Fucking Fukushima Daiichi Reactor 4’s Fuel Pool Is a Fucking possible Extinction Fucking Issue for every Fucking Person in the Whole Fucking World and the Fucking MainstreamMedia is mute on the whole subject The world needs to get mad real FUCKING mad right now and demand our Fucking defacto leaders do something instead of trying to fuck us!!! But maybe this is the biggest FUCK ever against Mankind???
PART IV
Plumegate Tales from the Script: Inside the NRC FOIA Documents… Part 1
The Intel Hub
By Tony Muga
March 17, 2012
Intel Hub Note: The Plumegate scandal has not gotten near enough coverage in both the alternative and corporate controlled media. Please send this article as well as our first two articles on Plumegate to your favorite alternative media news outlets.
‘You can ignore reality, but you cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.’ ~Ayn Rand
Digging through the NRC FOIA documents is a Herculean task considering that there are literally thousands of pages that must be carefully sifted through.
What is revealed therein however, is well worth the trouble, for a veil is drawn back upon so doing, a window that allows a view into a multi-agency cover-up.
The tentacles of this cover-up stretch as far as the White House, indications of which can be found throughout the transcriptions and emails.
For Obama, this election cycle can’t be over soon enough; for the GOP…why are they not using Plume-Gate as a tool with which to unseat their democratic rival?
It should be noted that a disclaimer, found on page one of the FOIA documents, states:
‘Except for the marked redactions for FOIA withholding, this transcript has not been edited or otherwise reviewed for accuracy by participants or the NRC. It may contain typographical mistakes or other transcription errors.’
All italicization is done by the Author of this article for emphasis on key points.
Also, keep in mind some of the participants are aware they are being recorded and that transcripts can be sought after and made available at a later date under the Freedom of Information Act.
You Can’t Handle a Worse-Case-Scenario!
Mike: Rob, this is (inaudible). I have a question for you. This request for doses in California projected with, I guess worst-case assumptions, is that correct? (inaudible.)
Mr. Lewis: I believe the doses that we saw from DITTRA represented a source term of 100 percent of the (inaudible).
Mike: Okay. And where—is this information being considered for releasing publicly, like we do with the press release?
Mr. Lewis: Which information are you speaking about?
Mike: I’m talking about these projected dose models, the models that you—the ones that you are doing and coordinating with other agencies, is there some thought about releasing that publicly?
Mr. Lewis: We have not had that discussion at this time.
Mike: And don’t take that as a suggestion to (inaudible). I’m just curious as to how we came upon doing that with our press release, and then, are we advocating that for any future press releases here for doses in the U.S.?
Mr. Dorman: Mike, this Dan. No. No, we’re not planning any press release with this information. This was a projection that we were requested to run. Separate from our being requested to run that, we got this DOE briefing package that had this other DITTRA run in it, and we’re not—I don’t know what prompted theirs or all of the assumptions that went into theirs, but it obviously caught our attention and we are looking to get what we think would be more realistic projections. Other questions?
Ms. Howe: Dan, just one comment, and Rob. This is Linda Howe in Region IV [four]. Rob, I can talk with you offline about some background information for California. The DITTRA and DOE runs for California may have been prompted by queries from the state, because the state has been conducting interagency conference call, and DOE, EPA, HHS, has been part of those calls. Our regional state liaison officer is also monitoring that, but there is some background that is politically sensitive that I can share with you offline.
Speaking Highly of DOE.
Male Participant: And we ought to giving assistance—we ought to be giving the experts, not—
Male Participant: On the other side of this is DOE is pushing to have a contingent of DOE people join Chuck. Chuck is saying, “I don’t need that kind of help just yet.” So that’s an issue that—
Male Participant: Yes, because if he sends a contingent of DOE people, we are going to have to send a contingent of wranglers to—
Male Participant: And Chuck knows that very well.
Working on worse-case-models? Cease and Desist!
Mr. McDermott: Josh, this is Brian McDermott.
Josh: Hey, Brian, real quick. I’m giving you from the chairman a cease and desist on the modeling that we started to attempt to do yesterday with the MACS code to get all the way to the U.S.
Mr. McDermott: Okay.
Josh: We don’t need to pursue—we would like to stop pursuing that. We don’t need to do that anymore.
Mr. McDermott: Okay.
Josh: Copy?
Mr. McDermott: I copy.
Josh: All right. We’ll follow up—I can follow up more after the call.
Mr. McDermott: Okay. Yeah, I’d like to understand. Thank you.
Josh: Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
We are being recorded; don’t talk about the California thing.
Brian: Did we ever get the—I’m trying to think of what the best term is, the—everything—everything (inaudible) scenario back from—I thought that was one we were going to ask NARAC to run once they had time.
Male Participant: Are you talking about the doses they saw all the way out in California?
Brian: Yes.
Male Participant: Yeah. That is going to be run by Research in Sandia, but they are not going to be able to do it until later today.
Brian: Oh, okay.
Male Participant: Sounds like they had to modify the code first in order to do that run.
Male Participant: had to modify the MAC code. They—NARAC did do their evaluation of—using our source term, and they—they were calculating doses, particularly for children—thyroid doses of (inaudible) after—that the one year dose, assuming some very conservative assumptions about ingestion, and (inaudible) practices.
Brian: Right.
Male Participant: Historical data. And convert those doses using the same update techniques. And they have some calculations—they hadn’t shown them to be (inaudible), but they are showing millirem range doses, like one to 10 millirem.
Male Participant: (inaudible)
Male Participant: For the actual deposits. So we think there is some extreme conservatism in the DITTRA numbers, and we will know more once Research does their (inaudible).
Privately, we know all about Chernobyl.
Male Participant: We know about Chernobyl. And if we were to have (inaudible) where we are today, and U.S. citizens in the Ukraine, what would we have told them? We’ve got the benefit of knowing everything there is to know about Chernobyl. How far out would we (inaudible)? Would that be roughly consistent with the recommendation we would have made then?
[2nd] Male Participant: We haven’t looked at that aspect of it. We are looking at—we are actually looking at the deposition (inaudible) function.
I’m sorry, is this press release not good enough for you?
Mr. Castleman: Rob, this is Pat Castleman. Could we get—could the commission offices get copies of the dose projections and plume models that supported the press release and the recommendation that American citizens evacuate out to 50 miles?
Mr. Lewis: Well, you have it on the press release. Do you want something more than that?
Mr. Castleman: Yeah, more than that. That’s kind of sketchy information, so we can explain to, you know, the commissioner, so that (inaudible) currently informed.
California is one hot topic!
Dan: Yes. A couple of the data points that I think you are waiting for we don’t quite have yet. There is aerial monitoring—aerial measurement system from DOE. They did do the flight. We got that initial data package within the last hour, but I think there was—I think that (inaudible) to get that data. The other piece looking at the projections to California, Research is working with Sandia. Sandia needs to modify the code, because the code only goes out to 1,000 miles, so we expect—we are hoping later today to get that worked out and get them to start getting some runs to support.
AND LATER:
Mr. Lewis: Okay. Good morning. I will cover four things that occupied most of the protective measures team time last night. First, there was a flight by NARAC last night, and the flight landed roughly after midnight. And the data became just available to us about an hour ago, so we’re in the process of obtaining and analyzing the data from (inaudible). We also are working—there was a request coming from last night—before last evening’s shift to develop projections for doses in California. And that is—has been in process. We will need to –in order to do that, we will need to engage with—we already have engaged with the Office of Research. We are looking to engage further with Sandia to make some modifications to the (inaudible) to effectuate those dose estimates in California. In conjunction with that,there was a DITTRA and NARAC dose estimate that was done for California that we obtained as part of the DOE briefing package. And those estimating what we believe to be very high doses to children, and a thyroid (inaudible) dosage.
Controlling the flow.
Male Participant: That would be helpful, because if NEI is looking for the background we’re not going to find it in a press release.
Male Participant: Well, they have that.
Male Participant: They want to know what was behind—
(Background conversations)
Male Participant: Are we protecting the—
Male Participant: Yes. NEI wants to know what’s behind—they want to know what’s behind it, so that they can be—
Male Participant: Are we prepared to share the whole thing with them?
Male Participant: No.
Female Participant: If we share it with NEI, we need to share it with the world. Okay? They’re a member of the public, as well, right?
Male Participant: Well, if they—you know, there’s a –you have the discretion in the releases—you are correct, that once you hand it to NEI, you have no basis to withhold it from anyone. But you do have the discretion to decide who you initially give it to.
AND MOMENTS LATER…
Male Participant: We’re getting there. That’s where it started. Is there a problem with handing it? Yes, there is. Okay. Are we willing to take them through the entire explanation?
Female Participant: Sure.
Male Participant: And they can sit there scribbling on the other end and recreate the document that we would have handed them anyhow. But we never handed them a document.
Female Participant: The short answer—
Male Participant: Done that before.
Female Participant: But the short answer to them is that the public doesn’t know what percentage of core damage (inaudible). We did not on purpose put that in the press release, because it’s a little alarming. I felt as the team director if we put in that it was hypothetical unit, you’ll see it in the press. That’s the best information.
A word about redaction: I understand redaction of documents when it comes to protecting national security, state secrets, black-ops projects, and/or even trade or design secrets of private corporations.
But when it comes to old GE reactor designs, especially the BWR Mark I reactors, experts admit they are old technology with questionable design and questionable safety records.
Why are we redacting ANYTHING at all? It would be like redacting documents from General Motors pertaining to the old Corvair: the dangerous automobile that Ralph Nadar fought to have removed from U.S. highways back in the ‘70s.
Afraid someone will copy your steering wheel design that impales drivers in low speed accidents?
The point here is: no need to hide failed technology…no one wants it. Are military secrets involved? Is National Security at stake?
I can find NO reason why the transcripts should not be available in their entirety.
A word about sound quality: I have only listened to one tape recording of conversations so I am unable to speak to the veracity of the inaudible (inaudible) sections but I will say this: for a country that spends BILLIONS on surveillance each year, why can’t we get a decent recording of the NRC phone conversations?
Do we need to upgrade microphones? Should I recommend a Rode-NT 1 with phantom power?
Much like the radiation monitoring equipment in the U.S., systems which might later be used to incriminate someone are often left under budget and under equipped.
A word about TEPCO, NISA (Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency) and the Japanese government: To be fair, the documents show that Japanese authorities were, from the start, less than forthright with the NRC about the conditions of the reactors.
Even if the NRC, DOE, DHS or White House had a policy of full disclosure (don’t laugh, I’m being hypothetical here), TEPCO and others were doing their best to cover-up the severity of the meltdowns and the condition of the plants…some delay of information was inevitable.
Nonetheless, considering our knowledge of Chernobyl, who needs TEPCO or NISA to tell us that the fallout from Fukushima will follow the Jetstream from West to East and eventually make landfall in North America?
Next in this series: Information dissemination, talking points and further evidence of the cover-up…
Important Links:
Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment
The Nuclear Industry and Health
AN UNEXPECTED MORTALITY INCREASE IN
THE UNITED STATES FOLLOWS ARRIVAL OF THE
RADIOACTIVE PLUME FROM FUKUSHIMA:
IS THERE A CORRELATION?
Joseph J. Mangano and Janette D. Sherman
The multiple nuclear meltdowns at the Fukushima plants beginning on
March 11, 2011, are releasing large amounts of airborne radioactivity that has
spread throughout Japan and to other nations; thus, studies of contamination
and health hazards are merited. In the United States, Fukushima fallout
arrived just six days after the earthquake, tsunami, and meltdowns. Some
samples of radioactivity in precipitation, air, water, and milk, taken by the
U.S. government, showed levels hundreds of times above normal; however,
the small number of samples prohibits any credible analysis of temporal
trends and spatial comparisons. U.S. health officials report weekly deaths by
age in 122 cities, about 25 to 35 percent of the national total. Deaths rose
4.46 percent from 2010 to 2011 in the 14 weeks after the arrival of Japanese
fallout, compared with a 2.34 percent increase in the prior 14 weeks. The
number of infant deaths after Fukushima rose 1.80 percent, compared
with a previous 8.37 percent decrease. Projecting these figures for the entire
United States yields 13,983 total deaths and 822 infant deaths in excess of
the expected. These preliminary data need to be followed up, especially in the
light of similar preliminary U.S. mortality findings for the four months after
Chernobyl fallout arrived in 1986, which approximated final figures.
http://www.radiation.org/reading/pubs/HS42_1F.pdf
Plume-Gate Tales from the Script: Inside the NRC FOIA Documents Part 2
The Intel Hub
By Tony Muga
March 21, 2012
You can read part 1 here.
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” ~Upton Sinclair
Chernobyl, a single reactor core meltdown, spread radioactive contamination across the Northern Hemisphere: by some accounts, causing the deaths of an estimated 985,000 people worldwide.
To arrive at this seemingly impossible figure, scientists studied data between the years 1986 and 2004. Why data from 18 years?
Although some deaths from Chernobyl were immediate, the vast majority occurred in the years following the meltdown in what can be described as a ‘time-delayed effect’.
In the U.S. study titled: ‘An Unexpected Mortality Increase in the United States Follows Arrival of the Radioactive Plume from Fukushima: Is There a Correlation?’ a period of 28 weeks of mortality rates were examined- 14 before and 14 after the disaster.
What authors Joseph Mangano and Janette Sherman discovered was that:
“Deaths rose 4.46 percent from 2010 to 2011 in the 14 weeks after the arrival of Japanese fallout, compared with a 2.34 percent increase in the prior 14 weeks. The number of infant deaths after Fukushima rose 1.80 percent, compared with a previous 8.37 percent decrease. Projecting these figures for the entire United States yields 13,983 total deaths and 822 infant deaths in excess of the expected. These preliminary data need to be followed up, especially in the light of similar preliminary U.S. mortality findings for the four months after Chernobyl fallout arrived in 1986, which approximated final figures.”
Is it fair to compare Chernobyl with Fukushima? And if so, can we extrapolate from that comparison an idea how much worse the latter is with the former?
Chernobyl Fukushima
Number of ‘source terms’: (1) one (6) six (4 reactors + 2 spent fuel pools)
Fuel type: Mox Uranium-235
Distance from the U.S.: 5,417 miles 5,029 miles
In direct path of Jetstream: No Yes
Government/Industry cover-up: Yes Yes
Fatalities: 985,000+ 40,000+ and counting
The phrase ‘source term’ indicates any source emanating uncontrolled radiation. In the case of the Fukushima Daiichi facility, the NRC FOIA documents reveal that authorities were considering a possible six source terms for their modeling: the #1 through #4 reactors and the two spent fuel pools of Units #3 and #4.
Compounding the problem, the controversial plutonium-containing ‘MOX’ fuel was being used at Fukushima. How dangerous is MOX fuel?
Consider this quote from author Praful Bidwai’s article ‘Warning Signals’ found in a March 2011 issue of India’s ‘Frontline’ magazine:
“…Reactor 3 uses mixed uranium-plutonium oxide (MOX) fuel in the core. According to Edwin Lyman of the UCS [Union of Concerned Scientists], ‘the use of MOX generally increases the consequences of severe accidents in which large amounts of radioactive gas and aerosol are released compared to the same accident in a reactor using non-MOX fuel….Because of this, the number of latent cancer fatalities resulting from an accident could increase by as much as a factor of five for a full core of MOX fuel compared to the same accident with no MOX.’ ”
Thanks to high-resolution photos available on the website pinktentacle.com, even the casual observer can see that the #3 reactor has sustained the greatest damage.
Furthermore, according to Amina Khan’s Los Angeles Times interview of Robert Alvarez, a former senior policy adviser for the U.S. Energy Department, the #3 reactor may have experienced something other than a hydrogen explosion:
“’They were irradiating Plutonium in Unit 3, which experienced the biggest explosion,’ he said. In fact, the explosion was so massive that investigators found fuel rod fragments a mile away, leading to speculation that a supercritical fission event may have also occurred, Alvarez said.”
All of this is bad news, but if the meltdowns had taken place at a nuclear plant in Australia, the effects of fallout on the U.S. would have been greatly reduced based simply on the actual physical distance between the two points and the location of the world’s jet streams.
The unfortunate reality is that the United States is in direct line with a powerful jet stream that flows from Japan, over Hawaii and to the West Coast.
The Northern Pacific Jet Stream is well known to commercial pilots who use the currents to save fuel, like a kayaker saves energy when paddling downstream in a river.
If Chernobyl deposited fallout on the U.S. without being in the direct line-of-fire, as far as jet streams are concerned, how is it possible that Fukushima, which lies perfectly within the flow of the Northern Pacific Jet Stream, has not?
On March 16, 2011 Congressman Earl Blumenauer of Oregon raised similar concerns in a letter to Lisa Jackson, administrator of the EPA, and Gregory Jaczko, chairman of the NRC. His skepticism of the rosy picture painted by the ‘experts’ is obvious:
“I write to inquire about the potential risk to U.S. West Coast communities from the explosion and release of radiation from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear facility in Japan. In a region that is already breathing air pollution from China, my constituents are concerned about radiation contamination from the facility reaching the West Coast. While a number of experts have indicated that contamination in the U.S. as a result of the Japanese catastrophe is unlikely, I would like to better understand the agencies’ contingency plans and your plan for disseminating information to concerned citizens.”
Is it unreasonable to ask such questions? Is it unreasonable to expect truthful answers? What happened to transparency?
Back to the Mangano and Sherman study:
“In the United States, Chernobyl fallout was detected in the environment just nine days after the meltdown. Gould and Sternglass (5) used EPA measurements of environmental radiation post-Chernobyl (6) and found elevated levels of radioactivity in air, water, and milk.
For example, EPA data indicate that from May 13 to June 23, 1986, U.S. milk had 5.6 and 3.6 times more iodine-131 and cesium-137 than were recorded in May-June of 1985.
In some cities, especially those harder-hit Pacific Northwest, average concentrations were as much as 28 times the norms, while some individual samples were much higher. Gould and Sternglass (5) also studied preliminary mortality data, to analyze any potential impact from fallout.
Using a 10 percent sample of all U.S. death certificates, they found that during the four months after Chernobyl (May-August 1986), total deaths in the United States rose 6.0 percent over the similar period in 1985. Eventually, final figures showed an increase of 2.3 percent, which exceeded the 0.2 percent decline between the actual and expected death totals, is 16,573.
To date, the cause of this unusual pattern remains unknown, and no research testing hypothesis for causes other than Chernobyl has been published. This difference has a very high degree of statistical significance; there is a less than 1 in 10^9 probability that it occurred by random chance.”
Visibly, one can watch the leaked DataPoke.org models from Tepco and frame by frame through the plume and fallout trail as it flows from the West to East and to the United States. But what is most stunning about the DataPoke models is that they are of the substances plutonium and neptunium: if these models are correct, or even close, the U.S. was hit a lot harder than anyone in government or industry has ever let on.
Interestingly enough, the words plutonium, uranium or neptunium are strangely absent from the NRC FOIA transcripts, at least what I have read so far (over 1,500 pages), how is this possible?
To be fair, the MOX fuel issue is covered, albeit in a talking points format (see below).
So what can we conclude from all this?
Considering what you have just read, and the fact that U.S. officials suspended radiation testing, raised the safe limits of exposure, and advised that Potassium Iodine (KI) was not needed in California (right after Surgeon General Regina Benjamin said it would not be an over-reaction to have some), the situation certainly appears as if it has all the trappings of a grandiose cover-up.
The American public seems to be, as I believe H.W. ‘Poppy’ Bush once famously said, ‘out of the loop’. And when we do get nosey and start asking questions, like the meddling kids of the cartoon Scooby-Doo, what do we get?
Talking points, talking points and more talking points.
(All italicization is done by the Author of this article for emphasis on key points.)
- -O-ri-g-in al Message —–
From: Jaczko, Gregory
To: Weber, Michael; Brenner, Eliot
Cc: Batkin, Joshua
Sent: Fri Mar 11 09:25:49 2011
Subject: Federal and public communication
I would like a written update by 10 for the status of us licensees and our best and accurate info for japan that could be distributed to public and fed family. Also I need a 1 page set of talking points with the most important points as soon as possible.
Thanks
- O–ri-gi-n al Message —–
From: Weber, Michael
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2011 9:41 AM
To: Jaczko, Gregory; Brenner, Eliot
Cc: Batkin, Joshua; Mamish, Nader; Virgilio, Martin; Collins, Elmo; Leeds, Eric
Subject: Response – Federal and public communication
We’re on it. I’m in the Ops Center. We have completed Federal agency notifications and are coordinating with the NRCC.
From: Brenner, Eliot
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2011 8:42 AM
To: Weber, Michael; Jaczko, Gregory
Cc: Batkin, Joshua; Mamish, Nader; Virgilio, Martin, Collins, Elmo; Leeds, Eric
Subject: RE: Federal and public communication
Our talking points are distributed for use agencywide, and there is a government-wide communicators conference call in a few minutes that OPA [Office of Public Affairs?] will monitor.
From: Maier, Bill
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 4:08 PM
To: Tifft, Doug; Logaras, Harra
Subject: SENSITIVE INTERNAL INFORMATION ATTACHED: FW: TALKING POINTS
Attachments: boardfile.docx
Here are the talking points – They are not approved for sharing with the states except orally (the public portions only).
From: LIA04 Hoc
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 1:25 PM
To: McNamara, Nancy; Maier, Bill; Trojanowski, Robert; Barker, Allan
Cc: Virgilio, Rosetta; Turtil, Richard
Subject: TALKING POINTS
ATTACHED IS OFFICIAL USE ONLY – ONLY USE PUBLIC-PORTION AS TALKING POINTS – DO NOT FORWARD
NOTE THAT STATES ARE RECEIVING NRC PRESS RELEASES; YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO ACCESS THOSE VIA BLACKBERRY
Note that OPA is referring questions about monitoring to EPA. The NRC EPA has indicated that if there is a release, they will assume their role as lead agency under the national response framework.
Talking points not good enough?
Dr. Wilds
Edward L. Wilds, Jr.; Ph.D.
Director, Radiation Division
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection
From: McNamara, Nancy
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2011 9:03 AM
To: LIA04 Hoc; OST05 Hoc; Maier, Bill; Logaras, Harral; Allard, David; Trojanowski, Robert
Cc: Dean, Bill; Lew, David
Subject: State of CT Requesting Input Parameters for Dose Projections
Please see the question below from the State of CT. Additionally, we were asked to pass along sentiments expressed yesterday to Region I on our SLO counterpart call with our States.
There was a unison request for the input parameters that was used in RASCAL for us deriving the data information released to the public. Due to the significant role our States play in making protective action decisions, they have the technical background for interpreting data and are proficient on RASCAL or a similar type of dose projection model. They strongly expressed that they are not capable of explaining to their Governor’s office the data that was released because they don’t know what assumptions were used in our dose assessment model.
We used our talking point and it appeared to be unsatisfactory. Until otherwise directed, Region I will continue to work with the States to help them understand the NRC’s position on not releasing the assumptions.
—–O riginal Message —–
From: Wilds, Edward rmailto:Edward.Wildsoct.govl
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2011 8:07 PM
To: McNamara, Nancy; Tifft, Doug
Subject: Input Parameters for
I am watching a C-Span briefing of the Japanese Natural Disasters & Nuclear Plant Crisis that involved NRC Chairman Jaczko and a DOE official. One of the members of the press asked Chairman Jaczko if the NRC would release the data that was used to base the decision for evacuation of 50 miles in Japan. Chairman Jaczko stated that all the data was released.
I request all input parameters used in the RASCAL runs attached to the yesterdays NRC press release. Since Chairman Jaczko has stated that the data used to base the decision was released to the public, it should be released to the states. If this information is not available, why is the Chairman stating to the press that all data has been released?
Dr. Wilds
Edward L. Wilds, Jr.; Ph.D.
Director, Radiation Division
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection
What’s the difference between talking points and non-talking points?
Excerpt taken from talking point guideline pages 15-18:
Questions and Answers for Chairman Jaczko
March 11, 2011 Japan Earthquake/Tsunami Aftermath
As of 10:00 a.m. 3/12/2011
7. What happens when/if a plant “melts down”?
Public Answer: In short, nuclear power plants in the United States are designed to be safe. To prevent the release of radioactive material, there are multiple barriers between the radioactive material and the environment, including the fuel cladding, the heavy steel reactor vessel itself and the containment building, usually a heavily reinforced structure of concrete and steel several feet thick.
Additional, technical, non-public information:
The melted core may melt through the bottom of the vessel and flow onto the concrete containment floor. The core may melt through the containment liner and release radioactive material to the environment.
It should be noted that a disclaimer, found on page one of the FOIA documents, states: ‘Except for the marked redactions for FOIA withholding, this transcript has not been edited or otherwise reviewed for accuracy by participants or the NRC.
It may contain typographical mistakes or other transcription errors.’
All italicization is done by the Author of this article for emphasis on key points.
Also, keep in mind some of the participants are aware they are being recorded and that transcripts can be sought after and made available at a later date under the Freedom of Information Act.
Links
The letter from Congressman Blumenauer to Lisa Jackson and Gregory Jaczko may be found on page 103 of this 413 page document.
http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1128/ML11285A009.pdf
The talking points section was taken from the above 413 page document and this 220 page document, http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1118/ML11186A916.pdf both free and available to the public at the NRC.gov website.
http://www.myspace.com/moogametal
One Year After Fukushima – Defining and Classifying a Disaster
The Intel Hub
By Lucas Whitefield Hixson
March 5, 2012
This is the first in a series of articles dedicated to preserve the facts revealed about the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster.
Disaster
A disaster is a natural or man-made (or technological) hazard that has come to fruition, resulting in an event of substantial extent causing significant physical damage or destruction, loss of life, or drastic change to the environment, as the consequence of inappropriately managed risk. These risks are the product of a combination of both hazard/s and vulnerability.
All disasters are the result of human failure to introduce appropriate disaster management measures.
This coming week will mark the first anniversary of Fukushima’s multiple meltdown nuclear disaster. There is little data on how badly contaminated the now-abandoned area of forced evacuation is in the 20-kilometer (12-mile) zone around the Fukushima plant.
The mainstream media has already begun trotting out assorted “experts” to assure anyone who might be still interested in Fukushima that all is well and no one’s been harmed by all the radiation the reactors released.
There’s no getting past the fact that the nuclear accident dumped radioactive particles into the atmosphere, soil and sea, which is a serious concern for the Japanese, who consume about 9 million tons of seafood a year, second behind China.
Those poisons “rained out,” creating hot spots over the Northern Hemisphere. Radioactive material can get into water from steam or smoke which is carried by wind, rain or other precipitation onto land, surface reservoirs or the ocean.
It could also be discharged directly into the ocean or leak onto land and eventually seep into groundwater. There are still traces of Cesium lingering from nuclear weapons tests in the Pacific in the 1950s and 1960s.
“The Japanese people no longer trust the nuclear industry and the government. People do not know whether their food and their land is safe,”
- Kim Kearfott, an expert on radiation health risks at the University of Michigan, who toured Japan in 2011.
Japan is under pressure to enhance food inspections as it has no centralized system for detecting radiation contamination. Japanese products including spinach, mushrooms, milk and beef were contaminated with radiation as far as 360 kilometers from the Fukushima Daiichi site which was destroyed by the disaster.
Adding to concerns, basic radiation checks with handheld dosimeters failed to detect the ingested cesium in the cattle.
The government argues that food fears are overblown. It says hundreds of food samples are tested daily for radiation, and few exceed government standards for radioactive cesium.
However, they are often seen as being habitual late-responders, critics point to contaminated beef that has turned up on the market. Broccoli, spinach and shiitake, too — all discovered after they were already on sale. The Japanese youth face years of uncertainty about what’s safe to put on the table.
The Fukushima disaster has been marked by such confusion, much of it due to TEPCO’s bungling response, which has been severely criticized by the government and the independent press.
Most recent reports also suggest that the Japanese government is seriously downplaying the real amount of radioactive substances that leaked from Fukushima. Experts said the Japanese government must decide what to do about contamination spread across the nation, especially since radiation releases from the plant could continue for years.
The contamination will affect Japan for decades, studies in Belarus found that in 2000, 14 years after the Chernobyl disaster, fewer than 20 percent of children were considered “practically healthy,” compared to 90 percent before Chernobyl.
Thousands of people continue to inhabit areas that are highly contaminated, particularly northwest of Fukushima. Radioactive elements have been found in tap water in Tokyo and concentrated in national products such as tea, beef, rice and other food.
Many want answers: How did radioactive cesium from the reactors at Fukushima end up here?
Tetsuo Iguchi, a specialist on radiation monitoring at Nagoya University, says experts don’t know. Iguchi is working as a consultant with a government group that is urging thousands of tons of contaminated soil to be cleared off and then sent to storage, possibly inside the Fukushima complex.
“Nothing like this has ever been seen before.” He said.
Radiation from Fukushima has been discovered on the other side of the globe in British Columbia, along the West Coast and East Coast of the United States and in Europe, and heavy contamination has been found in oceanic waters.
Radioactive cesium, xenon and iodine have been detected over a wide area of North America. Other radioactive particles have been detected in the waters near the plant, and some have made their way into fish. Trace amounts of radioactive cesium-137 have been found in anchovies as far away Tokyo.
Radiation is more dangerous for infants because their cells are dividing more rapidly and radiation-damaged RNA may be carried in more generations of cells.
Radioactive iodine has been detected in the thyroids of half of 1,000 Fukushima children, NHK reported, citing findings from a group led by Satoshi Tashiro, a professor at Hiroshima University. Prolonged exposure to radiation in the air, ground and food can cause leukemia and other cancers, according to the London- based World Nuclear Association.
“Usually the contamination happens in a nuclear facility, inside a controlled area, but this type of contamination is global environmental contamination – it’s completely different,”
-Shunichi Tanaka, the former acting head of Japan’s Atomic Energy Agency.
The contamination has also begun to seep into the sea, and tests iodine was found in nearby Fukushima seawater at levels 4,385 times the legal limit. Radioactive iodine is short-lived, with a half-life of just eight days, and in any case was expected to dissipate quickly in the vast Pacific Ocean. Radioactive contamination in groundwater underneath reactor No 2 was measured at 10,000 times the government health standard, according to media reports.
The release of radioactivity from Fukushima is the largest accidental release of radiation to the ocean in history, and it is still on-going. It will likely take decades before results are available to fully evaluate the impacts of this accident on the ocean.
Groundwater, reservoirs and sea water around Japan’s earthquake damaged nuclear plant face “significant contamination” from the high levels of radiation leaking from the plant, a worrying development that heightens potential health risks in the region.
A Kyodo News survey showed Sunday that 83 percent of local governments have anxiety about distributing iodine preparations to their residents in the event of a nuclear crisis, partly because they do not know how to instruct residents to take it. The results of the survey indicate that many local-level authorities are still having difficulty preventing internal exposure.
Most of Japan is skeptical about the Japanese governments’ objectivity because of their general mistrust of those who repeatedly have shown more loyalty to the nuclear industry than their own fellow citizens, and repeatedly delayed disclosing key data and revised evacuation zones and safety standards after the accident.
Some even wonder whether the government-organized studies are in fact really using them as human guinea pigs to examine the impact of radiation on humans. Some experts have voiced their concerns as well, stating that Japan has repeatedly only released data related to the “most popular” radioactive isotopes, and only looked at the “most widely known” effects and abnormalities that may infer internalized contamination.
They continue to call for the Japanese government to check for as many potential problems as possible.
Lucas Whitefield Hixson is a nuclear researcher based out of Chicago IL. Readers may contact the author at enfo@enformable.com and visit his website Enformable.com
Nuclear Expert: Fukushima 10 Times Worse Than Chernobyl — 1 Million Cancers
The Intel Hub
By Alexander Higgins – Contributing Writer
March 12, 2012
Nuclear expert Arnie Gundersen is raising the alarm for the people in Tokyo, warning that Fukushima is 10 times worse than Chernobyl and at least 1 million will get cancer over the next 20 years.
While many think they are out of the woods in respect to the Fukushima nuclear meltdown, the disaster may not even have started and that has sent nuclear expert Arnie Gundersen on a personal quest to raise the alarm to residents in Japan.
Following the 1 year anniversary of the massive quake and Tsunami that led to the reactor meltdowns, Gundersen is now doing interviews with Asian media outlets to inform them of the severity of the situation.
Today he told news agency Xinhua that he believes Fukushima is ten times worse than Chernobyl and over 1 million people will eventually get cancer.
He says that the people in Tokyo should not feel safe simply because no one has confirmed to have been killed from the radiation due to the fact that it takes an extended amount of time for cancer to develop and start showing up as an anomaly in populations.
EneNews provides excellent excerpts:
Title: Japan’s disaster as bad as or worse than Chernobyl
Source: Xinhua
Date: 2012-03-12 14:30The severity of Japan’s Fukushima nuclear disaster may be as bad as or worse than Chernobyl, an American nuclear expert warned Sunday.Arnold Gundersen, a former nuclear power industry executive, said it was clear to him within two days of the Japan earthquake and tsunami that “Fukushima was as bad as or worse than Chernobyl.” [...]
Gundersen, now chief engineer of the energy consulting company Fairewinds Associates, said he believed that Fukushima was 10 times worse than the 1986 Chernobyl meltdown in the former Soviet Union. Now it is in Ukraine.
Gundersen on Fukushima vs Chernobyl
Gundersen on Cancers and Other Health Problems
Read the report here
I previously reported on the subject of belated cancers, warning that it takes up to 20 years for the cancer to develop and detailing what the citizens of Japan could expect in just thyroid cancers alone.
Japan has finally released a nuclear radiation survey that reveals that 45% of Fukushima children had sustained thyroid radiation exposure by the end of March. Despite government attempts to downplay the survey results the data shows that at least 1 in 20 children will develop thyroid cancer. Unfortunately, this is just the latest side show in the 3 ring circus being ran by our corporate dictators.
Residents in Japan are being forced to take radioactive cleanup into their own hands in the absence of a plan from the government to remediate the problem of the nuclear radioactive fallout that is blanketing the nation.
According to a report from Reuters, residents are shoveling radioactive topsoil from their lawns and dumping it into forests, parks and streams in an attempt to protect themselves from high levels of radiation. Reuters quotes one resident as saying a Geiger counter measured radiation levels of 10 microsieverts per hour being emitted from the topsoil in her lawn.
An indication of the severity of the radiation exposure can be derived from a Kyodo news article which reports that Japan has finally released the results of a radiation survey conducted over 2 months ago by the central government and several local government located within the Fukushima Prefecture.
According to the article, the study revealed that 45% of the children surveyed in the Fukushima prefecture had already suffered thyroid radiation exposure by the time the survey was completed at the end of March. The survey found levels up to an equivalent of a 50 millisieverts per year of thyroid radiation exposure for 1 year olds. To put that in perspective, the US has an annual radiation exposure limit of 4 millisieverts per year in drinking water for adults.
Despite the findings of the survey, Japanese officials are still deceptively attempting to downplay the risks.
For example, The Japan Times reports officials as saying the levels detected “in all cases were trace amounts that did not warrant further levels of investigation”. Officials further attempt to downplay the situation by stating “a 100 millisieverts total radiation exposure” will only increase of the “cancer mortality risk by 0.5 percent”.
Arnie is not alone in his assessment of up to 1 million cancers either.
I previously reported on a study by Chris Busby predicting over 200,000 cancer deaths, which of course we now know was based on severely downplayed data released by the government of Japan.
Radiation Study Estimates Over 220,000 Cases Of Cancer From Fukushima Nuclear Fallout
A disturbing study estimates over 220,000 cases of cancer will result from the Japan nuclear radiation fallout. Those numbers are based on officially released radiation data which we learn more every day are understated lies put out by governments to avert panic.
Radiation Experts Determine Over 200,000 Cancers Likely from Fukushima
By: Chris Busby, Green Audit; Occasional Paper 2011/7 Aberystwyth UK, 30th March 2011
The Health Outcome of the Fukushima Catastrophe Initial Analysis from Risk Model of the European Committee on Radiation Risk ECRR
Conclusions and recommendations
1. The ECRR risk model has been applied to the 3 million people living in the 100km radius of the Fukushima catastrophe. Assuming these people remain living there for one year the number of excess cancers predicted by the method is approximately 200,000 in the next 50 years with 100,000 being diagnosed in the next 10 years. If they are evacuated immediately, the number will fall by a significant amount. For those 7 million living between 100km and 200km from the site, the predicted number of cancers is slightly greater with 220,000 extra cancers in the next 50 years and about 100,000 being expressed in the next ten years. These predictions are based on the ECRR risk model and the findings of cancer risk on Sweden after the Chernobyl accident.[...]
In fact, by the time August came, Dr. Helen Caldicott, working on updated research from Busby, warned that not only would there be 1 million cancers but over 1 million deaths as a result of the fallout.
Experts: Lethal Levels of “Off-Scale” Radiation At Fukushima Infer Millions Dying
Experts warn off-scale levels of radiation, which are at their highest levels since the disaster began almost 5 months ago, infers hundreds millions dying from the nuclear fallout.
Fukushima nuclear power plant radiation recordings of external gamma radiation have been so high this week, they went off scale said veteran nuclear expert Arnie Gundersen on Thursday after the famous physicist, Dr. Chris Busby told the Japanese people this week that radioactive air contamination there now is 300 times that of Chernobyl and 1000 times the atomic bomb peak in 1963, possibly inferring that hundreds of millions of people are now dying from Fukushima radiation, including people in the United States.
If noticing unusual amounts of hair falling out, confusion, nose bleeds or other odd symptoms typical of radiation sickness, it might be due to the United States record high levels of radiation, now multiple times acceptable safety limits not only on the west coast, but also in other locations around the nation.
Because Fukushima radiation data retrieval and interpretation has been so complex or non-existent for the concerned public, citizen reporters in Japan and United States have now established easily accessible ways to view radiation levels on the internet.
Alexander Higgins is an indepedent journalist and frequent contributor to The Intel Hub. He also writes at his site, blog.alexanderhiggins.com
Experts: Lethal Levels of “Off-Scale” Radiation At Fukushima Infer Millions Dying
Posted by Alexander Higgins – August 8, 2011 at 11:46 am – Permalink - Source via Alexander Higgins Blog
Experts warn off-scale levels of radiation, which are at their highest levels since the disaster began almost 5 months ago, infers hundreds millions dying from the nuclear fallout.
Deborah Dupre, Human Rights Examiner
August 5, 2011
Fukushima nuclear power plant radiation recordings of external gamma radiation have been so high this week, they went off scale said veteran nuclear expert Arnie Gundersen on Thursday after the famous physicist, Dr. Chris Busby told the Japanese people this week that radioactive air contamination there now is 300 times that of Chernobyl and 1000 times the atomic bomb peak in 1963, possibly inferring that hundreds of millions of people are now dying from Fukushima radiation, including people in the United States.
If noticing unusual amounts of hair falling out, confusion, nose bleeds or other odd symptoms typical of radiation sickness, it might be due to the United States record high levels of radiation, now multiple times acceptable safety limits not only on the west coast, but also in other locations around the nation.
Because Fukushima radiation data retrieval and interpretation has been so complex or non-existent for the concerned public, citizen reporters in Japan and United States have now established easily accessible ways to view radiation levels on the internet.
Fukushima radiation depopulation unfathomable: Possibly 100s of millions deaths
Dr Janette Sherman, a highly respected physician and acknowledged expert in radiation exposure who has reported a north-east United States 35% baby death spike since Fukushima fall-out reached the nation, concurs with estimates that world-wide, the Chernobyl Kill is one million people killed to date reported NOVA News. Extrapolating, worldwide deaths by Fukushima radiation could eventually be hundreds of millions of people, becoming the most significant depopulation event to date.
Watch: Top U.S doctor says millions will die
Dr. Chris Busby, world-famous physicist, said tests conducted at the respected Harwell Radiation Laboratory in England demonstrate that airborne radiation in Japan is 1,000 times higher than radioactive “fallout” at the peak in 1963 of H-Bomb detonations by nuclear powers. In March, Busby had estimated that Fukushima radiation to be 72,000 times greater than what the United States released at Hiroshima.
“Let’s wipe the Tokyo Electric Power Company and the General Electric officials and policy makers off the face of the Earth, as they manifestly deserve,” asserted Dr. Busby when addressing the Japanese this week.
Watch: Lethal Levels of Radiation at Fukushima: What Are the Implications?
TEPCO has discovered locations on the Fukushima plant site with lethal levels of external gamma radiation. Fairewinds takes a close look at how this radiation might have been deposited and how similar radioactive material would have been released offsite.
Thirty-nine year nuclear industry veteran Arnie Gundersen of Fairewinds stated Tuesday,”There will continue to be enormous spikes for at least ten years.”
Dr. Busby advocates not only independent studies of the nuclear catastrophe. He received a resounding applause when he told the Japanese people this week that in his opinion, scientists who said this accident was not a problem must be prosecuted.
“Many nuclear scientists said it was not a problem when the knew it was a serious accident. People who listened to those scientists and did not run away when they should have. Because of that, people will die.”
Busby explained that the World Health Organization is tied to the Nuclear Industry so their research is bogus. In studying Fukushima, the World Health Organization expects to find no effects “and so that’s what they’ll find,” he said.
According to Dr. Helen Caldicott, WHO’s subjugation to the nuclear industry has been widely known since May 28, 1959, when at the 12th World Health Assembly, WHO drafted an agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) granting the right of prior approval over any research it might undertake or report on to the IAEA, the group many people, including some journalists, think is a neutral watchdog but is, “in fact, an advocate for the nuclear power industry.”
”The agency shall seek to accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy to peace, health and prosperity through the world,” the founding papers state, as reported in The Age.
Latest nuclear ‘peace, health and prosperity’ spike
TEPCO discovered a hot spot location on the Fukushima nuclear power plant site a few days ago with lethal levels of external gamma radiation.
How the latest radiation spike at Fukushima might have been deposited and how similar radioactive material would have been released off-site was presented this week by Gunderson, with over 25-years of experience in nuclear decommissioning oversight, co-authored the first edition of the Department Of Energy (DOE) Decommissioning Handbook. (See embedded Vimeo, “Lethal Levels of Radiation at Fukushima: What Are the Implications?“, Arnie Gundersen, Fairewinds)
Gundersen noted that over 1000 REMs were released according to TEPCO earlier this week, an amount that, “if there, would mean death within a couple of days.”
Experts: Fukushima ‘off-scale’ lethal radiation level infers millions dying
Human Rights Examiner
Fukushima nuclear power plant radiation recordings of external gamma radiation have been so high this week, they went off scale said veteran nuclear expert Arnie Gunderson on Thursday after the famous physicist, Dr. Chris Busby told the Japanese people this week that radioactive air contamination there is now 300 times that of Chernobyl and 1000 times the atomic bomb peak in 1963, inferring that hundreds of millions of people are now dying from Fukushima radiation, including people in the United States.
If noticing unusual amounts of hair falling out, confusion, nose bleeds or other odd symptoms typical of radiation sickness, it might be due to the United States’ record high levels of radiation, now multiple times acceptable safety limits not only on the west coast, but also in other locations around the nation.
Because Fukushima radiation data retrieval and interpretation has been so complex or non-existent for the concerned public, citizen reporters in Japan and United States have now established easily accessible ways to view radiation levels on the internet.
Fukushima radiation depopulation unfathomable: Possibly 100s of millions deaths
Dr Janette Sherman, a highly respected physician and acknowledged expert in radiation exposure who has reported a north-east United States 35% baby death spike since Fukushima fall-out reached the nation, concurs with estimates that world wide, the Chernobyl Kill is one million people killed to date reported NOVA News. Extrapolating, worldwide deaths by Fukushima radiation could eventually be hundreds of millions of people, becoming the most significant depopulation event to date.
Dr. Chris Busby, world famous physicist, said tests conducted at the respected Harwell Radiation Laboratory in England demonstrate that airborne radiation in Japan is 1,000 times higher than radioactive “fallout” at the peak in 1963 of H-Bomb detonations by nuclear powers. In March, Busby had estimated that Fukushima radiation to be 72,000 times greater than what the United States released at Hiroshima.
"Let’s wipe the Tokyo Electric Power Company and the General Electric officials and policy makers off the face of the Earth, as they manifestly deserve," asserted Dr. Busby when addressing the Japanese this week.
Thirty-nine year nuclear industry veteran Arnie Gunderson of Fairwinds stated Tuesday,"There will continue to be enormous spikes for at least ten years."
Dr. Busby advocates not only independent studies of the nuclear catastrophe. He received a resounding applause when he told the Japanese people this week that in his opinion, scientists who said this accident was not a problem must be prosecuted.
"Many nuclear scientists said it was not a problem when the knew it was a serious accident. People who listened to those scientists and did not run away when they should have. Because of that, people will die."
Busby explained that the World Health Organization is tied to the Nuclear Industry so their research is bogus. In studying Fukushima, the World Health Organization expects to find no effects "and so that’s what they’ll find," he said.
According to Dr. Helen Caldicott, WHO’s subjugation to the nuclear industry has been widely known since May 28, 1959, when at the 12th World Health Assembly, WHO drafted an agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) granting the right of prior approval over any research it might undertake or report on to the IAEA, the group many people, including some journalists, think is a neutral watchdog but is, "in fact, an advocate for the nuclear power industry."
”The agency shall seek to accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy to peace, health and prosperity through the world,” the founding papers state, as reported by The Age.
Latest nuclear ‘peace, health and prosperity’ spike
TEPCO discovered a hot spot location on the Fukushima nuclear power plant site a few days ago with lethal levels of external gamma radiation.
How the latest radiation spike at Fukushima might have been deposited and also how similar radioactive material would have been released off-site was presented this week by Gunderson, with over 25-years of experience in nuclear decommissioning oversight, co-authored the first edition of the Department Of Energy (DOE) Decommissioning Handbook. (See embedded Vimeo, "Lethal Levels of Radiation at Fukushima: What Are the Implications?", Arnie Gunderson, Fairwinds)
Gunderson noted that over 1000 REMs were released according to TEPCO earlier this week, an amount that, "if there, would mean death within a couple of days."
"Those kinds of exposures cause extensive neurological breakdowns that can’t be reversed medically," Gunderson reported.
"To be anywhere near that for a couple of minutes would be a death sentence."
Gunderson has questioned how this hot spot could have been missed over 100 days.
"Earlier site maps do not show this high concentration of radioactivity in that area," he said. "More likely that this event happened over time. This radiation built up over time."
Gunderson said he wanted to put that into perspective and let the public know what is happening, saying the key is that it occurred in a vent.
It contained cesium and hot water that ran down the outside of the pipe and collected in the bottom, so the concentration got higher and higher as more water containing cesium came down. It was found in a stack condensing.
"Air was being pulled over that and exhausted into the air for a long period of time," he said.
"It speaks to how much radiation was released over the last 140 days, only a small amount compared to the total amount being released to the environment."
Nuclear insanity, ‘Destroyer of Worlds’ hits states but fixed by vaccines?
According to Gunderson, over the next ten years, there will be continued spikes in radiation on site, first where places bulldozed actually come to the surface in excavations.
"There will continue to be enormous radioactive sources that are unearthed," he said."When they get into these buildings to actually try to dismantle the plant, they are going to find even higher radiation levels than this one."
"At the bottom of the plant, the nuclear core has leaked out and is now lying like a pancake on the concrete floor, working its way down, but probably not through the concrete."
According to Gunderson, the bottom if the plant has even much more radioactive material leaking than the recent off-the-scale recordings.
"It’s going to take ten or twenty years to clean up," he said.
The Japanese government has called for a voluntary cease of using compost materials from fallen leaves due to humus registering cesium over the government’s acceptable radiation limits according to MSNBC World News Asia Pacific.
Following criticism of government radiation data being too difficult to interpret, organizations started collecting their own data. Now, the government is helping to interpret radiation readings found in air, water, grass, farm soil, trees and food.
Alexander Higgins is among citizen reporters in the United States who are rallying to provide accurate radiation monitoring data to Americans. This week, Higgins presented a new interactive website that clearly shows with maps and charts the radiation levels across the country.
Data on these pages reflect CPMs remarkably higher than government safety levels. For example, in recent days, Los Angeles radiation has been spiking higher than 300 CPMs, and Little Rock, higher than 250 CPMs. (See: "Real Time EPA RadNet Japan Nuclear Radiation Monitoring For Every Major City In The Entire US On A Single Page," Higgins, A.)
Global Security Newswire reported over one hundred million dollars allocated for drug research companies to address radiation sickness in the United States. Within less than a week of Fukushima’s catastrophe onset, on Mar 16, U.S. bio-defense groups, that develop products for radiation leak effects from nuclear power plants and attacks and a number of anti-cancer drugs, were awarded a five-year $118 million contract to further develop "research and producing vaccines and immunotherapies directed at potential agents of bio-terrorism," according to Daily Finance.
"The government’s concern is reflected in the 2004 passage of the BioShield Act, which created Project BioShield to fund countermeasures against a chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear attack. The project has set aside $5.6 billion for the next 10 years for the government purchase of next-generation medical countermeasures, including improved vaccines, diagnostics, and therapeutics. The budget includes grants from the Department of Health and Human Resources to biotechs developing such bio-defense products. That $5.6 billion budget may now look insufficient. Already, there is talk among some senators for the need to bump up the nation’s preparedness in the wake of the nuclear crisis in Japan." (Daily Finance)
As Americans struggle to survive amid the economic depression, Obama has allocated 39 billion dollars for the U.S. nuclear power industry, an industry that peace and justice human rights defender Dr. Caldicott has called "nuclear insanity" and the "Destroyer of Worlds."
Top Scientist: Fukushima Meltdown Could Trigger Atomic Explosion
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
April 12, 2011
A British professor and expert on the health effects of ionizing radiation told Alex Jones today evidence points toward a nuclear explosion occurring at the Fukushima Daiichi complex. Two explosions at the plant in March were described as hydrogen gas explosions by Japanese officials and the corporate media.
Professor Chris Busby on the Alex Jones Show, April 12, 2011.
Citing data collected by two Russian scientists, Professor Chris Busby told Alex Jones and his audience that the explosions at Fukushima were possibly nuclear. The Russian scientists, Sergey A. Pakhomov and Yuri V. Dubasov of the VG Khlopin Radium Institute in Saint Petersburg, examined data related to the explosion at Chernobyl.
Japanese nuclear safety agency raises crisis level of Fukushima Daiichi power plant accident from 5 to 7.
Using ratios of the radionuclides Xenon 133 and Xenon 133m which they measured by gamma spectrometer, the Russians demonstrated that the Chernobyl explosion was a fission criticality explosion and not principally a hydrogen explosion as has been claimed.
“I believe that the explosion of the No 3 reactor may have also involved criticality but this must await the release of data on measurements of the Xenon isotope ratios,” he writes in a statement on Fukushima and Chernobyl emailed to Infowars.com.
Busby further notes that the surface contamination and of dose rates 60 kilometers out from the Fukushima site on March 17 exceeded that released at Chernobyl.
He explains in his statement that the damaged reactors at Fukushima “are now continuing to fission. It is hoped that there will be no separation of plutonium and possible nuclear explosion. I feel that this is unlikely now.” Short of an actual plutonium explosion, the reactors remain open to the air and will continue to “fission and release radionuclides for years unless something drastic is done.”
Dr. Busby noted a precedent for the dire scenario now unfolding – a nuclear explosion at a plutonium production reprocessing plant in the former Soviet Union in 1957.
The incident at the Mayak facility was the second-worst nuclear accident in history after the Chernobyl disaster. The explosion released 50-100 tonnes of high-level radioactive waste and contaminated a huge territory in the eastern Urals. The Soviets kept the explosion secret for 30 years. According to a report on the accident, about 400,000 people in the region were irradiated following the explosion and other incidents at the plant.
Stock up with Fresh Food that lasts with eFoodsDirect (Ad)
Dr. Busby told Alex Jones that short of actual isotope readings, he cannot definitely state that the explosions at Fukushima were nuclear, although he believes they were. “We don’t have evidence of that,” he concluded, “we would need to have the Xenon isotope ratios.”
PEACE! Also Dutchsinse – who is out there in the field, radiation testing and reporting in to us all – you are AWESOME and keep up the great work! Subscribe to his chanel here: http://www.youtube.com/user/dutchsinse Sorry about the odd spelling mistake – I couldnt be bothered reloading it. Everyone deserves to know the truth – please share with all the people you can. As you all know things are gradually getting worse at Fukushima. The lies are starting to be exposed and the media is eerily quiet. I guess they have the orders not to panic the people. Take responsibility for your lives and do not blame your governments. Get off your butt and protect your kids if not yourselves. Download some vids about the mutations that happened in Chernobyl if you want to see what the future holds for your chiildren and your grandchildren if you remain in the poluted part of the Earth. May God help us all.
HEPA Air Filters in California Recorded Radiation Levels 538% Above Normal
The Intel Hub
February 2, 2012
A test of a HEPA air filter stationed in California recorded radiation levels at 351% and 538% above normal background levels.
The tests, conducted by the Enviroreporter, show levels much higher than normal background levels that are most likely coming from the Fukushima nuclear disaster.
It is clear that, despite a large scale misinformation campaign conducted by various governments and sock puppets throughout the internet, an increase in radiation HAS been seen in the United States after the Japan Fukushima nuclear disaster.
The great works of Fukushima
No respite for workers in Fukushima. It should be a cool hand and constantly monitor the former Central to prevent further explosions or fires and other emergency launch of major projects that will slow the spread of radioactive contamination in the environment. Now, the future of Japan and the Pacific, and probably in the northern hemisphere in general, depends not only on the achievement of these gigantic works, but also of their lasting effectiveness.
Work to prevent contamination of the air
The ex-reactors, which can be demonstrated that two of them have lost their primary containment integrity (unit 2 at the pool ring and Unit 3 at the lid of the enclosure), must be covered by watertight structures that prevent radioactive dust and gas to continue polluting the atmosphere. Ideally, it should also install a depressurization system to prevent gas leakage to the outside, coupled with a result of filtering the air to trap noxious gases and aerosols.
Obviously, a simple tarp placed on a former reactor can not remove any air pollution. Today, for Unit 1 only, this coverage is rather to stop the water supply outside the building, but above all to conceal the reactor of the Fukushima Daiichi who is ashamed of the atomic industry. Dissemination of the video of its explosion March 12, 2011 was historic: the first time we saw a nuclear explosion on television. 25 years of hard work of disinformation and formatting brain destroyed in seconds! In terms of image, the diffusion of the explosion of Unit 3 was even worse because, much more powerful, and confirmed it has tarnished forever the image of nuclear power safe. That’s why the video of the explosion of Unit 4 has been banned from broadcasting, locked, censored.
The cover of the reactor building No. 1 was completed in fall 2011. It remains to cover the units 2, 3 and 4. But before that, other major work remains to be done urgently.
Work to prevent contamination of groundwater
By the choice of water cooling of reactors pierced the basement of the old station has become a bottomless pit : the men are now condemned to pump and treat radioactive water for decades. And to contain too massive infiltration of outside water, TEPCO plans to drill 14 wells pumping upstream of the plant, in order to reduce the level of groundwater.
Cutting drainage work (Picture source Gen4 and Tepco )
The old power station in Tokyo is now devolved to expand to a reprocessing plant wastewater eternal in the nuclear industry. The plant, which employs thousands of workers during an indefinite period (minimum 40 years) will:
1) pump water from the water table upstream to avoid mixing with the water already polluted, check its non-contamination and discarded at sea, or if the circuit towards the reprocessing
2) pump water from basements of the plant, treated and filtered before reinjecting it into the cooling circuits of ex-reactors and cooling ponds 7,
3) pumping, treating and filtering water drainage across the site so radioactive that no water reaches the ocean,
4) package and store in a sustainable way of filtering radioactive residues
With the mixing of these millions of tons of contaminated water, the term "liquidator", originally given to people who have sacrificed to contain the Chernobyl disaster, here is a whole new meaning!
For now, the factory is temporary, built in the urgency of the disaster. This will require long-term design a factory hard, protected from frost and rain, and of sufficient capacity to treat water for all systems. It will also appoint him independent backup systems that will, whatever happens, to deal with any unforeseen event that could affect the cooling of 2400 tons of fuel are on the site.
Work to prevent contamination of the Pacific Ocean
In September 2011, TEPCO announced the construction of a dam, as described inthis article . It is supposed to retain water contaminated groundwater so that it does not reach the ocean. This is risky because the dam is open and leaks may be possible to the south and north of the structure. Other voices have proposed a full enclosure, completely surrounding the nuclear site, to be sure to capture all groundwater. This is probably what will be led engineers if they see pollution persists in the ocean. Like the first sarcophagus at Chernobyl, we must see the construction of the dam as a first step in the management of air pollution for the world as the Pacific waters are international.
Tepco has made new graphics to view the dam.
(Source Tepco )
Work to prevent another fire pool 4
15 March 2011, after several explosions, Unit 4 experienced a fire: the successive explosions have probably wasted a lot of water to delay tank. Moreover, without cooling, the water evaporated slowly let up in the air above the fuel rods. This is where the fire was able to declare, in the absence of cooling, the bars heat up quickly and burn, spreading their fission products directly into the atmosphere. The fire stopped around noon. But another fire was reported the next few hours.
For this can not happen again, for example because of another earthquake, TEPCO decided to put away the fuel pool 4 to a package secured to the ground. To do this, it is necessary to build a superstructure that will support a crane able to safely transfer the 1535 assemblies.
Here the project provided by Tepco :
(To learn more about this project, see the article Trifouillax .)
Other work needed and costs pharamineux
As for the dam, it is work which must be realized first. However it is clear that the fuel in Units 1 and 3 will also be transferred, because nothing says that their pools will take decades. But meanwhile, it will solve the problem of available space in theshared pool of Fukushima Daiichi because it already contains more than 1000 tons of fuel. Will it build an extra?
Should therefore be viewed all of these strategies that could almost make us believe that the nuclear industry mastered a disaster. Today Japan is widely contaminated, the damage is already done, and there will always leak, the plant will remain a threat.
Finally, how much will it cost?
Does the price consequences of nuclear disasters will now be included in the cost of kilowatts?
And who will pay in the end?
We already have some answers with the Chernobyl disaster (1986): the construction of the second sarcophagus has just started. Total estimated cost to a single reactor: 1.54 billion euros.
Friday, April 27, 2012
See Fukushima (33)
Fukushima Daiichi plant
- Unit 1
Tepco has since packed, there was more picture!
- Unit 2
Inspection of the pool ring, also called suppression chamber.
Click on image to view the slideshow of Simply Info
- Unit 3
Click this link to the photo in HD:
http://www.sdnyw.cn/news/edit/UploadFile1/201231292418951.jpg
Photo by Takashi Morizumi, Japanese photojournalist.
http://mphoto.sblo.jp/article/54815939.html
Inspection of the equipment hatch (hatch)
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/images/handouts_120419_03-e.pdf
Part of the refueling machine fell into the pool
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/science/news/20120413-OYT1T00996.htm
- Unit 4
during the visit of Vice Minister Ikko Nakatsuka
In the pool
The spent fuel pool, covered with a white tarpaulin
The containment flooded
Detail of previous photo.
More photos
Monitoring of internal contamination with Namie
Report on the decontamination of Flo Fukushima: workers without protective mask (click on the picture to access the report)
The picture was withdrawn at the request of the author
You can see it in the story of Flo at this address:
http://corgiflore.blogspot.fr/2012/04/fukushima-avec-un-journaliste-1.html
A Date City, town contaminated and full of hot-spots, we ask kindergarten children to clean up a mailbox. The horror of denial.
http://www.minyu-net.com/news/topic/0421/topic5.html
Images 360 ° of the Miyagi prefecture in March 2011 after the tsunami
http://www.360degres.info/japon.html
Response to Luke Oursel (Areva) in Fukushima
In an interview given to Luke OurselChallenges , it advises the Japanese authorities to "talk more about what is happening in Fukushima to explain how the situation is brought under control."
It is unlikely that the wishes of the chief executive of Areva are promptly fulfilled, because in fact little is under control.
Today, what control TEPCO Fukushima Daiichi?
Tepco master of water?
It has invaded the central artificially in the ongoing fight against nuclear attack and naturally by the water table. Tepco not know what to make of this contaminated water. To ensure a responsible image which is handling the situation, she created fields of tanks around the plant to recover the radioactive water pumped, then treated and reinjected into the reactor cooling circuit. But these makeshift factories that désalinisent filter and cesium-often fail Areva knows something – and the balance of cubic meters is ultimately positive, despite the promises of the roadmap of 2011. Indeed, considerable quantities of water from the water table – we talked in September of 200-500 tons per day – is directed into the basement of the plant and add to the volume of water pumped.
Storage of radioactive water – 98 000 to 120 000 tons estimated – can not extend infinitely, Tepco, after a year, is up against the wall.
Vats of radioactive water
The company is now preparing to want to lower the groundwater level by 14 pumping wells west of the site so that more water will invade the basement of the plant. This water should be conducted directly into the ocean. But nothing says it is not contaminated, because it no longer says that the operator is that the exchange with the water table occur in both directions and that radioactive contamination has spread in the ground in the early days of the disaster. This is Naoyuki Matsuma itself, Tepco spokesman, who testified in March 2011 to 15 m depth in the central action of iodine-131 indicated a rate 10,000 times higher than the norm . Since then the company has never provided more of these water tests the water table. Knowing his unspoken practices, it is likely that what analysis today is not politically communicable to the public.
Tepco master of fire?
After the historical series of explosions and fires that occurred on the first four reactors of the Fukushima Daiichi March 12 to 15, 2011 (No. 1: an explosion; 2: an explosion; 3: 3 explosions and a fire , 4: 3 explosions and fires 2), TEPCO Research hearts melted. Since the disappearance of three coriums plant in the early days of the disaster, the operator has good prospect, he does not find them. He filmedinside the containment and inspected the ring pool of reactor No. 2, he examined the lateral opening ( hatch ) from the base of the containment of the reactor No. 3: nothing. Certainly, a lot of radioactivity, confirming the meltdowns, but not for corium.So where are the coriums? Somewhere lodged in riffles or left in the wild? And how to handle the situation if we do not know the temperature? Indeed, the thermocouples are declared out of service on a regular basis, so that for the No. 2 reactor, there is more than one valid probe in the bottom of the tank.
After catastrophic fire past the fire and found this, Tepco control does fire future? To avoid further explosions, the operator injects nitrogen to counter the regular production of hydrogen from the plant, but it turns out that this system fails continually, and sometimes for several hours.
Moreover, great fears have gradually spread throughout the world on the possibility of a great finale fireworks if the pool No. 4 had to empty or to collapse after an earthquake of very magnitude.
Fuel from the reactor pool 4
It would not be the worst case scenario but the scenario of the end , to paraphrase the nuclear engineer Hiroaki Koide. In this case, 264 tons of fuel, private cooling, take fire and that fire would impose an immediate evacuation of the plant under penalty of death fast of all staff. From this site abandonment, the events enchaîneraient, without which no man can do about anything: one to one, the cooling systems of reactors and former six remaining cooling pools fall down lack of maintenance. Fire fuel, and perhaps nuclear reactions "prompt" a sort of micro-atomic explosions, would succeed then, ultimately involving the atmosphere more than 2400 tons of fuel (For the record, Chernobyl had sent 50 tons of fuel in the air).
Readers of this blog already know this since a long time , but awareness of such danger seems to finally arrive in the spheres of influence. So recently, a Japanese ambassador, Mitsuhei Murata and honest American Senator, Ron Wyden , spoke publicly for a better consideration of this global threat.
The opinion of the diplomat Akio Matsumura (subtitled in French)
For now, the pool No. 4 holds up, the explosions of the building affecting mainly the upper levels. Tepco has ruled out any danger of collapse of walls overlooking the pool by demolishing and removing carefully all structures that could have been let go during a major earthquake. The pool was also consolidated its foundations. Finally, TEPCO has already planned the transfer of fuel rods by threatening a special construction . But it will take time. Lot of time, from one to several years. And the work should not be stopped by an earthquake too important.
Tepco master of the earth?
So there is going to be very short, the event of March 11, 2011 has definitely shown that a nuclear plant should not be built in an earthquake zone. Men can not defy the forces of earth. Tepco was therefore wrong to build on Fukushima Daiichi an old fault . And all those who in the world now favor new nuclear build in earthquake zones or can continue their operations are taking huge risks to humanity. One thinks especially of the old Armenian Central Metsamor and the future of mégacentraleJaitapur in India (draft 6 EPR).
Of course, Mr. Oursel already knew all this: Tepco does not control much. The operator does not know what to do with radioactive water, just like the sorcerer’s apprentice, he does not know where is the nuclear fire that he created, he is no longer the subject since Fukushima Daiichi is no longer a nuclear plant and it does not control earthquakes, it can not know the date nor the intensity of the next. He has mastered perfectly, however communications, broadcasting its information in dribs and drabs, often several months late to lessen the impact of bad news.
Yet Mr. Oursel prefer they communicate more positively. For Areva, with a loss of 2.4 billion euros in 2011, much of the image suffers catastrophic Fukushima. Tepco does what he can, the liquidators are working hard to improve the appearance and security of the site by clearing all radioactive materials resulting from explosions. But a nuclear disaster is a disaster for very long. 25 years after the Chernobyl disaster, we must build a new shelter for one heart melted. How many decades will be needed to dismantle Fukushima and three hearts melted? No one knows, the disaster seems to eternal humanity, and whatever communication we use, the nuclear industry has no future.
Email this article to a friend
Print this article
Sunday, May 06, 2012 
External videos
.svg){kind=spacer}
![[before]](http://chong.zxq.net/misc/events/img/Daiichi_TsunamiBeforeFlood-1.jpg){kind=link}