Posted on 03/11/2011 4:22:39 PM PST by TigerLikesRooster
The US built at least two of the reactors having problems in Japan. Built by the General Electric Company. GE. That worries me more then if the Japanese had built them :>
WTH would anyone not in Japan want to buy Iodide tablets?
That was before Immelt became Obama’s butt boy. I’m sure they’re properly constructed.
Background is far lower than 1mR per hour. Assuming your normal exposure from all natural sources is about 100mR per year, you’d be looking at roughly 0.01 mR/hr. So even at 1000X background, you’re still around 10mR/hr. Significant, but you’d have to stay there on the order of a month to approach 10CFR20 limits (5R/year.)
With 40 year old technology.
Libs would be disappointed eventually.
Very true, but our 40 year old technology beats the heck out of the Russian technology to which Japan is being compared.
I believe that if the doo doo were to hit the fan, lots of employees would risk heavy exposure to get things done.
I did 6 refuelings (built scaffolding) at Clinton Power Station, Clinton, IL. I might have gotten 15-20 REM total exposure. Fascinating work, crawling ALL over the systems and nooks and cranies... I likened the work to a mouse being allowed to crawl on a recently shut off racing engine, when explaining my job to friends and family. Lots of Homer Simpson T shirts were en vogue with the full spectrum of radiological workers. Chaos = cash. LOL.
If there are no serious consequences, surviving an 8.9 quake is the best publicity the nuclear industry could have. Thanks for the common sense.
Which is why you have containment.
It’s a fricking 8.9 earthquake. Only happened maybe 3 or 4 times in history.
You simply can’t eliminate all risks. You can only put redundancies together to reduce the risk. If it takes an 8.9 earthquake right over a nuclear plant to raise the possibility of a meltdown, let alone a nuclear excursion, that’s pretty damn safe.
Still >1000 miles from Seoul to the plant. They’ve got it on the far side of Honshu.
Kiev was only about 50 miles from Chernobyl and it was fine.
Tokyo itself is about 100 miles from this reactor.
The only people who would have to worry about anything, even in an excursion would be the folks in Japan, and only those in North eastern Honshu.
There’s just not enough radioactivity in the entire plant to pose a risk to any area greater than 50 miles.
Ugh, bs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_earthquakes
Add human error. That is the biggest danger.
1 01960-05-22May 22, 1960 Valdivia, Chile 1960 Valdivia earthquake 9.5
2 01964-03-27March 27, 1964 Prince William Sound, USA 1964 Alaska earthquake 9.2
3 02004-12-26December 26, 2004 Sumatra, Indonesia 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake 9.1
4 02011-03-11March 11, 2011 Sendai, Japan 2011 Sendai earthquake 8.8 ~ 9.1
Bullshit, eh?
This was the 4th strongest recorded earthquake ever. Exactly what I said it was.
You said that it only happened 3-4 times in history (not recorded history) - we know that’s bs.
Problems are at 5 nuclear reactors located at two separate plants that are 7 miles apart.
We can only guess how strong earthquakes were prior to when they were measured.
So what we can say is that you might see an event like this every 15 years or so.
Chile, Alaska, and Japan are all on the ring of fire, so the only area that would experience this risk once every 20 years would be on the ring of fire.
Off it, you might see it once every 50-100 years. Which is beyond the working lifespan of any nuclear plant.
True, same as with Chernobyl, btw. They had 4 reactors, and even with the explosion, 2 of them were still running well after the disaster.
This nuclear plant has a different design from Chernobyl and has a cap. It’s very unlikely that it would ever experience an excursion bad enough to damage the surrounding reactors.
You left off the Western United States, that is also in the Ring of Fire.
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.