Possible reactor meltdown in Japan

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
It's an interesting moral argument. Who gets to (most probably) die, and at whose orders, to protect many more from a potential ?

If anyone believes in "suicide to cover shame", it's the Japanese. I wonder how many high-ranking guys are putting themselves in harm's way. Captain going down with the ship...
 
I wonder why they placed the aux power so close to possible water damage. Seems like it would have made more sense to place thier backup gens,fuel and batteries etc further inland.
 
Originally Posted By: Pablo
I just have two crazy questions:

1) Who the heck had the brilliant idea about storing spent nuclear fuel over an active reactor?

2) OK they didn't have the diesel generators protected from the tsunami, but how long can it take for a skilled crew working 24/7 to get them going?

The spent fuel must be stored at an elevation above the RV head bc refueling requires the fuel elements to be transferred underwater. Some plants fuel transfer tubes to move fuel from containment to the fuel handling building. The end result would be the same in both cases. A fuel pool that can't be cooled and reactors that are melting down.

The problem wioth getting power is that you have no infrastructure in place.

When TMI went the amount of resources needed to save the plant wass ioncredioble. Unless you have worked in antisieze units in the best of cases would giove you some idea how the situation is going for them. Unless you have even an inkling of whats involved you just wouldn't understand. These folks are in a place worse than [censored] right now..I can assure you.
 
From what I have heard, these are multi megawatt reactors each (I don't know the exact number). The residual heat is in 5% (after shutting down the main using the rods). 5% of megawatt is still big. Diesel genset to provide that kind of power will be huge and I am not sure if such a beast can be air lifted.

- Vikas
 
Originally Posted By: eljefino
Originally Posted By: Shannow
It's an interesting moral argument. Who gets to (most probably) die, and at whose orders, to protect many more from a potential ?

If anyone believes in "suicide to cover shame", it's the Japanese. I wonder how many high-ranking guys are putting themselves in harm's way. Captain going down with the ship...


There could be parallels drawn to soldiers who fight for their country and their commanding officers. There are people willing to die for "the cause" in every nation. They are usually branded as heroes in the eyes of those whom they save, regardless how they appear to others.

Sure we are not told all the information concerning the goings on there, it still doesn't lessen the fact that people have died and will die trying to save what remains of specific regions of the country.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Smokescreen

Sure we are not told all the information concerning the goings on there, it still doesn't lessen the fact that people have died and will die trying to save what remains of specific regions of the country.


By all means, the people trying to stop the escalation of this situation are the epitome of heros, but at some point, the Japanese are going to have to fess up and do a Chernobyl type dump of solid material and boric acid on that site and stop this disaster. They're still playing the PR game. They're dropping water out of helicopters for crying out loud!

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4590823/time-for-the-chernobyl-solution-in-japan/?playlist_id=86857
 
Originally Posted By: Smokescreen

There could be parallels drawn to soldiers who fight for their country and their commanding officers. There are people willing to die for "the cause" in every nation. They are usually branded as heroes in the eyes of those whom they save, regardless how they appear to others.

Sure we are not told all the information concerning the goings on there, it still doesn't lessen the fact that people have died and will die trying to save what remains of specific regions of the country.


No, the culture in Japan is not a "I'll die for the greater good" but a "never surrender to the enemy" one. In the old days, if you are captured as a prisoner, you are considered a coward and you'll not be looked up to even if you survive. So you have the option of either die as a hero in war, or live as a coward that everyone looks down to.
 
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Originally Posted By: Smokescreen

There could be parallels drawn to soldiers who fight for their country and their commanding officers. There are people willing to die for "the cause" in every nation. They are usually branded as heroes in the eyes of those whom they save, regardless how they appear to others.

Sure we are not told all the information concerning the goings on there, it still doesn't lessen the fact that people have died and will die trying to save what remains of specific regions of the country.


No, the culture in Japan is not a "I'll die for the greater good" but a "never surrender to the enemy" one. In the old days, if you are captured as a prisoner, you are considered a coward and you'll not be looked up to even if you survive. So you have the option of either die as a hero in war, or live as a coward that everyone looks down to.


Sure what you say seems to fit in times of war but....how does this Japan culture as you explain it apply to what we see, 50 plant workers trying to....? Military and other workers looking for and helping survivors because....?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Smokescreen

Sure what you say seems to fit in times of war but....how does this Japan culture as you explain it apply to what we see, 50 plant workers trying to....? Military and other workers looking for and helping survivors because....?


Go back to the original argument. eljefino said Japanese believe in the suicide to cover shame culture, and you said they are just dying for the greater good and don't believe in it.

I'm just trying to tell you what happens in history. What is in the mind of the workers remain, no body knows, but it has to be a noble one regardless of cause.
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
All of the worry of radiation in this country is nuts. The Feds exploded I don't know how many ABOVE GROUND nuclear bombs in the desert without disastrous effects on the population.


How do you prove that nuclear test in desert have no disastrous effects on the population?

Sakharov of Soviet estimate that 10000 people would suffer cancers, genetic disorders, and other ill effects from a megaton nuclear explosion, and a 58 megaton explosion would in the long term kill or injure about half a million people.

http://www.princeton.edu/sgs/publications/sgs/pdf/1_3-4Sakharov.pdf
 
Quote:
How do you prove that nuclear test in desert have no disastrous effects on the population?

Are you aware of any radiological mass death events in the US that I am not aware of?

People used to go out on the mountains and WATCH nuclear bombs go off. It used to be a tourist attraction here. I am unaware of any of these people perishing.

58 megatons??
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Are you aware of any radiological mass death events in the US that I am not aware of?

People used to go out on the mountains and WATCH nuclear bombs go off. It used to be a tourist attraction here. I am unaware of any of these people perishing.

58 megatons??


You are aware that radiation doesn't always causes instant death, but prolonged health problem right?
 
Originally Posted By: PandaBear

You are aware that radiation doesn't always causes instant death, but prolonged health problem right?

Of course, that's why they stopped above ground testing.

Still, people (via the media) are panicking over a contained reactor thousands of miles away, which is nothing compared to what the military directly dumped on people in the 50's and 60's.

300px-Exercise_Desert_Rock_I_(Buster-Jangle_Dog)_002.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom