How do you verify feeling tired, under par, not quite right, unable to do my job, week, lethargic, dizzy. How could you know what some ones health would be if they not come in contact with this?

By in large you can't. Is it because of the radiation from the power plant down the road, the overhead power lines, the lead in the paint in your old house, the transfats in your diet, the coffee you are drinking, the artificial sweeteners you consume, the gasoline fumes you inhale when filling up, the foam insulation in your house, or....

 

or... spending too much time in front of a computer screen reading AAC forums rather than going outside and getting some exercise...

 

or... spending too much time in front of a computer screen reading AAC forums rather than going outside and getting some exercise...

HEY! I resemble that remark!

 

link to a good documentary/film - http://www.nuclearsavage.com/?from_fb=1

 

I think this is new news - http://fairewinds.org/media/fairewi...ows-damage-unit-3-fuel-pool-much-worse-unit-4

 

Not too sure that a "documentary" on a site named "nuclearsavage" is likely to be too unbiased.

 

Looking at the articles about the used uranium rods. - if they touch or if the water drains off they start giving off radiation, and from what the articles say, lots of radiation.
I was also looking at this figure of 1,000,000 years before they are safe.
would it not be possible to bring these rods closer together in a controlled environment to produce energy, and in this bringing them to a more stable state lowering the 1,000,000 years?
I feel that if the power companies had to foot the bill for this 1,000,000 years containment in advance, rather than leaving it to future generations, a lot more investigation would have gone into this area.

 

Not too sure that a "documentary" on a site named "nuclearsavage" is likely to be too unbiased.

Looking at the clips from this move it is a very emotive issue. Here is an attachment of what the director has to say about using the name savage in the title

 

Looking at the clips from this move it is a very emotive issue. Here is an attachment of what the director has to say about using the name savage in the title

But that's part of my point. I don't believe I can put significant credence in the credibility of any "documentary" that aims to be "emotive". As soon as strong emotion enters into things, objectivity and truth usually go out the window and I find it very difficult to accept whatever is said at face value because there is almost always a strong bias behind what is being told, how it's being told, and what isn't being told -- and that's whether its about something I support or oppose.

 

I am not arguing with you I just chanced upon what the directer said about that point - the title - " savagenuclear" .
I have no doubt the director is very emotionally attached to the subject and making a film around that, and also wanting it to be watched.
I have not watched the movie just the clip, for myself if it were only 10% true I would still find it shocking.

It is hard to know what to believe, that is one of the problems with fukushima. we don't seem to be finding out what is happening until years down the line.
I certainly don't trust what governments are telling us, or multi national companies. when a doctor says something you have to wonder if he is a mouth piece for a drug company and if a scientist is saying something you have to see who is employing him and whether it is being manipulated. I definitely don't trust the nuclear power industry look at the cover up around fukushima or nuclear weapons industry.
In promoting this whole issue around fukushima I am amazed at how well it has been covered up. unless you are that way included, most people don't know about it.
I have been sending all the info to a friend who is a feature journalist for one of the main news papers. her first response was "what's fukushima", and then" i did'nt know it was leaking" - a journalist from a top news paper!
She now finds it a very important topic and has been putting it to the editors but they don't want to know. I think the papers are part of the something that don't want people to know about Fukushima.
I am very please about all the do it you self journalism around fukushima other wise we wouldn't know anything at all. you just have to take into account just about every thing has a slant to it

 

I know I said I wouldn't post again but....

It is hard to know what to believe

Scientific papers.

I certainly don't trust what governments are telling us, or multi national companies

But we'll believe something we read/see by some random person on the internet.

I am amazed at how well it has been covered up.

What has been covered up? Nothing has been covered up. There are vast quantities of papers which are available, containing data about fukushima. Yeah mountains of it. But it isn't nearly as interesting as reading a comfy blog post, or video. The facts are for everyone to see, but people are too lazy to see them, because they are quantified as cold, dry numbers.

just about every thing has a slant to it

Numbers don't. Also, scientific papers will most likely be refused to be published if they have any slant to them which is not backed up by hard facts.

Slightly off topic, I wonder how much better informed the general public would be if major media outlets were required to list sources, as per academic papers?

 

I know I said I wouldn't post again but....


What has been covered up? Nothing has been covered up. There are vast quantities of papers which are available, containing data about fukushima. Yeah mountains of it. But it isn't nearly as interesting as reading a comfy blog post, or video. The facts are for everyone to see, but people are too lazy to see them, because they are quantified as cold, dry numbers.

I was under the impression that the owners of the power station did not let people know that 3 reactors had actually gone into melt down and that 300 tons off radio active waste was pouring into the sea each day. It was not until nearly 2 years after the accident that this was made available.

If there are vast quantities of papers out lining this and made available to public at the time of the accident please leave a link I would be interested to view it.

Most people are not expecting to have to go searching through scientific data after each accident to find out if there has been a meltdown.


What TEPCO did not say was –

After the storm one of our reactors is not working and the other three have gone into total melt down. In fact they have melted down so much we don’t even know where they have gone.
Not only are we pouring radioactive pollution into the atmosphere we are also pumping 300 tons a day into the sea. Further more, we have absolutely no idea how to fix this.
Please take evasive action.

It would be interesting to take this into consideration when viewing the other power stations and proposed power stations - if there is a melt down, they feel no responsibility or compulsion to let any one know about it.

 

I was under the impression that the owners of the power station did not let people know that 3 reactors had actually gone into melt down and that 300 tons off radio active waste was pouring into the sea each day. It was not until nearly 2 years after the accident that this was made available.

Perhaps you might actually look for what was said when.

A two minute search popped up story after story published within weeks or a few months following the disaster in which much of what you are saying took nearly two years to be made available was, in fact, made public.

As just one example:

http://www.ctvnews.ca/japan-says-fuel-may-have-melted-through-3-reactors-1.654108

Notice that the article was published on 07 June 2011, less than three months after the disaster hit on and was based on a 750 page report that had been assembled and released.

An Associated Press article published on FoxNews on 13 March 2011 (just two days after the disaster hit) specifically discussed the likely partial meltdown in Reactor Unit 3.

It would appear that all of these efforts by everyone to cover up the fact that something happened weren't all the successful.

 

Yes I guess it seems your right they weren't all that successful. O well there you go more miss information on my part.

 

In the 11 days since I last posted some new posts persuade me to comment.

In connection with density and stuff floating on top of the liquid core it is important to note that iron and nickel exists as uncombined elements in the core but that trans-uranites mostly exist as chemical compounds. The density of the trans-uranite compounds is much lower than the density of the elemental iron and nickel. That's why they float on the surface of the molton core directly under the solid crust and pop up in areas of tectonic plate faults like the east slope of the Cascades and the north slope of the Himalayas.

Waste around a uranium mine is mostly irradiated rock and sand. It emits radiation because it was previously irradiated by intimate contact with uranium, but it is not radioactive or fissionable of itself. The radioactive, fissionable material has been extracted, purified, and is working in fuel rods at power plants.

Depleted fuel rods contain a lot of fissionable material, just not enough to allow them to produce enough heat to make electricity. If you reprocess the depleted rods you wind up with the same irradiated waste you find around uranium mines plus some newly purified fissionable stuff which you can pack into new fuel rods and use again.

Irradiated waste loses its radioactivity quickly, in less than a century. Fissionable material keeps on emiting radiation for millions of years.

We can't get rid of fissionable material except by tossing it into the sun. We might as well learn to use it, reprocess it, and use it again in as safe a manner as practicable. The only alternative is to ignore it, in which case it will still be producing defuse, low level radiation, we just won't be getting any benefit from the radiation. So ... use it to make electricity and stop burning coal to make electricity, and don't sit outside on sunny days.

Sunbathing kills people.

Someone said that too many potassium pills will kill you. So will too much sex! The question is, how much is too much.

 

In the 11 days since I last posted some new posts persuade me to comment.

In connection with density and stuff floating on top of the liquid core it is important to note that iron and nickel exists as uncombined elements in the core but that trans-uranites mostly exist as chemical compounds. The density of the trans-uranite compounds is much lower than the density of the elemental iron and nickel. That's why they float on the surface of the molton core directly under the solid crust and pop up in areas of tectonic plate faults like the east slope of the Cascades and the north slope of the Himalayas.

Waste around a uranium mine is mostly irradiated rock and sand. It emits radiation because it was previously irradiated by intimate contact with uranium, but it is not radioactive or fissionable of itself. The radioactive, fissionable material has been extracted, purified, and is working in fuel rods at power plants.

Depleted fuel rods contain a lot of fissionable material, just not enough to allow them to produce enough heat to make electricity. If you reprocess the depleted rods you wind up with the same irradiated waste you find around uranium mines plus some newly purified fissionable stuff which you can pack into new fuel rods and use again.

Irradiated waste loses its radioactivity quickly, in less than a century. Fissionable material keeps on emiting radiation for millions of years.

We can't get rid of fissionable material except by tossing it into the sun. We might as well learn to use it, reprocess it, and use it again in as safe a manner as practicable. The only alternative is to ignore it, in which case it will still be producing defuse, low level radiation, we just won't be getting any benefit from the radiation. So ... use it to make electricity and stop burning coal to make electricity, and don't sit outside on sunny days.

Sunbathing kills people.

Someone said that too many potassium pills will kill you. So will too much sex! The question is, how much is too much.

Thank you for this comment, from what you say the technology is there to keep reprocessing the used rods until the fissionable material is totally used? and then just left with irradiated material?
This now seems more ecologically viable and responsible, a much better alternative than leaving it for a million years. Each power plant should have its own reprocessing plant attached.
As well as the general problems with storing these used rods they seem like an ideal target for terrorists to me. especially the the plants with the used rods stored on the top floor, you might as well paint a big target on the roof.

 

Here's a nice video on what they do:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89UNPdNtOoE

As well as the general problems with storing these used rods they seem like an ideal target for terrorists to me. especially the the plants with the used rods stored on the top floor, you might as well paint a big target on the roof.

It's a threat, yes, but a very small one. If you're a terrorist, your goal isnt to simply kill people, it's to cause fear, panic and paranoia amongst the population. Making a few backpack bombs from fertiliser from the garden centre is much easier to do.

Wait! Perhaps we should ban fertilisers and shut down garden centres.

 

...The density of the trans-uranite compounds is much lower than the density of the elemental iron and nickel. That's why they float on the surface of the molton core directly under the solid crust and pop up in areas of tectonic plate faults
...

The molten core is NOT directly under the earth's crust! It is 2900 km down!

 

These are some photos taken by an aerial drone shortly after the 8.1 earthquake and sequential tsunami on March 11, 2011. These are VERY High Resolution photos and not widely distributed, of the real level of destruction to the reactor buildings from the tsunami.

http://cryptome.org/eyeball/daiichi-npp/daiichi-photos.htm .

 

I found this a good article - http://sfbayview.com/2014/a-global-...ut-damaged-the-thyroids-of-california-babies/

A lot of concern is going on about what effects are, or are not happening, along the west coast of the USA. I also wonder about the effects on the life in the sea, that is getting this disaster first hand. especially the top of the food chain, like the sharks, dolphins and whales. And presumably when they die it just gets passed on to what ever eats them and accumulates.