- 353
- irishfan311
Here's MIT's Nuclear Science and Engineering website. It is a great resource of facts to help people understand what is happening.
They aren't talking about to evacuate the population yet but the situation is not easy.Japan rushes to cool reactor TOKYO - Japanese military helicopters and fire trucks poured water on an overheating nuclear facility on Thursday and the plant operator said electricity to part of the crippled complex could be restored in a desperate bid to avert catastrophe.
Washington and other foreign capitals expressed growing alarm about radiation leaking from the earthquake-shattered plant, 240 km (150 miles) north of Tokyo. The United States said it was sending aircraft to help Americans leave Japan.
"The situation continues to be very serious," International Atomic Energy Agency chief Yukiya Amano told reporters at Vienna airport as he left with a group of nuclear experts for Japan.
Processing for travel docs free for Pinoys in Japan
French embassy urges citizens to leave Tokyo area in case radiation reaches city
German Embassy recommends Germans with children to leave Tokyo/Yokohama area
News are saying that, not me. I'm looking forward to read better news in the next days, really. I hope they find a solution.
About your weak comments. Leave the thread? Get out?
What's that? Seriusly. I've only posted links to actual news.
Here you go: Nagasaki survivor: People seem 'too sensitive'News are saying that, not me. I'm looking forward to read better news in the next days, really.
To give him the benefit of the doubt all those stories are about the possible risks now. They all are based on worst case scenarios, but they are relevant.Our weak comments? You mean raining on your parade of "Nuclear power will kill us all?"
You haven't addressed a single point anyone has made in here. You are just trying to poor gasoline on an issue you've fanned into flames.
Make a new thread, or at least try to have a discussion. Otherwise, you might as well be Fox News or any other sensationalist reporting agency.
They don't have a concrete embedment as far as I know, it's a pretty old design with just a steel vessel. A lot of old plants have that and it's a huge issue, one of the reasons why they've shut down some of the plants here in Germany now, to check if they are really safe.
Radiations? Hazard of Nuclear? I am assuming these odd bits of grammar are from English being a second language? Read this.
Here you go: Nagasaki survivor: People seem 'too sensitive'
She survived being 3.6km away from the bomb. Doesn't get the panic while she sits in Tokyo now.
Not all radiation is equal ... radiation emitted from bananas (because of the Potassium in bananas) are betas.
But you can't use these examples to play down the dangerousness of the situation. Just look how much people died around Chernobyl on cancer or watch the vid's on YouTube about mutated newborns.
Lots of fear-mongering in the media, lots of misinformation, etc.
The main particle emission from Fukishima are iodine 131 and Caesium 137, both of which are Beta sources.
They have, according to this article, that shows a typical BWR Mark 1 reactor:
http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/13/fukushima-simple-explanation/
Since the initial design as been superseded to Mark 2 and 3, I believe some modifications were made to the Mark 1 reactor.
Thing is, I don't really know the conditions inside the containment and if the reports of the core being partially uncovered are true. But even if they are, I think they wouldn't cause much trouble. The problem now is the cooling pools to cool the fuel.
This article is also pretty interesting:
http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/energy/26524/
There have been several follow-ups on that site since then. Professor Brook is somewhat "pro-nuclear" so be sure to extract the "facts" and recognise the parts that are mere opinion. He appears to have a decent level of integrity, though.
Here's his summary as of the 17th of March (AU).
There have been several follow-ups on that site since then. Professor Brook is somewhat "pro-nuclear" so be sure to extract the "facts" and recognise the parts that are mere opinion. He appears to have a decent level of integrity, though.
Here's his summary as of the 17th of March (AU).
When i take a look at the two images from your link:
Reactor 4 & 3 (the 2 from the left) are both ruins and visible nearly completely detroyed.
Using the first picture as reference, i can't locate the reactor vessels in the scrap heap in picture two where they should be.
Or are the reactor vessels in Fukushima placed a bit "deeper" in the underground?
What you can see as damage is what is labelled as "Refuelling Bay" on the first image. If there was an appropriate angle, you would be able to see the top of the reactor (which will be capped with a 3-foot thick concrete lid).
Sorry, but reading your post makes me think you've seen what is happening in Japan and decided to take an anti-nuclear stance without actually knowing anything about the subject.These are the human limits, thinking a powerful earthquake is just a "convergence of everything going wrong". We all need to understand everytime you create a Nuclear power plant there will be always a percentage of risks. Humans can't control earthquakes they can just hope those phenomenons aren't strong enough to cause massive damages. Planet Earth don't give a damn if we created Nuclear powerplants everywhere. If Planet Earth need to move, it will do it, no matter how many Nuclear Stations we've installed all around the world. Stating "Nuclear power is actually very safe" doesn't make too much sense. Even a car is safe is you don't crash, a motorbike is safe, until you don't fall dawn.. but a car and a motorbike cannot create massive radiations when they crash. Nuclear is too dangerous if something goes wrong.
mattymc96Apparently I'm not sure about the tidal tsunami bit but that's how I interpreted it. But Sky News say it's been verified by NASA and it's the biggest tidal effect caused by the moon since 1993.
The combined effect of the Sun and Moon on Earth's oceans, the tide, is greatest when the Moon is new or full.[5] Full Moons during lunar perigees (such as in the case of supermoons) exert an even stronger tidal force, resulting in more extreme high and low tides, but even at their most powerful this force is still considerably weak.[6]