Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Broken Pipe at Fukushima! (12 tons)

page: 1
8

log in

join

posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 02:23 AM
link   

Tepco: Strontium leaking into ocean — Tons more highly contaminated water enters sea — “TEPCO has apologized for the incident and says it will determine the cause and extent of the leakage”



TEPCO: Broken pipe at #Fukushima-1 has caused leak of up to 12 tons of water contaminated with radioactive Sr into Pacific.- Steve Herman


breakingnews

enenews

agile-news

Deltaworld

I've been looking for better sources. but none yet. I'll keep updating the thread.
edit on 5-4-2012 by novemberecho because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 02:25 AM
link   
Only 12 tons?

Call me when there's a big spill.








pffft.




posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 02:33 AM
link   
ah, this isn't really my field of expertise. I noticed there wasn't a thread, and I thought it was a rather large number xD

changed the title of the thread so I don't freak anyone out too badly.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 02:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by novemberecho
ah, this isn't really my field of expertise. I noticed there wasn't a thread, and I thought it was a rather large number xD

changed the title of the thread so I don't freak anyone out too badly.


I was kidding.


While it isn't as much that has been previously leaked, no amount should be acceptable.

Thanks for posting



On 21 April, TEPCO estimated that 520 tons of radioactive water leaked into the sea before leaks in a pit in unit 2 were plugged, releasing 4,700 TBq of total water release (calculated by simple sum, which is inconsistent with the IAEA methodology for mixed nuclide releases[62]) (20,000 times facility's annual limit).[62][81] TEPCO's detailed estimates were 2,800 TBq of I-131, 940 TBq of Cs-134, 940 TBq of Cs-137.[62]
*
edit on 5-4-2012 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 02:37 AM
link   
ahhhhhhh wow. "the moreeee you knowwwwwwww."
that's crazy. definitely more than 12 xD

and you're welcome :]



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 02:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by boncho

Originally posted by novemberecho
ah, this isn't really my field of expertise. I noticed there wasn't a thread, and I thought it was a rather large number xD

changed the title of the thread so I don't freak anyone out too badly.


I was kidding.


While it isn't as much that has been previously leaked, no amount should be acceptable.

Thanks for posting



On 21 April, TEPCO estimated that 520 tons of radioactive water leaked into the sea before leaks in a pit in unit 2 were plugged, releasing 4,700 TBq of total water release (calculated by simple sum, which is inconsistent with the IAEA methodology for mixed nuclide releases[62]) (20,000 times facility's annual limit).[62][81] TEPCO's detailed estimates were 2,800 TBq of I-131, 940 TBq of Cs-134, 940 TBq of Cs-137.[62]
*
edit on 5-4-2012 by boncho because: (no reason given)


For a little perspective, the volume to weight of water is approximately 1 cubic meter per tonne or approximately one cubic yard per ton. A single Olympc-size swimming pool has a volume of approximately 2500 cubic meters thus contains 2500 tonnes of water (approximately), or around 5 times more water than what was leaked.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 02:59 AM
link   
For me it's the dilution factor.

OK, 12 tons of highly contaminated may not be much BUT...

How far do you have to dilute 12 tons of highly contaminated water into the ocean for it to reach the point that it's not considered contaminated? I'd imagine it would take quite a lot.

How far does a teaspoon of sugar dilute into a gallon of water?



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 04:40 AM
link   
Together with caesium isotopes 134Cs, 137Cs, and iodine isotope 131I it was among the most important isotopes regarding health impacts after the Chernobyl disaster.

Strontium-90 is a "bone seeker" that exhibits biochemical behavior similar to calcium, the next lighter Group 2 element. After entering the organism, most often by ingestion with contaminated food or water, about 70–80% of the dose gets excreted. Virtually all remaining strontium-90 is deposited in bones and bone marrow, with the remaining 1% remaining in blood and soft tissues. Its presence in bones can cause bone cancer, cancer of nearby tissues, and leukemia. Exposure to 90Sr can be tested by a bioassay, most commonly by urinalysis.

As Strontium has an affinity to the Calcium-sensing receptor of parathyroid cells that is similar to that of calcium, the increased risk of liquidators of the Chernobyl power plant to suffer from primary hyperparathyroidism could be explained by bindlinlg of Strontium-90.[4]

en.wikipedia.org...


seems like it's not something we want to have collecting in our environment with a 29 year half life and being a bone seeker that spells real bad news for most life forms. just makes me wonder how they will ever get this cleaned up or if they even can.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 05:22 AM
link   
I think I'll take a long drive down PCH tomorrow and admire the Pacific's beauty before it's gone.

We're all guilty. Every single one of us.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 09:31 AM
link   
No YOU are guilty.....Tepco is guilty, but i feel no guilt.
I have been arguing for the removal and shut down of atomic power for the whole time its been in use......
But nobody would ever listen.....



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 01:00 PM
link   

AbecedarinA single Olympc-size swimming pool has a volume of approximately 2500 cubic meters thus contains 2500 tonnes of water (approximately), or around 5 times more water than what was leaked.

Don’t you mean 2500 divide 12 tonnes? Which = 208.33 times more than was actually leaked.

What Matters…
Is not the volume (or indeed tonnage) of radioactive water leaked, but how radioactive it was, and even more importantly what volume solid particles were dispersed in it, and how long their half-life is (the longer the half-life the longer enduring the environmental problem).


StirlingNo YOU are guilty.....Tepco is guilty, but i feel no guilt.
I have been arguing for the removal and shut down of atomic power for the whole time its been in use......
But nobody would ever listen...

And if you had your way there would be billions more tonnes of CO2 in the atmosphere by from fossil fuel burning. More mercury in the ocean as a direct result, radiation from coal (in the soil) and more overall deaths as a result.

You might imagine that you’d just stick with solar panels, but then your electricity would be so expensive, any industry or business in your nation requiring large amounts of electricity, would be financially compelled to relocate abroad. Even Germany (which has been spending spends tens of billions on solar, and has more than America) is struggling to produce more than 3 percent of its electricity needs.

The fact you campaign against all nuclear (and by extension the safe, human error free, reactors, like the Pebble Bed Reactor) suggests you are either fanatical or totally ignorant of the subject -of all perhaps the risks (just like most people who totally oppose nuclear).



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 01:49 PM
link   
well well well another TEPCO incedent , they have bein putting water from the plant in the ocean for a long time well the last year or so correct me if im wrong
edit on 5-4-2012 by McC556 because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
8

log in

join