iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Robert Alvarez

Robert Alvarez

Posted: March 13, 2011 04:45 PM

Meltdowns Grow More Likely at the Fukushima Reactors


Japan's government and nuclear industry, with assistance from the U.S. military, is in a desperate race to stave off multiple nuclear reactor meltdowns -- as well as potential fires in pools of spent fuel.

As of Sunday afternoon, more than 170,000 people have been evacuated near the reactor sites as radioactive releases have increased. The number of military emergency responders has jumped from 51,000 to 100,000. Officials now report a partial meltdown at Fukushima's Unit 1. Japanese media outlets are reporting that there may be a second one underway at Unit 3. People living nearby have been exposed to unknown levels of radiation, with some requiring medical attention.

Meanwhile, Unit 2 of the Tokai nuclear complex, which is near Kyodo and just 75 miles north of Tokyo, is reported to have a coolant pump failure. And Japan's nuclear safety agency has declared a state of emergency at the Onagawa nuclear power plant in northeastern Japan because of high radiation levels. Authorities are saying its three reactors are "under control."

The damage from the massive earthquake and the tsunamis that followed have profoundly damaged the reactor sites' infrastructure, leaving them without power and their electrical and piping systems destroyed. A hydrogen explosion Saturday at Unit 1 severely damaged the reactor building, blowing apart its roof.

The results of desperate efforts to divert seawater into the Unit 1 reactor are uncertain. A Japanese official reported that gauges don't appear to show the water level rising in the reactor vessel.

There remain a number of major uncertainties about the situation's stability and many questions about what might happen next. Along with the struggle to cool the reactors is the potential danger from an inability to cool Fukushima's spent nuclear fuel pools. They contain very large concentrations of radioactivity, can catch fire, and are in much more vulnerable buildings. The ponds, typically rectangular basins about 40 feet deep, are made of reinforced concrete walls four to five feet thick lined with stainless steel.

The boiling-water reactors at Fukushima -- 40-years-old and designed by General Electric -- have spent fuel pools several stories above ground adjacent to the top of the reactor. The hydrogen explosion may have blown off the roof covering the pool, as it's not under containment. The pool requires water circulation to remove decay heat. If this doesn't happen, the water will evaporate and possibly boil off. If a pool wall or support is compromised, then drainage is a concern. Once the water drops to around 5-6 feet above the assemblies, dose rates could be life-threatening near the reactor building. If significant drainage occurs, after several hours the zirconium cladding around the irradiated uranium could ignite.

Then all bets are off.

On average, spent fuel ponds hold five-to-ten times more long-lived radioactivity than a reactor core. Particularly worrisome is the large amount of cesium-137 in fuel ponds, which contain anywhere from 20 to 50 million curies of this dangerous radioactive isotope. With a half-life of 30 years, cesium-137 gives off highly penetrating radiation and is absorbed in the food chain as if it were potassium.

In comparison, the 1986 Chernobyl accident released about 40 percent of the reactor core's 6 million curies. A 1997 report for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) by Brookhaven National Laboratory also found that a severe pool fire could render about 188 square miles uninhabitable, cause as many as 28,000 cancer fatalities, and cost $59 billion in damage. A single spent fuel pond holds more cesium-137 than was deposited by all atmospheric nuclear weapons tests in the Northern Hemisphere combined. Earthquakes and acts of malice are considered to be the primary events that can cause a major loss of pool water.

In 2003, my colleagues and I published a study that indicated if a spent fuel pool were drained in the United States, a major release of cesium-137 from a pool fire could render an area uninhabitable greater than created by the Chernobyl accident. We recommended that spent fuel older than five years, about 75 percent of what's in U.S. spent fuel pools, be placed in dry hardened casks -- something Germany did 25 years ago. The NRC challenged our recommendation, which prompted Congress to request a review of this controversy by the National Academy of Sciences. In 2004, the Academy reported that a "partially or completely drained a spent fuel pool could lead to a propagating zirconium cladding fire and release large quantities of radioactive materials to the environment."

Given what's happening at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear complex, it's time for a serious review of what our nuclear safety authorities consider to be improbable, especially when it comes to reactors operating in earthquake zones.

 
Japan's government and nuclear industry, with assistance from the U.S. military, is in a desperate race to stave off multiple nuclear reactor meltdowns -- as well as potential fires in pools of spent ...
Japan's government and nuclear industry, with assistance from the U.S. military, is in a desperate race to stave off multiple nuclear reactor meltdowns -- as well as potential fires in pools of spent ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 98
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
05:56 PM on 03/16/2011
US NRC studies have estimated that many thousands of people living within 50 miles could die from the radiation released when spent fuel assemblies melt or catch on fire.
12:37 AM on 03/16/2011
i don't know what's more misleading: garbled halftruths issued by the japanese government (notorious for lying about nuclear accidents) or garbled alarmist american headlines. IF any of the reactors ever melted down, it happened the first day, when coolant levels dropped. for either 2, or 6 hours. biiiiig difference. but the reactors were only operating at about 10 percent when they scrammed, compared to 3 mile island's 97 percent. and their reactor vessels and containment vessels are still intact. the text of this article points out what is probably a much, much bigger risk: spent fuel rods catching fire and spewing cesium and iodine isotopes into the air. but the headline is grossly misleading. on purpose.

but so are japanese government reports which emphasize attempts at cooling reactors. for example, the rumor about using helicopters to dump coolant obviously applied to the spent rod storage pools, but the government, as usual, is deliberately obfuscating about that.

long story short: there's no reason to panic over what we're being told. if you want a reason to panic, panic over what we're not being told.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rbenjamin
Rule 5 rules
08:36 AM on 03/15/2011
From the NY Times:

"That fourth reactor had been turned off and was under refurbishment for months before the earthquake and tsunami hit the plant on Friday. But the plant contains spent fuel rods that were removed from the reactor, and experts guessed that the pool containing those rods had run dry, allowing the rods to overheat and catch fire. That is almost as dangerous as the fuel in working reactors melting down, because the spent fuel can also spew radioactivity into the atmosphere. "

It seems the ignition of the spent fuel rods is speculative, but likely. I'd say the "all bets are off" threshold has now been exceeded on a number of fronts.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alvdh1
01:17 AM on 03/16/2011
Unit 4 contains 20 years of spent fuel rods which contain far more radiation than the reactor cores of units 1-4 combined. These rods contain radioactive plutonium-239, strontium-90, cesium-137 and iodine-131. The spent fuel rods are outside of containment. The remaining reactors also contain spent fuel rods. This will be a scale 7 accident by tomorrow morning now that all 50 remaining workers from the plant have been evacuated. To sum this up, it is now a catastrophic event. To cheap to meter, safe and clean has gone out the door forever.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rbenjamin
Rule 5 rules
10:45 PM on 03/14/2011
According to MSNBC the spent fuel rods are now on fire at reactor 4. People are being warned to stay indoors out to a 30km radius to avoid acute radiation effects.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alvdh1
01:26 AM on 03/16/2011
All 50 of the remaining workers at the Fukushima nuclear plant have been evacuated according to the Japanese Government. This does not mean the facility is now on autopilot. By tomorrow morning, this will be a Chernobyl Scale 7 accident. There is no fluff here, just the reality of the situation escalating out of control.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wrabbitt
Soylent Green IS People.
10:33 PM on 03/14/2011
OK, one more time from the top, how safe are they? No one wants one next door, but, then no one wants a wind turbine next door either. As some one who grew up in the sight of a nuke plant, I'm glad we didn't have earth quakes, our heart goes out to Japan, this is a chance for still another Godzilla movie, (sorry about that.)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
johnminehan
07:04 PM on 03/14/2011
The only real disaster was Chernobyl, where the reactor was Navy surplus and there was no proper containment vessel. Even with a Three Mile Island-type melt down, the chance of any great harm is minimal.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
bbrecht
"pray for the dead, fight like hell for the liv
08:08 AM on 03/16/2011
I am sorry to say this appears to be a "real" disaster.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
johnminehan
12:11 PM on 03/16/2011
The biggest loss appears to be the reactors themselves. This is not 1986.
03:12 PM on 03/14/2011
The aim of nuclear power plants is to make plutonium 239 for atom bombs at tax payer and rate payer expense. The rest is PR to make the public accept the high cost and deadly, invisible health effects of nuclear power. Look what happened in Japan! Repeating old lies about nuclear power will not change the nature of permanent DNA damage caused by fission.

When Three Mile Island happened, the late Dr. Roy spent the summer university break to calculate and see if it is cost-effective to eliminate Pu 239 and other isotopes like Sr 90 and Cs 137. It could be done with existing infrastructure.The Roy Process became a worldwide AP news story. See Dr. Roy on Youtube.com. Put 'The Roy Process' in the Seach box.
03:41 PM on 03/14/2011
Moronic. We have more nuclear bombs than we will ever need. Nuclear power provides 20% of the electricity in US even though we no longer build them because people are afraid of them after years of sensationalism and paranoia. In Europe, France produces almost all of its power from nuclear reactors and then sells their excess energy to other countries afraid to build them. As for your health problems, fossil fuels kill far more people every year. Conspiracies do exist, but this one is ludicrous.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alvdh1
01:28 AM on 03/16/2011
John David Riser,

There is no basis whatsoever for your minimizations of what is going on at the Fukushima facility period.
03:11 PM on 03/14/2011
What.....,Me worry?
01:14 PM on 03/14/2011
It's a waste of time to blame "republicans" for nuclear problems or any other societal catastrophes. It's EVERYONE'S fault. It's just a convenient subject changer.
01:57 PM on 03/14/2011
Agreed. But Rush Limbaugh is, as we speak, still touting the safety of nuclear power. I'm convinced any position liberals and progressives strongly take, whatever the evidence of its honest authority, he simply cannot abide by. This position will hurt him significantly in the long run. A disasterously irresponsible stance on something so decisive, particularly when easily deciphered through all the discernable evidence, never does a body good.
03:49 PM on 03/14/2011
It's sad to see this made into a partisan issue. Obama's administration has been largely pronuclear energy. Thank god. If you know the science and statistics, you realize that at this point that we can either bite the nuclear bullet or kiss civilization goodbye. I am as liberal as they come, but I also can do math. Anyway, if you need conservative boogeyman, who do you think fears nuclear power more than anyone? BIG OIL.
01:12 PM on 03/14/2011
One thing I noticed clearly leading up to our own financial meltdown is the chilling fact that it's as impossible to lower one's standard of living as it is to lose 40 pounds. OK, some do, but most don't. Everyone knows nuclear energy is a killer at some point, let's get real. The fact is that this global lifestyle DOESN'T WORK, we all know it, yet we can't change. That's way scarier than nuclear waste. We have no control over our own healthy destiny, even if we "want" to. Who the hell are we.
01:39 PM on 03/14/2011
I think you're right. We're stuck with this disfunction for the forseeable future. All we can do is try like mad to mitigate the danger and pray something like this doesn't happen again - but throughout history anything man made and reputed to be a fail safe system has always had its dark side.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bosse
05:03 PM on 03/14/2011
Airline companies are fighting fast trains. They of course run on electricity, and decrease, fumes in our atmosphere, due to lesser uses of autos.
Flying and crashes can cause health problems.As long as there exists man made machines there will be dangerous catastrophes, in addition to natural disasters.Unexpected complications arise and we learn. Saving energy, using public transportation and turning off lights in huge buildings, and conserving energy rather than trying to build more generators for luxury...are things we ought to seriously consider.
Blame games do not help.
12:58 PM on 03/14/2011
What basis is there for speculation that the spent-fuel ponds were breached? These assertions appear to be unfounded.

There's a big difference between a hydrogen cloud ignition visibly blowing an aluminum roof and siding off an outer housing, and the breach of a thick concrete and steel waste containment.

I'm a skeptic of nuclear power, and I distrust industry-friendly regulators, but analysis of the Fukushima Daiichi plant should be based in fact and not paranoia.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alvdh1
01:57 AM on 03/16/2011
Michael Airhart,

Here are a few facts for you.

All 50 of the remaining workers at the Fukushima nuclear facility have been evacuated. Who exactly is monitoring the coolants at units 1-6 and the spent fuel rod pools without containment?

http://www.ratical.org/radiation/CNR/PP/#TOC
12:29 PM on 03/14/2011
Earthquakes, and/or fire, flood, tornado, hurricane, human error, equiptment failure, and terror attack.

Let's not pretend we only need to worry about California.
01:32 PM on 03/14/2011
I'm politically conservative and fully realize no one is truly safe anywhere. If these nuclear power events like Japan's could be guaranteed to be only localized, it would be no different than any other energy source disaster - but they cannot be. Everyone on earth can be detrimentally affected in the short and long term by a serious nuclear power catastrophe - and we may be looking squarely in the eye of one of those right now. .
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
izekman
10:02 AM on 03/14/2011
GE says let's build 50 more in the USA.
BP says let's build 50 more in the gulf of the USA.
Therefore it will be.
Who owns who?
photo
Computer Geek
Logician Atheist Lefty
09:53 AM on 03/14/2011
100% safe? Who is kidding who? There is no such thing in this world. Not. One. Thing. So why go there? Why use poison unless it's absolutely necessary? The argument is that because it's cheaper than the alternatives, that's why it should be used. I haven't seen masses of people killed by solar or wind yet, have you? What is the true cost? How much are lives and the environment worth? Depends on who you talk to I guess. To Republican climate change deniers and their corporate masters who are choosing company profits over lives and no regulation of companies over peoples lives, you and I have absolutely no value. We are pocket lint.
01:02 PM on 03/14/2011
" I haven't seen masses of people killed by solar or wind yet ..."

A number of workers have been killed in the USA by modern wind turbines, and dividing this body count into the relatively small amount of energy that sector produces yields a rather inferior kilowatt-hours-per-cadaver number compared to that of the Japanese nuclear industry, or even just the Fukushima station, up to today.
photo
Computer Geek
Logician Atheist Lefty
02:54 PM on 03/14/2011
False equivalency. Cheaper doesn't mean safer. Some people are killed by falling drywall, but that doesn't mean that asbestos is safer.