Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Japan admits daily radioactive release from Fukushima at least 15,000% more than previous estimate

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
amerfayed Donating Member (61 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-23-11 07:34 PM
Original message
Japan admits daily radioactive release from Fukushima at least 15,000% more than previous estimate
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DontTreadOnMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-23-11 07:39 PM
Response to Original message
1. 15,000%
hmmm... that is just slightly higher, correct?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CJvR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #1
16. Yes.
It means if the leaks are, and remain, that high for five more months the plant will have released as much additional radiation as it did during three hours (IIRC the leak back then was 10PBq/h) when the situation was at it's worst. 5 PBq a month, they flushed that much contaminated water last week, is hardly a good situation but the sky isn't falling just yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sabriel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-23-11 07:43 PM
Response to Original message
2. "No one could have predicted..."
Another good use for that phrase.

Still waiting for the strangely silent pro-radioactivity crowd to post.

Feel free to post these in GD, amerfayed, so we don't just sweep it under the rug.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-23-11 07:52 PM
Response to Original message
3. So how shocked and surprised should I act?
Oh wait, it is the industry's MO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-23-11 07:54 PM
Response to Original message
4. 154 terabecquerels per day - Holy Cow
Plutonium levels at 3.5 pCi/kg found in soil .5 km from reactor - WTF

if this is true....

:nuke:

not good
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-23-11 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Oh com'on we both know it is safe
we have been told this so by EXPERTS.

:sarcasm: just in case it is needed

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-23-11 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Yeah - enough with the alarmist crap
and the "experts" will be along any second now....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PamW Donating Member (566 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-23-11 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. Yes - WTF - Sounds pretty much on the LOW side to me...
Plutonium levels at 3.5 pCi/kg found in soil .5 km from reactor - WTF
======================================

Plutonium is found in the environment, not only due to the interactions of neutrons
with Uranium, but primarily due to years of atmospheric testing, as well as the
dropping of two nuclear weapons on Japan.

Here's a study courtesy of the National Institute of Health:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6739858

"Plutonium and radiocerium contents in shallow sea sediment
collected off shore in Ibaraki Prefecture, Japan."

The samples were collected in 1977 and 1980 at off shore of Ibaraki Prefecture for comparison of pre- and after operation of Tokai spent fuel reprocessing plant. The ranges and mean values of 239, 240Pu and 144Ce contents determined in the samples are 0.02 approximately equal to 2.85 Bq/kg-dry (0.55 approximately equal to 77 pCi/kg-dry) with mean values of 0.93 Bq/kg-dry (25 pCi/kg-dry) in 1977 and 0.52 Bq/kg-dry (14 pCi/kg-dry) in 1980 for 239, 240Pu , and 0.67 approximately equal to 19.5 Bq/kg-dry)
...
These values showed no environmental accumulation of the nuclides by the operation was detected.


So the radioactivity levels of 77 pCi/kg for the actinides for the 1977 sample and the
14 pCi / kg for the actinides in the 1980 sample demonstrated no environmental accumulation
due to the operation of the reprocessing facility.

So today we see levels of 3.5 pCi /kg of actinides. Holy Fukushima, Batman!!!

PamW

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:06 AM
Response to Reply #10
13. Brought to you by the Plutonium is Good for You Council and the NEI
What horseshit

yup



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-23-11 07:56 PM
Response to Original message
6. TEPCO Caught in ANOTHER Lie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-23-11 08:13 PM
Response to Original message
8. Megadeath.
Edited on Sat Apr-23-11 08:13 PM by Poll_Blind
PB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrJJ Donating Member (657 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-23-11 08:52 PM
Response to Original message
9. Fukushima leaks.. thirty years of accidents, and lies
Flashback: Fukushima leaks.. thirty years of accidents, and lies

http://economicsnewspaper.com/economics/fukushima-leaks...

In case you need it to read the docs: http://translate.google.com/#auto

excerpt:

March 20, 1990: the Sendai High Court rejects demand for stopping the central Fukushima

March 29, 1990: The Sendai High Court says that the plants are well designed and can not cause disasters

http://fukushimaleaks.wordpress.com/2011/03/18/fukushim... /

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nilram Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-23-11 11:48 PM
Response to Original message
11. 15,000% more than the previous estimate that was 15,000% off?
My goose is cooked!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpoonFed Donating Member (801 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 05:28 AM
Response to Original message
12. silence from the nookies...?

I've had the position that one must take whatever they say must be multiplied by a factor of 100 for a long long time. I guess I was off, multiply everything by 150.

There isn't much space left for nails in their coffin of credibility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow mix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:10 AM
Response to Original message
14. but but, nukers said we can take them at thier word! and they had links!
fucking fools and liars, whichever the case may be
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. To support Nuclear energy to make our electrical power one has to have no regard for the future
inhabitant of this world, pretty simple if you ask me. I really don't like the idea of dying knowing I'm leaving to future inhabitants something my people didn't fully understand, (as these accidents are proof of,) and that the future inhabitants won't have a clue about the dangers it poses. The nuke industry quit learning once they figured out how to half ass control fission seems like to me. But I'm just an old proud okie

Civilization as we know it today will not continue forever, it will disappear like the many that came before us, many will come later. It is those I'm scared and worried for.

We kill ourselves off by co2, no problem the world will rebound in a relative short time but if we kill ourselves off by radiation poisoning it'll take a long time before its inhabitable again. I don't even want to think of the deformities that will come with later civilizations due to our ill conceived and misuse of nuclear energy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 25th 2014, 08:05 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

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