Club409
Notable News
So that's what Dr Justin's been up to
It's definitely not good but nowhere near as bad as the media is making it sound. The reactors themselves are are too damaged to ever operate again but what has happened so far is nowhere near a Chernobyl-type disaster and I don't think it has the potential to become even close. There have been radiation releases but nothing that should cause major concern (unless they have been covering up the true dose rates though from what I've seen I don't think that is happening). At the rates they are describing here you would have to stand next to the damaged reactor for about 400 hours to reach the minimum dose for which an increased cancer risk is detectable (although still only an increased risk of about 8% over your lifetime) and around 4000 hours to see any immediate effects. I think Japan is taking appropriate conservative measures by evacuating people within about 15 miles of the reactors though that is largely precautionary in case something happens and the dose rate increases further. Overall I think the news agencies should be focusing on the tens of thousands of people that are actually dead or dying instead of playing the fear card focusing on the reactors that haven't caused any deaths.
Two more things (perhaps you've noticed I'm a little angry at the coverage).
1) When it is reported that radiation levels are double (or X times) the normal level (presumably the sea-level background rate) note that the dose rate on an airplane flying at 30000 feet is 20-30 times the "normal" level and people don't freak out about that.
2) People writing articles need to learn the difference between the radiation dose and dose rate. They take reported numbers (say 200 microsieverts/hour) and then claim that the number is equivalent to X percentage of your yearly dose limit. They describe it as if you would instantly receive 200 microsieverts of dose when you would actually have to stand in that exact spot for an hour to get that dose.
People dumb as hell.
Hey Steven I was reading that they stopped nuclear reactions after the earthquake. How do you stop a nuclear reaction? I am just curious
The supermoon is happening Saturday night!
You stop a nuclear reaction by inserting control rods into the reactor. Control rods are made of materials that absorb neutrons and therefore take away neutrons from the system that could otherwise interact with the fuel (uranium/plutonium/etc.) to cause fissions. All of the reactors were shut down as soon as the earthquake (and before the tsunami) hit. The problem is that even after the initial reaction is shut down the fuel stays hot for a very long period of time afterwards and you must continue to cool it to keep the fuel from melting. In Japan the earthquake essentially disabled the primary coolant system and the tsunami destroyed the backup pumps. There are smaller battery operated pumps that did come on but the batteries only last for about 8 hours (normally that would be enough time for replacements to be brought in from off site but due to the destruction to the roads it wasn't possible).
The situation has gotten a fair amount worse since my original posts but appears to have stabilized now. From all of the sources I have seen (including a nuclear engineering professor in Japan) there still has not been a radiation release that would cause any risk to the general population off of the plant site. There have been several periods where high levels were detected on site and it appears likely that a number of the plant workers have received significant exposure and will likely suffer major health issues and possibly die.
wow people are retarded. at least the reuters reports seem to have their facts straight.
