Nuclear fallout? / Media blackout?

Maudi · 08-08-2013 11:22PM

Sparticle wrote: »

I doubt there's enough radioactive material on earth to contaminate a body of water the size of the pacific.

Really?

Sparticle · 09-08-2013 08:40AM

Maudi wrote: »

Really?

There is 707.5 million km3 of water in the pacific. Assuming the worst containment is Cesium 137 and the factory loses 300 tonnes of radioactive water a day. To show how ludicrous contamination of the pacific ocean is I'll treat the water as 300 tonnes of pure Cesium 137.

300 tonnes = 2189781 moles per day.
707.5 million km3 of water = 7.075 x 10^17 m3 of water.

That equals 3.1 x 10^-12 moles per m^3 or 3.1 x 10^-15 moles per liter . The Japanese emergency provisional standard for safe drinking water is 60Bq per liter.

1 mole of Cesium has an activity of 428 teraBequerels.

Pacific water would show an increase of activity of 1.327 BQ per liter per day which is the equivalent of about 3 billion monthly fukishima releases of cesium 137 happening every day.

Now obviously this is very rough and levels would be much higher near Fukushima but to think this is a terrible disaster that will have grave repercussions for civilisation is mad. Sure it's totally unacceptable that it's still being released but the health problems will be minimal and more likely non-existent for regular people in Japan.

stuar · 09-08-2013 09:29AM

That's some great math there Sparticle, but your a bit naive to think that fukushima will have no effect on anybody or thing a few miles away from the disaster zone, what about fish/sealife migration etc?

Here's an example of tuna migration.

Tuna's 25,000-mile swim down marine highway
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/canada/1505564/Tunas-25000-mile-swim-down-marine-highway.html

So your John West tuna you may have ate yesterday may have had a swim through the radioactive waters off Japan, just an example of how this could reach further than thought, with health effects yet to be seen, and that's not even thinking of the air-bourne contamination.

Voodoo_rasher · 09-08-2013 11:07AM

sets out pretty much everything.

Hope Tepco like their whalemeat.

old hippy · 09-08-2013 11:11AM

Sparticle wrote: »

I doubt there's enough radioactive material on earth to contaminate a body of water the size of the pacific.

Would you live by the Pacific, though? In that region?

BloodBath · 09-08-2013 12:36PM

This is how godzilla starts.

Maudi · 09-08-2013 02:13PM

Sparticle wrote: »

There is 707.5 million km3 of water in the pacific. Assuming the worst containment is Cesium 137 and the factory loses 300 tonnes of radioactive water a day. To show how ludicrous contamination of the pacific ocean is I'll treat the water as 300 tonnes of pure Cesium 137.

300 tonnes = 2189781 moles per day.
707.5 million km3 of water = 7.075 x 10^17 m3 of water.

That equals 3.1 x 10^-12 moles per m^3 or 3.1 x 10^-15 moles per liter . The Japanese emergency provisional standard for safe drinking water is 60Bq per liter.

1 mole of Cesium has an activity of 428 teraBequerels.

Pacific water would show an increase of activity of 1.327 BQ per liter per day which is the equivalent of about 3 billion monthly fukishima releases of cesium 137 happening every day.

Now obviously this is very rough and levels would be much higher near Fukushima but to think this is a terrible disaster that will have grave repercussions for civilisation is mad. Sure it's totally unacceptable that it's still being released but the health problems will be minimal and more likely non-existent for regular people in Japan.

What about the dangerous levels of mercury that we hear mentioned in sea fish..where did that come from?and surley fukashima would end up in the fish food chain too.

stuar · 09-08-2013 05:16PM

From the link mentioned above.
http://enenews.com/category/location/japan

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zauXF70o6ik

Gundersen: No way to stop Fukushima’s radioactive water going into Pacific — It will continue for at least 20-30 years

Gundersen: Fukushima reactors “will become unstable” if new barrier causes water buildup underground — Nuclear buildings could topple during quake

Top Official: “The current situation is extremely severe” at Fukushima — Plan to reduce contamination flowing into ocean relies on ‘untested methods’ and ‘technologies that have not been developed’

But hey nothing to worry about here:eek::eek::eek::eek:

stuar · 09-08-2013 05:28PM

Voodoo_rasher wrote: »

Hope Tepco like their whalemeat.

Don't be silly, thats only for research!

But hey, want some deformed sushi?........You got it!

Deformed fish is served at Sushi bar
http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/06/deformed-fish-is-served-at-sushi-bar/

stuar · 16-08-2013 06:08PM

Mission Impossible? Fukushima scientists brace for riskiest nuclear fuel clean-up yet.

The operation, to remove 400 tons of highly irradiated spent fuel beneath the plant’s damaged Reactor No. 4, could set off a catastrophe greater than any we have ever seen, independent experts warn. An operation of this scale, says plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company, has never been attempted before, and is wrought with danger.

Here’s what needs to be done: more than 1,300 used fuel rod assemblies, packing radiation 14,000 times the equivalent of the Hiroshima nuclear bomb, need to carefully be removed from their cooling pool.

An uncontrolled leak of nuclear fuel could cause more radiation than the March 2011 disaster or the 1986 Chernobyl catastrophe, say consultants Mycle Schneider and Antony Froggatt. "Full release from the Unit-4 spent fuel pool, without any containment or control, could cause by far the most serious radiological disaster to date," the scientists say in their World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2013.

http://rt.com/news/fukushima-fuel-cleanup-operation-522/

BloodBath · 17-08-2013 12:12AM

This should be the catalyst to shut down all similar first generation plants and risk assess all plants.

To think all of this **** could have been avoided with Thorium. All future nuclear plants should be Thorium based until Fusion becomes a possibility.

Voodoo_rasher · 21-08-2013 07:08PM

to
Fukushima.

scroll down a good bit - its somewhere in a middle column.

Voodoo_rasher · 08-11-2013 06:14PM

shedweller wrote: »

In fairness, once it goes under the crust it would be so diluted in the magma, i doubt it would cause any problems. .

I would have thought when the molten core has burned its way down to the magma beneath you have the makings of a conduit for a volcano to emerge.
How about that then - a 6 reactor death-trap atop a river, over an aquifer, and a v.......wtf indeed.

What is attempted from today never before been tried. REmoval of 400

tonnes of plutonium, the rods must be kept under water during removal. And

to be achieved without the obligatory remote robotic equipment.

HOw high will be the pile of bodies of yakuza 'hired-help' at the end of each shift..

This is the same spent nuclear fuel that Sellafield-THORP was built to handle, British & french been sending their lethal consignments to Fckup-shima since.. Have a memory of this reported from way back.

As for you Fckup-shima disaster deniers have a glimmer on youtube of

"On Fukushima Beach", maybe look at helencaldicott.com. I doubt if jonny7 or kingmob will know haha.
thanks for reading.

Sadly ppl prefer to be entertained rather than informed. Ignorance is a personal choice. Advertisers can't flog their wares so well if this mass extinction event was prominent in the back of ppls minds, on mainstream tv current affairs etc. Wouldn't want to upset the consumer mood in any way.

Now I must look for that boron mineral supplement - repels the radionucleotide sh#t

)

Hope you are right about the integrity of the reactor cores Red Nissan.

here's something more: http://rt.com/op-edge/fukushima-nuclear-catastrophe-damage-440/

Red Nissan · 08-11-2013 06:24PM

Voodoo_rasher wrote: »

I would have thought when the molten core has burned its way down to the magma beneath you have the makings of a conduit for a volcano to emerge..

Theoretically possible but the meltdown in the reactors in Fukushima are contained in either the reactor core or the containment vessels. [As in Three Mile Island]

At least one has a cracked containment with a core melt inside. Radiation is currently coming from the coolant, much of which has just to be dumped into the sea.

Disturbing the core melt and recovering the spent fuels and fuel rods will risk exposing the atmosphere to the full effects, something that happened only in the initial explosions for relatively short periods of time.

Nuclear fallout? / Media blackout?

Comments