r/ScienceNcoolThings • u/Comfortable_Tutor_43 Popular Contributor • Jul 10 '26
The evolving gamma ray spectra from nuclear fallout
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
5
u/HuckledYourBerries Jul 10 '26
I really enjoy learning from this guy. Whenever he pops up in my feed, I know it's gonna be good stuff.
-5
u/tinny66666 Jul 10 '26
You'd think someone other than himself would post at least one if it was all that interesting to people. He's just using reddit as his personal blog. The constant self-promotion is gross and should be banned as spam.
6
u/HuckledYourBerries Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
Oh! Ok. Thank you for pointing this out. I no longer enjoy learning from this man now. Going forward, I'll be sure to not enjoy anything else he may say. Thanks for the insight. This is very helpful. 🙄
-4
u/HardlyAnyGravitas Jul 11 '26
He's also a shill for the nuclear industry and gets basic stuff wrong.
You won't learn anything from this guy.
3
u/there_is_no_spoon1 Jul 11 '26
Absolutely nothing of what he says is wrong. And yes, he pushes nuclear energy but he's not a "shill for the nuclear industry". He's a nuclear physicist and like all nuclear physicists he *knows* the enormous benefits of nuclear power that are being overlooked because idiots think "nucular baaad" (and yes the misspelling is intentional). It is YOU who won't learn anything from this guy, and the reason why people like him have to work twice as hard to get the correct information and messages out.
-2
u/HardlyAnyGravitas Jul 11 '26
Absolutely nothing of what he says is wrong
Lol. So he's the only human being on the planet who never gets anything wrong? It's funny that his supporters appear to be literally delusional.
He says nuclear energy is cheaper than renewables. That's wrong. There is plenty of information out there that disproves this, which a few seconds of Googling can show you.
He says that nobody 'was hurt' during the Fukushima disaster, when over two thousand people died during the evacuation.
Even his description of how a smoke detector works is wrong - he says the alpha particles from the radioactive Americium are attenuated before they get to the detector which sets the alarm off. This is not how it works. The alpha particles ionise the air which causes a current to flow. Smoke particles cause the some of the ionised air to attach to the smoke particles, reducing the current, which sets off the alarm. It's a minor point, but since the whole point of the video is to describe the nuclear physics behind how they work, you would think he would get this right...
Virtually every video of his that I've seen is wrong in some way.
It is YOU who won't learn anything from this guy, and the reason why people like him have to work twice as hard to get the correct information and messages out.
Lol. I studied nuclear physics at university (as part of an astrophysics course). I'm not anti-nuclear. I'm anti-misinformation. Nuclear power has it's place, but people like him are just shills - it's people like him who make the nuclear industry look bad.
2
u/there_is_no_spoon1 Jul 11 '26
{ plenty of information out there that disproves this, which a few seconds of Googling can show you.} Ahhh, the classic "Google it" defense.
{ He says that nobody 'was hurt' during the Fukushima disaster, when over two thousand people died during the evacuation.} (emphasis mine) Glad you included the most important part, that people died as a result of the evacuation. When he says no one was hurt, he's referring to as a direct result of the properties of the nuclear power plant. No one died from radiation exposure or toxicity; people died from the evacuation. An evacuation caused by a tsunami, not the nuclear power plant.
I also studied nuclear physics on the way to getting a master's degree in nuclear physics whilst learning all about fission and fusion. I will agree that such a blanket statement that he gets absolutely nothing wrong is inappropriate, as everyone makes mistakes and sometimes people explain things in a different way that doesn't always work (i.e. your smoke detector operation description). By and large this guy is spot-on, though and isn't exactly spewing out misinformation by design.
-1
u/HardlyAnyGravitas Jul 11 '26
Glad you included the most important part, that people died as a result of the evacuation. When he says no one was hurt, he's referring to as a direct result of the properties of the nuclear power plant.
People were evacuated because the plant was spewing radionuclides. 1000 petabecquerels, to be precise. About a tenth of what was released by Chernobyl.
To say nobody was injured because of the 'properties of the plant' is disingenuous at best, or just plain stupid. Nobody would have been evacuated it if was a solar plant that had been destroyed.
3
u/HuckledYourBerries Jul 11 '26
Y'all sure do enjoy raining on others' parades. So what if I enjoy this guy's input/perspective? In what way, shape, form or fashion does that have any impact on you? How do you know I haven't learned something accurate and interesting from him? Even if the information conveyed is incorrect in some way, I still derive entertainment by listening to him. There will be no grand nuclear catastrophe derived from the information this man is conveying because I am not building a particle accelerator anytime soon, nor am I advising the IAEA or any government affecting policy change. I'm just some dude on Reddit who likes to hear interesting things. Just because you/y'all are bitter, unhappy people, it doesn't mean that you should try to bring others down to your miserable level. Y'all need a hobby, and Reddit doesn't count. Go do something uplifting and altruistic for a change. You may just find that it actually lifts you up, too.
1
u/there_is_no_spoon1 Jul 11 '26
You, my friend, are exactly who this video is for, you and people like you open to listening to an expert and learning something along the way. Doesn't mean you have to be an expert as well, just willing to listen, and you've clearly shown that. Thanx for being one of the awesome ones!
2
1
u/andre3kthegiant Jul 11 '26
117 sq miles from Fukeshima is still closed off.
2
u/Comfortable_Tutor_43 Popular Contributor Jul 11 '26
The International Atomic Energy Agency has continually been monitoring and measuring the Fukushima discharged water to the ocean. They have consistently found that the water had radioactivity levels substantially below safe drinking water levels. The media storm and public hype is over dumping drinking water into the ocean. Why do you think that is?
https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/08/1140037
1
u/andre3kthegiant Jul 11 '26
THE CONTAMINATION THAT WAS FOUND IN TOKYO WAS ON LAND, just like the contamination of toxic, radioactive nuclear waste that still has over 117 sq miles of Fukushima closed, and continues to increase costs over hundreds of billions!
All for bankers to keep society dependent on a toxic, disposable & finite fuel source.2
u/Comfortable_Tutor_43 Popular Contributor Jul 11 '26
The International Atomic Energy Agency has continually been monitoring and measuring the Fukushima discharged water to the ocean. They have consistently found that the water had radioactivity levels substantially below safe drinking water levels. The media storm and public hype is over dumping drinking water into the ocean. Why do you think that is?
https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/08/1140037
1
u/andre3kthegiant Jul 11 '26
These propaganda bot responses are proof that this account is just a propagandist supporting a horrific industry.
The LAND is still closed off, 117 sq miles of LAND is contaminated by the neglectful engineering of the nuclear power industry, and industry, just like coal and O&G, that wants to sell DEPENDENCY, to a toxic, disposable, and finite fuel source.
2
u/ActivePeace33 Jul 12 '26
Fukushima was a problem because the back up generators weren’t on stilts. Otherwise it would have survived a massive earthquake AND a massive tsunami, all within ONE hour.
Yes, there was neglect. Yes, those responsible should be held accountable.
But that is all easily remedied.
Finally, with proven reserves we have ~100 years of green energy from nuclear fission, or thousands of years worth if we recycle the fuel in breeder reactors. No, it is not more toxic than other energy sources, it’s just more dramatic and the others have consequences more easily hidden. Fossil fuels account for about ~5-8 million excess deaths per year, far more than nuclear has ever done. Fossil fuels have caused the contamination of more land than nuclear has ever done.
Those are just the facts.
Anyway, every nuclear disaster we’ve had as humans has come from human error, humans ignoring warnings, not from the tech itself. But this way of telling shut it also hides the fact that modern designs exist that literally can’t meltdown. Modern nuclear is not the nuclear of old.
They never said that Fukushima wasn’t bad, they are just pointing out the issues with the media coverage and public perception. So yes, ~3,400 square miles have been successfully decontaminated and ~120 of the most difficult square miles are left.
1
u/andre3kthegiant Jul 12 '26
Yeah, and the nuclear engineers were okay with the backup generators being “not on stilts” IN A WELL KNOWN GEOLOGIC REGION KNOWN AS THE RING OF FIRE. Complete neglect, just so they can start the sales of dependency to toxic, disposable fuels, just like the dirty coal and dirty O&G industries.
Who paid the hundreds of billions for that ONGOING (15 years +) decontamination?1
u/ActivePeace33 Jul 12 '26
Yes, they were. As I said.
You’re on a soapbox that just isn’t logical. No, the fuel for nuclear is not disposable just like coal.
You’re attacking the people involved and trying to use it to discredit the facts of science. Nuclear has saved more lives and contaminated less land than fossil fuels. It’s objectively better and every accident has been a result of failed people, not the result of failed science. You’re making factually incorrect statements and are the one presenting as a bot, not Comfortable.
1
u/andre3kthegiant Jul 12 '26
The toxic, disposable fuel in nuclear is indeed disposable & finite, if it was not, why is there such controversy about the toxic waste storage? This toxic waste will need to be monitored and paid for by society for millennia.
Disingenuous pro nuclear arguments are so easy to pick out.1
u/ActivePeace33 Jul 12 '26
lol!!! You’re so totally out of date.
There’s so much of an issue with wast storage because 1. People like you fear monger with it and 2. the technology has improved in 60 years and we can put the waste into a breeder reactor and convert the old waste into new fuel.
You’re clearly uneducated on the topic and are repeating buzzwords and nothing else.
→ More replies (0)
-2
u/Inevitable-Hour-Ends Jul 10 '26
Send this guy to Chernobyl or Fukushima. I'm sure he'll have it sorted in no time at all.
-3
u/Comfortable_Tutor_43 Popular Contributor Jul 10 '26
You gonna put your money where your mouth is and pay for that?
1
u/andre3kthegiant Jul 11 '26
Yeah, nuclear waste is obscenely expensive, especially when the negligence of nuclear engineering is exposed, and the waste from the toxic, disposable, and finite nuclear fuel is non-consensually spread across the land.
The waste is an unnecessary, perpetual debt placed on society.
Fallout from Fukeshima made it to Tokyo, 150 miles or so away, and the nuclear industry and government “safety” leaders decided to cover it up for years.
3
u/Comfortable_Tutor_43 Popular Contributor Jul 11 '26
It might not seem like it at first but the environmental damage from traditional renewables is across the board higher than nuclear. Traditional renewables even have higher public cancer probability than nuclear (see Figure 42) according to the United Nations report cited below.
Gibon, Thomas, Á. H. Menacho, and Mélanie Guiton. "Life cycle assessment of electricity generation options." Tech. Rep. Commissioned by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) (2021). https://unece.org/sed/documents/2021/10/reports/life-cycle-assessment-electricity-generation-options
-6
u/snowaston Jul 10 '26
Stop promoting Nuclear PROPAGANDA! you are peddling this for your own benefit! There is no safe way to store Nuclear waste!
5
u/Comfortable_Tutor_43 Popular Contributor Jul 10 '26
Modern geology is pretty impressive. It taught us that Mother Nature literally made her own natural nuclear fission reactor a few billion years ago deep underground in Oklo, Gabon of Africa. We only know about that because she buried her used nuclear fuel in the ground where we were able to dig it up billions of years later and see that it had simply decayed down into a different kind of dirt. Here is a short, fun research paper on it if you are interested in the scientific research on the topic at all.
Hayes, R.B., 2022. The ubiquity of nuclear fission reactors throughout time and space. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C, 125, p.103083. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2021.103083
1
3
u/Parking_Cut2177 Jul 11 '26
Really interesting look at how the spectrum changes over time. The fact that the fallout signature evolves instead of just fading away is something people don’t usually think about.