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: 395.htm
513
<< 392  393  394    396  397  398 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kailassa

Originally posted by Vitchilo
reply to post by Kailassa
 




I wouldn't put it past TEPCO to dispose of their dead contract workers that way.

If they die at work, just drive them 5k away and dump them.
Who's going to know?

They gonna know at some point using identification of the body. After all, TEPCO got lists of workers who worked at the plant right? And even if TEPCO were to ``delete`` those workers from the list... I bet those workers have families, friends, co-workers who would know that they did work at the plant.

Or maybe not, since 90% of those who work at those plants are immigrants, so their families is probably in another country... but even then, the co-workers who worked with them in the plant surely know them... But you never know, those workers might be silenced by TEPCO using bribes or threats.


The police didn't take the body with them, because it was dangerously radioactive. They left it there to rot.
So who is going to identify, at some distant date in the future, one more rotted corpse left over from a time when over 10,000 people lost their lives?

At best he'll get reported missing, and how many "reported missing" cases do you think the police have on file in Japan now?

No, if TEPCO are doing this, they are getting away with it.



I think the police left it because they are justifiably scared of 'unknown' radiation hazards, and what they might have been exposing themselves to. Certainly if they have anyone with a bit of education among them they may have realized that the body itself could be a source of radiation ( through contamination or the unlucky recipient of a neutron beam ) . I would imagine it's tough to leave a dead person but in that situation....? On the gruesome side if the body is radioactive enough it won't rot for a long while,
but otherwise I totally agree with you ,
Fukushima is changing the face of our planet as we speak and the specter of death will follow it for the rest of human kinds collective memory , so I am sure that Tepco wouldn't even notice , in the words of Rorshack, "what's one more body among the ashes"




posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


It's also pretty cold there right now, it might actually not decompose nearly as quickly as normal due to this. Might have been one of the better options for dealing with it at the moment instead of risking contamination of *living* people in order to honor someone who's already dead.



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 03:58 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by jadedANDcynical
 


Thanks Jaded. See what a mess I get into, trying to micro-manage my run away thoughts...

Des



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Silverlok

There is still a lot of uncertainty... the vent created by a mass of corium would be heat-created, instead of mechanically created as in a drilling operation, meaning a difference in the rock strata stresses left from the vent creation. The corium vent would be larger in diameter (although more irregular) than a drilled vent. And there is a lot of variation in pressure between magma pockets.

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by checkmeout
reply to post by Kailassa
 


Well - technically they aren't lying - the red spots will not require treatment.. if they are petechiae (spelling?) then that indicates severe internal damage has already occurred. Those are the red spots we check for when looking for signs of meningitis - in that instance they indicate septicaemia which has already affected the internal organs and indicates a very poor prognosis. In the case of radiation damage - sadly I am not aware of any treatment? So going home to die quietly is probably the only option..

There are treatments, bone marrow transplants, blood transfusions, chelation therapy and observation to treat infections which the body can no longer fight.
I'm sure the company would be paying for such treatment if it was not "just (disposable) contract workers" affected.

But yes, you are right about the poor prognosis at this stage.


It must be heartbreaking for you when you see these petechiae, (yes, you got the plural right,) on children with meningitis.



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:08 PM
link   
here

Radiation from Japan found in seaweed and samples taken from Vancouver BC area, not apparently a risky level yet according to SFU. Not a cancer risk yet they say.



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by EnhancedInterrogator

Distilling water will remove any radioactive impurities (iodine, plutonium, uranium, even chlorine), but it will not remove absorbed neutrons. Absorbed neutrons are part of the water itself.

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


a corium vent would likely collapse in upon itself. I think it melting into the mantle would be a best case scenario.

Even if it didn't, it would provide us with an opportunity to collapse the vent when the corium is a good enough distance down (but still hasn't hit the mantle).
edit on 28-3-2011 by TheLastStand because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


They use radiation to kill bacteria and whatnot on beef and poultry, they tried to get it on a huge scale in the US but not many people were keen on the idea, he wouldn't even have to be very radioactive to remain fairly well preserved until he dried out



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Silverlok

At fukushima there were two pools of 'waste' rods NOT IN CONTAINMENT CORES and six cores , of which only two have some power restored, and none have anywhere fully functioning cooling systems , and most of them are leaking badly. Plus we have a very bad design (single cooling loop) and a history of safety violations including a previously cracked core.


As I understand it there were seven pools of waste rods, one in each reactor building, situated, (stupidly) above the reactors, and one separate, ground-level pool in which waste was stored after it had been in the reactor cooling pools long enough to cool down sufficiently.

www.consciousbeingalliance.com...

Same chart, different link:
techyum.com...


edit on 28/3/11 by Kailassa because: adding new link



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Kailassa
 

That link is 404

7? damn. I though only two of them had rods though, if all seven had rods then the initial explosion at numbers three powdered a few doughnuts



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by EnhancedInterrogator

Distilling water will remove any radioactive impurities (iodine, plutonium, uranium, even chlorine), but it will not remove absorbed neutrons. Absorbed neutrons are part of the water itself.

TheRedneck


So if we apply these principles to distilling rainwater and/or tapwater to be made safe for consumption (not for making the crazy nuke plant water safe), would neutron absorption in that water be an issue for most people? For instance, if we had some awful, horrible, unlikely scenario of extreme fallout in the US would distillation be sufficient for removing the dangers, or would we ever have to worry about the neutrons in it? Probably no neutron worries except close to the source of fallout right?



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by TheLastStand

There is something unsettling about using the term "best case scenario" along with the discussion of creating a new volcanic vent.


But it may well be our best case scenario.

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by curioustype
I thought this article gave a little more detail or insight than some that I have read about how this nuclear incident is affecting industry/recovery on the ground there. One thing I would add to this report, is that, if the parts suppliers are severely affected, it could cause problems far beyond simply new production, although that would clearly be the priority for the manufacturers.

Could Japanese Cars Go Nuclear? - from source: Wheels 24


Japanese automakers, their production stuttering after the tsunami and consequent nuclear reactor problems, now faces a whole new issue - nuclear radiation.Japanese automakers, their production stuttering after the tsunami and consequent nuclear reactor problems, now faces a whole new issue - nuclear radiation.

With the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reaction severely damaged, engineers at various vehilce assembly plants and ports of dispatch are assessing whether certain parts (or entire cars) ready for export could potentially be radioactive.

WRAPPED AND WASHED

Although the likelihood of radioactive cars being exported are low (finished units are plastic-wrapped for export, then washed at their final destination), the current concern is whether parts produced since Japan’s nuclear disaster could be contaminated and accumulated into the future production stream.

The manufacturers closest to the issue are Honda and Nissan.

Nissan’s Iwaki powertrain plant is 45km from the severely damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. Honda draws engine components from a facility in Tochigi (where Nissan also has an assembly plant), slightly within the 160km radius of Fukushima’s damaged reactors.



If the supply of replacement parts is severely affected, there could be a chain reaction into the ability of dealers around the world to service and maintain cars already on the road, and this could be enough to put cars off the road (as they are so complex and so highly regulated in their key markets i.e. with safety regs/inspection regs etc..)

I've seen this happen before but I suspect not on the scale that we could be about to see here, and with such massively important players in the global economy.


I'm building a 2000hp Camaro with parts form the US. I often worry about the occasional Brown Recluse spider in one of my packages. I'm glad I'm not building a Supra or GTR.

But face it. Most haven't even heard about the nuclear crisis in detail. Many would never suspect or believe they had radioactive cars or parts till they had issues.

The fact they can see in the dark without the headlights will be an advantage!!

By the way, just had a look at the TEPCO CAM and it's still smoking! www.tepco.co.jp...

Most people refuse to believe negative issues!



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Silverlok
reply to post by Kailassa
 


It might be possible to remove it but the cost would be astronomic.
seawater contains measurable amounts of uranium ions, and can be separated out of it using platinum catalysts or more recently carbon nano-tubials , If the carbon nano-tubes prove feasible they should be "tunable" ( made to catch) the chlorine , but then again chlorine is much more soluble than uranium ...


Interesting technology, using seaweed to extract uranium from seawater.
It's incredible what people can invent when they put their minds to it.

Perhaps one day it will become necessary to clean out the poisons we've dumped in the oceans, and perhaps a way will be invented to do it.

However cleaning the world's oceans would be very different to local harvesting.



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


Well I'm just remembering some of the scenarios from the bp disaster that involved a vent. If it were 10 km's down, I would get 10 km of primacord and a remote igniter attached on the bottom, steel wire to hold the suspension and some sort of sheath to protect it all, and sticks of dynamite or c4 or whichever explosive every meter for the length of the cord.



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by 00nunya00

if there is fallout in appreciable amounts across the US, it will probably be in the form of neutrons. Most of the other short-lived isotopes like iodine-131 will have decayed before they get here, and the heavier ones like Pu-239 will probably drop out over the Pacific. Cesium may be an exception to this, of course.

Neutrons would make the journey just fine, since they will be in the water molecules in the air. So all distillation would remove would be mostly cesium.

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Kailassa
 


You are totally correct here is a must read for anyone whom has been following this thread
(I've been through this whole thread and I don't think it's been posted but if it has please let me know )

hillarious:


"I've long thought that the whole system is crap," said Taro Kono, a Liberal Democratic Party lawmaker and a longtime critic of nuclear power who sees the need for a government-directed reorganization of Tokyo Electric.


bad

At the time of the March 11 earthquake, Reuters says that the reactor buildings at Fukushima held the equivalent of almost six years of the highly radioactive uranium fuel rods produced by the plant,


worse

4000 uranium fuel assemblies were stored in deep pools of circulating water built into the highest floor of the Fukushima reactor buildings. Each assembly stands about 3.5 meters high and even a decade after use emits enough radiation to kill a person standing nearby.


shameless

More than 60% of the uranium stored at Fukushima Daiichi made it through the quake and tsunami without being destabilized because it was kept in a separate pool built in 1997 and in a number of metal casks that do not rely on outside power, Japanese nuclear safety officials said. But the location of the remaining fuel storage pools - on the highest floor of the reactor buildings - exposed the fuel to additional risks because the pools would have swayed more in the quake and could have lost water through sloshing or leaks, experts say. According to the Reuters report, one of problems limiting the wider use of the dry storage units is their upfront costs: each cask costs about $1 million or more.


and for the U.S.


planners had once assumed that spent fuel rods would be moved... put the plan on hold, meaning spent fuel has largely piled up in on-site cooling ponds. "We have no plan for the back end of the (nuclear) fuel cycle, and we need one," said Allison Macfarlane, a professor at George Mason University in Virginia, who serves on a U.S. government panel studying the problem. "When those plans changed, we just filled the pools up to capacity without ever rethinking whether we should provide better safety or barriers," he said.

edit on 28-3-2011 by Silverlok because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


I think their calculations hinge on a lot of internal pressure for the magma and a relatively small hole that would be several miles long and not very straight



new topics

top topics



 
513
<< 392  393  394    396  397  398 >>

log in

join