MsMilkytheclown1 | Shake, Rattle & Roll: Seismic Report P1 w/ Fairewinds Energy @MsMilkytheclown1 | Uploaded May 2016 | Updated October 2024, 1 hour ago.
In this podcast, the Fairewinds Crew discusses seismicity risks and atomic power with Fairewinds Science Advisor Dr. Leslie Kanat, a double Fulbright scholar and professor of geology at Johnson State College. Dr. Kanat explains the difference between fault and subduction zones, why earthquakes are near impossible to predict, and how history can and does repeat itself. tinyurl.com/jtyvccr
Before its triple meltdown, the nuclear power industry claimed that the Fukushima Daiichi atomic reactors were earthquake proof – what the nuke proponents call ‘seismically qualified’. Fukushima Daiichi owner, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), conducted what atomic utility owners call a “Maximum Credible Assessment (MCA)” (or what the Fairewinds Crew calls the “Maximum Cost Affordable”). According to the nuclear industry, the MCA assesses the maximum magnitude of an earthquake or natural disaster based on industry best guesses in relation to anticipated costs for repair construction budgets.
Therefore, when a nuclear plant owner like Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) claims that its Diablo Canyon atomic reactors are earthquake proof… that’s not exactly true. What these atomic power producers are really claiming is that they have constructed an atomic reactor that should be able to withstand the worst possible earthquake that corporations believe is affordable. The aftershock earthquake that hit Fukushima Daiichi was a magnitude 6.6 that originated from a magnitude 9 earthquake offshore. As we continue to witness the ongoing tragedy created by the triple meltdown at Fukushima Daiichi, we also witness an atomic reactor deemed earthquake proof and ‘seismically qualified’ by the Maximum Credible Assessment suffering a major disaster and meltdown due to an earthquake less than the magnitude limit that the atomic reactor was built to withstand.
Full transcript available here: tinyurl.com/jtyvccr
MG: Hi, you’re listening to the Fairewinds Energy Education podcast hosted by the Fairewinds crew. I’m Maggie Gundersen, and welcome to our show. Today we have Dr. Les Kanat (:13), a special guest. He’s on sabbatical with us this term from Johnson State and he’s a geology professor with 25 years of experience as a geologist. We also have members of Fairewinds crew – Caroline Philips, Program Administrator, and Arnie Gundersen, Fairewinds Chief Engineer. Today we want to specifically talk to you about seismic issues across the country and what that means for nuclear power plants. We also want to talk about the atomic reactors at Fukushima Daiichi, and the seismic impact on them. What does it mean for a nuclear plant to face an earthquake? What happens? And what causes earthquakes? Can we predict them? Let’s talk to our guest, Dr. Les Kanat, and let’s talk to our Chief Engineer, Arnie Gundersen. Les, let’s start with earthquakes. Weather management has come really far and we get all these great predictions and we see radar bringing weather in. What about predicting earthquakes? Can we do that?
AG: What happened, for instance, down in Virginia at North Ana, when the earthquake happened, the nuclear core moved a little bit and they detected the change in neutron population. In other words, there was too many neutrons on one side of the nuclear reactor and not enough on the other, and the nuclear reactor automatically shut down.
CP: Well, let’s go back to the United States to California. You just discussed what happened at Fukushima Daiichi. My question for Les is 9 is a huge number on the Richter scale. What sort of earthquake caliber are we looking at for a plant like Diablo Canyon?
You know, when you get in one of these nuclear power plants, they’re so big. And a hubris sets in and you feel like you’re in control. And an engineer at Chernobyl I think really expressed it best. And here’s his direct quote: “We knew with certainty – with arrogant certainty – that we were in control of the power we were playing with. This was the day we learned we were wrong.” And that same mentality affects the people at Pacific Gas & Electric in Diablo Canyon. And it did at Fukushima, too. You look at how big these buildings are and you say, oh, this can withstand anything. But the reason they’re big is because they have enormous forces inside them that have to be constrained. And when we realize that there’s 4 or 5 million horses running around inside a nuclear core that’s 12 feet by 12 feet by 12 feet, then you get an idea of why these plants are as robust as they are. Because the energy you’re dealing with is so enormous that it’s dangerous. So we all look at how rugged these buildings are and it lulls you into a false security.
AG: (13:56) Well, there’s a four-inch mark next to the fuel canisters showing something moved four inches.
In this podcast, the Fairewinds Crew discusses seismicity risks and atomic power with Fairewinds Science Advisor Dr. Leslie Kanat, a double Fulbright scholar and professor of geology at Johnson State College. Dr. Kanat explains the difference between fault and subduction zones, why earthquakes are near impossible to predict, and how history can and does repeat itself. tinyurl.com/jtyvccr
Before its triple meltdown, the nuclear power industry claimed that the Fukushima Daiichi atomic reactors were earthquake proof – what the nuke proponents call ‘seismically qualified’. Fukushima Daiichi owner, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), conducted what atomic utility owners call a “Maximum Credible Assessment (MCA)” (or what the Fairewinds Crew calls the “Maximum Cost Affordable”). According to the nuclear industry, the MCA assesses the maximum magnitude of an earthquake or natural disaster based on industry best guesses in relation to anticipated costs for repair construction budgets.
Therefore, when a nuclear plant owner like Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) claims that its Diablo Canyon atomic reactors are earthquake proof… that’s not exactly true. What these atomic power producers are really claiming is that they have constructed an atomic reactor that should be able to withstand the worst possible earthquake that corporations believe is affordable. The aftershock earthquake that hit Fukushima Daiichi was a magnitude 6.6 that originated from a magnitude 9 earthquake offshore. As we continue to witness the ongoing tragedy created by the triple meltdown at Fukushima Daiichi, we also witness an atomic reactor deemed earthquake proof and ‘seismically qualified’ by the Maximum Credible Assessment suffering a major disaster and meltdown due to an earthquake less than the magnitude limit that the atomic reactor was built to withstand.
Full transcript available here: tinyurl.com/jtyvccr
MG: Hi, you’re listening to the Fairewinds Energy Education podcast hosted by the Fairewinds crew. I’m Maggie Gundersen, and welcome to our show. Today we have Dr. Les Kanat (:13), a special guest. He’s on sabbatical with us this term from Johnson State and he’s a geology professor with 25 years of experience as a geologist. We also have members of Fairewinds crew – Caroline Philips, Program Administrator, and Arnie Gundersen, Fairewinds Chief Engineer. Today we want to specifically talk to you about seismic issues across the country and what that means for nuclear power plants. We also want to talk about the atomic reactors at Fukushima Daiichi, and the seismic impact on them. What does it mean for a nuclear plant to face an earthquake? What happens? And what causes earthquakes? Can we predict them? Let’s talk to our guest, Dr. Les Kanat, and let’s talk to our Chief Engineer, Arnie Gundersen. Les, let’s start with earthquakes. Weather management has come really far and we get all these great predictions and we see radar bringing weather in. What about predicting earthquakes? Can we do that?
AG: What happened, for instance, down in Virginia at North Ana, when the earthquake happened, the nuclear core moved a little bit and they detected the change in neutron population. In other words, there was too many neutrons on one side of the nuclear reactor and not enough on the other, and the nuclear reactor automatically shut down.
CP: Well, let’s go back to the United States to California. You just discussed what happened at Fukushima Daiichi. My question for Les is 9 is a huge number on the Richter scale. What sort of earthquake caliber are we looking at for a plant like Diablo Canyon?
You know, when you get in one of these nuclear power plants, they’re so big. And a hubris sets in and you feel like you’re in control. And an engineer at Chernobyl I think really expressed it best. And here’s his direct quote: “We knew with certainty – with arrogant certainty – that we were in control of the power we were playing with. This was the day we learned we were wrong.” And that same mentality affects the people at Pacific Gas & Electric in Diablo Canyon. And it did at Fukushima, too. You look at how big these buildings are and you say, oh, this can withstand anything. But the reason they’re big is because they have enormous forces inside them that have to be constrained. And when we realize that there’s 4 or 5 million horses running around inside a nuclear core that’s 12 feet by 12 feet by 12 feet, then you get an idea of why these plants are as robust as they are. Because the energy you’re dealing with is so enormous that it’s dangerous. So we all look at how rugged these buildings are and it lulls you into a false security.
AG: (13:56) Well, there’s a four-inch mark next to the fuel canisters showing something moved four inches.
