Posted on 03/14/2011 2:11:19 AM PDT by buccaneer81
USS Ronald Reagan Moved After Detecting Radioactive Plume Off Japan Ship's Crew Was Exposed to Low Level of Radiation
By LUIS MARTINEZ March 14, 2011
The aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan and other US Navy ships in the waters off the quake zone in eastern Japan were repositioned after the detection of a low-level radiation plume from the troubled Fukushima nuclear plant located 100 miles away.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Intentionally steering the ship into an area where there is a known radioactive plume when it is completely avoidable is a sign of them "knowing what they are doing"? Tell that to the sailor who accidentally breathes in a hot "flea" and dies a miserable death from lung cancer a year and a half from now. Seems like an unnecessary and completely avoidable risk to me.
I used to live near TMI. Not during the time-frame of the accident, but years after. Some of my friends lived through it. One, a PA State Trooper, had to work the perimeter of the accident. He was issued iodine tablets along with all the other emergency response personnel.
There was a lot of panic then. A lot of it associated with a lack of accurate & timely information. One hopes that the Japanese authorities are playing straight with their people as to the risks.
Call 1-800-Edwards if you think you have been affected by the Japanese nuclear leak.
You’re assuming they knew the plume was there. The amount of exposure these guys received is not going to lead to lung cancer.
They are in more danger from the hysterics.
Shhh!
The more people joining the lawsuit, the less the payout.
It's harder to believe that an aircraft carrier that was designed to operate in a radiated environment, operating near a known nuclear accident, wasn't flying missions monitoring the radioactive plume.
The amount of exposure these guys received is not going to lead to lung cancer.
Depends on the type of radiation. Ingesting a radioactive "flea", IOW, a particle the size of a spec of dust, by breathing it in or swallowing it, is indeed enough to cause cancer, especially if it was cesium or plutonium. It just seems to me to be unnecessarily reckless to expose the ship in this manner. It can certainly be cleaned and decontaminated, but it's a big ship and it only takes ingestion of one minute particle to cause problems.
Those exposed were in a plane.
I can imagine all kinds of things. One of those things are facts and another is logic.
Oh my goodness, thanks for posting. There's nothing like proper context. At the top of the hour, Fox News had this alarmist headline about the Reagan pullback - "crew receives one month's radiation."
If they are moving the ship, imagine what level the people on the ground are absorbing???
True, I’m just asking a simple question based on what I’ve been reading. Unnecessarily exposing the crew to elevated levels of radiation just doesn’t make sense. Ground combat soldiers wear body armor, but that doesn’t mean they stand out in plain view and invite pot shots from snipers. Based on what I’ve read it just sounds to me like the risk was avoidable.
The PhD has no credability problem. If they actually received a months worth of exposure, the radiation exposure to the personel of the USS Ronald Reagan was still less than a person recieves in a 3 hour jet flight. If you note the exact wording in the article, they state the exposure was "less than" a months exposure. These people received more exposure to radiation in the flight from their hometown to the home port when they deployed.
The center of the destruction was just north of the plants- Sendai.
So obviously the optimum position for the carrier’s mission was NE of the plants.
Whether they should or could have moved to avoid the radiation would require more info and knowledge than I have.
Based on what? Not trying to be argumentative, just asking.
Being at the closest point to the most affected areas. Optimizing response time and fuel for missions.
Currents, wind and other factors would also affect the optimum position but I doubt as much- though I couldn’t knowledgeably comment on those anyway.
Not to single you out, because you raise a good point - but to everyone asking the question about the “wind direction”....just remember that ships move at a slow rate of speed and winds don’t typically remain the same direction for more than 24-48 hrs.
the one in the James Bond movie?
50 microrads = 2.5 x-rays.
This is not a disaster.
It is being dubbed Hiroshima’s revenge. Japans’ contingency plan for a nuclear plant meltdown is to allow the radioactive material to vent and escape with a high probability that the deadly cloud would be carried out to sea. The downside is that most of the radioactive dust and smoke would rise and be carried on the jet stream to western North America. Washington, Oregon and California will take the brunt of the fallout.
I read so many comments from ‘experts’ here, can any of you tell me how something that we have been told can last 10,000 years can magically disappear in a matter of a few miles floating across the ocean?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.