Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Power and Control: The Anti-Nuclear Energy Movement - Leveraging the Japan Tsunami and Other Disasters
03-29-2011, 09:33 PM,
#16
Nuclear alert fukushima...meltdown started - plutonium leak of radiation officials


Just follow your heart.
Reply
03-30-2011, 01:32 AM,
#17
RE: Power and Control: The Anti-Nuclear Energy Movement - Leveraging the Japan Tsunami and Other Disasters
The FEAR re-installation/continuance program got this guy good. I had to add that video to this thread as it is a perfect example of what this is doing to too many of us.

He's sincere but it's opinionated and lacks real details - just a "he said meltdown" fact reference. Nothing conclusive at all but dripping with opinionated passion.

Here's the (intentionally) vague story on this from the repeaters from yesterday, nothing announced since:

Quote:Partial Meltdown Suspected at Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant

On Monday, work began on removing the water and the plant operator said contamination was again detected in nearby seawater.

For several days, Tokyo Electric Power has known a pool of water inside a turbine building adjoining reactor-2 is highly radioactive. The water is 100,000 times more toxic than water typically found in a reactor core, but how it got that way has been a mystery.

Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano says the government believes the water came into contact with partially melted fuel rods and then leaked out of the plant's water system to collect in the basement of a building.
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/east-pacific/Japan-Warns-Residents-Against-Returning-to-Nuclear-Zone-118758949.html

Media gets a sniff of a meltdown and they are all over it. Somehow this is being drip fed to us to make it seem like a leak but it's just like the Gulf Spill that went on and installed oil rigs are the embodiment of evil for 150+ days.

Highly is subjective, .. 100,000 times higher than normal but is that still safe? Does it dissipate? If it's so bad why do we only have 4 burnt feet as casualties directly from the nuclear plant's disaster? We need more facts what is safe levels of radiation and how are we to determine that when the only guests they have on MSM and the fake alt-media are the doomsday This is Chernobyl, Dirty Bomb Scare that are cherry picked as their science 'experts'?

Simply put no matter the severity, no matter what the cause, this is obviously being rigged as Green Guilt Round 11. Main message It's All Your Fault.

I suppose it is we basically elected the media by paying attention to them. We work for, spend and accept money that is controlled at the top by a handful of bankers. We send our children to indoctrination systems for 12+ years. We have been permissive in our call for our right to be ruled.

Most people dead and missing were from the burst dam; that's 1000s of people by their count. Why are they not attacking hydro-electric or maybe some criticism for the dams that kill huge swaths of wildlife in drastically manipulating the ecosystem, that create millions of human refugees every year?

Here's the angle that news is competing for entertainment dollars via sensationalism, that's definitely part of it but it's more the green energy agenda their parent companies, advertisers, central newswires and string pullers are calling for. They say jump and they are rolling out the trampolines all to happy to bash evil nuclear. All nuclear, no differentiation on 40 year old technology vs as if all nuclear is doomed Into Eternity or could blow up like Chernobyl.

Quote:Praying for meltdown: The media and the nukes
Science and the public lose out with TV's Hollywood disaster film obsession
By Andrew Orlowski
Posted in Environment, 29th March 2011 12:22 GMT

Comment Sensationalism has always been part of the popular media - but Fukushima is a telling and troubling sign of how much the media has changed in fifty years: from an era of scientific optimism to one where it inhabits a world of fantasy - creating a real-time Hollywood disaster movie with a moralising, chivvying message.

Not so long ago, the professionals showed all the deferential, forelock-tugging paternalism of the dept of "Keep Calm And Carry On". That era lasted into the 1960s. Now the driving force is the notion that "We're all DOOMED – and it's ALL OUR FAULT" that marks almost every news bulletin. Health and environment correspondents will rarely be found debunking the claims they receive in press releases from lobby groups – the drama of catastrophe is too alluring. Fukushima has been the big one.

The Fukushima situation has yet to cause any measurable radiological health effects, and workers at the site were far less hard hit by the quake, tsunami and related events than just about anyone in the disaster zone, but nonetheless the nuclear story rapidly eclipsed the tens of thousands killed directly by the quake. TV's reaction to the crisis shows how at odds it is with a more rational audience, those who know something about radiation, its consequences, and the human body's capacity to absorb it and recover from it. The crisis for the media is that thanks to the internet, we can now all bypass these conduits for superstition and stupidity.

We've given the media's treatment of Fukushima plenty of attention in the past fortnight, so it's hardly worth reiterating. The reactors endured a Force 9 earthquake and 15m high tsunami – and three safety systems failed. The aging plant was never going to explode or meltdown ("like a dirty bomb" we were told); the containment vessels held firm.

In the first weekend, TV chose "experts" who could be relied upon to ignore this - and instead highlight the mythology of nuclear hazards. I noted two examples in the first forty eight hours. The BBC chose a radiation expert called Dr Christopher Busby, billing him as a former adviser to the government on radiation.

"If this stuff comes out then it's going to make what's happened so far, in terms of the tsunami damage, look a little bit like an entrée to the real course," predicted Busby, sending viewers diving behind the sofa.
Digg: http://digg.com/news/world_news/praying_for_meltdown_sensationalist_media_eager_for_japan_reactors_to_go_all_out_nuclear
Full Article (much more + links): http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/29/tv_news_goes_hollywood/

For those compelled to explore the reactor schematics here's the explanation for the layman of how a seal would be melted and lose containment of radioactive water and coolant from the 40 year old Fukushima nuclear power station that was about to be decommissioned. Good facts on the potential - nothing conclusive still, all speculation but it offers a good explanation of what could (or maybe has I'm just the fact digger and analysis guy; I ain't going to Japan anytime soon) happened despite the heavy bias and misdirection in the title.

HUGE PLUTONIUM LEAKAGE on LAND & SEA at Japan's Fukushima Nuclear Plant
http://wakeupfromyourslumber.com/news/huge-plutonium-leakage-land-sea-japans-fukushima-nuclear-plant
There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply
03-30-2011, 05:47 AM,
#18
RE: Power and Control: The Anti-Nuclear Energy Movement - Leveraging the Japan Tsunami and Other Disasters
(03-30-2011, 01:32 AM)FastTadpole Wrote: Media gets a sniff of a meltdown and they are all over it.

My local and national media are downplaying it anyway. "It can never be a new Chernobyl." "A life without excersice is going to kill you faster than the radiation." "Chernobyl wasn't that bad, look at all the happy animals living there." "You can be a tourist in beautiful Chernobyl." "Radiation in small doses might be good for you." and so on and so on.'

Of course the report on the newly found plutonium and such, guess it's criminal not to.
Reply
03-30-2011, 04:59 PM,
#19
RE: Power and Control: The Anti-Nuclear Energy Movement - Leveraging the Japan Tsunami and Other Disasters
Quote:"Chernobyl wasn't that bad, look at all the happy animals living there."

It is true. You ever see the biker that shot footage. Nature has a tremendous way of bouncing back, not that I would eat the venison from that neck of the woods.

As for the media it's polarized and doesn't talk about anything in depth of any value or significance and when it does speak true it spins and adds a bunch of worthless crap and extremism to the limited spectrum. I've personally seen more sensationalism than downplaying from the bit what I have read (haven't watched a single clip, never will) and that even acts as reverse psychology as to get people to ask the question "What are they hiding". The truth movement (which I can proudly say I have never been apart of) has jumped all over that.
There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply
03-30-2011, 06:39 PM, (This post was last modified: 03-30-2011, 06:40 PM by ^v^hooters ex.)
#20
RE: Power and Control: The Anti-Nuclear Energy Movement - Leveraging the Japan Tsunami and Other Disasters
You know how they have a big statue of the goddess Shiva outside Cern, the Hindu one that Oppenheimer mentioned .. Is it true that some white coated black hat boffins are going to chuck in some Plutonium into the accelerator to see what it does?
is it useless folly to listen to Duncan O'Finian's warnings ?
Reply
04-07-2011, 12:53 AM,
#21
RE: Power and Control: The Anti-Nuclear Energy Movement - Leveraging the Japan Tsunami and Other Disasters
US government animation shows tsunami path

This clearly shows that this is being plugged as a global disaster from the get go as opposed to an isolated disaster in Northeastern Japan.





This Reuters US government animation shows tsunami path. Notice it doesn't mention intensity to set the stage with this first impression to frame reality a global incident for global attention. This has directed the primary focus has been on not disaster preparation and mitigation, not backup infrastructure, not the problem with the massive dam that burst and unleashed wanton destruction (video) but on nuclear energy, front and centre.

There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply
04-07-2011, 02:00 AM,
#22
RE: Power and Control: The Anti-Nuclear Energy Movement - Leveraging the Japan Tsunami and Other Disasters
Here's a good point-case faq style summary on how the best of breed thorium reactors could perform. As mentioned China and particularly India have developed and successfully used thorium nuclear energy according to the reports I have sifted through to date.

Quote:Could thorium make nuclear power safe?
March 28, 2011

The world can have cheap nuclear power without Japan-level risks by swapping thorium for uranium, some scientists claim. Is that too good to be true?

Japan's escalating disaster at its Fukushima reactors is putting a damper on the nuclear power industry, just as nuclear energy was starting to bask in a post-Chernobyl glow. But instead of giving up on nuclear power, say an "almost cult-like" group of nuclear scientists, we should just switch from uranium-based reactors to ones fueled by cheaper, safer thorium. What is this miracle metal — and could it really bring us safe nuclear power?

What is thorium?
A silvery metal (symbol: Th; atomic number: 90) close to uranium on the periodic table of elements, with just two fewer protons. It was discovered in 1828, and is named after the Norse god of thunder. As an added bonus, it's "almost as common as dirt," says Antonia Zerbisias in The Toronto Star.

Why are fans so excited about it?
Thorium-fueled reactors are supposed to be much safer than uranium-powered ones, use far less material (1 metric ton of thorium gets as much bang as 200 metric tons of uranium, or 3.5 million metric tons of coal), produce waste that is toxic for a shorter period of time (300 years vs. uranium's tens of thousands of years), and is hard to weaponize. In fact, thorium can even feed off of toxic plutonium waste to produce energy. And because the biggest cost in nuclear power is safety, and thorium reactors can't melt down, argues Michael Anissimov in Accelerating Future, they will eventually be much cheaper, too.

How cheap would it be?
If a town of 1,000 bought a 1-megawatt thorium reactor for $250,000, using 20 kilograms of thorium a year with almost no oversight, every family could pay as little as $0.40 a year for all their electricity, Anissimov predicts. And small reactors like that aren't just potentially cost-effective, he says; they're much safer, too.

Where can we get thorium?

Lots of places. The U.S. has an estimated 440,000 metric tons, Australia and India have about 300,000 metric tons, and Canada has 100,000 metric tons. Until recently, U.S. and Australian mining companies threw it away as a useless byproduct. There is enough thorium to power the earth for about 1,000 years, boosters say, versus an estimated 80 years' worth of uranium.

If thorium's so great, why do we use uranium?
To make a "long story very short and simple," says The Star's Antonia Zerbisias, weapons and nuclear subs. U.S. researchers were developing both uranium-based and thorium-based reactors in the Cold War 1950s, but thorium doesn't create weapons-grade plutonium as a byproduct. Plus, nuclear submarines could be designed more easily and quickly around uranium-based light-water reactors.

OK, but there must be a downside to thorium, right?
Indeed. First, it will take a lot of money to develop a new generation of thorium-fueled reactors — America's has been dormant for half a century. China is taking the lead in picking up the thread, building on plans developed and abandoned in Europe. And part of the reason Europe dropped the research, according to critics, is pressure from France's uranium-based nuclear power industry. Others just think the whole idea is being oversold. If "an endless, too-cheap-to-meter source of clean, benign, what-could-possibly-go-wrong energy" sounds too good to be true, says nuclear analyst Norm Rubin, it's because it is.
http://digg.com/news/science/could_thorium_make_nuclear_power_safe
http://theweek.com/article/index/213611/could-thorium-make-nuclear-power-safe

Quote:Development of Tiny Thorium Reactors Could Wean the World Off Oil In Just Five Years
By Rebecca Boyle
Posted 08.30.2010 at 1:18 pm

[attachment=3970]

Thorium One ton of thorium can produce as much energy as 200 tons of uranium and 3.5 million tons of coal, according to the former director of CERN. via Telegraph

An abundant metal with vast energy potential could quickly wean the world off oil, if only Western political leaders would muster the will to do it, a UK newspaper says today. The Telegraph makes the case for thorium reactors as the key to a fossil-fuel-free world within five years, and puts the ball firmly in President Barack Obama's court.

Thorium, named for the Norse god of thunder, is much more abundant than uranium and has 200 times that metal's energy potential. Thorium is also a more efficient fuel source -- unlike natural uranium, which must be highly refined before it can be used in nuclear reactors, all thorium is potentially usable as fuel.

The Telegraph says thorium could be used as an energy amplifier in next-generation nuclear power plants, an idea conceived by Nobel laureate Carlo Rubbia, former director of CERN.

Known as an accelerator-driven system, it would use a particle accelerator to produce a proton beam and aim it at lump of heavy metal, producing excess neutrons. Thorium is a good choice because it has a high neutron yield per neutron absorbed.

Thorium nuclei would absorb the excess neutrons, resulting in uranium-233, a fissile isotope that is not found in nature. Moderated neutrons would produce fissioned U-233, which releases enough energy to power the particle accelerator, plus an excess that can drive a power plant. Rubbia says a fistful of thorium could light up London for a week.

The idea needs refining, but is so promising that at least one private firm is getting involved. The Norwegian firm Aker Solutions bought Rubbia's patent for this thorium fuel cycle, and is working on his design for a proton accelerator.

The Telegraph says this $1.8 billion (£1.2 billion) project could lead to a network of tiny underground nuclear reactors, producing about 600 MW each. Their wee size would negate the enormous security apparatus required of full-size nuclear power plants.

After a three-decade lull, nuclear power is enjoying a slow renaissance in the U.S. The 2005 energy bill included $2 billion for six new nuclear power plants, and this past February, Obama announced $8.3 billion in loan guarantees for new nuclear plants.

But nuclear plants need fuel, which means building controversial uranium mines. Thorium, on the other hand, is so abundant that it's almost an annoyance. It's considered a waste product when mining for rare-earth metals.

Thorium also solves the non-proliferation problem. Nuclear non-proliferation treaties (NPT) prohibit processes that can yield atomic bomb ingredients, making it difficult to refine highly radioactive isotopes. But thorium-based accelerator-driven plants only produce a small amount of plutonium, which could allow the U.S. and other nations to skirt NPT.

The Telegraph says Obama needs a Roosevelt moment, recalling the famous breakfast meeting when Albert Einstein convinced the president to start the Manhattan Project. A thorium stimulus could be just what the lagging economy needs.
http://digg.com/news/science/development_of_tiny_thorium_reactors_could_wean_the_world_off_oil_in_just_five_years_popular_science_3
http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2010-08/thorium-reactors-could-wean-world-oil-just-five-years

Sourced from Telegraph via PopSci:

Obama could kill fossil fuels overnight with a nuclear dash for thorium
If Barack Obama were to marshal America’s vast scientific and strategic resources behind a new Manhattan Project, he might reasonably hope to reinvent the global energy landscape and sketch an end to our dependence on fossil fuels within three to five years.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/7970619/Obama-could-kill-fossil-fuels-overnight-with-a-nuclear-dash-for-thorium.html

Pretty good updates on the nuclear situation here at an MIT student page.

MIT NSE Nuclear Information Hub
Information about the incident at the Fukushima Nuclear Plants in Japan hosted by http://web.mit.edu/nse/ :: Maintained by the students of the Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering at MIT
http://mitnse.com/

Here's the latest (posted today):

Quote:News updates, April 6, 2011
Posted on April 6, 2011 3:39 pm UTC by mitnse

TEPCO has reported that as of 5:38 AM JST, the leakage of water from Unit 2’s supply cable pit has stopped. Before and after photos supplied by the IAEA are shown below:

[attachment=3968] [attachment=3969]

After it was found that the leak had stopped, TEPCO continued to reinforce the crack by applying additional sealant. They are now considering the injection of additional “liquid glass” coagulant as an added measure of safety.

Release of low-level radioactivity water from the facility’s water treatment facility to the ocean is underway. This measure is intended to prevent a potentially much more serious release of contamination to the ocean by allowing the more radioactive water currently flooding the reactor buildings to be stored. The IAEA states that this operation is likely to last no more than five days.

Monitoring of radiation levels in air and water surrounding the plant is ongoing. Levels of radioactive iodine and cesium levels at the site continue to show an overall downward trend: http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/betu11_e/images/110406e8.pdf

Radiation levels in seawater immediately adjacent to the facility, near where the leak from Unit 2 occurred, have shown an increase in recent days: http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/betu11_e/images/110406e4.pdf. However, these levels are expected to decrease now that the leak has ceased. Officials in Japan are monitoring the levels of contamination to fish in the region, and at the time being, no vessels (including fishing vessels) are permitted within 30 km of the nuclear power station. The U.S. FDA has stated that it will carefully check all fish imported from Japan to ensure that it meets regulatory limits.
http://mitnse.com/2011/04/06/342/

But can we trust Nobel laureate Carlo Rubbia, former director of CERN? Too good to be true? It's been in use in India for over a decade as mentioned above and they're sprouting up in China as well. The US is playing a bit of catch-up here but it's not too far behind so it can be a home grown project. This particular implementation .. maybe - maybe not. Mini is good for decentralizing to a point but does that increase risks? What are the risks with thorium? It is entirely dependant on the implementation according to what I've dug up so far.

Of course there is other technology suppressed, patent mothballed, developing, theoretical and to weigh in on the controlled scope of existing options and railroaded pathways; one of which leads to green hell.

Time to come up with a comprehensive pro and con debate to the public marketplace of ideas to move the discussion forward.
There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply
04-07-2011, 12:01 PM,
#23
RE: Power and Control: The Anti-Nuclear Energy Movement - Leveraging the Japan Tsunami and Other Disasters
The proof is in the policy as the EU dictatorship has used this in light of the wave of public opinion to call for a moratorium on advancing nuclear power projects and suspending older ones.

What about the US?

To date not much has been said and all I can gather to date is this.

Obama has been pretty cryptic in saying through a buffered proxy that nuclear energy 'remains a part of the President's overall energy plan', despite new concerns about its safety, a White House spokesman said. Hardly reassuring.

This is how the climate change union fits in as it piggybacks on this tragedy to advance a more comprehensive plan to migrate the world energy systems.

Quote:Japan's nuclear crisis, the EU said that global climate change negotiations
By ZhongYuanWei
2011-04-07 09:20:41 AM GMT +0800

The European Union said Sunday that Japan's nuclear crisis would affect global climate change negotiations, prompted by the crisis countries to rethink energy policy.

EU's top climate change negotiator, that the concerns of nuclear energy should not affect the willingness of States to combat climate change, it will not undermine the national commitment to emission reduction targets.

He said: "On the one hand, you may want to not use nuclear energy, which could lead to nuclear disaster. But I think everybody here also knows that we must stop climate change, or will lead to disaster."

He acknowledged that Japan's Fukushima nuclear crisis will impact the formation of global climate change negotiations.

From nearly 200 countries, held in Bangkok since Sunday on behalf of a six-day conference on climate change negotiations.

Since the event of a nuclear crisis, Japan, Germany and Switzerland have attitude that older reactors will shut down or suspend approval of the construction of new projects. China has also suspended approval of nuclear power projects.

Analysts said the long term, the concerns of nuclear energy may be conducive to the development of renewable energy, but in the short term, may make the burning of coal and oil led to increased emissions.
http://www.ytwhw.com/2011/0407/Japan-s-nuclear-crisis-the-EU-said-that-global-climate-change-negotiations.html

More information on the EU plan to focus on nuclear power safety and here:

Quote:ENSREG’s aims are to maintain and further improve the:

* Safety of nuclear installations in the EU
* Safety of the management of spent fuel and radioactive waste in the EU
* Financing of the decommissioning of nuclear installations in the EU
http://ec.europa.eu/energy/nuclear/ensreg/ensreg_en.htm

Quote:This website gives an overview of how the need for the safe operation of nuclear installations is being addressed at the international, European and national level.

It introduces the important global agreements – the international conventions – that deal with nuclear safety and its regulation. It describes how these global agreements are implemented in the EU Member States and the role the EU and ENSREG play in this along with other international organisations. The Euratom Treaty, which forms the basis of many EU activities relating to nuclear power.
http://www.ensreg.eu/


They are also lumping in nuclear non-proliferation to advance momentum and gain support for the regulatory agenda.

Quote:The Euratom Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) was initially created to coordinate the Member States' research programmes for the peaceful use of nuclear energy. The Euratom Treaty today helps to pool knowledge, infrastructure, and funding of nuclear energy. It ensures the security of atomic energy supply within the framework of a centralised monitoring system.

The European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) acts in several areas connected with atomic energy, including research, the drawing-up of safety standards, and the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. One of the fundamental objectives of the Euratom Treaty is to ensure that all users in the EU enjoy a regular and equitable supply of ores and nuclear fuels (source materials and special fissile materials).

To this end, the Euratom Treaty created the Euratom Supply Agency, which has been operational since 1 June 1960. The Agency has the task of ensuring a regular and equitable supply of ores, source materials and special fissile materials in the European Union (EU).

Nuclear Illustrative Programme

This programme describes the status of the nuclear sector in the European Union (EU) in 2006 and the possible developments in this sector, taking into account economic and environmental issues
http://ec.europa.eu/energy/nuclear/euratom/euratom_en.htm

Legislative Documents Linked here:
http://ec.europa.eu/energy/nuclear/safety/safety_en.htm

They've been at this game of centralized regulation in establishing global governance and the supply chains for distribution for awhile now (1957). However the Fukushima incident happened it is being capitalized on in full force by the global energy cartel.

Quote:Nuclear power stations currently produce around a third of the electricity and 15% of the energy consumed in the European Union (EU).
http://ec.europa.eu/energy/nuclear/index_en.htm

15% of all energy 33% of electricity? That's exactly the amount that the privately owned and publicly funded North Africa solar project has promised to deliver. What a strange coincidence.

Was this event played out for maximum damage?

Russia could have prevented the diluted radioactive water into the seawater but despite pleas from Japan they could not lend assistance. This could prevented other assistance from coming forward in thinking the situation of a potential radioactive water spill into the ocean was covered.

Quote:Japan asked Russia to send ships of nuclear radiation
By HuDie 2011-04-06 20:55:30 AM GMT +0800

Japan asked Russia to send nuclear radiation processing vessels, to help solidify radioactive sewage.

Fukushima nuclear power plant engineer from the first Friday of radioactive water from the forced discharge into the sea, and desperate to control the losses, such as the use bath salts to color the water to determine the location of nuclear power plant leaks radioactive water.

Japanese earthquake and the tsunami have been more than the past three weeks, engineers have not yet control the situation, to stop living the nuclear leaks.

Interfax reported that Japan's assistance to the French and the United States, at present, Russia has requested the hope that the latter can send radiation ship "Lily of the Valley Road" (Suzuran), near Vladivostok, the ship has been decommissioned nuclear submarines to help deal with Russia sewage.

"Lily of the Valley Road" is the largest ship of radiation treatment can be used to the handling of radioactive substances in water, and then sealed with cement. The vessel can be handled at 35 cubic meters of sewage processing 7,000 cubic meters of sewage per year.

Engineers also plan to use polyester material in the sea and construction of two huge fences, to prevent the further spread of nuclear contamination.

Tokyo Electric Power Co. (9501.T: Quote) because there is no room to store more water cooling of fuel rods from the sea on Monday began to discharge 11,500 tons of low concentrations of radioactive water.

The company, an official at a press conference in tears, said: "We are involved in this area and the staff very sorry."
http://www.ytwhw.com/2011/0406/Japan-asked-Russia-to-send-ships-of-nuclear-radiation.html

After a last ditch effort of sawdust and newspapers Japan had to resort to the release of the radioactive water directly into the ocean.

This supports the Gary Bell inference that nuclear explosions were rigged to pull down the Japanese undersea plateau and hide radiation levels by pointing all fingers and directing all eyes to the nuclear plant as the source. It could also be used to blame nuclear power as a disproportionate contributor to ocean radiation levels in the region that were instigated by nuclear testing in the region by China and Korea.

Fishery stocks have since been banned in several countries, most recently by Canada. Which creates a further manufactured food scarcity. Japan's farmland is also effected.

Japan is a US military outpost in strategic proximity to China. Attacking food, telecom, transport, oil, gas and nuclear is quite a hit not only to the Japanese citizens but to the US military as well. China had recently cut off rare earth minerals to Japan. There was also that Honda recall that was played up in the media not too long ago.

Gary Bell smells a rat and is digging into this deep, maybe too deep at times, but that's what he does. At least two shows are up on the tracker; one aired 2011.04.02 and the other 2011.03.26 that are well worth a listen.

Pumps were allegedly out of commission due to the earthquake to compound the problem. They couldn't hook up the power cable. He also mentioned that there was a manual redundant system that could have prevented the heat buildup. Computer safety monitoring was also insufficient. I don't necessarily swallow the STUXNET theory but I wouldn't ignore the possibility.

Building a nuclear power plant on the most active fault line on Earth. Storing up to 40 years of spent fuel rods on site. Both were ingredients for the disaster recipe just waiting to happen. Who decided to built there?

It didn't need HAARP station or a big underwater explosion to set it off, not to rule them out as a trigger the earthquake.

Interesting point on the Diablo Canyon location for the Nuclear Power Plant in California that is also built on a fault line.

Interesting to follow the wikipedia updates.

In the past week the tsunami waves have increased from 97 feet to 127 feet. This line was also added "In addition, the U.S. recommended that its citizens evacuate up to 80 km (50 mi) of the plant.

Japan also had oil and gas energy hit hard.

Quote:A 220,000-barrel-per-day[228] oil refinery of Cosmo Oil Company was set on fire by the quake at Ichihara, Chiba Prefecture, to the east of Tokyo,[229] while others halted production due to safety checks and power loss.[230][231] In Sendai, a 145,000-barrel-per-day refinery owned by the largest refiner in Japan, JX Nippon Oil & Energy, was also set ablaze by the quake.[228] Workers were evacuated,[232] but tsunami warnings hindered efforts to extinguish the fire until 14 March, when officials planned to do so.[228]

An analyst estimates that consumption of various types of oil may increase by as much as 300,000 barrels per day (as well as LNG), as back-up power plants burning fossil fuels try to compensate for the loss of 11 GW of Japan's nuclear power capacity.[233][234]

The city-owned plant for importing liquefied natural gas in Sendai was severely damaged, and supplies were halted for at least a month.[235]
~wiki
There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply
04-08-2011, 11:32 PM,
#24
RE: Power and Control: The Anti-Nuclear Energy Movement - Leveraging the Japan Tsunami and Other Disasters
Here's a good point-case faq style summary on how the best of breed thorium reactors could perform. As mentioned China and particularly India have developed and successfully used thorium nuclear energy according to the reports I have sifted through to date.


Quote:Could thorium make nuclear power safe?
March 28, 2011

The world can have cheap nuclear power without Japan-level risks by swapping thorium for uranium, some scientists claim. Is that too good to be true?

Japan's escalating disaster at its Fukushima reactors is putting a damper on the nuclear power industry, just as nuclear energy was starting to bask in a post-Chernobyl glow. But instead of giving up on nuclear power, say an "almost cult-like" group of nuclear scientists, we should just switch from uranium-based reactors to ones fueled by cheaper, safer thorium. What is this miracle metal — and could it really bring us safe nuclear power?

What is thorium?
A silvery metal (symbol: Th; atomic number: 90) close to uranium on the periodic table of elements, with just two fewer protons. It was discovered in 1828, and is named after the Norse god of thunder. As an added bonus, it's "almost as common as dirt," says Antonia Zerbisias in The Toronto Star.

Why are fans so excited about it?
Thorium-fueled reactors are supposed to be much safer than uranium-powered ones, use far less material (1 metric ton of thorium gets as much bang as 200 metric tons of uranium, or 3.5 million metric tons of coal), produce waste that is toxic for a shorter period of time (300 years vs. uranium's tens of thousands of years), and is hard to weaponize. In fact, thorium can even feed off of toxic plutonium waste to produce energy. And because the biggest cost in nuclear power is safety, and thorium reactors can't melt down, argues Michael Anissimov in Accelerating Future, they will eventually be much cheaper, too.

How cheap would it be?
If a town of 1,000 bought a 1-megawatt thorium reactor for $250,000, using 20 kilograms of thorium a year with almost no oversight, every family could pay as little as $0.40 a year for all their electricity, Anissimov predicts. And small reactors like that aren't just potentially cost-effective, he says; they're much safer, too.

Where can we get thorium?

Lots of places. The U.S. has an estimated 440,000 metric tons, Australia and India have about 300,000 metric tons, and Canada has 100,000 metric tons. Until recently, U.S. and Australian mining companies threw it away as a useless byproduct. There is enough thorium to power the earth for about 1,000 years, boosters say, versus an estimated 80 years' worth of uranium.

If thorium's so great, why do we use uranium?
To make a "long story very short and simple," says The Star's Antonia Zerbisias, weapons and nuclear subs. U.S. researchers were developing both uranium-based and thorium-based reactors in the Cold War 1950s, but thorium doesn't create weapons-grade plutonium as a byproduct. Plus, nuclear submarines could be designed more easily and quickly around uranium-based light-water reactors.

OK, but there must be a downside to thorium, right?
Indeed. First, it will take a lot of money to develop a new generation of thorium-fueled reactors — America's has been dormant for half a century. China is taking the lead in picking up the thread, building on plans developed and abandoned in Europe. And part of the reason Europe dropped the research, according to critics, is pressure from France's uranium-based nuclear power industry. Others just think the whole idea is being oversold. If "an endless, too-cheap-to-meter source of clean, benign, what-could-possibly-go-wrong energy" sounds too good to be true, says nuclear analyst Norm Rubin, it's because it is.
http://digg.com/news/science/could_thorium_make_nuclear_power_safe
http://theweek.com/article/index/213611/could-thorium-make-nuclear-power-safe


Attached Files Image(s)
           
There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply
04-09-2011, 06:06 PM,
#25
RE: Power and Control: The Anti-Nuclear Energy Movement - Leveraging the Japan Tsunami and Other Disasters
I'm no big fan of nuclear power, but I definitely see the carbon-cap agenda at work here, as well as the carbon-based power industry.
[Image: conspiracy_theory.jpg]
Reply
04-19-2011, 01:33 PM,
#26
RE: Power and Control: The Anti-Nuclear Energy Movement - Leveraging the Japan Tsunami and Other Disasters
Now the Nuclear Power reactor that was built on a fault line 40 years ago by a company in General Electric MSNBC ComCast that has tight global ties with interests that want to see nuclear go away for security and power concentration motives, green guilt/religion movement and all that jazz.

GE has a a huge investment in their Wind Power (#2 Worldwide in Wind Turbines) and an quickly advancing Solar Power Divisions dropping a truckload of cash into creating the biggest US solar plant and are suddenly poised to produce 10% of the world's solar power now by 2014.

Quote:General Electric announced last week that it plans to build the largest solar plant in the U.S. Overall investment will be $600 million. The company targets $1 billion in sales within five years.

Why is GE (ticker: GE) doing this now? The key driver behind the announcement that the company is to build a 400 megawatt plant (exact location to be decided in the next few months; 100 megawatts of orders have been placed already), with full production in 2014, appears to be the achievement of 12.8% efficiency on GE's solar panel.

GE has just acquired in full PrimeStar Solar, and Converteam (which integrates the solar power onto the grid). Solar we estimate could comprise up to 10% of global power generation capacity additions in the coming five years.
http://online.barrons.com/article/SB50001424052970204569604576259332002597552.html

Many of their common partners are looking to cash in even more on solar. In Germany that just called for a (temporary?) shutdown of all its nuclear power plants (video h/t Dunamis) and the massive ~$600 Billion solar farm project in North Africa that will (promise to) produce 15% of all power for the European Union and another project slated for the Mugabe Desert in the US. Germany is poised to be the leader in the EU movement for solar in leading the north African project.

I think I had heard something about Siemens having something to do with the nuclear power construction they are dumping much of their interest and also have substantial investments in offshore wind turbines.

One final point to consider...

The name of the German company whose computer controller systems were exploited by the Stuxnet computer worm in Iran during the Iran Nuclear shutdown. It is Siemens.

Too many coincidences to ignore.
There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply
04-26-2011, 05:38 AM,
#27
Information  RE: Power and Control: The Anti-Nuclear Energy Movement - Leveraging the Japan Tsunami and Other Disasters
A Kickstarter Funded Project that hopefully is transparent, competent and accountable. Geiger Counters may be unreliable in trained or untrained hands and could mislead so I hope they invest in something that can produce a tad more conclusive result set. More on that in the article below at least as far as pointing it at a koi fish sitting on the plate.

Quote:RDTN.org: Radiation Detection Hardware Network in Japan
Project by Marcelino Alvarez

UPDATE:


We've rebranded RDTN as Safecast. Here's an in-depth explanation behind the name change: http://blog.rdtn.org/2011/04/24/rdtn-is-now-safecast/

And for some information about how the funding will be applied, see this post: http://blog.safecast.org/2011/04/24/first-safecast/

About:

Safecast.org (formerly RDTN.org) is a website whose purpose is to provide an aggregate feed of nuclear radiation data from governmental, non-governmental and citizen-scientist sources. That data will be made available to everyone, including scientists and nuclear experts who can provide context for lay people. In the weeks following launch, it has become evident that there is a need for additional radiation reporting from the ground in Japan. This Kickstarter project will help us purchase up to 600 Geiger Counter devices that will be deployed to Japan. (The project minimum will fund about 100 devices). The data captured from these devices will feed into our website and will also be made available for others to use via Pachube, an open-source platform for monitoring sensor data globally. Our field members will be trained by ouradvisors to properly use these devices. The field members will be required to report to the website 8-10 times per day.

Open-Source Underpinnings:


We will make the raw data available from our network for anyone to use under Creative Commons 0 dedication. It is our goal that providing this data to non-profit organizations, governments and scientists will keep people and societies more informed in the current crisis as well as future incidents where data might otherwise be scarce.

Phase 1 and Phase 2:

We want to eventually build our own network of devices. We recognize, however, that there’s an immediate need to get devices on the ground now. So our project has two phases. Phase 1 is about getting devices out to the areas with the least amount of data. Phase 2 will focus on building a larger network of devices that will help governments, citizens and organizations understand immediate and long-term implications of radiation levels.

Where will they be deployed?

In looking at a map of radiation detection in Japan, there are many holes where no data is being captured whatsoever. Some of those are very close to Fukushima while others are well outside of Tokyo. The initial set of devices will be utilized in areas where coverage is sparse. We will deliver these devices to people on the ground who have been trained in how to use them. It could be a teacher, a university student, or a citizen scientist looking to contribute to the project.

Who will be using these devices?

We want to provide the device to someone who has an above-average understanding of technology, but not necessarily an expert. This should be someone who knows how to install an app on their iPhone or Android device, and is familiar with filling out forms on websites. No programming skills or engineering degree is required. Knowing how to set up a wifi-router is a plus.

Device List: (UPDATED)


We are currently working with a distributor of detection devices in order to get them at a discounted cost. Due to the ease of use of the CRM-100, we have decided to focus on this unit for our volunteers in Japan.

CRM-100


The CRM-100 is a general purpose geiger counter that measures alpha, beta, gamma, and x-radiation. It is intended for personal safety and educational purposes, not for professional applications. Like the popular Radalert 100, the CRM-100 features a 3-second update on its digital liquid crystal display (LCD). The LCD shows the current radiation level in your choice of milliroentgens per hour from .001 to 110 or counts per minute (cpm) from 0 to 350,000. When SI units are selected, the LCD shows readings in microsieverts per hour from .01 to 1100 or counts per second (cps) from 0 to 3,500. This instrument also offers an accumulated total and timer function, up to 9,999,000 counts and 40 hours. A red LED blinks and a beeper chirps with each count (the chirp can be muted).


Project location: Tokyo, Japan
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1038658656/rdtnorg-radiation-detection-hardware-network-in-ja
http://safecast.org/

Back in the 70s everyone was recommended to buy a Geiger Counter but that produced a lot of false positives according to follow-up reports. Personally I'd stay away from a codfish that was registering off the meter though.

I'm sure there is a wide array of radiation detection technology avaialble and I'm not familiar with any of it to comment on its proficiency so I can neither advocate or criticize its use in all instances of the detection technology and situations. I wouldn't accept or deny any reading outright without more grounded knowledge.

Project organizers are going to judge who is qualified to operate the machinery. Hopefully the operators/testers are subject to audit on their findings and the equipment is reliable so we avoid the garbage in -> garbage out scenario where the readings could either be off high or low.

I do admire the public initiative put forth by this and other kickstarter projects though.

Quote:Geiger counters ineffective for checking food, water
Radiation factors hard to gauge; experts say rely on official data
Saturday, April 16, 2011

Geiger counters are probably ineffective for consumers in detecting hazardous levels of radiation in food and water at home, scientists, professors and device makers said.

Large samples should be tested in laboratory-like settings to obtain results, said Joseph Rotunda, who heads the radiation measurement division at toolmaker Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. Determining whether food, water or milk is safe also requires expert knowledge and more sophisticated equipment than the typical devices sold online, said Atsushi Katayama, a member of the Japan Society for Analytical Chemistry.

"Just pointing a measuring device at your food before dinner is pretty much meaningless," said Katayama, who has a doctorate in analytical chemistry from Hokkaido University. "Tap water and fish, for example, require special handling, isolation and concentration to get meaningful readings."

Geiger counters offered as far away as Germany have sold out after the March 11 disaster that crippled the Tohoku region and led to the world's worst nuclear crisis since Chernobyl. Tokyo Electric Power Co. has said its Fukushima No. 1 plant, which has withstood hundreds of aftershocks since the magnitude 9.0 earthquake and tsunami, may spew more radiation than the 1986 incident before the crisis is contained.

A sample for emergency testing should be at least 5 kg or 5 liters, according to instructions from the Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry. The manual advises against using Geiger-Muller devices, known as Geiger counters, for measurements in food and drink because of their low sensitivity to gamma radiation.

The ministry recommends using tools known as scintillation counters to detect iodine-131 in milk and vegetables, while devices called "inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometers" should be used to trace uranium. Detecting the radioactive material strontium requires nitric acid and dehydrated samples that are turned to ash over a 24-hour period in temperatures exceeding 400 degrees Celsius, according to the manual.

"Various types of radiation require different kinds of equipment," said Katayama. "It's safe to rely on government data" because the findings are closely watched by the international community, he said.

Supermarkets and convenience stores across Tokyo struggled to fill shelves with supplies in the initial weeks of the crisis after the detection of elevated iodine levels in water and food triggered bulk buying even as the government said the health risks are minimal. Companies including Morgan Stanley began shipping water to their Tokyo offices from Hong Kong.

Since March 23, water radiation readings in Tokyo have fallen below levels considered unsafe, even for infants, according to the city's Bureau of Waterworks. In the past month, the metro government ordered plants to step up filtering efforts and handed out about 240,000 bottles of water.

Seafood can require up to two years of monitoring because radioactive materials can take longer to reach larger fish such as sea bass, Katayama said. Even with the proper equipment and environment, making sense of the readings involves calculating the dosage per measure over time, he said.

"Just to know what the radiation levels are in your home, it's relatively straightforward, but when you get to measuring it in food, milk and soil it gets much more complicated," Rotunda said. "That I don't recommend at all."

The devastating temblor and tsunami disabled cooling systems at the Fukushima plant, and the buildup of pressure caused hydrogen explosions that damaged at least three reactors, leaking radiation. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Gregory Jaczko said at a Senate hearing Thursday that the nuclear station has yet to stabilize.

Readings in Tokyo soared more than 20-fold and reached 0.809 microsieverts per hour March 15, compared with 0.0338 microsieverts before the catastrophe, according to the Tokyo Metropolitan Institute of Public Health. The highest level was still below a hundredth of the radiation dose from a single chest X-ray.

German Geiger counter suppliers, including Conrad Electronic SE and Graetz Strahlungsmesstechnik GmbH, sold out of the devices in the week following the earthquake. Conrad is selling Geiger counters for ?299 (about ¥36,000) to ?499 (about ¥60,000) while the devices cost as much as ?3,000 (about ¥ 360,000) at Graetz.

People looking to measure air pollution in their homes and neighborhoods should expect to spend about $400 (¥33,400) for a Geiger counter, said Wade Allison, a physics professor at Oxford University and author of "Radiation and Reason."

"People need genuine reassurance," said Allison. "They should note that no harmful effects, including cancer, have been confirmed for doses below 100 millisieverts."

Buyers should chose an instrument that comes with clear instructions for interpreting results and is sensitive enough to measure background radiation, or about 0.01 microsieverts, Allison and Katayama said. Geiger counters with a digital display and ability to save a log of the results are easier to use and preferable to devices featuring analog screens with moving needles, they said.

Before taking measurements, users should shield the instrument in plastic to prevent contamination and determine background radiation levels, said Motoko Koyama, a spokeswoman at the Tokyo Metropolitan Industrial Technology Research Institute.

Poor ventilation, concrete walls in underground locations and proximity to granite and mobile phones can distort readings, Koyama and Katayama said. Measurements are best taken at a distance of 1 cm, moving the device about 2 to 3 cm per second, Koyama said.

"With so many Internet sites offering up-to-date radiation readings, does it really make sense to spend all that money?" Katayama said. "You can buy a ¥100,000 device, but I doubt you will get the price's worth without expert knowledge."

Geiger counters are probably ineffective for consumers in detecting hazardous levels of radiation in food and water at home, scientists, professors and device makers said.
http://digg.com/news/technology/geiger_counters_ineffective_for_checking_food_and_water_for_hazardous_radiation_levels_at_home
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20110416f1.html
There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply
05-10-2011, 07:59 PM,
#28
RE: Power and Control: The Anti-Nuclear Energy Movement - Leveraging the Japan Tsunami and Other Disasters
Quote:Media Ignores Energy Breakthrough: Worry-Free Nuclear Power
Monday, 09 May 2011 00:12

[Image: Focardi-Rossi-with-apparatus.jpg]
Rossi ® and Focardi demonstrate an Energy Catalyzer

The mainstream media has all but bypassed a truly remarkable development that could potentially be the biggest breakthrough in energy production since the discovery of fire: the Low Energy Nuclear Reactor, also called the Energy Catalyzer, invented by Italian engineer and inventor Andrea Rossi and his colleague, Sergio Focardi.

The Energy Catalyzer, or E-Cat, is essentially a small-scale cold fusion nuclear reactor about the size of a large suitcase that generates huge amounts of power very inexpensively, and without significant environmental drawbacks.

How Does it Work?

The E-Cat combines a small amount of the abundant and safe element nickel with hydrogen in the presence of a catalyst (the name of which is proprietary for now) under pressure in a sealed chamber. When a small amount of heat is applied to the chamber, it starts a nuclear reaction that generates more energy -- over 30 times more -- in the form of heat.

What happens inside the E-Cat is a low energy nuclear reaction (LENR), or "cold fusion" -- a nuclear reaction, but not like the ones in traditional nuclear reactors like those at the Fukushima Daiichi plant in Japan. Nuclear power plants employ nuclear fission reactions, in which atomic nuclei are split, or broken, to create energy. Nuclear fusion is just the opposite. It joins atomic nuclei, which results in the production of another, third element, and in the process releases enormous amounts of energy. It's the same atomic reaction that the sun and stars use to create heat and light, but in the E-Cat, it takes place at far lower temperatures, hence the term "cold fusion." The E-Cat can produce huge amounts of energy safely, reliably, and much more easily and cheaply than coal, natural gas, or "traditional" nuclear power plants -- without danger to humans or environmental degradation.

Lots of Cheap Power; No Dangerous Waste or Human Hazards

The E-Cat Rossi demonstrated is designed to produce 10 kilowatts (kW) of electricity, and it's very small. The volume of the reactor chamber is only one liter, and the unit's auxiliary components -- control mechanisms, piping, lead shielding and other parts -- can easily fit on the top of a medium-sized table. The E-Cat consumes just a tiny amount of fine nickel powder to make the reaction. Just one hundred grams of nickel can power the unit for six months. After six months, 90 percent of the nickel still remains. The small amount of nickel consumed in the reaction is transformed into non-radioactive isotopes of copper and trace amounts of other safe and stable, non-radioactive elements, like zinc. While the E-Cat relies on a nuclear reaction to produce energy, it does not use any radioactive materials to create the reaction, and does not generate any radioactive waste. Within a few hours after the system is turned off, it can be opened and no radiation can be detected.

This "cold fusion" reaction is far less dangerous than the nuclear fission that occurs at existing nuclear plants. If a catastrophe occurs and the reactor chamber breaks and spills its contents, the device would turn off immediately and the reaction would simply cease. Since there are no radioactive materials or radioactive waste, nothing bad would be introduced into the environment and no danger would be posed to humans or the environment by the device's failure.

Another important point is that these units have the potential to decentralize power generation. In other words, instead of tens of thousands of people relying on a single electrical power plant linked by miles of transmission lines, each individual household could potentially be powered by a relatively small E-Cat device which could fit in a space the size of a closet.

Proprietary Catalysts

At the heart of the reaction is the catalyst (or catalysts), which are key to the whole process. Right now, the catalysts are intellectual property and are being kept secret, at least until a Rossi can obtain a full patent on the system. Only Rossi and a few of his close business partners know the identity of the proprietary catalyst(s).

On January 14, 2011, Rossi and his colleague Sergio Focardi demonstrated a small working version of the Energy Catalyzer at the University of Bologna, Italy, that produced more than 10 kW of heat power for an hour, while only consuming a fraction of that amount of energy to run. The device takes about 400 watts/hour to run, but produces 15,000 watts/hour of energy. In other words, it takes the equivalent energy of about four 100-watt light bulbs to produce 150 100-watt bulbs' worth of power –- 37.5 times more output than input –- a fantastic rate of return. The inventors calculate that one gram of nickel in the E-Cat can produce the equivalent energy of 517 kilograms, or about 1,140 pounds of oil. A gallon of oil weighs roughly 6-8 pounds depending on its density, so one gram of nickel in the table-top sized E-Cat can produce about the amount of energy generated by about 142 gallons of oil.

Rossi has operated one of his Energy Catalyzer devices continuously for two years.

Rossi estimates that his system produces power at a cost of 1 cent per kilowatt-hour, although he doesn't specify whether this is a wholesale or a retail price. By comparison, power companies currently charge about 10 cents per kWh, so Rossi can produce power for about one-tenth of current rates, with no environmental drawbacks.

Soon to be in Commercial Production

Rossi's Energy Catalyzer is already well beyond the theoretical stages. He is already on a path to industrial production of his new device. He plans to open a one-megawatt heating plant in Athens, Greece this coming October, and plans to make his units commercially available in November 2011. It is anticipated that the Greek facility will turn out about 300,000 units a year destined for the Greek and Baltic markets. Estimates are that a home unit for heat will cost around 3,500 Euros (a little over US$5,000), and another 1,500 Euros (US$2,200) for the apparatus to convert the heat to electricity.

Rossi has gotten some criticism for failing to publish information about his system in peer-reviewed academic journals, but this is not to say he and Focardi haven't written research papers about it. You can read one of their detailed papers here. (pdf) The conclusions state that because the unit uses nickel and water (as a source of hydrogen) to operate, it "is an endless energy source for the planet, without emissions in atmosphere." Rossi and Focardi have brought the E-Cat to a useful stage without publishing their findings in journals, and sometimes innovations happen that way. When Rossi and Focardi demonstrate the E-Cat, they allow attendees to walk around it at will, observe its operation close up, and even invite scientists and researchers bring their own measuring devices to validate their claims about its input, output, elements used, etc. So far, no one has disproved the E-Cat's function or effectiveness. In fact, the opposite has occurred. On April 6, Swedish physicistssupervised another test of the E-Cat and confirmed that a nuclear reaction was, in fact, taking place and the unit worked as claimed.

Shortly after he demonstrated his unit in Bologna in January, Rossi (whose first language is Italian) challenged the "must-publish" ideology when he wrote in his blog:

We have passed already the phase to convince somebody. We are arrived to a product that is ready for the market. Our judge is the market. In this field the phase of the competition in the field of theories, hypothesis, conjectures etc etc is over. The competition is in the market. If somebody has a valid technology, he has not to convince people by chattering, he has to make a reactor that work and go to sell it, as we are doing.


Lack of News Bodes Poorly for Americans

Most of the news about the E-Cat has been reported in blogs operated by people and organizations interested in energy issues, and in the general press and media in Italy, Sweden, Greece and throughout Europe. By contrast, the Energy Catalyzer has received virtually no coverage in the U.S. mainstream media. The American media seems either unwilling or unable to grasp the significance of the Energy Catalyzer, or is omitting discussion of it for other reasons. The absence of news about the Energy Catalyzer, we could postulate, might be because it poses a threat to powerful American corporations that both control big media outlets and are vested in the energy production status quo. (Think General Electric, which both owns NBC and manufactures traditional nuclear fission reactors.) There would also appear to be motive enough to continue this news block as climate change pushes more policymakers to reconsider the more dangerous traditional nuclear power, and as corporations that benefit from recent huge price hikes in fossil fuels continue to rake in fabulous wealth with no end in sight.
http://twitter.com/#!/FastTadpole/status/68021829616414720
http://axiomatica.org/science-and-technology/nuclear-technology/1476-media-ignores-energy-breakthrough-worry-free-nuclear-power

More References Resources:

Energy Catalyzer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Catalyzer

Directory: Andrea A. Rossi Cold Fusion Generator (E-Cat)
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Andrea_A._Rossi_Cold_Fusion_Generator

Perhaps the whole spin by the media and the massive surge of cleverly inserted manufactured anti-nuclear movement, in demonizing all forms of nuclear power to be mothballed under a giant corporate/political tarp, then thrown down a deep dark mineshaft.

Combine this with and towards solar and wind including the recent appointment of the GE boss to the US federal jobs commission could play a big role in deep-sixing this innovation via super tight restriction on an all-encompassing nuclear energy prohibition that's already already written up in 1000 page+ obfuscation ready to be tabled and debated for a whole 2 hours before passage in the congress.

Now there is cause for skepticism I for one am not too thrilled they are not releasing the patent unlike the Bedini Monopole Energizer SSG. It's outlined a bit in this article.

Quote:Newest Cold Fusion Machine Does the Impossible ... Or Does it?

On the surface, the whole thing sounds fishy, and it is fishy: Rossi and Focardi do not claim to know how the fusion reaction they are harnessing actually works, and they even shy away from giving details about their machine's design, explaining that it isn't patent-protected. Furthermore, experts at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) have conducted two thorough reviews of cold fusion research in the past — one in 1989 and the other in 2004 — and in both instances, they were not convinced by either the theory or the experimental results.

On the other hand, inexplicable as it may be, the E-Cat does seem to work. Just last week, Rossi and Focardi demonstrated its operation for two credible individuals: Hanno Essen, a theoretical physicist at the Swedish Royal Institute of Technology and chairman of the Swedish Skeptics Society, and Sven Kullander of Uppsala University, chairman of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences Energy Committee.
Full article: http://www.livescience.com/13745-newest-cold-fusion-machine-impossible.html


Related:

YouTube Video: Free Energy E-Cat Andrea Rossi's Energy Catalyzer - Fast Facts (0:02:17) + Poll
http://concen.org/forum/showthread.php?tid=39870

97 E-Cats In Operation Right Now Across 4 Countries
http://freeenergytruth.blogspot.com/2011/04/97-e-cats-in-operation-right-now.html

The Trillions Poured into Multi-National Solar Energy - Green Hope & Epic Boondoggles
http://concen.org/forum/showthread.php?tid=38957

I had heard rumour that China has this technology nearly perfected a good 5 years ago.

At the same time I find it curious that Nicola Tesla has and is being promoted both in alt-media and now Hollywood, in an upcoming film with some major force behind it in 2011. Tesla was one time reported to be starring Christian Bale. Wonder what that is all about and how it will be played out, maybe to diffuse Tesla tech, Thorium (strange how the movie Thor just came out too and had an incredible energy source featured in it) energy reactors or maybe just to distract from a potentially greater discovery such as the Rossi E-Cat.
There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply
05-15-2011, 04:27 PM,
#29
RE: Power and Control: The Anti-Nuclear Energy Movement - Leveraging the Japan Tsunami and Other Disasters
Is the US infrastructure really sitting like a house of cards? If so is this by design or is ALL nuclear power really that unsafe?

The cover-ups that were uncovered, the hinting the comparisons with Chernobyl, Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Three Mile Island have been ramped up lately. (Some) people are freaking out because JAPANESE radiation is not being tracked in their water anymore even though the levels are minuscule.

Here's the stage being set by MSM and the alt-media puppets for a Nuclear disaster on US soil to maybe shut off Nuclear energy? This time by flood.

United States Nuclear Power Plants Threatened By Spillway Flooding
Warning: Ridiculous amount of Ads and Profiteer Cross Promos
http://lucaswhitefieldhixson.com/united-states-nuclear-power-plants-threatened-spillway-flooding

So how much Energy comes from nuclear power generation? Look it up yourself folks..

EIA:: Electric Power Monthly May 2011 Edition
Electric Power Monthly with data for February 2011
Report Released: May 13, 2011
Next Release Date: Mid-June 2011
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/epm_sum.html

"Don't Believe the Hype" ~ Chuck D
There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply
05-15-2011, 04:56 PM,
#30
RE: Power and Control: The Anti-Nuclear Energy Movement - Leveraging the Japan Tsunami and Other Disasters
Thanks FastTadpole, always good to have the facts at your fingertips.
An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it.
Mohandas Gandhi


Each of us is put here in this time and this place to personally decide the future of humankind.
Did you think you were put here for something less?
Chief Arvol Looking Horse
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  View from the Borderlands - Energy from the Galactic Center vagabonder 1 514 07-22-2014, 02:02 AM
Last Post: Watchdog
  Evidences of Space Weather Induced Natural Disasters vagabonder 2 640 04-14-2014, 04:50 PM
Last Post: vagabonder
Information Brain Implant Lets One Monkey Control Another thokling 4 902 02-22-2014, 12:27 AM
Last Post: Easy Skanking
  ecat - Energy Technologies sekular 5 1,774 02-02-2014, 07:03 PM
Last Post: CharliePrime
Rainbow BlackLight Power Announces 10 MW Free Energy Device CharliePrime 3 803 02-01-2014, 09:45 PM
Last Post: Easy Skanking
  OFFICIAL BEDINI SG MACHINE TRAILER - Energy from the Vacuum - DVD Part 33 investolator 7 2,470 01-28-2014, 09:02 AM
Last Post: investolator
  Hacker releases specs for anti-drone hunts mexika 1 428 12-10-2013, 08:13 PM
Last Post: April
Video ADAM High Energy Laser drummer 1 639 07-20-2013, 07:55 AM
Last Post: thokling
Video Dr M.T. Keshe - Free Energy Technologies drummer 0 777 02-27-2013, 09:24 PM
Last Post: drummer
  The nuclear energy panacea macfadden 8 1,617 02-08-2013, 03:07 PM
Last Post: macfadden

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)