Entire Pacific Basin put on alert after Japan earthquake.

But of course! Anything that weans us away from Big Oil and Big Coal have to be ruthlessly challenged and destroyed. The press is enthusiastically part of this. This is why Three-Mile Island is a household word and Kingston only gets you blank looks.

The Unoriginal wrote:

Braigwen wrote:

Just when we all thought things couldn't get any worse...

Quote :

apan that has not managed to recover after the first blow of natural disasters ( earthquakes and tsunamis) is risking to be overtaken by a new misery resulting from these disasters. Japanese Seismic Service has reported of a threat of its symbol, Fujiyama volcano’s eruption. The reasons for these assessments are recent 5-6 magnitude earthquakes on the volcano. The last time the volcano erupted was in 1707 when a new crater appeared on it and Tokyo streets ( named do at the time) were covered with 15 sm ash. Eruption of the national symbol will completely " smash" Japan which has just 2 days to stave off nuclear explosion at APS Fukushima affected by tsunami. So far Japanese Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) has increased the danger degree at wrecking Automatic power station Fukushima -1 till the 5th level out of 7 possible ones. International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) already considers wreckage at Japanese APS Fukushima-Daiichi the most serious one since Chernobyl catastrophe of 1986. Japanese government has already asked the USA for technical assistance to push aside wreckage on APS built under General Electric technology. At present it has been officially affirmed that another 6.200 people have become victims of Japanese earthquake on 11 March. Nearly 10.200 people are considered missing.

How come no one remembers the Mayak/Khystym accident? That was worse than either Three Mile Island or the current situation at Fukushima. Both dwarfed byt the tsunami.

I had to look that up. I'd never even heard of it.

On the subject of nuclear energy--is there a pressing reason why nuclear power plants need to be located in coastal areas? Yes, shitty natural disasters can happen elsewhere, too, but there's no denying that tsunamis only happen in coastal regions.

The Unoriginal wrote:

How come no one remembers the Mayak/Khystym accident? That was worse than either Three Mile Island or the current situation at Fukushima. Both dwarfed byt the tsunami.

Probably because it was thoroughly covered up by the Soviet Union for decades, and when the whistle was blown, it mainly was learned about by people who cared about what may or may not be happening in the Soviet Union?

Plus, it didn't make any neat ghost towns to set a video game in.

Speaking of the endless debate over nuclear energy, Ann Coulter's bringing the crazy again...

The New York Daily News wrote:

Right-wing blowhard Ann Coulter took her incendiary views to a whole new level Thursday, this time finding the silver lining in Japan's nuclear disaster.

During a segment on Bill O'Reilly's Fox News show, the conservative firebrand tried to calm jittery viewers by telling them "radiation is good for you."

Coulter went on to say that a growing body of evidence shows exposure to radiation above levels the government deems harmful actually reduces cancer.

The wannabe plutonium pundit cited her website's latest column, "A glowing report on radiation," in which she wrote, "With the terrible earthquake and resulting tsunami that have devastated Japan, the only good news is that anyone exposed to excess radiation from the nuclear power plants is now probably much less likely to get cancer."

Coulter pointed to articles in The Times of London and The New York Times as proof.

"So by your account, we should all be heading for the nuclear reactor" leaking radiation in Japan, joked a skeptical O'Reilly.

Some 140,000 people have been evacuated from a danger zone around the country's damaged reactors.

"You have to be responsible," he added.

"The prevailing wisdom is there's a level of radiation that's gonna hurt you and perhaps kill you ... What you say may be true - there may be some doses of radiation that in the human body can ward off infection. But in something like this, you gotta get the folks out of there, and you have to report worst-case scenarios."

O'Reilly pointed to the 1945 atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as proof that radiation kills, but Coulter wouldn't budge.

Considering the 'leak', you're actually more likely to get cancer from an X-Ray than from the small amounts leaving the plant.

Yes, there's a risk of meltdown. But it's very low. The chances of the place actually blowing up and decimating a city are pathetically low.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were decimated by bombs, by the way. Atomic bombs pretty much MADE to cause nuclear fallout.

...She's a troll, right? We've decided that after this. There's no way she's not a troll.

Lapin wrote:

...She's a troll, right? We've decided that after this. There's no way she's not a troll.

Either that, or she seriously doesn't understand radiation therapy.
Or, you know, both.

Lady Anne wrote:

I had to look that up. I'd never even heard of it.

Eh, I had to look up a lot of shit back when I was preparing the guys in the company for the admission test to work at Electrabel, and they were curious about everything (the fact that they were being paid to sit in a room with central heating and listen to a broad talking, instead of sandblasting steel three floors underground, sure helped). Want to know why RBMK reactors had a largely positive void coefficient and why they were used anyaway? Want to know what the fuck a positive void coefficient even mean? I'm at your service. If only our boys were as anal-retentive about their own job...

Quote :

On the subject of nuclear energy--is there a pressing reason why nuclear power plants need to be located in coastal areas? Yes, shitty natural disasters can happen elsewhere, too, but there's no denying that tsunamis only happen in coastal regions.

Ahem. I hope my usual logorrhea doesn't take over.

Power plants that produce electricity via the Rankine cycle need a source of cool water. It goes like this: you heat water until it boils and turns to steam, steam makes the turbine turn, the turbine is coupled to an alternator, which is a giant version of the dinamo powering the headlights in your bycicle.

Because the water going from the boiler to the turbine is treated (deoxygenated, demineralized, de-etc), you don't want to just throw it down the drain. On the other hand, unless you cool it, it would become hotter with every cycle and bring the yeld to zero. To cool the steam back into liquid water, there is a condenser, which is usually a bundle of tubes. Steam from the turbine flows between tubes, the coolant (water from an outside source) circulates inside the tubes. Condensed steam drips to the 'hot well' and is circulated back to the boiler, the coolant is discharged into the source again.

The more powerful the plant, the more water is needed to cool all that steam. A small power plant like those found in steel or paper mills can work with water taken from a well or canal, a nuclear power plant producing Gigawatts needs a major river or the sea. Cooling towers help reduce the coolant intake and/or cool it further before it is released into the source again (you don't want to scald the fishies), but AFAIK the design of these power plants is dependent on an external source of water to function.

The other nuclear plants that were affected by the Tohoku tsunami have some minor emergencies (Tokai, Fukushima II) are holding their own, with backup systems. I think much depended on how the wave affected the area at a very ow-scale range; what strategical piece of machinery was damaged and how.

Lapin wrote:

...She's a troll, right? We've decided that after this. There's no way she's not a troll.

Who, Ann Coulter or Harley? The latter at least made sense - the only thing I found that was close to an actual figure for the radiation level found in spinach said that eating one serving per day for a year would give you the amount of radiation you get from a CAT scan (feel free to contradict me with appropriate sources). That Coulter quote went again everything a sensible layman knows about the danger of radiation, and if I were in Coulter's target audience I'd take that as an offense to my intelligence.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

(it's that possible NSFW site again, so be careful)

Quote :

Complaints that Japanese hotels are treating quake victims from Fukushima prefecture as radioactive lepers and refusing them board have surfaced.

Japan’s ministry of health reports receiving a number of complaints from people forced from their homes in Fukushima prefecture, saying they were refused rooms at hotels and inns, apparently on the grounds that they came from the same prefecture as the crippled nuclear reactors and must therefore be considered dangerous.

The ministry is instructing local governments to tell their hoteliers that they should not refuse lodgings to people just because they have visited Fukushima prefecture, pointing out that the radiation levels involved are tiny and pose no risk to human health.

Such discrimination may be illegal under Japanese law, which only allows hotels refusals based on infectious diseases, suspicion of criminality and, of course, lack of room.

However, in practice hotels and landlords happily discriminate against potential patrons with no real legal repercussion, and for those affected is exceptionally difficult to demonstrate mysteriously disappearing vacancies are the result of such practices.

Further complicating matters is the fact that after the quake one large hotel chain has actually begun forcing those who wish to stay in its premises into signing a contract saying they will not sue the hotel for any reason, despite such provisions themselves being illegal.

There are now concerns that Japan may start seeing widespread discrimination against those from Fukushima prefecture, with some evacuation centres now insisting refugees submit to radiation screenings.

Discrimination against Japanese overseas also seems another unpleasant possibility – a number of nations have apparently been subjecting people leaving Japan to radiation tests with the intent of refusing them entry if sufficient radiation is detected.

The case has particular resonance in Japan – “hibakusha,” survivors of the atomic bombings at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, have at times been the subject of discrimination due to the hysterical superstitions the public frequently attaches to radiation.

Online, the reaction has largely been one of disgust, but with the public unable to comprehend the notion that minuscule amounts of radiation are harmless, it does not seem likely the hardships of quake victims will be end with recovery from the earthquake itself.

And the next person to go nuts and totally blow this admittedly dangerous but nothing like as bad as they make it out to be event way out of proportion will be...

The Unoriginal wrote:

Lady Anne wrote:

On the subject of nuclear energy--is there a pressing reason why nuclear power plants need to be located in coastal areas? Yes, shitty natural disasters can happen elsewhere, too, but there's no denying that tsunamis only happen in coastal regions.

Ahem. I hope my usual logorrhea doesn't take over.

Power plants that produce electricity via the Rankine cycle need a source of cool water. It goes like this: you heat water until it boils and turns to steam, steam makes the turbine turn, the turbine is coupled to an alternator, which is a giant version of the dinamo powering the headlights in your bycicle.

Because the water going from the boiler to the turbine is treated (deoxygenated, demineralized, de-etc), you don't want to just throw it down the drain. On the other hand, unless you cool it, it would become hotter with every cycle and bring the yeld to zero. To cool the steam back into liquid water, there is a condenser, which is usually a bundle of tubes. Steam from the turbine flows between tubes, the coolant (water from an outside source) circulates inside the tubes. Condensed steam drips to the 'hot well' and is circulated back to the boiler, the coolant is discharged into the source again.

The more powerful the plant, the more water is needed to cool all that steam. A small power plant like those found in steel or paper mills can work with water taken from a well or canal, a nuclear power plant producing Gigawatts needs a major river or the sea. Cooling towers help reduce the coolant intake and/or cool it further before it is released into the source again (you don't want to scald the fishies), but AFAIK the design of these power plants is dependent on an external source of water to function.

The other nuclear plants that were affected by the Tohoku tsunami have some minor emergencies (Tokai, Fukushima II) are holding their own, with backup systems. I think much depended on how the wave affected the area at a very ow-scale range; what strategical piece of machinery was damaged and how.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Harley Quinn hyenaholic wrote:

And the next person to go nuts and totally blow this admittedly dangerous but nothing like as bad as they make it out to be event way out of proportion will be...

Sean Hannity.

(Warning: Excessive exposure to Sean Hannity may cause skin irritation, loss of brain cells, nausea, and projectile vomiting.)

The Unoriginal wrote:

That Coulter quote went again everything a sensible layman knows about the danger of radiation, and if I were in Coulter's target audience I'd take that as an offense to my intelligence.

This. There's not a doctor in the country who'd say that radiation reduces cancer risk. Even used beneficially, it still fucks you up for years. I'd love to know how she comes up with this stuff, I really would. And it's doubly offensive, considering that I'm currently being intensively monitored for one of the big post-rad cancers (thyroid). It's not the only one, but it's usually number one on the hit parade.

Maybe I can arrange for her to take my next few thyroid biopsies for me--would a spring-loaded needle coming at her neck (multiple times) convince her of just how wrong she is?

Lapin wrote:

...She's a troll, right? We've decided that after this. There's no way she's not a troll.

She's all too real, actually.

It might be the end after all-Bill O'Reilly actually refuting someone who's spouting stupidity and craziness? The man's usually a veritable fountain of bullshit himself.

Sean Hannity is one of the few people alive that I think the world would be a better place if we were to go back in time and have him retroactively aborted.

John Stewart did an excellent job of mocking her, but her stupid needs to be made more public.

Sakurelf wrote:

video

Somebody send that man a bouquet for putting up with that sort of stupidity in a rational manner.

Sakurelf wrote:

Something I am stupider for having watched.

I can't decide which is worse: having this dumbass polluting our airwaves or that she was an actual prosecutor.

rachel wrote:

Sakurelf wrote:

Something I am stupider for having watched.

I can't decide which is worse: having this dumbass polluting our airwaves or that she was an actual prosecutor.

It's less surprising when you read about some of the other people out there actually practicing law.

So uh...


I'm supposed to be going to Japan in July.


Uh.

Seule: Where to? If it's not Fukushima or Miyagi, you are very likely to be FINE. Food in which elevated radiation levels are found is taken off the market, water is closely monitored and a lot of people outside the areas affected by the quake have largely returned to their routine. Children are back in school, diplomatic corps members from other countries are returning, and most foreign exchange students never even left. I've got friends near Hiroshima (in the south), in Nagano (on the western side of the country) and in Sapporo on Hokkaido (the northernmost island), and none of them are in any way freaking out or restricted in their nutrient intake.

If you don't want to go, give me the flight ticket - I'm contemplating selling my organs on the black market to get some language practice

About the miss-information that apparently everyone is guilty of.

It's amazing reading this. The reporters feed off each others' frenzy until you get radioactive clouds covering Europe.

Sorry to interrupt the nuclear wank, but an already tragic situation has just gotten ten times worse....

Quote :

By CARA RUBINSKY, Associated Press Cara Rubinsky, Associated Press – 5 mins ago
TOKYO – Japan was rattled by a magnitude-7.4 aftershock and tsunami warning Thursday night nearly a month after a devastating earthquake and tsunami flattened the northeastern coast.

Announcers on Japan's public broadcaster NHK told residents along the northeastern shore to run to move ground and away from the shore. An hour after the quake, there were no reports of a tsunami hitting the shore.

The Japan meteorological agency issued a tsunami warning for a wave of up to 6 feet (two meters) for a coastal area already torn apart by last month's tsunami, which is believed to have killed some 25,000 people and has sparked an ongoing crisis at a nuclear power plant.

More background by Asia Japan Watch, the English language news update service by the Asahi Shimbun:

Quote :

Strong quake hits northern Miyagi Prefecture, tsunami warning issued

A magnitude-7.4 earthquake hit off the coast of Miyagi Prefecture at about 11:32 p.m. Thursday. There were no initial indications of any injuries or damage from the quake, which comes almost a month after the devastating Great East Japan Earthquake of... March 11, which had a magnitude of 9.0. The quake registered an upper 6 on the Japanese intensity scale of 7 in Kurihara, Miyagi Prefecture as well as Sendai’s Miyagino Ward. The focus of the quake was about 40 kilometers east of the Oshika peninsula in Miyagi Prefecture at a depth of about 40 kilometers. A tsunami warning was issued for the coastal region of Miyagi Prefecture. According to Tokyo Electric Power Co., all workers at its Fukushima No. 1 and No. 2 nuclear power plants were unharmed as of 11:55 p.m. Thursday and there was no noticeable damage from the Thursday night quake.

(Copyright 2011 the Asahi Shimbun. All Rights Reserved.)

At least it doesn't seem to have made the situation at Fukushima worse... Also, from the LA Times here:

Quote :

There were no reports of damage from the aftershock centered off the northeast coast. Officials warned of tsunami heights of up to 6.6 feet, but the warning was lifted after 90 minutes. A nuclear plant in Miyagi lost three of its four power sources, while no damage was reported at the crippled Fukushima Daiichi plant.

The Miyagi plant still seems to have backup power, so they won't have yet another Fukushima on their hands. It's now been over 2 hours, and it doesn't seem like a tsunami is going to hit. Also, the Miyagi coastline is already fucked up to kingdom come, so it's unlikely that significant new damage occured. Not superb news in the least, but at least things didn't hit rock bottom (kinda sad when you have to resort thinking about the situation that way...).

Oh GOD, another violent earthquake?

I TOLD you this was the apocalypse year!

Let's just hope that there's no tsunami. That caused the worst of the problems.