Slashdot Mirror
Fukushima Radioactive Fallout Nears Chernobyl Levels
0WaitState writes "The cumulative releases from Fukushima of iodine-131 and cesium-137 have reached 73% and 60% respectively of the amounts released from the 1986 Chernobyl accident. These numbers were reached independently from a monitoring station in Sacramento, CA, and Takasaki, Japan. The iodine and cesium releases are due to the cooking off of the more volatile elements in damaged fuel rods."
glad to see that slashdot is 100% on board with the media's general nuclear hysteria
[I don't think I need to explain why "nearing chernobyl levels" is a ridiculous description...]
OMG, we're all gonna die! Again!
From TFA:
That's a really important difference. It means the total release of radioactive material is far smaller. And the iodine, at least, is a lot less scary than the sort of stuff you get from fuel particles -- it has a half-life of only 8 days, so there's no real long-term environmental threat from that. (The cesium is rather worse -- half life of ~30 years.)
This space unintentionally left unblank.
Like all other moments in life, there is a Simpsons quote that sums it up:
"turning a possible Chernobyl into a mere Three Mile Island"
Monstar L
Full translated interview:
17/03/2011 Rafael Poch, Berlin Correspondent
Andreyev: "In the nuclear industry there are no independent bodies" "The most dangerous reactor in Fukushima is 3, because it uses a fuel of uranium and plutonium," said Yuli
He spent five years at Chernobyl. Spetsatom was deputy director of the anti-Soviet body nuclear accidents and knows very well how the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) works.
Yuri Andreyev (1938) is one of the most knowledgeable in this area. To Fukushima includes four scenarios of varying severity, from mild to very severe.
"In Fukushima, the most dangerous reactor is three, because it uses MOX fuel more plutonium uranium that France is being used experimentally in two Japanese plants," says this expert.
In 1991 everything fell apart in Moscow. The salary of deputy minister of atomic energy, the position he was offered Andreyev, not enough for anything. The Academy of Sciences of Austria was invited to lecture and eventually settled in Vienna as adviser to the minister of environment, universities and the IAEA itself.
Chernoby is still surrounded by lies, says. The accident was not the responsibility of plant operators, as stated, but a clear design flaw in the RBMK reactors result of cost savings. Proper design of those Soviet reactors required a large amount of zirconium, a rare metal, and a maze of pipes, special techniques for welding of zirconium, stainless steel and huge amounts of concrete. It was a fortune, so they decided to save money, said Andreyev.
One of the resources of savings was to feed the reactor with relatively low enriched uranium, since uranium enrichment is a complicated and expensive. This increased the risks and was contrary to the rules of safety, but supervision in the USSR nuclear part of the Ministry of Atomic Energy. Something similar is happening today with the IAEA, as the UN agency "depends on the nuclear industry," said Andreyev, under which lies and secrets of Chernobyl are now fully present in Fukushima.
Security, money, irresponsibility
"Those who design nuclear power plants are pending on two things: safety and cost. The problem is that security costs money. If you spend too much on nuclear power plant it is not competitive. The accident at Three Mile Island is the perfect example. After the accident was to improve security in a convincing way to avoid repetition of the accident both plants more expensive, they lost all meaning. For thirty years in America was not built a single reactor. Chernobyl was all very complicated but also had to do with economics. Academician Rumyantsev showed that we had to close all RBMK reactors. Simply ignored. There are always people interested in hiding something ... "
What are they hiding?
They lend themselves to compromise on security in exchange for selfish considerations. In the USSR for the cost of uranium enrichment in Japan simply for money. The location of central Japan, near the sea is the cheapest. Emergency generators are not buried and, of course, were flooded instantly .... Behind all this there is corruption. I have no proof, but will not take long to appear. How can I design a nuclear power plant in an area of ââhigh seismic risk, near the ocean, with emergency generators at the surface?. Wave arrived and everything was out of service. There is no error, this is a crime.
What problems do you see wi
And the "something" that just doesn't work is Slashdot fact-checking.
Reporting live from Tokyo (well, just on the outskirts, but def. part of the greater Tokyo area):
People here have bought up massive amounts of bottled water, though apparently the level of radioactive iodine has fallen below the maximum legal limit for infants (which is one third for that of adults). Milk is also in short supply. Two days ago, two supermarkets near me had no milk, or plain bottled water. (Haven't looked since then.)
On the subject of meltdowns, there is no "official" meaning to the term. But, I would say that at least a couple of the reactors have "melted down" (I haven't really been paying attention to the news, so I don't know if any of the others have or not). Anyway, fun facts, the "precautionary" safe limit of 80 KM set by the US government (and then the Australian government), for folks, was apparently worth setting. At least one village outside the 30 KM radius has had really high levels of radioactive iodine get into the water.
Me, I'm staying in Tokyo until things get really bad. But, I imagine, at least a couple of million of the other residents would also want to leave at that time too. So...
Appended to the end of comments you post. The maximum is 120 characters.
So does this mean the reactor has officially "melted down"?
No, but the press has.
This is only referring to the cesium and iodine. I find even those figures suspect considering that Chernobyl literally ejected it's core directly into the air. Especially given the rather unalarming radiation measurements all around the area.
There are immediately several posts expressing scepticism about this story. You people need to set that instinct aside for a moment. I am not an anti-nuke hysteric. Allow me the benefit of the doubt.
Recent reports from Japan are trending towards large amounts of contamination. Levels of Caesium and Iodine in the sea are very high. Soil samples are turning up large amounts of contamination. Tokyo tap water (200 km away) is contaminated. Vegetables in Hong Kong are accumulating Caesium that exceed limits. I have been monitoring Kyodo and NHK news and the degree of contamination being reported is disturbing.
Today's events include severe radiation burns on two workers, acknowledgement of containment failure in No.3 (MOX reactor,) an increase of the evacuation radius from 20 to 30 km and an order to greatly increase radiation monitoring at the site. Unexplained bursts of various gases have been forcing worker evacuations throughout the week. Fukushima didn't end when the news cycle cut over to Libya.
Fukushima has been releasing vapour directly into the atmosphere from reactor pressure vessels in which fuel damage has occurred. There is no precedent for that procedure in the history of nuclear technology, there has been no opportunity to directly measure the contamination of these releases, so there is no credible information on the actual amount of contamination being released from these vessels. There is no credible information on the amount of spent fuel that was lofted by the spent fuel pool fires. There is no accounting of the amount of contamination flowing off the site due to the use of water cannons.
DO NOT discount reports of contamination. DO NOT dismiss out of hand comparisons of Fukushima with Chernobyl.
I can't find a way to sugar coat that. Sorry.
Lurking at the bottom of the gravity well, getting old
From TFA:
The amounts being released, he says, are "entirely consistent" with the relatively low amounts of caesium and iodine being measured in soil, plants and water in Japan, because so much has blown out to sea. The amounts crossing the Pacific to places like Sacramento are vanishingly small – they were detected there because the CTBT network is designed to sniff out the tiniest traces.
"Relatively low amounts" in Japan. "Vanishingly small" amounts elsewhere. Yeah, they're really sensationally hyping this one up. /sarcasm
I don't doubt the claim, I do doubt the presentation. Have some respect.
So you think the claim is true, but it should not have been presented? Reporting simple facts now is sensationalism? They should have had enough respect to simply not report it? (No doubt you'll claim they could have been presented in a less sensational manner, which is utterly ridiculous considering, but whatever. Clearly any reporting of these facts at all would be considered sensationalist by you.)
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
The article uses scientific notation to give the radiation release in becquerels.
It is impossible to be sensationalist when using scientific notation!
May the Maths Be with you!
"We have a Pope" - sorry, couldn't resist.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Iodine 131 has a half life of 8 days, caesium 137 is 30 years. 20 seconds in Wikipedia would have told you that. As you got these two basic facts wrong, I'm not reading the rest of your post. Your ignorance is no better than big media's malevolence, so kindly STFU.
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
Could you describe the difference between evolution caused by increased radiation and evolution caused by what ever else? Evolution is just changes and nothing more. Stuff happens and sometimes it turns out to be something that changes things.
No, evolution is not just changes. Evolution is the effect of long term adaptation of a population to the environment through the combined effects of mutation, natural selection and reproduction. Mere mutation alone doesn't give you evolution.
The speed of evolution is not directly proportional to the mutation rate. If the mutation rate is too high, beneficial mutations are quickly swamped in harmful mutations, and unable to contribute to an increased chance of reproduction. What does speed up evolution is a change in environment. I bet Chernobyl will result in organisms in the area being more resistant to radiation and radioactive pollution.
The problem is the title: "Fukushima radioactive fallout nears Chernobyl levels"
The headline is actually worse than sensationalist: It's an outright lie. Fallout of Cs-137 and I-131 are at near Chernobyl levels, but the fallout, as a whole, is far far less than Chernobyl.
"Spending a year close to Fukushima itself will have ZERO observable health effects."
Go for it. I'm sure they could use your assistance there.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
I still have some liquid soap left from last year's flu hysteria.
And some air masks too. Who wants some?
There was also a hysteria for the mad cow disease, but my wife did not buy anything, we merely rode the car through pools of soapy water back then (near farms)
The problem when the media says apocalypse is coming once a year, and we're still there the next year is that we pay less attention the next time.
This article is full of errors major errors, including the title/conclusion.
They're typically off by about a factor 10; they seem to have ignored the exponent when calculating the percentages they use to conclude Fukushima is nearing Tsjernobyl levels. Where they state that Tsjernobyl put out 70% more caesium-137 than Fukushima, it's actually 1700%. Where they state that Tsjernobyl put out 50% more Iodine-131 it's actually 1400%. These numbers are based on the readings provided by the article.
Apart from that the comparison simply makes no sense for a 1000 other reasons. Remote detectors for airborne radioactive particles cannot reliably provide an indication of what the reactor put out, especially given the fact that Tsjernobyl was a fire releasing all kinds of aerosols while Fukushima releases mostly gasses that probably get carried much futher by the wind and do not pollute the grounds in the perimeter of the reactor as much as Tsjernobyl.
Furthermore, Tsjernobyl started out with explosion that probably released a huge quantity of especially iodine in one big blast, not leaving quite that much for the "aftermath" (which this article makes a comparison with). Also, what they fail to mention is the deadly mix of compounds other than iodine and caesium released by Tsjernobyl.
This is nothing like Tsjernobyl and it will not become anything like it either. Stop the FUD please.
0x or or snor perron?!
Both Iodine and Cesium are only dangerous if you ingest significant quantities of them. Additionally they have halflives measured in hours
No.
I-131 8 days.
Cs-137 30.2 years.
The problem at Chernobyl was release of Uranium and Plutonium in clouds, which then spread around the site, and irradiated everything.
In the long term the problem was the Cs-137.
Does it really need to be said that the Japanese lost control of exactly 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000% of their nuclear fuel.
If exposure of the rods and burning off of radioactive isotopes is zero loss of control, then stabbing someone is zero loss of blood unless they die.
Wanna bet the author of this story is a "green scientist" ?
The only thing I'd bet is that you're thoroughly annoyed that an out-of-date power plant has demonstrated that humans need to try much harder when deploying nuclear power. You're deliberately polarising it as greens vs nuclear advocates when it's really the desire for safe nuclear power vs the desire for maximising profit at inappropriate risk.
He's correct on everything else though, and the reason why those clouds are generally harmless to population is because they tend to rain microscopic amounts of radioactive cesium as it cools. Cesium-137 is dangerous if breathed in as small particles that get stuck in the lungs (iirc).
Iodine 131 is even safer. It's risks are based on the fact that thyroid gland tends to vacuum all the iodine in the body, including isotope 131 where it irradiates your body from inside for a long time. Of course, that requires significant ingestion of such iodine in the first place, which most typically comes with significantly contaminated water. Again, amount needed is fairly significant, and ones measured on the microscopic levels are barely notable to the human and animal bodies, and are several tens of orders of magnitudes lower then total ionising effect of background radiation on sea level.
Essentially you're far more at risk of getting cancer if you move to live 500m higher from sea level then from radiation in Fukushima if you don't live in Japan at the moment. The main risk in Chernobyl has been that essentially entire heavy part of radioactive isotopes of table of elements got into atmosphere. This is obviously not the case with Fukushima.
P.S. And please, don't even DARE flying. That's incredibly dangerous, you get irradiated!
"Of course, that requires significant ingestion of such iodine in the first place, which most typically comes with significantly contaminated water."
Milk.
Chernobyl results showed that cows eating the contaminated grass had almost all the radioactive iodine in the milk and children who drank that milk got sick.
Apparently 90% of the children thyroid cancers could have been prevented if the government had issued a warning not to drink milk.
you don't want to see any Slashdot story about it that's not a glowing endorsement
There's enough glowing endorsements for nuclear power around Fukushima already.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
I wonder how far it will go though... Chernobyl actually really "exploded" and thus in contrast to what the officials say there is only very little radioactive material within the chernobyl sarcophagus (they say there is 97% left inside, but you can walk inside with little protection, check youtube - there are many videos of the inner sanctum of the sarcophagus ... there is only little left. the rest is spread around the ukraine, russia and europe mostly). Most of the material was pushed into the air when it exploded.
As there are no real (trustable) sources in terms of the Japanese nuclear catastrophe it wouldn't suprise me if there is a complete melt down of No. 3 and no public information available on the real scale of the disaster (e.g. plutonium 235, its byproducts and other radioactive material and spreading across continents and oceans).
There's a documentary on the scientists trying to find the radioactive fuel / core inside the chernobyl structure on google video. They had to use robots to scout ahead because some of the rooms had pockets of radiation that could emit a lethal dose in seconds. One difference between Chernobyl and the Japanese reactors is that Chernobyl wasn't contained. Even if the Japanese reactors melt down, it's very likely that the melting cores will be captured in the containment structures built beneath them. As long as the containment holds then you won't be seeing plutonium anywhere except where it's supposed to be.
You rang?
SSC
*raises hand*
OH OH OH!
RAIN!
*looks around looking very pleased with himself.*
My -1 Troll is actually a +1 funny. And my -1 flame is actually a +1 insightfull.
Yeah, yeah, your fancy exponents, but try using percentages!
From TFA:
"Similarly, says Wotawa, caesium-137 emissions are on the same order of magnitude as at Chernobyl. The Sacramento readings suggest it has emitted 5 Ã-- 10^15 becquerels of caesium-137 per day; Chernobyl put out 8.5 Ã-- 10^16 in total -- around 70 per cent more per day."
Yeah, seventy percent. The same 70% by which 85 is 70% more than 5.
WTF, NewScientist? The error's in the original article too, but this is the sort of mistake I expect from the mainstream media. A pop scientist publication should be smarter than this.
Chernobyl put out 8.5 10^16 Bqin total. The emissions lasted several days.
Save the bandwidth. Don't use sigs!
Death toll from Earthquake and tsunami 10,000+
Death toll from the reactor accident so far 0.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
And those thyroid cancers - while exceedingly unpleasant - killed about 40 people.
Nuclear is not 100% safe. Nothing is. It does happen to be about 4,000 times as safe as Coal though, measured in terms of human deaths per megawatt generated.
You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
The half-life of I-131 is 8 days, and effectively all of the volitiles have burned off at this point. Early this week, levels in Tokyo briefly reach levels where a baby in arms shouldn't be drinking (formulae made with) tap water - but it was only about twice safe levels for a baby, and no risk at all for those over 40. In a week that problem will have solved itself natually.
I'm sure there someone, somewhere who somehow didn't hear the warnings and a baby now has a slightly elevated risk of thyroid cancer. That's not a good thing, but it's unfair and sensationalist to compare that to Chernobyl. As my friend in Japan wrote
For us, we think (a) these amounts shouldn't matter and (b) our activated carbon filtration systems will take care of this, but carefully consumed wine and beer this evening just to be safe
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Quite true. Only the volatiles (Cs-137, I-131, etc) make it any significant distance from a nuclear disaster. The non-volatile elements end up attached to or as part of larger particulate matter and are generally deposited within 100km of the accident -- aka, significant amounts wouldn't even make it to Tokyo if the winds at the time of release were pointing straight at it.
A lack of those means it's less likely Fukushima will involve a permanent exclusion zone around it, but the overall health effects for regions beyond will be similar to that for Chernobyl after adjusting for prevailing wind direction.
Note that this accident isn't even close to over. There's several times as much nuclear decay waste products at Fukushima #1 as there were at Chernobyl, only a small fraction of those have been released into the environment so far, and the disaster is still clearly ongoing. There will almost certainly be more volatiles released by Fukushima than Chernobyl when this is done. The question is how kind will the winds be over the coming months and whether there will be even more "oh noes".
Did he just go crazy and fall asleep?
With a purposeful grimace and a terrible sound
He pulls the spitting high-tension wires down...
You know, I once came up with the notion that if you wanted an *incredibly* loud speaker, and had a large budget, you could encode music into detonating det cord by varying its radius and thus the force of its pressure wave. Depending on how thin you can make the cord, a normal length song would take a couple dozen to a couple hundred tonnes of explosives (not cheap), but you would have the volume to broadcast across a huge area.
I was then thinking of, "What song would be best to play to people out of the blue, no warning, as part of a crazy art project?" And then it hit me: Godzilla by Blue Oyster Cult. In Tokyo Bay. As you inflate a Godzilla parade float in the water with helium, causing it to rise up and out of the water head-first (ultimately releasing it to float away over the town).
Did he just go crazy and fall asleep?
No, he's not. I went one step further and followed his link. Proof by Ghost Reference. It does not say what he claims it does.
The main reason why elements with low half lives are dangerous is precisely *because* they have low half lives. U-238 is all over the bloody planet, but with a half life similar to the age of the planet, it poses little threat. Iodine poses the primary threat initially after a nuclear accident, followed by cesium and strontium over time. The Chernobyl exclusion zone may be opened for development and agriculture again up once the cesium and strontium decay sufficiently.
What sort of ridiculous-looking hat are you pulling your figures from, like your "500m higher" one? Fukushima City's radiation levels are ~100 times their normal background level -- and they're 30km *west* (against the prevailing winds) of the reactor. Tokyo today is at 4x their normal background, and they're *150km* away and tangential to the prevailing winds. And the accident is still ongoing, and will be for quite a while. And we're talking about external radiation, not inhaled/ingested particulate, which is orders of magnitude worse for the body than radiation from external sources (like most background radiation, like the radiation from X-rays, like the radiation from flying, etc).
Could you please put down the nuclear power pom poms for just a minute and enter the real world where this is a serious disaster having a serious effect on a first-world country?
Did he just go crazy and fall asleep?
Inside Chernobyl's Sarcophagus - BBC Horizon (1996): http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=B98ECEE5D787AABE
This is an amazing and terrifying retrospective, and a must watch for any fan of the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. games.