Posts
This is a long article because the author has provided so much documentation. When I hear the media STILL saying IF there is a meltdown when we know there was meltdown in THREE out of four reactors on day one (this is confirmed to me by reading the ABC correspondent Mark Willacy's book on Fukushima, I feel compelled to look at this seriously.
Comments from Mike Ruppert:
THE GREAT BLDG 4 CHARADE HAS A BIG NEW DEADLY TWIST
-- So let's speculate that TEPCO tells us in a few weeks or months that all fuel assemblies have been successfully removed. Do we believe it?
Well if that happens then we should all realize it's because the fuel pool has already completely (or almost completely) combusted. We have quite a few credible peeps screaming about this and I have to agree. This link has unimpeachable documentary evidence from the NRC and other sources indicating that the entire planet has almost assuredly already received lethal exposure to radioactivity BECAUSE THE FUEL POOL ABOVE 4 HAD A COMPLETE, OPEN-AIR BURN IN MARCH OF 2011.
I have also been unable to accept that there are any remaining fuel pools at Reactor 3 (just look at the billion pictures) which would mean that they also have burned and been released into the atmosphere. This has been nagging me for some time.
Sadly, the moment the absolutely incompetent TEPCO says -- defying all logic and prior experience, using amateur workers, removing one assembly at a time -- that they did it, we will all know that we are dead.
At the rate things are going, it doesn't look to be too long anyway.
Comments from Mike Ruppert:
THE GREAT BLDG 4 CHARADE HAS A BIG NEW DEADLY TWIST
-- So let's speculate that TEPCO tells us in a few weeks or months that all fuel assemblies have been successfully removed. Do we believe it?
Well if that happens then we should all realize it's because the fuel pool has already completely (or almost completely) combusted. We have quite a few credible peeps screaming about this and I have to agree. This link has unimpeachable documentary evidence from the NRC and other sources indicating that the entire planet has almost assuredly already received lethal exposure to radioactivity BECAUSE THE FUEL POOL ABOVE 4 HAD A COMPLETE, OPEN-AIR BURN IN MARCH OF 2011.
I have also been unable to accept that there are any remaining fuel pools at Reactor 3 (just look at the billion pictures) which would mean that they also have burned and been released into the atmosphere. This has been nagging me for some time.
Sadly, the moment the absolutely incompetent TEPCO says -- defying all logic and prior experience, using amateur workers, removing one assembly at a time -- that they did it, we will all know that we are dead.
At the rate things are going, it doesn't look to be too long anyway.
Fear
and Loathing on Fukushima Unit 4
By
Hatrick Penry, 9/29/13
(above:
Author Hunter Thompson (1937-2005) was never afraid to report
the truth no matter how ugly it was.)
29
September, 2013
The
trick is to convince the American public, and indeed the world, that
the worst-of-the-worst has not already happened at Fukushima. Even if
that means a media campaign of fear-mongering based around a fantasy
doomsday scenario involving the collapse of Unit 4 and its spent fuel
pool. Interestingly enough, all the alternative and mainstream media
outlets that are promoting this bogus Unit 4 doomsday scenario are
the same ones who have chosen not to report on the Nuclear Regulatory
Agency’s Freedom of Information Act documents pertaining to
Fukushima. These documents tell the true story of Fukushima: the
multi-agency cover-up that downplayed and concealed the radioactive
plume and fallout, the reality of a prolonged station blackout that
produced three ‘China Syndrome’ meltdowns, and the Unit 4 spent
fuel pool zirconium fire and subsequent ‘melt on the floor’ of
the fuel rods.
The
sad reality is that the effects of a nuclear plant meltdown or spent
fuel pool fire can be so sudden and so severe that the possibility
exists that no safety precautions can be taken quickly enough to
avoid the consequences completely. In the case of the Fukushima
catastrophe, it took about a week to produce a measurable plume that
traveled south down the coast and then swept inland across Tokyo.
These plumes were laden with aerosolized plutonium. I ask you: how do
you evacuate Tokyo in less than a week? How will we evacuate
New York if Indian Point has an accident and produces a plume? Where
do you relocate a city of millions of people?
So
you see, the reality of the potential of a meltdown or meltdowns is
so horrific, it must be hidden from the public at all costs. And when
a meltdown does occur, the truth of its severity and its effects must
also be hidden from the public at all costs. Can you imagine what it
would have been like if TEPCO, the Government of Japan, the NRC and
the White House had been up front and 100% honest about the disaster
from the start? What would have happened if officials announced that
1) a plutonium laden plume was drifting towards Tokyo and 2) multiple
plumes and fallout were heading across the Pacific towards the West
Coast of the US? What would have happened if officials were up front
and honest about the triple ‘China Syndrome’ and Unit 4 ‘melt
on the floor’ and its effects? No matter how you slice it, it would
be ugly, very ugly.
It
seems to me that when a country desires both national security and
nuclear power at the same time, it desires the impossible.
Furthermore, how can one have a rational discussion about national
security if one does not include a frank, open discussion about the
decommissioning of all nuclear plants? Which is a greater threat to
the American public, Iran’s nuclear program or our own nuclear
program? Why would Iran build a nuclear bomb to use against the US
when we have hundreds of stationary bombs, in the form of reactors
and fuel pools, already positioned throughout the country, with
incredible payloads far beyond the capacity of any bomb or missile?
Think of the possibilities: terrorist attack, sabotage, earthquake,
tsunami, earthquake AND tsunami, flooding from a broken dam upriver,
or even the old-fashioned accident that aging reactors are bound to
have from time to time…why do we leave ourselves so vulnerable?
About
the Fukushima Unit 4 Spent Fuel Pool:
The
evidence, from the NRC FOIA documents pertaining to Fukushima, has
led me to believe that:
1)
The March 11th, 2011 earthquake caused immediate structural damage to
the Unit 4 building. Spent fuel pool coolant began to drain out
through a crack or cracks that were a result of the earthquake.
2)
There was an H2 explosion and a wall or walls of the SFP #4 were
‘blown out’.
3)
On March 15th 2011, the hot offload of fuel experienced a
zirconium cladding fire and subsequent meltdown to the floor of the
spent fuel pool. According to the IAEA, SFP #4 was on fire and
emitting radiation directly to the atmosphere for at least 9 hours
and 10 minutes before TEPCO claimed it was extinguished.
4)
75% or more of the radiation contained in SFP #4 may have been
released into the atmosphere. Modeling was done on a 100% release.
5)
Any fuel rods recovered (official numbers vary on what the inventory
was) will be ones that were unused and ‘cool’…probably less
than 25% of inventory. It is possible that all fuel rods were
affected and none will be salvageable.
The
Evidence:
To
be clear: I cannot prove that the spent fuel pool of Unit 4 has been
destroyed or damaged. Nor can the nuclear apologists prove that the
pool is full of water and the fuel rods are intact. It should be
noted that those who claim that the damage to SFP 4 was minimal and
that the rods will be recovered have only their rhetoric to back them
up. They offer no proof. YouTube videos alleging to be of the Unit
4 spent fuel pool could be any spent fuel pool in the
world. Is it not evidence in and of itself that they have not proven
beyond a reasonable doubt that their claims are true? How hard would
it be to hold a current newspaper in front of a video camera and then
make an inspection of Units 1-4 for the world to see? Do you believe
TEPCO? Do you believe the NRC? Do you believe the Government of Japan
or our own government? All of these entities have extensive track
records of deception and dishonesty and they all have reason to hide
the truth, especially in the case of the Fukushima disaster.
(below)
The effects of a prolonged station blackout (SBO) caused by a 9.0
earthquake and 46 foot tall tsunami are catastrophic.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: normal operating temperature of the
coolant in a spent fuel pool is 30 degrees Celsius.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: March 14th, 2011 the temperature of SFP
#4 is now at 84 degrees Celsius.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: March 15th FAX from the IAEA to
the NRC “Release Radioactivity Unit 4 Fukushima Daiichi NPP”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: March 15th, 2011-Japanese authorities
inform the IAEA that the spent fuel pond at Unit 4 is on fire and
that “…radioactivity is being released directly into the
atmosphere.”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: Japanese authorities claim the fire at
the spent fuel pool of Unit 4 is extinguished 9 hours and 10 minutes
after it begins. Evidence found in the NRC FOIA documents contradicts
this claim. As of March 16th, TEPCO had yet to remove the rubble
blocking the path of fire trucks and other heavy equipment to the
Fukushima facility. Helicopter water drops, the only other
method of delivering water to the spent fuel pools, are said to
be ineffective by NRC officials.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: Situation Report Update shows Unit 4
spent fuel pool in grave danger. Radiation levels are too high to
initiate countermeasures at 30 REM/hr. Note that NRC officials were
adamant that the ‘lube oil fire’ of Unit 4 was NOT a lube oil
fire and instead referred to it as a ‘seminal event’.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: As the spent fuel pools heat up, access
problems (of which radioactive MOX sludge was a factor) and high
radiation levels impede any response to the disaster.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: (part 1 of a 5 part series) Plume
modeling (direction of plume by elevation) from the 15th to the 18th
of March, 2011 by the Japan Meteorological Agency. While this
modeling may or may not be based on the releases of SFP #4, it is
indicative of where the winds of that time period might have
carried radiation.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: (part 2 of a 5 part series) Plume
modeling of Cs-137 by the Japan Meteorological Agency. If modeling
of plutonium was
done by any agency or country, it has yet to be found in the NRC FOIA
documents pertaining to Fukushima.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: (part 3 of a 5 part series) Plume
modeling of Cs-137.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: (part 4 of a 5 part series) Plume
modeling of Cs-137.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: (part 5 of a 5 part series) Plume
modeling of Cs-137.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: confirmation of damage to wall of
Fukushima Unit 4.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: email from March 15th, 2011 “U4 zirc
fire, catastrophe”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: Ministry of Economy Trade and Industry
(M.E.T.I.) News Release: at 10:30 UTC on March 15th-orders are given
to extinguish the fire at Unit 4 and prevent “re-criticality”.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: email from March 16th, 2011-”U4
situation deteriorating. SFP water inventory is lost…dose rates
around U4 make entry impossible…”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: email
from March 16th, 2011 “The walls of the Unit 4 spent fuel pool have
collapsed, and there is no water in there.”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: cover-page for a March 16th transcript
wherein the damage to Unit 4 is discussed extensively. Speakers
include then NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko, Regional Administrator for
Region 3 Chuck Casto and Director of the Office of Public Affairs
Eliot Brenner.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: Chuck Casto: “…we absolutely
know that pool no. 4, though, the walls have collapsed…”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: Chuck Casto: “You cannot get inventory
[coolant] above the bottom of the fuel.”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: further discussion of damage to the Unit
4 spent fuel pool.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: Chuck Casto stakes his career on Unit 4
having major damage.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: Mike Weber “The pool structure is no
longer in existence. The walls have collapsed. So, you have spent
fuel sitting there in a pile.”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: a discussion of “quenching” the pool
(filling it with water…saltwater at first)
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: this next series of screencaptures
centers around a discussion about a video that TEPCO alleges shows
water in the Unit 4 spent fuel pool. The TEPCO video surfaced after
then NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko stood before members of Congress on
the 15th of March, 2011 and announced that the spent fuel pool at
Unit 4 was dry. Throughout the NRC FOIA documents there is evidence
that TEPCO pressured officials at the NRC to ‘reconsider’ their
position. A final back-and-forth between Gregory Jaczko, Chuck Casto
and Eliot Brenner settles the matter when they decide Jaczko will
not ’roll back’ any of his statements on Unit 4.
\
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: the TEPCO video discussion continues…
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: more on the TEPCO video…
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: the saga of the TEPCO video continues…
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: a discussion about the source of
information about the Unit 4 spent fuel pool.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: Jaczko will not be “rolling back”
any of his statements on Unit 4
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: confirmation from a secondary source
that the SFP of Unit 4 is dry.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: March 16th, 2011 inputs for a RASCAL
(plume modeling) projection. Considering the assumption that “all
of the fuel melted” on Unit 4 it’s no wonder this
information was not to be shared outside of the NRC.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: March 17th, 2011 “…freezing out
information from the other Commissioner offices” and ” the ET
stuck to the story that U4 SFP is likely dry.”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: March 17th, 2011 email-note that the NRC
is sticking with the pool as being empty and offer reasons why.
(below)
From the NRC documents: a March 17th “NRC INFORMATION
NOTICE” that states “Unit 4 suffered a total loss of water along
with an inability to retain water.”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: Reactor and Water Pool Release
Considerations as of March 18th, 2011. Note the peak of an incredible
400 REM/hr at the Fukushima facility and the statement that “periodic
additional releases of radioactivity are occurring as the plants vent
to atmosphere”.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: Reactor and Water Pool Release
Considerations as of March 18th, 2011 continued…”NRC believes
that water from the unit 4 storage pool completely drained and a
violent zirconium and water reaction occurred…”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: Reactor and Water Pool Release
Considerations as of March 18th, 2011 continued…Bettis Laboratory
estimates doses at 50 miles from a spent fuel pool meltdown. Evidence
throughout the NRC FOIA documents pertaining to Fukushima indicates
that estimates, assumptions and modeling was based on a
worst-case-scenario at Unit 4.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: Reactor and Water Pool Release
Considerations as of March 18th, 2011 continued. Here is why they
don’t want you to know what really happened at Fukushima Unit 4…”In
the more extreme scenarios involving significant additional core or
pool damage, there would not be sufficient time to evacuate Navy
civilians, military personnel, and their dependents to avoid
the higher exposure levels discussed above.”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: an email from March 18th, 2011…”Proposal
to handle dried spent fuel pool.docx”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: emails from March 18th, 2011 show
concern for the duration that fuel rods have been left to cool in the
spent fuel pool. Fuel rods that are a fresh offload are much
hotter than fuel rods that have cooled for 2 or more years. Hotter
fuel is naturally more dangerous if coolant levels drop or if a
spent fuel pool drains out entirely.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: evidence of a fresh offload of hot fuel
into the Unit 4 spent fuel pool.
(below) Cover-page
for NRC’s “Waste Confidence Generic Environmental Impact
Statement” NUREG-2157 for the next screencapture.
(below)
From NRC’s ”Waste Confidence Generic Environmental Impact
Statement” NUREG-2157…’time-to-release’ could be less than 10
hours if fuel has had less than 2 years to cool.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: March 18th brief: Unit 4 “pool may be
dry; damage to fuel rods suspected”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: March 18th, 2011…the source term
provided to NARAC (does plume modeling) includes the assumption
that ”100% of the total spent fuel was released to the
atmosphere from Unit 4.”
Note the flawed modeling based on a
limited 96 hour release. Measured plume maps found in the NRC FOIA
documents prove that emissions were ongoing beyond the month of
March, 2011.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: a March 18th, 2011 email with a
reference to then NRC Chairman Jaczko’s testimony that SFP 4 was
dry. Jaczko’s information was derived from NRC officials that were
‘embedded’ with TEPCO, Conti and the Government of Japan.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: a March 18th, 2011 email showing concern
for the spacing of hotter fuel rods in the Unit 4 spent fuel pool. If
freshly offloaded rods are clumped together, it makes a low or no
coolant situation exponentially worse. “Checker-boarding” stores
hot fuel rods next to cool fuel rods to even out the heat.
(below)
From the NRC’s NUREG-2157: hot fuel rods stored in close proximity
could allow the “runaway oxidation reaction to spread”. This is
known as a “propagating zirconium cladding fire” or a “zirc
fire”.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: a March 29th, 2011 email showing the
‘perfect storm’ for the Unit 4 spent fuel pool: full core offload
about 120 days ago, no checker-boarding of hotter fuel, structural
damage, dry pool and “cladding/water” reaction.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: cover-page for a summary of the Chief
Cabinet Secretary Edano’s press briefing of the 19th of March,
2011. Note the colored chart found below indicates that the Unit 4
spent fuel pool is “now in preparation for filling the water”.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: a March 19th email from former American
Nuclear Society President William Burchill asking relevant questions…
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: saltwater injection to the Unit 4 spent
fuel pool did not begin until March 20th, 2011 due to access problems
at the Fukushima facility. Prior to the 20th of March, helicopter
water drops and water cannons, both labeled ineffective by NRC
officials, were the only means by which TEPCO could attempt to
cool the reactors and spent fuel pools.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: cover-page for the next series of
screencaptures taken from March 20th, 2011 teleconference calls.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: mention of ‘signal events’ from Unit
3 and Unit 4. TEPCO’s cover-story was that the March 15th event was
a ‘lube oil fire’. NRC officials disputed TEPCO’s
contention/evidence about the ‘lube oil fire’ just as they did
with TEPCO’s video ‘evidence’ of water in the spent fuel
pool of Unit 4.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: The concern with Unit 4
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: “…the Japanese, they just grilled us
non-stop…”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: On the Unit 4 spent fuel pool “…they’re
at a loss what to do.”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: John Monninger on Unit 4 “…spent
fuel pool…going through the floor…”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: Brian McDermott on the Unit 4 spent fuel
pool “…people are worrying that that stuff has maybe melted
through that concrete floor.”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: Marty Virgilio on Unit 4 spent fuel pool
“…I don’t see how there could be possibly water left in there.”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: Dave Skeen on Unit 4 spent fuel pool
“…we’ve never seen any, any kind of steam or vapor coming out
of Unit 4.”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: an email from March 20th, 2011 from
Yama-Yamaguchi and a stunning admission ”We will be closed
1F-1 to 1F-4 permanently” and “we should have more strong
emergency redundant cooling system required for fule pool…”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: an email from Brian Sheron, NRC’s
Director of the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, in
regards to some questions from Congressional staff. It appears as if
someone was showing interest as to why the NRC decided the melted
fuel rods would not ablate (burn through) through the concrete floor
of the spent fuel pool.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: an email from March 21st, 2011 about the
Unit 4 spent fuel pool “the one that they’ve had trouble keeping
covered”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: cover-page for March 23rd, 2011
teleconference calls…
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: March 23rd, 2011 and TEPCO
is trying another scheme in an attempt to get closer to the
pool with a 50-meter boom truck…
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: NRC officials have problems with TEPCO’s
thermal signature…
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: March 23rd, 2011 water drops on spent
fuel pool #4 continue with no change to external dose.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: NRC Officials discuss the ‘bounding
analysis’ that includes 100% of the Unit 4 spent fuel pool.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: March 23rd, 2011…Robert Lewis,
Director of NRC’s Office of Preparedness and Response, on a NARAC
plume/dose model “It also includes I think a large fraction 100
percent of Unit 4 which we know has already had some release.”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: March 23rd, 2011…NRC officials unable
to take the Unit 4 spent fuel pool “off the table” as a source
term (radioactive emission)
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: seawater injection to the Unit 4 spent
fuel pool from the 24th to 25th of March, 2011 causes “white
smoke”.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: an email from March 28th, 2011
calculations show that TEPCO is losing water in a 1 to 22 ratio in
the spent fuel pool of Unit 4. Without leak a 44.60 inch increase in
water height should have occurred after adding 125 tons of water.
TEPCO numbers show a mere 2 inch rise in coolant height after adding
125 tons of water.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: a March 28th, 2011 email evidence
that some were questioning an NRC technical opinion that
criticality in the Unit 4 spent fuel pool (probably re-criticality at
this point if you consider the evidence already put forth in this
article) is unlikely based on the presence of “low density racks of
borated stainless steel”. Note that the Unit 4 racks were not
borated. Also note the reference to 204 fresh fuel assemblies and
“fuel damage due to uncovery’.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: the effects of pumping seawater in a
reactor or spent fuel pool after a meltdown…hot aqueous chloride
would cause stress corrosion cracking of the stainless steel cladding
and piping etc.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: March 29th, 2011 from an NRC brief…”…no
access [to U-4] due to dose rates.” High dose rates=no
repairs/countermeasures.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: GE had “first hand observations”
based on “eye-witness accounts” from the refueling floor of
the Unit 4 spent fuel pool when the earthquake struck.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: March 31st email indicating that a note
about the Unit 4 SFP that was in an earlier report is now missing
from an updated report…but was the “differing information about
water levels” ever resolved?
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: March 31st, 2011…an email that
disputes then Chairman Gregory Jaczko’s statement to the ‘Deputies
meeting’ that the Unit 4 spent fuel pool was full of water.
Jaczko’s statement from the 30th of March, 2011, as indicated in
this email, contradicts his own from March 15th, 2011.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: an April 4th, 2011 email discussing the
“junk-shot” that will patch “the Leak at Fukushima”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: an email from April 6th, 2011 in regards
to a presentation for the “European Melcore User Group”…one of
the key points “…there was a leak from the pool which depleted
the water.”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: an April 6th, 2011 email…”Over
the last few days, the makeup to the Unit 4 SFP has not been
sufficient to offset TEPCO’s calculated losses from steaming.”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: April 6th, 2011…Unit 4 spent fuel pool
cooling is “challenged” and integrity has “failed”.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: April 7th, 2011 ”ongoing
activity” is “not intended to be shared with other stakeholders
without Executive Team approval.” Note that as of April 7th,
2011 officials are still considering the sand and lead ‘slurry’
additive to the Unit 4 spent fuel pool as a possibility.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: April 8th status update of Unit 4.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: an April 12th email from Per Peterson
from Berkeley.edu that disputes TEPCO’s temperature reading of the
Unit 4 spent fuel pool.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: another email from Per Peterson from
Berkeley.edu disputing TEPCO’s temperature levels of the unit 4
spent fuel pool and stating that “The evidence is beginning to
accumulate that the water level on March 12 was already low…”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: excellent questions that dispute more of
TEPCO’s claims about the Unit 4 spent fuel pool.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: an April 15th email in regards to the
TEPCO claim that the spent fuel is undamaged and that “This is a
more positive view than yesterday’s statement that damage occurred
to some fuel rods.”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: April 16th status update of Unit 4.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: a Monday April 18th, 2011 email in
regards to TEPCO’s “Roadmap towards Restoration”…note comment
number 4.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: April 22nd status on Unit 4.
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: April 28th…TEPCO, possibly the world’s
worst flip-floppers, now admit publicly that a potential leak in the
spent fuel pool of Unit 4 may exist.
(below) An
excerpt from the Robert
Alvarez Study titled ”Spent Nuclear Fuel Pools in the U.S.:
Reducing the Deadly Risks of Storage”.
What you need to know about spent fuel pool fires…
“In
the summer of 2002, the Institute for Policy Studies helped organize
a working group including experts from from academia, the nuclear
industry, former government officials, and non-profit research groups
to perform in in-depth study of the vulnerabilities of spent power
reactor fuel pools to terrorist attacks. By January 2003, our study
was completed and accepted for publication in the peer-review
journal Science
and Global
Security We
warned that U.S. spent fuel pools were vulnerable to acts of terror.
The drainage of a pool might cause a catastrophic radiation fire,
which could render an area uninhabitable much greater than that
created by the Chernobyl accident.~
In
addition to terrorist acts, there are several events could cause a
loss of pool water, including leakage, evaporation, siphoning,
pumping, aircraft impact, earthquake, the accidental or deliberate
drop of a fuel transport cask, reactor failure, or an explosion
inside or Spent Nuclear Fuel Pools in the U.S.: Reducing the Deadly
Effects of Storageoutside the pool building. Industry officials
maintain that personnel would have sufficient time to provide an
alternative cooling system before the spent fuel caught fire. But if
the water level dropped to just a few feet above the spent fuel, the
radiation doses in the pool building would be lethal — as was
demonstrated by the loss of water in at least two spent fuel pools at
the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear power station.
The
NRC and nuclear industry consultants disputed the paper, which
prompted Congress to ask the National Academy of Sciences to sort out
this controversy. In 2004, the Academy reported that U.S. pools were
vulnerable to terrorist attack and to catastrophic fires. According
the Academy:
“A
loss-of-pool-coolant event resulting from damage or collapse of the
pool could havesevere consequences…It is not prudent to dismiss
nuclear plants, including spent fuel storage facilities as
undesirable targets for terrorists…under some conditions, a
terrorist attack that partially or completely drained a spent fuel
pool could lead to a propagating zirconium cladding fire and release
large quantities of radioactive materials to the environment…Such
fires would create thermal plumes that could potentially transport
radioactive aerosols hundreds of miles downwind under appropriate
atmospheric conditions.”
The
NRC’s response to this was to attempt to block the release of the
Academy’s report.”
(below)
From the NRC ‘s NUREG-2157…”the NRC confirmed that the overall
risks oassociated with these types of accidents remain low because
the spent fuel pool loss-of-coolant event probability is low (NRC
2001)” and “…no new information has emerged that would cause
the NRC to question the results of this study.”
(below)
From the NRC’s NUREG-2157: causes of a spent fuel pool fire…
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: Gary Holahan, Deputy Director for the
Office of New Reactors , makes a stunning admission in response to
President Obama’s directive of the NRC to conduct a
comprehensive review the domestic fleet of NPPs : “…we
likely will need to re-visit the issue of non-seismically qualified
SFPs [in the US]…of which I recall there are many.”
(below)
From the NRC FOIA documents: from a March 21st email on Fukushima
Unit 4 “…the melt would be retained in the spent fuel
pool.”
(below)
From the NRC’s NUREG-2157: decay times of less than 2 years (fuel
rods that have cooled less than 2 years and are still
hot) ”time-of-release” (time to release radiation) could be
less than 10 hours. If the fuel rods have cooled longer than 2 years
it could take longer than 10 hours…
THE
END
Link
to the NRC FOIA documents pertaining to
Fukushima: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/foia/japan-foia-info.html
Link
to NRC FOIA document on Unit 4 and the TEPCO
video:http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1205/ML12052A108.pdf
Link
to my book “Something
Wicked This Way Comes: The story of Plume-Gate, the world’s
largest, provable cover-up”
Hatrick
Penry wishes to thank Shazzam and MB for their assistance in
researching the NRC FOIA documents pertaining to Fukushima without
which these works would not be possible~HP
Debunking
Fukushima Unit 4...again
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.