Slashdot Mirror
Fukushima and Chernobyl Side-by-Side
gbrumfiel writes "It's now been six months since an earthquake and tsunami sparked a triple meltdown at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. New data from the Japanese government is now allowing a closer comparison of the fallout from the disaster with the Chernobyl. In terms of Cs-137, the contaminant of greatest concern, Fukushima appears to be about a fifth as bad as Chernobyl. Nature News has a Google Earth mash-up that lets you see the two accidents together. Nature also reports that chaos and bureaucracy are slowing efforts to research the crisis." (Note: There's plenty left for Linux users in the accompanying text, but the Google Earth plug-in is for Windows and Mac OS X only.)
I am disappoint.
"The total radioactive release from Fukushima is currently estimated at about 5.5% of Chernobyl, which spewed an incredible 14x1019Bq. "
Finally a story, (from something called the Nature News Blog no less), that doesn't try to say that the Japan incident is as bad a Chernobyl. Responsibility in reporting? I am shocked.
State operated nuclear power plant, designed to produce weapon grade nuclear material and operated without complete theoretical understanding of the underlying principles and mishandled due to political pressure
vs
privately operated, but State regulated power plant, designed to provide power while withstanding extreme weather conditions, but a plant that should really have been decommissioned and newer designs should have been put into operation.
--
A reactor explosion due to build up of extreme pressure
vs
A reactor breach without an explosion but with hydrogen exploding subsequently around the reactor.
--
Well, I want privately operated power plants with new types of design, that's what I want all over the place. I want private money being allowed into the field, letting up on the government regulations, I want a tiny nuclear reactor in my house and in my car and at some point in my lightsaber, how about that?
You can't handle the truth.
I had a friend who was actually considering buying a radiation detector back when this was in the news (he lives in Virginia, mind you). Of course, this is the same friend who also thought bird-flu/SARS/the West Nile Virus/ebola were going to sweep the world in a pandemic and Y2K was going to cause all our computers to explode. Some people are always looking for a reason to panic.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
The real Fallout from Fukushima is renewed fear of Nuclear power as if dumping tons of carbon into the atmosphere is LESS hazardous.
What's the half-life of carbon again? Oh yeah! FOREVER
Unless they received their assholes due to some sort of concession, I think you mean "conceited".
Seems to me that once the asshole is conceded, it is no longer tight.
The Stackexchange Skeptics web-site has a relatively thorough and well cited wiki, Is Japan's nuclear disaster "on par" with Chernobyl), that compares the two disasters using a number of objective metrics.
It seems fairly apparent based on that wiki that while Fukushima is a serious nuclear event, it is a fraction of the calamity that Chernobyl was, using the available objective data.
I didn't realize that graphite and diamonds were the byproduct of power generation.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
Depends on your point of view. Compare the population densities around Chernobyl and Fukushima.
If humanity is to survive, we must pledge to eliminate all carbon dioxide from our atmosphere by 2030
Do you have a citation for that asshat statement, or did you come up with it all by yourself ?
Missing the point. He said it dumped C. It does not dump C. It dumps CO2.
For being proud, you seem to be hiding behind the coward label. Log in and say it.
Opps! Carbon 12 has to get to C-14 first. So... longer, but not forever.
Yea, the fear-mongering by the TV media for Fukushima was pretty bad. They seemed to be calling the game when the first play was still running. I don't expect much from news media anymore when it comes to disasters. At the hint of uncertainty, they'll spout that the sky will likely fall at any moment and they'll still be reporting on it as they're crushed. Idiocy has been taken to new levels there....
Nature is one of the oldest science journals.
It's nice to see proof that the accident was not really on the scale of Chenobyl. It released only around 5% of the radioactive material, and lacked the dangerous and long-lived heavier isotopes of Chernobyl. The one downside is the proximity to the ocean, which could hurt the local fishing industry and is expected to spawn 1.5–2 horrific monsters bent on destroying Tokyo.
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
I'm more interested in the accuracy of the summary, when did Cs-137 suddenly become 'the contaminate of greatest concern'?
I was under the impression (correct me I'm wrong) that radioactive cesium was the _LEAST_ dangerous one, due to the long half-life and that is spread pretty evenly in the body. That plutonium and uranium where the most dangerous, despite the difference in ratio, and that more than cesium the radioactive iodine would be of concern.
People who don't understand and don't want to will view it as ample reason to oppose every new nuclear plant for *another* 40 years.
Never mind that Fukushima, as a BWR-type reactor, was designed in 1955 and that a new reactor would have practically nothing in common but the presence of uranium and steam. Never mind that a pebble bed reactor could, as far as I understand it, be left completely un-managed for months at a time or suffer a complete core breach and still be incapable of reaching the level of contamination caused by Fukushima.
No, nuclear power is bad. We need to wait for biological engineering or material physics or fuzzy starshine power to advance to the point where we can construct new capacity for $0.05/watt with no environmental impact and no space requirements. Huzzah!
In my opinion, after a initial period of secrecy, the Soviet Union did a lot better job with openness and communication on Chernobyl than the Japanese Government / TEPCO is doing with Fukushima.
That should say something to the Japanese Government, but I fear it will not.
Missing the point. He said it dumped C. It does not dump C. It dumps CO2.
Yes, because adding Oxygen to Carbon is the well known exception to the law of conservation of mater that lets CO2 not count as containing Carbon.
Carbon-14 has a radioactive half life of 5,730 years.
Oh, that's not what you meant? Oh, well in that case, atmospheric CO2 has a half-life of 38 years before it's scrubbed by plant life. Oh, I'm sorry, was that not alarmist enough for you? Here, try rephrasing it! "CARBON DIOXIDE WILL BE AROUND FOR OUR CHILDREN'S CHILDREN!". Better?
So what's your damn point? Carbon-14 is only one trillionth of the carbon in the atmosphere. Most of it is carbon-12, which has a half-life of -- you guessed it -- forever!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_carbon
GEEZ
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
I didn't realize that graphite and diamonds were the byproduct of power generation.
If your power source is a flame, then (technically) yes :)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-14564702
What the hell are you talking about?
The only thing more horrific than a horrific monster is HALF a horrific monster climbing out of the ocean and destroying Tokyo. I guess they can't call it God so it would just be Zilla, a pair of giant stomping legs and a tail, with nothing above the pelvis...
Well, are you sure enough you can trust the Japanese government?
Time and time again, the Japanese government has proved that it will distort or hide facts just to suppress public fear and outrage,
It has constantly been downplaying the consequences and denying facts.
I live in Japan approx. 200 miles from that plant.
Daily we still experience the consequences of a failing burocracy that was more interested in getting luxury dinners and gifts from the electric companies rather than demanding safe power plants.
It's easy for you to say that 'it wasn't so bad after all' because you're probably not living here. I can't drink a glass of water from the tap, use tapwater for cooking, have my kids play outside because the soil is too contaminated, don't know what I can eat because farmers/fishermen only care about making money and give a sh*t about safety. You don't see the radiation anyway so screw the customers. If they get cancer within 10 years, nobody can prove it.
Only when independent organizations measure products in labs, suddenly all hell breaks loose because stuff is exceeding even the ridiculous new standards.
If you were to take those products to Europe, all trade would be suspended immediately.
Besides amounts of radioactive material, also the landscape plays a role. Japan has much mountains so a lot of the stuff bumps into the mountains and came all down with the rain. In Chernobyl, the material was able to spread over a much wider area due to a lack of a lot of mountains. But you probably didn't know that up until this day some areas in Scotland are too poluted for keeping cattle.
Very funny when the government just raised all health strandards so high that most issues just could not be labelled as problematic. Everybody is hiding behind the goverments standards or is just acting as if they are stupid. (we-didn't-know-that).
The soil round our house is 30 times as radioactive as before. No matter if you remove it, after it rains, radiation levels are up again within no time.
Our drinkwater is slightly radioactive but since the health levels were raised 20 times, you can't complain with the water company because they insist level are below the government limits. The problem is that you hear 2 weeks afterwards that levels were too high for consumption.
Rice, vegetables, fish, everything is slightly contaminated but farmers keep on trying to ship their stuff because all they are interested in is making money.
Large departmentstores check their products but all the goods that come in through secondary channels are unchecked.
Officials from the farmers association JA look at vegetables with absolutely unsuitable radioactive measurement equipment and all conclude that it is absolutely safe.
And don't be surprised that the figures will be disputed by other organisations. In the first days after the tsunami, the government tried to cover everything up and for weeks was claiming everything was allright and no meltdown could have taken place. They have all melted down and up until this day, the plants are leaking radiation in the air because they are still not covered in anyway. So what didn't disperse during the initial explosion or leaked in to the sea through cracks, is still bit by bit leaking into the air.
Accuracy? Those numbers are based on what Tepco and the Japanese government provided. So far every estimate they have given has vastly understated the actual levels. They have done that through this whole thing and may still be attempting to hide the true impact.
Until there is a legitimate 3rd party that can verify all this then we just don't know.
Do you think Ferzerp gives a fuck about people!? As long as it is no one he knows, he does not give a fuck about the people in Fukushima and is more than happy to parrot his beliefs, as it costs him nothing. Besides, nuke power is still the cheapest and cleanest for HIM.
We are doomed as a species, but Ferzerp's belief system is more confident than ever.
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
One definition of stupid is to look with undiscerning eyes.. not understanding what is right in front of you in plain view..
This comparison to Chernobyl is hollow - radioactive Cesium has a half life of.. how long? 30 years ? the 6-half life rule means that this material is of concern for 180 years?
Radiation is still leaking out of that plant, and there is no 'cure' for it.. it collects in the food chain..
If you don't appreciate what a food chain is, time to go back to middle school science.
When new estimates are constantly coming out. And, "available objective data?" You have never fucking heard of TEPCO, have you?
I think anyone seriously trying to do comparisons at this point is clueless, especially when radioactive particles are continuously spewing out from the Fukushima site at rates that can only be guesstimated.
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
The problem I have with Fukushima is that the only criticisms of the safety mechanisms of the plant referred to two things: namely the lack of tsunami protection and the how people dealt with the aftermath. Otherwise it was stressed that Japan is a modern country with state-of-the-art technology. But those were literally the least of the problems. The whole Japanese coast in the area had tsunami protection after the devastating tsunamis of 1933 and 1896 ... which was overwhelmed, wiping a dozen towns off the coast. Either you criticize all of Japan in that regard, or none of it. And the way people are dealing with the aftermath is of much less concern than they dealt with safety before the accident.
... which is obviously very limited if you have fixed installations dependent on sea water.
In fact, Fukushima Daiichi could be found on the third last position in a world wide safety ranking of nuclear power plants in 2010. (Mostly concerned with on-site radioactivity that was pretty high due to leaks.) It lacked emergency generators (13 generators for 6 reactors - I've seen 12 generators in place for one reactor. At least 4 per reactor is common). It lacked redundancy in those generators. They were all the same kind of sea-water cooled diesel generators. And because of the latter, they lacked protection against common cause failure, which demands that you distribute emergency equipment over as wide an area as possible
It also lacked filtered containment vents. Those filters can filter out at least 99% of the Caesium and Iodine (I remember a figure of 99.99% but don't know if it was Cs-137 or I-131). It's somewhat expensive (although just a fraction of the cost of the whole plant), but was adopted in Europe in the 1980ies. Further, safety protocols didn't take account of the finding that the Mark I containment didn't properly seal in a test at a prototype plant at a pressure of about 70 bar. (In emergencies it is supposed to be tight up to 72 bar, but regular testing is only done up to 62 bar.) Which was what allowed the massive quantities of hydrogen to get into the buildings in the first place.
Finally, because hydrogen getting into the buildings couldn't be ruled out in 100% of the cases during simulations, at least European plants were equipped with passive autocatalytic recombiners in all closed rooms of the reactor building. Those are catalytic converters that burn hydrogen with oxygen in the air before it can reach concentrations in the buildings, where it can ignite and either burn or (as we've seen) explode. Those are pretty cheap (about $5 mio per reactor bulding) and were installed in the 1990ies.
None of what happened was a surprise to anyone who dug out the freely available descriptions and research on the safety of the Mark I containment after the earthquake. But of course, that is something that the media couldn't be bothered with. Because they are "reporters" and as such doing research or actually understanding what they are reporting is clearly beneath them. All that reporters are there for, is to "report" (that is: parrot) the statements of politicians and whatever "experts" they feel will give them the answers they want.
Overall, the containments used in Fukushima are a great demonstration of what engineers of the 1960ies could do. They did a remarkable job in preventing a major disaster like Chernobyl. But it also shows what happens when you ignore all further developments. There were flaws in the models of what happens during a meltdown that became obvious only years or decades after the development of those containments. In engineering on the one hand and in radiology on the other - namely, that the dangers of I-131 were under-appreciated until about that time. (Exposure limits were cut down to about one thousands of the previous limits some time in the late 1960ies.)
But given the way reporting was and is being done, nothing of that will ever be known to a wide audience - because it doesn't square with the scare
What does "All elements move towards iron (Fe)." have to do with your first sentence? What does it even mean? Could it be you have no clue?
Radioactive iodine is bad because it collects in your thyroid. When people talk about radiation tablets, all that is is concentrated non-radioactive iodine. The idea being that you can fill your thyroid up with that stuff, leaving no room for radioactive iodine to collect there. The big thing with plutonium and uranium is that they tend to emit alpha particles when they decay (since they are so big). If you inhale either of these, then they'll be in your body a very long time, bombarding sensitive tissue with helium nuclei sans electrons...highly charged, "massive" particles that don't do good things to cells. The good news is that since alpha particles are highly charged, the outer layer of dead skin tends to stop them, so external contamination isn't so much of an issue.
IIRC, rather than getting collected in the thyroid like iodine, cesium tends to go throughout the body. IANAChemist, but I think it forms a soluble solution in water, so that may be why it's considered the 'greatest concern'...if it contaminates the water supply, suddenly a lot more people get internal exposure. Nothing deadly unless there's a LOT of cesium, but most people don't seem to understand that.
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis hebes
Most of the Fukushima fallout went straight out to sea where the population density is usually around zero.
Cesium is one of the most problematic ones, because it has a half-life that is long enough that it will stay around and remain a problem, but short enough that it is still very radioactive. It is also problematic because it is taken up and concentrated by biological processes.
Iodine is a great concern in the immediate aftermath of the disaster, but its short half-life means it disappears quickly and is not a problem in the long term.
Uranium is not much of a problem in general. Plutonium is pretty bad, but neither of the two are usually spread very far.
But the Fallout from Fukushima while more hazardous, but the hazard is contained, as it just doesn't spread across the world by air, and it can be collected and moved for the most part Carbon from fossil fuel spread everywhere. Someone living Countries away who do not have Cars or Power is suffering the same consequences as someone who does live in a country doing so. At least nuclear energy when there is a problem, the people who benefit the most from the power are also the ones taking the most risk.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
I didn't know carbon vaporized into the air in power generation. Maybe he assumed people would understand he meant various carbon-based greenhouse gases?
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, though I'm not yet sure about the universe. - A Einstein
The map featured in the Nature is quite misleading. Both maps use the same colors to indicate severity but the actual Cesium levels are quite different. The corresponding colors on the map of Chernobyl represent a far greater range. If the color coding had been applied consistently it would show that Fukushima is much less severe than Chernobyl. But then that would contrast with tone of the article.
Not to downplay the seriousness of the situation, but the Fukushima event has been blown out of proportion. It's not even close to being a Chernobyl.
Carbon doesn't cause the Green house effect. How much carbon a power plant emits is nonsense. How much CO2 it emits matters.
The Japanese are forcing their kids to live in contaminated areas as part of an unprecedented experiment, while jackasses like yourself try to play the whole thing as some kind of comical joke. Well, on behalf of the victims of the accident, including myself, fuck you.
Just keep thinking nothing like this could ever happen in your backyard . . . just fucking keep thinking that . . .
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
The real Fallout from Fukushima is renewed fear of Nuclear power as if dumping tons of uranium into the atmosphere is LESS hazardous.
TFTFY
Uranium and plutonium are more harmful as toxic heavy metals than radioactive materials at the doses you'd receive from fallout. So, like you said, not much of a problem.
Just wait for China and India to double their reactors. We all know that their safety record is even MORE stellar.
It would be nice if we could push energy technologies that would not pollute the entire Northern Hemisphere every time our not so smart foreign counterparts have an "oops" moment . . .
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
Zilla, a pair of giant stomping legs and a tail, with nothing above the pelvis...
Reminds me of a girl I once went out with.
*shudder*
Troc's dubious podcast and blog: http://www.trocnet.net
I didn't know carbon vaporized into the air in power generation.
It doesn't it combines with oxygen and becomes CO2
Maybe he assumed people would understand he meant various carbon-based greenhouse gases?
No he meant Carbon and his point about it's half life is meaning less because power plants don't produce carbon. The carbon was there before hand will would always exist regardless of if there is a power plant or not. What a power plant can do is release it in the form of CO2 and other forms. Only the percentage that forms as CO2 plays any contribution to the green house effect.
Hmm, all elements move towards iron if they're inside of a massive star. Remember the context of a factoid before you use it.
Can't believe you are so ignorant that you don't know what Nature is.....
Considering the well-known lengths the establishment (US gov't, Nipponese gov't, "state-run" mainstream media) has gone to to hush this whole thing up (shutting down and doctoring the output of rad detectors all over the country for one, though that's just the beginning of a long list), I suppose "tone" of this discussion will be a good indicator of how much Slashdot has succumbed to the legions of Army/NSA trolls sitting in their cubicles at Fort Meade... (^5's, boys!)
"New data from the Japanese government" 'nuff said.
Ok, so there is less radiation spewing from Fukushima than Chernobyl, but Chernobyl was not leaking radiation into the ocean either! I think the Fukushima accident is much worse for the environment.
-- By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out.
What a relief! In fact, how much money have you invested in real estate in the area, by the way, because to have such views as you do and not invest in the extremely under-priced (by your accord) land would make you either a fucking moron or a fucking shill with nothing to lose for spewing a bunch of crap.
I have a good friend who cannot sell his new apartment 100 miles South from the plant. No one is buying. Just fucks like you saying everything is fine from a million miles away without putting one shiny nickle behind their beliefs.
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
Do you think Idou cares about objectivity? As long as there is a world to save or a news story to be had, he doesn't care about the truth and is more than happy to revel in sensationalism as it feeds his self-loathing. Besides, who needs the truth when what the TV tells him is so much more intertaining.
We aren't doomed as a species, but Idou's religion of human self-loathing sure wishes we were.
You don't happen to be from Innsmouth, do you?
I agree. While I'd love to see all nuclear plants gone, fleeing towards even worse technologies is not the right direction. The rising demand for coal scares me more than the existing nuclear plants.
How about we keep the nuclear plants we have for now, except maybe the really old ones that lack modern safety measures. Instead, we start to dismantle the coal plants, and we start building some cleaner power plants. Solar, wind, research thorium (it sounds like nuclear but without pretty much all the disadvantages). Hell, I'm fine with some new uranium plants to get us through until clean energy picks up, just as long as they're really as safe as they can possibly be.
Cesinmum 137 can chemically replace potasium in the food chain. It also has a wicked half life. So itsticks in the enviriment for longer and you are likely to ingest it.
Bikini atoll site of above ground testing is safe to walk on, however eating one of the coconuts can kill you as some of the potasium inside has been replaced with radioactive cesinmum.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
I was there when it happened and left for this very reason (at significant cost to my finances and career). It took 3 months for them to confirm rumors that the reactors had melted down, and the rumors these days are that steam is coming from cracks in the ground.
I think, in the end, the USSR did not feel like it needed to play PR games with the public. The government already had complete control, so they had no reason to lie at a certain point. However, PR is everything for the nuclear lobby in Japan, which may be the most powerful group in the country (remember, Japan is not just the #1 exporter of nuclear reactors, they are the ONLY exporter). Any little fact that gets denied, delayed, or manipulated results in either additional profit made or saved. Accordingly, I do not consider the reports coming out of Japan as facts, just measuring points for where the tip of the iceberg is.
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
The soil round our house is 30 times as radioactive as before.
This in itself says nothing. How radioactive is it? Is it more radioactive than what a lot of places already are due to background radiation? (Which poses no health risks in itself)
The IAEA? NISA? Both are in the country and sampling. If the government-published figures were far off their figures, you can be certain they'd raise a stink about it.
As bad? You behind the times dude, the fashion in the press is to state that Fukushhima is the worst disasta evah! If you Fox News it's also 10 times worse than Chernobyl AND since it happened during Obama's administration it's Obama's fault for his poor administration of the "Japanese territory".
The official figures provided by TEPCO and the Japanese government apparently didn't include the radiation released into the ocean as a result of the giant hole in the retaining wall.
A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
This is my fucking life, destroyed by people just as moronic as you, but with power.
I was in Japan when it happened. I still own a house 100 miles from the plant (no one can sell). I actually made a life changing decision based on this event and my sense that TEPCO and the government were lying.
Meanwhile clueless fucks like yourself spout crap without any action or risk. If the situation was as overblown as you make it seem, you would make tons of money investing in land around the area, yet no one is buying . . . Which means not just you but all other fucks who seem to share your idea on the situation are either financial fucktards or are just spewing bullshit because they can.
Either way, on the behalf of the victims (including myself), fuck you and fuck all those like you. May you remember this post when YOUR "oh, fuck" moment in life occurs.
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
Ocean = big. Very big. Anything release from Fukushima into the ocean won't even become a blip on a millionth part of a millionth part of ...
Do the math.
Cs-137 is the most problematic one after a few days. It not only represents most of the activity after than time, but its in the form of highly penetrating gamma rays (via a beta emission to the 137m Ba isomer). This makes quite a big difference, since for alpha and beta emitters you really need to ingest or breath it, not so with gamma sources. U and Pu are not nearly as bad as made out, they have long half lives and emit alpha particles that have short ranges. Sure they are not peachy or anything, but far from the elements of greatest concern.
However having said that the waste is *mostly* still unburnt/transmutation U238, so if you have say a graphite fire (aka Chernobyl) then a lot of does get out. Again however this is even less radioactive than U235 and Pu. So even then for the first 60-100 years Cs-137 is the lions share of damaging radiation.
If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
Your pollution = change climate over the next 50 to 100 years.
My pollution = fucking kill our children or ability to have children in the next 20 years.
Both are bad, but I know which one I would like to prioritize . . .
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
However, half the plutonium will be very radioactive, very intrusive radioactive decay elements in a decade or so. These areas may be uninhabitable for a few hundred years except by old people to whom the cancer risk doesn't matter.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
It's even worse. The CO2 will be around for so long that our children will part emitting CO2 from their bodies.
http://xkcd.com/radiation/
Daily background is 10uSv
So they could be getting 300uSv if they spend time outside. I'm assuming radioactive dust gets in the house too. They should have been evacuated if it were at that level since every 3 days they'd be getting the maximum EPA safe annual dosage.
Hmm. you get 4mSv per year so another way of putting it is that they might be getting 120mSv per year now. 100mSv is the lowest dose clearly linked to increased cancer risk.
Couldn't easily find what the increase was like. (10 years? 15 years? cancer rate increases?)
Seems like I'd want to buy a Geiger counter.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Sir -
I hope you ARE a paid shill, because someone posting such a long winded and meticulous reply to support such an argument for free makes me more depressed about your life than my own Fukushima refugee ass.
With that out of the way, my post seems incredibly valuable in that your pretty conclusive:
"It seems fairly apparent based on that wiki that while Fukushima is a serious nuclear event, it is a fraction of the calamity that Chernobyl was, using the available objective data"
Statement has been transformed into a bunch of meager qualifying statements that equate to "we might as well try to figure out with what we got." And, though you have beaten me in snobbery, I challenge you to another cherished Internet tradition, brevity:
-Any estimate change (3x the original) will impact the final total and should generate doubt in all estimates to date
-My argument is against your premature conclusion, not the current "official" guesstimate, per se.
-Not thinking TEPCO is relevant makes you clueless to the reality of the situation.
-Again, not attacking the wiki, just your clueless statement.
-No, I am saying your conclusive comparison is clueless
-I have no problem with wikis, just your premature conclusive statement
-The situation is still ongoing with tons more people (let's give this thing, say, 15 more years to conclude)
-Finally, have you ever had to leave your paid off land and quit your job because of a nuclear accident, and remained a completely polite person in the process? Fuck you, your premature ejaculative conclusions, and snobbish reply.
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
Can someone please lay the Fukashima and Chernobyl contamination maps over interesting swaths of the US...
What's her phone number?
Umm, no.
Plutonium has a half-life of 24000 years or so. In two decades, about 0.05% of it will have decayed into...U-235, which has a half-life of 250,000 years (so not very radioactive at all).
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
http://fukushima-diary.com/
it was estimated that fuku has become 160 times chernobyl. whats horrible is how government is trying to suppress any kind of information in the country. state hospitals are refusing to take care of fukushimia residents. (read within the site i linked). despite 100 times legal limit radiation detected in various parts of europe and usa, no tv channel is making these news, and epa suddenly increased the limit for radiation in rain water when it was discovered that michigan ground water suddenly contained high radiation after some torrrential rains. and so it goes. just read in there.
its appalling to see the morons talking out of usa here, saying how well the leak was 'contained' and so on, and what actual japanese people talk in the site i linked above. horizon-widening in regard to naivete and idiocy.
Read radical news here
bunch of fools to even trust any data from the japanese govt. Where is the independent data? I know for a fact that the Japanese govt has not been truthful or 100% forthcoming on any of their data numbers. They couldn't even get readings correct due to the sensors not being able to read that high!
It's all over the media in that respect, yet how true is any of that information? Chernobyl wasn't a triple meltdown so how can fukushima be less?
Cesium sits below potassium in the periodic table, and takes its place in food and is concentrated in the body. Cs-137 also has a particularly nasty half-life of about 30 years. Short enough that it is relatively active, but long enough to cause it to remain a concern for centuries. This graph of the relative contribution from different isotopes after Chernobyl is a particularly good illustration of this. Today everything that isn't Cesium is either gone, or was negligible compared to the Cesium in the first place. Any uranium powered reactor will give a similar profile.
Iodine is more dangerous if you're around to ingest it, and was a big killer in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But given a proper evacuation in the short term it won't have a chance to kill anyone in the few days it is a concern.
Hear, hear a conspiracy theory. Care to share?
Je me souviens.
part of the effect in scotland was due to the soil type, it did not flush the radioactive elements in the way the models (developed on different soils) predicted.
Translation, it's six months later and even the Enquirer doesn't believe there are two headed babies being born, so we can't fix our slow news day with more scarey headlines. Lets try the journalism thing...
But dilution is the solution to pollution. Ocean is a good way to dilute.
...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
Sunflowers help concentrate Caesium:
Monk's story (kinda) -- along with iconic picture of geiger counter pointed at sunflowers.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44206319/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/sunflowers-rise-battle-japans-nuclear-winter/
http://amazingnews.org/sunflowers-bring-hope-to-radiation-zone-in-japan/562453/
An old article abour Chernobyl state that the roots of the sunflower plant had 8000 times more Ceasium than the surrounding water.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1200/is_n3_v150/ai_18518620/
Another article I read states that the radioactive elements concentrate in their roots. perhaps Sunchokes would does this even better
Ways to avoid caesium in your food crops:
http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/node/3786
The most recent IAEA update (http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/tsunamiupdate01.html) seems to be from 2011-06-02.
To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
Safecast.org (http://blog.safecast.org/) is a global radiation (etc) monitoring/reporting project that all Slashdotters should be aware of and support. They designed, built and deployed radiation monitors in Japan, USA, etc. Their mapping system records, uploads and displays tracks of drives around Japan (USA, etc) with results of the geotagged measurements appearing on the map. Their blog provides a good bit of information on the system and various drives. Additionally there are some great photo essays by Sean Bonner, etc linked on the site.
Why are you against nuclear power plants but for nuclear power plants?
A Thorium cycle reactor is still a nuclear fission power plant which produces radioactive nuclear waste.
I live in Tsukuba you insensitive clod!
GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
Good post.
Well, since Fukushima is still fuming and building #4 might collapse with the next tremor, sending God knows how much radioactivity into the atmostphere and ocean, it's a bit premature to be making such a comparison. There are at least three reactors which have gone into complete melt-through with evidence that some fuel may be squirming around in the ground under the building. This is far from finished.
Watch Helen Caldicott. She says that Fukushima may be 3-5 times WORSE than Chernobyl. I trust her a lot more than I do the Japanese government or Tepco, both of which have been lying and underestimating radiation release from the beginning. We've had a long time to learn the truth about Chernobyl. The history of nuclear accidents is it takes a long time to learn the truth.
Here's the link for the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQzXRZ3R_w4
Remember that Fukushima had plutonium fuel in #3 ... which EXPLODED. Chernobyl didn't have plutonium fuel.
And for better news about Fukushima than you get on Slashdot, go to http://japancrisis.nodes.org ( a module ).
There is a lot going on over there and they need the world's help. Millions of Japanese need to evacuate!
Pay attention, please!
Steve Moyer
http://steve.nodes.org
Missing the point. He said it dumped C. It does not dump C. It dumps CO2.
Yes, because adding Oxygen to Carbon is the well known exception to the law of conservation of mater that lets CO2 not count as containing Carbon.
Oh so i suppose since i breath oxygen and water contains oxygen that means i can breath under water too.
Were all made of carbon so what?
Often though scientists talk in terms of carbon instead of CO2. That's because the CO2 is part of the Carbon Cycle that includes not only the atmospheric CO2 but the carbonic acid (dissolved CO2) in the waters of the planet, the carbon in the biosphere and the carbon in geologic processes. There is a balance maintained between those different stores of carbon and sometimes it's easier to talk about if you only consider the C in CO2.
I am surprised someone here actually took the time to read the context and then post. Just shows how having a slashdot account means people have years of posts to try to use against you, out of context. But I guess some people actually will occasionally point this out. Thanks.
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
But, if I were hit by a bus, and I had falsely accused a victim of a disaster of being a liar based on some none issue (to win an argument), it would probably be one of my last thoughts before dying. We all die sometime, best to die with a clean conscience.
And, if you took my comment to mean he literally deserved to die just for disagreeing with me, then you must be shocked and horrified by a lot of things every day.
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
Tokyo is less than 200 miles from the plant. You aren't close by at all. I'm personally closer than you.
Japanese government food and water standards equal or exceed WHO guidelines. But let me guess, they are in on the conspiracy too.
At no point did the government claim a meltdown couldn't have taken place, and I challenge you to provide evidence to the contrary. In fact it was clear to me from the publicly released TEPCO and METI data that a meltdown was occurring at the time.
You talk about contamination of soil, water and food. Have you any quantifications of radiation in the soil, water or food around you? You must have, right? Because you *know* that the soil is 30x what it was before. Strange that you were measuring the radiation in the soil around your house before the earthquake. Nevertheless, what are the actual figures? Oh right, you don't have any because you are ignorantly peddling panic. Why don't you run away to another country like a spoiled expat?
Yes, there have been incidents of contamination beyond set limits in water (for a very short period, months ago) and foodstuffs (spinach, for instance). These were foreseeable and were being proactively monitored for by the various agencies. In the limited cases where suspect foodstuffs have made it into distribution, they have been actively recalled with significant media coverage. In all these cases, the contamination levels were still such that only long term exposure would cause significant health effects.
Now, I don't like the Japanese government very much. And I really don't like TEPCO. But worst of all are the panic merchants, who spread fear and misinformation. There are a lot of hardworking, dedicated people and agencies doing their best to ensure a safe living environment for the people of Japan, after one of her greatest disasters. Perhaps you could be constructive too?
Chernobyl= huge disaster
Fukushima= minor disaster compared to Chernobyl but still a disaster
Thorium nuke plant= ZERO DANGER, ZERO RISK, ZERO DISASTER, ZERO ZERO ZERO
God I hate the government being too involved in certain things. Gov't is the cause of Chernobyl and Fukushima.
Apparently the plugin is windows-only. On a OSX (10.7 here), the plugin just crashes.
I remember reading it a while back but was having trouble using the right search terms just now. There appears to be an article describing this here.
Awesome that you went to the trouble to point this out, though. Thanks.
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
If government is not capable of adequately managing the risks of nuclear power and ensuring plants do not end up spewing their contents into the atmosphere before being decommissioned, then I really do not think it matters where anyone lives, as long as it is on this Earth. And yes, I do expect the government to protect nuclear plants from terrorists, or decide not to build them all together.
There are ways to invest in Japan real estate without the red tape or illiquidity (J-REITS), and, for instance, Orix is below its 3/11 dip. If the situation has been overblown, then why does the market not agree?
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
He is in VIRGINIA! Fukushima is not in VIRGINIA! Ergo, he is a fucking retard for wanting a geiger counter, right! RIGHT!?
Oh, wait.
Or maybe you are lacking the mental comprehension to understand my argument? Fukushima should be a changing point for how we treat nuclear technology. Buying a geiger counter is now a good idea, because the disaster in Fukushima taught us we can never be too careful. Making fun of such an act is a dipshit thing to do and disrespect to the victims of Fukushima.
Here is an example. Let us say 6 months after 9/11 your friend said he was scared of tall buildings and was thinking of buying a parachute. Making fun of him would be a dipshit thing to do and would be a form of disrespect to the victims of 9/11 and the horrific end they met. So yes, fuck you.
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
However, we do not live in an ideal world and, post-Fukushima, we really live in a different world. When an accident does occur, the level of contamination is at such a different magnitude and density.
Don't get me wrong, both suck and please let me know if you have come across something more recent that includes Fukushima, but I have yet to see such an argument seriously made post-Fukushima.
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, WHOA!
.
This is slashdot, since when do I need a excuse for buying a Geiger counter!
Geiger counters are cool
Now, obviously, if elrous0's friend isn't a geek, he should be resoundingly mocked for wanting a radiation detector. That's just the natural order of things.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
I cannot readily put my house on the market because my mother-in-law has nowhere else to go. My friend (who has an apartment near my house, shocker) has not been able to find any buyers, anyway. Another poster has already kindly pointed out that you are taking my earlier post out of context.
Did you use this same masterful method of reasoning to conclude that Chernobyl > Fukushima, at this early date?
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
They are still expensive in China, India, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, North Korea and everywhere else that they have been constructed. The argument of "it costs too much becuase of the government" is to a great extent nothing but a lobbist's attempt to get a discount or get hold of a lot more taypayers money for their project.
The US nuclear reactor industry is responsible for it's own problems. Their great hope is the AP1000 - 1980s technology mainly from Japan because US R&D was killed off, and there hasn't even been a single AP1000 constructed yet. If the USA wants a nuclear future it's going to have to come from government research because private industry thinks they have something good enough to milk the taxpayer already and do not care about designing an economically viable reactor.
You are correct. I'd crossed it with Caesium-137 which has a 30 year half life.
However, doesn't plutonium also decay into Americurium which is highly radioactive and has a 400ish year half life?
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Ah.. here it is... Apparently not confused about Caesium but about Plutonium 241 vs Plutonium.
http://www.ieer.org/ensec/no-3/puchange.html
selective quotes...
Both weapons grade and reactor grade plutonium contain some plutonium-241. Plutonium-241 decays into americium-241 by emitting a beta particle. Since americium-241 has a far longer half-life (432 years) than plutonium-241 (14.4 years), it builds up as plutonium-241 decays. The gamma radiation from americium-241 decay, which is far stronger than that from plutonium-239, also builds up with the age of the plutonium sample. Therefore, the more plutonium-241 there is and the older the sample, the greater the gamma radiation from the build-up of americium-241.
Since reactor-grade plutonium contains substantial amounts of plutonium-241, the older the sample, the greater the radiation dose to workers handling it.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
You live 200 miles from the plant, that is 321km.
You cannot drink tap water? Tap water had a short spike, and it was never harmful for adults. You cannot eat anything because all is radioactive? This is another lie. Furthermore, if you live 321km from Fukushima, you will never have 30 times the radioactivity as before.
I live in Tokyo and Tokyo to Fukushima is 165 miles or 265 km. There were two spikes in radiation and those were still lower than in other cities. Radiation risks are mainly in the 20km zone in a cone out to 40/50km to the northwest of the plant.
The only thing I agree with you is the fact that the japanese government is not reliable at all. But that is nothing new. And if you really life here you would have known that for a very long time.
See the Fukushima radiation map here: http://www.japanprobe.com/2011/05/10/fukushima-radiation-map/
"Freiheit ist immer auch die Freiheit des Andersdenkenden" - Rosa Luxemburg, 1871 - 1919
He probably doesn't know japanese and only watched the foreign news and is still in panic mode.
The people who really life in Japan watched NHK and knew what was actually happening.
And as you say, TEPCO never denied a core meltdown, they just said they do not know because they cannot look into the reactor or get even near to it.
"Freiheit ist immer auch die Freiheit des Andersdenkenden" - Rosa Luxemburg, 1871 - 1919
I think if I had a lot of carbon in form of diamond, it would have effect on global warming. Just think of environmental cost of production of all the stuff I would buy...
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
[insert Pinkie Pie reaction image here]
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
According to my limited understanding of the subject, a Thorium plant would produce a tiny fraction of the nuclear waste that a Uranium plant would. It would also have more intrinsic safety, operate under a lot less pressure, and not require anywhere near as much cooling. That it doesn't involve any fuel suitable for the creation of nuclear weapons is a nice bonus.
It's by no means perfect. I'd rather have us use solar. But if we have to use nuclear, then Thorium seems to lack most of the disadvantages that Uranium plants have.
My underlying point, though, is that we should be looking for a workable compromise, rather than lob irrational arguments around in an attempt to achieve some sort of Pyrrhic victory, which is what replacing nuclear with coal would be for environmentalists: great job getting rid of nuclear, you got something worse in return, and now we're all worse off. We need workable compromises in order to keep moving forward.
Yes, because when people talk about carbon trading they actually mean swapping the lead in pencils for food stamps.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
You nearly brought me to tears. Bravo. Bravo.
You're still confused. Pu-241 is about 14% of the Pu in a reactor. So while that 14% will have decayed into highly radioactive crap in a couple decades, the remaining 86% won't.
Which means that ~93% of the Pu will still be Pu in a couple decades, and ~7% will be something else.
Note also that "the older the reactor, the more Pu-241" is not quite correct. Half-life is 14 years, so after about a couple decades, it'll be decaying to whatever about as fast as it's being deposited.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
If Pu-241 is 14% of the Pu in Japan, then won't radiation increase over time as it did in Chernobyl?. So 10 years from now these ares with plutonium polution will be more radioactive than they are now.
My understanding is, this is where the 600 year before habitable again figures around Chernobyl come from.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
A circle jerk of pro nuclear fanbois.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
Nice, so you are claiming I am dishonest based on an argument method I used (over a month ago) in a post that was being used in this thread to create a strawman that I was a liar. Meanwhile, as an Anon, you are completely immune to any similar scrutiny. Accordingly, I am unable to really confirm your motivations for posting or even if you are the same person (unless I believe an anonymous post saying you are). I might as well assume you are the NRC individual I replied to a month ago, coming back for a revenge as an Anon (what pitiful thing to do . . .).
., and I would argue that you are the most dishonest relevant party so far for posting as an Anon (and using it as an opportunity to attack past posts, something that cannot be done to you). Consequently, this will be my last reply to an Anon.
Thanks, I think you just taught me why I should just ignore Anons 100% of the time going forward . .
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
Just noting the remarkable timing I got on two completely different threads by an Anon personally attacking me. Consequently, I assume it is the same Anon.
To use Anon posting for personal attacks against signed-in users must be something only done by those with such low self-esteem and basis for argument that they are unable to socially engage on fair ground. I find it truly disturbing the amount of time you must have wasted on this effort and believe it must stem from some serious social disorder you must be suffering from. Though I am ignoring your post/s, I found it necessary to point out that you are abusing a very useful functionality of Slashdot. Some posters have legitimate reasons for using the Anon feature to allow them to inform our community without compromising their careers or personal safety. Your abuse of this feature risks undermining that which brings otherwise unobtainable information to the community (by increasing the likelihood that all Anon posts will be ignored). In other words, you are hurting the community for selfish and antisocial personal gain. Please stop.
Anyone finding themselves in a similar situation are free to reuse the last paragraph. I believe if we respond consistently as a community we can limit the effects of such destructive behavior.
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
I haven't made any personal attacks against you. You, on the other hand, have done so to me, proving that your accusations can only possibly be projections of what you see in yourself.
Nothing about my posts to you have been in any way an "abuse" of anonymous posting.
Nothing about the amount of time I have spent on my posts to you (which is far smaller than you imply) impacts their truthfulness in any way.
You are reading this post. And you agree with every word of it, even though you don't want to.