3 ms·

"She missed pointing out the hundreds of nuclear bombs that were detonated in the sea water around bikini Atoll in the 50's and 60's which didn't kill the west

"She missed pointing out the hundreds of nuclear bombs that were detonated in the sea water around bikini Atoll in the 50's and 60's which didn't kill the west coast." Specifically: nuclear testing released about 30 times more Cs-137 (in particular) than Fukushima, also mostly into the Pacific. An estimated 25 MCi [0] = 925 PBq, vs. 23-50 PBq [1]. [0] http://books.google.com/books?id=JLFX6EMPqBkC&pg=PA34 http://books.google.com/books?id=JLFX6EMPqBkC&pg=PA34 [1] http://www.pnas.org/content/109/16/5984.full http://www.pnas.org/content/109/16/5984.full (copied from an older HN comment I wrote)

rhizome 13y ago
I thought the bigger problem with Fukushima was not the Cs-137, but the Sr-90.
- throwaway_yy2Di 13y ago
  I don't think Fukushima released much strontium (do you have a source otherwise)? The atmospheric release concentrated elements with high vapor pressures, in particular iodine and cesium. edit: Here's a paper [0] which measured Sr-89 and Sr-90 in seawater near Japan: they found a ratio of about 0.026 of Sr-90 : Cs-137 -- relatively little strontium. Their estimate for total Sr-90 released is 90-900 TBq, corresponding to Cs-137 release estimates of 3.5 - 35 PBq. The figures for Chernobyl [1] are 10 PBq and 85 PBq respectively -- that is, Chernobyl released 10-100 times more Sr-90 than Fukushima. The Sr-90 : Cs-137 ratio was even higher (0.63) for atmospheric weapons tests: 600 PBq Sr-90, 900 PBq Cs-137 [2]. edit2: Made a table: Sr-90 [PBq] Cs-137 [PBq] ratio ref Fukushima 0.09 - 0.9 3.5 - 34 0.026 [0] Chernobyl 10 85 0.12 [1] Weapons 590 930 0.63 [2] [0] (pdf) http://www.biogeosciences.net/10/3649/2013/bg-10-3649-2013.pdf http://www.biogeosciences.net/10/3649/2013/bg-10-3649-2013.p... [1] (large pdf) http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/11-80076_Report_2008_Annex_D.pdf http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/11-80076_Report_200... (table 1, page 9) [2] http://books.google.com/books?id=JLFX6EMPqBkC&pg=PA34 http://books.google.com/books?id=JLFX6EMPqBkC&pg=PA34

rhizome 13y ago

I thought the bigger problem with Fukushima was not the Cs-137, but the Sr-90.

throwaway_yy2Di 13y ago
I don't think Fukushima released much strontium (do you have a source otherwise)? The atmospheric release concentrated elements with high vapor pressures, in particular iodine and cesium. edit: Here's a paper [0] which measured Sr-89 and Sr-90 in seawater near Japan: they found a ratio of about 0.026 of Sr-90 : Cs-137 -- relatively little strontium. Their estimate for total Sr-90 released is 90-900 TBq, corresponding to Cs-137 release estimates of 3.5 - 35 PBq. The figures for Chernobyl [1] are 10 PBq and 85 PBq respectively -- that is, Chernobyl released 10-100 times more Sr-90 than Fukushima. The Sr-90 : Cs-137 ratio was even higher (0.63) for atmospheric weapons tests: 600 PBq Sr-90, 900 PBq Cs-137 [2]. edit2: Made a table: Sr-90 [PBq] Cs-137 [PBq] ratio ref Fukushima 0.09 - 0.9 3.5 - 34 0.026 [0] Chernobyl 10 85 0.12 [1] Weapons 590 930 0.63 [2] [0] (pdf) http://www.biogeosciences.net/10/3649/2013/bg-10-3649-2013.pdf http://www.biogeosciences.net/10/3649/2013/bg-10-3649-2013.p... [1] (large pdf) http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/11-80076_Report_2008_Annex_D.pdf http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/11-80076_Report_200... (table 1, page 9) [2] http://books.google.com/books?id=JLFX6EMPqBkC&pg=PA34 http://books.google.com/books?id=JLFX6EMPqBkC&pg=PA34