EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
As Fukushima Worsens, US Approves New Nukes
Nuclear Regulatory Commission OKs New Nuclear Plants in South Carolina
Despite reports this week that the Fukushima nuclear situation may be even worse than previously thought, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has given approval today for two combined licenses for two nuclear reactors in South Carolina, only the second time in the last three decades that new nuclear plants have been approved in the nation.
The Vogtle nuclear power plant, which was given the first license since the Three Mile Island nuclear disaster in 1979 South Carolina Electric & Gas Co., a unit of SCANA Corp., and Santee Cooper, South Carolina's state-owned electric and water utility, will begin construction on the reactors in Fairfield County, S.C. at the Summer nuclear power site.
The NRC's decision to approve the license passed by a 4-1 vote, with the lone dissent vote coming from NRC chairman Gregory Jaczko due to safety measures raised by the Fukushima disaster. Jaczko wrote in his dissent, "I continue to believe that we should require that all Fukushima-related safety enhancements are implemented before these new reactors begin operating.”
The nuclear reactors will use Westinghouse's AP1000 design. But in November nuclear expert Arnie Gundersen warned of several unreviewed safety concerns with this design and said that Westinghouse’s assumption of zero probability of reactor and/or spent fuel cooling failure “is a blatant manipulation of a safety code designed to protect public health and safety.”
In February the NRC also voted to extend licenses to build two nuclear reactors at the Vogtle nuclear power plant in Georgia.
Earlier this month, Amy Goodman noted that "Democrats and Republicans agree on one thing: they're going to force nuclear power on the public, despite the astronomically high risks, both financial and environmental."
* * *
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission: NRC Concludes Hearing on Summer New Reactors, Combined Licenses to Be Issued (pdf)
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has concluded its mandatory hearing on the South Carolina Electric & Gas (SCE&G) and Santee Cooper application for two Combined Licenses (COL) at the Summer site in South Carolina. In a 4-1 vote the Commission found the NRC staff’s review adequate to make the necessary regulatory safety and environmental findings, clearing the way for the NRC’s Office of New Reactors (NRO) to issue the COLs.
* * *
The Hill: Regulators approve construction of nuclear reactors in South Carolina
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) voted 4-1 to approve a license allowing construction and conditional operation of two new reactors at Scana Corp.’s Virgil C. Summer nuclear power plant in Fairfield County, S.C. NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko was the lone vote against approving the license. [...]
Friday’s decision is a major victory for the nuclear power industry, which has struggled for years to receive the necessary regulatory approvals to build new reactors.
In his dissent, Jaczko reiterated his long-standing call for the commission to include in the license a requirement that the plant operator – in this case Scana subsidiary South Carolina Electric & Gas – comply with all post-Fukushima safety standards. [...]
“I fully support the decision by my colleagues to include this license condition and I consider this important progress in incorporating the lessons from Fukushima,” he wrote in his dissent. “However, I continue to believe that we should require that all Fukushima-related safety enhancements are implemented before these new reactors begin operating.”
Jaczko was also the lone dissenting voice in February when the commission approved the Vogtle license. At the time, he raised similar concerns about incorporating the lessons learned from the Fukushima disaster into the license.
* * *
POWERGRID International: NRC approves COLs for SCE&G, Santee Cooper Nuclear Units
About 1,000 workers are currently engaged in early-site preparation work at the V.C. Summer construction site. The project will peak at about 3,000 construction craft workers over the course of three to four years. The two units, each with a capacity of 1,117 MW, will then add 600 to 800 permanent jobs when they start generating electricity. The two AP1000 nuclear reactors will be fabricated by Westinghouse.
V.C. Summer Station is about 20 miles northwest of Columbia, S.C., and includes the now-decommissioned Carolinas-Virginia Tube Reactor unit. The plant comprises one 1,000 MW Westinghouse 3-loop pressurized water reactor currently licensed to run through 2042.
* * *
Common Dreams: Experts: Radiation at Fukushima Plant Far Worse Than Thought
Water at surprisingly low levels; damage "worse than expected"
Radiation levels inside Fukushima's reactor 2 have reached fatally high levels, and levels of water are far lower than previously thought, experts say today.
The current radiation levels are so high that even robots cannot enter. Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) says that new robots and equipment will need to be developed to deal with the lethal levels of radiation.
TEPCO spokesperson Junichi Matsumoto told the Associated Press, "We have to develop equipment that can tolerate high radiation" when locating and removing melted fuel during the decommissioning.
At ten times the lethal dose, the radiation levels are at their highest point yet.
At the current level of 73 sieverts, the data gathering robots can only stand two to three hours of exposure. But, Tsuyoshi Misawa, a reactor physics and engineering professor at Kyoto University's Research Reactor Institute, told The Japan Times, "Two or three hours would be too short. At least five or six hours would be necessary." He added that "the shallowness of the water level is a surprise, and the radiation level is awfully high."
* * *
Amy Goodman: Big Nuclear's Cozy Relationship with the Obama Administration
Super Tuesday demonstrated the rancor rife in Republican ranks, as the four remaining major candidates slug it out to see how far to the right of President Barack Obama they can go. While attacking him daily for the high cost of gasoline, both sides are traveling down the same perilous road in their support of nuclear power.
This is mind-boggling, on the first anniversary of the Fukushima nuclear disaster, with the chair of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission warning that lessons from Fukushima have not been implemented in this country. Nevertheless, Democrats and Republicans agree on one thing: they're going to force nuclear power on the public, despite the astronomically high risks, both financial and environmental.
One year ago, on 11 March 2011, the Tohoku earthquake and tsunami hit the northeast coast of Japan, causing more than 15,000 deaths, with 3,000 more missing and thousands of injuries. Japan is still reeling from the devastation – environmentally, economically, socially and politically. Naoto Kan, Japan's prime minister at the time, said last July;
"We will aim to bring about a society that can exist without nuclear power."
He resigned in August after shutting down production at several power plants. He said that another catastrophe could force the mass evacuation of Tokyo, and even threaten "Japan's very existence". Only two of the 54 Japanese power plants that were online at the time of the Fukushima disaster are currently producing power. Kan's successor, Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda, supports nuclear power, but faces growing public opposition to it.
This stands in stark contrast to the United States. Just about a year before Fukushima, President Obama announced $8bn in loan guarantees to the Southern Company, the largest energy producer in the southeastern US, for the construction of two new nuclear power plants in Waynesboro, Georgia, at the Vogtle power plant, on the South Carolina border.
Since the 1979 nuclear accident at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania, and then the catastrophe at Chernobyl in 1986, there have been no new nuclear power plants built in the US. The 104 existing nuclear plants are all increasing in age, many nearing their originally slated life expectancy of 40 years.
While campaigning for president in 2008, Barack Obama promised that nuclear power would remain part of the US's "energy mix". His chief adviser, David Axelrod, had consulted in the past for Illinois energy company ComEd, a subsidiary of Exelon, a major nuclear-energy producer. Obama's former chief of staff Rahm Emanuel played a key role in the formation of Exelon. In the past four years, Exelon employees have contributed more than $244,000 to the Obama campaign – and that is not counting any soft-money contributions to PACs, or direct, corporate contributions to the new Super Pacs. Lamented by many for breaking key campaign promises (like closing Guantánamo, or accepting Super Pac money), President Obama is fulfilling his promise to push nuclear power.
That is why several groups sued the Nuclear Regulatory Commission last month. The NRC granted approval to the Southern Company to build the new reactors at the Vogtle plant despite a no vote from the NRC chair, Gregory Jaczko. He objected to the licenses over the absence of guarantees to implement recommendations made following the Japanese disaster. Jaczko said, "I cannot support issuing this license as if Fukushima never happened."
Stephen Smith, executive director of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, one of the plaintiffs in the suit against the NRC, explained how advocates for nuclear power "distort market forces", since private investors simply don't want to touch nuclear:
"They've asked the federal government for loan guarantees to support the project, and they have not revealed the terms of that loan guarantee … it's socializing the risk and privatizing the profits."
The Nuclear Information and Resource Service, noting the ongoing Republican attack on President Obama's loan guarantee to the failed solar power company Solyndra, said:
"The potential for taxpayer losses that would dwarf the Solyndra debacle is extraordinarily high … this loan would be 15 times larger than the Solyndra loan, and is probably 50 times riskier."
As long as our politicians dance to the tune of their donors, the threat of nuclear disaster will never be far off.
* * *
Nuclear Expert Cites New Concerns about Westinghouse Reactor Design Based on Fukushima Disaster:
DURHAM, N.C. - November 10 - Nuclear engineer Arnie Gundersen has documented at least six areas of unreviewed safety concern involving the Westinghouse AP1000 nuclear plant design based on the ongoing Fukushima disaster, and he says these problems require full technical review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission before the plant design can be “certified.” Today public interest groups filed his report – which expands on problems identified by a federal task force – with NRC commissioners who are considering a final vote on the plant design without responding to a long list of problems raised earlier by experts within and outside the industry.
The report was commissioned by NC WARN and Friends of the Earth, who say the NRC staff has avoided resolving the earlier problems – along with others the NRC’s Fukushima Task Force said apply to new reactors – in order to meet the nuclear industry’s AP1000 construction schedule. In a legal motion accompanying today’s report, the groups say federal regulations require correction of the multiple problems during the design certification phase – not after full construction of the AP1000 begins in Georgia and South Carolina.
Gundersen, of Fairewinds Associates, reports multiple “failure modes that the NRC and Westinghouse have not considered … impacting the ability of the Westinghouse passive design to cool” the reactor and spent fuel pools. The former nuclear industry senior vice-president says Westinghouse’s assumption of zero probability of reactor and/or spent fuel cooling failure “is a blatant manipulation of a safety code designed to protect public health and safety.”
“Fukushima Unit 4 released enormous amounts of radiation when its spent fuel pool cooling system was shut down during the tsunami – and the lessons learned from this disaster must be applied in the design phase of the AP1000,” Gundersen said during a press conference today. “This same sequence is possible on the AP1000, but the NRC and Westinghouse-Toshiba have factored a zero percent chance of such an accident occurring.”
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



59 Comments so far
Show AllI wonder what Obama's kickback was?
"It ain't over until it's over". Here's part of an item from the Nuclear Information and Resource Service which needs your action.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Friends,
*This is big.* The $8.3 Billion taxpayer loan for construction of two new reactors at the Vogtle site in Georgia, the centerpiece of the Obama Administration's support for the "nuclear renaissance," may be blocked–by the Obama Administration.
*Please act now and tell President Obama and Energy Secretary Steven Chu to stop these loans for good.
> http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5502/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY...
And please help us spread the word–in this case, our numbers really matter.
Here's the background:
*According to an article today from the industry publication Platt's:
> http://bit.ly/H6GSDo
–the nuclear industry is growing increasingly worried that the White House's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) will not give final approval for the Vogtle loan. That's because the nuclear industry wants a sweetheart deal–one where Southern Company has to put up virtually none of its own money and where all financial risk for the loan is laid squarely on the shoulder of taxpayers.
But both OMB and DOE have come under scathing criticism, especially from Congressional Republicans, over the failure of the Solyndra solar company loan granted by the Administration. And the proposed Vogtle loan would be 15 times larger (and far riskier) than the one given to Solyndra.
Thus, the Administration is being more cautious over the Vogtle loan than it would have been when first agreed to more than two years ago. And the more public scrutiny the Administration receives–and the more letters we send–the more likely that caution will lead to a cancellation of this loan
Craig
Support the troops, the bastard women, children, and babies they kill deserve what they get for perpetrating 9/11 on us, even if they never set foot on US soil, don't know the US even exists, or were born after 9/11. The US military is the greatest, most powerful military ever, even if it has either lost or fought to a stalemate almost every military action since WWII. But hey we did kick butt in Panama, but not so much in Vietnam.
When I was young I almost had to kill Vietnamese, it was all the rage back then. Just last year I bought a nice vest at Sears that was made in Vietnam. We went there to kill them, now they make clothes for us. Those God damn ungrateful bastards.
People need to understand that in the US radioactive elements are NOT radioactive. Meltdowns and leaks don't happen here. But if they do leak, it won't be an issue because the safe levels for radiation will be raised to just above the dangerous level of the leak. But remember, nuke plants in the US do NOT leak. That is until they do, then the safe levels will be raised. But remember Nuke plants in the US can not leak. Please repeat this as many time as needed until you believe in the sanctity of the Nuke.
Relax, radiation is safe in the US. You can't see it, fell it, taste it, or see it, so it must be safe. Makes sense? No? Well, you can't see God, fell her, taste him, or see it, but we know God is good, so nukes must also be good. Please repeat until you believe in the sanctity of the Nuke.
Three Mile Island was greatly blown out of proportion if you were alive when it happened. If you weren't born when it happened, then it didn't happen. It's that whole, we make our own reality thing. Yea I know at times it can be confusing. Just keep watching Fox news until it makes sense, and until you believe President wanabe Mittens loves you. That cold soulless stare of his is the new look of love in the US. When someone looks through like you don't exist it means they love you. Don't believe that? Then you must be a terrorist.
Most Americans are terrorists you know, that is why they must be electronically stripped searched at airports, and have their junk fondled. Or maybe it's because Uncle Sam is just a sexual pervert? If you think that, then you are a terrorist.
The US is a fact free, reality free zone. They only reality here is that everyday is 1984, and 1984 is good. Make sense? No? Then reread it until it does, because if this post didn't make sense then you are unAmerikan, you are at terrorist.
What is "worse then previously thought"? This speaks to the perversity of our media and Political systems.
People on THESE BOARDS were citing articles and making their own opinions known that the situation in Fukishima was far worse then what was being REPORTED and DIVULGED to us by the Governments.
Who were those that THOUGHT the situation was really not all that severe?
I doubt there were ANY people who were informed that THOUGHT it not all that bad.
It must have government single payer health insurance, loan guarantees, and a rigged regulatory system....and an apathetic public.
Build 2,200 of them and shut down the fossil fuel power plants.
Just imagine 2,304 nuclear reactors in operation in the US... Damn!
I still say geothermal is viable, cost effective and safe and would be easy to have at least two thouand geothermal power plants in operation in the US within three years if we wanted to save our dumb asses and the planet,,,and there is nothing worng with solar, wind and tidal in comparrison to fossil fuel and nuclear power plants. I believe it is not just an epidemic of autism with children we now see in progress..
What i love the most about this world is how Facebook sends me e-mails from "noreply@facebook.com" telling me someone i never met has commented on my photo i've never seen posted somewhere in the Facebook universe.
Maybe Fukushima will friend me on Facebook, i don't have a Facebook account, i wonder if Fukushima has a Facebook account.
Soon, oh yes so very soon we will all line up to joyfully accept our Network Implants into our brains, then we can e-mail each other inside our own heads and get into insulting blog threads with just the blink of an eye. Or watch My Mother The Car with our eyes closed, all day and night.
And so goes the pure capitalist!
Defined : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor
Explained in 5 min. : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9M__yYbsZ4
I am not advocating. I'm asking...
I have to say that this sounds good, although I have heard only the positives, and not yet the negatives.
But assuming that this is as good as it sounds, then why on earth are we still building these "Fukushimas". Why did we just license the destructive poisonous U235 reactors?
In Queensland Australia, the government has provided rebates (subsidization) for the use of home solar panels. These solar panels can charge a battery powered car or compress air for a very clean air car, but currently the energy goes back into the solar grid as well as to power air-conditioning. It has worked. People are buying these things, and mounting them on their roofs, and the power consumption has dramatically fallen.
Why cant the USA do that too? Why is it that we are building new Fukushimas.
Could it be that we/they wanted the Uranium for its "other" applications..... and that is why the nuclear arsenal and its many costs disappears into the department of energy.
It's just a question....
There's been a lot of hype about the virtues of Thorium vs BWR & PWR reactors. But I kept asking the question- If Thats So- why has NOT ONE production scale thorium reactor ever been built any-where in the World! Even considering that PWR & BWR reactors are more compatible w a nuke-weapons prog- one would think that Japan, Canada, Germany, Italy, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, etc [IE: technically advanced countries that have nuke power plants but no nuke weapons arsenal] would have jumped at the chance to lead the way to Thorium power! Well here some info that rains on that parade- - - Thorium Fuel: No Panacea for Nuclear Power- Physicians for Social Responsibility: @ www.ieer.org/fctsheet/thorium2009factsheet.pdf - } No Proliferation Solution: Thorium is not actually a “fuel” because it is not directly fissionable & thus cannot be used to start or sustain a nuclear chain reaction. Fissile material IE: U‐235 or Pu‐239 (which is made in reactors from U‐238), is required to kick-start the reaction. Enriched uranium or plutonium fuel also maintains the chain reaction till enough thorium is converted into fissile uranium‐233 (U‐233) to take over the job. Using enriched uranium or plutonium in thorium fuel has proliferation implications. U‐233 can be used to make nuclear bombs. In most proposed thorium fuel cycles, reprocessing is required to separate out U‐233 for use in fresh fuel- IE: bomb‐making material is separated out, making it vulnerable to theft or diversion. Some proposed thorium fuel cycles require 20% enriched uranium for starting existing reactors using thorium fuel. It takes 90% enrichment for weapons‐grade uranium, but little additional work is needed to go from 20% to 90% enrichment. It is claimed that thorium fuel cycles with reprocessing would be much less of a proliferation risk because the thorium can be mixed with U‐238. Fissile U‐233 would be mixed with non‐fissile U‐238. The claim is that if the U‐238 content is high enough, the mixture can't be used to make bombs without a complex enrichment plant. BUT- Even though more U-238 does dilute the U-233, it also produces more Pu‐239 as the reactor operates. So the proliferation problem remains- either bomb‐usable U‐233 or bomb‐usable Pu239 is created. No Waste Solution: Proponents claim that thorium fuel significantly reduces the volume, weight & long‐term radio-toxicity of spent fuel. Using thorium in a nuclear reactor creates radioactive waste that proponents claim would only have to be isolated from the environment for 500 years, as opposed to uranium fuel that remains dangerous for hundreds of thousands of yrs. This claim is wrong. The fission of thorium creates long‐lived fission products like technetium‐99 (half‐life 200,000+ yrs). While the mix of fission products is a bit different- the same range of fission products is created. With or without reprocessing, these fission products have to be disposed of in a geologic repository. If the spent fuel isn't reprocessed, thorium‐232 is very‐long lived (half‐life: 14 billion yrs) & its decay products will build up over time- making the spent fuel quite radio-toxic. Also inhaling a unit of radio-activity of thorium‐232 or thorium‐228 (a decay product of thorium‐232) produces a far higher dose, especially to certain organs, than the inhalation of uranium containing the same amount of radioactivity. IE: the bone surface dose from breathing an amount of insoluble thorium is about 200Xs that of breathing the same mass of uranium. Ongoing Technical Problems: Research & development of thorium fuel has been on-going in Germany, India, Japan, Russia, the UK & US for over half a century. Besides remote fuel fabrication and issues at the front end of the fuel cycle, thorium / U‐233 breeder reactors produce fuel much more slowly than uranium / plutonium‐239 breeders. This leads to technical complications. India has been trying to develop a thorium breeder fuel cycle for decades but has not yet done so commercially. One reason reprocessing thorium fuel cycles haven’t been successful is that U-232 is created along with U‐233. U‐232, is extremely radioactive- thus very dangerous in small amounts: Therefore fabricating fuel with U‐233 is very expensive & difficult. Not an Economic Solution: Thorium may be abundant & possess certain technical advantages, but it does not mean that it is economical. Compared to uranium, the thorium fuel cycle is likely to be even more costly... { Also see 'Thorium Reactors: Back to the {fission nuke} Dream Factory @ www.ccnr.org/Thorium_Reactors.html
First, the overview of the incident from Jiji Tsushin (3/27/2012):
分析用汚染水漏れる=運搬先の福島第2原発で-東電
Contaminated water from Fukushima I for analysis spilled at Fukushima II Nuclear Power Plant, says TEPCO
東京電力は27日、福島第1原発から分析のため福島第2原発に運び込んだストロンチウムなどを含む汚染水が容器から漏れ、机や通路などを汚染したと発表した。経済産業省原子力安全・保安院は、汚染水の取扱規定に違反している可能性が高いとして、運搬状況を報告するよう指示した。
TEPCO announced on March 27 that the contaminated water spilled from the container and contaminated desks and corridors at Fukushima II Nuclear Power Plant. The water contained radioactive strontium and other nuclides, and was brought from Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant to Fukushima II Nuclear Power Plant for analysis. The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency under the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry has instructed TEPCO to report the details, as the company is likely to have been in violation of the regulation that specifies how the contaminated water should be handled.
東電と保安院によると、汚染が見つかったのは第2原発3、4号機サービス建屋の机と通路など7カ所。水が付着した場所からは最高で1平方センチ当たり約700ベクレルの放射性物質が検出された。作業員の被ばくはないという。
According to TEPCO and the NISA, contamination was found at 7 locations in the service building for Reactors 3 and 4 at Fukushima II Nuke Plant, on the desks and corridors. Maximum 700 becquerels per cubic centimeter of radioactive materials have been found from the locations of the spill. There is no worker exposed to the contamination.
"140 liters" information comes from the ad hoc NISA press conference on March 27 at 9:15PM (that's unusual these days).
More detailed information from the press conference, by Ryuichi Kino: 東電の発表では、汚染は206Bq/cm2 [sic] という話だったが、保安院の発表では、最高700Bq/cm3と聞いているとのこと。ただ、運んでいた量が全部で140L。なんでこんなに多量の汚染水を運んでいたのかは、今のところ不明。保安院によれば今回の漏洩量は少ないが場合によっては汚染された水のすべてが漏洩した可能性があり、その場合に想定される放射性物質の量などからすると、国際原子力事象評価尺度(INES)の対象になり、暫定でINESレベル1と判断しているとのこと。
TEPCO announced the contamination as 206 Bq/cubic centimeter, but NISA says max 700 Bq/cubic centimeter. Total amount of the water was 140 liters. It's not known why such a large quantity of contaminated water was being transported. According to NISA, the amount of leak this time was small, but depending on the situation the entire amount could have leaked. If that was the case, INES (International Nuclear Event Scale) should be applied to the incident because of the amount of radioactive materials that would have been released; consequently, NISA considers the incident as INES Level 1, on a provisional basis.
もうひとつ疑問。東電は夕方6時からの会見で、この経緯をごく簡単に説明。汚染は1か所だけと発表していた。けれども保安院の発表では、汚染は全部で7か所と。事態の発生は午後0時42分とのことなので、それから5時間後の会見で詳細が発表されなかったのは、対応が遅すぎ。
Another question. TEPCO touched on this spill very lightly at the 6PM press conference, and said there was only one contamination. But NISA says there were 7 locations that were contaminated. The spill happened at 12:42PM, and TEPCO didn't have the details at the press conference, 5 hours after. Too slow.
Kino also reports this was the second time TEPCO transported a large quantity of contaminated water from Fukushima I to Fukushima II.
(Additional information)
Kino also says that the contaminated water is routinely sampled by the affiliate companies (probably Toshiba, Hitachi, and other top-tier contractors) for testing at their facilities. UNQUOTE
Read more unbelieveable FUBARS with pics of the follies at:
http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/
Has there ever been a more dishonest company handling something so critical?
It's "worse than previously claimed", but that's a whole other ball of wax.
And any legitimate news organization should have recognized the pattern of lies and deceptions long ago.
Certainly one like NPR that calls itself "public" radio.
Well, here's National "Public" Radio just a couple weeks ago (again) lowballing the magnitude o fthe Fukushima disaster (something it has done consistently since the very start).
NPR's 'science" corresponent Richard Harris
"Well, I would say it's a stable mess. The nuclear fuel has been cooled down with water so it's not hot, hot, hot anymore - although it's still highly radioactive."
Fukushima Starts Long Road to Recovery March 10, 2012)
http://www.npr.org/2012/03/10/148351019/fukushima-starts-long-road-to-re...
Got that?
NPR claims the situation is "stable" and "in recovery" while TEPCO (who does not exactly have a track record of bending over backwards to tell the truth) says there's almost no water and radiation levels have gone through the roof!
Can you say "NPR has zero credibility"?
NPR is "public" radio?
In your interest, right?
My **s.