- #281
Caniche
- 103
- 0
zapperzero said:TEPCO says it was 571 billion yen in the red in Q2.
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/business/T110810005340.htm
So who is paying the bill? As if
Last edited by a moderator:
zapperzero said:TEPCO says it was 571 billion yen in the red in Q2.
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/business/T110810005340.htm
swl said:The 'hot' area is not a gutter, but rather above ground in a grassy area with shrubs nearby.
Hundred percent agreed.NUCENG said:Your objective is to find the maximum contamination so you can keep your family safe. You can survey where your children actually go and play. That makes your survey efficient and effective.
The Japanese government and TEPCO do not have targets that are so clear so their surveys are trying to find out where the contamination went. When it comes to free release or cleanup their surveys should be more detailed.
What you found should be shouted from the rooftops as an example that every citizen in the exposed areas should understand. Large area surveys do not prove it is risk free for an individual.
One thing that really irked me about this disaster, in the beginning when it was the most important, is the lack of good information on this aspect of the contamination - they would report the contamination figures for cities with two, three, even four figures of accuracy, creating entirely false sense of accuracy, and to some extent playing on people's misunderstanding of difference between radioactivity (as in radioactive dirt) and radiation (as in something that falls off smoothly with distance). They treated the radiation as if it was UV index.That does not mean they are deliberately trying to miss the hotspots as zapperzero accuses, It is a valid criticism that they have not explained this to the public. And unfortunately that isn't the first time.
tsutsuji said:http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/national/news/20110907-OYT1T00524.htm & http://www.jiji.com/jc/c?g=soc_30&k=2011090700630 Pr Kunihiko Takeda of Chubu university was asked by the mayor of Ichinoseki, Iwate, to retract his comment aired on television on 4 September asking viewers to throw away Tohoku-grown food, and saying that agriculture should be suspended for one year.
Some of it is simply airborne contamination that fell to the water surface, no?tsutsuji said:"The big gap indicates radioactive substances could have leaked through other channels"
zapperzero said:Some of it is simply airborne contamination that fell to the water surface, no?
The researchers say the estimated amount of radioactivity includes a large amount that was first released into the air but entered the sea after coming down in the rain.
http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/08_25.html
tsutsuji said:http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20110908p2g00m0dm109000c.html A 15,000 terabecquerel sea release estimate calculated by researchers doesn't match Tepco's estimate for the unit 2 inlet leak last April. "The big gap indicates radioactive substances could have leaked through other channels"
zapperzero said:Some of it is simply airborne contamination that fell to the water surface, no?
Caniche said:True, but concrete is porous. Also what are the chances of a single leak occurring in a plant of this size after an earthquake of that magnitude with multiple aftershocks combined with the pressure of 100,000 tons of radioactive effluent that was never designed for?
Some relevant groundwater analysis might prove enlightening
clancy688 said:It would be nice to know how much of that stuff was C137/134
tsutsuji said:http://mainichi.jp/select/jiken/news/20110909k0000m040089000c.html The number of refugees is 101,931 as of the end of August.
Borek said:Can you clarify - are these just NPP disaster victims, or all earthquake victims?
clancy688 said:What's the meaning of the "25184"-number in the upper corner of the picture, at the location of Minamisoma?
clancy688 said:So all in all 0.5 - 1 % of the whole japanese population has been displaced?
clancy688 said:So those citizens are probably from the voluntary evacuation zone or even from locations outside the voluntary evacuation zone.
clancy688 said:Do you know how or if they're getting compensated for moving away? Because the government could always argue that they're outside all of the declared zones...
What is temporary compensation (with regard to the evacuation)?
It is payment of temporary compensation, that is, for those who live in the areas, due to the accident of out nuclear power station, of "Evacuation" or "Shelter in Place", or "Planned Evacuation" or "Emergency Evacuation Preparation" , designated by the Prime Minister pursuant to Act on Special Measures Concerning Nuclear Emergency Preparedness, we pay 1,000,000 yen per multi-person household (750,000 yen per single-person household) that will be appropriated to the damages that result from the evacuation, as a part of compensation money.
(...)
With regard to the final compensation, we will announce officially after the accident caused by the nuclear power station is settled and the final version of the above-mentioned policy is established.
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/karibaraihosyou/faq-e.html
tsutsuji said:According to http://www.stat.go.jp/english/data/jinsui/tsuki/index.htm , Japan's population estimate for August 2011 is 127,920,000.
101,931 / 127,920,000 = 0.0007968 (0.08 %)
rowmag said:Yes, I had noticed this in another location which was also downwind of Fukushima Daiichi and raining heavily that day. Two questions, for anyone who knows:
1) Why did the levels drop again after the rain stopped? If it was Cesium being brought down, should it not have remained on the ground and raised the background level permanently afterwards (as happened in the March bursts in several places)? But it doesn't, it drops back to the previous level after the rain stops. Why the difference this time from the spikes in March?
2) What does this imply about the ongoing level of atmospheric emissions from the plant?
Jim Lagerfeld said:According to a post made today at the ex-skf blog, we were not the only people to notice that spike - the blog has translated an article from Playboy which postulates a fresh release of radioactive isotopes around the time:
http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/2011/09/japanese-researcher-recriticality-in.html
tsutsuji said:(NHK) & http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/genpatsu-fukushima/20110918/1130_chizu.html The Osaka University research centre for nuclear physics will release on 19 September on its internet homepage a map displaying radiation estimates in 5 years' time in the Fukushima area. The source data are those measured by the ministry of education and science. [At present only a bar graph radiation display with some undated data (the last available ones ?) is available on the following google Earth application: http://www.rcnp.osaka-u.ac.jp/dojo/GE_dose.php ]
tsutsuji said:http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/genpatsu-fukushima/20110920/0440_keikai.html In his address to the IAEA general conference in Vienna on 19 September, Goshi Hosono said that the completion of step 2 (cold shutdown) does not necessarily mean that the restricted zones will be changed or shrunk. Reducing radiations to such levels that do not affect health will take time and an effective method of disposal of the waste generated by the decontamination work has not been found yet. Meeting with director general Amano, US and French representatives, Goshi Hosono obtained their cooperation such as the sending of experts to Japan. Whether decontamination work and waste treatment can be accelerated seems to be a challenge.
the amount of radioactive substances released from the plant was about
200-million becquerels per hour in the first half of September. They say that's
about one-four millionths of the level of the initial stages of the accident in
March.
zapperzero said:http://where-are-the-clouds.blogspot.com/
discusses plumes in a rather exhaustive manner.
tsutsuji said:Isn't his theory written on 31 March that "the insertion of sea water in the spent fuel pool of reactor 4 on March 21st, seems consistent with the dose rate increase in Ibakari several hours later (please note that I am not saying it is the only reason, just that it seems consistent based on the incomplete data we have so far)" a bit strange? Should not the radiation decrease rather than increase after they poured water?
zapperzero said:Not necessarily. Lots of radioactive steam may have been produced.