Meltdown Likely Under Way At Japan Nuclear Reactor

[elcent]

OK, lets question now something nobody has dared to ask yet.

What did Japan do with it's nuclear waste, or what did it do with the disposal when they were in process to recycle and make MOX fuel rods? Does anybody think this was smooth and without accidents?

Do you remember the eyewitnesses seeing fire on the top of the waves of the tsunami? Do you remember that NASA reported extreme heat over the center of the quake hours before it hit?

WAS THAT A GAS EXPLOSION? - that eventually triggered the earthquake and tsunami?

How could that happen? Now we know that the meltdown leads to burn through too the core of the planet. Could it be possible that the Japanes(or anybody else) sank their nuclear materials in that area, enough to cause a melt-through and down, hit and ignite gas/oil fields?

What happens now is that tens of tons of plutonium is melting through and down to the core. Lets pray that there're no gas fields or oil on the way down, at least in the upper areas. Since it is very close to a major faul-line it is very unlikely that the crust could withstand another major hit ignited by the hot radiating masses on its way down. This coud lead to an earthquake never seen before and even rip their Fuji-yama into pieces.

I wonder why that was never discussed. I think some know more than I even can suspect.

[vont]

elcent, my friend:

this is a very interesting and arousing topic,

perhaps worthy of a dissertation investigation.

but in terms of reality, how could such theoretically frightening ideas be so

subtlely accomplished in japan itself?

wasn't it also in Hiro itself and her sister city Naga that experienced the very first

horrific effects of radiation on all living organisms within the radius of the explosion?

as poster mentioned, how could the never sleeping eyes in the sky, never feel nor detect

such major attempt which surely, if and when attempted, would more than lighting up on

the surface of the earth and be easily detected from vertical angle, would it not?

for one selfish moment, i wish what the poster raised was true.... then we all would know for sure,

between man made substances and the yet unknown elements underneath the earth, to date unexplored as yet,

which would be neutralizing which, or which would exponentially complicate whatever into something never imaginable before....?

if and when you do find out, pls do wake me up.... with much appreciation and excitement.... humanly speaking, of course.... :jap:

Edited June 10, 2011 by vont

[elcent]

elcent, my friend:

this is a very interesting and arousing topic,

perhaps worthy of a dissertation investigation.

but in terms of reality, how could such theoretically frightening ideas be so

subtlely accomplished in japan itself?

wasn't it also in Hiro itself and her sister city Naga that experienced the very first

horrific effects of radiation on all living organisms within the radius of the explosion?

as poster mentioned, how could the never sleeping eyes in the sky, never feel nor detect

such major attempt which surely, if and when attempted, would more than lighting up on

the surface of the earth and be easily detected from vertical angle, would it not?

for one selfish moment, i wish what the poster raised was true.... then we all would know for sure,

between man made substances and the yet unknown elements underneath the earth, to date unexplored as yet,

which would be neutralizing which, or which would exponentially complicate whatever into something never imaginable before....?

if and when you do find out, pls do wake me up.... with much appreciation and excitement.... humanly speaking, of course.... :jap:

carelessness, greed, secrecy? - anything is possible.

TEPCO=GOVERNMENT=TEPCO=GOVERNMENT=TEPCO ... and then the greed of GE and others ...

If you pack 10 tons of plutonimum in led (maybe 20 - 50 cm thick) let it down and then just wait until it melts through. It would be not easy to dedect it from deep waters since not much of radiation would surface. The radiactive material would seek it's way right to the core and then meets eventually gas or oil (whoom)

This is really worrysome.

[JetsetBkk]

OK, lets question now something nobody has dared to ask yet.

What did Japan do with it's nuclear waste, or what did it do with the disposal when they were in process to recycle and make MOX fuel rods? Does anybody think this was smooth and without accidents?

Do you remember the eyewitnesses seeing fire on the top of the waves of the tsunami? Do you remember that NASA reported extreme heat over the center of the quake hours before it hit?

WAS THAT A GAS EXPLOSION? - that eventually triggered the earthquake and tsunami?

How could that happen? Now we know that the meltdown leads to burn through too the core of the planet. Could it be possible that the Japanes(or anybody else) sank their nuclear materials in that area, enough to cause a melt-through and down, hit and ignite gas/oil fields?

What happens now is that tens of tons of plutonium is melting through and down to the core. Lets pray that there're no gas fields or oil on the way down, at least in the upper areas. Since it is very close to a major faul-line it is very unlikely that the crust could withstand another major hit ignited by the hot radiating masses on its way down. This coud lead to an earthquake never seen before and even rip their Fuji-yama into pieces.

I wonder why that was never discussed. I think some know more than I even can suspect.

Thank you so much, elcent.

*edited out*

Edited June 11, 2011 by Scott
Flame edited out/Scott

[maidu]

Elcent, have there been others, particularly scientists, broaching such ideas? Just curious. Interesting scenario though, and now that you mention it, it is plausible that molten material, if it burned its way down to a fuel source, would ignite it.

Though perhaps a far-fetched scenario, it's not outrageous.

There are so many drawbacks to nuclear - that it's surprising EGAT won't give up its plan of building several N plants for Thailand.

Here are just some of the drawbacks, any one of which should nix the program:

- price of mining, purifying, shipping, refined U. and the greenhouse gases that produces. Plus insuring every phase.

- price of planning & constructing N power plants, and the amounts of greenhouse gases that produces. Plus insurance policies covering tens of billions of dollars.

- price of bribes & kickbacks which inevitably accompany any large municipal project in Thailand.

- price of securing N power plants, with a police and army that couldn't keep protesters from barricading Bkk or taking over both airports and gov't house 3 times.

- price of dealing with potential and unforeseen calamities (Fukushima's' tsunami was un-planned for).

- price of dealing with N waste and decommissioning the plants - at least a billion dollars per plant.

[canuckamuck]

Combustion requires oxygen, which there is very little of in the earths crust. Also a gas explosion could not produce the energy required for a 8.9 earthquake.

I enjoy your contributions, but you have wandered into fantasyland now.

[elcent]

Combustion requires oxygen, which there is very little of in the earths crust. Also a gas explosion could not produce the energy required for a 8.9 earthquake.

I enjoy your contributions, but you have wandered into fantasyland now.

When it is so harmless then a technique could be used to sink all nuclear waste in the ocean, burry it lets say 100 - 300m deep, ignite it to melt - bingo. Storage problems would be solved in a jiffy, don't you think so?

Why is a melt-through considered more dangerous than a melt-down? There's not so much groundwater in the coastal area.

To your gas explosion comment. You say there's little oxygen, - but that is probably enough to ignite an explosion and create so much pressure to shake the area. We're not talking about your cooking gas cylinder exploding. I'm talking about rich natural gas reserves or oil.

The impact of the heat that can melt anything known to mankind needs to be researched regarding this matter.

Or even the role of HAARP (it really exists). A quick search showed some irritating development in manipulations of great impact etc.. http://presscore.ca/2011/?p=1624

At the moment anything must be followed. I'm not trying to get into scientific details but to gain an overall understanding of things that happen, - natuarally or manipulated, everything is possible.

[canuckamuck]

Combustion requires oxygen, which there is very little of in the earths crust. Also a gas explosion could not produce the energy required for a 8.9 earthquake.

I enjoy your contributions, but you have wandered into fantasyland now.

When it is so harmless then a technique could be used to sink all nuclear waste in the ocean, burry it lets say 100 - 300m deep, ignite it to melt - bingo. Storage problems would be solved in a jiffy, don't you think so?

Why is a melt-through considered more dangerous than a melt-down? There's not so much groundwater in the coastal area.

When you have a little science to back up your imagination let us know.

To your gas explosion comment. You say there's little oxygen, - but that is probably enough to ignite an explosion and create so much pressure to shake the area.

I don't think oxygen exists in sufficient quantities in the earths crust to create an explosion. I don't recall any subterranean explosions outside of mining accidents. And all of those explosions were only damaging to the mine shafts and miners. But feel free to show me I am wrong.

In natural gas production it is common procedure to set of explosives in the the natural gas reservoir to break the formation and release the gas.

We're not talking about your cooking gas cylinder exploding. I'm talking about rich natural gas reserves or oil.

The impact of the heat that can melt anything known to mankind needs to be researched regarding this matter.

Or even the role of HAARP (it really exists). A quick search showed some irritating development in manipulations of great impact etc.. http://presscore.ca/2011/?p=1624

At the moment anything must be followed. I'm not trying to get into scientific details but to gain an overall understanding of things that happen, - natuarally or manipulated, everything is possible.

[elcent]

@ canuckamuck, @vont @maidu and all the others who are interested of the last standings on science

I have no pleasure to post this findings, but see it as my moral obligation to the communities.

covering SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

The following is about a book of the appointed

John P. Holdren

CHIEF ADVICER ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF the OBAMA BARACK ADMINISTRATION

it nearly blew me off the chair ...

Dr. Webster Tarpley uncovered it in four parts

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjGecwNRCTc

http://www.youtube.c...?v=6jbkrM1b0PYm part 2

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=-w5pBCqxoVg part 3

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=kf-ZAeqTQww part 4

Edited June 13, 2011 by elcent

[JetsetBkk]

Combustion requires oxygen, which there is very little of in the earths crust. Also a gas explosion could not produce the energy required for a 8.9 earthquake.

I enjoy your contributions, but you have wandered into fantasyland now.

When it is so harmless then a technique could be used to sink all nuclear waste in the ocean, burry it lets say 100 - 300m deep, ignite it to melt - bingo. Storage problems would be solved in a jiffy, don't you think so?

Why is a melt-through considered more dangerous than a melt-down? There's not so much groundwater in the coastal area.

When you have a little science to back up your imagination let us know.

<snip>

I didn't realise you had to "ignite" a fuel rod to make it melt. You learn something new every day from elcent.

[endure]

Combustion requires oxygen, which there is very little of in the earths crust. Also a gas explosion could not produce the energy required for a 8.9 earthquake.

I enjoy your contributions, but you have wandered into fantasyland now.

When it is so harmless then a technique could be used to sink all nuclear waste in the ocean, burry it lets say 100 - 300m deep, ignite it to melt - bingo. Storage problems would be solved in a jiffy, don't you think so?

Why is a melt-through considered more dangerous than a melt-down? There's not so much groundwater in the coastal area.

To your gas explosion comment. You say there's little oxygen, - but that is probably enough to ignite an explosion and create so much pressure to shake the area. We're not talking about your cooking gas cylinder exploding. I'm talking about rich natural gas reserves or oil.

The impact of the heat that can melt anything known to mankind needs to be researched regarding this matter.

Or even the role of HAARP (it really exists). A quick search showed some irritating development in manipulations of great impact etc.. http://presscore.ca/2011/?p=1624

At the moment anything must be followed. I'm not trying to get into scientific details but to gain an overall understanding of things that happen, - natuarally or manipulated, everything is possible.

It might be an inda to get into a few simple scientific details. Here's a quote from the site you've just quoted above:

"What is the significance of a 2.5 Hz ULF broadcast? The natural resonance of an earthquake is 2.5 Hz. Scientists working for the United States military discovered this using the phased array antennas at the HAARP facility in Alaska. HAARP’s own charts suggests that earthquakes occurred constantly for 3 days. We know for a fact that they haven’t.

The HAARP magnetometer data provides proof that the Japan earthquake was not a naturally occurring quake – it was triggered. This data shows us that a HAARP military installation was broadcasting the known earthquake signature frequency in order to trigger a major earthquake. The broadcast was most likely being transmitted from a floating HAARP system like the floating Sea-Based X-Band Radar platform that can be moved anywhere in the Pacific or Atlantic ocean under the protection of a carrier strike group – like the USS Ronald Regan. Where was the USS Ronald Reagan on the morning of March 11, 2011? According to a Stars & Stripes March 9, 2011 report "

The site implies that the quake was deliberately triggered by the transmission of a 2.5Hz signal. It further implies that this signal was probably being transmitted from an X-Band radar platform. X-Band radar runs at frequencies of between 8 and 12 GIGAHertz (that's 8,000,000,000Hz to 12,000,000,000HZ). So where's the 2.5Hz coming from?

[Chopperboy]

Six More Fukushima Workers Overexposed to Radiation, Raising Total to Eight

Half a dozen more nuclear workers at Japan's crippled Fukushima No. 1 power plant have been overexposed to radiation, according to Kyodo News, citing Tokyo Electric Power Co.

The report increases the total number of workers exposed to above government-mandated limits of radiation to eight. Two weeks ago, TEPCO announced that two other employees had been overexposed as well.

To deal with the country's worst nuclear crisis, the government raised the limit on the amount of radiation each worker can be exposed to from 100 millisieverts to 250 millisieverts. Even among those who have not maxed out, six have been exposed to more than 200 millisieverts and 88 have surpassed the old 100-millisievert line, although their doses are still below 200 millisieverts.

One workers internal radiation level hit 30,000 CPM. Internal exposure is caused by taking radioactive substances into the body via eating, drinking or breathing. Its unit, counts per minute (cpm), indicates the amount of radiation emitted per minute.

[Chopperboy]

High levels of strontium at Fukushima

More bad news for Japan and its stricken fishing industry: Tokyo Electric Power Company says radioactive strontium up to 240 times the legal concentration limit has been detected in seawater samples near an intake at the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant.

According to Japan Times, the utility said the substance was also found in groundwater near the plant's Nos. 1 and 2 reactors. And Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency said it is the first time that the substance has been found in groundwater—and that is necessary to carefully monitor the possible effects of the strontium on fishery products near the plant. Strontium tends to accumulate in bones and is believed to cause bone cancer and leukemia.

Strontium-90, an isotope of strontium, is present in radioactive fallout and has a half-life of 29 years. Both strontium and strontianite are named after Strontian, a village in Scotland near which the mineral was first discovered.

[elcent]

Combustion requires oxygen, which there is very little of in the earths crust. Also a gas explosion could not produce the energy required for a 8.9 earthquake.

I enjoy your contributions, but you have wandered into fantasyland now.

When it is so harmless then a technique could be used to sink all nuclear waste in the ocean, burry it lets say 100 - 300m deep, ignite it to melt - bingo. Storage problems would be solved in a jiffy, don't you think so?

Why is a melt-through considered more dangerous than a melt-down? There's not so much groundwater in the coastal area.

To your gas explosion comment. You say there's little oxygen, - but that is probably enough to ignite an explosion and create so much pressure to shake the area. We're not talking about your cooking gas cylinder exploding. I'm talking about rich natural gas reserves or oil.

The impact of the heat that can melt anything known to mankind needs to be researched regarding this matter.

Or even the role of HAARP (it really exists). A quick search showed some irritating development in manipulations of great impact etc.. http://presscore.ca/2011/?p=1624

At the moment anything must be followed. I'm not trying to get into scientific details but to gain an overall understanding of things that happen, - natuarally or manipulated, everything is possible.

It might be an inda to get into a few simple scientific details. Here's a quote from the site you've just quoted above:

"What is the significance of a 2.5 Hz ULF broadcast? The natural resonance of an earthquake is 2.5 Hz. Scientists working for the United States military discovered this using the phased array antennas at the HAARP facility in Alaska. HAARP's own charts suggests that earthquakes occurred constantly for 3 days. We know for a fact that they haven't.

The HAARP magnetometer data provides proof that the Japan earthquake was not a naturally occurring quake – it was triggered. This data shows us that a HAARP military installation was broadcasting the known earthquake signature frequency in order to trigger a major earthquake. The broadcast was most likely being transmitted from a floating HAARP system like the floating Sea-Based X-Band Radar platform that can be moved anywhere in the Pacific or Atlantic ocean under the protection of a carrier strike group – like the USS Ronald Regan. Where was the USS Ronald Reagan on the morning of March 11, 2011? According to a Stars & Stripes March 9, 2011 report "

The site implies that the quake was deliberately triggered by the transmission of a 2.5Hz signal. It further implies that this signal was probably being transmitted from an X-Band radar platform. X-Band radar runs at frequencies of between 8 and 12 GIGAHertz (that's 8,000,000,000Hz to 12,000,000,000HZ). So where's the 2.5Hz coming from?

That may explain the fact that there's nowhere an earthquake damage of the magnitute of 9. When you look at the images you only see tsunami damages.

Another strange role was the security surveilence installed a year before by a newly created Israeli company. This came through by the company itself. Yhwt haven't received authority to open the transmitted data. These highly sensitive cameras can even dedect any small amount of radiation in far distances. Each of them has 500kg. One was allegedly placed inside reactor unit 3. Some say it was a B.

[endure]

Combustion requires oxygen, which there is very little of in the earths crust. Also a gas explosion could not produce the energy required for a 8.9 earthquake.

I enjoy your contributions, but you have wandered into fantasyland now.

When it is so harmless then a technique could be used to sink all nuclear waste in the ocean, burry it lets say 100 - 300m deep, ignite it to melt - bingo. Storage problems would be solved in a jiffy, don't you think so?

Why is a melt-through considered more dangerous than a melt-down? There's not so much groundwater in the coastal area.

To your gas explosion comment. You say there's little oxygen, - but that is probably enough to ignite an explosion and create so much pressure to shake the area. We're not talking about your cooking gas cylinder exploding. I'm talking about rich natural gas reserves or oil.

The impact of the heat that can melt anything known to mankind needs to be researched regarding this matter.

Or even the role of HAARP (it really exists). A quick search showed some irritating development in manipulations of great impact etc.. http://presscore.ca/2011/?p=1624

At the moment anything must be followed. I'm not trying to get into scientific details but to gain an overall understanding of things that happen, - natuarally or manipulated, everything is possible.

It might be an inda to get into a few simple scientific details. Here's a quote from the site you've just quoted above:

"What is the significance of a 2.5 Hz ULF broadcast? The natural resonance of an earthquake is 2.5 Hz. Scientists working for the United States military discovered this using the phased array antennas at the HAARP facility in Alaska. HAARP's own charts suggests that earthquakes occurred constantly for 3 days. We know for a fact that they haven't.

The HAARP magnetometer data provides proof that the Japan earthquake was not a naturally occurring quake – it was triggered. This data shows us that a HAARP military installation was broadcasting the known earthquake signature frequency in order to trigger a major earthquake. The broadcast was most likely being transmitted from a floating HAARP system like the floating Sea-Based X-Band Radar platform that can be moved anywhere in the Pacific or Atlantic ocean under the protection of a carrier strike group – like the USS Ronald Regan. Where was the USS Ronald Reagan on the morning of March 11, 2011? According to a Stars & Stripes March 9, 2011 report "

The site implies that the quake was deliberately triggered by the transmission of a 2.5Hz signal. It further implies that this signal was probably being transmitted from an X-Band radar platform. X-Band radar runs at frequencies of between 8 and 12 GIGAHertz (that's 8,000,000,000Hz to 12,000,000,000HZ). So where's the 2.5Hz coming from?

That may explain the fact that there's nowhere an earthquake damage of the magnitute of 9. When you look at the images you only see tsunami damages.

Another strange role was the security surveilence installed a year before by a newly created Israeli company. This came through by the company itself. Yhwt haven't received authority to open the transmitted data. These highly sensitive cameras can even dedect any small amount of radiation in far distances. Each of them has 500kg. One was allegedly placed inside reactor unit 3. Some say it was a B.

What it explains is that the guy who wrote that article has no idea of the basics of radio and he's just making things up. Even the name gives it away - HAARP - HIGH frequency active auroral research programme. 2.5Hz is ULF Ultra LOW Frequency.

[Chopperboy]

More Workers Irradiated at Fukushima

The number of workers at the troubled Fukushima nuclear plant exposed to dangerous levels of radiation is steadily mounting. After recently reporting that two of its employees had received radiation doses greater than the 250-millisieverts maximum level of radiation permitted in one year, Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) said on Monday that six more workers could have exceeded that figure. The workers, all males in the 20s to 50s, were performing maintenance work or other jobs at the time of the earthquake.

A TEPCO official said that after power was lost on the site following the 11 March earthquake, workers were unable to read radiation monitors in the control rooms and in other buildings due to blackouts. The official added that although the company instructed the workers to wear protective masks, the instruction may “not have been timely or thorough enough.”

Following on the heels of this announcement, the Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare said on Tuesday that another 23 workers may have been exposed internally to over 100 millisieverts of radiation. Minister Risuo Hosokawa speaking to reporters said, “I told Tokyo Electric Power Co. to relieve from duty, the workers who were internally exposed to more than 100 millisieverts of radiation.”

http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/energy/nuclear/more-workers-irradiated-at-fukushima

[Chopperboy]

Food-Safety Fears Grow in Japan on Radiation Test Concern

Three months after an earthquake and tsunami crippled the plant, Japan doesn’t appear to have a comprehensive food-testing regime, said Peter Burns, the former chairman of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. Prolonged exposure to radiation in the air, ground and food can cause leukemia and other cancers, according to the London-based World Nuclear Association. “My impression is the monitoring has been a bit piecemeal,” the concern this year will be radiation that landed on crops, which will be absorbed directly, Burns said. Next year it’ll be radiation in the soil.

Products including spinach, mushrooms, bamboo shoots, tea, milk, plums and fish have been found to be contaminated with cesium and iodine as far as 360 kilometers from the station. Contamination was detected in 347 food samples from eight prefectures by June 9, according to the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare.

Rice may be the next produce to show signs of contamination, because the government allowed most farmers in Fukushima prefecture to plant the grain after testing a limited number of soil samples, said Junichi Sato, an executive at Greenpeace in Japan.

The government tested about 150 samples from farmland near the nuclear plant before deciding on areas where rice sowing is now banned. The affected areas cover about 8,000 hectares (19,800 acres) causing a 40,000 metric ton loss in rice production this year, according to the agriculture ministry.

For vegetables, Japan sets a limit at 2,000 becquerels of iodine per kilogram, and 500 becquerels of cesium a kilogram. The validity of the limits is questionable, according to Professor Tomoya Yamauchi, who specializes in radiation physics at Kobe University. “I don’t see an effort to properly monitor things,” he said.

It’s not just what’s in the ground that’s a concern. Atmospheric radiation levels in Fukushima prefecture remain high, according to Greenpeace, which says residents of the prefecture are getting an annual exposure of 10-20 millisieverts, not including food. The government has set a radiation exposure limit for the general public of 20 millisieverts a year.

[Chopperboy]

Japan's Radiation Twice As Bad

Arnie Gundersen Interview with John King on CNN

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXhNDgRkrd0

[Chopperboy]

Evacuation of new radiation hot spots

The government said today it will support evacuating residents in areas showing high levels of radiation that are out of a 20-kilometer evacuation zone from the crippled station. Some areas of the cities of Minami Soma and Date, both in Fukushima prefecture, are radiation hot spots, Prime Minister Naoto Kan’s office said in a statement. The government is still identifying areas that might be recommended for evacuation, the statement said.

[elcent]

One of the alternative media, a very prominent one and one that has triggered a major scandal in the recent past, came up with the camera issue and links to the Israeli company and website. I'm not going to tell the names at the moment. The article was meant to go out to MSM but, as they were afraid what would/could happen, were finally silenced.

Anyway, the cat is out the bag. If you look at the images of the earthquake damages you won't even find a broken window, which as they said was more like a magnitude 6 or even below magnitude kind of earthquake. We only see major tsunami damages. How did the Tsunami happen? This is a serious and tough question.

They go on ...

Well, allegedly the Japanese offered Iran to process their fuel rods, I think it was about recycling to MOX fuel. Someone didn't like it.

The cameras make sense, they look like standing guns and have a weight of 500kg each and were installed to observe the plants and to protect it from terrorism. But a camera with these kind of features was put inside a reactor building doesn't make sense at all.

The Israely company works mainly for military projects. Data and images were transmitted but the company is not allowed to access the data. This was the complaint of the CEO of that company.

[maidu]

excerpt from: Tepco Decontamination to Produce Radioactive Sludge Crisis

The sludge will be put in tanks at the station, where three reactors melted, and moved to a temporary storage unit in December, Kobayashi said. About 105 million liters of contaminated water lies in basements and trenches at Fukushima and Tepco expects the amount to almost double by the end of the year.

“Dealing with this type of sludge waste is something Japan never expected and not having the final disposal facilities is akin to building a condominium without any toilets,” said Ken Nakajima, a professor of nuclear engineering at Kyoto University. “It will likely have to be stored at the Fukushima plant for several years,” he said.

Sorry to hear of yet more damaging dimensions to the problems stemming from Fukushima. Now we're hearing about radioactive strontium and over a million liters of contaminated water (and that's just what they're telling us. The real numbers could be much higher, if we judge by earlier revelations).

How does this relate to Thailand's ongoing plans to go nuclear? Well, it took weeks for the best engineers in Thailand to figure out how to raise a barge in a shallow part of a river. How can we expect Thai engineers to deal with serious breaches at one or more nuclear power plants? If Japanese engineers are stumped at their nuclear challenges, how much further behind will Thai engineers (by anyone's yardstick - are behind their Japanese brethren) ......be, when faced with such seemingly insurmountable challenges?

Any one care to stand up and say, without smirking, that "nuclear is a safe, clean and low cost way to generate electricity?" No joke - that's what the Bt.175 million feasibility report, paid for by EGAT (which is Thailand's gov't/public owned utility) concluded a year ago. I'm still waiting for Thai ratepayers to band together and sue EGAT for derelict spending that 175 million baht, but it won't happen. Thais are famous for tolerating anything - at least until they blow up with rage. More here

[JetsetBkk]

<snip>

it took weeks for the best engineers in Thailand to figure out how to raise a barge in a shallow part of a river. How can we expect Thai engineers to deal with serious breaches at one or more nuclear power plants? If Japanese engineers are stumped at their nuclear challenges, how much further behind will Thai engineers

<snip>

I presume you never fly Thai Airways International.

[elcent]

here are links to my foregoing posts

there are three parts on youtube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSIdmBCpZV8&NR=1

http://crisisjones.w...e-at-fukushima/ another link and some info what "Magna BSP" that installed the cameras.

the website from where the video is made is online here

http://www.jimstonefreelance.com/fukushima.htm

Remember you're welcome to correct them and contribute to more insight.

This has nothing to do with conspiracy theories. If you're able to debunk any of the findings they will accept it and publish it.

Edited June 17, 2011 by elcent

[TheWalkingMan]

The link contains videos

NHK Special - Japan's Nuclear Crisis

NHK Special - Japan's Nuclear Crisis, Part 1

Written by Musubi

In this special documentary, NHK interviewed more than 200 people including government and TEPCO officials, experts, and engineers.

While reluctant, they agreed to speak with NHK. Some of the rather candid comments confirm that TEPCO, nor the Japanese government where adequately prepared for a disaster of this magnitude. The Economy, Trade, and Industry Minister, Banri Kaieda even made a rather damning remark (around the 4m30s mark in clip 1-A) that he could not deny there was a myth of safety regarding the nuclear power plants and that probably somewhere in their minds, they always felt that measures against emergency situations were unnecessary because such situations would never occur. This 1 hour video is split into 4 parts and hosted on Dailymotion (so you'll need to put up with the advertisements automatically displayed) since it is blocked on YouTube.

TheWalkingMan

[elcent]

The link contains videos

NHK Special - Japan's Nuclear Crisis

NHK Special - Japan's Nuclear Crisis, Part 1

Written by Musubi

In this special documentary, NHK interviewed more than 200 people including government and TEPCO officials, experts, and engineers.

While reluctant, they agreed to speak with NHK. Some of the rather candid comments confirm that TEPCO, nor the Japanese government where adequately prepared for a disaster of this magnitude. The Economy, Trade, and Industry Minister, Banri Kaieda even made a rather damning remark (around the 4m30s mark in clip 1-A) that he could not deny there was a myth of safety regarding the nuclear power plants and that probably somewhere in their minds, they always felt that measures against emergency situations were unnecessary because such situations would never occur. This 1 hour video is split into 4 parts and hosted on Dailymotion (so you'll need to put up with the advertisements automatically displayed) since it is blocked on YouTube.

TheWalkingMan

Thanks for that link. I watched them all. It only supports the finding of crisisjones and jimstonefreelance.com

Very sad.

Another holocaust created apart from 911.

[TheWalkingMan]

Yep. Very, very sad.

TheWalkingMan

[ScubaBuddha]

Any one care to stand up and say, without smirking, that "nuclear is a safe, clean and low cost way to generate electricity?"

When compared to coal, it's a hell'ov a lot safer, as long as it's not built in a tsunami zone. Without a doubt it's cleaner.

Gotta put it in perspective.

It took one of the largest earthquakes in history (which the reactors weathered just fine btw, all active reactors scrammed successfully) followed by one of the largest tsunami's in history (lets remember most people had never heard of a tsunami prior to 2004, yet Fukushima still had a 6m tsunami wall) to cause a partial meltdown causing so far a whopping zero deaths. The Fukushima disaster is a testament to nuclear safety. And 437 other reactors have been operating without incident for decades.

Meanwhile, worldwide an average of 6000 coal miners die in mine accidents each year, and 300,000 people people die annually societally-imposed, fossil fuel-based electricity generation pollutants (carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, particulates, volatile organics and heavy metals, notably mercury) and 170,000 people die annually world-wide from coal burning-based electricity generation.

The real tragedy here is the death of nuclear power.

There you go, and all without smirking.

[vont]

Any one care to stand up and say, without smirking, that "nuclear is a safe, clean and low cost way to generate electricity?"

When compared to coal, it's a hell'ov a lot safer, as long as it's not built in a tsunami zone. Without a doubt it's cleaner.

Gotta put it in perspective.

It took one of the largest earthquakes in history (which the reactors weathered just fine btw, all active reactors scrammed successfully) followed by one of the largest tsunami's in history (lets remember most people had never heard of a tsunami prior to 2004, yet Fukushima still had a 6m tsunami wall) to cause a partial meltdown causing so far a whopping zero deaths. The Fukushima disaster is a testament to nuclear safety. And 437 other reactors have been operating without incident for decades.

Meanwhile, worldwide an average of 6000 coal miners die in mine accidents each year, and 300,000 people people die annually societally-imposed, fossil fuel-based electricity generation pollutants (carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, particulates, volatile organics and heavy metals, notably mercury) and 170,000 people die annually world-wide from coal burning-based electricity generation.

The real tragedy here is the death of nuclear power.

There you go, and all without smirking.

....yet Fukushima still had a 6m tsunami wall) to cause a partial meltdown causing so far a whopping zero deaths....

where on earth or venus.... are you living....?

by deaths.... do you mean in terms of legality or science or medicine....?

those unfortunate japanese people living around the immediate areas, they are very admirable....

even though they are dying a very slow agonizing death.... some workers even volunteered to re-enter dangerous zones hopefully to perform some tasks to further reduce mounting risks to the general public....

HOWEVER, MORE ADMIRABLE ARE THOSE TO TOP.... taking direct responsibilities.... resigning and apologizing....

ScubaBuddha, better hurry back to earth soon.... or you may find once upon a time the green and peaceful earth is no longer peaceful and green any longer....

[JetsetBkk]

Any one care to stand up and say, without smirking, that "nuclear is a safe, clean and low cost way to generate electricity?"

When compared to coal, it's a hell'ov a lot safer, as long as it's not built in a tsunami zone. Without a doubt it's cleaner.

Gotta put it in perspective.

<snip>

The real tragedy here is the death of nuclear power.

There you go, and all without smirking.

Thanks for those hard facts. Makes a change from all the usual "crystal ball" posts here: "We're all going to die" & "The planet cannot take it any more"

You're right about the real tragedy here - media pressure, politicians electioneering... it's as if the lowest intellect will win because everyone has an equal vote, irrespective of whether their vote comes from an educated brain.

[vont]

Any one care to stand up and say, without smirking, that "nuclear is a safe, clean and low cost way to generate electricity?"

When compared to coal, it's a hell'ov a lot safer, as long as it's not built in a tsunami zone. Without a doubt it's cleaner.

Gotta put it in perspective.

<snip>

The real tragedy here is the death of nuclear power.

There you go, and all without smirking.

Thanks for those hard facts. Makes a change from all the usual "crystal ball" posts here: "We're all going to die" & "The planet cannot take it any more"

You're right about the real tragedy here - media pressure, politicians electioneering... it's as if the lowest intellect will win because everyone has an equal vote, irrespective of whether their vote comes from an educated brain.

so your summation is from an educated brain, i presumed, might i?

so the educated brain here and there and everywhere would agree with you and preferred radioactive byproducts over green nature....?

more than half of the brains (?) visiting or residing in and around thaivisa prefer green over nuclear radio isotopes....

it is very much like explosive.... did you ever see any nation use explosive for peace.... yes, for heavens sake.... they used them frequently in the name of peace.... which differed singnificantly.... don't you agree....?

humans survive very well without all these man made dangerous byproducts in the name of progression and science....

by the grace bestowed upon me, and as long as i still reside under his and her majesty grace in thailand.... i and a handful others shall see to it that commercial nuclear power generating plants shall forever ramain as blue print on the table and in a wooden cabinet somewhere....