Replies to post #2281 on The Rising Influence of Rising Affluence

[OakesCS]

ob,
i carefully omitted another 3 mile island as a possibility, however, there are literally many orders of magnitude difference (by several measures) between Chernobyl and three mile island. These have some reasonable comments regarding comparison:
http://library.thinkquest.org/17940/texts/nuclear_disasters/nuclear_disasters.html
and http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=36046 (c.f. alchemy's note)

the reuter's article is an excellent example of why i greet most mass media reports of scientific topics with great disdain. There are huge differences between things not operating in a preferred or expected manner (current state of affairs for reactors in Japan), making a difficult to repair or unrepairable but non-catastrophic mess (~3MI), and a catastrophic, global disaster (chernobyl).

I have yet to hear a single 'news' person discuss the source(s) of released radiation from the japanese reactors. If you hear a news person mention the source and form of radiation, then that would be a person to pay attention to. If they start talking about curies, roentgens, or rem dosages, and at what distance from the reactor then you can be impressed.

as a side note to give perspective and demonstrate the power of societal senility: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windscale_fire

regards,
Charlie

[old man]

Primer on radiation levels.
http://blogs.agu.org/wildwildscience/2011/03/12/massive-explosion-rocks-japan-nuclear-plant-radiation-facts/