[ RadSafe ] Philippines Carnage Direct Result of Fukushima Radiation
Richard L. Hess
lists at richardhess.com
Thu Jan 30 11:38:32 CST 2014
On 2014-01-30 9:42 AM, Tim Hart wrote:
> Down through the years I have watched this list with morbid curiosity
> for the various stories and discussions about the anti nuclear
> activist and their ilk. In general my impressions on this topic have
> been formed by the discussions held on this list server (okay I don't
> get out much). I am not one to challenge others usually because it
> tends to make me a little uncomfortable; I try to avoid confrontation
> as much as I can. Just recently my son sent me a link that he had
> stumbled on to, that he found quite disturbing:
> My son is probably better educated on these topics than most and has a
> very strong sense of right and wrong. He asked me how to respond to
> this very poorly informed and "fanatical," (his word), post. I am at a
> loss when faced by such misguided insanity, so my question to the
> group is this; How would you counsel your teenage son or daughter to
> Tim Hart
> US Navy (none of this is their opinion or is endorsed by them in any way)
> magspidy at gmail.com
> (757) 329-3933
As a parent of two boys 19 and 20, I care deeply about what they learn
and do on the Web.
My advice to my sons would be don't get involved with this p---ing match
on YouTube...you have better things to do with your time.
I feel especially comfortable in saying that as the most recent comment
on the video is:
> 6 days ago
> I think you misunderstand the magnitude of the energy that was
> contained within the reactor at the time of the disaster, as well as
> the magnitude of energy needed to heat up the ocean in a significant
> manner. Compare the size of the sun to the size of the Fukushima
> plant. They're both nuclear reactors, and the sun is more efficient.
> If the sun shining on one side of the planet does not invariably
> create catastrophic storms, how can a release of coolant and
> radioactive particles do so? I'm not even challenging the idea that
> heating the ocean would cause a typhoon.?
In Mid-November 2013, my wife and I took a trip to Maui and I had
thought for a bit it might be interesting to take my Geiger counter as I
did to Montana in 2002 after a friend told me to "be careful, I might
end up glowing in the dark" (the lip of the Butte open pit former mine
was the hottest I measured). I also measured a Los Angeles to Chicago
http://www.richardhess.com/rad/lax_chi.jpg (and yes, I know, I should
have used CPM rather than µR).
I decided against it in part because our luggage was limited AND I was
more interested in taking pictures.
On our flight out, I could see the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station
(SONGS) from the air (or what remains of it) and then I could see the
Pacific Ocean... Five hours of the Pacific. Then I imagined how deep it
was... and then I thought about the little speck that was SONGS and how
quickly it faded from view. At that point I decided that I was glad I
had not bothered. Yes, we should avoid pollution and not wantonly
pollute, but I suspect the amount of radiation leached into the Pacific
from all the crustal radioactive materials over this vast area is
probably significantly higher (albeit not a point source) than what
Fukishima has leaked and will leak. (I could be wrong on this--it is
just a gut reaction, not even back-of-envelope calculations.)
So, seriously, tell your son that you can't fight religious convictions
with facts because the zealot will counter with religious, faith-based
arguments. I don't discuss AGW with many of my friends, because they
BEELIEVEEE. I don't believe, but I'm still cautious because conservation
makes sense on many grounds even if AGW is later proven false.
There are many humorous ways of saying this, but I think you get the idea.
Richard L. Hess email: richard at richardhess.com
Aurora, Ontario, Canada http://www.richardhess.com/
Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.
More information about the RadSafe