atsiii

It seems interesting that nobody has touched on the fact that this proposal is blatantly racist. There is no mention of restricting religious tattoos on Thais, only on farangs; as if there is no such thing as farang Buddhists. When you propose restrictive laws aimed at one race or ethnicity alone, that is racist--pure and simple. It is actually quite frightening that these kinds of proposals can even be presented with a straight face--and then actually debated.

And finally, if "they" are so concerned that someone sporting a Buddhist tattoo might be seen drinking (or course they have trouble differentiating between Buddhist and Hindu tattoos!), then why do they tolerate Buddhist Monks seen smoking, sometimes drinking, playing with their iPhones, etc.? Buddha forbid that a "farang monk" be seen smoking--he would probably be crucified!! Not because he is a monk demonstrating addictive behavior in public... but only because he is a farang.

For a farang with a small guesthouse that spends 7 months a year in Thailand, it is a frightening politically racist atmosphere today.

One last question for the forum: how is this "proposal" any less racist and unbelievable than was the Thai Visa April Fool's Day prank of "proposing" that marriage rights of farangs over 50 would be restricted? Are not both proposals simply peas in a racist pod? So why is one a joke; while the other one is seriously proposed by Thai politicians and "cultural morality servants?"

Her work has nothing to do with the US (economy) in any way and should not be taken into the equation...

Thai authorities do not agree with your opinion.

Naam, can you explain more of what you mean? How is it different from a Thai journalist who is paid in Thailand by a Thai company to travel to the U.S. and send stories and photos back via the Internet?

It seems like from the Thai standpoint, she would still be getting paid by her Thai company and taxed on her Thai earnings. And from the U.S. standpoint, she would not be getting paid by or doing any work for U.S. companies or citizens--which is not allowed on a B1/B2 visitor visa. Rather, she would just be spending her Thai earnings in the U.S.; which I thought is what they (the U.S.) want foreigners to do.

Thank you, both! Yes, you are right, it's government so nothing is a "slam dunk."

When my GF applies for her visa, does she request a desired length of visa? Or does she simply present her hopes for taking a three-month holiday?

As a translator, she is able to do much of her work via the Internet, and she can get a letter from her company stating that she can work remotely via the Internet for six months and still retain her job. IYO, does this adequately explain how she can visit the U.S. for three months, and how she can support herself while there? As for her intent to return to Thailand... she has no relatives or friends in the U.S. (other than me when I am there), no job, etc. All of her family (Mother, Father, Sister & her family, Brother & his family), friends and co-workers are in Thailand, as is her employment, her apartment, etc. Other than these things, how can she actually "prove" her intent to return? Perhaps the more difficult question would be (at least for me to imagine), "how really could she not return?"

After we take over the guesthouse on Koh Mak this October, can we present this ongoing business/Thai company as demonstration of our obvious plans and intention to return to Thailand? We will have a multi-year long-term lease on the property, and that document will be drawn up in both our personal names as well as the business name. In my overly simplistic thinking, once this business is in place, I had assumed it would provide an adequate and honest justification for my GF to visit the U.S. during the off season (i.e. to promote the property), as well as documenting an obvious intent to return to Thailand to run the business during its seven month tourist season? IYO, am I just kidding myself?

I have two principal questions...

#1: in reading other topics and replies, I see a lot of reference to some Thai's having obtained a "10-year tourist" visa. I've never heard of a 10-year visa, so how does one go about getting such a thing?

#2: My Thai sweetheart is a mid-thirties college graduate, trilingual professional translator. She has worked the last 10-years for a Thai publishing company translating Japanese books into Thai. She is severely underpaid by our standards, but receives a good salary by Thai standards (+/- 15,000 to 20,000 baht per month). She also has a history of international travel to Japan for her job (maybe four of five trips over the last five years). We want to go spend the summer (+/- 3 months) together at my house in the mountains (USA), and then return to Thailand for the winter (7-9 months). If possible, we'd ultimately like to do this each year. After reading lots of horror (and whore) stories about how difficult it is for Thai's to get a USA visa, my question is: will it be difficult for my GF to get a visa? Isn't she a slam-dunk qualifier for a visa (i.e. college grad, professionally employed for 10+years with letter from company saying her job will be waiting, and a previous history of international travel)? Or am I just kidding myself (and her)?

#3: The above are my two questions today. But in order to keep everything in one topic (as posted), our long-range goal is to spend five months each year in the U.S. and seven months each year running a small 6-room guesthouse on Koh Mak. We will be starting a Thai company this year, which will operate the guesthouse/cafe on Koh Mak, and my GF/wife will most likely be a registered Director of that Thai company. So looking forward, is it better to pursue a long-tern tourist visa to allow us to travel back and forth seasonally (as described above), or might it be easier for her (us) to travel back and forth to the U.S. under some sort of business visa based on the Thai company? She would be unpaid when in the U.S., as required by U.S. laws, but we could (honestly!) claim that she was in the U.S. to promote the Thai resort property to potential USA customers.

Thanks in advance for sharing your suggestions and experience.

http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Radioactivity-rises-in-sea-off-Japan-nuclear-plant-1339627.php

But the government said Saturday that radioactivity in the seawater has risen again in recent days. The level of radioactive iodine-131 spiked to 6,500 times the legal limit, according to samples taken Friday, up from 1,100 times the limit in samples taken the day before. Levels of cesium-134 and cesium-137 rose nearly fourfold.

The new rise in radioactivity could have been caused by the installation Friday of steel panels intended to contain radiation which may have temporarily stirred up stagnant waste in the area, Hidehiko Nishiyama of the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency told reporters. However, the increase in iodine-131, which has a relatively short eight-day half life, could signal the possibility of a new leak, he said.

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20110415-704192.html

Company President Masataka Shimizu said Friday that about 50,000 households within a 30-kilometer radius of the facility will be eligible for initial payments of up to Y1 million, totaling around Y50 billion.

The move caps a week in which the Japanese government raised its assessment of the month-long crisis to the highest severity level by international standards--a rating conferred so far only upon the Chernobyl accident--due to large-scale releases of radioactive materials. Japanese regulators determined that the plant has likely released tens of thousands of terabecquerels of radiation in the immediate area since a series of explosions caused by loss of cooling capability following the massive earthquake and tsunami on March 11.

"terabecquerels" ...not sure if I have ever heard that term. So, tens of thousands of terabecquerels of radiation... is that the same as, "mai pen rai, just trust us?" But I'm thinking that is just the amount released to the atmosphere and does not include the tens of thousands of tons of radioactive water released to the sea. So what would the Greek word be for "all the radiation combined that has been released?" Would it just be the same word as the vegetable in my Thai clear soup?

http://www.businessw...tepco-says.html

External Power at Fukushima Plant Cut by Earthquake, Tepco Says

April 11 (Bloomberg) -- External power sources for the Nos. 1, 2 and 3 reactors at Japan's Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant were cut after an earthquake struck today, Tokyo Electric Power Co. said. The injection of water into the three units, powered by the outside electricity, was halted, an official at the utility told reporters today in a televised briefing.

ATS-- I read elsewhere that the power for the cooling pumps has now been reconnected.

http://edition.cnn.c...n.quake/?hpt=T1

Magnitude 6.6-quake jolts Japan coast

(CNN) -- Fires burned in northeastern Japan Monday evening after a powerful earthquake shook the region, sending a landslide into Iwaki City, authorities said. A preliminary estimate put the quake's magnitude at 7.1, which was later lowered to 6.6, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. Residents in Tokyo also felt the jolts. A tsunami warning issued by Japan's Meteorological Agency was canceled.

Japan urges more people near nuke plant to leave(AP) – 6 hours ago

TOKYO (AP) — Japan's government says it is urging even more people to evacuate the area around the crippled nuclear plant that has been spewing radiation since a tsunami swamped its cooling systems a month ago.

People living within 12 miles (20 kilometers) already have been ordered to leave because of radiation concerns. Other people farther out had been advised to stay indoors.

Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano said Monday that residents of five additional communities, some more than 20 miles (30 kilometers) from the plant, are being urged to leave within a month.

Of course they are only "urging" people to leave. After all, if they evacuated them, they would end up having to pay some form of compensation. If--upon urging--they leave voluntarily, they likely will not receive future compensation.

_{here just another nuke}

_{Thursday's quake damages Onagawa nuclear plant}

_{Tohoku Electric Power Company says Thursday night's strong earthquake caused water to overflow from spent fuel storage pools at one of its nuclear power plants.}

_{The power company reported on Friday that water had spilled onto the floor at all 3 reactors at the Onagawa nuclear power plant in Miyagi Prefecture. The amount of water spilled was 3.8 liters at the most.}

_{The utility firm also found water leaks at 5 locations in the plant, including inside buildings housing the reactors.}

_{The company added that blowout panels--devices designed to control pressure inside the buildings--were damaged at the turbine building of the Number 3 reactor.}

_{The newly reported problems add to the downing of 3 of 4 external power lines at the Onagawa plant. The plant is maintaining its cooling capabilities with the remaining power line.}

_{Tohoku Electric Power Company is continuing its efforts to determine the extent of the damage caused by the latest quake. But it says no change has yet been seen in radiation levels around the plant.}

_{Friday, April 08, 2011 11:59 +0900 (JST) http://www3.nhk.or.j...lish/08_20.html}

_{Experts estimate this and that.}

_{Hell,what is an expert? Estimators?}

I'm surprised and now confused (even more): We are generally told that these nuclear power plants located in active seismic zone are essentially "earthquake proof." But now this 7.4 tremor causes measurable damage and concern at this Onagawa Plant? And getting back to Fukushima, the following information was released about the ground acceleration forces experienced during the March 11th 9.0 quake:

TEPCO says 3 of the plant's 6 reactors were shaken on March 11th by tremors exceeding forces they were designed to withstand. Reactor No.2 suffered the largest horizontal ground acceleration of 550 gals, which is 26 percent stronger than the reactor's design limit.

So my confusion and question (for the local experts, here) is: if the March 11th 9.0 quake exceeded design standards by 15% to 26%, does that mean that the seismic design criteria used for nuclear plants located in the most active seismic zone on earth--the Pacific Rim of Fire--is something a little less than a 9.0 event on the Reciter Scale? Can this be true when there have been 10 to 15 quakes greater than 9.0 since 1900 alone? Is this the same design criteria used for the CA plants?

Does "earthquake proof" mean "up to just about a 9.0 event?"

How many people have died as a direct result of the Fukushima accident? And how many have died as a result of the earthquake and tsunami that caused that accident?

I have asked the rhetorical question in several previous posts: what happens if the third shoe drops? Well, last night there was a 7.4 aftershock, but thank Buddha, there was no tsunami--this time! I'm not sure if people (nuclear supports or detractors) understand just how precarious a string Fukushima is hanging on.

In all our proud engineering, we evaluate the risks of natural disasters in isolation, meaning we design for a certain anticipated earthquake event, we design for a certain anticipated tsunami, a certain flood, etc. But if nothing else, Fukushima shows us this design approach is complete fallacy. Natural disasters can and do occur simultaneously and/or in quick succession--amplifying the impacts.and results. I ask the rhetorical question because if--like last night's aftershock--another tsunami came in and swept away all the fragile progress towards control and containment that has been made at Fukushima since March 11, putting the response effort back to square one while the reactors and pools are already well along their paths to self-destruction, then we would without doubt have catastrophic results at all three reactors and all four cooling pools and nobody would be arguing about how many will die--directly or indirectly, or how much environment damage will result. We will all simply be saying, OMG.

In my mind, last night's aftershock should be a wake-up call. We have a plant teetering on the edge of catastrophic problems, that at best will take decades to contain and decommission, and we are arguing over the fact that it has killed only two workers so far? We (the world) dodged a bullet last night, and this was only one of hundreds of aftershocks that have occurred since March 11. What would have happened if that same 7.4 tremor had been centered directly under the plant? Or if it had spawned another tsunami? Or a natural gas ignited wild fire that burned through the plant wiping out all the temporary pumping equipment and alternate power supply cables?

We dodged a bullet of catastrophic proportions; so with all our engineering prowess, is this the best we can do? We are supposed to feel secure knowing we barely got away with it--again? This is the level of human engineering that we are proud of and want to defend? This is what we consider to be acceptable risk? If nothing else, Fukushima has demonstrated that our entire concept of engineering benefit/risk analysis must fundamentally change. We cannot look at individual risks in isolation. As pilots are taught from day-one, it is rarely the first event or failure that proves fatal. It is when the events and failures start piling up that the result is often fatal.

Finally, am I the only one staggered by these costs? The largest earthquake recorded in Japan, along with its spawned tsunami, creates immeasurable human suffering and $300 Billion in property damage. But just one nuclear plant with six reactors (only three of which where operating) will require an estimated 30-years (at least!) and from $120 Billion to $150 Billion to contain and decommission. That is almost half of the total property damage done by the quake and tsunami combined. And that doesn't even begin to include compensation to the people who used to live within the 12 mile exclusion zone (that will likely never be able to return), nor (considering it's in Japan!!) the real estate value of all the land within the ultimate exclusion zone. Half (or probably more!) of the total cost of the quake and tsunami combined (which will likely be rebuilt in 5 years or less) from just one nuclear plant. Is this a reasonable benefit/cost ratio?

And what if tonight we're not so lucky... and the third shoe drops?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-05/tepco-dumping-toxic-water-angers-fishermen-stock-plunges.html

The United Nations nuclear watchdog said the partial meltdown at the station was a result of “errors” from the time a March 11 quake and tsunami knocked out pumps used to cool reactors and spent fuel. “Such an accident should not have happened,” Denis Flory, deputy director general of theInternational Atomic Energy Agency, said at a press briefing in Vienna yesterday. “Something was not done from the very beginning.”

What kind of BS is this? “Such an accident should not have happened,” "Something was not done from the very beginning.”

If you know something was done wrong, then why don't you come out and say it?

Good grief...

Sorry too late to edit but i want to ask does anyone have any information if they checked for remainders of plutonium in that seawater?

I have not seen any other measures or analysis of the water that is being released. Most of it is coming from their own onsite waste disposal facility (10,000 tons), so they must know its radioactive composition--but I have not seen it released. The other 1500 tons is from the damaged site and is probably more contaminated.

Supposedly the water being released is not the highly radioactive water that has come in contact with the melted fuel rods, for which they are releasing this water to make room for. But some of that highly radioactive water is already confirmed to be leaking into the ocean--and it would almost certainly contain some level of plutonium. That's because plutonium is a normal by-product of the fission reaction in all three reactors (even the two reactors that were not using MOX rods). For this reason, there will also be some plutonium present in all four of the cooling pools. That's why when they first found plutonium present in the soil samples, they still didn't know which reactor or pool it was coming from.

A news report from another source says Japan will dump over 10,000 tonnes of low-level radioactive water into the Pacific but It wont do any damage.

It's "low level" now, that they want to dump it in the sea? My bullshit meter is ticking off the scale.

AGREED!

So... 11,500 tons of radioactive water x 2000 lb/ton / 8.345 lb/gal (fresh water) => +/- 2.7 Million gallons. I guess 11,500 tons sounds much better than between 2.5 to 3.0 Million gallons or 10 Million liters.

I've said it before, but I hope they have explained to the fish that eat plankton near the stricken plant, not to swim outside of the 12-mile evacuation zone where they might risk being caught!

More Survivors?

The U.S. Military and Japan Defense Corp were undertaking a large last ditch effort to find survivors this past weekend, culminating today (Monday). Strangely I can't find any mention about the operation online... either positive or negative. Does anyone know if they were able to find anybody else still alive?

Thanks!

http://edition.cnn.c...clear.reactors/

Workers Install Ocean Silt Fence...

As they mull other ways to cut off the leak at its source, workers will install a silt fence along a damaged sea wall surrounding the plant, Hidehiko Nishiyama of Japan's nuclear and industrial safety agency said Monday. The aim of this screening, which is usually used to halt erosion at construction sites, is to prohibit the spread of radioactive particles into the sea

Workers also have injected a dye tracer into the water to allow them to track the dispersal of such particles, the spokesman added. Addressing the issue quickly is critical because officials believe it is one source of alarmingly high levels of radiation spotted in seawater near the plant, as well as in nearby groundwater. "This situation has continued for a long time," Japanese Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano said Monday. "We need to stop the release into the seawater as soon as possible ... The soil contamination also needs to be stopped."

In some cases, authorities don't even know how much radiation is getting out. After some high-profile errors while offering regular radiation measurements on seawater, groundwater and the air, little new information has been released since Thursday. One reason is that the dosimeters being used don't go above 1,000 millisieverts per hour, Junichi Matsumoto, an executive with the plant's owner Tokyo Electric Power Company, told reporters Sunday.

In the Pacific Ocean itself, the last reported measurement (from Thursday) of seawater taken 330 meters (361 yards) offshore were said to have levels of iodine-131 at 4,385 times above the standard and cesium-137 at 527 times beyond normal. Experts say the latter radioactive isotope may be a greater concern because it persists longer, taking 30 years to lose half its radiation -- compared to an eight-day half-life for the iodine-131 isotope.

Plugging the external leak is job one, in order to prevent the outflow of radiation into the Pacific. But it may not be the most difficult, or important, task ahead.Authorities still have to figure out how the tainted water got into the concrete shaft in the first place. The water had to come from somewhere, potentially traveling across melted-down nuclear fuel in the reactor's core before somehow reaching the outside. Nishiyama, the nuclear safety official, said Sunday that the working theory is that water injected in recent weeks into the No. 2 reactor to help cool its nuclear fuel rods somehow got out. "We were assuming and hoping (that water) would stay in the containment vessel as vapor after being cooled," he said. "However, it may have flowed into the building, and then the trench."

Finding out why and how that happened -- and, more so, what to do about it -- promises to be "exceptionally challenging," said physicist James Acton, with the Washington-based Carnegie Endowment think tank. To do so, officials must inspect a complicated array of pipes inside the dangerous radioactive environment inside the containment buildings, according to Acton. He is familiar with Japanese nuclear plants, having examined one rocked by a 6.8-magnitude earthquake in 2007.

The amount of emitted radiation, be it into the water or air, is also unknown. Authorities do believe there had been at least a partial meltdown of nuclear fuel -- thanks to intense heat, at one point, topping 2,700 Celsius (4,800 Fahrenheit) in the No. 1 reactor and 1,800 Celsius (3,200 Fahreinheit) in the Nos. 2 and 3 reactors, according to an analysis from Areva, one of the world's top nuclear energy companies based in France.

Germany sends pumps designed for fighting catstrophies. The first picture shows a design that was created for Chernobyl, covered with lead. The arms of the pumps reach out over 60 m.

Wow... talk about a niche market!

Nope. Is it worth reading?

You have to marvel at some of the reports. This pump should have been on the way since day 1. There's no contingency planning at all.

As for the US Army stepping in 3 weeks after the quake to look for survivors - I did mention things will only step up once the US is involved - but this is crazy. It's very sad.

Oops, Pedro, I meant to give you you this link to Alex's book on "behind the scenes of Japanese industry" in my previous reply.

http://alex-kerr.com/html/dogs___demons__english_.html

Nope. Is it worth reading?

You have to marvel at some of the reports. This pump should have been on the way since day 1. There's no contingency planning at all.

As for the US Army stepping in 3 weeks after the quake to look for survivors - I did mention things will only step up once the US is involved - but this is crazy. It's very sad.

To be honest, I've not read it yet. But I have read and loved Alex's "Japan Lost" and "Bangkok Found." I intend to read "Dogs and Demons" as soon as I can. If you search this topic, you will find another poster that quoted some very salient passages from Alex's "Dogs and Demons." I suspect we will both find it a great read. He now lives pretty much full time in BKK; Sukumvit Soi 16.

Yes... very, very sad. It was not that long ago that I was enjoying the beauty and peace of an onsen outside Aomori.

...

"Amakudari" is widely practiced. - Descendents from heaven" are people who worked previously in the govt and then chang(ed) to private enterprises landing right in top management positions. This opens the door for what? This provides a close network and relationship of government, controlling agencies and businesses. This is especially very strong in the case of the atomic insdustry in Japan.

We shouldn't be surprised by the tooth-less controlling/reporting over there.

sounds like the revolving door in the USA ...

5555... Yes, as often is the case, I think we invented it. But the Japanese have truly refined it and made it their own!

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/01_19.html

US, Japan forces start massive search

The US military and Japan's Self-Defense Forces have launched a massive operation to find those still missing in the March 11th earthquake and tsunami. The joint operation started on Friday, 3 weeks after the disaster. More than 16,000 people remain missing. In the morning, helicopters of the Ground Self-Defense Force left their base in Sendai City to join the search mission.

Participating in the joint mission are 100 aircraft and 50 vessels from the Self-Defense Forces and about 20 aircraft and more than 10 vessels from the US military.

The search covers Pacific coastal areas in Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures, as well as waters up to 20 kilometers from shore. But the operation excludes the area within a 30-kilomter radius of the quake-damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, which is releasing radioactive substances.

The troops participating in the search operation are focusing their efforts on areas that have not previously been well covered. Rugged coastlines and swamp-like areas created by the tsunami have hindered search activities. The operation is scheduled to continue for 3 days.

Seems like the worlds largest concrete pump is on it's way to Japan...

The pump was moved Wednesday from the construction site in Aiken County to a facility in Hanahan, S.C., for minor modifications, and will be trucked to Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport, where it will be picked up by the world's largest cargo plane, the Russian-made Antonov 225, which will fly it to Tokyo.

http://chronicle.aug...te?v=1301580247

Amazing! Thanks for that, Pedro. I've read in previous posts that you too have spent a lot of time in Japan. Have you read Alex Kerr's "Dogs and Deamons?"

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/01_17.html

Tokyo Electric Power Company says it has detected radioactive substances in underground water at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. TEPCO, operator of the plant, has been checking below-ground water on the advice of the Nuclear Safety Commission of Japan.

The company says radioactive water was detected beneath the ground near the turbine buildings of five of the 6 reactors. The remaining reactor, No. 4, could not be checked because it was blocked by debris. TEPCO says radioactive substances dispersed into the atmosphere may have seeped into the soil through rain and sprayed water.

The company will further analyze underground water and release the result later on Friday.

http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2011/s3179531.htm

DAVID MARK: Both experts agree capping the damaged reactors with concrete isn't an option. Rather they say the current efforts to keep pumping water into the damaged reactors will eventually bring the situation under control.

PROF. LAURENCE WILLIAMS: Well my view is that as there hasn't been any sort of major catastrophic release of radioactivity, I think if they can continue now to get the fresh water into the reactors and cool them, the decay heat is now sort of fairly stabilising so it will take some time before it disappears. But so far so good I think. But it will take some time to bring under control.

DAVID MARK: But as Dr John Price explains there's a longer term picture.

JOHN PRICE: The final thing is that the reactors will have to be closed and the fuel removed and that is 50 to 100 years away.

DAVID MARK: Does that essentially mean that this entire site will just have to be locked off to the outside world for that period of time?

JOHN PRICE: Basically yes. It means that the workers and the site will have to be intensely controlled for a very long period of time.