{"id":2526,"date":"2011-04-13T23:11:34","date_gmt":"2011-04-13T21:11:34","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/nuclearpoweryesplease.org\/blog\/?p=2526"},"modified":"2013-03-01T00:44:01","modified_gmt":"2013-02-28T22:44:01","slug":"day-33-what-does-ines-7-mean","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nuclearpoweryesplease.org\/blog\/2011\/04\/13\/day-33-what-does-ines-7-mean\/","title":{"rendered":"Day 33: What does INES 7 mean?"},"content":{"rendered":"

22:00(CET)\/20:00(UTC)\/05:00<\/strong><\/p>\n

Not much newsworthy to report today. JAIF report<\/a> as usual on the status of the reactors. No new NISA update on the reactor status in English but in Japanese<\/a>, some values are taken from IAEA<\/a> rather than NISA. Links to graphs are links to the blog #FNPP1 and Irradiatio<\/a>n.\u00a0Pressure is continuing to rise in the number one reactor but still quite low. Seems like there is some kind of leakage out of the\u00a0containment\u00a0in number one, otherwise one would have expected higher pressure due to the nitrogen injection. Pumping of water from the number 2 turbin building basement is ongoing but slow, TEPCO say the work can take weeks.<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

\n<\/strong><\/td>\n		Reactor 1<\/strong><\/td>\nReactor 2<\/strong><\/td>\nReactor 3<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Water level (meter)*<\/a><\/td>\n-1.65<\/td>\n-1.5<\/td>\n-2.2<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Flow rate(liters\/min)<\/td>\n100<\/td>\n116.67<\/td>\n116.67<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Core pressure (kPa)<\/a><\/td>\n1034<\/td>\n100***<\/td>\n100***<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Containment pressure (kPa)<\/a><\/td>\n190<\/td>\n100***<\/td>\n100***<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Wetwell pressure (kPa)<\/td>\n165<\/td>\n–<\/td>\n168<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Feedwater nozzle temp (Celsius)<\/a><\/td>\n204.5<\/td>\n166.9<\/td>\n92.2 **<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Bottom head temp (Celsius)<\/td>\n119.0<\/td>\n208.0<\/td>\n116.0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Containment dose rate (Sv\/hour)<\/a><\/td>\n–<\/td>\n27.9<\/td>\n16.9<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Wetwell dose rate (Sv\/hour)<\/a><\/td>\n10.3<\/td>\n0.653<\/td>\n0.653<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
*Distance from top of assembly<\/em><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
– broken gauges or missing data<\/em><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
** Probably faulty reading<\/em><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
*** IAEA states atmospheric pressure<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Yesterday NISA released<\/a> this info about how much activity has escaped from the Fukushima reactors and compare it to Chernobyl.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Like I said yesterday its roughly 10%. The move from 5 to 7 on the INES scale has gotten a lot of media attention, but what does it really mean? Nothing became worse yesterday than it has been, no dramatic event changed the rating etc. What happened is that NISA estimated that the release of I-131 and Cs-137 is beyond a treshold of what is considered “Major release of radioactive material” acording to the level 7 definition:<\/p>\n

Level 7.<\/strong><\/p>\n