Skip to main content

Data plots showing the status of the Fukushima Daiichi units

A new blog was created several days ago just to show the parameters of FD units 1-3 based on the data that Japan’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency releases every day. The gentleman who’s running the blog, dgr4quake, is taking the data and creating meaningful charts to show what’s going on with each unit.

For instance, the chart below shows the continued increase in pressure in unit 1’s reactor pressure vessel over the past two and a half weeks. The other two RPVs have been flat and stable. The RPV pressure indicator shows an accumulation of gas in the core (likely including hydrogen). Nitrogen is currently being injected in the core so it can reduce the chance of fires or explosions from the hydrogen. According to his notes, the RPV normal operating pressure is 7MPa and maximum design pressure is 8.7 MPa. Right now unit 1 RPV pressure is almost 0.9MPa so the reactor can withstand the pressure increase for awhile.

FD - RPVpres

There are a number of other telling charts at the blog, those include data on the pressure containment vessels, drywells, and core water levels (copied below).

FD WaterLevel

As shown in the chart, about half of the fuel in all three units has been uncovered with water since the beginning of the accident. The nuclear industry considers any water uncovering of the fuel rods as core damage.

Before I continue to steal the rest of the blogger’s excellent material, let me point you over there to see the his charts and diagrams on Fukushima-Daiichi.

Comments

Mompson said…
That's some great stuff, thanks for posting! Helps us see through the media trying to sugar coat everything.
SteveK9 said…
The media have been 'sugar coating'?
Steve Darden said…
Thanks 10^6 David. It is unlikely I would have found Daniel's data site absent your post.

Did you notice that Daniel's his Twitter feed says Young Spanish permanent researcher @ Japanese Atomic Energy Agency; [PhD @ French Atomic Agency (CEA)]?
David Bradish said…
No, didn't notice his bio on the twitter page, good catch.

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…