Fukushima leaked twice as much radiation as thought

[PhoenixAsh]

The release of nuclear material is twice as much as was previously thought....making it 40% of the Chernobyl disaster.

Dismanteling the powerplant could take as much as 30 years.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/8854592/Japan-Fukushima-disaster-released-twice-as-much-radiation-as-initially-estimated.html

[piet11111]

The Japanese government estimated that 15,000 terabecquerels of caesium were released after the plant was damaged, while the new study put the figure at 36,000 terabecquerels – 40 per cent of the total released from Chernobyl.


From March 21 to mid-July, as much as 27.1 peta becquerels of caesium 137 entered the sea, according to the Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety, France's nuclear monitor.

I am not certain how much more peta is compared to tera but that they leave out the radiation that they flushed into the sea from the 40% of chernobyl figure makes me think that its worse then chernobyl when you add it all up.

[Proukunin]

I mean it's the same thing the US did with the BP spill..which I actually went to Grand Isle at the time.

Of course the Japanese government most probably lied. I mean why would they tell the truth anyway?

[piet11111]

I just want to go on record that i am pro-nuclear power and that in the hands of a democratic socialist government that invests in the safety of the plant nuclear power is not only safe but essential.

Modern reactors can use nuclear waste as fuel until its broken down to elements that have much shorter half lifes (meaning they are not dangerous for millenia but century's or even decades)

Nuclear reactors are also essential for the production of medical isotopes used for pain killing and radiation treatment for cancer patients and as contrast fluids for medical scans just to name a few.

However under a for profit system nuclear power and extensive safety are not "cost efficient" and this is why Fukushima had an outdated design and staff that where temp workers and undertrained.
This is because federal regulation only allows for the workers to be exposed to a set amount of radiation per year so if you have qualified permanent staff they will need to be paid for several months per year while they are at home because they had their maximum exposure reached.

Capitalism creates very dangerous situations in their pursuit of profit.

[Zav]

I just want to go on record that i am pro-nuclear power and that in the hands of a democratic socialist government that invests in the safety of the plant nuclear power is not only safe but essential.

Modern reactors can use nuclear waste as fuel until its broken down to elements that have much shorter half lifes (meaning they are not dangerous for millenia but century's or even decades)

Nuclear reactors are also essential for the production of medical isotopes used for pain killing and radiation treatment for cancer patients and as contrast fluids for medical scans just to name a few.

However under a for profit system nuclear power and extensive safety are not "cost efficient" and this is why Fukushima had an outdated design and staff that where temp workers and undertrained.
This is because federal regulation only allows for the workers to be exposed to a set amount of radiation per year so if you have qualified permanent staff they will need to be paid for several months per year while they are at home because they had their maximum exposure reached.

Capitalism creates very dangerous situations in their pursuit of profit.
I hold this opinion as well. I think however that nuclear power should not be a major component of power production, even in a Communist society, primarily because the fuel is not renewable, but also because the risk of malfunction, while small, is not one most would be comfortable taking. Like you said, nuclear reactors can be used to generate materials for medicine. These materials are also usable in scientific instruments. I find it foolish to waste these materials on electricity generation when there are other methods that do not require a grid and a lot of money invested in safe operation.
I would ask for a source on the newer reactors ability to re-consume their waste to the extent that the waste has a half-life of decades. That's quite impressive, and almost too good to be true.


I am not certain how much more peta is compared to tera but that they leave out the radiation that they flushed into the sea from the 40% of chernobyl figure makes me think that its worse then chernobyl when you add it all up.
One peta-x is equivalent to one thousand tera-x.