Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 93

Thread: Fukushima operator starts hazardous year-long fuel removal

  1. #71
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    01-03-16 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,761

    Re: Fukushima operator starts hazardous year-long fuel removal

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Why did you pick 28% and not -3%? Both numbers appeared in the abstract.
    Because of the relevance of the numbers....

    The 28% was the greatest divergence. 16% increase in west coast states and -3% in states NOT ON THE WEST COAST! !

    But sure, let's play your game, not being exposed to I-131, and your chances of thyroid problems drops relative to those who are exposed.

    Again, this is on the us side, where we are told that the exposure potential is within safe limits... and not in Japan where the risks are considerably greater.

  2. #72
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,799

    Re: Fukushima operator starts hazardous year-long fuel removal

    Quote Originally Posted by BmanMcfly View Post
    Because of the relevance of the numbers....

    The 28% was the greatest divergence. 16% increase in west coast states and -3% in states NOT ON THE WEST COAST! !

    But sure, let's play your game, not being exposed to I-131, and your chances of thyroid problems drops relative to those who are exposed.

    Again, this is on the us side, where we are told that the exposure potential is within safe limits... and not in Japan where the risks are considerably greater.
    So you picked the outlier deliberately.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  3. #73
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    01-03-16 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,761

    Re: Fukushima operator starts hazardous year-long fuel removal

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    So you picked the outlier deliberately.
    Where you would have used the -3% as the proof that I-131 is nutritious and delicious, in spite of the numbers not even being relevant.

    Hell, you're so dishonest that I could have used the values from other states not impacted and you still would play this stupid game.

    Some people just find safety in ignorance....

  4. #74
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,799

    Re: Fukushima operator starts hazardous year-long fuel removal

    Quote Originally Posted by BmanMcfly View Post
    Where you would have used the -3% as the proof that I-131 is nutritious and delicious, in spite of the numbers not even being relevant.

    Hell, you're so dishonest that I could have used the values from other states not impacted and you still would play this stupid game.

    Some people just find safety in ignorance....
    You picked the outlier deliberately and hoped nobody would notice.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  5. #75
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    01-03-16 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,761

    Re: Fukushima operator starts hazardous year-long fuel removal

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    You picked the outlier deliberately and hoped nobody would notice.
    Whatever it takes for you to remain in denial of reality.

    Look, the paper highlighted the period and scope of the greatest divergence relative to 30 other states studied.

    What I said was just as valid as a 16% increase compared to the previous year in the western states.

    Not like the papers you tend to push where they study the impact of 5+ times current levels of co2 to make a point...

    Got any more games you want to play? Perhaps any papers that say how radioactive iodine is safe?

    Btw, there's about a dozen more issues in the pacific that have already begun to be noted that I haven't had a chance to bring up thanks to your nonsense. Just those issues are not in published papers yet.

    Ignorance is easy.

  6. #76
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,290

    Re: Fukushima operator starts hazardous year-long fuel removal

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post
    I know you like the pretty pictures, but you should read the link, or get someone to read it to you. Disinformation and misinformation flow from you like water over Niagara Falls. Why do you think there is a huge concrete sarcophagus over the area at Chernobyl? What are they trying to protect you from?
    Pictures ?

    LOL !!

    You didn't even know what "Corium" was before you entered into this debate. You showed up with your generic corporate hate and your made up scenario's and I "corrected " you.

    Next time post data and do it with integrity, that way I won't have to school you anymore.
    The New Democratic Party Slogan :

    " Return to Power By Any Means Necessary "

  7. #77
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:48 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,299

    Re: Fukushima operator starts hazardous year-long fuel removal

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    Pictures ?

    LOL !!

    You didn't even know what "Corium" was before you entered into this debate. You showed up with your generic corporate hate and your made up scenario's and I "corrected " you.

    Next time post data and do it with integrity, that way I won't have to school you anymore.
    Post number 10 of this thread. First mention of corium, by guess who, yours truly. Back to your crayons.

    "I don't recall debating anyone so misinformed. Fukushima was built with and inadequate seawall in a place that had stone tsunami markers identifying previous tsunami levels. These were ignored by the engineering geniuses with the hugely safe design parameters and cost effectiveness mitigating factors. Translated. Screw the people. If it happens we'll claim it was an unforeseeable act of nature and laugh all the way to the bank. Remember the stone tsunami markers. There are no excuses here. Right now the molten coriums from the three reactors are in unknown locations somewhere beneath their original locations. Most likely will cook their way into the underground flowing water that will cool them and send their deadly mother lode into the Pacific, slowly and deadly. Hubris and arrogance combine with greed to engineer a disaster of cataclysmic proportions. Yeh, them nukes gotta be wonderful stuff.

  8. #78
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,290

    Re: Fukushima operator starts hazardous year-long fuel removal

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post
    Post
    number 10 of this thread. First mention of corium, by guess who, yours truly. Back to your crayons.

    "I don't recall debating anyone so misinformed. Fukushima was built with and inadequate seawall in a place that had stone tsunami markers identifying previous tsunami levels. These were ignored by the engineering geniuses with the hugely safe design parameters and cost effectiveness mitigating factors. Translated. Screw the people. If it happens we'll claim it was an unforeseeable act of nature and laugh all the way to the bank. Remember the stone tsunami markers. There are no excuses here. Right now the molten coriums from the three reactors are in unknown locations somewhere beneath their original locations. Most likely will cook their way into the underground flowing water that will cool them and send their deadly mother lode into the Pacific, slowly and deadly. Hubris and arrogance combine with greed to engineer a disaster of cataclysmic proportions. Yeh, them nukes gotta be wonderful stuff.
    You lying publicly about Fukishimas corium being exposed is not the same thing as being "informed".

    But I supppose the best your'e capable of is posting a previous comment embolded.. LOL !!

  9. #79
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:48 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,299

    Re: Fukushima operator starts hazardous year-long fuel removal

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    You lying publicly about Fukishimas corium being exposed is not the same thing as being "informed".

    But I supppose the best your'e capable of is posting a previous comment embolded.. LOL !!
    Fukushima 2013 « nuclear-news

    "The nuclear industry, which wants to continue to expand, fears Fukushima being widely discussed because it undermines their already weak economic potential. But, the profits of the nuclear industry are of minor concern compared to the risks of the triple Fukushima challenges.

    The second thing that must be faced is the incompetence of TEPCO. They are not capable of handling this triple complex crisis. TEPCO “is already Japan’s most distrusted firm” and has been exposed as “dangerously incompetent.” A poll foundthat 91 percent of the Japanese public wants the government to intervene at Fukushima.

    Tepco’s management of the stricken power plant has been described as a comedy of errors. The constant stream of mistakes has been made worse by constant false denials and efforts to minimize major problems. Indeed the entire Fukushima catastrophe could have been avoided:


    “Tepco at first blamed the accident on ‘an unforeseen massive tsunami’ triggered by the Great East Japan Earthquake on March 11, 2011. Then it admitted it had in fact foreseen just such a scenario but hadn’t done anything about it.”

    The reality is Fukushima was plagued by human error from the outset. An official Japanese government investigation concluded that the Fukushima accident was a “man-made” disaster, caused by “collusion” between government and Tepco and bad reactor design. On this point, TEPCO is not alone, this is an industry-wide problem. Many US nuclear plants have serious problems, are being operated beyond their life span, have the same design problems and are near earthquake faults. Regulatory officials in both the US and Japan are too corruptly tied to the industry.

    Then, the meltdown itself was denied for months, with TEPCO claiming it had not been confirmed. Japan Times reports that “in December 2011, the government announced that the plant had reached ‘a state of cold shutdown.’ Normally, that means radiation releases are under control and the temperature of its nuclear fuel is consistently below boiling point.” Unfortunately, the statement was false – the reactors continue to need water to keep them cool, the fuel rods need to be kept cool – there has been no cold shutdown. http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/10/25/the-global-threat-of-fukushima/"

    "Why TEPCO is Risking the Removal of Fukushima Fuel Rods. The Dangers of Uncontrolled Global Nuclear Radiation, Global Research, 24 Nov 13 By Yoichi Shimatsu After repeated delays since the summer of 2011, the Tokyo Electric Power Company has launched a high-risk operation to empty the spent-fuel pool atop Reactor 4 at the Dai-ichi (No.1) Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant.

    The urgency attached to this particular site, as compared with reactors damaged in meltdowns, arises from several factors:

    - over 400 tons of nuclear material in the pool could reignite

    - the fire-damaged tank is tilting badly and may topple over sooner than later

    - collapse of the structure could trigger a chain reaction and nuclear blast, and

    - consequent radioactive releases would heavily contaminate much of the world.

    The potential for disaster at the Unit 4 SFP is probably of a higher magnitude than suspected due to the presence of fresh fuel rods, which were delivered during the technical upgrade of Reactor 4 under completion at the time of the March 11, 2011 earthquake and tsunami. The details of that reactor overhaul by GE and Hitachi have yet to be disclosed by TEPCO and the Economy Ministry and continue to be treated as a national-security matter. Here, the few clues from whistleblowers will be pieced together to decipher the nature of the clandestine activity at Fukushima No.1"

    "The Global Threat of Fukushima, counterpunch A Global Response is Needed WEEKEND EDITION OCTOBER 25-27, 2013 by KEVIN ZEESE AND MARGARET FLOWERS ”………….An estimated 300 tons (71,895 gallons/272,152 liters) of contaminated water is flowing into the ocean every day. The first radioactive ocean plume released by the Fukushima nuclear power plant disaster will take three years to reach the shores of the United States. This means, according to a new study from the University of New South Wales, the United States will experience the first radioactive water coming to its shores sometime in early 2014.

    One month after Fukushima, the FDA announced it was going to stop testing fish in the Pacific Ocean for radiation. But, independent research is showing that every bluefin tuna tested in the waters off California has been contaminated with radiation that originated in Fukushima. Daniel Madigan, the marine ecologist who led the Stanford University study from May of 2012 was quoted in the Wall Street Journalsaying, “The tuna packaged it up (the radiation) and brought it across the world’s largest ocean. We were definitely surprised to see it at all and even more surprised to see it in every one we measured.” Marine biologist Nicholas Fisher of Stony Brook University in New York State, another member of the study group, said: “We found that absolutely every one of them had comparable concentrations of cesium 134 and cesium 137.”

    In addition, Science reports that fish near Fukushima are being found to have high levels of the radioactive isotope, cesium-134. The levels found in these fish are not decreasing, which indicates that radiation-polluted water continues to leak into the ocean. At least 42 fish species from the area around the plant are considered unsafe. South Korea has banned Japanese fish as a result of the ongoing leaks.

    The half-life (time it takes for half of the element to decay) of cesium 134 is 2.0652 years. For cesium 137, the half-life is 30.17 years. Cesium does not sink to the ocean floor, so fish swim through it. What are the human impacts of cesium?……..

    There is no end in sight from the leakage of radioactive water into the Pacific from Fukushima. Harvey Wasserman is questioning whether fishing in the Pacific Ocean will be safe after years of leakage from Fukushima. The World Health Organization (WHO) is claiming that this will have limited effect on human health, with concentrations predicted to be below WHO safety levels. However, experts seriously question the WHO’s claims………"

  10. #80
    Professor

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Last Seen
    06-21-17 @ 12:55 PM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    1,577

    Re: Fukushima operator starts hazardous year-long fuel removal

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    One of three things happened:
    1) Some blog told you about this paper, with the "28%" "in North America" "attributable to Fukushima" interpretation. You accepted this interpretation without question, but knew I would be skeptical about a blog so just posted the paper. Without reading it.
    2) You did read the paper, or at least the abstract, and deliberately lied about it.
    3) You did read the paper, or at least the abstract, and your reading comprehension is appallingly bad.

    Tell me which one it is.

    (this paper does not say what you think it says)
    Quote Originally Posted by BmanMcfly View Post
    1- you defend the charge that you ignore facts that do not suit your opinions by admitting that you ignored the paper.

    An you were also wrong because it was an interview with the doctors involved in the study explaining their findings and discussing the paper that just got published in a journal of pediatrics.

    Also false, had you even made it as far in your honest rebuttal to facts by even reading the one paragraph abstract, would have known that this is not a valid charge.

    You didn't even read it, by your own admission.

    Tell me, what is it that you think this paper is saying and tell me what I said that was wrong about it??

    Oh and tell me, how many times greater than background levels was the exposure while you are at it?

    Of course, as usual, you will come back with more nonsense to cover for your deliberate ignorance.
    Number 3 is the winner: appallingly bad reading comprehension.

Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •