Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
David Dodds

Meltdown in Japan's Reactors

Recommended Posts

More information will become available I'm sure, but I would not EXPECT a "dead zone". I would expect most folks could safely return their homes in a few weeks at most.

You don't expect this to be entombed? I must be a glass half-empty person because I think this will be covered in sand and concrete at some point and I fully expect we will definitely see a dead zone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting and reassuring for those not in the area. Article is clear to state that the cleanup workers are in immediate danger, which was the point that led to this discussion. Also, there are likely to be deaths in the immediate surrounding area (probably more thyroid cancer, though perhaps not as many as Chernobyl.) Of course, I somewhat question Forbes' motives, since they primarily want market stability and I very much question (as is acknowledged in the article) the accuracy of reporting related to Chernobyl deaths. Of course, there is a much greater threat posed in the near-term by hygiene, disease, lack of shelter and other factors. It's still unclear what the life expectancy will be for the cleanup workers and those absorbing radioactive iodine and other heavy radioactive particles. I guess in the end, I'd put it to you... If you lived with 30 miles of Fukashima, would you feel good about remaining there?

CNN has gullible, fearful reactive peope like you tuning in because they know if they tell you "everybody's gonna die" you will watch. You posted this:

BTW, thought I've had often during this is how we tend to glorify the selfless acts of these plant workers, when in reality the deaths many will experience will be agonizing and violent. I've heard some of the reports of how organs will be ravaged by those exposed to the core... It's not pretty. I suspect that more people will die of long-term Cancers just from being unfortunate enough to live nearby and be exposed to contamination. The sad fact is that an untold number of people will sacrifice their lives to rebuild, from those cleaning up the plant to those who simply remain in Fukashima to rebuild the economy. Sometimes something is so bad there's really no sugar coating it. This equates to a lot of people dying over a long period of time. Does anyone doubt that?

I not only doubt all of this nonesne, it frankly makes me beieve you are quite nuts. CNN has blatantly misled and even lied abou this entire event since day 1. In case you haven't noticed, only the "experts" (and most of them are now experts) that have been on CNN more than once are the ones who talk about worst case scenarios in "a nuclear accident", and talk in the abstract of that vs. actually discussing the Japan events. The truthful, informed experts show up once, and when they don't predict stupid stuff like "violent deaths" they aren't invited back.

Regarding these events, CNN has become less credible than the National Enquirer. Seriously. They have outright fabricated 100% lies to keep people watching. You are the sheep they can fool.

The bolded times a million.
Otis is one of the CNN sheep. At least Ham is crazy enough to watch and believe. You keep watching and crying how awful it is and questioning what kind of morons watch...then you continue to watch.
Don't be so boring and predictable all the time. I'd give you multiple stars if you didn't suck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fearmongers at Fox News had this to say:

http://www.foxnews.c...in-say-experts/

Japan's Nuclear Disaster Raises Concerns About Contamination of the Global Food Chain

"The radiation leaks at Fukushima don't come close to that of Chernobyl. Still, Japanese officials admit their food chain is also contaminated with harmful levels of radiation, in some cases up to 90 miles from the nuclear site."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This one seems a bit serious.

http://english.kyodonews.jp/news/2011/03/80057.html

Radiation 1,600 times normal level 20 km from Fukushima plant:

Radiation 1,600 times higher than normal levels has been detected in an area about 20 kilometers from the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, International Atomic Energy Agency officials said Monday.Data collected by an IAEA team show that radiation levels of 161 microsievert per hour have been detected in the town of Namie, Fukushima Prefecture, the officials said.The government has set an exclusion zone covering areas within a 20-km radius of the plant and has urged people within 20 to 30 km to stay indoors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

blah, blah, blah.Really the only question that needs answering, in laymen's terms, would you eat the food, or drink the water from the areas surrounding the plant. How far away should the food source be before you would feel comfortable with the food as your main diet. DO you expect a "dead" zone in the vicinity of the plant - how big a radius - < mile, or more?I don't care about the periodic table or half-lifes I care about the cumulative effect on the radiation that has been exposed to the environment as an airborne contaminant and/or in the food chain, or water table.I don't think anyone is growing 3 heads here, but what is the increased risk to the health of folks living within a certain radius of the plant. Are the radiation effects cumulative - meaning they are fine for a day/week/month, but at a certain level they become problematic over an extended period of time - week/month/year.I assume that at this point, the Japanese experts believe that the worst is behind them - otherwise I have to think they would be taking steps to bury the plant - given that the seawater has already rendered several of the reactors useless.

No matter what anyone tells you, if you don't understand the technical aspect, you can't separate the quacks from the people who know just enough to be dangerous, from the people who can honestly answer your question. I do not expect a permanent dead zone. I don't expect plants to wither and die.I would not drink milk produced from the vicinity of the plants for the next two months. Probably not fast-growing plants like spinach either.The table I provided describes in numerical fashion the increased health risk.It does sound like the worst is over - which it would have been anyway, because the short-lived radioactive daughter products are decaying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This one seems a bit serious.

http://english.kyodo...1/03/80057.html

Radiation 1,600 times normal level 20 km from Fukushima plant:

Radiation 1,600 times higher than normal levels has been detected in an area about 20 kilometers from the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, International Atomic Energy Agency officials said Monday.Data collected by an IAEA team show that radiation levels of 161 microsievert per hour have been detected in the town of Namie, Fukushima Prefecture, the officials said.The government has set an exclusion zone covering areas within a 20-km radius of the plant and has urged people within 20 to 30 km to stay indoors.

That chart is great... Let me get this straight... Exposure is cumulative right? So if severe radiation poisoning is 2000 mSu, as detailed in that chart, then roughly twelve hours of exposure (outside, I'm supposing) 20 kilometers out could be potentially fatal? How much does exposure drop off inside?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

High radiation detected 40km from nuclear plant

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/22_35.html

Japan's science ministry says radiation exceeding 400 times the normal level was detected in soil about 40 kilometers from the troubled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.

The ministry surveyed radioactive substances in soil about 5 centimeters below the surface at roadsides on Monday.

The ministry found 43,000 becquerels of radioactive iodine-131 per kilogram of soil, and 4,700 becquerels of radioactive cesium-137 per kilogram about 40 kilometers west-northwest of the plant.

Gunma University Professor Keigo Endo says radiation released by the iodine is 430 times the level normally detected in soil in Japan and that released by the cesium is 47 times the norm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- Bueno
It's like eating a banana. A banana the size of Rhode Island, but just a banana.
:lmao::lmao:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More information will become available I'm sure, but I would not EXPECT a "dead zone". I would expect most folks could safely return their homes in a few weeks at most.

You don't expect this to be entombed? I must be a glass half-empty person because I think this will be covered in sand and concrete at some point and I fully expect we will definitely see a dead zone.
"Entombing" would not be done for "radiation" concerns, but for economic ones. It might be cheaper to encase these reactors in concrete than to clean up the mess.The radionuclides they're talking about (in the environment) so far will not cause a "dead zone". The "Dead zone" around Chernobyl is already a LIVE ZONE. Nature has recovered there MUCH faster than even the most optimistic projections projected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

High radiation detected 40km from nuclear planthttp://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/22_35.htmlJapan's science ministry says radiation exceeding 400 times the normal level was detected in soil about 40 kilometers from the troubled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.The ministry surveyed radioactive substances in soil about 5 centimeters below the surface at roadsides on Monday.The ministry found 43,000 becquerels of radioactive iodine-131 per kilogram of soil, and 4,700 becquerels of radioactive cesium-137 per kilogram about 40 kilometers west-northwest of the plant.Gunma University Professor Keigo Endo says radiation released by the iodine is 430 times the level normally detected in soil in Japan and that released by the cesium is 47 times the norm.

Remember what NORM is....virtually zero. IN fact, norm is so low, that you have to super-concentrate your samples just to measure it. 430 X 1 is only 430. 430 X .01 is 4.3. 400 x virtually nil is still pretty darn low.The danger is grossly overstated when couched in terms like this to people who've never studied topics like this.Forget the iodine...its really no longer a concern. Edited by renesauz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That chart is great... Let me get this straight... Exposure is cumulative right? So if severe radiation poisoning is 2000 mSu, as detailed in that chart, then roughly twelve hours of exposure (outside, I'm supposing) 20 kilometers out could be potentially fatal? How much does exposure drop off inside?

You're getting milisievert (mSu) and microsievert (μSu) mixed up. It would take twelve thousand hours of exposure to add up to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IAEA tracks radiation leaks at Japan's crippled plant

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/22/us-japan-quake-idUSTRE72A0SS20110322?WT.tsrc=Social%20Media&WT.z_smid=twtr-reuters_%20com&WT.z_smid_dest=Twitter

...He gave no more details, but a TEPCO executive vice president, Sakae Muto, said the core of reactor No.1 was now a worry with its temperature at 380-390 Celsius (715-735 Fahrenheit). "We need to strive to bring that down a bit," Muto told a news conference, adding that the reactor was built to run at a temperature of 302 C (575 F).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

blah, blah, blah.Really the only question that needs answering, in laymen's terms, would you eat the food, or drink the water from the areas surrounding the plant. How far away should the food source be before you would feel comfortable with the food as your main diet. DO you expect a "dead" zone in the vicinity of the plant - how big a radius - < mile, or more?I don't care about the periodic table or half-lifes I care about the cumulative effect on the radiation that has been exposed to the environment as an airborne contaminant and/or in the food chain, or water table.I don't think anyone is growing 3 heads here, but what is the increased risk to the health of folks living within a certain radius of the plant. Are the radiation effects cumulative - meaning they are fine for a day/week/month, but at a certain level they become problematic over an extended period of time - week/month/year.I assume that at this point, the Japanese experts believe that the worst is behind them - otherwise I have to think they would be taking steps to bury the plant - given that the seawater has already rendered several of the reactors useless.

No matter what anyone tells you, if you don't understand the technical aspect, you can't separate the quacks from the people who know just enough to be dangerous, from the people who can honestly answer your question. I do not expect a permanent dead zone. I don't expect plants to wither and die.I would not drink milk produced from the vicinity of the plants for the next two months. Probably not fast-growing plants like spinach either.The table I provided describes in numerical fashion the increased health risk.It does sound like the worst is over - which it would have been anyway, because the short-lived radioactive daughter products are decaying.
Uranium bounced back to $60 last night. I'm guessing saner heads have prevailed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

blah, blah, blah.Really the only question that needs answering, in laymen's terms, would you eat the food, or drink the water from the areas surrounding the plant. How far away should the food source be before you would feel comfortable with the food as your main diet. DO you expect a "dead" zone in the vicinity of the plant - how big a radius - < mile, or more?I don't care about the periodic table or half-lifes I care about the cumulative effect on the radiation that has been exposed to the environment as an airborne contaminant and/or in the food chain, or water table.I don't think anyone is growing 3 heads here, but what is the increased risk to the health of folks living within a certain radius of the plant. Are the radiation effects cumulative - meaning they are fine for a day/week/month, but at a certain level they become problematic over an extended period of time - week/month/year.I assume that at this point, the Japanese experts believe that the worst is behind them - otherwise I have to think they would be taking steps to bury the plant - given that the seawater has already rendered several of the reactors useless.

No matter what anyone tells you, if you don't understand the technical aspect, you can't separate the quacks from the people who know just enough to be dangerous, from the people who can honestly answer your question. I do not expect a permanent dead zone. I don't expect plants to wither and die.I would not drink milk produced from the vicinity of the plants for the next two months. Probably not fast-growing plants like spinach either.The table I provided describes in numerical fashion the increased health risk.It does sound like the worst is over - which it would have been anyway, because the short-lived radioactive daughter products are decaying.
Uranium bounced back to $60 last night. I'm guessing saner heads have prevailed.
Course maybe not so much in this thread, but overall, seems like sanity has returned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

blah, blah, blah.Really the only question that needs answering, in laymen's terms, would you eat the food, or drink the water from the areas surrounding the plant. How far away should the food source be before you would feel comfortable with the food as your main diet. DO you expect a "dead" zone in the vicinity of the plant - how big a radius - < mile, or more?I don't care about the periodic table or half-lifes I care about the cumulative effect on the radiation that has been exposed to the environment as an airborne contaminant and/or in the food chain, or water table.I don't think anyone is growing 3 heads here, but what is the increased risk to the health of folks living within a certain radius of the plant. Are the radiation effects cumulative - meaning they are fine for a day/week/month, but at a certain level they become problematic over an extended period of time - week/month/year.I assume that at this point, the Japanese experts believe that the worst is behind them - otherwise I have to think they would be taking steps to bury the plant - given that the seawater has already rendered several of the reactors useless.

No matter what anyone tells you, if you don't understand the technical aspect, you can't separate the quacks from the people who know just enough to be dangerous, from the people who can honestly answer your question. I do not expect a permanent dead zone. I don't expect plants to wither and die.I would not drink milk produced from the vicinity of the plants for the next two months. Probably not fast-growing plants like spinach either.The table I provided describes in numerical fashion the increased health risk.It does sound like the worst is over - which it would have been anyway, because the short-lived radioactive daughter products are decaying.
Uranium bounced back to $60 last night. I'm guessing saner heads have prevailed.
Course maybe not so much in this thread, but overall, seems like sanity has returned.
:hifive:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those that believe this is under control, when do you think Operation Squirt Gun is completed? I posted a link from 5 days ago saying this should be done in two days. But it seems like they are spraying water on these around the clock and the temperatures appear to be increasing. Is that the strategy? Just keep dousing it with water for months/years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- Bueno
It's like eating a banana. A banana the size of Rhode Island, but just a banana.
:lmao::lmao:

"Tell him about the Twinkie..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those that believe this is under control, when do you think Operation Squirt Gun is completed? I posted a link from 5 days ago saying this should be done in two days. But it seems like they are spraying water on these around the clock and the temperatures appear to be increasing. Is that the strategy? Just keep dousing it with water for months/years?

Darnit, this just HAS to be a huge disaster. It just HAS to!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those that believe this is under control, when do you think Operation Squirt Gun is completed? I posted a link from 5 days ago saying this should be done in two days. But it seems like they are spraying water on these around the clock and the temperatures appear to be increasing. Is that the strategy? Just keep dousing it with water for months/years?

Darnit, this just HAS to be a huge disaster. It just HAS to!!
He's probably short U.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Environmental activist George Monbiot:

You will not be surprised to hear that the events in Japan have changed my view of nuclear power. You will be surprised to hear how they have changed it. As a result of the disaster at Fukushima, I am no longer nuclear-neutral. I now support the technology.

A crappy old plant with inadequate safety features was hit by a monster earthquake and a vast tsunami. The electricity supply failed, knocking out the cooling system. The reactors began to explode and melt down. The disaster exposed a familiar legacy of poor design and corner-cutting. Yet, as far as we know, no one has yet received a lethal dose of radiation.

Some greens have wildly exaggerated the dangers of radioactive pollution. For a clearer view, look at the graphic published by xkcd.com. It shows that the average total dose from the Three Mile Island disaster for someone living within 10 miles of the plant was one 625th of the maximum yearly amount permitted for US radiation workers. This, in turn, is half of the lowest one-year dose clearly linked to an increased cancer risk, which, in its turn, is one 80th of an invariably fatal exposure. I'm not proposing complacency here. I am proposing perspective.

Edit to add his comments on the xkcd chart Edited by Sarnoff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Environmental activist George Monbiot:

You will not be surprised to hear that the events in Japan have changed my view of nuclear power. You will be surprised to hear how they have changed it. As a result of the disaster at Fukushima, I am no longer nuclear-neutral. I now support the technology.

A crappy old plant with inadequate safety features was hit by a monster earthquake and a vast tsunami. The electricity supply failed, knocking out the cooling system. The reactors began to explode and melt down. The disaster exposed a familiar legacy of poor design and corner-cutting. Yet, as far as we know, no one has yet received a lethal dose of radiation.

:thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"We’re lucky to face nuclear-plant problems, because if the tsunami had hit a solar farm instead, 10,000’s of Lbs of lead and cadmium telluride would have been swept into the Sea of Japan poisoning just about everything."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those that believe this is under control, when do you think Operation Squirt Gun is completed? I posted a link from 5 days ago saying this should be done in two days. But it seems like they are spraying water on these around the clock and the temperatures appear to be increasing. Is that the strategy? Just keep dousing it with water for months/years?

Do you understand why they have to "squirt" water on it? Do you not know that they completed squirting water on it but until they get the normal cooling systems operational they will have to continue doing it?

For this round, water injecting has been completed in reactor 4.

Good news, power is back to the control room of reactor 3 and they should get power to the cooling system soon. Power cables are ready for reactor 4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it's not bad news so it'll probably be ignored like some of the other info I posted, but a CNN headline that isn't full of it.http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/03/22/japan.nuclear.reactors/index.html?hpt=C2

Tokyo (CNN) -- Technicians restored power to the control room of the No. 3 reactor at the quake-damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, the station's owner reported late Tuesday.Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) said it confirmed that the power was on by turning on the control room's lights. The next step, the company said, is to get air conditioning in the room so workers can enter and work there.

Not a major breakthrough since obviously many of the systems are damaged, but it's good to see something good happening with the power supply.On a related note:China Syndrome on IMDBMOVIEmeter: Up 319% in popularity this week. See why on IMDbPro! :banned: Edited by Blue-Kun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it's not bad news so it'll probably be ignored like some of the other info I posted, but a CNN headline that isn't full of it.http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/03/22/japan.nuclear.reactors/index.html?hpt=C2

Tokyo (CNN) -- Technicians restored power to the control room of the No. 3 reactor at the quake-damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, the station's owner reported late Tuesday.Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) said it confirmed that the power was on by turning on the control room's lights. The next step, the company said, is to get air conditioning in the room so workers can enter and work there.

Not a major breakthrough since obviously many of the systems are damaged, but it's good to see something good happening with the power supply.On a related note:China Syndrome on IMDBMOVIEmeter: Up 319% in popularity this week. See why on IMDbPro! :banned:
good news, perhaps Tepco has been overestimating the damage in the No. 1 and No. 2 reactors as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earlier Tuesday, TEPCO Vice President Sakae Muto said the No. 1 and No. 2 reactors at the plant suffered more damage than originally believed and will take more time to repair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earlier Tuesday, TEPCO Vice President Sakae Muto said the No. 1 and No. 2 reactors at the plant suffered more damage than originally believed and will take more time to repair.

How many were killed by the radiation so far?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is an example of what is pissing me off.
My dad used to say you can judge the size of a man's character by the size of the things that piss him off. Take it easy, B.
Well considering there is no such thing as a size of a persons character both you and your dad can stick it where the sun don't shine.

If you want to make comparisons to pettiness just see where your pointing out my dyslexia when it comes to i and e.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Environmental activist George Monbiot:

You will not be surprised to hear that the events in Japan have changed my view of nuclear power. You will be surprised to hear how they have changed it. As a result of the disaster at Fukushima, I am no longer nuclear-neutral. I now support the technology.

A crappy old plant with inadequate safety features was hit by a monster earthquake and a vast tsunami. The electricity supply failed, knocking out the cooling system. The reactors began to explode and melt down. The disaster exposed a familiar legacy of poor design and corner-cutting. Yet, as far as we know, no one has yet received a lethal dose of radiation.

Some greens have wildly exaggerated the dangers of radioactive pollution. For a clearer view, look at the graphic published by xkcd.com. It shows that the average total dose from the Three Mile Island disaster for someone living within 10 miles of the plant was one 625th of the maximum yearly amount permitted for US radiation workers. This, in turn, is half of the lowest one-year dose clearly linked to an increased cancer risk, which, in its turn, is one 80th of an invariably fatal exposure. I'm not proposing complacency here. I am proposing perspective.

Edit to add his comments on the xkcd chart
Logic and facts don't come into play amongst the folk I know. They hear nuclear and insist it's scary and dangerous. Here's hoping other folk aren't like them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is an example of what is pissing me off.
My dad used to say you can judge the size of a man's character by the size of the things that piss him off. Take it easy, B.
Well considering there is no such thing as a size of a persons character both you and your dad can stick it where the sun don't shine.

If you want to make comparisons to pettiness just see where your pointing out my dyslexia when it comes to i and e.

:lmao:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry to steal shtick, but its time for the full linkhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSjK2Oqrgic

That's weapons grade uranium, completely different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earlier Tuesday, TEPCO Vice President Sakae Muto said the No. 1 and No. 2 reactors at the plant suffered more damage than originally believed and will take more time to repair.

How many were killed by the radiation so far?
I don't know. How many babies drank contaminated milk?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earlier Tuesday, TEPCO Vice President Sakae Muto said the No. 1 and No. 2 reactors at the plant suffered more damage than originally believed and will take more time to repair.

How many were killed by the radiation so far?
I don't know. How many babies drank contaminated milk?
none. no milk was contaminated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earlier Tuesday, TEPCO Vice President Sakae Muto said the No. 1 and No. 2 reactors at the plant suffered more damage than originally believed and will take more time to repair.

How many were killed by the radiation so far?
I don't know. How many babies drank contaminated milk?
none. no milk was contaminated.
the Japanese government disagrees with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earlier Tuesday, TEPCO Vice President Sakae Muto said the No. 1 and No. 2 reactors at the plant suffered more damage than originally believed and will take more time to repair.

How many were killed by the radiation so far?
I don't know. How many babies drank contaminated milk?
none. no milk was contaminated.
I can't tell the trick questions from the real ones in here anymore. Lots of master shticksmen in here I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Putting Numbers On Japan’s Radioactivity Risk

My story Sunday saying that the danger from radiation in Japan will remain small even if things at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant go horribly wrong generated a lot of response. What about reports that radioactivity had already gotten not only spinach and milk but also into the water supply?

Actually, no. The whole point is that the amount of radioactivity people outside the evacuation zone are exposed to is likely to be small, even if we include the amounts in food and tap water. Radiation at close enough range to cause radiation poisoning is deadly, but although all radioactivity increases the risk of cancer, the increases are much smaller than you might think.

Answer this: if you were standing a mile away from the atomic bomb that destroyed Hiroshima when it exploded, how much would your lifetime risk of cancer go up?

Just 0.3%, says David Brenner, Director, Center for Radiological Research at Columbia University Medical Center in New York. For a man the lifetime risk of cancer is 44%; for a woman, it’s 38%. Even being near an atomic bomb doesn’t hold a candle to the risk of smoking, which causes 180,000 cases of lung cancer in the U.S. each year, as well as other cancers including mouth, throat, stomach and pancreas.

When it comes to health problems caused by the disaster in Japan, the lack of medical care, food, and clean water could dwarf the long-term death toll from radiation.

“If you want to look at the big picture of how many people are dying, you wouldn’t be in the radiation story at all,” says Brenner.

How bad could it get in Japan? Right now, according to measurements released by the Japanese government, people outside the damaged reactor are receiving between 1 and 100 microsieverts per hour of radiation. That’s well within the safe range. People in the U.S. can get more than that from cosmic rays.

If the amount of radiation from the reactors went up 100-fold, to 10,000 microsieverts, it would still be a very low level, Brenner says. That’s still just 0.01 sievert. When the National Acadamies of Science issued a report on radiation safety, it estimated that a dose of 0.1 sievert – ten times that much– would increase the number of cases of cancer by 2,270 in a population of 100,000 people.

But it’s unlikely that levels in Japan will ever get that high. There would have to be a catastrophic meltdown, combined with a terrible explosion, combined with howling winds going in exactly the wrong direction to even have a chance of coming close. You’d also have to believe that further efforts to stop the disaster, like pouring concrete and sand over it in the case of a meltdown, would fail to stop the radiation.

The word “radiation” conjures up images of death rays that burn invisibly through the air. But the case here is more one of poisonous dirt and dust being caught up and spread. The radioactive isotopes that are the source of concern here just don’t travel that well.

When the Chernobyl reactor in the Ukraine melted down, an entire reactor with virtually no containment system exploded, spewing huge amounts of radioactive material into the air, where they were blown by the wind into habitable areas. This resulted in amounts of radioactive iodine (iodine-131) that were, Brenner says, “thousands of times greater” than could be the case in Japan. And then the Soviet government did not tell people about the accident for days, during which time children drank locally produced milk, which contained the radioactive iodine.

A recent study by researchers at the National Institutes of Health found that the median exposure in a group of children it followed was 633,000 microsieverts, or 63 times our worst-case guess that is 100 times the highest levels in Japan aside from those heroic people who are trying to deal with the catastrophe at the reactor.

People shouldn’t eat food that has tested positive for radioactivity, Brenner says. But the fact that the food is being tested means they have the chance to not consume it, which will further reduce the risk of harmful radioactivity.

My initial reaction to the news of the catastrophe at the Fukishima Daiichi plant was that if Japan, with its focus on earthquake readiness, couldn’t keep its plants safe then maybe we shouldn’t be building nuclear power plants. But the reality seems to be that the risk from radiation is far less scary than most people think it would be. Science fiction movies and comic books haven’t given people a very clear perspective on what radioactivity actually is. Here’s another numerate perspective on this risk, from the comic strip xkcd.

The reality is that the biggest dangers to people in Japan are more mundane: lack of clean water, food, shelter, and medical care. Here is a link to the Red Cross.

:shrug:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earlier Tuesday, TEPCO Vice President Sakae Muto said the No. 1 and No. 2 reactors at the plant suffered more damage than originally believed and will take more time to repair.

How many were killed by the radiation so far?
I don't know. How many babies drank contaminated milk?
none. no milk was contaminated.
the Japanese government disagrees with you.
no. you disagree with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earlier Tuesday, TEPCO Vice President Sakae Muto said the No. 1 and No. 2 reactors at the plant suffered more damage than originally believed and will take more time to repair.

How many were killed by the radiation so far?
I don't know. How many babies drank contaminated milk?
So we're still at zero radiation deaths. How about radiation injuries?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earlier Tuesday, TEPCO Vice President Sakae Muto said the No. 1 and No. 2 reactors at the plant suffered more damage than originally believed and will take more time to repair.

How many were killed by the radiation so far?
I don't know. How many babies drank contaminated milk?
So we're still at zero radiation deaths. How about radiation injuries?
Do the ones from Hiroshima count?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Environmental activist George Monbiot:

You will not be surprised to hear that the events in Japan have changed my view of nuclear power. You will be surprised to hear how they have changed it. As a result of the disaster at Fukushima, I am no longer nuclear-neutral. I now support the technology.

A crappy old plant with inadequate safety features was hit by a monster earthquake and a vast tsunami. The electricity supply failed, knocking out the cooling system. The reactors began to explode and melt down. The disaster exposed a familiar legacy of poor design and corner-cutting. Yet, as far as we know, no one has yet received a lethal dose of radiation.

Some greens have wildly exaggerated the dangers of radioactive pollution. For a clearer view, look at the graphic published by xkcd.com. It shows that the average total dose from the Three Mile Island disaster for someone living within 10 miles of the plant was one 625th of the maximum yearly amount permitted for US radiation workers. This, in turn, is half of the lowest one-year dose clearly linked to an increased cancer risk, which, in its turn, is one 80th of an invariably fatal exposure. I'm not proposing complacency here. I am proposing perspective.

Edit to add his comments on the xkcd chart
Logic and facts don't come into play amongst the folk I know. They hear nuclear and insist it's scary and dangerous. Here's hoping other folk aren't like them.
I mentioned this guy to my dad. He immediately said this guy was paid off. :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earlier Tuesday, TEPCO Vice President Sakae Muto said the No. 1 and No. 2 reactors at the plant suffered more damage than originally believed and will take more time to repair.

How many were killed by the radiation so far?
I don't know. How many babies drank contaminated milk?
So we're still at zero radiation deaths. How about radiation injuries?
somewhere between 10-20 so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.