Big quake in Tokyo

[Free For All]

Some startling info I heard- this event moved the mainland of Japan 8 feet, and shifted the earth on its axis by about 4 inches. Holy crap.

[Dave James]

I know there's a fine line between too much information and not enough, but I hope the Japanese government will choose to be completely forthright with respect to what's happening at their nuclear facilities. I know no one wants to cause a panic, but people have a right to know exactly what's going on. I have a sense right now that the whole story is not being told.

[J Larsen]

Japan's nuclear agency has conceded that a meltdown may have occurred at Fukushima:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/03/12/japan.quake.nuclear.failure/index.html?hpt=T1&iref=BN1

I dearly hope this is not the case.

[GA Russell]

I know there's a fine line between too much information and not enough, but I hope the Japanese government will choose to be completely forthright with respect to what's happening at their nuclear facilities. I know no one wants to cause a panic, but people have a right to know exactly what's going on. I have a sense right now that the whole story is not being told.

I was just about to post the same thing, Dave. If nuclear power plants are so safe, why can't they get private sector insurance on them? I don't think the whole story is ever told about problems at nuclear power plants.

[JSngry]

Bill Nye The Science Guy was just on CNN definitely dropping some science about the potential meltdown. He came across as pretty skeptical - but not wholly convinced - that something bad was not happening.

For somebody who only remembers Bill Nye as host of a PBS science show that both kids watched, it was a jolt to hear him being for real, in a cool kind of way. Too bad the subject matter was so damn dark...

Edited March 13, 2011 by JSngry

[ghost of miles]

Latest version of the AP's story:

IWAKI, Japan – A partial meltdown was likely under way at a second nuclear reactor, a top Japanese official said Sunday, as authorities frantically tried to prevent a similar threat from nearby unit following a catastrophic earthquake and tsunami.

Some 170,000 people have been ordered to evacuate the area covering a radius of 12 miles (20 kilometers) around the plant in Fukushima near Iwaki. A meltdown refers to a very serious collapse of a power plant's systems and its ability to manage temperatures. A complete meltdown would release uranium and dangerous byproducts into the environment that can pose serious health risks.

Full article here.

[papsrus]

Latest version of the AP's story:

IWAKI, Japan – A partial meltdown was likely under way at a second nuclear reactor, a top Japanese official said Sunday, as authorities frantically tried to prevent a similar threat from nearby unit following a catastrophic earthquake and tsunami.

Some 170,000 people have been ordered to evacuate the area covering a radius of 12 miles (20 kilometers) around the plant in Fukushima near Iwaki. A meltdown refers to a very serious collapse of a power plant's systems and its ability to manage temperatures. A complete meltdown would release uranium and dangerous byproducts into the environment that can pose serious health risks.

Full article here.

Part of the problem for me is getting a handle on some of the terms being thrown around. And part of that is due to the sketchy reporting, frankly. What exactly is a partial meltdown? For that matter, what do people mean when they say "meltdown?"

From what I can decipher, the situations at these nuclear plants mainly concern failing cooling systems rather than runaway reactors melting down. The reactors themselves are shut down, I think, and the problem is cooling off the damaged innards without releasing too much radiation.

The WashPost has a fairly clear article on it all here.

[kinuta]

Latest version of the AP's story:

IWAKI, Japan – A partial meltdown was likely under way at a second nuclear reactor, a top Japanese official said Sunday, as authorities frantically tried to prevent a similar threat from nearby unit following a catastrophic earthquake and tsunami.

Some 170,000 people have been ordered to evacuate the area covering a radius of 12 miles (20 kilometers) around the plant in Fukushima near Iwaki. A meltdown refers to a very serious collapse of a power plant's systems and its ability to manage temperatures. A complete meltdown would release uranium and dangerous byproducts into the environment that can pose serious health risks.

Full article here.

Part of the problem for me is getting a handle on some of the terms being thrown around. And part of that is due to the sketchy reporting, frankly. What exactly is a partial meltdown? For that matter, what do people mean when they say "meltdown?"

From what I can decipher, the situations at these nuclear plants mainly concern failing cooling systems rather than runaway reactors melting down. The reactors themselves are shut down, I think, and the problem is cooling off the damaged innards without releasing too much radiation.

The WashPost has a fairly clear article on it all here.

That's right. The fission reaction was trip stopped automatically at the first shock. The diesel pump and the secondary back up system for pumping the reactor cooling water both failed causing a build up of steam pressure that increased beyond the safety limits of the ceramic containment shielding. The No1 reactor has been cooled using sea water, rendering in an expensive heap of scrap. The situation at reactor2 looks very similar.

[ghost of miles]

How you can help Japan

[Big Wheel]

Latest version of the AP's story:

IWAKI, Japan – A partial meltdown was likely under way at a second nuclear reactor, a top Japanese official said Sunday, as authorities frantically tried to prevent a similar threat from nearby unit following a catastrophic earthquake and tsunami.

Some 170,000 people have been ordered to evacuate the area covering a radius of 12 miles (20 kilometers) around the plant in Fukushima near Iwaki. A meltdown refers to a very serious collapse of a power plant's systems and its ability to manage temperatures. A complete meltdown would release uranium and dangerous byproducts into the environment that can pose serious health risks.

Full article here.

Part of the problem for me is getting a handle on some of the terms being thrown around. And part of that is due to the sketchy reporting, frankly. What exactly is a partial meltdown? For that matter, what do people mean when they say "meltdown?"

From what I can decipher, the situations at these nuclear plants mainly concern failing cooling systems rather than runaway reactors melting down. The reactors themselves are shut down, I think, and the problem is cooling off the damaged innards without releasing too much radiation.

The WashPost has a fairly clear article on it all here.

That's right. The fission reaction was trip stopped automatically at the first shock. The diesel pump and the secondary back up system for pumping the reactor cooling water both failed causing a build up of steam pressure that increased beyond the safety limits of the ceramic containment shielding. The No1 reactor has been cooled using sea water, rendering in an expensive heap of scrap. The situation at reactor2 looks very similar.

My understanding is that No.1 was scheduled to be decommissioned anyway on March 26, so not a huge loss there. There is lots of iffy information flying around on Fukushima at the moment - while not without its flaws (like not mentioning that the No.3 reactor contains plutonium as well as uranium), I thought this was one of the most thorough explanations: https://morgsatlarge.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/why-i-am-not-worried-about-japans-nuclear-reactors/

[kinuta]

Latest version of the AP's story:

IWAKI, Japan – A partial meltdown was likely under way at a second nuclear reactor, a top Japanese official said Sunday, as authorities frantically tried to prevent a similar threat from nearby unit following a catastrophic earthquake and tsunami.

Some 170,000 people have been ordered to evacuate the area covering a radius of 12 miles (20 kilometers) around the plant in Fukushima near Iwaki. A meltdown refers to a very serious collapse of a power plant's systems and its ability to manage temperatures. A complete meltdown would release uranium and dangerous byproducts into the environment that can pose serious health risks.

Full article here.

Part of the problem for me is getting a handle on some of the terms being thrown around. And part of that is due to the sketchy reporting, frankly. What exactly is a partial meltdown? For that matter, what do people mean when they say "meltdown?"

From what I can decipher, the situations at these nuclear plants mainly concern failing cooling systems rather than runaway reactors melting down. The reactors themselves are shut down, I think, and the problem is cooling off the damaged innards without releasing too much radiation.

The WashPost has a fairly clear article on it all here.

That's right. The fission reaction was trip stopped automatically at the first shock. The diesel pump and the secondary back up system for pumping the reactor cooling water both failed causing a build up of steam pressure that increased beyond the safety limits of the ceramic containment shielding. The No1 reactor has been cooled using sea water, rendering in an expensive heap of scrap. The situation at reactor2 looks very similar.

My understanding is that No.1 was scheduled to be decommissioned anyway on March 26, so not a huge loss there. There is lots of iffy information flying around on Fukushima at the moment - while not without its flaws (like not mentioning that the No.3 reactor contains plutonium as well as uranium), I thought this was one of the most thorough explanations: https://morgsatlarge.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/why-i-am-not-worried-about-japans-nuclear-reactors/

Not a big loss? Surely you jest?

We're facing wartime scale disruptions,massive panic buying, rolling power cuts and more than half, at best, of all trains and subways cancelled!!

[Chuck Nessa]

I think he was referring to the loss of a plant about to be decommissioned.

[Big Wheel]

Latest version of the AP's story:

IWAKI, Japan – A partial meltdown was likely under way at a second nuclear reactor, a top Japanese official said Sunday, as authorities frantically tried to prevent a similar threat from nearby unit following a catastrophic earthquake and tsunami.

Some 170,000 people have been ordered to evacuate the area covering a radius of 12 miles (20 kilometers) around the plant in Fukushima near Iwaki. A meltdown refers to a very serious collapse of a power plant's systems and its ability to manage temperatures. A complete meltdown would release uranium and dangerous byproducts into the environment that can pose serious health risks.

Full article here.

Part of the problem for me is getting a handle on some of the terms being thrown around. And part of that is due to the sketchy reporting, frankly. What exactly is a partial meltdown? For that matter, what do people mean when they say "meltdown?"

From what I can decipher, the situations at these nuclear plants mainly concern failing cooling systems rather than runaway reactors melting down. The reactors themselves are shut down, I think, and the problem is cooling off the damaged innards without releasing too much radiation.

The WashPost has a fairly clear article on it all here.

That's right. The fission reaction was trip stopped automatically at the first shock. The diesel pump and the secondary back up system for pumping the reactor cooling water both failed causing a build up of steam pressure that increased beyond the safety limits of the ceramic containment shielding. The No1 reactor has been cooled using sea water, rendering in an expensive heap of scrap. The situation at reactor2 looks very similar.

My understanding is that No.1 was scheduled to be decommissioned anyway on March 26, so not a huge loss there. There is lots of iffy information flying around on Fukushima at the moment - while not without its flaws (like not mentioning that the No.3 reactor contains plutonium as well as uranium), I thought this was one of the most thorough explanations: https://morgsatlarge.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/why-i-am-not-worried-about-japans-nuclear-reactors/

Not a big loss? Surely you jest?

We're facing wartime scale disruptions,massive panic buying, rolling power cuts and more than half, at best, of all trains and subways cancelled!!

That's a good point. I still wouldn't want to be the guy explaining to the public that desperate times require running 40-year-old reactors past their intended lifespan, though...

[Larry Kart]

This explains (or, if your prefer, claims) in some detail that the nuclear reactor situation is not that big a big deal:

http://morgsatlarge.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/why-i-am-not-worried-about-japans-nuclear-reactors/

[kinuta]

This explains (or, if your prefer, claims) in some detail that the nuclear reactor situation is not that big a big deal:

http://morgsatlarge.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/why-i-am-not-worried-about-japans-nuclear-reactors/

Doesn't alter the fact that we are without power all afternoon, the local station which is on a major commuting line is shut, businesses, mine included, are shut or subject to long power cuts and on and on.

[kinuta]

Complete pandemonium here, the roads and streets are jammed with traffic, massive panic buying , there are long lines waiting to get in supermarkets.

I can hardly believe the state of almost mass hysteria. PM Kan's little pep talk and axing of large parts of the transportation hub have really freaked people out.

Edited March 14, 2011 by kinuta

[GA Russell]

Here's a report that says that there was a hydrogen explosion at Plant #3 135 miles north of Tokyo. WTF!

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-14/hydrogen-explosion-occurs-at-nuclear-power-plant-135-miles-north-of-tokyo.html

Edited March 14, 2011 by GA Russell

[JSngry]

I think we need to clarify that "not that big a deal" is only referring to the potential for some kind of impending nuclear holocaust or some such.

Obviously the lost of power is a big deal for, not just the citizens immediately impacted for it, but for the country as a whole.

[Larry Kart]

I think we need to clarify that "not that big a deal" is only referring to the potential for some kind of impending nuclear holocaust or some such.

Obviously the lost of power is a big deal for, not just the citizens immediately impacted for it, but for the country as a whole.

The comment thread on that blog I linked to on this thread raises some significant questions/doubts about the reliability of the information in the original blog post. Sorry if I've contributed to the world's pool of misinformation; that was not my intent.

[JohnJ]

I am relatively lucky as I live and work in Central Tokyo which is deemed too important to be subject to power cuts. Also, I don't rely on trains, I either cycle or walk to work. Had honestly expected a return to relative normality in Tokyo today, but the transportation system seems to be in a chaotic state. Lots of panic buying too, as Kinuta says.

Anyway, should not complain looking at the scenes of total devastation further north, truly awful. The biggest worry in Tokyo is the nuclear reactor situation and it is difficult to find out what is really happpening there.

[sidewinder]

The biggest worry in Tokyo is the nuclear reactor situation and it is difficult to find out what is really happpening there.

Reminds me of the communications chaos of 3 Mile Island and different communications outlets saying different things and exacerbating the problem.

[Dmitry]

What a terrible disaster! I have never seen, nor imagined anything like this.

The footage I've seen on TV shows remarkable resilience and restraint of the Japanese people.

No looting, no pillaging, like in Katrina. The Japanese will rebuild their country much quicker than one might think.

Edited March 14, 2011 by Dmitry

[Rooster_Ties]

Edit: Another pic of the same...

Edited March 14, 2011 by Rooster_Ties

[Free For All]

Before and after photos- unbelievable!

I've seen numerous videos of the tsunami washing away villages. Just incredible. I can't imagine what it must have been like to watch from the high ground as your town was erased from existence.

[Jim Alfredson]

Really, really scary. And the nuclear reactor(s) issue is very troubling, too.