• Fukushima officially declared as bad as Chernobyl
    154 replies, posted
Saying this is as bad as Chernobyl is like saying a car accident with no fatalities and a car accident with eight fatalities are as bad as each other because the cars were going at the same speed.
Not to start a shitstorm, but i bet all the weeboos are crying right now... ...but i guess everyone is shedding tears for them. :smith:
[QUOTE=Billiam;29121626]Yeah, but if you look at the numbers they're still not as bad as Chernobyl.[/QUOTE] If you read the article you will see that it states it could reach the level of Chernobyl.
[QUOTE=Miskatonic;29121531]Fukushima officially declared as bad as Chernobyl[/QUOTE] [quote=Article]isn't anywhere near the disaster of Chernobyl.[/quote] :raise:
[QUOTE=Mr. Sun;29123676]Its for reasons like this why I am against nuclear energy UNTIL we can WITHOUT A DOUBT have everything under control.[/QUOTE] Bah, in my opinion, Nuclear energy is a complete waste, out of all of the Power generating methods we have all except for two (Wind & Solar) are nothing more than large kettles that boil water. I mean, are you fucking serious?! We create this thing that, if it goes wrong, the shit hit's the fan majorly and it's all so we can boil some fucking water... I cant help but feel that it's primitive in a way.
[QUOTE=madmax678;29125525]Not to start a shitstorm, but i bet all the weeboos are crying right now... ...but i guess everyone is shedding tears for them. :smith:[/QUOTE] Yes.
[QUOTE=Ignyte;29125594]Bah, in my opinion, Nuclear energy is a complete waste, out of all of the Power generating methods we have all except for two (Wind & Solar) are nothing more than large kettles that boil water. I mean, are you fucking serious?! We create this thing that, if it goes wrong, the shit hit's the fan majorly and it's all so we can boil some fucking water... I cant help but feel that it's primitive in a way.[/QUOTE] who gives a shit if it just boils water, it creates energy way better than all the other shitty water boiling methods.
I read the name as "fuck-you shima" and "fuk-oo shima". :crossarms: [editline]12th April 2011[/editline] Was the name not a clue?
[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;29121666]If it's bad as Chernobyl, then there would be a lot of fatalities for the past few weeks for many of the people living near, or around that plant had it gone through the same course as Chernobyl did.[/QUOTE] The main reason for the high deathtoll created by Chernobyl wasn't the radiation level. It was how slow the management was to react and how they tried to keep quite about it, and thus failed to evacuate Pripyat and the other surrounding cities in time.
[QUOTE=SexyDergon;29125613]Yes.[/QUOTE] Bet my ex is crying now Too fucking bad for him!
Ok, whoever said that 100µSv/h is 0.1 S/h wrong. 100µSv/h = 0.100mSv/h (or millisievert per hour) = 0.000100Sv/h Large comparison of radiation: [media]http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/4400/radiationw.png[/media] Even with that being said, 100µSv/h is really bad, it just isn't 1000 times worse right now. The 100µSv/h is "approximately the does rate for protective measures to be necessary" when exposed to it.
[QUOTE=Psygo;29125687]who gives a shit if it just boils water, it creates energy way better than all the other shitty water boiling methods.[/QUOTE] I completely agree, but at least gas, coal or what-have-you cant leak radiation or have severe effects on a wide spread effect if shit hits the fan at the plant. The worst that could really happen would be an explosion at a gas-plant or something.
[QUOTE=Ignyte;29125806]I completely agree, but at least gas, coal or what-have-you cant leak radiation or have severe effects on a wide spread effect if shit hits the fan at the plant. The worst that could really happen would be an explosion at a gas-plant or something.[/QUOTE] Coal power stations release more radioactive material into the atmosphere during normal operation than a nuclear reactor does. Nuclear power is a great idea, the number of incidents involving nuclear power stations is really low compared to other types of power generation. [editline]12th April 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=rampageturke 2;29125212]It was hit with a huge 8.1 earthquake, dozens of aftershocks including other major ones such as yesterdays 7.1, there's only so much you can do aganst earthquakes. The plant itself if 40 years old also[/QUOTE] The earthquake wasn't (and still isn't it seems) the problem, the massive amount of water that flooded the plant was the issue.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heORiZ8l484[/media]
What radioactive material and from coal?! why do I find this hard to beleive
[QUOTE=Ignyte;29126727]What radioactive material and from coal?! why do I find this hard to beleive[/QUOTE] [url]http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/4400/radiationw.png[/url] Top left corner.
Looks like my predictions are becoming true [url]http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1071018-Prepare-for-an-influx-of-Japanese-citizens[/url] I told you guys, But I guess some crap mod took it upon herself to ban me instead because apparently saying something like that is trolling.
[QUOTE=Jsm;29126783][url]http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/4400/radiationw.png[/url] Top left corner.[/QUOTE] The fuck?! This must be researched!
[QUOTE=Lamar;29126910]Looks like my predictions are becoming true [url]http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1071018-Prepare-for-an-influx-of-Japanese-citizens[/url] I told you guys, But I guess some crap mod took it upon herself to ban me instead because apparently saying something like that is trolling.[/QUOTE] Because it's bullshit. Even if the same amount of radiation is released as was in Chernobyl, it's not physically possible for it to cause as much harm as it did there because of the different design of the reactors. [editline]12th April 2011[/editline] It will be much more localised than in Chernobyl.
[QUOTE=Ignyte;29126924]The fuck?! This must be researched![/QUOTE] Burning stuff gives off radiation. Not news at all.
wow, thats amazing. and that chart is quite handy too.
[QUOTE=Turnips5;29126948]Because it's bullshit. Even if the same amount of radiation is released as was in Chernobyl, it's not physically possible for it to cause as much harm as it did there because of the different design of the reactors. [editline]12th April 2011[/editline] It will be much more localised than in Chernobyl.[/QUOTE] People called bullshit, when I made the original post, look whats happening now. I guranteee you it's going to get a lot worse. This unlike Chernobyl is in a highly populated region, oh it's going to be a lot worse than Chernobyl. Children in the future will be reading about Fukushima, I promise that.
[QUOTE=Jsm;29126972]Burning stuff gives off radiation. Not news at all.[/QUOTE] It is to me.
[QUOTE=Mr. Sun;29123676]Its for reasons like this why I am against nuclear energy UNTIL we can WITHOUT A DOUBT have everything under control.[/QUOTE] This disaster happened because of an earthquake. We can't have earthquakes under control.
[QUOTE=Ignyte;29126993]It is to me.[/QUOTE] Even we give off radiation ourself.
[QUOTE=Turnips5;29126948]Because it's bullshit. Even if the same amount of radiation is released as was in Chernobyl, it's not physically possible for it to cause as much harm as it did there because of the different design of the reactors. [editline]12th April 2011[/editline] It will be much more localised than in Chernobyl.[/QUOTE] Doesn't matter how bad the disaster is, people are still going to immigrate not everybody is a nuclear scientist, and when they see "LEVEL 7 MELTDOWN" they're not gonna be like "oh, well."
[QUOTE=blerb;29127352]Doesn't matter how bad the disaster is, people are still going to immigrate not everybody is a nuclear scientist, and when they see "LEVEL 7 MELTDOWN" they're not gonna be like "oh, well."[/QUOTE] you mean emigrate
[QUOTE=Turnips5;29127365]you mean emigrate[/QUOTE] Depends from what side you look at it.
[B]Definition of a scale 7 nuclear incident (the maximum):[/B] Major release of radioactive material with widespread health and environmental effects requiring implementation of planned and extended countermeasures By THAT stupid definition they ARE equal, in terms of damage caused to the environment, they are NO WAY near each other. The International Nuclear Event Scale is a stupid scale which is often used by the media to terrorize the populace. The two main problems with the scale is that it only goes from 1 to 7, but the range of possible nuclear incidents is far greater than that. If an earthquake scale went from 0 (no earthquake) to 1 (earthquake) with no inbetween ratings, every earthquake would be rated a 1 and suddenly the media would say "EARTHQUAKE X REACHED THE DEVASTATING RATING OF 1, SO DID EARTHQUAKE Y, END OF THE WORLD COMES". The other problem is that the scale does not signify in any way the strength or effect of the nuclear accident, just how widespread it will be. A weak nuclear accident on a very windy day in Europe for example could theoretically reach a scale 7 incident. So stop worrying, the media are using terminology that they do not understand.
[QUOTE=mobrockers alt;29127396]Depends from what side you look at it.[/QUOTE] And we're looking at it from Japan's side, so it's emigration.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.