Lidt perspektiv på Fukushima

Diverse — Drokles on April 6, 2011 at 2:20 am

Atomkraft er som bekendt sikkert, rimeligt billigt og CO2 neutralt. Men ideen om den usynlige ved en overdosis af stråling er ideel til at skabe frygt. Og frygt skal der til i kampen mod virkeligheden. Fra ScienceInsider

In the event of a meltdown, the fuel could melt through and flow out of the primary pressure vessel, falling into the so-called core capture chamber which sits below the reactor for this very purpose.

That vessel has water that would hopefully cool the molten fuel down, eventually ending the crisis. If this didn’t happen, however, a steam explosion could blow out the primary containment vessel, spewing massive quantities of radioactive aerosols as well as particulates. With towns evacuated at a perimeter of 30 kilometers, the lethality of that release “would depend on the winds,” says Lester.

Derfor siger vi nej tak til atomkraft for en nedsmeltning er verdens ende. Og dog. Fra Daily Mail

‘If the Japanese fail to keep the reactors cool and fail to keep the pressure in the containment vessels at an appropriate level, you can get the dramatic word ‘meltdown’. But what does that actually mean?  What a meltdown involves is [that] the basic reactor core melts, and as it melts, nuclear material will fall through to the floor of the container. There it will react with concrete and other materials. That is likely… remember this is the reasonable worst case, we don’t think anything worse is going to happen.

‘In this reasonable worst case you get an explosion. You get some radioactive material going up to about 500 metres up into the air.  Now, that’s really serious, but it’s serious again for the local area.  It’s not serious for elsewhere … if you then couple that with the worst possible weather situation i.e. prevailing weather taking radioactive material in the direction of Greater Tokyo and you had maybe rainfall which would bring the radioactive material down - do we have a problem?

‘The answer is unequivocally no. Absolutely no issue. The problems are within 30 km of the reactor.  And to give you a flavour for that, when Chernobyl had a massive fire at the graphite core, material was going up not just 500 metres but to 30,000 feet.  It was lasting not for the odd hour or so but lasted months, and that was putting nuclear radioactive material up into the upper atmosphere for a very long period of time.  But even in the case of Chernobyl, the exclusion zone that they had was about 30 kilometres.

‘And in that exclusion zone, outside that, there is no evidence whatsoever to indicate people had problems from the radiation. The problems with Chernobyl were people were continuing to drink the water, continuing to eat vegetables and so on and that was where the problems came from. That’s not going to be the case here. So what I would really re-emphasise is that this is very problematic for the area and the immediate vicinity and one has to have concerns for the people working there. Beyond that 20 or 30 kilometres, it’s really not an issue for health.’

Og selvom vi ikke vil se noget, der blot kommer i nærheden af Tjernobyl - der fordi det blev bygget af kommunister følgeligt var elendigt, som det var uansvarligt drevet - spørger Daily Mails Michael Hanlon alligevel…

What would happen if Fukushima does a Chernobyl?

The thing is, even Chernobyl did not do a Chernobyl. This was, by far, the worst nuclear accident in history (a Category 7) and yet the most astonishing thing about Chernobyl is just how uncatastrophic even this mega-disaster turned out to be.

After the explosion, the world waited. For the cancers, for the gruesome birth defects, terrible radiation burns. Up until the mid-1990s, the generally accepted death toll (including that quoted by the Ukrainian Health Ministry) was in the region or 125,000. As time wore on, these figures plummeted.

In fact, 31 people were killed when the reactor blew - 28 from radiation exposure and three scalded to death by escaping steam. In addition, 134 people received high radiation doses and several dozen of these have subsequently died, although several of unrelated causes. A few hundred people, maybe a few thousand, may die prematurely in years to come, mostly from untreated thyroid cancers, but it is becoming clear that the original assessment was wildly pessimistic.

Det er alt sammen lige meget for den usynlige dræber kræver ingen dokumentation end det vores inderste frygt fortæller os når den gødes med lige dele Hollywood og almen marxistisk realitetsbekæmpelse, som medierne hellere kolporterer end kedelig fysikundervisning. Sådan står vi i en evig kamp med mysticismen, der i disse tider annoncerer sig økologisk og social bevidst og gør alt for at aflede vores opmærksomhed mod det virkelige og erfarbare uanset, hvor usmageligt det så kan forekomme. For lidelserne i Japan er jo til at tage og føle på.

…this concentration on the nuclear angle is overstated, a peculiar misreading of the real situation. It illustrates a perverse desire to ignore what is by far and away the biggest real story here - the thousands, most probably tens of thousands, of Japanese people who have been drowned, crushed, entombed in mud, burned alive and swept away by that black tide of death that came sweeping through towns like Sendai and Minamisanriku last Friday afternoon.

The real story is of whole communities literally sluiced away, families shattered, economies ruined. This is, truly, a disaster on a biblical scale, a true apocalypse not the hysterical nuclear-version alluded to by, among others, Gunther Oetinger of the European Commission (who is talking of an ‘apocalypse’), the French government (which has told its nationals to evacuate Tokyo), German Chancellor Angela Merkel (who has put Germany’s nuclear programme on hold) and many other people who should know better.

De burde i høj grad vide bedre! Melanie Windridge sætter atomkraft op imod nogle mere kendte alternativer i Guardian

Compared with other sources of energy, nuclear power is one of the safest. We worry about radiation but are happy to accept air pollution from fossil fuels. Coal-related air pollution from power plants is globally responsible for more than 100,000 deaths per year.1,2 The World Health Organisation estimates that indoor air pollution from biomass and coal causes 1.5m premature deaths per year.3

Coal mining accidents also kill thousands every year, but are seldom reported.

I do not wish to trivialise the problems at Fukushima. I dislike the radioactive waste and safety issues of nuclear fission as much as anyone, which is why I work in research into a new form of nuclear energy – fusion. It’s the energy source that powers the sun and has none of the downsides of fission.

Fusion will produce abundant energy cleanly and safely, but it is not yet ready. With continued political and financial support we hope to have fusion power stations by the 2050s.

Og imens i Danmark meldes der alt udsolgt i geigertællere! Men alt indeholder en risiko ikke bare kul og indendørs bål, selv de miljøbevidste vindemøller. Fra

Tusindvis af danske arbejdere har de sidste 40 år arbejdet i giftige dampe for at producere vinger til verdens vindmøller.

40 tidligere ansatte hos LM Wind Power har igennem de sidste to uger stået frem med alvorlige sygdomme og symptomer, som overlæger sammenkæder med giften styren.

Men dét er selvfølgelig en undtagelse. Fra Daily Mail

The reality is that, as Britain flaunts its environmental credentials by speckling its coastlines and unspoiled moors and mountains with thousands of wind turbines, it is contributing to a vast man-made lake of poison in northern China. This is the deadly and sinister side of the massively profitable rare-earths industry that the ‘green’ companies profiting from the demand for wind turbines would prefer you knew nothing about.

Hidden out of sight behind smoke-shrouded factory complexes in the city of Baotou, and patrolled by platoons of security guards, lies a five-mile wide ‘tailing’ lake. It has killed farmland for miles around, made thousands of people ill and put one of China’s key waterways in jeopardy.

This vast, hissing cauldron of chemicals is the dumping ground for seven million tons a year of mined rare earth after it has been doused in acid and chemicals and processed through red-hot furnaces to extract its components.


Neodymium is commonly used as part of a Neodymium-Iron-Boron alloy (Nd2Fe14B) which, thanks to its tetragonal crystal structure, is used to make the most powerful magnets in the world. Electric motors and generators rely on the basic principles of electromagnetism, and the stronger the magnets they use, the more efficient they can be. It’s been used in small quantities in common technologies for quite a long time – hi-fi speakers, hard drives and lasers, for example. But only with the rise of alternative energy solutions has neodymium really come to prominence, for use in hybrid cars and wind turbines. A direct-drive permanent-magnet generator for a top capacity wind turbine would use 4,400lb of neodymium-based permanent magnet material.

In the pollution-blighted city of Baotou, most people wear face masks everywhere they go.

Undtagelser er undtagelser uanset omfanget. Vindmølleeventyret er allerede på vej til at overhale atomindustrien i antallet af dræbte og syge - men det har også kvævet statstilskud!

0 Kommentarer »

Ingen kommentarer endnu.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Kommentér indlægget...

Monokultur kører på WordPress