Japanese earthquake / tsunami discussion

Chicken1

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Would you just gtfo of this thread?

Rob has as much right as anyone to speak his mind on the radiation in Japan, if it was any closer to us and the wind was blowing in our direction you would be dam glad of advice about its effects on humans.

Canis Lupus

Chicken1 wrote: »

Rob has as much right as anyone to speak his mind on the radiation in Japan, if it was any closer to us and the wind was blowing in our direction you would be dam glad of advice about its effects on humans.

All Rob is doing is putting a scaremongering slant on EVERYTHING he says lik it's some giant conspiracy theory and I've lost patience for it, especially as this thread is filled with factual information on the effects of radiation and the real impact Fukushima will have both on Japan and the world.

It's people like you listening to him that makes me want to bang my head off my keyboard.

Turtwig

Chicken1 wrote: »

Rob has as much right as anyone to speak his mind on the radiation in Japan, if it was any closer to us and the wind was blowing in our direction you would be dam glad of advice about its effects on humans.

Well I can't speak for Canis but I would be horrified! His/her advice is terrible, inaccurate and the cynic in me sees it nothing more than attempts at fearmongering.

jackiebaron

Canis Lupus wrote: »

All Rob is doing is putting a scaremongering slant on EVERYTHING he says lik it's some giant conspiracy theory and I've lost patience for it, especially as this thread is filled with factual information on the effects of radiation and the real impact Fukushima will have both on Japan and the world.

It's people like you listening to him that makes me want to bang my head off my keyboard.

Once I hear people like you accuse others of "conspiracy theories" just because they question what they're told then I lose all respect for you.

So he's questioning the official narrative but your petty ad hominem attack is simply trying to paint him as a nutcase. Pretty shabby tactic.

Not cool.

Canis Lupus

jackiebaron wrote: »

Once I hear people like you accuse others of "conspiracy theories" just because they question what they're told then I lose all respect for you.

So he's questioning the official narrative but your petty ad hominem attack is simply trying to paint him as a nutcase. Pretty shabby tactic.

Not cool.

Have you read this thread? Have you seen the data provided regarding the radiation? Have you seen, despite this that Rob continues time and time again to post scaremongering crap and his new catch phrase is "Ignore what they say... watch what they do". :rolleyes: Not cool man, not cool.

Saadyst

jackiebaron wrote: »

Once I hear people like you accuse others of "conspiracy theories" just because they question what they're told then I lose all respect for you.

So he's questioning the official narrative but your petty ad hominem attack is simply trying to paint him as a nutcase. Pretty shabby tactic.

Not cool.

Actual facts have been provided in this thread to counter the scare stories, time and time again.

Rob A. Bank has not bothered to respond to any of them except picking and choosing a reply when a media scare story suits it. In fact he's barely engaged in any meaningful discussion in this thread at all, and has just been copy pasting from various sources, some very very dubious.

He's not questioning anything at all. He's stuck in his mindset and not listening to any rational source of information that is presented. Again, all he is doing is copy and pasting the scare stories he can find.

gargleblaster

Saadyst wrote: »

Actual facts have been provided in this thread to counter the scare stories, time and time again.

Rob A. Bank has not bothered to respond to any of them except picking and choosing a reply when a media scare story suits it. In fact he's barely engaged in any meaningful discussion in this thread at all, and has just been copy pasting from various sources, some very very dubious.

He's not questioning anything at all. He's stuck in his mindset and not listening to any rational source of information that is presented. Again, all he is doing is copy and pasting the scare stories he can find.

if it becomes too difficult to ignore his posts, there is an ignore function is there not?

telling someone to get the **** off of a thread because you don't like what they're saying is a bit much it seems.

Donal Og O Baelach

..And this constant accusation of "Scaremongering", is very condescending.

Its like the clever parents trying to protect the dumb kids from crazy uncle Robs boogie man story.

Rob a Bank might be as mad as a box of loyalist frogs on acid during the marching season, but this is After Hours, he fits right in here, and, most of us are actually adults.

enda1

A friend of mine bought a Geiger counter and recorded (a few days ago, I think on Friday last week), higher radiation levels in his embassy in Tokyo than in his apartment in Europe.

Puts things in perspective I think.

However, I think that Western people leaving Japan are right. For the sake of their families worries, peace of mind and primarily, the difficulty to leave if and when the situation gets worse and everyone wants to leave.

Knowing the Japanese culture quite/very well, I understand a lot of Western people reacting slightly panicked. This is because in their society they place a lot of trust in their authorities. Their is therefore a large onus on the authorities to prevent widespread panic, so information is very limited and in my opinion untrustworthy.

Also there it is a very rigid society, also in the company world with a strongly top down approach. To pass problems upwards is frowned upon, so there is a tenancy to try to hide problems or solve them on the ground level because it looks like a failure of yours if you report upwards. For this reason there can be a delay in information coming to management and subsequently to authorities, media etc.

To be honest in the case of ones personal health, the more prudent choice is to get the hell out of Dodge. Though the situation currently is not so dangerous, its hard to tell what direction the situation will go. All in all its a shit situation and one we can be thankful that we should never have to fear happening in Ireland.

gbee

Beta Ray burns, no symptoms yet. Radiation will go through paper, but is blocked by aluminium foil 1mm thick. Beta Ray burns will go red and form blisters. The effected workers wore ankle boots which seems to have been swamped.

No symptoms yet, contradicts an earlier report from NHK. Workers got 180mSv in forty minutes in the turbine building next door to the reactor which does not normally have high radiation. And usually does not have any water in it either.

Workers may have gone in there less protected than they otherwise would have been [possibly]. This incident may delay ongoing work as more ground surveys must be done as the day before there was no radiation or water in the turbine hall. The men worked in 15cm deep water.

123balltv

they had yellow rain anyone else heard of this
weather agency said 'cause of yellow rain found to be pollen'
thats strange its being snowing in Japan for a while now

gbee

Water: At 300 becquerels per litre, 3ltr per day takes six months to reach 50mSv.
During pregnancy a woman drinking 2 litres of water per day could have breast milk contamination of 1.2mSv at current and continued rates.

However; already water contamination has been reported have dropped back below the minimum safety levels for infants. Note: 50mSv is considered the minimum safety limit for civilians [workers at the plant are allowed 200mSv].

Tokyo 1.60µSv [Micro]/hr current report.

take everything

The 100mSv and 250mSv are only in emergency situations which I imagine is normally relatively short periods of time.

Yes i agree.

For a worker to exceed the 100mSv annual dose they would have to spend the whole year being exposed at 100mSv (this means every minute of every day for the whole year) or about 5 months at the 250mSv level.

I don't think that's true. To exceed the 100mSv dose for example they just have to get a dose of 100mSv, not get a dose of 100mSv constantly over the year.

What sort of emergency situation do you expect a single person to be needed for 5 months of exposure at 250mSv?

None. I don't imagine that. Emergencies mean short periods of time of course.
But, with even short exposure in emergencies, you can massively exceed the annual dose associated with an increased cancer risk. If you're exposed to 100 mSv in an emergency (over the period of just one day say), you've already got your annual dose associated with an increased cancer risk. If you're exposed to this dose for 2 days, you've already got double this dose.

Overheal

Rob A. Bank wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DVrQCRRN8A

The US Aircraft Carrier Ronald Regan sailed into the plume of radioactivity from the Fukushema nuclear plant on the 13th and then promptly changed course to avoid it.Though they were 100km downwind from the plant when they met the plume, they had to decontaminated the carrier by washing every exposed surface, suggesting that the radioactive pollution from the damaged reactors is far worse than has been admitted to date !

Japan cant move out of the way of the radioactive fallout which continues practically unchecked. Too bad the Japanese cant wash their country like this too.

Ignore what they say... watch what they do !

They would have had to do the same thing if they steered into a flock of seagulls that got done eating lunch. It's not an indication that the radiation was dangerous levels. Do you see the crewmen wearing protective gear?

Rob A. Bank wrote: »

Ionizing radiation and cancer…

Background radiation will cause 1 out of 100 people to die of cancer in their lifetimes, said Dr. Donald Bucklin, who spent 10 years as medical director for the Palo Verde nuclear plant in Arizona, the largest nuclear plant in the United States.

Additional exposure increases this risk.

Because more than 70 million CT scans are carried out each year, the US National Cancer Institute has estimated that 29,000 Americans will get cancer as a result of the CT scans they received in 2007 alone. The physician must weigh up the risk/benefit of doing the test. ie. does the information gained from the scan outweigh the risk from the radiation and is it therefore an acceptable risk.

Those who suggest that it is harmless to expose a whole population to what amounts to an unplanned, unwanted x-ray or CT scan are being very economical with the truth.

Did you find that on one of those Vegan websites? Virtually everything causes risks for cancer. Anything that emits ionizing radiation. You're ****ing correct. I fly on an airplane, that increases my risk. I microwave something, that increases my risk, I eat a hot dog, or other foods containing cooked sodium phosphates, that increases my risk. I go to the beach, that increases my risk. I eat a banana, that increases my risk.

If you're scared I highly recommend you put on some sunblock the next time you sleep next to someone, because that also increases your risk to cancer.

Chill the hell out already.

Overheal

123balltv wrote: »

they had yellow rain anyone else heard of this
weather agency said 'cause of yellow rain found to be pollen'
thats strange its being snowing in Japan for a while now

Ireland doesnt get a lot of pollen, but Japan must. My area certainly does. Anything you leave outside gets a fine powder of yellow in a couple hours during pollen season.

andrew

Regarding the aircraft carrier, I presume they're cleaning it because it's a nuclear carrier. Obviously, on a nuclear carrier, it's important to know whether the reactor is leaking. And to do that, I presume there's radiation sensors all around the ship; for a warship especially, i'd say it's important to be able to keep it running even if **** has hit the fan, which means having detailed information about the ship and it's state regarding radiation.

However, if the ship is being contaminated by some outside source of radiation, then any radiation kit they have aboard the ship becomes useless, as it means they can't know whether the radiation they're picking up is coming from outside sources or their own reactor. Hence the need to remove all and any exogenous source of radiation, so that should any radiation appear, they know it's their own reactor.


Regarding fear mongering, and posting information from sources like the daily mail. In a way, I think it's actually a good thing that people are doing this. It allows people here who are slightly more informed to debunk the kinda crap which is coming out of the media and which most people are being exposed to.

Here's an interesting article about the dangers the plant currently faces. Someone here pointed out a while ago that salt cooling on the fuel would become a problem; nice work!

Canis Lupus

take everything wrote: »

None. I don't imagine that. Emergencies mean short periods of time of course.
But, with even short exposure in emergencies, you can massively exceed the annual dose associated with an increased cancer risk. If you're exposed to 100 mSv in an emergency (over the period of just one day say), you've already got you're annual dose associated with an increased cancer risk. If you're exposed to this dose for 2 days, you've already got double this dose.

A dose of 250msv will give you a 1% increase in the liklihood of cancer over the course of your life.

"John Lee, a professor of nuclear engineering at the University of Michigan, said that acceptable levels of radiation are typically much lower — 50 mSv per year — "but this limit may be exceeded somewhat in emergency situations." It should be noted, however, that 250 mSv is not an unreasonable level of radiation. That dose equals 25 rem — another measure of radiation — and it takes a dose of 500 rem to kill a person. Exposure to 25 rem is still a lot under normal circumstances, but under guidelines set by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, these workers are not risking their lives.

Kim Kearfott, another professor of nuclear engineering at the University of Michigan, said there are a several radiation checkpoints in place to protect the workers. "When entering areas where one may become contaminated with radionuclides, protective clothing is worn which can be removed. The clothing becomes contaminated, and not the person." The white suits will block most low-energy alpha radiation, but not higher-energy gamma radiation, such as X-rays. To counter that, the workers would need to wear bulky lead shielding or should stand behind objects. Limiting exposure times is also effective.

If high amounts of airborne radioactivity are present, workers may wear respirators, or even carry their own air supplies on their backs like scuba divers. "This prevents the radionuclides from entering the body, where they can remain and continue to expose the workers even after they have left the area," Kearfott said. "There are stationary radiation detectors throughout the plant, as well as portable radiation detectors that can be carried around by workers. There are also walk-through monitors to check for external contamination."

Team effort

Japan has reportedly been cycling workers through dangerous high-radioactivity areas, which can minimize danger to them. "The shorter the total amount of time at a point with high radiation dose rates, the smaller the dose," Kearfott said. "Often, workers may be rotated through a job. In other words, the job may be completed by 10 workers, so each worker only gets 10 percent of the dose. This would keep worker doses below the thresholds for health effects like acute radiation syndrome."

Long-term health problems may depend on how quickly people are rotated through, Murray said. "The workers who cleaned up after Chernobyl were rotated through fairly quickly and did not seem to suffer many excess cancers. This experience has provided epidemiologists useful data on radiation exposure," he said, adding that the nuclear crisis at the Fukushima plants is not yet on par with the Chernobyl disaster."

Hazys

Some pictures inside the Fukushima Nuclear Plant:

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Japan-Fukushima-Nuclear-Plant/ss/events/wl/031411fukushima/im:/110324/photos_ts_wl_afp/67bed70d87299a4083763d60982cd51f/


Wow...when i heard about the workers working in there, i pictured them in control rooms pushing buttons, even if there was a radioactive leak in the room.

I never knew the control rooms and the buildings around the reactors were destroyed as badly as that. How they are keeping the reactors cool in those conditions with very limited technology that they are used to is a miracle.

Rob A. Bank

Overheal wrote: »

Did you find that on one of those Vegan websites?

No.. and strangely the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland (RPII), which is Ireland’s expert voice on ionising radiation, broadly agrees with those figures. It is only sensible to do everything you can to minimize exposure to ionizing radiation because of the risks. The idea that the Japanese population being showered with radioactive particles is somehow harmless is complete nonsense.

"The greatest health risk from radiation in Ireland is caused by radon. It accounts for 56 per cent of the total radiation dose received by the Irish population. Between 150 and 200 lung cancer deaths in Ireland every year can be linked to radon."

Radon is a radioactive gas which is naturally produced in the ground from the uranium present in small quantities in all rocks and soils

They also have a useful map showing where the highest levels of Radon occur in Ireland. http://www.rpii.ie/radon-map.aspx

Rob A. Bank

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Would you just gtfo of this thread?

Ohh the nuclear choirboys have progressed from "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" to ad hominem attacks.

How pathetic !

Rob A. Bank

Hazys wrote: »

Some pictures inside the Fukushima Nuclear Plant:

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Japan-Fukushima-Nuclear-Plant/ss/events/wl/031411fukushima/im:/110324/photos_ts_wl_afp/67bed70d87299a4083763d60982cd51f/


Wow...when i heard about the workers working in there, i pictured them in control rooms pushing buttons, even if there was a radioactive leak in the room.

I never knew the control rooms and the buildings around the reactors were destroyed as badly as that. How they are keeping the reactors cool in those conditions with very limited technology that they are used to is a miracle.

Good find, thank you.

Rob A. Bank

Japan detects radioactivity 30 km off coast according to IAEA.

"The iodine concentrations were at or above Japanese regulatory limits, and the cesium levels were well below those limits,"

http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/tsunamiupdate01.html

shadowninty

Rob A. Bank wrote: »

Ohh the nuclear choirboys have progressed from "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" to ad hominem attacks.

How pathetic !

lol what do you want to power the world on?
hot air?

Rob A. Bank

Tap water woes hit Chiba, Saitama, Ibaraki

"The scope of radiation-contaminated tap water expanded Thursday, with radioactive iodine detected in tap water in Chiba, Saitama and Ibaraki prefectures."

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20110325a1.html

Rob A. Bank

shadowninty wrote: »

lol what do you want to power the world on?
hot air?

Nuclear is necessary in the power mix for the forseeable future... but SAFE nuclear.

vibe666

here's a pretty swanky bit of road repair in japan that took only 6 days.

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/03/24/japanese-repair-quake-ravaged-road-in-just-six-days/

skelliser

Rob A. Bank wrote: »

Nuclear is necessary in the power mix for the forseeable future... but SAFE nuclear.

nuclear power is safe!

its actually the safest power generation we have!

andrew

Rob A. Bank wrote: »

No.. and strangely the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland (RPII), which is Ireland’s expert voice on ionising radiation, broadly agrees with those figures. It is only sensible to do everything you can to minimize exposure to ionizing radiation because of the risks. The idea that the Japanese population being showered with radioactive particles is somehow harmless is complete nonsense.

"The greatest health risk from radiation in Ireland is caused by radon. It accounts for 56 per cent of the total radiation dose received by the Irish population. Between 150 and 200 lung cancer deaths in Ireland every year can be linked to radon."

Radon is a radioactive gas which is naturally produced in the ground from the uranium present in small quantities in all rocks and soils

They also have a useful map showing where the highest levels of Radon occur in Ireland. http://www.rpii.ie/radon-map.aspx

Noone's denying that radiation can be harmful. Radiation in large doses can be harmful. Some people have large amounts of radon in their homes. When this is the case, it's harmful. Similarly, if people in Japan had large amounts of radiation 'showering' down on them, it would be harmful. But they don't. They're being exposed to a negligible amount of extra radiation; hence the accusations that you're scaremongering.

My name is URL

There's a documentary about the earthquake and tsunami on Channel 4 tonight at nine o'clock.. should be good.

Canis Lupus

Rob A. Bank wrote: »

Ohh the nuclear choirboys have progressed from "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" to ad hominem attacks.

How pathetic !

Tap water woes hit Chiba, Saitama, Ibaraki

"The scope of radiation-contaminated tap water expanded Thursday, with radioactive iodine detected in tap water in Chiba, Saitama and Ibaraki prefectures."

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20110325a1.html

You're right and I apologise. Please keep posting, we'll do our best to show everyone else the reality of the situation.

Of course I would expect you to be aware of the situation Rob but for anyone else not aware please understand the limits imposed, that of 300becs for adults and 100becs for infants under one year is per year. To make that clear, an individual would have to consume over this limit for an entire year before encountering health issues.

This article explains quite clearly HERE