Earfquake!

kerzain · 2011-05-25T20:19:22.000Z

Seven scientists and other experts are being tried for manslaughter in Italy because they failed to predict a 2009 earthquake that killed 300 people.

Quaro · 2011-06-09T11:47:24.000Z

While it has fallen from the headlines, the nuclear crisis continues:

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/09_22.html

The Japanese government says it will quickly decide on whether to evacuate more people from areas around the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant which have radiation levels exceeding the state limit.

This comes after it was found that accumulative radiation exposure levels in parts of Date and Minamisoma cities exceed the 20 millisieverts per year limit set by the government. The areas are outside the current evacuation zone.

Date is 60 kilometres (37 miles) from the plant.

playingwithknives · 2011-06-09T12:29:47.000Z

It looks like the fuel has melted through one or more of the containment vessels, and is now pooled in the secondary containment area. This may well be the cause of the above.

Link

Sarkus:

If they can resubmerge the rods, then the current (relatively) low levels of radiation being released should go away. Entombment is another long-term option. Remember, even at Chernobyl you can (and many people do) get very close to the reactor today

I guess entombment might be the only option now, unless they can cool the material thats gone through the bottom of the containment vessel? Even the containment isn’t really long term, that multi billion project they are starting at Chernobyl now is only good for 100 years. Chernobyl isn’t right next to the coast or in an active earthquake zone either. If the current sarcophagus was hit with a big earthquake no one would be going near.

At least Japan has the design and technical ability to construct something that will work, if only for the time it takes to develop technology to neutralize or process the mess safely.

Sarkus · 2011-06-09T12:37:13.000Z

playingwithknives:

I guess entombment might be the only option now, unless they can cool the material thats gone through the bottom of the containment vessel? Even the containment isn’t really long term, that multi billion project they are starting at Chernobyl now is only good for 100 years. Chernobyl isn’t right next to the coast or in an active earthquake zone either. If the current sarcophagus was hit with a big earthquake no one would be going near.

The Chernobyl comparisons are not apt, for a variety of reasons. Among other things, there is a lot more radioactive material inside the sarcophagus due to the initial explosion, whereas Fukushima has a relatively small amount of radioactive debris to deal with.

Quaro · 2011-06-09T13:13:54.000Z

What’s especially discouraging is every time they revise an estimate, it is always for the worse. They seem to have assumed best case scenarios for everything.

They just doubled estimated release with the most recent announcement:

In early April, the agency said some 370,000 terabecquerels escaped from the facility. It now believes that figure was 770,000 terabecquerels.

So the official estimate is about 1/8th of Chernobyl, but climbing.

Mordrak · 2011-06-09T13:55:21.000Z

Sarkus:

The Chernobyl comparisons are not apt, for a variety of reasons. Among other things, there is a lot more radioactive material inside the sarcophagus due to the initial explosion, whereas Fukushima has a relatively small amount of radioactive debris to deal with.

Are you talking about fuel and spent fuel in the cores? Or radioactive debris generally? And how does that affect long term entombment if that’s what they need to do? Or do you think they won’t need to do that?

I’m not exactly sure what your criticism of his point is. Yes there’s a scale difference (that seems to be shrinking unfortunately), but issues of viability of long term solutions are still relevant. Even if smaller than Chernobyl, the issue (viability of long term containment) itself doesn’t seem small.

jpinard · 2011-06-14T10:22:12.000Z

Quaro:

What’s especially discouraging is every time they revise an estimate, it is always for the worse. They seem to have assumed best case scenarios for everything.

They just doubled estimated release with the most recent announcement:

So the official estimate is about 1/8th of Chernobyl, but climbing.

I still think official Chernobyl numbers are too low and the amount of radiation (initial and post-entombment) are higher than what’s reported.

BrianRubin · 2011-09-01T13:51:19.000Z

Just felt a little fun one here in Los Angeles.

BrianRubin · 2011-09-01T13:55:20.000Z

Shallow 4.2 quake up in the valley:

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsus/Quakes/ci11001205.html

robsam · 2011-09-01T13:55:46.000Z

The epicenter is in the Games forum.

Cougar · 2011-09-01T14:03:26.000Z

Surprised you felt one that small in LA. When I lived there for ~15 years, I barely felt anything under a 5.

That being said, I lived in the areas with tons of bedrock underneath.

~C~

corsair · 2011-09-01T14:26:39.000Z

Cougar:

Surprised you felt one that small in LA. When I lived there for ~15 years, I barely felt anything under a 5.

That being said, I lived in the areas with tons of bedrock underneath.

~C~

When I was in Chino Hills, the outlying quakes tended to bounce off the bedrock and I felt them far less than, say, in Long Beach. However, the 4.5 one mile away within the bedrock caused the whole house to visibly flex.

That being said, didn’t feel it at all, but I think I was on the 210 Freeway at the time.

markv · 2011-09-09T13:48:44.000Z

Apparently we just had an earthquake just on the edge of Vancouver Island and people felt it here in Vancouver. I didn’t feel a thing, and didn’t even know we had one until I got some email notification about it.

6.7 is what it registered. As much as I shouldn’t be, I’m kind of disappointed I didn’t feel anything.

Zuwadza · 2011-09-09T13:51:04.000Z

I didn’t feel a thing either and I’m also kind of disappointed!

Creole_Ned · 2011-09-09T14:05:15.000Z

Downgraded to a 6.4, apparently. As per the other thread, I also did not feel the earth move for me.

Jason_McCullough · 2011-09-09T14:44:56.000Z

Based on the shakemap very localized.

Alan_Dunkin · 2011-09-09T14:47:26.000Z

It was based like 170 outside of Vancouver and 50 miles underground. Those kinds of quakes don’t propagate to the surface accept highly localized areas or super-loose terrain.

— Alan

WarrenD · 2011-09-09T15:09:52.000Z

My windows were rattling and felt a small vibration here in Vancouver, that’s about it thankfully.

Volksy · 2011-09-09T15:35:18.000Z

markv:

As much as I shouldn’t be, I’m kind of disappointed I didn’t feel anything.

I had the exact same reaction to the East Coast quake. After finding out there had been a quake that was felt by many of my friends and family in the area, I was kinda bummed that I felt nothing whatsoever.

Yeah, I should be thankful it was a non-event, but dammit, there’s only going to be so many earthquakes felt in NC in my lifetime and I feel I “missed out” on one of 'em.

RepoMan · 2011-09-09T16:04:55.000Z

Yikes, apparently this was felt rather strongly in a downtown Bellevue skyscraper. Didn’t feel a damn thing here in Redmond. Actually I am reassured that my home and office are evidently on bedrock.