angelburst29
The Living Force
Plume-Gate by Hatrick Penry features a well documented investigation through the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Freedom of Information documents (NRC FOIA) and public/non-public disclosure documents on the Fukushima catastrophe. Information on Chernobyl is also presented.
Penry breaks down the information in seven parts, starting out with an outline to the chapters, which are presented below in full, along with copies of NRC FOIA documents, video's and other referances to corresponding documentation.
Plume-Gate: the world’s largest, provable cover-up and conspiracy
_http://hatrickpenryunbound.com/?p=3683
Allow me too summarize what I have learned thus far from reading the NRC FOIA documents pertaining to Fukushima:
1) The damage to the Fukushima Daiichi facility was much greater and the ability to respond was much more difficult than we have been led to believe. There is a reference to a 46 foot tsunami, the height of which was measured by TEPCO on the walls of Unit’s 1 and 2. There is evidence Spent Fuel Pool (SFP) #4 and #3 went dry and had a ‘zirc fire’. At times, dose rates at the facility were lethal or near lethal and as such workers were, at times, unable and unwilling to make repairs. There is talk of 450-600 REM/hr between Unit’s 2 and 3 and MOX sludge causing access problems. Bulldozers were used to push rubble into piles to reduce the dose rates. Engineers and workers were unable to follow protocol as there was/is no known procedure that will rectify a prolonged station blackout due to saltwater inundation of switch boards, circuitry, electrical components, diesel generators etc. from a tsunami. The force of the wave dislodged and damaged the diesel fuel tanks that held the fuel that would have powered back-up generators and when the diesel generators themselves were not damaged from being submerged, the control panels that operated them were. The water-cannons and helicopter water drops were marginally effective and did little to cut dose rates. In the end, it all came down to shipping the Bechtel pumps from Perth, Australia…hooking them up and pumping (in most cases) saltwater into the reactors (At least one pumping unit was delivered to Japan on March 22nd, 2011 but I’m still hunting evidence that shows the pumps were even used.) DOD foot the bill on the Bechtel pumps which means John Q. Taxpayer actually covered the cost…approximately 9.6 billion dollars. It was at least two weeks before power began to be restored to any significant level in what can only be described as a slow, painstaking effort. There is proof of multiple radioactive plumes being emitted from the Fukushima facility…some well into the month of April, 2011. There is discussion that NOAA tracked a 19 mile radioactive cloud along the Japanese coast. There are TEPCO maps of measured (not modeled) plumes, some of which are over 60 kilometers long.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: March 13th, 2011…an excerpt from the Eliot Brenner memo to NRC OPA staffers: (snap shot of memo)
2) The world’s largest, provable cover-up is indicated in the NRC FOIA documents. Some of the agencies/figureheads implicated are: NRC, DOE, EPA, CDC, HHS, DHS, FEMA, NOAA, USAID, DOD (Navy, Naval reactors), White House, President Obama, Bechtel, GE, IAEA, INPO, NEI, and others in an orchestrated attempt to downplay and conceal the radioactive plume and fallout from Americans. Documents, plume models and SitReps (situation report) were denied to China, US states and global ‘stakeholders’. NEI and the ‘Federal Family’ had a password protected database for US Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) ‘rooftop grabs’. Information was suppressed by use of prefabricated ‘talking points’, Questions and Answers and Press Releases. NRC spends millions to search for negative press and to actively and aggressively perform countermeasures in the form of disinformation and careful gatekeeping by their agents (bloggers) online, on TV or in print (i.e.; we know them as trolls and shills). In one memo Eliot Brenner states (in regards to the NRC press release): ‘while we know more than what these say, we’re sticking to this story for now’. There is evidence of subversion of the Freedom of Information Act by the NRC. There is evidence that plume and fallout models were based on 96 hours or 4-5 days of emissions and there is proof that emissions continued up to the end of March and beyond. Officials did NOT issue rainwater warnings or ANY warnings based on these models. There is talk of modeling fallout in Alaska, California, Hawaii, and Midway. Conservative estimates ranged around 4.5 REM to children in a transpacific model. There was plenty of discussion of a ‘President’s worst case’ scenario…it was also based on 4-5 days of emissions. There is discussion about having the benefit of knowing all about Chernobyl even modeling based on Chernobyl depositions. FEMA was told to ‘stand down’. There is concern about a ‘diverging perspective’ and discussions about staying ‘aligned’.
3) It is obvious by the level of importance that the NRC, Japanese authorities and others placed on Potassium Iodine (KI) throughout the FOIA documents that it is a very important part of protecting oneself from fallout following a meltdown. This contradicts what US authorities have led us to believe over the years…that KI is not that big of a deal. I am not aware of any requirement that US Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) must stock KI in case of an accident.
4) There is evidence that ships from the US Navy were not relocated but that officials knew there were plumes and high levels of radiation all around the coast of Japan. NOAA tracked a 19 mile long radioactive cloud along the coast of Japan and on at least two occasions TEPCO measured (not modeled) radioactive plumes over 60 kilometers long. NRC officials state that most of the emissions blew offshore.
5) The NRC’s response to nuclear catastrophe is inhibited, in particular the ability to speak freely and communicate openly, because participants know they are being recorded and email saved for the Freedom of Information Act. In many cases participants were not at liberty to discuss the extent of the meltdowns as they really were. There is evidence of a ‘non-recorded’ line.
6) President Obama called for a review of our domestic fleet of reactors but to my knowledge no action is taken to rectify any of several critical issues. There are emails that indicate we have many non-seismically qualified spent fuel pools here in the US and that our nuclear plants may not be able to withstand a co-event 8.9 earthquake with a 46 foot tall tsunami (or tsunami of that height alone). NRC official admits that GI-99 manual proves they do not know everything about the seismicity of the CEUS (Central and Eastern United States), thus East Coast NPPs are vulnerable to a significant earthquake.
7) TEPCO intentionally discharged radioactive water into the Pacific beginning in March of 2011 and there is abundant proof of this in the NRC FOIA documents. Interestingly enough, I reported this fact before mainstream media did.
Throughout the NRC Freedom of Information documents pertaining to Fukushima there is evidence that officials are very much aware of the effects of the fallout from Chernobyl. There is discussion of using data recovered following the Chernobyl event in modeling of the fallout from Fukushima. There is even discussion of the number of fatalities that resulted from Chernobyl fallout. Officials cannot claim ignorance when you consider they admit they know all about Chernobyl, even using the data from the 1986 incident to aid in modeling. And consider also this: we are in the direct line of fire from the Pacific Jetstream…the same Jetstream that pilots ‘piggyback’, when returning from the orient, to save fuel. Can officials claim ignorance of the Pacific Jetstream?
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: “We’ve got the benefit of knowing everything there is to know about Chernobyl.”
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: more evidence that officials used data from Chernobyl fallout for modeling Fukushima fallout. Note the discussion of doses for children based on conservative assumptions.
below) From Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment: Note that Officials in Oregon issued rainwater warnings in 1986.
(below) From the study above: Fallout from Chernobyl detected in the Southern Hemisphere.
While it is true TEPCO withheld information from NRC officials they still had an excellent idea of what was unfolding and that Fukushima Daiichi facility was experiencing a ‘worse-case-scenario’…i.e.: a prolonged station blackout (PSBO). Ultimately this meant the nuclear reactors would be without power and proper cooling for weeks. When the nuclear fuel gets hot enough it begins to melt and will eventually take the form of a ‘corium’ blob, sublimating through concrete, rebar, steel and eventually down into the earth…forever irretrievable.
(below) NOT FROM THE NRC FOIA DOCUMENTS. Units 4 and 3 from left to right.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Evidence that access was restricted due to high dose rates.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: a discussion of how to drop the lethal dose rates so workers can make repairs.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: workers bulldoze rubble into piles to cut dose rates but dose rates still are ‘incredible’.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Japan slow to assemble Bechtel pumps due to high dose rates. Note that time and time again NRC officials state that the water cannons and helicopter drops are ineffective.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: talk of 450-600 REM/hr between units 2 and 3.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: no real plan, just making it up as they go along. Discussion of strapping lead to Humvees to be able to drive in to make repairs.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: TEPCO considering entombment.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Evidence of the ‘President’s source term’ and more proof that Obama’s administration knew the seriousness of the situation.
(below and continued from above) From the NRC FOIA documents: Discussion of the ‘President’s case’ and multiple ‘worst case’ scenarios. Models were not only downplayed by basing them on source terms of limited duration but by running multiple ‘worse case’ scenarios and choosing the ‘least-worst-case’.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Evidence of a ‘President’s run’ in Hawaii and California.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: March 29th and lighting is just being returned to Unit 4 control room where there is still no access due to high dose rates.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: March 16th email suggests SFP of Unit 4 has lost all water. High dose rates make entry impossible.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: March 14th email suggests Fukushima is a ‘worst case’ scenario i.e.: a prolonged station blackout.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: March 15th email suggesting that “U2 ex-vessel, U4 zirc fire SFP, catastrophe”. Note that redactions are likely further description of grave conditions at Fukushima, not military or trade secrets. We only get to see what they want us to see and yet we are expected to believe the levels of radiation and the damage were minimal.
(below) From EPA.gov: the worst probable nuclear incident at an industrial facility is a fire…(especially with MOX fuel)
below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Evidence that the March 14th Unit 3 ‘lube oil fire’ was not a lube oil fire but something much more serious.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Officials know all about plumes and fallout from a Mark I as they have already done a study of the possibility. Also note Chuck Casto’s contention: ‘…in a station blackout you’re going to lose containment.”
The result of the prolonged station blackout and subsequent meltdowns would produce an incredible amount of radioactive emissions from the Fukushima facility: many, many times more than Chernobyl. The radioactive plumes and clouds would be carried aloft, out to sea, and in the direction of the USA. The initial plume was a lethal cocktail of plutonium, strontium, cesium, iodine and other radionuclides and made impact with the West Coast just six days after the catastrophe. Officially, Americans were told not to expect harmful levels of radioactivity and no warnings were given. Meanwhile, as far away as France, rainwater and green leafy vegetable warnings were issued. It is interesting to note that in 1986 Oregon issued rainwater warnings over Chernobyl fallout.
(below) While President Obama told Americans to expect ‘harmless’ levels of radioactivity and to take no precautions beyond staying informed, countries much further from the Fukushima catastrophe did give rainwater warnings (just as Oregon did in 1986 over Chernobyl fallout) and green leafy vegetable warnings as well.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: prevailing winds carry the bulk of radioactive releases out to sea.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: evidence of a massive plume.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: NOAA’s big blunder (admission of tracking a 19 mile long radioactive cloud down the coast of Japan) draws the ire of NRC officials.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: “Now we’re getting calls from ordinary citizens from CA and OR wanting to know if they need to evacuate.”
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Talking points deflect the American public’s pesky questions.
(below) from the NRC FOIA documents: Evidence that EPA had lead role on plume effects in the US.
(below) NOT FROM THE NRC FOIA DOCUMENTS: EPA busted for ‘rigging’ the RADNET monitoring equipment to report lower levels of radiation. Meanwhile, US Nuclear Power Plants that detected fallout from Fukushima forwarded the data up the chain of command into a password protected database accessible only by the ‘Federal Family’.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Admiral Willard admits the plumes are a ‘repeated event’.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Evidence of venting from Unit 3 blowing offshore.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Moving Navy ships en masse would have been indicative that the situation was worse than Officials were willing to admit. Many of our sailors are already suffering from the effects of radiation sickness.
I will remind you that the modeling done by NARAC, DITTRA, SANDIA and the NRC appears to have been based on 96 hours or 4-5 days of emissions and thus evidence of dose rates will be greatly underestimated. These downplayed models and ones like ‘the President’s run’ were what ‘harmless’ levels of fallout were based upon. In the NRC FOIA documents pertaining to Fukushima I found hard evidence that plumes as long as 60 kilometers were being emitted as late as the 30th of March and beyond. I would also remind you that in July, 2013 Unit #3 had several days of what TEPCO labeled ‘mystery steam’. The simple fact is, radioactive emissions from Fukushima have been and will continue to be ongoing: to conduct modeling based on 4-5 days of emissions is madness! Again I remind you that the numbers expressed in the following screencaptures will be extremely conservative:
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: discussion of dose estimates in California.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: over conservative transpacific model shows 4.5 REM iodine to children…
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Transamerica model shows 4.5 REM to thyroid of infants in California.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: modeling suggests up to 35 REM thyroid dose to children in Alaska and 4.9 thyroid dose to children in Midway. Remember, modeling was based on short durations of 4-5 days of emissions. In the NRC FOIA documents, there is proof that emanations were ongoing well into the month of April, 2011. Recently, TEPCO announced a ‘mystery steam’ coming from Unit 3.
(below) NOT FROM THE NRC FOIA DOCUMENTS: Reality: following the Fukushima disaster the EPA rigs the RADNET system. Also, much of the RADNET system is found to be inoperable at the time. Later, Obama would allow the permissible radiation threshold to be increased dramatically. (This screencapture is not from the NRC FOIA documents. Credit and special thanks goes to Alexander Higgins.)
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Note the Ambassador is requesting a 'pessimistic scenario' and this request is forwarded up the chain of command to the White House for 'alignment' before being allowed. They don't want anyone speaking out of turn. In certain cases plume models and situation reports (SITREP) were denied to U.S. states, stakeholders outside the U.S.A (NPP owner/operators) and China. It is critical you understand 'gaining alignment' means prior approval of the task being requested (often modeling of the plume/fallout) or approval of information to be released and thus a unified voice as a result.
(below part 1) From the NRC FOIA documents: The next screencapture is a 3 part series. In this first segment there is a discussion taking place about some information that has leaked and made it's way to the Wall Street Journal. When Larry Camper says 'It's amazing how people know this staff and we can't seem to get it', he is referring to whoever leaked the information and the fact they should have known better. Sounds like the 'staff' does not have out best interest at heart...
(below part 2) Note the term 'consolidated viewpoint'.
(below part 3 ) From the NRC FOIA documents: Note the term 'consolidated input'. They want to be sure they are all giving the Ambassador the same story. Whatever the story was it was a much less alarming picture of reality, so much less alarming the Ambassador felt he needed to request a 'pessimistic scenario' (see above).
(below) This email is fairly self explanatory. There is one official plume model provided by the IAEA and everyone is to refer to that. Please note that in my article (included in this complete work) Seek and Destroy, I show where the NRC Cyber Security Team had several leaked plume models pulled from online.
(Continued in next Post)
Penry breaks down the information in seven parts, starting out with an outline to the chapters, which are presented below in full, along with copies of NRC FOIA documents, video's and other referances to corresponding documentation.
Plume-Gate: the world’s largest, provable cover-up and conspiracy
_http://hatrickpenryunbound.com/?p=3683
Allow me too summarize what I have learned thus far from reading the NRC FOIA documents pertaining to Fukushima:
1) The damage to the Fukushima Daiichi facility was much greater and the ability to respond was much more difficult than we have been led to believe. There is a reference to a 46 foot tsunami, the height of which was measured by TEPCO on the walls of Unit’s 1 and 2. There is evidence Spent Fuel Pool (SFP) #4 and #3 went dry and had a ‘zirc fire’. At times, dose rates at the facility were lethal or near lethal and as such workers were, at times, unable and unwilling to make repairs. There is talk of 450-600 REM/hr between Unit’s 2 and 3 and MOX sludge causing access problems. Bulldozers were used to push rubble into piles to reduce the dose rates. Engineers and workers were unable to follow protocol as there was/is no known procedure that will rectify a prolonged station blackout due to saltwater inundation of switch boards, circuitry, electrical components, diesel generators etc. from a tsunami. The force of the wave dislodged and damaged the diesel fuel tanks that held the fuel that would have powered back-up generators and when the diesel generators themselves were not damaged from being submerged, the control panels that operated them were. The water-cannons and helicopter water drops were marginally effective and did little to cut dose rates. In the end, it all came down to shipping the Bechtel pumps from Perth, Australia…hooking them up and pumping (in most cases) saltwater into the reactors (At least one pumping unit was delivered to Japan on March 22nd, 2011 but I’m still hunting evidence that shows the pumps were even used.) DOD foot the bill on the Bechtel pumps which means John Q. Taxpayer actually covered the cost…approximately 9.6 billion dollars. It was at least two weeks before power began to be restored to any significant level in what can only be described as a slow, painstaking effort. There is proof of multiple radioactive plumes being emitted from the Fukushima facility…some well into the month of April, 2011. There is discussion that NOAA tracked a 19 mile radioactive cloud along the Japanese coast. There are TEPCO maps of measured (not modeled) plumes, some of which are over 60 kilometers long.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: March 13th, 2011…an excerpt from the Eliot Brenner memo to NRC OPA staffers: (snap shot of memo)
2) The world’s largest, provable cover-up is indicated in the NRC FOIA documents. Some of the agencies/figureheads implicated are: NRC, DOE, EPA, CDC, HHS, DHS, FEMA, NOAA, USAID, DOD (Navy, Naval reactors), White House, President Obama, Bechtel, GE, IAEA, INPO, NEI, and others in an orchestrated attempt to downplay and conceal the radioactive plume and fallout from Americans. Documents, plume models and SitReps (situation report) were denied to China, US states and global ‘stakeholders’. NEI and the ‘Federal Family’ had a password protected database for US Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) ‘rooftop grabs’. Information was suppressed by use of prefabricated ‘talking points’, Questions and Answers and Press Releases. NRC spends millions to search for negative press and to actively and aggressively perform countermeasures in the form of disinformation and careful gatekeeping by their agents (bloggers) online, on TV or in print (i.e.; we know them as trolls and shills). In one memo Eliot Brenner states (in regards to the NRC press release): ‘while we know more than what these say, we’re sticking to this story for now’. There is evidence of subversion of the Freedom of Information Act by the NRC. There is evidence that plume and fallout models were based on 96 hours or 4-5 days of emissions and there is proof that emissions continued up to the end of March and beyond. Officials did NOT issue rainwater warnings or ANY warnings based on these models. There is talk of modeling fallout in Alaska, California, Hawaii, and Midway. Conservative estimates ranged around 4.5 REM to children in a transpacific model. There was plenty of discussion of a ‘President’s worst case’ scenario…it was also based on 4-5 days of emissions. There is discussion about having the benefit of knowing all about Chernobyl even modeling based on Chernobyl depositions. FEMA was told to ‘stand down’. There is concern about a ‘diverging perspective’ and discussions about staying ‘aligned’.
3) It is obvious by the level of importance that the NRC, Japanese authorities and others placed on Potassium Iodine (KI) throughout the FOIA documents that it is a very important part of protecting oneself from fallout following a meltdown. This contradicts what US authorities have led us to believe over the years…that KI is not that big of a deal. I am not aware of any requirement that US Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) must stock KI in case of an accident.
4) There is evidence that ships from the US Navy were not relocated but that officials knew there were plumes and high levels of radiation all around the coast of Japan. NOAA tracked a 19 mile long radioactive cloud along the coast of Japan and on at least two occasions TEPCO measured (not modeled) radioactive plumes over 60 kilometers long. NRC officials state that most of the emissions blew offshore.
5) The NRC’s response to nuclear catastrophe is inhibited, in particular the ability to speak freely and communicate openly, because participants know they are being recorded and email saved for the Freedom of Information Act. In many cases participants were not at liberty to discuss the extent of the meltdowns as they really were. There is evidence of a ‘non-recorded’ line.
6) President Obama called for a review of our domestic fleet of reactors but to my knowledge no action is taken to rectify any of several critical issues. There are emails that indicate we have many non-seismically qualified spent fuel pools here in the US and that our nuclear plants may not be able to withstand a co-event 8.9 earthquake with a 46 foot tall tsunami (or tsunami of that height alone). NRC official admits that GI-99 manual proves they do not know everything about the seismicity of the CEUS (Central and Eastern United States), thus East Coast NPPs are vulnerable to a significant earthquake.
7) TEPCO intentionally discharged radioactive water into the Pacific beginning in March of 2011 and there is abundant proof of this in the NRC FOIA documents. Interestingly enough, I reported this fact before mainstream media did.
Throughout the NRC Freedom of Information documents pertaining to Fukushima there is evidence that officials are very much aware of the effects of the fallout from Chernobyl. There is discussion of using data recovered following the Chernobyl event in modeling of the fallout from Fukushima. There is even discussion of the number of fatalities that resulted from Chernobyl fallout. Officials cannot claim ignorance when you consider they admit they know all about Chernobyl, even using the data from the 1986 incident to aid in modeling. And consider also this: we are in the direct line of fire from the Pacific Jetstream…the same Jetstream that pilots ‘piggyback’, when returning from the orient, to save fuel. Can officials claim ignorance of the Pacific Jetstream?
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: “We’ve got the benefit of knowing everything there is to know about Chernobyl.”
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: more evidence that officials used data from Chernobyl fallout for modeling Fukushima fallout. Note the discussion of doses for children based on conservative assumptions.
below) From Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment: Note that Officials in Oregon issued rainwater warnings in 1986.
(below) From the study above: Fallout from Chernobyl detected in the Southern Hemisphere.
While it is true TEPCO withheld information from NRC officials they still had an excellent idea of what was unfolding and that Fukushima Daiichi facility was experiencing a ‘worse-case-scenario’…i.e.: a prolonged station blackout (PSBO). Ultimately this meant the nuclear reactors would be without power and proper cooling for weeks. When the nuclear fuel gets hot enough it begins to melt and will eventually take the form of a ‘corium’ blob, sublimating through concrete, rebar, steel and eventually down into the earth…forever irretrievable.
(below) NOT FROM THE NRC FOIA DOCUMENTS. Units 4 and 3 from left to right.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Evidence that access was restricted due to high dose rates.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: a discussion of how to drop the lethal dose rates so workers can make repairs.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: workers bulldoze rubble into piles to cut dose rates but dose rates still are ‘incredible’.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Japan slow to assemble Bechtel pumps due to high dose rates. Note that time and time again NRC officials state that the water cannons and helicopter drops are ineffective.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: talk of 450-600 REM/hr between units 2 and 3.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: no real plan, just making it up as they go along. Discussion of strapping lead to Humvees to be able to drive in to make repairs.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: TEPCO considering entombment.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Evidence of the ‘President’s source term’ and more proof that Obama’s administration knew the seriousness of the situation.
(below and continued from above) From the NRC FOIA documents: Discussion of the ‘President’s case’ and multiple ‘worst case’ scenarios. Models were not only downplayed by basing them on source terms of limited duration but by running multiple ‘worse case’ scenarios and choosing the ‘least-worst-case’.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Evidence of a ‘President’s run’ in Hawaii and California.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: March 29th and lighting is just being returned to Unit 4 control room where there is still no access due to high dose rates.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: March 16th email suggests SFP of Unit 4 has lost all water. High dose rates make entry impossible.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: March 14th email suggests Fukushima is a ‘worst case’ scenario i.e.: a prolonged station blackout.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: March 15th email suggesting that “U2 ex-vessel, U4 zirc fire SFP, catastrophe”. Note that redactions are likely further description of grave conditions at Fukushima, not military or trade secrets. We only get to see what they want us to see and yet we are expected to believe the levels of radiation and the damage were minimal.
(below) From EPA.gov: the worst probable nuclear incident at an industrial facility is a fire…(especially with MOX fuel)
below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Evidence that the March 14th Unit 3 ‘lube oil fire’ was not a lube oil fire but something much more serious.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Officials know all about plumes and fallout from a Mark I as they have already done a study of the possibility. Also note Chuck Casto’s contention: ‘…in a station blackout you’re going to lose containment.”
The result of the prolonged station blackout and subsequent meltdowns would produce an incredible amount of radioactive emissions from the Fukushima facility: many, many times more than Chernobyl. The radioactive plumes and clouds would be carried aloft, out to sea, and in the direction of the USA. The initial plume was a lethal cocktail of plutonium, strontium, cesium, iodine and other radionuclides and made impact with the West Coast just six days after the catastrophe. Officially, Americans were told not to expect harmful levels of radioactivity and no warnings were given. Meanwhile, as far away as France, rainwater and green leafy vegetable warnings were issued. It is interesting to note that in 1986 Oregon issued rainwater warnings over Chernobyl fallout.
(below) While President Obama told Americans to expect ‘harmless’ levels of radioactivity and to take no precautions beyond staying informed, countries much further from the Fukushima catastrophe did give rainwater warnings (just as Oregon did in 1986 over Chernobyl fallout) and green leafy vegetable warnings as well.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: prevailing winds carry the bulk of radioactive releases out to sea.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: evidence of a massive plume.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: NOAA’s big blunder (admission of tracking a 19 mile long radioactive cloud down the coast of Japan) draws the ire of NRC officials.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: “Now we’re getting calls from ordinary citizens from CA and OR wanting to know if they need to evacuate.”
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Talking points deflect the American public’s pesky questions.
(below) from the NRC FOIA documents: Evidence that EPA had lead role on plume effects in the US.
(below) NOT FROM THE NRC FOIA DOCUMENTS: EPA busted for ‘rigging’ the RADNET monitoring equipment to report lower levels of radiation. Meanwhile, US Nuclear Power Plants that detected fallout from Fukushima forwarded the data up the chain of command into a password protected database accessible only by the ‘Federal Family’.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Admiral Willard admits the plumes are a ‘repeated event’.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Evidence of venting from Unit 3 blowing offshore.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Moving Navy ships en masse would have been indicative that the situation was worse than Officials were willing to admit. Many of our sailors are already suffering from the effects of radiation sickness.
I will remind you that the modeling done by NARAC, DITTRA, SANDIA and the NRC appears to have been based on 96 hours or 4-5 days of emissions and thus evidence of dose rates will be greatly underestimated. These downplayed models and ones like ‘the President’s run’ were what ‘harmless’ levels of fallout were based upon. In the NRC FOIA documents pertaining to Fukushima I found hard evidence that plumes as long as 60 kilometers were being emitted as late as the 30th of March and beyond. I would also remind you that in July, 2013 Unit #3 had several days of what TEPCO labeled ‘mystery steam’. The simple fact is, radioactive emissions from Fukushima have been and will continue to be ongoing: to conduct modeling based on 4-5 days of emissions is madness! Again I remind you that the numbers expressed in the following screencaptures will be extremely conservative:
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: discussion of dose estimates in California.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: over conservative transpacific model shows 4.5 REM iodine to children…
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Transamerica model shows 4.5 REM to thyroid of infants in California.
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: modeling suggests up to 35 REM thyroid dose to children in Alaska and 4.9 thyroid dose to children in Midway. Remember, modeling was based on short durations of 4-5 days of emissions. In the NRC FOIA documents, there is proof that emanations were ongoing well into the month of April, 2011. Recently, TEPCO announced a ‘mystery steam’ coming from Unit 3.
(below) NOT FROM THE NRC FOIA DOCUMENTS: Reality: following the Fukushima disaster the EPA rigs the RADNET system. Also, much of the RADNET system is found to be inoperable at the time. Later, Obama would allow the permissible radiation threshold to be increased dramatically. (This screencapture is not from the NRC FOIA documents. Credit and special thanks goes to Alexander Higgins.)
(below) From the NRC FOIA documents: Note the Ambassador is requesting a 'pessimistic scenario' and this request is forwarded up the chain of command to the White House for 'alignment' before being allowed. They don't want anyone speaking out of turn. In certain cases plume models and situation reports (SITREP) were denied to U.S. states, stakeholders outside the U.S.A (NPP owner/operators) and China. It is critical you understand 'gaining alignment' means prior approval of the task being requested (often modeling of the plume/fallout) or approval of information to be released and thus a unified voice as a result.
(below part 1) From the NRC FOIA documents: The next screencapture is a 3 part series. In this first segment there is a discussion taking place about some information that has leaked and made it's way to the Wall Street Journal. When Larry Camper says 'It's amazing how people know this staff and we can't seem to get it', he is referring to whoever leaked the information and the fact they should have known better. Sounds like the 'staff' does not have out best interest at heart...
(below part 2) Note the term 'consolidated viewpoint'.
(below part 3 ) From the NRC FOIA documents: Note the term 'consolidated input'. They want to be sure they are all giving the Ambassador the same story. Whatever the story was it was a much less alarming picture of reality, so much less alarming the Ambassador felt he needed to request a 'pessimistic scenario' (see above).
(below) This email is fairly self explanatory. There is one official plume model provided by the IAEA and everyone is to refer to that. Please note that in my article (included in this complete work) Seek and Destroy, I show where the NRC Cyber Security Team had several leaked plume models pulled from online.
(Continued in next Post)
