Japanese earthquake / tsunami discussion

Solair

It's hard to know. The British AGR and Magnox designs are unique to the UK. The EU or standardised design has little relevance to them.

I know concerns about containment were raised by South Korea when North Korea used old, now publicly available, British magnox designs.

The Russians thought Chernobyl type reactors were perfectly safe too. They were excellent engineers and certainly had no desire to have nuclear accidents!

andrew

Solair wrote: »

The Russians thought Chernobyl type reactors were perfectly safe too. They were excellent engineers and certainly had no desire to have nuclear accidents!

There's an interesting documentary (can't think of the name), it's a minute by minute reconstruction of the Chernobyl incident, focusing on the guy who ended up getting most of the blame. It was on BBC. Anyway, it explains that the Soviets did indeed know that RBMK design was defective. Being the secrecy loving progress-at-all-costs Soviets that they were however, they just covered up the design flaws and figured it'd be grand, rather than fix them.

Solair

It's something that would concern me about a lot of older reactor designs. They were initially dual purpose - civilian power generation and military plutonium production for weapons. Hence their design was shrouded in full cold war military secrecy and paranoia.

The UK magnox design was developed from plutonium production reactors too!

PWR reactors come from a heritage of submarine power system designs scaled up for commercial power generation.

If we are stuck with nuclear power, it has to be fully transparent and modern with safety being the absolute driving force of all decision making.

Military priorities were the risk in the past, corner cutting and profit drives are the risks now!

shadowninty

Solair wrote: »

It's hard to know. The British AGR and Magnox designs are unique to the UK. The EU or standardised design has little relevance to them.

The EPR is not an EU Government design, it is just a cross Union project (which we need more of in the engineering field).
What I was referring to was EU regulations - RMBK reactors are not allowed operate in the Union! (Lithuania had to shut theirs down, they got compensation), so I would assume if a nuclear facility in the UK posed such a risk it would be shut down

Cathaoirleach

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIyK0CN785s

Hal Emmerich

Plutonium and strontium found 50 miles from Reactor, first time discovered outside the immediate area.

TOKYO—Trace amounts of plutonium were found as far as 28 miles from the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear-power plant, the first time that the dangerous element released from the accident was found outside of the immediate area of the plant.

The science ministry report issued Friday comes just as the government lifted one of its evacuation advisories, underscoring the difficulty of restoring normalcy and assuring the safety of residents around the crippled plant.

The government also reported a rare detection of strontium, another highly dangerous element, far from the crippled reactor, in one spot as far away as 50 miles. Most of the radioactive material discovered to date in the communities surrounding Fukushima Daiichi has been cesium or iodine.

The report said that the radiation from plutonium and strontium was "extremely low" compared to the high concentration of cesium, advising that the government maintain its focus on measuring and clearing the areas of cesium.

Toshiso Kosako, a Tokyo University expert on radiation said in an interview that the level of plutonium found was "miniscule and poses no health risk."

Still, the latest discovery is a potentially disturbing turn, as it shows that people relatively far from the plant could be exposed to more dangerous elements than had been previously disclosed.

While neither plutonium nor strontium emit powerful gamma rays like cesium and iodine, both deposit in the body—strontium in the bones, plutonium in the bones and lungs—and can cause cancer of leukemia once inhaled or ingested.

Both isotopes also have long half lives: it takes about 29 years for some forms of strontium to reduce by half, while plutonium isotopes have half-lives ranging from 88 years to over 24,000 years.

That makes them highly toxic in the body as they continue to emit alpha rays, and immensely difficult to get rid of in the environment.

The half-life of one of the most common iodine formations is eight days, while that for much of the cesium released is 30 years.

Specifically, Plutonium-238 believed to have been emitted from the damaged Fukushima reactors was found in soil samples from six separate locations, ranging from 0.55 to 4.0 becquerels per square meter. Samples from Iitate, a village located 28 miles from the power plant, registered 0.82 becquerels of Plutonium-238 and 2.5 becquerels of Plutonium-239 and -240. Iitate was evacuated earlier this year.

The finding comes from the science ministry's analysis of 100 soil samples taken within a 50-mile zone from the damaged plant between June and July.

Plutonium had previously been detected in Japan after atmospheric nuclear tests, sometimes at higher levels than were found from the June-July samples, a science ministry official said. However, the ministry cites higher-than-usual level of Plutonium-238 found in the soil samples from the six locations as evidence that plutonium release was not limited to the plant's compound.

Strontium-89 and -90 were also found in almost half of the 100 samples, in one case as far as the edge of the 50-mile zone registering measurement of 500 becquerels per square meter of Strontium-89 and 130 becquerels of Strontium-90.

Separately, reflecting the mounting costs of cleaning up from the accident, government agencies have requested about ¥400 billion, or about $5 billion, to cover the cost of cleaning up after the nuclear accident in the budget for the next fiscal year, beginning in April 2012, local media reported.

Saila

Hal Emmerich wrote: »

Plutonium and strontium found 50 miles from Reactor, first time discovered outside the immediate area.

TOKYO—Trace amounts of plutonium were found as far as 28 miles from the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear-power plant, the first time that the dangerous element released from the accident was found outside of the immediate area of the plant.

The science ministry report issued Friday comes just as the government lifted one of its evacuation advisories, underscoring the difficulty of restoring normalcy and assuring the safety of residents around the crippled plant.

The government also reported a rare detection of strontium, another highly dangerous element, far from the crippled reactor, in one spot as far away as 50 miles. Most of the radioactive material discovered to date in the communities surrounding Fukushima Daiichi has been cesium or iodine.

The report said that the radiation from plutonium and strontium was "extremely low" compared to the high concentration of cesium, advising that the government maintain its focus on measuring and clearing the areas of cesium.

Toshiso Kosako, a Tokyo University expert on radiation said in an interview that the level of plutonium found was "miniscule and poses no health risk."...

another alarmist bump :rolleyes:
did you miss the part where it said extremely low dose, as in 'safe'

Hal Emmerich

Saila wrote: »

another alarmist bump :rolleyes:
did you miss the part where it said extremely low dose, as in 'safe'

Nope, I was just wondering what's going on since hadn't heard anything in months and this is the latest, 1 hour old news from there.

I'm sure it wouldn't cause leukemia if inhaled though.......:rolleyes::rolleyes: (two, just for you)

Saila

I'm sure it wouldn't cause leukemia if inhaled though....... (two, just for you)

there is a known cure for it in that situation, a tin foil hat and hemp trousers

Overheal

surely a contender for the largest disaster thread on boards.

That is, threads about a disaster, not disasters of a thread. Though it might get a special mention in the latter category at some point.

Oranage2

Overheal wrote: »

surely a contender for the largest disaster thread on boards.

That is, threads about a disaster, not disasters of a thread. Though it might get a special mention in the latter category at some point.

Now i don't want to come across as one of those 'topper' people that mention Africa to top anything you say but didn't the 04 tsunami kill 200 thousand, the Japan one only something like 15k

Statistician

Saila wrote: »

another alarmist bump :rolleyes:
did you miss the part where it said extremely low dose, as in 'safe'

So there is a safe dose of plutonium now, is there?

Any amount of plutonium is cause for alarm. I certainly would not be happy living in an environment that has any levels of plutonium.

Overheal

Oranage2 wrote: »

Now i don't want to come across as one of those 'topper' people that mention Africa to top anything you say but didn't the 04 tsunami kill 200 thousand, the Japan one only something like 15k

I was referring to postcount, not casualties.

AlmightyCushion

Statistician wrote: »

Any amount of plutonium is cause for alarm. I certainly would not be happy living in an environment that has any levels of plutonium.

It's really not, low levels are harmless. Just so you know, coal powered plants produce and release plutonium, uranium and thorium so you might want to stay far away from them. Whether normal coal fires (like the ones people have in their house) do or not I do not know.

Statistician

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

It's really not, low levels are harmless. Just so you know, coal powered plants produce and release plutonium, uranium and thorium so you might want to stay far away from them. Whether normal coal fires (like the ones people have in their house) do or not I do not know.

Do you have a source for that?
Which isotopes of Plutonium are produced from coal? The above article mentions that Pu-238 was found.

I'm aware that coal contains small amounts of Uranium, but I never heard of it also containing Plutonium.


As for Pu-238 being harmless, how much of it would you like to have in your lungs right now? - a small amount, or none?

ed2hands

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

It's really not, low levels are harmless.

Eh not last time i looked..

vibe666

anyone for free return flights to Japan?

http://bit.ly/p0HGUy

the Japanese government is giving away 10,000 free flights to tourists worth up to 1.1b yen, you just have to tell them why you'd like to visit and what you intend to do when you're there.

el diablo

Been there twice already but I wouldn't another trip there next year.

Ficheall

http://fukushima-diary.com/2011/10/breaking-news-110-micro-svh-in-setagaya/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+FukushimaDiary+(Fukushima+Diary)

110microSv/ph can't be right, can it?

Hal Emmerich

Ficheall wrote: »

http://fukushima-diary.com/2011/10/breaking-news-110-micro-svh-in-setagaya/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+FukushimaDiary+(Fukushima+Diary)

110mSv/ph can't be right, can it?

What's a normal reading?

Standman

I wish someone would change the thread title. Every time someone bumps this I think a new earthquake has hit.

Ficheall

Hal Emmerich wrote: »

What's a normal reading?

About 0.5 to 1.5microSv, I think?

Standman

Standman wrote: »

I wish someone would change the thread title. Every time someone bumps this I think a new earthquake has hit.

Yes: either that or put this thread to sleep and start another one about the Fukushima nuclear incident!

Solnskaya

jsd1004 wrote: »

There is very little evidence of a substantial increase in cancer rates as a result of Chernobyl. Thyroid possibly but that can be attributed to increased screening and children fed with contaiminated milk as outlined in the articles below

Regarding the medical data, would you care to comment.

http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/chernobyl.html
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs303/en/index.html

Regarding cost benefit I think that is incidental. If we do not use nuclear what option do we have? We are quickly killing the planet with Co2 emissions from fossil fuel. It is a tough choice but one that will have to be made.

Utterly, totally, completly, the most disingenuous post I have ever read on Boards.ie and God bless us, that's saying somthing. Wrong on so many levels its just....wrong. I despair somtimes.

shadowninty

Solnskaya wrote: »

Utterly, totally, completly, the most disingenuous post I have ever read on Boards.ie and God bless us, that's saying somthing. Wrong on so many levels its just....wrong. I despair somtimes.

Are you a global warming sceptic or something?

Elohim

Solnskaya wrote: »

Utterly, totally, completly, the most disingenuous post I have ever read on Boards.ie and God bless us, that's saying somthing. Wrong on so many levels its just....wrong. I despair somtimes.

Eh jsd1004 is right:

UN Report: http://www.un.org/ha/chernobyl/docs/report.pdf

"No reliable evidence has emerged of an increase in leukemias, which had been
predicted to result from the accident. However, some two thousand cases of
thyroid cancer have so far been diagnosed among young people exposed to
radioactive iodine in April and May 1986."

geetar

Solnskaya wrote: »

Utterly, totally, completly, the most disingenuous post I have ever read on Boards.ie and God bless us, that's saying somthing. Wrong on so many levels its just....wrong. I despair somtimes.

no. check your facts.

Solnskaya

Yup, chernobyl was good, Jet airplanes don't create excess cloud, CO2 is bad, Football is important and Gerry Ryan is a saint. "Whatever" is all that comes to mind.:rolleyes:

Solnskaya

shadowninty wrote: »

Are you a global warming sceptic or something?

Heaven forbid. Are you 17?

4leto

Solnskaya wrote: »

Utterly, totally, completly, the most disingenuous post I have ever read on Boards.ie and God bless us, that's saying somthing. Wrong on so many levels its just....wrong. I despair somtimes.

It happens to be true, there is also other studies about people who live in naturally high radiation environments such as an area rich in granite and there are no increases in cancers or any other diseases and the link provided by the poster is based on a WHO/UN report it was not commissioned by the daily mai,l or Greenpeace who wrote the original projections of the Chernobyl disaster which never came to fruition. We just simply didn't get the increase in cancers they suggested.

So lets see what happens in Japan in the future.