Follow this blog:
RSS

Report: Fukushima Daiichi reactor in state of “meltdown”

By | May 12, 2011, 7:55 PM PDT

Nuclear Energy Institute

Nuclear fuel has melted through to the reactor's containment vessel(s). Image Source: Nuclear Energy Institute.

Japan Broadcasting Corporation is now reporting that Tokyo Electric Power Company’s (TEPCO) Fukushima Daiichi reactor No. 1 is likely in a meltdown state.

TEPCO announced today that fuel rods within reactor No. 1 have melted through the reactor vessel into the bottom of the reactor’s containment vessel. The report is unclear on whether fuel had breached the reactor’s steel containment vessel into the primary concrete containment. A TEPCO spokesperson said fuel has “fallen to the bottom of the reactor.”

Coolant levels in the reactor are low enough to fully expose the fuel rods under normal operating conditions, TEPCO acknowledged.

The containment layers were designed to prevent the melted fuel from breaching the facility, but nuclear experts have long raised serious doubts about the decades old GE design’s reliability. Some critics have alleged that cost savings trumped safety.

The good news is that the reactor’s surface temperature indicates that the fuel has cooled down, TEPCO says. Molten fuel could possibly burn through the containment vessel, allowing radioactive material to escape into the environment.

TEPCO officials may fill the containment vessel with water by injecting greater volumes into the reactor core as an added precaution. Water will leak through the breached reactor vessel into the containment vessel; however, that plan also risks contaminating the facility around the reactor. Radioactive water from the plant was dispersed into the ocean several times last month.

This news serves as a reminder that conditions at the earthquake-damaged reactors remain hazardous even though the crisis at Fukushima Daiichi no longer makes front page headlines.

Related on SmartPlanet:

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

David Worthington

About David Worthington

David Worthington is a contributing editor for SmartPlanet.

David Worthington

David Worthington

Contributing Editor

David Worthington has written for BetaNews, eWeek, PC World, Technologizer and ZDNet. Formerly, he was a senior editor at SD Times. He holds a degree from Temple University. He is based in New York.

Follow him on Twitter.

David Worthington

David Worthington

David does not have financial holdings that would influence how or what he covers. Occasionally he consults for other companies; should David cover a topic in which a client is involved, he will disclose this fact in his writing. His views do not represent those of ScaleOut Software.

He writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

If you liked this, don't miss...
6
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
-3 Votes
+ -
http://www.jordansforking.com
very good web=== www---jordansforking----com
Posted by teedhh
12th May 2011
+1 Vote
+ -
Redundancy
It is unfortunate that while the reactors survived the earthquakes and even the tsunami, that the backup system failed and led to this fiasco. Hopefully, this will lead to better back up systems as well as better designs for the future.
Posted by sboverie
13th May 2011
+1 Vote
+ -
Hopefully we will all end dangerous Nuclear Power forever
"Hopefully, this will lead to better back up systems as well as better designs for the future."

Wrong. Hopefully we'll end industry that produces extremely large amounts of dangerous poison called the Nuclear Power Industry.

Even if you had 100 backup systems, you still have dangerous, poisonous nuclear waste.

Let's spend our resources developing further renewable, non-dangerous sources of electricity generation. We can do it, the technology is there.
Posted by dbreuer
13th May 2011
+1 Vote
+ -
Agree
I agree that the nuclear waste is still the biggest hurdle to be decided. Unless alternate power can fill in for the loss of current nuclear power generation then we have to keep burning fossil fuels or keep the nuclear energy options open. My comments also apply to the nuclear reactors in use currently.
Posted by sboverie
Updated - 13th May 2011
0 Votes
+ -
It is all about energy storage dbreuer.
Wind and solar power will become more viable when an affordable and reliable method of energy storage is finally developed. The well known weaknesses of solar and wind, limited to sunny days and unreliable wind speeds respectively, make energy storage absolutely essential for them to be viable as replacements for current options.

Another little mentioned source, lightning, becomes viable if the efficient energy storage developed for solar and wind can take a rapid charge.

With those 3 sources, solar, wind and lightning, you have the potential to power large parts of the world under various weather conditions and store that power for when the weather does not cooperate. But it all depends on developing efficient energy storage.

Another side effect of developing efficient energy storage is making EV's more viable with longer range.

Yet energy storage research is a relatively low priority within the renewable energy community. Why?
Posted by Hates Idiots
Updated - 17th May 2011
0 Votes
+ -
It was the earthquake, not the tsunami that caused the meltdowns
That's the disturbing conclusion of Tepco's report over the weekend. In other words, the earthquake probably broke loose a water pipe that went into the containment chamber, resulting in the fuel rods being exposed and melting down a mere 16 hours after the earthquake. While the report was concerning Unit 1, it is not a wild assumption to conclude that this is also what occurred in Units 2 and 3, and Unit 4 probably blew due to the hydrogen leaking from 3 into 4. Lest we think this is less of a concern than the first 3, apparently the entire Unit 4 structure has started to lean, and if it collapses, then the 1000 plus rods in the fuel storage tank will get dumped out, most likely causing an uncontained meltdown.

But all US nukes were built under the assumption that there was 0 percent chance of the containment chambers being breached during an accident. Seems that there are currently 3 of 4 reactors with breached containment vessels at Fukushima. Seems to me that it's time for a re-look at those risk factors, since pipes leading into the containment vessel are clearly a higher risk factor than what has been assumed to be the case.
Posted by klassman6
16th May 2011
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!