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.


Fukushima ‘unlikely’ to be new Chernobyl: IAEA

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 05:29 PM
Raw Story

VIENNA – The crisis at Japan's earthquake-damaged nuclear power plant is "unlikely" to turn into a new Chernobyl, which was the world's worst nuclear accident, the UN atomic watchdog said on Monday.

"Let me say that the possibility that the development of this accident into one like Chernobyl is very unlikely," Yukiya Amano told a news conference at the headquarters of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna.

The current crisis at the Fukushima nuclear plant was caused not by human error or a design fault, as in the case of Chernobyl in Ukraine in 1986, but by a "huge natural catastrophe beyond imagination," Amano said.

In addition, the reactors at Fukushima had been automatically shutdown when the earthquake hit, so "there is no chain reaction going on," the IAEA chief said.

Furthermore, the Chernobyl reactor did not have a reactor vessel, while Fukushima does "and that reactor vessel is still contained" even after two explosions there, he said.

OK, so the IAEA is stating that the disaster in japan is not bad as Chernobyl was because of all the fail safes in place and is even still standing after TWO explosions.

I know a lot of people are worried, that is completely understandable, but it is not as bad as it could of been if the fail safes in place didn't exist... I am trying to be optimistic and hope for the best outcome. If all hell does break loose with the Fukushima reactor, it will not only effect Japan, but anyone caught in the line of the jet stream.

So all in all, I don't think the situation is as bad as some people here are making it out to be. Hopefully everything that the IAEA is stating is true, and not a ploy to hide how possibly massive this could be.

Best wishes to Japan, and everyone caught in that madness.
edit on 3/14/2011 by ugie1028 because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 05:37 PM
Take what the media of any country says or a spoksman for them, then multiply it times 25, to the worst side, then you'll probably be some where near the truth. This guy is lying out his A$$.....

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 05:39 PM
I just heard on CBS news that Japan is just now asking for the US help. Why have they waited for so long to ask for help? Are things about to go horribly wrong? I feel terrible for the Japanese people. In the back of my mind though are thoughts not so good. What if all hope of fixing it is gone and the Japanese gov is just looking for a scapegoat? The US will get the blame if anything goes wrong now. I hope I am wrong and that everything goes just right and gets back under control.

ETA: 1706?lpos=World_News_Carousel_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15951706_Video_Japan_Quake_And_Tsunami%3A_Plea_For_US_Help_After_Second_Explosion_At_Nuclear_Plant< br />
Suddenly now after 40 years it is being called an American Nuclear Plant::

Japan has asked the US for help to stop the American-designed reactors plunging into uncontrollable meltdown.

And again in the same article:::

A hydrogen explosion occurred in the US-designed reactor 1 building on March 12 and a second blast destroyed the building housing unit 3 on Monday.

And again in same article::::

Harvard-based Mr Heinonen said it is now important for US expertise to be employed to minimise the risk of a catastrophic failure.

"They are the best people to know their (reactors') behaviour, particularly when you go into this phase and assess the consequences."

edit on 14-3-2011 by ohioriver because: Added Content

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 05:39 PM
I for one don't know much about much. And I'm not a nuclear physicist. But I do know that three different explosions at three different reactors on one site is bad!!!! No matter how you spin it. I may be wrong but I'm calling bull&$@!

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 05:43 PM
reply to post by Flyzoid

I understand, I am worried too.... but the cores of these reactors are still in tact, and the fail safes in place are these for SHTF scenarios such as this one. the explosions were caused by hydrogen and oxygen releases.... not the cores themselves... but that was due to the cooling systems being vented... and they are gone now... so there is no way to tell if its going to get better, or MUCH MUCH worse.

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 05:45 PM
reply to post by ugie1028

Well if the cooling systems aren't in tact anymore, wouldn't meltdown occur due to extreme temperature rise?

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 05:48 PM
reply to post by prolific

there are containment chambers that should limit the release of radiation into the atmosphere.

plus soon as the earthquake happened the reactor shut down and the uranium rods are not exposed anymore.

Yes there is still a chance S will HTF, but if it does, it will not match Chernobyl level of devastation.

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 05:55 PM
well now I know the IAEA is flip flopping around because one of the reactors is damaged the possibility of leaks has just increased!

Just in: Japan's govt says part of the container of a troubled nuclear reactor appears to be damaged
Huffington Post

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 05:59 PM
Mark my words:
They are playing it down as much as they can JUST like they did with Chernobyl!
Until we have areal photos or something out in the public that show the damage inside they will tell us whatever they think is best. And we all know how that works.

posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 06:45 PM

Even with the two Fukushima explosions, so far this is nothing like Chernobyl. In 1986, the control rods malfunctioned and the fuel rods melted down. A subsequent explosion catapulted tons of radioactive material into the atmosphere.

"One hundred times as much radioactivity as Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombs combined went up into the air at Chernobyl," Dallas said.

What is a meltdown?

Twenty-five years later, a dead zone with a 16 mile radius still surrounds Chernobyl. At least 11,000 children have developed thyroid cancer there.

Unlike Chernobyl, the explosions at Fukushima have come from the containment dome - not the radioactive core.

"The containment vessel only had a little bit of radioactivity in it," Dallas said. "But it's still nothing next to what you would get, or you would have to get in order to get sick."

new topics


log in