You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #6: I couldn't find data for that river [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
caraher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 07:40 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. I couldn't find data for that river
But typical river discharge rates appear to be a few hundred cubic meters per second for large rivers. Let's say that's 100 m^3/s here. There are 1000 l (and therefore about 1000 kg) per m^3, so that would be 100,000 kg/s.

50 x 10^9 Bq/day x (1 day/24 hr) x (1 hr/3600 s) x (1 s/100,000 kg) = 5.8 Bq/kg

I don't know how well-mixed the Cs would be; there may be higher or lower concentrations at the surface.

What is worse, having radioactive Cs wash out to sea via rivers or having it remain on land?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
  -Cesium levels hit tens of billions of becquerels at river mouth kristopher  Nov-26-11 08:12 PM   #0 
  - "immediate and continued monitoring of the situation" - that's not very reassuring.  geckosfeet   Nov-26-11 08:31 PM   #1 
  - Rice...  Melissa G   Nov-26-11 08:53 PM   #2 
  - Japan's Northern Prefectors are in long term trouble  jimlup   Nov-26-11 09:48 PM   #3 
  - Is it normal to report becquerels/day instead of per kg or sq. meter?  NickB79   Nov-26-11 11:52 PM   #4 
  - it is the OP's SOP  backwoodsbob   Nov-27-11 04:54 AM   #5 
  - It is exactly as the story was reported in a major, non-tabloid Japanese daily paper.  kristopher   Nov-27-11 10:02 AM   #8 
     - So newspaper scare-mongers; just like you do...  PamW   Nov-27-11 01:57 PM   #12 
        - Not at all.  FBaggins   Nov-27-11 08:35 PM   #23 
           - Point taken.  PamW   Nov-28-11 09:24 AM   #28 
  - I couldn't find data for that river  caraher   Nov-27-11 07:40 AM   #6 
     - What is worse, having radioactive Cs everywhere or not having Cs everywhere?  kristopher   Nov-27-11 01:32 PM   #10 
     - The fact is, the cesium is out of the reactor  caraher   Nov-27-11 04:15 PM   #15 
        - And the fact is there isn't a choice..  kristopher   Nov-27-11 05:03 PM   #17 
        - How is asking how to clean up cesium contamination promoting nuclear power or minimizing the damage?  NickB79   Nov-27-11 06:10 PM   #19 
        - Please stop hyperventilating  caraher   Nov-27-11 06:16 PM   #20 
           - The only reason you ever post is to sugarcoat bad news about the nuclear industry.  kristopher   Nov-27-11 07:44 PM   #21 
              - "I know what I consider it to be"  caraher   Nov-28-11 08:57 PM   #40 
                 - "What is worse, having radioactive Cs wash out to sea via rivers or having it remain on land?"  kristopher   Nov-28-11 09:04 PM   #41 
        - In the final analysis...  PamW   Nov-28-11 09:30 AM   #29 
     - We can convert that to better understood units..  PamW   Nov-27-11 02:24 PM   #13 
     - I don't think mass is the most appropriate unit though  caraher   Nov-27-11 04:31 PM   #16 
     - Agreed.  PamW   Nov-28-11 09:22 AM   #27 
     - Drink it and eat the fish out of it  jpak   Dec-02-11 10:40 AM   #55 
        - Why not?  FBaggins   Dec-02-11 11:23 AM   #56 
     - According to the Yomiuri Shimbun article, the amount of radiation  Art_from_Ark   Dec-02-11 01:20 AM   #50 
        - Which raises an obvious question.  FBaggins   Dec-02-11 09:04 AM   #51 
        - One thing to take into perspective about the headline  Art_from_Ark   Dec-02-11 10:41 PM   #59 
        - I was able to discuss this today with a chemical engineer  Art_from_Ark   Dec-03-11 06:31 AM   #60 
           - What is the name and contact information for the chemical engineer you cite?  kristopher   Dec-03-11 07:56 AM   #61 
              - I don't have his e-mail address  Art_from_Ark   Dec-04-11 06:01 AM   #62 
                 - That's what I figured.  kristopher   Dec-04-11 09:47 AM   #63 
        - The total amount of deposition is extremely relevant to safety.  kristopher   Dec-02-11 10:39 AM   #54 
  - This was doomed to happen  Yo_Mama   Nov-27-11 07:54 AM   #7 
  - You obviously have no idea how much the Japanese depend on coastal waters for food.  kristopher   Nov-27-11 10:04 AM   #9 
     - I do, which is why I brought it up  Yo_Mama   Nov-27-11 04:07 PM   #14 
     - You obviously didn't read or comprehend the post you are responding to.  AtheistCrusader   Nov-29-11 02:23 PM   #49 
  - How much is 50 Billion Bq of Cs-137?  PamW   Nov-27-11 01:47 PM   #11 
  - How should we deal with the risk that nuclear power might cause our country to perish?  kristopher   Nov-27-11 05:04 PM   #18 
  - Perhaps an easier to understand comparison  FBaggins   Nov-27-11 08:30 PM   #22 
     - "...a high level (of cesium) is being carried (into the ocean)," said (Prof) Yosuke Yamashiki,  kristopher   Nov-27-11 08:41 PM   #24 
     - What's the normal level for cesium?  FBaggins   Nov-27-11 08:44 PM   #25 
     - Who is expert in the field?  PamW   Nov-28-11 01:21 PM   #30 
        - Again you misunderstand the standard!  FBaggins   Nov-28-11 02:14 PM   #31 
           - Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa.  PamW   Nov-28-11 02:54 PM   #33 
     - Exactly!!  PamW   Nov-28-11 09:17 AM   #26 
     - Natural reaction to shills and fear  beardown   Nov-28-11 02:15 PM   #32 
        - The significance of the OP is a contaminated food chain.  kristopher   Nov-28-11 04:28 PM   #35 
           - The effect on the sea is one of my major concerns  beardown   Nov-28-11 05:00 PM   #36 
     - How much of the tritium in those signs...  ljm2002   Nov-28-11 04:18 PM   #34 
        - You MISSED the POINT!!  PamW   Nov-28-11 07:02 PM   #37 
        - I did not miss the point...  ljm2002   Nov-29-11 12:55 AM   #42 
           - Poor understanding and poor reading comprehension  PamW   Nov-29-11 08:57 AM   #44 
              - So let me get this straight...  ljm2002   Nov-29-11 10:11 AM   #45 
              - Did I say it was "OK"?  PamW   Dec-02-11 10:07 AM   #52 
              - Speaking of poor understanding / poor reading comprehension...  ljm2002   Nov-29-11 01:48 PM   #48 
                 - I would have used third person  PamW   Dec-02-11 10:18 AM   #53 
        - Virtually none at all. Which, coincidentally, is the same as the river.  FBaggins   Nov-28-11 07:14 PM   #38 
        - The fact that tritium signs may cause contamination...  ljm2002   Nov-29-11 01:05 AM   #43 
        - You are exactly correct. "NHK Survey Shows 1.74 Microsievert/Hr at Ocean Bottom off Fukushima"  kristopher   Nov-28-11 08:02 PM   #39 
           - See, this is how the very first article in this thread should have been written and reported  NickB79   Nov-29-11 12:31 PM   #46 
              - The existence of one doesn't preclude or negate the validity of the other.  kristopher   Nov-29-11 01:13 PM   #47 
  - Another way of thinking about 50 GBq/day...  caraher   Dec-02-11 03:11 PM   #57 
     - Bullshit.  kristopher   Dec-02-11 03:23 PM   #58 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC