Fukushima: Cold Shutdown or #4 Falling Apart - Which is It?

[don]

Japan May Declare Control of Reactors, Over Serious Doubts



TOKYO — Nine months after the devastating earthquake and tsunami knocked out cooling systems at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, causing a meltdown at three units, the Tokyo government is expected to declare soon that it has finally regained control of the plant’s overheating reactors.

On Friday, a disaster-response task force headed by Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda will vote on whether to announce that the plant’s three damaged reactors have been put into the equivalent of a “cold shutdown,” a technical term normally used to describe intact reactors with fuel cores that are in a safe and stable condition. Experts say that if it does announce a shutdown, as many expect, it will simply reflect the government’s effort to fulfill a pledge to restore the plant’s cooling system by year’s end and, according to some experts, not the true situation.

If the task force declares a cold shutdown, the next step will be moving the spent fuel rods in nearby cooling pools to more secure storage, and eventually opening the reactors themselves.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/15/wo....html?ref=asia


Reactor 4 is falling apart

The wall of the south side is falling apart at reactor 4.

Reactor 4 is in the most serious situation. It is assumed that if another aftershock hits, it will drop the spent fuel pool hung in the building.

On 12/2/2011 (JST), something like “fire” was observed beside reactor 4.

It was confirmed that the wall of reactor 4 was lost on the south side. At least since 12/5/2011, the wall is missing.

http://fukushima-diary.com/2011/12/r...falling-apart/

[Starving Steve]

Re: Fukushima: Cold Shutdown or #4 Falling Apart - Which is It?

"According to some experts, the government's pledge to restore the cooling system by year-end, can not be reached."

Starving Steve, the official moron and slow-learner here, would like to know who these so-called, "experts" are?

[c1ue]

Re: Fukushima: Cold Shutdown or #4 Falling Apart - Which is It?

A beautiful instance of misdirection.

#4 was off and was always off - as much as any fission reaction can be off.

It seems quite clear that any damage to #4 was entirely due to the effects of the earthquake and tsunami - and nothing to do with active reactor operations.

So this author is now blaming a turned off reactor's fuel rods for damaging the building it was in?

[lektrode]

Re: Fukushima: Cold Shutdown or #4 Falling Apart - Which is It?

A beautiful instance of misdirection.

#4 was off and was always off - as much as any fission reaction can be off.

It seems quite clear that any damage to #4 was entirely due to the effects of the earthquake and tsunami - and nothing to do with active reactor operations.

So this author is now blaming a turned off reactor's fuel rods for damaging the building it was in?

well you know how this goes (and nothing against don, he just the messenger/instigator keeping us in material to rant/rave about ;) - anything to 'help the cause' or more precisely help BE the cause of (by the MSM facilitating the anti-crowd in keeping nuke power throttled): endless war over oil in the mideast, with endless budget deficits to pay for it, globalwarming, coalmining deaths by the hundreds, stripmine environmental disaster after disaster, water pollution, smog-belching gasoline car choked trafficjams from coast to coast, skyrocketing electric rates, hundreds of billions squandered to find something - ANYTHING but eeeeek, gasp, ahhhhhh!!!! NOT nuke power - we're all gonna glow/die/hair fall out!!!

and just keep on denying the obvious solution to all of the above - right?
sigh...

why do we even bother...
(other than i'd like to enjoy the rest of my life not choking on/paying for all the above)

[Starving Steve]

Re: Fukushima: Cold Shutdown or #4 Falling Apart - Which is It?

I am in favour of all power that is cheap and plentiful. In this order, I support most: 1.) atomic power; then 2.) hydro-electric power; then 3.) natural-gas; 4.) oil recovered by fracking shale; 5.) upgraded oil from tar sands and bitumen; 6.) clean coal;
7.) power by burning garbage; 8.) filthy coal, especially when converted to synthetic oil; 9.) geo-thermal power where available; 10.) tidal power where available; 11.) wind power especially in and around the North Sea, also on the Great Plains of North America; 12.) last choice except in deserts: solar power.

[globaleconomicollaps]

Re: Fukushima: Cold Shutdown or #4 Falling Apart - Which is It?

I call that cold fusion.

[lektrode]

Re: Fukushima: Cold Shutdown or #4 Falling Apart - Which is It?

I am in favour of all power that is cheap and plentiful. ...

roger that mr steve - i'm with ya... on almost all... well... filthy coal to synfuel seems somewhat retrograde to sound energy policy (and how many billions did that one cost us?), but i spose it would better than walking... and dunno about frakin fer oil, that seems a stretch, maybe just keep it focused on gas?

and i know you arent part of the market for it, (and i know that you & mr c1ue will want to argue ;) but.. considering we're all pretty much marooned here in ZIRPland (unless one has the skill,brains,balls to play at the casino in lower manhattan) what if i told you there was an investment that would return upwards of 10% per annum, on an IRR basis (int rate ret), making it TAX FREE, that escalated at or above the rate of inflation, that is nearly 100% guaranteed to payout over 20-30years (short of the gods or alqaida messin with us), again at an escalating rate of return, with little or no risk of loss of principal (assuming one has homeowner ins) ?

wouldnt that make some sort of sense? - i mean assuming you like to watch TV, listen to music and turn the bathroom light on during those late night missions in the dark? (never mind be able to when the inevitable blackout occurs, since its not been very enviro-mentally PC in decades to spend money on upgrading our source of supply or the grid that delivers it...)

just sayin ya might wanna read this, and ya know, no pressure or nuthin, but maybe think about it for a few minutes:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/indust...lls/51840042/1

Household electricity bills skyrocket

By Dennis Cauchon, USA TODAY
Electric bills have skyrocketed in the last five years, a sharp reversal from a quarter-century when Americans enjoyed stable power bills even as they used more electricity.

Households paid a record $1,419 on average for electricity in 2010, the fifth consecutive yearly increase above the inflation rate, a USA TODAY analysis of government data found. The jump has added about $300 a year to what households pay for electricity. That's the largest sustained increase since a run-up in electricity prices during the 1970s.

Electricty is consuming a greater share of Americans' after-tax income than at any time since 1996 — about $1.50 of every $100 in income at a time when income growth has stagnated, a USA TODAY analysis of Bureau of Economic Analysis data found.

Greater electricity use at home and higher prices per kilowatt hour are both driving the higher costs, in roughly equal measure:
•Residential demand for power dropped briefly in 2009 but rebounded strongly last year to a record high. Air-conditioners and household appliances use less power than ever. A new refrigerator consumes half the electricity as a similar one bought in 1990. But consumers have bigger houses, more air-conditioning and more electronics than before, outpacing gains in efficiency and conservation.




"People have made a lot of money selling weight loss programs. It's the same for energy. Behavior is hard to change," says Penni Conner, vice president of customer care at NSTAR, a Boston-based utility.

(i'll say, just look at the battle, bordering on insanity, just over getting people to change out their phreakin heatbulbs ;)

•Prices are climbing, too, hitting a record 11.8 cents per residential kilowatt hour so far this year, reports the Energy Information Administration. The increase reflects higher fuel prices and the expense of replacing old power plants, including heavily polluting — but cheap to operate — coal plants that don't meet federal clean air requirements.

"Higher bills are a huge problem for low income families," says Chris Estes, executive director of the North Carolina Housing Coalition, which opposes a proposed rate hike in its state by Duke Energy. "Utilities are what people's budgets start with."
Duke Energy says the rate increase is needed to pay for replacing old power plants and making the transmission system more reliable. The Charlotte-based utility has reached a tentative agreement with North Carolina to raise rates 7.2% in February, lower than its original 17% request.

"The industry as a whole is facing higher costs because we're retiring our aging fleet" of power plants, says Duke Energy spokeswoman Betsy Conway.

Electricity cost varies widely depending on where you live. Cheapest: Northwest communities near hydropower dams — as low as 2 cents per kilowatt hour. Most expensive major utility: Consolidated Edison, supplier of New York City — 26 cents per kilowatt hour, according to EIA. (OK maybe they dont consider hawaii part of america, but we're at .34-.44, all-in cost)

High taxes, limits on air-polluting fuels and the expense of maintaining an underground transmission system keep consumer costs high, says ConEd spokesman Chris Olert.

A potential bright spot: Electric bills appear roughly the same so far this year as last when adjusted for inflation, based on preliminary reports. (what? using shadowstats for the CPI vs the increase in KWH?... HUH?!)

However, the future of energy prices and the upcoming closure of more polluting coal plants makes the long-term outlook cloudy for consumers. Duke Energy plans to ask for another rate hike next year to cover the costs of new natural gas-fired plants.

and see their nifty little mouse-over gizmo for rates around the US:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/indust...lls/51840042/1

and even tho i've reached the conclusion that its (PV, the actual silicon stuff - but not install labor or misc metal pieces) likely to get cheaper and that mr c1ue is correct about the ultimate failure of the subsidies to fix anything by drowning the problem in borrowed money?

i'm still of the opinion that it might just start making cents for a lot of people to start thinking about it, eh?

[lektrode]

Re: Fukushima: Cold Shutdown or #4 Falling Apart - Which is It?

I call that cold fusion.

dunno about that one, but the pebble bed and thorium things are starting to sound promising, assuming its not going to take another 30years just to get regulatory approval to even try one...

[Starving Steve]

Re: Fukushima: Cold Shutdown or #4 Falling Apart - Which is It?

I thought the nights in Hawaii were very dark: the hotel we stayed in was lit by 7watt bulbs or 25watt bulbs--- and very few of those, even. The bar was almost totally dark. Sitting outside drinking, we had only moonlight and lanterns.... And now viewing the electric rates in Hawaii, I can understand why the nights were so dark.

[lektrode]

Re: Fukushima: Cold Shutdown or #4 Falling Apart - Which is It?

that must have been before the CFL age, mr steve?
since even a 7watt rating would give plenty lumens, never mind a 25 (=100watt worth of an edison heatbulb ;)

[Starving Steve]

Re: Fukushima: Cold Shutdown or #4 Falling Apart - Which is It?

Yes, I was in Hawaii ( Kauai Island ) in the mid-1990s. That was still the pre-CFL age.

[lektrode]

Re: Fukushima: Cold Shutdown or #4 Falling Apart - Which is It?

yeah, hurricanes will do that to a place...

[Shakespear]

Re: Fukushima: Cold Shutdown or #4 Falling Apart - Which is It?

Not directly on the subject BUT IF there was any of this stuff then it is long gone into the big ocean

Strange nuclear waste lint might be "biological in nature"

http://chronicle.augusta.com/latest-...e?v=1324037122