If Fermi was Fukushima Who Would be "Sheltering in Place"?

[Magnatomicflux]

What would I do? I'd stay right here in Windsor unless told to do otherwise. Windsor [[St. Clair Collage) and Harrow, are Amherstburgs retreat in the event of a major ie: meltdown, of the Fermi II reactor. Us folks here in Detroit and Windsor will be just fine, I wouldn't worry too much about it right now...if it were happening you can bet I'll be glued to the radio for instructions...but I'm staying here.

I found this from DTE's website...looks like they only have a 10 mile evac zone in the event of an emergency at Fermi.




and I found this for Amherstburg.....






My understanding is that the 30 KM radius was arrived at seemingly arbitrarily, with no hard science or mathematical equation to support it as opposed to, say, 25 KM or 40 KM. [[from Crystal)

Really?? Seems crazy to me. These people do not just throw numbers out there...they just don't. Can you even imagine scientists having a conversation like that?

"Say Stan....how far do ya think the effects of this so-called radiation would spread if there were a meltdown? I mean a real, honest to god meltdown?"
"Well......if I'm figurin' right...and don't quote me here cause it's just a guess.....mmmmmmmeh....saaaay...15....30k?"

Nah.....it just doesn't go down like that. This is nothing BUT hard science and mathematical equations.

[Lowell]

Yikes --> Remaining 50 workers at Fukushima nuclear plant have suspended operations...

[wolverine]

There has been continual earthquake activity in Lake Erie. While these rarely get above the 5.0 magnitude, it is not like it is unknown. Since the history of this continent is so short we do not have a records beyond a 2 or 3 of centuries, so no one knows if an event such at the 4 7.2 – 8.1 New Madrid quakes may or may not be possible. While I agree that a large scale quake with a resultant tsunami sweeping over Fermi is unlikely, it is not totally out of the question.

I find is puzzling how some like to adopt and 'it can never happen here' attitude then trot out the 'technology has improved since then' lines when it does.

Nuclear energy only exists because it is subsidized and given a liability waver. [look at your home owners insurance if you don't believe me]. The industry is not held responsible for the damage it can do nor for the impossible task of guaranteeing the long-term security of its waste which remains toxic for thousands of years and always will be a target for terrorist dirty bomb-making. Nuclear energy is only 'clean' and 'cheap' because it gets a pass the other industries do not.

Coal has its vices, as pointed out above, but if a coal-fired plant goes haywire, will it make thousands of square miles uninhabitable? Will people be sheltering in place for a 30KM radius? The problem with nukes is that there is no room for error. The Japanese with all their knowledge of earthquakes, tsunamis, experience with radiation, and precision know-how still screwed up.

Certainly there is always the "unknown." Yes, there is the very very VERY extremely slim chance we could get a huge earthquake out in Lake erie that would generate a big enough wave. along with the very, very, very slim chance it would cause enough damage to one of the nuclear power plants.

Okay, let's say this is possible, now is it worth the money and effort for creating preparedness and investing in defense technology to stop a tsunami in the region? Michigan has plenty of other problems to throw money at, not tsunami protection.

A good example to use here is your car. Your car could obviously be safer. We have plenty of ways we could build a car to be indestructible so that people never die in accidents. So why don't we do it? Well, a cost-benefit analysis assigns a value to human life. If the cost of building indestructible cars is unreasonably high it's not worth pursuing.

Point is Lowell, you need statistical evidence to prove a point when it comes to the time and money for technology and preparation for a disaster. If the chances are too slim, it's not worth it, [sadly] even if human lives may be in danger.

[hybridy]

FYI...Michigan still not at risk

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42103936...ws-asiapacific

What are the odds? US nuke plants ranked by quake risk

So much for San Andreas: Reactors in East, Midwest, South have highest chance of damage

[Crystal]

I agree with Magnatomicflux that it seems crazy that the 30 KM radius was not arrived at using hard science.

But it also seems crazy that a nuclear power plant would be constructed so close to fault lines and with only two back up systems.

And it also seems crazy that KM 30 would be dangerous but KM 31 would be okay.

A 30 KM radius does not take into account which way the wind is blowing, which could change the shape from circular to oval to a very long oval.

I also don't think there is enough experience with actual meltdowns to be able to truly know the correct radius.

[MikeM]

What makes you think the evacuation zone size was arrived at arbitrarily?

[Crystal]

If I originally wrote "arbitrarily" that was not the word I should have used. A television reporter [[maybe an interviewee?) quoted an engineer as saying the 30 KM radius was arrived at arbitrarily, and that the 30 KM figure was not arrived at using math. "Educated guess" might be a better way to put it.

Maybe the 30 KM is really 10 KM and they are rounding up by a lot to take into account wind or other variables.

I am reading this morning that a Chernobyl-esque meltdown is not possible in Japan because of the design of the Japanese reactors.

In the past 48 hours I have heard 15+ nuclear engineers give 15+ different takes on the situation in Japan.

I'm not so much arguing about the 30 KM itself as I am describing that I don't feel confident that any country is truly taking appropriate precautions about nuclear energy.

[Redleg81]

All this reminds me of a story from a long ago coworker..... He was working as a welder at Fermi 2 during some expansion or refit at the plant. His team was tasked with doing some sort of high grade welding on some kind of vent pipes several stories up in the air... This was critical work that was to be inspected with some sort of high tech electronic gear by some sort of nuclear regulatory guy to insure the solidity of the welds. Anyway, one time as the story goes, one of these inspector guys show up. He was pushing nearly 300lbs. and was out of breath from lugging his case of instrumentation to the job site. My old coworker buddy said this guy took one look up at these pipes several stories up, wiped his brow, and says "Looks good to me!" digs out some paperwork and signs off on their work-- Without ever even pulling out his instruments, let alone crawling his bulk up there for an actual look-see.... My long ago friend said there were other things that made him at the very least scratch his head, if not make his hair stand on end as to how this job was run. As for me, aside from the self generated "hypocrisy" of knowing that perhaps a good chunk of my power to my house comes from Fermi or its sisters, this story is enough for me not to want to live in its shadow.

[yupislyr]

FYI...Michigan still not at risk

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42103936...ws-asiapacific

What are the odds? US nuke plants ranked by quake risk

So much for San Andreas: Reactors in East, Midwest, South have highest chance of damage

Not at risk? No. Just apparently an acceptable risk.

88. Fermi 2, Monroe, Mich.: 1 in 238,095 chance each year. Old estimate: 1 in 625,000. Change in risk: 163 percent.

That's a 1 in 238,095 chance every year that an earthquake may cause damage to Fermi 2 bad enough that some radiation is released.