Sunday, March 18, 2012

Article from India

A year after the nuclear catastrophe began at the Fukushima Daiichi station in Japan, the world has a historic chance to put an end to one of the biggest frauds ever played on the global public to promote a patently unsafe, accident-prone, expensive and centralised form of energy generation based upon splitting the uranium atom to produce heat, boil water, and spin a turbine. Candidly, that’s what nuclear power generation is all about.

The lofty promise of boundless material progress and universal prosperity based on cheap, safe and abundant energy through “Atoms for Peace”, held out by US President Dwight D Eisenhower in 1953, was mired in deception and meant to temper the prevalent perception of atomic energy as a malign force following the horrors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Eisenhower was a hawk committed to building up the US nuclear arsenal from under 1,500 to over 20,000 warheads and sought to “compensate” for this by dressing up nuclear energy as a positive force. “Atoms for Peace” camouflaged the huge US military build-up in the 1950s.

The nuclear promise was also based on untested, unrealistic assumptions about atomic electricity being safe and “too cheap even to meter”. The projection sat ill at ease with the subsidies, worth scores of billions, which nuclear received. The US navy transferred reactor designs developed for its nuclear-propelled submarines to General Electric and Westinghouse for free. The US also passed a law to limit the nuclear industry’s accident liability to a ludicrously low level.

Fifty-five years on, the world has lost over $1,000 billion in subsidies, cash losses, abandoned projects and other damage from nuclear power. Decontaminating the Fukushima site alone is estimated to cost $623 billion, not counting the medical treatment costs for the thousands of likely cancers.

All of the world’s 400-odd reactors are capable of undergoing a catastrophic accident similar to Fukushima. They will remain a liability until decommissioned (entombed in concrete) at huge public expense, which is one-third to one-half of what it cost to build them. They will also leave behind nuclear waste, which remains hazardous for thousands of years, and which science has no way of storing safely.

All this for a technology which contributes just two percent of the world’s final energy consumption! Nuclear power has turned out worse than a “Faustian bargain” – a deal with the devil. Even the conservative Economist magazine, which long backed nuclear power, calls it “the dream that failed.”

Nuclear power experienced decline on its home ground because it became too risky and “too costly to hook to a meter”. The US hasn’t ordered a single new reactor since 1973, even before the Three Mile Island meltdown (1979). Western Europe hasn’t completed a new reactor since Chernobyl (1986). As a former member of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission put it: “The abiding lesson that Three Mile Island taught Wall Street was that a group of NRC-licensed reactor operators, as good as any others, could turn a $2 billion asset into a $1 billion cleanup job in about 90 minutes.”

Nuclear power is now on the run globally. The number of reactors operating worldwide fell from the historic peak of 444 in 2002 to 429 this past March 1. Their share in global electricity supply has shrunk from 17 to 13 percent. And it’s likely to fall further as some 180-plus 30 years-old or older reactors are retired. Just about 60 new ones are planned.

After Fukushima, nobody is going to build nuclear reactors unless they get a big subsidy or high returns guaranteed by the state – or unless they are China, India or Pakistan. China’s rulers don’t have to bother about democracy, public opinion, or safety standards.

Nor are India’s rulers moved by these considerations. They are desperate to deliver on the reactor contracts promised to the US, France and Russia for lobbying for the US-India nuclear deal in the International Atomic Energy Agency. Manmohan Singh has even stooped to maligning Indian anti-nuclear protesters as foreign-funded, as if they had no minds of their own, and as if the government’s own priority wasn’t to hitch India’s energy economy to imported reactors. Pakistan’s nuclear czars are shamefully complacent about nuclear safety.

Nuclear power is bound up with secrecy, deception and opacity, which clash with democracy. It evokes fear and loathing in many countries, and can only be promoted by force. It will increasingly pit governments against their own public, with terrible consequences for civil liberties. A recent BBC-GlobeScan poll shows that 69 percent of the people surveyed in 23 countries oppose building new reactors, including 90 percent in Germany, 84 percent in Japan, 80 percent in Russia and 83 percent in France. This proportion has sharply risen since 2005. Only 22 percent of people in the 12 countries which operate nuclear plants favour building new ones.

Nuclear reactors are intrinsically hazardous high-pressure high-temperature systems, in which a fission chain-reaction is barely checked from getting out of control. But control mechanisms can fail for many reasons, including a short circuit, faulty valve, operator error, fire, loss of auxiliary power, or an earthquake or tsunami.

No technology is 100 percent safe. High-risk technologies demand a meticulous, self-critical and highly alert safety culture which assumes that accidents will happen despite precautions. The world has witnessed five core meltdowns in 15,000 reactor-years (number of reactors multiplied by duration of operations). At this rate, we can expect one core meltdown every eight years in the world’s 400-odd reactors. This is simply unacceptable.

Yet, the nuclear industry behaves as if this couldn’t happen. It has had a collusive relationship with regulators, which has been highlighted in numerous articles on Japan, including one by Yoichi Funabashi, chair of the Rebuild Japan Initiative Foundation: “We Japanese have long prided ourselves on being a society that provides safety and security...[But this] has been matched by our aversion to facing the potential threat of nuclear emergencies...”

He adds: “Any drills for a nuclear emergency were meticulously designed to avoid giving any impression that an accident could possibly progress to the severity of a meltdown.... After all, why stir up unnecessary anxiety when such contingencies simply are unthinkable? But avoidance ultimately translated into unpreparedness.”

Nuclear power is bound up with radiation, which is harmful in all doses, at each step of the nuclear fuel cycle. Nuclear plants routinely expose surrounding populations to harmful radioactive and chemical emissions.

Nuclear power is expensive not just in relation to coal or gas, but increasingly, to renewable sources. New-generation reactor costs have more than doubled. For instance, the European Pressurised Reactor of the crisis-ridden French firm Areva, and earmarked for Jaitapur in India, is now quoting for $6,500-plus per kilowatt, compared to under $2,000 for wind turbines.

Nuclear power cannot be a solution to the climate crisis. Its potential carbon reduction contribution is far too small, it is too slow to deploy, and too expensive. By contrast, renewables have already emerged as a safe, flexible, quickly deployable solution, with a typically lower carbon footprint than nuclear power.

The world needs a new climate-friendly, safe, decentralised energy system with smart grids and high efficiency. Nuclear power can have no place in it and must be abolished.

The writer, a former newspaper editor, is a researcher and peace and human-rights activist based in Delhi. Email: prafulbidwai1@yahoo.

Nuke Liars Club, Energy Subsidies

The following was a reply to a PNP who was lying about federal subsidies.    He was lying by a factor of 3000%.    His lies are at the bottom.

A solar system that will produce 380,000 kWH on a 30 year life will cost about a "sell price" of $30,000. With a 30% Federal Tax credit, that is $9000,

380,000 kWH = 380 MWH

9000/380 = $23.68 /MWH in federal subsidies.

NOT $775 as you lie

However, I have also invested in oil wells, you know why? Because old school corruption has the best rate of return as old school corruption has been swaying the laws for decades.

On an investment of $100,000 I get an instant tax deduction of $80,000, then the future income (roughly 20% to 30% per year) is also part shielded from taxes. These are just the handouts to the investors, there are additional handouts directly to the exploration and production companies.


Kind of seems like your supposed argument is full of holes.

Liars Club
05:56 PM on 03/16/2012
"I. Energy Subsidies Are much Greater for Oil, Gas, Coal and Nuclear Than for Renewables, Which Are Simply More Affordable Than Ever"

Here's the truth. Subsidies per unit production­:

Solar: $775.64/me­gawatt hour
Wind: $56.29/meg­awatt hour
Geothermal­: $12.85/meg­awatt hour
Nuclear: $3.14/mega­watt hour
Hydro: $0.82/mega­watt hour
Coal: $0.64/mega­watt hour
NG/Petro: $0.64/mega­watt hour

Ms Norris, when it comes to nuclear power your article is so biased it can't be called anything but propaganda. Most of what you say is unsupported and when you do cite a source, it is a radical activist site like Please learn the facts about nuclear power and the nuclear industry. Don't just assume the anti-nuke rhetoric you've head is true.

Ah, an Executive Order

There are certain emergency powers vested in the President of the US.

Now by executive order some of these powers are being transferred to other individuals.

Executive Order -- National Defense Resources Preparedness

Also, this order specifies that now these individual persons can buy whatever they want, in whatever quantities they want.

They can hand money to whomever they want, including loan guarantees to whomever they want.

Any resources that the US has that are specific to the National Defense can be redirected by certain individuals to be taken for the governments use, superseding all other contracts, and these individuals shall act as to have the full power of the President of the United States in these matters.

These resources are broad: Food, food production, animals and plants, farm equipment, fertilizer, all forms of energy, health care, water, ALL OTHER MATERIALS.   


These individuals who are acting with the full power of the President can extend these authorities to anyone else as long as that new individual is the "head of an agency".

 With one exception, the Secretary of Defense is given full authority to do whatever they want in regards to Chemical and Biological warfare, however, good thing, they cannot further delegate that authority.

Each agency can make whatever loan guarantees they want in whatever language they want and they shall collaborate with the Federal Reserve Bank.

They can hand extra money "subsidy payments" to anyone, as long as it regards "supply in any area" -304

The Government be allowed to install government owned equipment into facilities owned by private persons.-308

Sec 310- the individuals acting with full power of the President shall be able to give money without bidding to any supplier that they like as long as that supplier is a "reliable source"

Sec 601--The Secretary of Labor may assist the Director of Selective Service to make whatever rules they want in forcing people into the armed services.

Sec 804-This law makes is specifically illegal for anyone to sue the United States, and agency, officer, employees, agents, or any other person from doing whatever they want under this act.

Barack Obama

March 16, 2012





Saturday, March 17, 2012

Nuke Costs Too Much, and they lie about the initial construction cost

2 hours ago ( 3:06 PM)
Ever wondered why nuclear can't be delivered on budget, but often comes in at twice (or more) projected costs? Perhaps it's so they can maintain appearances with EIA, and look competitive vis a vis other technologies.

The Candu reactor at Darlington was proposed at $3.9 billion and came in at $14.4 billion CAD. Labor stoppages, improper choice of equipment, mid-construction safety reviews ... all run of the mill for nuclear. Proposals for new reactors at Darlington did no better with a projected $28 billion cost. At some $7,375 per kilowatt, EIA must be spinning its head (but not so much that they want to revise any of their projections)!

Friday, March 16, 2012

A rant, perchance a reflection

  • A great comment post at ENENEWS
    Ras Bumboclat
    I can't help but think of children playing with matches, who then burn the neighborhood down with their ignorance of fire. That seems to be the story of man playing with atoms. A horrific price to pay for a clever species that doesn't seem to have the corresponding intelligence or wisdom to match.

    A hard core natural selection fk up. If you make the wrong mistake, you're gone. You get wiped out of the gene pool, and that seems it may be our fate? As George Carlin said "just another closed-end biological mistake. An evolutionary cul-de-sac."

    There's a reason the earth has this wonderful protective atmosphere, to protect us from all the fking radiaion in space! Haha! It's comedic and at the same time would make for an epic novel or a great play. We decided to make the radiation inside the atmosphere, because we thought we could get one up on the sun! We thought we could, yeah, become god.

    The price for this arrogance and vanity seems to be almost beyond calculation, but for nature it may have been just an experiment? Who could these people become, what could they do? Would they make a wonderful world or blow it all to hell? Oops! There's your answer.

    I hope everyone keeps their levity and sense of humor as long as they're kicking around this planet.
    Remember there is another 400+ nuclear reactors out there (the ones we know about), not including all the nuclear aircraft carriers, submarines, weapons, that somewhere some point need to be dealt with? Hmm.

    Alan Watts. Is it serious?

Thursday, March 15, 2012

Internal Emitters, one of the Great Lies of Nuke

An internal emitter will give repeatedly body blows a nearby cell.

Cell can do some minor repair on a not perfect basis, BUT they CANNOT take the internal Emitter type of abuse.

The whole argument of acceptable radiation doses goes out the window when internal emitters are involved.   ANOTHER Great Lie of Nuke

Sunday, March 11, 2012

Regulatory Capture, Failure of Government

5 hours ago ( 4:28 PM)
I suggest you look at the NRC's Fukushima Task-Force orders, which were unanimously approved by the Commission, before you throw around this sort of nonsense.
45 minutes ago ( 8:48 PM)
Regulatory capture in the nuclear industry in the US and around the world is a fact and is obvious to all but the most ignorant or those pushing the industry's agenda.

This film demonstrates the pervasiveness of nuclear industry capture in the US. 
Meanwhile, in China, they convicted 40,000 government official of corruption just last year.   How many in the US?

Saturday, March 10, 2012

EPA quits monitoring

11:59 AM on 03/09/2012
Why has EPA quit monitoring the radiation from Japan? In the air and now also in the ocean swirling around the Pacific ocean off Calif, Oregon and Wash. Get informed. Spend some time reading: watch this video

Thursday, March 8, 2012

80% Reneweable by 2035, a law for the USA

Plutonium in Air Is It Dangerous - A Green Road

Kind of the question of the year. We know that tens of tons of Uranium and thus alot of plutonium were launched into the air.

In case you missed it---the density, volume, and mass are calculated in no uncertain terms here--this is the 80,000 lb gorilla in the room.   It is the death knell of Nuke.    It may not kill off the earth from this one event, but the results are still going to be tragic.     Thrive?   Hell just be glad to be alive.

How dangerous is this?

I have heard that one particle in your lungs will guarantee kill you. I don't believe that.

A Green Road did a study on plutonium and they use NukeTruth calcs for dispersion quantities.

Little Black Spot on the Sun Today --- King of Pain

Anyone got the literary allusion?
Nuke safety all an illusion

Ah, they discourage 'speculation', in other words stay blind to possibilities

Old Sep15-11, 06:42 AM
Re: Effect of Solar Storms on the Grid and Nuke Plants?

PF Admin

Astronuc's Avatar

Posts: 19,000
Originally Posted by docneil88 View Post "...there may also be disruption of power supply for years, or even decades, as geomagnetic currents attracted by the [solar] storm could debilitate the [grid] transformers."

How long must active nuclear fuel rods in a reactor be cooled to prevent a meltdown after a reactor is shut down? Is the quote above from the International Business Times way off? I honestly don't know. But if solar storms were to knock out the grid for a year, society would probably descend into chaos. Also, the process of refining oil into diesel fuel or nat gas into propane requires electricity, which would no longer be available, unless backup generators were brought to the refineries. And the NPP (Nuclear Power Plant) backup generators require continuous diesel or nat gas. Also, trucks would be needed to ship the fuel to the NPPs during a one year power outage.
The issue of electrical grid security/reliability/stability is in the realm of electrical engineering, and really has nothing to do with nuclear engineering. The IBTimes articles is speculative, and perhaps overly speculative.

It is hard to imagine a nation having an electrical grid down for weeks, months, years. The technology is much more robust than in the 1800s.

The solar activity is a discussion topic for astrophyiscs. Prior to solar cycle 24, there was speculation about the sun entering a relatively prolonged quiet phase. Now we see 'speculation' about an active period in 2013. We discourage and even prohibited 'overly speculative' posts at PF to avoid the unnecessary and unproductive arguments about what might be.

This is pretty said, last year September 15th 2011, "they" (physics eggheads) were calling cyclical physical phenomenon speculative, after the 4 sigma event of a massive minimum did occur already in the last several years.

Sure, lets hope we don't get a Carrington event, but the comment in blue about how total loss of the grid has nothing to do with nuclear engineering.   What a joke!   It has everything to do with nuclear engineering, unless you just want to play your egg head games without having an annoyances like planning for a black swan that it guaranteed to happen sometime and would wipe out the human race.

And price for the boys to play with their big important toys, any price including your life...roll the dice.

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Per Kevin on review of Gunderson Video

I have had a healthy dose of skepticism when dealing with Arnie and have stated so in many instances on this list.
However, in this video at 24:25 Arnie partially redeems himself on one particular issue that is very important. In Arnies last video he went into great depth about unit 1 and how the lid may have lifted off as was proven in testing that occurred 40 years ago.
When admin posted that video I made a big stink about how Arnie was contradicting known facts. In particular, in his video he focused on the time after the Tsunami and before the explosion. At which point he laid out a theory about how the explosion was caused due to pressure lifting off the reactor cap and releasing the hydrogen. I jumped on his analysis and claimed he was misinforming people because it was known that in fact the EQ caused damage to the containments and radiation was released before the tsunami. This was/is a very important point becuase the industry has repeatedly made the claim that the reactors survived the EQ in tact and the damage was caused by the tsunami. A point I have disagreed with since day one and it is a very important point because the implications are very serious for the entire industry.
In this video at 24:25 he contradicts his last video and supports my assertions by claiming that in the case of reactor one it is unclear whether or not the EQ was responsbile for damaging the containments. This is a large step toward doing what I demanded he do and address the conflict of what he presented in his video and what the facts are. I am impressed that Arnie made this small step. He is actually admitting that his theory on reactor one that he presented in detail in his last video could be wrong.
I demanded he address this point in detail because it was a point where he was clearly providing misinformatoin and distracting people from a very serious issue by focusing them on the details in his video all of which occurred after the EQ caused the real damage.

So, in conclusion, this small step Arnie makes is good. However it does not fully address the major problem that arises from his last video. And I renew my request for him to provide details. In fact, now that he has admitted in this video that the EQ could have done the damage necessary he must address his own conflicting views on what occurred at reactor one.
This may sound like nit picking but its very serious and he did his last whole video on this topic alone. And it could be construed that the effort was entirely a deflection away from the fact that the EQ caused the damage and subsequent explosion. He did this by explicitly focusing on the time after the Tsunami and deliberately not addressing the time period between the time of the EQ and the Tsunami when it is known that a radiation leak was detected.
Arnies credibility rests on this in my eyes. It is a clear example where he contradicts himself in just a matter of a couple weeks on a very serious issue. Until Arnie addresses this in detail he no longer has credibility in my opinion and in fact through this issue has proven that he is conducting a misinformation campaign designed to damage control for the industry. In this clear and precise incident it has to do with protecting the industry from the fact that the EQ caused fatal damage to a reactor. An issue that has ramifications worldwide and puts their claims that these things are quake proof to shame.
I look forward to Arnie addressing this in a timely fashion

Further down--more by Kevin

There are a lot nuances and subtleties involved.
Due to a complete lack of credible information coming from industry, government and supporting agencies Arnie has filled the void. In so doing he has reached hero status in many peoples eyes.
The problems arise with respect to whether he arrived or was sent.
Given that he has a career in the industry and that there is otherwise complete silence about the issues he addresses it seems that every potential exists for him to be fulfilling a vital role for the industry, more so than the vital role he is filling for us lay people.
Regardless of what one thinks of him, and whether or not he is a misinformation agent, I think he needs to address the conflict I detail. It is imperative to maintain credibility either way.
For me, I subscribe to the old Fox Mulder motto when dealing with this industry "trust no one." And view all information critically in a bid to discover the truth and the risk to my child.
I would feel more comfortable if someone else from the industry stepped up to the plate and provided detailed analysis. I think Arnie would too.
In the end its shameful that we have to live under these conditions, seek out truth in the abscense of professionals providing facts. Its a fine display of the circumstances that are at the core of what ails modern day society and could be the evidence of our collective demise.
I do not hate Arnie, I appreciate what insights he has provided. But I also do not envy him. There is only person you have to go to sleep with every night in this life and the decisions we make can make that nightly experience very troubling, and I am sure Arnie is only all too well aware of that.

I made some comments:

A few ideas
Dai means  "number"
Ni Means Two
Ichi Means One

The Japanese beat around the bush, alot.   If you come off too direct too strong too attacking, they will shun you, regardless of the accuracy of your position.   I speak a little Japanese and have traveled the country and married a Japanese woman.

I don't think that the issue of whether the EQ or the tsunami caused the radiation leak is a make or break issue.    Nuke can be sentenced to death without that, that is a battle that I don't think even needs to be fought, in fact an energy wasting argument. 

I don't know all the facts and I don't need to, my opinion is adequately backed up, and my ability to sway others is adequately armed. 

Another point.   Arnie is old, and getting older by the month, this is wearing on him.  Unless he is an idiot financially, he should have $5M to $15M saved up.    He is not doing any of this for money, unless I am wrong.   His neighbors like him.   Just saying that any implication that he is hitching his organization to nuke just makes no sense to me based on why?   To go against everything you have worked for, when you don't need money anymore--than what he has, well that makes no sense.    He lives for the love of his wife, and his wife adores him for beating up on the nukers. 

My analysis.    

X5 Solar Flare coming our way

I haven't checked...was just thinking
We had lighting storm hit right down the street, 2000' away

In Wisco, probably need 2 good size lighting rods, because the PV array is highly grounded (a great lighting rod)

After solar minimum we went through...I expect a bounce back maximum.   

"You guys" (LOL all of us) need to get rid of those stinking Cash for Clunker nuke plants at Kewaunee, Palisades, that one in Illinois that smoked got a bunch of the worst old ones right there, they get cited for violations all the time, like a 1974 Matador, no one wants to buy them, yet they can't die a natural death.    A culture of incompetence has emerged, Kewaunee got busted for a worker doing brewski's at lunch.

A week without power and chaos and no diesel deliveries and they will all be melted down and blown up like Fukushima, which by the way, is still spewing radiation at a very harmful rate regardless of what you don't hear in the media.    Worst man made disaster in human history, ongoing, with a near media blackout.....almost a year. 

Obama says no harmful radiation will come to US Hawaii Alaska

How's that working out for ya with those plutonium hot particles in your lungs?

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Some senators, like Senator Akaka get it

Fortunately not all our senators are that stupid.

Dear Mr. __________:

Thank you for your comments regarding nuclear power plants.

I believe that nuclear power plants and nuclear weapons pose a great threat to our environment and security. I am concerned about the management of radioactive waste, proliferation of nuclear weapons, vulnerability of nuclear power plants to terrorist attacks, and effectiveness of nuclear power plant regulations. I believe that funding is better spent on clean, renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies than on the design and construction of nuclear power plants. Nuclear power plants have very high startup costs and rely heavily on federal subsidies. In addition, our nation's nuclear power plants, which generate a fifth of our electricity, produce about 2,000 metric tons of highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel in a year that must be properly stored for thousands of years.

    As an alternative to nuclear and fossil fuel energy, I have supported clean energy technology throughout my career in Congress. For instance, legislation I wrote, entitled the Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technology Act of 2005, was included in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-58). This bill provides funding for the research and development of hydrogen fuel cells. I also introduced the Marine and Hydrokinetic Renewable Energy Promotion Act of 2007, which was included in the CLEAN Energy Act of 2007
(P.L. 110-140). This legislation resulted in an initial U.S. Department of Energy grant of $978,000 to establish a National Marine Renewable Energy Center in Hawaii. Additionally, I cosponsored the Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion Research, Development, and Demonstration Act (P.L. 96-310), which laid the foundation for federal funding for research and development of ocean thermal energy conversion systems.

I will continue to advocate for a comprehensive energy plan that addresses our national, economic, and environmental security needs and makes use of renewable energy, such as hydrogen, solar, wind, ocean waves, and biomass. Mahalo again for contacting me.
Aloha pumehana,

U.S. Senator

Reactor 3 gone away.

Iam335, I have pondered this question alot, done hours of calcs, viewed all the pictures I could easily obtain.

It appears that the Reactor 3 is completely gone, just a few scraps of yellow metal in the rubble.   If this is true, then would the SFP have blown up in the same instance, or at a different time and if so, where is that evidence?

Or alternately, if the SFP blew up could it have completely destroyed the reactor (like 3" to 8" thick steel), or caused the reactor to simultaneously blow  up too?

Riddle me this, answer me thus and here if you would...

Monday, March 5, 2012

TEPCO Busted Dead to Rights on Photoshopping to Deceive

First reported by Asahi

And here is the TEPCO website where they show this photo also, in case you think that maybe Asahi Newspaper played with it, they didn't

Check out this photo which is in the link above

But wait this gets even more curious. TEPCO also post a video of the bots trip through building 2. 6 video's actually. And you can tell when the robot takes a high resolution photo, it stops and 16 blocks snap off.

In the second video, which is 27MB zipped (thus too large for me to post using BOX), but which you can download, and at the exact moment that the Bot is in place to take the photo in question (the one above that got photoshopped), the video mysteriously jumps to a completely different picture, and then return to it's normal position on the re-fueling deck---the position just past where that picture was taken.

No joke, chicken skin stuff.

 It is roughly at 4:25 into the WMV video. This is also at 68:36 in the mission timer as shown in the picture.

They just spliced in a whole different video of a robot taking a picture at a different view altogether. Very Odd.

You can download the video at the TEPCO site, and play it,

go to

then scroll down to February Archive and click on that

then go to 

when you get to the right time in which the angles and distance from the refueling crane are correct, the mystery jump occurs.

Cool Poll on Nuke, Initial Sunday Night Results

Poll is on the right side, top.

Please drop some comments here too, and sign up as a follower so I know all this hard work is not just a waste.

Sunday, March 4, 2012

Humans can be 26000% over the limit for Contaminated Meat

Of course, the calculation is only illustrative of the fact that a massive amount of deadly radiation was released from Fukushima.

This shows that just the Cesium alone, as officially reported is enough to push all humans to being 26,000% over the limit for being contaminated meat (using 500Bq/kG).

Now the reality is that humans won't get all the Caesium, we can share that with all the rest of the animals and plants in the world.   Share the Pain!!!!!!!!!     Something to be thankful for, LOL, ouch.

Here is the news story and the calculation

Majia great PDF of the Coverup, the Deception of the Nuke Cartel

Great PDF, its long over 100 slides.

Fuel Inventory at Fukushima

You know the old saying, one ton of Plutonium can really ruin your day....

Saturday, March 3, 2012

Good Videos on state of "Cash for Clunkers" nuke plants in the USA

They are Corporations, their only obligation is to maximize profit.  

These clunkers sell for $180M, and yet a new plant will cost $14B at least, based on ZERO cost overruns.

Thursday, March 1, 2012

Smart Grid

What is a Smart Grid?

The main factors that concern us is the ability of the grid to accept renewable energy mostly via Solar PV and some Wind. These sources are low cost and clean, but when the sun goes away, the incoming power goes away.

So a method to make up that power supply is needed, because the demand will not change quickly. At lower levels of renewable, it hardly matters, but when you get to say 30% renewable, it will matter quite a bit. The utility generation rolling reserve has to be ready to quickly pick up the load, AND/OR energy storage devices need to be built into the system.

More on all this later, for now, I just found this Smart Grid write-up under

"Governing" which is a good periodical.

I haven't read this yet, but a quick skim showed it to be better than 90% of the "Internet Fluff" which is out there related to renewable energy. Seriously, it is that bad ---- 90% of what is on the net is either just plain opposite wrong, non-applicable, or just someone writing stuff who has no engineering or practical application experience. Much of what is written is done by parties with vested interest and they have some point to prove or some ax to grind.

Considering that this is one of the major issues facing humanity right now, all the Fluff is curious at the least.