Mainichi: Malfunction at Japan MOX plant — Mystery black particles found — Throws future of Japan’s nuclear cycle policy into doubt

Published: January 31st, 2012 at 9:04 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
62 comments


Title: Furnace malfunction hobbles Aomori spent nuke fuel reprocessing plant
Source: Mainichi Daily News
Date: Jan 31, 2012

A furnace malfunction at a nuclear fuel reprocessing plant [in Aomori, Japan] has stalled a planned trial run of the facility, throwing the future of Japan’s nuclear cycle policy into doubt. [...]

The technical impasse could prompt calls for a review of the country’s nuclear fuel cycle policy, under which spent fuel from conventional nuclear reactors would be reprocessed into MOX plutonium-uranium mixed-oxide fuel for so-called “pluthermal” and “full MOX” reactors. [...]

On Jan. 24, when workers started melting beads made from a mixture of glass and nonradioactive mock liquid waste in the furnace and pouring the molten material into a container below, they found the flow gradually slowing down, threatening to block the furnace outlet. Workers suspended the procedure three times and stirred the furnace interior in an attempt to restore function, but the glitch has not yet been fixed. Furthermore, unidentified and unexpected black particles each measuring several millimeters were found in the outflow. [...]

Read the report here

Published: January 31st, 2012 at 9:04 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
62 comments

Related Posts

  1. US Nuclear Officials: Fuel fragments were likely ejected from cladding at the 3 Fukushima reactors — Particles of fuel resemble highly radioactive ‘mystery black substance’ often seen in Japan since 3/11 (PHOTOS) December 10, 2013
  2. New Studies on Mystery ‘Black Substances’ Released: Fuel core materials from Fukushima plant detected — Plutonium, Uranium-236, Curium discharged into environment likely in form of fine particles (PHOTO) March 7, 2014
  3. Mainichi reveals “Secret” at Japan nuke plant — Country has ‘latent’ possession of nuclear weapons October 29, 2011
  4. Source: “Very interesting” mystery black substance in Fukushima — Beta particles too intense to be only cesium-134 and 137 (VIDEO) May 28, 2013
  5. Japan Times: Prime Minister’s position on nuclear power “extremely regrettable” — “Deplorable” decision to continue fuel cycle project January 1, 2013

62 comments to Mainichi: Malfunction at Japan MOX plant — Mystery black particles found — Throws future of Japan’s nuclear cycle policy into doubt

    • BreadAndButter BreadAndButter

      Maybe HP is in Illinois and evacuated.

      *sorry


      Report comment

    • HoTaters HoTaters

      Whoopie and others from here: great job posting at Huffington Post. Lots of good comments to get people thinking who aren’t familiar with the pro-nuke vs. anti-nuke debate. You are helping to educate people! It needs to be done.


      Report comment

      • HoTaters HoTaters

        I’m going to post this for a couple more days. The new “Avatar” picture is a mutated orange found in Fairfield, CA, in December, 2011. Basically exploded from the inside. Only half the inside is properly formed, and the rest looks like it was developing a gaping hole, then grew tentacles and odd tissue to try to cover its insides.

        I do not know if plants “suffer” but if they do, this is a picture of slow-motion suffering. Some of the tentacles are crossed. It’s very strange. It looks almost like they are little arms crossing over the inside of the orange, like a person would look if shot in the belly.

        It’s horrifying to see what radiation does to people, animals, and plants.

        Need help posting the photo to “Effects of low level radiation” forum, thanks.


        Report comment

        • MaidenHeaven MaidenHeaven

          @
          First you must register for a free account at an Image Hosting site. I use http://photobucket.com/ After arriving at your new page First Upper Right.. Mouse over your name & choose Account settings….choose Albums & choose Newest first, choose setting to Always Display links.

          Near the bottom ..See Album Privacy Settings
          Click View and manage the Album Privacy Settings See Privacy settings Content Privacy…. CHECK MARK… When I upload, permanently remove information about where my photos were taken …Be sure to Click Save at bottom of page.

          That is the most important setting, at another time go back to Account settings & choose the Applications Tab at the top & Remove Permission for a few of those Applications & look over other settings & tabs.

          Now you can choose Albums Tab at the top of page. To the left click create a New Album, here you will choose Public for this one, you can change these setting at anytime, for each album. Now upload your image ….add Title & description.

          NOTE: Image will only upload to 98 or 99% …it is finished uploading…Click Save and Continue to Album lower left.

          When uploading from now on Note the list of folders you have to the left & click on Folder Image to ensure you are uploading to correct folder. There are options to easily move images, but the above saves that step.

          Now Click on HTML code, you know if the word Copied appears briefly. Now post in the forum. By leaving at least 1 line after image link before Submitting comment you can write a description.

          You can always register at other Free Image Hosting sites as well like Flicker, Picaso & others. :) You can never have enough storage. ;)


          Report comment

        • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

          @HoTaters: awesome avatar! I wasn’t sure what it was, so thanks for the explanation.

          Regarding CA-derived foods: I’ve pretty-much made a point of reducing – as-much-as-possible – all foods in my diet that come-in from the West-coast. It’s sad how few people are aware of how contaminated our food supplies already become. I’m also in the process of beefing-up my water filter system…


          Report comment

          • lam335 lam335

            I have also given up West Coast foods for the time being (I think Washington state is even worse than California). But there’s a problem. I originally thought Florida fruits would be much better, but the weather models (and the plutonium/neptunium dispersion model) seem to indicate that Florida also got blasted in the early days of the plume’s arrival.

            This summer I lived on pomegranates and bananas from South America. I was anticipating the arrival of berries from down there as the seasons changed, but then I heard that changing whether patterns are starting to send Fuku’s nastiness down there too.

            If there any place on the planet that is not tainted by this?


            Report comment

  • or-well

    Workers stirring unexpected sludge…
    the epitome of hi-tech or…
    didn’t this happen somewhere else recently (France?) triggering an unexpected criticality?
    “Hey, climb into that turbine and see what’s jamming it. It’s almost lunch so hurry up.” and the B-movie audience waits for the splat…
    From concept to waste
    nuke power gives us a taste
    of Science Gone Wild,
    Of P-path childkillers,
    Of Power Elites
    Who see us a filler,
    statistics and mortar,
    as they build the wall
    of their nuclear horror.


    Report comment

    • Whoopie Whoopie

      Morning or-well. Guess who’s been M.I.A. these days? The Pro-Nukes. We’re thinking THIS might be why: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/01/world/asia/united-nations-tentatively-backs-japans-nuclear-stress-tests.html


      Report comment

      • or-well

        Help! NY Times wrong!
        They say that, until recently, nukes provided 30% of Japans electricity.
        BUT, once upon a time
        I SAW J-GOV STATS THAT SAID IT WAS 11+%!
        AND THAT WAS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009!
        I knew I’d regret not saving the link.
        It’s just not something I do.
        Damn.


        Report comment

        • Hmmm…

          A mere 11% instead of 30%? I think you may have uncovered what might be the cleverest nuclear deception of all, as well as the truth about how Japan can still be functioning with 30% of their electrical generation capacity shut down.

          Has to do with issues of “offsite power” we’ve all become too familiar with over the past year, and the rather surprising amount of energy needed from the EDGs (up to four very, very big ones) just to keep the reactor coolant pumps going when the power goes out (remember they don’t power the circulation in SFPs)…

          Seems nuclear plants use more of the energy they produce than they send to the grid. That’s of course all spread around (via the grid), but these figures look a whole lot like two-thirds of the nuclear capacity is used just to keep the nukes going. So a 1000 Mw reactor is, after all the pluses and minuses are factored, really only supplying ~333 Mw to the grid for water heaters and washing machines and neon lights…

          Heh.


          Report comment

        • MaidenHeaven MaidenHeaven

          @or-well 6% Energy Surplus “The (released) estimate is based on the extreme presumption that was drawn from claims by utilities. The figures in the estimate led to politicians’ remarks approving the restarting of nuclear plants.”

          http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20120123p2a00m0na007000c.html

          Japanese increase surplus solar energy by 50%

          “The country cracked down on inefficiency as a matter of course and as a whole, exceeded national energy conservation mandates. And now, another trend is emerging from the island nation: according to Reuters, owners of small solar panel installations sold 50 percent more power back to their utilities in 2011 than in the previous year.”

          “This segment of the population–homeowners and small businesses with small solar panel systems–took advantage of a government feed-in tariff scheme that requires Japan’s 10 regional power companies to purchase surplus solar power. In 2011, over 2,150 gigawatt hours were sold to the utilities in this way, equally a total of $1.2 billion spent on solar power. Comparatively, only 1,400 gigawatt hours of surplus solar energy were purchased in 2010.”

          http://www.atissun.com/blog/6366/japanese-increase-surplus-solar-energy-by-50/

          I want to say thanks for all the *poems. :)


          Report comment

          • or-well

            MaidenHeaven, good links, wow, renewables equal to 7 reactors!
            Macks’ link shows Japan still up against the wall tho, regarding imported fossil fuel thermal electric generation.
            They (and we) need to use every page in the alternative book so to speak!
            Thats one reason their shrinking population is such a critical issue –
            it will force them to rethink the entire economic paradigm extant today, but it also offers them opportunities to restructure their energy use. Big issue, many facets…
            You’re welcome for the rhymes, think of it as hit-and-run busking…


            Report comment

            • Holy Moly!!! This thread is worth way, way more than its weight in gold (or maybe plutonium)!

              I have been pointedly asking every pro-nuke I’ve encountered since 3-11 – and that’s a whole boatload of pro-nukes, believe me – to give me a nice round figure (round down if you need to) on how much energy it really takes to run a nuke. I’ve been dealing in things nuclear for very nearly four decades of my life, and this is NOT a question I ever asked before. Because until 3-11 I hadn’t encountered (or paid attention to) the event known as “Station Black-Out” and what that means. Since 3-11 it’s been a regular huge deal, as the NRC doesn’t want to say.

              Think about it. It’s not just spent fuel pool circulation that goes down until power’s restored, no thanks to gigantic 500+ Mw super-diesels making only enough emergency power to operate the 2-4 in-line Reactor Coolant Pumps plus instrumentation. Secondary (heat removal) circulation is convection during an SBO, or is for the SBOs I’ve read about so far over the past near-year. Probably BWRs more than PWRs (which need that secondary at least for awhile or it’ll melt).

              Not a single anti-nuke has ever once even so much as refused to answer the question – they have all universally ignored it as if I’d never asked. Even when I repeat the question several times. Looks like one of those “Absolute No-No” technicalities that a nuke Must Never Mention.

              I’m going to go looking deeper into this. Don’t know how deep they’ve buried this technicality, so I could use y’all’s help. Anything you find, and keep it on a word processor document for easy retrieval when we put it all together. This could really blow the head off nuclear power’s Biggest Lie if it’s just what we think it is. Wow.

              Just… Wow.


              Report comment

              • Note to Self: Don’t forget to factor grid losses by spreading the consumption around via the grid. Because it ‘loses’ nearly 20% of the energy that IS generated and uploaded, more in places where the grid hasn’t been updated since the ’30s…


                Report comment

              • or-well

                @JoyB, hasn’t a poster here said that there is no net gain or output from nukes, once everything is factored in?
                I’m not knowledgeable about this, so I just figured the smarter folks all knew this and the info was “out there” somewhere…
                I think (don’t trust me on this!) it’s actually Ramaswami Kumar who’s said this, or maybe A Green Road.
                Somebody will know! Keep asking, there’s a new “shift” coming on :)


                Report comment

                • Indeed.

                  It’s one of those “duh” things you don’t think to ask, especially if you’ve seen ‘em up close and uncomfortable. These are literally monster-sized power plants, Gigawatts worth.

                  When it suddenly (seemingly) becomes entirely apparent that these babies are also sucking Gigawatts from the grid just to keep each other going, the question arises quite naturally. What are these things actually worth per our actual ways of life? We could conserve quite a lot of that. Nukes just might end up Zero-Net – or less – when you add the ‘hidden’ costs of decommissioning and high level waste.


                  Report comment

              • Cataclysmic Cataclysmic

                @joyb.. try finding out costs of Uranium mining.. huge use of fossil fuel, and the cost of utilizing these fuels to add how much to the energy grid? Could we be using more energy to mine and run the dang things than we make from endangering our DNA and risking our survival as a species?

                How about the cost of waste storage? Is that really factored in or?

                http://www.expatica.com/fr/news/french-news/france-faces-79-bn-euro-charge-for-nuclear-power-auditor_205088.html

                Sure starts to make a case for conservation :)


                Report comment

                • Oh, I know all those arguments, and use them often when the whole “climate change! Fear! Terror! More Nukes!” thing comes up. Which is often. Nukes are by no means ‘carbon neutral’ and never can be. There are many ways this technology is completely untenable now and for the future of humanity.

                  I’d just never used (or knew, or maybe just paid attention to) the Zero-Net angle. Hmmm… I like it. Zero-Net. Think I’ll use it… §;o)


                  Report comment

    • @Or-well Orwellian disaster. Nuclear waste or radioactive material output is an extinction level event. I was surprised at the fascist greed of our Indian rulers:
      Re: India eyes $100 bn foreign investment in nuclear power sector
      Paris, Jan 31, 2012, (IANS):
      India is hopeful of getting more than $100 billion worth of foreign investment in the nuclear power sector in the next two decades and a quarter of it would come from France, Commerce and Industry Minister Anand Sharma has said.

      http://www.deccanherald.com/content/223409/india-eyes-100-bn-foreign.html

      It is dishonest to say that India wants this investment. It is the fascist ruling elite that craves this foolishness.

      When energy audit shows that no energy is available from nuclear programmes to society outside the nuclear industry and the safety problems are insoluble, we must apply the precautionary principle and avoid such stupid,dud and infintely dangerous investments. You are going against the people and stop this crime against all life for all time.
      They are commissioning a fast breeder of 500 MW capacity at Kalpakkam soon? MOX for a new type of mechanical ox. A bull that dosent work.
      See my additional data study of dams and quakes for hydrological year 2011 at
      http://glaringlacuna.blogspot.in/search?updated-min=2011-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&updated-max=2012-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&max-results=1


      Report comment

      • or-well

        Hi Ramaswami,
        two quick notes:
        always interesting to trace these “investments” to actual funding source origins and find tax avoidance, tax favouritism, taxpayer-subsidized loans and grants facilitating corporate opportunity!

        Also, nice to see you mention reforestation in connection with water supply, but that’s a whole other topic!


        Report comment

    • HoTaters HoTaters

      Wow, Orwell, you just get better and better.

      ” …. Who see us a filler,
      statistics and mortar,
      as they build the wall
      of their nuclear horror.”

      All in all we’re just another brick in their wall.


      Report comment

      • or-well

        Hi HoTaters, look around, it’s a (sadly) inspiring day.
        See the “Asahi: on “unusual”" and
        “AP: officials don’t yet” threads
        (he said spammingly touting the anti-nuke spouting, for HoTaters orange that’s shouting to doubters the need for rerouting pro-nuclear snouters a’grunting in troughs of
        SLAP!
        I’m OK now…


        Report comment

  • I have to wonder if there is contamibation entering the mix, causing it structurly and physically ?

    “JNFL to postpone official completion as many as 18 times.”
    Troubles in getting the place licensed in Japan !

    “The prototype “Monju” fast-breeder reactor in Fukui Prefecture, which is aimed at efficiently utilizing reprocessed nuclear fuel, has no prospect of restarting.”
    That’s good news ! Huh !

    “The total amount of spent nuclear fuel at nuclear power plants across Japan currently stands at some 14,000 metric tons”
    Know we know the total they have on the island !


    Report comment

  • HoTaters HoTaters

    ‘Don’t know whether to say, “Oh, s____ , or thank God!” ‘Guess that depends upon whether or not they were really using nonradioactive materials.


    Report comment

    • HoTaters HoTaters

      Yeah, you have to wonder what were they thinking …. Or were they thinking when they sited these things. Politics trumps sanity.


      Report comment

      • Actually, the really weird thing is that when nukes were first sited – which for most of the rustbuckets was back in the late ’50s and early ’60s even though it took often more than a decade to build them and get them operating – is that plate tectonics wasn’t hard science back then. In fact, all the way into past mid-60s they used to derisively laugh at students who noticed that Africa and South America looked to fit together like puzzle pieces, as if that were the most ridiculous idea ever.

        Sans plate tectonics, seismology wasn’t a very well developed science back then either. Sure, they could measure earthquakes and had a scale, but they were always surprised when earthquakes happened. Hell, it took ‘em way too long to even notice the plates physically sliding past each other in Southern California to where they accepted that the fault lines they could easily see with the naked eye indicated places where the earth was actually moving…

        Now, of course, this is all Hard Science and looking at a map of nukes makes everybody shake their heads at the sheer stupidity of it all. Yet another good reason to shut ‘em all down – humans really don’t know enough not to commit mass suicide.


        Report comment

        • VanneV anne

          After seismology became hard science and there were many warnings about the expected earthquakes, why was the license of Fukushima reactors extended? Why was MOX added?


          Report comment

          • Because they really are that terminally, suicidally, arrogantly egotistical, greedy, and stone cold blind to the existential threat to life itself that this technology represents in ALL of its applications. Like a wide-open Gate to Hell with a nice, welcoming sign over it that reads…

            Arbeit Macht Frei

            Nothing else makes any sense.


            Report comment

  • VanneV anne

    Rokkasho Reprocessing Facility
    another leak from spent fuel pool
    http://cnic.jp/english/newsletter/nit107/nit107articles/nit107rokleak.html

    Rokkasho Update: Earthquake safety and criticality design flaws
    http://cnic.jp/english/newsletter/nit118/nit118articles/nit118rokactive.html

    Exposure to Radiation During Regular Operations
    of Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant
    http://cnic.jp/english/newsletter/nit114/nit114articles/nit114rokradexpo.html

    Nuclear waste that can’t keep its cool
    “Major problems have arisen with the cooling system of the vitrified high-level waste storage buildings at the Rokkasho nuclear fuel cycle facilities in Aomori Prefecture….”
    http://cnic.jp/english/newsletter/nit105/nit105articles/nit105glassrok.html

    On the Danger of a Killer Earthquake in the Japanese Archipelago
    The Nuclear Disaster That Could Destroy Japan … and the World
    http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/04/25/the-nuclear-disaster-that-could-destroy-japan-and-the-world-2/


    Report comment

  • VanneV anne

    “In June 2008, several scientists stated that the Rokkasho plant is sited directly above an active geological fault line that could produce a magnitude 8 earthquake. But Japan Nuclear Fuel Limited have stated that there was no reason to fear an earthquake of more than magnitude 6.5 at the site, and that the plant could withstand a 6.9 quake.[5][6]”
    http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=49680798787

    “Japan Sea Earthquake Pictograph Date May 26, 1983 Place Akita and Aomori, Japan Location along the coast of the Sea of Japan Overview A powerful earthquake of magnitude 7.7 occurred 70 km northwest off the Oga peninsula in Akita and unleashed a tsunami that devastated 8 prefectures located along the coast of the Sea of Japan. Waves struck the coastal towns before and after a warning was issued, claiming lives of more than 100 people. The earthquake itself damaged Akita and Aomori the most, killing 4 people and destroyed structures, roads, railroads and embankments. Ground liquefaction that occurred as a result of combination of earthquake and tsunami heavily increased the damages. The disaster killed 104 people and destroyed 3,049 homes for a total of $180 billion in property damage.”
    http://www.sozogaku.com/fkd/en/cfen/CA1000617.html


    Report comment

  • VanneV anne

    Japan’s Other Nuclear Disaster

    Forbes Magazine dated April 25, 2011
    At the nuke dump in Rokkasho, a nation’s hunger for power has spawned a financial catastrophe.

    http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2011/0425/technology-rokkasho-japan-electric-nuclear-disaster.html


    Report comment

  • arclight arclight

    “Vitrification tests completed in November 2007. This consists of pouring high level dry waste reside along with molten glass into steel canisters.[7]

    In June 2008, several scientists stated that the Rokkasho plant is sited directly above an active geological fault line that could produce a magnitude 8 earthquake. But Japan Nuclear Fuel Limited have stated that there was no reason to fear an earthquake of more than magnitude 6.5 at the site, and that the plant could withstand a 6.9 quake.[8][9]”

    “After the Tōhoku earthquake in March 2011, the plant ran on emergency power provided by backup diesel generators.[10] The emergency generators were not intended for long-term use.[11] Reportedly there are about 3,000 tons of highly radioactive used nuclear fuel stored in Rokkasho at current, that could overheat and catch fire if the cooling systems fail. Japanese radio reported on March 13 that 600 liters of water leaked at the Rokkasho spent fuel pool.[12] According to The New York Times, grid power was restored on March 14, 2011.[13]”

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

    “Stop Rokkasho is a project run by the Japanese NGO Boomerang Net and headed up by musician Ryuichi Sakamoto. In order to bring attention to the nuclear reprocessing plant in Rokkasho in Aomori Prefecture, they get artists to contribute songs and other art to the cause. The music and other media are available on the website and as podcasts. The content is licensed to be freely distributable.”

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


    Report comment

  • VanneV anne


    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/78/SeismicAreas_JapanTrenchEarthquakes.png

    This map from:
    2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami

    “…Japan experienced over 1000 aftershocks since the earthquake, with about 60 registering over magnitude 6.0 Mw and at least three over 7.0 Mw. A magnitude 7.7 Mw and a 7.9 Mw quake occurred on 11 March[70] and the third one struck offshore on 7 April with a disputed magnitude. Its epicenter was underwater, 66 km (41 mi) off the coast of Sendai. The Japan Meteorological Agency assigned a magnitude of 7.4 MJMA, while the U.S. Geological Survey lowered it to 7.1 Mw.[71] At least four people were killed, and electricity was cut off across much of northern Japan including the loss of external power to Higashidori Nuclear Power Plant and Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant.[72][73][74] Four days later on 11 April, another strong magnitude 6.6 Mw aftershock struck Fukushima, causing additional damage and killing a total of three people.[75][76]…”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_T%C5%8Dhoku_earthquake_and_tsunami


    Report comment

  • Cataclysmic Cataclysmic

    “had approved the use of MOX fuel in ten reactors” from Nuclear Power in Japan http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf79.html

    By end of January 2010 the Nuclear & Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) on behalf of the Ministry (METI) had approved the use of MOX fuel in ten reactors, including: Takahama 3 & 4, Fukishima I-3, Kashiwazaki Kariwa 3, Genkai 3, Hamaoka 4, Onagawa 3 and Shimane-2. This is expected to occur progressively to 2012, after modifications to the reactors to take a one quarter or one third core of MOX. NISA permission for MOX use in Tomari 3 is pending…

    just one tidbit in a long list of tidbits

    lots of information in this one.. and also a link to Fukushima disaster.. official details are “interesting”


    Report comment

    • VanneV anne

      I’m only counting 8 listed reactors approved for MOX fuel. Fukushima I – is reactor #3 of Fukushima Daiichi. What are the other two approved for MOX? Was reactor #2 at Fukushima Daini using MOX fuel as one blogger stated as a comment to an Ex-skf article in August about problems at Fukushima Daini?


      Report comment

  • Cataclysmic Cataclysmic

    Anne.. Fukushima 1 through 3.. so 1, 2, and 3 were approved for MOX,(this does not mean that all had the MOX already, only that all had been approved)

    Remember the distinction Daiichi and Daini is for westerners.. there are 10 reactors at Fukushima, 6 at Daiichi and 4 at Daini and two more in planning at Daiichi.. look at the picture on the article.

    From what I have read over the last couple of days, it occurs Japan was indeed intending to utilize the fast breeder technology on an astounding level. Read the whole article and consider so much of what we have seen.. or maybe just the section entitled..
    Fast Neutron Reactors and be sure to glance at “See Generation IV paper”

    the DOTS are everywhere :)

    “experimental” fuel, lab underneath, more escaped radioactive isotopes, wider contamination..etc.. “new” unforeseen reactions..


    Report comment

    • VanneV anne

      You might be right, but Fukushima 1-3 wouldn’t say which Fukushima it is. I think it is Fukushima I for Fukushima Daiichi (first), and Reactor #3. Otherwise it could be Fukushima Daini #1-3. Also someone posted that Fukushima Daiichi #1 is too small for MOX. All Three reactors at Fukushima Daini are Mark II reactors whereas Fukushima Daiichi #1-3 are all Mark I reactors, even less suitable for MOX than Mark I reactors.

      Also, from the script, it is a capital I and not a number 1.


      Report comment

    • VanneV anne

      Interestingly, Wikipedia give the type of fuel for only the reactors @1-3 of Fukushima Daiichi. And does not give the fuel type for reactors #4-6 at Fukushima Daiichi, not the fuel type for reactors #1-4 at Fukushima Daini. At Fukushima Daiichi only reactor #6 is of the Mark II type, the rest are the earlier Mark I.
      At Fukushima Daini, reactor #1 is Mark II like reactor #6 of Fukushima Daiichi. And the rest of the reactors 9 #2-4) at Fukushima Daini are Mark II Advanced.

      Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant

      Unit Type[23] Containment Start construction[24] First criticality[24] Commercial operation[24] Electric power[24] Reactor supplier[23] Architecture[6] Construction[6] Fuel

      Fukushima I – 1 BWR-3 Mark I July 25, 1967 October 10, 1970 March 26, 1971 460 MW General Electric Ebasco Kajima LEU
      Fukushima I – 2 BWR-4 Mark I June 9, 1969 May 10, 1973 July 18, 1974 784 MW General Electric Ebasco Kajima LEU
      Fukushima I – 3 BWR-4 Mark I December 28, 1970 September 6, 1974 March 27, 1976 784 MW Toshiba Toshiba Kajima LEU/MOX[8]
      Fukushima I – 4 BWR-4 Mark I February 12, 1973 January 28, 1978 October 12, 1978 784 MW Hitachi Hitachi Kajima
      Fukushima I – 5 BWR-4 Mark I May 22, 1972 August 26, 1977 April 18, 1978 784 MW Toshiba Toshiba Kajima
      Fukushima I – 6 BWR-5 Mark II
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_Nuclear_Power_Plant


      Report comment

    • VanneV anne

      Location Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4 Unit 5 Unit 6 Central Storage
      Reactor Fuel Assemblies 400 548 548 0 548 764 0
      Spent Fuel Assemblies 292 587 514 1331 946 876 6375
      Fuel UOx UOx UO2/MOX UOx UOx UOx UO2/MOX
      New Fuel Assemblies[32] 100 28 52 204 48 64 N/A
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster


      Report comment

    • VanneV anne

      This article explains the fuel rods at Fukushima Daiichi in detail:

      Radioactive Inventory at the Fukushima NPP
      http://www.eurosafe-forum.org/userfiles/2_1_%20paper_Radioact%20inventory%20Fukushima_Pretzsch_19102011.pdf


      Report comment

  • VanneV anne

    IV. Occurrence and Development of the Accident at the Fukushima Nuclear Power Stations
    1. Outline of Fukushima Nuclear Power Stations

    Unit 1 at Fukushima Daiichi NPS was BWR-3;
    Unit 2-5 were BWR-4
    Both BWR-3 and BWR-4 Mark I
    Unit 6 was BWR-5; Mark II
    http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/kan/topics/201106/pdf/chapter_iv_all.pdf


    Report comment