Register

Peak Oil is You


Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)


Page added on December 10, 2013

Bookmark and Share

Fukushima WAS a Nuclear Explosion, Here Is The Proof

The only way that the tens of tons of uranium and plutonium shown by US EPA air samples could occur was if the explosion came from within the reactor vessel, and/or spent fuel pool.   So clearly the explosion was a nuclear type of explosion from within.    Nuclear promoters have long stated that nuclear plants can’t blow up in a nuclear explosion.    We know this to be a lie.  In fact Chicago’s own Argonne National Lab has video from back in the day when it was “cool” to perform open air tests to blow up reactors to prove the nuclear chain reaction can blow up the reactors.    The special type of Nuclear Explosion is called a “prompt moderated criticality”.

A blast from a “hydrogen explosion” would come from a wide area where hydrogen would be, Hydrogen is the lightest element, so it would float up and fill the reactor building from the top down.   If it truly was a hydrogen explosion, and it wasn’t, then the blast would come from the top down.   The fuels would be compressed into their deep containments, not launched thousands of feet into the air as did occur.

I am going to stop calling these things reactor vessels, and instead call them “Radiation Canons”

Here is the Argonne National Lab proof of concept Even Arnie Gundersen chimed in to clarify the nature of the Prompt Criticality

This Prompt criticality doubles in power every millionth of a second and causes incredibly rapid power increase that is the destructive nature of a bomb. The second type of prompt criticality is called a prompt MODERATED criticality, which is what I believed happened at Fukushima.

Here is his whole email on the subject
Gundersen Email

Now we do we know that tens of tons (at least) were launched into the air and effectively aerosolized by the Radiation Canon (aka reactor vessel)?   Simply using the density of the uranium and plutonium in the air as presented by EPA air sampling tests that are data mined to reveal their dirty little secrets.   All that data and the simple calculations to calculate mass using known density and area/volume of dispersion are HERE-

http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/p/uranium-aerosolized-into-atmosphere.html

Read the link above, its important.   It is the smoking gun.   Here is a excerpt table from the calcs in the link above, from EPA data

One thing to note, the nuclear promoters know that plutonium is a dirty word, and many laymen know how dangerous plutonium is.   In the table above, EPA states ND supposedly for “None Detected” but in reality, that is a lie as the real story was “not tested”.    3 facts: in reactors, as uranium burns, it turns into some percentage of plutonium.   Also any “spent fuel” will therefore also contain plutonium.  And finally in Reactor, aka Radiation Canon 3, they were using MOX fuel which is a uranium with highly concentrated Plutonium.

The nuclear promoters try to lie to cover up their dirty little secrets, to protect “their precious”.

Bottom line….if there is uranium in the air, there is plutonium in the air.

Below you find 3 separate sources proving the Plutonium detected in USA and even as far as Lithuania.

Plutonium Admission by EPA

Just today, ENENEWS broke an article showing plutonium in New Mexico with the Fukushima “signature”
http://enenews.com/facility-director-we-saw-fukushima-plutonium-out-in-the-new-mexico-desert-local-and-regional-contaminations-of-plutonium-in-the-environment-have-resulted

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22206700

And just for good measure, here is the video of Radiation Canon 3 exploding.   Note the huge chunk of steel/concrete that was launched upward, and the apex, it falls off to the left.

Wouldn’t it be better to remove the Radiation Cannons from your Backyard?   Remove them all from the HOME PLANET.

Per blogger “AGreenRoad”—-http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2013/10/fukushima-plutonium-detected-in.html

Now, why do you think that they are claiming nothing happened at Fukushima, and nothing harmful came out? They cannot afford to let you know the horrible truth of what happened.

Toxicity of both Uranium and Plutonium are functions of their radioactivity AND even more importantly, they are highly toxic heavy metals.    Their One-Two punch is a killer.

A 1996 testing of 144 Beagals given inhaled Plutonium killed 141 of the dogs within 1.5 to 5.4 years.  Bone tumors killed 93, Lung tumors killed 46, and liver tumors killed 2 (although liver tumors were found in 20 dogs, just that the Bone and Lung killed quicker).
 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8927705

Maybe we ought to stop putting this stuff into Radiation Canons?

nuke professional



8 Comments on "Fukushima WAS a Nuclear Explosion, Here Is The Proof"

  1. SilentRunning on Tue, 10th Dec 2013 3:21 am 

    A nuclear explosion vaporizing tons of highly dirty nuclear fuel from a reactor would have killed all the workers present and would make the area so radioactive that any subsequent work would be utterly impossible.

    I checked the math on the website listed – it makes very unreasonably high assumptions about plume size and density. The actual amount of U-238 in the atmospheric samples given support perhaps 50 kg total in vapor form, spread over 1 million cubic kilometers. This is consistent with a meltdown of 3 reactors.

    One thing the webpage analysis assumes is that the U-238 density is uniform in the atmospheric column. This is a *poor* assumption, since Uranium is a very dense material, it will be strongly concentrated at the bottom of the atmosphere.

  2. surf on Tue, 10th Dec 2013 8:13 am 

    Note the plutonium levels shown in the table are in pico curies. Thats 0.000000000001curies. Also note that the highest reading is 0.00000XXpcu. When they say NA it is very likely that the levels were way below what the equipment could measure. Not as the author contends “note tested”.

  3. J-Gav on Tue, 10th Dec 2013 10:05 am 

    Though some of the info in the article remains ‘unsettling,’ to say the least, I think Silent makes a valid point. I’ll add that one of the contributors to the author’s arguments, Arnie Gundersen (follow the link to original), is known for over-playing his hand.

  4. stock on Tue, 10th Dec 2013 5:50 pm 

    Did anyone ever stop to think…heh, why were they never pouring water into the reactor 3 or SFP 3?

    Can you figure it out?

    Because there is nothing there.

  5. stock on Tue, 10th Dec 2013 5:54 pm 

    @ silent

    You state “make unreasonable assumption about the plume size and density”

    huh? The density is exactly from the EPA. The plume geographical spread is of course estimated, but supported by density samples in Guam, Hawaii, Saipan, and California, thats a big area.

    The height of the column is taken at 8 miles….what if it is only 1 mile? that still implies 25,000 pounds of uranium still floating in the air.

    Just saying, your unsupported 50kG is well….unsupported.

  6. kickerbocker on Tue, 10th Dec 2013 6:45 pm 

    anti-nuke clowns never sleep

  7. Hugh Culliton on Tue, 10th Dec 2013 11:21 pm 

    It’s sad that a nuclear explosion would be preferable to the daily misery that’s still happening.

  8. Atoms4Peace1 on Wed, 11th Dec 2013 5:17 am 

    We professionals have seen these websites, the Gundersen claim, and the false calculations by the “nuke pro”. All of them fail to assert the real forensic evidence for a prompt moderated criticality – a very large neutron spike on the order of 10^18 neutrons over a millisecond. There is really no claim to the Fukushima explosion and the old Borax explosion. In fact the explosion at Borax is steam from the rapid heatup of the core from prompt criticality. The Fukushima explosion was hydrogen,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *