A guide to radiation for the clueless...

Generali

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

Him



And seriously Generali I believe you are taking the mick. Even you used to be able to spot dodgy articles.

I suggest you start researching the damage of Chernobyl to humans & the food chain in relation to the article & start there.

Research.......


You could start with these
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Physicians_for_Prevention_of_Nuclear_Warfare


These people produced a report in 2006 critising the UNs report of the death & damage caused by Chernobyl.

You may call these biased but in the interest of balance it may be useful for someone to have a quick read if they want to educate themselves.

Also you will have to look at google cache for some of the info...... Because it has recently (yes, recently within the last 2 weeks after being up for 6 years) been pulled............


Also you may want to google the death & disability rates of the liquidators (clean up people). Apparently there were between 200,000 & 800,000 of these liquidators.

Interesting group.

While they are anti-nuclear power they don't seem interested in examining the safety of alternatives. As I said in a previous post, thousands die very boring deaths each year in their ones and twos in mines and many more from diseases such as black lung.

According to Wikipedia, 10,000 cases of black lung are diagnosed in China each year and 4,000 in the USA. 100,000 coal miners died in mining accidents in the USA in the 20th Century.

The biggest estimate, and an apparently credible one, seems to be that 60,000 of the 600,000 liquidators at Chernobyl have died subsequently (link). According to the World Bank via Google (link) the average life expectancy of a Ukrainian is 68 years, 65 for men. Many of the people involved in a clean-up 25 years ago you would expect to have died from other causes by now anyway.

If we're not going to generate electricity from nuclear power, it has to be produced from something or we have to use less. Both have risks.

chris_m

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

.radioactivity in water at reactor 2 at the quake-damaged fukushima nuclear plant has reached 10 million times the usual level, company officials say. ..............

They now say that reading was an error.

It had said radiation levels reached 10 million times higher than normal in the cooling system but because the level was so high the worker taking the reading had to evacuate before confirming it with a second reading.

blueboy43

Generali wrote: »

Which bit is inaccurate in your opinion? It all sounds reasonable to me as a layman.

it puts the other side of the view for sure, but is about as balanced as Smilin' Joe fission from The Simpsons.

itsallagame_2

Ha,so they say it is an error,

so how do they know this,they did another reading?

if so,what's the current reading?

no doubt extremely high still,else surely they would release the new reading.

A right mess and nowhere near being brought under control.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

Generali wrote: »

Interesting group.

While they are anti-nuclear power

I suggest you do some proper research on who "they" are before ascertaining their position on nuclear power.

Interesting that you take your perception on things & pass that judgment onto those who do not fit into your box.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

itsallagame wrote: »

A right mess and nowhere near being brought under control.

At least 2 are certainly out of control.

no doubt extremely high still,else surely they would release the new reading.

They haven't done another reading. They have done one reading & it came in at 10 million times over. Then said, "well it must be wrong"......

Ilya_Ilyich

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia-pacific/2011/03/2011327144430593782.html looks like they measured the wrong thing!:

AJE wrote:

Jiji Press quoted the Tokyo Electric Power (TEPCO) as saying on Sunday that the mistake - which indicated radiation levels 10 million times higher than normal - was due to confusion between readings of iodine and cobalt in the water.
The inaccurate reading had forced emergency workers to flee from the complex's Unit 2 reactor.
"The number is not credible," said TEPCO's spokesman, Takashi Kurita. "We are very sorry."
He said officials were taking another sample to get accurate levels, but did not know when the results would be announced.

gratefulforhelp_2

ninky wrote: »

there is a difference between radiation and radioactive isotopes (e.g. iodine 131 and cesium 137). whilst radiation levels may reduce relatively quickly radiocative isotopes once released get into the food chain and cause longterm health problems. radio active isotopes have now been detected in the food chain (and tap water). this is more of a longterm worry than radiation levels tbh.

The real worry is the ingestion of radioactive isotopes and/or particles.

JonnyBravo wrote: »

Yes of course.
It is isotopes such as these that generate radiation.

If this source is IN you it is much more dangerous. Alpha and beta radiation are relatively poorly penetrating types of radiation. If the source is inside you and being concentrated in your thyroid you are not in a nice situation.

Alpha particles are much more dangerous once ingested or inhaled, since they are very ionising and do much more damage.

There is a really good drama on youtube with Ade Edmondson in about Chernobyl.

amcluesent

>so how do they know this<

The readings were in the 10s to 100s of milli-Sieverts. If they had increased by 10 million times, the person measuring it would not be returning to tell anyone as > 10000 mSv is certain death.

vivatifosi

As this remains the most active Japan thread, thought I'd mention tonight's Horizon (just finished) in case anyone fancies catching it on iPlayer. It covers the earthquake, tsunami and a bit about the nuclear emergency, though its focus is on the former two events. Very interesting.