The last I heard, only one of the marine sample locations being monitored by MEXT (not TECPO) shows any detectable levels of radiation.

The only fish that is currently restricted is the sandlance from Fukushima bay, and for very good reason. Radiation levels (as well as mercury levels etc) are monitored routinely on commercial fish catches.  

It may not be showing significant levels, but the Japanese have gone off fish big time.  Would you like some wasabi on your sushi, Foolosophy?

http://www.scpr.org/news/2011/04/05/sushi-science-fear-not-radiation-seen-as-ris...

Wooo - nice primary colours- big letters too.

So what are exactly are you saying here? That undetectable levels of Uranium (somewhere) can cause cancer?

I know that alpha particles (eg from Uranium, Plutonium and Radon can have an increased effect for internal doses. Generally, we express dose rate in Sieverts (usually microsieverts), and as I'm sure you know already, that has a correction factor for alpha particles.  So 1 micro Gray (uGy) for alpha particles is equal to 20 uSv, but 1uGy for gamma radiation = 1 uSv. 

Did your friends at Greenpeace detect any plutonium 40km from the plant? Where are the results? This is not good enough. What are they trying to hide?

Anyway, you'll have to explain what you're trying to say.

What I wanna know is: why did the IAEA cease its monitoring activities in Japan mid-crisis!?


http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/tsunamiupdate01.html

Quote:



Oh, and WTF re coding their reports on the Fukushima nuclear crisis a "tsunami update"!?

Hello, it is a nuclear crisis!

Just go on with your script and don't bother answering any questions.

It just makes you look silly.

Foolosophy wrote on Apr 25^th, 2011 at 7:36pm:


Let's see, the factor that's important is the total release, not the hourly release. Now for Chernobyl, they quoted a figure of about 50 million Curies (Ci) which is 1.85 million terabecquerel (TBq).  The release from Fukushima was stated at around 5-10% of that, and most of that ended up in the ocean. So we'll take 185,000 TBq as most conservative. (of course, it was expressed separately as beta and gamma radiation, but this is just an approximation.

I guess it depends whether you're talking peak or average hourly rates, but let's take the assumption that the maximum emission was over 14 days (336 hours).  That would be the equivalent of about 550 TBq/hr.

Well back around the 4th April, the Japanese Government (NIRS) stated that the maximum (peak) release rate was around 10,000TBq/hr, but of course that was just short term spikes.

I don't know where you got 6.9TBq/hr and 0.69TBq/hr from, and whether that's supposed to be average release or what, but for once, your figures grossly understate the actual release.  

Stand by for more pictures of drunken black guys in baths etc.  
- Foolosophy's standard shorthand for "I dunno!"

Foolosophy wrote on Apr 25^th, 2011 at 9:37pm:


Well I don't think I'll bother replying. I'll just leave it to others to read the last two posts and try to work out how anybody could say anything so unbelievably thick.

Well there was just one other occasion like that - I remember a woman at a market in Africa. She was being sold two hats for a certain price, and she was angry because she just wanted one hat for that price and thought she was being cheated. She was getting quite angry about it, and couldn't work out why people were laughing at her (the phrase 'silly old cow' was appropriate for that occasion)

To recap, you just stated that the radiation release was X, and I stated that it was actually much more than that.

You just lost any vestige of credibility as anything other than the forum clown.

This footage was shot about 3 weeks ago:



Very poignant, especially the pet dogs wandering the streets.