Asahi: Video shows Tepco’s hastiness when reporting Unit 3 as a hydrogen explosion — Cause “has yet to be determined”

Published: August 8th, 2012 at 1:00 pm ET


Title: Video shows TEPCO’s hastiness in reporting cause of reactor explosion
Source: AJW by The Asahi Shimbun
Date: August 08, 2012

Video shows TEPCO’s hastiness in reporting cause of reactor explosion

Tokyo Electric Power Co. announced, without verifying the cause, that a “hydrogen explosion” had occurred in its Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant on March 14, 2011, simply parroting what the government had reported.

The hasty announcement by TEPCO, the operator of the Fukushima plant, came following an explosion in the plant’s No. 3 reactor building, which occurred at 11:01 a.m. on March 14.


The cause of the explosion in the No. 3 reactor building has yet to be determined.

This footage was not on the 1.5-hour version of the video TEPCO released to the media, but was among the more than 150 hours of footage the utility allowed journalists to view on weekdays through Sept. 7, on condition no video or audio recording be made of any segments. Here is Asahi’s summary transcript:

Akio Takahashi, a senior Tepco official:  “In short, the only change we have made was replacing ‘No. 1 reactor’ with the ‘No. 3 reactor’?… We do not know whether it was a hydrogen explosion, but since the government–the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency–is saying it is a hydrogen explosion, we can just say so–a hydrogen explosion, can’t we?”

“On television a short while ago, NISA was saying it was a hydrogen explosion […] I guess we’d better keep pace.”

Unidentified Person: “The prime minister’s office has also been using the term hydrogen explosion. Perhaps we should do the same.”

Tepco President Masataka Shimizu: “All right. I agree. This is fine.”

Two seconds of bleeped-out footage

Shimizu: “Speediness is the key.”

Tepco Spokesman at Press Conference: “It was a hydrogen explosion.”

Published: August 8th, 2012 at 1:00 pm ET


Related Posts

  1. Tepco Official on Unit 3: “We don’t know if it was really a hydrogen explosion” August 8, 2012
  2. Tepco: We don’t know if it was a hydrogen explosion at Unit 3 — Tell public it was though because “it’s a speed game” (VIDEO) October 8, 2012
  3. Reactor Specialist on Unit 3: “I can’t tell you if it’s a hydrogen explosion or a nuclear explosion” (VIDEO) August 24, 2012
  4. Real severe problem cooling Unit No. 3 reactor — Hydrogen explosion possible (VIDEO) May 13, 2011
  5. Gundersen’s Kansai Presentation: Pellets of nuclear fuel were scattered around Fukushima site — Pieces, not atoms, but pieces — Hydrogen will not create explosion seen at Unit No. 3 (VIDEO) May 13, 2012

12 comments to Asahi: Video shows Tepco’s hastiness when reporting Unit 3 as a hydrogen explosion — Cause “has yet to be determined”

  • Jebus Jebus

    The evidence shows, if ya want a good reactor core ejection, MOX fuel is your choice…

  • PhilipUpNorth philipupnorth

    "Hey, so let's make sure that what we say is the "party line", whether or not it is true. The sheeple don't need right answers, they only need consistent party line answers, after all."

    Hydrogen doesn't go up like Fuku3 did.
    Steam doesn't go up like Fiku3 did.
    SFP3 doesn't go up like Fuku3 did.
    So can you please tell us what exactly happened to send the contents of Reactor3 hurtling into the skies above Fuku?, you really need to come clean on this now. No more party line. No fake answers. Tell the truth. What really happened to Fuku3?

    • takedake

      "Steam doesn't go up like Fiku3 did."

      You'd be amazed at the power of expanding super-hot steam. It remains a probability.

  • Radio VicFromOregon

    What i find interesting here is that it appears that the government had its own nuclear consultants and aired an analysis without first checking in with the TEPCO whomevers – owners?

  • TerraHertz TerraHertz

    Sigh. Once more unto the breech, I guess. Not that it will make any difference.
    The Message of Fukushima Unit Three
    Permission granted to repost that anywhere, by the way.

    I'd sure like to know if Arnie Gundersen has ever seen (and heard) the off-air video of the unit #3 explosion, in which the three separate bangs can be heard. (Linked in my article above.) From his public comments, it does not appear that he has.

    It's pretty obvious that TEPCO knew it wasn't purely a hydrogen explosion. But I doubt they understood at the time what it really was. Maybe they still don't. Too horrible to think about, so denial continues.

    One could say that is the story of all nuclear accidents.

    • pierre

      I'm probably digressing a bit (though if Truth were fresh air, well, the fresh air we used to have, it might become clear) but parallels with the bang noises in the Twin Towers on 911, and how they also don't gell with the official line of kerosene fires on high.
      sometimes I suspect AG is not telling the whole truth, or not bothering to investigate beyond a narrower confine. That said, he's one of the best we've got.
      and I reread your article too, well thought out.
      and what will become of japan ? part of the global fascist solution to the problems globalist corporations (and their owners) have created. invade a disfunctional state in the name of saving humanity, and get more power and ability to lie ad infinitum.
      one hope for the epigenetic issue is for genetic engineered repair, but we are hardly going to track down every microbe to fix the biosphere. (unless Dr Deagle is correct and they have advanced techno to vibrate vast areas in a swoop and fix the vibrationally correspondent aberant genes). but I digress….

    • Nigwil

      Yes Arnie has commented on this.
      See around 11:15 on

      He shows the same image as you with a huge hole in the debris above the spent fuel pond, and an wrecked but relatively intact roof over where the reactor is. So the ejection was from the SFP.

      I think though, because there was not a complete burn out of the SFP, that the ejection was only from part of the pond and there was enough water left in the pond to prevent a zirconium-uranium (+plutonium)fuel rod fire. As Arnie notes once a rod fire starts water cannot put it out.

      So the happening in Unit 3 was a hydrogen explosion that caused a prompt criticality in the pond due to compression of the water and the consequent change in the moderating properties of the water and a jiggling of some of the fuel assemblies. The explosion occurred under water and ejected part of the core (the smoking hole in the wreckage in your photo), leaving enough water in the pool (there was 7 metres of water above the fuel assemblies) to re-inundate the assemblies and prevent a fuel rod fire.

      If there had been a fuel rod fire in SFP3 the population of the Northern Hemisphere would probably be in the process of moving south right now, so it didn't happen.

  • sunpower

    I'm with TerraHertz. His is the most plausible explanantion, and I share all his conclusions as well, about what this means. The nuclear engineers mostly all do not even understand the physical events that occurred. AG does some good but is mostly 'inside the box' set up by the nuke industry.
    Hey well anyway, no new licenses coming from NRC…baby steps in the right direction of burying the whole shebang where the sun don't shine.

  • Flapdoodle Flapdoodle

    In the early days, (I really didn't think I would be calling it that), there was some talk of dropping an A bomb on it "because that was the only way to get rid of the radioactive elements". Anybody know if that is still on the table, or are they waiting for it to explode by itself?

  • AGreenRoad AGreenRoad

    What? And vaporize some HUNDREDS of TONS of radioactive fuel rods?

    When your only tool is a nuclear bomb, everything starts looking like a opportunity to use it.