Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Fukushima: Open Air Fission? - RT

page: 2
11
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Human0815
 



Following the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, Busby established a television and internet presence where he discussed the risks of ionizing radiation and the Japanese Government's handling of the disaster.

Busby furthermore marketed, on his Japanese language website, tests and a mineral supplement (dubbed by critics an "anti-radiation" pill) that he claimed could mitigate the effects of ingested radioisotopes.[6]


Wikipedia: Christopher Bugsby

Well then, he does seem kind of like a snake oil salesman?
edit on 3-9-2013 by darkbake because: (no reason given)


Wow, I forgot the link in the O.P... was looking for that. Here it is: Fukushima: Open Air Fission. I wanted to check it...


Although they may think this is a leak from the tank, and there may well be leaks from the tank, this sudden increase of 1.8 Sieverts per hour is an enormously big doze that can probably kill somebody in 2 to 4 hours.



There is a fog condensing over the area of the ocean close to the reactors, which means that hot water is getting into the Pacific that means something is fissioning very close to the Pacific and it is not inside the reactors, it must be outside the reactors in my opinion.


That is basically what I wanted to get out of it, he was interested because of the sudden increase in radiation and it is possible that there was a rise in ocean temperature corresponding with it if the fog levels are new. He must think that it points to open air fission.

I read earlier on an ATS thread that the equipment being used to check radiation levels was not calibrated to check for radiation levels that high, and that is why there was the "sudden" spike.
edit on 3-9-2013 by darkbake because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by darkbake
 


Your Argument cant stand a critical Analysis!

Rt Headlines regarding F'Shima is out of Reality and they never spoke with real Scientist (Busby is not),
Engineers (Radchix is not) or with the People of Tepco because the People who really want to know
are not their Targets, they look for the usual Conspiracy People, but it is as irresponsible like Tepco!

We have a real Crisis here and they bring up one Lie after the next and this is against the Journalistic Codex!



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 10:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Human0815
 


I had to go back to the source article and examine the arguments he made for the open air fission, maybe it's not what is going on, but his two point argument is ready to be debunked... the fog thing could be something to look into.

Fukushima Web Cams

Y'all can check that webcam to see what kind of fog there is, as fog would represent warmer water, especially in the winter - it is night time at the moment, though!
edit on 3-9-2013 by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 10:01 AM
link   
@ Op

(Sep 01,2013) Explanation regarding the high radiation levels (maximum 1,800 mSv/h) found at tanks in Fukushima Daiichi NPS on August 31, 2013





We deeply apologize for the great anxiety and inconvenience caused by the recent contaminated water issues at the Fukushima Daiichi NPS, which affect residents near the power station and the broader society. With regard to the high radiation levels (maximum 1,800 mSv/h) found at tanks in Fukushima Daiichi NPS on August 31, some articles reported that "by simple calculation, if a person were exposed to this amount of radiation for four hours continuously, it would lead to death," or "it would take only one minute to reach the annual radiation exposure limit for workers," etc.

We would like to explain more about the figure of 1,800 mSv/h. We used measuring equipment that measures both beta radiation and gamma radiation. The 1,800 mSv/h figure represents the total amount of beta radiation and gamma radiation.

Most of the 1,800 mSv/h was beta radiation; gamma radiation measured 1 mSv/h. Since the control level of the equivalent dose for skin is 500 mSv/year, such radiation level (1800mSv/h) should be carefully controlled. However, since beta radiation travels only a short distance, radiation levels can be reduced considerably by maintaining a distance. Moreover, since beta radiation is weak and can be blocked by a thin sheet of metal, such as aluminum, we believe that we can control radiation exposure by the using proper equipment and clothing. Additionally, although 1,800 mSv/h was detected at 5cm above the floor, the radiation level at 50cm above the floor was 15 mSv/h.

Thus, the figure of 1,800 mSv/h does not represent the radiation level of the whole area. Some articles reported that "if a person were exposed to this amount of radiation for four hours continuously, it would lead to death," by comparing with the radiation level that would result in death (7,000 mSv), or "it would take only one minute to reach the annual radiation exposure limit for workers," by comparing with the annual radiation exposure limit for workers (50 mSv).

However, we believe that simply comparing the 1,800 mSv/h figure with these standard levels is inappropriate, since the standard levels represent the cumulative effective dose (not equivalent dose) upon the whole body. We will investigate the cause of this issue, taking any appropriate countermeasures immediately, and continue to make every effort to secure the safety of workers.

Source



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Human0815
 


Say what? This reads like backpedaling. Does anyone really measure 2 different radiation types and then combine both the readings for a totally different reading like they claim? Because that makes absolutely no sense and seems misleading.



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 10:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Nyiah
 


Did they change their radiation measuring protocols in the middle of the Fukushima crisis? Is it because the government took over? Hmm.

@Human: RT provides more interesting and risk-taking reporting methods, which is what I like. It does give food for criticism, of course, because it needs to be refined.
edit on 3-9-2013 by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Nyiah
 


I don't get your Question, i am not native in English!

For me there is a elementar difference between Alpha-, Beta- or Gamma Radiation!



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by darkbake
reply to post by Nyiah
 


Did they change their radiation measuring protocols in the middle of the Fukushima crisis? Is it because the government took over? Hmm.

@Human: RT provides more interesting and risk-taking reporting methods, which is what I like. It does give food for criticism, of course, because it needs to be refined.
edit on 3-9-2013 by darkbake because: (no reason given)


But the majority of us is not able to do so because we are not nuclear Engineers!



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Human0815
 


True enough, I think if there is consistent fog over the ocean out of nowhere, it would indicate a rise in sea temperature due to radiation there, but that's all I know.



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 03:57 PM
link   
Can I ask.

Can Hertz at a certain frequency change anything here?



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by darkbake
 

There was also this video from a couple of months back, showing steam from undetermined source coming from #3 building.



Digging around now to see if the cause/source was ever nailed-down.



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 11:28 PM
link   

Originally1800,ted by Nyiah
reply to post by Human0815
 


Say what? This reads like backpedaling. Does anyone really measure 2 different radiation types and then combine both the readings for a totally different reading like they claim? Because that makes absolutely no sense and seems misleading.



No that's actually quite accurate. I can stand in a room and have a point source giving off 180rem/r which is the same as the 1800. I can be 3 feet from the hot spot and only register say 15 rem/h

The closer i go the higher it gets. The further back i go the less it gets.

So yes in total its 1800, but that's contact. 2 feet away and it could drop to 100.

If iI was standing there. I would be in a double plastic suit and think nothing of it as its mostly. Just beta radiation. That cannot penetrate your skin. The high dosage you guys are screaming about would be, standing behind a rolling shield while RX is 100% and refueling is underway or sticking your head In front of the calandria tube while the end cap is off. That's all gamma.

Gamma will kill you.
Beta will not.


UNLESS you ingest beta emitting particles. Then your in bad shape until you cough it up or crap it out.

So yes, its a bad situation, no question. 1800 milliseiverts/h contact. No worries unless your naked, no mask and licking the water.



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 11:31 PM
link   
reply to post by darkbake
 


Which makes sense, as fog would come from warm water, and not as much from cold water.
No.
You have it backwards. Sea fog is the result of warm air over cold water. The cold water cools the air causing the water vapor in it to condense into fog.
It is a regular and well know occurrence in Japan and elsewhere (San Francisco is a very good example).


The Japanese call it oyashio — an ocean current that pulls in cold water from the northern Pacific.

“The interaction between the cold water and the [warmer] air temperature creates fog along the coast,” said Capt. Brooke Matwick, 35th Operations Support Squadron weather flight commander. “There’s days where you just have fog right off the coast and it’s clear-and-a-million right in Misawa. But once the sea breeze starts to kick in and the winds shift to the east, that’s when the sea fog can roll in as well.”


“This is pretty average for the sea fog season,” Matwick said. “Typically, our peak month is in July, where we typically see about 25 days of fog. It tends to taper off in August with about 21 days of fog.”

www.stripes.com...
edit on 9/3/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 09:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Ah, thanks Phage, good information.



posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 05:14 PM
link   
well, i could be wrong but i think the photo is real. i was watching a video the other day and a reporter from japan mentioned the steam coming off the ocean as a cause for concern. now of course..... I DON'T KNOW WHAT VIDEO IT WAS! i'm so mad at myself for not saving it. i've watched quite a few over the last week and my brain is starting to fry.

honestly, i think the photo is steam. i don't think it's "boiling" but i think something very wrong is happening (more wrong than it has been) and the water at the coast is hot. since this photo has come out the radiation levels have been increasing significantly and it was AFTER the photo that the event (leakage from storage containers) was raised to a level 3.

the other thing...... i'm pretty sure they've been intentionally dumping waste water in the ocean because they know very well that they can't keep up with the amount of output so they stored as much as they could but also dumped. the containers are shoddy.... just bolted instead of welded.... and they are almost at capacity now. i think they almost had no choice but to dump the waste water somewhere and we've been told over and over that the ocean is SOOOO BIG that the radiation will just disperse and cause very little harm.

that's my theory. obviously i don't' have anymore proof than the next guy but it's not a far fetched theory at all.



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 09:41 AM
link   
Looks like a no win situation for everyone not just Japan. Their honor once again has got in the way of logic and we will all pay the price for it. Can one country sue another in international courts for damages?



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 10:05 AM
link   
The sea-fog looks kinda localised to me, wouldn't it blanket out the whole area in the photo if it were sea-fog?





new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1   >>

log in

join