jollyroger's picture

    Rooting for radiation; Praying for poison

    By jollyroger on Fri, 03/25/2011 - 6:39pm |

    Shorter Fukashima: Shit Happens.

     Dual cautionary tidbits from Japan give rise in me to an unattractive satisfaction.

    We learn that the Japanese government is expanding the evacuation zone around Fukashima, and are separately informed that a long vertical crack in one reactor vessel has been identified, probably signaling that cooling water sprayed in will become radioactive water leaking out.

    Before hurling (insults) at my inhumanity, let me ask you to pause to learn of my underlying thinking.

    I deplore, I lament, I grieve the hardships and sadness being visited upon the Japanese people.

    But I fear a nuclear future more,  and from that inexorably anti-nuclear power position, I am obliged to note with satisfaction that Germany has cancelled several proposed reactors under the spur of this catastrophe.

    We may well be seeing the slow imposition of a "dead zone" around Fukashima that will make Chernobyl look like day in the park.

    To Japan, I say, "sorry 'bout your luck."

    To the proponents of nuclear power, I say, let the free market prevail.  No damage caps for you, no loan guarantees.

    Die, reactors, die.

    Comments

    You mean radioactive like this ....

    Tokyo Electric Power Co., the plant operator, found water at No. 1 reactor with radiation levels 10,000 times higher than normal cooling water, company officials said at a press conference shown on a webcast.

    A similar finding at the No.3 reactor delayed attempts to restore power to control and cooling systems. Three workers were hospitalized after stepping into water at the turbine building of the No. 3 reactor.

    Tokyo Electric plans to drain radioactive water from the turbine building of the No. 3 unit where the accident occurred, spokesman Osamu Yokokura said. It has yet to determine how and when to do this, he said.

    “The water that is coming out of that area is much higher in terms of radiation and this is obviously complicating the clean up,” said Tony Roulstone, an atomic engineer who directs the University of Cambridge’s master’s program in nuclear energy. “If it’s leaking out then they have to figure out some way to contain this water.”


    by kgb999 on Fri, 03/25/2011 - 7:00pm

    Yeah, that's what a more energetic poster would have linked to in the OP.

    I figure that the water will seep into the ground, spread, and then....


    by jollyroger on Fri, 03/25/2011 - 7:09pm

    In an effort to rehabilitate Nuclear, this chart from Reason's The Truth About Nuclear Power, is making the rounds:

    ... and it's true - nuclear power is relatively safe and clean - until it isn't. But when it isn't it gets way out of control much faster than fossil fuels. Some other blogs have cherry-picked this one chart, and a more graphic version, to make the argument that a planet with nukes instead of coal, climate change and air pollution would be a fair trade, but they aren't reading the entire article:

    Myth 1: Nuclear power is a cheap alternative to fossil fuels.

    Fact 1: It isn’t.

    Myth 2: Risk is the main problem with nuclear power.

    Fact 2: Cost is the main problem, not risk.

    Myth 3: The spread of nuclear power has stalled in the U.S. due to a hostile regulatory environment.

    Fact 3: Nuclear power has stalled because it is simply not profitable.

    Myth 4: Nuclear power is the key to energy independence.

    Fact 4: More nuclear doesn’t mean less oil.


    by Donal on Fri, 03/25/2011 - 9:27pm

    safe and clean

     

    What is really safe and clean is turning off the lights when you leave the room...or, more globally, the low hanging fruit is conservation.

    Of course, in a political system that permits the preservation of the incandescent light bulb to become a cause, one does despair.


    by jollyroger on Fri, 03/25/2011 - 10:06pm

    I'm a big fan of conservation, but Astyk notes that it is antithetical to middle class desires:.

    On Baby Harp Seals, Coal Plants and Nuclear Power

    Several years ago I was invited to protest a coal plant with a group of environmental activists. Speaking as someone who believes in civil action even when it is largely pointless, I agreed - it had been a depressingly long time since I'd been arrested for anything, and the occasional civil disobedience arrest is good for the soul, and coal is bad for it. Most of my fellow activists were students, and they invited me first to address the student group. I asked them how much electricity they use. They spoke proudly of their local diets, bikes and cloth bags. I observed that none of those things has much to do with electricity - on the other hand, electric devices, refrigeration and using a dryer have a lot to do with it. I invited them to measure their electric usage, and to ask themselves what they will give up to use 1/2, 1/3, 1/4. Since nearly 3/4 of this particular area's electric usage comes from coal, that was what was required - that they drop their usage by 3/4. That everyone else do so - that the library that was open all night for their study convenience be closed at night, so to reduce energy usage. That they use their computers dramatically less, in order to reduce both their personal use, but also the huge servers that create most of the internet's impact. Reduced use of refrigeration - how will they eat with a fridge the size of a dorm fridge - holding all their food, not just the private stash in their dorm, but their share of what exists in the communal cafeteria, and at home.

    I asked them how many of them were prepared to give these things up in order to end coal usage, to use that much less energy. About half of them raised their hands, divided between hesitant and enthusiastic - these were smart, educated and committed young people, and that's a hard road to travel. Then we talked about how. I asked how could this be made easier - how could infrastructure changes make it more possible. They were full of ideas. I asked how many of them would have done so after 9/11, if they were asked to do so rather than go to war in the Middle East - they all raised their hands. I asked how many of them would be prepared to do this if everyone else were doing it. All the hands rose. I asked how many of them would be willing to do it if they understood it as a way of saving future generations, their own future children and grandchildren. Most of them did. What if they were told they were heroic, that their acts were ones of courage and heroism, rather than just being weird things done in the dark by themselves.


    by Donal on Sat, 03/26/2011 - 11:52am

     middle class desires

    It's a good thing no one brought up riding the bus instead of using private cars....that's the heavy lift.

    I wouldn't pretend that conservation can save us from  the impending catastrophe.  It would, however, without impinging impermissably upon the study time of the priveleged college attending class, get us 5-10% of the way there.

     


    by jollyroger on Sat, 03/26/2011 - 5:11pm

    You know Jolly, I was just thinkin about the insurance industry.

    When you are a PI attorney, that is your enemy but this industry was the net for corporations (charters) to investigate the seas; to find markets all around the world five hundred years ago.

    The British Empire was based upon these insurers.

    The deck is stacked before you ever get to court of course, but enough mavericks wreak havoc so that the repubs attack the victims every fucking time!

    It may be, I mean it just may be, that the demise of these enclosed atom explosions will lose their allure due to capitalist considerations.

    Who knows? ha


    by Richard Day on Sat, 03/26/2011 - 2:33am

    Two words: Price-Anderson


    by jollyroger on Sat, 03/26/2011 - 3:49am

    Beyond my wildest hopes... "Spent fuel can be safely stored once cooled and blended with concrete into blocks. This process costs around $US1000000 per rod. There are 1500 rods in reactor 4 pool, and 5000 more in the central pool next door. Total cost for proper waste disposal is over 6.5 billion US$. Admitting to that expense would make nuclear power no longer feasible or competitive (which it never was anyway). Ignorance is preferable." Next quake, sayonara Tokyo. Sorry 'bout your luck

    by jollyroger on Fri, 06/29/2012 - 1:12am

    Hanford, proud builder of bombs? Really?

    Helen Caldicott is read to move back to Australia. I take back what I said.

    faced with the task of
    cleaning up “ radiation
    equivalent to 14,000
    times the amount
    released in the atomic
    bomb attack on
    Hiroshima ,” Tokyo
    Electric Power
    Compancy (Tepco)
    brought in the big
    dogs: the maker of the
    atomic bomb dropped
    on Nagasaki.


    by jollyroger on Sat, 08/17/2013 - 8:16pm

    Some 400 tons of fuel in that pool could spew out more than 15,000 times as much radiation as was released at Hiroshima.

    OK, ok, this really is enough.  Stop already with the poison....


    by Jolly (not verified) on Mon, 09/23/2013 - 2:04pm

    Latest Comments