It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Fukashima Reactors likely to go "China Syndrome" says Michio Kaku

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 12:04 AM
link   


That's horrific for Japan and the world. They've got to get some robots in there, or something! My God! What a nightmare scenario - abandoning ship and allowing the meltdown, but it would appear that nothing can be done to avert it.

I wonder how bad it is relative to Chernobyl?

Why were the rods stored there on the roof?

Oh man, not good.




posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 12:08 AM
link   
For their side of the globe, wouldn't it be South American syndrome?
edit on 30-9-2016 by neutronflux because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 12:10 AM
link   
a reply to: AnkhMorpork

So then what? Doesn't china syndrome mean a hole thru the earth?
What would it be in Japan, the Holland syndrome?
Is it melt down or melt thru?
IDK

edit on Ram93016v13201600000037 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 12:12 AM
link   
a reply to: AnkhMorpork

I know Fukushima may be in bad shape, but the video is from 2011.



posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 12:15 AM
link   
a reply to: AnkhMorpork



From: www.scientificamerican.com...

Title: The Workings of an Ancient Nuclear Reactor.

Two billion years ago parts of an African uranium deposit spontaneously underwent nuclear fission. The details of this remarkable phenomenon are just now becoming clear.



posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 12:39 AM
link   
a reply to: AnkhMorpork

Less than one month later, Kaku contradicts himself, perhaps because of more data being collected, when he states, "Chernobyl represents the high end of the category. Right now Fukushima would be more on the low end - about one-tenth the level of Chernobyl." Source: Daily News 12 April 2011

Fast forward six years for current information: IAEA's Fukushima Daiichi Status Updates or the actual report provided by the Japanese Government first mentioned in the IAEA's 16 September 2016 status update.

Additional Reading:
Washington State Department of Health - Fukushima and Radioactivity in Washington

And a private web site hosting Fukushima Accident Updates (Blog)
with an update posted 29 September 2016.



posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 12:56 AM
link   
a reply to: AnkhMorpork
That video is somewhat dated.

Oh, I see that's been covered.



edit on 9/30/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 04:10 AM
link   
a reply to: EightAhoy

Yeah, but chernobyl had much more time until now, fukushima was only 5 1/2 years ago.



posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 06:19 AM
link   
a reply to: AnkhMorpork

It wouldn't be even close to a Chernobyl level event, they're two different types of reactors, the type Chernobyl was is essentially only used in a few reactors in France now because they are not self regulating. Modern reactors put themselves out so to speak if there's a problem.



posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 09:31 AM
link   
Chernobyl - 1 reactor

Fukushima - 3 reactors

Do the math. Fukushima is worse, but no one wants to admit it. Our governments think they're protecting us by telling us lies.

I'm reading FUKUSHIMA: THE STORY OF A NUCLEAR DISASTER right now. It was bad from Day 1. Uncovered cores and spent fuel pools, steam and hydrogen explosions. Cesium-127 leaking straight into the sea from fractured containment vessels.

That area is poisoned for the next 24,000 years. They should have encased it in a sarcophagus immediately.

The Japanese were very arrogant and in complete denial. The US and other countries offered immediate help and the Japanese didn't want it.

The title of the book SHOULD be FUKUSHIMA: HOW NOT TO HANDLE A NUCLEAR DISASTER.

The Russians handled Chernobyl much better, although they, too, lose points for keeping secrets at the onset of the disaster.



posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 09:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: 123143
Chernobyl - 1 reactor

Fukushima - 3 reactors

Do the math. Fukushima is worse, but no one wants to admit it. Our governments think they're protecting us by telling us lies.

I'm reading FUKUSHIMA: THE STORY OF A NUCLEAR DISASTER right now. It was bad from Day 1. Uncovered cores and spent fuel pools, steam and hydrogen explosions. Cesium-127 leaking straight into the sea from fractured containment vessels.

That area is poisoned for the next 24,000 years. They should have encased it in a sarcophagus immediately.

The Japanese were very arrogant and in complete denial. The US and other countries offered immediate help and the Japanese didn't want it.

The title of the book SHOULD be FUKUSHIMA: HOW NOT TO HANDLE A NUCLEAR DISASTER.

The Russians handled Chernobyl much better, although they, too, lose points for keeping secrets at the onset of the disaster.

wrong
so many years later and still so stupid, how?
for those that can't be bothered to follow the link
fukushima released 900 PBq of radiation affecting around 60km.
chernobyl released 5,200 PBq of radiation affecting around 500km.



posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 09:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
For their side of the globe, wouldn't it be South American syndrome?

Even in America, it ought to have been called "Indian Ocean syndrome".



posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 10:12 AM
link   
a reply to: AnkhMorpork

"We almost lost Detroit"....interesting book to read. We were in meltdown and just minutes away from the worst case scenario. Minutes....I was here then as well....and with the Fermi Reactor in Monroe just barely minutes away from complete destruction...Detroit and Windsor Canada, Ohio to Chicago to Buffalo NY...we all had nowhere to run to...it was bad....



posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 10:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: stinkelbaum

originally posted by: 123143
Chernobyl - 1 reactor

Fukushima - 3 reactors

Do the math. Fukushima is worse, but no one wants to admit it. Our governments think they're protecting us by telling us lies.

I'm reading FUKUSHIMA: THE STORY OF A NUCLEAR DISASTER right now. It was bad from Day 1. Uncovered cores and spent fuel pools, steam and hydrogen explosions. Cesium-127 leaking straight into the sea from fractured containment vessels.

That area is poisoned for the next 24,000 years. They should have encased it in a sarcophagus immediately.

The Japanese were very arrogant and in complete denial. The US and other countries offered immediate help and the Japanese didn't want it.

The title of the book SHOULD be FUKUSHIMA: HOW NOT TO HANDLE A NUCLEAR DISASTER.

The Russians handled Chernobyl much better, although they, too, lose points for keeping secrets at the onset of the disaster.

wrong
so many years later and still so stupid, how?
for those that can't be bothered to follow the link
fukushima released 900 PBq of radiation affecting around 60km.
chernobyl released 5,200 PBq of radiation affecting around 500km.


Is Chernobyl leaking Cesium? No.



posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 11:50 AM
link   
a reply to: randyvs

China Syndrome is loss of containment and the fuel begins eating through the earth... like "digging a hole to China" (where the name comes from). The real bad SHTF scenario is when the fuel hits the water table. The water boils, creates hydrogen and oxygen, then whole thing explodes. With a fresh hole from the surface the whole explosion blows sky high and contamination everywhere begins.



posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 01:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: AnkhMorpork

I know Fukushima may be in bad shape, but the video is from 2011.


Thanks for pointing this out.

What HAVE they done since then and is it now fully contained and getting cleaned up?



posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnkhMorpork
Thanks for pointing this out.

What HAVE they done since then and is it now fully contained and getting cleaned up?
It's hard to believe someone starting a thread about Fukushima knows so little about Fukushima especially when lots of information is widely available about it on the internet, like this:

Why Fukushima Will Take Decades To Clean Up - March 10, 2016

edit on 2016930 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join