Hybrid Car – More Fun with Less Gas

Nuclear reactors in the news - accurate reporting? - Page 16

register ::  Login Password  :: Lost Password?
Posted by T. Keating on April 1, 2011, 6:49 pm
 
On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 14:25:39 -0400, "vaughn"


It's not over yet, not by a long shot.  

Currently they are unable to stem the flow of large  amounts of
radioactive isotopes making their way into the ocean.  

Which will work it's way up the food chain.  Care to guess which way
the Ocean currents flow from Japan??  Next stop.. Alaska..

Goodbye fast food Fish sandwiches (Alaskan pollock fishery).. Goodbye
King/Opilo crab seasons,  pacific ocean salmon runs.   Oh don't forget
a lot of non-filet quality goes to the fish farming industry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_pollock
"The Alaska pollock has been said to be "the largest remaining source
of palatable fish in the world."[1] More than 3 million tons of Alaska
pollock are caught each year in the North Pacific from Alaska to
northern Japan. "


====

As for life expectancy... The Countries affected by chernobyl took a
major  hit in life expectancy after the event..

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/apr2010/2010-04-26-01.html
"Chernobyl Radiation Killed Nearly One Million People: New Book"

"NEW YORK, New York, April 26, 2010 (ENS) - Nearly one million people
around the world died from exposure to radiation released by the 1986
nuclear disaster at the Chernobyl reactor, finds a new book from the
New York Academy of Sciences published today on the 24th anniversary
of the meltdown at the Soviet facility. "

PS, That's just 23 years with a body count of almost a million !!!

The authors said, "For the past 23 years, it has been clear that there
is a danger greater than nuclear weapons concealed within nuclear
power. Emissions from this one reactor exceeded a hundred-fold the
radioactive contamination of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and
Nagasaki."

"No citizen of any country can be assured that he or she can be
protected from radioactive contamination. One nuclear reactor can
pollute half the globe," they said. "Chernobyl fallout covers the
entire Northern Hemisphere."

"The proportion of children considered healthy born to irradiated
parents in Belarus, the Ukraine, and European Russia considered
healthy fell from about 80 percent to less than 20 percent since 1986.
"

That's one hell of price to pay and is still not part of the body
count.. yet..

Posted by vaughn on April 1, 2011, 7:42 pm
 


Indeed it isn't.  But in spite of the arm waving in your previous post, you
still gave no justification for a reduction of a "couple years of lifespan
from people who live in North America.".  We are still waiting.

This will be great news for the USA's Social Security trust fund!

Vaughn





Posted by T. Keating on April 1, 2011, 7:56 pm
 On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 15:42:52 -0400, "vaughn"


Except, The people who loose the most lifespan from radioactive
exposure are the young.  (more future cell divisions @ risk from
mutation).      I.E. No help for SS in the near term.

http://enenews.com/radioactive-iodine-131-in-pennsylvania-rainwater-sample-3300-above-federal-drinking-water-standard
"Radioactive Iodine-131 in Pennsylvania rainwater sample is 3300%
above federal drinking water standard"
March 29th, 2011

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20285-fukushima-radioactive-fallout-nears-chernobyl-levels.html
"Fukushima radioactive fallout nears Chernobyl levels "
24 March 2011



Posted by vaughn on April 1, 2011, 8:44 pm
 

Still waiting!  You haven't shown any 2-year reduction in lifespan for those of
us in north America..

(Excuse the clipping of your other stuff that doesn't apply to the specific
question.)

Please limit your answer to directly supporting your specific claim of a 2-year
life reduction for those of us in north America..

Vaughn




Posted by daestrom on April 2, 2011, 3:43 pm
 On 4/1/2011 15:56 PM, T. Keating wrote:

still

most

about

http://enenews.com/radioactive-iodine-131-in-pennsylvania-rainwater-sample-3300-above-federal-drinking-water-standard

Why don't you give the rest of the quote:
"It is important to note that the corresponding MCL for iodine-131 was
calculated based on long-term chronic exposures over the course of a
lifetime – 70 years. The levels seen in rainwater are expected to be
relatively short in duration,” the [EPA] states in a FAQ that
accompanied yesterday’s brief news release. …

"

Even at these levels, there's no evidence it will shorten anyone's
lifespan.  Just more alarmist, misquoted, rantings from Keating

daestrom

This Thread
Bookmark this thread:
 
 
 
 
 
 
  •  
  • Subject
  • Author
  • Date
please rate this thread