Crazy happenings over in Japanland.
03-25-2011, 01:47 AM
#101
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,050
Total Cats: 6,608
Jacob, please don't take any of what I'm saying as a personal attack against you. This is actually a very stimulating exercise- I appreciate being challenged and forced to critically analyze my words and thoughts. And an open dialog on controversial subjects is generally a good thing, provided that all parties make an effort to separate facts from conjecture, and identify the difference between the two.
Yes, I think we're all in agreement here. But there's a huge difference between an accidental criticality and... well, pretty much everything else.
There have been quite a number of criticality accidents over the years (here is a partial list) and none of them have ever resulted in injuries or fatalities to personnel outside the immediate vicinity of the event.
There's no question that the spent fuel in the pools at Fuku present a risk, it's easily the largest combined mass of fissionable material which has ever been subjected to these conditions. And it's quite probable that they have already suffered damage. Where I'm not quite following your argument is where these fuel rods apparently jump into the air and shout "ooga booga!" and then disperse themselves over a wide area. The radioactive isotopes which are likely to be emitted into the environment from the fuel pools are essentially the same as those which have already been released by the reactors themselves. (More on that further down.)
It's certainly not a good thing, and it's one element of this situation for which we have no prior precedent, including TMI. But it is still quite a long ways removed from Chernobyl. (More on that too, furtherer down.)
Yes, I agree that this is the most likely explanation (except for the idea that it constitutes fallout. Fallout is what you get after a thermonuclear explosion. This is more like runoff.)
But again, we are talking about very trivial quantities of relatively harmless fission by-products. This stuff will rapidly disperse into unmeasurable quantities, unlike the uranium dust which was rained down over the Chernobyl site. Uranium pellets (or a puddle of molten uranium) are neither airborne nor waterborne- it just sits there being extremely radioactive but not going anywhere. And that is not what is being emitted at Fuku. Once they get the reactors under control and stop the unfiltered emissions, things will rapidly return to normal from a radiological standpoint. This isn't speculation; we've seen this exact same set of circumstances before (albeit at smaller scale) and so we have a pretty reasonable basis for predicting how it will play out. I-131 and Cs-137 aren't going to spontaneously transmutate into uranium or plutonium. That only happens in comic books.
Let me put it another way. Assume that a news report says that "scientists have found measurable concentrations of caffeine in seawater found 30km off the coast of Corpus Christi." Now, caffeine is technically poisonous. It can cause paralysis and death in sufficiently high concentration. But I wouldn't be too worried. There is a much higher concentration than merely "measurable" in the 4 to 6 cups of coffee that I drink on a typical day, and I seem to be doing fine. (Admittedly, I tend to be a little jittery if I'm soldering under the microscope at, say, 11am when it's really kicking in. But I try to avoid that.)
Now, let's say that they report having found "measurable concentrations" of cyanide in the water. Honestly, I still wouldn't be freaking out. The fact that they described it as "measurable" tells us that "it's within our ability to detect, but outside of the range that your body would notice." Kind of like how there's a "measurable" amount of sunlight when I roll out of bed at 5am. You'd never know it. (Hell, there probably is a measurable amount of cyanide in seawater.)
They've been able to detect "measurable" amounts of I-131 here in California, as well as in Colorado and Oregon. Do you suggest that the whole west coast of the US is now unsafe to be in?
Be it suntan lotion, sexual assault, or radioactivity, it's all a matter of degrees.
Not really. If it were a hurricane, we'd have dispatched the WP-3D "Hurricane Hunter" aircraft. It doesn't mean we don't trust anybody, it's just too good of an opportunity to pass up for gathering empirical data. Academics will be studying this event for decades to come, and it would be irresponsible to not gather as much data as possible from as many sources as possible.
I honestly can't tell if you're not paying attention to what I am saying here, if you don't comprehend it, or if you just don't believe it. So please forgive me if my tone sounds patronizing or simplistic, but I am trying as hard as I can to make sure that you at least understand the tenet of what I am saying, regardless of whether you accept it or not.
At Chernobyl, the reactor core itself- the actual uranium fuel- was pulverized into dust and blown into the sky.
At Fuku, the reactor cores are still entirely contained within the pressure vessels, which in turn are contained within the containment buildings. The only things being emitted into the environment (either by seawater runoff or by airborne emission) are fission byproducts (Cs-131, I-137, etc) which are relatively harmless as compared to pulverized uranium fuel pellets.
It's like comparing a guy who blew his engine to smithereens on 75 PSI of boost plus nitrous to a guy who threw a rod and put a hole in the side of the oil pan. Yeah, both engines leaked oil all over the place. The first one also "leaked" pistons, connecting rods, the flywheel, the crankshaft and the head.
All very good questions, which I expect we will have to wait quite some time before we have definitive answers to.
It's probable that the MOX fuel assemblies, having been operated and stored in the some conditions as the single-oxide assemblies, have suffered similar amounts and types of damage. They do not, however, obey a different set of physical laws, so molten or not, they are unlikely to jump out of the pools and spread themselves over half of Japan.
It's a scary thing to think about. Honestly, I can't even imagine how I would react if I were in their situation.
I can only hope that we apply the lessons learned here to other industries, and stop the senseless slaughter of rooftop solar-panel installers, who on average fall to their death at eleven times the rate of those within the nuclear power industry (including Chernobyl.)
Uhm, ok. To be honest, that's actually kind of insulting. I actually thought it was a very well-reasoned and logical argument, particularly the part where I did a little research and quoted actual facts from named sources, rather than just making unsubstantiated and unquantified claims.
Yup.
Of course, if you add water to crusty salt, then you get salt water again.
Or if you add heat, you get molten salt.
(Hint: salt melts at a lower temperature than uranium.)
(Hint #2: molten salt is actually used as the primary coolant in some reactor designs instead of water.)
Yes, that's one possible challenge that they might face once the freshwater pumps are brought back on line. It seems rather premature to say "this horrible thing absolutely will happen" at this stage, especially in light of that fact that at many reactors, including not only Fuku but also at San Onofre nuclear generating station (about 30 miles from where I live) raw seawater is normally used as the secondary-loop coolant.
I'll say that again: At many nuclear plants, raw seawater is used as the secondary-loop coolant.
But more to the point, think for a moment about the logic of what you are saying. The tenet of your argument here is that the valves may have frozen. Ok, let's assume that you're correct, and that every valve in every one of the half-dozen or so cooling circuits is now rusted in place.
At least some of them are already open.
I'm sorry if what I wrote was phrased in a way which implied that this was the case. Re-connection of grid power is one step towards a stable, end-state shutdown. Restoration of the control rooms is another. When the deionizers and primary-loop pumps (or ECCS pumps) are started up, that will be yet another. It's a very long road ahead, but current indicators seem to suggests that the end result will be a stable shutdown, rather than a cataclysmic breach.
Going back to my earlier message (post #93) I have re-read it and confirmed that it is unambiguously phrased in the speculative future tense, so I don't really feel too guilty here.
After the earthquake, all three of the then-operating reactors SCRAMmed and began normal shutdown procedure. They continued operating in this mode, drama-free, for the better part of an hour until the tsunami took out the backup generators. I think it's reasonably safe to say that the Fuku reactors handled the quake itself just fine. If anything, they are likely in better shape than the TMI-2 plant was after the initiating water-hammer event, which quite seriously ruptured the plumbing in the secondary loop and immersed the turbine hall in steam.
Well, yeah. I wouldn't take it on a cross-country tour, but it'll run well enough to get me home.
Likewise, restoration of primary circulation should get units 1-3 operating well enough to achieve a cold shutdown condition so that they can be de-commissioned. I don't think there's any argument that those three reactors will never run again- they are indeed toast. Just like Unit 2 at TMI was after it melted down and was subsequently stabilized.
A spent rod gets very hot from radioactive decay, the process which generates its intense radioactivity. These rods have to be cooled in ponds for many years (6-8) then transfered to another holding take for up to 20 years before they can be taken to a dry storage facility. (...) That’s bad news, because plutonium scattered into the atmosphere is even more dangerous that the combustion products of rods without plutonium.
There have been quite a number of criticality accidents over the years (here is a partial list) and none of them have ever resulted in injuries or fatalities to personnel outside the immediate vicinity of the event.
There's no question that the spent fuel in the pools at Fuku present a risk, it's easily the largest combined mass of fissionable material which has ever been subjected to these conditions. And it's quite probable that they have already suffered damage. Where I'm not quite following your argument is where these fuel rods apparently jump into the air and shout "ooga booga!" and then disperse themselves over a wide area. The radioactive isotopes which are likely to be emitted into the environment from the fuel pools are essentially the same as those which have already been released by the reactors themselves. (More on that further down.)
It's certainly not a good thing, and it's one element of this situation for which we have no prior precedent, including TMI. But it is still quite a long ways removed from Chernobyl. (More on that too, furtherer down.)
(Reuters) - Japanese scientists have found measurable concentrations of radioactive iodine-131 and caesium-137 in seawater samples taken 30 km (18 miles) from land, the U.N. nuclear watchdog said on Thursday.
Now this radiation in the ocean and the radiation in Tokyo very well could stem from fallout. I'm willing to bet the radiaiton in the ocean is the by product of pumping salt water into the reactors that most likely have massive damage and are leaking that radioactive salt water back into the water table and ocean.
Now this radiation in the ocean and the radiation in Tokyo very well could stem from fallout. I'm willing to bet the radiaiton in the ocean is the by product of pumping salt water into the reactors that most likely have massive damage and are leaking that radioactive salt water back into the water table and ocean.
But again, we are talking about very trivial quantities of relatively harmless fission by-products. This stuff will rapidly disperse into unmeasurable quantities, unlike the uranium dust which was rained down over the Chernobyl site. Uranium pellets (or a puddle of molten uranium) are neither airborne nor waterborne- it just sits there being extremely radioactive but not going anywhere. And that is not what is being emitted at Fuku. Once they get the reactors under control and stop the unfiltered emissions, things will rapidly return to normal from a radiological standpoint. This isn't speculation; we've seen this exact same set of circumstances before (albeit at smaller scale) and so we have a pretty reasonable basis for predicting how it will play out. I-131 and Cs-137 aren't going to spontaneously transmutate into uranium or plutonium. That only happens in comic books.
Let me put it another way. Assume that a news report says that "scientists have found measurable concentrations of caffeine in seawater found 30km off the coast of Corpus Christi." Now, caffeine is technically poisonous. It can cause paralysis and death in sufficiently high concentration. But I wouldn't be too worried. There is a much higher concentration than merely "measurable" in the 4 to 6 cups of coffee that I drink on a typical day, and I seem to be doing fine. (Admittedly, I tend to be a little jittery if I'm soldering under the microscope at, say, 11am when it's really kicking in. But I try to avoid that.)
Now, let's say that they report having found "measurable concentrations" of cyanide in the water. Honestly, I still wouldn't be freaking out. The fact that they described it as "measurable" tells us that "it's within our ability to detect, but outside of the range that your body would notice." Kind of like how there's a "measurable" amount of sunlight when I roll out of bed at 5am. You'd never know it. (Hell, there probably is a measurable amount of cyanide in seawater.)
They've been able to detect "measurable" amounts of I-131 here in California, as well as in Colorado and Oregon. Do you suggest that the whole west coast of the US is now unsafe to be in?
Be it suntan lotion, sexual assault, or radioactivity, it's all a matter of degrees.
Just the fact that the US has sent its own team out there to measure radiation and there own IR plane tells me the US believes they are being lied to by the Japanese government.
This situation is very sad for the Japanese people. Only one Chernobyl reactor blew, it was only three months old at the time with relatively little radiation absorbed compared to Fukushima. Fukushima’s reactors have been operating for 40 years, and would hold some where near 30 times more radiation than Chernobyl.
At Chernobyl, the reactor core itself- the actual uranium fuel- was pulverized into dust and blown into the sky.
At Fuku, the reactor cores are still entirely contained within the pressure vessels, which in turn are contained within the containment buildings. The only things being emitted into the environment (either by seawater runoff or by airborne emission) are fission byproducts (Cs-131, I-137, etc) which are relatively harmless as compared to pulverized uranium fuel pellets.
It's like comparing a guy who blew his engine to smithereens on 75 PSI of boost plus nitrous to a guy who threw a rod and put a hole in the side of the oil pan. Yeah, both engines leaked oil all over the place. The first one also "leaked" pistons, connecting rods, the flywheel, the crankshaft and the head.
Yes, MOX fuel was being used. It is also a known fact that MOX spent fuel rods have a greater danger of catching fire is the fuel ponds are drained, are more radioactive than other methods of fission and have a greater danger of going critical. The question is how much was active? Is it damaged? How much is stored in fuel ponds? Was it damaged?
It's probable that the MOX fuel assemblies, having been operated and stored in the some conditions as the single-oxide assemblies, have suffered similar amounts and types of damage. They do not, however, obey a different set of physical laws, so molten or not, they are unlikely to jump out of the pools and spread themselves over half of Japan.
5 workers are already confirmed dead as of Tuesday. If you believe TEPCO/Japangov as much as I do it's probably close to 10-15.
I can only hope that we apply the lessons learned here to other industries, and stop the senseless slaughter of rooftop solar-panel installers, who on average fall to their death at eleven times the rate of those within the nuclear power industry (including Chernobyl.)
I'm not even going to comment on your bantering.
Again your making the comparison to a reactor that didn't have earthquake damage. For a week and a half now they have been pouring water through there. And it’s salt water, right? You pour salt water on a hot pan and what do you think happens? You get salt.
Of course, if you add water to crusty salt, then you get salt water again.
Or if you add heat, you get molten salt.
(Hint: salt melts at a lower temperature than uranium.)
(Hint #2: molten salt is actually used as the primary coolant in some reactor designs instead of water.)
That salt will get into all the valves and cause them to freeze. They won’t move. This will be happening in every reactor they tried to cool with salt water.
I'll say that again: At many nuclear plants, raw seawater is used as the secondary-loop coolant.
But more to the point, think for a moment about the logic of what you are saying. The tenet of your argument here is that the valves may have frozen. Ok, let's assume that you're correct, and that every valve in every one of the half-dozen or so cooling circuits is now rusted in place.
At least some of them are already open.
So I can’t believe that it’s just a simple matter of you reconnecting the electricity and the water will begin to circulate.
Going back to my earlier message (post #93) I have re-read it and confirmed that it is unambiguously phrased in the speculative future tense, so I don't really feel too guilty here.
We also need to factor in the amount of pump/pipe/pool/mechanical destruction occured from the earthquake.
No, because in your relation the car will then run again until the fresh battery drains. I'll stick with my relation. Multiple reactors are toast.
Likewise, restoration of primary circulation should get units 1-3 operating well enough to achieve a cold shutdown condition so that they can be de-commissioned. I don't think there's any argument that those three reactors will never run again- they are indeed toast. Just like Unit 2 at TMI was after it melted down and was subsequently stabilized.
Reply
0
0
03-28-2011, 02:33 PM
#102
Elite Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 3,203
Total Cats: 147
:(
Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) admitted to the possibility in its early March 28 press conference that the steel Reactor Pressure Vessels that hold nuclear fuel rods in the Reactors 1, 2, 3 at Fukushima I Nuclear Plant may have broken. TEPCO explained the situation "Imagine there's a hole." Because of this "hole", contaminated water that's been poured into the Pressure Vessels to cool the fuel rods continues to leak, it is assumed.
In the Reactors 1, 2, and 3, the water level within the Pressure Vessels are not rising as much as desired. TEPCO admitted in the March 28 press conference that the reason why the Pressure Vessels haven't been filled with water was "probably a hole near the bottom, that's the image we have". Asked why there was a hole, TEPCO answered they did not know.
The Reactor Pressure Vessels (RPVs) are the most important of the 5-layer protection against radiation leak (other 4 are the fuel pellets, cladding of fuel rods, Container Vessels, and the Reactor buildings). The RPVs at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant is made of 16-centimeter thick steel, and it has an outlet at the bottom to insert measuring instruments. It is possible that the leak is from that area.
TEPCO also admitted to the possibility of the exposed nuclear fuel rods overheating and damaging the RPVs. According to the nuclear experts, if the fuel rods get damaged and start to melt, it will fall to the bottom of the RPVs and settle. It then becomes harder to cool with water effectively, because the surface area is smaller. It is possible that the melted fuel rods melted the wall of the RPVs with high temperature and created a hole.
On the other hand, TEPCO said it didn't think the RPVs are completely broken, because the pressures inside the RPVs were higher than the atmosphere. "It is not like Chernobyl where the RPV exploded and the fuels were outside the RPV." TEPCO continued to believe in the integrity of the RPVs.
Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) admitted to the possibility in its early March 28 press conference that the steel Reactor Pressure Vessels that hold nuclear fuel rods in the Reactors 1, 2, 3 at Fukushima I Nuclear Plant may have broken. TEPCO explained the situation "Imagine there's a hole." Because of this "hole", contaminated water that's been poured into the Pressure Vessels to cool the fuel rods continues to leak, it is assumed.
In the Reactors 1, 2, and 3, the water level within the Pressure Vessels are not rising as much as desired. TEPCO admitted in the March 28 press conference that the reason why the Pressure Vessels haven't been filled with water was "probably a hole near the bottom, that's the image we have". Asked why there was a hole, TEPCO answered they did not know.
The Reactor Pressure Vessels (RPVs) are the most important of the 5-layer protection against radiation leak (other 4 are the fuel pellets, cladding of fuel rods, Container Vessels, and the Reactor buildings). The RPVs at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant is made of 16-centimeter thick steel, and it has an outlet at the bottom to insert measuring instruments. It is possible that the leak is from that area.
TEPCO also admitted to the possibility of the exposed nuclear fuel rods overheating and damaging the RPVs. According to the nuclear experts, if the fuel rods get damaged and start to melt, it will fall to the bottom of the RPVs and settle. It then becomes harder to cool with water effectively, because the surface area is smaller. It is possible that the melted fuel rods melted the wall of the RPVs with high temperature and created a hole.
On the other hand, TEPCO said it didn't think the RPVs are completely broken, because the pressures inside the RPVs were higher than the atmosphere. "It is not like Chernobyl where the RPV exploded and the fuels were outside the RPV." TEPCO continued to believe in the integrity of the RPVs.
Reply
0
0
03-30-2011, 04:38 PM
#103
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,050
Total Cats: 6,608
Well, yeah. From the fact that the reactors are holding pressure, it's obvious that there is no serious breach of the pressure vessel. About a million other ways for water to be escaping, though. Lots of valves and pipes and fittings...
Jacob posited earlier that the Japanese authorities were lying about the radiation reports. Turns out that even Greenpeace says "no, they're actually being completely honest and accurate."
In other news, units 1, 2 and 3 appear to be headed for a stable shutdown condition after all. The electrical pumps are up and running, supplying a constant stream of fresh feedwater to all three reactors. Pressure and temperature within the reactors are becoming stable, so barring the appearance of Mothra and Godzilla, it's a pretty safe bet that the reactors are not going to experience a catastrophic breach.
Likewise, concentrations of fission isotopes in the environment (both the air and the water) continue to decline as the materials dissipate. "As of 28 March, recommendations for restrictions based on I-131 concentration remain in place in one village in the Fukushima prefecture. In three other locations of the Fukushima prefectures, restrictions continue to apply for infants only.
(...)
As far as food contamination is concerned, 35 samples taken from 25-29 March, and reported on 29 March, for various vegetables, fruit (strawberry), seafood, pork and unprocessed raw milk in nine prefectures (...), stated that results for iodine-131, caesium-134 and caesium-137 were either not detected or were below the regulation values set by the Japanese authorities."
No contaminated food, and nearly no contaminated water.
Source: http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/...iupdate01.html
On the downside, the effects of this disaster are finally starting to be felt here. One of our FPGA suppliers (Alterra) is now quoting us a 28 week lead-time on a certain family of ICs, because they can't get their hands on some specific epoxy that they normally use which they buy from a company in Japan.
Jacob posited earlier that the Japanese authorities were lying about the radiation reports. Turns out that even Greenpeace says "no, they're actually being completely honest and accurate."
Lawrence Solomon Mar 30, 2011 – 4:10 PM ET
Greenpeace’s independent radiation monitoring teams have confirmed that the Japanese authorities are not lying about the extent of radiation released from the Fukushima nuclear plant. At a press briefing today in Tokyo, Greenpeace radiation safety expert Jan van de Putte stated that “our measurements verified the authorities’ data,” news that will be welcome to those who have been suspicious about the data on radiation leaks that the Japanese government has been relaying to the public.
In fact, the Japanese authorities throughout the tragedies that have befallen the country have been reporting daily the radiation in the air and in drinking water in all 47 prefectures, showing radiation levels every 60 minutes. These reports are posted on the web in Japanese, Chinese, Korean and English. For those who want to see yesterday’s report in English, click here for radiation in water and here for radiation in air and here for hourly readings.
Source: http://opinion.financialpost.com/201...eenpeace-says/
I think it's safe to say that if not even Greenpeace is accusing you of doing something wrong, you're probably in the clear. Greenpeace’s independent radiation monitoring teams have confirmed that the Japanese authorities are not lying about the extent of radiation released from the Fukushima nuclear plant. At a press briefing today in Tokyo, Greenpeace radiation safety expert Jan van de Putte stated that “our measurements verified the authorities’ data,” news that will be welcome to those who have been suspicious about the data on radiation leaks that the Japanese government has been relaying to the public.
In fact, the Japanese authorities throughout the tragedies that have befallen the country have been reporting daily the radiation in the air and in drinking water in all 47 prefectures, showing radiation levels every 60 minutes. These reports are posted on the web in Japanese, Chinese, Korean and English. For those who want to see yesterday’s report in English, click here for radiation in water and here for radiation in air and here for hourly readings.
Source: http://opinion.financialpost.com/201...eenpeace-says/
In other news, units 1, 2 and 3 appear to be headed for a stable shutdown condition after all. The electrical pumps are up and running, supplying a constant stream of fresh feedwater to all three reactors. Pressure and temperature within the reactors are becoming stable, so barring the appearance of Mothra and Godzilla, it's a pretty safe bet that the reactors are not going to experience a catastrophic breach.
Likewise, concentrations of fission isotopes in the environment (both the air and the water) continue to decline as the materials dissipate. "As of 28 March, recommendations for restrictions based on I-131 concentration remain in place in one village in the Fukushima prefecture. In three other locations of the Fukushima prefectures, restrictions continue to apply for infants only.
(...)
As far as food contamination is concerned, 35 samples taken from 25-29 March, and reported on 29 March, for various vegetables, fruit (strawberry), seafood, pork and unprocessed raw milk in nine prefectures (...), stated that results for iodine-131, caesium-134 and caesium-137 were either not detected or were below the regulation values set by the Japanese authorities."
No contaminated food, and nearly no contaminated water.
Source: http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/...iupdate01.html
On the downside, the effects of this disaster are finally starting to be felt here. One of our FPGA suppliers (Alterra) is now quoting us a 28 week lead-time on a certain family of ICs, because they can't get their hands on some specific epoxy that they normally use which they buy from a company in Japan.
Reply
0
0
03-30-2011, 06:43 PM
#104
On the downside, the effects of this disaster are finally starting to be felt here. One of our FPGA suppliers (Alterra) is now quoting us a 28 week lead-time on a certain family of ICs, because they can't get their hands on some specific epoxy that they normally use which they buy from a company in Japan.
Reply
0
0
03-31-2011, 11:24 AM
#105
Elite Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 3,203
Total Cats: 147
Joe, its time take off the "I love nuclear" glasses and see this for what it is. I'm reading reports that 1,2,3 have containment breaches and 2 has molten rods in the basement water. Radiation in towns greater than 20k have been reported as being over the Japanese Gov raised limit, yet they haven't increased the radius. The IAEA has even reported as late as yesterday that one of the reactors might have criticality. Its clear that there is more going on then whats being reported. Clearly we have two people with opposing views on Fuku, and in a broader sense how they view news when major catastrophe's occur. My view is most major negative news is going to have a huge cover up. With that being said, I never take reports at face value. I read between the lines and just use my own logic to weed out what is fact and what possible could be the truth.
I think the situation is out of control and is heavily being down played. I think that the radiation is also higher than whats being reported. I think this incident is on par or worse than Chernobyl but that Japan/Tepco is avoiding the "cask" on fear that it will always be compared to Chernobyl if that is used. I think when the real radiation numbers come out it will shock a lot of people. I don't think the US has any real worry about radiation reaching us in levels that would kill someone in the near future. I think the bigger problem will be the economic impacts of country number 3 collapsing will be the biggest problem to the US.
That being said I really could care less about debating the topic. I research 3-4 hours daily on the US economy, global economy, and any breaking news such as Fuku. It's a pet project of mine and honestly is quite interesting. I do it for the shear pleasure of stimulating my brain, to report my finding's to my family and friends, and to protect my family from any future economic hardships. I'm happy with just posting news clips as they come in. I'm not really all that concerned about Fuku except for the economic snowball that will arise from Japan's economy taking this hit, rolling it to the global economy, and transfering down to the US economy. The US is in big trouble financially and is akin to a Jinga stack thats been played for 15min by some drunk guys. I think my advice to anyone interested in Fuku would be to read everything left or right on the subject and then come to your own conclusion. That goes for the US economy as well.
I think the situation is out of control and is heavily being down played. I think that the radiation is also higher than whats being reported. I think this incident is on par or worse than Chernobyl but that Japan/Tepco is avoiding the "cask" on fear that it will always be compared to Chernobyl if that is used. I think when the real radiation numbers come out it will shock a lot of people. I don't think the US has any real worry about radiation reaching us in levels that would kill someone in the near future. I think the bigger problem will be the economic impacts of country number 3 collapsing will be the biggest problem to the US.
That being said I really could care less about debating the topic. I research 3-4 hours daily on the US economy, global economy, and any breaking news such as Fuku. It's a pet project of mine and honestly is quite interesting. I do it for the shear pleasure of stimulating my brain, to report my finding's to my family and friends, and to protect my family from any future economic hardships. I'm happy with just posting news clips as they come in. I'm not really all that concerned about Fuku except for the economic snowball that will arise from Japan's economy taking this hit, rolling it to the global economy, and transfering down to the US economy. The US is in big trouble financially and is akin to a Jinga stack thats been played for 15min by some drunk guys. I think my advice to anyone interested in Fuku would be to read everything left or right on the subject and then come to your own conclusion. That goes for the US economy as well.
Reply
0
0
03-31-2011, 12:47 PM
#106
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (33)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: atlanta-ish
Posts: 12,659
Total Cats: 134
Business interruption has always been the biggest fear from this disaster for me. The true effects won't be seen for a while yet. With so many minor and major electronics components made there, the specific $.03 resistor spec'ed in the assembly could be the thing to keep whatever widget from being made.
Here is an email we received form 1 Japanese parts supplier after we inquired about possible product shortages:
Brand XXXXX says theyto not expect to be affected, followed by a long disclaimer:
Words such as "expects," "anticipates," "believes," "estimates," variations of such words and other similar expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions, which are difficult to predict. Therefore, actual outcomes and results may differ materially from what is expressed or forecasted in, or implied by, such forward-looking statements. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which reflect management's judgment only as of the date hereof.
Words such as "expects," "anticipates," "believes," "estimates," variations of such words and other similar expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions, which are difficult to predict. Therefore, actual outcomes and results may differ materially from what is expressed or forecasted in, or implied by, such forward-looking statements. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which reflect management's judgment only as of the date hereof.
Reply
0
0
03-31-2011, 12:58 PM
#107
Joe, its time take off the "I love nuclear" glasses and see this for what it is. I'm reading reports that 1,2,3 have containment breaches and 2 has molten rods in the basement water. Radiation in towns greater than 20k have been reported as being over the Japanese Gov raised limit, yet they haven't increased the radius. The IAEA has even reported as late as yesterday that one of the reactors might have criticality. Its clear that there is more going on then whats being reported. Clearly we have two people with opposing views on Fuku, and in a broader sense how they view news when major catastrophe's occur. My view is most major negative news is going to have a huge cover up. With that being said, I never take reports at face value. I read between the lines and just use my own logic to weed out what is fact and what possible could be the truth.
I think the situation is out of control and is heavily being down played. I think that the radiation is also higher than whats being reported. I think this incident is on par or worse than Chernobyl but that Japan/Tepco is avoiding the "cask" on fear that it will always be compared to Chernobyl if that is used. I think when the real radiation numbers come out it will shock a lot of people. I don't think the US has any real worry about radiation reaching us in levels that would kill someone in the near future. I think the bigger problem will be the economic impacts of country number 3 collapsing will be the biggest problem to the US.
That being said I really could care less about debating the topic. I research 3-4 hours daily on the US economy, global economy, and any breaking news such as Fuku. It's a pet project of mine and honestly is quite interesting. I do it for the shear pleasure of stimulating my brain, to report my finding's to my family and friends, and to protect my family from any future economic hardships. I'm happy with just posting news clips as they come in. I'm not really all that concerned about Fuku except for the economic snowball that will arise from Japan's economy taking this hit, rolling it to the global economy, and transfering down to the US economy. The US is in big trouble financially and is akin to a Jinga stack thats been played for 15min by some drunk guys. I think my advice to anyone interested in Fuku would be to read everything left or right on the subject and then come to your own conclusion. That goes for the US economy as well.
I think the situation is out of control and is heavily being down played. I think that the radiation is also higher than whats being reported. I think this incident is on par or worse than Chernobyl but that Japan/Tepco is avoiding the "cask" on fear that it will always be compared to Chernobyl if that is used. I think when the real radiation numbers come out it will shock a lot of people. I don't think the US has any real worry about radiation reaching us in levels that would kill someone in the near future. I think the bigger problem will be the economic impacts of country number 3 collapsing will be the biggest problem to the US.
That being said I really could care less about debating the topic. I research 3-4 hours daily on the US economy, global economy, and any breaking news such as Fuku. It's a pet project of mine and honestly is quite interesting. I do it for the shear pleasure of stimulating my brain, to report my finding's to my family and friends, and to protect my family from any future economic hardships. I'm happy with just posting news clips as they come in. I'm not really all that concerned about Fuku except for the economic snowball that will arise from Japan's economy taking this hit, rolling it to the global economy, and transfering down to the US economy. The US is in big trouble financially and is akin to a Jinga stack thats been played for 15min by some drunk guys. I think my advice to anyone interested in Fuku would be to read everything left or right on the subject and then come to your own conclusion. That goes for the US economy as well.
Edit: Upon reading back a little bit, It seems that you just for no reason refute what Joe says, with out supporting evidence, or you just summarize what some other doom and gloom anti-nuke guy says. I feel like your argument is weak, and unsupported. Besides, how are we supposed to power things? Nasty coal that runs out, and dumps thorium into the atmosphere, and emits more radiation in the environment than a nuke plant does? Sure, that is short term, but inferior to nuclear. All other forms of power are just pipe dreams. Sure you can make power with wind, water and solar, but it just isn't going to power the world. So, if not nuclear, and you are so against it, what then?
Last edited by chicksdigmiatas; 03-31-2011 at 01:42 PM.
Reply
0
0
03-31-2011, 02:38 PM
#108
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,050
Total Cats: 6,608
Radiation in towns greater than 20k have been reported as being over the Japanese Gov raised limit, yet they haven't increased the radius.
The IAEA has even reported as late as yesterday that one of the reactors might have criticality.
Please cite a source for this.
Its clear that there is more going on then whats being reported. (...) My view is most major negative news is going to have a huge cover up.
Did you see the source I cited earlier in which Jan van de Putte, who is a "radiation safety expert" with Greenpeace, said outright that the data being provided by the Japanese government is correct?
I'll repeat, for clarity: Greenpeace says that the Japanese government is being truthful.
These are the people who love nothing more than to blow everything out of proportion and warn us of the potentially dire and catastrophic repercussions of pretty much everything imaginable. Trust me, if they're not jumping up and down, screaming their heads off that somebody is lying about radiation, then they're not lying about radiation.
I think the situation is out of control and is heavily being down played.
I think that the radiation is also higher than whats being reported.
Where do you think the level of radiation is higher than being reported? In the air? In the soil? Inside containment? Please explain why you feel this is the case.
I think this incident is on par or worse than Chernobyl
I think I've quite clearly laid out the many reasons why I believe that Fuku is nowhere near Chernobyl (eg: Chernobyl lacked a containment, Chernobyl suffered an explosion which caused the ejection of many tons of pulverized core material into the atmosphere, etc) and I am genuinely curious to hear why you believe that the situation here is equal to or worse than that.
I'm not trying to be contrarian here- you really have aroused my curiosity.
Reply
0
0
03-31-2011, 02:48 PM
#109
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,050
Total Cats: 6,608
Well, in fairness, if you look at the bottom of pretty much any statement which is released by any publicly traded company that has to do with forecasting of any kind, they all have a statement such as that at the bottom. It's standard boilerplate CYA stuff.
For instance, here's a Harris Corporation financial statement from last year: http://www.harris.com/view_pressrele...kup&pr_id=3049
Here's one of the two disclaimers at the bottom:
That pretty much covers every conceivable bad thing which could possibly happen short of being attacked by giant, radioactive, mutant walruses.
For instance, here's a Harris Corporation financial statement from last year: http://www.harris.com/view_pressrele...kup&pr_id=3049
Here's one of the two disclaimers at the bottom:
Statements in this press release that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements that reflect management's current expectations, assumptions, and estimates of future performance and economic conditions. Such statements are made in reliance upon the safe harbor provisions of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Forward-looking statements in this release include but are not limited to: earnings and revenue guidance for fiscal 2011; the potential value of contract awards; and statements regarding outlook, including expected revenue and orders. The company cautions investors that any forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results and future trends to differ materially from those matters expressed in or implied by such forward-looking statements. The company's consolidated results and the forward-looking statements could be affected by many factors, including but not limited to: the loss of our relationship with the U.S. government or a shift in U.S. government funding; potential changes in U.S. government or customer priorities; risks inherent with large long-term fixed-price contracts, particularly the ability to contain cost overruns; financial and government and regulatory risks relating to international sales and operations; our ability to continue to develop new products that achieve market acceptance; the consequences of future geo-political events; strategic acquisitions and the risks and uncertainties related thereto, including our ability to manage and integrate acquired businesses; performance of our subcontractors and suppliers; potential claims that we are infringing the intellectual property rights of third parties; the successful resolution of patent infringement claims and the ultimate outcome of other contingencies, litigation and legal matters; customer credit risk; risks inherent in developing new technologies; changes in our effective tax rate; the potential impact of natural disasters or other disruptions on our operations; changes in future business conditions that could cause business investments and/or recorded goodwill to become impaired; and the recession in the United States and general downturn in the global economy. Further information relating to factors that may impact the company's results and forward-looking statements are disclosed in the company's filings with the SEC. The forward-looking statements contained in this release are made as of the date of this release, and the company disclaims any intention or obligation, other than imposed by law, to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise.
Reply
0
0
04-01-2011, 04:22 AM
#112
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Warrington/Birmingham
Posts: 2,642
Total Cats: 42
(can't hotlink to the Telegraph's pictures).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pict....html?image=25
It's real.
Reply
0
0
04-04-2011, 11:08 AM
#113
Elite Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 3,203
Total Cats: 147
Read about all the latest developments in the fiasco that keeps getting worse, more improvised, and more out of control by the day.
•Tokyo Electric Power (TEPCO) began to release more than 10,000 tonnes of contaminated water from its crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant into the sea to free up storage space for water with much higher levels of radioactivity.
•Engineers also plan to build a giant silt curtain in the ocean to stop the spread of more contamination from the plant.
•Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano says that if the current situation continues for a long time, with accumulation of more radioactive substances, there will be "a huge impact on the ocean."
•Edano also says there was no other choice but to release the water, which was about 100 times more radioactive than legal limits.
•Japan warns it could take months to stop radiation leaking from the nuclear plant.
•Engineers mixed sawdust and newspapers with polymers and cement to try to seal a crack in a concrete pit at the complex's reactor no.2, where radioactive water has been seeping into the sea.
•The majority of voters polled by a newspaper say a coalition government would better handle the crisis and post-quake recovery effort.
•A central bank survey, underlining the concern over the impact of the crisis, shows that big manufacturers expect business conditions to worsen significantly in the next three months, though they were not quite as pessimistic as some analysts had expected.
•Engineers examine alternatives to pumping in water to cool the reactor, including an improvised air conditioning system, spraying fuel rods with vaporised water or using the plant's cleaning system.
•TEPCO has said it will scrap at least four reactors once they are under control, but this could take years or even decades.
•Japanese manufacturing activity slumped to a two-year low in March and posted the sharpest monthly fall on record as the quake and tsunami hit supply chains and output.
•A total of 12,087 people were confirmed dead by Japan's National Police Agency, while 15,552 are missing. A total of 167,700 households were without electricity and at least 200,000 without running water.
•Estimated cost of damage to top $300 billion, making it the world's costliest natural disaster. The 1995 Kobe quake cost $100 billion while Hurricane Katrina in 2005 caused $81 billion in damage.
NHK reports
http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/04_10.html
It has been learned that the Japanese government withheld the release of computer projections indicating high levels of radioactivity in areas more than 30 kilometers from the troubled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.
The estimates were made on March 16th following explosions at the plant by an institute commissioned by the government using a computer system called SPEEDI. The system made its projections on the assumption that radioactive substances had been released for 24 hours from midnight on March 14th, based on the available data.
But the government was reluctant to reveal the SPEEDI projections, and did not release them until March 23rd.
The released data showed that higher levels of radioactive substances would flow over areas to the northwest and southwest of the plant.
The estimates showed that the radiation would exceed 100 millisieverts in some areas more than 30 kilometers from the nuclear plant if people remained outdoors for 24 hours between March 12th and 24th.
That is 100 times higher than the 1 millisievert-per-year long-term reference level for humans as recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection.
The Nuclear Safety Commission says it did not release the projections because the location or the amount of radioactive leakage was not specified at the time.
Professor emeritus Shigenobu Nagataki of Nagasaki University, says the government should release more data about the dangers of possible radiation exposure and draw up evacuation plans and other measures together with residents.
Monday, April 04, 2011 12:38 +0900 (JST)
Video Quality
Low (256K)High (512K)..
•Tokyo Electric Power (TEPCO) began to release more than 10,000 tonnes of contaminated water from its crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant into the sea to free up storage space for water with much higher levels of radioactivity.
•Engineers also plan to build a giant silt curtain in the ocean to stop the spread of more contamination from the plant.
•Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano says that if the current situation continues for a long time, with accumulation of more radioactive substances, there will be "a huge impact on the ocean."
•Edano also says there was no other choice but to release the water, which was about 100 times more radioactive than legal limits.
•Japan warns it could take months to stop radiation leaking from the nuclear plant.
•Engineers mixed sawdust and newspapers with polymers and cement to try to seal a crack in a concrete pit at the complex's reactor no.2, where radioactive water has been seeping into the sea.
•The majority of voters polled by a newspaper say a coalition government would better handle the crisis and post-quake recovery effort.
•A central bank survey, underlining the concern over the impact of the crisis, shows that big manufacturers expect business conditions to worsen significantly in the next three months, though they were not quite as pessimistic as some analysts had expected.
•Engineers examine alternatives to pumping in water to cool the reactor, including an improvised air conditioning system, spraying fuel rods with vaporised water or using the plant's cleaning system.
•TEPCO has said it will scrap at least four reactors once they are under control, but this could take years or even decades.
•Japanese manufacturing activity slumped to a two-year low in March and posted the sharpest monthly fall on record as the quake and tsunami hit supply chains and output.
•A total of 12,087 people were confirmed dead by Japan's National Police Agency, while 15,552 are missing. A total of 167,700 households were without electricity and at least 200,000 without running water.
•Estimated cost of damage to top $300 billion, making it the world's costliest natural disaster. The 1995 Kobe quake cost $100 billion while Hurricane Katrina in 2005 caused $81 billion in damage.
NHK reports
http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/04_10.html
It has been learned that the Japanese government withheld the release of computer projections indicating high levels of radioactivity in areas more than 30 kilometers from the troubled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.
The estimates were made on March 16th following explosions at the plant by an institute commissioned by the government using a computer system called SPEEDI. The system made its projections on the assumption that radioactive substances had been released for 24 hours from midnight on March 14th, based on the available data.
But the government was reluctant to reveal the SPEEDI projections, and did not release them until March 23rd.
The released data showed that higher levels of radioactive substances would flow over areas to the northwest and southwest of the plant.
The estimates showed that the radiation would exceed 100 millisieverts in some areas more than 30 kilometers from the nuclear plant if people remained outdoors for 24 hours between March 12th and 24th.
That is 100 times higher than the 1 millisievert-per-year long-term reference level for humans as recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection.
The Nuclear Safety Commission says it did not release the projections because the location or the amount of radioactive leakage was not specified at the time.
Professor emeritus Shigenobu Nagataki of Nagasaki University, says the government should release more data about the dangers of possible radiation exposure and draw up evacuation plans and other measures together with residents.
Monday, April 04, 2011 12:38 +0900 (JST)
Video Quality
Low (256K)High (512K)..
Last edited by jacob300zx; 04-04-2011 at 11:19 AM.
Reply
0
0
04-04-2011, 03:34 PM
#115
Elite Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 3,203
Total Cats: 147
http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/...el-7-incident/
Hamburg — As new reports emerge of highly radioactive water leaks at Fukushima’s reactor 3, a new analysis prepared for Greenpeace Germany by nuclear safety expert Dr Helmut Hirsch shows that Japan’s nuclear crisis has already released enough radioactivity to be ranked at Level 7 on the International Nuclear Event Scale (INES). This is the scale’s highest level, and equal to the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster.
Dr. Hirsch’s assessment, based on data published by the French government's radiation protection agency (IRSN) and the Austrian governments Central Institute for Meteorology and Geodynamics (ZAMG) found that the total amount of radionuclides iodine-131 and caesium-137 released between March 11 and March 23 has been so high that the Fukushima crisis already equates to three INES 7 incidents.
"What is happening at Fukushima is just as serious as Chernobyl. It’s crucial that Japan’s authorities, the nuclear industry and the IAEA immediately stop their downplaying of the threat of radioactive contamination, and instead provide clear and honest communication about the risks to public health in order to protect people”, said Greenpeace energy campaigner Dr Rianne Teule.
”The events of the last two weeks are a wake up call for governments around the world to bring the nuclear age to a close, by shifting investments towards energy efficiency, and redoubling efforts to harness safe and secure renewable energy sources.”
The report can be downloaded from:
http://www.greenpeace.org/internatio...-scale-rating/
Hamburg — As new reports emerge of highly radioactive water leaks at Fukushima’s reactor 3, a new analysis prepared for Greenpeace Germany by nuclear safety expert Dr Helmut Hirsch shows that Japan’s nuclear crisis has already released enough radioactivity to be ranked at Level 7 on the International Nuclear Event Scale (INES). This is the scale’s highest level, and equal to the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster.
Dr. Hirsch’s assessment, based on data published by the French government's radiation protection agency (IRSN) and the Austrian governments Central Institute for Meteorology and Geodynamics (ZAMG) found that the total amount of radionuclides iodine-131 and caesium-137 released between March 11 and March 23 has been so high that the Fukushima crisis already equates to three INES 7 incidents.
"What is happening at Fukushima is just as serious as Chernobyl. It’s crucial that Japan’s authorities, the nuclear industry and the IAEA immediately stop their downplaying of the threat of radioactive contamination, and instead provide clear and honest communication about the risks to public health in order to protect people”, said Greenpeace energy campaigner Dr Rianne Teule.
”The events of the last two weeks are a wake up call for governments around the world to bring the nuclear age to a close, by shifting investments towards energy efficiency, and redoubling efforts to harness safe and secure renewable energy sources.”
The report can be downloaded from:
http://www.greenpeace.org/internatio...-scale-rating/
Reply
0
0
04-04-2011, 05:09 PM
#116
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,050
Total Cats: 6,608
Again, no question at all that significant amounts of radioactive material have been released and will continue to be released. All that seawater that's been pumped into the containment buildings over the past few weeks has to go somewhere now that the electric pumps are up and running and they've transitioned back to freshwater feed and have stabilized pressure and temperature at all three of the "out of control" reactors.
I think that it's important to distinguish between airborne or waterborne fission byproducts (such as the Cs-137 and I-131 quoted in Dr. Hirsch’s assessment) and the much more serious contamination that occurred at Pripyat (Chernobyl) as a result of the direct deposition of massive amounts of uranium into the environment.
While it's certainly true that I'd prefer not to have to breathe in large quantities of Cesium and Iodine if it can be avoided, the fact is that those elements are not going to linger in the local area- they will be dispersed by wind, rain and tide, and will quickly diminish in concentration to nearly zero. Again, we have real-world data from multiple sources including TMI, Chernobyl, and many above-ground weapons tests to support this projection.
By contrast, the many tons of uranium that spewed out of Chernobyl when it popped simply rained down over a wide area and then sat there.
So while it's perhaps technically accurate by some measures to say "this is the total amount of radioactivity which has been released," it's not a meaningful comparison unless you have some manner of context as to the nature of the radioactive material.
Let me draw a simple comparison. Let's say that I shock myself on the tongue with a 9v battery. If I do this for one second, and the current passing through my tongue is 100ma, that's roughly 1 joule of energy.
Most of us have done this, and we know that it's pretty harmless.
Now, let's say that I'm a masochist, and I do this twenty times a day for 41 years. I honestly have no idea whether I'd have any taste buds left at the end of that time, but I feel fairly secure in saying that it probably wouldn't kill me. At this end of this period, I'll have absorbed roughly 300,000 joules of energy in this manner.
But wait! I've just proven that you can receive a shock equal in severity to that of being executed in the electric chair* from a 9v battery!
Well, hell. If the total amount of power absorbed from both methods is the same, then doesn't that make 9v batteries every bit as dangerous as the electric chair? No, of course not. Because it fails to account for that fact that the electric chair delivers this energy as a single concentrated charge, whereas the 9v battery delivers it in a much more diffuse manner.
*= I'm basing this on a rated power of 2kv at 10A for 15 seconds. A brief survey of a couple of different sources places this roughly in the median of what is claimed and observed for the operation of a modern (late 20th century) electric chair.
Lastly, here's a recent update from NHK, which you cited as a source a little while ago:
I think that it's important to distinguish between airborne or waterborne fission byproducts (such as the Cs-137 and I-131 quoted in Dr. Hirsch’s assessment) and the much more serious contamination that occurred at Pripyat (Chernobyl) as a result of the direct deposition of massive amounts of uranium into the environment.
While it's certainly true that I'd prefer not to have to breathe in large quantities of Cesium and Iodine if it can be avoided, the fact is that those elements are not going to linger in the local area- they will be dispersed by wind, rain and tide, and will quickly diminish in concentration to nearly zero. Again, we have real-world data from multiple sources including TMI, Chernobyl, and many above-ground weapons tests to support this projection.
By contrast, the many tons of uranium that spewed out of Chernobyl when it popped simply rained down over a wide area and then sat there.
So while it's perhaps technically accurate by some measures to say "this is the total amount of radioactivity which has been released," it's not a meaningful comparison unless you have some manner of context as to the nature of the radioactive material.
Let me draw a simple comparison. Let's say that I shock myself on the tongue with a 9v battery. If I do this for one second, and the current passing through my tongue is 100ma, that's roughly 1 joule of energy.
Most of us have done this, and we know that it's pretty harmless.
Now, let's say that I'm a masochist, and I do this twenty times a day for 41 years. I honestly have no idea whether I'd have any taste buds left at the end of that time, but I feel fairly secure in saying that it probably wouldn't kill me. At this end of this period, I'll have absorbed roughly 300,000 joules of energy in this manner.
But wait! I've just proven that you can receive a shock equal in severity to that of being executed in the electric chair* from a 9v battery!
Well, hell. If the total amount of power absorbed from both methods is the same, then doesn't that make 9v batteries every bit as dangerous as the electric chair? No, of course not. Because it fails to account for that fact that the electric chair delivers this energy as a single concentrated charge, whereas the 9v battery delivers it in a much more diffuse manner.
*= I'm basing this on a rated power of 2kv at 10A for 15 seconds. A brief survey of a couple of different sources places this roughly in the median of what is claimed and observed for the operation of a modern (late 20th century) electric chair.
Lastly, here's a recent update from NHK, which you cited as a source a little while ago:
Radiation levels drop or remain flat
Radiation levels continue to drop or remain flat on Monday morning in many locations around the disabled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.
In Fukushima City, about 65 kilometers northwest of the power plant, 2.51 microsieverts per hour of radiation was detected. The reading in Koriyama City, also in Fukushima Prefecture, stood at 2.21.
Both figures are higher than the normal levels of 0.04 to 0.06 microsieverts per hour, but lower than that on Sunday.
The reading stood at 0.49 microsieverts per hour in Kita-Ibaraki City and 0.07 microsieverts per hour in Sendai City, Miyagi Prefecture.
Higher-than-usual levels of radiation were also observed in other locations, including Tokyo's Shinjuku Ward and main cities of Tochigi, Gunma, Saitama, Chiba and Kanagawa prefectures.
Authorities say these levels of radiation do not pose health risks.
Monday, April 04, 2011 13:16 +0900 (JST)
Radiation levels continue to drop or remain flat on Monday morning in many locations around the disabled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.
In Fukushima City, about 65 kilometers northwest of the power plant, 2.51 microsieverts per hour of radiation was detected. The reading in Koriyama City, also in Fukushima Prefecture, stood at 2.21.
Both figures are higher than the normal levels of 0.04 to 0.06 microsieverts per hour, but lower than that on Sunday.
The reading stood at 0.49 microsieverts per hour in Kita-Ibaraki City and 0.07 microsieverts per hour in Sendai City, Miyagi Prefecture.
Higher-than-usual levels of radiation were also observed in other locations, including Tokyo's Shinjuku Ward and main cities of Tochigi, Gunma, Saitama, Chiba and Kanagawa prefectures.
Authorities say these levels of radiation do not pose health risks.
Monday, April 04, 2011 13:16 +0900 (JST)
Reply
0
0
04-05-2011, 09:04 PM
#117
Elite Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 3,203
Total Cats: 147
Tellurium 129 Presence Is Proof Of Inadvertent Recriticality At Fukushima
http://vimeo.com/21881702
Arnie Gunderson from Fairewinds and Associates explaining that now there is definitive proof, courtesy of Tellurium 129 and a order of magnitude higher concentration of Iodine 131 in Reactor 1, that the reactor is now undergoing sporadic events of recriticality: in other words, the fission reaction is recommencing on its own, and without any supervision, emitting undetectable neutron beams which are irradiating any and all personnel still on location.
Arnie Gunderson from Fairewinds and Associates explaining that now there is definitive proof, courtesy of Tellurium 129 and a order of magnitude higher concentration of Iodine 131 in Reactor 1, that the reactor is now undergoing sporadic events of recriticality: in other words, the fission reaction is recommencing on its own, and without any supervision, emitting undetectable neutron beams which are irradiating any and all personnel still on location.
Reply
0
0
04-05-2011, 10:09 PM
#118
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Springfield nj
Posts: 53
Total Cats: 3
http://vimeo.com/21881702
Arnie Gunderson from Fairewinds and Associates explaining that now there is definitive proof, courtesy of Tellurium 129 and a order of magnitude higher concentration of Iodine 131 in Reactor 1, that the reactor is now undergoing sporadic events of recriticality: in other words, the fission reaction is recommencing on its own, and without any supervision, emitting undetectable neutron beams which are irradiating any and all personnel still on location.
Arnie Gunderson from Fairewinds and Associates explaining that now there is definitive proof, courtesy of Tellurium 129 and a order of magnitude higher concentration of Iodine 131 in Reactor 1, that the reactor is now undergoing sporadic events of recriticality: in other words, the fission reaction is recommencing on its own, and without any supervision, emitting undetectable neutron beams which are irradiating any and all personnel still on location.
Uranium-235 + 1 neutron -> 2 neutrons + Krypton-92 + Barium-142 + E
Now being that this is chain reaction where the reactions will continue until all the U-235 is used. How do they really plan to stop it? They have tried using the boron-laced seawater to simply act as an additional moderator, it does not hide the fact that there is still U-235.
Tying back to jacob, hasn't the chain reaction been occurring all along and they have simply tried to slow it down to release the amount of radioactive waste/heat?
On a final note, what is recriticality? Is it just another name for another nuclear energy term?
Reply
0
0
04-05-2011, 11:34 PM
#119
Elite Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 3,203
Total Cats: 147
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticality_accident
A criticality accident, sometimes referred to as an excursion or a power excursion, is an accidental increase of nuclear chain reactions in a fissile material, such as enriched uranium or plutonium. This releases a surge of neutron radiation which is highly dangerous to humans and causes induced radioactivity in the surroundings.
Critical or supercritical nuclear fission (one that is sustained in power or increasing in power) generally occurs inside reactor cores and occasionally within test environments. A criticality accident occurs when a critical reaction is achieved unintentionally. Although dangerous, typical criticality accidents cannot reproduce the design conditions of a fission bomb, so nuclear explosions do not occur. The heat released by the nuclear reaction will typically cause the fissile material to expand, so that the nuclear reaction becomes subcritical again within a few seconds.
In the history of atomic power development, sixty criticality accidents have occurred in collections of fissile materials outside nuclear reactors and some of these have resulted in death, by radiation exposure, of the nearest person(s) to the event. However, none have resulted in explosions.
Me
Tellurium 129 half life is only like 12hrs, so since the reactors have been down for a month any measured Tellurium 129 means criticality is occuring. Just like I posted last week that I was suspect of this happening. This also means the reported radiation numbers are bogus.
A criticality accident, sometimes referred to as an excursion or a power excursion, is an accidental increase of nuclear chain reactions in a fissile material, such as enriched uranium or plutonium. This releases a surge of neutron radiation which is highly dangerous to humans and causes induced radioactivity in the surroundings.
Critical or supercritical nuclear fission (one that is sustained in power or increasing in power) generally occurs inside reactor cores and occasionally within test environments. A criticality accident occurs when a critical reaction is achieved unintentionally. Although dangerous, typical criticality accidents cannot reproduce the design conditions of a fission bomb, so nuclear explosions do not occur. The heat released by the nuclear reaction will typically cause the fissile material to expand, so that the nuclear reaction becomes subcritical again within a few seconds.
In the history of atomic power development, sixty criticality accidents have occurred in collections of fissile materials outside nuclear reactors and some of these have resulted in death, by radiation exposure, of the nearest person(s) to the event. However, none have resulted in explosions.
Me
Tellurium 129 half life is only like 12hrs, so since the reactors have been down for a month any measured Tellurium 129 means criticality is occuring. Just like I posted last week that I was suspect of this happening. This also means the reported radiation numbers are bogus.
Reply
0
0
04-05-2011, 11:43 PM
#120
I used to think it was funny when people quoted wikipedia, but to quote wikipedia for nuclear research...that just takes it to a whole new level. I have worked for a company that does nuclear work...worked side by side with a few technicians that worked in a plant for over 30 years...and I had access just about any technical information I desired with the exception of the technical nuclear design content. I find it hilarious that everyone in the US is suddenly an expert on nuclear power plant design.
Reply
0
0
