Radioactive Concrete From Fukushima Found In New Construction 237
mdsolar writes "The Japanese government is investigating how radioactive concrete ended up in a new apartment complex in the Fukushima Prefecture, housing evacuees from a town near the crippled nuclear plant. The contamination was first discovered when dosimeter readings of children in the city of Nihonmatsu, roughly 40 miles from the reactors at Fuksuhima Dai-ichi, revealed a high school student had been exposed to 1.62 millisieverts in a span of three months, well above the annual 1 millisievert limit the government has established for safety reasons."
Re:A bit of perspective (Score:2, Insightful)
While the use of contaminated materials is something to be concerned about, let's not forget how much radiation this actually is. It's roughly the equivalent of one chest CT scan per year [xkcd.com].
You want you children growing up with that? 18 years worth? really?
Calling Dr. Freeman (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess one important question is, what's the half-life of this particular contamination?
And is it (relativly) sealed in, or can it become airborne?
Re:More importantly, (Score:4, Insightful)
Thankfully the Japanese have much more common sense than the person and people like him spouting this prison crap.
Prisons are built to take away freedoms, not cause lifelong implicit bodily harm from radiation exposure. I cake a couple of guesses where you're from, that being some first world country who treats their citizens like third world crap and their prisoners like dogs and feel justified in doing so. You are the problem with humanity.
Re:More importantly, (Score:4, Insightful)
Why are the building new housing complexes in the Fukishima Death Zone? Build prisons instead.
They haven't developed the prison-industrial growth complex like the Americans have. Japan is a civilized society and does not have enough prisoners.
Before someone heartlessly suggests imprisoning the Fukishima workers, the guys who designed it / built it are retired / dead of old age, and a heck of a lot of the operators downed when they were sent home after the earthquake before the tsunami, and you don't need to build an entire prison to house the small number of fall guys left, and there seems little reason to punish the temps sent in after the disaster.
Re:A bit of perspective (Score:5, Insightful)
From the same chart, 18 years of that (117 mSv), if it were absorbed in only one year, would still be only marginally higher than the lowest dose clearly linked to an increased risk of cancer (100 mSv/year). Since it's being absorbed over 18 years, the body has a much better chance of repairing any damage, so health is most likely not affected.
The human body can take a surprising amount of radiation and do just fine when compared to detectable levels. A report of "radiation found!" really means very little in terms of overall health. Much more concerning is that the contaminated materials were used at all, implying that the construction controls aren't right. Finding some low levels of contamination should lead to an inspection of all buildings recently built by the same company, to see where else (potentially more) radioactive materials have been used, and to assess if there's any real danger.
Re:More importantly, (Score:5, Insightful)
Wait, why is it the Fukushima Death Zone? Because of the people that died there when they drowned or were crushed by the tsunami?
Nobody has died from the radiation released by Fukushima, and likely no one will.
Re:A bit of perspective (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes. I also drive a car to work, which is far more dangerous. I also use a laptop on my lap, stand near the microwave, and have a slippery shower floor. I'm a risky person. Please don't tell my insurance agent.
Re:A bit of perspective (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes. Disagreement among scientists is about the range of problems connected to the range of radiation doses received. Below a given dose, nobody except crackpots thinks radiation causes problems. Above a certain dose, nobody except crackpots thinks radiation's safe. These crackpot thresholds apply to almost any risk. There's a certain height above which a fall is deadly. There's a certain amount of water that can be in the lungs without any problem. There's a certain amount of traffic that can go through an intersection before it will work better with a stoplight.
The non-idiots recognize that some things aren't known perfectly, so they learn the crackpot thresholds and just try to stay on the safe sides, without worrying too much. They don't need to know exactly how much radiation causes what problems, just that a little bit has almost no risk. The idiots are the ones who see "radiation" and immediately assume it's an absolutely-deadly dose, and that the child in TFS is now doomed to die of cancer at 20.
Re:Does the nuke industry troll here? (Score:5, Insightful)
Or are Slashdot posters that infatuated with nuclear? Seems like no matter what news comes out on that disaster, we've got apologists crawling out to explain how we don't need to worry about it and any concerns are the ignorant fears of the anti-nuke brainwashed.
Yes, because posts like this
by Tyr07 (2300912) on 10:15 16 January 2012 (#38714956)
*snip*
If I lived there, I'd have radiation meters weaved into my clothes.
People go 'OH it's not that much' FINE, let government leaders live in those places. I wouldn't want my life shortened at all, I'm thinking 40 years down the road I don't want to die from horrible radiation inflicted disease, nor do I want to find out some sort of penis monster finds me attractive.
are the epitome of rational and calm appraisal of the dangers...
No (Score:5, Insightful)
It is that there are some smart people who post here, people who can look at numbers and do a bit of math, and thus realize that this story is in fact a complete non-story since the levels are so low.
The anti-nuke crowd gets all worked up over radiation as a boogeyman without any thought. None of them seem to appreciate that you are exposed to radiation every day, every where, just by living. They seem to think ANY amount of radiation is evil.
Also plenty of people on Slashdot can do risk analysis and understand that yes, nuclear power has risks but so does everything else in the world. They've looked at the risk, and decided it was worth it.
Re:More importantly, (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't know about that. I haven't heard many bad things about Chinese prisons; I think it's because, for any kind of serious crime, they simply execute them. It's the US where we keep people in concrete cells for decades at a time, subjecting them to daily anal rapes so that we can drive them insane.
Re:More importantly, (Score:4, Insightful)
A couple of the Fukushima workers were exposed to some pretty heavy dosages. Only a matter of time for them.
And the statistical nature of exposure and the way radiation does its thing means that it's unlikely but possible for anyone exposed to the initial releases of material, or to material that travelled long distances, can ultimately die from it. Japan's population density is much thicker than almost any other place, so this tiny likelihood becomes a statistically significant likelihood across the larger number.
So it's very likely someone will die from the radiation released by Fukushima, but unlikely anyone will ever be able to connect it conclusively.
Re:More importantly, (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's see... various things that have been and still are criminal: Having sex in an unsanctioned way between two consenting adults. Speaking against the elite of the region you're in. Drinking alcohol.
I'd say "no". I'd say that crime in itself isn't a problem at all - various things that are crimes are, but the fact that something is a crime doesn't make it wrong.