Japan Earthquake | Page 120 | Liveblog live blogging

Japan Earthquake | Page 120

Last report I read earlier about the condition of the three workings said only two of them were still under observation, mentioned no burns had been sustained and no health hazard was suspected. We have highly contradictory information being posted here.
by Pedro Jesus 3/28/2011 12:28:10 AM

@alblee Of course it would be wise to follow their health..I am pretty sure thee will be massive agency observation..question is, if we will read about it?
by VeenOui 3/28/2011 12:28:38 AM

@Pedro Jesus yup
by NHK Listener 3/28/2011 12:29:04 AM

@Hank Scorpio 40 Sieverts?
by Jim Carver 3/28/2011 12:29:18 AM

Did NHK just crash or is it on my end ?
by VeenOui 3/28/2011 12:29:19 AM

The problem is the main health risks are cancers, which can take years to show up even with a high dose and even low doses add to the risk. We are OK here in the US no matter what happens, but in Japan....
by Ralph Unger 3/28/2011 12:29:35 AM

Even surviving the immediate effects, fatality rates are 5% per Sv.
by Jojo 3/28/2011 12:29:55 AM

@Jim Carver - That was the original estimate based upon the supposedly erroneous data. The new data excluded I-134 and reduced it to 30 or so.
by Hank Scorpio 3/28/2011 12:31:05 AM

Extremities (hands and feet) have higher dose limits than the whole body. This is bad, but if it is isolated to the feet, it's not that bad. The femur region has major implications on blood chemistry, so that region would be considered whole body. You'd have to do some radcon math to figure the dose about 2 feet above the floor.
by NHK Listener 3/28/2011 12:31:33 AM

Honestly, I think their math might be wrong and it's closer to 3Sv/hour. Still, that's unapproachable essentially.
by Hank Scorpio 3/28/2011 12:32:05 AM

@Hank Scorpio K thanks. Hmm, some murky waters there be.
by Jim Carver 3/28/2011 12:32:05 AM

@you 5% per Sv, meaning .5 % (1 in 200) from a dose of 100 mSv. Which is why when their computer models showed > 100 mSv dosage to INFANTS outside the 30 km zone, it is so tragic.
by Jojo 3/28/2011 12:32:26 AM

Should we rename corium to "Seppukuium" or "Bukkakeium?" - arstechnica.com
by Hank Scorpio 3/28/2011 12:33:10 AM

Any news on Pu testing results guys?
by Dennis Tucker Jr 3/28/2011 12:33:15 AM

No Dennis, and it stinks, pardon the pun.
by Hank Scorpio 3/28/2011 12:33:28 AM

Thanks, @Pedro Jesus, @VeenOui. The journalist in me is really itching to find a way to inflitrate the medical information cordon. I am certain with more "workers" rotating in and out by the day, there has to be a bulging health dossier by now. Sniff, sniff ... any sharpnosed fidos out there on the ground?
> Last report I read earlier about the condition of the three workings said only two of them were
> still under observation, mentioned no burns had been sustained and no health hazard was suspected.
> We have highly contradictory information being posted here.
.
by alblee 3/28/2011 12:33:42 AM

@alblee Seems this version is limited and any major deviation from the basic template means custom API work. I agree with what your saying about time stamps since often comments include items with little reference at all.
by George Gibb 3/28/2011 12:34:01 AM

@Hank think the guy must have mixed it up a bit. The I-134 made up >95% of the activity in the old data, no way removing it would just reduce dosage by 25%.
by Sims 3/28/2011 12:34:06 AM

@Dennis Tucker Jr TEPCO says test results will be available in the next couple of days. So give it 2 or 3 days before they are made available.
by Pedro Jesus 3/28/2011 12:34:09 AM

@Ralph Unger "We are OK here in the US no matter what happens" - no evidence this is true - how about "we don't know"?
by Bobby1 3/28/2011 12:34:19 AM

@Sims - Where do you get the 95%?
by Hank Scorpio 3/28/2011 12:34:49 AM

I am using Chernobyl as a reference, and it is much closer to the US then Japan.
by Ralph Unger 3/28/2011 12:34:56 AM

@Pedro Jesus I would hope and think that int'l communities are not waiting 2-3 days for test results of the most toxic substance inside that place. Greenpeace make any mention of them testing for it?
by Dennis Tucker Jr 3/28/2011 12:35:17 AM

Last earthquake update - it was 6.1M
by Korwus 3/28/2011 12:35:37 AM

@Sims - They based it on comparing levels of isotopes in the water of reactors 2 and 3. arstechnica.com
by Hank Scorpio 3/28/2011 12:36:15 AM

@Hank just look at the bq/kg from the press release. I134 had 10e9, everything else had 10e7
by Sims 3/28/2011 12:36:25 AM

by NHK Listener via Imgs.xkcd 3/28/2011 12:36:43 AM

@VeenOui Would you look at something with your keen eye? Check out 21Mar (5:00hr.) @minute 5:23, and 24Mar (1900hr./5:00hr) @ minute 7:19?/7:21, please?
by marie rich 3/28/2011 12:37:09 AM

Looking at the old data I see that the highest release so far occurred on march 13th, That release has already passed over the US. www.tepco.co.jp
by Ralph Unger 3/28/2011 12:37:09 AM

@VeenOui link www.youtube.com
by marie rich 3/28/2011 12:37:30 AM

@Dennis Tucker Jr I can't confirm but I do recollect Green Peace having something to do with it. But the company who's testing the soil in and around the nuclear plant is independent. Anyway, Pu levels have been monitored since day 1 of this crisis and no alarms have sounded yet. The soil tests are a lot more reliable though.
by Pedro Jesus 3/28/2011 12:37:32 AM

@bobby1: i hope this link works better ~ www.nytimes.com
by elise 3/28/2011 12:37:54 AM

@Pedro Jesus Yeah, I agree. they would've been looking already. Stall tactic undoubtedly but we'll see what the "new" results are when they report them.
by Dennis Tucker Jr 3/28/2011 12:38:49 AM

www.fccj.or.jp does this get webcast anywhere?
by gabe 3/28/2011 12:41:25 AM

@Pedro Jesus : Greenpeace is around the area. they made some testings and up to now they confirmed tepco's readings.
by Matsuoka 3/28/2011 12:42:18 AM

"Vetter notes that sensitive monitoring equipment in the U.S. may in fact detect fallout from Japan, but the levels will be negligible from a human health standpoint. "It's inconceivable that we would have health effects in this country as a result of this accident," he says." www.scientificamerican.com
by Ralph Unger 3/28/2011 12:42:41 AM

@Dennis Tucker Jr: The Japan Atomic Energy Agency and the Japan Chemical Analysis Center are also testing soil samples taken from the area of the nuclear plant.
by Pedro Jesus 3/28/2011 12:43:06 AM

@Ralph Unger Inigo Montoya would say "Inconceivable? I do not think it means would you think it means."
by Jojo 3/28/2011 12:43:48 AM

@Matsuoka Could you look at this for me? link www.youtube.com @minute 5:23 and @7:19/7:20
by marie rich 3/28/2011 12:43:58 AM

@marie rich try to find it. what am isupposed to see?
by Matsuoka 3/28/2011 12:45:56 AM

Here's a real scary part of even their revised numbers: www.tepco.co.jp This link is sorted in element number order. Are they saying there are no isotopes detected above 140...or are we missing page 2?
by Jojo 3/28/2011 12:46:16 AM

@Jojo One of my favorite movies! It makes my point about people who think they are smart vs people who are not smart (Nancy Grace) .
by Ralph Unger 3/28/2011 12:46:39 AM

look at about 1 inch in and just below midline of photo, where the plant is
by marie rich 3/28/2011 12:46:44 AM

@Ralph Unger 9-day old article, weasels around the point of ingestion and inhalation of particles - of course point radiation of microsieverts is not an issue in US, but is irrelevant from a health standpoint
by Bobby1 3/28/2011 12:46:57 AM

@Ralph Unger Agreed on that.
by Jojo 3/28/2011 12:47:01 AM

Japan Earthquake | Page 120

Who's Blogging

hudebnik
alblee
UKVal
Oliver (ScribbleLive)
Jonathan Keebler
kaykodh
PKelley
Markfm
Angie
Deb
Mid Valley
Pedro Jesus
Matt (ScribbleLive)
George Gibb
elainekirk
lillymunster
dean
bo
Edano
IanGoddard