It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Japan declares 'nuclear emergency' after quake

page: 1169.htm
<< 1166  1167  1168    1170  1171  1172 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 06:38 PM
Some close-ups of the #4 truck entrance.

And an interview with Arnie.

posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 08:21 PM

Originally posted by Aircooled
Some close-ups of the #4 truck entrance.

Does this make sense to anyone. R3 has exploded, and the threat of contamination is everywhere in the vicinity. The reactors they are concerned with are 1, 2 and 3. And problems are beginning to arise with R2, and potentially another explosion. Why in the middle of the night (the truck was either coming or going) would they open up R4s truck bay and send a truck in. After R3 blew Tepco claimed the reason they didnt see what happened to R4 was because they were intensely working to control 1, 2 and 3.

What the fug was so important in R4 that they risked lives getting it out at a time when there werent enough workers to work the known problems. The damage to the truck bay is more indicative of shaking than a blast wave. This truck wasn't blown into position. It was in use, maybe leaving with something, but if so, what?

posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 10:21 PM
Excellent editorial

Editorial: Gov't should promote renewable energy as myth of nuclear power's cheapness shattered

The government should take this opportunity to proceed with full-scale measures to invest in and promote renewable energy sources, which had previously been shunned for their "high costs."

The government panel has also indicated that energy savings per household are tantamount to generating power and pointed to the potential of a dispersed power system, to which we should pay renewed attention.

Just seeing that in print almost makes me cry. Dispersed generating systems are the future if there is one. TPTB pretty much erased it from the discussion since it means removing from the larger grid and doing small grids here there and everywhere. If I live on a mountaintop (which I used to) and had four or five windmills (farm size, not the big monster bladed ones) and numerous solar panels generating electricity, I could then bank it and charge or barter with neighbors to tap in.

People in the hills are already doing this kind of stuff. Now we need to make it a law that every home built has solar roof shingles (or whatever) and a 12vDC as well as 110/220vAC system built in. We used to run everything but a dryer in the backwoods off of solar, water and wind. And the dryer most often was a line either outside or by the woodstove.

posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 11:17 PM
reply to post by zworld

Just paint your house with solar cells,on the south side.
Works better.

University of Notre Dame researchers have developed an inexpensive energy-producing "solar paint" made from semiconducting quantum dots. The team at Notre Dame's Center for Nano Science and Technology (NDnano) used the quantum dots to make a spreadable ‘solar paint’ that can be applied to any conductive surface without special equipment, said Prashant Kamat, John A. Zahm Professor of Science in Chemistry and Biochemistry, who led the team. The quantum dots, made from titanium dioxide, were coated with cadmium sulfide or cadmium selenide, and then suspended in a water-alcohol mixture to create a paste. When the paste was brushed onto a transparent conducting material and exposed to light, it created electricity.

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 09:23 AM

Arnie's latest from Fairewinds. Z is going to love it...

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 11:27 AM

Originally posted by kdog1982
reply to post by zworld

Just paint your house with solar cells,on the south side.
Works better.

Excellent idea. imagine if in the last 100 years we had been investing in R & D for alternative fuels instead of oil, gas, coal and nuclear. We'd have voltaic cells the size of a matchbox, one of which could run a house on a sunny day. Or solar cars with batteries the size of shoeboxes that could run a car for 200 miles.

Solar paint. i like it.

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 12:54 PM

Originally posted by matadoor

Arnie's latest from Fairewinds. Z is going to love it...

Even though its just an estimate, if even a ball park figure, Arnie says the amount of radioactive solid waste that will come from Fukushima prefecture and need removal would fill 33 Superdomes. Theres no place on earth where that much waste can be stored.

Im assuming this includes the plant itself.


I know I said previously that I wouldnt be posting much as I was going to work full time on my report. Instead I end up putting it aside and have posted more than ever. Typical.

But I feel that it is very important to get it done, now more than ever. I know that some think the idea of an illegal weapons factory underneath Fukushima is ridiculous. Others may not be sure. I realize from going over data that alot of it only makes sense when seen in a cohesive fashion, as a report would do, as opposed to individual posts.

And it is important that the world understand the levels of danger that this potentially enters into the current equation. Dr Caldicott alluded to the fact that there could be weapons factories associated with all nuclear plants in countries that dont have confirmed nuclear arms.

Of those countries, Japan is considered the most likely to have an illegal weapons program. And Fukushima is the first big plant Japan built, originally run by an ex military officer, and is the perfect location for an underground complex.

There are many mysteries to Fukushima, but to me the UC isn't one of them. And believing as I do of it's existence, there is pressing need to make this danger known. We have the potential for multiple plutonium pits, warhead sized balls to be in an enclosed system filled with an excellent moderator, seawater/groundwater, and the potential of a corium mass dropping into this seawater/groundwater acting as a primary reaction producing secondary reactions.

This is now way past the point of localized concern. Just like fallout and debris makes it a concern for the western US and Canada, a nuclear device the size of Fukushima is a worldwide problem.

And so the report will be done, and Ill post chunks as I go along.

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:23 PM
reply to post by GhostR1der


Thank you for the kind words.

Perhaps Fukushima will have some positive effect on the people's nuclear mindset by focusing more on the radioative waste NO WIN fiasco.

We have been investigating the radioactive nuclear waste musical chairs fiasco here in America which led to the $24 billion fund designated to build the “final resting place” for the nation’s high-level nuclear waste (Yucca Mountain).

Since Yucca is not happening, a lot of money is sitting on the table.

Let’s look at the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. We could call this segment:
Nuclear Waste Fund Watch 2012.

By law, the federal government (DOE) is responsible for removing and permanently disposing of spent nuclear fuel generated by civilian facilities, which pay fees for that waste disposal service.

The Nuclear Waste Policy Act authorized an underground repository to permanently dispose of spent nuclear fuel from civilian nuclear reactors.

Under contracts signed with electric utilities pursuant to NWPA, DOE was scheduled to start removing waste from storage sites at individual power plants for transport to a federal storage or disposal facility by 1998.

Currently, the federal government is 14 years behind schedule in its contractual obligations to dispose of this waste and by all indications, by the time any repository might ever be opened, it is likely to face at least a 25-year radioactive waste backlog.

But wait, there is no depository site even being actively considered - and Yucca Mountain is surely not going to be that depository, even after a $10 billion investment in that boondoggle.

In the absence of a federal underground repository to accept nuclear waste for storage, [color=Cyan]taxpayers are now starting to pay—in the form of legal settlements with utilities—[color=Cyan]for a decentralized waste storage system at sites around the country. (Those payments are being made from the Department of the Treasury’s Judgment Fund.)

The Department of Energy (DOE) currently estimates that payments to utilities pursuant to such settlements will total at least $7 billion, and possibly much more if the program’s schedule continues to slip. Regardless of whether or when the government opens the planned repository, those payments are likely to continue for several decades.

Ultimately, Yucca Mountain, the repository that is was authorized under NWPA, [color=Chartreuse]would not provide sufficient capacity to store all of the waste for which the federal government is responsible.

The statutory cap on [color=FDD017]the amount of waste that can be stored there is significantly lower than the volume of waste that DOE expects will be generated during the lifetimes of existing nuclear facilities, let alone the additional volume from any new facilities that may be built. Congressional Budget Office


“Shelter-in-place” for radioactive nuclear waste?

It looks like us taxpayers (what a surprise) will have to pay utilities to dispose of a substantial amount of additional waste in the future... say at the rate of 2-3 thousand tons per year.

But what is the end-game?

These charts are from 1996, indicating that our USGOV knew that this was a no-win situation way back then.

When a reactor shuts down, its owners theoretically have three options: prompt and complete dismantlement; delayed dismantlement (sometimes called SAFSTOR); and entombment, probably in concrete.

In reality, however, [color=Cyan]dismantlement of the entire facility is not really possible because there is no place to ship spent nuclear fuel.

Are these people merely delusional or just plain stupid and therefore even more dangerous?

When a reactor shuts down, managers have two options. They can keep the pools operating, or, if they anticipate at-reactor storage for more than a few years, they can more economically move all of the spent fuel into dry storage.

Indications are that there may be some cost advantages associated with long-term centralized storage once reactors begin shutting down in large numbers, in large part, because of the high cost of operating pools. However, as long as reactors are operating, the costs of centralized and at-reactor storage appear to be comparable.

What part of “there is no centralized storage” is too difficult to understand?

At the moment, there are only three federal nuclear facilities currently storing defense/research spent fuel and high-level radioactive wastes - Savannah River, Hanford and INEL.

To be continued...

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:23 PM

(Continued from previous post)

Let’s go with Door #3 for this discussion, since we have previously discussed Savannah River and Hanford.

A 1995 agreement between the DOE and the state of Idaho prohibits the DOE from shipping spent fuel from commercial reactors to INEL. (PSC of Colo. v. Batt 1995).

Actually, that is not quite the real story. Consider this:

In October of 1995, the state of Idaho, US Navy, and US Department of Energy (DOE) reached agreement (most often called the Settlement Agreement) settling a lawsuit filed by the state to prevent shipment of spent nuclear fuel to the INL for storage. Highlights of the agreement include the following:

• The state of Idaho will allow a total of 1,135 shipments of spent fuel to come to the INL
for interim storage over a 40-year period. Of those shipments, 575 will come from the Navy.

• The rest will come from other DOE sites, foreign research reactors (if DOE chooses to accept that fuel), university reactors and a specified amount from private companies directly supporting DOE research and development activities.

Now it gets really good.

• DOE will remove all spent nuclear fuel from Idaho no later than 2035.

And pigs will fly.

• DOE will treat all high-level waste at the INL, in preparation for final disposal elsewhere,
by a target date of 2035.

Treat? This should be interesting. DOE can’t even keep track of $24 billion or so.

• If DOE fails to remove all spent fuel by 2035, the state may levy a fine of $60,000 per day.

Good luck on collecting. BTW, how would a state strong-arm the feds?

If DOE fails to meet any of the agreement milestones at any point, the state may ask the federal court to halt any further spent fuel shipments to the INL.

This stuff just can’t be made up. Come on, folks. Just how many other gems like this are buried in the mountains of paper trails generated to hide this nefarious shell game?

Why is the Settlement Agreement good for Idaho?

Gets nuclear waste out of Idaho. Idaho is now the only state in the nation that has a court
order mandating that federal nuclear waste leave state boundaries by a specific date. No other state in the nation has such a legally binding commitment

Forces the federal government to dry up ALL the highly radioactive liquid wastes, which greatly reduces the risks to the aquifer

Prevents Idaho from becoming the dumping ground for the nation's commercial spent
nuclear fuel

Protects the economy of eastern Idaho

Poor, poor disillusioned Idaho governor. We are willing to bet that this will not come about as promised. How much are we talking about, anyway?

DEQ's INL Oversight Division estimates that approximately 10,851 shipments of nuclear material will leave Idaho. The first shipments began leaving Idaho in early 1999. The last shipments should leave Idaho by 2035.

Approximately 3,051 shipments of spent fuel will leave Idaho.

Approximately 7,800 shipments of transuranic material will leave Idaho for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico.

An agreement between the state of Idaho and DOE was finalized in 2008 setting forth the compliance requirements for this section of the Settlement Agreement.

Huh? Where are the “Approximately 3,051 shipments of spent fuel ...” going?

BTW, wasn’t the reactor core debris and fuel from TMI shipped there in the late ‘90’s?

Special train for removal of damaged fuel.

Here are actual photos of the event.

Specially designed rail casks for hauling fuel core debris.

The federal government took responsibility for the waste after it left TMI's plants. [color=Chartreuse]The refuse will remain radioactive for more than 10,000 years...The Idaho lab houses about 99 percent of the uranium fuel from Three Mile Island.

The Energy Department and the state of Idaho plan to spend $30 million to move the 344 containers of TMI waste into steel-and-concrete dry storage casks, deemed an improvement from the 1950s-era cooling water pools that lack protective steel linings or a leak-detection system.

The rest of the fuel and other parts of the damaged generating station remain at the plant site near Harrisburg, Pa. The station will be dismantled after 2014, when the license for a sister plant expires.

Nuclear waste, secrecy and slippery slope

In January 2011, the state of Idaho signed a secretly negotiated deal allowing shipments of highly radioactive commercial nuclear waste to the Idaho National Laboratory.

To be continued...

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:23 PM

(Continued from previous post)

Aha! The proverbial nose of the camel under the side of the tent. Guess what?

Nuclear waste, secrecy and slippery slope

In January 2011, the state of Idaho signed a secretly negotiated deal allowing shipments of highly radioactive commercial nuclear waste to the Idaho National Laboratory.

The “state” didn’t sign anything, as it has no hands.

The Governor, C.L. "Butch" Otter, signed the “secret” agreement.

It violates the spirit and intent of the 1995 agreement between Idaho and the US Department of Energy forbidding such shipments...

[color=Cyan]The state will be told, with a time lag of a year, the source and amount of spent fuel shipped here, any research project’s purpose and schedule and how much waste it will produce, and the waste’s “potential” disposition path.

Our good ol’USGOV at work. Any time public policy is developed and carried out in secret, it undermines the transparency and accountability that are the bedrock of good government. However, there doesn’t appear to be either when speaking about nuclear waste.

And the game becomes more interesting the deeper the hole... this gem from March 1996:

Disposal and Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel - Finding the Right Balance
A Report to Congress and the Secretary of Energy Nuclear Waste
Technical Review Board

Although geologic disposal of spent fuel and high-level waste enjoys broad support from the scientific community in this country and abroad, a site has not yet been judged suitable for a repository nor has a repository design received final regulatory approval in any nation developing a radioactive waste management program...

Finally, the Board believes that future uncertainties and the likelihood that many reactors will be shutting down beginning in 2010 argue for having a fully operational centralized storage facility available — and [color=FDD017]capable of accepting around 3,000 metric tons of spent fuel per year — by at least 2010, ideally at a repository site...

How about in here?

Argentinean 3D street artist Eduardo Relero has created worlds of wonder on pavements all over the globe:
A visitor stands next to a 3D mural called, 'Insesatez', in Lleida, Spain

And this bit of information projecting 60,000 tons of spent fuel by 2010:

2 February 1997
Three Mile Island's radioactive debris remains a headache

Crews have completed the cleanup from the 1979 partial meltdown at the Pennsylvania reactor and transported the radioactive materials to a temporary underwater storage a continent away, in the Idaho desert. It will stay there until safer quarters can be built, at least 2010...

The situation reflects a larger problem facing the government and the nuclear industry - where to bury 30,000 tons of spent fuel from more than 100 commercial nuclear reactors from Maine to California. The amount is expected to double by 2010 and continue climbing as older reactors are shut down.

We notice that the estimates of the spent fuel totals are different by as much as 10,000 tons - 14 years ago and the information is all from government sources.

Back to the money trail.

Someone, some person - a living, breathing individual with a title and name - working for we, the people, has the charge of keeping track of this $24+ billion. Let us remember this as we wind our way down the rabbit hole...this is good stuff.

Title 42 of the US Code as currently published by the US Government reflects the laws passed by Congress as of Jan. 7, 2011, and it is this version that is published here.

We recommend a careful read of this document.

United States Code: Title 42,10222. Nuclear Waste Fund | LII /
Legal Information Institute



(a) Contracts
(1) In the performance of his functions under this chapter, the Secretary is authorized to enter into contracts with any person who generates or holds title to high-level radioactive waste, or spent nuclear fuel, of domestic origin for the acceptance of title, subsequent transportation, and disposal of such waste or spent fuel. Such contracts shall provide for payment to the Secretary of fees pursuant to paragraphs (2) and (3) sufficient to offset expenditures described in subsection (d) of this section.

To be continued...

edit on 30/12/2011 by thorfourwinds because: color

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:23 PM

(Continued from previous post)

(2) For electricity generated by a civilian nuclear power reactor and sold on or after the date
90 days after January 7, 1983, the fee under paragraph (1) shall be equal to 1.0 mil per

(3) (...) Such fee shall be paid to the Treasury of the United States and [color=Cyan]shall be deposited in the separate fund established by subsection (c) of this section. In paying such a fee, [color=FDD017]the person delivering spent fuel, or solidified high-level radioactive wastes derived therefrom, to the Federal Government [color=FDD017]shall have no further financial obligation to the Federal Government for the long-term storage and permanent disposal of such spent fuel, or the solidified high-level radioactive waste derived therefrom...

(5) Contracts entered into under this section shall provide that—
(A) following commencement of operation of a repository, [color=Chartreuse]the Secretary shall take title to the high-level radioactive waste or spent nuclear fuel involved as expeditiously as practicable upon the request of the generator or owner of such waste or spent fuel; and
(B) in return for the payment of fees established by this section, the Secretary, [color=Chartreuse]beginning not later than January 31, 1998, will dispose of the high-level radioactive waste or spent nuclear fuel involved as provided in this subchapter.

Provenance, chain-of-evidence, whatever you call it - the buck stops with the Secretary.

This item is of particular interest:

(4) No high-level radioactive waste or spent nuclear fuel generated or owned by any department of the United States referred to in section 101 or 102 of title 5 may be disposed of by the Secretary in any repository constructed under this chapter unless such department transfers to the Secretary, for deposit in the Nuclear Waste Fund, amounts equivalent to the fees that would be paid to the Secretary under the contracts referred to in this section if such waste or spent fuel were generated by any other person.

Just exactly what departments of the USGOV are generating high-level radioactive waste or spent nuclear fuel that are involved in this nuclear waste Ponzi scheme?

University research reactors? Wouldn't be the first time places of higher learning would be used in a covert op.

Military reactors? US Navy? What do we have now, about a hundred or so nuclear-powered submarines and 11 aircraft carriers and 9 cruisers? Obviously, that spent fuel has to go somewhere.

This does not pass the smell test and seems to be a part of a circle-jerk Ponzi operation designed to obfuscate the fact that there is no money anywhere to be found as of this writing on Christmas Eve, 2011.


Merry Christmas everyone!

Happy Holidays to all on ATS and the best staff in the business! Thank you for making this “consciousness expanding tool” what it is.


Dare you try to prove us wrong, all you “regular” ATS debunkers?

Phage, care to take a swing at this?

We’re sure everyone would be interested in your unique answer to the long-term nuclear waste depository problem.

Also, can even you verify that the $24+ billion has not somehow mysteriously evaporated?

(e) Administration of Waste Fund
(1) [color=FDD017]The Secretary of the Treasury shall hold the Waste Fund and, after consultation with the Secretary, annually report to the Congress on the financial condition and operations of the Waste Fund during the preceding fiscal year.

Based on the foregoing, the Secretary is ultimately responsible for the $24+ billion.
Let’s cut to the chase and ask to see the money - plain and simple.

Oops... the Secretary of the Treasury is “Fast Timmy Furious” Guitner.

What was it we said about the fox and the henhouse?

Digging a bit deeper in the DOE mud:

5 April 2010
US nuclear utilities sue to stop waste fund fees

The demands:

• Want DOE to stop collecting $750 mln in annual fees

• Fees paid by consumers on monthly electric bills

• DOE should suspend fees until find Yucca alternative

• DOE says fees are legally mandated

The U.S. Nuclear Energy Institute and 16 utilities filed a lawsuit on Monday to try to get the Energy Department to stop collecting fees from utilities for a waste program [color=Cyan]now that a planned disposal site has been scrapped.

To be continued...

edit on 30/12/2011 by thorfourwinds because: color

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:23 PM

(Continued from previous post)

They want the court to tell the DOE to suspend collection of the fee, which it said amounts to about $750 million per year, because [color=FDD017]the Obama administration has announced it will not pursue plans to store waste at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. [ID:nN16251516]

The group says the fee, which is paid by consumers with a surcharge of one-tenth of a cent per kilowatt-hour on monthly electric bills, should be suspended until the government determines its new plan for waste.

The department's nuclear waste fund has a balance of more than $24 billion, the group said. The group first asked the DOE to stop collecting the fee last July. [ID:nN09459025]

It seems that they infer money is there as of 5 April 2010. And then this turn of events.

(...) At least one company, Exelon Corp (EXC.N), has said it will not pursue new U.S. nuclear plants at this time, citing the lack of a national plan for waste in its decision. [ID:nN25221371]

One might wonder why the sudden change of heart. After all, these guys are fairly big guns in the nuclear power business.

On the trail of the money; a name for the account where the $24+ billion resides: Treasury’s [color=Cyan]Nuclear Waste Fund.

27 July 2010
The Federal Government's Responsibilities and Liabilities Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act

(...) Starting in 1983, the NWPA authorized DOE to charge electric utilities fees to cover the costs of disposing of the nuclear waste they generate. Utilities today pay annual fees at a rate of 1 mil (0.1 cent) per kilowatt-hour of the electricity they sell that is generated by nuclear power plants...

The fees, which are recorded in the budget as offsetting receipts (a credit against direct spending), are deposited into the Treasury’s Nuclear Waste Fund.

Aha! We have an account at the US Treasury...should be safe there, n’est-ce pas?

(...) Table1 summarizes the government’s receipts and disbursements related to the nuclear waste disposal program from 1983 through the end of fiscal year 2009. During that time, $31.0 billion was credited to the Nuclear Waste Fund. That amount includes fees paid by the nuclear industry totaling $17.1 billion as well as $13.8 billion from intragovernmental transfers of interest credited to the fund.

Cumulative expenditures from the fund during that period totaled about $7.3 billion, mostly for analyses related to the waste disposal program and for initial design work by DOE on the Yucca Mountain facility. The NRC and other federal entities also received modest appropriations from the fund for work related to the program, leaving an unspent balance of $23.6 billion at the end of fiscal year 2009.

CBO estimates that in 2010, another $2.0 billion will be credited to the fund—nearly $800 million from fees and the rest from interest. Expenditures in 2010 will total $0.2 billion, bringing the fund’s end-of-year balance to $25.4 billion, CBO estimates...

The inference is that the money existed on this date, 27 July 2010, according to the CBO.

Is that like the fox guarding the henhouse?

Are there any hens actually still inside?

If, in fact, this document is shown to be false, are there any remedies to this situation?

Who should hang for this deception and outright theft?

Does anyone really care, or merely is this another piece of bravo sierra to be shoved in a corner, hopefully out of sight?

NukeSpeak...well, at least it's only six months old and states that the $24+ billion is there.

May 2011
Budget and Financial Management Improvements to the Nuclear Waste Fund (NWF)

3. Administratively reclassifying the NWF annual fees as budget offsetting collections, so
that funds appropriated are the used/spent nuclear fuel management can be scored on a
net zero basis for purposes of compliance with Congressional spending caps.

We smell ‘eau de rat!

A closer look...

Background Report to the Blue Ribbon Commission
on America’s Nuclear Future

The NWF currently holds a surplus balance of over $24 billion, increasing at a rate of about $2 billion per year.

Annual fees provide about $0.8 billion per year; interest on the fund balance is credited at a rate of over $1 billion annually...

To be continued...

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:23 PM

(Continued from previous post)

The NWF currently holds a surplus balance of over $24 billion, increasing at a rate of
about $2 billion per year. Annual fees provide about $0.8 billion per year; interest on
the fund balance is credited at a rate of over $1 billion annually...

Can't we just follow the paper trail?

The three issues for possible administrative action include:

1. Instituting financial management enhancements to foster multi-year budgeting and
appropriations; combined accrual and cash budgeting; and separate capital budgeting;

2. Applying the dual accrual/cash accounting and budgeting process for collecting the
annual 1 mil (0.1 cents) per kWh annual fee, with the timing of cash collections linked
to appropriations and outlays; and

[color=Chartreuse]3. Administratively reclassifying the NWF annual fees as budget offsetting collections, so
that funds appropriated are the used/spent nuclear fuel management can be scored on a
net zero basis for purposes of compliance with Congressional spending caps.

To sum up this possible exercise in futility, we are led to believe that as of May 2011, the money was there. Of course, there are “improvements” in the works.


Management of the used/spent fuel from commercial reactors is a business-like activity. Because of the very long time frames in permanent disposal of used/spent fuel, Congress decided in 1982 that the federal government would take management responsibility for used/spent fuel, but require the generators of the used/spent fuel to pay the full cost for this service.

Thus, management of used/spent fuel should be viewed as a business-like rather than inherently government function, such as national defense or highway maintenance...

Head spinning yet? Watch the sleight-of-hand here.

Does the $24+ billion simply evaporate in an accounting “reclassification?”

Enquiring minds want to see the money.

Peace Love Light
[align=center][color=magenta]Liberty & Equality or Revolution[/align]

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 03:42 PM
Netsweep continues. I think Im going to start calling this nukegate

If anyone has saved early press releases from NEI from the first months of the disaster please let me know. This isn't a major concern, but shows more obfuscation taking place.

NEI is another site that has been swept clean that provided early news briefings and updates on Fukushima. There were three primary news feeds in the first two weeks of the accident, Tepco, NEI and the IAEA. Tepco has altered their early data to reflect what ever scenario they are currently trying to convey.

The NEI on the other hand has made anything from the first two weeks just disappear. In the following story ( fukushima-accident ) from May the NEI states:

May 12, 2011—Getting the word out early was essential in establishing NEI as a leading source of reliable and timely information on nuclear energy after the Fukushima nuclear accident.....

The communications strategy included establishing an early and strong presence in the broadcast media. NEI augmented its senior management to the media by asking for, and readily obtaining, access to its member companies’ media representatives and communications contractors.

Peterson said NEI’s communications efforts made extensive use of video, using subject matter experts to explain complex technical issues to the public. As a result of this strategy, the videos on NEI’s YouTube channel were accessed by approximately 50,000 people in the first two weeks after the earthquake.

NEI also created an emergency response website to provide regular news updates and updated member resources that related to the events at Fukushima. The site received so many hits—8.6 million—that by March 16 substantial upgrades to NEI’s computer server capabilities were required. The site remains available online and continues to be updated regularly.

Yeah right. Click on anything and it takes you in an endless cycle no-where. as the above states, by March 16th they had to upgrade servers from all the traffic, yet there is nothing on their site from the first two weeks except a March 15th video on SFPs at nuke plants and a March 17th video full of nuclear industry propaganda and nothing else.

The PF forum, NEI, IAEA and other agencies and media outlets were all in collusion in one form of another to obfuscate Fukushima.

Another news source, though mostly just a mouthpiece for whatever Tepco releases, appears to have been scrubbed.

This is the first of JAIFs updates I can find, only its #6 and the first five cant be found. Funny thing here is the fact that their data starts on the 15th, instead of after. Does anyone have one of the first five releases.
edit on 30-12-2011 by zworld because: (no reason given)


NRC has been scrubbed too. Their update page is no longer there and the listserve goes no where. Cant find anything from the first week.
edit on 30-12-2011 by zworld because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 05:50 PM
reply to post by zworld

A TAD off topic to start, but I just finished rooting my Gtablet, and MAN what a difference in speed!!

Using it's new resources, and it's ties to google, are making searching so much easier!

Having said this, Z, I had saved some of the pages and data listed on your post, but unbelievably they are gone. This was on a protected Kingston 128G thumb drive, WITH passwords. STRONG ones.

Gone. All of it.

I'm now sitting here completely freaked out.

Okay on edit: The entire Fuk directory is gone. None of my pics, content, nothing remains. Everything else, remains intact, including my business files.

I'm pretty net savy, I also hold a CISSP (which was a BITCH to get BTW).

I'm trying to figure out how they did this.

But, an important lesson learned. I will NEVER install that thumb drive into a PC that is net connected again.

edit on 30-12-2011 by matadoor because: More data...

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 07:06 PM
Everything is in here including the kitchen sink and quite a bit of info from the Fin [Arto].
Are there TWO Daini's south of Daiichi?

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 07:51 PM
reply to post by thorfourwinds

Wow,TFW,that seems to deserve it's own thread.Alot of info there.

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 07:54 PM

Originally posted by Aircooled
Everything is in here including the kitchen sink and quite a bit of info from the Fin [Arto].
Are there TWO Daini's south of Daiichi?

Alot of good info there,AC.

A little scary also.

Since 1970s, Nuclear Reactor -licensees have been implementing power uprates [ = adding Plutonium = MOX ] to increase Nuclear Power Plant electric output. [Plutonium utilization increases dramatically Reactor core heat and also danger of uncontrolled meltdown. This means that cooling water circulation speed and volume has to be increased exponentially... This heat produces more steam and thus more power from steam turbines: steam age madness to boil water with uranium]

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 09:33 PM


Some really interesting graphs to share... nice & colorful for the holidays...

Historical graphs of Units 1-3 at Fukushima Daiichi, updated daily, including temperatures, pressure readings and radiation levels for all data points collected by TEPCO.

The data may take some time to load, but we found it well worth it.

Fukushima Daiichi Reactor Statistics Graphs Historical Data

We’ll post smaller versions of the originals in the link as a reference for your interest.


Peace Love Light
[align=center][color=magenta]Liberty & Equality or Revolution[/align]

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 10:54 PM
If the TEPCO movies do get removed today (31st December), I have a friend who downloaded them onto harddrive. If anyone wants to download one or two then I am sure she would not mind making them available.

I have put a link to the list below, in case the original page really does disappear. In total, they are over 1Gb so I dont think she will be putting them on any website for the general download.

Fukushima Nuclear Disaster Related information List at the bottom of the page.

new topics

top topics

<< 1166  1167  1168    1170  1171  1172 >>

log in