Radiation at Fukushima nuclear plant at unimaginable levels

a reply to: loam

New Zealand isn't that far away. Wonder if the news today of 100 Pilot Whales beaching themselves this week is related to the Radiation levels around that neck of the woods

a reply to: loam

Check this out:



ZeroHedge Article - It's going to get worse

Don't worry.... 530 sieverts is normal for a airplane flight or a bag of potato chips.


Eat that North Pacific seafood boys and girls........who can't use a third arm in today's busy world?

originally posted by: roadgravel
Probably too late now. Six years of TEPCO should show they aren't capable.

Maybe it's so grave that there is nothing to be done really, by nobody ?

a reply to: Riffrafter

Check this out:

Real good source you have there. I didn't know radiation was measured in centimeters.

That is a plot of the tsunami.
defensetech.org...

Removed

originally posted by: roadgravel
It recently killed a robot in 1 hour.

Bad news for decades to come.

We have the technology know-how to fix this problem, but the wrong people are in charge.

No robot based on semiconductor control circuitry can survive the radiation.

But...there's an old technology used by the Germans in World War II, that's called the "Magnetic Amplifier" or "Saturable Reactor"..which basically uses magnetic switches with similar function to vacuum tubes and transistors.

If we built a robot with this older tech, that robot would be immune to the radiation.

Unfortunately, much of the Magnetic Amplifier tech was "classified" after the war, because it allowed one to build practically indestructible control components particularly suitable for weaponry and military applications, so the tech is suppressed today.

So, either we keep our secret tech suppressed and all die of radiation poisoning our food, or we release the secret tech and let high tech industry build capable robots to go in and fix the problem for us.

Humans, you decide.

a reply to: neutronflux

Please research the uranium enrichment required for a nuclear weapon vs how much uranium dispersed over the length of a fuel rod.

I have. MOX fuel, incorporating PU as well.

The fission products in a fuel rod, their half lives, and radioactive decay is what makes a fuel rod dangerous. And that is after going critical.

I know. Especially after melting down.

It's not the uranium that makes power plants dangerous. It's the amount and concentration of fission products after going critical.

Thanks for agreeing with me. In the case of a bomb, little, in the case of the reactors, up to hundreds of tons were involved the cores and fuel pools.

The resulting explosions were indeed a result of the fission by product hydrogen, in at least building 1, 3, and more than likely, 4 as well.

I appreciate your input here, keep up the good work. Thanks for the reply.

www.foxnews.com... m=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fscitech+%28Internal+-+SciTech+-+Mixed%29

I was actually going to post a topic on this. This is unbelievable, the plant is leaking 530 sieverts per hour. 10 is fatal, so the radiation there is 530 times fatal exposure. This eclipses Chernobyl. This is the planets biggest environmental crisis.

a reply to: AMPTAH

That's probably why fallout the game has retrograde equipment and tech. lol

a reply to: Riffrafter

Those little black triangles are radioactive sites? 🔫 glad I live on the east coast... don't eat west coast sea food...

a reply to: Brainiac

I was actually going to post a topic on this. This is unbelievable, the plant is leaking 530 sieverts per hour.

False.
That is a reading taken inside the containment building.
www.smithsonianmag.com...

a reply to: corblimeyguvnor

Probably, wouldn't you jump out if you felt ill dying from radioactive water?

a reply to: Phage

Ah, still disastrous to the ocean.

a reply to: Phage

Ironic that a country that got hit by the first atomic weapon in history would have this fate befall them.

a reply to: Brainiac
For the ocean near the plant, yes. The seafloor in the region will be dangerous for a long time.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Out of the Pacific? Heh. Too late for that. It's there.

a reply to: Groot

Chernobyl isn't comparable. I think the crux of the whole issue is that many don't understand how serious the Fukushima business really is. People have the illusion that it has been "contained.." It hasn't and judging by what I have seen, there's no indication they have an idea of how they're going to "contain" it.

a reply to: SpeakerofTruth

While contamination of seawater continues near the plant, the levels are very low.

"Levels today off Japan are thousands of times lower than during the peak releases in 2011," says Buesseler. "But we are not seeing the steady decrease we would expect to see off Fukushima if all sources had stopped; rather, we are finding values are still elevated, which confirms that there is continued release from the pant."

phys.org...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Riffrafter

Check this out:

Real good source you have there. I didn't know radiation was measured in centimeters.

That is a plot of the tsunami.
defensetech.org...

I guess ZeroHedge made a mistake. Feel free to post an accurate map of the radiation spread that also incorporates the new data. I'm at work and don't have time to source although it seems that you do at the moment.

I do know that 530 Sieverts per hour onsite with water still constantly leaching into the Pacific is something of great concern.

Wouldn't you agree?