Latest Breaking News

Throckmorton

(3,579 posts)

47. Inleakage, from rain and ground water intrusion.

Tue May 21, 2013, 10:39 PM

May 2013

Last edited Wed May 22, 2013, 01:09 AM - Edit history (1)

They do recycle part of the outflow, but the in-leakage is still an issue. All the fuel fragments make water pumped out too hot for free release. That being the case, it is stored on-site, My guess is it will be released after 3 or 4 years in storage.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

109 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Fukushima No. 1 can’t keep its head above tainted water [View all] Wernothelpless May 2013 OP

The fricking hits just keep coming, don't they? deutsey May 2013 #1

From the article "Tepco must perpetually pour water over the melted cores of reactors 1, 2, and 3... Poll_Blind May 2013 #2

Their worries are founded. Many have stopped buying products from Japan as well as from California socialsecurityisAAA May 2013 #3

This is the kind of problem sulphurdunn May 2013 #4

+100 darkangel218 May 2013 #5

+101. closeupready May 2013 #13

+1000. Great point. Safetykitten May 2013 #69

You know, there are easier ways to boil water. Octafish May 2013 #6

Still stuck on that, eh? FBaggins May 2013 #8

Still stuck on defending the indefensible, I see. Octafish May 2013 #19

Nope. Just correcting the ridiculous. FBaggins May 2013 #25

Shows what you know. Octafish May 2013 #48

Seriously? That's the best that you could come up with? FBaggins May 2013 #49

It's more than you've come up with. Not a single article. No journal entries. No links. Nothing. Octafish May 2013 #53

Wrong. FBaggins May 2013 #57

Smear away, I don't care. Octafish May 2013 #73

Must disagree on one item: chknltl May 2013 #95

They do get depleated uranium sulphurdunn May 2013 #71

From reactors? No. FBaggins May 2013 #77

Still can't figure out why it can't be a closed system. FBaggins May 2013 #7

Yeah, it's easy to fix this thing right FBaggins? You always underestimated this disaster flamingdem May 2013 #9

Never copped to that ongoing miscalculation? FBaggins May 2013 #11

For starters you denied that there could be a meltdown flamingdem May 2013 #16

Can you back it up? FBaggins May 2013 #17

You are consistent. Here's one thing you wrote on March 11, 2011. Octafish May 2013 #22

Thanks for backing me up FBaggins May 2013 #23

Not backing you up. Those are your words, minimizing the danger and defending the indefensible. Octafish May 2013 #54

So did you not read them... or not understand them? FBaggins May 2013 #56

Plutonium is an issue. Octafish May 2013 #72

Time to come back to the real world Octafish. FBaggins May 2013 #74

The open-to the air fuel pool with all the debris and crap sticking out? That fuel pool? Octafish May 2013 #85

Yep. That's the one. FBaggins May 2013 #90

So what if they put a cover over it? The thing exploded sending plutonium fuel all over Honshu. Octafish May 2013 #99

How would you maintain the pumps, valves, etc? AtheistCrusader May 2013 #10

They're already pumping radioactive water. FBaggins May 2013 #12

I highly doubt AtheistCrusader May 2013 #14

Oh I agree... FBaggins May 2013 #15

Seriously? Nuclear waste is negligible? RobertEarl May 2013 #27

I live on the pacific rim. AtheistCrusader May 2013 #28

You're gonna stick with negligible, eh? RobertEarl May 2013 #29

I don't live apart from nature. Again, you seem incapable of understanding context. AtheistCrusader May 2013 #30

Of course RobertEarl May 2013 #31

Before I do, do we AtheistCrusader May 2013 #32

Not escaped containment? RobertEarl May 2013 #34

You have no idea what you are talking about. AtheistCrusader May 2013 #35

The cores melted through the containment RobertEarl May 2013 #37

You don't seem to know what the containment is. AtheistCrusader May 2013 #39

They melted through but they are contained? RobertEarl May 2013 #40

First off, it's not cores anymore. AtheistCrusader May 2013 #41

By the way, guess who else used the word 'negligible?' AtheistCrusader May 2013 #36

There you go RobertEarl May 2013 #80

Who 'we' white man? AtheistCrusader May 2013 #84

You are almost there RobertEarl May 2013 #89

While we are 'taking lessons' here you might want to know AtheistCrusader May 2013 #91

Closer, but still RobertEarl May 2013 #93

I do not support closing ALL reactors. AtheistCrusader May 2013 #94

Back to containment RobertEarl May 2013 #96

You are making assumptions. AtheistCrusader May 2013 #97

Well RobertEarl May 2013 #100

Another untrue statement. AtheistCrusader May 2013 #102

+++++ marions ghost May 2013 #55

You lost all credibility with anything related to nukes NickB79 May 2013 #51

Nonsense. FBaggins May 2013 #58

Hahaha RobertEarl May 2013 #63

You forget that you're one of the few things that nuke and anti-nuke here agree on. FBaggins May 2013 #64

Hahaha RobertEarl May 2013 #68

Thanks, nick. Great threads, eh? RobertEarl May 2013 #109

I asked a similar question a while back. sofa king May 2013 #20

That's definitely not the case. FBaggins May 2013 #24

Are you including direct contact, coolant and core? sofa king May 2013 #70

It was really in the context of your statement. FBaggins May 2013 #76

Understood. sofa king May 2013 #82

That's it RobertEarl May 2013 #83

Tritium is a form of helium and has likely infiltrated the water molecules. Sirveri May 2013 #103

Inleakage, from rain and ground water intrusion. Throckmorton May 2013 #47

That makes sense. FBaggins May 2013 #50

it is at sea level it will always flood! incoming radioactive isotopes to the west coast usa Sunlei May 2013 #18

The terrible, inevitable, ongoing Zoeisright May 2013 #21

Is there any way to treat the contaminated water at all? mwooldri May 2013 #26

Yes. Of almost all but the tritium. FBaggins May 2013 #33

That technology does not exist RobertEarl May 2013 #38

Except that the article in the OP says they're doing exactly that for everything but tritium caraher May 2013 #42

Sure, Tepco has it all figured out RobertEarl May 2013 #44

TEPCO is definitely sleazy caraher May 2013 #45

Gosh, you're right RobertEarl May 2013 #46

Reading comprehension fail caraher May 2013 #75

I see no reason to limit your post in that way. FBaggins May 2013 #78

I am not so proud RobertEarl May 2013 #79

What you are proud of is your concern, not mine. caraher May 2013 #81

Not proud of you RobertEarl May 2013 #86

The pollution is, and will continue to be produced by this damaged reactor complex regardless of AtheistCrusader May 2013 #87

to be fair, it is technically possible to get the tritium out of the water. Sirveri May 2013 #104

Sure caraher May 2013 #105

Probably much more expensive, but doing things right tends to cost money. Sirveri May 2013 #106

Good point caraher May 2013 #107

I used to be a nuke tech on my submarine. Sirveri May 2013 #108

K&R DeSwiss May 2013 #43

Does anyone here really think that contaminated water hasnt been already dumped into the ocean?? darkangel218 May 2013 #52

Of course there has. Lots of it RobertEarl May 2013 #59

All nuclear plants should be closed ASAP darkangel218 May 2013 #60

It is the only wise action RobertEarl May 2013 #61

People are ignorant darkangel218 May 2013 #62

Well, almost half of the represented material was dumped in a very uncontrolled manner in the early AtheistCrusader May 2013 #92

WHEN ARE PEOPLE GOING TO WAKE UP AND REALIZE THE DANGERS?? darkangel218 May 2013 #65

When do they generally wake up? ... Wernothelpless May 2013 #66

Yah, and that will indeed be too late darkangel218 May 2013 #67

Yeah, I didn't take it. AtheistCrusader May 2013 #88

lol darkangel218 May 2013 #98

All nukes need to go CountAllVotes May 2013 #101