General Discussion

TBF

(35,134 posts)

113. Ionizing Radiation -

Sat Jan 25, 2014, 10:48 AM

Jan 2014

Ionizing Radiation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionizing_radiation

Ionizing radiation is generated through nuclear reactions, nuclear decay, by very high temperature, or via acceleration of charged particles in electromagnetic fields. Natural sources include the sun, lightning and supernova explosions. Artificial sources include nuclear reactors, particle accelerators, and x-ray tubes.

Effects of Chernobyl disaster: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_the_Chernobyl_disaster

Radiation damage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_damage

High-intensity ionizing radiation in air can produce a visible ionized air glow of telltale bluish-purplish color. The glow can be observed e.g. during criticality accidents, around mushroom clouds shortly after a nuclear explosion, or inside of a damaged nuclear reactor like during the Chernobyl disaster.

Significant amounts of ozone can be produced. Even small amounts of ozone can cause ozone cracking in many polymers over time, in addition to the damage by the radiation itself.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

226 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Plutonium from Fukushima is a global catastrophe. [View all] Octafish Jan 2014 OP

Ah c'mon Octafish. Cleita Jan 2014 #1

Thanks, Cleita. That's why I posted. Few who know are talking about Fukushima in public. Octafish Jan 2014 #3

Maybe when people start discovering they have polluted a whole food supply chain, they will Cleita Jan 2014 #6

I feel the same, Cleita! countryjake Jan 2014 #15

It was brought up on the Stephanie Miller radio show... Rockyj Jan 2014 #24

Why would the media lie? Octafish Jan 2014 #96

Stephanie Miller isn't all that smart. She means well, but she's not one to go to for info. cui bono Jan 2014 #97

we don't know what to do questionseverything Jan 2014 #60

More On Fukushima Unit 3, TEPCO Fails To Explain Levels Octafish Jan 2014 #134

Starfish dying in the NW Pacific antiquie Jan 2014 #2

No, plutonium isn't killing the starfish. Vashta Nerada Jan 2014 #5

Ok then ...we won't worry about it. Thanks. L0oniX Jan 2014 #27

On this you should not nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #39

Oh ...my auto sarc tag isn't working again. My bad. L0oniX Jan 2014 #42

Thank you for pointing that out, antiquie. We need more information. Octafish Jan 2014 #7

I worry about my grandkids. antiquie Jan 2014 #8

That's the kicker, isn't it? Whisp Jan 2014 #30

We can protect our kids from this RobertEarl Jan 2014 #32

They'll still be human when they grow up Shivering Jemmy Jan 2014 #226

Yes, in the case of star fish yes they do nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #48

absolutely! Me too. n/t wildbilln864 Jan 2014 #138

See 39 please nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #40

Die off started before the reactor blew up. jeff47 Jan 2014 #21

Yep. Plutonium has been there awhile. RobertEarl Jan 2014 #25

So....never took a biology class, huh? jeff47 Jan 2014 #26

"there is no telling what may happen" NuclearDem Jan 2014 #29

Not like this. antiquie Jan 2014 #36

Yes, like this. In fact, it is literally this die off. jeff47 Jan 2014 #38

That has zero to do with fukushima nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #34

Plutonium G_j Jan 2014 #4

1 Millionth of One Gram of Inhaled Plutonium Will Give You Cancer -- Helen Caldicott, MD Octafish Jan 2014 #9

thank you G_j Jan 2014 #14

G_j, have you heard about this? countryjake Jan 2014 #18

yes, but I haven't seen this latest update G_j Jan 2014 #28

Corporate media and government silence on Fuku is deafening. JEB Jan 2014 #10

Thanks for the heads-up, JEB. Don't have a replacement for the original, yet. Octafish Jan 2014 #55

our granddaughter wanted to spend this summer in Japan... that was nixed in a heartbeat secondwind Jan 2014 #11

That's very good flamingdem Jan 2014 #12

Do you remember the special trip Hillary made to Japan after Fukushima? flamingdem Jan 2014 #13

So you are claiming the Obama administration is complicit? Bluenorthwest Jan 2014 #63

It's more of a tendency rather than a blatant policy flamingdem Jan 2014 #74

They've done it for banksters and corporations. n/t cui bono Jan 2014 #98

Orders. Word from above... Octafish Jan 2014 #133

No. Agschmid Jan 2014 #205

Oh, BULLSHIT! ChisolmTrailDem Jan 2014 #16

Yeah, go shopping. JEB Jan 2014 #17

You first, (in the hug your plutonium for real department with no shielding) nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #35

You do realize I was being facetious, right? nt ChisolmTrailDem Jan 2014 #37

When it comes to this subject my sarcasm-o-meter is non functional nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #41

Bananas! 1000words Jan 2014 #50

Phew, not the only one who noticed that meme nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #59

LOL! Plutonium is good business. Octafish Jan 2014 #67

Wrong. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #19

Natural plutonium is extremely rare. Rex Jan 2014 #20

But if it were natural, then it would be healthy and good Orrex Jan 2014 #197

I tried to buy some from GNC and they called the cops! Rex Jan 2014 #219

I've wondered if there could be a link between southerncrone Jan 2014 #101

That may be so, but the fuel in Reactor 3 is enriched with plutonium. Octafish Jan 2014 #104

I wouldn't trust TEPCO to tell us the truth no matter what. Rex Jan 2014 #122

Something like 80% of the mass of the core of the reactor at Chernobyl AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #131

It is extremely embarrassing RobertEarl Jan 2014 #22

Nuclear Information and Resource Service Octafish Jan 2014 #222

100th rec RobertEarl Jan 2014 #225

Don't worry, there's an app for that MyNameGoesHere Jan 2014 #23

Didn't they take that one off the market? Octafish Jan 2014 #70

wow, that's uhhhh flamingdem Jan 2014 #75

Not this again, Jesus! nt Logical Jan 2014 #31

Fukushima is all over the news? Octafish Jan 2014 #92

Nope. lonestarnot Jan 2014 #117

One would think, just based on the SCALE of the disaster, it'd be on TV. Octafish Jan 2014 #119

They must not like the smell of plutonium and stapelia gigantea. Sucks the breath right out of them lonestarnot Jan 2014 #147

EDIT: Original line here contained statistics I pulled out of my ass. It was wrong, and I apologize. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #33

But it's going to annihilate all life in the Northern hemisphere!!!!!!!!! jeff47 Jan 2014 #43

That is the stupidest thing I've read all day! Just how the fuck can you say that? You have ChisolmTrailDem Jan 2014 #44

thank you G_j Jan 2014 #45

"You fuckers"? zappaman Jan 2014 #47

And all the other side has is a bunch of hyperbolic faulty reasoning. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #51

the comment G_j Jan 2014 #53

And the jury results are.... aikoaiko Jan 2014 #88

Looks like the post was edited after the alert was sent...nt SidDithers Jan 2014 #109

Where did I mention starfish? Octafish Jan 2014 #49

Didn't say you did. But I know RobertEarl's OP probably triggered this OP. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #52

No. Plutonium is the trigger RobertEarl Jan 2014 #54

You're unbelievable. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #57

So, you brought it up to conflate the issues. Octafish Jan 2014 #56

Ah, Christ. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #58

"Octafish, is there anyone who disagrees with you that isn't a COINTELPRO operative? "... SidDithers Jan 2014 #61

Tag team is so profound, SidDithers. Octafish Jan 2014 #65

The BFEE are killing starfish!!...nt SidDithers Jan 2014 #66

Ha ha. It is to laugh at Fascism. Octafish Jan 2014 #68

If you want honest discussion, don't attribute to me what I didn't write then. Octafish Jan 2014 #62

You really don't understand any of this, do you? RobertEarl Jan 2014 #64

"International problem" is pretty far from "global catastrophe." NuclearDem Jan 2014 #72

International problem is global. RobertEarl Jan 2014 #73

For the record, I enjoyed the DU Mail back and forth just a few minutes ago. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #76

And? RobertEarl Jan 2014 #77

You have GOT to be joking. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #79

You caught me RobertEarl Jan 2014 #80

You mean like the half a nano sievert increase in radiation over BC? NuclearDem Jan 2014 #81

See that>>> ""increase in radiation"" RobertEarl Jan 2014 #83

You know what a nano sievert is right? NuclearDem Jan 2014 #85

Concentrated RobertEarl Jan 2014 #86

Mercury contamination in fish RobertEarl Jan 2014 #87

Seriously, enough plutonium to completely contaminate the food supply? NuclearDem Jan 2014 #89

There were many tons of plutonium RobertEarl Jan 2014 #90

Again, at levels far, far below levels that would cause even minor health risks. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #91

Again RobertEarl Jan 2014 #93

Where the hell are you getting that 4.194 pCi/kg figure? NuclearDem Jan 2014 #95

It is found in this DoE report RobertEarl Jan 2014 #120

Granted those figures are in that study... NuclearDem Jan 2014 #126

Point is RobertEarl Jan 2014 #127

No. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #128

Like I say RobertEarl Jan 2014 #129

So you've got nothing else then? NuclearDem Jan 2014 #130

huh? questionseverything Jan 2014 #135

I never said that wasn't true. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #136

p239 is an isotope and lasts about 2 years questionseverything Jan 2014 #139

I think you're confusing Pu-239 with Cs-134 NuclearDem Jan 2014 #141

yes i did questionseverything Jan 2014 #143

Except that study indicated the plutonium, americium, and uranium levels corroborated with pre-2000 NuclearDem Jan 2014 #144

my theory is not either or questionseverything Jan 2014 #145

it si the nonuniform distribution in particulate form questionseverything Jan 2014 #146

Yes, questionseverything RobertEarl Jan 2014 #140

links? nt G_j Jan 2014 #71

And dismissing real concerns is being very disingenuous to the people suffering. Rex Jan 2014 #123

The word "catastrophe" may not mean what you think it means cthulu2016 Jan 2014 #46

You are so right. The lights are still on. Octafish Jan 2014 #69

What do you think it means for the Japanese? Rex Jan 2014 #124

As a child in the 1950s, I got lots of propaganda about the "promise of the peaceful atom." LongTomH Jan 2014 #78

Better Dead than Red. Octafish Jan 2014 #84

How could it not be? Whisp Jan 2014 #82

It's a disaster on a planetary scale and yet Corporate Media pretend it isn't. Octafish Jan 2014 #94

What exactly do you think it's going to do? Sirveri Jan 2014 #102

I try not to dwell on this because, frankly, there's Jack Shit that I can do about it. Electric Monk Jan 2014 #99

I feel that way too, Electric Monk. Problem is, TEPCO also feels that way, too. Octafish Jan 2014 #107

Because Justin Beiber's antics are more important southerncrone Jan 2014 #100

No one died when Justin Bieber got drunk -- but they could have. Octafish Jan 2014 #106

same with the who questionseverything Jan 2014 #137

Here's a report on plutonium from Fukushima: only detectable very close to the reactor muriel_volestrangler Jan 2014 #103

Here's a report where plutonium was found 40 km from the plant. Octafish Jan 2014 #105

this part shows how ununiform movement can be questionseverything Jan 2014 #121

Thank you - TBF Jan 2014 #108

It is impossible for it to impact weather patterns hack89 Jan 2014 #110

Ionizing Radiation - TBF Jan 2014 #113

Your links saying nothing about changing weather patterns hack89 Jan 2014 #115

Still reading - I found one USA Today TBF Jan 2014 #118

Krypton Gas effecting weather? RobertEarl Jan 2014 #125

Thank you! It's an older article but that's probably better - TBF Jan 2014 #132

You are most welcome, TBF. Octafish Jan 2014 #112

Very helpful - TBF Jan 2014 #114

K&R DeSwiss Jan 2014 #111

LOLOLOLOL! Thanks, DeSwiss. ...except for the Aerosolized Plutonium... Octafish Jan 2014 #116

well, I'll not argue... FreeJoe Jan 2014 #142

How Dangerous Is 400-6000 Pounds Of Plutonium Nano Particle Dust Liberated By Fukushima? Octafish Jan 2014 #148

Wow, first of all, that's a hell of a range (400-6000). NuclearDem Jan 2014 #149

I'll side with Helen Caldicott. Octafish Jan 2014 #150

What does Helen Caldicott's position on transparency have to do with the validity of her claims? NuclearDem Jan 2014 #151

Diversion, misattribution, strawmen and ad hominem attack. Octafish Jan 2014 #152

Yep, most of those were in your post. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #153

Now you are projecting. Octafish Jan 2014 #154

Projecting? You can't be serious. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #155

Perfectly serious. That's why the OP. Octafish Jan 2014 #156

Written entirely without any sort of awareness. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #158

No. Caldicott made a mistake, based on what was then known. A lot different than what you call her. Octafish Jan 2014 #159

No, she took a study that fit her preconceptions despite its numerous known flaws NuclearDem Jan 2014 #161

Again, TEPCO lies. Octafish Jan 2014 #164

Did I ever say TEPCO can be trusted? At all? NuclearDem Jan 2014 #165

Thank you for bringing some rationality to this issue. zappaman Jan 2014 #157

So, you've nothing to write about plutonium from Fukushima, zappaman. Octafish Jan 2014 #160

Nope. zappaman Jan 2014 #162

OK. I'd rather be called Brad, than Dude. Octafish Jan 2014 #167

Whatever... zappaman Jan 2014 #168

Why sources matter, from a journalist at Project Censored... Octafish Jan 2014 #170

Release of plutonium isotopes from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident SidDithers Jan 2014 #163

As opposed to this? Octafish Jan 2014 #166

As everything you've republished has links to originals dipsydoodle Jan 2014 #169

It may have to do with clouding the central issue: Fukushima is a global catastrophe. Octafish Jan 2014 #171

So are US CO2 emmisions since the late 1840's dipsydoodle Jan 2014 #172

Carl Sagan and Helen Caldicott... Octafish Jan 2014 #174

You continually claim the plutonium from Fukushima is a 'global catastrophe' without any evidence muriel_volestrangler Jan 2014 #173

The OP and most of my replies are sourced. Octafish Jan 2014 #175

I gave you science from sources independent of TEPCO, or governments, in #103 muriel_volestrangler Jan 2014 #176

Great. And I gave you sources in #105 that showed where it was found 25 miles away from FNPP. Octafish Jan 2014 #177

Thank you. Now I see where you're coming from. Octafish Jan 2014 #178

And 25 miles is not 'global' (nt) muriel_volestrangler Jan 2014 #180

Right. But it's plutonium and found 25 times further from the plant than you reported in #103. Octafish Jan 2014 #181

No; the paper found some at 16km away too. But it's patchy muriel_volestrangler Jan 2014 #182

I'd rather people get the facts and use them to set policy. The phrase is democracy. Octafish Jan 2014 #184

was this supposed to be "safe" too? questionseverything Jan 2014 #187

Globalresearch.ca. LOL... SidDithers Jan 2014 #195

For the cost of Iraq War, we could've built National 100% Renewable Clean Energy Grid. Octafish Jan 2014 #224

... longship Jan 2014 #179

Exactly... SidDithers Jan 2014 #183

Don't worry. The situation may even be worse than what's posted on this thread. Octafish Jan 2014 #188

3-5 orders of magnitude less bad than Chernobyl... SidDithers Jan 2014 #189

But Helen Caldicott said Chernobyl killed nearly a million people! NuclearDem Jan 2014 #191

''3-5 orders of magnitude less than Chernobyl.'' Octafish Jan 2014 #192

Oh for crying out loud. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #198

I want you on the record about this..... Logical Jan 2014 #190

Where did I write that, Logical? Octafish Jan 2014 #193

You claim this is a real true crisis! Where is the coverage??? nt Logical Jan 2014 #196

Oh, I see. If it's not on tee vee, it's not real. Octafish Jan 2014 #204

Where is it? Why was Chernobyl on the tee vee? Or TMI??????? nt Logical Jan 2014 #208

Unfortunately, the facts say otherwise: Plutonium from Fukushima is a global catastrophe. Octafish Jan 2014 #185

ARRRRRGH!!!! longship Jan 2014 #186

They found Fukushima shit in NM? RobertEarl Jan 2014 #194

Same report said it was of no environmental concern. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #199

What is it with you? Any amount of plutonium is cause for concern. Octafish Jan 2014 #202

Alright, so you didn't read the report then. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #206

I read the article where the scientist from NMSU said they detected plutonium on March 14, 2011. Octafish Jan 2014 #207

No, that's not what he said. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #211

do you back the use of depleted uranium in weapons too? questionseverything Jan 2014 #209

Oh, there's a straw man if I ever saw it. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #212

i was just pointing out questionseverything Jan 2014 #213

What bearing does that have on this? NuclearDem Jan 2014 #214

you have been telling me for days how safe things are questionseverything Jan 2014 #215

There's a big difference between depleted uranium and the nearly-undetectable cesium in tuna. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #216

Sure they did. longship Jan 2014 #200

No wonder all you got is ridicule. Octafish Jan 2014 #201

The article itself.......... NM_Birder Jan 2014 #210

Doesn't the US military use plutonium missiles ... MindMover Jan 2014 #203

May explain the birth defects... Octafish Jan 2014 #217

Yes, plutonium is bad. Any amount in your lungs causes cancer but... ryan_cats Jan 2014 #218

An Admirable Ability. Here's what Physicians for Social Responsibility said back in March, 2011... Octafish Jan 2014 #223

I saw about a three minute report last night. lonestarnot Jan 2014 #220

Did they ask: 'What if the Fukushima nuclear fallout crisis had happened here?' Octafish Jan 2014 #221