Thursday, May 10, 2012

"discover if the radiation has harmed your health" | Department of Nuclear Engineering

"discover if the radiation has harmed your health" | Department of Nuclear Engineering: " people and"

'via Blog this'

"discover if the radiation has harmed your health"

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 2011-07-27 11:46 
:
Dear Citizens of Fukushima and nearby areas.
As a result of the releases of radioactivity from the nuclear site you will have been contaminated with substances which are believed by some scientists to carry significant harm to your health. You have been reassured by the Japanese government and international agencies that at the doses you have received there is NO chance of any measurable ill health occurring. But there are other scientists who believe that these exposures may be much more harmful than the Japanese government and their advisors believe. If it turns out that the government have been wrongly advised, or have not adequately investigated the scientific evidence, then your family would be in a position to obtain legal redress since the government will have failed in their duty of care.
The questionnaire below will enable scientists to discover if the radiation has harmed your health. This questionnaire defines a background for a range of health conditions associated with radiation. You will be asked to fill out another questionnaire in 3 years and 5 years time. Your answers are very important to the Japanese people and are also valuable for humanity in the assessment of risk from internal radiation exposures. They may also form the basis for future compensation cases against the Japanese government.
All personal details will be kept confidential. You will be told the results of the analysis.
‹ Fukushima Children meet with GovernmentMolten Salt Reactor: Safer Nuclear Energy? ›

Penalty Box

Submitted by Bill Duff (not verified) on Wed, 2011-08-03 12:39.
:
We have a flagrant violation of the CTBT.
The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) bans all nuclear explosions in all environments, for military or civilian purposes. And the red penalty flag has been thrown on Japan, TEPCO, General Electric, Hitachi, Toshiba, Siemens and Areva. MOX is in the Penalty Box.
The US Government knew Fukushima Reactor-3 nuclear blast parameters in real-time. That is why we pay the ‘big-bucks’ for satellite ‘eye-in-the-sky’. Just as certainly, US allies in NATO, Japan and South Korea were briefed before the debris quit falling. Perhaps it took a couple of hours for the CTBT folks to process the facts. http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/ctbtsig
That is when this particular federal ‘pack-of-lies’ began. We would like to thank Barack Obama, Ann Coulter, GE, NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, CNN, PBN, NYTimes, LATimes … and all the rest of the shills for this little charade game. So when do the CTBT hearings begin?
GE Mark-1 Reactor failures are far too common to rate the ink on a national security ‘CLASSIFIED’ stamp.
Game Over, so out with it!

WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 2011-09-20 07:43.
We have a flagrant violation of the CTBT.
The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) bans all nuclear explosions in all environments, for military or civilian purposes. And the red penalty flag has been thrown on Japan, TEPCO, General Electric, Hitachi, Toshiba, Siemens a.
=========================
WRONG! You cant' violate a Treaty that is not yet in force
See the United Nations CTBT status page at:
See where it says at top "not yet in force". In order for the CTBT to go into effect, all 40+ nuclear capable countries need to be signatories. President Clinton signed the CTBT, but in 1998 when he submitted it to the Senate for ratification, the Senate did not ratify. Therefore, the USA is not a signatory, and the USA is one of the nations that has to ratify for the CTBT to go into effect.
You are also WRONG that the CTBT bans all explosions military and civilian. The CTBT bans the test explosions of nuclear weapons - but NOT all releases of nuclear energy.
Courtesy of the US State Department:
http://www.state.gov/www/global/arms/ctbtpage/treaty/art01.html

It is important to emphasize that Article I prohibits only nuclear explosions, not all activities involving a release of nuclear energy. It is clearly understood by all negotiating parties, as a result of President Clinton's announcement on August 11, 1995, that the U.S. will continue to conduct a range of nuclear weapon-related activities to ensure the safety and reliability of its nuclear weapons stockpile, some of which, while not involving a nuclear explosion, may result in the release of nuclear energy.

NIX-2-TVA-MOX

Submitted by Bill Duff (not verified) on Mon, 2011-08-01 19:13.
:(
TVA to use MOX fuel
The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) could sometime after 2016 begin burning a portion of 34 tons of surplus weapons grade plutonium in two of its reactors. Mixed Oxide Fuel (MOX) that is expected to be produced at a fuel fabrication center being built by Shaw Areva MOX Services at Savannah River, SC, will be offered for sale by the Department of Energy (DOE) to TVA and to other commercial nuclear utilities. According to the NRC, up to 40% of a reactor core could use MOX fuel.
(World Nuclear Association briefing on MOX fuel) http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf29.html
TVA expects buying MOX from the Savannah River plant will be cheaper than buying other fuel. Speaking this past August at the same meeting as Ed Lyman, Ken Baker, (right) deputy administrator at DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) said the tests at the two TVA reactors are an “important step” in evaluating the potential use of the fuel. Also, he pointed out burning the weapons grade plutonium, as MOX fuel, serves important nonproliferation goals.
TVA and Shaw Areva MOX Services signed an agreement in July 2009 to test and evaluate the use of MOX fuel. The MOX fuel will be a mix of 95% uranium and 5 % plutonium. NNSA’s 600,000 sq ft. MOX plant in South Carolina is being built as part of an agreement with Russia for the U.S. to turn 34 metric tons of weapons grade plutonium, enough for 8,500 warheads, into commercial fuel to generate electricity. Russia will also convert 34 metric tonnes of weapons grade plutonium into MOX fuel.

TVA code violations

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 2011-08-02 10:38.
:(
TVA activities are not consistent with code.
When TVA reapplied for that permit in 2008, it came under scathing review by the NRC itself. Joseph Williams, an NRC senior project manager, wrote in his report on TVA's application:
"Contrary to the Policy Statement expectations, TVA has not continued to implement the various requirements described in Section III.A.3 of the Policy Statement. Instead, TVA's August 26, 2008, letter describes 'investment recovery' activities, including removal of steam generator tubing and sections of reactor coolant system piping. TVA has subsequently taken action 'to inspect, clean, cap off, and stabilize those systems.' These activities were not conducted in accordance with NRC-approved programs, and were not subject to NRC inspection. Further, TVA states that it is in the process of performing repairs to the site to eliminate water intrusion, indicating the facility has not been maintained in a manner that would prevent serious degradation. It appears that the activities TVA describes are within the scope of the definition of construction as given in 10 CFR 50.2, but have not been conducted in accordance with NRC-approved programs. These activities are not consistent with section lli.B.2(b) of the Policy Statement, and need to be evaluated before the construction permits can be reissued."

Sloppy maintenance

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 2011-08-02 10:45.
“have not been conducted in accordance with NRC-approved programs”
DECLARATION OF ARNOLD GUNDERSEN SUPPORTING BLUE RIDGE EDL CONTENTIONS
“Contrary to the Policy Statement expectations, TVA has not continued to implement the various requirements described in Section III.A.3 of the Policy Statement. Instead, TVA's August 26, 2008, letter describes "investment recovery" activities, including removal of steam generator tubing and sections of reactor coolant system piping. TVA has subsequently taken action "to inspect, clean, cap off, and stabilize those systems." These activities were not conducted in accordance with NRC-approved programs, and were not subject to NRC inspection. Further, TVA states that it is in the process of performing repairs to the site to eliminate water intrusion, indicating the facility has not been maintained in a manner that would prevent serious degradation. It appears that the activities TVA describes are within the scope of the definition of construction as given in 10 CFR 50.2,' but have not been conducted in accordance with NRC-approved programs.

Preaching to the Choir

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 2011-08-02 11:15.
Verily?
Is that a prediction rather than a prescription?
IMHO, TVA theology is no better than their maintenance programs.
NNSA explains nonproliferation goals continued …
“It is the ultimate expression by the two nations of Isaiah's biblical call for turning “swords into ploughshares.”
…
While, no doubt there are bibliocentric arguments, perhaps this is not very persuasive. Are these also biblical directives?
11:6-8 The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them. And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.

Are we capable of objectivity?

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 2011-08-01 12:07.
Thank you for a critically necessary discussion about the possibility of nuclear detonation in March. This is much too important to hold onto an agenda or personal prejudice about the nuclear industry (regardless of position) - we must explore this issue objectively.
Sincere thanks to all who are contributing on both sides of the argument.

Never say never again

Submitted by Bill Duff (not verified) on Mon, 2011-08-01 18:52.
:
It appears that a nuclear explosion occurred at the Fukushima-3 Reactor. Concrete blocks do not typically emit 1 Sv/Hr.
Various mechanisms have been proposed to explain the mechanism which gave rise to the prompt criticality. Reportedly, Reactor-4 was empty and the Reactor-4 spent fuel pool is relatively intact.
These data-points presently tend to focus our attention upon MOX fueled Reactor-3. Plutonium captures more neutrons and control is more difficult to maintain, than with uranium. Thus, the most likely suspect is the plutonium.
Melting Point (Celsius): (Pu - 639.4C, PuO2 - 2,400C) - (U - 1,132.0C, UO2 - 2865C)
Professorial handwaving notwithstanding, it seems premature to categorically state that super-criticality is impossible within the confines of Reactor-3. So, for now, melting and/or explosive mechanisms are not ruled out as causes of a prompt criticality event. There certainly may be other nuclear detonation mechanisms at work.
It is difficult to anticipate and outthink Murphy.

HOT Structural Sections

Submitted by Bill Duff (not verified) on Tue, 2011-08-02 08:50.
:
Gamma radiation hot spots, presumably between Reactor-3 and Reactor-4, indicate a nuclear explosion.
Death in seconds: Radiation pockets found at Fukushima plant
Plant operator Tokyo Electric Power (Tepco) reported on Monday that radiation exceeding 10 sieverts (10,000 millisieverts) per hour was found at the bottom of a ventilation stack standing between two reactors.
Tepco said Tuesday it found another spot on the ventilation stack itself where radiation exceeded 10 sieverts per hour, a level that could lead to incapacitation or death after just several seconds of exposure.

Radiation evacuees deserve help

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 2011-07-31 10:57.
:
Editorial - Excerpts
“Evacuees should receive compensation in line with radiation levels in neighborhoods.”
Only those who have evacuated from government-designated evacuation zones are eligible for provisional compensation by Tokyo Electric Power Co., the operator of the crippled Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant, or to receive donations that the Japanese Red Cross Society and other organizations have collected from the general public.
No compensation has been paid to households with children who have evacuated from areas that are more than 30 kilometers away from the crippled plant and where high levels of radiation have been detected. It is hard to understand that the government has failed to rectify such unfairness.
The Fukushima Prefectural Government has asked the national government to use taxpayers' money to cover the costs of voluntary evacuation. The Japan Federation of Bar Associations has announced its official view that at the very least, compensation needs to be paid to those who have voluntarily fled so-called radiation controlled zones where more than 5.2 millisieverts of radiation a year has been detected and where nobody but those who are deemed absolutely necessary are allowed to enter. The government should extend assistance to evacuees from affected areas -- including those who want to evacuate from such areas but have been unable to do so -- in a fair manner.
The government should pay compensation to evacuees while taking into account the state of affairs of radiation contamination in their respective neighborhoods.

TOTALLY HOSED

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 2011-07-29 08:27.
.
There will be no shortage of Japanese patients/subjects for this nuclear disaster study. The initial evacuation area was only 3,000 meters from the front gate of the plant. This is little more than the balistic range of a 22-short, fired from a rifle.
Japanese citizens were stranded in a flood-zone without electricity. Many were stranded outdoors on their roofs during the vast radionuclide storm. They were not decontaminated or given counter-radiation drugs. The evacuation area presently stands at 10,000 meters, well within artillery range. The plant hydrogen detonations and/or prompt criticality events certainly exceeded the present evacuation area, without regard to the wind or nuclear fallout pattern. Their government has denied medical care, and fed them a steady diet of lies and contaminated food.
The Nipponese are in a word ... screwed.
British subjects were evacuated for 30 miles and from Tokyo. They were issued counter-radiation medications.
The USA evacuated US citizens for a 50 mile radius and moved military dependents out of the country. Team Obama SOLD the US medical counter-radiation supply strategic stockpile for 'walking-arround-money'. So US citizens did not receive any KI or Prussian Blue, regardless of medical necessity.

Nuclear Detonations?

Submitted by Bill Duff (not verified) on Fri, 2011-07-29 08:49.
:(
Debris from the three stricken GE Mark-1 detonations was propelled to flight level 50 and scattered via the Jet Stream to the entire Northern Hemisphere. While such trajectories can be achieved with conventional artillery, it requires a long barrel and a tight-fitting, aerodynamic projectile.
Certainly, a cursory review of the blasts for Reactor-1, Reactor-2 and Reactor-3 very closely resembles a nuclear artillery piece detonation. The initial blast was likely hydrogen and arguably, if not definitively, that compressive event was sufficient to cause prompt-criticality events.
Just as certainly, TEPCO, the Japanese government and Team Obama have been 'less than forthcoming' and 'less than candid' from the get-go.
For the present, I shall 'go-with-the-visual' rather than their continued lying and hypocrisy. If it looks like a duck, has feathers like a duck, walks like a duck and swims like a duck ... it is a duck.
If it looks like a nuclear blast ...

Please review the literature

Submitted by dchivers on Fri, 2011-07-29 09:59.
Please review the literature on this...a nuclear blast, even a small one (say 1 kiloton) is equivalent to 1000 Oklahoma style bombings. The amount of energy released by this hydrogen blast is impressive but many orders of magnitude (i.e. factors of 10) to produce the any effects on the fuel. If one is interested, please pick of a copy of "Effects of Nuclear Weapons (1977)" which goes into infinite detail on every aspect of what a real nuclear blast looks like, from crater sizes to down-wind dose rates. If you are lucky enough to get a copy with the blast effects calculator which is in a back cover pocket, this contains a circular slide rule with multiple wheels that can be used to compute many quantities from a nuclear blast with known yield.
Another point,..., it is physically impossible to go prompt critical with reactor grade enrichment...this is the reason enrichment is limited to 5% for commercial plants. Re-criticality is possible during meltdown but this would not be prompt and would require fractionation of the fuel such that neutron absorbers are somehow separated from the fissionable material. In any case, a hydrogen explosion (even one that can blow the roof off) is far too weak (i.e. impossible) in terms of energy to change the geometry of the fuel.

MOX Fueled Nuclear Blast

Submitted by Bill Duff (not verified) on Sat, 2011-07-30 06:53.
Dr. Chivers,
Amongst and amidst the specious ‘shop-talk’, condescension and disinformation, we find a welcome glimmer of pre-TMI thought. Oh and thanks for the refresher course on big O, (order of magnitude). Since I was familiar with scientific notation before you graduated from diapers, perhaps you think my memory is in failure mode. Anything is possible.
You stated above: “Re-criticality is possible during meltdown but this would not be prompt and would require fractionation of the fuel such that neutron absorbers are somehow separated from the fissionable material. In any case, a hydrogen explosion (even one that can blow the roof off) is far too weak (i.e. impossible) in terms of energy to change the geometry of the fuel.”
Murphy’s Law appears to be fully functional at the Fukushima nuclear generation station, particularly in MOX fueled Reactor-3. The added plutonium adds fission instability, higher thermal generation and much greater mechanical stresses and strains.
Core temperatures soared for Reactor-1, Reactor-2 & Reactor-3. Computer control systems appear to ‘go haywire’ once the emergency protocols are initiated, (a characteristic of the Stuxnet malware). Cooling systems engage and disengage properly, but fail to re-engage. Hydrogen gas evolution and core meltdown proceed. Recriticality apparently kicks in for the three doomed reactors. Reactor-1 and Reactor-2 undergo (white) hydrogen gas detonation as opposed to deflagration.
The detonation of MOX-fueled Reactor-3 is a horse of a different color; black with implosion, explosion, light-burst and mushroom cloud. The blast blast differs somewhat from the thermobaric fuel ordinance popularly referred to as the Mother Of All Bombs (MOAB).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_gk49n5djw
The Reactor-3 detonation looks like a nuke to me.

NOT

Submitted by Bill Duff (not verified) on Fri, 2011-07-29 11:14.
:(
Dr. Chivers,
Get real!
Shall we review the long litany of stray criticality events in nuclear history?
Down to flasks boiling over?
Including dropping a reflective brick on a subcritical mass?
Please recall that I remain one of the rapidly diminishing number of supporters, albeit tepid, for continued development and use of nuclear power.

who let the dog out who who

Submitted by can you see the real me (not verified) on Fri, 2011-07-29 17:32.
i was going to say.
pick a bale of cotton, pick a bale of hay.

Hydrogen or Criticality BLAST?

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 2011-07-29 18:14.

Cotton and Hay bales...

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 2011-07-29 18:02.
So how many bales have you picked ?
Was the hay radioactive ?
Pick a green steamy bugie for me !
Honestly, can you please.....please.....stop posting that message it gets old. Say something meaningful ?!

something else

Submitted by can you see the real me (not verified) on Fri, 2011-07-29 18:39.
oh and one other thing. the mushroom cloud should have been a dead give-away. it is not uncommon for a nuclear detonation to make a crater in the ground as small as six feet deep.
pick a bale of cotton, pick a bale of hay.

who let the dog out

Submitted by can you see the real me (not verified) on Fri, 2011-07-29 18:28.
sorry. no can do. and your childish, spurious ad hominems/worthless strawmen tell a story and are completely unreasonable. my posts are fluid and dynamic, i am able to separate the wheat from the chaff, the childish broadsides from the true science, and fact from fiction.
have a nice day.
pick a bale of cotton, pick a bale of hay.

CRITICALITY ACCIDENTS

Submitted by Bill Duff (not verified) on Fri, 2011-07-29 15:57.
:(
Regarding 'The Possible & the Impossible' ...
The interested reader may wish to review a few criticality accidents at this URL.
Trinity Atomic Web Site (from Operational Accidents and Radiation Exposure Experience Within the United States Atomic Energy Commission, 1943-1970, U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington, D.C., 1971.)
In the AEC's operational activities (not licensed) for the past 28 years there have been a total of 26 occasions (see Chart XV) when the power level of fissile systems became uncontrollable because of unplanned or unexpected changes in the system reactivity. On three occasions, the power excursions were planned; however, the fission energy released during the excursion was significantly larger than was expected. There have been a total of six deaths attributable to criticality accidents.

thinking it inherently safe

Submitted by Bill Duff (not verified) on Fri, 2011-07-29 13:31.
:(
Thinking it inherently safe, does not render it inherently safe.
The Stationary Low-Power Reactor Number One, (SL-1) was a United States Army nuclear power reactor underwent a, prompt criticality event, steam explosion and meltdown on January 3, 1961, killing its three operators. The event is an early fatal nuclear power reactor accident in the United States.
The facility, located approximately 40 miles west of Idaho Falls, Idaho, was intended to provide electrical power and heat for small, remote military facilities, such as radar sites near the Arctic Circle. The design power was 3 MW (thermal). Operating power was 200 kW electrical and 400 kW thermal for space heating. The core power level reached nearly 20 GW in just four milliseconds, precipitating the reactor accident and steam explosion.
On the night of January 4, a team of six volunteers used a plan involving teams of two to recover the body of Byrnes. Radioactive gold 198Au from the man's brass watch buckle and copper 64Cu from a screw in a cigarette lighter subsequently proved that the reactor had indeed gone prompt critical. Up until the recovery of radioisotopes of uranium, fission products, and the radioactive isotopes from the men's belongings, scientists had doubted that a nuclear excursion had occurred, thinking it inherently safe. These findings ruled out early speculations that a chemical explosion caused the accident.
The third man was discovered last because he was pinned to the ceiling above the reactor by a shield plug and not easily recognizable. On January 9, in relays of two at a time, a team of ten men, allowed no more than 65 seconds exposure each, used sharp hooks on the end of long poles to pull Legg's body free of the shield plug.
The bodies of all three were buried in lead-lined caskets sealed with concrete and placed in metal vaults with a concrete cover. Some highly radioactive body parts were buried in the Idaho desert as radioactive waste. Army Specialist Richard Leroy McKinley is buried in section 31 of Arlington National Cemetery.

Fatal Stray Criticality

Submitted by Bill Duff (not verified) on Fri, 2011-07-29 11:19.
These stray criticality events promptly SNUFFED HKD & LS!
21 August 1945, Los Alamos scientist Harry K. Daghlian, Jr. suffered fatal radiation poisoning after dropping a tungsten carbide brick onto a sphere of plutonium. The brick acted as a neutron reflector, bringing the mass to criticality. This was the first known fatal criticality accident.
21 May 1946, Los Alamos scientist, Louis Slotin, accidentally irradiated himself during a similar incident; in a critical mass experiment with the same sphere of plutonium. Slotin died of radiation poisoning nine days later.
3w.orau.org/ptp/Library/accidents/la-13638.pdf
3w.osti.gov/bridge/servlets /purl/442135-jDDq4J/webviewable/442135.pdf
http:// library.lanl.gov/ cgi-bin/getfile?00538246.pdf
3w.atomicheritage.org/index.php/ component/content/92.html?task=view

actual artillery shell yields

Submitted by Bill Duff (not verified) on Fri, 2011-07-29 11:59.
Dr. Chivers,
Let’s scale that blast down to actual artillery pieces.
W48 155-millimeter Nuclear Artillery Shell
An estimated 1,000 W48 nuclear artillery shells (designed by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory) were produced and deployed with Army and Marine Corps forces between 1963 and 1991. The W48 had a yield of 0.02-0.04 kilotons (equal to 2-4 tons of TNT).
The U.S. Nuclear Weapons Cost Study Project was completed in August 1998 and resulted in the book Atomic Audit:
The Costs and Consequences of U.S. Nuclear Weapons Since 1940
Edited by Stephen I. Schwartz.
Credit: Department of Energy (courtesy Natural Resources Defense Council)
http://www.fema.gov/rebuild/mat/mat_fema277.shtm
The Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, Oklahoma City truck bomb was reportedly equivalent to the detonation of 4,000 pounds of TNT.

radioactive concrete fragment

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 2011-08-01 18:30.
:
TEPCO: Highly radioactive concrete fragment found
The operator of the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant says that concrete debris emitting a high level of radiation has been found near the Number 3 reactor.
Tokyo Electric Power Company, or TEPCO, says its workers detected radioactivity of 900 millisieverts per hour being emitted from a 30-by-30 centimeter concrete fragment, 5 centimeters thick, on Wednesday.
The workers were using heavy equipment to remove rubble near the electrical switchyard.
TEPCO says the workers were exposed to 3.17 millisieverts of radiation during the clean-up and the concrete block has been stored safely in a container with other debris.
The utility believes the contaminated fragment could be part of debris scattered across the compound as a result of a hydrogen explosion at the Number 3 reactor.
Sunday, April 24, 2011 00:23 +0900 (JST)
Source: NHK
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)