5 ms·

Does anyone else feel like this is slightly overblown? From my perspective it was a localised and relatively limited risk and had fairly obvious and achievable

Does anyone else feel like this is slightly overblown? From my perspective it was a localised and relatively limited risk and had fairly obvious and achievable corrective actions with a relatively good chance of success. It intrigues me that this seems to be perceived as something so calamitous/ risky.

Gare 4y ago
I'd rather live in a country where authorities are overly cautious and transparent than secretive and negligent.
- ekianjo 4y ago
  More like they are likely not telling about the stuff they are doing that is really dangerous.
  - johnchristopher 4y ago
    They are hiding a teapot in orbit.
    - scns 4y ago
      Damn, that was funny, Thanks.
      - johnchristopher 4y ago
        And of course https://m.xkcd.com/1866/ https://m.xkcd.com/1866/
- TomK32 4y ago
  Australia has slipped quite a few places on the last World Press Freedom Index. Let's not forget that friendlyjordies, while also making comedy videos but also making videos on corruption, politicians and the gambiling industry, was targeted by a firebomb and his house burnt down. Luckily he was away and no one at home.
  - stirlo 4y ago
    Right but there is no suggestion the firebombing was linked to any government or regulatory policy/action/initiative. It's simply that he upset organised crime groups. These exist everywhere in the world and theres no suggestion the Australian authorities aren't investigating and trying to bring those responsible to justice.
    - dbuder 4y ago
      It was prob the bikies that are associated with the union - a lot of drug money is washed via real estate development The state politician who set the anti terror squad on friendlyjordies is more concerning from a freedom standpoint
    - sidewndr46 4y ago
      Yes, because an organized crime group would never have a politician involved. That politician also might never mention to said crime group that an investigation might be difficult, ineffective, or simply take a very long time to determine those responsible.
chinathrow 4y ago
Tell that to the driver if the capsule would have been stuck in a tire instead.
MrDresden 4y ago
On the world stage, this is not even a small blip. But the fear of radiation is a deep seated one, cultivated over the last 80 years by constant bombardment (pun intended) of information and media showing the dangers and hazards of runaway nuclear fission.
- flangola7 4y ago
  You have a point but orphan sources are pretty legitimately scary, and have historically caused many horrible deaths and even more (survivable) suffering, often with the victims having no idea what is happening to them. Radiological dangers are uniquely hazardous - bacteria and viruses dry out and die, poisons and acids can be neutralized. Almost every other hazard on Earth can be eradicated with nothing more than a good hot fire. But unstable isotopes answer to no one but time.
  - MrDresden 4y ago
    It may have come accross as I was belittling the seriousness or danger that the capsule poses to those who come into contact with it. That was not my intention. The capsule is incredibly dangerous to anyones health. My point was simply that, from my vantage point, the media coverage and attention that this incident has received is out of proportion to the likely impact that it will have (i.e the danger it poses to people on the world stage, or even on the national stage in Australia). As an example, and again only from my vantage point, the situation with the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station received less direct news coverage focusing on the dangers it would have posed to the whole European continent than it seems this single capsule is receiving. Again, not saying the capsule is not a danger to people. Just agreeing that the attention is out of proportions.
mschuster91 4y ago
> From my perspective it was a localised and relatively limited risk Localized? Yes. But limited? You can't see radiation. The absolute worst case would be someone getting it stuck into a tire or a shoe, spreading radiation everywhere they go.
- puffoflogic 4y ago
  > spreading radiation everywhere they go. Radiation is not "spread" in the manner you are suggesting. The only affect on passers-by would be transient exposure - less than ideal, but not a fatal risk. If the capsule were breached and radioactive material were spread, then that would be a disaster posing actual risk to the public at large.
  - logifail 4y ago
    > Radiation is not "spread" in the manner you are suggesting "[in] 1987 in Goiânia, Brazil [..] a forgotten radiotherapy source was stolen from an abandoned hospital site in the city. It was subsequently handled by many people, resulting in four deaths. About 112,000 people were examined for radioactive contamination and 249 of them were found to have been contaminated" "In the consequent cleanup operation, topsoil had to be removed from several sites, and several houses were demolished. All the objects from within those houses, including personal possessions, were seized and incinerated"[0] That incident would appear to confirm that radiation (from a radioactive source) is able to be "spread". [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident
    - WantonQuantum 4y ago
      In the Wikipedia article it’s clear that the container of the caesium 137 was punctured and the grains of caesium powder were handled by many people and spread on surfaces. That’s just the original source of beta particles being spread around rather than the beta radiation “spreading” in some way.
      - 4y ago
dabiged 4y ago
I think you are missing the context around nuclear anything in Australia. We have no nuclear powerplants. We have no nuclear submarines. Large portions of the country are staunchly against mining uranium. Most people don't know We operate a single nuclear reactor that only produces medical isotopes. There is no nuance on anything nuclear here because it is almost completely absent from the country.
- antihipocrat 4y ago
  I don't disagree that nuclear anything is a big deal, but just wanted remind everyone that the British tested their nuclear bombs in the outback.. and Australia has ordered some nuclear subs.
  - ggm 4y ago
    Nuclear powered subs, there is no intent or request to provide nuclear weapons. It is not unusual for nuclear capable vessels to visit Australia and in the usual "will not confirm or deny" sense nobody is going to speak to visiting vessels with ICBM or tactical nuclear weapons. But the formalism remains: Australian defence forces are not overtly seeking nuclear arms to operate under the Australian flag.
    - chmod600 4y ago
      In the context of this thread, I don't think it's important whether nuclear material is used for weapons or not.
    - dbuder 4y ago
      "Nuclear powered subs, there is no intent or request to provide nuclear weapons" Oh there is intent - enough nukes to end a superpower from the grave is our goal
- defrost 4y ago
  Australia has large Uranium reserves. It was an Australian nuclear scientist (who later became the South Australian Governor) who convinced the USofA that building an atomic weapon was in fact possible. Australia has a reasonable number of people in the International weapons inspection (conventional and atomic) game. Australia performs a significant amount of radiometric surveying. There is no nuance on anything nuclear here (in Australia) because most people choose to remain unaware.
iamtedd 4y ago
"Localised"? Along a route 1400 km long? That's approximately the distance between New York City and Atlanta, GA. Or London, UK to Monaco.
- krisoft 4y ago
  Not in that sense. Localised in the sense that the dangerous zone was limited to a few tens of meters radius, and was unlikely to spread. As opposed to an airborne, or water soluble contamination which can spread to a wide area as the winds or the ground water flows.
  - PeterisP 4y ago
    Given the tiny size of the capsule, it's only dangerous because it's so concentrated. If it would be diluted by spreading to a wide area, it would just slightly raise the background radiation.
  - jon-wood 4y ago
    One of the risks that was believed to exist was that the capsule had fallen onto the road, and could have become embedded in someone's car tire. That would then place the owner of that car within the few tens of meters radius multiple times a day, along with their neighbours, and anyone they park near on a regular basis.
Oxidation 4y ago
I don't think it's much more complex than "nuclear doomsday crisis" gets clicks and sells papers.
trashface 4y ago
Perhaps not. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident

Gare 4y ago

I'd rather live in a country where authorities are overly cautious and transparent than secretive and negligent.

ekianjo 4y ago
More like they are likely not telling about the stuff they are doing that is really dangerous.
- johnchristopher 4y ago
  They are hiding a teapot in orbit.
  - scns 4y ago
    Damn, that was funny, Thanks.
    - johnchristopher 4y ago
      And of course https://m.xkcd.com/1866/ https://m.xkcd.com/1866/
TomK32 4y ago
Australia has slipped quite a few places on the last World Press Freedom Index. Let's not forget that friendlyjordies, while also making comedy videos but also making videos on corruption, politicians and the gambiling industry, was targeted by a firebomb and his house burnt down. Luckily he was away and no one at home.
- stirlo 4y ago
  Right but there is no suggestion the firebombing was linked to any government or regulatory policy/action/initiative. It's simply that he upset organised crime groups. These exist everywhere in the world and theres no suggestion the Australian authorities aren't investigating and trying to bring those responsible to justice.
  - dbuder 4y ago
    It was prob the bikies that are associated with the union - a lot of drug money is washed via real estate development The state politician who set the anti terror squad on friendlyjordies is more concerning from a freedom standpoint
  - sidewndr46 4y ago
    Yes, because an organized crime group would never have a politician involved. That politician also might never mention to said crime group that an investigation might be difficult, ineffective, or simply take a very long time to determine those responsible.

chinathrow 4y ago

Tell that to the driver if the capsule would have been stuck in a tire instead.

MrDresden 4y ago

On the world stage, this is not even a small blip. But the fear of radiation is a deep seated one, cultivated over the last 80 years by constant bombardment (pun intended) of information and media showing the dangers and hazards of runaway nuclear fission.

flangola7 4y ago
You have a point but orphan sources are pretty legitimately scary, and have historically caused many horrible deaths and even more (survivable) suffering, often with the victims having no idea what is happening to them. Radiological dangers are uniquely hazardous - bacteria and viruses dry out and die, poisons and acids can be neutralized. Almost every other hazard on Earth can be eradicated with nothing more than a good hot fire. But unstable isotopes answer to no one but time.
- MrDresden 4y ago
  It may have come accross as I was belittling the seriousness or danger that the capsule poses to those who come into contact with it. That was not my intention. The capsule is incredibly dangerous to anyones health. My point was simply that, from my vantage point, the media coverage and attention that this incident has received is out of proportion to the likely impact that it will have (i.e the danger it poses to people on the world stage, or even on the national stage in Australia). As an example, and again only from my vantage point, the situation with the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station received less direct news coverage focusing on the dangers it would have posed to the whole European continent than it seems this single capsule is receiving. Again, not saying the capsule is not a danger to people. Just agreeing that the attention is out of proportions.

mschuster91 4y ago

> From my perspective it was a localised and relatively limited risk Localized? Yes. But limited? You can't see radiation. The absolute worst case would be someone getting it stuck into a tire or a shoe, spreading radiation everywhere they go.

puffoflogic 4y ago
> spreading radiation everywhere they go. Radiation is not "spread" in the manner you are suggesting. The only affect on passers-by would be transient exposure - less than ideal, but not a fatal risk. If the capsule were breached and radioactive material were spread, then that would be a disaster posing actual risk to the public at large.
- logifail 4y ago
  > Radiation is not "spread" in the manner you are suggesting "[in] 1987 in Goiânia, Brazil [..] a forgotten radiotherapy source was stolen from an abandoned hospital site in the city. It was subsequently handled by many people, resulting in four deaths. About 112,000 people were examined for radioactive contamination and 249 of them were found to have been contaminated" "In the consequent cleanup operation, topsoil had to be removed from several sites, and several houses were demolished. All the objects from within those houses, including personal possessions, were seized and incinerated"[0] That incident would appear to confirm that radiation (from a radioactive source) is able to be "spread". [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident
  - WantonQuantum 4y ago
    In the Wikipedia article it’s clear that the container of the caesium 137 was punctured and the grains of caesium powder were handled by many people and spread on surfaces. That’s just the original source of beta particles being spread around rather than the beta radiation “spreading” in some way.
    - 4y ago

dabiged 4y ago

I think you are missing the context around nuclear anything in Australia. We have no nuclear powerplants. We have no nuclear submarines. Large portions of the country are staunchly against mining uranium. Most people don't know We operate a single nuclear reactor that only produces medical isotopes. There is no nuance on anything nuclear here because it is almost completely absent from the country.

antihipocrat 4y ago
I don't disagree that nuclear anything is a big deal, but just wanted remind everyone that the British tested their nuclear bombs in the outback.. and Australia has ordered some nuclear subs.
- ggm 4y ago
  Nuclear powered subs, there is no intent or request to provide nuclear weapons. It is not unusual for nuclear capable vessels to visit Australia and in the usual "will not confirm or deny" sense nobody is going to speak to visiting vessels with ICBM or tactical nuclear weapons. But the formalism remains: Australian defence forces are not overtly seeking nuclear arms to operate under the Australian flag.
  - chmod600 4y ago
    In the context of this thread, I don't think it's important whether nuclear material is used for weapons or not.
  - dbuder 4y ago
    "Nuclear powered subs, there is no intent or request to provide nuclear weapons" Oh there is intent - enough nukes to end a superpower from the grave is our goal
defrost 4y ago
Australia has large Uranium reserves. It was an Australian nuclear scientist (who later became the South Australian Governor) who convinced the USofA that building an atomic weapon was in fact possible. Australia has a reasonable number of people in the International weapons inspection (conventional and atomic) game. Australia performs a significant amount of radiometric surveying. There is no nuance on anything nuclear here (in Australia) because most people choose to remain unaware.

iamtedd 4y ago

"Localised"? Along a route 1400 km long? That's approximately the distance between New York City and Atlanta, GA. Or London, UK to Monaco.

krisoft 4y ago
Not in that sense. Localised in the sense that the dangerous zone was limited to a few tens of meters radius, and was unlikely to spread. As opposed to an airborne, or water soluble contamination which can spread to a wide area as the winds or the ground water flows.
- PeterisP 4y ago
  Given the tiny size of the capsule, it's only dangerous because it's so concentrated. If it would be diluted by spreading to a wide area, it would just slightly raise the background radiation.
- jon-wood 4y ago
  One of the risks that was believed to exist was that the capsule had fallen onto the road, and could have become embedded in someone's car tire. That would then place the owner of that car within the few tens of meters radius multiple times a day, along with their neighbours, and anyone they park near on a regular basis.

Oxidation 4y ago

I don't think it's much more complex than "nuclear doomsday crisis" gets clicks and sells papers.

trashface 4y ago

Perhaps not. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident