MSNBC: Latest news says Reactor disaster at Level 6 and could become a Level 7. (Chernobyl)

[Stinky The Clown]

Chris Jansing reported this, live from Japan, just a few minutes ago.

"It is very clear that we are at a level 6," ASN President Andre-Claude Lacoste told a news conference in Paris. "We are clearly in a catastrophe."

"This event is now closer to a level 6, and it may unfortunately reach a level 7," added David Albright, head of the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington, D.C.

At Three Mile Island, the radiation leak was held inside the containment shell — thick concrete armor around the reactor. The Chernobyl reactor had no shell and was also operational when the disaster struck. The Japanese reactors automatically shut down when the quake hit.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42084187/ns/world_news-asiapacific/

In related news, iodine is being given to US sailors on ship in the area.

[Arugula Latte]

1. How can a small, densely populated country like Japan endure a dead zone like that part of Ukraine?

It's unimaginable.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[northernlights]

3. it will all depend on which way the prevailing winds blow nt

[Rex]

5. That is worst case scenario. Not there yet and help has been offered.

Russia has offered them a place to live, temporary or permanent. Maybe it is time for those two nations to 'bury the hatchet' and start working together in ernest.

[LaPera]

4. We certainly are not getting the truth from Japanese corporate officials - So I have to assume

it's already at level 7......I see no reason to trust these fucks anymore than I trusted BP for the truth in the gulf or any greedy lying republican corporatist!

[Raschel]

12. I think many experts have said it's already at seven. CNN, FOX, and MSNBC have

had conflicting reports. I don't know if anyone knows what's up. I heard also that this is uncharted territory...

[dogday]

6. I believe it is potassium iodide that is being distributed for

radiation exposure.

[Stinky The Clown]

7. Yes, that's correct - potassium iodide as a radiation prophylaxis

[dogday]

9. Thanks

:hi:

[rdking647]

8. no chance of it becoming chernobyl

anyone with a clue and no agenda to push realizes that it can not become "like chernobyl" Its physically impossible

[cbdo2007]

10. Please explain.

For those of us who are ignorant on the nuclear subject, we don't know who to believe. The people saying it's bad but definitely won't get to *that* level or the people who think this will create a giant hole in the world where Japan use to be and we'll all suffer the fallout.

[rdking647]

11. chernobyl

the major reason is that the chernobyl plant used graphite to moderate the nuclear reaction. the mixture of graphite,uranium and water is know to be very volatile and not used the western reactors. hen the graphite was exposed to the air it ignited and teh resulting fire is what threw up massive amounts of radiation
chenobyl also didnt have the concrete/steel containment system that western reactors have so any explosion exposed the core to the . the japanese rectors have endured multiple explosions and the containment system has controled most of the radiation

[Raschel]

13. But, Japan stores their spent rods, which are more dangerous, uses Mox which is more dangerous, and

this is a natural disaster, unlike Chernobyl which was man-made and therefore more predictable. These are all things I've heard.

I really don't think anybody's too sure of anything right now.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[flamingdem]

18. MSM experts are reporting that meltddown is possible if container is breached

and it would result in a steam explosion and large amount of radioactive material being shot high into the atmosphere, and likely to spread long distances, that means USA included

[Hannah Bell]

14. just to clarify. the article says that is the opinion of a french nuclear official. it does

not say the accident *has* been classified level 6.

ines standards here, chart on p. 3

http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/INES-2009_web.pdf

[Raschel]

16. Yes it does. Classified as a six by France's ASN nuclear safety authority

"We are now in a situation that is different from yesterday's. It is very clear that we are at a level six, which is an intermediate level between what happened at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl," ASN President Andre-Claude Lacoste told a news conference in Paris on Tuesday.

"We are clearly in a catastrophe," Lacoste added, citing the deterioration of the containment structure at Daiichi 2 as one of the key elements supporting the ASN's more pessimistic assessment.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/15/japan-quake-nuclear-france-idUSLDE72E2M920110315

A US think tank believes it will reach seven.

[Hannah Bell]

17. no, it doesn't say that. it says that lacoste said "it is clear", not that

the agency issued any rating.

which it does not have the authority to do, btw.

the french nuclear agency isn't in charge of rating international nuclear incidents.

the national authorities of the country where the incident took place & the iaea do that.

he is voicing his view & possibly the view of his entire agency.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Nuclear_Event_Scale

Commonly, the organisation where the nuclear incident occurs assigns a first provisional INES rating to an incident, after it is being reviewed and possibly revised by the designated national radiation authority.

Fukushima I nuclear accidents, Japan, 2011; ongoing. Thousands of residents were evacuated after earthquake and tsunami caused loss of coolant. Hydrogen explosions later destroyed reactor buildings, and two reactors entered a state of partial meltdown after fuel rods were exposed to air. INES rating rating for this disaster was initially declared as Level 4, but after subsequent explosions, Andre-Claude Lacoste, president of France's nuclear safety authority, suggested that it is in fact Level 6. There has been no official rating from either Japanese officials or the IAEA.<13>.

[Raschel]

19. Yeah, it does say that. Headline: French nuclear agency now rates Japan accident at 6

They are a nuclear safety agency giving their assessment of the situation. I find that pretty weighty. It is being reported by every media outlet and not being disputed by any. It's not just the "opinion" of a sole person.

[Hannah Bell]

20. the headline is misleading. no "rating" has been issued. the french

nuclear authority has no authority to issue such a rating. the text of the article in fact does not say that the nuclear agency, or lacoste himself, issued a "rating".

the spokesperson for the french nuclear agency has issued his opinion. which is perhaps the opinion of his agency, though the article does not say that.

he had a similar opinion before the most recent events.

i agree he is not just any individual. nevertheless, no rating has been issued. that is a fact.