This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
No, Japan's Nuclear Reactors Are Not "Stable"
The Japanese government and Tepco claim that the nuclear reactors are "stable" and that radiation releases have subsided to low levels.
But world renowned physicist Michio Kaku - who studied under atom bomb developer Edward Teller - told Democracy Now today:
Tokyo Electric has been in denial, trying to downplay the full impact of this nuclear accident. However, there’s a formula, a mathematical formula, by which you can determine what level this accident is. This accident has already released something on the order of 50,000 trillion becquerels of radiation. You do the math. That puts it right smack in the middle of a level 7 nuclear accident. Still, less than Chernobyl. However, radiation is continuing to leak out of the reactors. The situation is not stable at all. So, you’re looking at basically a ticking time bomb. It appears stable, but the slightest disturbance—a secondary earthquake, a pipe break, evacuation of the crew at Fukushima—could set off a full-scale meltdown at three nuclear power stations, far beyond what we saw at Chernobyl.
***
When the utility says that things are stable, it’s only stable in the sense that you’re dangling from a cliff hanging by your fingernails. And as the time goes by, each fingernail starts to crack. That’s the situation now.
***
TEPCO is like the little Dutch boy. All of a sudden we have cracks in the dike. You put a finger here, you put a finger there. And all of a sudden, new leaks start to occur, and they’re overwhelmed.
I suggest that they be removed from leadership entirely and be put as consultants. An international team of top physicists and engineers should take over
I suggested the same thing with regards to BP during the Gulf oil spill.
»
- advertisements -
But not regular horse shit, this is the non-toxic, non-smelly barely noticable kind of horse shit. Perhaps you're referring to the bad kind. This stuffs all natural.
With all the intelligent people in the world, Why are the idiots running things?
Partly because... Atlas Shrugged.
... coming to a theater near you on April 15th, BTW.
Intelligent people are quickly shunned in alot of professional, scientific life.
Tesla, einstein and these types, could not get people to think outside the box, let alone understand.
Rockafucker said he would rather have 40,000 workers than 40,000 thinkers.
Smart people know that in most cases that money can buy you shit and maybe a little love.
Everyone has their place. Controllers know how to control, trollers know how to troll, and some people just like to the make the best out of it and have a life.
Perhaps the intelligent folks are too warn down by the idiots and gave up so that the idiots could have enough rope to hang themselves? Idiocracy.
This things about as safe and stable as someone standing in a puddle of gasoline playing with their new flint.
I am tired of hearing that there exists little to no health risks from the radiation spewing from Fukushima so I did a little research. Here is what I found:
1. Ionizing radiation is a protoypical DNA-damaging agent. (Wilson et al, 2010) 2. Cancer risks increases with iodizing radiation exposure even at low doses 3. Ionizing radiation damages DNA repair mechanisms. Thus, bodies lose the capability to repair DNA damaged by the radiation or by other mutagens 4. Cancer, birth defects, and immunological problems can thus result from the effects of exposure to low-level ionization (the birth defects research is particularly fascinating because of the role of epigenetics) 5. There appears to exist individual differences in the susceptibility to the damage causes to DNA repair mechanisms with the possibility being that some subset of the population is particularly vulnerable 6. IMPLICATIONS: EXPOSURE TO LOW LEVELS OF IONIZING RADIATION FROM FUKUSHIMA IS NOT SAFE, PARTICULARLY FOR SUB-SETS OF THE POPULATION THAT MAY BE PARTICULARLY SUSCEPTIBLE TO THE DNA-REPAIR DISRUPTIONS CAUSED BY EVEN LOW LEVELS OF IONIZING RADIATION •References •Wilson et al in 2010 essay "Inter-Individual Variatin in DNA Double-Strand Break Repair in Human Fibroplasts..." Mutation Research/Fundamental Mechanisms of Mutagenesis, vol 683, pp. 91-97 Sankaranaarayanan, K. 1999 Ionizating radiation and genetic risks X. The potential of 'disease phenotypes' of radiation-induced genetic damages in humans...Mutation Research 429, 45-83 •A.M. Kellerer, Risk estimates for radiation-induced cancer–the epidemiologicalevidence, Radiat. Environ. Biophys. 39 (2000) 17–24. •D.J. Brenner, R. Doll, D.T. Goodhead, E.J. Hall, C.E. Land, J.B. Little, J.H. Lubin, D.L.Preston, R.J. Preston, J.S. Puskin, E. Ron, R.K. Sachs, J.M. Samet, R.B. Setlow, M.Zaider, Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: assessing •what we really know, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 100 (2003) 13761–13766. •R. Wakeford, The cancer epidemiology of radiation, Oncogene 23 (2004) 6404–6428. •P. Bhatti, J.P. Struewing, B.H. Alexander, M. Hauptmann, L. Bowen, L.H. Mateus-Pereira, M.A. Pineda, S.L. Simon, R.M. Weinstock, M. Rosenstein, M. Stovall, D.L.Preston, M.S. Linet, M.M. Doody, A.J. Sigurdson, Polymorphisms in DNA repair genes, ionizing radiation exposure and risk of breast cancer in U.S. radiologic technologists, Int. J. Cancer 122 (2008) 177–182.Thank you!
+100
Great post!
Yes, I'll give +1,000 real gold-backed points plus a couple of trillion fiat Bernanke points as well ...
Not sure why peer-reviewed, scientific research not payed for by the nuclear industry would be junked? Trolls perhaps???
Payed? what is payed?
PS junked...
I blame this troll:
http://cgi.ebay.com/BURGER-KING-1993-GLOW-DARK-3-TROLL-DOLL-I-Q-/2005661...
Ha!
Trolls perhaps... but also those whose minds are devoid of critical reasoning facilities. They are thus mentally ill equiped and incapable of truly recognizing the deep shit that Japan... and potentially the World... is now in.
They simply lash out emotionally in response to what they do not wish to hear. Kinda like... Arrrghhhh!!! Junk to you... you MF'er!!!
I dated some chicks like that over the years.
you tell 'em pop, you tell 'em
I'm trying Falak... I'm trying!
So what's your take on the situation these days?
Just askin'... :)
well I sort of look at it this way; the whole Fukushima thing is a sad metaphor for the current economic crisis but like any metaphor it can only be extended so far
Of course.They are tedious however.The difference between radiation sources that are external(plane trip) vs internal(Iodine 131 in your thyroid) is also blurred or omitted.
Ingesting radioactive sources is very, very dangerous.Hence the whole Cesium 137 on farmland problem...cancer rates WILL rise.Which sucks profoundly....
Correct.
And it's even worse to inhale into your lungs.
It's like buying lottery tickets where a cancerous tumor is the prize. The chance of an individual ticket winning (risk to yourself) is very low for now... but someone(s) out there will surely win the prize!
And Fukushima has been sending 50,000 trillion Becquerels of them by airmail into the Northern hemisphere.
And as I have prognosticated before... the party is still just beginning... one month down with no stabilization in sight and substantial downside risks that could ostensibly raise the radiation levels by a power of 10^3.
Good luck (or in this lotto case Bad luck) to us all.
Especially our Japanese friends.
Having lived in Japan for 4 years it is not unusual for Kan to give the ''rally 'round the flag, boys" speech. Japan = so self sufficient in their eyes, so ingrained into following orders, so rigid in their belief system. At least when the US blew up Bikini atoll we could claim honest ignorance about the resultant environmental disaster. These bumpkins had fore-knowledge and plenty of direct warnings. Criminal.
The unwillingness to make the right choices will be crucial in this, and since there's a time lag (of several years), something that may look like defiance in the face of danger, and overcoming hardship, will be the cause of total defeat in a decade or two. Different circumstances require different types of action.
If this continues, the USA and other countries in the northern hemisphere will be forced soon to make simular descisions.
Public awareness (not hype, awareness) is crucial for survival at this point, for obvious reasons.
Yes. Dig back in ZH archives for William Banzai's post on the "Mental Castration" the japanese have agreed to. Then it's easier to see how they can keep consistently f*cking the dog on this.
Leadership?
Honest leadership?
Anyone?
"honest" and "leadership" are contradictory in any ethical society. Every individual has the right to lead his own life... lock, stock and barrel. Thus the mere mention of "leadership" admits injustice.
It is possible that this crisis will be resolved with minimum loss of life? Yes.
Is it probable?
Hopopoium at it's best, helped but some corporate media turd polish.
Of course if you wander over to Alex Jone's Prison Planet you'll see an article claiming that more than meets the eye might have been occurring at the FD plant. The claim is that a nuclear weapons program was operating under cover at FD. Interesting article that includes Lee Harvey Oswald. Can't have a better conspiracy theory.
Finding MOX (Mixed OXide) in a reactor ... a little like finding a bong in a teenager's room.
"Of course if you wander over to Alex Jone's Prison Planet you'll see an article claiming that more than meets the eye might have been occurring at the FD plant. The claim is that a nuclear weapons program was operating under cover at FD. Interesting article that includes Lee Harvey Oswald. Can't have a better conspiracy theory."
Speaking of full of horse shit, last night I heard Alex Jones on Coast explaining how the Queen of England just overthrew the Canadian government for some nefarious rreason. I won't insult your intelligence by explaining why this is bogus except to say that Her Majesty Queen Victoria gave Canada self government in 1867 and since then, no British sovereign has had any such power.
Funny, I listen to AJ all the time and have heard none of what you guys talk about. Did you know that the queen can disolve Canadian Parliament at her pleasure and has done it several times? Perhaps somebody else's intelligence needs to be insulted a little bit. As far as I'm concerned, the best sources are ZH, AJ, and Drudge. If you wanna know what's going on these are the sites to go to.
When FD #3 blew up, AJ reported fuel rods blown up in the air and scattered all over, and no one else reported it. 3+ weeks later it gets reported on ZH and Drudge.
Well, not too sure, really, if the Queen has the power to dissolve parliament, but she sure does have the power to 'prorouge' (temporarily suspend) parliament. Harper asked the Queen's representative in Canada, the Governor General, to prorouge parliament a few years back to avoid a vote of non-confidence and the Queen said OK. That to me is bad enough and proves the Queen still has too much power in Canada.
It was on Coast to Coast AM monday april 11.
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/shows
And from Jones' own web site
http://www.infowars.com/queen-dissolves-canadian-parliament-for-third-ti...
Funny, when I google "queen dissolve canadian parliament" the only sites that seem to suggest such a thing are PrisonPlant, InfoWars, and a bunch of other conspiracy porn sites. I call bs.
BTW Look up Alex Jones' Y2K "The Russians are attacking!" broadcast on YouTube. Who would trust that guy? "They're burning an effigy under that owl, but I swear to God they're burning a child behind it!" Please.
Funny, when I google "queen dissolve canadian parliament", the very first site shown is the NY Times:
Canadian Parliament is dissolved - The New York Times
7 Sep 2008 ... TORONTO — The Canadian prime minister dissolved Parliament on Sunday ... The governor general is the representative of Queen Elizabeth II of ...
www.nytimes.com/.../07iht-08canadaFW.15951020.html - Cached - Similar - Add to iGoogle
lol! Nice try. How about we paste the rest of that sentence:
"The governor general is the representative of Queen Elizabeth II of Britain, who is Canada's head of state, but the position is purely ceremonial and obeys the wishes of the prime minister."
You're as bad as the MSM.
As I pointed out above Queen Elizabeth signed away all rights interfere in Canada's government in 1982. She and her representative, the Governor General, have purely ceremonial positions with no actual power whatsoever.
That's what Prime Minister of Australia, Gough Whitlam, also thought back in 1975 ... until the G-G sacked him and his government!
If Betty Battenberg is Canada's head of state, and the G-G serves at her pleasure, and if all actions of parliament must be ratified by the G-G, then the positions are only nominally ceremonial (no matter how you want to phrase it).
Wikipedia says it most plainly: "The Governor General of Canada is the federal viceregal representative of the Canadian monarch, Queen Elizabeth II".
OK you got me. Queen Betty reigns from our National Igloo while sitting on a throne made of unborn seal skin wearing a tiara of Yukon diamonds. She rides to and from work in a solid gold coach drawn by kangaroos as a compliment to her Australian slaves. She dismisses Parliament at a whim.
Now that I have told you all this I will have to kill you. Expect to be run over by James Bond driving an Aston Martin with scythe hubcaps as soon as he can get his Lucas battery to take a charge.
Did you look at the article?
"On Sunday, Harper visited Governor General Michaelle Jean and asked her to dissolve Parliament. The governor general is the representative of Queen Elizabeth II of Britain, who is Canada's head of state, but the position is purely ceremonial and obeys the wishes of the prime minister."
Why the charade?
First day on the job at Langley? They normally prefer you to go for a few ad hominems before you step down to just plain nonsensical ridicule. No need to thank me, just trying to help you to do your job!
Baa-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-h
I hear ya Transformer!! ZH, AJ, Drudge... I would add RT (just for sound bites and fresh from the scene vids) and as a lookover of all media I tune into Gerald Celentes blog... I dont shy away from the MSM outlets either (it is getting hard though)- it is possible to find bits of truth in the bullshit cake, or at least- know the enemies method...
Now for the claims that have just been made about Alex... I have not heard a line like that come out of the mans mouth... Most of what I heard from Infowars about the Fukushima Daiichi disaster, reflected the reports on ZH, and then (3 weeks after being rolled out by AJ) turned out to be true- just kept under the rug. Alex does make far out claims very often- that is true, but a couple of comments above make him sound like an ourageous liar and lunatic- witch is completeley untrue. When touching on subjects that are institutionaly held back from us and made secret by TPTB, one can go and speculate in many different dimentions (as sometimes truth turns out to be stranger then fiction)- and thats what AJ does.
Now, the rant about the Queen on coast to coast- I havent heard it and I dont know what real, legistlation backed powers the British Crown holds in regards to the Canadian government, but I shure as hell believe that the British Crown is held by the wrong people... And as recent history has shown- all the current blue bloods have their fair share of skelletons in the closet.
The Queen cannot dissolve Parliament. That is entirely bogus. England may have had an absolute monarchy 1000 years ago but those powers were slowly whittled down over the years. After Canada got self government in 1867 we still needed the British government's approval to change the laws but that was a rubber stamp approval that was never denied. Theoretically, a citizen could go over the head of the Supreme Court of Canada to the British Parliament but such cases only came up once in 15 or 20 years. In all this the King or Queen had nothing to say, the decisions were made by Parliament or the Prime Minister.
Then, in 1982, Trudeau repatriated the Constitution. Since then Her Majesty has been purely a figurehead with no power whatsoever. The Canadian government does not need permission of the British Parliament or Queen for anything.
Parliament was dissolved following a vote of non confidence by the opposition parties. That is how parliamentary democracy works. There is no set term for a government in office. It is up to the party in power to call an election, or for the opposition parties to force the issue if they think they have a shot or if they think the government has gone too far and does not represent the will of the people.
Now there is to be an election and hopefully one party will have a mandate to govern. If there is no clear majority party then we will have a minority government as we have had for the last 5 years, or possibly a coalition government .
It may sound messy and confusing but at least we have the power to vote out the government if they promise to do one thing and then do the opposite.
Well, without her you crazy Canucks would likely put Justin Bieber on the face of the Maple, so God Save the Queen.
Sorry Diogenes but you are incorrect. The Queen absolutely has the power to dissolve parliament. The Canadian parliament and prime minister sit "at her majesty's pleasure." You are not alone - most Canadians are unaware of the powers that the Queen still (unbelievably) wields. The Governer General is the Queen's representative, and any act of parliament (including the creation and dissolution of the gov't) is done via the GG (who acts on the Queen's behalf.
Sure, lots of this is ceremonial, but the reality is the Queen is the ultimate head of state (is the Canadian Sovereign), and has final say. Sure, she doesn't exercise this power against the wishes of the gov't (since you'd quickly see a move to become a true republic), but that doesn't mean she doesn't wield true power.
If you are interested in helping getting rid of the foreign monarch (I find it crazy that we still have a head of state who doesn't even live on the same continent) I'd suggest you join the CCR (Citizens for a Canadian Republic).
The short answer to whether the Queen would ever do the unthinkable and dissolve Parliament contrary to the Government’s wishes is that there is, almost certainly, no legal impediment to her doing so. But the constitutional objections against such a course would be likely to prove overwhelming unless there were some constitutional crisis.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article6329207.ece
The gist of the article you link to is that the Queen might theoretically have the right to dissolve Parliament and appoint a new government even though no Queen or King has done so since 1834.
This may apply to England but it does not apply to Canada. Her Majesty signed away all right to interfere in the government of Canada in 1982.
Incorrect.
On November 11th, 1975, the Governor-General (Queen's agent) of Australia, Sir John Kerr, dismissed Mr Gough Whitlam as Prime Minister and appointed Mr Malcolm Fraser as a caretaker Prime Minister.
The Whitlam government had popular support and a majority in parliament. But they were preparing to evict US military bases from Australia, and disband ASIO (the Australian equivalent of the CIA, and hopelessly infiltrated by the CIA.) So they had to go. The undemocratic dismissal was an operation involving the Queen, her representative John Kerr, the US government, and members of the Australian Liberal Party (Malcolm Fraser etc) who were happy to perpetuate the client state relationship Australia has with the USA.
Bingo! You beat me to it. The power is NOT theoretical. It has been exercised, and will be again in extremis. Just because they're very judicious in using it doesn't mean it isn't there. It's a sword of Damocles that most Commonwealth citizens are not even aware exists.
Who runs Canada? Who makes Canada's money?
"The patriation of the Canadian Constitution was achieved in 1982 when the British and Canadian parliaments passed parallel acts – the Canada Act, 1982 ([UK] 1982, c.11) in London, and the Constitution Act 1982 in Ottawa. Thereafter, the United Kingdom was formally absolved of any remaining responsibility for, or jurisdiction over, Canada; and Canada became responsible for her own destiny. In a formal ceremony on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, the Queen signed both acts into law on April 17, 1982."
From the Wikipedia entry for Constitution of Canada. I know Wikipedia is not the final word on anything but whoever wrote this entry seems to know what he is talking about.
It is interesting that Quebec is the only province that did not sign the new law, therefore it may be possible technically that Queen Elizabeth is still queen of Quebec.