Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 39 40 41 42 43 44
Send Topic Print
Fukushima - Consequences? (Read 102541 times)
Emma
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9853
OZ
Gender: female
Re: Fukushima - Consequences?
Reply #600 - May 16th, 2011 at 2:33pm
 
and a death has occurred among the people trying to clean up. Reported on SBS last night - think. He was an older man , 61, who  died on only his second shift.
Back to top
 

live every day
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: Fukushima - Consequences?
Reply #601 - May 16th, 2011 at 6:38pm
 
Emma wrote on May 16th, 2011 at 2:33pm:
and a death has occurred among the people trying to clean up. Reported on SBS last night - think. He was an older man , 61, who  died on only his second shift.


Sounds like a heart attack. "No significant levels of radiation".
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
Emma
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9853
OZ
Gender: female
Re: Fukushima - Consequences?
Reply #602 - May 16th, 2011 at 9:37pm
 
apparently- increased intake of this  radiation can lead to deaths caused by other than radiation poisoning - so they said,  and that included 'heart attack'. Sad
Back to top
 

live every day
 
IP Logged
 
Emma
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9853
OZ
Gender: female
Re: Fukushima - Consequences?
Reply #603 - May 16th, 2011 at 9:41pm
 
and  -- he was reported as having received less than the new 250 r  level. You know what I mean.

Heart attack was one of the possible causes of death suggested, but an authoratitive answer requires a full post-mortem.
Back to top
 

live every day
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: Fukushima - Consequences?
Reply #604 - May 18th, 2011 at 9:58pm
 
With Reactor Damage Thought to Be Worse, Tokyo Utility Sticks to Plan


TOKYO — Japan vowed Tuesday to stick to its goal of stabilizing a stricken nuclear power plant in as soon as six months, despite recently acknowledging that damage to the plant’s reactors might be worse than initially estimated.

The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, Tokyo Electric Power Company, has in the past week offered a graver account of how the accident unfolded after the facility was ravaged by the tsunami that followed the March 11 earthquake. The company now acknowledges that a fuel meltdown occurred at three of the plant’s six reactors in the early hours of the crisis, something experts had been suggesting for weeks.

“Even though we have confirmed that the nuclear core melted soon after the accident, our three- to six-month timeline will not change,” Tokyo Electric’s nuclear chief, Sakae Muto, said at a news conference on Tuesday.

Tokyo Electric said it would change some aspects of its plan to bring the reactors to what it called a “cold shutdown,” where temperatures at the core fall below the boiling point.

The utility no longer plans to fill up the reactors with water to stabilize them, it said. Instead, the company will now try to keep the reactors cool by building self-circulating cooling systems at the damaged reactors.

Workers have been pumping water into the reactors since the first days of the accident, but have allowed contaminated water to seep out, causing dangerous runoff, some of which has spilled into the Pacific Ocean.

Tokyo Electric will also drape a large polystyrene cover around the severely damaged outer structure of Reactor 1 in an attempt to reduce radiation emissions, and to shield the building from summer typhoons.

To protect the plant from tsunami risks, Tokyo Electric will start placing stone-filled cages as makeshift armor units along the site’s shoreline.

Stabilizing the reactors would allow workers to start dismantling and decontaminating the site, a process which experts have said will take at least a decade. About 80,000 people who lived around the plant, 140 miles north of Tokyo, have fled their homes, while thousands of farmers and fishermen risk losing their livelihoods as contamination spreads from the plant.

It is unclear whether even six to nine months will be enough to start a cleanup. Tokyo Electric in the past week has released data that show that the fuel rods at the three most damaged reactors started to melt down rapidly after the site was jolted by a quake at 2:46 p.m. on March 11, knocking out its external power supply. Less than an hour later, the plant was overrun by a 50-foot tsunami, which inundated the plant’s backup diesel generators, according to the company.

The crisis worsened rapidly after that. At 7:30 p.m. on March 11, less than five hours after the quake, damage began to the nuclear fuel at Reactor 1, the company now says.

Twenty minutes later, an uncontrolled meltdown had begun, as fuel started to slump to the bottom of the reactor pressure vessel.

By 9 p.m. on the 11th, temperatures had reached 2,800 degrees Celsius, the melting point of the uranium nuclear fuel rods, leading most of the fuel to fall to the bottom of the reactor vessel. The company says meltdown also happened at Reactors No. 2 and 3.

Tokyo Electric officials had previously said that the uranium fuel rods in the reactors’ cores were likely to have melted only partly.

The high temperatures also caused the fuel rods’ zirconium cladding to react chemically with water, producing hydrogen gas. That hydrogen built up inside the reactor buildings, setting off explosions at two reactors and severely damaging a third.

A fourth reactor that was not operating at the time of the accident has also been wrecked. Tokyo Electric has suggested that hydrogen may have traveled there from an adjacent reactor through pipes and vents.


The International Atomic Energy Agency will send a fact-finding mission to Japan next week, the government said Tuesday.

Japan’s chief cabinet secretary, Yukio Edano, said that the 20-member team will spend about a week in Japan and report its findings in June.

Link -
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/18/world/asia/18tepco.html?_r=1
========================
Not telling the truth, is that the same as a lie?

And, if you start telling porkies, when do you stop?

Bearing the above comments in mind, is the IAEA's fact find mission next week, a mission to find the facts they already know, but didn't tell us?

Or, is it simply a mission to continue the good work that has been carried out by TEPCO, the Japanese government, the IAEA & others, since March 11th, to ensure that the Public continues to receive all the information required, by US MUSHROOMS?  
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Equitist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9632
NSW
Re: Fukushima - Consequences?
Reply #605 - May 18th, 2011 at 10:55pm
 


So, who still believes that: -

1. Fukushima shouldn't have been rated a 7 from the outset!?

2. Fukushima has released only around 10% of the radiation that Chernobyl did?

3. Fukushima will not match or exceed Chernobyl in terms of total radiation released!?

4. Tepco, Japanese authorities and./or international nuclear authorities have exercised due caution and diligence in relation to: transparency; the siting, protection and overall risk-management of nuke plants, and; planning for contingencies in times of natural catastrophe or other crisis!?

5. Nukes are clean, safe and/or cheap!?

Back to top
 

Lamenting the shift in the Australian psyche, away from the egalitarian ideal of the fair-go - and the rise of short-sighted pollies, who worship the 'Growth Fairy' and seek to divide and conquer!
 
IP Logged
 
Equitist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9632
NSW
Re: Fukushima - Consequences?
Reply #606 - May 19th, 2011 at 11:51pm
 


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-19/fukushima-may-have-leaked-radiation-bef...

Quote:
Japan’s Fukushima Reactor May Have Leaked Radiation Before Tsunami Struck

May 19, 2011 8:21 PM ET

A radiation alarm went off at Tokyo Electric Power Co.’s Fukushima nuclear power plant before the tsunami hit on March 11, suggesting that contrary to earlier assumptions the reactors were damaged by the earthquake that spawned the wall of water.

A monitoring post on the perimeter of the plant about 1.5 kilometers (1 mile) from the No. 1 reactor went off at 3:29 p.m., minutes before the station was overwhelmed by the tsunami that knocked out backup power that kept reactor cooling systems running, according to documents supplied by the company. The monitor was set to go off at high levels of radiation, an official said.

“We are still investigating whether the monitoring post was working properly,” said Teruaki Kobayashi, the company’s head of nuclear facility management. “There is a possibility that radiation leaked before the tsunami arrived.” Kobayashi said he didn’t have the exact radiation reading that would trigger the sensor.

Officials at the company, known as Tepco, had earlier said the plant stood up to the magnitude-9 quake and was crippled by the tsunami that followed, causing the world’s worst nuclear crisis since Chernobyl in 1986. The early radiation alarm has implications for other reactors in Japan, one of the most earthquake prone countries in the world, because safety upgrades ordered by the government since March 11 have focused on the threat from tsunamis.

Earthquake Risk

Many scientists have considered the possibility of damage to Fukushima reactors from the quake, said Tetsuo Ito, head of the Atomic Energy Research Institute at Kinki University in western Japan. “Utilities should reinforce safety measures at nuclear power plants, particularly ones housing old reactors like the Fukushima station."

The company’s shares fell 8 percent today to 358 yen. They’ve fallen 83 percent since the disaster. The cost of protecting the Tepco’s debt from default rose to a record today, according to data provider CMA.

Tepco this week released thousands of pages of documents that highlight the chaos in the early hours of the disaster as workers frantically tried to prevent meltdowns in three of six reactors at Fukushima. They included pictures of whiteboards with scribbled notes of times and events.

Among the documents, the pressure and water level inside of No. 1 reactor inner vessel fluctuated after the earthquake hit at 2:46 p.m. Most of the readings for the No. 1 reactor go blank a little after 3:30 p.m. when the waves swamped the plant.

Venting Attempts

The company is still verifying the accuracy of the data, Takeo Iwamoto, a spokesman for the utility, said. Tepco submitted the documents to the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency on May 16 after the watchdog requested them, Iwamoto said. The files were released to the media to increase transparency, he said.

The documents show that a little after 9 a.m. on March 12, workers at the No. 1 reactor started trying to vent steam and gas as pressure in the reactor exceeded design specifications. The vent was partly opened manually at about 9:15 a.m. and attempts to get it fully opened were abandoned about 15 minutes later due to high radiation levels.

Workers in the control room then opened it by remote control, only for it to keep closing, according to the documents. A build up of hydrogen gas in the reactor building then caused an explosion that blew out part of the structure at 3:36 p.m. the same day.

Attempts to vent gas at the No. 2 and No. 3 reactors probably also failed and the pressure inside exceeded design levels for their containment vessels, the records show. Gauges in these buildings, which later were damaged by hydrogen explosions, also failed.
Instrument Blindness

Reading radiation and pressure levels was the only way to establish whether venting succeeded, Kobayashi said.

On May 15, or more than two months after the disaster at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi plant, Tepco said conditions were worse than expected in reactor No. 1 when it found
all uranium fuel rods had melted
.

Two workers entered the Fukushima the No. 3 reactor building to check radiation levels yesterday, the first time they’ve been in since March 14, spokesman Takeo Iwamoto said by telephone.

Yesterday it sent four workers into reactor No. 2 for the first time since March 14 to measure radiation levels and assess whether work can be done to fix gauges that will show the condition of the core.

Beside radiation leaks into the atmosphere forcing about 50,000 families near the plant to evacuate, more than 10 million liters (2.6 million gallons) of radiation-contaminated water have leaked or been released into the sea.

Millions of liters of radiated water have also filled basements and trenches at the station from leaking reactor vessels and piping.

Japan’s government in April raised the severity rating of the Fukushima crisis to the highest on an international scale, the same level as the Chernobyl disaster.

The station, which has experienced hundreds of aftershocks since March 11,
may release more radiation than Chernobyl before the crisis is contained
, Tepco officials have said.



Back to top
 

Lamenting the shift in the Australian psyche, away from the egalitarian ideal of the fair-go - and the rise of short-sighted pollies, who worship the 'Growth Fairy' and seek to divide and conquer!
 
IP Logged
 
Equitist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9632
NSW
Re: Fukushima - Consequences?
Reply #607 - May 24th, 2011 at 10:45pm
 



(Fukushima meltdown x 3 ) + exposed spent fuel rods = ?

Surely, it is time to revisit the nuclear incident scale - cos a 7 ain't likely to cover the unprecedented (and still unfolding) disaster at Fukushima!?
Back to top
 

Lamenting the shift in the Australian psyche, away from the egalitarian ideal of the fair-go - and the rise of short-sighted pollies, who worship the 'Growth Fairy' and seek to divide and conquer!
 
IP Logged
 
Emma
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9853
OZ
Gender: female
Re: Fukushima - Consequences?
Reply #608 - May 24th, 2011 at 11:27pm
 
Consequences ??  
They will unfold for many generations to come .....(assuming there are many generations to come).
Who can say ??

I did try to post on this days ago but lost it. I am no scientist, as I am sure you already know.

I want to address  the last 2 q's from Equitist, posted a while ago..
They are most significant.

I think we can safely say the answer to 5. is ............NO.

4. Tepco, Japanese authorities and./or international nuclear authorities have exercised due caution and diligence in relation to: transparency; the siting, protection and overall risk-management of nuke plants, and; planning for contingencies in times of natural catastrophe or other crisis!?

5. Nukes are clean, safe and/or cheap!?


That leaves the most difficult question - the MOST important question -  No 4.
Tepco, Japanese authorities and./or international nuclear authorities have exercised due caution and diligence in relation to: transparency; the siting, protection and overall risk-management of nuke plants, and; planning for contingencies in times of natural catastrophe or other crisis!?    Again - I can only say - the answer is NO.

But the q is more complex - ..and so I'll share a thought I have had since the Earthquake and Tsunami first set off this Nuclear Disaster. Something that clarified as I realised the extent and foolhardiness of Japan's embrace of Nuclear technology.

Why would a nation as proud as Japan, a Warrior nation, a nation brought to its knees by this nuclear technology, embrace it so fully?
Why would such nuclear technology be located so consistently in unsafe areas?.
Why would the Japanese put to the international media the apologies of those men considered responsible for this Nuclear program?   The apologists were all OLD men , men who could have been in training in 1945.

It could be perfectly simple.

The creation of Japan's Nuclear power system, which propelled it to the forefront of the world economies, was a tool of War.

If they could not defeat and harness this beast which brought them low, they could still have the last word, -- if worst case occurred. What could be better??


THIS is just a thought now. OK?   Wink

Back to top
 

live every day
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: Fukushima - Consequences?
Reply #609 - May 25th, 2011 at 11:18pm
 
Fukushima Containment Vessels May Be Leaking, Tepco Says


May 25 (Bloomberg) -- Tokyo Electric Power Co. said the containment chambers of damaged reactors at its Fukushima nuclear plant were likely breached, identifying additional source of radiation leaks that may exceed Chernobyl.

Computer simulations of the meltdowns of three reactors in March indicates holes formed in chambers, the company known as Tepco said in a report.

The analysis confirms what independent researchers have said occurred after the March 11 earthquake and tsunami hit the plant. The report to the government raises fresh questions about how Tepco, which took more than two months to acknowledge fuel rods had melted, is handling the crisis, a nuclear researcher said.

“Unfortunately I can’t find any consistency in the report,” Hironobu Unesaki, a nuclear engineering professor at Kyoto University, said by phone. “Tepco hasn’t released sufficient radionuclide analysis of leaked contaminated water. Now they’ve confirmed fuel rods melted, they should also release more data including plutonium and uranium readings.”

Japan’s government in April raised the severity rating of nuclear crisis at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant to the highest, matching Chernobyl in 1986. At the time Tepco officials said the crippled plant may release more radiation than the Chernobyl.

Tepco’s analysis shows the No. 1 chamber has one hole and the No. 2 unit has two breaches, according to a report filed to a Japanese nuclear watchdog. Cooling systems may have been breached at the No. 3 reactor at the site, Tepco said.

“The breaches were created awhile ago, so they won’t cause rapid increases in radiation doses,” said Ken Nakajima, a professor of nuclear engineering at Kyoto University who specializes in reactor safety. “However, I’m concerned about a possible increase in tainted water leaking from the holes, which may lead to contamination of groundwater and seawater.”

Link -
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-05-25/fukushima-containment-vessels-may-be...
=======================================
TEPCO, Japanese Politicians, as well as other Politicians (Globally) and the regulatory authorities, should all get indicted over what is a giant cover up!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Emma
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9853
OZ
Gender: female
Re: Fukushima - Consequences?
Reply #610 - May 25th, 2011 at 11:28pm
 
Quite so -  but not going to happen in this lifetime.!.
Sad
Back to top
 

live every day
 
IP Logged
 
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: Fukushima - Consequences?
Reply #611 - May 26th, 2011 at 4:48am
 
GO THE SWISS!  Wink
Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: Fukushima - Consequences?
Reply #612 - May 30th, 2011 at 5:29pm
 
Merkel Coalition Agrees to Shut Nuclear Plants by 2022


May 30 (Bloomberg) -- German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s coalition resolved their differences over the timing of an exit from nuclear power, setting a final date of 2022 for the country’s remaining reactors to shut down.

A tax on spent fuel rods will remain even as the shutdown proceeds, German Environment Minister Norbert Roettgen told reporters following late-evening coalition talks in Berlin.

The decision reversed a 2010 plan to extend the operation of the facilities by an average of 12 years.

Germany’s four biggest utilities including E.ON AG and RWE AG own the country’s reactors. The plants supplied some 22 percent of power in 2010, while renewable sources such as wind and solar provided 17 percent, the Economy Ministry said.

Link -
http://noir.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aVwdbQuVf9ds&pos=8
============================
Given the likely status of Oil, Coal & Gas, by 2020, I suspect that this shutdown, may be shutdown or, at the least, suspended, to provide time for other alternatives to be found, then brought on stream?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Equitist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9632
NSW
Re: Fukushima - Consequences?
Reply #613 - Jun 2nd, 2011 at 1:21pm
 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-01/radiated-water-at-fukushima-plant-may-b...

Quote:
Fukushima Radiated Water May Breach Storage Trenches in 5 Days

By Tsuyoshi Inajima - Jun 2, 2011 9:12 AM ET

Radioactive water accumulating in Tokyo Electric Power Co.’s crippled Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant is set to start overflowing from storage trenches in five days, data provided by the company show.

To prevent leakage into the ocean, the utility has poured concrete and gravel to seal off storage trenches closest to the sea containing water from the No. 3 and No. 4 reactors, according to Hikaru Kuroda, a nuclear facility maintenance official at the company.

“Even as we have sealed these trenches, there is still the risk of radioactive water leaking into the sea,” he said to reporters after a media conference yesterday. The company is seeking additional storage space to move the water from trenches to reduce such risk, he said.

The utility known as Tepco has pumped millions of liters of cooling water into the three reactors that melted down after the March 11 earthquake and tsunami. By May 18, almost 100,000 tons of radioactive water had leaked into basements of reactor and turbine buildings and connected tunnels and storage trenches at the plant, according to Tepco’s estimates.

Water levels are between 26.5 and 33.2 centimeters (10 and 13 inches) below the top of storage trenches for the No. 2 and No. 3 reactors, according to Tepco figures dated June 1. The water levels were 45.6 and 64.1 centimeters on May 27, showing a rate of increase that will reach the lip of the trenches as early as June 6.

Workers will seal off trenches for the No. 2 reactor today in a process that will funnel radiated water to other trenches, Tepco spokeswoman Ryoko Sakai said by telephone yesterday.
Typhoon Season

The contaminated water is a “massive problem,” Tetsuo Iguchi, a specialist in isotope analysis and radiation detection at Nagoya University, said in a phone interview on May 27. Tepco has to ensure the contaminated water doesn’t get into the soil, Iguchi said.

The rate of increase in water level quickened because of three days of rain from typhoon Songda that weakened as it swept pass Japan earlier this week. Namie, a town near the Fukushima Dai-Ichi station, had 112 millimeters of rain on May 30, according to the Japan Meteorological Agency.

Japan is regularly buffeted by typhoons and tropical storms during the northwestern Pacific cyclone season, adding another risk to containing the radiated water at the Fukushima station. Hydrogen explosions at the plant blew the roofs off three reactor buildings, exposing pools containing spent fuel rods.

Tepco said last week it was still considering typhoon measures and that it couldn’t announce detailed plans. Takeo Iwamoto, a spokesman for the utility, said it plans to complete installing covers for the buildings by October.
Plugging Leaks

In early April, Tepco spent days trying to stop a leak of highly radioactive water into the sea from a pit near the No. 2 reactor. It turned to using concrete, sawdust, newsprint and absorbent polymer used in diapers to block the leak.

The efforts failed and drew comparisons with BP Plc’s attempts to plug an oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico last year with golf balls and strips of rubber tires. The Tepco leak was eventually sealed with sodium-silicate, known as liquid glass.

Tepco on April 5 said it had dumped almost 10 million liters (2.6 million gallons) of radioactive water into the sea from the Fukushima plant, which led to radioactive cesium being found in fish at levels exceeding health guidelines.

The company said at the time the decision was the lesser of two evils as it needed to find space for storing water that was highly radioactive and more toxic that what was released into the sea.


Back to top
 

Lamenting the shift in the Australian psyche, away from the egalitarian ideal of the fair-go - and the rise of short-sighted pollies, who worship the 'Growth Fairy' and seek to divide and conquer!
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: Fukushima - Consequences?
Reply #614 - Jun 6th, 2011 at 12:19pm
 
Exclusive Arnie Gundersen Interview: The Dangers of Fukushima Are Worse and Longer-lived Than We Think


Chris Martenson: Let’s just briefly review – if we could just synopsize – I know you can do this better than anybody. What happened at Fukushima – what happened and I really would like to take the opportunity to talk about this kind of specifically, like where we are with each one of the reactors. So first of all, this disaster – how did it happen? Was it just bad engineering, was it really bad luck with the tsunami? How did this even initiate – something we were told again and again – something that couldn’t happen seems to have happened?

Arnie Gundersen: Well the little bit of physics here is that even when a reactor shuts down; it continues to churn out heat. Now, only five percent of the original amount of heat, but when you are cranking out millions of horsepower of heat, five percent is still a lot. So you have to keep a nuclear reactor cool after it shuts down. Now, what happened at Fukushima was it went into what is called a “station blackout,” and people plan for that. That means there is no power to anything except for batteries. And batteries can’t turn the massive motors that are required to cool the nuclear reactor. So the plan is in a station blackout is that somehow or another you get power back in four or five hours. That didn’t happen at Fukushima because the tidal wave, the tsunami, was so great that it overwhelmed their diesels and it overwhelmed something called “service water 2” But in any event, they couldn’t get any power to the big pumps.

Now, was it foreseeable? They were prepared for a seven-meter tsunami, about twenty-two feet. The tsunami that hit was something in excess of ten and quite likely fifteen meters, so somewhere between thirty-five and forty-five feet. They were warned that the tsunami that they were designed against was too low. They were warned for at least ten years and I am sure that there were people back before that. So would they have been prepared for one this big? I don’t know, but certainly, they were unprepared for even a tsunami of lesser magnitude.

Chris Martenson: So let me summarize here – we have these four reactors, three of them have melted through – one of them is – Unit 4 – is probably one of the more dangerous ones in the sense that it is going to be years to build a building around it. It's going to be years until really the situation is contained. And in unit four though, we are still concerned that in the year or two or however it takes to build a building and really stabilize that, another aftershock could come along. Or in the case of Unit 3, if another aftershock comes along and the pressure vessel is full of water there’s a chance here that we could see other event. That this situation is not yet fully stabilized in the sense that there are still surprises to be found. It's surprising where the water shows up. There might still be some surprises left in how the building behaves or systems hold up or fail. What else would you add to that summary?

Arnie Gundersen: The groundwater. I am very concerned – I am hearing nothing about ground water monitoring. We know the ocean – we know there have been leaks into the ocean. I am not convinced that there are not cracks in the structures that are allowing this highly radioactive water to get into the groundwater. And I have been talking to people in Japan and my recommendation there is that they should build a moat all the way around the reactor, down to bedrock, which is sixty feet or twenty meters, and about four and a half feet wide, which is a meter and a half wide. And fill it with a material called Zeolite. It's a very good absorber of radioactive material and it would prevent the outward migration of any of this radiation. That’s not happening and I don’t understand why.

So now we look at the building and we look at stopping the heat and the radiation that is going upward, but this is an enormous amount of radioactive material in the soil right now. And one of the prefectures nearby had radioactive sewage sludge. Someone who watches our site is an executive at a sewage business and he said it's not uncommon after an earthquake for groundwater to infiltrate a sewage system and that frightened me a lot, because if the groundwater is already contaminated out in these prefectures it could be a serious problem that is receiving no attention right now.


Part 1 of Chris' interview with Arnie Gundersen (runtime 36m:31s):

http://www.chrismartenson.com/blog/exclusive-arnie-gundersen-interview-dangers-f...

Part 2 of Chris' interview with Arnie Gundersen (runtime 22m:26s):
http://www.chrismartenson.com/martensonreport/part-2-arnie-gundersen-interview-p...
====================================
There are two lengthy embedded interviews, one each in the above sites, which include quite a lot of information, you will not get from the usual media outlets.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 39 40 41 42 43 44
Send Topic Print