Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Censorship Power Your Rights Online

Suppresed Video of Japanese Reactor Sodium Leak 341

James Hardine writes "Following an announcement this week that the infamous Japanese Monju fast-breeder nuclear reactor would be re-opened with a new plutonium core, Wikileaks has released suppressed video footage of the disaster that led to its closure in 1995. The video shows men in silver 'space suits' exploring the reactor in which sodium compounds hang from the air ducts like icicles. Unlike conventional reactors, fast-breeder reactors, which 'breed' plutonium, use sodium rather than water as a coolant. This type of coolant creates a potentially hazardous situation as sodium is highly corrosive and reacts violently with both water and air. Government officials at first played down the extent of damage at the reactor and denied the existence of a videotape showing the sodium spill. The deputy general manager, Shigeo Nishimura, 49, jumped to his death the day after a news conference at which he and other officials revealed the extent of the cover-up. His family is currently suing the government at Japan's High Court."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Suppresed Video of Japanese Reactor Sodium Leak

Comments Filter:
  • by wizardforce ( 1005805 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @03:24PM (#22201594) Journal
    sodium cooled reactors also have a tendancy to produce radioactive isotopes of sodium like Na22 or Na24 from the high levels of neutron radiation exposure, the first produced by knocking a neutron out of Na23 and the second from neutron capture. sodium reacts with water to produce sodium hydroxide [caustic soda] and hydrogen gas, both of which are very dangerous in large quantities for obvious reasons.
  • Youtube link (Score:5, Informative)

    by pirodude ( 54707 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @03:28PM (#22201622)
    Uploaded to youtube http://youtube.com/watch?v=pwWQLMmn0tM [youtube.com]
  • Re:Video down? (Score:5, Informative)

    by hyperherod ( 574576 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @03:31PM (#22201630)
    An English subtitled version can be found here [dotsub.com] until that also runs out of bandwidth. Also a link to a version on YouTube [youtube.com] but this is with Japanese subtitles only.
  • Re:Youtube link (Score:5, Informative)

    by pirodude ( 54707 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @03:31PM (#22201638)
  • Safe Nukes (Score:3, Informative)

    by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @03:35PM (#22201662) Homepage Journal
    See, nuke power is safe, and we always know how bad even these contained breakdowns are.
  • by Dun Malg ( 230075 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @03:41PM (#22201702) Homepage

    sodium cooled reactors also have a tendancy to produce radioactive isotopes of sodium like Na22 or Na24
    Eh. The chemical dangers are more significant. Na-22 isn't particularly radioactive, and the highly radioactive Na-24 has a half-life of only 15 hours.
  • by Big Frank ( 921537 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @03:45PM (#22201726) Homepage
    The next generation of nuclear power reactors is on the drawing boards today, and they aren't pressurized liquid sodium.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 27, 2008 @04:09PM (#22201864)
    Rice.

    The Japanese won't put soy sauce on rice.
  • by schnikies79 ( 788746 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @04:11PM (#22201874)
    I'm a chemist, but not big into nuclear.

    Na-24 beta decays into Mg-24, which is stable and not dangerous.
  • Re:Also (Score:5, Informative)

    by Jeffrey Baker ( 6191 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @04:15PM (#22201896)
    Oh, hell yes. The initial key exchange to start an https connection is wonderfully expensive.

    Note to web "masters" everywhere: you cannot distribute huge files to millions of people using MySQL and SSL. Full stop. Upload that shit to Amazon S3 or Akamai or YouTube or _anything_ other than mediawiki. Thanks!
  • by NevermindPhreak ( 568683 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @04:21PM (#22201940)
    So interesting, that i took the liberty of finding the source.

    http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/np-risk.htm [isu.edu]
  • by Shining Celebi ( 853093 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @04:22PM (#22201954) Homepage

    Those do not incur the risk of radioactive contamination, which has long-term consequences that are more worrying than those resulting directly from the incident (I'm not saying every nuclear incident goes the way of Chernobyl -- just pointing out there is a risk). So it's not just a matter of comparing casualties resulting from the particular explosion/meltdown/whatever.

    Coal mining accidents might not incur the risk of significant radioactive contamination, but the combustion of coal does release massive amounts of radioactive material into the atmosphere [ornl.gov], and people living near coal-fired power plants are exposed to more radiation than those living near nuclear power plants.

    I've always found these statistics to be interesting:

    For comparison, according to NCRP Reports No. 92 and No. 95, population exposure from operation of 1000-MWe nuclear and coal-fired power plants amounts to 490 person-rem/year for coal plants and 4.8 person-rem/year for nuclear plants. Thus, the population effective dose equivalent from coal plants is 100 times that from nuclear plants.

    Of course, in the case of an extreme nuclear accident, as in Chernobyl, we have a very big problem to deal with right away that wouldn't be possible with coal. But I think it's worth remembering that a great deal of radioactive material is accumulating from coal-fired power plants, and that could someday be a major problem too. Nuclear power is not the only source of radiation released because of human activity.

  • Re:I find it odd (Score:3, Informative)

    by BlueParrot ( 965239 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @04:25PM (#22201968)
    There wasn't any radioactivity in the area. The leak occurred in the secondary loop which is not radioactive. The primary loop is inside quite a bit of shielding so even if there was a leak there you couldn't just walk up to it with a video camera.
  • by CrazedWalrus ( 901897 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @04:28PM (#22201984) Journal
    I don't know about that study, but the statement itself seems to agree with this:

    http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste [sciam.com]

    Over the past few decades, however, a series of studies has called these stereotypes into question. Among the surprising conclusions: the waste produced by coal plants is actually more radioactive than that generated by their nuclear counterparts. In fact, fly ash--a by-product from burning coal for power--contains up to 100 times more radiation than nuclear waste.

    At issue is coal's content of uranium and thorium, both radioactive elements. They occur in such trace amounts in natural, or "whole," coal that they aren't a problem. But when coal is burned into fly ash, uranium and thorium are concentrated at up to 10 times their original levels.


  • by BlueParrot ( 965239 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @04:28PM (#22201986)

    sodium cooled reactors also have a tendancy to produce radioactive isotopes of sodium like Na22 or Na24 from the high levels of neutron radiation exposure


    Except that the leak was in the secondary loop, which is never in contact with the core, and hence not radioactive. Had the leak been inside the primary loop you wouldn't have been able to walk up to it with a video camera because there would have been quite a bit of radiation shield and concrete in the way.
  • by BlueParrot ( 965239 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @04:36PM (#22202020)
    Would not have made much difference to be honest. If you get several atmosphere pressure of radioactive water suddenly blowing a hole in your sub and disabling its power system, you would be fairly stuffed as well. The US navy stopped using sodium cooled reactors mainly because they wanted to standardize on one design. Sodium would have a lot of merits, even at sea. In particular, because it doesn't boil at the temperatures used you don't have any pressure in the reactor, so an explosion or leaking of primary coolant is a lot less probable ( and sodium or not, leaking of primary coolant would certainly be a show-stopper for a naval mission ).

    Oh, and btw, the summary is misleading. Sodium is very corrosive to concrete and a lot of other materials, but provided it remains pure ( i.e, doesn't mix with water / air ) it is in fact very non-corrosive to steel, which is one of the reasons why it is used. It is certainly a lot less corrosive than 300 C water with boric acid in it.
  • by sjames ( 1099 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @04:40PM (#22202052) Homepage Journal

    Actually, breeders can do both. Early examples were primarily for weapons grade Pu production but many designs exist geared more for commercial power production. The Pu they produce is well suited for further use in a reactor, but is much more difficult to process into weapons material. That, of course, is a big plus these days when the world has quite enough bombs.

  • by Ironsides ( 739422 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @04:42PM (#22202066) Homepage Journal

    Of course, in the case of an extreme nuclear accident, as in Chernobyl, we have a very big problem to deal with right away that wouldn't be possible with coal. But I think it's worth remembering that a great deal of radioactive material is accumulating from coal-fired power plants, and that could someday be a major problem too. Nuclear power is not the only source of radiation released because of human activity.

    There is another factor to consider in this. Chernobyl used a design whereby a lack of water caused a positive feedback loop in the reactor to cause it to get even hotter. U.S. and most other designs use a negative feedback loop so the less water/coolant there is in the reactor, the less energy is put out. A Chernobyl type accident is physically impossible in any reactor used in the U.S. 3 Mile Island is about the worst nuclear accident that can occur in a U.S. nuclear power plant and about three dozen things went wrong (including stupidity on the part of the plant operators) in order to cause it.
  • by Jesus_666 ( 702802 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @04:57PM (#22202158)
    Actually, they partially are. Breeders can be reduced to dramatically reduce the amount of waste generated, thus eliminating one of the major issues with nuclear power. I've seen predictions from 95% to 98% less waste.
  • by Jesus_666 ( 702802 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @05:01PM (#22202178)
    Breeders can be used to reduce nuclear waste. The reduction of breeders does not help with that.
  • Re:why sodium? (Score:5, Informative)

    by BlueParrot ( 965239 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @05:01PM (#22202184)
    A number of reasons:

    a) It is liquid at temperatures suitable for the reactor operation meaning you don't need any pressure in the cooling system. In contrast pressurized water reactors and gas cooled reactors need to keep the entire core under high pressure.

    b) Sodium is a metal and hence conducts heat very well, this allows you to build a very compact reactor that is still capable of dissipating its heat after shutdown even if the cooling pumps were to fail.

    c) Sodium doesn't absorb neutrons nearly as much as water does, and this allows you to build a reactor which produces more plutonium than it consumes, thus eliminating the need to enrich uranium.

    d) Sodium atoms are heavier than hydrogen atoms, so the neutrons will not lose their energy as quickly. As a consequence the neutron spectrum is a lot harder, and capable of destroying much of the long-lived waste. The Waste from a breeder reactor would hit uranium levels of radioactivity in 300 years rather than tens of thousands of years.

    e)While sodium is corrosive when mixed with air or water, pure sodium is almost completely non-corrosive to steel. This is in sharp contrast to 300 C pressurized water with boric-acid dissolved in it. A sodium cooled reactor generally experiences virtually no corrosion to the reactor core unless an accident occurs.

    Basically, if it wasn't for the fire-hazard sodium would be close to an ideal reactor coolant.
     
  • by BlueParrot ( 965239 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @05:07PM (#22202234)
    Actually their main problem was that the plants they built ashore in order to heat the reactors didn't manage to supply enough heat so they ended up running the reactors non-stop without service, and they were not designed for that so they eventually broke under the stress. Also, lead-bismuth and sodium are very different coolants. While sodium reacts explosively with water , lead does not. Lead does however corrode steal quite aggressively while sodium is completely non-corrosive to steel ( unless it is mixed with air/water ).

  • Re:Youtube link (Score:3, Informative)

    by TubeSteak ( 669689 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @05:17PM (#22202334) Journal
    Here's the subtitle text:

    NPJ Video News No. 3
    Video taken just after the sodium leak accident at Monju, hidden by the PNC - the so-called 2 o'clock video
    Just after the accident, the PNC sent employees to the site to film the leak.
    However, due to the graphic nature of the footage, the PNC hid it
    The PNC explained that they hid it because "it has no value"
    With your own eyes, we want you to judge why the PNC hid the video
    This video was not only hidden at Monju (Fukui Prefecture),
    it was also discovered later that there was another copy hidden at the head office
    An employee who had to lie at the press conference committed suicide right afterwards
    What was it that drove him to commit suicide... Think about this
    Nishimura-san's death is also being reported on at "Joho Tsushin Sokushin Keikaku" (tokyodo-2005) blog
    Search in the blog for "Nishimura" (è¥æ? in Japanese)
    Employees heading for the site of the leak
    Sodium mist fills the air
    Footsteps on white sodium
    Repeatedly checking something
    Camera also moving toward the scene
    Visibility is very poor
    The sodium "snow" is so deep that footsteps do not leave a trace
    The mist gets deeper
    Seems like they found something
    A small mountain of sodium
    Camera angle graphically tells the story
    Going back quickly
    Emergency telephone
    The video continues a bit longer, but the important part is up to here
    To make the most of Nishimura-san's death, all we who live in Japan
    must think of what needs to be done
    NPJ Video News No. 3
  • Re:why sodium? (Score:3, Informative)

    by schnikies79 ( 788746 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @05:20PM (#22202366)
    The NaOH isn't the problem. Sodium Hydroxide can be easily neutralized.

    The problem is when Na comes in contact with water, it gives off hydrogen gas, and being that the rxn is exothermic, the hydrogen can be ignited resulting in an explosion.

    2Na + 2H20 --> H2 + 2NaOH
  • by BlueParrot ( 965239 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @05:25PM (#22202400)

    There is another factor to consider in this. Chernobyl used a design whereby a lack of water caused a positive feedback loop in the reactor to cause it to get even hotter.


    Oh if that was the ONLY thing that was wrong with it...

    1)The end of the control rods were made of graphite, which accelerated the reaction rather than slowing it when the operators pushed the panic button.

    2)The channels that contained the control rods were far too narrow, causing the control rods to get jammed when they deformed due to the intense heat.

    3)The reactor did not have a containment building, allowing the radioactive gases to escape into the atmosphere after the accident blew the roof of the reactor itself.

    4)The reactor core was unusually large, containing much more nuclear fuel than other reactor designs, thus making the radioactive release worse.

    5)The reactor was staffed with uneducated workers that didn't have significant experience with nuclear reactors.

    6)The operators were not told about the design problems with the reactors even thou they were well known at the time.

    7)The operators ran the reactor outside of safety regulations, withdrawing many more control rods than the reactor was designed to operate with ( that this was even possible is another design flaw ).

  • Re:why sodium? (Score:3, Informative)

    by BlueParrot ( 965239 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @05:32PM (#22202444)
    No you are right. Lead, Bismuth, Helium, Molten Salts, and even Water has been suggested. As for the last one, water is often claimed to be unusable in a breeder reactor because it absorbs too many neutrons. However, this is only true if you run the reactor on plutonium and use a thermal low-enrichment neutron spectrum. It is quite possible to design water/steam cooled reactors that have a fast neutron spectrum, and if you use heavy water it is even possible to design breeder reactor running on U-233 / Thorium in a thermal spectrum.

    Sodium still has some advantages thou, such as favorable melting/boiling points, no long lived radioactivity under neutron irradiation , low corrosion rates against steel, and superior heat conductivity.
  • by m0rph3us0 ( 549631 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @05:46PM (#22202534)
    Technically you're right, there is no "risk" of contamination from coal, it just plain contaminates everyday. There is enough uranium and thorium in most coal that if you could extract it economically would produce more power than the coal itself. Coal is somewhat radioactive, how do you think they do carbon dating?

    http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste [sciam.com]

  • by BlueParrot ( 965239 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @05:49PM (#22202552)

    The halflife of Sodium-24 is around 15 hours. The primary decay route is beta emission to an excited Magnesium-24 which then emits two gamma rays at 2.75Mev and 1.37Mev. So the snow is probably pretty radioactive too.


    Siiiigh, again.. The leak was in teh SECONDARY LOOP. It wasn't any radioactivity in it. Nada, zero, zip... Yes, it was a bad accident, but the only thing nuclear about it was that it occurred in a nuclear power plant. The same thing would be much less likely to occur in the radioactive primary loop, because that counts as part of the nuclear island and is hence under much stricter safety requirements.
  • Volume of sodium... (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 27, 2008 @05:59PM (#22202610)
    I was trying to visualize how big a spill this was, but I didn't find 700kg easy to visualize.

    700kg of sodium, which has a density a little less than water (0.968g/cm^3), would be less than a cubic metre by volume (0.723m^3 or so, or about 723 Litres), and would fit into three bathtubs (filled to the edge, they're apparently about 300 Litres or so).

    Conversion to Imperial or kegs of beer equivalents is left as an exercise for the reader.
  • Re:Youtube link (Score:3, Informative)

    by BlueParrot ( 965239 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @06:14PM (#22202720)

    If there was water in any of those multitudes of pipes overhead that started leaking, the whole place would have been one large crater.


    I give you one chance to guess why the reactor was built to carry the hot sodium far away from the reactor before using the heat from it to boil water for the turbines. Also, the white powder was probably not sodium ( sodium is silver-like in colour ) but rather sodium-oxides produces when the sodium is oxidized in the air.

    Now for the record, had those pipes actually been carrying high-pressure water for a power turbine you would certainly be dead had they leaked. To achieve high turbine efficiency power plant engineers try to maximize the pressure and temperature on the hot side of the turbine, which means that if one of those pipes bursts when you are standing next to it, you are in deep shit. In fact Japanese workers have indeed died from steam pipes bursting at a nuclear power plant. Was no sodium involved in that one thou.

    In general there is only one point in a sodium cooled power plant where water and sodium are even remotely close to one another, namely the secondary sodium-water heat exchanger. Mixing of sodium and water has occurred in Russian plants in the past, but it didn't cause any damage that was beyond repair, and no release of radioactive material.
  • Re:Also (Score:3, Informative)

    by owlstead ( 636356 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @06:38PM (#22202850)
    Yes, then again, without hardware crypto, the symmetric encryption and MACing (for authenticity of the data) of a 9 MB stream will be much more CPU consuming than the initial setup. Asymmetric encryption is much slower than symmetric encryption in general but normally you only need it for initial authentication and session key changes.

    If you use a lot of SSL/TLS (the S in HTTPS) you might need an SSL off-loader, a PCI based hardware accelerator or a CPU containing hardware crypto. The first one is most safe and can be very fast, a CPU with crypto (e.g. Sun T2) will beat it in performance per dollar. Then again, with most software/CPU aided cryptography the private keys will reside in main memory, which makes it possible to copy the key if the web server is compromised.

    EC cryptography could dramatically reduce the CPU time needed for the (cryptographic) part of the SSL handshake, but unfortunately MS and the major certification authorities don't seem to be too happy to provide support for Elliptic Curve cryptography.
  • by thermopile ( 571680 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @06:41PM (#22202862) Homepage
    Although I've never worked on one, I understand that sodium reactors are a real bear to manage. The US Navy tried it once [wikipedia.org] on the USS Seawolf, but opted for plain-old-water. Some of the reasons were:

    1.) The 15 hour half-life of Na-24 prevented immediate entry to the reactor in case of repair. Five half lives (the standard assumed for total decay away) means you're cooling your heels for about three days before you can really do any work. It makes quick response - like the kind Monju would have liked to have done - very difficult, if not impossible. 2.) Sodium freezes at 208F (almost 100C). Freezing in the pipes can be very bad for decay heat removal, as well as putting undue stresses on the pipes. I have seen previously rectangular "pipes" get their sides sucked in when the sodium freezes - which is impressive because they were 1/8-inch thick metal walls. Hence, you have to keep the sodium hot to work on it.

    Neither of the above are necessarily deal-killers, particularly for land-based reactors. Yes, you can work around the 15 hour half life of the sodium, but it sure makes reactor entry challenging in times of distress.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 27, 2008 @07:58PM (#22203348)

    The thing to keep in mind is that sodium is so popular as a reactor coolant precisely because it doesn't form a lot of long lived radioactive isotopes when irradiated in a nuclear reactor.
    Wrong. Sodium does form radioactive isotopes like Na-24 (that has a half-live of 15 hours). Water cooled reactors and CO2 cooled reactors produce shorter half-live isotopes like N-17 (that has a half-life of a couple seconds). Water in a PWR or BWR will become slightly radioactive over time due to stripping slight amounts of cobalt from valve seats (in a form like stellite which is used to make hard valve seats) and from the release of fission products that are not due to the fuel particles but from uranium impurities in the core materials that are very close to the coolant surface (so that in some cases the fission fragment can be ejected into the coolant through a very short distance of some part of the core material). This level of radioactivity is extremely low so that the coolant really isn't a threat even though the radioactivity is detectable. A simple filter will clean the water further. Sodium reactors have the same issues as well as having to worry for days after shutdown about the levels due to Na-24. If there was a core casualty and you needed to get in near the core, you could do it in a couple of hours with a properly shielded PWR or BWR. It would a week for a properly shielded liquid sodium reactor.

    So you are right that sodium does not produce long-lived isotopes. But you are wrong that sodium cooled reactors are used in lieu of water or gas cooled reactors for that reason. Sodium cooled reactors are popular for fast breeder reactors. Water cooled reactors are popular for ease of use and maintenance which is why they are used widely in power generation.
  • Re:Youtube link (Score:3, Informative)

    by emilper ( 826945 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @08:48PM (#22203656)
    the subtitles are misleading:

    "Sodium mist fills the air" and "The mist gets deeper" -- the camera was out of focus and it was quite dark in there; no "sodium" mist; a second after they filmed the "sodium mist", the "mist" dissapeared. There was not enough light, and the operator had to use a large aperture, so the range at which the objects were in focus was short: move the camera from the back of the shining suit in front to the wall that's 3m away and you get "mist".

    "Footsteps on white sodium" -- not sodium but sodium carbonate, which was used some 40 years ago for washing clothes by hand (prolonged use caused sores on skin, but by prolonged use I mean keeping your hands in warm water with 4-5 hours a day), and still is used in detergents, and sodium hydroxide, which you can buy in some shops, and is used for some household tasks, such as unclogging pipes. Ever bought those small bags with colored granules which are supposed to be miracle pipe uncloggers ? There is sodium hydroxide in that. Yes, it will damage your skin.

    and a comment to "To make the most of Nishimura-san's death, all we who live in Japan must think of what needs to be done": how about toning down the obsession with saving face, this is what killed Nishimura-san, and it also prevented his bosses from being completely open about the accident.

    The video is useless. It says nothing about the gravity of the accident, but instead can be misconstrued in many creative ways: in it you see people in shiny protective suits (which, btw, were not hermetically sealed) going through some rooms in a nuclear (oh, nuclear ... that must be dangerous) power plant in a bad light and everything is shot with a low quality black and white camera. With the help of the subtitles it has become "Blair reactor project".
  • Re:Mod parent up! (Score:3, Informative)

    by quacking duck ( 607555 ) on Sunday January 27, 2008 @10:21PM (#22204148)

    This is so true! I am in japan now and they go bananas every time I want to put soy sauce on my rice. In Sweden, and other parts of europe I guess, we can put soy sauce on the rice. But here in Japan it is not acceptible - sauce on rice is "dog food", very strange.. :) The most funny thing is that when I try to tell them "I like it better this way", they truly do not understand what I mean. It seems food here is not about eating in a way you like but rather eating in a way that the ancients developed thousands of years ago. Weird people.


    Westerners often eat cooked rice which is drier and doesn't stick by itself, so some type of sauce is usually added to make it stick together better on a fork.

    Traditional Japanese (also Chinese and probably other *ese) traditionally eat rice which is moist and sticky by default, obviating any need to douse it with soy or other sauce. Sauce from the various dishes is acceptable.

    Rice was not meant to be eaten in isolation, but that's exactly what happens when you put it onto a plate...
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 27, 2008 @10:50PM (#22204318)
    This video is a joke & indeed there was no need to release the video. The white stuff is simply a chemical fire retardant. It was released at the fist indication of a leak in order to avoid a larger disaster, ergo., a massive fire. If you don't belive me that the white stuff isn't sodium, consider this. Look at the suits these guys are wearing - notice they have a bottle of air on their backs? That's a one way system. The air supplies them with the good stuff they need to stay alive in a hostile environment which in this case is a room full of chemical fire retardant. When they breath out, they exhale into the environment. If that white stuff coating everything and making the room foggy was sodium the whole place would go up in one big fire ball as humans tend to breath out a bit of good old H2O which of course would react very violently with the airborne sodium. If the white stuff was sodium, they'd be wearing rebreathers and they clearly are not! Rebreathers are large backpack units.

    It's video interpretations like this that destroy the credibility of the anti-nuke crowd. Of course there's nothing wrong with that. The anti-nuke folks are primairly responsible for global warming because of their irrational fear of one of the safest forms of energy production. Breeder reactors for all!
  • by patio11 ( 857072 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @06:23AM (#22206258)
    You can get food your way in Japan. Really, really easily -- one way is to go into any fast food restaraunt. Hold the pickles, add more lettuce, special orders don't upset us because they're in the freaking manual. Seriously, though, there is a wide spectrum of culinary traditions in this country, from "The chef is the master, you are the student, you should be glad you were even allowed to choose to eat dinner at this restaraunt" to "Hum a few bars and I'll get you something in that general direction" to "Did you know there are 745,000 combinations of ingridients possible with this dish? We have 10 named varieties which are our most popular, or you can just pick one of the other 744,990."

    There is also a wide spectrum of cooks having egos. (There is a bad habit among a certain type of Westerner to assume that any odd action taken by a Japanese person is because they are Japanese. That is one theory -- another is that the cook just can't be bothered to help you, or is excessively proud, or is just a disagreeable person. All of thsee will be right at least part of the time.) I assure you, if you visit enough hoity-toity restaraunts in NYC, you will fairly quickly find someone who would not be willing to accomodate a simple request that wasn't in their "vision" for the food. ("Where is the ketchup?" "THIS IS A FOI GRAS AND CAVIAR PATTE SERVED IN A LIGHT BALSAMIC VINAGRETTE."* "I like my foi gras with ketchup!"

    (Sidenote: I do E->J and J->E translation in Japan as one of my work duties. I am not, however, a professional translator. The difference is that the folks who pay my salary pay me to *resolve* issues like "I just don't want squid" rather than just passively relaying the "Oh, we can't do that" response. I understand that the standard practice among professional translators is that you are supposed to not get in the way of the speaking parties at all -- this is why I am not a professional translator, I just translate for money.

    P.S. For those of you considering a job in this general line of work, the pay is a heck of a lot better if you pitch yourself my way. Most clients do not appreciate the value of a beautifully articulated "The waitress says no" nearly as much as they do "OK, so here's what is going on here, and here is what I did to get you your squidless pizza. Aren't you glad you hired me." The same fundamental issue scales straight from "I can't give you pizza w/o squid" to "I can't approve that $1 million deal you are suggesting".)

    * Sorry, I only eat at restaraunts that cost more than $15 when the client is paying, and then I'm having what he is having, so I have absolutely no clue whether this is actually a plausible French food combo or not. Bonus points: consultants get to eat at dinner, translators don't.

egrep -n '^[a-z].*\(' $ | sort -t':' +2.0

Working...