Merged nuclear power safe?

[r-j]

All my points, which for the most part were in regards to the Fuksuhima Disaster, are clear and easy to follow.

http://online.itp.ucsb.edu/online/plecture/bmonreal11/oh/101.html

Looking at that diagram, and then looking at reactor #3, the fuel rod pools holding the plutonium fuel have to be exposed to the air. Or damaged.

Which is what I just heard on the news. There is nothing over the fuel rod pools in reactor#3

If burning plutonium fuel rods are no big deal, why is everyone so concerned about that?

It turns out, based on the transcripts, my concerns were almost exactly the same as the highest level of nuclear experts.

They were actually a lot more alarmed than I was, since they knew more. Plans as to how they were going to get water (or sand and boron) onto burning fuel rods was a major issue. And what would happen when they did.

It's an incredibly revealing look into the disaster. Especially since they had reports of cesium and iodine from a US air base 100 miles away, before the big explosions. They are essentially starting to plan out what to do, based on radiation levels from US bases. They knew fuel had burned (and released radioactivity into the air), before the first explosion.

Obviously they weren't going to tell anyone. Especially not the citizens of Japan. That would have caused mass panic.

 

[Belz...]

All my points, which for the most part were in regards to the Fuksuhima Disaster, are clear and easy to follow.



It turns out, based on the transcripts, my concerns were almost exactly the same as the highest level of nuclear experts.

They were actually a lot more alarmed than I was, since they knew more. Plans as to how they were going to get water (or sand and boron) onto burning fuel rods was a major issue. And what would happen when they did.

It's an incredibly revealing look into the disaster. Especially since they had reports of cesium and iodine from a US air base 100 miles away, before the big explosions. They are essentially starting to plan out what to do, based on radiation levels from US bases. They knew fuel had burned (and released radioactivity into the air), before the first explosion.

Obviously they weren't going to tell anyone. Especially not the citizens of Japan. That would have caused mass panic.

If your point is so clear, why don't you give me a summary of it, rather than just say "it's clear" ?

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

It turns out, based on the transcripts, my concerns were almost exactly the same as the highest level of nuclear experts.

No, your concerns aren't even remotely the same.

I would punch this dirt bag in the face if I saw him.
You disgust me. Dr. Ted Rockwell, you disgust and insult the intelligence.

You were shown expert testimony and rather than find evidence to support your claims, you threaten them with physical violence.

 

[JeanFromBNA]

I found the documents posted intriguing, r-j. since I hadn't seen them before. I paged through a few, and came upon this nugget right away. It's on page 13, starts with line 6 in this document: http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1205/ML12052A105.pdf

MATTHEW CHANCE: Well, I think there,
7 there are big differences, clearly.
SJI'm not a nuclear expert, but one of the
9 characteristics of the Chernobyl disaster back in
10 1986 -- in fact, nearly 25 years it was; next month
1i is the anniversary, 25th anniversary of the
12 explosion at Chernobyl -- was that there was this
13 enormous explosion that did take place in the, in
14 the building, but it was in the reactor core. Now,
15 the radioactive material, literally big chunks of
1 radioactive material were spilled out in a big black
17 plume of smoke and it was carried all over the
18 western and eastern Europe, you know, carrying, you
19 know, contaminating radioactive material all over
20 this very highly populated area of western and
21 eastern Europe.
22 That has not happened in Japan. The
23 reactors have been essentially shut down. They're
24 not in danger, it seems, of the kind of, you know,
devastating explosions that affected Chernobyl. But
there is this -- you know, you do have to keep
2 cooling the reactor cores. We've been reporting all
3 along, that's where the problems have been stemming
4 from.
5 And when they failed to do that, there
6 would have been, the fuel rods had been exposed to
7 the air, that's when we're seeing these limited
a releases of radiation. But at this point, it's
9 pretty clear that it's not on the same scale as the
10 Chernobyl explosion 25 years ago.

I had no trouble finding reference numbers, r-j. Perhaps you can find and cite those alarming figures and evidence that the NRC said that they were "melting down" the same way? BTW, the .pdf documents are searchable.

I also had no trouble finding multiple references to the concern of a melt down, discussion of the potential for melt downs, and radiation dose rates in Japan, as well as how to handle a phone call from Wolfe Blitzer, who wanted to call it a melt down. There is some redacted information in the documents, as the FOIA statement indicates in the first page of each one, but it does not appear that the documents are trying to hide any critical information about the situation in Fukushima or make it appear better than it was.

You, on the other hand, appear to be supporting or creating a disaster CT story.

What I read (and you are right, the documents are fascinating), were transcripts of professionals doing their jobs, pitching in during a crisis, and considering all possibilities, as they should be.

 

[r-j]

Perhaps you can find and cite those alarming figures and evidence that the NRC said that they were "melting down" the same way? BTW, the .pdf documents are searchable.

After I read that, I tried again, and not only can you search, the copy and paste now works as well. (either my software was acting up, or they changed the files) There was a long stretch where I couldn't download them, then they came back up.

I can't link to anything, and the transcripts are not searchable. I will figure out a way to make it easy for you to read the important parts.

After I wrote that I was going to try to screen capture and post images. But none of them would load. Now they are perfect. Thanks.

I also had no trouble finding multiple references to the concern of a melt down, discussion of the potential for melt downs, and radiation dose rates in Japan, as well as how to handle a phone call from Wolfe Blitzer, who wanted to call it a melt down. There is some redacted information in the documents, as the FOIA statement indicates in the first page of each one, but it does not appear that the documents are trying to hide any critical information about the situation in Fukushima or make it appear better than it was.

The following is from March 12 2011
available here
ML12052A100 - FOIA/PA-2011-0118, FOIA/PA-2011-0119, FOIA/PA-2011-0120 - Resp 43 - Partial - Group Letter ZZ. Part 2 of 10. (310 page(s), 3/11/2011)

The issue is that Unit 1 at Daiichi, this is the unit that's similar to Oyster Creek, the isolation condenser plant.
CHAIRMAN JACZKO: Yes.
MR. DORMAN: Based on the information in the email, it's evident that there is core damage at that facility,

Page 2

DAN: Okay. Nader, we did -- one thing you'll want to look at, when we didn't get in, is there was a direct communication from the head of the Japanese Atomic Energy Commission to the Deputy Secretary of Energy, around midnight, our time, today, a little bit more details, in terms of yes, they've been venting containment. Yes, they've got high rad levels, along those lines, yes.

Page 12

We understand that the Unit 1 at Fukushima Daiichi site has high radiation levels. They have vented the containment, perhaps four hours ago, and that there is some indications of possible core damage.

page 17

The explosion is first mentioned on page 18.

You, on the other hand, appear to be supporting or creating a disaster CT story.

Anyone can read the documents, and spin it any which way they choose. I tend to stick to the facts.

 

[r-j]

The following are all facts. Not my opinions, facts.

From page 84 (and on) the Reagan becomes an issue to them. For good reason. (and this is where they kept their information from us, and for good reason)

ML12052A107 - FOIA/PA-2011-0118, FOIA/PA-2011-0119, FOIA/PA-2011-0120 - Resp 43 - Partial - Group Letter ZZ. Part 3 of 10. (347 page(s), 3/11/2011)

March 13 2011

page85
Earlier this evening, as the USS Ronald Reagan was operating off the coast of Japan, we -- the ship just arrived. We had given the ship some guidance as far as positioning was concerned to stay clear of the area of the potential plume, basically told her to stay 50 miles outside of the radius of the -- 100 miles -- excuse me -- 50 miles radius outside of the plant -- damaged plant -- potentially damaged plant, and then 100 miles along the plume with a vector of 45 degrees.
page 87

I forget there's some you know, acronym for it, PAG or something, how do the levels detected compare with what is permissible?
MR. MUELLER: If it were a member of the general public, it would take -- well, it would take about 10 hours to reach a limit, a PAG limit.
MR. PONEMAN: Right.
MR. MUELLER: For a member of the general public.
MR. PONEMAN: Right. You mean, at the level you detected?
MR. MUELLER: Yes sir.
MR. PONEMAN: But 10 hours, okay.
MR. MUELLER: Yes sir, and it would be a thyroid dose issue.
MR. PONEMAN: It's a thyroid dose issue.
Okay, but the net of all this is that the amount of release that is detected by these two episodes or whatever you would call them, is significantly higher than anything you would have expected from what you have been reading from all sources?
MR. MUELLER: Yes sir.

page93
detected some activity about two and a half times above normal airborne activity using on-board sensors on the aircraft carriers. So that indicated that they had found the plume and it was probably more significant than
what we had originally thought.

The second thing -- the second thing that has happened is we have had some helicopters conducting operations from the aircraft carrier and one of the helicopters came back from having stopped on board the Japanese command ship in the area, and people who had been on -- were on the helicopter who had walked on the deck of the ship, were monitored and had elevated counts on their feet, 2500 counts per minute.

MR. MUELLER: Right, but this is 100 nautical miles away at 2500 counts per minute. So they don't even correlate, the two numbers that you just said. It's a different -- it's much worse if we are detecting 2500 counts per minute on people's shoes 50 miles away. MR. WEBER: Yes, but I don't know where that other vessel was before it was 50 miles off the coast.

MR. MUELLER: That's true, but with the airborne at -- the airborne that we detected at 100 nautical miles, that's far and above what we would expect.

You have to read it all, and it goes on and on through multiple days, to grasp the whole story.

For those unfamiliar with radiation, dose rates, the particles they are concerned about, and the distances, especially the shoe problem, here is a short synopsis.

The airborne readings on the nuclear carrier were alarming, they were in the plume of radiation, a 100 miles at sea. The iodine would cause every crew member to reach their radiation limits within a day. Civilians in 10 hours.

This was far more than they expected, and it's why they moved the ship.

But the shoes. The deck of the other ship, closer to the plant, must have also been in the plume. The amount that had already settled on the deck was huge. Just walking on it made the soles contaminated.

Obviously the Reagan couldn't also become contaminated, so that every part of the deck and all the equipment and people became over the limits, even for a nuclear craft. The alarms would always be going off. Everything on the ship would be contaminated.

The other ship, the one they walked on, it's deck was already hot.

So they knew that even 50 miles downwind, before the other reactors went, before the really bad radiation leaks, they knew even a 100 miles out was dangerous.

Obviously they weren't going to inform the public. Talk about panic.

In this case, fear would have been much worse than the dose of radioactive iodine, cesium and other airborne radiation. Tokyo would have started evacuating.

But don't pretend it wasn't a conspiracy of silence. Most people suspected the very same, based on the lack of radiation data that was forthcoming at the time.

Like the real story about the Reagan. That was covered up right away. And nothing was said at all about the other ship. or ships.

I don't blame them. Leaking reactors and burning fuel is very very dangerous. Containment buildings blowing up is very very dangerous.

Next, all the deaths and injuries they never reported.

 

[r-j]

lol just kidding. The Japanese never followed up on or reported any deaths of any kind. The 11 GE employees contaminated also are never mentioned again. Just that 11 of them were contaminated. There were 40 at the plant at the time. All Americans.

page 148 of that same document, they are discussing how to make a report to the news that avoids mentioning core damage, meltdown, or the facts (which they know) about iodine and the distance from the plant the radiation actually is at that point. They have many discussions about how important it is not to actually say anything false. They try and leave out information, and pretend they don't know anything.

It's quite fascinating. They know, but they sure can't say.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

But the shoes. The deck of the other ship, closer to the plant, must have also been in the plume. The amount that had already settled on the deck was huge. Just walking on it made the soles contaminated.

Wut.

When I turn off the light in a room, the whole room goes dark. The walls and furniture won't still glow from "light contamination", they'll go dark when nothing shines on them. I've never heard of radiation "settling" on anything.

So they knew that even 50 miles downwind, before the other reactors went, before the really bad radiation leaks, they knew even a 100 miles out was dangerous.

I have never heard of radiation affected by winds either.
"God, I wish we could have some more sunlight, but the wind is blowing it all away from us"?

Obviously they weren't going to inform the public. Talk about panic.

Obvious conspiracy theory is obvious.

I don't blame them. Leaking reactors and burning fuel is very very dangerous. Containment buildings blowing up is very very dangerous.

Lots of things are very very dangerous. Automobiles kill so many many people every year it's ridiculous, yet I don't see any panicked citizens -- do you?

lol just kidding...

The

button doesn't work for you?

It's quite fascinating. They know, but they sure can't say.

Fascinating indeed. Their secret is so well-kept it can't be uncovered except by... well, by anyone with a web browser. Amazing how they do it. Wonder how many people they had to threaten, bribe or "silence" to cover it up that well.

 

[r-j]

The following US reactors are the same as Fukushima One (Mark I containment)

Browns Ferry 1, Athens, Ala., 1973, GE 4
Browns Ferry 2, Athens, Ala., 1974, GE 4
Browns Ferry 3, Athens, Ala., 1976, GE 4
Brunswick 1, Southport, N.C, 1976, GE 4.
Brunswick 2, Southport, N.C., 1974, GE 4.
Cooper, Brownville, Neb., 1974, GE 4.
Dresden 2, Morris, Ill., 1970, GE 3.
Dresden 3, Morris, Ill., 1971, GE 3.
Duane Arnold, Palo, Iowa, 1974, GE 4.
Fermi 2, Monroe, Mich., 1985, GE 4.
FitzPatrick, Scriba, N.Y., 1974, GE 4.
Hatch 1, Baxley, Ga., 1974, GE 4.
Hatch 2, Baxley, Ga., 1978, GE 4.
Hope Creek, Hancock's Bridge, N.J. 1986, GE 4.
Monticello, Monticello, Minn., 1970, GE 3.
Nine Mile Point 1, Scriba, N.Y., 1969, GE 2.
Oyster Creek, Forked River, N.J., 1969, GE 2.
Peach Bottom 2, Delta, Pa., 1973, GE 4.
Peach Bottom 3, Delta, Pa., 1974, GE 4.
Pilgrim, Plymouth, Mass., 1972, GE 3.
Quad Cities 1, Cordova, Ill., 1972, GE 3.
Quad Cities 2, Moline, Ill., 1972, GE 3.
Vermont Yankee, Vernon, Vt., 1972, GE 4.

page 41

CHUCK CASTO: I would just ask for their recommendations. You know, they've got all the science. They have these codes that can run this event, that have run this event. They ran it for Peach Bottom. They ran this event for a number of sites.

And, you know, you may just want to reach out, and we may just want to reach out and ask them what their recommendations are based on MELCORE, and I don't know, I can't remember all those code names, but there's a lot of different ones. Do they have recommendations about the crust that forms and keeping water on it, and keeping the right pH, all that stuff.

And, you know, if we end up with a molten core and then you talk about the time for the concrete to disassociate, you know, that NUREG says it's a couple of inches an hour, you know. And, of course, that Mark 1 containment is the worst one of all the containments we have, and it's literally, you know, this NUREG tells you that in a station blackout you're going to lose containment. There's no doubt about it.

But, anyhow, I just would highlight that that is a valuable resource, that NUREG. I think it's -- is it 6150, CR-6150, Perspectives on Nuclear
Safety? It completely walks all of this down. It's already been thought out. It's already been reviewed, looked at, modeled, everything.

So, the one thing the NUREG doesn't really do is tell you how to stop it, how to mitigate it, other than keeping water on it.

http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1205/ML12052A108.pdf

"that in a station blackout you're going to lose containment. There's no doubt about it."

Now we will hear how he doesn't know what he is talking about. I can hardly wait.

 

[r-j]

Lots of things are very very dangerous. Automobiles kill so many many people every year it's ridiculous, yet I don't see any panicked citizens -- do you?

Your denial is obvious. We are discussing nuclear energy, and safety. Rhetoric and emotional statements, logical fallacies and absurd statements are not helpful.

I'm quoting and linking to actual information. Try it some time.

 

[r-j]

"So, the one thing the NUREG doesn't really do is tell you how to stop it, how to mitigate it, other than keeping water on it. "

That pretty much sums it up right there. And it's a main reason why I do not support unsafe nuclear reactors, of which they are a good many around the world.

If you can't add on safety features to keep it from melting down in a power failure, then shut it down. Build a safe new one instead. Something.

But don't deny there is a problem.

Not with 10 ruined reactors in Japan. Several of which are still leaking.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

But don't deny there is a problem.

Not with 10 ruined reactors in Japan. Several of which are still leaking.

Not taking the bait. You've had this explained to you repeatedly in this thread alone.

 

[r-j]

.... it does not appear that the documents are trying to hide any critical information about the situation in Fukushima or make it appear better than it was.

Ignoring the vast amounts of critical information blacked out, what is there tells a very fascinating story about what was really happening at the time. Especially about why the reports read the way they do.

The alarming air radiation readings from the Reagan get communicated as

The Navy's Monday statement, however, provided some perspective, noting that the maximum potential radiation dose received by ship personnel when it passed through the area was "less than the radiation exposure received from about one month of exposure to natural background radiation from sources such as rocks, soil, and the sun."

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-03-15/...diation-exposure-aircraft-carrier?_s=PM:WORLD
That's what we heard. The documents tell the real story. Sort of. There never is any follow up or data on what was causing the radiation readings.

The alarming radiation on the shoes gets transmitted as

On Monday the Navy said it was repositioning ships after tests had detected low levels of radioactivity on 17 U.S. Navy helicopter crew members that had been conducting disaster relief missions in Japan.

That's what we heard. In fact, the 2500 cpm readings were from shoes that had simply walked on the deck of a ship 50 miles away from the reactors. This means they know it isn't noble gases, but particles adhering to the deck.

and the extremely alarming radiation levels detected 180 miles away, south of Tokyo, get communicated as

U.S. Navy personnel are taking precautionary measures after instruments aboard an aircraft carrier docked in Japan detected low levels of radioactivity from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, the Navy said Tuesday.The USS George Washington was docked for maintenance in Yokosuka, about 175 miles (280 kilometers) from the plant in Okuma, when instruments detected the radiation at 7 a.m. Tuesday (6 p.m. ET Monday), the Navy said in a statement.

Reading the transcripts, even with all the missing data, it's obvious what was really happening.

http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1205/ML12052A105.pdf

page 267 March 13 2011

JACK GROB: Chip, this is Jack Grob. Chairman Zaczko's here with me and several other people. We're getting some information that, that is very limited as far as, as the actual data goes but it's, but it's somewhat troubling as well. We're getting information from a Navy base about 190 miles from the site where there's been fuel damage that indicates that at that Navy base they're getting on the order of 20 mrem whole body TEDE and 120 mrem thyroid in 12-hour time. And if that's true, we're running calculations to try to understand what the doses might be closer in to the site if in fact that data is true. If it seems to us that the doses are very substantial close to the site and, and we're asking ourselves what an appropriate protective action recommendation might be if in fact that, those numbers are true.

CHIP PARDEE: Let me, let me make sure I heard the numbers right again, Jack. This was 120 miles away?

JACK GROB: A hundred and eighty miles away.

CHIP PARDEE: One hundred and eighty. I'm afraid I'm traveling without a pan. But, okay, 180 miles away, 22.0 mrem TEDI in a one- to 12-hour time period.

JACK GROB: Yes. And a 120 mrem thyroid in a 12-hour time period.

It gets way more interesting, because they also detected cesium and iodine, so they knew the core damage was bad.

 

[r-j]

I see the crazies have also found this information, and are trying to put a very negative spin on it already. But unlike myself they don't seem to be providing page numbers.

http://enformable.com/2012/02/march-20th-2011-navy-vice-admiral-reports-150-milliremhr-thyroid-dose-in-area-south-of-tokyo/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Enformable+%28Enformable%29

That is from http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1205/ML12052A111.pdf and page 199 shows what they left out. To make it sound worse than it may have been. Maybe.

It's very annoying that the records simply stop right after that. We never find out what the real numbers were.

In fact, they are stonewalling on releasing all kinds of information still.

http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/forum/218/status-update-request.2012-02-20

Note she asked for the information on March 16 2011. They just now released a very small part of what the press requested.

 

[shadron]

Wut.

When I turn off the light in a room, the whole room goes dark. The walls and furniture won't still glow from "light contamination", they'll go dark when nothing shines on them. I've never heard of radiation "settling" on anything.

Uhh, Safe-keeper, they're talking about fallout particles. These are particles of dust which have 137-iodine or other radioactive isotopes attached. They settle out of a plume of such dust progressively. They could even be individual atoms of iodine floating on the wind. Individual atoms of almost anything can do this, with heavier ones tending to settle first, but in general, unless they are quite dense in the air, they are not really a significant problem, not like particles are.

I have never heard of radiation affected by winds either.
"God, I wish we could have some more sunlight, but the wind is blowing it all away from us"?

See above.

Obvious conspiracy theory is obvious.

Lots of things are very very dangerous. Automobiles kill so many many people every year it's ridiculous, yet I don't see any panicked citizens -- do you?

It's pretty obvious that fallout particles are not one of your usual hazards. They are, none the less, real.

Consider the Crossroads/Baker bomb test. A Mark III Fat Boy was anchored 50' down in the Bikini lagoon, surrounded by WWII obsolete boats, and exploded. The worst contaminant of the test was about four pounds of sea salt, irradiated with neutrons, changing the sodium into 24sodium, with a half-life of 2.2 days. Short half-life means violent radiation density, and it proved so - the boats contaminated could be washed down to about 50% of original radiation, but beyond that it was embedded in microscopic cracks in everything. Several of the boats, such as the German cruiser Prinz Eugen, were intentionally scuttled because they were so heavily contaminated.

Fascinating indeed. Their secret is so well-kept it can't be uncovered except by... well, by anyone with a web browser. Amazing how they do it. Wonder how many people they had to threaten, bribe or "silence" to cover it up that well.

I'll agree with this assessment.

 

[r-j]

I can see there is going to be a continued confusion by a few people here. The historical documents, just released, show that during the early days of the disaster, the whole truth was not told, and when they did mention things, they did it in a way to obscure the meaning.

The discussions about this, that they had at the time, it's one of the more interesting parts about reading the story.

There is a great concern over telling the public/press anything, especially anything the Japanese told them. Or what the Navy was reporting at the time.

So we get 2500cpm readings, from particles stuck to shoes, from walking on the deck of a Japanese ship, 50 miles away, and it is told as

On Monday the Navy said it was repositioning ships after tests had detected low levels of radioactivity on 17 U.S. Navy helicopter crew members that had been conducting disaster relief missions in Japan.

The untold part, is what level of radiation caused that much contamination on a ship 50 miles away. On Saturday March 12th

At the same time, we have

TOKYO, March 13 (Xinhua) -- Tohoku Electric Power Co. said Sunday that radiation rose to 21 micro sievert, around 400 times higher than the normal level at the Onagawa nuclear plant in Miyagi Prefecture.


The utility company attributed the sharp rise in radiation to radioactive substances floating from Fukushima No.1 nuclear power plant.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-03/13/c_13776090.htm

A sharp physics person, with math skills, could figure out the amount of radiation needed to produce that level of contamination 50 miles away.

Same for the ships readings.

 

[shadron]

The alarming air radiation readings from the Reagan get communicated as http://articles.cnn.com/2011-03-15/...diation-exposure-aircraft-carrier?_s=PM:WORLD
That's what we heard. The documents tell the real story. Sort of. There never is any follow up or data on what was causing the radiation readings.

No, these transcripts don't tell the real story. Let's try to remember that the telephone is probably not the only means of communication in use. It's fast and immediate, but is not conducive to well thought-out or documented information. Written reports and faxes are also traveling back and forth. No one has committed to keeping telephone conversation transcripts up to date or assuring follow-through.

The alarming radiation on the shoes gets transmitted as That's what we heard. In fact, the 2500 cpm readings were from shoes that had simply walked on the deck of a ship 50 miles away from the reactors. This means they know it isn't noble gases, but particles adhering to the deck.

and the extremely alarming radiation levels detected 180 miles away, south of Tokyo, get communicated as Reading the transcripts, even with all the missing data, it's obvious what was really happening.

And perhaps not. While it looks bad from your and my point of view, neither of us are nuclear engineers, and there are possibly other reasons for this.

It gets way more interesting, because they also detected cesium and iodine, so they knew the core damage was bad.

Cesium and iodine are to be expected when iodine (mention of thyroid exposure means iodine) has been detected already. Detecting it doesn't have additional significance, as far as I know; in fact, 137Cs is a decay product of 137I. They're all coexistent fission products. One thing that is significant is that 137I peaked in May and died away, not to return. That has a definite meaning.

 

[r-j]

Of course NOW we know the radiation being released was so much worse than anything that was being reported at the time. But that's what is so interesting about it. Seeing what was really going on, and comparing it to what the press was being told at the time. From the insiders POV

 

[r-j]

The discussions about radiation from "shine" are shocking in some respect. Like the sure knowledge they had that containment was going to be lost.

They thought the fuel ponds had to be dry, and burning. So they keep talking about the rads being from "shine", from the spent fuel. (unless fuel was blown out of the buildings, they couldn't explain the high levels between buildings three and four)

I never heard that term, in all the thousands and thousands of postings about the disaster. That they were wrong, and the pools didn't go dry, that makes the extreme levels outside the containment buildings a mystery.

Along with the other evidence, it's looking like core material really was ejected from reactor three, from the huge explosion.

 

[a_unique_person]

http://www.theage.com.au/world/nobody-seems-to-be-in-charge-20120310-1uqw6.html

The failure to properly record the minutes of the government’s crisis management meetings has added to sharp public criticism about how the nuclear crisis was handled, deepening distrust of politicians and bureaucrats.
‘‘Who is the leader of the actual operation? I get too many requests and appeals that are incoherent,’’ Yoshihiro Katayama, internal affairs minister at the time, said at a March 15 meeting. ‘‘Nobody seems to be in charge.’’
The minutes also showed top crisis managers were confused, causing miscommunication that left local officials and residents without crucial information needed for evacuation.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/world/nobody-seems-to-be-in-charge-20120310-1uqw6.html#ixzz1oglklTOd
​

I think I said all along, the response did not appear to be optimal, but was an ad hoc mess.
​