fools - Quote:


they are people, people are of a negative value.
nuclear energy is the safest most practical energy source there is

muso wrote on Mar 31^st, 2011 at 10:54am:


there is a big difference in the radiation fallout and decay spectrum for a fission bomb and a radioactive release from a nuclear reactor.

Guess which has the more severe long term effects on people and the environment:?

Surely you dont believe TEPCO and the Japanese Authorities over the incident? They have lied since the start - they cannot even get the incident rating correct.

Only 19 workers exposed with <100mSv lol

As dangerously high levels of radiation spread beyond the Fukushima exclusion zone in Japan, there are fears the race to contain the nuclear crisis has been lost and meltdown has already taken place.

Radiation measured at a village 40 kilometres from the Fukushima nuclear plant now exceeds a criterion for evacuation, the UN nuclear watchdog .

The indications are the most serious nuclear crisis in 25 years is getting worse.

Richard Lahey, head of safety research for this type of reactor at General Electric, which installed the reactors at Fukushima in the 1970s, says workers at the site appear to have lost the race to save the crippled No. 2 reactor.

The Guardian newspaper quotes him as saying he believes the reactor core has melted through the bottom of the pressure vessel and at least some of it is down on the concrete floor beneath.

This would mean in simple terms the accident is no longer a matter of melting fuel rods, but of meltdown.

That situation is reminiscent of Chernobyl where the plant needed to be covered with a concrete sarcophagus to seal it off.

However Dr Lahey says there is no danger of a Chernobyl-style catastrophe because in that case the plant exploded releasing a massive amount of radioactive steam.

The situation in Japan would still be immense environmental damage in the localised area.

Meanwhile, IAEA head of nuclear safety and security Denis Flory says he has heard there might be "recriticality" at the Fukushima plant, in which a nuclear chain reaction would resume, even though the reactors were automatically shut down at the time of the quake.

Link -
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/03/31/3178263.htm
============================
So, it appears that -
1) Dangerous levels of Radiation are spreading beyond the existing exclusion zone.
2) The core may have melted through the bottom of the pressure vessel, at Reactor 2 and some of it may now be on the concrete floor beneath.
3) It is suggested, by the IAEA, that "recriticality" may occur?

Now, I may be wrong, but I don't recall seeing "recriticality" mentioned in the IAEA update notes. I should add, the IAEA notes "are rather sanitised".

By way of observation, the exclusion zones will start to encroach very close to one of the largest cities on the planet, Tokyo, and the knock on effects for the "local people" will be enormous, as will the effects on the Global Economy!

If a meltdown does happen or has already occured and "recriticality" occurs, then another dimension, will be added to the existing issues!

March 31 (Bloomberg) -- Tokyo Electric Power Co.’s shareholders may be wiped out by clean-up costs and liabilities stemming from the worst nuclear accident since Chernobyl.

The company faces claims of as much as 11 trillion yen ($132 billion), if the crisis lasts two years, that could lead to nationalization, according to Bank of America Merrill Lynch. Investors, including Mitsushige Akino and Edwin Merner, also said shareholders should brace for further losses.

Tokyo Electric has tumbled 78 percent, the worst performer on the MSCI World Index, since the March 11 earthquake and tsunami knocked out cooling systems at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant, causing radiation to leak. Should the crisis persist, the company may be unable to repay bondholders and could be taken over by the government, according to Merrill.

“Some sort of capital reduction or dilution is inevitable depending on the degree of shareholder responsibility,”
“It’s not yet clear whether it will be down to zero or just halved, but it won’t be what it is now.”

Worst-Case Scenario
“We are aware that compensation may be huge and haven’t decided how to make the payment,” said Osamu Yokokura, a spokesman at the utility known as Tepco.

The utility may face claims of less than 1 trillion yen if the crisis is resolved within two months and as much as 3 trillion yen if it takes about six months, Ueda wrote.

Should claims reach 10 trillion yen to 11 trillion yen, bankruptcy laws may be invoked, Merrill wrote. Still, it’s “very unlikely” Tepco will go bankrupt because of its importance as a provider of electricity, Ueda wrote.

Spread Widens
“It’s becoming clear that Tepco cannot recover from this by itself, the government’s involvement is very likely, but the question is to what extent,” said Yoshihiro Okumura
“The issue is bigger than Tepco, it has to do with the country’s energy policy.”

“There will be a debate on how Tepco should exist or be,” he said. “Containing the situation is necessary more than anything else.”

“It’s too early to talk about nationalization yet.”

Four of the plant’s six reactors became unusable after sea water was used to cool them. The reactors need to be decommissioned, Katsumata said yesterday, without giving a timeframe.

The process will take longer than the 12 years needed to decommission the Three Mile Island reactor in Pennsylvania following a partial meltdown, said Hironobu Unesaki, a nuclear engineering professor at Kyoto University.

Nuclear Incidents
Japanese authorities rated the Fukushima accident a 5 on the International Atomic Energy Agency’s 7-step scale for nuclear incidents, under which each extra point represents a 10- fold increase in seriousness.

Tepco’s importance as an electricity supplier to the nation’s capital may protect it, according to Yoshihiro Nakatani, a senior fund manager who helps oversee $851 million at Asahi Life Asset Management Co. in Tokyo.

“An increase in the damages figure means deeper involvement by the government,” said Nakatani. “Tepco is guaranteed a stable cash flow as the provider of electricity for Tokyo metropolitan area, so it’s unlikely to being allowed to implode.”

Tepco had cash, near cash and marketable securities amounting to 677.4 billion yen as of Dec. 31. The company had total assets of 13.8 trillion yen, or about 3 trillion yen more than its liabilities.

Debt Ratings Cut
Moody’s Japan K.K. and Standard & Poor’s cut their ratings on Tepco’s bonds on March 18 and put the debt on review for additional downgrades, citing concerns over the nuclear crisis.

The Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare earlier this week warned that radioactive contamination in food is likely to increase as the result of the disaster. Some 99 products, including milk and vegetables, were found to be contaminated in Tokyo and five prefectures to its north and east as of late March 26, according to the ministry.

“When do you think the nuclear problems can be over? When you know that then you can talk about some kind of nationalization, or recapitalization or restructuring,” said Edwin Merner, Tokyo-based president of Atlantis Investment Research, which manages about $3 billion in assets. “Right now it’s not the problem, the problem is the meltdown.”

Link -
http://noir.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=axCT9kts47tY&pos=3
========================
A few observations -
1) This incident has a long way to run and the worst may well, still be ahead! This is not a category 5 on the INES scale, as the Japanese government is currently asserting, it is already a certain 6 and it is arguably heading for a 7!
2) The authorities in Japan & elsewhere, seem to be "truth inhibited", as it appears that “Containing the "situation", is necessary, more than anything else.”  
3) The effects from this entire disaster, particularly as higher Radiation levels creep closer to Tokyo, will be massive, both for the local Japanese, but also for the entire Global Economy!

Good luck & watch the Debt!
And, Good luck, in deciphering the BS!

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 31^st, 2011 at 1:37pm:


Not necessarily......It might just mean the internal damage would cost more to repair than it would to build new reactors....

After all, the operating licence was due expire in a couple of months anyway....

Quote:


prob get more die every year in coal mines

Sprintcyclist wrote on Mar 31^st, 2011 at 3:16pm:


According to Russian papers translated by US scientists, the Chernonyl accident alone has reuslted in almost 1 million radiation related deaths - SO FAR