MOX fuel in Reactor No. 3 is 2 MILLION TIMES more dangerous than enriched uranium!!

Originally posted by pattonisit
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

"Can anyone appreciate the...well, "irony" doesn't do it justice...that the thread immediately after this one was "How can I protect my jewelry from scratches?"...?"

haha yea.... gobsmacked, it made me wish i had a suitably expressive & appropriate emoticon

Yeah. I was... Well I did a double-take. I don't think they appreciated my posting the fact in the other thread though...

Originally posted by starless and bible black
The news guy on channel 7 ABC is not wearing a tie. His shirt is unbuttoned, and I wonder if his pants are even zipped. It's as though he couldn't bother to get dressed for work. The lady next to him is showing a lot of cleavage. She may not even be wearing a bra, I don't know. This while discussing the tragedy in the aftermath of the earthquake. They are rubbing it in, while they ignore any useful data.

Very good observation. Yes, the MSM is utterly pathetic.

Thanks for the post.

ALL reactor fuel that is or has been in a reactor contains Plutonium.

Its a byproduct of the nuclear reaction inside all reactors.
When operating, a typical 1000 MWe nuclear power reactor contains within its uranium fuel load several hundred kilograms of plutonium.

www.world-nuclear.org...

Since Plutonium is in ALL REACTORS MOX fuel or not what's your point.

Is it disinformation or just to try to scare the c**p of of everyone.

I just love people who do not do there research before post threads like this

Click here for more information.

reply to post by FoxStriker

Well that adds more confusion to my basic calculations ,so what that means is that as we travel further away at an increasing speed by the time we get far enough away it will be safe to come home.The mind boggles.I think the quote from Homer Simpson is apt "whats the point of going anywhere ,when we just end up back here anyway" or something like that.

its sick twisted and pathetic whats going on, japan have outright lied through their teeth about this

i hope and pray the worst doesnt happen

Originally posted by FoxStriker
reply to post by 12voltz

 

Actually you have to remember that as the amount of time and space the radiation travels, the quicker it becomes less hazardous.

Regarding the amount of radiation that falls out.

Radioactive fallout from a nuclear explosion, though very dangerous initially, loses its intensity quickly because it is giving off so much energy. For example, fallout emitting gamma ray radiation at a rate over 500 R/hr (fatal with one hour of exposure) shortly after an explosion, weakens to only 1/10th as strong 7 hours later. Two days later, it's only 1/100th as strong, or as deadly, as it was initially.

Well that's just Gamma radiation, that's not the whole picture at all - Gamma radiation will move out from it's source at the speed of light and it's gone, it does not linger any longer than the source will emit it - and you can block most of the dangerous effects (not all) with something like heavy lead shielding.

The particulate radioactive matter will have a half life of many thousands of years and nature is just going to go ahead and spread that stuff wherever it takes it's self - that's you'r Alpha and Beta radiation, you will probably never know that with your very next breath you could very easily breath in a radioactive particle from any number of nuclear accidents, weapons tests or the 2 times nukes were used in war - the half life is such that it really makes very little difference when the event took place as the average human life span is insignificant compared to the half life's we are talking about - that little radioactive particle could easily lodge in your gut or your lungs, potentially damaging the DNA of adjacent cells and possibly causing cancers - but breath easy! - every breath you have ever taken would of been the same to some extent, the only difference is that with each accident or God forbid nuke weapon used in the atmosphere the gross total of radioactive particulate fall out in our skies, in our water, in our food, in the soil, waiting to be disturbed in some unnoticed or overlooked location where amounts have settled - well just about everywhere nature or man can move the stuff, that gross total increases a certain amount - and like I said, the human life span is insignificant to the half lives we are talking about here, to all intents and purposes from our point of view they will remain radioactive at dangerous levels until the day you die.

Originally posted by guessing
and ingest 2,000,000 times the iodine.

LOL, the point of ingesting potassium iodide is to flood the thyroid with the non radioactive iodine so there is no capability for the thyroid to absorb the radioactive iodine, so overdosing on it is fairly useless and to take 2 million times the does, well you'd be dead before you have even made a dent in your pile of potassium iodide

Edit - one dose is 130mg, that makes for 260kg per dose! - over a quarter of a metric tonne (wait is that right? checking)

Also potassium iodide does not protect against many other effects of radiation, basically it's to protect against thyroid cancer.

Originally posted by ANNED
ALL reactor fuel that is or has been in a reactor contains Plutonium.

Its a byproduct of the nuclear reaction inside all reactors.
When operating, a typical 1000 MWe nuclear power reactor contains within its uranium fuel load several hundred kilograms of plutonium.

www.world-nuclear.org...

Since Plutonium is in ALL REACTORS MOX fuel or not what's your point.

Is it disinformation or just to try to scare the c**p of of everyone.

I just love people who do not do there research before post threads like this

I think the point is in the actinides. They seem to be substantially worse than the plutonium issues and are only present in the MOX reactor.

Originally posted by Amaterasu

Originally posted by starless and bible black
The news guy on channel 7 ABC is not wearing a tie. His shirt is unbuttoned, and I wonder if his pants are even zipped. It's as though he couldn't bother to get dressed for work. The lady next to him is showing a lot of cleavage. She may not even be wearing a bra, I don't know. This while discussing the tragedy in the aftermath of the earthquake. They are rubbing it in, while they ignore any useful data.

Very good observation. Yes, the MSM is utterly pathetic.

Thanks for the post.

After about an hour, the news guy finally put on his tie. Usually it only takes a few minutes for them to react to criticisms, so I'm losing my touch. I'll add that he made the girl to his left seem sleazy with his sloppy attire. If they weren't seated at a glass table, I'd have had suspicions about their real purpose for being there, in the studio. This was on Chicago's local ABC news, channel 7, for the proles.

Originally posted by Truthof2012
my question is this, and can you guys answer this

i feel very sorry for the people people of japan, but we should refuse to send any more financial aid to japanese government until they are honest and straight forward

But man... Why punish the people? Those decisions were probably made by a room full of people, no more than 15 people.... And you propose refusing water, food and blankets to the hundreds of thousands of completely innocent people who have done nothing to you or me?

Seriously shame on you. How about help them first, then punish those responsible AFTER this has been cleaned up and stabilised?

You know, a slightly more human approach?

reply to post by ANNED

Since Plutonium is in ALL REACTORS MOX fuel or not what's your point.

Sigh.

Plutonium is a byproduct of nuclear power generation. The difference with MOX fuel is that the plutonium from used rods is mixed with new uranium then put into the reactor.

It's a little bit different because the rods in other reactors (non mox) when depleted are removed and disposed of as nuclear waste product. In a MOX fueled reactor, these rods are stored then reused.

That's the difference, the rods with MOX are in the reactor core.

Originally posted by starless and bible black
The news guy on channel 7 ABC is not wearing a tie. His shirt is unbuttoned, and I wonder if his pants are even zipped. It's as though he couldn't bother to get dressed for work. The lady next to him is showing a lot of cleavage. She may not even be wearing a bra, I don't know. This while discussing the tragedy in the aftermath of the earthquake. They are rubbing it in, while they ignore any useful data.

edit on 15-3-2011 by starless and bible black because: (no reason given)

They probably felt that the world or they both will vanish with the accident in Japan and 2012 to follow so probably went for a quickie

Just wanted to add something here about MOX fuel rods.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e082675900d6.jpg[/atsimg]

That is a picture of a pellet of MOX - it is a mixture of plutonium and uranium. The uranium and plutonium are mixed together as a powder and turned into the ceramic (oxidised) fuel pellet, those pellets are then loaded into metal fuel 'pins' or rods... I'm guessing the diameter of that pellet, looks about 1cm in diameter.

Now the reason I'm mentioning this is that I am guessing the increased surface area to mass ratio is important here, which may in part explain why this stuff can be considered more dangerous than uranium - (although I would not go so far as to say two million times as dangerous, that number just seems to come from differing safety guidelines on different nuclear fuels).

So a high surface area, and even worse, the uranium and plutonium were in a powdered form before somehow being turned into the ceramic form - I have no idea if that process is reversible in the conditions we are seeing in the Japanese reactors, but if it is, then wow! The surface area to mass ratio just went into orbit....

So any way, just wanted to mention that.

If there was lying going on wouldnt like everyone be getting radiation poisoning? It doesnt seem like that is actually happening.

Originally posted by Truthof2012
i feel very sorry for the people people of japan, but we should refuse to send any more financial aid to japanese government until they are honest and straight forward

I hope Americans are never judged by the honesty and straightforwardness of our government.

And you can't say the Japanese people didn't try.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3b47aec1e6df.png[/atsimg]

May 18, 2009 Tokyo, Japan -- Two British-flagged vessels, the Pacific Pintail and Pacific Heron arrived in Japan from France carrying 1.7 metric tons of weapons-usable plutonium contained in 69 assemblies of MOX (mixed plutonium and uranium oxide) fuel. This is the world's largest shipment of plutonium ever undertaken.

Originally posted by 12voltz
reply to post by FoxStriker

 

Well that adds more confusion to my basic calculations ,so what that means is that as we travel further away at an increasing speed by the time we get far enough away it will be safe to come home.The mind boggles.I think the quote from Homer Simpson is apt "whats the point of going anywhere ,when we just end up back here anyway" or something like that.

My apologiez, I was trying to say that the longer the amount of time the radiated isotopes are in the air, ground, or water the less potent they become, I believe that is for the Gamma Radiation. Although the shelf life of Mox is a lot longer, the effect should be less severe in the United States than in Japan although undoubtebly still dangerous to any form of life.

That's quite scary. The whole thing has gotten me on edge.

The world needs to do away with nuclear power once and for all. It's done nothing but cause problem after problem.

I hope all of the people in Japan stay safe.=[

Originally posted by scottlpool2003
The world needs to do away with nuclear power once and for all. It's done nothing but cause problem after problem.

A common knee jerk reaction, nuclear power is still very safe.

Over the past few decades, however, a series of studies has called these stereotypes into question. Among the surprising conclusions: the waste produced by coal plants is actually more radioactive than that generated by their nuclear counterparts. In fact, the fly ash emitted by a power plant—a by-product from burning coal for electricity—carries into the surrounding environment 100 times more radiation than a nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy.

source

There is just one example

When you take a moment and realize that these reactors are loaded with up to 140 TONS of this stuff, and more than one could potentially meltdown... The true magnitude of the potential global disaster begins to materialize.

One complete melt down of any one of these fully fueled reactor cores where it melts through the earth to the water table and explodes... Would release radioactive debris, gases and core particulates that would exceed the radiation dispersed from several simultaneous nuclear bomb detonations, without the destructive detonations.

There are 6 or more of these reactors in serious trouble now.

Pray they can keep cooling these monsters.

Originally posted by Now_Then

Originally posted by scottlpool2003
The world needs to do away with nuclear power once and for all. It's done nothing but cause problem after problem.

A common knee jerk reaction, nuclear power is still very safe.

No, no it's not. There is no way to build to ensure a 10 on the scale earthquake cannot take it out, we have the waste issue, and other accidents do occur (that release radioactivity - hardly comparable to a car crash, say).

Let's promote the plenum (zero point/"dark") energy extraction. It is clean, negentropic, and available everywhere in the universe.