Skip to main content

Monday Evening Update

From NEI's Japan Earthquake launch page:

UPDATE AS OF 7 P.M. EDT, MONDAY, MARCH 28:
The International Atomic Energy Agency said that Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency is planning a meeting with Tokyo Electric Power Co. to determine the origin of contaminated water in the turbine buildings at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.

Contaminated water from the basement floor of the reactor 1 turbine building is being pumped into its main condenser. At reactor 2 that process has not begun because the steam condenser is full, IAEA said. Pumping contaminated water is being considered at reactors 3 and 4.

Three workers who received radiation exposure from standing in contaminated water were released today from the National Institute of Radiological Sciences, where they had been under observation. The level of localized exposure received by two of the workers is between 200 to 300 rem, lower than the previous estimate of 200 to 600 rem, IAEA said.

Radiation Monitoring Continues

Results from ocean monitoring stations up to 18 miles off the shoreline from the Fukushima Daiichi plant showed levels of iodine-131 at most locations were below federal limits. IAEA said results from four monitoring stations on March 26 showed iodine-131 concentrations were between 162 and 486 picocuries (1 picocurie is one-trillionth of a curie) per liter. Cesium-137 concentrations ranged from below the level of detection up to 432 picocuries per liter.
IAEA said that it is still too early to draw conclusions for expected concentrations in marine food, because the situation can change rapidly.

The latest sampling shows that drinking water in Fukushima and Ibaraki prefectures remain below the Japanese limits for the ingestion of drinking water by infants. Iodine-131 was reported in food samples taken from March 26 to March 27 in six prefectures (Fukushima, Gunma, Ibaraki, Niigata, Tochigi and Yamagata) in vegetables, strawberries and watermelon.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency identified trace amounts of radioactive isotopes at its 12 RadNet air monitor locations across the nation. The levels are extremely low and are far below levels that would be a public health concern. EPA's samples were captured by monitors in Alaska, Alabama, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada and Washington state over the past week and sent to EPA scientists for detailed laboratory analysis.

For more information about radiation, see NEI's Web page on health and radiation safety. For detailed information on EPA's RadNet air monitor locations, click here.

Comments

netudiant said…
The Austrians report massive emissions from the plant equivalent to 10% of the Chernobyl total every day, mostly iodine 131 but also about 10% cesium 137.
They base this on the CNTBT monitoring network.
The web site http://www.zamg.ac.at/ is in German but the tables and dispersion maps are self explanatory.
These emissions have been blown to sea almost continuously since the accident, but are not reported anywhere else.
If the wind shifts, they will come as a severe shock to the Japanese people.
Could someone knowledgeable explain how long these emissions are projected to continue, where they come from and what is their likely impact.
jimwg said…
"No Threat From Japanese Radiation Spread Across U.S."
Published March 28, 2011
Associated Press

It'd help further dispell radioation's eternally virulent "creeping glowing fog" perception if the AP put into contrast how weak these traces are; that such are found in volcanic eruptions, and that were there detectors so designed one could detect particulates from Chinese coal-fired plants in the U.S. or sand from Sahara sandstorms.

Already cable busuness shows are inviting more and more biased "consultants" announcing that this is the "final nail in the coffin for nuclear energy" and Greenpeace has started to "review" even thermonuclear fusion on their anything nuclear exorcism list.

Where is the nuclear industry's demand to have the media fair and balanced?
David Bradish said…
netudiant, there are not massive emissions coming out of the plant. That implies the reactor cores are exposed like Chernobyl and that's not the case. A piece in the BBC news explains that the "radioactive fallout at Fukushima is less than 1% of that at Chernobyl."

jimwg, the whole nuclear industry is mobilized and talking with the media as much as possible. Of course, it would be easier if the media only listened to us (ha ha), but that's simply not the case. We just have to continue to present the facts and help folks under the situation and put it into perspective. I'd have to say not all is bad with the media, there are quite a number of good pieces out there which we've tried to highlight. If you have ideas on how the industry could be more effective, please share them.
Atomikrabbit said…
“If you have ideas on how the industry could be more effective, please share them.”

The only way the media is going to give equal treatment to nuclear is when you are spending as much on daily advertising as the oil/gas/coal industry. In the meantime, for every reactor-year of delay, postponement, or premature cancellation they can create, the fossil energy interests make an extra $365 million in revenue. Tilting the media is a pay-to-play game.

Nuclear was an industry created by scientific geniuses, and destroyed (in the democracies anyway) by media executives, politicians, and lawyers.

Popular posts from this blog

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

Ohio faces a decision soon about its two nuclear reactors, Davis-Besse and Perry, and on Wednesday, neighbors of one of those plants issued a cry for help. The reactors’ problem is that the price of electricity they sell on the high-voltage grid is depressed, mostly because of a surplus of natural gas. And the reactors do not get any revenue for the other benefits they provide. Some of those benefits are regional – emissions-free electricity, reliability with months of fuel on-site, and diversity in case of problems or price spikes with gas or coal, state and federal payroll taxes, and national economic stimulus as the plants buy fuel, supplies and services. Some of the benefits are highly localized, including employment and property taxes. One locality is already feeling the pinch: Oak Harbor on Lake Erie, home to Davis-Besse. The town has a middle school in a building that is 106 years old, and an elementary school from the 1950s, and on May 2 was scheduled to have a referendu

Wednesday Update

From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin