mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Fun Stuff > Lounge

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2011-03-21, 13:49   #1
firejuggler
 
firejuggler's Avatar
 
Apr 2010
Over the rainbow

1001011001002 Posts
Default japan catastroph explained to kids

not sure if it is the right place but...
it is a japanese video subtitled in english
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sakN2hSVxA
firejuggler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-21, 14:31   #2
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

22×5×373 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by firejuggler View Post
not sure if it is the right place but...
it is a japanese video subtitled in english
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sakN2hSVxA
The prospect of radiation is frightening. However, it must be
looked at in perspective; something most people can't do.

A single failure as an abrupt event is more frightening than the
same failure spread over time.

Allow me to ask:

Does anyone have data as to how much radiation is released as the
result of buring fossil fuels for electricity? Clearly this happens a little
bit at a time. How many people get cancer from it?

Compare the integrated result (over time) from fossil fuels vs. the
single abrupt failure of a nuclear plant. Which is worse???
R.D. Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-21, 14:43   #3
xilman
Bamboozled!
 
xilman's Avatar
 
"π’‰Ίπ’ŒŒπ’‡·π’†·π’€­"
May 2003
Down not across

2·32·569 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman View Post
The prospect of radiation is frightening. However, it must be looked at in perspective; something most people can't do.

A single failure as an abrupt event is more frightening than the same failure spread over time.

Allow me to ask:

Does anyone have data as to how much radiation is released as the result of buring fossil fuels for electricity? Clearly this happens a little bit at a time. How many people get cancer from it?

Compare the integrated result (over time) from fossil fuels vs. the single abrupt failure of a nuclear plant. Which is worse???
Yes, some do have that data.

I personally don't have epidemiological data but know how to find out what is known.

It depends on the nature of the fossil fuel; natural gas (methane), for instance, releases much less radioactive waste than a U-powered fission reactor but vastly more chemical pollutants.

(Actually, the answers to all of your questions depend on the nature of the fossil fuel used.)

I'm fairly sure that you meant these as rhetorical questions, not least because I've already posted some the answers in much greater detail in the forum.

Paul

Last fiddled with by xilman on 2011-03-21 at 14:45 Reason: Qualify the term "gas".
xilman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-21, 14:59   #4
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

22·5·373 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xilman View Post
Yes, some do have that data.

I personally don't have epidemiological data but know how to find out what is known.

It depends on the nature of the fossil fuel; natural gas (methane), for instance, releases much less radioactive waste than a U-powered fission reactor but vastly more chemical pollutants.

(Actually, the answers to all of your questions depend on the nature of the fossil fuel used.)

I'm fairly sure that you meant these as rhetorical questions, not least because I've already posted some the answers in much greater detail in the forum.

Paul
Yes. Intended as rhetorical.
R.D. Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-21, 17:43   #5
CRGreathouse
 
CRGreathouse's Avatar
 
Aug 2006

31·191 Posts
Default

Blatantly (as usual) ignoring the "rhetorical", I feel compelled to post this:

http://xkcd.com/radiation/

The second and fourth entries on the left are relevant. Also the green block in the middle for Three Mile Island.

Last fiddled with by CRGreathouse on 2011-03-21 at 17:44
CRGreathouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-21, 23:19   #6
Flatlander
I quite division it
 
Flatlander's Avatar
 
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England

40358 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRGreathouse View Post
Blatantly (as usual) ignoring the "rhetorical", I feel compelled to post this:

http://xkcd.com/radiation/

The second and fourth entries on the left are relevant. Also the green block in the middle for Three Mile Island.
That's interesting. The chest x-ray I had 2 weeks ago = eating 200 bananas.
In most casing then, worrying about radiation is probably more dangerous than the radiation you are receiving.
Flatlander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-22, 16:13   #7
Jeff Gilchrist
 
Jeff Gilchrist's Avatar
 
Jun 2003
Ottawa, Canada

7×167 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRGreathouse View Post
Blatantly (as usual) ignoring the "rhetorical", I feel compelled to post this:
http://xkcd.com/radiation/
I was just going to post that but I see you beat me too it. I find it interesting that eating 1 banana has a higher radiation dosage than living within 50 miles of a nuclear reactor for 1 year.
Jeff Gilchrist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-22, 16:22   #8
Mr. P-1
 
Mr. P-1's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

49116 Posts
Default

Quote:
Potassium in the body is under strict homeostatic control.[4] The human body does a pretty good job of regulating potassium, and thus there isn't much of a chance of getting a buildup of 40K, so the additional potassium (radio-active or not) is quickly eliminated from the body.
From Wikipedia, which I guess is as credible a source as xkcd.
Mr. P-1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-22, 16:48   #9
science_man_88
 
science_man_88's Avatar
 
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville

26·131 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. P-1 View Post
From Wikipedia, which I guess is as credible a source as xkcd.
counteract the potassium with sodium they affect the same hormone ( aldosterone) you can get it out, not necessarily without kidney damage ( or heart failure as ANP is affected by sodium) though.
science_man_88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-22, 17:02   #10
science_man_88
 
science_man_88's Avatar
 
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville

26·131 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by science_man_88 View Post
counteract the potassium with sodium they affect the same hormone ( aldosterone) you can get it out, not necessarily without kidney damage ( or heart failure as ANP is affected by sodium) though.
actually unless you get extremely low sodium I don't see a way never mind. because low sodium can tell the body potassium is too high and the potassium lowers it's levels in favor of sodium.
science_man_88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-22, 21:11   #11
Flatlander
I quite division it
 
Flatlander's Avatar
 
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England

31·67 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Gilchrist View Post
I was just going to post that but I see you beat me too it. I find it interesting that eating 1 banana has a higher radiation dosage than living within 50 miles of a nuclear reactor for 1 year.
Nothing for me to worry about then. I am 53 miles from Dungeness, as the three-headed crow flies.
Flatlander is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
a numberphile like channel by kids science_man_88 science_man_88 0 2017-11-17 21:37
Remember kids, compressed air. TheMawn Lounge 1 2013-11-17 08:53
Kids? Xyzzy Programming 12 2012-08-04 16:06
P+1 factoring explained RichD Factoring 9 2010-04-11 12:33
Prime95 worktodo.ini parameters not explained azhad Software 2 2008-05-31 23:38

All times are UTC. The time now is 09:16.

Sun Sep 20 09:16:45 UTC 2020 up 10 days, 6:27, 0 users, load averages: 1.54, 1.55, 1.48

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.