GUNDERSEN: Nuclear Fuel Pool Has NO WATER, RODS EXPOSED

[FourScore]

Run time: 05:05 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StYxRtKfzmA   Posted on YouTube: April 01, 2011 By YouTube Member: NWOIS666 Views on YouTube: 224   Posted on DU: April 01, 2011 By DU Member: FourScore Views on DU: 1869

 

[bertman]

1. Thanks for posting this, FourScore. Rec. nt

[AtheistCrusader]

2. Actually, his comment was more measured than that.

Not 'no water' but either none, or very little, because the level isn't visible. There pretty much has to be SOME water in the pool for there to be steam.)

Careful when 'headlining' a news item. (He does say the rods are likely exposed. Can't see them, but you can see the boxes they sit in.)

[liberation]

3. Check the video: at the 4:25 mark he says "... and the fact that the pool has no water"

He mentions that the steam is most likely coming from the water being pumped into the reactor, which vaporizes almost instantaneously without really pooling as it is intended.

[AtheistCrusader]

9. At 3:10 he says the top is exposed. Then goes on to say possibly ALL of the fuel is exposed.

That's where he qualified the statement. I think the later statement 'no water' is safely couched behind that. He might re-phrase it if you asked him about it. Seems clear to me he's smart enough not to claim the water is completely gone, when it MIGHT be completely gone.

I'm not trying to diminish the issue, this is serious, in either case. Just keeping things specific to what was said.

[liberation]

10. You claimed he did not say something he clearly did say. That is all.

Technically you should be the one asking him to re-phrase so he can be compliant with your expectation.

[AtheistCrusader]

11. The implication in the headline is completely different than the content of his message.

Especially with the 'emphasis added'. (Not by the poster, but not by the man in the video either)

[liberation]

13. Hopefully, in the future the youtube poster will check with your interpretation of the video

before they go on to include actual content of the video, verbatim, as part of the headline.

[AtheistCrusader]

16. If you exaggerate that part of his talk, you make the entire thing internally inconsistent.

When he talks about what we see in the video of the site, he CAREFULLY points out the pools MAY be dry, but he doesn't know for sure.

His other references to dry pools was more casual. The title is misleading. I may contact him, actually, and ask for clarification. I suspect he would be dissapointed by that usage of his video.

[liberation]

17. Then contact him and let him know how he is wrong on his own video

Thanks.

[AtheistCrusader]

18. Go to his site and see how HE titled his video.

"New images reveal nuclear fuel rack exposed to air"

See how that's a little bit different than what some clown re-posted it on youtube with a new title for?

[liberation]

19. I thought you were contacting Mr. Gundersen...

and yet...

:shrug:

[AtheistCrusader]

20. I have e-mailed him.

We shall see what he replies with.

[liberation]

21. Awesome

thanks.

[FourScore]

22. The headline says: "Nuclear Fuel Pool Has NO WATER" and at 2:16 Gundersen says,

"this picture is undated, but what it clearly shows is that there is NO WATER IN THE POOL."

I'm not sure why you continue to argue this.

[FourScore]

12. At 2:16 he says very clearly, "There is no water in the pool." n/t

[FourScore]

6. Sorry. I took the headline straight from the YouTube post.

[grahamhgreen]

23. He said that at minimum, the tops of the rods are exposed to the air, and possibly all of them.

In other words, the pool is no longer able to be filled because it is cracked open or leaking, and the pool may no longer be holding water at all.

[felix_numinous]

4. K&R

Thanks for posting this, he is very informative and is a good teacher of a complex subject.

[postulater]

5. I bet he is a nice grandpa.

Besides being smart.

[FourScore]

7. Isn't he just lovable? He's like Andy Griffith. n/t

[PoliticAverse]

8. What a mess. n/t

[ElsewheresDaughter]

14. and all that mess is headed here....until they entomb it it will be falling here daily .....

the winds have brought it here and will continue to bring it ....stay indoors...but it won't matter because our food supply is contaminated already and will get worse.

it's already in the water and soil and milk in NY

[JDPriestly]

15. When I was younger, we feared devastation due to nuclear war

Now, it is evident that no ill intention is needed to cause nuclear disasters.

It is time to close down nuclear reactors across the world.

There is no really safe nuclear reactor.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

24. the first political pin I ever bought said "Nuclear Power? No Thanks"

I still have it. I bought it at the Earth Day Fest in the early 70's in Madison, Wis. I have been afraid of and hated nuclear for decades. I think I'll start wearing my pin again, though it is probably too late now.