Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Radioactive Japan: People Invited to Eat Cesium Beef from Iwate (Fukushima)
Ex-SKF.blogspot.com ^ | April 26, 2012 | ex-skf.blogspot.com

Posted on 04/25/2012 2:54:32 PM PDT by ransomnote

This is the copy of the printed version of Fukushima Minpo on April 25, 2012, a local newspaper in Fukushima:

snip

What does it say?

The series title in the upper right corner: "New Happiness in Japan - Measure"

The article title in the middle: "Think what "food safety" means"

The subtitle of the article: "Cesium beef offered at an event"

From this information, if you conjure up the image of the gist of the article as "OK, the happiness in Japan in post-Fukushima is to gladly eat beef known to contain radioactive cesium to help producers as long as it is measured and disclosed properly, and that's food safety", I'll give you an A.

Quick translation (main article only, subject to revision later, maybe):

It was quiet in the office district on Sunday. It was March 11 afternoon, one year anniversary of the disaster. Couples with children, middle-aged men in jeans were entering a 12-story public building off the busy streets in Shinjuku, Tokyo.

On the tables in the kitchen that is used for cooking classes were the plates with hamburgers just cooked. Mitsuhiro Anada (age 40) told the people in the kitchen, "These contain 6 becquerels/kg [of radioactive cesium]. Please let me know if you don't want to eat them. We have also prepared cesium-free ones." About 30 people then sat at the table and started to eat.

Mr. Anada is the head of "Mo-ton Family", a meat processing company located in the northern Iwate. The event, "Let's eat cesium beef" came about after calling the customers who buy ham, hamburger meat and sausages from his company by mail order.

The main dishes are the hamburgers and beef stew made from the beef that had been detected with radioactive cesium.

(Excerpt) Read more at ex-skf.blogspot.com ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: fukushima; japan; nuclear; radiation
"I wanted the consumers to think about what "food safety" means, by showing the number [of radioactive cesium measurement] and having them eat [the meat]", said Anada when asked why he held this event.
1 posted on 04/25/2012 2:54:41 PM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

can I get some of this ‘cesium beef’ at QFC?


2 posted on 04/25/2012 3:00:37 PM PDT by RitchieAprile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RitchieAprile

I believe so. I believe that the US is accepting imported foods and other materials from Japan.


3 posted on 04/25/2012 3:03:33 PM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

The beef tested at about 10% of the safe limit (typically arrived at by force-feeding lab mice several times their own body weight of whatever materials are being tested). Much ado about nothing.


4 posted on 04/25/2012 3:14:05 PM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

Michigan Plants Mutated Due to Radioactive Fukushima Nuclear Fallout?

http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2012/04/23/michigan-plants-mutated-due-radioactive-fukushima-nuclear-fallout-125991/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AupyLDGHKk&feature=player_embedded


5 posted on 04/25/2012 3:14:31 PM PDT by Whenifhow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

The safe limit is not safe. It is not safe to eat radioactive waste, even small amounts of it cause small increased risk of cancer and other ailments.


6 posted on 04/25/2012 3:16:40 PM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

Don’t eat bananas then. The average for bananas is about 100 Bq/kg (not activity from Fukushima), so this beef is about 17 times less in terms of specific activity. By that standard bananas must be 17 times more dangerous than the beef from Fukushima.


7 posted on 04/25/2012 3:24:59 PM PDT by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
"These contain 6 becquerels/kg [of radioactive cesium]. Please let me know if you don't want to eat them. We have also prepared cesium-free ones."


Not much but still.

8 posted on 04/25/2012 3:25:16 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chimera

That’s interesting to note.


9 posted on 04/25/2012 3:26:52 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: chimera

No no no no....not bananas again! I am tired of explaining bananas to people. Look it up on WIkipedia and read up on the differences between radiation given off by bananas and radiation given off by cesium. HINT: It’s not the over active imagination of the public at work trying to avoid cesium. The Department of Transportation maintains the regulations pertaining to the handling of dangerous substances like radioactive cesium and no, they didn’t just overlook banana trucks. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE.


10 posted on 04/25/2012 3:29:29 PM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Head of Isotope division of a Tokyo Medical Institute said in a public hearing that 2 becq’s per liter of water was sufficient to cause bladder cancer (no word on how long people had to drink water at that level). Beef stays in the intestinal tract for a long time, longer than water passing through the bladder. Not good to risk direct irradiation of gastrointestinal tract.


11 posted on 04/25/2012 3:32:47 PM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

This strangely reminds me of suicidal banzai charges & kamikazes. The Japanese seem to have a streak of fatalism in their character.


12 posted on 04/25/2012 3:33:20 PM PDT by Mister Da (The mark of a wise man is not what he knows, but what he knows he doesn't know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

They’ll do anything to save face.


13 posted on 04/25/2012 3:39:17 PM PDT by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

So, with the Cesium in the beef killing bacteria, is it now OK to make steak tartare?


14 posted on 04/25/2012 4:04:02 PM PDT by 2nd Bn, 11th Mar (The "p" in Democrat stands for patriotism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
The safe limit is not safe. It is not safe to eat radioactive waste, even small amounts of it cause small increased risk of cancer and other ailments.

We'll have to agree to disagree. The usual experience with new things is that we assume something's safe, then we assume it's hemlock. I think we've gotten to the point where we think exposure to even trace atmospheric radiation is akin to being bitten by a black mamba.

15 posted on 04/25/2012 4:31:42 PM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
It is different. The potassium in bananas gives you a larger absorbed dose. Let's run the numbers for the cases described.

We assume that one person eats a kilogram of the Fukushima beef containing the 6 Bq/kg specific activity of 137Cs. Another person is scared of that and decides he'd rather eat natural bananas, with their 100 Bq/kg of 40K. Which of these persons gets more radioactive decay energy deposited in their bodies?

Start with the banana eater. Potassium 40 decays primarily by beta and electron capture. The electron capture occurs 10% of the time and gives rise to a gamma ray with an energy of 1.461 MeV. The beta decay populates a ground state of a daughter nucleus and no further emissions occur. Very rarely 40K will decay by positron emission, but for this calculation we'll neglect that. The maximum beta energy of the 40K decay is 1.31 MeV, and since the average beta decay energy is about a third of the maximum energy, we'll assume an average beta energy of about 0.44 MeV. So, if you eat 1 kg of bananas, you'll have the following energy deposition (dose): from gammas, you have 11% decays (0.11) times 1.461 MeV gamma energy (assume electronic equilibrium) times 100 decays per second (specific activity) equals 16.1 MeV/second being deposited in your body; for the betas, it will be 0.44 Mev per beat particle times 0.9 (90% of time time you get a beta emission) times 100 decays per second of specific activity equals 39.6 MeV/second. Add beta dose to gamma dose and you get 55.7 MeV/second deposited in your bodily tissues from eating one kilogram of bananas.

Now we'll look at the 137Cs ingestion. 137Cs gives off a gamma ray of energy 0.661 MeV for 85% of all its decays. It has two beta decay modes, one with an average energy of 0.171 MeV, given off 95% of the time, and the other given off 5% of the time with an average energy of 0.391 MeV. Again we assume electronic equilibrium for our dosimetry calculation (complete absorption). For the gamma energy deposition rate, we get 0.661 MeV per gamma times .85 (85% emission abundance) times 6 decays per second (specific activity), or 3.4 MeV/second. For the beta particles, we have to add the two decay modes: (0.171 MeV per beta times 0.95 (95% emission probability) times 6 decays/second) plus (0.391 MeV per beta times 0.05 (5% decay abundance) times 6 decays per second), which gives 3.6 MeV/second. Adding beta to gamma dose for the 137Cs ingestion, we get about 7 MeV/second absorbed dose.

So, comparing things on an internal absorbed dose basis, the one kg of bananas gives 55.7 MeV/second, whereas the "contaminated" beef gives 7 MeV per second, or a factor of about eight times higher for the bananas.

Check my arithmetic, I could have made an error. If not, which is "worse" in terms of radiological dose? Remember, dose is dose, no matter what the source.

16 posted on 04/25/2012 4:36:47 PM PDT by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: chimera

“Check my arithmetic, I could have made an error.”

Err..I’ll take your word for it.


17 posted on 04/25/2012 4:42:31 PM PDT by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: chimera

Quick! ALERT DOT THAT YOU CLAIM BANANAS ARE WORSE THAN CESIUM! Mention while you’re at it, that the human body will simply not uptake more than a tiny amount of potassium - there is a biological feedback system that halts uptake. Cesium is taken into the body tissues continuously with no upper limit, no biological upper limit. So eat alot of bananas and your body will not take into tissues more than a tiny amount. Eat alot of cesium and your body will continue to add more cesium to your tissues. Oh and don’t forget to tell them that body tissues are said to be ‘relatively transparent’ to higher energy emissions (bananas) compared with the damage done to tissues by lower energy emissions (cesium). Run along now....go tell them!


18 posted on 04/25/2012 4:50:32 PM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

I agree to disagree. I’ve never heard anyone liken trace atmospheric radiation to a bite from a black mamba! How hysterical! My opinions as to whether radioactive food is safe or not is based on the ongoing battle in the Ukraine to limit the amount of radioactive food people eat so that their immune systems can function to fight diseases instead of radiation damage. ‘Chernobyl AIDS’ is the term used to describe children with immune systems suppressed by consumption of radioactive foods and water.


19 posted on 04/25/2012 4:54:29 PM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
The homeostatic control you allude to makes no chemical distinction, so the excess potassium excreted is by no means assured to be the stuff you took in. In fact, you could in theory excrete non-40K and replace it with 40K. And it resides forever in your body, with a half-life of over a billion years, it will be there until you croak.

137Cs, OTOH, has a biological half-life of 110 days, so if you run the equations, there is in fact an upper limit of body burden based on the biological half-life, although even eating "contaminated" beef you would be unlikely to approach the equilibrium concentration.

The physiological model for the "standard man" (person?) used for absorbed dose calculations assumes electronic equilibrium for the gamma energies for both 137Cs and 40K. This is a reasonable assumption given densities of both bone and soft tissue.

Did you read my calculation above? Most of the absorbed dose from 40K bananas is from beta emissions, whereas for 137Cs is is pretty evenly divided between the two. So there is no way the human body will be "transparent" to those beta emissions, even if a small fraction of the gamma emissions got out.

So you run along and check my numbers and see if you can find fault with any of the calculations.

20 posted on 04/25/2012 5:07:56 PM PDT by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

cesium burger grill themselves.


21 posted on 04/25/2012 5:44:01 PM PDT by 6SJ7 (Meh.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chimera

Let’s see...your first paragraph is irrelevant so I’ll skip it.
The second paragraph begins to hint at but...still tries to obscure the fact that your body will only take in a tiny amount of potassium but takes in much more cesium and as you may have read, isotopes do not behave the same in the human body so Strontium is a ‘bone seeker’ and cesium is a ‘muscle seeker’ and potassium....isn’t. See it’s a problem if cesium is a muscle seeker (terms common among doctors treating patients living in radioactive waste in the Ukraine) because the heart is a muscle so potassium isn’t known to concentrate in the heart whereas for some reason, cesium consumption is coorelated to cardiac events (heart attack, heart failure, heart damage). Oh but you knew this...we all kind of knew it...because bananas are not considered harmful and radioactive cesium is proven to damage human health in controlled medical studies and that big big region around Chernobyl where people still suffer terribly and the nuke apologists pretend the effects of radiation are mysterious, unknown, and made up.

I find fault with your entire premise. Physicians KNOW what happens to people who eat bananas and they KNOW what is happening to people living in Belarus and consuming radioactive cesium. Radioactive potassium and cesium are not the same. Obviously. VERY VERY OBVIOUSLY. All radioactive sources are NOT equal and the EPA issues reports on the threats various radioactive isotopes relative to human health wherein cesium is hazardous but cobolt is even more hazardous based on damage done.
My comment about ‘transparent’ refers to gamma radiation which is more damaging to the body than beta. SO, according to the EPA, higher energy gamma emissions are less damaging to the human body than are lower energy gamma emissions. I had to stop and investigate that because it is counter intuitive to me. So, only 10 percent of radiation from potassium is gamma radiation and it emits higher energy gamma radiation that is less damaging to the body than lower energy gamma radiation emitted by radioactive cesium.

To Summarize: Smaller amounts of potassium are retained in the body compared with cesium. The potassium doesn’t have the rep for the same localizing problems that strontium (bones and bone marrow=leukemia) or cesium (muscles=tumors and heart attacks) have and that is a plus. More of the radiation released by cesium is gamma and it is at a lower, more damaging energy level and it is retained in much higher amounts in the human body and has a crappy medical track record still being recorded in the Ukraine today.
This business of trying to get the public to equate bananas with radioactive cesium is unethical.


22 posted on 04/25/2012 5:49:24 PM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: chimera

I’m glad I hate bananas. I mean I hate bananas. I hate the smell of bananas, the taste of bananas, the look of bananas the very thought of bananas. I really hate bananas.

Now a little cesium beef who knows? When the grid goes down glowing in the dark may be a good thing.


23 posted on 04/25/2012 6:02:28 PM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
Radioactive potassium and cesium are not the same.

That is why I did the dose calculation. Dose is dose, regardless of the source. The LNT model, which I assume you accept, quantifies risk in terms of absorbed dose. That is what I calculated. Show where in my calculation where there is a mistake. Absorbed dose accounts for energy. Comparison of absorbed dose as a proxy for overall risk is a very appropriate and acceptable manner of risk comparison.

My comment about ‘transparent’ refers to gamma radiation which is more damaging to the body than beta.

You seem to lack a basic understanding of radiobiology. Absorbed dose is what causes damage. My dose calculation included both beta and gamma emissions. If you calculate things in terms of absorbed dose, you are doing an apples-to-apples comparison. The fundamental unit of absorbed dose is energy absorbed per unit mass. If the "unit mass" is taken to be the whole body, then absorbed dose is the quantity of energy deposited in the body by the source material intake. You can calculate that based on decay properties and specific activity, which I did.

SO, according to the EPA, higher energy gamma emissions are less damaging to the human body than are lower energy gamma emissions.

That is only true if you do not assume electronic equilibrium. If you don't, then you are going to have to do a very detailed stochastic model of the system, so you account for escaped energy in some fashion. I see none of that in the article cited, or in what you have presented. Lacking that, a very reasonable assumption is to assume electronic equilibrium and total absorption. That is almost certainly true for the case we are discussing.

24 posted on 04/25/2012 6:08:45 PM PDT by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: RitchieAprile
“can I get some of this ‘cesium beef’ at QFC?”

I would pay a premium for this niche market beef. Where can I buy it?
I want a rib eye now....

25 posted on 04/25/2012 6:12:55 PM PDT by HereInTheHeartland (We are the 53%. 47% of Americans pay no taxes; end the free ride...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: chimera

So we agree to disagree. I point to medically recorded damage to human beings for radioactive cesium and the presence of bananas without Department of Transportation regulations in place in the grocery store. I cite EPA guidelines detailing some isotopes as being more hazardous than others based on emissions, medical observations of cesium, strontium and their differing behavior in the human body (e.g., strontium collecting in bones and teeth, cesium distributed through muscle) and common sense and you continue to insist none of this actually exists. So your attempts to equate bananas to radioactive cesium should no doubt motivate the Department of Transportation to lift all restrictions and licensing and lead shielding requirements for those transporting even small amounts of cesium or....more likely, creating certification and lead shielding requirements for bananas. I’ll keep a close eye on my local grocer’s produce section to see if you have succeeded in convincing the regulatory agencies to adopt your theory that the radioactive potassium in bananas is equivalent to radioactive cesium. I can’t wait to see the results!


26 posted on 04/25/2012 6:33:51 PM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
What I am pointing out is that the limits imposed by regulatory authorities are very, very conservative, and are far, far below the thresholds where we observe harmful effects. Your error is one of perception. You seem to assume that the limits the authorities impose represent some threshold for harm. They do not. If you reached the regulatory threshold, chances are you are still a very long way from any threshold where quantifiable effects are observable and for which a causal link can be established.

The dose comparisons of the beef and the bananas were made to put the risks in perspective using a quantifiable number. Absorbed dose is absorbed dose no matter how you slice it, whether you get it from beef, bananas, x-ray machines, airport scanners, medical procedures, nuclear reactors, or a nuclear bomb.

Anyway, evidently we've said what we want to say. Thanks for taking the time to respond to (challenge) my posts.

27 posted on 04/25/2012 7:04:04 PM PDT by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

Unfortunately the amount of cesium emissions from #2 reactor Fukushima Plant 1 increased 700 percent last month. Pressure also increased by over 100 % the past month. Unfortunately, there were 14 nuclear reactors in Japan damaged just from the earthquake alone. All 14 lost external power due to earthquake damage. And aftershocks keep coming. We will be living with elevated cesium for decades. Also rumors of a partial meltdown in a reactor in Fukushima plant 2 (Danai). Japan is also now abandoning some decontamination efforts and admitting some areas will remain off limits for decades.


28 posted on 04/25/2012 7:51:44 PM PDT by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape
Here is something interesting:

No containment torus breach

FUD gets squashed again.

29 posted on 04/25/2012 7:59:06 PM PDT by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: chimera
Excerpt from your link.

The robot spent over two hours performing almost a full circuit of the catwalk above the torus, ..

That states ABOVE the torus. IE - The upper torus areas. They did not survey the lower bottom section of the torus where gravity would have taken the corium. Personally will never ever again expect truth from organizations that flat out lie about meltdown for 2 months and delay for one year letting people know that 14 reactors lost external power that day.

30 posted on 04/25/2012 8:24:53 PM PDT by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: chimera
The best article on #2 that I have seen come out recently is linked below.

A scenario of large amount of radioactive materials discharge in the air from the Unit 2 reactor in the Fukushima Daiichi NPP Accident

31 posted on 04/26/2012 12:24:37 AM PDT by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape

Justa-hairyape said:
Personally will never ever again expect truth from organizations that flat out lie about meltdown for 2 months and delay for one year letting people know that 14 reactors lost external power that day.

_________________________________________________________

Could not have said it better. They never have and never will accept any responsibility for the damage they cause. They lie proactively, they lie re-actively, they lie retroactively, they lie theoretically and all the while, they talk down to the citizenry as if WE are the ones with the credibility problem????!!!


32 posted on 04/26/2012 1:06:06 AM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
I think their idea of volunteerism is worth noting: Elders Offer Help at Japan’s Crippled Reactor
33 posted on 04/26/2012 1:28:41 AM PDT by Daffynition (Our forefathers would be shooting by now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape
Ha. I knew it. More FUD. Should’ve known better. Here you finally get a first-hand look, an up-close in-situ measure of dose rate as well as visuals, and it isn't good enough for the FUDdies. Do you really think that in that region there would be readings in the mSv range if a large amount of core material was unshielded? Hell, when I was at Oak Ridge we were measuring unshielded fuel assemblies from a 30 MW research reactor and getting rates in the range of several Sv/hr about 20 feet away in air, and those were just single fuel assemblies from a 30 MW reactor.
34 posted on 04/26/2012 1:43:34 AM PDT by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: chimera

Sorry, should have been Sv without the /hr.


35 posted on 04/26/2012 1:45:30 AM PDT by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: chimera

No, it was right the first time. Damn SI units. Sv/hr. Back in the day we used R/hr, so I recall rates of something like 400 R/hr at 20 feet for a single decayed assembly. That would be 4 Sv/hr.


36 posted on 04/26/2012 1:48:29 AM PDT by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Daffynition

Awesome! I remember last year reading about seniors volunteering but I never knew what happened. Thanks for the update!


37 posted on 04/26/2012 1:13:11 PM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: chimera
Measurements from Tepco have been routinely under reported. And in many cases they have forgotten to mention the reading was due to reaching the maximum setting for the particular sensor instrument. So we have learned from actual history that Tepco readings can never be taken as fact.

And there would not have been an entire core that slid down into the Torus. Just a partial amount from the splash effect, that the NRC documented could occur, when a large scale core meltdown happens. All you need is enough corium to cause the reported explosion from down deep within the torus. That small amount of corium bore down through the bottom of the Torus and into the concrete catch. You do realize that Tepco has stated it is impossible to survey the bottom of the Torus. The only section that matters in this case.

And if you read the article I linked, the Torus has to have been breached to produce the amount of emissions that have been measured to have been emitted from #2.

So how many temperature sensors are currently working in #2 RPV ? Why are they failing ?

38 posted on 04/27/2012 3:42:29 PM PDT by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape
Why are they failing ?

Probably because of radiation damage. I replaced some thermocouples in a reactor a few months ago that had drifted out of calibration range. We did a PIE and saw evidence of radiation embrittlement. Nothing terribly surprising. In this case it is not a dispositive indiccator of PV breach, although some time ago in a similar thread I acknowledged that the one Oak Ridge study identified the possibility of failure around the instrument tube penetrations. Those would be relatively small areas individually, but there are a fair number in total, so if enough were damaged you could have drippage of melted material out of the PV, but given the relatively low exposure rates reported it is unlikely there is much material in the drywell, if any. More likely is that we're still seeing the fission products from the initial venting operations. If there was significant leakage of core material into the drywell those readings would be a lot higher, just based on what I know uncovered fuel can produce in terms of dose rates, even shielded by the containment and drywell walls.

Look, all I'm saying is now we have hard evidence that a great deal of the FUD generated here and elsewhere in the early days of this event has been debunked. I know many will find that disappointing and hard to accept, but the evidence seems to be indicating that a lot of the FUD was just speculative hype, things like the torus blowing up (it didn't), that this would be "Chernobil on steroids" (it wasn't), that millions would die (no one has, not one person), that the Pacific Ocean would become lifeless (it hasn't), that the fission reactions continued long after shutdown (they didn't), that the SFP went dry and burned up (it didn't), that Japan would become a contaminated zone uninhabitable forever (it hasn't, and won't). IOW, the FUD has been debunked.

39 posted on 04/27/2012 6:02:08 PM PDT by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: chimera
Sorry for the late reply. Getting ready for a trip out of town. Thanks for the information.

The problem as I see it, is that if high radiation is causing the temperature sensors failures in unit #2, why are the temperature sensors not failing in #1 and #3 at the same failure rate ?

What concerns me is that they found the water level in the CV of #2 to be much lower then they had predicted. Now that points to additional possible leakage and/or the possibility that the #2 RPV and CV are more damaged then thought.

There was an explosion in the lower Torus area of #2. People heard it and reported it. Tepco claims it was really the explosion in #4, and that the workers were confused. These workers have reported that there was no explosion in #4. They have reported that building #4 just disintegrated before their eyes without an explosion.

We are only in the middle phase of this disaster. Much more to go yet, and you know that. Very premature to say anything about this situation, but to say people should not be concerned with the resulting increase of radiation exposure, is just flat out irresponsible. And to not warn the US west coast that they are one significant earthquake away from dealing with major nuclear fallout from Japan, is also irresponsible. Heck, our own government has a faulty radiation sensor network. They cannot even tell us the radiation levels before, after and during an accident accurately.

40 posted on 04/29/2012 1:05:54 PM PDT by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape
The problem as I see it, is that if high radiation is causing the temperature sensors failures in unit #2, why are the temperature sensors not failing in #1 and #3 at the same failure rate ?

Probably a difference in exposure rates because of the variable geometry in the damaged cores. Also, radiation damage effects can be somewhat stochastic in nature. I've had thermocouples fail after a few years of service near the core, but in the reactor I work with we have one thermocouple below the core that is going on 20 years of service with very little drift, it calibrates within a degree of the standard every time.

What concerns me is that they found the water level in the CV of #2 to be much lower then they had predicted. Now that points to additional possible leakage and/or the possibility that the #2 RPV and CV are more damaged then thought.

The answer will require further inspections.

There was an explosion in the lower Torus area of #2. People heard it and reported it. Tepco claims it was really the explosion in #4, and that the workers were confused. These workers have reported that there was no explosion in #4. They have reported that building #4 just disintegrated before their eyes without an explosion.

The article says they reported "loud sounds" which regulators confirmed as "coming from the building". The pressure spike and subsequent decay was thought to have indicated a rupture in the torus, but the pictures taken seem to show that the torus is intact as far as they can see at this point. So I'd say the early conclusions may be somewhat speculative and the situation is somewhat ambiguous.

... they are one significant earthquake away from dealing with major nuclear fallout from Japan, is also irresponsible.

I don't think so. You can't change the laws of physics, and radioactive decay over the last year has greatly reduced the potential source term. A lot of what was released early has either been dispersed or collected and contained. There is no longer active fission producing stored energy which is necessary to drive the materials out into the environment. Without the stored energy, you will very likely have only local effects. The West Coast is far enough away to avoid those. Spreading FUD is what is really irresponsible.

41 posted on 04/29/2012 3:02:13 PM PDT by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson