It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What "if" N. Korea nuke Fukushima, spent fuels has 85 times more cesium than released at Chernoby!

page: 2
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 01:13 PM
link   
NK wouldn't even have to nuke the place, just bombing the facility with a regular missile in the condition they are in would cause a big mess. If they knocked out the other nuclear plants ability to cool, it could also be a mess.

Technology makes us more vulnerable, not more secure.



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by amraks
Hope NK aren't reading this thread it might give them idea's

Not a good idea.




That's funny really funny ..


You think me or you have some knowledge what they don't have, lo0l ..

Sorry to say but you live in some-kind illusion, again I'm really really surprised ..

Maybe they don't have technology but believe me one things, human or personal knowledge don't come in some borders or continents also knowledge don't knows bounds ..

Very much people or nationality have extremity highly knowledge worldwide what transmitted through the generations ..

Also "never underestimate opponents", probably you never been a soldier ..
edit on 6-4-2013 by MariaLida because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by MariaLida
 


Anyway like I see you are missing mostly important information, here is one from today ..

Japan's Fukushima nuclear plant leaking contaminated water

TOKYO | Fri Apr 5, 2013 10:48pm EDT


(Reuters) - As much as 120 tons of radioactive water may have leaked from a storage tank at Japan's crippled Fukushima nuclear plant, contaminating the surrounding ground, Tokyo Electric Power Co said on Saturday. The power company has yet to discover the cause of the leak, detected on one of seven tanks that store water used to cool the plants reactors, a spokesman for the company, Masayuki Ono, said at a press briefing.

The company plans to pump 13,000 cubic meters of water remaining in the tank to other vessels over the next two weeks. Water from the leaking tank, which located 800 meters from the coast, is not expected to reach the sea, Kyodo news wire reported, earlier, citing unidentified officials from the utility. The company did not say how long the tank had been leaking.


www.reuters.com...



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by MariaLida
 


That is a very scary thought. But I think even a mad man would not use there valuable nuclear weapons on a plant that is already destroyed. I think a nuke hitting any nuclear power plant would be the same. There are lots of bigger ones to worry about.



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by d8track
reply to post by MariaLida
 


That is a very scary thought. But I think even a mad man would not use there valuable nuclear weapons on a plant that is already destroyed. I think a nuke hitting any nuclear power plant would be the same. There are lots of bigger ones to worry about.


Yes that's rally very scary thought ..

Also Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant is not destroyed, In the hours and days after EQ Reactors 1, 2 and 3 experienced full meltdown but greatest danger is spent fuel rods what lying there unprotected in spent pools and that will be similar in future ..

So that will be around of 100 times of radiation from Chernobyl or 200 times of present situation, you have more info in OP ..

Amount of nuclear fuel in reactors
Fukushima Daiichi, Chernobyl
1,600 tons , 180 tons




edit on 6-4-2013 by MariaLida because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by MariaLida
 


US Spent Nuclear Fuel Largest Concentration Of Radioactivity On Planet

Uploaded on Mar 27, 2011

Bob Alvaraz: US has 71,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel that is not properly protected




posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by MariaLida
 


this may be an incredibly stupid question but would the fuel(nuclear rods) be vaporized if hit with a nuclear weapon or would it add to the magnatude of the blast? nuclear stuff is a bit over my head on most things so i apologize if this is an outlandish question



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by MariaLida
 


Sorry but i dont think it would matter too much what NK do.Found this earlier scary stuff really!!!!

youtu.be...







posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by MariaLida
 


NOAA map shows massive temperature anomaly off the coast of Japan.

www.ncdc.noaa.gov...

www.ncdc.noaa.gov...




posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by MariaLida
 


Have you considered Chelation Therapy?

I have.

Check Out Line : en.wikipedia.org...


edit on 6-4-2013 by Wildmanimal because: typo



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by MariaLida

Originally posted by amraks
Hope NK aren't reading this thread it might give them idea's

Not a good idea.




That's funny really funny ..


You think me or you have some knowledge what they don't have, lo0l ..

Sorry to say but you live in some-kind illusion, again I'm really really surprised ..

Maybe they don't have technology but believe me one things, human or personal knowledge don't come in some borders or continents also knowledge don't knows bounds ..

Very much people or nationality have extremity highly knowledge worldwide what transmitted through the generations ..

Also "never underestimate opponents", probably you never been a soldier ..
edit on 6-4-2013 by MariaLida because: (no reason given)



I wasn't suggesting they wouldn't BUT what if they were that darn naive and not think of that idea.
I think we all live in illusion, we don't know whats going on.



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 10:13 PM
link   
Interesting theory. If the North Koreans were to launch a nuclear weapon at the stricken nuclear plant I see 2 scenarios...

1.) Massive release of radiation from the plant breaching reactor and fuel rod storage in reactor building 4,5,6 adding to the already dire situation.

2.)Depending on how close the weapon detonates to the nuclear material it could amplify the nuclear explosion. According to some estimates that is enough radioactive material there to build 65,000 nuclear weapons. Imagine the 1 North Korean nuke having the effect of detonating all of the planets nuclear weapons at once. That's on hell of a boom.

Scenario 1 seems more plasable, 2 not sure if physics are on my side for that scenario



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 10:45 PM
link   
reply to post by MariaLida
 


"What if" their missiles are destroyed 18 meters above the launchpads.
Need a further reply be Sub stantiated?

Again Diplomacy is failing here.

A Chinese Boycott would come in handy right about now.



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 11:50 PM
link   
reply to post by MariaLida
 


I love how your picture of missile ranges mislead the people by omission. Type 4 @ 6000 km range, on your list can easily reach Alaska. Type 5 on your list @ 10,000 km range, can easily reach anywhere from California to Texas.

They could really mess up Japan But I don't think they will do it - japan is way too close to them for fallout not to effect the whole of Korea.
edit on 6-4-2013 by JohnPhoenix because: sp



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by JustMike

And as for the comment by one member who said "what if NK reads this thread?" -- I mean, seriously. Neither NK nor any other govt has to resort to reading threads on conspiracy sites to work out what targets are in range of their weaponry and what would cause the greatest harm, both physically and psychologically. It is well-known that NK and Japan are no friends and so I would expect the NK military have long since analysed the Fukushima Dai-ichi disaster and considered if there is any way they could use it to their advantage.



I posted something similar after your post I'm quoting here.....erm....have you forgotten how to have a giggle every now and again Mike?

Just asking.
rainbows
Jane



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 08:20 AM
link   
Japan gov't orders SDF to shoot down any incoming N. Korea missile
TOKYO, April 7, Kyodo


Japanese Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera on Sunday ordered the Self-Defense Forces to prepare for the shooting down of North Korean ballistic missiles in the event that any are launched, government sources said.

"There is not a high possibility that a missile would target Japan, but we have determined we should prepare for any contingency," a source said.


english.kyodonews.jp...



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 05:42 AM
link   
reply to post by MariaLida
 


Never gunna happen..

NK can't hit the side of a barn at point blank range.



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 07:06 AM
link   
Won't happen for the simple reason that it would be considered a crime against humanity and not an act of war.



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 07:11 AM
link   
I dont believe NK guidance systems are sophisticated enough yet to pinpoint targets that closely. They more or less loft their missles torward targets. No presision guidance. Hitting a town accurateley would be their best currently.



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 12:08 AM
link   
Wouldent happen.

1: if they nuked the site, and released all the stored radiation in the fuel bundles. I don't care how big your jet stream is or how fast it moves or where it moves, you would see a global radioactive cloud. N Korea would be killing themselves slowly.

2: if they attacked the plant with nuclear or non nuclear weapons, I'm pretty sure a lot of counties are going to take notice and figure out that N Korea would look better as a big parking lot. I doubt they would care at that point, as most if not all counties are already dead due to the radioactive cloud and are now on borrowed time.

I doubt nuke bombing the site would vaporize the fuel bundles and I highly doubt it would set off a chain reaction. In fact I know it wouldent set off a chain reaction of the fuel bundles as,

A: they are spent
B: they are no longer enriched
C: I believe these reactors even with new fuel, do not contain weapons grade enriched uranium.




top topics



 
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join