How long until we know
How long will it take before scientists start admitting that this is the worst nuclear accident in human history? 10 years? 20 years? 50 years? How long do you think it will take before it is obvious enough that it can no longer be denied and ignored?
one year, for many of
one year, for many of them.
I already can feel the tides turning, but I think we're in for a bumpy ride this summer.
Thanks to all who
Thanks to all who contributed in this thread, for the civil exchange of important information. Many topics dissolve into name calling and/or sarcasm, which helps no one.
this accident should be a
this accident should be a wake up call for the world, poisoning ourselves and our children and our children's children should never be acceptable
gieger? counters don't
gieger? counters don't count shit when it's aerosolised 1-30 micron particles you are breathing in. Too far and few between to register on most geieger counters. You can only measure it using a air filter and analysing particle count vs airflow. Usa is on average 5-10 hot particles a day per person.
Sieverts don't mean shit in this scenario. Internal radiation is much worse than external readings. This is vastly worse than chernobyl (3x meltdowns) plus most is in the sea
WRONG!!!
You don't understand how Geiger counters work.
It doesn't matter how few and far between the particles are. What matters is that if the particle emits ionizing radiation, the ions cause the gas in the Geiger counter to become conductive and that registers. It just takes a few electrons.
Quit fabricating nonsense when you don't know how the instrumentation works.
Geiger counts can count
Geiger counts can count aerosol material. The reason they don't see anything here is because it is so dilute. Even if you capture it on a filter, a Geiger counter will still not be able to see much of anything. Sievert is a measure of does so that means it takes into account internal radiation. I feel most of the public don't get the danger of meltdowns. They are terrible events, but not the worst. The cores are contained in containment. They are just a melted mess at the bottom of the rpv. That is significantly better than being vaporized into the atmosphere.
Depends on how you define
Depends on how you define worst. If you define it as deaths, it wont be. It will probably be the worst economically.
I hope you are right that it
I hope you are right that it will not be the worst in terms of death but I am not very confident especially since this is still ongoing and no end seems in sight. Japan is saying it will take a year, I would say probably 10 years.
How can you believe that
How can you believe that this will not be the worst in terms of human life, it is leaking radiation like a sieve. This will not end anytime soon either. To say that this wont be the worst in terms of death is unknowable and sounds more like wishful thinking to me.
Well I know because the
Well I know because the amount of radiation leaking is minuscule. The worst radionuclide is I-131 and people were evacuated away from the plant pretty early so the deaths associated with that will be much smaller than from Chernobyl. I don't know how much is still leaking, I am assuming you mean into the ground. One can look at the distribution of radionuclides and calculate the annual dose associated with that distribution. That dose would give a cancer rate, and then you need to take that cancer rate and determine probability of death from that cancer. There is no way there would be more deaths than Chernobyl.
three core meltdowns is
three core meltdowns is minuscule?
I would rather have 3 core
I would rather have 3 core meltdowns than have a core explode into the atmosphere.
One did explode and
One did explode and obviously much is in the atmosphere if it is raining iodine-131 in Boston. Who knows what else is raining down.
That is just from steam
That is just from steam release, not explosions. Chernobyl literally exploded into the atmosphere. All the H explosions at Fukushima were outside of containment. Yes there was I131 found around the globe, but in small amounts. It has a short half life so it is effectively gone now. What made Chernobyl so terrible was it expelled a lot of material that had long half lives into the atmosphere. That did not happen here. Most of the Cs and other nuclides never went into the atmosphere.
Does this look like a steam
Does this look like a steam release?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_N-wNFSGyQ
One of those kids was doing his own thing
Good eye
One of those kids was doing his own thing , wasn't he?
That is a hydrogen explosion
That is a hydrogen explosion that occurred outside of containment. That was bad, but it doesn't release the core into the atmosphere. The core was still in containment.
Core still in containment,
Core still in containment, huh? What is Te-129m doing outside of containment on June 4?
"TEPCO dumped 143 pages of "confirmed" data (no English yet) on types of nuclides and density found at and around Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant in air and water on June 29. The company releases many of the data everyday or at a regular interval but the nuclides announced daily are iodine-131, cesium-134 and -137 only. For other nuclides, after being excoriated by NISA in early days of the crisis, they've stopped releasing the data until "confirmed".
It was on page 74, as part of the "confirmed" results of the seawater samples taken on June 4:
Te-129m (half-life 34 days): 720 becquerels/liter, outside the silt fence in front of the Reactor 1 water intake canal."
http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/2011/06/fukushima-i-nuke-plant-radioactive_29...
There are confirmed leaks
There are confirmed leaks from somewhere in the containment. This means there is probably water leaking from one of the units that can release some of the fission products into the ocean. That is still nothing compared to ejecting a core into the atmosphere. Te-129m will be gone soon.
Is any part of reactor
Is any part of reactor number 4 "in containment"? You know, the fuel rods you can see from the aerial photos.
The spent fuel rods are
The spent fuel rods are outside of containment. That is a design flaw of the reactor. However, the data suggests the spent fuel in 4 was never exposed.
"fragments or particles of
"fragments or particles of nuclear fuel from spent fuel pools above the reactors were blown “up to one mile from the units,” and that pieces of highly radioactive material fell between two units and had to be “bulldozed over,” presumably to protect workers at the site. The ejection of nuclear material, which may have occurred during one of the earlier hydrogen explosions, may indicate more extensive damage to the extremely radioactive pools than previously disclosed."
New York Times
I remember reading about
I remember reading about that. What I found interesting was they never presented evidence for this claim, it was just speculation like everything was back at the beginning of the crisis. Also, how can pieces of spent fuel rods be blown out of a building when the spent fuel pools were never uncovered?
source of spike / 'dog's breakfast of radionuclides'
The photos of #3 spent fuel pool look like an energetic event occurred IN its upper reaches. This would explain what looks EXACTLY like brackets holding fuel rods in the plume of that memorable event. One good hydrogen bang perhaps augmented by a wee dram of resulting prompt criticality ? As in BOMB?
the more I read and see info
the more I read and see info about a possible bomb, which I discarded as nonsense at first, the more I'm convinced. I won't begin the argument/debate here, but I encourage objective truth seekers, not those who are entrenched in anti or pro nuke, to investigate.
A reactor or spent fuel can
A reactor or spent fuel can never be a bomb. Even if it reached prompt criticality, it would blow itself to pieces quickly. My last statement may sound like a bomb, but it is more like a small explosion. Like the one you get when you let off a bunch of bottle rockets in a bottle. For the spent fuel to reach criticality would be near impossible. The reactors and pools are designed in such a way that make criticality extremely difficult to reach. The rods and reactor need water to be critical.
No, not that the reactor or
No, not that the reactor or spent fuel was a bomb, but the concern that there was a planned explosion. The Stone theory, and a few others before him, who said the facts, pictures and videos, and propaganda don't add up. It's interesting.
And since we now know that we have been lied to from day 1, we can't close our minds to alternate possibilities, no matter how uncomfortable to consider.
explosion possibly a bomb?
Some people say that the cameras fairly recently installed in the plant, with their 'long lenses' design were in fact nuclear bombs planted by the installation company.
The "hydrogen" blast was rather mushroom-shaped and certainly can be seen to contain many bits and pieces and tepco has admitted that at least 3 reactors have now melted through. The fact that the blast went straight up, some people suggest that this points to it being not a general H explosion but a more concentrated one.
This has been discussed extensively in the 965+ page thread on Above Top Secret http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread672665/pg966
Whales found containing radiation 650km off Japan
http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2011/06/15/japan-nuclear-radiation-whal...
There are some incredibly naieve views expressed in this thread. Think about it - the nuclear industry represents a multi-billion dollar industry and it has already been shown that the UK government is in bed with their nuclear industry. Dont you think that governments all over the world have a vested interest in this technology too?
When the flood waters overrun the nuclear reactors on the banks of the rivers we are going to see more problems I fear.
Here is the
Here is the link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/06/world/asia/06nuclear.html?_r=2&hp=&pag...