Live data from Hacker News

Power plant executives to face Fukushima charges for first time

washingtonpost.com

11–20 of 35 posts

Re: Power plant executives to face Fukushima charges for first time

#11
post #8

Wow, the concept of citizens' panels sounds awesome. I wish we had something similar in the US. It's the perfect solution for dealing with police shootings, where prosecutors are reluctant to indict an officer (since they need to work closely with police in their everyday work).

On the other hand, japan also has the concept of "guilty until proven innocent". I don't know if and how it applies in this case, but you might be making a monkey paw wish there.

Re: Power plant executives to face Fukushima charges for first time

#12
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your analysis might confuse two different phenomena. When you mention TEPCO pouring "400 million gallons" into the Pacific, what you're talking about is them dumping contaminated cooling water from tanks into the ocean. The scale of that dumping is caused by (a) the ongoing need to pump water into the compromised reactor to cool it and (b) the large amounts of water they've already stored. However: that water is also…

Fair enough - though I'm not sure if I will just take your word for it that the potential for new releases of new cesium 137 is not an ongoing threat from Fukushima Daiichi. The only way we can know for sure I suppose, is through the efforts of independent researchers brave enough to get close to the facility. In the spirit of HN, it would be neat to see an open technology solution for the purposes of monitoring. Ie:…

> it would be neat to see an open technology solution for the purposes of monitoring

It's trivial to do so. Decay of Cs-137 releases a 662 keV gamma ray that is easily measured and the count rate is proportional to the source activity (or ultimately the total amount of Cs-137 present). You can calibrate an inexpensive NaI detector such that it will tell you how much Cs-137 is in a given volume of water. If you place it next to a pipe that has a constant flow rate, you can infer the average amount of Cs-137 in the liquid flowing through the pipe. It's something that you can build in an afternoon if you know what you're doing and have the equipment.

This is pretty much how they monitor liquids for contamination in a real plant, except they use more detailed spectral measurements to monitor multiple isotopes. If you ever have the rare opportunity to go into a reactor control room, there will be a display somewhere that reads out this exact measurement.

Re: Power plant executives to face Fukushima charges for first time

#13
post #8

Wow, the concept of citizens' panels sounds awesome. I wish we had something similar in the US. It's the perfect solution for dealing with police shootings, where prosecutors are reluctant to indict an officer (since they need to work closely with police in their everyday work).

A pre-trial in the court of public opinion? I thought that is the purpose of grand juries. After all, a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich. (Though not all pork, evidently)

On one hand, it's a massive waste of judicial bandwidth. On the other, it's an effective check on the coziness between AGs, DAs, and law enforcement organizations.

Re: Power plant executives to face Fukushima charges for first time

#14

NOVA's documentary on Fukushima [1] is a very informative watch and shows the immense challenges faced by TEPCO. I don't think they will be convicted. [1] - http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/tech/nuclear-disaster.html

The blame should not be with the operators, but with decision makers who signed off on a fatally flawed plant design. Really, you'd think it was common sense: if you absolutely need these generators in case of a disaster, like a flood, don't put the generators and their gear/infrastructure at a lower flood level! Much the same mistake was repeated many times in Houston, and came to light after Hurricane Ike.

Other things that came to light that were shown in the video:

Completely passive backup cooling systems that were dependent on actively-actuated valves for proper functioning. (Should have defaulted open in case of a power failure.)

Dependence on sensors that would fail without power.

Dependence on sensors that would provide dangerously misleading readings in precisely the most dangerous situation. (Water already boiled away)

I think it's a good video to watch if you are doing operations of any kind that requires worst-case thinking and planning.

Re: Power plant executives to face Fukushima charges for first time

#15
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough - though I'm not sure if I will just take your word for it that the potential for new releases of new cesium 137 is not an ongoing threat from Fukushima Daiichi. The only way we can know for sure I suppose, is through the efforts of independent researchers brave enough to get close to the facility. In the spirit of HN, it would be neat to see an open technology solution for the purposes of monitoring. Ie:…

> it would be neat to see an open technology solution for the purposes of monitoring It's trivial to do so. Decay of Cs-137 releases a 662 keV gamma ray that is easily measured and the count rate is proportional to the source activity (or ultimately the total amount of Cs-137 present). You can calibrate an inexpensive NaI detector such that it will tell you how much Cs-137 is in a given volume of water. If you place…

Good info!

If the technology is cheap, as you point out, then the next logical step might be a collaborative project to get a network of inexpensive, miniature, buoyant craft's out to sea - for the purpose of actively measuring levels of cesium 137; sharing these results for everyone to see, to graph, and to check on at any given time of the day.

One-time results from a fish is useful data but to have a whole swarm of devices actively monitoring levels in various locations would be ideal.

Thinking ahead, the next hurdle could be the logistics of internet connection - maybe they could connect to each other in a mesh-network that daizy-chains back to an internet connection closer to shore. Oh, and power (solar panel maybe?). Navigation. Yeah - some challenges for sure, but it all seems within reason.

Re: Power plant executives to face Fukushima charges for first time

#17
The people who lived near the plants lost everything, perhaps 80000 of them. I'm not sure what became of them, but I'm pretty sure no one came up and said, here is a check for the fair market value of your property. It was more like, you can live in this cardboard cubical in this community center now. I'm sure they've moved on by now.

I'm sort of surprised they weren't treated better. All of the nuclear reactors in Japan are shut down now, and the financial interests would like to see them turned on. But how do you expect public support with 80000 refugees from the meltdowns that are grumpy about it?

Re: Power plant executives to face Fukushima charges for first time

#18
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it would be neat to see an open technology solution for the purposes of monitoring It's trivial to do so. Decay of Cs-137 releases a 662 keV gamma ray that is easily measured and the count rate is proportional to the source activity (or ultimately the total amount of Cs-137 present). You can calibrate an inexpensive NaI detector such that it will tell you how much Cs-137 is in a given volume of water. If you place…

Good info! If the technology is cheap, as you point out, then the next logical step might be a collaborative project to get a network of inexpensive, miniature, buoyant craft's out to sea - for the purpose of actively measuring levels of cesium 137; sharing these results for everyone to see, to graph, and to check on at any given time of the day. One-time results from a fish is useful data but to have a whole swarm o…

Somebody did this. Before the experiment, they expected a background level of Cesium 137 of between 1 and 2 bq/M^3 (caused by 1950s nuclear testing, which released a ton of it). They found actual levels between 1 and 2 bq/M^3 across the Pacific with some small variation above and below: http://ourradioactiveocean.org/results.html

Think about it this way. Worst-case estimates are that 2-4 kilos of Cesium 137 were released. If it all ends up in the ocean, the total Pacific Ocean weighs on the order of 638,000,000,000,000,000,000 kilos. The total new Cesium 137 is: 0.000000000000000000627% of the ocean. At a 30 year half-life, that's one decay event per 70 liters per hour.

Re: Power plant executives to face Fukushima charges for first time

#19
post #8

Wow, the concept of citizens' panels sounds awesome. I wish we had something similar in the US. It's the perfect solution for dealing with police shootings, where prosecutors are reluctant to indict an officer (since they need to work closely with police in their everyday work).

A pre-trial in the court of public opinion? I thought that is the purpose of grand juries. After all, a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich . (Though not all pork, evidently) On one hand, it's a massive waste of judicial bandwidth. On the other, it's an effective check on the coziness between AGs, DAs, and law enforcement organizations.

The difference seems to be that a US grand jury can indict on a prosecutors motion (and even, IIRC, in certain cases independently), but no one is obligated to prosecute based on an indictment once it is issued (obviously, one sought by a prosecutor will probably usually be followed up on by that prosecutor.)

But, from the description in the article, when a citizens' panel finds that charges should be issued after a prosecutor has decided not to prosecute, the case is reopened by prosecutors. Assuming this isn't just a reconsideration where the prosecutor can again decide not to actually prosecute the charges, this is a fairly substantial difference.

Re: Power plant executives to face Fukushima charges for first time

#20
post #8

Wow, the concept of citizens' panels sounds awesome. I wish we had something similar in the US. It's the perfect solution for dealing with police shootings, where prosecutors are reluctant to indict an officer (since they need to work closely with police in their everyday work).

If history is any guide, they'd mostly be used to indict minorities for crimes when prosecutors wouldn't go forward with the case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching#United_States
Post reply on HN