Fukushima - Plutonium MOX Fuel Pool Explodes During the Night

[DeSwiss]

Run time: 03:01 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBuq-PFaIXQ   Posted on YouTube: June 16, 2011 By YouTube Member: 888Quetzalcoatl888 Views on YouTube: 314   Posted on DU: June 16, 2011 By DU Member: DeSwiss Views on DU: 1988

 
{Check huge flash @ 2:12 mark of video)

Thanks to Youtuber MrSmotegi for this video

http://www.youtube.com/user/MrSmotegi

ALERT!!! THIS PLACE IS NOW IMPOSSIBLE TO WORK IN!!!

As if it wasn't already....???

Plutonium is not a stable element. As plutonium decays, it releases radiation and forms decay products. For example, the decay products of plutonium-238 and plutonium-239 are uranium-234 and uranium-235, respectively. The decay process continues until a stable, non-radioactive decay product is formed. Radiation is released during the decay process in the form of alpha and beta particles, and gamma radiation. Alpha particles can travel only short distances and generally will
not penetrate human skin. Beta particles are generally absorbed in the skin and do not pass through the entire body. Gamma radiation, however, can penetrate the body. Plutonium-238, plutonium-239, and plutonium-240 are isotopes of plutonium, and have half-lives of 87 years, 24,065 years, and 6,537 years respectively.

Plutonium has been released to the environment primarily by atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons and by accidents at facilities where plutonium is used. The amount of plutonium introduced into the environment through nuclear weapons production operations have been negligible compared with those released during testing of nuclear explosives.

Plutonium-238, plutonium-239, and plutonium-240 are alpha emitters. As a result, the potential for direct exposure is minimal from these isotopes. When mixed in soil on the ground these plutonium isotopes have a potential risk that is predominantly from the inhalation and ingestion pathways.


http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2011/04/problems-at-reactor-number-4.html

The operator of the troubled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant is carefully monitoring the situation at the Number 4 spent fuel pool, where the water temperature is rising despite increased injections of cooling water.

Tokyo Electric Power Company, or TEPCO, says it will inject 210 tons of water into the pool on Monday, after finding on Sunday evening that the temperature in the pool had risen to 81 degrees Celsius.

On Friday, TEPCO found that the pool's temperature had reached 91 degrees, so it began injecting 2 to 3 times the amount of water.

The Number 4 spent fuel pool stores 1,535 fuel rods, the most at the nuclear complex.

(Bear in mind that the amount of radioactive fuel at Fukushima dwarfs Chernobyl.)

As I noted on April 2nd:

Nuclear engineer Arnie Gundersen notes that the spent fuel rods in reactor number 4 have no water, and the rods are exposed:

These are very high levels of radiation. As I noted on April 10:

Radiation levels were apparently about 300 sieverts per hour ... right after Chernobyl exploded.

To be clear, the Chernobyl figure is radiation released into the environment, while the reactor 4 figure is radiation within the containment vessel. I have seen no evidence to date that reactor 4 is leaking.

This is especially odd given that reactor 4 was supposedly shut down prior to the earthquake for maintenance. In other words, reactor 4 was - according to official reports - shut down, and shouldn't have very much radiation at all. Something doesn't add up.

In contrast, the radiation inside the cores of the other reactors are much lower: * Reactor 1: 0 * Reactor 2: 26.3 * Reactor 3: 11.1 * Reactor 5: 0 * Reactor 6: 0

Indeed, the Japanese nuclear agency prominently displays the radiation data for all of the reactors except number 4 on it's main page. Number 4 is conspicuously absent, and you have to type in the url for the correct web page to find it.

The building housing reactor 4 doesn't seem to be quite as badly damaged as those housing other reactors:

Plutonium Facts P.D.F -

http://www.youtube.com/redirect?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Furl%3Fsa%3Dt%26source%3Dweb%26cd%3D3%26ved%3D0CDQQFjAC%26url%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.epa.gov%252Fsuperfund%252Fhealth%252Fcontaminants%252Fradiation%252Fpdfs%252Fplutonium.pdf%26rct%3Dj%26q%3Dplutonium%2520facts%26ei%3DBQr6TcfHJcS48gPr8qizCQ%26usg%3DAFQjCNHW_vec_DYgo3gAp7V1xktsJ9g-wg%26sig2%3DOX7Vgp8EFsO5l_6BE7-8Ew%26cad%3Drja&session_token=vjE4Ab0Whj1pcdLxaOrU9IAC6W18MTMwODM0Mjg3NEAxMzA4MjU2NDc0

Creative Commons ;o)

[murielm99]

1. When did this explosion take place? n/t

[DeSwiss]

3. Not sure, the poster put it up today. n/t

[DJ13]

4. The top right on the video says 6-14-2011 at 040 AM (12:40)

[Steepler0t]

2. I live in San Francisco and I would cautiously wager a bet on that being fog

It is a pretty sped up video, the light source is coming from the ground level. I do see a small drift from 3 repeatedly a bit in the foreground of #4. Looks like rolling fog coming in from the second counter on the video.

And no I am no nuke power apologist, I am half expecting to wake up to news of #4 falling over or something like that soon. But this looks like coastal fog luckily!

[DeSwiss]

5. Possible. And I might readlily agree....

...if San Francisco also had a nuclear power plant with radioactive spent fuel pools and reactors in various stages of meltdown and melt-through.

[Steepler0t]

6. The fog creeps like a solid creature

I am sure yes comparatively, this coastal fog coming through the building is carrying a little something extra by the time it surrounds the plant like that and drifts through the compromised buildings. It does not change the fact that that looks like the mornign fog rolling in. When the damn thing tips over or their is light coming from floor 3 or above instead of ground level then panic. Peace.

[wxgeek7]

11. I agree

I agree; certainly looks like fog creeping (advecting) over the area.

And I checked out Fukushima and Sendai Airport weather observations for that morning, and sure enough, mist and very low stratus was being reported. Must've been fog, imho.

Good catch, btw.

[AtheistCrusader]

7. I don't see an explosion at 2:12.

Or anywhere else in the video.

[cliffordu]

8. Neither do I.

What a complete waste of time. I watched it twice.

[AtheistCrusader]

9. If I had to guess, costal fog bank

or a layer of colder air, where steam forms readily, where in previously warmer air it was not visible.

[marions ghost]

10. What's Arnie Gunderson

say about this?

At one point the "cloud" does look like it's emanating from the remains of the building.

[jimlup]

12. This should be the #1 story on tonights news but it won't be ...

Instead we'll get a stupid Weiner resigns story.

[AtheistCrusader]

13. In that case, perhaps you can point out the explosion?

Because nobody else seems to be able to see it.