220 Million Bq/liter of Cesium now in No. 2 Spent Fuel Pool — SFP No. 1, 2, & 3 “clearly have significant spent fuel damage” (VIDEO)

Published: August 28th, 2011 at 7:02 am ET


Newly Released TEPCO Data Proves Fairewinds Assertions of Significant Fuel Pool Failures at Fukushima Daiichi, Fairewinds, August 26, 2011:

Transcript Excerpts

[…] Just 2 days ago, TEPCO released a report that has a water analysis of the condition of the spent fuel pools at Fukushima. This data was taken in August, August 19th and 20th, so it is very current and I wanted to share it with you today. […]

[T]he combination of both Cesiums in the fuel pool on Unit 2, is 220 million disintegrations per second in a liter of water.

So think of a liter Coke bottle and inside it the water is disintegrating at 220 million disintegrations every second, and that is just for Unit 2. The table also shows similar very high concentrations of Cesium in Unit 1 and in Unit 3. It clearly shows that there is damage to the fuel in those 3 units. […] Units 1, 2, & 3 clearly have significant spent fuel damage. […]

Newly Released TEPCO Data Proves Fairewinds Assertions of Significant Fuel Pool Failures at Fukushima Daiichi from Fairewinds Associates on Vimeo.

Published: August 28th, 2011 at 7:02 am ET


Related Posts

  1. 16 million Bq/liter of Cesium-137 in water at Fukushima Daiichi Spent Fuel Pool No. 1 — More than in June 2011 — Almost 5,000 times Unit 4’s levels March 23, 2013
  2. Ex-Chairman of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission: Upcoming ‘attempt’ to remove Fukushima Unit 4 spent fuel is very, very unprecedented — Pool has significant structural damage — Will be very risky (VIDEO) September 24, 2013
  3. Top scientists refute Japan gov’t: “Copious quantities” of radioactivity leaked from Spent Fuel Pool No. 4 — A “significant part” of overall cesium release October 25, 2011
  4. TEPCO: Nuclear fuel rods in No. 4 spent fuel pool are “confirmed to be damaged” — First time damage revealed at any pool April 13, 2011
  5. Suspected damage to fuel assembly racks in Spent Fuel Pool No. 4 — See anything missing? (VIDEO) November 21, 2011

152 comments to 220 Million Bq/liter of Cesium now in No. 2 Spent Fuel Pool — SFP No. 1, 2, & 3 “clearly have significant spent fuel damage” (VIDEO)

  • Jebus Jebus

    France heedless to Fukushima wake-up call
    Author: David Cronin
    28 August 2011 – Issue : 950

    Back in the 1990s, I was given a guided tour of Sellafield, an infamous nuclear complex on the edge of England’s spectacularly beautiful Lake District. One of the first things I noticed was a sign reading “Mr Bean free zone” in a plant containing spent radioactive fuel. For years afterwards, I thought about the damage that a clumsy character could do in a facility like that. Today, I reckon that Mr Bean would offer a safer pair of hands than the people who run the nuclear industry….


    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar anne

      In an article I posted tonight, an excerpt of a book, the author said that the English are putting low level radioactive waste from Sellafield into the ocean.

  • Everyday,more and more women tweet “I wonder if I should give up having a baby.”
    They are not saying it hysterically.
    They are sometimes doctors,scientists,or journalists.
    At first I thought they are over reacting but as I got to know the situation more,I’m getting to understand their feeling. *PIC* (Hydrocephalus in an infant, as seen on an ultrasound)
    I’m shocked.
    If you are my friend,and asked me if you should abort your …

  • dharmasyd dharmasyd

    In conclusion:
    Let me repeat.
    Give Leo Slizard the correct prophecy award. The nuclear conundrum has indeed ignited the atmosphere and sucked out all breathable air.

    Maybe I will awake sometime in future when we can talk again. Until then, bon nuit, and sweet dreams.


    Artificial radiation belts are radiation belts that have been created by high altitude nuclear explosions.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artificial_radiation_beltsList of artificial radiation belts
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    List of Artificial Radiation Belts

    Explosion Location Date Yield (approximate) Altitude (km) Nation of Origin
    Hardtack Teak Johnston Island (Pacific) 1958-08-01 3.8 megatons 76.8 United States
    Hardtack Orange Johnston Island (Pacific) 1958-08-12 3.8 megatons 43 United States
    Argus I South Atlantic 1958-08-27 1-2 kilotons 200 United States
    Argus II South Atlantic 1958-08-30 1-2 kilotons 256 United States
    Argus III South Atlantic 1958-09-06 1-2 kilotons 539 United States
    Starfish Prime Johnston Island (Pacific) 1962-07-09 1.4 megatons 400 United States
    K-3 Kazakhstan 1962-10-22 300 kilotons 290 USSR
    K-4 Kazakhstan 1962-10-28 300 kilotons 150 USSR
    K-5 Kazakhstan 1962-11-01 300 kilotons 59 USSR

    The table above only lists those high-altitude nuclear explosions for which a reference exists in the open (unclassified) English-language scientific literature to persistent artificial radiation belts resulting from the explosion.

    The Starfish Prime radiation belt had, by far, the greatest intensity and duration of any of the artificial radiation belts.

    The Starfish Prime radiation belt damaged the United States satellites Ariel 1, Traac, Transit 4B, Injun I and Telstar I. It also damaged the Soviet satellite Cosmos V. All of these satellites failed completely within several months of the Starfish detonation.

    Telstar I lasted the longest of the satellites damaged by the Starfish Prime radiation, with its complete failure occurring on February 21, 1963.

    In Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory report LA-6405, Herman Hoerlin gave the following explanation of the history of the original Argus experiment and of how the nuclear detonations lead to the development of artificial radiation belts.

    “Before the discovery of the natural Van Allen belts in 1958, N. C. Christofilos had suggested in October 1957 that many observable geophysical effects could be produced by a nuclear explosion at high altitude in the upper atmosphere.

    This suggestion was reduced to practice with the sponsorship of the Advanced Research Project Agency (ARPA) of the Department of Defense and under the overall direction of Herbert York, who was then Chief Scientist of ARPA. It required only four months from the time it was decided to proceed with the tests until the first bomb was exploded. The code name of the project was Argus.

    Three events took place in the South Atlantic. … Following these events, artificial belts of trapped radiation were observed.
    “A general description of trapped radiation is as follows. Charged particles move in spirals around magnetic-field lines.

    The pitch angle (the angle between the direction of the motion of the particle and direction of the field line) has a low value at the equator and increases while the particle moves down a field line in the direction where the magnetic field strength increases. When the pitch angle becomes 90 degrees, the particle must move in the other direction, up the field lines, until the process repeats itself at the other end.

    The particle is continuously reflected at the two mirror points — it is trapped in the field. Because of asymmetries in the field, the particles also drift around the earth, electrons towards the east. Thus, they form a shell around the earth similar in shape to the surface formed by a field line rotated around the magnetic dipole axis.”

    Illustration of the motion of a charged particle trapped in the Earth’s magnetic field.

    In 2010, the United States Defense Threat Reduction Agency issued a report that had been written in support of the United States Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse Attack.

    The report, entitled “Collateral Damage to Satellites from an EMP Attack,” discusses in great detail the historical events that caused artificial radiation belts and their effects on many satellites that were then in orbit.

    The same report also projects the effects of one or more present-day high altitude nuclear explosions upon the formation of artificial radiation belts and the probable resulting effects on satellites that are currently in orbit.

    NOW Russian cargo ship for space station crashes, rocket accident may delay launch of next crew
    A spacecraft carrying nearly 3 tons of supplies failed to reach orbit Wednesday and crashed into Siberia.

    NASA’s space station program manager, Mike Suffredini, says next month’s planned launch of a new crew may be delayed. That’s because the upper stage of the Soyuz rocket that failed is similar to the ones used to launch astronauts.

    Suffredini says three of the six space station astronauts who are due to return to Earth in two weeks, might end up staying longer. NASA wants to keep the outpost fully staffed with six to keep research going.

    As for supplies, the space station has plenty to last until spring.

    THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP’s earlier story is below.

    MOSCOW (AP) _ An unmanned Russian supply ship bound for the International Space Station failed to reach its planned orbit Wednesday, and pieces of it fell in Siberia amid a thunderous explosion, officials said.

    A brief statement from Roscosmos, Russia’s space agency, did not specify whether the Progress supply ship that was launched from the Baikonur cosmodrome in Kazakhstan had been lost. But the state news agency RIA Novosti quoted Alexander Borisov, head of a the Choisky region in Russia’s Altai province, as saying pieces of the craft fell in his area some 1,500 kilometers (900 miles) northeast of the launch site.

    “The explosion was so strong that for 100 kilometers (60 miles) glass almost flew out of the windows,” he was quoted as saying. Borisov said there were no immediate reports of casualties.

    The ITAR-Tass news agency quoted Choisky’s Interior Ministry as saying the space ship crashed in a vast Siberian forest that contains small villages. Yuri Shmyrin, the chief of Karakoksha, one of those villages, told Interfax news agency that the search operation for the wreckage is not likely to start until Thursday morning.

    The Russian Emergencies Ministry could not be reached for comment. A Roscosmos media officer who refused to be identified said the agency had no immediate comment.

    Roscosmos said the third stage of the rocket firing the ship into space failed a few minutes into the launch. The ship was carrying more than 2.5 tons of supplies, including oxygen, food and fuel. Since the ending of the U.S. space shuttle program this summer, Russian spaceships are a main supply link to the space station. It was the 44th Progress to launch to the International Space Station.

    Roscosmos said the accident “would have no negative influence” on the International Space Station crew because its existing supplies of food, water and oxygen are sufficient.

    Interfax cited a Russian space analyst, Sergei Puzanov, as saying those supplies could last two to three months and that “the situation with the loss of the Progress cannot be called critical.”

    In the United States, NASA said the rocket appeared to function flawlessly at liftoff, which occurred right on time, but there was a loss of contact with the vehicle just over five minutes into the flight.

    On NASA TV, Russian officials said the upper stage did not separate from the supply ship and that on two subsequent orbits controllers tried to contact the supply ship _ in vain. Two hours after the mishap, Russian Mission Control told the space station crew: “We’ll try to figure it out.”

    NASA is counting on Russia as well as Japan and Europe to keep the orbiting outpost stocked, now that the space shuttles are no longer flying. The shuttle program ended in July with the Atlantis mission; a year’s worth of food and other provisions were delivered.

    Late this year, a commercial company in California plans to launch its own rocket and supply ship to the space station. NASA is encouraging private enterprise to make station deliveries.

    There are six astronauts aboard the International Space Station, which orbits 350 kilometers (220 miles) above the Earth. They are Russians Andrei Borisenko, Alexander Samokuyayev and Sergei Volkov, Americans Michael Fossum and Ronald Garan and Satoshi Furukawa of Japan.

    “The supplies aboard the space station are actually pretty fat” after the resupply mission by space shuttle Atlantis in July, NASA spokesman Kelly Humphries said from Houston. “So we don’t anticipate any immediate impact to the crew.”

    Humphries stressed that NASA was waiting to get more details from Russian space officials on what actually happened.

    In July of 2010, a Progress supply ship failed in its first automatic docking attempt due to equipment malfunction, but was connected with the orbiting laboratory two days later.
    Marcia Dunn contributed from Cape Canaveral, Florida.

    Why did they fail to reach orbit>>>?


    • Notice in bold that they are NOT sending another rocket with people and supplies…

      Imagine why…

      • I would assume fukushima can now be categorized as a high altitude nuclear explosion…

        Being it was a nuclear explosion…
        That went 30,000 feet into the air…

        The only part you need to be concerned about is
        its anywhere between 168 and 70,000 tests taken at the same time…

        as insignificant as that is…

        • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar anne

          Some questions: Actually, I think, there is a great difference between a nuclear explosion which explodes at ground level and whose debris shoots up 5 miles and a high altitude explosion that explodes between 26.7 miles and 250 miles up according to:
          “High-altitude nuclear blasts produce significantly different effects. In the lower reaches of vacuous space, the resulting reaction grows much larger and faster than it does near the ground, and the radiation it emits travels much farther.”
          High-altitude nuclear explosion

          Of course, none of the high altitude nuclear tests used MOX fuel. What source do we have that tells us how high the explosion of reactor #3 went into the air?

          • actually Dutchsinse showed us that information… The fukushima radiation went as high as 50,000 feet (during its dispersion)

            theres imaging of this in this video. (scroll to the end this is only an example of that source / information).

            So 50,000 feet and higher… In my opinion that means there is a Very real Fukushima radiation belt. In my opinion A. NASA Knows this…

            I suppose were the only people to know aside from them…

            Because in my opinion there is an artificial fukushima radiation belt… MSM just hadn’t told you yet…

        • 1 mile = 5280 feet

          10 miles = 52,800 feet.

          Another way of looking at it is: The rads went to the jet stream right… well that is located at 23,000 – 52,000 feet.

          In other words great questions… But I will assume that the radiation is high enough to cause alarm. In regards to an artificial / radiation belt.

          • so 10 miles multiplied by 168 nuclear test bombs =___________

          • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar anne

            There were 21 high altitude nuclear bomb tests, but only 9 man-made radiation belts.
            Also, just because radioactive particles reached the jet stream, it doesn’t mean they went 10 miles high. I don’t see how anyone can postulate that another radiation belt has been created.
            The lowest man-made radiation belt was at 26.7 miles up. As far as we know none of the particles from Fukushima reached that high. It certainly exploded at ground level. The problem for space travelers doesn’t being until 400 miles up. And there were problems last year before Fukushima.
            I don’t think you can count Fukushima as a high altitude nuclear explosion for any angle. Maybe someone with more expertise can shed light on this conjecture.

          • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar anne

            CORRECTION: begin

  • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar anne


  • Hey greetings all. I’m jumping into the conversation late into the game and haven’t read all comments so forgive me if I’m saying something that has all ready been said.
    My respect to all contributors for having the patience to study the situation to get an informed opinion. Your all miles ahead of the average person still trusting mainstream media. Special thanks to Tacomagroove who has in the past suffered much undeserved ridicule and who has obviously spent a large amount of time researching. Thank You. I think everybody including Tacomagroove are praying she is wrong.

    I happened to be reading the local paper today and came across a small article buried in the middle of a weekend edition paper titled

    Areas near Japan’s crippled Fukushima nuclear plant may be off limits for decades

    Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Areas+near+Japan+crippled+Fukushima+nuclear+plant+limits+decades/5317721/story.html#ixzz1WOYcTElS

    You know contrasting what Arnies video is saying, to the newspaper article is worrying.

    The article is admitting what we have known for months that parts of Japan will be uninhabitable for decades but still describing the radiation emitting from Fukushima as “low level”. The feel good spin.

    Arnie is technically explaining there is more unreported damage, more unknown situations and the prognosis is dismal.

    Sadly I concur with Emmy’s general opinion. From what I see, and I sure hope I’m wrong, they can’t control the multiple nuclear melt-downs and what they are doing is just slowing down the inevitable fact that soon it will be an uncontrolled nuclear event due to too much on site radiation for man or machine to intervene.

    And I draw my conclusion not from solid research like Emmy but by casual observation of MSM vs enenews. The MSM news clipping I posted above, saying parts of Japan will be unlivable for decades was not acknowledged info back in March except if you were an enenews person. Mainstream says what enenews says months later. Now they are saying Fuki is emmitting low levels of radiation while us folks here know radiation is actually increasing.

    Its just very sad BUT at least us folk can prepare in some way. I plan on at least having a few cold beers on hand…. Info is King so we are armed. God Bless everyone

  • matina matina

    infiltrate? what are you 10 years old?
    Sorry I’m sick of this b(#*#@#*?
    you make your little private groups to keep people informet after ‘a personal invite only’ ? ? that sounds so USEFULL for the people of Japan or anybody else who would really benefit from good info
    why FuckBook when you have ENENEWS ?
    Somehow you make it sound like ENENEWS is not good enough to inform people and ENENEWS is FREE for anyone to access!!!!
    Its lake we are back at school where kids had their secred clubs and would not play ball with outsiders
    GROW UP you are doing what IAEA is doing, witholding valuable info from the public

    • livelife

      matina – that is very unbecoming. Many people in my social circle who were unaware of the severity of the Fukushima nuclear nightmare became enlightened when I shared enenews links on facebook. As much as I can’t stand fb, I will use it as a medium to spread information. If I get through to just 1 person, that’s one more in fight to defeat nuclear. Keep up the good work everyone!!!

      • matina matina

        Yes i agree with you o share ENENEWS links as they are free for anyone to read but brivate groops after invitation only are just that. The information here shared here is most relevant to Japanese, how many of them will be invited in to the “private” group. Besides in this kinds of times open free unrestricted flow of informtion is very important thats why i support enenews but not private groups who clame to infiltrate organisation.