“Definite”: Fukushima No. 3 has “long vertical crack” down side reactor vessel – Nuclear Exec.

Published: March 25th, 2011 at 6:02 pm ET
By

12 comments


Japan Encourages a Wider Evacuation From Reactor Area (mirror), New York Times, March 25, 2011:

Concerns about Reactor No. 3 have surfaced before. Japanese officials said nine days ago that the reactor vessel may have been damaged. …

A senior nuclear executive who insisted on anonymity but has broad contacts in Japan said that there was a long vertical crack running down the side of the reactor vessel itself. The crack runs down below the water level in the reactor and has been leaking fluids and gases, he said.

The severity of the radiation burns to the injured workers are consistent with contamination by water that had been in contact with damaged fuel rods, the executive said.

“There is a definite, definite crack in the vessel — it’s up and down and it’s large,” he said. “The problem with cracks is they do not get smaller.” …

Read the report here.

 

Published: March 25th, 2011 at 6:02 pm ET
By

12 comments

Related Posts

  1. Melted fuel in Reactor No. 3 appears to have burned through pressure vessel — Loaded with rods containing plutonium May 18, 2011
  2. “Most” of the fuel at Reactor No. 3 may have breached vessel after melting down twice August 8, 2011
  3. TV: High-level radiation leak at Fukushima reactor thought to be from “cracks in containment vessel” — “Even more radioactive than expected” — Salt corrosion may have led to breach (VIDEO) January 21, 2014
  4. Nuclear expert: “Water is literally pouring out of the side” of reactor containment (VIDEO) April 25, 2011
  5. KYODO NEWS ADVISORY at 10:27 pm: Government says No. 3 reactor vessel may be damaged — MOX March 24, 2011

12 comments to “Definite”: Fukushima No. 3 has “long vertical crack” down side reactor vessel – Nuclear Exec.

  • Your readers might also be interested in how to treat their radioactively contaminated drinking water:
    http://crisismaven.wordpress.com/2011/03/22/dangers-properties-possible-uses-and-methods-of-purification-of-radioactively-contaminated-drinking-water-e-g-in-japan/
    A Japanese translation seems underway, see comment by Takuya there. Maybe someone wants to help with other languages?

  • Slick Vick

    In other words, plutonium has been leaking for over 2 weeks now……………….

  • Dougie McEwan

    How can a damaged reactor be brought under control- why are they not starting to put some sort of containment over the buildings it at least reduce the amount of particles being released

  • xdrfox

    Those beams were the givaway !

  • We need a Nuclear Strike Right down the pipe on all 6 reactors. The damage left will be far less then if we let this shit bubble for 240.000 years. It would take out most of the problem in less ten a second then we can all deal with the REAL FACTS.

  • iNDREBA

    “There is a definite, definite crack in the vessel — it’s up and down and it’s large,” he said. “The problem with cracks is they do not get smaller.” …
    I LOOKED TO SEE THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE FROM AND CAN’T SEE ANYTHING QUOTED FROM ANYONE THAT SAYS THIS. IS FACT GETTING RATHER MUDDLED HERE? MUCH AS I SUSPECT THERE MAY BE DAMAGE TO THE INNER CORE, WE NEED TO SEPARATE FACT FROM FICTION AND NOT ADD FICTITIOUS QUOTES. PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG, BUT I CANNOT FIND THIS ANYWHERE IN THE ARTICLE WHICH THIS ALLEGEDLY COMES FROM!

  • radegan

    iNDREBA is right – this is likely a tasteless prank or the NYT removed that part, but I can’t believe someone didn’t make a screensaver of it and will bust them if that’s what they did.

    However, if you google: “A senior nuclear executive who insisted on anonymity but has broad contacts in Japan”

    You will find those words were used in an earlier story about Iodine levels in Tokyo water. Likely the same source, but might be a fraud or strawman to taint nuclear opponents as fools who believe anything.

  • There is NO NYT article posted on the 25th that mentions problems with “Concerns about Reactor No. 3”. The date on their article now says Mar 26th

  • arkansascajun

    Unsaid is that, besdies the Air, the groundwater and ocean are now being contaminated.

  • Moondancermom

    The NY Times article has since been censored/altered.

  • Robert

    The article was revised. The statements of the “senior nuclear executive” about the crack were removed in the print edition, and then in the Web version (possibly because they couldn’t be confirmed, possibly because somebody contradicted them), and comments the same executive made about the aircraft carrier Ronald Reagan were moved to a different article; but I have a copy of the original page, he was quoted as above at some length, and furthermore if you Search the Times’ site for “long vertical crack”, this article URL is returned — but the words are now missing.