Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Physicist: There was no Fukushima nuclear disaster
CFACT.org ^ | October 12, 2013 | Kelvin Kemm

Posted on 10/29/2013 9:11:15 AM PDT by Twotone

I have watched a TV programme called ‘Fear Factor.’ In the series there are contestants who have to confront their worst fears to see who bails out and who can fight the fear and get through.

(Excerpt) Read more at cfact.org ...


TOPICS: Conspiracy; Health/Medicine; Science; Society
KEYWORDS: fukushima; nuclearpower; radiation
Very interesting article, and some very informative comments about Fukushima at the site.
1 posted on 10/29/2013 9:11:16 AM PDT by Twotone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Twotone

My computer gives me a warning when I try to reach that site.


2 posted on 10/29/2013 9:16:50 AM PDT by cuban leaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

it was interesting. It will also be interesting to read this author’s opinion after reviewing cancer and birth defect data in the following decades.


3 posted on 10/29/2013 9:21:56 AM PDT by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

I didn’t have any difficulty, & I have good anti-virus software.


4 posted on 10/29/2013 9:28:32 AM PDT by Twotone (Marte Et Clypeo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

Yes. Fukushima is similar to Two Mile Island. Hysteria all over the place, nuclear plants shut down, no more nuclear development, and all over maybe ONE casualty.

The Tsunami waves did terrible damage to Japan, and they wrecked that nuclear plant. But the amount of radiation released is negligible—although I’ve heard people say that you shouldn’t go swimming in the ocean off California if the currents are flowing the wrong way.

Nuclear power is far cleaner and safer than other kinds of power—and it’s basically renewable, if someone would just cancel the Jimmy Carter rules that say you have to take all the nuclear waste out and bury it. No, burial of most “nuclear waste” is not a requirement of nuclear power as such—it’s a Jimmy Carter regulation, and you can guess how much sense anything that he did makes.


5 posted on 10/29/2013 9:28:44 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stormer

It’s hard to know who to believe, but we do know that we get too much hysterical nonsense out of the environmentalists. We need to step back and make sure we’re looking at good, solid scientific facts. It’ll just take a while to get that.


6 posted on 10/29/2013 9:31:41 AM PDT by Twotone (Marte Et Clypeo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

There is no spoon.


7 posted on 10/29/2013 9:43:11 AM PDT by epluribus_2 (he had the best mom - ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

In my town there is a “superfund” site a huge park like area surrounded by a fence. When some methane gas leaked about 30 years ago it caused a nearby upscale housing development to stop in its tracks, new homes were boarded up.

I called the EPA to get the facts. The ONLY risk is that its possible some tiny streams will develop metal levels above those permitted because wild waterfowl might frequent them. Even this has NEVER happened. The site remains fenced 30 years later.


8 posted on 10/29/2013 9:43:51 AM PDT by Williams (No Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

On NPR (of all places) a guy who sounded like he had impressive experience in these matters, said all those tanks where they are storing the “radioactive” water are in fact holding water that is far below international radioactive limits. There is no rational reason not to dump that clean water into the ocean and the only reason they don’t is they know there will be OUTRAGE over POISONING the oceans.


9 posted on 10/29/2013 9:44:05 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

The author is correct in many of his points, but I would caution everyone to not gloss over the potential for real danger at Fukushima, and I certainly wouldn’t title an article ‘There was no Fukushima nuclear disaster’.

The melted remnants of the cores are sitting on their respective containment floors. Thus two layers of safety have been breached, with only one layer remaining. No one knows how well containment integrity withstood the massive earthquake, nor does anyone know when the next massive earthquake might occur.

Furthermore, thousands have been displaced from their homes, out of good sense caution.

However, the author is very correct that the danger that has actually ocurred is way overblown.


10 posted on 10/29/2013 9:45:43 AM PDT by kidd (No blood for ego)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone
I was always told that if a nuclear bomb were to detonate, the area would be radiated and uninhabitable for hundreds of years......

Hiroshima is looking pretty good these days.........

11 posted on 10/29/2013 9:46:34 AM PDT by Hot Tabasco (Make sure you have removed the kleenex from your pockets before doing laundry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Hot Tabasco

I hear Hiroshima and Nagasaki are modern cities due to the rebuilding. Does anyone know what remaining effect the bombings had?


12 posted on 10/29/2013 10:04:21 AM PDT by gr8eman (Bandying nice with wannabe commies is over! You're either for freedom or you're not!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Hot Tabasco

Anti-nuclear hysteria is just that. Eco-nuts panic over just about anything that doesn’t fit their organic/dream-like existence. ted kennedy killed more people in the US than any nuclear accidents.


13 posted on 10/29/2013 10:06:11 AM PDT by hal ogen (First Amendment or Reeducation Camp?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
No, burial of most “nuclear waste” is not a requirement of nuclear power as such

Amen to that, Brother!

Years ago I worked at a nuclear power plant during a refueling (called an "outage"). We were doing routine maintenance while the reactor was shut down. Once the job was finished we had a container partially filled with "low level nuclear waste". We were required to weigh the container and certify that weight in triplicate. Three forms, three people verify & sign.

What was this "low level nuclear waste"? The power tools and hand tools used in the "hot" work areas are kept in the secure "hot tool storage" between "outages", stored in heavy polyethylene bags which are taped shut with duct tape. When we checked these out of "hot tool storage" at the beginning of the job we removed these plastic bags. These bags and duct tape were now "low level nuclear waste". Disposable booties and rubber gloves also made up a large part of the total.

If we came out of a hot area and a small piece of mildly radioactive dust or dirt on our protective clothing or booties set off the Geiger counter alarm, we used a strip of 2" wide masking tape, wrapped a sticky side out around a hand, to grab the offending particle. This now became "low level nuclear waste". The Geiger alarm was set to sound at a reading of 150 dpm. IF you go to a sporting goods store and check the replacement mantle for Coleman gas lanterns you will find they read 2000 dpm.

14 posted on 10/29/2013 10:07:08 AM PDT by BwanaNdege (Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. J.F. Kennedy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: kidd
thousands have been displaced from their homes, out of good sense caution.

Thousands of homes were also destroyed by the tsunami........coincidence?

15 posted on 10/29/2013 10:16:20 AM PDT by Hot Tabasco (Make sure you have removed the kleenex from your pockets before doing laundry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: gr8eman
Does anyone know what remaining effect the bombings had?

The effects were so widespread that Detroit has never recovered.......

16 posted on 10/29/2013 10:18:13 AM PDT by Hot Tabasco (Make sure you have removed the kleenex from your pockets before doing laundry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

I just read this article about Fukushima — methinks there hasn’t been near enough hysteria over this mess, which could indeed play out to be an “On the Beach” scenario - no mention of GE as one of the incompetents here, but they should also be included. If you are anti-nuke or pro-nuke, it doesn’t matter - we need the Facts - we deserve to know what is really going on and why the MSM blackout.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36649.htm


17 posted on 10/29/2013 10:18:46 AM PDT by Sioux-san
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Sioux-san

The Japanese company was to blame for building the reactor in a vulnerable place and not protecting it sufficiently from a tsunami. Apparently they are rare on that part of the coast, but even a slight chance should have been avoided.

As for the duplicity and silence of the MSM, that’s what they always do. It’s politically correct to hate nuclear power, so they hate nuclear power. They don’t want to know the truth, they just want to ensure that nuclear power continues to be blocked.


18 posted on 10/29/2013 10:32:53 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Hot Tabasco

Tens of thousands of homes near the coast were damaged by the tsunami. Tens of thousands of homes were damaged by the earthquake. They will have to be repaired/rebuilt.

But because of Fukushima, thousands of intact homes have been evacuated until the danger has minimized. I believe that some of them may be re-occupied sometime this decade. Most will be ready for immediate re-occupancy.


19 posted on 10/29/2013 10:43:21 AM PDT by kidd (No blood for ego)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Hot Tabasco

Allow me to indulge a pet-peeve. If, as you write, the “area would be radiated,” that means that the land would be emitting some sort of radiation whereas, more properly, a target is irradiated. Look at it this way, the Sun radiates light and the Earth is irradiated by the light.

I thoroughly enjoyed a reporter commenting that the Fukushima accident radiated people. This statement means that people were flying through air with the Fukushima plant as the point of origin. The reporter meant to say that the Fukushima plant “irradiated” people.

Similarly, you meant to write “the area would be irradiated.”

Sorry for being the pedant.


20 posted on 10/29/2013 10:44:39 AM PDT by bagman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege

External contamination and exposure are manageable occupational hazards. Time, distance, shielding, PPE, dosimetry. On the job we have all sorts of controls for safety.

The problem for the general public is internal contamination, primarily due to bioaccumulation of isotopes that are ingested (cesium, strontium) or inhaled (radioiodine, respirable dust). Particularly insidious are the alpha emitters, since those can be difficult to detect and from a radiation quality standpoint are about 20X worse than gamma photons. Much of what we accumulate in plant work or (especially) in NORM scenarios is alpha emmitting.

I am all for tight accounting for and segregation of radioactive waste. The point about the very slightly radioactive waster is valid, though I think it needs to be dumped out in very deep ocean, not near shore where it will bioaccumulate in seafood. The Japanese diet (small ‘d’) is VERY seafood-dependent. Its all about keeping those pesky Bequerels out of the human environment.


21 posted on 10/29/2013 10:49:39 AM PDT by SargeK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

Funny how leftists keep insisting they are the bastion of freely available science and against the type of superstitions calling a gun evil.


22 posted on 10/29/2013 11:14:26 AM PDT by lavaroise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
The Japanese company was to blame for building the reactor in a vulnerable place

Well blow me down! I would have thought it was the Japanese govt. that chose the location for the plant, not the company that built it.

And who woulda thought 45 years ago that a once in a millenium tsunami would come along and destroy it and that coastline.........

And while we're using your logic, how stupid were those multi-generational people in choosing to live on that coast anyway?

23 posted on 10/29/2013 12:40:21 PM PDT by Hot Tabasco (Make sure you have removed the kleenex from your pockets before doing laundry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: bagman
Similarly, you meant to write “the area would be irradiated.”

If you say so.....since I barely made it thru high school I'll have to take your word for it.

24 posted on 10/29/2013 12:46:00 PM PDT by Hot Tabasco (Make sure you have removed the kleenex from your pockets before doing laundry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SargeK

I would have to get someone who REALLY knows what he is talking about get all technical on me!

Just kidding. Thanks for the detailed, informative reply!

As you say, just be careful not to ingest alpha emitters and wash your outsides and that will take care of a lot of the problem.

Is the contaminated water mostly a problem with tritium? Decay releases beta radiation?


25 posted on 10/29/2013 1:20:05 PM PDT by BwanaNdege (Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. J.F. Kennedy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Nuclear power is far cleaner and safer than other kinds of power

It is until it isn't. Then it's a real mess. The cost of failure is staggering. There's a major accident it seems like every 10 years. If you add up the total costs of nuclear it is far more expensive than coal and natural gas. It's in the cost range of wind power, which is why no nuclear plants are being built without a whole lot of government.

26 posted on 10/29/2013 1:22:03 PM PDT by Reeses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Reeses
If you add up the total costs of nuclear it is far more expensive than coal and natural gas

Post proof. I do not believe that.

27 posted on 10/29/2013 1:23:43 PM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

Thank you for this report, it mirrors my own beliefs so far.


28 posted on 10/29/2013 2:13:06 PM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

3 Mile Island was 24/7 with the Media as I recall. China Syndrome, the movie, came out shortly thereafter. Talk about Hype.

I look at Fukushima the same way I looked at the BP oil debacle. International help was needed & offered & rejected by our PINO until things got good and greasy. In Japan’s case, this mess will affect more than just the people who live in that area if some serious intervention doesn’t happen soon, IMHO.


29 posted on 10/29/2013 3:21:10 PM PDT by Sioux-san
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: central_va
Post proof. I do not believe that.

Wind average estimate: $86.60/MWh
Advanced nuclear: $108.40/MWh

From: The real reason to fight nuclear power has nothing to do with health risks

Suggested conservative Cato org article (convinced me): Nuclear Energy: Risky Business

30 posted on 10/29/2013 6:00:35 PM PDT by Reeses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

There were stone markers hundreds of years old giving warnings of the hazards of tsunami in that location, as well as others. They built inside of the warned area.

Sometimes, no matter how “stupid” or “primitive” you think something is, it’s just plain worth listening to regardless...


31 posted on 10/29/2013 8:19:26 PM PDT by Fire_on_High (RIP City of Heroes and Paragon Studios, victim of the Obamaconomy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Williams

Are you referring to the Brio site?


32 posted on 10/29/2013 8:38:39 PM PDT by Clay Moore ("In politics, stupidity is not a handicap." Napoleon Bonaparte)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Reeses; central_va

Recognize this — based on current radiological specifications as imposed on the nuclear power industry, commercial airlines would be restricted to 12,000 feet.


33 posted on 10/30/2013 7:52:23 AM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege

Tritium is a weak beta emitter. I think the good news is that it isn’t something the body grabs onto and doesn’t let go, like iodine or strontium. I don’t know if that is the main problem with this water. I haven’t seen any radiochemistry reports. It’s all about the picocuries/ml and the isotope/dose equivalence.

Stimulating discussion. Thanks!


34 posted on 10/30/2013 9:05:12 AM PDT by SargeK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Fire_on_High

I’m sure there were Indians wondering what the French thought they were doing in building New Orleans, and the French wondered what the English were doing when they laid out the 9th ward.

Indian #1 “What are the white guys doing down there. Don’t they know that floods?”

Indian #2 “I don’t think they do.”

Indian #1 “You gonna tell them?”

Indian #2 “They’ll figure it out.”


35 posted on 10/30/2013 9:11:40 AM PDT by SargeK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

This was so played up by the media that we had people here literally afraid of a cloud of radiation coming over and killing everyone. In the grand scheme of things the nuke part of it was a non-event.


36 posted on 10/30/2013 12:28:08 PM PDT by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DouglasKC

“Never let a crisis go to waste.”


37 posted on 10/30/2013 12:29:05 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: DouglasKC

I have a friend who’s still worried that the ocean is contaminated, & those waters will contaminate US beaches as currents move around the ocean. I’ve tried to explain things, but she just can’t seem to understand.


38 posted on 10/30/2013 12:39:00 PM PDT by Twotone (Marte Et Clypeo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

Dr Kemm’s opinion is very similar to that of a retired LRL physicist for whom I’ve done work from time to time.

But interestingly enough he has an elaborate fallout shelter in his back yard. (I know, different hazard)


39 posted on 10/30/2013 12:52:26 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DouglasKC

>> “ In the grand scheme of things the nuke part of it was a non-event.” <<

.
So far.

Except for the expenditure of copious quantities of money to manage it.


40 posted on 10/30/2013 12:55:02 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: kidd
But because of Fukushima, thousands of intact homes have been evacuated until the danger has minimized. I believe that some of them may be re-occupied sometime this decade. Most will be ready for immediate re-occupancy.

Most, if not all abandoned homes will not be livable...They've gone back in and found much of the area has been reinhabited by wildlife, mostly rats and other vermin. They've studied the kinds of damage...walls, roofs, even wiring being eaten by critters. It will require almost complete demolition and reconstruction.
41 posted on 10/30/2013 1:06:53 PM PDT by rottndog ('Live Free Or Die' Ain't just words on a bumber sticker...or a tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Twotone
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMWmEbIuWkE

8:}

42 posted on 11/01/2013 11:29:01 PM PDT by AwesomePossum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AwesomePossum

I got through 25 minutes of the video. But when they claimed a million deaths from Chernobyl I couldn’t take it anymore. Here’s a short excerpt from Wikipedia:

“During mid-1986 the official Soviet death toll was raised from 2 to 31, a figure that has often been repeated. While some claim that deaths as a result of the immediate aftermath and the cleanup operation may number at least 6000,[2] that exceeds the number of workers believed to have died from all causes by the National Committee for Radiation Protection of the Ukrainian Population.”

They don’t do themselves any favors when they make such extreme statements.


43 posted on 11/02/2013 3:22:39 PM PDT by Twotone (Marte Et Clypeo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Twotone
Thanks for your reply.......both sides lie and both sides make extreme statements...........figured the You Tube would help balance this thread out, haha.

Seriously though, they are still trying to fabricate a "final" solution to Chernobyl.....and Fukushima is on the verge of becoming completely out of control.........these are facts, plain and simple........

8:}

44 posted on 11/02/2013 7:17:45 PM PDT by AwesomePossum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson