Gundersen: Tepco photoshopped Fukushima Unit 4 image to hide crack (VIDEO)

Published: September 23rd, 2012 at 2:10 pm ET


Follow-up to: [intlink id=”tepco-admits-we-replaced-photo-for-physical-protection-of-nuclear-materials” type=”post”]{{empty}}[/intlink]

Interview with Nuclear Engineer Arnie Gundersen
Capitol Forum (Sundays at 8a CT)
Sept 23, 2012

At ~15:00 in

Close-up of obscured area

Fairewinds’ Arnie Gundersen, Nuclear Engineer: [Unit 4] has a crack on one side of it that Tokyo Electric tried to ‘Photoshop’ out of one of the pictures, but they did such a poor job it actually highlighted the crack.

Stream the full broadcast here

Published: September 23rd, 2012 at 2:10 pm ET


Related Posts

  1. Again: Tepco edits image of Fukushima Unit 4 — Still attempting to hide something at bottom of reactor building (PHOTO) November 29, 2012
  2. Gundersen: Tepco was hiding “crack in the foundation” of Fukushima Unit 4 (AUDIO) October 22, 2012
  3. Gundersen in Japan: Lawmakers told me they don’t believe Tepco or NISA — Crowd laughs out loud when Tepco responds to Unit 4 comments (VIDEO) September 3, 2012
  4. Gundersen: Everybody’s focused on Unit 4, but structure of Unit 3 thought to be weaker (VIDEO) May 12, 2012
  5. Report: Tepco reveals damage to Unit 4 near ‘photoshopped’ area (PHOTO) September 5, 2012

70 comments to Gundersen: Tepco photoshopped Fukushima Unit 4 image to hide crack (VIDEO)

  • Atomfritz Atomfritz

    The typical Arnie blabber again.
    I wish he'd care to provide a little bit of proof, which would possibly not that difficult.

    • timebomb

      The Atomfritz blabber continues… and what is worse he is in a basement constantly posting messages to internet sites thinking he is smart and cool. Perhaps you should go on a radio show to share your thoughts. Oh wait, no one cares what you say so shut up.

      • Atomfritz Atomfritz

        Believe what you want to believe 🙂

        • timebomb

          "Believe what you want to believe"… Thanks for your permission you passive agressive propaganda spreader. Now, go have some fun with your hot photos of glowing fuel rods.

        • patb2009

          i believe the proof is that Tepco tried to photoshop the picture. Badly.

          If TEPCO would stop lying as reflex and just publish data and report their analysis,
          we wouldn't be calling them liars on a daily basis, but TEPCO fired every spokesperson
          who told the truth and spent months trying to cover up the Metldown, the decision for workers to flee the plant or levels of damage.

    • nyarlathotep nyarlathotep

      The proof is lying all over the main island of Japan…

  • moonshellblue moonshellblue

    Arnie Gundersen is an amazing man and I totally trust his judgement and applaud his efforts to keep us inform. He has provided the truth concerning TMI which I greatly appreciate since I live within 35 miles of the plant. Arnie is my hero.

  • TheBigPicture TheBigPicture

    Yep, thumbs up to Arnie Gundersen. Way.

  • Sickputer

    It didn't highlight the crack for me, but I'll take Arnie's word for it. I bet he has some Japanese snitches. Good! We need some spies.

    • moonshellblue moonshellblue

      Lol but you're probably spot on, I bet he does have some connections as Arnie has spent a lot of time talking to the Japanese and taking soil samples in Tokyo, etc. What an awesome guy.

  • Fury Fury

    I am sorry to see that Mr Gunderson appears to be changing his talks from calming people down and saying only the truth as is known, and not speculatingon what most likely WON'T happen, to starting to talk like Mucho Kaka and going along with the prevailing attitude of " Find something wrong , even if it's not". That pic looks like it is the bottom of the wall and not part of the fuel pool at all. And if that's the worst damage that part of the building sustained, I for one won't be the least worried about anything.!! Except maybe my house mortgage!That fuel pool will probably be there for the next 1000 yrs or so. After they empty it they could pour concrete under and around it, lot's of expensive concrete, and make a monument of it!

    • timebomb

      He didn't say it was part of the fuel pool, he said it was the unit 4 building. How do people make these kind of accusations when they can't even get basic facts correct? You need to stop typing, stick to 'trying' to read//listen.

      • Fury Fury

        He tried to imply that this would cause the pool to leak. not hardly. It is not the primary structural member. pretty much a solid filler in the wall for containment of vapors and radiation, the support will be provide by huge beams that aren't visible because of this facade. If the pool could leak because of this minor crack it would already have done so.

    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar anne

      Fury, your improbable exaggeration belies your propaganda:

      "That fuel pool will probably be there for the next 1000 yrs or so. "

      You are only worried about your house mortgage? How about caring about all the children bathed in radiation in Japan and around Chernobyl, and all the other places (too numerous to recount). How about your own children and grandchildren? Or your pregnant wife? Why don't you sell your house and try to do something positive for all the children of the world?

      • Fury Fury

        What kind of radiation are they bathed in, Sunlight? I am pro low cost energy, and this will help make future reactors safer against acts of nature. Nuclear energy is safe under most conditions, this was not a fault of nuclear energy but a mistake in position of where to put the plant. A few meters higher up the slope and this accident would not have happened. What about Wind power? Is it cheaper? No. And no one wants these windmills in their front and back yard either. But they sure want the electricity! People here in the Texas panhandle want to sell the energy from wind but don't want to see the mills that generate it, and the people down state want the energy ,; You generate we'll buy it. Same thing with nuclear, You want energy, someone has to have a plant close by them.

        • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar anne

          Not only is nuclear energy the most dangerous, it is also the most expensive. What about methane leaks from the ground? What about release of tritium? What about Krypton-85 releases? Why do they have to release radiation into the atmosphere every day from nuclear reactors? If it is as safe as you claim, why don't they just keep all the radiation trapped into the reactors containment vessel and containment building?

          How about some scientific links to prove your point? Why aren't you living on the grounds at Fukushima, or in Belarus is nuclear is so safe?

          Do you use tanning booths? Tan in the sun on the beach? Didn't you ever hear of skin cancer? Anyway, plutonium doesn't exist naturally in nature. Are you comparing the radiation of plutonium to the radiation from the sun? Are you claiming that ingested radiation is the same as radiation from the sun?

          Radiation from nuclear power plants destroys the human genome. Why don't you study some biology?

        • richard richard

          you see fury, all this thinking of yours is based on the selfish premise that you can poison the future.. leave the nuke waste as a legacy for all future generations, simply for your greedy desire for power.

          nothing can justify leaving untreatable waste for future people. you can't arrange and agreement, nor negotiate with people who don't even exist yet.

          the answer is simple. if you can't get enough power from renewable energy.. then stop what you're doing!

          but it get's even simpler. nukes consume power from the grid. and when they get shutdown, no one seems to notice. they are not here to produce power, they are here to produce nuke fuel for weapons.

          and then, why do you even want to play this stupid game with corrupt government and corporations that are out to exploit ever sweat and tear from you .. and you are blathering on with their propoganda. you are a pawn to the PTB.

          decentralised, renewable energy with break down the that's destroying our world. why is that not a palatable solution… maybe you're part of the fascist abomination of a culture that supports poisoning the future.

          nukes create to problems (at least), ecocide and futurecide.

          (ps, i don't really care if your side wins, because you'll suffer before i do, i'm down under).

          • Mack Mack


            Nuclear energy is Not low cost energy. It's the most expensive energy to taxpayers there is.

            TRILLIONS of dollars have gone to nuclear energy for insurance; government agencies who oversee nuclear; nuclear labs; clean-up of nuclear contamination; pay-outs to nuclear workers hurt by radiation contamination…the list is endless.

            That money could have gone to Research, Development and implementation of Renewable Energy.

            —-> WINDPOWER is Cheaper Than Nuclear

            "Japanese Breakthrough Will Make Windpower Cheaper Than Nuclear"


            —-> SOLAR is Cheaper Than Nuclear

            "The costs for solar photovoltaic (PV) systems have fallen steadily while construction costs for new nuclear power plants have been rising over the past decade, which now makes electricity generated from new solar installations cheaper than electricity from proposed new nuclear power plants, according to a new report published by a retired Duke University professor."


            For more Renewable Energy success stories, check out ENENews Forum for Alternative Energy:

            AND with windpower and solar you don't need the BILLIONS of dollars it costs to process & store nuclear waste, clean-up radioactively contaminated superfund sites, ETC.

            • Mack Mack

              Nuclear energy can never be "cheap" because generations of your great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandchildren will still be paying to store nuclear waste.

              No one NEEDS nuclear energy. The government WANTS it so it can create fissionable products for nuclear weapons. Nuclear power plant owners WANT it because they get the profits while the ratepayer pays the bills.

              Nuclear energy only provides 9% of nuclear energy in the U.S., and this could easily be Conserved and then they could shut down every nuclear power plant.

              Show Texans this photo of a Japanese child being checked for radiation after Japan's nuclear meltdowns and they'll welcome wind farms with open arms:


        • or-well

          ah – auto-"out"-ification
          of nuclear shillerisation.
          Saddle up Tex
          and google the wrecks
          of other nuke installations.

        • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar anne

          Actually, if you want electricity including enough to drive your electric car, just put up solar panels.

          When you argue: "You want energy, someone has to have a plant close by them.' You are admitting that it is not safe to safe to live next to a nuclear plant.

          Just take away the obscene, huge government subsidies to nuclear power, and make the industry carry its own insurance, and the nuclear industry is deader than a doornail. There is no insurance company which will insure a nuclear power plant, which also proves that it is not safe at all.

          There is no investor on the earth that will invest in a nuclear power plant without massive government subsidies. The corporate welfare to the nuclear industry must stop. There is nothing cheap about energy that needs the government to provide massive subsidies and massive insurance. Please put an end to this fascism, and get a life based on the truth, not some flicker imposed propaganda.

        • richard richard

          "A few meters higher up the slope" – yeah right.

          with all those 'brilliant' (cough cough) engineers and the decades of design and contruction, you'd think someone would have said, 'hey, let's take it all one step backwards for the sake of, well, gee, i dunno, just cos'.

          so now you come along with your stellar suggestion. you think any of that poison on that site will get moved in time for the next quake and tsunami?

          better hope so.. japan and the usa are co-joined at the pacific.

        • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar anne

          Who's going to pay for 1,000,000 years guardianship of nuclear waste? Talk about saddling your grandchildren with debt. Nuclear energy just brings disease, debt, and death. Life is the biggest treasure. Nuclear energy is not just economically a failure (haven't your heard the CEO's of Exelon, and GE)? It is too expensive a price to pay in every respect. And you don't even give anyone a vote. You just take their lives without asking permission.

        • Anthony Anthony

          Under which conditions are you saying Nukes are safer under anyways?

      • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar anne

        Fury, have you missed the news?

        “…Concern to Spent Fuel Pool collapse by aftershock, especially that by Shouwa-Sanriku Earthquake, which should be caused in near future by normal fault due to change of stress field by main shock…”

    • Johnny Blade Johnny Blade

      @Fury;With regard to the idea of "lots of cement" & "make a monument out of it"~the "monument" should be having a sculptor/artist design the proposed sarcophagus as a working model of a giant toilet with the "flush lever" being the control for an enormous amount of cooling water swirling around until the corium & whatever "crap" bubbling up goes back down into the ocean(the way they ALREADY designed it to do!) For "shits"& giggles-they could have TEPCO leadership dressed up like the Tyvex Tidy Bowl Man in a little boat proclaiming how "safe" everything is and "under control"??!! Maybe zeolite & Prussian Blue would even turn the water blue with every "flush"?!! LOL…At this point NOTHING would surprise me anymore!~what a world we (made)live in??!!~P.S.,yeah I know it's a dumb post,but it's no worse than anything TEPCO or the nuclear knuckleheads have come up with or DONE so far!!(as long as the last to use it puts the seat back down & closes the lid!!)… 🙂

  • farawayfan farawayfan

    Nuke-shill assault on ENENEWS in progress! If you think everything's fine at Fuku please just leave, you're obviously paid for your opinion.

  • RBN costs a lot, actually. Is there no other way to see this?

  • richard richard

    what's RBN ? i'm not from the land of the three-lettered-acronym (USA), i'm from australia where we spell things out like it is.

  • Jebus Jebus

    When will humans in charge, figure it out. This single planet is not your fathers planet anymore.
    It is amazing how few humans realize, the true hurt, that humans have put upon this earth.
    These man made radionuclides are not your average toxic pollutants.
    The volumes of non radioactive toxic pollutants currently produced is epic, in and of itself.
    But, these are persistant global pollutants, that affect every living organism alive.
    The modern world has never seen the amounts of manmade long lasting toxins,
    being injected into the environment on such a grand scale as the last fifty years.
    Elements so facetious, they have no bounds. Tricking life, with lies, like a psychopathic killer.
    Elements so lethal, they threaten the only code of evolution and creation, in the hood.
    Trillion's of manmade nanosized bits of the sun, sterilizing the process's of nature,
    Unknown quantities of efficient little neutralizers, lasting from seconds to millions of years
    All the while smiling at you and telling you everythings okay.
    Of all the genies man has conjured up, this one shouldn't have left the bottle.
    The silence, the lies, the coverups, and the hubris, can't hide the truth.
    These pollutants, are not going away anytime soon. And their spreading like ink on a carpet.
    If man keeps injecting this waste, nuclear waste, in these quantities into the environment,
    whether inadvertantly or ignorantly, life itself will be changing. All life.

    • Jebus Jebus

      I'm only fifty three and I remember that the atom was going to bring epic changes to the way in which we lived.
      The few humans in charge are the ones who choose the theory of nuclear. They wished for this.
      There's truth to the phrase, be careful, for what you wish for.
      One percent choose this dream and one percent has woke up. Everyone is living the nightmare.
      Nope, this is not your daddy's planet anymore…

      • andagi andagi

        Dear Jebus,
        Thank you for your tender and poignant post. It seems that what we must do is stick together and keep working for change. It is still a new day, everyday, and ENENews will continue tenaciously fighting for our precious biosphere. Keep repeating your information!
        Thank you for all you do and have done by posting. You and many here continue to help humanity in countless ways 🙂
        Take good care.

  • American Phoenix57

    Has anyone read this before?

    "I'll be philosophical. Until about two billion years ago, it was impossible to have any life on earth; that is, there was so much radiation on earth you couldn't have any life, fish or anything. Gradually, about two billion years ago, the amount of radiation on this planet and probably in the entire system reduced and made it possible for some form of life to begin… Now when we go back to using nuclear power, we are creating something which nature tried to destroy to make life possible…

    Every time you produce radiation, you produce something that has a certain half-life, in some cases for billions of years. I think the human race is going to wreck itself, and it is important that we get control of this horrible force and try to eliminate it… I do not believe that nuclear power is worth it if it creates radiation. Then you might ask me why do I have nuclear powered ships. That is a necessary evil. I would sink them all.

    I am not proud of the part I played in it. I did it because it was necessary for the safety of this country. That's why I am such a great exponent of stopping this whole nonsense of war. Unfortunately limits – attempts to limit war have always failed. The lesson of history is when a war starts every nation will ultimately use whatever weapon it has available."
    – Adm. Hyman G. Rickover, the Father of the Nuclear Navy on the hazards of nuclear power in testimony to Congress (28 January 1982).

  • Moving those power plants a few yards higher up, or even a mile up, would not have made any difference. The cooling pumps were at sea level because that's where the water is. The tsunami immediately destroyed the pumps, which would have caused the meltdowns even without earthquake damage.

    • timebomb

      Some basic research will tell you otherwise… It was the loss of the water intake that is said to be the ultimate cause, not the cooling pumps.

      • dosdos dosdos

        Actually, Fukushima Daiichi released significant atmospheric radiation before the tsunami hit, detected by satellite. That means the earthquake was to blame for part, if not all, of the meltdowns.

        Do your research.

      • Fall out man!

        Its even worse than that TimeBomb. There were eye witness accounts from workers in the early days of the disaster reporting that after the earthquake hit, pipes burst and there was a steam explosion in at least one of the reactor buildings. There was steam pouring out all over the place and reports of loud bangs and terrified workers. From memory more than one reactor lost cooling as a result of the quake and BEFORE the Tsunami hit. If you hunt through the back archives at Enenews you will see this in articles and discussions.
        Hearing that explained another "anomaly". Before the Tsunami struck there were radiation detectors going off a kilometer away from the plant. Tepco said they were just malfunctioning from the earthquake. But according to eye witnesses they already had steam explosions and workers desperately clambering over fences in a mad dash to get away from the place. I also remember there being a reference to the problems before the Tsunami in releases of transcripts from the NRC (but I could be wrong on that last point).

        The plant was in trouble before the Tsunami hit. The Tsunami no doubt made things worse, but the melt downs were already underway. In that sense, the Tsunami is a good cover story for saying "how could we know". Its important to remember what has been disclosed previously, because the main stream media is not going to remind us of these embarrassing revelations.

        • Fall out man!

          Actually, 14 reactors in various locations around Japan ran into major problems. Information that the Japanese govt released many months later. (and that is all they would admit too). Note that it was so serious that they shut down all nuke power in Japan. Obviously the problems extended well beyond Fukushima.
          I remember people pointing out early on that there were extra hot radiation spots in the middle of cooler spots further from Fukushima. In at least one of those cases I remember there were other nuclear plants in trouble in those areas. Apologies for not going into detail, but this was commented on at the time. Whatever the case, the Japanese government now admits as much.
          So the earthquake caused 14 melt downs or partial melt downs. Not just those at Fukushima. The only reason we heard about Fukushima was that it came close to taking out Tokyo and blew up so spectacularly there was no hiding it. (though even then, initially the public was told it was just a harmless steam explosion and blowing the roof off was just part of the plan, nothing to worry about!)

          • Anthony Anthony

            ***The pumps along the water were destroyed. And that is the real root cause of the accident at Fukushima Daiichi. We call that the loss of the ultimate heat sink. And the keyword there is ultimate. You need the ocean to pull the water out of the nuclear reactor to keep it cool. But that same water has to cool the diesels to make that happen. The diesels would not have worked even if they had not been flooded. Now this problem that we call the loss of the ultimate heat sink, did not just happen at Fukushima Daiichi I, II, III, and IV. All 6 reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi site experienced it, but also at the Fukushima Daini site, the Onagawa site, and the Tokai site. Between those 4 sites there are 14 nuclear reactors. ***


          • m a x l i

            @Fall out man! A few details of your account seem not to be correct.

            Firstly, they didn't shut down all nuke power immediately. From memory, they shut down some reactors immediately, others where kept online until scheduled 13-or-so-monthly maintenance shut-down and after that not put back online – thanks to opinion of local populace and veto by local bureaucrats.

            Secondly, I heard about the tsunami and about problems at one nuclear power plant in the radio news in the evening of day 0 (Japan time), when I already heard the name Fukushima, whereas the explosions of reactors 1,3 and 4 took place later on days 1,3 and 4.

        • aSpadeisaSpade aSpadeisaSpade


          "Its important to remember what has been disclosed previously, because the main stream media is not going to remind us of these embarrassing revelations."

          Indeed! Well said. The MSM is not only not going to remind us, they are actively trying to obfuscate it and deny it!

          We need to bear witness to the truth often and emphatically, lest evil wins out.

  • pierre

    and not forgetting Gundersen said the seals are (likely) going to fail, doesn't matter about pumps or water then.

  • W8R W8R

    As an ex nuclear employee, I must state:
    Without Stuxnet, or something like it, this COULD NOT have happened.
    The meltdowns were caused by a failure of the electrical switching subsystem.
    After about a week, they gave up and ran cables, bypassing the switching station, which refused to allocate power to the control rooms..
    Many control readings still show "normal" pressures and temps in 1,2,3 and 4.
    Not a tsumani, not an EQ.. A virus is what poisoned the Earth…

    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar anne

      Sorry, W8R, the meltdown was caused by the earthquake. Fukushima Daiichi was supposed to have been shut down, but they granted an extension on the license. Also, this nuclear power plant shouldn't have been built there. It was built on porous sandstone. Also, reactor 4 was cracked before they even installed it. Also, instead of shutting reactor 3 down instead of granting an extension of the license, they put MOX fuel in it. This reactor design was never supposed to hold MOX fuel. Also, the salt water from the tsunami corroded everything.

      These accidents are just waiting to happen. There is human error in the operation. There is cost cutting on the materials. Fukushima Daiichi was the least safe nuclear power plant on the planet and its safety checks were falsified for many years.

      There are many accidents all the time in the nuclear industry. Even it it was run properly, nuclear power plants foul the water and vent radiation every day into the air. They could not operate otherwise. Sadly, loyalty to the industry is killing every living thing on the planet and making every square inch on the planet uninhabitable for millions of years if not forever.

    • TerraHertz TerraHertz

      I agree with Anne. All nuclear power plants are unacceptably and intrinsically unsafe. For many reasons but in particular because humans can *never* guarantee an absence of major natural disasters. A major meteorite strike in almost any ocean causing a huge tsunami will destroy all nuclear plants along all surrounding coastlines. Major earthquakes also cannot be predicted.

      The presence of nuclear plants transform major disasters from local tragedies that can be recovered from in a few years, into endless global nightmares spanning hundreds of human generations. Or potentially even worse – ending all higher life on Earth.

      In Fukushima's case, whether or not Stuxnet was present in the industrial controllers, seawater flooded the basement backup diesel generators, washed away the dockside diesel fuel storage tanks, and also flooded most of the electrical switch rooms. Somewhere I've got a photo of one of those flooded switch rooms, and it's extremely clear why no power was ever going to be routed through that room again. Apart from the physical damage, salt water and high voltage don't mix well.

      It also has been reported that the initial earthquake broke some of the critical cooling water pipes. Just that alone would make meltdown inevitable.

    • TerraHertz TerraHertz

      And even if the Fukushima disaster *was* entirely due to Stuxnet… well that implies nuclear plants are even more unsafe.

      Stuxnet was developed by US and Israeli government agencies, as a weapon to be used against Iran's entirely legal civilian nuclear power industry. The US and Israeli governments are insane, full of warmongering psychopaths, motivated by lunatic ideologies (Zionism to name just one.) They are extreme examples of governments gone bad, but that's not relevant in this instance.

      What is relevant is that someone developed a computer virus able to destroy nuclear installations. Iran admitted some of their centrifuges were destroyed by Stuxnet.

      Why should the existence of such risks not be factored into the overall safety equation of nuclear plants? There will always be psychopaths in the world, whether they are in government (the usual case) or outside it.

      When nuclear plants exist, it is absolutely necessary to consider that there may be attempts to destroy them, and that such attempts (crazy or not) will be backed by great human ingenuity. This alone tells us nuclear power is an unacceptable risk, since the consequences of 'accidents on purpose' are effectively eternal and horrible.


        brilliant stuff TerraHertz.

        I might also add, I could suspect that numerous theories are being submitted as to why these power plants failed, as means of both confusing the observer into thinking that we need-only come up with better defenses against them. I'd submit, it is not so important as to how the failures occur…but that they can occur! I could care less if it's Stuxnet, invaders from deep-space or rabid zio-cons that caused this catastrophe. I only care that we allowed this planet to be put in such an incredibly vulnerable position! Because, as we're discovering, worse than the failure itself is the very real possibility that we cannot – now – put a practical timeline to ending this nightmare…

        Thanks again for your brilliant words…

  • TerraHertz TerraHertz

    Arnie is a great guy and doing a fine job, but… sometimes I wish he'd do a little more checking of his facts before speaking.

    It's already been established that TEPCO photoshopped out a large truck-entry portal in that image. Not a 'crack'. Also TEPCO finally admitted their photoshop was to 'protect the security of nuclear materials'.

    So the only debate is *which* nuclear materials – does this mean part of Japan's weapons grade plutonium stockpile is stored in the Unit 4 building?

    Here are some links. (shows the portal location is what they erased.) (another view of it, prior to demolition.)