Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials
marketwatch.com
Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials
1–10 of 24 posts
Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials
#2Even if it is 23 times normal it appears to be lower then living next to Ontario's nuclear plants with 1.1 microsieverts at Darlington, 2.8 microsieverts at Pickering.
http://www.opg.com/safety/nsafe/nuclear/
not an expert and the spelling of the unit seems wrong in the story.
Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials
#3Even if it is 23 times normal it appears to be lower then living next to Ontario's nuclear plants with 1.1 microsieverts at Darlington, 2.8 microsieverts at Pickering. http://www.opg.com/safety/nsafe/nuclear/ not an expert and the spelling of the unit seems wrong in the story.
The article screwed up the units: it is likely "0.809 microSieverts per hour". Your link's figures are over one year.
Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials
#4AndyIngram , thanks for the info, and i thought that my friends there in Japan are in danger of radiation. when i saw this news, i thought, WTH, 23 times. it turns out im just overreacting. let's just hope and pray(if you're religious) that Japan could recover quickly. crises like this makes a nation stronger.
Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials
#5Even if it is 23 times normal it appears to be lower then living next to Ontario's nuclear plants with 1.1 microsieverts at Darlington, 2.8 microsieverts at Pickering. http://www.opg.com/safety/nsafe/nuclear/ not an expert and the spelling of the unit seems wrong in the story.
7000 microsieverts/year is what we are talking about.
Still, that's 175 plane rides from ontario to vancouver.
Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials
#6At this rate, an average person would still be under 1/7th the ALI for a worker in a field of radiation, assuming rate was held for a year (limit is 50 mSv, or 50000 uSv
Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials
#7Actually at that level chronic radiation a positive. Long term research on a large group of people in Taiwan living in somewhat radioactive buildings showed significantly lower cancer rates than the populace a whole.
http://toshuo.com/2009/chronic-low-level-radiation-good-for-...
Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials
#8These numbers are still very very small.
I'm sitting in Tokyo right now working away on my codebase. No need to get worked up over nothing and so far it is nothing. A lot of my friends (mostly foreigners in Tokyo) are getting on trains out to Kyoto or Osaka. I think that's fine; maybe it's better to be safe than sorry. Maybe it's the cynical New Yorker in me but I feel like I've seen too many of these scares before. Sometimes you just have to turn off the TV/Twitter/whatever and get back to work.
Who knows, maybe in a few hours or days I'll be heading out too. I think it's unlikely. Right now, I don't think there's a need .
Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials
#9Even if it is 23 times normal it appears to be lower then living next to Ontario's nuclear plants with 1.1 microsieverts at Darlington, 2.8 microsieverts at Pickering. http://www.opg.com/safety/nsafe/nuclear/ not an expert and the spelling of the unit seems wrong in the story.
The article screwed up the units: it is likely "0.809 microSieverts per hour ". Your link's figures are over one year.
That's still way below the "no health issues" threshold of 0.01 Sv/hr (so we're 10 000 times below the threshold)
(source : http://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/docs/energy-good-bad.pdf)
Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials
#10Actually at that level chronic radiation a positive. Long term research on a large group of people in Taiwan living in somewhat radioactive buildings showed significantly lower cancer rates than the populace a whole. http://toshuo.com/2009/chronic-low-level-radiation-good-for-...
Although this research is interesting, it isn't widely accepted yet. All major authorities still contend that there's not enough evidence to prove that low doses of radiation aren't harmful:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model#Contr...