Jump to content
G0ldfinger

Fukushima I: four reactors in trouble.

Recommended Posts

Looking at the damage done to the reactor housings, I cannot see how any of the control mechanisms can possibly have survived.

 

.......none of the official explanations make sense!

 

The reactors do not need any controlling since if they are shut down all they need is cooling.

 

Each reactor apparently has a pipe for fire fighting that they have been using to pump sea water in

 

I agree that at least one of the reactors could have blown up or at least blasted off the top of the reactor pressure vessel and then the containment vessel.

 

I agree hot pieces of fuel could be everywhere meaning comments about successful cooling pond water replenishment because steam was observed after pouring water could be total bullshit.

 

However latest video shows a much cleaner atmosphere around these sites. Earlier there was an alarming amount of haze and smoke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jake, is it true that there is (say, compared to Germany) almost no critical discussion about the risks and the need of nuclear power in Japan? Is it true, that people just have a "shoganai" kind of attitude?

I think most people don't have a clue about nuclear power or why we have to have it-peak oil- and no resources in Japan-no military power to maintain sea lanes, and no idea about how precarious a position Japan is in regarding food, imports, energy dependence, how actually despised the Japanese are in the world (asia anyway). To say that Japan has been living in a la la land of economic security, cultural superiority complex, US military security umbrella with an ineffable self belief that the show can go on ad infinitum whilst they play computer games, read manga, eat sushi and export stylish products to an everlasting pool of global consumers, would be very generally correct. Of course there are good sides too but most of them are rooted in the false starter that the last 60 years (of oil based gizmo life) can continue for the indefinite future. ie we can now make electric battery cars and energy saving products enabling us and the world to squeeze the last few drops of life out of the 'world we know' allowing the game to continue a little bit longer ('till I retire or die') and thus don't have to worry about it any more.

 

Now is this the event that will wake the Japanese up? Because, as I have said, when they make up their minds to change they do so wholeheartedly and as a group think. Look at before WWll and post war commitment for details. They are as committed as ants when they have to be...discipline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want good information about the status of the plant, just ask the French:

 

The French have a huge vested interest in down playing any safety concerns.

 

The nuclear industry is not going to be the most reliable information source for obvious reasons.

 

If the aging Japanese head of an international nuclear agency is not prepared to visit the area it tells you all you need to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I understand there is no cause (yet) to assume everything will burn up. I'm trying to gauge the worst case, and I prefer not to burden myself with having to first develop a "plausible scenario" for everything to burn. My non-scientific logic is quite simple: A whole lot of shit that "couldn't possibly go wrong" already has. I want to know what it would mean if Murphy prevails and everything else that possibly could go wrong does go wrong.

 

Might burn up....might not. Probably they are lying. Worry about the bigger picture, the one you can best prepare for:

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/all-mizuho-atms-japan-have-stopped-working

Read the comments below by CPL that refer to libor issues that will arise from this disaster.

 

DrBubb's thread about Chris Martenson's warning here. At least you have more control over the outcome....assuming you will heed the warnings. As Martenson states, hope is a poor strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think most people don't have a clue about nuclear power or why we have to have it-peak oil- and no resources in Japan-no military power to maintain sea lanes, and no idea about how precarious a position Japan is in regarding food, imports, energy dependence, how actually despised the Japanese are in the world (asia anyway). To say that Japan has been living in a la la land of economic security, cultural superiority complex, US military security umbrella with an ineffable self belief that the show can go on ad infinitum whilst they play computer games, read manga, eat sushi and export stylish products to an everlasting pool of global consumers, would be very generally correct. Of course there are good sides too but most of them are rooted in the false starter that the last 60 years (of oil based gizmo life) can continue for the indefinite future. ie we can now make electric battery cars and energy saving products enabling us and the world to squeeze the last few drops of life out of the 'world we know' allowing the game to continue a little bit longer ('till I retire or die') and thus don't have to worry about it any more.

 

Now is this the event that will wake the Japanese up? Because, as I have said, when they make up their minds to change they do so wholeheartedly and as a group think. Look at before WWll and post war commitment for details. They are as committed as ants when they have to be...discipline.

 

Jake

 

You obviously have strong views but you need to consider that the future of the world is not decided only by what you can imagine to be true. There could be other good futures that are not yet imagined by you. Other people might already be imagining these better possible futures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The French have a huge vested interest in down playing any safety concerns.

 

The nuclear industry is not going to be the most reliable information source for obvious reasons.

 

If the aging Japanese head of an international nuclear agency is not prepared to visit the area it tells you all you need to know.

 

You're welcome aak... Will it be worth bothering with the translation next time?

 

Have you even read it? It's not exactly rosy and clearly worse news that what is available from the general media.

The French nuclear experts also are pushing the incident to be classified from level 4 to level 5 or 6, which is not much into the way of positive promotion.

I don't think they (we) care about promoting or not. They don't export much and already are sorted in terms of nuclear energy production.

 

That's besides the point anyway. It's just some data I thought would be interesting, just take what you think is relevant.

 

Also, I'm not interested in an "being more right" competition, so, if some of you guys would like more updates from this source, please let me know. It takes me some time to do, so there's no point in spending time translating if it's not of interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jake

 

You obviously have strong views but you need to consider that the future of the world is not decided only by what you can imagine to be true. There could be other good futures that are not yet imagined by you. Other people might already be imagining these better possible futures.

True. But I think these 'better futures' are well into the future. In the meantime there will be ructions. Japan has a population of 127 million. This is way too many for the land to sustain by about 40 million, minimum. Japan will work hard, you can rely on that, to mitigate the immediate future shock. But there will be a fair amount of backpeddling imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Much of the newsflow last 48 hrs has focused on getting main grid power to the plant again, and centers on the message that what is most needed is electricity to run the coolant pumps, which we are led to believe/assume are still operable if only there were electricity.

 

I just don't buy this story. Could be media reporting it wrong, or could be disinformation from authorities - I have no idea which and I have no theory for why they might want to spread this information.

 

If the pumps are operable and all that's needed is electricity, the simple/obvious solution would be to airlift diesel gensets (and fuel) to the site, and direct-wire them to the pumps, bypassing any electrical switching gear that may have been damaged. Even if Japan's ability to source a working genset is compromised by the tsunami, U.S. military has plenty of them and has SOPs for air-lifting them into an emergency zone.

 

I'm not saying there's a hidden agenda or conspiracy. I'm just saying this story about how if we had power to the plants it would be all better just doesn't add up.

 

Erik

 

You are right, of course. It does not add up. This is just a time wasting exercise in 'doing everything we can' before admitting the obvious-it is out of control and there is nothing that can be done except pray the wind will blow out to sea. Trouble is it wont soon-those prevailing winds change direction soon and blow across Japan to the Japan sea as soon as the weather warms up. This happens year in year out. Ask people in Fukushima or the met office.

 

Burying the mess in concrete is how this will end up. Japanese love concrete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're welcome aak... Will it be worth bothering with the translation next time?

 

Have you even read it? It's not exactly rosy and clearly worse news that what is available from the general media.

The French nuclear experts also are pushing the incident to be classified from level 4 to level 5 or 6, which is not much into the way of positive promotion.

I don't think they (we) care about promoting or not. They don't export much and already are sorted in terms of nuclear energy production.

 

That's besides the point anyway. It's just some data I thought would be interesting, just take what you think is relevant.

 

Also, I'm not interested in an "being more right" competition, so, if some of you guys would like more updates from this source, please let me know. It takes me some time to do, so there's no point in spending time translating if it's not of interest.

 

I was greatful for the information and appreciated the effort you went to correct the translation which was more or less perfect. (Controls rooms being too radiant would be 'too radioactive')

 

The information fits to some degree with what the Japanese are saying - the japanese are saying the reactor cores are not hot and they have exact temperaturs of cores and suppression pools and have pumped in sea water to all reactors. So it helps build a picture if the pieces interlock - thanks. And i read every word as carefully as i could.

 

However because you said 'if we want good information just ask the french' it annoyed me a bit because the french blew up the rainbow warrior in Auckland harbour, where the french took a furck you attitude towards their own nuclear testing in the pacific while they lived it up in their beautiful country far away, and i lived in NZ for 15 years, still have a home there, and have dived to the wreck of the rainbow warrier which i have to say was a very moving event for me.

 

Your information and work was appreciated and will be appreciated in the future.

 

But what i said is still true of people who work in an industry where their living comes from continuation of that industry. All of these people are at least to some extent captive by realities and politics. For example are french officials on site?

 

Yes there was earlier comments from France about the obvious low hazard status of the reactors and fuel.

 

But we need to be careful about what we are being told and be honest - even if people get upset.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True. But I think these 'better futures' are well into the future. In the meantime there will be ructions. Japan has a population of 127 million. This is way too many for the land to sustain by about 40 million, minimum. Japan will work hard, you can rely on that, to mitigate the immediate future shock. But there will be a fair amount of backpeddling imo.

 

Well NZ is geologically similar to Japan and they want more people and Finland has a nuclear industry that is far from most centres and they have a technically literate population and they want more people.

 

Both my computers here have japanese parts - one is fujitsu siemens, the other is Toshiba. NZ is more or less full of older japanese cars from japan. Japan still has a mighty economic engine running.

 

No worries!

 

You can of course see the glass is half empty........Over population seems a big issue. But meanwhile you can live in plenty of places that are short of people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep hearing more and more people who seem like they ought to know what they are talking about saying there is no way this will ever be close to as bad as Chernobyl. "Not even close". Example: Jim Puplava's interview with Bill Powers, where Powers cites how hundreds upon hundreds of suicide workers had were lost, and "Not a single life has been lost to this event!".

 

I just plain don't get the logic. My understanding of the Chernobyl event is that most of the extreme sacrifice occurred when they had to go in and build a concrete "sarcophagus" over the remains of the plant, exlosing all the CLEAN UP AND CONTAINMENT workers to extreme radiation. Why would this be different? Clearly, the plant is already extremely radioactive, and will be much more so if the SFP inventory burns. Why would the inescapable need to bury the mess and seal in the radiation be any less hazardous to Japanese workers than to Ukranians? I suppose there is more potential to use robots and remotely controlled equipment to seal the thing in, but it's still going to be incredibly dangerous work.

 

Am I missing something here? It seems to me as a confessed non-expert like a lot of people who really ought to know better keep saying really, really stupid things. Am I the one who is being stupid and not seeing some fundamental difference between this and Chernobyl in terms of what it's going to take to contain it? Yes, I know there is no big fire YET, but I'm trying to understand the WORST case, and I see no reason to believe that possibility of a major fire has been ruled out.

 

Erik

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However because you said 'if we want good information just ask the french' it annoyed me a bit because the french blew up the rainbow warrior in Auckland harbour, where the french took a furck you attitude towards their own nuclear testing in the pacific while they lived it up in their beautiful country far away, and i lived in NZ for 15 years, still have a home there, and have dived to the wreck of the rainbow warrier which i have to say was a very moving event for me.

 

This was tongue in cheek, and obviously doesn't translate well down to writing.

 

I believe this is a better source of information than the Japanese officials, but that's just an opinion and that has no bearing on facts and expertise.

 

I believe I now understand why you reacted that way.

 

Only the way events actually unfold will allow us to (retrospectively) assess what the situation really is.

Even then, there will still be room for imagination to go wild unless one stands there and does assessment by oneself (which is, realistically, not going to happen to any of us)

 

Finally, reading the report, I believe no French official will want to go there as it's stated radiation levels are high ;) I know I wouldn't unless I had a binding reason to be exposed to radiations!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep hearing more and more people who seem like they ought to know what they are talking about saying there is no way this will ever be close to as bad as Chernobyl. "Not even close". Example: Jim Puplava's interview with Bill Powers, where Powers cites how hundreds upon hundreds of suicide workers had were lost, and "Not a single life has been lost to this event!".

 

I just plain don't get the logic. My understanding of the Chernobyl event is that most of the extreme sacrifice occurred when they had to go in and build a concrete "sarcophagus" over the remains of the plant, exlosing all the CLEAN UP AND CONTAINMENT workers to extreme radiation. Why would this be different? Clearly, the plant is already extremely radioactive, and will be much more so if the SFP inventory burns. Why would the inescapable need to bury the mess and seal in the radiation be any less hazardous to Japanese workers than to Ukranians? I suppose there is more potential to use robots and remotely controlled equipment to seal the thing in, but it's still going to be incredibly dangerous work.

 

Am I missing something here? It seems to me as a confessed non-expert like a lot of people who really ought to know better keep saying really, really stupid things. Am I the one who is being stupid and not seeing some fundamental difference between this and Chernobyl in terms of what it's going to take to contain it? Yes, I know there is no big fire YET, but I'm trying to understand the WORST case, and I see no reason to believe that possibility of a major fire has been ruled out.

 

Erik

 

My understanding in the logic to differentiating this event to chernobyl's is that no long lived isotopes are being emitted. They are byproducts of the injection of "dirty" water into the cores and have a half life of seconds to minutes which means it can't spread very far.

 

What happened in Chernobyl was that the core itself went boom and spread bits of fissile material all over the place. Now, that has a half life of millenia and did spread a very long way.

 

Some people in this forum argue that some reactors in Japan actually exploded like Chernobyl leaking fissile material dust (dirty bomb - style), unlike what official statements ... state :P

 

Hope this helps understanding the difference in statements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're welcome aak... Will it be worth bothering with the translation next time?

 

Have you even read it? It's not exactly rosy and clearly worse news that what is available from the general media.

The French nuclear experts also are pushing the incident to be classified from level 4 to level 5 or 6, which is not much into the way of positive promotion.

I don't think they (we) care about promoting or not. They don't export much and already are sorted in terms of nuclear energy production.

 

That's besides the point anyway. It's just some data I thought would be interesting, just take what you think is relevant.

 

Also, I'm not interested in an "being more right" competition, so, if some of you guys would like more updates from this source, please let me know. It takes me some time to do, so there's no point in spending time translating if it's not of interest.

i like your post and i am emailing to my friends this morning. keep the updates coming in that same format. i like it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep hearing more and more people who seem like they ought to know what they are talking about saying there is no way this will ever be close to as bad as Chernobyl. "Not even close". Example: Jim Puplava's interview with Bill Powers, where Powers cites how hundreds upon hundreds of suicide workers had were lost, and "Not a single life has been lost to this event!".

 

I just plain don't get the logic. My understanding of the Chernobyl event is that most of the extreme sacrifice occurred when they had to go in and build a concrete "sarcophagus" over the remains of the plant, exlosing all the CLEAN UP AND CONTAINMENT workers to extreme radiation. Why would this be different? Clearly, the plant is already extremely radioactive, and will be much more so if the SFP inventory burns. Why would the inescapable need to bury the mess and seal in the radiation be any less hazardous to Japanese workers than to Ukranians? I suppose there is more potential to use robots and remotely controlled equipment to seal the thing in, but it's still going to be incredibly dangerous work.

 

Am I missing something here? It seems to me as a confessed non-expert like a lot of people who really ought to know better keep saying really, really stupid things. Am I the one who is being stupid and not seeing some fundamental difference between this and Chernobyl in terms of what it's going to take to contain it? Yes, I know there is no big fire YET, but I'm trying to understand the WORST case, and I see no reason to believe that possibility of a major fire has been ruled out.

 

Erik

 

Many of the men and women risking their lives now in Japan will be dead in a month as were the heroic people who worked to make Chernobyl safe. Because there are these people things will get better.

 

The fuel containers can burn like the graphite core of Chernobyl burnt and the particles would enter the air.

 

But people are going to carry on sacrificing themselves to get this sorted out. It is just the way it is.

 

At Chernobyl as the crisis developed and the reactor had already exploded three men reportedly volunteered to dive into the cooling pond to operate a valve in darkness. Two died later. Many of the earlier firefighters died. For the Japanese this will be a fight for their home land, way of life and loved ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding in the logic to differentiating this event to chernobyl's is that no long lived isotopes are being emitted. They are byproducts of the injection of "dirty" water into the cores and have a half life of seconds to minutes which means it can't spread very far.

 

What happened in Chernobyl was that the core itself went boom and spread bits of fissile material all over the place. Now, that has a half life of millenia and did spread a very long way.

 

Some people in this forum argue that some reactors in Japan actually exploded like Chernobyl leaking fissile material dust (dirty bomb - style), unlike what official statements ... state :P

 

Hope this helps understanding the difference in statements.

 

You need to get up to speed with events.

 

1. The fuel cans contain gases and are not designed to be exposed to exstreme heat without being emmersed in water. Even in normal operation some of them fail due to stress fracturing. There are already substantial amounts of very long life highly radioactive materials going here and there.

 

2. The Chernobyl disaster was mainly due to exposure of the rods rather than the explosion itself. Once the hot rods were exposed to air the graphite all around then caught fire. In japan if the rods are exposed to air they can catch fire.

 

3. Officially there is a crack in at least one reactor pressure vessel secondary containment vessel so it is possible there was a small nuclear event or dirty bomb. The French or Japanese are telling us that 30% to 70% of the internal structure of the reactors is damaged and they have talked about re-criticality events being possible. Critical just means the reactor has a power surge as a minimum event.

 

4. the appearance of the number three reactor and the explosion we saw on video suggest something other than a simple hydrogen explosion - what that other thing is we do not yet know.

 

5. a major part of this disaster has nothing to do with the current reactor cores but the approximately 8? to 10? times reactor fuel that is in the cooling ponds. That can go critical or worse if the fuel is not arranged correctly and *if* there *is* water present - we saw the size of the explosions and do not know the conditions of the pools and fuel. If the water evaporates the zircalloy could be burning and it could be many times worse than chernobyl

 

Anyway since every university in America with a mass spectrometer will be sampling the air now already, we are going to find out at bit more later today as the particles arrive for their testing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At Chernobyl as the crisis developed and the reactor had already exploded three men reportedly volunteered to dive into the cooling pond to operate a valve in darkness. Two died later. Many of the earlier firefighters died. For the Japanese this will be a fight for their home land, way of life and loved ones.

 

 

The story of Chernobyl's firefighters is quite shocking as they had no idea what kind of fire they were attempting to douse.

 

It took a full day for the managers of the plant to alert the authorities of the actual extent of the damage and trigger the evacuation plan.

In the meantime those poor men got irradiated to death.

 

I also read that there was nearby a "sports day" happening and the kids could actually spot the "funny flame" from a distance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to get up to speed with events.

[...]

 

I'm aware of the facts and suppositions, thanks. I was just answering the general question and didn't think it was necessary to be pedantically correct so precise on all accounts.

 

Anyway since every university in America with a mass spectrometer will be sampling the air now already, we are going to find out at bit more later today as the particles arrive for their testing

 

Indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The story of Chernobyl's firefighters is quite shocking as they had no idea what kind of fire they were attempting to douse.

 

It took a full day for the managers of the plant to alert the authorities of the actual extent of the damage and trigger the evacuation plan.

In the meantime those poor men got irradiated to death.

 

I also read that there was nearby a "sports day" happening and the kids could actually spot the "funny flame" from a distance.

 

We are told that some of the firefighters picked up pieces of the reactor and some knew they were heading for something terrible but felt honour bound to go and do their duty.

 

The stories might be total bollocks for all i know but they seem plausible - which i suppose would be the best psy ops. :(

 

Plus ca change mon ami. Plus ca change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm aware of the facts and suppositions, thanks. I was just answering the general question and didn't think it was necessary to be pedantically correct so precise on all accounts.

 

 

 

Indeed.

 

ah. Sorry. Well that shows what my judgement is like! I totally missed that. It was a bit too subtle for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ah. Sorry. Well that shows what my judgement is like! I totally missed that. It was a bit too subtle for me.

 

Maybe I was harsh there, but I'm not unfortunately as rigorous as you are. I'm quite of the forgetful sort in fact:

 

If I was the nuclear plant manager, I'd certainly have come "Oh, shit, the cooling pools!" as well... (tongue in cheek!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i like your post and i am emailing to my friends this morning. keep the updates coming in that same format. i like it

 

I'll keep them coming when there's new ones then. Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From http://www.irsn.fr/FR/Actualites_presse/Actualites/Pages/20110317_simulation_dispersion_panache_radioactif.aspx

 

Take it as you will:

 

Simulations of atmospheric dispersion of the plume formed by the release of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, between March 12 and March 20, 2011

17/03/2011

 

1 - What are the known radioactive releases issued since March 12, 2011?

 

The IRSN has no direct information on the composition and extent of radioactive releases. It only has the interpretation of dose rate measurements on site and the likely scenarios of degradation of three reactors since March 12, assuming that these releases will continue until 20 March. The radioactive elements released during various episodes of rejection are rare gases (radioactive elements chemically unreactive, remaining in the atmosphere without being deposited on the ground) and volatile elements, mainly from radioactive iodine, including iodine-131 which has a half life of 8 days, and radioactive cesium, which is cesium 137. The proportions of the different radioactive elements takes into account general knowledge about nuclear reactors.

 

2 - The dispersion of radioactive releases into the atmosphere

 

IRSN simulated atmospheric dispersion of releases estimated between 12 and 20 March, using its numerical model applicable to long distance (scale of several hundred kilometers), using weather forecasts provided by Météo France .

 

This simulation was applied to the cesium 137, as a tracer of the plume during this period. The results of this simulation, conducted every hour from 12 March, are expressed in becquerels of cesium-137 per cubic meter of air (Bq / m 3). By comparison, values ​​measured near the Chernobyl plant, shortly after the accident on April 26, 1986, exceeded 100 000 Bq / m; they were in the range of 100-1000 Bq / m 3 in the country most affected by the plume (Ukraine, Belarus); France, values ​​measured in the east were the order of 1 to 10 Bq/m3 (May 1, 1986).

 

Today, a very low activity of cesium-137 remains in the air, on the order of 0.000001 Bq/m3.

 

Watch the simulation of the plume : http://www.irsn.fr/FR/popup/Pages/animation_dispersion_rejets_17mars.aspx

 

 

3 - Estimation of doses likely to be received by persons exposed to the radioactive plume

 

IRSN said the doses likely to be received by a person exposed to the radioactive plume, assuming it stays in one place and unprotected (outside) for the duration of discards (from March 12 to 20 ). For these dose calculations, the SNRIs considered a child of a year which is most sensitive to iodine 131 (thyroid dose). It is therefore prudent assumptions.

 

The following simulations show the evolution of doses over time, the simulation period. If no new discharges would occur in the future, these rates may increase further in the absence of protection for those most at risk.

 

- Whole body dose that may be received by a child of 1 year in the absence of protection from emissions

 

Watch the simulation : http://www.irsn.fr/FR/popup/Pages/animation_doses_corps_entiers_17mars.aspx

 

In case of accident, the dose values ​​from which protective actions are recommended are 10 mSv for sheltering in place and 50 mSv for evacuation. Below 10 mSv, the health risk is considered low enough not to make the necessary protective actions. For comparison, the average annual dose received in France due to natural radioactivity and medical exposure is 3.7 mSv.

 

 

- Thyroid doses that could be received by a child of 1 year in the absence of protection from emissions

 

Watch the simulation : http://www.irsn.fr/FR/popup/Pages/animation_doses_corps_thyroide_17mars.aspx

 

In case of accident, the dose values ​​from which the ingestion of stable iodine is recommended is 100 mSv in Japan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Tepco is itself reporting west gate readings of a humans safe annual in one hour 1.1km from the reactors?? Cant now find the text. In fact it was only 18 times background and is about 270 units now

 

The 1-4 reactor temperatures are unknown and i was earlier mixed up with the other set of 4 Fukushima reactors elsewhere which are in 'cold' shutdown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the VIEWING THE FUTURE thread (in the Fringe Section):

 

"Rainmaker" Kim Greenhouse has asked Lyn, the "psychic Remote Viewer" to apply his skills and talents to the problems in Japan arising from the Quake, Tsunami, and Nuclear meltdown.

 

Solving the Crisis in Japan Former guest Lyn Buchanan returns to discuss how controlled remote viewing can help Japan in this time of crisis...

 

Solving the Crisis in Japan

 

Lyn Buchanan - Interviewed by KIM GREENHOUSE on MARCH 16, 2011

 

MP3: http://media.blubrry.com/itsrainmakingtime/p/itsrainmakingtime.com/_radioshows/110316Buchanan.mp3

 

"It can be said that disasters and other crisis situations bring us to a place of greater receptivity. The more urgent and dire the crisis, the more quickly we should become receptive to new ways of doing things to expedite the delivery of needed solutions. Given the potential for worldwide radiation exposure (and associated health risks) due to the crisis situation at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, I was prompted to reach out to former guest Lyn Buchanan, the founder and executive of Problems Solutions Innovations to explore the potential for using controlled remote viewing to aid Japan in this time of crisis. A professional remote viewer for over 30 years and a controlled remote viewing teacher, Lyn Buchanan served in the military’s Psychic Spy Unit at the Stanford Research Institute. His story is documented in his book The Seventh Sense: The Secrets Of Remote Viewing As Told By A “Psychic Spy” For The U.S. Military. Our ultimate goal is to resolve the dangerous situation at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. If you feel called to help us in this humanitarian endeavor, we strongly encourage you to contact The Rainmaking Company as soon as possible at (626) 398-8652."

 

/source: http://itsrainmakingtime.com/2011/lynbuchanan2/

 

HERE's A COMMENT that I posted there:

Kim,

Your wonderful interviews are attracting a Global audience. I am based in Hong Kong, and my GEI forum has over 4,000 members who are mostly in the UK. But many others are in places like New Zealand and Japan.

 

I have mentioned your excellent interviews with Lyn and described then as “Must Listen” material.

Please continue to favor us all with your generous contributions to global understanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×