I still don't see why they are spending years trying to make rad hard robots. A long steel tube with fiber optics to pipe in light, mirrors and optics to transmit an image down the tube would be infinitely easier. They'd need to burn a few holes, but none of the reactor vessels are intact so that wouldn't allow additional radioactive material to escape. I'm surprised the Japanese decision to dump the all the tritium…
Pictures aren't the ultimate goal. This is a first step towards cleanup, and that'll need more than optics.
I still don't see why they are spending years trying to make rad hard robots. A long steel tube with fiber optics to pipe in light, mirrors and optics to transmit an image down the tube would be infinitely easier. They'd need to burn a few holes, but none of the reactor vessels are intact so that wouldn't allow additional radioactive material to escape. I'm surprised the Japanese decision to dump the all the tritium…
They want to retrieve samples and eventually remove the melted fuel.
The robots will likely at least be useful for retrieving the samples.
As I feel incompetent to comment on the article's content, I'll be glad to start a thread on the linguistics of that car crash of a headline. It took me three or four fresh starts to parse it correctly. The linguistic term for this is garden path sentence[1][2] and it's such a good one that it makes me wonder if it's deliberate. Even just some small adjustments would make it more readable: "Japanese pictures may show…
Melted Fukushima fuel photographed for the first time. First photos of melted Fukushima fuel. If you take away the tentativeness of "may", "likely", etc., you can make the sentence much easier to read. I wouldn't mind a slight lack of qualifiers as long as the whole thing is not too linkbaity and the content puts the qualifiers back where they belong.
The second one would never fly as a news headline, even though I agree it's clear, readable and descriptive. The Bloomberg News style guide probably specifies that headlines should have a verb in them, and maybe encourages the active mood which would rule out your first suggestion too. Looking at the front page of bloomberg.com, the same pattern is universal with one exception: "Trump, Russia and the Early Murmurs About Pardons". Looking further down, their opinion pieces seem to be allowed a wider variety of styles.
I still don't see why they are spending years trying to make rad hard robots. A long steel tube with fiber optics to pipe in light, mirrors and optics to transmit an image down the tube would be infinitely easier. They'd need to burn a few holes, but none of the reactor vessels are intact so that wouldn't allow additional radioactive material to escape. I'm surprised the Japanese decision to dump the all the tritium…
Complex problems often require complex solutions. I imagine that your suggestion works for some situations but not all. The cynical side of me thinks that one of the few benefits of the disaster will be new technology and robots that will help prevent future disasters. I imagine there's a very high priced market for these kinds of hardened robots.
There was a documentary about Tchernobyl surrounding forest few years ago. Most of the vegetation grew back, healthily for my naked eye. Anyways, the most surprising part is that mammals were back too; even though the radiation level was higher than average. I concluded that only a few generation of darwinian selection is needed to breed radiation hardened humans.
In terms of a hardened robot, hydraulic or pneumatic movement powered by an diesel engine seems like the way to go. depending on the location you could run the pressure lines to the robot and keep the engine outside.
In terms of a hardened robot, hydraulic or pneumatic movement powered by an diesel engine seems like the way to go. depending on the location you could run the pressure lines to the robot and keep the engine outside.
I get paid over $95 per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I'd be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I've been doing,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfJ3KWPnqqs
Complex problems often require complex solutions. I imagine that your suggestion works for some situations but not all. The cynical side of me thinks that one of the few benefits of the disaster will be new technology and robots that will help prevent future disasters. I imagine there's a very high priced market for these kinds of hardened robots.
There was a documentary about Tchernobyl surrounding forest few years ago. Most of the vegetation grew back, healthily for my naked eye. Anyways, the most surprising part is that mammals were back too; even though the radiation level was higher than average. I concluded that only a few generation of darwinian selection is needed to breed radiation hardened humans.
Animals that die within 5 years probably don't have enough time to succumb to the effects of radiation. That's just a guess though.
Complex problems often require complex solutions. I imagine that your suggestion works for some situations but not all. The cynical side of me thinks that one of the few benefits of the disaster will be new technology and robots that will help prevent future disasters. I imagine there's a very high priced market for these kinds of hardened robots.
There was a documentary about Tchernobyl surrounding forest few years ago. Most of the vegetation grew back, healthily for my naked eye. Anyways, the most surprising part is that mammals were back too; even though the radiation level was higher than average. I concluded that only a few generation of darwinian selection is needed to breed radiation hardened humans.
Why would you draw such a concrete conclusion?
What about the animals you possibly didn't see and how many animals reach fertility in 2-3 years?
Complex problems often require complex solutions. I imagine that your suggestion works for some situations but not all. The cynical side of me thinks that one of the few benefits of the disaster will be new technology and robots that will help prevent future disasters. I imagine there's a very high priced market for these kinds of hardened robots.
There was a documentary about Tchernobyl surrounding forest few years ago. Most of the vegetation grew back, healthily for my naked eye. Anyways, the most surprising part is that mammals were back too; even though the radiation level was higher than average. I concluded that only a few generation of darwinian selection is needed to breed radiation hardened humans.
Alternatively, the animals aren't radiation hardened and do die of cancer, but not fast enough to get in the way of breeding and multiplying. Or, in other words, while radioactive waste is unhealthy, it fatality rate is lower than having humans around.