Give me a reason to doubt this: Leaked TEPCO report: 120 billion Becquerels of plutonium, 7.6 trillion Becquerels of neptunium
http://fukushima-diary.com/2011/10/news-media-knew-1-2%C3%971012-bq-of-p...
Leaked TEPCO report: 120 billion Becquerels of plutonium, 7.6 trillion Becquerels of neptunium released in first 100 hours — Media concealed risk to public
I don't read Japanese. Does the report say that? Can it be a fabrication? How can we know?
If this is true, there is nothing comparable in history, is there? This seems very dark indeed. These would be the hot particles we were looking for, no?
:( The French map is rather
:(
The French map is rather obviously inaccurate.
The Color Scale on the right, would appear to indicate that there is NO Cs-137 in the Northwest Pacific.
It would appear rather obvious, that many tons of radioactive waste have been added to the ocean waters off the coast of Japan.
Some of these nuclear waste materials were blasted high into the air and fell directly into the Pacific.
More gushed from the Fukushima Daichi Units due to overflow of vast quantities of sea water used as an emergency coolant.
Rain and runoff have washed additional tons into the Pacific.
Deliberate dumping is a contributing factor.
Obviously it is only for land contamination
Obviously, the map only reports the contamination for land areas.
Otherwise, the pseudo-color plots would not have hard edges at the shores.
You are correct that the contamination of the oceans is not zero.
But it is obvious that the map was intended to show only land contamination, and the fact that they "filled in" the oceans which they didn't measure, with zeros; doesn't call into question the accuracy of the values on land.
French map of cesium-137
French map of cesium-137 deposition from Fukushima shows the US more contaminated than Western Japan
http://cerea.enpc.fr/HomePages/bocquet/Doc/cumulated_total_deposition_gr...
Order Magnitude Errors.
Your title under-represents the 'official' radioactive release figures by a factor of 10.
The 'official' TEPCO/Japan figures, likely under-represent the release by about 8 orders of magnitude.
Not sure what would cause you personally to doubt or believe ... anything.
OKEE Dokey
OK
Tons of Nuclear materials were blasted to Flight Level 60 in multiple explosions
Nuclear cores melted through nuclear reactors and their low pressure, so-called 'containment' vessels.
Concrete building walls, (so-called 'containment' systems) crumbled and fell, like the fragile garbage they are. Apparently, the walls of Fukushima Daichi Unit-4 are tumbling down, perhaps perilously endangering the so-called 'spent-fuel' pool.
The global nuclear powered electrical generation industry has lied at every turn and endangered world health.
The infintessimal radiation figures you quote would amount to only a few pounds of nuclear fallout materials. Thus any reasonable person would DOUBT the figures.
Perhaps the agenda is yours.
The infintessimal radiation figures you quote would amount to only a few pounds of nuclear fallout materials. Thus any reasonable person would DOUBT the figures.
=================
Rather than casting aspersions on the honesty of the results of the good scientists of BRAWM; perhaps you need to question your own preconceived notions as to what happened and the seriousness of same.
For me, I will go with the measured truth of the good scientists, and leave the political preconceived notions in the trash where they belong.
BRAWM not at issue
:(
NO aspersions are cast upon BRAWM, and NONE are intended.
Garbage In Garbage Out (GIGO). By my lights, BRAWM has simply received bad nuclear fallout/washout data from known unreliable sources.
TEPCO, GE, Siemens, AREVA, Japan-Gvt, Toshiba-Westinghouse, Hitachi, Obama, USSR, France, England et al have been less than candid, from the 'get-go'. with respect to all nuclear disasters.
The MSM has played along with these fictions, sourced from their advertizers, owners and sponsors.
There are plenty of explicit aspersions; and no need for you to fabricate a new one from whole cloth.
Measurements don't lie.
Garbage In Garbage Out (GIGO). By my lights, BRAWM has simply received bad nuclear fallout/washout data from known unreliable sources.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BRAWM doesn't have to rely on unreliable sources concerning nuclear fallout.
Perhaps you haven't read the process by which BRAWM makes their measurements.
BRAWM can detect nuclear fallout levels for themselves.
They don't need the Government or anyone else to tell them what the background levels are due to fallout from weapons tests, etc. They can measure it.
Any nuclear laboratory in a University, or national lab, both within the USA, or abroad can measure the fallout levels. The Government can't hide the amount of radionuclides that was blown into the environment by '50s weapons tests; it's there for anyone to measure.
Measurements Lie
Measurements Lie, but more importantly, Liars Lie.
Measurements are not exact, under the best of circumstances, even neglecting ‘moral hazard’. We routinely include error bars and employ the Error Function (ERF) to quantify the error.
TEPCO, GE, Siemens, AREVA, Japan, Toshiba-Westinghouse, Hitachi, Obama, USSR, France, England et al have been less than candid, from the 'get-go'. with respect to all nuclear disasters. The MSM has played along with these fictions, sourced from their advertisers, owners and sponsors.
The appropriate plus or minus radioactive fallout errors for these groups is on the order of 10 billion percent.
Liars Lie
Errors not that big - not everyone is a liar
Measurements are not exact, under the best of circumstances, even neglecting ‘moral hazard’. We routinely include error bars and employ the Error Function (ERF) to quantify the error.
The appropriate plus or minus radioactive fallout errors for these groups is on the order of 10 billion percent.
---------------------------------------------------------
Again any properly equipped laboratory can measure the fallout for themselves, within error limits; but those limits are certainly not 10 billion percent.
BRAWM and many good scientists worldwide have measured the fallout and honestly reported their results for all to see.
I know it must be frustrating to be an anti-nuke, when the Fukushima accident wasn't as bad as you had hoped for. The only thing the anti-nuke has left is to claim that all the scientists are lying or have been duped, and only the self-righteous anti-nukes have a monopoly on truth.
Liars Lie
Again, BRAWM integrity is NOT in question.
Just the BS.ORGS mentioned multiple times.
Japan Citizens, cities, prefectures and various international organizations are doing their own mapping, and the 'official test results' did not look very good in early comparisons.
The Japanese are well advised to continue this process; as they are surrounded by and apparently governed by, 'Lying Liars'.
As are we!
Perhaps ERF of 1 Trillion percent is more accurate, regarding the Fukushima Daichi emissions.
The bottom line -preventable -and this is very bad for npp ind.
"According to the report, this meant people in charge misjudged the situation when an alternative water source was needed to cool the No. 1 unit's core, which delayed the injection of water. The report notes there were at least three opportunities for the emergency headquarters and the TEPCO head office to notice the isolation condenser had stopped functioning. Since they failed to do so, key opportunities to keep the reactor from overheating were missed."
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/T111229004103.htm
Report: U.S. nuclear renaissance unlikely after Fukushima
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2011/12/a-new-study-released-to...
Chiming in on your pr not effective...
"Again any properly equipped laboratory can measure the fallout for themselves, within error limits; but those limits are certainly not 10 billion percent.
BRAWM and many good scientists worldwide have measured the fallout and honestly reported their results for all to see.
I know it must be frustrating to be an anti-nuke, when the Fukushima accident wasn't as bad as you had hoped for. The only thing the anti-nuke has left is to claim that all the scientists are lying or have been duped, and only the self-righteous anti-nukes have a monopoly on truth."
==================================================
Deposition occurred on my land 4000 miles away wtf are you talking about .fukushima could have been prevented !or could have been worse is this something to be touting anti nuke or not grow up.tdm
WHAT???
Deposition occurred on my land 4000 miles away wtf are you talking about .fukushima could have been prevented !or could have been worse is this something to be touting anti nuke or not grow up.tdm
-----------------------------------------------------
Perhaps you've not covered this in school. The English language has a syntactic convention known as the "period". It is denoted by a small dot. It divides strings of words into sentences. Also by convention, the first word of a sentence is capitalized. Sentences express a single thought.
A conversation goes much better when people talk in complete sentences.
Perhaps if you terminated the use of your drug of choice, you'd be more coherent. I know it's a lot to ask....
agenda shmenda
'infinitesimal radiation figures' vs 'only a few pounds of nuclear fallout materials'
Who REALLY knows yet and whatever.
Expect the full studies to be released in DECADES if ever.
The effects are horrendous ALREADY:
Mycoplasma pneumonia cases reported per sentinel weekly [定点当たり報告数]
http://idsc.nih.go.jp/idwr/kanja/weeklygraph/IMG/16myco.gif
The Graph, with Y axis
The Graph, with Y axis labeled may be located at:
http://idsc.nih.go.jp/idwr/kanja/weeklygraph/18myco-e.html
Few base 52/53 applications are extant, besides the weekly calendar. This in conjunction with the 01 to 11 description of the curve colors, gives an acceptable indication of a linear time scale for the X Axis.
Perhaps, the 'meaningless' comment, is more appropriate for undergraduate students, than for an engineering blog, with written descriptions of the graph purpose, stated.
Thus, I am comfortable with the illustrative quality of the posted graph.
Meaningless
The above graph is totally meaningless because the vertical and horizontal axes are not identified as to what quantity they represent, nor the units that quantity is given in. Is this a plot of radioactivity vs the number of days since the accident? If so, are the units of the vertical axes Becquerels or Curies?
Without identification, and without units, how is one to compare and put this data into perspective? The curves plotted may be 6 orders of magnitude down from the natural radioactivity that we are all exposed to. The data could be down in the "noise" and inconsequential. Yet it is presented here as if it were something meaningful.
The above plot totally fails if it is intended as any type of rebuttal.
Meaningful
Tokyo Infectious Disease Weekly Report
Disease Trend Graph (weekly reported cases per sentinel in comparison)
Mycoplasma pneumonia cases reported per sentinel weekly [定点当たり報告数]
vertical - cases (in hundreds)
horizontal - week of report
red line -- Current year(Tokyo)
See also:
http://idsc.tokyo-eiken.go.jp/weekly/2011/48e.pdf
http://idsc.tokyo-eiken.go.jp/weekly/2011/49e.pdf
http://idsc.tokyo-eiken.go.jp/weekly/2011/50e.pdf
Radiation levels in Koriyama children exceed annual limit: survey
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20111209p2a00m0na011000c.html
Japan Emperor’s granddaughter hospitalized with mycoplasmal pneumonia
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20111105a5.html
Yablokov on Chernobyl:
Children in the contaminated territories currently have more bronchial asthma and chronic bronchitis owing to irreversible structural lung changes. In the contaminated territories there is a marked increase in the incidence of both acute pneumonia and chronic broncopulmonary pathology, expressed as bronchial asthma and chronic bronchitis.
Alpha emitters tend to adhere to lung tissue.
Internal (sustained) emitters result in intense foci with a huge cumulative dose to a cluster of cells which results in profound long-term tissue changes somewhat different and beyond what transient (and generalized) exposure would cause such as described below:
Radiation-induced lung injury:
Radiation-induced lung injury is a general term for damage to the lungs which occurs as a result of exposure to ionizing radiation. In general terms, such damage is divided into early inflammatory damage (radiation pneumonitis) and later complications of chronic scarring (radiation fibrosis). Radiation-induced lung injury most commonly occurs as a result of radiation therapy administered to treat cancer.
The lungs are the most radiosensitive organ, and radiation pneumonitis can occur leading to pulmonary insufficiency and death (100% after exposure to 50 gray of radiation), in a few months.
Radiation pneumonitis is characterized by:
Loss of epithelial cells
Edema
Inflammation
Occlusions of airways, air sacs and blood vessels
Fibrosis
Coggle, J.E., Lindop, Patricia J. "Medical Consequences of Radiation Following a Global Nuclear War." The Aftermath (1983): 60-71.
It's just a graph with the
It's just a graph with the cases of Mycoplasma pneumonia detected in Japan (I think the whole country.)
You can check graphs for other diseases here:
http://idsc.nih.go.jp/idwr/kanja/weeklygraph/index-e.html
if strontium and plutonium
if strontium and plutonium are now measurable in japan, why are there no actual measurements of these isotopes being made on US soil/in US sediment? can BRAWM comment? (apologies if this has been answered previously)...
Ostrich Syndrome
Very little radionuclide test data has been released to the public for Alaska, Marianas Islands, British Columbia or the Lower 48.
The governments, nuclear industry, press and food industries are working very closely together. Their objective is to hide the truth about the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster.
They have been quite sucessful, to date in preventing PUBLIC DISCLOSURE of the massive amounts of data collected.
Is the military-industrial
Is the military-industrial so giant an atrocity that it depends upon this kind of insulting censorship?
Sadly - Yes
Apparently, the answer to your question is, YES!
From President Ike Eisenhower's Farewell Address to the Nation
January 17, 1961
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ike.htm
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Consider that the
Consider that the military-industrial complex (MIC) "censors" out of ability, not need. It can so it does.
SPAM Censor
Censorship via SPAM.
The little temper tantrums include churning up VERY old threads.
Here we go again, for the umpteenth time.
Indeed. With the excellent
Indeed. With the excellent anti-spam device in place, it's obviously a human being with a well-defined agenda.
Perhaps a whole crew.
Perhaps a whole crew.
Getting Paid
Perhaps as a condition of their employment.
Repeat X 1000
Repeat, Threepeat, 4peat ... 99peat ... 999peat
My, are we having another posting temper tantrum? Dredging up 20 and 30 week old posts, again with no substantial comments.
No problem, we will merely dredge the more recently commented posts back to the surface.
Hello Mr. Spam
SPAM
This latest SPAM attack, is increasingly a quick phrase, such as 'way to go' or 'good comment'
The Homepage is some random commercial site.
This is one such example:
http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/node/5230#comment-21947
http://www.buildingmaterials.co.uk/Geotextile.html
It is an 'Anonymous' submission, with a homepage for building materials.
Here is the full 'message' ...
"Thanks for sharing.Geotextile"
Under a Rock
Oh there ARE PLENTY of measurements and scads of data for every radionuclide.
However the data are not effectively available for public consumption. Hidden somewhere under a rock, no doubt.
Translation
Next, one can often get the key points of a foreign language news story, by posting the link to the Google Translation page.
http://translate.google.com/#
http://fukushima-diary.com/2011/10/news-media-knew-1-2%C3%971012-bq-of-p...
News: Media knew 1.2 × 10 ^ 12 Bq of plutonium was released to the air in the first 100 hours
The Report which Tepco made for press conference on 6/6/2011 was leaked on the internet.
According to the report, Tepco already announced that Plutonium 238, 239, 240, 241 was released to the air in the first 100 hours after the earthquake. According to the report, Tepco already announced that Plutonium 238, 239, 240, 241 was released to the air in the first 100 hours after the earthquake.
It reads the amount is 120 BILLION Becquerels . It reads the amount is 120 BILLION Becquerels. (Comment -- As indicated, this is 1.2 TRILLION Bq - some nations use different words, so the Order of magnitude scientific notation is best --)
When it comes to Np-239, it is 7,600 BILLION Becquerels . When it comes to Np-239, it is 7,600 BILLION Becquerels.
It is possible to assume a certain amount of them have flown to around Tokyo. It is possible to assume a certain amount of them have flown to around Tokyo.
Knowing the fact, Media kept concealing the risk for 7 months and kept people exposed. Knowing the fact, Media kept concealing the risk for 7 months and kept people exposed.
VERY BIG NUMBERS
Big numbers, VERY big numbers - for ~ the first 100 hours.
http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/kan/topics/201106/pdf/attach_04_2.pdf
Cs-134 2.1 y 1.8×10?16
Cs-137 30.0 y 1.5×10?16
Sr-89 50.5 d 2.0×10?15
Sr-90 29.1 y 1.4×10?14
Pu-238 87.7 y 1.9×10?10
Pu-239 24065 y 3.2×10?09
Pu-240 6537 y 3.2×10?09
Pu-241 14.4 y 1.2×10?12
I-131 8.0 d 1.6×10?17
I-132 2.3 h 4.7×10?14
I-133 20.8 h 6.8×10?14
I-135 6.6 h 6.3×10?14
…
Mark, can you comment
I'm concerned about this numbers, Mark what are your thoughts?
Thanks
Some context
Any context for ocean contamination/ seafood test annual please
"PARIS — France's nuclear monitor said on Thursday that the amount of caesium 137 that leaked into the Pacific from the Fukushima disaster was the greatest single nuclear contamination of the sea ever seen.
But, confirming previous assessments, it said caesium levels had been hugely diluted by ocean currents and, except for near-shore species, posed no discernible threat.
From March 21 to mid-July, 27.1 peta becquerels of caesium 137 entered the sea, the Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety (IRSN) said.
One peta becquerel is a million billion bequerels, or 10 to the power of 15.
Of the total, 82 percent entered the sea before April 8, through water that was pumped into the Fukushima's damaged reactor units in a bid to cool them down, it said.
"This is the biggest single outflow of man-made radionuclides to the marine environment ever observed," the agency said in a press release."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jqygIKKphM-aWIfeNoAWb...
Not plausible
Mark,
Thank you for the math calculation verification. You have worked backwards from the disclosed radioactive fallout data to 5 kg of radioactive material. The calculations have been published elsewhere, with similar solutions. So the stated math problem is considered to have been properly worked here: http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/node/5774#comment-21635
This brings us to an uncomfortable, but familiar impasse. The rather dramatic explosions of the reactors appear to vigorously expel more than 5 kg of radioactive material, even accounting for the oxide purity levels. In fact, by my lights, the total radionuclide ejection numbers appear to be outrageously low. The 5 kg numerical solution does not appear plausible. MOX fuel rods were blasted to flight level 60 and scattered over several square miles of landscape and seascape. All the heavy water in 3 reactors was vented into the atmosphere or washed into the Pacific, as well as several (dozen?) refills.
This is a familiar, and uncomfortable impasse. The negligible radioactive ejection numbers at the Three Mile Island (TMI) were inconsistent with the ‘VOID’ in the reactor and the Pennsylvania Cancer Spikes. The USSR disclosures for Chernobyl releases were low. So the international nuclear community has again apparently done, what they always have done in the past. They lied … again.
It appears to me, that the Fukashima data is not plausible, whatever the theory of the explosions. But, again, thanks for confirming the math.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiNUpeODOEU
http://abcnews.go.com/International/japan-earthquake-explosion-fukushima...
http:/www.youtube.com/watch?v=mH9oiGUWMuc
UNIT 3 REPORT: http://iangoddard.com/fukushima01.html
Two independent estimates lead to same amount of Cs-137
Hi Bill Duff,
The release estimate for Cs-137 provided by TEPCO in that report (1.5×1016 Bq or 4.7 kg) has recently been corroborated by the estimate of Stohl et al. using worldwide CTBTO data. They estimate 3.58×1016 Bq of Cs-137, with a confidence interval of 2.33–5.01×1016 Bq. This amount is larger than the estimate in the TEPCO report but in the same order of magnitude, yielding a total mass release of 7.25–15.6 kg of Cs-137 versus 4.7 kg.
The TEPCO report was a calculation using a sophisticated program that used the measured temperatures and pressures inside the reactors to estimate the releases of fission products from the fuel, and the analysis assumes that three full meltdowns occurred. The Stohl et al. paper is based solely on measurements of Cs-137 in the air throughout the world, including in Japan. Both completely independent lines of evidence lead to essentially the same quantity of Cs-137.
Mark [BRAWM Team Member]
Trust
Mark,
I understand; and have already agreed that the mathematics are in order, for the given emissions data set.
Unfortunately, my eyes tell a different story when reviewing the Fukushima blasts. When the literature tells me one thing and my observations conflict; I never discount my own observations.
One fuel rod, blasted from one plant would exceed 5 kG. Thus, I cannot accept that the total environmental releases from the multiple meltdowns, explosions, ventings and liquid releases are so miniscule.
In my experience ... 'Objective' scientific publication only goes so far, when a dollar is involved. Thus, I do not personally trust the international data set.
Bill
Comment...
Unfortunately, my eyes tell a different story when reviewing the Fukushima blasts. When the literature tells me one thing and my observations conflict; I never discount my own observations.
========================
Two questions:
1) According to your eyes, how much mass went up in those explosions?
2) What fraction of the mass of a nuclear power plant is radioactive material, as opposed to ordinary non-radioactive building materials?
the numbers from the establishment are likely ALMOST correct....
had not fuel rods and chucks of core (which enter the environment more slowly) been ejected on SEVERAL occasions.
The ocean emissions, quantity dissolved (unrecovered), will be what is left when they find the slag and subtract a total of the volume left, quality ejected, quantity aerosoled / vaporized, from the starting volume.
Documented Absurdity
:(
Mark,
The mathematics indicate a mass of about 5 kG of radioactive materials, which corresponds to an imperial weight of about 11 pounds.
Let us take the activity level, natural abundance and relative mass, of Potassium (K-40) and the average banana mass to be *120 grams.
What is the Banana Equivalent Dose (BED) for the total disclosed Fukushima fallout level?
How many bananas are required to match the purported total fallout of the Fukushima nuclear disaster.
* According to the International Banana Association, an average-sized banana weighs 120 grams.
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_weight_of_a_banana_in_grams#ixzz1c...
Radioactivity is not dose
The estimates of releases are in terms of radioactivity (Becquerels). Radioactivity is not dose. Dose (Sieverts) depends on how someone is exposed to radioactivity. Dose cannot be calculated just based on the amount of radiation released.
For example, of the estimated 1.6×1016 Bq of Cs-137, a small portion reached California. We have made measurements and calculated the dose for inhaling and ingesting the trace amounts that arrived here, and the doses are tiny. In Japan, there are areas that had to be evacuated because the external dose rate due to Cs-137 and Cs-134 was too large for people to safely remain there. There have also been radioactive foods in Japan that would contribute to someone's dose from internal exposure.
Besides this, we have commented elsewhere about why the banana equivalent dose does not make for a completely honest dose comparison.
Mark [BRAWM Team Member]
NO INCONSISTENCY!!!
This is a familiar, and uncomfortable impasse. The negligible radioactive ejection numbers at the Three Mile Island (TMI) were inconsistent with the ‘VOID’ in the reactor and the Pennsylvania Cancer Spikes.
=========================================
There's no inconsistency between the neglible emission from TMI and the "void"
Three Mile Island has a containment building - and it WORKED.
The containment building at TMI bottled up 100% of the accident. However, because Metropolitan Edison wanted to get some workers into a portion of the containment building, they vented a small portion of the containment to the atmosphere in order to lower the dose of the personell when they entered. That intentional venting, which was within legally permissable limits; is the entire source of the radioactivity ejected during the TMI accident.
With all the ignorant errors in your post; you have the unmitigated gall and audacity to call other people liars?
Why don't you just accept the fact that what you "think" ( term used loosely ) are lies, are just your own misunderstandings.
Great Post!!
You might also point out that there were NO cancer spikes due to TMI.
There were extensive hearings on this in court when people around TMI sued Metropolitan Edision. The chief federal judge, Sylvia Rambo dismissed the case without a trial.
You can read her ruling here:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/tmi.html
As is clear from the preceding discussion, the discrepancies between Defendants, proffer of evidence and that put forth by Plaintiffs in both volume and complexity are vast. The paucity of proof alleged in support of Plaintiffs, case is manifest. The court has searched the record for any and all evidence which construed in a light most favorable to Plaintiffs creates a genuine issue of material fact warranting submission of their claims to a jury. This effort has been in vain.
No cancer spikes
You are correct. There were NO cancer spikes. The anti-nukes are LIARS.
Courtesy of CBS News:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/11/01/health/main527826.shtml
(CBS) People who live near the Three Mile Island nuclear plant show no significant increase in cancer deaths more than 20 years after an accident at the plant released low amounts of radiation.
Researchers at the University of Pittsburgh studied deaths between 1979 and 1998 among people who reside within five miles of the Pennsylvania plant. Their findings are reported on the Web site of the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.
Courtesy of Penn State University:
http://www.personal.psu.edu/bah282/tmi.html
Additionally, unlike Chernobyl, which is believed to have caused a cancer spike, “a four-years study by Columbia University and the National Audubon Society found ‘no convincing evidence’ that [the] minor amounts of radiation released during the TMI accident led to an increase in cancer among those exposed” (USCEA 2). In fact, “numerous health studies by independent medical and scientific organizations confirm that the Three Mile Island accident and nuclear power operations have had no impact on public health”
Beware the anti-nuke LIARS and PROPAGANDISTS
Fraud from sea to sea
:(
We are collectively confronted by one of the larger frauds in human history.
I remain a tepid supporter FOR continued use of nuclear technologies in military, space, medical, taggant and electrical power applications. That support does not extend to 'drinking the purple Kool-Aid or believing 'What I Am Told'(WAIT). This is particularly true, when 'WAIT' is absurd upon it's face.
Certainly, there has been a massive anthopogenic cancer spike due to wide-spread electrical generation via nuclear and coal based facilities, as well as nuclear weapon testing. Certainly, the ACTUAL radionuclide releases from Chernobyl, TMI, Fukushima and the other disasters have materially increased cancer occurrences for an extended downwinder population.
Just as certainly, the Pro-Nuke industry groups have engaged in every sort of scientific, medical, economic, political and judicial fraud; to buttress their public relations efforts. Just as certainly, there are Anti-Nuke 'loonies' on the loose. I am not particularly swayed by the countervailing frauds; but am apparently fated to continue hearing them ... ad infinitum.
Improper influence is possibly the single dominent characteristic of the presently composed federal judiciary. So 'judge quotes' are not persuasive. While coincidence is not causality; I take it as a given that cancer spikes are present and a causal link is present in the TMI nuclear disaster. Findings of federal judges and federal panels ... notwithstanding.
I will stick with ALARA and maintain a high level of skepticism, where there is a dollar involved.
>'What I Am
>'What I Am Told'(WAIT).
WIAT?
Dyslexia is a terrible thing.
Lysdexia
Intermittent lysdexia is not particularly uncommon; nor is twisting anagrams.
ERROR!! ERROR!! ERROR!!!
All the heavy water in 3 reactors was vented into the atmosphere or washed into the Pacific,
==========================
There's NO HEAVY WATER in the Fukushima reactors. Those reactors are LWRs - Light Water Reactors; specifically BWRs - Boiling Water Reactors.
The Canadian CANDU reactors use heavy water; but not boiling and pressurized LWRs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CANDU_reactor
You can't even get the correct facts about the type of reactors present at Fukushima; yet you arrogantly, and ignorantly claim you can identify how much nuclear material has been ejected merely by looking at the mushroom cloud, and with no instrumentation.
Why don't you sit this thread out; it's way over your head.