US Nuclear Reactors VS Fukushima

[Colors]

FFS, can someone tell me already whether the guy is full of sh!t or not? That's all I would like to know.

[ACfixer]

Here's the IAEA website. They claim the situation is getting better. But they're just a bunch of nuke geeks...

http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/...iupdate01.html

2. Radiation Monitoring
The daily monitoring of the deposition of caesium and iodine radionuclides for 47 prefectures is continuing. Since 17 May, deposition of I-131 has not been observed. Low levels of Cs-137 deposition were reported in a few prefectures on a few days since 18 May; the reported values range of from 2.2 to 91 Bq/ m2 for Cs-137.

Gamma dose rates values for all 47 prefectures are reported daily by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) of Japan. On 31 May the gamma dose rate reported for Fukushima prefecture was 1.5 µSv/h. In all other prefectures, reported gamma dose rates were below 0.1 µSv/h; with a general decreasing trend. Meanwhile, the decrease of the gamma dose rate has slowed down, since the short-lived radionuclides have decayed away.
Gamma dose rates reported specifically for the monitoring points in the eastern part of Fukushima prefecture, for distances of more than 30 km from the Fukushima Daiichi plant, showed a general decreasing trend, ranging from 0.1 µSv/h to 17 µSv/h, as reported for 31 May.

On-site measurements at the west gate of the Fukushima Daiichi plant indicate the presence of I-131 and Cs-137 in the air in the close vicinity of the plant (within approximately 1 km). The concentrations in air reported for 29 May were about 3 Bq/m3 for I-131 and about 9 Bq/m3 for Cs-137. The values observed in the previous days show daily fluctuations with an overall decreasing tendency.

Protective Actions
In April, the Government of Japan announced protective actions to reduce the external exposure to the population beyond a distance of 30 km from the Fukushima-Daiichi Nuclear Plant. NISA has reported that the evacuation of the "Planned Evacuation Zones" within Iitate village and Kawamata town commenced on 15 May. Confirmation of completion of the evacuation is awaited.
and Kawamata town commenced on 15 May. Confirmation of completion of the evacuation is awaited.

[Turbozag]

Originally Posted by RexRawk

FFS, can someone tell me already whether the guy is full of sh!t or not? That's all I would like to know.

http://vimeo.com/23186557

[In Absentia]

Originally Posted by Turbozag

http://vimeo.com/23186557

Fairewinds again?

[rob2001]

The sad thing is....there may very well be problems with US nuke plants but guys with agendas polarize the issues and nothing can be agreed on. Take away the anti-nuke agenda and i'm sure most here would agree that safety at US plants is of utmost importance.

[Quantum Cat]

can someone tell me already whether the guy is full of sh!t or not? That's all I would like to know.

He's not full of sh!t, but he's not putting out any useful info either (I'm trying to be charitable). To the public, radiation is a scary bogeyman and I think he plays into that fear by blurring facts with hypotheticals. He should know better.

Here's the IAEA website. They claim the situation is getting better. But they're just a bunch of nuke geeks...

http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/...iupdate01.html

This is the best source of info going right now. Turbozag, you would be better served by going here for info. There are actual facts and data. It paints a picture that one might expect from an incident like this. It's bad in the immediate vicinity but not so bad farther away. IOW, it's a local and not a global disaster.

[ACfixer]

Originally Posted by Quantum Cat

This is the best source of info going right now. Turbozag, you would be better served by going here for info. There are actual facts and data. It paints a picture that one might expect from an incident like this. It's bad in the immediate vicinity but not so bad farther away. IOW, it's a local and not a global disaster.

Turbozag doesn't want to read that, it doesn't fit with his agenda. It tells the story as impartially as anyplace I have found and it would appear the truth is it's bad enough on it's own that we don't need to blow it out of proportion. There are some shreds of good news in there, but good news isn't much fun to those that love sensationalism over true journalism.

[Gigbag]

Originally Posted by rob2001

The sad thing is....there may very well be problems with US nuke plants but guys with agendas polarize the issues and nothing can be agreed on. Take away the anti-nuke agenda and i'm sure most here would agree that safety at US plants is of utmost importance.

Well said.

[Average Joe]

Originally Posted by rob2001

The sad thing is....there may very well be problems with US nuke plants but guys with agendas polarize the issues and nothing can be agreed on. Take away the anti-nuke agenda and i'm sure most here would agree that safety at US plants is of utmost importance.

While I agree with the sentiment, I think it would be far easier to to disspell myths if the pro nuclear side was to be trusted. Putting it mildly, the authorities we should be able to trust haven't exactly been beacons of reliabilty during the japanese crisis - rather admisions about the severity have been parced, facts have been denied until they couldn't be denied no further and then only reluctantly conceded. I wish institutions and authorities would learn that the best way to kill myths and conspiracy theries is full and honest disclosure rather than spin/ media damage control.

[Turbozag]

Originally Posted by ACfixer

Turbozag doesn't want to read that, it doesn't fit with his agenda. It tells the story as impartially as anyplace I have found and it would appear the truth is it's bad enough on it's own that we don't need to blow it out of proportion. There are some shreds of good news in there, but good news isn't much fun to those that love sensationalism over true journalism.

My main motivation for posting this stuff is because I believe it is important news that is NOT getting out to the people. If you think people are going to the IAEA website, they aren't! How do I know? Because nearly every person I speak to in real life (as in, not HERE) has NO IDEA about MOST of the facts going on... (re Fukushima)

Maybe I should post a poll asking how many people are aware of this one fact (hot particles in Seattle)? Hmmm...

What "agenda" do I have? I admitted that I have changed my mind about nuke power after this (continuing nightmare).
I have not bashed anyone here (except for people like you who post protagonistic jabs instead of facts that might disprove the data presented in the videos).

I have posted videos that people can watch, consider, investigate and then make their own mind up. But instead of discussing the facts about the radioactive contamination, you yell "agenda!, biased!", etc, and refuse to refute the facts.

Now as for agendas, lets see,,, IAEA. Are you kidding me?

BTW, that IAEA report did nothing to disprove anything in the videos I posted. No "story", merely charts of data, none of which refutes the videos.

Perhaps you could point to a video or article that states, "there are no such 'hot particles' from Fukushima being inhaled and ingested by Seattle residents" (and Hawaii and other parts of the west coast AND MA!).
*(as pointed out in the video, Wooster Poly Tech has installed 6 air-sampling stations around the country to get this data)

Or perhaps you could dispute ANY statement made by Dr. Gundersen?

Haven't seen ONE.

Obviously, you have the agenda.

OOOPS! I posted again... Darn it... Maybe my memory is going....

[ACfixer]

Originally Posted by Turbozag

BTW, that IAEA report did nothing to disprove anything in the videos I posted. No "story", merely charts of data, none of which refutes the videos.

Precisely, no "story", just data... Call me crazy, but that's how I prefer my news. Your videos are from sources I would consider on par with the likes of Michael Moore or Alex Jones. Few facts and much hyperbole.

Let me show you how this is done Turbozag, I'm finished with my comments in this thread. I'll show you how a man stands by his word.

Good luck on bringing this crushing news of impending doom to the world. I gotta go get me some hot particles and wash them down with a cold drink.

[rob2001]

I can't watch the vids (I can get only dialup at my location), and maybe it was covered in the vids...

How many hot particles can one "ingest" before it's a problem? Do we tolerate these hot particles when we get an Xray? What is the honest danger level?

So for the moment i'll assume the guy is onto something and there are indeed radioactive particles in Seattle....has there been any kind of official warning of danger to Seattle residents? Are officials putting people in harms way and covering up a real threat?

[Fuzzles]

http://www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/rert/radnet-seattle-bg.html

[In Absentia]

Originally Posted by Turbozag

My main motivation for posting this stuff is because I believe it is important news that is NOT getting out to the people. If you think people are going to the IAEA website, they aren't! How do I know? Because nearly every person I speak to in real life (as in, not HERE) has NO IDEA about MOST of the facts going on... (re Fukushima)

Maybe I should post a poll asking how many people are aware of this one fact? Hmmm...

What "agenda" do I have? I admitted that I have changed my mind about nuke power after this (continuing nightmare).
I have not bashed anyone here (except for people like you who post protagonistic jabs instead of facts that might disprove the data presented in the videos).

I have posted videos that people can watch, consider, investigate and then make their own mind up. But instead of discussing the facts about the radioactive contamination, you yell "agenda!, biased!", etc, and refuse to refute the facts.

Now as for agendas, lets see,,, IAEA. Are you kidding me?

BTW, that IAEA report did nothing to disprove anything in the videos I posted. No "story", merely charts of data, none of which refutes the videos.

Perhaps you could point to a video or article that states, "there are no such 'hot particles' from Fukushima being inhaled and ingested by Seattle residents" (and Hawaii and other parts of the west coast AND MA!).
*(as pointed out in the video, Wooster Poly Tech has installed 6 air-sampling stations around the country to get this data)

Or perhaps you could dispute ANY statement made by Dr. Gundersen?

Haven't seen ONE.

Obviously, you have the agenda.

OOOPS! I posted again... Darn it... Maybe my memory is going....

Yet, again, it is not up to us to disprove your videos. It is called burden of proof, and it rests squarely on you. Also, i can't prove that these things aren't happening because you can't prove a negative.

[rob2001]

Originally Posted by Fuzzles

http://www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/rert/radnet-seattle-bg.html

Thanks. From the EPA article regarding Seattle......

To-date, levels recorded at this monitor have been thousands of times below any conservative level of concern.