nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

What's the story about Fukushima these days?

Bradidup

There seems to be very little mentioned about the crippled nuke plant in the media these days. Is everything going according to plan? Last I heard about the place we were told that they were clearing the spent rods from the upper storage area above the reactor in case of another quake. Where I'd the best place to get up to date news?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

El Weirdo

Have you tried here?

B.A._Baracus

Wikipedia for a start, op

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

**edit**
Ah yes, El Weirdo with his usual sarcastic reply.

SuperInfinity

I think that what nuclear proves is that no matter how incredibly disastrous something could potentially be, if there's a large profit to be made and the risk is very small then they will drive it through the government.

The thing is that the law of averages doesn't take kindly to such risks being carried out over and over again. Let's hope that the entire world doesn't go kablam after thousands of such "miniscule" risks are taken.

up for anything

Have a search through here - NHK World. Although judging by what the people on the ground say, they neither trust nor believe their government and news. Sounds familiar.

Run_to_da_hills

The average person would last 7 minutes in any of the exposed reactor buildings, A remote controlled robot would last 2 hours at the most due to EMF breakdown in PCB circuits.

Estimated time to remove spent rods and clean up most of the mess from reactors 1 to 4 could be in the region of 10 years.

Reactor building 4 is the most precarious of all the crippled buildings as a quake as low as magnitude 6 could topple the bring it down spilling its load of rods. If this was the case I would run further than hills. :eek:

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/10/11/what-are-efforts-to-contain-fukushima-2/

Good sites for up to date news and information.

www.rense.com
http://enenews.com/
http://fukushima-diary.com/category/dnews/
http://www.fairewinds.com/content/fukushima-daiichi-truth-and-future

kevin12345

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The average person would last 7 minutes in any of the exposed reactor buildings, A remote controlled robot would last 2 hours at the most due to EMF breakdown in PCB circuits.

Estimated time to remove spent rods and clean up most of the mess from reactors 1 to 4 could be in the region of 10 years.

Reactor building 4 is the most precarious of all the crippled buildings as a quake as low as magnitude 6 could topple the bring it down spilling its load of rods. If this was the case I would run further than hills. :eek:

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/10/11/what-are-efforts-to-contain-fukushima-2/

Good sites for up to date news and information.

www.rense.com
http://enenews.com/
http://fukushima-diary.com/category/dnews/
http://www.fairewinds.com/content/fukushima-daiichi-truth-and-future

How did I know you would post on this RTDH?

El Guapo!

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

.....spilling its load of rods......

/snigger

MistyCheese

Not too much of a story, everyone is okay luckily.

MadYaker

It'll be grand shur

darlett

El Weirdo wrote: »

Have you tried here?

Helpful. Go Fuk yourself :rolleyes:

Banned

B.A._Baracus

darlett wrote: »

Helpful. Go Fuk yourself :rolleyes:

Agree.
I've actually seen alot of El Weirdo's posts. Apart from mod posts, all he does is just be sarcastic or generally be a dick in his replies.

How he is a mod ... I dunno. Or maybe thats how you become a mod around here?

Banned

Pottler

darlett wrote: »

Helpful. Go Fuk yourself :rolleyes:

In fairness, it's the answer to half the tarded questions posted on Boards. "How long will it take me to drive to Dublin?" Feck knows, try it and see, ya spa. "My gas meter is reading too high, what should I do??" Ring the gas company??? Tard. "My girlfriend is riding the lad next door, should I dump her??" Well, what would Chuck Norris do?? Woos. "Fukushima is worrying me. What the story?" It's a reactor, it's fecked. How good do ye think it might be? Scale of 1-10. 10 being "quite fecked!" How about a 9??

B.A._Baracus

Pottler wrote: »

In fairness, it's the answer to half the tarded questions posted on Boards. "How long will it take me to drive to Dublin?" Feck knows, try it and see, ya spa. "My gas meter is reading too high, what should I do??" Ring the gas company??? Tard. "My girlfriend is riding the lad next door, should I dump her??" Well, what would Chuck Norris do?? Woos. "Fukushima is worrying me. What the story?" It's a reactor, it's fecked. How good do ye think it might be? Scale of 1-10. 10 being "quite fecked!" How about a 9??

cour·te·ous/ˈkərtēəs/
Adjective: Polite, respectful, or considerate in manner.

After all its ones own choice to reply, Pottler.

[Deleted User]

darlett wrote: »

Helpful. Go Fuk yourself :rolleyes:

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

Agree.
I've actually seen alot of El Weirdo's posts. Apart from mod posts, all he does is just be sarcastic or generally be a dick in his replies.

How he is a mod ... I dunno. Or maybe thats how you become a mod around here?

Pottler wrote: »

In fairness, it's the answer to half the tarded questions posted on Boards. "How long will it take me to drive to Dublin?" Feck knows, try it and see, ya spa. "My gas meter is reading too high, what should I do??" Ring the gas company??? Tard. "My girlfriend is riding the lad next door, should I dump her??" Well, what would Chuck Norris do?? Woos. "Fukushima is worrying me. What the story?" It's a reactor, it's fecked. How good do ye think it might be? Scale of 1-10. 10 being "quite fecked!" How about a 9??

...

IvySlayer

A nuclear power station survived a 9.3 magnitude earthquake and the resulting tsunami with no deaths caused by radiation.

Nuclear power is the way to go!!!!

Degag

Pottler wrote: »

In fairness, it's the answer to half the tarded questions posted on Boards. "How long will it take me to drive to Dublin?" Feck knows, try it and see, ya spa. "My gas meter is reading too high, what should I do??" Ring the gas company??? Tard. "My girlfriend is riding the lad next door, should I dump her??" Well, what would Chuck Norris do?? Woos. "Fukushima is worrying me. What the story?" It's a reactor, it's fecked. How good do ye think it might be? Scale of 1-10. 10 being "quite fecked!" How about a 9??

No, just use less gas.

Run_to_da_hills

Pottler wrote: »

In fairness, it's the answer to half the tarded questions posted on Boards. "How long will it take me to drive to Dublin?" Feck knows, try it and see, ya spa. "My gas meter is reading too high, what should I do??" Ring the gas company??? Tard. "My girlfriend is riding the lad next door, should I dump her??" Well, what would Chuck Norris do?? Woos. "Fukushima is worrying me. What the story?" It's a reactor, it's fecked. How good do ye think it might be? Scale of 1-10. 10 being "quite fecked!" How about a 9??

I would disagree totally on this particular one.

With so much government lies, main stream media blackout and cover ups it is quite difficult to find the correct answers on the subject of Fukushima.

the groutch

IvySlayer wrote: »

A nuclear power station survived a 9.3 magnitude earthquake and the resulting tsunami with no deaths caused by radiation.

Nuclear power is the way to go!!!!

and that was a very old nuclear station, modern ones would be even better built

Krieg

Pottler wrote: »

In fairness, it's the answer to half the tarded questions posted on Boards.

Aye very true, but there wouldn't be much point in having a discussion board if 50% of the replies was 'LMGTFY', Unless the OP asks something specific like what year was a certain actor born.

The OP does bring up a very good point in that it hasn't been talked about much even though it was a relatively recent major disaster.

ted1

SuperInfinity wrote: »

I think that what nuclear proves is that no matter how incredibly disastrous something could potentially be, if there's a large profit to be made and the risk is very small then they will drive it through the government.

The thing is that the law of averages doesn't take kindly to such risks being carried out over and over again. Let's hope that the entire world doesn't go kablam after thousands of such "miniscule" risks are taken.

explain what happened that was so bad? It was the tabloids that were blown it up.

Show Time

Have the cheese eating surrender moneys(The French) went back to Japan yet??

**Don't forget they were the first out the door when the S**t hit the fan**

SuperInfinity

Pottler wrote: »

In fairness, it's the answer to half the tarded questions posted on Boards. "How long will it take me to drive to Dublin?" Feck knows, try it and see, ya spa. "My gas meter is reading too high, what should I do??" Ring the gas company??? Tard. "My girlfriend is riding the lad next door, should I dump her??" Well, what would Chuck Norris do?? Woos. "Fukushima is worrying me. What the story?" It's a reactor, it's fecked. How good do ye think it might be? Scale of 1-10. 10 being "quite fecked!" How about a 9??

Oh please, for the love of god, please tell me you are a joke poster and not actually that stupid and... (what's a word like deranged but slightly less offensive?)

SuperInfinity

ted1 wrote: »

explain what happened that was so bad? It was the tabloids that were blown it up.

More than 300 people, many of whom are innocent civilians, received more radiation than they should in their whole lifetimes. Estimates of people who are going to die from cancer range from none to 100 (peer reviewed) to 1000 (non-peer reviewed guesstimate). Yes I did just read this from wikipedia.

mattjack

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The average person would last 7 minutes in any of the exposed reactor buildings, A remote controlled robot would last 2 hours at the most due to EMF breakdown in PCB circuits.

Estimated time to remove spent rods and clean up most of the mess from reactors 1 to 4 could be in the region of 10 years.

Reactor building 4 is the most precarious of all the crippled buildings as a quake as low as magnitude 6 could topple the bring it down spilling its load of rods. If this was the case I would run further than hills. :eek:

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/10/11/what-are-efforts-to-contain-fukushima-2/

Good sites for up to date news and information.

www.rense.com
http://enenews.com/
http://fukushima-diary.com/category/dnews/
http://www.fairewinds.com/content/fukushima-daiichi-truth-and-future

When you say ' the average person '... would Superman or Batman be above average ?, myself in school was classed as above average but the teachers always said I could try harder, so what category would I be in ?.

Mrs Mattjack reckons my level is gobshite however,would that be average gobshite ?

Guy:Incognito

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I would disagree totally on this particular one.

With so much government lies, main stream media blackout and cover ups it is quite difficult to find the correct answers on the subject of Fukushima.

Yep. What he should do is ask you. You'll provide him with all the unbiased truth.

ted1

SuperInfinity wrote: »

More than 300 people, many of whom are innocent civilians, received more radiation than they should in their whole lifetimes. Estimates of people who are going to die from cancer range from none to 100 (peer reviewed) to 1000 (non-peer reviewed guesstimate). Yes I did just read this from wikipedia.

because we know wikipedia is a perfectly credible source.

meanwhile in 2012 approx 300,000 people have died as a result of fossil fuel burning elec plants...

SuperInfinity

Well, I find wikipedia to be a credible source, especially for something like this. If you like go and follow the citations or search for where they're getting those numbers.

Pottler

wrote: »

Oh please, for the love of god, please tell me you are a joke poster and not actually that stupid and... (what's a word like deranged but slightly less offensive?)

Gobshyte? It's the one that sprung to my mind anyway. Considering my average post is pure guff and intended(however much it fails)to amuse, what do you reckon?:)

Run_to_da_hills

ted1 wrote: »

because we know wikipedia is a perfectly credible source.

meanwhile in 2012 approx 300,000 people have died as a result of fossil fuel burning elec plants...

You won't find this in main stream media or Wikipedia.

Ground under Fukushima Unit 4 sinking, structure on verge of complete collapse

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LCTv65aqgA

ted1

Conspiracy theories is in another forum.