Posted on 02/08/2017 5:55:27 PM PST by Tours
Hmmm, that pic of “Chernobyl” when was that taken? Certainly not recently, because if that shit has been sitting their since 1986 it wouldn’t look like that.
A sievert is a measure of radiation. It is not a radioactive material.
This is all scare tactics. It there were elevated levels of radiation in the Pacific, it would be easily measured.
We are not told how much in the way of radioactivity is getting into the Pacific. From another article, the number given was 300 tons of “radioactive water” per day.
How much radiation is that? How far about background radiation?
1 m Sievert = 1 pCi (but that is conflating dose in a human with radiation levels, so it is not precise.)
http://people.uwec.edu/jolhm/EH/Rosenhoeft/index5.htm
Background radiation in the Oceans is about 330 pCi/Liter.
http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/natural.htm
Ocean water is naturally radioactive, as is the ground, as is the air. What we would like to know, is how much more radioactive is the water that is going into the Pacific from the damaged nuclear plants, than the natural background level.
That is the critical measure that we are not being told.
If it a trillion times as radioactive, it might be a problem. Currently, they say 300 tons of the water is going into the ocean every day. That is about 300 cubic meters of water. The Pacific has a volume of about 6.549 x 1017 m3 cubic meters of water. To double the background radiation in the Pacific, if the water going in were a trillion times as radioactive, as ocean water, it would take six years of that output.
We do not see anywhere near that level of radioactivity rise in the oceans, so the water going in must be much, much less radioactive than a trillion times as much as the natural background.
How much is it above background levels? Double? Triple? A million times? A billion times? At even a billion times, it would raise the background level only .01 percent in six years.
The numbers are important.
Math done quickly, but I think the numbers are close.
The particular radioactive isotopes and their half lives are likely far more important.
Background radiation levels on land vary by at least 10X, and there is no detectable difference in disease levels.
It is unlikely that even a 10X increase in ocean radiation would cause measurable harm.
I suspect that the radioactive levels of the water close to Japan are being monitored closely, so we should see if anything detectable happens to the sea life.
Yeah...funny...
My Geiger counter hasn’t twitched a bit.
Didn’t say they were always wrong, just that FR has always had them.
I see...(I haven’t paid much attention to any of this since NBC Warfare School in 1968...)
Wow! The Northern Hemisphere. That’s where I live. At least it’s not as bad as the propaganda I was subjected to in my youth (in the ‘60s). Then we had the movie “On the Beach”. After the Northern Hemisphere was destroyed, the destruction moved to the Southern hemisphere, until ALL was lost. I survived that, too.
OK...Thanks...What is the half life of a seivert?
Is it classified as alpha, beta or gamma?
(this is the first time I ever heard of “seiverts”)
Seiverts refer to dosage, so there are different numbers for alpha, beta, and gamma. 1 Seivert = 100 Rem
As I am sure you know, half lives are specific to various isotopes.
Gotcha...Thanks...
“...On the same page there is a note about the high value of 530 Sv/h reported for point number 2: although a direct comparison is not 100% correct, if one was to measure the radiation right on the surface of a fuel bundle one day after the stopping of the nuclear reaction, the dose rate value would be of the order of several tens of thousands Sievert per hour. (This certainly helps put things in perspective.)”
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/japan-earthquake-nuclear-plants-part-2.711577/page-56
These guys have been the best source for info on Fukushima.
Mostly nuke plant operators and students to be operators participate.
Your figures assume the radiation will dissolve uniformly throughout the entire Pacific. That’s not how it works.
“But of course, the MSM and the Goverment always tell the full and complete truth. No families, clans, tribes, religions or nations every conspire against others.”
Straw man! Straw man! Straw man! Straw man! Straw man! Straw man! Straw man! Straw man! Crap. Go flush the toilet, Tours. It’s getting stinky in here.
I learned that too, though, being from Minnesota, we were told it was only unsafe if the radiation turned it yellow. (Or something like that).
Can they not find a way to get a siphon into the plant and then flood and separate the water? Something doesnt make sense here. I think this is serious but the end of the world hype is being used for propaganda.
How about a low yield neutron detonation at the site?
That is not a plot of radionuclide concentration. It is a plot of maximum wave amplitudes from the tsunami. Passing it off as having anything to do with contamination is dishonest.
Are we talking alpha or beta particle,or gamma waves? A plane flying overhead would detect any gamma radiation and even a couple inches of concrete will still 100% of all alpha and beta particles. It seems the containment building was poorly constructed.
One sievert—the international measurement of radiation exposure—is enough to cause radiation sickness, infertility and cataracts. Exposure to 10 sieverts will lead to person’s death within weeks,
That action would disperse more radioactive material than it would destroy. That would be bad.
It is possible to place neutron emitters and moderators around the hot zone to increase the flux and the rate of burn. That might reduce the half-life of the most severely contaminated areas. Or it might not.
We will find out one way or another. The natural processes of rainfall and underground water tables containing dissolved minerals will introduce neutron emitters and moderators into some of the contaminated areas. That will cause intermittent flaring of the radiation levels followed by steam venting.
The deadly stuff coming out of the melted cores is gamma radiation - the worst.
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.