Japan Radioactivity Spreading to West Coast of US

AI Thread Summary
Speculation surrounds the potential for nuclear material from a meltdown to reach the West Coast of the U.S. via the Jet Stream, but many argue that the dilution of radioactive material over such a distance would render it harmless. Historical context is provided by referencing the lack of widespread contamination in the U.S. following the atomic bombings in Japan. Concerns about health hazards from iodine pills selling out on the West Coast are dismissed, with experts noting that current radiation levels in Tokyo remain normal. Monitoring efforts are underway by nuclear engineering professionals to detect any fission products in air and rainwater. Overall, there is a consensus that California is not in danger from potential fallout.
sadasiva
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
There is a lot of speculation about this. Is that really possible?

It is being proposed that after meltdown and release the nuclear material will enter the Jet Stream and be in west Coast US in a few days.

Personally I find it hard to swallow. I mean we exploded two nuclear devices over Japan in 1945 and did not experience widespread nuclear contamination in the US.. A core meltdown devastates the soil, water and local air.. for at least a few hundred miles, but by the time anything enters the Jet Stream, etc.. how powerful could it be?

I realize these are different scenarios, a nuclear blast and a core meltdown in a nuclear reactor.. (with the Atomic explosion MUCH MORE SEVERE).

So, is there any scenario whereby even if four core meltdowns occur and their radioactivity gets released, that the West Coast of US needs to worry.

Am I missing something here?

Thanks a lot
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
The amount released from the damaged reactors would be diluted so much on its way here that it should pose almost no health hazard. I laughed when I saw on the news that Iodine pills were selling out all along the west coast here in the US. (Of course I could be wrong, but then I'm glad i live in Louisiana instead of California.)
 
Drakkith said:
The amount released from the damaged reactors would be diluted so much on its way here that it should pose almost no health hazard. I laughed when I saw on the news that Iodine pills were selling out all along the west coast here in the US. (Of course I could be wrong, but then I'm glad i live in Louisiana instead of California.)

I read that too while I was eating, had to spit out my water laughing. Unfortunately, it's people like that that will be deciding public policy about reactors going forward...
 
mhs25 said:
I read that too while I was eating, had to spit out my water laughing. Unfortunately, it's people like that that will be deciding public policy about reactors going forward...

Yep. Nothing better than uninformed decision makers eh? Oh wait...
 
To put this in perspective - there is an online live geiger counter in Tokyo. Tokyo is south of the plant a ways and it is reading normal background levels of radiation still.

California is in *no* danger from this. I can't imagine what the Surgeon General is thinking.
 
http://www.kek.jp/quake/radmonitor/GeMonitor2-e.html

KEK (in Tsukuba, outside Tokyo) is currently detecting atmospheric 131I at 2.7×10-7 Bq/cm3.

That's absolutely tiny... I doubt it will be detectable at all on the other side of the pacific. There's absolutely no way in hell it's harmful.

It may be detectable. The nuclear engineering community at Berkeley are currently running air and rainwater samples as we speak, looking for traces of those fission products.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hello everyone, I am currently working on a burnup calculation for a fuel assembly with repeated geometric structures using MCNP6. I have defined two materials (Material 1 and Material 2) which are actually the same material but located in different positions. However, after running the calculation with the BURN card, I am encountering an issue where all burnup information(power fraction(Initial input is 1,but output file is 0), burnup, mass, etc.) for Material 2 is zero, while Material 1...
Hi everyone, I'm a complete beginner with MCNP and trying to learn how to perform burnup calculations. Right now, I'm feeling a bit lost and not sure where to start. I found the OECD-NEA Burnup Credit Calculational Criticality Benchmark (Phase I-B) and was wondering if anyone has worked through this specific benchmark using MCNP6? If so, would you be willing to share your MCNP input file for it? Seeing an actual working example would be incredibly helpful for my learning. I'd be really...

Similar threads

Back
Top