Foolosophy wrote on Apr 30^th, 2011 at 11:41pm:


I take that as an admission of ignorance. It was a very straightforward question.

Foolosophy wrote on May 1^st, 2011 at 1:12pm:


I already did.

Put it this way - you don't bother to read my posts. If you did, you would realise that I already discussed the issue of alpha radiation and the fact that increased risk is factored in.

I think I'd get more sense speaking to It_Is_The_Light

Just as a matter of curiosity, were you a heavy drug user when you were younger?

There is probably some understatement from the likes of Tepco, there was initially some understatement from the Japanese Government too.

Greenpeace and your banjo picking mate Chris Busby however are off the planet when it comes to anti-nuclear propaganda. Some of the statements that he has made are so nonsensical as to be bizarre.

I can't believe that anybody would swallow everything that the Anti-Nuclear activists say, hook line and sinker.

THE operator of Japan's Fukushima nuclear plant will build a wall to defend it against future tsunamis, reports say, as public confidence slipped in the government's handling of the disaster.

Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) also plans to triple from about 1000 to 3000 the number of staff nuclear workers and subcontractors handling the crisis to reduce each individual's radiation exposure.

Emergency crew have been battling for eight weeks to stabilise the six-reactor plant which was damaged by the March 11 quake and tsunami, and which has since been hit by explosions, leaking radiation.

Confidence has slipped among voters in the handling of the wider disaster by the centre-left government of Prime Minister Naoto Kan, according to a nationwide telephone poll by the mass-circulation Asahi Shimbun.

The survey showed 55 per cent of respondents expressed reservations about how the government was dealing with the crisis, while 27 per cent were hopeful about the efforts, according to the poll of more than 3000 people on April 23-24.

In order to guard the plant against future quakes and tsunamis, TEPCO plans to build a wall about two metres high and 500 metres long, made of rocks contained by wire mesh, said reports citing TEPCO officials.

The wall would be built at a height of about 10 metres above sea level and be designed to resist a wave generated by an 8-magnitude quake - smaller than the monster wave triggered by the 9-magnitude quake in March.

TEPCO will also set up air ventilation machines with filters at the reactor one turbine building in order to pave the way for workers to re-enter the site where radiation is now too high, reports said.

The operator also said it plans to hire more staff with training in the nuclear industry to share the burden, and the radiation exposure, of the roughly 1000 workers currently tackling the crisis.

Japan raised the maximum exposure level for male nuclear emergency workers to 250 millisieverts a year, up from 100 millisieverts previously, amid the current atomic crisis, the world's worst since Chernobyl 25 years ago.

Link -
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/japan-plans-tsunami-wall-at-nucle...
=============================================
A few observations -
1) It seems there may be a comprehension problem here?
TEPCO failed to build their sea walls high enough initially at Fukushima, to allow for what had been previously experienced.

Then, they failed to upgrade the size of those Fukushima sea walls, following a 30 metre tsunami that hit Japan back in 1993.

Then, Fukushima is wiped out by a Tsunami estimated between 10-38 metres.

Now, TEPCO are going to build an extra 2 metre high wall at 10 metres above sea level, which in all likelihood will still be lower than the wave that just knocked out Fukushima???

2) Is there any suggestion that other Japanese Nuclear plants, which are also on the coast, will get upgraded sea walls?
No!

Can I just say in respect of 1 & 2, that TEPCO, THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT & MOST INTERNATIONAL GOVERNMENTS, JUST DON'T GET IT,

they are all (or almost all) into things, other than the proper protection & the best long term interests, of the Public!!!

3) Japan raised the maximum exposure level for male nuclear emergency workers to 250 millisieverts, from 100 millisieverts.

Q.On what scientic basis has that move been made?
A. Necessity!

Hayden James wrote on May 2^nd, 2011 at 7:43pm:


Hayden, could you repost your comment in English, please?

perceptions_now wrote on May 2^nd, 2011 at 4:37pm:


Well the limit for radiation workers in Australia is as low as possible, but no more than 50mSV in a year. There are also limits for 5 years.

Well, the risk of raising the exposure limit to 250 mSv has been quantified. This ISCORS publication provides some cancer risk rates for exposure to different substances:
http://www.iscors.org/doc/RiskTEDE.pdf

The question is whether it's acceptable or not.

As a ballpark figure, the morbidity risk is about 0.02 per Sievert. At one Sievert exposure, one in every 50 people would contract cancer as a result of the exposure.  At  0.25 Sv, it would be about 1 in 200.

Please note that I'm not defending the decision - just providing some information that might be useful.