Earthquake Resistance And Nuclear Power Plants; 100% Failure Rate So Far
Sep 28, 2013
EARTHQUAKE CAUSED FUKUSHIMA MELTDOWN
Hiroshima Univ. Historian: Donât believe Tepcoâs lies â Fukushima meltdowns caused by quake not tsunami â Smoke, radiation spike, loss of coolant, collapsed walls and pipes were all before wave hit (VIDEO
â Particularly Unit 1 released a lot of radiation before tsunami hit.
â Ex-Tepco worker: "I personally saw pipes that came apartâ¦"
â 5 minutes before tsunami flooded the plants, radiation alarm went off.
â Much damage to cooling system before tsunami.
Arnie Gunderson makes the points that nuclear power plants have numerous design flaws and weaknesses. Any nuclear plant can be taken out by an earthquake, no matter what the 'experts' or computers say. The nuclear industry refuses to admit that even after Fukushima had multiple reactor melt downs and melt throughs directly caused by one earthquake. In the following video, Arnie makes the point that the 9.0 earthquake caused damage to the unit #4 building at Fukushima, and that this earthquake damage almost brought it down. He says that due solely due to the earthquake, that the walls of the reactor building are sinking, leaning and bulging. His advice is to get the spent fuel out of the building as fast as possible, but it took TEPCO over a year to even start the process. He does not believe that the building can withstand another 7.0 earthquake. TEPCO denies any damage was caused by the earthquake, for political reasons, and ignored he advice for a year, during which time another earthquake could have hit and brought down the building, spilling all of the contents of the spent fuel pool.
Specifically, at least one and possibly three reactors melted down as a direct result of what should have been a survivable earthquake at Fukushima. For example, it was revealed in an investigation that the earthquake damaged emergency pipes that directly caused at least one and possibly more reactors to melt down. Loss of power due to transmission lines coming down into Fukushima took care of some of the rest. The earthquake exceeded the design basis of the plant by 25%, according to the investigators. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZgYmkItcqk&feature=share&list=PLG9Nh9qMTUKDPtgIeNyZ89E4CAOO285ov
In the video link above, it was also revealed that the SR valves did not work after the earthquake, because they were powered by gas, and the pressure in the reactors pushed back hard enough against these gas powered SR valves to keep them from working. The engineers did not foresee this possibility. TEPCO avoids any mention of this 'defect' in planning. The #4 spent fuel pool also cracked and let out all cooling water, solely due to the earthquake. (A tsunami did not go 100 feet up to the 5th floor and cause it to crack. That means that the analysis and data used to calculate risk and strength needed in nuclear reactors is extremely flawed, because with just one earthquake, up to 4 huge radiation sources leaked or failed completely.
According to the investigators in the video above, it was also revealed that the reactor and drywell were built to the highest earthquake standards, class S, but the piping and equipment around it were built at MUCH lower earthquake safety standards, class C. (30 min. in) To this day, no one has done a systematic survey of all pipes and equipment in all buildings to see what failed due to to the earthquake, but TEPCO thinks the damage to pipes and equipment from the earthquake was 'minimal'. They offer no proof of that however. On March 15th, after massive pressure buildups in #2, a large bang was heard and the pressure dropped to zero in the drywell and reactor. To this day, no one knows what happened... was it a leak in pipes, a crack in the reactor, a blown weld? Did the bottom blow out of the reactor? What is known for absolutely sure, is that massive amounts of radiation were released, because the reactor melted down core was now directly connected to the outside, with nothing in between, and that is still how it is today. At reactor #3, the pressure also rose and water dropped below the level of the fuel rods, causing them to melt down. On March 13th, 1,000 spare batteries to operate valves, generators, pumps and other emergency equipment was located 50 miles away at a stock base, but these items never got to the Fukushima Daichi plant, despite being requested over and over again. Instead, the wrong batteries from the military were delivered, and could not be used. The workers tried using car batteries from their own personal vehicles, but by then it was too late. A massive explosion hit #3 on March 14th at11AM, (movie says just a hydrogen explosion) but what really happened is that the reactor blew and spread it's contents for miles around the plant, making it much worse than either #1 or #2. The Fukushima plant was supposedly designed to withstand a 8.2 earthquake. The 'computer' assumption was that there would be no larger earthquake within 1,000 years, and no tsunami larger than the sea wall would happen for the same period of time. Both the earthquake and the tsunami were larger by orders of magnitude than the computer assumptions made by the designers and builders, and the resulting statistics that these 'experts' used to design, build and defend it were completely useless and worthless. But these are the same experts and the same methods used to design and build not just nuclear power plants, but also nuclear weapons. For example, among those who know how earthquakes REALLY work, as opposed to how the nuclear industry presents things, it is well known that there is a 'formula' for earthquakes. Even Arnie in the video above talks about this. The formula is very easy to understand. For every ten earthquakes of one class, there will be one of the next higher class. For example, if there are ten 6.0 earthquakes in a certain region, then there will be ONE 7.0 earthquake. For ever ten 7.0 earthquakes in a region, there will be one 8.0 earthquake and so on.. This is a rough formula, but it is pretty accurate and dependable.
Both TEPCO and the Japanese government lied about the earthquake after the accident, about both the meltdown happening due to it, and the severity of the 'accident', as well as the causes of the meltdowns. Can we really call this mega nuclear disaster an 'accident', when all parties involved knew 20-30 years ago that this would happen eventually and were warned about it from many different sources and experts? Fukushima nuclear reactors 1, 2 and 3 all failed due to the earthquake, and in addition, #4 spent fuel pool failed. This means Fukushima proved 100% guaranteed that earthquake damage prevention plans are not adequate for ANY nuclear reactor, anywhere in the world. Fukushima was designed more robustly to counter earthquakes than any other reactor in the world, and it failed 100%, multiple times.
Since the earthquake actually was centered 150 miles off the coast, the Fukushima plant did not actually experience a 9.0 earthquake. More than likely it only experienced an 8.0, a 7.0 or maybe even less, since the distance from the actual earthquake created a reduction in the effects experienced by the earthquake.
It could very well be that the Fukushima plant only felt what amounted to a 7.0 or 6.0 earthquake. It is telling that the plant failed and at least one reactor melted down due to the earthquake. In other words, the tsunami did not cause the meltdown of multiple reactors, it just accelerated the process.
The above picture of a reactor smoking and radiation alarms going off before the tsunami even hit should provide enough evidence for even the most ardent sceptics. Source is below..
For those who need more evidence, in the following NRC transcript, it was revealed that backup generators failed after the 9.0 earthquake (not after tsunami). This is what caused #1 reactor to meltdown at Fukushima.
An article in Nature revealed that radioactive Xenon began to vent almost immediately after the earthquake.
"The latest analysis also presents evidence that xenon-133 began to vent from Fukushima Daiichi immediately after the quake, and before the tsunami swamped the area. This implies that even without the devastating flood, the earthquake alone was sufficient to cause damage at the plant....The Japanese government's report has already acknowledged that the shaking at Fukushima Daiichi exceeded the plant's design specifications. Anti-nuclear activists have long been concerned that the government has failed to adequately address geological hazards when licensing nuclear plants.":
Engineers Knew Fukushima Might Be Unsafe, But Covered It Up â¦And Now the Extreme Vulnerabilty of NEW U.S. Plants Is Being Covered Up
âPreface: The current nuclear reactor design was chosen â not because it was safe â but because it worked on navy submarines. And governments have been covering up nuclear meltdowns for 50 years.
âBBC reporter Greg Palast reports â based on a first-hand interview of a senior engineer for the corporation which built the Fukushima nuclear plants, and a review of engineersâ field diaries â that the engineers who built the Fukushima nuclear plants knew their design would fail in an earthquake:
âThe plant was riddled with problems that, no way on earth, could stand an earth- quake. The team of engineers sent in to inspect found that most of these components could âcompletely and utterly failâ during an earthquakeâ¦.â
Fukushima also proved that if one nuclear plant blows up, as #3 did, it can prove to be very difficult to maintain the other reactors safely, because they are all connected together with one central control facility. Putting multiple reactors in one place has been proven by the 400% failure at Fukushima to NOT be a good idea.
GEOLOGY ISSUES IGNORED
âI have talked with some of my colleagues (geology professors) today, and some of them knew for many years/decades that the bed rock of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuke Power Plant is soft sedimentary rock. They do not know why government (both national and local/prefectural) approved for the construction of the plant on such a bad spot, and can only think of*unethical acts of polititians and the industry.*Also,*my colleagues warn that the type of bed rock, which geologists identify,*and the strength/suitability of the*bed rock, which soil/geo-engineers determine, is different, even though I would*still support that*young sedimentary rocks below the Fukushima Daiichi Nuke Plant is NOT*suitable for constructing buildings that have to endure earthquakes. â
âIn addition, years before Fukushima engineer Mitsuhiko Tanaka blew the whistle on the fact that Tepco covered up a defective containment vessel, the above-quoted Japan Times article blew the whistle:
ââYoichi Kikuchi, a Japanese nuclear engineer who also became a whistle-blower, has told me personally of many safety problems at Japanâs nuclear power plants, such as cracks in pipes in the cooling system from vibrations in the reactor. He said the electric companies are âgambling in a dangerous game to increase profits and decrease government oversight.â
ââ[Kei Sugaoka, a Japanese-American senior field engineer who worked for General Electric in the United States, who previously blew the whistle on Tepco's failure to inform the government of defects at the reactors] agreed, saying, âThe scariest thing, on top of all the other problems, is that all nuclear power plants are aging, causing a deterioration of piping and joints which are always exposed to strong radiation and heat.ââ¦ââ
Engineers Knew Fukushima Might Be Unsafe, But Covered It Up â¦ And Now the Extreme Vulnerability of NEW U.S. Plants Is Being Covered Up - November 12, 2011- WashingtonsBlog
âIn 2004, Leuren Moret warned in the Japan Times of the exact type of nuclear catastrophe that Japan is now experiencing: ...Japan sits on top of four tectonic plates, at the edge of the subduction zone, and is in one of the most tectonically active regions of the world....Many of those reactors have been negligently sited on active faults, particularly in the subduction zone along the Pacific coast, where major earthquakes of magnitude 7-8 or more on the Richter scale occur frequently. The periodicity of major earthquakes in Japan is less than 10 years. There is almost no geologic setting in the world more dangerous for nuclear power than Japan â the third-ranked country in the world for nuclear reactors.
âââI think the situation right now is very scary,â says Katsuhiko Ishibashi, a seismologist and professor at Kobe University. âItâs like a kamikaze terrorist wrapped in bombs just waiting to explode.â
âAs the US Geological Survey notes, Japan has had many earthquakes, including:
â¢ 1891 10 27 â Mino-Owari, Japan â M 8.0 Fatalities 7,273
â¢ 1896 06 15 â Sanriku, Japan â M 8.5 Fatalities 27,000
â¢ 1911 06 15 â Ryukyu Islands, Japan â M 8.1 Fatalities 12
â¢ 1923 09 01 â Kanto (Kwanto), Japan â M 7.9 Fatalities 143,000
â¢ 1927 03 07 â Tango, Japan â M 7.6 Fatalities 3,020
â¢ 1933 03 02 â Sanriku, Japan â M 8.4 Fatalities 2,990
â¢ 1943 09 10 â Tottori, Japan â M 7.4 Fatalities 1,190
â¢ 1944 12 07 â Tonankai, Japan â M 8.1 Fatalities 1,223
â¢ 1945 01 12 â Mikawa, Japan â M 7.1 Fatalities 1,961
â¢ 1946 12 20 â Nankaido, Japan â M 8.1 Fatalities 1,330
â¢ 1948 06 28 â Fukui, Japan â M 7.3 Fatalities 3,769
â¢ 1952 03 04 â Hokkaido, Japan region â M 8.1 Fatalities 31
â¢ 1964 06 16 â Niigata, Japan â M 7.5 Fatalities 26
â¢ 1968 05 16 â Off the East Coast of Honshu,Fatalities 10,
Bottom line, the authorities and nuclear companies involved were warned 20-30 years before this nuclear mega disaster happened about both the disastrous earthquakes that were coming and the tsunami records showing huge tsunamis that happened regularly in this area. The warnings included that these tsunamis would easily overtop the tsunami wall being designed for Fukushima and that earthquakes would easily surpass the design basis of the plant. But the government and regulators IGNORED the warnings, just the same way that they do all around the world, in all other countries. They proceed ahead anyway, because short term profits trump the long term community and national concerns that are always being pointed at.
What drives this process? Why do they proceed ahead, knowing these facts? Why do they do it, in spite of massive and overwhelming failure guaranteed in the future? Bottom line, the nuclear power or other company involved knows that it will be bailed out financially, no one will go to jail, and no one will be blamed. They know and count on the fact that taxpayers will pay the companies involved to clean up the mess through no bid contracts.
No bid 'failure' contracts mean even more profits than the actual building and operation of the nuclear plant or military facility. So for the nuclear companies, a massive failure and meltdown of a nuclear power plant or disaster in a military facility means win win win for them financially. It actually pays for them to cause a failure either through inaction, denying dangers, ignoring warnings and/or actively causing a nuclear plant to fail. Failure is VERY PROFITABLE, because it generates massive no bid contracts. The companies causing these mega disasters are the same ones that get the 'cleanup' or emergency disaster contracts, such as TEPCO in the case of Fukushima Daichi multiple meltdowns. For taxpayers, it is a lose lose lose situation for hundreds of thousands of years, in every case, guaranteed.
THE MEDICAL AND BIG PHARMA CONNECTION
The medical community by and large also buys into and supports the the 'failure is success' nuclear industry mentality and process, because when a nuclear facility fails/melts down, many more thousands or millions of people need surgeries, treatments and medical care, permanently, even if they would otherwise be living healthy lifestyle and would not otherwise get sick or be disabled.
Any failure or nuclear accident guarantees a massive number of medical 'clients' for life taking drugs, getting surgeries and radiation treatments. The money and profits go back to the same companies that built the nuclear plants to start with, such as GE for example. GE building nuclear power plants that are guaranteed to fail, and it also builds and promotes the nuclear medical technology and 'medicines'.
So again the public and politicians are confronted with the fact that a failure of ANY nuclear facility means financial success for the medical community as it is structured today. There is no incentive to change anything for the better either. Profits for both the nuclear industry and the medical industry as well as Big Pharma just get bigger and bigger as the failures become larger and more severe. These profits are guaranteed and built into the system, no matter how big the failures become.
Underneath everything, all nuclear power plants generate weapons grade plutonium. This is the real reason for nuclear power plants. Trying to prevent nuclear power plants is the only way to prevent a nation from getting 'the bomb'. Everyone knows that a virus/worm called Stuxnet was created and then released by the United States CIA working together with Israeli military industry counterparts. The virus was delivered into the Iranian uranium enrichment facilities as they were enriching uranium to make fuel for their nuclear power plant. The uranium enrichment equipment in Iran used the exact same Siemens software that Fukushima has in place, to control valves and controls.
The Stuxnet virus is extremely dangerous because it attacks speed control motors, pumps and valves inside of a reactor just as easily as these same things inside of an enrichment facility. The control room operators do not know anything is happening as valves, motors or pumps are destroyed by the virus, silently, secretly, under the cloak of invisibility.
The virus can even be designed to be triggered on top of unusual things happening inside of a reactor, such as an earthquake, but to stay out of sight until then. A Stuxnet virus could have been triggered to start destroying the reactor(s) at Fukushima as soon as the earthquake hit for example.
The Stuxnet virus was discovered in Japan several months before the disaster. Why were Japanese nuclear facilities infected? Could one reason be that Japan had offered to help Iran enrich uranium, or supply uranium for their reactors? Iran is a known 'enemy' of Israel. Israel is very clear and direct in their motivations and methods to get nations to support their position, no matter how extreme that position might be. The position of Japan supporting Iran's nuclear ambitions might have triggered a response from either the CIA or from their counterparts in Israel, in order to teach Japan a lesson. On the other hand, maybe Stuxnet was not a part of the Fukushima multiple reactor melt down. No matter how it turned out, we will probably never hear about it.
Bottom line though, the blowback from infecting Iranian computers and nuclear facilities with viruses is bound to come back to haunt the US and possibly other countries as well, as each one tries to get 'revenge' on perceived or real enemies. Stuxnet clones or other viruses will be designed and sought to be planted by CIA type Iranian operatives in US, Japan and other nuclear facilities around the world as 'payback' for insults or even political opposition. This new threat to nuclear power plants and research facilities is a very dangerous game of chicken that may mean life extinction on the whole planet if certain scenarios play out, such as the Stuxnet virus causing meltdowns of nuclear power plants or launch of nuclear missiles even. Did the CIA and Israeli counterparts foresee this blowback?
Due to the earthquake dangers and other safety concerns, the former Nuclear Regulator NRC Chairman Says â 100% Of ALL US Nuclear Reactors Should Be SHUT DOWN PERMANENTLY! Former Nuclear Regulator NRC Chairman Says â 100% Of ALL US Nuclear Reactors Should Be SHUT DOWN PERMANENTLY! via @AGreenRoad
EARTHQUAKE RISK CALCULATIONS The NRC is using outdated research in it's methodology to calculate earthquake risk and design standards. The NRC appears to NOT be following the most updated and recent research in seismology.
For example, the research cited by the NRC when they make their risk assumptions around earthquakes is based on a probabilistic model that no longer applies. The 'assumption' being made is that there is a 'maximum' earthquake which can occur in any given region on a regular periodic basis. But that does not work in real life. See the follow paper which explains why... (Y.Y. Kagan, D.D..Jackson, R.J. Geller: Seismological Research Letters, 2012):
The physical universe is figured out by objective testing, not by agreement of a theoretical computer model, based on flawed assumptions, and then agreed on by the nuclear scientists who are less then objective. Their paycheck depends on them coming up with a positive, reduced risk model that will cost less, or they lose their job. Never mind that the data does not match the computer models; the data will be ignored or attacked.
One particular earthquake model deserves to be investigaged; and that is the âtapered Gutenberg-Richterâ(GR)
The PSHA, which is currently used by the NRC and the nuclear industry seems at first glance to work well, and it provides numbers to work off of. There is just the teensy weensy problem, in that the hazard maps do not agree with the impartial data that has been collected.
The March 11, 2011 Tohoku earthquake (a magnitude-9 quake which occurred in a place where the national hazard map said only a magnitude-8 was expected, with a much lower hazard level than other regions of Japan that supposedly were at much greater risk) should have been a wake-up call not only for seismologists but for also for users of hazard maps.
But there seems to be a lot of cognitive dissonance here, as typified by the NRC post-Fukushima view that PSHA has solved the problem and that everything has been taken care of. There seems to be a great demand for products that produce PSHA-type answers. So the nuclear community has to take responsibility for seismic and tsunami risk assessment issues rather than just taking whatever the usual group of consultants may tell them as established truth. Not what the nuclear community wants to hear, I suppose, but thatâs the way it is.
Bottom line, planning for the infinite future by depending on a limited past recorded history, does not ensure nuclear plant safety or resistance to melt downs! FACT: A once in a hundred year or even a thousand year event is just as likely to happen tomorrow as many years in the future; then what?
COST OF 1 NUCLEAR PLANT MELTDOWN In France, the cost of a meltdown was projected to be â¬760 billion, but when updated with the impact on tourism and exports, the cost would jump to â¬1 trillion.
âOne trillion, thatâs what Fukushima will ultimately cost,â Repussard said.
Part of the â¬5.8 trillion would be the âastronomical social costs due to the high number of victims,â the report stated. The region contaminated by cesium 137 would cover much of France and Switzerland, all of Belgium and the Netherlands, and a big part of Germanyâan area with 90 million people (map). The costs incurred by farmers, employees, and companies, the environmental damage and healthcare expenses would amount to â¬4.4 trillion.
âThose are social costs, but the victims may not necessarily be compensated,â the report stated ominouslyâbecause there would be no entity in France that could disburse those kinds of amounts.
Closer to the plant, 5 million people would have to be evacuated from an area of 87,000 square kilometers (about 12% of France) and resettled. The soil would have to be decontaminated, and radioactive waste would have to be treated and disposed of. Total cost: â¬475 billion.
The weather is the big unknown. Yet itâs crucial in any cost calculations. Winds blowing toward populated areas would create the worst-case scenario of â¬5.8 trillion. Amidst the horrible disaster of Fukushima.
The USA cannot afford a Trillion Dollar Eco-Disaster like Fukushima. The Fukushima mega disaster will cost Japan between 1 to 10 Trillion dollars, unless they cover it up, deny it happened and just ignore all of the issues that cost money, which is what they are doing at present. But the consequences of ignoring the disaster and not spending the money needed to address the REAL issues in the long term will only increase the bottom line costs in the long run.
Catastrophic nuclear disasters like Chernobyl in 1986 or Fukushima in 2011, are, weâre incessantly told, very rare, and their probability of occurring infinitesimal.
But when they do occur, they get costly. So costly that the French government, when it came up with cost estimates for an accident in France, kept them secret.
But now the report was leaked to the French magazine, Le Journal de Dimanche. Turns out, the upper end of the cost spectrum of an accident at the nuclear power plant at Dampierre, in the Department of Loiret in north-central France, amounted to over three times the countryâs GDP.
Source: French Nuclear Disaster Scenario Was So Bad The Government Kept It Secret
Northern California Beach
Reading 500 CPM on
12/20/2013 - Fukushima
Radiation Is Here. Via @
From Rense; "The above
video was taken today
with an Inspector Plus
Geiger counter by 'Dave',
giving readings on a
According to wiki; "A
classic staple of science
fiction and superhero
is matter composed
subatomic particles that
have mostly exactly the
same properties (mass,
intrinsic angular mo...
Beginning in the 1950s,
American and Soviet
scientists engaged in a
dangerous race to see who
could build and detonate
the world's largest bomb.
In the Soviet Union,
Andrei Sakharov was the
architect of this
According to the movie,
According to NIRS;
"Marine life in all
forms, from endangered
manatees and sea turtles
to essential microscopic
organisms, is being
harmed and killed by
systems, used to remove
waste heat at nuclear
Tucson's 32nd Annual
Peace Fair and Music
Climate JusticeThis FREE
event is Arizona's
largest gathering of
Peace, Justice, and
with Live Music, Tables,
Hello my C2 Family,
First let me say Thank
You to those of you who
have so sweetly fwd my
posts. You are SO
AWESOME!! I will never
forget your help. Anytime
I can repay the favour,
please tell me. Second,
my Submit button has
disappeared leaving ...
My little Valentine,
Lily, loves taking
pictures. She said "Mom,
let's do a Valentines
photo shoot, so I can
send the pics as cards to
our friends" lol. I
can't believe she's 5 yrs
old! Looking back at my
1st album of her:
"Lilyanna Jane, is cra...
telling myself the truth.
And honesty is telling
the truth to other
Many years ago, when I
was in high school
chemistry lab, I was
assigned to do a litmus
test to determin...