Fukushima Plant Now Leaking Highest Radiation Levels Since Tsunami

Chernobyl, Bhopal, Fukushima, Love Canal, the Centralia Mine fire, Three Mile Island...these are a few of the hideous sores on the arms and legs of the earth, our home. We just change the dressing and bandages, hoping for some cure to be discovered. That doesn't seem to be working too well.

"I find Gizmodo as the internet equivalent ... or to start using some more reputable links."

This Gizmodo issue has been recently discussed. I stopped short of calling for some sort of explanation, though. I see these blogs in a light similar to the Hemmings.

Nearly thirty years ago I was in Centralia PA. It has to be the slowest but unstoppable natural(?) disaster. At that time there were still many people still living there and the populous were negotiating relocation expenses. It was the only place I ever saw a road with a two inch tall vent stack in the asphalt. In the winter, some of the streets never needed to be plowed.

Congratulations on hitting your 101 mark! You little rascal.

The Centralia Mine fire is certainly a strange beast. Been burning for 49 years. But like the other troubles, we can't seem to find a way to 'fix' it. As you said, a temporary patch lasting (in this case) 49 years. It is a lower profile problem than Fukushima, but it is more localized, and the 49 years have made us more complacent (as in the pedagogical Complacency:The Foundation of Human Behavior by Robert Bruce Raup (1925)). Well, it might be more like How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love The Bomb.

Thanks for your congratulations, it is appreciated. Yes, I am the third little rascal from the left! I'm just one of Our CR4 Gang!

Centralia is but one of an estimated 200 coal seam fires in the USA. There are also many more fires elsewhere in the world. Occaisionally these fires just spontaneously happen, like a pile of oily rags.This is why I question the often cited "abandoned garbage fire" explanation for Centralia.

A last bit of trivia, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love The Bomb was James Earl Jones movie debut.

Those coal seam fires sound like good locations to sequester CO2.

Thanks for putting up the link. One of my best friends was from Penn so I learned of the Centralia story from him, but I've never done any digging beyond that and was stunned at what was there.

I have to admit I was completely unaware how extensive (common even) coal seam fires are. In the link the bit about Colorado I found particularly interesting...

"In Colorado, coal fires have arisen as a consequence of fluctuations in the groundwater level, which can increase the temperature of the coal up to 300°C, enough to cause it to spontaneously ignite."

Again I have to admit, I've never considered fluctuating groundwater levels as a possible fire hazard.

Some of the "tech" and "gadget" zines amaze me, particularly Gizmodo. It seems they very thoroughly screen their writers to assure that the authors have absolutely no knowledge on the subject that they are reporting on. To further enhance the drama, the writers also seem to have a grasp of technology and science far below that of the average 9th grader, enhanced by a bit of common internet lore.

This is why I am embarrassed that bloggers here quote Gizmodo. An engineering based blog should have integrity and an understanding in units at the very least.

If the plant isn't leaking contamination (i.e. curies), then reporting radiation (i.e. sieverts or rems) levels is factual and needs to be stated that way (although if they gave the level at some distance from the source it would be more meaningful). That is the big ball in the sky does have measurable radiation levels (again rems or sieverts) at the surface of the Earth, but it would be incorrect to state that it is contaminating the surface of the Earth (curies).

My only issue is the use of the word "leakage". Although not quite incorrect, the connotations don't quite fit right. When someone says "leak" most people think of things dealing with water or a fluid. The connotation being that you can unknowingly carry the radiation around with you, and hence my issue with the term.

Chaotic,

I am surprised a person of your intellect did not question the statement made in the article,

"the news should be startling, and proof that the plant is still an enormous hazard to the people of Japan"

That is pure unsubstantiated opinion unless the people of Japan are planning to go directly into the site.

As I presume you are aware, dose rate decreases proportional to the inverse square of the distance, but leakage can carry the emitter of a dose (contamination) over distance in air and water currents. By intent or ignorance the author is giving an inaccurate impression of the available information.

I readily admit that there is a hazard, but in my opinion I suspect that the author is spewing emotional crap to promote an ideology.

You're absolutely right. That statement needs to be reworded to say something more along the line of "... an enormous hazard to the plant workers..." and perhaps "a mild health risk to its neighbors".

I guess when I read it, I assumed that some reporter simply got the information about the rad levels and reported it. I also assumed there it wasn't due to radioactive particulate leakage, otherwise, he'd be reporting contamination levels along with it. (hence, my using the word "if" in my original response). This is why I dislike the word leak(age). The media will use the term leakage to report increased rad levels (i.e. even if the contamination is still contained). Granted the article does mention "contaminated beef", which insinuates it is contamination that is leaking, not radiation.

I think we'd both agree, though that the media is fairly adept at producing junk when it comes to the nuke industry.

Wow, I guess I wasn't the only one who had tired of the useless garbage coming from Gizmodo. If I had only one word to describe Gizmodo, I think I would have to vote for "banal".