2011-03-18, 07:25 PM
Seems like Japan has allowed IAEA to jump in, they should have more detailed information that Japanese officials hold (should they have withheld any priorly).
Anyway, this slide has some info about gammy-dose rates at a selected few populated areas. All figures are under 2 microsieverts per hour at peak points, and remain around and under 0.2 microsieverts as of March 17.
About this:
1/ ((3,450 * 6) + 6,291) * 63 = 1,700,433; not over 600,000
Sometimes it makes me wonder what these authors make of us, idiots? Or maybe geniuses -if some hidden factors make the number actually 600,000 and we have to automatically know that by ourselves.
2/ We don't have to worry about 30% of that fuel load:
Anyway, this slide has some info about gammy-dose rates at a selected few populated areas. All figures are under 2 microsieverts per hour at peak points, and remain around and under 0.2 microsieverts as of March 17.
About this:
Anonymous Moose Wrote:Actually, the 40 years worth of used fuel rods could interestingly be worse than chernobyl.
http://my.firedoglake.com/kirkmurphy/201...-steroids/
Something mentioned earlier in the topic.
1/ ((3,450 * 6) + 6,291) * 63 = 1,700,433; not over 600,000
Sometimes it makes me wonder what these authors make of us, idiots? Or maybe geniuses -if some hidden factors make the number actually 600,000 and we have to automatically know that by ourselves.
2/ We don't have to worry about 30% of that fuel load:
IAEA Wrote:On 18 March 2011, Graham Andrew, Special Adviser to the IAEA Director General on Scientific and Technical Affairs, briefed both Member States and the media on the current status of nuclear safety in Japan. His opening remarks, which he delivered at 14:00 UTC at the IAEA headquarters in Vienna, are provided below:
...
No problems have been reported at the common spent fuel pool. The spent fuel in the pool is fully covered by water.