seriously wondering about nuclear power Fukushima?!

page: 1
3

log in

join

posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 04:32 PM
link   


Nuclear power The study says the Fukushima disaster in 2011 may have released twice as much radiation as the Japanese government admitted. The emissions of radioactive caesium-137 from Fukushima are said to have started earlier than the authorities have claimed, to have lasted longer, and to have spread over a wider area of land than previously believed. The authors say that it is far too early to make any responsible estimate of the potential health impact of the Fukushima disaster. The report reopens the controversy between pro- and anti- nuclear power advocates about the health damage from in the 1986 Chernobyl disaster. While the World Health Organisation has claimed that only 28 people died and there could be a possible 4,000 additional cancer deaths , the EU study states that the numbers of deaths could range from "at least 17,000 to 68,000 over 50 years". In a sharp rebuke to pro-nuclear advocates who have argued that the accident produced very few extra cancers, it argues that it is wrong to focus solely on cancer as an outcome of Chernobyl. "Post-Chernobyl non-cancer impact may be very great, including immunological disorders, and cardiovascular disease - especially among the young," it says. Reactor accidents are said to be by far the single largest risk now facing the nuclear industry. According to the study, the probability of a future major nuclear accident has increased 20-fold since Fukushima An urgent re-appraisal of the way that nuclear power stations are assessed for safety is long overdue, says the study. "Whatever one's view of the risks and benefits of nuclear energy, it is clear that the possibility of catastrophic accidents must be factored into the policy and regulatory decision-making process. Both the regulation of operating nuclear reactors and the design-base for any proposed reactor will need significant re-evaluation."


so i have been wondering for a while how badly has this nuclear accident affected us done lots of research and was wondering other peoples views on this.

found an article online today that confirmed my suspicions i had a few months ago . now thing is if the press are saying japan played it down and we all know the British press play things down how bad is this in reality

here is the link to the website www.guardian.co.uk...




posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 04:52 PM
link   
I`ve always believed that it was much worse than they were telling us. World governments and the media downplay everything else so why wouldn`t they downplay something as bad as this.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 05:02 PM
link   
Estimates range in the millions from the radiation release from Chernobyl, that is over a very long time scale till today.

Cancer rates and such shot through the roof.

Now as for Fukushima we wont know for 20 or 30 more years just how bad it was, just watch the cancer rates rise over the next few decades.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Tardacus
 


after it happened i scoured the net for info but didn't find much it worried me so much the lack of info after a while i stopped looking into it. just when i gave up hope and stopped researching came across the link.

we have nuclear power stations worldwide and it worries me deeply especially when the build one like that on fault lines.

there have been a few other smaller earth quakes near by in recent times but they lack info on wherever or not the reactor was effected they also have a storage pool damaged and exposed which could cause serious harm quite easily if hit by a quake . there are only bags of rock stopping it leaking in the sea which would affect people world wide.

another concern of mine is where are they disposing of all this radiated soil they are cleaning up.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 05:59 PM
link   
itsnot just that there was several hydrogen air chemical explosions , what the hell exactly has this done to our atmosphere sorry if i sound like a green peace warrior im not just worried.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 06:06 PM
link   


The radiation effects from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster are the results of release of radioactive isotopes from the crippled Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant after the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami. Radioactive material has been released from the Fukushima containment vessels as the result of deliberate venting to reduce gaseous pressure, deliberate discharge of coolant water into the sea[citation needed], and associated uncontrolled events[citation needed]. Concerns about the possibility of a large-scale release of radioactivity resulted in 20 km exclusion zone being set up around the power plant and people within the 20–30 km zone being advised to stay indoors[citation needed]. Later, the USA, UK, France and some other countries told their nationals to consider leaving Tokyo, in response to fears of spreading radioactive contamination.[3] The Fukushima incident has led to trace amounts of radiation, including iodine-131 and caesium-134/137, being observed around the world (New York State, Alaska, Hawaii, Oregon, California, Montreal, and Austria).[4][5][6] Detectable amounts of radioactive isotopes have also been distributed into the Pacific Ocean and widely dispersed



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 06:10 PM
link   


The study also suggests that, contrary to government claims, pools used to store spent nuclear fuel played a significant part in the release of the long-lived environmental contaminant caesium-137, which could have been prevented by prompt action. The analysis has been posted online for open peer review by the journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.


here is a link suggesting what i am saying www.scientificamerican.com...



and a video opinions please
edit on 18/02/2013 by leopardpimps because: added more



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 06:18 PM
link   
here is another video asks more questions than answers but it is interesting =) thanks for looking guys




posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 06:24 PM
link   
and here is another interesting one




posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 06:40 PM
link   
i remember hearing a report on the news at the time that this was happening and the report said that all the radioactive flood water that was going back into the ocean wouldn`t be a problem for the fish and other wildlife because the ocean water would dilute it.
I don`t know a lot about radioactive waste but that report didn`t sound right even to me. I decided right then that if they were going to lie about something like that then they were certainly lieing about how bad things really were.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 06:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Tardacus
 


they did reveal in the media not so long ago the fish was unsafe. it's disgusting how much this has been covered up, it's a shame people don't take more interest in things like this.

we spend so much time looking up conspiracy's we forget the things that are actually happening right now . don't get me wrong i love conspiracy theory's and researching but this has happened and is still happening and when we are all dying from radiation poisoning and wondering why . we should of paid attention and asked the right questions.

sorry went off on one there but this bothers me deeply. if only more people was interested in this as it affects us all.i am very glad two people read my post. its a start.

forget about the Mayan prophecies we are going to destroy the earth all by ourselves and i can guarantee it will be caused by some thing nuclear



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 09:54 PM
link   
This is without a doubt, a long term nightmare that the governments want you to ignore. this constant release of radiation is ongoing and may continue for a long time as encasing these thousands of pooled rods is still touch and go to this very day. But the state run media just wants you to pay attention to american idol.



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 12:40 AM
link   
reply to post by teslahowitzer
 


they could of got secure storage for them but they cost roughly a million pound a pop much cheaper to use the unstable storage pools they do!




top topics
 
3

log in

join