Special Report: Radiation fears may be greatly exaggerated

I went through your convoluted sign up procedure because I had to ask:

Doesn’t Reuters feel even the smallest particle [sic] of complicity and therefore guilt in helping cause the widespread panic even as far as the USA.

I refer you to your articles:
“West Coast radiation risk low, but fears persist” and
“Low radioactivity seen heading towards N.America”.

The constant race to deliver news re Fukushima has seen numerous conflicting and often completely technically inaccurate (re nuclear reactors) reports not to mention apocalyptic insinuations with constant references to TMI and Chernobyl despite experts from all over the planet stating categorically that this “catastrophe” was never going to be another Chernobyl.

I understand that you’re a commercial organisation but when so many other media outlets depend on you surely you must have some sense of responsibilty towards your ‘customers’, the ‘consumers’ of your products?

I’ve been battling against the apocalyptic hyperbole surrounding Fukushima for the last six days via Twitter and Facebook, I’m not a physicist nor a nuclear engineer yet I was able to do some basic research and I taught myself the basics of the technology in a few short hours so that I could have an informed viewpoint.

It’s the race to be first (and to be the most dramatic) that brought the USA and the UK into war with Iraq. Again, I educated myself with regards to WMD and read the freely available UN reports for myself and knew that there were no WMD in Iraq before a single shot had been fired. If I, a relatively simple man, can do this then I expect you can too.

Noel in Cork, Ireland.

Where do I start here to expose the smug complacency of most of the “experts” quoted in this article?

First of all, almost no one was interviewed who is not part of the nuclear establishment and who therefore is not already massively biased in favor of it. These people dread the prospect of that establishment taking a huge P/R hit, resulting is a great loss of business and funding due to the Japan crisis. Therefore, they significantly downplay the risks of radiation. They love to portray ANYONE who is concerned about radiation as uneducated, panic-prone buffoons.

One one point, let me say that the moron “expert” who is quoted as saying the crisis in Japan is nothing like Chernobyl because in Chernobyl you had no containment and the radiation was burning into the open air, shows by his statement that he is absolutely CLUELESS! What does he think the spent fuel rods are doing in Japan? They are burning and releasing high levels of radiation into the open air, because there is no containment left after the multiple hydrogen explosions there. And there are MULTIPLE spent fuel ponds in trouble with burning fuel rods there, whereas the was only one unit involved in Chernobyl.

This entire article smacks of Japan-style propaganda designed to avoid panic and to avoid a very deserved global black eye upon the nuclear power industry.

Sure, there are plenty of uneducated idiots who’ll panic at almost anything in the news. Unfortunately, they make it rough for the rest of us who are reasoned and logical but who don’t blindly trust what the “experts” say just because they are the experts.

One scientist in the article admits that 10% of persons will develop cancer in his lifetime due to background levels of radiation, and that the effects of radiation are cummulative during one’s lifetime. Now, just increase the amount of radiation above the normal background, due to a crisis like Chernobyl and Japan, and extrapolate the results. This usually isn’t like jumping of a high building because unlike that, the consequences of radiation exposure are delayed for years. That fact tends to make “experts” disconnect cause from effect and downplay the risks. If exposure to radiation in the U.S., for example, increases by 5 or 10 or more times the normal background levels, and does so for some months or perhaps a few years, we’re going to hear form these “experts” that it’s inconsequential. It most certainly is not inconsequential. Most studies on Chernobyl were done two decades ago before the longer-term effects had been visible – thus the number of deaths and cancers from that accident are unquestionably grossly understated. I’m not ready to blindly agree with the Russian experts who published a book on the 24th anniversary of Chernobyl and say that the number of deaths is 1 million, but I think it needs to be carefully looked at. Their conclusion is much more scientific than the ones that estimate only a few thousand deaths over the last 25 years.

People – think for yourselves and research it for yourselves, don’t put unjustifiable faith in these “experts” who most often than not have an agenda that severely minimizes your interests in favor of their own careers and livelihood in the nuclear industry.

“At that level, residents were exposed to 0.809 microsieverts per hour — 1,000 times less than a millisievert, or about 10 times less than a chest X-ray.”

this means, it equals taking an x-ray every 10 hours, right? and thats no reason for concern?

Sorry – I mistated the percentage of those who will get cancer from background radiation. I said “10%” and I meant to say “1%”. Sorry for this error.

@NukerDogger…for one the article said 1 out of 100 people will die as a result of cancer from background radiation, not 10%.

Look it is real simple, if here in the USA (or more then 20 or so miles from site in Japan) and you are worried about the effects of this accident, you need to put your fears in perspective. Do you know how many people die in car accidents each year? Accidental Shootings? home Accidents? I can tell you it ALOT more then # that going to die from this. You have a million more times chance of dieing in your shower then suffering any effects from this accident, are you going to stop taking showers now?

The fear of the unknown is a knee jerk human reaction, use your logical brains and you can get by it.

I don’t wish to be cynical, but this piece feels like an attempt to manage public opinion more than an informative piece that sheds new light on the dangerous situations Japan (and the world) face with nuclear power stations.

Nobody has even mentioned they will stop using X-rays. So why does Kemper float this nonsense? Does he have such little respect for the general public and assumes we are stupid as to reject medical treatments because there is radiation involved?

We are hyper concerned when it comes to nuclear power and all industrial accidents for that matter when the legacy of this mismanagement is passed down to all future generations. We only have one planet. It has to last the human race FOREVER.

Radioactive plutonium, cesium, and the radioactive waste from nuclear power plants CANNOT be exaggerated. This stuff is the most toxic, car cinogenic on this planet. True, we may not die off it immediately, however be assured,cancer rates WILL skyrocket in the future. These Plants should have never been allowed, what we are seeing now is the power of money, corruption and lobbying efforts (bribes), with their earth be damned attitude. Our beautiful planet has been ruined by greedy corporations.

Beam me up scotty, theres no intelligent life down here.

This is what I’ve been trying to explain for some time. Unfortunately the physics, even at the overview level, and the biological issues, ditto, are a little more complex than the typical information relevant to the public.

As it happens, I am a survivor of thyroid cancer due to exposure to radioactive iodine around age 12. The cancer appeared 9 years ago, when I was 50. It was treated, successfully, with surgery, radioactive iodine, which I had to ingest, and radiation treatments. As expected, I have had no sign of recurrence.

The fact that I was made ill, some 40 years after exposure, by a radioactive substance that entered my body — and then was cured, in part, by more of that very same radioactive substance, and also by more radiation which was beamed at my body from a powerful and precise machine — illustrates some of the natural confusion surrounding this subject. Untangling so many strands of scientific knowledge and medical technology is a genuine challenge for journalists, even those who specialize in science news.

seeit360, the planet will recover fine from whatever we do to it, the question is will the human race survive? In this specific case the answer is CLEARLY yes, unless things change dramatically the effects will be local only.

One of the worst things about this nuclear incident is how it has distracted the general public from the true suffering of hundreds of thousands who lost it all and the death of over 10,000 people. All because, in general, the public is so uneducated on nuclear issues.

So Reuters finally admits it is ‘overblown’? But that is what I have been telling you all in various forums since very early in this incident.

Thank you @cybernoelie. My family overseas was so worried. I’ve spent the past week just trying to get them to calm down. There seriously needs to be more reporting of facts and less sensationalism in the news. Reuters, msnbc, and cnn in particular have to take some responsibility for some of the panic that was spreading in the Tokyo region. I am so, so disappointed in the media.

@USAPragmatist, I agree that the public is horribly undereducated in general. But this particular topic is genuinely complex and confusing. It is very natural for people to have a difficult time dealing with questions related to radiation exposure.

USAPragmatist: The logic of your position is that it doesn’t matter what we do or what increases in health risks result from what we do. I’d call that denial. Thus, you’re the flip side of the ‘panic-over-everything’ crowd. Neither extreme is desirable.

NukerDoggie
WRONG WRONG WRONG!!

Thanks to add your IGNORANCE to the panic
Chernobyl was a disaster because they actually had the rods explode WITH the containment.
What do I think is happening there- I think they are EXPOSEd are burining but with mostly water vapor with short lived radioactive particles.
The REAL issue is with the reactor that has Plutonium that has the possibility of releasing particles that ARE NOT short lived.

There is a difference between radioactive particles AND radiation.

cyberleptic wrote:
”
“At that level, residents were exposed to 0.809 microsieverts per hour — 1,000 times less than a millisievert, or about 10 times less than a chest X-ray.”

this means, it equals taking an x-ray every 10 hours, right? and thats no reason for concern?”

NO IT ISNT! Its like saying the Sun/clear is hot today so dont go to the beach and lay out for 1 hour or you will get a sunburn ( technically a radiation burn!!) If the sun were to be 1/10 the possible strength and be prolonged for over 10 hours instead of 1, you would NOT get a sunburn. Human bodies can tolerate a certain amount of radiation!

So knock off the panic already!!!

This writer has it completely wrong. It is level 5 now and that means evacuate 50 miles for US. Japan is keeking it at 20 miles because people have nowhere to go. They are stuck there with radiation. Level 6 and they should evacuate Tokyo. level 7 is up to 500 miles like Chernobyl. Are they? No.

Pragmatist, If I fall in the shower or crash my vehicle, these are risks I was willing to take. Nuclear poisoning is a risk I am NOT willing to take. You did not even touch on the problem of getting rid of nuclear waste, a problem that has no solution.

jabberwolf: – talk about IGNORANCE! Your’s is legendary. You admit the spent rods are burning in the open air, then proceed to make the incredible statement that the radiation from those rods is short-lived! You couldn’t be more wrong!

For but one element they are spewing – cesium 137. Half-life of about 30 years, and emitting gamma radiation all the while. Gamma is the more potent particle, in case you didn’t know. 30+ years is not what I would call short-lived. It’s plenty of time to cause real health effects. The plutonium half-life is about 24,100 years. Agreed – much worse. But yet again we have a pro-nuclear advocate dishonestly downplaying the risks of what’s happening in Japan. You guys really pound the pavement with your “Don’t Panic!” drumbeat. ANYTHING that puts nuclear power in a questionable or bad light is defined by you guys as “panic”. How convenient! You HATE the fact that your nuclear orthodoxy is threatening to come crashing down around your heads!

Hey jabberwolf, you’re the guy that’s panicked.

Jabberwolf, I think you are the ignorant one here. When you say “What do I think is happening there- I think they are EXPOSEd are burining but with mostly water vapor with short lived radioactive particles”, I have no idea what you mean. What is burning? Burning is a chemical reaction; nuclear decay is not a chemical reaction. So you think that there are no gamma rays being output from the waste piles? In that case, why dont you volunteer to go in there with a lead shield and fix the water pumps yourself? A lead shield should protect you from the alpha/beta particles!

Well said NukerDoggie!

@NukerDoggie:

Where do I start to break down your completely emotional tirade you have unleashed on the rest of us.

(University of California Davis): Part of the nuclear establishment, really? Where are your facts on this one because being in California quite near Davis I would LOVE to see your facts. The industry has already taken a huge P/R hit, it has done so throughout its history. I have news for you, its not going anywhere – those nuclear submarines/carriers that allow you to sleep in your bomb shelter at night are in it for the long run. China have squarely stated they will not stop their nuclear program because of this – and India have reassured all that their plants are safe.

They have not at all “downplayed” the risks as you suggest, they are merely stating that radiation levels are not anywhere near the level of say, a Chernobyl. Radiation is bad in large doses, in small doses it’s all around you – go play eat a banana for your daily dose.

The crisis in Japan is absolutely nothing like Chernobyl. I’m not an expert but I spent the time to study the differences which are quite simple. The Japanese reactors were “SCRAMED” or shutdown, which means the nuclear chain reaction had been stopped leaving only heat to contend with. At the Chernobyl plant the reactor was operating above design spec at the time of accident and the reaction was still going on. This is also known as a critical accident because the reactor was critical when it occurred.

The reactor pool has spent fuel in it which is all not ‘critical’ nor could it become so. They are keeping the pool in water and in fact are taking heroic efforts to do so. So that alone means that technically speaking this is not like Chernobyl at all, in a worst case scenario in Japan it would not equal a best case scenario in Chernobyl.

They are releasing radiation into the air from the recovery process. But my friend, radiation dissipates very quickly and the only levels of radiation that are dangerous at this stage are at the facility itself which is what we want. Now lets go on to the math lesson of this, 1 in 100 is not equal to 10% but I realize you are a “reasoned” person here (your word not mine) so lets redo the math okay? How many 1’s make up 100?

Now for your fear mongering regarding the long term effects of radiation. Shall we? There are a number of studies on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, Chernobyl and even our favorite here in America Three Mile Island that suggest the rates of cancer are not significant. In fact, if you were paying attention you would have noticed that the New York Times produced an article today that suggested that a staggering 65 out of 12,500 people who were children during Chernobyl and lived there developed thyroid cancer, which I might add is one of the most treatable forms of cancer. Care to do the math for me, no never mind, less than a percent. This study has been ongoing and just released this week I believe, strategically likely by a pro nuclear group (aka National Cancer Institute). If you would like me to go into Nagasaki and Hiroshima to demonstrate the long term effects of the type of radiation that is many times worse than Fukushima or probably Chernobyl let me know.

That’s right people think for yourselves, don’t believe Physicists and Scientists and for gods sake do not listen to that Pro-Nuclear anti-Green establishment the University of California. Listen to people like fallout shelter here and construct your own lead sarcophagus and place yourself square into it because these guys are lying to you, since you can’t see radiation you cannot detect it!

“This means, it equals taking an x-ray every 10 hours, right?”

No.

Chest X-Ray (each) = 0.020000 MILLI Sv
Tokyo (per hour) = .809 MICRO Sv = 0.000809 MILLI Sv

.02 / .000809 = a chest X-ray is 24.72 times more powerful than the Tokyo hourly dosage. So staying in Tokyo for a full day is still less than a single chest X-ray.

Normal background radiation is equivalent to a chest X-ray every 2.5 days. This means current levels in Tokyo are approximately 2.5 times stronger than normal. Which is still not much, so no big concern yet.

Typical dosages based on data from fda.gov –
http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/RadiationEmittingProductsandProcedures/MedicalImaging/MedicalX-Rays/ucm115329.htm

Oh, and by the way, the spent fuel rods also contain plutonium and are spewing this into the air as they overheat and burn. Plutonium is a by-product of uranium fission, and is present in the spent fuels rods whether the plutonium-containing MOX fuel was used or not. So we’ve undoubtedly already got plutonium (half-life=24,100 years) spewing into the environment.

But there’s no need to PANIC!!!! Right??? Oh, sorry – saying ANYTHING against nuclear power is the same as PANIC. That’s the way the self-ordained Priests of Nuclear define it, anyway.

IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano:

“We don’t have concerns at the moment both in Japan and, if not in Japan, clearly more widely for human health. If the situation changed dramatically, then we’d have to make a reassessment.”

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=37816&Cr=japan&Cr1

NukerDoggie,
I don’t think you understand science or how nuclear power actually works. What you are spewing is panic and alarmist crap. Several people have tried to explain the situation to you at varying levels of complexity and you just keep ignoring it.

This is not Chernobyl, this is nothing like Chernobyl. Chernobyl was a flawed and dangerous design which caused an entirely different accident. This may be a little more serious than TMI but if you actually researched TMI it was an issue for the people who worked at the plant and less for the surrounding people. If the engineers can get water back into the pool and cool the rods, this incident is over. Water stops radiation well. Its why the repairs inside those pools are done by scuba divers.

@NukerDoggie

Do you happen to be from Coal country? Or perhaps another state with a vested interest in the return to fossil fuels as our main source of base load energy? Because I have to say I am not part of the lobby you claim any of us presenting facts are but you sure do seem to have an agenda that is fueled by emotions.

Anyway. Uranium Fission is what happens in a nuclear reaction, according to the propaganda from the Japanese Nuclear Agency, IAEA, NRC and even Air Force drone pictures and measurements a nuclear reaction is not occurring in the “SPENT” rod pool. The nuclear reactions were stopped immediately at all power plants effected by the quake by a reactor shutdown.

So, how since there is no reaction going on in the spent fuel does that = Plutonium. Stop spreading misinformation already.

Interesting tidbit – the Nuclear Fission that you speak of like its a horrible and most terrible thing has been found occurring in nature: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_nuclear_fission_reactor

djlowballer & friends: You don’t think the Mark I is a dangerous and flawed design??? The GE-3 engineers who know a hell of a lot more than you do disagree with you. This reactor is a piece of garbage design from the 1970s. I suggest you put your money where your mouth is and go to Fukashima and hang out in the evacuation zone, ok? I’ll buy your tickets. Your rant against me offers no facts, no science, no logic, beyond your blind assertion that ‘it’s not so bad and it will all be fixed soon’. Go to the Fukashima site, breathe deep, and then come back here and we’ll debate your health.

Good that the radiation levels from Fukushima that have reached California aren’t at a dangerous level.

What’s startling is that the radiation is there – world wide within a week. So, if we have a really bad disaster anywhere in the Northern hemisphere we have nowhere to hide. We’re all at risk, dependant on the weakest link.

Well, are the risks greatly exaggerated? I see in the medical press that doctors are generally puzzled as to why there is, what they term, a “cancer epidemic”, they’re looking for an explanation of why there are so many more cancers than in the past. Better reporting? Longer lives? Food additives? Who knows? But maybe, just maybe, it’s the increasing low level radiation that we’re all getting.

Also for those knowing commentators (like our friends here) who say it’s over-reacting to call Fukushima Chernobyl-like. Well, yes… Chernobyl didn’t have tons and tons of spent fuel stored above its reactors in open tanks, chernobyl was only 1 reactor melting down, not 4 melting down, Chernobyl was in a deserted area, not next to 26 million people and the core of a good percentage of the world’s economy. So it’s clear it’s not a Chernobyl level incident – thank goodness, we can all rest easy.

@forsetiboston you said:

“They are releasing radiation into the air from the recovery process. But my friend, radiation dissipates very quickly and the only levels of radiation that are dangerous at this stage are at the facility itself which is what we want. Now lets go on to the math lesson of this, 1 in 100 is not equal to 10% but I realize you are a “reasoned” person here (your word not mine) so lets redo the math okay? How many 1’s make up 100?”

So you think the Japanese government is was playing a big joke when they forced everyone within a 20 mile radius to evacuate their homes and go into shelters that dont have adequate food, water or heat? Also, your math skills that you boast of, and which took you about 3 hours to figure out, were earlier corrected by NukerDoggie within about 20 minutes of his original post!

Also, regarding your vaunted “research” on long term effects of radiation – you are saying there were only 12,500 children within the population of 336,000 that were resettled (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster)? 4% seems an unrealistic number of people under the age of 18 in a random population. Care to provide some of the sources for this “research”?

Bottomline: Nuclear energy is not viable or necessary. It’s too dangerous and has been rammed through by greedy corporations (GE).

Shut them down and concrete over them NOW.

@dlweld: I would speculate that the increase in cancer rates is a combination of all the factors you mentioned. I would even agree with your case about increase in low level radiation, but I would say that it is more from decrease of the ozone layer, rather than radiation emanating from nuclear plants. In general nuclear plants are safe. But Fukushima at the moment is not! I think the Japanese government is severely downplaying the actual risks.

Those criticizing the reassuring voices (including my own) are missing an important point. We are trying to be reassuring in order to avoid frightening the Japanese public too much. It may already be too late to avoid an overdose of fear, but the fact is that fear is at least as damaging as radiation. Some people, especially in Japan, will probably be frightened about this incident for the rest of their lives!

As a 9-year survivor of radioactive-iodine induced thyroid cancer, I can tell you that it’s a bad thing to have, but it’s definitely not worth lying in bed worrying about for 30 years. Thyroid cancer is overwhelmingly curable.

On the contrary, radiation fears are customarily overlooked, or else humans wouldn’t be subject to so much of it: at dentists’ and doctors’ offices, in airports, via electronics. After Bush the elder’s war on Iraq the International Red Cross estimated that 45 percent of children under age four in the area around Basra developed leukemia, which the Red Cross attributed to the US’s use of depleted uranium. In Bush junior’s war on Iraq American forces used more than twice the amount as in the first conflict.

A couple facts on some of the above comments:

1. As mentioned, all the reactors went into shutdown (i.e. were scram’ed) at the time the earthquake happened. But a shutdown stops only the primary nuclear reaction from happening, by cutting off the flow of neutrons that split uranium or plutonium atoms. The primary nuclear reaction produces so-called “daughter” products that undergo further nuclear reactions (decay) all on their own, without needing neutrons. These secondary nuclear reactions continue for a few days, continuing to produce heat during this time (though not as much as from the primary reaction). This is why the coolant flow being cut off so soon after the main reaction shutdown is causing such problems — there’s still a fair amount of heat that has to be gotten rid of before the reactor is truly in a “cold shutdown” state.

2. The fire that was burning at Chernobyl was produced by the graphite (carbon) blocks that made up the structure of the reactor itself. When the reactor blew, it shattered these blocks and mixed them with the melted uranium fuel and radioactive daughter products. Some of the mixture was thrown into the air directly and landed on the ground for miles around the plant. The rest started on fire. When this mixture burned (graphite burns very hot, much like pure charcoal), it produced a smoke made up of particles of the radioactive products. This fire burned in the open air, completely uncovered, for several days.

The “fires” at the Japan reactors are nothing like the one that raged at Chernobyl. They are fairly enclosed and not made up of burning graphite. It was the graphite burning that caused the emission of particles to be much worse at Chernobyl.

Randy549:

Well said! My concern is that the Japanese government may not be giving the clear picture, or they may just not know the reality. How do you see the outcome of the spent fuel masses coagulating at the bottom of the tanks, without any water covering? That is certainly a possible scenario.

What I find enlightening here is that my debate rivals are far, far more concerned with what I’m saying than they are with the radiation spewing from the reactors in Japan. My rivals use such words as “spewing” as in spewing radiation, but they never, ever use such words with regard to the radiation, but only with regard to my words. Isn’t that interesting? They severely downplay the radiation, using terms like “harmless” and “short-lived” and so on. But they vehemently attack my posts as if they are plutonium-laced. Why are these people so much on the defensive? So much so that they feel they must discredit me in any way they can, especially by personal attacks? Anyone here can re-read my posts to see the scientific references and facts I have used. True, I also have thrown their personal attacks back at them. No regrets.

Randy549: Regardless of the wishful thinking that says this crisis simply cannot equal Chernobyl, no one can truly make that assurance because we’re largely in uncharted territory. Six reactors and many tons of spent fuel all at serious risk of burning into the open air for days, weeks and perhaps months longer – every possibility of more fires and explosions – how much of what’s ALREADY happened was seen as possible or probable by the experts? If I had predicted in detail five days ago exactly what’s already happened up to today, all of you would have called me a panic-monger. Why can’t you pro-nuclear people even admit that the chances are pretty good, better than 50%, of an even worse crisis? There are several nightmare scenarios that could well occur if efforts to cool the reactors and the spent fuel fail, and realistically the chances of success aren’t that good. The reactors and their fuel ponds could spew harmful radiation for weeks until they can be cooled down enough to be buried, for example.

If they can detect particles as far away from Japan as California then there is too much radiation contamination. Since they can detect these particles in California which is so far away from Japan and because the particles and radation contamination will spread around the world over the next few weeks there is cause for concern and in some cases – alarm. Perhaps now American will consider how foolhardy it is to have 80 percent of their fruit and vegetables being produced in one or two valleys in California instead of in their own home state.

Oh, and I forgot to answer the question about my supposed bias on this issue. I live in the U.S. I am not nor have I ever been an anti-nuclear activist. I have been in IT for 38 years. I am a software developer and tester for one of the big-3 telecoms. I am 58 years old and in excellent health. I have a great sense of humor according to all my friends. I have a rather sharp and biting wit, according to them. I cannot bear disingenuous people with a hidden agenda. My views on this issue are driven exclusively by the facts – that means that, while I am intensely respectful of nuclear technology itself, and believe it is profoundly useful and ingenuous, I fundamentally distrust the qualifications of those administering it in the real world. I think they tend to be smug and intellectually dishonest and lazy. With nuclear technology, this simply cannot be permitted. The stupid drunks at Chernobyl were a particularly notable example of this – however, they certainly don’t represent the nuclear industry at large. Yet, I will say again that those administering the technology are too devious, intellectually lazy and they make far too many convenient assumptions – just as those posters here have often done that support nuclear power. There is a culture of complacency that leads to terrible mistakes in design, construction and operation. Until this culture is changed, and the technology matures somewhat more, nuclear power won’t be safe.

NukerDoggie:

I dont think this one would rival Chernobyl because
1. Japan is not a cash-starved impoverished nation as USSR was back in ‘86.
2. As forsetiboston pointed out earlier, the “active” (chain) reaction was stopped at the onset of the crisis, unlike Chernobyl.

Having said that, I also realize that the sheer number of reactors involved in this case overwhelms the Chernobyl incident, and indeed, now there is already talk of burying the mess with a 20 mile “off limits” sign around it. I personally think that would be a bad idea; I “feel” it would come back to bite them in the rear end at some point in time, because there is such a big probability that something will go wrong in the process. Japan is not too big, and pollution of groundwater, as it happened in Chernobyl, would be devastating to them. Just my $0.02.

What I want people to consider here is that the Japan crisis, though very unlikely to be able to spew ALL AT ONCE the same amount of radiation that Chernobyl did in a very short span of time, still has the very real possibility of spewing at least as much and far more, over a longer span of time than Chernobyl did. Authorities are now saying that making a sarcophagus for the 6 reactors is not possible. This means that they will be forced to resolve matters at each one of the reactors and their spent fuel ponds, and this is greatly complicated by the radiation spewing out of the buildings. Compared to Chernobyl, this is like a slow burn of the nuclear materials. OVER TIME the amount of radiation may equal, and even exceed, that released at Chernobyl. It’s “toxicity” (meaning a lot of things, like how much of it is plutonium, etc) could well equal that at Chernobyl. What I’m trying to get people to think about is the net effects of the crisis as far as how much radiation gets released and how widespread it might be. If we get more fires and more explosions then this would only increase the level of the crisis. Regardless of whether or not the active fission reaction was/is ongoing or not (and in Japan it is not), there are many other factors contributing to the amount of net release of harmful radiation. I’m trying to get these people to think outside the very small and well-defined box they are used to thinking inside of. This is crucial if we’re ever going to see nuclear energy mature.

By the way, my moniker has never had anything to do with nuclear. My Siberian Husky/Alaskan Malamute mix is named Tanuka, and we call him by the nickname “Nuker”.

@Nuker: Also, the danger posed by nuclear radiation has more to do with the time span than the amount. An amount that could kill you if received in an hour would be unnoticeable if received over a lifetime. In other words, a “slow burn” has the potential to be infinitely less dangerous than a Chernobyl type disaster where things get released quickly.

People and statistics have a torrid history. I’d rather play it safe and wear a face mask. Alpha particles are the most destructive ionizing radiation known. What media isn’t saying is that people win the lottery all the time. The risks aren’t one in a quintillion; they are in the millions at best. Anyone should have the right to be concerned. I doubt anyone wants to ingest alpha particles that end up in bone marrow inevitably mutating DNA. Especially since alpha particles and DNA attract. Wear a face mask this weekend; at least on the West Coast.

It would be much easier to believe “the experts” if, at the beginning of this crisis there weren’t “experts” at MIT who claimed in the very first emphasized sentence of their statement that there was absolutely zero chance of radiation being released during this event, and if a report published two days ago by other “experts” saying we had “a few weeks” before the spent fuels pools would run out of water. If there is plenty of water in the pools, where is the hydrogen coming from that caused these massive explosions?

If there is no radiation risk, in Japan, why are they asking for volunteers? Why the 30 km exclusion zone? Why can’t they just walk up to these building to spray water on them? Why are there lead plates on the helicopters? Why are the helicopters flying by rather than hovering over the reactors? Why are/were they racing up to the front gate in a car to get radiation levels? Is there some Star Trek inspired force field around these reactors?

And lets not forget, we are talking about radiation exposures that are in addition to normal background radiation, not in place of them. We are also talking about accumulated exposure, not simply one second out of one day.

I don’t believe Americans have much to worry about, but I could be wrong, but I am concerned for the Japanese population, down wind, which ever direction that ends up being.

The true experts are those who say right up front, we simply don’t know enough to make a accurate prediction. We truly are in totally uncharted territory, operating at best, based on education guesses. This isn’t TMI or Chernobyl, it is its own unique event.

I don’t have a link to the MT article. Here is the statement about the water levels http://resources.nei.org/documents/japan/Used_Fuel_Pools_Key_Facts_March_16_Update.pdf

@forsetiboston “(University of California Davis): Part of the nuclear establishment, really? Where are your facts on this one because being in California quite near Davis I would LOVE to see your facts.”

Yes, really! For facts you could look at wikipedia. Who do you think operates Los Alamos National Labs and LBL (Lawrence BERKELEY Lab)?

But why shouldn’t you take on a sarcastic and patronizing tone about things you don’t understand?

I’m getting really tired of irrational pro-nuclear activists trying to shut down discussion.

nafhan: The slow burn in Japan is still going to be measured only in a time period of weeks and perhaps months, so that is still a pretty compressed period of time with respect to the releasing of radiation into the air. Once released, the radiation will accumulate in soil, water and will permeate the air and winds will spread it. Only the iodine will dissipate quickly. The other isotopes could very well build up to levels possibly equaling, or even exceeding those from Chernobyl. The plutonium from the high number of MOX spent fuel rods is especially worrisome. Once this radiation is deposited, it will remain a real concern – if the slow burn lasts long enough (weeks) and the volume of isotopes spewing from the site is great enough over that period of slow burn. So a slow burn scenario does not represent less of a threat, unless the total volume of radiation is quite small. The amount of radiation coming out of the site per day can be very much less than Chernobyl, but if that slow burn lasts for weeks, then its net cumulative pollution could get close to that of Chernobyl, or even exceed it.

I have to agree thoroughly with cybernoelle.

Reuter’s headline writers – through the breadth of this disaster – reflect the looney fringe of enviros. A category I consider myself part of for 40+ years. Ecology activist that is – not the fringe nutters.

The science, of even just the release is VERY complicated! Chemical reactions, and nuclear ones too — yes, even in the storage pools. Why do you think the pools have to be cooled? Because the ->ongoing

What I want to know is how much fallout going to be getting into the topsoil of the croplands on a permanent basis. The iodine will decay quickly, the other material may mean those whose food is mostly local will simply have to stop eating anything grown there.

I don’t know the answers, but somebody should look into it. And it ain’t over till it’s over. They haven’t fixed those reactors yet.

Here’s a question: Why was the tap water in Tokyo and 9 other prefectures showing iodine 131 contamination? Are the reservoirs nearer to Fukushima? And does it mean that radioactive particles (fallout)came down into those water supplies by clouds/rain?

Here’s another question: Comparing CAT scans or bananas isn’t really accurate since the population of Tokyo would be contaminated by particles in the air/water. So we’d ingest it. Correct me if I’m wrong but ingesting even the smallest amount of radioactive contamination is harmful to health, right?

Thanks.
RobbieinTokyo

Ralphooo, do you mind me asking how did you become exposed to iodine 131 at the age of 9? Was it a medical accident?

Thanks.

You can ingest minute amounts of radioactive isotopes without immediate ill effects. If the amount is very minute you may not be able to directly trace the ingestion to any ill effects in your lifetime. However, there is still a debate about the levels that can be ingested without harm. Many factors come into play. Age, general health, other exposures like x-ray, etc. The effects of radiation tend to be cummulative. The particular isotopes matter a lot. Some, like iodine, dissipate completely in a few weeks. But others, like Cesium, take 2 years to a lifetime to dissipate significantly. And plutonium’s most common isotope has a half-life of 24,100 years. Whether the isotope(s) you’ve ingested are alpha, beta or gamma radiation sources matters quite a bit. Gamma is the most worrisome of the 3 because of the high level of energy emitted into the tissues. No sane person wants to do anything to increase his exposure to radiation because the effects are cummulative.

Ingested/inhaled radiation does pose a much greater risk, assuming the amount ingested is not merely a very minute amount. Government and Utility claims to the effect that “there’s no risk” need to be carefully examined and guaged with factors I mentioned, as well as the length of exposure one is enduring. After all, being exposed to a certain level of radiation for 1 hour is not the same as being exposed to that same level of radiation for 1 month.

Officials are understandably trying to avoid panic. But you’ve got to tell people the full truth, not half-truths or outright misinformation and lies. Too little details are being disclosed about the levels, isotopes and what is considered safe and for how long (time of exposure). The public needs to be educated, not propagandized. They are being propagandized to some extent by officials, and also by calamity howlers who scream that the planet is doomed. Let’s educate.

In view of what’s happening now at Fukushima, how about changing the title to, “Projected Radiation Contaminations were Greatly Under-Exaggerated by the Experts”