Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Can We Stop the Next Fukushima Times 10,000?
The horrible news from Japan continues to be ignored by the western corporate media.
Students wear masks at an elementary school outside of the 20-km (12 mile) radius zone from the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Minami Soma, Fukushima Prefecture, Japan, September 8. (Kim Kyung-Hoon/Reuters)
Fukushima's radioactive fallout continues to spread throughout the archipelago, deep into the ocean and around the globe---including the US. It will ultimately impact millions, including many here in North America.
The potentially thankful news is that Fukushima's three melting cores may have not have melted deep into the earth, thus barely avoiding an unimaginably worse apocalyptic reality.
But it's a horror that humankind has yet to fully comprehend.
As Fukushima's owners now claim its three melted reactors approach cold shutdown, think of this:
- At numerous sites worldwide---including several in the US---three or more reactors could simultaneously melt, side-by-side. At two sites in California---Diablo Canyon and San Onofre---two reactors each sit very close to major earthquake faults, in coastal tsunami zones.
- Should one or more such cores melt through their reactor pressure vessels (as happened at Fukushima) and then through the bottoms of the containments (which, thankfully, may not have happened at Fukushima), thousands of tons of molten radioactive lava would burn into the Earth.
- The molten mass(es) would be further fed by thousands of tons of intensely radioactive spent fuel rods stored on site that could melt into the molten masses or be otherwise compromised.
- All that lava would soon hit groundwater, causing steam and hydrogen explosions of enormous power.
- Those explosions would blow untold quantities of radioactive particles into the global environment, causing apocalyptic damage to all living beings and life support systems on this planet. The unmeasurable clouds would do unimaginable, inescapable injury to all human life.
Fukushima is far from over. There is much at the site still fraught with peril, far from the public eye. Among other things, Unit Four's compromised spent fuel pool is perched high in the air. The building is sinking and tilting. Seismic aftershocks could send that whole complex---and much more---tumbling down, with apocalyptic consequences.
Fukushima's three meltowns and at least four explosions have thus far yielded general radioactive fallout at least 25 times greater than what was released at Hiroshima, involving more than 160 times the cesium, an extremely deadly isotope.
Reuters reports that fallout into the oceans is at least triple what Tokyo Electric has claimed. Airborne cesium and other deadly isotopes have been pouring over the United States since a few scant days after the disaster.
Overall the fallout is far in excess of Chernobyl, which has killed more than a million people since its 1986 explosion.
Within Japan, radioactive hotspots and unexpectedly high levels of fallout continue to surface throughout the archipelago. The toll there and worldwide through the coming centuries will certainly be in the millions.
And yet....it could have been far worse.
In the US, in the past few months, an earthquake has shaken two Virginia reactors beyond their design specifications. Two reactors in Nebraska have been seriously threatened by flooding. Now a lethal explosion has struck a radioactive waste site in France.
We have also just commemorated a 9/11/2001 terror attack that could easily have caused full melt-downs to reactors in areas so heavily populated that millions could have been killed and trillions of dollars in damage could have permanently destroyed the American economy.
The only thing we now know for certain is that there will be more earthquakes, more tsunamis, more floods, hurricanes and tornadoes....and more terror attacks.
Horrifying as Fukushima may be, we also know for certain that the next reactor catastrophe could make even this one pale by comparison.
Japan will never fully recover from Fukushima. Millions of people will be impacted worldwide from its lethal fallout.
But the next time could be worse---MUCH worse.
The only good news is that Japan, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Sweden and others are dumping atomic power. They are committing to Solartopian technologies---solar, wind, tidal, geothermal, ocean thermal, sustainable bio-fuels, increased efficiency and conservation---that will put their energy supplies in harmony with Mother Earth rather than at war with her.
The rest of humankind must do the same---and fast. Our species can't survive on this planet---ecologically, economically or in terms of our biological realities---without winning this transtion.
The only question is whether we do it before the next Fukushima times ten thousand makes the whole issue moot.
- Posted in
48 Comments so far
Show AllIt's hardly a question of what we will do--we, the people of the United States, as apathetic, uninformed and apolitical as we are,and governed by a federal government as sold out and corrupt as it is--we will do nothing until it bites us and takes out a good chunk of our flesh. The nuclear Rottweiler is growling. The chain link fence holding him back looks rusted and weak. All the neighbors know it's just a matter of time before something bad happens. But when it does the injured parties--that's us, will nevertheless cry out, "How could this have happened to us."
"The rest of humankind must do the same---and fast. Our species can't survive on this planet---ecologically, economically or in terms of our biological realities---without winning this transtion."
until "humankind"--all seven billion of us--realize LIFE isn't just about our species, we'll continue to see more problems than you can shake a stick at.
Every nuke plant and its used fuel sitting there will someday soon become the worst terrorism imaginable.
At least in an Atomic bomb war in a city you wont feel a thing... if you are lucky.
As usual Harvey Wasserman is long on alarming adjectives and short on facts. This is scaremongering at its worst. There are no supporting citations of evidence for these scenarios. "Over the top" again, Harvey.
What is "over the top" and what is your prediction of earthquakes, floods, accidents, sabotage and assessment of the safety of Nuke plants and storage of the fuel rods and waste?
"Fukushima's three meltowns and at least four explosions have thus far yielded general radioactive fallout at least 25 times greater than what was released at Hiroshima, involving more than 160 times the cesium, an extremely deadly isotope"
Wasserman is considering Hiroshima's A-bombing as regards its radioactivity. In point of fact, the radioactivity in the weapon went into the stratosphere and killed no one near ground zero. The bomb killed by blast, heat, fire, neutrons and gamma rays, not by radioactivity. It is inappropriate to compare the Fukushima reactor accident's release of cesium to that from the A-bomb, as if to say the accident will kill more than did the bomb.
"Reuters reports that fallout into the oceans is at least triple what Tokyo Electric has claimed. Airborne cesium and other deadly isotopes have been pouring over the United States since a few scant days after the disaster"
The amount of fresh cesium 'pouring' over the US has been monitored and is small compared to the residue here from atmospheric weapons testing that ended 40 years ago..
"Overall the fallout is far in excess of Chernobyl, which has killed more than a million people since its 1986 explosion".
To the contrary, the amount of fallout from Chernobyl and its dispersion was much more signicant than Fukushima because Chernobyl went prompt neutron critical and blew up while the Fukushima reactor cores melted down. Much more radioactivity was released by Chernobyl and went significantly further downwind.
The 'more than a million people killed' has not been substantiated by any international scientific body and is the claim of several scientists without peer-review.
More likely the world-wide toll from Chernobyl projects out to 10's of thousands, assuming linear dose-effect risk estimate for low doses.
I could go on, but enough of Harvey Wasserman's typical exaggerations. One doesn't have to go to such extremes to question/oppose nuclear power.
Radiation killed almost no one near ground zero at Hiroshima? Watch the documentary footage of people whose flesh fell from their bones a few days after. Those people died from radiation sickness.
You don't seem to understand what radioactivity is, RFinston. When a nuclear reaction takes place, whether as part of a chain reaction in a bomb, or randomly during normal decay of a radioactive substance, the nuclei of atoms are destroyed, in the process producing heat, neutrons, gamma rays, alpha, and/or beta particles (depending on the specific element and isotope) - the very things you think are not radioactivity.
The claims about relative amounts of radiation from Chernobyl and Fukushima are nearly impossible to verify because TEPCO has been lying the whole time. We know that because they have repeatedly changed their statements as time has gone by. We also know that the radiation levels showing up around Japan are too high to be accounted for by TEPCO's claims. So while I do agree with you that Wasserman does not have sufficient basis for claiming outright that Fukushima has released more radiation than Chernobyl, time will tell. Fukushima is nowhere near finished.
The New York Academy of Sciences came up with an estimate of 1 million deaths from Chernobyl. Studies by Russian scientists came to similar conclusions. Are we to discount them because they are not "international"? Also, "projects out to 10's of thousands" is something you apparently just made up off the top of your head. The Chernobyl studies which came up with numbers of deaths less than ten thousand did not attempt to answer the question of how many people are likely to have died worldwide from the Chernobyl accident, but the number who died of thyroid cancer contracted through exposure to radioactive iodine.
I said the cesium radioactivity which Wasserman raised did not cause death at Hiroshima, so any comparison of that cesium with the cesium from Fukushima is false. Those whose flesh fell from their bones a few days later died of thermal burns not radiation. Deaths from radiation occured weeks later (bone marrow depression being the cause) and not from radioactivity but rather from neutron and gamma rays emitted directly by the fission process in the chain reaction. There is a clear physical difference between that prompt radiation and delayed radiation from radioactive fission products and my point was to show that Wasserman's claim that Fukushima released more cesium than the atomic bomb was a misleading attempt on his part to compare the overall radiation exposure from the two events when they were grossly different.
Again, it was not the New York Academy of Sciences that came up with the claim, and if fact the Academy explicitly did not endorse it. If you would like the reference to that report I can provide it to you. The 10's of thousands estimate, rather than the 'millions', comes from the Union of Concerned Scientists which is not known to be a pro-nuclear power group but rather a responsible scientifically-oriented environmental information organization.
Three months ago a retired nuclear engineer who managed a nuclear power plant in the US for 30 years, calulated that the radioactive poisons released from Fukushina were 50 times greater than those from Chernobyl... That was three months ago ~RFinston~ and they are still spewing out... Shut it off RF. Whom do you believe is listening and trusting your misinformation? .
"Shut it off RF. Whom do you believe is listening and trusting your misinformation?"
At least one thing he's been saying here is true: "radioactivity" and "radiation" are not one and the same thing. Some of us -- perhaps because we don't understand this -- have misquoted RF and misconstrued his argument.
I've written many comments here that hammered the nuclear industry, its government lackeys, and its web-forum shills, but I, too, considered this article poorly supported. It reflects poorly upon our credibility if we defend such articles and try to silence a critic who does have some legitimate points.
"I said the cesium radioactivity which Wasserman raised did not cause death at Hiroshima, so any comparison of that cesium with the cesium from Fukushima is false."
Without researching the matter myself, I don't know whether the comparison is false. However, you definitely were misquoted.
Will anyone else here be honest enough to admit that?
~~SSJJ~~ In regards to Hiroshima, ~~Wasserman~~ wrote ...("Fukushima's three meltowns and at least four explosions have thus far yielded general radioactive fallout at least 25 times greater than what was released at Hiroshima, involving more than 160 times the cesium, an extremely deadly isotope.")
No honest person who has any common sense should have a problemwith that comment... Fukushima will make the disaster at Hiroshima seem as a Sunday school picnic befrore it's over and it ain't over and Hiroshima was no picnic. Any comparrison as to the far more disasterous consequences of Fukushima's three meltdowns is valid.
What is occcurring at Fukushima with radioacitve poisons', especially cesium137 still releasing is far worse than atomic bomb radiation releases at Hiroshima and or Nagasaki combined for that matter and radioacitve poisons were released by those two bombs, plutonium at Nagasaki.. The vast differance between Hiroshima and Fukushima was and is Wasserman's point.
~~RFinston~~ is nit picking words, as is his usual obtuse, ignorant style... RF is a pro nuker and spouts off false information condtiniously, every time an article about the hazards of Fukushima are posted.
No sensible person would defend his/her comments, those of any nuker shill.. And His/her obtuse arguments about Hiroshima are not all he/she wrote... You want to play footsie with RF go ahead and play.. I wouldn't defend him if he did write something that was correct and on occassion he/she does. That doesn't enhanse RFs credibility, which is minus 100
"You want to play footsie with RF go ahead and play.. "
Admitting that we've misquoted someone isn't "playing footsie" with him/her; it's a matter of integrity and common decency, and indispensable to being seen as credible ourselves.
"I wouldn't defend [RFinston] if he did write something that was correct and on occassion he/she does. That doesn't enhanse RFs credibility, which is minus 100"
If you dogmatically refuse to defend a person even when you know that he/she is correct, what does that do to your own credibility?
Chernobyl had commie radiation. Fukushima is good capitalist radiation, so by definition, the subatomic particles and rays are better for you.
>>The bomb killed by blast, heat, fire, neutrons and gamma rays, not by radioactivity. <<
For Christ's sake, do you ever read what you write or do you just happily, and haplessly, babble on?
The number of people killed by Chernobyl has been shown by several studies, comparing cancer and birth defects ratios before and after the disaster. http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/01/10-3
http://www.onearth.org/article/chernobyl-25-years-later-its-not-over-yet
http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/chernobyl-cancer-death-toll-0536.html
Yea don't worry about a little radiation raining down on your head or a large increase in Infant Mortality or even a contaminated Food Chain - Dancing With the Stars is on!
Couple of things...
If nuclear power is so safe, let's rescind the Price-Anderson Act which limits utility liability to a small fraction of the cost of an accident, and see what happens. Free market, and all that.
Most of our reactors are at their design limit age. One might expect to see a few...10% ?... retired due to age-risk factors, not to mention spent rod storage. Know of any? Most are being rubber-stamp re-certified by insider regulators.
Tell us where in the nuke system, top to bottom, would a request to de-commission a plant not result in the whistle-blower being marginalized/removed, the "problem" disappeared, regs/exposures redefined or papered over by lawyers.
It's a corporate death spiral: management crunches false risk numbers and guards their rice bowls, insiders rubber-stamp safety issues, and congress in the pockets of the industry, even maintanence men willing to fudge and cover to keep a well-paying job.
Whom can we trust? "too cheap to meter"? Vepco's lies/hiding faultline reports? Tepco raising exposure limits after their quake/tsunami fiasco?
What's to keep the plants from being run until they fail?
So if I predict an 8.9 magnitude earthquake at San Onofre, I'd be "over the top" I suppose. How about after the quake and a subsequent meltdown with said accompanying hydrogen explosions? Still over the top? Hiroshima and Nagasaki were "over the top". Yet they still happened. "Over the top" events have a way of occurring all too often.
We've created a world where if we don't take extreme care of 1000's of industrial plants etc 24/7 365 Armeggdeon occurs.
Hell all a terrorist has to really do at these plants is take them over for a few hours and shut off the power.
One good event where the power goes out, the roads are impassable and the deisel runs out and it's Bye Bye LA - or NY - or Portland- or Ohio, Nebraska etc etc etc
And Obummer still is pushing Nuke Power as safe and superior to Solar and Wind - of course he's been Completely Bought Off by Exelon Corp the largest Nuke operator in the Country.
"We have also just commemorated a 9/11/2001 terror attack that could easily have caused full melt-downs to reactors in areas so heavily populated that millions could have been killed and trillions of dollars in damage could have permanently destroyed the American economy."
Why does no one talk about the fact that the Indian Points nuke plant is within walking distance of NYC? If the planes had hit the plant NYC would have become completely uninhabitable, not in a matter of weeks, but in a matter of hours. (The corporate answer -- America built all nuke plants to such high specifications that even an attack by the Borg would not destroy them, don't worry, be happy)
Speaking of 9-11... I have always wondered if the Arabs flying the hi-jacked airliner which crashed in Pennsylvania had been searching for the nuclear power plants in Pennsylvanina as their primary target?
They overflew TMI twice before heading south towards Washington DC... Luckily the hi-jackers were not well trained navigators, although it is obvious some were able to head south and pick out the Twin Towers in Manhatten..
One thing I note is the photo of the children wearing those cloth or paper masks... Those masks will not help one bit to filter out microscopic radioactive isotopes of cesium 137 or other radioactive poisons. Those children are in serious trouble... The deadly health effects of inhaling radioactive isotopes normally won't show up for a long time ,, up to fifteen years, sometimes however within a year's time.
Another thing I note is in addition to the nuclear power plants near a major earthquake fault lne in California is, we have (15 ) nuclear reactors and their spent fuel rod ponds very near the most dangeours earthquake faul tline in the US, the Meredian falult line which runs from upper Illinois to Arkansas. It is due another "bang".
The last two earthquakes there were of magnitude 8+ and 7+ with some aftershocks of 7 and 8. The Mississippi River ran from south to norht for several days. Those were very serious quakes.... Those (15) nuclear reactors are designed to withstand earthquakes of magnitude 6 and or up to 6.5... It is just a matter of time.
Imagine three melted down reactors all at the same time? How about up to 15 all at the same time?
And ~~RFinston~~, shut it off, your continuing denials that such a catastrophic disaster can happen are very tiring and ignorant... The odds are from possible to likely, only rich fools and their corrupt shills are willing to gamble on that.
It's the Madrid fault in the American midwest, not "Meredian," and it is continually active although mostly at a low level. I've felt it. But yes, it is overdue for a major adjustment.
-30-
It is blatantly apparent that "Mark Abrams" has rebranded himself as "RFinston." Joy. I <3 nuke shills that ignore the ovewhemling evidence that non-ionizing radiation builds up in our bodies over time and gives us all cancer.
As for the New Madrid Fault zone, it is an ancient fault system that gets reactivated by far field stress related to the extension of the Rocky Mountains (which in turn is caused by strain associated with the San Andreas fault system) and to a lesser extent isostatic rebound. No one knows which ancient faults are going to be reactivated by far field stresses and there are thousands of them all over the continent from the formation and separation of previous supercontinents. Most recent studies utilizing GPS, indicate that stress in the New Madrid region is waning and likely being transferred somewhere else in the Midcontinent. To say that the New Madrid will have a major earthquake ever again is pure speculation, to say its "overdue" for a major adjustment is just pure nonsense.
I have tried for months to find out WHO or WHAT in the US is monitoring fallout from Fukushima in the US and where such information can be obtained. Nothing but the runaround.
It's a fact that fallout from Fuku has been raining down on the US for half a year and will continue to do so for many months. IF ANYONE KNOWS WHERE INFORMATION RE US FALLOUT CAN BE FOUND, IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO POST.
PS: RFinston is the kind of ass/apologist that always shows up on such threads to represent industrial interests.
Many thanks Hero
I looked at the site. Interesting. For instance, Eureka CA between 7/14 and 9/14 has quite a few beta readings above 50. The quality of the information seems questionable, though. Disturbing are the facts that:
When you sort the readings column by clicking, what you get is an alphabetic sort rather than a numeric sort (180 sorts near 18)
That there are many missing readings.
That the query did not always return the date range requested.
It is a very amateurish table, as though the readings are typed into a poorly designed database and do not come directly from any instrumentation.
"Don't blame yourself. The apocalypse wasn't your fault. Actually, it was just as much your fault as it was anyone else's. Come to think of it, if you're an American, it was probably about 80-90 percent more your fault than the average human. But don't let that get you down. It wasn't exclusively your fault. Unless you're the president. Then it might be your fault. But you'll have plenty of interns to tell you that it wasn't, so you'll be fine."
MEGHANN MARCO, Field Guide to the Apocalypse
I have only one thing to say - we need a green energy project and green jobs.
You are correct ~~Joe~~..but here is another comment about the (*New Madrd*) earthquake fault line, which runs from the Chicago, Ill area to Arkansas.
~~BProgress~~posted the following comment above here... ("To say that the New Madrid will have a major earthquake ever again is pure speculation, to say its "overdue" for a major adjustment is just pure nonsense.") ... We'll see.
Hers is a link for a credible article with a far different opinion.
http://www.scchealth.org/docs/ems/docs/prepare/newMadrid.html
From the link’s article .... (“The highest risk of a major earthquake in the United States, outside the West Coast, is along the New Madrid Fault”) .... (From me, which some old timers “incorrectly” name the ~Meridian~ fault line after Meredian Miss.)
"A damaging earthquake in this area, 6.0 (*or greater*),,,, occur about every 80 years,,, (the last one in 1895"). Therefore a damaging quake is OVERDUE.. "A (major) earthquake in this area, 7.5 (*or greater*), happens every 200- 300 years (the last one in 1812)". Therefore one is due at any time.
There are 15 nuclear reactors and spent fuel rod ponds in very close proximety of the New Madrid fault lline.. Is that really smart? __Nope, it's really stupid! Are all spent fuel rod ponds able to withstand a 6.0+ earthquake?
When a DAMAGING or a MAJOR quake will occur there is a guess,,,, but either are (due), or overdue without playing word games... Either one could cause nuclear reactors and or spent fuel rod ponds to suffer total meltdowns, up to 15 of each of them, (all at the same time)... Just one would be a catastrophe... Up to 15? Oh-oh!!!.
We all know a damaging or major quake may not happen during any of our lifetimes... We should realize eithr could occur tonight, or tomorrow, next week, next month or next year... So we should all be concerned that we have nuclear reactors built along earthquake fault lines, or in the Tornado Alley,,,,,,, or anyplace!
thank you all for a great discussion. some really good points made here. every time i wanted to jump in, somebody came up with a better comment than i couldhave written. much appreciated. no nukes/4 solartopia...harvew
gotta do like germany... shut 'em down, and go renewable. germany is now setting a world standard... it can be done elsewhere too
I'll go on-record with a prediction...
Within the next three years a nuclear plant will shutdown/crash because of a seasonally rare/over-sized ice storm...lines down, generators dead, plant inaccessible, etc.
Let's talk in '14.
>>The unmeasurable clouds would do unimaginable, inescapable injury to all human life.<<
To ALL life, Harvey, to ALL life. These monstrosities are planet killers. Any single ONE of them, given the right conditions, could poison the entire planet and kill off ALL life. Doesn't matter, though. There are PROFITS to be made, after all.
>>The rest of humankind must do the same---and fast. Our species can't survive on this planet---ecologically, economically or in terms of our biological realities---without winning this transtion.<<
Our species will not survive on this planet much longer as long as we keep drilling for and fighting wars over oil, blanketing the earth in "depleted" uranium (truly depleted uranium is LEAD, which is NOT radioactive).
Good comments ~~dkshaw~~I believe you know that when DU (is burned), deadly radioactive isotopes are released... When DU is used in weaponry and fired or exploded, (it burns).
In a DU bunker buster bomb, trillions of deadly, microscopic, gaseous isotopes are released into the atmosphere and they go wherever the wind takes them. In a tank's DU cannon shell, billions are released. In an A-10 Warthog aircraft's 30mm DU cannon shell, a billions are released, with ever shell fired... The half life of those invisible deadly isoptopes is (4.5) billion years... Lots worse than cesium 137, which is bad enough.
Off topic? __ Sort of, but DU is a (waste product) produced when using uranium for fuel in an atomic reactor... DU is supposed to be 'SAFELY' stored for billions of years, not sold to weapons manufactures... Ha Ha ha, but not really funny...The nuclear industry has proven that they cannot safely store radioactive waste for just 60 years... Google: atomic accidents.
Depleted uranium is uranium, and lead is lead. There are large numbers of birth defects in Iraq from depleted uranium as well as many US soldiers suffering the effects from depleted uranium. It is an international crime to use radioactive materials in battle, for good reason.
While nuke dupes continue to try and blame the tidal wave for Fukushima disaster, the earthquake broke and dislodged cooling circulation piping before the tidal wave took out the cheaply installed generators in the basement. Furthermore, any interruption of grid power can cause loss of cooling capability at similar designed reactors, of which more than 20 are present in the US. The pools for "spent" fuel were also a large part of the Fukushima problem, and overhead pools are subject to cracks and damage form earthquakes, or terrorist attack. The resulting radioactivity from overheated fuel rods come from 13 different fission products, most with long half lives. Nuke dupes like to mention the shortest lived of those and ignore the rest.
As far as claims of people killed, the nuclear industry uses figures of those deaths proven to be due only to radiation, knowing it is impossible to prove an individual cancer was created by a certain event many years later. But statistical evidence is undeniable that increased cancers occur from radioactive exposures. and even without disasters, these exposures continue at normal operation of nuclear power. http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2002/jul/14/greenpolitics.science?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487
http://www.unplugsalem.org/childhood_cancer_in_south_florid.htm
Correct.. After a few billion years uranium does covert to lead.. In the meantime DU is very hazardous for health when it has burned, as in weapons use. It's use in weapons is a war crime, at least 26 countries use it and no one will be prosecuted... It is everyplace now.
BTW; some have said earthquakes are in a decline.... Not so... The global energy of "small" earthquakes (below 7.0) increased only by 40% since 1973. In contrast, the global energy of quakes 7.0 and above increased 6 times as much in the same period. This is not any theory. It is a well proven fact. .
Guys,
The EPA had on line nuclear treaty compliance charts that all spiked in San Francisco, Fresno and Anaheim in Alpha and Gama radiation about a week after the March 12th. But the charts were buried in the gov website and extremely difficult to pull up. A kid was posting these on his site:
http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com
/2011/03/19/realtime-epa-japan-nuclear-fallout-
radiation-graphs-west-coast-cities-9228/
It's worth looking at. Remember that they were running charts, not snapshots. The spikes were evident in the days following the quadruple reactor building explosions, and I printed them out at very poor resolution. I think two things are important to realize on this subject: A radiation spike from an air plume is extremely transitory in nature. It is like taking a snapshot of a newborn smiling. Scientist examining the Three Mile Island accident had a lot of trouble chasing air release plumes with EPA helicopters. It may only last for a scant second or so. The twenty shots you tried to take usually show nothing. Now you are left to take soil, food, water and urine samples to confirm the air spikes. Dozens of agencies have done this after Fukushima and confirmed radioactive isotopes all over the Northern Hemisphere.
Secondly,
A nuke bomb test only has a few pounds of plutonium, while a Mark I,II,or III containment vessel that blows up has thousands of fuel rods which contain many many tons of material which all contain plutonium since they were hot fuel for a nuke reactor. To say that nuclear weapons testing spread out over many decades using mere pounds of plutonium is worse that Fukushima is probably wrong imho. Fukushima Unit three had a supersonic shock wave blow off it: I saw the live feed from Japan when it happened. Arrnie Gundersen speculates that the size of the mushroom cloud coming out of Unit Three was too big to have been just a hydrogen explosion like the other units experienced. He says it was a Spent Fuel Pond detonation which blew fuel rod fragments 1mm in size over a mile away. The recent NRC commission task force disputed this, saying that the plutonium fuel rod fragments were from the reactors! Without more transparency from the NRC on how hot the fragments were and the very dishonest TEPCO we will never know which one it was.
A large volcano also blew up in Japan due to the Earthquake. It's volcanic ash fallout hit my island about six days later. An Acrid black grit was everywhere and a few days later dogs lost all the hair on their backs and I developed skin hemorrhaging that looked like pink paint on my legs that were exposed.
So it was nice knowing all you. Just remember always that toxins, heavy metals and radiation are always harmless in your water air and food according to industry and government. And no one has been killed at the FukU plant (except the ones that dropped dead recently to fast growth Leukemia, the guy who fell to his death when the internal crane collapsed and the hundreds of "Five Minute" tasked workers who had neither radiation gear nor dosimeters. Let's not even monitor or remember "the Fukushima Fifty" who never evacuated and who are basically dead men walking.)
Nuclear power is completely safe. Say it to yourself five times a day and it will be true.
TJ
What if all the trillions spent on nukes had instead been spent on windmills, solar, tidal, geothermal and all other forms of renewable energy? I do not believe we would be fighting over oil in the mideast, central asia and the far east. I believe we would have much less pollution in the world today. Nuclear energy? What a travesty.
There is very little need to worry about global warming. There are now enough nuke plants worldwide, and enough of them will wind up like Chernobyl, TMI and Fukushima that the world will be adequately poisoned by radiation such that most species will die off prior to any die-off due to global warming. In other words we are already fucked.