ScribbleLive

@gabe I doubt that the leak they allegedly stopped was the only leak out to the ocean. There were two different sets of pics that surfaced claiming to be "the" leak. You have to think the 9.0 quake created a large number of cracks in the foundation of the Fukushima nuclear facility. With all of the water being poured into the reactor buildings, some is leaking out to the ocean, and some leaking into the groundwater.

@James Ward I noticed something looking at the PDF reports for 5 & 6 that they were releasing water into the ocean on them but I don't think that was as widely reported.

@Mid Valley transport.nilu.no www.youtube.com Useful links. I'm in Oregon as well.

Sorry...that didn't owrk...here is the report...http://tinyurl.com/3lbyv5k

Ty.. tinyurl.com

@ColorMeRed : "The ECRR risk model has been applied to the 3 million people living in the100km radius of the Fukushima catastrophe. Assuming these people remainliving there for one year the number of excess cancers predicted by the method isapproximately 200,000 in the next 50 years with 100,000 being diagnosed in the next 10 years. If they are evacuated immediately, the number will fall by asignificant amount. For those 7 million living between 100km and 200km fromthe site, the predicted number of cancers is slightly greater with 220,000 extra cancers in the next 50 years and about 100,000 being expressed in the next ten years. These predictions are based on the ECRR risk model and also the findings of cancer risk on Sweden after the Chernobyl accident."

@Mid Valley The plume you had last night is lightening up, it is moving into the Great Plains, and will shift north to northern michigan and finally to Canada.

2010 Recommendations of the ECRR The Health Effects of Exposure to Low Doses of Ionizing Radiation www.euradcom.org

@Mid Valley none taken at all. :-)

Monday 11th April 2011 1st paragraph updated 12th April
Advice for the people of Japan
Large areas of Japan are contaminated to measured levels around 1 microsievert per hour. This figure is just for Caesium 137; it does not measure the alpha-emitting radionuclides Plutonium and Uranium. These contaminants are the real threat to health. No official sources are saying anything about this hazard although hundreds of tonnes of Uranium and Plutonium are missing from the spent fuel ponds. It's known that up to 1760 tonnes of spent fuel was stored on site. Some of it was in pools in the roofs of reactor containments which these high resolution aerial photos show to be absent, following explosions. www.llrc.org

Conclusions and recommendations
1. The ECRR risk model has been applied to the 3 million people living in the
100km radius of the Fukushima catastrophe. Assuming these people remain
living there for one year the number of excess cancers predicted by the method is
approximately 200,000 in the next 50 years with 100,000 being diagnosed in the
next 10 years. If they are evacuated immediately, the number will fall by a
significant amount. For those 7 million living between 100km and 200km from
the site, the predicted number of cancers is slightly greater with 220,000 extra
cancers in the next 50 years and about 100,000 being expressed in the next ten
years. These predictions are based on the ECRR risk model and also the findings
of cancer risk on Sweden after the Chernobyl accident.
2. The ICRP model predicts 2838 extra cancers in the 100km population. The
eventual yield will therefore be another test of the two risk models.
3. Calculations based on official gamma dose rates published by the Japanese
Ministry MEXT can be used to back calculate surface contamination at the
positions of the measurements using accepted scientific methods. The results
show that the IAEA reports have significantly under reported the contamination
levels
4. It is recommended that urgent attention is given to making isotope specific
ground contamination measurements.
5. It is recommended that populations living within the 100km zone to the North
West of the site are immediately evacuated and the zone is made an exclusion
zone.
6. The ICRP risk model should be abandoned and all political decisions should
be made on the basis of the recommendations of the European Committee on
Radiation Risk www.euradcom.org This is the conclusion of the eminent
radiation risk experts who signed the 2009 Lesvos Declaration
7. Investigation and legal sanctions should be brought against those who
knowingly held back data from the public
8. Investigation and legal sanctions should be brought against those minimising
the health effects of this event in the media.

@ Dean. Am I just being paranoid? Last week Onagawa. Leak or spill. If water leaked rather than spilled, doesn't that imply that something is cracked or damaged. They seem to be carefully saying that they don't know if it was just a spill. "In all, water spilled or leaked at eight sections of the plant "..."As much as 3.8 liters of water leaked at one of them, with the highest level of a radioactive isotope -- 5,410 bequerels per kilogram -- found in the spilled water on the floor beside a spent fuel pool in the building housing the No. 1 reactor." english.kyodonews.jp

@jay : but it is true. i have wondered before if Edano's words about "no threat to human health" are legally justitiable. it is really dangerous to diminish the threat.

@tenzig, can you put links for those videos and their websites in the FAQ? Maybe on the radiation dosage pages?

Japan eyes possible damage to spent nuclear fuel
April 14, 2011 9:21 a.m. EDT Tokyo (CNN) -- Japanese regulators discounted concerns about damage to the still-potent spent fuel from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant's No. 4 reactor Thursday, saying high radiation levels reported earlier this week "most probably" came from outside debris.
A high reading above the pool prompted the plant's owner, the Tokyo Electric Power Company, to take a sample from the spent fuel pool on Tuesday. But the radiation levels are far lower than they would be if there were damage to the fuel rods, said Hidehiko Nishiyama, the chief spokesman for Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Commission.
"We need more analysis to identify the precise status of the spent fuel in unit 4," he said.
Tokyo Electric said Thursday night that the sample was the first time they have taken a reading off one of the spent fuel pools. The water temperature in the No. 4 pool was 90 degrees Celsius, more than twice a normal reading, and more coolant water was poured into the reservoir on Wednesday. The company said it suspects the fuel rods were damaged due to insufficient coolant at some point since the crisis began, but could not clarify the timing.

Nishiyama told reporters Thursday evening that the fuel rods have not suffered "any particular damage." Officials are still looking at the readings from that water sample before reaching a final conclusion, but said the radiation reading was "most probably due to debris" blown into the badly damaged housing around the No. 4 reactor. www.cnn.com

@Bobby1 : you have to calculate the atomic weight. i'll give it a rty. one moment please.

BTW, those are rough - I just ballparked them, no calculator

source: wikipedia