What kind of radiation levels have been recorded at Fukushima?
The Kyodo news agency reports that a radiation level of 1,557 microsieverts per hour was registered on Sunday. At this level, one hour's exposure is roughly equivalent to one chest X-ray. Later measurements included 750 microsieverts per hour at 0200 on Monday, and 20 microsieverts per hour at 1145. On a long-haul flight, passengers are exposed to about five microsieverts per hour. However, after Tuesday's explosion, readings at the site rose again beyone safe limits - 400 millisieverts per hour and people living within 20 miles (32km) of the plant were told to stay indoors. Moving away from the source of radiation, measurements quickly tail off, and in Tokyo they were reported to have been higher than normal, but officials said there were no health dangers.
I would strongly suggest that the media is still getting behind the story and pushing for all it's worth rather than trying to actually report the news.
The situation is indeed fluid and dangerous but, until and if there is an explosion that breaches a reactors containment, there is no point talking it up to be worse than it already is (which is pretty bad but not catastrophic).
What made Chernobyl so bad was a huge blast that threw radioactive material up into the winds and spread it far and wide.
Have a read of this article which deals with things fairly matter-of-factly:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12722435
This bit is particularly important for underlining the geographical scope of the danger:
What risk does Fukushima pose currently?
The Japanese authorities have recorded a radiation level of up 400 millisieverts per hour at the nuclear plant itself.
A sievert is essentially equivalent to a gray, but tends to be used to measure lower levels of radiation, and for assessing long-term risk, rather than the short-term acute impact of exposure.
Professor Richard Wakeford, an expert in radiation exposure at the University of Manchester, said exposure to a dose of 400 millisieverts was unlikely to cause radiation sickness - that would require a dose of around twice that level (one sievert/one gray).
However, it could start to depress the production of blood cells in the bone marrow, and was likely to raise the lifetime risk of fatal cancer by 2-4%. Typically, a Japanese person has a lifetime risk of fatal cancer of 20-25%.
Prof Wakeford stressed only emergency workers at the plant were at risk of exposure to such a dose - but it was likely that they would only be exposed for short periods of time to minimise their risk.
The level of exposure for the general population, even those living close to the plant, was unlikely to be anywhere near as high.
And for a bit of simple-terms video: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12744973
The Kyodo news agency reports that a radiation level of 1,557 microsieverts per hour was registered on Sunday. At this level, one hour's exposure is roughly equivalent to one chest X-ray. Later measurements included 750 microsieverts per hour at 0200 on Monday, and 20 microsieverts per hour at 1145. On a long-haul flight, passengers are exposed to about five microsieverts per hour. However, after Tuesday's explosion, readings at the site rose again beyone safe limits - 400 millisieverts per hour and people living within 20 miles (32km) of the plant were told to stay indoors. Moving away from the source of radiation, measurements quickly tail off, and in Tokyo they were reported to have been higher than normal, but officials said there were no health dangers.
I would strongly suggest that the media is still getting behind the story and pushing for all it's worth rather than trying to actually report the news.
The situation is indeed fluid and dangerous but, until and if there is an explosion that breaches a reactors containment, there is no point talking it up to be worse than it already is (which is pretty bad but not catastrophic).
What made Chernobyl so bad was a huge blast that threw radioactive material up into the winds and spread it far and wide.
Have a read of this article which deals with things fairly matter-of-factly:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12722435
This bit is particularly important for underlining the geographical scope of the danger:
What risk does Fukushima pose currently?
The Japanese authorities have recorded a radiation level of up 400 millisieverts per hour at the nuclear plant itself.
A sievert is essentially equivalent to a gray, but tends to be used to measure lower levels of radiation, and for assessing long-term risk, rather than the short-term acute impact of exposure.
Professor Richard Wakeford, an expert in radiation exposure at the University of Manchester, said exposure to a dose of 400 millisieverts was unlikely to cause radiation sickness - that would require a dose of around twice that level (one sievert/one gray).
However, it could start to depress the production of blood cells in the bone marrow, and was likely to raise the lifetime risk of fatal cancer by 2-4%. Typically, a Japanese person has a lifetime risk of fatal cancer of 20-25%.
Prof Wakeford stressed only emergency workers at the plant were at risk of exposure to such a dose - but it was likely that they would only be exposed for short periods of time to minimise their risk.
The level of exposure for the general population, even those living close to the plant, was unlikely to be anywhere near as high.
And for a bit of simple-terms video: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12744973
Last edited: