Japanese earthquake / tsunami discussion

Overheal

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

The scale of events at Chernobyl was kept under wraps for more that a week by the Soviet government.. It was only when radiation was detected in the Scandinavian countries and the UK that they finally came clean and admitted how bad it really was. There is a possibility that the Japanese govt are not admiting how bad things really are.

That was before we had modern communication and back during the days of the Iron Curtain. They have no way of hiding anything that big from the int'l community here. Commercial satellites, i-Reports, tweets, foreign aid workers, etc.

The US Navy, providing aid, can also monitor the rad levels and will be interested in doing so since winds will carry the airborne stuff offshore and in the direction of the US.

Rob A. Bank

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

Some before and after the tsunami aerial shots... how anyone who was caught by the wave can survive this horror is a minor miracle.

My heart goes out to the Japanese people.

Thrill

Fukushima nuclear plant was tested to withstand 7.9 quake, not 8.9 - wsj

Seaneh

Overheal wrote: »

Indeed.

Chernobyl leaked radiation for months, which attributed to those type of defects. We can't say how long Fukushima cores will have to release radioactive materials but the amounts being seen now aren't enough to even hold a candle to Chernobyl. And still far far below global levels seen during the cold war when above-ground and atmospheric weapons testing took place.

/last atmospheric test was October 16, 1980 by China. All subsequent tests have been underground by all nations.

Weren't france bombing rocks in the pacific in the 90's?

Thrill

1. 0352: The news coming from Japan remains bleak. Government spokesman Yukio Edano: "We do believe that there is a possibility that meltdown has occurred - it is inside the reactor, we can't see. However, we are acting, assuming that a meltdown has occurred and with reactor number 3 we are also assuming the possibility of a meltdown as we carry out measures."
   
   

3ndahalfof6

Thrill wrote: »

1. 0352: The news coming from Japan remains bleak. Government spokesman Yukio Edano: "We do believe that there is a possibility that meltdown has occurred - it is inside the reactor, we can't see. However, we are acting, assuming that a meltdown has occurred and with reactor number 3 we are also assuming the possibility of a meltdown as we carry out measures."
   
   

I just hope the others are secured, and not heating up.

Overheal

Seaneh wrote: »

Weren't france bombing rocks in the pacific in the 90's?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_tests#France

Operation Xouthos. I can suspiciously find little to no information about this bomb or test except that it happened in French Polynesia.

darkman2

Zerohedge reporting 6 reactors (the full number) undergoing "meltdown" at the Fukushiman plant in Northeast Japan. Cooling by sea water has failed. Has the Government been untruthful? Seems like it.

Seaneh

Overheal wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_tests#France

Operation Xouthos. I can suspiciously find little to no information about this bomb or test except that it happened in French Polynesia.

I just remember a lot of hulabelu about it at the time.

Overheal

darkman2 wrote: »

Zerohedge reporting 6 reactors (the full number) undergoing "meltdown" at the Fukushiman plant in Northeast Japan. Cooling by sea water has failed. Has the Government been untruthful? Seems like it.

Deep breaths OP.

What is your source? Do you know factually that all 6 are experiencing meltdown, or only the 1 that we know is probably in meltdown?

amacachi

Overheal wrote: »

Pretty much, which reminds me nobody should consider any plans to travel there for aid purposes just yet. The disaster situation is still active between the aftershocks and the nuclear reactors. Most foreigners have been actively evacuating the country since the start of the disaster.

Right Overheal, what's the story? Still messy with the nuclear plants? Does it still look like early vents would've been a good idea or should rational people now start worrying about the nuclear situation?


What's the latest death toll/doomsday amount dead?

Thrill

1. 0406: More on the specific dangers of Fukushima 1 plant's reactor 3: The BBC's Chris Hogg in Toky says the reactor is fuelled with uranium and plutonium, meaning the consequences of a meltdown are much more severe than at the other reactors.
   
   

Overheal

amacachi wrote: »

Right Overheal, what's the story? Still messy with the nuclear plants? Does it still look like early vents would've been a good idea or should rational people now start worrying about the nuclear situation?


What's the latest death toll/doomsday amount dead?

a couple hundred people exposed to radiation. some plant workers died in the explosion yesterday at the no. 1 reactor. The number 3 is the one that i believe they are saying is not in meltdown, or that may be the number 1 after seawater cooling attempts apparently failed. I dont have accurate information right this second.

amacachi

Already. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=2056207455

Good man Overheal

darkman2

Overheal wrote: »

Deep breaths OP.

What is your source? Do you know factually that all 6 are experiencing meltdown, or only the 1 that we know is probably in meltdown?

At least 3 reported as "partial meltdown" now as we type. This is serious stuff. The 6 are speculative I would say.

Overheal

Thrill wrote: »

1. 0406: More on the specific dangers of Fukushima 1 plant's reactor 3: The BBC's Chris Hogg in Toky says the reactor is fuelled with uranium and plutonium, meaning the consequences of a meltdown are much more severe than at the other reactors.

Do they elaborate how? Im still quite sure that doesnt mean the system can nuke or anything.

some_dose

Jesus Christ. Talk about kicking people when they are down. I truly hope that it is not as bad as it is made out to be but I have a sneaking suspicion the the Japanese government have not been truthful with the media.

MrStuffins

Darkman, why do you HAVE TO introduce the Conspiracy angle in such a serious situation? Surely even if the Govt. have been untruthful, this is the least of anyone's worries!!!

amacachi

Overheal wrote: »

a couple hundred people exposed to radiation. some plant workers died in the explosion yesterday at the no. 1 reactor. The number 3 is the one that i believe they are saying is not in meltdown, or that may be the number 1 after seawater cooling attempts apparently failed. I dont have accurate information right this second.

No big deal with the radiation. RIP to the lads in the explosion.

It's frustrating trying to follow reports, as soon as it gets legible they start creaming themselvers about a "meltdown".

Overheal wrote: »

Do they elaborate how? Im still quite sure that doesnt mean the system can nuke or anything.

Would be incredibly stupid if they're using plutonium, I thought only the Soviets were stupid enough for that. There'll be no nuke, like I was saying last night, vent it all while the wind blows it away, best for everyone.

EDIT: For a nuke there has to be a critcal mass reached, I'm pretty sure no country even has a tenth of a critical mass in one place, it would be irresponsible and retarded.

Seaneh

Overheal wrote: »

Do they elaborate how? Im still quite sure that doesnt mean the system can nuke or anything.

Yeah, I can't find anything that makes an explosion a reality, the physics is all wrong for That, thankfully.

Thrill

Shaun Bernie, from lobby group Greenpeace, tells the BBC that using plutonium as fuel increases the risk that something could go wrong because plutonium-fuelled plants operate at a higher level. He also says plutonium is far more dangerous if it's released into the environment.

x in the city

if thats the case Tokyo could be f**ked with radiation.. this could be huge.

jaysis...poor Japs, not sure what they were thinking of making houses with wood near the coast, on the edge of the ring of fire....

Adamantium

darkman2 wrote: »

Zerohedge reporting 6 reactors (the full number) undergoing "meltdown" at the Fukushiman plant in Northeast Japan. Cooling by sea water has failed. Has the Government been untruthful? Seems like it.

deep,deep chills :eek::mad::mad:

It seems to be runaway...
I pray that such a wonderful, mesmerising country(and further afield) is not rendered uninhabitable....christ

Overheal

darkman2 wrote: »

At least 3 reported as "partial meltdown" now as we type. This is serious stuff. The 6 are speculative I would say.

Did you read Three [1 2 3] Reactors, or the Number-3-Reactor? Because it's the Number 3 reactor that they believe may be in partial meltdown. In total 6 are having cooling problems but this does NOT directly mean they are in meltdown!

Don't panic and don't rush around like you have precious seconds to blog/create new threads spreading panic. Take time to verify what you're reading.

amacachi

Thrill wrote: »

Shaun Bernie, from lobby group Greenpeace, tells the BBC that using plutonium as fuel increases the risk that something could go wrong because plutonium-fuelled plants operate at a higher level. He also says plutonium is far more dangerous if it's released into the environment.

True, that it is more reactive but it's not particularly dangerous in the environment over the other nuclear elements.

Killer Pigeon

Jesus people, just go to bed FFS. There'll still be an exciting Japanese disaster to watch in the morning, now go to sleep.

Overheal

It's probably (obviously) only fuel-grade plutonium.

If Libyan weapons-grade plutonium can only get you back to 1955 on a single tank I question how much fuel-grade is capable of.

Thrill

1. 0419: Possible fusion in two reactors - AFP, quoting government
   
   

darkman2

Overheal wrote: »

Did you read Three [1 2 3] Reactors, or the Number-3-Reactor? Because it's the Number 3 reactor that they believe may be in partial meltdown. In total 6 are having cooling problems but this does NOT directly mean they are in meltdown!

Don't panic and don't rush around like you have precious seconds to blog/create new threads spreading panic. Take time to verify what you're reading.

Well I took it from Zerohedge, It is possible it could be "no3 reactor" (a disaster in itself btw if a meltdown).

amacachi

Overheal wrote: »

It's probably (obviously) only fuel-grade plutonium.

If Libyan weapons-grade plutonium can only get you back to 1955 on a single tank I question how much fuel-grade is capable of.

I agree, but it's still stupid to put it near a reactor.


Just saw the post above, I don't see how it's possible.




EDIT: @the post above, if they left that possibility open then they brought it all on themselves, I can't imagine anyone being that stupid.