Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Fukushima now a Level 7 emergency

page: 8
78
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 08:23 PM
link   
could anyone elaborate on this? my opinion is that it is only to the west of the plate but a few of my friends believe activity is shifting clockwise around the plate www.scribd.com...




posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 08:30 PM
link   
One more thing, if you decide to buy gas masks and filters, do not buy filters from surplus. Those are all expired, and do not buy the surplus m10m Czech gas masks either, you won't find any new filters for those gas masks. You will only waste your money, and old filters will cause you other respiratory problems that can also kill you.



The above Czech gas mask is the m10m, which it's filters are discontinued but some people are buying them thinking they can be used.

It is also a good idea to have a few iodine pill bottles, they are cheap and can last for several years.

edit on 12-4-2011 by ElectricUniverse because: link



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Stringycheeseman
 





Nobody was prepared for such a crisis. For the next seven months, 500,000 men will wage hand-to-hand combat with an invisible enemy – a ruthless battle that has gone unsung, which claimed thousands of unnamed and now almost forgotten heroes. Yet, it is thanks to these men that the worst was avoided; a second explosion, ten times more powerful than Hiroshima which would have wiped out more than half of Europe. This was kept secret for twenty years by the Soviets and the West alike.


OMG... wheres the laws againt this s***??



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
There were reports that the secondary containment base in the reactor structures at Fukushima are coated with graphite...


As far as I'm aware, that's not accurate...


While the situation is dire, and still unfolding, it's clear that even if the worst happens at Fukushima the outcome will be much better than Chernobyl. Even though the Japanese and Ukrainian facilities were both built in the early 1970s, the Fukushima plants (along with every plant in the United States and most plants in the world) featured a safer design that already prevented the worst from happening.

For starters, the Fukushima facilities use water to both cool its reactors and moderate its nuclear reaction speeds. The Chernobyl facility also used water to cool its reactors, but used volatile graphite to slow its reactions to produce heat. When Chernobyl's Reactor No. 4 exploded, this graphite caught fire and burned like coal, billowing radioactive material across Europe. "In Fukushima, the fuel will melt, but it is surrounded by water and won't burn nearly the same way as graphite," says Peter Caracappa, a Radiation Safety Officer and assistant professor at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, who has studied the power systems of plants like Fukushima.

Read more: Fukushima Nuclear Meltdown - Japan 8.9 Magnitude Earthquake - Popular Mechanics
www.popularmechanics.com...

Yeah but was Cherynobyl dumping contamination directly into our sea ???



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by RoyalBlue
Yeah but was Cherynobyl dumping contamination directly into our sea ???


Not that I know of. But, the sea absorbs radiation everyday from the sun. And, unlike oil, the radiation coming from the reactor diminishes greatly over just a few days. Here's some info regarding the threat of radiation in our sea...


On Tuesday, the Japanese government raised the crisis level at the Fukushima nuclear complex to a level similar to the 1986 Chernobyl disaster in the Ukraine, citing high overall radiation leaks. Government officials contended, however, that the health risks caused by Chernobyl still far outweighed those posed by the Fukushima plant, the Associated Press reported.

U.S. experts said radiation dumped into Japanese waters isn't likely to make it over here in sufficient concentrations to cause any harm.

"If the radioisotopes that are released into the water in Japan on the other side of the Pacific were to make it over to the eastern Pacific, let's say the coast of Alaska, the concentrations are likely to be so vanishingly low that any radioactivity accumulated by fish in U.S. waters will be virtually certain to be negligible," said Nicholas Fisher, professor of marine and atmospheric sciences at the State University of New York at Stony Brook. "The radiation dose will be extremely low compared to radiation that's naturally occurring in fish."

Added Jacqueline Williams, program director for radiation medicine at the Center for Biophysical Assessment and Risk Management Following Irradiation at the University of Rochester Medical Center in New York: "Obviously, if it's going into the ocean, there's going to be a dilution factor. We're 5,000 miles away. There's a lot of ocean between Japan and the U.S."

Also, Williams explained, "the particular isotope everyone is fussing about [iodine 131] has a half life of about eight days, which means that every eight days, the level of radioactivity is halved."

"After 56 days, you're down to a little less than 1 percent," Fisher said. "After 10 half lives, you're down to about one-tenth of 1 percent so it's almost certain it's not going to be a problem."
health.usnews.com... ns


Even in the worst case, this situation will not be like Chernobyl. But, the mainstream news won't pass up the opportunity to hype it up, and sell boner pills for their sponsors while everybody is glued to the TV waiting for the next shoe to drop...



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 09:12 PM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 


i dont think you realize that not only is it more then one reactor, they are dumping in the sea. fukushima will be the new standard in how bad things can go.



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by yourmaker
 


I'm sure the people making those assessments are just as aware of the specifics of this situation, as ATS members are. But, I've been here long enough to know, you don't get between some members and their certainty of our impending doom. I thought the BP oil spill was supposed to be the extinction level event that was going to bring an end to life on earth as we know it. But, that was so last year. Fukushima is it, this time, we're done for.


Radiation is a part of our environment. It's not some alien toxin that our earth is unable to deal with. If you're in the vicinity of the reactor, then you're probably absorbing too much, too fast. But, most of us will not be affected. Sorry to burst any doomsday bubbles.
edit on 12-4-2011 by 27jd because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 





And, unlike oil, the radiation coming from the reactor diminishes greatly over just a few days


Really now??? so how many days does it take for Cs-137 to diminish just to name one?



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by okiecowboy
 


Sorry, I was referring to the iodine, which is the radiation everybody is most worked up about. Cesium is 30 years, plutonium, alot longer. Like I said, I'm not one to try and ruin everybody's panic party. See ya'll round the next disaster thread...unless we're all dead from radiation poisoning before then



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 12:37 AM
link   
Interesting article about the safety of nuclear energy vs. coal...


Meeting in Vienna in 1986, experts expressed a hope that Chernobyl would finally resolve the debate. "In 20 to 30 years' time we're going to know whether the linear dose hypothesis [is correct]," predicted one, "at least for leukemia and maybe for lung cancer."

It was not to be. For the record, aside from a serious uptick in curable thyroid cancer among those exposed as children (which faster action at the time would have avoided), a U.N. monitoring project finds "no scientific evidence of increases in overall cancer incidence or mortality rates" among residents of the Chernobyl region. But that hasn't stopped other studies from predicting tens of thousands of "excess" cancer deaths across Europe over many decades based on the same linear, no-threshold modeling that governments everywhere have adopted as a regulatory standard.

All this has direct bearing on Japan, where hot particles especially will be a worry for some time to come. In a linear, no-threshold world, the Japanese government can never call a given level of exposure "safe" even if the additional risk is statistically negligible for the average person. In fact, Japanese politics may be roiled for decades to come by insoluble arguments over small anomalies in the cancer rate and whether a given sufferer is a "victim of Fukushima."

Of course, the galloping irony for the Baden-Württemberg Greens is that the exact risk model doesn't matter. However you slice it, coal is more dangerous than nuclear.

Start with deaths that aren't the product of statistical imagination: Thousands more die in coal mining accidents each year (especially in China) than have been killed in all nuclear-related accidents since the beginning of time. What's more, coal plants spew toxins like mercury and other metals—along with more radioactive thorium and uranium than a nuclear plant—which are no less amenable to linear, no-threshold thinking. In 2004, the EPA estimated that a new emissions standard then being promoted would, by itself, save 17,000 lives a year.
www.morningstar.co.uk...
edit on 13-4-2011 by 27jd because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 12:53 AM
link   
reply to post by midwest
 


Yes sir, i'm not motivated to do # anymore, just tweak my car, play with my dog while I still have my health...



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 01:07 AM
link   
reply to post by just_julie
 


Nothing is being done that will stop it, ask yourself what will happen when that radioactive water evaporates? It will, you know. All that radioactive fallout riding the jet stream will rise and fall as the winds blow and the radioactive evaporation will fall as rain, then snow, sleet and hail. Fukushima will continue to churn out this poison river for an extremely long time.



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 05:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd
Interesting article about the safety of nuclear energy vs. coal...


Meeting in Vienna in 1986, experts expressed a hope that Chernobyl would finally resolve the debate. "In 20 to 30 years' time we're going to know whether the linear dose hypothesis [is correct]," predicted one, "at least for leukemia and maybe for lung cancer."
*snip*
www.morningstar.co.uk...
edit on 13-4-2011 by 27jd because: (no reason given)


I want to focus on the following statement made in the article:



Thousands more die in coal mining accidents each year (especially in China) than have been killed in all nuclear-related accidents since the beginning of time.


First:
Since the beginning of time?
Isn't coal as an energy source a lot older than nuclear power?
Is that fair to compare?

Second:


(especially in China)


Does China have the same safety standards as the US?
If not, why is this a factor? If China's standards are lax with coal, they can be lax
with nuclear. How does this help us in anyway?



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 05:58 AM
link   
U2 "Tokyo" Electric Co


www.youtube.com...



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 07:04 AM
link   
I have read posts on this thread and replied with my own but i'm not sure i want to keep reading more.... i know the situation is bad but if we keep posting more bad stuff about this, it will only get us more scared or panicked about the situation.... but what to do? Do we just wait for the msm to tell us the truth (which may not happen) or do we switch off this thread and hope it all goes away?

Hmmmm..... decisions.... decisions



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 08:47 AM
link   
Some information about Caesium:


Radiocaesium does not accumulate in the body as effectively as many other fission products (such as radioiodine and radiostrontium). As with other alkali metals, radiocaesium washes out of the body relatively quickly in sweat and urine. However, radiocaesium follows potassium and tends to accumulate in plant tissues, including fruits and vegetables.


en.wikipedia.org...

That's not to say that it's safe, or that radioactive iodine, tellurium, xenon aren't also floating around in the air.



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by TruthxIsxInxThexMist
I have read posts on this thread and replied with my own but i'm not sure i want to keep reading more.... i know the situation is bad but if we keep posting more bad stuff about this, it will only get us more scared or panicked about the situation.... but what to do? Do we just wait for the msm to tell us the truth (which may not happen) or do we switch off this thread and hope it all goes away?

Hmmmm..... decisions.... decisions


How you react is one thing, how you choose your actions is another.

Fear is the enemy within. Being informed makes you able to choose your actions more appropriately.

So when you feel fear, refocus onto what you can do in your life, today.



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by condition9
reply to post by Ghost375
 


You know this did not have to hit here at all Russia offered to help and this could have been contained so Why is the world or other people not in a serious revolt or uproar over this?? I mean this is genocide bigtime!

My guess is that there was some nuclear weapon material, design, experiment, or uranium enriching for U.S's nuclear weapons program that the Jap's didn't want the rest of the world to know about, or to physically see, so they refused to let anyone in to help, to protect their own interests...



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
Just found this article in my local news, is it possible that this is related to the disaster or is it really something else as stated in the article?
Radioactive Water in Philadelphia

from the article..."Kathryn Higley, a health physicist at Oregon State University, said the most likely source is a nearby or upstream medical facility that treats cancer patients with Iodine-131, which can enter the water supply when patients go to the bathroom."
I don't which is more disturbing, that we have contaminated radioactive drinking water, or that the water we drink is contaminated from contaminated bodily waste...I mean, did I read that right, that we're drinking recycled sewer water ???



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by RoyalBlue

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
Just found this article in my local news, is it possible that this is related to the disaster or is it really something else as stated in the article?
Radioactive Water in Philadelphia

from the article..."Kathryn Higley, a health physicist at Oregon State University, said the most likely source is a nearby or upstream medical facility that treats cancer patients with Iodine-131, which can enter the water supply when patients go to the bathroom."
I don't which is more disturbing, that we have contaminated radioactive drinking water, or that the water we drink is contaminated from contaminated bodily waste...I mean, did I read that right, that we're drinking recycled sewer water ???


Old, old story. Buried regularly. Everything we release into our world becomes a part of it: part of the soil, water, plants. And we DO drink it, eat it and breathe it because it doesn't break down or "go away." Dispersal and dilution are myths.

Drugs show up in Americans' Water

Pharmaceutical Metabolites in Wastewater

Southern Ontario, Prozac and painkillers found in tap water





new topics

top topics



 
78
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join