The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: does a picture say more than a thousand words?  (Read 86186 times)

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #200 on: 30/10/2012 18:47:03 »
What is a word made up of four letters yet also made up of three. Although written with eight letters and then with four? Rarely consisting of six but never written with five.

Solve that one :)
 

Offline bizerl

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #201 on: 31/10/2012 21:47:18 »
W H A T = 4
Y E T = 3
A L T H O U G H = 8
T H E N = 4
R A R E L Y = 6
N E V E R = 5

All those cryptic crosswords finally paid off!  ;D
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #202 on: 10/10/2013 16:18:52 »
Heh, better later late than never :)
Good on you Bizerl.

Just wanted to post a update on Fukushima

Seems we've forgotten that one doesn't it :) It's not about cuddly animals, and it has no 'human interest' for the papers, and so our politicians can look up in the sky and whistle as they go to work, making a better world for us all.

But the sh* seems ready to hit the fan here.

"A Yale Professor is compelling the world to wake up from its nuclear slumber and face some cold-hard facts, “All of humanity will be threatened for thousands of years” if the Fukushima Unit 4 pool can’t be kept cool. Your worries about eating cesium-contaminated fish from the Pacific Ocean are grounded in fact, but this is a world-wide disaster of the most epic proportions just waiting to happen. If nothing else, it points to the necessity of nuclear-free power to fuel the planet, but in the meantime, more than 1,535 fuel rods must be meticulously removed from Unit 4, which in all likelihood is crumbling. Charles Perrow, Professor Emeritus of Sociology from Yale University cautions: “Conditions in the unit 4 pool, 100 feet from the ground, are perilous, and if any two of the rods touch it could cause a nuclear reaction that would be uncontrollable. The radiation emitted from all these rods, if they are not continually cool and kept separate, would require the evacuation of surrounding areas including Tokyo. Because of the radiation at the site the 6,375 rods in the common storage pool could not be continuously cooled; they would fission and all of humanity will be threatened, for thousands of years.” In early stages of the Fukushima disaster Tepco, under influence of the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA), tried to keep the full ramifications of Fukushima under wraps, and now the entire country faces a possible trillion dollar price tag and multiple decades of active clean up to make this go away, but that will all be a moot point if the fuel rods aren’t removed properly.

All the boron between spent fuel rods has disintegrated.

(Arnie Gundersen, Chief Engineer at Fairewinds Energy Education:

    Tokyo Electric has admitted that the boron between these fuel cells — there’s a boron wafer in between the fuel to prevent something called an inadvertent criticality, you can have a nuclear chain reaction in the fuel pool, and that’s not a good thing — but they’ve admitted that all the boron has disintegrated.  So the only thing preventing a chain reaction from occurring […] in the fuel racks themselves, is the fact they put all sorts of boron in the water. But if the rods get too close to each other, they can still fire up again and create a chain reaction in the nuclear fuel pool.)

This means a nuclear chain reaction could ensue if the rods get too close together in the pools, causing nuclear mayhem like we’ve never endured. In less than two months, Tepco plans to try to remove these rods, admitting that they haven’t the expertise or resources to do it perfectly – and that is what it would take – absolute perfection. According to globalreasearch.ca, “Some 400 tons of fuel in that pool could spew out more than 15,000 times as much radiation as was released at Hiroshima. More than 6,000 fuel assemblies now sit in a common pool just 50 meters from Unit Four. Some contain plutonium. The pool has no containment over it. It’s vulnerable to loss of coolant, the collapse of a nearby building, another earthquake, another tsunami and more.” Overall, more than 11,000 fuel assemblies are scattered around the Fukushima site. According to long-time expert and former Department of Energy official Robert Alvarez, there is more than 85 times as much lethal cesium on site as was released at Chernobyl.” This is no time for Tepco or the Japanese government to try to save face, or the world to turn the other cheek. If we don’t treat this as a global disaster it would be like waiting for the Russians to start nuclear war back in the 1980s – or worse. Harvey Wasserman has created a petition at NukeFree.org to alert our own president and other politicians about the extreme seriousness of this incident. All while they were planning to go to war with Syria, the nuclear disaster right under our noses was escalating to unfathomable proportions. Not to sound doom and gloom, but it’s important to recognize the ramifications if this issue isn’t taken care of – properly."

As well as.

"Jiji Press, Oct. 10, 2013: Radioactive cesium levels have surged 13 times in the bay of the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power station in northeastern Japan [...] Seawater sampled near a water intake of the No. 2 reactor on Wednesday contained 1,200 becquerels per liter of radioactive cesium, up from 90 becquerels the previous day, TEPCO said. [...]

Reuters, Oct. 10, 2013: Radiation levels in seawater just outside one of the damaged Fukushima reactors spiked this week to the highest level in two years, the operator of the crippled Japanese nuclear plant said on Thursday. [...] In the latest incident, a worker on Wednesday mistakenly detached a pipe connected to a treatment system, releasing seven tonnes of highly radioactive water. [...] The pressure from pumping chemicals into the ground pushed some contaminated soil out into the port area, the spokesman said.

Fukushima Daiichi NPS Prompt Report, Oct. 10, 2013: [...] On October 9, we found a significant increase in the measurement results of cesium 134 and 137 sampled inside the silt fence of the water intake for Unit 2 [...] Cesium 134: 370Bq/L; Cesium 137: 830Bq/L [...]Measurement results on October 8: Cesium 134: 26Bq/L; Cesium 137: 64Bq/L [...]It is assumed that the ground improvement work administrated near the water intake for Unit 2 (where high concentration contaminated water leaked two years ago) has some influence on the increase in the measurement results this time. We continue to watch the situation."


Meaning that they can not contain the situation. They need to cool the fuel cells, spent and unspent. They use water to do so, the water gets contaminated with radioactivity and must be stored. And now they are running out of storage, with radioactive water leaking from the tanks already placed there. And some of it must have constantly moved down into groundwater, it being the natural cycle.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #203 on: 10/10/2013 16:26:14 »
Let me guess. Politicians all over the world will blame such a disaster on the Japanese Tepco, and the Japanese government, and then whistle some more as they go home, another days work done.
=

Yeah, I know, we will try, as us ordinary voters puts pressure on those 'state man' like politicos of vision and flair, eh, when the papers finally reports on it I mean. But by then it will be too late, and it won't be enough.

Also " After the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami, the four reactors at Fukushima II automatically shut down. Japan's worst nuclear incident occurred at TEPCO's Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, a 11.5 km (7.1 mi) boundary to boundary road journey to the north, after the same March 11 earthquake."

What will happen to that one, if now Tokyo needs to be evacuated?
People working in 'space suits'?
For how long?
« Last Edit: 10/10/2013 16:48:59 by yor_on »
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #204 on: 10/10/2013 17:03:32 »
Seem we're letting this world go to sh1t, in so many ways, from Global Warming to our nuclear provisions. and all in the name of profits. Who said we can plan long term?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #205 on: 10/10/2013 20:45:14 »
Guess I'm getting a little tired on all the empty words coming from politicians, and power brokers. the problem with them is that they 'fought' their way up. or 'earned it' some way or another. they become a club for insidious admiration, solving the worlds problem not in assembly's but in small corners. It's a very unhealthy attitude to democracy, with lobbying acting as a added pressure from big business and other profit gathering interests. I said it before and I'll say it again. People likes, and seem to think they can relate to 'politics', but in my view most sorely miss what a democracy should mean. One voice, one vote.  With representatives of the peoples will, elected through such practice.

You might say it's a human failing, everyone wants a bite of the cake, and some want more than just one bite. And being a politician becomes a job in the end, not a calling. Doesn't mean that politicians can't be honest, but looking at what action has been taken on problems that definitely will change my life, and even more so, my kids lives, i can't state that I'm impressed.

So what would it cost to dismantle a nuclear power plant?

"Sooner or later, all 500 reactors now operating or under construction around the world will have to be retired.

Reactors are not only costing more than they were expected to when the nuclear power era began but are also wearing out quicker than expected, with radiation making metal piping in the plants brittler than engineers foresaw. The Department of Energy estimates that 16 reactors now operating in the United States will reach the end of their useful lives by the end of the century. That number could grow to 53 by 2005 and 70 by the year 2010. A Knowledge Vacuum

Although nuclear power generated 13 percent of the world's electricity in 1984, until now only small, research reactors have been disassembled. ''Nuclear engineers have been attracted to the exciting challenge of developing and improving new technology, not to figuring out how to manage its rubbish,'' Ms. Pollock wrote in a booklet published this year about decommissioning.

That knowledge vacuum has led to a bitter, and many say belated, debate about what should happen to these hulks of contaminated steel and concrete and how much it will cost to dismantle them.

Estimates have varied widely. Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratory, an independent nonprofit laboratory that frequently does research for the Federal Government, estimated in 1984 that it would cost $104 million to take apart a 1,155-megawatt reactor that uses pressurized water and $133 million for a similar-sized reactor using boiling water, the two most common types in use.

But Ms. Pollock says the experience from decommissioning smaller reactors indicates much higher costs. She said a three-year study in Switzerland concluded that retiring a nuclear plant would cost, adjusted for inflation, 20 percent of the price of building it, while an analysis conducted for New York State concluded it would cost 24 percent, or more than $500 million for recently completed plants. Other estimates are higher.

Ms. Pollock said Bechtel International, the construction company, recently bid $104 million to disassemble a new, never used and therefore uncontaminated plant in Zwentendorf, Austria. Both critics and proponents of nuclear power acknowledge it will be much more expensive to take apart contaminated plants.

Many states have started pressing utilities to set aside millions of dollars to finance the dismantling of their plants. But how much the utilities should set aside and who should provide the money are hotly debated. " http://www.nytimes.com/1986/11/25/science/nuclear-power-plant-dismantled.html

Well, no surprise there, is it? Private interests are going for the profit, and thats the way we've all learnt to live too. Being egoistical is a healthy sign, isn't it? A person being totally altruistic is at best naive, otherwise a fool, wouldn't you say :) So, who do you expect to pay for the dismantling :) One way or another it will end up at the state I would say, financing it. that means your and my wallet paying for it. Would be interesting to see the real price for our power consumptions, if the dismantling is counted in.

And the price is in no way set. Not until we have a way to make radioactive materials safe. And we still don't have that.

Here's another take on it.

"According to a new report from GlobalData, Europe is on track to decommission nearly 150 nuclear power plants in the next two decades. Some, like those in Germany, are being mothballed for political reasons. Others, in France and Britain, are simply getting old. Yet dismantling a nuclear reactor is an arduous, time-consuming task — typically costing between $400 million and $1 billion per plant. And it’s not clear that Europe is fully prepared for the onslaught of retirements.

In a recent issue of New Scientist, Fred Pearce offered a handy step-by-step guide on how to take apart a nuclear reactor. There are thousands of tons of radioactive material to deal with — not just the spent fuel rods, but also various materials that have picked up lower levels of radioactivity. That includes, potentially, the reactor vessel, the fuel-rod casings, various bits of scrap metal and even old clothing. That waste can’t just be carted off to regular landfills; it needs to be disposed of properly. (Here’s a graphic breaking down the various types of waste.)

Very broadly speaking, there are three main ways (pdf) to decommission a nuclear reactor. The first option is to remove the fuel, disassemble the surrounding structure and find a safe place to store all the different radioactive bits. One problem with this option? Not every country in Europe currently has proper waste facilities set up, Pearce reports.

Alternatively, workers could simply take out the fuel, drain the plumbing and then lock up the reactor, letting the isotopes decay until the plant itself is less radioactive. After 10 to 80 years, the whole structure will be easier to dismantle. The third option, meanwhile, is to bury the reactor in a “tomb” of concrete and hope that no one cracks the structure open for the next 1,400 years. The U.S. Department of Energy took this approach for two old reactors at Savannah River in South Carolina." http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/how-hard-is-it-to-dismantle-150-nuclear-reactors-europes-about-to-find-out/2012/06/09/gJQA2EH0PV_blog.html

Makes you feel all cozy doesn't it :)
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #206 on: 10/10/2013 21:20:02 »
So what is the cost of Fukushima so far? You can split in two parts, one part is the cost for TEPCO, losing face and trust. The other is the cost, so far, for handling the disaster.


Tepco: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/06/us-japan-fukushima-tepco-finances-idUSBRE9950H220131006

Fukushima: http://phys.org/news/2013-07-fukushima-nuclear-clean-up-bn.html

And we don't know what the real costs will be, I do know that USA gave up on cleaning one field they had placed a nuclear plant on, due to the costs involved, but I doubt Tepco can do the same. Japan is a relatively small island chain, holding 125 694 708 citizens, as of today. They value their land, and use it to its fullest extent.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #207 on: 10/10/2013 21:32:55 »
I'm in fact very tired of taking care not to hurt profit interests feelings :) It's time those jerks woke up to the fact that they are nothing more than ordinary citizens of whatever Country they belong. They need to become aware of that fact, and so do politicians.
 

Offline CliffordK

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6321
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Site Moderator
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #208 on: 12/10/2013 03:45:17 »

There are quite a few nuclear plants that have been decommissioned, had their cores removed, and are in various stages of dismantling.  One of the problems in the USA is that there has never been a good place to store the spent rods.  Nor are they being recycled, thus many plants have the rods in long-term storage on-site.

A problem that no doubt will impact Fukishima is that if waste is transferred from one location to another for "disposal", it will no doubt become  more.  Does Japan have any low value land for waste relocation and disposal?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #209 on: 13/10/2013 00:30:16 »
Don't know Clifford. They are fiercely protective over their history, and land, as I've understood it. As well as they live on the Ring of Fire? They will also find it hard to send them somewhere else, as Africa, to bury 'out of sight out of mind'. And to be honest I think the best solution so far, is the one in where one can oversee those rods on a daily basis. Not burying them and forget.

The reason i mention Afrika is that there are some bad rumors about decontaminated materials getting disposed around there, as in the waters outside Somalia, coming from several Country's apparently. A little like Russians sinking their old armada of nuclear submarines. On the bright side one could expect us finding a better solution for our energy in three hundred years, but that is only guess work naturally, with a assumption that we still will have a technology, and planet, working for us at that time.

(as for saying that those sunken power plants will stay intact underwater for millenniums, I leave for you to decide)
=

An alternative are molten sand reactors as I understand they can be used to break down the rods, into components decaying over a few hundred years, instead of over scores of millenniums. But they will bring with them other problems as they get popular. And three hundred years is actually the time we went from horse and cart to smart phone. It's not that short time at all for us humans, only geologically.
« Last Edit: 13/10/2013 01:24:35 by yor_on »
 

Offline CliffordK

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6321
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Site Moderator
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #210 on: 13/10/2013 04:06:47 »
I was thinking of the option of paying for waste disposal in Africa, but thought better of it.  The money may be tempting, but it is a bad idea.

Perhaps rather than just burying the waste, one could actually refine it for reuse, but it is still a big operation.

An alternative are molten sand reactors as I understand they can be used to break down the rods, into components decaying over a few hundred years, instead of over scores of millenniums. But they will bring with them other problems as they get popular. And three hundred years is actually the time we went from horse and cart to smart phone. It's not that short time at all for us humans, only geologically.

If these systems come to production, we'll see if everything works out as well as is speculated.  They may find that low grade fuels don't give the desired energy production.

As far as 300 years.  If one considers say 30 year generations, that is 10 generations.  It is hard to think of one's great grandparents...  and it takes 7 more "greats" added to that.

However, say with a 90 year lifespan, it is merely 3 to 4 lifespans.  Hmmm  [:-/]  What are they estimating?  Five - 60 year halflives?  The radiation would have dropped off significantly within the first 2 or 3 halflives.

Anyway, hopefully our government will still be more or less stable in 300 years (assuming it makes it through the next few weeks).  It is better than making plans for the entire time since the beginning of the Holocene, and prior to the copper, bronze, and iron ages.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #211 on: 13/10/2013 14:53:13 »
Yes it is :)

So don't sell the horse before the cart here :)
We're good at jumping from one man made disaster to another, and we seem to be able to keep us one step ahead. Maybe it will work out. But we need to find some other idea of how to share, at the same time fulfill our egos cravings. Because I see profit as the common nominator behind it all.
 

Offline CliffordK

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6321
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Site Moderator
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #212 on: 13/10/2013 21:58:45 »
The government, of course, can work at a loss for the "greater good".

It can be pretty extraordinary the amount of money the government here in the USA is willing to pay on a cleanup project.  Often in excess of $1 Million per acre when the value of the land is likely closer to $10K per acre.

Then again, our government is now half shutdown because they can't figure out how to pay their bills.  Unfortunately, they seem to spend more money to not work than to actually work.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #213 on: 14/10/2013 13:00:58 »
Here are some facts and figures on the Chernobyl meltdown. From Chernobyl international. One can argue that you should find greater health issues in a poor, than in a rich, country but the statistics still are scary.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #214 on: 14/10/2013 13:09:38 »
A nuclear plant may be a profit making design under its productive time, assuming no bigger mishaps, but the total cost for it, including dismantling, makes me wonder. And now we've had two serious well known incidents with a lot of the nuclear plants closing in on the time limit they were supposed to run, also in Sweden. And the nuclear industry worldwide want to drive them further in time, and I would say they have two good reasons. One is the profit they can make, the other is the fear of costs for dismantling. And there the governments knows who will end up with the costs, and so it becomes 'reasonable' to let them continue over their planned life length..
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #215 on: 15/10/2013 14:50:39 »
The worst point to me, with all of this kind of shady bussiness, is that those that pay will not be those reaping the profit. Meaning that people without money will be those paying in health, and deaths. Those reaping the benefits making sure to be at a good distance from the problems. From some ideal of justice I think it should be the opposite. You make sh* happens? People die from it? Well, join them. Those people dying is paying for your dinner.
=

You could see it as a question of accountability, and where it should end. I say, the worse the problems you make, the harder the punishments. Or we can do as we do now :) profit-lovers without accountability, in principle free to do whatever they set their little hearts too, only questioned through extremely expensive lawsuits, for those individuals willing to pay and try for it, unless a state goes in, and that is mostly if the profit interests happens to be outside its own country.

No accountability is a very bad concept.
« Last Edit: 15/10/2013 15:06:34 by yor_on »
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #216 on: 15/10/2013 16:20:21 »
There are some, presumably well meaning lies out there on the net, telling me that I can't compare this  to Chernobyl, as that was worse.

Lets take some statistics, and please stop the bs about it being questionable.

"    Today in Ukraine, 6,000 children are born every year with genetic heart defects. More than 3,000 will die for lack of medical attention.

Children born since 1986 are affected by a 200 percent increase in birth defects and a 250 percent increase in congenital birth deformities.
   
85 percent of Belarusian children are deemed to be Chernobyl victims: they carry “genetic markers” that could affect their health at any time and can be passed on to the next generation. 
 
UNICEF found increases in children’s disease rates, including 38 percent increase in malignant tumours, 43 percent in blood circulatory illnesses and 63 percent in disorders of the bone, muscle and connective tissue system.

Belarusian doctors have identified increases in a number of cancers, including: a 200 percent increase in breast cancer, a 100 percent increase in the incidence of cancer and leukemia, and a 2,400 percent increase in the incidence of thyroid cancer.

More than one million children continue to live in contaminated zones. The mortality rates among the population already outstrip their birth rates. "

Short and sweet, isn't it? And this is nothing, compared to what Fukushima may end in. It may end in northern Japan being inhabitable for any life, unless you enjoy a early death and mutations. As for the rest of the globe? Well, with several half lives before anything being 'humanely safe', we should be able to presume some medium scenario of maybe? 50 000 years, how's that for the slowest decaying radioactive substances?

So, how much time do you expect those substances to need? To cover a Earth, following the natural circle, killing living things that breaths it in through dust or ingest it through food and water, Finally returning to the ground, lifted out with groundwater, rain, winds, streams etc etc. to start it all over again. Fifty millenniums, as a guess.

those laboring with this as acceptable risks have no accountability, and if worst come to worst, will still escape responsibility. Most often the defense used have been that they, or 'nobody' could imagine it happening. Do you believe this? I don't, I do believe profit will make you 'one-eyed' though. and that one is a general truth, for all profit making interests.

Why not read through this one.

Fukushima apocalypse.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #217 on: 15/10/2013 16:55:34 »
Kill one, that's a murder. Kill a hundred, you're a serial killer. Kill a million? It's a 'unfortunate disaster'.

No accountability.
Democracy turned into a game of lobbying by profit and other interests.
Democratic states behaving as if they govern people, one-sidedly deciding what is best for you.

It's a bad mistake assuming that politics is democracy. Democracy is you and me voting, then finding servants of the state applying what we voted about. It goes from the people to the state, not the other way around. Whatever the state 'gives back' is earned by us all, paying for it naturally. Some can't, or just won't. Either due to no money, or too much money. The funny thing being that the last category of people are the ones we gives the most attention to too :) And it is funny, if you think a little. Personally, I wouldn't give those the time of the day.

what does that tell us, about ourselves?
« Last Edit: 15/10/2013 17:08:29 by yor_on »
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #218 on: 15/10/2013 18:48:19 »
It's worth looking carefully at the reported statistics of childhood tumors, in particular. we know from carefully controlled epidemiology that radiogenic hard tumors take about 10 - 20 years to express as clinically significant, and childhood cancer is very rare. So (a) any tumor occuring under the age of say 10 is most unlikely to be caused by gamma radiation and (b) if you only found one tumor per 10,000 per year before an event, and four in 3 years after the event, you have prima facie a 33% increase in incidence, but more probably just the result of the incident making you look more closely at the population. I know that medical services in Belarus have improved significantly since Chernobyl, so even if the true incidence of a particular disease had decreased, the likelihood is that the reported incidence will have increased. In a less emotive area, it turns out that the difference in rates of death from heart disease between Britain and France is almost entirely due to a French disdain for writing it on a death certificate when "natural causes" would cause less upset to the relatives. Be very wary of statistics that don't make biological sense!       

And apropos emotive matters. I wonder why Clifford has decorated his posting with a clip of a non-nuclear cooling tower being demolished by conventional explosives?
« Last Edit: 15/10/2013 18:51:22 by alancalverd »
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #219 on: 15/10/2013 19:14:49 »
Seems so. But Alan, where do you get your views from? What do you see as being "carefully controlled epidemiology"? Laboratory experiments? And this is statistics cited, are you telling me that their handling of statistics changed as between the 'before the Chernobyl accident'. to after it? Have you a proof for that? If you really want something to bite in I linked Free Ebook; Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment .

It's somewhat weird that the Country, now countries, that in fact have the best practical experience of what nuclear pollution means, from their own risky behavior earlier, are getting ignored by our part of the world, having the least practical experience. And Russians do both statistics, medical science and mathematics, quite well.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #220 on: 15/10/2013 19:39:57 »
What worries me, if we move the question of how they will handle the removal of fuel rods aside for a second is also this.

"We have three 100-ton melted fuel blobs underground, but where exactly they are located, no one knows. Whatever ‘barriers’ TEPCO has put in place so far have failed. Efforts to decontaminate radioactive water have failed. Robots have failed. Camera equipment and temperature gauges…failed. Decontamination of surrounding cities has failed.

We have endless releases into the Pacific Ocean that will be ongoing for not only our lifetimes, but our children’s’ lifetimes. We have 40 million people living in the Tokyo area nearby"

Why would that be?

" At the time of the Fukushima accident an unprecedented quantity of highly radioactive water was also released into the Pacific Ocean. But it hasn’t stopped. TEPCO (Tokyo Electric Power Company) now admits that 300 tons of this water has been leaking into the Pacific every day since the accident 30 months ago and so far 270,000 tons of water has been released.

It is becoming apparent that the three molten cores, each weighing 120 to 130 tons have not only melted their way through 6 inches of steel in the reactor vessels, but they now either sit on concrete floors of the severely cracked containment buildings or they have melted their way into the earth itself – this, in nuclear parlance, is called ‘A Melt Through to China Syndrome’.

Because the reactor complex was built upon an ancient river bed located at the base of a mountain range, huge quantities of water flowing down from the mountains (1,000 tons daily) are circulating around these highly radioactive cores absorbing large concentrations of radioactive elements.

TEPCO constructed a type of concrete dam near the sea front to prevent this radioactive water from entering the sea. But the continuous flow of water built up behind the dam and overflowed into the Pacific Ocean. Each reactor core contains as much radiation as that released by 1,000 Hiroshima-sized bombs and contains more than 200 different radioactive elements, which variously last seconds to millions of years." From Many generations’ health at stake. A very well written piece by Helen Caldicott

Worth reading.

there was an study on global warming recently, querying people on their thoughts. In it a overwhelming majority thought main stream science being correct in that we had a global warming. But when it came to if they thought themselves, and their locality, involved in the coming climate changes, a majority expected it to happen 'somewhere else', not where they themselves lived :)

reminds me of this, we don't want it to happen, and if we keep quiet about it, maybe it will go away?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #221 on: 15/10/2013 20:13:19 »
This one might also be interesting.

"Children are 10 to 20 times more sensitive to the carcinogenic effects of radiation than adults, fetuses are thousands of times more so. One x-ray to the pregnant abdomen doubles the likelihood of leukemia in the baby. Females are also more sensitive than men at all ages. Radiation is cumulative, there is no safe dose and each dose received by a person adds to the risk of developing cancer.

Of great concern is the fact that 18 cases of childhood thyroid cancer in children under the age of 18 have already been diagnosed and 25 more are suspected in Fukushima. This is a remarkably short incubation time for cancer, indicating that these children almost certainly received a very high dose of iodine 131 plus other carcinogenic radioactive elements that were and are still being inhaled and ingested. Thyroid cancer in Chernobyl victims did not appear for four years. Thyroid cancer is rarely found in young children. Iodine 131 is radioactive for 100 days, and is a potent carcinogen. Iodine 129 on the other hand lasts millions of years. Over 350,000 children still live and go to school in highly radioactive areas, and as juvenile thyroid cancers are arising, so the number of leukemia cases will start to increase about two years from now, with solid cancers of various organs diagnosed about 11 years later. These will increase in frequency for the next 70 -80 years.

Food in the contaminated zone will remain radioactive for hundreds of years because it will continue to bio-accumulate radioactive elements from the soil, thus ensuring that an increased incidence of cancer will devastate many future Japanese generations.

Medical doctors in Japan are reporting that they have been ordered by their superiors not to tell the patients that their problems are radiation related. " Also from Helen Caldicott.

A very ugly response to truth that been tried before, in the Soviet Union.

"A report on the health of the people living on the banks of the Techa River was published in 1991, which showed that the incidence of leukemia increased by 41% since 1950. From 1980 to 1990, all cancers in this population rose by 21% and all diseases of the circulatory system rose by 31%. These figures are probably gross under-estimations, because local physicians were instructed to limit the number of death certificates they issued with diagnosis of cancer and other radiation-related illnesses. According to Gulfarida Galimova, a local doctor who has been keeping records in lieu of official statistics, the average life span for women in Muslyumovo in 1993 was 47, compared to the country average of 72. The average life span of Muslyumovo men was 45 compared to 69 for the entire country.

Chelyabinsk regional hospitals were not allowed to treat the villagers and they were sent to the Ural Centre for Radiation Medicine. The medical data of the UCRM was classified until 1990. Records of the UCRM chart the decline in health of 28,000 people along the Techa and all of them are classed as seriously irradiated. Since the 1960s, these people have been examined regularly by public health officials.

According to the head of the UCRM clinical department the rate of leukemia has doubled in the last two decades. Skin cancers have quadrupled over the last 33 years. The total number of people suffering from cancer has risen by 21%. The number of people suffering from vascular diseases has risen 31%. Birth defects have increased by 25%. Kosenko carried out a small epidemiological study of 100 people selected at random. From this group 96% had at least five chronic diseases (heart diseases, high blood pressure, arthritis and asthma), 30% had as many as ten chronic conditions.

Local doctors estimate that half the men and women at child bearing age are sterile." From Chelyabinsk: The Most Contaminated Spot on the Planet.

Although, maybe it will have to share that infamy, considering Fukushima, and also the question of what will happen with those nuclear power plants being closest to it, as Fukushima II, residing just some eleven kilometers from our now infamous Fukushima. It's worse than I thought, Fukushima.

Or would anyone know where else we have spent fuel rods burning, " three 100-ton melted fuel blobs underground' formerly three reactors. Doesn't really matter to me that they are underground, if now that is correct. It will move out following ground water anyway.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #222 on: 15/10/2013 20:25:42 »
So should profit be held accountable for their mistakes?

Y e s.

Why?

Because if you are accountable, you will find reason to think it through twice, before promising too much. And if you gamble on it 'working out' you will go to court. As it is, the only ones going to court are the victims of your folly. furthermore, having ones 'peers' judging one, is not satisfying to me. Can you see what I aim at? What is a crime against humanity?  And if there would be one, who would you want to judge those committing it?
=

Also, what is a fitting punishment?
I don't know there.

Either I have to presume that it was ignorance leading to this, or incompetence. Japan? Ignorant of atomic power :) Give me a break. They if anybody should know about atomic power. So, how about lying then? Just telling the good stuff, keeping quiet about the bad? A trait shared by fanatics, con men, and those wanting profit, by any price. And how about egoism, arrogance, a firm belief in ones own understanding of consequences, although as we can see here, not getting it at all? Well, yeah, as long as we admit that those traits are here too, in both Europe and USA.
« Last Edit: 15/10/2013 21:05:52 by yor_on »
 

Offline CliffordK

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6321
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Site Moderator
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #223 on: 15/10/2013 21:56:39 »
Profit?  Liability?

I suppose that is one of the things that I dislike about the insurance industry. 

Mistakes happen, and certainly our collective knowledge about radiation has increased significantly since 1940 or so.  And, over time, we've also learned a lot about metal fatigue and such.

At the same time, many organizations will choose the absolute minimum they can get by with.  Spend less, more profit in the sort run.  But, society should not be liable for one person's greed. 

Designing a system so that a 3rd party pays for someone's ill thought actions is a disservice to everyone.

Why build a house inside the 100 year (or 1000 year) flood plain?  Should those individuals that build on a hillside be held liable for those building in the flood plain?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #224 on: 15/10/2013 22:17:15 »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: does a picture say more than a thousand words?
« Reply #224 on: 15/10/2013 22:17:15 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums