Excellent article explaining the situation at the Fukushima plant

[don]

Re: Excellent article explaining the situation at the Fukushima plant

sensationalism? MSM BS? It is CBS after all . . .

Travelers coming in from Japan on Wednesday triggered radiation detectors at O'Hare International Airport as they passed through customs. Only very small amounts of radiation were detected.

"We are aware of the radiation," said Chicago Aviation Department spokeswoman Karen Pride. "We are adding screenings and precautionary measures."

In one instance, radiation was detected in a plane's air filtration system. Radiation was also found in luggage and on passengers on flights from Japan.

Mayor Richard M. Daley and other city officials wouldn't provide any additional details, saying federal authorities were handling the situation.

"Of course the protection of the person coming off the plane is important in regards to any radiation and especially within their families," Daley said at an unrelated event.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/...20044341.shtml

[unlucky]

Re: Excellent article explaining the situation at the Fukushima plant

I recall creating a gamma-ray spectrograph for a soil sample back in physics lab in my college days. You could see lots of bigs spikes in the graph at various different energies. The lab instructor came over and said, "yeah - that one there is from Chernobyl, this one is from weapons testing back in the fifties, etc". I was tempted to put the sample in the low-grade radioactive waste bin when we were done.

I have say the MSM reporting and fear-frenzy surrounding this incident is deplorable. Thanks to those (clue1?) who posted the link to the MIT site.

[mirana]

Re: Excellent article explaining the situation at the Fukushima plant

I cannot speak for all of Oehmen's critics but what irked me is that he is belittling the risks
of a reactor accident like this in a style that suggests that he knows what he is talking about (see the title of his screed and various instances in the text).
As for the facts of the post, the fact that a reactor has a core and rods etc is not in dispute. It is his claim that there is nothing to worry
about that has been refuted by reality. Even if things don't get worse and everything is under control from tomorrow on, the Japanese will have to fence off, for the foreseeable future, a significant amount of coastline, keep people from farming and eating animal products from a wider region around the zone, and may
have a number of cases of acute radiation sickness or death,
and for a few years, an increased cancer rate. Nothing to worry about ? Can't happen because there are so many redundancies that a core meltdown (pardon me,
"fuel failure") is no problem at all ?

I do believe in ad hominem arguments, by the way. It often saves time to look at the source and motivation behind some claims
before you try to look at the claimed facts.
In the case of Oehmen, it is possible that he was only trying to calm his relative in Japan when he wrote this explanation,
and that he is regretting that all of this went public. On the other hand, it is a rather polished piece of text, that does not
seem for private consumption only, and he keeps making
public statements in the same cocksure style on his facebook and other places. That tells me that he is full of it.

Taking KI tablets yet?
No, I am in Los Angeles, and any radiation here will be highly diluted (no alarmism!). Good idea though to stock up soon. We live
30 miles from the San Andreas fault, and the Big One is overdue. Some Caltech scientist's hairdresser's boyfriend
will soon write an article arguing that the atom is our friend and all our reactors are doing fine.

[c1ue]

Re: Excellent article explaining the situation at the Fukushima plant

sensationalism? MSM BS? It is CBS after all . . .

Travelers coming in from Japan on Wednesday triggered radiation detectors at O'Hare International Airport as they passed through customs. Only very small amounts of radiation were detected.

I note that article makes no mention of just how much radiation was detected.

Nor does the article note what the sources wound up being - radiation is something which is quite easy to localize.

I do believe in ad hominem arguments, by the way. It often saves time to look at the source and motivation behind some claims
before you try to look at the claimed facts.
In the case of Oehmen, it is possible that he was only trying to calm his relative in Japan when he wrote this explanation,
and that he is regretting that all of this went public. On the other hand, it is a rather polished piece of text, that does not
seem for private consumption only, and he keeps making
public statements in the same cocksure style on his facebook and other places. That tells me that he is full of it.

Whatever your beliefs may be, nonetheless there are still facts that can be ascertained from the situation.

The facts are that whoever Oehman is - he and the others behind the MITNSE web site are doing their level best to clearly articulate what the actual situation is.

If you think the facts of what they say are wrong, then demonstrate so.

To latch onto alarmist commentary does no one any good.

As for your belief in ad hominem, that's wonderful for you.

What do your ad hominem beliefs say about those who promulgate easily disprovable lies as Ritholz, Geniusnow.com, and others have demonstrably done in this case?

[mirana]

Re: Excellent article explaining the situation at the Fukushima plant

Whatever your beliefs may be, nonetheless there are still facts that can be ascertained from the situation.

The facts are that whoever Oehman is - he and the others behind the MITNSE web site are doing their level best to clearly articulate what the actual situation is.

If you think the facts of what they say are wrong, then demonstrate so.

To latch onto alarmist commentary does no one any good.

As for your belief in ad hominem, that's wonderful for you.

What do your ad hominem beliefs say about those who promulgate easily disprovable lies as Ritholz, Geniusnow.com, and others have demonstrably done in this case?

My criticism was of Oehmen's original posting, not of what keeps being added and changed after the fact. I do have a hunch, though (no facts)
that university departments in applied fields will tread carefully when it comes to criticizing their respective industries (future employers, donors, revolving door),
although I would not want to go off in this direction here.

As for refuting the facts, Oehmen's main incendiary claim and the entire tenor of his paper was that there is nothing to worry about, because the built-in redundancy will work.
For the refutation of that, see the pictures of helicopter's dropping water. That was not built in. Nor was the large scale
evacuation. Nor will be the problems after the immediate danger is over.

If you want a wrong technical detail of Oehmen's claims: He says that "...It is worth mentioning at this point that the nuclear fuel in a reactor can *never* cause a nuclear explosion the type of a nuclear bomb..." That sounds reasonable, but funny enough,
a paper from scientists in St. Petersburg recently argued, based on measurements of Xe133/Xe133m, that one of the multiple explosions at Chernobyl
was a "nuclear excursion" with the equivalent of about 10 tons of TNT. Small on the scale of nuclear explosions, but nevertheless.

Ritholz/Geniusnow etc: in my post I was linking to these sites as sources of a backlash, not necessarily defending every detail on them.
As far as they describe the "viral" response of the media to the Oehmen post, how it was picked up uncritically by those
who wanted to hear it, the lack of professional expertise of Oehmen in the field, and the belittling attitude about risk in his post,
I agree with them, as I had independently formed a very similar
opinion. Frankly I don't see what is controversial there. To see that they are right in this does not require rocket (uh, nuclear) science ...or insights into the
biography of the authors (they may be opinion peddlers, but they are not held up as experts in an arcane field).

About alarmism: I was a German student in nuclear physics at Mainz university during the
Chernobyl incident. After sitting in the grass outside during lunch break our hands, elbows, T-shirts, hair, everything was polluted with fallout from Chernobyl
(about 800 miles away). Upon our return the alarms of the institute were triggered, and following their rules (this was Germany) they would normally not have allowed us
to let us go home in the evening (the dose was probably not of serious concern).
It turned out that unfavorable winds had spread a plume of radioactive material over much of central Europe and Sweden. It was serious enough that
milk products, meats and game stopped being sold in shops in Germany. Now Fukushima is not Chernobyl, and the zone of pollution is going to be much
smaller, but locally in Japan, at some radius from the nuclear plants you will have a similar mess, with significant pollution being taken up by the soil and water, and ending up in the food chain. Should the Japanese be bothered by this ? Alarmism ?

[CNiko]

Re: Excellent article explaining the situation at the Fukushima plant

Gee, too bad they didn't call you right away. You obviously have more knowledge of logistics and the situtation at the plant than the boots on the ground.

Fine Sarcasm, but it is the irony in your answer which will take you a while to understand. You see, Nuclear Power pays my bills, and the decisions made from the beginning of this incident don't seem to be from the "boots on the ground" as you call them.

[sunskyfan]

Re: Excellent article explaining the situation at the Fukushima plant

Just because a blip in a physics lab seems small doesn't mean the effects of the event were small. Chernobyl has killed about a million people over time and is still killing people. Thyroid cancer alone rose 42% in Europe due to Chernobyl. Who knows the true effects of atmospheric testing? Do you think the US and USSR were really interested in figuring out how many people they killed of the years from that testing?

[c1ue]

Re: Excellent article explaining the situation at the Fukushima plant

It turned out that unfavorable winds had spread a plume of radioactive material over much of central Europe and Sweden. It was serious enough that
milk products, meats and game stopped being sold in shops in Germany. Now Fukushima is not Chernobyl, and the zone of pollution is going to be much
smaller, but locally in Japan, at some radius from the nuclear plants you will have a similar mess, with significant pollution being taken up by the soil and water, and ending up in the food chain. Should the Japanese be bothered by this ? Alarmism ?

The problem with every single statement you made above - except for the plume - is that each category can as easily be ascribed to fear as it can to fact.

Yes, Chernobyl dropped glowing bits from the sky.

As I mentioned previously, Chernobyl was a series of operator errors combined with a poorly designed plant. The result was effectively the creation of a fission bomb inside the reactor with the subsequent explosion scattering reactor contents all over the place.

That is fact.

What we have in Fukushima is completely different. There are no clear indications whatsoever of any similar circumstances in Fukushima vs. Chernobyl:

1) Reactor design in Fukushima is far more safe, with much stronger and more layers of containment

2) Operators made no errors. There was an immediate SCRAM of the reactor - i.e. further chain reactions were interdicted to the maximum possible state.

3) Temperature increases were certainly high due to the earthquake and tsunami damage, but again no fission explosion breaching containment

4) TEPco and the Japanese government to date have freely acknowledged what they are doing and why, and have warned the population.

Meat and whatever being banned - that is a fear issue.

Everything being polluted - please show some evidence of this.

In fact, the data from Chernobyl showed levels of radiation on site 25,000 times that shown at peak in Fukushima - Wiki says on site radiation levels were 30,000 roentgens vs. the peak Fukushima (thus far) of 12 millisieverts. (Using 1 roentgen = 1 rem = 10 millisieverts). The levels right now are more like 100,000 times less.

The real impact is going to be fear.

Fear which causes delivery drivers to not want to drive food anywhere near Fukushima.

Fear which causes Japanese products everywhere to be considered 'radioactive'.

Fear which brings even more of Japan's electrical generation offline, with attendant effects on transportation and everyday living.

Just because a blip in a physics lab seems small doesn't mean the effects of the event were small. Chernobyl has killed about a million people over time and is still killing people. Thyroid cancer alone rose 42% in Europe due to Chernobyl. Who knows the true effects of atmospheric testing? Do you think the US and USSR were really interested in figuring out how many people they killed of the years from that testing?

Can you at least provide a link?

Because what you say is 100% opposite to what the RER says about the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs. From that ongoing study, the immediate deaths are generally from leukemia (first 15 years), not thyroid cancer.

Secondly the data I found in 2 seconds seems to indicate numbers very different from your assertion:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16919778

Data on 1690 childhood and adolescent cases of thyroid cancer registered in 61 European cancer registries were extracted from the database of the Automated Childhood Cancer Information System (ACCIS) and included in analyses of incidence and survival. In 1988-1997, the age-standardised incidence rates (ASR) for children aged 0-14 years varied in European regions from 0.5 to 1.2 per million and the age-specific incidence in adolescents aged 15-19 years ranged from 4.4 to 11.0 per million. Over the age-span 0-19 years, the female to male ratio increased from 1 to around 3. Papillary thyroid cancer accounted for almost 65% of cases in children and 77% in adolescents. In the childhood population of Belarus, the ASR for 1989-1997 was 23.6 per million and the proportion of papillary tumours was 87%. No association was found between thyroid cancer risk and national dietary iodine status across 16 countries. Incidence of thyroid carcinoma among children and adolescents in Europe (excluding Belarus) increased during 1978-1997 by 3% per year, largely due to papillary carcinoma. Survival of children and adolescents was high over the entire study period and in all regions of Europe. Children with medullary carcinoma had slightly lower 5-year survival (95%, 95% CI 81-99), than those with papillary carcinoma (99%, 95% CI 95-100). More than 90% of patients survived 20 years after diagnosis. Further standardisation of diagnostic, classification and registration criteria will be fundamental for future studies of thyroid carcinomas in young people.

This seems to say that thyroid cancer incidence went up 3% - with 90% of those contracting it surviving after 20 years. RER also noted that thyroid cancers primarily show up in children.

More importantly, the rate of thyroid cancer was a maximum of 11 per 1 million.

500 million EU residents, of which maybe 25% (likely less) are 19 or under.

125 million / 1 million * 11 = 1,375

3% of 1,375 = 41.25

So every year, there are at most 41.25 extra cases of thyroid cancer possibly - even probably due to Chernobyl - and 36 of them live at least 20 years after diagnosis.

This seems a far cry from 1 million over time.

[Shakespear]

Re: Excellent article explaining the situation at the Fukushima plant

c1ue

nonetheless there are still facts that can be ascertained from the situation.

I have no problem with your scientific approach to this issue but with FACTS we are going to have problems. The FACTS are most likely not to be given to the public without "Thorough Cleaning". In Poland, where I am, it is an open secret that the Oncology departments are busier than ever and that certain (Eastern parts) regions of Poland have higher than normal incidence of various cancers. Reasons are simple,

http://newenergyportal.files.wordpre...l-accident.png

This issue surfaced in the media several years ago but disappeared as quickly as it was mentioned. I'm not going to get in a jousting match why, why not, etc. With a little bit of reading it is easy to show that gov. will lie, do lie, and are lying. So getting FACTS is going to be a problem.

The fear mongering straw-man argument is a nice one when you are thousands of kilometers from the problem. On the ground over years things may be completely different and after a bit of time will be completely forgotten except by those living in the problem situation. They will know the FACTS.

In Japan I suspect they will be working on the FACTS as they do all over the world. To make them as clean as possible, I mean correct, I mean accurate ... Oh hell, you know what I mean :-)

[c1ue]

Re: Excellent article explaining the situation at the Fukushima plant

I have no problem with your scientific approach to this issue but with FACTS we are going to have problems. The FACTS are most likely not to be given to the public without "Thorough Cleaning". In Poland, where I am, it is an open secret that the Oncology departments are busier than ever and that certain (Eastern parts) regions of Poland have higher than normal incidence of various cancers. Reasons are simple,

As I noted in my previous post - there is in fact good evidence of increased cancer incidence.

But the actual numbers are very small.

Perhaps you can provide some counterpoints then - contrast rates before Chernobyl vs. after.

Then add up the numbers.

The problem with anecdotes is people. When SARS was all the rage, there were people all over the world who thought they had SARS. Some were right, but the vast majority were wrong.

As for Poland - perhaps some of the 'busyness' is as much due to Poland's increasing wealth and corresponding increasing average age.

Japan before Fukushima already had very high incidences of cancer primarily due to its population tending to live for a very long time.

[c1ue]

Re: Excellent article explaining the situation at the Fukushima plant

More data for those who actually want to see it:

US citizen radiation counts (live - click link):

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/03/1...sa/#more-36112

The map is updated every 5 minutes.
Key to the map:
Nuclear Power Site Location
Alert Level = 100 CPM (counts per minute)

Holy crap! the plume is in Colorado already! (NOT)

The same page shows Tokyo radiation counts - units are microRems.

Again, 1 rem = 10 millisieverts; 40 microrems = 0.4 microsieverts = 1/30,000 of peak at Fukushima #1. Seems like there is no plume.

Denphone Tokyo Office Geiger Counter

Posted: 2011-03-16 2:28 pm by Simon Gibson.
Here are the outputs from the Geiger Counter in our office in Azabujuban, Tokyo:
4 hour reading


Reload Image
24 hour reading


Reload Image
One week reading

[Master Shake]

Re: Excellent article explaining the situation at the Fukushima plant

Fine Sarcasm, but it is the irony in your answer which will take you a while to understand. You see, Nuclear Power pays my bills, and the decisions made from the beginning of this incident don't seem to be from the "boots on the ground" as you call them.

Really? Where did those decisions come from?

[Master Shake]

Re: Excellent article explaining the situation at the Fukushima plant

As I noted in my previous post - there is in fact good evidence of increased cancer incidence.

But the actual numbers are very small.

Perhaps you can provide some counterpoints then - contrast rates before Chernobyl vs. after.

Then add up the numbers.

The problem with anecdotes is people. When SARS was all the rage, there were people all over the world who thought they had SARS. Some were right, but the vast majority were wrong.

As for Poland - perhaps some of the 'busyness' is as much due to Poland's increasing wealth and corresponding increasing average age.

Japan before Fukushima already had very high incidences of cancer primarily due to its population tending to live for a very long time.

You don't have to go back as far as SARS. Just two years ago, the media, with help from the WHO and CDC, were going apeshit over H1N1, treating what was a fairly mild flu virus (which requires contact precautions, i.e. hand hygiene, cover your sneeze, etc) as a highly dangerous airborne transmissible disease. IIRC, even EJ and FRED succumbed to the hysteria on this board, along with the usual suspects. I also recall the conspiracy nonsense that H1N1 was intentionally created by one of the Big Pharma companies.

[c1ue]

Re: Excellent article explaining the situation at the Fukushima plant

You don't have to go back as far as SARS. Just two years ago, the media, with help from the WHO and CDC, were going apeshit over H1N1, treating what was a fairly mild flu virus (which requires contact precautions, i.e. hand hygiene, cover your sneeze, etc) as a highly dangerous airborne transmissible disease. IIRC, even EJ and FRED succumbed to the hysteria on this board, along with the usual suspects. I also recall the conspiracy nonsense that H1N1 was intentionally created by one of the Big Pharma companies.

I do recall that, but chose SARS because I was actually flying to/from Taiwan right at the peak of the scare.

People asked me why I was risking myself, but I pointed out that while there was exposure risk from the flights to/from Taiwan, on the other hand while actually there I was spending most of my time inside areas where the clean room status was such that I would be safer than anywhere else in the world.

As for Fred/EJ on H1N1 - I think this was before EJ at least started to question the provenance of MSM reports on health issues/bullhorn & kazoo outside of economics.

[Chris Coles]

Re: Excellent article explaining the situation at the Fukushima plant

Holy crap! the plume is in Colorado already! (NOT)

No, not a "NOT", but almost certainly Rocky Flats.

Activists: Plutonium Traces in Air Near Rocky Flats

http://www.aolnews.com/2010/08/04/ac...r-rocky-flats/

For those of you not familiar with the event. This was a nuclear trigger factory manufacturing the plutinium "triggers" for H Bombs. The place caught fire some years ago, much in the same way and for the same reasons that here in the UK we had a fire at Windscale. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windscale_fire