Allegro.cc - Online Community

Allegro.cc Forums » Off-Topic Ordeals » 8.8 Earthquake in Japan

This thread is locked; no one can reply to it. rss feed Print
8.8 Earthquake in Japan
type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

Wiki about cosmic particles says vast vast majority are alpha, and you say it's absorbed by the skin.. Furthermore, something tells me the fuselage would have some stopping effect. There's some beta too, but almost no gamma as I understand, so.. What is harmful there? Do the crews keep track of it?

OICW
Member #4,069
November 2003
avatar

If I'm not mistaken x-rays are there too. Essentially any photon with high enough frequency is ionizing radiation. Not to mention neutrons.

[My website][CppReference][Pixelate][Allegators worldwide][Who's online]
"Final Fantasy XIV, I feel that anything I could say will be repeating myself, so I'm just gonna express my feelings with a strangled noise from the back of my throat. Graaarghhhh..." - Yahtzee
"Uhm... this is a.cc. Did you honestly think this thread WOULDN'T be derailed and ruined?" - BAF
"You can discuss it, you can dislike it, you can disagree with it, but that's all what you can do with it"

Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
avatar

Didn't all of you know that the yellow lines are long pieces of tape that hold the road together? ???

Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

Didn't all of you know that the yellow lines are long pieces of tape that hold the road together? ???

Wow! I didn't know half this stuff!

They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas.

gnolam
Member #2,030
March 2002
avatar

type568 said:

Wiki about cosmic particles says vast vast majority are alpha

It's mostly protons, actually. :)

Quote:

What is harmful there?

First off, cosmic rays have vastly greater energies than particles produced through simple radioactive decay. The helium nuclei produced by alpha decay typically have energies in the order of 5 MeV or so. Cosmic ray helium nuclei OTOH can have energies up to the order of TeV...

Anyway. The answer is "various kinds of secondary radiation: mostly neutrons" (at cruising altitude, neutrons make up more than 50% of the equivalent dose[1]). AFAIK, the neutrons are mostly produced through a process called spallation, when high energy cosmic rays strike nuclei in the atmosphere.

[EDIT]
Kyodo News: All 6 Fukushima reactors reconnected to external power

References

  1. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans: Neutron Exposure (Yay, I finally found a publically accessible source! :))

--
Move to the Democratic People's Republic of Vivendi Universal (formerly known as Sweden) - officially democracy- and privacy-free since 2008-06-18!

Polybios
Member #12,293
October 2010

gnolam said:

Kyodo News: All 6 Fukushima reactors reconnected to external power [english.kyodonews.jp]

Afaik they have been able to switch on the lights in the control room of no 3. Great! ;D
So far, there is no information on the cooling systems, however... :-/

edit:
Austrian meteorology office said:

Quote:

First emission estimates
[...]
Regarding Iodine-131, the picture is relatively homogeneous. A source term of 1017 Bq per day would explain the measurements in Takasaki as well as Sacramento. The total 4-day emission of 4 1017 Bq is on the order of 20% of the total emissions of Iodine-131 that occurred during the Chernobyl accident. Regarding Cesium-137, the situation is a bit different. In the cloud eventually propagating to the United States, the ratio of Iodine-131 to Cesium-137 was about 30. This is similar to the Chernobyl accident. In Takasaki, however, this ratio was four. This would indicate a much larger Cesium-137 release in the second two-day period after the accident. Taking this together, the source terms would be about 3 1015 Bq during the first two days, and 3 1016 during the second two-day period. In sum, this could amount to about 50% of the Chernobyl source term of Cesium-137.

Source: here

gnolam
Member #2,030
March 2002
avatar

The official death toll has risen to 10000, with 17000 still missing, and 240000 still living in temporary shelters.

Also, three workers at Fukushima aiming for a Darwin Award have suffered radiation burns. :P

Quote:

The two men were not wearing rubber boots as they stood in water that contained radioactive materials 10,000 times the normal level, plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. said.
[...]
''Because of this, the workers are believed to have continued working even after the alarm on their dosimeter went off, assuming there was a problem with the device,'' a TEPCO official said.

--
Move to the Democratic People's Republic of Vivendi Universal (formerly known as Sweden) - officially democracy- and privacy-free since 2008-06-18!

type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

So death pool being about 30 000.. Eh, considering the scale of the disaster I'd say very well done.

Though the world has lost 25% of it's silicon chip manufacturing abilities :(

Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
avatar

What I've learned from this is we need to do a better job building nuclear plants. >:(

type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

That is correct! I believe a nuclear power plant must be able to survive a direct nuclear warhead hit without releasing a Bq of radiation itself!

Polybios
Member #12,293
October 2010

Quote:


...a TEPCO official said.

Oh, there are really so many reasons to trust them, including this:
(Wikipedia:)

Quote:

The utility "eventually admitted to two hundred occasions over more than two decades between 1977 and 2002, involving the submission of false technical data to authorities" [...]

In 2007, however, the company announced to the public that an internal investigation had revealed a large number of unreported incidents. These included an unexpected unit criticality in 1978 and additional systematic false reporting, which had not been uncovered during the 2002 inquiry

Business as usual ::)

There was this interesting report about TEPCO having been hiring unskilled workers for years, firing them after their radiation dose was reached... Unfortunately, I can't find it in English.

What I've learned from this is we need to do a better job building nuclear plants. >:(

At some point, they'll become too expensive...

I forgot to mention: No insurance-company has ever covered nuclear accidents at power plants. I guess they know why, AFAIK they're pretty good at estimating risks.

gnolam
Member #2,030
March 2002
avatar

Polybios said:

I forgot to mention: No insurance-company has ever covered nuclear accidents at power plants.

Patently false.

--
Move to the Democratic People's Republic of Vivendi Universal (formerly known as Sweden) - officially democracy- and privacy-free since 2008-06-18!

decepto
Member #7,102
April 2006
avatar

Question: Why aren't nuclear reactors built underground?

--------------------------------------------------
Boom!

type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

decepto said:

Question: Why aren't nuclear reactors built underground?

Why should they?
No, it would not prevent nuclear leaks in case of a meltdown: the pressure would push the dirt out in either case.

Polybios
Member #12,293
October 2010

Quote:

Patently false. [www.amnucins.com]

Interesting. I admit I didn't word my claim carefully enough. ^^
At any rate, that's no regular insurance company doing business. It's a construct of/encouraged by the government and it can only exist because it is backed by tax-money. There's no private insurance company which will insure nuclear plants up to a reasonable amount insured.

BTW, risk estimates are roughly at 1 "beyond design basis accident" every 30 years with about 400 reactors in the world. So, it is actually a bit too early. :-/

Johan Halmén
Member #1,550
September 2001

Polybios said:

Oh, there are really so many reasons to trust them,

At the marriage counselor:
Husband: "My wife is unfaithful."
Wife: "That's not all true. I can mention lots of occasions when I have been faithful."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Years of thorough research have revealed that the red "x" that closes a window, really isn't red, but white on red background.

Years of thorough research have revealed that what people find beautiful about the Mandelbrot set is not the set itself, but all the rest.

Dennis
Member #1,090
July 2003
avatar

video

Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
avatar

gnolam
Member #2,030
March 2002
avatar

--
Move to the Democratic People's Republic of Vivendi Universal (formerly known as Sweden) - officially democracy- and privacy-free since 2008-06-18!

Tobias Dammers
Member #2,604
August 2002
avatar

What people conveniently do not mention is that even though a nuclear disaster of epic proportions was eventually avoided at Fukushima, it was a pretty damn close call. And the reactor itself is pretty much the cleanest and safest part of the whole chain.

Another thing that bothers me to no end is that people conveniently suggest that the amount of required energy is a given - it's not.

---
Me make music: Triofobie
---
"We need Tobias and his awesome trombone, too." - Johan Halmén

Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

{"name":"117322.strip.gif","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/2\/d\/2d54072eddc0533acba76a22874a9569.gif","w":640,"h":199,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/2\/d\/2d54072eddc0533acba76a22874a9569"}117322.strip.gif

They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas.

gnolam
Member #2,030
March 2002
avatar

Another thing that bothers me to no end is that people conveniently suggest that the amount of required energy is a given - it's not.

You're right. The energy demand will only grow further. :P

--
Move to the Democratic People's Republic of Vivendi Universal (formerly known as Sweden) - officially democracy- and privacy-free since 2008-06-18!

Elias
Member #358
May 2000

But what about daylight savings time? And abandoning light bulbs? Clearly a lot is being done to reduce energy consumption.

--
"Either help out or stop whining" - Evert

gnolam
Member #2,030
March 2002
avatar

Quote:

But what about daylight savings[sic] time?

Irrelevant. Even the few modern studies that show any kind of power savings from daylight saving time show absolutely insignificant savings.

Elias said:

And abandoning light bulbs?

Also irrelevant. Put it like this: Earth Hour was indistinguishable from noise in the power companies' usage charts.
Also, the goddamn EUSSR-mandated CFLs are shite. They give shitty discrete-spectrum light, they don't save nearly as much energy as they claim (the lumen values and light bulb equivalence values are grossly inflated), they have to be kept on for long periods of time (as they take several minutes to warm up), and they're horrible for the environment (yay, mercury and worse). :P

--
Move to the Democratic People's Republic of Vivendi Universal (formerly known as Sweden) - officially democracy- and privacy-free since 2008-06-18!

Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

Just think of the uproar that would ensue if the 10,000 deaths were due to unclear energy instead of a natural cause.

They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas.



Go to: