Hi guys,
I don't know if this is accurate, but if it is, is very alarming.
Does anybody has more information about this?
Conservation and the Environment / Archived topic
Started by acuevas ·
Read-only discussion
Hi guys,
I don't know if this is accurate, but if it is, is very alarming.
Does anybody has more information about this?
Hi guys,
I don't know if this is accurate, but if it is, is very alarming.
Does anybody has more information about this?
This is not accurate at all. This is based solely on drift models. There are water monitors right offshore the power plant that constantly test the water and the fish showing levels well below anything considered unsafe.
http://radioactivity.mext.go.jp/en/
http://radioactivity.mext.go.jp/en/monitor...1330_031618.pdf
Theres's no good data regarding the initially amount released (source) and no good data regarding the concentrations of the type of contamination (Iodine vs cesium's uranium) Additionally the Iodine isotopes break down very quickly (matter of weeks) and most of the contamination was iodine related (but some cesium and uranium was detected). This drift model cannot account for these factors (especially that iodine isotopes have a half life of ~8days)
do not put stock in this graphic, it's not based on enough facts to accurately represent the situation.
Thanks,
john
Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.