Keep up with the news by installing RT’s extension for . Never miss a story with this clean and simple app that delivers the latest headlines to you.

 

Pump and pray: Tepco might have to pour water on Fukushima wreckage forever

07.08.2013 20:10

Fukushima is a nightmare disaster area, and no one has the slightest idea what to do. The game is to prevent the crippled nuclear plant from turning into an “open-air super reactor spectacular” which would result in a hazardous, melted catastrophe.

View full story

Comments (36) Sort by: Highest rating Oldest first Newest first

 

Angie Hamilton 26.09.2013 14:50

The whole thing needs to be entombed top and bellow deep into the ground and it needs to be built now. Say no to nuclear and go for Solar Thermal. The Sahara Solar Breeder Project can Power half the world so why go with nuclear? Nuclear is a wast of taxpayers money and has already cost taxpayers trillions in clean up costs, we are running low on Uranium and the Weapons industry has their dirty little hands in the mix.

 

Tom Perry 23.08.2013 01:49

We could burn piles of hemp like we burn coal to power turbines. That's the reason why Cannabis has been declared a schedule I narcotic, even though that is illogical. Cocaine is schedule II, but Cannabis is I. They must think we are stupid. And we are stupid. When you crunch the numbers, it seems more expensive compared to petroleum. However, if you factor in the hideous pollution, the oil spills, and global warming, you'll see that nature is the answer. Now I got to explain the global warming thing. In second grade we learned plants breath CO2. The carbon they produce is equal to what they breathe. Duh.

 

Jonathan Newman 22.08.2013 22:24

rodney newell 11.08.2013 15:29

anybody offering an alternative here? I want real solutions please no wind or solar rubbish please

  

W ind/Solar why rubbish?? Solar energy alone has the potential to power the planet, that is before we get started on Tidal,Geothermal, Wind, wave the list goes on! The mindset at the moment is towards a single solution, we need to loose this, one solution does not fix all, you need to combine these technologies if we are serious about clean energy.

 

Scotty Stanley 21.08.2013 16:47

Basically it somehow needs to go into the sun or deep space at least but noone can get close to it they say, its too "HOT"....d rag it into the Marianas Trench, 35,000 feet deep or sea water there! there ya go make it so! your welcome.

 

Kelley Eidem 19.08.2013 05:51

The dilution theory would be correct if it were a chemical reaction. It does not apply to a nuclear reaction whatsoever. With a chemical poisoning each chemical molecule has one reaction. It's one-and done.

But the same radioactive particle can react millions, trillions or quadrillions of times. It's the half-life that tells us when the radioactivity is half as active and so on. The particle doesn't lose its potency based on how many times it causes an injury to a cell.

 

Pop Nicolae Sorin 14.08.2013 20:38

Pentru a impiedica transformarea reactoarelor avariate de la CN Fukushima intr-un “superreactor deschis in atmosfera si incontrolabil” care ar otravi intreaga planeta, TEPCO va trebui sa il raceasca cu apa … o vesnicie, intrucat nimeni nu stie alta solutie! Apa contaminata ar trebui apoi depozitata in spatii imense si tinuta mii de ani pana va deveni iar cat de cat tolerabila! Deja cantitatea de apa contaminata care e deversata zilnic in ocean e dubla fata de cea anuntata oficial de TEPCO, adica 600t/zi!

 

Aeylyeas Ellhe De Ellendeh 13.08.2013 19:55

[quote name='Richard Atkinson' time='08.08.2013 15:19']It stands to reason the uranium won't need cooling forever

Is it really more polluting to just let it burn out then? And why do i hear everywhere they have to pour water on it forever. I did n't hear that argumented so i don't know if it stands to reason it was n't going to burn forever. A runaway fission is alleged to be able to burn trough the earth.

 

Bruce Miller 12.08.2013 15:17

A bigger concern: the similar enrichec uranum plants scattered accross U.S.A.? A Qureston: Will the Chinese Thorium LFTR styed reactors operating at 99% efficiency, prove safer?

 

breakbeats 12.08.2013 13:32

worried about "the negative effect on nuclear energy and Uranium shares" Those words say it all, nuclear energy is dead and its time we moved on to more cleaner and less dangerous sources

 

CrudeDude 12.08.2013 09:20

This disaster, and it's leaks of radioactivity to the air, the land and into the Pacific, have been ongoing for more than 2 1/2 years, and there's no end in sight.

What I don't understand is why Is TEPCO in charge of remediating this radiological disaster?
I suppose the reason that no one ELSE wants to step in, is simply because no one ELSE has a solution either.

Thi s disaster will continue, and will grow even more critical.
I see no solution, but... it WILL be interesting (to say the least) to witness the ultimate outcome, as horrible as it will be, and it WILL be horrible.
VERY horrible.
Count on it.

 

rodney newell 11.08.2013 15:29

anybody offering an alternative here? I want real solutions please no wind or solar rubbish please

 

Hoar Fraust 11.08.2013 03:37

Hard to understand why countries refuse to look into thorium reactors. They are so much safer and have far more benefits!

 

Maynard 10.08.2013 05:07

Nuclear anything is perpetrated by men, and stupid. Scared little order is conducting war against female on all levels of reality. The honest truth. Sisters unite!

 

S Smith 09.08.2013 20:45

While your arithmetic about the Pacific Ocean's volume is close enough, your conclusion that "Californians can relax..." shows your glaring lack of understanding of a basic oceanographic science principle: water of different temperatures and salinity generally DO NOT MIX but stay separated into discrete layers for very long periods of time. So what we'll have is A LAYER of radioactive seawater that WILL REMAIN QUITE DISCRETE over the thousands of miles from Japan to the West Coast of the United States.The dilution effect will be much less than you propose and the radioactivity levels therefore will be much higher.

 

Tom Mysiewicz 09.08.2013 05:18

The Pacific may be big enough to soak up the radiation. But what about bioaccumulation???? That's the problem. Kelp in S. California already have 240X elevated Cesium isotope levels and rising.

 

Curtis Waters 09.08.2013 03:56

They need to remove the radioactive material but they can't use humans, so why don't they use robots? Would it be that difficult to make an unmanned vehicle capable of undertaking this task? You can't pour water on it forever, the entire ocean will become radioactive. Nuclear power plants are not safe in an area that is prone to earthquakes and tsunamis.

Add comment

Authorization required for adding comments

Register or

Name

Password

Show password

Register

or Register

Request a new password

Send

or Register

To complete a registration check
your Email:

OK

or Register

A password has been sent to your email address

Edit profile

X

Name

New password

Retype new password

Current password

Save

Cancel