tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post2088045517340629753..comments2023-09-25T21:20:27.863+10:00Comments on Nuclear Australia: Coal: 1 Fukushima every 600 yearsEdhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00021931700499537674noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-59967714375345046092015-12-01T22:37:54.010+11:002015-12-01T22:37:54.010+11:00Coal burning in China kills 250,000 people every y...Coal burning in China kills 250,000 people every year. The death toll from nuclear power plants and the accidents over the last 60 years is tiny in comparison. Jon Cranfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14954002781733372259noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-46855716638062818572012-01-25T05:13:34.579+11:002012-01-25T05:13:34.579+11:00I recommend you broaden your scope.
The vast majo...I recommend you broaden your scope.<br /><br />The vast majority of peer reviewed scientists agree the carbon emissions of coal and other fossil fueled power stations pose a credible risk to life as we know it on the entire planet.<br /><br />This is in addition to the health and environmental impacts from mercury, fine particulates and other pollutants released from coal.<br /><br />Maybe after Nuclear Australiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17626325905460792450noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-33104942157659563032012-01-24T22:04:53.940+11:002012-01-24T22:04:53.940+11:00There is no place on the planet where the burning ...There is no place on the planet where the burning of coal has made hundreds of square kilometres of valuable land uninhabitable for 30 plus years as in Fukushima.<br />The risk of Nuclear is that it's not just atmospheric contamination, its the land and water.<br /><br />I have a lot of faith in engineering but absolutely NONE in the people running the plants.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-88914505624665872122012-01-14T04:42:17.764+11:002012-01-14T04:42:17.764+11:00I agree. In the real world, it is quite complex. F...I agree. In the real world, it is quite complex. For example Iodine-131 has a half life of about 8 days - so Iodine-131 released as a result of the accident in March has decayed away and does not pose an ongoing risk. Even over the course of my example (hundreds of years), Cesium-137 will be, for the most part, decayed away (half life of about 30y).<br /><br />As for China and Rick's post: Nuclear Australiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17626325905460792450noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-64676535784491290442012-01-13T22:09:39.901+11:002012-01-13T22:09:39.901+11:00Yes, 1000 times off not a million, i'm europea...Yes, 1000 times off not a million, i'm european and i often confuse point and comma. <br />You must also consider that coal fly ashes are far less than 1% in weight and that coal combustion emits through the stack the totality of the volatile elements of the Uranium and Thorium decay chain (e.g radon) but many elements remain in the coal ash. <br />So is quiet complex to make a evaluation of Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-9964354601798132492012-01-13T19:08:10.590+11:002012-01-13T19:08:10.590+11:00Your analysis is less reassuring than I had hoped....Your analysis is less reassuring than I had hoped. I had thought that the radiation emitted from coal in China was greater than that of Fukushima. From your numbers Fukushima emits at least 600 times more than what China emits. I'm assuming that china is at least as bad as the US in coal emissions.Rick Maltesehttp://deregulatetheatom.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-13523282671329365002012-01-13T05:35:09.396+11:002012-01-13T05:35:09.396+11:00I was looking for a source of error after receivin...I was looking for a source of error after receiving Ian's post. However, I focused on the references... the source of the numbers.<br /><br />Thanks for the reviews and comments. The post has been corrected and the error tweeted.Nuclear Australiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17626325905460792450noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-92174858060858254292012-01-13T03:34:02.331+11:002012-01-13T03:34:02.331+11:00If you convert 0.00427 millicuries/ton the result ...If you convert 0.00427 millicuries/ton the result is 157,990 Bq/ton.<br />You are in excess of a factor "1 million".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-32341592076850563452011-12-28T18:35:04.345+11:002011-12-28T18:35:04.345+11:00When flyash and bottom ash are buried, they are bu...When flyash and bottom ash are buried, they are buried in landfills with a design life of about 30 years. Compare that with the 5 billion year half-life of uranium. However, not all flyash and bottom ash is buried. Much of it is used to manufacture wallboard which is used in housing and other structures. Other large amounts of flyash and bottom ash is stored in large ponds. <br />Don KosloffAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-60260676407949604632011-12-18T17:03:40.347+11:002011-12-18T17:03:40.347+11:00I think those data are a bit suspect - 174 kBq/kg ...I think those data are a bit suspect - 174 kBq/kg is higher than any published figure i have seen. See also <br />http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf30.html<br />Also, most of these radionuclides are captured with flyash and bottom ash and buried.<br />The ORNL paper is 1993.Ian H-Lhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07914495188045472709noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-56335808215074854082011-12-09T10:01:32.805+11:002011-12-09T10:01:32.805+11:00I was looking at outdated coal consumption numbers...I was looking at outdated coal consumption numbers. The U.S. consumes about an eighth of the world's coal annually. So every 24 months, U.S. coal combustion releases as much radiation as 1 Fukushima.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-39698194919362327802011-12-09T09:51:19.103+11:002011-12-09T09:51:19.103+11:00Thanks, I have been looking for those numbers. So ...Thanks, I have been looking for those numbers. So let's say your 3 month comparison is the best estimate. The U.S. consumes about a quarter of the world's coal. So each and every year, US coal combustion releases as much radiation as 1 Fukushima.<br /><br />Does that sound more or less correct?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com