“Fukushima was mistake” : Westinghouse Chief. Boy, he thinks it’s still 1954.

http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/09/13/nuclear-industry-idINL5E8KD5MZ20120913

Nuclear sector seeks to regain trust after Fukushima

Thu Sep 13, 2012 5:10pm IST
* Nuclear industry needs to be transparent – Areva chief

* Fukushima was an error – Westinghouse executive

Throughout my life, I recall, a constant stream of nuclear lies. As the old nukers die, new ones fill their shoes and believe, without much question, everything they are told. When it blows up in our faces, they first deny and then cry “Error”.

Pray for Japan. Its useless looking for nuclear help, or nuclear truth, from nuclear industry. imo.

By Karolin Schaps

LONDON, Sept 13 (Reuters) – The global nuclear industry, traumatised by Japan’s Fukushima accident 18 months ago, needs to redefine itself to regain public trust and better cooperate to improve safety, senior executives of the sector said on Thursday.

The worst such accident in 25 years laid bare the industry’s dependence on public confidence as governments in countries such as Germany, Switzerland and Belgium promised their voters to pull out of nuclear energy as soon as possible.

Although the order books of large nuclear companies were hit hard after the disaster, with forecasts for new nuclear capacity projecting a fall by 12 percent by 2020, other major economies are pushing ahead with nuclear newbuilds despite Fukushima.

“We need to make a collective effort to restore our reputation and to rebuild the nuclear brand,” Luc Oursel, chief executive of France’s flagship nuclear reactor producer Areva , told an industry conference in London.

With almost 80 percent of its domestic electricity generated from nuclear power plants, France has the world’s highest share of nuclear energy and Britain, China as well as the United States are planning to build several new nuclear power stations.

Areva is contracted to build nuclear reactors in many sites around the world.

Oursel said it was more important than ever to be open about nuclear operations and that the industry as a whole should support colleagues in Japan to restore public confidence after one of the country’s Fukushima nuclear reactor leaked radiation following a tsunami in March 2011.

Japan has seen widespread anti-nuclear protests in recent weeks as it decides whether to ditch the technology forever.

Fukushima and events such as the recent discovery of cracks in a Belgian nuclear reactor have dented the public’s confidence in the safety of nuclear power.

“What came down at Fukushima was more than a seawall. March 11 was an error,” said Ric Perez, president and chief operating officer of Westinghouse, also a leading nuclear company and majority-owned by Japan’s Toshiba.

Perez said it was the sector’s obligation to continue to improve safety and address points of contention as a collective industry rather than companies from different countries.

Even though the impact of Fukushima was undeniable, the global financial crisis is also taking its toll on new nuclear project development as customers find it hard to raise finances to cover the high upfront costs, Kirill Komarov, deputy director general of Russia’s Rosatom, Russia’s state nuclear power corporation, told the conference.

The International Energy Agency (IEA), which advises industrialised countries on energy, says nuclear energy is important as a low carbon source of power to support the rise of renewable power generation supply. end quote.

They will say and do anything to hide the fact that the Fukushima reactors are still venting radionuclides onto land, sea and air. They will say and do anything to keep their share values up. They will do anything to block such news from being accurately and routinely reported in the mass media. They cannot at this point though, control the internet.

These are the very same companies and governments who warned favored people to move out of Utah and Nevada, the same ones who, throughout the 1950s to 1980s labelled dissenting scientists and individuals as “unpatriotic”, the same ones who called who complained to government about the death of their children from nuclear fallout as being ‘Communistically inspired’, the same ones who forced the Marshall Islanders to return to contaminated land. They are the sames who directed funds which became a permanent Dole to nuclear industry, the same ones who permit nuclear industry to cause global havoc within the protection of limited liability, the same ones who fund phony research known as hormesis, which these liars falsely claim “proves” that nuclear emissions such as strontium, cesium, Xenon and Krypton is beneficial to health. These routine emissions, particularly at refuelling cause disease.

These are the same ones who told Japan and the world that there were no meltdowns at the Fukushima Reactors, the same ones who told Japan and the world that it was fine to eat plutonium, that only unhappy people get radiation sickness, that noone was at risk, that it was safe to move back into the Fukushima immediate fallout zone, that it was good to decontaminate even when fallout is still arriving and even civilians have returned to the areas being decontaminated. The rad readings in air in Fukushima City, where people walk passed workers removing cesium and other nuclear shit with steam cleaners, where kids have to walk to school even though they are warned to avoid the rain and stay indoors, is higher than the rad rad readings in air in the permanent exclusion zone.

Until all this stuff – the months of lies and disinformation, the year and a half of the bullying, exclusion of an entire population – is openly admitted and discussed in public by world nukers, they will remain a blatantly deceptive mob of red neck hicks, as they have always been.

Yea, you are a mistake Westinghouse. So are the rest of them. If Fukushima was a mistake unforeseen by world nuclear industry and government, why were scientists in the 1960s and 1970s so abused and ignored by pro nuclear companies and government? Why, when the AEC Ergen Report of the 1960s demanded a technical fix to the high risk of emergency core cooling system failure was it ignored? Why were no full scale tests conducted? When Lapp highlighted the “Problem of Nuclear Plumbing” (New York Times) in 1971, why was he ignored? When Nader and Abbott highlighted the high inherent risks of ranks of reactors clumped together in “reactor parks” in 1975 and when those two also repeated the high risks presented by “nuclear plumbing”, inadequate containment and poor resistance to disasters inherent in nuclear reactors, why did World Nuclear respond by merely calling Nader and Abbott nasty names? The sale and construction of the reactors for TEPCOs Fukushima Diiachi site went ahead in this very same period. Was that a mistake? How is it a mistake if dozens, literally dozens of people from around the world, many independent scientists and some scientists who lost their jobs because they spoke honestly, all said the same things.That the ECCS was inadquate, that disaster resistance was inadequate, that containment was inadequate, that lives would be at risk.

The world nuclear lobby built reactors anyway. That is a deliberate act. Lapp could see that reactors had to be built away from major cities. As a result the Japanese food basket of Fukushima now lies as radiologically, nuclide venting ruin. Well done? I don’t think so.

And down here, we have nuclear industry funded crap like this, served up by a local university.

http://blogs.flinders.edu.au/flinders-news/2011/07/14/radiation-response-a-meltdown-in-reason/

The Fukushima reactors will take 4 decades to decommission according to the Japanese government. According to the Japanese press yesterday, the cores are still molten and the broken reactor vessels continue to vent radionuclides into air sea and land. Flinders university claims this presents a health benefit. This flies in the fact of the facts. Take this crap off your taxpayer funded website, Flinders University, and start publishing the truth.

Over the last year and a half I have watched world nuclear authorities act increasingly in the same manner as the British nuclear authorities acted in Australia. They lied about the amount and impact of fallout. They lied about the extent of contamination residue on land and in water and food. They lied about casualities, they lied about and with held diagnosis for decades, they with held hospital records, they claim to have lost ALL of the Maraling nuclear test health records. They claim radiation affected no nuclear veteran, even at the same time as they admit that nuclear veterans suffer 23% higher risk of disease. They are perplexed, in public about this. Even today, the land which British authorities claimed was perfectly clean,remains, forever, banned from permanent human use. Yet Aboriginal people, whose land it is, know very well that the game they catch up there may well British radionuclides in its flesh.

The Japanese nuclear authorities made the blatantly arrogant attempt of claiming that the global bomb test fallout was perfectly safe, so was the continuing Fukushima fallout. What patent crap. Add them both up idiots, and stop insulting those whose lives were cut short by nuclear testing, and since, by the activities of world nuclear industry. This is not a mistake, it is the truth. The very same exclusion from medical diagnosis and treatment which took place in relation to nuclear victims of the 1950 is taking place today in Japan, with people who front to Japanese hospital asking for blood tests are being turned away!!!! In 1953, Lallie Lennon was engulfed by a bomb fallout cloud. She became ill. She still suffers painful scars, though they have improved. From 1952 she began asking for a diagnosis. She asked throughout the 1950s, the 1960s, the 1970s. Not until the 1980s did she get an answer.
And then, the Young Doctors ignored radiation as a factor. They brushed aside her mention of the fallout which caused her health to decline and which caused her suffering. She is not the only one.

Is what happened to Lallie a mistake ? Or is it rather, a prototype for what is now being inflicted upon the people of the Japan and indeed the rest of the world?????

“We need to make a collective effort to restore our reputation and to rebuild the nuclear brand,” Luc Oursel, chief executive of France’s flagship nuclear reactor producer Areva , told an industry conference in London.

Bullshit. Find another job and do something useful for a change. It is plain to see the Luc hasn’t changed.

All my life, all I have witnessed from nuclear authorities is lies, more lies and damned lies. The British Chief Scientist in March 2011 stated that if meltdowns occurred at Fukushima, the fallout zone would extend no more than 5 metres around the TEPCO site and that emissions would last a few short hours. Piss off Beveringham, the reactors, even as you spoke were in meltdown and even as you spoke, the reactors were venting in land sea and air. Find something useful to do, try telling the truth. At the very least you talk out of your arse. Chances are the Fukushima reactors will vent until they are disassembled and removed. In 40 years time. Optimistically.

Mistake. Bullshit. Foreseen and followed by a failed attempt at cover up. Unlike 1945, the world can read, if it chooses to, the Japanese press reports and scientific papers, in many local languages. Such as English. Such information reveals world nuclear experts to be more than mistaken. Much more. The false information issued by them over the last year and a half has been willfully, deliberately,wrong, incorrect, not reflective of reality.

Pam Sykes: The doses suffered by people living in the Fukushima Hot Zones in Japan gain no medical benefit from the Reactor emissions. It is not “like vitamins” as you claim in public. Not one civilian in Japan, subject to reactor emissions of radioactive material such as cesium, strontium, uranium and plutonium presented to TEPCO and gave consent for that company to administer radionuclides to them. Not one. Medicine depends upon informed consent. If there is no informed consent, then it is not medicine, it is industrial radiological pollution. What you say is however, in conformity with the wishes of your funding organisation, the US Department of Energy is it not? The US Department of Energy has a mandate to promote nuclear power, and a desire to implement cheap clean up regimes. If you believe what you say Pam, fine. If not, get the hell away from them.

You are not my doctor Pam, you do not have my consent.

Earlier this year, the was a public meeting held at the Walkerville Hall. Barry Brook of Adelaide University, passed around little sealed plastic bags containing uranium ore to the gathered crowd. Perfectly safe he said. True enough at the level of radiological laboratory Barry. People measured the gamma dose emitted by the ore, the gamma penetrating, largely unattenuated, the little plastic bags. The alpha radiation was not measured. It presents only as a severe internal hazard if taken into the body.

Barry, how many little plastic bags, glued to the shattered Fukushima reactors, will it take to seal the inside the reactors the radionuclides which have been venting and leaking from them since March 2011?

A rough number will do. What the hell were you thinking? That a broken reactor complex is anything remotely like a rad lab, the main aim of which is to keep its radioactive sources sealed?

A rad lab and a broken rank of reactors are two very different things Barry. So what was your point?

The idea of the myth of progress is to enable a false claim that present “mistakes” are not actually mere repeats of the deliberate crimes of the past.

That is why, sometimes, “progress” is indeed a myth.

Sometimes, the nuclear victims of the earlier nuclear escapades had children. And those children often remember precisely what happened to their parents, and sometimes, to themselves, as a result of nuclear “mistakes”.

The children of Fukushima will retain their memories for a long time, and will perhaps pass onto their children their recollections of what Mr Perez calls an “error”.

The record shows that from the 1960s even the Atomic Energy Commission knew of all of the key failure points manifest in March 2011. That the US authorities knew these things yet still approved the export and construction of the technology at Fukushima Diiachi with the features and protections deloyed is not an error, it is part of a deliberate and decades long scandal which has, from time to time, hit the public mind. Roughly once a decade. Each time, the world nuclear industry has claimed that reactors are safe. That is, repeatedly the warnings have been ignored decade after decade. It is very very self serving for world nuclear authorities to let the Japanese authorities take sole blame. Everyone from Strauss and Seaborg down, both in hierarchy and time, should take the blame. Of course the originators are all dead now and the young ones in their shoes today think they told the truth.

The fundamental “mistake” (I’ll it that for now) of nuclear industry is this: Since 1946 it has promised to keep its radioactive sources sealed. But it never ever has. By the 1990s, this fact was so patently obvious to anyone, that a new regime was put in place. “Radiation is good for you, its a like a vitamin”. A re hash of the crap they told the nuke vets in Nevada. Teller took to demonstrating the safety of bomb fallout by using a radium luminous watch as an example. Lapp, also of the AEC took issue. So did many others. The bombs stopped in 1963. The reactors did not. Today, the US Academy of Sciences is preparing the basis for a new nation wide survey of reactor emissions related cancer survey of the USA. It has not started collecting data yet.

Any assurances issued from Adelaide South Australia that insist industry keeps its sources sources sealed are wrong. Any assurances also issued from here that claim the nuclear fuels and fission product emissions and waste are “like vitamins” is not merely a mistake. It is total and utter crap.

Back in the 1960s, Seaborg, the Chair of the AEC, had the choice of either building a sodium cooled fast breeder reactor (Fermi, Detroit) or building a full scale Emergency Core Cooling System. He authorized the construction of the Fast Breeder. Shortly after completion and start up, the Fast Breeder failed. It very nearly took out Detroit.

As for the ECCS, the AEC was limited to semi scale models. The results even so caused concern and protest among scientists. The AEC maintained the failures predicted even from the semi scale tests could be discounted and ignored. They were not real they said, because they were not full scale tests. The tests indicated the inadequacy of reactor containments. In March 2011 the rank of reactors Fukushima Diiachi, built upon approval of both US and Japanese nuclear authorities in the same era as the semi scale tests, melted down. They melted because an earthquake knocked out a power pole outside the TEPCO plant. As TEPCO had taken the cheap way out and mounted the emergency generators and switching circuits in the reactors the basements, these became flooded.

From March until April 2011 World Nuclear Authorities denied the reactors had melted down. In April they came clean. Is this high science or is it the Monty Python Parrot Sketch? It is not funny. People remain in harm’s way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enrico_Fermi_Nuclear_Generating_Station

Quote: The Enrico Fermi Nuclear Generating Station is a nuclear power plant on the shore of Lake Erie near Monroe, in Frenchtown Charter Township, Michigan. It is approximately halfway between Detroit, Michigan, and Toledo, Ohio. It is also visible from parts of Amherstburg and Colchester, Ontario as well as on the shore of Lake Erie in Ottawa County, Ohio. Two units have been constructed on this site. The first unit’s construction started in 1963, and the second unit reached criticality in 1988.
The plant is named after the Italian nuclear physicist Enrico Fermi, most noted for his work on the development of the first nuclear reactor as well as many other major contributions to nuclear physics. Fermi won the 1938 Nobel Prize in Physics for his work on induced radioactivity.
On October 5, 1966 Fermi 1 suffered a partial fuel meltdown, although no radioactive material was released.[1]

Source 1 : US NRC at http://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/decommissioning/power-reactor/enrico-fermi-atomic-power-plant-unit-1.html

Is the claim, similar to some made about Fukushima Diiachi, that “no radioactive material was released” by Fermi 1 as accurate as the claims originally made about the Fukushima Diiachi emissions (March 2011 to the present time)? Or is this more historic bulldust?

“The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s estimate of the risk each year of an earthquake intense enough to cause core damage to the reactor at Fermi was 1 in 238,095, according to an NRC study published in August 2010.[13][14]” Hmm, shall I trust that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_Almost_Lost_Detroit

Looks like an interesting read. Wonder if the staff at Monju have read it. Probably not.

Like Fermi !, Monju has failed as an economic unit. It has caught fire more than once, suffers from repeated accidents and workers there are subject to secrecy provisions. In the course of one fire, caused by leaking sodium coolant bursting into flames from coming into contact with air, the attending firemen was compelled not to speak about the horrors that they witnessed.

Sodium cooling is currently being promoted in Adelaide by nuclear spokes people in Adelaide as the best thing since sliced bread. How many Fermi ! and Monju type economic and ecological events do these people want and foresee? Shades of AEC, 1963, if you ask me.

In the current era (Post Clinton Administration, Post the Clinton ACHRE investigation and Report), the nuclear industry has apparently had to abandon its promise to keep its radioactive source material sealed. It has to date done this on the promise that the public exposure to nuclear industry radio nuclide (radio=chemical) emissions will only ever be on the basis of a promised health benefit.

In the context of Japan in the Fukushima Diiachi nuclear disaster era, that claim, that promise can seen to be patently false. For weeks the farming community of Iitate was told they were safe. Greenpeace undertook independent monitoring. The results sparked denial from the Japanese Government. The result sparked the IAEA into a belated call to evacuate the people. The Japanese government relented, the people were moved. The farms around Iitate remain, and will remain, abandoned. Not out of some ideological consideration. But on the basis of reality as understood by Health Physics. The risks of farming there are just too real and too great.

This is not evidence of a health benefit. It is prove of the contrary. It is proof of what has come to be known as the SPEEDI data deception. That situation where Japanese authorities told the US the truth but with held the very information from its own people. And at the same time, Japanese authorities were telling these people of Iitate that they were perfectly. That, the authorities said, if anyone was sick, it was because they were “mentally weak”.

Was that a mistake too Westinghouse? Or was it just another nuclear lie?

“That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + …” “Are you gonna stop? “Nope”.

“That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + “That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + …”

“Oops, we made a mistake”. The world shakes off humanity and remains a small blue dot framed by the sunrise on the moon.

7 Responses to ““Fukushima was mistake” : Westinghouse Chief. Boy, he thinks it’s still 1954.”

  1. CaptD Says:

    We are lucky that the new Chairwomen of the NRC is a highly respected Geologist because the NRC needs to start giving much more importance to potential Earth Quakes than they have in the past, illustrated by the fact that US reactors are not build to anywhere near the degree of Earth Movement standards as the one in Japan and we all know how Fukushima faired when struck by a BIG Earth Quake…

    BTW Many in Japan and elsewhere believe that the Quake not the Tsunami was the true cause of the Fukushima triple meltdown; which if true would be yet another reason to NEVER allow SORE (San Onofre Reactor Emergency) to ever be restarted! http://wp.me/pDwKM-2Cx

  2. CaptD Says:

    How would you suggest any Country pay for a Trillion Dollar Eco-Disaster like Fukushima? Time for the Nuclear Industry and all those that depend upon some form of Nuclear Payback* from them, to answer that question…

    Almost a year and a half later Japan still has well over 100,000 people living in Nuclear refugee housing and having to pay for their meals…

    * http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Nuclear+payback

    Those that support nuclear power because nuclear power somehow supports them; no matter what the health implications or other “costs” are for others.

  3. CaptD Says:

    Why not look at Germany, they are going GREEN and N☢N Nuclear, if they can do it so can other Countries
    IF (and it is a BIG IF)
    We start doing ASAP, before China buys up all the Copper, Silver, Gold and rare earths we need to do it with…
    Think what could mean to not only other Countries but the Planet…

    Read “Red Alert” for more on what delaying our conversion to Solar (of all flavors) could mean for our future.

    —> Nuclear “foot dragging” just ties US to the past and prevents US from LEAPING forward, and that is if everything goes OK and there are N☢ Fukushima’s…

  4. Bobby1 Says:

    That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a small dose + That’s Ok, it’s a LARGE dose

  5. Lies and coverups about radiation, from Maralinga to Fukushima « Antinuclear Says:

    […] will vent until they are disassembled and removed. In 40 years time. Optimistically….. https://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2012/09/13/fukushima-was-mistake-wetinghouse-chief-boy-he-thinks… Share this:FacebookTwitterLike this:LikeBe the first to like […]

  6. How nuclear lobbyists like Barry Brook trivialise the health impacts of ionising radiation « Antinuclear Says:

    […] will perhaps pass onto their children their recollections of what Mr Perez calls an “error”. https://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2012/09/13/fukushima-was-mistake-wetinghouse-chief-boy-he-thinks… Share this:FacebookTwitterLike this:LikeBe the first to like […]

  7. For decades, a stream of lies from the nuclear industry « nuclear-news Says:

    […] of Fukushima now lies as radiologically, nuclide venting ruin. Well done? I don’t think so… https://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2012/09/13/fukushima-was-mistake-wetinghouse-chief-boy-he-thinks… Like this:LikeBe the first to like […]

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: