• Gold Money
    05/03/2016 - 11:35
    Crude oil time-spreads have completely dislocated from inventories. Historically, such dislocations have proved to be short lived. We expect that either spot prices will sell-off again or the back...

Guest Post: Another Asian Fukushima Imminent?

Tyler Durden's picture

Your rating: None

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:26 | 2019589 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Wang To-Far....Long Duck Dong and Bang Dae Ho's cousin.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:33 | 2019608 cossack55
cossack55's picture


You are one sharp dog.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 15:14 | 2019948 mrgneiss
mrgneiss's picture

Am I missing something or what does weather have to do with tsunamis and earthquakes?  Or are they saying that if some kind of Fukushima event occurred in Taiwan the inevitable typhoon would smear the fallout all over the island, and do so 2-4 times per year?

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 15:42 | 2020070 trav7777
trav7777's picture

I got no clue, and neither do their candidates, who seem to think they can have power without having power plants.

So if they are going to BOTH reduce nuclear power AND cut CO2 emissions, where the fuck EXACTLY are they gonna get electricity from?

There is no fundamental problem with Mark 1 BWR that poses any great risk.  The problem with NPP is always the same- decades worth of cores are sitting uncontained in swimming pools.  This is true be they the latest CANDU or APWR, or the most ancient Mark 1 BWR.

Fukushima should have at least taught the necessity of H2 venting, and having shore power present within 6 hours of scram.  Either way, the catastrophe at Fukushima is from the SFPs, not the reactors.  Had those ponds been empty, this would have been a serious disaster but nowhere NEAR the scale it turned out to be.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 19:06 | 2020580 lincolnsteffens
lincolnsteffens's picture

Trav, I hate to agree with you, but, I do.

It seems that the more complex human lives become the more stupid they get. If Tiwan has an " anomalous incident of a rare and unusually a-typical complex unheard of coincidences ..blah, blah, blah"  there will be a deserted rock off the coast of the Peoples Republic of China that has had an Easter Island experience. Within a week of a blow up/earthquake nuclear disaster Taiwan would be 80% depopulated. The Red Chinese will welcome their brethren home to occupy new cities that have already been built but not used. The Chinese Nationalists will surrender what ever they need to in order to get fed and housed. No shots fired. Just a crises driven  emergency evacuation and eventually the manufacturing dynamo that was once Taiwan is transfered to the mainland.

I can see a welcomed Normandy type invasion by a Red Chinese flotilla of thousands of ships to hurriedly rescue the island's population from nuclear fall out. Mother Nature is not happy with human foolishness and is going to fix the problem by making life much simpler for humans to handle. Can you imagine trying to evacuate up to 23 Million people!

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 22:08 | 2020787 malek
malek's picture

> having shore power present within 6 hours of scram.

That's a step in the right direction, but doesn't help you much if the main power distibution rooms are flooded with seawater...

Sat, 12/31/2011 - 06:32 | 2023404 Element
Element's picture

There is no fundamental problem with Mark 1 BWR that poses any great risk.


Trav, Taiwan's regional geological setting is different to Japan's but it's almost equally prone to large earthquakes.

See figs 2, 3 and 4.

That impressive fresh-looking central mountain belt is the result of regular large earthquakes. Note that figure2 is the product of a sample period that's far too short to show the scale and periodicity what made those mountains so impressive.

One day we'll find out what does that and I hope they're not still operating BWRs when that happens.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 16:21 | 2020202 Freddie
Freddie's picture

General Electric/Obama and Westinghouse make sh*t reactors built by union goons who vote Dem.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 23:36 | 2020954 ThrivingAdmistC...
ThrivingAdmistCollapse's picture

I thought Toshiba now runs Westing house?  In anycase, Taiwan is an integral part of the world economy at this point.  If Taiwan has a nuclear meltdown, such a small island society will not be able to cope with it.  Their downfall might trigger a broader East Asian economic collapse.

Fri, 12/30/2011 - 01:05 | 2021034 Reptil
Reptil's picture

Wait until the full reality of the Fukushima disaster dawns on the japanese people themselves.

We'll (sadly) see something new in the global economy. Open revolution in a "developed" country.

People have started getting sick and dying already, it has begun. Until now the cultural code in Japan has held this process of open revolt within check.

This is just one example, the authorities have now resorted to suppression of the citizens, they must be very afraid.
"I've heard that the excrement from the irradiated evacuees like yourselves contaminates the environment more with radiation". Mayor of Tomakomai City

Or import (expensive) Panda bears?
"Sendai City in Miyagi Prefecture wants to "borrow" pandas from China to cheer children in the city. So the vice mayor of Sendai visited PM Noda on December 22 with two TV celebrities to press Noda to ask for panda loan when he visits China on December 25. Sure, says Noda.

The celebrities, Masahiko Kondo and Tetsuko Kuroyanagi, vow they will support the city by providing money for panda housing and protection, which is estimated to be 1 billion yen over 5 years. Kondo says the money comes from donations that his office has collected from citizens for the people in disaster-affected areas. (Yomiuri Shinbun Miyagi local version 12/23/2011)"

Panda bears are a good replacement for Lady Gaga? To calm the restless natives? Aaaah but it is obvious; A cute bear, on the extinction list, comforting cute japanese children who have no hope of ever producing healthy offspring themselves.

The inverted totalitarian state is showing deep cracks.

Radiation affects intelligence. How would citizens react, if they'd know? In both the USA and Japan, the effects are known, can be known.

So... there are more problems because of .... more awareness??!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDHS6Ddn4ow

In Japan and in Belarus they call that "harmful rumours".
And no, a fair number of USA plants are EXACTLY the same as Fukushima Dai-ichi. The new AP-1000 is not safe at all, no "lessons from Fukushima" have been implemented. They just going to build the plants, reason be damned! http://fairewinds.com/content/ap-1000-press-conference-%E2%80%93-technic...

Why? Here's why: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/11/21/2795537/warren-buffett-visit...

Cognitive dissonance at it's finest.

Fri, 12/30/2011 - 00:25 | 2021010 Reptil
Reptil's picture

General Electric (and the whole nuclear industry): cesspool

Whistleblower Jack Shannon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yf1ur9aBiS8

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:39 | 2019628 Tsar Pointless
Tsar Pointless's picture

You forgot his brother, Wang To-Suck.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 17:18 | 2020382 Steaming_Wookie_Doo
Steaming_Wookie_Doo's picture

If his Wang To-far, then I hope the wife's Pu See Wei-deep

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 14:08 | 2019747 earleflorida
earleflorida's picture

"Dr Stu's Blog" 3/24/11___Stuwart Farrimond

'The Future of Nuclear Power after Fukushima': Thorium Reactors *{LFTR-Reactors'}


Thu, 12/29/2011 - 15:37 | 2020059 Matt
Matt's picture

I like how people express how safe, efficient and non-waste producing these LFTRs are. Especially considering they are hypothetical.

What I want to see is for a bunch of them to be built in a desert somewhere, and then tested to higher standards than we test cars. smash stuff into them, flood them, bomb them. Let one run for 50 years, and see what happens at the end of its life.

I mean, Fukushima reactos were within 3 years of being decommisioned; if they were brand new, they wouldnt have overfilled spent fuel ponds and likely wouldn't have been so problematic.

Forget how awesome it is hypothetically. I want to see real-world worst case scenarios and know the true risks and costs from planning through operation to complete decommissioning and disposal of all waste before we deploy them all over the world in large numbers.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 15:46 | 2020084 trav7777
trav7777's picture

I want you people to sit back and contemplate how MINOR Fukushima would have been had it NOT been for the 50 years' worth of spent core material sitting in uncontained swimming pools.

Even Gundersen maintains that the big boom was caused by a prompt criticality in a SFP. 

The problem with NP is NOT the reactor design...although the Mark 1 has some definite safety flaws, these were not what the great risk was.  If you decomission a BWR, STILL wtf do you do with the spent fuel!?!?

Fukushima in the event of coolant loss has the same issues with hydrogen and explosions and release of core materials because they'd STILL have been in those pools.  If Japan built a brand-new APWR on the site, they would STILL HAVE the SAME issues with spent fuel to deal with (although some of the newer reactor designs can partially reprocess and burn this stuff)

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 16:34 | 2020235 Fukushima Sam
Fukushima Sam's picture

Dude, Fukushima (sans pools) is still playing out.  They don't know where the corium is, but they do know they have contaminated groundwater.

Imagine a solar storm taking out everything electrical in the US or even the globe.  Including the NPP control systems...

Without immediate cold shutdown capability nuclear power is a huge bet against nature.  And on a long enough timeline...

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 22:11 | 2020793 trav7777
trav7777's picture

Newer designs have passive safety features.

if there is such a solar storm FAR MORE people will die as planes fall out of the sky than from nuclear material

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 17:11 | 2020366 Matt
Matt's picture

Did you even read my post before replying to it? I specifically said: "I mean, Fukushima reactos were within 3 years of being decommisioned; if they were brand new, they wouldnt have overfilled spent fuel ponds and likely wouldn't have been so problematic." I already considered how much less of a problem there would have been.

When the BWRs were originally designed, they were made to have a certain amount of fuel in the Spent Fuel Ponds. Over time, the amount of material and the density of storage was increased multiple times, since they never came up with a long term solution.

Who knows what challenges there would be after 40+ years of operating a Thorium reactor? who knows what modifications to procedures and regulations will be implemented to cut costs, or "solve" waste storage problems? The only way to know would be to run one for real through its whole life, prior to deploying them all over the world, in case they somehow create some as-yet-unforseen problem worse than the SFP problem we currently have.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 22:15 | 2020801 trav7777
trav7777's picture

of course I read your post, don't assume that I am specifically replying to you as opposed to the theme in general.

Without a solution to the waste problem, no NPPs can be built, until we get magic Gen 4 that can burn waste and generates stuff only radioactive for a few hundred years lol

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 22:11 | 2020790 malek
malek's picture

So you're saying the complete meltdowns of several reactor cores were/are not a real problem?

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 22:13 | 2020796 trav7777
trav7777's picture

no; they really weren't a big deal compared to the other issues.

Meltdowns are just when core materials melt. 

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 15:57 | 2020125 LowProfile
LowProfile's picture

Hypothetical my ass.  They had one running for five years, and I for one don't want to wait until after I'm dead to adopt thorium power.

Your comments smack of someone woefully uniformed about thorium power.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 17:16 | 2020371 Matt
Matt's picture

You comment smacks of someone who only cares about short term gain, without considering any long term implications. It's thinking like yours that got us into this whole problem of overfilled Spent Fuel Ponds to begin with. Why worry about waste disposal now? I want my cheap electricity NOW, and someone else later on can figure out where to dispose of the waste.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 22:51 | 2020866 Errol
Errol's picture

Matt +1

I think it's very possible that between the three E's (Economy, Energy, Environment), humanity will not have the money/resources to properly decommission most of the plants now in operation.  I personally believe that peak cheap oil, peak debt, and overpopulation will result in the unravelling of industrial civilization, leaving these radioactive buildings' pipes, wiring, etc to be scrapped in the future by people who have no idea what the plant's original purpose was.

Dmitry Orlov has proposed a competition to design statues that are both very enduring and will properly convey to illiterate people the horrors that await them if they try to salvage materials from these sites.  God help them if this doesn't happen.

Fri, 12/30/2011 - 09:57 | 2021356 Chump
Chump's picture

Are you actually saying that we don't know how to store the waste??  I swear, you dumb anti-nuclear cunts lobby left and right to cut off any and all waste disposal options and then use waste disposal problems as a reason to continue being anti-nuclear.  Go die in a fire!

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 14:33 | 2019818 CORNGUY
CORNGUY's picture

Outstanding SheepDog


Thu, 12/29/2011 - 16:08 | 2020162 AchtungAffen
AchtungAffen's picture

Yuu Arafuka, just shut up.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:26 | 2019592 gmrpeabody
gmrpeabody's picture

Shake and bake bitchez...

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:28 | 2019595 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

But.....but......but I thought they figured out what went wrong in Japan and fixed it. No more Earthquakes by order of the www.BIS.org.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:51 | 2019674 LeBalance
LeBalance's picture

many many more 9.0 Earthquakes to come courteousy of Nuclear Fallout (thank you 2000 plus nuclear tests and other PLANNED releases!) changing the absorption albedo of the ICE it landed on Leading to Melting Ice (40 Trillion Tons per year in Greenland alone) Leading to Isostatic Depression of the Ocean floors Leading to Changes in Ocean Current (Big time Climatic Change: Ice Ages Etc), Continental Plate Movement to Compensate, ETC!

Watch some believersunderground (YT). He looks like a jesus goof until you check out his references.  (lol).

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:30 | 2019602 redytogo
redytogo's picture

Radiation is good for you, just ask, anyone within a 20 mile radius of Fukushima...


Thu, 12/29/2011 - 14:05 | 2019731 Non Passaran
Non Passaran's picture

What's that supposed to mean?

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 14:21 | 2019789 Reptil
Reptil's picture

The problem is way way WAY beyond Fukushima's 20 miles, or even Japan.
You all need to watch this:


Fri, 12/30/2011 - 00:35 | 2021021 FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

If this is true, and it seems likely, how much worse is it in Japan?  Millions?


Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:31 | 2019605 ACP
ACP's picture

Ha! It's probably happen 6 times in China already and we just don't know about it.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:33 | 2019609 taniquetil
taniquetil's picture

Irrefutable Politician Logic:

"We should move of nuclear power for the security of our country"

Imports 99% of its energy, most of it from China.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:34 | 2019613 sabra1
sabra1's picture

it's no accident that reactors are built on fault lines! it's no accident radioactive  safety limits have been raised, and deemed safe!

check out 1:50 min. into the video!


Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:39 | 2019630 fuu
fuu's picture

Check out how many reactors are located on important rivers and lakes in the US.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 15:47 | 2020088 trav7777
trav7777's picture

JFC I hope you were being sarcastic here; if not, you are an idiot.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 16:28 | 2020222 fuu
fuu's picture

Are you denying that reactors in the US are located on rivers and lakes?

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 16:44 | 2020283 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

Whoosh!   Right over yer haid!  Think for a sec:  Something hot that's cooled by water -- WHERE do you place it?

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 16:59 | 2020330 fuu
fuu's picture

No way captain.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:35 | 2019617 wolfy747400
wolfy747400's picture

Nice to know...But will that change anything? No. In relation to Nuclear what is the best way forward? Thorium. The reason we don't want to change IMO is the shit it used in bombs. Easy to get your hands on if it's everywhere. But I could be wong.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:42 | 2019636 Schmuck Raker
Schmuck Raker's picture

Ron Paul/Thorium 2012!

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:35 | 2019619 vegas
vegas's picture

I'm canceling my timeshare condo in Taiwan.



Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:39 | 2019629 Harrison
Harrison's picture

Yet another kneejerk overreaction to a one-time catastrophe. If Taiwan really does shut down its nuclear power plants, the island's economy will collapse. Taiwan's economy has already been hollowed out from moving manufacturing (and jobs) over to mainland China; Taiwan simply cannot afford to import enough oil and natural gas to make up the balance, and as we've seen in Spain, "green energy" is a fraud.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:40 | 2019633 fuu
fuu's picture

"Yet another kneejerk overreaction to a one-time catastrophe"


Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:45 | 2019652 Ancona
Ancona's picture

"Knee jerk overreaction"???

Perhaps you should go and live in Fukushima dumbass.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!