How Chernobyl effected the European and British film production ?
Originally Posted by tkamiya
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.
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.
Originally Posted by nickrapak
I have no idea. Sorry.
Originally Posted by Mustafa Umut Sarac
You would have to ask someone from Agfa, Foma or EFKE.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
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.
Last edited by Ken Nadvornick; 03-23-2011 at 12:12 AM. Click to view previous post history.
"They are the proof that something was there and no longer is. Like a stain. And the stillness of them is boggling. You can turn away but when you come back theyll still be there looking at you."
Diane Arbus, March 15, 1971, in response to a request for a brief statement about photographs
I have heard Fuji also has such protection in place.
Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
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.
For anyone interested in what is really going on in terms of the nuclear incident, I can heartily recommend the following resources:
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:
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:
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:
16th of March:
15th of March:
USTREAM channel of CNIC (some not translated):
Last edited by Marco B; 03-23-2011 at 04:30 AM. Click to view previous post history.
"The nineteenth century began by believing that what was reasonable was true, and it wound up by believing that what it saw a photograph of, was true.
" - William M. Ivins Jr.
"I don't know, maybe we should disinvent color, and we could just shoot Black & White.
" - David Burnett in 1978
"Analog is chemistry + physics, digital is physics + math, which ones did you like most?
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.
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.