Worse than Chernobyl?

[likearock 2]

There's just no way to sugar coat this.

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=54890

Japan Nuke Disaster Could Be Worse Than Chernobyl
By Stephen Leahy

UXBRIDGE, Canada, Mar 17, 2011 (IPS) - A global nuclear disaster potentially worse than Chernobyl may be under way in Japan as hundreds of tonnes of highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel are open to the sky, and may be on fire and emitting radioactive particles into the atmosphere.

Many countries have advised their citizens in Japan to leave the country.

"This is uncharted territory. There is a 50-percent chance they could lose all six reactors and their storage pools," said Jan Beyea, a nuclear physicist with a New Jersey consulting firm called Consulting in the Public Interest.

"I'm surprised the situation hasn't gotten worse faster... But without a breakthrough it's only a matter of days before spent fuels will melt down," said Ed Lyman, a physicist at the Union of Concerned Scientists and an expert on nuclear plant design.

Japan's Fukushima Daiichi plant was damaged by a powerful earthquake and tsunami on Mar. 11. It has an estimated 1,700 tonnes of used or spent but still dangerous nuclear fuel in storage pools next to its six nuclear reactors, according to Kevin Kamps, a radioactive waste specialist at Beyond Nuclear, a U.S. anti-nuclear environmental group.

The storage pools holding 30 to 35 years worth of spent fuel at reactors No. 3 and No. 4 have lost containment and most if not all of their coolant water. They may be on fire, venting radioactive particles into the atmosphere, Kamps told IPS.

On Thursday, Japanese military helicopters protected by lead shielding managed to dump some seawater on the damaged reactors No. 3 and No. 4 in a desperate and very risky last- ditch effort at the highly radioactive site.

"If some of the spent fuel ignites and propagates throughout the rest of the fuel enormous areas of Japan could be contaminated by radioactive caesium 137 for 30 to 50 years," Beyea told IPS.

Caesium 137 remains radioactive for more than a hundred years and is a known cause of cancer and other health impacts. Once released, it is very difficult to cope with. Caesium is why a large region around the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster remains uninhabitable 25 years later.

A 2010 health study by the University of South Carolina in the U.S. showed that children born after the disaster and living more than 75 kilometres away have long-term problems with their lungs resulting from caesium 137 in dust and soil particles.

"Caesium particles were blown hundreds of miles away during the intense fire at Chernobyl," Kamp said.

For comparison, Chernobyl held 180 tonnes of nuclear fuel. Fukushima Daiichi has 560 tonnes of nuclear fuel in its reactors along with 1,700 tonnes of spent fuel.

"The nuclear industry in Japan and the U.S. knew the loss of coolant at spent-fuel storage pools would be a big problem but they simply said it couldn't happen," said Beyea, who is a co-author of a 2004 study on this very topic for the U.S. National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences.

Having worked in the industry, Beyea says it is run by overconfident engineers who minimise or ignore low- probability disasters even if they might have huge consequences.

Nuclear reactors generate enormous amounts of heat and must be constantly cooled to keep the metal fuel casing from catching on fire and the fuel from melting. Since a nuclear reaction cannot be turned off, when spent fuel is removed from a reactor it still generates a great deal of heat and must be cooled underwater for five to 20 years. All reactors have storage pools with thick reinforced-concrete walls and are about 15 metres deep, containing around 1.5 million litres of water. This water soon warms and must be constantly replaced with cooler water.

The loss of electricity and failures of backup generators at Fukushima Daiichi has meant little water has been pumped through the storage pools or into the reactors. Radiation levels inside the plant have now climbed so high that it is hazardous for workers to try to keep jury-rigged pumps pumping sea water. Normally only fresh water is used because sea water contains salts that eventually degrade the metals.

Radiation levels are deadly when there is not enough water to cover a spent fuel pool, said Kamps. "It will be very difficult to get close enough to cool these pools down," he noted. "If the worst happens, and the six pools burn, it will be an unimaginable disaster. It could be worse than Chernobyl."

The amount of caesium that could be released at Fuskushima is many thousands times that from the Hiroshima atomic bomb during World War Two, acknowledged Beyea. However, it was the bomb blast that killed over 120,000 people in the immediate months afterwards, he said.

"Japan is facing enormous potential impacts on its economy, its society and on the health of its people," he said, adding that people will be worried sick about the potential impacts on their health for decades to come.

"We recommended that the nuclear industry move spent fuel into dry storage containers after five years to reduce this risk but they said a loss-of-pool coolant event would never happen," said Beyea.

The status as of Thursday, 4 pm EST according to Tokyo Electric, the owner and operator of Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant:

Reactors No. 1, No. 2 and No. 3 nuclear cores have partially melted as they lost cooling functions after the quake.

Reactor No. 2 containment vessel suffered damage and has been breached.

The buildings housing the No. 1, No. 3 and No. 4 reactors and storage pools have been severely damaged by apparent hydrogen blasts.

Water levels and temperatures at storage pools of the Nos. 1 to 4 units are unknown.

Temperatures at storage pools at No. 5 and No. 6 are climbing.

[Andy9o8 2]

Good thing you brought this to our attention.
Anyhow, it's useless unless its a poll.

[billvon 3,114]

Chernobyl went prompt-critical and blew the core apart with enough force to launch fuel hundreds of feet into the air. The core itself then caught fire and the ensuing fire was so hot that it lofted much of the rest into the atmosphere. Workers leaving had to step over chunks of fuel and graphite that had been blown into the parking lot. Local dosages were 5-50 times above the lethal dose. No one knows for sure how bad it was because the radiation detectors were not designed to go that high.

57 plant workers died. An estimated 4000 people died from exposure to radiation.

In Japan, LOCA accidents have rendered several reactor cores so hot they've been damaged, and some of the fuel melted. It is all still within the containment building. Local dosages are well below 100 millisieverts, which is the limit below which no one can determine whether or not there is a health risk. Maximum levels recorded very close to the reactor itself (inside the boundary) briefly exceeded 1 sievert/hr, which is enough to make you sick if you stay there for more than an hour.

So far one person has died because a crane collapsed.

There's no comparison.

[quade 4]

Quote

There's no comparison.

Uh . . . then what would you call the paragraphs you just wrote?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[champu 1]

http://xkcd.com/radiation/

[likearock 2]

Quote

Chernobyl went prompt-critical and blew the core apart with enough force to launch fuel hundreds of feet into the air. The core itself then caught fire and the ensuing fire was so hot that it lofted much of the rest into the atmosphere. Workers leaving had to step over chunks of fuel and graphite that had been blown into the parking lot. Local dosages were 5-50 times above the lethal dose. No one knows for sure how bad it was because the radiation detectors were not designed to go that high.

57 plant workers died. An estimated 4000 people died from exposure to radiation.

In Japan, LOCA accidents have rendered several reactor cores so hot they've been damaged, and some of the fuel melted. It is all still within the containment building. Local dosages are well below 100 millisieverts, which is the limit below which no one can determine whether or not there is a health risk. Maximum levels recorded very close to the reactor itself (inside the boundary) briefly exceeded 1 sievert/hr, which is enough to make you sick if you stay there for more than an hour.

So far one person has died because a crane collapsed.

There's no comparison.

Then again, it's really just begun in Japan and no one can say with authority how and when it will end. Now that power has been restored, will they be able to re-establish functioning cooling systems before the radiation levels get so high that human beings won't be able to do work at the site? Does all that smoke coming from reactors 2 and 3 mean that the spent fuel rods are actually on fire thereby further increasing the millisiebert readings? Do they know for sure that all the containment vessels are still intact?

Hey, I'm hoping with everybody on a happy outcome here. But it doesn't seem that that can happen until all the damaged cooling systems are fully repaired and fully functioning. It just won't do to keep dumping water from helicopters and hoping for the best.

Even if there is no explosion as was the case in Chernobyl, a worst case scenario should take into account that there's still some 10 times the amount of fissionable material at the Fukushima site than was the case in Chernobyl. If it continues to get more radioactive over time, it becomes ever more difficult to do the necessary repairs to stabilize the situation.

[lurch 0]

Zzzzzzzzing!
That was awesome.
That was, like, There Is No Spoon, but I eat with it anyway.
I say, Billvon is a duck, which means he can divide by zero whenever he damn well feels like it, and use apostrophes whenever he wants to, even with words like "nukular" which don't even have an apostrophe yet.

Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

[antonija 0]

Chernobyl was a test of what would happen if everything went wrong. They deliberately turned off just about every security system they had installed, and then overheated the reactor core on purpose. The results of that test are well documented.

Events in Japan are really really sad, but what pisses me off the most is the way media is reporting about them. One person died (indirectly) because of steam explosion in power plant, while there are like 15k dead from the earthquake and tsunami.

I know that FUD is word of the day on any news channel (not just the US ones) but I imagined a person that's smart enough to judge if it's safe to jump from a plane would also be able to tell a difference between a media sensation and a horrible disaster that happened in Chernobyl.

I understand the need for conformity. Without a concise set of rules to follow we would probably all have to resort to common sense. -David Thorne

[likearock 2]

Quote

Chernobyl was a test of what would happen if everything went wrong. They deliberately turned off just about every security system they had installed, and then overheated the reactor core on purpose. The results of that test are well documented.

Events in Japan are really really sad, but what pisses me off the most is the way media is reporting about them. One person died (indirectly) because of steam explosion in power plant, while there are like 15k dead from the earthquake and tsunami.

I know that FUD is word of the day on any news channel (not just the US ones) but I imagined a person that's smart enough to judge if it's safe to jump from a plane would also be able to tell a difference between a media sensation and a horrible disaster that happened in Chernobyl.

It's incredibly short-sighted to assess the full threat of Fukushima by simply focusing on the fatality rate so far. We should be asking ourselves "how will this end?" Unfortunately, no one can give a good answer to that question.

Blaming the media is sometimes justified, sometimes it's just a way to avoid looking at an unpleasant truth.

[DougH 270]

Quote

Chernobyl was a test of what would happen if everything went wrong. They deliberately turned off just about every security system they had installed, and then overheated the reactor core on purpose. The results of that test are well documented.

Events in Japan are really really sad, but what pisses me off the most is the way media is reporting about them. One person died (indirectly) because of steam explosion in power plant, while there are like 15k dead from the earthquake and tsunami.

I know that FUD is word of the day on any news channel (not just the US ones) but I imagined a person that's smart enough to judge if it's safe to jump from a plane would also be able to tell a difference between a media sensation and a horrible disaster that happened in Chernobyl.

Fear sells newspapers, and it is proven that we fear the unknown the most.

The impact of the tsunami is known and quantifiable, but people could dream about the what ifs of the nuclear disaster for days on end.

I am not suprised at all by the direction our media coverage has taken.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

I am not suprised at all by the direction our media coverage has taken.

Nor am I; and to some degree it's due to the 24 hour news cycle that now exists. Now all news has to be "Breaking News!!", even if it's not - otherwise, why not just wait for the 6:30 news like in the Days of Yore?

[billvon 3,114]

>One person died (indirectly) because of steam explosion in power plant, while there
>are like 15k dead from the earthquake and tsunami.

Yep. And just try to find this story in any paper:

=================
Associated Press
Worker killed in explosion at NC power plant
Associated Press, 03.15.11, 05:53 PM EDT

WILMINGTON, N.C. -- Officials say an explosion at a coal-fired power plant in North Carolina has killed one worker.

Progress Energy Inc. ( CPWLP.OB - news - people ) says the explosion Tuesday morning killed 24-year-old technician Cory Rogers at the L.V. Sutton Steam Electric Plant in Wilmington. The company says Rogers was performing maintenance on the of the plant's units that was offline.
==================

"Well, that's coal - that's not scary."

[likearock 2]

Quote

>One person died (indirectly) because of steam explosion in power plant, while there
>are like 15k dead from the earthquake and tsunami.

Yep. And just try to find this story in any paper:

=================
Associated Press
Worker killed in explosion at NC power plant
Associated Press, 03.15.11, 05:53 PM EDT

WILMINGTON, N.C. -- Officials say an explosion at a coal-fired power plant in North Carolina has killed one worker.

Progress Energy Inc. ( CPWLP.OB - news - people ) says the explosion Tuesday morning killed 24-year-old technician Cory Rogers at the L.V. Sutton Steam Electric Plant in Wilmington. The company says Rogers was performing maintenance on the of the plant's units that was offline.
==================

"Well, that's coal - that's not scary."

Compared to an uncontrolled leakage of radioactivity 150 miles from Tokyo with no clear strategy to stop it, then no, it really isn't that scary.

[virgin-burner 1]

Quote

Quote

>One person died (indirectly) because of steam explosion in power plant, while there
>are like 15k dead from the earthquake and tsunami.

Yep. And just try to find this story in any paper:

=================
Associated Press
Worker killed in explosion at NC power plant
Associated Press, 03.15.11, 05:53 PM EDT

WILMINGTON, N.C. -- Officials say an explosion at a coal-fired power plant in North Carolina has killed one worker.

Progress Energy Inc. ( CPWLP.OB - news - people ) says the explosion Tuesday morning killed 24-year-old technician Cory Rogers at the L.V. Sutton Steam Electric Plant in Wilmington. The company says Rogers was performing maintenance on the of the plant's units that was offline.
==================

"Well, that's coal - that's not scary."

Compared to an uncontrolled leakage of radioactivity 150 miles from Tokyo with no clear strategy to stop it, then no, it really isn't that scary.

well, it's pretty far from NC; nope, not scary!

“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.”
-Hunter S. Thompson
"No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try."
-Yoda

[likearock 2]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/12/world/asia/12japan.html:

Japan Nuclear Disaster Put on Par With Chernobyl

By HIROKO TABUCHI and KEITH BRADSHER
Published: April 11, 2011

TOKYO — Japan has decided to raise its assessment of the accident at the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant from 5 to the worst rating of 7 on an international scale, putting the disaster on par with the 1986 Chernobyl meltdown, the Japanese nuclear regulatory agency said on Tuesday.

According to the International Nuclear Event Scale, a level 7 nuclear accident involves “widespread health and environmental effects” and the “external release of a significant fraction of the reactor core inventory.”

Japan’s previous assessment of the accident puts it at level 5 on the scale, the same level as the Three Mile Island accident in the United States in 1979. The level 7 assessment has been applied only to the disaster at Chernobyl in the former Soviet Union.

The scale, which was developed by the International Atomic Energy Agency and countries that use nuclear energy, requires that the nuclear agency of the country where the accident occurs calculate a rating based on complicated criteria.

Japan’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency said at a news conference Tuesday morning that the rating resulted from new estimates by Japan’s Nuclear Safety Commission that suggest some 10,000 terabecquerels of radiation per hour was released from the plant into the environment for several hours in the aftermath of the March 11 earthquake and tsunami. (The measurement refers to how much radioactive material was emitted, not the dose absorbed by living things. )

The scale of the radiation leak has since dropped to under 1 terabecquerel per hour, the Kyodo news agency said, citing the commission. Commission officials in Tokyo said they could not immediately comment.

Michael Friedlander, a former senior nuclear power plant operator for 13 years in the United States, said that the biggest surprise in the Japanese reassessment was that it took a month for public confirmation that so much radiation had been released.

Some in the nuclear industry have been saying for weeks that the nuclear accident released large amounts of radiation, but Japanese officials had consistently played down this possibility.

The announcement came as Japan was preparing to urge more residents around a crippled nuclear power plant to evacuate, because of concerns over long-term exposure to radiation.

Also on Monday, tens of thousands of people bowed their heads in silence at 2:46 p.m., exactly one month since the 9.0-magnitude earthquake and ensuing tsunami brought widespread destruction to Japan’s northeast coast.

The mourning was punctuated by another strong aftershock near Japan’s Pacific coast, which briefly set off a tsunami warning, killed at least one person and knocked out cooling at the severely damaged Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station for almost an hour, underscoring the vulnerability of the plant’s reactors to continuing seismic activity.

On Tuesday morning, there was another strong aftershock, which shook Tokyo. The authorities have already ordered people living within a 12-mile radius of the plant to evacuate, and recommended that people remain indoors or avoid an area within a radius of 18 miles.

The government’s decision to expand the zone came in response to high readings of radiation in certain communities beyond those areas, underscoring how difficult it has been to predict the ways radiation spreads from the damaged plant.

Unlike the previous definitions of the areas to be evacuated, this time the government designated specific communities that should be evacuated, instead of a radius expressed in miles.

The radiation has not spread evenly from the reactors, but instead has been directed to some areas and not others by weather patterns and the terrain. Iitate, one of the communities told on Monday to prepare for evacuation, lies well beyond the 18-mile radius, but the winds over the last month have tended to blow northwest from the Fukushima plant toward Iitate, which may explain why high readings were detected there.

Yukio Edano, the government’s chief cabinet secretary, said that the government would order Iitate and four other towns and villages to prepare to evacuate.

Officials are concerned that people in these communities are being exposed to radiation equivalent to at least 20 millisieverts a year, he said, which could be harmful to human health over the long term. Evacuation orders will come within a month for Katsurao, Namie, Iitate and parts of Minamisoma and Kawamata, Mr. Edano said.

People in five other areas may also be told to evacuate if the conditions at the Fukushima Daiichi plant grow worse, Mr. Edano said. Those areas are Hirono, Naraha, Kawauchi, Tamura and other sections of Minamisoma.

“This measure is not an order for you to evacuate or take actions immediately,” he said. “We arrived at this decision by taking into account the risks of remaining in the area in the long term.” He appealed for calm and said that the chance of a large-scale radiation leak from the Fukushima Daiichi plant had, in fact, decreased.

Mr. Edano also said that pregnant women, children and hospital patients should stay out of the area within 19 miles of the reactors and that schools in that zone would remain closed.

Until now, the Japanese government had refused to expand the evacuation zone, despite urging from the International Atomic Energy Agency. The United States and Australia have advised their citizens to stay at least 50 miles away from the plant.

The international agency, which is based in Vienna, said Sunday that its team had measured radiation on Saturday of 0.4 to 3.7 microsieverts per hour at distances of 20 to 40 miles from the damaged plant — well outside the initial evacuation zone. At that rate of accumulation, it would take 225 days to 5.7 years to reach the Japanese government’s threshold level for evacuations: radiation accumulating at a rate of at least 20 millisieverts per year.

In other words, only the areas with the highest readings would qualify for the new evacuation ordered by the government.

But the Soviet Union used a lower threshold — five millisieverts per year — in eventually offering resettlement to people who lived near the Chernobyl reactors in 1986.

Mr. Friedlander, the former nuclear plant operator , who is a specialist in emergency responses to nuclear accidents, said that the Japanese decision to evacuate more communities made sense not just to protect people, but also to make the eventual decontamination of farms and communities easier.

Allowing people and nonemergency vehicles to continue moving through both radiation-contaminated areas and safer areas farther from the Fukushima reactors runs the risk of spreading radioactively contaminated particles, which could result in more square miles of territory ultimately being contaminated. “Unless you gain control, it will be like trying to mop your kitchen floor with the kids running in and out of the house,” Mr. Friedlander said.

Masataka Shimizu, the president of Tokyo Electric, visited the tsunami-stricken area on Monday for the first time since the crisis began. He called on the governor of Fukushima Prefecture, Yuhei Sato, but was refused a meeting. He left his business card instead.

[quade 4]

Hey, were are all the guys that two days after the quake were saying this was nothing to be concerned over; that it WASN'T a disaster?

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/04/11/japan.nuclear.reactors/index.html

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Regulators have determined the amount of radioactive iodine released by the damaged reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant was at least 15 times the volume needed to reach the top of the International Nuclear Event Scale, the agency said. That figure is still about 10 percent of the amount released at Chernobyl, they said.

The amount of radioactive Cesium-137, which has a half-life of 30 years, is about one-seventh the amount released at Chernobyl, according to the agency.

[quade 4]

Quote

Quote

Regulators have determined the amount of radioactive iodine released by the damaged reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant was at least 15 times the volume needed to reach the top of the International Nuclear Event Scale, the agency said. That figure is still about 10 percent of the amount released at Chernobyl, they said.

The amount of radioactive Cesium-137, which has a half-life of 30 years, is about one-seventh the amount released at Chernobyl, according to the agency.

So by one measure it's more than an order of magnitude greater than what qualifies is the highest level of disaster on the International Nuclear Event Scale, but . . . gee that's not as big as another disaster, so it's not really a big deal.

Uh . . . yes . . . it's still a big deal and a disaster by any standard.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

by two measures - iodine and cesium. If we knew how many Soviets actually died, we'd have a third measure.

The headline of this thread is worse than Chernobyl, and the news today keeps talking about how it has the same 7 rating.

But they're not the same at all.

[Calvin19 0]

It seems you have an agenda?

[thomas.n.thomas 0]

Quote

Quote

Chernobyl was a test of what would happen if everything went wrong. They deliberately turned off just about every security system they had installed, and then overheated the reactor core on purpose. The results of that test are well documented.

Events in Japan are really really sad, but what pisses me off the most is the way media is reporting about them. One person died (indirectly) because of steam explosion in power plant, while there are like 15k dead from the earthquake and tsunami.

I know that FUD is word of the day on any news channel (not just the US ones) but I imagined a person that's smart enough to judge if it's safe to jump from a plane would also be able to tell a difference between a media sensation and a horrible disaster that happened in Chernobyl.

It's incredibly short-sighted to assess the full threat of Fukushima by simply focusing on the fatality rate so far. We should be asking ourselves "how will this end?" Unfortunately, no one can give a good answer to that question.

Blaming the media is sometimes justified, sometimes it's just a way to avoid looking at an unpleasant truth.

So what is the unpleasant truth? I'm assuming you speak with some subject matter expertise on nuclear power other than that gained from the internet and media (clarification: reading the internet and watching the news does not make you a subject matter expert).

You have media spreading hysteria about "fuel ignition" and the need for "special coolant" and it is clear they have no idea what they are talking about.

If you'll excuse me now, I'm going to go write an autobiography about being a famous black civil rights leader who delivered the "I have a dream" speech.

[likearock 2]

Quote

by two measures - iodine and cesium. If we knew how many Soviets actually died, we'd have a third measure.

The headline of this thread is worse than Chernobyl, and the news today keeps talking about how it has the same 7 rating.

But they're not the same at all.

The headline asks the question "Worse than Chernobyl?" and given that their "end game" continues to be to indiscriminately dump water on the reactors, I'd say it's still an open question.

Another measure of comparison is how many people are permanently displaced by the disasters. With the Japanese widening the evacuation zone, I wonder if they're already on track to pass Chernobyl by that measure.

[lawrocket 3]

[Reply] it's still a big deal and a disaster by any standard.

[antonija 0]

Still here. It is not on par with Chernobyl. Japanese raised disaster ranking so it now has the same ranking as Chernobyl.

However if you have read/watched anything about Chernobyl you will know that back in 1986 graphite moderator ignited, burned and was indeed trusted into the air when reactor vessel exploded scattering radioactive material (we're talking metric tons of material here) all around Chernobyl, Ukraine and Europe. Damage from radiation was however limited to close proximity of the plant, leaving couple thousand of square km under permanent observation and portion of it closed off. Death toll was 57 due to accident itself plus less than 10.000 from radiation related disease (cancer; UNESCO states that up until 2005 there were about 6.000 thyroid cancer patients related to accident with more expected; hence my 10.000 estimate).
In short: Chernobyl was a very big boom with huge mass of radioactive material scattered on vast surface.
The cause of Chernobyl disaster is one of the most bitter-sweet examples of human stupidity at its best, but I'll leave that one for you to find out (in hindsight it would make a great South Park episode).

Now Fukushima is a tiny bit different. No big bum, no massive spread of radioactive material, no huge cloud looming over Japan, 2 deaths from accident, unknown deaths from radiation in following years. Judging by Chernobyl it will be only a minor fraction of what was seen in late 80's and 90's.

Fukushima same as Chernobyl? Really?

As a sidenote: about 14.000 people died from the tsunami and about 13.000 are still missing. There are 2 deaths related to Fukushima plant (none from radiation). Why would Fukushima receive such attention and no one seems to give a fuck about 10 times more death people than there were in WTC?

I understand the need for conformity. Without a concise set of rules to follow we would probably all have to resort to common sense. -David Thorne

[lawrocket 3]

[Reply]Why would Fukushima receive such attention and no one seems to give a fuck about 10 times more death people than there were in WTC?