Fukushima Emergency
snopes.com
snopes.com
In addition to the needed nuclear materials for the reactor itself, there were/are at least 89 tons of used rods, "hot" enough that they need to be constantly cooled, stored on the Reactor 3 site.
You can read about the Reactor 4/5/6 spent fuel pools here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_units_4,_5_an...
Read this January 3, 2014 Tepco press release and notice the use of the word "assume" : http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/2014/123333... ... it means "we don't know".
There's no need to put "hot" in quotes, it's not a synonym for anything, it means the spent fuel is literally hot as in temperature.
It is true that the reason they are hot is because of ongoing heat generation from the fission fragment/decay products in the spent fuel. But that is an issue at literally every other uranium-fueled PWR or BWR reactor. They all need to be cooled until the decay heat finally dissipates.
Failing to cool the fuel rods would not turn them any more radioactive than they already are. Rather, the loss of physical fuel integrity once the fuel melts would release the existing radioactivity into the spent fuel pool (which essentially means the nearby air, since the fuel pool would not have water in it by definition in this scenario).
Luckily it's the easiest thing in the world to avert this; just keep water on the fuel rods, and there is no problem. You can even avoid circulating the water if you wish, the boiling water will remove heat just fine (but in this case you must still pour more water in to maintain the level).
The loss of full containment is certainly unfortunate, but it's nothing more than that. It's certainly better than having the entire reactor core assemblies dumped out straight into the ocean, but even that would not be the disaster implied by many if you run the numbers.
(BTW I did use hot in quotes, to make it clear I was referring to the fact that there is still low level fission occurring.)
Because I have already told you how water temperatures are safe from a heat transfer perspective.
I should hope I don't have to remind you not to immerse yourself in water that is too hot, but the fuel itself will be fine if it can be cooled, and it can be cooled by nothing more than water immersion.
This is, after all, how the fuel rods at Unit 4 were being cooled for a short time during the Fukushima meltdown.
But the gist of the bullshit is that Fukushima poses a threat to Americans.
Contained or not, Fukushima never has and never will pose a threat to any Americans on the US mainland, or any other country for that matter.
You have absolutely no competence to determine that.
Explosion? Complete melt-down? Meteor strike? Super volcanic eruption?
Interestingly, worst-case might be to have the reactor limp along while continuing to cool it with water that's being pumped back into the ocean. Like they're doing now. Having it totally destroyed, or pushed under the sea, although perhaps creating an bad initial spike, probably wouldn't release as much radiation long-term.
This entire incident has become a test for how scientifically literate people are. And most folks aren't hitting on much.
Once your scenario reaches that kind of scale, I think the effect of Fukushima itself is going to be fairly negligible... :)
The reactor has generated as much radioactive contamination as it's going to make (note that contamination is not the same as radiation).
So in that regard the worst numerical damage Fukushima could realistically do is to eject all of the contaimination into the sea. But even assuming that it would be of negligible impact to radiation levels ocean wide (at least, assuming adequate dispersal).
Given that it's easier to assure adequate dispersal for a continuous low-level transfer to the sea than it is to assure dispersal for effectively dropping the cores into the ocean, I think that dropping the cores into the ocean at once would actually be the worst possible thing.
Of course there are real concerns with groundwater contamination too, which might make people think that getting the damaged cores as far away as possible into the ocean is preferable. But even that possibility is more of an annoyance than a health hazard, since if the potable water going is radioactive it's easy to detect and avoid drinking it, unlike other chemical and biological drinking water hazards.
Another good question is, supposing that a mass panic would be elicited if there were honestly a wave of harmful contamination approaching, which answer should the government give?
One might reasonably assume that the government should give the answer which causes the least public disorder (and subsequent harm to the public).
But this doesn't mean you shouldn't trust the government per se, this means you should educate yourself so that you have some basic understanding of the likelihood of things like Fukushima affecting the West Coast. It does no good to say that you can't abdicate your rationality and trust to the government exclusively, if you then simply abdicate those to whoever is screeching the loudest.
I seriously doubt that there's any more mistrust than there ever has been. But now, instead of churning out a few flyers about UFOs and distributing them to those who will take them, the nutcases can instead put up a web site and get a million readers.
The extra dose in Tokyo immediately after Fukushima was only twice a standard chest x-ray, or one NYC->LA flight.
So any excess radiation reaching the US West Coast will be diluted to negligibility.
Living near Tokyo, after 3/11 I rather compulsively monitored the various web-available radiation counters, and many of them also stored historical data. The readings were almost universally so close to normal background radiation levels that it was questionable whether there was any difference at all. There was, as I recall, one notable spike at some point, but it was only notable because it was above background level; it was way too small to have any health impact.
[Radiation levels were a little higher in places like Chiba that are closer to Fukushima, but still quite firmly in the "no possible effect" region.]
I did cut my trip short, flew out on 3/15. I wasn't worried about the radiation, I just didn't feel comfortable taking up resources in a country that had just suffered so much damage. In fact, I recently got back from a 3 week trip around Japan to finish my original trip.
== 1 ==
"Nuclear Fallout Map
Claim: Message details effects of nuclear fallout from
Japan across the western United States." FALSE
http://www.snopes.com/photos/technology/fallout.asp
== 2 ==
"Claim: Giant mutant killer hornets created by exposure
to radiation from the Fukushima nuclear plant have killed
several people in Nebraska. " FALSE
I'm guessing it's not happening and this solicitation is unrelated, although the time from the solicitation (December 6) to the delivery date is very compressed for it to be a normal US government order. It reflects an urgent desire to stock the pills for some reason.
http://deepseanews.com/2013/11/true-facts-about-ocean-radiat...
Some brief research indicates that there is a national stockpile of potassium iodide maintained for emergency response to domestic nuclear disasters. The tablets in this stockpile don't last forever, and have to be replenished. This is probably just a stockpile replenishment.
More info here:
http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/emerg-preparedness/about-emerg-...
Source: http://news.stanford.edu/news/2012/may/tuna-radioactive-mate...
"A numerical simulation of global transport of atmospheric particles emitted from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant"
http://www-aos.eps.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/nakamura_lab/PDF/Takemura...
and
"No matter what happens in Fukushima, it's not going to be a problem over here." -- Eric Norman
NO MATTER WHAT?? That's a pretty big statement. Especially since that, when radiation levels were detected to increase, the EPA just raised the minimum level of harmful radiation to a higher level. See?? Not a problem anymore.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/01/governments-worldwide...
"With the amount of dilution that would occur, any kind of release in Japan would be non-detectable here," said David Yogi
But it has been detected...
http://www.nbcnews.com/science/leaky-fukushima-nuclear-plant...
TEPCO is likely connected to the japanese mob:
http://rt.com/news/fukushima-workers-violations-yakuza-730/
The IAEA is there is promote nuclear power:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISu7O47d1Ko
US sailors claim cancer from Fukushima assistance:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/12/20/sickened-by-service-mor...
Finally, the worst part of the cleanup is still yet to happen:
http://fairewinds.org/media/in-the-news/mission-impossible-f...
The snopes article is a form of deceptive propaganda and is all-around bullshit.
Also, the link you gave on the US raising safe level markings is not a respected news source, and the article only links to other articles from the site as "sources". If's fine to call BS on an article on HN, but make sure you give proper backing to your claims, the post you just wrote doesn't.