Fukushima disaster

Gunther Rattay


Matt Watts


makerj101

Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #2, on September 17th, 2014, 02:18 PM »Last edited on September 17th, 2014, 08:57 PM by makerj101
Quote from Gunther Rattay on September 16th, 2014, 09:20 AM
Over 2 Trillion Becquerels of Radioactive Waste Flowed from Fukushima Plant into Pacific in Just 10 Months

http://www.globalresearch.ca/over-2-trillion-becquerels-of-radioactive-waste-flowed-from-fukushima-plant-into-pacific-in-just-10-months/5401946
That is such a blown out of perspective article that is meant to scare people and make them think nuclear is a horrible thing.  Do you even know what a becquerel is???  I bet not, I bet 90% of the public never even heard of becquerel before!  All you know is that 1 trillion becquerels sounds like an awful lot, and don't get me wrong it does sound like a whole lot.  Well it's not a lot.  And they fact of the matter is that they are only using that unit because it sounds like a lot and because most of the public won't have a clue what it is and it will scare them into being anti nuclear.  It's like me saying oh my gosh, I just ran 1 million millimeters!!!  But turns out I only ran 1 kilometer, big deal right?  1 trillion becquerel is the same as about 27 curies.  Both are a measure of radioactive decay.  One becquerel is equal to one nuclear decay or other nuclear transformation per second.  A becquerel is an extremely extremely small amount of radiation.  1 gram of Cs-137 emits 83 curies or 3.1TBq(Trillion Becquerel).  1 gram of Sr-90 emits 139 curies or 5.1TBq.  The article says that 20TBq of Cs-137 and 10TBq of Sr-90 flowed into the bay.  So 6.5 grams of Cs-137 have been released and 2 grams of Sr-90.  That's 8.5 grams of radioactive material in millions of gallons of sea water.  More radioactive material is released from a coal burning plant in a year.  So you still think that's a lot?  Watch this video!  Radioactive tourist beaches in Brazil!  People that live there and go to the beach regularly receive more radiation in a year than the occupational limit.  The bay and land around the Fukushimai plant is less radioactive than that naturally occurring beach. 
Radioactive beach:

Becquerel:
https://orise.orau.gov/reacts/guide/measure.htm
Curie and how many curies different isotopes produce:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curie
Quote from Matt Watts on September 16th, 2014, 06:06 PM
Go see the damage for yourself:

http://www.thenuclearproctologist.org/

It's real and it's here.
What's real and what's here?  Those star fish look perfectly healthy.  And why wouldn't they be?  There is hardly any radioactive waste in the water at all.  It's not like they dumped uranium fuel in the water.  People still find pieces, PIECES of uranium fuel around the Chernobyl reactor and even in the cooling pond. Just by looking at the fish and wild life around Chernobyl you would never be able to guess that it is a site of a nuclear disaster. 
Catfish in the Chernobyl cooling pond:

Gunther Rattay

Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #3, on September 17th, 2014, 03:23 PM »Last edited on September 17th, 2014, 03:33 PM
@makerj101
you should explain that to Chernobyl mothers and their malformed children. The same but worse will happen to Japanese mothers the next years. And you will have to explain why sealife is dying at extended ranges. TEPCO has dumped incredible amounts of contaminated water during the last few years. And there is another reactor waiting to melt down ...

"Fukushimai plant is less radioactive than that naturally occurring beach." <<< That´s wrong for sure.

Radiation at Fukushima plant is that intese that autonomous robots exclusively constructed for this kind of nuclear catastrophy fail after a short time because they can´t stand that radiation for long. The only "units" able to work in that environment are people, but they´ll die after some time as those supporters from Chernobyl did.

Maybe that people forget that there is an unresolved problem, but our biosphere won´t forget and over time radiation will migrate into our food and water supply chain. Many animals don´t get that old as humans. So lifespan for accumulation of radioactive particles in a body plays an important role.

Fukushima is a tough challenge for future generations engineers.

BTW Chernobyl is an unsolved problem today.

Matt Watts

Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #4, on September 17th, 2014, 05:06 PM »Last edited on September 17th, 2014, 05:14 PM
AND...

The constant neutron bombardment of those reactor facilities are degrading the infrastructure at an alarming rate.  When those buildings collapse with their storage pools some 100 feet in the air, all hell will break loose.  That's if there is anyone still around to see it.  At the moment the food chain hasn't been completely destroyed, but's it's certainly got a good headstart.

makerj101

Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #5, on September 17th, 2014, 09:31 PM »
Quote from Gunther Rattay on September 17th, 2014, 03:23 PM
@makerj101
you should explain that to Chernobyl mothers and their malformed children. The same but worse will happen to Japanese mothers the next years. And you will have to explain why sealife is dying at extended ranges. TEPCO has dumped incredible amounts of contaminated water during the last few years. And there is another reactor waiting to melt down ...

"Fukushimai plant is less radioactive than that naturally occurring beach." <<< That´s wrong for sure.

Radiation at Fukushima plant is that intese that autonomous robots exclusively constructed for this kind of nuclear catastrophy fail after a short time because they can´t stand that radiation for long. The only "units" able to work in that environment are people, but they´ll die after some time as those supporters from Chernobyl did.

Maybe that people forget that there is an unresolved problem, but our biosphere won´t forget and over time radiation will migrate into our food and water supply chain. Many animals don´t get that old as humans. So lifespan for accumulation of radioactive particles in a body plays an important role.

Fukushima is a tough challenge for future generations engineers.

BTW Chernobyl is an unsolved problem today.
I want you to prove that there is a increase in cancer, malformities, and mutations.  But it needs to be greater than the 1% expected cancer rate in a population of that size.  Please research Chernobyl.  The wildlife is NOT dieing.  It's flourishing.  Sure there is some radioactive isotopes in the bones and bodies of animals but in small amounts it is beneficial.  Small amounts of radiation are good for you.  Just like getting sunshine is good for you.  Not enough sunshine and you become vitamin-D deficient and all kinds of bad things can happen.  Too much sunshine and you can get skin cancer.  Radiation is the same way.  Small doses are good for you.  It gives your body practice repairing wounded cells.  Balance is needed.  You need some sun but not too much.  Same with radiation.  Some is good but too much is bad.

I did NOT say that.  You have twisted what I said.  This is what I said: The bay and land around the Fukushimai plant is less radioactive than that naturally occurring beach.  If I said what you said, I would be wrong.  But I did not say that.  Of course the plant itself is more radioactive than that beach.  It's got enriched uranium in it!

Please give me some resources to back up your claims about these robots failing as a direct cause of the radiation.

Yes, it is true that since humans live longer they accumulate more radioactive materials than animals and because we are at the end of the food chain.

I'm interested in hearing what you propose we do?  How should we generator the electricity we need to keep our lights and computers on?  What do you think we should replace 11.5% of the worlds nuclear energy with?

Thank you!  Interesting discussion!
Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #6, on September 17th, 2014, 09:34 PM »
Quote from Matt Watts on September 17th, 2014, 05:06 PM
AND...

The constant neutron bombardment of those reactor facilities are degrading the infrastructure at an alarming rate.  When those buildings collapse with their storage pools some 100 feet in the air, all hell will break loose.  That's if there is anyone still around to see it.  At the moment the food chain hasn't been completely destroyed, but's it's certainly got a good headstart.
Constant neutron bombardment from what?  Degrading the infrastructure, what do you mean?  Please explain.

Gunther Rattay

Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #7, on September 17th, 2014, 11:12 PM »
Quote from makerj101 on September 17th, 2014, 09:31 PM
...
Please give me some resources to back up your claims about these robots failing as a direct cause of the radiation.
...
Google search term: fukushima robot failure gives

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2012/01/06/national/domestic-robots-failed-to-ride-to-rescue-after-no-1-plant-blew/#.VBp1YJR_u0c
http://fortune.com/2013/03/20/robots-have-failed-fukushima-daiichi-and-japan/
Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #8, on September 17th, 2014, 11:42 PM »Last edited on September 18th, 2014, 12:14 AM
Quote from makerj101 on September 17th, 2014, 09:31 PM
I want you to prove that there is a increase in cancer, malformities, and mutations.  But it needs to be greater than the 1% expected cancer rate in a population of that size.  Please research Chernobyl. 
...
Google search term: chernobyl malformations gives


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEYZl8-3sDQ#ws

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LYClI5orMY#

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STSmFZeE50E#

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ITrXVJMKeQ#

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLlXfB_GxMg#ws
in 2011




Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #9, on September 18th, 2014, 12:21 AM »Last edited on September 18th, 2014, 02:40 AM
And now comes

https://vimeo.com/93775852

Homo sapiens sapiens or simple trust in authority?

Japanese officials were warned years before that this would happen in the near future. They were that much scared that they decided to ignore the information! They did not publish the information and so Ed Dames spread it thru Coast to Coast radio.

Power of Remote Viewing repudiated in the past, today (and tomorrow?).


Matt Watts

Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #10, on September 18th, 2014, 12:51 AM »Last edited on September 18th, 2014, 12:55 AM
Quote from makerj101 on September 17th, 2014, 09:34 PM
Constant neutron bombardment from what?  Degrading the infrastructure, what do you mean?  Please explain.
You are aware there are three complete nuclear meltdowns correct?  Not partial like Chernobyl, complete.  The coriums are no longer even in the reactors anymore; they're somewhere underground and no one even knows how deep.  These molten coriums are still fissioning, still releasing neutrons at levels that can only be contained/controlled within a fully functioning reactor chamber.  When these neutrons hit materials like steel and concrete, they destroy the molecular integrity of these materials, and the materials basically come apart in months the same way they would normally over the course of hundreds of years.

To me, the completely insane design of having the fuel rod storage pools located five stories up in the air is the part of the infrastructure that we need to worry about next.  These storage pools contain many times more nuclear fuel rods than the actual reactor can hold.  When the building can no longer support their massive weight and they fall, keeping them cool will be next to impossible.  And when they heat up, they will start fissioning too.  And if enough of them are smashed together after the fall, they won't just heat up, they will go critical and blow themselves all over creation.  Keep in mind reactor #3 had MOX fuel, not just uranium.  Nasty, nasty stuff.  You certainly don't want to breath any of those hot particles.

Probably a good idea for you to listen to one of the most conservative nuclear engineers I know of and get up to speed a little on what is going on over there:
http://www.fairewinds.org/

Gunther Rattay

Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #11, on September 18th, 2014, 01:08 AM »Last edited on September 20th, 2014, 10:22 PM
https://vimeo.com/105897911

Let´s look at that CME event:

The EMP will reach earth without warning. solar observing satellites will be immediately destroyed or their information transferred by radio waves will be as fast as the pulse itself. any visual earth-bound observation will take place the second that EMP reaches earth.

8 minutes after the CME 80% of all electronics on earth is destroyed. and of course 80% of all car/ship/aircraft electronics are destroyed. 80%  of all water pump facilities for human water supply are destroyed.
80% of all nuclear plant electronics will fail.
from that moment there will be no emergency services available for years ...

8 minutes after the CME 80% of all industry facilities malfunction because of electronic malfunction.

days after the CME 50% of all heavy duty transformers get destroyed by the solar wind effects. the remaining grid infrastructure is working like a gigant antenna amplifying the voltage and current induction.
most of these transformers are produced in China today. there is no transport facilities left to transport those spare parts already produced to  their target locations.
btw. those transformers in stock might be also destroyed by the CME.
2 days later the remaining nuclear plants in operation will malfunction because of an interrupted diesel fuel supply chain for their emergency operation control system.

brave new world we have established ... how could that happen?
people knew the devasting effects of EMP since the early atomic bomb experiments.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn6OVLK0MBI#

how to cope with that problem?

military knows how to build electronic devices surviving EMP. They use special shielding, mulit-layer pcbs and special military versions of integrated circuits and microprocessors based on reinforced semiconductor microstructures.

what does that mean?

complete exchange of 100% of all electronics on earth utilizing that protected technology.

but this prudent idea is in no way compatible to today´s profit maximation approach ...


 
who can honestly say "I didn´t know ..." and reject responsibility?

homo sapiens sapiens???


BTW in case you want to preserve your ready-to-run laptop for a post technology age of mankind without internet you have to do the following:

1. extract your laptop battery (batt1) from the laptop
2. add some customized cables and voltage lifter for DC laptop supply
3. wrap the laptop, cables and voltage lifter in 1 shielding layer standard aluminum foil
4. wrap that package in 1 isolating layer standard plastic foil
5. take special care that there are no electrical connections between different aluminum foil layers
6. redo steps 3 and 4 3 times
7. do steps 2 to 5 for your solar panel(s) charging your notebook in the new age time
8. buy an identical 2nd laptop battery (batt2)
9. do steps 3 to 6 for batt1
10. charge batt2 at a reasonalble time schedule
11. once the battery is charged swap batt1 and batt2 and re-iterate steps 9 to 11  persistently

Copyright: Mad Max 2014


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ti6rG4NmsyM#


Matt Watts

Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #12, on September 18th, 2014, 01:15 AM »
That's the current one Gunther, go back and look through all of his videos, some he gets into great detail.

Remember, Fukushima happened over a 1000 days ago.  It isn't fixed and it's not getting any better because no one engineered a solution for something like this and it may be a long time before technology out of some black project is actually used to make a positive difference.

Gunther Rattay

Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #13, on September 18th, 2014, 02:34 AM »Last edited on September 18th, 2014, 02:52 AM
Quote from makerj101 on September 17th, 2014, 02:18 PM
That is such a blown out of perspective article that is meant to scare people and make them think nuclear is a horrible thing. 
...
too scary??? it´s manmade reality!

you got the choice - take the blue pill or take the red pill


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE7PKRjrid4#ws
Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #14, on September 18th, 2014, 11:04 PM »Last edited on October 24th, 2014, 03:28 AM
Fukushima´s radiation and particle emission is not healthy at all! it´s burning and killing live at the atomic level ...
All information derived from offical documents avaliable ...



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IkQlmAlTVo#ws
Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #15, on September 19th, 2014, 12:21 AM »Last edited on September 19th, 2014, 12:53 AM
Quote from makerj101 on September 17th, 2014, 09:31 PM
...
I'm interested in hearing what you propose we do?  How should we generator the electricity we need to keep our lights and computers on?  What do you think we should replace 11.5% of the worlds nuclear energy with?

Thank you!  Interesting discussion!
This question directs into magic wonderland ...

What we should do as homo sapiens sapiens is taking a collective effort and put serious R&D on a global, professional science and big company driven level and to crack the nut of magnet motor and water fuel technology.

1st priority should be to crack that nut ignoring commercial consequences for global economics.

unfortunately this seems not to be going to come ...

so we have to be realistic!

so my answer is - this nut must be cracked in forums like this ...

little money, average competence - but ...

intrinsic motivation to crack that nut, cooperation, creativity and diversity might do the job.

And don´t forget - mind is sexy, has a better taste than money ;)

http://open-source-energy.org/?topic=2033.0

that gives hope to us, our children and the Thrive Movement.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OibqdwHyZxk#ws




~Russ

Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #16, on September 20th, 2014, 08:46 PM »
wow This Got crazy :)

~Russ

makerj101

Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #17, on September 21st, 2014, 11:23 AM »
I'm not going to argue any more about nuclear because I see that I can not change your mind anytime soon that nuclear is good and you can't change my view that nuclear if the best form of green energy.  I have read your links and videos and considered your point of view.  Many of the articles and videos are flawed in my opinion and I can't find any research to back them up as being the truth.  They are mostly people opinions and not backed up by much or truth.  I'm just not going arguing my point of view anymore because it's just a waste of my time, your time, and in general not very productive with the amount of school work I have and the many projects I want to work on.
Quote from Gunther Rattay on September 19th, 2014, 12:21 AM
This question directs into magic wonderland ...

What we should do as homo sapiens sapiens is taking a collective effort and put serious R&D on a global, professional science and big company driven level and to crack the nut of magnet motor and water fuel technology.
"Magic wonderland?"  What do you mean by that?  This is not a "magic wonderland" we are talking about.  This is real life.  I'm sorry but things that work in a "magic wonderland" just don't work in real life.

I havn't seen any working magnet motors yet.  Where does a magnet motor get it's energy from?  They just don't work yet if they ever will.  All the videos I've seen are fake.  I'm not saying they are impossible but they are not supported by current theories and I don't see how they could work. 

"Water fuel technology" do you mean hydrogen?  Like hydrogen fuel cell?  How to you plan to get the energy to get the hydrogen because it takes an enormous amount of energy to make it.  As technologies get better hydrogen will probably become better than batteries.  Then again with all kinds of new super capacitors and battery advances...  You understand that hydrogen is not a energy source right?

Gunther Rattay

Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #18, on September 21st, 2014, 12:30 PM »Last edited on September 21st, 2014, 12:34 PM
Quote from makerj101 on September 21st, 2014, 11:23 AM
... 
"Magic wonderland?"  What do you mean by that?  This is not a "magic wonderland" we are talking about.  This is real life.  I'm sorry but things that work in a "magic wonderland" just don't work in real life.
...
"Water fuel technology" do you mean hydrogen?  Like hydrogen fuel cell?  How to you plan to get the energy to get the hydrogen because it takes an enormous amount of energy to make it.  As technologies get better hydrogen will probably become better than batteries.  Then again with all kinds of new super capacitors and battery advances...  You understand that hydrogen is not a energy source right?
Magic Wonderland means that big business will neither take care for this planet (as they would be responsible to do) nor start a common effort to develop green energy (as they should).

Ask a plant, a tree how it makes good use of the sunlight and WATER and how a little grass stalk is able to pierce thru a massive beton road.

No idea? This tiny little piece of grass knows how to manage that ;)

Homo sapiens sapiens will understand nature´s way to use the universal energy, but us???
We have to learn to listen ...

Matt Watts

Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #19, on September 21st, 2014, 05:38 PM »
Quote from makerj101 on September 21st, 2014, 11:23 AM
I'm not going to argue any more about nuclear because I see that I can not change your mind anytime soon that nuclear is good and you can't change my view that nuclear if the best form of green energy.
Spoken like a typical teenager.  :D

That's okay, to each their own.  Someday your life won't seem nearly so black & white.
Quote from makerj101 on September 21st, 2014, 11:23 AM
... I don't see how they could work.
Quote from Russ Gries
If you believe even though you cannot see, you will see.
Quote from makerj101 on September 21st, 2014, 11:23 AM
You understand that hydrogen is not a energy source right?
I hope Russ didn't hear you say that.  After all, it would be like saying Stan Meyer is a lier and a hoaxer as well as gpssonar, Les Banki and many others.  Just because I haven't been successful turning water into HydrOxy gas and burning it at a rate far exceeding the input energy to split it, doesn't mean it is impossible.  What it means is that I don't know enough yet, how to do it.


There are three types of people in the world:
  • Dumb -- People that do not learn from their mistakes.
  • Smart -- People that do learn from their mistakes.
  • Wise -- People that learn from other people's mistakes.
Think about which type you would like to be before this grand experiment comes to a close.
Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #20, on September 21st, 2014, 05:52 PM »Last edited on September 21st, 2014, 05:57 PM
Quote from Dana Durnford
I think the video below sums up the day for me and Simon  , we worked hard to get underwater video from the open ocean because that should be covered in life . Well it is not and the kelp was in degeneration mode , all the kelp's we seen were covered in massive white dead zones . All plants had middle sections that are white and  dead and all the edges on all the kelp was like toilet paper in water . The bull kelp was to thin for sea urchins to climb up , none of the sea urchins in the videos had kelp under them or attached to them . We never seen a single healthy ecosystem any where so far, even after traveling over 500 km of BC Canada coast line . Barkley Sound was suppose to be a top notch place well everything is dead or dieing none of the kept that we seen can survive , every single strand was full of dead zones.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgOLbpqzrtk#ws

makerj101

Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #21, on September 21st, 2014, 07:34 PM »Last edited on September 21st, 2014, 07:47 PM by makerj101
Quote from Matt Watts on September 21st, 2014, 05:38 PM
I hope Russ didn't hear you say that.  After all, it would be like saying Stan Meyer is a lier and a hoaxer as well as gpssonar, Les Banki and many others.  Just because I haven't been successful turning water into HydrOxy gas and burning it at a rate far exceeding the input energy to split it, doesn't mean it is impossible.  What it means is that I don't know enough yet, how to do it.
I'm sorry, I hope I didn't hurt anyone by what I've said.  :(  And you are right, there is a lot we don't know yet and a lot to be discovered.  There was a lot of people who thought Thomas Edison would never find a filament material for the light bulb.  But he did and now we think nothing of flicking a switch.  I have been very foolish doubting your experiments and research.  I will try to see your research in a different way from now on.  Somethings we just don't know yet.  Thank you all.  I'm sorry I shouldn't have posted a comment on this post in the first place.  I should have just let you guys be and I'm sorry.  :(  After all, we can't change other people we can only change ourselves.

Have a nice day!
Good luck and best wishes!  :)
-Makerj101

Matt Watts

Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #22, on September 23rd, 2014, 01:01 AM »
Quote from Dana Durnford"
As we head towards open ocean here in Barkley Sound there is less life not more life not that there is much life here anywhere anyway . I hung my head in shame today its all gone,  just some dead kelp hanging in there in a environment on its last legs and the ocean is turning silent like the singing of the killer whales turned silent this year on us as we no longer listen to Barkless Sound.
Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #23, on September 23rd, 2014, 05:06 PM »Last edited on September 23rd, 2014, 05:18 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiYEcDu35HM#ws

What you will witness in this video is how the academics and other "officials" have been highjacked and are feeding the public a complete line of bull to cover their dispicable actions.

Gunther Rattay

Re: Fukushima disaster
« Reply #24, on September 24th, 2014, 05:21 AM »Last edited on September 24th, 2014, 08:36 AM
Klaatu has to answer the ultimate question: does human species deserve to live because of it´s impact on the rest of the planet´s species ... ?



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00J0S9JRyzM#ws


Good question!