Tohoku Earthquake, Tsunami and Nuclear Disaster!!!

[Yokohammer]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spent_fuel_pool

Check the topic on risks and criticality.

The biggest take-home from that is

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission estimates that many of the nuclear power plants in the United States will be out of room in their spent fuel pools by 2015, most likely requiring the use of temporary storage of some kind.

Yes. this is one of the big unknowns of nuclear power. There is still no effective means of "neutralising" the spent fuel, other than storing it somewhere for however long it takes the radiation to decay to safe levels (i.e. a very, very long time). Storage takes space, requires constant maintenance (i.e. it costs money ... forever), and it is dangerous.

I'm not asking them to plan for n half-lives in the future, even though I probably should, but I am asking them to plan more than three years in advance.

And on that point we are in total agreement.

The thing about the spent fuel handling, transport, storage and eternal babysitting is that it adds so much to the cost of nuclear power that even without disasters it is considerably more expensive than the pro-nuclear people would like us to believe.

[Russell]

when some of those fuel rods start to burn.

OK, I'll bite. What makes you think some of the fuel rods might start to burn?

So, why do you think they cool these fuel rods in the first place?

[Russell]

Also my understanding was that fuel rod casings are pretty damn difficult to set alight.

Do you think there are still intact casings of fuel rods that have melted down? (which is the case in at least three of the four reactor vessels).

Even worse, those casings tend to corrode when in contact with sea water, which some of them were.

[Russell]

Seriously, this spent fuel removal thing is going to be delicate, even if there's no actual "burning" involved.

There, you have no argument from me: it is not going to be an easy task and I'm not entirely sure anyone has the skills necessary for it. However, much of the (for want of a better word and I know it is a biased expression) "woo-niverse" seems to be fixated on this fire in the fuel rod issue, which is why I specified that bit of Russell's post. I suppose they are looking at that because they see it as a mechanism for radiation to be carried beyond the local area, so it gives them permission to be worried about it. Rather than just being concerned about simply moving the fuel rods, as you (correctly, in my opinion) are. In a way, it strikes me as a very selfish concern -- it almost looks like they are only worried about something if it has a potential impact on themselves.

I can't follow your reasoning. You are probably trying to project yourself on others again.

I will spell it out for you.

The big challenge is to make these pools and reactor vessels stable in the coming four decades (or longer).

For this to accomplish, the fuel rods need to be removed.

The fuel rods in the storage pools are the easy part. As Hammer pointed out, it is an extremely difficult job, because all the infrastructure to do so (i.e. computer-controlled cranes etc) has been destroyed in the nuclear disaster in 2011. So, there is plenty that can go wrong, especially since it has never been done before. The good part is that Japanese tend to be VERY SKILLED in doing very precise work by hand, so let's hope they will pull off this job successfully.

Now the hard part: the (partly) melted down fuel rods in the reactor vessels are inaccessible, because they are very radioactive and nobody knows exactly the situation inside the reactor vessels. It is possible that they will be unable to remove those rods. In that case they have to entomb those vessels. Are they sure that this tomb (likely made of concrete) can stay intact for decades? And how can they manage the ground water and ocean contamination problem. Continue in the way they do now?

Finally, if anything goes wrong (due to some natural disaster or whatever reason), there is a potential for these rods to ignite. I do not see what is selfish in being worried about that.

[wagyl]

when some of those fuel rods start to burn.

OK, I'll bite. What makes you think some of the fuel rods might start to burn?

So, why do you think they cool these fuel rods in the first place?

What temperature range are they in now after more than three years removed from the reactor core? What temperature range are they likely to become if removed from the pool? And what temperature do they require to combust? This is what doesn't add up for me and why I wonder about the fire fixation.

[Russell]

when some of those fuel rods start to burn.

OK, I'll bite. What makes you think some of the fuel rods might start to burn?

So, why do you think they cool these fuel rods in the first place?

What temperature range are they in now after more than three years removed from the reactor core? What temperature range are they likely to become if removed from the pool? And what temperature do they require to combust? This is what doesn't add up for me and why I wonder about the fire fixation.

You didn't answer the question.

There must be some reason they cool those guys, right?

[Yokohammer]

Wagyl, let's just make up a worst-case scenario for the sake of argument.

The spent-fuel pool was damaged in the 3.11 earthquake/tsunami, but not to the point that it leaked (or not much, as far as we know). "They" say they've patched up the pool, and they've built an enclosure around it. But we can assume that it is compromised in some way. Now, supposin' there's a large aftershock of the 3.11 quake. Say 7.0 at the epicenter, which just happens to be shallow and off the Fukushima coast. And supposin' that shake-up is enough to create a crack in the pool that drains it while causing the spent fuel rods it contains to fall in a pile.

I'm making this up as I go, obviously, but I don't think anything I'm imagining is less likely than what has already happened.

If my imagined scenario happens, I'm pretty sure you're going to have some serious nuclear fission happening in what is essentially an open-top box. That is going to be very nasty indeed. And very, very hot. Stuff is going to burn and chances are that a huge amount of radiation will be released into the atmosphere.

Again, I'm just making this up, but it's not an impossible chain of events.

Remember the Tokai Mura accident? That was a case of nuclear fission occurring in a bucket. A worker put too much fissionable material in a small tank, and a reaction started. It doesn't take much (something like 16kg of uranyl nitrate in the Tokai Mura case), and people really are that incompetent/forgetful/clumsy/stupid at times. Particularly in times of stress.

So, the spectre of burning nuclear fuel rods is not to be discounted or taken lightly. It could happen. And it might just be an idiot pushing the wrong pedal on a forklift that causes it. Is it a one in a million chance? One in ten thousand? Don't matter, it could happen.

[Russell]

Thanks Hammer for your reply.

Let's hope this nightmare will not happen.

And let's hope the Japanese government will do everything to prevent it from happening...

[wagyl]

when some of those fuel rods start to burn.

OK, I'll bite. What makes you think some of the fuel rods might start to burn?

So, why do you think they cool these fuel rods in the first place?

What temperature range are they in now after more than three years removed from the reactor core? What temperature range are they likely to become if removed from the pool? And what temperature do they require to combust? This is what doesn't add up for me and why I wonder about the fire fixation.

You didn't answer the question.

There must be some reason they cool those guys, right?

The heat released by radioactive decay continues after reaction is shut down, but the heat it produces decreases markedly with time.

Let's look at the fuel rods in the spent fuel pool at Daiyon, because this structure is fragile, it has had a troubled history and we have lots of reports on what is happening in the pool. We are talking about fuel rods where reaction was shut down on 29 November 2010.

The regulations require that the cooling pools be kept to no more than 65 degrees Celsius, so cooling procedures continue to this day. With the initial failure of the cooling systems there were reports that the water may be boiling in March 2011. In April 2011 the temperature of the fuel storage pool was reported to have reached 90 degrees.

On 30 June 2012 at 6:25 a.m, when it was realised that the cooling system had again failed the temperature was 33.3 degrees. When the cooling system was restarted at 3 p.m. on 1 July, the water temperature had risen to 42.9 degrees.

When a rat caused a short circuit and shut down power (these guys don't deserve good luck, but do they deserve this bad luck?) on 18 March this year, once again shutting down the cooling system, it was estimated that it would take 4 days before the water temperature of the pool would reach the regulatory limit of 65 degrees. As it was, the system was restored in two days.

So, Russell, in answer to your question, they continue to cool because they are keeping the temperature below 65 degrees. I don't think anyone is suggesting that they burst into flames at 66 degrees. Or even at 130 degrees. And when it takes them four days to increase the temperature of the water they are in by (the most generous figures) 45 degrees, you start to ask just how much heat is still being produced. And then you ask, what temperature do they need to become to start combustion.

Nowhere have I been saying that this couldn't happen. But I am wondering why "fuel rods might catch fire" is receiving such prominence, as opposed to any number of other more likely events.

[Russell]

when some of those fuel rods start to burn.

OK, I'll bite. What makes you think some of the fuel rods might start to burn?

So, why do you think they cool these fuel rods in the first place?

What temperature range are they in now after more than three years removed from the reactor core? What temperature range are they likely to become if removed from the pool? And what temperature do they require to combust? This is what doesn't add up for me and why I wonder about the fire fixation.

You didn't answer the question.

There must be some reason they cool those guys, right?

The heat released by radioactive decay continues after reaction is shut down, but the heat it produces decreases markedly with time.

Let's look at the fuel rods in the spent fuel pool at Daiyon, because this structure is fragile, it has had a troubled history and we have lots of reports on what is happening in the pool. We are talking about fuel rods where reaction was shut down on 29 November 2010.

The regulations require that the cooling pools be kept to no more than 65 degrees Celsius, so cooling procedures continue to this day. With the initial failure of the cooling systems there were reports that the water may be boiling in March 2011. In April 2011 the temperature of the fuel storage pool was reported to have reached 90 degrees.

On 30 June 2012 at 6:25 a.m, when it was realised that the cooling system had again failed the temperature was 33.3 degrees. When the cooling system was restarted at 3 p.m. on 1 July, the water temperature had risen to 42.9 degrees.

When a rat caused a short circuit and shut down power (these guys don't deserve good luck, but do they deserve this bad luck?) on 18 March this year, once again shutting down the cooling system, it was estimated that it would take 4 days before the water temperature of the pool would reach the regulatory limit of 65 degrees. As it was, the system was restored in two days.

So, Russell, in answer to your question, they continue to cool because they are keeping the temperature below 65 degrees. I don't think anyone is suggesting that they burst into flames at 66 degrees. Or even at 130 degrees. And when it takes them four days to increase the temperature of the water they are in by (the most generous figures) 45 degrees, you start to ask just how much heat is still being produced. And then you ask, what temperature do they need to become to start combustion.

Nowhere have I been saying that this couldn't happen. But I am wondering why "fuel rods might catch fire" is receiving such prominence, as opposed to any number of other more likely events.

Wagyl, thanks for your reply.

The temperature rises slowly because of the heat capacity of the water in the pool. Take the water away, and the temperature rises faster. Also, the distances between rods is important, as Hammer pointed out. Decrease it, and more heat will be dissipated. A temperature of 1800 degrees Celsius is critical, because at that point radioactive gases and aerosols will be released; in other words, the rods catch fire.

This possibility receives so much attention, because it would be disastrous for the environment.

[Coligny]

Nowhere have I been saying that this couldn't happen. But I am wondering why "fuel rods might catch fire" is receiving such prominence, as opposed to any number of other more likely events.

In case of highly 'volatile' situation, were not much is controlled and even less is known. It is usually considered a good practice to prepare for the worst case scenario. ANd not rely on wishfull thinking even if they are 'more likely' scenarios. Since it's a little pretentious to call 'more likely' anything related to an unprecedented event, usally, the only relevant statistical law to use is called the law of murphy....

[Taro Toporific]

Nature magazine calls radiation-spewing Fukushima: "a laxly guarded time bomb"

Nuclear error
Japan should bring in international help to study and mitigate the Fukushima crisis.
Nature magazine | 03 September 2013
...After an earthquake and tsunami crippled the Fukushima plant in March 2011, it became clear that efforts to decontaminate the area would be long-lasting, technically challenging and vastly expensive. Now it turns out that the task has been too big for the owner of the plant, the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO). The Japanese government on 3 September announced a plan to take over the clean-up, but its intervention is overdue.
In the two and a half years since the accident, TEPCO has repeatedly failed to acknowledge the nature and seriousness of problems with safeguarding nuclear fuels in the three destroyed reactors at Fukushima. Each day, some 400,000 litres of water are being funnelled into the reactor cores to prevent the rods from overheating. Only in recent months has TEPCO admitted that some contaminated water is leaking into the reactor basement and, through cracks in the concrete, into the groundwater and the adjacent sea. Few independent measurements of radiation exposure are available, and it is worryingly unclear how these leaks might affect human health, the environment and food safety. But the problems do not stop there. There are now almost 1,000 storage tanks holding the used cooling water, which, despite treatment at a purification system, contains tritium and other harmful radionuclides. The leaks make clear that this system is a laxly guarded time bomb.
More...

Olympics-bought-already.jpg

poster by kinokuniyanet

[Russell]

Seems I am on the same wavelength as Nature regarding Fukushima.

Then there is this poster: excellent Taro!

Wow, it sums up the current political situation in Japan very well. Compared to these guys, George W. Bush was a statesman... (kind of)

[Yokohammer]

Taro ... brilliant.
Had to grab a copy of that for my scrapbook.

[Russell]

福島第一原発 クレーン折れる

東京電力福島第一原子力発電所で、がれきの撤去作業に使っている大型クレーンが、途中から折れ曲がり先の部分が地面に落ちるトラブルがあり、東京電力で原因を調べています。
福島第一原発３号機では、水素爆発で壊れた原子炉建屋の上部からがれきを撤去する作業が行われています。
５日午前８時半すぎ、撤去作業のため建屋の横に設置されたアームの、長さおよそ１００メートルの無人の大型クレーンを遠隔操作しようとしたところ、関節部分が徐々に折れ曲がり、最後は完全に折れて５０メートル下の地面に落下したということです。
原発にあるカメラの映像では、アームの関節の部分からゆっくりと傾いていき、２分余りかけて折れ曲がるのが分かります。
東京電力によりますと、落下した部分は重さがおよそ２０キロあり、作業員が利用する仮設の通路に落下しましたが、当時作業は行われておらず、けがをした人はいなかったということです。
折れた部分には亀裂のようなものが見つかったということで、東京電力で原因を調べています。
３号機では、去年もがれきが燃料プールに落ちるトラブルがあり、使用済み燃料の取り出しの予定がすでに半年以上遅れています。
東京電力は、３号機のがれきの撤去はもう１台ある大型クレーンで進めるとしていますが、今回のトラブルでもさらに作業が遅れるおそれがあります。

Short translation: After 08:30 on 5 September, the arm of a remote-controlled crane that is used to carry out debris removal work at unit 3, bent, and the arm tip fell down. Source

Hint: watch the crane in the left half of the image starting to buckle from 1:30 on...

It's almost comic if it weren't so serious. FYI, TEPCO is still investigating the cause of this incident...

[Russell]

Tanks, not leak, main problem at Fukushima

The radioactive water leaking into the sea from the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant has developed into a scandal, drawing media attention from around world in the past few weeks.

Despite the screaming headlines, however, a critical question remains unanswered: Just how much danger does the contaminated water pose to human health?

Jota Kanda, a professor at Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology, has some insight to offer.

“Compared with the release of radioactive materials in the initial stage (of the crisis), the amount of material now is overwhelmingly small,” the expert on maritime movement of radioactive substances said in a recent interview with The Japan Times.

“This is not something that has a big impact on fish in the sea,” Kanda said.

The real threat is not the 300 tons of toxic water flowing into the Pacific each day, but the highly radioactive water sitting in the more than 1,000 huge tanks on land, Kanda argued.

“I understand it’s quite important to try to stop the groundwater (from flowing into the sea). But I’m far more concerned about the tanks,” he said. “We still have extremely contaminated water in those tanks. In that sense, we are in a crisislike situation.”

Kanda was one of the scientists who first pointed out that contaminated water was entering the sea, which Tokyo Electric Power Co. continued to deny until the day after the Liberal Democratic Party won the Upper House election in July.

According to an estimate by Daisuke Tsumune, a researcher at the Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, 3.5 petabecquerels, or 3.5 quadrillion becquerels, of cesium-137 was released into the sea in the first three months after the three reactor cores began melting on March 11, 2011. Tsumune’s estimate is based on his simulations of how the radioactive isotope spreads in the Pacific.

According to Kanda’s estimates, 17.1 trillion becquerels of cesium-137 was released into the sea in the period between June 2011 and September 2012.

Kanda asserted that this means most of the material contaminating the fish and other sea life largely came from the massive environmental release in the first part of the crisis, particularly from April 1 to April 6 of 2011.

“When you hear ’17.1 trillion,’ it may sound awful, but this is overwhelmingly small” when compared with the initial release, he said.

Tests performed on fish caught along the Tohoku coastline, including Fukushima, have shown that seafood contamination has been declining since the first few months of the crisis, even though the water spill continues.

Although Kanda’s estimate covers only cesium-137, he said the other radioactive substances, including strontium, which causes bone cancer, and tritium should be following a similar pattern.

“Radioactive materials have been leaking into the sea, but the amount is very small and the contamination in fish has been steadily declining,” Kanda said.

According to sampling data published by the Fisheries Agency in August and September, 35 of the 2,211 fish taken from the sea and from rivers along the Pacific coast had been tainted with cesium exceeding the government’s limit of 100 becquerels per kilogram.

Of the 35 tainted fish, 26 were caught in places off Fukushima, where all fishing is banned. The other nine were freshwater species caught in rivers and ponds not only in Fukushima, but in Gunma and Chiba as well.

While downplaying the sea contamination, Kanda said he is deeply concerned about the massive amount of radioactive material in the huge water tanks at Fukushima No. 1.

According to Kanda’s estimates, which are based on official data from Tepco, the cesium-137 in the highly contaminated water in the basements of Fukushima No. 1′s flooded reactor buildings was giving off as much as 160 petabecquerels as of the end of May 2011.

This is nearly twice the cesium-137 released by the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, which was estimated at 85 petabecquerels by the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation.

Tepco filters out most of the cesium-137 from the cooling water before storing it, but huge amounts of strontium, tritium and other dangerous materials remain in the roughly 340,000 tons of water still sitting in 1,060 tanks, Kanda pointed out.

If several of the tanks were breached in an accident or new natural disaster, all of that water would go directly into the sea, with catastrophic results, he emphasized.

Tepco and the government have announced an expensive experimental plan to create a massive wall of frozen soil around the plant to prevent groundwater from entering the reactor buildings, which are generating toxic water of their own.

Kanda, however, said the top priority for now should be to strengthen the tanks and remove the other radioactive materials in the water they’re holding.

Tepco had by now planned to start using ALPS — a high-tech filtering machine that can remove everything radioactive but tritium from tainted water — but the utility halted test runs after finding corrosion holes in the equipment. It is set to reactivate ALPS later this month.

Kanda, no defender of Tepco or the nuclear industry, was among the first scientists to sound the alarm about the radiation risk to the ocean, despite Tepco’s denials. He published his findings on probable cesium contamination in an academic thesis in English in February this year. When NHK and other media reported on his findings, Tepco disputed them.

“I was surprised. I thought, ‘Wow, the Tepco people clearly deny this,’ ” Kanda said, asserting that the conclusion of his thesis was basically “common knowledge” among marine researchers who have been monitoring the density of radioactive substances in and outside the crippled plant’s artificial bay on a regular basis.

Kanda’s estimates on cesium-137 are based on earlier cesium density fluctuations in the bay. Given the rapid decline in cesium density right after the three meltdowns, Kanda concluded that 44 percent of the water in the bay is exchanged daily with water from the ocean. Using this data, Kanda inversely calculated the amount of cesium-137 that was reaching the sea from the nuclear compound.

Since around April 2012, the cesium density in the bay has leveled out and stayed basically constant despite the daily exchange between the bay and the wider sea. This indicates that the radioactive substances have been leaking into the bay at a constant rate that has reached a rough parity with the amount leaving each day, he said.

In August, Tepco reluctantly accepted Kanda’s theory and published a simulation showing that a maximum of 20 trillion becquerels of cesium-137 had reached the ocean, along with 10 trillion becquerels of deadly strontium.

Tepco’s denial and ensuing about-face helped the radioactive water spill become a scandal instead of a discovery, fanned by media reports that didn’t clearly explain the impact of the leakage, Kanda said.

“Tepco had some (communication) problems, as did researchers like us. And, of course, so did the mass media,” he said.

[Russell]

Ex-top U.S. nuclear regulator urges end to nuke power

The ongoing crisis at the Fukushima No. 1 plant is a sign that the world needs to seriously rethink nuclear safety and consider possibly ending its dependence on atomic power, the former chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission said Tuesday in Tokyo.

“When you look at what happened around the Fukushima Daiichi (No. 1) area, it’s simply unacceptable,” as tens of thousands of people have been unable to return to their homes due to radioactive contamination, said Gregory Jaczko, who served as the top U.S. nuclear regulatory official for nearly three years until July 2012.

Given that Japan is extremely prone to earthquakes and tsunami, among other disasters, using nuclear power poses serious risks unless some kind of new technology is created to completely eliminate the possibility of severe accidents, Jaczko told reporters at the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan.

However, Jaczko also said that creating such zero-risk technology is next to impossible.

Instead, Jaczko said, he hopes Japan pours its resources and energy into coming up with ways to function without atomic power.

“I think the Japanese people have the ability to do that,” he said.

While Japan’s atomic watchdog, the Nuclear Regulation Authority, is now examining requests from utilities to restart reactors, Jaczko stressed the importance of getting the public actively involved in the process.

“There needs to be a thorough public debate and a public dialogue to ensure that those decisions” have received as much support from the public as possible, said Jaczko, who headed the NRC when the Fukushima crisis erupted on March 11, 2011.

As for the ongoing issue of tainted groundwater flowing into the ocean at the No. 1 plant, Jaczko expressed befuddlement that the issue has only recently come under the spotlight.

“This was known from the beginning that there would potentially be these contamination problems,” he said.

Link

[matsuki]

TEPCO and Subaru need to trade some people to get a balanced plan for the future....they're fucking polar opposites.

“We know how to study worst-case scenarios, but we’ve never examined a best-case scenario,” Subaru of America Chairman Takeshi Tachimori told the Wall Street Journal recently.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/20 ... ly-problem

[Mike Oxlong]

The Fukushima Generation: New Data on Birth Defects in Post-Meltdown Japan
New unpublished data reveals a slight rise in birth defects in post-nuclear-meltdown Japan. Jake Adelstein and Nathalie Stucky report on this exclusive data—and what Japan needs to do next to understand the health impact.

The Daily Beast recently obtained unpublished data on birth defects in Japan, which showed a small increase in prevalence rates for 2011—the year there was a triple nuclear meltdown in Fukushima Prefecture. The prevalence rate—the frequency of malformations among childbirths, such as holes in the heart (atrial septal defect)—was 2.43 percent, a number that is still below what is considered a normal figure among radiation experts. The university that conducted the study will not release regional figures. However, several nuclear experts in and outside of the country assert that Japan needs to seriously measure the health impact of its nuclear problems, including birth defects, “with not just annual data but monthly data and broken down by prefecture.”

On March 11, 2011, a magnitude 9.0 earthquake and a tsunami hit the northeast coast of Japan, which triggered a triple meltdown at the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) operated Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. The meltdown released massive amounts of radiation into the atmosphere and the water supply, with some reports suggesting certain types of radioactive materials have been released at levels that surpassed Chernobyl. Earlier this month, Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority said radiation readings near water-storage tanks at Fukushima Daiichi had reached previously unrecorded high levels. Near one group of tanks the levels reached 2,200 millisieverts per hour. An unprotected person standing close to the contaminated areas would receive a lethal radiation dose within hours.

The exact amount of radiation released into Japan from the accident is still unknown. Japan’s now defunct NISA (Nuclear Industrial Safety Agency), originally hid important radiation data from the general public, to avoid causing panic. Independent studies suggest the amounts of radiation released were far above the Japanese government’s official findings. Radioactive materials have also been leaking into the groundwater for possibly months and TEPCO is making efforts to contain the damage. After the initial nuclear disaster in March of 2011, Japan took months to finally admit that a triple nuclear meltdown had occurred.

The data obtained by the Daily Beast was compiled by Yokohama City University, which has been doing studies of birth defects in Japan for over a decade. The 2011 Report on Congenital Malformations notes the prevalence of malformed infants as 2.43 percent, the highest figure since 1999 (1.48 percent). However, the figures for 2010 were 2.31 percent, indicating only a small increase between 2010 and 2011. The 2011 report surveys infants born from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2011, in 170 hospitals throughout Japan.

Since 1999, the Yokohama City University has been releasing the statistical report regularly around the month of May, but did not publish the data this year. After repeated requests, it finally provided the 2011 data, which is still currently unavailable to the public.

The university, while releasing the total figures, would not release prefecture-by-prefecture data. Japan is divided into 47 prefectures. Dr. Fumiki Hirahara who is in charge of compiling the data stated, “It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to try to compare the prefectural data. There is no meaningful increase in in birth defects since 2011, in my opinion.” British radiation expert Dr. Ian Fairlie disagrees, noting, “What would be needed is monthly, not just annual data and broken down by Prefecture.”

Dr. Hirahara noted that every year since 2006 has seen a greater prevalence of birth defects that he suspects is due to Japanese women giving birth at an older age. The university is still collecting the data for 2012. Dr. Hirahara notes, “There will always be cases of birth defects, even in Fukushima.” He doubts 2012 data will show a significant increase in birth defects in Fukushima or Japan. “But I don’t know for now, I need to finish up the report for 2012. We will have to join our efforts with the people in Fukushima and compare our work,” he added...

[Samurai_Jerk]

I was in Korea last week and was asked several times whether or not it was dangerous to live in Tokyo because of Fukushima. Once guy even told me that a Korean celebrity tried to show solidarity by going to Japan and eating the food to show people it wasn't dangerous and now he's really sick from radiation poisoning. Of course the guy couldn't remember exactly which celebrity it was so I'm sure it's a bullshit urban legend.

I have one friend there who has a Masters in nuclear physics and used to work in a lab with highly radioactive material. He said they used to be pretty sloppy about safety so he's definitely been exposed to levels he shouldn't have been and isn't the type to panic about these things. He told me that the levels being reported for the Tokyo area are nothing to be worried about especially in the short term. However, he said that prolonged exposure (like over the next 20 years) could be a problem. Especially if the levels are being under reported.

[Russell]

The biggest problem is the contamination of the food.

It is reported that it is tested, but that cannot be trusted.

Not that I have a solution.

[Coligny]

It's sort of like acetone, a little use here and there might give you a small headache at best like in his lab... But spending your days yearlong with a bucket open in the living room will do you no good. Also, I'm pretty sure Marie Curie would like to have a word with that guy...

At least he was clumsy in his job by choice and for limited amount of time. You can't honestly compare living in a potentially contaminated area with monkeying from time to time in a lab.
Basically, you are just reporting that a sloppy scientist don't see a problem with other people's sloppiness because he's not even dead yet... Color me surprised...

[Samurai_Jerk]

At least he was clumsy in his job by choice and for limited amount of time. You can't honestly compare living in a potentially contaminated area with monkeying from time to time in a lab.
Basically, you are just reporting that a sloppy scientist don't see a problem with other people's sloppiness because he's not even dead yet... Color me surprised...

You've got such a hard on for trying to start arguments that you'll misread anything just to make it disagree with your view.

[matsuki]

At least he was clumsy in his job by choice and for limited amount of time. You can't honestly compare living in a potentially contaminated area with monkeying from time to time in a lab.
Basically, you are just reporting that a sloppy scientist don't see a problem with other people's sloppiness because he's not even dead yet... Color me surprised...

You've got such a hard on for trying to start arguments that you'll misread anything just to make it disagree with your view.

Remember that English isn't his first language though.

Coligny - His friend was basically saying low levels of rad there are now, aren't going to fuck anyone up short term....but long term, could be a problem.

[Coligny]

Yeah, but ponctual lab spill versus constant environemental exposure is not exactly a good ground for a demonstration...

Or if you prefer, the warm and fuzzy "I survived much bigger" then the small footnote "by you guys might want to move if it's even as p00py as the governement says"...

Plus starting a fight with Hubby usually need nothing more than stating that I ate potatoze for lunch...

[Samurai_Jerk]

Yeah, but ponctual lab spill versus constant environemental exposure is not exactly a good ground for a demonstration...

Or if you prefer, the warm and fuzzy "I survived much bigger" then the small footnote "by you guys might want to move if it's even as p00py as the governement says"...

Stop reading so much bullshit between the lines. He wasn't comparing the two or even saying that he's fine. He says what he and his colleagues were doing in the lab was pretty stupid and knows he might pay for it someday. I only mentioned that to give context. In other words this is a guy who knows his shit and isn't going to piss his pants over a little radiation exposure.

If anything, he was agreeing with you to a certain extent. His point was that the real danger (at least potentially) was cumulative exposure over a long period of time. He also said that since officials in Japan have demonstrated they can't be trusted, I might want think about whether or not I want to stay long term. Of course I've been thinking about that regardless of what's going on in Fukushima.

[Coligny]

Hum...

So...

Okay... I guess...

You want cupcakes ? I'll put my sexy French maid uniform...

[IparryU]

Hum...

So...

Okay... I guess...

You want cupcakes ? I'll put my sexy French maid uniform...

do that off the board and when you two elope in Vietnam.

[Samurai_Jerk]

Hum...

So...

Okay... I guess...

You want cupcakes ? I'll put my sexy French maid uniform...

do that off the board and when you two elope in Vietnam.

Fuck that shit. I'm going to Vietnam for the pussy not the pussy whipped.

[matsuki]

I miss good viet ice coffee...