Wednesday, December 14, 2011

Unit 4 Roof Myhstery: It's gone but they THINK it was cut down?


Simplyinfo says it looks like it was cutoff when folks think it might have collapsed, but why no official explanation from TEPCO of what they are up to? Where is NHK and the Japanese press when the only news we are getting from from the conspiracy / rumour sites?

Published: December 14th, 2011 at 04:42 AM EDT | Email Article EMAIL ARTICLE
By ENENEWS ADMIN
25 COMMENTS

Was a portion of Reactor No. 4 cut off? — Report: “Appears to be a planned action” (PHOTOS)

  • It is unlikely that the portion of unit 4 that is no longer there fell off
  • More likely based on looking at images it was cut off
  • Marks where the remaining unit begins are clean breaks
  • Is unit 4 falling apart? Yes
  • Very unstable
  • Far from safe or able to withstand a significant quake
  • Back top (near unit 3) shifted during a quake over the summer
  • But the entire top section above the pool appears to be a planned action
SOURCE: SimplyInfo
See photos here
UPDATE

Related Posts

  1. Report: “Confirmed that the wall of reactor 4 was lost on the south side” (PHOTOS)December 12, 2011
  2. Report: “Evidence Of Fukushima Daiichi Reactor Fire” (PHOTOS & VIDEO) May 8, 2011
  3. Report: Reactor No. 4 on fire after quake? (PHOTOS & VIDEO) September 29, 2011
  4. Work to reinforce No.4 reactor building starts soon, hoping done by August — To prevent bottom of spent fuel pool from falling out May 23, 2011
  5. Report: More plant mutations observed — Cases on the rise (PHOTOS & VIDEO)October 9, 2011
December 14th, 2011 | Category: Spent Fuel Pool No. 4
«   
   »

25 comments to Was a portion of Reactor No. 4 cut off? — Report: “Appears to be a planned action” (PHOTOS)

  • ZombiePlanetZombiePlanet
    December 14, 2011 at 5:56 am 
    Appears to be an improved poolside view from the Tepco condo.
    Then again, it does look rather “clean cut” as opposed to the collapse of a deteriorating structure. Could this be a “better” method of ventilation? :(
    If this was a intentional modification of the building, (1) how was it done, (2) is it possible for a human to withstand the punishment that exists inside that building, to preform such a task?
    I have not keep up with the photo’s, over time, of this building. Can anyone verify that this “missing wall” is actually a “recent” occurrence?
    (Not much “inside” left there, is there)
  • Gaalic Joe
    December 14, 2011 at 6:03 am 
    Thanks, NoNukes, for saying it better than most of us ever could!
  • NONUKEBOXNONUKEBOX
    December 14, 2011 at 7:46 am 
    Maybe they are trying to cope with the demands to strengthen the building against EQs: it’s hard to be building up new concrete stuctures if you got loose parts of walls etc. making your work even more difficult. Or then they could be making arrangements to try to reduce the amount of spent fuel elements by somehow robotically, by cranes, do the lifting of the older, cooler fuel elements to spent fuel elements transport containers. If I were a TEPCO engineer I would be urgently trying to arrange as much SF away from the pool as possible. All this demands much room around it and maybe cannot be done at all, but still – just guessing…
  • anneanne
    December 14, 2011 at 8:03 am 
    I posted this on the webcam thread, but it posted quite above the previous post by mungo:
    On the TBS/JNN cam there an orangish blob just to the right of reactor #4 that is pulsing. I have never seen this before. The green place just to the right of reactor #3 is larger than I have seen it before and is pulsing more than I have seen it before.
    It is 10:21 on the JNN cam and still going on.
  • jec
    December 14, 2011 at 8:13 am 
    The missing parts might explain what the cranes have been lifting and dumping into the lagoon..and it also might explain what the emergency vechiles were doing at Reactor 4. See the Fukushima Webcam discussion,and video captures. Any workers would be disposable in the dismanting scenario.
  • James2
    December 14, 2011 at 8:42 am 
    I agree with this analysis. I didn’t say, but my first impression was that they had removed the top in order to access the fuel pool more readily.
    Someone here had what I thought was a good idea the other day. I have no idea how feasibile it is.
    Why not dig a giant pit next to reactor 4 that can be filled with water when the fuel pool eventually collapses?
    I’m sure it’s not that easy – but I’m also sure that would be preferable to letting it burn in place.
    • anneanne
      December 14, 2011 at 8:51 am 
      I suspect that the ground next to reactor #4 would not hold water. Part is porous sedimentary rock and part is landfill. Again they don’t seem to want to spend the money on any other structure like lining such a structure because earthquakes would cause unrepairable leaks.
      • or-well
        December 14, 2011 at 9:04 am 
        @Anne,
        I thought I read somewhere they took the bluff overlooking the sea down to bedrock…
        in case of earthguake…
        making the site more vulnerable to a tsunami !
        Wish I knew for sure.
        • anneanne
          December 14, 2011 at 9:22 am 
          Limk provided by Misitu:
          [Geology of Fukushima]
          “I have talked with some of my colleagues (geology professors) today, and some of them knew for many years/decades that the bed rock of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuke Power Plant is soft sedimentary rock. They do not know why government (both national and local/prefectural) approved for the construction of the plant on such a bad spot, and can only think of*unethical acts of polititians and the industry.*Also,*my colleagues warn that the type of bed rock, which geologists identify,*and the strength/suitability of the*bed rock, which soil/geo-engineers determine, is different, even though I would*still support that*young sedimentary rocks below the Fukushima Daiichi Nuke Plant is NOT*suitable for constructing buildings that have to endure earthquakes. ”
          http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=3356008#post3356008
        • anneanne
          December 14, 2011 at 9:23 am 
          Why Underground Entombment At
          Fukushima Daiichi Won’t Succeed
          By Yoichi Shimatsu, 7-28-11
          “Fukushima No.1 rests on landfill comprising loose rock and sand over the natural seabed and is positioned only a couple of meters above the high tide mark. Water seepage and earthquake-caused liquefaction have seriously disturbed this rather weak soil structure….
          “Much of the danger comes from simpler processes. Extremely hot magma, consisting of nuclear residues mixed with soil minerals, will boil any sea water seeping underground, creating pressurized steam.Think of oatmeal cooking in a pot and how bubbles create blow holes. The same is happening inside the landfill.
          “The steam-created tubes harden when they cool, leaving lines of structural weakness. Eventually, these air pockets will collapse, and the massive weight of the water-filled reactors, piles of spent rods and their supporting structures will drop into deep sinkholes.
          “If the magma tubes become filled with sea water, the landfill will resemble a gigantic sponge, prone to liquefaction and collapse under earthquake motion. Even the resonance vibrations from large machines could trigger the sudden opening of new sinkholes.
          “Water holds other dangers as well, since it is a better medium for nuclear fission than the mix of stones, dirt and concrete now under the reactors. Once sea water seeps into the newly opened underground channels, the fissile particles will become free-floating and fire neutrons into bits of uranium, plutonium and other isotopes, triggering cascades of fission. The resulting steam pressure is volcanic, bursting out of the ground and spewing vast amounts of radioactive material into the atmosphere. The oatmeal spatters across the stove top. …”
          http://www.rense.com/general94/whyf.htm
        • anneanne
          December 14, 2011 at 9:23 am 
          Faults unconsidered in the seismic design of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear … Map of Outer sea from Shioyazaki” (Geological Survey Japan, 2001)
          http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/betu11_e/images/110531e4.pdf
  • JebusJebus
    December 14, 2011 at 8:59 am 
    Destroy evidence of reactor failure, sfp failure, human failure.
    Muck up crime scene, only speculation and grainy pictures left for history.
    Hotel Fukushima, you can check it out any time you like, but the radiation never leaves….
    • aigeezer
      December 14, 2011 at 12:45 pm 
      “Destroy evidence of reactor failure, sfp failure, human failure.
      Muck up crime scene, only speculation and grainy pictures left for history.”
      That’s a REALLY important point, Jebus.
      For nine months and counting the perps have been the only ones allowed at the crime scene (other than one press-corps guided tour on a bus, complete with Tepco minders/handlers).
      Westerners used to mock these practices when the Soviets did them.
  • entropy
    December 14, 2011 at 9:37 am 
    This is the kind of tabloid reporting that had us all, on the report that the wall fell, ready for the end.
    It was pure conjecture the wall fell. I don’t blame enenews because tepco has a camera pointing at this disater but fails to give us a hint of what is going on. Silence seems to imply they are more incompetent then they are. That is if they were able to remove the wall. That’s pretty impressive considering the debri and radioactivity. Of course, maybe nothing is left in storage pool anyway.
  • Mark
    December 14, 2011 at 10:12 am 
    Pure conjecture but maybe they cut the wall to gain access to the fuel pool. They may be secretive about the operation because they are planning to dump the mess into the ocean. They may be forced into this choice as the lesser of two evils, the other choice being to wait for spent fuel pool to fall down.
  • risabee
    December 14, 2011 at 12:21 pm 
    I did say on the earlier post that I watched a crane doing this on TBS/JNN. It’s parked tonight right by the building, on the right. Sometimes I’m afraid to comment or assert my views because I fear I might be seen as too conservative in my photo interps. I think Mark may be right on the dumping. What else, realistically, can they do?
    • aigeezer
      December 14, 2011 at 12:50 pm 
      “I might be seen as too conservative in my photo interps.” Risabee, please don’t self-censor, otherwise the only interps we see will be those that aren’t conservative enough. ;-)
      I think all interps are useful if they are made in a spirit of thoughtful, honest assessment. Agenda-driven stuff… not so much.
  • Heart of the RoseHeart of the Rose
    December 14, 2011 at 12:55 pm 
    The wall didn’t fall down..it was a planned removal of debris…How the hell… did the wall become debris?
    • xdrfox
      December 14, 2011 at 1:48 pm 
      xdrfox
      December 13, 2011 at 9:42 pm · Reply
      Unit 4 at Daiichi Cut Off, Didn’t Fall Off
      Dec 13th, 2011
      [Translate] It is unlikely that the portion of unit 4 that is no longer there fell off. More likely based on looking at images it was cut off. The marks where the remaining unit begins are clean breaks like they were cut rather than broke off. There is no rubble on top of the spent fuel pool. If all of this fell away during a quake in recent days there would be a pile of considerable rubble on top of the spent fuel pool. If you inspect the photos closely it is a nice clean cut and very tidy in the manner the rubble was cleaned off. TEPCO did mention in earlier reports they were going to try to remove rubble at both units 3 and 4. Unit 3 has been plagued …
      http://www.simplyinfo.org/?p=4324
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)