Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,415 Year: 3,672/9,624 Month: 543/974 Week: 156/276 Day: 30/23 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The nuclear generation option
Taq
Member
Posts: 10038
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.4


Message 12 of 22 (795392)
12-12-2016 3:51 PM


Nuclear Power is Bananas, But In A Good Way
A writer at Forbes (perhaps the same one mentioned earlier?) wrote an article on the Fukushima radiation leaks where he measured the radioactivity in bananas. Since bananas are rich in potassium, and 40K is radioactive, you can actually calculate the radiation exposure from eating one banana.
As it turns out, the Fukushima disaster released 76 million bananas of radiation. If that was all in one place, that's a high dose. However, this dose was diluted in the ocean. It is also worth mentioning that worldwide banana production is about 145 million tons a year. That comes to 165 million bananas eaten PER HOUR. The radiation from Fukushima is less than the radiation exposure experience by the human population in one hour from just the eating of bananas. Banana farming poses a much higher radiation risk than Fukushima.
Read more here:
The Fukushima Radiation Leak Is Equal To 76 Million Bananas
Edited by Taq, : fixed the math, and added more math

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by NoNukes, posted 12-15-2016 3:49 AM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10038
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.4


Message 15 of 22 (795736)
12-15-2016 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by NoNukes
12-15-2016 3:49 AM


Re: Nuclear Power is Bananas, But In A Good Way
NoNukes writes:
Forbes is almost alt-right on some topics. If I am going to quote a Forbes article as fact, I would check it thoroughly. FWIW, the calculations about the radioactivity of the typical banana based on the amount of K40 that is likely present are correct. But the dismissal of the concerns cited in his article are all hand waving.
The author is correct when he states that the amount of radiation leaked into the Pacific is insignificant relative to the amount of radiation we experience on a daily basis.
There is no safe amount of radiation. As best we know, the risk added by sources of radiation are cumulative.
However, when you stack the amount of radiation produced by Fukushima it is dwarfed by the other sources of radiation we experience in our every day lives. We should be as concerned about the radiation released by Fukushima into the Pacific as we are about exposing ourselves to the mid-summer Sun for 30 minutes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by NoNukes, posted 12-15-2016 3:49 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by NoNukes, posted 12-15-2016 6:43 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10038
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.4


Message 19 of 22 (795803)
12-16-2016 10:44 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by NoNukes
12-15-2016 6:43 PM


Re: Nuclear Power is Bananas, But In A Good Way
NoNukes writes:
I suspect that you've made an over estimate here. But a source of radiation comparable to 30 minutes of sun is something to be concerned about. And of course you've ignored some of the comments I've made about concentration of metals by sea life among other things.
If you think 30 minutes of Sun exposure is something to be worried about, it pretty much discredits your other statements.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by NoNukes, posted 12-15-2016 6:43 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Porosity, posted 12-16-2016 4:16 PM Taq has not replied
 Message 21 by NoNukes, posted 12-16-2016 5:35 PM Taq has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024