Please share far and wide!

Monday, August 31, 2015

Lies Of Nuclear -- Nuke Propaganda Debunked, There IS NOT Any Significant Natural Radio-Isotopes Like Iodine 131 and Cesium 137

stock here: Folks, drop a comment, or sign up as a follower, Mahalo!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In July and August of 2015, Japan measured significant amount of Iodine 131 in sewage.

Since Iodine 131 has a fast half life of 8 days, it goes away pretty quick.    So everything creating and disbursed in the Fukushima Initial Explosions is gone, not even a fraction of a hundreth of a percent is left.

So measuring Iodine 131 now, indicates that there is on-going fission at Fukushima.  Note this is also before Sendai was restarted.

The coriums are loose to the environment, and they are fissioning.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But in order to dispute the propaganda that even Iodine 131 is "natural" so measuring 49 Bq/kG of dewatered sludge "doesn't mean anything".   Well that is just not true, it means a lot.

Here is the calculation of how much natural Iodine 131 exists in its most dense natural environment

1.91 E-9 Bq/M^3   !!!!    Amazingly small!    .00000000191 Bq/kG

Compare that to 49 Bq/kG of Iodine 131 measured in Japan.    That is

25,711,281,588 Times larger than "Natural".     









11 comments:

  1. I131 is a fission product sure but not a sign of criticality. There is a tremendous amount of natural uranium in sea water that undergoes spontaneous fission. You left that out of your calcs.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your mistakes are numerous. First and most importantly you failed to account for u238 which is much more prevalent in the ocean and has a higher sf rate than 235. You conveniently leave this out. Your calcs just reiterate the old magic trick of card forcing, steering the discussion to your ready made answer. Fools the rat farm but not this real pro.

      Delete
    2. Your mistakes are numerous. First and most importantly you failed to account for u238 which is much more prevalent in the ocean and has a higher sf rate than 235. You conveniently leave this out. Your calcs just reiterate the old magic trick of card forcing, steering the discussion to your ready made answer. Fools the rat farm but not this real pro.

      Delete
    3. Your mistakes are numerous. First and most importantly you failed to account for u238 which is much more prevalent in the ocean and has a higher sf rate than 235. You conveniently leave this out. Your calcs just reiterate the old magic trick of card forcing, steering the discussion to your ready made answer. Fools the rat farm but not this real pro.

      Delete
    4. Your mistakes are numerous. First and most importantly you failed to account for u238 which is much more prevalent in the ocean and has a higher sf rate than 235. You conveniently leave this out. Your calcs just reiterate the old magic trick of card forcing, steering the discussion to your ready made answer. Fools the rat farm but not this real pro.

      Delete
    5. 4 times? Loose Nuke...you need to repeat the same comment 4 times? Indeed, why don't you just take that wasted time and go add in the U238 activity?

      Always waiting for something of value, never getting it from the nukists?

      Delete
    6. Its your silly site that does it. There is a lot more 238 than 235 in the ocean. 7/1000 parts uranium is 235. The sf rate of 238 is higher too. Redo your calcs. Correctly. Use ORIGEN-ARP and scrap the Excel method. Its off by many orders

      Delete
    7. Loon, I used the total activity for the ocean, not just for 235. So it off by a factor of around 4, to account for half life and assumping fraction is same as 235.

      So it 5 times
      .00000000191 Bq/kG

      oh wow, scary.

      Delete
    8. LNUke, can you get me a download link for Scale or Origin Arp
      It looks like a multi hour learning curve at least, but would like to give it a test drive.

      I asked Oak Ridge but those people never respond.

      Delete
    9. You also have neutron induced capture that results in fission and spontaneous fission as well. Excel doesn't cut it Solve the Bateman equations.

      Delete

Insightful and Relevant if Irreverent Comments