Japan nuclear agency upgrades Fukushima alert level

[TargeT]

I wonder who's company will be heading up the "ice wall" project... I bet a good old game of "follow the money" would be VERY telling at this point....


Look at the expansion of water tank storage... someone is making out like a BANDIT here....

[Kimberley]

I have not been to this thread for a few days thank you gittarpikk and all for your posts.

[Delight]

I just came across this and have no idea if its been posted...if yes, mods can delete. It put things in better perspective for me about the conventional ideas of dosage meaning



http://xkcd.com/radiation/

[panopticon]

Another good resource, though a bit complicated (it is a complicated subject), for understanding the differences in measuring between absorbed, equivalent and effective dose:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=PTaSfpBJgCE

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Fjy_hVpWgWs

Which are originally from here:
www.ionactive.co.uk/multi-media_video.html?m=14

-- Pan

[panopticon]

Back in June of this year Akio Matsumura was writing about the contaminated water stored onsite @ the Fukushima Plant.

He mentioned the 'June 18 New York Times article by Hiroko Tabuchi' titled 'High Levels of Radioactive Strontium Found in Groundwater Near Fukushima Plant' and went on to reference an explanation of the effects that Strontium and Tritium have when internalised.

I found this description useful so thought I'd share excerpts from it.

##########

Explaining Radiation

Like all material things, radioactive substances are made up of atoms. However, the atoms of a radioactive material are unstable, unlike most of the atoms in most of the materials around us in everyday life, which are stable.

Unstable atoms are particularly dangerous.

Stable atoms don’t change. They stay the same forever. But a radioactive atom will suddenly and violently disintegrate, giving off a burst of subatomic shrapnel called “atomic radiation”.

The unit of radioactivity is “one becquerel”, which indicates that one radioactive atom is disintegrating every second. One thousand becquerels means a thousand disintegrations are taking place every second, or over 3 and a half million disintegrations every hour.

Living cells are injured or killed by the passage of the subatomic projectiles given off by disintegrating atoms, which may be one of three types, called alpha, beta and gamma emissions.

Gamma emissions are like x-rays, but more powerful. They can penetrate right through the human body. Beta emissions are quite different; they are not rays, but electrically charged particles, and they can only travel a few millimetres in soft tissue. Alpha emissions are also made up of electrically charged particles, but those particles are much more massive and even less penetrating than beta emissions.
Each alpha particle is roughly 7000 times heavier than a beta particle. Alpha particles can be stopped by a single sheet of paper or by the dead layer of skin on the outside of your hand.

The Dangers of Radioactivity

Outside the body, the main danger is from the penetrating gamma radiation. External gamma rays can cause “whole body irradiation”, although some parts of the body may get the bulk of the dose — the hands, the feet, the gonads.

But once radioactive materials get inside the body, because a person has unknowingly breathed contaminated air, or drank contaminated water, or ate contaminated food, then those radioactive atoms are disintegrating right inside the body. Such inhaled or ingested radioactive materials are called “internal emitters”, because the gamma rays and beta particles and alpha particles are now being given off internally, directly damaging internal cells. Occasionally, such damaged cells can turn into cancerous growths many years later. If reproductive cells are damaged, the harmful effects can be experienced by children or grandchildren.

Decades of careful research has revealed that internal alpha emissions are about 20 times more biologically damaging than internal beta or gamma emissions, per unit of energy. In other words, a given internal alpha emission experienced by a given population will cause 20 times more cases of cancer or genetic defects than a comparable internal beta or gamma emission experienced by a similar population. (This factor is called the “relative biological effectiveness” or RBE.)

Research has also shown that in many cases internal beta emissions are more damaging than gamma emissions of similar energy. In such cases the RBE could be 2 or 3 or more, meaning that beta particles can be 2 or 3 times as biologically damaging as gamma rays.

What Do Tritium and Strontium-90 Do?

Tritium (the name given to radioactive hydrogen) and strontium-90 ... are beta-emitting radioactive materials. They give off almost no gamma rays, so they are primarily an internal hazard. Since water is essential for all living things, water contaminated with tritium and strontium-90 will be eagerly absorbed into any living organism that drinks that water.

Strontium-90 is chemically similar to calcium, very important for the formation of bones and teeth, and a key nutrient in milk. So when strontium-90 is ingested, the body eagerly stores it up in the bones, the teeth — and in mother’s milk, where it is readily passed on to the nursing infant. Since strontium-90 has a half-life of about 30 years (that’s the time required for just half of the radioactive atoms to disintegrate) it is easy to see that the beta emissions will continue for decades to irradiate the bones and the bone marrow of the contaminated individual, whether adult or infant. This unremitting radioactive exposure will increase the risk of bone cancer and leukemia (cancer of the blood).

... when a radioactive atom of strontium-90 disintegrates, it changes into an atom of yttrium-90 — another beta-emitting radioactive material. Yttrium-90 is not chemically similar to calcium, and so the body moves it around to other organs inside the anatomy...

Tritium is chemically identical to ordinary hydrogen, except that it is radioactive. Since hydrogen is one of the basic building blocks of all organic molecules, including DNA molecules, some of the radioactive tritium that is ingested by a person will become “organically bound” as part of larger organic molecules. The long-term medical effects of chronic tritium exposure are still not well understood and remain the source of considerable scientific controversy.
...
And it should be borne in mind that there are many dozens of other radioactive materials in the contaminated water at Fukushima, mostly beta-emitters and alpha-emitters, that are not even being mentioned by TEPCO or by the Japanese government.
Source

##########

Remember that Tritium can not be removed from the contaminated water.

This is not meant as a "be afraid, be very afraid" post.
It is simply to inform those interested in the way that differing elements behave.

The human body will remove many of these contaminants as part of the normal "in and out" process. As I said before most material ingested goes straight through. The danger at low dose is in that small % that remains behind in the blood, bones and organs. Inhaled particulate matter also can be absorbed or expelled by the body quite readily at low concentrations. It is the cases where this doesn't happen that presents the need for regulation.

The dilution of the contaminated water in the ocean, while not ideal, will bring it below "hazardous" levels as dictated by those who think they know what is best for us..

It will also put a small amount of Tritium (with an ~12 year half-life) into the food chain, however Tritium has a biological half-life of between 9 and 13 days (dependent on it being eaten/drank and the individual) so presents minimal statistical danger. The best way to move Tritium from the body (according to the research I've done) is to drink non-contaminated water.

-- Pan

Sources:

NYT: High Levels of Strontium Found in Groundwater Near Fukushima Plant
High Levels of Radioactive Strontium Found in Groundwater Near Fukushima Plant
Tritium page - wikipedia
Preliminary report on human excretion of tritium (1950)

[panopticon]

Handout from Tepco, 2nd September, showing where radiation levels were detected and images of flanges believed to be responsible:



Source



Source

-- Pan

[panopticon]

Using the above posts as reference in reading the following statements from Tepco shows how differing radiation sources and types can cause confusion and why more detailed explanations are needed.

####################

Explanation regarding the high radiation levels (maximum 1,800 mSv/h) found at tanks in Fukushima Daiichi NPS on August 31, 2013
September 01, 2013

We deeply apologize for the great anxiety and inconvenience caused by the recent contaminated water issues at the Fukushima Daiichi NPS, which affect residents near the power station and the broader society.

With regard to the high radiation levels (maximum 1,800 mSv/h) found at tanks in Fukushima Daiichi NPS on August 31, some articles reported that "by simple calculation, if a person were exposed to this amount of radiation for four hours continuously, it would lead to death," or "it would take only one minute to reach the annual radiation exposure limit for workers," etc. We would like to explain more about the figure of 1,800 mSv/h.

We used measuring equipment that measures both beta radiation and gamma radiation. The 1,800 mSv/h figure represents the total amount of beta radiation and gamma radiation. Most of the 1,800 mSv/h was beta radiation; gamma radiation measured 1 mSv/h.

Since the control level of the equivalent dose for skin is 500 mSv/year, such radiation level (1800mSv/h) should be carefully controlled. However, since beta radiation travels only a short distance, radiation levels can be reduced considerably by maintaining a distance. Moreover, since beta radiation is weak and can be blocked by a thin sheet of metal, such as aluminum, we believe that we can control radiation exposure by the using proper equipment and clothing.

Additionally, although 1,800 mSv/h was detected at 5cm above the floor, the radiation level at 50cm above the floor was 15 mSv/h. Thus, the figure of 1,800 mSv/h does not represent the radiation level of the whole area.

Some articles reported that "if a person were exposed to this amount of radiation for four hours continuously, it would lead to death," by comparing with the radiation level that would result in death (7,000 mSv), or "it would take only one minute to reach the annual radiation exposure limit for workers," by comparing with the annual radiation exposure limit for workers (50 mSv). However, we believe that simply comparing the 1,800 mSv/h figure with these standard levels is inappropriate, since the standard levels represent the cumulative effective dose (not equivalent dose) upon the whole body.

We will investigate the cause of this issue, taking any appropriate countermeasures immediately, and continue to make every effort to secure the safety of workers.
Source

###

Water Leak at a Tank in the H4 area in Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station (Follow-up Information 28)
September 04, 2013

This is follow-up information on the "water leak at a tank in the H4 area in Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station" found on August 19.

During a patrol yesterday (on September 3), we detected high does equivalent rates at the 2 locations in the H3 area which we previously announced as having showed high dose equivalent rates (β and γ rays (70μm dose equivalent rate*1)). We conducted dose measurement at these locations using a high-range measuring device also.
*1: 70μm dose equivalent rate = dose equivalent rate to the skin, etc.

In addition, on Tank No.7 in Group A in the H6 area around which a high dose equivalent rate (β and γ rays (70μm dose equivalent rate*1)) was detected on September 2, we conducted dose measurement using a high-range measuring device also. The dose rate detected at the 50-cm distance today was 5.5mSv/h and did not exceed 10mSv/h.

· Tank No.4 (north side) in Group B in the H3 area: 40mSv/h (at the 50-cm distance)*2, 2,200mSv/h (at the 5-cm distance)*2
· Tank No.4 (south side) in Group B in the H3 area: 10mSv/h (at the 50-cm distance)*2, 400mSv/h (at the 5-cm distance)*2
· Tank No.7 in Group A in the H6 area: 5.5mSv/h (at the 50-cm distance)*2, 300mSv/h (at the 5-cm distance)*2
*2: Values of 70μm dose equivalent rates (β ray).
(Values of 1cm dose equivalent rates (γ ray) were less than 1mSv/h.)

Further, we have confirmed that the water levels of the tanks in the group including Tank No.7 in Group A in the H6 area have been unchanged.
Source

####################

So, if these reports are to be believed, the potential danger to employees on site was much less than was being widely bandied around by the media.

In addition the impression that had been given (or maybe it says more about my interpretation of the impression than what was actually said) was that there was a major water leak on site. Whether there was or not is hard to tell (Tepco have a long history of covering up accidents) however it is plain from what little we know of the situation that the employees are under-paid and under-trained with sub-standard equipment. The ones who identified the radiation leak may have received a high dose of beta radiation (not the more dangerous gamma radiation) but if their protective gear was of a high enough standard there should be no harmful side-effects.
Kind Regards,
Panopticon

[Cidersomerset]

Update on yesterdays article...........




4 September 2013 Last updated at 09:55

Radiation levels hit new high near Fukushima water tanks




Aerial view shows Tokyo Electric Power Co.


(Tepco's) tsunami-crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant and its
contaminated water storage tanks (bottom) in Fukushima, in this file photo taken
by Kyodo 20 August 2013 Tepco faces a major challenge to safely store
contaminated water at Fukushima




Radiation levels around tanks storing contaminated water at Japan's crippled
Fukushima nuclear plant have risen by a fifth to a new high, officials say.
Ground readings near one set of tanks stood at 2,200 millisieverts (mSv) on
Tuesday, the plant operator and Japan's nuclear authority said.

Saturday's reading was 1,800 mSv.

Last month, plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco) said it had found
highly contaminated water leaking from a storage tank.Other leaks have also been
reported, prompting the government on Tuesday to pledge 47bn yen ($473m, £304
m) in funding to tackle the problem.

The spike in radiation levels found on Tuesday was in the same area where the
1,800 mSv level was detected on Saturday, a spokeswoman from Tepco told
Bloomberg.

Joanna Gosling explains where the leaks are coming from

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=N2Uydo2MA8k

The readings are thought to be high enough to provide a lethal radiation dose to
someone standing near contaminated areas without protective gear within hours.

But Japan's Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) also said the areas were easily
contained.

'Drastic measures'

The earthquake and tsunami in March 2011 knocked out cooling systems to
reactors at the Fukushima plant, three of which melted down.

Water is now being pumped in to cool the reactors, but storing the resultant large
quantities of radioactive water has proved a challenge for Tepco.

The process creates an extra 400 tonnes of contaminated water every day, which
must be stored in temporary tanks. But leaks of contaminated water, both from the
tanks, pipes and through damaged structures, have been a persistent problem.
Groundwater from the hills surrounding the plant also flows down and into the
radio active areas. Under the government plan announced on Tuesday, a wall of
frozen earth will be created around the reactors using pipes filled with coolant. This
aims to prevent groundwater coming into contact with contaminated water being
used to cool fuel rods.

Water treatment systems would also be upgraded to tackle the build-up of
contaminated water, officials said.

On Wednesday, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe told journalists in Tokyo that
the government was willing "to take drastic measures of a maximum scale" to
resolve the issue ahead of the 2020 summer Olympic Games.

"We are aware of concerns over the issue of contaminated water leakages at
Fukushima, the government will take charge and will definitely resolve this
problem," he said.

Tokyo is a candidate as a host nation for the Olympics, and the decision is expected
in days.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-23945612

[TargeT]

all of these dose charts you guys are posting are pretty cute, the text next to them is based on nothing, no studies, nothing at all except the nuclear regulatory committees suggestions of what level of exposure does what.

1,800-2,200 mSv is NOT leathal after an hour not even close... notice how they put in "is thought" as a way to couch their statement; very clever use of language to suggest an idea but not to stand behind it.


I'm seeing more fear porn here & it's sad.

2,200 mSv is getting much closer to levels that we should be concerned about; but NOT a "the world is going to die" situation.

[onawah]

I still have no idea what levels are safe or whose statistics to trust--that will take more time and study, but I can say that I am experiencing much less anxiety about Fukushima (and particularly the welfare of my loved ones who live on the West Coast) since I've accepted the possibility that things are not as bad as they've been portrayed.
It's been difficult to make the leap of faith because I've been an environmentalist all my adult life, and Helen Calidicott was a heroine of mine for a long time.
This is one instance in which keeping an open mind has paid off in lessening worry, and I'm grateful for that.

[panopticon]

Here's a few excerpts from a longer article by Tim Hume (CNN) on the present situation @Fukushima.

###########################

Why are these holding tanks leaking?

The leaks that have occurred so far have been in a type of storage tank using plastic seals. About 350 of the 1,000 tanks in place are constructed in the same way. These are the ones that were constructed hastily in the aftermath of the disaster as a makeshift measure -- but, two and a half years on, are beginning to fail.

Michael Friedlander, a nuclear engineer and former U.S. power plant operator, told CNN the eventual failure of the tanks years after they were deployed on a supposedly temporary, emergency basis is illustrative of TEPCO's ad hoc, unsustainable response to the disaster.

"Given the cards they were dealt, building a tank farm to hold the water in in the heat of the emergency, there was really there only one option, so I don't fault them for that," he said.

But beyond the emergency response, TEPCO had demonstrated no long-term vision for dealing with the problem, he said.

"You can't be getting rid of 400 tons of water a day with no end in sight," he added. "Their strategy was never sustainable. You've got all this radioactive material sitting there next to the plant with effectively no long term strategy for dealing with it."

What threat does the current leak pose?

"In the grand scheme of things, is it a potential threat to Tokyo or the countryside outside the plant proper? Truthfully, no," said Friedlander.

"In the event one of the tanks ruptures due to another seismic event would it make a huge mess? Absolutely."

It also represents a threat to the workers at the plant if they come into contact with radiation at that level. Some experts have suggested that contaminated water may need to dumped into the ocean at some stage.

What are the options to halt this leakage?

TEPCO has proposed setting up a subterranean barrier around the plant by freezing the ground around it, preventing groundwater from leaking into the damaged plant and carrying radioactive particles with it as it seeps out.

The plan to freeze the ground presents significant technical challenges. It could involve plunging thousands of tubes carrying a powerful coolant liquid deep into the ground surrounding the stricken reactor buildings. The technology has been used before in the construction of tunnels, but never on the massive scale that the Fukushima plant would require.

Will it work?

According to Friedlander, this technology has only really been employed as a temporary solution, during construction projects for example -- but to attempt to use the freezing option as a long-term option would make little sense.

He said the only viable option is to clean the water to a standard where it can be released. "I get it's going to take 40 years to decontaminate those buildings," he said.

"But there has to be a way to figure out where groundwater intrusion is coming from and stop it. There has to be a way of doing that from outside the buildings -- you can't be getting rid of 400 tons of water a day with no end in sight.

"This is nothing more sophisticated than when your basement at home leaks. There's well established technology for dealing with groundwater intrusion in facilities.

"But freezing the ground for 40 years doesn't sound like a sustainable solution."

Source

###########################

The full article goes into more detail and, in my opinion, is quite well balanced.
-- Pan

[SKIBADABOMSKI]

My mother in law was going through a relationship break up. Really feeling down she set off on a journey to clear her head. My misses called her up asking how she was and she's told us she was in Sendai in the worst hit tsunami struck areas. She spent 3 days there wandering around the provinces and going very close to the (NO GO ZONES) she say she feels uplifted and free from all the pain she had.

She's the type that likes to climb mountains. Yup at 67 years of age she scrambles up those peaks with ease. If some of you may remember when March 11 kicked off and me and my friends were getting all wrapped up in the fear mongering that she was the only one that didn't want to be running away from Tokyo.

She was laughing when we bundled her in a van as we set off to more southernly areas for 2 weeks. Everyday she kept asking "can we go back today?"

Yes this may seem crazy to you. But for people here it's the norm. Many elderly folk go touring the Sendai areas along with thousands of people just going to help clean up.

May seem off topic but there is lot in what I'm saying.



Brilliant.

[onawah]

This was on the Natural Solutions website. I don't know if it's in the MSM as yet.
http://drrimatruthreports.com/ambass...-the-olympics/

Email from Ambassador Murata

Dear Mr. Fucetola,

I wish to thank you for your significant message. I read with great interest the memorandum from Dr. Rima. I admired the powerful dissemination capacity of your campaign – hoping for our cooperation.

I have drafted the attached urgent appeal to UNSG Ban Ki-moon and have sent it out. Please feel free to make use of it.

I an m very much encouraged by the appropriate efforts your Foundation is making to cope with the worst global crisis.

Yours truly,

Mitsuhei Murata

Urgent Appeal to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon

I am extremely worried about the lack of the sense of crisis in Japan and abroad,as regards the worsening situation at the Fukushima Daiichi.

The international community is required to prevent the Fukushima accident from developing into the ultimate catastrophe of the world, a possibility the collapse of the Unit 4 by a mega earthquake could turn into a reality. It could happen at any moment!

Faced with this unprecedented crisis, the mobilization of human wisdom is required on the widest possible scale. The full assumption of responsibilities by the Japanese Government is urgently needed.

The present abnormal lack of the sense of crisis is due to the fact that inconvenient truth is not disclosed.

The international community has the duty, for example, to grasp correctly the precise volume of the continuous release of radiation from Fukushima.

In this connection, the official numbers published by Tepco, 10 million BQ/H, unchanged for the last year and half, could hardly be trusted. They remain unchanged even after the revelation by Tepco that, since the accident in 2011, 400 tons of contaminated water daily leaked into the sea. Now the Government admits that 300 tons daily flow into the sea. The situation is worsening. And no solution in sight!

The so called international strategy to consider that Fukushima accident did not happen, as some papers writes, is doomed to failure. This strategy is evidenced by the continued promotion of nuclear reactors worldwide, and their restarting and exporting by Japan.

Even if it succeeds to hide the head, it cannot hide the tail that is the contamination of the ocean on a planetary scale.

Conscientious citizens are now calling for the withdrawal of the invitation for Olympic games by Japan.

Allow me to count on your understanding and support.

Yours truly,
Mitsuhei Murata
Former Japanese Ambassador to Switzerland

[Atlas]

From nuclearfreeplanet.org/prof-mitsuhei-murata

A Plea for a Total Ban on the Use of Nuclear Energy
By Mitsuhei Murata, Former Japanese Ambassador to Switzerland

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=NicSZgWJZlI

Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is for me a great honor and a real pleasure to participate in this memorable event.

In 1956 the cold war was at its height, nuclear war was menacing mankind and my prize essay alleged that the world was "on the verge of total destruction."Today the consequences of Fukushima threaten the world. Unit 4 contains 10 times more cesium 137 than Chernobyl. A strong earthquake could mean collapse.

The Japanese people realize from experience that nuclear energy generates unacceptable calamities. The collapse of unit 4 could be one. Japan must assume the historic role of promoting denuclearization, both civilian and military. Ignoring the conditions of the Fukushima nuclear reactors continue to be promoted at home and abroad. Fukushima must not be forgotten. In the name of the victims and 170,000 refugees, I call for a total ban of nuclear energy. The world must realize that any radioactive contamination creates immense and permanent harm for mankind and the earth.

1. Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima are no less dreadful thanatomic bombs. Nuclear reactors are potential “super bombs." No single weapon can compete with the potential damage that can be caused by Fukushima unit 4 or reprocessing plants.
2. The Fukushima accident could have been more catastrophic for Japan and the world. The still present danger of a collapse of unit 4 after an intensity 7earthquake must be broadcast the world over.
3.Sound judgment would not have permitted construction of 54 nuclearreactors in a Japan menaced by frequent earthquakes and tsunamis.Only the lack of ethics and responsibility made it possible. Money and thecorruption of power plant management sow the seeds of catastrophe. This is not limited to Japan.
4.The same technology that produces nuclear energy produces nuclear weapons. The proliferation of nuclear power plants leads to the proliferationof nuclear weapons, as we are seeing today in North Korea and Iran. There is no way to ensure the safety of future generations except to eliminate the use of nuclear fission technology across the planet.
5. The lack of ethics and responsibility is highlighted by the absence of a solution for nuclear waste that threatens future generations. The Japanese “nuclear village" or nuclear dictatorship envisions the restarting and export of nuclear reactors, thus regaining the offensive for the Japanese nuclear industry. This is immoral. It shows no sense of international or inter-generational responsibility. Alas, I fear it will last.
6. Japan should warn the world of the consequences of not heading towardsdenuclearization. Eight years ago, I predicted that Japanese electriccompanies would decide Japan's fate. Two years ago at the World Congress of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War ( IPPNW) in Basel, I pleaded for mobilizing human wisdom to avert the ultimate catastrophe a nuclear calamity could produce. Sadly, these warnings did not deter my fears.

7. Considering the worldwide consequences of a nuclear accident, countries not possessing nuclear reactors should urge denuclearization, be it military or civilian. Countries already opting for nuclear energy should do so as well.

8. Originally, Japan had a maternal culture characterized by harmony and solidarity. After the Meiji Restoration was introduced to Japan, a paternal culture characterized by competition and confrontation in military form. History shows that paternal cultures end in catastrophe. Fukushima is the result of the supremacy of economy, another form of paternal culture introduced after WW2. The Maternal culture of harmony is the remedy forthe paternal culture of power.

9. Nuclear accidents cause limitless consequences unacceptable to human society. Fukushima is a reminder that the possibility of such a disaster should be completely zero. The great principle of a world without nuclear weapons and reactors should not be forgotten. The transition to maternalcivilization is a prerequisite for this vision.

10. Today mankind faces a crisis of civilization. The true cause is lack of ethics. Fundamental ethics would prohibit the abuse and exhaustion of natural resources leaving, permanently poisonous waste and enormous debt in its wake. Global ethics requires maternal culture, respecting the environment and interests of future generations. 3 transitions are necessary: Turn selfishness to solidarity, greed to contentment and materialism to spiritualism. Natural and renewable energies could amply supply the needs of such a civilization with a transitional period supplemented by fossil fuels. We must prepare to make the short term sacrifices in our lifestyles for the long term safety of mankind and the earth without nuclear energy.

11. The proposal to hold a UN Ethics Summit now draws more global attention. The trinity of global ethics, maternal civilization and true denuclearization should become a reality. President Obama's vision of the 'World without Nuclear Weapons’ needs to become the 'World without Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear Reactors." The UN Ethics Summit is the first concrete step. I ardently hope that President Obama takes the initiative to realize this Summit and create an International Day of Global Ethics to serve as a yearly reminder. Initially, controversy over content should be carefully avoided.

Conclusion:

In concluding, let me say the following.

The critical situation at Fukushima requires the mobilization of human wisdom on the widest possible scale. The pressing need for setting up a neutral assessment team as well as an international technical cooperation team is evident.

The fuel rods in the decaying cooling pool of unit 4 must be moved to another place as soon as possible. It is a global security issue requiring maximum efforts which regrettably are not being made.

More and more Japanese are awakening to the real dangers of nuclear accidents and nuclear reactors. Japan is thus heading steadily towards establishing zero dependency on nuclear energy.

"The will of heaven and earth" is my translation of "Providence as philosophy,"protecting mankind and the earth. It will help achieve true denuclearization, civil and military, in due course. The rage of those who lost all will continue to enliven anti-nuclear movements in Japan and eventually abroad.

Japan must now contribute to the realization of true denuclearization. Then the victims of Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Fukushima will not have suffered in vain.

[Atlas]

From TEPCO : Radiation dose measured in the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station

2013/09/06

MP-1 : 2.8 μSv/ｈ
MP-2 : 4.9 μSv/ｈ
MP-3 : 5.7 μSv/ｈ
MP-4 : 5.0 μSv/ｈ
MP-5 : 5.3 μSv/ｈ
MP-6 : 2.8 μSv/ｈ
MP-7 : 3.2 μSv/ｈ
MP-8 : 3.2 μSv/ｈ

Comparison - external dose rates:

5 μSv/ｈ: The dose rate in an aeroplane flying at an altitude of 12 kilometres
5 μSv/ｈ: The highest dose rate measured in Finland during the Chernobyl accident



TEPCO measurements indicate that we are closer to an "Elevated risk: relocate ASAP" zone rather than an "Elevated risk: take safety precautions" zone.

To reach the "sickness risk" zone, we need 4 times the actual levels.

[TargeT]

Posted by buares (here)

Where does the text come from on that chart? who made up those statements? Was it anyone that had ever actually seen radiation exposure?

Here's a chart that is much more believable, it was created by a man who worked in the nuclear industry Long before, and after there was a nuclear regulatory scare team.

Dosages that can burn if exposed long enough.

850 R/milli-second ............................ Fatally burned one man: 3 survived same dose.
60,000 R/hr @ 1 minute .....................Kills rats: approx same as UV light from electric arc welder.
7000 R ...............................................Individual medical dose for cancer therapy.

"Will not burn skin"
200 R/hour ........................................ Near Chernobyl #4 reactor 1 week after accident (1986)
(one hundredth medical dose for cancer therapy).
60 R/hour ...........................................Human cells OK - self-repair during exposure.
1 R/min @ 1 meter ...................... One Curie (one gram radium) (won’t burn skin).
1 R ...................................................... 1 seiverts = 100 Roentgen (typo on attached chart)

"Regulatory Nonsense: Meaningless in terms of harmful impact on people"
1 Seivert .............................................One hundred Roentgen.
Milli-R ................................................. one thousandth Roentgen.
150 milli-R/year ................................. Average natural background exposure from natural sources.
Micro-R .............................................. One millionth Roentgen.
60 micro-R/hr .................................... N.E.C. prescribed off-site limit (outside the fence).
25 micro-R/hour ............................... Off-site dose at Three Mile Island #2 one week after “incident.”
20 micro-R/hour ................................ Average natural background radiation.
1 Microseivert ................................... 10 Roentgen.
Nano-Curie ........................................ One billionth Curie.
1 Becquerel ........................................ .000037 Curie.
5.25 nano-Curies/literIodine-131 ....... Rainwater tested in Portland, OR after Chernobyl.
4.9 nano-Curies/liter Potassium-40 ... Common salad oil in super market.
Pico-Curie ........................................... One trillionth Curie.
5 pico-Curies/liter .............................. Government radium limit for drinking water.
4 pico-Curies/min/ltr of air ..................EPA’s limit for radon in homes

Radiation Exposure Chart.pdf

Notice the EXTREME difference in these charts?

10 Sv will not kill you, not even close! (as the chart you posted states).

when you are working with such incredably wrong data, how can anyone be expected to be taken seriously...

[Atlas]

Posted by TargeT (here)
Where does the text come from on that chart?

I'm checking this right now.

Posted by TargeT (here)
10 Sv will not kill you, not even close! (as the chart you posted states).

From wikipedia:

4.5 to 6 Sv: fatal acute doses during Goiânia accident
5.1 Sv: fatal acute dose to Harry Daghlian in 1945 criticality accident

From World Health Organisation:

Beyond certain thresholds, radiation can impair the functioning of tissues and/or organs and can produce acute effects such as skin redness, hair loss, radiation burns, or acute radiation syndrome. These effects are more severe at higher doses and higher dose rates. For instance, the dose threshold for acute radiation syndrome is about 1 Sv (1000 mSv).

Epidemiological studies on populations exposed to radiation (for example atomic bomb survivors or radiotherapy patients) showed a significant increase of cancer risk at doses above 100 mSv.

[TargeT]

Posted by buares (here)
From wikipedia:

4.5 to 6 Sv: fatal acute doses during Goiânia accident

5.1 Sv: fatal acute dose to Harry Daghlian in 1945 criticality accident

Daghlian and the Demon core, this is not a very good example, you don't have a core of plutonium go critical at 6 Sv... maybe 60R (and that's 60R/second, not per hour on a reactor core in critical reaction (critical just means sustained, it's a good term in the nuclear industry))

this case was either reported wrong or not measured at all when the incident happend; people re-created his experiment and were exposed to doses around 50-70R/second (very significant doses, definately in the fatal ranges)

and the brazil thing ( Goiânia ) had extremely concentrated material, something like 50 BILLION bq, or what... 1,850,000R ? most people were getting exposures of 400-600 REM over LONG durations and injesting it as well (the "glowy blue powder") that **** was super hot! so radioactive it glowed on it's own; people were rubbing it on their skin so they could glow (and then, later died).

I don't know why wikipidia says 4-6Sv, that's WAY WAY off what those poor people got, i guess it just shows that wikipedia can still have it's flaws.

Posted by buares (here)
From World Health Organisation:

Beyond certain thresholds, radiation can impair the functioning of tissues and/or organs and can produce acute effects such as skin redness, hair loss, radiation burns, or acute radiation syndrome. These effects are more severe at higher doses and higher dose rates. For instance, the dose threshold for acute radiation syndrome is about 1 Sv (1000 mSv).

Epidemiological studies on populations exposed to radiation (for example atomic bomb survivors or radiotherapy patients) showed a significant increase of cancer risk at doses above 100 mSv.

I just don't see the WHO as a good source on this, these are the same people who were pushing the swine flu scare / vaccine... I'd have to see those studies they did of atomic bomb survivors and how they "guessed" at exposure doses; I highly doubt there were any actual radiological meters at the sites of those bombs.

[Atlas]

From theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/mar/15/radiation-exposure-levels-guide

[TargeT]

well at least that one says 10sv is fatal with in weeks of exposure.. yeah i could see if you were getting exposed to 10sv/s or 10sv/min for WEEKS you would accumulate fatal levels of radiation. 10sv exposure needs a time hack on it, and to be really accurate it needs to be converted to REM.

these numbers are confusing and hard to wrap your mind around, there's like 4 different types of measurements that are interchanged when they shouldn't be as they all mean different things; I could get 10,000 msv exposure for WEEKS on my fingers or hand and be fine, if I got that exposure in my chest cavity I would not be fine; there's a lot more to exposure and it's health risks than just a number like Sv.