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

Skip to comments.

Nuclear Damage Control (Fukushima)
businessinsider.com ^ | 2/10/2012 | Russ Baker

Posted on 02/10/2012 11:39:25 AM PST by ransomnote

What if you were promoting an industry that had the potential to kill and injure enormous numbers of people as well as contaminate large areas of land for tens of thousands of years? What if this industry created vast stockpiles of deadly waste but nevertheless required massive amounts of public funding to keep it going? My guess is that you might want to hide that information.

From the heyday of the environmental movement in the late 1960s through the late 1970s, many people were openly skeptical about the destructive potential of the nuclear power industry. After the partial meltdown at Three Mile Island in central Pennsylvania in March 1979 and the explosion of Chernobyl’s unit four reactor in the Ukraine in April 1986, few would have predicted that nuclear power could ever shake off its global pariah status.

Yet, thanks to diligent lobbying efforts, strong government support, and a full public-relations blitz over the past decade, the once-reviled nuclear industry succeeded in recasting itself in the public mind as an essential, affordable, clean (low carbon emission), and safe energy option in a warming world. In fact, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has just cleared the way for granting the first two licenses for any new reactors in more than 30 years. The new reactors will be built at the Vogtle plant in Georgia, southeast of Augusta.

SNIP

In response, the nuclear industry and its supporters have employed sophisticated press manipulation to move the public conversation away from these thorny issues. One example is PBS’s recent Frontline documentary, Nuclear Aftershocks, which examines the viability of nuclear power in a post-Fukushima world.

What follows is a detailed critique of many of the issues raised in the program, which initially aired January 17, 2012.

(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: fukushima; japan; nuclear; radiation
Lots of good info I haven't seen anywhere else. For example: "A report in January in the Montreal Gazette noted that Japanese testing for radioactive cesium revealed contamination in sixteen of 22 species of fish exported to Canada. Radioactive cesium was found in 73 percent of the mackerel tested, 91 percent of the halibut, 92 percent of the sardines, 93 percent of the tuna and eel, 94 percent of the cod and anchovies, and 100 percent of the carp, seaweed, shark, and monkfish. These tests were conducted in November and indicate that the radioactivity is spreading, because tuna, for example, is caught at least 900 kilometers (560 miles) off shore. "
1 posted on 02/10/2012 11:39:35 AM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ransomnote; SunkenCiv; no-to-illegals; All

One problem with tuna is they try to catch the largest ones which over years will have the greatest build-up of toxic products. Any word on what has happened to our air as a result of Fukishima?


2 posted on 02/10/2012 11:44:43 AM PST by gleeaikin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

I was in the nuclear industry for over 20 years. The greatest threat I ever faced was Amory Lovins.


3 posted on 02/10/2012 11:48:27 AM PST by brivette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gleeaikin

I’ve seen computer modeling re Fukushima in March. Showed Xenon throughout Northern Hemisphere for several days and modeling showed snake like wisps of radioactive Cesium and Iodine sweeping to AK and down the coast to Northern CA while some came laterally from the West to Central CA then moving inland. This sort of model doesn’t indicate altitude of fumes. I recall hearing that Boise Idaho had highest count of radioactive iodine in rainwater and that a location in VT dumped dairy milk for iodine or cesium (I forget) and some Hawaiian dairies added boron to cattle feed to lower contamination in milk. Those computer modeling programs I mentioned earlier were from Europe. The Ex-SKF blogger had 3 links to foreign agencies projecting airborne fallout but he noted that all 3 halted monitoring.
UC Berkley reported on Feb. 6 that contamination testing revealed radioactive cesium in San Francisco milk sample ‘highest since August’ and at 150% of EPA limit (EPA Maximum Contaminant Level for radioactive cesium in milk is 3 picocuries/L and this test found 4.5). Now I don’t know if it’s ‘highest since August’ because contamination continues to blow in from the west or because the cattle were given fodder that originally had higher amounts of contamination. Here’s the UC Berkely link: http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/UCBAirSampling/MilkSampling


4 posted on 02/10/2012 12:11:57 PM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape; TigerLikesRooster; bgill

ping


5 posted on 02/10/2012 12:14:27 PM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

Thanks for posting the truth about nuclear power. The sheeple here can flame away, but Nuclear power is Insanity in its current form at least. As the article suggests- The sheeple have been well programed to think it is great. Yet it can do far more permanent damage than a nuclear bomb. These plants are getting older and being extended past their lifetime limits. It is simple fact that eventually events will happen that satisfy the makings of a disaster lasting thousands of years. If those makings be man made or some natural event, it does not matter. History shows that these kinds of events will happen. To put humanity at such risk results from either ignorance, or from being just plain dead in a spiritual sense. Very important is the fact that when such events happen then you can’t just turn the thing off and have the problem go away. The contamination and its effects on life are permanent for all practical purposes.

What is morally and spiritually important is to live within our means on power consumption. Any power we can not produce by some other means Should not be consumed by us. Sadly mankind seems to have no more ability to do that, then they do to live within their means in a financial sense.

The Japanese Civilians have learned their lesson. Unfortunately- Too late. Some day America is going learn its lesson- Also too late.


6 posted on 02/10/2012 12:36:02 PM PST by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
The Ex-SKF blogger had 3 links to foreign agencies projecting airborne fallout but he noted that all 3 halted monitoring.

Hmmm.

7 posted on 02/10/2012 2:06:42 PM PST by bgill (Romney & Obama are both ineligible. A non-NBC GOP prez shuts down all ?s on Obama's admin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Revel
The Japanese Civilians have learned their lesson

I don't think they have.

8 posted on 02/10/2012 2:08:45 PM PST by bgill (Romney & Obama are both ineligible. A non-NBC GOP prez shuts down all ?s on Obama's admin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
The author:

The reactors are 40 years old, bad location and a bad design at that.

The reactors today are a much safer design and I would live near one. In fact, I did live near one, Rancho Seco, the same design as TMI and I wasn't worried.

I'm glad the Georgia company got a permit.

The professional protestors are going to try to get every mile they can out of this.

9 posted on 02/10/2012 2:45:14 PM PST by Lx (Do you like it, do you like it. Scott? I call it Mr. and Mrs. Tennerman chili.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Revel

When someone uses the term ‘sheeple’ as if they are above the fray, makes me move on to the next post.


10 posted on 02/10/2012 2:47:22 PM PST by Lx (Do you like it, do you like it. Scott? I call it Mr. and Mrs. Tennerman chili.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Lx

Well, the fact that the reactors were old and newer designs were safer was the excuse used to deflect attention from Chernobyl by nuke apologists on FR shortly after Fukushima blew up. We were assured melt-thru was impossible with the newer, safer design. And then melt-thru occurred on all three reactors despite the newer, safer design.

TEPCO was in trouble for falsifying safety inspections before this disaster. They were warned to retrofit the location of the fuel tanks. THey chose not to. A scientist provided TEPCO with a report demonstrating that catastrophic tsunami risk was present due to the historical occurrence of one in that region x years prior and the geology/activity of the area. TEPCO chose to ignore his data. TEPCO certainly knew it built on seismic faults. Shortly before Fukushima blew up, TEPCO celebrated a worker who showed them how to conceal damage to a reactor vessel at the foundry it was made (big dent in it meant it had to be discarded to the tune of millions of dollars and he showed them how to pull the dent out so it could pass inspection; he feels bad about that now, that one was intended for the fourth reactor at Fukushima). Once the disaster occurred, safety precautions and procedures were discarded: SPEEDI data projecting the path of the plume was not released to the public to avoid panic, Potassium Iodide was forbidden to be distributed but one mayor went against the directive and helped to protect the children in his district anyway.

So you see - ‘safety’ means nothing if the public cannot force the nuke companies to obey safety regulations, implement known retrofit needs, respond to tsunami risks given them in reports from scientists, distribute Potassium iodide etc. ‘Safety’ precautions are apparently just smoke and mirrors the nuke industry uses to silence the will of the public. Oh and Japan also built the largest nuke plant in the world on a seismic fault and didn’t know it until an earthquake knocked the plant offline. When Fukushima blew up, 25% of US nuke plants reported that they, too, had excessive amounts of nuke fuel suspended in pools above reactors and requested fed funds to develop a safer alternative. This, inspite of FEMA’s New Madrid fault etc. Safety? Right.

PS: THank you for including your picture - it makes our exchange a bit more like a conversation, a tiny little perk I didn’t know I would like.


11 posted on 02/10/2012 3:29:06 PM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
Some environmentalists are seeing their no-carbon energy program in jeopardy if they do not propose alternative means of providing energy at reasonable cost. Wind and solar energy are not getting anywhere. They are too expensive and inefficient. So these folks turned their attention to 'safer nuclear power.' Bill Gates was said to plan his (charity) project to provide so-called 'micro-reactors' to communities. Nuclear power started to win approval from some prominent liberals. That is probably why PBS ran the series discounting fallout from Fukushima disaster. Long persecuted nuclear industry was about to make a comeback and Japanese crushed the revival dream.

They should have acted proactively and get things under control by strong-arming(or even breaking arms of) Japanese nuclear establishment. It would have done more good for them than spending most of their efforts on PR to play down Fukushima problems. It could have salvaged their reputation better than keep covering up for them. Those TEPCO boys should be shot.

12 posted on 02/10/2012 4:51:52 PM PST by TigerLikesRooster (The way to crush the bourgeois is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
PS: THank you for including your picture - it makes our exchange a bit more like a conversation, a tiny little perk I didn’t know I would like.

I'm sure your mom thinks you're clever.

13 posted on 02/10/2012 6:24:40 PM PST by Lx (Do you like it, do you like it. Scott? I call it Mr. and Mrs. Tennerman chili.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Lx

I was literally stating the fact that I like having a picture of a person before me when responding.


14 posted on 02/10/2012 6:42:05 PM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: gleeaikin

The leakage from Fukishima was much less than any of those large atmospheric nuke tests in the 1950s and 1960s — and the only precaution we had to take back then was not to eat snow, and some schools and other institutions stocked iodine pills.


15 posted on 02/10/2012 7:19:34 PM PST by SunkenCiv (FReep this FReepathon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv; All

My aunt was living in Reno, Nevada when the testing was being done. She said several times she and others would feel kind of sick for several days a few days after an explosion. I wonder if the population of Reno was ever sampled for radiation exposure?


16 posted on 02/10/2012 10:42:27 PM PST by gleeaikin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: gleeaikin
They are still injecting water into three reactors that have holes in their RPV's. The ocean contamination is not being monitored at all. The water injection will continue for a few years. Three meltdowns. Physically impossible for it not to be far worse then Chernobyl already. Just do the math. Substitute steam and gases (Fukushima) for smoke and particulates (Chernobyl).

And the latest line is the Japanese government is considering making it illegal to report radiation levels.

17 posted on 02/11/2012 5:45:55 AM PST by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: gleeaikin

I've seen John Wayne's cancer (and the cancer that killed his costar) attributed to location shooting near a recent atmospheric test. The fact that JW smoked like a chimney for years had nothing at all do with it. ;')
John Wayne -- Life is tough, but it is tougher when you are stupid

18 posted on 02/11/2012 7:28:49 AM PST by SunkenCiv (FReep this FReepathon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
So, how many people died as a result of the damage to the reactors at Fukushima? How many people in this country have died as a result of radiation effects from nuclear plants? Compare that to fatalities from renewable energy sources, such as hydropower. On that basis, which has proven to be more dangerous to the average person? How does the death toll from the Fukushima reactors compare to the overall fatalities from the earthquake and tsunami?
19 posted on 02/11/2012 7:46:23 AM PST by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chimera

I sure hope the nuclear industry will institute some professional education programs for its workers. None of them know anything about Chernobyl when you’d think that topic would be required reading for the industry...if they cared about human life. Reading up on Chernobyl, they’d learn people died; at the start of Fukushima there WERE nuke apologists insisting that NO ONE died as a result of Chernobyl. Can you imagine? Being in the nuke industry and thinking not one person died as a result of Chernobyl???
If the nuke industry educates its workforce, they’d learn that the Soviet Union made it illegal for deaths to be attributed to radiation for two years following the event. They’d find out all about the pattern of mortality and suffering and come to realize that people alive today are still contracting illnesses (and dying as a result) from radiation released by Chernobyl more than 25 years ago and they will continue to do so for countless generations. Nuke apologists would be shocked to discover the genetic damage that ravages or ends infant life and that people living near the contamination can have babies with birth defects today due to that explosion almost a quarter of a century ago.

Oh the nuke industry workers are some of the most ignorant people I’ve ever posted comments to. I have tried hard to bring them up to speed by telling about state of the art research in the National Academy of Sciences BEIR and the composite report created by a group of scientists compiling all the known medical research for the region. Here’s a description of that report:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl:_Consequences_of_the_Catastrophe_for_People_and_the_Environment
Here’s the actual report:http://www.strahlentelex.de/Yablokov%20Chernobyl%20book.pdf

I think the very least the American public should demand from it’s nuclear workers is a)basic science information so that they no longer try to scare the public with bananas, air travel, medical x-rays etc. b)thorough knowledge of the BEIR VI and c)one read through of the PDF report I linked and d) an analysis demonstrating that the nuclear industry has intentionally deceived the public before, during, and after nuclear ‘events’ with particular focus on their abuse of the excuse “we didn’t want the public to panic.”
If we had an educated nuclear power workforce, they’d know that the horrible ramifications for human life in Japan are yet to come. They’d understand that the Japanese government is working hard to conceal and diffuse medically relevant information. The nuke force would not waste my time pretending that you really can coat the landscape, air, food, and water with radioactive waste and not have resulting human suffering.

Believe me, I know that nuke apologists are being intentionally deceptive each and every time they ask “How many people died as a result of the damage to the reactors at Fukushima?” But, the public isn’t fooled by it because of information sharing made possible by the internet. In fact, it just makes us furious to witness the absolute refusal and denial of responsibility on the part of nuke power advocates. Lie to my face about Fukushima while celebrating the announcement that the US will build new reactors; it makes nuke pimps feel good but doesn’t do the PR job they actually want.
Does anyone know a nuke pimp who admits and regrets the role that bad management played in Chernobyl? Anyone ever hear “I can’t believe the industry I love so much is responsible for such catastrophic human suffering in the Ukraine! And to think, it will continue for generation after generation...”? And now the nuke pimps are using the same deny and lie routine re Fukushima because it worked so well for them in Chernobyl??? I think the US deserves better from ‘so-called’ Americans in the nuke industry; let our US nuke force at least state publicly the truth about non-existant ‘cold shutdown’ in Fukushima because the longer they are silent in the face of obvious lies and deceptions, the clearer their primary loyalty to their industry to the detriment of their country becomes.
The fact that nuke pimps breezily deny the existence of the human toll in Chernobyl and are already hard at work distancing themselves from a disaster that isn’t even over yet in Japan infuriates me.
Oh and WHY would even waste my time asking me to compare the death toll from Fukushima, which was avoidable (had they retrofitted fuel tanks, responded to research indicating the tsunami risk, warned the public to shelter or flee, distributed potassium iodide, developed a ‘safety’ oriented work force instead of the one that got them reprimanded for falsifying safety reports, declined to build the plant on a seismically active area, etc.) and is yet to unfold, with the tsunami and earthquake? We just can’t trust nuke people; they simply have no conscience, no integrity.


20 posted on 02/11/2012 11:31:05 AM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape

Wow, I recall that the Japanese government made it illegal for doctors to examine citizens of Fukushima without first obtaining authorization to do so from the government. I am glad so many members of the Japanese public are buying radiation detection devices and sharing information with each other. This just keeps getting worse.


21 posted on 02/11/2012 11:43:45 AM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
Answer the question. No need for a long anti-nuclear rant or trying to start a game of whack-a-link. How many people have died as a result of the damage to the reactors at Fukushima? How many of the general public in this country have been injured, much less died, from the operation of a nuclear plant? Surely if they are as dangerous as you and the anti-nuke kooks say they are, you can tell me the name of one person who has died as a result of a nuclear accident that has affected the general public. One will do. And never mind complaining about government cover-ups. Surely if things were as bad as you say, the news media could have ferreted out the name of just one person who died as a result of the reactor damage at Fukushima. Just name one person. If you can't, I'd say take a healthy dose of STFU.
22 posted on 02/11/2012 11:53:26 AM PST by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]




Click the Porcupine         Thank you, JoeProBono

Baby Dragon Makes a New Friend

Don't you be prickly!
Donate monthly

Sponsors will contribute $10
For each new monthly sign-up

23 posted on 02/11/2012 12:49:30 PM PST by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: chimera

I think you have a short attention span so you’ll want to skip to the bottom and read below the line.

I just pointed out that fatalities and illnesses don’t happen immediately. History shows that. The research I linked to proves it. That’s why you are demanding to know NOW - because the toll on human health is not yet known. That was the sickening game nuke pimps played in Chernobyl, that’s the sick game you are playing now. YOU KNOW that cancers, leukemias etc. take time to develop. You keep isolating the ‘death toll’ to those suffering from Acute Radiation Sickness (ARS) because the IAEA used this method starting with Chernobyl and you people just can’t let go of a ‘good thing’, right? I just told you there is medical, scientific proof. That comprehensive medical report re Chernobyl identifies mind boggling levels of illness and death- regions of the Ukraine where ‘most children are too ill to attend school’, it documents cancers, leukemias etc. The report also traces upsurges in still births, trisomy, etc. across the globe and it does it well. And when it is done, the death toll for Chernobyl is presently estimated at around 1 million people and it is still continuing. Don’t like that estimate? OK, just for your benefit, let’s cut it by 75% for no reason at all other than your need for denial. So the death toll would be at around 250,000 and climbing for hundreds of years - so it’ll get back over 1 million anyway.

Those who read John Gofman will discover that the NRC began stripping researchers of funds when researchers reveal that radiation causes cancer. It’s been a long hard haul for the BEIR VI to get out the door - many other scientists never survive the onslaught of our government and nuke industry’s suppression. Oh but the medical community knows that radiation causes cancer and some intrepid soul actually plotted all the breast cancer in the United States geographically for a span of several years and, what do you know, 2/3 of these cases were located within a few miles of nuclear power plants! Surprise! But not really that surprising because there are people like a researcher known as ‘the mouse lady’ (because she creates breast cancer in mice for laboratories studying breast cancer). Wanna know her motto? “There is no breast cancer without radiation!” She says that because she had never found any other way to create breast cancer in mice in the lab other than radiation. Oh, Gofman was a nuclear physicist AND a medical physician and he proved that radiation causes breast cancer back in the 70’s. People die from that, ya know? What about the Downwinders who post on FR that ‘my wife’s entire high school class is dead’ as a result of being downwind of above ground testing? The hazards of radiation are known but are but denied heartily by the nuke industry.
So the long, sordid history of nuclear power in the US is bullying of scientists and suppression of research. There is a report out now studying nuke workers in Europe and what do you know, they are finding higher incidence of cancer at low exposure levels! SURPRISE! It shouldn’t really be a surprise because in 2000, the US congress enacted a worker protection act to compensate nuke workers employed by the defense. These workers were being declined compensation for their medical illnesses because they were technically below their legal exposure limit acquired while working on nuke defense projects. In fact, the defense department litigated against workers who tried to collect. But in 2000, congress passed a law to protect workers and noted that there was medical evidence that demonstrated that radiation causes cancer at levels below the limits set by the defense department. Ever hear about that? Why not? The government supports the nuke industry in bullying and stripping research funds from those whose research sheds an unpleasant light on the nuke industry. And then the nuke industry sneers that there’s no proof. But proof is leaking out anyway. Oh people have been injured and died in the US and the US, as the insurer of nuclear power, has the ability to deny, deny, deny and harass.
__________________________________________________
Oh, and while research shows that x exposure of radiation causes x increased amount of cancer/death, there are other causes for cancer as well - that’s why you keep wanting a name, one name from me. You ask for ONE NAME because you know medically we can prove radiation kills and sickens but on a ONE NAME basis, we cannot find a medical marker that says THIS specific person died from nuclear radiation induced cancer and THAT person died from genetic sensitivity to other environmental toxins. So your entire ‘test’ of my veracity is just one more pathetic game the amoral, conscience-free, unpatriotic parasites in the nuke industry play in order to refuse their responsibility.

Keep your dose or choke on it, it doesn’t matter to me.


24 posted on 02/11/2012 1:34:51 PM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
You know nothing of epidemiology and radiation biology. If you did, you'd know that there are documented acute radiation effects that lead to fatality. They have been documented. If you knew this you could name names. You didn't because you didn't know those facts. The trouble for you is, none of them are members of the public harmed by nuclear power plants. If there had been any you should be able to name names. You can't, because there has never been a verifiable, documented case of a member of the public being harmed by radiation from a nuclear plant in this country or anywhere employing LWR technology. Not one. Zero.

You also know nothing of nuclear technology. Chornobil is not a valid example because its design and physics is totally different from anything used in Western countries. In fact, it is more of a plutonium production design, which has a dual purpose for electricity production. It has no containment structure. It has a positive reactivity feedback over part of its operating regime. LWR designs are completely different. There is always containment, and there is always negative power-reactivity feedback over the entire operating range.

John Gofman, eh? Now I see the problem. You're using debunked sources. Gofman has been thoroughly discredited in the radiation science community. Depending on Gofman for factual information is like going to Bill Clinton for guidance on sexual morality.

25 posted on 02/11/2012 1:52:09 PM PST by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
Reactor #2 recently increased in temperature down near the bottom of the reactor. The nuclear geniuses in Japan could only respond by increasing the amount of water injection. We have thousands of tons of highly contaminated water sitting in welded make shift tanks. No place to put it. No way to properly clean it. And no one wants it. So everyone just ignores it. Its not going away and those welded tanks will eventually fail.

Latest info is that the temperature has started to increase again. If it reaches 80 C, cold shutdown is officially over. This is because the gages have a 20 C error margin. At 100 C, no cold shutdown. It is currently 78 C and Tepco as usual has failed to report their latest failure. And the cold shutdown was nothing but a lie to begin with, since about 2/3 of the total cores in three reactors have left the RPV. So we are about to enter the hot stage of the middle of this crisis.

26 posted on 02/11/2012 1:57:26 PM PST by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape

Oops. Actually some of those make shift tanks were not even welded. Held together with bolts. And many have already leaked.


27 posted on 02/11/2012 2:01:26 PM PST by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: chimera

You have fallen back on nuke pimp strategy - once again you limit death and illness to ARS. Deaths and illness from ARS occur rapidly - massive amounts of death and debility set in slowly as a result of exposure to radiation. Oh how the nuke industry wishes the public would forget about the slow, grinding debility and death, still births, early dementia, genetic damage resulting from radiation contamination that doesn’t happen right away. Note the further attempts you use to limit the scope of damage - you specify ‘member of the public’ to avoid including people like the military guy who was pinned to the ceiling (oh yeah that was a fatality) by an rod ejected from the core) and again narrow it to LWR technology. So Downwinders are out, eh? Radiation has and will continue to cause fatalities in this country and others. There is no basis other than public relations for you to attempt to limit this discussion to a specific sub category of person (public - not military), speed of illness/fatality onset (ARS) or specific technology (LWR).

You just haven’t been paying attention to your peer nuke pimps regarding Chernobyl. They were on FR insisting that there could be no comparison between Fukushima and Chernobyl because *GASP* Chernobyl didn’t have a containment structure. These pimps therefore declared that melt through was impossible in Fukushima and called anyone concerned by events unfolding there ‘hysterical’ and ‘fear monger’. Your peer pimps went silent about the ‘can’t happen in Japan (because Japan uses containment structure, more modern design etc.) when it was FINALLY revealed that melt-through had occurred on all three reactors. So this idea that newer design and containment structures create safety is a joke because the Soviets had many reactors without containment structures and they lost ONE. Fukushima lost at least three and there are rumors about others that the Japanese would rather we not think about. It’s not the technology - it’s the hubris, incompetent management and the use of radioactive fuel to boil water.

I LOVE how John Gofman still can make a nuke pimp cry! He has never been discredited - for his nuclear work (discovering radioactive isotopes), his breast cancer work, or his pioneering work in LDL cholesterol and it’s effects on human health. The National Academy of Sciences reviewed his work and...to the dismay of the bullying nuke industry...supported it, even at a time when the NRC and US government was stripping researchers of labs and funds. No - his valid research will never go away. Comparing ‘the father of plutonium’ to Bill Clinton - you really are hurtin’! Bwahahahaha!!!


28 posted on 02/11/2012 2:28:01 PM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape

Great update - I didn’t realize it was gettin’ so bad so fast. Thanks.


29 posted on 02/11/2012 2:35:08 PM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
Western countries have been generating commercial-scale electricity from nuclear sources for going on 40 years now. That's two generations of humankind. More than enough for any latent effects to show. So, tell me the name of one person in this or any other country using LWR technology who has shown latent effects that are demonstrably causally linked to nuclear energy use among the general populace. You are the one posting these fearmongering threads. It is incumbent on you to present credible evidence in the form of just a simple naming of one person who has been harmed by radiation effects from LWR reactor accidents or operations. Surely in 40 year's time you could come up with just one name, acute or latent effects, whichever you like.

Bringing up the SL-1 event is really reaching for them. First, that was a military reactor, not a commercial design. No one designs reactors that have such a high individual control rod worth, much less one that can be manually moved. Show me one commercial design that has that feature.

There is no comparison between Chornobil and Fukushima. Chornobil was one core. There were three damaged at Fukushima and the total release is in the range of a few percent of the Chornobil release.

You're reaching far back into the past for any credible work by Gofman. His latest "work" and "pronouncements" have been completely discredited. He's just one more sad case of a one-time credible researcher going over to the fearmongering side.

30 posted on 02/11/2012 2:48:16 PM PST by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: chimera

On an flight with a nuke engineer, Gofman did some back of the envelope calculations. He knew from all his years in the lab (as a physicist) that human limitations contribute to the release of samples no matter how careful they were. As he sat contemplating how toxic plutonium was, based on his research, he then did some calculations to see how much radioactive material nuclear plants would be expected to release based on known laboratory experience. He was horrified - the toll on human health was shocking and unacceptable. So he then calculated the maximum percentage a power plant could release without damaging the human population - this value was quite low. Concerned about his research and the impact radiation could have on humans, he turned the the nuke engineer next to him and asked him how much containment engineering limitations would allow him to build into a plant (how tight could they build a plant). The engineer breezily said that plants could be built to whatever specification John gave them ‘you give us the specification, we build it’. And John smiled and basically said “I’ve been working in labs for many many years and I can tell you that there’s a limit, it’s impossible to guarantee ANY specification given.’ As the nuke engineer reiterated that they’d build whatever was specified, John, a highly accomplished nuclear physicist and medical physician, was horrified to recognize the degree of hubris the man displayed. THIS was the turning point. John was dismayed that his research revealed that radiation was far more damaging to human health than anyone had previously realized. He started to share his work and they tried to destroy him and others in his lab for it. John and his peers plotted how to get their research to the public - they shouldn’t have to of course but that was the birth of the nuke industry: suppression, lies, intimidation. THIS is when the nuclear people stopped praising his work (He had previously done Oppenheim a great service by refining fuel samples faster than previously possible) and started to sneer that he was a nut. That’s all it takes to alienate the nuke industry - the truth.

I already posted upthread research demonstrating the death toll resulting from Chernobyl and the the state of the art BEIR VI that even small amounts of radiation increase the risk of developing cancer. Did you know cancer can kill? I have already explained what you know - that on a NAME ONE PERSON basis, the nuke industry hopes we’ll forget the plain, obvious, undeniable fact that radiation causes cancer and that cancer causes fatalities. The comprehensive report that I linked to: It tracked jumps in cancer and leukemia in Belarus and across the globe along with jumps in birth defects and still births. Do I know the names of still born babies in the US that can be tagged to a nuke plant? Uh no - that’s not how research works. A research sample has to be large (tens of thousands) and the names are not published. But you know that. That’s why you keep ignoring documented research and asking for ONE NAME. Time for your next dose.


31 posted on 02/11/2012 3:30:33 PM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
OK, so you can't give me a name. Fine, we'll leave it at that. I ll count that round as a win by default.

So, if you can't give me a name, and there is all this harm being done out there, how about a citation for a successful case brought by class action lawsuit that demonstrates harm to a group of people that is causally linked to radiation from a power plant? No individual names, just an example of case law that shows a group of people was awarded a judgment based on harm proved to be caused by radiation from a nuclear plant. Don't say it isn't possible to prove a case on this basis. There is tons of case law on the very same thing, for effects of things like pesticides, chemicals, tobacco use, pharmaceuticals, etc. You can't, because there is no such proof.

Those are horseshit calculations. I don't care who did them. During normal operation no plutonium is released from an LWR. In the most pessimistic accident scenario you are going to get local contamination and nothing else. Even if someone ingests a significant amount of plutonium, it is far from the 100% death sentence you fearmongers push. There is an ongoing study of plutonium workers at Los Alamos who have probably ingested more plutonium than could ever be emitted from a nuclear plant. The cohort group consist of 26 white males. Of that group, seven have died, compared with an expected death rate of 16 for US mortality at the age of these individuals. That means on average they are living longer than non-exposed individuals. (Interestingly, the "hot particle" plutonium "theory" pushed by fearmongers would predict a 99.5% mortality in this group, all from lung cancers induced by plutonium This has not happened.) Of the seven fatalities, three were from cancer (bone, prostate, and lung). That is not statistically elevated. Of the others, they show physical changes and illnesses consist with unexposed groups of this age. Of the 26 total, eight have been diagnosed with one or more cancers, which is within the expected range for a unexposed cohort group. It is worth noting that these individuals received far higher exposures to plutonium (from a laboratory, not a power plant) than any member of the public ever would from a nuclear plant even under the worst circumstances, and no demonstrable harm was caused them that can be causally linked to their exposure.

32 posted on 02/11/2012 4:12:34 PM PST by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: chimera
I should add that the study of the Los Alamos workers has been ongoing for over 50 years. Far more than enough time for latent effects to be manifest.
33 posted on 02/11/2012 4:14:13 PM PST by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: chimera

OK, so you can’t give me a name. Fine, we’ll leave it at that. I ll count that round as a win by default.
_____________________________________________

I stopped reading here because you are claiming to win by default when in fact you are refuting the scientific method used to gather medical data. Nuke pimps know that an individual one to one basis does not reveal direct causal factor for cancer but large, blind studies with thousands of people reveal mortality caused by radiation. You want to deny the basis for scientific research and then declare a win by default? Go waste someone else’s time.


34 posted on 02/11/2012 5:41:07 PM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
You're the one wasting time. All I asked you for was simple proof of your fear-mongering assertions, something as simple as one lousy, single name of someone who has been harmed, either acute or delayed effects, from a radiation accident from the use of LWR-based nuclear energy, in this or any other country. You failed. When I said fine, you say there are widespread, long-term delayed effects, I pointed out that we have been using LWR technology for over two generations in this country alone, more than enough time for latent effects to be expressed, show me a group of people (no individual names, just a group) that has successfully proved harm from latent effects of radiation from an LWR facility. You failed in even that.

You went off on the plutonium trail using an anecdotal story of a person whose recent work has been thoroughly discredited. Just an anecdote, no chance for peer review, no independent verification of his purported "calculations", just a fear-driven agenda (i.e., "horror"). I countered with a scientific study of actual plutonium ingestion in humans, conducted by reputable scientists at a national laboratory (not back-of-the-envelope calculations on a plane flight), published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal (Health Physics). I'll leave it to the more reasonable readers of the thread to decide which argument is more credible. The fact remains that to this day not a single human fatality has been demonstrably linked to plutonium ingestion. Yet you and your "Dr. Gofman" keep bringing up that boogieman to scare us.

Sorry, leave the scare stories to the kiddies. I got over those a long time ago in my 60+ years on this Earth. Until you can do better than scare mongering, I'm not going to bother.

35 posted on 02/11/2012 6:12:49 PM PST by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: chimera

Your response is a mess so I’ll try to pick through the swamp for a moment....

I’ve already pointed out that you deny the basis of scientific research and then declare yourself the winner - wasting my time again.

You are trying to conflate John Gofman with a study on Plutonium ingestion? Well I guess you had to try something because he proved that LOW LEVEL exposure to ionizing radiation causes cancer; there is no safe threshold below which exposure is safe. The National Academy of Sciences latest, state of the art research specifically states in it’s report that despite what the nuclear industry wants to believe ‘there is no safe threshold’ for exposure to ionizing radiation.
You consider Dr. Gofman a boogieman, the nuke industry does, because he had credentials, access, credibility and integrity and it scared them and scarred them and they still haven’t stopped attacking him. Yes - I think it is excellent that we just leave the credibility decision to those reading our posts.
Oh Chimera - scientists and medical people already know that radiation causes cancer and damages cells - that’s why they limit x-rays to necessity etc.


36 posted on 02/11/2012 6:25:22 PM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
I’ve already pointed out that you deny the basis of scientific research and then declare yourself the winner - wasting my time again.

You post an anecdotal story about someone doing calculations on the back of an envelope and then you have the nerve to criticize me for "denying" scientific method? The fact that you'd try to pass off an anecdotal tale as something relevant in a technical discussion proves you wouldn't know scientific method if it came up and whapped you upside the head.

You are trying to conflate John Gofman with a study on Plutonium ingestion? Well I guess you had to try something because he proved that LOW LEVEL exposure to ionizing radiation causes cancer; there is no safe threshold below which exposure is safe. The National Academy of Sciences latest, state of the art research specifically states in it’s report that despite what the nuclear industry wants to believe ‘there is no safe threshold’ for exposure to ionizing radiation.

Hey, you brought up Gofman and the plutonium crap. I swatted it down with a reference to a verifiable study published in the open literature, not some unverifiable tale of someone scratching out calculations and then getting scared talking to someone on an airplane flight. What kind of crap is that?

It's pure, unadulterated horseshit. In fact, the BEIR-VII study effectively threw the LNT under the bus with the introduction of the dose rate effectiveness factor (DREF). The original development of the LNT concept was NEVER intended to imply that there is "no safe dose", and doing so is an example of junk science at its worst. And LNT was NEVER intended to be a vehicle for developing public policy regarding the use of nuclear energy. Doing so is even worse junk science, and I don't have time to dispute your junk science, it disputes itself.

You consider Dr. Gofman a boogieman, the nuke industry does, because he had credentials, access, credibility and integrity and it scared them and scarred them and they still haven’t stopped attacking him. Yes - I think it is excellent that we just leave the credibility decision to those reading our posts.

All you do is post conspiracy theories, that "they" are out to "get him", that "they" are afraid of him so "they" cut his (and others') funding. Tinfoil hat material, man, nothing more. Sure, let the readers decide. I'll take the word of reputable people over crackpot tinfoil hat conspiracy theorists anytime.

Oh Chimera - scientists and medical people already know that radiation causes cancer and damages cells - that’s why they limit x-rays to necessity etc.

You totally ignore the fact that there is absolutely no data at low does that proves a demonstrable harm to an organism receiving the dose, and that is the basis of the BEIR studies. Radiation protection paradigms use the LNT as a basis for developing protection strategies, because it gives a conservative result. That is the only purpose of LNT, to present an overly conservative protection regime. If there was any indication of harm at low doses then there would be NO prescriptions for diagnostic procedures using ionizing radiation, nor would there be radiation therapy protocols, no evidence of curative effects of radiation exposure, no ability of multicellular systems to resist and repair damage, exactly as they do in other instances.

So keep on posting your crap, I don't care, I don't have time anymore for your baloney. You couldn't answer my very simple challenges presented earlier. Until you do, you have no credibility, just technobabble.

37 posted on 02/11/2012 7:11:06 PM PST by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
Latest temp reports from #2 (79.1 C). Looks like the Cold Shutdown Lie will come to an end soon. Now Tepco/Japan is trying to keep the dance going by suggesting that other parameters beside temperature should be used to determine Cold Shutdown Conditions. Of course they could always blame the sensor, this would be at least the third sensor gone bad. In the meantime, on Planet Earth.

Fukushima Reactor 2 RPV Temperature: 79.1 Degrees Celsius as of Noon, February 12, 2012

38 posted on 02/11/2012 10:48:23 PM PST by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape

Well they invented the term ‘cold shutdown’ as it applies to unknown location of corium blobs thought to be heading toward the water table - I guess they feel entitled to then make up the parameters as they keep changing.
I really appreciate the update - I didn’t know the temp was climbing back up out of fictional fake cold shutdown.
It galls me that it isn’t just the Japanese who are keeping the lie alive. Notice how the US nuclear industry doesn’t seem to have a problem with this? Or the European nuclear industries? I suppose if the US nuclear industry said “Hey, there’s no such thing as cold shutdown for a corium blob!” then the Japanese could respond by airing the dirty laundry the US nuclear industry is hiding so...they support each other.


39 posted on 02/11/2012 11:31:06 PM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape

Ex-skf has a link now that says 82 degrees C.
http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/2012/02/just-in-fukushima-reactor-2-rpv-bottom.html


40 posted on 02/11/2012 11:34:20 PM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
Yep. Cold Shutdown is no more. There was a rumor that they were considering distributing Iodide tablets. They had a quake shake up the site on the 9th. That always causes the temperatures to rise up a little bit. Shake and bake. So it was inevitable.

The real concern is what the temperature is down where the main mass of melted corium is located. If this temperature reading near the bottom of the RPV, is due to heat from the corium sinking down into the concrete base. Then the middle game crisis has begun. And they do not have enough water to stop that.

41 posted on 02/12/2012 1:02:54 AM PST by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
Tepco has been showing some very misleading diagrams on the location of the temp sensors. They claim that two still reading low are at the same height in the RPV as the one reading high. Therefore the one reading high is faulty. That is not the diagram I saw about a week ago when they first starting having this problem. The high reading sensor was located low and the low reading temp sensors were higher up in the RPV.

At this point in time, watch their actions again, not their words. Especially if they distribute Iodide tablets and start dumping mass quantities of boric acid into the #2 hole in the ground.

And from someone who trouble shooted complex electro mechanical digital gear for over 10 years, never assume the sensors with readings you like, are the functional ones. Yes, the odds say they are, but the odds can work against you.

42 posted on 02/12/2012 1:54:38 AM PST by justa-hairyape
[ 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