• Thank you for visiting the Cafe Rad Lab Forum
  • Welcome to the discussion on all things nuclear
  • This site is updated daily.
Hello There, Guest! Login Register


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
WEBCAM May 2017
#21
(05-18-2017, 09:04 AM)Chasaha Wrote:
(05-14-2017, 10:25 PM)Horse Wrote: Pics
05-12 021209 spark 1 pair
05-12 021303 c4 spark

Undecided These 2 shots seem close enough in time and even color that it could possibly be 'triangulated', so to speak.   Anybody else notice that?  

Wink  From time to time I still look and try to compare the angles.

I currently see about a 40 second difference between the tepcams with cam4 about 40 secs after cam1 even when I try restarting both at the same time.  The time on the Futaba cam is in between the two tepcams.  I've been mindful of that 'aerial theory'; when I catch a c4 spark I try to look at cam1's sparks too.  Many times they've been close but more often not close enough.  This time there was 2 rapid-fire sparks on cam1 just a couple frames apart less than a minute before the cam4 spark.  If I had two Geiger counters set up about a kilometer apart and a radioactive cloud passed in between I would expect to see detections close in time but caused by different radioactive particles hitting the detectors.  Cam1 records hundreds of more sparks in an evening than cam4 since the tent covering reactor1 was removed.  Tepco says it’s more radioactive at the north end of the site.  My guess is that r1 is the main source and cam1 is physically very close to that reactor compared to cam4 located much further away from the reactors and getting much fewer radiation detections.  Another thing to consider is that we don't know if the tepcams are the same model or different.  Different models or enclosures might make one a more sensitive detector than the other.  I haven’t been able to calibrate the rate of sparks to a known radiation measurement.  If the forest fire smoke caused the cam4 sparks and the uptick in cam1 sparks that was some smoke I don’t want to inhale.  The problem of triangulating is the small area covered by both cameras.  My suggestion would be to compare crane movement that can be seen on both cams because sight line angles and elevations are deceiving.  When we were catching sparks on the TBS-JNN cam I thought we’d have a good chance of real triangulation and evidence one way or the other but alas, that view is still offline to American viewers.  

05-12 021209 spark 2
   
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#22
Hi Folks,

Just a few pictures before it gets too late. Tepco is messing with my computer only cause my McAfee Secure somehow turned off. It opens MS Word document, puts the tepco webcam link inside then saves it to my desktop, I delete it of course.  Looks like the removed the corner of R1 and made it more open in the back. Suits meandering back and forth behind R1, blurred out the middle between R1 & R2.
   
After this ugly black sprayer from the crane was used inside R1 they did the automatic inside fog sprayer. Keeps down the floating emission cloud we see at night over R1.
   

 
Reply
#23
05-16 I counted some sparks for another spark report.  The distortions are labeled with a d for less typing. The first spark pair caught my eye while I was watching so it’s where I started scanning.  

05-16 202238 d.bmp
05-16 202239 d end.bmp
05-16 202329 spark pair.bmp
05-16 202354 spark.bmp
05-16 202619 spark.bmp
10 minutes had 3 sparks and a distortion

05-16 203133 d.bmp
05-16 203136 d end.bmp
05-16 203212 spark.bmp
05-16 203326 spark 1f.bmp
05-16 203627 d.bmp
05-16 203628 d end.bmp
05-16 203918 d.bmp
05-16 203920 d end.bmp
05-16 204712 spark.bmp
05-16 205114 spark.bmp
05-16 205551 spark.bmp
30 minutes had 5 sparks and 3 distortions

05-16 210109 spark.bmp
05-16 210110 spark.bmp
05-16 210159 spark.bmp
05-16 210443 d.bmp
05-16 210445 d end.bmp
05-16 210612 spark.bmp
05-16 212410 spark.bmp
05-16 212415 spark.bmp
05-16 212818 spark.bmp
05-16 212848 spark.bmp
05-16 212905 spark 3f.bmp
05-16 212933 spark.bmp
30 minutes had 10 sparks and a distortion

05-16 213101 spark.bmp
05-16 213105 spark.bmp
05-16 213152 d.bmp
05-16 213155 d end.bmp
05-16 213411 spark.bmp
05-16 214247 spark.bmp
05-16 214248 spark faint.bmp
05-16 214500 spark pair.bmp
05-16 214722 spark.bmp
05-16 214950 spark.bmp
05-16 215345 spark pair.bmp
05-16 215817 spark.bmp
30 minutes had 10 sparks and a distortion

05-16 220322 spark.bmp
last one for the night

Pics of the pairs
   
   
   
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#24
Pure water posted to the ENEnews webcam forum some grabs of Futabagun camera showing light reflecting off the emissions over the Dai-ichi site.  
Quote:pure water
May 22, 2017 at 3:19 pm • Reply
Hi! This is a collection of screenshots from 13 and 15 of May. You may see the change of brightness and the scope of visible emittions, and they are not from the reactors in this case.
https://postimg.org/gallery/1remcjgm4/
I made a comment that maybe it wasn’t so much the reactors but the CSFP overheating.  Probably not the most accurate way to describe it but the CSFP is the largest source of fuel.  The CSFP is probably kept at a nominal temperature so it doesn’t steam up from too much heat but like a soup on simmer the aroma can fill a kitchen.  The emissions are radioactive particles out-gassing from all the nuclear fuel sources.  The radioactive particles in the air promote fog creation.  I’ve come to think of the vapor as more of a radioactive fog than steam when I see the emissions reflecting light.  Steam isn’t a good choice because most of the fuel has cooled enough to not boil water.  Fog isn’t good either because the localized fogging could be mistaken for common natural fog.  Vapor sounds like the problem has already vanished.  I usually use the word emissions but somehow that doesn’t even convey how bad it is to see the radioactivity hanging in the air.  The emissions don’t exactly dissipate and go away; they become invisible radioactive clouds that travel in plumes to places far away and come down in patches of radioactive fallout.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#25
MVB at AllegedlyApparent has again found traces of recent fission products in European radiation monitoring data.
 
BREAKING: Ruthenium-103, Cobalt-60, Niobium-95 & Cesium-134 Validated Detections in Finland, Cesium-137 Uptick, Artificial BETA upticks in The Netherlands and Italy, as yet another Mystery Radiological Disturbance rolls across Europe… (EURDEP, MAY 2017)
Posted on May 20, 2017
https://allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/...y-radiolo/

Quote:MVB
May 21, 2017 at 12:17 pm • Reply
Hi Horse,yes, ru-103 would not be in forest fire smoke, nor escape from a tunnel with old wastes. Its a recent fission product with a melting temp of 2250 Celcius. The high cobalt-60 content suggests fukushima.
The forest fire may even have been arson to provide a cover.
That hanford is serious stuff is clear: https://allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/...-gunpoint/
But the fact that various nuclear stories show up in the media when clearly none of those stories can explain the detections I reported on (and added this commentary to @ https://allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/...chi-japan/ ) leaves the possibility wide open that these are essentially diversion stories.

Maybe two to three weeks for a radioactive cloud to travel from Dai-ichi to Europe.  Tepco was adding new sections to the r3 superstructure.  Did they have another slip of the crane?  The tepcams show some of the gamma in the air and they were sparking up a storm even before the forest fire.  Better detectors are in the hands of industry and government officials and they would know for sure but we don't get access to complete data sets.  No one stands up and no one cries foul.  When MVB reported earlier on the Iodine-131 detections; no source was declared and the detection dropped out of the news.  Here we are again wondering; what's the source and what happened.  The forest fire near Namie wouldn't have to be arson to be used as cover to explain elevated Geiger readings because Japan has never admitted to any recent fission or any radiologic hazards escaping from Dai-ichi; just safe releases.  The Hanford tunnel collapse lets the industry cry for more money but it wasn't the source of recent fission.  If one or the other accident had not happened the industry would still ignore any recent fission detections just as it has done before.  MVB's latest findings aren't in the mainstream media at all this time.  Nuclear accidents are now just diversion stories and recent fission products are becoming part of the background.  I might suspect some other country's NPP of a meltdown, but I know that any of the Dai-ichi fuel melts or pools could be the source of recent fission.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#26
People need to stop wondering why cancer, hearts attacks, and other radiation induced diseases are on the rise and take down the nuclear industry and their colluding governments and international agencies.

RIP Sir Roger Moore
   
Pia
Jitsi chat: enfo.pia@gmail.com
 
Reply
#27
Exclamation 
(05-23-2017, 08:32 AM)Horse Wrote: MVB at AllegedlyApparent has again found traces of recent fission products in European radiation monitoring data.
 
Nuclear accidents are now just diversion stories and recent fission products are becoming part of the background.  I might suspect some other country's NPP of a meltdown, but I know that any of the Dai-ichi fuel melts or pools could be the source of recent fission.

I would go out on a limb here and predict that, sometime soon, there may be something like a Nuclear bomb exchange or some sort of a bad guy dirty bomb in addition to various accidents.  These types of events will 'buffer' the more long term serious accumulation from the ongoing FALLOUT from Fukushima that's steadily destroying our planet.  

The Nuclear Industry will do anything to keep any kind of negative publicity about their 'precious' Nuclear Power out of the public's mind. They've been successful at it for 70 years, they're good at it. Wink

I've said it before, and I'll say it again.  It's hard to comprehend, we are literally at the beginning of these nonstop TRIPLE NUCLEAR NIGHTMARES, hundreds to thousands of years, located on a tsunami prone shoreline.  

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the longer this debacle goes on without a full on international effort and a transparency to the people of this planet about exactly what the situation really is and what it can quickly become just seems crazy to me.   Confused
 
Reply
#28
Crossing my fingers that it won't be so! But, the inability of nuclear industry and agencies to ensure 100% containment/security of nuclear materials is disturbing. Somebody, somewhere is bound to have enough materials for a dirty bomb or two.
Pia
Jitsi chat: enfo.pia@gmail.com
 
Reply
#29
(05-23-2017, 11:50 AM)Chasaha Wrote: I would go out on a limb here and predict that, sometime soon, there may be something like a Nuclear bomb exchange or some sort of a bad guy dirty bomb in addition to various accidents.  These types of events will 'buffer' the more long term serious accumulation from the ongoing FALLOUT from Fukushima that's steadily destroying our planet.  

The Nuclear Industry will do anything to keep any kind of negative publicity about their 'precious' Nuclear Power out of the public's mind.  They've been successful at it for 70 years, they're good at it.  Wink

We used to have a good healthy fear of radiation.  Governments and Industry keeps telling everyone how safe each and every release of radioactivity is.  What's to stop them from a nuclear exchange when we're repeatedly told that no one ever dies from radiation exposure.  Recent fission product detections aren't newsworthy.  We'll have no warning.  We won't panic when we get sick and die.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#30
05-25 Rained during the day, grey and cloudy. 20:25 watched webs on cam4 and noted a burst of sparks on cam1. The webs played on the screen quite a while. Cleared up around midnight, webs gone and less sparking.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
  


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  WEBCAM February 2017 Horse 17 4,290 05-01-2017, 04:34 AM
Last Post: piajensen
  WEBCAM April 2017 Horse 41 4,388 04-30-2017, 12:40 PM
Last Post: Horse
  WEBCAM March 2017 Horse 33 4,716 04-04-2017, 02:31 PM
Last Post: Horse
  WEBCAM January 2017 Horse 8 2,039 01-31-2017, 05:48 PM
Last Post: Horse

Forum Jump:


Browsing: 1 Guest(s)