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: 689.htm
<< 686  687  688    690  691  692 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 09:13 AM

Originally posted by Himal
Request to the MODs:

Please move this threat to the "Prophecies and Predictions Forum" - since this is the only thread on ATS
where events were called before they actually occurred unlike all other threads on the above said forum where predictions are made either after an event occur or the prophecies are way way off base or false flags. I must definitely give credit to "TheRedNeck" for calling it a "LEVEL 7 event from the get go even though he was scolded as a fear monger.
I have been tracking this thread from day one and the events has played out exactly as its been called here - THANKS TO ALL OF THE CONTRIBUTORS... you all are doing a great service to ordinary folks like me all over the world .. who realize the gravity of the situation but would never hear about it except from MSM. Thank you once again.

So why were they calling it a Level 5 until yesterday and suddenly jumped to Level 7. After reading this thread it all makes sense. THEY HAVE MOVED ALL THE WEAPON GRADED PLUTONIUM AND WEAPON MAKING MACHINERY OUT OF FUKUSHIMA. By designating it a Level 5, the disaster was still a company wide (TEPCO) problem - supposedly being handled by TEPCO, why they were trying their best to fix the problem and keeping all International help at bay, even if it meant putting the people at risk. THEY WERE TAKING ONE FOR THEIR COUNTRY. That is until the reactors exploded and they realized that the problem was unfixable and getting worse. That is when they started ordering the barges and moving the weapon making equipments and machineries and whatever was too difficult to move, they buried under tons of cement.

Now that all the evidences has been cleared - the disaster is a LEVEL 7, a national if not an international problem. Now Japan will cry for help from the international community and now the real mitigation will start.

VERY good points...
Have any more images become available of the barge tied up at Fukushima that needs protection by a JSDF destroyer? Is the "white spot" in the night webcam shots a work light while the barge is loaded by expendable employees? Dead men tell no tales...
It's only a 140 mile run to the 20K ft deep Japan Trench...out of sight out of mind...

posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 09:19 AM
Ripples.....making people think, and act.

Fake reporters waited in turn to ask scripted questions of play-acting officials Tuesday in a disaster drill involving the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, given a new sense of urgency by the still-unfolding nuclear crisis at the Fukushima Dai-ichi plant in Japan.

Dozens of real news crews descended on a cavernous Southern California Edison truck bay in Irvine to record and photograph the drill, which featured a series of increasingly alarming fake announcements made by a small team of communications personnel participating in the even


posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 09:26 AM
Radiation surges above 4's fuel pool

Radiation has risen to high levels above the spent-fuel pool at reactor No. 4 and its temperature is rising, the nuclear safety agency said Wednesday, indicating the fuel rods have been further damaged and emitting radioactive substances.The radiation level 6 meters above the spent-fuel storage pool at the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant was measured at 84 millisieverts per hour Tuesday. Normally, it's 0.1 microsievert......Tokyo Electric Power Co. was unsure whether the surge in radiation was being caused by the spent fuel rods or radioactive material leaking from the reactor's pressure vessel.

Perhaps someone could explain to me why radioactive material would be leaking from a reactor that supposedly had all of its fuel rods removed in December 2010. I remember seeing reactor pressure and temperature reports for No. 4 at the beginning of this crisis and having the same question then (though I didn't post it). Am I misunderstanding something? Or is this another slip up revealing the possibility that No. 4 was not shut down like they claim? Which begs the question: What were they really doing in No. 4 and how does that affect the current situation there?

posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 09:31 AM
reply to post by Aponi

Perhaps someone could explain to me why radioactive material would be leaking from a reactor that supposedly had all of its fuel rods removed in December 2010.

Probably for the same reason that they had to provide cooling water to the same un-fueled reactor, I guess?

Another time they are caught lying about Reactor #4.

If it is not loaded with fuel, it doesn't need cooling water. It also shouldn't melt down and leak radiation...... So what are they lying about? Was it loaded or not? Sure seems like it must have been.

posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 09:40 AM
reply to post by butcherguy

I try very hard not to buy into possible conspiracy theories without a fairly solid foundation of facts, but I am willing to admit now that the possibility of No. 4 being used to enrich uranium for weapons or some other shady purpose is looking likelier by the day. Of course, we may very well never know the truth, but I hope the truth is less insidious than it seems now.

posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 09:49 AM
Japan’s Reactors Still ‘Not Stable,’ U.S. Regulator Says April 13 2011

WASHINGTON — The condition of the damaged Fukushima Daiichi reactors in Japan is “static,” but with improvised cooling efforts they are “not stable,” the chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission told a Senate committee on Tuesday.

Gregory B. Jaczko, the chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, testified before a Senate committee on Tuesday.

“We don’t see significant changes from day to day,” the chairman, Gregory B. Jaczko, said, while adding that the risk of big additional releases gets smaller as each day passes.

Long-term regular cooling of the reactors has not been re-established, nor has a regular way of delivering water to the spent-fuel pools, he told the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. And when an aftershock hit the site and cut some offshore power supplies, he said, some pumps failed and cooling stopped for 50 minutes.

The situation is “not stable” and will remain so until “that kind of situation would be handled in a predictable manner,” he said.

Commission officials have also seemed less certain after stating that the spent-fuel pool in the No. 4 reactor was empty or close to empty, a situation that was evidently the basis for recommending a 50-mile evacuation for Americans in the plant’s vicinity. Commission experts also said that radiation readings suggested that core material had slipped out of the vessel of the No. 2 reactor and entered a drywell in the primary containment, only to retreat again on whether that was in fact the case.

Japanese Officials on Defensive as Nuclear Alert Level Rises (April 13, 2011)

TOKYO — Japanese officials struggled through the day on Tuesday to explain why it had taken them a month to disclose large-scale releases of radioactive material in mid-March at a crippled nuclear power plant, as the government and an electric utility disagreed on the extent of continuing problems there.


posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:08 AM
This is the first I've heard if this. If true, how awful for all those poor people who thought they were fleeing to safety

Japan tsunami hit over 100 designated evacuation sites North Korea Times
Wednesday 13th April, 2011

The March 11 tsunami triggered by a massive earthquake, flooded more than 100 evacuation spot designated by local governments in north-eastern Japan.

Many people are believed to have died after fleeing to those sites, which were supposed to be safe areas.

No specific information or data on the actual death toll at those places have been collected so far, the Kyodo News reports.

There have been no attempts to date by citizens to hold the authorities responsible for designating those areas, apparently because the tsunami's size was unexpected.

The tsunami hit atleast 101 evacuation sites in the prefectures of Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima.


posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:13 AM
BBC shows a few reports from people in Japan.

I heard one official on TV saying we need to be ready for the possibility that things may take a turn for the worse. Well, it's difficult to know what we should be prepared for when they keep changing the information they give us.

Damn straight

Does anybody else feel their bile rise when those annoying little mouth-pieces emerge onto the stage. They're like Oompa Loompas only even more annoying

posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:21 AM
edit on 13-4-2011 by rubyeyes because: fixing link

Michio kaku today speaks about fukushima.

edit on 13-4-2011 by rubyeyes because: adding description

posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:22 AM

Originally posted by Curio
BBC shows a few reports from people in Japan.

I heard one official on TV saying we need to be ready for the possibility that things may take a turn for the worse. Well, it's difficult to know what we should be prepared for when they keep changing the information they give us.

Damn straight

Does anybody else feel their bile rise when those annoying little mouth-pieces emerge onto the stage. They're like Oompa Loompas only even more annoying
I shudder to think what a turn for the worse might mean in their vocabulary!

Other than their orange skin, I never disliked the Oompa Loompas that much. They are very industrious.

posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:22 AM

Originally posted by maria81

The alternative is feed and bleed into the ocean, (as for now they propose at least 3 to 5 years of it), and simply kill everything therein. And if the oceans are dead, the continents will die, too.

They'll practice the mantra of the '50s through '80s "The solution to pollution is dilution"
Unfortunately there has been massive amounts of radioactive waste dumped in the oceans by nations already.
It's estimated the Russians alone have dumped more than 90PBq of waste over 30yrs at what was secret dump sites. OK5f9c9v0RraQeaInw4k-7bE&hl=en&ei=M7WlTb33CJOCtgeqtti9Ag&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&sqi=2&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false
That's petrabecuerels. 1 petrabecuerel=10 to the 15th becuerels.
The total potential at Fukushima may just be drop in the bucket.

posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:25 AM

Originally posted by Kailassa
This project is a good example to show the impossibility of drilling through cracked/cracking sandstone and making a chamber in it to work from below the level of the corium at Fukushima Dai-ichi. One tiny sliver encountered during the drilling of an exploratory tunnel was similar to the sandstone at Fukushima, but even that was not being shaken by constant earthquakes, and neither was in below the water table. The engineers could only cope with this because the tunnel on either side was through solid rock. They had to just let the mess drain, then after it had drained into the solid rock tunnel scoop it out until the tunnel was cleaned up, and then construct a huge metal tube to connect the two sections of rock tunnel. This could never have been done if the whole area the tunnel was being excavated through was crumbling, wet sandstone.

Finally, it was decided to completely avoid the Piora Mulde in the construction of the Gotthard Base Tunnel, and drill it lower, through rock which was mostly solid marble.

ok, I didn't know that the real tunnel was done like that. I followed the news in 1996 as they encountered the difficulties but I didn't do the check up how the problem was solved. Thanks for the update.

Nevertheless, if what you say would be true, there could be no bridges over big rivers, because there is water and loose sand and dirt and gravel alot and still one can construct a pillar to support a bridge.
The tunnel at Hamburg which traverses the river Elbe is another project, where there was no rock, just loam and sand and that all very wet. Still it has been built. So I am not convinced that constructing a chamber under the corium is not possible. You would have to line it with concrete wall support, of course, but apart from that there should be no difficulty which engineers have not already mastered often before.

Originally posted by Kailassa
Even if you could do that, corium is not a homogeneous liquid which will flow to order.

Then heat it so that it becomes that liquid. If the corium were 3600 degrees hot molten gold, I bet there would be thousands of ideas to get hold of it and to fill it into appropriate containers.

Originally posted by Kailassa
There's no putting the milk back into the cow.

I understand that you are convinced that you personally can think of no way to put milk back into the cow.
But that does not mean there is no way. The absence of a solution is VERY difficult to prove, even in mathematics.

Originally posted by Kailassa
Sunken corium is not all runny like a molten, uniform metal. It is non-uniform, as in lumpy, and forms a crust around it, and this crust is incredibly tough. Despite being hard and tough it is still hot, in both senses of the word. It's unlikely there is any drill which could drill through it.

Then heat it. The experiments to core catching did also function with added heat from outside.

Originally posted by Kailassa
Once the corium is doing this, even if you could move it elsewhere, why would you do this rather than let it bury itself?

because it is an unsolved problem, as it sinks ever deeper and some day arrives at the water table, thus poisoning it permanently.

Originally posted by Kailassa
Tantrum time? Insults and sarcasm are not a mature response to people who have pointed out flaws in your ideas.

You just keep on saying it is impossible.
That is just a unfounded statement, but no argument which points out flaws in an idea.

And I leave it entirely to your own judgment if a repeated statement of "it is not possible" without reasons is a mature response.

posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:33 AM
reply to post by Destinyone

"Unexpected" is a lie. Looking at historic data, the possibility was obvious. However, people like to believe that a rare event is not something imminent enough to warrant additional planning or resources.

That said, it was not unreasonable for evacuation centers to be built within the tsunami zone as most tsunamis would not affect them and the centers could be useful in other emergencies. People living in those areas though should have taken responsibility for their personal safety (instead of just trusting officials) and researched facts for themselves. Had they done so, they would have realized those evacuation centers would quite possibly not be suitable shelter after such a large event and they would have kept moving inland (if at all possible).

If you're going to live in a high-risk area, the least you should do is prepare appropriately IMO. Placing blind trust in authorities to protect and care for you in the case of an emergency has been proven, once again, a gullible mistake.
edit on 4/13/2011 by Aponi because: spelling error

posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:41 AM
reply to post by Wertwog

Not if you handle the corium in SMALL amounts. If you take it out as a huge lump - you've sure got a problem.

If you take it out in small, tiny, amounts it has less mass to continue the chain reaction.

Less mass, fewer atoms, fewer neutrons. Fewer neutrons, less reaction.

If you think about doing this all at once, sure, you're going to fail.

This needs to be thought of as operations where, the components driving are not at the point of contact, and the point of contact is limited to extremely short periods of time.

It doesn't matter if things fail - you need to design the plan around things failing. The tasks must be short. Like the men running in and out of Chernobyl knew.

Where does it go? Under the ground. Way under. Deep into a subduction zone. Drill it down close to the mantle. If you drill twenty holes, and in each core "fish" left in those holes you have a small amount of encased corium, you should have little enough to be handled.

Access. Power by action not at source. Short duration tasks.

Now, I guess you could just blow the fracker apart so that the chain reaction is spent all at once and the left over radiation is what is left to decay. The forest is still burned down, but at least it isn't still burning.

posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:44 AM
I remember there has been news about ANOTHER plant, which leaked radioactive water, the Onagawa nuclear plant in Miyagi.

Have not heard anything from there since a week or so, any search engines did not bring any results.

Has anybody news/sources what is happening there.

(Just asking since it's TEPCO as well, so no news does not necessarily means good news.)

posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:50 AM
reply to post by Silverlok

I'm thinking much smaller. The operators are much further away from the end of the hole.

With a drill string like this

Leave the entire drill string in place. Assume that it stops functioning properly when near the radiation source.

Then trip in a smaller drill bit/core catcher and drill the corium. The source of the power is far away. You don't want to retrieve very much at a time, so if you only get a tiny amount, and if the drill bit stop what? Trip the entire string back out, and seal and transport the retrieved radiation source.

Then go back in, and do it again.

I don't think you need a gigantic operation. Small, precise, and designed to fail everytime.

edit on 2011/4/13 by Aeons because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:54 AM
reply to post by maria81

Sandstone is drilled all the damn time.

If it collapses, you drill, pump/squeeze cement, let it set up, then drill the cement plug and the ground, and then do it again. You CREATE the compacted ground you need to stablize the sloughing.

posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:58 AM

Originally posted by DancedWithWolves
Protesters should darken TEPCO's doors for as long as radiation from this negligent disaster darkens our environment. TEPCO had best crack open that check book NOW. People have nothing left and are expected to fend for themselves. With what? How are they to do that when this company has stolen their future? What they are doing to these people is criminal.
edit on 13-4-2011 by DancedWithWolves because: (no reason given)

TEPCO says: We are sorry

posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:01 AM

edit on 13-4-2011 by bitbytebit because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:02 AM
reply to post by SDoradus

Yeah I noticed that. I punched 370,000 into some conversion programs and it over shot the limits and came up with 10 million curie.

I doubt we will ever get true readings until the Pentagon releases the scans from the drones flying daily over the plant

new topics

top topics

<< 686  687  688    690  691  692 >>

log in