Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Shop the Truthdig Gift Guide 2014
December 20, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Get Truthdig's headlines in your inbox!


Loss of Rainforests Is Double Whammy Threat to Climate






Truthdig Bazaar
PornoPower

Boots on the Ground by Dusk: My Tribute to Pat Tillman

By Mary Tillman with Narda Zacchino
Hardcover $17.13

more items

 
Report

The Latest From Japan’s Nuclear Disaster

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Mar 12, 2011
AP / The Yomiuri Shimbun, Yasushi Kanno

Fukushima Daiichi power plant’s Unit 1 after Friday’s earthquake. Later it would be the scene of an explosion.

By Derek Lazzaro

For the very latest, watch the live stream from Japanese television below.

Update, Tuesday, March 15: Wednesday (Japan time), multiple news services reported that Japanese officials had withdrawn all emergency workers from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. Meanwhile, the Nikkei.com news service reported that officials now estimate that 70 percent of the fuel rods at the Unit 1 reactor core were damaged, with damage to approximately 33 percent of the fuel rods in the Unit 2 reactor core also reported.

According to the NHK TV News channel, around 10:30 a.m. Japan time on Wednesday, white smoke or steam poured from one of the damaged reactor buildings. At the same time, radiation levels within the plant went rose significantly, into the low millisievert-per-hour range. The plant’s operator could not confirm the origin or nature of the cloud, but said that supervisors had withdrawn their workers as a result of the radiation spike. Radiation levels began to drop after the initial spike. It was not immediately clear when workers would return to the plant. Commentators and officials speculated that the cloud could have come from either the Unit 4 waste pool or the Unit 2 reactor building.

Update, Tuesday, March 15: The fire is reported as no longer “visible” at Unit 4. That is significant because of the danger of an active fire at the fuel pool.

Update, Tuesday, March 15: At 5:45 a.m. Wednesday (Japan time) a new blast and fire were reported in the waste storage area in the Unit 4 reactor containment building at the Fukushima Daiichi reactor facility. The Unit 4 reactor had been offline for maintenance before the earthquake, but extremely radioactive nuclear waste was stored in the building above the reactor core. Like the cores, that waste requires constant water cooling, but unlike the cores it is not contained within a hardened metal pressure vessel. The blasts are believed to have been caused by hydrogen byproducts that are safely suppressed during normal plant operations.

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
According to NHK TV News, neither the government nor the Tokyo Electric Power Co. immediately held a press conference, and emergency crews were unable to reach the reactor to assess the situation. Shortly before the latest blast, the Japanese and United States governments ruled out the use of helicopters to drop water on the four stricken reactor cores at the Fukushima Daiichi facility.

The Japanese government immediately expanded the exclusion zone to 30 kilometers around the plant. Individuals in that zone were told to either evacuate or stay indoors with the windows closed and the air conditioning off.

Recap, Tuesday, March 15:

  • Fires or explosions have affected all four of the reactor containment structures at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.
  • The Unit 1 and Unit 3 containment buildings have visible damage to their structures, while damage to the Unit 2 building was reportedly in the lowest level of the building, in the suppression pool. No images of the Unit 4 building have been made available since before Tuesday’s fire.
  • The Unit 3 reactor core was fueled with a plutonium-uranium MOX mixture, making it potentially the most dangerous of the reactors.
  • The Unit 4 reactor was offline at the time of the accident, but extremely radioactive waste was stored in a room above the reactor core, and a fire was reported in that room late Monday.
  • The Unit 4 fire (Wednesday morning, Japan time) resulted in a release of radiation that at least temporarily spiked local readings around the plant to more than 400 millisieverts per hour (40,000 microsieverts/hour). The normal, natural, background rate is approximately 0.2 to 0.35 microsieverts/hour. A medical X-ray results in approximately 20 to 100 microsieverts per film.
  • Readings dropped well below the 400 mSv/hour reading level once the fire at Unit 4 was countered. It was unclear if the fire was entirely suppressed.
  • Clouds of smoke and steam were detected from both the Unit 3 and Unit 4 containment buildings at various times in the last 24 hours.
  • The 400 mSv/hour reading caused Tokyo Electric Power Co. to pull all but 50 of its several hundred emergency workers from the plant site. The company said that cooling efforts at all reactors were continuing.
  • The Japanese regulatory agency, the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, has not issued an English-language report since before the Unit 4 fire (Wednesday morning, Japan time).

Update, Monday, March 14: The owner of the Fukushima plant reported that a blast was heard Tuesday (local time) at the building containing the stricken Unit 2 reactor. The blast, which followed explosions at Unit 1 and Unit 3, may have occurred near the suppression pool at the bottom of the reactor assembly. The atmospheric pressure in the pool dropped suddenly, indicating that the pool’s casing may have cracked or otherwise been damaged.

Japanese channel NHK reported that noncritical workers at the Unit 1 and Unit 3 reactors were being evacuated, at least temporarily. The plant operator said that water injection efforts would continue as efforts were made to cool the three damaged reactor cores.

There were no reports of visible damage to the Unit 2 building, but local radiation levels increased, leading to the staff evacuation.

Update, Monday, March 14: Clarification: British Nuclear Fuels Ltd. became defunct in 2010. Since then French nuclear firm AREVA has replaced it as a major foreign supplier of nuclear fuel.

Update, Sunday, March 13: A large explosion has occurred at the Unit 3 reactor at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear power plant. The explosion included a large orange flash, which indicates that it was probably the result of a hydrogen detonation. This explosion follows the partial destruction of the Unit 1 containment building in a previous hydrogen explosion. [See video of the explosion here]

The Washington Post reports that Japanese nuclear officials have resorted to using fire pumps to inject tens of thousands of gallons of seawater directly into the reactors at two Fukushima nuclear power complexes. This emergency action has been undertaken to control what is now being described as a “partial meltdown” of at least two reactor cores.

Reports said that Japanese nuclear officials believe the inner containment vessel of the Unit 3 reactor was still intact after the explosion. The danger posed by a containment breach at the Unit 3 reactor is especially serious because the reactor was recently fueled with a semi-experimental MOX nuclear fuel, which is a combination of plutonium oxide and the more common uranium oxide. Plutonium is considered a substantially more dangerous nuclear fuel, and the Japanese MOX program was delayed for more than a decade because of local opposition and the revelation that the British fuel manufacturer, British Nuclear Fuels Ltd., had falsified safety reports in the late 1990s.


Live TV : Ustream

Original report:

Dramatic and conflicting reports emerged Saturday regarding the safety status of the Unit 1 reactor at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi power plant.

The news aggregator Drudge Report linked to a story in the Japanese press that said the explosion that destroyed the reactor’s outer containment building “could only have been caused by a meltdown of the reactor core.” The Japanese article said the source of the report was the Japanese Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency.

Some websites and blog posts criticized the article, saying it was either the result of “hysteria-driven journalism” or old information. 


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Napolean DoneHisPart's avatar

By Napolean DoneHisPart, March 17, 2011 at 11:37 am Link to this comment

It is possible.

Reluctance and greed come to mind when considering this topic.

The tax breaks and further social welfare for big corporate nuclear facilities could, at the stroke of a pen, be directed to fund the burgeoning solar-power industry… and we’ll see results in a timely manner.

Of course, this means the pigs earning their millions and billions from this competitive-less industry ( nuclear ) will hoot and holler and we’ll be hearing responses similar to of the world coming to an end or a dark age emerging.. which, by definition, is the M.O. of hierarchy.

Thing is, too many people cannot swallow the lies anymore, and too many people ( growing exponentially ) are ‘tuning in’ to the communication super-highway, and folks cannot hide from the truth much longer.

Report this

By Jim Yell, March 17, 2011 at 10:32 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

This morning as I watched a dispersed drop of water on the nuclear reactors, I realized that the Japanese Government had just admitted they had no control over what was going on below. I doubt very seriously that the way they are dropping the water, that they have any expectation that enough water could enter the hole in the roof to make any difference. If they had been able to put a focused stream of water thru the roof that might have worked. Throwing water at it and running away is futile.

Once more I will say—-“there is no safe nuclear power and that is because we can not afford even one accident. The results of even the supposed controled accidents have been contamination that in many cases will out last our existence. It is a mistake made by arrogant people, looking for easy way of dealing with difficult matters.

We hear “We can’t ignore nuclear power, there is no alternative” I remember when I was told Can’t can’t do anything. Our inability to change direction is because the people making the descisions have an invested interest in keeping things the way they are. It can be changed, people can learn to think about how they will use the energy we produce. We can value efficient use of energy over immediate access. I never have understood why most electronics continue to use electricity even when they are turned off. I know that is one thing that production could easily change.

Every long journey starts with one small step. It is time we made these small steps to change.

Report this

By Bill Britton, March 17, 2011 at 8:18 am Link to this comment

For those who wish to drop nuclear power immediately, here is the harsh reality: Coal generates 45% of U.S. electric power; Natural Gas, 24%; Nuclear, 20%; Hydro, 6%; Renewables, 5%.  There is no extant capacity to make up nuclear’s 20%.  To turn off nuclear would disrupt the entire economy.  Besides, each method has its downside.  Coal in particular produces 2.5 gigatonnes of carbon annually, along with tonnes of NOx and other pollutants.  Yes, we must make the transition to renewables to avoid the risk of man-induced climate change, but nuclear is the only realistic bridge to a carbon-reduced and, eventually, a nuclear-free world.  The question remains, though, how can this be accomplished when world population is projected to reach 9+ billion by 2050?

Report this

By Ratiocinator, March 17, 2011 at 5:50 am Link to this comment

Why aren’t there the high tech mobile generators there to power high volume
pumps to saturate the spent fuel rods? They should have been there already. They
keep displaying on the mass media that helicopters are dumping 7.5 tons of water
on them like that will make a difference. Think about it; That is only 15,000 lbs, a
little over a third of the capacity of a semi trailer load. Do they really think we are
that stupid or are they counting on it?

Report this
Napolean DoneHisPart's avatar

By Napolean DoneHisPart, March 17, 2011 at 12:35 am Link to this comment

Whomever would be at the helm of this country should DEMAND that all nuclear facilities be systematically shut down starting immediately ( or have a horizon time-line of no more than 180 days ) and the implementation of solar, wind, and all other alternative types of energy be brought enforce to replace the dangerous and extinction-able capabilities these unstable creations of man have.

Obama should be the voice of this, since he does sit in that office… but he or another would quickly be called an obvious dictator / tyrant / whatever… but we must ask ourselves:

Is the risk worth the juice? 

The technology is here, we just can’t see it for the continual obfuscations in the profiteering media.

Report this

By Dale Headley, March 16, 2011 at 5:14 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Here’s something to ponder:

    65 years ago, the Japanese were grinning, nearsighted, sadistic, bloodthirsty
savages and Americans were downright gleeful when the “Japs,” in tens of
thousands, were toasted by a nuclear holocaust that makes the current one pale
in comparison.  Are Americans now pouring out their compassion to the Japanese
people because they (and we) have changed so much in such a short time?  Or just
perhaps, wartime propaganda then, as now, was so efficient at demonizing the
perceived enemy that we chose not to feel the unimaginable suffering we inflicted
on the Iraqi (I mean Japanese) people.

Report this

By Maani, March 16, 2011 at 2:20 pm Link to this comment

C.Curtis.Dillon:

Re plutonium, you are right, of course.  Forgive me if my tone was “stronger” than it was meant to be.

Gerard:

Re the SNPC, I was aware of them.  I myself was a member of both SANE and FREEZE (the anti-nuclear power and anti-nuclear weapons groups) in the mid-1970s, and was the youngest member of the coordinating committee when the two groups merged.  (Among my compatriots was Peter Yarrow, with whom I remain friends over 35 years later…)  Those were certainly heady days…

All:

One of the saddest true quotes I have read so far:

“In a poignantly tragic twist of history, an accidental toxic catastrophe involving the peaceful use of nuclear energy is visited upon the only nation to have ever borne the brunt of intentionally inflicted nuclear explosions used as weapons of war.”

Peace.

Report this

By gerard, March 16, 2011 at 12:10 pm Link to this comment

And Robert Oppenheimer’s dry comment on the invention of the A-bomb and
activities at Los Alamos in generally:  “Now Science has known sin.”

Those physicists of that period were not exactly “happy campers.”  When I
worked for Sane Nuclear Policy Committee (yes, there was one once, and we
tried) Leo Szilard and Linus Pauling both worked with us, along with Norman
Cousins, editor of the Saturday Review at that time.  The biggest problem we
had trying to get
information out was the lack of understanding of science in general among
average Americans—and the anti-intellectual drag that causes so many
people to not really want to know.  It’s still a very active handicap, generally
speaking.

The other big deterrent to public information getting through was, of course,
government propaganda about the “Japs” and all that destructive nonsense.
Not only was it lack of good information, but tons of really bad slander and
fear-mongering.  Of course it went both ways (as it always does).  When I was
in Japan after the war, people told me they actually expected the LARA milk
handed out to starving children was poisoned and were surprised to find out
otherwise.  I could say more, but it really shouldn’t be necessary at this late
date.

Report this

By gerard, March 16, 2011 at 12:10 pm Link to this comment

And Robert Oppenheimer’s dry comment on the invention of the A-bomb and
activities at Los Alamos in generally:  “Now Science has known sin.”

Those physicists of that period were not exactly “happy campers.”  When I
worked for Sane Nuclear Policy Committee (yes, there was one once, and we
tried) Leo Szilard and Linus Pauling both worked with us, along with Norman
Cousins, editor of the Saturday Review at that time.  The biggest problem we
had trying to get
information out was the lack of understanding of science in general among
average Americans—and the anti-intellectual drag that causes so many
people to not really want to know.  It’s still a very active handicap, generally
speaking.

The other big deterrent to public information getting through was, of course,
government propaganda about the “Japs” and all that destructive nonsense.
Not only was it lack of good information, but tons of really bad slander and
fear-mongering.  Of course it went both ways (as it always does).  When I was
in Japan after the war, people told me they actually expected the LARA milk
handed out to starving children was poisoned and were surprised to find out
otherwise.  I could say more, but it really shouldn’t be necessary at this late
date.

Report this

By Bill Britton, March 16, 2011 at 8:02 am Link to this comment

Regarding the nuclear disaster in Japan, the atomic genii is out of the bottle and all the test-ban treaties and all the reviews of nuclear plant integrity in the world will not put it back in. The terms “safety standards,” “back-up systems,” “redundancy,” and “safe levels” mean little under the bright light of nuclear fission. Those words are merely oxymoronic, or more accurately, moronic.

Remember J. Robert Oppenheimer’s words from the Bhagavad Gita, “Now, I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.”

Report this

By C.Curtis.Dillon, March 16, 2011 at 4:07 am Link to this comment

Maani:

Not discounting the dangers of plutonium but it is only a real problem if it gets into the body. The director of Los Alamos used to keep a ball of plutonium on his desk and anyone who wanted to handle it could. There was minimal risk. Its radiation is only dangerous if released inside the body where there is no dead skin protective layer to absorb the alpha particles. And it doesn’t have great mobility as it’s too heavy to blow very far. By far, its greatest danger lies in its toxicity. It’s a heavy metal and very toxic to the body. So, for the average Japanese, plutonium is not the greatest risk to their health. The lighter and more radioactive elements pose a far greater threat.

Report this

By TDoff, March 15, 2011 at 7:03 pm Link to this comment

We keep getting ‘updates’ on the situation at the Fukushima nuclear reactors. And they seem to be following a pattern.

So when you see notice of an ‘update’, but the illustration space is black (or blank), and there is no text, it’s time to go back to bed and pull your lead sheets over your head. And hope for the best, and dream of ‘What might have been, had the human race been rational’.

Report this

By solar worker, March 15, 2011 at 1:32 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

MIKE789 (this is not really directed @ you)

No human can really answer these questions. All ‘energy sources’ have their place on this earth. Humans need multiple types of energy sources to maintain their ‘standard of living’ and to compete with each other (without gov’t interference such as bailouts, subsidies, and cartels that white-wash the supposed regulations) so we as individuals can decide on which sources to use based on a multitude of values that each one of us holds dearly (that’s why we have so many retards on this site making statements condemning on thing or another- what we should be condemning is that type of thought process).
The different solar cell technologies have many hurdles to overcome- one that is NEVER talked about in the MSM is END OF LIFE (why- well, that would make these idiots think, and then they might come across a thought that conflicts with what they have been TOLD over and over by the leaders THEY elected). Many solar companies are looking into EOL recycling processes but this does not address the mining and other releases of pollution when a closed loop system is hard to maintain, nor does it address how nasty the leeching process is and what types of pollutants it creates as well.

I am all for FUEL CELLS, NUCLEAR, SOLAR, WIND, GEO, GAS, OIL, COAL—- pretty much in that order.

GREEN ENERGY—WHERE??  It’s only green because the type of pollution that it creates is a type you CHOOSE not to worry about (GO learned behaviors!)

The best bet for all of us is to get out of this thought process that we as Americans are stuck in (distraction-blame, distraction-blame, distraction-blame, distraction-blame, distraction-blame, distraction-blame,) and start focusing on energy and economic policy.

Report this
prisnersdilema's avatar

By prisnersdilema, March 15, 2011 at 1:29 pm Link to this comment

Our life in this world to what should I compare it?
It’s like an echo, resounding through the mountains,
And off into the empty sky. - Monk Ryokan

Report this

By Maani, March 15, 2011 at 11:31 am Link to this comment

C.Curtis.Dillon:

You are correct, of course, that plutonium is heavier than iodine and cesium.  However, its radiation is ultimately far more dangerous; i.e., it takes less of it to cause more damage.  As well, because it is heavier, it remains concentrated, unlike cesium and iodine which disperse easily.  So while it is true that there is far more to be concerned about given the (current) comparative levels of the cesium and iodine vs. plutonium, suggesting that the plutonium is not dangerous is imprudent.

As an aside, re Shoreham, the final anti-nuke “action” there prior to the state and feds deciding to abondon it was a civil disobedience action in which over 700 “jumped the fence” and lay on the ground to be arrested.  I was among those 700, and it was one of the most thrilling and satisfying moments of my long activist career.

sdemetri:

While it is true this is not (yet) another Chernobyl, the mere fact that the systems are different does not mean it could not become as bad or worse, depending on how many reactors have complete meltdowns, and how much radiation is ultimately released.  The only thing that made Chernobyl “special” was that, since it had a graphite-cooled (as opposed to water-cooled)reactor, the burning of the graphite itself became part of the toxic cloud.

Peace.

Report this
kogwonton's avatar

By kogwonton, March 15, 2011 at 10:58 am Link to this comment

So, what do you think the chances are that the ‘owner’ of this nuclear power plant has insurance enough to repair all that damage to health, property, and the environment?

Report this

By samosamo, March 15, 2011 at 8:59 am Link to this comment

****************


789

Dunno. But maybe if we can get several more reactor cores to
melt through the earth’s crust we could reach all that geothermal
energy. Whadda you thing?

Report this
Mike789's avatar

By Mike789, March 15, 2011 at 8:54 am Link to this comment

Citing solar worker ~ [WAKE UP AMERICA SOLAR IS NOT GREEN LIKE YOU THINK]

What are the thin film contaminants and how are they being contained?

What are your thought about solar parabolic mirror facilities? A massive program would require upgrading the grid. Going on 3 yrs of Obama’s energy plan and I’ve heard nothing about upgrading the national grid.

Seems to me we could get off sitting on our thumbs, ahem, “Congress”? Also, it’s very obvious special interest are locked into coal and natural gas and give the Greens token commercials.

Is drilling technology up to speed for geothermal?

Report this

By sdemetri, March 15, 2011 at 8:07 am Link to this comment

This is not another Chernobyl. Entirely different design and circumstances.
Hyperbolic comparisons don’t serve any good purposes.

http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/15/fukushima-15-march-
summary/#more-4029

Report this

By NYCartist, March 15, 2011 at 7:59 am Link to this comment

Nuclear energy: the gift that keeps on giving.  From Hiroshima to ...

Report this

By C.Curtis.Dillon, March 15, 2011 at 5:08 am Link to this comment

On another TruthDig thread I made some comments about this but will chirp in here as well. I direct your attention to that thread for some of my early comments on this problem. First, the danger:

Gaseous radioactive elements, like iodine and cesium, are the most dangerous as they can travel by air. Prevailing winds will carry them quite far. In the Chernobyl accident, the first indications there was a radioactive leak showed up in Scandinavia! We are still dealing with thyroid cancers today in people who were children at that time. In Crimea, 800 Km south from the blast, on day 3 the winds blew in our direction and much radioactivity fell here. We see elevated counts of thyroid cancers here! The heavy elements, like plutonium, will not be carried by the wind. They drop like the proverbial lead brick when freed. They are just too heavy to move very far. And plutonium is only dangerous if inhaled. It is an alpha emitter so can only do you harm if it gets into your lungs and internal organs. Your dead skin layer protects you from alpha radiation very well. It’s gamma that’s really dangerous because it passes through all tissue without much trouble. This is what’s known as “ionizing radiation” as it breaks the chemical bonds between elements in your DNA and causes the severe burns one characteristically sees on radiation exposed patients.

Unfortunately, it takes an accident like this to get us once again thinking about nuclear power. I drove past Harrisburg on the day TMI happened and was considering buying a building lot within eyeshot of the Shoreham nuclear power station when the state shut it down. I started my career in Los Alamos, working on the uranium separation problem. I was an early supporter of nuclear power but turned against it for 2 critical reasons. 1 - reactor safety depends on people and their decisions. After TMI and Shoreham I became convinced that money and greed were too prevalent in that industry to ever trust management with doing the right thing. TMI melted down because of bad design and a poorly trained operator. GPU was notorious for things like that. Lilco was equally bad at making decisions. Chernobyl has similar causes. 2 - the design is inherently unstable. Even when refueling, the reactor has to circulate water to keep the rods cool. And, as the fuel ages it gets ever more dangerous. When fully spent, the waste fuel has to be kept in cooling ponds with water circulating constantly or it can melt down and start on fire. That appears to be what happened at reactor 4 in Japan since that unit was down and being retrofitted so the core was not working. “Residual heat” is not the problem ... even with the control rods in place, the fuel continues to generate new heat as its elements decay. The reaction is still going even when the reactor is “shut down”.

The real issue, for me, is human. Nuclear power is just to dangerous to be left to humans. Someone, somewhere, will cut a corner or make a bad decision and the consequences will be very serious. Chernobyl showed that as did TMI. Humans get greedy and then problems start. I’m sure the investigation in Japan will show similar issues. Greed does not mix well with nuclear power!

Report this

By Maani, March 15, 2011 at 1:37 am Link to this comment

As of 1:30am NY time, the news is not good.  There has been an explosion at a fourth reactor at Daiichi, and one reactor is expected to go critical (i.e., complete meltdown) by the time I wake up in NYC later this morning.  All but 50 workers have been evacuated, and those workers are fighting a losing battle to keep the four reactors cooled.  As well, there is evidence that at least one of the “spent fuel pools” has lost its coolant, and the rods are on fire (thus spewing even more radiation into the air).  Radiation levels outside the plant are now so high that exposure for more than 75 minutes can cause acute radiation poisoning.  The Japanese PM has gone on TV to tell all residents without 20 miles of the plant who have not been evacuated to either self-evacuate, or remain indoors with windows closed and A/C off.

Current prevailing winds are southeast, so most of the radiation is being dispersed over the Pacific Ocean, though, of course, there is radiation drift in all directions.  One scientist noted that if the prevailing winds change to a westward direction, major cities in South Korea (including Pyongyang and Seoul) and China (including Shanghai and possibly as far as Beijing) would be in possible danger of some radioactive contamination.

The Daiichi situation has been elevated to a Category 6 accident, making it worse than TMI, but not as bad (yet) as Chernobyl.  If more than one reactor goes critical at Daiichi, it will be raised to a Category 7 - the first time since Chernobyl.

It’s not looking good…

Report this

By SteveL, March 15, 2011 at 1:29 am Link to this comment

Remember what the corporate liars said when they started building these atomic power plants from hell?  “All that is needed to shut the reactor off is to pull out the rods”.  Apparently it is a lot more complicated than that.  If they lied about that what else did they lie about?  Today an engineer stated that these atomic plants could withstand an earth quake or a tsunami but not both.  San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station built on the beach near a fault, Diablo Canyon Power Plant built on a fault at the beach. Anyone think GE or the rest that build atomic plants will move their corporate headquarters or their personal home near any of these?

Report this
prisnersdilema's avatar

By prisnersdilema, March 14, 2011 at 11:51 pm Link to this comment

Oh well, once again, we have another ecological disaster in the making… not long after the Gulf Oil spill..

When you look at all the deaths of fish, Cetaceans, Amphibians, Colony Collapse Syndome - the extinction of the honeybee, white nose bat disease, NVCJD in wild herbavors, climbing cancer rates, and 700 million obese people worldwide as result of HFCS & GMO’s, all that emotional pain makes you to want to live in your head..

Where any idea, can be rationalized, or disembled; the mind has a never ending ability to argue, and live an illusory existence..

That reactor meltdown, is a burning spear into the heart and blood of the earth, and into technology we don’t understand, and cannot control, because we lack the intelligence even to control ourselves..

And in the end, the deaths of so many will be hard for some to rationalize, there will be others, that will soldier on marching to the ideas in their head, believing at all costs in the slogans of their party, instead of feeling something, for what has happened, it is those people who will kill us all.

They will care more about, the impact of what has happened to the Nuclear Power Industry, and will shed no tears, as the body bags, are buried in mass graves, by workers wearing protective radition suits.

Report this

By samosamo, March 14, 2011 at 11:21 pm Link to this comment

****************


But tdoff, wouldn’t bring the human population well under
1,000,000,000 people be a better safer way of managing
energy? Probably not. The facade of the sanctity of human life
won’t allow such rational thought or actions, which don’t
necessarily have to be inhumane.

Report this

By TDoff, March 14, 2011 at 11:16 pm Link to this comment

C’mon, let’s look on the bright side. I mean, sure nuclear power can be a disaster when the fuel rods aren’t adequately cooled and the containers explode and radiation clouds drift around the earth until it rains and storing the spent fuel is a bit of a problem since it is deadly to living creatures for tens of thousands of years. But things could be worse.

Suppose our energy companies and other corporations (Exxon, BP, GE, Westinghouse, et.al.) had discovered a process by which it were possible to make a profit by burning dirt and rocks to boil water to make steam and drive the turbines to generate the power we ‘need’. Doncha know that by now they’d have set fire to the whole of planet Earth and we’d all be clinging to a rapidly shrinking ball of ashes circling the Sun?

So, relatively speaking, this Japanese FUKU———Reactor brew-ha-ha is not so bad. At least we have a chance of surviving. Whereas if the Earth itsownself was burning under our feet, we’d be screweder.

Maybe there is a ‘god’.

Report this

By samosamo, March 14, 2011 at 11:06 pm Link to this comment

****************


By Gmonst, March 14 at 4:04 pm

Yes I was but I was dishearten to see it took someone, you,
about a day and half to catch that. My sense of deep dark
sarcasm.

But to see a map of nuke plants, check this out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NRC_regions_and_plant_locatio
ns_2008.jpg

Compared to the map link you passed, it sure seems
irresponsible.

I would say not much real attention has been paid to the
placement of these ticking time bombs considering the 3 or 4
earthquakes in the winter of 1811 to 1812.

A very interesting read is Simon Winchester’s ‘Crack in the Edge
of the World’. Mostly focuses on the S.F quake of 1903 but goes
into a bunch of other quakes and, not counting the nuke plants,
the damage that would occur in the New Madrid region when
those faults rupture again. Devastating nukes or not.

Report this

By Maani, March 14, 2011 at 9:57 pm Link to this comment

Kanamachi:

I feel for you, brother, and my thoughts and prayers are with you.

My mother - a pre-eminent structural geologist who served as a site specialist for the Nuclear Regulation Commission and Department of Energy, and a coordinator at National Academy of Science - says that the danger to any specific area of Japan will be determined by three factors: (i) the direction of the wind (more on that in a moment), (ii) the actual amount of radioactivity released, and (iii) what type of radioactivity (i.e., what specific radioactive elements) was released, and in what concentration.

Re wind, there are three variables.  First is the local wind conditions.  Second is what are often called the “trade winds,” which generally move east to west.  Third is the jetstream, which generally moves west to east.  For you, the local conditions are most critical.  For those in China and eastern Russia, the trade winds should be watched.  And for those in Alaska, the western U.S. and (to a slightly lesser degree) Hawaii, the jetstream is most critical.

Re amount of radioactivity, this is obvious difficult to measure, particularly as things continue to be unstable and possibly worsening overall.  However, even with a total meltdown of the core, there is arguably as much to be concerned about re groundwater and arable land as there is re the air itself.  You simply need to research as many sources as possible (radio, print, TV, Internet) - not just media, but also check the NRC, DOE, IAEA and other similar sites.

Re type of radioactivity, thus far it is fairly certain that both cesium and iodine have been released.  There is also some concern that plutonium has been released (there may be plutonium in some of the “spent fuel pools” at some of the reactors), though thus far this may just be rumor.  Needless to say, none of this is good.  But plutonium is particularly ugly, so keep your eye out for that.

Unfortunately, ultimately, since the situation remains fluid, as noted above simply keep checking a many sources as possible.  As usually occurs, the more you see a particular report from a variety of sources (i.e., the more “overlap” there is of common denominators), the more likely it is to be accurate (or at least more accurate than hype and rumors).

Our hearts go out to you!

Peace.

Report this
Kanamachi's avatar

By Kanamachi, March 14, 2011 at 9:05 pm Link to this comment

For us living in the shadow of the Fukushima nuclear power plants we are
interested in getting some straight answers. Japanese TV, including NHK which
is actually and surprisingly better then most on the subject, is still not giving us
the answers that we need to have. Watching the BBC or CNN, I am getting a lot
of debate on is nuclear power good or bad, this is useless chatter.
We want to know if we and our families are going to be safe and what is likely to
happen at these plants as they continue to go south, not some pro-nuclear
industry pundit in Washington DC telling us from his safe seat that there is
noting to worry about in a meltdown or that the plants are doing everything
that they are designed to do. It is clear that they are not functioning correctly
but Tokyo Power, the operators, only come on TV and tell us what we already
know - that there has been another explosion - and that they are sorry.
Here in Tokyo we are only 178 miles away from these plants and the wind is
currently blowing towards the region with more than 25 million people.
We need information not banter!

Report this

By solar worker, March 14, 2011 at 7:32 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Please review what the USA’s policies are regarding recycling nuclear fuel. We do not recycle for commercial purposes or for making weapons. This is well documented. Yes, there are programs that have started ‘commerical relationships’ (state sponsered BS) concering this. But as far as the law is concerned Mr. Carter banned it a while ago.

FAS is the leading private resource ragarding this type of info also check the gov’t site of the NEI.

Report this

By reynolds, March 14, 2011 at 5:41 pm Link to this comment

“The strides in solar energy in Germany has come with
the second highest electricity costs on the globe.”
nice syntax. i am never surprised by what you do not
know.

Report this

By big huge giant hyper anxious news, March 14, 2011 at 5:36 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

You can’t really get people to watch reports of functioning nuke plants
every night.  The coverage is always going to be slanted, especially if the
source relies on advertising revenue.  It’s a good idea to diversify your info
sources.  I never stop looking for new ways to stay informed.

Report this

By dolphiniii, March 14, 2011 at 4:33 pm Link to this comment

Hey Solar Worker:
You are right on the money although I am a proponent of solar as well as wind and fuel cells….
To answer your question WE DO RECYCLE FUEL in this conuntry… just not ours… the bomb waste from the nuclear weapons treaties as well as waste from other plants in Europe have been coming over here for years and we have make it into fuel for our power reactors… and by the way did anyone ever wonder how the US Navy ships their used fuel cross country to be recycled ad reused???  Hmmmmmmm I always have..

Report this

By ejreed, March 14, 2011 at 4:18 pm Link to this comment

Authorities Downplay Nuclear Threat
Japanese officials are denying the possibility of major radioactive contamination after two explosions in reactors at the Fukushima nuclear plant. http://www.newslook.com/videos/297618-authorities-downplay-nuclear-threat?autoplay=true

Report this

By solar worker, March 14, 2011 at 2:51 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

wow-
I have worked developing RCMS systems for ABWR plants and updgrade to the RCMS for BWR plants.
I now work in thin-film solar.
WAKE UP AMERICA SOLAR IS NOT GREEN LIKE YOU THINK—DO ANY OF YOU KNOW WHAT IT TAKES TO PRODUCE A THIN-FILM SOLAR CELL??
WHAT CHEMICALS??
WHAT WASTE??
Why do we not recycle our nuclear waste like other countries?? Maybe because of the type of information that passes as ‘truth’ from places like this.

Report this

By dolphiniii, March 14, 2011 at 1:00 pm Link to this comment

OK… I thought this discussion was supposed to be about how much of the media info is real and how much is sensationalism…  I watched the news all weekend and saw the ‘info’ from all of the ‘experts’ and their ignorance of nuclear power plants and this situation in particular ranged from laughable to downright sickening…
So here is what I know and speculate happened (sith speculations identified by an *):
*  The tsunami washed up so much debris into the intake structure (where the cooling water comes from) that it stopped the flow of water to the condenser of the turbine stopping their ability to cool the plant (reguardless of whether or not they had electricity) I suspect that the diesels failed for the same reason if they were cooled by sea water.

The reactor automatically scrams (shuts down) immediately which inserts the contrlrods STOPPING the nuclear reaction immediately.

The reactor continues to heat up however due what is known as decay heat.  And since they lost flow in the reactor system after a few hours of using the diesels to provide circulation.  This removes a substantial amount of heat since the nuclear reaction has stopped it is no longer adding heat to the system.  As temps rise above the boiling point, the water turns to steam and ceases to cool the fuel.  At this point is where the melting can start.  When the melting occurs it also melts the control rods, which are made of halfnuim which is a neutron absorber and would help to arrest any future reactions.

As with TMI, the fuel would melt and remain inside the reactor vessel to be removed at a later date.

The off gassing that is done is release of steam from the system to prevent overpressurization that would compromise seals, flanges and other connections within the system. 

All of this takes place within the reactor itself and there is another boundary known as the drywell which the reactor system is inside of…This is a watertite ‘building’ with very thick walls and provisions for monitoring the air inside of it for lekage from the reactor system.

As to the reporting:
Bill Nye the ‘Science Guy’=the control rods are made of Cesium and if they are seeing cesium in the gas that means they have a meltdown… the control rods are made of halfnuim with a zircalloy claddin….the cesium comes from the fission reaction not the rods
he also stated that the hydrogen explosion was probably due to helium and the info got crossed up in the translation—-helium is an inert non flammable gas…
*the hydrogen explosion probably came from the bottles of hydrogen that are stored for injection ofhydrogen into the system to prevent an air accident.

All the comparisons of this to Cherynoble..totally different reactor and system..like comparing a 747 crash to a piper cub…. forget it..

There is a site that is updated as often as they get the information that is knowledgable on this and it is the Nuclear Energy Institue site..you might what to check that out..

Last word is that i am only pro nuclear as long as it is operated safely with the proper safety systems in place to protect the public.  Us folks that work in and around the plants know there is a risk, as there is with any job but we are also very aware that the pulic safety is our highest priority…

Report this

By sdemetri, March 14, 2011 at 12:43 pm Link to this comment

Here is a good site to get accurate information about the reactors’ designs and the
dangers posed by what is happening there:

http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/13/fukushima-simple-explanation/

Report this

By Gmonst, March 14, 2011 at 12:04 pm Link to this comment

If that is the case, I suggest, once again, that the area around
Memphis, TN and New Madrid, Missouri be a nuclear plant
concentrate of about 20 or 40 reactors. I couldn’t think of a safer
place to put nuclear reactors in this country because there just
isn’t any significant seismic activity in that area. That way these
centrally located plants could supply the north, east, south and
west of most of america for minimal costs.

I sure hope you were being sarcastic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Madrid_Seismic_Zone

Report this

By SteveL, March 13, 2011 at 11:12 pm Link to this comment

Atomic energy is the most government subsidized form of electrical production there is.  So far we have spent a tiny fraction of this on safe renewables.  Nuke plants cannot be insured by private insurance period.  In a free market world there would be no nuclear production of electricity.  If San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station blows up the counties of San Diego, Orange, Los
Angeles, Ventura and Santa Barbra become inhabitable.  Where are all the millions of people going to go?  Safe renewables would be cheaper and need to be built right now.  Start with covering the acres of parking lots with elevated solar panels providing electricity right where it is needed and shade for the cars.

Report this

By DGBJPN, March 13, 2011 at 11:08 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

To all you ‘nuclear energy is relatively safe’ out-of-sight-out-of-mind types, please offer your neighborhoods up as new facility and, or byproduct dump sites. Because there’s nothing more liberating than walking the walk from time to time.

Report this

By Conden, March 13, 2011 at 9:37 pm Link to this comment

The PR campaign for the high-carbon, wastefull, toxic nuclear industry is already prepared to go out and slander people that may be poisoned by radiation in order to build more of their dangerous, ineficient technology.  Us greens definitely will side with the people, side with the truth over corporate power. Solar, wind, tidal, and geothermal power are ready right now to power our entire planet. 

Alan Weisman, The World Without Us wrote:
“Together, the worlds 441 functioning nuclear plants annually produce almost 13,000 tons of high-level nuclear scrap.”

“…Used nuclear fuel, some of it decades old, languishes in holding tanks. Oddly, it is up to a million times more radioactive than when it was fresh. While in the reactor, it began mutating into elements heavier than enriched uranium, such as isotopes of plutonium and americium. That process continues in the waste dumps, where used hot rods exchange neutrons and expel alpha and beta particles, gamma rays, and heat.”

Report this

By Maani, March 13, 2011 at 9:21 pm Link to this comment

Gerard:

Hear, hear!  Amen to that!

Peace.

Report this

By gerard, March 13, 2011 at 8:29 pm Link to this comment

It will take more than this to convince Americans not to drive everyday bumper to
bumper on freeways miles to get to work. Or to realize that conservation at every
possible level is absolutely essential.  Or that money should go into wind and
solar instead of oil and nuclear.  Or that geothermal might be worth more
research.  Or that people by the millions in the “rich” countries need to go for a
simpler, less extravagant way of life.  People would rather risk extermination than
think about how to avoid it.  It’s called “living it up” or “the richest country in the
world” or “tomorrow the deluge” or “I’m not going to worry because God know
what He is doing and He will ‘beam me up’.  Anything for an excuse.

Report this

By gerard, March 13, 2011 at 8:29 pm Link to this comment

It will take more than this to convince Americans not to drive everyday bumper to
bumper on freeways miles to get to work. Or to realize that conservation at every
possible level is absolutely essential.  Or that money should go into wind and
solar instead of oil and nuclear.  Or that geothermal might be worth more
research.  Or that people by the millions in the “rich” countries need to go for a
simpler, less extravagant way of life.  People would rather risk extermination than
think about how to avoid it.  It’s called “living it up” or “the richest country in the
world” or “tomorrow the deluge” or “I’m not going to worry because God know
what He is doing and He will ‘beam me up’.  Anything for an excuse.

Report this

By Maani, March 13, 2011 at 5:11 pm Link to this comment

Blackspeare:

“Well put!  But that is exactly what the anti-nuclear power lobby will do.  All the news channels are making a bad situation even worse by hyping the incident.  The Chernobyl incident was an aberration——the plant had no adequate containment.  Three Mile Island was never a danger to any of the public just hyped-up.  Throwing around figures like 1000x the allowable limit when put into perspective is still two magnitudes less that a typical CATSCAN.”

I agree that some news outlets are deliberately hyping the situation.  Also that Chernobyl was an aberration: it wasn’t that they had no adequate containment, but that it was a greaphite-cooled reactor, not a water-cooled reactor.  So when the system went down, the graphite (unlike water) didn’t simply get hot, it exploded, thus cracking the containment vessel for the fuel rods.  Thus, what you had was not simply radioactivity, but also graphite smoke, which is highly toxic.

Re TMI, it was, indeed, a danger to the public - more than most people know.  My physics professor was on the first team to go into the plant to assess the damage, and he was the one who “blew the whistle” on the lies, noting that there was a 70% meltdown of the core.  Had they not caught it when they did, there was the very real possibility of a situation in which they would have had to evacuate 50-100 miles around, and the area within 5-10 miles would have been uninhabitable for years.

Re CATscans, your figures are incorrect.  Firstly, different CATscans create different levels of millirems, from 10 millirems to over 1500mr.  The levels in the control room at Daiichi were said to be as high as 100,000mr, with outside measurements at close to 10,000mr.  Not necessarily harmful in a quick, one-time exposure, but definitely dangerous over extended periods.

You might also want to consider this: “It has been estimated that CT radiation exposure will result in 29,000 new cancer cases just from the CT scans performed in 2007.[15] The most common cancers caused by CT are thought to be lung cancer, colon cancer and leukemia with younger people and women more at risk.”

samosamo:

Although I am personally against nuclear power (for more reasons than those discussed thus far), I also know that nuclear power itself (setting aside spent fuel rods, etc.) is comparatively safe.  It can be compared to airplanes: when one goes down, lots of people die and we see it for the horrible tragedy it is.  That does not change the fact that air travel is the safest mode of travel there is - safer than cars, rail or water.

Peace.

Report this
Blackspeare's avatar

By Blackspeare, March 13, 2011 at 4:47 pm Link to this comment

Maani…

“But to minimize the very real danger of what is happening is no better than to make it into some Armageddon scenario.”

Well put!  But that is exactly what the anti-nuclear power lobby will do.  All the news channels are making a bad situation even worse by hyping the incident.  The Chernobyl incident was an aberration——the plant had no adequate containment.  Three Mile Island was never a danger to any of the public just hyped-up.  Throwing around figures like 1000x the allowable limit when put into perspective is still two magnitudes less that a typical CATSCAN.

Report this

By samosamo, March 13, 2011 at 3:52 pm Link to this comment

****************


Interesting to read how many experts there are on what is
happening and for some strange reason the need to retain,
maintain and build more nuclear power plants.

If that is the case, I suggest, once again, that the area around
Memphis, TN and New Madrid, Missouri be a nuclear plant
concentrate of about 20 or 40 reactors. I couldn’t think of a safer
place to put nuclear reactors in this country because there just
isn’t any significant seismic activity in that area. That way these
centrally located plants could supply the north, east, south and
west of most of america for minimal costs.

Report this

By Maani, March 13, 2011 at 3:40 pm Link to this comment

Blackspeare:

Methinks you put WAY too much faith and reliance on what we are being told.  It should be no surprise that the Japanese would be “spinning” things in the best possible light.  But the situation - as of this writing (3/13, 3:30pm) - has gotten remarkably worse.

There have now been partial meltdowns in two reactors, with probable partial meltdowns in another two.  (And that’s only what we are being told.)  The radiation level in the control room at the Daiichi plant was ONE THOUSAND TIMES the acceptable (safe) level as of late yesterday, and the radiation measured outside the plant has gone up to 8 times the safe level.  Over 200,000 people have already been evacuated, with even more evacuations likely.

The U.S. flew in emergency cooling systems for the plants, but teams have been unable to get them up and running: this is why they had to flood one reactor (and possibly two) with seawater (thus, by the way, making these reactors completely unusable ever again).

True, this is not Chernobyl.  And even if there is a complete meltdown of one or more reactors (which would make it a worse accident than Three Mile Island), it need not create a globally dangerous situation.  But to minimize the very real danger of what is happening is no better than to make it into some Armageddon scenario.

Peace.

Report this

By Frederick Glaysher, March 13, 2011 at 2:45 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The engineer in charge of the design of the nuclear
plants explains the problems now faced… perhaps 4 or
5 Chernobyl explosions… skip long lead in to 3 1/2
minutes for discussion & translation. Japan Press
Correspondents Club, Tokyo

??????????????????????videonews.com, ???
?????????????????? videonews.com on USTREAM.
Other News…

http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/13295291

Report this

By srelf, March 13, 2011 at 2:05 pm Link to this comment

From the FDA:
“KI (potassium iodide) provides protection only for the thyroid from radioiodines.
It has no impact on the uptake by the body of other radioactive materials and
provides no protection against external irradiation of any kind. FDA emphasizes
that the use of KI should be as an adjunct to evacuation (itself not always feasible),
sheltering, and control of foodstuffs.”

Report this

By California Ray, March 13, 2011 at 1:41 pm Link to this comment

Obama - worst President in three decades: http://tinyurl.com/6d2ctsz

Report this
Blackspeare's avatar

By Blackspeare, March 13, 2011 at 1:20 pm Link to this comment

Watch out for the “Greens.”  They will make the most from the affected reactors in Japan.  The truth is simply there is no major leakage occurring from the plants.  The standards are set with magnitudes of safety.  The radioactivity measured at the periphery of the plants is actually 1/100 of the energy one receives from a CATSCAN.  Even though the plants are over 40 years old, they were properly engineered and the containment system has held.  Nothing to see here——move along.

Report this

By TDoff, March 13, 2011 at 1:17 pm Link to this comment

Intelligent folks are studying the jet stream patterns between Japan and the US west coast, to determine whether to jump into their pre-packed SUV’s and head north to Canada or south to Mexico to escape death by radiation, when their Geiger counters or scintillometers sound the alarm that Japan has finally succeeded in revenging Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Report this

By Jim Yell, March 13, 2011 at 11:59 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

First of all and again—Nuclear is not GREEN. It also isn’t safe and not just because of accidents. The by-products are toxic for thousands of years and can not be contained. This means somewhere the material will get out if not today, tomorrow.

One must realize that building Nuclear may make sense only if the contamination is ignored, only if the cost of trying to isolate the contamination isn’t factored it, only if the increase in cancer is not factored it. In other words, Nuclear is not safe and is not cost effective in the long term.

Better use of energy is the answer, along with less toxic ways of creating it. For starters we can stop using huge amounts to light up the night as if it were day.

Every day that we do not close down Nuclear Plants is a day closer to a truely horrid future.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, March 13, 2011 at 11:36 am Link to this comment

SteveL,

The strides in solar energy in Germany has come with the second highest electricity costs on the globe. Germany has recently begun pushing for more coal and oil usage in order to bring costs down.

Solar is not nearly ready for prime-time. And it won’t be for several decades. With current technology solar energy would likely handle less than 3% of the world’s energy needs.

Solar research? Yes. Convert to solar in the next two decades? Absolutely not!

Report this

By balkas, March 13, 2011 at 11:04 am Link to this comment

nuclear power for electric knives, golf carts, toothbrushes, hair driers, and the
like. for lighting/heating empty churches, huge buildings.
for powering warships, tanks.
for invading inner, outer, and ocean deeps space.

goddevil help us with such sanely insane masters of people, wars, peace,
healthcare, nutrition or lack of it, disinfor—mation, ‘education’, etcetc! .
no, no, they are not psychopaths—that wld be insulting to insanely insane or
brain injured people.

well, we tried god [s] and organized religions; i.e., a peculiar sciences, using an
apriori method of evaluating, and the whole hell broke lose upon us.

however, we shall never have god w.o. devil; thus, i pray now to unity of
devilgod—or gooddevil, if it is MORE MELODIC to u!

to me, the second label is more musical! tnx

Report this

By JJW, March 13, 2011 at 7:42 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Hard to evaluate an number of disasters that are out of control. unpredictable, and changing.  Isn’t this why nuclear energy was considered too risky in the US?

Report this

By expat, March 13, 2011 at 3:41 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

History’s supreme irony….

US nukes Japan in WWII in one of history’s greatest display of unjustified savagery…


The cataclysmic nuke spewout from a meltdown in Japan will go straight to uSSa @ 400 MPH on jet stream…  payback, or should I say, fallout, is a bitch!  Ain’t it?  Everytime it rains or snows… think about it!    All the uSSa grown food, etc, etc..  Don’t despair,  monsanto surely will find a way to make new and improved nuke crops, at least their ads will say so.

Hey, after screwing with haarp so much, now comes the blowback.  I could not be more impressed with history’s beyond wicked sense of humor!

Anyone still residing in these united states ought to have their head examined.

Travel a little bit, and you will quickly realize what a fourth world, unfree, mean spirited and filled with bigots nation the uSSa has become.

So go ahead, let the morons remain in their soon to be toxic concentration camp (already partial), if you have half a brain, leave.  NOW !

It’s not as hard as you think and actually it can be an incredible rebirth.  Money the problem?  What, you think you’re gonna repay your credit in US once having found a good life overseas?  You’ll be but a spec in a defaulting nation.  Isn’t it your turn to screw the banksters?  Let me tell you, it’s orgasmic!

I am faithful to the ideals of the Constitution, but it’s ameriKa which abandoned these ideals, I left with my family in 03 and never regretted it.  Great, almost free health care, almost free world class university for the kids, business opportunities aplenty, the economy is so so, like everywhere else, but way better than uSSa, etc, etc…

Imagine you live in Germany in 1933 knowing all you know…  would you stay?  Explain to me how this is different.

Report this

By SteveL, March 12, 2011 at 11:37 pm Link to this comment

Develop nuclear energy?  You have to be kidding!  If a solar plant of any kind breaks in way it simply stops working.  The Germans despite their northern latitude have had a great success with solar power.

Report this
 
Monsters of Our Own Creation? Get tickets for this Truthdig discussion of America's role in the Middle East.
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Zuade Kaufman, Publisher   Robert Scheer, Editor-in-Chief
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook