Order of Kilopi
I don't know if you caught my "BTW" edit.Originally Posted by geonuc
So; I would be interested to know how you factor out the health issues from the Tsunamis.
It was already discussed earlier in this thread that the evacuation death rate was considerably larger because the people were already suffering.
I just wan things to be compared apples to apples.
Bad Post-Doc
I'm not sure that's possible. These days, when it comes to nuclear, I'm satisfied if we mostly manage to avoid comparing apples to orchards.
_____________________________________________
Gillian
"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"
"You can't erase icing."
"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"
Order of Kilopi
It probably would depend on the nature of the problem that caused the injuries and deaths during the evacuation. If people were trying to cross bridge damaged by the tsunami or earthquake and fell off and died or got into a car accident because the road was buckled, I wouldn't count that as part of the nuclear death toll. But if someone has a heart attack because they are in a panic to get out or two buses collide at an intersection with working signals, then maybe that should be counted.
Et tu BAUT? Quantum mutatus ab illo.
Order of Kilopi
Oh; I agree, I just want to hear from Geonuc.
And, some of those situations wouldn't be clear. Like infections from injuries, or lack of medications. You could never be sure if the lack of resources was the cause of death, or if the person would have died regardless of the resources.
I don't think it's possible myself. I'm just trying to make it clear that it gets much more involved than just surface statistics and many of them seem to say "nuclear, bad" before digging deeper into it.
Order of Kilopi
Nuclear power plants: A hidden world of untruths, unethical behavior
http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311dis...AJ201208060093
Order of Kilopi
It's sad that that kind of thing happens. To me the lesson is that those kinds of tasks should not be outsourced to subcontractors. Many of the people who work for those kinds of companies are not particularly well off, and honestly they need the work. So when the supervisor tells them to put badges in radiation, they will do it because they'd rather not go over the limit and have to stop working. If the company had to put its own workers on the job, then it could just give them a different job to do if their dose got close to the limit. This same kind of thing happens in the transportation industry, where workers are legally not allowed to work over a certain number of hours, but they will sometimes (with their supervisor's knowledge) fudge on the hours because they want the work and the company wants the money. I'm sure this is not only a Japanese problem.
As above, so below
Order of Kilopi
Yes, I did. I just chose not to respond to that part.
My statement (evacuation deaths should be counted against nuclear) should not be taken to imply I believe or think anything other than what that statement literally says. I do not know how you factor out health issues from the tsunami, and I have no opinion on whether the number of deaths attributed to the nuclear evacuation is even accurate.
I'm not a stranger to this thread, so anyone who's been following it should know my stance on nuclear power. My statement reflects part of the process I use to support that stance - namely, that when considering the risks and benefits of the various available forms of large-scale electric power production, all factors directly attributable to each of the forms should be weighed. If someone died while being evacuated because the local nuclear plant melted down and started releasing radioactive material above the locally regulated limits, then that's a strike against nuclear power on my ledger. That person would not have died at that time or in that way if his or her community had decided to go with, say, coal power.
Please do not make the mistake of inferring that I believe or think that people dying as a direct result of other forms of power production shouldn't be counted. Quite the opposite. Nor should deaths directly attributable to non-power production related events (i.e., a tsunami) be counted against any form of power producing technology.
To be clear, after weighing the risks and benefits, I conclude that nuclear power is the best - and safest - way to expand electric power production on a large scale. I conclude that even after considering any Fukushima meltdown related deaths, injuries and economic hardships. The other forms of power production available to us now simply cause much more harm, in my opinion.
Order of Kilopi
Except for the slight adjustment that I'd limit the statement to nuclear being better than all other economically viable forms of power production, I totally agree.
__________________________________________________
Reductionist and proud of it.
Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn. Benjamin Franklin
Chase after the truth like all hell and you'll free yourself, even though you never touch its coat tails. Clarence Darrow
A person who won't read has no advantage over one who can't read. Mark Twain
Order of Kilopi
I consider that to be a mostly false statement. Some entity would not be making profits if workers were not...Nuclear power plants probably would not operate properly in Japan if workers were not willing to sacrifice their health, and possibly their lives.
Although; You can argue that the plant is already not operating properly because it lets these things happen.
Either way it seems like a worker health issue rather than a safety issue.
I appreciate that you did. It's hard to get a feel for an opinion through short statements, and this post made yours very clear. Thanks.
Established Member
I figured someone would have bumped this thread with this interesting news: IAEA: Japan nuclear plant closer than Fukushima to quake epicenter is remarkably undamaged
Not a huge surprise since it was the poor choice of not protecting the backup systems in Fukushima that was the real problem, but this is another point to raise to people who think that all nuclear is bad. Only bad designs are bad. Designs that exceed capacities are a good thing.The Japanese nuclear power plant that was closest to the epicenter of last year's earthquake suffered more ground shaking than Fukushima but was largely undamaged because it was designed with enough safety margins, nuclear inspectors said Friday.
The Onagawa plant in northern Japan recorded temblors that exceeded its design capacity and the basement of one of its reactor buildings flooded. But the plant maintained its cooling capacity, its reactors shut down without damage to their cores and there were no signs of major damage to crucial safety systems.
Administrator
Yes
Established Member
I hope this doesn't qualify as a thread derail, but I'd like to point out that what unsettles me most about living near the oldest operating nuclear power plant in the US is the fact that they keep extending its life (well beyond the original design) rather than replace it. While I consider nuclear power to be relatively safe, I would feel better if they replaced the thing with a more modern design. I'm sure the design isn't "bad", but I'm willing to bet they've learned how to do it better in the last 40 years.
I may have many faults, but being wrong ain't one of them. - Jimmy Hoffa
Order of Kilopi
You're welcome. I do tend to post lightly and perhaps some are too concise, inviting confusion and speculation as to my intent.
Established Member
This feeling is understandable, and the blame for this particular situation rests squarely on the shoulders of those who are actively trying to prevent replacement plants to get built. without any new reliable capacity coming online to replace these old plants, it becomes impossible to maintain grid stability if they shut down. hence the licence renewals that go way beyond their intended design limit in regards to age. luckily each such renewal require that the plants is upgraded to a newer standard, (altho this is not as good as getting a brand new plant with the most up to date modern designs)
Order of Kilopi
Quite correct. I've been involved with nuclear plant design for some time and have railed against what I consider bad design. Fortunately, those instances are relatively rare and the inherent conservatism incorporated in western nuclear designs almost always makes the point moot. But I don't like to cut corners because then when do you decide how much compromise is too much? TEPCO, in my opinion based on what I know now, may have made a few poor decisions in favor of expediency and cost to the detriment of protecting the plant's design basis. Protecting the design basis is paramount. However, the tsunami was beyond design basis and even prudent design may not have saved the plant. We learn and improve the design.
Order of Kilopi
I wouldn't worry too much about the life extension. The original 40 year license was based on what we conservatively assumed to be a safe neutron embrittlement of the reactor vessels. We now know through many years of analysis of reactor vessel steel samples inserted into the vessels and exposed to the lifetime dose that the steel can handle much more. It's based on good science and engineering. Many plants have been re-licensed for 60 years.
Also, the re-licensing process is not automatic. The NRC requires a quite thorough reanalysis of many systems before approving life extension, and also upgrades to not only some of the equipment but to the design basis. In many ways, by re-licensing the plant for 60 years, you're getting a better and safer plant than the one you had.
Order of Kilopi
Well, there's a few not-easily-foreseeable things that would really have helped handle problems that couldn't be prevented. Better systems for preventing hydrogen buildup, for example. Think of how much harder recovery was made by the hydrogen explosions, which could have been prevented with catalytic recombiners, or battery or rooftop-generator powered ventilation. But now we have a better idea how important such things are to have.
Order of Kilopi
We do, yes. One of the design changes being mandated by the NRC is installation of hardened vents for BWRs, so that the primary containment can be vented without the need for operators to manually open them in potentially high radiation areas. Many US BWRs already have this feature.
Established Member
The scariest part to me is how "management" or "engineering mistakes" could make a power plant dangerous. Recently the 40 year old boilers in the San Onofre plant (5 miles from my home) were replaced. To avoid the high cost re-qualifying (or re-licensing), Edison told the NRC they that they would replace the boilers with duplicates. BUT THEY DIDN'T. They made design changes in the supports for the boiler tubes. After installation of the new boilers, a vibration problem was quickly discovered. They attempted to correct the problem by closing off many of the tubes but that was unsuccessful. The vibrations led to rapid wear of the tubes and caused a small radiation leak. The plant is currently shutdown for repairs.
This raises lots of questions. Why did they change the design? Who permitted this? The construction was done by Mitsubishi who has been blamed for faulty computer modeling of the new design. Why the heck would you change it in the first place when the original design had worked so well for so many years? Where did the oversight fail? Isn't that what the NRC is for?
A far as I know there has not been an official investigation yet. I don't loose sleep over my safety, but some of the cost to fix the mistake is going to be passed on to the consumers.
Wouldn't it be ironic if the reason for the design change was to reduce costs?
Established Member
Have you ever longed to replace a worn 1970's vintage pole lamp with a modern day perfect copy? If so, you'll find that the state of the art has moved on, and the best you can likely get is something similar. It's the same with boiler/nuke plant parts, design moves on . Until 3D printers get really good, there is no practical choice other than to accept some redesign.
Order of Kilopi
What Squink said, although it's a bit more complicated.
I worked at SONGS for about 12 years and consider it a well managed plant. SCE obviously needs to look to the bottom line, but in my opinion, they do so prudently. That said, the steam generator replacement is a real mess.
Established Member
Did you read my post? The point is there was no necessity to change the design. In fact they agreed not to change it in order to avoid re-qualification. The tubing used was to exactly the same specs as the original. The change in the supports probably reduced the cost because less SS was used, but the new supports were woefully inadequate. This is in no way a case in which redesign was required. I'll bet my bippie that some MBA thought he could save some money and get a big bonus.
Order of Kilopi
Did you read Squink's? It's not a matter of them making unnecessary changes in the design...the tooling and such to recreate the original items may no longer exist! Considering the near-infinitesimal fraction of the total cost that the materials likely were, compared to the costs of design, fabrication, testing, etc, I'm doubtful they could remove enough steel to make a significant difference.
It may simply be a matter of miscommunication, the people involved thinking identical hardware was being built. Or an honest mistake, a near-equivalent substitution being made through a misinterpretation of requirements. Maybe some mistake was made while replicating the old rigs due to inadequate or unclear documentation, the people involved having retired. Possibly some bean counter decided to save some money by not replicating the old rigs, but you can't assume this was so without evidence.
Established Member
The biological impacts of the Fukushima nuclear accident on the pale grass blue butterflyNothing venomous, telepathic, or Mothra-sized yet; mostly wing abnormalities, antenna and leg deformities.Here we show that the accident caused physiological and genetic damage to the pale grass blue Zizeeria maha, a common lycaenid butterfly in Japan. We collected the first-voltine adults in the Fukushima area in May 2011, some of which showed relatively mild abnormalities. The F1 offspring from the first-voltine females showed more severe abnormalities, which were inherited by the F2 generation. Adult butterflies collected in September 2011 showed more severe abnormalities than those collected in May. Similar abnormalities were experimentally reproduced in individuals from a non-contaminated area by external and internal low-dose exposures.
Order of Kilopi
Which is irrelevant as the real problem is to first claim that a recertification is unnecessary because the replacement is identical, then make a replacement that wasn't identical.
Why it wasn't identical isn't relevant for a false claim that it was.
__________________________________________________
Reductionist and proud of it.
Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn. Benjamin Franklin
Chase after the truth like all hell and you'll free yourself, even though you never touch its coat tails. Clarence Darrow
A person who won't read has no advantage over one who can't read. Mark Twain
Order of Kilopi
It is not irrelevant to TooMany's assertion that they unnecessarily changed the design. And yes, the main issue is that it was incorrectly claimed to be identical, which is why I covered multiple possible reasons (both accidental and intentional) for such a claim, to counter TooMany's assertion that the likely reason was to cut costs on stainless steel.
Established Member
I always figured one of the reasons behind the changes was to increase power output w/out having to wade through a regulatory process that was sure to end badly for everyone involved, producers and (ultimately) consumers. When the report came out of Fukushima several weeks back about the all too-cozy nature of the relationship between regulators and producers over there, I wondered what the state of that relationship was over here. This article takes a look at (and links to) the actual NRC report on Sna Onofre, as well as the recent Jaczko fiasco to shed some light on that relationship:
http://truth-out.org/news/item/10479...overnment-work
Order of Kilopi
I'm pretty familiar with the relationship between the industry and the USNRC and it isn't 'cozy'. I don't care what that link claims.
A plant cannot gain more power from improved steam generators without a specific license amendment. Power output is a license parameter.
Insert awesome title here
Refreshing to have some good news for biodiversity for once.
Order of Kilopi
It's good to know that after 66 years of cesium being released into the world's ecosystem, we now know it causes genetic deformities in butterflies. Oh sure you might think that at sometime in the past experiments were done to find this out, but according to the study (in which they fed plants contaminated with cesium to butterflies) they actually were not sure the radioactivity was the cause of the problem.
Hence the feeding of radioactive cesium to insects. In he future they might also do the same thing with animals, so they can find out what effects eating radioactive materials from Fukushima might cause in all the other wildlife effected. Science marches on,.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote