A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

Gundersen: Everybody’s focused on Unit 4, but structure of Unit 3 thought to be weaker (VIDEO)

Published: May 12th, 2012 at 12:27 am ET
Email Article Email Article

Arnie Gundersen Interviewed by Mike Adams
May 11, 2012

“Gundersen is chief engineer of energy consulting company Fairewinds Associates and a former nuclear power industry executive” -Wikipedia

At 25:00 in

Everybody’s focused on Unit 4, and rightfully so, but Unit 3 had a more severe explosion and is likely structurally weakened more than Unit 4.

See also: Gundersen: No. 3 fuel pool worse off than No. 4 -- Mechanically it's rubble, the pool is rubble -- Nobody has even gotten near it yet (VIDEO)

Published: May 12th, 2012 at 12:27 am ET
Email Article Email Article

26 comments to Gundersen: Everybody’s focused on Unit 4, but structure of Unit 3 thought to be weaker (VIDEO)

  • Re: Risk Assessment (Relative Risk) "…in any fool proof system the fools are going to exceed the proofs." – Gundersen

    "A technology ….have one bad day, …and wipe you out." – Gundersen

    Here's my risk/consequences assessment. It's NOT worth risking all (any) life on the planet in order to boil water. EVER!

    Report comment

    • PraisingJesus(Eashoa’ M’sheekha) anne

      +1000000000000000 You are so right!

      Report comment

    • StillJill StillJill

      Yeah,…Arnie had some great one liners today. While talking about the birthing aged Mothers,..he said they are now basically saying, "Hell no we won't glow!" :-)

      Report comment

    • Arnie picked up that foolproof line from Edward Teller (father of the hydrogen bomb). Teller said "There's no system foolproof enough to defeat a sufficiently great fool." And he said “Sooner or later a fool will prove greater than the proof even in a foolproof system."
      I think that boils down the danger of nukes so well that I had that line in big leters across the top of a blog for months.

      Report comment

      • Sooner or later a fool… (a terrorist, an idiot, greed mongers, a psycho or unforeseen random events of nature.)

        "…that BOILS DOWN the danger of nukes…" – Spagnoli

        That's a good statement too. Maybe Mr. Gundersen will use it someday.

        Report comment

    • HoTaters HoTaters

      What a great statement re: risk assessment!

      Report comment

    • AGreenRoad AGreenRoad

      How Dangerous Is 400-600 Pounds Of Plutonium Nano Particle Dust Liberated By Fukushima? Via A Green Road Blog

      Still no one talking about this in the mass media..

      Another sacred cow.. time for everyone to worship at the alter.

      Bow down to the God of Pluto, destroyer of worlds.

      Pluto asks for blood sacrifices, not just one at a time, as in times past.. Now it has to be thousands, even MILLIONS of sacrifices at a time.

      Who will be sacrificed next, near you?

      Report comment

  • Stop by and add to this poll, 1 day left

    Stupidest Endeavor the Man Thought He Could Handle

    67 (63%)

    Most Dangerous Way to Boil Water

    61 (58%)

    Fails us Time and Time Again

    42 (40%)

    Lies Lies Lies and Denials

    61 (58%)

    The Most Likely Way to Wipe Out the Human Species

    65 (61%)

    The Old Clunker Plants are Even More Dangerous

    45 (42%)

    An Alien Visitor Would Think We Are Not Worthy

    31 (29%)

    Solar and Wind Is Cheaper and Safer

    48 (45%)

    The Military/Nuke Cartel Cannot Be Trusted

    55 (52%)

    Nuke Can Be Made Safe If Enough Money is Spent

    7 (6%)

    The "new reactors" This Time It Is Different and Safe

    6 (5%)

    A Carrington Event Would Cause 400 Reactors to Melt Down

    32 (30%)

    Over 1% of All Plants Blow Up –What Are We Thinking

    32 (30%)

    Report comment

  • Toadmac

    "The NRC needs to consider all of the costs and benifits of removing the fuel"?????
    This statement should make everyone's alarm bells ring!
    This is blatant admittance to murder for money. The rich are always bailed out, no matter the cost!!! The greed is appalling!

    They take our money to keep there hold,
    All they care about is there gold,
    You and I are just there tax,
    Then they knife us in the back,
    Our lives to them have been sold,
    Life to them just a stain of mould,
    Killing us for there need,
    Using us for there greed,
    They say its for us and its for good measures,
    The truth is,
    They are killing us to keep there treasures!

    I'm no poet, but felt the an urge….

    Report comment

  • Heart of the Rose Heart of the Rose

    It SEEMS..Gundersen points to one.. then runs off to discuss another…but we never get to 1 and 2…
    Do tell… Mr. Gundersen.

    Report comment

    • Kevin Kevin

      Yeah the old shell game remains a dominant and recurrent theme in the communications of the Fukushima disaster. Moreover his analysis on three is based on "assumptions" as he admits that the status of SFP 3 is sketchy at best. May be weaker, have we seen anything remotely definitive on the status of the fuel pool since day one? There may have been half of the fuel in 3 than 4 but half of a world threatening event is still a world threat and may have already released the threat it posed/poses. To my mind nowhere has this issue been properly addressed and all the attentino on 4 seems more like a distraction or even a cover up of things that already occurred.

      Report comment

  • Whoopie Whoopie

    You have got to be kidding me. Ishihara Tokyo governor plans to build a nuclear plant along Tokyo bay | Fukushima Diary:

    Report comment

    • Whoopie Whoopie

      Fukushima elementary schools held sports festival | Fukushima Diary:
      Happy Mothers Day. :(

      Report comment

    • HoTaters HoTaters

      Tokyo is known for having very large, damaging earthquakes every 80-100 years. They have been overdue for a large earthquake since at least the 1980's.


      Report comment

      • HoTaters HoTaters

        Very destructive earthquakes at least every 200-300 years.

        Fusakichi Omori (1868-1923), director of the Seismological Institute of Japan, studied the occurrence of earthquakes around Tokyo and wrote in 1922:

        "Currently the immediate area of Tokyo is seismically quiet while in the mountains around Tokyo in a distance of about 60 kilometres there are often triggered earthquakes …. Over time, the seismic activity in these areas will gradually diminish, meanwhile it will increase as compensation in the bay of Tokyo and will possibly cause a strong earthquake ….
        One year later, on Saturday the 1. September 1923, the city of Yokohama and Tokyo were hit again by an earthquake, today it is remembered as the Great Kanto- earthquake with a magnitude of 7.9 on the Richter scale and the epicentre situated in the bay of Sagami – adjacent to the bay of Tokyo. More than 99.000 people were killed by the collapse of buildings, a 10 to 12m high tsunami and a fire that raged for 2 days in the city. The bodies of possibly more than 40.000 people were never found. September the 1. is today a national day of remembrance for the dangers of earthquakes."

        Massive earthquake there in the 1600's and again in 1855. Take special note of the woman jumping over the fissures opening beneath her feet, in the 1948 Fukui earthquake.

        Report comment

  • el


    Report comment

  • americancommntr

    Thank you, Mr. and Mrs. Gunderson.

    I think God, the God of the Bible, as revealed in the Bible, creation, and Christ, has to be pleased with what you do.

    I don't know about the politics and information control of Fukushima, but know that a little light in darkness is so much better than no light and can be seen by all in darkness.

    Report comment

  • americancommntr

    Gundersen, sorry.

    Report comment