It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
15,000 hiroshimas= 187.5 megaton bomb
(0.0125*15000)edit on 16-10-2013 by larapa because: (no reason given)
The link is not broken and it will answer a lot of your questions. It even has a diagram showing where they think the fuel is, having left the primary containment to varying degrees but according to their diagrams not having left the secondary containment. There could be some question about the accuracy of the diagrams, but in reality it's not possible to know the exact location of the melted cores. I think they used estimates, simulations etc to determine the location but they aren't 100% sure.
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
I understand that the fact is maybe that no one knows, thanks for the link however it seems to be broken ...
Again you need to read that source. But to summarize what it says, the radiation levels in the reactor are lethal, but at the boundaries of the property they are 1/70th of the background radiation above background. I'm not sure I believe them, but that's what it says.
I was hoping for a layman terms blow by blow of the situation: reactor 1 stable, impacton surrounding environment minimal etc
Yes it's complicated and there's disinformation, but I can tell you some things we do and don't know. We do know what radiation levels are harmful/lethal, like LD50 with is the radiation dose that will kill 50% of people exposed to it. So right off the bat you have some uncertainty, 2 people get exposed to the exact same radiation level and one lives and one dies (or 100 exposed and 50 live and 50 die), so you know it's not completely predictable. I'm sure you can get such lethal exposure if you get close enough to the melted cores but of course nobody goes there.
However it may just be a simple case of acomplicatedsituation with limited information released to ascertain basic theories on what is happening ( and potentially large amounts of hersay/disinformation)...
We lack scientific data to determine a precise risk of cancer in the future from radiation exposure today
That's the reality, in the middle between "any amount will kill you" and "low levels are safe". That's a pretty useful document that even gives you things to think about if you're considering medically related radiation exposure.
True, that's covered on page 3 of the pdf link I posted, and it's called the "hormesis hypothesis", which I was aware of, but omitted for the sake of simplicity since my post was already so long.
There's actually still a third option which isn't in that middle. What doesn't kill you, makes you stronger?!
I said it makes sense with Iron, you said it makes sense with some Herbs, and maybe both of those are true, but it doesn't follow to me that the same is true for radiation. Take a closer look at what happens after radiation damage occurs:
reply to post by Arbitrageur
It makes sense the same as how slightly toxic herbs stimulate the kidney and/or liver to upregulate genes necessary to handle the toxicity. This upregulation more than compensates for the toxin, leading to a "detox" effect. After a threshold is reached, variable from individual to individual, the net effect is detriment.
Intuitively it makes good sense.