Fukushima radiation… what you need to know and why

Human0815
Fukushima was and is the Garden of Japan and one of the most important parts
for our production of Food, we can't keep away from t/here.

Way to go buiding a plant in that region! Geesh I cant imagine what youll think next!
Now i get why you let radiation leak into the ocean, if you dont mind having power plant next to your crop fields

reply to post by payta


???

Something is, in my humble Opinion, wrong
with the Way how you think and interpret
other People but i am not "that" surprised!

reply to post by Human0815

Yeah, well im not surprise you look down on me, keep the good work champ

reply to post by payta

Can we say that people being divided and wasting energies on one another instead of the problem is the number one objective of the nuclear industry ?

Maybe then the greatest thing we could do is not give into this. No matter the emotions something so traumatic brings about .

We all live here ! And this affects everyone here and will ....

Considering that all waters are connected, this is a very bad situation for Earth. We all have to drink water. Water has been shown to retain any energy. Anyone that says fukushima is nothing to worry about, should get thet head checked. I live on the East coast of the United States. I wouldn't go out until the fog lifts. I also take chlorella faithfully for radioactive detox/protection. If I or my family lived on the West coast, we would have moved as soon as the reactor first melted down. If I could, I would move to Africa. Get as far away from the Northern hemisphere as possible.

payta
reply to post by Human0815

 

I cant believe this guy. This is a global disaster!
Still im glad you are happy for japan since the leak went to the pacific so it will trouble other countries too, and not so much yours!
Japan is the first responsible for this whole disaster. The plant shouldnt have been built there in the first place.
And I personally believe that if the problem should have happened in europe it would be better dealt with, any european country would call for interntional assist in such a case, instead of closing themselves and restricting information on the accident.

Yes, I agree - having it go into the ocean is insane and far more catastrophic. If it was buried in dirt it could minimized and more importantly 'contained'. Now the ENTIRE ocean(s) of the planet are also getting nuked many times worse than other nuke leaks previous and currently. Most of us know there are other leaks and other disasters - most of us also 'know' Fukushima takes the cake of all of them. I realize some people on these Fukushima forums want to pretend it's a totally 'okay' disaster and continually downplay the entire event, not sure why though... denial?



Generally to Fukushima posters - Regarding this "doom porn" saying I see being posted everywhere as the new favorite 'buzzword' for anyone wanting to mock this and other SERIOUS, GLOBAL events - calling information and opinions 'doom porn' is a reflection of lack of depth of understanding. I can only imagine a fleeting feeling of glee using every opportunity to throw it out to try and minimize the seriousness most of us here take this for. Is great to have diverse opinions, is not so great to use them to mock... just a thought...

reply to post by wishes


It seems you are the one lacking in understanding of the situation. Everyone needs to step back, review the facts of the situation and stop using their gut as a scientific calibration device.

The biggest thing people aren't realizing here is that the ocean is actually saving the planet as it is literally dilluting the contamination down to almost natural radiation levels....

If it goes on for decades we'll have a problem...but right now, and for the near future...no problem.

dilluting the contamination down to almost natural radiation levels

reply to post by raymundoko

Works fine if it is the concentration of a substance that kills you or could lead to your death.
However, when dealing with a substance that can kill or lead to your death with a single atom, the term should be dispersion.

Leading to more chances of encountering one of these unlucky atoms.






Concentration may weigh heavily on how quickly you will die or survivability.

reply to post by 8675309jenny


Localised except for moderate atmospheric fallout!

Get a life, there are still parts of Wales where sheep cannot be sold into the food chain because of Chernobyl. Ministry Officers or Vets still use Geiger counters to check for contamination.

reply to post by RickinVa


I think human0815 meant that bioaccumulation has been studied before fukushima, because nuclear waste was dumped in the atlantic, the baltic and some other places north of the baltic. Some of that waste is situated at very low depths in the atlantic and extremely close to the english and french coasts, where our (european) fish comes from. We are talking about 100000 tons here. And the containers, which started being dumped in the 50ies, were made of iron and are rusting. No one is caring to take these away. It is a scandal and very dangerous for all european sea fish eaters! So do no buy european sea fish either! There has been a long report on that scandal on arte-tv, a very well known and serious german-french television channel. The source is in german and in french, so i am not sure you can watch it, but there are sources in english too I suppose.
And there is more :
There are also russian nuclear submarines and complete reactors that are resting on the bottom of the ocean en.wikipedia.org... So I think what human0875 is saying is that the bioaccumulation is nothing new, and not only in the pacific!
Maybe this contributions helps you both to understand eachother. (I feel a little like Mariko-san

raymundoko
reply to post by wishes

 

It seems you are the one lacking in understanding of the situation. Everyone needs to step back, review the facts of the situation and stop using their gut as a scientific calibration device.

The biggest thing people aren't realizing here is that the ocean is actually saving the planet as it is literally dilluting the contamination down to almost natural radiation levels....

If it goes on for decades we'll have a problem...but right now, and for the near future...no problem.

That's the biggest misconception the pro nukers would like you to believe,,,, that it is being diluted by the ocean....


RADIATION DOES NOT DILUTE!!!!


every single isotope of Strontium 90 being generated by Fukushima will stay on this planet for thousands of years....

one single isotope of Stronium 90 in your body is a bad thing......... it loves to settle in your bones and teeth should you ingest it and there it will remain for the rest of your life happily tracking across nearby cells causing cell mutations.

Like I said before..... it doesn't matter whether that single isotope of Strontium 90 is on the head of a pin or happily snuggled up with 684,382 gazillion quadrillion quintillion million billion shama lama ding dong dillion liters/quarts/tons of sea water...

you do not want to be near it

you do not want it on you

and you definitely do not want it in you.


So lets go over some basic arguments put forth by those who would like you to believe that Fukushima is being blown way out of proportion:

1. Fukushima is a localized event that is not affecting the rest of the world!

FALSE Radiation from the triple meltdown at Fukushima has been found all over the planet. It continues to add more radiation every single day and will continue to add more radiation to the environment for centuries.

2. Fukushima has been contained and is under control!

FALSE The Japanese have no idea where the 3 coriums from reactors 1, 2 & 3 are located... they pump approximately 800 tons of seawater daily down 3 holes hoping they are hitting the coriums.... These 3 reactors will remain too deadly radioactive for humans to enter for decades, most likely centuries. The ground at the site is completely saturated with ground water to the point even a moderate local quake could cause liquefaction with disastrous results. The area is earthquake prone... you simply can't stop mother nature or ask her to please not shake the ground until you say she can!!

3. The amount of radiation coming out of Fukushima is harmless to humans!

FALSE I personally believe that no amount of radiation is good for you.... I have a basic (personal) rule of thumb about radiation..... any ionizing radiation you receive tomorrow that you didn't receive today is not healthy for you... the theory of 0 state radiation has already been discussed in this thread, scroll back up.

One of the more interesting things I see coming out of pro nukers is this..... they will swear that the radiation coming of of Fukushima is of low enough level to be relatively harmless.... but yet they can not tell you how much radiation is coming out of Fukushima because NO ONE actually has an accurate figure.....so to tell someone that something is harmless when you actually don't have all the information about qauntity is just plain dangerous.

4. Your information is outdated!! Fukushima is in much better shape now!!!!

Poppycock!! There is very little information coming out of Japan. Most information about this disaster is provided to you by Tokyo Electric Company (TEPCO). Tepco has been caught lying or trying to cover up information so many times it's not even funny. There are still 3 melted cores, the spent fuel pool in Reactor #4 is still dangling dangerously in the air. There are other fuel rods scattered around the site that need to be removed asap. Reactor 3 still has radioactive steam coming out of it into the atmosphere. They have managed to trap about 1/2 of the radioactive seawater they use to try and keep the coriums cool, but now they are rapidly running out of storage space and will soon have no option other than to dump that too into the ocean.


5. Your information about the radiation is invalid because its 3 months (example) old!!! Levels have dropped since then!

Poppycock!! Anything other than Iodine 131 is going to stick around a lot longer than 3 months,, most of it for thousands of years...... trying to tell people that that reading of strontium 90 that was taken 6 months is old is just plain stupid,,, that reading won't be old for at least 5,000 years.

6. The ocean will dilute the radiation to safe levels.

FALSE see above. The whole argument about safe levels of radiation has been discussed....... scroll up and read!

7. People are fearmongering and saying that Fukushima is the end of the world!!!

PARTIALLY TRUE Fukushima is not static.... it is a dynamic situation that could change drastically with no notice. There has been tons of false information put out by people to prove their point that Fukushima is a lot worse than it actually is.

enenews.com is a good example.... if you read their posts and especially the comments, then we should of all been dead months ago.... but there is some good information provided by the site.... you just have to wade through the rest of the stuff to find it.

8. Humans have been dumping nuclear waste into the oceans long before Fukushima!!!

TRUE But its just as bad for you.......if all the nuclear waste dumped into the ocean was a 10 foot pile of poop and Fukushima has added 1 inch to that pile..... guess what??? now you have a 10'1" pile of poop that is ....wait for it... still a big ole pile of poop.

9. Bananas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The comparison between the naturally occurring radiation in banana's and the man made radiation at Fukushima is about the dumbest thing that I have seen to be used in an argument about a triple core nuclear meltdown.

Please do not get me wrong, Fukushima is a very very bad situation and could potentially be the end of mankind.... but in its current state, that would probably take thousands of years to manifest... all of us will be long dead by the time that occurs.

Unfortunately, Fukushima remains a fluid situation due to the ground water issues (Pun intended). A fluid situation is not exactly the best thing when it comes to a triple meltdown.

Do your own research and come up with your own conclusions.... for every argument put forth about Fukushima... but you have to look at both sides of the argument and all available information you can find to make an informed decision.


My basic stance is again, any ionizing radiation you receive tomorrow that you didn't receive today is bad for you.... whether it be from Fukushima, an x-ray, a Cat scan, Barium enema, enhanced MRI, solar flare... your microwave... etc.....


So once again.....

Should you be concerned about the radiation leaking out of Fukushima?

Absolutely!!!

Tianmat
reply to post by RickinVa

 

I think human0815 meant that bioaccumulation has been studied before fukushima, because nuclear waste was dumped in the atlantic, the baltic and some other places north of the baltic. Some of that waste is situated at very low depths in the atlantic and extremely close to the english and french coasts, where our (european) fish comes from. We are talking about 100000 tons here. And the containers, which started being dumped in the 50ies, were made of iron and are rusting. No one is caring to take these away. It is a scandal and very dangerous for all european sea fish eaters! So do no buy european sea fish either! There has been a long report on that scandal on arte-tv, a very well known and serious german-french television channel. The source is in german and in french, so i am not sure you can watch it, but there are sources in english too I suppose.
And there is more :
There are also russian nuclear submarines and complete reactors that are resting on the bottom of the ocean en.wikipedia.org... So I think what human0875 is saying is that the bioaccumulation is nothing new, and not only in the pacific!
Maybe this contributions helps you both to understand eachother. (I feel a little like Mariko-san

Mankind has been using the oceans for dumping grounds for centuries..... Nuclear waste has been dumped into the ocean in so many places its not even funny.... the situation in Italy comes to mind, where is has recently come to light about the mafia dumping toxic waste close to major population centers.

The Oceans can only take so much before the negative effects become apparent. Once the oceans start dying, mankind will follow shortly.

We are our own worst enemy!!!

reply to post by RickinVa

RADIATION DOES NOT DILUTE!!!!

Caesium-137 (137 55Cs, Cs-137), cesium-137, or radiocaesium, is a radioactive isotope of caesium which is formed as one of the more common fission products by the nuclear fission of uranium-235 and other fissionable isotopes in nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons. It is among the most problematic of the short-to-medium-lifetime fission products because it easily moves and spreads in nature due to the high water solubility of caesium's most common chemical compounds, which are salts.

Wiki-Source

Human0815
reply to post by RickinVa

 

RADIATION DOES NOT DILUTE!!!!

Caesium-137 (137 55Cs, Cs-137), cesium-137, or radiocaesium, is a radioactive isotope of caesium which is formed as one of the more common fission products by the nuclear fission of uranium-235 and other fissionable isotopes in nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons. It is among the most problematic of the short-to-medium-lifetime fission products because it easily moves and spreads in nature due to the high water solubility of caesium's most common chemical compounds, which are salts.

Wiki-Source

read my above post...... a radioactive isotope is still the same radioactive isotope..... whether it be on the head of a pin, in a glass of water, in a bathtub full of water or if its one single isotope in all of the oceans of the world.... its still that same isotope..... all the water in the world will not change the fact that the isotope is the same. The radioactivity of same isotope would definately be harder to find as the amount of liquid is increased, but that single isotope itself is not "diluted" it still has the same strength that it had from day 1, minus any loss from decay of the isotope itself.

playing word games doesn't change things.

forget radioactivity for the moment, I think you are too excited about Fukushima.

Lets phrase this another way:

I have one black marble. That black marble is going to stay black until it is detroyed.... now if I add 10 white marbles does the black marble somehow become magically unimportant anymore? Its still the same marble it was before I added the white marbles........ no matter how many white marbles I add.... that one marble is going to stay black, its not slowly going to turn dark grey and get lighter as I add more white marbles.... it may be harder to see because of all the white marbles, but that does not change the fact that the marble itself remains black and remains unchanged from since the time it was a lonely black marble.

and no, I haven't lost my marbles (pun intended)

Unfortunately, Fukushima has an virtually endless supply of black marbles.

reply to post by RickinVa


You are actually wrong. I think you're just confused about how radiation gets diluted and you should research that.

raymundoko
reply to post by RickinVa

 

You are actually wrong. I think you're just confused about how radiation gets diluted and you should research that.

edit on 15-1-2014 by raymundoko because: (no reason given)

post some links to facts to back up your claim please.... I think that some people are using the term "dilution" in an incorrect way. If you can find somewhere where it states that a radioactive isotope itself in diluted by adding a liquid, I would like to see it... I couldn't find one.

I don't see anything logically wrong with the marble comparison, I just put it as basic as I could. For the black marble to become "diluted", it would have to slowly turn more white as more white marbles are added. That simply does not happen.

I am not saying that Fukushima radiation is not harder to find the further you get away from Fukushima, that wouldn't be logical. I am saying that all the black marbles that comes out of Fukushima are going to stay that way for a long long time.

Should you be concerned about the radiation coming out of Fukushima....

Absolutely!

reply to post by RickinVa


No, imagine the white marbles are much harder than the black one and the constant banging of the white marbles on the black one grinds it to dust...

en.wikipedia.org...

Caesium-137 (137
55Cs, Cs-137), cesium-137, or radiocaesium, is a radioactive isotope of caesium which is formed as one of the more common fission products by the nuclear fission of uranium-235 and other fissionable isotopes in nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons. It is among the most problematic of the short-to-medium-lifetime fission products because it easily moves and spreads in nature due to the high water solubility of caesium's most common chemical compounds, which are salts.

You see, Cesium and Iodine are WATER SOLUBLE. The more water, the more they are dissolved and absorbed back into nature. If it was a human body then it would dissolve into your body killing you...however right now it's dissolving into the surrounding sea water and being rendered relatively harmless after a few miles of travel.

This is the main reason many conspiracy sights have gotten off the whole Cesium and Iodine kick and are trying to point at other radioactive material.

reply to post by RickinVa


Also, to be clear, I am specifically talking about how Fukushima is affecting the rest of the planet...it isn't. Right now it is affecting Japan and only Japan. If it isn't controlled completely within the next few years it could reach other areas around Japan.

raymundoko
reply to post by RickinVa

 

Also, to be clear, I am specifically talking about how Fukushima is affecting the rest of the planet...it isn't. Right now it is affecting Japan and only Japan. If it isn't controlled completely within the next few years it could reach other areas around Japan.

I never said that radiation from Fukushima is affecting the rest of the world, other than the fact that cesium and iodine were Fukushima were detected in various places around the world after the initial event. It has the POTENTIAL to have dire consequences, due to the fact that the future of Fukushima is an unknown.

To say it is only affecting Japan is incorrect... They have found traces of minute radioactivity from Fukushima in Alaska and elsewhere from the radioactive water leaks at Fukushima. Since I believe that any radiation is not good for humans, then to say it's only affecting Japan and Japan only is a statement that I just do not agree with.

I, like you, don't think that the amount of radioactivity released so far is much to worry about,,, but everyone should be concerned about the radiation being released and the time frame involved in stopping the releases.

We are closer to being on the same boat than you realize, I just happen to think that any extra radiation added to the earth is not a good thing.

I do not agree with the statement that the ocean is "diluting" the radiation.... is it lessening the impact caused by the radiation? Absolutely... never said it wasn't, there's a lot of water in the ocean.... but to say its being diluted is not correct in my opinion and and being used to make it sound "less bad".

According to a previously secret 1955 memo from the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission regarding concerns of the British government over contaminated tuna, “dissipation of radioactive fall-out in ocean waters is not a gradual spreading out of the activity from the region with the highest concentration to uncontaminated regions, but that in all probability the process results in scattered pockets and streams of higher radioactive materials in the Pacific. We can speculate that tuna which now show radioactivity from ingested materials [this is in 1955, not today] have been living, in or have passed through, such pockets; or have been feeding on plant and animal life which has been exposed in those areas.”

www.washingtonsblog.com...


Now that's a word I like: dissipate..... doesn't sound as harmless as "dilute"

dilute [dih-loot, dahy-; adj. also dahy-loot] verb (used with object), diluted, diluting. 1. to make (a liquid) thinner or weaker by the addition of water or the like. 2. to make fainter, as a color. 3. to reduce the strength, force, or efficiency of by admixture. verb (used without object), diluted, diluting. 4. to become diluted. adjective 5. reduced in strength, as a chemical by admixture; weak: a dilute solution.

dissipate [dis-uh-peyt] verb (used with object), dissipated, dissipating. 1. to scatter in various directions; disperse; dispel. 2. to spend or use wastefully or extravagantly; squander; deplete: to dissipate one's talents; to dissipate a fortune on high living. verb (used without object), dissipated, dissipating. 3. to become scattered or dispersed; be dispelled; disintegrate: The sun shone and the mist dissipated. 4. to indulge in extravagant, intemperate, or dissolute pleasure.

dictionary.reference.com...