Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

FBaggins

(28,677 posts)
35. Plenty to celebrate
Thu Nov 21, 2013, 07:39 PM
Nov 2013

IF you believed any of the nonsense about melted fuel and crushed racks.

The videos clearly show what looks like a perfectly normal extraction process.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

To add: There were lots of predictions of disaster MineralMan Nov 2013 #1
Not Predictions. The odds simply didn't look good. Katashi_itto Nov 2013 #68
K & R malaise Nov 2013 #2
Thank you. I hope so, too. MineralMan Nov 2013 #3
Something they should have done a year ago. Baitball Blogger Nov 2013 #4
I think the planning process was done very carefully. MineralMan Nov 2013 #6
Wait what? Egnever Nov 2013 #5
Almost all of those stories were from advocacy websites and publications. MineralMan Nov 2013 #7
I think being an opponent of nuclear power is great! Egnever Nov 2013 #8
That's a lesson that advocacy groups rarely learn. MineralMan Nov 2013 #9
Agreed and it is very unfortunate Egnever Nov 2013 #11
Ive learned to take Arne Gundersen's hyperbole with a grain of salt Warren DeMontague Nov 2013 #52
Nope not even close madokie Nov 2013 #10
oh really? Egnever Nov 2013 #12
Operative word here is 'could' madokie Nov 2013 #13
LOL thats just one of many hair on fire world is going to end Egnever Nov 2013 #14
do show me more madokie Nov 2013 #16
Why so you can continue to stick your fingers in your ears? Egnever Nov 2013 #18
go pound sand madokie Nov 2013 #20
Even so, the statement was an exaggeration. MineralMan Nov 2013 #15
I don't think you are a nuclear expert MM madokie Nov 2013 #17
I would not call myself a nuclear expert. MineralMan Nov 2013 #19
Plus, people sniping from the sidelines is not good form. longship Nov 2013 #23
From the "sidelines?" 99Forever Nov 2013 #30
It also dissipates with distance. That's how it works. longship Nov 2013 #50
Thanks for that. MineralMan Nov 2013 #48
The problem is that this was never even close to rational FBaggins Nov 2013 #32
Excellent. pa28 Nov 2013 #21
They're doing the easiest stuff first Art_from_Ark Nov 2013 #22
Thank you for that clarification.n/t dixiegrrrrl Nov 2013 #24
exactly. furthermore, reactor 4 is the easiest of the reactors to remove the fuel from... magical thyme Nov 2013 #25
Plenty to celebrate FBaggins Nov 2013 #35
perfectly normal except manually operated and the easiest of the rods to be removed. magical thyme Nov 2013 #37
Manual doesn't really make it harder FBaggins Nov 2013 #42
Sorry, but I'm taking the word of people who actually do the job of fuel removal magical thyme Nov 2013 #44
Like who? FBaggins Nov 2013 #46
Like Toshio Kimura, former Tepco technician magical thyme Nov 2013 #49
I figured that's who you were thinking of FBaggins Nov 2013 #55
thank you for the source links to back up your claims... magical thyme Nov 2013 #56
They might not remove those. Warpy Nov 2013 #27
According to TEPCO, they've already started removing them Art_from_Ark Nov 2013 #28
Yes, from those pools but not from the reactor Warpy Nov 2013 #29
Why would the unused fuel rods be easier than the spent ones? FBaggins Nov 2013 #34
This video explains why Art_from_Ark Nov 2013 #36
Could you translate the key point? FBaggins Nov 2013 #38
I can't listen to it right now Art_from_Ark Nov 2013 #41
??? FBaggins Nov 2013 #43
I have watched the video before Art_from_Ark Nov 2013 #45
Ok. Thanks. FBaggins Nov 2013 #47
well, for one thing, if they have never been critical, they are only alpha emitters. Throckmorton Nov 2013 #60
That doesn't make them harder to remove. FBaggins Nov 2013 #61
Never said you did, Throckmorton Nov 2013 #72
These are MOX rods, Pu239 undergoes spontaneous fission Sirveri Nov 2013 #73
No they aren't. FBaggins Nov 2013 #75
Scratch that, double checking the numbers you're right. Sirveri Nov 2013 #77
I'm sure. Yes. FBaggins Nov 2013 #78
Right, due to U-238 activation via neutron flux you'll have Pu-239 Sirveri Nov 2013 #79
I listened to it again-- twice Art_from_Ark Nov 2013 #74
Yes, of course. When faced with MineralMan Nov 2013 #39
Thank you for this, I am a bit relieved Warpy Nov 2013 #26
It's just silly to call this the "most dangerous operation" FBaggins Nov 2013 #31
It is dangerous RobertEarl Nov 2013 #53
Not to the rest of the world FBaggins Nov 2013 #57
Aww, you are such a dreamer RobertEarl Nov 2013 #58
I'm not the one with the active imagination FBaggins Nov 2013 #59
Hey, you almost got something correct. RobertEarl Nov 2013 #62
Lol! You're the entertaining gift that just keeps on giving, aren't you? FBaggins Nov 2013 #63
Quit yer dreaming, FBaggins RobertEarl Nov 2013 #64
Stop... I can't take it. FBaggins Nov 2013 #65
Heh RobertEarl Nov 2013 #66
You shoud just stick with that "I don't get it" FBaggins Nov 2013 #67
"the entertaining gift that just keeps on giving"... SidDithers Nov 2013 #69
A start. 99Forever Nov 2013 #33
Yes. MineralMan Nov 2013 #40
Storage is a MAJOR ISSUE. Tikki Nov 2013 #51
Just the beginning..... Bennyboy Nov 2013 #54
Good job, Japan. Bonobo Nov 2013 #70
Nuclear power generation was very, very attractive MineralMan Nov 2013 #71
Keeping fingers crossed. Warren DeMontague Nov 2013 #76
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Fuel rod removal: Fukushi...»Reply #35