Highest Yet: Radiation inside Reactor No. 1 drywell rises to 250 Sieverts per hour

Published: June 4th, 2011 at 6:53 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
88 comments


Radiation dose, Unit 1 nuclear power plant Hukushima, atmc.jp, June 4, 2011:

See also: 4,000 millisieverts per hour detected at No. 1 reactor building

Published: June 4th, 2011 at 6:53 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
88 comments

Related Posts

  1. Radiation inside Reactor No. 1 drywell hits new high of 251 Sieverts per hour June 12, 2011
  2. Highest radiation dose yet at Reactor No. 1 — 204 Sieverts per hour in drywell May 25, 2011
  3. Now over 260 Sieverts per hour inside Reactor No. 1 drywell June 12, 2011
  4. Japan switches measurements: Reactor No. 1 drywell, not suppression chamber, now at 192 Sieverts per hour May 24, 2011
  5. Off the Chart: 225 Sieverts per hour at Reactor No. 1 — Highest radiation dose yet measured May 30, 2011

88 comments to Highest Yet: Radiation inside Reactor No. 1 drywell rises to 250 Sieverts per hour

  • Fap

    Same question again: Why do you make news out of a probably false reading (“instrument failure”)?

    This has not been answered yet, so please respond!


    Report comment

    • steve

      Do you trust the reading of (“instrument failure”) from TEPCO? It should say (“TEPCO failure – run for your lives!”)


      Report comment

      • Fap

        That is not the question. I asked why ENENEWS trusts the readings of a failed TEPCO-instrument.

        My guess is: because the readings indicate trouble and generate attention. But maybe i am wrong and the readings are indeed somewhat helpful for understanding whats going on. But i don’t see that.


        Report comment

        • cossack55

          Don’t think Enenews made any claims. They report news, it is up to you to perform due diligence on that news. Trust no one.


          Report comment

        • SteveMT

          TEPCO is the only source for these readings whether they are accurate or not. What else can enenews do but report what TEPCO says?
          Enenews posts the reports here, and we vet this information.


          Report comment

    • radegan

      Look at the graph – Is the corium is going in and out of fission, and that’s why it rises and drops? When fission is occurring the Sieverts soar?


      Report comment

    • kx

      The reality is that reading is a best case scenario given by tepco data, probably its worst, when it drops to 0 you know the hardware finally failed


      Report comment

    • U235P239

      Seriously … who gives a shit what the readings are inside the drywell … it’s completely irrelevant.
      The readings that everybody should be demanding, are the ones that directly effect people subjected to the fallout from this clusterfuck.


      Report comment

  • Maa

    Something tells me that Tepco are dividing all the actual radiation by 10. So 250sv could possibly mean much higher readings. Quote from a website “The radiation levels at Chernobyl were of the order of 30000 roentgens per hour near the plant. 30000 roentgens is 3579 sieverts”


    Report comment

    • Maa

      One question. If chernobyl managed to hit 3579 sieverts, how much will Fukushima be? Will it give out the same or more depending on the size of it. If Fukushima has at least 50 times more nuclear materials than Chernobly, Will it be capable of hitting 3578 * 50 = 178900 sieverts?


      Report comment

  • irradiated californian

    i sort of notice that only things like this get attention. when the readings drop, people here tend to be biased and say ‘oh they are lying’ or ‘the instrument failed, don’t trust the reading’, yet when it is high, everybody jumps all over it. i guess because it is more believable that the reading would be higher than believed, but even if that is the case…why totally change the tune when it is lower?


    Report comment

    • Pensacola Tiger

      It’s called confirmation bias.

      “Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency for people to favor information that confirms their preconceptions or hypotheses regardless of whether the information is true.”

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias


      Report comment

      • Call Me Shark

        Posting headlines at this website is like throwing blood to sharks — not to suggest the blood is fake, of course.

        If TEPCO said “the sky is blue,” then I would reply “that’s a dirty lie” — because it probably is.

        Not everyone is a scientist nor an intellectual giant. Some of us, in my opinion, are ordinary people. We boo and hiss at TEPCO because they’re greedy, lying, murdering sons of bitches.

        It’s a ritual — I admit — like cheering for the good guy (humankind) and hissing at the villian (nuclear power).

        Impartial discussions belong in school, but this is a battlefield. This is for real.

        All I need is a one-word headline: Fukushima, or TEPCO, will do. And then it’s feeding time.


        Report comment

      • Psychologically Speaking

        @Pensacola Tiger — with respect

        Not precisely accurate.

        In the field of psychology, “confirmation bias” is a SUBCONSCIOUS process. When one does it consciously, it’s merely “taking sides.”

        If “confirmation bias” means “to choose a side and stand your ground,” then I’ve got enough to spare you some.


        Report comment

      • Studies That I've Read

        @Pensacola Tiger
        Many study psychology to cure whatever ails them, according to the studies that I’ve read.


        Report comment

        • here is Your reply

          Pensacola Tiger
          “Many study psychology to cure whatever ails them, according to the studies that I’ve read.”

          And many attempt to turn psychology to fit their own purposes. Some refer to themselves as the Tiger. And if asked if those attributes are evidence of “ailing”, they refuse to answer?

          Failing may be applied to those, as well, as Psychologically Speaking explained to you.

          “In the field of psychology, “confirmation bias” is a SUBCONSCIOUS process. When one does it consciously, it’s merely “taking sides.””

          For your instance, if you had been assigned a task to automatically oppose those who have taken a side opposite to your assignment goals, could you be said to be conscious or unconscious?

          There ‘ya go.


          Report comment

      • Poor Daddy

        Which is why Fox news is the preferred source of “information” in the US.


        Report comment

  • milk and cheese

    I, too, would like to know if damaged, irradiated measuring instruments might be giving inaccurate readings. There were reports a few weeks ago that these measuring tools had been compromised. The figure may well be higher.


    Report comment

  • milk and cheese

    250 Sieverts per hour is instant death four or five times over.


    Report comment

  • Icone

    I believe the suppression chamber measurements are the instrument failure, not the drywall measurements. My 2 cents.


    Report comment

  • roller

    Nobody knows what these figures mean. Where is the data taken? Why only once per day? Is it a median value? What kind of instrument failure are they talking about? The results could still be valid in spite of the failure. Especially because ALL of these instruments are designated as failures, even at #5 and #6. My guess is that they cannot go out and verify the sensors are working correctly, so they say they all failed – they don’t know which ones are ok and which ones aren’t.


    Report comment

    • irradiated californian

      good point.


      Report comment

    • Fap

      Yeah, but why post them here then?

      The problem is: If i (as a complete amateur) read about those data here i think that there are maybe some kind of experts behind this site that have a reason for posting it. So i think, if they post it, it must have some relevance.

      That’s because i think mainstream media does it allright, when they don’t write about those “news”. It’s pointless scaremongering as far at i can tell.

      But in fact i can’t tell anything, thats why i still hope to get some expert’s explanation how those readings can be interpreted and i keep asking.


      Report comment

      • Fap

        To make it short:

        ENENEWS: If you know what those readings mean, please explain it!

        If you don’t know, please stop posting them!


        Report comment

        • youb

          @Flap : as a news agregator, ENENEWS won’t explain anything to you… just not their job. And i think you’re wrong asking them not to publish TEPCO repports while they belong to be so. You want more accurate and deep informations about what’s going on there, better take a look at :
          For général information, Fairewind associates videos are easy to understand
          For more technical things , physicsforums.com and his related forum part (Japan earthquake : nuclear plants).


          Report comment

        • U235P239

          Listen moron …. It is not the function of a news site to suddenly become experts on the subject matter they present …. get it ?
          If you want to know what the readings mean, phone Tepco and ask them … they released the data.


          Report comment

          • Fap

            So why don’t they post astrological readings or something like that? Because they are irrelevant and it’s their job to decide which information is relevant. Get it, moron?


            Report comment

          • Heart of the Rose

            @FAP..The JOB of this site ..is nothing more or less than the owner wants to take on.
            This site is a hot news aggregate.
            The comment section is nothing more than that..a comment section.
            The contributors have no obligation to the public other than they take on.
            The posters CHOOSE to be helpful to themselves and others,,by working on a scientific consensus as to the event and consequences.
            The comment section is not a research group.
            Most will encourage individual research..so others will not go around ..complaining they were misled.
            Chill….


            Report comment

          • extra knight

            @ Fap

            your whiny, irrelevant, opaque criticisms does not change the validity of the data, the accuracy of the data, the accuracy of news reports, nor does it stop reckless disinformation and expediient, specious misinformation from being created and casually distributed by big box media outlets.


            Report comment

      • Steven

        @Fap

        Unless the instrument has completely failed to the point of spurious positives and negatives, then any indication of a rise in radioactivity – no matter how far out of callibration – is significant. The scale may be unknown, but going up is quite different to stable, or going down.


        Report comment

        • Fap

          That seems quite reasonable. Thanks.


          Report comment

          • radegan

            What’s reasonable is what Gunderson said – the fuel is going critical, heats up, then gets too hot and shuts down – in cycles. Look at the graph – that is a cycle.


            Report comment

          • misitu

            Radegan: this reminds me of the Tokaimura incident. When the next bucket of uranyl nitrate went in the tank, a criticality occurred. Until they figured out what to do, the criticality kept switching off and on.

            This was because, as the criticality headed the water towards boiling, voids formed and the moderating power of water was lost, killing the chain reaction locally; then the water cooled and moderation was reestablished with consequent recriticality.

            If the readings are to be believed, this may be a similar process.


            Report comment

          • Fallout Man!

            Thanks Misitu, Radegan and Steven, those explanations sound reasonable.


            Report comment

          • charlie

            I think that I can shed some light on the on-again, off-again nature of thecriticality.
            A similar phenomenon plagued early test reactors in the 1940s, called “poisoning” of the reactor…
            The splitting of uranium or plutonium in a chain reaction leads to the production of iodine 135, with a half-life of about 9 hours.
            The iodine then breaks down into Xenon 135.
            Xenon 135 is a potent neutron absorber, even better than cadmium.
            The Xenon 135 absorbs neutrons and (temporarily) ends the chain reaction, until it’s exhausted and then the cycle begins again.


            Report comment

      • roller

        Basically, nothing means anything. Quantitative measurements under these conditions are dubious. Even if TEPCO did this under laboratory conditions, I would not believe them. Proper measurements always tell you where when how who why what and in which direction and under which conditions. Showing a number doesn’t really cut it. And driving around in the countryside holding Geiger counters here and there won’t tell you much either. The “experts” don’t know because this is a completely new situation. They know meltdowns only from simulations. And nuclide release like this and distribution in nature is not understood. It’s a complete non-linear self-accelerating catastrophe on all fronts. But they need something to work with, so they work with this.

        ENENEWS are obviously a bunch of panicmongers who hurl themselves onto any piece of bad news. PANIC, though, IS JUSTIFIED AND NECESSARY. All you really need is to see nuclear reactor buildings blowing up in fiery detonations and you know enough already. You don’t need to know about further measurements. You know the stuff it out there and is leaking out of this pile of junk shown on the webcam.


        Report comment

        • misitu

          Dear roller,

          (1)
          there are some so called human beings who were away gossipping when empathy was being given out and can only understand numbers

          (2)
          this is the world’s biggest worst catastrophe of all time and it is our god given right and duty to use our brains to try to appreciate what is happening in the best way we can

          (3)
          I hope that helps you with your focus

          Sincerely
          Misitu


          Report comment

        • Fallout Man!

          Enenews has been very helpful in tracking this man made disaster and exposing the Nuke industry for what it is. A way of sucking money out of people. No nuke plant is built for economic reasons, only political reasons.

          There have been recent news reports of the CIA boasting that they developed software so that each of their call centre style operators can manage a horde of untraceable reasonable sounding identities to post on forums like this to influence public opinion. No doubt large firms like TEPCO and other governments will have teams of people doing the same.

          Make no mistake. This very helpful site has done the world a service, and some of the links posted in comments have been very useful as well.

          I have no doubt this site will come under attack from PR guys trying to muddy the waters. The Nuke industry has also boasted that it learned a lot from the gulf oil disaster in “managing opinion”.

          So called “Trolls” are a big problem, and government’s and the nuke industry can afford to employ small armies of them to post bogus posts to important forums such as this.


          Report comment

      • Museonit

        I saw the same kind of comments during the gulf oil catastrophe on the boards of theoildrum.com Trolls will be Trolls!


        Report comment

  • Darth

    Here is a damning account of the nuclear industry. RUN FOR YOUR LIVES…

    “GE Nuclear Inspector And Whistleblower Kei Sugaoka Speaks Out About Fukushima , GE & Obama.

    General Electric nuclear plant inspector Kei Sugaoka was one of the inspectors at the Fukushima Daiichi plant in 2000. He noticed a crack in the steam dryer which he videotaped. He was later ordered by TEPCO to edit this part of the tape which is illegal in the United States. He went public and some TEPCO managers were fired. He thought that things would change but they have not. Additionally as a result of being a whistleblower he was also fired by General Electric and has been struggling to get the truth out about these dangerous plants. This interview was done on May 5, 2011.”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNAWJNa-wsY

    @7 minutes he begins to talk about R4 at Fukushima

    @16 Shroud crack – TEPCO & Government are a hand and glove relationship. It is no different than the NRC and the US government.

    @16:30 Obama wants to give more money to build nuke plants. Obama was brought out by Illinois nuclear power plants – even Hillary Clinton brought that out. Illinois is mostly run by electricity generated by nuclear power.

    @24 I said to GE, after they picked on Jane Fonda recently, – your next memorial is the Fukushima memorial. You bring good things to life. Leuren Moret predicted it in 2004 – BINGO – she hit it.

    @26 Reactors get old, brittle after so many (40) years. Yet they have extended licenses another 20 years.

    @40 Governor of Fukushima in 2003 smeared and lost his 6 times elected office because he was against using French made MOX at Fukushima.


    Report comment

    • wanted to mention. I remember when we were all warned about the fukushima reactors in 2004. For some reason it terrified me years earlier.

      I assume its safe to say it was all for good reason. I am very deeply concerned in the events to come in the next few weeks.


      Report comment

    • We Want Facts

      Your breakdown of this interview sounds fascinating … but it seems to have been REMOVED from every source I’ve checked ?! What’s up with that …. how can we view this?


      Report comment

    • misitu

      I still need to find what these monsters are built on, unless someone would like to get there first. We need a civil engineer and/or a soil scientist.

      Proving the structures basically unsafe in terms a building inspector could take to court would be an excellent start to a campaign, I believe


      Report comment

  • Ken Nohe

    It is indeed very difficult to understand these readings especially since they cannot be corroborated.
    If real, they would indeed indicate that fission is on-going on and off. Not a very good omen for the next phase of the clean-up.
    The frightening thing is that the ratio of Iodine-131 to Cesium-137 is not going down as expected (due to the difference of half-lives). This would tend to confirm the suspicion of on-going fission although the origin is not clear.
    Again, as long as we cannot get any closer to the reactors due to high radiations, we won’t know for sure what is going on and work, any significant work will be indefinitely postponed. This is the major difference with Chernobyl and what may eventually make this catastrophe worse in the end.
    In this respect, one recent development is the proposal from retired employees of Tepco to do this dangerous job. It sounds terrible at first, but thinking about it, it may in the end be the only solution. Dreadful, but they may help avoid an even worse outcome. I think it will be a week or two to discuss the ethical aspect of this but in the end this will be the real first step towards a resolution.


    Report comment

  • Flapdoodle

    I see no reason to question the up/down pattern in the graph since it matches what we see on live cam, bursts of steam/smoke and occasional flashes of light.


    Report comment

    • So what did you make of all the manufactured reports by the iaea between march and may? They too had graphs… Even though they were fabricated to create an illusion of non existant meltdown…

      could this be a trend???

      I for one will always believe anything tepco says…
      sarcasm… extreme sarcasm detected…


      Report comment

    • Steven

      A cyclic pattern of criticality as predicted by Mr Gunderson. He does seem to know what he’s talking about.


      Report comment

  • jump-ball

    If the 50 story office building near me is engulfed in flames, and the fire department starts issuing varying levels of thermal intensity, well, it’s time to call in a new fire department, and for those nearby to move away from the vicinity.


    Report comment

  • roller

    In my opinion it won’t be bad enough to make Northern Japan a post apocalyptic wasteland. Most people will remain there and just take the disease. For the next 200 000 years. And we will take it with them because it will spread over the whole world, concentrated and recycled in organisms, human beings included, over and over again.


    Report comment

  • WindorSolarPlease

    As of right now, I don’t trust any readings.
    I feel that these readings, only give a little of an idea what is happening.

    Some idea of this disaster, is better than nothing. I would rather see numbers, than not.

    I believe we are all in a big mess.
    Between Japan’s disaster and the gulf, our oceans are so contaminated.

    It’s like we are lunch meat, that’s sandwiched between two breads that’s dipped in oil and radiation, with a topping of corexit.
    How is this not going to effect us?

    Like Ollie said: “Well, here’s another nice mess you’ve gotten me into.”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sICVWwI3LE


    Report comment

    • Nevadan

      I was thinking the same as you. A little idea of the ups and downs may give us clues to glean that they don’t mean to convey. Also, watching their mind games helps us get inside their heads a little and that is another way to gain info by seeing how they are trying to manipulate public perception.


      Report comment

  • Red Mercury

    Looks like the feudal hive mind that is Japan has downside that is going to largely destroy them and erode life in the region for many generations to come. In the short term we need to prepare for refugees from Honshu.


    Report comment

  • Yes! How can we get refugees out? Is anyone doing this? (and if they could leave, would anyone want to come to the States with all the problems we have ? ) I would happily take a family, I’m sure we all have space. What about friends and famiiy? How can we get them out??


    Report comment

    • Bread+Butter

      May I ask: do the Japanese WANT to be “rescued”?
      As one of the richest countries in the world I think money is not the issue. I’d be also more than willing to help, but again the Japanese “losing the face”-mentality comes into play. I think many of them would feel humiliated, As bizarre as it may seem for us.


      Report comment

  • shockwave

    Is there anyone else has noticed the date of this graph is “Mar 15″, not “May 15″??????????????????????????

    I have noticed this from this graph appeared and have no idea what is going on.

    WTF

    IMO, the readings are at least a month ago


    Report comment

  • Zaneinvernon

    I think we should at least get the children out of Fukushima Prefecture. As a parent I think most would allow their children for a year to be billited abroad. Is their a program or anything of this nature occuring? Does anybody know? I can host 2.


    Report comment

  • Jim

    The point is TEPCO and Japan have lied from the beginning, to the world and their own people. The is no real truth about this horrific incident. One cannot really speculate how high the radiation is, we do know they are in full meltdown.


    Report comment

  • James

    Anyone who has any engineering knowledge at all knew right from the beginning that all the temp and pressure data was fabricated.

    First off, there was no power to the facility for a few weeks. Second, no instrumentation could have survived the explosions we saw.

    All the temp, pressure, radiation readings, water levels and predictions about whether the fuel has melted and where it is contained are 100% guesstimates, and have been since the beginning.


    Report comment

    • Fallout Man!

      Tepco admitted at one point that their radiation ‘monitoring’ early on was done from a car racing past the main gate with the windows wound up. No doubt they still divided the readings by 5, as per standard operating procedure established by the Soviets at Chernobyl.


      Report comment

  • Pensacola Tiger

    A good question is raised over on Radiation Safety Philippines:

    WTH is going on in the reactor #1 building?

    There is also an informative radiation map of reactor #1.


    Report comment

  • midwestguy

    im gonna take a wild stab in the dark and say the readings are somewhat accurate. why? the graph they are using only goes up to 300Sv more than likely the sensors used to dectect radiation were designed to go up to 300Sv. so i dont see how they could be damaged by being in an enviroment that is within the detection equipments operating range. who the hell makes a detector that has a range up to 300Sv but cannot work in that enviroment without failure?

    Maa – you math is way off
    100 rads = 1 sievert
    30,000 rads = 300 sieverts, not 3,579 sieverts.


    Report comment

  • stockdude

    Please read this article from March 26, from an Oxford Expert. Telling people to “stop running away from radiation”

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-12860842

    I found his email address through a web search, here it is. I suggest that as many people as possible email him and ask him if he still feels the same way.

    wade.allison@keble.ox.ac.uk


    Report comment

    • Fallout Man!

      Wow. That’s just evil. I watched a documentary about Chernobyl on line (either BBC or Discovery, a big name anyway). They interviewed the Russian General in charge of the clean up, and Gorbachev himself. According to the latest estimates pulling together over 500 slavic language research studies, compiled by academics in the Ukraine, the radiation from Chernobyl killed approximately 1 million people over the 20 years since the disaster. According the Russian General organizing the clean up the Russians used about 800,000 workers in the clean up operation and at the time of the interview (20 years later) one third of those workers were either dead or cripples.

      The Russians were surprisingly frank and open about the disaster after they had cleaned it up. When the Russians met with the IAEA they estimated how many people would die from the radiation by basing their estimates on Hiroshima. The russians estimated that they had released 10 times the radiation Hiroshima did and the yanks had publicly said Hiroshima’s radiation killed 4,000 over time. So the Russians estimated it would kill 40,000. The IAEA told them to shut up, divided the figure by 10, and published that. I saw Hans Blix, then head of the IAEA interviewed. When asked about how they came up with their estimates he not only looked a guilty man, he looked downright evil.
      Since the UN has published their lies originally, the Nuke industry can simply trot out the old lies, despite the fact that more facts have come to light since then. Don’t be fooled, all radiation is dangerous. It damages your genetic code, and that damage is passed down through the generations. However, internal radiation, by ingesting fallout particles is particularly serious.
      That genetic damage is with us today. Enenews posted a link to a photographers photobook on Chernobyl. He showed many many crippled children with the most horrible deformities. Cancer is only one small part of the damage. In that doco interviewing clean up…


      Report comment

    • Fallout Man!

      One more thing to note StockDude. At Hiroshima the US banned any research into the health effects of radiation at Hiroshima for 4 years after the bombing. At Chernobyl there was a ban on research for 6 years. However, some soviet era documents were revealed when the soviet union collapsed showing many more workers died quickly and directly from radiation than the official IAEA figures revealed at the time. From memory over 300 got essentially cooked the clean up. Remember, latest figures are 1 million killed over the first 20 year period. An estimated 180,000 extra cancer deaths from fall out drifting to North America as well. Note the current disaster is much closer to the USA and will have an even worse effect.
      Internal radiation emitters (fallout particles ingested or breathed in) continue to irradiate cells near them for a long time. They are very , very dangerous. Radiation damages the genetic code. The damage is passed on down he generations. Its serious, and should be avoided. The lying scum who wrote that propaganda article will not be going anywhere near Fukushima, Chernobyl or 3 mile Island. They are laughing at those who believe their lies.


      Report comment

    • Bread+Butter

      Done.
      “you got mail”

      Thanks for sharing!


      Report comment

    • misitu

      Thanks for the pointer.

      Would anyone like to see what I sent him?
      Read on…..

      Dear Wade Allison
      Someone recently brought the above to my attention. I have read it carefully.

      I have a couple of topics on which I would be interested to have your considered opinion. Both of them relate to an analysis of the risks to the general public as part of the biosphere. To me, relevant analyses have not taken place.

      The first risk I want to ask you about is the danger to future generations of stored used nuclear fuel. Much of said fuel will remain active for years, centuries, or more. My concern is that while the quantity of this material inevitably increases there is no solution to the problem of storing it, without prejudice to life forms, during the effective decay period. Recent events in Japan have demonstrated risks to health from what now turns out to be unplanned improvisations to storage procedures.

      The second risk I want to ask you about is the danger to the environment of nuclear power generators built in unsafe areas. It has been announced that the damage to Fukushima Dai-ichi 1, 2, and 3 occurred before the tsunami arrived. There can be little doubt that the buildings themselves were strong enough, but the pipes and connections would have easily been severed were the ground underneath to have been fluidised. I have identified several sites on the coast of Japan where NPGs are built on what the JGS labels Holocene Reclaimed Land, i.e. dredged sand. The sand and water mix is easily fluidised in seismic events, as the 1906 San Francisco earthquake demonstrated. I am interested in working on this hypothesis further. I suspect from your article that you may already know the answer and can provide me, if you have time, with a reference or two. I would very much like to reassure myself that there are no more liquefaction events waiting to happen next time a tremor moves a NPG.

      I trust that your aim to reassure the worried public, as evidenced in your…


      Report comment

      • misitu

        … Dear Wade Allison

        I trust that your aim to reassure the worried public, as evidenced in your article, will encourage you to share with me your detailed knowledge that the risks I have noted above have in fact been fully analysed and included in NPG standards.

        Best regards


        Report comment

  • jcrabb

    Graphs for all of the reactors have instrument failure on them.


    Report comment

  • Fallout Man!

    From memory radioactive Cesium is the isotope that tends to cause the most defects, as opposed to outright death. This is the “harmless” radiation that Wade Ellison was talking about.

    http://inmotion.magnumphotos.com/essay/chernobyl

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fCCVU4y7oE


    Report comment

  • charlie

    I think that I can shed some light on the on-again, off-again nature of thecriticality.
    A similar phenomenon plagued early test reactors in the 1940s, called “poisoning” of the reactor…
    The splitting of uranium or plutonium in a chain reaction leads to the production of iodine 135, with a half-life of about 9 hours.
    The iodine then breaks down into Xenon 135.
    Xenon 135 is a potent neutron absorbers, even better than cadmium.
    The Xenon 135 absorbs neutrons and (temporarily) ends the chain reaction, until it’s exhausted and then the cycle begins again.


    Report comment

  • Fallout Man!

    One further point to note. I recall (and please do correct me if this one statement is wrong) that when Fukushima blew up the sitting head of the IAEA was a former TEPCO employee. Do you think that might create a bias? Do you think the IAEA will suddenly start telling the truth now when it worked very hard to cover up Chernobyl. Its an industry captured group.


    Report comment

  • NowWhat

    Tepco has stated that their analysis indicates that the core of reactor 1 has totally melted down and that the reactor pressure vessel (RPV) for reactor 1 has been breached. Holes as big as 10 cm have been estimated. Therefore, it’s reasonable to assume that much of the corium is now sitting in the drywall area. Furthermore, there is other major evidence that periodic criticality is occurring at the plant. Under these circumstances I would think that readings such as those shown for the drywall are to be expected. Last, there is the other report about 4 Sieverts (a new all time high) being measured in the reactor 1 building. This would be outside primary containment and would be what one would expect if radiation levels were rising to very high levels within said containment. In summary all the evidence sure seems to be telling a consistent story.


    Report comment

  • FTG2000

    Maybe using the inverse square root formula , if we know there 4 sv/h in the building and if we know the average distance from the building to the core , one could evaluate the amount inside ?


    Report comment