Tag Archives: Tokyo

Fukushima Nuclear Cleanup Plans Hinge on Unknowns

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/15/world/asia/15cleanup.html?_r=1&ref=asia

Hiroko Tabuchi, New York Times, April 14, 2011

TOKYO  Even before the troubled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear
plant has been brought under control, two conglomerates vying
for contracts in an eventual cleanup are estimating that the effort
could take 10 years — or 30.

Nuclear Company to Compensate Evacuees in Japan (April 16, 2011)

The widely divergent outlooks underscore the basic uncertainties
clouding any forecast for Fukushima. It is far from clear when the
cooling system will be restored and radiation emission halted; how
soon workers can access some parts of the plant; and how bad the
damage to the reactors, their fuel and nearby stored fuel turns out
to be. The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission has
warned that at least one reactor’s fuel may even have leaked out
of the reactor pressure vessel.

A global team led by Hitachi said Thursday that it would take at least
three decades to return the site to what engineers refer to as a “green
field” state, meaning within legal limits of radiation for any residents.
Toshiba, Japan’s biggest supplier of nuclear reactors, said it could
take as little as 10 years.

Both companies have large nuclear-related businesses and appear
to be eager to speak about endgame possibilities for a crisis that has
heightened global public mistrust of nuclear power. Billions of dollars
are likely to be at stake in the cleanup, which could help Hitachi and
Toshiba improve their bottom lines. The two said last week that annual
profits would fall short of their forecasts because of the widespread
disruptions in production and supply chains caused by the disaster.

At a roundtable with reporters on Thursday, Toshiba’s chief executive,
Norio Sasaki, wielded an inch-thick proposal outlining the dismantlement
plan submitted to the plant’s operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company,
this month. Hitachi has presented a competing plan.

The scale and complexity of the challenge are unprecedented. No
nuclear reactor has ever been fully decommissioned in Japan, let
alone the four certain to be dismantled at Fukushima Daiichi after
being flooded with seawater to avert meltdowns and after suffering
explosions and other damage. The final fates of the two other reactors
there have not been announced, but they, too, may need to be
decommissioned.

The 1979 accident at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania involved just
one reactor, and though there was a partial meltdown of the nuclear
fuel rods, the chamber holding them did not rupture. The cleanup there
still took 14 years and cost about $1 billion. (Two reactors that continue
to operate at the site are set to be decommissioned in 2014.)

Recovery from the 1986 disaster at Chernobyl in Ukraine, meanwhile,
is an example engineers are not eager to follow. Following explosions
and a fire that sent huge radioactive plumes into the atmosphere,
workers covered the remains of the reactor with sand and lead and
eventually entombed it with concrete to halt the release of radiation.
The concrete coffin still remains at Chernobyl, and the area is
uninhabitable.

For now, workers in Japan are still trying to stem leaks of highly
radioactive water from the plant even as they add to the flow by
continuing to pump in water — now fresh, not saltwater. They are also
racing to revive the contained cooling systems that circulate water and
do not bleed contaminants.

But serious challenges remain, including what Japan’s nuclear regulator
said Thursday were rising temperatures at one of the units, as well as
a series of strong aftershocks. Later, Hidehiko Nishiyama, the deputy
director general of Japan’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, said
the situation at the plant remained “difficult.”

Still, Toshiba’s engineers expect the plant to stabilize “in several
months,” Mr. Sasaki said, and for full-scale cooling to resume. It
would be five years before engineers would be able to open the
pressure vessels to remove the nuclear fuel, he said, and dismantling
the reactors and cleaning up radiation at the plant would take at least
another five years.

Toshiba’s team includes engineers from Westinghouse, whose majority
owner is Toshiba, and the Babcock & Wilcox Company, an energy
technology and services company that handles the disposal of
hazardous materials. The two companies helped shut down the
damaged reactor at Three Mile Island.

A Hitachi spokesman in Tokyo, Yuichi Izumisawa, said that the 10-year
projection was overly optimistic. He said that Hitachi’s engineers
expected it to take that long just to remove the nuclear fuel rods from
the plant and place them in casks to transport to a safe storage facility.

Only then can the dismantling of the plant’s structures begin, he said,
followed by the cleanup of the remaining radiation.

Hitachi, the country’s second biggest supplier of reactors, has a team
of 50 experts working on its dismantling plan. It has a joint nuclear
venture with General Electric and is also working with the American
nuclear operator Exelon and Bechtel, an engineering company.

“You basically need to dismantle the plant from the inside, and the
inside is still very radioactive,” Mr. Izumisawa said. “At Hitachi, we are
baffled over what kind of technology would allow everything to be
finished in 10 years.”

Tetsuo Matsumoto, a professor of nuclear engineering at Tokyo City
University, said that how long the decommissioning process would take
depended heavily on the state of the nuclear fuel.

“Will it still be shaped like rods? Or will it have melted and collapsed
into a big mass?” he said. “It could be 10 years or it could be 30. You
just won’t know until you open up the reactor.”

Ken Ijichi contributed reporting.

137 total views, no views today

Rate this post

Fukushima – a 1 percent risk is 100 percent too high

Source of article: http://www.leadershiponline.co.za/articles/other/1244-fukushima-disaster

A one percent risk, 100 percent too high

As news of the nuclear disaster at Fukushima in Japan in the wake of the earthquake and tsunami of March 11 disappears from the front pages of the newspapers, some experts warn that the threats from the power plant can persist indefinitely, with one saying the mess cannot be cleaned up and “no-one will live in that area again for dozens or maybe hundreds of years.”

The New York Times last week reported that United States engineers sent to help with the crisis in are warning that the troubled nuclear plant is facing an array of fresh threats that could persist indefinitely. In some cases these threats are expected to increase as a result of the very measures being taken to keep the plant stable, according to a confidential assessment prepared by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

In the new threats cited in the assessment, dated March 26, are the mounting stresses placed on the containment structures as they fill with radioactive cooling water, making them more vulnerable to rupture in one of the aftershocks rattling the site.

“Among other problems, the document raises new questions about whether pouring water on nuclear fuel in the absence of functioning cooling systems can be sustained indefinitely. Experts have said the Japanese need to continue to keep the fuel cool for many months until the plant can be stabilised, but there is growing awareness that the risk of pumping water on the fuel presents a whole new category of challenges that the nuclear industry is only beginning to comprehend,” the report states.

For instance a rise in the water level of the containment structures has often been depicted as a possible way to immerse and cool the fuel in the plant. The assessment, however, warns that “when flooding containment, consider the implications of water weight on the seismic capacity of the containment.

“Enormous stress is put on the containment structures by the rising water. “The more water in the structures, the more easily a large after-shock could rupture one of them.”

David A. Lochbaum, a nuclear engineer who worked on similar General Electric reactors to those used in Japan and who now directs the nuclear safety project at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said that the welter of problems at three separate reactors revealed in the document made a successful outcome even more uncertain.

“Even the best juggler in the world can get too many balls up in the air. They’ve got a lot of nasty things to negotiate in the future, and one missed step could make the situation much, much worse,” he told The New York Times.

In the meantime Dr. Tom Burnett is reported on the Information Clearing House site as saying: ”Fukushima is going to dwarf Chernobyl. The Japanese government has had a level 7 nuclear disaster going for almost a week but won’t admit it.

“The disaster is occurring in the opposite way to Chernobyl, which exploded and stopped the reaction. At Fukushima, the reactions are getting worse. I suspect three nuclear piles are in meltdown and we will probably get some of it.

“The Japanese are still talking about days or weeks to clean this up. That’s not true. They cannot clean it up. And no-one will live in that area again for dozens or maybe hundreds of years.”

Spreading contamination

Radioactive lodine 131 has recently been turning up in Tokyo’s drinking water some 240 kilometres south of Fukushima. It led to official advice not to give this water to babies.

This contamination emanated from the core of the reactors at the nuclear plant, signifying a partial meltdown, which could result in far greater contamination from other dangerous radionuclides, such as Ceasium 137, and possible plutonium contamination.

Unlike lodine 131, with a half-life of just over eight days, these long-lived radioactive substances were strongly implicated in clusters of childhood leukemia near the UK nuclear facilities at Sellafield and Aldermaston from the 1960s to the 1990s

After Fukushima

“As we pursue the abolition of nuclear weapons, we also need to phase out reliance on nuclear energy. Both are incompatible with our environmental and human security,” writes the director at the Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy, Rebecca Johnson on the openDemocracy website.

“There is still a long way to go before anyone can feel reassured that the disaster caused by Japan’s massive off-shore earthquake and tsunami will not result in an additional nuclear catastrophe,” she writes.

She argues that major natural disasters might not be very frequent, but they will keep happening when we least expect. So we need to factor that into our energy and security choices.

“It is an inherent problem of nuclear technologies that if something goes wrong the risks are much greater and may spread far more widely than with any other kind of weapon or energy,” she writes and adds: “… the Fukushima crisis demonstrates with chilling clarity, a nuclear crisis can turn into a long-term tragedy far more frightening for the world than the worst foreseeable oil spill, fire or fossil-fuel accident.

“Fifty years of nuclear operations have resulted in many near misses and several severe nuclear accidents that caused serious contamination outside the plant: Sellafield (UK, 1957), Three Mile Island (USA, 1979), Chernobyl (Soviet Union, 1986). And now Japan, which believed it had designed its many nuclear facilities well enough to withstand earthquakes,” she writes.

The bottom line is that by the very nature of the risks involved with nuclear technology, a one percent risk is 100 percent too high.

In an interview with Germany’s Der Spiegel peace activist and author Jonathan Schell warns that “our most dangerous illusion is that we can control nuclear energy” and comes to the conclusion that what has happened in Japan could mark a turning point for the world.

Source of article: http://www.leadershiponline.co.za/articles/other/1244-fukushima-disaster

18 total views, no views today

Rate this post
lazy-submarginal