Japan: Huge radiation spike at plant was a mistake

[Kurmudgeon]

Source: msnnbc.msn.com

TOKYO — Emergency workers struggling to pump contaminated water from Japan's stricken nuclear complex fled from one of the troubled reactors Sunday after reporting a huge increase in radioactivity — a spike that officials later apologetically said was inaccurate.

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42291675/ns/world_news-asiapacific/

---

Thank goodness!

[enough]

1. Discussion on this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x750991

[jpak]

2. They would not or could not "believe" the measurements - and will retest

as in "it can't really be that bad, everything is under control and it really really can't be that bad!!!1111"

yup

[grahamhgreen]

3. They are guessing: "He said officials were taking another sample to get accurate levels, but did not

"He said officials were taking another sample to get accurate levels, but did not know when the results would be announced."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110327/ap_on_re_as/as_japan_earthquake

[reorg]

4. the Japanese news agencies apparently didn't get the message

Kyodo News just repeated half an hour ago (22:25 27 March local time) what they earlier reported:

"Japan on Sunday faced an increasing challenge of removing highly radioactive water found inside buildings near some troubled nuclear reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi plant, with the radiation level of the surface of the pool in the basement of the No. 2 reactor's turbine building found to be more than 1,000 millisieverts per hour."

and the current top story at NHK is:

"Tokyo Electric Power Company says it has detected radioactive materials 10-million-times normal levels in water at the No.2 reactor complex of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant."

They must be overworked, or perhaps they don't watch MSNBC.

[lostnfound]

5. If you read the link you'll see it is just guessing

They haven't tested it to read anything different yet. They are just saying the guy took one reading and fled, where he should have done an immediate retake.

[flamingdem]

6. You know they're not lying IF they send crew in a few hours

March 25th
Tokyo Electric Power Co.
Fukushima Dai-ichi NPS
Measurement in the water in the basement
Unit 1 of Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Station

Radioactive Nuclide
Concentration (Bq/cm3)
Cl-38 1.6×106
As-74 3.9×102
Y-91 5.2×104
I-131 2.1×105
Cs-134 1.6×105
Cs136 1.7×104
Cs-137 1.8×106
La-140 3.4×102

[underpants]

7. Officials: Big spike at Japan nuke plant an error

Source: AP Yahoo

TOKYO – Emergency workers struggling to pump contaminated water from Japan's stricken nuclear complex fled from one of the troubled reactors Sunday after reporting a huge increase in radioactivity — a spike that officials later apologetically said was inaccurate.

The apology came after employees fled the complex's Unit 2 reactor when a reading showed radiation levels had reached 10 million times higher than normal in the reactor's cooling system. Officials said they were so high that the worker taking the measurements had withdrawn before taking a second reading.

On Sunday night, though, plant operators said that while the water was contaminated with radiation, the extremely high reading was a mistake.

"The number is not credible," said Tokyo Electric Power Co. spokesman Takashi Kurita. "We are very sorry."



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110327/ap_on_bi_ge/as_japan_earthquake

[Lost-in-FL]

8. Umhum...

:eyes:

[underpants]

10. What, you are second guessing the TEPCO spokesman?

:shrug:

[madmax]

9. Right. nt

[TheDebbieDee]

11. Yeeeeeeaaah! That's the ticket.

[Jim__]

12. I'd appreciate more of an explanation than "not credible."

What is the basis for that claim? Did he say? I can't find elaboration in the cited article.

[AtheistCrusader]

15. Defective equipment?

Diagnostic failure when the worker brought the device back for testing? Of course, radiation can damage electronics, so ...


I'm inclined to believe them, since little is gained by lying about this. If that number is accurate, everyone will soon find out anyway, because this is not contained.

[fascisthunter]

13. sure

[wordpix]

14. uh huh, right, Tepco, we believe you since you're so credible, yourselves

:sarcasm:

[GeorgeGist]

16. So they sent some poor soul back in ...

to take a second reading?

[BrookBrew]

17. Here are live radiation readings from all over japan..

please review and form your own opinions.

http://www.mext.go.jp/english/radioactivity_level/detail/1304082.htm

[aquart]

20. Why, yes. I believe even I can see a spike.

Reading point (83) 20km northwest 2011/3/27 10:25 87.0 no rain reading by police

Reading point (84) 40km southwest 2011/3/27 11:18 .05 no rain reading by MEXT

http://www.mext.go.jp/component/english/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2011/03/27/1304318_2716.pdf

[BrookBrew]

23. Those are microsierverts according to the doc

there is a upswing there but be sure you understand the scale.

http://www.convertworld.com/en/equivalent-dose/Sievert.html

[aquart]

24. I don't have the faintest idea of the scale.

I am however clear on the difference between 85.0 and .05 when both are in the same scale.

[BrookBrew]

26. Stacking sugar cubes vs 40' containers

is a rough estimation of scale variance between USV and SV.

[aquart]

37. Thank you!

So there was a spike 20KM away, but nothing to fuss about?

[Igel]

33. You see variation.

For a spike you'd have to look at one place over time to see if there's a surge and drop-off.

Variation by place can due to several different things. I can think of three. There are probably more.

There are mines in some of the areas with tailing piles. Those have higher levels of background radiation.

If the plant is emitting any radiation at all, it'll head where the wind blows it--it won't be evenly dispersed 360 degrees out 20 or 30 km.

If there was a spike in radioactive particles last week or the week before that settled in an area there'd still be elevated radiation levels. If the wind primarily blew in just a few directions it would mean that the distribution of radioactive particles wasn't random, so there is no good "average" distribution.


When you have a test you have false positives and false negatives. If you get a lot of each it's not much of a test. But a lot of tests can't be honed to produce low levels of false results--even if it's possible, the resulting test can be too expensive or time-consuming. So you run the same flawed test over and over as many times as necessary to get the percentage of likely false positives (or negatives) down to near zero, even though taking action on that non-zero number of false positives can still be expensive. You really don't want false negatives; then any error is likely to result in something important not being done and this can kill people. If the test done has a high rate of false positives then a second test should have been done at once. I don't know squat about the test that was actually done, but figure that false negatives are so bad that the test is almost certainly geared to producing false positives.

[barbtries]

18. okay.

i OFFICIALLY do not know what to believe.

[daleo]

36. "not credible" does not mean "not accurate"

The wording makes me suspicious.

[joanbarnes]

19. The lies are getting more surreal, who to believe?

[aquart]

22. Look at the pdf.

The spike was impressive.

[Teaser]

21. The first tier tests always have a high false positive rate.

which is good, a la, better to be safe than sorry.

Explaining type I vs. type II error to the average person, though, is a mug's game.

[aquart]

25. I'm very average and I have no idea what you just said.

[Teaser]

32. I'm sure you're qutie above average

but perhaps I was unclear.

Two kinds of mistakes you can make when running a test: type I, (false positve) vs. type II (false negative). The more sensitive a test, the more likely one is to have false positives. Generally, you run a very sensitive test first, and in doing so, you are being caurious, because it's likely it will show a positive result that is wrong. Then you run a more specific test, in order to validate the first result.

I believe the first used breast cancer test shows a false positive around 15% of the time.

[Teaser]

34. quite, even

probably a qutie too, but that's not my lookout.

[davidthegnome]

27. Giving me a head ache

Just trying to decide what or whom to believe. The sort of disaster this is - and the scope of it, is far beyond me. I don't get it, at all. The barrage of information is pretty mind boggling for someone like me.

In short... uh, wtf?

[Nossida]

28. No

Believing a single word, Spewed by MSNBC, who
is owned by GE, who built those reactors is a
mistake.

But thats what you get for watching a Corporate
Mouthpiece News channel.

[DeSwiss]

29. K&R

I hope it was a mistake. Japan could use a break.

[Omaha Steve]

30. More obstacles impede crews in Japan nuke crisis

Source: AP

By YURI KAGEYAMA and MARI YAMAGUCHI

TOKYO (AP) - Mounting problems, including badly miscalculated radiation figures and inadequate storage tanks for huge amounts of contaminated water, stymied emergency workers Sunday as they struggled to nudge Japan's stricken nuclear complex back from the edge of disaster.

Workers are attempting to remove the radioactive water from the tsunami-ravaged nuclear compound and restart the regular cooling systems for the dangerously hot fuel.

The day began with company officials reporting that radiation in leaking water in the Unit 2 reactor was 10 million times above normal, a spike that forced employees to flee the unit. The day ended with officials saying the huge figure had been miscalculated and offering apologies.

"The number is not credible," said Tokyo Electric Power Co. spokesman Takashi Kurita. "We are very sorry."

Read more: http://apnews.excite.com/article/20110327/D9M7O4CG1.html

---

This image released by Japan Ground Self-Defense Force via Kyodo News shows the inside of Unit 4 at the stricken Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant in Okumamachi, Fukushima Prefecture, northeastern Japan, Sunday, March 27, 2011. (AP Photo/Japan Ground Self-Defense Force via Kyodo News) JAPAN OUT, MANDATORY CREDIT, NO LICENSING IN CHINA, HONG KONG, JAPAN, SOUTH KOREA AND FRANCE



In this image released by Japan Ground Self-Defense Force via Kyodo News, smoke billows from Unit 3 at the stricken Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant in Okumamachi, Fukushima Prefecture, northeastern Japan, Sunday, March 27, 2011. (AP Photo/Japan Ground Self-Defense Force via Kyodo News) JAPAN OUT, MANDATORY CREDIT, NO LICENSING IN CHINA, HONG KONG, JAPAN, SOUTH KOREA AND FRANCE



A protester holds a placard during an antinuclear rally in Tokyo Sunday, March 27, 2011. Leaked water in Unit 2 of the Fukushima Dai-ichi plant measured 10 million times higher than usual radioactivity levels when the reactor is operating normally, Tokyo Electric Power Co. spokesman Takashi Kurita told reporters in Tokyo. "Genpatsu" on the sign means "nuclear power plant." (AP Photo/Itsuo Inouye)

[stranger81]

31. While they don't seem to be sticking by the 10Mx number, latest

reports say radioactivity at reactor 2 exceeds the limits of their instruments & is too high to gauge:

http://enenews.com/tepco-official-admitted-radioactivity-2-exceeded-limit-gauge-video

[plumbob]

35. Oh, so no bad reading is possible due to the limits of the instruments?

Great news! No reading means no radiation! Whoopee!






Always sad to find out other countries' big corps act just like ours.......