Report: Maximum bulge in No. 4 reactor building 40% larger than previously stated in Tepco data

Published: June 25th, 2012 at 4:24 pm ET
By

65 comments


The biggest bulge reported by Tepco in May 2012 was 33 mm. The biggest bulge now being reported is 46 mm.

Tepco’s latest data regarding the bulge in the No. 4 reactor building with translated summary by Fukushima Diary:

Tepco revised the data of the reactor4 building on 6/25/2012

[...]

The South-West corner of reactor4 building turned out to be bulged/leaned to outward.

The third floor is 46mm outward compared to the first floor. On their last report, it was 33mm.

[...]

Previous Report:

See also: Japan TV: "Tilted walls found at Fukushima No.4 reactor" -- "Further investigation found damage in various parts of structure's west and south side"

Published: June 25th, 2012 at 4:24 pm ET
By

65 comments

Related Posts

  1. Report: Wall of No. 4 reactor building missing on south side (PHOTOS) December 12, 2011
  2. “It’s Leaning”: Japan nuclear engineer concerned about collapse of Reactor No. 4 — Oxidation must have weakened building material… MORE January 3, 2012
  3. Tepco: No. 4 reactor building can withstand 6-plus intensity quake -Asahi August 31, 2012
  4. Report: New images of Reactor 4 show point where structure begins to angle off — Breaks indicated in outer building frame (PHOTOS) January 17, 2012
  5. Tepco checks for cracks in Spent Fuel Pool No. 4 — Now says reactor building not tilting “as a whole” May 25, 2012

65 comments to Report: Maximum bulge in No. 4 reactor building 40% larger than previously stated in Tepco data

  • GeoHarvey

    How does something as brittle as concrete bulge?
    Normally it would just boggle my poor little mind.
    Not so here. It is too scary to confuse me. It rivets my attention and makes me wonder about the people running this show, instead of the physical and chemical science of concrete.
    What is wrong with these people? Do they really want to start up more nuclear plants and try for a replay of this mess?
    Personally, I think corporate, military, or political leader should all be required to write letters to their great grandchildren, explaining why they felt it was okay to make a mess for someone else to clean up later:

    Dear Little Nodas of the Future;
    I started these reactors just so you could play in the dust and glow prettily in the dark…

    Perhaps we should all be satisfied with less than the obscene amounts of consumer products we have been educated to regard as a right.

    Sorry – I am ranting.


    Report comment

    • CaptD CaptD

      Continue to rant…

      Our Leaders are ALL in Nuclear Denial*….

      * http://is.gd/XPjMd0

      The illogical belief that Nature cannot destroy any land based nuclear reactor, any place anytime 24/7/365!


      Report comment

      • GeoHarvey

        And what is the likelihood that nature will destroy something?
        Do you suppose it might be 100%?
        Try this out for size. Westinghouse claims its new AP1000 nuclear reactor has a maximum core damage frequency of 2.41 × 10−7 per plant per year.
        With a little math, we can conclude that if 415 AP1000 reactors were put into service, we could expect one meltdown in 100,000 years. Pretty safe, wouldn't you say? (Grrr!)
        What is the margin of error for the calculation that produced this figure? What was the margin of error in the calculation that put a 5.7 meter seawall at Fukushima? Did the engineers take into consideration the tsunami of 1933, with its maximum wave height of 26 meters? Did they take into consideration the tsunami of 1896, with its maximum wave of 36 meters? Or did the engineers make a mistake?
        Did the engineers who calculated the core damage frequency of the AP1000 make any mistakes? As an engineer, I can tell you the probability that they made multiple mistakes is precisely 100%.
        Mother nature has an almost infinite number of ways to destroy anything we build, and will do so regardless of either calculations or feelings.
        I will admit that the likelihood of many of these possibilites is almost infinitely small.
        What this means is that the actual likelihood of failure due to natural causes is a number approaching infinity divided by a number approaching infinity.
        This number has no name – perhaps we could give it one: "Googoldygook." (A mantra for…


        Report comment

        • GeoHarvey

          By the way, speaking of financials. Solaria announced they were building an unsubsidized 60 MW photovoltaic farm in Spain next year, and expected to deliver electricity at $68 to $75 per MWh. The US DOE is projecting electricity from nuclear at $113.80 per MWh, not counting the costs of Price-Anderson liability, managing nuclear waste, loan guarantees, or tax incentives.
          Why do we even consider allowing pro-nuclear corporations to continue their rape-pillage-burn campaign?


          Report comment

        • Jebus Jebus

          My math says that, no matter the odds, the likelyhood of a nuclear power plant failing and causing massive radioactive contamination, becomes 100%, when one of them fails…


          Report comment

        • HoTaters HoTaters

          GeoHarvey, I'll rant too. The 26 meter tsunami was by no means the most severe in the past 200+ years.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historic_tsunamis

          Note all the ones in Japan. Quoted from the article:

          "See also: Mount Unzen and 1792 Unzen earthquake and tsunami

          Tsunamis were the main cause of death for Japan's worst-ever volcanic disaster, due to an eruption of Mount Unzen in Nagasaki Prefecture, Kyūshū, Japan. It began towards the end of 1791 as a series of earthquakes on the western flank of Mount Unzen …. In February 1792, Fugen-daké started to erupt, triggering a lava flow which continued for two months…. On the night of 21 May, two large earthquakes were followed by a collapse of the eastern flank of Mount Unzen's Mayuyama dome, causing an avalanche which swept through Shimabara and into Ariake Bay, triggering a tsunami…. The tsunami struck Higo Province on the other side of Ariake Bay before bouncing back and hitting Shimabara again. Out of an estimated total of 15,000 fatalities, around 5,000 are thought to have been killed by the landslide, around 5,000 by the tsunami across the bay in Higo Province, and a further 5,000 by the tsunami returning to strike Shimabara. The waves reached a height of 330 ft (100 m), classing this tsunami as a small megatsunami."

          Note the use of the word "small", i.e., "small megatsunami."

          What are they thinking?


          Report comment

    • "Perhaps we should all be satisfied with less than the obscene amounts of consumer products we have been educated to regard as a right."

      No, you got that right.

      http://climatechange.thinkaboutit.eu/scripts/tinymce/jscripts/tiny_mce/plugins/imagemanager/files/Lucy/minamata1.jpg


      Report comment

    • Longjohn119

      They sure can. You have to realize that buildings such as these (and many roads and especially bridges) have an inner 'skeleton' of interwoven steel reinforcing rods. So even though the brittle concrete cracks the 're-rod' holds it together but can and will bend and bulge which OBVIOUSLY weakens the structure integrity severely.

      This is why the bulge is growing in size and will likely continue to increase until the weight is removed from the top or it collapses completely


      Report comment

    • razzz razzz

      Concrete really doesn't like vibrations (think jackhammers) but that is why they put steel and/or rebar inside the concrete to help it transfer and withstand flexing and vibrations or tall buildings and bridges would be falling down all the time. Concrete doesn't really like heat either, causes the cement to dehydrate and lose its binding properties.

      Once becoming off center, gravity takes over. If they start bracing the walls to keep them in place, you can start worrying for real.


      Report comment

  • harengus_acidophilus

    Nice…
    A nightmare in stopmotion.

    h.


    Report comment

  • GeoHarvey

    I love science. I love reason. I love people. I love heroes. I love art. I love nature.
    Once in a while, I have to rant because I find something so obscenely vile, so ugly, so careless of the damage it does, that I makes me very angry.
    The Peter Principle was developed by a man who observed it in nuclear power plants. I will paraphrase it here:

    Any dangerous but profitable activity will be used progressively more and more until it fails.
    If it fails sufficiently rarely, it will have an opportunity to become very ubiquitous.
    If it is sufficiently ubiquitous and sufficiently dangerous, it can produce failures that are widespread, even global.
    But if it is sufficiently profitable, its promoters will put enough advertising money into it to make sure it lasts until it is too late to have any effect but to wipe us all out.

    Human nature being what it is, people who want nuclear power would rather live in denial than face the fact that it is dangerous. That way, they can get rich while they are waiting for their Frankenstein monster to kill them.
    But their descendants will suffer through a number of generations, cursing their ancestors for their greed.
    Perhaps our generation will be the most cursed in history.


    Report comment

  • jec jec

    South West corner..so a collapse could focus energy TOWARDS the western areas of Japan? Any ideas of where all this could go? THAT might energize TEPCO/AKA JAPAN's government more.


    Report comment

  • dosdos dosdos

    The most dangerous thing about nuclear power plants are the people who own and run them.


    Report comment

  • or-well or-well

    Is that a radioactive banana in your plants
    or are you just happy to be steaming?
    Don't rads change materials composition
    or was all that science but dreaming?
    There's a bulge at the top -
    where Leaders should be –
    of folks with dubious sanity,
    a bulge that's getting ready to pop
    us all in the oven of infirmity
    due to chemical, biological, radiological ill
    to be addressed with a marketable pill
    of no use in terms of correction
    but made for symptomatic misdirection.


    Report comment

    • omniversling

      Is that a radioactive banana in your plants? No, just glad to see you Or-well…that made my day!


      Report comment

    • NoNukes NoNukes

      or-well,

      we are all throwing flowers and blowing kisses from the stands :)

      encore, encore.


      Report comment

      • or-well or-well

        NoNukes,
        those flowers smell sweet, airborne kisses land gently
        as my ego inflates – I'll explode imminently !
        What a mess that'll be, a miss-spelled word-splatter
        a run-amok or-well mad as a hatter !
        Oh wait, that's just normal, a usual condition -
        you'll just have to stay tuned for more rhyme-emission.
        I'm thinking the off-topic discusion forum
        is where I can best express lack of decorum.
        Haha! Not that I'm planning on rudeness or nudeness
        just an occassional how-do-you-do-ness
        aimed at the Rulers of Drooling Cluelessness,
        the odd bit of brevity from the ranks of the shoeless.
        When last I laid hit-and-run rhymes on nukes' ass,
        Enenews was forgiving and gave me a pass
        tho sometimes I veered somewhat off-topic
        I have ideas now that unless one's myopic
        are not quite so anti-nuclear focused
        but more for lightening the gloom of a nuke locus.

        I just got lucky there wordwise so I'll stop now.
        I really do appreciate everyones kind words.


        Report comment

    • NoPrevarication NoPrevarication

      So nice to have you here again, Orwell!


      Report comment

    • HoTaters HoTaters

      Welcome back, or-well. Missed ya.


      Report comment

      • Jebus Jebus

        Same here or-well, missed your prose
        You tend to lighten a heavy load
        You give us laughter with our woes
        Your verse takes us down a better road
        Stick around and keep em on their toes


        Report comment

    • BreadAndButter BreadAndButter

      I missed you


      Report comment

      • or-well or-well

        Hmmm, lets see if I guess correctly…
        HoTaters with sour cream and fresh chives
        BreadAndButter with blackcurrent jam and some Brie,
        Sunday roast for NoNukes and WindSolarPlease -
        thats four I'm sending a big happy squeeze!
        Unless that's too fresh and a bit impudent –
        for the sake of the kids I'll just say "Well met!"
        That leaves omniversling and GeoHarvey,
        NoPrevarication, Jebus, philipupnorth
        and for you I think my hand I'll hold forth
        with a BBQ burger and ice-cold beer and
        say "How about our Team this year?"
        Caricature sexist outrageous I know!
        But it's just for fun among pixels aglow
        and I bow with thanks for your kind words bestowed,
        as I do to all who have made my heart grow.


        Report comment

        • WindorSolarPlease

          or-well I'll share that roast with NoNukes, and I'll also gladly take that big happy squeeze. Your arms better be long enough for the four of us ;)

          Now if you could only make this disaster go away and end nuclear power.


          Report comment

  • About 1/2 an inch difference.

    46 mm = 1.81 inches
    33 mm = 1.29 inches

    http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=46+mm


    Report comment

    • HoTaters HoTaters

      Hmmn … where are they measuring this? At the bottom of the structure, or at the floor where the SPF is located. Makes a big difference. The angle would be of far greater interest & significance. One has to wonder if they reported the measurement in millimeters as a means of obfuscation ….

      Tepco, obfuscatorily obfuscating into oblivion ….


      Report comment

  • moonshellblue moonshellblue

    So it's bulging more or this is just a revision. Wow TEPCO is quite a puzzle. NO NUKES


    Report comment

  • Sharp2197 Sharp2197

    Slowly, very slowly, release gradually worse news, the majority will not notice just how bad it is because they become acclimated to the news. Soon they realize how terrible it is but it is too late.


    Report comment

  • Nigwil

    Mmm… plus or minus 30mm over a building 30 metres in extent. I would be surprised if it was built to that accuracy in the first place, but I guess if they are measuring a distinct change its a sign of something bad.


    Report comment

  • mungo mungo

    they are in a real hurry, they are working thruogh the day and night to sort this out..


    Report comment

    • WindorSolarPlease

      Hi mungo

      I think every minute counts now, getting some sort of handle of this before it totally blows and wrecking the whole earth. It's been a time bomb to long.

      I do think North America is already in trouble with this radiation. I think something is going on I feel like I did, when it first happened.


      Report comment