Japan earthquake + tsunami + nuclear problems

:troll

Belz... said:
This thread is for adults, Punshhh. Please don't come here either peddling your silly ideas or making fun of dead people.
Click to expand...



Godzilla (a cross between a gorilla and a whale) is for adults.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From The Oil Drum

What do we think we know for sure?

1) The Japanese government have warned of a grave nuclear incident on a number of occasions.

2) The status of the reactors, fuel pools and dispersion of radioactive materials continues to get worse, not better.

3) There are perhaps 7 or 8 reactor loads of fuel in play compared with a single load at Chernobyl and 4 or 5 of those are outside of containment in badly damaged spent fuel pools.

4) This report suggests that daily release of radioactive 131I and 137Cs is running at around 73% and 60% of Chernobyl respectively.

5) The Chernobyl fire burned for 8 to 10 days whilst Fukushima Dai-ichi has been emitting radioactive material for around 15 days with no end in sight.

6) There is a 30 km exclusion zone in place and thousands of residents have become refugees with little prospect of returning home in the near future.


http://www.theoildrum.com/node/7722
 
I have learned two units of measurement I had never heard of before. The sievert and the becquerel. I still don't really know what they are, but it seems like there are a lot of them.
 
alfaniner said:
I have learned two units of measurement I had never heard of before. The sievert and the becquerel. I still don't really know what they are, but it seems like there are a lot of them.
Click to expand...

Becquerel tells you how many radioactive atoms there are in a given substance. It's usually given per liter, kilogram or square meter (for an area covered with radioactive material).

Sievert tells you how dangerous the radiation coming from the radioactive atoms is.

The big thing to remember: ONE CANNOT CALCULATE Sievert FROM Becquerel. In order to quantify the dangerousness, one need to take into account what radioactive materials there are, which kind of radiation they give off, and how the radioactive material is handled. Becquerel can be used to quickly certify items for further use (can you still eat this food or drink this liquid? Do I need to wash this surface?), but nothing further.
 
The mayor of Minami Soma city, located 25 km away from the Fukushima, appeals to the world for help:

 
Cooling reactors(radioactive materials?) & controling spread of radiation & radioactive material (if monentary loss is immaterial) seem to be need of time to handle crisis in Japan. I am trying to know the difference in 1. keeping radioactive material in current & anticipated state of nuclear plant at Japan,2. Burrying it into concrete & 3. dumping whole plant or in pieces into the Sea..to control the current crisis esp. health & life effecting. What can be the impact of keeping radioactive material into Sea? Will it cool & stop radiating esp. to humans there?
 
Japan: Nuclear crisis raised to Chernobyl level

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13045341

There have been no fatalities resulting from the leaks at Fukushima, and risks to human health are thought to be low.
Click to expand...

Analysis

Richard Black
Environment correspondent, BBC News

Why the uprating? What it does not mean is that things have got worse at the plant. Rather, Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (Nisa) has re-analysed data from the incident and decided that collectively the releases of radioactivity mean it slots into a level seven categorisation.

Radioactivity is measured in bequerels (Bq); a million million of these is a terabequerel (TBq).

The Fukushima figure is clearly beyond the threshold for classification as a level seven event, although an order of magnitude lower than the 5.2 million TBq released from Chernobyl.

But that tells you nothing about the danger to people. Bequerels are a measure of the rate of radioactive decay - one atomic nucleus per second.

By contrast, sieverts measure the likely medical impact of the radiation to which an individual is exposed. And a huge number of bequerels does not automatically translate into a huge amount of sieverts.
Click to expand...

"We have upgraded the severity level to seven as the impact of radiation leaks has been widespread from the air, vegetables, tap water and the ocean," said Minoru Oogoda of Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (Nisa), the government's nuclear watchdog.
Click to expand...

One official from Tepco said that radiation leaks had not stopped completely and could eventually exceed those at Chernobyl, Reuters news agency reported.

However, a nuclear safety agency spokesman told reporters the leaks were still small compared to those at the plant in Ukraine, then part of the Soviet Union.

"In terms of volume of radioactive materials released, our estimate shows it is about 10% of what was released by Chernobyl," he said.
Click to expand...
 
Whether electricity from nuclear energy is bread & butter for us? Can't we manage anyhow without it with some lesser luxuary/convinience? If we can't control such crisis which is on the verge of breaking all records, why we encourage it at first place? God has provided us energy from SUN, why we don't expolit it even if it is with some inconvinience. Nothing can be more precious than health & life.
 
Why we can't manage anyhow? Were we not without it since our evolution? At the moment can also include what odds we have added & we need it for those unhealthful odds. We substituted A.Cs and cut the trees which were natural A.C providers. We added so much heat so need A.Cs. Mother nature has kept us existed since our evolution & we?

Anyway, if I have to live in similar region as of Japan, then for what things I should be careful?
 
Last edited:
Kumar said:
Why we can't manage anyhow? Were we not without it since our evolution? At the moment can also include what odds we have added & we need it for those unhealthful odds. We substituted A.Cs and cut the trees which were natural A.C providers.
Click to expand...


I doubt a tree outside a home can cool the interior of the home. It may help keep from the home from getting as warm as it might otherwise have, but it's not magically going to remove the heat from inside the house.

Besides, why is it either-or? How about folks replace their old, energy inefficient air conditioners with new models that achieve the same cooling while using much less energy?
 
Kumar said:
Cooling reactors(radioactive materials?) & controling spread of radiation & radioactive material (if monentary loss is immaterial) seem to be need of time to handle crisis in Japan. I am trying to know the difference in 1. keeping radioactive material in current & anticipated state of nuclear plant at Japan,2. Burrying it into concrete & 3. dumping whole plant or in pieces into the Sea..to control the current crisis esp. health & life effecting. What can be the impact of keeping radioactive material into Sea? Will it cool & stop radiating esp. to humans there?
Click to expand...
Even if you encase it you still have to ensure it remains cool. Part of the continuing problem at Chenobyl is that the containment structure is not air-tight and that the radioactive sources are not easily containable because of the severity of the accident.

At Chernobyl there is an artifact called the Elephant's Foot - a congealed mass that solidified after flowing down from the core, an honest-to-god meltdown, rather than the over-dramatised 'China syndrown' scare stories. It's hideously radioactive but hardly a serious risk because it doesn't dissipate anywhere. It can't be encased in concrete though because the concrete would act as an insulator and cause the temperature to rise again!

Fukishima has nothing that even remotely compares to Cherobyl. The only leakage has been from contaminated water.
 
Corsair 115 said:
I doubt a tree outside a home can cool the interior of the home. It may help keep from the home from getting as warm as it might otherwise have, but it's not magically going to remove the heat from inside the house.
Click to expand...

Previous houses were not felt so hot but were managable. Is it not selfishness to cool your home but warm the outside--global warming?

Besides, why is it either-or? How about folks replace their old, energy inefficient air conditioners with new models that achieve the same cooling while using much less energy?
Click to expand...

But this can add to their quantity. If global waming & other odds are increasing then we can't say we are improving.
 
Mikemcc said:
Even if you encase it you still have to ensure it remains cool. Part of the continuing problem at Chenobyl is that the containment structure is not air-tight and that the radioactive sources are not easily containable because of the severity of the accident.

At Chernobyl there is an artifact called the Elephant's Foot - a congealed mass that solidified after flowing down from the core, an honest-to-god meltdown, rather than the over-dramatised 'China syndrown' scare stories. It's hideously radioactive but hardly a serious risk because it doesn't dissipate anywhere. It can't be encased in concrete though because the concrete would act as an insulator and cause the temperature to rise again!

Fukishima has nothing that even remotely compares to Cherobyl. The only leakage has been from contaminated water.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Still it is bit different from other controlable problems. I was trying to know, how can we be protected from such events if living in similar environment. Whether keeping following precautions would be sufficient:

1. Living at min 30' alltitude in coastal area.

2. Living in earthquake proof building.

3. Living at least 20 Kms away from a nuclear power plant.

OK????
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom