Arnie Gundersen confirms massive explosion at Unit No. 3 was in spent fuel pool

[flamingdem]

Run time: 13:24 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jnZSuNeDNc   Posted on YouTube: May 07, 2011 By YouTube Member: silvertongue14454 Views on YouTube: 214   Posted on DU: May 08, 2011 By DU Member: flamingdem Views on DU: 1919

 
Arnie Gundersen updates us on the latest emmissions coming from Fukushima and the implications. He finishes with the story that
the EPA has ended radiation testing for Fukushima even though the situation is extremely unstable and venting is occurring this weekend.
Also, Fukushima Groundwater contamination continues and is the worst in nuclear nistory.

He begins with a report from the Japanese Nuclear Safety Commission Ex-Secretariat, Dr. Saji, credits the current status of the accident to "luck". Gundersen discusses what could have happened if the wind had been blowing in-land.



Fairewinds Associates
http://www.fairewinds.com/

[AtheistCrusader]

1. I disagree.

Hydrogen could have blown fuel out of the pool, especially given the liklihood the hydrogen was being generated IN the pool as the water level fell below the tops of the fuel rods. Hydrogen could have nearly displaced all atmosphere within the building. Assuming hydrogen could not have propelled the fuel rods/pieces out of the building assumes facts not in evidence:

1. The amount of hydrogen in the building.
2. The source.
3. The state of the fuel pool's contents at the moment of ignition, especially the water (which may no longer have been present at all).

[lastone]

7. so then i assume

you are a nuclear engineer with the same access to information as this gentleman?

[AtheistCrusader]

8. Nope.

But his statement, as presented, is not true, as I do happen to have occasion to work with hydrogen gas, and am familiar with its properties in an enclosed space, as well as mixing with atmosphere.

Nuclear engineering is not required to understand how solid matter may be embedded in an explosive matrix. Nor for understanding how light gasses disperse in atmo, or in an enclosed space.

You might similarly criticize Gunderson for explaining deflagration/detonation, when neither are applicable to his nuclear science field.

[lastone]

9. too funny

"you do happen to have occasion to" and your refuting an expert. sorry buddy - i'll take an experts analyses over an occasional observer.

[AtheistCrusader]

10. He is not an expert in that particular subject.

Not unless there's something in his background he has not shared.
Again, that is not specific to, or even relevant to nuclear science. A welder would have as much or far more experience.

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. thanks

[DeSwiss]

3. K&R n/t

[oldbanjo]

4. From the moment that they started

spraying water on these reactors they have been contaminating the ground water, they just kept this fact from the public. This is one main reason that nuclear power needs to be re looked at, in many States of the USA there are shortages of drinking water. It's not worth the risk of possible contaminating what little we have.

[Overseas]

5. Excellent review of the situation.

Stunning that we have shut down our EPA monitoring and seafood inspections.

[wundermaus]

6. All other issues except global climate destabilization pale in comparison to this catastrophe

This is an ongoing global environmental catastrophe and yet it has almost completely disappeared from the American public's attention.

Millions upon millions of cancer caused deaths and unimaginable genetic mutation and health damage for all future generations...

Why this is not an emergency event demanding a global international response of every leader of every nation in the world is beyond me.

All the terrorists and extremists that ever existed could not have created a more horrific attack on ALL life on this planet.

Our Silence is Deafening!