• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Big quake near Fukushima would ‘decimate Japan, lead to US West Coast evacuation

Cardinal said:
Certain phrases by Suzuki, however, aren't the kind of stiff formal talk you'd come to expect from a scientist speaking on grave matters, such as the use of "lying through their teeth" to describe the Japanese government on its handling of the Fukushima disaster; and when describing the potential future catastrophe he described it as "bye bye Japan." This kind of vernacular tends to set off my bull**** alarms. Indeed...





Then again...



Big quake near Fukushima would ?decimate Japan, lead to US West Coast evacuation? ? RT News


So is the good doctor a sensationalist and an alarmist? Or is this a good time to check out some worthless Nevada and Utah real estate?
Click to expand...

Michio Kaku mentioned this a year ago. Fukushima could end up being apocalyptic.
 
danarhea said:
Michio Kaku mentioned this a year ago. Fukushima could end up being apocalyptic.
Click to expand...

That only applies to people who have no objective educated reference.

Scare tactics indeed.
 
BmanMcfly said:
You are still hung up on the ONE typo, where I is next to u on the keyboard and was a typo... You forgot the other mentions of fission to stick on that. I am aware of the differences.




You are confusing the first explosion with the second explosion... The first one looks like your description would be valid...



Not;






Yes, of course, and im not claiming to know WHAT exploded; however, that second one in no way appears like a "contained hydrogen explosion" (whatever the technical details are)


Arnie Gundersen gives a detailed, Step-by-step walkthrough of the Fukushima accidents - YouTube

Watch from 3:00-at least 5:00 and this guy tries to have it both ways. Won't back away from it being a hydrogen explosion; but admits that between himself and other scientists, cannot explain the power in that explosion.



No, it's bad, and we can't delude ourselves that this isn't a big deal... Doomed is a bit strong; we don't know what will happen to all the radiation thats found it's way in the oceans...



There's more than just cesium....

Now I do agree with you; nuclear power is extremely safe an clean power... Until something goes wrong.

Consider that nuclear waste takes millions of years to decay, and it's only a problem when that waste escapes, it's not even 100 years and there's been 3 MAJOR incidents with nuclear power...


The nice thing is that since most people receive only small doses if a person gets a cancer 10-15 years later it becomes difficult to attribute it to the exposure.
Click to expand...


The second explosion could have only resulted from one of two different scenarios.

Either from hydrogen, produced as super-heated steam reacted with the Zirconium cladding or a build up of pressure as molten core material came in contact with water and produced super heated steam.

That second scenario was a real threat at Chernobyl as molten core threatened to breach the lower levels beneath the reactor and come in contact with a storage area filled with water.

Are you trying to suggest that the second explosion was because core material went critical ? I've already explained why that's NOT POSSIBLE.
 
Fenton said:
The second explosion could have only resulted from one of two different scenarios.

Either from hydrogen, produced as super-heated steam reacted with the Zirconium cladding or a build up of pressure as molten core material came in contact with water and produced super heated steam.

That second scenario was a real threat at Chernobyl as molten core threatened to breach the lower levels beneath the reactor and come in contact with a storage area filled with water.

Are you trying to suggest that the second explosion was because core material went critical ? I've already explained why that's NOT POSSIBLE.
Click to expand...

No, I'm trusting this expert, gundersen, he says in this presentation that himself, and other scientists CANNOT explain how hydrogen in any concentration can generate a detonation (as opposed to deflagration).

That and the FACT that this shot several years of spent fuel many km away.

Add to that the extent to which tepco has been lying from the start, covering up radiation readings, etc...

So what are we left with??

Either;
A) unknown exploded
B) hydrogen exploded in an unexplained configuration for the power of the explosion
C) the "impossible" is not quite as impossible as you suggest

I'm really not making any claims, but at a certain point, when even a novice in the subject, as myself can see the bs getting tossed around here, you gotta start asking the right questions.

Of course, I'm also not taking the side of the eco-fascists, they are just as crazy.

Seriously though, the official numbers put Fukushima as between 3-4x the radiation that used to be background levels through the ocean.

The question becomes, as safe and as clean as nuclear energy is, how many of these accidents can we have before the earth actually does become toxic to humans?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom