The materials from reactor 4 core appear to be completely dissipated into the atmosphere, and that we are really really not hearing the truth from japan.
http://iis-db.stanford.edu/evnts/6615/March21_JapanSeminar.p...
The materials from reactor 4 core appear to be completely dissipated into the atmosphere, and that we are really really not hearing the truth from japan.
http://iis-db.stanford.edu/evnts/6615/March21_JapanSeminar.p...
You COULD read it that way, but the bottom of the slide says in big bold red letters that 'It is currently unclear if release from fuel pool already happened'.
To me it seems most of the bullet points on this slide are conjectures, not statements of fact (though note I haven't been keeping up to date on other news sources about the situation in Fukushima).
Or were you meaning to question whether they believe what they say they believe?
Look at these pictures and tell me if you think it is possible that a reactor core outside the containment would not have release material.
http://cryptome.org/eyeball/daiichi-npp/daiichi-photos.htm
Sure, we can speculate that it has not yet released 100% - and given the fact that refugees are being turned away for fear of contamination at hospitals, bodies from the Tsunami are too radioactive to be recoverable, and reports are stating levels that are just freaking scary - I prefer to err on the side of caution.
I think that in such cases its bettr to assume the worst case as opposed to saying "its probably less than we think".
And where did you hear that "bodies from the tsunami are too radioactive to be recoverable"? That's such a fantastic claim that it definitely requires a citation. (Unless you refer to the plant workers that were killed. They may very well be contaminated, but that's inside the plant. We've known the radiation levels inside the plant have been high since it happened, no news there.)
I'm not a nuclear apologist by any means, but I don't like such obvious speculation however way it goes.
Also, we are seeing reports, such as this thread of extremely high radiation - we already know that Japan was slow to report actual numbers and each report that comes out is something along the lines of "XXX times [whatever] levels"
Look again at the last slide where is specifically says "into fresh air"
I am not saying the pools are like backyard swimming pools with open exposure to the sky - but I would believe that if pretty every other report is claiming that radiation is very high there is clear evidence to show that being the case.
EDIT: Try clicking the link and reading it, there are multiple articles that clearly state "Up to 1,000 bodies of victims of Japan's quake and tsunami remain uncollected in the exclusion zone around a stricken nuclear plant because of radiation fears."
EDIT 2: please make an attempt to google fantastic claims if you don't believe them, and others should make it a point to link to sources when posting something that seems fantastical/really alarming.
Just like you might not recover a body from a minefield, but it doesn't mean the body is explosive.
The fact is that there is an evacuation area around the Fukushima plant established out of an abundance of caution. The highest readings that have been taken within that region --- not including the plant itself, which is a different story --- are still below a level that would pose a plausible threat to human health; they're in the single-digit mSv/hr range.
It's also important to understand that the evacuation area is designed to address multiple vectors for radiological health threats. Not all radionuclides disperse the same way, and the ones with the strongest impact on the environment settle out of the atmosphere as sediment. Presumably, you don't want kids stuffing their mouths with I-131 that settled in their sandbox. To avoid scenarios like this, you evacuate.
But most laypeople (of which I am definitely one) start with a conception that is much more primitive than reality. They imagine gamma radiation zinging through the air and making people's hair stand up and giving the carp in the lake third eyes. Not so. The most radiologically active stuff dispersed over a distance around the plant is probably no longer airborne; it settles out of the air quickly (and, not for nothing, but also has a short half-life).
It is also a problem that these bodies have been in some (tragic) cases sitting out in the air --- not because of radiation, but because of the scale of the disaster across Japan --- and thus the same rationale that motivates the evacuation (to avoid pointless exposure to Cs-137 and I-131 sediment) also suggests maybe it's not a good idea to distribute the personal effects of contaminated disaster victims. But that doesn't mean the corpses are glowing. It may, for instance, mean that the jackets of 1 out of every 400 people have to be bagged differently.
It is simply not the case that the region within 30km of the Daiichi plant is a nuclear hellscape.
Deleted comment
If we are going to try an impose some sort of posting etiquette here on HN such as reminding me to discuss content rather than commentors then I suggest we remind people to make attempts to look into things themselves before hitting the down arrow and asking for sources of information that should be readily available to anyone staying abreast of the details surrounding the topic at hand via a simple google search.
Deleted comment
Is it still the case and this is overblown or have things actually gotten bad enough that if you lived near the power plant moving further away might be recommended?
You might consider getting news from other sources as well. The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists has dailyish updates at http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/columnists/tatsujiro-... ...
Also note that what's dispersed is the fission products, i.e. noble gases, iodine, cesium, etc. The fuel itself will not leave in any significant quantity.
Now, even though my Grandfather was a nuclear engineer for GE for 50 years and worked on Hanford and many other plant designs during his career -- I really am quite naive to the matter.
However, that doesn't preclude me from taking a cautionary stance simply because I don't know the empirical truth of the matter directly.
http://energyfromthorium.com/2011/03/30/areva-fd-presentatio...
Some interesting intrigue here. Apparently the version you linked redacts the author's name from the second page (Matthias Braun), and removes the signature with his name and the Areva logo from every following page.
There's a NYT article that confirms this much:
Stanford, where Dr. Hanson is a visiting scholar, posted the slides online after the March presentation. At that time, each of the roughly 30 slides was marked with the Areva symbol or name, and each also gave the name of their author, Matthias Braun.
The posted document was later changed to remove all references to Areva, and Dr. Braun and Areva did not reply to questions about what simulation code or codes the company may have used to arrive at its analysis of the Fukushima disaster.
“We cannot comment on that,” Jarret Adams, a spokesman for Areva, said of the slide presentation. The reason, he added, was “because it was not an officially released document.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/03/science/03meltdown.html?pa...
This is a site with real-time radiation levels . The readings from this, and several other sites, have been verified as accurate.
I see a disaster, but not a coverup.
edit: http://www.city.yokohama.lg.jp/kankyo/saigai/ is the radiation report from Yokohama.