Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
quilp

Sellafield, How safe on our doorstep..?

Recommended Posts

1.) "Review of oceanographic processes influencing radioactive waste dispersal in the Irish Sea." (1986)

 

http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/view/subjects/GC.html

 

http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/15099/1/15099-01.pdf

 

 

I haven't checked whether Sellafield is storage only now or if there are ongoing [intentional] 'discharges'. Also I don't know enough about this generally from a technical perspective, so just flag up the above source since it *may* be of continuing relevance. Given its content, there were points noted for further investigation in 1986, whether or not Sellafield's status was later storage-only.

[. . . ]

 

"The effluent discharged into the sea from the nuclear reprocessing plant

at Sellafield contains a number of radioactive isotopes of long half life.

There is concern to ensure that these isotopes, particularly the [alpha] emitting

isotopes of plutonium and americium, are dispersed or buried and do not present

a hazard to man. The critical future pathway to man is thought to be via the

atmosphere and human inhalation of the radionuclides. This report reviews the

oceanographic processes that are involved in either contributing to this

pathway or to final deposition of the radionuclide, highlights the crucial

factors governing transport and exchange, and defines areas in which

insufficient is known.

 

Upon discharge much of the radioactivity becomes associated with the

sediment particles, and the majority of the radionuclides discharged in the

past are to be found in a muddy area of the sea bed within 30km of the

pipeline. This contaminated sediment undergoes intense bioturbation, and since

little new sediment appears to be depositing, the radioactivity is not buried,

but is continually available for physical, chemical or biological

remobilization and transport to other areas. During stormy periods physical

stirring brings the sediment into suspension and spray from breaking waves can

convey the contaminated particles into the atmosphere where they can be blown

ashore. In calmer periods chemical or biological remobilization may be

significant. Marine processes could also transport the particles into

estuaries and onto the beaches where, in the intertidal areas, they could

become windblown.

 

It is concluded that transport is almost entirely dominated by physical

processes, though chemical and biological processes are important in

determining the stability of the radionuclide/particle interactions. There is

a major lack of knowledge of the processes involved in the transfer and of the

rates of transfer which makes prediction of the ultimate fate of the

radionuclides impossible at present.

 

 

In particular it is concluded that studies are needed to:

 

1. Clarify the processes by which the radionuclides become associated with

the sediment particles upon discharge.

 

2. Determine independently the rates of erosion or deposition in the muddy area

off Sellafield."

[etc etc, see the pdf for them all]

 

 

2.) I have a tape compendium of Pathe' Newsreel excerpts from 1957 among which figures a scene of Cumberland (?) farmers pouring milk down the drains following the Sellafield/Windscale 'effusion' of October 1957, as previously cited https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windscale_fire

 

3) Given that the thrust of the 1986 paper seems to be the principal potential threat was via airborne particles, the relative incidence of certain types of cancer in the IoM population may or may not produce some interesting correspondences.

 

4) Cancer and GcMAF - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqMohmjJ4mg - August 2014 weekend intro discussion.

"Caveat spectator"

 

 

All very interesting...................not.

Has somebody just let you out from a bunker or something ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You only have to look to history to see what effect a major incident would have at Sellafield. In 1957 a fire occurred in the Windscale nuclear reactor on the site. Nobody had any idea what to do, various different attempts were made to bring it under control until it was finally controlled after 16 hours by pouring water on it. The reason it had taken that long to try pouring water on it was that it was thought that it could have disastrous consequences, so every other possibility was tried first. Fuck knows what would have happened if it didn't work.

Throughout its history Sellafield has cut corners, during the nuclear weapons race the manufacture of reactors was rushed and is still causing problems today. During the miners' strike it was vastly overworked, the results of which are still with us today.

And the UK Governments answer to this - to put the decommissioning process out to the lowest bidder.

 

So what does our Government do about it? Fuck all, they won't say boo to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MB: You only have to look to history to see what effect a major incident would have at Sellafield

 

You need look no further than your avatar photo to see what effect a major incident at Sellafield would havebiggrin.png .....word has it you were once a very handsome child.

Edited by Lisenchuk
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You only have to look to history to see what effect a major incident would have at Sellafield. In 1957 a fire occurred in the Windscale nuclear reactor on the site. Nobody had any idea what to do, various different attempts were made to bring it under control until it was finally controlled after 16 hours by pouring water on it. The reason it had taken that long to try pouring water on it was that it was thought that it could have disastrous consequences, so every other possibility was tried first. Fuck knows what would have happened if it didn't work.

Throughout its history Sellafield has cut corners, during the nuclear weapons race the manufacture of reactors was rushed and is still causing problems today. During the miners' strike it was vastly overworked, the results of which are still with us today.

And the UK Governments answer to this - to put the decommissioning process out to the lowest bidder.

 

So what does our Government do about it? Fuck all, they won't say boo to them.

Stop talking fucking rubbish.

 

The IoM government has zero say in Sellafield. Never has and never will. No point in saying a thing.

 

Just like the counties that surround it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nuclear power is safe. Safer than hydro, safer than wind, safer than solar.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_accidents

 

Even Chenobyl killed less than coal continues to kill. Even Fukushima which was the 2nd worse overall nuclear 'disaster' MIGHT kill up to 180. The bigger problem was the HUGE TSUNAMI which if it happens again will kill many more.

 

You're smarter than this Monkey Boy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tarne

 

You are correct. Of course you have selected the statistics to suit yourself. After a tsunami the builders can move in and the towns can be rebuilt. The land around Chernobyl will not he habitable for thousands of years. There will be genetic issues in future generations etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like propaganda. Who funded the research, Barry? Or did they just make it up out of thin air? Cancer is definitely very high here and it didn't used to be. People aren't living longer either, another old chestnut that gets brought up to explain it.

 

BBC Radio 4 is a non commercial station and the programme would have been "Analysis" or "File on Four" and they are put together by people who will investigate..

 

By the way, cancer is high on the Island due to (a) aged population (b) heavy drinking © smoking and a Manx tendency towards the "Glasgow Scots Diet"...

 

Down on the fringe of my manor we have (had) a power station at Bradwell (Now closed) but due to be the site of a new Chinese financed/owned nuclear power station (They have distracted everyone with Hinckley Point but this is another one)...

 

Now many people live within a few miles of Bradwell and it is a leisure activity area...No one mentions cancer being higher or at least I have not heard..It used to give off a continuous hum sound though Bradwell power station.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tarne

 

You are correct. Of course you have selected the statistics to suit yourself. After a tsunami the builders can move in and the towns can be rebuilt. The land around Chernobyl will not he habitable for thousands of years. There will be genetic issues in future generations etc.

 

Well actually a BBC Radio 4 team and correspondents were there recently and they commented that contrary to what they had been told people were living in and around Chernobyl and it looked rather green and settled...The population had drifted back in...The area was restoring itself apparently...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well actually a BBC Radio 4 team and correspondents were there recently and they commented that contrary to what they had been told people were living in and around Chernobyl and it looked rather green and settled...The population had drifted back in...The area was restoring itself apparently...

 

 

Yeah, it's still livable there but you do have a higher risk of cancer in the area. The 2008 UN report had:

 

2008 UNSCEAR report[edit]

The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) produced a detailed report on the effects of Chernobyl for the General Assembly of the UN in 2011.[93] This report concluded that 134 staff and emergency workers sufferedacute radiation syndrome and of those 28 died of radiation exposure within three months. Many of the survivors suffered skin conditions and radiation induced cataracts, and 19 had since died, but from conditions not necessarily associated with radiation exposure. Of the several hundred thousand liquidators, apart from some emerging indications of increased leukaemia, there was no other evidence of health effects.

In the general public in the affected areas, the only effect with 'persuasive evidence' was a substantial fraction of the 6,000 cases of thyroid cancer in adolescents of whom by 2005 15 cases had proved fatal. There was no evidence of increased rates of solid cancers or leukaemia among the general population. However, there was a widespread psychological worry about the effects of radiation.

The total deaths reliably attributable by UNSCEAR to the radiation produced by the accident therefore was 62.

The report concluded that 'the vast majority of the population need not live in fear of serious health consequences from the Chernobyl accident'

Which is a tiny amount of deaths compared to all the fear it generated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a study of the wildlife conducted in the Chernobyl area (probably ongoing) that suggested the presence of humans was far worse for wildlife than the radiation. Elk, wild boar and wolves are all thriving in the exclusion zones, principally because they are left alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Judging from the above we should have more nuclear power stations, and more accidents. All fro the good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You only have to look to history to see what effect a major incident would have at Sellafield. In 1957 a fire occurred in the Windscale nuclear reactor on the site. Nobody had any idea what to do, various different attempts were made to bring it under control until it was finally controlled after 16 hours by pouring water on it. The reason it had taken that long to try pouring water on it was that it was thought that it could have disastrous consequences, so every other possibility was tried first. Fuck knows what would have happened if it didn't work.

Throughout its history Sellafield has cut corners, during the nuclear weapons race the manufacture of reactors was rushed and is still causing problems today. During the miners' strike it was vastly overworked, the results of which are still with us today.

And the UK Governments answer to this - to put the decommissioning process out to the lowest bidder.

 

So what does our Government do about it? Fuck all, they won't say boo to them.

Stop talking fucking rubbish.

 

The IoM government has zero say in Sellafield. Never has and never will. No point in saying a thing.

 

Just like the counties that surround it.

 

Well not all of the countries that surround it are so scared to make their feelings known http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/ireland-demands-the-closure-of-sellafield-9193917.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well not all of the countries that surround it are so scared to make their feelings known

 

Most people who live on the island knew about Sellafield before moving here so it would be a bit off to moan about it. If you don't like it you could always move somewhere else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...