Tepco’s first press conference of 2014 last only 11 minutes

Note : If you are from the international mass media, Don’t read this site before taking a contact with me.



Tepco's first press conference of 2014 last only 11 minutes


Following up this article.. Tepco not to hold regular press conference for one week / “The New Year’s holiday” [URL]

Tepco held the first press conference of 2014 on 1/6/2014, but it was only 11 minutes and 43 seconds.


It usually lasts for 30 minutes ~4 hours. When the contaminated problem was found, it was 3 ~ 4 hours most of the time.

We can see Tepco’s reluctance to disclose the facts.




I reject the international mass media to read this site without taking a contact with me.I know some of the mass media corporations read Fukushima Diary to understand the trend so they know when to report about Fukushima as if they were independently following it for a long time.
In short, they make you individual readers pay for this site while they pay nothing, and when they publish the “authorized news”, you pay for the “secondhand news”, which is nothing new for us.
This site is free for the individual readers, but not for corporations.In the world, this site is nearly the only source about Fukushima. I came here alone without any supporting organizations, background or anything. I’m not pleased to be exploited by the corporations that didn’t even properly report about Fukushima when 311 took place.

I demand them to take a contact with me BEFORE reading this site whatever the purpose is.


Français :

La première conférence de presse de Tepco de 2014 expédiée en moins de 12 minutes
Note : Si vous êtes de la grande presse internationale, ne lisez pas ce site sans avoir préalablement pris contact avec moi.


Tepco's first press conference of 2014 last only 11 minutes

Article lié : Tepco interrompt ses conférences de presse pour une semaine : “Vacances de fin d’année”

Tepco a tenu sa première conférence de presse de 2014 le 6 janvier 2014 mais elle n’aura duré que 11 minutes et 43 secondes.

Elles durent habituellement entre 30 minutes et 4 heures. Lorsqu’ils parlaient du problème des eaux extrêmement radioactives elle durait entre 3 et 4 heures la plupart du temps.
On voit bien la réticence de Tepco à donner les faits.


J’interdis à la grande presse internationale de lire et d’utiliser ce site sans préalablement prendre contact avec moi. Je sais que certaines grandes sociétés de presse lisent le Fukushima Diary pour comprendre la tendance et trouver quand rendre compte de la situation de Fukushima comme s’ils la suivaient indépendamment depuis longtemps.
En résumé, ils vous font payer à vous, simples lecteurs, ce qu’ils prennent gratuitement dans ce site et lorsqu’ils publient des “nouvelles de première main” vous payez pour des “nouvelles resucées”, qui n’ont rien de nouveau pour nous.
Ce site est gratuit pour les lecteurs individuels, pas pour les sociétés. Ce site est pratiquement la seule source au monde sur Fukushima. Je viens ici seul sans aucun soutien d’organisation quelconque, ni références, ni rien. Je n’apprécie pas de me faire exploiter par ces sociétés qui n’ont même pas été foutues de relater correctement ce qui se passait à Fukushima quand a eu lieu le mois de mars 2011.

Je leur demande de prendre contact avec moi AVANT de lire ce site dans quelque but que ce soit.

  1. I feel compelled to say …

    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS)

    It appears, that PNAS is incorrect, on its face; which is an unusual conclusion, for me. And I substantially agree with the Natural News article challenging PNAS.

    http www naturalnews com/ (043380_Fukushima_radiation_ocean_life html#)

    Study: Dead sea creatures cover 98 percent of ocean floor off California coast; up from 1 percent before Fukushima

    Thursday, January 02, 2014 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer

    (NaturalNews) The Pacific Ocean appears to be dying, according to a new study recently published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Scientists from the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI) in California recently discovered that the number of dead sea creatures blanketing the floor of the Pacific is higher than it has ever been in the 24 years that monitoring has taken place, a phenomenon that the data suggests is a direct consequence of nuclear fallout from Fukushima.

    It is almost as if the powers that be want us all to forget about Fukushima and the catastrophic damage it continues to cause to our planet. But they will not be able to cover up the truth forever, as human life is dependent upon healthy oceans, the life of which provides the oxygen that we all need to breathe and survive.

    http www pnas org/ (content/early/2013/11/05/1315447110)
    www pnas org/ (lookup/suppl/doi:10.1073/pnas.1315447110/-/DCSupplemental)
    http www pnas org/ (content/suppl/2013/11/05/1315447110.DCSupplemental/sd01) xlsx

    1. Temperature varies with depth and latitude. Therefore, water temperature changes in an open ocean would tend to move biota north/south and/or up/down.

      If an open ocean increased in average temperature by 5 degrees, then the most suited Northern Hemisphere plants and animals would be relocated on the order of 1,000 miles north, a few feet deeper and/or a combination of the two, subject to necessary light conditions. If the open ocean cooled off 5 degrees, then the relocation would be South and up, again subject to light constraints. A similar process happens on land.

      It is preposterous, on its face, to suggest a TOTAL oceanic die-off, for ANY temperature between zero (freezing) and 100 degrees (boiling) centigrade.


      Bill Duff

    2. Interesting …

      The highly QUESTIONABLE article (puff-piece) is still available.

      However, it appears to be no longer INDEXED.

      Perhaps these brain-dead authors, should consider WITHDRAWING the POS.


      Bill Duff

      http www pnas org/ (content/early/recent)

      http www pnas org/ (content/early/2013/11/05/1315447110)

      Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS)
      Deep ocean communities impacted by changing climate over 24 y in the abyssal northeast Pacific Ocean

      Kenneth L. Smith, Jr.a,1,
      Henry A. Ruhlb,
      Mati Kahruc,
      Christine L. Huffarda, and
      Alana D. Shermana

  2. “a very rapid fission process”

    “The experiment will test a small fuel rod in a very rapid fission process.”

    http worldnews nbcnews com/ (_news/2014/01/09/22239864-japan-plans-nuclear-reactor-meltdown-to-help-prevent-another-fukushima-disaster) – By Henry Austin, NBC News contributor

    Nuclear scientists in Japan are planning a controlled reactor meltdown in the hope of learning how to prevent disasters like the one at the Fukushima power plant in 2011, according to local media reports. Using a scaled down version of a nuclear reactor, Tomoyuki Sugiyama, a senior scientist at the Japan Atomic Energy Agency, told MSN Sankei that scientists “want to help improve the accuracy of the Fukushima accident analysis” using the data from their experiment.

    “We want to study exactly how meltdowns happen and apply what we will learn to help improve ways to deal with severe accidents in the future,” another spokesman for the government-backed engineering agency told Agence France Presse. The experiment will test a small fuel rod in a very rapid fission process. The project will begin sometime later this year, the spokesman said.

    1. Sounds somewhat like an atomic bomb simulation, IMHO

      “a small fuel rod in a very rapid fission process”

      Pop – not boom (what is the isotopic composition of the ‘fuel’.

      Kind of an iffy exception to the CTBTO process, routinely used by the former USA.

      This would be the 2nd ‘somewhat iffy’ recent Atomic Explosion in Japan, counting the FDU-3 exceptionally energetic detonation.

      Contrary to ‘official statements’, there is NO Evidence of a hydrogen OR steam explosion in the FDU-3 supersonic detonation. Orange Flame, Black Smoke and a supersonic explosion are inconsistent with hydrogen and/or steam explosions.


      Bill Duff

      1. subcritical nuclear tests

        http nnsa energy gov/ (sites/default/files/nnsa/inlinefiles/SSP_quarterly_May2011) pdf

        http www armscontrol org/ (act/2011_04/DAgostino)

        http fopnews wordpress com/ (2011/02/)

        http mdn mainichi jp/ (mdnnews/international/news/20110720p2g00m0in077000c) html

        International News

        U.S. conducted subcritical nuclear tests in Dec. and Feb.

        WASHINGTON (Kyodo) — The United States conducted subcritical nuclear tests at a Nevada underground test site on Dec. 1 last year and Feb. 2 this year, an arm of the Energy Department said Tuesday.

        With the revelation by the National Nuclear Security Administration, the administration of President Barack Obama, who has called for creating a nuclear-free world, is likely to face criticism from antinuclear groups, including those in Japan.

        The United States conducted a subcritical nuclear test in September, which marked the first such experiment since Obama took office in January 2009.

        The latest experiments brought the total number of confirmed subcritical nuclear tests since then to three and underscored the administration’s policy of maintaining its nuclear arsenal as long as nuclear weapons exist in the world.

        Although the NNSA unveiled the testing on its website in June more than four months later after the most recent experiment, the entity explained it strives to promote transparency by releasing its subcritical nuclear tests in a quarterly “Summary of Experiments Conducted in Support of Stockpile Stewardship.”

        An NNSA official said the experiments contributed to assuring the overall safety and security of the remaining nuclear stockpile.

        The two experiments are part of the test dubbed Bacchus which involves the Sept. 15 subcritical nuclear test last year, the official added.

        The September experiment was the first of its kind since August 2006, under the administration of President George W. Bush.

        The subcritical nuclear test does not entail a chain reaction that would create a nuclear explosion. The United States suspended underground nuclear explosion tests in 1992.

        The United States first conducted a subcritical nuclear test in 1997. It argues that subcritical tests are not banned under the 1996 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty on nuclear arms on the grounds that they do not accompany a nuclear explosion.

        (Mainichi Japan) July 20, 2011

      2. Tickle,

        The experimental description sounds like Japan is ‘tickling the tail of the dragon’.


        Bill Duff

      1. Weapon Grade

        The tests will likely involve weapons grade fissile materials. The uranium bombs are FAR easier to build than the plutonium bombs.

        The purity levels required for a useful (compact, light, high-yield) atomic weapon are MUCH higher than used in civilian reactors.

        A 10,000 kg (mass), low-yield atomic bomb could be constructed, and detonated but it would have no military value.

        The FDU-3 atomic explosion was a screw-up, not a plan.


        Bill Duff

        1. Quote: “New Technologies and the Qualitative Arms Race

          Working Paper submitted by the India at the Third Special Session
          of the United Nations General Assembly devoted to disarmament, 1988”

          “A number of third generation nuclear-weapon designs are being actively explored. These include the X-ray laser in which the energy of the nuclear explosion is channeled into focused beams of intense X-ray radiation. The gamma ray laser microwave weapons and nuclear devices that can generate powerful electromagnetic pulses are other third generation concepts that are being explored.

          Concurrently more accurate and precise modes of delivery of nuclear warheads are being explored to avoid the large collateral damage, inevitable in less accurate delivery. The maneuverable re-entry vehicle (MARV) is one such technology that is likely to dramatically increase the ability to deliver nuclear weapons with pin-point accuracy. The Earth-penetrating nuclear warhead design is another example of militarily usable nuclear explosions.

          New directions in the use of nuclear energy for military purposes are also evident. Plans to deploy compact and powerful nuclear reactors in space are in advanced stages of development. The new military space missions for reactors include the powering of beam weapons, battle stations and supporting satellites. Accidents in already existing nuclear space systems have not been uncommon. Increased use of nuclear power in space could have dangerous ecological consequences.”

          . quoted from: https : //www.fas.org/nuke/guide/india/doctrine/880000-disarm.htm

          That was submitted over 25 years ago.

        2. Would it not be incredibly short-sighted and dimwitted to neglect to test MOX fuel rod(s) in a meltdown situation?
          If they do test a MOX rod, will the public ever be permitted to know the results?

          1. Decay Heat:

            Spent Nuclear Fuel gives off enormous heat. Thus a gram, kilogram or TON of UOX or MOX, fresh from a nuclear reactor, can EASILY be used to evaluate meltdown conditions.

            Just shut the cooling down. The fuel will melt. Sufficient material can be placed below the superheating fuel, to alloy with the UOX and/or MOX. The diluted corium can be cooled at will, with water, or Liquid Nitrogen, if necessary.

            Another Kettle of Fish:

            Japan’s presumed nuclear weapon program experiments are a separate matter entirely. The belligerence of PRC and Iran, have provoked the Japan and KSA nuclear weapon programs. We may not ‘Like It’, but the threats are credible and there IS an ‘inherent right of self-defense.


            Bill Duff

            1. Oversimplified

              Obviously, a melting fuel rod would have the products of fission, such as strontium-90, Cesium-134, Cesium-137, Iodine-131 and so forth.

              So the simulation is a reduced form of the disaster.

              And our ventilation system would filter these fission products. And our experimental system would recombine the hydrogen from the zircalloy.

              Oh, and by the way, such experiments have presumably been conducted, in various locations.


              Bill Duff

    2. Lab Procedure

      http rt com/ (news/japan-fukushima-meltdown-experiment-372)

      Published time: January 09, 2014 15:32 Edited time: January 11, 2014 09:18

      The meltdown project will be conducted at the Nuclear Safety Research Reactor in Tokaimura, Ibaraki Prefecture, which started operations in 1975, and is designed to conduct these kinds of experiments. The test will see a 1.2-meter-long stainless steel capsule containing a 30-centimeter-long fuel rod to be placed at the core of the reactor in a way that the coolant water would not come into contact with the rod. This will recreate conditions similar to the Fukushima crisis when reactors lost water due to heat generated by the nuclear fuel. The JAEA also plans to install a camera inside the capsule to record the process.

    3. The Fukushima Daiichi meltdowns are NOT simulated

      FDU-1, FDU-2 & FDU-3 were SCRAMMED (off). No fission was underway at the time of the initial meltdowns.

      The test is not predictive

      The melting points of plutonium, plutonium oxide, uranium and uranium are HIGHLY VARIABLE. The melting points are different for irradiated and non-irradiated conditions.

      No new science

      MANY similar tests have been conducted in England, France, Pakistan, PRC, Israel, as well as the former USA and former USSR. The melting point data is available.

      This is a bomb-building laboratory exercise.


      Bill Duff

Comments are closed.

About this site

This website updates the latest news about the Fukushima nuclear plant and also archives the past news from 2011. Because it's always updated and added live, articles, categories and the tags are not necessarily fitted in the latest format.
I am the writer of this website. About page remains in 2014. This is because my memory about 311 was clearer than now, 2023, and I think it can have a historical value. Now I'm living in Romania with 3 cats as an independent data scientist.
Actually, nothing has progressed in the plant since 2011. We still don't even know what is going on inside. They must keep cooling the crippled reactors by water, but additionally groundwater keeps flowing into the reactor buildings from the broken parts. This is why highly contaminated water is always produced more than it can circulate. Tepco is planning to officially discharge this water to the Pacific but Tritium is still remaining in it. They dilute this with seawater so that it is legally safe, but scientifically the same amount of radioactive tritium is contained. They say it is safe to discharge, but none of them have drunk it.


January 2014