Nuclear Energy: Anydex-The Index of Anything

Arthur's Anything Index | Home | Contents | Links | Home | Diversity / Politics / Opinion | webmaster |(c) 1995-2011


This my index of nuclear energy information. I was a pro-nuclear guy until the Fukushima incident shows what happens with things happen outside of design parameters. Lots of people die with conventional energy, but at least it doesn't spread radioactive badness across the planet and render farmland and seas useless for food when something goes badly wrong.

Also See: Live Blog | Timeline | GE BWR Mark I Reactors


§  Fukushima I nuclear accidents (Wikipedia)

§  Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant

§  IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency

§  Boiling Water Reactor Wikipedia

§  Boiling water reactor safety systems (Wikipedia)

§  TEPCO Photos and Videos

@@Links to blogs and websites

Asian Week Fukushima / Nebraskahima Archive

Websites with regular news updates. Beware of conspiracy sites that blame HAARP, zionists, Israel, or promote Russia, Iran or 9-11 theories for Palestine.

Fukushima project

·  Scribble Live photographs

·         Fairewinds Fukushima Updates anti-nuke

·         Scribble Live Japan Earthquake

·          Fukushima FAQ wiki

@@Comprehensive Explanations

  • @@Contents
  • § 

  • Americium

    §  Boiling Water Reactor  Troubled design


  • Chris Busby Low level radiation activist against Uranium use in Iraq


  • Canada Safer design than BWR

    §  Casualties/ Deaths: From zero to over 50 vs 30 for Chernobyl.

    §  Cooling failure

    §  Criticality

    §  Damaged Containment

    §  Failures



    §  Fuel Pool

    §  Iodine-131

    §  Japan Fukushima 2011

    §  Lost power

    §  Milk

    §  No Problem “there should be no release of radiation”

    §  Prompt criticality Unit 3 may have been a "small" nuclear fission explosion as hydrogen explosion re-arranged fuel rods


    §  Radiation Exposure Spectrum

    Radiation Sickness

    §  Rainwater

    §  Robot

    Rocketdyne 1969 meltdown releasing Iodine

    §  Seawater injection

    §  Spent | Nuclear fuel shipping cask

    §  #Sievert

    §  Smokestack

    §  Timeline

    §  Uranium

    ·  Workers

    §  Vent

    §  Weather

    @@9-Month Plan

    I transcribe here a post by my friend ELGER regarding these issues. If somebody wish to discuss this further, please contact
    me under


    This release by TEPCO and the Government is misleading politics at it worst, a WISHKIST at it best, not providing any credible solution Factually, they virtually admit it.
    1) They state

    ""The timetable was released FIVE DAYS AFTER KAN CALLED for Tokyo Electric....""

    ""spokesman Hiro Hasegawa acknowledged that PUBLIC PRESSUE HELPED speed the company's decision to release a plan and warned that the outline remained TENTATIVE -- "but we will do our best" to stick to it""
    So, what they are factually saying that AS YOU WANT A PLAN, WE GIVE YOU A PLAN (of course, as it shown further below, they have no idea how to implement it)

    2) They state:
    ""Everything is a high-radiation area inside the reactor buildings""

    ""That (NEW)system would remove heat from the water being pumped through the reactors and decontaminate it before circulating it back through them.
    Currently, engineers have improvised by pumping roughly 170 metric tons (45,000 gallons) of water a day into each reactor, an unknown portion of which is leaking out. The leaking water comes out full of particles like radioactive iodine and cesium, the byproducts of the reactors""
    SO, IF THE RADIOACTIVE WATER is leaking out of control to the basement
    from the "high radioactive area", and the new cooling system therefore must collect it to channel it through the the new heat exchangers, how they suppose to be able to do that within the, as they state, highly radiant area, only accessible by the radiation measuring robots??

    3) They state:
    ""The wildcard in the utility's plan may be reactor No. 2, where another suspected buildup of hydrogen is believed to have ruptured the suppression pool -- a donut-shaped reservoir at the base of the reactor. That may make it more difficult to carry out one of the first stages of their planned cooling process, filling the concrete primary containment shell around the reactor pressure vessel with water, Hasegawa said.
    Unless that damage is REPAIRED SOMEHOW (?!), that part of the plan may be unsuccessful, he said.""

    As long this situation continues,as stated 170 Ton/day = 7 Ton/hour for EACH reactor (not the total, as told yesterday), i.e. ~500 Ton/day for the 3 reactors will be sprayed and the bulk leaked (the remainder to be radioactive vapor) and once the available store volumen is full, RELEASED TO THE SEA, AGAIN AND AGAIN, PROBABLY ONCE A MONTH. Possibly the radioactivity could be diminished somwhat by biological means, but certainly by far not enough!

    It is time the Japanese Government takes over the problem and contracts the best internationally available firms and brains to find and implement a solution, swallowing their nationalistic pride!!



    Summary: There are very few reports of Americium outside of Japan, making this a dubious source. Gunderson has been quoted mainly by conspiracy sites like Russia Today, World Socialists, Democratic Underground.

    Fukushima radiation levels rise to highest levels yet By William Whitlow 2 May 2011 He points out that uranium has been found on Hawaii, americium has been found in New England and plutonium dust has been found on the Fukushima site. These latter elements are transuranic, i.e. heavier than uranium, and indicate that nuclear fuel was volatilized at Fukushima. If Gundersen’s hypothesis is correct then Fukushima will rival or surpass Chernobyl in its global health consequences.
    Americium, Bismuth, Uranium is showing up on the West Coast of the United States. What are the implications?

    Nuclear expert says Americium has been found in New England — Element even heavier than Uranium (VIDEO) April 28th, 2011 Gundersen Postulates Unit 3 Explosion May Have Been Prompt Criticality in Fuel Pool, Fairewinds Associates, April 26th, 2011:

    At 3:05 in video: Americium has been found in New England Most americium is produced by bombarding uranium or plutonium with alpha particles in nuclear reactors one tonne of spent nuclear fuel contains about 100 grams of americium. It is widely used in commercial ionization chamber smoke detectors, as well as in neutron sources and industrial gauges Plutonium transforms into americium and enters the water table. It can contaminate a water supply for centuries. The half life of americium is 433 years.

    ·  Advanced boiling water reactor

    @@Advanced boiling water reactor


    ·         emphasis on full passive nuclear safety and an entirely different approach to power regulation (natural circulation rather than circulation pumps)

    ·         The Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) has been improved in many areas, providing a very high level of defence-in-depth against accidents, contingencies, and incidents.


    ·  Blueprints



    After the tsunami knocked out the power to the reactors and destroyed the diesel back-up system, plant workers fanned out into the plant's parking lot, which was full of wrecked cars. "So people were out scavenging batteries out of cars and trucks," says Lake Barrett, a retired nuclear engineer who led the Three Mile Island cleanup. He says that workers brought those batteries into the control rooms, "wiring them with hot wires to the instrumentation to try to determine the water level in the cores, and to control the pumps they had."


    Workers tried to use car batterys to power valves: ...trying to operate valves using a car battery


    Becquerel Spectrum:
       8x10^24:  Hiroshimia nuclear explosion
     1-2x10^18:   Chernobyl 
      Chernobyl & the marine environment: The radiological impact in context
,1518,411272,00.html The
    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California : "mammoth." The
    reactor core contained roughly 80 million curies of iodine 131 and 6
    million curies of caesium 137, a "large part" of which was released
    into the atmosphere.
    60x10^10: Three Mile Island (15 curies of radiation were
      released during the reactor meltdown at Pennsylvania's Three Mile
      Island plant in 1979.
    The level of radioactive cesium in sewage sludge 6/2011
      Fukushima city     447,000 becquerels per kilogram.
      Tokyo               55,000
      Maebashi            42,800
      banana = 100 bq/kg 
      brazil nuts may have up to 444 Bq/kg (12 nCi/kg) (4xbanana)

    TEPCO: level of plutonium-238 detected near the recreational ground was 0.19 becquerels per kilogram and the figure is down from the 0.26 becquerels detected in April.

    Becquerel (Wikipedia)One Bq is defined as the activity of a quantity of radioactive material in which one nucleus decays per second.

    The curie (Ci) is an older, non-SI unit of radioactivity equal to the activity of 1 gram of radium-226. The conversion factors are: 1 Ci = 3.7×10^10 Bq 1 Ci = 37 GBq 1 µCi = 37,000 Bq 1 Bq = 2.70×10-11 Ci

    @@Beta Radiation

    Beta Radiation in the United States Following the Fukushima Disaster A statistical study. Highlights: Beta radiation was 5x background in the US overall in the second half of March. Areas in California and Arizona were 10x, 15x, up to 53x background. California, Arizona, Hawaii, Florida were hardest hit. Increases in beta radiation were statistically significant in March, April, and May.


    Summary: TEPCO is trying to take down copies of a blueprint of the reactor on copyright basis, but it has been widely available for months

    House of Foust statement on why TEPCO is not releasing drawings

    @@Boiling Water Reactor

    see BWR Boiling Water Reactor: see Main article

    see wikipedia


    Boiling water reactors (BWRs) are the second most common form of light water reactor with a design that is simpler and less costly to build, but bigger and slightly less efficient, than the classic pressurized water reactor (PWR) originally designed for submarines.


    The latest generation is the advanced boiling water reactor.


    5 of 6 reactors at Fukushima Daiichi are General Electric BWR-3 with Mark I containment building. They were designed in the 1960s and installed in Japan in the 1970s. 92 plants around the world use the BWR system, and 32 use the Mark I containment. They are considered "second" generation as are all reactors in the US and France. The first generation according to World Nuclear Association were developed in the 50s and 60s and most are gone.

    Generation III reactors integrate passive or inherent safety system that operate without intervention or power, and have been around since 1982. Only 15 of 442 are G3 now, with 14 under consruction.



    OECD NEA Basic Design Information for Boiling Water Reactors BWR3 & BWR 4 Fukushima-Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Information


    An introduction by NRC to boiling water reactor technology can be accessed here [pdf].


    General Electric BWR reactors had 3 types of containments:

    ·         Mark I: Type that failed at Fukushima. Storage ponds kept at top refueling level. Suppression pool is a steel torus under the dry well. Upper level has sheet metal walls, with steel or concrete frame, maintained at slight negative pressure so that internal air can be filtered before being vented. These side panels, and in unit 3 west concrete wall pillars as well blew away with hydrogen explosions at Fukushima units 1, 3, and 4.


    o    Fuel for generators was stored next to the shoreline where they were destroyed by the tsunami after operating for 1 hour.

    o    Did not have "hardened venting system" which allowed venting of hydrogen from primary containment to venting "smokestack" tower. This led to explosions in units 1, 3, and 4 which destroyed the secondary containment upper building, damaged or destroyed overhead crane and refueling platform.

    o    Spent fuel pool is next to the reactor, so it is a) affected by any problems with reactor meltdown just downstairs b) too high to easily get water to fill in case of power failure and water loss due to boiling or evaporation. Water had to be delivered by helicopter (ineffective, and only works if the roof is blow off) water cannon (also with blown roof) or concrete pump crane.

    o    Unlike Mark III and most newer reactors, the upper "secondary containment" has only thin sheet metal or reinforced concrete sheet walls which previous studies had shown were likely to be destroyed by  hydrogen explosions in the event of a meltdown. The original design had “blow out” panels in case of tornado. TThey are also vulnerable to aircraft crashes. Most newer reactors (and Mk III) have a thick domed concrete outer building which resists impacts or explosions. After the hydrogen explosions, the spent fuel pool was exposed, and spent fuel fires spread radioactivity and even some plutonium into the air and surrounding grounds.

    ·         Mark II: Supression pool is concete rather than torus. Upper level 2ndary containment is still lightweight steel sheet metal structure, not concrete, and the spent fuel pool is still above the reactor.

    ·         Mark III: Reactor is capped by a domed concrete shield building whic covers an airtight sheet metal steel silo. It is not obvious it could have withstood a blast the size of the ones at units 1 and 3. Spent fuel is kept in another lower adjoining building



    Possible milk radiation scare from website in Hawaii claims they are feeding sodium borate to their animals to treat radiation. This one article posted on a "Hawaii health" website is being replicated across the conspiracy-sphere.

    The Hawaii Health Department latest results in the May 2nd DOH Update are that amounts are detectable, but nowhere near levels of health concern. Nothing like the "400 to 2400 times" safe levels quoted in the alarmist article:

    Latest Milk Sample Shows Decreased Amounts of Radiation in Milk From Big Island Dairy Still Far Below Levels of Public Health Concern
    Results of EPA laboratory analysis of a milk sample collected April 13, 2011 on the Big Island showed small amounts of Cesium-134 and Cesium-137. The amounts were 11 pCi/L and 10 pCi/L, respectively. The results for Iodine-131 were non-detect. These findings have decreased from the previous sample collected on April 4, 2011 and are still far below levels of public health concern. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Derived Intervention Levels (DIL) for milk are 4700 pCi/L for I-131 and 33,000 pCi/L for Cs-134 and Cs-137 combined.

    Additional analysis was performed by the EPA on the milk sample collected on April 4, 2011. Trace amounts of Strontium-89 were detected (1.4 pCi/L). Strontium-90 was non-detect in this sample. These levels are below FDA’s DIL of 4400 pCi/L for the Strontium-90 radionuclide group.

    The department is continuing to monitor all milk produced at Big Island dairies, as well as milk imported from California. We do not expect to see any levels of significant health impact and there is no need to take any protective action based on current guidance.

    April 13th update Milk Sample Shows Trace Amounts of Radiation in Milk From Big Island Dairy Results of EPA laboratory analysis of a milk sample collected April 4, 2011 on the Big Island showed small amounts of Iodine-131, Cesium-134 and Cesium- 137. The amounts were 18 pCi/L, 24 pCi/L and 19 pCi/L, respectively. These findings were expected and are far below levels of public health concern. By comparison, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Derived Intervention Levels (DIL) for milk are 4700 pCi/L for I-131 and 33,000 pCi/L for Cs-134 and Cs-137 combined. The milk from the dairy is distributed primarily on the Big Island. Most of Hawaii’s milk is sourced from a dairy located in California. The department is continuing to monitor all milk produced at Big Island dairies, as well as milk imported from California. We do not expect to see any levels of significant health impact and there is no need to take any protective action based on current guidance.

    Hawaii Farmers Treating Milk With Boron After Finding Radiation 2400 Times Above Safe Levels Posted by Alexander Higgins - May 26, 2011 at 6:56 am

    Big Island Dairy Farmers fight radiation with Boron ...An open letter from dairy farmers on the Big Island of Hawaii shares some solutions for working with radiation problems in milk.

    Dear Milk Share Members, Our goal to offer high quality safe food to our community has recently been challenged in the reality of the radioactivity being released into our environment. In the past weeks radioactive levels have increased in Hawaii, with high spikes and a more current leveling off of radiation levels. Milk from the large dairies in Hamakua and Hawi has shown elevated levels of radiation, from 400 to 2400 times the recognized safe levels.

    Aside from the much recognized supplement potassium iodine as a protection against radioactive iodine, there are a number of ways we can help. We have remembered our friend, elemental boron and the position it plays on the earth. Boron is the only mineral capable of accepting and ionizing radiation that never changes the innards or the nucleus of the cell. Spoken simply, boron can take radiation and release it without upsetting its own very delicate balance.

    Boron is used extensively in the nuclear industry. Sodium borate is regularly used for standby liquid control systems, in case of emergencies. It was used in Cheronbyl in 1986 mixed with sand to prevent further radiation leakage. It was also used in 1999 in Tokaimura, Japan, to absorb the massive amounts of radiation after an accident at a plant. Currently it is being dumped on fuel rods and in surrounding waters of the Fukushima plant. Boron is widely recognized as extremely safe and can be used to capture radioactivity on our soils, gardens, orchards, etc. It also can be safely ingested by humans and animals. Boron will accept radiation and ionize it within our bodies, after which our bodies will safely excrement the boron and radioactivity.


    @@Chris Busby

    Summary: Christopher Busby (born 1945) is a British scientist known for his controversial theories about the negative health effects of very low-dose ionising radiation. He appears on the anti-Iraq war/ pro-muslim media circuit on the harmful effects of Uranium ammunition used in Iraq, and has made some alarming statements on Fukushima. Some of the media giving him a soapbox are:


    From Wikipedia: Chris Busby Televised comments on Fukushima I nuclear accidents

    In a March 14 broadcast on BBC, Busby was interviewed along with Ian Fells, and characterized the accident as "exactly the same scenario" as Chernobyl. While admitting that the containment structure for Fukushima Dai-ichi was more much advanced than that at Chernobyl, he claimed there could be "nuclear explosion" rather than (as reported) a hydrogen explosion, if fuel elements had melted down and collected at the bottom of the vessel. He also asserted that a brief spike in radiation levels at a reactor north of Fukushima Dai-ichi indicated "up to 100 kilometers away, we are getting concentrations of plutonium, cesium and iodine" (sic - presumably radionuclides thereof) released from Fukushima Dai-ichi, making the releases comparable in his opinion to Chernobyl, in terms of human health impact. In response to Fells' characterization of the worst immediate effects being loss of power to an advanced industrial society, Busby said "this is a radiological catastrophe already", asserting in particular that plutonium releases were the major cause of concern.[34]

    On 30 March 2011 Busby first appeared on Russian Today stating that the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster was worse than being reported.[36] During the follow up interview on April 13, 2011, Busby stated that Fukushima radiation pollution could cause up to 400,000 added cancer cases among those living within 200 km of the reactor, with " reports of significant radiation ... even south of Tokyo".[37][38]

    On April 25 Busby stated on one Russian Today that he believed one of the explosions at the Fukushima I nuclear reactors was a "nuclear" one, rather than a hydrogen explosion as reported. In the same Russia Today broadcast, he referred to calculations made with his colleagues estimating that Chernobyl had killed 1,400,000 people, and that Fukushima's death toll would be in the same range, if not worse.

    Chris Busby « Antiwar Radio with Scott Horton and Charles Goyette

    co-author of this study, “ Cancer, Infant Mortality and Birth Sex-Ratio in Fallujah, Iraq 2005–2009, ” published at .. · (anti-Israel conspiracy media)

    Iraq, Depleted Uranium and a Song for Sanity.

    internationally renowned scientist (crackpot) and founder of the Low Level Radiation Campaign ... · (anti-Israel conspiracy media)

    Invited to Iraq and Kosovo (Islamic fighter battlegrounds)

    Red flag: he was invited to Iraq and Kosovo to investigate the health effects of ... ·

    Deconstructing Nuclear Experts By Chris Busby

    Iraq AfPak War. 29 March, 2011 Counterpunch. S ince the Fukushima accident we have seen a ...  (anti-israel conspiracy media)

    Chris Busby: Deconstructing Nuclear Experts

    Alexander Cockburn ... Top 10 Reasons Iraq War was No.. (conspiracy media)


    Hmmm, posting shows this guy is linked to jihadist freedom fighters in Falluja. Not a good sign.

    "Falluja Worse Than Hiroshima "

    The information is too important not to jot down...this is a rushed post.


    I just finished watching a re-run of Ahmad Mansour's Al-Jazeera Arabic - interview with Prof.Chris Busby. Prof Busby is a Scientist and Director of Green Audit, and scientific secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Risks. To find out more on Prof Chris Busby and his work -- Google -- Chris Busby Uranium.


    Prof Busby has published many articles on radiation, uranium and contamination in countries such as Lebanon, Kosovo, Gaza and of course Iraq.


    His latest findings - which were the subject of the program aired on Al-Jazeera are what I will focus on here.


    As some of you know, Falluja is a forbidden city. It was subjected to intense bombardments in 2004, with DU bombs and White phosphorus, and since it has become a no go zone - meaning that both the Iraqi puppet authorities and the U.S invading/occupying forces do not allow anyone to conduct any real study in Falluja. Falluja is basically under siege.


    Obviously both the Americans and the Iraqis know something and are hiding it from the public. And this is where Prof. C.Busby comes in the picture. He was/is adamant to get to the bottom of what took place in Falluja in 2004.


    Being a top scientist in his field, he set out to conduct a survey/research in Falluja whose preliminary results will be published in 2 weeks - hopefully.


    Prof Busby found many obstacles while undertaking this project. Neither he nor any member of his team were allowed access to Falluja to conduct interviews. He said when the main door closes, one has to find other doors to open. And this is what he did. He managed to gather a team of Iraqis from Falluja to conduct the surveys for him.


    The research project was based on 721 families from Falluja with 4'500 participants - living in both high level and lower level radiation zones. Results were compared to a control group - a sample of the same number of families living in a non radioactive zone in another Arab country. For the purpose of the study he chose three other countries for comparison - Kuwait, Egypt and Jordan.


    Before getting into the preliminary results I must note the following :


    - the Iraqi authorities threatened all the participants of this survey with arrest and detention should they cooperate with the "terrorists" who were interviewing them. In other words, they were threatened under the anti-terrorism act.


    - The U.S forces prohibited Dr.Busby for gathering any data, arguing that Falluja is an insurgency zone.


    - The doctors from Falluja turned down the request to be aired live on the Ahmad Mansour program because they had received several death threats and feared for their lives.


    In other words, the study was conducted under very difficult and life threatening conditions. But it was conducting nonetheless.


    As the program has not been uploaded on youtube, I can't give a word for word transcription. I took short hand notes and memorized the rest. But I will do my best to present all the facts I heard today.



    So what is it that the US and its Iraqi puppets do not want the public to learn ? And why are they are not allowing any measurements of the levels of radiation in Falluja, and why did they even forbid the IAEA to enter Falluja ?


    What exactly happened in Falluja ? What were the kinds of bombs used ? Was it just DU or more ?


    1) One thing that is very peculiar to Falluja is that the rates of cancer have risen dramatically in a very short space of time i.e since 2004. Examples given by Dr.Busby :


    - rate of Child Leukemia is 40 X (times) higher since 2004 than during previous years. And compared to Jordan for instance it is 38 X times higher.

    - rate of breast cancer is 10 X higher since 2004

    - rate of lymphatic cancer is also 10 x higher since 2004.


    2) Another peculiarity to Falluja is the dramatic rise in infant mortality rates. Compared to 2 other Arab countries like Kuwait and Egypt who are not contaminated by radiation these are the figures :


    - infant mortality rates for Falluja is 80 infants out of 1'000 births in comparison to Kuwait with 9 infants out of 1'000, and to Egypt with 19 infants out of 1'000. (so Iraqi infant mortality rate is 4 times higher than Egypt and 9 times higher than Kuwait)


    3) the third peculiarity to Falluja is the number of genetic deformities that has suddenly exploded since 2004. This is a subject I've already covered in the past. But this is not the whole story, today I learned something else. The radiation of whatever agent that was used by the "liberating forces", not only causes massive genetic deformities but also and this is very important :



    Canadian reactors have many safety features compared to the BWRs used at Fukushima. They don't boil the water that circulates through the reactor core. All radioactive water is in the containment which is under 3 meter thick walls. Fuel pellets are ceramic which resist melting compared to steel. Dousing tanks work without pumps with gravity.

    CANDUs don't permit boiling of the primary loop water. This very hot water, which is also radioactive, circulates in a closed loop entirely within containment. It passes through steam generators (heat exchangers) which transfer heat to secondary loops to power steam turbines and associated electrical generators. The residual low-pressure steam is routed back through a condenser, where it becomes water again and is returned back to the steam generators. The steam and water in CANDU's secondary loops is not radioactive, so in the event that a heat release is required, the secondary side could be safely vented to the atmosphere and new plain water introduced once the water inventories are depleted.

    Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Top of page

    CANDU safety features

    CANDU reactors can be refuelled while operating, and incorporate dozens of safety features to respond to the stringent safety requirements imposed by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. Safety highlights include:

    ·         a design that can use passive convection cooling for the primary systems to keep the reactor cool in the absence of power

    ·         the use of dousing tanks high in the reactor or containment building that work on gravity, which can be used to replenish secondary side inventory and refill the steam generators, as required, to continue heat release in the event of a loss of power

    ·         use of ceramic uranium fuel pellets that tolerate high temperatures

    ·         two independent and diverse shutdown systems

    ·         calandria vessel that contains the fuel rod assembly and heavy water moderator

    ·         high-density, reinforced concrete containment walls, almost a metre thick


    0 or 54 Fukushima deaths vs 30 Chernobyl

    According to Wikipedia, there are no deaths at Fukushima due to the nuclear accident. However, if we count all deaths at the nuclear plants as is sometimes done for wind power, that would include the 1 crane operator at Daini, and the two tsunami victims at Daichi. 6 self defense force persons were reportedly killed in the unit 3 explosion though they did not work at the plant. Two additional workers were reported missing in unit 4 turbine building after an explosion in unit 4. That's nine people onsite.

    However, adding the deaths of 45 patients who were hastily evacuated without sufficient life-saving attention would make 54, would FAR EXCEED the 30 who died of radiation poisining at Chernobyl, not counting animal deaths from starvation.

    Two Chernobyl plant workers died on the night of the accident, and a further 28 people died within a few weeks as a result of acute radiation poisoning.src


    Casualties among power plant workers 

    ·         Two Tepco employees have minor injuries.

    ·         Two contractors were injured when the quake struck and were taken to hospital, one suffering two broken legs.

    ·         A Tepco worker was taken to hospital after collapsing and experiencing chest pains.

    ·         A subcontract worker at an "important earthquake-proof building" was found unconscious and was taken to hospital.

    ·         Two Tepco workers felt ill whilst working in the control rooms of Fukushima Daiichi units 1 and 2 and were taken to the medical centre at Fukushima Daini.

    ·         Four workers were injured in the hydrogen explosion at Fukushima Daiichi 1. They were all taken to hospital.

    ·         Eleven workers (four Tepco workers, three subcontract workers and four members of Self Defence Force) were hurt following a similar explosion at Fukushima Daiichi 3. They were transferred to the Fukushima Daini plant. One of the Tepco employees, complaining of pain in his side, was later transferred to hospital.

    ·         The whereabouts of two Tepco workers, who had been in the turbine building of Fukushima Daiichi unit 4, is unknown. 




    Farm animals starving to death in 20-km evacuation zone BY SATOSHI OTANI STAFF WRITER 2011/04/28 Corpses of cattle, hogs and chickens have been left rotting in barns within the 20-kilometer evacuation zone of the hobbled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant, a veterinarian said. The animals likely starved to death after their owners left the area on the government's warning last month. Some farm animals were still alive, but most appeared too debilitated to feed themselves


    %%Hospital patients

    from: Families want answers after 45 people died following evacuation from Fukushima hospital

    Japanese citizens are demanding explanations for 45 mysterious deaths of hospital workers and patients over the course of the last month. Patients and workers were in the area when the Fukushima #3 nuclear reactor exploded and since the explosion and over the course of the following month a total of 45 have died  so far.

    Families want answers after 45 people died following evacuation from Fukushima hospital

    OKUMA, Fukushima — Nearly 45 people out of some 440 patients and workers at a hospital here are estimated to have died while or after being evacuated following the accident at the tsunami-hit Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant.

    The Fukushima Prefectural Government is investigating why 90 patients were temporarily left behind at Futaba Hospital in Okuma, Fukushima Prefecture, following the disaster.

    Even though these facilities were not hit by a massive tsunami triggered by the temblor, electric power and water supply was cut off.

    The day after the quake, authorities issued an evacuation order in areas within 10 kilometers from the nuclear power station. In response, 209 patients at the hospital and care home who were able to walk on their own, as well as many of workers, fled the area. However, bed-ridden and seriously handicapped patients were unable to do so.


    On the early morning of March 14 [3 Days later], a health and welfare office in Minami-Soma, Fukushima Prefecture, which is designated as a site for radiation screening, received a list of residents who needed to be rescued from the Prime Minister’s Office by fax. The list mentioned Futaba Hospital.

    Shortly afterwards, about 130 patients and workers that the Ground Self-Defense Force (GSDF) had rescued from the hospital arrived at the office by bus. [...]


    School principal Masaaki Tashiro was shocked to see the patients in the vehicle – two of them were already dead and others had had incontinence, with their intravenous lines disconnected. The school has no medical equipment and the identities of the patients were not known.

    Despite their strenuous efforts, two of the evacuees died in the early hours of March 15 [4 days later]. The principal even appealed for assistance on a local FM radio station, saying, “Help us!”

    At the time, about 90 patients and four hospital workers as well as police officers and Self-Defense Forces (SDF) members were at the hospital. The crisis at the nuclear plant was only growing worse, and a GSDF rescue team never came to rescue them.

    Following an explosion at the nuclear plant, SDF members remaining at the hospital left there after telling staff, “We must go back.”

    At around 1 a.m. on March 15, police officers urged hospital staff to evacuate, saying, “You have no choice but to leave here.” In response, the staff fled to the neighboring village of Kawauchi, while leaving behind the patients.

    Later in the morning, the team went to the hospital to find bed-ridden elderly patients were remaining at the institution, which was filled with a strange odor [ the odor of dead bodies].


    About 90 patients rescued by the GSDF team were transported to evacuation shelters in the Fukushima Prefecture cities of Date and Fukushima, but 10 of them died during or after the evacuation operations. [...]


    A bus carrying 21 of the patients arrived at Fukushima Prefectural Aizu General Hospital on March 15, but the bodies of many of them had become very cold. One of the nurses who saw the patients screamed, “There is a patient in critical condition.” In the end, six of them died between that night and April 11.


    On April 6, Fukushima Prefectural Police officers discovered the bodies of four patients, including 87-year-old Kyugo Sato, at Futaba Hospital.


    At a police station, Futaba Hospital director Suzuki handed him his father’s death certificate simply stating that the patient “died at 5:12 a.m. on March 14 of lung cancer.”

    He said he asked Suzuki, “Is cancer indeed the only cause of his death? Why did you abandon him at the hospital?” However, Suzuki declined to provide any explanation by simply saying, “I’m sorry.”

    Sato emphasizes he wants to clarify under what circumstances his father died after most hospital employees fled. “I want to know the truth.”


    Other patients at the hospital died one after another, reportedly bringing the death toll at the institution to about 45.


    The Okuma Municipal Government compiled its own evacuation assistance plan in April 2009.

    However, the plan covers the procedure for evacuating elderly and handicapped people staying at home. It is extremely rare that all patients must be simultaneously evacuated from hospitals and nursing care institutions like in the case of Futaba Hospital.

    “In principle, hospitals and nursing care homes are responsible for the evacuation of their inpatients,” a Cabinet Office official said.


    In interviews with the Mainichi on March 17 and 21, Futaba Hospital’s Suzuki denied that the institution abandoned the patients. “We were unable to return to the hospital because of an explosion at the nuclear power plant. It’s not true that we abandoned our patients,” he said.


    Source: Mianchi Daily News

    As I have previously reported, the evacuees aren’t the only ones who that are mysteriously dying in Japan.
    (Translated) Within 10 km of primary Fukushima / fate of the cows cry Many cattle are dying.

    wikipedia 4/28/2011: Reported death(s) None: src

    Q+A: How does Fukushima differ from Chernobyl? Apr 12, 2011 · At Fukushima, there have been no deaths so far due to radiation. Eight people have been injured. src

    Battle to stabilise earthquake reactors 12 March 2011 World Nuclear News
    A seriously injured worker was trapped within Fukushima Daiichi unit 1 in the crane operating console of the exhaust stack and is now confirmed to have died. Four workers were injured by the explosion at the same reactor and have been taken to hospital. A contractor was found unconscious and taken to hospital. Two workers of a 'cooperative firm' were injured, said Tepco; one with a broken bone. A Tepco employee who was unable to stand and grasping his left chest was taken to hospital

    The tsunami kills two TEPCO workers in the basement of Reactor No. 4.

    found later Not clear if these are confused with or different from the two who were missing the turbine building after the explosion and fire in reactor 4 spent fuel pool.

    14 elderly are reported to have died during or after transport from the nuclear evacuation area, these are really victims of the nuclear crisis as well.

    Only two confirmed deaths by April? Japan Nuclear Plant: 2 Missing Fukushima Workers Found Dead RYAN NAKASHIMA and MARI YAMAGUCHI 04/ 2/11 11:55 PM ET

    The men sustained multiple external injuries and are believed to have died from blood loss, Tsunoda said. Their bodies had to be decontaminated. The two workers – a 21-year-old and a 24-year-old – had been missing since a massive March 11 earthquake spawned the wave, but their bodies were discovered only last week

    Bodies found as nuclear plant leak poisons ocean Rick Wallace, Tokyo Correspondent From: The Australian April 04, 201
    The Tokyo Electric Power Company said the two workers, missing since the March 11 earthquake and tsunami, were found floating in water in the basement of the turbine building in reactor No 4.



    (no confirmed deaths?)

    Situation of the injured (As of 22:00 March 18th)

    1. Injury due to earthquake

    - Two employees (slightly)

    - Two subcontract employees (one fracture in both legs)

    - Two missing (TEPCO’s employee, missing in the turbine building of Unit


    - One emergency patient (According to the local prefecture, one patient of

    cerebral infarction was transported by the ambulance).

    - Ambulance was requested for one employee complaining the pain at left

    chest outside of control area (conscious).

    - Two employees complaining discomfort wearing full-face mask in the

    main control room were transported to the industrial doctor of

    Fukushima Dai-ni NPS.

    2. Injury due to the explosion of Unit 1 of Fukushima Dai-ichi NPS

    - Four employees were injured at the explosion and smoke of Unit 1

    around turbine building (out of control area) and were examined by

    Kawauchi clinic.

    3. Injury due to the explosion of Unit 3 of Fukushima Dai-ichi NPS

    - Four TEPCO’s employees

    - Three subcontractor employees17

    - Four members of Self-Defence Force (one of them was transported to

    National Institute of Radiological Sciences considering internal possible

    exposure. The examination resulted in no internal exposure. The

    member was discharged from the institute on March 16th.)

    4. Other injuries

    - A person  who  visited the climic in Fukushima Dai-ni NPS from  a

    transformer sub-station, claiming of a stomachache, was transformed to

    a clinic in Iwaki city, because the person was not contaminated.


    “How many killed? How about a big fat zero?” Sere NYC April 19th, 2011 Man it was precious and made my (too early) morning to read someone above saying "Fukushima a zillion times worse than the Gulf!" …  And how many people has the "calamity" at Fukushima killed so far? A million? ten million? how about a big fat zero.


    <hr size=2 width="100%" align=center>

    ·  Containment Damage

    Concrete Debris

    Radioactive debris at Fukushima plant An arrow shows a concrete fragment (just a tiny hand sized piece) q with radiation measurements of 950 millisieverts per hour in a location west of the building housing the No. 3 reactor of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station in Fukushima Prefecture in this handout photo taken on June 4, 2011. (Kyodo)



    ·        Battle of Chernobyl Discovery 90min | transcript

    ·        Seconds From Disaster - S01E07 - Meltdown In Chernobyl "minimum 26 control rods, removes all but 6 rods" also reduced water to the reactor

    ·        Disaster at Chernobyl Discovery | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 6

    %%Statistics Chernobyl & the marine environment: The radiological impact in context The total activity of the nuclear debris released was so high (1-2.10^18 becquerel) that the radioactive fallout distributed widely after the accident actually dominated anthropogenic environmental levels in various parts of the world. Chernobyl's legacy: no likely return to normality and a never-ending bill Guardian 26 April 2011

    ·        Ukraine and Belarus have had to spend more than $12bn (£7.3bn) each on Chernobyl measures so far.

    ·        More than five million people lived in the 200,000 sq km of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia that were classified as "contaminated", and more than 330,000 people were moved.

    ·        High contamination levels are still found in reindeer in Scandinavia and more than 300 hill farms in Wales still have to have their milk and animals tested before sale

    ·        Germany paid out $555,000 in 2009 to hunters in compensation for wild boar meat that was too contaminated to be sold. In some areas this is more than 7,000 becquerel per kilogram, compared to the 600 bequerels which is considered safe.

    @@Conspiracy Theory

    Anonymous said...,7340,L-3853864,00.html (Israeli
    News Article - 02/24/2010 - Japan offers to enrich uranium for Iran)

    (Israel proud of their invention, the Stuxnet virus - Feb 16, 2011)
 (Jerusalem Post,
    March 15 2011 - They admit to having remote access to security cameras
    that an Israeli security firm installed last year.)
    Google Kobe (7.2 magnitutde) earthquake images and then watch a video
    of the 03/11 tsunami hitting the mainland. Virtually no earthquake
    damage for a 9.0 earthquake. It was measured as a 5.9-6.7 by multiple
    seismic detectors in the Miyagi prefecture, 5.9 being the closest to
    the epicenter of the "9.0" quake.
    I recommend this link if you want more detailed information:
    JUNE 5, 2011 10:07 AM

    @@Containment Damage

    Summary: Containments developed holes after meltdowns in Fukushima but also at other plants

    Arnie Gunderson on containment leakage | Transcript and supporting docs

    ·        Beaver Valley hole in side of containment.

    ·        Fitzpatrick crack in the side of the containment

    ·        Millstone - smallest containment for power 4:01

    @@Cooling failure

    Summary: All emergency cooling systems failed except for using fire trucks to pump in water

    Fukushima Reactor Must Be Shut Down, Core Cooled from cnn comment "the cooling system had failed at three of the four such units of the Daini plant." comment by someone named jjj4591. It is the explanation of a licensed senior reactor operator/control room supervisor on a boiling water reactor (BWR) similar to the Fukushima plant I’ve worked in the US nuclear industry for 30+ years and for 18 years I was a licensed senior reactor operator/control room supervisor on a boiling water reactor (BWR) similar to the Fukushima plant.

    Based on limited information, this is what I think might happen:

    ·         Earthquake hits, high vibration on the main turbine automatically trips the turbine by rapidly closing stop valves.

    ·         Reactor automatically shuts down (scrams) all rods go in. This happened as designed. No need to inject "poison" to stop reaction.

    ·         Earthquake disrupts off site power to the plant and back up diesel generators should have started, maybe they did not. yes they did start, stopped when fuel tanks washed away

    ·         Main sources of water to the reactor are not available. Normal source is water condensed from steam sent to turbines, but this is cut off by earthquake shut down

    ·         If there is no pipe break off of the reactor, the pressure will slowly increase. Not know if any pipes were broken, possible

    ·         After about an hour, a relief valve(1 of about 10) will open at about 1100 psig and drop pressure to about 1080. but pressure increased to 2X design pressure

    ·         The steam is sent to a pool of water called a suppression pool in the containment that condenses the steam. This valve will cycle open and close every 5-10 minutes.not clear if this ever happened

    ·         Operators would use a small steam driven turbine (RCIC) to supply water at high pressure to the reactor under these circumstances for several hours. You can sit like this a long time, hot and at 1000 psig it’s no big deal as long as water covers the fuel in the reactor pressure vessel.

    ·         If that turbine is not available, there is a larger steam driven turbine (HPCI) that supplies more water meant to provide make up if there was a pipe break.

    ·         If neither of these systems is available, the relief valve will continue to cycle and reactor water level will slowly drop.

    ·         At some point before the water level lowers to the point of uncovering the fuel, all the relief valves would be open (ADS) and pressure would be reduced to below 300 psig to allow the low pressure but high flow systems (CS & LPCI) to restore water level and cooling.

    ·         These pumps however, need electricity, like from the diesel generators, to run. no generators were working after shut down until the next morning, after things were melting down

    ·         If things get this far but there is no injection, in US plants there are things like diesel fire pumps that can be tied in to provide alternate sources of water. I’m not sure if they are set up to do this in Japan. The Japanese also used fire engines to inject sea water as a last desperate measure

    ·         Without cooling, eventually the fuel temperature will exceed 2200 deg F and the clad will melt. Fission products that are highly radioactive will get dispersed into the reactor vessel. If there is a pipe break or relief valve open, those fission fragments get dispersed through containment.

    The USNRC has some technical info on this link for those of you that wish to know more.



    Summary: Criticality refers to there being conditions that will start or end a chain reaction. When a nuclear chain reaction in a mass of fissile material is self-sustaining, the mass is said to be in a critical state in which there is no increase or decrease in power, temperature or neutron population. Subcritical is less, supercritical is more.

    Some have speculated that after the reactors were shut down, some of them or the storage ponds went critical again

    DRAINS 1 AND 3 OK, BUT 2 AND 4 INDICATE FISSION 1-2 WEEKS AFTER Chain Reactions Reignited At Fukushima After Tsunami, Says New Study kfc 05/09/2011 ratios from drains at reactors 1 and 3 at Fukushima are consistent with the nuclear reactions having terminated at the time of the earthquake. However, the data from the drain near reactor 2 and from the cooling pond at reactor 4, where spent fuel rods are stored, indicate that the reactions must have been burning much later. "The data of the water samples from the unit-4 cooling pool and from the sub-drain near the unit-2 reactor show anomaly which may indicate, if they are correct, that some of these ?ssion products were produced by chain nuclear reactions reignited after the earthquake," he says. These chain reactions must have occurred a significant time after the accident. "It would be di?cult to understand the observed anomaly near the unit-2 reactor without assuming that a signi?cant amount of ?ssion products were produced at least 10 - 15 days after X-day," says Matsui.

    @@Damage Unit 1


    @@Damage Unit 2


    @@Damage Unit 3

    ·        < href="">Steam kettle is claimed to be reactor well, but it's gate to dry equipment pool goddardsjournal


    ·        @z0nt21 I meant to say NW, not SW. My bad. There's no sign of a "split open" reactor well, and that's not smoke.

    ·        Regarding alleged implosion at building 3 The photographic evidence shows that the blow out panels were blasted outward with great force, the roof was blown upward and off the building, and something heavy fell on the northwest corner of Bldg. 3 after the initial explosion. I have seen no compelling photographic evidence to the contrary.

    It's rather likely that water is leaking through the barrier onto the *drywell head* (that's the yellow dome).

    SuperAhmed13373 weeks ago

    Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description:

    o    Share

    o    Remove

    o    Flag for spam

    o    Block User

    o    Unblock User

    ·        @SuperAhmed1337 PCV yellow dome is stored in the NW, not SW part of the building - at least in Units 2 through 4 it is.

    At 0:30 you can see the reactor well split open along with SFP at the bottom with BOTH of them smokin', camera is facing North, and East is to our right, towards the ocean.

    z0nt213 weeks ago


    ·        @z0nt21 What you're describing as "confirmed" is heavily disputed. The loading crane is still visible in the center of the building, above the drywell. Why #3 exploded differently is a riddle (not as much as #4). The sources for steam/smoke aren't very reliable. Under stress, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Regarding telemetry etc, sensors can fail when pushed to hard. A blown off drywell would result in a much hotter picture for a thermal camera, too.

    SuperAhmed13373 weeks ago

    ·        @SuperAhmed1337 There's been confirmation via all the telemetry, not to mention thermal & optical imagery that is available, that at the veeery least the PCV dome is absent with and the concrete plugs not in their intended location, and are tilted like an over-sized coin in a cylinder.

    Smoke from reactor 3, along with steam has been documented on footage throughout the weeks, confirmed by TEPCO's actions to evacuate personnel prior to every (uncontrolled) radiation release from Unit 3.

    z0nt213 weeks ago

    ·        @exoplanet11 At 1:28 you can see the south-west corner of reactor building nr 1. Technically, there's not much of relevance there. Normally, you would store the drywell head there when the reactor is open for maintenance (as it is in reactor nr 4, the yellow dome). The spent fuel pool of reactor nr 3 is the pond-like thing you can see at around 0:30 and following, yes. A lot of debris in it, but also a lot of water.

    SuperAhmed13373 weeks ago

    Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description:



    @@Damage Unit 4



    @@Damaged Containment

    Summary: Containment reactor vessels may be damaged in units 1, 2, and 3, all active reactors

    TEPCO has been unable to verify the water levels at the No. 2 and No. 3 reactors, and suspect that water is leaking from the damaged containment vessels.












    ·  Deaths


    Summary: Overall, still pretty safe in terms of deaths per power produced

    Michael Mann
    Nuclear power is STILL the safest way to produce electrical power in the USA


    inside the Drone Missions to Fukushima Inside the Drone Missions to Fukushima By Alexis Madrigal Apr 28 2011, 10:02 AM ET2 The Honeywell T-Hawk, an 18-pound flying machine, was used to explore the disaster site at Japan's devastated nuclear power plant

    @@Dry Cask Storage

    The Dry Cask Storage system for spent nuclear fuel is a safer alternative to water filled pools which can ignite only hours after losing water. Warm fuel rods are put into concrete and steel casks which use natural air circulation without need for water which can boil way or pumps which can fail.


    ·         Dry cask storage


    Fukushima warning: US has 'utterly failed' to address risk of spent fuel By Mark Clayton Christian Science Monitor March 30, 2011 The NAS report found that another method of storing spent fuel, called "dry cask" storage, did not require on complex power systems. Dry-cask storage involves putting older spent fuel into concrete- and steel-lined cylinders to allow natural air circulation for cooling. Dividing up spent fuel among a large number of such cylinders also makes "it more difficult to attack a large amount of spent fuel at one time" and also reduces "the consequences of such [terrorist] attacks," the report found







    Radiation map identifies clearing near unit 1 as "elephant", that is also location of the remote controlled excavator, likely named for the long excavator arm. The concrete pump is nicknamed "giraffe".


    80,000 forced to evacuate nuclear crisis vs 90,000 for tsunami

    "Radiation fears have forced more than 80,000 people to evacuate their homes around the plant. Many more people have had to leave their homes along the northeast coast because of tsunami damage. Three months after the disasters, 90,000 are still living in temporary shelters such as school gyms and community centers." Thousands of Japanese march against N-power By JAY ALABASTER The Associated Press


    Fukushima Unit 3 ? Two Theories - ??????3?? GoddardsJournal Unit 1 has steel upper walls. 3 and 4 are concrete. Theory 2 did explosion reflect back into pool. Detonation goes up. Chernobyl may have been prompt criticsal

    Fukushima ? Nuclear Blast? GoddardsJournal Compared to small nuclear cloud, and difference in clouds 1 vs 3.

    Unit 3 explosion analysis slow motion


    ·          Human Hubris Fuels Nuclear Catastrophe BY THE OUTPOST – MARCH 18, 2011 BWR core shroud cracking (NUREG-1544), reactor pressure vessel cracking (NUREG-1511), embrittled components and aging (NUREG/CR-5939), cooling system failures (NUREG/CR-6087), reactor containment isolation systems failures (NUREG/CR-6339) — all thoroughly documented. Ditto for the Pressurized Water Reactors, a Westinghouse Corporation specialty. PWRs are equally frightening boondogles with cracking steam generators (NUREG/CR-5117). The redundancy and ever-touted ‘defense-in-depth’ systems failed at Fukushima. All over the U.S. such systems have been routinely disabled to minimize electricity-generating outages, increase output power and maximize corporate profits.

    Amongst the most troubling and most deeply underplayed questions of the entire crisis concern the Fukushima Spent Fuel Pools. These basin are packed with tons of irradiated fuel rods that need to be cooled. One of the major postulated accident scenarios involves a Loss-of-Coolant Accident (LOCA) to the reactor core, but a LOCA event can also occur with a spent fuel pool. It has. Fires and explosions in Japan. The Spent Fuel Pools at the six Fukushima reactors are NOT inside primary containment. They are exposed. Burning. About to burn.






    ·  Arnie Gunderson

    ·  Flood


    Summary: Reactors are supposedly built to 500 year flood standards, but sites like Ft Calhoun basically have only a sandbag plan

    NF: "The 100 and 500 year flood thing is out the window. Grand Forks and Fargo ND both had flooding over their IIRC 100 year and the big one in GF about 10 years ago was a 500 year, but they have had bad flooding like that before."

    Wikipedia 100 year flood

    Q: WHAT IS THE "500-YEAR FLOOD"? A: The 500-year flood, like the 100-year flood is misleading. The 500-year flood is not the flood that will occur every 500 years, instead, it is the flood that has a .2% chance of occurring each year. The 500-year flood, which is the standard used by most Federal and state agencies, is used by the National Flood Insurance Program as the standard for floodplain management and to determine the need for flood insurance.

    4-28-2011: It's more like a 500 year flood Gene Rench with the National Weather Service said all eyes are on the Mississippi... Right now the Mississippi river is in the process of going through what we call an epic flood, meaning it's more than historic, it's more than a 100 year flood, it's more like a 500 year flood," he said.

    Two 500-Year Floods Within 15 Years: What are the Odds? Released: 6/20/2008 The term "500-year flood" has been used to describe the recent flooding in the Midwest. Midwesterners who experienced the Great Flood of 1993 – said to be a 500-year flood at the time – can hardly be faulted for thinking they were off the hook for seeing that designation again for, say, a few hundred years. "The term ‘500-year flood' can be a little misleading,"

    @@Arnie Gunderson


    Summary: Anti-nuclear activist / safety expert. He was a former nuclear industry executive in the 80s who has coordinated projects at 70 nuclear power plants around the country. He was fired in 1990 when he came forward as a whistleblower.

    He's made statments that Fukushima may be worse than Chernobyl, that the #3 explosion was probably a prompt-critical chain reaction, not just hydrogen. He's one of a handful of anti-nuclear experts being quoted by the conspiracy press like Russia Today. He makes some perceptive and reasonable statements, but hangs out with a Democracy Now crowd that is pro-Islamist and anti-Israel, and prone to sympathizing with 9-11 truth movement.

    June 12th, 2007 What Arnie Gundersen Says About Yankee Eventually Becomes Truth About Yankee On the Vermont Yankee issue, I got religion in the North and I got religion in the South: Arnie Gundersen, my neighbor in Burlington’s New North End, and Steve West and Gorty Baldwin, WKVT radio hosts in Brattleboro, all began schooling me in the issues and the various dangers.... Arnie was an executive in the nuclear industry, back in the late ’80’s, but in 1990 he came forward as a whistleblower and was fired the same year. Over the next several years, his case got a great deal of attention, and he testified before Congress during hearings on ways to protect whistleblowers. Fast-forward to 2007. Arnie is now a prominent nuclear safety expert witness.

    his number one worry was Steam Dryer cracking. Cracking directly due to the increase in output. Which rang a bell when I read last week’s Rutland Herald. The piece was slugged, “State Concerned about Cracks at Vermont Yankee.”

    1) Arnie Gundersen knows from whence he speaks. He is not some crank with an irrational fear of nuclear energy. Rather, he is a highly skilled watchdog, whose views the State should begin actively soliciting rather than fighting or disparaging.

    2) Rather than discussing the merits of a windfall profits tax on Yankee, we should be openly debating its closure


    YouTube - Nuclear safety inspector Arnie … A public forum on the future of Vermont Yankee, which will complete its designed lifetime in 2012. The owners of the plant are asking to extend the license a full 20 ... March 15, 2011
    “This Could Become Chernobyl on Steroids”: Nuclear Engineer Arnie Gundersen on Japan’s Growing Nuclear CrisisThe blast seriously damaged the plant’s Number Two reactor’s steel containment structure, causing nearby radiation levels to rise to 100 times the legal limit for exposure in a year. Plant workers “were manually opening valves into these containments to keep the pressure from building up,” says our guest Arnie Gundersen, a nuclear engineer. “I would suspect that a lot of those efforts have been abandoned because of the high radiation levels.”

    SHARIF ABDEL KOUDDOUS: Japan is on the verge of a nuclear catastrophe after a third explosion at the nuclear reactor most damaged by Friday’s 9.0-magnitude earthquake and tsunami

    The most telling issue, as far as I’m concerned, is that the site has been evacuated. There was 800 people on the site, and then they evacuated all but 60 people. That’s basically telling the crew to man the lifeboats.

    In the fourth unit, there is—there was a fire in the fuel pool. And I have heard unconfirmed reports that it has started back up again. In the fifth and six units, the fuel pools are getting warmer.

    So, basically, three units are in meltdown condition. One is definitely worse than the other two. But, you know, "meltdown" and "worse" are relative terms. It’s very bad in three units. The fire in the fourth unit is also a serious concern.

    the New York Times is reporting that workers are picking up in seven minutes their yearly exposure in certain areas within the plant.

    if you’ve let 800 people go and are trying to do the work of 800 with 60 people, clearly critical items are not going to be accomplished.

    It’s almost identical to 23 of them. For instance, the Quad Cities and the Dresden plant in Illinois, the Vermont Yankee plant here in Vermont, Oyster Creek in New Jersey, Pilgrim in Massachusetts—it’s almost identical to those and more than a dozen others. You know, this reactor design, this containment design, has been questioned since 1972. The NRC in 1972 said we never should have licensed this containment. And in 1985, the NRC said they thought it was about a 90 percent chance that in a severe accident this containment would fail. So, that we’re seeing it at Fukushima is an indication that this is a weak link. It’s this Mark I, General Electric Mark I, containment. And we have—essentially one-quarter of all of the nuclear reactors in the United States, 23 out of 104, are of this identical design.

    Last year, state legislators voted to close the plant when its license expires next year. The 38-year-old plant is one of the oldest in the country and has had a series of leaks.

    must reexamine our policy of irrational exuberance when it comes to extending the lives of aging nuclear power plants—we have 103 in America—that were designed to be shut down after 40 years. Ours was designed be shut down in 2012.

    ARNIE GUNDERSEN: This is certainly right now bumping up against the magnitude of Chernobyl. It’s clearly passed what happened at Three Mile Island. And it’s not clear that this situation may not get worse, not better. You know, Chernobyl was one reactor. There are three in either partial meltdown or meltdown. And then the other one has a fuel pool fire. And I understand this morning that the temperatures in the other two fuel pools are also increasing. So, you know, I’ve said before that this could easily become Chernobyl on steroids. It’s not there yet, but given that the essential personnel have been evacuated, it could easily get there within 24 hours. When plutonium volatilizes, when it gets hot and turns to a vapor, it can be breathed in. And, of course, it’s very—it can cause cancer in lungs very, very easily. And the containments, which are designed to contain this plutonium, are—have failed, at least in Unit Two. I believe in Unit One and Three, they are leaking, but they probably haven’t failed. So, it is likely that volatile plutonium is being released right now

    So, it’s a little bit too early to determine what the health effects are on the United States. But it’s clear to me we will detect it. Within about five to seven days, the plume will hit the West Coast, and we’ll begin to detect the radiation. Democracy Now! bids a fond farewell to Sharif Abdel Kouddous, our senior news producer for the past eight years. Kouddous joined Democracy Now! in 2003 just as the United States invaded Iraq. He was soon covering Iraq then returned to produce the daily show, traveling to New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, to the climate change conferences in Copenhagen, Bolivia and Cancun, and together with Amy Goodman to Haiti to cover the return of former Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide just weeks ago. During the popular uprising in Egypt, Kouddous became the eyes and ears of CairosTahrir Square as he reported throughout the uprising. Kouddous is heading home to Egypt and will continue his work reporting as a Democracy Now! correspondent."

    this guy is favorited by a palestine blog, and supports the "pro-democracy" movement in Egypt where he is from (canadian socialist paper)Amy Goodman was arrested [, detained, and charged with conspiracy to riot.] along with Democracy Now! producers Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Nicole Salazar at the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minnesota. They were among 19 journalists arrested at the RNC, of an estimated total of over 800 arrests.,kWfFy4H8HQ6E
    America's unending war against Iraq SHARIF ABDEL KOUDDOUS: And Joy






    @@Hot Particle

    Fairewinds on hot particles Hot particles are hard to detect, 10-20 per day in Tokyo, 5 per day in Seattle, 30-40 times that in Fukushima

    @@Hydrogen explosion p. 17
    Estimated masses hydrogen
    Unit 1: 300-600kg
    Unit 2/3: 300-1000kg = 2000 lb
    Goodyear blimp gross weight = 12,840 pounds

    U.S. Experts Blame Fukushima 1 Explosions and Radiation on Failed Venting System By PETER BEHR AND JOHN J. FIALKA The hydrogen explosions that shattered the tops of two reactor buildings at the Fukushima 1 nuclear complex followed the venting of hydrogen and steam by plant operators desperate to prevent a far greater disaster: a high-pressure explosion of the primary reactor containment shell and radioactivity release, a former senior U.S. nuclear official concludes.

    Lake Barrett, who led the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's investigation of the Three Mile Island accident, describes the burning of zirconium cladding on fuel rods in the reactor cores after normal cooling operations failed

    the operators vented the primary containment through the safety venting system trying to reject heat and excess gases up the 100 meter tall stacks at the plants," he wrote. "Normally there are operable fans and filters to control this dangerous mixture, but there was no electrical power for the fans. So most, if not all, of this dangerous mix of hydrogen gas seeped into the reactor building in Units 1 and 3. The hydrogen, being lighter than air, mixed with air in the upper large refueling floor area."

    Braving dangerous conditions, workers had time to remove a wall panel at the top of the unit 2 reactor building providing an exit for hydrogen, avoiding a similar roof-level explosion, he said. The damage to the buildings 1 and 3 and the opening in 2 created an exit route for radioactive releases from the spent fuel pools at the top of the reactor pools

    ....he believed -- based on the still incomplete evidence from Fukushima -- that hydrogen was vented from the primary containment through duct work that allowed the hydrogen to collect in units 1 and 3 in the refueling floor in the secondary containment building. Normally, an exhaust system could have filtered and removed the hydrogen, but it was not working because of the loss of outside electric power. When the hydrogen accumulated above the 8 percent detonation limit in air in units 1 and 3, it exploded.




    See Wikipedia Iodine-131


    Conspiracy theorists use the crisis to attack Israel or further other political agenda.


    MONSTERS LIVE AMONG US By Michael Rivero (MR is anti-zionist 9-11 truther) (pro-Iranian propoganda??) Can you imagine the fear? Maybe you don't have to. Maybe you are old enough to remember Three Mile Island, or Chernobyl. Maybe you're one of the people living where the radiation meters are already singing their songs of death. If you aren't, you soon will be. Three nuclear reactors melted down, and continue to pour radiation into the atmosphere and ocean. Can you feel the horror? There is an invisible killer dancing in the air. Maybe hiding in that rain drop. You cannot know for sure. That metallic taste in your mouth; is it being that scared? Or is it something ... worse?

    What happened by accident at Three-Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima was done intentionally by Israel to the people of Iraq, when Israel bombed the nuclear power plant at Osirik in the erroneous assumption that Iraq was building nuclear weapons. Then Israel did it again in Syria. Thankfully, there were no nuclear weapons at the Iraq or Syrian targets, or the people of Iraq and Syria would have suffered what those people living downwind from Three-Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima (and indeed the whole northern hemisphere) are all suffered. But no doubt, those innocent and unoffending Iraqi and Syrian people knew the fear of wondering whether the silent killer was there in their homes moment to moment, just as you are wondering whether the silent killer is in your home this very moment, even as you read these words. Israel did that to those people; cursed them with that endless dread that lingered for months on end. And now Israel wants to bomb more nuclear facilities in Iran, so that what happened by accident at Three-Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima, will be done deliberately to the people of Iran, who have not invaded or threatened anyone. You cannot know for sure. There is an invisible killer dancing in the air.

    %%Conspiracy theory


    ·          New York Times Before/After

    ·            Pressure Vessel Drawings

    ·             Digital Globe

    ·             TEPCO press release pictures

    ·             High Res on-site pictures by xtcbz

    ·             Description: Description: Description:

    ·             Photo tour before accident

    ·             flickr collection


    Summary: Study says cost of nuclear cleanup is equal to all nuclear power profits since 1970

    38 years of nuke profit up in smoke? Kyodo Tokyo Electric Power Co. faces a potential damages bill exceeding its profits from nuclear power generation over a 38-year period beginning in 1970, the year it opened the crisis-hit Fukushima No. 1 plant, according to a recent study....Tepco in that time earned just less than ¥4 trillion, possibly equal to or less than the amount it must pay farmers, fishermen, evacuees and others affected by the nuclear crisis...Kenichi Oshima, an environmental economist and professor at Kyoto-based Ritsumeikan University

    @@Prompt criticality

    Prompt Criticality - Definition (wikipedia) In nuclear engineering, an assembly is prompt critical if for each nuclear fission event, one or more of the immediate or prompt neutrons released causes an additional fission event. This causes a rapidly exponential increase in the number of fission events, and an explosion. An assembly can be supercritical without being prompt critical. Prompt criticality must be avoided in the operation of a nuclear reactor, and reactors are designed to make it as unlikely as possible that it will occur. Only two reactor accidents are suspected of having achieved prompt criticality, those of Chernobyl #4 and SL-1, and in both cases there is doubt, although in both the uncontrolled surge in power was sufficient to cause an explosion that destroyed the reactor.

    Fukushima And The Plutonium Mystery 
    By Mary Hamer, M.D
    13 April, 2011 *WORSE THAN CHERNOBYL: The Rad Rider, a Scientist states regarding the Reactor #3 explosion of 3/14/11: *“ Study the close up views of the #3 reactor explosion and you will see that the blast was not the type of explosion one would expect from the ignition of hydrogen. The fireball seen in the corner of the plant may have been due to hydrogen but it was much too small to cause the main blast *NUCLEAR FRAGMENTS BLOWN UP to ONE MILE AWAY: Also, regarding the “Fragments or particles of nuclear fuel” that were “Blown ‘Up to one mile from the units' (that) contained highly radioactive material” & that were “Bulldozed over” (18) – Did any of this nuclear debris contain Plutonium? & If plutonium was found in this ejected material, then did it have an isotope signature more consistent with a Reactor #3 Mox core explosion or a Unit #4 spent fuel rod explosion/fire? The Rad Rider states: “Plutonium contamination is being reported as far as a mile away from the plant but it is being attributed to spent fuel.” (19)

    *Question: Have TEPCO & the Japanese Fukushima nuclear power plant abided by the ICRP's plutonium contamination standards regarding the March 14 th Reactor #3 explosion? i.e. Was 1 mg or less of plutonium released during the Unit #3 explosion on 3/14/11 ? – Or during any other major event at the Fukushima nuclear accident?

    See march 14 - world's dirtiest hydrogen explosion
    from: comment by The Rad RiderMarch 29th 06:36am later quoted across internet: Study the close up views of the 3 reactor explosion and you will see that the blast was not the type of explosion one would expect from the ignition of hydrogen. The fireball seen in the corner of the plant may have been due to hydrogen but it was much too small to cause the main blast. Not only that, inspection reveals that this was a directional blast. Much as if a cannon had been fired straight up from inside the reactor building. This is what one would expect if the reactor dome exploded with enough force to take out the removable concrete pads covering it. Injecting sea water into the molten core caused an immediate explosion of steam. If the temperature of the reactor vessel had reached critical temperature, it would not have had the integrity required to withstand this dramatic increase in pressure. If my assessment is correct, the dark colored cloud we witnessed, that was shot approximately 1,000 feet into the air, contained the MOX core and made this accident worse than Chernobyl from: >


    The next time the explosion at the Fukushima I reactor number one building is shown, look closely at the video. You will see a shock wave traveling upward just before the rest of the smoke and clouds appear. Based on this, it appears that what happened was that hydrogen gas released by the venting process had gathered at the top of the containment building. Since there is air in the containment building, there also is oxygen present. With both hydrogen and oxygen present, one has an explosive mixture which needs only a spark to set it off, and that is what appears to have happened. It looks as though it was a hydrogen explosion. This does normally not happen inside the coolant system because that is a sealed system with no air present, but once that gas is vented to the containment building, it will tend to collect in the upper part of the building, and an explosion can result. (Look at the later pictures of the reactor one containment building and you will see panels form the upper half of the building have been blown off.)
    Now there has also been an explosion at Fukushima I Reactor Three, and it appears this, too, was due to hydrogen accumulating in the containment building.
    There will likely be subsequent similar explosions as steam and hydrogen continue to be vented from the damaged reactors.
    Why this is not Chernobyl: Too many have cited the Chernobyl Reactor Four explosion and have compared the conditions there with those at the Fukushima nuclear power plants. Bad comparison.
    First of all, the two reactors are considerably different construction and operation. The Chernobyl plant used four Soviet RBMK-1000 reactors, which are graphite pile reactors rather than the sealed boiling water reactors as used at the Fukushima plants. The Chernobyl reactors had a badly flawed design, which allowed the reactors to reach prompt criticality (uncontrollable criticality) when the control rods were inserted during a scram. Prompt criticality is akin to what happens in a nuclear weapon. Modern Western reactor design, such as used at Fukushima I and II, should not allow prompt criticality.
    Secondly, the Chernobyl reactor was in operation at the time of the accident (I am sparing you some very pertinent technical details here), whereas the Fukushima reactors had been shut down automatically. This means that fission was continuing at Chernobyl, whereas the controlled fission reaction had stopped at Fukushima.
    Thirdly, when the Chernobyl reactor was scrammed (control rods inserted rapidly), the flawed reactor design caused prompt criticality, with an estimated power surge of at least 1700 percent power (17 times rated power) in the reactor core. This means that in the center of the reactor core at Chernobyl nuclear power had reached levels well exceeding design power levels. No power surge at all has been reported in the Fukushima reactors.
    Finally, the initial explosion at Chernobyl was a steam explosion, caused by the power surge. This was like a boiler explosion. It is likely the subsequent explosion at Chernobyl may have been from a hydrogen buildup. In any event, it was not a nuclear explosion. The explosions expelled about half the core material into the surrounding countryside. No such explosion, or sequence of events leading to an explosion, is being contemplated at the Fukushima I and II plants.

    Core Meltdown:

    This sometimes is called the China Syndrome, from the fear that if the core melts, nuclear fission will continue unchecked and the core will melt its was down into the Earth with catastrophic results. Of course, the core could never actually reach China simply because the gravitational pull from the Earth at the center of the Earth is zero. In addition, as soon as the core reached the molten mantle it would no longer be in one place. And it is not even going to reach the mantle. Great science fiction, though! ;-)
    First, what is all this about "core meltdown?"
    If the decay heat cannot be removed from the reactor core, the core can overheat, causing damage to the fuel elements in the core. The nuclear fuel in a reactor is contained in fuel elements, which can take any of several forms. If the form is cylindrical, these are often called fuel rods. Basically, the uranium fuel is contained in a metal casing. The purpose of the casing (in some cases called fuel cladding) is to contain the radioactive fission products and decay products and keep them from being released into the coolant.
    When the reactor core overheats, the fuel elements can be damaged. The first way this can occur is by warping of the elements, and thus possible opening of the seams in the fuel elements. If the heating continues, localized melting of the fuel elements may occur, along with release of fuel and fission products from the fuel element. Finally, in the final stages complete melting is possible, but not as likely.
    So, what is going on at Fukushima? Most likely the fuel elements have been compromised. Such core damage cannot be corrected, only contained. The evidence for this is the detection of small amounts of Iodine (I-129 and I-131) and Cesium 137 (Ce-137). These are fission products, and their detection outside the plant would seem to indicate that fuel element damage has occurred. The amount of damage is unknown yet, but clearly some fission products have been released.
    Does this indicate a complete "core meltdown?"
    No, it does not. It does indicate that there has been some core damage however. Furthermore, it seems as though, given the low levels being reported, the fission products most likely were released during venting (see section above on venting).
    Furthermore, the levels being reported do not yet indicate the primary coolant system has been breached.

    The Future:

    It is not possible yet to foresee how the nuclear accidents at Fukushima I and II will progress. It seems certain that Reactors One and Three will not be placed back in service very quickly, if at all. At the very least it seems likely the current cores will have to be replaced in Reactor One, and possibly in Reactor Three as well. That will take time. Furthermore, the Reactor One containment building will have to be rebuilt. It is quite possible that the reactor may have been damaged beyond repair.
    The status, and thus the future, of Reactor Three is less clear.
    In addition, it seems quite likely the existing safety systems will be reviewed extensively. In particular, the reasons for the failure of back-up safety systems need to be determined, the systems need to be redesigned, and possibly upgraded or added to, in order to preclude a recurrence and to enhance reliability.
    Clearly natural circulation reactors, plants in which the reactor coolant is circulated as the result of being heated, with no circulation pumps required, offer a good solution to the problem of coolant circulation under emergency conditions.
    Criticality: This term refers to the ability of a mass of fissile material to sustain a nuclear chain reaction. If the mass is:
    Ø Subcritical, the nuclear chain reaction cannot be sustained and will die off.
    Ø Critical, the nuclear chain reaction is sustained, with power neither increasing nor decreasing.
    Ø Supercritical, the nuclear chain reaction is increasing, with power increasing.
    Ø Prompt critical, the nuclear chain reaction is increasing out of control.
    The critical mass of U-235 is about 52 kilograms, or a sphere about 17 centimeters (6.7 inches in diameter. For reactor fuel at 20% enrichment (20% U-235 and 80% U-238), the critical mass is closer to 400 kg.

    ·  4/25: Arnie Gunderson Chief Nuclear Engineer Fairewinds Associates said that what occurred in reactor 3 (one loaded with plutonium!) Was a nuclear explosion, not just hydrogen! Nuclear expert discusses explanations for the much larger explosion at Fukushima Unit 3, compared to the other units. Also, how unit 3 blew large pieces of fuel rods from the fuel pool over two miles and aerosolized plutonium as far as New England.

    More and more evidence points to our own assessments about the Fukushima nuclear plants being far more accurate than the official story line. Now they are finally admitting leaks in 3 of the reactors, they are admitting that the number 4 fuel pool is leaking, and now experts are considering the possibility that the number 3 explosion wasn’t just hydrogen, but that it also had a nuclear impetus that spread the number 3 fuel pool fuel all over the planet…

    Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description:

    Studying the videos of the two reactor explosions at Fukushima in Japan, one can see that the destruction of reactor no. 3 (above) was far more violent than the earlier wreck of reactor no. 1. (The explosion of reactor no. 4 apparently happened at night, undetected by any camera.) What happened?

    Retired nuclear power exec Arnie Gunderson theorizes that the spent fuel pool in no. 3 may have undergone a "prompt criticality" -- instantaneous, uncontrolled nuclear fission -- that blew it sky high. His thoughtful video on the topic is here.

      Gundersen Postulates Unit 3 Explosion May Have Been Prompt Criticality in Fuel Pool from Fairewinds Associates on Vimeo.

    Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description:
    Dimensions of the blast, based on landmarks, yup about 1000 ft high mushroom cloud

    ·          unit 3 much bigger than 1.

    ·          detonation vs deflgration

    ·          1 much more "leisurely"

    ·          3 much more massive

    ·          large energy straight up that is not in unit 1

    ·          clear in unit 3 there is

    ·          bright yellow flash, another important clue

    ·          pieces of nuclear fuel rods were discovered up to 2 miles from the plant

    ·          unit 4 fuel rods are intact. Unlikely thrown from the pool, so fuel had to come from unit 3.

    ·          Uranium found in Hawaii in West coast

    ·          Americium found in New England - transuranics.

    ·          Nuclear fueld was volitalizd

    ·          Large portion of building is missing on south side, heat source still on south side

    ·          the containment itself remains intact

    ·          building blown to smithereens

    ·          belive fuel pool container was empty

    ·          filled with gases blew upward

    ·          explosion from inside fuel pool

    ·          Fuel pool like muzzle of a gun, blew upward

    ·          a lot of rubble coming down - pieces of uranium and plutonuium

    ·          explains miles off site

    ·          blackness of cloud volitized the fuel

    ·          what caused the force

    ·          hydrogen makes water, travels at speed of sound

    ·          dramatic but not explosive

    ·          magnitude of plume

    ·          has to be something more here

    ·          hydrogen starts shock wave which moves fuel in the pool

    ·          distortion creates prompt prompt nuclear reaction which blows up way to test for this isotopes

    ·          The comparative videos of "blasts," at each, #1 vs #3
    ·          Detonation vs deflagation (really interesting point about the rates of shock wave travel and what results from each)
    ·          Upward vector of "blast," at #3 vs the milder smaller gray-smoked event at #1.
    ·          The fact that traces of uranium isotopes were found as far away as 2 kilometers following #3's blast.
    ·          The comparative videos of "blasts," at each, #1 vs #3
    ·          Detonation vs deflagation (really interesting point about the rates of shock wave travel and what results from each)
    ·          Upward vector of "blast," at #3 vs the milder smaller gray-smoked event at #1.
    ·          The fact that traces of uranium isotopes were found as far away as 2 kilometers following #3's blast.
    ·          The flame visible out of the south end of #3, wherein #1 had no such flame visible also bolsters the detonation vs deflagration analysis.
    ·          Last part of his presentation essentially says we don't have all the evidence of all this yet, but he thinks our government does, as our military was nearby monitoring when #3's blast occured and they no doubt have air samples.The flame visible out of the south end of #3, wherein #1 had no such flame visible also bolsters the detonation vs deflagration analysis.

    ·          Prompt Criticality

    Long story short, the spent fuel pool at reactor #3 actually detonated. Hydrogen was the initial culprit, but Gunderson presents evidence that the initial hydrogen explosion compressed the spent fuel rods of mixed uranium and plutonium enough that they achieved critical mass. That is, enough neutrons shot around in a tight enough space to create an uncontrolled and fast chain reaction. Gunderson called it a “prompt criticality.” The fuel pool walls and open top acted like the barrel of an upturned cannon and shot pieces of fuel rods as much as two miles away.

    “Prompt criticality.” Hmmm.

    As I recall from studying physics and technological history, compressing uranium and plutonium in order to create a critical mass that detonates is the job description of an atomic bomb. That flash and column of smoke we saw on the news at reactor #3 was probably a small, but quite real nuclear blast.



    Summary: At peak, 10,000 terabecquerels of radioactive iodine-131 per hour were release into air for hours. Up to 630,000 terabequerels total were released compared to release from Chernobyl which was 5.2 million terabecquerels (about 1/10).

    Update: Japanese govt said the radiation that leaked into the air amounted to about one-sixth of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in 1986 — double previous estimates. Thousands of Japanese march against N-power By JAY ALABASTER The Associated Press

    One terabecquerel equals 1 trillion becquerels.
    One sievert is equal to 1 Gray or 100 rem
    One millisievert equal to 10 centi-gray or .1 rem
    One miliisievert equal to One millirem = 1/100 millisievert

    Radiation Levels millisieverts

    o     1,120 millisieverts per hour inside No.1 reactor building 4/26

    o     1,000+: per hr pool surface basement of the unit 2 turbine building 4/27

    o     1,000: radiation sickness with nausea and vomiting

    o     250: Japan newly doubled limit for workers for one year

    o     125: Japan's old annual limit for worker exposure

    o     100: per hr outside buildings 4/5

    o     49-57: Levels inside unit 3 building after one month

    o     50: US nuclear industry limit for one year

    o     50: 4/16 helicopter measurements scrubs CH-47 water drop

    o     13.6 millisieverts woman internal radiation

    o     1-10: year background radiation from air and soil.

    o     1: 2 or 3 chest x-ray

    o     1: 2011 Perry Incident "high" levels exposed to workers


    ·          As shown below, radiation at a level that has harmful effects on human health has not been detected at any of the airports in Japan.
    For your reference, according to the World Health Organization (WHO), an average person is exposed to 3,000μSv of radiation dose (2,400μSv from natural environment and 600μSv from medical equipments) each year

    ·         UPDATE: 1000AM 6 May 2011>


    Distance from Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Station

    Measurement Point
    (nearest to each airport)

    Hourly Radiation Dose

    Estimated Annual Exposure (μSv) <Reference>

    Original Website of the Measurement Data



    1. Narita (Tokyo)



    Within the Airport Premises



    Narita International Airport Corporation

    2. Haneda (Tokyo)



    Kawasaki City,
    Kanagawa Pref. 



    Kanagawa Pref.
    (Japanese Only)

    3. Kansai (Osaka)



    Izumisano City,
    Osaka Pref.
    (Hineno High-school)



    Osaka Pref.
    (Japanese Only)

    4. Central Japan



    Nagoya City,
    Aichi Pref.



    Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan (MEXT)

    5. New Chitose (Sapporo)



    Sapporo City,
    Hokkaido Pref.







    Sendai City,
    Miyagi Pref.






    Hiroshima City,
    Hiroshima Pref.




    8. Fukuoka



    Dazaifu City,
    Fukuoka Pref.







    Tamagawa Village,
    Fukushima Pref.



    Fukushima Pref.




    Hokota City,
    Ibaraki Pref.



    Ibaraki Pref.
    (Japanese Only)

    ·          Note that Fukushima would be about double the annual rate, probably not toxic.



    Click here to check the distance and radius of Narita and Haneda Airports from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Station.


    For the latest measurement of radiation doses, please refer to each original website listed above.


    For the estimation purpose, 1 micro-Gray/hour(μGy/hr) is converted into 1 micro-Sievert/hour.(μSv/hr)


    “Estimated Annual Exposure” is the estimation under the hypothetical condition where a person is continuously exposed to the hourly radiation dose at the measurement point for 24 hours, 365 days.


    1 milli-Sievert (mSv) is equal to 1,000 micro-Sievert (μSv).

    ·         Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: 参考:日常生活と放射線

    (Excerpt from Website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan)



    1 sievert = 100 REM (a very serious dose)
     .01 (cinti)sievert = 1 REM (not a serious dose, but should be avoided)
     .001 (milli)sievert = 0.1 REM (not a serious dose)
     .000001 (micro)sievert = 0.0001 REM (not a threat)
     400 milisieverts = 40 REM (a dangerous but not lethal dose)
    Short term readings have reached 400 millisievert, and then dropped.
    So far no radiation in the sievert range has been measured. Radiation
    damage potential is a function of intensity and time.
    three basic types of radiation, gamma (and X-rays), beta and alpha.
    Isotopes that emit beta and alpha particles can only harm you if the
    isotopes themselves enter your body. You skin will shield you from
    them as long as they are external. Only dense metal can protect you
    from gamma and X-rays, however. 

    Articles by date

    o     Business Week April 4-12 2011 "Economic Aftershocks" France Institut de Radioprotection estimated Mar 22 that 90 quadrillion becquerels of iodine 131 was released, 100,000 times Three Mile Island

    o     Q&ampA: Is Fukushima as bad as Chernobyl? By Thair Shaikh, CNN April 13, 2011 Livens says that technically Fukushima is a level-seven incident, although he added that in his opinion Fukushima was a "low-level seven," while Chernobyl was at the upper end of the scale.

    o     Level 1 is an "anomaly," 2 is an "incident," and level 3 is a "serious
    o     incident."
    o     Level 4 is an accident with "local consequences," 5 is an accident
    o     with "wider consequences," 6 is a "serious accident."
    o     Level 7 is: "A major release of radioactive material with widespread
    o     health and environmental effects requiring implementation of planned
    o     and extended countermeasures," according to the IAEA.
    o     32 deaths among plant workers and firefighters, mostly due to
    o     radiation exposure IAEA estimates another 4,000 will or have died of
    o     related cancers.
    o     NISA on Tuesday said they now estimate that the Fukushima plant's
    o     reactors released up to 10,000 terabecquerels of radioactive
    o     iodine-131 per hour into the air for several hours after they were
    o     seriously damaged on March 11.
    o     And they estimate that up to 630,000 terabequerels has been estimated
    o     at the stricken plant which would classify the crisis at level 7. In
    o     comparison the Japanese government said the release from Chernobyl was
    o     5.2 million terabecquerels.
    o     Livens said: "Less radiation has been released and as a vague
    o     calculation it is 5 or 10% of that released at Chernobyl."


    o     Atmospheric radiation leak underestimated The Yomiuri Shimbun April 25, 2011 Iodine-131 and cesium-137 were released into the atmosphere that day at the estimated rates of 0.69 terabecquerel per hour and 0.14 terabecquerel per hour... converted into iodine-131 equivalents arrive at the total 154 terabecquerels per day... [TEPCO] would not start to get radiation leakage under control until the plan's fourth month of implementation... means 10,000 terabecquerels of radioactive substances would be released into the atmosphere from the plant during the coming three months, according to simple calculations based on the estimated emission rate as of April 5.

    %%City ;;Duluth






    @@Seawater injection

    When all power failed, the only way to get cooling water to the reactors was to use fire engines to dump water directly into the dry well surrounding the reactor - designed to be filled with nitrogen, not water. This may have contributed to production of hydrogen which destroyed the top floor of the reactor buildings.

    ========================= 4/25/2011: Seawater used for cooling At 20:05 JST on 12 March, the Japanese government ordered seawater to be injected into unit 1 in a new effort to cool the reactor core.[61] The treatment had been held as a last resort because after it the reactor cannot be salvaged for future use.[98] TEPCO started seawater cooling at 20:20, adding boric acid as a neutron absorber to prevent a criticality accident.[99][100] The water was to take five to ten hours to fill the reactor core, after which the reactor would cool down in around ten days.[88] The injection of seawater into the reactor pressure vessel was performed by means of mobile fire trucks of the fire department.[101][102][103] At 01:10 on 14 March, injection of seawater was halted for two hours because all available water in the plant pools had run out (similarly, feed to unit 3 was halted).[101] NISA news reports stated 70% of the fuel rods had been damaged when uncovered.[104]

    Engineers try to lower danger level at crippled Japanese nuclear plant April 6, 2011 Los Angeles Times a new report from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission leaked to the New York Times suggests that the continued pumping of water into the plant may be putting a strain on the Fukushima facility that will leave it more susceptible to future earthquakes.

    The report from engineers who have visited the site suggests that filling the reactor containment vessels with water that they were not designed to hold may place undue stress on the concrete vessels, leaving them susceptible to breakage if another quake strikes the facility"

    U.S. Experts Blame Fukushima 1 Explosions and Radiation on Failed Venting System These cores are likely still in the reactor vessels, and are being cooled by seawater injection using highly pressurized fire engine pumps," he said. Venting continues to contain pressures in the primary containment... "This current 'feed and bleed' method of cooling with salt water is not a sustainable long term cooling method. Salt deposits are likely building up in locations in the thermally heterogeneous core rubble pile. This configuration is completely unknown. But the Fukushima reactors, I believe, are much more damaged and contaminated than TMI was and there are three of them in this state."






    @@Secondary Containment Failure

    IN OTHER WORDS, THE BUILDINGS WILL BLOW UP IF CORES MELT DOWN OCRDocuments:Role of BWR Secondary Containments in Severe Accident Mitigation ...While not designed for severe accident mitigation, these secondary containments might also reduce the radiological consequences of severe accidents. This issue is receiving increasing attention due to concerns that BWR MK I primary containment integrity would be lost should a significant mass of molten debris escape the reactor vessel during a severe accident. Failure of the primary containment pressure boundary during a severe accident may result in the discharge of large quantities of hydrogen into the secondary containment atmosphere. Deflagration of this hydrogen within the secondary containment would result in pressure loadings which might threaten secondary containment structural integrity. The fission product retention capability of an intact secondary containment will depend on several factors. Recent analyses indicate that the major factors influencing secondary containment effectiveness include: the mode and location of the primary containment failure, the internal architectural design of the secondary containment, the design of the standby gas treatment system, and the ability of fire protection system sprays to remove suspended aerosols from the secondary containment atmosphere.



    The level of radioactive cesium in sewage sludge
    Fukushima city     447,000 becquerels per kilogram.
    Tokyo               55,000
    Maebashi            42,800 


    #Radioactive Sewage Sludge and Slag in Tokyo
    It was big news when the radioactive sewage sludge and slag were found
    in Fukushima Prefecture earlier this month (see my posts here, here
    and here).
    And it is almost no news when the highly radioactive (170,000
    becquerels per kilogram) sewage slag was found in TOKYO, and the
    slag's been already sold as construction materials.
    Here's a report from a week ago by Nippon Television (3;48PM JST
    Nippon Television's investigation has revealed that the radioactive
    materials in very high concentration, 170,000 becquerels per kilogram,
    had been found in the sewage slag from a sewage treatment facility in
    Tokyo.  ...The slag has already been recycled into cement and other
    construction materials.
    The national government issued a guidance on May 12 as to how to
    dispose the radioactive sludge and slag in Fukushima Prefecture, which
    is to burn the sludge and store the burned sludge (slag) in
    containers. However, there is no such standard for radioactive sewage
    treatment outside Fukushima Prefecture.
    In comparison, the sewage slag from Koriyama City in Fukushima
    measured 334,000 becquerels per kilogram, and Koto-ku is **225
    kilometers away** from Fukushima I Nuke Plant.
    In the latest test (done on May 10-12), the result for the slag at the
    Koto-ku facility was lower, at 18,470 becquerels/kg (cesium-134 and
    cesium-137). Instead, the treatment facility in Edogawa-ku (east of
    Koto-ku) tested high radiation at 53,200 becquerels/kg.
    And the highly radioactive sludge in Fukushima is to be burned. That's
    just great. According to Sankei News, the national government will
    allow the radioactive sludge and slag with low radiation (few
    thousands becquerels per kilogram) to be used as cement materials, as
    before, as long as the radioactive materials are diluted enough to the
    level that has no immediate effect on health.
    Between 10,000 becquerels/kg and 100,000 becquerels/kg, they should be
    put in a temporary storage. The government guideline doesn't say what
    will happen when the temporary storage becomes full.

    Radioactive material in sludge at 16 prefectures NHK Jun 14 NHK has found through interviews that at least 22 of Japan's 47 prefectures have been testing sludge for radioactive material. 16 of them, ranging from Hokkaido to Osaka, have actually detected radioactive substances. The level of radioactive cesium was highest in Fukushima city, at 447,000 becquerels per kilogram. This was followed by Tokyo at 55,000 becquerels and Maebashi, north of Tokyo, at 42,800 becquerels Japan has had no safety guidelines for contaminated sludge, which is a new problem. Last month, the government decided on an emergency measure to incinerate and store sludge that's been found to contain 100,000 becquerels or more of radioactive materials


    A unit of measure which combines the amount of radiation with the amount likely actually absorbed by tissue which can cause harm, but sometimes used equivalently. Radiation sickness is said to be caused by 1 Gray (100 centigray) or 1,000 millisieverts

    see wikipedia The sievert (symbol: Sv) is the International System of Units (SI) SI derived unit of dose equivalent radiation. It attempts to quantitatively evaluate the biological effects of ionizing radiation as opposed to the physical aspects, which are characterised by the absorbed dose, measured in gray. It is named after Rolf Maximilian Sievert, a Swedish medical physicist renowned for work on radiation dosage measurement and research into the biological effects of radiation.

    The unit gray measures the absorbed dose of radiation (D), absorbed by any material. The unit sievert measures the equivalent dose of radiation (H), supposed to have a damaging effect equivalent to the same dose of gamma rays. Both the gray, with symbol Gy and the sievert, with symbol Sv are SI derived units, defined as a unit of energy (joule) per unit of mass (kilogram): 1 Gy = 1 Sv = 1 J / kg







    by Dean Curtis
    Summary: study concludes similar failure based on "The assumptions in this
    report are based on a culmination of reports and theories on what
    happens to a BWR during a Loss of Coolant Accident combined with a
    total station black out and assumed 3 cases which identify the
    availability of post accident safety systems.  The table at the end of
    this report explains those conditions."
    Depending on what fails, it predicts core uncovered from 37 to 315
    minutes (half to 5 hrs), then the steels RPV pressure vessel bottom
    head fails from 142 to 543 minutes. Molten fuel Corium starts boil off
    of water @ concrete containment floor at 142 to 543. Corium starts
    melting steel/ concrete containment floor at 162-544. Containment
    failure and leakage starts at 185 to 601 minutes. These are entirely
    consistent with TEPCO findings of unit 1 melting down and containment
    failure within the first day even with water injection.

    Table data: Note:  Initial Condition Assumed at Reactor SCRAM + 10 minutes to Station Blackout
    All times are in minutes.
    SCRAM = Emergency shut down of a nuclear reactor.
    HPCI =  High Pressure Coolant Injection
    RCIC = Reactor Core Isolation Cooling
    SORV = Safety Operated Relief Valve

    5/17/2011                ACCIDENT PROGRESSION IN MINUTES


    Case 1



    Station Blackout

    Station Blackout

    Station Blackout


    Manual HPCI/RCIC

    Normal HPCI/RCIC


    Manual SORV

    Normal SORV

    Core uncovered




    Start core melt




    Corium slumps to bottom head




    RPV bottom head fails




    Corium starts boil off of water @ concrete containment floor




    Corium starts melting containment floor




    Containment failure and leakage starts




    Drywell and Wetwell electric penetrations start to leak at T=204C – 400F

    Drywell and Wetwell electric penetrations decompose and blow out of containment at T=260C – 500

    Table 1 Accident Progression Timeline


    1961 Explosion caused only US reactor deaths

    1961 steam explosion in United States of a small prototype military nuclear reactor which killed all 3 operators. Reactor was scrapped and buried. One worker impaled on the ceiling. The event is the only known fatal reactor accident in the United States. The need to supress such surges resulted in the characteristic torus supression pool in the mark I containment design used at Fukushima. While there was no violent steam explosion, there was a violent hydrogen explosion.

    Wikipedia SL-1

    The SL-1, or Stationary Low-Power Reactor Number One, was a United States Army experimental nuclear power reactor which underwent a steam explosion and meltdown on January 3, 1961, killing its three operators. The direct cause was the improper withdrawal of the central control rod, responsible for absorbing neutrons in the poorly-designed reactor core.[1][2] The accident released about 80 curies (3.0 TBq) of I-131,[3] which was not considered significant due to its location in a remote desert of Idaho. About 1,100 curies (41 TBq) of fission products were released into the atmosphere.[4]

    The facility, located at the National Reactor Testing Station approximately forty miles (60 km) west of Idaho Falls, Idaho, was part of the Army Nuclear Power Program and was known as the Argonne Low Power Reactor (ALPR) during its design and build phase. It was intended to provide electrical power and heat for small, remote military facilities, such as radar sites near the Arctic Circle, and those in the DEW Line.[5] The design power was 3 MW (thermal). Operating power was 200 kW electrical and 400 kW thermal for space heating. The core power level reached nearly 20 GW in just four milliseconds, precipitating the reactor accident and steam explosion.[6][7]








    %%Nuclear Explosion

    Nuclear Explosion Into Sea

     Sunday, May 29, 2011Fukushima: The Nuclear Explosion Solution #2
    From Fukushima to Nukeushima???
    "Nuke the reactors at Fukushima Daiichi right into the sea, Mr.
    President." - Bob Nichols of Veterans Today
    In yesterday's article on Veteran's Today: Fukushima: How Many
    Chernobyls Is It? Bob Nichols paints a very frightening picture of
    what the whole world is facing now. He also explains how the The
    Nuclear Explosion Solution is now the only option left for ending this
    horrible nuclear disaster:
    "The Fukushima Kill, already underway world wide, will certainly dwarf
    that of Chernobyl. All US Super Power President Obama’s delay does is
    increase the numbers of The Kill. That is a clear Choice. We call on
    President Obama to re-visit that Choice."
    "Generally speaking, most Radiation cannot escape into the atmosphere
    if it is covered by water. Honshu, Japan 

    @@Spent fuel pool

    see fuelpool.htm






    @@Japan Fukushima 2011

    Some key problems

    o     Powerplant was hit by several beyond-design-basis conditions which led to destruction of reactor buildings, partial meltdown, and global release of radioactive products measurable in milk and rainwater globally, and contaminating food locally beyond safety standards.

    o     Diesel fuel tanks placed next to shoreline where they were destroyed by tsunami

    o     Earthquake proofed for 7.0 quake, 8.2 shutdown, largest expected was 8.6 but got 9.0 quake

    o     5 meter seawall was defeated by 15 meter tsunami waves

    o     Guages and controls disabled by power, radiation evacuation

    o     Flimsy sheet metal secondary containment upper buildings instead of strong concrete domes resistant to explosion or collision such as BWR Mark III or other new reactor designs.

    o     Hardened vent systems required by US to vent hydrogen from reactor to smokestack tower were not installed.

    o     Hydrogen explosions destroyed or damaged reactor buildings 1 through 4, exposing spent fuel pools to air.

    o     Spent fuel pool overheated and caught fire at reactor 4, perhaps unit 3


    Nuclear Plant Designed for 8.2 Earthquake hit by 9.0

    Discussion: The Daiichi plant was originally designed for a 7.0 quake, safe shutdown at 8.2, and thought the maximum that might be produced would be 8.6 with a 5-6 meter tsunami, but it faced a 9.0 quake and 15 meter waves.

    Fukushima Tsunami Plan: Japan Nuclear Plant Downplayed Risk YURI KAGEYAMA and JUSTIN PRITCHARD 03/27/11 04:47 PM ET TEPCO's looked at the magnitude-8.8 off the coast of Chile in February 2010, but figured the maximum possible would be at 8.6 magnitude, meaning the March 11 quake was four times as powerful as the presumed maximum. Read more: Japanese government was 'warned that nuclear plants could not withstand quake' By Daily Mail Reporter Last updated at 5:20 PM on 16th March 2011 they were warned more than two years ago that the country's nuclear power plants could not withstand powerful earthquakes. The international nuclear watchdog raised concerns that safety measures were outdated and a major tremor could cause 'serious problems', leaks cables have revealed. It is not known what changes the Japanese government made after an offi made after an official from the International Atomic Energy Agency made the comments in December 2008. ... The plant was only designed to withstand 7.0 magnitude quakes but the massive disaster that struck last Friday measured 9.0 on the Richter scale.
    the Japanese government even opposed a court order to close down a nuclear plant that was feared unsafe in the face of an earthquake above 6.5 magnitude. The government later overturned in 2009 the court's ruling top shut down the 'unsafe' plant. The cable added: 'Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency believes the reactor is safe and that all safety analyses were appropriately conducted.'

    comment: The plant was only designed to withstand 7.0 magnitude quakes......since 1900 Japan has had over 20 earthquakes over 7.0 ...eight of them over 8.0......a DISASTER waiting to happen, a case of WHEN not IF ! Britain is not in an earthquake zone. - ollie, uk, Read more: TESTIMONY OF Michael Corradini American Nuclear Society BEFORE THE HOUSE ENERGY AND COMMERCE COMMITTEE SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS April 6, 2011 Following the earthquake on Friday afternoon, the nuclear plants at Fukushima-Daiichi, Fukushima-Daini, and Osonawa plant sites shut down as designed, and emergency power systems were activated as expected; even though the earthquake was beyond the design basis. At the Daiichi plants, the design basis safe-shutdown earthquake was 8.2 as measured on the Richter scale, which is a design base above historical values link

    wikipedia: The 9.0 MW Tohoku earthquake at 14:46 JST on Friday, 11 March 2011 resulted in maximum ground accelerations of 0.56, 0.52, 0.56 g (5.50, 5.07 and 5.48 m/s2) at units 2, 3 and 5 respectively, well above their design basis of 0.45, 0.45 and 0.46 g (4.38, 4.41 and 4.52 m/s2), and values below the design basis at units 1, 4 and 6.[131] When the earthquake occured, reactor units 1, 2, and 3 were operating, but units 4, 5, and 6 had already been shut down for periodic inspection.[130][143] When the earthquake was detected, units 1, 2 and 3 underwent an automatic shutdown (called scram).[144]

    UNIT 3 EXCEEDED 441 GROUND ACCEL DESIGN BASIS At the Daini plant, ground accelerations ranged from 186 gal in the vertical plane at unit 1 to 277 gal from north to south at unit 3, as recorded by sensors in the reactor building foundation. The range of design basis figures is a spread from 415 gal to 512 gal. At Daiichi there is still no data for units 1, 2 and 5, but available figures put the maximum acceleration as 507 gal from east to west at unit 3. The design basis for this was 441 gal. Other readings were below design basis, although east-west readings at unit 6 of 431 gal approached the design basis of 448 gal.


    Reactor 1 explosion:
    Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description:  Screengrab obtained on 15 March 2011 shows an explosion at the Fukushima nuclear plant after Friday's devastating earthquake in Japan.

    Warning: US Embassy cables revealed how the Japanese government was warned that an earthquake could pose 'serious problems' for nuclear plants including Fukushima, pictured, which suffered three explosions

    %%Fuel Tanks

    Idiotic Placement Of Fuel Tanks Doomed Fukushima Mar. 16 2011 By BRUCE UPBIN This satellite photo of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant before and after the quake/tsunami tells a damning story. The red box shows where the fuel tanks for the entire site were placed, powering the generators counted on to pump water into reactors and spent-rod wells to keep the rods from overheating and going critical. Only a dike separated the tanks from the wrath of the ocean. What kind of genius planners locate fuel tanks at the edge of a tsunami-prone sea? We’re talking a matter of yards here. A small shed a few meters behind the tanks was left unharmed. This whole disaster was compounded 100x by bad design. url:

    by williambanzai7
    on Mon, 03/21/2011 - 02:26

    Image showing two fuel tanks were next to the water, and one washed up on an access road near the stranded boat

    Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Plant

    this picture inside unit 3 identifies the big yellow tank as a "fuel storage tank"


    ##Ground Plutonium detected near nuke plant 'not significant': U.S. official WASHINGTON, March 29, Kyodo A senior U.S. Energy Department official said Tuesday the level of plutonium detected in soil at the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan is ''not significant.'' Tokyo Electric Power Co., the operator of the stricken reactors, said Monday that plutonium has been detected in soil at five locations at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. The much-troubled reactor #3 is the only reactor that housed the highly deadly substance. Read more:







    Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Dangerous: A fuel storage tank inside the Fukushima plant's third reactor building that was taken before the disaster struck. Four of the six reactors at the Fukushima No.1 plant have now overheated and sparked explosions

    Dangerous: A fuel storage tank inside the Fukushima plant's third reactor building that was taken before the disaster struck. Four of the six reactors at the Fukushima No.1 plant have now overheated and sparked explosions






    %%Reactor layout

    Oyster Creek picture blog: The Fukushima-1 Reactor at Daiichi is a General Electric BWR-3 design with Mark I containment.  It turns out that the Boiling Water Reactor at Oyster Creek, New Jersey, is an almost identical design: BWR-2 with Mark 1 containment.  Oyster Creek is the oldest operating commercial nuclear reactor in the US today.

    Here's a very, very pretty picture of Oyster Creek.

    Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description:

    The above is from a
    University of New Mexico archive of fascinating drawings of nuclear power plants from around the world, which will make almost any nuclear engineer drool.  You can get the full pdf of Oyster Creek here.

    In particular (I think you need the full pdf to see the detail), note the location of #14 (the spent fuel pool), #6 (safety valve -- this is probably what they used to burp the reactor), and #27 (the recirculation pump, which is what's keeping the water circulating and core cool right now).


    Fukushima-1: 460 MWe, initial criticality in October 1970.
    Oyster Creek: 619 MWe (it's been uprated a few times), began operation on December 23, 1969.
    6 said...

    Fukushima has some distinct design differences from Oyster Creek. For example, item 10 above (Isolation Condensers) do not exist in Fukushima Unit 1. If I am not mistaken only Oyster Creek and two others in the world have them. This design feature was removed after 2 BWR/2's basically to save GE/utilities money. Fukushima 1 is BWR/3. If this one feature alone existed at the Fukushima plants, they could have relieved reactor pressure without electricity, without venting radioactive gasses/hydrogen, and without losing reactor inventory resulting in uncovering fuel. It's critical valves are DC operated, so loss of power is irrelevant, and it works without pumps, by gravity. GE BWR's brought these simple and effective condensers back in its new designs.

    If Fukushima 1 had isolation condensers, they would have attained stable hot shutdown and the plant would not have been destroyed, this goes for the other units as well. The spent fuel pool would have still been an issue, but it also would have received more immediate focus and could have been kept full using diesel pumps.

    The safety valve was not likely used to relieve pressure, as by the time that automatically activated they let pressure get out of control to the point where it is almost at the design limits for the vessel. Electromatic relief valves off of the main steam lines were almost undoubtedly used instead, which dump steam directly into the suppression pool, which is the massive donut shaped structure at the bottom, through large nozzles. The steam then collapses to water averting a huge pressure spike in primary containment, as obviously water takes up a much smaller volume than steam.

    Releasing steam to relieve pressure results in uncovering fuel. When fuel Is uncovered the fuel temperature rises to very high levels, and at around 2200 degrees F the cladding, made of zircaloy, begins to react with the steam to produce hydrogen gas among other things in an exothermic reaction, producing more heat. The hydrogen is then later vented with the steam, does not condense in the suppression pool, and helps to pressurize the primary containment. The primary containment is maintained filled with nitrogen gas (zero oxygen) for this very reason to prevent the possibility of a devastating explosion within the primary containment. The problem really presents itself when they vent the primary containment to the reactor building atmosphere to relieve pressure, and the hydrogen sees oxygen and the slightest spark causes a massive explosion as we saw on the news.

    Oyster Creek also has a hardened vent system, as would all Mark 1 BWR’s in the US as per a 1989 NRC order that identified this possibility. As a result the primary containment would not have been vented into the reactor building ducting, but instead through a strong metal pipe to outside of the reactor building. Hydrogen explosions would then occur outside, and the reactor building roof does not blow off as we saw.

    Recirculation pumps do not provide cooling. Their purpose is to increase reactor power during power operations by reducing the void coefficient of reactivity I (too long to explain). The pumps they need to restore for vital cooling are Rx Bldg closed cooling water, shutdown cooling, fuel pool cooling, and service water pumps, which remove decay heat from the fuel pool and reactor vessel through a series of closed loops sending the heat to the ocean. However much more immediately they need their emergency core cooling system, containment/suppression pool cooling. None of those systems are shown in the diagram except the S/D cooling heat exchangers (28). Basically they need to restore power to most everything in the reactor building. Restoring power has been difficult to do after the tsunami flooded out much of their critical infrastructure, including and especially their emergency diesel generators, and vital electrical busses. The plants are all still in pretty bad shape, and there are no easy fixes.

    March 19, 2011 9:28 AM Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: \\\img\icon_delete13.gif

    Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description:

    6 said...

    Sorry for my questionable sentence structure and grammar, I studied engineering, not english, haha. Also, as a disclaimer, my post was a combination of mostly fact, but also some of my opinion/speculation extrapolated from knowledge of similar plants. I have no first hand knowledge of the exact design of Fukushima Unit 1.

    Reactor Layout:

    Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: G:\y\doc\web\index\nuclear.htmDescription: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description:

    Layout of Reactor 3 / 4
    Map looking down, East going up
    Turbine Building
    |    o     RRR   FFFCFFF  |
    |    o     RRR   FFFCFFF  |
    |    o     RRR   FFFCFFF  |
    |    o     RRR   FFFCFFF  |    PPPPP
    |    o                    |
    |    o   YY               |
    | ss o  YYYY              |      300 ft high
    | ss o   YY               |    exhaust tower 
    +-------------------+----++        + +++
                        |    |        +  oo  +
    fffff                Vehicle entry
    Access road
    <-N                     S->
    f - water canon fire truck parked west of reactor 3
    P - concrete pumping crane truck south of reactor 4 
    o - big roof crane, suspended from mid-roof walls. Covered by fallen 
        roof at south side of reactor 1.
    C - green refuling crane, visible from SE wall of reactor 4, interior
        of reactor 3
    R - reactor containment hatch
    F - spent fuel pond, showing steam coming out
    Y - big yellow ??? tank visible through roof of reactor 4, back of reactor 3
        interior picture
    S - silver domed structure
    Side view
    |B                   |
    |               C C C|
    |             C C C C|
    |A                   |
    |                    |
    +                    |
    |                    |
    |                    |
    Unit 1 looking east:
    A - painted walls intact
    B - painted walls blown out, girders mostly intact
    C - roof has fallen down to refueling floor, appears to
    cover the refueling and the big crane at the south
    side of the building.
    Explosion was largely horizontal, black square roof
    could be seen going up a short distance in the air and
    fall back down.
    The black roof surface was blown away from units 3 and 4,
    shows some small holes in unit 2.
    Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Reactor 4 Damaged Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant 
    Unit 4 Looking East
    |  |f |b |b |  |  |     
    |  |g |  |  |  |  |     
    |  |p |  |  |  |  |     
    |    c      |x |x |
    * All east wall panels are damaged or missing
    * b wall panels are damaged
    * c wall panel lying on ground
    * = refuling level
    * x damanged
    * f big overhead crane
    * g green refueling crane
    * p probable location of south fuel pool, source of steam/smoke
    Looking North
    |             C C C C|
    |             C C C C|
    |   GGGG             |
    |   GG               |
    +   GG               |
    |   GG               |
    |                    |
    G - big gash in south wall below refueling level
    C - green refueling crane
    B - big overhead crane






    %%Reactor 3






    %%Reactor 4
    Japan safety agency: roof cracked at Fukushima No 4 reactor
    TOKYO | Tue Mar 15, 2011 4:47pm EDT 
    TOKYO (Reuters) - Two workers are missing after Tuesday's explosion at
    one of the reactors at a crippled Japanese nuclear plant, the
    country's nuclear safety agency said.
    The agency did not identify the missing workers, but said they were in
    the turbine area of the No.4 reactor at the Fukushima nuclear plant,
    which was damaged by last Friday's earthquake and tsunami.
    Agency official also told a news conference there was a crack in the
    roof of the reactor building.
    The latest incidents, an explosion Tuesday at the plant’s No. 2
    reactor and a fire in a cooling pond used for nuclear fuel at the No.
    4 reactor, briefly pushed radiation levels at the plant to about 167
    times the average annual dose of radiation, according to details
    released by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
    High temperatures inside the building that houses the plant's No. 4
    reactor may have caused fuel rods sitting in a pool to ignite or
    explode, the plant's owner said 3/16/2011 2:29am ET on Tuesday a
    fire broke out in Unit 4's fuel storage pond, an area where used
    nuclear fuel is kept cool, causing radioactivity to be released into
    the atmosphere.
    The news followed a fire and blast Monday night at the plant’s unit 4
    that opened two large holes in the structure housing spent nuclear
    fuel rods. Two workers inside the unit were missing, Japan’s nuclear safety
    agency said Wednesday.
    Japanese officials told the IAEA that the spent fuel storage area had
    caught fire and that radioactivity was “being released directly into
    the atmosphere.”
    After the fire was extinguished, a Japanese official said the pool
    used to cool the spent fuel rods might still be boiling, though the
    reported levels of radiation had dropped dramatically by evening
    Latest from TEPCO: Radiation near No. 4 reactor reached 400
    millisieverts Tuesday night by Stephanie Ditta at 3/15/2011 10:31:27
    PM6:31 PM “Around 5:45 a.m., a worker at the plant saw flames on the
    fourth floor of the reactor’s building, believed to be the same spot
    where an apparent hydrogen explosion caused a fire Tuesday morning in
    the wake of last Friday’s magnitude 9.0 earthquake.” – Kyodo
    Update 9:41 PM EST NHK reports largest amounts of white smoke
    billowing from the number #4 reactor.
    NHK nuclear experts says that a hydrogen explosion could not be
    responsible for the flames witnessed coming from reactor #4 earlier. A
    hydrogen explosion would cause an initial explosion but there should
    be no flames afterward. The presences of flames is indication of
    another problem.





    @@Lost power

    Summary: 21,000 megawatts of electrical generating capacity was lost due to the earthquake, about 10 Hoover dams, forcing rolling blackouts and energy shortages on Japan. source: Business Week April 4-10, 2011 "Japan's Rolling Blackouts"

    Unit 1 = 469 mw, 2-4 760 mw each total = 2,749 (about 1/3 of the total loss)






    Metallic Taste
    Unit 3's plume probably passed over Tokyo. I recall myself what the
    author cites, that there were reports of sickness and a metallic taste
    in the mouth from some Tokyo residents, but media dismissed them as
    hysteria. I wonder if that metallic taste can be found among Chernobyl
    witnesses, for I've heard several people report that from different
    settings around the Fuku incident. I know I've also read it wrt a
    resident who lived next to Three-Mile Island way back then, who report
    sounded like a major exposure at odds with official reports of almost
    no release.
    Ian G:
    Wow, someone found exactly what I speculated could be found:
    This article on the Chernobyl Disaster, was written by a LINC student,
    Lana Petriw. April 26 is the anniversary of this terrible disaster.
    Lana came to Canada four years ago from Ukraine. 
    "I remember that day very well. The day was warm and sunny, but the
    wind blew very hard. The wind brought with it very fine ash-like dust
    from Chernobyl. The radioactive dust fell on the ground, grass, trees,
    roofs, roads and almost everywhere. The dust was even inside buildings
    since the windows were open. Innocent people were breathing in
    radioactive dust. It was a holiday and thousands of people, including
    children, were playing outdoors. The children were playing with
    radioactive sand in the parks.
    In a few minutes the people could feel the metallic taste in their
    mouths, their throats were sore and skin was itchy. Almost all
    complained of severe headaches and diarrhea. Nobody could explain at
    first what was going on, but soon after they realized that they were
    exposed to abnormally high level of radiation.

     I added this: There was at least one metallic-taste report from the
    Three-Mile-Island incident by a person who lived very close. That
    witness testimony is relayed in the video here :


    Summary: Milk across the US was found to be contaminated with detectable amounts of iodine 131

    o    Professor Busby replied: ...since then I have re-thought this advice as the thing is still fissioning and releasing 10 to the fourteen becquerels a day. This will mean that Sr-90 [strontium 90] and Uranium and particulates will be building up in the USA and Europe. I will assess this later but for now I think it prudent to stop drinking milk. I also attach the particulates note.     

    Don't Panic About Milk paper



     Some of the
    documentation mentions that the fuel manufacturer of the FUKU MOX load
    had lower standards than the load of MOX for another plant that was
    sent back as being defective.  The British plant that had their MOX
    sent back as defective had better manufacturing processes and better
    finished product than the fuel made for FUKU. The fuel coming out of
    the plant that made FUKUs (Congema IIRC) had problems with the fuel
    pellets not being fully mixed. The uranium and plutonium was not
    getting uniformly mixed so the FUKU fuel had larger hot spots of
    plutonium than the rejected fuel from the British plant. This is
    explained in great detail in a 2001 Greenpeace paper. Not sure why
    this didn't trigger a review or rejection of the MOX load at FUKU...
    What those hot spots can do is degrade holes into the cladding and
    under bad situations like loss of cooling can blow holes or split the
    cladding. Since this was a 2001 article it doesn't get into what could
    happen when the cladding gives way or bursts vs. a uniform melt down.

    @@Neutron Beam
    March 24, 2011
    A neutron beam has been reported emanating
    from Fukushima
    Neutron beam observed 13 times at crippled Fukushima nuke plant 
    Tokyo Electric Power Co. said Wednesday it has observed a neutron
    beam, a kind of radioactive ray, 13 times on the premises of the
    Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant after it was crippled by the massive
    March 11 quake-tsunami disaster.
    Neutrons are emitted during a nuclear chain reaction; so given the
    context, is Kyodo's report to be taken as indicating that a chain
    reaction took place after the reactors shut down?
    Redflag conspiracy site:
    What Really Happened 
    PAJU Palestinian and Jewish Unity 
    Information Clearinghouse 
    Global Research-Centre for Research on Globalization 

    @@No Problem

    RodAdams pro-nuke the technology is robust enough and the operators well trained enough so that essentially all of the radioactive materials will be contained within the boundaries of the primary containment structure. I do not expect that unit 1 at the Daiichi plant will ever operate again, but that is not much of a tragedy compared to all of the other capital equipment in Japan that will never again operate after the earthquake and tsunami. It is, after all, a 40 year old facility that has been helping to avoid burning fuel oil and natural gas for a very long time. A very good source of concise information on the worst possible accident in a light water reactor licensed to standards that have been in effect since the late 1950s can be found in the 20 September 2002 issue of Science Magazine. You can find a PDF at the following URL


    the technology is robust enough and the operators well trained enough so that

    essentially all of the radioactive materials will be contained within the

    boundaries of the primary containment structure. I do not expect that unit 1 at

    the Daiichi plant will ever operate again, but that is not much of a tragedy

    compared to all of the other capital equipment in Japan that will never again

    operate after the earthquake and tsunami. It is, after all, a 40 year old

    facility that has been helping to avoid burning fuel oil and natural gas for a

    very long time.

    A very good source of concise information on the worst possible accident in a

    light water reactor licensed to standards that have been in effect since the

    late 1950s can be found in the 20 September 2002 issue of Science Magazine. You

    can find a PDF at the following URL, the technology

    is robust enough and the operators well trained enough so that essentially all

    of the radioactive materials will be contained within the boundaries of the

    primary containment structure. I do not expect that unit 1 at the Daiichi plant

    will ever operate again, but that is not much of a tragedy compared to all of

    the other capital equipment in Japan that will never again operate after the

    earthquake and tsunami. It is, after all, a 40 year old facility that has been

    helping to avoid burning fuel oil and natural gas for a very long time.

    A very good source of concise information on the worst possible accident in a

    light water reactor licensed to standards that have been in effect since the

    late 1950s can be found in the 20 September 2002 issue of Science Magazine. You

    can find a PDF at the following URL, the

    technology is robust enough and the operators well trained enough so that

    essentially all of the radioactive materials will be contained within the

    boundaries of the primary containment structure. I do not expect that unit 1 at

    the Daiichi plant will ever operate again, but that is not much of a tragedy

    compared to all of the other capital equipment in Japan that will never again

    operate after the earthquake and tsunami. It is, after all, a 40 year old

    facility that has been helping to avoid burning fuel oil and natural gas for a

    very long time.

    A very good source of concise information on the worst possible accident in a

    light water reactor licensed to standards that have been in effect since the

    late 1950s can be found in the 20 September 2002 issue of Science Magazine. You

    can find a PDF at the following URL

    You can also learn more about the accident consequences from an operator's

    perspective at


    @@Radiation Safety
    Promoted to Headline (H2) on 3/27/11:     Permalink 
    "Safe" Radiation is a Lethal TMI Lie
     By Harvey Wasserman
    As we have learned so tragically from Drs. Stewart, Morgan, Gofman and
    Sternglass, from Gundersen and Mangano and so many other researchers,
    from TMI and Chernobyl, and from the on-going operation of nuclear
    plants where infant death rates continue to be affected---a "perfectly
    safe" dose of radiation does not exist.  
    No truly informed or responsible scientist, medical doctor, health
    researcher, TV weatherman, bloviating "expert" or on-the scene
    reporter would ever tell you otherwise.  Whenever you hear the term
    "insignificant" fallout, ask yourself: "insignificant to whom?"
    "Acceptable" to which expectant mother?  To whose child?  To how many
    mourning parents?  For which dying elder?

    @@Radiation Sickness

    These some of the initial signs of radiation sickness. 
    Metallic taste in your mouth.
    Weak feeling. 


    Summary: Radiation from Fukushima contaminated rain water across the United States, although not at a high enough level to constitute an immediate threat to health


    Across Entire US Contaminated With Japan Nuclear

    Radiation Rainwater across the entire United States is now testing positive for nuclear radiation contamination from Japan’s nuclea rfallout.


    Here is current home page of The

    Huffington Post.


    Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Rainwater Across Entire US Contains Japan Nuclear Radiation


    Rainwater Across

    Entire US Contains Japan Nuclear Radiation


    Clicking on the individual stories quickly reveals that

    Japan nuclear radiation is being detected in rainwater across the entire United



    For example:



    In Massachusetts Rainwater Likely From Japan



    — Health officials said Sunday that one sample of Massachusetts rainwater has

    registered very low concentrations of radiation, most likely from the Japanese

    nuclear power plant damaged earlier this month by an earthquake and tsunami.



    Auerbach, the Massachusetts commissioner of public

    health, said that radioiodine-131 found in the sample – one of more than 100

    that have been taken around the country – has a short life of only eight days.

    He said the drinking water supply in the state was unaffected and officials do

    not expect any health concerns.



















    The Japanese were initially hesitant to use robots to measure conditions in the plants, but later got Packbots made by iRobot (the Roomba company) to investigate and find radiation exposure levels in one hour that exceeded US annual levels.


    JAPANESE GOVERNMENT STOPPED UNAUTHORIZED SHIPMENT OF RADIATION-PROOF ROBOTS Japan engineers knew tsunami could overwhelm Fukushima plant Reuters Tue Mar 29, 2011 [after gauges failed that] left a pair of workers in a white Prius to race into the plant to get radiation readings with a handheld device in the early days of the crisis, according to Tokyo Electric.

    Immediately after the tsunami, a French firm with nuclear expertise shipped robots for use in Fukushima, a European nuclear expert said. The robots are built to withstand high radiation.But Japan, arguably the country with the most advanced robotics industry, stopped them from arriving in Fukishima, saying such help could only come through government channels, said the expert who asked not to be identified so as not to appear critical of Japan in a moment of crisis. o    

    Robot Detects High Radiation In Japan Reactors MARI YAMAGUCHI, Associated Press POSTED: 9:45 pm CDT April

    17, 2011 TOKYO -- A pair of thin robots on treads sent to explore buildings inside Japan's crippled nuclear reactor came back Monday with disheartening news: Radiation levels are far too high for repair crews to go inside... two  Packbots, (made by iRobot which also makes Roomba household vacuum) which resemble drafting lamps on tank-like treads, entered. ...reported radioactivity readings of up to 49 millisieverts per hour inside Unit 1 (same as US annual limit) and up to 57 inside Unit 3, levels too high for workers to realistically enter. ...doubled the legal limit for nuclear workers since the crisis began to 250 millisieverts a year. Workers in the U.S. nuclear industry are allowed an upper limit of 50 millisieverts per year. Doctors say radiation sickness sets in at 1,000 millisieverts and includes nausea and vomiting.


    1959 partial meltdown at Rocketdyne in Los Angeles In July 26, 1959 a partial meltdown occurred at the Boeing-Rocketdyne nuclear testing facility, about 30 miles northwest of downtown Los Angeles. The incident released the third greatest amount of radioactive iodine in nuclear history. But no one really heard about it until Boeing recently settled a class-action suit filed by local residents. The plaintiffs complained of nuclear-related cancers and thyroid abnormalities caused by proximity to the facility (from LOE reference below). The 1959 Sodium Reactor Experiment (SRE) incident was kept secret for decades. The large facility was located at the Santa Susana Field Laboratory.

    A Nuclear Incident “Worse Than Three Mile Island” Boeing-Rocketdyne Nuclear Facility, also referred to as the Santa Susana Field Lab, is located about 30 miles northwest of downtown Los Angeles, near the Simi Valley area. And in 1959, a clogged coolant channel in a 20-megawatt nuclear reactor lead to the melting of 30 percent of the fuel elements in the reactor core.

    Iodine-131 – that is, radioactive iodine – was released in doses estimated up to 100 times that of Three Mile Island, enough to cause various types of cancers and thyroid abnormalities, particularly in children under the age of 15. And while radioactive iodine only has an eight day half life, that’s more than enough time to get into the local dairy cows and contaminate the milk supply. The facility also released many other radioactive materials, as well as other toxic chemicals, over a period of years. After an eight-year-long court battle, more than 100 local residents reached a settlement with Boeing-Rocketdyne.

    I was there in ’63. That happened ’59, but we had another meltdown in ’64, which is just becoming public now, as far as I know. They had 80 percent of the cladding on the fuel rods melt down. And it was immediately shut down when they found that out, and decommissioned in 1965. And that’s been kept secret for a very long time.

    Draft Preliminary Site Evaluation
     Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL)
     Ventura County, California
    Table 2. Chronological List of Radiological Incidents in Area IV of the SSFL. 
    Description of Incident 
    March 25, 1959
    AE-6 Power Doubling Excursion
    June 4, 1959
    SRE Wash Cell Explosion
    July 13, 1959
    SRE Power Excursion
    July 26, 1959
    SRE Fuel Damage "Meltdown"
    March 19, 1960
    SRE Steam Cleaning Pad Contamination
    SNAP 8 (S8ER) Fuel Element Failures
    SNAP 8 (S8DR) Fuel Element Failures
    May 19, 1971
    Hot Lab NaK Fire in the Hot Lab DecontaminationRoom
    November 3, 1976
    Radioactive Material Disposal Facility LeachfieldContamination
     AE-6 was a 2 kilowatt, low power research reactor with a solution of
    uranyl sulfate in a spherical tank andused as a neutron source.
     SRE (Sodium Reactor Experiment) was part of a program with the Atomic
    Energy Commission todemonstrate the feasibility of a high-temperature,
    sodium cooled power reactor for civilian application.
     SNAP 8 was a small sodium cooled reactor for space applications.
    Of all these incidents, only the Sodium Reactor Experiment (SRE) Fuel
    Damage incident, commonly known as "The Meltdown," resulted in a
    measurable release of radioactive material into the environment. The
    SRE was a graphite moderated, liquid sodium metal cooled, 20 MW power
    reactor (Figure 3). In 1959, a clogged coolant channel resulted in
    localized melting of 30% of the fuel elements in the reactor core. The
    fuel elements fell to the bottom of the primary sodium containment
    vessel and the reactor was shut down. Most of the radioactive fission
    products were trapped in the sodium coolant or attached to metal
    components. Only the noble gas fission products made it to the helium
    cover gas and were held for decay before being vented to the
    atmosphere [Hart, 1962].
    These operations and the resulting releases of chemicals and
    radionuclides into the environment are discussed in the following
    section, Exposure Pathways Analyses.
    Accidents and site contamination
    Sodium Reactor Experiment: An exposed worker aligns repair equipment
    directly over the core after its meltdown, his hat reads: "Your safety
    is our business, Atomics International."  Throughout the years,
    approximately ten low-power nuclear reactors operated at SSFL, in
    addition to several "critical facilities": a sodium burn pit in which
    sodium-coated objects were burned in an open pit; a plutonium fuel
    fabrication facility; a uranium carbide fuel fabrication facility; and
    the purportedly largest "Hot Lab" facility in the United States at the
    time.[citation needed] (A Hot Lab is a facility used for remotely
    cutting up irradiated nuclear fuel.) Irradiated nuclear fuel from
    other Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and Department of Energy (DOE)
    facilities from around the country were shipped to SSFL to be
    decladded and examined.
    The Hot Lab suffered a number of fires involving radioactive
    materials. For example, in 1957, a fire in the Hot Cell "got out of
    control and ... massive contamination" resulted. (see: NAA-SR-1941,
    Sodium Graphite Reactor, Quarterly Progress Report, January–March
    1957). In July, 1959, the site suffered a partial nuclear meltdown
    that has been named "the worst in U.S. history", releasing an
    undisclosed amount of radiation, but thought to be much more than the
    Three Mile Island disaster in 1979.[21] Another radioactive fire
    occurred in 1971, involving combustible primary reactor coolant (NaK)
    contaminated with mixed fission products.[22][23]
    At least four of the ten nuclear reactors suffered accidents. The AE6
    reactor experienced a release of fission gases in March 1959, the SRE
    experienced a power excursion and partial meltdown in July 1959; the
    SNAP8ER in 1964 experienced damage to 80% of its fuel; and the SNAP8DR
    in 1969 experienced similar damage to one-third of its fuel.[24]
    The reactors located on the grounds of SSFL were considered
    experimental, and therefore had no containment structures. Reactors
    and highly radioactive components were housed without the large
    concrete domes that surround modern power reactors.


    Summary: Unit used at Chernobyl. An exposure of 500 roentgens in five hours is usually lethal for human beings. The typical exposure to normal background radiation for a human being is about 200 milliroentgens per year, or about 23 microroentgens per hour.


    1 roentgen = .119 sievert

    1 roentgen = 11.9 rem


    The roentgen (R, also röntgen) is a unit of measurement for exposure to ionizing radiation (such as X-ray and gamma rays), and is named after the German physicist Wilhelm Röntgen. Adopted in 1928[1], 1 R is the amount of radiation required to liberate positive and negative charges of one electrostatic unit of charge (esu or StatCoulomb) in one cubic centimeter of dry air at standard temperature and pressure (STP). This corresponds to the generation of approximately 2.0819×109 ion pairs.

    The weather station outside of the Atomic Testing Museum on a hot summer day. Displayed background gamma radiation level is 9.8 µR/h which would be approximately 86 mR per year—less than typical. The station is part of the Community Environmental Monitoring Network(CEMP).

    The unit is of a family of variant metric radiation units used largely in the United States. Related units are the rad, a measure of absorbed dose, and the rem, a unit of equivalent dose which adjusts for the impacts of different forms of radiation on biological matter.

    In SI units, 1 R = 2.58×10-4 C/kg (from 1 esu ˜ 3.33564×10-10 C and the standard atmosphere air density of ~1.293 kg/m³).[2]

    Until 2006, a different roentgen was (confusingly) accepted for use with the SI system, with its value expressed in terms of the SI units charge divided by unit mass (coulomb/kg) rather than as in the original definition (statC/cm³). Although its use was allowable under the SI system, it is not itself an SI unit and its continued use is "strongly discouraged" by the National Institute of Standards and Technology style guide for NIST authors.[2]

    An exposure of 500 roentgens in five hours is usually lethal for human beings. The typical exposure to normal background radiation for a human being is about 200 milliroentgens per year, or about 23 microroentgens per hour.

    When measuring dose absorbed in man due to exposure, units of absorbed dose are used (the related rad or SI gray), or, with consideration of biological effects from differing radiation types, units of equivalent dose, such as the related rem or the SI sievert


    Radiation Exposure Conversion Radiation exposure is a measure caused by ionizing radiation like X-rays or gamma rays) for a certain length of time.  Roentgen, sievert, rem, rep, parker, coulomb per kilogram, millicoulomb per kilogram are the units of radiation exposure.


    List of temperatures in a reactor:


    100 C water boils



    302 C Normal reactor fuel temperature




    390 C Unit 1 March 22



    exposed, temp will exceed 900C, cladding will balloon or break, and fission

    products will be released from gaps as 1st line of containment fails.



    ZIRCONIUM FIRE: if 3/4 exposed, temp

    exceeds 1200C, zirconium will burn in a steam atmosphere Zr

    + 2H20 -> ZrO2 + 2H2 producing hydrogen. The reaction produces even more

    heat and hydrogen. Unit 1 thought to produce 300-600kg of hydrogen, 2/3

    300-1000kg. The gas travels first from reactor to the wet well, and from there

    into the drywell light-bulb containment.



    at 1800C, cladding and steel

    structures of fuel rods melt (1,2,3 units)



    at 2500C, fuel rods break, debris

    falls in bed at bottom (1,2 unit)



    at 2700C uranium-zirconium eutectics

    melts (unit 1)


    (March 22) said the core of reactor No.1 was now a worry with its temperature

    at 380-390 Celsius (715-735 Fahrenheit). "We need to strive to bring that

    down a bit," Muto told a news conference, adding that the reactor was

    built to run at a temperature of 302 C (575 F







    @@Timeline See Japan Nuclear Timeline

    Spentfuel shipping cask


    ·  Tsunami




    Summary: Fukushima’s problem was a 5Meter Seawall vs 14 Meter Tsunami Waves


    Daiichi plant was designed to withstand tsunami surges of 5.7 meters and Daini was 5.2 meters but was struck by at least 7 meters

    which was now revised to 14 meters high surges in some parts of Japan. The Fukushima nuclear plant relied on a 5-meter-high seawall. The wall did not work for a 10-meter-high tsunami, and eventually this failure caused a nuclear meltdown

    Engineer Kit Miyamoto surveys damage in Japan after earthquake POSTED: Thursday, March 17, 2011 at 08:31 AM PT BY: Aaron Spencer Kit Miyamoto, an earthquake and structural engineer who’s done work in Haiti and other international locales, is in Japan after the country’s 8.9 magnitude earthquake and ensuing tsunami.


    In early statements, Tepco had said the tsunami was at least seven metres high. Later the company increased its estimate to ten metres at the Daiichi plant and 12 metres at Daini. Today's figures describe a 14-metre tsunami at both plants. By regulation, the Daiichi plant

    was fully prepared for a tsunami of up to 5.7 metres. At Daini, ten kilometres along the coast, the design basis was 5.2 metres. link


    The plant was protected by a seawall designed to withstand a tsunami of 5.7 metres (19 ft), but a few minutes after the earthquake it was struck by a 14-metre (46 ft) tsunami[5] wave that easilytopped the seawall


    Summary: Fukushima was built for a 5 meter tsunami, hit by 15 meter. Other plant san ofre in San Diego is built for 30 ft. Tidal surge can move a lot of water very far inland and very high, and swamp generators

    Arnie Gunderson oncontainment leakage | Transcript and supporting docs "The other thing is the tidal surge. Now, Fukushima had a tsunami. They were designed for a six or seven meter tsunami around 20 feet and, in fact, the tsunami was 15 meters. At the California plants, San Onofre, they are designed for a 30 foot tsunami, but yet weknow there was a 45 foot tsunami in Japan. So, we need to take a look at these tidal surges that can wipe out, maybe not the diesels, but the pumps that pump the water to the diesels. On the East Coast, you have Florida and the tidal surge from a hurricane. What that means is that the hurricane can push an enormous wall of water inland. For instance, the Turkey Point plants can get inundated by the flood from that tidal surge. We need to look at these events, that right now we have said are impossible, in light of what proved to bepossible at Fukushima. "


    @@Spent fuel

    shipping cask


    @@Nuclear fuel

    shipping cask


    Summary: (wikipedia) In the case of some materials, such as fresh uranium

    fuel assemblies, the radiation levels are negligible and no shielding is

    required. Other materials, such as spent fuel and high-level waste, are highly

    radioactive and require special handling. To limit the risk in transporting

    highly radioactive materials, containers known as spent nuclear fuel shipping

    casks are used which are designed to maintain integrity under normal

    transportation conditions and during hypothetical accident conditions.