company was good at covering it up. A lot of Japanese were forced into hospital after a self-sustaining fission chain reaction.

Thankfully nothing has gone 'Chernobyl' yet, it would be especially bad in the Tokyo region. With a metropolitan population of over 30 million people you'd be talking about a large number of deaths plus because Japan is a big player in production cars, electronic products et cetera there is a chance of a wider economic impact on the world economy.

Glom
2007-Jul-18, 07:45 AM
The BBC love homeopathy, being the chattering class luvvies that they are. They are loving this (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/6903146.stm) almost as much as launch window is.

Glom
2007-Jul-18, 12:00 PM
I think we have this homeopathy wrong. If we go by the tenets of homeopathy, then Sea of Japan is now the cure for all radiation induced diseases. It is a Sea of Life. Peopel will make pilgrimages to the Holy Waters. In fact, we could say it was the hand of God, who tipped over those canisters to create his Waters of Creation.

NEOWatcher
2007-Jul-18, 12:16 PM
Okay. This is the CNN headline: Japanese nuke plant leaked after earthquake.
So I'm sorry for being dense, but what exactly is your point? It looks like the same headline everybody ran with to me.

Maybe now it is, but it wasn't when I wrote the OP. It was exactly as I quoted.

I don't really know what you mean by that...
Well; I see my opinions will just create debate, so I'll let you be befuddled.

And they did this how? They used an unedited article from the AP with essentially the same headline that every other news organization did.
This is not a black and white, wrong or right issue. It is an issue of protrayal, interpretation and emotion. The headline indicated a major problem, which it was not. It's my opinion and induced an image to me.

I watched CNN for an hour or so yesterday and again this morning and saw nothing about this...
I am discussing the headline. What others did, or what CNN did at other times or how they did it in the story are not what I'm saying. Yes; I use many sources just because of this type of situation.

Please; I had a beef, I got it out, it's only my opinion. It's not worth debating. You had some good points, but we will never be able to convince each other.

There are others here posting good information about the spill, and generally what goes on at a plant. How about we focus on that.

Demigrog
2007-Jul-18, 06:07 PM
tipped over those canisters to create his Waters of Creation.

The tipped canisters are a separate incident from the water leak, and as far as I have read there was no radioactive material from the canisters that escaped from containment. Tepco has a PDF file (http://www.tepco.co.jp/cc/press/betu07_j/images/070718a.pdf) on their website with a complete list of everything they know so far. Unfortunately, they disabled copy-paste from the PDF so I can't translate it without retyping it all--in Japanese. Anyone here read Japanese and want to translate? :)

Captain Kidd
2007-Jul-18, 06:46 PM
Let's see...
Title is ...
Niigataken over center field open sea jishinhassei by means of kashiwazaki kariwa nuclear power station of omona plant situation

top left is:
plant information (jishinhassei afterwards before plant halt)

top right is:
* storage ghostly dead leaf today blank natural defences wo enforcement
* radioactive material load kakawa bend over event : area fill

Well, that didn't make much sense. Obviously I'm not translating this. :) I just figured out how to unlock the PDF for copy/paste. ;)

First line is:
. second-hand fuel pool of change base by means of untenjou limit of deviation and return. 7 moon 16 day at notice corner (I'd say that's suppose to be 7 month 16 day, or 7/16.)

Edit: Wrong blasted button.

Well, for what I've translated so far, it's a long grocery list of what they're inspecting and working on and it'll put you to sleep. Weld inspection status, electrical conduit inspection, an "Ocean fart discharge", etc. Looks very similar to ye ole outage status report.

Demigrog
2007-Jul-18, 07:21 PM
Well, for what I've translated so far, it's a long grocery list of what they're inspecting and working on and it'll put you to sleep. Weld inspection status, electrical conduit inspection, an "Ocean fart discharge", etc. Looks very similar to ye ole outage status report.

Exactly, yet that list is the source of the "Quake causes 50 problems at nuclear plant" headline that was going around yesterday. All of the problems are minor and pretty much what the designers intended after a large earthquake, yet the headline writer is clearly just looking for a big scary number. It wouldn't be so bad if the article itself at least gave the details necessary to put the "50 problems" in perspective, but there is not really any more information in them than the headline.

BTW, how do you unlock the PDF? :) Also, what translator are you using? Google's was doing a little better than that for me.

Jens
2007-Jul-19, 01:12 AM
Let's see...
Title is ...
Niigataken over center field open sea jishinhassei by means of kashiwazaki kariwa nuclear power station of omona plant situation


That's pretty funny. I can guess most of it, though. the "over center field open sea" is just the name of the earthquake in Japanese. "Jishin hassei" means "earthquake event". And "omona" means "serious".

So I think it means "Serious situation at Kashiwazaki Kariwa nuclear power plant station due to occurrence of earthquake off coast of Niigata Prefecture."

Note: I didn't look at the PDF. I'm just guess translating.

Jens
2007-Jul-19, 01:15 AM
And by the way, people here are taking it pretty seriously, which I think is why the media has highlighted that part of the story. Earthquakes are not really big stories unless something like this happens. And a lot of people, as mentioned by Launch window, are suspicious of the electric companies, and people always wonder, "is it really safe to have nuclear power plants in a country that is so earthquake prone?"

So I guess the media can be faulted for being sensationalistic about it. But in a sense it's responding to what people want from the media, I think.

Captain Kidd
2007-Jul-19, 02:47 AM
I searched for online translators, partway through I noticed that it was associated with an anime fan site, go figure. Didn't think of using Google to translate it.

I also searched for "unlock pdf" and came across a site that does it for you.

Dutch
2007-Jul-19, 07:50 AM
How would you express a Hirhoshima - Nagasaki echo without dropping a fat boy, with a sense for symbolism?

powerful typhoon, strong earthquake, nuclear leak

I expected this echo as mentioned on the timeline weeks ago....again

Kelfazin
2007-Jul-19, 03:18 PM
They were talking about this reactor on NPR this morning because they have apparently discovered a new leak at the plant. They were interviewing Adrian Heymer, senior director at the Nuclear Energy Institute (http://www.nei.org/). (you can listen to the interview here (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12091969)). The interviewer (Linda Wertheimer) was trying to make the accident sound severe, like they do, by saying the plant suffered significant damage because it was built on top of a fault line, but I liked Heymers response.

Wertheimer: In fact this plant was built on top of a fault line, and a 6.8 earthquake did a tremendous amount of damage.
Heymer: I don't think it did a whole lot of damage to the plant. When you look at the results coming out of Japan, and I've only seen the news releases, in fact the plant withstood the earthquake very well. There was some spillage from a fuel pole (pool?), a small amount, and a few drums fell over and opened. But as regards to the rest of the plant, everything operated as it should be.

This forced Wertheimer to make comments about leaving nuclear waste lying around instead.

All in all, I like NPR because they at least get on the phone with people that know what they're talking about instead of inventing "facts" and sensationalising endlessly.

Jim
2007-Jul-19, 05:15 PM
Dutch, do not discuss your ATM concepts in this thread. Consider this a warning.