Skip to main content

Data plots showing the status of the Fukushima Daiichi units

By

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.

Labels:

Comments

Mompson said…
That's some great stuff, thanks for posting! Helps us see through the media trying to sugar coat everything.
April 10, 2011 at 2:29 PM
SteveK9 said…
The media have been 'sugar coating'?
April 10, 2011 at 5:20 PM
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)]?
April 10, 2011 at 10:51 PM
David Bradish said…
No, didn't notice his bio on the twitter page, good catch.
April 11, 2011 at 6:30 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Wednesday Update

By
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...
Post a Comment
Read more

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

By
Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...
23 comments
Read more

Nuclear Utility Moves Up in Credit Ratings, Bank is "Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy"

By
Some positive signs that nuclear utilities can continue to receive positive ratings even while they finance new nuclear plants for the first time in decades: Wells Fargo upgrades SCANA to Outperform from Market Perform Wells analyst says, "YTD, SCG shares have underperformed the Regulated Electrics (total return +2% vs. +9%). Shares trade at 11.3X our 10E EPS, a modest discount to the peer group median of 11.8X. We view the valuation as attractive given a comparatively constructive regulatory environment and potential for above-average long-term EPS growth prospects ... Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy. SCG plans to participate in the development of two regulated nuclear units at a cost of $6.3B, raising legitimate concerns regarding financing and construction. We have carefully considered the risks and are comfortable with SCG’s strategy based on a highly constructive political & regulatory environment, manageable financing needs stretched out over 10 years, strong partners...
Post a Comment
Read more