Japan Earthquake

Japan Earthquake | Page 27

I believe that even the military was told very little while info traveled down the chains of command. It seems like all of the people I communicate with that have a friend/family member on the same ship heard the exact same answer. How could anyone NOT be concerned or worried about a conspiracy? It's classic, like when you're a kid and you get together with your siblings to hide a lie: When all your stories match up perfectly, its been doctored. So sad that the media is affected when they should be informing. Very disheartening.
by stef 3/26/2011 4:06:00 PM

@Nancy I'll keep this site going as long as possible
by George Gibb 3/26/2011 4:06:36 PM

Please note: I use conspiracy lightly. I'm no survivalist in the mountains of montana- but I believe what we are told is doctored- and that is total garbage.
by stef 3/26/2011 4:06:54 PM

@Nancy No worries, we're here for the long haul.
by Jim Carver 3/26/2011 4:07:01 PM

Talking about conspiracies: A few days ago, wikipedia had a blip that stated that Kan "ordered" the spraying of sea water. It's on Reuters somewhere, but the link has been updated and the comment has been removed.
by Karen Warren 3/26/2011 4:07:54 PM

@Joshua Diamond My concern would be the gate that separates the dry well head. If it was torn open the water would be halved and the fuel rods tossed about like toys in a bathtub. And that was a 7.0 on the video the japan quake was a 9.0 so that's a pretty dramatic difference.
by NHK Listener 3/26/2011 4:08:36 PM

@ Karen; I know exactly what you're talking about. I noted that also.
by stef 3/26/2011 4:08:41 PM

@Karen Warren Revisionist history?
by Jim Carver 3/26/2011 4:08:58 PM

Another personal observation: The New York Times is really digging into the story.
by Karen Warren 3/26/2011 4:09:20 PM

@ Karen- thats because New York is ruthless!
by stef 3/26/2011 4:09:45 PM

@stef @Paul For a while, along with mixing up Plant numbers and Reactor numbers Fukushima plant number 1, reactor number 3) there seemed to be a tendency to mix up the builders as well. If I hadn't read up on the plant on wiki the first day, I wouldn't have known that GE actually designed and built the site. News outlets would drop in Toshiba or Hitachi as builders when mentioning the reactor vessels they built. As soon as the talk started zeroing in on GE, the story was moved below the fold.
by radioguy 3/26/2011 4:10:20 PM

Does anyone now how they plan on containing the water pumped from the turbine buildings?
by Jeff 3/26/2011 4:11:17 PM

@Karen Smart move on their part when every other outlet on the planet seems to be done with it.
by radioguy 3/26/2011 4:11:23 PM

I have to go. My OCD meter is flagging (ha ha!), and I have stuff to do. If Bev shows up, please ask her for the 'white paper' link that she posted. I went back last night, found her post and the link isn't working. Hopefully, she saved it on her PC/Mac. Thanks all!
by Karen Warren 3/26/2011 4:11:39 PM

@george here is a loggin with my google account . I change it a little to fit, I can't choose another nickname, but it's quite the same. so it's the last time you have to auto-me ;-)
by Future Isnow 3/26/2011 4:11:50 PM

@ radioguy- I think this is actually a much bigger issue than anyone is making it out to be. I'm really concerned with those articles that dean posted on MOX.
by stef 3/26/2011 4:13:01 PM

@futureisnow good to know thanks
by George Gibb 3/26/2011 4:13:15 PM

@radioguy Remember the piece about the engineer who quit GE over safety issues in the design of the plant?
by Jim Carver 3/26/2011 4:13:36 PM

@stef well how about this article on MOX then? :) www.ans.org
by borrrden 3/26/2011 4:14:48 PM

@Jim this enginer have explained for several hours what was his thinking about the situation, I posted several links for the ustream page, it's very informative
by Future Isnow 3/26/2011 4:15:21 PM

www.ustream.tv his name is Tanaka
by Future Isnow 3/26/2011 4:16:04 PM

Another: Fukushima Engineer Says He Helped Cover Up Flaw at Dai-Ichi Reactor No. 4
www.bloomberg.com
by Karen Warren 3/26/2011 4:17:12 PM

@ borrrden; Thanks for the article.
by stef 3/26/2011 4:17:16 PM

Out for a bit, Keep the info flowing George, et al!!!!
by Dennis Tucker Jr 3/26/2011 4:17:44 PM

unfortunately, their stream is a bit messy to follow the recorded one, and one is still missing
by Future Isnow 3/26/2011 4:17:50 PM

@borrrden; What is your take on that article?
by stef 3/26/2011 4:18:06 PM

But I have more understood what happen than with 3 hours of Nhk, lol
by Future Isnow 3/26/2011 4:18:24 PM

@stef I am not in a position to comment on it. The one thing that I take away from it is that this plant has much less MOX fuel than many other plants do (<6% as opposed to 40% or so).
by borrrden 3/26/2011 4:19:26 PM

@Jim Carver - Yes. Adding the GE engineers issues to the CNIC bit Dean posted about the questionable MOX assemblies it's not good. It's the failing point of so many systems: enough redundancy to cover one bad actor in a system where you've built other bad actors in by trying to cut costs and corners.
by radioguy 3/26/2011 4:20:04 PM

Latest update: www.iaea.org Really out of here now... :-)
by Karen Warren 3/26/2011 4:21:08 PM

@borrrden, yes- thats basically what they are saying. But, what I'm wondering- and I still didn't totally understand- is whether it is a small amount or large- it was still deemed dangerous overall. I think that article just points out "We should be more careful, oh and by the way...we shouldn't use mox so much"
by stef 3/26/2011 4:21:22 PM

Oh, another useful link: www.stormsurf.com Check the wind tab.
by radioguy 3/26/2011 4:21:33 PM

What do I know...I went to school for business/comm. :)
by stef 3/26/2011 4:21:35 PM

Failure studies usually focus on a single component failure - they don't have a grasp on the different permutations that occur when multiple components fail at once.
by Bobby1 3/26/2011 4:22:04 PM

enenews.com
by WolfDK 3/26/2011 4:25:10 PM

@Karen Warren "On March 2, 2011, just days before the start of the current earthquake catastrophe, Japan's nuclear regulators lobbed accusations of mass negligence against Tepco. It alleged that Tepco had failed to inspect 33 pieces of equipment at the Fukushima-Daiichi plant, one of the sites of the current catastrophe, including central cooling system elements in the six reactors, and spent fuel pools that hadn't been inspected according to regulations. The company has since admitted to having made the errors." (Japanese Nuclear Plant Operator Plagued by Scandal www.spiegel.de )
by kgriff 3/26/2011 4:25:14 PM

the triumpf of cool marketing (nuclear business). sethgodin.typepad.com
by hans 3/26/2011 4:26:14 PM

Fukushima No. 3 has “long vertical crack” down side reactor vessel – Nuclear Exec.
March 25th, 2011 at 06:02 PM enenews.com
by WolfDK 3/26/2011 4:26:26 PM

@stef on a "normal fuel, after the fission, plutonium is 1% (wikipedia) With Mox, it is from 6 to 7 %, before fusion, which is a fair difference . France have 12 plants using Mox, the other one was Japan. it's true that it is know since 1960, but it was rejected first by the usa. Usa which would have in future some mox fuel plant . for the moment, it's france, switzerland, and Japan . Japan have developped it's own Mox production, which is not yet operationnal, in the north east of Japan
by Future Isnow 3/26/2011 4:26:59 PM

@ Wolf- okay so now that this is definitely the case which we all knew but they're confirming it...what has to be done going forward?
by stef 3/26/2011 4:27:02 PM

@WolfDK That article couldn't possibly be more vague on its source...."A senior nuclear executive who insisted on anonymity but has broad contacts in Japan"
by borrrden 3/26/2011 4:27:57 PM

@ Borrrden- CNN has used the same tactic- when discussing the possibility of a mandatory evac with personnel.
by stef 3/26/2011 4:28:44 PM

@wolf article seen 2 days ago, I agree with Borrrden . no source: "some one say..."
by Future Isnow 3/26/2011 4:29:00 PM

@WolfDK I am not keen on the NYT's source for that article. "A senior nuclear executive who insisted on anonymity but has broad contacts in Japan" -- in other words "Some suit who stands to make money on this and claims to know someone who knows someone who lives in Japan and heard about the reactor accident". Also, if you read the rest of the article, they also quote others who say that the found radioisotopes can be explained in other ways.
by Joshua Diamond 3/26/2011 4:29:05 PM