Fuji and the earthquake

[2F/2F]

Of course in an island as small as the U.K. a leak big enough to affect film might be the least of our worries.

Telephone operator to John Cleese: "There are too many people on this island."

 

[vpwphoto]

As for my sources, they are impeccable, I assure you! After all, even if I was quoting myself!
PE

Right on PE.

 

[tkamiya]

This intense posturing on Internet is getting quite annoying.... Seems no one can talk about product shortage or buying "just in case" without prefacing statements with their deepest concern to people of Japan or else they get attacked for being insensitive, self-servicing, and just plain evil.

The truth is, people of Japan are suffering immensely. The truth is, people in rest of the world still has to live their lives and enjoy themselves. The truth is, products shortage will likely be a reality at least for a short term for some products. Rest of the world enjoying their lives doesn't impact people in Japan. While I wish people don't buy now only to sell later at inflated prices, products are there to be purchased.

Look... I was born there and lived there until late teen years. I appreciate very much when people ask me if my family or friends are impacted. (no one I know are impacted) But there is no need for this hyper sensitivity and posturing. This endless argument isn't helping anyone and you are only creating animosity. Please stop if you are concerned about people there and care about the actual problem. If would like to act, please consider making even small donations. If your situation does not permit it, please keep them in your thoughts.

That's all I have to say. Good night.

 

[M.A.Longmore]

.
Thank You, Mr. Kamiya !

.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Sandholm and I were both correct about the mistakes made at TMI, PE. To mention him alone here implies that I was not correct.

But it is not correct that "pure luck" saved it from being even more disastrous. That is crazy; you two are defending a ridiculous overstatement, and categorizing the operators as a group of 100% screwups, who had nothing to do with preventing this from becoming a worse accident. The truth of the matter is that a bunch of people scrambling to figure out what the hell to do finally arrived at the right answer. That is not luck. Luck would have been choosing response steps "purely" (to use Sandholm's term) at random from a wide possibility of options, and having the chosen step turn out by chance to be the correct step. There wasn't any chance involved in a group of operators finally figuring out what was going on and how to stop it. This was not "pure luck." Do you really believe that some divine thing such as CHANCE saved that reactor from totally melting down and probably busting open?

Are you here to post information that stirs people up and gets the last laugh? That is a funny way around responding to contrary points, especially from someone who uses the fact that he used to be a scientist in order to defend his arguments so often. Ignore my points if you don't want to respond to them. You have no duty to answer anyone. But at least accept that they are reasonable points, and don't make fun simply because I am not 100% on the same page as you.

However well-intentioned your post was – and I do think that it was, PE, don't get me wrong! – all you had to do was wait for real information with a real, nameable source. If your sources are impeccable, then name them. And tell us what they said. "Hi, folks. Fujifilm Japan reporting here. Radiation is going to affect our film production. We are receiving this much, which is enough to affect our film negatively," would be what they would have need to have said to make this a responsible and timely post on your part. As of now, it is an alarmist and fear-stirring post without cause.

The NBC national news reported that 3 mile island was prevented from becoming a major national disaster on the order of Chrenoby (Wormwood in Russion which led many to believe that it was from Revelations in the Bible) by the action of several heroic engineers and "good luck". I was combining several sources to come to that final statement of mine which agreed with others.

My sources prefer to remain anonymous! If I revealed them, then you would not be safe in the confessional, would you? I can't tell you anything except that they know what they are talking about. But then, having been in middle management at Kodak for years, you are also questioning my veracity.

OTOH, I did say "possible"! We just don't know! That is the problem. If I knew, I would say.

Have a nice day. You need one!

PE

 

[2F/2F]

No mSv values has been release except the values are 1600 times higher then normal, and Japan has earlier reported that the normal value for them are 10.27 mSv/24h, so the 1600x increase should give them a value around 16500 mSs/24h. Chernobyl was around 10,000–300,000 mSv/hr, so its far from Chernobyl. If you worked at a nuclear plant you know that most of them say that you should not be exposed to more then 20 mSv for a whole year, and current/earlier (dont know now) its around 640 mSv/hr at "ground zero", and I would not call this "nothing", that IS really bad, just for reference (and this is a single dose, not over 1hr)

100 mSv - great risk for birth defects
3-4 Sv - 50% chans to die
10 Sv - 100% chans to die, aka DEAD

Here is a live geiger counter in Tokyo http://www.ustream.tv/channel/7517126
(a geiger measurement alone can not be translated to mSv, because to do that you have to know the type of radiation and how deadly it is)

cheers

Hi, Sandholm.

The numbers you post are not in relation to my statement against which you are arguing. You are talking about the plant grounds, and at those levels, specifically core readings. I was talking about the surrounding communities (i.e. the evacuated areas). From what I can gather from a little rereading of newspaper articles, there are readings that peaked at 0.17 mSv/hr (about 4 mSv per day) within the evacuation zone, where nobody is located. Here is what I said initially, to which you responded with your post that I quoted:

Yes, it is to be expected. But what are the levels? Not enough to do anything to anyone. Even in the communities surrounding "ground zero," this is not the case.

The first three sentences refer to PE's mention of radiation (of unspecified amounts) in the Pacific NW. The fourth sentence says that even the radiation in the communities surrounding the plant (i.e. the evacuated areas) is not enough to do anything to anyone unless maintained at that level for some time (which will not be the case once the radiation leaks are contained at the plant).

20 mSv/yr is correct for international workers. The limit for U.S. plant workers is 2.5x that. (We use rem here, and the limit is 5 rem/yr, though we try, and usually succeed to keep it to 1/10 of that.)

I also do not gather that 640 mSv/hr is average for the grounds of the plant. From what I have read, there was a confirmed spike up to 400 mSv/hr at one of the cores about a week ago, and an unconfirmed spike up to 1 Sv/hr at one of the cores at one point. The peak recorded at the main gate at Fukushima is 11 mSv/hr, and that is above the average for the gate throughout the accident.

That spike reading of 0.17 mSv/hr is in the communities surrounding the plant. Add 6,000 miles of overseas travel to it, and you'll see that the radiation reaching the Pacific NW isn't even worth losing a second's sleep over. Yet people are intent on mentioning over and over and over that radiation has arrived here on the west coast, as if it means something.

Again, if you are really worried about radiation here, wear sunscreen every day. It will do you more good over your life than freaking out and staying indoors eating iodine tablets.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

.
Thank You, Mr. Kamiya !

.

I second that.

 

[2F/2F]

If I knew, I would say.

But you did say. Even though you don't know. Something like, "This is the case, but I don't really know, but somebody says this, but I cannot tell you who or what exactly they said, but trust me it's true, and NO I will never reveal who even though I will gladly tell you what they sort of said, and by the way radiation has reached the west coast, and it could affect film production in small amounts, but I don't know what amounts, and............so on and so on." What is the point of this post, PE? It is a bunch of sourceless hoopla over nothing, for as much as we know right now.

Can't you at least source the two painfully obvious questions before publishing?

1) What types and amounts of radiation damage film in production?
2) Are these types and levels present at the Fuji manufacturing plant/s?

Then you have something to actually say, instead of dancing drunk through an ill-prepared post.

As for TMI, so, you think an NBC newscast recalled from 30 years ago has it right, but Naval Reactors and the NRC have it wrong. I think that NR and the NRC would beg to differ...and I can guarantee you that "pure luck" is not in any of their reports on the accident. Additionally, even the NBC source credits heroic engineers and good luck. And that proves to you that "pure luck" is the cause of minimizing the accident? You just disproved your own point with that source you named. What is was was a timely discovery of a solution, not luck. There is a big difference between the two.

Ok. What I have done is argued sensible, and provably correct, points dryly, without attacking you personally. What you have done is to post meandering sort-of-statements of sort-of-fact, lumber around any criticism with smart alec comments, and dole out backhanded personal swipes. I have to ask again what your game is here?

 

[nickrapak]

PE, Do your sources know whether there was any adverse affect to film coating operations from the Ginna NPP incident in 1982? From what I know, there was a small radioactive gas leak from a burst steam pipe. Since it is only about 20 miles from Kodak Park, I assume there was some contamination, but I would have no idea how much.

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

PE ,

How Chernobyl effected the European and British film production ?

Umut

 

[removed account4]

This intense posturing on Internet is getting quite annoying.... Seems no one can talk about product shortage or buying "just in case" without prefacing statements with their deepest concern to people of Japan or else they get attacked for being insensitive, self-servicing, and just plain evil.

The truth is, people of Japan are suffering immensely. The truth is, people in rest of the world still has to live their lives and enjoy themselves. The truth is, products shortage will likely be a reality at least for a short term for some products. Rest of the world enjoying their lives doesn't impact people in Japan. While I wish people don't buy now only to sell later at inflated prices, products are there to be purchased.

Look... I was born there and lived there until late teen years. I appreciate very much when people ask me if my family or friends are impacted. (no one I know are impacted) But there is no need for this hyper sensitivity and posturing. This endless argument isn't helping anyone and you are only creating animosity. Please stop if you are concerned about people there and care about the actual problem. If would like to act, please consider making even small donations. If your situation does not permit it, please keep them in your thoughts.

That's all I have to say. Good night.

THANKS!

john

 

[Photo Engineer]

2F;

Gee, you are right. I have posted something ambiguous. If I knew the radiation level at the Fuji plant I would publish it. But, no one knows. The plant the company and the government in Japan are being ambiguous. US and Japanese figures differ by a large figure. If you expect me to do better, sorry!

I can't do better on Kodak's part either as they don't know for sure but probably suspect a problem may arise and they may be getting prepared, IDK. That is why this is just a "warning" about Fuji products.

I've already explained that damage can take place after months of keeping and that the damage takes place at levels below himan problm arise. I have also said that it manifests iself as black speckles on the coating.

Now, what more do you want than this honest exposition of a generic warning that certain events might take place? Read my OP please.

PE

 

[Photo Engineer]

PE, Do your sources know whether there was any adverse affect to film coating operations from the Ginna NPP incident in 1982? From what I know, there was a small radioactive gas leak from a burst steam pipe. Since it is only about 20 miles from Kodak Park, I assume there was some contamination, but I would have no idea how much.

There were none due to 2 factors. Wind blew much of the radioactivity south and east and KP was west of Ginna. Also, Kodak had a very complete protection plan in operation at that time.

PE

 

[Photo Engineer]

PE ,

How Chernobyl effected the European and British film production ?

Umut

I have no idea. Sorry.

You would have to ask someone from Agfa, Foma or EFKE.

PE

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Regarding the events at Three Mile Island, this is probably as authoritative a source as you'll find. It's a reasonably short, non-technical overview of the events that occurred on Wednesday, March 28, 1979 at generating unit TMI-2, and their subsequent impacts. There is also a nicely stylized diagram of the plant components at the very bottom of the page:

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission report: Backgrounder on the Three Mile Island Accident

For those reading along here who may be unfamiliar with the incident, this report should serve to get you up to speed.

Ken

 

[Ray Rogers]

There were none due to 2 factors. Wind blew much of the radioactivity south and east and KP was west of Ginna. Also, Kodak had a very complete protection plan in operation at that time.

PE

I have heard Fuji also has such protection in place.
Can you describe what Kodak's plan involved?

(besides testing, which we saw in the '58 Kodak film)

What was Kodak's plan if one morning they discovered "too much" radiation?

What are your thoughts on the usefulness of underground storage?

From your earlier comments, it seems as if rapid turnover (from manufacture to processing) would just about make it OK to use, at least for the levels already mentioned.

?

 

[Marco B]

For anyone interested in what is really going on in terms of the nuclear incident, I can heartily recommend the following resources:

MEXT
It seems MEXT (the Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (http://www.mext.go.jp/english/), has now made available aggregated data of radiation levels in microSv / hour and fall out in MBq / km2 for all prefectures of Japan. The data can be found here, including for the past few days. Notice for example the marked changes to Tokyo deposits due to the forecasted change in wind direction:

http://www.mext.go.jp/english/radioactivity_level/detail/1303962.htm

ZAMG
Another very interesting and disturbing source is the modelling done by ZAMG, the Austrian weather institute. Based on their weather models and some measurements from also the West coast of the US, they have "reverse" calculated the needed emission to cause it. It is estimated at 20-50% of total Chernobyl emissions:

PDF of ZAMG here explaining it:
http://www.zamg.ac.at/docs/aktuell/Japan2011-03-22_1500_E.pdf

CNIC
A last good resource is CNIC (the Citizens Nuclear Information Centre), a Japanese volunteer organization dedicated to informing the public about nuclear energy. They managed to gather a small group of pensioned Japanese nuclear experts for regular press conferences. Some of them are engineers that actually worked on the design of the Fukushima plant. They give insight in the weaknesses and design constraints of the original plant, and how such a nuclear plant operates in general terms.

Also, in the 16th of March video, there is a female radiological expert talking about the risks of exposure, essentially telling that there is a linear relationship between damage and cancer risk and the radiological dose received. Another important notion is that 1 mSv about corresponds to on average about 1 track of radiation going through the nucleus - where your DNA is stored and might be damaged - of each(!) cell of your body. To put natural background radiation (the one you can impossibly avoid because it is everywhere) in perspective to this, it is about 1.5 to 3 mSv per year depending on the area you live according to some articles I saw, but in some areas peaking well over 10 mSv. Our human bodies and cells, like the cells of all living creatures on our planet, are to some extent adapted to repair the possible damage.

There are other, unfortunately disheartening but honest revelations. It is not a pretty picture these engineers describe, be prepared for that. Of course, since these experts are limited by the lack of information too, just like the general public, they can not give direct insight or answers as to the level or current risks / status of the plants. They therefore describe the plants and risks in a more general way.

There are English translators present at the conferences for the following listed videos, so you can follow everything being said. Not all videos on CNIC Ustream channel have that though. Please also note that the videos are not professional productions, so sometimes it takes a few seconds or minutes for image or sound to appear, or the press conference to really start. Please be patient, despite the conferences each being close to two hours, it is definitely worth the watch.

Recommended videos with translator:

18th of March:
http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/13410573

16th of March:
http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/13359218

15th of March:
http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/13295291

USTREAM channel of CNIC (some not translated):

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/cnic-news

CNIC website:

http://cnic.jp/english/

 

[Photo Engineer]

Marco, thanks.

Ray, Kodak put in to action a complete plan including special air filters, water washes at the entry of each building, positive air pressure in each building (it was hard closing doors when you entered and you had wet feet). There was much more.

PE

 

[hrst]

Three Miles; The concept of "luck" is difficult. Of course you can say it's luck that it didn't go worse, but you forget to mention that, at the same time, it already was bad luck it got that worse. Luck has two sides. So, "it was very bad luck it got that bad" is just as valid as an argument. This is why I wouldn't use luck as an argument at all, but keep to the facts. The effect of "luck" has to be minimized in design, but IMO, it has no place in speculation in aftermath, because you can claim anything with it. Optimists will say that it was just "bad luck" it happened and pessimists will say it was "good luck" it didn't go worse.

The exact radiation measurements from Japan are available somewhere online but I couldn't find them... The bottom line was, that outside the 30 km area the levels are mostly around 5 µSv/h, with some exceptions in north or north-east where they had one peak considerably more at one point about 30 km from the plant. At 50 km or so, the numbers dropped very quickly below 1 µSv/h.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

How about existing film far from the incident?

...Film is hyper sensitive to all radiation. If there is any present, they will have to introduce draconian methods at the Fuji plant in Ashigara to eliminate the problem...I have been told that Fuji film and paper users should stock up on film as a "just in case" provision to tide them through to the summer months...

...There is more radiation from taking a cross-country plane trip than from Japan right now!...

...Remember that I said nuclear tests in the Pacific had an effect on film made in Rochester!...

...it showed up as tiny black specks and then it only showed up after a few months. It took time for cumulative exposure to affect the films. The 120 films were heavily affected to my knowledge because the paper was "infected"...

Tonights news reports that sensors in Seattle and Vancouver have detected an increase in radiation. Also, some detectors in northern US have detected radiation as well...

...The levels from the nuclear tests in the Pacific were too low to affect anyone here, but they affected Kodak films and changed the way the buildings making emulsions and coatings were built and protected...

...People will not notice it any more than they notice an X-Ray, but the film might look like someone peppered it with black dots...

OK Ron, the main question for me is as follows. Given a freezer stocked full of Kodak sheet film made at least six months ago, being on the west coast of the US, how would you guess this incident might affect long term keeping? Any measurable artifacts over time compared to expected fog from normal cosmic radiation? Did the nuclear tests' fallout have more impact on Kodak production during coating and the time immediately after than it did on fully "mature" film? Thanks in advance.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Sal;

Everyone here is missing a salient point in this. There is radiation such as cosmic and X-Rays etc.. and there are particles that emit radiation such as alpha and beta radiation. These are different!

The radiation from the nuclear plants are particles of dust that are radioactive and that emit radiation such as alpha and beta radiation and other types as well. So, water in Tokyo is contaminated with radioactive Iodine. You cannot filter out the Iodine with a filter, but rather you have to precipitate it chemically. Then you filter it out and hope that the Iodine has not created secondary radioactive materials in the water. At the same time, the radioactive water (steam) emitted from the plant undoubtedly contains some radioactive Zirconium. Zr has 3 radioactive isotopes with half lives that are quite long and I believe that they all emit beta radiation. These high energy electrons (or positrons) are only stopped by a barrier and can be widely distributed by the Zr dust and oxides of Zirconium caused by the fires.

So, we have a radioactive dust that is floating in the air and which can be carried far and wide. Now, this dust can land on a piece of film during manufacture. As is sits there, the atoms in this particle of dust begin to emit beta particles or whatever radiation is applicable to the dust and eventually a black spot shows up.

You could get this dust into a camera, onto your shoes (see news reports of reporters having radioactive dust on their shoes but nowhere else) and you can get it into your lungs. As the dust sits there (as is), the level may be very low and test low, but with time, it emits particles which cause a fog center that becomes larger and larger until the film is speckled with black dots.

At Kodak, we did nothing about Cosmic Radiation, but we did filter out particles as much as we could, and we used foot baths for shoes that might pick up these dust particles from the ground. We used positive pressure in all buildings and coating rooms so that dust was blown out, and we used air curtains to blow the dust and dirt off of our clothes when we went into coating areas. In some areas, we used white suits supplied by EK, along with special shoes. We even had an in-plant shoe store that sold special shoes to employees. I wore those shoes for years. They prevented static electricity, were water tight, and didn't let dust cling to them. They also had steel toes as an added precaution but that is another story.

The whole thing boils down to radioactive dust or gas that is transported and deposited. The worst problem comes when something dissolves in water such as the Iodine mentioned above.

PE

 

[Sal Santamaura]

I'll interpret your reply to mean...

Thanks for all that information. Given the situation I asked about, I'm going to take your reply to mean that I should pay close attention to keeping the top of my refrigerator dust-free and not be too concerned about any effect on stockpiled film in the freezer compartment.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Not quite Sal. Cosmic radiation is also cumulative over time, but the film manufacturing process is so short lived as far as the film is concerned, that the radiation is not a huge factor. Also, the brick buildings tend to absorb some of it just as your house does.

So, 400 speed film will "age" faster in the freezer than 100 speed film, and the dust is just insult to injury over the long haul.

PE

 

[Sal Santamaura]

...So, 400 speed film will "age" faster in the freezer than 100 speed film, and the dust is just insult to injury over the long haul...

I understood and was expecting cosmic radiation-induced cumulative fog on higher speed films in long-term storage. I inferred from your previous answer that any added "insult" would be at a lower order of magnitude, especially if one prevents dust from accumulating on top of the refrigerator.

Was I being too optimistic?

 

[Photo Engineer]

Actually no. Only gamma radiation would get through your refrigerator IMHO, along with Cosmic rays! IIRC, the gamma radiation comes from Iodine 101 and this isotope has a half life of about 8+ days. So, it will probably be long gone by the time it arrives here. The question is why so much radioactive Iodine in Tokyo water, more than 8 days after the event?

So yeah, you are probably safe unless you get the dust into your camera or lungs! Too bad you live in CA.

Tonight's news says that the problem is getting worse instead of better! No in-depth report yet.

PE