Arnie Gundersen Interview: The Dangers Of Fukushima Are Worse And Longer-lived Than We Think

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Chris Martenson

Exclusive Arnie Gundersen Interview: The Dangers Of Fukushima Are Worse And Longer-lived Than We Think

"I have said it's worse than Chernobyl and I’ll stand by that. There was an enormous amount of radiation given out in the first two to three weeks of the event. And add the wind and blowing in-land. It could very well have brought the nation of Japan to its knees. I mean, there is so much contamination that luckily wound up in the Pacific Ocean as compared to across the nation of Japan - it could have cut Japan in half. But now the winds have turned, so they are heading to the south toward Tokyo and now my concern and my advice to friends that if there is a severe aftershock and the Unit 4 building collapses, leave. We are well beyond where any science has ever gone at that point and nuclear fuel lying on the ground and getting hot is not a condition that anyone has ever analyzed."

So cautions Arnie Gundersen, widely-regarded to be the best nuclear analyst covering Japan's Fukushima disaster. The situation on the ground at the crippled reactors remains precarious and at a minimum it will be years before it can be hoped to be truly contained. In the near term, the reactors remain particularly vulnerable to sizable aftershocks, which still have decent probability of occuring. On top of this is a growing threat of 'hot particle' contamination risk to more populated areas as weather patterns shift with the typhoon season and groundwater seepage.

In Part 1 of this interview, Chris and Arnie recap the damage wrought to Fukushima's reactors by the tsunami, the steps TEPCO is taking to address it, and the biggest operational risks that remain at this time. In Part 2, they dive into the health risks still posed by the situation there and what individuals should do (including those on the US west coast) if it worsens.

Click here to listen to Part 1 of Chris' interview with Arnie Gundersen (runtime 36m:31s)

Report a Problem Playing the Podcast

Or start reading the transcript below:

Chris Martenson: Let’s just briefly review – if we could just synopsize – I know you can do this better than anybody. What happened at Fukushima – what happened and I really would like to take the opportunity to talk about this kind of specifically, like where we are with each one of the reactors. So first of all, this disaster – how did it happen? Was it just bad engineering, was it really bad luck with the tsunami? How did this even initiate – something we were told again and again – something that couldn’t happen seems to have happened?

Arnie Gundersen: Well the little bit of physics here is that even when a reactor shuts down; it continues to churn out heat. Now, only five percent of the original amount of heat, but when you are cranking out millions of horsepower of heat, five percent is still a lot. So you have to keep a nuclear reactor cool after it shuts down. Now, what happened at Fukushima was it went into what is called a “station blackout,” and people plan for that. That means there is no power to anything except for batteries. And batteries can’t turn the massive motors that are required to cool the nuclear reactor. So the plan is in a station blackout is that somehow or another you get power back in four or five hours. That didn’t happen at Fukushima because the tidal wave, the tsunami, was so great that it overwhelmed their diesels and it overwhelmed something called “service water 2” But in any event, they couldn’t get any power to the big pumps.

Now, was it foreseeable? They were prepared for a seven-meter tsunami, about twenty-two feet. The tsunami that hit was something in excess of ten and quite likely fifteen meters, so somewhere between thirty-five and forty-five feet. They were warned that the tsunami that they were designed against was too low. They were warned for at least ten years and I am sure that there were people back before that. So would they have been prepared for one this big? I don’t know, but certainly, they were unprepared for even a tsunami of lesser magnitude.

Chris Martenson: So the tsunami came along and just swamped the systems and I heard that there were some other design elements there too, such as potentially the generators were in an unsafe spot or that some of their electrical substations all happened to be in the basement, so they kind of got taken out all at once. Now, here’s what I heard – the initial reports when they came out said, “Oh, nothing to fear, we all went into SCRAM,” which is some kind of emergency shutdown and they said everything is SCRAMed and I knew that we were in trouble in less than twenty-four hours, they talked about how they were pumping seawater in. Which I assume, by the time you are pumping seawater you have a pretty clear indication from the outside that there is something really quite wrong with this story, is that true?

Arnie Gundersen: Yes. Seawater and as anybody who has ever had a boat on the ocean would know, saltwater and stainless steel do not get along very well. Saltwater and stainless steel at five hundred degrees don’t get along very well at all. You are right, they had some single points of vulnerability – the hole in the armor and the diesels were one of them. But even if the diesels were up high, they would have been in trouble because of those service water pumps I talked about. And they got wiped out and those pumps are the pumps that cool the diesels. So even if the diesels were runnable, cooling water that runs through the diesels would have been taken out by the tsunami anyway. So it's kind of a false argument to blame the diesels.

Chris Martenson: Okay, so take us through. Reactor number one, it was revealed I think about a week ago now that they finally came to the revelation that I think some of us had come to independently, that there had been something more than a partial meltdown, maybe even a complete meltdown. What is your assessment of reactor one and where is it right now?

Arnie Gundersen: When you see hydrogen explosions, that means that the outside of the fuel has exceeded 2,200 degrees and the inside is well over 3,500 degrees. The fuel gets brittle, it burns, and then it plops to the bottom of the nuclear reactor in a molten blob like lava. It was pretty clear to a lot of people, including apparently to the NRC, but they weren’t telling people back in March, that that had occurred in reactor one. There was essentially a blob of lava on the bottom of the nuclear reactor. So I have to separate this – a nuclear reactor - and that is inside of a containment. So there is still one more barrier here. But the problem is that the reactor had boiled dry and they were using fire pumps connected to the ocean to pump saltwater into the reactor. Now, if this thing were individual tubes, the water could get around the uranium and completely cool it. But when it's a blob at the bottom of the reactor, it can only get to the top surface and that would cause it to begin to meltdown. Now, on these boiling water reactors, there are about seventy holes in the bottom of the reactor where the control rods come in and I suspect that those holes were essentially the weak link that caused this molten mass. Now it's 5,000 degrees at the center, even though the outside may be touching water, the inside of this molten mass is 5,000 degrees. It melts through and lies on the bottom of the containment.

That’s where we are today. We have no reactor essentially, just a big pressure cooker. The molten uranium is on the bottom of the containment. It spreads out at that point, because the floor is flat. And I don’t think it's going to melt its way through the concrete floor. It may gradually over time; but the damage is already done because the containment has cracks in it and it's pretty clear that it is leaking. So you put water in the top. And the plan had never been to put water in the top and let it run out the bottom. That is not the preferred way of cooling a nuclear reactor in an accident. But you are putting water in the top and it's running out the bottom and it's going out through cracks in the containment, after touching directly uranium and plutonium and cesium and strontium and is carrying all those radioactive isotopes out as liquids and gases into the environment.

Chris Martenson: So this melting that happened, is this just a function of the decay heat at this point in time? We’re not speculating that there has been any sort of re-criticality or any other what we might call a nuclear reaction – this is just decay heat from the isotopes that are in there from prior nuclear activity – those are just decaying and giving off that heat. That’s sufficient to get to 5,000 degrees?

Arnie Gundersen: Yes, once the uranium melts into a blob at these low enrichments, four and five percent, it can’t make a new criticality. If criticality is occurring on the site - and there might be, because there is still iodine 131, which is a good indication - it is not coming from the Unit 1 core and it's not coming from the Unit 2 core, because those are both blobs at the bottom of the containment.

Chris Martenson: All right, so we have these blobs, they’ve somehow escaped the primary reactor pressure vessel, which is that big steel thing and now they are on the relatively flat floor of the containment – they concrete piece – and you say Unit 2 is roughly the same story as Unit 1 – where’s Unit 3 in this story?

Arnie Gundersen: Unit 3 may not have melted through and that means that some of the fuel certainly is lying on the bottom, but it may not have melted through and some of the fuel may still look like fuel, although it is certainly brittle. And it's possible that when the fuel is in that configuration that you can get a re-criticality. It's also possible in any of the fuel pools, one, two, three, and four pools, that you could get a criticality, as well. So there’s been frequent enough high iodine indications to lead me to believe that either one of the four fuel pools or the Unit 3 reactor is in fact, every once in a while starting itself up and then it gets to a point where it gets so hot that it shuts itself down and it kind of cycles. It kind of breathes, if you will.

To read the rest of the transcript to Part 1, click here.

 

Click here to access Part 2 of this interview (free executive summary, enrollment required for full access)

On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Adam Taggart wrote:
Tyler -

We just posted a very in-depth exclusive interview with Arnie Gunderson. While forgotten by the mainstreet media, the risks of Fukushima are still very real, large & precarious.

http://www.chrismartenson.com/blog/exclusive-arnie-gundersen-interview-d...

HTML below. --tx, Adam

"I have said it's worse than Chernobyl and I’ll stand by that. There was an enormous amount of radiation given out in the first two to three weeks of the event. And add the wind and blowing in-land. It could very well have brought the nation of Japan to its knees. I mean, there is so much contamination that luckily wound up in the Pacific Ocean as compared to across the nation of Japan - it could have cut Japan in half. But now the winds have turned, so they are heading to the south toward Tokyo and now my concern and my advice to friends that if there is a severe aftershock and the Unit 4 building collapses, leave. We are well beyond where any science has ever gone at that point and nuclear fuel lying on the ground and getting hot is not a condition that anyone has ever analyzed."

So cautions Arnie Gundersen, widely-regarded to be the best nuclear analyst covering Japan's Fukushima disaster. The situation on the ground at the crippled reactors remains precarious and at a minimum it will be years before it can be hoped to be truly contained. In the near term, the reactors remain particularly vulnerable to sizable aftershocks, which still have decent probability of occuring. On top of this is a growing threat of 'hot particle' contamination risk to more populated areas as weather patterns shift with the typhoon season and groundwater seepage.

In Part 1 of this interview, Chris and Arnie recap the damage wrought to Fukushima's reactors by the tsunami, the steps TEPCO is taking to address it, and the biggest operational risks that remain at this time. In Part 2, they dive into the health risks still posed by the situation there and what individuals should do (including those on the US west coast) if it worsens.

Click the play button below to listen to Part 1 of Chris' interview with Arnie Gundersen (runtime 36m:31s):

[swf file="http://media.chrismartenson.com/audio/arnie-gundersen-2011-06-03-part1.m..."]

Download/Play the Podcast

Report a Problem Playing the Podcast

Or start reading the transcript below:

Chris Martenson: Let’s just briefly review – if we could just synopsize – I know you can do this better than anybody. What happened at Fukushima – what happened and I really would like to take the opportunity to talk about this kind of specifically, like where we are with each one of the reactors. So first of all, this disaster – how did it happen? Was it just bad engineering, was it really bad luck with the tsunami? How did this even initiate – something we were told again and again – something that couldn’t happen seems to have happened?

Arnie Gundersen: Well the little bit of physics here is that even when a reactor shuts down; it continues to churn out heat. Now, only five percent of the original amount of heat, but when you are cranking out millions of horsepower of heat, five percent is still a lot. So you have to keep a nuclear reactor cool after it shuts down. Now, what happened at Fukushima was it went into what is called a “station blackout,” and people plan for that. That means there is no power to anything except for batteries. And batteries can’t turn the massive motors that are required to cool the nuclear reactor. So the plan is in a station blackout is that somehow or another you get power back in four or five hours. That didn’t happen at Fukushima because the tidal wave, the tsunami, was so great that it overwhelmed their diesels and it overwhelmed something called “service water 2” But in any event, they couldn’t get any power to the big pumps.

Now, was it foreseeable? They were prepared for a seven-meter tsunami, about twenty-two feet. The tsunami that hit was something in excess of ten and quite likely fifteen meters, so somewhere between thirty-five and forty-five feet. They were warned that the tsunami that they were designed against was too low. They were warned for at least ten years and I am sure that there were people back before that. So would they have been prepared for one this big? I don’t know, but certainly, they were unprepared for even a tsunami of lesser magnitude.

Chris Martenson: So the tsunami came along and just swamped the systems and I heard that there were some other design elements there too, such as potentially the generators were in an unsafe spot or that some of their electrical substations all happened to be in the basement, so they kind of got taken out all at once. Now, here’s what I heard – the initial reports when they came out said, “Oh, nothing to fear, we all went into SCRAM,” which is some kind of emergency shutdown and they said everything is SCRAMed and I knew that we were in trouble in less than twenty-four hours, they talked about how they were pumping seawater in. Which I assume, by the time you are pumping seawater you have a pretty clear indication from the outside that there is something really quite wrong with this story, is that true?

Arnie Gundersen: Yes. Seawater and as anybody who has ever had a boat on the ocean would know, saltwater and stainless steel do not get along very well. Saltwater and stainless steel at five hundred degrees don’t get along very well at all. You are right, they had some single points of vulnerability – the hole in the armor and the diesels were one of them. But even if the diesels were up high, they would have been in trouble because of those service water pumps I talked about. And they got wiped out and those pumps are the pumps that cool the diesels. So even if the diesels were runnable, cooling water that runs through the diesels would have been taken out by the tsunami anyway. So it's kind of a false argument to blame the diesels.

Chris Martenson: Okay, so take us through. Reactor number one, it was revealed I think about a week ago now that they finally came to the revelation that I think some of us had come to independently, that there had been something more than a partial meltdown, maybe even a complete meltdown. What is your assessment of reactor one and where is it right now?

Arnie Gundersen: When you see hydrogen explosions, that means that the outside of the fuel has exceeded 2,200 degrees and the inside is well over 3,500 degrees. The fuel gets brittle, it burns, and then it plops to the bottom of the nuclear reactor in a molten blob like lava. It was pretty clear to a lot of people, including apparently to the NRC, but they weren’t telling people back in March, that that had occurred in reactor one. There was essentially a blob of lava on the bottom of the nuclear reactor. So I have to separate this – a nuclear reactor - and that is inside of a containment. So there is still one more barrier here. But the problem is that the reactor had boiled dry and they were using fire pumps connected to the ocean to pump saltwater into the reactor. Now, if this thing were individual tubes, the water could get around the uranium and completely cool it. But when it's a blob at the bottom of the reactor, it can only get to the top surface and that would cause it to begin to meltdown. Now, on these boiling water reactors, there are about seventy holes in the bottom of the reactor where the control rods come in and I suspect that those holes were essentially the weak link that caused this molten mass. Now it's 5,000 degrees at the center, even though the outside may be touching water, the inside of this molten mass is 5,000 degrees. It melts through and lies on the bottom of the containment.

That’s where we are today. We have no reactor essentially, just a big pressure cooker. The molten uranium is on the bottom of the containment. It spreads out at that point, because the floor is flat. And I don’t think it's going to melt its way through the concrete floor. It may gradually over time; but the damage is already done because the containment has cracks in it and it's pretty clear that it is leaking. So you put water in the top. And the plan had never been to put water in the top and let it run out the bottom. That is not the preferred way of cooling a nuclear reactor in an accident. But you are putting water in the top and it's running out the bottom and it's going out through cracks in the containment, after touching directly uranium and plutonium and cesium and strontium and is carrying all those radioactive isotopes out as liquids and gases into the environment.

Chris Martenson: So this melting that happened, is this just a function of the decay heat at this point in time? We’re not speculating that there has been any sort of re-criticality or any other what we might call a nuclear reaction – this is just decay heat from the isotopes that are in there from prior nuclear activity – those are just decaying and giving off that heat. That’s sufficient to get to 5,000 degrees?

Arnie Gundersen: Yes, once the uranium melts into a blob at these low enrichments, four and five percent, it can’t make a new criticality. If criticality is occurring on the site - and there might be, because there is still iodine 131, which is a good indication - it is not coming from the Unit 1 core and it's not coming from the Unit 2 core, because those are both blobs at the bottom of the containment.

Chris Martenson: All right, so we have these blobs, they’ve somehow escaped the primary reactor pressure vessel, which is that big steel thing and now they are on the relatively flat floor of the containment – they concrete piece – and you say Unit 2 is roughly the same story as Unit 1 – where’s Unit 3 in this story?

Arnie Gundersen: Unit 3 may not have melted through and that means that some of the fuel certainly is lying on the bottom, but it may not have melted through and some of the fuel may still look like fuel, although it is certainly brittle. And it's possible that when the fuel is in that configuration that you can get a re-criticality. It's also possible in any of the fuel pools, one, two, three, and four pools, that you could get a criticality, as well. So there’s been frequent enough high iodine indications to lead me to believe that either one of the four fuel pools or the Unit 3 reactor is in fact, every once in a while starting itself up and then it gets to a point where it gets so hot that it shuts itself down and it kind of cycles. It kind of breathes, if you will.

To read the rest of the transcript to Part 1, click here.

 

Click here to access Part 2 of this interview (free executive summary, enrollment required for full access)

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
sdmjake's picture

Damn...just damn.

andybev01's picture

*pardon the intrusion*

How can I tell what exactly, has been 'updated' in an article? I read this story when it first was posted, then saw "New Updated" in red so I opened it again and can't tell what the new info is...

blindman's picture


thanks for pointing this out.
i have wondered many a time ....?
give us a clue like bold type?
something.

Fish Gone Bad's picture

I was kinda hoping in some sort of crossing my fingers way, that maybe the update was that everyone was joking and Japan wasn't fucked.  No such luck.  Japan is such a mess, and it is not looking any better with typhoon season.

http://www.wunderground.com/tropical/

Tyler Durden's picture

We fixed the link to the original podcast.

Thomas's picture

My link still didn't work. (BTW-I did a podcast with Chris and you didn't link it. I feel like chopped liver. I'm gonna need a shrink.)

Cheesy Bastard's picture

Totally bullish.  Unless I'm mistaken, this radiation will produce a giant lizard which will protect Japan from other giant creatures such as moths, apes, and megalons.

camaro68ss's picture

Thats good for what, 500+ points for the DOW

Cheesy Bastard's picture

At least.  Here is a 1 minute video explaining everything.  Note the number of broken windows that will need repairing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOiSU36_WTU&feature=related

divide_by_zero's picture

Yep, this all spells "investment in infrastructure", better than QE!

MrFriskles's picture

So, job creation in Japan yes?

Logans_Run's picture

Not central bankers though?

Cheesy Bastard's picture

I don't know how Godzilla would do against a giant vampire squid.  Any answer I could give would merely be speculation on my part.

knukles's picture

There's a Weather Related App for that.

Milestones's picture

Not Bankers and attorney's??      Milestones     

The Architect's picture

Bullish for live tentacle porn

cossack55's picture

"It kind of breathes, if you will."  I have found that generally speaking, nuke reactors that "breathe" will usually cause you to stop breathing.

redpill's picture

Very transitory.

cougar_w's picture

On a geological time frame, absolutely. Flash in the pan. Nothing to this at all. The islands that make up Japan will subduct under the Pacific plate and there goes your problem.

People like the excitement. But a few million years from now none of this will matter.

NotApplicable's picture

Yeah, subduct you, Fuku! (that'll teach 'em)

zeroman's picture

I heard the US Fed Reserve and the Bank of Japan will be offering a new Nuclear Reactor Bond which will be a really hot rate of return and guarantee of no default!! 

knukles's picture

Assholes at TEPCO shoulda gotten No Fault Insurance.

Al Gorerhythm's picture

I'm hearing this a lot more lately: The situation in Fukushima is stable, serious but stable". This is usually supported by: "The Japanese experts are working tirelessly to solve the problem." Lying out of both sides of their mouth. This bitch needs beheading, like yesterday. The world needs to solve this, not just Japan, and then the whole shebang needs mothballing, from mining to production. Ain't gonna be easy.

knukles's picture

Ah hah!  But now the plot thickens....
Gotta figure out which side of both mouths thay're lying out of now...

Things that go bump's picture

Nothing like that appears possible in the current climate.  Everybody seems to be so distracted about money they can't spare the attention to be worried about a little thing like maybe radiation poisoning the entire northern hemisphere.  

oldman's picture

But a few million years from now none of this will matter.

It matters now only to the species that created this disaster; for all the others it has never mattered nor will it in the future. No further comment is necessary.

I'm curious to see how this ends.


equity_momo's picture

lol quite.   in fact , if you look at this in the time frame of our galaxy's existence , its very transitory , just like our species.

PhattyBuoy's picture

I say bullshit on #3 ... if #1 & #2 are "core on the floor", then #3 damn sure is too ...

redpill's picture

Given the size of the explosion at Reactor 3, "core on the floor" is probably a best case scenario.  I wouldn't be surprised if it blew all over the place.

TomGa's picture

The #3 explosion could very well have been the fuel pool going critical. Recall that with #3 there was a hydrogen explosion followed a millisecond or so later by what appears to have been a steam explosion. Later pictures have shown a completely devastated #3 fuel pool but have also shown that the top of the #3 containment vessel is still in place. My bet is that a prompt moderated criticality caused a flash steam explosion which was somewhat contained and directed by the walls of the #3 fuel pool straight up. It's quite possible that the initial hydrogen explosion caused a rearrangement of the spent fuel racks leading to the criticality.  Pieces of spent fuel from #3 have been found up to two  miles away from the building, so I'm tending to believe this scenario.

Thus, while it's highly likely that #3 reactor is in the same state as #'s 1 and 2, at this time I don't think it was a failure of the pressure vessel that occurred in the tremedous initial blast.

 

All in all, though, Japan is still royally screwed.

cranky-old-geezer's picture

Pieces of spent fuel from #3 have been found up to two  miles away from the building, so I'm tending to believe this scenario.

If this is true (very likely), then the site is too hot to do any significant cleanup and north central Japan is fucked ...for a few thousand years anyway.

Keeping decades of spent fuel, hundreds of tons, right next to those reactors in elevated pools made of nothing more than concrete, right on top of a major tectonic plate subduction zone, will prove to be one of the most catastrophic blunders in human history.

Yes, the entire northern hemisphere might be contaminated by it.

divide_by_zero's picture

#1 radiation bouncing up and down every few days in big swings,

http://atmc.jp/plant/rad/?n=1

 

apberusdisvet's picture

The recovery pumpers need to be re-indocrinated as to how to spin the fact that it is almost all over for the world's 3rd largest economy.  DOW to 600 by Chistmas as the truth comes out about the radiation fallout over the US.

ibjamming's picture

I sure hope you're wrong... 

Laddie's picture

Did Katie Couric or Brian Williams or Dianne Sawyer talk about these?

 

April 22 OH Radiation Release, Plant Evacuation Admitted By NRC

 

Tuesday, May 10, 2011 SunHerald Biloxi-Gulfport
April tritium release from nuclear reactor still not measured
Tritium released by Grand Gulf still not measured

chunga's picture

Posting this short video again. For some reason it hit me like a ton of bricks. Includes a post made on ZH.

THE REALITY DETACHED AMERICAN

djsmps's picture

That video hits home. I can be at work, or out at a bar, and no one is aware of what is going on. If you ask them about the earthquake, they may have heard about one. Most aren't aware at all of what is going on in the MENA area and that we are involved in a war with Libya. If they are employed, they don't have a clue about the economy. I asked one person last week, an intelligent young person, if he was aware that most products were manfactured in China. He was completely unaware. But they all know the winner of Dancing With The Stars.

What happened to this country?

chunga's picture

                                                  "It is no measure of mental health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society."

                                                                           "all these are the beginning of sorrows."

                                                                                            matthew 24: 8

My attendance at Places of Worship are normally restricted to funerals. I'm starting to re-think that. Yes, there is something special about that video.

equity_momo's picture

thanks for the link. that 4 minutes might even jolt my wife into realizing life wont "just keep going on like it has"

 

sometimes i wish i was just "free and clear" and i dont mean on my house.

onthesquare's picture

did the leg work and the payback everkthing was a go to put a 10kw photovoltaic system on my roof and be payed $0.82 per kw. Government insentive with a binding contract for 20 years. Finanace, pay interest still make money. Win Win.

Needed wifes signiture. NFW!

American Idot zombie. These grapes come from Chile.

36 years and still keeping the harmony.

But when the shit hits the fan the first person to blame for her new missery will be yours truly

Yes she does need a weather man to know which way the wind blows.

 

cranky-old-geezer's picture

These ETEs (end-time events) are happening with greater frequency now, just as scripture and other ancient sources predict.

America doesn't figure prominently in end-time prophecies.  One can read out of that anything they wish.  I read out of it that America wont be a significant player on the world scene at that time. 

I believe as things get worse in America (leading to America's downfall), we'll see wives blaming husbands for their collapsing living standard, when those wives stubbornly ignored what's happening around them, choosing to believe things will go on like normal, untill reality rips those rose-colored glasses from their eyes and they panic, blaming the closest person to them, dear ole hubby.

No, there's no way I would be married these days.  As things get worse a head-in-the-sand wife would become a liability, maybe even an enemy.

And no I'm not saying all wives. I said head-in-the-sand wives.

And yes I'm sure there's some head-in-the-sand husbands out there too.

Misstrial's picture

Thank you for that link. Just underscores what I've been thinking already.

Today I read that The Bad Girls Club gets about 1.7M viewers per episode.

The consequences are going to be a lot worse than anyone has imagined....

~Misstrial

chunga's picture

You're welcome. Believe it or not I stumbled on it on a site from Taiwan while searching for something else. We all have to fight back in our own way.

LoneuhRanger's picture

Very good. Thanks for that.

Twelve tries at the sign-in captcha. I am fucking stupider than some people already here. (edit for spelling)

merehuman's picture

i felt stupid after 3 fails. You kept on, and there is the measure of your success. my hat is off to you for your stubbornness.

chunga's picture

I never log out (deliberately). Even with a calculator it's sometimes a fuss to get back in. Forgetting for a moment that I joined a whole nine weeks ago, I think it works. At times the correct solution to captcha exceeds the bucket maximum limit.

(The correct answer will absolutely not fit within the alloted space declared by an equation engineered to result in just that.)

It doesn't matter.