3.000.000 gallons of poisoned atomic water just got dumped in the Pacific

[Snoutport]

Let's see... gulf oil spill= 11 dead, gulf destroyed, beaches with oil a few inches underneath, sick workers dying, dead whales and dolphins.... What does that mean? A Safety bonus!! $375,000 for the CEO.

I wonder how much the CEO's of Tepco will give themselves as a bonus for their hard work over the past couple of weeks in Japan.

Personally, I'd like to see a CEO Law: if your company pollutes the CEO and top leaders of the country should have to be in the trenches cleaning until everything is cleaned up. If that were the case, you know they wouldn't be taking so many risks with the lives and well being of others.

(the 3,000,000 number just came off CNN)

[LaurenG]

1. This is outrageous. I get that they have to do something with it but dumping it into the ecosystem

is NOT the answer. When will human beings get that they are causing harm to themselves by what they do?

[Skidmore]

14. So what do you do with that many gallons of water,

especially when you live on an island? That's a lot of water. With as much land as we have here, we would be hard pressed to find a place to put it that does not impact the ecosystem.

[LaurenG]

21. Bury it I suppose.

I really don't know but it's terrifying that even the fish have to pay for our stupidity over and over again.

[Paradoxical]

30. They possess the ability to filter out particulates.

They do it all the time. In fact, many nuclear power plants generate "heavy" water that is later filted and released.

The reason why they may not be doing it currently is that filter systems may be non-functional 

[Angry Dragon]

2. Personal fines and jail time would work too ........

[RKP5637]

3. The ocean is becoming (and some places is) a sewer for mankind's crap. Humans will

eventually drown in their own crap. Many of these so called gallant captains of industry should be sitting in jail.

[xchrom]

4. recommend

[SidDithers]

5. 3 trillion gallons?...nt

Sid

[Snoutport]

6. million....but that is what they are admitting to.

[SidDithers]

8. Ah. Your headline is confusing...

I read that as 3,000,000 million = 3 trillion.

Thanks.

Sid

[Snoutport]

9. :0) I changed it already.

Thanks for the editing! I didn't realize I'd done that until you pointed it out.

[PearliePoo2]

12. and in a related article...Japan apologizes to S.Korea for water release

Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency has apologized to neighboring countries for causing concern over the release of contaminated water into the sea from the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.
The release was an emergency measure.
South Korea expressed concern on Monday that Japan hadn't notified the country of the release in advance.

(Hmmmm....as if notification would make it all better..or as if South Korea could do a fucking thing about it anyway??)

Yeah...we're so sorry (Uncle Albert).

[Skidmore]

15. OK, Sid, why are you denigrating brussel sprouts?

[madokie]

38. Just to get us brussel sprouts lovers dander up

:-)
:hi:

[Snoutport]

56. brussel sprouts are terrible...but, last week at a wedding. they were wrapped in bacon

brussel sprouts, wrapped in bacon, it ends up, were pretty damned good.

usually they make me gag.

[PearliePoo2]

7. And the whiz-kid engineers defense: "Who would have THOUGHT"

that a 30-meter fucking tsunami would pour over a 25-meter sea wall wiping out all the back-up generators crucial for cooling their white-hot mess???

[RC]

10. The site worked as designed for almost 40 years.

A few more years and they would have decommissioned that site. In fact they had already started preparations.
A world record setting tsunami is not something you can really prepare for.
How about some empathy for the almost 30,000 people the tsunami has killed so far? Or the towns they lived in getting literally washed off the map? Or don't they count?

And BTW, it's not a "white hot mess".

[bahrbearian]

11. Its not a white hot mess?,, or is it a Turd and your putting a bow on it.

[axollot]

51. +1000 n/t

[PearliePoo2]

13. there's evidence of a past tsunami in the same area...

equal to THIS one.
40 years geologically in this planet's history is NOTHING and YES, you DO (or should) prepare for record events.
U.S. plants of the same design ALL have their back-up systems on high ground. (NOT as tsunami bait)
So engineers CAN prepare for "worst case" record events.
I have no empathy? People don't count? You know NOT of what you speak.

[truedelphi]

26. From what I hear from folks who study this issue here in California - that is

Simply not true.

The back up systems are just as inadequate, and the only reason that you can claim the backup systems are on higher ground is that so far we haven't had any tsunami hit the San Onofre nuclear plant area yet.

And again, I must repeat my earlier posts on this: The Japanese People did not want these nuclear rectors in Fukushima Prefecture to be up and running. They wanted to have them decommissioned. they held an election, ditch ed the mayor who was pro-nuke, got Mr Sato elected, and as he was attempting to figure out how to have these plants decommissioned Lo and Behold:

Bush officials and GE officials swarmed Japan. They saw to it that bribery charges were brought against Mr Sato, totally trumped up charges, and he wa thrown to the wolves. A new and pro nuke mayor was installed, and the rest is radioactive history.

[Warren DeMontague]

31. I've heard that claim elsewhere, here.

I'm not challenging it, but I'd be really interested in seeing a link to the story.

[Art_from_Ark]

36. I second that

First we go from the "people of Japan", to Fukushima Prefecture, to a local election involving "Mayor Sato", who was mayor of what city/town/village, exactly?

And the current governor of Fukushima Prefecture is a man named Sato, so I am really confused.

http://wwwcms.pref.fukushima.jp/pcp_portal/PortalServlet;jsessionid=FBE55FDCF4E2A7B0EA025C9F69FB45A4?DISPLAY_ID=DIRECT&NEXT_DISPLAY_ID=U000004&CONTENTS_ID=10083

[truedelphi]

53. Again, as was posted when I originally wrote about this,

The way this information came to me is from a friend who now lives in San Francisco.

K. is very familiar with Fukushima Prefecture politics. The rest of his family is in Japan, except for his sister in law, who took the toddler to Canada as she didn't want her kid ingesting radiation.

[Art_from_Ark]

58. So who is this Mr. Sato?

What was his exact title/position?

[PearliePoo2]

40. I found this:

http://resources.nei.org/documents/japan/FactSheet_US_Nuclear_Plant_Enhancements_4-4-11.pdf

It's a fact sheet addressing the status of U S nuclear plants in light of Japan's situation.

Personally, I am an opponent of nuclear power.
We can't even address the problem of what to do with the waste that's generated.
I believe man is way in over our collective heads on this monster that we created.

[Art_from_Ark]

37. That tsunami occurred more than 1200 years ago

It's not like 30-ft-high tsunamis are a regular occurrence in that area

[Warren DeMontague]

45. Here's an idea, then: as a baseline, why don't they figure the amount of time

that the surrounding area will be uninhabitable in a worst-case accident- say, 200,000 years. Then build to specifications of any conceivable natural disasters that could occur in that time frame.

Seems fair.

[truedelphi]

54. I like it. Great idea. n/t

[PearliePoo2]

47. Tsunamis don't have to be a regular occurance....

The fact that there already was one historically, means there could be another.
And there WAS.(with continuing catastrophic consequences)

[PVnRT]

43. The worst 20th century tsunami was Lituya Bay, Alaska, in 1958

It measured over 520 meters high, taller than the Empire State Building. Sounds like a "worst case" to me - should they plan based on that?

[PearliePoo2]

18. RC said: And BTW, it's not a "white hot mess".

Really?

Metal Temperature by Color: White-Hot 2200°F 1205°C

"A meltdown is when the uranium dioxide fuel melts. The melting temperature of uranium dioxide is 5,189 degrees Fahrenheit (2,865 degrees Celsius)," said Martin Bertadono, a nuclear engineer at Purdue University.

So, you are RIGHT! It's not a white-hot mess...it exceeds it.
Google is your friend....educate yourself.

;)

[Ignis]

25. Oh, well played.

:thumbsup:

[ljm2002]

19. "A few more years and they would have decommissioned that site."

Coulda, woulda, shoulda.

Guess what? They didn't decommission it. Furthermore, it is likely that its life would have been extended for another 20 years just like they do routinely here in the US, in spite of safety concerns.

The fact that it worked as designed for 40 years is immaterial in the current situation. We are now dealing with several damaged reactors, they are unable to get the thing under control, they are unavoidably polluting the ocean with millions of gallons of radioactive water -- it is in short an ongoing catastrophe with few good signs at the moment.

When you are dealing with radioactive materials whose half-life is measured in thousands or tens of thousands of years, then yes, you do have to prepare for events that happen only once every 500 or 1000 or 5000 years. It was already known there was a similar tsunami to this one in the year 800, well within the span of events that MUST be considered when playing with nuclear materials.

BTW, worrying about the ongoing nuclear disaster does not mean failing to have empathy for the destruction and death visited on Japan by the tsunami. Totally false dichotomy.

[marions ghost]

20. nice summary

of the facts as we all know them.

There is no possible excuse for this. None.

[Warren DeMontague]

29. "I had almost made it home from the bar, officer, when I ran over that pedestrian"

:eyes:

[PCIntern]

22. Your post would be a "DUzy" if you weren't serious...n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

28. "A world record setting tsunami is not something you can really prepare for."

Okay, then. You can't prepare for it, then you don't build the fucking power plant. Period.

[axollot]

48. Even if they decommissioned it - the fuel ponds would still be

there as there is no other means of storage. The spent fuel ponds are the problem - more so than a reactor meltdown is the exposed racks of spent fuel.
But move along, nothing to see here.
Cheers
sandy

[truedelphi]

55. Yep, it is just about always "Nothing to see here."

Why do the citizens want transparency in our financial affairs over at the Federal Reserve?

Why do citizens along the Gulf remain so dubious about the results of the "Oil Spill." And they are dubious about the safety of Corexit, even after the EPA goes to the trouble of conducting a one week study to deem the product "A-okay?"

Why do activists and concerned citizens refuse to believe in statements put forth by the same people that wanted the folks in Fukushima to trust them about that GE designed and GE built reactor?

Why are Americans so skeptical?

[axollot]

50. dupe

sandy

[suffragette]

52. Yet they have apparently been trying for 15 years to add 2 more reactors to that site

Amid nuclear crisis, Japan’s Tepco planned new reactors

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/amid_nuclear_crisis_japans_tepco_planned_new_reactors/2011/04/05/AFtBbfkC_story.html?wprss=rss_homepage


Tokyo Electric, known as Tepco, informed Fukushima prefecture on March 26 of its desire to start building the reactors as early as next spring, local officials said. That was just two weeks after an explosion at the utility’s tsunami-crippled complex set off a cascade of catastrophes.

~~~


When Tepco notified Fukushima’s energy department of its new reactor plans, Nozaki immediately told Fukushima’s governor, Yuhei Sato, who reacted with fury. “What is going on?” he fumed. Nozaki met the head of Tepco’s local branch and told him “we definitely cannot accept” the building of new reactors. A Tepco team from Tokyo was given the same “no way” message. The electricity company, said Nozaki, was told by prefectural officials “to sort out problems on the ground first and stop thinking about new reactors.”

Tokyo Electric pressed on, declining to alter its plans and submitting them to the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, or METI, in Tokyo.


~~~

Tokyo Electric has dreamed for more than 15 years of adding two reactors to the six-reactor Fukushima Daiichi complex but has been repeatedly thwarted.

[NightWatcher]

16. History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of man

there goes Tokyo

[sofa king]

23. For the win!

[Art_from_Ark]

41. Tokyo's still there, the last time I checked

which was, oh, yesterday.

[Marblehead]

17. Good bye Oceans

[TNLib]

24. More like good bye Us

We are basically poisoning our food supply. The oceans will be fine in about a 1000 years after we kill ourselves with poison.

[Paradoxical]

27. This about 4.5 olympic swimming pools. Not a whole lot.

The gulf oil spill was roughly 70 times larger and the oil will be toxic for longer than some of the radionuclides.

We should be looking at the level of radioactivity per unit volume, not the volume alone.

[dipsydoodle]

34. To put it in perspective

In fact, the Pacific Ocean holds about 300 trillion swimming pools full of water.

http://www.khon2.com/news/local/story/Three-million-gallons-of-radioactive-water-dumped/p0mTCcgy70mEK4OACpm7wA.cspx

That doesn't mean its right : just that it may not be too significant.

[PufPuf23]

32. I have turned 100% anti-nuke after Japan.

I expect out of control releases for months and impact worse than Chernobyl.

Looking at maps of nuke facilites Japan, the eastern USA, and western Europe esp France seem at risk.

The nuke plants are old and easy targets for attack in war.

Should there be a major impact to society where the plants cannot be maintained, much of the most modern world will be contaminated by unattended reactors gone feral. Africa, South America, and eastern Russia are the most free of nuke plants.

The MOX (uranium oxide and plutonium from nuclear weapons reductions) fueled plants are an even larger risk because of the persistency and toxicity. Less risk would be to hold the excess plutonium as safe as possible and not use as fuel.

Renewables will work especially with some population control and maximum local cogeneration.

Cap and trade is a just financial fraud for fossil fuels. The better policy is best management practices (less emmission per kwh)and a tax or those exceeding the minimum (from technology and fuel procurement). Also carbon offset credits tend to porr forest management practices in 3rd world areas and politics prevent better forest management in the USA.

[marions ghost]

42. You put it well

clear, brief, to the point.

This is the essential Truth that many do not want to hear.

These are the points that are the most salient --with the addition of the one about the huge, often hidden expense, of nuclear facilities.

keep on puffin, puf :thumbsup:

[Warren DeMontague]

44. I'm in complete agreement.

I was on the fence, before. No longer.

[Snoutport]

57. i think this deserves its own post...well said.

[Sirveri]

33. Dilution is the solution to pollution. -Chief ELT for my boat

Just sayin'...

[Keith Bee]

35. Hey, look on the bright side:

Now we'll be able to import those delicious three-eyed fish from The Simpsons!

[Urban Prairie]

39. Really don't see any good outcomes from this

Read some real "radical" solutions online some that include nuking the plant :nuke:

:wtf:

Yikes!!

:scared:



Are these morans aware of the hundreds of tons of spent nuclear fuel rods being stored @ the Fukushima Daiichi Plant?

• Reactor No. 1: est: 50 tons of nuclear fuel
• Reactor No. 2: 81 tons
• Reactor No. 3: 88 tons
• Reactor No. 4: 135 tons
• Reactor No. 5: 142 tons
• Reactor No. 6: 151 tons
• Also, a separate ground-level fuel pool contains 1,097 tons of fuel :wow: and some 70 tons of nuclear materials are kept on the grounds in dry storage.


The reactor cores except #4 themselves contain "merely" less than 100 tons of fuel.

This of course does not include the four reactors and also their hundreds of tons of stored spent fuel rods @ the nearby Fukushima Dai-ni Plant, which could also be affected by runaway nuclear reactions and fires after "surgically" donating a nuclear bomb or bombs over the Daiichi Plant.

[Warren DeMontague]

46. I suspect the folks floating that idea are just yahoos who like to see stuff blow up.

I don't think anyone with a serious grasp of the situation is suggesting such a thing.

[Life Long Liberal]

49. Wow!

[ddeclue]

59. Umm.. 3 million gallons in the Pacific is like a thimble full in an Olympic sized pool..

scratch that.. it's more like a drop of water in that pool.