PDA

View Full Version : Fukushima



Raymond Fries
12-30-2013, 3:56 PM
If you think this is over...

...think again.

We have been following this ever since the disaster. Thousands of gallons of waste have been pouring into the ocean every day and it has now reached the west coast.

And now this:

http://www.occupycorporatism.com/tepco-quietly-admits-reactor-3-melting-now/

Hope the wind shifts and it stays over the ocean...

I do not understand why this disaster has been ignored.

Thoughts?

Todd Burch
12-30-2013, 4:48 PM
I suppose TEPCO has been lying about the criticality of this, and reports about the true devastation that will become of this have been suppressed.

When I read "it will fry North America", that's a bit vague. Surely it's already "frying" Japan, whatever that means.

I mean, though, it's not like we can say "Excuse me - can you stop the planet - I would like to get off now." What can be done?

I say, if a government, or mankind, can't take responsibility for controlling a technology, they ought not be allowed to use it.

What were they thinking? "Let's put a nuclear reactor right on the edge of the Pacific Rim and hope we never have a earthquake."

Will future generations forgive us?

David Weaver
12-30-2013, 4:58 PM
I can't figure out what's right and what's fiction in that, mostly because it's hard to dodge all of the advertisements and attempts to generate ad revenue (what I'm saying is it appears to be sensationalized to a fairly significant degree).

It also looks like the picture that they use at the top of the article is not representative of what fukushima looks like right now, but you wouldn't put an honest picture on an article that was sensationalized.

I would personally wait a little bit before deciding that there's going to be a killing fallout is worth worrying about.

TEPCO has not been forthright about information, and the result has been worse than they suggested, as michio kaku suggested right away, but I'd like to see fanatical blog entries substantiated a little better.

Mark Bolton
12-30-2013, 5:09 PM
If you do a bit of reading it seems that there is a very high likelihood that this is bunk. Even TEPCO has a live video feed from the site (which of course could be faked but Im not a tin-foil hatter). It seems most of the videos and data posts pertaining to this are years old and its cobbled together.

It sure seems to me like its a bit suspicious (the claim). That said, we (the world) are still dealing with the fact that there have been three confirmed meltdowns there. Far from a good situation.

Jim Matthews
12-30-2013, 5:19 PM
I'm no radiologist, but the poison is in the dose.

The amount of fissile or gamma emitting material involved compared to the Pacific ocean is vast.
The concentration falls with the square of the distance.

It's bad, that's true. It's not so clear that the current conditions threaten life and limb in the US.

This likely means the end of light water plants that relied on backup cooling systems located below flood levels.

I can't see what the Japanese could have done differently, as they followed the state of the art when commissioning these plants.

They're a proven GE design, which is very reliable.

It bears mentioning that Plutonium was used in concentrations of 6% in the latest fuel rods, and it's unknown how much of that has escaped.

It would be revealing to known how much the standard daylight exposure to radiation is, from sunlight as compared to this source.

I would hazard a guess that airline pilots are exposed to more radiation in a year of flying than most of us will attribute to
this exposure, over a natural lifetime. But that's just a SWAG.

Raymond Fries
12-30-2013, 5:38 PM
I agree that the article may be sensationalized. Most media do that as they want the biggest reaction as possible. I doubt this is bunk. I have read post after post from other sources about thousands of gallons of waste dumped into the ocean every day since the disaster happened. I saw a video several days ago with a guy on the beach in San Francisco with a geiger counter. The device picked up radation levels that told him to get away. I have read posts of radioactive fish from the Pacific. It is real and it is pretty bad in my opinion. Hopefully, the ocean and the distance from Japan will protect us from something horrible. If 89 tons of fuel rods melt, it will cause a pretty bad blow to the environment.

Dave Sheldrake
12-30-2013, 5:54 PM
A lot of fear comes from a lack of understanding of Nuclear Physics,

Imagine three sources

Uranium - 238 with a half life of 4.46 BILLION years

Bismuth - 209 with a half life of 1 BILLION x the estimated age of the universe

Iodine - 131 with a half life of 8 days

which one is more immediately dangerous?

cheers

Dave

Todd Burch
12-30-2013, 5:54 PM
I saw a show on TV, maybe Discovery channel or Nat GEO, showing all the mutated plants and veggies that are showing up in Japan. It was like "isn't this an interesting cucumber, growing a second cucumber inside out from the middle of it". No, it's not interesting... it's scary! New life forms are being created. It's not right.

Clay Crocker
12-30-2013, 6:15 PM
The source of the story, TRN, should tell you everything you need to know about the validity of the "report". Reading the disclaimer on TRN's home page was all it took for me to move on..

Dan Hintz
12-30-2013, 6:25 PM
Ah, sensationalistic reporting at its finest :rolleyes:


Persons residing on the west coast of North America should IMMEDIATELY begin preparing for another possible onslaught of dangerous atmospheric radiation from the Fukushima nuclear disaster site in Japan.
I believe the LAST time we were "victims of an onslaught" from them, the radiation was barely registering above background rad levels...

Pat Barry
12-30-2013, 6:53 PM
A lot of fear comes from a lack of understanding of Nuclear Physics,

Imagine three sources

Uranium - 238 with a half life of 4.46 BILLION years

Bismuth - 209 with a half life of 1 BILLION x the estimated age of the universe

Iodine - 131 with a half life of 8 days

which one is more immediately dangerous?

cheers

Dave

Gee Dave, don't leave us hanging. Please enlighten us.

Pat Barry
12-30-2013, 6:58 PM
I love the recommendations to buy duct tape and plastic up your windows. That will buy you another day for sure. ROFL. I love science.


"Some of the recommendations to mitigate damaging effect of radiation exposure include:
• Keep up-to-date on developments via the Internet
• Buy Duct tape, masking tape and self-adhesive weather stripping
• Cover windows and doors with plastic
• Cover electrical outlets and light switches with plastic
• Cover vents in bathrooms and stoves with plastic
• Purchase a NIOSH N100-certified filter mask for each member of the family
• Purchase disposable TYVEK suit for going outside
• Wash obsessively"

Ken Fitzgerald
12-30-2013, 7:02 PM
It really depends on a lot of variables....type of radiation.......half-life.....amount.......distance......the materials between you and the source........the length of time you are exposed to it.......a lot of variables....

I would suggest TRN isn't known for unbiased reporting.......a lot of things reported today are written to sensationalize the incident because it garners more attention. More attention means more advertising dollars.

Mark Bolton
12-30-2013, 7:28 PM
My statement about bunk wasnt to minimize the scope of the disaster, becsuse it is in fact a disaster, and likely to get worse. The bunk part is if there is even steam at present, along with all the other bogus info thats already been re-posted here.

The simple fact is there are three confrirmed and acknowledged melt downs. There is a high likleihood of it getting even worse. The cores were cooled with salt water (what other choice) and dumped to the ocean, and so on. Its a bad situation. Its been well published that the release is at the very least 20+ times hiroshima.

Anyone trying to trivialize it, or trivialize what we are guaranteed to see with regards to the known impacts, science or not, is also bunk.

But while an attempt to minimize three confirmed melt downs is pretty bad, attempting to propagandize information to forment fear is simply disgusting.

Dave Sheldrake
12-30-2013, 7:35 PM
Gee Dave, don't leave us hanging. Please enlighten us.

Bismuth is used in many indigestion remedies so I wouldn't be worried too much about that one.

Uranium 238 decays with emission of Alpha particles or it can Double - Beta decay (not it's primary but possible) it doesn't support chain reactions as is (no bombs here) Alpha particles are blocked by something as simple as day to day clothing so you can hold a lump of 238 metal in your hand with no real danger to you short term.

Iodine 131 is a hard Gamma emitter, not nice at all, 131 is used in medicine to detect and treat some forms of cancer but it's inane ability to destroy the thyroid is well known.

In general the news media loves to tell people about huge half lives and how many million years something will be radioactive for when in real terms the short half life sources are usually far more dangerous. Caesium 134 and Caesium 137 were also spewed out by the Fukushima plants and again are hard hard Gamma emitters with relatively short half lives.

I'd rather take my chances with the Plutonium / Uranium family to be honest....

cheers

Dave

Ken Fitzgerald
12-30-2013, 8:00 PM
I suggest that a large population of nuclear physicists would be up in arms if the matter was as dire as trying to be depicted here.
After all, they have to live on this earth too and.....they have families and loved ones who they would want to protect.

While some may say trivializing the situation is bunk, I suggest that overdramatizing it is just as morally wrong.

Remember those folks who reacted after 9/11 and wrapped their houses when the thought of "dirty bombs" was first introduced?

Again.....a lot of knowledgeable folks would be up in arms if the situation was truly dire. I haven't witnessed it yet.

Dave Sheldrake
12-30-2013, 8:10 PM
ome of the recommendations to mitigate damaging effect of radiation exposure include: Keep up-to-date on developments via the Internet
Buy Duct tape, masking tape and self-adhesive weather stripping


You must be kidding me!! some idiot got paid to write that up!


Fry North America

Absolute rubbish!

A meltdown in a spent fuel pond is very serious, make no mistake and could have long term effects we as yet are unaware of but this report is just scaremongering trash......inaccurate trash too. Duct tape and Tyvek to protect you from Hard Gamma emitters?? I think not somehow :)

cheers

Dave

Jim Matthews
12-30-2013, 8:10 PM
it's inane ability to destroy... Dave

Hey, you're talking about my periodic family, there.
Consider us the Beta (ray) testers for breakables...

Mark Bolton
12-30-2013, 9:04 PM
I suggest that a large population of nuclear physicists would be up in arms if the matter was as dire as trying to be depicted here.
After all, they have to live on this earth too and.....they have families and loved ones who they would want to protect.

While some may say trivializing the situation is bunk, I suggest that overdramatizing it is just as morally wrong.

Remember those folks who reacted after 9/11 and wrapped their houses when the thought of "dirty bombs" was first introduced?

Again.....a lot of knowledgeable folks would be up in arms if the situation was truly dire. I haven't witnessed it yet.

Protect where? They have some bunker or secret planet to escape to and a ship? Im in no way insinuating a conspiracy but you can listen to every interview and bit of coverage I have. Its all streamable on google from the weeks after the event. Three reactors have been completeky breached and the remaining spent fuel is tenuous at best. The report that started the thread questionable at best but the fact that there really just isnt anything substantial that can humanly be done about the situation likely puts even the most concerned in a place of simply realizing it is what it is.

Dave Sheldrake
12-30-2013, 9:06 PM
Hey, you're talking about my periodic family, there.
Consider us the Beta (ray) testers for breakables...


:) I should be glowing in the dark by now with my history and love of Vaseline Glass collectables :)

cheers

Dave

Ken Fitzgerald
12-30-2013, 10:47 PM
Protect where? They have some bunker or secret planet to escape to and a ship? Im in no way insinuating a conspiracy but you can listen to every interview and bit of coverage I have. Its all streamable on google from the weeks after the event. Three reactors have been completeky breached and the remaining spent fuel is tenuous at best. The report that started the thread questionable at best but the fact that there really just isnt anything substantial that can humanly be done about the situation likely puts even the most concerned in a place of simply realizing it is what it is.

Mark,

The internet is the largest source of unreliable, mistaken and invalid information in the world.

If the situation there was as dire as that article indicated, there would be a multitude of nuclear physicists voicing their concerns. Even if a few nuclear physicists voiced their concern, I wouldn't be upset. If a large number voiced their concern then so I would join them in their concern.

You just don't see that happening.

John Coloccia
12-30-2013, 11:09 PM
The sources for these reports are the news equivalent of Cliff Clavin.

Stephen Cherry
12-30-2013, 11:56 PM
One thing to remember is that the mainstream news leaves a lot to be desired. Basically, there is a little coverage of yurp, but nothing on South America, Africa, and Asia. This vacuum of information makes the referenced information seem more credible because nothing else is out there as a point of reference.

One easy source of information is the John Bachelor show, on podcasts. LOTS of world news. He covers the Japan story regularly.

Mark Bolton
12-31-2013, 7:10 AM
Mark,

The internet is the largest source of unreliable, mistaken and invalid information in the world.

If the situation there was as dire as that article indicated, there would be a multitude of nuclear physicists voicing their concerns. Even if a few nuclear physicists voiced their concern, I wouldn't be upset. If a large number voiced their concern then so I would join them in their concern.

You just don't see that happening.

I wasn't talking about the internet. Merely stating that all the various news sources from The AP, US mainstream media, NPR, science reviews and podcasts, and the like. I don't listen or follow the kooky fear longer/ extremists.

All of this was well covered in the weeks and months after the event by numerous outlets. It's all still out there to listen to again if one chooses.

As I've said, in no way an end of the world event, but it's an extremely bad situation which is basically a massive tire fire that just has to burn itself out. I.e. It is what it is.

There simply isn't much that can be done.

Larry Edgerton
12-31-2013, 8:46 AM
My big concern is, "Is my Tunafish sandwich safe?"

I have a motto that I live by, "Don't worry about what you can not change". This falls into that catagory. I keep up on it but there is not a darn thing I can do about it, except stop eating tuna maybe.

Larry

David Weaver
12-31-2013, 8:57 AM
If you live downwind of a power plant, you can always purchase potassium iodide - it's cheap and it stores well and could keep you out of a bind to some extent.

I don't put much stock in the fukushima reports, nor the geiger counters near water, etc, because it only takes one dishonest or ignorant link in the chain of information to make a story totally false. For example, if the guy with the geiger counter is taking a reading off granite at a shoreline, it could very well be loaded with radium, he may know that or he may not. It could also be a white guy taking a reading a year ago and in japan, but fronted on a blog as recently occurring and in a different place. 10 reliable sources not knowing it's false could put it out.

If there is something very significant, like there was at the outset when Michio Kaku was saying there could be criticality in the reactors and that the situation had to be much worse than they were claiming, and that there was a good chance of meltdown (when claims were that everything was under control), then I'll gladly listen to those guys - like michio - and monitor the ground water, milk, and rain water reports that are made (i.e., readings that actually affect us).

Until then, there's plenty of real life problems to deal with. I wouldn't be surprised if there are people drinking well water loaded with radium and worrying only about fukushima.

Dave Sheldrake
12-31-2013, 9:33 AM
A lot of the problem is the news reports of the isotopes being released, Strontium 90, carbon 16, Iodine 131, Xenon , Krypton, Argon, Radium etc etc yes these are extremely dangerous and have short half lives (ie: they are radioactively very *hot*) but when you consider the type of emitter they are and what blocks the emissions as well as the distribution over the planet they don't seem to be so much of a concern.
The press mentions the two Caesium isotopes and people run off to Wikipedia and scare themselves silly by reading up the properties of them both when in reality the rest of the information makes the release irrelevant.

"200 non naturally occurring isotopes produced by PWR's"

True, there are 200 non naturally existing isotopes produced by reactors, some are radioactively so dangerous that they make Plutonium look like cotton candy...but again what you don't get told is over 100 of those have a half life under TEN seconds and are Alpha emitters that cannot penetrate even 1 layer of skin.

Fear sells papers, more fear...more sales....

cheers

Dave

Ken Fitzgerald
12-31-2013, 9:42 AM
A lot of the problem is the news reports of the isotopes being released, Strontium 90, carbon 16, Iodine 131, Xenon , Krypton, Argon, Radium etc etc yes these are extremely dangerous and have short half lives (ie: they are radioactively very *hot*) but when you consider the type of emitter they are and what blocks the emissions as well as the distribution over the planet they don't seem to be so much of a concern.
The press mentions the two Caesium isotopes and people run off to Wikipedia and scare themselves silly by reading up the properties of them both when in reality the rest of the information makes the release irrelevant.

"200 non naturally occurring isotopes produced by PWR's"

True, there are 200 non naturally existing isotopes produced by reactors, some are radioactively so dangerous that they make Plutonium look like cotton candy...but again what you don't get told is over 100 of those have a half life under TEN seconds and are Alpha emitters that cannot penetrate even 1 layer of skin.

Fear sells papers, more fear...more sales....

cheers

Dave

Bingo!

Dave....in the UK.....in elementary school......did they tell the fairy tale of "Chicken Little"? The sky is falling.....the sky is falling......... or the little boy who cried "Wolf"?


As I stated earlier....it's a complex issue.....type of radiation......amount.

Until I see a massive concern by a large number of nuclear physicists and engineers, I am not going to worry about it.

Myk Rian
12-31-2013, 10:30 AM
So far, I have been unable to find a live webcam of the plant.

David Weaver
12-31-2013, 10:38 AM
There is one, just google it. But it's a limited view of either reactor 1 or reactor 4. I think the picture at the bottom of the article posted has a chance of being live or at least more representative, but the one at the top is old stock.

Harry Hagan
12-31-2013, 11:10 AM
Thomas Gray said it best in his "Ode on a Distant Prospect of Eton College"

Here's a partial quote from the last verse:

"Yet ah! why should they know their fate?
Since sorrow never comes too late,
And happiness too swiftly flies.
Thought would destroy their paradise.
No more; where ignorance is bliss,
'Tis folly to be wise."



Thomas Gray, 1716 - 1771

Mark Bolton
12-31-2013, 12:23 PM
Its on tepcos site but it isnt any sort of wide/long angle. Not much to see.

Jim Matthews
12-31-2013, 1:04 PM
My big concern is, "Is my Tunafish sandwich safe?"Larry

Tuna is pretty far up the food chain.
Maybe sardines, herring or mackerel, instead?

Dave Sheldrake
12-31-2013, 1:14 PM
All round the world we as a society build PWR's and FBR's to satisfy the desire for power, both produce some pretty nasty by-products (that just happen to be bomb making material) by processing an element that is rarer than gold! (wanna start burning gold to get power?)

Of the 3 natural occurring fissile or fertile materials the one we don't use is Thorium, why? because the decay chain doesn't produce workable bomb material instead it produces Thallium - 208 in the decay chain that makes bomb production close to impossible (208Th is a hard Gamma emitter that destroys electronics in any kind of bomb) (thermal to electric efficiency can be above 50% in a Thorium reactor)

Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors can't melt down in the way Hard nuclear systems do, the hotter the core gets the more Neutrons the material will uptake and current stocks of nuclear waste can be reused (destroyed) by processing in a Thorium reactor. Oak Ridge had a functional LFTR 1965 to 1969 and had no problems at all.

Developed in the US but dropped and now undergoing development in China (from documents given away by Oak Ridge) to provide clean efficient energy.

What do we do in the west? keep making Hard Nuclear systems that present a multitude of problems in control and waste disposal (as well as security of by products)

Fukushima, Three Mile Island, Windscale, Chernobyl .... how long before it all goes badly wrong and all of us pay the price of governmental arrogance.

cheers

Dave

Ken Fitzgerald
12-31-2013, 2:57 PM
Dave,

I will caution everybody that politics, even international politics are not a subject allowed at SMC.

That being said, I find it difficult to believe that governments are preventing the research and development of LFTRs just to continue making nuclear bomb materials. In as much as only a couple bombs have ever been used, I doubt there is a shortage of materials.

Since the politics of storing spent rods is so sensitive, I can't imagine that governments wouldn't be encouraging research along the lines of LFTRs.

What are the drawbacks LFTRs? There has to be drawbacks.

Is the LFTR technology as economical as the current technology?

What percentage of your collueges agree with your opinion?

I bring this up only because it's also important for people to realize that even among scientists and engineers, there are often strong disagreements about different technologies. For example, I was shocked to learn not too long ago, that physicists are still arguing what the field strength of the earth's magnetic field is.

I can't imagine the whole scientific community would not be causing a major uproar if LFTR technology is totally superior to the technology currently being used.

It's my nature to want to believe in the overall good nature of mankind.

John Coloccia
12-31-2013, 3:52 PM
The bomb materials degrade, Ken. There's a real possibility that some of the bombs we have right now won't actually work, though we think they will. There was also a program that was just recently killed to make a more reliable and stable bomb. To build such a thing, you need to have more material. It's not just the radioactive substance that can degrade. Explosives, tampers, etc have had definite degradation problems over the years.

Anyhow, I think LFTRs do have drawbacks, but I think the major drawback is it has "nuclear" somewhere in the cycle :)

Raymond Fries
12-31-2013, 4:26 PM
Nuclear power has certainly been good for the world's power consumption. I find it sad that there is not some way to shut it down in a disaster situation. If this was a requirement for all facilities, people could rest easier. I have read that cancer rates in Japan are rising; this is really sad. There is so much mis-information with media trying to "get a good story", it is sometimes hard to evaluate the real risk of disasters like this. Hopefully, it will never get worse for us.

David Weaver
12-31-2013, 4:30 PM
Cancer rates are probably rising everywhere in the world. If the cancers are due to iodine, I think the spike is supposed to come a little bit later. post-chernobyl, there was a serious spike in thyroid cancer, but at a duration that hasn't occurred yet with japan.

It could very well be that japan's cancer rate is rising because:
1) they're adopting westernized cultural habits
2) they're old on average and have better longevity than we do.

Dave Sheldrake
12-31-2013, 4:52 PM
Hi Ken,

Apologies, I didn't intend to get political :)

A lot of the problem is many of the Green advocates that object to Nuclear object based on evidence of Hard Nuclear and the potential for problems that it causes. The big money isn't in building reactors (even at several billion $$'s a shot) the big money is in supplying fuel for those and existing reactors. The suppliers of hard nuclear materials are very limited worldwide so the prices the fuel commands is HUGE. Thorium on the other hand is already considered a waste product (from Rare Earth mining) and is most often stored above ground with minimal security (it doesn't fission as such, it's fertile but not fissionable) , in the US at the moment there are current stocks of low level mining waste (Monasite) that if converted at even 20% efficiency in a LFTR would provide the entire worlds electrical needs for the next decade.Typically fluoride reactors work at 45% efficiency to electricity and 90+% conversion from atomic weight. (uranium is around 0.7% conversion by weight)

The problem:

Thorium salt cooled reactors are expensive to build, VERY, the salts used in the reactor are highly corrosive leading to high quality requirements for the materials to build them (50 years ago it was a problem, these days with Hastaloys it's not really an issue)

50 years ago Alvin Weinberg created the first MSR (Dr Weinberg was the father of the FBR) but because the by products of the system cannot be weaponised and at the time weapons grade nuclear material was needed by the crate load, so the entire project was dropped.

Quite a few in the Nuclear Physics community are looking very closely at LFTR's now, there are drawbacks but it seems to be the biggest one is the one John mentions....it has "Nuclear" in the name, that and the fact the by products are no good for making bombs.

China is not so limited by outside factors and has plans to build 4 MSR's over the next 20 years culminating in 2030 with a 100MW plant in Shanghai.

Australia and the Czech Republic are building a 60MW MSR in Prague that started ground working late last year (2012)

Some conversion figures:

Thorium conversion potential 3.5 million Kw hours per Kg
Uranium conversion potential 50,000 Kw hours per Kg
Coal/Oil fire conversion potential 350 Kw hours per Kg

(conversion potential is how much energy can be obtained using the mean efficient method currently available)

The biggest benefit?

If an MSR gets too hot, it turns off, as in cold shut down....click no more problem. Hard Nuclear systems even if all the control rods are used take many months to achieve cold shutdown :(

cheers

Dave

Dave Sheldrake
12-31-2013, 5:15 PM
If the cancers are due to iodine, I think the spike is supposed to come a little bit later.

15 years later apparently David (Dr Helen Caldicott Md/NPP)

cheers

Dave

Mark Bolton
12-31-2013, 5:45 PM
It's my nature to want to believe in the overall good nature of mankind.

Ken,
Not to sound rude, as you have far more years and experience on the planet than I, but it's my opinion that this, what some might say, blind faith.. Is your Achilles heel.

As has been already stated, there are far more factors than "the greater good" that go into everything from the free flow or silencing of information to whether a great and novel innovation which would be welcomed by the masses even gets to see the light of day.

Again, you can choose, or choose not to, listen to hundreds of accounts from numerous sources of information and technology being stiffled or extinguished all together by major corporate and political interests.

The petroleum revolutions in Brazil are a perfect example. The innovators have recounted in the open, numerous times, global petroleum executives telling them point blank to watch themselves because they will simply drop the price of oil and render them insolvent. It matters not whether it's better or profitable. The only matter is who gets the profit.

It's not conspiracy or paranoia, it's merely the capitalist system at work. It is of course sick that it operates even in disastrous situations but we Can see it does over and over.

Sadly, those with power often lose sight of doing good. Google a TED talk about "does money make you mean" or something to that effect. Easily found. It's the tip of the iceburg.

I am a capitalist. Self employed. My focus is profit and money. My blind faith is that in the face of great success and millions or billions at my feet I would be more like bill gates and warren buffet as opposed to Lee Raymond, Dennis Koslowsky, Ken Lay, and the like.

Devils advocacy and faith in the greater good only goes so far when money is involved.

Dave Sheldrake
12-31-2013, 6:32 PM
The irony is that MSR technology is American designed and made, by some of the greatest minds on the planet in the world of Physics and yet the way things are going the US will end up licensing the technology from China in the mid term future :(

cheers

Dave

Erik Loza
12-31-2013, 6:42 PM
Unrelated to any of this but interesting: There was a rumor going around the machinery manufacturing industry about ten years ago that a good portion of the machinery coming out of the Eastern Bloc countries could be found to have traces of radioactivity. The chain of logic being that the ores being use to cast components out of was either processed in factories which manufactured radioactive munitions or were possibly even smelted out of decommissioned radioactive munitions metals. I never saw any facts to substantiate this nor ever really pursued it but if I happened to end up in the same room with someone who worked at one of those plants. LOL....

Erik Loza
Minimax USA

Ken Fitzgerald
12-31-2013, 8:10 PM
Mark,

I don't mean to be rude either. I disagree. I think it is paranoia to believe so many things are being controlled by secret groups and meetings to control things. Sorry. I believe that there are enough good in people, regardless of faith or lack of faith, that these things would be making headlines, not in small biased websites or newsletters but in major newspapers and news reports.

Too may people in the fields of science, politics and society have predisposed ideas and perform research only to the level necessary to support the ideas they had coming into the study. This holds true in the research beliefs of men.

Sorry. I have faith in man. Yes there are a few crazies out there that skew the group but for the most part, I have faith in man and his ability to want to do and do good.

Ken Fitzgerald
12-31-2013, 8:31 PM
Dave,

You indicate the research was done over 50 years ago and it was extremely expensive to build the reactors at that time. I suggest the cost at that time was the reason the research was cancelled.

Today, the Cold War is over. In fact, the number of nuclear warheads has been decreasing and frankly, I believe the need for nuclear warheads is decreasing. Even in this country, our leaders have been changing the designed purpose of our military due to the expected change in what will be needed to defend this country in the future.

The need for weapons grade radioactive materials is declining. The cost of building the LFT reactors would be less today and physicists are once again considering it. One has to understand that a great expense would have to be incurred or committed to construct such a reactor. It's a long term commitment for a new technology that would be a great liability for a public corporation.

There has to be enough interest, knowledge, technological understanding and profit to warrant a substantial investment in the LFTR field but I think you could see it in the future.

Ken Fitzgerald
12-31-2013, 8:42 PM
Mark and Dave.....you can call me nave.... I'll call you cynics..... Happy New Year guys!

Dave Sheldrake
12-31-2013, 9:24 PM
I hope so Ken,

One day I hope my children and grandchildren live in a world were Nuclear Weapons are a thing of the past, not because we decide not to use them but because we no longer need them and the huge intelligences that designed them serve a better purpose that benefits us all.

cheers

Dave

Larry Edgerton
01-01-2014, 5:21 PM
Thomas Gray said it best in his "Ode on a Distant Prospect of Eton College"

Here's a partial quote from the last verse:

"Yet ah! why should they know their fate?
Since sorrow never comes too late,
And happiness too swiftly flies.
Thought would destroy their paradise.
No more; where ignorance is bliss,
'Tis folly to be wise."



Thomas Gray, 1716 - 1771

The thought has often crossed my mind that I would like to be the village idiot.

Larry

Steven Satur
01-01-2014, 6:00 PM
I have been following this for some time now. John B. Wells is the weekend host of Coast to Coast Am and his show is always enlightening on this subject.
Here is a like to his web site. http://caravantomidnight.com/category/red-alert/

Steve

Jim Matthews
01-01-2014, 6:36 PM
Again, you can choose, or choose not to, listen to hundreds of accounts from numerous sources of information and technology being stiffled or extinguished all together by major corporate and political interests.

What, like the room temperature fusion reactors, or the 200 mpg carburetors in the 1970's?


The petroleum revolutions in Brazil are a perfect example. The innovators have recounted in the open, numerous times, global petroleum executives telling them point blank to watch themselves because they will simply drop the price of oil and render them insolvent. It matters not whether it's better or profitable. The only matter is who gets the profit.

Brazil currently consumes more barrels of oil each day than it produces. It supplements petroleum distillates with sugar derived ethanol. Ford started this in 1908, it's not a new idea.


It's not conspiracy or paranoia, it's merely the capitalist system at work. It is of course sick that it operates even in disastrous situations but we Can see it does over and over.

It walks like a duck, and quacks like one. Perhaps you have confused transformative technologies with regulations of same. Teddy Roosevelt put that ball in play.


Sadly, those with power often lose sight of doing good.
That's a little broad. Nuclear power was first demonstrated by Fermi and Szilard as a power source.


Devils advocacy and faith in the greater good only goes so far when money is involved.
That's overtly cynical, and isn't voiced by the successful in an open market. Predatory capitalism is a cyclic phase that modern economies endure.

It's neither a permanent condition, nor one endemic to power generating. The side costs of large scale power distribution at a profit
are born by the taxpayers, and contribute to the ease of commerce in other venues. Health and safety are expenses willingly
born in stable economies - not circumvented by the most profitable at the expense of their consumers.

Nuclear power isn't finished - but FBR and High Temperature steam systems are circa 1960's designs.
It's not as if everyone would gladly drive a 2014 Dodge, built just like the 1974 model.

Steveo O'Banion
01-01-2014, 7:44 PM
1. Consider the news source, I'm thinking they both have an ax to grind along with their agenda.

2. It's not coming out of a 1000' tall stack, most of what ever it is won't get this far. Easy for me to say sitting in the midwest. :)

3. In the middle 70's the Chinese were doing a series of above ground nuke tests and that radiation made it around the world. I can remember standing in the rain waiting for the bus while the radioactive cloud passed over. In other words, we were standing in radioactive fallout. We survived.

4. If none of that assuages your fear remember that there is nothing you can do about it anyway and that your chances developing COPD from wood dust or choking on a weenie are much higher than any peril Fukushima may have in store for you.

Dave Sheldrake
01-01-2014, 8:03 PM
Hiya Steve,

From Mr Wells page


As atomic isotopes decay, they spin off energized particles that can penetrate human organs and damage human cells, potentially causing cancer.

Sadly this is again a great example of a half truth, based in fact but missing a large percentage of the information that really matters.

If they really must worry about anything then the spent fuel pond structural integrity in Reactor 4 would be the thing I'd be concerned with.

cheers

Dave

Art Mann
01-01-2014, 8:56 PM
Ken, I really don't understand. If politics is truly off the table on SMC, then why do you permit its occurrence and even participate in it yourself?

Dave Sheldrake
01-01-2014, 10:16 PM
Ken, I really don't understand. If politics is truly off the table on SMC, then why do you permit its occurrence and even participate in it yourself?

Hi Art,

Politics? it's only really Ken voicing his faith in the good in people and Mark voicing his opinion of the bad in some people,me, I just sit on the fence and look at the numbers and smile at some of the mainstream media stories :)

Fukushima is a problem, maybe a big one, maybe not so big but I think all of us can agree that no matter what the facts are the mainstream media will dramatise it to sell product (papers).

cheers

Dave

Harold Burrell
01-01-2014, 10:17 PM
Sorry. I have faith in man.

Then...why do we need moderators? ;)

Ken Fitzgerald
01-01-2014, 10:20 PM
Discussing nuclear reactors or nuclear safety isn't political until you start laying blame on governments etc.

It's just like discussing economics. It's not political until you start laying blame on governments or political parties.

Mike Cutler
01-01-2014, 10:21 PM
I've spent 29 years working in US commercial nuclear reactors. Prior to that I spent 6 years in the Navy Nuclear Weapons Program. I've been wearing a TLD, radiation monitoring badge, since I was 19 years old.
The Fukushima event will have world wide consequences for all commercial reactors and the lessons learned will be, and currently are, being incorporated into enhancing, redesigning and implementing fail safe strategies for all reactors, regardless of vintage, generation, or design.
The fundamental flaw, or "root cause" associated with Fukushima was the location and design of the emergency backup Diesel generators and their associated power distribution network. It was not nature.
I could expound ad nausea in response to Dave Sheldrake's posts, which I find very articulate and suspect that Dave has more than an academic background on the subject. Most people don't know about core poisons, high and low energy beta's and gamma's, and fission byproduct half lives. I know that Keith Outten can though.;)
In the end, I stand with Ken. I believe that people inherently will work towards a common goal, and given the correct operation envelopes, will do the most correct thing they can, and that they are capable of. We may be flawed in some respects, but we are socially gregarious mammals, and by nature need each other to survive.
I have met people from all over the world that work in nuclear power plants and can tell you that they are very serious people. Corporations as a whole may make bad decisions, as evidenced by TESCO's lack of movement in relocating those back up power systems, even though they were known to be vulnerable, but the individuals that operate and maintain these plants are acutely aware of the consequences of action and lack of action.
From the standpoint of someone very familiar with the operation, design, and layout, of the Fukushima GE style plants. I can tell you that the moment the roofs were blown off due to hydrogen, it had been game over for quite some time. It was already too late, and from there it just got worse.
While there once was a somewhat cavalier attitude with regard to radiation exposure in the nuke plants, it is now an extremely serious matter. The amounts of exposure we receive now are less by factors of 10, from as little as 15 years ago. US plants have really cleaned up their act, and that is a good thing. A very good thing. Any rad exposure beyond that which occurs naturally should be held to the absolute minimum, to the fullest extent possible.
The Nuclear power industry will change as a result of Fukushima, and hopefully it will be the catalyst to spur the next generations of inherently safer reactor designs to come into being.

Dave.
Post 39 states a 100mW output for the MSR reactor design. Is that really the correct number? That is a very tiny plant, and the Chinese are currently in the process of constructing over two dozen Westinghouse style PWR's, each at about 1200mW electrical output. (It will be interesting to see what happens to the price of oil when they shut down their fossil fleets, which is their intention. Right now they are split between fuel oil and coal.)

Ken Fitzgerald
01-01-2014, 10:21 PM
Then...why do we need moderators? ;)

I didn't say "all men"........

Ken Fitzgerald
01-01-2014, 10:36 PM
Mike,

I began wearing a TLD in 1976 and gave one up in 2010 when I was forced to retire due to my sudden deafness caused by Meniere's disease.

At NAS Meridian, MS I was a member of the NBC warfare team and qualified annually. The last 8 months of my 8 Years in the US Navy, I worked aboard the USS Orion, AS-18. We had a squadron of fast attacks attached. I was a qualified sub-safe inspector. E-6 and above stood OD watches aboard the tender so I had to be nuclear and nuclear security qualified as I stood OD watches.

For 34 years I wore a TLD as I worked on CT scanners, x-ray machines, nuclear medicine cameras and MR scanners. We had to qualify annually on radiation safety taking courses and passing exams.

Far from an expert but I did have and use daily a working knowledge. I worked regularly with private and government health physicists.

Obviously you and Dave have experience with reactors but as you are aware, radiation goes beyond reactors.

Brian Elfert
01-01-2014, 11:04 PM
A nuclear plant produces electricity. Why does a plant that produces electricity need a constant connection to the grid or backup generators? How come the plant wouldn't make its own power to keep the cooling and such running?

Mike Cutler
01-02-2014, 4:51 AM
A nuclear plant produces electricity. Why does a plant that produces electricity need a constant connection to the grid or backup generators? How come the plant wouldn't make its own power to keep the cooling and such running?

Brian
They do, but the rub is that they still need to be connected to the grid.
The output for a US "Nuke" plant is 345,000 volts and 100's of megawatts, which is connected to the grid in such a manner that all of the turbines on the grid are in sync. A power plant by itself is too small a load by itself to run electrically when presented to the main generator output, and still maintain thermal efficiency of the reactor itself, so the power is sent out and back, so to speak. The power for the pump motors is 6.9KV, and 4160, so the voltage has to be stepped down for motor operation. It's pretty involved actually
In the event of grid instability, which happened at Fukushima, the plant disconnects itself from the grid by virtue of a turbine trip, once the generator output breakers are opened.
Once disconnected from the grid, and in the absence of power on the grid, the back up generators start to power the electrical busses required for safe shutdown and continuous plant operation to maintain reactor core integrity. It is a layered approach based on redundancy for safety margin.
These backup power supplies, diesels, at US plants are tested, and surveilled, continuously. The inability to demonstrate that back up power systems are available 24/7 will force the owner/operator of a plant to shut down, administratively, to meet regulatory requirements. The diesels are a very big deal at US plants.

Harold Burrell
01-02-2014, 9:10 AM
Discussing nuclear reactors or nuclear safety isn't political until you start laying blame on governments etc.

It's just like discussing economics. It's not political until you start laying blame on governments or political parties.

Yeah, but...just because we're not laying blame on them doesn't necessarily mean that it's not their fault. ;)


I didn't say "all men"........

:p

Raymond Fries
01-02-2014, 9:24 AM
Dave, Mike, Ken, and anyone else with nuclear experience:

Do you see the US at risk? I know nothing about nuclear energy, electricity, ocean currents, etc.. I read reports of thousands of gallons of waste that has been dumped every day since the disaster. Other reports of radioactive clouds and radioactive fish have surfaced. I am sure there is drama here to sell the news, however, there is usually a thread of truth in every story. Based on your knowledge, do you see this as affecting the USA? What do you see as any problem for us?

Ken Fitzgerald
01-02-2014, 10:25 AM
Yeah, but...just because we're not laying blame on them doesn't necessarily mean that it's not their fault. ;)



:p

Doesn't mean it is their fault either. (For some reason, I can't post a emoticon here so imagine me rolling my eyes and then smiling.)

Dave Sheldrake
01-02-2014, 10:49 AM
It's a hard call to make Ray,

Radiation covers a lot of factors, persistence of the emitter (short or long half lives) how and what it emits (Alphas, Betas, Gammas etc) and the distribution of those by products. Toxicology is another factor (how biologically toxic the by products are) as chemicals rather than isotopes. Granite for example is radioactive as is Vaseline glass but many homes have this as decoration even today without any safety fears.
As things stand with the Diachi plants I wouldn't have too many concerns, the situation is rather fluid though and further accidents or building collapses could make a unpleasant situation very serious very quickly. TEPCO being less than down the line with their information certainly hasn't helped and in the early times after the accidents honesty would have made the situation easier to deal with or at least allowed those trying to deal with it to make more informed decisions.

The biggest problem with Light Water Reactors and Breeders is you are constantly fighting to keep them under control, they aren't "walk away safe" and when systems fail the outcome can be very serious as we have seen. Dealing with the by-products such as radioactive Xenon that poisons the core is a constant battle. I'm sure Mike will agree that the constant fear is run-away or heaven forbid, Meltdown if there is a failure in the control or command train.
Molten salt reactors are walk away safe, all the efforts in an MSR are directed at keeping the reaction going rather than trying to stop it going too far, if you "walk away" the entire system shuts down quite quickly. The fuel is already a liquid so meltdown isn't a problem. There are problems (they are seeded with 233 that has to be produced), the fuel is highly corrosive and great care has to be exercised to prevent cracking of the Graphites but in the scenario of a tidal wave, an earthquake, terrorist event or a plane dropping on the reactor building the entire system goes into shutdown rather than run-away. There is no Hydrogen produced (no big explosions like Daichi) and the reactor vessel runs at atmospheric pressure.

Looking at the US annual dose figures the biggest offender is natural Radon @ 55% of your annual intake emitter, 3% comes from previous nuclear testing with less than 0.4% coming from the nuclear industry. The problem with the media is the leaps they make when discussing the event, many types of radiation are harmless (effectively) but because they are still radiation the media tends to ignore their lack of danger and just tell half the story scaring people silly. For any source (emitter) the critical information is how much and the type of radiation that it puts out and this is what gets over looked or ignored.

Hi Mike,

From what I've seen the 100Mw system is really a test bed, the biggest proponent of it is the former leaders son who has managed to get quite a few mainstream guys onboard and base funding for the experiments. I'm really hoping it will pan out and lead to other nations doing more dedicated work. At the moment the efforts seem to be around single fuel types with lower efficiency but the last I heard they are looking at the two fuel systems, how far they will go I have no idea. The MSR technology if it is exploited it going to lead to interesting times indeed ;)

cheers

Dave

Ken Fitzgerald
01-02-2014, 10:55 AM
Raymond,

I'm not qualified to respond to that but until I see a majority of nuclear physicists and engineers concerned, I am not going to worry about it.

IIRC it was stated earlier that the dangers from Chernobyl were greater than those from this accident.

Understand that my training was from the safety and measurement standpoint. How to recognize, measure, plot radiation and what safe levels were. A lot of the training we took was generic so we learned about all forms of radiation. In the course we also learned about safe shielding for different types of radiation. It really is a complex matter and with a lot of variables. It's complex enough we had to retake courses and recertify annually.

Among scientists, nuclear physicists and nuclear engineers, which I am not, there can be disagreements about accepted theories. That is why I have stated I will not get concerned until I see a majority of those professionals get concerned.

Mike Cutler
01-03-2014, 8:27 AM
Dave, Mike, Ken, and anyone else with nuclear experience:

Do you see the US at risk? I know nothing about nuclear energy, electricity, ocean currents, etc.. I read reports of thousands of gallons of waste that has been dumped every day since the disaster. Other reports of radioactive clouds and radioactive fish have surfaced. I am sure there is drama here to sell the news, however, there is usually a thread of truth in every story. Based on your knowledge, do you see this as affecting the USA? What do you see as any problem for us?

Raymond
The event is extremely serious,and there is no one that would tell that somehow, in some minute amount, we would not see some measurable level of activity from this event. Everything can be measured and quantified mathematically, so the math would state that there has to be some level of consequence. It's that level that is important, and as of yet I haven't read of any measurable level that would be of dramatic concern. This is not to diminish the seriousness, as this event will have long term consequences for generations going forward.
The Pacific Ocean is enormous and it is deep. Heavier particles will sink and fall into the sand. The saltwater and cold temps of the ocean will act as a natural moderator, or shield. While thousands of gallons can be dumped into the ocean, the important fact is what is the activity level of the water as measured in micro curies per cubic liter. I believe the Japanese use seiverts instead of curies though.
I'm more worried about unscrupulous people and that they would somehow scavenge material from the area and get it into the mainstream market places. That would be a problem.

In your opening post you questioned why no one was doing anything about the event. I can assure you that governments, and nuclear utilities, all over the world are helping the Japanese in any way they can.

Dave Sheldrake
01-03-2014, 9:01 AM
I'm more worried about unscrupulous people and that they would somehow scavenge material from the area and get it into the mainstream market places.

Happened a few times from memory Mike, Spain and Brazil? Gamma sources improperly disposed of that got back into the scrap metal chain and a few deaths involved?

I guess the length of the potential problem is the issue, even the mid life sources are going to stay around for 600 years (131 / 137) with the Pu for 1/2 a million or so. The last figure I saw was just under 4Kg for Ceasium - 137 released at Fukushima compared to 28Kg for Chernobyl.

cheers

Dave

Mike Cutler
01-03-2014, 10:08 AM
Happened a few times from memory Mike, Spain and Brazil? Gamma sources improperly disposed of that got back into the scrap metal chain and a few deaths involved?

I guess the length of the potential problem is the issue, even the mid life sources are going to stay around for 600 years (131 / 137) with the Pu for 1/2 a million or so. The last figure I saw was just under 4Kg for Ceasium - 137 released at Fukushima compared to 28Kg for Chernobyl.


cheers

Dave

Dave
It just happened in Mexico a month or so back. All the Police had to do was wait until the thieves showed up in the hospitals with radiation poisoning. It didn't take long, about a week.
People can be foolish sometimes.

Raymond Fries
01-03-2014, 7:26 PM
WOW - I never thought about people gathering material and trying to use or sell it. Kinda like the scenario in the movie Sum of all fears. Hopefully, that will never happen here.

Brian Ashton
01-03-2014, 7:31 PM
You must be kidding me!! some idiot got paid to write that up!

Absolute rubbish!

Dave

My guess is a gen y junior "journalist"

Brian Ashton
01-03-2014, 7:33 PM
WOW - I never thought about people gathering material and trying to use or sell it. Kinda like the scenario in the movie Sum of all fears. Hopefully, that will never happen here.


Sum of all fears was at least written well, by comparison that is, this "article" (i'm being really generous with categorising it) was written by an idiot.

Dan Hintz
01-03-2014, 8:40 PM
Interesting...
http://deepseanews.com/2013/11/true-facts-about-ocean-radiation-and-the-fukushima-disaster/

Dave Sheldrake
01-03-2014, 10:29 PM
Great find Dan :)

The responder "Nutronium" has it bang on the money, excellent work and accuracy all round in his posts.

I loved the comment about "Licking glow in the dark dials" :)

cheers

Dave

Dave Sheldrake
01-03-2014, 11:05 PM
WOW - I never thought about people gathering material and trying to use or sell it. Kinda like the scenario in the movie Sum of all fears. Hopefully, that will never happen here.

Hi Ray,

Some of the locals in Laos are still making ornaments from and selling UXB's without regard for what things like MK82's do when they go boom. If there is $$$ to be made some people will take inordinate risks for very little return :( Currently the death rate is around 300 a year from "recycling" accidents.

Fun facts,

If you managed to eat enough Bananas then you could give yourself radiation poisoning from Potassium - 40
Antistatic brushes for cleaning photographic film contains Polonium - 210
Thorium Oxide is used in Gas Lamp Mantles
Smoke detectors contain Americium - 241 with a half life of 458 years
Fluorescent lamp starters contain Krypton - 85 (a Beta & Gamma emitter with a 10.5 year half life)
Cerium Oxide used for polishing often contains Thorium Oxide
Glow in the dark watches made in the 50's can liberate up to 50 counts per minute due to the Radium used in the paint
From the 60's Tritium was used (a radioactive form of Heavy Hydrogen, H3) with a half life of just over 12 years OR Promethium - 147 with a 2.6 year half life, both are Alpha & Gamma emitters

Seeing how most of the human race (not to mention all the worlds monkeys) haven't all died from Radiation poisoning it's a pretty safe bet that there are other factors involved before getting too concerned about the big "R" word ;)

cheers

Dave

Dan Hintz
01-04-2014, 10:44 AM
My favorite from XKCD's chart is you are actually being irradiated if you sleep next to someone... what a lonely life to stay healthy!

http://xkcd.com/radiation/

Dave Sheldrake
01-04-2014, 10:57 AM
It's the bananas Dan, Bananas will kill us all!! ;)

cheers

Dave

Dave Sheldrake
01-05-2014, 7:21 PM
Just had an Email from Kim and she kindly provided a few more mythbusters :)

http://deepseanews.com/2014/01/is-the-sea-floor-littered-with-dead-animals-due-to-radiation-no/

http://deepseanews.com/2013/12/three-reasons-why-fukushima-radiation-has-nothing-to-do-with-starfish-wasting-syndrome/

cheers

Dave

Kelly Craig
01-17-2014, 9:50 PM
Actually, that may not be wholly true. As I was pointing out to someone the other day, just take some moments out and wander the history of governments. That would include a review of the experiments they have done on their own people, the times they knowingly ignored danger and so forth.

When I worked at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, in Bremerton, Washington, I found myself working near laggers (the insulation boys) tearing out insulation. Often, they had little more than a nuisance dust mask and a six inch air, suction hose to deal with the crap they were throwing in the air. Those of us next to them had nothing. The government knew the dangers of asbestos decades earlier, but still took no precautions.

Sailors often suffered lead poisoning chipping off the paint from the sides of ships. They've known about lead for a long time too.

Some of the danger comes from ignorance at the lower levels and on up. Some comes from greed (keep costs down). Here, we could have all kinds of "let's not panic the public" or "what will it do to foreign relations" crap going on. From years of dealing in administrative law, I've learned government is often out for its [artificial] self. Except for the FDA, which could never be influenced by drug companies, or the IRS, or ..........

In short, we don't know what's going on. It'd be interesting to know a few someones with Geiger counters, or whatever they are using these days, on the West Coast.

Dave Sheldrake
01-18-2014, 5:46 AM
Hiya Kelly,

Governments may well have a jaded history but silencing a few hundred thousand Physicists would be impossible as their expertise crosses governmental boundaries. Respected members of the community would be screaming blue murder from the roof tops if there was any real perceived threat.

The warnings that have been made public much of the time have been taken out of context by the press. One well known physicist did extrapolate a possible problem with the spent fuel pool in reactor 4 but the reporters neglected to mention the chance of it happening are the same as winning the lottery every week for 6 months.

cheers

Dave

Dan Hintz
01-18-2014, 8:06 AM
the chance of it happening are the same as winning the lottery every week for 6 months.

Where do I sign up for THOSE odds?!!! :D

Dave Sheldrake
01-18-2014, 8:34 AM
Where do I sign up for THOSE odds?!!! :D

:)

Was something from memory like

If there is another quake &
If it is above a given magnitude &
If the epicentre is within X distance of the fuel pools &
If the building integrity is below XXX &
If certain supports collapse &
If the spent fuel is exposed &
If there is no water supplied for XX time &
If the fuel reached thermal runaway &
If no action is taken for XX time
etc etc etc

There was a small chance that a *dirty bomb* event could happen. The media just reported Professor Kaku's synopsis as "Another quake will nuke half the northern hemisphere" without mentioning to qualifying factors or the fact that reactor fuels don't have the required enrichment to sustain a *bomb* reaction (3-5% enriched compared to 90% enriched in bombs) not forgetting the cross sections of 235 and 238 are unbalanced in a reactor environment when compared to nuclear explosives.

cheers

Dave

David Weaver
01-18-2014, 8:47 AM
In short, we don't know what's going on. It'd be interesting to know a few someones with Geiger counters, or whatever they are using these days, on the West Coast.

You might find yourself locating high background radiation from natural sources and getting upset over nothing - just like the folks in san francisco (?) have done the last couple of weeks. Nothing from fukushima, but they sure made a big deal about it, anyway. Even now that it's known that it has nothing to do with fukushima, the articles written about it still imply it does because they can't resist ad revenue no matter how misleading they need to be to get it.

Mike Cutler
01-18-2014, 9:17 AM
In short, we don't know what's going on. It'd be interesting to know a few someones with Geiger counters, or whatever they are using these days, on the West Coast.


The equipment required is very expensive, manufactured by only a handful of companies world wide, very sensitive to calibrate, and would have to be set up for the detectors and associated circuitry to discriminate the anticipated isotopes that would be postulated to have come from a reactor that had melted down.
A "geiger counter" type of device would indicate a broad spectrum of energy, and there would be no way of knowing where it came from.

I install, repair, and calibrate, the equipment that would be required on a daily basis for the day job. The math/electronics can be intensive.

As an aside I know that there are ongoing repair activities at the site. We just flew in some cable testers to test out our cables and they were at Fukushima testing their cables. Another very weird science.