You do realize that your own body is radioactive, right?
[QUOTE=johnpost]
reports are 2 plant workers have been killed. though i suppose because they were killed due to explosion some would claim they were not nuclear deaths.
[/QUOTE]
It depends on how you shift the goal posts. The big hand wringing worry in these threads is all about the radiation. If you just want to look at deaths due to an explosion, that’s fine. So…2 dead at the nuclear power plant due to an explosion of hydrogen gas. How many died in the latest 6.5 earthquake? 10. How many died in the initial earthquake? No one really knows yet, as they still haven’t found all the bodies, but it’s over 17k the last time I checked, with another 10k+ still missing.
See, it’s all a matter of scale. If every worker who is or has worked at the nuclear power plant since this all started were ‘fried’ as gonzomax keeps claiming, that would be tragic…it would mean a few hundred workers died. Now…scale that to the disaster as a whole. See the difference? Folks like gonzo, FXM, TSS and lev certainly can’t seem to wrap their minds around it. Can you?
[QUOTE=The Second Stone]
Of course not. These explosions weren’t caused by nuclear reactions directly, they were only related to nuclear reactions through a long chain of causation. And they were in Japan, in Fukushima, not here. The laws of physics are such that no explosions occur in the USofA because we are exceptional. Unlike the Japanese, our nuclear plants are designed by American companies like GE and Westinghouse. And our nuclear plants are of later generations of design.
[/QUOTE]
Dude…seriously! Stop waving that torch around all that straw! You are going to burn yourself if you keep doing that stuff.
[QUOTE=gonzomax]
Why do you think they are evacuating a huge area? Kids and pregnant women are especially vulnerable. But they will not keel over within your attention span.
[/QUOTE]
So, in other words zero, with some non-zero percentage having a higher probability of getting cancer over their lifetimes. Right? Hard for you to admit, isn’t it? Why is that?
-XT
The trouble is that the universe and the Earth itself already bombard us with radiation. If you get 3 days worth of radiation from a source, you have the same cancer risk as you would have had three days later. There may be small increases in chances of cancer. But as I say, coal causes small increases in chances of cancer.
If there were a demonstrated effect I’d be right with you. But most people who live long enough get cancer. You have to show that the rates of cancer are higher than a similar population.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-17/japan-churns-through-heroic-workers-hitting-radiation-limits-for-humans.html Yep they are killing them. they have raised the limits they should be exposed to. As a matter of fact, they apologized to the workers when they did it. Why would they do that?
Japanese Nuclear Plant Workers Say Radiation Death Is Inevitable - Gothamist And the workers know it too.
[QUOTE=gonzomax]
Why would they do that?
[/QUOTE]
Because they are exposing them to more risk, perhaps? :rolleyes: They raised the limits (as they are allowed to in an emergency) because, well, it’s a FUCKING EMERGENCY YOU GOD DAMNED IDIOT!
Yeah, they do…and they are still willing to work there, despite the raised level of risk. Pretty brave of them, no?
-XT
I can just about understand that you’re too lazy to read other people’s cites, but fuck me sideways at least try to read your own:
To date, 4 workers have had a dose of 100 millisieverts. Worst case, this will have raised their risk of them getting serious cancer in later life from 25% to 26%. Most likely scenario, the workers involved in this will be getting annual healthchecks far above what other people will get, and probably end up with an increase in life expectancy.
How the fuck you translate that to “yes they are killing them” is something for you and your conscience to decide. Is it because your stupid, or you’re just deeply dishonest?
And once more, just so you can’t do the usual strawman. No-one is arguing that this is not a serious situation. It is. It’s just nothing like the holocaust you’re so desperately trying to claim it is.
Level 7 International Nuclear scale
Release of radioactive material withe widespread HEALTH and environmental effects requiring implementation of planned and extended countermeasures.
I read fine but the situation is beyond what nuke lovers state. Japan did not want to go to level 7. They had to.
Is it as bad as Chernobyl. No ,it is worse. It is not far out in the country. It is in a densely populated land .
You are actually admitting that the percentage is non-zero? Holy smokes! So what will the percentage be approximately? How many real people will get cancer or worse cancer as a result of this preventable disaster? 1 percent of the local population? 10 percent? 50 percent? I think we can safely assume it is non-100 percent. GE and the local utility had no right to expose these people to this risk. I think we can safely assume that GE will not write a single get well card to any Japanese person who gets cancer apologizing for it’s part in this screw up. We can also safely assume that they will not pay one dime in indemnity. Personal responsibility my ass. GE brings good things to death.
I’m sure that will come as a great comfort to those who lose their homes and those who will in years to come suffer from cancer and wonder if this disaster had a part in it. But since they cannot prove it, they cannot sue. Of course Japan has socialized medicine so the cost of treatment is spread over all taxpayers.
Serious question: How much risk does a commercial operation have a right to impose on the population? What determination did you use to decide that GE doesn’t have the right to expose the local population to a 1% increase in the risk of cancer when a one in 1200 year event happens?
Before you answer that, consider that commercial and non-commercial entities expose the population to risks all the time. Every airplane flying over your head exposes you to some risk that it will crash on you. Every propane truck or HAZMAT shipment exposes the population to some risk. My city is full of refineries which can fail in spectacular and dangerous ways. Your local water treatment plant probably stores enough chlorine to kill a few thousand people should a freak accident release it all at once.
So… What’s the acceptable limit?
And what makes you assume that? I don’t know the laws in Japan, but if this happened in the U.S. my guess is that GE would be inundated with lawsuits and would probably face billions in fines and compensation from judges and juries swayed by quack science and questionable ‘expert opinion’. Just like Dow Corning was forced to pay out millions in lawsuits for breast implants that turned out to be completely harmless, or Volvo was forced to pay out millions in ‘sudden acceleration’ lawsuits that almost certainly were caused by people simply hitting the gas instead of the brake, or Ford was forced to kill the Corvair because it was ‘unsafe at any speed’, despite the fact that it was actually one of the better handling vehicles of its time.
Given that GE is currently paying $500 million to clean up the Hudson river, I’m not sure how you can categorically claim that they won’t have to pay anything for the Japanese nuclear cleanup.
How about the people who lived in old age free from emphysema because they didn’t have to live next to a coal plant? Do they get a say in the matter? How about all the people in the warm coastal regions who may get a little less damage from ocean rise and typhoons because nuclear power helped slow global warming? Do they get a say? How about the people who weren’t exposed to radiation from alternative coal plants, which generally exceed the maximum allowable radioactive emissions for nuclear plants?
It’s easy to make anything look bad if you only discuss the negatives and refuse to entertain the positives.
Nonsense.
Maybe they’ll crank it up to 11.
Spinal Tap reference noted.
I never thought about it before, but the only reason there is a 7 is because of Chernobyl. Nobody probably ever even contemplated anything worse. Like 6 reactors and shit ton of fuel rods. If even one reactor goes boom, steam explosion or worse, so that they can’t ride herd on the others, this might go to 11
Hell, there wouldn’t even be a level to describe that catastrophic level of radioactivity released.
Haha
Just checking the latest feeds, and there it is
they want to add an 8 and a 9 to the scale, but not for the reasons you might think
tv news stated TEPCO has made a statement that they don’t know when the leakage will stop and say it is possible it will eventually exceed the amount of radioactivity released by Chernobyl.
[QUOTE=The Second Stone]
You are actually admitting that the percentage is non-zero?
[/QUOTE]
That the probability is non-zero? Of course. YOUR probability of getting cancer is non-zero. The radiation released is going to have an effect, and probability wise people in that area, especially the workers are going to have a slightly elevated probability of getting cancer over what they would have had if there had been no problem with the plant. I have to ask…do you understand what a non-zero probability means?
No idea, and I doubt anyone else knows either. From what I was reading earlier (sorry, too lazy to get a cite you won’t bother reading) the probability of those workers getting cancer during their life times was a couple percentage points higher than it would have been had nothing happened. Do you understand what that means? Again, just curious.
Closer to 1 percent than 10…certainly not 50%. If they stood in the radiation every day for the rest of their lives it wouldn’t be 50% greater probability of getting cancer.
Do you understand how cancer forms? Do you understand what probability is, and more specifically what the probability of getting cancer means? I ask because you don’t SEEM to.
No? Does your local electrical plant have the ‘right’ to expose you to risk? Does the manufacturer of your car have the ‘right’ to expose you to risk? Does the sun have the ‘right’ to expose you to risk? Your life is filled with risk. You are at risk by something every…single…day…of…your…life. Your life is one big risk. Who gave the universe the ‘right’ to put you at risk?
As a society we have collectively decided that the trade off of risk for our industrialized lifestyle is worth the risks we incur from them…as opposed to the higher risks we would take if we went back to being hunters and gatherers.
Put it this way. When you get a vaccination there is some small risk that you will have a reaction and die. Is that small risk worth it in order to protect yourself from the larger risk of getting the disease it’s intended to prevent?
It’s a serious question that gets to the heart of the issue, so please answer it if you are able.
-XT
[QUOTE=johnpost]
tv news stated TEPCO has made a statement that they don’t know when the leakage will stop and say it is possible it will eventually exceed the amount of radioactivity released by Chernobyl.
[/QUOTE]
Do…you…have…a…cite? I ask because the last time you made such a statement it turned out to be something very different than what you claimed, and I’ve heard nothing about any large scale continued leaks that would put this even even within shouting distance of what Chernobyl released, let alone over that level.
-XT
Try watching the news. Reuters will work.
[QUOTE=FXMastermind]
they want to add an 8 and a 9 to the scale, but not for the reasons you might think
[/QUOTE]
Actually, that’s exactly the reason I thought it might be. Did you actually read the article? The current system is too course…ranking what’s happening in Japan with what happened at Chernobyl, even though the amount of radiation released in Japan is only 10% of that released at Chernobyl is confusing and alarming people (like you for instance). So, they want a different scale so that they can make more precise rankings of any future disasters.
Seems reasonable to me.
-XT
[QUOTE=FXMastermind]
Try watching the news. Reuters will work.
[/QUOTE]
So, that would be a ‘no’ from you. Thanks for playing.
-XT
Now the trolls want you to watch the news for them as well. Good luck with that tactic.