Slashdot Mirror

Except the bulk of news from Fukushima is backed up by independent expert Arnie Gundersen.

Arnie is an energy advisor with 39-years of nuclear power engineering experience. A former nuclear industry senior vice president, he earned his Bachelor's and Master's Degrees in nuclear engineering, holds a nuclear safety patent, and was a licensed reactor operator.

Of course if you believe the corporations, governments and their employees involved will tell you the whole story, you won't get much information information about all that has been leaked, and what the people of Fukushima REALLY thinks of their government, so will most probably dismiss the whole thing.

However, such blank dismissal is just cognitive dissonance, nothing else. But just stay with the blue pill, you probably won't be able to deal with conflicting information anyways.

Btw, NO, US is not checking imported foods from Japan for nuclear radiation. Hillary Clinton signed agreement on that AFTER the Fukushima disaster to ensure everything from Japan continues to be imported regardless of hazards. Look it up.

Japanese officials confronted with question wether people in Fukushima has the same rights as other people to protect themselves against radiation, and their surprising answer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=rVuGwc9dlhQ [youtube.com]

VIDEO: Fukushima children forced to drink radioactive milk at school:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Aq4JG9ULVNE [youtube.com]

Fukushima secret news:

http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/much-of-northern-japan-uninhabitable-due-to-nuclear-radiation [endoftheam...ndream.com]
http://www.independentaustralia.net/2011/media-2/fukushima-meltdown-caldicott-says-japan-may-become-uninhabitable-media-silent/ [independentaustralia.net]
http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2011/06/10/japan-deal-radioactive-sewage-crisis-produce-cement-25231/ [alexanderhiggins.com]
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/remember-fukushima-its-back [zerohedge.com]

US to NOT check for radiation in imported goods and foods from Japan (made after Fukushima started melting down):
http://www.nuclear-news.net/2011/08/20/hillary-clintons-pact-with-japan-to-downplay-fukushima-radiation-risks/ [nuclear-news.net]
http://www.examiner.com/human-rights-in-national/radiating-americans-with-fukushima-rain-food-secret-clinton-pact [examiner.com]

Experts: Fukushima 'off-scale' lethal radiation level infers 100 millions dying:
http://www.examiner.com/human-rights-in-national/experts-fukushima-off-scale-lethal-radiation-level-100s-millions-deaths [examiner.com]

Independent measurements (uncalibrated, non-discriminatory - but shows no "need" for global mass-panic yet):
http://www.radiationnetwork.com/Message.htm [radiationnetwork.com]

Independent news (only ones still covering Fukushima):
http://www.fairewinds.com/ [fairewinds.com]
http://enenews.com/ [enenews.com]

Japanese government changing the "safe health standards" just moments after disaster struck. Now includes absurd amounts of radiation 20-30 times more than previously, which were already 2-10 times more than most Western countries'. The change document is of course provided, also with a "safe" limit of "plutonium and other ALPHA emitters". Plutonium! The most toxic substance known to life!

Raising the exposure limits were allegedly done to increase safety for citizens, something you'd expect in a Hitchcock movie..

"Becquerels" and Japan's changing "safety" standards for radiation in food and water
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oc6FPIK1VaY [youtube.com]

"Detoxify or Die: Natural Radiation Protection Therapies for Coping With the Fallout of the Fukushima Nuclear Meltdown":

http://www.he

I reserve my comment until after that guy fro http://fairewinds.com/updates/ has given us his analysis on this.
He KNOWS this stuff.

Re What are the possibilities?
http://fairewinds.com/content/cancer-risk-young-children-near-fukushima-daiichi-underestimated
January 17, 2012 Arnie Gundersen - energy advisor with 39-years of nuclear power engineering experience -(Bachelor's and Master's Degrees in nuclear engineering)

Crisis in Fukushima and Japan is far from over. It's just begun. Expect to see "lost decades" due to all kinds of sicknesses due to radiation exposure. Please study the material below, also for your own knowledge and safety:

MUST SEE VIDEO: Japanese officials confronted with question wether people in Fukushima has the same rights as other people to protect themselves against radiation, and their surprising answer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=rVuGwc9dlhQ

VIDEO: Fukushima children forced to drink radioactive milk at school:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Aq4JG9ULVNE

Fukushima-get up to date on repressed news:
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/much-of-northern-japan-uninhabitable-due-to-nuclear-radiation
http://www.independentaustralia.net/2011/media-2/fukushima-meltdown-caldicott-says-japan-may-become-uninhabitable-media-silent/
http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2011/06/10/japan-deal-radioactive-sewage-crisis-produce-cement-25231/
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/remember-fukushima-its-back

Secret pacts to NOT check for radiation in imported goods and foods from Japan (made after Fukushima started melting down):
http://www.nuclear-news.net/2011/08/20/hillary-clintons-pact-with-japan-to-downplay-fukushima-radiation-risks/
http://www.examiner.com/human-rights-in-national/radiating-americans-with-fukushima-rain-food-secret-clinton-pact

Experts: Fukushima 'off-scale' lethal radiation level infers 100 millions dying:
http://www.examiner.com/human-rights-in-national/experts-fukushima-off-scale-lethal-radiation-level-100s-millions-deaths

Closer to home:
http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/uriks/article4151087.ece

Independent measurements (uncalibrated, non-discriminatory - but shows no "need" for global mass-panic yet):
http://www.radiationnetwork.com/Message.htm

Independent news (only ones still covering Fukushima):
http://www.fairewinds.com/
http://enenews.com/

Japanese government changing the "safe health standards" just moments after disaster struck. Now includes absurd amounts of radiation 20-30 times more than previously, which were already 2-10 times more than most Western countries'. The change document is of course provided, also with a "safe" limit of "plutonium and other ALPHA emitters". Plutonium! The most toxic substance known to life!

Raising the exposure limits were allegedly done to increase safety for citizens, something you'd expect in a Hitchcock movie..

"Becquerels" and Japan's changing "safety" standards for radiation in food and water
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oc6FPIK1VaY

"Evacuate Children!" Rally & Demo in Koriyama City, Fukushima Pref. on Oct. 15, 2011"

MUST SEE VIDEO!!:
Japanese officials confronted with question wether people in Fukushima has the same rights as other people to protect themselves against radiation, and their surprising answer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=rVuGwc9dlhQ

VIDEO: Fukushima children forced to drink radioactive milk at school:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Aq4JG9ULVNE

Fukushima-get up to date on repressed news:

http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/much-of-northern-japan-uninhabitable-due-to-nuclear-radiation
http://www.independentaustralia.net/2011/media-2/fukushima-meltdown-caldicott-says-japan-may-become-uninhabitable-media-silent/
http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2011/06/10/japan-deal-radioactive-sewage-crisis-produce-cement-25231/
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/remember-fukushima-its-back

Secret pacts to NOT check for radiation in imported goods and foods from Japan (made after Fukushima started melting down):
http://www.nuclear-news.net/2011/08/20/hillary-clintons-pact-with-japan-to-downplay-fukushima-radiation-risks/
http://www.examiner.com/human-rights-in-national/radiating-americans-with-fukushima-rain-food-secret-clinton-pact

Experts: Fukushima 'off-scale' lethal radiation level infers 100 millions dying:
http://www.examiner.com/human-rights-in-national/experts-fukushima-off-scale-lethal-radiation-level-100s-millions-deaths

Closer to home:
http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/uriks/article4151087.ece

Independent measurements (uncalibrated, non-discriminatory - but shows no "need" for global mass-panic yet):
http://www.radiationnetwork.com/Message.htm

Independent news (only ones still covering Fukushima):
http://www.fairewinds.com/
http://enenews.com/

Japanese government changing the "safe health standards" just moments after disaster struck. Now includes absurd amounts of radiation 20-30 times more than previously, which were already 2-10 times more than most Western countries'. The change document is of course provided, also with a "safe" limit of "plutonium and other ALPHA emitters". Plutonium! The most toxic substance known to life!

Raising the exposure limits were allegedly done to increase safety for citizens, something you'd expect in a Hitchcock movie..

"Becquerels" and Japan's changing "safety" standards for radiation in food and water
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oc6FPIK1VaY

"Detoxify or Die: Natural Radiation Protection Therapies for Coping With the Fallout of the Fukushima Nuclear Meltdown":

http://www.health-matrix.net/2011/03/19/d

For real updates on Fukushima and nuclear tech in general see http://fairewinds.com/updates

E.g. see the info at http://fairewinds.com/updates

The NRC is slow, weak and not well informed.

Nice try, top nuclear experts already predicted the core has melted days after the event due to plutonium being detected miles away from the reactor:
http://www.fairewinds.com/content/fukushima-one-step-forward-and-four-steps-back-each-unit-challenged-new-problems

Things are worse than people realise. Units 1 and 2 are both leaking water from the pressure vessel and containment vessel. Also, the quake craked the site foundations. So the contaminated water is seeping into the groundwater.
http://fairewinds.com/content/fukushima-groundwater-contamination-worst-nuclear-history
They have found highly radioactive sludge in several sewage treatment plants. http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20110513p2a00m0na019000c.html

http://fairewinds.com/updates ha
Try the same news in video form from a US energy advisor with 39-years of nuclear power engineering (Bachelor's and Master's Degrees in nuclear engineering) experience.
http://fairewinds.com/content/who-we-are

http://fairewinds.com/updates ha
Try the same news in video form from a US energy advisor with 39-years of nuclear power engineering (Bachelor's and Master's Degrees in nuclear engineering) experience.
http://fairewinds.com/content/who-we-are

As well as that there has been some speculation that the explosion in unit 3 was more than just a hydrogen explosion. If you compare the unit 1 and unit 3 explosions, you see the unit 3 was far larger in magintude, plus there is a flash right where the spent fuel pool is located. Also pieces of nuclear fuel rods were found 2 km from the site. Arnie Gundersen speculates that this was caused by a "prompt criticality" in the fuel pool, triggered by the hydrogen explosion. http://fairewinds.com/updates

Please see the videos at http://fairewinds.com/updates for some truth.

Speaking of brittleness, nice demonstration of embrittlement of fuel rods by a nuclear engineer: http://www.fairewinds.com/updates

Plenty of people covering it in enough detail that industry apologists won't win.

See fairewinds.com.... Closing Ranks: The NRC, the Nuclear Industry, and TEPCO are Limiting the Flow of Information.... interesting.

On the other hand, we've had about 63 deaths occurring directly from nuclear incidents since nuclear power started. Now, while others have obviously had larger cancer risks and such resulting in death, but it is nearly impossible to be 100% certain about how many of those have occurred.

As you obviously know from the caveats you include after this statistic, the deaths from Chernobyl are in the thousands, and possibly tens of thousands, which you discount because 'it's impossible to be 100% certain'. So why do you repeat this misleading figure of 63? Like the climate change debate, debate on nuclear power has been poisoned by both sides attempting to distort the statistics. You're not going to persuade anyone by producing obviously cooked statistics or attacking straw men - no one is suggesting going all coal power instead, apart from you.

Nuclear (fission) is not the safest type of power we have at the moment, for that, you'd have to look at solar or wind, fusion or perhaps hydro (though globally there have been some accidents with that). Those alternatives have not been fully explored yet, and perhaps we should spend more money on exploring other options than building new nuclear plants? Thermal solar for example could provide good baseline power on a large enough scale, with zero risk of pollution or serious accidents.

Nuclear power does provide good baseline power, it doesn't cause huge numbers of deaths, in spite of several serious accidents, but it is very expensive and it does cause some deaths and the potential for catastrophic accidents. Fukushima still has the potential for serious pollution of the surrounding land, and we should not downplay the situation there. Here is a good summary of the situation from a guy who handled recovery at TMI:

http://www.fairewinds.com/updates

Given the lax regulatory environment in some countries which have a lot of nuclear plants (the US, China and former USSR), ageing nuclear power plants are at serious risk of problems and many have had their lifetimes extended past their intended operating lifespan (as Fukushima did). There are plants in the US for example which have had warnings of serious failures in safety for decades, and *nothing* has been done about it. Here is one example:

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/03/28/us-entergy-indianpoint-idUKTRE72R60W20110328

This is a serious concern, which could perhaps be alleviated by building more modern plants, but there are other concerns with nuclear power which I believe should be addressed first. For a start, the astronomical costs of decommissioning, fuel storage, and accident clean-up (which are currently borne by governments, not the nuclear industry), mean that fission is not really economically viable IMHO. That doesn't mean it warrants scare-mongering about fallout or banning all nuclear plants when we don't have alternatives, but we should be frank and open about the dangers and costs involved rather than trying to sweep them under the carpet. Opponents of nuclear power are not always irrational fear-mongers.

If we have no alternatives right now, we might need to keep these old fission plants running, but we should be clear about the dangers, and urgently exploring alternative sources of power (fusion, hydro etc), not trying to cheerlead for a nuclear industry which does not have our best interests at heart, has a focus on profit above safety, and depends on government largesse to deal with its problems of waste storage and decommissioning. There will be serious economic consequences from Fukushima for hundreds of years for Japan and further earthquakes there make it questionable whether you can safely site nuclear plants in the country.

Decommissioning costs for Sizewell A for example (2 reactors, which shut down normally), are so far £1.2 billion, and are ongoing, while build cost

On the other hand, we've had about 63 deaths occurring directly from nuclear incidents since nuclear power started. Now, while others have obviously had larger cancer risks and such resulting in death, but it is nearly impossible to be 100% certain about how many of those have occurred.

As you obviously know from the caveats you include after this statistic, the deaths from Chernobyl are in the thousands, and possibly tens of thousands, which you discount because 'it's impossible to be 100% certain'. So why do you repeat this misleading figure of 63? Like the climate change debate, debate on nuclear power has been poisoned by both sides attempting to distort the statistics. You're not going to persuade anyone by producing obviously cooked statistics or attacking straw men - no one is suggesting going all coal power instead, apart from you.

Nuclear power does provide good baseline power, it doesn't cause huge numbers of deaths, in spite of several serious accidents, but it is very expensive and it does cause some deaths and the potential for catastrophic accidents. Fukushima still has the potential for serious pollution of the surrounding land, and we should not downplay the situation there. Here is a good summary of the situation from a guy who handled recovery at TMI:

http://www.fairewinds.com/updates

Given the lax regulatory environment in some countries which have a lot of nuclear plants (the US, China and former USSR), ageing nuclear power plants are at serious risk of problems and many have had their lifetimes extended past their intended operating lifespan (as Fukushima did). There are plants in the US for example which have had warnings of serious failures in safety for decades, and *nothing* has been done about it. Here is one example:

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/03/28/us-entergy-indianpoint-idUKTRE72R60W20110328

This is a serious concern, which could perhaps be alleviated by building more modern plants, but there are other concerns with nuclear power which I believe should be addressed first. For a start, the astronomical costs of decommissioning, fuel storage, and accident clean-up (which are currently borne by governments, not the nuclear industry), mean that fission is not really economically viable IMHO. That doesn't mean it warrants scare-mongering about fallout or banning all nuclear plants when we don't have alternatives, but we should be frank and open about the dangers and costs involved rather than trying to sweep them under the carpet. Opponents of nuclear power are not always irrational fear-mongers.

If we have no alternatives right now, we might need to keep these old fission plants running, but we should be clear about the dangers, and urgently exploring alternative sources of power (fusion, hydro etc), not trying to cheerlead for a nuclear industry which does not have our best interests at heart, has a focus on profit above safety, and depends on government largesse to deal with its problems of waste storage and decommissioning. There will be serious economic consequences from Fukushima for hundreds of years for Japan and further earthquakes there make it questionable whether you can safely site nuclear plants in the country.

Decommissioning costs for Sizewell A for example (2 reactors, which shut down normally), are so far £1.2 billion, and are ongoing, while build cost was £65 million and decommissioning was first estimated at £500m but has since ballooned in cost. It recently narrowly avoided meltdown in the spent fuel ponds due to an unobserved leak, which thankfully was found in time by chance (a contractor doing his laundry). That would have been very expensive to clean up and could have created something similar to Fukushima (on a smaller scale). Sellafield (another plant in the UK) has estimated cleanup costs of £31.5 billion. Those