Merged nuclear power safe?

[r-j]

I don't respond to anyone acting like they can question me. Certainly not from anyone who thinks there is cesium in all milk. That is crazy. I challenged your false claim, and of course you have no source to back it up.

I know you had to make it up, because it's not true.

Anyone who isn't also challenging that false claim, I consider you just as bad. Disgusting really, that anyone would promote such a terrible lie about milk.

 

[r-j]

It's as if somebody claimed that all food contains raw human feces, in very small amounts. That is how disgusting it sounds.

Then you want to question me? You have zero credibility now. Understand?

 

[r-j]

Your outrage is noted, and I am content to let you continue to argue this point with Aepervius.

I'm not arguing a point. He lied, and I called him on it. Now he's trying to avoid admitting the truth. That's not an argument.

 

[MattusMaximus]

It's as if somebody claimed that all food contains raw human feces, in very small amounts. That is how disgusting it sounds.

Then you want to question me? You have zero credibility now. Understand?

Last time: do you or do you not acknowledge that there are naturally-occurring sources of radiation that permeate our food (no matter what the source)?

The fact that you continue to ignore this question speaks to your lack of credibility, I think, regardless of whatever mistakes someone else on this thread may have made.

 

[r-j]

Anybody with any knowledge of food knows that naturally occurring radioactivity exists, and depending on the food it varies a lot. It's like you are asking if food has minerals in it.

It's ridiculous.

 

[Christian Klippel]

Keyword : negligible.

That word pops up in the mind of the greens only in connection with the resources, energy and space needed for, as well as the environmental impact of, the production, build and operation of renewable energy plants and energy storage systems. It also appears in conjunction with the changes needed to the grid to accommodate for all that.

And very often they substitute that word for "non existent" in that context.

Greetings,

Chris

 

[George 152]

Regardless of the cesium 137 issue, would you be willing to address my question about naturally-occurring radiation in food?

ETA: More on cesium in general, if you guys want to keep pecking at each other about it.

My reading of the subject is:
Quoted
"Exposure to Cesium and Cesium-137
How does cesium-137 get into the environment?

Cesium-137 in the environment came from a variety of sources. The largest single source was fallout from atmospheric nuclear weapons tests in the 1950s and 1960s, which dispersed and deposited cesium-137 world-wide. However much of the cesium-137 from testing has now decayed.

Nuclear reactor waste and accidental releases such as the Chernobyl accident in the Ukraine release some cesium-137 to the environment. Spent nuclear fuel reprocessing plant wastes may introduce small amounts to the environment. However, the U.S. does not currently reprocess spent nuclear fuel.

Although hospitals and research laboratories generate wastes containing cesium-137, they usually do not enter the environment. Occasionally, industrial instruments containing cesium-137 are lost or stolen. Anyone who unwittingly handles them may be exposed. These devices are typically metal, and may be considered scrap metal and sold for recycling. If they find their way into a steel mill and are melted, they can cause significant environmental contamination. They may also be discarded and sent to a municipal landfill, or sold for other reasons. These devices should be considered dangerous."

 

[r-j]

Healthy food does not contain any of the dangerous nuclides from reactors. You might as well say milk contains traces of Strontium 90 and Plutonium 239. That is so disgusting.

 

[Christian Klippel]

Also please note that he originally spoke of radioactive materials in food generally, and only switched to caesium once he had to see that his position was just stupid.

Just in case someone did not notice where that goalpost went.

Greetings,

Chris

ETA: And now he's moving the goalposts even more and brings strontium and plutonium in.
Hey, we should hook up a generator to his goalposts. Plenty of renewable energy in that, methinks.

 

[MattusMaximus]

Anybody with any knowledge of food knows that naturally occurring radioactivity exists, and depending on the food it varies a lot. It's like you are asking if food has minerals in it.

It's ridiculous.

So you acknowledge that there is a certain minimum level of naturally-occurring radiation within food that cannot be avoided. And, according to the United States' EPA, this comes out to about 40 mrem/year.

Good, some progress in the discussion

Now, might I suggest, that any further discussion of the cesium 137 question be put into this context? If there is such cesium found within the food, what is the amount, and - in the context of the facts you have admitted - is this a problem based upon the standard dosage amounts?

 

[MattusMaximus]

Healthy food does not contain any of the dangerous nuclides from reactors. You might as well say milk contains traces of Strontium 90 and Plutonium 239. That is so disgusting.

Who the hell brought up strontium and plutonium?

Oh, that's right... you did. Why? Have either of these been detected anywhere in the food supply in amounts that should be of concern?

ETA: No matter what radioactive isotope you invoke, the same standards must apply in the discussion. Namely, If there is such an isotope found within the food, what is the amount, and - in the context of the facts you have admitted - is this a problem based upon the standard dosage amounts?

 

[Aepervius]

I'm not arguing a point. He lied, and I called him on it. Now he's trying to avoid admitting the truth. That's not an argument.

Think whatever you want. I don't care the least if you do not believe me and refuse to check around. This is an anonymous internet forum. Think that will damage my rep ?

And frankly seeing what you posted in this thread, I don't think you check or even double check info.

So one last time : Cesium 137 is a product of fission of U235. Atom bomb and particularly chernobyl released that all over the world in the atmosphere in clouds. Half life is 30 years. There are also natural source near the surface of Uranium. The quantity of Cs137 will be negligible since it tends to go in the soil and stay there, but it will with all probability be non zero.

But since you are not able to use google :

You can be exposed to stable or radioactive cesium by breathing air, drinking water, or eating food containing cesium. The level of cesium in air and water is generally very low. The concentration of natural cesium in air is generally less than 1 nanogram (1 nanogram equals 1/1,000,000,000 of a gram) per cubic meter of air (ng/m3). The amount of cesium in drinking water is ordinarily about 1 microgram (1 microgram equals 1/1,000,000 of a gram) per liter of water (µg/L). On average, a person swallows about 10 µg of stable cesium per day in food and water, and breathes about 0.025 µg per day. Plants and animals contain cesium at concentrations of about 1-300 ng/g.

Radioactive cesium has been detected in surface water and in many types of food. This includes breast milk and pasteurized milk. The amount of radioactive cesium in food and milk is highly dependent upon several factors. The most important factor is whether or not there has been recent fallout from a nuclear explosion such as a weapons test or an accident that has occurred at a nuclear power plant.

Gee was that hard ?

And before you stop drinking milk : unless you live in Prypiat the quantity are negligible.

Although some study in Croatia showed quite higher quantity than normal after Chernobyl (double CS137 than normal... still negligible).

 

[r-j]

If you believe made up facts, all milk has a little Strontium 90 and Plutonium 239, as well as cesium137 and Iodine 129 and Iodine 131, so you should stop drinking milk.

It's no different making that up, than what he did, making up that all milk has a little cesium137 in it. It's disgusting nonsense and you should be ashamed for not challenging that.

 

[Aepervius]

Oh and the coup the grace :

Since cesium is naturally found in the environment, we cannot avoid being exposed to it. However, the relatively low concentrations of stable cesium do not warrant any immediate steps to reduce exposure. You are unlikely to be exposed to high levels of radioactive cesium unless there is a fuel meltdown and accidental release at a nuclear power plant or a nuclear weapon has been detonated. In such cases, follow the advice of public health officials who will publish guidelines for reducing exposure to radioactive material when necessary.

 

[Aepervius]

If you believe made up facts, all milk has a little Strontium 90 and Plutonium 239, as well as cesium137 and Iodine 129 and Iodine 131, so you should stop drinking milk.

It's no different making that up, than what he did, making up that all milk has a little cesium137 in it. It's disgusting nonsense and you should be ashamed for not challenging that.

I think you do not understand what the word negligible means.

 

[r-j]

I see you found a source that explain why milk 'can' have cesium137 in it. And all of the reasons are bad.

"The most important factor is whether or not there has been recent fallout from a nuclear explosion such as a weapons test or an accident that has occurred at a nuclear power plant"

Which is why normally milk has no radioactive Cesium in it. Or any other dangerous material from a nuclear power plant.

 

[r-j]

But it's clear you will never admit you made it up. Or understand why such behavior reduces your ability to assure people about food safety, or nuclear risks.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

It's as if somebody claimed that all food contains raw human feces, in very small amounts. That is how disgusting it sounds.

Then you want to question me? You have zero credibility now. Understand?

I don't respond to anyone acting like they can question me. Certainly not from anyone who thinks there is cesium in all milk. That is crazy. I challenged your false claim, and of course you have no source to back it up.

I know you had to make it up, because it's not true.

Anyone who isn't also challenging that false claim, I consider you just as bad. Disgusting really, that anyone would promote such a terrible lie about milk.

There is an old saying in the legal profession; "When the facts are against you, pound the law. When the law is against you, pound the facts. When the law and the facts are against you, pound the table."

I'm seeing lot of furniture abuse and wasted bandwidth in your posts, but little evidence and logic.

 

[Aepervius]

I see you found a source that explain why milk 'can' have cesium137 in it. And all of the reasons are bad.

"The most important factor is whether or not there has been recent fallout from a nuclear explosion such as a weapons test or an accident that has occurred at a nuclear power plant"

Which is why normally milk has no radioactive Cesium in it. Or any other dangerous material from a nuclear power plant.

Half life of CS 137 : 30 year.

Chernobyl was 30 years ago. Last Atmospheric test were something like 60 years ago. Any cesium belched over Europe by Chernobyl is about 1/2 gone, and from last atmospheric test is 1/4 gone.

Sure it is in majority gone, and mostly present as negligible trace, but it is still there.

 

[Aepervius]

I see you found a source that explain why milk 'can' have cesium137 in it. And all of the reasons are bad.

"The most important factor is whether or not there has been recent fallout from a nuclear explosion such as a weapons test or an accident that has occurred at a nuclear power plant"

Which is why normally milk has no radioactive Cesium in it. Or any other dangerous material from a nuclear power plant.

Again there is a difference between NOEN, ZERO, and NEGLIGIBLE. Learn the difference.