Please read:
This post is a bit more metaphysics than physics, and overdue.
I have been reading the posts on this forum for the last week and it has turned from scientific discussion to a hangout for paranoid delusionals. I think everyone who is posting anxiety-dripping topics and replies needs to make a re-evalution.
The situation in Japan is pressing and important, but it has already been shown that unless you live in Japan, it's not anywhere near life-threatening or deserving of the hysterical rhetoric posted here.
How are the Japanese people dealing with this issue that is on their doorstep? They are scared, but are composed and functional. When you look across the board here, you see people that are driving themselves crazy with molehills being turned into mountains.
It's not good that we, as a society, screwed up and had this level of accident, but the world has seen worse, and yet we are still alive as a race.
I'm not going to downplay the risks, or say this will or won't cause people to get cancer or any other outcome; the control over that aspect is minimal.
However, in each of our lives, there are situations we can't control even though we can make adjustments. And, when your number is up, it's time.
What this boils down to, is that America had become the land of adult children, not adults. We are too sheltered and soft. No strength or constitution. Have some dignity, and if it's your time to go or face your fate, face it with courage and don't hide under the rug.
Do what you love, and don't let this stop you from living your lives. I would also recommend reading "On the Beach" if you already haven't.
Please bring on the science and leave the drama at the door.
I suggest that if the
I suggest that if the direction this public forum has taken bothers you, then you need to take yourself elsewhere.
It is really that simple. There is a combination of trying to understand the data and science with real life concerns.
If you cannot understand or appreciate the concern, fear and anger, then move on. Otherwise, to post what you did, clearly expressing your discontent, all the while staying here and debating people calls you out as a TROLL.
So run along, go live your happy life and be near happy people.
On the contrary. It was a
On the contrary. It was a pleasant scientific discussion until the lot of you showed up and decided that the NUC staff was your wetnurses.
I'm fine right where I am.
why must you respond to each
why must you respond to each and every person with vitriol, despite the fact that they are being perfectly respectful to you?
please do clean up your act or leave. you are merely being disruptive. you can find ways to voice your opinion more persuasively without being angry and in people's faces.
Exactly. I don't see how the
Exactly. I don't see how the OP has added anything constructive to the discussion here.
Well OP, it appears that
Well OP, it appears that there are many people that have legitimate arguments. So what that tells me is that maybe you are the one that has the problem.
I say again....
The bottom line is that there has NEVER been an accident with the unique issues this one does. Multiple reactors, inconsistent/questionable amounts and elements,the plume pulse factors, the concentrations in the rain and the constant flow of radioactive materials we are having for this long of a duration, etc etc. The cumulative effect is not known or being addressed.
Now if you can honestly tell yourself that anyone in the nuclear community can give us factual information about the consequences that the unprecedented elements pose to our future health then I call you a liar.
And add to these unknowns the lack of transparency and information we are getting from our government. Its not very reassuring imho.
I have read all kinds of reports from agency's all over the world on nuclear science and the effects of the different types of radiation so it is not as if I am speaking on this w/o doing my own homework. I do not claim to be an expert or to understand everything I have read completely. But what I have gathered is that there is no way in hell that they should be telling us not to worry, there is no danger to our health. It is slight of hand when they say "no immediate health risks".
What should have been done and they govt has still not done is tell us what we can do to protect ourselves from the low level exposure we are getting, what almost 3 weeks now and no end in sight. As another poster mentioned, a supplement with the drd of iodide, calcium, zinc, not going outside as much as possible, not going out in the radiation rain.
So I say they are the ones not being reasonable and rational when there is absolutely no way they can convince me that in good conscience that they know what risk this is posing to our health in the future.
Go back to sleep
Do you know that it took 7
Do you know that it took 7 months to completely stop Chernobyl, and that there have been worse accidents of meltdowns in California? Find out more about Santa Susana if you don't believe me.
Ignorance it seems is stronger than fact.
You don't know anything.
You don't know anything.
"Fact" being a very pliant
"Fact" being a very pliant word in your world.
Santa Susana was not worse than Chernobyl. It was definitely worse than Three Mile Island.
A couple of things to note:
1) The government grabbed the milk from the surrounding areas of Santa Susana and destroyed it - no such actions being contemplated here despite UCB's findings.
2) A lot of people died and got cancer from Santa Susana. There were lawsuits; damages were awarded.
So, it's not *really* all right that we are being exposed right now simply because people have been exposed before. People who have been exposed before died and got sick. We're trying not to die or get sick, and we're trying to make sure our kids don't die or get sick - BASED ON THE HISTORICAL FACT THAT SUCH RELEASES CAUSE ILLNESS AND DEATH.
The UCB team has posted the rainwater results. You can see them for yourself. If you want to send your children out to play in that rain, by all means, please do so. Those of us who are not sympathetic to (nor paid by) the nuclear industry will continue to pursue the facts.
The obviousness of my post
The obviousness of my post eludes you. If this incident was even as bad as one that has already occurred on our soil, then the same actions would be taken to stop the consumption of milk.
My pointing out Santa Susana was to illustrate that your assumptions about the complex and novel nature of this accident are without merit. We have faced worse accidents here than Fukushima. Was it right, of course not. But your protests of catastrophe from Fukushima are paled by comparison to what gas happened locally and that people still live in LA and Simi Valley.
By the way, you probably should realize that it's not just me sending kids to play in the rain, but the folks that run this site and ate giving you their effort and data say the same thing.
Please get some help.
Well and forgive me if I am
Well and forgive me if I am blunt. The fact that there are members of the human race that think its perfectly acceptable to play with elements that destroy our earth and the people in it is in and of itself insanity.
And that radiation cannot be seen makes it all the more hard for people to accept as real. So keep playing it down. The children will pay in the future. Not you.
Complacency at its finest.
The local milk, as the UCB
The local milk, as the UCB team has shown us, already contains batches with I-131 levels multiple times higher than the legal drinking water limit.
If you feed that milk to children and pregnant/breastfeeding mothers, some number of them or their children will get sick as a result, because their thyroid glands will absorb some of it.
And this can be easily prevented by:
1) not having nuclear power plants and not exploding nuclear devices.
2) or, in the absence of such a sane policy, the use of kelp to supplement iodine and the use of natural detoxifiers to keep one's self and one's children healthy in the face of KNOWN, FACTUAL dangers.
The UCB team has demonstrated clearly that what you are saying is simply not true - if it were true, then they would not be able to measure the spikes in I-131 that they have. We do not live with rain containing 20Bq/l of I-131 on a daily basis, and yet that did occur on 3/23.
Please refute me with facts, logic, and reason, and refrain from namecalling as it only weakens your argument.
The EPA's MCL (Maximum
The EPA's MCL (Maximum Contaminant Level) for drinking water is 4mrem/year for all beta emitters, co-occurring.
The AVERAGE concentration of I-131 which is assumed to yield the MLC of 4mrem/year for 'Reference Man' (who btw, consumes 730L drinking water every year, that thirsty, thirsty man, or woman, we don't want to be gender-specific here.. i.e. this would be an average across 730L of drinking water), assuming CONTINUOUS EXPOSURE - is 3pCi/L.
To simplify, 730L worth of drinking water 'tainted' with 3pCi/L worth of I-131 would accumulate to 4mrems. Not taking into account co-occurring beta-emitters', of course.
I hope it's a bit more clearer now.
I can't speak for your
I can't speak for your adversary, but I would say it's about time you heeded his advice to stick to the issues at hand.
The milk was tested at over 6x the limit for drinking water; the rainwater at many multiples more than that.
According to the Yablokov & Nesterenko study, 985,000 people had died from the Chernobyl accident up to 2004, including hundreds of thousands who were far from the accident site. Many hundreds of thousands more are alive but sick.
It is unclear (mainly, due to lack of information) just how bad this accident is. It also appears that it's entirely possible that it could get worse, or that it could get worse then Chernobyl ever was.
Fearmongering is irresponsible. I have no doubt that there are foolish people out there taking way too much KI thinking that it's going to save them from the nuclear boogeyman. On the otherhand, heavyhanded complacency has no place in the discussion either - the risks and dangers are real and people are right to be concerned and right to be looking for answers.
I'm no expert...
...Not by a long shot. But I would guess that we've now WELL passed Chernobyl:
http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/05_27.html
(Also posted under "Not good" in its own Forum thread.)
Rick Cromack.
Allen, Texas
www.facebook.com/lonestarplano
RichardFCromackJr@gmail.com
972-746-8575
I have a theory...
...That addresses much of the criticism about the federal government's response to all this, which can be summarized thusly:
"Yes, this stuff is bad, but it's not THAT bad. And, yes, that contradicts what we've been saying for decades, but please forget about that. Trust us: We don't know what's coming, and we have no desire to tell you what's already here, really; but you're going to be FINE, JUST FINE. Now, moving on: Let me be clear, I'm running for a second term!"
Here, then is my hypothesis:
- The reason why milk hasn't been destroyed, is that there will BE no "safe" milk, not for a while, not in THIS country, certainly, and, increasingly, all over the world. Simply removing all milk from the supply would be incredibly costly and disruptive, potentially logistically impossible, it would almost certainly throw the country into a fairly massive economic tailspin, it might well bankrupt many farmers, it would have MASSIVE long-term impact on the food supply (I dare you to find a burger chain, a pizza parlor or a salad bar that doesn't use cheese, to say nothing of The Cheesecake Factory). Perhaps more importantly: It would cause an ABSOLUTE PANIC. The veneer of civilization is not so thick, folks.
- The reason why people in the general population haven't been distributed -- or been advised to procure on their own -- doses of potassium iodide, Prussian Blue, and perhaps other helpful "blocking" medicines, is that there simply isn't enough to go around. IF the Government has ANY of this stuff stockpiled in quantity -- something I very seriously doubt -- it's going to reserve it for the military, officers and agents of the Government, and first responders, which MIGHT actually be the prudent thing to do, until there's that panic, anyway. Remember there is currently NO public demand for EITHER of these things; there are only a very few voices calling for consideration of these sorts of things, and they are very widely spaced, their credibility and expertise can easily be assailed, and they don't have any microphones in front of them. Look at how quickly "America's favorite scientist", Michio Kaku, went from being every network's go-to expert on the Fukushima crisis, to being COMPLETELY off-the-air and reduced to making Twitter posts and engaging in a round-table circle-jerk with people who already agree with him on his Website. There are people speaking out, yes, but they can be easily ignored, and their outrage is at best very very quiet when compared to the great, big media machine churning out stories about budget talks, Libya, the Royal Wedding, Charlie bleedin' Sheen and Judge Judy.
...The more likely explanation, though, is this: We don't have much of it AT ALL. Remember, we relied on FOREIGN MANUFACTURERS to "ramp up" the bird flu vaccine -- how'd THAT work out? We ended up getting that shipment, what, SIX MONTHS AFTER THE PANDEMIC FIZZLED OUT? Please. A helluva lot of money goes into this Government. Some of it is supposed to protect us, or at least assist us, at times such as this. Most of it gets flushed down a very big toilet. Nobody's watching; it's only at a time like this that ANYBODY, outside of an Inspector General's office, cares. Not enough people care (yet). Wait a few weeks, folks. You ain't seen nothin', yet.
- The reason why the Government is taking NO definite steps to address this health and welfare crisis of potentially Biblical proportions (if the entire site has to be abandoned and EVERYTHING there eventually melts down, which is the very worst of the worst-case scenarios, I think even the most conservative among us will agree with that terminology), is harder to guess. I figure, One, They genuinely don't believe it's a problem, nor that it ever WILL be, not for America or Americans. Two, They figure it COULD be a problem, but they're willing to wait and see what happens before they commit any sizeable resources or devote any real attention to it. Three, They figure it's a problem, but since they're not equipped or prepared to deal with it on ANY level, they're content for the moment to ignore, downplay and dismiss it. Four, they don't give a damn, and are far more interested in political gamesmanship, re-election, and the NCAA Final Four.
In other words: Our Government is either delusional, detached, dumb, or deranged. And then there's Answer [E]: All of the Above. You make the call.
Rick Cromack.
Allen, Texas
www.facebook.com
RichardFCromackJr@gmail.com
972-746-8575
Go read the FAQ
Go read the FAQ
If the only thing you can do
If the only thing you can do is dole out insults and RTFMs, it's clear that you are more interested in being disruptive than contributive.
I am asking *you* to respond to my facts in a civil manner. Are you able to do that or not?
Alex
your facts have nothing to
your facts have nothing to do with this discussion and are completely tangential to the original post, so no I will not dignify them with a response.
Your attitude is dangerous
Your attitude is dangerous and deadly Mr/Ms 'please read' and here's why.
According to the New York Academy of Sciences, in a peer-reviewed study, approximately one million people died because of Cherynobl. Millions more were sickened and/or injured.
In case after case of nuclear poisoning, health effects have not shown up for 10 years or more - the most dramatic example being your fouling of the Marshall Islands resulting in widespread thyroid disease - none of which showed up until 10 years later.
If you really think that low levels of ingested radioactive material is nothing to worry about, I suggest you go to google images and search for "BABIES IN FALLUJAH."
Now that you have seen what "BABIES IN FALLUJAH" look like, let us note a couple of things:
1) The official position of the US government is that Depleted Uranium does not pose a threat to health
2) One-quarter of births in Fallujah are DEAD ON ARRIVAL. Doctors tell women there not to have babies - period. The rate of deformation has skyrocketed.
So when you or anyone else comes along and tells us there is nothing to worry about, your credibility is torn to shreds before you've even finished typing.
If you think DU dust is safe for children, by all means cover your children with it. If you think the rainwater (measured by the UCB team to contain extremely high levels of I-131) is safe, by all means have your children play in it. If you think the local milk (measured by the UCB team to have detectable levels of I-131 which appeared after Japan) is safe, by all means hae your children chug it.
But please stop describing perfectly rational people who are far more concerned and aware as you as "paranoid delusionals." If you would get off your nuclear-industry-sponsored high horse, you would see that perfectly reasonable suggestions are being made like making sure kids have enough iodine and encouraging the use of metal detoxification.
People who work for the government or the corporations are absolutely excluded as sources of reliable information - based on the FACTUAL HISTORY of their conduct in the past. The UCB team is, sadly, the only place we are able to get anything near accurate information, and that information is disturbing to say the least. Your attempts to dissuade people from taking actions which might save their lives and the lives of their loved ones is unconscionable - and yet totally expected in a society where the scumbags in the nuclear industry have spent so much time, money, and effort to twist your minds.
Alex
The very fact that you would
The very fact that you would conclude that I am a pro-nuclear supporter indicates your level of paranoia. I have made no attestments either way to my view of nuclear power, yet you somehow create facts to suit your argument.
You are a paranoid delusional and should seek help.
thou dost protest to much
You are in the minority here, sir. None of the UCB scientists who have
intelligently answered questions here have called one of their posters
paranoid or delusional. Why are you? The public forum had less than 900 posters a week ago. Today there are over 1600 posts. It will continue upward. The public seeks information. UCB is answering the call. They have shown an amazing tolerance and patience explaing their data. In an academic setting, there are no dumb questions.
No, they have certainly been
No, they have certainly been more kind by simply ignoring the posts that scream crazy, or outright deleting them.
Readers will note that no
Readers will note that no attempt has been made to refute or impugn the facts presented in my post; the replier insisting instead on using namecalling to convey his (lack of a) point.
Please respond to the FACTS that I have presented.
Who you take a paycheck from is irrelevant. The nuclear industry has spent tons of money to insure that people have incorrect ideas about the dangers of nuclear radiation pushed into their heads. As anyone involved in the business world of today knows, the use of paid online presences is now routine for both the government and the corporations. Therefore it is perfectly reasonable, and far from paranoid delusional, to suspect posters who parrot the nuclear industry's "don't worry/be happy" nonsense.
Alex
So first you want to know if
So first you want to know if I'm a shill for nuclear, and now you don't care?
Your facts as you see them are filtered by fear and not logic.
I have never said anything about radiation being negligable, yet you continue to generate misinformation to support an argument that is Machiavellian in nature.
I think, as with the lot of you attacking me, that facts are irrelevant to this discussion. You prefer a witch hunt with pitchforks and fire. I'm really not surprised.
Thought Police
Thought Police
Please refute my facts,
Please refute my facts, logic, and reason with facts, logic, and reason of your own. Calling me names does not further your argument.
The UCB team has asked everyone on this forum to act in a civil manner so that it can be a useful place for discussion and sharing of information. Insisting that those who disagree with you - those who present actual facts - are somehow "paranoid delusional" is hardly civil behavior.
I ask you again: please refute my facts.
Let's start with the New York Academy of Sciences saying that one million people died from Chernobyl. Do you disagree with their assessment? Why? On What basis?
Your logic is faulty because
Your logic is faulty because Fukushima is not Chernobyl and we are 5000 miles away and not next door.
2+2 = 5!
2+2 = 5!
Chernobyl was on land
. . . and there was a military of hundreds of thousands to work on it. It wasn't built on a man-made island, on a beach, on the Pacific ocean.
Chernobyl wasn't dealing with a catastrophic earthquake and tsunami, water shortages, power outages and hundreds of aftershocks. There was still power, roads and infrastructure to the facility.
Chernobyl didn't have 600,000 spent fuel rods stored on the premises, although I will concede that Fukushima NO LONGER has those stored there as they have exploded all over the place.
Chernobyl wasn't six reactors having problems (since now TEPCO is reporting problems with 5 & 6).
Chernobyl could be tunneled under, Fukushima can't.
Tell us again how this isn't as bad as Chernobyl. Really, it's fascinating to hear your cognitive dissonance.
You didn't answer the questions
On one hand, you urge us to do our own research. So when someone does present facts that refute your assertions, you resort to name-calling.
I've lost all respect for you. Not that I had much in the first place.
Good. I really have no
Good. I really have no concern for your respect for me. However, I am sure that this event will not be nearly as bad as you picture it. Doomsayers always get it wrong.
Oh Really? You're Sure?
"Good. I really have no concern for your respect for me. However, *I am sure* that this event will not be nearly as bad as you picture it. Doomsayers always get it wrong."
Do you have a crystal ball and know how this thing is going to be controlled? I mean, since you're "sure" and all -- please tell us how they are going to stop this runaway train. I am confident that most humans on the planet would love to know your brilliant plan.
I know you think we're dimwitted, so please describe in detail so we can be "sure" like you are.
Should we have listened to the so-called experts who told us that there would be no danger of radiation to anyone in Japan? Apparently, they were wrong. This is a fact I have brought up before which you have ignored.
IF EXPERTS WERE WRONG FOR THE PAST THREE WEEKS, WHY WOULD THEY BE RIGHT NOW?
If they can't tell us what is going to happen immediately for 50 miles around the plant, why would they be able to tell us the long term consequences? I'd really like you to answer that.
Should we listen to experts that told us that there would be no problem with spent fuel pool? How about the idiots that said that radiation is good for you?
Should we listen to the experts who told us that 5 & 6 were not in danger, you know, now that TEPCO is on television today and crying about two more reactors without cooling problems?
WHEN, EXACTLY, HAVE THE SO-CALLED EXPERTS BEEN RIGHT IN ALL THIS?
It is reckless to promote this idea that there isn't going to be a problem in the US when there are already elevated radiation levels in drinking water, milk and rainwater -- and the crisis still isn't under control.
Using logic, do you think those levels aren't going to increase? Please tell me how that works! You know, using your scientific facts instead of mere opinions.
Do tell us how even more radioactive water flowing into the Pacific is not going to be a problem, how these plants continuing to leak are NOT going to raise radiation levels.
This should be good.
Agreed, to a point
"Doomsayers always get it wrong." Well, to be sure, you have history on your side, there. Millennialism, the population bomb, the next ice age, genetic testing creating superbugs, global warming, nano-technology turning the earth into a puddle of elemental goo. To say nothing of 2012 (although I WILL say: The timing of all this is certainly... coincidental).
Chicken Little's been skwaking a long, long time. The lyrics change, but the song remains the same.
So I understand your (and my, until the events of the last three weeks, anyway) inclination to remind us of the boy who cried wolf. Honestly, I do; this is VERY new, strange mental and emotional territory for yours truly. Never in my wildest hallucinations did I ever expect the world to EVER be indistinguishable with a Roland Emmerich, Michael Bay or Robert Wise film. Guess what? We're there now.
A final word: Just remember one thing about the story of the boy who cried wolf... How it ends.
Rick Cromack.
Allen, Texas
www.facebook.com/lonestarplano
RichardFCromackJr@gmail.com
972-746-8575
OP, I have one word for you
OP, I have one word for you "Chernobyl".
And I would have a few for
And I would have a few for you, such as:
How exactly does it compare? Show your data.
Ignorance is Bliss
Ignorance is bliss. Show your data?? If a top nuclear physicist can't even predict the depth of the problem and we've already found fairly high levels of Iodine 131 and Cesium 137 on US Soil, it's certain there will be some future problems. Sorry I don't have any cancer cases to report just yet, but please don't be so ignorant. Or maybe that's how you live you life, so continue on!
Please don't kid youself.
Please don't kid youself. These levels aren't high. At the hight atmospheric testing milk spiked to over 1000 picocuries per liter.
Get your facts straight please.
Anonymous: Quick favor,,,
...Would you mind, please, providing some "source documentation" or a reference for that number? (The picocuries in milk during days of nuke testing.) Please understand: I am NOT trying to put you on the defensive. Neither am I arguing that you're wrong or anything. I would just like more information, if it wouldn't be too much trouble, thanks.
I am by no means educated or qualified enough to deal with the matter at hand; this is just my way of trying not to be quite so ignorant and hysterical, if possible. (It may not be; I'm an Aggie.)
Rick Cromack.
Allen, Texas
www.facebook.com
RichardFCromackJr@gmail.com
972-746-8575
http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/n
http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/node/2328
Ah... Thank You!
I appreciate it, sir. (I'm assuming... Please forgive if I guessed wrong!)
Rick Cromack.
Allen, Texas
www.facebook.com/lonestarplano
RichardFCromackJr@yahoo.com
972-746-8575
Here's the problem...
At least in my view (corporate attorney working in Southern CA), there's just a credibility problem in this country with reporting of risks by the government (which is why we're quite fortunate to have this site).
In the first few days of the Fukushima crisis, without even knowing the amount of source material released into the atmosphere, when the situation would be contained and/or if there was going to be a meltdown (all still open issues), the U.S. government stressed over and over that there was nothing to worry about and that this was no Chernobyl.
Then it turned out that the amount of I-131 and Ce-137 being released was approaching Chernobyl levels with vast amounts of fuel still left in the reactors with a situation still not under control.
Then it turned out that some radiation would reach the United States, it would just be "low" levels that weren't harmful.
Then it turns out that actually there is no "safe" level of inhaled/ingested radiation and that for people like my wife who are in their first trimester of pregnancy, there could be a disproporiate impact on babies (that's what happened in Sweden after Chernobyl -- see Columbia University Professor Douglas Almond's study).
In my mind, this is similar to the situation when the EPA initially issued press releases stating the air around Ground Zero was safe, only to later backtrack several weeks later (see, e.g., http://www.epa.gov/oig/reports/2003/WTC_report_20030821.pdf).
Yes, the incremental risks here are really small--BUT it's important in a democracy to let people know that there are added risks--just like we know there are added risks from sun exposure, smoking, etc.
If there's some things people can do to minimize their chances of developing cancer, they should be informed and then make their own decisions--just like you can choose not to smoke, drink or get a suntan.
For example, if the current detected levels of I-131 in milk remain for some period of time then it's a fact that some people will develop cancer from the exposure. In that case maybe pregnant women could easily avoid exposure by taking calcium supplements for a few weeks or months.
The fact that our laws/regulations permit a few extra cancer deaths per 200,000 isn't exactly disclosed in the generic EPA statements that these are levels "far below public concern." I know that sound bite is more reassuring for the general public, but I think that we should be given the most accurate data possible. If there's something easy that can be done to minimize exposure (similar to staying out of the sun or putting on sunscreen), then why not let people know and try to avoid those extra cancer deaths? At the very least be honest and acknowledge that inhaling and ingesting these radionuclides is not in fact the same as an airplane flight (at least for the thyroid of an infant).
In the end you're probably right regarding the minimal control we have--it's just a fact of life in today's world. But if that's the case then tell it like it is and don't just pretend like there's no risk to the public when in fact there is.
I could not agree more. The
I could not agree more. The announcements that the plume will be very diluted and not dangerous BEFORE THE STUFF ARRIVED SHOWS THEIR TACTIC TO DOWNLPLAY THIS FROM THE BEGINNING AND THAT IS NEGLIGENT. HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE DRAINED IN THE RAIN, children, pets without knowing it is radioactive at a time WHEN EPA KNEW IT IS RADIOACTIVE?
EPA AND THE GOVernment should be sued. That is manslaughter. NOT WARNING SOMEONE OF A POTENTIAL DANGER IS NEGLIGENT.
I can tell from experience. during Chernobyl the GERMAN government announced through the radio that NOONE SHOULD GO IN THE RAIN AND TO STAY IN THE HOUSE!
THIS IS WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE BY EPA and obama!!
Nothing else one would expect but the government to protect its citizens!!!!Which they failed to do so! KNOWLINGLY!
Please show me your data
Please show me your data where I-131 and CS-137 approach levels of Chernobyl output. To date I have only seen estimations and guesses. And the data we are seeing here doesn't support that theory either.
Data/Figures
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/04/20114219250664111.... citing ZAMG (Central Institute for Meteorology and Geodynamics of Vienna - http://www.zamg.ac.at):
"Japan’s damaged nuclear plant in Fukushima has been emitting radioactive iodine and caesium at levels approaching those seen in the aftermath of the Chernobyl accident in 1986. Austrian researchers have used a worldwide network of radiation detectors – designed to spot clandestine nuclear bomb tests – to show that iodine-131 is being released at daily levels 73 per cent of those seen after the 1986 disaster. The daily amount of caesium-137 released from Fukushima Daiichi is around 60 per cent of the amount released from Chernobyl."
Do you realize that there
Do you realize that there haven't been steam emissions since over 5 days ago, and that the radiation coming out of the plant is localized?
The total output is only fractionally moving to the US.
It is bad for Japan, yes but for the West Coast it is only another wave in emissions that have gone on for 50+ years.
I'm sorry that you feel emotionally that it shouldn't be happening to you, but you will survive, and so will your child.
Steam Emissions
You can focus on steam emissions but that ignores the radionuclides deposited by the rainfall in March that ended up in CA & WA milk. You're also making an implicit assumption that there won't be any additional steam releases which seems silly coming the same day that 11,000 tons of radioactive water is being released into the Pacific.
Sorry if I don't get much comfort in the 50 years of testing + additional releases from Fukushima...that wave of emissions has led to more cancer cases as a result. Perhaps you haven't lost anyone to cancer? Maybe it takes losing a sister to understand what the statistics mean.
I understand that the incremental/excess risk is low, but why wouldn't you want more information from the government? I think it would be great if the EPA had a forum set up like this -- at least by exchanging information and having questions answered people can better understand what's going on. I also don't understand why you're taking issue with people wanting to take steps to avoid exposure if they want to.
Chiming in... (To the Berkeley Lab folks)
I would just like to chime in for a moment, to APPLAUD the suggestion that the EPA set up a similar Forum to this. That is the best positive, concrete suggestion -- with the highest probability of success -- I have heard since this disaster began to unfold.
I suspect that this "suggestion" would be far more likely coming from actual, qualified, professional, engaged persons than I, who would easily be dismissed as a troll, crank, anti-nuclear activist, doomsayer or crackpot. (Very likely, all of the above.) May I recommend that the Berkeley Lab folks consider passing this suggestion up the chain of command / communication? You're the ones to ring that sort of bell, after all -- people in positions of power and authority MIGHT just listen to you, or, at least, take your "call".
Rick Cromack.
Allen, Texas
www.facebook.com
RichardFCromackJr@gmail.com
972-746-8575
The Federal Government
The Federal Government doesn't even have a budget (not right now, at least), let alone one for public forum moderators.
So far the BRAWM scientists have been real gentlemen about it, but I won't be surprised if they shut this forum down, should this forum abuse continues.
This forum is supposed to be for questions about the data and their analysis. Not for random ramblings of disturbed individuals.
ROTFL!
Well, now. I guess the old saying is true: You live long enough, you get to see everything. And I do mean, EVERYTHING.
Congratulations -- you're the first person to ever call me "disturbed". (To my face, at least.) Slainte.
You know what? You're right. I AM disturbed.
I'm disturbed that I am, right now, breathing, eating, drinking, and coming into bodily contact with radioactive isotopes.
I'm disturbed my wife and daughter are doing the same. So is everybody reading this. So are you. And THAT, my friend, disturbs me, too.
I'm disturbed that I have NO IDEA how long I can expect this to continue, how this is all going to shake out, what sort of effects this will have on my life, its length, or how it will be lived. Ditto for my wife and daughter, times about a million for each of them.
I'm disturbed that our Government seems more concerned with other matters, rather than deploying ALL assets, activating ALL resources, and spending ALL necessary funds -- even to the point of bankrupting us as a nation -- in assisting the Japanese with this situation, that they have very clearly demonstrated themselves to be ill-equipped to address.
I'm disturbed that millions of gallons of radioactive soup are being poured into the Pacific Ocean. It's not going to wash up on my doorstep... But it may well end up on my table.
I'm disturbed that this is, WITHOUT QUESTION, one of the scariest, most poorly understood, fluid, impossible-to-predict crises in recent human history, with the POTENTIAL to contaminate large areas of the globe -- and that you have a problem with me being concerned, deeply so, by all these knowns, and even more by the unknowns.
Let me set you straight, pal: I served my country during wartime. I've had bullets fired at me. I've taken people bodily out of a burning car. I've pulled people out of a burning house. I know danger, and I've felt fear.
All those were interesting events in my life, no doubt. But when my FAMILY's on the line... That's something else again. I've had forty pretty darned good years. I'd like my wife to have at least eighty. Ditto for my daughter. And I'm far less sure about that than I was four weeks ago.
You want to make fun? Go right ahead. We come through this all right, I'll even join you. I've lived long enough to have made a fool of myself a time or two. I've even been wrong on occasion (though I burned all the evidence).
I'm not going to take it personally. You don't know me, I don't know you. For all you know I could be lying about everything, I might have a little career whipping people up into frenzies online just for fun. I know there are people out there like that.
So, let's just do this: I'll continue to put my name on posts I author, and you feel free to ignore me. I certainly would ignore someone who I thought was "disturbed". No harm, no foul.
Don't feel obligated to reply -- let's just call us square and be done with each other. Take care, now. I do hope you're right... This is ONE "I told you so" I DON'T want to utter, EVER.
...If you have something more to say to me, put it in an E-mail, please. That way, we can do EVERYONE the courtesy of "taking it outside".
Everyone, apologies for losing my temper, there.
Rick Cromack.
Allen, Texas
www.facebook.com/lonestarplano
RichardFCromackJr@gmail.com
972-746-8575
Your statistical risk of
Your statistical risk of getting cancer in California is 1:250.
Even if this is bad as you say, the risk is marginal by comparison. 1:50,000, 100,000 200,000?
If anyone should worry, it is the Japanese where risk is elevated to 1:15.
You have blown this out of proportion when you are still getting less radiation from this event than people living in Denver do from background and Rocky Flats.