Facts on the Nuclear Energy Situation in Japan (Update)

March 15, 2011

Update: April 6, 2011: We’ve added new details about GE’s disaster relief efforts following a visit to Japan by GE Chairman and CEO Jeff Immelt.

Update: March 18, 2011: Read “Setting the Record Straight on Mark I Containment” about the performance of the nuclear reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi Power Plant.

Update: March 17, 2011: We’ve added new details regarding our disaster relief efforts in Japan.

Update: March 16, 2011. Click here to read about the Mark I containment units used at the reactors.

Update: March 15, 2011: GE’s thoughts and condolences continue to be with the people of Japan affected by the devastating impact of last Friday’s unprecedented natural disaster. And GE officials continue to closely monitor the events at the Fukushima Daiichi Power Plant, which suffered a loss of power after the tsunami struck the site.

During the magnitude 9.0 earthquake (the fifth largest earthquake in recorded history), the GE Boiling Water Reactors (BWR), performed as designed and initiated safe shut down processes. We understand that the back-up generators performed as designed to begin the cooling process. Shortly thereafter, we understand that the tsunami disabled the back-up emergency generation systems.

Immediately following the earthquake and tsunami, Hitachi-GE Nuclear Energy (GE’s nuclear joint venture with Hitachi based in Japan) communicated to the Japanese Government and Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), the plant operator, that we were ready to assist them. The GE and Hitachi alliance assembled incident response and engineering teams in Tokyo and Wilmington, NC to provide 24/7 support.

While TEPCO is managing the response efforts, GE has been offering its assistance from the beginning and is now taking a number of additional actions, including:

Providing technical assistance to TEPCO through our joint venture partners in Japan
Providing technical assistance to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), which is in turn providing assistance to the Japanese government
GE’s cross-functional business teams are coordinating engineering and project resources as well as equipment availabilities to support equipment delivery in Japan. GE’s Aeroderivative business is working to send 10 GE truck-mounted gas turbines (TM2500 22.5MW) which can provide temporary power. Units are available and we are working with partners to prioritize needs and finalize arrangements.
Engaging our network of more than 1,000 engineers within GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy to provide technical assistance to the NRC, Nuclear Energy Institute, the government of Japan and TEPCO.

Reactor Safety:

The fleet of GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) BWR reactors has a proven track record of performing reliably and safely for more than 40 years.
GE has been in the nuclear industry for more than half a century. There are currently 92 GE-built BWR plants and plants using the licensed GE BWR design operating globally. Our BWR designs meet the rigorous regulatory requirements of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and other government regulators and have proven to be safe and reliable. Our reactors are one of the workhorses of the industry.
The Unit 1 reactor at the Fukushima Daiichi site went into commercial operation in 1971; it is a BWR-3, with a Mark I containment system. That means that the reactor is the third generation of the BWR design. The reactor in Unit 1 is the same type as several reactors in the U.S., although every reactor is designed specifically for each project and site. All GEH BWR designs meet all NRC requirements for safe operation during and after an earthquake for the areas where they are licensed and sited.
BWR reactors are designed to be able to safely shutdown in the event of an earthquake or other natural disaster.

What is GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy?

The global nuclear alliance was formed by combining GE and Hitachi’s nuclear businesses. The timeline at the bottom shows how GE and Hitachi independently progressed since the 1950s, ultimately combining operations in 2007 to create GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy.
In 2010, GEH had approximately $1 billion in revenue for GE.
Our global nuclear alliance is recognized as the world’s foremost developer of boiling water reactors, robust fuel cycle products, and highly valued nuclear plant services. Beginning in the 1950s, we developed breakthrough light water technology with the Boiling Water Reactor (BWR). Since that time, GE has developed nine evolutions of BWR technology including the ABWR, the world’s first operational Generation III Class advanced light water design and, most recently, the ESBWR, our latest Generation III+ Class design that combines advanced safety features, improved economics, and new operational efficiencies. The first ABWR became operational in Japan in 1996.
GEH also offers a wide range of services that can improve performance, increase power output, and extend plant life.
GEH’s fuel cycle business supplies reliable fuel products and services to utilities all around the globe.
Japan, like most countries with nuclear power, has a channeling law under which the operator and government are liable for damage to third parties and the operator carries insurance. Suppliers bear no liability under the law.

The following links are supplied by the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) and offer additional information on the situation in Japan:

Nuclear Energy Situation in Japan: This page includes frequently asked questions about the situation with Japan’s nuclear energy plants, a time line of events, graphics of the nuclear power reactors and other general statistics on Japan’s nuclear energy program.

Radiation and Japan’s Nuclear Energy Plants: This page provides background information on radiation, including its different sources, how it is measured, and the ways federal authorities protect the public and workers from radiation exposure. It also explains how the Japanese plant operators are using a process called “venting” to manage the temperature and pressure of the reactor vessels and protect the integrity of the primary containment.

Reactor Designs:This page describes how nuclear plants are designed and constructed to withstand natural disasters, including: earthquakes, tsunamis, fires and other natural or man-made events.

NEI Backgrounders: Fact Sheets and Policy Briefs: This page includes fact sheets and policy briefs on environmental protection, safety and security, and nuclear waste and used nuclear fuel management

GEH Timeline: Click to enlarge. Use your icon to zoom further, or the view tab on your browser.

Published March 14, 2011: As the people of Japan work to recover from the devastating impact of Friday’s unprecedented natural disaster, GE offers its heartfelt condolences — and ongoing help. Japanese authorities are working around the clock to ensure the safety of the nuclear reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi Power Plant, which was damaged by a tsunami following the initial earthquake.

At a press conference yesterday in India, GE Chairman and CEO Jeff Immelt — there as part of a previously planned business visit — said, “Clearly we are offering any kind of technical assistance to our customer TEPCO and the government of Japan as they go through the recovery efforts with the nuclear power plants. Our first priority is to support the government and people of Japan.”

To that end, he announced that GE and the GE Foundation, the company’s philanthropic arm, will be committing $5 million in cash, equipment and services toward relief in the coming weeks and months. GE is currently working with disaster relief organizations, GE regional business leaders and the Japanese government to determine what specific additional GE support can be provided to best complement Japan’s response capacity.

Immelt, who also visited Japan’s embassy in New Delhi to personally express GE’s deepest sympathy to the government and people of Japan, explained to the press, “I think we just have to let the discovery take place…we are going to be supportive and transparent in that process.”

This entry was posted in Japan, Nuclear, Other, Stories. Bookmark the permalink.

GE aviation RSP IHI in Soma city

One of the key GE aviation business RSP IHI manufacturing facility just locate in the Fukushima prefecture, Soma city…there they have more than thousand employees for manufacturing of the GE 90 and GEnx components….wish they are all survive ..God bless Japan and IHI…
Kaz

“We build machines that we can’t control and bury our waste in a great big hole”
Sting

A perfect new jingle that describes reality for GE power.

A lot of people are and will be paying a very high price and ultimately with their health for your “cheap energy”

We should stop building any more nuclear plants and dismantle the current ones ASAP.

Solar and wind are the way to go.
Paul Lewis

This leaves a lot of questions unanswered. I does not address the issues/problems cited in the press wrt the troubled reactors. Non GE friends ask questions. We just have to shrug our shoulders and say that GE has not supplied any answers. Bit of an embarrasment.
Dan

At the Fukushima 1 plant, it appears that the backup cooling systems were intended to be powered by a back-up generator. This generator was shut down immediately after the tsunami hit. I don’t understand why the double casualty of a reactor/power shut down caused by the earthquake and a tsunami wasn’t considered. Earthquakes and tsunamis go together. It should have been a fundamental part of the plants design to consider this double causality. Placing the backup generators up on pedestals in a weatherproof container seems like an obvious design choice. Of course, hindsight is always 20/20.
Bjoern Havnes

Boasting about I billion USD revenue………….your philanthropic arm must be asleep, committing
the ridiculously low amount of USD 5 mill towards relief.
How does that amount compare to salary levels of your top execs?
George Alder

I am a supporter of Nuclear Power but I find your communication strategy lacking.

GE should acknowledge the risks with nuclear power and point out the different causes of accidents that the news media refuses to acknowledge. We should clarify that the Chernobyl accident was caused by an inferior design, the Three Mile Island accident was caused by human error and the Fukushima Daiichi accident was caused by the Tsunami and not the Earthquake.

The news media’s hype on Earthquake risks to US Plants fails to address the actual cause which was that the Tsunami knocking out backup power by disabling the diesel generators.
GE and the rest of the industry should provide an active response to this misinformation by advising plant operators to update their risk assessments. Their risk assessments should now consider exposure to events that previously would have been thought to occur outside of the lifecycle of a plant such as 200, 500 or even 1000 year events.

The first review should be of backup power sources to ensure that they can withstand catastrophic events such as tsunamis, flash floods, tornados and hurricanes. The situation at Fukushima Daiichi has illustrated that no matter how well constructed the reactor is, this design can be negated when backup power systems are rendered inoperable by environmental threats.

GE should provide leadership to the industry and counter the media’s misinformation by taking an active role in ensuring that plants are assessed to address these vulnerabilities. GE and the industry should reassure the public that these risks can and will be mitigated.
laf

Many opinions here- but I agree w/ George. GE could do a lot to help public understanding of the issues surrounding this catastrophic event. Our future in nuclear power depends on people realizing that the basic principles and design of the reactors is Safety… public and environmental safety. The latest ESBWR designs are the best yet- and could be promoted once the tragic elements of this event have been addressed. As for Bjoern’s comment- I doubt that any amount of cash will make the problems diminish. GE also has the matching gift option, so any that feel compelled, can contribute to that & have their funds matched by the company. That has the ability to exponentially increase the cash flow to Japan.
Greg

I would think that GE can not, and should not, speak for the plant owners when it comes to discussing licensing issues. GE only sold Tokyo Power the plant that Tokyo Power had designed, and has no ownership in it’s licensing or operation.
if you’re looking for answers to questions such as “How did this happen?” and “What are the operators doing now?”, you’d be better served checking the IAEA website. If you’re expecting a synopsis of what changes will be made to the design/licensing requirements here in the US, that will certainly take time.
For now, keep the local residents, who have already suffered greatly, and the operators, some of whom will likely lose their lives, in your thoughts and prayers
Steven G.

I think nuclear power is very very dangerous. We should concentrate our efforts on other generation methods. We have ocean wave generation that continues no matter what. The generators may be ugly to look at but I prefer that to a ugly experience with radiation. At least you are alive. With modern transmission techniques, much less energyis lost with distance.
Also I think we need to re-evaluate the renewal of nuclear licenses for plants with out dated systems. Why should we renew 40, 30, 20, year old systems when there are advanced fuel rods and containment systems available. Why should we settle for less when an accident can mean death for many, if not the ruination of our economy/planet. Now we may have to relocate 120 million japaneese to another country. Tell me is nuclear power worth that? Penny wise and pound foolish.
bushwacker

GE’s response is typical for companies in this situation. They want to tout the positives and not the negatives. As an investor I want to know what is the long range forecast for this portion of their business. To say that this is a billion dollar revenue source is RIDICULOUS! We want to know what this arm of their operations produces in profits contributed to the overall health of the business. Also what affect does the bad taste in the industry have on future operations? What liability does the company face?
Charles Putzier

George Alder’s comments are right on and I would like to see a more prominent response from GE pursuing his comments.

Better media response is really needed to uphold the prominence of GE in the Nuclear field.
KH

My thoughts and prayers are with those in Japan. The situation at the Fukushima Daiichi reactors is of great concern. Although this event is indeed catastrophic, we must keep in mind the positive history of safety of nuclear power when compared to other energy sources (bottom of the page):
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf06.html

It is a testament to the design of the reactors that they have been able to withstand this catastrophic event in as much capacity as they have, while other buildings have been swept away. It was a tremendous event. Newer reactor designs have even more of an ability to withstand such events. For example, the ESBWR relies on no diesel generators to pump water, passively removing decay heat to the atmosphere. It takes advantage of gravity and natural circulation—phenomena which are very hard to lose—and can remain stabilized for 72 hours without any operator interaction. There are still risks, but they are continually decreasing. (http://www.gepower.com/prod_serv/products/nuclear_energy/en/new_reactors/esbwr.htm)

Renewable sources should definitely be part of our “energy mix.” Renewable energies, sadly, cannot come close to meeting our base energy demands. We must also realize that our fossil fuel resources are limited and dependent on foreign entities. Without many major scientific advances, the only way to meet our energy demands is to include nuclear as a major portion of our energy mix. I’m all for reducing energy consumption, but I don’t think many people will hop on that bandwagon voluntarily.
Charles Heck

The tone of this communication is way off the mark. It sounds like a marketting brochure. We are the BWR experts. Why are we not acting like it? Our GEH response is very disappointing.

We should be plugged into the source of factual information, processing it with our expertise, and actively communicating the details to the public. We could do so much more to help clarify the technical issues in the media and counter all the misinformation that keeps getting repeated over and over. We need to be leading rather than simply reacting.
Norman

I agree with Bjoern, GE’s 5 million dollar pledge is an embarrassment. With more than $150 BILLION in annual revenues, that amounts the about 1/100th of one days revenues. That would be the equivilant of me bragging about donating one whole dollar.

Come on GE – if you really want your philanthropic arm to be taken seriously, you REALLY need to up the ante here. $50 million is even on the low side, IMHO – $100-$500 million would be far more appropriate and admirable.

Kaz – Sting is an idiot like most entertainers. The fact is that solar and wind CANNOT do it all. They are certainly part of the solution, but they are not ‘on demand’ power sources. We cannot simply ‘turn the wind and sun on’ when and where we need it. We need on demand sources such as hydro, nuclear, and gas fired plants as well. Like it or not thats the cold hard facts of power generation and distribution.
Steven G.

What KH says above is true. ESBWR relies on no diesel generators to pump water, passively removing decaying heat to the atmosphere. While this is true, we still need better structures to contain the reactors, and now the cooling ponds too. Japaneese skyscrapers were able to sway in this 9.0 and still stand. What can we do if the earth opens up and swallows these reactors whole. They can tumble and tumble and land upside down in a crevice. Will the reactor still stay intact? Will the heat vent correctly? Remember a 9.0 force is like a hammer of superman strength pounding on the side. In fact all the sides. Can steel reinforced in pressurized hardened concrete with stand that? I don’t kmow. We are just kids playing with fire. We are in the infancy of nuclear power.
Keith

Thank you KH. You make a point that everyone seems to forget, we need nuclear power in America… 104 reactors running for an average of 40+ years. It accounts for about 20% of our energy. You just cannot fill that gap with solar panels and wind farms. If you tried to, you might increase our national public debt baout 100-fold. The technology is 100% worth investing it, but it is so infantile that you cannot go full-scale yet.

As far as safety is concerned, our track record for safety is ever-improving and the technology is always advancing (see PBMR, ESBWR). This event in Japan is absolutely a wake-up call to re-examine our safety procedures and plant designs, but this is hardly a reason to axe the nuclear network entirely. If you do, you risk reversing twenty years of curbing climate change (which, let me tell you, is much more dangerous to human health than nuclear power), not to mention remove the power source for all modern US aircraft carriers and submarines.

Many people assume that a failure of any kind at a nuclear plant equates to a total meltdown – radiation poisoning for thousands of people and an uninhabitale landmass. Partly due to the graphic images of Chernobyl, but mostly due to a lack of public information disclosure (or interest), no one realizes that these reactors are built to withstand catastrophic events on an unbelieveable scale. The 5th largest earthquake on record – the epicenter being 154 km from the plant – has not even caused that. The one reactor (out of six) that is in a questionable state, is still in a manageable state.

This event is one we need to learn from in order to alter our policies and managerial practices in order to make sure we can continue to use what is, in my opinion, one of the greatest technological advances of the past century.
Sean-GE

I’m the site editor for GE Reports. We’ve just updated the story with new information, which is now at the top of this post.
Joe Monty

In light of what has happened and is continuing to happen this article just insults everybody’s intelligence and is an embarassment to the company. Underrstand this one thing -NOBODY GIVES A RIP WHAT STANDARDS THE THINGS COMPlY WITH AND HOW SAFE THEY WERE DESIGNED TO BE BECAUSE THEY’RE MELTING DOWN, SO ALL THAT WINDOW DRESSING AND PROPAGANDA IS MEANINGLESS!!!! Whatever safety and redundancy measures were taken are obviously inadequate. The only potentially good thing is that now that we know how they can actually fail, we can take better measures in the future. We know how to build better and safer reactors than we do in 1971, but we won’t be given the chance if we destroy our credibility with self serving articles like this one. Nuclear is still too valuable a resource to lose by destroying the credibility of the industry as we apparently continue to do. People are owed a much more candid assessment of what is happening and why, and how we can prevent it in the future, or we will never be able to sell another reactor to anyone.
ROBERTO ROJAS

In Chile we well kown the magnitude and impact of the tsunamis. Who every body try to take advantage, please don´t take advantage of the dissaster.

What I don´t understand if why the press is saying that Fukujima Power Plant people is cooling the reactor with sea water when it suppose they don´t have emergency (diesel generator or batteries) power.
Joe Palladino

George Adler comments are right. I, too, am vey disappointed in GE’s response – it sounds like it is written by a marketing person and edited by a lawyer. The media won’t ever be able to explain this disaster in any meaningful manner and GE will continue to be bashed in the press. GE must clarify the effects of the earthquake and the tsunami on the base design and the back up system. GE should identify what went wrong, how it impacts installations at other sites in the US and world wide and what actions must be taken to protect these sites.
Dan B.

So far this nuclear accident has resulted in 1 death from a person operating a crane. It’s not even clear if that death had anything to do with the reactor problems. The level of radiation exposure of even the plant workers is less then you’d get at a long day at the beach. Yet, I’ve been hearing people say we need to abandon using nuclear power because it’s too dangerous. The tsunami has most likely killed more than 10,000 people. By what logic are these people not arguing that we need to stop building communities within 10 miles from the coast where tsunamis may hit? An objective observer will realize that, water (in the form of a tsunami) will kill far more people by drowning than any nuclear accident. An intelligent person would argue to build better tsunami defenses. Since our politicians and schools are failing to education the public about the facts of nuclear power and radiation, I think our technology companies (like GE) should do a better job at it. Unfortunately this memo with its comments like the following just expand the problem.

“BWR reactors are designed to be able to safely shutdown in the event of an earthquake or other natural disaster.”

In this situation with 3 hydrogen explosions, clearly the reactors did not safely shut down; so by making claims like this, you make the engineers who designed the plant seem incompetent.

They reactors shut down, but because they need a continuous source of power to continue cooling, which was not available, they did not safely shut down. There are many lessons to be learned from this accident and by making broad claims like this, you make it seem like there are no lessons to be learned or improvements to be made to our nuclear power plants.
time compression TM2500

it is certain great that 3 of 10 TM2500 is ready to airfreight to Japan…if time is so urgent, we should consider that GE aviation and marine engine have sold many units of similar gas engine power generator for emergency use and were installed in the back up emergency for the Japanese the skyscrapers buildings ..it should shorten the time to deliver from USA…see if this help to relieve the time by taking a few units immediately locally from Japan… …
truck-mounted gas turbine

IHI, one of GE aviation RSP, is a gas turbine system integrator for the truck-mount with mobility in Japan, they have total engineering capabilities to support this sort of emergency support…the IHI plant in Hiroshima purchases GE gas turbine and integrate into the total mount system…Tokyo power might also consider to invite the immediate assistances from IHI engineering…
Responsibility

Typical AM sweet & sour. Your engineers are needed at site NOW. Unfortunately nobody isn’t willing to go there… I don’t see big difference with Tshernobyl as that was creamed with russian stupidity, this case seems that biggest god in AM (BuSiNe$$) has eaten the safety in here.

What is expected to get out of trouble is to admit that something didn’t went as planned and fix it. It might lead to some compensations, but that is worth more money than a 10 great advertising campaign.

Fast movements are necessary to fix a problem, later comes time where responsible people / authors has to have courage to admit faults.
I Melt

This is not safe technology. All the PR damage control in the world will not change the facts.
Keller

Is there currently any machine in the world that can withstand a 9.0 earthquake AND a tsunami?
Sean-GE

I’m the GE Reports site editor. We’ll try to answer as many of your questions as we can as facts come in. Regarding local sourcing in Japan for the TM2500 generators — it’s a good question and we should have explained what we are doing. GE Energy, along with its Aeroderivative Gas Turbines business, is working directly and with IHI in Japan, in addition to other companies in the region, to support equipment delivery in Japan. GE’s cross-functional business teams are coordinating engineering and project resources as well as equipment availabilities. We’ve updated the post to reflect this.
Matt

If it takes a 9.0 earthquake (5th largest on record) and a huge tsunami to pose a temporary problem for these reactor sites with minimal radiation leakage when the plants were designed to handle far less about 40 years ago, then I think nuclear is pretty safe. If you study current reactor designs, automatic gravity systems handle cooling during total system failure to shut down and cool the plants. The reactors in Japan are operating on older technology.

GE could post a link to the NEI site higher on the page and highlight the updates are focused there, but if you have an attention span, you can click around a bit and find it.

We need non-oil based energy solutions for our national security. Nuclear cannot be dismissed. Retrofitting of current plants to meet more serious and less likely catastrophy scenarios can be pursued in the US but we should not think that this will happen here tomorrow. It won’t.
Sean-GE

This is the site editor again. There have been a number of comments asking for more information. We understand that everyone reading would like to know more. While GE has thousands of engineers who could provide opinions, we strongly believe this would be counterproductive as it would only be speculation and might be based on inaccurate information. Because GE is only providing technical assistance, at this point we do not necessarily know the latest developments on the ground. We will continue to update this page with any hard facts that we obtain. But we believe we must stick to the facts
RJS

We owe it to the public to inform them truthfully how the engineered safety systems function and how they are performing at Fukishima.
Every news organization, including NBC/MSNBC, and CNBC, are allowing every anti-nuclear group, every clueless acedemic and every uninformed reporter and anchor to spew wit-less statements, speculation and misinformation around the clock. On our side we have the NEI that barely says a word in the industries defense. We are really doing ourselves a disservice by remaining silent and not defending our product.
Silence implies guilt
Paulo Toyosi Toda Nishimura

I think we can only know the aftermath of this disaster caused by natural phenomena when this is over. Furthermore, in the meantime we must think logically and act together with all partners having transparency and truth because everything was done as well as it could have been. The accident was caused by “força majore”, a natural catastrophe.

Situation analysis: A humongous tsunami and a violent earthquake shook a region where there is a very resilient GEH nuclear power plant that withstood the natural phenomena. However, somehow the cooling system failed. Bringing the outer building to apparently explode making it look like an ugly situation shown in all media. Exactly what happened couldn’t be predicted. Some may say that if the generator was gasoline powered instead of diesel, or even if there was a system that relied on gravity and worked passively instead, would have been different, but really; who knows?
Now the worst case scenario would be something like “Chernobyl”. Thing which is by the way very bad, but, not the end of the world. This lamentable accident brought hideous Public Relations (P.R.) issues to the sector of Nuclear power plants. Opening room for people against Nuclear power plants. GEH as a business is directly affected by this.

To do:
Good PR in the right time and to think outside the box to implant new ideas because this catastrophic disaster is also an opportunity for alternative ideas.

Therefore GEH should do, from my perspective three things:
+Good P.R.: GEH should engage in good ingratiation: towards Japan through its government by offering technical help and equipment, towards the population through medical doctors to assist the population in whatever they may come to need because of their displacement and to talk with the press and show people that it is impossible nowadays to live in countries like Japan without BWR. Philanthropy is a good idea but please watch the bottom line, GE is a business.

+Wait for the right moment and think: I heard yesterday here in the Brazilian press that our BWR is better than the Japanese because it is different somehow and that there was a flaw in the Japanese project. When 9/11 happened, when the people from the press was juggling with info they said horrible things. I even saw somebody saying live that the Twin towers were being imploded. So my advice is wait until the nerves are well again. In reality, today, we need Nuclear power plants so there will always be demand for good reactors. We don’t need to push the sale of one, do we?

+Think “outside the box”:Also it should use this as an opportunity to maybe think outside the box for a while and elaborate a system to generate electricity with Fuel Cell fueled with Hydrogen (H2).
H2 would then be extracted through electrolysis of the Sea water producing as a by product fertilizers for the cultures around the world, salt and chemical commodities.
This H2 would be produced using electricity from windmills, solar panels elsewhere and hydro electrical power plants elsewhere. It could then be transported to the sites where it would be used to produce electricity and hot water.
There is a company in Canada called Ballard that, as far as I know, used to research in partnership with MItsubishi towards the development of know how to use this technology.
bushwacker

Sean-Your site has definitely responded with better information since this blog began. Congratulations to GE.
I’m glad to hear you are proactive in assisting the Japanese. It is indeed remarkable that these reactors are intact after such a record breaking natural disaster. Let’s hope that your help and that of others will save the day.
RJS-Your comments were spot on.
R Herbin

Great work, the system is so dangerous that even when it is shut down it goes completely out of control. Not just the reactor, but the spent fuel become dirty bombs when onsite power is interrupted for even a short time. What a great idea to store the spent fuel in the attic of the reactor building, especially after roof of same gets blown off.

Then following loss of onsite power we see an inevitable and predictable progression of catastrophic events that are all impossible according to your “probabalistic risk assessment methodology”. It would appear that the analysis was somewhat defective.

When you be sending a team of heroic executives and lobbyists to the site to aid in the firefighting?
awake

We as a people, we as a nation, can no longer sleep walk sleep through the troubles of our nation. Nor can we sleep walk through the troubles of our neighboring nations. In times past as well as present day,and furure events, there has been, there is, and will be be catastrophe events such as the tsunami that has stricken this nation of peoples. The world of nations have been shaken as well , to wake up and to stand and look up, out of the dream state that they have cacooned them selves in over these generations.
We need a solution. I tell you now , that no amount of money or natural power may relieve the catasrophic turn of events that this country of peoples are now facing. Nor will there be any relieve from the fear that has been speedly developing in the imagination of the minds of the peoples of the nations of the world. Many more of these type of catastrophe event are to strick the nations of the earth. Prepare, the day is at hand. There is Hope, through prayer, and trust in God our savior. For those who believe, no explaination is needed. For those who do not believe no explaination can be given. Awake and no your season of life!
Tom Dunning

We have known how to prevent fuel rods from overheating and distorting, ever since after the three mile island disaster. The sinple addition of ceramic spacers in the fuel rods would have saved these plants. I am shocked and saddened to see this was not done in Japan. Every time i see a GE comercial on TV, with dancing Elephants or farting cows, I want to throw up! I hope the truth comes out and people find out what a bunch of self seving creeps run GE. GOD-DAM you GE!
char

It is really lame that GE is only today, sending 3 turbines ( well, having them await in Florida for air transport). They should of done this the second they heard about the disaster. They’re too cheap- money over lives.
Track-Record

GE is the best company in the world to work for, the lines at the Employment offices further prove it when they are hiring. The Engineers are the tops, doing superior tasks with a knowledge base that cannot be matched. Hip Hip Huray, thank you GE for an outstanding job and a design that has proven itself for the better part of 40 years, that truly is unprecedented, and I know from experience that you will carefully analyze these events and implement what is learned with current units. Nuclear is Necessary. Unfortunately, Engineers cannot out design everything that God may subject them to, but I must say they do a pretty good job at trying. Prayers are with the people of Japan, GE and the situation at hand.
container size TM2500

sean… to air ship the TM2500 might be a challenge unless asking assistances from C130′s… Russian AN124, or airbus beluga fleet… the commercial air freighter cargo do not have the capacity… keep good job…
Todd

Could someone explain the explosions outside of the containment vessel? Where is the hydrogen coming from that is causing these explosions from what the media claims? Thanks.
Tim

These plants were built to the specifications of the utility, as approved by the Japanese regulatory authority. They set the standards for the design basis. The problems have arisen because water supplies were not maintained as required, which is somewhat understandable given the massive earthquake and tsunami. Of course there are lessons to be learned, but GE should be proud that the reactor vessels themselves seem to be essentially holding so far. These plants have “failed” no more than you would say your Honda Civic failed if it were demolished after being struck by an 18-wheeler.
Dave

IF GE has technical know-how, WHY IT DID NOT SAY, that a tsunami triggered by Earthquake could devastate the current Nuclear Plants. They were built right on the shore. What happened with modelling? Who is paying the price. As always, poor people. CEO’s and to Exec got their money? Right. Wake up people!!!

GE Should help and pay for containment and cleanup. Japan! Make your legal team big not just engineers!
rjs

Todd, The hydrogen was created in the reactor when the water level dropped below the top of the active fuel in the core. Zircalloy fuel cladding oxidizes reacting with water stripping the oxygen from the H2O leaving hydrogen. as the pressure builds in the reactor, relief valves lift relieving pressure to the suppression pool (primary containment). With no method of cooling the reactor or suppression pool, pressure builds in the primary containment. To save the containment, operators would have to vent the containment, it appears they vented to secondary containment (the reactor building) and some ignition souce caused the hydrogen to explode.
david foster

GE should have been taking a much more active role, over the last several years, in promoting safe nuclear energy and explaining to the public the differences in risk among different generations/designs of reactors, and in honestly pointing out the realistic limitations in solar and wind power. Education cannot be accomplished in a few days in the middle of a crisis.

It is unfortunate that Mr Immelt, when it comes to energy, has chosen the easy path of pandering to popular trends and current politicians rather than standing up for technological and economic sense. I do not think this will prove to have been in the long-term interests either of the company or the nation.
Robert

My heart goes out to the people in Japan. They have not done anything to deserve this.
Paul Lewis

Thanks to the site manager for adding some information. I am hoping that more will be coming from above.
There are potentially 6 troubled reactors and the site. The GE articles so far only mention one of them. What of the others? They are apparently not all the same or of the same age. Some built by GE, some designed by GE, some installed by GE? Apparently GE has no records of upgrades and changes? Response to or comment on the 6 reactors on the New York Times Graphic: Nuclear Crisis?
I do not in the least think that the GE design is at fault in any of this but the lack of information is still a problem and will remain so for a long time. Lost time in response cannot be recovered.
geo

Isn’t it both predictable and shamefull that all these hypocrite bloggers, in the midst of the crisis in Japan, can only point fingers and lobby to advance their own political, environmental and self-serving agendas rather than contributing to, or participating in constructive solutions to the immediate issues. Trust me, I’m sure there will be plenty of time for you all to line up behind your attorneys to make sure you get your 15 minutes and what you think you have coming to you.
Linda Fredrickson

I commend GE (thanks Sean) for all the informational links above. We all care about how this crisis is progressing. I am personally proud to be a part of the company that is a first responder to helping the Japanese. It would be nice if more could be done on an individual basis rather than mostly at a corporate level.

Thanks!
george k. stavro P.E.(ret)

I have seen h schemaic of te changes you are making to the Mark 1 reactor which are comendable. In my opinion no change of the Reactor chamber will be required, except the “whole unit” should seat on a special platform which has undrneath a multitude of helical springs wich should be able to take the jolts of a 9.5 on the Richter scale earth quick. Therefore those springs will be sandwiched between the basic foundation and the new platform.Pipng should have additional expansion joints to whithstand the stresses which will be less severe than the reactor unit sitting on the initial main foundation. All pumps carrying cooloant water should be diesel driven.
The utility company and their Contractor should consider to add expansion joints to the piping of the adjasant building’s equipment.That would make a much safer plant and prevent any failures n the reactor chamber unit and it’s periphery.
Paul Rapach

Some common sense questions. Why are the feedwater (cooling water) pumps not steam driven? If the fuel rods are too hot, they produce steam to run the pumps. A self correcting situation. Same with standby generators. How does a power generating plant lose power? Again, too much steam pressure, spin the generators, which would release the steam to generate power then recycle it into the condenser. Why the problem with the spent fuel cooling pool? If you can dump water from a helicopter into it, then why can’t you get a (or many) simple gasoline powered pump, drop the pickup in the ocean, and run a hose into the pool? Too many engineers and not enough plain folk working on the problem?

Many of the posts I see are foolish. Nuclear power is safe, but visible. Planes are much safer than cars, but look at the press every time one crashes. Old plants are run for the same reason old cars are driven, they still work and are much cheaper than buying a new one every year. Businesses are there to make money. If there is no profit, what’s the point? How many of your detractors are willing to disconnect the power to their home to allow nuclear plants to shut down.
Mark B.

The best journalistic coverage of the events seems to be on Wikipedia. Very little hype. Just reporting of the facts, as they are made available.