Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster

Stanley Edwards said:
OK. For a dumb fuck like me, quote a question I asked and show me the answer given :)
Click to expand...

Stanley Edwards said:
Much as I like to read your posts, I think that one was just a bit more contagious bamboozle. Why can't someone just publish readings from a Geiger counter?
Click to expand...

elbows said:
They do, lots of them, from lots of different places. This hardly gives the whole picture.

For the whole picture you have to look at levels in the sea, the soil, the air, tapwater, etc, from a load of different places. We also need a better indication of how much stuff is continuing to escape from the plant right now, as the seawater escape route is the only one getting a lot of attention right now.

Im not sure quite what you are looking for in order to be able to judge the problem. There isnt a single number that will tell you much really. And questions that a lot of people seem to ask, such as 'is it worse than Chernobyl?', or gloomy reactions to words such as plutonium and meltdown dont really enlighten that much either.

More generally I dont think humans overall are setup to get a proper sense of risk and stuff when it comes to events that pose some osrt of health risk. We are use to seeing statistics, and of making a meal of stats in order to 'prove' a point. We dont tend to spend long talking about the full risk picture for things like coal powered stations, so its not surprising that this is also the case for nuclear, whether under normal operating conditions or during an emergency.
Click to expand...
seems a reasonable answer to me.
 
FridgeMagnet said:
Go to fucking bed Stanley.
Click to expand...

I will do.

But...

Scary flu and nuclear catastrophe is scary, but don't worry - Elbows will reassure you! In the meantime, those mutated things some people may notice are just an inconvinience.

Kind regards,

S Edwards.

PR Executive. Energy Corp Inc.
 
Fuchs66 said:
Your posts?

They're probably of more interest to a psychologist, I cant get a great deal of useful information from them.
Click to expand...

Did I claim you would?

I think any rational shrink reading through this thread would see where Elbow is coming from. You lot all fell for it!
 
They do, lots of them, from lots of different places. This hardly gives the whole picture.

For the whole picture you have to look at levels in the sea, the soil, the air, tapwater, etc, from a load of different places. We also need a better indication of how much stuff is continuing to escape from the plant right now, as the seawater escape route is the only one getting a lot of attention right now.

Im not sure quite what you are looking for in order to be able to judge the problem. There isnt a single number that will tell you much really. And questions that a lot of people seem to ask, such as 'is it worse than Chernobyl?', or gloomy reactions to words such as plutonium and meltdown dont really enlighten that much either.

More generally I dont think humans overall are setup to get a proper sense of risk and stuff when it comes to events that pose some osrt of health risk. We are use to seeing statistics, and of making a meal of stats in order to 'prove' a point. We dont tend to spend long talking about the full risk picture for things like coal powered stations, so its not surprising that this is also the case for nuclear, whether under normal operating conditions or during an emergency.
Click to expand...

Any answers there people? Nice words, but any answers?
 
Did Elbows claim to be the fountain of all knowledge? He is collating available information and giving his opinion on it in a way that a non-expert should quite easily be able to understand. Its you that's presenting made up crap as fact.
 
Stanley Edwards said:
NO! I said 'geography'. That's what you said!
Click to expand...

Yeah and I meant that the quantity of nuclear shit is what matters to health, and the quantity varies by location for the reasons I went on to discuss.

Sorry that my crystal ball and all seeing eye are out of service, but I dont feel too much remorse for not having the answer when you are having trouble even being able to say what the question is exactly.

As for the idea that I come across like nuclear PR, lol, unless the PR newsletter is named Clusterfukushima I dont think Im cu out for that job somehow.
 
elbows said:
Yeah and I meant that the quantity of nuclear shit is what matters to health, and the quantity varies by location for the reasons I went on to discuss.

Sorry that my crystal ball and all seeing eye are out of service, but I dont feel too much remorse for not having the answer when you are having trouble even being able to say what the question is exactly.

As for the idea that I come across like nuclear PR, lol, unless the PR newsletter is named Clusterfukushima I dont think Im cu out for that job somehow.
Click to expand...

So, where exactly, or approximately is the stuff we should be avoiding?
 
Ah fuck it. I have to get out of bed before 11 tomorrow and then meet Californian Lorena to make lunch and share showers. Pointless arguing here so late with pseudo-scientists trying to be knowledgable about stuff they know fuck all about. Possibly? I awate a simple answer :)
 
blueplume said:
Click to expand...


elbows said:
Cheers. Thats an excellent summary of all it seems possible to deduce about reactor 1 right now. I've been looking at the reactor & contamination data myself for a week or so, and noticed the same things. Some discussions elsewhere on the net explained to me what this stuff may mean (since I dont know enough to deduce all this myself and could easily make a mistake) and it is the same as what the bloke on that video is saying.

The media on the other hand tend to make a botch of this issue, for example there was an awful fox news video that just mentioned the unit 1 recriticality possibilities as resulting in 'flashing blue lights in the sky', with no mention as to whether such light had actually been observed at Fukushima, or whether they had just done 30 seconds research on criticality accidents and decided that blue light was the most easily described phenomenon that criticality can in theory induce. It was such a bad report that it almost came across as an april fools, except the rest of the report was all the serious nuclear news of the day from Fukushima.
Click to expand...

TEPCO saying the tellurium-129 levels were too high

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/01_28.html
 
I've had nowhere near enough sleep so not much discussion from me today, but here is a story that adds another layer to the evacuation stupidity:

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/04_10.html

It has been learned that the Japanese government withheld the release of computer projections indicating high levels of radioactivity in areas more than 30 kilometers from the troubled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.

The estimates were made on March 16th following explosions at the plant by an institute commissioned by the government using a computer system called SPEEDI. The system made its projections on the assumption that radioactive substances had been released for 24 hours from midnight on March 14th, based on the available data.

But the government was reluctant to reveal the SPEEDI projections, and did not release them until March 23rd.
The released data showed that higher levels of radioactive substances would flow over areas to the northwest and southwest of the plant.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

likesfish
Australia buys nuclear subs au us uk pact
2 3 4 5
Replies
126
Views
6K
A380
A380
A380
Over 44 people killed in crowd disaster in Israel
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
160
Views
8K
Pickman's model
Pickman's model
likesfish
Russian Nuclear policy
Replies
21
Views
1K
likesfish
likesfish
Jeremiah18.17
Baltic Nuclear Incident 2020
Replies
1
Views
468
2hats
2hats
editor
US nuclear weapons: first low-yield warheads roll off the production line
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
likesfish
likesfish
Back
Top Bottom