RE: Fukushima still a Threat to Humanity?
November 5, 2013 at 3:46 pm
(This post was last modified: November 5, 2013 at 4:06 pm by Anomalocaris.)
The level of radiation measured at Fukushima is only an indication of how poorly contained tha radioactive materials on the plant site continues to be. It is not the immediate level of radiation that presents a potential widespread threat. It is the amount of radioactive material that remains either poorly contained, or essentially uncontained, in the shabby riveted tanks of water, leached into soil, deposited onto various surfaces, that makes the potential of further major accidental release to the outside world much higher than in a normal undamaged nuclear power plant.
Will there be another INES level 7 accident there? Probably not, but not totally inconceivable.
But I would be amazed if more level 3 or level 4 accidents don't happen repeatedly at Fukushima during the course of clean up. If you ask me to guess where in the world the next level 5 nuclear accident will most likely happen? I will also say Fukushima.
I think Fukushima will remain by far the worst bleed sore in world's nuclear safety for some time. The risk of moderate to serious nuclear release at Fukushima now probably surpass the combined risk of a similar incident at all of the world's other nuclear power plants combined.
As to the risk of siting Fukushima near sea coast, please note Fukushima actually experienced very little physical damage from both the earth quake and the tsunami. This shows the concept of siting nuclear power plants near sea shore is not in itself fundamentally flawed. Rather it is a specific flaw in the actual execution that was at fault - namely the failure to locate the backup powersource at some place less likely to become waterlogged than literally the lowest point in the basement of the entire facility.
Will there be another INES level 7 accident there? Probably not, but not totally inconceivable.
But I would be amazed if more level 3 or level 4 accidents don't happen repeatedly at Fukushima during the course of clean up. If you ask me to guess where in the world the next level 5 nuclear accident will most likely happen? I will also say Fukushima.
I think Fukushima will remain by far the worst bleed sore in world's nuclear safety for some time. The risk of moderate to serious nuclear release at Fukushima now probably surpass the combined risk of a similar incident at all of the world's other nuclear power plants combined.
As to the risk of siting Fukushima near sea coast, please note Fukushima actually experienced very little physical damage from both the earth quake and the tsunami. This shows the concept of siting nuclear power plants near sea shore is not in itself fundamentally flawed. Rather it is a specific flaw in the actual execution that was at fault - namely the failure to locate the backup powersource at some place less likely to become waterlogged than literally the lowest point in the basement of the entire facility.
