It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Japan declares 'nuclear emergency' after quake

page: 190.htm
513
<< 187  188  189    191  192  193 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnhancedInterrogator

Originally posted by 00nunya00
reply to post by EnhancedInterrogator
 

Yes, it's being blocked along with 15 other sites I think, because they need the bandwidth for emergency communications and whatnot. Facebook is still available, however.
ETA: I mention Facebook because you can use that to do almost everything the other sites are used for, except shopping. Upload video, spread news, etc. So it's not a move to be worried about, IMHO.

Anybody got a link for that? or what station is was on?


Linky
Linky 2
edit on 17-3-2011 by Digital_Reality because: Added another link..




posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by 00nunya00
reply to post by Mr Tranny
 


Are you saying it will take more or less water than that to cool it down? I'm confused, LOL! I was told there would be no math.


He stated that it would take 81,000 gallons of water to cool one ton of uranium down 1000F.

My calculations would show that it would take less than 8 gallons. Four orders of magnitude difference.

I would really like to see how he come up with his figure.
As the teacher always says… “Show your work!!!!!!!!”

The problem isn’t cooling down the uranium. It’s getting enough water into the pool to cover the rods, and replenishing the water as it boils to keep the rods covered.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Erasurehead
 


Why aren't they doing this? Why aren't they doing anything?? The news about S. Korea sending over boric acid came out yesterday ... it should be there by now ... what could be more important than this situation? Why aren't other countries helping?

I'm starting to get the feeling that the other countries (and maybe Japan) wanted the worst ... and they're gonna get it. The handling of this whole situation has been ridiculous.

Sorry for the rant ... getting super stressed.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by dvrt10
 


They are not doing this yet because it is the absolute last resort. Once you entomb the reactors the people that live there for miles around would have to be relocated permanently.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Tranny
 


Could it be that you are using Farenheit, and he is using Celcius



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Tranny

I have quite a lot going on here atm.... I said I would re-calculate.

Just hang on and gripe about the NRC for a while until I can get back to you.


TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 04:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Erasurehead
 


OK thanks ... that makes sense. The way things are going they might want to resort to this soon.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Tranny
 


I think he said 1000C? Does that make a difference? I can't check either of your math, so I'm no help there, but it just seems like 1 ton of anything would take more than 8 gallons to cool----if you have a 50 gallon aquarium, and a warm room or lights, you need something like a 1/4 horsepower water chiller constantly running to achieve a bring-down of like 20F. So I'm not sure how 8 gallons would help even my smallest aquarium stay cool from its lights.....let alone a nuclear chain reaction?

I eagerly await the resolution of this issue!



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Digital_Reality
Linky
Linky 2

Thanks... this is the end-destination for one of those links ...
U.S. military blocks websites to help Japan recovery effortsl
What's not clear to me is, those web-sites are blocked from being accessed from where?
From all of Japan? (all ISP's in Japan)?

edit on 2011-3-17 by EnhancedInterrogator because: spelling, grammar, formatting, etc.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erasurehead
reply to post by dvrt10
 


They are not doing this yet because it is the absolute last resort. Once you entomb the reactors the people that live there for miles around would have to be relocated permanently.


I have an idea how to avoid that....... Look at the thread I just started.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by EnhancedInterrogator
 

Never-mind, it answers my own question ...

U.S. Pacific Command made the request to free up the bandwidth. The sites, 13 in all, are blocked across the Department of Defense's .mil computer system.

Apparently they are blocked from DOD source IP's - not from Japanese civilian sources.
The implication (possibly incorrect or deliberately exaggerated) of all the tweet's, etc. is that the Japanese public is being blocked from YouTube, etc. Anybody got any good evidence of that?

PS: Obviously, another reason that Twitter, re-Tweet's and most "blogs" are not good sources. (as if I really needed to say that again).

edit on 2011-3-17 by EnhancedInterrogator because: added post-script.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 05:08 PM
link   
Plutonium is the biggest risk??? There were many kilograms on reactor 3, more than enough to pose a very big problem to every person on this planet. Its too heavy right?

What about in in nano dust form. Its not enough to say it wont make the jetstream. Look at the depleted uranium nano dust, its all over the planet. What was used in the middle east was found in antartica, in the Himalyas.

Anway, my question to those with greater knowledge has to do with this plutonium, and if it gets aloft in small enough particles, then, any chances? Apparently according to someone watching an Italian physicist, and I guess it may take time for this to reach youtube, but, he said that there were many kilograms on reactor 3, that was the mushroom cloud. He added that if that reactor exploded, it would release this into the atmosphere.

Until I can find the video, or someone does, he remains questionable, but hypethetically, could he be right?
edit on 17-3-2011 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 05:12 PM
link   
For those in SoCal, this website will be providing updates of radiation levels in the area:

AQMD

It's a gov website ... but at least it's something else to monitor.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 05:12 PM
link   
I was so happy that US military started evacuating those willing to leave! Finally somebody does something!

As why TEPCO doesn't... they don't know how to act and are just buying time. With a horrible price of workers lives and delaying evacuation of the rest of the nation. (At least the North end.) I still would start dropping sand, lead, clay, anything... (altought I presented the scenario of an actual atomic explosion - I think it's highly unlikely, but just wondered if they knew it to be a risk). Or maybe they think starting to cover up the whole site is too big a job and looks bad.

The media cover up seems to go better - they've got most people convinced that they could actually do something! That outside electricity line should be for pools #5 and #6, save what you can...

My point was, don't trust them, it's not getting better for a week.

CURIOUSTYPE: you asked about ocean ecology: plankton intakes heavy metals so the fallout will end up in the food chain even though it's dispersed out to Pacific. Slowly reproducing whales are in greatest danger. Big areas out there are without much plankton life becuse of the lack of nutrients like iron. Ironically this fallout may fertilize them to crow and concentrate radioactives into food chain again.

Other than that, particles will be diluted so much that I don't believe that the overall ocean radioactivity would even double. There will be a measurable difference still.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by 00nunya00
reply to post by Mr Tranny
 


I think he said 1000C? Does that make a difference? I can't check either of your math, so I'm no help there, but it just seems like 1 ton of anything would take more than 8 gallons to cool----if you have a 50 gallon aquarium, and a warm room or lights, you need something like a 1/4 horsepower water chiller constantly running to achieve a bring-down of like 20F. So I'm not sure how 8 gallons would help even my smallest aquarium stay cool from its lights.....let alone a nuclear chain reaction?

I eagerly await the resolution of this issue!


It would take under 14 gallons to cool it 1000C

Uranium is a poor heat storage substance. Look at it in reference to other metals. www.engineeringtoolbox.com...

It is dense, but that density doesn’t bring with it, any capability to store heat.

Aluminum takes almost 10X as much heat to raise one pound 1F. All though, 1 Lb of aluminum is a lot bigger (volume) than 1 Lb of uranium.

The reference is water which takes 1Btu/Lb F

You would have to have to drop 35 Lb of uranium 1 F to change 1 Lb of water 1F

One pound of water evaporating can change over 34,600 Lb of uranium 1F



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by 00nunya00
reply to post by Mr Tranny
 


I think he said 1000C? Does that make a difference? I can't check either of your math, so I'm no help there, but it just seems like 1 ton of anything would take more than 8 gallons to cool----if you have a 50 gallon aquarium, and a warm room or lights, you need something like a 1/4 horsepower water chiller constantly running to achieve a bring-down of like 20F. So I'm not sure how 8 gallons would help even my smallest aquarium stay cool from its lights.....let alone a nuclear chain reaction?

I eagerly await the resolution of this issue!


Get a window air conditioner and chuck those metal halides in the trash can, switch to leds!!!! J/k, excellent point.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   
Questions, if the plant was in meltdown wouldn't we be seeing huge columns of billowing smoke as steel and concrete were burned? Does anyone know about if the fuel rods them selves would give off smoke as they burn / oxidize. How bright would a nuclear reaction / fire be, would it be like a campfire or hotter and brighter like arc welding? Could TOPECO be telling us the truth about getting pumps running may divert a meltdown?.
I admit my first reaction at seeing buildings explode was that we were seeing a melt down, now I do wonder.

On a side note I realize it has already became an environmental disaster of monumental proportions.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Styrge
 


I heard on Bloomberg news earlier that many times in Japan, when a person has cancer they're not told what they have to spare them the mental despair or something, I guess.

Now, what does that mean to this situation? We can only guess, and nothing more, until it's over. Scary, though. The Japanese government might feel like if everyone has already been harmfully exposed, they're better off being lied to about the reality of their futures.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by jaynkeel
 


Heh heh heh. A big "wink wink" and a "nudge nudge, say no more" to you. I use T5s.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 05:27 PM
link   
www.oocities.org...

Well I did some research and apparently other heavier things travel. Mercury travels.

Now this relates to plutonium, Here:


AREA 13-A PLUTONIUM DISPERSAL EXPERIMENT (Plutonium Fields Forever)

The Area 13 experiment can be considered an unqualified "success," in that it certainly dispersed highly toxic and flammable plutonium widely into the environment. The area remains highly contaminated today and will remain so for some 240,000 years, however, so the project did not yield a method for cleaning up plutonium, either at Area 13 or anywhere else...


Researchers(12) concluded that up to 99% of fragmented plutonium at Area 13 is in particles small enough to be picked up by wind and water and redeposited elsewhere(13) - a process called "resuspension."...


Plants grown in Area 13 have plutonium concentrations of 5.2 to 1,200 pCi/g (dry weight)(15) - as much as a hundred times more than a fatal human dose - in plant stems and in dust coatings on stems and leaves. ...


High winds can, and probably do, carry radionuclides away from Area 13 and the other test sites - but researchers cannot find any monitoring data on the topic of radionuclide resuspension and movement away from the site. This suggests that the radiation boundary is not now and never was monitored to detect resuspension and escape. Plutonium also can escape from radioactive test sites in and on native wildlife, taking it into the ecosystem food chain. Many kinds of animals, including birds, bees and other insects, rodents (mice, rats), and lizards live on or pass through Area 13. Only limited plutonium-239 and americium-241 studies have been done on native animals, however - most were on kangaroo rats that lived on Area 13 for at least 6 months.



It actually appears to enter the food chain, and environment and spread.
edit on 17-3-2011 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
513
<< 187  188  189    191  192  193 >>

log in

join