Fukushima by the Numbers

page: 3
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 18 2014 @ 02:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Yes I have always thought that using a Geiger to take reading with water was kind of foolish. You would think some sort of spectroscopy would be needed like NMR. Also I opened your link but when I scroll down the page starts to shake up and down maybe its Safari, Ill try in a different browser. but thank you for the link.




posted on Aug, 18 2014 @ 02:30 AM
link   
a reply to: BGTM90

We dry the resin and transferred it to a plastic “counting jar,” which we then place in an expensive ($75,000), high-purity germanium well detector made by Canberra Industries2 for between 24 and 72 hours (see 3:05 here). Every time a cesium atom decays, that event is registered in the instrument’s multichannel analyzer, which has the ability to discern energy given off by decay of two critical isotopes of cesium: 134Cs and 137Cs.3 By counting the decay events associated with each isotope, we calculate the total counts per second (cps) for a given sample.
ourradioactiveocean.org...



posted on Aug, 18 2014 @ 02:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage
Chromatography, Mass spectroscopy, extractions, sounds fun I wonder if they take volunteers, But as I posted in an different thread the concentrations are about 1.5 Bq per m3 and a cubic meter is a lot of water. 264 gl, 1,000 Kg or 2,200 pounds has 1.5 Bq and that is left over from atmospheric testing. I don't think that is killing any thing on the west coast.



posted on Aug, 18 2014 @ 03:06 AM
link   
a reply to: BGTM90
So far there's no indication that the contamination has arrived on the west coast, even at the very low levels predicted by various models.



posted on Aug, 19 2014 @ 02:34 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 19 2014 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: thorfourwinds

So is that a no on helping me find a the core innovatory on the original thread? Did you read my last post to you? If you did not I would suggest you go back and read it as I asked for your help. As for the poster Phage what ever he is he posted a link to a reputable institution doing real experiments and getting real results. Those results have been posted above. If you can find a error in the experimentation they preform than we can consider the experiment invalid. Until that time or some one comes up with another experiment that came up with different figures than we can consider that experiment valid. But like I said go back and read my last post to you and maybe you can help me out. Thanks.



posted on Aug, 19 2014 @ 08:41 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 19 2014 @ 08:57 PM
link   
a reply to: BGTM90

I think trying to post real numbers/data is a great idea. I have messaged someone who was archiving the mega Fukushima threads to ask if he might be able to pull up the original data. I will also post a request on that thread to see if anyone can help.




posted on Aug, 19 2014 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: wishes

Thank you I've been looking all over the net for the core innovatory. I haven't checked Tepcos website because people don't find them a reputable source because of the constant false information they have put out. I'm working on so other numbers for different isotopes that I will post soon but I have a lot of Anatomy vocabulary that I'm trying to memorize so most of my energy is being spent there. Also if the land deposition figures are any where in there that would help a lot to that was the next thing I was going to start looking at. Again thank you.



posted on Aug, 19 2014 @ 09:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: BGTM90
a reply to: wishes

Thank you I've been looking all over the net for the core innovatory. I haven't checked Tepcos website because people don't find them a reputable source because of the constant false information they have put out. I'm working on so other numbers for different isotopes that I will post soon but I have a lot of Anatomy vocabulary that I'm trying to memorize so most of my energy is being spent there. Also if the land deposition figures are any where in there that would help a lot to that was the next thing I was going to start looking at. Again thank you.


The only thing Tepco's numbers are useful for is to give us the low end of their lies. Everything they say is grossly minimized. I sent out a couple requests, hopefully someone will be able to help in the next while.



posted on Aug, 19 2014 @ 10:42 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 02:53 AM
link   
I am having issues with this site at the moment. However,let me know how I can help. BGTM90 I have sent you a pm.



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 07:00 AM
link   


I am having issues with this site at THE MOMENT.


Aren't we all...and it was the 'other Z'. lol
However, we have found and will get back to you with the info,
if the Mods let us get a word in edgewise. lol
Here's something for starters...


edit on 21/8/2014 by thorfourwinds because: added graphic



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: thorfourwinds


I am having issues with this site at THE MOMENT.


Aren't we all...and it was the 'other Z'. lol
However, we have found and will get back to you with the info,
if the Mods let us get a word in edgewise. lol
Here's something for starters...




Thank you! Finally we are getting some where. Like I said before I'm really not trying to downplay. Just trying to deal with the numbers. People claim my sources are bias but I only used the highest release figures I could find. Thats why I wanted to use the core inventory of each reactor and do reales to do different amounts of %s. Also I looked at the Wiki numbers and they are below the values I have already posted. But back to the inventories, TFwinds thank you for the table, There are calculations you can do using the Megawatts the reactor was running at along with length of operating time, fuel composition, and placement of fuel assemblies but sense they move the fuel around and add new fuel while taking out older fuel it makes it extremely complicated. I'll look into what the calculations are and see if I have the skills to do the calculations with out making error. qmantoo, Thank you I'm sending you an email, Also I remember that bird from the Original Fukushima thread.



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Greetings:


Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), after visiting the plant, has called for the US and Japan to initiate an immediate international effort to stabilize and neutralize the spent nuclear fuel pool before another earthquake triggers an enormous radioactive spill.


What's needed is for people to overcome denial and become aware.

We need to make the situation at Fukushima a priority.

We need to overcome the social taboo against discussing nuclear threats to our future and express our concerns - to our family, friends, neighbors and political representatives.

We need to get together and organize and put pressure on the US government to pressure the Japanese government to allow outside supervision and assistance.




posted on Aug, 31 2014 @ 01:14 AM
link   
I have a feeling that we also have a record of the amount of fuel that was shipped out to Japan and where it went to. Of course, I dont knoiw if that can be used to determine exactly what went where and more importantly when it went where. There are a lot of wheres and whens in that last sentence. :-) They were invoices or fuel processing documents or something similar.



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 10:15 AM
link   
This information from our friends at World Nuclear.org.


Japanese Waste and MOX
(Updated February 2014)

From 1969-90 there were more than 160 shipments of used nuclear reactor fuel from Japan to Europe.
Reprocessing of the Japanese used fuel has been undertaken in UK and France under contract with Japanese utilities.
Recovered fissile materials are returned to Japan as reactor fuel, notably as mixed oxide (MOX) fuel.

The first shipment to Japan of immobilized high-level waste from reprocessing took place in 1995 and the 12th and last one from France was in 2007. The first one from UK was in 2010.

Nuclear power provides about one third of Japan's electricity, and with the enhanced efficiency brought about by reprocessing used fuel to recycle the uranium and plutonium, it represents a major part of Japan's endeavours to achieve maximum self sufficiency in energy. Japan plans to have one third of its 53 reactors using some mixed uranium-plutonium oxide (MOX) fuel by 2010.

In February 1995 the first of 12 shipments of vitrified high-level waste (HLW) departed from France for Japan. The last was in 2007. This waste belonged to the ten Japanese power utilities who are responsible for its safe storage and eventual disposal.

The 12 waste shipments over 12 years total 1310 canisters containing almost 700 tonnes of vitrified high-level wastes. These are packed in heavy steel shipping casks (see section on Marine transport below).



Shipment of the vitrified high-level wastes from UK to Japan commenced early in 2010 and requires about 11 shipments over 8-10 years to move about 900 canisters.

Under the Vitrified Residue Returns (VRR) program, some of this HLW will be substituting for a larger volume of intermediate-level wastes, on the basis that a radiologically-equivalent amount of HLW can be substituted in order to minimize the volume shipped.

Both UK and Japan have legislation allowing this.

The shipments are a continuation of the established waste return program from France. The second shipment arrived in Japan in September 2011. A third arrived in February 2013. The fourth is due in April 2014.



Peace Love Light
tfw
Liberty & Equality or Revolution



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 12:34 AM
link   
a reply to: BGTM90

I came across this website/blog today and thought it might have some useful information for you:
robinwestenra.blogspot.ca...

It has many comments about studies/results along with the url's and links to them as sources, for example:


In March 2013, a fish measuring 740,000 Bq/kg was caught off of Fukushima.[iii] In April 2012 the Japanese media reported: ‘Cesium up to 100 times levels before disaster found in plankton far off nuke plant.’[iv]


and



Significantly high level of all β nuclide (including Strontium-90) is detected in groundwater on the seaside of reactor2, and it’s breaking the highest records every time Tepco analyzes. This is the groundwater sampled from one of the borings between reactor2 and the sea. From Tepco’s own data, the density has been increasing at least since 11/25/2013. The latest reading is 1,900,000,000 Bq/m3, which is measured on 12/19/2013. This is approx. as double as the one of 11/25/2013.


I'm not any good with numbers and appreciate anyone who is!





new topics
top topics
 
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join