"Stop Comparing Fukushima to Chernobyl"

Why stop? Does it hurt someone's feelings? I think the nuclear industry can be a big boy, and take it on the chin.


It is valid to compare the two in respect to amount of undesirables entering the enviroment.

Amount and cost of clean up.

Focusing on the health impact is premature anyway, those effects reverberate through the generations.

Perhaps focus on cost of clean up first.

Exactly OP, it's like comparing an ant hill to a Volcano.

Fukushima is a volcano of unending spewing radioactive death.

I think when you look at the cost of clean up these nuclear plants really fail the test of practicality.

You must pay for high tech salaries not only to babysit a reactor, but also spent fuel pools.

Cost to clean up routine and casual venting of tritium, enormous and growing spent fuel pools, minor accidents, and major every-generation catastrophes is huge.

These things are heavily subsidized by YOUR tax dollars, somehow companies get rich operating them, and then your tax dollars pay to deal with the mess.

Evacuation developments
The view of Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant taken from the city of Prypiat

Prypiat evacuation broadcast
Russian language announcement
Problems listening to this file? See media help.

The nearby city of Prypiat was not immediately evacuated after the incident, for the general population of the Soviet Union was not informed of the disaster until Monday, April 28, 2 days later, with a 20 second announcement in the TV news program Vremya.[49] At that time ABC released its report about the disaster.[50] During that time, all radio broadcasts run by the state were replaced with classical music, which was a common method of preparing the public for an announcement of a tragedy that had taken place. Scientist teams were armed and placed on alert as instructions were awaited.

Only after radiation levels set off alarms at the Forsmark Nuclear Power Plant in Sweden,[51] over one thousand kilometers from the Chernobyl Plant, did the Soviet Union admit that an accident had occurred. Nevertheless, authorities attempted to conceal the scale of the disaster. For example, after evacuating the city of Prypiat, the following warning message was read on the state TV

"There has been an accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant. One of the nuclear reactors was damaged. The effects of the accident are being remedied. Assistance has been provided for any affected people. An investigative commission has been set up" ”
Vremya, April 28, 1986 (21:00)[49]

A state commission was set up the same day (April 26) and tasked with investigating the accident. It was headed by Valery Legasov, who arrived at Chernobyl in the evening of 26 April. By the time Legasov arrived, two people had already died and 52 were receiving medical attention in hospital. By the night of 26–27 April – more than 24 hours after the explosion – Legasov's committee had ample evidence that extremely high levels of radiation had caused a number of cases of radiation exposure. Based on the evidence at hand, Legasov's committee acknowledged the destruction of the reactor and ordered the evacuation of Pripyat.

The evacuation began at 14:00 on 27 April. In order to expedite the evacuation, the residents were told to bring only what was necessary, as the authorities had said it would only last approximately three days. As a result, most of the residents left their personal belongings, which are still there today. An exclusion zone of 30 km (19 mi) remains in place today, although its shape has changed and its size has been expanded.
[link to en.wikipedia.org]

The People who lived around the Plant in F'Shima
was evacuated already hours after the Tsunami arrived,
this was 5Km around the Plant,
the second Ring comes in Affect only Hours later than the first!

Last Edited by The real and almighty Atom-Boy on 03/18/2012 09:58 PM

Directly comparing Fukushima to Chernobyl
A couple of things have changed since those first reports. First, the Japanese doubled their estimate of the radiation released by Fukushima in June to 7.7×1017 Becquerels (Bq). Then, on 30 August, they released the first maps of radioactive caesium-137 (Cs-137) contamination from the plant. Cs-137 has a half-life of 30 years, and it’s considered the major long-term contaminate for both accidents.
---
But that’s not the whole story. If Chernobyl had happened over Japan, much of its Cs-137 contamination would have ended up in the Pacific. Similarly, a good deal of the Fukushima fallout isn’t seen here because it has blown out into the ocean. Indeed, the total estimate delivered to the International Atomic Energy Agency in June states that Fukushima has released 1.5×1016 becquerels (Bq) of Cs-137—about a fifth of the Cs-137 from Chernobyl. The total radioactive release from Fukushima is currently estimated at about 5.5% of Chernobyl, which spewed an incredible 1.4×1019Bq.

The Fukushima fallout is notable for what it doesn’t contain. Some very nasty contaminants like strontium-90, americium-241, and various plutonium isotopes are all absent in any significant quantity because the concrete vessels around the reactors appear to be largely intact. In Chernobyl, the explosion and subsequent fire spewed these extremely dangerous isotopes far and wide.
[link to blogs.nature.com]

Fallout boy=shill

When we compare Fukushima and Chernobyl in terms of how the public opinion is on the quality of response.

[link to www.brookings.edu]

You might think the population as a whole appreciate a consistant response to the release of potentially hazardous material.

If it's localized, it's contained and taken care of thoroughly based on strict guidelines. To some it would seem if it is larger in scope the response is riddled with deception and corruption.

Is this because bad management breed bad practice? We cannot afford bullshit (american term meaning fraud) when it comes to these potentially massive disasters.

Profit cannot cloud vision, because in the beginning it is the public's tax dollars that get these things off the ground.

The response should be truthful and transparent, and the fear of strong public reaction should not be handled with authority figures cringing in cowardace.

I also disagree with the logic in falling back to the old practice of dumping waste into the ocean simply because it's the most cost effective choice.

does the truth hurt?

Moep, you fail

In our Discussion about the further use of Nuclear Energy
we should not make any Mistakes,
we can't discuss with this People when our Numbers are wrong!

We need to make our request 100% Waterproofed,
this means first we need to face the so called REALITY!

Number of workers hospitalised with acute radiation sickness
Chernobyl 134
Fukushima none

Number of deaths of workers within a month
Chernobyl 31
Fukushima none

I could go on.”
[link to www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz]

Last Edited by The real and almighty Atom-Boy on 03/18/2012 10:24 PM

Regulatory Failure: The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant crisis is exposing the extent to which Japan’s powerful nuclear industry has been subject to lax oversight, or worse. For starters, the effectiveness of the regulator comes into question in light of TEPCO’s history of deceit. In assessing governance in the industry, it would be unfair to single out only one company, when the entire industry was not subject to proper oversight.


from the link i posted.

A process for energy can't be ethical or unethical by itself. The opponents of nuclear power, I think, haven't ever been against the knowledge of a thing.

It's just that it's a lot to trust any group that have let things get a bit out of control in both how they handle old reactors, but also realistic risk assessment.

If there were a cap on the number of plants, they'd be forced to decommission the old, keep the new efficient and leak free.

Trust though, is key, and a lot of the public outcry and mistrust isn't anyone's fault. It's a symptom of a bigger problem.

Fukushima 'not comparable' with Chernobyl: French watchdog
The accident at Fukushima has released "significant" amounts of radiation but at levels and with an impact that are "not comparable" to Chernobyl, France's nuclear safety agency said on Tuesday.

"At present... Fukushima is not, nor will it be, Chernobyl, even though it is a very serious accident," the head of the Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety (IRSN), Patrick Gourmelon, said.
---
But the Japanese plant has released only one-tenth of the radioactivity disgorged by Chernobyl because its reactor vessels have so far remained intact, thus keeping almost all of the nuclear fuel enclosed.

In addition, radioactive contamination from Fukushima has been "very local" because of prevailing winds and rain, the IRSN said. Most of the contamination occurred between March 12 and 21.

At Chernobyl, an authorised experiment went catastrophically wrong, causing the reactor vessel to explode and catch fire, spewing radioactive dust and ash across swathes of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia, even reaching as far west as Ireland.

As for the impact on health, exposure to cancer-causing contaminants was worsened in the Chernobyl disaster because the Soviet authorities delayed evacuating the population, distributing iodine pills to protect the thyroid and halting consumption of milk.
---
In addition, the reactors at Fukushima had been automatically shutdown when the earthquake hit, while at Chernobyl the reactor had been operating.

"The mechanics of the accident are very different," Flory said.

The Chernobyl reactor did not have a reactor vessel, while Fukushima does and that reactor vessel is still contained even after a series of explosions.

That meant that the power of the Chernobyl explosion sent huge amounts of radiation into the high atmosphere "spreading it all over the world".

By contrast, the Fukushima reactors were all shut down during the earthquake and there was no explosion in the reactor vessel itself.

---

"The rating ... does not change what they have done by way of evacuation, sheltering, monitoring of the environment," the IAEA expert said.
---

Flory said the overall situation at Fukushima was "very serious, but there are early signs of recovery in some functions" such as the power systems needed to cool the reactors.
[link to www.terradaily.com]

Last Edited by The real and almighty Atom-Boy on 03/18/2012 10:30 PM

How does fukushima compare to plywood on your mothers deck? I don't understand how you are this blind to see that blinds are a human creation put here by demons from another soiled planet.. from somewhere in a black hole on mars.

I love you btw.

Release of radionuclides

The accident at the Chernobyl reactor happened during an experimental test of the electrical control system as the reactor was being shut down for routine maintenance.

The operators, in violation of safety regulations, had switched off important control systems and allowed the reactor, which had design flaws, to reach unstable, low-power conditions.

A sudden power surge caused a steam explosion that ruptured the reactor vessel, allowing further violent fuel-steam interactions that destroyed the reactor core and severely damaged the reactor building. Subsequently, an intense graphite fire burned for 10 days. Under those conditions, large releases of radioactive materials took place.
---
Average effective doses to those persons most affected by the accident were assessed to be about 120 mSv for 530,000 recovery operation workers, 30 mSv for 115,000 evacuated persons and 9 mSv during the first two decades after the accident to those who continued to reside in contaminated areas. (For comparison, the typical dose from a single computed tomography scan is 9 mSv).

Maximum individual values of the dose may be an order of magnitude and even more. Outside Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine, other European countries were affected by the accident.

Average national doses there were less than 1 mSv in the first year after the accident with progressively decreasing doses in subsequent years. The average dose over a lifetime in distant countries of Europe was estimated to be about 1 mSv.


[link to www.unscear.org]

Last Edited by The real and almighty Atom-Boy on 03/18/2012 10:37 PM

The following Article is free for common use!

Japan: Comparing Chernobyl and Fukushima

Key Facts

The 2011 nuclear accident at Fukushima Daiichi and the 1986 incident at Chernobyl may both be rated 7 on the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale,
but the events are starkly different.

No deaths from radiation exposure have been attributed to the accident in Japan. At Chernobyl, 28 highly exposed reactor staff and emergency workers died from radiation and thermal burns within four months of the accident, and 19 more by the end of 2004.

Officials believe the accident also was responsible for some 4,000 cases of thyroid cancer. A United Nations study published in September 2005 estimated that 56 deaths could be attributed to radiation exposure from the Chernobyl accident.

The radiation released into the atmosphere from Fukushima was about 10 percent of that from Chernobyl.

At Chernobyl, the reactor exploded, leading to a fire that lasted several days. The less-intense explosions at Fukushima Daiichi were from hydrogen that had built up inside the reactor buildings and did not involve the reactors themselves.


Comparing Chernobyl and Fukushima
Unconventional reactor operations at Chernobyl resulted in a runaway power surge followed by steam and hydrogen explosions and a sustained fire in the reactor. Without a containment structure, the explosions propelled radioactive material from the reactor core high into the atmosphere and across eastern and western Europe for at least 10 days.

The earthquake and tsunami that struck the Fukushima Daiichi reactors resulted in the loss of electric power to the site and temporarily halted cooling the fuel in the reactor cores.

There were explosions at three of the reactor buildings as a result of hydrogen buildup. Although the uranium fuel overheated and partially melted, there were no releases of radiation into the atmosphere at the levels seen during the Chernobyl accident.

In December 2011, the Japanese government said the three damaged reactors had reached a “cold shutdown condition,” indicating the coolant temperature had stabilized below the boiling point and further release of radioactive material from the site had been stopped.

Emergency Response
The uncontrolled release of the Chernobyl reactor’s fission products was exacerbated by the failure of Soviet authorities to take immediate action to protect surrounding populations.

The most discernible health effect from Chernobyl—thyroid cancer in children—could have been mitigated by the early and widespread use of radiation protection procedures, including distribution of potassium iodide and conprocedures,
including distribution of potassium iodide and control of the food supply in affected areas.

By contrast, Japanese authorities took early steps to evacuate people from a 12.5-mile zone around the Fukushima plant. Authorities also distributed potassium iodide to residents near the plant and restricted the transport and sale of milk, leafy vegetables and other food from the region.

Besides child thyroid cancer, no other discernible health effects have been detected in the populations around Chernobyl, according to a 2008 report of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation.

Based on all information to date, no discernible health effects are expected among the Japanese people as a result of the events at Fukushima.
[link to www.nei.org]

Last Edited by The real and almighty Atom-Boy on 03/18/2012 10:55 PM

OP, have you ever heard of an expression: Selling your soul to the devil?

How much did they pay you for giving up decency and dignity, you piece of SHIT?

C'mon, let us just stay with the Facts and Evidence at first,
we can start ranting later

You are free, like everyone else, to add some regular Stuff
and you can express your self as well but please refrain from
calling me a piece of Shite because this is not 4Chan, wakata?

Last Edited by The real and almighty Atom-Boy on 03/18/2012 11:01 PM

Fuck off, shill. Fuck off.

I find it hilarious that those that disagree resort to lame name calling of the OP rather than providing any facts themselves to the table...i guess its just proof that some people "want" to see Fukushima be very bad rather than actually having a sigh of relief that Fukushima is not nearly as bad as what "some people" led many to believe...

OP is from Japan of all places..that ruffles up the feathers of the doomtards to a high degree it seems and resort to petty name calling..again..without laying a single fact on the table what-so-ever!

Remember ..what goes around comes around..ify ou hope for disaster..disaster will come to you personally..mark my words.

I totally agree with OP..the entire Fukushima incident is not nearly as bad as Chernobyl..not even close..its little league being compared to big league..plain and simple and that surprisingly bugs the fuck out of some people here lol....GOOD I SAY!!

Good post OP.. 5stars!!

Normally, I don't waste much time dealing with shills and/or morons, but every once in a while I have to:

[link to www.corbettreport.com]

Just because people have not started dropping like flies (yet), does not mean everything is OK.

OP is right about one thing though - there is NO COMPARISON between Fuku and Chernobyl. Fukushima is way, way worse.

Name calling is nothing compared to concealing the truth from public.

H. Caldicot as well as Snake Oil Busby
are nearly the only ones from the academic
Circle who create a big Tara,
in my Research i found that the overwhelming
Majority of Scientists don't agree with them!

When you mention both in a Discussion
all you get is a pitiful Smile!

Why do so many Scientists going conform
with the UNO and other nuclear Friendly
organisations, imo the dependence on the
Apparatus/ the Machine is only responsible
for a few People but the rest is facing the Facts only!

100,000's of people have died because of Chernobyl.
...and FUKUSHIMA is EXPONENTIALLY WORSE than Chernobyl.




:chern:

Last Edited by Useless Cookie Eater on 03/19/2012 12:39 AM

@ Burt.

why do you think that Fukudaiichi
is worse than Chernobyl and what are
your personal Sources?

How is your definition of "hundreds of Thousands"?

I personally know Ukrainians who were involved in the cleanup.
100,000's of THOUSANDS HAVE DIED.

Let's not even bother talking about all the horrible disfigured children either.






YOU ARE A SHILL FOR TEPCO AND/OR THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT.
You can LIE to your own people....but you cannot LIE to the rest of the world who knows better.




Last Edited by Useless Cookie Eater on 03/19/2012 12:59 AM

This post is a little bit troubling.

You think the scale of the disaster is minimized because much of the radiation has blown out to sea?

Not making many friends with other countries with that argument. Not being a good neighbor, are ya Japan?

sad but true