Fukushima Operator Lays Out Plan to Control Nuclear Plant

[AsahinaKimi]

Power plant before the quake and tsunami

The operator of Japan's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant says it will take between six to nine months to bring the reactors at the complex fully under control. A two-step plan published Sunday outlines a number of tasks and risks that remain, but doesn't provide an estimate for when thousands of evacuees can return home.The plan is divided into two stages, and has as its goal the removal of the fuel rods from the reactors and and from the spent fuel pools at the plant.

It was unveiled by Tokyo Electric Power Chairman Tsuneihisa Katsumata.

Katsumata says during the first stage of the project the company will achieve stable cooling at the reactors and spent fuel pools, secure enough space to store highly contaminated water, and reduce the output of radiation. That will take around three months.

The second stage is expected to take another three to six months. During this period, the company expects to bring the water temperature in the reactors fully under control.

Tokyo Electric is currently engaged in a delicate balancing act. It is trying to pump in just enough water to keep the temperature of the reactors stable but not enough to cause excessive leakage or a hydrogen explosion.

http://www.thejapannews.net/story/770529

[bananas]

1. It will take a lot longer than that to remove the fuel rods

"The plan is divided into two stages, and has as its goal the removal of the fuel rods from the reactors and and from the spent fuel pools at the plant."
But removing the fuel rods is not part of those two stages.

[MadHound]

2. Meanwhile those plants continue to spew radioactive material into the environment,

TEPCO needs to be removed from this disaster. Their goal is apparent, to save the plant assets at all costs, damned the consequences to people and the environment in general.

It is past time for the Chernobyl solution to be applied to Fukushima, and every day that passes brings us closer and closer to even greater disasters. Once again, TEPCO is putting profits, or at least minimizing losses, ahead of the general health and welfare of people and our planet.

[Odin2005]

3. Whose bright idea is it to build a nuke plant right on the coast?

[Bonobo]

4. It is intentional so that they have a large access to water

to cool the reactor in the event of failure of other backup systems.

I believe it is wide-spread practice.

[tavalon]

6. Well, in practice, much of the secondary problems have been caused

by salt build up, so that wasn't as bright as it might have seemed. Not all water, as you and I know, is created equal.

[tavalon]

5. Well, speaking of bright ideas....

Whose idea was it to build 55 reactors all over a highly unstable little island called Japan? Then again, here in America, we had many places we could have built, but at least 5 of ours are on a fault line, too. Not a whole lot of critical thought went into any of this, really.

[cambie]

7. Link to a nice map.

Building them on the shore is standard practice as it makes them more efficient and less expensive. There are many on the Eastern seaboard, some in the gulf, and about nine on the Great Lakes. Many others are on a river for the same reason. So you still think it is a bad idea?


http://money.cnn.com/news/specials/nuclear_power_plants_locations/

[jimlup]

8. Well honestly at least they have a plan!

I mean it may not go by this timeline but at least they are working from something instead of just blindly forging ahead.