Fukushima: Very high radiation levels still being found in some parts of power plant

Discuss

10 Responses to “Fukushima: Very high radiation levels still being found in some parts of power plant”

  1. Rob says:

    Correction: At least 10 sieverts / hour. Other sources indicate that’s the maximum measuring capability of the device.

  2. tp1024 says:

    Better to have the radiation there than outside. Reasonably equipped power plants have filters in order to contain at least 99% of released Iodine and Cesium in case of a meltdown – instead of just a fraction.

    Of course you can’t expect to find such things in the nuclear power plant that ranked third worst in the world in terms of security.

    http://www.interaksyon.com/article/9480/fukushima-long-ranked-most-hazardous-plant

  3. broadstrokes says:

    Looks like the filters at the bottom of the stack did their jobs.

    • tp1024 says:

      Alas, there aren’t any (appropriate) filters in those stacks.

      What you see is most likely Cs-137 in water that condensated in the stack and followed gravity downward, collecting where you see it. The total amount trapped that way is very small compared to the amount that was released.

      Although a lot of the stuff was actually released because of the hydrogen explosions – a problem that people knew about at least since the 1980ies. And one that could be resolved relatively easily and cheaply with sets of passive autocatalytic recombiners (about $5 mio per reactor building – though that might be 1980ies dollars). And the equipment is in fact installed at least in the plants of France, Germany and Sweden. (With those I’m sure. That doesn’t mean other countries reactors don’t have them. – Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi obviously had not.)

  4. narddogz says:

    I just see a OM NOM NOM monster

  5. jphilby says:

    So … THAT’s where the chunks were leaning after the spent-storage fuel pool went critical and exploded …

    10Sv/hr is a -hellacious- lot of rads. That’s not coming from a little Ce dust.

    • tp1024 says:

      Care to provide a source for that statement? It just so happens to be absurd.

      Edit: Also, less than a gram of Cs-137 is perfectly sufficient to get that kind of dose. The dose refers to the surface of the stack – which might be just a few millimeters away from the source of the radiation, if it is on the other side of a thin sheet of metal. You’d have a much smaller dose just a few centimeters away from the surface, and a very much smaller dose a few meters away – so small, that it drops below the (rather high) background radiation. The high concentration at the spot can’t be discovered without some specialized equipment such as a gamma-ray-camera – but as the spot only contributes a small amount to the background radiation, that doesn’t really matter much until you have to work right next to this spot.

      Think of it as a lightbulb. The filament is some 3000 degrees hot – which is why it glows with such intensity and that bright color. But a few meters away, you can’t feel its heat at all. It’s good to know though, that the bulb is hot – as you would burn your hand if you were to go very close to it and touch it.

      The intensity of radiation falls off with the square of distance – no matter what radiation you’re talking about. That’s not, btw. caused by the radiation, it’s about geometry, which is the reason why it’s applicable for gamma radiation, x-rays, visible light, radio, sound and many other phenomena.

  6. Matt Nelson says:

    You put a BLUE FIRE into the bottle!

  7. Trent Hawkins says:

    http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/01_39.html

    10,000 millisieverts not 10,000 sieverts!

    this is a huge difference, so check your fact first.

  8. chris mcdonald says:

    “radiation poisoning” you say…. at that kind of exposure, it’ll be
    cooking the flesh everywhere, inside and out. imagine a bad sunburn that
    penetrates thru’ the entire body of yours. your flesh will look like over-coocked turkey drum sticks.

    “poisoning” does not do justice!!!

Leave a Reply