Skip to main content

Evening Update

UPDATE AS OF 5:00 P.M. EDT, TUESDAY, MARCH 29:

Tokyo Electric Power Co. said that cooling water is being added to the spent storage fuel pools at reactor 2 and 3. Reactor 2 was using a temporary motor-driven pump and reactor 3 was using a truck to pump the freshwater into the fuel storage pools. The International Atomic Energy Agency said that plans are being made to begin pumping freshwater into the fuel storage pool at reactor 4 starting today.

IAEA said that 63 food samples taken March 24-29 in eight prefectures (Chiba, Fukushima, Gunma, Ibaraki, Miyagi, Niigata, Tochigi and Yamagata) were below regulatory limits set by the Japanese government for iodine-131, cesium-134 and cesium-137.

New analyses of seawater about 1,000 feet from the discharge point of reactor 1 through 4 show “a significant decrease” in radiation levels from March 26, IAEA said.

Readings for iodine-131 went from 2,000,000 picocuries (1 picocurie is one-trillionth of a curie) per liter on March 26 to 297,300 picocuries per liter on March 27. Readings for cesium-137 went from 324,324 picocuries per liter on March 26 to 51,351 picocuries per liter on March 27. IAEA said that radiation readings in seawater “will be quite variable in the near future depending on water discharge levels.”

Japan’s National Research Institute of Fishery Research has analyzed five fish samples from the port of Choshi in Chiba prefecture and found concentrations in the fish to be “far below any concern for fish consumption.” Four of five samples showed cesium-137 concentrations below the limit of detection. In the remaining sample, cesium-137 was found to be slightly above detectable levels.

IAEA said the situation was evolving, but that concentrations of radionuclides in seawater would soon drop to lower values by dilution and that the levels in marine food would most likely not reach levels above regulatory limits set for consumption.

In the United States, EPA’s daily data summary from its RadNet radiation air monitors across the U.S show typical fluctuations in background radiation levels as of 8:30 A.M. EDT. “The levels detected are far below levels of concern,” EPA said.

Comments

Meredith Angwin said…
Is this right? I have to sign in and give them my password in order to see the EPA data? There should be nothing secret about this data. And they seem to want my email password or something...when I gave them a fake password, just for the site, they weren't buying.

What don't I understand about getting this data?
David Bradish said…
Meredith, we had a wrong link, it's fixed now and goes to EPA's home page. Thx.
jimwg said…
NEI's "Myths & Facts About Nuclear Energy" page is well done. My sole problem is that it's all stuck HERE! This good work should be plastered out to every media outlet and newspaper whose perspective on this event has largely been anything but composed and even-handed. In fact, I'd like NEI to _challenge_ the media to quote or cite this material in lieu most of the implacable anti-nuclear anything advocates they're guesting these days who are going to strike the metal while it's red-hot to bend fear-softened politicians and public. Take the initiative NEI!
Anonymous said…
what stories are you reading? NEI has been quoted in almost every US story on this.

This BS about a media conspiracy against nuclear power is unsubstantiated and, frankly, getting old.

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…