safeharbor37
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 23:18:19 GMT -5
Posts: 1,290
|
Post by safeharbor37 on Mar 15, 2011 12:32:56 GMT -5
Radioactive steam is not the problem. Particles of heavy metals like uranium is. It is very unlikely that steam or air could cause much damage although hydrogen does have a couple of isotopes which are somewhat radioactive. Even if radioactive hydrogen is inhaled, it is dissipated and discharged from the body as water and other wastes including exhalation. Heavy metals on the other hand tends to concentrate in more permanent parts of the body such as glands, bones and such where they can over time cause mutations which may result in cancer, birth defects, etc. Wearing a face mask type filter [the finer the filter the better] and carefully washing after being [exposed] outdoors will reduce the probability of long term damage. On the other hand, direct exposure to radiation can cause, in addition to long term damage, short term effects such as "radiation sickness" which may be fatal and, even if not, will have the same deleterious effects as long term exposure [it's total exposure, not time, that counts]. Standard procedure after exposure is to strip completely, shower and avoid contact with the contaminated clothes until they are thoroughly washed ~ the wash water will also be contaminated. Procedures and precautions such as wearing shielded clothing is effective in reducing, but not eliminating exposure. The only complete protection is simply to leave the area of contamination.
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on Mar 15, 2011 13:19:09 GMT -5
Radioactive steam is not the problem. It's not? The emergency flooding of stricken reactors with seawater and the resulting steam releases are a desperate step intended to avoid a much bigger problem: a full meltdown of the nuclear cores in reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station. www.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/world/asia/japan-fukushima-nuclear-reactor.html?_r=2&ref=global-homeI might agree that the steam is a better option than a full scale meltdown, but it is still a serious problem, but I don't believe there have been any studies done on radioactive steam released into the atmosphere. Yes...particles being carried in the steam making it radioactive. Are you sure about that? When the fuel was intact, the steam they were releasing had only modest amounts of radioactive material, in a nontroublesome form. With damaged fuel, that steam is getting dirtier.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 16, 2011 14:09:22 GMT -5
My understanding is that it is extremely unlikely that this develops into a full meltdown. There will be radioactive material released, but no fuel spewing into the air.
At Chernobyl, they used graphite instead of water, graphite is flamable-- and instead of cooling the reactor, it flashed and things got out of hand fast. Also, at Chernobyl there was no containment vessel at the center of the reactor- the place operated with the core exposed.
It is by every estimation a lousy situation. A nuclear reaction continues to take place, radioactivity is being released, but I saw some report last night on CNN about "Chernobyl X 3...yeah, um, that it is not.
|
|