Fukushima melting down?

Arlo1

Arlo1

1 TW
Joined
Apr 26, 2009
Messages
8,460
Location
Nanaimo
So I keep reading all the posts mostly on FB and people are worried about the radioactive materials leaking/dumping into the pacific ocean. I know there is some smart MO-FOs on here and some have training in the Nuclear field. So what should we be wary of and what should be written off as BS?
http://thebovine.wordpress.com/2013/09/05/fukushima-radiation-dangers-10-foods-can-help-protect-your-family-naturally/

[youtube]Ye-N7MGz-GE[/youtube]

[youtube]M60ZdXCLNLY[/youtube]
 
This is an opinion only... and an opinion offered without doing any calculations...

Key rule: "The solution is dilution..." Works in general terms.

I believe there is a significant localized risk/problem/crisis in Fukushima Providence and certain down wind and water runoff areas. That problem is real, significant, and understated currently.

The concept of a "crisis" to the west coast of the US or Canada is hype.

The long term effects of under reported leakage of isotopes into ocean water is unknown, and may or may not be a problem. Only time will tell for sure. Clearly less leakage is more safe. The rule "The solution is dilution..." is deeply in play here.

TEPCO is (or has lost) loosing control of runoff and open cycle cooling water at the Fukushima site. I believe there is still a massive amount of fuel rods still "hanging out" in elevated storage chambers in a couple of the reactor halls. If/when these collapse there will be the acceptance of "a real, significant and understated local issue in Fukushima Providence..."

TEPCO is not moving fast enough.
 
bigmoose said:
This is an opinion only... and an opinion offered without doing any calculations...


The concept of a "crisis" to the west coast of the US or Canada is hype.
Click to expand...
Thanks Dave you are the first one who came to mind for info/advice on this. I have people posting they are moving away from Vancouver because of this. I figure the Pacific is pretty big and can dilute a lot of this before it gets here.

The funny thing is the one person who says they moved away actually moved to Alberta :roll: A friend said they are planning a Nuclear power plant a couple hours north east of Edmonton (I have to look into it) but I think it was around fox creak. Not if that's bad enough but all the pollution into the lakes and underground water supply there is ridiculous.

I have been out dirt biking and stumbled on marshes and puddles full of crude oil seeping from some sort of oil field failure more then a few times its not a good scene there.

This whole Nuclear power plant thing is scary. I know we have enough green energy here in BC and most other places can do the same I just don't see the need for Nuclear.
One Major thanks to Ryan for his work on the wind generators because we are seeing a lot of them in Alberta and now some here on Vancouver island as well.
 
I live about 60 miles downwind from a nuclear power reactor. I probably should snag some iodine pills to keep on hand... but I haven't.

I have never been too concerned about being exposed to "reasonable" amounts of radiation... but have been very careful about ingesting isotopes that can bind in the cells of my body. For example people are very concerned about plutonium ingestion, but this article presents some data that shows it's not as bad as feared: http://atomicinsights.com/how-deadly-plutonium/

If you are concerned, then I would purchase a decent low range Geiger counter and take your own background readings. Keep a plot of your locale. Scan fish that you might buy. Not foolproof, but a tool to get quantitative data in lieu of innuendo.
 
the problem is that the nuclear fuel has melted down and the containment vessels have been penetrated by the ground water that flows down the hillside through the internal sub basements of the reactor building and flows out onto the surface and has overflowed the containment lines when they had the recent typhoon. the water is pumped from the reactor building and is stored in thousands of temporary tanks all over the site. this water is then sent through filters to trap the most damaging isotopes such as cesium and these filters are proving very difficult to maintain and keep the process going fast enuff to keep up with the amount of water coming down the hill side and into the reactor buildings.

it would be great if there is so much radiation released that it would stop the over fishing of the tuna, but that is not likely to happen. the hysteria over the presence of radioisotopes along the pacific coast are useful if you can get someone spooked enuff to sell their property cheap you can take advantage of them when they cut and run. so work on the guy you know owns property you would like to buy and get him so fearful that he sees you as his salvation.

the biggest problem is the social and emotional health issues for the poor residents of the fukishima area who were evicted from their farms and forced into temporary housing hundreds of miles from their ancestral homes. almost all of these people have family farms and residences that go back for many generations and the human devastation is far worse than the nuclear radiation they would be exposed to if they returned to their properties.

Japan ruling party questions plan to let Fukushima evacuees go home
12:27 AM ET 11/3/13 | Reuters

TOKYO, Nov 3 (Reuters) - A Japanese ruling party official has called into question a government plan to let people who fled from the Fukushima nuclear disaster go home, saying the government should identify areas that will never be habitable.

The Fukushima plant north of Tokyo was battered by an earthquake and tsunami in March 2011, leading to meltdowns and explosions that sent plumes of radiation into the air and sea.

About 150,000 people were evacuated. A large area of surrounding land is off-limits because of radiation but the government is hoping to eventually allow everyone to go home.

But Shigeru Ishiba, secretary general of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), said it was inevitable that some people would never go back.

"The time will definitely come that someone must say 'they cannot live in this area but they would be compensated'," Ishiba was quoted as saying in the Asahi Shimbun newspaper.

The question of letting people go home is politically sensitive for the government and it would not want to have to tell thousands of residents that cannot go back.

The plant's operator, Tokyo Electric Power Co, has been struggling to stop radiation leaks from the wrecked plant.

It is now preparing to remove 400 tonnes of highly irradiated spent fuel from a damaged reactor building, a very dangerous operation that has never been attempted before on this scale.

Ishiba also said authorities might have to relax limits for radiation exposure if anything was ever going to be done in terms of re-building the area.

"Unless we come up with answer as to what to do with a measure for decontamination, reconstruction of Fukushima won't ever make progress," Ishiba was quoted as saying.
 
I remember asking a friend why all of a sudden people are so worried all of a sudden by "such n such" I was truly perplexed , the problem had been around for a long time and nothing had ever changed...
He replied with a genius yet very simple answer...
"Because Its On TV"

I have often thought about why nuclear radiation creates such terror when statistics show very little people die from it compared to the rest of the crap in the world.
Reason why radiation creates fear is because it is a "poison" that humans can not "see, touch, or taste". Its the lack of familiarity.
More people would buy geiger meter on ebay then test for lead in their food but we all know there probably is lead in their food or their kids toys.

I guess like a snake bite, the poison will show visual tissue destruction while radiation poison tends to just destroy DNA. Snake bite will break down tissue and destroy DNA. When you get any kind of sun tan, the sun is destroying your skin cells DNA.
I think if there was a geiger meter built into everyones iphone/smart phone people would probably feel a lot safer. But if it was lead in there food they probably don't care.

Fact is not many people have died from the king of nuclear disasters Chernobyl, official total deaths was 31.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster

I find it amazing living in Australia how many young people from Europe come down to Australia and want to get a nice dark tan. I guess its something to show off when they go back to Europe. Though these people are bathing them self in bad radiation, where its from nuclear power or from cosmic space its all the same.

80,000 people died from skin cancer in 2010, I bet all of them lived in more fear of dieing from nuclear radiation then sun/cosmic radiation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skin_cancer

Same thing with road deaths, in 2010 32,885 people died on the roads in the USA but I am sure all those people much more feared dying from nuclear radiation. In two years thats as many as all the US soldiers who died in the entire decade long vietnam war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year

I don't think Japan will dump radioactive water into the sea simply because they love sea food too much, they are sea food crazy, I think Japan would rather have contaminated soil then hurt their tasty fish supplies.

I still think people fear what is most bombarding them in the media at the time.
In the 1980s nuclear power was the ultimate king of environmentally destructive evil to all the environmentalists out there.
Then in the 2000s global warming because of green house gasses became the hot topic and Al Gore created the documentary Inconvenient Truth all of a sudden nuclear power looked great to a lot of environmentalists due to low carbon emissions and coal power plants became the ultimate king of destructive evil.
Who know what the media will decide for them next.
 
Maybe it did melt down some. But it's not going to blow it's top now I think. I was very worried that first month. The leakage sucks, but it will get a lot of dilution. People flock to live in some pretty hot places, like the Taos area. Naturally pretty high background, made worse by the uranium mine tailings just north of Taos in Questa.


If you want to get worried about all nuke plants, read the book Ablaze, by Piers Paul Read. A detailed account of Chernobyl, It will make you worry about how they run every nuke plant on earth. The size of the seriously contaminated area is an eye opener. Hard to find a place to live that isn't downwind of a nuke plant. Can't do a thing about it, so best to just stop worrying about that one. Maybe at most, have an entry level gas mask to catch the particles around the house.
 
Even David Suzuki warns about a future earthquake in Japan and if the reactor falls the entire west coast should evacuate. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/11/04/david-suzuki-fukushima-warning_n_4213061.html
 
Yeah, that would be bad. Hopefully the control rods won't move too much, but the leak would get much worse. I'd be more worried about the still running plants in Japan getting the "big one".
 
Media are on their own mission. Granted you don't know the absolute truth unless you have "boots on the ground" at Fukushima. A good second is the International Atomic Energy Agency reports that are available to the public here: http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/focus/fukushima/status-reports.html

As for the leakage, this is encouraging from http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/2013/japan-basic-policy8.html 30 October 2013 report:

The NRA report notes no significant increase in the concentrations of Cs-134 and Cs-137 and total Beta in the designated sampling points, even after the rainwater flowed over the dikes on 20 October 2013 due to continued heavy rains.
Click to expand...

Real sea area monitoring from the end of October here:
http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/2013/seamonitoring291013.pdf

The above area sea reports are real, and I believe accurate. Remember "The solution is dilution" There is a lot of water between a kilometer off Fukusima and the west coast of Canada/USA...

Read the data, make your own conclusions...

State of the reactors from here: http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/afp/130919/status-fukushima-nuclear-plant

-- Reactors 1, 2 and 3 went into meltdown after their cooling systems were knocked out. The temperature of the cores and spent fuel pools at all units is now stable and water is being used to keep them cool.

-- Reactor 1: Workers have constructed an outer cover on the broken building to contain radioactive material. The original building was ruptured in a hydrogen explosion.

-- Reactor 2: Hindered by high levels of radiation, workers have used endoscopes to inspect the inside of the reactor and robots to examine damage to the housing and radiation levels.

-- Reactor 3: Workers are still removing highly radioactive rubble from the building, which was damaged by a hydrogen explosion. They plan to construct a crane and an outer cover, in preparation for removing used fuel rods from the pool.

-- Reactor 4 has an empty core but around 1,500 spent fuel rods are in its storage pool. The outer building was damaged by fires and an explosion. Work to remove the fuel rods will start in November.
Click to expand...

To me, the need is to get the blasted spent fuel rods out of Reactor 3 and 4 elevated storage pools. Those elevated pools are structurally compromised. An earthquake can drop them, and the debris is then going to be hotter than hades and nearly uncontrollable.

The long term plan is to freeze the ground around the plant to control the migration of groundwater.
 
Arlo1, thks for posting. Would you post the YouTube URL for that interview with Christina from nuke radio? I've been watching the news regularly over the last couple years at enenews.com and what she states is very close to their reporting.

In case pool #4 goes, I now have KI powder to make the daily doses; but now, I think I will just vacation with relatives in FL.

Thks for sharing
 
don't be silly. the fuel in #4 storage is being removed. it already survived the earthquake, that is their current priority since the cores are now stable.

the biggest problem is not being able to manage the flow of groundwater through the compromised containment vessels. the problem is that the number and volume of the ion absorption columns are insufficient to meet the requirements of circulating cooling water over the residual cores and the extra groundwater that is penetrating the building through cracks in the foundation of the containment vessels. it is thought that the cores have melted down and are buried underneath the primary containment and is in the plumbing vessel portion used for the distribution of coolant around the core.

they are running out of space for storage tanks and will eventually have to release the least radioactive portions into the sea or maybe they will put it into a big barge yet.

they have had minor accidents such as the recent release where a new worker removed the wrong flange on a storage tank and a large amount of more highly radioactive water was released, but it was contained inside the retaining dikes around the storage tanks. i think there were 3 workers who received high doses, but not life threatening. just job ending. that is the problem they have now, finding new workers capable of doing the work.
 
Okay, as for "Little people" (?) Dying of radiation, my father said that's what killed him, I think that particular physicist knew what he was talking about. I spent my teen years taking care of him, this being 30 years after he'd woke up in the hospital to talk he might not be going home.

Compare that to someone I know who tried to get a really powerful cleaner by mixing ammonia and chlorine. She woke up wondering why she blacked out, but once she had survived, it was over. No lingering mutagenic action for 30 years. Had only my Father been so lucky.

So CNN's 'Crossfire' pitted unthinking consumer 'Avocate' Ralph Nader against a formerly rabid antinuke who now argues against rabid antinukes. He says coal is killing more people than nuclear power, but then there's not only more coal, they also do much less to protect us from it.

They also showed this guys' documentary going to Japan and testing the deserted area. Is that area as big as the entire county Disneyland is in? They said it is measureably hot. Let's say you inhale dust in that area. Its not like poison where a small dose can be eliminated from your system, if it settles in your lungs you'll eventually be faced with new cells that never mature but rapidly reproduce their immature selves: this would be lung cancer.

There is nothing unique about "Can't see or hear" what can kill you. But there's not much that will torture so slowly and painfully. If it doesn't kill you iinstantly. THAT is why people fear radiation so much. Most people wouldn't. Know what radiation was if television didn't tell them, don't blame the messenger.
 
Dying of cancer is a horrible way to die but it is in fact a pretty common way people die.
Peoples homes are riddled with carcinogenic substances, people even smoke cigarettes which is widely accepted to contain carcinogenic substances.

Fact is there is a lot of science and statistics that show very little people die from nuclear radiation even in the face of massive nuclear disasters.

UNSCEAR The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation would happily increase the total count of dead people from Chernobyl or Fukushima from cancer etc if they can find anybody, because it helps they get more funding etc. Fact is its hard to find people who die of this stuff compared to other cancers and its possible they even throw a few people in who died of cancer from other reasons.

I think its a great example of the power of fear. Fear is a primitive emotion that has incredible control over how we see and judge things, no emotion has more power.
 
The media says smokers. have killed many with second hand cigarette smoke.
I say Bullshit.
 
yopappamon said:
National Cancer Institute says not.

http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2013/12/05/jnci.djt365.extract
Click to expand...

No, they don't but whoever writes Oxford Journals headlines needs to be sacked.

The forth paragraph from your report 'showing' that it doesn't cause increased risk of cancer.

'The only category of exposure that showed a trend toward increased risk was living in the same house with a smoker for 30 years or more.'
Click to expand...

Seems like a pretty clear link to me.

From the exact-same observational study that your report obtained all its information:

"Among women who had never smoked, after adjustment for potential confounders, those with the most extensive exposure to passive smoking (≥10 years’ exposure in childhood, ≥20 years’ exposure as an adult at home, and ≥10 years’ exposure as an adult at work) had a 32% excess risk of breast cancer compared with those who had never been exposed to passive smoking (hazard ratio 1.32 (1.04 to 1.67))."
Click to expand...

Passive smoking causes death either from lung or breast cancer.
 
zerogee said:
http://deepseanews.com/2013/11/true-facts-about-ocean-radiation-and-the-fukushima-disaster/
Click to expand...
Interesting read. This is how I am thinking about it as well, its all there in the science and math, not our imaginative gut fear brain.
I like this bit, and I guess it sums up what the article is trying to say...

It’s not even dangerous to swim off the coast of Fukushima. Buessler et al. figured out how much radiation damage you would get if you doggie paddled about Fukushima (Yes, science has given us radioactive models of human swimmers). It was less than 0.03% of the daily radiation an average Japanese resident receives.

Or this bit....

To put 0.9 μSv of radiation in perspective check out this awesome graph of radiation by xkcd http://xkcd.com/radiation/. You’ll get the same amount of radiation by eating 9 bananas.

Reminds me of this article I read yesterday which rings a similar theme.
http://www.dailytech.com/WiFi+Fearing+Parents+Knock+Out+Internet+in+New+Zealand+School+System/article34004.htm
 
Don't americans eat fish from that ocean? The coastal waters might be ok, but where are your fish coming from?

I see japan's need for cash as a good reason to buy sony cells at the moment. Or anything else made in japan. Although batteries are about all that concerns us here.
 
Joseph C. said:
Passive smoking causes death either from lung or breast cancer.
Click to expand...

It also can degrade your life expectancy and vigor. For example the ol' guy (me) has bronchial asthma. The doc's told me years ago that I was "the poster child for second hand smoke."

Both my parents smoked in the small 700 square foot home I was raised in. My mother was a registered nurse. I was sneezing constantly and getting more and more breathing/respiratory problems. My mother fastidiously cleaned the home, always telling me it was "the dust that is making you sneeze and cough." ... all the while smoking and wearing the carpet out vacuuming. We were all foolish, no one connected "the dots."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top