Visiting Tokyo Japan in 2013 - Radiation Concerns

My brother and I are planning to travel to Tokyo Japan in May 2013 for 2 weeks of vacation.

Given the 2011 earthquake in Japan that led to the nuclear meltdown at the Fukushima Plant, we’ve been doing some research and had a few concerns about the radiation from the fallout. A coworker of mine recently decided to cancel his trip to Japan, so we’ve been concerned even more. I understand that it has been almost 2 years since the incident, and that Fukushima is 160 miles away from Tokyo, but we just wanted to make sure it is safe to visit given that we are not sure what impact has been left behind.

Here are some of our concerns given the research we’ve done on the internet:

1. Cesium and Strontium

A. What is the likelihood of cesium being inahled or ingested. If inhaled or ingested over a 2 week period what are the Long term effects?

B. I’ve read that cesium has a half life of 70 days in the body for adults up to 30 years of age, is this true?

From Japans Consumer Affairs Agency:
The biological half-life for iodine-131 is approximately 11 days in infants, 23 days in five-year-olds and 80 days in adults. For cesium-137, it is approximately 9 days for one-year-olds, 38 days for children up to nine years of age, 70 days for adults up to 30 years of age, and 90 days for adults up to 50 years of age. Therefore, when cesium-137, which has a long physical half-life of 30 years, is taken into the body, the amount remaining in the body is reduced by half in three months (in the case of 50-year-olds).


C. Does Cesium affect the heart negatively? Do we have reason to be concerned long term if we are only staying for 2 weeks?

D. I notice cesium observations and readings are very common, but I don’t see very much coverage around strontium 90. Is there a reason why the Japanese Government hasn’t given more attention to strontium 90 monitoring in soil, air, and food than cesium monitoring? I’ve read through sites such as wikipedia that strontium can cause lukemia in the long run and would have the most severe effect of all the fallout materials. Is there any reason why the government held off till this year to report these numbers? Please see articles below

 Asahi article on strontium
 Fukushima diary
 A Fukushima Blog
 Ministry of Education, Sports, Science, Technoloy – Japan
Strontium Results (Japansese)
Strontium Results (Translated In English):

E. What is the likelihood of strontium being inhaled or ingested? If inhaled or ingested over a 2 week period what are the long term effects? Can you get lukemia from breathing strontium over a 2 week period? Do we have reason to be concerned or paniced?

F. Does strontium stay in the body long run?

G. I’ve also gone to a few other websites to see if there are other concerns around radiation in Tokyo and have attached them below. Are these credible, and should these be reason for concern? The Dr. Chris Busby article especially concerns me, as it implies that maybe indoor areas maybe high with radiation?

1.) Dr. Chris Busby
 I watched an online video on You Tube from Dr. Chris Busby. In the video he claims an air condition filter from Tokyo has high levels of radiation. 183,000 BQ Is this credible? Should we be concerned/paniced with hotel rooms and indoor area air quality?
Article from a Canadian Website:
About Chris Busby:
2.) Video on train
 I watched an online video of a passenger taking a train ride to Tokyo Narita Airport and he found high levels of radiation on the train using a radiation meter. Is this credible and should I be concerned?
3.) Radiation Defense Project
 This website reported high levels of radiation (cesium) in hotspots around tokyo. Is this credible and should I be concerned?
About Radiation Defense:

H. Given all these concerns, should we be concerned about visiting Tokyo and Japan? Will these concerns above give us long term issues? Are there any other particles from the fall out that we should be concerned about (ie. plutonium)

Thanks for taking the time to answer my email

Radiation concerns

HI. Am travelling to Japan in May 2013 as well for 2 weeks and have the same concern as you do. Could you share if you have obtain any infomation on the cesium and Strontium inhaled or ingested over a 2 week period what are the Long term effects?

Visiting Tokyo Japan in 2013 - Radiation Concerns

HI. Am travelling to Japan in May 2013 as well for 2 weeks and have the same concern as you do. Could you share if you have obtain any infomation on the cesium and Strontium inhaled or ingested over a 2 week period what are the Long term effects?

.trip business or pleasure?

If i was Visiting Tokyo for a few weeks i would have no problem(8.6 million live there). i would however minimize my risk watch what you eat food supply in Japan is still showing some activity (radiation) see for good data on testing of various items .tdm...

Monitoring in tokyo up to date

The Tokyo Metropolitan Institute of Public Health monitors environmental radiation levels year-round.
In response to the accident at TEPCO's Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, we have posted the latest data on radiation levels on this website.
Please be assured that the radiation levels monitored to date have no impact on health.

Up to date monitoring below .tdm....

Reduced Cardiac Output

Useful Link Diemos,

Cs-137 linked to reduced Cardiac Output, segment shortening and loss of variability. In rats exposed to 137Cs arrhythmias included: 9% ST Segment Shortening, 11% RT segment shortening, blood pressure decrease 10%, Circadian rhythm disappearance.

Cardiovascular Toxicology, March 2008, Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 33-40: Yann Guéguen, Philippe Lestaevel, Line Grandcolas, Cédric Baudelin, Stéphane Grison, Jean-René Jourdain, Patrick Gourmelon, Maâmar Souidi, Abstract (Excerpts)

Chronic Contamination of Rats with 137Cesium Radionuclide: Impact on the Cardiovascular System

“Cardiovascular system impairment has been observed in children and in liquidators exposed to the Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident.”

“ECG analysis did not disclose any arrhythmia except ST- and RT-segment shortening (−9% and −11%, respectively, P < 0.05) in rats exposed to 137Cs. Mean blood pressure decreased (−10%, P < 0.05), and its circadian rhythm disappeared.”

Oooops .... Right about now

Right about ... now, in response to an earlier hint ...

I expect that a significant number of Fukushima region parents, including: nurses, paramedics, cops, physicians, technicians ... and their friends, have hooked themselves and their kids to readily AVAILABLE heart monitors.

Also, a significant number of EE-Sparkies have figured out that their O-Scope will produce a heart rhythm trace, with a bit of conducting gel and a couple of standard probes and a bit of aluminum foil taped to their kid's chest.

Similarly, it is expected that UPS, DHL and other international shippers are delivering PERSONAL heart monitors to customers in the Fukushima region and throughout Honshu Island. There is probably a slight shortage and backlog, but the information BLACKOUT is already OVER!

The heart conduction question will NOT remain an OPEN question ... for long. Word travels FAST, in my experience. The ladies (moms) will soon be, or already are, chatting about this at the beauty-shops, nail salons and shoe stores, as well as at their places of employment in the hospitals, engineering firms, law offices, bars, restaurants and ...

Time is SHORT ... where it counts.

The disaster ahead

Data & Reality

The doomed Fukushima REGION has the same DISMAL future as the damned Chernobyl REGION. The WIDESPREAD cardiac conduction problems are only ONE FACET of a multifaceted public health collapse. Citizens of the USA, Britain and France would be well advised to HEED the WARNINGS of Chernobyl and Fukushima.

WE can expect to experience the SAME systemic secrecy, media-cover-up, lies, inaction, sickness, withholding-of-anti-radiation medications, cheerleading, failure to treat and death. The USA nuclear reactor FLEET is poorly designed, poorly constructed, aging, corroded, embrittled, fire-prone, flood-prone, and POORLY defended against terrorist attack.

The present REALITY at Chernobyl and Fukushima represents the American Future, perhaps in your region. If the DATA is overwhelming, the REALITY is much, much worse. The film below gives some basic insight into the American disaster ahead.

The Heart of Chernobyl

The Heart of Chernobyl

Honest as the day is long

“the difference between schoolchildren playing outside or indoors and families staying or evacuating.”

Japan scientists took utility money


Influential Japanese scientists who help set national radiation exposure limits have for years had trips paid for by the country's nuclear plant operators to attend overseas meetings of the world's top academic group on radiation safety. The potential conflict of interest is revealed in one sentence buried in a 600-page parliamentary investigation into last year's Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant disaster and pointed out to The Associated Press by a medical doctor on the 10-person investigation panel.

Some of these same scientists have consistently given optimistic assessments about the health risks of radiation, interviews with the scientists and government documents show. Their pivotal role in setting policy after the March 2011 tsunami and ensuing nuclear meltdowns meant the difference between schoolchildren playing outside or indoors and families staying or evacuating.

The doctor on the parliamentary panel, Hisako Sakiyama, is outraged about utility funding for Japan's ICRP members. She fears that radiation standards are being set at a lenient level to limit costly evacuations. “The assertion of the utilities became the rule. That's ethically unacceptable. People's health is at stake,'' she said. “The view was twisted so it came out as though there is no clear evidence of the risks, or that we simply don't know.''

College Town Newspapers

A smattering of ‘College Town’ newspapers picked up the NPP PAID SHILL story from the AP.

Oh and how cute. The Japanese Lying sunnybeaches spout the SameCrap that Johnny Boice and Ann Coulter SPEW.

Sing it in harmony you BabyKillers, “RADS IS GUUUD, RADS IS GUUUD, RADS IS GUUUD.”

Now in a minor key, “Get-de-GLOW, Get-de-GLOW, Get-de-GLOW”

On the Marked Down Rack

MOX for sale, CHEAP!

Pacific Island Nation wishes to sell all!

MOX, UOX and Spent Fuel, All must go.

Will accept any offer.

You can become the proud owner of 100,000 Tons of nuclear fuel and processing equipment.

Your credit is good.

Step Right Up

Yes or No?

Incredibly EASY and INEXPENSIVE to determine at the local EMS station.

Either the kids have profound changes to their PQRST Waves, or the tracing is grossly normal. It is as simple as that.

Professor Chris Busby:

“I hear reports from Japan from mothers of children who say that they are showing all the signs of contamination with Cesium that were also were also found by my colleague Yury Bandazhevsky after Chernobyl in the areas of Belarus that were contaminated similarly with this substance, Cesium 137. What it did there was it went into the heart muscle and caused conduction difficulties and destroyed destroyed heart muscle. So the children in Belarus were suffering heart attacks and arrythmias. That is when the heart does not beat properly. And of course later on in life they die young from heart disease because the heart cells don't replicate themselves. Your heart cells, you get all your heart cells at once.You get maybe only a 1% increase in heart cells a year, but over the period of time we are talking about there will be no replacement for the cells that were damaged by the Fukushima catastrophe in the children.”

“The Fukushima catastrophe is probably the worst nuclear disaster in human history. It is certainly worse than Chernobyl. The contamination from Fukushima has gone as far south as Tokyo. I have measured it personally in air filters from cars. At least twelve different air filters from cars were sent to me, some of them from the south of Tokyo, and many of them from a 100 kilometers away from Fukushima, and they contained very large amounts of radioactivity in them. High levels of Cesium 134 and Cesium 137. So we can conclude, without any doubt, that that area up to 200 kilometers, maybe more, away from the catastrophe site, has been seriously contaminated with radionucleides.”

Busby is wrong.

Busby is quoted as saying:
“The Fukushima catastrophe is probably the worst nuclear disaster in human history. It is certainly worse than Chernobyl.

The following is the testimony to the US Congress by Dr. John Boice, the President of the Health Physics Society:

Starting on page 2, Dr. Boice explains how the Fukushima accident is an order of magnitude less severe than Chernobyl and why.

Busby is a well-known anti-nuclear propagandist, and his missives have been demonstrated to be in error many times on this forum.

Boice is a liar

Ultimately, it comes to this.

Boice is a liar. A paid industry shill.

Boice is as unreliable as the Tobacco executives and the (recently indicted) BP witness before congress.

And for the same reason.

$$$$$$$$$ money crosses the palm

Believe whom you will.

Boice is a professor of medicine at Vanderbuilt

Don't people look to University Professors for accurate information?

John D. Boice, Jr:

John D. Boice, Jr, ScD.
Professor, School of Medicine
Vanderbuilt-Ingram Cancer Center

John Boice is professor of Medicine at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine and President Nominee of the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP). NCRP, located in Bethesda, Maryland, is a Congressionally-chartered not for profit organization that supports the scientific and public aspects of radiation protection through independent analyses by leading scientists throughout the United States.

So much for the ad hoc LIES about $$$ being involved.

And a boldfaced liar


People will seek ACCURATE information where we can get it. And that does NOT include John Boice, who is, apparently after some evalutation, a bold-faced liar,

In my estimation

Vacuous statement from the anti-nukes

In your WORTHLESS estimation.

The turnip-brain above offers nothing in the way of any proof. That's the hallmark of the idiot anti-nukes; "proof by assertion".

The idiot doesn't like what the scientist says, so the idiot calls the scientist a liar. That's become de riguer for the anti-nukes on this forum. We get only a constant stream of vacuous claims of what these little mindless fools claim are lies - which is anything with which they disagree.

We have documentation of people holding academic positions and positions of responsibility in the scientific community. Evidently the non-scientists don't realize that you don't just "buy" your way into a position of respect in the scientific community.

If you don't respect the academic community and its tenets; then what are you doing here besides wasting bandwidth?

Move along, little vacuous purveyor of unsubstantiated claims of lies.

Deal with IT

We have come to the conclusion that your STAR (expert) Witness ...

John Boice Is a LIAR!

Juries come to that conclusion every day, in courtrooms from coast to coast.

So DEAL with it. We have.

Game Over

Anglo-American Jurors have a time-honored: duty, right, obligation and POWER; to determine the FACTS. The Brits coined the phrase, 12 good men and true. This with time has become 12 jurors good and true.

In some jurisdictions, such as Texas, the jury explicitly determines the FACTS and the LAW. Jury nullification (of the law) is more informally practiced, in other jurisdictions, when the jurors so choose.

While juries may from time to time ERR, they are seldom Paid HHOOOERS (sic).

In the words of Lord Devlin: "Trial by jury is more than an instrument of justice and more than one wheel of the constitution: it is the lamp that shows that freedom lives." We must not allow anything to undermine it.


I am a degreed engineer, and peer-published, and you are a damnliar.

Manufacturers of dangerous, defective products SHOULD 'make-whole' their victims, which is a principle the nuclear power industry observes. primarily in the breach thereof. Grossly defective-design nuclear power plants have caused virtually INFINITE damages in Japan and the USSR.

The nuclear industry has substantially corrupted science, law, economics, engineering, public health and sound public policy. Even with enormous subsidy, and monopoly status, the nuclear power industry has marginal economic prospects. The death, disease, destruction and disinformation campaigns of the nuclear power industry in the decimated the former USSR and the rapidly unwinding Japan. It is therefore time to shut those bad-boys DOWN.

Those bad-boys simply CANNOT admit the enormity of the damage they have wrought.

Shut Her Down


Most engineers can distinguish between the products built by one company and another, or one country and another. Evidently, you can't.

There is no comparison between the USSR-designed RBMK reactors at Chernobyl and US licensed reactors. The RBMK was over-moderated and unstable, while US licensed reactors are under-moderated and stable. The Chernobyl accident occurred during an experiment conducted in the middle of the shutdown Xenon transient due to a delay. In the USA, utilities don't conduct experiments on their reactors.

Although the Japanese reactors used designs licensed from a US company, General Electric; the Fukushima reactors were not built to specs that would have allowed them to be licensed in the USA. The back-up generators were not protected from flood / tsunami as the USA's NRC requires. The fuel tanks were not buried as the NRC requires. The Japanese utilities were not required to have compatible back-up generators ready to fly in, and actually drill on this, as their US counterparts are required to do.

The things that failed at Fukushima are precisely the things that are different between Japanese plants and those in the USA.

Evidently you've bought the vacuous anti-nuke propaganda "hook, line, and sinker" about subsidies. That's a poor showing; I would expect better from an engineer.

The anti-nuke claims of huge subsidies are based on including all the money the USA spends on nuclear weapons as a subsidy. That's like saying all the money the Pentagon spends on fighters and bombers is a subsidy to the airlines.

The anti-nukes also claim the Governmet subsidizes the insurance of US plants, and that there is no commercially available insurance. The Price-Anderson Act actually requires that the utilities obtain insurance for the first tier of liability protection. The Price-Anderson fund is the second tier; but the anti-nukes don't tell you that is funded by the utilities:

The Price-Anderson fund, which is financed by the reactor companies themselves, is then used to make up the difference

There are, in fact, commercial insurers that insure nuclear power plants:

American Nuclear Insurers

American Nuclear Insurers (ANI) is a joint underwriting association created by some of the largest insurance companies in the United States. Our purpose is to pool the financial assets pledged by our member companies to provide the significant amount of property and liability insurance required for nuclear power plants and related facilities throughout the world.

Watch who you are calling a damn liar; since the facts appear to favor my side.

Engineering Blog

These bloggers have a long-standing familiarity with these pieces of Happy Horse Hoodah.

Thus, we are well aware of the DETAILS of the KNOWN DEFECTS in the GE MARK-1 and GE MARK-2 'contaiment' designs. This familiarity includes the congressional testimony and the rather pitched ethical debates in IEEE.

The FAILURE MODES of the GE MARK-1 reactor, detailed decades ago, played out their KNOWN DESIGN DEFECTS in FDU-1, FDU-2, *FDU-3, and FDU-5. GE MARK-2 containment FDU-6 failures were less tramatic, but unacceptable.

Oh and we are aware of the GE E&C contributions to the Fukushima Daiichi Campus, particularly in FDU-1.

Since we have blogged on these subjects EXTENSIVELY, you are only making a public spectacle of your character defects, particularly pathalogical lying.

Everybody KNOWS that you are a liar. We are just tired of laughing at you. So now you know, that we know.


Upside Down AND Under-Water

The ACTUAL damages for a Fukushima/Chernobyl style atomic explosion, on American Soil, would run to about $5T.

That absurd (miniscule) PW fund could not pay for the rather trivial damages accrued by BP, as a result of their 'little booboo' out in the Gulf of Mexico.

Pure Ponzi Scheme

Bernie Madoff had a more substantial reserve.

Upside Down AND Under-Water

You are one serious dumbassus

Distinction without a difference:

The USSR Chernobyl reactor had a carbon fire and (small) atomic explosion.

A vast region and it's population were contaminated for eons.

The GE Mark-1 NPP at FDU-3 had Zircalloy and hydrogen fires and a (small) atomic explosion.

A vast region and it's population were contaminated for eons.

The distinctions are trivial!

What's the DIFFERENCE?

There is no difference!


Combustion, Chemical FIRE, deflagration, detonation inside a nuclear reactor ...

Not good things

Fuel ... insignificant to a 1ST engineering approximation.

Atomic Explosion in a nuclear reactor such as at Chernobyl AND FDU-3

Now, THAT seriously SUCKS.

I mentioned your carbon v zircalloy/hydrogen fuels. A more accomplished debater would have then skipped the 'talking point'. But you are the low-budget-bargain-rack shill. So you blundered on into the buzzsaw.

Oh and that WSJ STAKEHOLDER/Stockholder message from the SPONSOR ... that is advertizing and NOT science. The Wall Street Journal, LMAO ... now THAT is some kinda technical reference ... NOT! We can just HEAR the GE Jingo song ''good things to LIIIIIFE' playing in the background. Get REAL Loser!

Nescience is a deadly combination of ignorance & stupidity, which you appear to personally embody.

The reference is to the Professor; not the journal

The Wall Street Journal, LMAO ... now THAT is some kinda technical reference

It's not the Wall Street Journal that is providing the information. The reference is not to an editorial by the staff of the WSJ.

The reference is to a UC-Berkeley Professor of Physics, Richard Muller.

Are you attempting to make the obviously wrong point that if Professor Richard Muller writes a paper in Physics Today, then we take it seriously. However, if Professor Richard Muller writes a paper for the Wall Street Journal, then we don't take it seriously.

Who cares where the paper is published. The credibility of the paper is due to the author and not the publisher.

Who gives a Hoot N Hell

Who gives a 'Hoot In Hell' what 'Line of BS" you Lying Shills are pimping and pumping and priming each other?

Oh and give each other a bottlecap-medal, like the USSR 'comrades' used to do. Yeah, that oughta work wonders, comrade!

A pack of tattered lies from a pack of Liars.

The mindless 'drone-on' NPP sales pitch is a bit frayed about the edges and 'Shop Worn'.

WE have moved on from your mindless Rah-Rah NPP cheerleading yells.

Time to shut those 'Bad Boys' DOWN!


The above poster claims:
Distinction without a difference:
The USSR Chernobyl reactor had a carbon fire and (small) atomic explosion.

Yes - and you can't have a graphite fire in a US reactor; there's no graphite. The bulk of the mass of the RBMK is graphite. Only a very small percentage of the material in a US light water reactor is zirconium.

We've debunked the Fukushima atomic explosion propaganda on this forum previously:

1) The Fukushima fuel was too dilute in fissile isotopes to have a nuclear explosion
2) The single explosive, hydrogen; could not compress fuel to nuclear explosion conditions since there is no explosive lens which is required. Gundersen is just plain WRONG
3) The explosive flash at Fukushima is yellow; a nuclear explosion would be white. A hydrogen explosion would be yellow.
4) The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization states that the detected fallout from Fukushima was consistent with a reactor accident, and not a nuclear detonation.

UC Berkeley Physics Professor Richard Muller puts that fallout into perspective:

The Panic over Fukushima

The radioactivity in Denver is naturally 3 times what the fallout in Fukushima is. If Denver can handle 3X the level without severe health effects, then Fukushima can handle the lower levels they are exposed to.

There IS a difference for those who are not self-blinded enough to see it.

Lie 1, 2, 3, 4 ...


This is an engineering blog and we have blogged extensively on these subjects. Thus the audience already knows the details about EVERY LIE in your post.

The bloggers here are quite familiar with the LIES that you conveniently labeled 1-4, together with the reality. You are clearly unfamiliar with your target audience ... never a good idea. Thus WE know that you are completely full of Horse Hoodah.

TTFN ... dumbassus

PBA Below


'Proof By Assertion'

The CTB Authority did NOT RELEASE their MASSIVE Fukushima data on a contemporary basis.

The USA did not NOT RELEASE their MASSIVE Fukushima data on a contemporary basis.

Japan Inc. did NOT RELEASE their Fukushima data on a contemporary basis.

That is, BY DEFININTION, a cover-up Their 'conclusions' are scientifically unverifiable and therefore ... meaningless.

Warnings and Evacuations were not timely or sufficiently broad. Decontamination of persons was rare, and inadequate. Anti-Radiation Drugs were, for the most part, withheld from the Local Population. Hot Spot Mapping has been repeatedly demonstrated to be fraudulent. Medical dosage exams have been late and fraudulent.

I could go on ... and on ... and on, you silly little lying dipstick.

'Proof By Assertion'
ARGO, 'From the Movie'.


The above anti-nuclear MORON just can't get past the fact that scientists release their data only when they have checked it out.

This anti-nuke nut states above that if data is not released on a contemporary basis, then that is the definition of a cover-up, and any released information is meaningless.

This nutcase sure doesn't know how scientists work. Scientists don't release raw data straight out of the monitoring equipment. Raw data may contain errors. How many times have we seen this with the news media; there's some significant event like the start of a war and the first reports are likely to be wrong and have to be recanted later.

Scientists don't work like the news media. Rather than racing to press with potentially wrong information, scientists analyze their information so that the information has all been deemed to be "high quality", and then it is released.

That's an attempt by scientists to get only the best, most truthful, information to the public. However, this dimbulb above "thinks" ( term used advisedly ) that the wait to analyze data is prima facia evidence that the data is faulty.

The CTBTO office analyzed the data and reported what they accurately found.

Of course, all the other points mentioned went unaddressed because the data that was released by scientists; namely what the minimum fissile concentrations that would support a nuclear explosion are, or the fact that explosive lenses are required for a nuclear explosion, or the properties of thermal radiation; i.e. the information for points 1,2, and 3; were all information that was released BEFORE Fukushima - in fact YEARS before.

That wasn't information that was "diddled" to cover-up Fukushima. That information was released before anyone ever heard of the Fukushima accident.

But I just love it how this fool attempts to "spin" the facts. Whenever I get challenged on my claim that the anti-nukes are a bunch of brain-dead idiots, I have the postings of the above poster to refer the skeptics to.

The clown is so clueless that he probably doesn't realize he's making my job easier, and not harder. Such are the wages of stupidity.

OMG is that a PERSONAL Attack

Why YES, yes it does appear to be so.

I am cut to the QUICK, and I have a SLOW quick.

NPP Invective

More "proof" by assertion

Once again the anti-nukes make claims of lies that they never can substantiate. That is because the claims of lies are false. Each of the enumerated points has a scholarly reference to back it up.

1) Reactor fuel is too dilute to sustain a nuclear explosion

Reactor fuel is 3-4% fissile U-235, and if MOX is used, it is about 7% Pu-239.

The ONLY real experts on what can / can not be made to sustain a nuclear explosion are the scientists at the two nuclear weapons labs, Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore and much of that is classified. However, they have released some information about what can / can not support a nuclear explosion in order to lessen the security requirements for material for which the bomb-grade security is not justified. The weapons labs have stated that enrichment of less than 20% can not support a nuclear explosion. Additionally, a mixture of less than 14% Pu-239 mixed with U-238 also can not be made to explode. The reference for this from Page 6 of the Princeton document at:

The source of the threshold information is given in footnote 2 on page 6 as one "Robert W. Selden, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory"

2) Nuclear explosives require explosive lenses.

A good reference here is the biography of Oppenheimer by Peter Goodchild, "Robert Oppenheimer, Shatterer of Worlds". This scholarly work details the work of the implosion concept inventor Seth Neddermeyer at Los Alamos. Neddermeyer attempted to create the required symmetrical implosions with a single explosive but could not beat the fact that the scheme is Raleigh-Taylor unstable. It was only when Oppenheimer brought in George Kistiakowski who devised the explosive lenses that the implosion scheme could be made to work. One can also see that nuclear explosives use multi-component explosive lenses at:

In general, it is a device composed of several explosive charges that are shaped in such a way as to change the shape of the detonation wave passing through it, conceptually similar to the effect of an optical lens on light. The explosive charges that make it up have different rates of detonation.

In a nuclear weapon, an array of explosive lenses is used to change the several approximately spherical diverging detonation waves into a single spherical converging one. The converging wave is then used to collapse the various shells (tamper, reflector, pusher, etc.) and finally compresses the core (pit) of fissionable material to a prompt critical state.

3) Nuclear explosion flashes are white not yellow.

The temperatures attained in nuclear explosions are 10s of millions of degrees and the thermal radiation from such temperatures is in the X-ray regime. In fact, it is now declassified that the Teller-Ulam principle for using a fission explosion to ignite a fusion explosion relies on the X-rays from the fission explosion:

" The essential features of the mature thermonuclear weapon design, which officially remained secret for nearly three decades, are: 1) separation of stages into a triggering "primary" explosive and a much more powerful "secondary" explosive, 2) compression of the secondary by X-rays coming from nuclear fission in the primary, a process called the "radiation implosion" of the secondary,.."

If an object is so hot as to radiate X-rays, it is also radiating all lower frequency radiation. That is it is radiating all frequencies of ultraviolet, all frequencies of visible light, all frequencies of infrared.... That is just the basic physics of thermal emission:

The graph at right says it all. The radiation extends to all higher wavelengths. Since frequency and wavelength are inversely proportional, all higher wavelengths translates to all lower frequencies.

Since all frequencies of visible light are emitted from a nuclear explosion, the color will be white. Nuclear explosions are also two explosions, a hydrodynamic explosion and a radiation explosion. The interaction of the two produces the characteristic "double flash" which is the hallmark of a nuclear explosion but was notably lacking at Fukushima:

While a "double flash" signal is characteristic of a nuclear weapons test, ...

The flash of the explosion at Fukushima was yellow. That means that the explosion was not hot enough to emit green, blue, indigo, and violet photons. This pegs the temperature of the explosion to a few thousand degrees which is what one expects of a chemical explosion where hydrogen gas is the fuel.

4) The CTBTO says the Fukushima explosion was a reactor accident.

The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO) in order to police the Comprehensive Treaty when it goes into effect, has to be able to tell the difference between the fallout from a nuclear explosion and a reactor accident. Otherwise, a nation could conduct an illegal nuclear test explosion, and when the fallout was tracked back to that nation, they could just claim to have had a reactor accident and hydrogen explosion that created the fallout.

Can the CTBTO tell the difference? YES!! The distribution of fission products in the fallout is dependent on the energy of the incident neutron causing the fission. Light water reactors like at Fukushima operate with slow or thermal neutrons. A nuclear explosion, by necessity, operates on fast neutrons. ( The length of time it takes to slow a neutron is longer than the explosion. So the neutrons used have to be fast; there's not enough time to slow the neutrons in a nuclear explosion. )

So a reactor accident will give one distribution of fission products, and a nuclear explosion will give another distribution of fission products. If you take ratios of the amounts of the different fission products, the ratio of any two will have one value for a reactor accident and another value if the fallout came from a nuclear explosion.

Shortly after the Fukushima accident, those here who claimed Unit 3 was a nuclear explosion said, "Just you wait until the CTBTO analyzes the fallout; they'll tell us it was a nuclear explosion".

Well the CTBTO has analyzed the fallout; and what did they say? Here is their own release:

Looking at the ratios between the various radioactive isotopes – in particular Caesium-137 – enables the source of the emission to be identified. In the case of the current readings, findings clearly indicate radionuclide releases from a damaged nuclear power plant, which is consistent with the recent accident at Fukushima in Japan.


So much for the hollow, vacuous claims that I'm lying from our anti-nuclear MORON.

Counter to the claims of the MORON, I do know my target audience. I expect the followers of a forum hosted by the Nuclear Engineering Dept. of UC-Berkeley to know their neutron physics, so that they will understand point 1. I also expect that they would know some hydrodynamics, and hence would be able to understand point 2. I also expect that they would know about thermal radiation, "blackbody radiation", and Planckian radiation and therefore can understand point 3. Finally, I expect that they would know about the differences in fallout produced by slow neutrons from a reactor vis-a-vis the fallout produced by the fast neutrons of a nuclear explosion.

The MORON doesn't understand any of that; so the MORON is completely clueless to the fact that I am reaching my target audience.

Go play on some political forum; you are over your head here, LOSER.

Fukushima MOX Load

The ACTUAL MOX load at FDU-3 is a matter of ... some contention.

See if you can google that internal MOX fuel percentage parameter debate up, in your Mom's Basement. Who said what, dipstick? The reactor may have been HOT Loaded.

The ATOMIC detonation at FDU-3 was rather widely witnessed, recorded and archived.

The fuel concentration, prior to meltdown, does NOT describe the mechanical state of the fuel, at the time of the Atomic Kah Aaaah BOOOOOOOM.

The PRESENT CONCERN at the now Open Air FDU-3, is the ongoing CHINA SYNDROME, not the earlier Atomic Blast.

Oh and it took a good deal more than a hydrogen deflagration in FDU-3, and a little piped in H2, to SHATTER FDU-4 and teeter-totter its massive Spent Fuel Pond.

ARGO, from the movie


You gawdamn ignorant piece of horse hoodaw.

Implosion is ONE of MANY useful weapon designs.

There are a countably INFINITE number of ways to achieve criticality.

Wikipedia ... get a gawdamn life ...

You stupid, vacuous, moronic, nescient, lying piece of equine excrement.

Few 6th graders would be convinced by your 'fund' of knowlege.

ARGO, from the movie

Still Waiting...

Still waiting on the answer to the challenge.

The above poster claims that there are a countable infinity of ways that nuclear weapons can be assembled, aside from the acknowledged TWO ways of the "gun method" as was employed in the Hiroshima device, and the "implosion method" as was employed by the Nagasaki device.

I ask that the poster above to cite JUST ONE of this countable infinity of ways nuclear weapons can be assembled that he claims.

Please tell us the method and the identity of the nuclear weapon that used that method.

We await your reply...

Nun Too Good

I shall pass.

Most any half-decent engineer can probably figure a LOT of ways to construct an operational fission device.

I decline to discuss such design parameters in a public, on-line forum.

The security of the Highly Enriched (weapon grade) USA nuclear security has recently proven to be Nun Too Good.

Countably Infinite

If you can't figure it out from that, then you should not be told.

And ... I ain't telling


I shall pass.

I KNEW it!! I told everyone here that the above poster would shirk at the challenge.

There's no national security threat. The basic design principles of nuclear weapons have been declassified; only the the design details ( blueprints, if you will ) remain classified.

I didn't ask for anything classified; that's just a feeble / lame excuse.

I wanted nothing more than saying the Hiroshima bomb was a gun assembly / the Nagasaki bomb was an implosion assembly! That information is declassified:

The design used the gun method to explosively force a hollow sub-critical mass of uranium-235 and a solid target cylinder together into a super-critical mass, initiating a nuclear chain reaction.

"Fat Man" was an implosion-type device using plutonium-239. A subcritical sphere of plutonium was placed in the center of a hollow sphere of high explosives.

This claim of classification is a farce for this nitwit to avoid owning up to his own claims. He made a claim and can't back it up.

In fact, this poster NEVER backs up his claims.

Too self-righteous to play by the rules of academic discourse.

Gundersen's contention

The whole folderol about Unit 3 being a "nuclear explosion" was started by that idiot Arnie Gundersen. In his video saying that Unit 3 was a nuclear explosion, Gundersen stated that the hydrogen released by the oxidation of the zirconium cladding by the coolant water acted as the high explosive does in a nuclear weapon in imploding the fuel.

Counter to the uninformed missives from our non-scientist anti-nuke above who claims that there is a countable infinity of ways to reach supercriticality; the number of methods used in nuclear weapons is NOT infinite. There have been precisely two methods devised for assembling a nuclear weapon; the "gun method" as used in the Hiroshima bomb, and the "implosion method" as used in the Nagasaki bomb.

Perhaps this uninformed nitwit would tell us specifically just ONE of the countably infinite ways of assembling a nuclear weapon that he knows about. Please tell us the assembly method and which nuclear weapon used that particular method.

Of course, the nitwit won't be able to give us any specifics; because he is just plain WRONG.

Compelling argument?????

So when all the self-serving, factually incorrect blather from the anti-nukes is answered and disposed of; we see below that the argument of the anti-nukes basically boils down to "..NPPs SUCK..".

Does that sound like a compelling argument?

Suppose we had someone who was anti-aviation. When all their self-serving, factually incorrect blather was dealt with, their argument boiled down to "...airliners SUCK.."

Well, is that a compelling argument. Am I going to call up Delta and cancel my Christmas travel plans because some idiot tells me "..airliners SUCK.."

The anti-nuclear argument is just as vacuous as the anti-aviation argument above.

You R as persistent as:

1) an IDIOT
2) Agents Provacateurs
3) an unauthorized person seeking a nuclear device design

Your repeated requests for a nuclear design are denied. Governments have their own. Nobody else needs one.

Everybody that has worked in the field, in any way, KNOWS the drill.

Go beg, whine, btch and complain elsewhere

OMG ... a PERSONAL Attack


You LOSERS have been disparaging ... virtually everybody since 3/11/11.

Well, you SUCK! Oh and you LIE like a Dog.

Your Double Standard SUCKS!

Your NPP products SUCK!

Welcome to YOUR WORLD, turned back ATCHA!



It is admittedly anecdotal; however EVERYONE that I know, over the age of 40, in Denver has experienced a bout of Cancer.

Could be those old WetEye bombs and heavy metals from mining and/or the Legal 'Herb'.

Or maybe the INTENSE radiation field and Radon/Radium have something to do with it.

There are a lot of cancer patients in Denver.

Just wondering, about 'The Denver Dose'.

Perhaps they could benefit from some shielding.

Must be some non-scientist law student

Again we have more vacuous platitudes about "legalities" and "law".

What we don't get from the idiot anti-nukes is anything about scientific fact.

That's understandable; since they can't deal with scientific facts because they don't support the case for the anti-nukes. All they have is their feeble claims of lies.

While juries determine "facts" for the legal system; they don't determine facts in science. Juries can, and have been, 100% WRONG.

Science doesn't vote, or use juries to determine truth. Mother Nature determines truth for us.

One can have all the judges and juries and the world vote, deliberate, and rule that the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is null and void; and what does that mean?


Mother Nature will continue to enforce the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics inspite of what self-righteous and self-important lawyers and juries say.

Likewise, with the physics surrounding radiaiton and its effects on human.

Mother Nature doesn't give a diddly damn about your juries.

It's not a game; it's science.

Answered Above ... Loser


Whilst you are ... stupid, and a terrible apologist for NPP(s). I could do a much better job, but then I would be LYING like you. And my heart would not be in it.

Or I could do it at the local Comedy Club. Those Dead Pan Deliveries of your pro-NPP drivel, just might bring the house down.

But it would not be a good idea to 'quit the day job'; as Mass Casualty Jokes are not very funny, even to drunks at the Comedy Club.

Maybe we will leave the jokes to Jon Stewart

Stupid people have a right to be WRONG!!

I have no problem in dealing with this. This is the USA where people have a right to their opinions. So I accept the following:

STUPID people have a Constitutional right to be WRONG

Facts are facts in science.

In science, we don't vote as to what is right or wrong.

In science, we have "someone" to tell us what is right and what is wrong.

That "someone" is Mother Nature.

Nescience and Nonsense

Nescience literally means No Science.

Nonsense is similar in meaning.

The procured pronouncements of John Boice are nescient nonsense.

By My Lights

Who the HELL are you?

Who are you to say what is nonsense or not?

You are just another vacuous anti-nuke wrapped up in your own self-importance and self-righteous; and telling the rest of us what is truth merely because YOU believe it.

Get over yourself. You are not that important.

The scientists here give references to scientific papers or to experts who have been acknowledged by the scientific community as experts. They don't speak for themselves. The scientific community speaks together.


This is an engineering blog.

We are having an informal chat.

Definition of CHAT

intransitive verb
1: chatter, prattle
2a : to talk in an informal or familiar manner b : to take part in an online discussion in a chat room

transitive verb
chiefly British : to talk to; especially : to talk lightly, glibly, or flirtatiously with —often used with up

Origin of CHAT
Middle English chatten, short for chatteren
First Known Use: 15th century

Oh and ...

ARGO ... from the movie

Yes - an engineering blog

Did you ever notice how the engineers back up what they say with scholarly cites?

The anti-nukes don't do that. They just make pronouncements that someone is lying, or "on the take", or whatever is the excuse du jour for discrediting the person.

However, they never post anything to back up their contentions. They expect everyone to just believe them without backing things up.

That's how engineers and scientists conduct blogs. They don't claim to be the trut prevaracators of truth, and require everyone to believe what they say just because they post it.

NO - they give evidence. They quote scientific papers. They quote the results and positions from scientific societies. They quote the testimony of acknowledged experts in the field.

Do you see the anti-nukes do that? NOPE!

Elaborate Lies

The NPP Shills merely string LIES together.

Kinda gets tiresome to read your mindless blather. Very stupid statements. They all begin to sound like that stringy haired lying blond, Ann Coulter. "RADS can be good for you", gawd, she is dumber than she looks. "It's not as bad as a banana, or a balloon trip."

That Ann Coulter is one brain-dead, walking-talking 'Dumb-Blond-Joke'. And the rest of you LOSERS are even worse. We KNOW she is just a lawyer, lying for her client; and probably gets paid more than you Lying Blogger types. The scrawny, lying-thing probably even gets invited to a few decent parties.

Brain Dead