Japan Earthquake

Japan Earthquake | Page 2767

@lillymunster ok, I'll look under that name. So does this blog get credit for it?
by MaryW 12/13/2011 12:21:42 AM

@MaryW it links back here to that post.
by lillymunster 12/13/2011 12:23:06 AM

@lillymunster So no hash# symbols have to be used. correct?
by MaryW 12/13/2011 12:23:52 AM

Areva posts huge losses www3.nhk.or.jp

No Monju test runs in 2012 www.yomiuri.co.jp
by lillymunster 12/13/2011 12:25:06 AM

@MaryW Veenie and Elaine maintain a SimplyInfo group twitter account so tweets from @simplyinfo1 are from them out of that account. We have individually as we tweet thing, been using various # tags to categorize posts to make sure the right readers find them. We don't have a # tag just for simplyinfo posts. We have been using some of these hash tags for posts:

#fukushima #nuclear #genpatsu #nuclearJP #nucleaire #eco

There are probably others I am forgetting.
by lillymunster 12/13/2011 12:27:34 AM

Lack of snow removal cited as problem for nursing homes in disaster areas. Also temporary housing has no snow removal systems. www.minyu-net.com
by lillymunster 12/13/2011 12:32:45 AM

@lillymunster I found this link, Japan Warthquake LIVE-History, but it starts with the oldest posts. Its a history of all these posts here. poudreinternetservices.com
by MaryW 12/13/2011 12:39:35 AM

@MaryW I'll email the link to you
by MaryW 12/13/2011 12:41:01 AM

@MaryW Is it still logging posts for current days?
by lillymunster 12/13/2011 12:42:29 AM

@lillymunster Still working with it. As I said it has earliest posts first, so you have to forward pages. I emailed you the link, you should have it now @gmail
by MaryW 12/13/2011 12:44:04 AM

Looks like it is a complete history with pix and vid.
by MaryW 12/13/2011 12:44:49 AM

@MaryW It was set up early on to log information for the site. I can't remember if Patrick or someone else set it up..
by lillymunster 12/13/2011 12:48:24 AM

@lillymunster Feel free to remove my posts on this. But the link email address is a Brad. So you could email him :) also, history is from March25-April 1. On the last page is a index to all charts, videos, diagrams...its interesting
by MaryW 12/13/2011 12:51:13 AM

@MaryW I hadn't thought about it until you brought it up. We could use that archive to go back and try to save copies of old news articles. We have seen many older articles go away so I have been looking at archival systems to start saving them.
by lillymunster 12/13/2011 1:35:44 AM

@lillymunster, well, the nuclear-advocate commenter was not dissuaded from her claim that the maximum allowable level in Fukushima is 1 mSv/y.

Unfortunately the best evidence we have to go on is inferences from media reports (no explicit government document I've found stating that right now the limit is 20 mSv/y), which make it clear to me that the level is 20 mSv/y, and was only lowered to < 1 mSv/y for children while at school as quoted below.
by Ian 12/13/2011 1:40:49 AM

@Ian I believe your statement to be true from what I have read. The govt is making no direct effort to decontaminate students homes specifically. The "rules" are phrased as deals with the devil in a way, worded very carefully for specific reasons. IE: read between the lies, look at what is isn't as much as what it is.
by lillymunster 12/13/2011 1:43:51 AM

@Mary, that link has been pinned above for a long time. It would be nice to see it remain just what it is, a document of the beginning of this crowd-sourced project.
by history 12/13/2011 2:10:31 AM

USA Today shilling hard for the nuke industry. They must be really scared about what is coming down this week as far as post Fukushima rulings by the NRC. The noise of the shills ramped up 2 weeks ago, there were suddenly lots in the news media, as usual failing to mention their industry associations and financial ties that a simple google of their name pop up. Now the big slap fight among the NRC heads and Congress. I think the industry is really afraid.
by lillymunster 12/13/2011 2:12:17 AM

@lillymunster @history How very observant of you! :) I had just come across it while google searching.
by MaryW 12/13/2011 2:12:30 AM

This guy is an industry expert that has worked in JP nukes for a while based on the background in the article. He says unit 3 had a hydrogen and a nuclear explosion claiming the multiple blasts in the video of 3 as partial proof. It is in JP but rather long. I can machine translate and post if anyone can't pull a machine translation themselves. www.zakzak.co.jp
by lillymunster 12/13/2011 2:27:07 AM

rebooted:)
by Mid Valley 12/13/2011 6:17:39 AM

by Ian 12/13/2011 7:49:05 AM

Hi Ian. Have you figured what the Japanese Government means by the new 1 mSv/year exposure limit? We've been confused about that one.
by Pedro Jesus 12/13/2011 8:02:49 AM

@Pedro Jesus, what's the source for the Japanese Govt saying there's a new 1 mSv/year exposure limit? And who's the 'we' who's been confused. Nobody here but you appears to be aware of any such new limit, and it makes no sense so I don't believe you know that. :)
by Ian 12/13/2011 9:50:23 AM

@Ian Excuse me?
by Pedro Jesus 12/13/2011 9:55:32 AM

@Pedro Jesus, what's the source to back up your claim? Is that hard to understand?
by Ian 12/13/2011 9:57:37 AM

@Ian The claim is definitely not mine. I was discussing with Lilly an article that she posted about this and I only argued that it doesn't make any sense by providing a real life example. Refer to page 4 of this scribble to follow the discussion.
by Pedro Jesus 12/13/2011 9:59:50 AM

@Pedro Jesus, the only thing I find on page 4 www.scribblelive.com about it says: "Radiation is to be reduced to less than 1 millisieverts per year and no more work is basically required once that goal is attained." That's not a limit, it's a decontamination goal.
by Ian 12/13/2011 10:05:46 AM

@Ian OK, it's a goal, not a limit. So...?
by Pedro Jesus 12/13/2011 10:06:32 AM

My question is, is there any idea how Japan Government plans to achieve that? And is it 1 mSv/year or is it 1 mSv/year above background radiation and if it is the latter, what background radiation are they referring to? Before or after the March 11 accident? That is my question.
by Pedro Jesus 12/13/2011 10:08:50 AM

@Pedro Jesus, okay, that reads as a different question but I can see how that's what you asked and why we're talking past each other a bit, lol! Sorry. It's a good question, I don't know the answer.
by Ian 12/13/2011 10:12:18 AM

@Ian That's all right, I sometimes don't express my doubts in a clear way. I still think it's a pertinent question, don't you agree? Neither me or Lilly could find an answer to it yet.
by Pedro Jesus 12/13/2011 10:13:46 AM

The goal of less than 1 mSv/year exposure seems pure utopia in this planet given the different average background radiation readings around the world. I gave the example of Portugal official numbers because this country hasn't been affected, as far as we know, by any of the past atomic bomb tests, the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs, nor by Chernobyl and/or Fukushima releases, and it is not an area of the world with predominant natural radioactive isotopes so our radiation background is among the lowest worldwide. And even then, it is hard to stay lower than that level of exposure. I have serious doubts that it can be implemented in Japan, given the circumstances.
by Pedro Jesus 12/13/2011 10:20:31 AM

@Pedro Jesus, well said! I agree. And I think they must mean < 1 mSv/y exposure to fallout-sourced radiation because natural background in Japan is said to be 1.5 mSv/y, so you couldn't go lower than that.
by Ian 12/13/2011 10:27:03 AM

"11th-hour agreement in Durban sees Big Three legally bound to reduce carbon emissions" www.independent.co.uk
by Pedro Jesus 12/13/2011 10:28:14 AM

@Ian I've got this feeling, shared by many of our collaborators here, that the Government of Japan has some serious issues regarding simple mathematics when dealing with radiation exposure levels.
by Pedro Jesus 12/13/2011 10:30:42 AM

"Areva Sees Huge Write-Down" online.wsj.com
by Pedro Jesus 12/13/2011 11:40:55 AM

"IEA: Fuel Production to Rise" online.wsj.com
by Pedro Jesus 12/13/2011 11:43:29 AM

they always speak of radiation limits plus "natural" or "background" radiation.
by Edano 12/13/2011 11:46:40 AM

Japanese Engineer: "There Was a Nuclear Explosion in Reactor 3 in Addition to a Hydrogen Explosion"
There are foreign nuclear experts who have said the explosion in Reactor 3 on March 14 at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant was a nuclear explosion. But this Japanese engineer and whistleblower at JNES (Japan Nuclear Energy Safety Organization) Setsuo Fujiwara says there were two explosions at Reactor 3: a hydrogen explosion, and a nuclear explosion at the Spent Fuel Pool. ex-skf.blogspot.com
by Majj 12/13/2011 12:00:56 PM

@Edano So, referring back to that article we have been writing about, that would be <1 mSv/year over average background radiation before March 11?
by Pedro Jesus 12/13/2011 12:04:09 PM