Fukushima

A place for regulars and new visitors to talk about whatever comes to mind. An opportunity to share your 'non-surf' wisdom with the rest of us.

Re: Fukushima

Postby flacky » Fri Dec 16, 2011 6:46 pm

Yeah, it's a concern once the information stops coming out of the usual sources... You have to search for the raw details it's hard to know who you are listening to.

Fed up reading emails about how every penny of tsunami aid went on whaling vessels or something though... Here's the thing, you send aid to a charity, you don't get to decide how it's spent. They eat whale meat, agree with it or not, as a nation, they do it. So if the harbour there had whaling vessels, and they are using the funds to rebuild the community... Guess what...

Be nice and easy to have no morals wouldn't it...
Pedro Plankwalker
flacky
 
Posts: 3282
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 7:43 pm

Re: Fukushima

Postby shackattack2 » Sun Jan 22, 2012 2:25 am

http://tomsandbasil.com/
shackattack2
 
Posts: 1735
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 7:10 pm
Location: Sunny Coast

Re: Fukushima

Postby Chai Wallah » Sun Jan 22, 2012 2:13 pm

More alarmist tripe probably published by an editor who has less understanding of science than an average 10 year old. I dont think even Roy Stewart would get excited about this

The key message in the article "is even if you were receiving that dose every hour for a full year you would have less dose than one CAT Scan"
Chai Wallah
 
Posts: 1532
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 8:26 pm
Location: UK

Re: Fukushima

Postby shackattack2 » Mon Jan 23, 2012 2:46 am

Chai Wallah wrote:More alarmist tripe probably published by an editor who has less understanding of science than an average 10 year old. I dont think even Roy Stewart would get excited about this

The key message in the article "is even if you were receiving that dose every hour for a full year you would have less dose than one CAT Scan"


Thats a pretty stupid comparison considering you don't actually ingest radioactive dust in CT Scans. :roll:
http://tomsandbasil.com/
shackattack2
 
Posts: 1735
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 7:10 pm
Location: Sunny Coast

Re: Fukushima

Postby Chai Wallah » Mon Jan 23, 2012 7:54 am

And that comment highlights your complete ignorance
Chai Wallah
 
Posts: 1532
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 8:26 pm
Location: UK

Re: Fukushima

Postby shackattack2 » Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:47 am

Its a loose comparison to make. A radioactive cloud like this will persist in the environment and spread around. OK it is small, but it highlights probs in keeping control.

What about the people living on the sunny coast who have to get a CT scan as well? :wink:
http://tomsandbasil.com/
shackattack2
 
Posts: 1735
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 7:10 pm
Location: Sunny Coast

Re: Fukushima

Postby Chai Wallah » Mon Jan 23, 2012 8:23 pm

The small spike in radiation is probably from a natural source - a huge of the worlds Uranium is mined in Northern Aus
Chai Wallah
 
Posts: 1532
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 8:26 pm
Location: UK

Re: Fukushima

Postby Roy Stuart » Fri Feb 10, 2012 7:25 pm

It's actually huge, don't believe the whitewash.
www.roystuart.biz
User avatar
Roy Stuart
 
Posts: 2546
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 4:56 am

Re: Fukushima

Postby flacky » Fri Feb 10, 2012 8:26 pm

How do you know it's size Roy?
Pedro Plankwalker
flacky
 
Posts: 3282
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 7:43 pm

Re: Fukushima

Postby Chai Wallah » Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:24 pm

Roy Stuart wrote:It's actually huge, don't believe the whitewash.


I bow to your training as an applied nuclear physicist Mr Stewart, yes you are correct - you were of course successfully educated at the renowned school of conspiracy theories within the world famous university of the internet, where you have obtained a PHD in trolling
Chai Wallah
 
Posts: 1532
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 8:26 pm
Location: UK

Re: Fukushima

Postby flacky » Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:30 pm

Roy Stuart wrote:It's actually huge, don't believe the whitewash.


Still no???
Pedro Plankwalker
flacky
 
Posts: 3282
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 7:43 pm

Re: Fukushima

Postby Roy Stuart » Thu Feb 16, 2012 3:07 am

Research it yourself, the evidence abounds.
www.roystuart.biz
User avatar
Roy Stuart
 
Posts: 2546
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 4:56 am

Re: Fukushima

Postby flacky » Thu Feb 16, 2012 6:41 am

That's a no then. We're not talking about rocker curves or fin angles here. Just put up your evidence, why would you not???
Pedro Plankwalker
flacky
 
Posts: 3282
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 7:43 pm

Re: Fukushima

Postby Roy Stuart » Thu Feb 16, 2012 8:08 am

For the very good reason that any evidence which goes against the preconceived ideas of the chai Wallah is automatically deemed to be coming from an invalid source... thus the ignorance remains impregnable.

So it isn't a 'no'.

By the way we don't need pro nuclear people in NZ. Try Canada.
www.roystuart.biz
User avatar
Roy Stuart
 
Posts: 2546
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 4:56 am

Re: Fukushima

Postby Chai Wallah » Thu Feb 16, 2012 8:26 am

Roy Stuart wrote:For the very good reason that any evidence which goes against the preconceived ideas of the chai Wallah is automatically deemed to be coming from an invalid source... thus the ignorance remains impregnable.

So it isn't a 'no'.

By the way we don't need pro nuclear people in NZ. Try Canada.


No Roy I just discount cranks, loons and scientists with questionable training and history, unless their work has been successfully peer reviewed, unfortunately these are ones that you normally like to quote and you do not to seem to understand the importance of peer review in science.
Chai Wallah
 
Posts: 1532
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 8:26 pm
Location: UK

Re: Fukushima

Postby flacky » Thu Feb 16, 2012 1:24 pm

Roy Stuart wrote:For the very good reason that any evidence which goes against the preconceived ideas of the chai Wallah is automatically deemed to be coming from an invalid source... thus the ignorance remains impregnable.

So it isn't a 'no'.

By the way we don't need pro nuclear people in NZ. Try Canada.


I'm massively anti nuclear, obvious from past posts. I just like facts as opposed to scaremongering and misinformation.
When the new power stations are built here there'll be 3 within 100 miles of my house. NZ's stance was a strong factor in our decision to move. Don't presume Roy, I'm not chai, nor do I share his opinions for all I know, or you. It's not Roy vs the world anywhere but in your world. Don't lump us all together. It's pretty shallow.
Pedro Plankwalker
flacky
 
Posts: 3282
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 7:43 pm

Re: Fukushima

Postby Poo Stance » Thu Feb 16, 2012 2:24 pm

Think I've posted this link before but can't hurt to do so again...

http://fukushimaupdate.com/

some good info in there. Doesn't seem to be agenda driven either. They had a nice report from ACRO in there somewhere a month or few back that looked at radiation in the land, sea and marine life.

I'm pretty certain that there are more discharges of radio-active spent/leaked cooling water into the sea coming. What the effects will be I can't say though, but as someone famous once said... "I've got a baaaad feeling about this."
User avatar
Poo Stance
 
Posts: 3789
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2005 2:07 pm

Re: Fukushima

Postby flacky » Thu Feb 16, 2012 6:12 pm

cheers poo man.
Pedro Plankwalker
flacky
 
Posts: 3282
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 7:43 pm

Re: Fukushima

Postby Chai Wallah » Thu Feb 16, 2012 8:23 pm

flacky wrote:. Don't presume Roy, I'm not chai, nor do I share his opinions for all I know, or you. It's not Roy vs the world anywhere but in your world. Don't lump us all together. It's pretty shallow.


I am actually pretty undecided about nuclear - a true fence sitter

Poo thanks for that link - seems to be pretty anti nuclear but we need the debate and there has not been much information in western media about what is really happening in Japan - i.e. the reactors are now shut down etc

One thing which jumps out though is this article stating there was radiation spikes on the 15th February http://fukushimaupdate.com/radiation-mo ... ern-japan/

This spike coincides with some major solar flares that emit radiation and would have reached earth
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/spac ... -Nasa.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_flare

Therefore as a cynic who questions everything,it could be possible that the spike in radiation measured could be a result of the solar flares rather than Fukishima and I also suspect that this could be the case in the measurements shackattack reported in Queensland - no proof but as good an explanation as fukishima at this stage. I am sure our bearded shaper will disagree but is he qualified to comment??
Chai Wallah
 
Posts: 1532
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 8:26 pm
Location: UK

Re: Fukushima

Postby flacky » Thu Feb 16, 2012 11:01 pm

Did you know the sun is actually a american invention first used to dry up the russian water supply...
Pedro Plankwalker
flacky
 
Posts: 3282
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 7:43 pm

Re: Fukushima

Postby Poo Stance » Fri Feb 17, 2012 9:23 pm

Chai Wallah wrote:not been much information in western media about what is really happening in Japan - i.e. the reactors are now shut down etc

This was actually reported for a day or so in most main outlets.

Think I posted this before
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... %3Darticle
which if true made me doubt these 'cold shutdown', everything is fine, under control statements made at that time.

...Indeed, there can be few firm declarations about the plant's status. Daiichi's reactors are littered with debris. Many measurement and control systems are on the blink. Radiation levels are too high for people to get close to the reactors, leaving engineers and scientists to make important judgments using computer simulations, scattered bits of data and guesses... ...Hard information is so scarce that Tepco officials say they still aren't sure how the meltdowns unfolded and about the current state of the nuclear fuel...


Forgive my ignorance, but this says to me that computer modelling says that by now all the fuel rods should have been spent. However, due to high levels of radiation nobody can get close to the reactors and fuel rods to confirm this is happening. And if there was a cold shutdown, whereby 'no nuclear reaction' is taking place, why is there still radiation being emitted, enough to halt any attempt to physically observe the fuel rods.

If it looks like shit, smell like shit...

So do we know if the reactors ARE now confirmed to be in cold shutdown?

Just further ranting here. Maybe I've said this before too so sorry if so. But why did it take 2 months (or was it weeks?) for the IAEA to turn up in Japan? I remember a press conference/statement from them at the time stating that, "The IAEA only makes recommendations on how nuclear power stations are built". So who's responsible for making sure containment units, cooling systems, security and whatever else it takes to build and run a nuclear facility isn't compromised? Yeah sure, Britain, USA, France and Germany have the money (cough) and resources to build safe bases and we can all check up on each other. But what about Iran, N. Korea, Pakistan where paranoia and less resources dog the nuclear industry?

I've got no problem with nuclear, it's the people that run it that worry me. Not because they are out to kill us all or they are money grabbing badgers but because they are HUMAN and all humans make mistakes at some point. I've always said that you can do what you want until it starts harming other people. Nuclear power has the power to harm a lot of people, intentionally or not. At the end of the day Fukushima boiled down to a HUMAN ERROR and it seems like a lot of people are now paying with their lives and ecosystems with their, erm, ecosystem-ness.

but yeah, don't really have a problem with nuclear at all. But dump a load of windmills on a sandbank near Wales and I flip my flop all over the interweb. :p
User avatar
Poo Stance
 
Posts: 3789
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2005 2:07 pm

Re: Fukushima

Postby Roy Stuart » Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:37 pm

flacky wrote:
Roy Stuart wrote:For the very good reason that any evidence which goes against the preconceived ideas of the chai Wallah is automatically deemed to be coming from an invalid source... thus the ignorance remains impregnable.

So it isn't a 'no'.

By the way we don't need pro nuclear people in NZ. Try Canada.


I'm massively anti nuclear, obvious from past posts.




My mistake.

.
www.roystuart.biz
User avatar
Roy Stuart
 
Posts: 2546
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 4:56 am

Re: Fukushima

Postby Poo Stance » Fri Mar 09, 2012 5:48 pm

http://www.enviroreporter.com/2012/03/h ... a-air-yet/

and while i'm at it...

http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disast ... 1202290025

40,000 trillion becquerels of radioactive cesium, or twice the amount previously thought, may have spewed from the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant after the March 11 disaster...
which represents about 20 percent of the discharge during the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster...
...Scientists believe that around 30 percent of the radioactive substances discharged during the crisis ended up on land, while the rest fell on the sea...

...The researchers also estimated that 24-30 quadrillion becquerels of...cesium reached the sea.

That combines the roughly 70 percent of the total discharge, which is thought to have reached the ocean, and the cesium content of radioactive water that Tokyo Electric Power Co., the nuclear plant operator, released from the plant to the sea.

TEPCO on Feb. 28 began pouring cement on a trial basis from a marine platform onto the seabed in the port at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant. The work is intended to cover 7 hectares of seabed inside the breakwaters.

The aim is to prevent radioactive cesium that accumulated there from spreading offshore. The project is expected to take 3-4 months to finish.
User avatar
Poo Stance
 
Posts: 3789
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2005 2:07 pm

Re: Fukushima

Postby buttholesurfer » Sun Mar 11, 2012 6:24 am

Just off track a little, I see a company has a plug on for smart phones that measures radiation back ground levels, excellent little tool if you live in Japan. At least you've got the knowledge then to get the hell out of an area with high levels.
User avatar
buttholesurfer
 
Posts: 1658
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:47 pm
Location: Don't bro me if you don't know me!

Re: Fukushima

Postby Kamikaze » Mon Mar 12, 2012 12:14 pm

buttholesurfer wrote:Just off track a little, I see a company has a plug on for smart phones that measures radiation back ground levels, excellent little tool if you live in Japan. At least you've got the knowledge then to get the hell out of an area with high levels.


A smart phone with geiger counter built in! what will they think of next, I was impressed when they added a compass.
Image
User avatar
Kamikaze
 
Posts: 2085
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:51 pm
Location: Sunny, yet normally flat Bournemouth

Re: Fukushima

Postby Roy Stuart » Sat Mar 31, 2012 6:13 am

www.roystuart.biz
User avatar
Roy Stuart
 
Posts: 2546
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 4:56 am

Re: Fukushima

Postby flacky » Sat Mar 31, 2012 4:46 pm

Hasn't most of what Rokke said been de-bunked?
Pedro Plankwalker
flacky
 
Posts: 3282
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 7:43 pm

Re: Fukushima

Postby Roy Stuart » Sat Mar 31, 2012 8:17 pm

The truth is always 'de bunked' wake up man the truth about uranium ammunition is clear.
www.roystuart.biz
User avatar
Roy Stuart
 
Posts: 2546
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 4:56 am

Re: Fukushima

Postby surfinsmiler » Sat Mar 31, 2012 8:38 pm

Don't know about this particular "figurehead" but personal experience leads me to believe that depleted uranium rounds cause cancer.I had a friend who was a member of the armed forces,Royal Artillery,attached to special forces and generally playing secret squirrels in all the last few Gulf skirmishes.Retired from active duty to pursue an academic life as a lecturer at Cambridge.Super-fit guy who suddenly noticed a lessening of his abilities he went to his GP who promptly gave him 6 weeks to live.Diagnosis of several cancers some of which were inoperable.He died after 4 weeks.I think we don;t know enough about nuclear to handle it,be it weapons or power generation.The shits just too long lived and unstable.
Started out in life with nothing and I've still got most of it left!
surfinsmiler
 
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 8:36 pm

Re: Fukushima

Postby flacky » Sat Mar 31, 2012 8:59 pm

Roy Stuart wrote:The truth is always 'de bunked' wake up man the truth about uranium ammunition is clear.


The truth is always de-bunked...

Amazing insight there.
Pedro Plankwalker
flacky
 
Posts: 3282
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 7:43 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Chat (Non-Surf Related)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest