Nuclear fallout? / Media blackout?

gbee · 07-12-2011 08:08PM

King Mob wrote: »

Also your point is still very nebulous and non-committal. Do you think that the Guardian's "misreporting" was just incompetence or on purpose?

Well TEPCO have a history since the very beginning, they showed evidence of a criticality and when questioned on this they said that it was impossible and then said there would be no more live reports on the findings around the plant.

We now know there was a criticality and effectively a nuclear explosion, something that was also "impossible".

So if I were reporting anything from TEPCO, I'd put them in brackets too, TBH. Totally untrustworthy.

shedweller · 22-01-2012 11:10PM

More "non-news" not worthy of more widespread coverage:

http://enenews.com/over-epa-limit-cesium-levels-in-san-francisco-area-milk-now-higher-than-6-months-ago

shedweller · 22-01-2012 11:10PM

More "non-news" not worthy of more widespread coverage:

http://enenews.com/over-epa-limit-cesium-levels-in-san-francisco-area-milk-now-higher-than-6-months-ago

Moriarty · 22-01-2012 11:35PM

Lol..

Yeah, I can't belive it isn't all over the headlines that if you drink 36,000 litres of milk - 18,000 days at 2 litres a day so nearly fifty years worth of what a regular adult male would generally drink in total per day - you'll receive so much radiation that .. it will be the same exposure as a round-trip flight from LA to DC.

Are you just relying on people reading headlines here or what?

shedweller · 23-01-2012 08:34AM

Moriarty wrote: »

Lol..

Yeah, I can't belive it isn't all over the headlines that if you drink 36,000 litres of milk - 18,000 days at 2 litres a day so nearly fifty years worth of what a regular adult male would generally drink in total per day - you'll receive so much radiation that .. it will be the same exposure as a round-trip flight from LA to DC.

Are you just relying on people reading headlines here or what?

I see. So there really is nothing to worry about then. I just thought that radiation levels above the legal limit were something to be concerned about, thats all. But lets all go back to crying about ufo's. Thats much more important.

23-01-2012 09:45AM

shedweller wrote: »

I see. So there really is nothing to worry about then. I just thought that radiation levels above the legal limit were something to be concerned about, thats all. But lets all go back to crying about ufo's. Thats much more important.

But they set the "legal limit" far far below the point were any possible sickness could occur and way way below a lethal or damaging dose.

So what exactly should we be concerned about if we are to disregard what is reported in the link your provided?
Further more, do you still not find it odd that you are posting about a media blackout while also finding and posting information as it is reported in the media?
Cause it seems self contradictory to me...

shedweller · 23-01-2012 10:41AM

Aye! It is somewhat contradictory alright. But it's still not exactly making the news either. All i'm saying is that the agreed limit on radioactivity was exceeded in the milk. It's an agreed limit for a reason i'm sure.

23-01-2012 11:00AM

shedweller wrote: »

Aye! It is somewhat contradictory alright. But it's still not exactly making the news either.

But it did make the news, you posted it. I'm sure it's probably reported in the local media in the local areas where it's a problem.

Why would this be reported in the international media, it's not a particularly breaking story?

shedweller wrote: »

All i'm saying is that the agreed limit on radioactivity was exceeded in the milk. It's an agreed limit for a reason i'm sure.

Yes, and?
There's quite a large buffer between that limit and when damage will actually be done. As reported in the article you need to drink gallons of milk for weeks to get the same exposure of a portion of a high altitude flight.
It's not a danger, at least not by itself. But it is of concern to people in the energy and diary industries and their related marketing, hence why you get the information on specialised sites like the one you posted.

This information is not worrying nor is it being hidden, so what's the conspiracy?

gbee · 23-01-2012 11:40AM

http://vimeo.com/35212151

Somewhat support the OP. It says that the radiation levels are more harmful than the government in Japan in indicating and this message is facilitated by press and other media supporting the government's figures whilst ignoring other established sciences on the subject.

shedweller · 23-01-2012 11:47AM

King Mob wrote: »

.............so what's the conspiracy?

Ah jaysus! Seriously?

Ok, i'll bite.

Maybe because it's not all over the evening news. I had to go looking for this information. If you're not seeing the conspiracy then maybe you should refrain from posting on this subject.

23-01-2012 11:55AM

shedweller wrote: »

Ah jaysus! Seriously?

Ok, i'll bite.

Maybe because it's not all over the evening news.

But why would it be? It's not particular vital, important or exciting news to to most people. And by your link it's being reported to the people who would find it as such.

shedweller wrote: »

I had to go looking for this information.

And yet you found it, and the information is there.
Why would they go to the trouble of preventing it form being on the news, but then leave it freely available on the internet? Why is the raw data on a site they control if they don't want people to see it?

shedweller wrote: »

If you're not seeing the conspiracy then maybe you should refrain from posting on this subject.

Or I could ask and find out and try to discuss the points raised.

I can't see the conspiracy as you had agreed that there was no attempt to hide it and that the information is not particularly terrifying.
But now you are proposing a conspiracy that does not make any sense.

stuar · 23-02-2012 06:20PM

A Tokyo park has a higher level of radiation as OFF LIMITS area's of Chernobyl.
I googled "Mizumoto park radiation" news results and not one story was there to be found.
http://www.google.ie/search?hl=en&gl=ie&tbm=nws&q=Mizumoto+Park+radiation&oq=Mizumoto+Park+radiation&aq=f&aqi=d1d-o1&aql=&gs_sm=12&gs_upl=10506l10506l0l11569l1l1l0l0l0l0l110l110l0.1l1l0#q=Mizumoto+Park+radiation&hl=en&gl=ie&prmd=imvns&source=lnms&tbm=nws&ei=q3RGT77rKI2whAfy9IWKDg&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=4&ved=0CBEQ_AUoAw&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=38ee45b34f6b49a3&biw=1280&bih=724

Tokyo is contaminated as the worst place in Chernobyl

The contamination level of Mizumoto Park turned out to be the same level of “off-limits zone” in Chernobyl.
The contamination level of the park was 23,300 Bq/Kg.
According to Nuclear Safety Commission, it is converted to be 1.4 ~1.5 million Bq/m2.
In Chernobyl, if the area is more contaminated than 1.48 million Bq/m2, it was labelled as off-limits zone, which was the worst level of the pollution.
Because cesium doesn’t choose Mizumoto park intentionally, at least some parts are contaminated as the worst area of Chernobyl.
http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/02/tokyo-is-contaminated-as-the-worst-place-in-chernobyl/

Source

Mizumoto Park
http://www.panoramio.com/photo/23699494

shedweller · 24-02-2012 03:54PM

But its not a media blackout because someone is talking about it!! You've just linked to a website that mentioned it ......... Once........ In japaneese, where few if any westerners will understand it or even accidentally end up at the website and see the picture of the geiger reading and be bothered enough to then translate the body of text!!!

Noooo, thats not a media blackout at all!

stuar · 24-02-2012 08:07PM

shedweller wrote: »

But its not a media blackout because someone is talking about it!! You've just linked to a website that mentioned it ......... Once........ In japaneese, where few if any westerners will understand it or even accidentally end up at the website and see the picture of the geiger reading and be bothered enough to then translate the body of text!!!

Noooo, thats not a media blackout at all!

Your right, my bad, here it is in black and white:

東京・葛飾区の「水元公園」の土壌から、１キロ当たり２万ベクレルを超える高濃度の放射性セシウムが検出された。葛飾区や江戸川区など首都圏東部は「ホットスポット」地域として知られているが、事故から１年が経とうとしているのに、今なお、こんな危険地域があったのはショックだ。
　日本共産党都議団が調査し、２１日、会見で明らかにした。それによると、調査したのは「水元公園」内にある「メタセコイアの森」「駐車場植え込み」「ドッグラン」「野鳥観察舎」――の４カ所で、土壌や落ち葉を採取し、ドイツ製の測定器で放射性セシウムの濃度を測定。精度を高めるため、今月１５日以降、複数回に分けて測ったという。

el diablo · 25-02-2012 01:45AM

Anyone see Inside the Meltdown on BBC2 on Thursday night? Interesting stuff.

Another show next Thursday on the same channel about the kids that survived the disaster.

shedweller · 26-02-2012 03:15PM

el diablo wrote: »

Anyone see Inside the Meltdown on BBC2 on Thursday night? Interesting stuff.

Another show next Thursday on the same channel about the kids that survived the disaster.

I missed it but it is available to download i believe......;)

daelight · 27-02-2012 02:06PM

Shouldn't be surprised such OTT BS being eaten here but cannot help to be very disappointed. As someone who is living on the doorstep - I can tell you things are not as bad as these reports would have you believe.

Misunderstanding on radiation measurements / doses / effects //// are amusing to read so the thread holds comedy value for sure.

stuar · 27-02-2012 05:07PM

daelight wrote: »

Shouldn't be surprised such OTT BS being eaten here but cannot help to be very disappointed. As someone who is living on the doorstep - I can tell you things are not as bad as these reports would have you believe.

Misunderstanding on radiation measurements / doses / effects //// are amusing to read so the thread holds comedy value for sure.

Living on the doorstep?, you enjoying the invisible man?, have you got kids?, no!, thought so.
Radiation really isn't that bad until your glowing and dying, but don't notice, have a nice time on the doorstep while you can, which way is the wind blowing?

clever_name · 27-02-2012 06:23PM

stuar wrote: »

Living on the doorstep?, you enjoying the invisible man?, have you got kids?, no!, thought so.

Its polite (and useful) to wait for an answer to a question rather than just picking an answer that suits your needs.

stuar wrote: »

Radiation really isn't that bad until your glowing and dying, but don't notice, have a nice time on the doorstep while you can, which way is the wind blowing?

While you have have been aiming for hyperbole(?) you have actually written something that is almost accurate, each of us are exposed to radiation everyday, to varying degrees depending on where we go and what we do.

Lefticus Loonaticus · 09-04-2012 12:18PM

Akio Matsumura, a highly accredited japanese diplomat has spilled the beans on what is currently going on at fukushima.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwCfAY4iyPQ&feature=relmfu

In a nutshell:

Reactor No.4 has over 1500 spent fuel rods stored inside and it is barely being contained.

If it becomes uncontainable, via another tsumani / earthquake / loss of water supply / or by any other reason such as building collapse or otherwise, it will affect all of the other reactors and all the other spent fuel rod storages (there are many more thousands of spent fuel rods in the area). Thus making the area too dangerous to work in for humans and making it almost impossible to contain.

If this happens, it will cause tokyo to be evacuated. It will also highly irradiate most other countries in the region, and to a lesser extent the entire planet.

It will be on a scale that you could not even measure by Chernobyl and it would take over 50 years to contain. 50 years leakage of such a high level of radiation all around the world would put in jeopardy human civilization.

Q: Whats the worst case scenario if reactor No.4 fails?

A: Akio Matsumara: "Hydrogen explosion will happen, or a steam explosion may occur. The radiation is no question. There is no containment building, or crane to remove the 1500 spent fuel rods to the safety place.

For those that want to know who this guy is - http://akiomatsumura.com

gbee · 09-04-2012 12:29PM

daelight wrote: »

so the thread holds comedy value for sure.

I'll ask you to revisit this in ten years time. We'll see if you and your children, grandchildren still find it funny.

gbee · 09-04-2012 12:56PM

http://www.fairewinds.com/

stuar · 12-04-2012 03:45AM

Lefticus Loonaticus wrote: »

Akio Matsumura, a highly accredited japanese diplomat has spilled the beans on what is currently going on at fukushima.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwCfAY4iyPQ

In a nutshell:

Reactor No.4 has over 1500 spent fuel rods stored inside and it is barely being contained.

If it becomes uncontainable, via another tsumani / earthquake / loss of water supply / or by any other reason such as building collapse or otherwise, it will affect all of the other reactors and all the other spent fuel rod storages (there are many more thousands of spent fuel rods in the area). Thus making the area too dangerous to work in for humans and making it almost impossible to contain.

If this happens, it will cause tokyo to be evacuated. It will also highly irradiate most other countries in the region, and to a lesser extent the entire planet.

It will be on a scale that you could not even measure by Chernobyl and it would take over 50 years to contain. 50 years leakage of such a high level of radiation all around the world would put in jeopardy human civilization.

Q: Whats the worst case scenario if reactor No.4 fails?

A: Akio Matsumara: "Hydrogen explosion will happen, or a steam explosion may occur. The radiation is no question. There is no containment building, or crane to remove the 1500 spent fuel rods to the safety place.

For those that want to know who this guy is - http://akiomatsumura.com

I've been looking into reactor 4 lately and the consequences if it's hit by another tsunami or earthquake, in the past 24Hrs there have been 40+ 5.0mag or above earthquakes, 2 above 8.0mag off Indonesia and a 7.0mag in Mexico today that hasn't got much attention.

If all the worse case scenario stuff is correct about reactor 4's spent fuel pool and collapse is correct such as:

I was asked to make a statement at the public hearing of the Budgetary Committee of the House of Councilors on March 23. I raised the crucial problem. of N0.4 reactor of Fukushima containing1535 fuel rods. It could be fatally damaged by continuing aftershocks. Moreover, 50 meters away from it exists a common cooling pool for 6 reactors containing 6375 fuel rods!
It is no exaggeration to say that the fate of Japan and the whole world depends on NO.4 reactor.
http://akiomatsumura.com/2012/04/682.html

They even now need to design and make new robots and CCTV equipment that can work in such high radiation as nothing available can withstand the radiation in reactor 2, so it's just getting worse by the day.
3 day's before Paddy's day a 6.9 mag hit off the Japanese coast, that very easily could have been it for reactor 4, if reactor 4 collapses Tokyo will have to be evacuated, maybe all of Japan, but the worst part is, nobody has a f**king clue what to do about it, it would suddenly become news worthy again.

If humanity can be put in danger by one of these plants what hope have we with the hundreds around the world:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_reactors
many in area's with high seismic activity,

.
Since 1900 of the 10 deadliest earthquakes 5 occured since 2000, of the 10 largest earthquakes since 1900, 5 occured since 2000, so it's obvious they are getting bigger and badder recently, that spells disaster for us all.

Run_to_da_hills · 12-04-2012 08:44AM

stuar wrote: »

Since 1900 of the 10 deadliest earthquakes 5 occured since 2000, of the 10 largest earthquakes since 1900, 5 occured since 2000, so it's obvious they are getting bigger and badder recently, that spells disaster for us all.

Not alone are they getting more frequent and bigger, we are also getting more and more of them in diverse places, ie under the seabed.

I see the UK is considering a Soviet Nuke Company that had some involvement in Chernobyl in building an expansion at Wylfa near Holyhead which is more or less at our back yard.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-west-wales-17682322

shedweller · 12-04-2012 08:53AM

How much of an ordeal would it be to remove the spent rods and store them elsewhere?

Re: the increasing strength of the earthquakes. Has anyone seen the video of quakes last year? It's over in a thread in after hours about the recent quake. It really shows how active the earth is.

Run_to_da_hills · 12-04-2012 09:05AM

shedweller wrote: »

How much of an ordeal would it be to remove the spent rods and store them elsewhere?

Major, they need the right men, lifting gear, transport and safety equipment and I don't think they can get that together. They would have had it done long ago even before this disaster happened if it was feasible.

shedweller wrote: »

Re: the increasing strength of the earthquakes. Has anyone seen the video of quakes last year? It's over in a thread in after hours about the recent quake. It really shows how active the earth is.

pacquiao wrote: »

Turn up your volume and watch this. At least watch the first 2 minutes.

RoboClam · 12-04-2012 10:36AM

On the subject of more earthquakes occurring, here is some more info on it:

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqarchives/year/graphs.php

From that link, there are some nice graphs:

There are some nice graphs in that link, but the main thing to point out is that if you look from 1980 to 2010 the frequency of large earthquakes remains relatively stable (with obvious year to year variations). The main difference is the number of deaths, which are clearly higher since 2000. But all this means is that the earthquake hit areas of high population density those years. I don't have the pre-1980 figures but I'm sure there were spikes before this.

There does also seem to be an increase of 6-6.9 quakes, which can be explained by the link below:

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/topics/increase_in_earthquakes.php

Basically, the methods for measuring the earthquakes has improved as well as the reporting of them.

stuar · 12-04-2012 10:55AM

Another 6.1 mag and a 7.1 mag in the Gulf of California a few hours ago, I believe a lot of the US reactors are just as vulnerable as the Fukishima reactor.:eek:

hooradiation · 12-04-2012 11:58AM

stuar wrote: »

Another 6.1 mag and a 7.1 mag in the Gulf of California a few hours ago, I believe a lot of the US reactors are just as vulnerable as the Fukishima reactor.:eek:

You'd be hard pressed to find anything that isn't 'vulnerable' to the combined efforts of a 9.0 magnitude earthquake and a Tsunami.

gbee · 12-04-2012 12:16PM

stuar wrote: »

I believe a lot of the US reactors are just as vulnerable as the Fukishima reactor.:eek:

All of them are as vulnerable, a good number are even more vulnerable. The Fukishima Plants had been upgraded and had 5 levels of backup and some 36 hours of power, yet they failed within 5 hours.

Compare that to The Fort Calhoun nuclear power station that had a fire during a preventative safety shut down as the Mississippi flooded and the realisation that it has less backup than Fukishima had.

Three Mile Island, a melted core that still can't be accessed.

Nuclear fallout? / Media blackout?

Comments