Published: August 18th, 2012 at 10:36 pm ET
|
Follow-up to: NHK: “The unimaginable was happening” — After alarming pressure readings, “we heard a loud bang… pressure is now zero” (VIDEO)
Title: Interview with Arnie Gundersen of Fairewinds
Source: SolarIMG
Date: August 12, 2012
At 20:00 in
Gundersen: Japan narrowly missed 14 meltdowns [...]
What happened was unimaginable.
This is almost unimaginably unimaginable how close we came to losing 14 nuclear reactors…
Listen here
Published: August 18th, 2012 at 10:36 pm ET
|
sending...
Shwew!
Report Comment
On 3/11; 15-28 Nuclear Reactors/SFP’s In Japan Were Damaged, Not 3 or 4; via A Green Road http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/03/14-nuclear-reactors-at-4-japan-sites.html
The Diablo You Don't Know; via A Green Road
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/04/diablo-you-dont-know.html
Report Comment
So instead we "only" lost, what, 10 reactors instead?
Am I supposed to be relieved and grateful?
Report Comment
Thyroid cancer risk persists decades after radiation
By Genevra Pittman | Reuters – Fri, 17 Aug, 2012
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/thyroid-cancer-risk-persists-decades-radiation-181520912.html?_esi=1
Radon linked to more lung cancer deaths than previously thought
CBC – Fri, 17 Aug, 2012
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/radon-linked-more-lung-cancer-deaths-previously-thought-011632017.html?_esi=1
Report Comment
I thought they did lose 14 reactors and probably even more.
Report Comment
With all due respect to those posting 14 or more melted down, would you please confirm your source? Or the source for your source?
Are you saying you don't agree with this:
http://enenews.com/us-commission-14-nuclear-reactors-at-4-sites-in-eastern-japan-were-affected-on-311-according-to-nisa-fukushima-daiichi-had-the-most-serious-damage-daini-onagawa-and-tokai-were-others
And if not, why not? Am not saying you're wrong, but what evidence is this based upon?
Report Comment
@anne
August 19, 2012 at 4:12 am
Indeed. You know what? At this rate we will see in our lifetimes the explosion of many more of the 400 and more nuculars because of the ongoing grid conditions consequent to the dam nuclear effect.
See http://glaringlacuna.blogspot.in/2012/01/nuclear-effect-in-causing-earthquakes.html
Report Comment
This is a very real threat.
Report Comment
I have to admit I did a double take when I first heard that. That's a really funny comment, but I guess there is no better way to describe it.
Report Comment
What is unimaginable.. is all these reactors..being undamaged.
What is unimaginable..is that the damaged reactors could be repaired before meltdown.
What is unimaginable is having to listen to this garp..from a supposed expert.
Report Comment
Totally agree Heart. It made me ill just listening to the statement. If one NPP were in uncontrolled meltdown, three would be unimaginable. So, what are we to do to solve the problem? We'll just say how unimaginable it'd be to have four-five-fifty-two-hundred-thirty-five-and-on-and-on-and…
I beginning to think this guy's playing good cop…
Report Comment
@Heart of the Rose
August 19, 2012 at 7:32 am
How imaginatively put forth HOTR.
The safety of nuclear power programmes is too difficult to solve and each reactor becomes hell let loose on earth with time.
Report Comment
"hell let loose on earth with time"
Unimaginable!
It is beyond a single life?
Report Comment
Is Gunderson trying to say things could have been worse? Sure, no doubt they could have been worse. Why weren't they? Was it because nuclear energy is a reliable method of producing power and all the checks and balances are in place for anything that might come a long like a huge tsunami, earthquake, a terrorist act?
Gunderson doesn't say that. Perhaps he feels it was serendipity..
His comment pointes toward a conclusion that…well we had some trouble but it wasn't as bad as it could have been…..
The reactors haven't changed much since the explosions, the accident, nothing has been concluded. There is plenty of truble to focus on…
Report Comment
Unimaginable??? Sometime ago Mr. Gunderson said the likelyhood of a nuclear disaster in the US was 300 percent…it's a sure thing. Not unimaginable…unavoidable…???
Totally imaginable!!!
Report Comment
You'll want to this article that's featured in the Weekend edition of the Wall Street Journal's, on why the fears over Fukushima are overblown. It's written by Richard Muller (Professor of Physics at UCB) and will doubtless go down as one of the finest attempts at pro-nuclear propaganda and Fukushima coverup.
It's riddled with so many reassuring vignettes, you'll be on the floor with laughter; that is, after you've finished with the cursing. Here's a teaser: "Residents of Fukushima who are concerned that residual radiation will cause additional risk can avoid that by leaving, but they need to recognize that any additional cancers will be statistically unobservable, hidden well below those of natural cancer and the other dangers of modern life."
If that doesn't wet your appetite, how's 'bout this one: "The great tragedy of the Fukushima accident is that Japan shut down all its nuclear reactors. Even though officials have now turned two back on, the hardships and economic disruptions induced by this policy will be enormous and will dwarf any danger from the reactors themselves." You've got to love that kind of double-speak; and all this from a man of 'letters'.
"The Panic Over Fukushima"
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444772404577589270444059332.html?mod=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read
Report Comment
@AFTERSHOCK
August 19, 2012 at 10:12 am
Muller's concepts are pre DNA era witchcraft deduced from external irradiation models of ICRP. And not taking into account the fact that with internal irradiation a single decay of a radionuclide can permanently damage you and lead to cancer. His article deserves to be scientifically condemned and the refutation as widely circulated as possible and WSJ castigated for such a biased article with absolutely no scientific merit and full of falsehoods. See ECRR 2003/2010.
Report Comment
Precisely why I was laughing Rama. Rather than develop processes needed to reduce the damage-done to our environment, we have this vile excuse of a 'papered' monkey extolling the virtues of squat-where-you-eat.
It should come as no revelation that the WSJ will answer their master's call. It is, after all, a financial publication that panders to those who think little of the world around them and more of what's in their bank accounts. Going back to my earliest days of reading the Journal (on a daily basis), I can assure all, it's become nothing more than a glorified "Globe". We all knew it'd go that way. Murdock's promise that he'd refrain from controlling editorial content is what every guy promises, before closing the bedroom door. Of course, you have to ask who Murdock serves. And finally, there's a massive nuc-portfolio that must be shifted to the rubes, before the big guys complete their divestitures. Any who follow these issues know the writing's on the wall. Unfortunately for us, we have the half-life of plutonium to backup our argument. Richard Muller has tenure…
Report Comment
5 things you will need right after natural or nuclear disaster
Published on Aug 18, 2012 by aristoman007
I stripped the list of needed items to minimum. This is all I needed when the crises started.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbOpCKEXzf4
Report Comment
Thanks for the link arclight, I have everything but gasoline, I'm not sure how/where to store it. I try to keep a fullish tank of gas in my car at all times, but that most likely won't be enough depending on the situation.
Report Comment
Is Gundersen turning into Donald Rumsfield, this sounds like the good old "unknowable unknowns?"
Hey, has Gundersen apologized for comparing the hot runaway fuel to "cold pancakes" yet? Did I miss that retraction? Thanks.
Report Comment
I can imagine him saying like Rummy "Oh, those are the OLD nuclear power plants, these new world order Thorium…..". not saying he's said that exactly though (yet).
(I am still waiting for someone to tell me who started this ENENEWS, given Jim Stone's saying that Arnie did so in the weeks after 311).
mod? come out come out where ever you are.
Report Comment
If that's true, pierre, I apologize. I try not to be so rude in someone's house. Although Rumsfeld was a creative and memorable speaker so it could be a complement, lol.
Report Comment
I'll say this..when one clicks on Gundersen's name in these posts.
The Fairwinds donation link shows up.
Not…Heart of the Rose…lol.
Report Comment
If you go to Admin's bio information and read it carefully you may be able to figure it out. Look very carefully at the statement about the motivation for starting the site, and there's your clue.
We need to be careful not to go about "outing" the founder. This person (probably now a group of people) is covering some very unpopular information with powerful energy companies. Admin has already attracted the attention (and probably the ire) of the UC Berkeley BRAWN Lab personnel. They wondered who is behind Enenews starting shortly after 3/11. Don't forget BRAWN is largely DOE funded. Having a site with honest reporting on these issues is a blessing for us; don't shoot the messenger! Please let's not "out" Admin or we may lose Enenews completely. IMHO a large part of the success of this site is Admin's being able to operate more or less "under the radar."
I'm sure a read on the IP address and server location would reveal the person's identity, which TPTB have likely already done. So let's say Enenews is allowed to exist, but it's no doubt very unpopular with the pro-nuke community.
Do not underestimate the power of the oil companies, nuclear power companies, and the governments with nuclear weapons programs. Think about it. It's much better, IMHO, if Admin. has some level of anonymity. Seriously, you can connect the dots, but please don't try out "out" the Admin!
Report Comment
I didn't say a word…frankly… I think anonymity is best.
And… I have all the time in the world to rework.. Arnie's half-truths.
Report Comment
Comment above was to Pierre, thanks.
Report Comment
I'll even pitch in..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b49lKEAOB70
Arnie..ALMOST saying SFP 4 caught on fire.
Report Comment
I hear you. the fact that these comments haven't been censored is in itself encouraging.
though where I am coming from is having almost all my alternatives tarred with the same brush (you name the genre of medium), consistent with the re-reading of history as it has been lied to us. I could rattle off these names, but that would be off topic.
still, it is a fair comment that this site is drip feeding us to some extent, like Arnie.
not saying I expect kamikaze saint-hood either, but how would it hurt for admin to "come out" as you put it?
I'll leave it at that and thank admin for the site, though i am amazed at how few "alternative" sites there are in the big wide internet. it must be a branding thing or people just don't care.
Report Comment
Hi pierre, please consider this, just food for thought. For Admin to post news here, it is re-posting existing articles. It takes lots of diligent research to find the articles. IMHO it's nearly impossible for one person or a small team to scour the international news wires and find the stories to post here, just to keep this site going. Not to mention Admin's admin time, site maintenance, etc., etc. Everything which goes into web site authoring, monitoring, and maintenance.
It would take very in-depth research to uncover the background data (what exists), time to read the studies, and much genius in an interdisciplinary sense to assimilate and accurately interpret it all.
IMHO that's too much to ask of a site like this. There have been some articles covering scientific study results. My interpretation of what I've read here is this is primarily a news site. And it's a place for airing and sharing ideas and opinions. It's not the nature of this site to go sleuthing for scientific studies, and for Admin try to interpret all the data. There's so much (and so little in some ways) out there it may be one or two more generations (another 50 years or more) before we can look at all the data and understand what's actually happening in Japan, and globally, with nuclear power and weaponry.
Maybe we should try trusting the scientists, engineers, academics, and members of the int'l community who still have integrity to do their jobs.
Report Comment
(CONT) … and members of the int'l community who still have integrity to do their jobs. And report back to us. And perhaps it's our job to monitor them and hold them accountable.
That being said, yes, Pierre, there is a stifling lack of accountability in the international community these days. And MSM is utterly corrupted.
And "absolute power corrupts absolutely."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dalberg-Acton,_1st_Baron_Acton
John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton, 1st Baron Acton, KCVO, DL (10 January 1834 – 19 June 1902), known as Sir John Dalberg-Acton, 8th Bt from 1837 to 1869 and usually referred to simply as Lord Acton, was an English Catholic historian, politician, and writer. He was the only son of Sir Ferdinand Dalberg-Acton, 7th Baronet[1] and a grandson of the Neapolitan admiral Sir John Acton, 6th Baronet.[2][3] He is famous for his remark, often misquoted: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."[4]
Report Comment
Ah yes, and see, I've mis-quoted Lord Acton too! "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Similar to the difference between, "Money is the root of all evil," and "The love of money is the root of many kinds of evil."
Report Comment
Reply to myself 8/20/11 at 11:55AM, that was a very unclear sentence. Meant to say Admin is covering issues which are very unpopular topics of discussion with many powerful energy concerns. I hope y'all caught my drift. Wasn't in any way insinuating Admin represents these energy concerns.
Report Comment
The meaningful comparison is "how much better things would be if we abandoned nuclear energy", because this disaster is far from over.
Report Comment
@TheBigPicture
August 19, 2012 at 1:21 pm · Reply
The meaningful comparison is "how much better things would be if we abandoned nuclear energy", because this disaster is far from over.
Since we do not know the answer except that it will be a set of infinitely dangerous events, let us apply the precautionary principle and shut them all down and sit down to see the difference.
Report Comment