On 04/13/2011 04:12 AM, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
On 4/12/2011 7:40 PM, RHF wrote:

JAPAN CRIMINAL POLLUTERS ON A GLOBAL SCALE !

So tell us, Roy...just exactly how did those evil Japanese cause that
earthquake and tsunami to cause all that "criminal pollution".

The criminal act was putting reactors so close together that a
catastrophe in one of them makes the area too hot for workers to prevent
catastrophes in the ones next to it.

On Apr 13, 12:18*am, RHF wrote:

-fyi- Fear Mongering Would Be About the 'Possibility'
of a Japanese Nuclear Disaster and all the Global
Radioactive Contamination That It Might Bring With It.

Fearmongering takes many forms, including hyping a situation far
beyond it's worth. Stop doing it.

OOPS... TRUTH BE TOLD THE JAPANESE NUCLEAR
DISASTER DID IN-FACT HAPPEN FOUR-TIMES [4X]
OVER AND THE RADIOACTIVITY IS SPREADING
IN JAPAN TODAY AND GLOBALLY OVER THE NEXT
FEW WEEKS, MONTHS, YEARS, DECADES AND
BEYOND -fear-monger-no- TRUTH TELLER YES ~ RHF

Yes, maybe but that's NOT what you said. Your implication was that
this would be a worldwide catastrophe, when in fact the math is pretty
clear that except for the local area (like within a 100 kM radius),
the effects will likely be small or unmeasurable.

BpnJ,

So when the Japanese admit to a Math Error of
Two Orders of Magnitude -oops-
-not- 10 Million Times the Safe Levels of Radiation
-but- Only 100 Thousand Times the Safe Levels of Radiation
? ? ? YOU ARE OK WITH THAT ! ! !

Did I say that? No.

-and- The Resulting 70K Years of Global "U" and
"PU" Radioactive Toxic Waste

Yes, locally, a serious problem. Not for the world, for the Japanese.

Oops One Million Gallons of Contaminated Toxic
Radioactive Sea Water dumped into the Japanese
Coastal Waters of the Pacific Ocean -and- Oops
Each Gallon Potentially Has 100 Thousand Times
the Safe Levels of Radiation -hey- to get down to
the One-Times [1X] Safe Levels of Radiation only
requires that Japan Contaminates -doing-the-math-
1,000,000 x 100,000 = 100,000,000,000 Gallons
of World Wide {Global} Ocean Waters
? ? ? Which Part of 100 Billion Gallons of Radioactive
Contaminated Waste Waters Is Un-Clear ! ! !

Your math is fuzzier than a koala bear.

Take 100,000 and divide it by 330,000,000,000. What do you get? You
get an increase in radiation *over natural background levels* of
1/330,000, or an INCREASE of 0.0003%. Tiny. Insignificant. Probably
much less than you get from a walk in the mountains from radon gas.

-oops- 70K Years of Global Radioactive Toxic Waste

Yep Some of this Radioactivity is Multi-Generational
-reminder- 70K Years of Global Radioactive Toxic Waste

Yes, I know. Just like the stuff every nuke has been generating since
the 1950s. It's bad long-lasitng stuff. I know, I pay attention to
science and technology all the time. But it is in Japan, not the
entire globe. They have a serious cleanup problem there, if it is
even possible - but it is not a global disaster. The math just does
not support it.

If there is a global implication, it is a policy implication. This
could happen anywhere, and it is why Pu/U nukes need serious
reconsideration.

# 1 - You Move To Japan with Your Family :
Do A House Exchange With A Japanese Family
I Am Sure That There Are Plenty Who Would Want
To Swap for the Next 'Glowing' Year or too...

What is this? Where did this BS come from? Unless you were planning
on going to live in Japan, what is the point of making this scenario
up? This is fluff.

# 2 - Go On A Japanese Sea Food Diet of Local
Sea Food from Japanese Coastal Waters :
You Will Know It's Fresh When The Geiger-Counter
on the Kitchen Table Starts Ticking Wildly...

Didn't I just say this?

Are you planning on eating a bunch of Japanese seafood? I thought
not. More fluff.

# 3 - Each Time It Rains in the SF Bay Area for the
Next 100 Years : Stripe Down and Take an "Au-Natural"
Natural Rain Shower in those Glowing Rain Waters :
They Will Make You Look Positively "Radiant" ;;-}}

BS. As I began to explain, the only way you can get rain with greater
than natural levels of radiation is if a cloud of *dust* (not vapor,
dust) from the plant gets into the atmosphere and becomes the nuclei
for droplet growth. It won't happen any other way. IF this even
happens, which is unlikely on anything like a regular basis for all
kinds of reasons, you will have a few tiny specks of radioactive
material in each raindrop, and these will quickly wash to the sea. To
be perfectly honest, the mushroom cloud from a single above-ground
detonation will put more radiation into rain at one fell swoop than
this plant will put there in 70,000 years.

BpnJ : How Can You Claim To Be A "Die-Hard
Environmentalist" {Dead-and-Hard-Cold} When
You Actively Support Nuclear Power

You cannot read either. I *told you* I do not support nukes in their
present form. I never have. Pu and U-235 fission is recipe for
disaster. I do like Thorium reactors as a short term energy solution
because they avoid nearly all the problems of U/Pu and the fuel is
plentiful.

Fusion I like much better, but our shortsighted politicians have never
seen fit to support its development while all that oil money rolls
in. Thus, it's still 40-50 years away

and It's
70K Years of Global Radioactive Toxic Waste - rotfl ~ RHF

Sorry, Roy, but youre statement is a repugnant and misleading lie.
When will you stop? Is it habitual?

Just quit making stuff up and pretending it's truth.

On Apr 13, 6:31*am, dave wrote:
On 04/12/2011 09:48 PM, bpnjensen wrote:



The problem Dave relates, that of further meltdown and steam
explosion, is demonstrably more immediate and dangerous locally.
Earthwide, however, not a big deal, for the same reason - dilution.
If it goes on for a LONG time, like years, I suppose it could have
effects on populations of nearby Pacific Islands, assuming favorable
wind patterns...but I'd have to see some better analysis to be
convinced.

That, from a die-hard environmentalist.

Bruce Jensen

You can't dilute radioactive particles and make them less mutagenic; you
are just dispersing them more.

When the secondary containment of F.D. reactor 3 exploded three days
into the incident its spent fuel (waste) pond was pulverized and the
contents were scattered for many kilometers around the plant. At that
point the incident was in Chernobyl category 7 territory, but the
authorities were afraid to panic rescue workers away from the region.

Yes, but higher concentrations are demonstrably more likely to cause
mutagenesis problems. An average increase in rads above background
levels of less than 0.001% in oceanic waters is not going to cause
significant increases in cancer anywhere. I do agree with your last
point.

On 04/13/2011 09:22 AM, bpnjensen wrote:
On Apr 13, 6:31 am, wrote:
On 04/12/2011 09:48 PM, bpnjensen wrote:



The problem Dave relates, that of further meltdown and steam
explosion, is demonstrably more immediate and dangerous locally.
Earthwide, however, not a big deal, for the same reason - dilution.
If it goes on for a LONG time, like years, I suppose it could have
effects on populations of nearby Pacific Islands, assuming favorable
wind patterns...but I'd have to see some better analysis to be
convinced.

That, from a die-hard environmentalist.

Bruce Jensen

You can't dilute radioactive particles and make them less mutagenic; you
are just dispersing them more.

When the secondary containment of F.D. reactor 3 exploded three days
into the incident its spent fuel (waste) pond was pulverized and the
contents were scattered for many kilometers around the plant. At that
point the incident was in Chernobyl category 7 territory, but the
authorities were afraid to panic rescue workers away from the region.

Yes, but higher concentrations are demonstrably more likely to cause
mutagenesis problems. An average increase in rads above background
levels of less than 0.001% in oceanic waters is not going to cause
significant increases in cancer anywhere. I do agree with your last
point.

Plankton-phytoplankton-krill-etc. Each step in the food chain
concentrates the toxic materials. By the time the chain gets to us,
there could be problems. Burning coal has made some wild fish inedible
due to mercury.

Cesium and strontium dumped into a major ocean current is going to
result in an increase in cancer in the North Pacific and most likely a
collapse in the seafood industry.

On Apr 13, 10:08*am, dave wrote:
On 04/13/2011 09:22 AM, bpnjensen wrote:





On Apr 13, 6:31 am, *wrote:
On 04/12/2011 09:48 PM, bpnjensen wrote:

The problem Dave relates, that of further meltdown and steam
explosion, is demonstrably more immediate and dangerous locally.
Earthwide, however, not a big deal, for the same reason - dilution.
If it goes on for a LONG time, like years, I suppose it could have
effects on populations of nearby Pacific Islands, assuming favorable
wind patterns...but I'd have to see some better analysis to be
convinced.

That, from a die-hard environmentalist.

Bruce Jensen

You can't dilute radioactive particles and make them less mutagenic; you
are just dispersing them more.

When the secondary containment of F.D. reactor 3 exploded three days
into the incident its spent fuel (waste) pond was pulverized and the
contents were scattered for many kilometers around the plant. At that
point the incident was in Chernobyl category 7 territory, but the
authorities were afraid to panic rescue workers away from the region.

Yes, but higher concentrations are demonstrably more likely to cause
mutagenesis problems. *An average increase in rads above background
levels of less than 0.001% in oceanic waters is not going to cause
significant increases in cancer anywhere. *I do agree with your last
point.

Plankton-phytoplankton-krill-etc. Each step in the food chain
concentrates the toxic materials. By the time the chain gets to us,
there could be problems. Burning coal has made some wild fish inedible
due to mercury.

Cesium and strontium dumped into a major ocean current is going to
result in an increase in cancer in the North Pacific and most likely a
collapse in the seafood industry.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I understand the process and the know of the issue; but oceanic mixing
over time is pretty good, and significant dilution occurs even as we
speak. Do you know of any uptake data on Pu and related contaminants
by plankton? I honestly do not know.

And you have to admit - the ubiquity and longevity of coal burning
(kajillions of tons over several centuries) GREATLY exceeds by
multiple orders of magnitude those same factors as applied to nukes in
general or this one in particular. Mercury in the global environment
is common and widespread; same with radon gas. The same will never be
true of Pu or U235, at least from an accident of this type.

We need to keep this in perspective. In terms of global effects, we
currently have problems that really make this one a piker. That is
not say we should be concerned about Japan and vicinity; but compared
to all the other things we are faced with daily in NAm, for example,
this appears to be an insignificant blip.

I live on the West Coast NAm too - and I just don't see any numbers
that create concern in my mind.

Bruce

On Apr 13, 4:12*am, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
On 4/12/2011 7:40 PM, RHF wrote:

JAPAN CRIMINAL POLLUTERS ON A GLOBAL SCALE !

So tell us, Roy...just exactly how did those evil Japanese cause that
earthquake and tsunami to cause all that "criminal pollution".

Dintcha know? They brought the wrath of God upon them for not being
Christians ;-)

On Apr 13, 6:47*am, dave wrote:
On 04/13/2011 04:12 AM, Joe from Kokomo wrote:

On 4/12/2011 7:40 PM, RHF wrote:

JAPAN CRIMINAL POLLUTERS ON A GLOBAL SCALE !

So tell us, Roy...just exactly how did those evil Japanese cause that
earthquake and tsunami to cause all that "criminal pollution".

The criminal act was putting reactors so close together that a
catastrophe in one of them makes the area too hot for workers to prevent
catastrophes in the ones next to it.

Criminally stupid, at least.

On 04/13/2011 11:48 AM, bpnjensen wrote:
On Apr 13, 10:08 am, wrote:


I live on the West Coast NAm too - and I just don't see any numbers
that create concern in my mind.

Bruce

Like I said, Red Snapper will cost more.

Article at http://www.rense.com
says the biggest Yapanee Nuke cloud is over Vietnam.
Vietnam getting Nuked?

Hillbillies are Californians, ergo there are so many hills over
there.Some of those hills are sliding down, some of those hills are
taking sections of highways and homes and cars and trucks with them
too.Missy Sippy is mostly flatland Territory.No Hillbillies over here,
only backwater hicks.
cuhulin

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11-04-12 05:40 PM, RHF wrote:

The Japanese will be pumping over a Million Gallons of
Contaminated and Polluted Radioactive Waste Water
into the Worlds Oceans and spreading Radioactive
Toxic Waters all around the World; with the potential
to Toxicify All Sea Food for Years if not Generations.

JAPAN CRIMINAL POLLUTERS ON A GLOBAL SCALE !

and that is how 'i' see it ~ RHF


...and the dumping of 80 thousand barrels of nuclear waste into the ocean
next to California by the US radiation industry is fine, right?

The dumping of nuclear waste into the North Sea by Russia is fine, right?

Japanese are criminals, Americans are just businessmen, right? Funny how
it didn't need a Tsunami and gigantic earthquake to convince the US to
pollute the world's oceans.


mike




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNp0QoAAoJEJXfKw5kUPt7zdgIAIjfvWw6LV zpLxsnHSE2+eeV
b9DtyQMIIeQP9V4+SCxI4sDoGKAyFcGNLD1CozYQsYak5Cb4wa OAiXFT9WxhNhcU
KvPEjAgkWugnd0OM+eIaAWJBWzqOQOKISll0cJoBM4wDgW9Hyz EJ1QNCbsIr1K1Z
ZcDmrRsHeypECVfyUpBGvi7vmXwqTnNYG9JVl5oKHuAPA6z9Ux 1ghZoBzvGTkFsb
1qo3eZAggdnamkeHnKb7con4xPVkgt0s2GSEl3ooiFKuWL3nFY 69nJLdAcaiQ3+i
S9ORrvFtY0hmia4cFoKoXZPrCrER0voy4gFYLIZqBnPrdQxlU+ xHIUJ6qqZGzZE=
=fBzo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----