Planet X Town Hall

Yowbarb - SURVIVING the CHANGES => Survival Shelter and Location Ideas => Topic started by: gagan on February 25, 2016, 02:18:34 AM

Title: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on February 25, 2016, 02:18:34 AM
Some VERY chilling advice from Major Ed Dames on choosing the right survival location:

http://www.rvcommunity.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=10828&sid=91b872f1b40876ea606eb7cf340dbfee

Ed Dames
RV Professional
RV Professional

Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:18 am
Posts: 4703
Location: Saint Petersburg, Russia & Shackleton Crater (provisional)
   
Post Re: Personal sanctuary clients (RV Geofix)
It is interesting to observe that very many notable bankers, oligarchs and 'elite' have already hunkered down in extremely fortified 'safe locations' -- protected (they believe) from perceived life-threatening exigencies on the immediate time horizon.

Interesting, also, (from an expert RV perspective) that most all of them are doomed to (prematurely) end their days in those 'logically survivable' locations. What a shame...

Nominally 80% of my personal sanctuary clients have already relocated. You 20 percenters need to, once more, reconsider the effects of infrastructure (and economic) collapse -- particularly grid down, nuclear radiation effects, martial law. There's still a little time remaining to decide, and act.

Major Doom

Norbert77
Ultimate User
Ultimate User
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 1:55 am
Posts: 484
   
Post Re: Personal sanctuary clients (RV Geofix)
-->>Pardon the side tracking, I once heard that radiation might make most, if not all of the northern hemisphere uninhabitable. Is that the case?

Ed Dames
RV Professional
RV Professional

Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:18 am
Posts: 4703
Location: Saint Petersburg, Russia & Shackleton Crater (provisional)
   
Post Re: Personal sanctuary clients (RV Geofix)

You haven't attended my closed-door presentations, my friend. The facts re. both marine and airborne rad plumes, present and future, are downright ugly. Add that to grid/infrastructure breakdown, and we're talking TEOL(OE)AWKI stuff. Sadly/grimly it's all real. Prepare/dig in…

Doom

Stay Safe!
Max
Title: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on February 25, 2016, 02:18:34 AM
Some VERY chilling advice from Major Ed Dames on choosing the right survival location:

http://www.rvcommunity.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=10828&sid=91b872f1b40876ea606eb7cf340dbfee

Ed Dames
RV Professional
RV Professional

Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:18 am
Posts: 4703
Location: Saint Petersburg, Russia & Shackleton Crater (provisional)
   
Post Re: Personal sanctuary clients (RV Geofix)
It is interesting to observe that very many notable bankers, oligarchs and 'elite' have already hunkered down in extremely fortified 'safe locations' -- protected (they believe) from perceived life-threatening exigencies on the immediate time horizon.

Interesting, also, (from an expert RV perspective) that most all of them are doomed to (prematurely) end their days in those 'logically survivable' locations. What a shame...

Nominally 80% of my personal sanctuary clients have already relocated. You 20 percenters need to, once more, reconsider the effects of infrastructure (and economic) collapse -- particularly grid down, nuclear radiation effects, martial law. There's still a little time remaining to decide, and act.

Major Doom

Norbert77
Ultimate User
Ultimate User
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 1:55 am
Posts: 484
   
Post Re: Personal sanctuary clients (RV Geofix)
-->>Pardon the side tracking, I once heard that radiation might make most, if not all of the northern hemisphere uninhabitable. Is that the case?

Ed Dames
RV Professional
RV Professional

Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:18 am
Posts: 4703
Location: Saint Petersburg, Russia & Shackleton Crater (provisional)
   
Post Re: Personal sanctuary clients (RV Geofix)

You haven't attended my closed-door presentations, my friend. The facts re. both marine and airborne rad plumes, present and future, are downright ugly. Add that to grid/infrastructure breakdown, and we're talking TEOL(OE)AWKI stuff. Sadly/grimly it's all real. Prepare/dig in…

Doom

Stay Safe!
Max
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on February 25, 2016, 02:19:37 PM
For those that would like some help in finding their “ultimate survival retreat”

Here is a word from Major Ed Dames regarding his recent 1-day crash course tour announcement:
 
"People are beginning to figure out that this is my FINAL workshop tour. I hope the very best to those that do not obtain their personal sanctuary locations by the end of 2016. Most of my team has already relocated, and are now using Remote Viewing to generate funds to store up supplies. I have spent years warning the world of not only what's coming, but also how to use RV to generate funds so there's absolutely no excuse to not be ready. With RV, a prosperous future is left to choice, not chance. For those that have not yet received RV training and a personal sanctuary location (not just a safe zone) then I hope to see you on the tour." - Major Ed Dames (US Army Intelligence Ret.)

http://www.survivingthekillshot.com

Max.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on February 25, 2016, 02:19:37 PM
For those that would like some help in finding their “ultimate survival retreat”

Here is a word from Major Ed Dames regarding his recent 1-day crash course tour announcement:
 
"People are beginning to figure out that this is my FINAL workshop tour. I hope the very best to those that do not obtain their personal sanctuary locations by the end of 2016. Most of my team has already relocated, and are now using Remote Viewing to generate funds to store up supplies. I have spent years warning the world of not only what's coming, but also how to use RV to generate funds so there's absolutely no excuse to not be ready. With RV, a prosperous future is left to choice, not chance. For those that have not yet received RV training and a personal sanctuary location (not just a safe zone) then I hope to see you on the tour." - Major Ed Dames (US Army Intelligence Ret.)

http://www.survivingthekillshot.com

Max.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on February 27, 2016, 03:26:13 AM
To gain a better appreciation of exactly what Major Dames is saying here that there will be MANY “Fukushim” type events around North America as the “Kill Shot” solar flare sequence takes down the power girds in North America and the spent fuel in all the reactor pools that are being cooled down lose their cooling power, melt down and are released into the atmosphere...  :o

To gain a better appreciate for what is so important here I highly recommend that anyone that seriously wants to find a good shelter location “invest” in a months subscription to CosttoCoast.am , down load the audio interviews from Major Dames from the last five years and listen to what he has to say.

Short of attending (as I have) one of his closed door seminars on finding a good survival location (away from the radiation plums released into the atmosphere due to power plant power failures). Below are some summaries of a couple past shows to give a bit of perspective of what he is talking about..

Stay safe,
Max.

Major Ed Dames show archive “Coast to Coast”

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/guest/dames-major-ed/5589


http://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2014/02/20


Nothing can compare to the problems we're facing from Fukushima radiation, he declared. The West Coast will have permanent damage, and Hawaii will be particularly hard hit by aerosol plumes. "Over the next few years, the marine concentration of radionuclides hitting the Hawaiian islands will render that paradise, not so much of a paradise anymore," he lamented. Dames has a bad feeling about 2014 and predicted that North Korea will fire a nuke, and there'll be wars, and economic collapse. The solar kill shot is also on the horizon in the next few years, he said, and a Planet X-like body that travels into the inner solar system every 11,500 years may be connected to it.

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2013/12/09

Living up to his nickname of "Dr. Doom," he foresees 2014 to be a dark time, when the mainstream media will no longer be able to cover-up the disastrous effects of Fukushima radiation which will begin to show up on the West Coast of North America. There are almost no sanctuaries in California, Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia as they will be hit by both airborne and marine radionuclide plume, "and they're going to continue to hit the coast for the next 100 years," unless there's some kind of intervention, possibly ET in nature, he indicated.

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2013/04/23


In the latter half of the program, remote viewing teacher, Ed Dames, talked about his predictions that North Korea would use a nuclear weapon in anger and how a global economic collapse would happen concurrently with a pandemic in the not too distant future. Dames claimed that his team has uncovered the "real plan" at work by the North Korean government. According to him, they have developed small nuclear devices which will be transported via submarine to be placed off the coast of US territories.

Despite this looming danger, Dames put forward that he is "far more concerned" with a global pandemic breaking out, concomitant with a worldwide economic collapse, and leading to a devastating solar flare hitting the planet.

. "Even Dr. Doom is beginning to get scared now," he mused, "and when Dr. Doom gets scared, that should be a red flag to a lot of people.”

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2012/03/15

Remote viewing teacher Ed Dames presented his latest insights and predictions on such subjects as 'Solar Killshot' safe havens, ongoing extraterrestrial intervention, the Fukushima disaster, and war with Iran. We're not going to be hit by just one mega solar flare, but a series of them over time (perhaps over a 1-2 year period), "that's going to turn Earth into a veritable X-ray & proton rotisserie," he said. Locations in the southern hemisphere, such as in Australia and Africa will have few survival zones, though Christchurch, New Zealand is one possible sanctuary, he said. If you aren't in a safe haven, then living underground to avoid the high winds and dark skies, is your best option, he added.


.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on February 27, 2016, 03:26:13 AM
To gain a better appreciation of exactly what Major Dames is saying here that there will be MANY “Fukushim” type events around North America as the “Kill Shot” solar flare sequence takes down the power girds in North America and the spent fuel in all the reactor pools that are being cooled down lose their cooling power, melt down and are released into the atmosphere...  :o

To gain a better appreciate for what is so important here I highly recommend that anyone that seriously wants to find a good shelter location “invest” in a months subscription to CosttoCoast.am , down load the audio interviews from Major Dames from the last five years and listen to what he has to say.

Short of attending (as I have) one of his closed door seminars on finding a good survival location (away from the radiation plums released into the atmosphere due to power plant power failures). Below are some summaries of a couple past shows to give a bit of perspective of what he is talking about..

Stay safe,
Max.

Major Ed Dames show archive “Coast to Coast”

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/guest/dames-major-ed/5589


http://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2014/02/20


Nothing can compare to the problems we're facing from Fukushima radiation, he declared. The West Coast will have permanent damage, and Hawaii will be particularly hard hit by aerosol plumes. "Over the next few years, the marine concentration of radionuclides hitting the Hawaiian islands will render that paradise, not so much of a paradise anymore," he lamented. Dames has a bad feeling about 2014 and predicted that North Korea will fire a nuke, and there'll be wars, and economic collapse. The solar kill shot is also on the horizon in the next few years, he said, and a Planet X-like body that travels into the inner solar system every 11,500 years may be connected to it.

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2013/12/09

Living up to his nickname of "Dr. Doom," he foresees 2014 to be a dark time, when the mainstream media will no longer be able to cover-up the disastrous effects of Fukushima radiation which will begin to show up on the West Coast of North America. There are almost no sanctuaries in California, Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia as they will be hit by both airborne and marine radionuclide plume, "and they're going to continue to hit the coast for the next 100 years," unless there's some kind of intervention, possibly ET in nature, he indicated.

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2013/04/23


In the latter half of the program, remote viewing teacher, Ed Dames, talked about his predictions that North Korea would use a nuclear weapon in anger and how a global economic collapse would happen concurrently with a pandemic in the not too distant future. Dames claimed that his team has uncovered the "real plan" at work by the North Korean government. According to him, they have developed small nuclear devices which will be transported via submarine to be placed off the coast of US territories.

Despite this looming danger, Dames put forward that he is "far more concerned" with a global pandemic breaking out, concomitant with a worldwide economic collapse, and leading to a devastating solar flare hitting the planet.

. "Even Dr. Doom is beginning to get scared now," he mused, "and when Dr. Doom gets scared, that should be a red flag to a lot of people.”

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2012/03/15

Remote viewing teacher Ed Dames presented his latest insights and predictions on such subjects as 'Solar Killshot' safe havens, ongoing extraterrestrial intervention, the Fukushima disaster, and war with Iran. We're not going to be hit by just one mega solar flare, but a series of them over time (perhaps over a 1-2 year period), "that's going to turn Earth into a veritable X-ray & proton rotisserie," he said. Locations in the southern hemisphere, such as in Australia and Africa will have few survival zones, though Christchurch, New Zealand is one possible sanctuary, he said. If you aren't in a safe haven, then living underground to avoid the high winds and dark skies, is your best option, he added.


.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on February 27, 2016, 03:49:00 AM
Here is a good article from “ENENEWS.com” that gives the details of the Fusushima radiatin’s effect on the West Coast of the United States (you won’t find this reported on CNN!) :'(

Max.

Study: Fukushima airborne plumes “caused significant deposition of radioactivity over North America” — Especially for West Coast and eastern U.S. — Around 13% of all radioactive iodine released into atmosphere was deposited over USA and Canada (MAP)

http://enenews.com/study-fukushima-airborne-plumes-caused-significant-deposition-radioactivity-north-america-especially-around-west-coast-eastern-around-13-all-radioactive-iodine-released-atmosphere-deposited-usa

European Commission, Science for Environment Policy News Alert (pdf): The 2011 nuclear accident at Fukushima, Japan, caused the release of large amounts of radionuclides (unstable atoms that produce radioactive emissions) to the atmosphere. Caesium and iodine radionuclides can negatively affect human health through the contamination of air, water, soil and agricultural products. The EU-funded study1 modelled the global spread of radionuclides of caesium and iodine from Fukushima in the atmosphere [...] or iodine radionuclides [...] meteorological conditions and convection promote more long-distance transport. This is because iodine does not dissolve as easily as caesium so it remains in a gaseous form and is redistributed by convection to the troposphere (lowest part of atmosphere) where the wind speed is greater and transports the iodine greater distances. The model results suggest that 12.7% of iodine radionuclides were deposited over the USA and Canada [...] Approximately 50-60% was deposited locally in Japan.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on February 27, 2016, 03:49:00 AM
Here is a good article from “ENENEWS.com” that gives the details of the Fusushima radiatin’s effect on the West Coast of the United States (you won’t find this reported on CNN!) :'(

Max.

Study: Fukushima airborne plumes “caused significant deposition of radioactivity over North America” — Especially for West Coast and eastern U.S. — Around 13% of all radioactive iodine released into atmosphere was deposited over USA and Canada (MAP)

http://enenews.com/study-fukushima-airborne-plumes-caused-significant-deposition-radioactivity-north-america-especially-around-west-coast-eastern-around-13-all-radioactive-iodine-released-atmosphere-deposited-usa

European Commission, Science for Environment Policy News Alert (pdf): The 2011 nuclear accident at Fukushima, Japan, caused the release of large amounts of radionuclides (unstable atoms that produce radioactive emissions) to the atmosphere. Caesium and iodine radionuclides can negatively affect human health through the contamination of air, water, soil and agricultural products. The EU-funded study1 modelled the global spread of radionuclides of caesium and iodine from Fukushima in the atmosphere [...] or iodine radionuclides [...] meteorological conditions and convection promote more long-distance transport. This is because iodine does not dissolve as easily as caesium so it remains in a gaseous form and is redistributed by convection to the troposphere (lowest part of atmosphere) where the wind speed is greater and transports the iodine greater distances. The model results suggest that 12.7% of iodine radionuclides were deposited over the USA and Canada [...] Approximately 50-60% was deposited locally in Japan.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on February 27, 2016, 05:53:13 PM
MadMax thanks so much for your  new Topic here.
I will be catching up, viewing the videos,
All The Best,
Yowbarb
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on February 27, 2016, 05:53:13 PM
MadMax thanks so much for your  new Topic here.
I will be catching up, viewing the videos,
All The Best,
Yowbarb
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on February 28, 2016, 04:34:56 AM
Morning Barb,

 Thank you for inviting me into the forum here LOTS of good stuff/information that I have just started to explore.

One of the things that I have not seen here (yet) is a good discussion of the importance of considering how close a potential survival location is to nuclear power plants and the possible effects of a “grid down” EMP/solar event.

Below is a good article that goes into good detail about this and how the government refuses to spend very little money to fix this potentially catastrophic problem..

Max.

NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS: The Very Real Possibility of A Global Nuclear Catastrophe

http://www.globalresearch.ca/nuclear-power-plants-the-very-real-possibility-of-a-global-nuclear-catastrophe/29951

The Government Spends Trillions On Unlikely Threats … But Won’t Spend a Billion Dollars to Prevent the Very Real Possibility of Global Nuclear Catastrophe

We’re Spending Money Combating the Wrong Dangers..

Studies show that people are worry about the wrong things.

We are terrified of things that will probably never happen, and underestimate the real dangers which face us.

NASA scientists are predicting that a solar storm will knock out most of the electrical power grid in many countries worldwide, perhaps for months… 

Indeed, the Earth’s magnetic field protects us from the sun’s most violent radiation, and yet the magnetic field fluctuates over time. As the Telegraph reported in 2008:

Large hole in magnetic field that protects Earth from sun’s rays … Recent satellite observations have revealed the largest breach yet seen in the magnetic field that protects Earth from most of the sun’s violent blasts.


What would happen to nuclear power plants world wide if their power – and most of the surrounding modern infrastructure – is knocked out?

Nuclear power companies are notoriously cheap in trying to cut costs. If they are failing to harden their electrical components to protect against the predicted solar storm, they are asking for trouble … perhaps on a scale that dwarfs Fukushima. Because while Fukushima is the first nuclear accident to involve multiple reactors within the same complex, a large solar storm could cause accidents at multiple complexes in numerous countries.

If the nuclear power companies and governments continue to cut costs and take large gambles, the next nuclear accident could make Fukushima look tame.

The head of the leading consulting firm on the effect of electromagnetic disruptions on our power grid – which was commissioned to study the issue by the U.S. federal government – stated that it would be relatively inexpensive to reduce the vulnerability of our power grid:

What we’re proposing is to add some fairly small and inexpensive resistors in the transformers’ ground connections. The addition of that little bit of resistance would significantly reduce the amount of the geomagnetically induced currents that flow into the grid.

Mechanical engineer Matthew Stein does a good job of reporting on this issue today:

There are nearly 450 nuclear reactors in the world, with hundreds more being planned or under construction…. Imagine what havoc it would wreak on our civilization and the planet’s ecosystems if we were to suddenly witness not just one or two nuclear meltdowns, but 400 or more! How likely is it that our world might experience an event that could ultimately cause hundreds of reactors to fail and melt down at approximately the same time? I venture to say that, unless we take significant protective measures, this apocalyptic scenario is not only possible, but probable.

In the past 152 years, Earth has been struck by roughly 100 solar storms, causing significant geomagnetic disturbances (GMD), two of which were powerful enough to rank as “extreme GMDs.” If an extreme GMD of such magnitude were to occur today, in all likelihood, it would initiate a chain of events leading to catastrophic failures at the vast majority of our world’s nuclear reactors, similar to but over 100 times worse than, the disasters at both Chernobyl and Fukushima.

Unfortunately, the world’s nuclear power plants, as they are currently designed, are critically dependent upon maintaining connection to a functioning electrical grid, for all but relatively short periods of electrical blackouts, in order to keep their reactor cores continuously cooled so as to avoid catastrophic reactor core meltdowns and fires in storage ponds for spent fuel rods.


If an extreme GMD were to cause widespread grid collapse (which it most certainly will), in as little as one or two hours after each nuclear reactor facility’s backup generators either fail to start, or run out of fuel, the reactor cores will start to melt down. After a few days without electricity to run the cooling system pumps, the water bath covering the spent fuel rods stored in “spent-fuel ponds” will boil away, allowing the stored fuel rods to melt down and burn[2]. Since the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) currently mandates that only one week’s supply of backup generator fuel needs to be stored at each reactor site, it is likely that, after we witness the spectacular nighttime celestial light show from the next extreme GMD, we will have about one week in which to prepare ourselves for Armageddon.

To do nothing is to behave like ostriches with our heads in the sand, blindly believing that “everything will be okay” as our world drifts towards the next natural, inevitable super solar storm and resultant extreme GMD.

–>>  Such a storm would end the industrialized world as we know it, creating almost incalculable suffering, death and environmental destruction on a scale not seen since the extinction of the dinosaurs some 65 million years ago. :o

In the event of an extreme GMD-induced long-term grid collapse covering much of the globe, if just half of the world’s spent fuel ponds were to boil off their water and become radioactive, zirconium-fed infernos, the ensuing contamination could far exceed the cumulative effect of 400 Chernobyls.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on February 28, 2016, 04:34:56 AM
Morning Barb,

 Thank you for inviting me into the forum here LOTS of good stuff/information that I have just started to explore.

One of the things that I have not seen here (yet) is a good discussion of the importance of considering how close a potential survival location is to nuclear power plants and the possible effects of a “grid down” EMP/solar event.

Below is a good article that goes into good detail about this and how the government refuses to spend very little money to fix this potentially catastrophic problem..

Max.

NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS: The Very Real Possibility of A Global Nuclear Catastrophe

http://www.globalresearch.ca/nuclear-power-plants-the-very-real-possibility-of-a-global-nuclear-catastrophe/29951

The Government Spends Trillions On Unlikely Threats … But Won’t Spend a Billion Dollars to Prevent the Very Real Possibility of Global Nuclear Catastrophe

We’re Spending Money Combating the Wrong Dangers..

Studies show that people are worry about the wrong things.

We are terrified of things that will probably never happen, and underestimate the real dangers which face us.

NASA scientists are predicting that a solar storm will knock out most of the electrical power grid in many countries worldwide, perhaps for months… 

Indeed, the Earth’s magnetic field protects us from the sun’s most violent radiation, and yet the magnetic field fluctuates over time. As the Telegraph reported in 2008:

Large hole in magnetic field that protects Earth from sun’s rays … Recent satellite observations have revealed the largest breach yet seen in the magnetic field that protects Earth from most of the sun’s violent blasts.


What would happen to nuclear power plants world wide if their power – and most of the surrounding modern infrastructure – is knocked out?

Nuclear power companies are notoriously cheap in trying to cut costs. If they are failing to harden their electrical components to protect against the predicted solar storm, they are asking for trouble … perhaps on a scale that dwarfs Fukushima. Because while Fukushima is the first nuclear accident to involve multiple reactors within the same complex, a large solar storm could cause accidents at multiple complexes in numerous countries.

If the nuclear power companies and governments continue to cut costs and take large gambles, the next nuclear accident could make Fukushima look tame.

The head of the leading consulting firm on the effect of electromagnetic disruptions on our power grid – which was commissioned to study the issue by the U.S. federal government – stated that it would be relatively inexpensive to reduce the vulnerability of our power grid:

What we’re proposing is to add some fairly small and inexpensive resistors in the transformers’ ground connections. The addition of that little bit of resistance would significantly reduce the amount of the geomagnetically induced currents that flow into the grid.

Mechanical engineer Matthew Stein does a good job of reporting on this issue today:

There are nearly 450 nuclear reactors in the world, with hundreds more being planned or under construction…. Imagine what havoc it would wreak on our civilization and the planet’s ecosystems if we were to suddenly witness not just one or two nuclear meltdowns, but 400 or more! How likely is it that our world might experience an event that could ultimately cause hundreds of reactors to fail and melt down at approximately the same time? I venture to say that, unless we take significant protective measures, this apocalyptic scenario is not only possible, but probable.

In the past 152 years, Earth has been struck by roughly 100 solar storms, causing significant geomagnetic disturbances (GMD), two of which were powerful enough to rank as “extreme GMDs.” If an extreme GMD of such magnitude were to occur today, in all likelihood, it would initiate a chain of events leading to catastrophic failures at the vast majority of our world’s nuclear reactors, similar to but over 100 times worse than, the disasters at both Chernobyl and Fukushima.

Unfortunately, the world’s nuclear power plants, as they are currently designed, are critically dependent upon maintaining connection to a functioning electrical grid, for all but relatively short periods of electrical blackouts, in order to keep their reactor cores continuously cooled so as to avoid catastrophic reactor core meltdowns and fires in storage ponds for spent fuel rods.


If an extreme GMD were to cause widespread grid collapse (which it most certainly will), in as little as one or two hours after each nuclear reactor facility’s backup generators either fail to start, or run out of fuel, the reactor cores will start to melt down. After a few days without electricity to run the cooling system pumps, the water bath covering the spent fuel rods stored in “spent-fuel ponds” will boil away, allowing the stored fuel rods to melt down and burn[2]. Since the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) currently mandates that only one week’s supply of backup generator fuel needs to be stored at each reactor site, it is likely that, after we witness the spectacular nighttime celestial light show from the next extreme GMD, we will have about one week in which to prepare ourselves for Armageddon.

To do nothing is to behave like ostriches with our heads in the sand, blindly believing that “everything will be okay” as our world drifts towards the next natural, inevitable super solar storm and resultant extreme GMD.

–>>  Such a storm would end the industrialized world as we know it, creating almost incalculable suffering, death and environmental destruction on a scale not seen since the extinction of the dinosaurs some 65 million years ago. :o

In the event of an extreme GMD-induced long-term grid collapse covering much of the globe, if just half of the world’s spent fuel ponds were to boil off their water and become radioactive, zirconium-fed infernos, the ensuing contamination could far exceed the cumulative effect of 400 Chernobyls.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on February 28, 2016, 07:47:34 AM
Here is an article from the NASA Science website (its not just us “tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy types” that are thinking about this VERY real threat..

Max.

Solar Shield--Protecting the North American Power Grid

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2010/26oct_solarshield/

Every hundred years or so, a solar storm comes along so potent it fills the skies of Earth with blood-red auroras, makes compass needles point in the wrong direction, and sends electric currents coursing through the planet's topsoil. The most famous such storm, the Carrington Event of 1859, actually shocked telegraph operators and set some of their offices on fire. A 2008 report by the National Academy of Sciences warns that if such a storm occurred today, we could experience widespread power blackouts with permanent damage to many key transformers.

Every hundred years or so, a solar storm comes along so potent it fills the skies of Earth with blood-red auroras, makes compass needles point in the wrong direction, and sends electric currents coursing through the planet's topsoil. The most famous such storm, the Carrington Event of 1859, actually shocked telegraph operators and set some of their offices on fire. A 2008 report by the National Academy of Sciences warns that if such a storm occurred today, we could experience widespread power blackouts with permanent damage to many key transformers

A large-scale blackout could last a long time, mainly due to transformer damage. As the National Academy report notes, "these multi-ton apparatus cannot be repaired in the field, and if damaged in this manner they need to be replaced with new units which have lead times of 12 months or more.”

.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on February 28, 2016, 07:47:34 AM
Here is an article from the NASA Science website (its not just us “tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy types” that are thinking about this VERY real threat..

Max.

Solar Shield--Protecting the North American Power Grid

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2010/26oct_solarshield/

Every hundred years or so, a solar storm comes along so potent it fills the skies of Earth with blood-red auroras, makes compass needles point in the wrong direction, and sends electric currents coursing through the planet's topsoil. The most famous such storm, the Carrington Event of 1859, actually shocked telegraph operators and set some of their offices on fire. A 2008 report by the National Academy of Sciences warns that if such a storm occurred today, we could experience widespread power blackouts with permanent damage to many key transformers.

Every hundred years or so, a solar storm comes along so potent it fills the skies of Earth with blood-red auroras, makes compass needles point in the wrong direction, and sends electric currents coursing through the planet's topsoil. The most famous such storm, the Carrington Event of 1859, actually shocked telegraph operators and set some of their offices on fire. A 2008 report by the National Academy of Sciences warns that if such a storm occurred today, we could experience widespread power blackouts with permanent damage to many key transformers

A large-scale blackout could last a long time, mainly due to transformer damage. As the National Academy report notes, "these multi-ton apparatus cannot be repaired in the field, and if damaged in this manner they need to be replaced with new units which have lead times of 12 months or more.”

.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on February 28, 2016, 03:44:25 PM
Wow, MadMax, and thanks so much for posting all this stuff, links and all, and now I'm like Yowbarb with LOTS of reading and viewing to do.  Much to ponder.
Thanks again.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on February 28, 2016, 03:44:25 PM
Wow, MadMax, and thanks so much for posting all this stuff, links and all, and now I'm like Yowbarb with LOTS of reading and viewing to do.  Much to ponder.
Thanks again.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on February 29, 2016, 03:57:02 PM
The closest nuclear power plant to me is over 200 miles away.  But this plant is only a few miles from my brother and his family.  When I asked once what would they do if it had a meltdown, my sister-in-law said they have iodine tablets, which are expired, but they'll just take them anyway.  I wish they didn't have such a casual approach to what may be real threat.  This plant is one of those over 30 years old and has cracks in the towers.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on February 29, 2016, 03:57:02 PM
The closest nuclear power plant to me is over 200 miles away.  But this plant is only a few miles from my brother and his family.  When I asked once what would they do if it had a meltdown, my sister-in-law said they have iodine tablets, which are expired, but they'll just take them anyway.  I wish they didn't have such a casual approach to what may be real threat.  This plant is one of those over 30 years old and has cracks in the towers.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on March 01, 2016, 02:26:35 PM
For the “skeptics” on the forum that think ALL we have to worry about is the coming economic collapse and finding a nice “out of the way” place to ride out the collapse as major metropolitan areas descend into chaos as the food supply runs out..

Here is a modern day example from 1989 Ontario Canada and what happened when an X15 Solar Storm headed toward planet earth:

The Day the Sun Brought Darkness

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/sun_darkness.html


On March 13, 1989 the entire province of Quebec, Canada suffered an electrical power blackout. Hundreds of blackouts occur in some part of North America every year. The Quebec Blackout was different, because this one was caused by a solar storm!

On Friday March 10, 1989 astronomers witnessed a powerful explosion on the sun. Within minutes, tangled magnetic forces on the sun had released a billion-ton cloud of gas. It was like the energy of thousands of nuclear bombs exploding at the same time. The storm cloud rushed out from the sun, straight towards Earth, at a million miles an hour. The solar flare that accompanied the outburst immediately caused short-wave radio interference, including the jamming of radio signals from Radio Free Europe into Russia. It was thought that the signals had been jammed by the Kremlin, but it was only the sun acting up!


On the evening of Monday, March 12 the vast cloud of solar plasma (a gas of electrically charged particles) finally struck Earth's magnetic field. The violence of this 'geomagnetic storm' caused spectacular 'northern lights' that could be seen as far south as Florida and Cuba. The magnetic disturbance was incredibly intense. It actually created electrical currents in the ground beneath much of North America. Just after 2:44 a.m. on March 13, the currents found a weakness in the electrical power grid of Quebec. In less than 2 minutes, the entire Quebec power grid lost power. During the 12-hour blackout that followed, millions of people suddenly found themselves in dark office buildings and underground pedestrian tunnels, and in stalled elevators. Most people woke up to cold homes for breakfast. The blackout also closed schools and businesses, kept the Montreal Metro shut during the morning rush hour, and closed Dorval Airport.

The Quebec Blackout was by no means a local event. Some of the U.S. electrical utilities had their own cliffhanger problems to deal with. New York Power lost 150 megawatts the moment the Quebec power grid went down. The New England Power Pool lost 1,410 megawatts at about the same time. Service to 96 electrical utilities in New England was interrupted while other reserves of electrical power were brought online. Luckily, the U.S. had the power to spare at the time…but just barely. Across the United States from coast to coast, over 200 power grid problems erupted within minutes of the start of the March 13 storm. Fortunately none of these caused a blackout.


March 1989 geomagnetic storm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1989_geomagnetic_stom


A severe geomagnetic storm struck Earth on March 13, 1989. It occurred during solar cycle 22 and caused a nine-hour outage of Hydro-Québec's electricity transmission system.

The geomagnetic storm causing this event was itself the result of a coronal mass ejection on March 9, 1989.[1] A few days before, on March 6, a very large X15-class solar flare also occurred.[2] Three and a half days later, at 2:44 am EST on March 13, a severe geomagnetic storm struck Earth.[3][4] The storm began on Earth with extremely intense auroras at the poles. The aurora could be seen as far south as Texas and Florida.[5] As this occurred during the Cold War, an unknown number of people worried that a nuclear first-strike might be in progress.[5] Others incorrectly considered the intense auroras to be associated with the Space Shuttle mission STS-29, which had been launched on March 13 at 9:57:00 AM.[6] The burst caused short-wave radio interference, including the disruption of radio signals from Radio Free Europe into Russia. It was initially believed that the signals had been jammed by the Soviet government.

As midnight came and went, a river of charged particles and electrons in the ionosphere flowed from west to east, inducing powerful electrical currents in the ground that surged into many natural nooks and crannies.[5]

Some satellites in polar orbits lost control for several hours. GOES weather satellite communications were interrupted, causing weather images to be lost. NASA's TDRS-1 communication satellite recorded over 250 anomalies caused by the increased particles flowing into its sensitive electronics.[5] The Space Shuttle Discovery was having its own problems: a sensor on one of the tanks supplying hydrogen to a fuel cell was showing unusually high pressure readings on March 13. The problem went away after the solar storm subsided.


A Scary 13th: 20 Years Ago, Earth Was Blasted with a Massive Plume of Solar Plasma!

Violent space weather treated many to a fantastic display of colorful auroras, but damaged power grids left six million Canadians in the dark

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/geomagnetic-storm-march-13-1989-extreme-space-weather/

On March 10, 1989, a CME about the size of 36 Earths erupted from the sun's roiling surface and ripped through space at a million miles (1.6 million kilometers) per hour. Two days later, the torrid gas cloud crashed against Earth's magnetosphere—the magnetic field generated by the planet's spinning molten iron core that helps deflect the solar wind and more potent solar jetsam. This blast from the sun severely disrupted the magnetosphere and set off a geomagnetic superstorm.


But the event of March 13 (the date fell on a Monday that year) was no mere breath of solar wind or a flare that kindled a transient, flickering light show. Undulating, multicolored auroras spread as far south as Texas and Cuba, and a red glow appeared in the night sky over most of the world. Some startled people who had never seen an aurora before even feared that nuclear war had broken out, Odenwald recounts.

Most significantly, at about 2:45 A.M. local time on Monday, March 13, Canada's Hydro-Québec power utility's grid crashed when safety systems sensed a power overload caused by the currents pulsing through the ground. The failure knocked out electricity to six million people in northeastern Canada for as long as nine hours—the biggest outage ever caused by a geomagnetic storm.


The “locals” I am sure will soon gather express their “gratitude” to utility officials for being so cheap not to spend a few $$ to provide protection for our power distribution system.  Pitchforks and torches are being readied!!

Max.


Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on March 01, 2016, 02:26:35 PM
For the “skeptics” on the forum that think ALL we have to worry about is the coming economic collapse and finding a nice “out of the way” place to ride out the collapse as major metropolitan areas descend into chaos as the food supply runs out..

Here is a modern day example from 1989 Ontario Canada and what happened when an X15 Solar Storm headed toward planet earth:

The Day the Sun Brought Darkness

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/sun_darkness.html


On March 13, 1989 the entire province of Quebec, Canada suffered an electrical power blackout. Hundreds of blackouts occur in some part of North America every year. The Quebec Blackout was different, because this one was caused by a solar storm!

On Friday March 10, 1989 astronomers witnessed a powerful explosion on the sun. Within minutes, tangled magnetic forces on the sun had released a billion-ton cloud of gas. It was like the energy of thousands of nuclear bombs exploding at the same time. The storm cloud rushed out from the sun, straight towards Earth, at a million miles an hour. The solar flare that accompanied the outburst immediately caused short-wave radio interference, including the jamming of radio signals from Radio Free Europe into Russia. It was thought that the signals had been jammed by the Kremlin, but it was only the sun acting up!


On the evening of Monday, March 12 the vast cloud of solar plasma (a gas of electrically charged particles) finally struck Earth's magnetic field. The violence of this 'geomagnetic storm' caused spectacular 'northern lights' that could be seen as far south as Florida and Cuba. The magnetic disturbance was incredibly intense. It actually created electrical currents in the ground beneath much of North America. Just after 2:44 a.m. on March 13, the currents found a weakness in the electrical power grid of Quebec. In less than 2 minutes, the entire Quebec power grid lost power. During the 12-hour blackout that followed, millions of people suddenly found themselves in dark office buildings and underground pedestrian tunnels, and in stalled elevators. Most people woke up to cold homes for breakfast. The blackout also closed schools and businesses, kept the Montreal Metro shut during the morning rush hour, and closed Dorval Airport.

The Quebec Blackout was by no means a local event. Some of the U.S. electrical utilities had their own cliffhanger problems to deal with. New York Power lost 150 megawatts the moment the Quebec power grid went down. The New England Power Pool lost 1,410 megawatts at about the same time. Service to 96 electrical utilities in New England was interrupted while other reserves of electrical power were brought online. Luckily, the U.S. had the power to spare at the time…but just barely. Across the United States from coast to coast, over 200 power grid problems erupted within minutes of the start of the March 13 storm. Fortunately none of these caused a blackout.


March 1989 geomagnetic storm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1989_geomagnetic_stom


A severe geomagnetic storm struck Earth on March 13, 1989. It occurred during solar cycle 22 and caused a nine-hour outage of Hydro-Québec's electricity transmission system.

The geomagnetic storm causing this event was itself the result of a coronal mass ejection on March 9, 1989.[1] A few days before, on March 6, a very large X15-class solar flare also occurred.[2] Three and a half days later, at 2:44 am EST on March 13, a severe geomagnetic storm struck Earth.[3][4] The storm began on Earth with extremely intense auroras at the poles. The aurora could be seen as far south as Texas and Florida.[5] As this occurred during the Cold War, an unknown number of people worried that a nuclear first-strike might be in progress.[5] Others incorrectly considered the intense auroras to be associated with the Space Shuttle mission STS-29, which had been launched on March 13 at 9:57:00 AM.[6] The burst caused short-wave radio interference, including the disruption of radio signals from Radio Free Europe into Russia. It was initially believed that the signals had been jammed by the Soviet government.

As midnight came and went, a river of charged particles and electrons in the ionosphere flowed from west to east, inducing powerful electrical currents in the ground that surged into many natural nooks and crannies.[5]

Some satellites in polar orbits lost control for several hours. GOES weather satellite communications were interrupted, causing weather images to be lost. NASA's TDRS-1 communication satellite recorded over 250 anomalies caused by the increased particles flowing into its sensitive electronics.[5] The Space Shuttle Discovery was having its own problems: a sensor on one of the tanks supplying hydrogen to a fuel cell was showing unusually high pressure readings on March 13. The problem went away after the solar storm subsided.


A Scary 13th: 20 Years Ago, Earth Was Blasted with a Massive Plume of Solar Plasma!

Violent space weather treated many to a fantastic display of colorful auroras, but damaged power grids left six million Canadians in the dark

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/geomagnetic-storm-march-13-1989-extreme-space-weather/

On March 10, 1989, a CME about the size of 36 Earths erupted from the sun's roiling surface and ripped through space at a million miles (1.6 million kilometers) per hour. Two days later, the torrid gas cloud crashed against Earth's magnetosphere—the magnetic field generated by the planet's spinning molten iron core that helps deflect the solar wind and more potent solar jetsam. This blast from the sun severely disrupted the magnetosphere and set off a geomagnetic superstorm.


But the event of March 13 (the date fell on a Monday that year) was no mere breath of solar wind or a flare that kindled a transient, flickering light show. Undulating, multicolored auroras spread as far south as Texas and Cuba, and a red glow appeared in the night sky over most of the world. Some startled people who had never seen an aurora before even feared that nuclear war had broken out, Odenwald recounts.

Most significantly, at about 2:45 A.M. local time on Monday, March 13, Canada's Hydro-Québec power utility's grid crashed when safety systems sensed a power overload caused by the currents pulsing through the ground. The failure knocked out electricity to six million people in northeastern Canada for as long as nine hours—the biggest outage ever caused by a geomagnetic storm.


The “locals” I am sure will soon gather express their “gratitude” to utility officials for being so cheap not to spend a few $$ to provide protection for our power distribution system.  Pitchforks and torches are being readied!!

Max.


Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on March 02, 2016, 02:50:09 AM
Here is an article from the NASA Science website (its not just us “tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy types” that are thinking about this VERY real threat..

Max.

Solar Shield--Protecting the North American Power Grid

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2010/26oct_solarshield/

Every hundred years or so, a solar storm comes along so potent it fills the skies of Earth with blood-red auroras, makes compass needles point in the wrong direction, and sends electric currents coursing through the planet's topsoil. The most famous such storm, the Carrington Event of 1859, actually shocked telegraph operators and set some of their offices on fire. A 2008 report by the National Academy of Sciences warns that if such a storm occurred today, we could experience widespread power blackouts with permanent damage to many key transformers.

Every hundred years or so, a solar storm comes along so potent it fills the skies of Earth with blood-red auroras, makes compass needles point in the wrong direction, and sends electric currents coursing through the planet's topsoil. The most famous such storm, the Carrington Event of 1859, actually shocked telegraph operators and set some of their offices on fire. A 2008 report by the National Academy of Sciences warns that if such a storm occurred today, we could experience widespread power blackouts with permanent damage to many key transformers

A large-scale blackout could last a long time, mainly due to transformer damage. As the National Academy report notes, "these multi-ton apparatus cannot be repaired in the field, and if damaged in this manner they need to be replaced with new units which have lead times of 12 months or more.”

.
Mad Max, yes these are very real threats, threats which are probably recognized by most people here on the forum.
There is a topic I started a couple of years ago about which contains messages or agencies in government...about various threats.  Topic: Messages from the US President and Government RE disaster preparedness 

https://planetxtownhall.com/index.php?topic=5498.0#lastPost

It is  OK to post about threats here, especially if you can figure out the safer areas, based on what you learn.
thanks,
Yowbarb
...
Yowbarb Note -
The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), within the Executive Office of the President of the United States released a statement May 07, 2015.  Here is the link to the pdf of the document: http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/DRAFT-NSWS-For-Public-Comment-508.pdf 

Yowbarb Note: In this post I put the live links within brackets.
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/news/national-space-weather-strategy-released-public-comment

http://www.dhs.gov/national-space-weather-strategy

National Space Weather Strategy

The technology and infrastructure that forms the backbone of America’s economic vitality and national security is subject to many risks, and among the most challenging is the risk posed by space weather storms. [ http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/about-space-weather ]

In November 2014, the National Science and Technology Council
[ https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ostp/nstc ]
established the Space Weather Operations, Research and Mitigation (SWORM) Task Force, and its charter directed the development of a National Space Weather Strategy, which will articulate high-level strategic goals for enhancing national preparedness to space weather events. Assistant Secretary for Infrastructure Protection Caitlin Durkovich is a co-chair of the SWORM Task Force. [ http://www.dhs.gov/person/caitlin-durkovich ]

Reducing the nation’s vulnerability to space weather is a national priority. The Strategic National Risk Assessment identifies space weather as a hazard with the potential to pose a significant risk to national security.
[ http://www.dhs.gov/strategic-national-risk-assessment-snra ]
As a national risk, space weather warrants a coordinated strategy, and the Whole Community must work together to enhance the resilience of critical infrastructure to the potentially debilitating effects of space weather. [ https://www.fema.gov/whole-community ]

The SWORM Task Force recently released a draft national strategy and is seeking public comment. Everyone has a part to play in mitigating the nation’s risk to space weather, and the Office of Infrastructure Protection encourages stakeholders to review the current draft.
 
Last Published Date: April 29, 2015

https://planetxtownhall.com/index.php?topic=5498.0#lastPost
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on March 02, 2016, 02:50:09 AM
Here is an article from the NASA Science website (its not just us “tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy types” that are thinking about this VERY real threat..

Max.

Solar Shield--Protecting the North American Power Grid

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2010/26oct_solarshield/

Every hundred years or so, a solar storm comes along so potent it fills the skies of Earth with blood-red auroras, makes compass needles point in the wrong direction, and sends electric currents coursing through the planet's topsoil. The most famous such storm, the Carrington Event of 1859, actually shocked telegraph operators and set some of their offices on fire. A 2008 report by the National Academy of Sciences warns that if such a storm occurred today, we could experience widespread power blackouts with permanent damage to many key transformers.

Every hundred years or so, a solar storm comes along so potent it fills the skies of Earth with blood-red auroras, makes compass needles point in the wrong direction, and sends electric currents coursing through the planet's topsoil. The most famous such storm, the Carrington Event of 1859, actually shocked telegraph operators and set some of their offices on fire. A 2008 report by the National Academy of Sciences warns that if such a storm occurred today, we could experience widespread power blackouts with permanent damage to many key transformers

A large-scale blackout could last a long time, mainly due to transformer damage. As the National Academy report notes, "these multi-ton apparatus cannot be repaired in the field, and if damaged in this manner they need to be replaced with new units which have lead times of 12 months or more.”

.
Mad Max, yes these are very real threats, threats which are probably recognized by most people here on the forum.
There is a topic I started a couple of years ago about which contains messages or agencies in government...about various threats.  Topic: Messages from the US President and Government RE disaster preparedness 

https://planetxtownhall.com/index.php?topic=5498.0#lastPost

It is  OK to post about threats here, especially if you can figure out the safer areas, based on what you learn.
thanks,
Yowbarb
...
Yowbarb Note -
The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), within the Executive Office of the President of the United States released a statement May 07, 2015.  Here is the link to the pdf of the document: http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/DRAFT-NSWS-For-Public-Comment-508.pdf 

Yowbarb Note: In this post I put the live links within brackets.
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/news/national-space-weather-strategy-released-public-comment

http://www.dhs.gov/national-space-weather-strategy

National Space Weather Strategy

The technology and infrastructure that forms the backbone of America’s economic vitality and national security is subject to many risks, and among the most challenging is the risk posed by space weather storms. [ http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/about-space-weather ]

In November 2014, the National Science and Technology Council
[ https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ostp/nstc ]
established the Space Weather Operations, Research and Mitigation (SWORM) Task Force, and its charter directed the development of a National Space Weather Strategy, which will articulate high-level strategic goals for enhancing national preparedness to space weather events. Assistant Secretary for Infrastructure Protection Caitlin Durkovich is a co-chair of the SWORM Task Force. [ http://www.dhs.gov/person/caitlin-durkovich ]

Reducing the nation’s vulnerability to space weather is a national priority. The Strategic National Risk Assessment identifies space weather as a hazard with the potential to pose a significant risk to national security.
[ http://www.dhs.gov/strategic-national-risk-assessment-snra ]
As a national risk, space weather warrants a coordinated strategy, and the Whole Community must work together to enhance the resilience of critical infrastructure to the potentially debilitating effects of space weather. [ https://www.fema.gov/whole-community ]

The SWORM Task Force recently released a draft national strategy and is seeking public comment. Everyone has a part to play in mitigating the nation’s risk to space weather, and the Office of Infrastructure Protection encourages stakeholders to review the current draft.
 
Last Published Date: April 29, 2015

https://planetxtownhall.com/index.php?topic=5498.0#lastPost
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on March 08, 2016, 02:31:00 AM
An “update” from Japan’s former Prime Minister:

Former Prime Minister Admits Fukushima Almost Completely Destroyed Japan

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/former-prime-minister-admits-fukushima-almost-completely-destroyed-japan_032016

his Friday, it will officially have been 5 years since the Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami disabled Tepco’s nuclear power plant in Fukushima. But despite the passing of 5 years, we still don’t really know much damage this disaster really caused. We don’t know what the long-term effects will be on the environment, or on the people of Japan, and both Tepco and the Japanese government have lied to the world about the gravity of the situation.

And the situation is still much more serious than they’ve been letting on. We know that plant is still leaking radiation, we know the ocean and the area surrounding Fukushima is still radioactive, and we know that the nuclear power plant is a flimsy house of cards that could crumble at any moment.

But as bad as the situation was and still is at the Fukushima Daiichi Power Plant, believe it or not, it could have been far worse. In fact, Japan’s former Prime Minister, Naoto Kan, admitted that the country came within a “paper thin margin” of an apocalyptic disaster.

In an interview with The Telegraph to mark the fifth anniversary of the tragedy, Naoto Kan described the panic and disarray at the highest levels of the Japanese government as it fought to control multiple meltdowns at the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station.


He said he considered evacuating the capital, Tokyo, along with all other areas within 160 miles of the plant, and declaring martial law. “The future existence of Japan as a whole was at stake,” he said. “Something on that scale, an evacuation of 50 million, it would have been like a losing a huge war.”

Could you imagine? I don’t think an evacuation of 50 million people has ever been attempted before, much less in a country that already has such a high population density. If the worst case scenario had come to pass, it would have been the biggest humanitarian disaster in history, and that’s not counting what the effects would have been outside of Japan. As for what that worst case scenario might have been, Prime Minister Kan explained:

Max.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on March 08, 2016, 02:31:00 AM
An “update” from Japan’s former Prime Minister:

Former Prime Minister Admits Fukushima Almost Completely Destroyed Japan

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/former-prime-minister-admits-fukushima-almost-completely-destroyed-japan_032016

his Friday, it will officially have been 5 years since the Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami disabled Tepco’s nuclear power plant in Fukushima. But despite the passing of 5 years, we still don’t really know much damage this disaster really caused. We don’t know what the long-term effects will be on the environment, or on the people of Japan, and both Tepco and the Japanese government have lied to the world about the gravity of the situation.

And the situation is still much more serious than they’ve been letting on. We know that plant is still leaking radiation, we know the ocean and the area surrounding Fukushima is still radioactive, and we know that the nuclear power plant is a flimsy house of cards that could crumble at any moment.

But as bad as the situation was and still is at the Fukushima Daiichi Power Plant, believe it or not, it could have been far worse. In fact, Japan’s former Prime Minister, Naoto Kan, admitted that the country came within a “paper thin margin” of an apocalyptic disaster.

In an interview with The Telegraph to mark the fifth anniversary of the tragedy, Naoto Kan described the panic and disarray at the highest levels of the Japanese government as it fought to control multiple meltdowns at the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station.


He said he considered evacuating the capital, Tokyo, along with all other areas within 160 miles of the plant, and declaring martial law. “The future existence of Japan as a whole was at stake,” he said. “Something on that scale, an evacuation of 50 million, it would have been like a losing a huge war.”

Could you imagine? I don’t think an evacuation of 50 million people has ever been attempted before, much less in a country that already has such a high population density. If the worst case scenario had come to pass, it would have been the biggest humanitarian disaster in history, and that’s not counting what the effects would have been outside of Japan. As for what that worst case scenario might have been, Prime Minister Kan explained:

Max.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on March 27, 2016, 01:46:56 AM
MadMax, thanks for posting this info here...
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on March 27, 2016, 01:46:56 AM
MadMax, thanks for posting this info here...
Title: avoiding mosquitoes up the mountain
Post by: Socrates on March 10, 2017, 01:58:38 PM
Many peoples used to live 'above the mosquito line', i.e. at an altitude where there are none.
Nowadays, mainly because there are too many people around, people live everywhere. Consequently, there are hundreds of millions of folks effected by mallaria

The mosquito line used to be a big deal. Basically it had a lot to do with determining how cities (and empires) were set up. So, just an FYI; if you're hating the mosquitoes at the location you've chosen to make your stand, know that people throughout history and all over the world have shared your annoyance.
Mosquitoes come out at night. You've flies during the day, then usually half an hour of quiet and then the mosquitoes come out. Which means you can be busy all day all around the mountain, just make sure you make it back up to the safe altitude before night falls. After all, and especially in regards to mallaria, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on March 11, 2017, 01:57:01 PM
Morning Barb,

 Thank you for inviting me into the forum here LOTS of good stuff/information that I have just started to explore.

One of the things that I have not seen here (yet) is a good discussion of the importance of considering how close a potential survival location is to nuclear power plants and the possible effects of a “grid down” EMP/solar event.

Below is a good article that goes into good detail about this and how the government refuses to spend very little money to fix this potentially catastrophic problem..

Max.

NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS: The Very Real Possibility of A Global Nuclear Catastrophe

http://www.globalresearch.ca/nuclear-power-plants-the-very-real-possibility-of-a-global-nuclear-catastrophe/29951


Hi again, MadMax - thanks for all your work here, research and posts and the great images. :)
Quite a long time ago, a couple times I had posted screen shots of nuclear plants (as part of locations discussions) but it has been a long time. Probably got lost in the many pages.
I  should re- post it and post it again, periodically... Nuclear Power in the USA(Updated March 2017) Image at bottom of this post.

Also here is a link to an article... for all to see again...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_the_United_States
This page was last modified on 9 March 2017, at 19:15.
........................................................................................
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on March 11, 2017, 01:57:01 PM
Morning Barb,

 Thank you for inviting me into the forum here LOTS of good stuff/information that I have just started to explore.

One of the things that I have not seen here (yet) is a good discussion of the importance of considering how close a potential survival location is to nuclear power plants and the possible effects of a “grid down” EMP/solar event.

Below is a good article that goes into good detail about this and how the government refuses to spend very little money to fix this potentially catastrophic problem..

Max.

NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS: The Very Real Possibility of A Global Nuclear Catastrophe

http://www.globalresearch.ca/nuclear-power-plants-the-very-real-possibility-of-a-global-nuclear-catastrophe/29951


Hi again, MadMax - thanks for all your work here, research and posts and the great images. :)
Quite a long time ago, a couple times I had posted screen shots of nuclear plants (as part of locations discussions) but it has been a long time. Probably got lost in the many pages.
I  should re- post it and post it again, periodically... Nuclear Power in the USA(Updated March 2017) Image at bottom of this post.

Also here is a link to an article... for all to see again...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_the_United_States
This page was last modified on 9 March 2017, at 19:15.
........................................................................................
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on March 11, 2017, 03:05:27 PM
Morning Barb,

 Thank you for inviting me into the forum here LOTS of good stuff/information that I have just started to explore.

One of the things that I have not seen here (yet) is a good discussion of the importance of considering how close a potential survival location is to nuclear power plants and the possible effects of a “grid down” EMP/solar event.

Below is a good article that goes into good detail about this and how the government refuses to spend very little money to fix this potentially catastrophic problem..

Max.

NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS: The Very Real Possibility of A Global Nuclear Catastrophe

http://www.globalresearch.ca/nuclear-power-plants-the-very-real-possibility-of-a-global-nuclear-catastrophe/29951


Hi again, MadMax - thanks for all your work here, research and posts and the great images. :)
Quite a long time ago, a couple times I had posted screen shots of nuclear plants (as part of locations discussions) but it has been a long time. Probably got lost in the many pages.
I  should re- post it and post it again, periodically... Nuclear Power in the USA(Updated March 2017) Image at bottom of this post.

Also here is a link to an article... for all to see again...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_the_United_States
This page was last modified on 9 March 2017, at 19:15.
........................................................................................
Thanks for posting this again, as I had not realized that, although our MO nuke plant would most likely send emissions in a direction slightly away from us, those two in Arkansas look rather intimidating, especially if they are ever "out of control" and air emissions travel in a normal and usual direction.  Yikes. Thanks again.

As they say, "we all live downstream" (from something).
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on March 11, 2017, 03:05:27 PM
Morning Barb,

 Thank you for inviting me into the forum here LOTS of good stuff/information that I have just started to explore.

One of the things that I have not seen here (yet) is a good discussion of the importance of considering how close a potential survival location is to nuclear power plants and the possible effects of a “grid down” EMP/solar event.

Below is a good article that goes into good detail about this and how the government refuses to spend very little money to fix this potentially catastrophic problem..

Max.

NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS: The Very Real Possibility of A Global Nuclear Catastrophe

http://www.globalresearch.ca/nuclear-power-plants-the-very-real-possibility-of-a-global-nuclear-catastrophe/29951


Hi again, MadMax - thanks for all your work here, research and posts and the great images. :)
Quite a long time ago, a couple times I had posted screen shots of nuclear plants (as part of locations discussions) but it has been a long time. Probably got lost in the many pages.
I  should re- post it and post it again, periodically... Nuclear Power in the USA(Updated March 2017) Image at bottom of this post.

Also here is a link to an article... for all to see again...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_the_United_States
This page was last modified on 9 March 2017, at 19:15.
........................................................................................
Thanks for posting this again, as I had not realized that, although our MO nuke plant would most likely send emissions in a direction slightly away from us, those two in Arkansas look rather intimidating, especially if they are ever "out of control" and air emissions travel in a normal and usual direction.  Yikes. Thanks again.

As they say, "we all live downstream" (from something).
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on March 11, 2017, 08:43:20 PM
ilinda, I feel that is likely true, all downwind or downhill from something...
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on March 11, 2017, 08:43:20 PM
ilinda, I feel that is likely true, all downwind or downhill from something...
Title: Re: radiation threats
Post by: Socrates on March 12, 2017, 03:04:34 AM
@ my own online database (http://b2012overleven.runboard.com/) radiation and location are just about at the top of the list of topics to cover. I remember being very reticent years ago of diving into the topic of radiation as i intuited how much work that would be. In the end, though, the topic clearly could not be avoided and i put in the hours of listening to 'the experts' [often the people with their feet on the ground in Fukushima]. I learned some important things that completely go against mainstream assumptions concerning the dangers of radiation, like...

- air does not become radioactive; it is elements in the air that carry radioactive particles. Therefore a filter is enough to keep out 'radioactive air'.
- besides radioactive iodine, all radioactive particles are quite heavy and do not tend to travel significant distances. So you may be 'downwind' from a power plant, but that doesn't mean you'll be forced to deal with radioactive heavy metals.
- radioactive iodine is carried all over the world but it only gets absorbed by people already iodine-deficient. On the one hand 95+% of folks suffer from iodine deficiency, on the other hand some Lugol's and/or nascent iodine will remedy that (quite serious) condition in a matter of months for relatively little money and effort.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on March 12, 2017, 03:28:28 AM

Here (as Socrates has pointed out may times in his excellent posts) is why you don’t want to be anywhere near large urban areas when “TSHTF”:

(Sounds just like something right out of an old Mel Gibson movie!)

Venezuela's spiraling violence!

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/323394-venezuelas-spiraling-violence

Venezuela is once again a world leader. Unfortunately we are not a leader in oil revenues, nor do we have the most miss universe winners, nor is our soccer team surging up the world’s rankings.

As we begin 2017, Venezuela is, however, a true global leader in violence.  Shootings, stabbings, grenades, bombs, tear gas, kidnappings, gang violence, extortion; you name it, we’ve got it.

According to the Venezuelan Observatory of Violence, Venezuela is now the second most violent country in the world.  In 2016, the country suffered from 28,497 violent deaths, that is almost 100 homicides per 100,000 people.  When we think of the most dangerous cities in the world, we consider Harare, Baghdad, Fallujah and Kabul. Yet, somehow, Caracas is leading the pack as the most dangerous city (120 homicides per 100,000 people) and is joined by two other Venezuelan cities in the world’s top-ten most violent cities.

With the regime of the dictatorial socialist president, Nicolas Maduro, creating anarchy infused with dangerously rife corruption, sophisticated weaponry has turned entire areas of the country into war zones. Senior Venezuelan officials traffic drugs and weapons throughout the Americas with bedfellows Iran and Hezbollah. While at a lower level, regime cronies and corrupt law enforcement agencies serve as local arms dealers, and soldiers supplement their wages through the sale of all sorts of weaponry and military materiel.  It is therefore no surprise when criminal bands use grenades and automatic rifles to assert their authority, and exert revenge. 

And why not? They can get away with it.  Impunity is the name of the game in Venezuela. Over 90 percent of cases are never tried. And when impunity and injustice pervade throughout a quasi-anarchical society, the people inevitably take the law into their own hands.  In recent years there has been a distinct rise in street trials, public lynching, and revenge killings involving blood and guts worthy of an episode of Game of Thrones, not a modern country. There was a whopping 650 percent increase in such incidents during 2016.   

When Chavez took power in 1999, the annual figure of violent deaths was 6,000. Chavez, as was his way, did not do things by halves.  His legacy reflects that, with violent deaths since 1999 exceeding a quarter of a million (an average of 15,000 a year). As with his (mis)management of the economy and the health system, President Nicolas Maduro has only made matters worse. No less than 24 security plans have been tried.  They’ve all been complete and utter failures.

Maduro and his allies have even created pro-government militias called “colectivos”. This is neither fighting fire with fire, or water.  In fact the government is pouring gasoline on the flames, as these thugs are empowered both to “run security” in low-income communities, and at the same time “mobilize people to vote”! Opposition leaders have understandably and vocally criticized these groups as illegal paramilitary bands armed by the government to suppress legitimate protests and dissent.

In fact, the Venezuelan opposition has, quite literally, felt the full force of these ‘colectivos’.  The militias turn up heavily-armed at peaceful demonstrations, beating, and maiming.  When Venezuelans have had the opportunity to place their vote at the ballot boxes, the ‘colectivos’ intimidate opponents at voting stations, often on motorcycles, and always well-armed.   Instead of providing security for the average citizen, they serve as yet another layer of state-sponsored brutal oppression. 

And as the economy continues to collapse, inflation becomes hyperinflation, and anarchy reigns, poverty has driven the desperate into new and creative forms of violent crime.  "Express kidnappings” are now petrifyingly common.

One known example in Venezuela, missed by the international media, is of Juan Manaure, a Venezuelan basketball player whose 14 year old son was kidnapped on Dec. 23, 2016. The last time they spoke was on that day: “Dad, help me, they want to kill me”.

There have been no signs of Juan’s little boy since then, and it’s been 45 days.

According to Fermín Mármol García, a lawyer specializing in criminal affairs (the government doesn’t publish figures as part of their censorship efforts), there are over 3,000 kidnappings in Venezuela every year, and 2016 saw a 170 percent increase in kidnappings.

Kidnappers, often young and desperate, sometimes with no previous criminal record, are abducting the most vulnerable – not necessarily because they want to punish them, or to hurt them – but because they have no money, no food and no hope.

Max.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on March 12, 2017, 03:28:28 AM

Here (as Socrates has pointed out may times in his excellent posts) is why you don’t want to be anywhere near large urban areas when “TSHTF”:

(Sounds just like something right out of an old Mel Gibson movie!)

Venezuela's spiraling violence!

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/323394-venezuelas-spiraling-violence

Venezuela is once again a world leader. Unfortunately we are not a leader in oil revenues, nor do we have the most miss universe winners, nor is our soccer team surging up the world’s rankings.

As we begin 2017, Venezuela is, however, a true global leader in violence.  Shootings, stabbings, grenades, bombs, tear gas, kidnappings, gang violence, extortion; you name it, we’ve got it.

According to the Venezuelan Observatory of Violence, Venezuela is now the second most violent country in the world.  In 2016, the country suffered from 28,497 violent deaths, that is almost 100 homicides per 100,000 people.  When we think of the most dangerous cities in the world, we consider Harare, Baghdad, Fallujah and Kabul. Yet, somehow, Caracas is leading the pack as the most dangerous city (120 homicides per 100,000 people) and is joined by two other Venezuelan cities in the world’s top-ten most violent cities.

With the regime of the dictatorial socialist president, Nicolas Maduro, creating anarchy infused with dangerously rife corruption, sophisticated weaponry has turned entire areas of the country into war zones. Senior Venezuelan officials traffic drugs and weapons throughout the Americas with bedfellows Iran and Hezbollah. While at a lower level, regime cronies and corrupt law enforcement agencies serve as local arms dealers, and soldiers supplement their wages through the sale of all sorts of weaponry and military materiel.  It is therefore no surprise when criminal bands use grenades and automatic rifles to assert their authority, and exert revenge. 

And why not? They can get away with it.  Impunity is the name of the game in Venezuela. Over 90 percent of cases are never tried. And when impunity and injustice pervade throughout a quasi-anarchical society, the people inevitably take the law into their own hands.  In recent years there has been a distinct rise in street trials, public lynching, and revenge killings involving blood and guts worthy of an episode of Game of Thrones, not a modern country. There was a whopping 650 percent increase in such incidents during 2016.   

When Chavez took power in 1999, the annual figure of violent deaths was 6,000. Chavez, as was his way, did not do things by halves.  His legacy reflects that, with violent deaths since 1999 exceeding a quarter of a million (an average of 15,000 a year). As with his (mis)management of the economy and the health system, President Nicolas Maduro has only made matters worse. No less than 24 security plans have been tried.  They’ve all been complete and utter failures.

Maduro and his allies have even created pro-government militias called “colectivos”. This is neither fighting fire with fire, or water.  In fact the government is pouring gasoline on the flames, as these thugs are empowered both to “run security” in low-income communities, and at the same time “mobilize people to vote”! Opposition leaders have understandably and vocally criticized these groups as illegal paramilitary bands armed by the government to suppress legitimate protests and dissent.

In fact, the Venezuelan opposition has, quite literally, felt the full force of these ‘colectivos’.  The militias turn up heavily-armed at peaceful demonstrations, beating, and maiming.  When Venezuelans have had the opportunity to place their vote at the ballot boxes, the ‘colectivos’ intimidate opponents at voting stations, often on motorcycles, and always well-armed.   Instead of providing security for the average citizen, they serve as yet another layer of state-sponsored brutal oppression. 

And as the economy continues to collapse, inflation becomes hyperinflation, and anarchy reigns, poverty has driven the desperate into new and creative forms of violent crime.  "Express kidnappings” are now petrifyingly common.

One known example in Venezuela, missed by the international media, is of Juan Manaure, a Venezuelan basketball player whose 14 year old son was kidnapped on Dec. 23, 2016. The last time they spoke was on that day: “Dad, help me, they want to kill me”.

There have been no signs of Juan’s little boy since then, and it’s been 45 days.

According to Fermín Mármol García, a lawyer specializing in criminal affairs (the government doesn’t publish figures as part of their censorship efforts), there are over 3,000 kidnappings in Venezuela every year, and 2016 saw a 170 percent increase in kidnappings.

Kidnappers, often young and desperate, sometimes with no previous criminal record, are abducting the most vulnerable – not necessarily because they want to punish them, or to hurt them – but because they have no money, no food and no hope.

Max.
Title: Re: radiation threats
Post by: gagan on March 12, 2017, 11:31:17 AM
@ my own online database (http://b2012overleven.runboard.com/) radiation and location are just about at the top of the list of topics to cover. I remember being very reticent years ago of diving into the topic of radiation as i intuited how much work that would be. In the end, though, the topic clearly could not be avoided and i put in the hours of listening to 'the experts' [often the people with their feet on the ground in Fukushima]. I learned some important things that completely go against mainstream assumptions concerning the dangers of radiation, like...

- air does not become radioactive; it is elements in the air that carry radioactive particles. Therefore a filter is enough to keep out 'radioactive air'.
- besides radioactive iodine, all radioactive particles are quite heavy and do not tend to travel significant distances. So you may be 'downwind' from a power plant, but that doesn't mean you'll be forced to deal with radioactive heavy metals.
- radioactive iodine is carried all over the world but it only gets absorbed by people already iodine-deficient. On the one hand 95+% of folks suffer from iodine deficiency, on the other hand some Lugol's and/or nascent iodine will remedy that (quite serious) condition in a matter of months for relatively little money and effort.

Interesting, somewhat reassuring post! Thanks for the reminder on dosing up with iodine.
Title: Re: radiation threats
Post by: marshall on March 12, 2017, 11:31:17 AM
@ my own online database (http://b2012overleven.runboard.com/) radiation and location are just about at the top of the list of topics to cover. I remember being very reticent years ago of diving into the topic of radiation as i intuited how much work that would be. In the end, though, the topic clearly could not be avoided and i put in the hours of listening to 'the experts' [often the people with their feet on the ground in Fukushima]. I learned some important things that completely go against mainstream assumptions concerning the dangers of radiation, like...

- air does not become radioactive; it is elements in the air that carry radioactive particles. Therefore a filter is enough to keep out 'radioactive air'.
- besides radioactive iodine, all radioactive particles are quite heavy and do not tend to travel significant distances. So you may be 'downwind' from a power plant, but that doesn't mean you'll be forced to deal with radioactive heavy metals.
- radioactive iodine is carried all over the world but it only gets absorbed by people already iodine-deficient. On the one hand 95+% of folks suffer from iodine deficiency, on the other hand some Lugol's and/or nascent iodine will remedy that (quite serious) condition in a matter of months for relatively little money and effort.

Interesting, somewhat reassuring post! Thanks for the reminder on dosing up with iodine.
Title: Re: radiation threats
Post by: gagan on March 12, 2017, 04:29:43 PM
@ my own online database (http://b2012overleven.runboard.com/) radiation and location are just about at the top of the list of topics to cover. I remember being very reticent years ago of diving into the topic of radiation as i intuited how much work that would be. In the end, though, the topic clearly could not be avoided and i put in the hours of listening to 'the experts' [often the people with their feet on the ground in Fukushima]. I learned some important things that completely go against mainstream assumptions concerning the dangers of radiation, like...

- air does not become radioactive; it is elements in the air that carry radioactive particles. Therefore a filter is enough to keep out 'radioactive air'.
- besides radioactive iodine, all radioactive particles are quite heavy and do not tend to travel significant distances. So you may be 'downwind' from a power plant, but that doesn't mean you'll be forced to deal with radioactive heavy metals.
- radioactive iodine is carried all over the world but it only gets absorbed by people already iodine-deficient. On the one hand 95+% of folks suffer from iodine deficiency, on the other hand some Lugol's and/or nascent iodine will remedy that (quite serious) condition in a matter of months for relatively little money and effort.
It sounds like something I want to hear, but I'm not convinced that radioactive iodine is the only radionuclide we have to worry about becoming airborne. 

Think of how much a feather weighs.   Not a lot, but more than a microgram of Plutonium or some other heavy radionuclide.  Think of how the feather can become airborne and presumably remain aloft for hours, days or longer. 

Remember that Chernobyl was not reported to the media and continued quietly emitting, and it was the Finnish government that discovered their rad-monitors were showing radioactive emissions that should not have been there.  Now I admit I do not have a list of the radionuclides that were emitted from Chernobyl but am betting iodine was not the only thing.

Then one might want to consider the emissions will be falling onto farmland, and even if near, those farm crops will be contaminated, as will the soil.

I remember hearing Dr. Helen Caldicott talk about radioactive cesium and how it competes with potassium for binding sites in the body, so that if one inhales cesium, it then can cause heart irregularities because the heart uses cesium, thinking it has taken up potassium. 

Lots of food for thought.  In the meantime, I'm hoping to learn that I'm WRONG and that none of the radionuclides become airborne except iodine.
Title: Re: radiation threats
Post by: marshall on March 12, 2017, 04:29:43 PM
@ my own online database (http://b2012overleven.runboard.com/) radiation and location are just about at the top of the list of topics to cover. I remember being very reticent years ago of diving into the topic of radiation as i intuited how much work that would be. In the end, though, the topic clearly could not be avoided and i put in the hours of listening to 'the experts' [often the people with their feet on the ground in Fukushima]. I learned some important things that completely go against mainstream assumptions concerning the dangers of radiation, like...

- air does not become radioactive; it is elements in the air that carry radioactive particles. Therefore a filter is enough to keep out 'radioactive air'.
- besides radioactive iodine, all radioactive particles are quite heavy and do not tend to travel significant distances. So you may be 'downwind' from a power plant, but that doesn't mean you'll be forced to deal with radioactive heavy metals.
- radioactive iodine is carried all over the world but it only gets absorbed by people already iodine-deficient. On the one hand 95+% of folks suffer from iodine deficiency, on the other hand some Lugol's and/or nascent iodine will remedy that (quite serious) condition in a matter of months for relatively little money and effort.
It sounds like something I want to hear, but I'm not convinced that radioactive iodine is the only radionuclide we have to worry about becoming airborne. 

Think of how much a feather weighs.   Not a lot, but more than a microgram of Plutonium or some other heavy radionuclide.  Think of how the feather can become airborne and presumably remain aloft for hours, days or longer. 

Remember that Chernobyl was not reported to the media and continued quietly emitting, and it was the Finnish government that discovered their rad-monitors were showing radioactive emissions that should not have been there.  Now I admit I do not have a list of the radionuclides that were emitted from Chernobyl but am betting iodine was not the only thing.

Then one might want to consider the emissions will be falling onto farmland, and even if near, those farm crops will be contaminated, as will the soil.

I remember hearing Dr. Helen Caldicott talk about radioactive cesium and how it competes with potassium for binding sites in the body, so that if one inhales cesium, it then can cause heart irregularities because the heart uses cesium, thinking it has taken up potassium. 

Lots of food for thought.  In the meantime, I'm hoping to learn that I'm WRONG and that none of the radionuclides become airborne except iodine.
Title: Re: heavy radioactive particles
Post by: Socrates on March 12, 2017, 07:59:28 PM
Actually, come to think of it [it's been years since i looked into this stuff (http://b2012overleven.runboard.com/f20)], it also turns out that when a dose of radiation is large enough, the radioactive particles tend to nullify each other's effects, reacting with  one another, as well.

As far as weight is concerned, one must realize that we're talking "heavy" particles, particles of the periodic table of the elements down from gold, i.e. heavier than gold or lead. There may be tiny particles and they may travel some, but gravity is going to effect them and pull them down asap. Anyway, the research shows they don't travel far.
Fukushima is such a great disaster because the radioactive particles are being carried far and wide by seawater and are now part of the life living in it, i.e. now fish and other lifeforms are carrying their radioactive bodies throughout the ocean. Of course eventually those creatures at the top of the food chain will die and sink to the bottom of the ocean, as well...
Title: Re: heavy radioactive particles
Post by: gagan on March 16, 2017, 04:07:54 PM
Actually, come to think of it [it's been years since i looked into this stuff (http://b2012overleven.runboard.com/f20)], it also turns out that when a dose of radiation is large enough, the radioactive particles tend to nullify each other's effects, reacting with  one another, as well.

As far as weight is concerned, one must realize that we're talking "heavy" particles, particles of the periodic table of the elements down from gold, i.e. heavier than gold or lead. There may be tiny particles and they may travel some, but gravity is going to effect them and pull them down asap. Anyway, the research shows they don't travel far.
Fukushima is such a great disaster because the radioactive particles are being carried far and wide by seawater and are now part of the life living in it, i.e. now fish and other lifeforms are carrying their radioactive bodies throughout the ocean. Of course eventually those creatures at the top of the food chain will die and sink to the bottom of the ocean, as well...
The article below pertains mainly to laboratories, however some of the information is relevant to any radionuclide that becomes airborne. 

And remember that all those dioxins, furans, DDT, and other "VOC"'s (volatile organic compounds) that concentrate at the North Pole got there mainly via their volatility, and wind currents.  The molecular weight of any of those toxins (which now contaminate polar bears, seals, etc.)  greatly surpasses that of any atom of ion of radioactive elements, and the air currents had no trouble carrying these large molecules thousands of miles.

"Let the breather beware."


http://www.ehs.msu.edu/radiation/programs_guidelines/radmanual/48rm_airborne.htm
Airborne Radioactive Materials
Radioactive materials have the potential for release into the air, causing the worker to have an uptake of the material through one or more of the routes of entry into the body, particularly inhalation. Numerous situations may cause airborne release of radioactive materials.
Contamination present in a room may create airborne radioactivity by simple movement of the air over the contamination, spreading it around in the air. Most radioisotopes will be picked up by air and spread through this mechanism. This is one more good reason to keep areas free of contamination.
Use of volatile forms of radionuclides, such as 125I for iodinations or 3H-sodium borohydride may generate airborne radioactivity. Any chemical or physical form which readily volatilizes or evaporates into the air must be considered a potential airborne radioactivity risk.
Chemical reactions may generate radioactive gases or other airborne contaminants. An example is the labeling reaction for 35S methionine, which generates a methyl mercaptan reaction which liberates HCl and 35SO2 gas. Airborne radioactivity has resulted in unnecessary intakes and area contamination in laboratories where the users were unaware of this risk and have not taken precautions to trap or contain the liberated 35SO2.
Heating or incubating may cause evaporation or chemical reactions which release radioactive materials into the air. Aerosols (tiny droplets or particles) are present with all materials, and pose an increased risk when handling stock solutions or other high concentrations of radionuclides. Use chemical fume hoods or biological safety cabinets for high activity, concentrated or potentially volatile radioactive materials manipulations.
Materials which have been frozen may release substantial quantities of aerosols or gaseous radioactive material when the containers are opened. There have been numerous incidents at MSU and other institutions where this has occurred and has caused significant contamination of work areas, equipment and clothing of the worker opening the containers.
Another cause of airborne radioactivity is media or solutions containing cells, bacteria or other living organisms. The living organisms metabolize the radioactive substrates and may produce radioactive gases or vapors as a byproduct.
When hazardous chemical forms of the radionuclides are used, such as radiolabeled carcinogens or toxins, increased risks are presented by the vapors, aerosols or gases present or generated in the use. In this case, the hazard present is not only radioactive, but may also pose airborne chemical risks.
In order to prevent uptake in these increased risk situations, fume hoods, biological safety cabinets or other containment must be used to protect the worker from uptake and internal deposition. Do not use clean benches (tissue culture hoods) for use of radioactive materials, or any other hazardous material. While the product is kept sterile by these hoods, the hazardous material present in the materials used are blown into the face of the worker, and into the room. Therefore, there is no protection for the worker.
In certain rare cases, respiratory protection may be necessary for certain radioisotope uses. However, respiratory protection should only be used when other means of control and containment do not provide enough protection. Respirators must be chosen carefully to ensure the proper fit and type of cartridge, and the use must be monitored carefully. For this reason, use of respirators for radioactive materials use must be pre-approved by EHS, documented and monitored. Prior to using respirators for any reason, fit testing and medical monitoring are required.
Title: Re: heavy radioactive particles
Post by: marshall on March 16, 2017, 04:07:54 PM
Actually, come to think of it [it's been years since i looked into this stuff (http://b2012overleven.runboard.com/f20)], it also turns out that when a dose of radiation is large enough, the radioactive particles tend to nullify each other's effects, reacting with  one another, as well.

As far as weight is concerned, one must realize that we're talking "heavy" particles, particles of the periodic table of the elements down from gold, i.e. heavier than gold or lead. There may be tiny particles and they may travel some, but gravity is going to effect them and pull them down asap. Anyway, the research shows they don't travel far.
Fukushima is such a great disaster because the radioactive particles are being carried far and wide by seawater and are now part of the life living in it, i.e. now fish and other lifeforms are carrying their radioactive bodies throughout the ocean. Of course eventually those creatures at the top of the food chain will die and sink to the bottom of the ocean, as well...
The article below pertains mainly to laboratories, however some of the information is relevant to any radionuclide that becomes airborne. 

And remember that all those dioxins, furans, DDT, and other "VOC"'s (volatile organic compounds) that concentrate at the North Pole got there mainly via their volatility, and wind currents.  The molecular weight of any of those toxins (which now contaminate polar bears, seals, etc.)  greatly surpasses that of any atom of ion of radioactive elements, and the air currents had no trouble carrying these large molecules thousands of miles.

"Let the breather beware."


http://www.ehs.msu.edu/radiation/programs_guidelines/radmanual/48rm_airborne.htm
Airborne Radioactive Materials
Radioactive materials have the potential for release into the air, causing the worker to have an uptake of the material through one or more of the routes of entry into the body, particularly inhalation. Numerous situations may cause airborne release of radioactive materials.
Contamination present in a room may create airborne radioactivity by simple movement of the air over the contamination, spreading it around in the air. Most radioisotopes will be picked up by air and spread through this mechanism. This is one more good reason to keep areas free of contamination.
Use of volatile forms of radionuclides, such as 125I for iodinations or 3H-sodium borohydride may generate airborne radioactivity. Any chemical or physical form which readily volatilizes or evaporates into the air must be considered a potential airborne radioactivity risk.
Chemical reactions may generate radioactive gases or other airborne contaminants. An example is the labeling reaction for 35S methionine, which generates a methyl mercaptan reaction which liberates HCl and 35SO2 gas. Airborne radioactivity has resulted in unnecessary intakes and area contamination in laboratories where the users were unaware of this risk and have not taken precautions to trap or contain the liberated 35SO2.
Heating or incubating may cause evaporation or chemical reactions which release radioactive materials into the air. Aerosols (tiny droplets or particles) are present with all materials, and pose an increased risk when handling stock solutions or other high concentrations of radionuclides. Use chemical fume hoods or biological safety cabinets for high activity, concentrated or potentially volatile radioactive materials manipulations.
Materials which have been frozen may release substantial quantities of aerosols or gaseous radioactive material when the containers are opened. There have been numerous incidents at MSU and other institutions where this has occurred and has caused significant contamination of work areas, equipment and clothing of the worker opening the containers.
Another cause of airborne radioactivity is media or solutions containing cells, bacteria or other living organisms. The living organisms metabolize the radioactive substrates and may produce radioactive gases or vapors as a byproduct.
When hazardous chemical forms of the radionuclides are used, such as radiolabeled carcinogens or toxins, increased risks are presented by the vapors, aerosols or gases present or generated in the use. In this case, the hazard present is not only radioactive, but may also pose airborne chemical risks.
In order to prevent uptake in these increased risk situations, fume hoods, biological safety cabinets or other containment must be used to protect the worker from uptake and internal deposition. Do not use clean benches (tissue culture hoods) for use of radioactive materials, or any other hazardous material. While the product is kept sterile by these hoods, the hazardous material present in the materials used are blown into the face of the worker, and into the room. Therefore, there is no protection for the worker.
In certain rare cases, respiratory protection may be necessary for certain radioisotope uses. However, respiratory protection should only be used when other means of control and containment do not provide enough protection. Respirators must be chosen carefully to ensure the proper fit and type of cartridge, and the use must be monitored carefully. For this reason, use of respirators for radioactive materials use must be pre-approved by EHS, documented and monitored. Prior to using respirators for any reason, fit testing and medical monitoring are required.
Title: Re: radioactive particles
Post by: Socrates on March 16, 2017, 07:32:17 PM
There are always radioactive particles around and one is always subject to a certain amount of radioactivity. To some extent this is even natural. Cosmic radiation, for instance, which is quite high up at 10,000 feet or so, though pilots and stewards live through it year after year...

A nuclear power plant puts out certain kinds of radioactive particles and i was referring to how those tend to behave. I was also referring to the mainstream scare concerning said particles, i.e. ...
Oh my, oh my! We're all DOOMED! No one can survive a nuclear holocaust!
This attitude is not substantiated by the research.
Title: Re: radioactive particles
Post by: gagan on March 17, 2017, 04:49:32 PM
There are always radioactive particles around and one is always subject to a certain amount of radioactivity. To some extent this is even natural. Cosmic radiation, for instance, which is quite high up at 10,000 feet or so, though pilots and stewards live through it year after year...

A nuclear power plant puts out certain kinds of radioactive particles and i was referring to how those tend to behave. I was also referring to the mainstream scare concerning said particles, i.e. ...
Oh my, oh my! We're all DOOMED! No one can survive a nuclear holocaust!
This attitude is not substantiated by the research.
The most worrisome, IMHO, aspect of a nuke plant going critical, is that if some cosmic event were to happen and the Earth's power grid went down for longer than the backup generators could last, all 400-some nuclear plants would go critical unless someone knows a way to keep the cooling waters flowing in, and warmed waters flowing out.  (I may have the 400 number wrong, as that's off the top of my head).
Title: Re: radioactive particles
Post by: marshall on March 17, 2017, 04:49:32 PM
There are always radioactive particles around and one is always subject to a certain amount of radioactivity. To some extent this is even natural. Cosmic radiation, for instance, which is quite high up at 10,000 feet or so, though pilots and stewards live through it year after year...

A nuclear power plant puts out certain kinds of radioactive particles and i was referring to how those tend to behave. I was also referring to the mainstream scare concerning said particles, i.e. ...
Oh my, oh my! We're all DOOMED! No one can survive a nuclear holocaust!
This attitude is not substantiated by the research.
The most worrisome, IMHO, aspect of a nuke plant going critical, is that if some cosmic event were to happen and the Earth's power grid went down for longer than the backup generators could last, all 400-some nuclear plants would go critical unless someone knows a way to keep the cooling waters flowing in, and warmed waters flowing out.  (I may have the 400 number wrong, as that's off the top of my head).
Title: Re: power plant meltdowns
Post by: Socrates on March 18, 2017, 05:38:46 AM
if some cosmic event were to happen and the Earth's power grid went down for longer than the backup generators could last, all 400-some nuclear plants would go critical
Count on it!
If you take a long hard look at coasts like those in Hawaii or the Canary islands it's clear they are regularly buffeted by megatsunamis. You can tell because these islands are millions of years old but they are not worn down, except at higher altitudes; the megatsunamis come and scour away all rock that's weather-beaten [happens at least every 13,000 years] and that's why they don't 'smooth down' but remain ragged-edged.

It's a safe bet that whatever knocked our ancestors into the Stone Age was not survived by their power plants. Megagales/-tsunamis or -quakes, take your pick.
Indeed, if radiation were really as terrible as most folks fear, Earth would probably already be some lifeless barren rock in space...
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on March 18, 2017, 10:01:34 AM
Quote
Quote from: ilinda on March 17, 2017, 07:49:32 PM

    if some cosmic event were to happen and the Earth's power grid went down for longer than the backup generators could last, all 400-some nuclear plants would go critical

I think not like that, exactly.  I have looked into some details of the design of nuclear power plants, and they do have provisions for safe total shut-down in that case.

The problem with Fukushima was the destruction of the structures, which stopped the operation of the safety procedures.  That could happen elsewhere also, of course.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on March 18, 2017, 10:01:34 AM
Quote
Quote from: ilinda on March 17, 2017, 07:49:32 PM

    if some cosmic event were to happen and the Earth's power grid went down for longer than the backup generators could last, all 400-some nuclear plants would go critical

I think not like that, exactly.  I have looked into some details of the design of nuclear power plants, and they do have provisions for safe total shut-down in that case.

The problem with Fukushima was the destruction of the structures, which stopped the operation of the safety procedures.  That could happen elsewhere also, of course.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on March 18, 2017, 06:05:19 PM
Quote
Quote from: ilinda on March 17, 2017, 07:49:32 PM

    if some cosmic event were to happen and the Earth's power grid went down for longer than the backup generators could last, all 400-some nuclear plants would go critical

I think not like that, exactly.  I have looked into some details of the design of nuclear power plants, and they do have provisions for safe total shut-down in that case.

The problem with Fukushima was the destruction of the structures, which stopped the operation of the safety procedures.  That could happen elsewhere also, of course.
This is totally new information to me.  The main question is, then, how do they keep the fuel rods cool during an extended power outage, if they have no backup power generation (because their emergency energy rations are spent)?
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on March 18, 2017, 06:05:19 PM
Quote
Quote from: ilinda on March 17, 2017, 07:49:32 PM

    if some cosmic event were to happen and the Earth's power grid went down for longer than the backup generators could last, all 400-some nuclear plants would go critical

I think not like that, exactly.  I have looked into some details of the design of nuclear power plants, and they do have provisions for safe total shut-down in that case.

The problem with Fukushima was the destruction of the structures, which stopped the operation of the safety procedures.  That could happen elsewhere also, of course.
This is totally new information to me.  The main question is, then, how do they keep the fuel rods cool during an extended power outage, if they have no backup power generation (because their emergency energy rations are spent)?
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on March 19, 2017, 03:15:28 AM
The issue here is the spent fuel pools that are kept cool when the power is on (only a week or so of fuel is on site to keep them cool by diesel generators if the power goes off). These spent fuel pools would melt down after a permanent power outage and cause “Fukushima” like events at all of the 400 or so nuclear reactors..

After the EMP comes Nuclear Meltdown

http://modernsurvivalblog.com/emp-electro-magnetic-pulse/after-the-emp-comes-nuclear-meltdown/

An EMP (electro magnetic pulse), if strong enough (and regardless of the source – weaponized or solar), will potentially fry electronics and electronic systems within its invisible sphere of destruction. Many expert opinions and reports suggest that our electrical power grid could go down.

A large weaponized nuclear EMP detonation (or group thereof) high in the atmosphere will cause a wide ranging debilitating EMP.

A solar super flare (X-50+) and accompanying CME (Coronal Mass Ejection) will zap the surface of the earth with an even longer lasting EMP as it did during 1859 (the Carrington event).

The question is, What will happen to our nuclear reactors following an EMP event? Will we all be facing extermination from hundreds of simultaneous meltdowns?

The scenario:

An X-60 solar super-flare leaps off the sun with its coronal mass ejection (CME) heading straight towards earth. The CME (a slower moving cloud of charged particles than the X-ray burst), reaches the earth – and the solar particles interact with earth’s magnetic field to produce powerful electromagnetic fluctuations. It is these fluctuations that produce electrical currents in electrically ‘conductive’ things here on Earth, such as our criss-crossing power lines suspended above our streets. Electrical currents build up during the lasting event, and while some grid circuit breakers trip in an effort to save itself, many transformers and their high number of internal windings of copper wire continue to heat up and overload until they burn up as they exceed their design capacity.

 
The result:

Electricity across the land will be gone. Lights out. Communications and cell phones – down. Gas station pumps – down. Banking and commerce – down. Food distribution networks – down. Transportation grinds to a halt.

Much of the electricity may not be restored for months or even years due to the unimaginable requirements of transformer and electronic infrastructure re-manufacture and replacement.

As if that isn’t bad enough, what happens to our nuclear reactors?

Separate from the scrammed rods of the reactors, there is the issue of the spent fuel rod Storage pools of the containment facility. They too need a constant supply of water.

Backup batteries will keep pumps running for a day or so.

Diesel generators (assuming they or their electronics are hardened and not damaged from the effects of the EMP) will keep pumps running as long as there is diesel fuel on hand. A question is, do the nuclear plants have enough stored diesel fuel to keep the cooling pumps operating for months and months afterwards?

The fuel (gasoline-diesel) distribution systems will be down (or mostly), so where will the fuel come from? This will obviously be a high priority for plant managers, but will they all be able to scrounge up what they need?

In conclusion:

It is a foregone conclusion that a Carrington event will happen again. When it does, will we be ready? Will the world’s arsenal of nuclear weapons (and EMP weapons) always remain silent and unused? Will the world’s ‘leaders’ always be sane? There are risks, and this article simply exposes one or two – and presents questions for you to ponder.

Spent fuel fire on U.S. soil could dwarf impact of Fukushima

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/05/spent-fuel-fire-us-soil-could-dwarf-impact-fukushima

But the national academies’s report warns that spent fuel accumulating at U.S. nuclear plants is also vulnerable. After fuel is removed from a reactor core, the radioactive fission products continue to decay, generating heat. All nuclear power plants store the fuel onsite at the bottom of deep pools for at least 4 years while it slowly cools. To keep it safe, the academies report recommends that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and nuclear plant operators beef up systems for monitoring the pools and topping up water levels in case a facility is damaged. The panel also says plants should be ready to tighten security after a disaster.

At most U.S. nuclear plants, spent fuel is densely packed in pools, heightening the fire risk. NRC has estimated that a major fire at the spent fuel pool at the Peach Bottom nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania would displace an estimated 3.46 million people from 31,000 square kilometers of contaminated land, an area larger than New Jersey. But Von Hippel and Schoeppner think that NRC has grossly underestimated the scale and societal costs of such a fire.

Nightmare scenarios

A simulated spent fuel fire at the Peach Bottom nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania had a devastating impact on the mid-Atlantic region. Click on the dates to see the extent of contamination, which depended on weather patterns. Courtesy of F. Von Hippel and M. Schoeppner

Max. 
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on March 19, 2017, 03:15:28 AM
The issue here is the spent fuel pools that are kept cool when the power is on (only a week or so of fuel is on site to keep them cool by diesel generators if the power goes off). These spent fuel pools would melt down after a permanent power outage and cause “Fukushima” like events at all of the 400 or so nuclear reactors..

After the EMP comes Nuclear Meltdown

http://modernsurvivalblog.com/emp-electro-magnetic-pulse/after-the-emp-comes-nuclear-meltdown/

An EMP (electro magnetic pulse), if strong enough (and regardless of the source – weaponized or solar), will potentially fry electronics and electronic systems within its invisible sphere of destruction. Many expert opinions and reports suggest that our electrical power grid could go down.

A large weaponized nuclear EMP detonation (or group thereof) high in the atmosphere will cause a wide ranging debilitating EMP.

A solar super flare (X-50+) and accompanying CME (Coronal Mass Ejection) will zap the surface of the earth with an even longer lasting EMP as it did during 1859 (the Carrington event).

The question is, What will happen to our nuclear reactors following an EMP event? Will we all be facing extermination from hundreds of simultaneous meltdowns?

The scenario:

An X-60 solar super-flare leaps off the sun with its coronal mass ejection (CME) heading straight towards earth. The CME (a slower moving cloud of charged particles than the X-ray burst), reaches the earth – and the solar particles interact with earth’s magnetic field to produce powerful electromagnetic fluctuations. It is these fluctuations that produce electrical currents in electrically ‘conductive’ things here on Earth, such as our criss-crossing power lines suspended above our streets. Electrical currents build up during the lasting event, and while some grid circuit breakers trip in an effort to save itself, many transformers and their high number of internal windings of copper wire continue to heat up and overload until they burn up as they exceed their design capacity.

 
The result:

Electricity across the land will be gone. Lights out. Communications and cell phones – down. Gas station pumps – down. Banking and commerce – down. Food distribution networks – down. Transportation grinds to a halt.

Much of the electricity may not be restored for months or even years due to the unimaginable requirements of transformer and electronic infrastructure re-manufacture and replacement.

As if that isn’t bad enough, what happens to our nuclear reactors?

Separate from the scrammed rods of the reactors, there is the issue of the spent fuel rod Storage pools of the containment facility. They too need a constant supply of water.

Backup batteries will keep pumps running for a day or so.

Diesel generators (assuming they or their electronics are hardened and not damaged from the effects of the EMP) will keep pumps running as long as there is diesel fuel on hand. A question is, do the nuclear plants have enough stored diesel fuel to keep the cooling pumps operating for months and months afterwards?

The fuel (gasoline-diesel) distribution systems will be down (or mostly), so where will the fuel come from? This will obviously be a high priority for plant managers, but will they all be able to scrounge up what they need?

In conclusion:

It is a foregone conclusion that a Carrington event will happen again. When it does, will we be ready? Will the world’s arsenal of nuclear weapons (and EMP weapons) always remain silent and unused? Will the world’s ‘leaders’ always be sane? There are risks, and this article simply exposes one or two – and presents questions for you to ponder.

Spent fuel fire on U.S. soil could dwarf impact of Fukushima

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/05/spent-fuel-fire-us-soil-could-dwarf-impact-fukushima

But the national academies’s report warns that spent fuel accumulating at U.S. nuclear plants is also vulnerable. After fuel is removed from a reactor core, the radioactive fission products continue to decay, generating heat. All nuclear power plants store the fuel onsite at the bottom of deep pools for at least 4 years while it slowly cools. To keep it safe, the academies report recommends that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and nuclear plant operators beef up systems for monitoring the pools and topping up water levels in case a facility is damaged. The panel also says plants should be ready to tighten security after a disaster.

At most U.S. nuclear plants, spent fuel is densely packed in pools, heightening the fire risk. NRC has estimated that a major fire at the spent fuel pool at the Peach Bottom nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania would displace an estimated 3.46 million people from 31,000 square kilometers of contaminated land, an area larger than New Jersey. But Von Hippel and Schoeppner think that NRC has grossly underestimated the scale and societal costs of such a fire.

Nightmare scenarios

A simulated spent fuel fire at the Peach Bottom nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania had a devastating impact on the mid-Atlantic region. Click on the dates to see the extent of contamination, which depended on weather patterns. Courtesy of F. Von Hippel and M. Schoeppner

Max. 
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on March 19, 2017, 10:01:48 AM
Quote
The issue here is the spent fuel pools that are kept cool when the power is on (only a week or so of fuel is on site to keep them cool by diesel generators if the power goes off).

Right.
Quote
All nuclear power plants store the fuel onsite at the bottom of deep pools for at least 4 years while it slowly cools.

1.  Gravity feed from surface water might be possible in some locations.
2.  The nuclear-fuel rods were used to boil water into steam, and so the spent fuel rods would not have the same heat-producing capacity as the operational rods.   Are the cooling pools normally boiling? I think not, but not sure.  If the spent rods were simply laid out on bare rock, they would not melt the rock (that is not a good solution, but perhaps necessary as the last option).

Quote
These spent fuel pools would melt down after a permanent power outage and cause “Fukushima” like events

Different situation.  In Fukushima, the problem was damage to the reactors.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on March 19, 2017, 10:01:48 AM
Quote
The issue here is the spent fuel pools that are kept cool when the power is on (only a week or so of fuel is on site to keep them cool by diesel generators if the power goes off).

Right.
Quote
All nuclear power plants store the fuel onsite at the bottom of deep pools for at least 4 years while it slowly cools.

1.  Gravity feed from surface water might be possible in some locations.
2.  The nuclear-fuel rods were used to boil water into steam, and so the spent fuel rods would not have the same heat-producing capacity as the operational rods.   Are the cooling pools normally boiling? I think not, but not sure.  If the spent rods were simply laid out on bare rock, they would not melt the rock (that is not a good solution, but perhaps necessary as the last option).

Quote
These spent fuel pools would melt down after a permanent power outage and cause “Fukushima” like events

Different situation.  In Fukushima, the problem was damage to the reactors.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on March 19, 2017, 12:09:33 PM
Here are a couple good articles on the subject there are may more ..

Nuclear Power Plants Will Become America’s Extinction Level Event

http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2014/04/18/nuclear-power-plants-will-become-americas-extinction-level-event/

Critical Analyses

According to Judy Haar, a recognized expert in nuclear plant failure analyses, when a nuclear power plant loses access to off-grid electricity, the event is referred to as a “station blackout”. Haar states that all 104 US nuclear power plants are built to withstand electrical outages without experiencing any core damage, through the activation of an automatic start up of emergency generators powered by diesel. Further, when emergency power kicks in, an automatic shutdown of the nuclear power plant commences. The dangerous control rods are dropped into the core, while water is pumped by the diesel power generators into the reactor to reduce the heat and thus, prevent a meltdown. Here is the catch in this process, the spent fuel rods are encased in both a primary and secondary containment structure which is designed to withstand a core meltdown. However, should the pumps stop because either the generators fail or diesel fuel is not available, the fuel rods are subsequently uncovered and a Fukushima type of core meltdown commences immediately. At this point, I took Judy Haar’s comments to a source of mine at the Palo Verde Nuclear power plant. My source informed me that as per NERC policy, nuclear power plants are required to have enough diesel fuel to run for a period of seven days.

The Unresolved Power Blackout Problem

A long-term loss of outside electrical power will most certainly interrupt the circulation of cooling water to the pools. Another one of my Palo Verde nuclear power plant sources informed me that there is no long term solution to a power blackout and that all bets are off if the blackout is due to an EMP attack. A more detailed analysis reveals that the spent fuel pools carry depleted fuel for the reactor. Normally, this spent fuel has had time to considerably decay and therefore, reducing radioactivity and heat. However, the newer discharged fuel still produces heat and needs cooling. Housed in high density storage racks, contained in buildings that vent directly into the atmosphere, radiation containment is not accounted for with regard to the spent fuel racks. In other words, there is no capture mechanism. In this scenario, accompanied by a lengthy electrical outage, and with the emergency power waning due to either generator failure or a lack of diesel needed to power the generators, the plant could lose the ability to provide cooling. The water will subsequently heat up, boil away and uncover the spent fuel rods which required being covered in at least 25 feet of water to remain benign from any deleterious effects. Ultimately, this would lead to fires as well and the release of radioactivity into the atmosphere. This would be the beginning of another Fukushima event right here on American soil. Both my source and Haar shared exactly the same scenario about how a meltdown would occur. Subsequently, I spoke with Roger Landry who worked for Raytheon in various Department of Defense projects for 28 years, many of them in this arena and Roger also confirmed this information and that the above information is well known in the industry. When I examine Congressman Franks letter to NERC and I read between the lines, it is clear that Franks knows of this risk as well, he just stops short of specifically mentioning it in his letter.

None of the NERC, or the Nuclear Regulatory tests of handling a prolonged blackout at a nuclear power plant has answered two critical questions, “What happens when these nuclear power plants run out of diesel fuel needed to run the generators”, and “What happens when some of these generators fail”? In the event of an EMP attack, can tanker trucks with diesel fuel get to all of the nuclear power plants in the US in time to re-fuel them before they stop running? Will tanker trucks even be running themselves in the aftermath of an EMP attack? And in the event of an EMP attack, it is not likely that any plant which runs low on fuel, or has a generator malfunctions, will ever get any help to mitigate the crisis prior to a plethora of meltdowns occurring. Thus, every nuclear power plant in the country has the potential to cause a Chernobyl or Fukushima type accident if our country is hit by an EMP attack.

Conclusion

I would echo her concerns and apply the “not if, but when” admonition to the possibility of a mass meltdown in this country. It is only a matter of time until this scenario for disaster comes to fruition. At the end of the day, can anyone tell me why would any country be so negligent as to not provide its nuclear plants a fool proof method to cool the secondary processes of its nuclear materials at all of its plants?


400 CHERNOBYLS: SOLAR FLARES, EMP, AND NUCLEAR ARMAGEDDON

http://www.whentechfails.com/400-chernobyls-solar-flares-emp-and-nuclear-armageddon/

There are nearly 450 nuclear reactors in the world, with hundreds more either under construction or in the planning stages. There are 104 of these reactors in the USA and 195 in Europe. Imagine what havoc it would wreak on our civilization and the planet’s ecosystems if we were to suddenly witness not just one or two nuclear melt-downs but 400 or more! How likely is it that our world might experience an event that could ultimately cause hundreds of reactors to fail and melt down at approximately the same time? I venture to say that, unless we take significant protective measures, this apocalyptic scenario is not only possible but probable.

It was a short-term cooling system failure that caused the partial reactor core melt-down in March 1979 at Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania. Similarly, according to Japanese authorities it was not direct damage from Japan’s 9.0 magnitude Tohoku Earthquake on March 11, 2011 that caused the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactor disaster, but the loss of electric power to the reactor’s cooling system pumps when the reactor’s backup batteries and diesel generators were wiped out by the ensuing tidal waves. In the hours and days after the tidal waves shuttered the cooling systems, the cores of reactors number 1, 2, and 3 were in full meltdown and released hydrogen gas, fueling explosions which breached several reactor containment vessels and blew the roof off the building housing the spent fuel storage pond of reactor number 4.

Of even greater danger and concern than the reactor cores themselves are the spent fuel rods stored in on-site cooling ponds. Lacking a permanent spent nuclear fuel storage facility, so-called “temporary” nuclear fuel containment ponds are features common to nearly all nuclear reactor facilities. They typically contain the accumulated spent fuel from 10 or more decommissioned reactor cores. Due to lack of a permanent repository, most of these fuel containment ponds are greatly overloaded and tightly packed beyond original design. They are generally surrounded by common light industrial buildings, with concrete walls and corrugated steel roofs. Unlike the active reactor cores, which are encased inside massive “containment vessels” with thick walls of concrete and steel, the buildings surrounding spent fuel rod storage ponds would do practically nothing to contain radioactive contaminants in the event of prolonged cooling system failures.

Since spent fuel ponds typically hold far greater quantities of highly radioactive material then the active nuclear reactors locked inside reinforced containment vessels, they clearly present far greater potential  for the catastrophic spread of highly radioactive contaminants over huge swaths of land, polluting the environment for multiple generations spanning hundreds of years. A study by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) determined that the “boil down time” for  spent fuel rod containment ponds runs from between 4 and 22 days after loss of cooling system power before degenerating into a Fukushima-like situation, depending upon the type of nuclear reactor and how recently its latest batch of fuel rods had been decommissioned[16].


Had it not been for heroic efforts on the part of Japan’s nuclear workers to replenish waters in the spent fuel pool at Fukushima, those spent fuel rods would have melted down and ignited their zirconium cladding, which most likely would have released far more radioactive contamination than what came from the three reactor core melt-downs. Japanese officials have estimate that the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster has already released into the local environment just over half the total radioactive contamination as was released by Chernobyl, but other sources estimate it could be significantly more than was released by the accident at Chernobyl. In the event that an extreme GMD induced long-term grid collapse covering much of the globe, if just half of the world’s spent fuel ponds were to boil off their water and become radioactive zirconium fed infernos, the ensuing contamination could far exceed the cumulative effect of 400 Chernobyls.

Max.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on March 19, 2017, 12:09:33 PM
Here are a couple good articles on the subject there are may more ..

Nuclear Power Plants Will Become America’s Extinction Level Event

http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2014/04/18/nuclear-power-plants-will-become-americas-extinction-level-event/

Critical Analyses

According to Judy Haar, a recognized expert in nuclear plant failure analyses, when a nuclear power plant loses access to off-grid electricity, the event is referred to as a “station blackout”. Haar states that all 104 US nuclear power plants are built to withstand electrical outages without experiencing any core damage, through the activation of an automatic start up of emergency generators powered by diesel. Further, when emergency power kicks in, an automatic shutdown of the nuclear power plant commences. The dangerous control rods are dropped into the core, while water is pumped by the diesel power generators into the reactor to reduce the heat and thus, prevent a meltdown. Here is the catch in this process, the spent fuel rods are encased in both a primary and secondary containment structure which is designed to withstand a core meltdown. However, should the pumps stop because either the generators fail or diesel fuel is not available, the fuel rods are subsequently uncovered and a Fukushima type of core meltdown commences immediately. At this point, I took Judy Haar’s comments to a source of mine at the Palo Verde Nuclear power plant. My source informed me that as per NERC policy, nuclear power plants are required to have enough diesel fuel to run for a period of seven days.

The Unresolved Power Blackout Problem

A long-term loss of outside electrical power will most certainly interrupt the circulation of cooling water to the pools. Another one of my Palo Verde nuclear power plant sources informed me that there is no long term solution to a power blackout and that all bets are off if the blackout is due to an EMP attack. A more detailed analysis reveals that the spent fuel pools carry depleted fuel for the reactor. Normally, this spent fuel has had time to considerably decay and therefore, reducing radioactivity and heat. However, the newer discharged fuel still produces heat and needs cooling. Housed in high density storage racks, contained in buildings that vent directly into the atmosphere, radiation containment is not accounted for with regard to the spent fuel racks. In other words, there is no capture mechanism. In this scenario, accompanied by a lengthy electrical outage, and with the emergency power waning due to either generator failure or a lack of diesel needed to power the generators, the plant could lose the ability to provide cooling. The water will subsequently heat up, boil away and uncover the spent fuel rods which required being covered in at least 25 feet of water to remain benign from any deleterious effects. Ultimately, this would lead to fires as well and the release of radioactivity into the atmosphere. This would be the beginning of another Fukushima event right here on American soil. Both my source and Haar shared exactly the same scenario about how a meltdown would occur. Subsequently, I spoke with Roger Landry who worked for Raytheon in various Department of Defense projects for 28 years, many of them in this arena and Roger also confirmed this information and that the above information is well known in the industry. When I examine Congressman Franks letter to NERC and I read between the lines, it is clear that Franks knows of this risk as well, he just stops short of specifically mentioning it in his letter.

None of the NERC, or the Nuclear Regulatory tests of handling a prolonged blackout at a nuclear power plant has answered two critical questions, “What happens when these nuclear power plants run out of diesel fuel needed to run the generators”, and “What happens when some of these generators fail”? In the event of an EMP attack, can tanker trucks with diesel fuel get to all of the nuclear power plants in the US in time to re-fuel them before they stop running? Will tanker trucks even be running themselves in the aftermath of an EMP attack? And in the event of an EMP attack, it is not likely that any plant which runs low on fuel, or has a generator malfunctions, will ever get any help to mitigate the crisis prior to a plethora of meltdowns occurring. Thus, every nuclear power plant in the country has the potential to cause a Chernobyl or Fukushima type accident if our country is hit by an EMP attack.

Conclusion

I would echo her concerns and apply the “not if, but when” admonition to the possibility of a mass meltdown in this country. It is only a matter of time until this scenario for disaster comes to fruition. At the end of the day, can anyone tell me why would any country be so negligent as to not provide its nuclear plants a fool proof method to cool the secondary processes of its nuclear materials at all of its plants?


400 CHERNOBYLS: SOLAR FLARES, EMP, AND NUCLEAR ARMAGEDDON

http://www.whentechfails.com/400-chernobyls-solar-flares-emp-and-nuclear-armageddon/

There are nearly 450 nuclear reactors in the world, with hundreds more either under construction or in the planning stages. There are 104 of these reactors in the USA and 195 in Europe. Imagine what havoc it would wreak on our civilization and the planet’s ecosystems if we were to suddenly witness not just one or two nuclear melt-downs but 400 or more! How likely is it that our world might experience an event that could ultimately cause hundreds of reactors to fail and melt down at approximately the same time? I venture to say that, unless we take significant protective measures, this apocalyptic scenario is not only possible but probable.

It was a short-term cooling system failure that caused the partial reactor core melt-down in March 1979 at Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania. Similarly, according to Japanese authorities it was not direct damage from Japan’s 9.0 magnitude Tohoku Earthquake on March 11, 2011 that caused the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactor disaster, but the loss of electric power to the reactor’s cooling system pumps when the reactor’s backup batteries and diesel generators were wiped out by the ensuing tidal waves. In the hours and days after the tidal waves shuttered the cooling systems, the cores of reactors number 1, 2, and 3 were in full meltdown and released hydrogen gas, fueling explosions which breached several reactor containment vessels and blew the roof off the building housing the spent fuel storage pond of reactor number 4.

Of even greater danger and concern than the reactor cores themselves are the spent fuel rods stored in on-site cooling ponds. Lacking a permanent spent nuclear fuel storage facility, so-called “temporary” nuclear fuel containment ponds are features common to nearly all nuclear reactor facilities. They typically contain the accumulated spent fuel from 10 or more decommissioned reactor cores. Due to lack of a permanent repository, most of these fuel containment ponds are greatly overloaded and tightly packed beyond original design. They are generally surrounded by common light industrial buildings, with concrete walls and corrugated steel roofs. Unlike the active reactor cores, which are encased inside massive “containment vessels” with thick walls of concrete and steel, the buildings surrounding spent fuel rod storage ponds would do practically nothing to contain radioactive contaminants in the event of prolonged cooling system failures.

Since spent fuel ponds typically hold far greater quantities of highly radioactive material then the active nuclear reactors locked inside reinforced containment vessels, they clearly present far greater potential  for the catastrophic spread of highly radioactive contaminants over huge swaths of land, polluting the environment for multiple generations spanning hundreds of years. A study by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) determined that the “boil down time” for  spent fuel rod containment ponds runs from between 4 and 22 days after loss of cooling system power before degenerating into a Fukushima-like situation, depending upon the type of nuclear reactor and how recently its latest batch of fuel rods had been decommissioned[16].


Had it not been for heroic efforts on the part of Japan’s nuclear workers to replenish waters in the spent fuel pool at Fukushima, those spent fuel rods would have melted down and ignited their zirconium cladding, which most likely would have released far more radioactive contamination than what came from the three reactor core melt-downs. Japanese officials have estimate that the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster has already released into the local environment just over half the total radioactive contamination as was released by Chernobyl, but other sources estimate it could be significantly more than was released by the accident at Chernobyl. In the event that an extreme GMD induced long-term grid collapse covering much of the globe, if just half of the world’s spent fuel ponds were to boil off their water and become radioactive zirconium fed infernos, the ensuing contamination could far exceed the cumulative effect of 400 Chernobyls.

Max.
Title: Re: power plant meltdowns
Post by: gagan on March 19, 2017, 04:11:18 PM
Indeed, if radiation were really as terrible as most folks fear, Earth would probably already be some lifeless barren rock in space...
The present time may represent the only time in humanity's history that the planet was dotted with nuclear power plants of the type we now use.  Ionizing radiation comes with a price, whether it be for diagnostic purposes (think mammograms), therapeutic doses (think cancer treatments) or accidental exposure from something such as Fukushima, Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, or any of the future disasters that are just waiting to happen.

Madam Curie died of some blood cancer, leukemia, IIRC, which is nowadays known to be caused by exposure to ionizing radiation.  IIRC, she was not the only Curie family member to die of cancer in an age where cancer was much less prevalent.

Fear of radiation can be different from an awareness that there really isn't a "safe" dose of ionizing radiation, as it has the potential to cause chromosome breaks and other problems.  Ionizing radiation is not the clean energy solution the nuclear industry would have us believe.

Ever owned, or been required to install a smoke detector?  The radioactive americium in most of them is actually a by-product of the nuclear industry and they dreamed up a way to dispose of their so-called "low-level" radwaste--recycle it into peoples' homes as a fire alarm.

Ever seen any of that beautiful "Cloissonne" (sp) jewelry from France?  The ones I owned were earrings, usually in lovely colors, even appearing hand painted and very decorative.  After owning some of this jewelry for several years, I read in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch that they are radioactive!  So I threw them away without knowing for sure.  Then years later, in approximately 2014, I had my radiation monitor at a friend's house, checking their ambient levels, which were fine, and for some reason the earring issue arose in conversation, so I asked the friend if she owned any of those Cloissone (sp) earrings, which she did.  She went to retrieve them, and as she walked into the kitchen, my meter began clicking faster and faster and before she even got to the table it was "off the charts".  So we all verified those Cloissone earrings from France were radioactive.  Think about the fact that France derives more of its electric power from nuclear plants than any other country on the planet (to my knowledge).  What do they do with their radwaste in such a small country?  I'm not sure what they do with ALL of it, but am betting some of it was being recycled into toxic jewelry.

Then there's the issue of radwaste and storage.  The planet has more radwaste than they know what to do with.  It sits in radwaste storage facilities, ALWAYS ending up leaking and always ending up in the groundwater below.  One good example is the Weldon Spring area in MO not too far from St. Louis.  That place is so toxic that it will never be cleaned up in the time humans still walk the planet.

I'm betting there is not one radwaste storage facility that does not leak.  If people fear radiation, they are probably wise.
Title: Re: power plant meltdowns
Post by: marshall on March 19, 2017, 04:11:18 PM
Indeed, if radiation were really as terrible as most folks fear, Earth would probably already be some lifeless barren rock in space...
The present time may represent the only time in humanity's history that the planet was dotted with nuclear power plants of the type we now use.  Ionizing radiation comes with a price, whether it be for diagnostic purposes (think mammograms), therapeutic doses (think cancer treatments) or accidental exposure from something such as Fukushima, Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, or any of the future disasters that are just waiting to happen.

Madam Curie died of some blood cancer, leukemia, IIRC, which is nowadays known to be caused by exposure to ionizing radiation.  IIRC, she was not the only Curie family member to die of cancer in an age where cancer was much less prevalent.

Fear of radiation can be different from an awareness that there really isn't a "safe" dose of ionizing radiation, as it has the potential to cause chromosome breaks and other problems.  Ionizing radiation is not the clean energy solution the nuclear industry would have us believe.

Ever owned, or been required to install a smoke detector?  The radioactive americium in most of them is actually a by-product of the nuclear industry and they dreamed up a way to dispose of their so-called "low-level" radwaste--recycle it into peoples' homes as a fire alarm.

Ever seen any of that beautiful "Cloissonne" (sp) jewelry from France?  The ones I owned were earrings, usually in lovely colors, even appearing hand painted and very decorative.  After owning some of this jewelry for several years, I read in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch that they are radioactive!  So I threw them away without knowing for sure.  Then years later, in approximately 2014, I had my radiation monitor at a friend's house, checking their ambient levels, which were fine, and for some reason the earring issue arose in conversation, so I asked the friend if she owned any of those Cloissone (sp) earrings, which she did.  She went to retrieve them, and as she walked into the kitchen, my meter began clicking faster and faster and before she even got to the table it was "off the charts".  So we all verified those Cloissone earrings from France were radioactive.  Think about the fact that France derives more of its electric power from nuclear plants than any other country on the planet (to my knowledge).  What do they do with their radwaste in such a small country?  I'm not sure what they do with ALL of it, but am betting some of it was being recycled into toxic jewelry.

Then there's the issue of radwaste and storage.  The planet has more radwaste than they know what to do with.  It sits in radwaste storage facilities, ALWAYS ending up leaking and always ending up in the groundwater below.  One good example is the Weldon Spring area in MO not too far from St. Louis.  That place is so toxic that it will never be cleaned up in the time humans still walk the planet.

I'm betting there is not one radwaste storage facility that does not leak.  If people fear radiation, they are probably wise.
Title: Re: power plant meltdowns
Post by: Socrates on March 19, 2017, 11:22:58 PM
The present time may represent the only time in humanity's history that the planet was dotted with nuclear power plants of the type we now use.
You know what they say happens when "u" assume... I have heard of a radioactive site in India, probably caused by some nuclear explosion but maybe by a meltdown. But we just don't know what happened 20 or 50 millennia ago, though common (genetic) sense tells us there must have been humans walking around back then with brains exactly like ours [since genetic mutations happen extremely slowly and 50,000 years is nothing when it comes to evolution].

We should respect radioactivity and the threat of nuclear fallout, you will get no argument from me there. Having said that, i feel there appears to be a general assessment of... "We're all doomed, doomed i say! NO ONE can survive anything that destroys all the nuclear power plants!" And my point is that this fatalistic approach is not warranted. It is not supported by the research. There would be dead zones, for sure, but the same can be said for geologic upsets, like the kind that made 4,000 meter mountains out of 400 meter hills where the Alps now are, some 12,000 years ago...
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on March 20, 2017, 09:55:41 AM
Quote
Nuclear Power Plants Will Become America’s Extinction Level Event

http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2014/04/18/nuclear-power-plants-will-become-americas-extinction-level-event/

Critical Analyses

OK, finally a real technical analysis, thanks MadMax.  I do have one criticism of it, however.  Fukushima experienced severe damage to the core as well as to the cooling ponds, followed by meltdown of the damaged core.  That would not be the situation in the case of EMP damage to electronics.  Claims that the possible radiation escape from nonfunctional cooling ponds would be equivalent to the Fukushima event are exaggerated.

Do we have any information about which - if any - of the nuclear power plants could put water into the cooling ponds by gravity feed from surface water?  Many of the plants are on the beaches of lakes, rivers, or oceans, and the spent rods in the cooling ponds are below surface level.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on March 20, 2017, 09:55:41 AM
Quote
Nuclear Power Plants Will Become America’s Extinction Level Event

http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2014/04/18/nuclear-power-plants-will-become-americas-extinction-level-event/

Critical Analyses

OK, finally a real technical analysis, thanks MadMax.  I do have one criticism of it, however.  Fukushima experienced severe damage to the core as well as to the cooling ponds, followed by meltdown of the damaged core.  That would not be the situation in the case of EMP damage to electronics.  Claims that the possible radiation escape from nonfunctional cooling ponds would be equivalent to the Fukushima event are exaggerated.

Do we have any information about which - if any - of the nuclear power plants could put water into the cooling ponds by gravity feed from surface water?  Many of the plants are on the beaches of lakes, rivers, or oceans, and the spent rods in the cooling ponds are below surface level.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: R.R. Book on March 20, 2017, 04:00:00 PM
Hi all,

Regarding concerns about genetic and other damage from ionizing radiation:

PQQ (a derivitive of B-6?) is capable of repairing damaged mitochondrial DNA in the cell, if I understand correctly.  According to these two studies published on the National Institutes of Health website, a new definition of aging is linked to mitochondrial death (mitochondria being the energy producing factories of the cells).  So death=no energy.

http://benthamscience.com/journal/abstracts.php?journalID=cas&articleID=95200)

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00424-009-0724-5/fulltext.html

According to Wikipedia, the mitochondria contain between 50 and 500 times as much DNA as the cell nucleus, and contain the most easily damaged DNA as well:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_DNA

These next two studies establish that PQQ is safe and needs to be supplemented, and establish suggested amounts:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1136652/pdf/biochemj00065-0028.pdf)

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/130/4/719.full)

This study describes the mechanism by which it works in the body:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1460-9568.2002.02169.x/abstract)

This study postulates that only a very small amount can reverse damage, and specifically addresses mitochondrial protection:
http://jn.nutrition.org/content/136/2/390.full?sid=e43a4ab7-42b9-4702-9b25-fc7cf8d2ef33)

There are also studies posted by NIH on use of another B vitamin, pantothenic acid, to prevent and reverse radiation damage. 





Title: Re: power plant meltdowns
Post by: gagan on March 20, 2017, 04:47:45 PM
The present time may represent the only time in humanity's history that the planet was dotted with nuclear power plants of the type we now use.
You know what they say happens when "u" assume... I have heard of a radioactive site in India, probably caused by some nuclear explosion but maybe by a meltdown. But we just don't know what happened 20 or 50 millennia ago, though common (genetic) sense tells us there must have been humans walking around back then with brains exactly like ours [since genetic mutations happen extremely slowly and 50,000 years is nothing when it comes to evolution].

We should respect radioactivity and the threat of nuclear fallout, you will get no argument from me there. Having said that, i feel there appears to be a general assessment of... "We're all doomed, doomed i say! NO ONE can survive anything that destroys all the nuclear power plants!" And my point is that this fatalistic approach is not warranted. It is not supported by the research. There would be dead zones, for sure, but the same can be said for geologic upsets, like the kind that made 4,000 meter mountains out of 400 meter hills where the Alps now are, some 12,000 years ago...
I don't think ALL would be automatically doomed, but perhaps we're about to find out.  OTOH, I keep thinkiing of the Hopi Prophecies about the Earth's destruction and subsequent purification.  Who knows what cosmic or other forces could "purify" the Earth.  We do have a lot to learn.
Title: Re: power plant meltdowns
Post by: marshall on March 20, 2017, 04:47:45 PM
The present time may represent the only time in humanity's history that the planet was dotted with nuclear power plants of the type we now use.
You know what they say happens when "u" assume... I have heard of a radioactive site in India, probably caused by some nuclear explosion but maybe by a meltdown. But we just don't know what happened 20 or 50 millennia ago, though common (genetic) sense tells us there must have been humans walking around back then with brains exactly like ours [since genetic mutations happen extremely slowly and 50,000 years is nothing when it comes to evolution].

We should respect radioactivity and the threat of nuclear fallout, you will get no argument from me there. Having said that, i feel there appears to be a general assessment of... "We're all doomed, doomed i say! NO ONE can survive anything that destroys all the nuclear power plants!" And my point is that this fatalistic approach is not warranted. It is not supported by the research. There would be dead zones, for sure, but the same can be said for geologic upsets, like the kind that made 4,000 meter mountains out of 400 meter hills where the Alps now are, some 12,000 years ago...
I don't think ALL would be automatically doomed, but perhaps we're about to find out.  OTOH, I keep thinkiing of the Hopi Prophecies about the Earth's destruction and subsequent purification.  Who knows what cosmic or other forces could "purify" the Earth.  We do have a lot to learn.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on March 20, 2017, 04:51:34 PM
Quote
Nuclear Power Plants Will Become America’s Extinction Level Event

http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2014/04/18/nuclear-power-plants-will-become-americas-extinction-level-event/

Critical Analyses

OK, finally a real technical analysis, thanks MadMax.  I do have one criticism of it, however.  Fukushima experienced severe damage to the core as well as to the cooling ponds, followed by meltdown of the damaged core.  That would not be the situation in the case of EMP damage to electronics.  Claims that the possible radiation escape from nonfunctional cooling ponds would be equivalent to the Fukushima event are exaggerated.

Do we have any information about which - if any - of the nuclear power plants could put water into the cooling ponds by gravity feed from surface water?  Many of the plants are on the beaches of lakes, rivers, or oceans, and the spent rods in the cooling ponds are below surface level.
The Calloway plant in MO uses the Missouri River for cooling waters--you know, cooler water in, then warmer water out, so it always depends on the flow of the MO River being uninterrupted.  I don't know of any body of water in that vicinity (Fulton County) that is large enough to flow via gravity down into the cooling pools.  Since they always seem to do things "on the cheap", they've probabaly not got the option of gravity flow cool water.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on March 20, 2017, 04:51:34 PM
Quote
Nuclear Power Plants Will Become America’s Extinction Level Event

http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2014/04/18/nuclear-power-plants-will-become-americas-extinction-level-event/

Critical Analyses

OK, finally a real technical analysis, thanks MadMax.  I do have one criticism of it, however.  Fukushima experienced severe damage to the core as well as to the cooling ponds, followed by meltdown of the damaged core.  That would not be the situation in the case of EMP damage to electronics.  Claims that the possible radiation escape from nonfunctional cooling ponds would be equivalent to the Fukushima event are exaggerated.

Do we have any information about which - if any - of the nuclear power plants could put water into the cooling ponds by gravity feed from surface water?  Many of the plants are on the beaches of lakes, rivers, or oceans, and the spent rods in the cooling ponds are below surface level.
The Calloway plant in MO uses the Missouri River for cooling waters--you know, cooler water in, then warmer water out, so it always depends on the flow of the MO River being uninterrupted.  I don't know of any body of water in that vicinity (Fulton County) that is large enough to flow via gravity down into the cooling pools.  Since they always seem to do things "on the cheap", they've probabaly not got the option of gravity flow cool water.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on March 20, 2017, 04:59:13 PM
Hi all,

Regarding concerns about genetic and other damage from ionizing radiation:

PQQ (a derivitive of B-6?) is capable of repairing damaged mitochondrial DNA in the cell, if I understand correctly.  According to these two studies published on the National Institutes of Health website, a new definition of aging is linked to mitochondrial death (mitochondria being the energy producing factories of the cells).  So death=no energy.

http://benthamscience.com/journal/abstracts.php?journalID=cas&articleID=95200)

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00424-009-0724-5/fulltext.html

According to Wikipedia, the mitochondria contain between 50 and 500 times as much DNA as the cell nucleus, and contain the most easily damaged DNA as well:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_DNA

These next two studies establish that PQQ is safe and needs to be supplemented, and establish suggested amounts:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1136652/pdf/biochemj00065-0028.pdf)

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/130/4/719.full)

This study describes the mechanism by which it works in the body:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1460-9568.2002.02169.x/abstract)

This study postulates that only a very small amount can reverse damage, and specifically addresses mitochondrial protection:
http://jn.nutrition.org/content/136/2/390.full?sid=e43a4ab7-42b9-4702-9b25-fc7cf8d2ef33)

There are also studies posted by NIH on use of another B vitamin, pantothenic acid, to prevent and reverse radiation damage.
Your links are very appreciated, as we will all probably be exposed to SOME degree of radioactive aerosols, foods, water, or objects unknowingly, and will most likely start to experience various strange symptoms.

About a month or so ago there was a "blip" of elevated readings on my rad-monitors, and then a few weeks later my thyroid began to swell.  It is still swollen and after adding Iosol and Brazil nuts (for selenium) to my diet, the swelling is still there, so now am self-dosing with an herbal prep. that I'll report on in one of the Self-Healing areas on the TH.

So, these links might be something we all need to study, and even photocopy some of what's out there, as we may not always have internet.  In fact, we might be without internet for years.  Who knows?  Knowledge is power, so thanks for the links.

One link I love for health issues is run by Sayer Ji and it is www.greenmedinfo.com and he has done a fantastic job.  There are probably a thousand articles on turmeric.  So much more.

Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on March 20, 2017, 04:59:13 PM
Hi all,

Regarding concerns about genetic and other damage from ionizing radiation:

PQQ (a derivitive of B-6?) is capable of repairing damaged mitochondrial DNA in the cell, if I understand correctly.  According to these two studies published on the National Institutes of Health website, a new definition of aging is linked to mitochondrial death (mitochondria being the energy producing factories of the cells).  So death=no energy.

http://benthamscience.com/journal/abstracts.php?journalID=cas&articleID=95200)

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00424-009-0724-5/fulltext.html

According to Wikipedia, the mitochondria contain between 50 and 500 times as much DNA as the cell nucleus, and contain the most easily damaged DNA as well:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_DNA

These next two studies establish that PQQ is safe and needs to be supplemented, and establish suggested amounts:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1136652/pdf/biochemj00065-0028.pdf)

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/130/4/719.full)

This study describes the mechanism by which it works in the body:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1460-9568.2002.02169.x/abstract)

This study postulates that only a very small amount can reverse damage, and specifically addresses mitochondrial protection:
http://jn.nutrition.org/content/136/2/390.full?sid=e43a4ab7-42b9-4702-9b25-fc7cf8d2ef33)

There are also studies posted by NIH on use of another B vitamin, pantothenic acid, to prevent and reverse radiation damage.
Your links are very appreciated, as we will all probably be exposed to SOME degree of radioactive aerosols, foods, water, or objects unknowingly, and will most likely start to experience various strange symptoms.

About a month or so ago there was a "blip" of elevated readings on my rad-monitors, and then a few weeks later my thyroid began to swell.  It is still swollen and after adding Iosol and Brazil nuts (for selenium) to my diet, the swelling is still there, so now am self-dosing with an herbal prep. that I'll report on in one of the Self-Healing areas on the TH.

So, these links might be something we all need to study, and even photocopy some of what's out there, as we may not always have internet.  In fact, we might be without internet for years.  Who knows?  Knowledge is power, so thanks for the links.

One link I love for health issues is run by Sayer Ji and it is www.greenmedinfo.com and he has done a fantastic job.  There are probably a thousand articles on turmeric.  So much more.

Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: R.R. Book on March 21, 2017, 07:49:12 AM
Thank you so much for the link, Ilinda.  Lots of good reading there - I especially agree with the comment on the website that all cholesterol is good, esp. as a brain, hormone and bile component. 

Good that you're supplementing Iosol and selenium.  Here are some studies on the website of the National Institutes of Health suggesting that we Westerners may be drastically under-dosing ourselves with iodine, even for those who supplement, as Japanese women not assimilated into Western culture are virtually free of iodine deficiency diseases (with emphasis on breast health) and consume the element in large mg amounts, rather than in the mcg amounts available supplementally in the West:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18590348

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC314438/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8230262

So maybe it might be possible to infer that more of the Iosol could be taken experimentally, perhaps in the morning so as not to cause p.m. insomnia?



Title: Re: iodine deficiency
Post by: Socrates on March 21, 2017, 09:28:20 AM
Japanese women not assimilated into Western culture are virtually free of iodine deficiency diseases (with emphasis on breast health) and consume the element in large mg amounts, rather than in the mcg amounts available supplementally in the West
If you are not already regularly taking in considerable amounts of iodine/iodide [the body needs both iodine and it's salt form], you would do well to listen to the expert, Jorge Flechas (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBM2qWKkFxE); it might save your life...

Some practical pointers...
- Lugol's is a combination of iodine and it's salt, iodide
- drop on skin; it is easily absorbed this way
- the skin will color but the color disappears as the Lugol's is absorbed [use sole of foot]
- if the skin is still colored after 24 hours, you are no longer iodine deficient
- this will take a while... [some months]
- taking iodine pushes out another halogen your body has absorbed in it's place: flourine
- taking a lot of iodine pushes out potentially painful amounts of the toxic flourine
- too much flourine in the blood will lead to headache
- Robert Von (http://b2012overleven.runboard.com/t394) advises the following protocol to prevent the above:
day 1: 1 drop; day 2: 2 drops; [...] day 6: 6 drops; then 3 days no drops and resume protocol (potentially by increasing the amount of drops, i.e. 2, 4, 6, etc.)

META: as Ron Cusson (http://essencesea.com/meet-the-team/) has argued, all great human cultures developed around locations where sea minerals were abundant, including iodine... Usually we're talking about river deltas [Rome, Egypt, Tianjian] but also Tibet [i.e. Himalayan salt, i.e. dried ocean beds]
Title: Re: iodine deficiency
Post by: gagan on March 21, 2017, 05:17:31 PM
Japanese women not assimilated into Western culture are virtually free of iodine deficiency diseases (with emphasis on breast health) and consume the element in large mg amounts, rather than in the mcg amounts available supplementally in the West
If you are not already regularly taking in considerable amounts of iodine/iodide [the body needs both iodine and it's salt form], you would do well to listen to the expert, Jorge Flechas (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBM2qWKkFxE); it might save your life...

Some practical pointers...
- Lugol's is a combination of iodine and it's salt, iodide
- drop on skin; it is easily absorbed this way
- the skin will color but the color disappears as the Lugol's is absorbed [use sole of foot]
- if the skin is still colored after 24 hours, you are no longer iodine deficient
- this will take a while... [some months]
- taking iodine pushes out another halogen your body has absorbed in it's place: flourine
- taking a lot of iodine pushes out potentially painful amounts of the toxic flourine
- too much flourine in the blood will lead to headache
- Robert Von (http://b2012overleven.runboard.com/t394) advises the following protocol to prevent the above:
day 1: 1 drop; day 2: 2 drops; [...] day 6: 6 drops; then 3 days no drops and resume protocol (potentially by increasing the amount of drops, i.e. 2, 4, 6, etc.)

META: as Ron Cusson (http://essencesea.com/meet-the-team/) has argued, all great human cultures developed around locations where sea minerals were abundant, including iodine... Usually we're talking about river deltas [Rome, Egypt, Tianjian] but also Tibet [i.e. Himalayan salt, i.e. dried ocean beds]

Really excellent video of Dr. Flechas' presentation.  All my life I've been off and on hypothyroid, coming from family with mom, and three daughters all having thyroid problems, and we did live in "The Goiter Belt".  Long story short, I've been able to avoid surgery, ablation, etc., but both sisters have thyroid nodules, and mom had thyroidectomy for goiter.

So, in spite of studying the thyroid for years, I did learn some things, plus will pressure hubby to watch the video, as he has dry eyes and dry mouth sometimes, and am pondering his own possibly low iodine levels. 

Also, I had read hints and rumors about our iodine needs being greater than we've been told, but Dr. Flechas is convincing about the amounts.  I have been taking 153 ug/day, and will see how things look in a few weeks before considering whether to raise the level of Iosol.  Hubby had looked at the organic kelp we ordered for the goats and talked about how appetizing it looks.  Maybe we might try it in soups.

Thanks for posting the Jorge Flechas M.D. tutorial-of-sorts on iodine and things related.
Title: Re: iodine deficiency
Post by: marshall on March 21, 2017, 05:17:31 PM
Japanese women not assimilated into Western culture are virtually free of iodine deficiency diseases (with emphasis on breast health) and consume the element in large mg amounts, rather than in the mcg amounts available supplementally in the West
If you are not already regularly taking in considerable amounts of iodine/iodide [the body needs both iodine and it's salt form], you would do well to listen to the expert, Jorge Flechas (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBM2qWKkFxE); it might save your life...

Some practical pointers...
- Lugol's is a combination of iodine and it's salt, iodide
- drop on skin; it is easily absorbed this way
- the skin will color but the color disappears as the Lugol's is absorbed [use sole of foot]
- if the skin is still colored after 24 hours, you are no longer iodine deficient
- this will take a while... [some months]
- taking iodine pushes out another halogen your body has absorbed in it's place: flourine
- taking a lot of iodine pushes out potentially painful amounts of the toxic flourine
- too much flourine in the blood will lead to headache
- Robert Von (http://b2012overleven.runboard.com/t394) advises the following protocol to prevent the above:
day 1: 1 drop; day 2: 2 drops; [...] day 6: 6 drops; then 3 days no drops and resume protocol (potentially by increasing the amount of drops, i.e. 2, 4, 6, etc.)

META: as Ron Cusson (http://essencesea.com/meet-the-team/) has argued, all great human cultures developed around locations where sea minerals were abundant, including iodine... Usually we're talking about river deltas [Rome, Egypt, Tianjian] but also Tibet [i.e. Himalayan salt, i.e. dried ocean beds]

Really excellent video of Dr. Flechas' presentation.  All my life I've been off and on hypothyroid, coming from family with mom, and three daughters all having thyroid problems, and we did live in "The Goiter Belt".  Long story short, I've been able to avoid surgery, ablation, etc., but both sisters have thyroid nodules, and mom had thyroidectomy for goiter.

So, in spite of studying the thyroid for years, I did learn some things, plus will pressure hubby to watch the video, as he has dry eyes and dry mouth sometimes, and am pondering his own possibly low iodine levels. 

Also, I had read hints and rumors about our iodine needs being greater than we've been told, but Dr. Flechas is convincing about the amounts.  I have been taking 153 ug/day, and will see how things look in a few weeks before considering whether to raise the level of Iosol.  Hubby had looked at the organic kelp we ordered for the goats and talked about how appetizing it looks.  Maybe we might try it in soups.

Thanks for posting the Jorge Flechas M.D. tutorial-of-sorts on iodine and things related.
Title: Re: nascent iodine
Post by: Socrates on March 21, 2017, 11:44:17 PM
I get my nascent iodine (https://www.thefinchleyclinic.com/shop/detoxadine-iodine-p-1042.html?gclid=Cj0KEQjwnsPGBRDo4c6RqK-Oqu8BEiQAwNviCdyNebX2q6bD5bVIf5XrXK6TbRVdWyn4PpuHkcyHdkgaAoc48P8HAQ) through OneRadioNetwork (http://www.oneradionetwork) [but my computer won't let me link theirs :-( ].

It's a process and takes some time [just, as posted above, don't overdo or do before 'sleepy time'].
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on November 09, 2017, 04:46:39 AM
Hi all,

Regarding concerns about genetic and other damage from ionizing radiation:

PQQ (a derivitive of B-6?) is capable of repairing damaged mitochondrial DNA in the cell, if I understand correctly.  According to these two studies published on the National Institutes of Health website, a new definition of aging is linked to mitochondrial death (mitochondria being the energy producing factories of the cells).  So death=no energy.

http://benthamscience.com/journal/abstracts.php?journalID=cas&articleID=95200)

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00424-009-0724-5/fulltext.html

According to Wikipedia, the mitochondria contain between 50 and 500 times as much DNA as the cell nucleus, and contain the most easily damaged DNA as well:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_DNA

These next two studies establish that PQQ is safe and needs to be supplemented, and establish suggested amounts:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1136652/pdf/biochemj00065-0028.pdf)

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/130/4/719.full)

This study describes the mechanism by which it works in the body:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1460-9568.2002.02169.x/abstract)

This study postulates that only a very small amount can reverse damage, and specifically addresses mitochondrial protection:
http://jn.nutrition.org/content/136/2/390.full?sid=e43a4ab7-42b9-4702-9b25-fc7cf8d2ef33)

There are also studies posted by NIH on use of another B vitamin, pantothenic acid, to prevent and reverse radiation damage.

RR, awesome data to read, thank you so much.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on November 09, 2017, 04:46:39 AM
Hi all,

Regarding concerns about genetic and other damage from ionizing radiation:

PQQ (a derivitive of B-6?) is capable of repairing damaged mitochondrial DNA in the cell, if I understand correctly.  According to these two studies published on the National Institutes of Health website, a new definition of aging is linked to mitochondrial death (mitochondria being the energy producing factories of the cells).  So death=no energy.

http://benthamscience.com/journal/abstracts.php?journalID=cas&articleID=95200)

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00424-009-0724-5/fulltext.html

According to Wikipedia, the mitochondria contain between 50 and 500 times as much DNA as the cell nucleus, and contain the most easily damaged DNA as well:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_DNA

These next two studies establish that PQQ is safe and needs to be supplemented, and establish suggested amounts:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1136652/pdf/biochemj00065-0028.pdf)

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/130/4/719.full)

This study describes the mechanism by which it works in the body:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1460-9568.2002.02169.x/abstract)

This study postulates that only a very small amount can reverse damage, and specifically addresses mitochondrial protection:
http://jn.nutrition.org/content/136/2/390.full?sid=e43a4ab7-42b9-4702-9b25-fc7cf8d2ef33)

There are also studies posted by NIH on use of another B vitamin, pantothenic acid, to prevent and reverse radiation damage.

RR, awesome data to read, thank you so much.
Title: Re: nascent iodine
Post by: gagan on November 09, 2017, 04:46:58 AM
I get my nascent iodine (https://www.thefinchleyclinic.com/shop/detoxadine-iodine-p-1042.html?gclid=Cj0KEQjwnsPGBRDo4c6RqK-Oqu8BEiQAwNviCdyNebX2q6bD5bVIf5XrXK6TbRVdWyn4PpuHkcyHdkgaAoc48P8HAQ) through OneRadioNetwork (http://www.oneradionetwork) [but my computer won't let me link theirs :-( ].

It's a process and takes some time [just, as posted above, don't overdo or do before 'sleepy time'].

Thanks!
Title: Re: nascent iodine
Post by: marshall on November 09, 2017, 04:46:58 AM
I get my nascent iodine (https://www.thefinchleyclinic.com/shop/detoxadine-iodine-p-1042.html?gclid=Cj0KEQjwnsPGBRDo4c6RqK-Oqu8BEiQAwNviCdyNebX2q6bD5bVIf5XrXK6TbRVdWyn4PpuHkcyHdkgaAoc48P8HAQ) through OneRadioNetwork (http://www.oneradionetwork) [but my computer won't let me link theirs :-( ].

It's a process and takes some time [just, as posted above, don't overdo or do before 'sleepy time'].

Thanks!
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on November 09, 2017, 04:53:30 AM
Hi all,

Regarding concerns about genetic and other damage from ionizing radiation:

PQQ (a derivitive of B-6?) is capable of repairing damaged mitochondrial DNA in the cell, if I understand correctly.  According to these two studies published on the National Institutes of Health website, a new definition of aging is linked to mitochondrial death (mitochondria being the energy producing factories of the cells).  So death=no energy.

http://benthamscience.com/journal/abstracts.php?journalID=cas&articleID=95200)

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00424-009-0724-5/fulltext.html

According to Wikipedia, the mitochondria contain between 50 and 500 times as much DNA as the cell nucleus, and contain the most easily damaged DNA as well:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_DNA

These next two studies establish that PQQ is safe and needs to be supplemented, and establish suggested amounts:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1136652/pdf/biochemj00065-0028.pdf)

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/130/4/719.full)

This study describes the mechanism by which it works in the body:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1460-9568.2002.02169.x/abstract)

This study postulates that only a very small amount can reverse damage, and specifically addresses mitochondrial protection:
http://jn.nutrition.org/content/136/2/390.full?sid=e43a4ab7-42b9-4702-9b25-fc7cf8d2ef33)

There are also studies posted by NIH on use of another B vitamin, pantothenic acid, to prevent and reverse radiation damage.
Your links are very appreciated, as we will all probably be exposed to SOME degree of radioactive aerosols, foods, water, or objects unknowingly, and will most likely start to experience various strange symptoms.

About a month or so ago there was a "blip" of elevated readings on my rad-monitors, and then a few weeks later my thyroid began to swell.  It is still swollen and after adding Iosol and Brazil nuts (for selenium) to my diet, the swelling is still there, so now am self-dosing with an herbal prep. that I'll report on in one of the Self-Healing areas on the TH.

So, these links might be something we all need to study, and even photocopy some of what's out there, as we may not always have internet.  In fact, we might be without internet for years.  Who knows?  Knowledge is power, so thanks for the links.

One link I love for health issues is run by Sayer Ji and it is www.greenmedinfo.com and he has done a fantastic job.  There are probably a thousand articles on turmeric.  So much more.

Wow ilinda, I had missed your post here, too. Let us know how that is coming along with monitoring your situation? You had suggested green media info... will remember...
You inspired me to look up some things..quickly posting a few things which I want to make sure my family knows about:

https://www.drweil.com/health-wellness/balanced-living/technology/protection-against-radiation/ DR. WEIL

Protection Against Radiation?
The terrible tragedies in Japan – earthquake, tsunami, danger from the release of radiation – are heartbreaking.  I’m wondering what precautions can safeguard health if the radiation travels beyond Japan.

– MARCH 17, 2011  EXCERPT from article:

I discussed other preventive strategies with Tieraona Low Dog, M.D., an internationally recognized expert in the fields of integrative medicine, dietary supplements and women’s health. She said that there is reason to believe that taking two to four grams of curcumin, the active compound in turmeric, can help protect a number of body tissues. In addition, reishi and cordyceps mushrooms can protect bone marrow from toxic assaults, and antioxidants can help the body defend itself from radiation damage. Since radioactive particles may be carried by dust, having a HEPA filter in your home would also be a good idea in the event of a nuclear accident that is close enough to be of concern.

[continues]

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/turmeric-extract-strikes-root-cause-cancer-malignancy
...
http://www.oncologynurseadvisor.com/advisor-forum/role-of-curcumin-in-radiation-therapy/article/301141/

Role of curcumin in radiation therapy. Turmeric is a spice used to flavor everything from curry dishes to chutney, pickles, and American mustard. Its first recorded use dates back to 600 B.C. ... According to some researchers, these same anti-inflammatory effects assist curcumin in killing tumor cells.Jul 1, 2013
...
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on November 09, 2017, 04:53:30 AM
Hi all,

Regarding concerns about genetic and other damage from ionizing radiation:

PQQ (a derivitive of B-6?) is capable of repairing damaged mitochondrial DNA in the cell, if I understand correctly.  According to these two studies published on the National Institutes of Health website, a new definition of aging is linked to mitochondrial death (mitochondria being the energy producing factories of the cells).  So death=no energy.

http://benthamscience.com/journal/abstracts.php?journalID=cas&articleID=95200)

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00424-009-0724-5/fulltext.html

According to Wikipedia, the mitochondria contain between 50 and 500 times as much DNA as the cell nucleus, and contain the most easily damaged DNA as well:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_DNA

These next two studies establish that PQQ is safe and needs to be supplemented, and establish suggested amounts:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1136652/pdf/biochemj00065-0028.pdf)

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/130/4/719.full)

This study describes the mechanism by which it works in the body:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1460-9568.2002.02169.x/abstract)

This study postulates that only a very small amount can reverse damage, and specifically addresses mitochondrial protection:
http://jn.nutrition.org/content/136/2/390.full?sid=e43a4ab7-42b9-4702-9b25-fc7cf8d2ef33)

There are also studies posted by NIH on use of another B vitamin, pantothenic acid, to prevent and reverse radiation damage.
Your links are very appreciated, as we will all probably be exposed to SOME degree of radioactive aerosols, foods, water, or objects unknowingly, and will most likely start to experience various strange symptoms.

About a month or so ago there was a "blip" of elevated readings on my rad-monitors, and then a few weeks later my thyroid began to swell.  It is still swollen and after adding Iosol and Brazil nuts (for selenium) to my diet, the swelling is still there, so now am self-dosing with an herbal prep. that I'll report on in one of the Self-Healing areas on the TH.

So, these links might be something we all need to study, and even photocopy some of what's out there, as we may not always have internet.  In fact, we might be without internet for years.  Who knows?  Knowledge is power, so thanks for the links.

One link I love for health issues is run by Sayer Ji and it is www.greenmedinfo.com and he has done a fantastic job.  There are probably a thousand articles on turmeric.  So much more.

Wow ilinda, I had missed your post here, too. Let us know how that is coming along with monitoring your situation? You had suggested green media info... will remember...
You inspired me to look up some things..quickly posting a few things which I want to make sure my family knows about:

https://www.drweil.com/health-wellness/balanced-living/technology/protection-against-radiation/ DR. WEIL

Protection Against Radiation?
The terrible tragedies in Japan – earthquake, tsunami, danger from the release of radiation – are heartbreaking.  I’m wondering what precautions can safeguard health if the radiation travels beyond Japan.

– MARCH 17, 2011  EXCERPT from article:

I discussed other preventive strategies with Tieraona Low Dog, M.D., an internationally recognized expert in the fields of integrative medicine, dietary supplements and women’s health. She said that there is reason to believe that taking two to four grams of curcumin, the active compound in turmeric, can help protect a number of body tissues. In addition, reishi and cordyceps mushrooms can protect bone marrow from toxic assaults, and antioxidants can help the body defend itself from radiation damage. Since radioactive particles may be carried by dust, having a HEPA filter in your home would also be a good idea in the event of a nuclear accident that is close enough to be of concern.

[continues]

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/turmeric-extract-strikes-root-cause-cancer-malignancy
...
http://www.oncologynurseadvisor.com/advisor-forum/role-of-curcumin-in-radiation-therapy/article/301141/

Role of curcumin in radiation therapy. Turmeric is a spice used to flavor everything from curry dishes to chutney, pickles, and American mustard. Its first recorded use dates back to 600 B.C. ... According to some researchers, these same anti-inflammatory effects assist curcumin in killing tumor cells.Jul 1, 2013
...
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: R.R. Book on November 09, 2017, 07:32:54 AM
Quote
Re: nascent iodine
« Reply #43 on: Today at 04:46:58 AM »

    Quote
    Modify

Quote from: Socrates on March 21, 2017, 11:44:17 PM

    I get my nascent iodine through OneRadioNetwork [but my computer won't let me link theirs :-( ].

    It's a process and takes some time [just, as posted above, don't overdo or do before 'sleepy time'].


Thanks!

I start my day with it every day in water or tea. :)
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on November 13, 2017, 05:08:33 PM
RE OHIO possibly having some good survival regions:

I've been spending a lot of time and effort looking at geographical maps, fracking maps...just some rudimentary knowledge gained... Will share more as I have it.
Mainly thinking of a state my local family and friends could go to, completely out of this Florida region,
but think about Town Hall folks too.
I had crossed Ohio off my list, temporarily then came across some reminders.

Ohio has a "Hill Country" geographically part of the Appalachian Plateau.
The "lower 1/3 southeast quadrant of the state."
Although fracking has encroached upon this region, there are some areas without wells.
...

Counties of Appalachian Ohio, with East Central region in yellow, South East region in red, and Southern region in blue 1. Adams County 2. Ashtabula County 3. Athens County 4. Belmont County 5. Brown County 6. Carroll County 7. Clermont County 8. Columbiana County 9. Coshocton County 10. Gallia County 11. Guernsey County 12. Harrison County 13. Highland County 14. Hocking County 15. Holmes County 16. Jackson County 17. Jefferson County 18. Lawrence County 19. Mahoning County 20. Meigs County 21. Monroe County 22. Morgan County 23. Muskingum County 24. Noble County 25. Perry County 26. Pike County 27. Ross County 28. Scioto County 29. Trumbull County 30. Tuscarawas County 31. Vinton County 32. Washington County
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on November 13, 2017, 05:08:33 PM
RE OHIO possibly having some good survival regions:

I've been spending a lot of time and effort looking at geographical maps, fracking maps...just some rudimentary knowledge gained... Will share more as I have it.
Mainly thinking of a state my local family and friends could go to, completely out of this Florida region,
but think about Town Hall folks too.
I had crossed Ohio off my list, temporarily then came across some reminders.

Ohio has a "Hill Country" geographically part of the Appalachian Plateau.
The "lower 1/3 southeast quadrant of the state."
Although fracking has encroached upon this region, there are some areas without wells.
...

Counties of Appalachian Ohio, with East Central region in yellow, South East region in red, and Southern region in blue 1. Adams County 2. Ashtabula County 3. Athens County 4. Belmont County 5. Brown County 6. Carroll County 7. Clermont County 8. Columbiana County 9. Coshocton County 10. Gallia County 11. Guernsey County 12. Harrison County 13. Highland County 14. Hocking County 15. Holmes County 16. Jackson County 17. Jefferson County 18. Lawrence County 19. Mahoning County 20. Meigs County 21. Monroe County 22. Morgan County 23. Muskingum County 24. Noble County 25. Perry County 26. Pike County 27. Ross County 28. Scioto County 29. Trumbull County 30. Tuscarawas County 31. Vinton County 32. Washington County
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: R.R. Book on November 13, 2017, 05:48:34 PM
Barb, that would put you an easy drive or train ride from here - could be done in a day (no telling what will happen to those means of transportation though...).  Hope Wes will go wherever you go - will keep it in prayers. :)
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on November 13, 2017, 07:02:09 PM
Barb, that would put you an easy drive or train ride from here - could be done in a day (no telling what will happen to those means of transportation though...).  Hope Wes will go wherever you go - will keep it in prayers. :)

You are right that drive is doable... I am putting Ohio back on the list.
Thank you so much for the good thoughts and prayers.
It would mean a whole lot to me to have all my kids with me...
4 out of 5 of them are out here.
Only one of my kids is on the other side of the country but she is happily married in a good inland area with good group of friends, resources, CA family...
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on November 13, 2017, 07:02:09 PM
Barb, that would put you an easy drive or train ride from here - could be done in a day (no telling what will happen to those means of transportation though...).  Hope Wes will go wherever you go - will keep it in prayers. :)

You are right that drive is doable... I am putting Ohio back on the list.
Thank you so much for the good thoughts and prayers.
It would mean a whole lot to me to have all my kids with me...
4 out of 5 of them are out here.
Only one of my kids is on the other side of the country but she is happily married in a good inland area with good group of friends, resources, CA family...
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on November 13, 2017, 07:30:17 PM
This is the sort of thing you will run into randomly while looking at areas, land ads with in a region you think might work...

http://www.yourohiovalley.com/story/25894483/authorities-confirm-well-site-fire-in-monroe-county

WTRF.com UPDATE: Authorities Confirm Monroe County Well Site Fire

Posted: Jun 28, 2014 10:52 AM EDT


Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on November 13, 2017, 07:30:17 PM
This is the sort of thing you will run into randomly while looking at areas, land ads with in a region you think might work...

http://www.yourohiovalley.com/story/25894483/authorities-confirm-well-site-fire-in-monroe-county

WTRF.com UPDATE: Authorities Confirm Monroe County Well Site Fire

Posted: Jun 28, 2014 10:52 AM EDT


Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on November 13, 2017, 09:09:13 PM
Barb, that would put you an easy drive or train ride from here - could be done in a day (no telling what will happen to those means of transportation though...).  Hope Wes will go wherever you go - will keep it in prayers. :)

RR - that's funny I was just musing about train bugouts the other day... no idea how reliable any of that will be...
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on November 13, 2017, 09:09:13 PM
Barb, that would put you an easy drive or train ride from here - could be done in a day (no telling what will happen to those means of transportation though...).  Hope Wes will go wherever you go - will keep it in prayers. :)

RR - that's funny I was just musing about train bugouts the other day... no idea how reliable any of that will be...
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: R.R. Book on April 26, 2019, 04:26:59 AM
Those wishing to relocate in the States might be interested in this new chart:

(https://infographic.statista.com/normal/chartoftheday_13601_the_best_and_worst_places_to_breath_air_in_america_n.jpg)
https://www.statista.com/chart/13601/the-best-and-worst-places-to-breath-air-in-america/
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on April 26, 2019, 09:53:46 PM
R.R. - good data to keep in mind...
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on April 26, 2019, 09:53:46 PM
R.R. - good data to keep in mind...
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: gagan on November 11, 2019, 12:05:50 AM
Marshall Masters gives consultations on the best, most practical bugout location.
Title: Re: Choosing the RIGHT Survival Location
Post by: marshall on November 11, 2019, 12:05:50 AM
Marshall Masters gives consultations on the best, most practical bugout location.