Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
this just in
climber
north fork
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2013 - 10:14pm PT
|
This statement is 100% accurate.....you will die. Sorry.
|
|
Mimi
climber
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2013 - 10:23pm PT
|
It is very bad and there seems to be no sense of urgency but maybe that's because they know it's a royal screw up. It's too late from what I've read and the release is still going full tilt because tank capacity has been exceeded and they have to keep cooling it down with seawater. No one wants to go near the place. How can they? How could they have built that plant there? Blows my mind.
|
|
Mimi
climber
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2013 - 10:45pm PT
|
Do you mean it's being downplayed? All I've seen is doom except for the seafood levels. They can't eat the nearby crops. And many of our sailors on the boats that helped have cancer.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2013 - 10:58pm PT
|
The USA main stream media starts reporting the truth when everyone is dead.
Mostly because the USA main stream media itself is already dead.
Ever wonder why Americans are so obsessed with so many zombie movies .......
|
|
Mimi
climber
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2013 - 11:04pm PT
|
It's not just the USA, we'll be one of the last to fall. You might be onto something with symbolic zombies. The zombies in WWZ were really scary. They ran really fast. And the way they clacked their toofuses. Scary!
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2013 - 11:09pm PT
|
it is nonsense...
It's hard to fully know what the counter is counting. For instance, the web site for the counter indicates that the sensor size is large, 4.5 cm diameter window, that is an area of 16 cm² from which you'd expect roughly 16 cosmic rays intersecting the counter per second, or about 1000 per minute.
With as poor an efficiency as 1% for detecting the minimum ionizing cosmic rays, you'd expect 10 per minute just from that... the backgrounds can vary quite a bit, let's take the 40 counts per minute away from the ocean as a background level.
The problem with assigning the increase to Fukushima is that the guy has no comparison with the radioactive levels before Fukushima.
And the sea water is radioactive..
http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/natural.htm
Postassium 40 is the largest component, at 11 Bq/L
a Bq, Becquerel, is one radioactive decay per second, if you filled your Nalgene up with seawater you'd expect to see 660 CPM on the geiger counter... if the radiation could penetrate the plastic.
Potassium 40 decays 90% of the time to Calcium 40 and a β¯ (an electron) with 1.33 MeV of energy. The counter is probably nearly 100% efficient for detecting this radiation. How many liters of seawater spray do you think is in the air around the seashore?
The range of a 1.33 MeV β¯ in the atmosphere is meters. A meter diameter sphere is 12.6 m³ or 12.6x10⁶ cm³ one liter is 1000 cm³ so if the concentration of seawater spray were as little as 1 in 10,000 you'd have the equivalent of a liter of seawater in it, and the rates as high as 660 CPM...
Note that if you vaporized a liter of seawater the vapor would be roughly 1/1000 of the density of the liquid. You mix it into the air and the fraction is smaller...
So the count rate at the ocean, in the seawater spray, is consistent with the estimated natural background level.
The radiation from Fukushima is much much smaller than that.
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2013 - 11:14pm PT
|
You are a machine .Sir
|
|
Brokedownclimber
Trad climber
Douglas, WY
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2013 - 11:25pm PT
|
The joys of Internet "Yellow Journalism."
|
|
Mimi
climber
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2013 - 11:30pm PT
|
Even low levels of radiation are dangerous. It's genetic roulette with regard to cancer and other disastrous effects like ruining the real estate and very important Japanese fishing villages. We have to prevent such releases.
The US Navy was in the hot zone right after it happened and were not informed that there had been such a release as reported in recent testimony. The Japanese utility company is in big doodoo. And so is the government. And the problem is not solved at all. It's toxic waste flowing into the ocean at a significant rate no matter how you slice it.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2013 - 11:30pm PT
|
is their any reason for concern regarding the situation at fukishima?
not as far as direct radiation exposure to anyone in the US (or anywhere else, for that matter).
From the standpoint of systems engineering, there seemed to be some rather major oversights in designing that reactor complex, sited near the ocean and exposed in a seismically active region with a history of tsunamis.
The tension between government regulations and industry interests did not achieve a safe outcome in this case.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2013 - 11:32pm PT
|
Even low levels of radiation are dangerous.
you live in a sea of natural radiation, it is as much a part of life on Earth as the sun and the air. Life on Earth has evolved in this environment of natural radioactivity so, obviously, there is little harm at low levels.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2013 - 11:51pm PT
|
Ron's link points to this article:
http://www.csulb.edu/~slmanley/es203598r_b.pdf
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46, 3731
Canopy-Forming Kelps as California’s Coastal Dosimeter: ¹³¹I from Damaged Japanese Reactor Measured in Macrocystis pyrifera
Steven L. Manley and Christopher G. Lowe
ABSTRACT: The Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant, damaged by an earthquake and tsunami on March 11, 2011 released large amounts of ¹³¹I into the atmosphere, which was assimilated into canopy blades of Macrocystis pyrifera sampled from coastal California. The specific activity calculated to the estimated date of deposition/assimilation ranged from 0.6 to 2.5 Bq gdwt⁻¹, levels greater than those measured from kelps from Japan and Canada prior to the release. These ¹³¹I levels represent a significant input into the kelp forest ecosystem. Canopy-forming kelps are a natural coastal dosimeter that can measure the exposure of the coastal environment to ¹³¹I and perhaps other radioisotopes released from nuclear accidents. An organizational mechanism should be in place to ensure that they are sampled immediately and continuously after such releases.
note that this is an increase of about 1 or 2 decays per second per gram (dry weight)...
this is a very very small contribution to your natural radiation exposure, and by now most of the ¹³¹I has decayed away.
|
|
Mimi
climber
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2013 - 11:55pm PT
|
What do you mean, rival the deniers?
|
|
nature
climber
Boulder, CO
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2013 - 12:44am PT
|
oh wait...
yer gonna die?
tsunami?
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2013 - 12:54am PT
|
nature, didn't we already discuss that graphic?
it's the tsunami map, not the radiation dispersal pattern.
|
|
nature
climber
Boulder, CO
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2013 - 12:55am PT
|
yes we did. And I have many times over.
but you are being a spoiler.
I'm trolling and figured someone would bite!
And I maintain that so far I continue to be more worried about mercury in fish than radiation from fukushima.
|
|
Mimi
climber
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2013 - 12:57am PT
|
nature, I'm shocked!
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!