ScribbleLive

Maybe it's just me but I wouldn't consume anything from Fukushima Prefecture and would certainly think twice about the surrounding prefectures as well.

@LM two worries, one that the water is not contaminated, the other being general residual radiation on or in the can. Can aluminum absorb the types of radiation that make it outside the plant?

@RBeaner We wouldn't be having this discussion, if the US government would behave like a rational entity, and test all supplies of water and milk, as well as releasing air concentration data.

@Nancy I agree..good questions. Unfortunately, If I were living in Japan I would not feel comforted by the lack of vetted information. Taking Tepco at face value is laughable given their track record. Vigorous unaffiliated testing would need to be done before I ate or drank anything from that area.

@hudebnik The emergency status still applies AFAIK. The NRC supercedes the EPA and all other agencies in releasing radiation data as long as this status is in effect.

@Bobby1 - indeed it is still in force but it is a bit misleading to post "The NRC has declared a state of emergency" without qualification.

@RBeaner It would behoove the GoJ to let outside organizations who have NO nuclear vested interests to get in there and independently monitor. Their credibility is greatly questioned!

@Bobby1 - well I'm not qualified to opine on the NRC Chairman's powers, but I'd suggest that he did, very early, judge that a major nuclear emergency at occurred at Fukushima and that it might well affect the USA. His call was well in advance, if I remember correctly, of the true gravity of the Fukushima situation being admitted by TEPCO.

@Nancy

Alot of beer is made from distilled water, I'm sure they have a plan to remove any possibility of radioactivity. LOL

Your other point on the engineers vs. technicians. Often, as with most jobs, the lower level people have a good understanding of their job. Their job is usually less complicated. (Put the white paper in the blue bin and the plastics in the red bin type stuff..:-) That's not to denigrate them, it is just a simplified mental job. Reactor Physics is complicated, especially with added chemical complcations, and is prone to possible Unexpected Consequences in an emergency.

Radiological or Radiaton Controls are implemented at the site by trained professionals. I am NOT vouching for what TEPCO Has done since 3/11, just the norm. It is straight forward, survey, shielding and stay time for the workers. It is uncomplicated and easy to compute. It is done all the time within safety and regulatory requiements.

@RBeaner Given the number of food recalls in this country these days, excuse me if I don't feel comforted by the reassurance that all is done within safety regulations. I hardly think it's any different in Japan!

@RBeaner that is what I am digging for, the data to back that up.

@LM I agree with and wrote the "yet". I don't believe this is over. Things could still go horribly bad. Every day without a disater reduces the power level/decay heat involved.

@Nancy That's exactly what I suspected. it wouldn't be very different here. We definitely need to be our own self-advocates. That's why I'm here.

@RBeaner, listen to what he says in the vid. He does not elaborate on the weak spots. Perhaps he could be asked.

@LM I wholeheartedly agree with this. " It would behoove the GoJ to let outside organizations who have NO nuclear vested interests to get in there and independently monitor. Their credibility is greatly questioned!" Independent verification is kind of like market (capitalist) competition. Maybe you thoguht me some kind of TEPCO sympathizer, but no, I just don't agree with whacky, unscientific, non-peer reviewed assessments of the situation.

@LM There is no reason for the existence of this board without the posters being self-advocates. @RBeaner Rational estimates based on scientific principles are not whacky. Blind dismissal of radiation hazards are not only whacky, but criminal.

@Bobby1 The whole quote was " I just don't agree with whacky, unscientific, non-peer reviewed assessments of the situation." Focus, for me is on the NON-PEER reviewed assesments.

People have been trying to build a set of information to factually understand the implications of the radiation releases. Part of that process is discussing it here. There will be some good discoveries and probably a few "misses" as we dig through information. Taking one set of information and calling it a day going either direction isn't a good process. So my take is that the exploration should continue. We all should try to document and fact check everything we find with a bit of skepticism and assure that the sources facts meet up.

@Nancy - Seconded!

>...I too would be a very Unhappy camper if I was in Fukushima, but I am in the US. The >dispersion and dilution has had its great effect before the radioactivity got here. I am not >minimizing the radioactivity released in Fuku, or its health effects, I pray for the people of >Japan that have to deal with these Significantly increased radiation levels. But I am in the >US and noone here has to worry about it....yet.
Dispersion, yes. But there isn't any accounted dilution to radiological materials that I know.

TEPCO analysis of water in #4 SFP www.tepco.co.jp

@Bobby1 gather the info, then we also need to determine or find someone with the deeper understanding to help interpret. A good example is the MIT article released today that talked about ongoing chain reactions and how the ratios of isotopes explained the evidence this is still going on. It gets to be complicated technique where we either need to learn the complexities of interpreting that info or find someone willing to look at it and give opinion. But you have to gather that data first.