Japanese earthquake / tsunami discussion

up for anything

I have as much faith in the truth of the information that the Japanese government have been releasing as I did in Brian Cowen's 'corners' which was probably about a 1,000,000 of a millisievert.. :rolleyes:

Hal Emmerich

digme wrote: »

French Research Body On Radioactivity Says Risks No Longer Negligible, Warns Pregant Women And Infants To Stay Away From ‘Risky Behavior’


Meanwhile, a French Research Body On Radioactivity has broken stride with the corporate controlled media/experts and released a stern warning.
“The risks associated with iodine-131 contamination in Europe are no longer “negligible,” according to CRIIRAD, a French research body on radioactivity. The NGO is advising pregnant women and infants against “risky behaviour,” such as consuming fresh milk or vegetables with large leaves,” reported euractiv.com.

Aww, I've the garden ready to go....

Rob A. Bank

andrew wrote: »

I agree; my intuitive grasp of what it means to have 10,000 tBeq released into the environment is limited; if you have more information about this it'd be appreciated. However, it remains the case that radiation levels around the plant (as measured in Sieverts at least) have remained at safe levels, and no one has died from radiation, or come close to dying; so why the sudden increase in threat level?

"The Japanese government's nuclear safety agency has decided to raise the crisis level of the Fukushima Daiichi power plant accident from 5 to 7, the worst on the international scale.

The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency made the decision on Monday. It says the damaged facilities have been releasing a massive amount of radioactive substances, which are posing a threat to human health and the environment over a wide area."

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/12_05.html

Obviously TEPCO have been downplaying the bad news from the beginning of this disaster.

Run_to_da_hills

Reactor 4 on fire..

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/04/12/3188819.htm?section=world

up for anything

They've had another 6.4 in the last few hours.

http://www.japanquakemap.com/#

Rob A. Bank

http://www.fairewinds.com/updates

In the second video on the page Arnie Gundersen suggests that The NRC, the Nuclear Industry, and TEPCO are limiting the flow of information to the public.

While at the same time nuclear industry insiders have a totally different view of the gravity of the situation in private.

Its the same old story " …as it is all over the world, when they cannot control atomic power they will try to control the information"

Yakult

Couldnt be bothered reading all the previous posts here and rarely anything on the news, but can someone tell me whats going on now? Is it getting worse/better or whats the story?

Run_to_da_hills

Yakult wrote: »

Couldnt be bothered reading all the previous posts here and rarely anything on the news, but can someone tell me whats going on now? Is it getting worse/better or whats the story?

Basically it is to be upgraded to a level 7 which has put it in par with Chernobyl with regards to its level of seriousness.

A statement that has been long overdue by the Japanese authorities.

Overheal

Rob A. Bank wrote: »

"The Japanese government's nuclear safety agency has decided to raise the crisis level of the Fukushima Daiichi power plant accident from 5 to 7, the worst on the international scale.

The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency made the decision on Monday. It says the damaged facilities have been releasing a massive amount of radioactive substances, which are posing a threat to human health and the environment over a wide area."

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/12_05.html

Obviously TEPCO have been downplaying the bad news from the beginning of this disaster.

How do you downplay dumping hundreds of metric tons of highly radioactive seawater? That wasn't exactly kept secret.

andrew

Says here that the Release of radiation is 10% that of Chernobyl

up for anything

Hmmm, the rumour mill at it's best. This quote comes from a post on another forum made by a Malaysian who married into a Chinese family.

It looks like we need Dirk Pitt and Al Giordino.

there are rumours circulating in Hong Kong that the power plants are actually just cover ups for real nuclear weapons being made and which are stored below the plants, that's why the Japanese were late in taking actions since the leakage wasnt as simple as anyone think. The Japanese have to have nuclear weapons too since China has them.

KamiKazi

*Scrolls back to the start of this thread where all the bedroom nuclear experts insisted this would never reach level 7*

gbee

Yakult wrote: »

Couldnt be bothered reading all the previous posts here and rarely anything on the news, but can someone tell me whats going on now? Is it getting worse/better or whats the story?

Back in an early post, the china syndrome was mentioned, as events are unfolding, those very early reports were in fact correct. We do have a reactor breech and uncontrolled reaction taking place in the Torus.

The almost certain possibility of this happened had been known from the beginning.

Agent Smith

Mod Edit: still not funny.

Mister men

andrew wrote: »

Says here that the Release of radiation is 10% that of Chernobyl

Very serious if true

andrew

KamiKazi wrote: »

*Scrolls back to the start of this thread where all the bedroom nuclear experts insisted this would never reach level 7*

I think you'll find that even actual nuclear experts were saying the same thing at the time.

Run_to_da_hills

KamiKazi wrote: »

*Scrolls back to the start of this thread where all the bedroom nuclear experts insisted this would never reach level 7*

And now that it is a level 7 (and has been from the start) These so called bedroom nuclear apologists are still playing down the seriousness of matter.

PeakOutput

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

And now that it is a level 7 (and has been from the start) These so called bedroom nuclear apologists are still playing down the seriousness of matter.

How many people have died hills? How many people have been made sick?

I couldn't give a **** about nuclear power but comparing it to Chernobyl is still ****ing retarded.

7 is the highest ranking for a nuclear accident. this is a serious accident, so was Chernobyl that doesn't mean they are the same. The only thing they have in common is the fact its a nuclear reactor.

it took one of the largest earthquakes in history to damage a 50/60 year old reactor to an extent that it eventually caused a major accident. To me that speaks volumes about how safe nuclear energy has been made.

That doesn't mean its not serious, it is, any accident or radiation leak is serious and it doesn't mean it won't get worse, it might, it might even eclipse chernobyl in eventual damage but there is no telling right now and pretending that you know what is going on is ridiculous.

Turtwig

andrew wrote: »

I think you'll find that even actual nuclear experts were saying the same thing at the time.

Actually I think you'll find the line they were using was this won't be another Chernobyl, it is still a very serious matter.

KamiKazi wrote: »

*Scrolls back to the start of this thread where all the bedroom nuclear experts insisted this would never reach level 7*

Just curious who said this would never reach level 7?

Run_to_da_hills

PeakOutput wrote: »

How many people have died hills? How many people have been made sick?

I couldn't give a **** about nuclear power but comparing it to Chernobyl is still ****ing retarded.

7 is the highest ranking for a nuclear accident. this is a serious accident, so was Chernobyl that doesn't mean they are the same. The only thing they have in common is the fact its a nuclear reactor.

it took one of the largest earthquakes in history to damage a 50/60 year old reactor to an extent that it eventually caused a major accident. To me that speaks volumes about how safe nuclear energy has been made.

That doesn't mean its not serious, it is, any accident or radiation leak is serious and it doesn't mean it won't get worse, it might, it might even eclipse chernobyl in eventual damage but there is no telling right now and pretending that you know what is going on is ridiculous.

Cancers and birth defects dose not appear over night. :rolleyes:

This is not sawdust we are talking about as the apologists like to lead us into believing, it is highly contaminated nuclear fallout radiation that will render possibly hundreds of square kilometers of good arable land within possibly 50km of the plant into a nuclear tip head which will be good for absolutely nothing and this is not mentioning water contamination, marine life devastation etc..

All it takes is one big one to tell us the dangers of Nuclear power and it has now happened twice.

I was protesting at Carnsore point in 1978 and 1979 about the proposed ESB plant and this was before any plants blew up. Thank god it never happened. There is no such thing as "nuclear power being safe". All nuclear power plants are potential dirty bombs.

thecornflake

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Cancers and birth defects dose not appear over night. :rolleyes:

This is not sawdust we are talking about as the apologists like to lead us into believing, it is highly contaminated nuclear fallout radiation that will render possibly hundreds of square kilometers of good arable land within possibly 50km of the plant into a nuclear tip head which will be good for absolutely nothing and this is not mentioning water contamination, marine life devastation etc..

All it takes is one big one to tell us the dangers of Nuclear power and it has now happened twice.

I was protesting at Carnsore point in 1978 and 1979 about the proposed ESB plant and this was before any plants blew up. Thank god it never happened. There is no such thing as "nuclear power being safe". All nuclear power plants are potential dirty bombs.

What about fusion ?

PeakOutput

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Cancers and birth defects dose not appear over night. :rolleyes:

This is not sawdust we are talking about as the apologists like to lead us into believing, it is highly contaminated nuclear fallout radiation that will render possibly hundreds of square kilometers of good arable land within possibly 50km of the plant into a nuclear tip head which will be good for absolutely nothing and this is not mentioning water contamination, marine life devastation etc..

All it takes is one big one to tell us the dangers of Nuclear power and it has now happened twice.

I was protesting at Carnsore point in 1978 and 1979 about the proposed ESB plant and this was before any plants blew up. Thank god it never happened. There is no such thing as "nuclear power being safe". All nuclear power plants are potential dirty bombs.

Ah ok so you had a previous agenda that makes sense. renewables are the best option but after that nuclear is the best option particular with the new zero waste designs but because of irrational claims from people on your side of the fence they are made far to difficult a sell and we will continue to **** ourselves over far worse then any chernobyl or 3 mile island or fukishima every day by continuing to rely fossil fuels

Run_to_da_hills

PeakOutput wrote: »

Ah ok so you had a previous agenda that makes sense. renewables are the best option but after that nuclear is the best option particular with the new zero waste designs but because of irrational claims from people on your side of the fence they are made far to difficult a sell and we will continue to **** ourselves over far worse then any chernobyl or 3 mile island or fukishima every day by continuing to rely fossil fuels

The very medium that leveled Fukushima has potential and has been totally under estimated and under used. I worked in the Irish Light house service where WAG's (Wave activated generators) were successfully used on buoys as far back as 1981.

It is also down to demand, society has got too dependent on consuming large amounts of electric power on unnecessary uxuries etc. If there is going to be a Green tax it should be charged on the power consumption of an appliance.

Ie those wanting their fcuk off 62" Plasma surround cinema TV or their American style fridge will pay dearly for it.

I can foresee a day when those purchasing unnecessary power consuming luxuries will be frowned upon and treated just like those currently driving those large fuel guzzling SUV's in this country. Large illuminated commercial signs will no longer be acceptable in society. This trend will more than likely begin in Japan.

PeakOutput

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Ie those wanting their fcuk off 62" Plasma surround cinema TV or their American style fridge will pay dearly for it.

they don't have to though but scaremongering about any of these technologies will force the outcome you are talking about not get rid of it

if you havnt already go onto ted.com and search for bill gates: innovating to zero

nuclear power could (if we cant sort out battery technology to make renewables viable) be the best solution

up for anything

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I can foresee a day when those purchasing unnecessary power consuming luxuries will be frowned upon and treated just like those currently driving those large fuel guzzling SUV's in this country. This trend will more than likely begin in Japan.

Considering they're the miniaturisation experts I somehow doubt it. It will be interesting to see though how they miniaturise a 60" television.

Run_to_da_hills

up for anything wrote: »

Considering they're the miniaturisation experts I somehow doubt it. It will be interesting to see though how they miniaturise a 60" television.

It will be back to the basic 24" size screen that we were brought up with.

up for anything

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

It will be back to the basic 24" size screen that we were brought up with.

I still have those. Now I'm never going to own a home cinema jobbie.

Run_to_da_hills

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Ie those wanting their fcuk off 62" Plasma surround cinema TV or their American style fridge will pay dearly for it.

I can foresee a day when those purchasing unnecessary power consuming luxuries will be frowned upon and treated just like those currently driving those large fuel guzzling SUV's in this country. Large illuminated commercial signs will no longer be acceptable in society. This trend will more than likely begin in Japan.

Micro cars have been around in Japan for some time now, more to do with lack of space than economy but the same result, yes, the world is past "peak energy" and we'll all have to come to terms with the fact there will be less for each and every one of us.

That reduction will be exasperated because of countries like China being "cash" buyers of oil!

Standman

Anyone else think it's a bit misleading when they keep reporting that the nuclear crisis level has been raised to the same as the chernobyl disaster? Seems a bit sensationalist when they eventually tell you the radiation emitted from Chernobyl was 100 times stronger.

shedweller

andrew wrote: »

Jesus Christ. Not a single person has died directly due to radiation though, so how can they rise the incident to such a level?

The decades of increased cancer rates in Japan AND worldwide (at least in the northern hemisphere) may be testimony to how serious this is.

PeakOutput wrote: »

How many people have died hills? How many people have been made sick?

I couldn't give a **** about nuclear power but comparing it to Chernobyl is still ****ing retarded.

7 is the highest ranking for a nuclear accident. this is a serious accident, so was Chernobyl that doesn't mean they are the same. The only thing they have in common is the fact its a nuclear reactor.

it took one of the largest earthquakes in history to damage a 50/60 year old reactor to an extent that it eventually caused a major accident. To me that speaks volumes about how safe nuclear energy has been made.

That doesn't mean its not serious, it is, any accident or radiation leak is serious and it doesn't mean it won't get worse, it might, it might even eclipse chernobyl in eventual damage but there is no telling right now and pretending that you know what is going on is ridiculous.

Here is a standard "pro-nuclear" response. ^^^^

PeakOutput wrote: »

Ah ok so you had a previous agenda that makes sense. renewables are the best option but after that nuclear is the best option particular with the new zero waste designs but because of irrational claims from people on your side of the fence they are made far to difficult a sell and we will continue to **** ourselves over far worse then any chernobyl or 3 mile island or fukishima every day by continuing to rely fossil fuels

"Zero waste designs" you say. Explain where ALL the waste goes.