Posted on 03/12/2011 8:16:13 AM PST by Chunga85
The Institute for Public Accuracy issued the following statement by nuclear expert, Kevin Kamp, about the risk of nuclear disaster in post-Earthquake Japan: “The electrical grid is down. The emergency diesel generators have been damaged. The multi-reactor Fukushima atomic power plant is now relying on battery power, which will only last around eight hours. The danger is, the very thermally hot reactor cores at the plant must be continuously cooled for 24 to 48 hours. Without any electricity, the pumps won’t be able to pump water through the hot reactor cores to cool them. Once electricity is lost, the irradiated nuclear fuel could begin to melt down. If the containment systems fail, a catastrophic radioactivity release to the environment could occur.”
“In addition to the reactor cores, the storage pool for highly radioactive irradiated nuclear fuel is also at risk. The pool cooling water must be continuously circulated. Without circulation, the still thermally hot irradiated nuclear fuel in the storage pools will begin to boil off the cooling water. Within a day or two, the pool’s water could completely boil away. Without cooling water, the irradiated nuclear fuel could spontaneously combust in an exothermic reaction. Since the storage pools are not located within containment, a catastrophic radioactivity release to the environment could occur. Up to 100 percent of the volatile radioactive Cesium-137 content of the pools could go up in flames and smoke, to blow downwind over large distances. Given the large quantity of irradiated nuclear fuel in the pool, the radioactivity release could be worse than the Chernobyl nuclear reactor catastrophe of 25 years ago.”
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.forbes.com ...
“The Institute for Public Accuracy”
Already the red flag has gone up. Public is one of those clue words which usually translates to leftwing psuedoscience when used in this context.
I had no idea John McEnroe was that stupid.
Here’s hoping you jokers are right.
No slam against Americans but I've got more confidence in the engineers and their facilities in Japan than anywhere else....not too many of them got into college with sports scholarships.
You and others will be most interested in the following article by Michael Crichton:
“Fear, Complexity, & Environmental Management in the 21st Century.”
Here is the tease:
Fear, Complexity, & Environmental Management in the 21st Century
(An excellent article by Michael Crichton, which discusses Chernobyl, Yellowstone, the Club of Rome, Y2k and more.)
I am going to challenge you today to revise your thinking, and to reconsider some fundamental assumptions. Assumptions so deeply embedded in our consciousness that we don’t even realize they are there.
But the assumptions I am talking about today represent another kind of map—a map that tells us the way the world works. Since this is a lecture on complexity, you will not be surprised to hear that one important assumption most people make is the assumption of linearity, in a world that is largely non-linear. I hope by the end of this lecture that the meaning of that statement will be clear. But we won’t be getting there in a linear fashion.
Some of you know I have written a book that many people find controversial. It is called State of Fear, and I want to tell you how I came to write it. Because up until five years ago, I had very conventional ideas about the environment and the success of the environmental movement.
The book really began in 1998, when I set out to write a novel about a global disaster. In the course of my preparation, I rather casually reviewed what had happened in Chernobyl, since that was the worst manmade disaster in recent times that I knew about.
What I discovered stunned me. Chernobyl was a tragic event, but nothing remotely close to the global catastrophe I imagined. About 50 people had died in Chernobyl, roughly the number of Americans that die every day in traffic accidents. I don’t mean to be gruesome, but it was a setback for me. You can’t write a novel about a global disaster in which only 50 people die.
________________________
Also, Michael knew global warming was/is a hoax and gave many speeches about it.
The fact that I have doubts about the source does not make me a joker. It just makes me one who prefers her facts to come from disinterested sources that do not have an agenda.
Yeah, I consider it a load of garbage. Every resource available to the government of Japan will be devoted to getting electricity to this plant if it’s true. There’s no way they’ll let it happen.
I’m not a nuclear scientist, engineer, nor an evironmentalist. Though it seems to me that this particular case can not be fully compared to Chernobyl of 1986 - too many differences. Forbes or not, the situation in Japan, at moment, is very fluid & can be confusing. I anticipate it’ll remain so in the short term, and we will not know the full/real fallout from the nuclear plant & its impact on Japan and/or elsewhere in the next few days, weeks or even months - hence a great deal of speculation by ‘experts’ as well as others depending on their ‘political’ stance.
Also, I can’t think of another country which could’ve been better prepared (technology & engineering) for such a natural disaster, except Japan, given the history of earthquakes there. Actually, “Tsunami” is Japanese for “harbour wave” ? Of course, a natural disaster on this scale is heartbreaking particularly for those who are directly affected. Nonetheless, it is also a real test for how well Japan, with all its technology & preparedness can stand up to it & manage it.
I did not call you a joker. Am I concerned yes. But I am not going to react to a situation until the facts are in.
“The bottom of the containment vessel did melt and penetrate the bed rock beneath the vessel. “
Do you have a source for that?? Thanks.
Good explanation. Thanks for the link,
E
It’s disinfo. They’re getting things under control.
Who???
excellent rebuttal
why can’t the networks hire a guy like you to “assess” the situation instead of picking up all the anti nuke crowd for alarmist crap
Because the news “industry” gains their ratings from stampeding people into a panic.
About the only way I watch news any more is to pick the station or network with the best cleavage, mute the sound and look for blondes in fuzzy pink sweaters.
Rachael Maddow might be many things, but “muted TV eye-candy” she is not.
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.