Japans earth quake 20110311

[jpm1]

now you understand why i suscribed to a 100% clean electricity provider . they say no there's no problem the chances that such scenario happens is infinitesimal , and when it happens each time we come close to apocalypse . i hope Japan recovers soon and most important solves the nuclear plant problem soon because Japan is a great nation .

[hassata]

God-this is like a bad disaster movie now. A volcano exploded.

 

iGBq6Z-qFxo

[EtherealN]

now you understand why i suscribed to a 100% clean electricity provider . they say no there's no problem the chances that such scenario happens is infinitesimal , and when it happens each time we come close to apocalypse . i hope Japan recovers soon and most important solves the nuclear plant problem soon because Japan is a great nation .

 

Compare how many were killed by Chernobyl with how many have been killed by Moose.

 

The figure is of course contested, but I've mostly seen 52 for Chernobyl. (There is however issues with integrating Thyroid cancer data, since the increased surveillance introduced artefacts into the statistics.) In 1986, 13 people were killed in automobile-moose accidents in Sweden alone. (Total traffick mortality was 844 persons.) 1986 to 1996 there were 118 people killed by Moose, 234 for the period 86-09.

 

It's not a doomsday scenario. It's definitely not nice and comfy, but don't knee-jerk into the apocalypse. There were statistical inferences made that said that it should cause ~4000 cancer cases (though that's morbidity, not mortality). For the same period in time (1986-2009), swedish moose caused severe injury to 1832 persons.

 

The point I'm making is that even the posterboy of apocalyptic nuclear accidents, Chernobyl, isn't that "bad" compared to something as mundane as swedish people driving their cars into moose. If you want to compare with something really apocalyptic, take the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami: 230 000 people dead. Or the Haiti earthquake: 316 000 dead. The big "problem" with the nuclear accidents isn't the death toll, the problem is the economic damage which can be substantial - and probably even more so in Japan considering how densely populated it is, increasing the amount of third parties affected.

 

Fortunately, it seems that it was only a steam explosion that blew out the outer building, not the actual reactor going up. The reactor itself (and it's shielding units and so on) is still, according to what I read a couple minutes ago, intact. Hopefully it'll stay that way.

Edited March 12, 2011 by EtherealN

[Jg2001_Rasputin]

Roof of Fukushima 1 collapsed today

 

German news video

http://www.stern.de/panorama/explosion-in-akw-fukushima-1-dach-von-fukushima-1-eingestuerzt-1662801.html#utm_source=igoogle&utm_medium=gadget&utm_campaign=canvas-view-widget

 

 

big shit over there :(

[EtherealN]

Roof of Fukushima 1 collapsed today

 

German news video

http://www.stern.de/panorama/explosion-in-akw-fukushima-1-dach-von-fukushima-1-eingestuerzt-1662801.html#utm_source=igoogle&utm_medium=gadget&utm_campaign=canvas-view-widget

 

 

big shit over there :(

 

Steam explosion. That building isn't the "money bits". What I'd really like more news about is the actual reactor enclosure.

[RIPTIDE]

Steam explosion. That building isn't the "money bits". What I'd really like more news about is the actual reactor enclosure.

Here's the thing. Boiling water reactors are designed in such a way that some radiation is always present in the turbine steam.. as its a close loop its not a big deal. Is it still a closed loop after this explosion? I've just saw the vid so need more details.

[RIPTIDE]

Compare how many were killed by Chernobyl with how many have been killed by Moose.

 

The figure is of course contested, but I've mostly seen 52 for Chernobyl. (There is however issues with integrating Thyroid cancer data, since the increased surveillance introduced artefacts into the statistics.) In 1986, 13 people were killed in automobile-moose accidents in Sweden alone. (Total traffick mortality was 844 persons.) 1986 to 1996 there were 118 people killed by Moose, 234 for the period 86-09.

 

It's not a doomsday scenario. It's definitely not nice and comfy, but don't knee-jerk into the apocalypse. There were statistical inferences made that said that it should cause ~4000 cancer cases (though that's morbidity, not mortality). For the same period in time (1986-2009), swedish moose caused severe injury to 1832 persons.

 

The point I'm making is that even the posterboy of apocalyptic nuclear accidents, Chernobyl, isn't that "bad" compared to something as mundane as swedish people driving their cars into moose. If you want to compare with something really apocalyptic, take the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami: 230 000 people dead. Or the Haiti earthquake: 316 000 dead. The big "problem" with the nuclear accidents isn't the death toll, the problem is the economic damage which can be substantial - and probably even more so in Japan considering how densely populated it is, increasing the amount of third parties affected.

 

Fortunately, it seems that it was only a steam explosion that blew out the outer building, not the actual reactor going up. The reactor itself (and it's shielding units and so on) is still, according to what I read a couple minutes ago, intact. Hopefully it'll stay that way.

Just leave the Moose alone. I know it can get lonely up in the hills, but its not right. Same with them Canadians. :)

[Antartis]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SkidMark]

Can somoene confirm the coincidental dates/graphs here for me? >> http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread473466/pg1

..or am i just imagining things.

Proceed down to the close up shot of the "event timeline 2011"... check the dates/months....and remember that this graph was out in 09' aprx b4..... woooooooooooo.

Off to tend my veggie patch now...(armed)....hehe

[Sticky]

pics

 

Unbelievable..

[Pilotasso]

I dont think 1000 casualties is a realistic estimate, seen too many towns being hit with people still circulating on the roads let alone inside buildings and houses. :cry:

[SkidMark]

I dont think 1000 casualties is a realistic estimate, seen too many towns being hit with people still circulating on the roads let alone inside buildings and houses. :cry:

Sure Pilo....but lets not give up hope for the survivers just yet.... or give below average results from the past printed....to those related.......I'm sure the toll will be enormus.......the chaos in those cities must be HUGE.....but those that may be reading this that are involved......May the all mighty be with you and them......Looks like it peaks towards end of month.......Then the incidents die down

REFERING TO: Those graphs >> http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread473466/pg1

[EtherealN]

Can somoene confirm the coincidental dates/graphs here for me? >> http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread473466/pg1

..or am i just imagining things.

Proceed down to the close up shot of the "event timeline 2011"... check the dates/months....and remember that this graph was out in 09' aprx b4..... woooooooooooo.

Off to tend my veggie patch now...(armed)....hehe

 

Oh god...

Seriously, just... No. 2012 crap in this thread. Please.

[jpm1]

Compare how many were killed by Chernobyl with how many have been killed by Moose.

 

The figure is of course contested, but I've mostly seen 52 for Chernobyl. (There is however issues with integrating Thyroid cancer data, since the increased surveillance introduced artefacts into the statistics.) In 1986, 13 people were killed in automobile-moose accidents in Sweden alone. (Total traffick mortality was 844 persons.) 1986 to 1996 there were 118 people killed by Moose, 234 for the period 86-09.

 

It's not a doomsday scenario. It's definitely not nice and comfy, but don't knee-jerk into the apocalypse. There were statistical inferences made that said that it should cause ~4000 cancer cases (though that's morbidity, not mortality). For the same period in time (1986-2009), swedish moose caused severe injury to 1832 persons.

 

The point I'm making is that even the posterboy of apocalyptic nuclear accidents, Chernobyl, isn't that "bad" compared to something as mundane as swedish people driving their cars into moose. If you want to compare with something really apocalyptic, take the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami: 230 000 people dead. Or the Haiti earthquake: 316 000 dead. The big "problem" with the nuclear accidents isn't the death toll, the problem is the economic damage which can be substantial - and probably even more so in Japan considering how densely populated it is, increasing the amount of third parties affected.

 

Fortunately, it seems that it was only a steam explosion that blew out the outer building, not the actual reactor going up. The reactor itself (and it's shielding units and so on) is still, according to what I read a couple minutes ago, intact. Hopefully it'll stay that way.

 

maybe the mooses were irradiated one never knows

 

@ Antartis "nice" images , image #19 is :shocking:

[Speed]

No not residual. The various isotopes and by products still produce heat through fission. The main show (ie the uranium fission) is mostly stopped, but the myriad of other daughter isotopes and their associate reactions can continue at varying rates.

 

Reactors are extremely complex. And as they 'burn' through their uranium fuel they get even more complex. Maybe a dozen or more of various elements and isotopes are produced, and because of this the reactors characteristics change over the fuel cycle. Moderating neutrons to stop one reaction might have a side effect of increasing the radiative decay (and heat) of another. And it all depends on the stage at which a reactor is at. Like women, they get complicated after time. lol :D

 

I remember years ago reading about some laid up Russian nuclear subs that nearly went ciritcal because someone didn't pay the power bill. And they were tied up for months or more on the pier and reactors were "off". You can't 100% turn them off. ;) Diff. design of reactor though, but the principle is similar.

 

Anyway, if there's anyone that can fix this up, the Japanese can. Here's hoping. S!

 

Thanks for more info! This is very grim now though, with a hydrogen-oxygen explosion.... sounds like the reactor is still OK, but this can't be good for nuclear power as a whole.

 

So what you are saying it is the decay of short half-life byproducts of nuclear fission that is keeping the reactor hot? Or are you saying there some other fissile isotopes (isotopes and elements, or too many to list?) the control rods can't stop?

[Speed]

Compare how many were killed by Chernobyl with how many have been killed by Moose.

 

The figure is of course contested, but I've mostly seen 52 for Chernobyl. (There is however issues with integrating Thyroid cancer data, since the increased surveillance introduced artefacts into the statistics.) In 1986, 13 people were killed in automobile-moose accidents in Sweden alone. (Total traffick mortality was 844 persons.) 1986 to 1996 there were 118 people killed by Moose, 234 for the period 86-09.

 

It's not a doomsday scenario. It's definitely not nice and comfy, but don't knee-jerk into the apocalypse. There were statistical inferences made that said that it should cause ~4000 cancer cases (though that's morbidity, not mortality). For the same period in time (1986-2009), swedish moose caused severe injury to 1832 persons.

 

The point I'm making is that even the posterboy of apocalyptic nuclear accidents, Chernobyl, isn't that "bad" compared to something as mundane as swedish people driving their cars into moose. If you want to compare with something really apocalyptic, take the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami: 230 000 people dead. Or the Haiti earthquake: 316 000 dead. The big "problem" with the nuclear accidents isn't the death toll, the problem is the economic damage which can be substantial - and probably even more so in Japan considering how densely populated it is, increasing the amount of third parties affected.

 

Fortunately, it seems that it was only a steam explosion that blew out the outer building, not the actual reactor going up. The reactor itself (and it's shielding units and so on) is still, according to what I read a couple minutes ago, intact. Hopefully it'll stay that way.

 

Ethereal,

A more relavent comparison is just to compare the number of people killed by nuclear power to the number of people killed by mining coal. Probably something like 10,000 people, if not more, killed by coal mining worldwide over the past 50 years.

 

Better yet, divide the number of people killed by mining coal to the number of people killed by nuclear power, in the US. You get infinity :)

[RIPTIDE]

Thanks for more info! This is very grim now though, with a hydrogen-oxygen explosion.... sounds like the reactor is still OK, but this can't be good for nuclear power as a whole.

 

So what you are saying it is the decay of short half-life byproducts of nuclear fission that is keeping the reactor hot? Or are you saying there some other fissile isotopes (isotopes and elements, or too many to list?) the control rods can't stop?

Some of the products have short half life's, others don't. One of the isotopes of Nitrogen has a half life of a few seconds for example. That would be present in the turbine steam. Another isotope that is now known to be in the venting gas is Ceasium. Most likely Ceasium-137, which has a half life of ~30 years. This is really bad stuff and because it now is in the vented gas it means that the water level has dropped below the level of the control rods which would allow the Ceasium to escape into the steam. Seems to me that a least a partial meltdown is underway.

[hassata]

 

They're evacuating the area now. This is no good.

[Kuky]

man, nature is too powerful and there's nothing we can do about it... so much damage...

[jpm1]

 

They're evacuating the area now. This is no good.

 

the mess is out there , now it's about to know if they'll manage to control the temperature inside the plant , and if they can't , well i prefer not to think about it . but the lack of information about the disaster is strange . it's hard to believe that with such a huge explosion only the external structure has been hit . other reactors of the plant are critical too

[jpm1]

latest BBC talk about meltdown , emergency cooling systems unable to work . it smells more and more like Tchernobyl . seems the security container is still intact but if they can't manage to get control over the temperature it won't stay intact for a long time

[andysim]

its sad to see lives ripped apart. Buildings can be rebuilt lives lost cannot be replaced.

 

My thoughts go out to the People of Japan.

[MoGas]

http://www.japannuclear.com/nuclearpower/program/locationPop.html

 

I didnt know until this days, that Japan had soo many plans.

[mig29]

http://www.japannuclear.com/nuclearpower/program/locationPop.html

 

I didnt know until this days, that Japan had soo many plans.

 

And all of them are situated in the coastal region.

[FullerGer]