NY Times Plays Up Fukushima Ho-Hum Factor

Regarding the ongoing Fukushima disaster, whom do we believe?  One of the scariest news stories we’ve ever read implies that we’re all doomed – not just Japan, but the whole world. It boils down to this: try to move hundreds or perhaps even thousands of nuclear fuel rods, some of which may already be damaged or leaking, to a supposedly safe place, and sooner or later a couple of them will bump up against each other, triggering a chain reaction with enough heat to send a radioactive plume into the upper atmosphere and the ends of the earth.  From some of the same sources, we are given to understand that thyroid cancers are already epidemic in Japan, that radiation levels are starting to rise on the U.S. West Coast, that hundreds of tons of highly radioactive coolant are finding their way into the ocean and groundwater each day, and that every fish in the northern Pacific has already been contaminated to some degree.

But if any of this true, why hasn’t it appeared in The New York Times? Well, it’s not quite correct to say the Times hasn’t reported the story. It’s there, all right — for anyone with the patience and diligence to find it.  On November 18, for instance, buried on an inside page, is a “quick update” on efforts to clean up the tsunami-damaged reactor complex. Doomsday fears are way overblown, implies David Lochbaum, a nuclear engineer quoted as an expert by the article’s author, Andrew Revkin. “The truth is that the irradiated fuel in the Unit 4 spent fuel pool does pose some hazard,” notes Lochbaum, “and the prudent management of that risk is to remove it from its present location to a safer, more secure location. In other words, do exactly what it [sic] being done now at Fukushima.” Lochbaum sounds like one level-headed dude, for sure. Revkin too. He ends on a note intended to silence those, including Russians involved in the Chernobyl cleanup, who are skeptical that Tokyo Electric Power Company is up to the job. “I think the international community has better things to do than interfere in this matter’” writes Revkin — “like bailing out the U.S. if we go bankrupt next January.”

So which is it, dear readers? Is the worst nuclear accident since Chernobyl something that deserves little more than a passing mention in the Times?  Or are we all in fact doomed?  Please bring the best evidence you can find – links, quotes, anecdotes…whatever — to support your point of view.

  • DK December 7, 2013, 7:22 am

    The examples of this go on and on and the situation gets worse everyday. There are a few good sources, although the new “Secrets Bill” in Japan (link above) may soon do away with them. It passed, forcibly, to my understanding; protests ensue.
    One that consistently seems to provide good info is http://enenews.com/
    I cannot bring myself to read it too often, although, I find myself checking it more than I probably should.

    They do not have the situation under control, the buildings are quickly deteriorating/rusting. They do not report on reactors 1, 2, or 3 (MOX fuel).

    At least Marin County, California Officials are stepping up measures. A little late. But how much of their own wastewater do THEY dump into the Pacific every day?

    Back in 2011, in Vancouver and California, seaweed was found to contain radionuclides at levels 4 higher than considered safe for humans; ditto for tuna. That was 2 years ago, following the original hydrogen explosion.

    Not one sardine caught in Alaska this year?

    Unprecedented marine life found up and down the west coast (Monterey Bay in particular). I mentioned this a few days back.
    Coincidence?

    Where’s that Ann Coulter sound byte?

    This saddens and worries me. The probable levels of Cesium-137 hitting the west coast (as early as 2014) are 3x HIGHER than originally estimated, and that’s got a 30.1 year half life, and they’re still pouring tons of wastewater in the ocean daily.

    Oh and about all of that rain that comes in off of the Pacific, hmm. The Olympic Peninsula? 2014 and beyond?

    The potential economic impacts are TREMENDOUS.

    Perhaps its a good time to start thinking more about Malbec from Chile, Bordeaux, Chianti, and the occasional African Pinotage. Maybe that’s a bad joke in poor taste.

    Super Sake, anyone? Sorry.

    Here’s a doozy, TEPCO reporting a GAIN! Haha!

    http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2013-11-01/japan’s-most-hated-outfit-tepco-reports-fat-profit-taxpayer-bailout-money

    “”So where did that big fat profit of ¥616.2 billion come from? Turns out, “ordinary income” was only ¥141.6 billion, up from a loss last year. Those were the rate increases. The difference? “Extraordinary Income.”

    A lot of it! So TEPCO sold some fixed assets for a gain of ¥74.2 billion, fine. But then there was an interesting, and huge entry: ¥666.2 billion ($6.7 billion). It was the amount of taxpayer bailout money TEPCO had received during the first half. Booked as income!””

    Bend over Japan, just like we did for DaBoyz.

    I hope we are all flat out wrong.

    I’ve heard some interesting info on clean up ideas, but nothing compelling enough to make me feel at ease too much. I’m sure something does exist though.
    I pray it does.

  • mava December 6, 2013, 10:34 pm

    Ha-ha, check this out, they are considering dumping the radioactive water in to the oceans, all of it.

    This is so funny, I can barely hold myself straight.
    They are going to prepare the environmental study where they will prove it to us, that there will be very minimal risks involved.

    (Not as if you light up a cigarette on the campus).

    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/12/theyre-going-dump-fukushima-radiation-ocean.html

    The truth is this: Yes, they will dump it into your ocean. F. you all (I included). Because, if the water breaks out in Japan, the Japanese are gone (the people who benefited from this government reactor). So, F you all and your kids. Better you all suffer a little bit, than the Japanese.

    • Rick Ackerman December 6, 2013, 11:15 pm

      Enjoy sashimi while it lasts. As for the Japanese, their craving for fish has always tended toward the exotic, so it’s probably only a matter of time before a Cesium 137 Cookbook is a best seller there.

      • mava December 8, 2013, 8:24 am

        God knows I partake in sushi (and sashimi especially), rather heavily. Nothing better than the colorful explosion of taste one experiences when he bites on Ikura in a tripple dose of green mustard in light soy sauce. I always liked the fish, especially the raw fish, and caviar. (yuck you think, I know, but it is not yuck to me).

        Ah, this way, I am in the first row to take the hit.

      • Jonathan December 10, 2013, 7:44 am

        Rick,

        There’ll be no need for a cesium 137 cookbook. Once a fish has ingested enough radioactive substance, it will cook itself. Perhaps we should be counting the number of ready-to-eat fish that get washed ashore.

  • gary leibowitz December 5, 2013, 8:29 am

    Just finished reading an interesting article broken down into 3 steps. I suggest some might want to read it since it answers most of the questions we have.

    1 – Are low radiation levels dangerous?
    2 – How much will we be exposed to?
    3 – How to protect yourself from radiation?

    Nice piece using the latest information and science. Tries to be objective and uses many different sources, including “secret” studies done by our government decades ago. Breaks down the type of radiation most concerned with, Cesium-137 and Iodine-131. The levels he comes up with are much larger than any other previous accident. Talks about internal as opposed to external radiation and all its implications as well as where in the body it accumulates.

    As for the disbursement from the sea, there can be very high concentrations (pockets) along side areas with very low concentrations.

    Fascinating stuff, and very enlightening. No slogans of doom and gloom to entice the public, just some cold hard facts as we know it. Doesn’t paint a good outcome. I just wish it was a history lesson from a thousand years ago. We play with such dangerous materials when we know the risk/reward ratio is so high.

    Just one more thing to worry about. The real problem is how do we protect ourselves after the fact. The amount of private and government involvement to monitor this mess is daunting. Politics, and the lack of funding, will get in the way and downplay this event.

    After reading this article I came away scared, since there is no know cleanup process. Banning all these radioactive materials for energy consumption and for military use would be impossible today. We just have to live with it and hope that science catches up before it is too late. The knowledge we had for decades on the harmful use of chemicals hasn’t stopped science from making a slam dunk case for its abolishment, and hasn’t meant a darn thing in our continued practice. We are a strange lot. We can fully understand the implications thru strict scientific observation and rule, but we can’t seem to translate that information into ensuring our very existence.

    What to do, what to eat, where to live?

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/what-is-the-actual-risk-for-pacific-coast-residents-from-fukushima-radiation/5359968

    • Rick Ackerman December 6, 2013, 12:30 am

      You are on-topic with this post, Gary, for sure. The link you’ve provided should disabuse optimists of the notion that using the Pacific Ocean as a radiation sink does not have potentially dire implications for all of us in the future.

      • gary leibowitz December 6, 2013, 1:34 am

        What if I came to the opposite conclusion based on scientific papers and research? Would you still assume I was on-topic. I ask since you keep accusing me of always taking the opposite side. If you look at my other posts they were not all argumentative. In this case I initially excused the scare as hype because I didn’t do my homework thoroughly.

        There are so many blogs here that always assumes the worse without any reliable and verifiable sources. The excuse I usually get is that it is covered up. I don’t believe that can ever happen since the web provides an easy voice to shout your claims to whomever will listen. It is the great equalizer to prevent any government disinformation, but at the same time it does allow hoaxes to spread as gospel. You must be diligent and sift thru the fear mongering as opposed to real unbiased opinion or scientific study. I always check the source before I allow myself to believe. I do not look for reinforced opinions, and instead go out of my way to challenge them. Hope more people do the same.

        For TV reporting I use the independent news from PBS. Not sure if many agree with me since it doesn’t like to make extreme statements on the right or left without doing as much thorough research as possible. For instance the reporting on Bush’s Iraq campaign had all the major news media stay focused on what was believed as a patriotic stance. PBS broke the story on how that administration rounded up the media for a cohesive but faulty conclusion. There were newsmen that openly apologized after the fact.

        I suspect you might ban this response since it is not razor focused on radiation contamination. Thought it was needed to define what is on-topic or not.

        &&&&&&

        Two-thirds of your posts here have no reason other than to start arguments. You routinely misquote and/or deliberately misconstrue what others have said, now and in the past, in order to provoke them. The only reason I’m letting this off-topic post run is because Daniel has taken time to formulate a thoughtful and interesting reply. RA

      • DK December 6, 2013, 7:20 am

        Gary, nice post and link. I cannot believe you posted that, more on that below.

        Sorry, but your reply is pure bilge.

        Mava isn’t in complete agreement, do you see Rick targeting those comments? You broke off topic and onto a rant about conspiracy talk and peoples’ worries.

        The amazing, yet insane, irony of it all, the link you’ve provided is sourced from Washington’s Blog. Have you EVER followed that blog before?
        I’d argue that you would challenge 99% of the content on that site and go as far as to call it a conspiracy buff haven while attempting to unsuccessfully discredit it.

        Further, http://www.globalresearch.ca, is basically the premier hub for that content. 9-11 Commission derniers, the NWO, BP/Mocando/Corexit, GMO’s, NSA surveillance, DHS, false flag events & psyops, and virtually every author and article you consistently refute. You’ll likely find all of it there.

        “The amount of private and government involvement to monitor this mess is daunting. Politics, and the lack of funding, will get in the way and downplay this event.”

        Give me a break! Get in the way? I’m practically dry heaving here.

        So politics and lack of funding are the cause of various governments (Japan, Canada, AND USA) raising the acceptable doses for people (Protective Action Guidelines)? As well as reducing their efforts to monitor because it is not deemed as necessary? Relaxing what are acceptable safety standards for existing plants? Concealing data they have, which the Japanese gov’t gave to our military (Navy) 3 days after the event?

        http://www.epa.gov/japan2011/data-updates.html

        http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-21/some-radiation-tracking-air-monitors-may-not-be-working-properly-epa-says.html

        New PAG’s were proposed a few years back, the EPA was facing a lawsuit over it, they revisited it a few months ago and public comments are now close. Prior revisions include 1000 fold increases in acceptable exposures to Iodine-131, Strontium-90, and Nickel-63.
        Of course, the article from The Tennessean that originally reported all of this is now a broken link.

        http://www.peer.org/news/news-releases/2013/04/08/white-house-approves-radical-radiation-cleanup-rollback/

        More:

        http://www.nbcnews.com/id/43455859/ns/us_news-environment/#.UqFR2CiWW5d

        Exactly what many of the people I associate with, handle on a daily basis – consulting on fixes, updates, replacements. Plenty of work to do on plants well over 40 years old.

        http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/12/canada-busted-lying-fukushima-radiation.html

        http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-22/hanford-nuclear-waste-s-safety-may-not-be-assured-by-u-s-markey-says.html

        It’s a good thing this and prior administrations give such great treatment to whistleblowers and industry insiders.

        Speaking of BP and the Gulf, this sounds eerily familiar:
        http://blog.al.com/live/2010/09/fdas_standards_for_gulf_seafoo.html

        http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/305096#ixzz1HsjsqUUn

        Not only does the gov’t let this happen, they ASSIST in covering it up.

        The evidence is everywhere.

      • Redwilldanaher December 7, 2013, 3:16 am

        Great responses to Gary’s tired bag of parlor tricks. I couldn’t agree more. Washington’s blog would take the contra side to 99% of Gary’s passive/aggressive attack pieces. That’s what makes it so rich and leads to the ? Of the day: Does he realize that?

      • gary leibowitz December 8, 2013, 5:31 am

        You can now have your harmony since my responses are being deleted on a constant basis. I must have breached a high level of misconduct for Rick to do exactly what every single person complains is being done by the evil governments of the world, total controlled censorship. Congrats for showing me and everyone else you are no different than the worse government offenders.

        A sounding board that just echoes one voice.

        Good luck to ya.

        &&&&&

        Not a high level of misconduct, Gary, just a steady, annoying drone. You constantly provoke gratuitous arguments in this forum by making straw men of everyone else. Because they evidently are finding it difficult to ignore you as I’ve suggested, I’ve started deleting many of your posts. To give the narcissist his due, you are one of the more skillful trolls I’ve encountered on the Web. But I’ve tired of being your facilitator.
        RA

      • Cam Fitzgerald December 8, 2013, 1:05 pm

        I used to think that your comments added a helpful contrary position Gary but lately this site has turned into the Gary show where most of the responses from other posters only revolve around what you are saying.

  • Redwilldanaher December 5, 2013, 5:36 am

    Rick, my apologies but you have to see this!

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-12-04/greenspan-baffled-over-bitcoin-bubble-be-worth-something-it-must-be-backed-something

    ******

    Let me repeat this, since I am so certain of it: The bitcoin experiment can only end badly. Meanwhile, I congratulate those, Max Keiser among them, who bought bitcoin for pennies and who have already cashed out. But the greedy morons who are loading up at $1000+ are going to reap the disaster they so richly deserve. RA

    • mario cavolo December 6, 2013, 7:28 am

      Fortunately there is a very low risk way to bet on bitcoin if you have a forex account such as avafx. I know these are often unavailable to U.S. based traders. Bitcoin is a CFD in my platform like any other currency pair, index, commodity. So, you can go long and set your stop loss and limit where you wish, perhaps $50-$150 and your bet’s in place. Frankly, yesterday’s China Central Bank release on bitcoin was a big nothing. They only and prudently stated the rather obvious. So, who knows? This thing could continue as a fiasco to $2-3k or higher or crash and burn and be done. Meanwhile, dozens of over similar currencies have been launched, Litecoin being the next in line at the moment.

    • Redwilldanaher December 6, 2013, 5:36 pm

      I hear you loud and clear regarding bitcoin. I really posted it so that you wouldn’t miss Easy Al’s latest epic hypocrisy. Maybe he really is that obtuse.

      &&&&&&

      Hard to tell whether Greenspan is a liar, an imbecile, or a combination of both. In any case, he deserves to be remembered as an economic bozo for having spoken 1) of inflated home prices as ‘wealth’, and 2) of a supposed capital investment boom in the U.S. at a time when household savings growth was in fact negative. Even by the abysmal standards of the Dismal Science, he is a disgrace to the profession. He’ll never be called on his ignorant version of economics, however, much less be remembered for it, because millions of Americans, including those who shape the news, only know what they see on
      Jerry Springer. RA

  • Rich December 4, 2013, 7:42 pm

    Out of puts and into calls
    Fuku a bona fide mess
    Cheers All

    • gary leibowitz December 5, 2013, 6:52 pm

      Rich, I believe you are too early for those calls. Minimum another 5 to 7 trading days before bottom is seen. 10 year note once again trying to break out. If it does hit 3 percent soon watch out for a nasty drop. if however, like last time, it fails to materialize a big rally is in store.

  • mava December 3, 2013, 10:08 pm

    The rods… There are more than one, in any given reactor, and for a good reason, – cooling. If not cooling issue, these rods could be bundled together into one giant “rod”. But this also means that one or two rods, especially expended ones, simply do not have enough of correct uranium isotope to be “rich” enough to be able to constitute the critical mass required for the start of the chained reaction. This is high school physics 101, – I would NOT worry about two of the spent rods “bumping” against each other. Speaking of “bumping”, IIRC, even when you have “rich” material that can be combined into a single piece of critical mass, you still need to use high explosives designed in a very particular way in order to correctly “bump” them into that single piece. Non withstanding the “less than chain” pollution issues, nuclear materials are actually very very safe to handle. You typically worry only about losing the material or some of it which causes pollution and the radiation issues themselves. You do not worry about anything “going off”.

    Likewise, I don’t think that the Fukushima will be a very significant contributor to the pollution.

    What I do worry about is that the story of Chernobyl and Fukushima will inevitably become the norm, and then 10 or 20 of events like that can really contribute to the pollution levels.

    Consider this: Right now, all the punk is about “sustainable” electric energy. Which, by the way, is worse than anything else, except if derived by the high energy release by means of a chained nuclear reaction.
    Thus, a while ago, I calculated on the back of the napkin, that if we really want to be as dim as Obama, we would have to increase the total output of nuclear reactors worldwide about (10^2), or hundred folds.

    Now which way do you want it? Nuclear reactors being 100 times bigger or them being 100 times more of the reactors worldwide? Which way do you think we would be looking at a safe future?

    I, personally, think we will reach a crisis condition way way before we could increase the output 100 fold. Somewhere around 20 fold, we would hit the major snag that will take us all out.

  • Cam Fitzgerald December 3, 2013, 1:28 pm

    “Every day that goes by, the statistical risk increases for this apocalyptic scenario. No one can say or know how this will play out, except that millions of people will probably die even if things stay exactly as they are, and billions could die if things get any worse”.
    ——–

    The sentence above quoted from the Lew Rockwell article that is linked in today’s story typifies what is bothering me about the reporting on the Fukushima disaster. It is an assertion of global apocolypse that fails to bother telling us how or even why anyone, let alone billions of people, might meet their maker. What evidence do they have that might explain how millions might die if things stay exactly as they are? Adding that billions might perish seems even more unlikely in the absence of any supporting commentary about how or why that might come about. Is it because we will be showered with radiation in our rains? How much potential radioactive material? Am I supposed to guess? I for one want to hear a better explanation about how these real and potential mortality claims are being formulated and on whose expertise they are supported. Call me a doubter I suppose but after years of reading and listening to gloom scenarios on the economy (like the fears over an impending hyperinflation) I just need to see something more substantive when wild, unbacked claims are being made. In any case I am reading these postings with interest just in case someone comes here with the proof that the world needs to be afraid to the extent that the Northern Hemisphere might actually be evacuated. Where would those people even go? If things are this close to the end it is more likely the whole lot will die in their own backyards without ever seeing the shores of another country like Australia, Brazil or South Africa anyway. Whole continents just don’t get evacuated like householders do after a big storm or tornado. There is no Red Cross set up for this kind of scenario either and no hope of so many people being accepted by poor Southern Hemisphere countries either (Zimbabwe anyone?). Since I cannot know if the risk is real of not I will continue reading and hoping that this is just another case of popular mythology of the internet that seems to captivate the minds of people to the exclusion of all else as long as the story runs hot.

    • mario cavolo December 3, 2013, 3:57 pm

      I have to agree Cam, it seems weird to me that this problem could be “SO” serious, I mean we are talking out of the ball park off the charts disaster and yet its all talk in the media by a couple of experts, where is the worldwide govt response? From what I can see its virtually being ignored by everyone outside of Japan, very weird and disturbing politics and reporting on this. On the other hand maybe it is a case of they have all been apprised of the situation i fact and all know that it is a global disaster waiting to happen with truly little that can be done about it so therefore “let’s intentionally keep it quiet” ?

      Uncomfortable stuff to say the least and why I brought up my post earlier, if it was “that” bad, you can bet your ass Japanese people with lots of money and influence and wherewithall to find out would know it, so what then, everyone has become a passive fatalist to their date with a radiation poisoning death… If the powers to be are hiding a big secret we’re in deep doodoo on this one….even I’m just ranting speculating nonsense..pointless then.

      Cheers, Mario

    • Cam Fitzgerald December 3, 2013, 8:28 pm

      Mario, I sincerely hope that the risk is not as severe as some are saying. The problem is that I just don’t know and I have no more background or knowledge on the topic or technology than most non-scientific people do. In short, I rely on expert opinion and can only hold out faith that an honest assessment is making its way to us through the media channels. If the situation is so serious that it really is being suppressed then we probably do have reason to worry. With luck a nuclear expert or two will weigh in on the topic and fill us in on the bare bones of the hazard in plain English.

      • DK December 3, 2013, 9:43 pm

        Rick, Cam, & Jason,

        Agree with the above posts and concerns therein.
        Again, I have several people very close to me who work in commercial nuclear power and other relevant applications. They are mostly divided, both sides of the fence.

        The mention of MOX fuel makes all eyebrows raise (reactor 3).

        The media does not mention, ever, reactors 1, 2, or 3. All of which melted down, spent fuel pools in all of them and they were adversely affected. The MSM has disclosed that at least 77 fuel rods between them were compromised.

        One of the problems people have with this tragedy is being able to understand the severity. We are constantly fed language like REM, Sievert, mSiev, becquerel, etc. Not layman friendly at all. Some refers to half-life, some refers to quantity, some is only useful when applying it to a specific issue – like soft tissue affected.

        I cannot and will not take this lightly, ever. I was young when Chernobyl happened, so, it didn’t mean a lot to me. This does and it shakes me to my core (no pun intended).
        Not unlike Macondo, just more.

        We know that grounds have been contaminated, as well as building debris, demolished and raw. Already, there have been banned food imports and imported manufactured goods have been turned away by at least 3 countries (China, Russia, Chile – automobiles). Nissan has moved its engine manufacturing to mainland China (they produced them close to the prefecture), and many cars have been refurbished and resold to ignorant buyers. This makes me wonder about Japan’s exports. Japan supplies a lot of technology worldwide, especially to neighboring developing countries.

        Internally, some professionals (biologists and physicists) are saying up to 70% of Japan is radioactively contaminated.
        These are no small claims.

        Also, a comparison of this to Hiroshima/Nagasaki is somewhat apples to oranges, if not irrelevant. Those were bombs intended to cause instant damage and they did.
        However, the amount of radioactive material from Fukushima is exponentially greater.
        As with so many other environmental issues, the issue is not just instant cause-effect, it is bioaccumulation.

        There were a few hundred thousand people working to decommission Chernobyl and that was 1 reactor. Yes several thousand did die, directly connected to that event. That sarcophagus was erected in, what, 8 months? They are still cleaning it up (actually trying to make it into somewhat of a tourist attraction), and they are erecting a new encasement dome.
        They weren’t battling the ongoing problem for 2+ years and they weren’t dumping waste into the ocean or incinerating it.

        Nearly 30 years later, there are much higher rates of cancer in Ukraine, food controls, and local wildlife has been affected, according to scientific studies.

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1354464/Birds-living-near-Chernobyl-smaller-brains-radiation-scientists-warn.html

        Fukushima had an enormous release, particularly when the hydrogen explosion first occurred. Even where I live, in the upper north east of the US, communities were employing monitors/geiger counters and picking up traces of I-131 where they weren’t at least significantly measurable prior.

        I have lots of links, most are reactionary to Chernobyl. I urge others to look to the past, it is worth reading for perspective, but it will not put you at ease.
        Most of what is available today, re: Fukushima, is 3rd party and wait-and-see. Just like many, I’m not sure what to believe and what not, just what all confirm – perhaps that’s the point (my thoughts).

        I’m concerned and taking supplements, they won’t hurt.

        Also, this is suspect and alarming:
        http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/11/30/national/japan-the-new-uzbekistan-of-press-freedom-in-asia/#.Upw1iiiWW5d

    • Jason S December 3, 2013, 8:41 pm

      I agree Cam. I know next to nothing on the subject but based on common sense if I do the math, some are saying that as much as 500 tones of water are leaking from Fukushima daily, well that is about 119,000 gallons. Seems like an excessive amount of water to me. Also, listening to the “expert” in the Youtube video posted by Chuck, he says that 1 million millirads of material is escaping every hour. If the lethal dose for humans is 500 millirads then at a dispersal rate of 2000 times the lethal limit per hour, you would have a swath of death for miles and miles in its path. I don’t think the news could black out hundreds or thousands dying of radio active poisoning not to mention the mass exodus of people fleeing the surrounding areas as people keeled over left and right. So, I think it is overhyped.

  • Andy B December 3, 2013, 10:39 am

    Here is a video by Arnie Gundersen, nuke expert as he debunks a promo video by Tokyo Electric on their “rod removal process” at Fukushima. A must-watch for Fukushima watchers.

    http://fairewinds.org/media/fairewinds-videos/remove-tepco-removing-fuel

  • Joseph December 3, 2013, 10:03 am

    “Salt water will bond with the radiation material and mitigate most of the problems by dispersing it. Why we don’t really have a issue with the nuclear subs at the bottom of the ocean with weapons grade material?”

    “I had asked Bob Ballard about why we didn’t recover those lost subs from the ocean floor thinking that the nuke tipped torpedoes could be recovered by terrorist. He says the material will quickly bond with the sodium in the water and disperse it. Although some disagree with this. ”

    “The oceans of the world contain 4.5 billion tons of uranium dissolved in seawater.”

    Close to Japan yes a big issue, until it has been dispersed.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEmms6vn-p8 Life In The Dead Zone
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9Ts18dxuH0 25 years later

  • mario cavolo December 3, 2013, 4:57 am

    Well, relative to what may come from Fukushima, you’ll all be relatively happy to hear this:

    My jazz vocalist and I are working on a sweet Diana Krall set these days… Rick, Departure Bay and Almost Blue 🙂

    Yes, its about nuclear: her husband is in the astronaut category, rare, he’s the nuclear industry advisor in China to one of those international consulting firms that is very well known whose name you would instantly know I won’t say which one; he and his team have been directly involved in the ongoing upgrade/buildout China’s nuclear facilities to latest state of the art safety and technology levels. Particularly knowing that China’s future includes at least 50 more nuclear reactors, one less thing to worry about, relatively speaking…

    Cheers, Mario

  • M. Smith December 3, 2013, 3:04 am

    Here are links to the Japan/US NRC FOIA Reports. You will not see this in the MSM, but it has been out in the open all this time. Someone took the time to put it all online for free, for all to read:

    http://www.HatrickPenryunbound.com, all the info is in the three parts & much more on youtube under HatrickPenry.

    I would not eat the tuna or any other fish from the West Coast!

  • Buster December 3, 2013, 1:44 am

    I really don’t assume to know much about this subject with any certainty. However, Lauren Moret appears sincere & paints a pretty dire picture of the situation, which seems to be confirmed by other sources.
    In light of this I’d suggest taking nascent iodine or the like.

    • Rick Ackerman December 3, 2013, 3:50 am

      I ran the Lew Rockwell piece by a scientist friend of mine. He’s an astrophysicist, not a nuclear scientist, but I trust his judgment about such things because he is generally cautious and optimistic. He said the article, scary as it was, rang true. The main flaw, he said, is that it might give some readers the impression that a bungle during the Fukushima cleanup could cause a nuclear explosion. This is in fact impossible, for reasons that I won’t go into here. But a radioactive cloud that could cover the Earth? That is by no means farfetched, according to my friend.

  • Chuck December 2, 2013, 10:37 pm

    here is an interesting idea……entombing the entire place in hugely thick concrete – and then cleaning up the livable area surrounding these sites.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-15/nagasaki-bomb-maker-offers-lessons-for-japan-s-fukushima-cleanup.html

    • Rick Ackerman December 3, 2013, 3:43 am

      Sounds like a lousy plan for Fukushima — but a potential big winner for the U.S. if applied to the Capitol when Congress is in session.

      • Joseph December 3, 2013, 10:26 am

        If only that was possible Rick, if only.

  • mario cavolo December 2, 2013, 9:36 pm

    I know a number of folks this side of the pond with ties / lives in Japan, will inquire to them and let you all know what closer to home insights they might have…

    • mario cavolo December 2, 2013, 9:39 pm

      Er um, if it is all that bad, one might think that we would already be seeing a “better safe than sorry” driven trend of people in major Japanese cities who have plenty of money to spare movin’ out…maybe in fact that is quietly happening…worth the concern to look into it IMHO…

      • Rick Ackerman December 2, 2013, 9:52 pm

        We shouldn’t kid ourselves that any catastrophe that warrants evacuating Japan would not ultimately have dire implications for the rest of the world. The movie On the Beach gets this point across clearly.

      • redwilldanaher December 3, 2013, 1:41 am

        On the Beach seems like a movie that people really like or think is really boring.

        There’s a great shot in the middle of it when Gardner and Peck are in a bungalow together. Good work Stanley Kramer.

        And as you note, no where to run or hide nor can you plumb the depths forever.

        &&&&&

        Haven’t met anyone who remembered the film as boring, but if so, their judgment is suspect. My favorite scene is when Astaire fires up his Ferrari for the last time — in his garage. RA

  • Chuck December 2, 2013, 6:48 pm

    I got a kick out of the fact that our Navy was not allowed to get anywhere near this situation. Where were all the ‘international’ helpers? These poor people were left to handle this themselves – well OBVIOUSLY no one wanted to get anywhere NEAR all this radiation.

    I don’t know all of the engineering issues of moving these rods, but if it’s anything like the engineering explanations that were given to describe why the twin towers wouldn’t stand up after jet fuel burned off inside and supposedly melted metal that was engineered to withstand MUCH hotter temps……you get the idea.

    • gary leibowitz December 2, 2013, 7:26 pm

      Got to love the position that all the wacko conspiracy blogs put out. You just mentioned the scientific impossibility on Towers collapsing, yet all the major reports and studies managed to find structural engineers that would perjure themselves in a courtroom by declaring it is not only possible, but likely given the circumstance. Have you uncovered some secret scientific document that blows your case wide open? Please give me a report by the experts as to why the collapse couldn’t happen the way it was reported.

      As for the radiation from Japan, why not worry about Russia’s debacle, or Three Mile Island, or the massive chasm in the ocean floor from BP’s excellence environmental record. Geomagnetic reversal are known phenomenon that can happen in our lifetime. It is hypothesized that whole species can be wiped out during this time, not to mention massive radiation exposure from the Sun. Wait, there is an asteroid that is expected to come very close to earth in 2032. We do know statistically it is a given that life threatening objects will hit our earth.

      Stay tuned in and there is always something to worry about. So stop worrying about not finding anything to worry about.

      China is once again flexing its muscle in the South Seas. Oil rich area is conflicting with claims from Taiwan, Malaysia, Brunei, the Philippines and Vietnam, and now Japan. I would worry about human nature as opposed to mother nature. We have the capacity to destroy ourselves even with a brain capacity to solve the mysteries of the universe.

      &&&&&&

      Gary, this will be the last post I allow from you on this topic unless you stay razor-focused on the topic itself (as opposed to reflexively and obliquely disagreeing with what anyone else might have to say about it just for the sake of disagreement). RA

      • Chuck December 2, 2013, 7:52 pm

        well – you live in NYC I guess you were there…..but you gotta admit no one wanted to get anywhere near the reactors to offer help to these poor people. I hope they return the favor by unleashing a QE tsunami (or have they already?).

      • BDTR December 2, 2013, 8:04 pm

        You know, Gary, what worries me most about humanity is its propensity for gullibility and easy acceptance of pure fantasy as fact. Odd, isn’t it?

        But if you knew anything about the enormous resources spent developing technology and psychological mind control projects by major intelligence services over the past half century, I’d wager that you’d be worried too.

        The strangeness of what we think as real is maybe best revealed in our most articulated science; Physics. That all consciousness is utterly subjective is proof enough that no one of us is more or less delusional in what we believe actual. Your view is as good, or bad, as any.

        As my post of Poe, above, ‘a dream within a dream’ is all we really have, for now. We’ll awake all too soon, or not soon enough.

        But rest assured, China isn’t the problem.

  • mario cavolo December 2, 2013, 4:46 pm

    oh thanks, so its not an antioxidant found abundantly in grape seeds that scavenges our free radicals and makes us feel healthier…?

    • old Dave December 2, 2013, 5:48 pm

      Good to have potassium iodide on hand to protect thyroid from radiation.
      http://www.fda.gov/drugs/emergencypreparedness/bioterrorismanddrugpreparedness/ucm072265.htm

      Cyber Monday/Weekly promos abound.
      The 130mg dose is recommended to fully protect.

      http://www.amazon.com/s?ie=UTF8&page=1&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3APotassium%20iodide

      Rick, Where’s Cyber Monday Rick’s Picks offers?
      Even The Wall St. Journal is offering $1 for 3 months digital subscription today!

      &&&&&

      Everyday low prices apply, Dave. Incidentally, the cost of Rick’s Picks and the Hidden Pivot/Camouflage Trading webinar have never gone up. Moreover, Rick’s Picks in its Black Box Forecasts days — little different from what you see now — sold for as much as ten times the current $350 subscription price. RA

      • old Dave December 2, 2013, 10:56 pm

        You saw what happened to JCPenney when previous CEO instituted everyday low prices. With new CEO I got a $75 shirt for $15 at JCP on Black Friday. At Best Buy, a $250 camera for $125. You DO want to increase subscribers??? 😉

      • redwilldanaher December 3, 2013, 5:45 pm

        Old Dave, I was involved in a successful website that utilized options plays for newsletter style portfolio trading. The website also provided professional level options education. Unfortunately for me and a few other partners the criminal CEO along with the criminal CFO funneled and embezzled millions of dollars away from each of us. I mention this only so you know that I have a clue when I tell you that increasing subscribers at dirt cheap price levels usually isn’t worth it. As some point you just can’t cheapen yourself down to that level as the backend expenses involved simply do not permit it and longterm subscribers do not appreciate being punished for their loyalty.

        Most newsletters, especially Internet based ones, are not legitimate. Rick’s Picks is one of the few that is legitimate. Rick’s commentary is also legitimate. I wouldn’t waste my time reading and commenting here if it were just another TPTB bullish propaganda all the time echo chamber. Having said that, Rick has been bullish for as long as I can remember based solely upon his proprietary technical methodology even if his commentary has sounded much more cynical. Actually, although this seems difficult for a few around here to comprehend, many of us that despise the artificiality of the last few bull runs, have stuck with our technicals to navigate the turns and trends in the market. I learned that this is a MUST if you really plan to actively trade the markets. Learned it a long time ago, you can’t trade on fundamentals.

        I began trading as a professional options market maker on an exchange floor in 1992. This is one of the few good sites that exist IMO.

        For the record, I do not work for/with Rick. He compensates me in no way etc. In fact, I’ve never met the man in person.

      • Rich December 4, 2013, 7:43 pm

        Second RWD’s comments

  • John Jay December 2, 2013, 2:33 pm

    “Adm. Hyman Rickover, the father of the nuclear Navy, when asked after addressing a Joint Session of Congress, what he thought would be the ultimate disposition of nuclear weapons, replied, “I suppose we’ll blow ourselves up some day.”

    Link: http://tinyurl.com/qbf2zok

    “Do you hear that Mr. Anderson, that is the sound of inevitability.”

    Agent Smith to Neo in “The Matrix”

    I’ll just let Admiral Rickover and Agent Smith speak for me on this one!

    • Rick Ackerman December 3, 2013, 3:13 am

      Ironic that no single person had a greater influence on the design of reactors in the U.S. than Rickover.

      • John Jay December 3, 2013, 6:24 pm

        Admiral Rickover was probably the last competent Flag Officer this nation will ever see.

        Now we have an unending series of Toadies working from the same playbook used in WWI, that reads, “So what if a dozen or a million soldiers/citizens get slaughtered, just so long as it advances my career.”

        Dark Ages Now!

    • redwilldanaher December 3, 2013, 6:35 pm

      JJ, much like Stone’s Wall St. inspired tens of thousands of Gekkos, it seems as though many in the upper echelons of the services and government believe that Kubrick made Paths of Glory as a career guide.

      The laws of unintended consequences ain’t what they used to be…

      • John Jay December 3, 2013, 9:09 pm

        Red,
        Yes, it is sad to see what we have become after the great Generals/Admirals we had in WWII.
        Even sadder to see the long line of grunts who will still walk out to their certain deaths for no good reason.

        Two thousand years ago Roman legionaries had more common sense.
        On more than one occasion during Rome’s endless civil wars, the legions refused to fight each other, and told their General’s to patch things up with the other side.
        Even the soldiers of Alexander the Great finally told him that’s far enough, we want to go home!
        The closest we came to that was 1500 “fragging” incidents in Vietnam that helped end that madhouse.
        Lunacy.

  • Sigmund Fraud December 2, 2013, 2:31 pm

    Someone commented on tfmetalsreport.com some months ago that there were reports of researchers at Stanford Univ. finding that samples of salmon caught off the coast west of San Francisco were contaminated with radioactive cesium, which is potentially harmful to humans. There were links to video news reports made in Japan. Reportedly the Stanford researchers were shipping some of their salmon samples to a researcher in Japan to confirm their measurements. Reportedly radioactive cesium could only have originated at Fukushima…..

  • Len Tisdale December 2, 2013, 10:34 am

    Taking those rods out is suicidal. One mistake will be a worldwide disaster. The world’s top nuclear scientists and engineers must be brought in immediately to solve this problem. The United Nations should have been in charge of this from the start, instead of a Japanese company that seems to be blowing smoke up the world’s ass. God help us…..

  • Did you know December 2, 2013, 10:14 am

    The release of radiation at Fukushima has been less than the combined release of Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

    Did people in California die or get radiation poisoning in 1946-1950?

    No. This is why the crybabies screaming doom have been wrong.

    &&&&&

    ‘Crybabies screaming doom’?? This would appear to be your first post here, but that’s no excuse for inflicting such a wretched metaphor on the discussion. Might I suggest that you do your blogging at MSNBC?
    RA

  • BDTR December 2, 2013, 10:13 am

    …I stand amid the roar
    Of a surf-tormented shore,
    And I hold within my hand
    Grains of the golden sand—
    How few! yet how they creep
    Through my fingers to the deep,
    While I weep—while I weep!
    O God! Can I not grasp
    Them with a tighter clasp?
    O God! can I not save
    One from the pitiless wave?
    Is all that we see or seem
    But a dream within a dream?

    (From Edgar Allen Poe’s ‘A Dream Within a Dream’)