This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Arnie Gundersen Interview: The Dangers Of Fukushima Are Worse And Longer-lived Than We Think
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
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)
»
- 21429 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
It's bata love. It gets in your food your drink and your air.
You can run but not hide.
"Where are you going to run; where are you going to hid? No where because there is no where to run to."
-Body Sntchers.
Amazon, South Africa, Deep Antarctica.
Vary few have no trade with ships of the North Pacific. Vary few have anything but trade with those who do have trade with the NP.
Maybe that one tribe in the Amazon or maybe a tribe in Africa will still have un-mutated, un-corrupted genes.
Most likely if you have contect with the outside world even in the south; given the winds and the water. You too maybe a mutant.
Welcome mutants. Its not you its your rotting flesh that puts off the ladies. :P
I surmised very early on that this would be "worse than Chernobyl," simply because of the amount of nuclear material and the rate at which the situation deteriorated at the beginning.
The problem is, it gets harder and harder to remedy the situation, as radiation makes it eventually impossible, for even robots to enter the environment for a long period of time.
It's possible the situation will get worse (huge geyser like releases), but it's also possible it will stay at about this level of badness (which is awful).
Now, can someone tell me why this thing won't be smoldering for the next 1,000 years? Seriously. Won't it just sit around giving off heat and radioactivity for a very long time? That's the ramification of having tons of the most energy dense substance in the known universe.
Hopefully someone can devise something clever in the next year that will process the radioactive waste water and mitigate the radioactive steam.
Your a bright guy ive read some of your posts.
Robots? Maybe? Numbers and money determines there effectiveness. Small cell size robots (nano-bots) can ( with the right hardware/softeware.) seek, contain and detain radiation.
Problems are legion.
This is a problem smart people can solve if given freedom and unlimited access to funding. Sure most of the Phds are grade A (assholes and should be shot on site) but even some of the worst in humanity (in the science field know that if you are proven wrong, you can't be right.) Please know this.
That gives logic and reason just enough breathing room that progress can be made even threw the worse of humanites EGO.
So bring a chainsaw your going to need it. :)
I find myself avoiding this thread. Reality is upon me and now I must face it.
I have an idea? Quit whining, and bury that radioactive piece of antiquated JUNK, and lets move on.
Mother Nature gave us radiation, lets EXPLORE SPACE!
I agree and i even came up with a plan. Because im like that.
Mars is the safest. Of the now 8 planets. A base can be used as a jump site for an: event-horison-gravity-well-bypass device.
Lots of metal on Mars and few rules (Yeeha).
But for the last 60years its been "scientist on tap, not on top"
- I forget what stupid said that, but im sure you can google it.
When men of science need to slit each others throat for a limited grant, its not worth being in the field.
Pluto will always be my favorite 9'th Disney Character. Thanks for the JUNK.
Is this article a hint of X-men origins probability- the movie was out today and the claim was a nuclear reaction created a gene mutation and voila! X-men. I think its a conspiracy as X-men are now imminent! And you thought hollywood wouldn't expose it!
homosapien to homosuperior
Yeah, I'm a comic book geek.
#Fukushima I Accident: Tellurium-132 Was Detected on March 12 Morning, 6 Kilometers from the Plant, NISA Now Admits"Telluriuim-132 was detected 6 kilometers northwest of Fukushima I Nuke Plant in Namie-machi in the morning of March 12.
That's before the Reactor 1's reactor building blew up (March 12 late afternoon), and even before TEPCO managed to do the venting (March 12 early afternoon) for the Reactor 1.
Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, regulator for the nuclear industry, decided to sit on the data for 2 months and 3 weeks. Agency spokesman Nishiyama's excuse? "It never occurred to us to disclose the data."
...
By the way, University of California Berkeley was detecting tellurium-132 in the air from March 18 to March 29. Is it any wonder that it was detected at a location 6 kilometers from the plant, when it was detected across the Pacific Ocean?
Tellurium-132's half-life is 3.2 days."
Uh oh.
The parties at Berkeley are wild. Tellurium is the least worrisome thing you can inhale there.
Well here is another conspiracy I'd like to explore. If Chris Martenson thinks this thing is so bad, why is he bothering to collect money from people to listen to the last half of the interview (what people can do in response to this diaster)?
If Fukushima is that bad - i.e it results in essentially ending Japan, then collecting fiat from people isn't going to do him much good. If Japan really is fucked, we are all fucked even if the radiation doesn't make its way all around the world. Japanese entities are amongst the largest US debt-buyers and holders. They are also major counterparties for scores of trading firms around the globe. Those extra fees aren't going do much for Martenson if this plays out like some are fearing. He should make the whole piece available for free.
Maybe he is collecting money to buy or long-term lease property in Argentina or some other South American country...
:)
No, its more normalcy bias at work. This story is a big one for blogs like ZH and enenews. Its generating a great deal of traffic for these sites and so they are trying to make cesium-flavored hay while the sun is out.
Frankly, I know one thing for certain about this whole mess. Nobody out there knows anything. Not Arnie, not other nuclear experts, not the Japanese, not world politicians and certainly not TEPCO. Nobody really has a handle on how bad this will get and what it will mean for the residents of Fukushima, Japan or the rest of the globe. We are in comletely uncharted territory. Forecasting outcomes is kind of fruitless when we don't even have facts about the current conditions at the plant.
That's why we have this post on Friday night, with a link to Martenson's premium content. Because even smart guys like the Tylers and Martenson know that if things don't turn out to be that bad (for whatever reason), they at least made money off of this. God bless them too.
" Nobody out there knows anything. Not Arnie, not other nuclear experts, not the Japanese, not world politicians and certainly not TEPCO. Nobody really has a handle on how bad this will get and what it will mean for the residents of Fukushima, Japan or the rest of the globe."
What do you want to know?
You just lost 20 years of your life your children 30-40. How much do you really want to know? Go ask a cancer ward.
Really go visit a terminal cancer ward and see what you and your children face.
Otherwise drink, purge and dream a good dream that can't be and never was.
I don't know where you get your numbers from. They might as well be from the captcha. How did you arrive at these estimates for the cancer effects?
That said, I am taking your second piece of advice. Tonight I will have a good meal and some nice wine (bottled well before March of this year of course). I have no doubt that some people may be severely impacted by this. I also don't doubt that people in Japan may die as a result of this. But we have no data on this yet. For a site that features a lot of traders, there sure is a lot of speculation based on little to no hard data. That's not trading, that's playing Russian roulette.
You should check out the death tole from those poor brainwashed soldiers told by the chaplin, who did not know anything, that watching the nuclear tests of the 50 done in the south west us was ok.
They all died young. So the data is there. The results are in.
When the barriers are down
and the signals are flashing
and the whistle is blowing in vane
but you stay on the tracks
ignoring the facts
well you can't blame the wreck on the train
Don McLean
Check out the teapot experiment. The genie is out of the bottle.
this is just garbage
Oh and check this out. I was told by someone today that things were fine in Japan because they had a colleague with family over there who aren't the least bit concerned. Normalcy bias is a fucking bitch:
http://www.falloutphilippines.blogspot.com/
The body you inhabit is the anchor and house for you to be, TO BE. To be here on the material plane and learn what you are. So far been out of this carcass a few times and learned that i am a point of awareness in space and time and beyond. i also gather one must be selfaware, control the flow of thought or put it aside, manage ones emotions and keep a balance in all things. one of the bigger keys appears to be the ability to FOCUS ones ATTENTION. And not waste too much LIMITED TIME. imagination and love also play a huge part. I have seen more than i can comprehend and put intelligent words to. I do get that those who are asleep on earth, will also be asleep in the next life. there is no hurry, fear not results.
I am essentially waiting for the Paradoy videos to hit Y Tube showing how Hitler Discovers FuKu has melted down.
It's going to take a long time to clean up this mess. (Duh...) However what will not be realized is the extent of the totality of wasted motion, irrevelant all is well by the media and the People themselves who are unaware of the scale of the fallout. To all intents and purposes, the Japanese are now living in a post nuclear world where radition determines what must be done according to the old cold war Civil Defense information that is still in some libararys.
Pardon my spelling and my rather loose focus, meds are not quite what they are tonight.
Cheers.
Meanwhile another nuclear experiment continues in japan. It's called drop it in the core have it melt and not be able to get it back out or get the lid back on.
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20110524p2g00m0dm067000c.html
Oh also. When something like this happens and it goes completely ignored by everyone you know things are bad.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gpl3VK3dl7I
My Spouse is the only one so far other than my Brother who understands the difficulties facing us in the near future. The rest of the family could not give a damn (Or even most of the Church either) and don't prepare while there is time to do so.
I am totally convinced the entire County is intent on walking themselves blindly off the cliff and fall into the Abyss while going about thier own selfish, self centered, unemployed lives....
I only add that I would love to see how the Experts solve THIS problem underway at Fuku. And if they do.... I will be the first to celebrate.
I just flew yesterday, for the first time, with my geiger counter.
OMFG
It generally sits at 0.07ms to 0.12ms for my normal (European) background radiation reading.
When it came out of the the xray machine it was showing 0.19 but was dropping fast as I picked it up. I guess it had had 30 seconds chill time from its zap by the time I picked it up.....it dropped to 0.05 as it got itself back to background....
I then got on the plane and forgot I had it on until the the threshold alarm went off.....I have it set at 0.25ms and the alarm goes off it thrshhold is crossed by 0.1....... so it hit 0.35ms pretty much as we hit crusing altitude, then steadily dropped as we descended.
This was only a one hour flight, so we prob didnt even gonvery high!
I guess my question, is is this a higher reading than would normally be expected when flying in Europe..... and Is it more dangerous to fly and be up in the gamma muck now than it was in February??!!!!!
quick question...are you freakin stupid?
head in sand, not listening, can't hear you, but fluffy clouds and honey sticks to you too.
chirp, chirp.
You did good.
It was a very strong "Tipping Point" for me when I saw the pictures of one of our Aircraft Carriers deploying the anti radiation wash down system. To me that is pretty damn serious.
Now consider the number of xrays, ct's, mri's etc etc etc etc. Then add the cigerettes etc. Even nursing a spouse through cancer as she is irradiated until her skin turned red. It probably cause her to be radioactive too.
I got a little Rad sniffer on my keychain, it has not chirped yet. So far so good.
sorry wrong posting.
blah blah blah
no productive contributions in all this crap
just some light weights trying to sound important
am a light weight myself
thought there might be some substance here
but all i found was opra winfrey stuff
wish you well and so long