Chubu Electric: NISA tried to deceive public forum
Chubu Electric Power Company says the government's nuclear agency asked it to make sure that questions in favor of nuclear power be asked at a government-sponsored symposium in 2007.
In a report submitted to the government on Friday, the utility said the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency requested that it gather participants and have local residents pose prearranged questions at the forum held in Shizuoka Prefecture, central Japan.
The utility said it refused NISA's request to arrange the questions, citing difficulties with ensuring compliance. But senior officials of the Hamaoka nuclear power plant sent e-mails to employees and visited affiliate companies in an effort to comply with the request.
An official of Chubu Electric Power Company said on Friday that his firm issued calls to the public to participate in the forum.
He said he doesn't think the act was an outright breach of the law. But he added that it could have led to the misunderstanding that his firm was trying to manipulate public opinion, and he offered apologies.
The revelation comes after Kyushu Electric Power Company came under fire for submitting fake e-mails in support of a restart of idled nuclear reactors in a government-sponsored meeting for local residents in June.
Following the scandal, the industry ministry ordered the 6 Electric Power Companies to conduct an internal investigation of its activities aimed at winning local support for nuclear power.
Living near a cellphone tower might eventually melt your brain, give you cancer or worse, neuter your reproductive organs -- at least that’s the warning issued this week by a dissenting group of trade activists.
There must be small nuclear reactors in those cell phone towers
Nice distraction campaign. Still doesn't address the fact that workers comp was paid to nuclear power plant workers that contracted cancer, at levels considered safe. I would assume the dosage was internal, and if my assumption is correct, then a whole lot of people in Japan are going to suffer from cancer. Though you will probably blame it on cell towers, or microwave ovens.
IP: Logged
11:35 AM
Jul 31st, 2011
phonedawgz Member
Posts: 17091 From: Green Bay, WI USA Registered: Dec 2009
Yeah and you guys were saying the Fukushima 50 were all going to die too.
If you are exposed to a known safe level of radiation, then it's quite unlikely that you will get cancer from it. Yes I know you don't even come close to believing it, however. It is what the people with college degrees and a lifetime of studying nuclear radiation have declared as safe. I am sure you believe you know better then they do.
IP: Logged
01:10 AM
carnut122 Member
Posts: 9122 From: Waleska, GA, USA Registered: Jan 2004
Yeah and you guys were saying the Fukushima 50 were all going to die too.
If you are exposed to a known safe level of radiation, then it's quite unlikely that you will get cancer from it. Yes I know you don't even come close to believing it, however. It is what the people with college degrees and a lifetime of studying nuclear radiation have declared as safe. I am sure you believe you know better then they do.
How many times have industry sponsored "experts" been proven wrong? Virtually...always. Do a little research on the effects of smoking. It may prove enlightening. OBTW, here's a link to the cell phone debate:
Which industry do you want to attack? More than one deal with radioactivity. Or do you think you are smarter than all of them just because you are a leftist wacko?
IP: Logged
01:18 PM
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
Yeah and you guys were saying the Fukushima 50 were all going to die too.
If you are exposed to a known safe level of radiation, then it's quite unlikely that you will get cancer from it. Yes I know you don't even come close to believing it, however. It is what the people with college degrees and a lifetime of studying nuclear radiation have declared as safe. I am sure you believe you know better then they do.
How come you always ignore internal vs external radiation exposure, it is vastly different. Imagine getting your heart sun burned. I bet that would have a much different effect than your arm. Or how about a hot coal in your hand versus one you swallow? Btw there was a professor stating that people were in grave danger when the known radiation levels were much lower. If I recall you called him a whacko, so I guess you know better than the Phd's also.
[This message has been edited by dennis_6 (edited 07-31-2011).]
IP: Logged
02:15 PM
phonedawgz Member
Posts: 17091 From: Green Bay, WI USA Registered: Dec 2009
Yes if you have one professor who argues against the rest of the known body of science, with few exceptions outstanding, that makes him a wacko.
This really has become a middle school type discussion hasn't it? That is why I have tended to stay away. I have figured you have established yourself and your reputation. Some people might believe you but most will see through you. There is not much more of a need for me to establish a sane voice in this alarmist agenda.
Yes an internal dose is greatly different and much more harmful than an external dose.
IP: Logged
08:57 PM
PFF
System Bot
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
Yes if you have one professor who argues against the rest of the known body of science, with few exceptions outstanding, that makes him a wacko.
This really has become a middle school type discussion hasn't it? That is why I have tended to stay away. I have figured you have established yourself and your reputation. Some people might believe you but most will see through you. There is not much more of a need for me to establish a sane voice in this alarmist agenda.
Yes an internal dose is greatly different and much more harmful than an external dose.
Sludge too radioactive to bury is alarmist? You never addressed why the nuke plant workers with very low dosages were being paid workers comp for cancer linked to their job. Also, radioactive school grounds, radioactive beef, radioactive crops, radioactive rain. I don't know how you maintain there is no problem in Japan.
The reason you have been quiet is because there is no positive news about the disaster, there is no news that support everything is fine. If there was I am sure you would have posted it, but believe it or not, if it was credible I would post it also.
IP: Logged
09:15 PM
carnut122 Member
Posts: 9122 From: Waleska, GA, USA Registered: Jan 2004
Which industry do you want to attack? More than one deal with radioactivity. Or do you think you are smarter than all of them just because you are a leftist wacko?
Just the ones that may cause massive loss of property or life . Love that sense of humor.
IP: Logged
09:20 PM
phonedawgz Member
Posts: 17091 From: Green Bay, WI USA Registered: Dec 2009
One more reason I have left this thread alone is your lack of any respect for the truth
quote
Originally posted by dennis_6:
Sludge too radioactive to bury is alarmist? You never addressed why the nuke plant workers with very low dosages were being paid workers comp for cancer linked to their job. Also, radioactive school grounds, radioactive beef, radioactive crops, radioactive rain. I don't know how you maintain there is no problem in Japan.
The reason you have been quiet is because there is no positive news about the disaster, there is no news that support everything is fine. If there was I am sure you would have posted it, but believe it or not, if it was credible I would post it also.
quote
Originally posted by phonedawgz: 6/22/2011
I already read the headline and can deduce it lacks basic scientific and journalistic standards. I have never said high levels or any levels of radiation are good for anyone. I am not surprised you are trying to promote lies about what I have said.
Clearly Fukushima is far worse than 3 Mile Island. Can you find a single example where I have made some statement that it was not worse, after it became worse that TMI? Or is it that again you have no problem with totally distorting the truth to fit your alarmist storyline?
Many people died at Chernobyl. There has yet to be a single death attributable to radiation at Fukushima. Seems to me to be quite easy to judge which one is worse. But then I am not a fear monger poster.
IP: Logged
10:07 PM
Aug 1st, 2011
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
One more reason I have left this thread alone is your lack of any respect for the truth
Thats rich, you have downplayed the disaster from day 1, and you respect the truth. If things were getting any better I would post articles about that. I have ignored articles that were just downright anti-nuclear and clearly propaganda, instead of posting them here. You also have once again side stepped my questions with a personal attack, nice.
IP: Logged
11:18 AM
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
Aug. 1 (Bloomberg) -- Tokyo Electric Power Co., operator of Japan's crippled Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant, said it detected the highest radiation to date at the site.
Geiger counters, used to detect radioactivity, registered more than 10 sieverts an hour, the highest reading the devices are able to record, Junichi Matsumoto, a general manager at the utility, said today. The measurements were taken at the base of the main ventilation stack for reactors No. 1 and No. 2.
The Fukushima plant, about 220 kilometers (137 miles) north of Tokyo, had three reactor meltdowns after the March 11 magnitude-9 earthquake and tsunami knocked out power and backup generators. Radiation leaks displaced 160,000 people and contaminated marine life and agricultural products.
The utility, known as Tepco, tried to vent steam and gas the day after the earthquake as pressure in reactor No. 1 exceeded designed limits. A buildup of hydrogen gas subsequently caused an explosion that blew out part of the reactor building.
"I suspect the high radiation quantity was an aftermath of venting done," Matsumoto told reporters in Tokyo. "The plant is not running. I don't think any gas with high radiation level is flowing in the stack."
Tepco sent three workers around the ventilation stack today after a gamma camera detected high radioactivity levels in the area yesterday, Matsumoto said. The workers were exposed to as much as 4 millisieverts during the work, he said.
The utility will create a no-go zone around the stack and cover the area with protective material, he said.
--With assistance from Shunichi Ozasa in Tokyo. Editors: Amanda Jordan, Reed Landberg
". A dose of under 100 rems is subclinical and will produce nothing other than blood changes. 100 to 200 rems will cause illness, but will rarely be fatal. Doses of 200 to 1,000 rems will probably cause serious illness with poor outlook at the upper end of the range. Doses of more than 1,000 rems are almost invariably fatal[6]."
Yeah and you guys were saying the Fukushima 50 were all going to die too.
If you are exposed to a known safe level of radiation, then it's quite unlikely that you will get cancer from it. Yes I know you don't even come close to believing it, however. It is what the people with college degrees and a lifetime of studying nuclear radiation have declared as safe. I am sure you believe you know better then they do.
Actually, no I wasn't, but thanks for lying...
My big concern isn't the long-term cancer risk from exposure, though that's not insignificant nor acceptable as a "cost of doing bidness" as some would seem to believe, my concern is the economic fallout as an ever larger portion of Japan's economic output goes to just servicing the "nuclear debt" so to speak. You know, paying all those homeowners, small business owners, farmers, ranchers, families, etc, for all their lost work product and lost homes and land. These costs as well as mitigation and cleanup costs will be a serious drain on the Japanese taxpayer for the next few decades from just Fukushima, and overall with permanent and indefinite storage costs for the billions of pounds of high-level nuclear waste that will last longer than it's been since Jesus walked this earth, I can't see nuclear being sustainable beyond another couple of generations at best.
The biggest problem with Fukushima is that nobody knows for certain just where and how much radiation is in and still being introduced into the food chain and general environment. Therefor, with that whole side of the equation unknown it's impossible for someone to say it's safe, PhD or otherwise.
How many times have industry sponsored "experts" been proven wrong? Virtually...always. Do a little research on the effects of smoking. It may prove enlightening. OBTW, here's a link to the cell phone debate:
When I was a child in the 1970's I remember seeing a full-page ad in the local paper, paid for by a consortium of tobacco companies, that in essence stated that there was no proven link between smoking and various diseases and cancers of the lungs and heart. The article stated that people saying that were hysterical and weren't using sound science. The tobacco companies went on to say that they had scientific studies that showed there was no significant link to those diseases.
I wish I'd saved that ad. My parents smoked at the time and I hated it, and it ended up killing both of them by age 60.
When I was a child in the 1970's I remember seeing a full-page ad in the local paper, paid for by a consortium of tobacco companies, that in essence stated that there was no proven link between smoking and various diseases and cancers of the lungs and heart. The article stated that people saying that were hysterical and weren't using sound science. The tobacco companies went on to say that they had scientific studies that showed there was no significant link to those diseases.
I wish I'd saved that ad. My parents smoked at the time and I hated it, and it ended up killing both of them by age 60.
So you believe what the accepted body of scientists say when you want to believe it (smoking causes cancer) and you decidedly don't believe what the accepted body of scientists that say things you don't want to believe. Yep, in my mind that makes you a wacko.
quote
Originally posted by JazzMan:
Ah, yes, if someone disagrees with your view of the world they're a... leftist wacko...
Do you get the urge to go shoot a bunch of liberal teenagers too?
There is only one side in this argument that has shown their urge that it would be good to expose people they don't agree with to a potentially harmful environment.
quote
Originally posted by JazzMan:
Wonder what TEPCO is going to do with all that cattle and feed they just bought? At least, I hope they're buying it right now, this very minute, as I can't see any reason why the farmers and ranchers should have to suffer from TEPCO's screwups.
Maybe TEPCO can have a BBQ and hayride for their employees and investors? That would be so right on so many levels...
". A dose of under 100 rems is subclinical and will produce nothing other than blood changes. 100 to 200 rems will cause illness, but will rarely be fatal. Doses of 200 to 1,000 rems will probably cause serious illness with poor outlook at the upper end of the range. Doses of more than 1,000 rems are almost invariably fatal[6]."
Never said it was funny people died, you didn't quote the whole statement, What I actually said lol about was where you were proven wrong. "
quote
Originally posted by phonedawgz:
Totally incorrect.
If you believe global warming then every fossil fuel plant emits byproducts that CAN NOT be cleaned up. Burning coal raises radioactivity in the atmosphere by releasing radioactive particles that were trapped in the coal. More people die from other power sources. That fact however is ignored because of alarmists.
In 2010, 48 people died in coal mine deaths in the US alone. In ONE year!
How many people have died because of this accident - 0.
How many are expected to die - 0 2 so far, tho cause of death not fully explained. May have died in the earthquake/tsunami but their bodies were discovered at the nuclear complex.
quote
RIKUZENTAKATA, Japan — Two missing Fukushima nuclear plant workers were found dead on Sunday as more highly radioactive water spilled into the sea and authorities struggled to seal the leak.
The two workers — a 21-year-old and a 24-year-old — had been missing since a massive March 11 earthquake and tsunami, but their bodies were discovered only last week at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear complex"
Its funny you always state people will see through me, when I just post articles to update the members of this site, and you haven't for a long time. You only do two things, attack the character of people who disagree with you, or try to mislead others in believing that people who disagree with you don't understand simple things like rems per hour, or miles per hour which is ludicrous. I believe most people understand that your tactics indicate you are not credible.
[This message has been edited by dennis_6 (edited 08-01-2011).]
IP: Logged
06:40 PM
phonedawgz Member
Posts: 17091 From: Green Bay, WI USA Registered: Dec 2009
The above article said the reading was above what the geiger counter was capable of reading, which was 10 Sieverts, so its above 1000 rems.
Your quote which is wrong. The geiger counter reads in Sieverts/hour. Anyone can read your posts and see you use the units interchangeably. Nice try to poo poo it away.
[This message has been edited by phonedawgz (edited 08-01-2011).]
IP: Logged
06:51 PM
carnut122 Member
Posts: 9122 From: Waleska, GA, USA Registered: Jan 2004
Your quote which is wrong. The geiger counter reads in Sieverts/hour. Anyone can read your posts and see you use the units interchangeably. Nice try to poo poo it away.
So your telling me that 10 sv an hour does not = 1000 rems an hour, and it does not mean in one hour you will obtain a dose of 10sv? Thats the same as traveling at 60mph and somehow magically in an hour you didn't manage to make it 60 miles despite traveling 60mph the entire hour.
You either know very little about dosages from radiation or you just believe that everyone on this forum is stupid enough to believe your twisting of facts.
Please explain to me how 10 Sieverts an hour does not = a ten Sieverts dose in one hour. I am all ears.
Or maybe you just don't understand 10 Sieverts is a dose, 10 Sieverts per hour is the rate of dosage? Its amazing the I quote wikipedia on radiation sickness and your arguing about the difference of a total dosage and a dosage rate. The wikipedia was just thrown in there so people have a reference on how that level of radiation would affect a person. That would be like saying a car traveled at 1 mph and then explaining to people who are used to the metric system how far a mile is.
[This message has been edited by dennis_6 (edited 08-01-2011).]
IP: Logged
07:01 PM
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
Highly radioactive water has been found in the basement of a building at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant near the storage facility for contaminated water.
Tokyo Electric Power Company said on Monday that it discovered about 700 tons of contaminated water on Saturday in the basement of an on-site building.
The utility said the water contained 19,000 becquerels of radioactive cesium 134 per cubic centimeter, and 22,000 becquerels of cesium 137 --- both very high levels.
Until June, the building was connected by a hose with another building where highly radioactive water is now being stored. The buildings are located next to each other and are part of the plant's waste disposal facility.
The utility is investigating how the leak happened. But it says it that there is no danger of the contaminated water leaking out of the building.
Highly radioactive water has been found in the basement of a building at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant near the storage facility for contaminated water.
Tokyo Electric Power Company said on Monday that it discovered about 700 tons of contaminated water on Saturday in the basement of an on-site building.
The utility said the water contained 19,000 becquerels of radioactive cesium 134 per cubic centimeter, and 22,000 becquerels of cesium 137 --- both very high levels.
Until June, the building was connected by a hose with another building where highly radioactive water is now being stored. The buildings are located next to each other and are part of the plant's waste disposal facility.
The utility is investigating how the leak happened. But it says it that there is no danger of the contaminated water leaking out of the building.
No I only believe you were foolish enough to not notice the difference between Sieverts and Sieverts per hour. If nothing else you were the only one to post where you clearly didn't distinguish the difference.
You also still haven't figured the difference between a Geiger counter reading and the quantity of radioactive decays per unit time in a sample of material.
This was taken out of context, which makes it a lie. Now, the question is, did phonedawgs deliberately lie, or did he not get the context of the original Dennis_6 comment? Phonedawgs has demonstrated that he's pretty smart WRT technical things, as evidenced by his helpful posts in technical, and his writing ability, at least in terms of vocabulary and sentence structure, seems to indicate that his grasp of the english language (written, anyway) is somewhat better than the average on this forum, so I think those two facts rule out that phonedawgs could have missed Dennis_6's original context. That means that when phonedawgz made the above comment about Dennis he was deliberately lying, deliberately taking something out of context. Folks who think like him here on the forum would simply take it as an article of faith that phonedawgz' comment was true and correct, many folks wouldn't bother looking for themselves to see what the context was and assume, incorrectly as always, that there's always a little truth in what phonedawgz says around here, and finally, a small minority would know phonedawgz lie for what it was, and is.
Or I could be wrong and indeed phonedawgz' reading comprehension skills are seriously lacking. Actually, either argument would be true, either he's a liar or he can't read, since the result of either would explain what and how he writes here.
IP: Logged
08:55 AM
phonedawgz Member
Posts: 17091 From: Green Bay, WI USA Registered: Dec 2009
Jazzman you have openly stated that you thought exposing investors and employees of TEPCO "would be so right on so many levels"
I don't question the idea that other liberals also think like you. When dennis_6 responds to the news report that TEPCO employees died with "lol" I take it at it's apparent face value.
IP: Logged
11:39 AM
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
No I only believe you were foolish enough to not notice the difference between Sieverts and Sieverts per hour. If nothing else you were the only one to post where you clearly didn't distinguish the difference.
You also still haven't figured the difference between a Geiger counter reading and the quantity of radioactive decays per unit time in a sample of material.
Ludicrous again, Are you one of the people who need a sticker telling them to keep their hands out of under a lawn mower deck? Do you have no common sense and need a big flag any time some uses another unit? When some one ask my speed I tell them in mph, when they ask how far I went I tell them in miles. I expect them to be able to understand the correlation between the two,
So when I post an article that states a part of the plant is at 10sv/hr and then I post an article that shows what various dosages of radiation does to a human being, you come out with some retarded statement that 10sv/hr is not 10sv. Well no duh, but if you understand that a 10sv dose causes death, you understand that in one hour at a spot that is reading 10sv and hour you will have a death sentence.
Or maybe you back on the kick about 10sv an hour on a geiger counter does equal a 10sv dosage in one hour, because the geiger counter units just sound like the lab units, meaning sv/hr has nothing to do with sv dose an hour, rems an hour has nothing to do with rems dose an hour, rads an hour have nothing to do with rads dose an hour, miles an hour, has nothing to do with miles traveled at hour at the speed.
My God you are dense, I have already explained a geiger counter detects decay per second and explained at distance it will have a lower for much the same reason a decibel meter will have a lower reading at distance from a sound source.
You are outright distorting the truth, to try and discredit me, and by proxy discredit the articles I post, just because your afraid people will turn against nuclear power in the usa and you won't have your cushy job again. You are the worst kind of liar.
IP: Logged
12:14 PM
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
Fatal Radiation Level Found at Japanese Plant By MARTIN FACKLER Published: August 1, 2011
TOKYO — The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant said Monday that it measured the highest radiation levels within the plant since it was crippled by a devastating earthquake. However, it said the discovery would not slow continuing efforts to bring the plant’s damaged reactors under control. Related
The operator, Tokyo Electric Power, said that workers on Monday afternoon had found an area near Reactors No. 1 and 2, where radiation levels exceeded their measuring device’s maximum reading of 10 sieverts per hour — a fatal dose for humans.
The company said the reading was taken near a ventilation tower, suggesting that the contamination happened in the days immediately after the March 11 earthquake and tsunami, when workers desperately tried to release flammable hydrogen gas that was then building up inside the reactor buildings. The release, known as venting, failed to prevent crippling explosions that destroyed the reactor buildings.
The company said the workers who found the reading were safely protected by antiradiation clothing. Tokyo Electric said it has closed off an area of several yards around where the lethal radiation level was found. The company said this would not hamper efforts to build a new cooling system and remove contaminated water.
The plant has continued to spew radiation since the disaster, though levels have been dropping. The operator is working to install a new makeshift cooling system by early next year that will allow it to finally shut down the plant’s three damaged reactors.
That effort includes removing thousands of tons of highly contaminated water from the reactor buildings. On Monday, Tokyo Electric also said it will begin constructing a new wall that will extend some 60 feet underground to prevent radioactive groundwater from seeping into the nearby Pacific Ocean. A version of this article appeared in print on August 2, 2011, on page A9 of the New York edition with the headline: Fatal Radiation Level Measured At Stricken Japanese Nuclear Plant. http://www.nytimes.com/2011...ia/02japan.html?_r=1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ exceeded their measuring device’s maximum reading of 10 sieverts per hour — a fatal dose for humans. Remember the wiki article you got so upset about phonedawgz? The on that said anything over 10 sieverts was fatal? Remember how you said 10sieverts an hour did not mean 10 sieverts in an hour? Isn't it funny that 10 sieverts an hour is evidently also fatal. So lets recap, 10 sieverts is fatal, 10 sieverts an hour is fatal. Nah, they can't be related. {/sarcasm] I hope this exposes you as the liar you are.
[This message has been edited by dennis_6 (edited 08-02-2011).]
IP: Logged
12:19 PM
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
TOKYO, Aug. 2 (AP) - (Kyodo)—Radiation doses of more than 10 sieverts, or 10,000 millisieverts, per hour have been detected outdoors again at the crisis-hit Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, its operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. said Tuesday.
If exposed to such a high-level dosage of radiation in a short period of time, almost all people exposed would die, radiation experts said.
Tokyo Electric, known as TEPCO, also said radiation dosages of 5 sieverts per hour were detected indoors on the second floor of the No. 1 reactor at the plant. The amount is the highest figure for indoors.
The figure was detected in front of a pipe in an air-conditioning machine room, the utility said, adding the dosage may be larger than the measured amount as it exceeds the capacity of measuring equipment.
On Monday, Tokyo Electric said radiation doses of as high as 10 sieverts per hour were detected outside the buildings for the No. 1 and No. 2 reactors.
On Tuesday, Tokyo Electric also announced more than 10 sieverts per hour were detected near the scene.
Gamma camera images which show radiation doses by color indicated red at the bottom of the main exhaust pipe between the two reactor buildings, which means that radiation doses top 10 sieverts per hour, TEPCO said.
Those images also showed red at a height of 10 meters above ground on the back of the exhaust pipe.
TEPCO said radioactive substances might have adhered to the back of the exhaust pipe after they were emitted when the company vented at the No. 1 unit to lower pressures within the reactor pressure vessel and reactor container.
TEPCO said those places with high doses of radiation pose no major trouble for the company's work to contain the nuclear crisis and that it has no plan to measure radiation doses in detail.
On Monday, TEPCO said its plant workers confirmed the high-level doses of radioactivity Monday afternoon when they put the measuring device to the surface of the exhaust pipe. The level may have been higher than the measured amount of 10 sieverts per hour as it exceeds the capacity of measuring equipment.
Previously, the highest dose detected was 4 sieverts per hour measured at the floor of the No. 1 reactor building.
Meanwhile, State Minister Goshi Hosono, who is in charge of the nuclear accident, called Tuesday for correctly analyzing the situation, saying at a news conference that a correct grasp of the situation is essential to settle long-term issues involving the Fukushima Daiichi plant that was crippled by the March 11 earthquake and tsunami.
Wow the most damning statement yet phonedawgz, -------------------------------------------- Peter Burns, former chief executive officer of the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, says given the scale of the Fukushima emergency, the high reading is to be expected.
"The levels reported of 10 sieverts per hour are very high levels and it's going to be very difficult to manage workers going into those areas and doing operations," he said.
"To put the 10 sieverts into context, that 10 sieverts is actually a lethal dose of radiation. So you can't afford to be exposed for more than a few minutes at those levels. http://www.abc.net.au/news/...ushima-plant/2821276 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Sounds like how I used the units. LOL You want to tell him, he doesn't know the difference between sieverts per hour or sieverts since he seems to use them interchangebly? I guess you know more them him? He must be a leftist whacko too. LOL
IP: Logged
12:34 PM
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
You know something else funny, if you go back and read the other thread you will see where phonedawgz was basically me an idiot for suggest I believed the containment vessel leaked.
"It means you're directly exposed to fuel rods in the reactors or the spent fuel ponds very closely and while it's possible to get to those levels it means there is very little shielding going on there." - Peter Burns, former chief executive officer of the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency http://www.abc.net.au/news/...ushima-plant/2821276
"TEPCO said melted fuel in the No. 1 reactor might have collected inside the duct after leaking from the containment vessel during venting early in the crisis." http://www.seattlepi.com/ne...on-level-1693617.php
quote
Phonedawgz: Graphite burns. Burning graphite mixed with a melted radioactive core launches radioactive particles into the atmosphere. Last I checked water doesn't burn.
This reactors core is located inside a containment vessel. The core could melt and there still could not be the release of radioactive particles.
....And it's not foreseeable that these boiling water reactors will somehow change into graphite reactors.
Totally different design.
.....There is pretty much 0% chance that any radioactive issues could reach California, even in the worst foreseeable situations.
Originally posted by dennis_6: Sounds like how I used the units. LOL You want to tell him, he doesn't know the difference between sieverts per hour or sieverts since he seems to use them interchangebly? I guess you know more them him? He must be a leftist whacko too. LOL
Remember, if you (or anyone else in the whole wide world) disagrees with phonedawgz then that person is a "leftist whacko" by definition.
Oh, and you shouldn't have used LOL, because now phonedawgz will quote it later out of context and try to make it look like you were laughing at his mother, or some such BS.
All play and no job makes phonedawgz a dull boy... All play and no job makes phonedawgz a dull boy... All play and no job makes phonedawgz a dull boy... All play and no job makes phonedawgz a dull boy... (cue soundtrack from The Shining...)
Edit to add, after reading Dennis_6's last comment exposing more errors from phonedawgz, I'm realizing that either phonedawgz worked for the nuclear industry or he works for TEPCO. I can't think of any other reasons why he's behaving the way he is in this thread.
[This message has been edited by JazzMan (edited 08-02-2011).]
