South China Morning Post (Subscription Required), Apr. 4, 2014:
Ernst G. Frankel is emeritus professor of ocean engineering at MIT — Jerome A. Cohen is co-director of the US-Asia Law Institute at NYU Law School — Julian Gresser is chairman of Alliances for Discovery — Dick Wullaert also contributed to the article
- Headline: Abe must act now to seal Fukushima reactors, before it’s too late
- Dear Prime Minister Abe, the Fukushima crisis is getting worse.
- The key assumption […] is that you still have a safe window of time, at least two or three more years, and possibly longer, to deal with Fukushima’s four damaged nuclear reactors
- What if this assessment is unrealistically optimistic? What if the safe window of time is less than a year? What if the very concept of a safe window is inappropriate for Fukushima? The fact is, we really don’t know what might happen.
- According to [Tepco’s] published engineering reports, the most severely damaged reactors are only secure to the level of a magnitude 7.9 earthquake.
- The crucial question is: how secure is the facility against any number of dark scenarios?
- There is a high probability that, if a quake of magnitude 7.9 or above, or some other serious event, strikes Fukushima, a “criticality” will occur.
- The least dangerous would be the local release of strontium-90, caesium 134/137, or nano-plutonium.
- Far more dangerous would be an explosion, or a series of explosions – a chain reaction, engulfing reactors one to four – that would spew this contamination over much broader areas of helpless populations. The next criticality may be far more serious […]
- The jet stream will transport airborne contamination to the U.S. and other parts of world
- Fukushima may be far more dangerous [than Chernobyl] because the risks are continuing, and the situation is dynamically degrading and unstable.
- The formidable problems of access to reactors one to three make accurate assessment of the true extent of the damage, hence the level of risk and vulnerability, extremely challenging.
- We urge that you commission a 30-day independent assessment by a multidisciplinary international team of experts on the feasibility of entombment of reactors one to four, addressing the following specific scenario among others: Use helicopters mounted with telescopic nozzles, and, after reinforcing the spent fuel pool in the target reactor, spray it with special lighter-than-water concrete, dissolved in water solution; let the pool harden, along with the remainder of the facility, which is also sprayed until it becomes impervious to radiation or explosion.
- Reactors one to four can probably be entombed within six months. Entomb them.
Must act now? How? The reactors are too hot to get close enough to do anything. If they had followed Russia’s example, and buried all six of them in concrete right after it happened, it would probably work out.
Now, it is too late, and they know it. I am amazed at MIT for coming out with this…..they are three years late. This is what happens when corporations are given too much power in fine universities thanks to large donations. The incorporating of American universities is one of the most dangerous and vile of our traditions. Some day, I might write about it. The University environment when we attended compared to today’s.
MIT might say it, but covering all of that in concrete isn’t an option. It is like Moody’s downgrading the Ukraine to default status……..as their owners ordered them to do…..nothing behind it but political spin. Pity, MIT used to be one of the top schools in the nation……still is for engineering and other technical applications.
Where has all the truth gone? We face our own extinction, and we are fed stuff like this?