Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Japan to Restart Nuclear Reactor on July 1st

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 04:37 AM
Japan will once again have nuclear-power generated electricity, after all 50 of it's commercial nuclear reactors were shut down on May 5th for safety and stress tests. The no. 3 reactor at KEPCO's Ohi Nuclear Power Plant is scheduled to be restarted on July 1st, amid fierce debate, and should be providing power to the grid by July 4th. Ohi's No. 4 reactor is scheduled to resume operations by July 24. Nuclear-power supplied 30% of Japan's electricity needs before the Fukushima disaster. It's quite shocking that there are no clear plans, and that no decisions have been made, about how to replace that portion of the country's power needs. Seems the plan is to start up the reactors again while doing little to nothing to mitigate the risks. The people of Japan deserve a better plan and must demand their government take immediate steps to secure their safety and power supply.

edit on 28-6-2012 by BULLPIN because: added links and info
edit on 28-6-2012 by BULLPIN because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 04:49 AM
Then the NWO banking cartels will just use there HAARP device again, generate another quake via scalar waves and que Fukushima II return of the waves!!!

posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 05:54 AM
Nuclear power is too lucrative to worry about the people or the environment..
'Easy' , makes a lot of money and produces a lot of power. Such a shame.

posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 06:04 AM
I've got to give it to Japan. She is one STOIC nation. The amount of whining that would emanate from the US citizenry in Japan's shoes would be deafening. My admiration.

I want to start a thread about everything that was posted that turned out to be BULL#. You can go on Youtube and watch old videos that talk of "eminent collapse." We should have a forum devoted to threads that cried wolf...hard.

Back to Japan, my friend who is a nuclear engineer said that the Fukushima reactor was a risky design to begin with before it was shaken by an earthquake and pounded by a tsunami. It is silly to say that all nuclear reactors in Japan should be permanently deactivated because of it, and # everyone that says we are all going to die from cancer because of radiation flying across the pacific.

posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 06:48 PM
Restarting is a terrible, terrible idea. .

Half my family lives in Japan and the sentiment there is, the people don't want it.

The same week the gov't announces they want to restart, a 5.2 earthquake just miles from Fukishima

and the cooling system on reactor 2's spent fuel pool shuts down today. It looks like a sign from above to rethink

the whole thing.

posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 07:21 PM
I am glad that…

A lot less Japanese will be dying from the fossil fuel pollution

"Coal Kills 4,000 Times More People Per Unit of Energy than Nuclear"

See how oil & gas aren’t much better
See also: Coal Ash (Practically) 100 times More Radio Active than Nuclear

The Oceans Will Be Less Polluted

To make up for its dwindling supply of nuclear power, Japan is on a frenzied but costly hunt for fossil fuels.

They May Meet Climate Change Targets

The Fukushima crisis is eroding years of Japanese efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming, as power plants running on oil and natural gas fill the electricity gap left by now-shuttered nuclear reactors.

The Japanese Economy Will Grow Again…

Japan posted a record high trade deficit in January after its nuclear crisis shut down nearly all the nation’s reactors for tougher checks, sending fuel imports surging. Exports were hurt by a strong yen and weak demand.

As predicted earlier this year, Japan continues to struggle with its energy needs. The chart below shows the recent trend in Japan’s imports of residual fuel oil. Residual fuel is used for electricity generation, industrial process and space heating, as well as fuel for large ships. Japan had always bought some fuel oil for shipping and certain industrial processes, but nuclear generators had in the past been the dominant source of electricity. Now the source of power has been replaced by expensive fuel oil.

warreniteI want to start a thread about everything that was posted that turned out to be BULL#. You can go on Youtube and watch old videos that talk of "eminent collapse." We should have a forum devoted to threads that cried wolf...hard.
Be prepared to get told you are a Sheep (for your independent thinking of course).
And asked “who’s paying you pay checks” for supporting an industry less profitable than coal, oil & gas, and that’s much less corrupt than renewables that aren’t practical.

Prepare yourself for causing great to offence to a religion selectively interested in all things anti-nuclear, has little to zero interest in how it can work safe, because that would end the Adeline rush from fear-paranoia.

People will die because of anti-nuclear lies, other Deep Water accidents will now happen, and overall far more will be killed.
And wildlife is burnt alive, the people on this Forum will moan about that too –even though (by failing to tell the truth they’ve caused it!!!)

(Despite its location) Japan is going to have one of the safest nuclear industries in the world post Fukushima. Of course one doesn’t expect the people-sheeple of Japan to immediately understand why this is necessary, so education (of the facts is key).

But if I were Japanese PM, I’d be opening as many at once, to minimise the controversy, and distress caused to people not in the least bit capable of understanding why the (real-practical) alternatives are worse.
edit on 090705 by Liberal1984 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:30 PM
This is unbelievable. It truly is. Worst idea ever.. "Oh, lets restart two reactors next to 4 already melting down ones. Nothing can go wrong.

Well, here's the Japanese public responding to such an ass-brained idea.

posted on Jul, 1 2012 @ 11:29 AM
reply to post by owlwoman

kindly allow me to ease your nervousness

where are the thousands of people dead from radiation poisoning?

fukushima is a psyops

Fukushima Radiation Fear Mongering: An Orchestrated Scare Campaign Exceeding the Fraud of 9/11

I posted my first article on Fukushima radiation alarmism (which currently floods the Internet) just 8 days after the March 11, 2011 attack on Japan. Titled, Japan Radiation Scare Hugely Overblown by Western Media (Mar. 19, 2011), I pointed out in that article that there was a HUGE disconnect between the actual background radiation readings measured in Tokyo (and within the 12.5 mile radius zone around the Daiichi nuclear station) and the absurd, irresponsible ("foreigners should leave Tokyo"), and grossly exaggerated 'dangers' being fomented by alternative news media (Amy Goodman, et al), Internet web sites, Youtube, and leftist leaning radio stations quoting and interviewing anti-nuclear energy propagandists like Arnie Gundersen, Christopher Busby, Leuren Moret, Yoichi Shimatsu, and later, Robert Alvarez, Kevin Kamps, Paul Gunter, Stephen Jones, Mark Sircus, and John Apsley among many others. Youtube presenters or media interviewers are treating these people as if their wild exaggerations, overstatements, and outright fabrications possessed scientific validity and factual certitude. And I've yet to hear or see one of these Youtube Fukushima radiation fear fest (or radio interviews) include an opportunity for someone from the other side of the fence to counter or challenge the statements from these nuclear energy critics. It's been a one-sided radio/Internet media barrage since mid March of 2011 and it's more intense now than ever.
Within a few days of the 3/11 attack on Japan, it became clear that was destined to become Command Central for the Fukushima radiation fear promotion campaign. I can't get over how many the-sky-is-falling, Fukushima radiation 'catastrophy' aticles (and radio interviews) are posted to that web site on a daily basis. I've had many people send me e-mails to tell me that they can no longer go to because the Fukushima fear mongering is simply too much to put up with.

ENE News logo
Another web site that leads the pack in pounding away at the Fukushima radiation party line is This web site ONLY posts articles exclusively devoted to driving home the Fukushima fear package. According to Whois-search, this web site was created on March 16, 2011 and quickly zoomed to a very high traffic ranking of 26,000 for world traffic and 7,700 for the USA (by comparison, currently ranks 61,000 world and 21,000 USA; while currently ranks at 7,600 world and 2.800 USA). How is it that a web site that is only one year old, and devoted to one topic, could rise to such a high ranking plateau without lots of money, technological savoir faire, and busy worker bees to make that happen so quickly? (Hint: Oil & natural gas energy companies that want to push nuclear energy competitors out of the way)

So who's behind this web site? No one knows because the identity of the owners are hidden. The Administrative Contact given at WhoIs is ", Private Registrant (" located in Providence, Utah. The Technical Contact is "UK2 Group, Technical Support (", also located at the same address in Providence, Utah. The Registrar is ENOM Inc.; a seller of domain names and security services.

Here's a smapling of the "Latest Headlines" at

Ambassador’s comments translated by Asahi: Another accident at No. 4 reactor building could cause the “final catastrophe of the world” (03:43 PM EST on May 21st, 2012 | 3 comments)

Gundersen: Pyrophoric fire if fuel rods in Unit 4 pool are not cooled — Potential contamination of entire northern hemisphere (VIDEO) (02:30 PM EST on May 21st, 2012 | 9 comments)

Reporters repeatedly ask gov’t why it does not consider worst-case scenarios at Unit 4 and get help from foreign experts (01:39 PM EST on May 21st, 2012 | 8 comments

There are hundreds of articles posted at with similar fear-invoking titles. The message?

Get out of nuclear energy as fast as possible or we're all doomed to die from radiation poisoning!

The Game Plan
It's important to realize that the 3/11, attack on Japan and the sabotage of the Daiichi nuclear power station was intended by the Rockefellers to both cripple the Japanese economy (which was heading towards a giant leap in new technology) and to disassemble the entire nuclear power industry - worldwide - in order to consolidate the energy market down to oil and natural gas. It's not an accident that all of that natural gas "fracking" that we've been hearing about for the past year or two, would need to create a new market to sell all of that newly extracted natural gas to, and what better way than to shut down all of those 'dangerous', radiation-spewing, dinosaur nuclear power plants and convert them over to "safe" and "clean" natural gas power plants using that new spiffy German design gas turbine that Merkel is so proud of. Gee, isn't it simply wonderful how the fracking gas solution just happened to show up at just the right time to save the day from the perils of the deadly Fukushima radiation 'catastrophy' ("many times worst than Chernobyl" according to Leuren Moret and Christopher Busby)?

In this Youtube video posted on Feb 23, 2012, Rod Adams explains the ruse to replace the nuclear power industry with natural gas power plants by pumping the Fukushima radiation psyops to the hilt in order to stampede the Pajama People into demanding an end to all nuclear power plant facilities (our own ZS Livingstone, bless his uncannily accurate and intuitive soul, was first to bring to my attention the natural-gas-to-replace-nuclear-power ruse in articles and radio interviews presented at this web site in March and April of 2011).

[Update Note, May 25, 2012. This web page was hacked on May 25, 2012 and the video from Rod Adams which I originally placed at this location was removed and the video seen below (with Senator Carper sitting at a committee hearing) was substituted in its place. Apparently, this article is hitting a nerve with someone since they're willing to hack into my server and change the embedded video of Rod Adams. I'll leave this hacker's embedded video in place for now, but re-insert the Rod Adams video immediately below this one. ..Ken Adachi]

more links here
scroll down the page a bit until you reach

The 3/11 Attack on Japan Exposed (mp3 audio and printed transcript)

posted on Jul, 1 2012 @ 08:23 PM
To all the pro non-candu-nuclear folks on here.

Wtf are we sitting on all these spent fuel rods that could be producing power in a candu design? Theyrr much safer than the normal reactors.

Why is it that to you people the only alternative is oil? Remember the paint on solar panels a few months ago? What if every roof in japan had that on its entire surface? How much power would that produce?

How about the natural gas? Theres a sewage treatment plant downtown in my small city with an eternal flame burning off methane. Same at lanfills and sewage treatment plants across the world. You can even make and comoress your own with uhm...poop. theres even an oil refinery near me that burns it off several times an hour. And why are we fracking to make gas where we fail to collect most of it?

Why dont we make electricity from flowing sewage? Wouldnt be much but would be something.

What about all the paper we throw away? Wood gas!

Why arent there thermocouples in spent fuel pools? Would be similar to an rtg used in space.

posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 06:42 PM

phroziac To all the pro non-candu-nuclear folks on here.
I support Candu for being available now, but like the Integral Reactor, and Thorium Reactor more.

Wtf are we sitting on all these spent fuel rods that could be producing power in a candu design?
Fuel rods produce only around 5% of the energy outside the reactor, as they were inside. Over the next few years the amount produced falls exponentially due to the increase of Neutron Poisons inside the rods. This is actually a good thing, as the decrease in temperature enables you to cut the rods up, for recycling & reprocessing (or in America’s case burying!).
However some newer reactor designs, will utilise some of their spent fuel rods heat.

Remember the paint on solar panels a few months ago? What if every roof in japan had that on its entire surface? How much power would that produce?
Oh there’s loads of ideas, but when will be cheaper enough to stop firstly coal (the most carbon intensive), then gas, and finally (to solve our transport needs) oil (which is more carbon intensive (per unit of energy) than gas, but less than oil)?
Although maybe promising us something, practical one day; you know, as well as I (that without government subsidies) the future for solar, is looking well... pretty overcast!

Why dont we make electricity from flowing sewage? Wouldn’t be much but would be something.
No it wouldn’t be much, less than 10% of the UK grids requirements.
The human body is about 50% efficient, so the amount of energy available to power our modern energy needs is about the same as what it takes to live. However we consume far more electricity than it takes to us energy to live.
Furthermore bacteria consume most of mucks energy, before leaving just some as methane gas. Nevertheless what you say is underway, and deserves more government subsidy because it is actually reliable (without expensive lead batteries) as well as workable.

What about all the paper we throw away? Wood gas!
You forgot “Plasma Waste Recycling” this burns waste at such high temperatures, that no oxygen is required. Instead gases are produced which are burnt (releasing some C02) but making much electricity, plus metals (from unsorted waste) are recovered, and the waste ash, comes as a rock, good enough for building & insulating materials. Two minute public education vid...
With all the UK’s waste recycled this way, together with the bio gas mentioned, our government thinks we should be able to meet around 25% of our electricity needs.
In the end (after solar, wind, and tidal) around 50% is going to be nuclear. The first step was just to replace existing nuclear capacity. However it does look like it will take some kind of government subsidisation to actually get all our nuclear power stations built. But the public (reluctant to spend even on renewables) is not willing; so we’ll see how this pans out.

The Future...
My bet is: Electricity prices will rise, whilst individual reactors, will be made much smaller so they can be completed faster. I.e. Britain will still have large nuclear power station sites -just with many smaller reactors.
Ultimately more nuclear is certainly on the way, but (despite being a big fan of science) if I were a electricity company; I would invest in gas turbine electricity. This is exactly what they are doing!!! This means... We are about to have our ancient water supplies permanently contaminated with fracking chemicals. Then nuclear will follow.
Of course: If the sorts of people on here were a bit more considering of the bigger picture, then we could get away with just nuclear right now; but that won’t happen, so our water will be contaminated first (then nuclear gets built afterwards anyway).

On the Upside
With the Passive Safety of modern technology, we can safely say that what happened to Fukushima (designed in the 60’s and built in 70’s) is a lot closer to becoming history. That is the nature of Passive Safety i.e: No moving parts, no need for functioning cooling systems, because the rector shuts itself down anyway.
The Integral Reactor (for instance) uses a Neutron Reflector with holes in it, to reflect radiation back onto the reactor. If the shield is not there, then the reactor cannot operate. However in the integral reactor, the holes simply expand (due to the increase in temperatures from a reactor failure) so with bigger holes, letting more radiation out onto the shield (i.e. neutron absorber) the reactor closes itself down. The Thorium Reactor ceases to operate the moment it goes into meltdown, and leaves it’s neutron shield. Sure it’s still radioactive, but it produces very, very, little heat.
PS: Another reactor you hear a lot about is the Pebble Bed Reactor, it's possibly literally safer than our sun, but produces too much nuclear waste, for too little heat. That isn't a safety issue (unlike reactor accidents, nuke waste has killed almost nobody) but it is a cost issue, as well as public relations one (since the public don't tolerate waste anywhere).
edit on 090705 by Liberal1984 because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics


log in