Two years have passed since Japan nuked the rest of the world
by Lucas W. Hixon (website)
This year, on the second anniversary of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, the author would like to pose the following questions, and invite the reader to do the same.
The Fukushima Disaster is old news… right?
Nuclear power plants are not dirty bombs… right?
Fukushima is no Chernobyl… right?
Radiation from Fukushima Daiichi didn’t affect any other nations… right?
...
It has also been popular for pro-nuclear lobbyists to promote the idea that the release at Fukushima Daiichi was not equal to or greater than Chernobyl, and even more, that the potential source release was never on a scale comparable to the 1986 Soviet nuclear disaster.
At Chernobyl, the radiation source was confined to the inventory of one reactor, and by using data provided by a 2000 UNSCEAR report to establish the core source at Chernobyl, we can compare it to the Fukushima Daiichi source term as provided in the Stohl report released in 2012.
...
| Combined Cesium 137 Inventory | |||
| Unit 1 | 461 PBq | 4.61 x 1017 | > 1,000% greater than Chernobyl |
| Unit 2 | 708 PBq | 7.08 x 1017 | > 240% greater than . Chernobyl |
| Unit 3 | 655 PBq | 6.55 x 1017 | > 225% greater than Chernobyl |
| Unit 4 | 1,110 PBq | 1.11 x 1018 | > 380% greater than Chernobyl |
| Reactors and SFPs | 2,934 PBq | 2.93 x 1018 | > 1,000% greater than Chernobyl |
...
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please, be reasonably respectful when making comments. I do not tolerate in particular sexism, racism nor homophobia. The author reserves the right to delete any abusive comment.
Comment moderation before publishing is... ON