I'll tell you what is lacking in the Fukushima reporting.

The worst-case/best-case scenario from this point on.

What is the worst case scenario??? THEN we can talk about the plan...What is being done? What is the process? What are the contingency plans? How do the engineers and experts think the worst-case can be averted? What are the chances?

It just appears as if everyone is confused and shooting from the hip. There is no real clarity of the situation or the solution.

My husband has a background in engineering. He tells me that it is easy to develop something new and exciting. One of the hurdles, though, is to imagine the worst-case scenario and solve THAT. If you don't have the solution to the worst-case scenario, then you got squat.

The way I see it, nuclear meltdown procedures are built on so much theory. IT'S NOT TRIED SCIENCE. "The containment vessel is safe." "Even in a meltdown scenario, the containment vessel will hold." It was all THEORY. They have never been able to rigorously TEST this stuff.

I have the book Chernobyl: Insight From the Inside by Vladimir Chernousenko. Chernousenko was the leading nuclear physicist in the USSR when Chernobyl blew. He was in charge of the clean up. He is dead now, of course, but he wrote this book before he died. In it, he explains how he had always been an advocate of nuclear energy until Chernobyl happened. It was then that he came to the painful realization that all the safety measures were only theoretical. The robots that were supposed to replace humans in a high radiation zone were clumsy and couldn't maneuver well. Eventually they failed to operate altogether due to the fact that high radiation destroys electronics. Nobody had thought about that! Can you imagine? Let me say this again...They made these robots to go into high radiation zones instead of humans, but they DIDN'T WORK because high radiation KILLS electronics...How dumb was that??? Everyone has been talking about robots going in, but has anyone bothered to ask why they haven't used them yet? 'Cuz there's a reason. Also, have you seen the pictures of the devastation? The robots can't move around in it. Explosions have occurred and there is heavy debris all over the place. That was another problem at Chernobyl. They couldn't move around it. And finally, robots can't physically move the way humans can. They can't climb utility poles one minute and crawl through tunnels the next. So, the robots idea was THEORY -- IT DIDN'T WORK. It didn't work then, it wouldn't work now. And that's just one example of how the theory broke down in a real life scenario.

I think they are not telling us more detailed reports because they don't really know. They have their first real test-case scenario on a meltdown and the protection theories are not working. The containment vessel now "may be cracked". The fuel rods, which originally were going to "take 24-48 hours to cool" still aren't cool and now "it may take months".

So what are they gonna do? If the radiation doses continue to soar, what will they do? At Chernobyl, they bussed in thousands of undocumented army grunts and had each grunt run with a shovel of dirt and sand to bury the damn thing. These poor individuals received doses that would undeniably have detrimental, perhaps lethal, health consequences. But the Soviet Union never followed up on any of them. It remained, purposefully, undocumented. This, by the way, outraged Chernousenko.

I deserve, as does the rest of the world, to know the worst-case scenario. Then I deserve to know the plan, the hurdles, and the theories that work, as well as those that don't. I want real information.

immediately afte the tsunami and the JApanese customs officials would not let the units in without going through proper government channels.

You do bring up a very good point about what the builders and engineers should have imagined as a worst case scenario. I think in this instance that there is gross, criminal negligence in the design, site selection and operating procedures at the plant. What happened to Fukushima should have been EXPECTED in a country that invented the word tsunami by the architects, engineers and builders. I suspect it was known and discounted in the name of profit. In short, they saved a few bucks by not implementing more rigorous design elements to deal with tsunami and loss of power etc. and now the bill has come due.

You never can be too careful. Next thing you know, those robots will start making good coffee and sleeping with everyones' spouses.

at least for coffee-lovers and (some) spouses.

can you imagine how thick and heavy the protection over the electronics would have to be? But even if they worked, it still doesn't solve the problem that they can't maneuver.

They probably wheeled into place and stayed.

amidst the rubble. The photos have white specks all over them from the high radiation. They LOOK useless.

Consider all the scenarios? In the US they do, and the scenario that is of most concern is how much does it cost the utility to build a nuke plant? When Diablo Canyon was constructed, it is a historical fact that folks demanded a worst case earthquake preparedness plan for that plant before it was built. They sued, the question was heard by the US Appeals Court in DC. They denied the citizens suit complaining about the lack of a preparedness plan in worst case scenario, because;


"As the world's attention remains focused on the nuclear calamity unfolding in Japan, American nuclear regulators and industry lobbyists have been offering assurances that plants in the United States are designed to withstand major earthquakes.

But the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant, which sits less than a mile from an offshore fault line, was not required to include earthquakes in its emergency response plan as a condition of being granted its license more than a quarter of a century ago. Though experts warned from the beginning that the plant would be vulnerable to an earthquake, asserting 25 years ago that it required an emergency plan as a condition of its license, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission fought against making such a provision mandatory as it allowed the facility to be built...


...The case made its way to the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., where a 5-4 majority -- including current Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and former Clinton independent counsel Kenneth Starr -- ruled that earthquakes did not have to be included in the plant's emergency response plans.

The underlying theory was that the plant's design, which came after years of planning and geological studies, could withstand any foreseeable earthquake in the area -- the same assumption that guided thinking in Japan..."

http://m.aol.com/portal/file-01.do?file=N9992%2FN4133%2...



Just wondering if the history of the Fukushima plant's construction in Japan reflects the same scenario as that in the US? From witnessing the obfuscation and double-speak/no speak from the utility company and the government responsible for permitting this plant over there in the first place, I have no doubt the same capitalist dynamic was in place. Regulations bad = expensive and will make public aware and afraid.

No one has ever died from a nuclear accident, right?

Move along, nothing to see here. Until our next ambiguous and misleading press conference that is.

He said, at Chernobyl the situation was even worse because of the lack of free press in the Soviet Union. However, he describes how he and the head of the IAEA flew over the exploded reactor in a helicopter to observe the damage, and then the head of the IAEA stood in front of the world press at a press conference and said that the situation looked manageable. Chernousenko could not believe it! He said it is the industry norm to deny and obfuscate.

but those reports are ignored.

worst case scenarios? Nuclear power plants are subsidized by the taxpayer from mining to meltdown.

They rake in the profits and the people can just drop dead (literally).

How revolting is that?

Those on this board who are promoting nuclear power either haven't thought it through or they're tools of the industry. Take your pick.

are as expendable as cockroaches to the nuclear power industry. And like cockroaches, they'll always bounce back.

Promoters of nuclear power are in deep denial of the risks and consequences.

The smart thing to do would be to decommission all of the reactors in the US, and stop the building of new ones. Leave the middle-aged ones for a specified length of time and then get rid of them too.

The nuclear power industry does not deserve support. They are criminally irresponsible. This whole scenario makes any efforts to keep people healthy and safe a sham. It's hard to go on working and contributing to society, in the face of such wanton disregard for human life.

nuclear energy production would be a severe money losing proposition.

There are a number of similar industries.

And twenty three of the hundred and some reactors we have in the USA are very similar to the GE designed built and politically protected Fukushima plant.

In 2006, the Powers that Be, from both the Bush regime, and from GE, went over to Fukushima, saw that the mayor who was put in by popular vote was removed due to unfounded bribery charges being slammed against him, and then a pro-nuke mayor was put in his place.

So despite the will of the Japanese people, who had voted for a man who had said he would decommission the reactors, the nuke industry got its way.

It' s just too bad if we all die from cancer because we cannot mutate fast enough to handle the radiation.

posed to the US at this time....we should calm down. But, as you say, they didn't talk about what still could happen or what could be happening right now. They based their discussion on official reports....not on the worst case current conditions and worst case future scenario.

Nuclear energy is for the stupids.


- Period.

due to genetic damage from air and waterborne radiation. Although those humans alive in at the end will be suffering from various cancers and other radiation poisoning effects long before the species expires.

I have a well-meaning friend (who has no children and is nearing menopause) assuring me that "changes in diet" will protect us from the effects of radiation...of course, she wasn't interested in grandchildren or anything...

When the global financial Ponzi implodes, there won't be any money (except what the banksters have stolen). No money, no food, no transportation. Most of us will die of starvation before we die from the radiation effects.

For once the affluent West will suffer first from jet stream-borne radiation. The wealthy would probably move to Africa or S. America and hide in shelters. They'll still die.

Rec

See the DU thread just started about the EPA. They will raise the "acceptable" levels to appease the Nuclear Industry and 1 in 4 people will get cancer. Easy come, easy go. Such is life in corporate owned America.

SS, DD.

By the way, you keep saying "theory" when you mean "hypothesis." You know, like how evolution and global warming are "just theories."

based on my understanding of nuclear reactions.

First, there is no chance that this will blow up like an atomic bomb. Fission bombs come in two varieties - uranium and plutunium. The former don't blow up unless you first compress the uranium into a really tight ball. The challenge is that if you don't compress it almost perfectly, the heat blows it apart before the nuclear explosion goes off. Building a working uranium bomb is very hard. Just dumping a bunch of uranium together won't do it. We're dealing with uranium here, so a nuclear explosion isn't a concern.

The biggest concern is that this stuff will escape containment. When that happens, you don't get an explosion, but you do get radioactivity everywhere. How harmful that is depends on how much exposure you get.

One helpful thing about radioactivity is that the more radioactive something is, the quicker the radiation levels die off. The very worst stuff becomes harmless in minutes. Really bad stuff stays really bad for weeks. Things that stay radioactive for years have much lower levels of radiation.

Being exposed to radiation is like playing Russion Roulette. Exposure to radiation can cause cancer. Scientists have worked out how much your chance of getting cancer will increase depending on how much radiation you are exposed to. The science is pretty good for moderate to high levels of exposure.

For lower levels of exposure, there is a lot of debate. Some scientists think that the exposure/cancer relationship is linear from no exposure up to massive exposure. Other scientists think that once you get below a certain exposure level, radiation isn't harmful. That sounds crazy, but one solid piece of evidence is that Denver has a pretty high level of background radiation but has fewer cases of cancer than cities without detectible radiation levels.

The claims that the US are safe are based on the fact that radiation exposure levels here will be minimal. The further the radioactive material spreads from Japan, the more dilute it will get because it is spread over more area. It also takes time to get from the source to the US, so the more radioactive elements will be greatly diminished. The resulting exposure level will almost certainly be less than the increase exposure you get just from flying in a commercial airplane.

So assuming the "worst case" scenario of a meltdown that escapes containment, I think you'll see lots of deaths of workers onsite, an increase in cancer deaths from people in a relatively wide area (10 miles?, 20 miles?, 50 miles?). The cancer rates will be higher closer in and lower the further you get away, but I don't know enough to say how quickly they will drop off. I doubt that you'll see any increase in cancer deaths in the US under any circumstances. It is possible that rates will increase, but the effect would be so small that you'll never be able to see it in the already huge number of cancer deaths we regularly get here.

I don't know where you're getting your disinformation, but you're wrong about at least one thing.

"One helpful thing about radioactivity is that the more radioactive something is, the quicker the radiation levels die off. The very worst stuff becomes harmless in minutes. Really bad stuff stays really bad for weeks. Things that stay radioactive for years have much lower levels of radiation."

Tell that to somebody who inhales a .00001 gram particle of plutonium 239 emitted in smoke from the burning fires of Fukushima 20,000 years from now. You'll have to tell them fast because they'll be dying fast.

as in "mushroom cloud A-Bomb" scenario. That is a silly strawman.

The explanation you gave for radioactive decay is very partial and incorrect in certain areas. Plutonium for example, has a relatively long half life (which I don't think many people truly understand what it means honestly) and it is a very strong emitter of Alpha, Beta and Gamma particles. A big issue of the reactors used is that they use zircaloy rods, which can be explosive at temperatures which can be easily be reached by the Pu and Ur fuel when melting down. The explosion can disseminate a large number of dust particles of Plutonium, that if inhaled or absorbed into the blood stream now have a direct path through the skin for their alpha radiation.

Given that Japan is one of the most densely populated islands on earth, and that Tokyo (one of the largest, if not the largest) urban area on the planet is less than a couple hundred miles away... depending on the wind patters, the dissemination of Plutonium dust could have catastrophic effects.

Even if not a single person dies, it is still and unacceptable risk. Playing Russian roulette is a silly way of boiling water, and so is using Plutonium and Uranium.

which is (IMHO) one of the reasons the info you mention is not known, assuming it exists.

As a side note, I'm expecting any day now to hear of the first suicide from someone losing face over all of this.

I hope not though. Better to stay and fight it.

His cabbage farm was near the reactor and it's unrecoverable - after 30 years of his ownership and hard work. His farm was ruined. His livelihood snuffed out. And he did himself in.

SO SAD AND HORRENDOUS! And he's just the one we know about. The CEO of the Fukushima reactors should consider hara kiri - in the spirit of longstanding Japanese tradition of the penalties for abject disgrace.

Which means they cannot bring them back to operation, they're lost. What I find disturbing is that since they found plutonium in the ground around the plant, it means there was a meltdown somewhere, allowing the material to get out.

I think it's about time to do what was done in Chernobyl. Bring in the Japanese military to entomb the whole mess. Haven't heard them speak of that yet. It's as if they still think they can 'fix' the problem.

an honest, plain language video. http://www.fairewinds.com/

Cheers
Sandy

I still wish it had the worst-case/best-case all laid out for me with the possible plans of attack. But, nonetheless, that was exactly the kid of thing I have been looking for. Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!

This link is for all videos he's done since he's been inspecting damage through pics and reports.

http://www.fairewinds.com/updates

Wish it was more optimistic but really gives a better understanding at least.

Cheers
Sandy

You dissertation on radiation and electronics makes sense.

I remember stumbling across some articles that mentioned that eh Apollo space missions were not shielded enough to protect the men in side while they traveled through space, and the solar radiation emissions outside of the Earth's magnetosphere. While I get the gist of it, and why it could be kind of a smoking gun for the guys that deny the moon landings actually occurred, there is very little I can do to verify the facts, especially is NASA, a goverment agency is not will to tell the truth to us.

We do know that robots were all the rage for defusing bombs, placing tear gtas in hostile crack houses and the like, but I have to agree, the lack of robots in the aftermath of the Fukushima disaster is inexplicable. Even Hollywod has dozens of RC helecopters they use for filming that could be useful for reconnoitering the damage, but we see nothing.

Thats the most disturbing thing about the disaster.. It's like they can dare to sacrifice a 15,000 dollar micro uav to loiter over the site until it succumbs to radiation..

Bullshit I say.

There's evidence. On the moon. It's still there- not only have we been bouncing lasers off the ranging reflectors left by the astronauts, now we have additional photos of the landing sites, courtesy of more recent NASA spacecraft (among them, the dreaded "moon bombing" probe):





...now, was the Apollo spacecraft totally shielded from radiation? No, absolutely not. But the Apollo spacecraft only needed to be in space for about 7-10 days, outside of Earth orbit less than that. The apollo crews that went to the moon did notice odd, occasional flashes of light with their eyes closed, that were later determined to actually be cosmic rays striking their heads. Certainly, additional radiation shielding is something that needs to be thought about for longer missions (i.e. Mars) but for the brief trips to the moon, although there was a radiation hazard, NASA felt the exposure would be brief enough not to be a major problem. If they had had a big solar flare while out there, though, they could have been screwed.


None of this, of course, has anything to do with Fukushima; although there HAVE been some detailed unmanned photographic surveys of the site in the past week or so:



What makes me nuts is, we're spending way more money trying to bust pot growers in California than we are on technology to throw at this potentially unimaginable disaster.

But please. Don't derail an otherwise educational thread with that nonsense about faked moon landings. Yes, your government has lied to you, but not about that.

And there is plenty of video and images from the site:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXsJxgHajQo&feature=related

The "experts" were sure this could never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, under any circumstances happen, so why worry about it?