Have You Heard About Fukushima?

[Triple Zero]

It may be the worst accident in the history of Science IMHO.

I think all of Russia and most of Eastern Europe would probably disagree with you.

Only because Fukushima's fallout probably ended up in the ocean (which is also bad, but there's no people there).

I was 6 years old when Chernobyl happened, I vaguely remember we shouldn't eat certain vegetables or drink cow's milk for a while (weeks?) and wild mushrooms were discouraged for at least 5-10 years afterwards (because the mycelium is mostly on the surface they grow on and therefore absorbs a lot of radioactive dust).

I wouldn't have a problem saying Fukushima is at least on the same order of magnitude. But it's a bit more that, for some reason, we won't realize the full extent of contamination until a few years.

And some reason is of course that the Powers That Be have gotten a lot better in controlling/using mass-media communication than they did in 1986.

[East Coast Hustle]

There's also the part where Chernobyl released 10 times as much radioactive material into the atmosphere as Fukushima did. It's easy for people who were very young or not alive in 1986 to not realize the scope of that catastrophe, but unless there are further criticality events at Fukushima I don't see any possible way that it even comes close to Chernobyl.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

There's also the part where Chernobyl released 10 times as much radioactive material into the atmosphere as Fukushima did. It's easy for people who were very young or not alive in 1986 to not realize the scope of that catastrophe, but unless there are further criticality events at Fukushima I don't see any possible way that it even comes close to Chernobyl.

Yep.  We had to go inside whenever the cloud passed over.

[minuspace]

Not to force the point, however, Chernobyl was before we figured out how to sell options on guilt.  Now, we excuse the production of weapons grade plutonium because it can be "recycled" into fast reactor (or thermal with the right permits) fuel.  Plutonium is actually quite a bit more problematic for humans than say cesium, or even uranium.  If reactor 4 breached, we would have a problem that we don't yet fully understand given how studies on the effects of plutonium usually involve scenarios where the isotopes have been subject to thermonuclear reaction, instead of simple atmospheric dispersion.   Reactors should not be allowed to run on plutonium?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Not to force the point, however, Chernobyl was before we figured out how to sell options on guilt.  Now, we excuse the production of weapons grade plutonium because it can be "recycled" into fast reactor (or thermal with the right permits) fuel.  Plutonium is actually quite a bit more problematic for humans than say cesium, or even uranium.  If reactor 4 breached, we would have a problem that we don't yet fully understand given how studies on the effects of plutonium usually involve scenarios where the isotopes have been subject to thermonuclear reaction, instead of simple atmospheric dispersion.   Reactors should not be allowed to run on plutonium?

Forcing what point?  This wasn't the worst disaster.  That's all there is to it.

[minuspace]

Not to force the point, however, Chernobyl was before we figured out how to sell options on guilt.  Now, we excuse the production of weapons grade plutonium because it can be "recycled" into fast reactor (or thermal with the right permits) fuel.  Plutonium is actually quite a bit more problematic for humans than say cesium, or even uranium.  If reactor 4 breached, we would have a problem that we don't yet fully understand given how studies on the effects of plutonium usually involve scenarios where the isotopes have been subject to thermonuclear reaction, instead of simple atmospheric dispersion.   Reactors should not be allowed to run on plutonium?

Forcing what point?  This wasn't the worst disaster.  That's all there is to it.

Chernobyl did not use MOX, Fukushima did.  Therefore, it is still too early to draw a comparison, I think.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Not to force the point, however, Chernobyl was before we figured out how to sell options on guilt.  Now, we excuse the production of weapons grade plutonium because it can be "recycled" into fast reactor (or thermal with the right permits) fuel.  Plutonium is actually quite a bit more problematic for humans than say cesium, or even uranium.  If reactor 4 breached, we would have a problem that we don't yet fully understand given how studies on the effects of plutonium usually involve scenarios where the isotopes have been subject to thermonuclear reaction, instead of simple atmospheric dispersion.   Reactors should not be allowed to run on plutonium?

Forcing what point?  This wasn't the worst disaster.  That's all there is to it.

Chernobyl did not use MOX, Fukushima did.  Therefore, it is still too early to draw a comparison, I think.

Jesus H Christ.  Whatever.  Enjoy digging your heels in, Sparky.

[East Coast Hustle]

The invasion of Panama was actually just as costly to America's military as the Vietnam War. I mean, there were alot less lives lost but the couple guys who got shot were shot with WAY bigger bullets.

[Triple Zero]

It appears that I did not really use a lot of thought writing that previous post yesterday at 4am. In other circumstances I would probably have wiki'd some more details about either one.

I thought the thing with Fukushima was that it's going to keep on getting worse for a while first--but it's 4am again (really WTF, TIME?) so don't mind me. Fuck it's even hard enough to write a coherent post about that you guys shouldn't pay attention to these incoherent posts

[Lenin McCarthy]

Do you know that Fukushima probably isn't dangerous because nuclear power isn't dangerous because thorium fusion nuclear power isn't dangerous, even though that hasn't really been developed yet and Fukushima isn't thorium-driven. But anyways, nuclear power isn't that dangerous really.

At least that's what the nuclear power advocates I know say.

SRLSLY, it isn't dangerous at all, it's just, like, don't worry. It'll sort itself out after a while (that's probably true, though. A few thousand years only).

[East Coast Hustle]

I'd say Fukushima probably isn't dangerous because I'm unlikely to ever go to Japan.

[minuspace]

Do you know that Fukushima probably isn't dangerous because nuclear power isn't dangerous because thorium fusion nuclear power isn't dangerous, even though Fukushima isn't thorium-driven. But ...

Let me clarify.  Thorium fusion has not been invented because that makes no sense...

Thorium is not suitable for fusion.

Thorium can be used in MOX

Fukushima was MOX driven

Therefore?

[Cain]

Fukishima will be the end of all vertebrate life on the planet.

[East Coast Hustle]

Fukushima is the cancer that's killing PD.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

The bottom line right now is that we actually don't know the scope of the Fukushima disaster, and probably will not know for years.

I know that the West coast of the US has experienced elevated radiation levels from Fukushima for several months. That data is not officially available anywhere, and that in combination is not a very good sign.