It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: pfishy
a reply to: engineercutout
I can certainly understand your 'follow the money' argument, but what exactly do you mean by neutralizing the waste? Are you talking about a safe storage method, or neutralizing the material's radioactivity?
Also, you mentioned in the post previous to this one that molten salt reactors were an option. An option to what, exactly?
originally posted by: zinuru
a reply to: Chrisfishenstein
Why is fukishima a taboo topic?
The becquerel (symbol Bq) (pronounced: /ˈbɛkərɛl/ BEK-ə-rel) is the SI derived unit of radioactivity. One Bq is defined as the activity of a quantity of radioactive material in which one nucleus decays per second.
originally posted by: Chrisfishenstein
originally posted by: woogleuk
Whilst the ongoing contamination isn't good, I don't think we are at panic stations just yet, nor should we be at all.
The ocean is rather large, by the time any of the nasties have gotten a few miles from Fukushima they are diluted to a point where it shouldn't really be much of a concern.
So let's just leave it alone right? There is lots of water to take care of that.....
No concerns here.....
Does anyone know the half life of the radiation leaking into the Pacific?