Earthquake, Tsunami, Nuclear Reactors and Media Sensationalism

Discussion in 'Energy' started by boedicca, Mar 15, 2011.

  1. boedicca
    Offline

    boedicca Uppity Water Nymph Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Messages:
    32,262
    Thanks Received:
    9,410
    Trophy Points:
    300
    Location:
    The Land of Funk
    Ratings:
    +10,990
    This is a good read. It contains some valuable info regarding the design of the nuclear reactors in Japan. There is a lot of media hysteria and disinformation spinning around.

    Hope this helps clarify the situation.


    ...What happened at Fukushima Daiichi

    The original earthquake hit. Three of the six reactors were in operation, the other three were shut down for scheduled maintenance. The reactors were designed to sustain an earthquake of magnitude 8.2; at magnitude 9, the Honshu quake was 16 times more powerful. This caused the plant to automatically shut down; this was apparently successful, but …

    About an hour later, the tsunami hit. The tsunami did two significant things: it destroyed the backup generators that kept the pumps running, and it apparently so contaminated the reserve coolant that it was not only no longer pure, but was so mucked up with the scourings of the tsunami that it couldn’t be safely pumped. At this point, the reactor was in some trouble.

    As the reactor heated up, water began to react with the zirconium fuel-rod containers, liberating hydrogen, which started to build up in the boiler. The operators began to vent gases from the reactor to reduce the pressure, liberating the hydrogen into the outer façade building. These gases are mildly radioactive, mainly with nitrogen-16 and several isotopes of xenon, all products of the fission reaction that powers the reactor; apparently they were vented into the outer building in order to slow their dispersion and give them a chance to lose radioactivity.

    Hydrogen in combination with the oxygen in the air can be explosive, and at some time after the venting started in reactor 3, the hydrogen in the outer façade exploded, blowing off the walls of upper half of the building and leaving the steel structure exposed. This explosion put six workers in hospital, with various injuries and one apparent heart attack. This was the first spectacular explosion that raised great clouds of white smoke.

    This was reported in the New York Times as “radiation poisoning.” No other source has reported this, including the IAEA. Apparently, according to the Times, radiation poisoning breaks arms.

    The second explosion was another hydrogen explosion; as before, apparently what was destroyed was the outer building that surrounds the containment, not the containment itself.

    Confusion

    This is the point at which the media confusion starts. Many stories concentrating on the reactor accidents were illustrated with blazing pictures of a natural gas plant explosion and a burning oil refinery, much more visually impressive than a building with the façade stripped off, but giving the false impression of a blazing inferno at the reactors.

    Several headlines said “nuclear explosion,” which is something very different from “an explosion in a nuclear power plant.”

    Anti-nuclear politicians like Senator Ed Markey and anti-nuclear activists from groups like the Institute for Policy Studies warned ominously of “another Chernobyl” — which this isn’t and never will be; the reactors are wildly, radically, different in design. (More on this below.)

    Television talking heads talked about the “containment building.” Which is strictly true, since the building in which the containment is housed would be the “containment building” — but misleading and confusing, because the containment for all three reactors remained intact.

    So there’s the first bottom-line point: at least so far, the inner, steel, containment vessel on all three Fukushima reactors remains intact....



    Pajamas Media » Fear the Media Meltdown, Not the Nuclear One (UPDATED)
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    62,496
    Thanks Received:
    8,579
    Trophy Points:
    317
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +9,224
    I searched the New York Times for a story where they called injuries radiation poisoning and found nothing. I can therefore assume this article is nothing but a hit piece full of lies.
     
  3. boedicca
    Offline

    boedicca Uppity Water Nymph Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Messages:
    32,262
    Thanks Received:
    9,410
    Trophy Points:
    300
    Location:
    The Land of Funk
    Ratings:
    +10,990
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Zoom-boing
    Offline

    Zoom-boing Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    21,037
    Thanks Received:
    6,277
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    East Japip
    Ratings:
    +6,483
    Updates at link

    Before you give in to the media’s nuclear meltdown… | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog


    Ziggy Switkowski on the nuclear meltdown threat.

    Chris Smith speaks to Doctor of Philosophy in Nuclear Physics Ziggy Switkowski about the nuclear meltdown threat in Japan.

    2GB Media Player - Ziggy Switkowski on the nuclear meltdown threat
     
  5. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    62,496
    Thanks Received:
    8,579
    Trophy Points:
    317
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +9,224
    Thanks for proving my point. The article says some workers were treated for radiation poisoning. It does not say broken arms were caused by radiation poisoning.

    I love how you tools keep using this disaster for cheap, and false, political points.
     
  6. boedicca
    Offline

    boedicca Uppity Water Nymph Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Messages:
    32,262
    Thanks Received:
    9,410
    Trophy Points:
    300
    Location:
    The Land of Funk
    Ratings:
    +10,990
    Pathetic.

    The broken arms were reported by other media outlets. The NYT is the only one that claims they were treated for radiation poisoning.

    It must be sad going through life lacking any intellectual curiosity.
     
  7. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    62,496
    Thanks Received:
    8,579
    Trophy Points:
    317
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +9,224
    :lol:

    Now go ahead and deny that your little hit piece didn't say this:

    Apparently, according to the Times, radiation poisoning breaks arms.
     
  8. boedicca
    Offline

    boedicca Uppity Water Nymph Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Messages:
    32,262
    Thanks Received:
    9,410
    Trophy Points:
    300
    Location:
    The Land of Funk
    Ratings:
    +10,990
    Yet more unsurprises; you don't understand sarcasm either.

    The NYT sensationalized the injuries in ways the other media did not. And you have no capacity to understand why they would do so.
     
  9. Mini 14
    Offline

    Mini 14 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Messages:
    3,947
    Thanks Received:
    570
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +570
    I thought there were 4 reactors at Daiichi? That is the first claim of 6 I have seen.

    Also, #4 was off line, but is storing spent rods, which have to be kept cool just like the active rods.
     
  10. boedicca
    Offline

    boedicca Uppity Water Nymph Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Messages:
    32,262
    Thanks Received:
    9,410
    Trophy Points:
    300
    Location:
    The Land of Funk
    Ratings:
    +10,990

Share This Page