The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Anyone have an new theories on what to do about the nuclear situation in Japan?  (Read 12159 times)

Offline Jolly- Joliver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
    • View Profile
I was thinking that lead paint might be a way to supress radition on site and might even be a good form of protection if workers paint themselves, lead is toxic but I mean they paint themsleves with body paint undercoat.

So any ideas?


 

Offline grizelda

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 740
    • View Profile
Abandon ship?
 

Offline Jolly- Joliver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
    • View Profile
Abandon ship?

What is that? We cannot let Japan go. We need to fix this.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8655
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
I was thinking that lead paint might be a way to supress radition on site and might even be a good form of protection if workers paint themselves, lead is toxic but I mean they paint themsleves with body paint undercoat.

So any ideas?

I have an idea.
Don't paint yourself with lead paint.
It takes inches of lead to stop gamma rays but it doesn't take much to poison you.
 

Offline Jolly- Joliver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
    • View Profile
I was thinking that lead paint might be a way to supress radition on site and might even be a good form of protection if workers paint themselves, lead is toxic but I mean they paint themsleves with body paint undercoat.

So any ideas?

I have an idea.
Don't paint yourself with lead paint.
It takes inches of lead to stop gamma rays but it doesn't take much to poison you.

My point being that if used in conjunction with a suit, it could provided added protection. It might not take much to poision you, people are working in that, any extra protection is something!

What are you saying Bored Chemist? Just let them go die? Why even bother thinking about finding a safer way for workers to fix plants having problems.
 

Offline grizelda

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 740
    • View Profile
The emergency back-up generators should have been in a building as safe as a bank vault. Were they in a shed? If lead paint is the best we can offer as a solution, then they are doomed.
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
You'll find a lot of discussion about lead in this thread.

http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=38011.0
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8655
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
"What are you saying Bored Chemist? Just let them go die? Why even bother thinking about finding a safer way for workers to fix plants having problems."
Don't be silly, I didn't say anything like that.
What I was saying was don't waste time pissing about with things that will never work and may lull people into a false sense of security causing even more harm than the lead.

I'm happy to think of ways to improve the safety of the workers there.
The way to do it doesn't start with gibberish like a coat of lead paint.
Incidentally, it might include a use of ordinary paint.
A layer of fresh paint will trap dust and therefore ensure that radiation isn't dispersed into the air.
It's a strategy that works well with asbestos and it's worth thinking about in this case.
In general, it's better to control hazards at source, rather than to try to wrap up individuals in PPE.
 

Offline Jolly- Joliver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
    • View Profile
The emergency back-up generators should have been in a building as safe as a bank vault. Were they in a shed? If lead paint is the best we can offer as a solution, then they are doomed.

No they were in the basements apparently, as the water from the tsuami came in they all got flooded. If they had been in a shed outside they might not have survived either.
 

Offline Jolly- Joliver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
    • View Profile
"What are you saying Bored Chemist? Just let them go die? Why even bother thinking about finding a safer way for workers to fix plants having problems."
Don't be silly, I didn't say anything like that.
What I was saying was don't waste time pissing about with things that will never work and may lull people into a false sense of security causing even more harm than the lead.

I'm happy to think of ways to improve the safety of the workers there.
The way to do it doesn't start with gibberish like a coat of lead paint.
Incidentally, it might include a use of ordinary paint.
A layer of fresh paint will trap dust and therefore ensure that radiation isn't dispersed into the air.
It's a strategy that works well with asbestos and it's worth thinking about in this case.
In general, it's better to control hazards at source, rather than to try to wrap up individuals in PPE.

My point about using lead is that it might do something, as you say stopping the dust would achieve something, I was looking to see if you had a lead based material paint would it not reduce some of the radioactivity of the dust.

Might be tiny but tiny isn't nothing.
 

Offline grizelda

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 740
    • View Profile
No doubt some of the workers pointed out that the back-up electrical supply was vulnerable. They were probably dissed for not being a "team player" and not contributing to the "consensus" and suspected of "politically incorrect" opinions. No science involved in these decisions.
 

Offline Jolly- Joliver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
    • View Profile
No doubt some of the workers pointed out that the back-up electrical supply was vulnerable. They were probably dissed for not being a "team player" and not contributing to the "consensus" and suspected of "politically incorrect" opinions. No science involved in these decisions.

There were reports of generators being sent/flown in over the monday-tuesday, but nothing seems to have come from it, they have carried on trying to connect grid power.

35 years ago engineers that helped design the mark one resigned because of flaws in the design, 25 years ago a report showed that with power failure the mark one had 90% probability to fail, industry did nothing, so people complaining about the location of the back-up generators are not really going to be listened to; That's clear.
 

Offline Heikki Rinnemaa

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 92
  • MoHei. :)
    • View Profile
    • My website.
Hi.

Short time,,no solution,,, i think that must done same than Tsernobyl,,fukushima is losed,,i afraid.

Long time future,,,only way is to get out nuclear-power,,how,,that is the question,,need many things,

- less consumption
- ground heat
- sun-electric
- flow-generator water-station
- etc

Earth-ball dont have resources to give life-properties todays consumption all it's peopple.

 

Offline Jolly- Joliver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
    • View Profile
Hi.

Short time,,no solution,,, i think that must done same than Tsernobyl,,fukushima is losed,,i afraid.

Long time future,,,only way is to get out nuclear-power,,how,,that is the question,,need many things,

- less consumption
- ground heat
- sun-electric
- flow-generator water-station
- etc

Earth-ball dont have resources to give life-properties todays consumption all it's peopple.



Thankyou for the reply, I hope fukushmia isn't lost. That this could spell the end for nuclear power is possible yet, even if we did today decide to stop using nuclear power all of the waste we will have to take care of for 1,000s of years to come.

But there are better options.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8655
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
"What are you saying Bored Chemist? Just let them go die? Why even bother thinking about finding a safer way for workers to fix plants having problems."
Don't be silly, I didn't say anything like that.
What I was saying was don't waste time pissing about with things that will never work and may lull people into a false sense of security causing even more harm than the lead.

I'm happy to think of ways to improve the safety of the workers there.
The way to do it doesn't start with gibberish like a coat of lead paint.
Incidentally, it might include a use of ordinary paint.
A layer of fresh paint will trap dust and therefore ensure that radiation isn't dispersed into the air.
It's a strategy that works well with asbestos and it's worth thinking about in this case.
In general, it's better to control hazards at source, rather than to try to wrap up individuals in PPE.

My point about using lead is that it might do something, as you say stopping the dust would achieve something, I was looking to see if you had a lead based material paint would it not reduce some of the radioactivity of the dust.

Might be tiny but tiny isn't nothing.
Are you in some way constitutionally unable to understand that spending a lot of money (or other resources) on lead paint is a bad idea (because it simply won't work)and spending less money on something else is a better idea?

Perhaps I can put in a different context for you.
For a given thickness, gold is a rather better gamma ray shield than lead- and it's non toxic.
Would you advocate coating the workers with gold leaf?
« Last Edit: 24/03/2011 20:20:37 by Bored chemist »
 

Offline Jolly- Joliver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
    • View Profile
"What are you saying Bored Chemist? Just let them go die? Why even bother thinking about finding a safer way for workers to fix plants having problems."
Don't be silly, I didn't say anything like that.
What I was saying was don't waste time pissing about with things that will never work and may lull people into a false sense of security causing even more harm than the lead.

I'm happy to think of ways to improve the safety of the workers there.
The way to do it doesn't start with gibberish like a coat of lead paint.
Incidentally, it might include a use of ordinary paint.
A layer of fresh paint will trap dust and therefore ensure that radiation isn't dispersed into the air.
It's a strategy that works well with asbestos and it's worth thinking about in this case.
In general, it's better to control hazards at source, rather than to try to wrap up individuals in PPE.

My point about using lead is that it might do something, as you say stopping the dust would achieve something, I was looking to see if you had a lead based material paint would it not reduce some of the radioactivity of the dust.

Might be tiny but tiny isn't nothing.
Are you in some way constitutionally unable to understand that spending a lot of money (or other resources) on lead paint is a bad idea (because it simply won't work)and spending less money on something else is a better idea?

Perhaps I can put in a different context for you.
For a given thickness, gold is a rather better gamma ray shield than lead- and it's non toxic.
Would you advocate coating the workers with gold leaf?

If it could help them stay more protected yes.

Gold Paint, thankyou.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8655
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
So, you don't realise it would be better to spend the money on, for example, a robot to do the work instead of people?
 

Offline Jolly- Joliver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
    • View Profile
So, you don't realise it would be better to spend the money on, for example, a robot to do the work instead of people?

A robot that works would be great, first we have to build them, and this situation is a presnt issue. Manufacuturing gold or lead paint, rather less time consuming and probably already exists as does Gold leaf. And time is an issue here.

If they already have robots that can access these types of areas and weld pipes back together fix electronical conponents that are broken, and rebuild walls and stuff, that would be fantastic but they don't, people have to.

I posted this thread to look at quick easy answers to these issues using things we already have or would be quick to make.

Any assistence is better than none, and time is an issue.

If nothing else maybe we could have some ideas for any future problems, if nothing is useful for today.
« Last Edit: 24/03/2011 21:36:47 by Wiybit »
 

Offline rosy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1018
  • Chemistry
    • View Profile
Wybit:

Using lead paint could not, would not, work. Nor would gold leaf. That is all BC is saying here, and that is why it is being rubbished as an idea. It would not provide signficant protection against gamma rays (a thick enough coat to serve a useful purpose would be so heavy that the workers could not stand up, let alone achieve anything), and moreover lead is poisonous, so as well as providing no worthwhile protection it would actively cause harm to the workers. Time, and then some, to drop this one!
 

Offline Jolly- Joliver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
    • View Profile
Wybit:

Using lead paint could not, would not, work. Nor would gold leaf. That is all BC is saying here, and that is why it is being rubbished as an idea. It would not provide signficant protection against gamma rays (a thick enough coat to serve a useful purpose would be so heavy that the workers could not stand up, let alone achieve anything), and moreover lead is poisonous, so as well as providing no worthwhile protection it would actively cause harm to the workers. Time, and then some, to drop this one!

Thankyou Rosy, But i was actually thinking in terms of wearing a body paint under the radiation suit to offer a form of extra protection. In theory you could add a gold or lead coating to the suit itself couldnt you? Or gold and lead to the suit it would be heavy but, protect them more surely
 

Offline Jolly- Joliver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
    • View Profile
Just as another question if you wrapped the reactor building, in huge sheets of gold leaf and lead leaf how many leafs would you need to stop any radioactivity comming out?

Could using the two together, not add to there abilities?
 

Offline Jolly- Joliver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
    • View Profile
Euronews, Workers taken to hospital beacuse water entered there boats,
feature=channel_video_title

I question again why they are not water-proff?

Any one here know how good this suit could be?
feature
« Last Edit: 25/03/2011 00:30:55 by Wiybit »
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8655
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Just as another question if you wrapped the reactor building, in huge sheets of gold leaf and lead leaf how many leafs would you need to stop any radioactivity comming out?

Could using the two together, not add to there abilities?
Your increasingly silly ideas suggest that you are trolling.
But, in case you are serious, roughly how many layers of gold leaf are there to an inch thick shield?
 

Offline imatfaal

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2787
  • rouge moderator
    • View Profile
Just as another question if you wrapped the reactor building, in huge sheets of gold leaf and lead leaf how many leafs would you need to stop any radioactivity comming out?

Could using the two together, not add to there abilities?
Your increasingly silly ideas suggest that you are trolling.
But, in case you are serious, roughly how many layers of gold leaf are there to an inch thick shield?

Sir Sir - I know this one - about 200,000 layers of gold leaf per inch.  I think there may be better ways of preventing contamination/radiation than covering a large area with one of the most expensive metals. 
 

Offline Jolly- Joliver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
    • View Profile
Just as another question if you wrapped the reactor building, in huge sheets of gold leaf and lead leaf how many leafs would you need to stop any radioactivity comming out?

Could using the two together, not add to there abilities?
Your increasingly silly ideas suggest that you are trolling.
But, in case you are serious, roughly how many layers of gold leaf are there to an inch thick shield?

Sir Sir - I know this one - about 200,000 layers of gold leaf per inch.  I think there may be better ways of preventing contamination/radiation than covering a large area with one of the most expensive metals. 

And if you mixed it a few inner layers of gold then lead on top?

Go for it, How else could we prevent the reactor buildings from leaking?
 

The Naked Scientists Forum


 

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