Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Environment & Energy

In reply to the discussion: TEPCO Rose [View all]

PamW

(1,825 posts)
24. But you need to be an engineer...
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 10:58 AM
Feb 2013

Octafish,

But you need to be an engineer to evaluate this properly.

I've heard this from others; "I saw this with my own eyes, and there must have been tons of radioactive material released..."

What you saw was mostly tons of structural material from the plant released. That's where it helps to be an engineer or scientist. Because you are not an engineer or scientist, you don't know what fraction, if any; of that material that you saw dispersed was radioactive. For all you know, 100% of the radioactive material could be safely locked away inside the inverted light-bulb containment and you saw a bunch of structural material from the building around it dispersed.

There's no way anyone can make a proper assessment of how much radioactivity was released if they don't know what parts of the plant are radioactive and what parts are not.

So I categorically REJECT your assertion that you don't need to be a nuclear engineer to make an accurate assessment. Without knowing what is radioactive and what is not; you may have just seen a bunch of structural concrete from the outer building dispersed which is not radioactive.

You have to understand that good scientists and engineers with the national labs were tasked by the President and Congress to get them the best possible analysis of the consequences; and that is the information that I have passed along.

PamW

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

TEPCO Rose [View all] Octafish Feb 2013 OP
What "murder of 8 billion people" are you talking about? wtmusic Feb 2013 #1
I imagine that refers to plutonium exposure. Octafish Feb 2013 #2
Sounds like the seabirds are healthy. wtmusic Feb 2013 #3
According to your way of thinking, wtmusic, plutonium must be good for you. Octafish Feb 2013 #4
Is that what passes for logic these days? FBaggins Feb 2013 #8
Fantastic catch! Octafish Feb 2013 #11
What about him/her? FBaggins Feb 2013 #12
Lady Barbara Judge is the subject of the post. Do you have anything to add about her? Octafish Feb 2013 #13
She's the subject of the thread... not the post. FBaggins Feb 2013 #18
Thanks. Very astute observation, FBaggins. Octafish Feb 2013 #29
This is where EDUCATION is needed.. PamW Feb 2013 #34
I like education Thanks Pam RobertEarl Feb 2013 #35
Spontaneous fission. PamW Feb 2013 #36
Turbine steam was in direct contact with the MOX fuel? RobertEarl Feb 2013 #37
Actually... PamW Feb 2013 #40
Tell us what you think of this, Pam RobertEarl Feb 2013 #41
Sure.... PamW Feb 2013 #43
Plutonium Pam RobertEarl Feb 2013 #44
I've looked... PamW Feb 2013 #46
Denying science again, aren't you, Pam? Yep. RobertEarl Feb 2013 #49
I don't doubt the Lithuaninan scientists.. PamW Feb 2013 #51
Bravo. wtmusic Feb 2013 #38
Pam sure made this clear RobertEarl Feb 2013 #39
You need to cool a reactor.. PamW Feb 2013 #42
Wow, Pam. RobertEarl Feb 2013 #45
Again... PamW Feb 2013 #47
Another profound statement RobertEarl Feb 2013 #50
I'm glad you AGREE!! PamW Feb 2013 #48
She's not suggesting they are thinking about re-starting parts of the Dai-ichi plant is she? AtheistCrusader Feb 2013 #5
Her hiring may be a PR move of the first stank rather than as a professional fixer-upper. Octafish Feb 2013 #6
K&R RobertEarl Feb 2013 #7
Nuclear war is crazy. Nuclear weapons are crazy. Nuclear power is crazy. Octafish Feb 2013 #9
There's tons spread around the world WITHOUT the bunkers. PamW Feb 2013 #10
That paper was published in 2002. It's a good bet there's a lot more plutonium now. Octafish Feb 2013 #14
WRONG!!! WRONG!!! WRONG!!! Everything you said was 100% WRONG!!! PamW Feb 2013 #15
Uhhh, Pam? You do know this, right? RobertEarl Feb 2013 #16
I hope she doesn't know it... FBaggins Feb 2013 #19
Hey, ya seen #4 RobertEarl Feb 2013 #20
Another straw man? FBaggins Feb 2013 #21
Building #4 has crumbled RobertEarl Feb 2013 #23
WRONG AGAIN!!! PamW Feb 2013 #25
There are TONS of spent MOX (PLUTONIUM and URANIUM!!!) outside that core in the spent fuel pools. Octafish Feb 2013 #32
Another thread you should review FBaggins Feb 2013 #33
You're kidding, right? FBaggins Feb 2013 #26
Self-righteous anti-nukes. PamW Feb 2013 #28
You'll get a kick out of today's Dilbert FBaggins Feb 2013 #30
I'll have to send this to my colleague.. PamW Feb 2013 #31
YES - volatile materials PamW Feb 2013 #22
Thank you for straightening me out, PamW. Octafish Feb 2013 #17
But you need to be an engineer... PamW Feb 2013 #24
Scientifically - I agree with the TEPCO assessment PamW Feb 2013 #27
Lady Barbara Judge to give David J. Rose Memorial Lecture at MIT PamW Feb 2013 #52
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»TEPCO Rose»Reply #24