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.
…John Auerback, from the Department of Public Health said, “there are no anticipated public health concerns associated with this finding.” … “It is still 25 times less risky than it would need to be in order to cause any health concerns.” …
Originally posted by Silverlok
Originally posted by curioustype
reply to post by burntheships
Thanks for the news on that, it prompts another question from me:
If the radiation levels are high enough to be unsafe for infants in tap water/mains supply, could this lead to a situation, or be indicative of a situation brewing, whereby we begin to see evidence of radiation 'building-up' in places so as to cause a more serious hazard to health.
I say this because, as I believe I read on this very thread a few pages ago, one of the issues with say the need to still cull sheep in the UK post Chernobyl fall-out is the fact that radiation levels were concentrated in certain circumstances (i.e. the food-chain/ecology/flocks of sheep that graze on afflicted soil/pasture). Could similar concerns be projected onto an urban water supply/environment?
They went out and killed all the animals around chernobyl to a distance of 30clicks if I remember correctly
Originally posted by Kailassa
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.
Originally posted by Procharmo
In theory there would be no MOX in the spent pool. I have no idea where they keep fresh rods?
Greater Danger Lies in Spent Fuel Than in Reactors
According to Tokyo Electric, 32 of the 514 fuel rod assemblies in the storage pond at Reactor No. 3 contain mox.
Can anyone please confirm the spent fuel rods are not the brown mushroom we saw!
Has any one seen a photo of the yellow or red top of the reactor vessel in No3?
Originally posted by 00nunya00
reply to post by TheRedneck
Can you elaborate on the neutrons that could (in the unlikely scenario) come over here? I mean, neutrons of what? Just from the fission reaction going on, kind of the same as the neutron rays/beams? They wouldn't be in any certain form that they could test for? Is there a "mark" of these besides just geiger counter readings? Any way we can tell if they're here or not?
Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by 00nunya00
Yikes indeed. Which is why I was watching before for a steam explosion.
Neutrons are not detected by Geiger counters, although the gamma rays they emit can be. And outside of some complicated chemical testing, there is really no way to find them. They would come from nuclear fission and decay, making the water radioactive just as the decay makes other elements radioactive through neutron absorption.
I consider neutron radiation to be one of the most dangerous types because it is so hard to remove.
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