Posts
Fukushima
Reactor #4 fuel rods
Comments
from Mike Ruppert:
(The
picture) in this
RT story completely gives the lie to every assertion by TEPCO and
the Japanese government that removal of the fuel rods is a simple,
straightforward process. The picture also completely validates
Arnie Gunderson's repeated assertion that the fuel pool has been
crumpled like a pack of cigarettes. It's there for the eye to
see.
During removal, fuel rods cannot break or make contact with each other. TEPCO has been telling us that the process is "under control" with new cranes, even though each assembly must now be removed by hand rather than by computer because the computers and original cranes were destroyed. This photograph also shows that much of the TEPCO-originated video propaganda, disseminated by major news organizations has been a complete lie.
During removal, fuel rods cannot break or make contact with each other. TEPCO has been telling us that the process is "under control" with new cranes, even though each assembly must now be removed by hand rather than by computer because the computers and original cranes were destroyed. This photograph also shows that much of the TEPCO-originated video propaganda, disseminated by major news organizations has been a complete lie.
Some of those containers look like they have become fused to their neighbors. This is a big problem.
ReplyDeleteI'm having a difficult time reconciling the two different and seemingly contradictory narratives coming out of the "alternative" press. The two stories about SFP #4 seem to be:
ReplyDeleteA) The pool is intact, but the fuel rods have been damaged to some unknown extent by the earthquake, tsunami, saltwater, and falling debris. The majority of the radioactive material that existed in the pool prior to the disaster is still there, with little being released. The extraction of the rods will be difficult at best. The lies being told to the public mostly revolve around the state of the rods and the dangers related to the operation.
B) The pool ran dry shortly after the accident due to a complete lack of cooling. The tank may have been cracked, but, even if it wasn't, the heat from the stored fuel would have boiled off the cooling water in short order. Reactor #4 had a core removed and placed in SFP #4 only a short time before the accident. The combination of a dry tank and hot rods resulted in a possible melting of the stored rods and a massive release of radiation. At this point there isn't much left in the tank. The entire story about the removal of the rods is a cover to allow them to clean up the mess and hide the fact that so much radiation was released.
So which is it? A? B? Neither?
As a professional photo/cinema/video tech person with over 30 years professional experience, I have to ask? "Is the camera above the water or in the water?" If it is above the water (which I very strongly suspect it is) then this photo doesn't necessarily mean what you propose it means. I also mention that because the post at the vertical left (as well as horizontal bottom) is bent as if to suggest a camera above water which is in flow; and the water bends the light. Basic photography stuff, actually. The rods could be bent, but this photo does not, in any way, seem to prove that.
ReplyDeletePS: The light glare at the top middle, with the inconsistent line, seems to confirm my previous statement.
ReplyDelete