onlyme2 Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Horseburgers. Made of fish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Jib Fingers Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Wouldn't a few thousand tonnes of concrete help keep all the crap inside? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gardener Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Yes, as expected its a complete f'ing disaster of gigantic proportions. From day one I never believed anything else despite all the so-called experts on here telling us all was well and how the reactors were safe. This stuff will be contaminating the oceans for decades to come. It's worse than Chernobyl, far worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okaycuckoo Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 NRA Chairman Shunichi Tanaka: "Of course, we'd hope to eliminate all leaks, but in this situation, all we can hope for is to minimize the impact on the environment. If you have any better ideas, we'd like to know." I bet Kevin Costner has a patented solution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onion Boy Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Er, build an ocean barrier right around any runoff areas ASAP? That's all I can think of in 2 secs, but I don't see it mentioned. This is massive and extremely frightening. One wonders just how many other radiation cover ups there have been in this world? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuggets Mahoney Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 This is massive and extremely frightening. One wonders just how many other radiation cover ups there have been in this world? There may be another way... DT: China blazes trail for 'clean' nuclear power from thorium The Chinese are running away with thorium energy, sharpening a global race for the prize of clean, cheap, and safe nuclear power. Good luck to them. They may do us all a favour. The downside being that thorium reactors would be rubbish for producing stuff to make nuclear weapons out of. Which, aside from not being much of a downside, is very possibly the reason the research money went into the reactors we've got. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybong Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Good though to know solving the problem is urgent - after 2 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kraft Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 oh no radiation how terrifying. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xwy1o5_bbc-horizon-nuclear-nightmares-2006_tech#.Ud9H0zs3uM4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RufflesTheGuineaPig Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 To be fair, it was bound to be a disaster. A huge 140ft wave wiped out 20,000 people and levelled hundreds of square miles of towns and cities. It might as well have been hit by a meteorite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Cavey Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 If you put concrete on top it will force more contaminated water out from underneath which is where the leaks are coming from. If they dig underneath to seal it from underneath then I guess the leaks will increase at least for the several years the digging would take ... so after two years they are ... well no further forward and the plant infrastructure will be getting progressively worse day by day. NRA Chairman Shunichi Tanaka: “Considering the state of the plant, it’s difficult to find a solution today or tomorrow… That’s probably not satisfactory to many of you. But that’s the reality we face after an accident like this… We don’t truly know whether that will work… Of course, we’d hope to eliminate all leaks, but in this situation, all we can hope for is to minimize the impact on the environment. If you have any better ideas, we’d like to know.” I IMHO it is a mess of immense proportions which will not go away for decades if ever. no need to dig - there's a standard technique for lowering the permeability of a rock mass that comprises injecting a cementiceous grout at high pressure from a series of drill holes in a closly spaced pattern. This is used in the constructions of dams to prevent excessive leakage off the water beneath the dams foundation. I'd be surprised if the plant didn't have one in the first place, but it may not have been been extensive enough to stop the volume of contaminated water now present. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weaker Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 ... This is massive and extremely frightening. One wonders just how many other radiation cover ups there have been in this world? I find this comment to be one of the scariest I have ever seen here. Do you get spoonfed all your news from the BBC or something? The real news media have been screaming about this and all the other leaks since it happened. Did you know the leader of the explosion response team af Fukushima died of cancer a few days ago? You know, your friendly BBC aren't going to talk about this (and you actually pay for that cr*p!). BTW, don't eat the tuna, they concentrate heavy metals like mercury anyway - but that must also apply to Caesium-137 (half-life 30.7 years) , Strontium-90 (half life 28.8 years) etc. The bluefin spawn off Japan, and many migrate across the Pacific Ocean. Tissue samples taken from 15 bluefin caught in August, five months after the meltdowns at Fukushima Daiichi, all contained reactor byproducts cesium-134 and cesium-137 What's happened in fuku Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weaker Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 CONT'D: is a massive coordinated cover-up. MSM to Farm animals: please don't worry. We won't talk about it so you won't be worried. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monks Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 Take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure. Seriously though, isn't this how Godzilla was created? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloo Loo Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 In other news: Arrogant execs and Politicians are shocked that nature doesnt bow down to their words and pronouncements. Diversionary Airstrikes ordered on Iran. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giordano Bruno Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 Er, build an ocean barrier right around any runoff areas ASAP? That's all I can think of in 2 secs, but I don't see it mentioned. This is massive and extremely frightening. One wonders just how many other radiation cover ups there have been in this world? Proponents of Nuclear Energy often call NE 'clean'. My understanding of clean is not having anything that could be harmful in any way. So how the fook is NE clean? It's effing filthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shipbuilder Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 I find this comment to be one of the scariest I have ever seen here. Do you get spoonfed all your news from the BBC or something? The real news media have been screaming about this and all the other leaks since it happened. Did you know the leader of the explosion response team af Fukushima died of cancer a few days ago? You know, your friendly BBC aren't going to talk about this (and you actually pay for that cr*p!). http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-23251102 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-22974316 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-22793353 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22770095 Yawn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corevalue Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 Weren't the Russians getting ready to freeze the ground under Chernobyl to prevent the corium reaching the groundwater and causing a second massive explosion? I guess Fukushima is too big a site to even consider it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloo Loo Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk...d-asia-23251102 http://www.bbc.co.uk...d-asia-22974316 http://www.bbc.co.uk...d-asia-22793353 http://www.bbc.co.uk...onment-22770095 Yawn. It appears that 6 nuclear plants, leaking and radiating to their hearts content is perfectly safe...according to the last link...just wondering why they need any sheilding, fail safes and double backups at all really? You could eat your dinner on the roof and be perfectly safe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scary Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-23251102 Masao Yoshida, the Fukushima nuclear chief who led efforts to stabilise the crippled plant after the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami, has died at the age of 58. He had been suffering from oesophagal cancer, which Tepco said was not linked to his work at the plant. Tepco has said it does not believe his illness was linked to radiation exposure, saying the condition would normally take between five and 10 years to develop if radiation were to blame. SRSLY? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weaker Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-23251102 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-22974316 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-22793353 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22770095 Yawn. Nicely squirreled away, not discussed in major news bulletins. Also with the tone of "Let's not worry the farm animals". Cancer not related to Fukushima. Tuna is safe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scunnered Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 (edited) If we're worrying about pollution and cancer, it might be worth taking a look out of the window: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jul/10/air-pollution-lung-cancer-heart-failure Air pollution, chiefly from traffic exhaust fumes in cities, is having a serious and sometimes fatal effect on health, according to two studies that link it to lung cancer and heart failure.Air pollution increases the risk of lung cancer even at levels lower than those recommended by the European Union, which are also standard in the UK, says a paper in the Lancet Oncology journal. Although smoking is a far bigger cause of lung cancer, a significant number of people will get the disease because of where they live. Personally, I'm a lot more worried about that than I am about Fukushima. Edited July 12, 2013 by Scunnered Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shipbuilder Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 (edited) Nicely squirreled away, not discussed in major news bulletins. Also with the tone of "Let's not worry the farm animals". Cancer not related to Fukushima. Tuna is safe. Apparently the BBC weren't taking about it. Then it's squirrelled away....yet I found all of these stories in less than a minute. The tone is the same as any other mainstream news report on the subject. A direct link to the Tuna study is there if you want to take issue with it with the authors. The plant chief apparently had cancer at the time of the accident - if you dispute the claim that cancer takes a number of years to develop, then I guess you'll have done your research and have research that backs up your view? Personally I have no idea and would be interested to find out what you have found. Edit to add - please post a link to your 'real news media' source (including the graphic in your post), then we can do a fair comparison with the BBC. Sound fair? Edited July 12, 2013 by shipbuilder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluffy666 Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 Proponents of Nuclear Energy often call NE 'clean'. My understanding of clean is not having anything that could be harmful in any way. So how the fook is NE clean? It's effing filthy. Indeed. Magic energy faeries are totally clean and produce as much energy as we want, I don't know why we don't use them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluffy666 Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 If we're worrying about pollution and cancer, it might be worth taking a look out of the window: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jul/10/air-pollution-lung-cancer-heart-failure Personally, I'm a lot more worried about that than I am about Fukushima. Look, soon you'll be talking about realistic metrics such as risks vs. utility, deaths per kWh, and things like that. And we don't want that, we want to run around with our hands in the air because of TEH RADIATIONZ IZ COMIN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloo Loo Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 If we're worrying about pollution and cancer, it might be worth taking a look out of the window: http://www.guardian....r-heart-failure Personally, I'm a lot more worried about that than I am about Fukushima. yeah, but its an addition to the current risk....but hey, you are more likely to slip and fall in the bath than be killed by a terrorist, but we need to employ 2.5 million and security guards come cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.