Nuclear power continues in the world

[Obamot]

This is added to the pollution of Chernobyl and Fukushima

https://france3-regions.francetvinfo.fr ... 73641.html

The sand dust of the Sahara carried Cesium-137, residue of old French nuclear tests

[Christophe]

80000 bq per km2?

[sicetaitsimple]

80000 bq per km2?

AToday, cesium 137 activities
in soils can thus vary by almost
two orders of magnitude depending on the
initial radioactive deposits: two-thirds
west of the territory present deposits
homogeneous and less than 5 Bq/m000,
while in the eastern part of the country, the
deposits are very heterogeneous and can
reach 40 Bq/m000 (Figure I.2).

https://www.irsn.fr/fr/expertise/rappor ... 0-2011.pdf

It's good per m2, not per km2.
In other words, it's that damn this episode of Saharan sand, whatever the size of the font and the color that Obamot chooses to talk about it.

[Obamot]

Yes, a few million deaths over a century — due to low-dose irradiation — sucks for Dopey.

Plus this cesium that is not counted. But you understand, he does copy/paste in the text, like Végaz... Unable to get involved in substantive discussions fossil-nuclear-energies / continuous-nuclear-in-the-world-t15964-380.html # p495375

It disturbs him

[Christophe]

80000 bq per km2?

AToday, cesium 137 activities
in soils can thus vary by almost
two orders of magnitude depending on the
initial radioactive deposits: two-thirds
west of the territory present deposits
homogeneous and less than 5 Bq/m000,
while in the eastern part of the country, the
deposits are very heterogeneous and can
reach 40 Bq/m000 (Figure I.2).

https://www.irsn.fr/fr/expertise/rappor ... 0-2011.pdf

It's good per m2, not per km2.
In other words, it's that damn this episode of Saharan sand, whatever the size of the font and the color that Obamot chooses to talk about it.

Thank you for checking…8 bq per m2 is therefore peanuts…

[Christophe]

And this table of the pdf confirms the debility of neuneus who are currently asking for iodine in pharmacies in fear of a nuclear war!!!

I had doubts they are confirmed!

No radioactive iodine created by a nuclear test, therefore by a military explosion...

Probably the same dorks who rushed for the vaccine…

1D307324-5C18-4B60-A4E7-61747FBE5983.png (343.91 Kio) Consulté 896 fois

They will still call me a conspirator

[Christophe]

But what a big stupid veran!

[sicetaitsimple]

I do not think so. If there is no iodine131 due to atmospheric nuclear tests, it is because its half-life is 8 days and the last atmospheric test must have taken place in 1980 in China.

[Christophe]

reread with your fingers the first line of the table

If there was iodine from nuclear tests, they would have specified it since this document is not "for a fixed date"...

So you take the IRSN for morons...in short, not very scientific as a remark...yet it was you who found this very good doc...

There's no Uranium in an H-bomb...I'm not a nuclear physicist but I know how to read a table.

For the brave: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_de_l%27iode

[sicetaitsimple]

List of the main radionuclides constituting the fallout from nuclear weapons tests, classified by increasing period (the period is the time required for the radioactivity to decrease by half):

iodine 131 131i 8 days iron 55 55fe 2,7 years
barium 140 140ba 13 days antimony 125 125sb 2,8 years
cerium 141 141ce 33 days tritium 3h 12 years
ruthenium 103 103ru 39 days plutonium 241 241pu 14 years
strontium 89 89sr 51 days strontium 90 90sr 29 years
Yttrium 91 91Y 59 days Cesium 137 137cs 30 years
Zirconium 95 95Zr 64 days americium 241 241am 433 years
cerium 144 144ce 280 days carbon 14 14c 5 years
manganese 54 54mn 310 days plutonium 240 240pu 6 years
ruthenium 106 106ru 370 days plutonium 239 239pu 24 years

Source: the same, IRSN.

https://www.irsn.fr/FR/connaissances/En ... jihLOrMKM8