T O P

How would you prepare for a radiation leakage from a nuclear power plant?

How would you prepare for a radiation leakage from a nuclear power plant?

tamum1

Eat iodine and leave... this is pretty basic.


bellj1210

if you are too late, put plasic sheeting over windows, get to an interior room and pray that you do not die? But yes, iodine and leaving is your best chance at survival.


Itsallanonswhocares

Is there a substitute for iodine pills?


Aberdolf-Linkler

Seaweed and kelp


Itsallanonswhocares

Excellent, how much would cover a 200 pound man in an emergency? This is an excellent substitute for pills.


Aberdolf-Linkler

No idea, you could probably find a recommendation someplace online. Dried seaweed basically keeps forever, can be eaten out of the package, and can be purchased pre-seasoned. But a single pill is pretty easy as well. It's not like you need much, just got to get your dose in and follow the evacuation plan.


TacTurtle

A large seaweed sheet daily (Kombu kelp can contain up to 2,984 mcg of iodine per seaweed sheet (1 gram). This provides almost 2,000% of the recommended daily intake), the idea is to flood the body with excessive amounts of potassium and iodine so the body doesn’t uptake any radioactive K or iodine and store it in the thyroid or bones. Can buy potassium pills at the grocery store or CVS.


Itsallanonswhocares

Hell yeah, thanks for the info. Just the type I'd pick up in the supplement section?


TacTurtle

Potassium pills in supplements / vitamins section. Kombu kelp from the Asian section of the grocery store


Robertsipad

Bug out. See this thread's experience: [https://www.reddit.com/r/preppers/comments/o0decs/i\_had\_to\_bugout\_but\_didnt\_have\_a\_bag/](https://www.reddit.com/r/preppers/comments/o0decs/i_had_to_bugout_but_didnt_have_a_bag/) ​ 100 km with 40 km/h (25mph) winds gives 2.5 hours before the gases reach you. Keep in mind you're not only outrunning the gases, but also everyone else evacuating.


TacTurtle

Remember to run perpendicular to the plume, not in line like Prometheus


Hooligan30

Leave. Once you're in a safe environment take a shower and change your clothes if possible. Use soap and shampoo but DO NOT use conditioner, it will cause radioactive material to stick to your hair/skin.


hantif

Good suggestion for fallout but useless for radioactive gas releases. Leave, travel crosswind, monitor news for when it's safe to return.


reborngoat

Stock up on potassium iodide tablets. One of the major dangers of nuclear reactor malfunction is radioactive iodine being taken up by the thyroid gland and just sort of sitting there in your throat throwing off radiation. Your body is good at only keeping the resources it needs, so if you overload your thyroid with normal iodine your body will automatically piss out the extra (radioactive) iodine that gets into you rather than storing it and causing cancers or other radiation damage.


[deleted]

I'm actually within 100km of a nuclear power plant. They have evacuation plans they send out yearly to people. I'd probably just use that if they ever said it was leaking or about to explode. Other than that, I'd just head in the opposite direction as fast as I could.


WardenWolf

100km generally provides ample time to get away before the radiation reaches dangerous levels. You load up your shit and run.


dittybopper_05H

Not only that, but it's also a significantly far distance that you might not even have to evacuate. The Fukushima Daiichi disaster only required evacuation within a 20 km radius around the station. Chernobyl, arguably the worst nuclear disaster so far, resulted in an exclusion zone that's bigger than 100 km in at least one direction, but the RBMK reactor design was \*VERY\* dangerous and none were ever built in the US. The ones left operating have been modified to make them much safer than they used to be. If there is an event that is 100 km away and you're in danger, you're going to have to deal with a whole lot more issues than just the radiation. Things like "half a million people are going to do the same thing you are". But I don't think that's a reasonable distance, I'd be concerned if I was less than 25 or 30 km away from one, and also down wind of the prevailing winds. But it would have to be an \*EXCEPTIONALLY\* bad disaster, the likes of which have not been seen outside of the Soviet Union, for it to be a real threat at 100 km distance.


WardenWolf

It's better to get out early and be safe than find out later you've been exposed. Don't take chances. You can always come back.


bluefiretoast

Look for the emergency evacuation plan for the plant. There's probably a plan for who needs to evacuate and where shelters will be set up (there are for the ones near me), and what the decontamination procedures are. Pack a bug-out bag. Potassium Iodide is helpful for one specific type of cancer but doesn't help with radiation exposure in general. Your vehicle and clothing can become contaminated, and you can bring it to people you love if you're fleeing to a relative or friend outside the contamination zone. So if you can take advantage of a decontamination site, you do.


PAwellguy

Lots of potassium iodide comments which is good, but one thing to remember is that those pills only prevent FURTHER uptake of radiation. So the key is to take it early as they protect the thyroid but will not mitigate any radiation already absorb by it. So make sure they are on hand to take quick as taking them after the fact does not help. Source: I am a CBRNE trained paramedic and emergency manager.


Potential-Chemistry

Have iodine tablets but the only thing you can do is move. Interestingly, I read that the incidents of cancer from Fukishima were bad, but not as bad as expected because acute exposure is less harmful that chronic exposure. Obviously this is highly dependent on dose of radiation but it should remind us that we should not ignore small chronic exposures to chemicals, radiation and inflammatory things in our ongoing daily lives. Instead of worrying about a nuclear power plant leaking perhaps review what chemicals you are cleaning your home with or something else you have regular contact with in your daily life.


ashkesLasso

If i may give a little argument for reason, were in the world did you get the idea that you need to prep for a nuclear reactor to explode? There is a reason no where but the old soviet union used the type of reactor you see in chernobyl, its because its a horribly flawed design. No American reactor is able to do that. Its literally impossible based on design. Slowly poisoning your ground water because they aren't moving the nuclear waste to a secured storage facility... thats an entirely different story.. Edit : i am assuming American designs because thats what im familiar with, another country this might be a different story entirely.


CirclesOfConfusion

Let me add some reason on top of your reason (and I say this as a fan of nuclear energy who thinks we should build more reactors): Can an American reactor melt down exactly like Chernobyl's did? No. Is there still a minuscule potential of an American reactor failing in a way that causes radiation release? Yes (see Fukushima, which used reactors similar to American reactors). Are American reactors well-engineered to prevent this? Absolutely. Even if one blew, would many die? Probably not - nuke accidents are generally much less impactful than people imagine. Should you ever use the word "impossible" to describe freak accidents that likely obey normal accident theory? Probably not. After all, it was "impossible" for the Titanic to sink, and the Soviet's believed it was "impossible" for an RBMK reactor to explode. We can acknowledge very remote possibilities and still say that it's very unlikely anything like this would ever happen and that nuclear power is an awesome energy solution we should use more


ashkesLasso

Given your entirely reasonable answer, allow me to answer with reason as well. I think the big difference in what people are talking about here is they are talking about different things. There is a large difference between meltdown and explosion. A meltdown of the core in an American reactor is almost impossible because the moderator is water. If the water boils off, nuclear fission stops very rapidly. And all of this takes place inside a giant concrete containment vessel similar they put on chernobyl After it blew. So even if a meltdown somehow occured, it would be inside a containment vessel already. This is what im refering to when i say American designs. And yes Fukushima is a similar design. But what happened there, as bad as it was, is pretty much an example of the second scenario as well. An explosion is not a reference to a nuclear material. Like all power plants, including the coal fired one i work at, there are large amounts of explosive gases on property. Some of those gases exploded in both cases causing damage and release of gases that had exposure to radiation thus they worried about exposure. In three mile islands cases, the result was no damage to property or people. In Fukushima's case it was much more a result of damage from the tsunami than any accident at the plant. Im not as familiar with that one, but as i understand it while there was a back ground radiation increase, it wasn't enough anyones worried. As i understand it, that one had the potential to be alot worse because it damaged all the equipment around the plant. Of these, the danger of radiation from a steam or gas explosion, while there, is manifestly less. To use popular examples, chernobyl was mostly dangerous because what was burning off and flying up in the air was actually parts of the interior of the reactor. I mean, jesus, even the other engineers at that plant knew how dangerous that was. If someone did as much damage to half the industrial sites around major cities as that tsunami, you would see similar things. All those big gas tanks for hydrogen or anhydrous ammonia, if those lit off, wow that would be a small tactical nuke in terms of yield. I will completely admit, my annoyance with people in relation to nuclear power did make me use impossible, something i try never to do when it comes to human beings. I still contend that due to design, the chance of melt down in modern reactors is next to nil. The chance of a steam explosion is similarly extremely low, but still possible. The chance of it seriously impacting someones health however i would say is another factor lower still. Thank you for responding so reasonably, the fact I'm standing in a 120 degree coal plant is my only excuse for responding so crossly. Edits: some of my atrocious grammar


CirclesOfConfusion

Amen \^\^ well-written and agreed! Thanks for keeping our energy flowing!


Sean1916

Did you forget about 3 mile island? [link](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile_Island_accident)


ashkesLasso

I did not. Did you read the last paragraph in what you linked? Basically although there was a leak, it wasn't significant enough to cause any damage or any real exposure at all. Also, that happened in 1979. Thats before most people on this website where born. Do you think no lessons where learned from it? Not a thing changed in the last 40 years? I know the exact opposite to be true. What bothers me is people who believe in climate change because science says its happening, but when it comes to nuclear power, its like the logical part of their brain turns off. The type of power best suited to helping mitigate climate change and no one wants it because of a few accidents 40+ years ago.


didgeridoodady

Probably afraid of a cyber attack. Could be sensationalism.


IndividualAside7557

Which reactor do you live near?


Blackthorn_Bushcraft

I'd move before it became an issue.


toecutter45

move so you dont live near a nuke plant.


holoworld3

Nuclear power plants are more common than everyone realizes. http://modernsurvivalblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/united-states-nuclear-reactors-map.jpg


kalmakayah

This is what bug out bags are for. Get in your car and GTFO.


CanadianJeep79

Move


gonnagetbannedagain9

Run


Stolenbikeguy

Pray to god


bobDbuilder177

Move


RockhoundinnaWoods

Leave. Simple as that distance equals safety with radiation


PaganRob

Experiments from the cold war show that radiation can be blocked by large enough quantities of mass, which is why in America fallout shelters were in the basements of schools. Tons of cement and brick minimizes exposure. But we don't have fallout shelter capable buildings anymore. So unless you have time to have a specialty contractor build you an underground concrete and lead lined bunker you just will have to pop the iodine and bail. That being said, fallout shelters are sometimes available on survival reality or whatever the site is.


UndiscoveredState

Have a fast car or 4x4 to drive the ditches.


hoomabloom

I would bust out all the mirrors in the house. Radiation mutants don't like to look at their reflection!


mickasenoman

Chernobyl affected areas 900 miles away. People within the vicinity moved away.


qwertyboi1433

You around Taishan i heard a plant was leaking over there?


Seablian

Unless you’re within 5km, just stay. There is little chance of significant radiation. You will probably be exposed to as much radiation as a flight attendant in 2 months of work.


chowder007

If your in the blast zone your pretty much fucked. But myself, my wife, and my kids all have a pack of these in each of our bags. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01LMPIR06/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_glt_fabc_D9XBTF0F0BZRF2V2RVHX


Seablian

lmao nuclear power plants can not explode


holoworld3

I think that the only way to prepare for this scenario is for the industry to implement more strict backup controls. For example, in addition to backup gas powered generators for cooling of the radioactive material they should have backup wind generators as well. They should also move some of the spent fuel out of the storage pools so there is less radioactive material onsite. These are things that could have prevented or lessened the Fukishima disaster. They are not things that a single person can prepare for but I think that if enough people lobbied for these changes perhaps something would get done. During hurricane sandy several nuclear reactors on the east coast did emergency shut downs and one location experienced flooding almost to the level of the backup generators. Flooding of the backup generators was the main reason for the Fukishima meltdown. Scientists predict a 50/50 chance of another Chernobyl level nuclear disaster by 2050. They attribute this prediction not to human error but to what they call a dragon king event - a random unforeseeable occurrence. [https://www.technologyreview.com/2015/04/17/168600/the-chances-of-another-chernobyl-before-2050-50-say-safety-specialists/](https://www.technologyreview.com/2015/04/17/168600/the-chances-of-another-chernobyl-before-2050-50-say-safety-specialists/) I personally think this problem is a huge danger. It is not one we can solve by prepping individually but only by coming together on a larger scale.