Coming in here is like...
Coming to this forum to ask 'BRAWM' about nuclear safety issues and the health consequences of radiation, is like talking to RJ Reynolds about the dangers of tobacco. These guys won't say a single negative word about the industry or the technology powering it all... they are all owned by the 'industry' and have their lives invested in this nuclear energy. Why anyone would think these guys are unbaised is beyond my realm of comprehension! They have been wrong all along, people wake up.
If you want unbiased
If you want unbiased, don't look for them to speak positively or negatively about either side of the issue.
Has anyone seen them speak positively about the nuclear power industry?
For me, if they said anything positive or negative about either side of the issue, I would walk away. But, from what I've seen, they've done a good job of limiting their comments to their results and statistics. Now, if you don't like their results, statistics or dosage comparisons (even though they've compared to both external and internal exposure), then I don't know what to say.
I've said something like this on another thread, but I'll say it again here. Where all the goverment agencies have stopped reporting results because "there's nothing detectable", the BRAWM team has kept scaring us with detections. For two months after everyone else stopped!!!. Why would anyone "owned by the 'industry'" do that? I'm sure the nuclear 'industry' wants this to quiet down as soon as possible.
How can you say that
How can you say that equating this nuclear radiation to background radiation such as, radon, plane flights, bananas, brazil nuts, and sun tans is "scaring us" and not a positive spin on the real dangers we all face from nuclear energy? Not all of us are that dumb.
True. Just you.
True. Just you.
Radiation is radiation
It's fair game to make comparisons. And I don't view it as "spin" when the exposure is put into perspective. In fact, I think the BRAWM team would be doing a great disservice if they just posted their results without providing some perspective. Doing that would only create more fear and questions. And whether you believe it or not, we are exposed to radiation from radon, plane flights, bananas, brazil nuts, and sun tans. And many, many more sources. Including uranium in the water you drink. All of which is "nuclear" radiation. Just because the comparisons don't support claims of extreme danger doesn't justify saying a "spin" is being put on things.
And while many folks have accused the BRAWM team of down playing "the real dangers we all face from nuclear energy", all they've done is reported what they've seen in Berkeley and the surrounding area and compared it to what occurs naturally. They have not compared bananas, nuts or radon to doses the folks close to the plant in Japan are receiving (which is much higher than the Berkeley area).
As I've said before, there are two things being mixed in many conversations.
1. The dangers of nuclear power (which I believe I'm in agreement with you on)
2. The danger/risk we are currently seeing in the Berkeley area
Those are two different conversations. The BRAWM team is providing information on #2 only.
Radiation is radiation?
You're comparing apples to oranges, sure they are both fruit and grow on trees so why not???(wow) If you think "radiation is radiation" and don't acknowledge the drastically different dangers between internally ingested man made radioiostopes and the natural ones, then you have alot to learn or are being outright deceptive IMO. Are u paid to post here-VB and BC? Sounds like spin to me!
I am not a shill, nor am I
I am not a shill, nor am I paid to be here. I am a guy trying to figure out as much as I can about what has happened here in the US since 3/11.
I have a wife, I have kids, I breathe the air and eat the food. I want to know as much as I can about what is really going on, and this place has helped with that more than any other.
I do not think everything is A-OK, but I don't believe we're doomed either. If I told you I wasn't a little scared on an emotional level, that would be a lie - thus I am trying to use my brain to cipher out what is really going on. Emotions are not the best way to know how much XXX is in your kid's food.
Heh, saw that one coming,
Heh, saw that one coming, VB, sorry to say.
If you don't feed the trolls, you're either a shill, a plant or a Cromack. (ARE you a Cromack?)
Give it up, they don't want to be reasoned with, can't be convinced and won't be satisfied until every single person here is as paranoid and skwerilly as they are. Don't waste your time is my advice.
Not necessarily directed at the poster
Good advice. But, I'm not naive enough to believe I can convince those who are either purely up to mischief or actually believe such things. My response is more directed at those who read that stuff and are simply confused about what to believe. And whatever open minds there may be out there......
Best of luck then. Me
Best of luck then. Me though, I think I've had enough. You can only argue with fools and idiots for so long before it becomes foolish and idiotic.
Thanks. And I don't blame you
As time goes by, the folks who were truly concerned and looking for information about a real crisis have dropped off. And what is left becomes less and less informative.....to say the least. Even my patience has limits.
There's a real law of
There's a real law of diminishing returns at work here on BRAWM's forum lately. Not to mention diminished capacity on the part of some.
I expect the comparative lack of REAL disastrous news lately motivates certain unstable types to make stuff up to fill the silence.
i think it's the opposite...
I don't think it's the lack of something more serious, I think it's the lack of progress in Japan that feeds the concerns.
Seriously, what progress has been made in Japan? Other than, so far, preventing another major explosion, NO real progress has been made. More contaminated areas are found over there, steam and water continue to be contaminated, etc.
The water filtration isn't working, and even when it's up and running (IF!), there's still too much water. There's the problem of leakage into the ground and air too that hasn't been addresses.
tonight, the water in reactor is near boiling.
We are seeing the potential for our own disasters at Cooper and Ft. Calhoun.
Those that some call fear mongers are really supported by the lack of reportable progress.
"I don't think it's the lack
"I don't think it's the lack of something more serious, I think it's the lack of progress in Japan that feeds the concerns. "
Just try to follow the English editions of NHK, yomiuri, asahi and mainichi (if you read Japanese, better).
What they've done so far just from the top of my mind:
- Prevent further explosions, as you said, which is not a small feat
- Stop a leak that was pouring radioactive water directly from the buildings into the ocean
- Bring No. 5 & 6 under control
- Access No. 1 and obtain real data about the state of the core. This includes opening the doors and installing air filters all over the building.
- Install a cooling system at the spent fuel pool of No. 2
- Access No. 3 (don't remember if they could actually work there)
- Access No. 4 and install dozens of steel pillars in order to reinforce the structure under the pool (they still need to cover them in concrete, it will take a while)
- Build from scratch a whole installation in order to purify more water with higher concentration of radioactive contaminants than anyone ever imagined it was going to be necessary. Not surprisingly, they are having troubles (including someone screwing with the open/close labels of some valves) but they already purified enough water to buy themselves 4/5 days of extra time before the water overflows
Natural is good, and man made is bad?
Is that what you are saying? If so, that's simply not true.
The BRAWM team has provided more information that we'll ever be able to understand regarding the various isotopes, energy emmissions, half life, quantities, etc, etc, etc. Your body does not care if it's isotope "A" or "B". Just like your body doesn't care if it's being burned by a match or a lighter. All your body cares about is the energy that's being dumped into it. And the BRAWM team has gone to great pains to account for those differences in their calculations.
And the "Are u paid to post here" comments worn pretty thin. I ask questions, I get educated and I try to explain things as I see them. If you believe you have all the knowledge necessary to accuse the BRAWM team of putting a spin on things, then please share that knowledge with all of us. From a technical perspective. Not a gut feeling.
"Plutonium (specifically,
"Plutonium (specifically, plutonium-238) was first produced and isolated on December 14, 1940, and chemically identified on February 23, 1941, by Dr. Glenn T. Seaborg, Edwin M. McMillan, J. W. Kennedy, and A. C. Wahl by deuteron bombardment of uranium in the 60-inch (150 cm) cyclotron at the University of California, Berkeley.".....UNBIASED??? ROFLMAO!!!!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutonium
conflict of interest
Sounds like a conflict of interest to me.
So you refuse to deny or
So you refuse to deny or confirm if you're being paid to post here,simple yes or no question- got it. From a technical perspective man made radiation creates tons of toxic waste with half-lives of millions of years and natural radiation doesn't thats just a simple fact(not to mention that plutonium is the most deadly substance on earth and yes man created it! If you won't acknowledge even that then you are a dolty shill IMO. What waste does natural radiation produce- from a technical perspective???
"Over 1500 metric tons of plutonium have been produced world wide, some for weapons use, and most of the rest as a by-product of electricity production. It is important to note that the plutonium produced as a by-product in a nuclear power reactor is created in its many isotopic forms, including Pu-239, Pu-240, Pu-241, and Pu-242. This is known as "reactor-grade" plutonium. In contrast, "weapons-grade" plutonium contains almost pure (over 90%) Pu-239. Plutonium-239 is created in a reactor that is specially designed and operated to produce Pu-239 from uranium."NRC site...
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/plutonium.html
BROTHER!!!
From a technical perspective man made radiation creates tons of toxic waste with half-lives of millions of years and natural radiation doesn't thats just a simple fact
===========================
BROTHER - this person needs to study some science.
Naturally occuring Pottasium-40 (K-40) has a half-life of 1.25 BILLION years. That's about 52,000 times as long as Plutonium-239.
This person is a sucker for all the anti-nuke propaganda that natural radiation is OK, and man-made radiation is bad. Radiation is radiation. It is also a myth that natural radiation is short-lived and man-made is long-lived; witness the very long lived K-40.
Additionally, short-lived radioisotopes are more radioactive than long lived. If a nuclide has an infinite half-life, then it is stable, and doesn't emit radiation.
Mother Nature also created Plutonium-239 in the natural reactors at Oklo, Gabon:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_nuclear_fission_reactor
Additionally, Uranium-238 is naturally occuring and is one of the most uniformly distributed elements in the Earth's crust. Cosmic rays interacting with the atmosphere creates free neutrons. When these free neutrons hit U-238; they create Plutonium. Mother Nature has made, and continues to make Plutonium.
These Nature "good" / man "bad" comparisons are naive and silly.
sigh.
Plutonium is NOT a "man-made" substance, you sh!thead. You morons are so fond of digging up info online, go Wikipedia 'plutonium' and while you're at it, 'primordial elements'. Matter of fact it's EVERY BIT as natural as oxygen, hydrogen or carbon. (Rarer, but natural.) That's right I said carbon is naturally occurring, and so is carbon dioxide for all the global warming cultists out there.
You people need to understand that your out-there speculations and idiot drivel is that much harder to accept when you screw up even the simple stuff. Hard to take raving tardbuckets seriously when you manage to f--- up something as simple and straightforward as the periodic table of elements. Hell my sixth grade niece knows that.
"Because plutonium occurs in
"Because plutonium occurs in nature in only minute amounts, it must be considered for all practical purposes a man-made element (some pitchblende ores, once a main source of uranium and radium, contain one part per trillion natural plutonium)". This is from the NRC website so u most know more than them must be nice to be so smart sh!thead. You're off buy orders of magnitude.
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/plutonium.html
Diamonds un-natural?
Diamonds are found in minute amounts also. So by your definition, diamonds are not natural?
Evidently you haven't studied science, and have gullibly accepted the nonsense propaganda of the anti-nukes. I've heard this all before.
You're talking nonsense, and
You're talking nonsense, and so is the NRC. PLUTONIUM OCCURS NATURALLY. IN NATURE. Yes in small amounts which is why you have to REFINE it (separate it from other elements and purify it to achieve maximum viability and efficiency). But don't tell me it's a man-made element. Want references? Fine. Here: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=do-transuranic-elements-s (oh no, not Scientific American again, they must be lying): 'in the strictest sense, the answer to the question is yes, plutonium does occur naturally.' 'Plutonium is produced in nature' 'we have plutonium produced naturally in the environment (admittedly in trace quantities). This reaction has been going on since the creation of the Earth.'
Got it? NRC "considers" plutonium man-made b/c it's so rare and because most of it's resulted from human technology - but IT IS NATUALLY OCCURING. Quit just taking what you 're spoonfed and learn to think for yourself for the love of Pete.
Why don't you learn something Son and shut it
You have lost all credibility with the last statement about plutonium be ing "refined" you must be thinking of uranium which is refined and more abundant in nature. Before you go spewing your delusional opinions as facts do some research at least. Ploutinium 239 is considered a man made substance buy the Gov. nuclear physicists that created it. You really think you know more than them? You have alot to learn son. FYI plutonium 239 is produced from uranium-Mcdolty. You are off by orders of magnitude!
Conversion to plutonium
The nonfissile uranium-238 can be converted to fissile plutonium-239 by the following nuclear reactions:
In this equation, uranium-238, through the absorption of a neutron (n) and the emission of a quantum of energy known as a gamma ray (?), becomes the isotope uranium-239 (the higher mass number reflecting the presence of one more neutron in the nucleus). Over a certain period of time (23.5 minutes), this radioactive isotope loses a negatively charged electron, or beta particle (?-); this loss of a negative charge raises the positive charge of the ... (100 of 3277 words)
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/619232/uranium-processing/8160...
WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!
Ploutinium 239 is considered a man made substance buy the Gov. nuclear physicists that created it. You really think you know more than them?
=============================
"Man-made" is just a label. It's not exclusionary.
Just because we call an element "man-made" does NOT mean that Mother Nature has never made it.
You need to study some science.
--A Nuclear Physicist.
F---ing loudmouthed idiot,
F---ing loudmouthed idiot, PLUTONIUM IS REFINED BY BOMBARDING URANIUM WITH NEUTRONS. I didn't even need to consult an online reference for that. Go piss up a rope you mental midget.
Thats not called "refining"
Thats not called "refining" its created or produced artificially buy engineers.. uranium is refined -time to get a new degree??? piss pot.
'buy engineers", right. You
'buy engineers", right.
You win. I can't spend all my time educating morons. Enjoy your reign of stupid. This place no longer serves any purpose but to give the mentally and emotionally challenged free publicity and international exposure.
That crown sure fits you. Too bad it's a dunce cap.
by*,congrats you got me on a
by*,congrats you got me on a typo..time to get a new major you troll!
"man made radiation creates
"man made radiation creates tons of toxic waste with half-lives of millions of years and natural radiation doesn't thats just a simple fact"
Carbon-14, naturally occurring, half-life 5,730±40 years
Potassium-40, naturally occurring, half-life 1,248 million years
Uranium-235, naturally occurring, half-life 703.8 million years
Uranium-238, naturally occurring, half-life 4,468 million years
"plutonium is the most deadly substance on earth"
Urban legend. "Botulinum toxin is a protein produced by the bacterium Clostridium botulinum, and is considered the most powerful neurotoxin ever discovered. [...] It is the most acutely toxic substance known, with a median lethal dose of about 1 ng/kg when introduced intravenously[3] and 3 ng/kg when inhaled.[26]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botulinum_toxin#Chemical_overview_and_letha...
Those are all very stable
Those are all very stable elements and can't produce a nuclear chain reaction Plutonium 238 is not and can. What does botulinum have to do with this forum does it mutate DNA too? I don't think so...go piss in the water some more.
"Plutonium is the heaviest primordial element, by virtue of its most stable isotope, plutonium-244, whose half-life of about 80 million years is just long enough for the element to be found in trace quantities in nature. Plutonium-238, one of the most toxic substances known to man can be fatal to inhale so much as a speck of the radioactive isotope.The most important isotope of plutonium is plutonium-239, with a half-life of 24,100 years. Plutonium-239 is the isotope most useful for nuclear weapons. Plutonium-239 and 241 are fissile, meaning the nuclei of their atoms can break apart by being bombarded by slow moving thermal neutrons, releasing energy, gamma radiation and more neutrons. These can therefore sustain a nuclear chain reaction, leading to applications in nuclear weapons and nuclear reactors."
WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!
Those are all very stable elements and can't produce a nuclear chain reaction Plutonium 238 is not and can.
===========================
Radioacitivy and being fissionable or fissile are two DIFFERENT concepts that you have confused.
A substance doesn't support a chain reaction because it is radioactive. A substance will support a chain reaction because it has a non-zero fission cross-section.
"Those are all very stable
"Those are all very stable elements and can't produce a nuclear chain "
Uranium-235 can't "produce a nuclear chain"? Good to know.
To make a sizable piece of
To make a sizable piece of U-235, you must refine many tons of the naturally occurring uranium mix, removing the U-238 and U-234.
Read more: Difference Between Uranium-235 & Plutonium-239 | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/info_8273167_difference-between-uranium235-plutonium...
VB- Agree. A note on water -
VB-
Agree.
A note on water - once a year they publish the results of the drinking water analysis for the town I live in. It looks a little like a blood test read-out with ranges for given materials.
Uranium range is 1 to 6.
My water is a 6. I don't know if that actually means it's an 8 or 10, but there you go. We are all exposed, every day, it's just that this disaster has brought it into out field of view in a big way.
Maybe most people can try
Maybe most people can try and talk themselves into believing that we are always exposed and what harm is it to have a bit more but I CAN NOT. Every time we accept more andvmore poison in our lives from industries and poor standards we are sending a very bad message...a message that reads...that's ok, we understand that you are poisoning us for financial gain because you don't want to spend the money to repair the damages in your plant, we can take it! Are you kidding me! Every being deserves to have clean air , water, food, and soil to grow things. There is a way to keep this stuff from happening but it is this indifference that allows them to continue to poison us! Wake up people!!
Mixing topics again
You are once again mixing topics.
The question the BRAWM team is trying to answer is "As a result of the Japan nuclear crisis, are we being exposed to additional radiation and what are the risks of that addition radiation?". The BRAWM team has provided information on both.
That question has "NOTHING " to do with "accepting more and more poison in our lives from industries and poor standards". The BRAWM team has NOT said that this is an acceptable situation. They have merely answered the question of if this specific exposure poses a significant increase in risk or not. They have provided scientific and statiscal information indicating that it does not. With that being said, we can move on to the other topic, which is do we want this sort of thing to continue? I think both the BRAWM team and everyone on this forum would immediatly answer with a loud "NO!!!". At that point, we can work on a plan to insure that it can't happen again. Which, again, is a completely different topic than trying to determine if we should pack up and move to the southern hemishere because of "THIS" event.
So, before you accuse the BRAWM team of supporting "more and more poison in our lives from industries and poor standards", you should first understand the question/s they are answering.
I'm not accusing BRAWM team
I'm not accusing BRAWM team of anything. I appreciate everything they have done to inform the public. I am referring to the people on this forum who continue to downplay the situation. I am sorry if I have mislead anyone!
Then. Don't.
Then. Don't.
unbiased*
unbiased*...OP.
I assume a little bias. Less
I assume a little bias.
Less than some, though.
Calibrate for it.
Excellent reply.
Excellent reply.
Now that the error bars are icluded
"Now that the error bars are included, I hope that it is clear that even though the results might look larger than other results, they are still statistical fluctuations around zero."-Marks(BRAWM) analysis of plutonium levels....LOL!
testing - fallout distribution
Fallout over long distances is distributed as aerosols and gases. Gases diffuse to a greater degree than aerosols in the atmosphere and are usually a better gauge of area or overall level of contamination. Plutonium will have a much more uneven distribution than fallout with half its weight. With this in mind we can understand why at this distance it is seen appearing here and there, and at varying levels of concentration. We need more testing and less guessing now and in the very long term. This is going to go on for a very long time. I hope you maintain your interest.
also an excellent reply.
also an excellent reply.
Radon=Plutonium
The Brawn Team equates Plutonium with Radon, even though "Most countries have adopted a radon concentration of 200–400 Bq/m3 for indoor air as an Action or Reference Level" while obviously the same reference level is not typical indoor concentrations of Plutonium, etc. It is absurd.
I don't think the BRAWM team
I don't think the BRAWM team has ever equated Radon to Plutonium, but anyway, if they had to I guess they would take concentration, energy emitted and biological half-life of each of the isotopes as essential parts of the analogy, like they have done before.
Im pretty sure they have...
Im pretty sure they have...