tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850795848027608997.post2773081322029504533..comments2023-11-05T02:15:15.513-08:00Comments on Majia's Blog: Making Sense of FukushimaMajia's Bloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04941091700194936591noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850795848027608997.post-22429451031008716032015-12-26T06:59:52.444-08:002015-12-26T06:59:52.444-08:00well said!well said!Majia's Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04941091700194936591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850795848027608997.post-87074654217121326882015-12-25T09:54:18.809-08:002015-12-25T09:54:18.809-08:00If human error is involved, the responsible corpor...If human error is involved, the responsible corporations should pay up out of their profits. There was criminal negligence. So the strategy is to dispute the nature and extent of harm and the causation thereof. Also, the legal team tries to hide behind immunities and the complexitiesof international law of nuclear liability. Unit #4 spent fuel pool or may not have burned off into the atmosphere. But massive amounts of radionuclides were released, worse than Chernobyl. Nuclear energy cannot be cheap if all steps are taken to make it safe. Absolute care is required which is impossible for profit-driven humans to deliver. Nature is also unpredictable. This accident scenario will be repeated. Every seven years on the average there has been a nuclear catastrophe, usually followed by a cover-up. Consumers and taxpayers pick up the tab. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02236958667790834555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850795848027608997.post-79515808184587056562015-12-25T09:54:09.006-08:002015-12-25T09:54:09.006-08:00If human error is involved, the responsible corpor...If human error is involved, the responsible corporations should pay up out of their profits. There was criminal negligence. So the strategy is to dispute the nature and extent of harm and the causation thereof. Also, the legal team tries to hide behind immunities and the complexitiesof international law of nuclear liability. Unit #4 spent fuel pool or may not have burned off into the atmosphere. But massive amounts of radionuclides were released, worse than Chernobyl. Nuclear energy cannot be cheap if all steps are taken to make it safe. Absolute care is required which is impossible for profit-driven humans to deliver. Nature is also unpredictable. This accident scenario will be repeated. Every seven years on the average there has been a nuclear catastrophe, usually followed by a cover-up. Consumers and taxpayers pick up the tab. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02236958667790834555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850795848027608997.post-71285975604121661552015-12-24T15:27:28.082-08:002015-12-24T15:27:28.082-08:00My scope for this comment is SFP4 only.
My argume...My scope for this comment is SFP4 only.<br /><br />My argument is that the existence of the 25/50/100 source term does not answer the question of whether SFP4 was lost. <br /><br />My purpose is to caution both you (Majia), and the reader, that the 25/50/100 source term should not grow legs and become a "fact."<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16543411882553596721noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850795848027608997.post-30140690586614082282015-12-24T10:15:21.414-08:002015-12-24T10:15:21.414-08:00There is no definitive set of source terms availab...There is no definitive set of source terms available in the scientific literature, which I've reviewed in my many publications on Fukushima.<br /><br />So, all we have are educated guesses based on SNAPSHOT representations of fallout contamination.<br /><br />SNAPSHOTS: The xenon and krypton releases exceeded Chernobyl's and were detected around the world. <br /><br />Iodine 131 levels WEEKS AFTER DEPOSITION reported by the US geological survey indicate that fallout in some places exceeded IAEA standards of "contamination" for radioiodine alone.<br /><br />Safety assurances are being based on measurements of single radionuclides with no consideration of the 1000 radioactive elements said by TEPCO to have been emitted during Daiichi's early meltdowns.<br /><br />Maybe government officials at high ranks know the true source terms from March 11-15, but what about the ONGOING contamination of the ocean and atmosphere? Have ongoing contamination levels been factored into risk assessments?<br /><br />And then we have the problems with modeling dose. The NRC, EPA, FDA dose-models entirely lack ECOLOGICAL VALIDITY, as demonstrated by quite a bit of EMPIRICAL research on radiation-contaminated environments.<br /><br />So, what is your argument Michael? It seems to me that you are saying that without definitive source terms no arguments can be made about the catastrophic consequences of the disaster.<br /><br />Am I correctly representing your argument. Please clarify if I'm incorrect in my assessment.<br /><br />Majia's Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04941091700194936591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850795848027608997.post-85480608032257444462015-12-24T10:03:46.860-08:002015-12-24T10:03:46.860-08:00I often think I've fallen down Alice's Rab...I often think I've fallen down Alice's Rabbit Hole or into the "Twilight Zone."Majia's Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04941091700194936591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850795848027608997.post-59743180568298232972015-12-23T10:26:24.547-08:002015-12-23T10:26:24.547-08:00Michael Magyar is correct. Why would you accept c...Michael Magyar is correct. Why would you accept conclusions made by people who were trying to makes guesses based on a little low-quality evidence, when there is now a lot of high-quality evidence available?Ashleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13871602809790144927noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850795848027608997.post-18574538679675857462015-12-22T20:34:04.388-08:002015-12-22T20:34:04.388-08:00There were multiple competing source term models i...There were multiple competing source term models in play as of March 15, 2011, with the NRC providing this particular 25/50/100 source term model to the NARAC as stated in the PDF document referenced above. <br /><br />Tepco did not agree with this source term model. <br /><br />You should note that all source term models were guesses as of March 15, as nobody could get close enough to the damaged reactors 3 and 4 to make an accurate assessment.<br /><br />If you were an engineer from the NRC, who just arrived on the scene, and you wanted the NARAC to come up with some advisories, you'd give them "worst case." IMHO, that is all we have here: the worst case among multiple competing source term models.<br /><br />Don't get me wrong, Unit 4 was plenty bad, and Unit 3 even worse, but the elephant in the room is the video documentation of SFP4 fuel removal. To dismiss these videos as elaborate hoaxes, as others have done, is to be intellectually lazy. Where is the evidence? <br /><br />If there is no evidence, we should be careful not to portray a source term model, generated by the NRC on March 15, as fact, or anything close to fact. This, when the Japanese--who were far more familiar with the plant--did not agree with the NRC's imagined loss of SFP4.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16543411882553596721noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850795848027608997.post-25043737209870558992015-12-19T12:50:53.135-08:002015-12-19T12:50:53.135-08:00I have a design for a T Shirt with Unit #3 going k...I have a design for a T Shirt with Unit #3 going kaboom in full color and the phrase<br />Got Fukushima! <br /><br />This is no joke folks. If you have known about #3 all along, great, if not, start praying.<br /><br />Nothing else will work any way.<br /><br />Twilight Zone.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18047458603811485801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850795848027608997.post-4081810312469788022015-12-19T12:45:42.540-08:002015-12-19T12:45:42.540-08:00Nick from enenews....completely hacked out.
My lo...Nick from enenews....completely hacked out.<br /><br />My love to us all. The Truth has been told.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18047458603811485801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850795848027608997.post-2627920280799573222015-12-18T09:29:03.443-08:002015-12-18T09:29:03.443-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Dr Goodhearthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07518656860182780457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850795848027608997.post-37099675531262802612015-12-18T09:25:10.332-08:002015-12-18T09:25:10.332-08:00You and majia are good people doc. So is Lucas and...You and majia are good people doc. So is Lucas and pia. too many spooks otherwise. im gointo belize soon. sayonaraAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850795848027608997.post-13925276653479705712015-12-18T09:11:52.146-08:002015-12-18T09:11:52.146-08:00Worst Case Scenario Around The Fukushima Mega Nucl...Worst Case Scenario Around The Fukushima Mega Nuclear Disaster, Vs Best Case Scenario Presented By Nuclear Industry<br />http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2015/10/worst-case-scenario-around-fukushima.htmlDr Goodhearthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07518656860182780457noreply@blogger.com