Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: Become a Podcaster | Find a Show
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2012 the authors
Syndicate
Windpower is great and all, but let's not pretend that it doesn't have its own liabilities. For one, apparently it's killed more people than have been directly attributed to Chernobyl. Plus, where are you going to find the hundreds and hundreds of square kilometers of space to put the turbines that would be needed to make up for nuclear?
I'd be happy to see wind combined with massive solar arrays (like in California). And, like they do in some parts of the UK, free solar power panels.
Here's an article that seeks to reassure.
http://post.theenergycollective.com/?q=barrybrook/53461/fukushima-nuclea...
Nuclear Catastrophe
If the hydrogen explosions damaged those pools - or systems needed to keep them cool - they could become a big problem. Keeping spent-fuel pools cool is critical and could potentially be an even more severe problem than a reactor meltdown, some experts say. If water drains out, the spent fuel could produce a fire that would release vast amounts of radioactivity, nuclear experts and anti-nuclear activists warn.
"There should be much more attention paid to the spent-fuel pools," says Arjun Makhijani, a nuclear engineer and president of the anti-nuclear power Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. "If there's a complete loss of containment [and thus the water inside], it can catch fire. There's a huge amount of radioactivity inside - far more than is inside the reactors. The damaged reactors are less likely to spread the same vast amounts of radiation that Chernobyl did, but a spent-fuel pool fire could very well produce damage similar to or even greater than Chernobyl."
Does Canada have statistics on the long term health of nuclear power workers? And I'm sure that is complicated by turnover. The reason I ask that is I knew someone in the late 80s or early 90s that worked at Pickering who told me when there was a problem at the plant they were ordered into areas which resulted in exceeding the safe limits of their monitors by their supervisors. I remember telling the person to refuse to do it.
Canada regulator reports water leak at nuclear plant
http://af.reuters.com/article/energyOilNews/idAFN1610498020110316
Two stories on the "Fukushima 50", who are apparently 180 workers working in shifts at the Daiichi power plant. These are private employees of a company cited in the past for skimping on safety and inspections.... I hope their work is not forgotten once this situation fades from the headlines. I can't imagine what staying behind in that plant is doing to their bodies.
Thinking a lot today about the thousands of unnamed people, whether workers, military or volunteers, who are taking enormous risks to help others in the face of these catastrophes.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110315/ts_yblog_thelookout/japanese-nuclear-plant-workers-emerging-as-heroic-figures-in-tragedyhttp://www.asiaworks.com/news/2011/03/16/last-defense-at-troubled-reactors-50-japanese-workers-nytimes-com/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=last-defense-at-troubled-reactors-50-japanese-workers-nytimes-com
Are We in Danger of Radioactive Exposure from the Japan Nuclear Leaks?
http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2011/03/are-we-in-danger-of-radioa...
"If we could rely on the Japanese and American governments to inform us of any danger, we wouldn't have to be so vigilant.."
Weak Law Puts Canada at Risk of Catastrophe
http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2011/03/16-2
"Federal law must require assessment of worst case scenarios such as nuclear meltdowns, off shore oil spills, and tar-sands tailing dam breaches, says Ecojustice..."
As bad as this situation is, and it's horrific, nuclear power is here to stay. So what we need are regulatory bodies that have teeth, with much more stringent safey regulations, and when an engineer says a stucture being designed is not safe and he quits, as what happened at GE in this case, there needs to be an immediate investigation.
NY Times coverage appears to be good
---------------------------
U.S. Calls Radiation 'Extremely High' and Urges Deeper Caution in JapanMr. Jaczko's testimony came as the American Embassy in Tokyo, on advice from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, told Americans to evacuate a radius of "approximately 50 miles" from the Fukushima plant.
The advice represents a graver assessment of the risk in the immediate vicinity of Daiichi than the warnings made by the Japanese themselves, who have told everyone within 20 kilometers, about 12 miles, to evacuate, and those between 20 and 30 kilometers to take shelter.
Mr. Jaczko's testimony, the most extended comments by a senior American official on Japan's nuclear disaster, described what amounts to an agonizing choice for Japanese authorities: Send a small number of workers into an increasingly radioactive area in a last-ditch effort to cover the spent fuel, and the fuel in other reactors, - with water, or do more to protect the workers but risk letting the pools of water protecting the fuel boil away - and thus risk a broader meltdown.
The Japanese authorities have never been as specific as Mr. Jascko was in his testimony about the situation at reactor No. 4, where they have been battling fires for more than 24 hours. It is possible the authorities there disagree with Mr. Jascko's conclusion about the exposure of the spent fuel, or that they have chosen not to discuss the matter for fear of panicking people.
Experts say workers at the plant probably could not approach a fuel pool that was dry, because radiation levels would be so high. In a normally operating pool, the water provides not only cooling but also shields workers from gamma radiation. A plan to dump water into the pool, and others like it, from helicopters was suspended because the crews would be flying right into a radioactive plume.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/17/world/asia/17nuclear.html?partner=rss&...
This thread is about nuclear energy, not tsunamis or earthquakes. The title should be changed.
I suggest "Japanese Nuclear Catastrophe Is a Lesson to Us All"
Crisis At Japan's Fukushima Could Reach Worst Level on Nuclear Accident Scale, US Think Tank Warns
http://www.straight.com/article-381663/vancouver/crisis-japans-fukushima...
"A US think-tank has warned the crisis at Japan's earthquake damaged Fukishima Daiichi power plant could reach the worst level for nuclear accidents....'This event is now closer to a level 6, and it may unfortunately reach a level 7. We are clearly in a catastrophe."
So who do you believe?
I think I prefer to err on the side of caution.
Japan denies meltdown threat assessment by U.S.
U.S. urges 80 km evacuation zone for its citizens around nuclear planthttp://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/story/2011/03/16/japan-radiation-c...
End Nuclear Power Before it Ends Us
http://blog.buzzflash.com/node/12494
"Today we are in the midst of a disaster with no end in site. At least 4 reactors are on fire. As we see all too clearly, atomic technology is at war with our earth's eco-systems.."
The Return of Nuckespeak
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2011/031511b.html
"Orwall would not have been surprised to learn, that there is literally no word for 'meltdown' in the Nuclear Regulatory's Commission's glossary of atomic related words and phrases. Nukespeak is the language of the nuclear mindset."
Chavez Halts Venezuela Nuclear Plans After Japanese Crisis
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-16/chavez-halts-venezuela-nuclear-...
"Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said he's halting plans to develop nuclear power in the South American country, as Japan struggles to avoid a meltdown at a plant after last week's earthquake and tsunami.."
The risks of nuclear roulette
Chris Williams, author of Ecology and Socialism: Solutions to Capitalist Ecological Crisis, explains how nuclear industry practices and government policies set the stage for a nuclear disaster in Japan that is on the verge of becoming the worst in history.
Finally perhaps a little dose of reality
U.S. Concerned Japan Facing Situation That Could Be 'Deadly For Decades': ABC Newshttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/16/japan-nuclear-crisis-us-officia...
Finally perhaps a little dose of reality
U.S. Concerned Japan Facing Situation That Could Be 'Deadly For Decades': ABC Newshttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/16/japan-nuclear-crisis-us-officia...
Finally perhaps a little dose of reality
U.S. Concerned Japan Facing Situation That Could Be 'Deadly For Decades': ABC Newshttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/16/japan-nuclear-crisis-us-officia...
Britain advises citizens to consider leaving Tokyo
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jmpSIEi0rMCKIj5-CBF4h...
I had no real objections when they wanted to put a nuclear reactor in my back yard a few years back. The alternate site further north was selected in the end. But it's not like I would have had to worry about it being hit by an earthquake and then a tsunami and then catching fire and blowing up and all that.
It seems to me that there were some pretty glaring flaws in both the reactor design in Japan as well as in their contingency planning, but that's also armchair quarterbacking on my part and it's easy to criticize from the comfort of my home.
I hope things have finished blowing up and they will be successful in their continuing efforts to get things "under control".
I'm sure that when your neighbourhood nuclear reactor goes critical we'll all be able to identify the "pretty glaring flaws" in its design.
Red Alert in Japan; An Unfolding Nuclear Catastrophe - by Stephen Lendman
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2011/03/red-alert-in-japan-unfolding-nucle...
"Since March 12, a potentially unprecedented catastrophe has been unfolding in Japan, despite official denials and corroborating media reports - managed, not real news. Believe none of them. Independent experts agree. It's an unprecedented disaster, spreading globally. All the Fukushima reactors are crippled, four of them spewing unknown amounts of radiation. According to Hiroaki Koide, senior researcher engineering specialist at Kyoto University's Research Reactor Institute:
'We are on the brink. We are now facing the worst case scenario. We can assume that the containment vessel at Reactor No. 2 is already breached. If there is heavy melting inside the reactor, large amounts of radiation will most definitely be released.' Earlier he said the situation isn't similar to Chernobyl, in fact, potentially it's far graver, unprecedented."
I followed A_J's link to the stats on deadly windmills and found this disclaimer:
These accident statistics are copyright Caithness Windfarm Information Forum 2010. The data may be used or referred to by groups or
individuals, provided that the source (Caithness Windfarm Information Forum) is acknowledged and our URL
www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk quoted at the same time. Caithness Windfarm Information Forum is not responsible for the accuracy of
Third Party material or references.
Far as I can see, these are just boxes with numbers in them.
http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf
Great BBQ anecdotes for petro ghouls?
To be fair, the best people may not be harvesting wind power either.
Any form of energy production comes with advantages and disadvantages.
While some day I may indeed have to worry about my friendly neighbourhood nuclear reactor going critical, there are at least a few key points to keep in mind:
1. At the most basic level, we all want to be able to keep warm and turn the lights on and off and cook dinner and whatnot. Which a lot of people not only in Japan tonight but in many other places around the world and here at home don't have the luxury of doing. Currently I am enjoying the benefits of natural gas and probably coal fired electricity. Both of those have their own advantages and disadvantages, just like wind power and nuclear power and any other form of energy production. But I am willing to accept some disadvantages for the big bonus of heat and light and internet and refridgeration and what have you.
2. Not so far away from me, about as far away as the site of this proposed nuclear reactor, is the fabulous Athabasca tar sands around Ft. McMurray. While not as scary as a burning and exploding nuclear reactor, all the industrial development up there and it's associated hazards likely pose a far greater threat to me than the current situation in Japan. In some ways I am willing to accept such industrial development up there in my old home town because again, not to belabour the point, but it's a price I pay to keep the lights on so to speak.
3. People fear the unknown. And for the most part any sort of nuclear anything gets people bent out of shape way faster than a ring tailed pole cat at a barn dance. And that's when it is being discussed in the abstract, as a proposal even, let alone when it's on fire and or exploding and or emitting various scary sounding numbers of radiation, and I do not mean in any way to belittle the current situation facing the Japanese.
Currently I am enjoying the benefits of natural gas and probably coal fired electricity. Both of those have their own advantages and disadvantages, just like wind power and nuclear power and any other form of energy production.
I love the way you casually suggest that there is some kind of equivalency between all forms of energy production, as if it doesn't really matter which technology we use, because they all have their "advantages and disadvantages". The big difference is that fossil fuels are not renewable and their carbon emissions are forcing climate change. That's a big enough "disadvantage" to rule them out as energy sources to be encouraged and expanded.
How big of you to be so willing to accept destruction of the environment and global climate change to ensure the continuation of your own convenience and comfort level. How do you think the rest of the world feels about your choice?
Again, you fail to acknowledge that the "fabulous" tar sands pose a threat to the entire world, including Japan, because of their contribution to global climate change and their perpetuation of reliance on fossil fuel as a major energy source. You're not paying anywhere near the price that the First Nations are paying for the environmental destruction and toxicity, or the price that the global south is paying for the effects of climate change.
Nuclear power is hardly "the unknown". We have good reason to fear what such a destructive and potentially deadly technology will do in the hands of those who place private profit before the welfare of humanity.
I love the way you (M. Spector) read way, way too much into my posts.
Yes it does really matter what forms of energy production we use. Really, it does. I'm not denying it. The "big disadvantage" with fossil fuels that you (MS) did not mention is that we are running out of them. Fossil fuels provided us with huge advantages that we largely pissed away as a society in largely meaningless and trivial ways. There's some very basic reasons why the world today runs on oil, also a big factor in why we are running out of them.
Global climate change is being caused by global factors. The rest of the world largely made my choice for me. I am living with it as best I can. That's a whole other topic.
"Fabulous" tar sands was me being facetious, again you (MS) read too much into my words. I grew up in Fort McMurray and I am going to guess that I am also the only rabble poster who has actually been to Ft. Chipewyan, if I am wrong please correct me and we can swap Ft. Chip stories. You do not need to lecture me about what is going on in quite literally my own back yard, I am quite aware of the price being incurred on both the environment in northern Alberta and on the First Nations people who live their lives there.
People hear "nuclear" anything and all they think about it the Cold War and mushroom clouds. They call an MRI an MRI because Magnetic Resonance Imaging is less scary sounding than Nuclear Resonance Imaging. All those medical isotopes from the Chalk River reactor? Not claiming to be an expert but I'm pretty sure those isotopes are what makes an MRI machine do what it does. But they called it an MRI to avoid the scary n-word.
Do you (generic you here, not M. Spector specifically) really have any idea how a nuclear reactor works? Or what can go wrong with one? Or back on topic, do you (generic you) understand what is currently going on in Japan? I sure don't. I probably know more than some but that comes from a long interest in the subject, and that's just amateur enthusiast "fan boy" type knowledge. And I sure don't know what is going on in Japan and how it will eventually unfold and affect everybody. That's what I mean about the unknown. That and people freaking out possibly unnecessarily over the mention of "nuclear" and "anything else" in the same sentance, let alone "nuclear" and "emergency" or "crisis" or "apocalypse" or what the hey ever.
Nuclear power is like doing brain surgery for a headache. Canada doesn't need nuclear power. Canada is a net exporter of three significant types of energy source siphoned off to corporate America 24-7: oil, natural gas, and massive amounts of hydroelectric power.
You want to keep the lights on, yes. But you don't need nuclear power in Alberta - corporate America does. Not you but Exxon-Imperial and the fossil fuel industry, and corporate America. Their's is the most wasteful, most fossil fuel-dependent, and most unsustainable economy in the world. Capitalists have designed their economies around a fuel source in dead plant matter. And we are about 30 to 50 years behind the eightball on safe and nuclear power physics. That's what streaming our best and brightest into business, banking and finance studies have produced for us - a financialized meltdown of thermonuclear proportions and another energy crisis unnecessarily. Our capitalist economies are simply not realistic on a number of levels.
Keep your lights on by all means. And I think we should try not to obsess about needing something we don't, like nuclear killerwatts.
Caldicott: Japan May Spell End of Nuclear Industry Worldwide
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23744
"Independent Australia spoke exclusively to Dr. Caldicott yesterday as she was in transit to Canada to speak at a hearing into a proposal to build four new power plants in Darlington, Ontario.
'The situation is very grim and not just for the Japanese people,' said Dr. Caldicott. 'If both reactors blow then the whole of the Northern Hemisphere may be affected,' she said. 'This could be a diabolical catastrophe - we'll just have to wait and see. But I think the nuclear industry is finished worldwide...'"
That and people freaking out possibly unnecessarily over the mention of "nuclear" and "anything else" in the same sentance, let alone "nuclear" and "emergency" or "crisis" or "apocalypse" or what the hey ever.
I thought he captured the essence of it quite well. When it comes to nuclear as we understand it today, to my mind no amount freaking out is unnecessary. We're talking about hundreds of containers spread around the world housing radioactive mini-suns and their byproducts, whose safe operation are overseen, supposedly to our benefit, by governmental bodies or private sector conglomerates that on their very best days for the most part, cannot manage to provide a single reason as to why we should trust them with anything.
How big of you to be so willing to accept destruction of the environment and global climate change to ensure the continuation of your own convenience and comfort level. How do you think the rest of the world feels about your choice?
Something tells me your post wasn't exactly composed on a slate chalkboard by candle light, either, MS
Man, I really have to figure out how to quote stuff like that.
Fidel, no arguing with you over the corporate aspects of it all. Anyways we (collective we) should have had nuclear power long ago in Alberta in my opinion. We (collectively) burn an insane amount of natural gas to make steam to get oil out of the tar sands. Nuclear power could easily have been used from the start to make that steam. Do we need to build reactors now? I really don't know. I doubt we will anyways with the current state of things. Given the current impact of the tar sands operations I don't think it's too far of a reach to claim that having a nuclear power plant up there wouldn't significantly degrade the situation much further, regardless of if this hypothetical reactor or reactors was built in 1975 or 2025.
Should we have never built any nuclear power plants in Canada? That's a whole other topic. Probably not too hard to guess where I'd sit on that issue.
How many nuclear power plants are out there across the globe right now, quietly and peaceably splitting atoms or whatever it is they do? How many storage facilities are currently in use? I don't have an exact number but I'd say Slumberjack is a little low in calling them "hundreds of containers", add them all up and there's probably thousands and thousands if you count in military stuff.
And I'd say that speculating how "both reactors could blow and affect the whole northern hemisphere" is unnecessary freaking out. Far as I know they cannot and will not "blow up" in a big old mushroom cloud. Continue to leak dangerous levels of radiation yes, "blow up" no but hey, I'm just some guy on the internet.
Forgive me but I havent read the whole thread yet. public hearings begin in Ontario in A WEEK regarding the plant expansion of the Darlington Nuclear facility.
Is anybody organizing any anti-nuke demos in the province or the country? Cuz I'd sure as shit like to help
Good site I found, seems to be pretty objective and non-biased and in no way connected to the industry or other lobby groups that I can see:
http://library.thinkquest.org/17940/texts/nuclear_disasters/nuclear_disasters.html
So there may still be explosions and maybe it still could blow up, just not like an atomic bomb if that is any consolation.
Anyways I continue in my hopes that this will all get "sorted out" before it gets to that catastrophic stage.
Q: where does Canada store its nuclear waste? Anyone know?
They need to entomb this entire reactor complex in concrete - sounds like a job for organized labour construction workers.
Japan nuclear reactor water-bombing has little effect
Radiation levels rising rather than falling after No 3 reactor doused with hoses, while helicopters appear to miss their target
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/17/japan-nuclear-crisis-fukushi...
People who advocate for nuclear energy really don't understand the concept of permanent. They have a limited grasp of the concept of risk, and they are certainly clueless about the hazards of technology. They also cannot think outside their own timeline, or conceive of a world existing beyond their lifetimes. What happens at the end of a plant's lifecycle? What happens to the irrradiated fuel? What happens when the "impossible" does happen?
Like I said, anyone advocating for nuclear energy should be on a plane to Japan right now, ready to put out the fires. If they are unwilling to risk their lives for that, then they should STFU.
In comparing capitalist disasters as the commonplace occurrences they are, where each one reveals itself as something so dreadful in a magnitude that has never been seen before, the undeniable novelty here consists in the potential scale of its harmful effects to humanity across multiple hemispheres. And where the terror of each catastrophe surpasses the previous manifestations, the reactionary management of the fiasco is all too familiar.
Worse Than Chernobyl? - by Russell D Hoffman
http://www.counterpunch.org/hoffman03172011.html
"Of course you can always listen to the pro-nukers tell you not to worry because it can't happen 'here', wherever 'here' is for you. It is clear now that this is worse than Chernobyl. Nuclear power will do this to us again and again, unless there is a global effort to close the plants. No reactor is safe..."
I'm not hearing much from the anti-nuclear people on how to solve the current problem in Japan. Saying I told you so doesn't help much.
We need to find solutions to solve the present crisis first, and then after that explore what the future holds for generating power.
This is also beginning to have serious political ramifications what with China now demanding Japan tell everybody what is actually going on with radiation levels, etc.
Japan Nuclear Emergency Deepens - by Chris Talbot
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/mar2011/lead-m17.shtml
"The fact that the management of a crisis that threatens human health on a global scale remains in the hands of a private company, speaks eloquently of the irrationality, indeed criminality of the capitalist system. TEPCO is still calling the shots. No company, no body of shareholders should have the power to put at risk the health of the entire population of a country, let alone the world, in the name of private profit..'
Statement to US Senate
SENIOR SCIENTIST, GLOBAL SECURITY PROGRAM
TO THE SENATE ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS
MARCH 16, 2011
On behalf of the Union of Concerned Scientists, I would like to thank Chairman Boxer, Ranking Member Inhofe, and the other members of the Environment and Public Works Committee for the opportunity to provide our views on the unfolding accident at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi plant and its implications for nuclear power in this country.
The Union of Concerned Scientists would like to extend its deepest sympathies to the people of Japan during this crisis.
While the ongoing situation in Japan should be a main focus of U.S attention, we should not hesitate to ask ourselves whether we are doing all that we can do to prevent a Fukushima-like nuclear disaster from happening here.
Before proceeding, I would like to say that the Union of Concerned Scientists is neither pro nor anti-nuclear power, but has served as a nuclear power safety and security watchdog for over 40 years.
In the aftermath of the 1979 Three Mile Island accident, the NRC undertook a major overhaul of its rules to correct many of the regulatory weaknesses that the accident revealed. In contrast, seven years later, the Commission and the industry avoided learning any lessons from the far more severe Chernobyl accident because of the misleading claim that such an extreme release of radioactivity could never happen at a plant of Western design.
However, the NRC and the industry cannot hide this time behind the "it can't happen here" excuse. We have 23 plants of the same design. We have plants that are just as old. We have had station blackouts.
We have a regulatory system that is not clearly superior to that of the Japanese. We have had extreme weather events that exceeded our expectations and defeated our emergency planning measures (Katrina).
We have had close calls (e.g. Davis-Besse) that were only one additional failure away from becoming disasters. We have had full-blown disasters in other industries (e.g. BP). We have suffered a devastating terrorist air attack against our infrastructure for which we were completely unprepared.
I would ask the Committee to imagine for a moment that the crisis unfolding at Fukushima is taking place in their home states, and to consider whether this is something that Americans should ever have to endure under any circumstances.
If the answer is no-the right answer, in our opinion-then it is incumbent on you to thoroughly investigate whether the risk of an American Fukushima is really as low as the NRC and the industry claim.
But even though it will be a long time before we learn all the lessons from the still-evolving disaster in Japan, it is not premature to immediately take steps to reduce vulnerabilities that have long been known by regulators but have not been addressed. I will offer a few examples.
1. At least two spent fuel pools at the Fukushima plant have caught fire and are releasing radiation into the atmosphere. These pools are on the upper floor of these Mark I boiling-water reactors and are now open to the air following explosions that breached the buildings around them. The U.S. has 31 boiling-water reactors with similarly situated spent fuel pools that are far more densely packed than those at Fukushima and hence could pose far higher risks if damaged. The U.S. should act quickly to remove spent fuel from these pools and place them in dry storage casks to reduce the heat load and radioactive inventories of the pools.
2. The Fukushima accident was precipitated by an earthquake and tsunami, but the direct cause appears to have been a loss of both off-site and on-site power supplies, a situation known as a station blackout. There are many other types of initiating events that could cause such a situation, including terrorist attacks. The NRC requires U.S. plants to have the capability to cope with a station blackout for no more than four to eight hours. We need to re-evaluate the adequacy of these requirements and the effectiveness of their implementation.
3. Although the Japanese are engaged in truly heroic efforts to mitigate the worst effects of this accident and reduce radioactive releases that could harm the public, these efforts have only been partially effective, are already resulting in life-threatening conditions for the workers on site, and are likely to ultimately fail. U.S. nuclear plants have severe accident management plans, but these plans are not required by regulations and do not have to be evaluated by the NRC and tested for their effectiveness. In the case of aircraft attack on a nuclear plant, the NRC does require plants to have plans to cope with the loss of large areas of the plant due to explosion and fire. These plans will have to be re-evaluated in light of Fukushima to judge whether they can be realistically carried out. In the meantime, the NRC should place a far greater emphasis on preventing accidents and terrorist attacks rather than trying to control them afterward.
4. Elevated levels of radiation have already been detected more than one hundred miles from the release site. While these levels remain low, if the accident continues to worsen then they could increase dramatically. If there was a reactor accident in the United States, the emergency preparedness measures that would directly protect the public, including evacuation planning and potassium iodide distribution, are limited to a 10-mile radius. Whether this distance should be increased will need to be reevaluated, as will the workability of emergency plans in the context of natural disasters or terrorist attacks.
There are many other areas where we believe the NRC has allowed safety margins to decrease too far. Now, not after an accident, is the time to reconsider whether the NRC's position on "how safe is safe" is truly adequate to protect public health and safety.
Thank you for your attention, and I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.
See also World Nuclear News website
Nuclear power debate amid Japan crisis ruled by superstition
http://www.straight.com/article-382241/vancouver/gwynne-dyer-nuclear-pow...
Dearth of Candor From Japan's Leadership
With all the euphemistic language on display from officials handling Japan's nuclear crisis, one commodity has been in short supply: information.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/17/world/asia/17tokyo.html?_r=1&src=un&fe...
Learning From Disaster: After Sendai? - by Richard Falk
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/201131691422585897....
"There is no doubt that the huge earthquake/tsunami constellation of forces was responsible for great damage and societal distress, but its overall impact has been geometrically increased by this buying into the Faustian baragain of nuclear energy, whose risks, if objectively assessed, were widely known for many years..
It is the greedy profit-seekers who minimise these risks. These predatory forces are made more formidable because they have cajoled most politicians into complicity and have many corporatist allies in the media that overwhelm the publics of the world with steady doses of misinformation..."
Nuclear Energy Advocates Insist U.S. Reactors Completely Safe Unless Something Bad Happens
— The Onion
And this genius is the guy running the country.
Emergency backup power for pumps cooling the reactors was the failure that led to the current disaster. The earthquake knocked out the power grid connecting to the nuclear power stations, and the the tsunami knocked out the diesel generators/power supply that was to be used in case the power grid was knocked out. With both out, it's called a station blackout.
What Canada needs is a station blackout on the Conservative regime in Ottawa. And the sooner the better with these losers.
Nuclear Apocalypse In Japan - by Keith Harmon Snow
http://www.consciousbeingalliance.com/2011/03/japans-catastrophic-nuclea...
"The situation is apocalyptic and getting worse. This is one of the most serious challenges humanity has ever faced..."
Things may be slowly improving at the Fukushima nuclear power plant - at least no explosions today.
The yen is UP? Fits some of my darkest thoughts.
"Now the earthquake catastrophe has further intensified global instability. One of its immediate effects has been to push up the value of the yen, which yesterday reached a post-World War II record high of 76.25 to the US dollar. This counter-intuitive development arises from the leading role played by Japanese institutions in supplying credit to financial markets around the world.
Notwithstanding its enormous internal public debt, equivalent to more than 220 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), Japan is the world's leading creditor nation, with around $3 trillion in foreign assets. Of this, around $900 billion is invested in US treasury bonds, playing a crucial role in sustaining the American financial system."
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/mar2011/pers-m18.shtmlBurying the plant in concrete might be the best possible option here.
Japan raises nuclear threat level, weighs need to bury planthttp://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/956060--japan-raises-nuclear-t...
Now this is tragic:
While Japan continues to deal with the aftermath of last Friday's devastating earthquake and tsunami, and has yet to recover from one of the greatest disasters in its history, Israelis fear a shortage in the ingredients of one of their favorite dishes: Sushi.
Many of sushi's basic components come from Japan or are imported through the battered countries. Will Israelis soon suffer from a shortage of the beloved rolls' necessary ingredients?
Does Japan need your donation?[...]
The Japanese are world-renowned experts in disaster preparedness, relief and recovery, and Japan is the third largest economy in the world. There should be no mistake that the Japanese government and Japanese organizations are well-equipped to take the lead.
Our best advice for people who feel moved to give by the tragedy in Japan: Give generously, in cash, to an organization that you trust, and don’t restrict your donation. This way, your charity can use the funds for Japan if it turns out they are needed. If not, then it is free to use your donation for another purpose, like the dozens of under-reported, large-scale disasters that CNN isn’t featuring today.
There is no more techno-advanced country in the world than Japan. Nuclear power is not safe there, and it is not safe anywhere.
Norman Solomon
Thanks Catchfire for your considerate post.
I'm not hearing much from the anti-nuclear people on how to solve the current problem in Japan. Saying I told you so doesn't help much.
We need to find solutions to solve the present crisis first, and then after that explore what the future holds for generating power.
are you Kim Campbell? Because that comment is right up there with "an election is no time to discuss serious issues."
Bad Reactor
Rhythm Pigs:
Bad reactor/ No containment/ now all the people/ have an artificial/ sun
Chernobyl/ Chernobyl
Bad reactor/ build 'em all over/ too bold to use the wind and sun/ the benefits of science will destroy everyone
Chernobyl/ Chernobyl
Bad reactor/ dumptrucks full of sand/ single file and keep the line moving please/ a phosphorescent column of million refugees
Chernobyl/ Chernobyl
They couldnt even pronounce it/ Didnt want to announce it/ We were held hostage by a boy with a gun
bad reactor/ now its all over/ drive the cement trucks across the land/ this ones the ultimate evacuation plan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CEk3J4oAq0
71,000 people in the city next to the Fukushima nuclear plant "We've Been Left to Die"
I'm remembering the ice storm of 1998 and what a clusterfuck that was as week after week rolled by and people were still without electricity and heat in the Ottawa Valley area and Quebec. I wouldn't trust our corrupt stooges to run a lemonade stand in a pinch without effin it up.
Proof: At the beginning of 2010, Tepco announced net earnings of 157.7 billion yen (1.19 billion euros) for the period from April to December 2009, as compared with a loss of 137.7 billion yen (1.04 billion euros) a year earlier. Miraculous recovery, for a multinational company whose annual turnover decreased, at the same time, by 14%. In order to restore profits, the officers of the company affirm, Tepco had to restrict its "current expenses", which dropped by 22%. Officially, this was due to a drop in the price of petroleum needed for the functioning of its thermal power plants. The explanation is a bit thin, for an industrial outfit that insisted, in a financial document in August 2003, on the necessity of "a rationalization of the totality of operations, including a reduction of the costs of maintenance" in order to render its profits "secure".
Has performance of maintenance, and thus the security of equipment, become a variable for adjustment? Tepco has not hesitated to do this in the past. Between September 2002 and April 2003, the multinational was constrained to shut down its 17 nuclear reactors. This was a consequence of revelations concerning the falsifications of some thirty inspection reports on three nuclear power plants in the group. It involved, among other aspects, the electro-nuclear giant's act of disguising three incidents that had occurred in the nuclear facilities in Fukushima and Kashiwazaki-Kariwa.
This scandal implicating Tepco is not an isolated one. In March 2007, to cite but one example, the company Hokoriku Electric Power admitted having knowingly hidden a nuclear incident that occurred at the plant in Shikamachi eight years earlier, the 18 June 1999.
But who cares about security, when the race for profits takes command?
Source
A US nuclear industry expert on the Rachel Maddow show rather glibly made the same point, treating it with smug indifference mind you, in response to a question about whether the steps taken were too slow for public health concerns in Japan. Private profit trumps public good - even if it means a gigantic risk to millions of people - and this fact is treated as something quite ordinary under capitalism.
There are four reactors in California that are very close to earthquake faults – two at the Diablo Canyon power plant at San Luis Obispo, between San Francisco and Los Angeles, and two at the San Onofre nuclear generating plant between LA and San Diego.
These are particularly vulnerable to the same kind of disaster as Japan because both plants are within three miles of major earthquake faults and both are on the ocean. San Onofre is right on the ocean – literally right on the beach, and its defenses against a tsunami of the power of the one that struck Japan are inadequate. Diablo is a little removed up a hill, but not that far.
But I read an article posted at nukefree.org which says that the worst earthquake danger for any reactor right now is actually at the Indian Point nuclear plant in New York – which is located less than 40 miles away from New York City, the biggest metropolitan area in the country.
Harvey Wasserman
The nuclear situation in Japan explained for children. Too bad it's not really about poo.
I thought the sci-fi movie Godzilla was a pretty good allegory for warning about nuclear disasters in general. Go back to the sea, Godzilla!
Roberto Alvarez: The Danger of Spent Nuclear Fuel
http://www.counterpunch.org/alvarez03212011.html
"US reactors are each holding at least 4 times as much spent fuel as the individual pools at the wrecked Daiichi nuclear complex in Fukashima. According to the Energy Department, about 63,000 metric tons of spent fuel has been generated as of this year, containing approximately 12.4 billion curies. These pools contain some of the largest concentrations of radioactivity on the planet. Merely 14 percent of US spent fuel is in dry storage..."
George Monbiot: Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power
You will not be surprised to hear that the events in Japan have changed my view of nuclear power. You will be surprised to hear how they have changed it. As a result of the disaster at Fukushima, I am no longer nuclear-neutral. I now support the technology.
...
Some greens have wildly exaggerated the dangers of radioactive pollution. For a clearer view, look at the graphic published by xkcd.com. It shows that the average total dose from the Three Mile Island disaster for someone living within 10 miles of the plant was one 625th of the maximum yearly amount permitted for US radiation workers. This, in turn, is half of the lowest one-year dose clearly linked to an increased cancer risk, which, in its turn, is one 80th of an invariably fatal exposure. I'm not proposing complacency here. I am proposing perspective.
...
Yes, I still loathe the liars who run the nuclear industry. Yes, I would prefer to see the entire sector shut down, if there were harmless alternatives. But there are no ideal solutions. Every energy technology carries a cost; so does the absence of energy technologies. Atomic energy has just been subjected to one of the harshest of possible tests, and the impact on people and the planet has been small. The crisis at Fukushima has converted me to the cause of nuclear power.
I'm not trying to convince anyone here, as I have yet to be convinced myself. But I feel that Monbiot has credibility, so I'm treating this as food for thought.
No Radiation Threat Says Media: Reporters Pulled Out of Japan - by Keith Harmon Snow
http://dissidentvoice.org/2011/03/no-radiation-threat-says-media-reporte...
"Meanwhile, frightened investors in USA and Europe seek protection...
Reporting about the nuclear crisis in Japan and around the world is getting curiouser and curiouser. Western media are heavily downplaying the threat of radiation, in what amounts to an Alice in Wonderland fable of disinformation straight out of the rabbit hole.."
Japan Fears Reactor Core Breach
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/171556.html
"Japanese officials have expressed alarm over a possible fracture of a reactor core at one unit of the troubled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. Reports indicate that a number of Japanese people who lived between 200 and 350 kilometers away from the plant have been hospitalized for exposure to radioactive materials.."
Japan: Radioactive 1,850 Times Legal Level
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/171823.html
"Radioactivity near Japan's Fukushima nuclear plant has risen to 1,850 times the legal level and the nuclear crisis is worsening in the quake-hit country after more than two weeks. On Saturday, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said it could offer no timeline on when Japanese engineers could stop radioactive leakage from the stricken nuclear facility, even though the likely source of the emmissions have been identified..."
A useful, updated, source aggregator of links is here:
http://www.commondreams.org/japan-earthquake
It includes this very informative link to
Union of concerned scientists: All things nuclear
http://allthingsnuclear.org/tagged/Japan_nuclear?utm_source=SP&utm_mediu...
Is Fukushima about to blow?
Conditions at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant are deteriorating and the doomsday scenario is beginning to unfold. On Sunday, Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) officials reported that the levels of radiation leaking into seawater at the Unit 2 reactor were 100,000 times above normal, and the airborne radiation measured 4-times higher than government limits. As a result, emergency workers were evacuated from the plant and rushed to safe location. The prospect of a full-core meltdown or an environmental catastrophe of incalculable magnitude now looms larger than ever. The crisis is getting worse.
If spent fuel rods catch fire from lack of coolant, the intense heat will lift radiation plumes high into the atmosphere that will drift around the world. That's the nightmare scenario, clouds of radioactive material showering the planet with lethal toxins for months on end. And, according to the Central Institute for Meteorology and Geodynamics of Vienna, that deadly process has already begun. The group told New Scientist that:
Chernobyl had 180 tonnes of nuclear fuel on site. Fukushima has 1700 tonnes of nuclear fuel on site.
Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power
I have yet to read it but the title is idiotic enough for me: "Why Fukushima MADE me stop worrying". What is this event in the past tense now? Everythings fine? All the facts are in?
Gee, in 1939 World War II didnt seem like much of a big too-do either. THIS is an intellectual position? Fuck Monbiot. In Tokyo BABIES aren't supposed to drink WATER. Would you care to provide me with a MORE fundamental health crisis than that? Oh, well, maybe its like 25% of kids having asthma and peanut allergies, no big deal, just a new part of growing up.
And what kind of luddite would deny the scientific community the unique opportunity to study the human breast's ability, or lack thereof, to filter out plutonium and iodine in a control group of 100 Million people. What bold times in which to live!
Fuck Monbiot. he's a clueless fucking goof
The title of the article bears a remarkable similarity to the title of a film starring Peter Sellers in which a series of predictable mistakes leads to a global thermonuclear holocaust. Is there a satirical intent here?
Nah. Took a nap. Read the article. It's complete horseshit, and its not a Swiftian satire.
The title of the article bears a remarkable similarity to the title of a film starring Peter Sellers in which a series of predictable mistakes leads to a global thermonuclear holocaust. Is there a satirical intent here?
Only if someone rides a atomic bomb down to a target...
The title of the article bears a remarkable similarity to the title of a film starring Peter Sellers in which a series of predictable mistakes leads to a global thermonuclear holocaust. Is there a satirical intent here?
We just have to make sure there's enough mine shafts:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iesXUFOlWC0
Yes, it may be about to blow. We are not hearing this on mainstream news, but the Gaurdian, and the Health Ranger Mike [crazy guy] Adams, are reporting it:
The reactor core has melted through the containment vessle.
Quote from the Gaurdian > http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/29/japan-lost-race-save-nuclear...
"The radioactive core in a reactor at the crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant appears to have melted through the bottom of its containment vessel and on to a concrete floor, experts say, raising fears of a major release of radiation at the site."
Widening Global Implications Of Japan Nuclear Crisis - by Chris Talbot
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/mar2011/fuku-m31.shtml
"The nuclear crisis at Fukushima is looking increasingly open-ended as teams of workers battling in dangerou and often life-threatening conditions fail to stem the flow of nuclear radiation into the surrounding environment. The longer the crisis goes on, the greater and more complex its environmental, social, economic and political implications become.
Radiation levels in the seawater samples near the plant were 3,355 times the legal limit late Tuesday, according to the Japanese safety agency NISA. Three days before, they were 1, 850 times the limit. There is an exponential increase, and it points to a continuous flow of newly contaminated water from the plant.
The scale of the financial implications of the crisis are being compared by Bloomberg News to those of the crash of Lehman Brothers, which initiated the 2008 financial meltdown..."
The hard to get, wildly reviled by pro nukes, expensive book Chernobyl: consequences of the catastrophe
http://www.strahlentelex.de/Yablokov%20Chernobyl%20book.pdf
all 349 pages. Just getting into it now, but wanted to post the link to it. Huge furor about this, much foot-stamping, no no no Chernobyl only killed 42 people etc.
thx margot. I'll check it out. i think at the tenth anniversary of Chernobyl I saw a documentary about it on CBC Newsworld or PBS. There was a shot of a plum tree growing through the fence of the exclusion zone, and the fruit was purple, and pink, and green, and blue, and translucent white, and yellow ... all on the same tree
How does nuclear radiation affect animals?
Toronto, CANADA - Many of us are animal lovers, and we have heard very little about the affects of the nuclear radiation on the animal kingdom in Japan and near the Fukusima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. The focus is centred on the residents, but what about the animals?
The devastation of the earthquake, tsunami and now nuclear radiation that hit Japan on March 11, 2011 has killed many and displaced thousands but we always seem to forget about the domestic pets and animals in the area. The nuclear radiation from the nuclear meltdown at Fukusima Daiichi, Japan affects those that have survived this tragedy and that means animals too. It is estimated there are 30,00 domestic pets affected by this and many residents are bringing them to the shelters with them. There was a YouTube video that can be seen below of one injured dog standing by and protecting his friend as rescuers come to save the two. Although many forget about the animal kingdom, animal lovers from all over the world have been concerned for the domestic pets and wildlife and how the radiation will affect them if they have survived this incident.
Dr Joanna Coote, Doctor of Veterinary Medicine (DVM) from the Toronto Humane Society took some time to explain how the radiation could have an impact on animals and wildlife that could have survived the tragedy.
"I guess it depends which animals you are referring to, so if we talk about dogs, cats, horses, cattle, pigs, goats, sheep those are all mammals, so the way that animals are affected by radiation will be quite similar to humans, they often worry about the cumulative radiation affect so that if you are exposed to certain levels of radiation over time they're worried that there would be a cumulative affect of radiation that can cause dangerous levels." said Dr. Coote.
"In animals they don't really have a prolonged exposure to radiation, because they have such a short lifespan relative to humans," she went onto say about farm animals, "If they are farming dairy, goats or chickens, it's the issue with, one, the actual exposure to radiation the way we get exposed in the atmosphere so there's that exposure and then there's the exposure they get from the vegetation that they are eating. And it's also in the water, the runoff and the rain."
"Birds and insects will be affected as well and they can spread the radiation as they fly miles from the danger zone but they have a very low life-span and then it becomes a problem for the food chain as the bird eats the contaminated insect or the bird eats a contaminated fish that's a concern and then flies miles away and then the bird gets eaten by another predator and the cycle continues"
Tokyo, Japan - "Japan National Police Agency, on Tuesday (March 16, 2011) said, dead and missing has exceeded 12,000 and is expected to go well beyond this figure. Out of this number 4277 are confirmed dead with 2282 injured from the tsunami and earthquake, not including any that may die from nuclear radiation.
On Sunday (March 13, 2011), police chief of Miyagi, one of the prefectures hardest hit disaster, said the number of death toll is estimated at more than 10,000 in its own territory." Story from WorldNews
Ontario Veterinary College spokeman Barry Gunn said,
"There really isn't anybody that can talk about your questions clearly, in general, the assumption is that any threat would be the same as it is for people, these animals might be exposed to radiation from food or water, some of the nuclear isotopes have a short half-life, and caesium has a half-life of 30 years so they disappear soon after exposure and I suppose the caesium will be around for a while in the soil."
Animal support Groups and interesting LINKS ...
Japan Earthquake and Animal Rescue
World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA)
Toronto Humane Society
Ontario Veterinary College Health Sciences Centre
World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA) has committed $150,000
Health hazards if exposed to nuclear radiation, Great LINK about radiation affects
Daniel ... Toronto, CANADA
Radiation Experts Determine 200,000 Cancers Likely From Fukushima Dr. Chris Busby
http://newsdoom.blogspot.com/2011/04/radiation-experts-determine-200000....
Fukushima: 1,000 Millisieverts Per Hour In The Air Inside Pit of Reactor Two
http://cryptogon.com/?p=21594
"According to the IAEA, the limit for public radiation exposure is 1 msv per year. At Fukushima, they're dealing with 1,000 msv/hour."
Panic Over Japan Nuclear Crisis Increases
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/172917.html
"As Japan has been unable to stop the leakage of radiation into open waters, fear over the spread of radioactive contamination through seawater has increased.."
'No Safe Levels' Of Radiation in Japan - by Dahr Jamail
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/04/20114219250664111....
"...when dealing with long-lived radioactive materials, in addition to carcinogens there are intergenerational effects that include the mutation of the genetic structures of life. This is permanent and irreversible. Sullivan uses Fukushima reactor No. 3 as an example, because it is fueled with Mox fuel uranium and plutonium. Plutonium has a half-life of 24,000 years, which means it is carcinogenic and mutagenic for up to 250,000 years, or 12,000 human generations.
A radioactive half-life means that in this case, in 24,000 years, half of the ionizing radiation will have decayed, then in another 24,000 years half of that radiation will decay, etc..."
Japan's Tsunami Victims Left Struggling To Cope - by John Chan
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/apr2011/japa-a05.shtml
"...there are concerns in ruling circles that unrest could deepen..."
Glow Boys and Gamma Sponges: Fukushima's Suicide Squads - by Richard D Hoffman
http://www.counterpunch.org/hoffman04042011.html
"The call them 'gamma sponges' and 'glowboys'. The teams are called 'suicide squads'. Now they're dropping like flies..."
Radioactivity In Sea Up 7,5 Million Times - by Kanako Takahara
http://www.countercurrents.org/takahara050411.htm
"Radioactive iodine-131 readings taken from seawater near the water intake of the Fukushima No.1 nuclear plant's No.2 reactor received 7.5 Million times the legal limit, Tokyo Electric Power Co. admitted Tuesday. The sample that yielded the high reading was taken Saturday, before Tepco announced Monday it would start releasing radioactive water into the sea, and experts fear the contamination may spread well beyond Japan's shores to affect seafood overseas..."
Deadly Radiation More Widespread
http://pennyforyourthoughts2.blogspot.com/2011/04/dangerous-radiation-mo...
US Sees Array Of New Threats At Nuclear Plant
http://cryptogon.com/?p=21639
"Recent reports have discussed the possibility that Fukushima Unit 1 may be having a nuclear chain reaction...There is growing awareness that the risks of pumping water on the fuel present a whole new category of challenges.."
Watch the Expression Of the Tecpo Official
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/04/watch-expression-of-tecpo-officia...
"If you think that dumping 11,500 tons of radioactive water into the Pacific is nothing to be concerned about, look at the facial expression of the Tecpo official announcing the procedure.."
Fukushima Pit 2 Sealed?
http://pennyforyourthoughts2.blogspot.com/2011/04/fukushima-pit-2-sealed...
Cumulative Low Level Doses Of Radiation Can Cause Big Problems
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/04/cumulative-low-level-doses-of-rad...
Canada suspends mobile radiation measurements around Vancouver, BC "until further notice" as radioactive cloud looms (VIDEO)
http://enenews.com/canada-suspends-mobile-radiation-measurements-around-vancouver-bc-further-notice
Physicians have "deep concerns" about impact on Canada from Fukushima
http://enenews.com/physicians-have-deep-concern-about-canada-being-impacted-by-radioactive-isotopes-from-fukushima
From this thread
RT: Immeasurable Levels Of Radiation Reported At Fukushima Plant (and vid)
http://rt.com/news/radioactive-water-pacific-plant/
"The radioactive levels inside the plant have risen beyond the limit where it can be measured, NHK local television reported, quoting a plant's monitoring specialist..'
http://enenews.com/canada-suspends-mobile-radiation-measurements-around-vancouver-bc-further-notice
The fixed point measurements for Vancouver are right here:
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hc-ps/ed-ud/respond/nuclea/_data/surveil-eng.php
Increasing Fukushima Radiation Dangers - by Stephen Lendman
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2011/04/increasing-fukushima-radiation-dan...
"So what to do, asked Adams. It you're the (EPA) one option remains: Declare radiation to be safe. As a result its Protective Action Guides (PAGs) are being revised 'to radically increase the allowable levels of iodine 131 to anywhere from 3,000 to 100,000 times the currently allowable levels.."
UPDATE, 3:15 pm, Thursday, April 7, 2011. Today’s earthquake (which we have seen variously reported as between 7.1 and 7.9 in magnitude) has knocked out power in some sections of northeast Japan. The single-unit Higashidori Boiling Water Reactor and the Rokkasho reprocessing plant have lost offsite power and are running on emergency diesel generators. Offsite power may also have been lost to the three unit Onagawa nuclear complex, although there is a report that power remains for the reactors themselves, but not for the fuel pools and that those are relying upon emergency diesel generators.
http://nirs.org/fukushima/crisis.htm
I hope all of you take the time to make a bug out bag. Something you can grab incase of emergency and go.
Some water, food, basic first aid supplies. Emergency blanket. Map and compass. survival book. Phone card, some money. am/fm radio that works on a crank. Flashlight and batteries.
Pick some prearranged meeting places with your family so should anything happen you can meet there
I'm becoming worried of an impending Mount Fuji eruption...will need to look up where this one was centered
Some water, food, basic first aid supplies. Emergency blanket. Map and compass. survival book. Phone card, some money. am/fm radio that works on a crank. Flashlight and batteries.
And just where would people be bugging out to?
Last I heard we did not have interstellar travel.
We do Remind but it hasn't filtered down yet.
Depending on peoples geographical locations they can with a little effort relocate. Get to higher ground. Go farther in land. If a city goes to shit they can try to go to another city or head someplace rual.
Are you suggesting people stay put during natural disasters? Or that having water food and medical supplies on hand is a waste of time?
Run to the hills...
Windpower is great and all, but let's not pretend that it doesn't have its own liabilities. For one, apparently it's killed more people than have been directly attributed to Chernobyl. Plus, where are you going to find the hundreds and hundreds of square kilometers of space to put the turbines that would be needed to make up for nuclear?
Gee, I gotta try to keep up... sorry this is so far behind but I just have to say OFFSHORE is where 1000s of sq kms of wind exist.
And how did windmills kill people?
Closed for length.