Doesn't seem like the situation is under control, especially if the radiation level is higher than it should be even outside of the plant. As long as death is not a risk to health, it is really healthy. _________________
Joined: 18 Jul 2008 Posts: 2757 Location: Under ur bed
Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:23 am Post subject:
Looks like they're downplaying the radiation levels near the exploded power plant as officials says it's low, but according to a news coverage on that matter, another sources say they have to released radiation into the environment in order to reduce the pressure building up within the reactor.
The amount of radiation release is what a human being is exposed to in a year. If the amount of radiation a person is exposed to in a year is all released at once, that is a lot! They also say it can be another Chernobyl like disaster if there is a meltdown. This can cause radioactive isotope to be released and cause the area to be inhabitable for a extremely long time. This is why the area near Chernobyl disaster site is still inhabitable as of today. _________________
Not again...
There are tons of stupid 2012 topics already. This topic was about the accident so far.
Quote:
Looks like they're downplaying the radiation levels near the exploded power plant as officials says it's low, but according to a news coverage on that matter, another sources say they have to released radiation into the environment in order to reduce the pressure building up within the reactor.
The amount of radiation release is what a human being is exposed to in a year. If the amount of radiation a person is exposed to in a year is all released at once, that is a lot! They also say it can be another Chernobyl like disaster if there is a meltdown. This can cause radioactive isotope to be released and cause the area to be inhabitable for a extremely long time. This is why the area near Chernobyl disaster site is still inhabitable as of today.
Yep they have released some radioactive steam into the air to decrease pressure. But it doesn't seem like Chernobyl, that was way bigger and massive. Still, I have no doubt that workers in the plant will die soon enough as they have got enough radiation. It really sucks to be working in a power plant if something like this happens and it takes some training to keep yourself together when you are exposed to deadly radiation levels. It is one of the worst things that could happen. _________________
Joined: 18 Jul 2008 Posts: 2757 Location: Under ur bed
Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 11:53 am Post subject:
There are fusion reactors and it's much safer than nuclear reactor. Why must we still continue to use nuclear as we know the dangers to it, is a mystery. _________________
There are fusion reactors and it's much safer than nuclear reactor. Why must we still continue to use nuclear as we know the dangers to it, is a mystery.
There are fusion reactors and it's much safer than nuclear reactor. Why must we still continue to use nuclear as we know the dangers to it, is a mystery.
There are not fusion reactors. First lets get something straight... fusion and fission are both NUCLEAR reactors. They are simply different methods of using radioactive material to generate electricity.
It's true, nuclear fusion is much safer. There is not any risk of a meltdown or catastrophic failure. It is also theoretically more efficient. This means instead of mining the limited supply of uranium in the Earth's crust, it's theoretically economically feasible to extract deuterium from the ocean, where it is so abundant that it could supply the world with electricity for millions of years.
The problem is that we can't figure out how to do it. I haven't looked into it much, but it seems the major setback is that it takes more energy that it puts out. So right now there are not any nuclear fusion reactors.
Between 1951 and 1963, 390 nuclear bombs were exploded above the ground, 205 by the US, 160 by the former Soviet Union, 21 by Britain and four by France.
I think actually one more or less doesn't count. The power plant situation is worse for those who are living there but if someone is worried about the fallout, the above mentioned data is raising more concerns. I wonder how much radiation did those experiments cause.
Probably much more people died because of meaningless testings and in the actual bombing of Japan than in these power plant accidents. After all this is an accident only in a plant which is producing electricity for probably millions of people and the detonated bombs were on purpose, without any serious needs.
I don't have a clue how long will the radiation remain in the air (for months at least) but basically with all those testings, we were living in a slightly radioactive atmosphere anyways. The list that I have posted is ending in the 90's but nuclear tests are made even these days so you get a healthy dose every time, like it or not.
For the Japanese people, it is really a crisis but for us who are far away, it doesn't really matter. _________________
All times are GMT - 6 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2
Page 2 of 2
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Reputation: 14
Reputation: 119
Reputation: 22
Reputation: 8
Reputation: 0
Reputation: 5
Reputation: 20
