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.

 

March 11th Fukushima was a susp. level 7 event

page: 2
11
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 04:13 AM
link   
What was the time scale of them _starting_ the process of building the sarcophagus at Chernobyl? I.e. Day 0 (explosion) + xx? And then how long did it take for them to complete the sarcophagus?



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 04:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by binkbonk

Originally posted by snewpers
reply to post by Bronco51082
 


The image in the link you supply still shows a level 5.

Where does it say it's a level 7?
(Susp. Level of INES 7- Chernobyl like - accident)


Susp. Means Suspected.

This doesn't mean it's not all lies, but nor does it mean it really is a 7. All it means was the officials in charge of updating the status at the time believed it to potentially be a class 7 nuclear disaster.

Truely there is nothing to see here, no?

(For the record, I believe we all know it to be above a 5, they were saying it was a 6 all along anyway [it probably really is a 7]. Five is Three Mile Island, this has always been worse than 3 mile... from all outlets.)



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 10:44 AM
link   
when they start saying it is a lost cause, seal it off with concrete, workers knowing that it is certain death to even get near the plant then this is a type 7 event, and the bad,sad thing is there is more than one there are 3 reactors and one cooling pound that are melting. try it with magnesium the more you add the bigger and hotter the fire gets, and you do not need flames to have a fire. and then there is this plumbot.com...:_Major_accident from the link

Recent events
Events at Fukushima I and II nuclear power plants
See also: 2011 Japanese nuclear incidents

Fukushima I nuclear accidents, Japan, 2011; ongoing. Thousands of residents were evacuated after earthquake and tsunami caused loss of coolant. Hydrogen explosions later destroyed reactor buildings, and two reactors entered a state of partial meltdown after fuel rods were exposed to air. INES rating for this disaster was initially declared as Level 4 by Japan's nuclear safety agency,[18] but after subsequent explosions, Andre-Claude Lacoste, president of France's Autorité de sûreté nucléaire, suggested that it is Level 6.[19] United States Energy Secretary Steven Chu told Congress that the events in Fukushima "appear to be more serious than Three Mile Island."[20] On March 18 there had been no official rating from the IAEA, but Japanese officials revised the initial assessment of Unit 1 to Level 5 and gave the same rating to Units 2 and 3. In addition the cooling accident at Unit 4 was classified as Level 3. Also the events at the Fukushima II nuclear power plant were classified as Level 3.[7][21][22] US based Institute for Science and International Security stated that it might reach Level 7. The event matched all criteria used by the IAEA to classify an event:[clarification needed]

Contamination spread within the facility
Damage to radiological barriers
Degradation of defence in-depth
Overexposure of a worker
Person injured physically or casualty
Overexposure of a member of the public
Release beyond authorized limits

On March 25 Asahi Shimbun reported the incident might warrant a Level 6 rating, based on Japanese Nuclear Safety Commission numbers.[23][24] The newspaper used these estimates and criteria, considering releases of radioiodine:

Level 5: Three Mile Island. Limited discharge, but the Level 5 rating was based on damage to the core.
Level 6: Fukushima. "Simple calculation" of 30,000 to 110,000 TBq, meeting the Level 6 criterion of "several thousands to several tens of thousands of terabecquerels".[23]
Level 7: Chernobyl. Estimated 1.8 million TBq.
to me this is a level 7 read this line,US based Institute for Science and International Security stated that it might reach Level 7. The event matched all criteria used by the IAEA to classify an event:[clarification needed]then read this,
Contamination spread within the facility
Damage to radiological barriers
Degradation of defence in-depth
Overexposure of a worker
Person injured physically or casualty
Overexposure of a member of the public
Release beyond authorized limits
now does this not meet cat 7 requirements, i think so. not fear just the facts a flood is a flood not a stream nor a lake.

edit on 1-4-2011 by bekod because: editting



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by bjsmi2
We all knew that was coming last week + ... I feel sorry for the poor Japanese public being kept in the dark by their government. And its only a matter time most of the northern hemispere will be polluted and glowing. Stupid humans again playing with toys they shouldnt be. Earth is being destoyed !!


Great post my friend...You are 1000% right......and we aint seen nothing yet.....




top topics
 
11
<< 1   >>

log in

join