Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Navy sailors have radiation sickness after Japan rescue

nypost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 161 posts

Re: Navy sailors have radiation sickness after Japan rescue

#101

Post by sliverstorm »

_wp3r wrote: post #98
sliverstorm wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm still confused why the snow was radioactive. Snow = water. Did it form around radioactive particles?

The low on the 13th was 33 around Fukushima. If the humidity was low enough it would not be impossible to have ground level or especially 250ft off the water snow. EDIT: misread your question. If the steam was radiated it "could" carry that downwind but the nature of decay would greatly reduce the possibility for anything at the size of snow to stay frozen at sea level.

Right, but to my understanding water can't become radioactive. It can contain radioactive things, but H2O doesn't turn radioactive. So I'm wondering why the snow was radioactive.

Re: Navy sailors have radiation sickness after Japan rescue

#102

Post by harshreality »

AnotherDesigner wrote: post #47

The nuclear apologists are out in full force today. I love how you guys, mostly computer programmers, are so much more informed than experts in nearly every other field of science existing. It must be amazing to be that smart.

There is no hard data in the original article.

Useful information that could have been included: Actual radiation measurements, with units. Specific location of the ship over the timeline. What radiation the Navy and the ship in question knew about, and when (news reports indicate the USS Reagan nearby knew very early on when radiation exceeded background radiation since as a nuclear vessel it had good radiation sensors). And, since some of the claimants are claiming thyroid problems, whether the navy issued iodine tablets to sailors in the area, since that's a well known and practically risk-free preventative measure against radioactive iodine uptake. Hell, the standard navy rations probably have supplemental iodine. Table salt often does.

You might also be interested in researching how much radiation is released into the atmosphere from coal plants, and how many health problems are caused by all sorts of conventional energy sources, coal, burning fuel, pollution from batteries, etc.

Disclaimer: not to say that 60's-era nuclear reactor designs are good, even with more precautions being taken since Fukushima; they absolutely should be phased out in favor of new designs that provide passive safety (for several days without power).

Re: Navy sailors have radiation sickness after Japan rescue

#103

Post by patrickg_zill »

The meaning behind the story is far more sinister than the sad case of some people getting cancer...

it is that TEPCO, which is the organization best suited to know and measure what was/is going on, has been shown to lie, even to its own government, about the situation.

(mentioned in more detail here: http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/28/world/asia/japan-fukushima-law... )

If it truly the case that TEPCO has been lying about things from the start, then nothing that they have said in the interim, or things that they say in the future, can be taken at face value, and whatever claims they make require independant third party confirmation.

Re: Navy sailors have radiation sickness after Japan rescue

#105

Post by lostlogin »

scotty79 wrote: post #99
coldtea wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I hope I don't offend anyone by saying that most of the numbers reported after a radioactive disaster are BS spin in order for the company/state to save face.

Nothing offensive about it. Everybody hates governments and companies when things go wrong.

I disagree. The recent local calamity was the Christchurch earthquake. By and large companies and the government acted well. A few big problems cropped up (dodgy insurance companies, regional government dealing with unsafe land, overwhelmed fire service etc), and things are far from sorted, however I am deeply impressed by what systems were in place. Funds existed to rebuild despite massive devastation, the emergency response was incredible and mostly well organized. There has been little corruption, mostly transparent processes and despite the most obnoxious bunch of cabinet ministers I can remember, the process has gone far better than I could have imagined.

Re: Navy sailors have radiation sickness after Japan rescue

#106

Post by alan_cx »

JanezStupar wrote: post #57
zequel wrote: post #19

This is why I wouldn't let my kids EVER enlist. The government has no regard for its enlisted. Doesn't take a genius to think our navy would be in harm's way during a RADIOACTIVE DISASTER. Reminds me of when soldiers were being electrocuted in showers in Iraq because of totally incompetent contractors wiring electricity near the showers.

Sure, better let somebody else's kids take care of the shitty work. I agree wholeheartedly.

"Sure, better let somebody else's kids take care of the shitty work."

Bullshit. That was never implied, let alone said, you simply made it up.

Re: Navy sailors have radiation sickness after Japan rescue

#107

Post by _wp3r »

_wp3r wrote: post #98
sliverstorm wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm still confused why the snow was radioactive. Snow = water. Did it form around radioactive particles?

The low on the 13th was 33 around Fukushima. If the humidity was low enough it would not be impossible to have ground level or especially 250ft off the water snow. EDIT: misread your question. If the steam was radiated it "could" carry that downwind but the nature of decay would greatly reduce the possibility for anything at the size of snow to stay frozen at sea level.

wont let me reply, radionuclides can be aqueous check out HTO and free-water tritium(FWT) in google that will get you what you are looking for.

TLDR they bond with organics and other stuff in the water, and snow initiates around particulates.

Re: Navy sailors have radiation sickness after Japan rescue

#108

Post by moocowduckquack »

sliverstorm wrote: post #101
_wp3r wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The low on the 13th was 33 around Fukushima. If the humidity was low enough it would not be impossible to have ground level or especially 250ft off the water snow. EDIT: misread your question. If the steam was radiated it "could" carry that downwind but the nature of decay would greatly reduce the possibility for anything at the size of snow to stay frozen at sea level.

Right, but to my understanding water can't become radioactive. It can contain radioactive things, but H2O doesn't turn radioactive. So I'm wondering why the snow was radioactive.

It may have nucleated around radioactive particles in the plume.

Re: Navy sailors have radiation sickness after Japan rescue

#109

Post by lostlogin »

mikeash wrote: post #95
AnotherDesigner wrote: post #47

The nuclear apologists are out in full force today. I love how you guys, mostly computer programmers, are so much more informed than experts in nearly every other field of science existing. It must be amazing to be that smart.

Er, the opinions expressed by the "nuclear apologists" generally line up with those of experts in the field. It's the fools who talk about "400 tons of radiation" who are committing the sin of hubris in thinking that they know more than the experts.

If you want an independent opinion upon the pros and cons of disbanding my field of work, don't ask me.

Re: Navy sailors have radiation sickness after Japan rescue

#110

Post by cmgreen »

ams6110 wrote: post #72

Guam turned us away That sounds suspicious. Guam is a U.S. Territory.

It may be the lack of capabilities to deal with a mass radiation event.

I can't find any references to how many crew are typically assigned to the USS Ronald Regan. Guam doesn't seem like it has a lot of healthcare support for a full-aircraft carrier of irradiated seamen.

Post reply on HN