[Reactor3] 1st floor : 16℃, 2nd floor : 9℃ / The deeper you go, the warmer it gets at 4m from the primary vessel









Following up this article.. [Leakage of reactor3 coolant water] Tepco “Can’t touch anything due to the high level of radiation” [URL]


In reactor3 building, the deeper it goes, the warmer it becomes, and the lower it goes, the higher the radiation level gets, according to Tepco.


On 4/23/2014, Tepco finally entered the 2nd floor of reactor3 building and dropped the camera and instruments onto the 1st floor, where the coolant water is possibly leaking out. It was approx 4m from the primary vessel.

Unexpectedly, Tepco couldn’t find a pipe leaking the reactor coolant water directly.

However they found the radiation level and the temperature become higher toward the floor.


The radiation level was 0.6 mSv/h on the 2nd floor, but it was 110 mSv/h on the 1st floor. They also found unidentified water is retained on the floor of the 1st floor.

Also, the temperature was 16℃, when it was 9℃ on the 2nd floor.

The reason hasn’t been identified yet.


The video below was taken by the camera hung from the 2nd floor. It gets a lot of white dots when the camera focuses on the retained water (10:34 ~). They look like the same thing as what the endoscope caught in the reactor vessels due to the high level of radiation.








You read this now because we’ve been surviving until today.


Français :

[Réacteur 3] 1er étage : 16℃, 2e : 9℃ = Plus on descend, plus ça chauffe, à 4 m de l’enceinte primaire


Article lié : [Fuite refroidissement réacteur 3] Tepco : “On ne peut rien faire, la radioactivité est trop forte“

Selon Tepco, dans le bâtiment du réacteur 3  plus on descend plus ça chauffe et plus bas on est plus la radioactivité est forte.

Le 23 avril 2014, Tepco est finalement entré dans le 2e étage du bâtiment du réacteur 3 et a fait descendre une caméra et des instruments de mesure au 1er étage où fuit probablement le liquide de refroidissement. On était à environ 4 m de l’enceinte de confinement primaire.
De façon inattendue, Tepco n’a pas trouvé de tuyau percé laissant s’écouler directement de liquide de refroidissement du réacteur.
Ils ont toutefois établit que la radioactivité et la température augmentent quand on se rapproche du sol.

La radioactivité était à 0,6 mSv/h au 2e étage et à 110 mSv/h au premier. Ils ont aussi trouvé de l’eau d’origine inconnue stagnant au sol du 1er étage.
La température y était de 16 ℃ alors qu’elle était de 9 ℃ au 2e étage.
La cause n’en est pas encore établie.

La vidéo ci-dessous a été enregistrée par la caméra suspendue depuis le 2e étage. On a un paquet de points blancs lorsque la caméra se fixe l’eau stagnante (vers 10:34 ~). Ça ressemble à ce qu’on avait eu avec les endoscopes dans les enceintes des réacteurs, à cause de la trop forte radioactivité.


Vous pouvez lire ceci parce que nous avons survécu jusqu’à aujourd’hui.

  1. huh.

    Looks remarkably intact for something you keep saying went up in a nuclear explosion Bill.

    1. Low Yield nuclear blasts do not vaporize extensive areas.

      A significant body of work, which relates to the ‘Tickling the Dragon’ experiments in the Manhattan Project.

      Nuclear Fission Chain Reactions can be produced down to the size of a single stick of dynamite, with a nasty Blue Flash.

      The FDU-3 Atomic explosion was on the order of the tactical Davy Crockett artillery round.

      The energy phase and power phase of atomic blasts are bomb design parameters.

      And Nuclear Reactor screwups come in all sizes.

        1. Simply put,

          ‘Niall in Sweden’ but not ‘of Sweden’, is nescient and a pathologic, habitual and volitional LIAR. The Diemos posts are less transparent trollary, and serve some occasionally useful, if generally deceptive purposes.

          The detail is provided for the interested reader; due to the general interest in the physical parameters of the FDU-3 Supersonic, Hyperthermic, Gamma Radiation Inducing, and therefore Atomic Explosion.

          A great deal of money, and nefarious political purposes, ride on the ‘Team Nuke’ attempt to deny the Atomic Blast in FDU-3.


          Bill Duff

    2. Nuclear Weapon Tests

      At least one, USA tower based, nuclear weapon test fizzled. The site was not ‘declassified’ by the blast. This means, translated to the English language, that much of the tower remained, intact.

      I do not offhand recall the code name of the blast, or in which Western State the test was conducted.

      Simple reality & basic science

  2. ‘Ruth’ did not take long to locate:

    http www nuclearweaponarchive org/ (Usa/Tests/Upshotk) html

    Test: Ruth
    Time: 13:00 31 March 1953 (GMT)
    05:00 31 March 1953 (local)
    Location: Nevada Test Site (NTS), Area 7
    Test Height and Type: 300 Foot Tower Shot
    Yield: 0.2 kt

    This was the first device to be tested by UCRL (University of California Radiation Laboratory, later Lawrence-Livermore) the new second weapons laboratory, established by Teller and Lawrence. The device, named Hydride I, was a fission bomb based on a enriched uranium hydride fuel. Like its sister device tested in the Ray shot 12 days later, Hydride I was intended for use as a primary in a compact thermonuclear system.

    The uranium hydride fission bomb approach was considered during the days of the Manhattan Project as possible way for reducing the required critical mass of uranium. The hydrogen in the hydride compound (UH3) moderates the fast neutrons somewhat, which moves the energy spectrum down into a region where the average fission cross section of uranium is substantially higher giving a smaller effective critical mass. Unfortunately, bomb efficiency is very adversely affected by the slowing down of the neutrons since it gives the bomb core more time to blow apart. The concept (if it worked) would allow low yield bombs that, while inherently inefficient, also did not use up much fissile material.

    The Manhattan Project had abandoned this idea as a practical bomb design, although uranium hydride systems proved quite valuable for criticality experiments when fissile material was scarce. The famous “Dragon” prompt criticality experiments where a chunk of fissile material was dropped through a subcritical mass to momentarily reach supercriticality used uranium hydride.

    After the war Los Alamos physicists were skeptical of the usefulness of uranium hydride in weapons. Edward Teller remained interested in the concept though, and used his prominent position to push hydride weapon development when the UCRL weapons lab opened.

    The Ruth shot was a fizzle. The predicted yield was 1.5 to 3 kt, while the 200 ton yield was a fraction of that. Especially embarrassing to UCRL was that only the top 100 feet of the 300 foot shot tower was vaporized (though much of the remainder was scattered across the desert). It was standard practice at that time for each test to totally erase all evidence associated with it (automatically “declassifying” the site), which Ruth failed to do.

    Hydride I weighed 7400 lb, was 56 inches in diameter and was 66 inches long. A betatron was used for initiation.

    1. Nested Comment: ~ Fizzle Yield nuclear blast ‘Ruth’

      Upshot Knothole, Nevada Site: Tower Stump Photo, ‘Ruth’

      http www nuclearweaponarchive (org/Usa/Tests/Ukruth) jpg

      Atmospheric nuclear weapon test – DATA

      Science and observed reality

    2. Thanks for this, Mr. Duff. I appreciate it and don’t doubt for an instant that others do too.

      Where would your naysayers be without you? They are YOUR shadow, after all. 😉

      1. Mr Bill Duff replies to himself. It is extremely embarrassing and shameful, but that doesn’t deter him.

  3. Same Source:

    Test: Ray
    Time: 12:45 11 April 1953 (GMT)
    04:45 11 April 1953 (local)
    Location: Nevada Test Site (NTS), Area 4
    Test Height and Type: 100 Foot Tower
    Yield: 0.2 kt

    This was the second test of a uranium hydride device, this time using the heavy isotope of hydrogen – deuterium. The uranium deuteride device was called Hydride II, and was otherwise basically identical to Hydride I. The predicted yield was 0.5-1 kt, the lower expected yield making a smaller gap with the same 200 ton yield as the first test. UCRL scientist Herbert York claims not to regard this test as a failure since it was lower than the predicted range by “only a factor of three”. Legend has it that this shot was fired on a tower of only 100 feet (compared to 300 feet for Ruth) to ensure that the tower would be entirely destroyed.

    1. Mr Bill Duff pastes some irrelevant text. It had numbers and letters in it, so he considered it scientific. I do not know why he considered it to be of interest to Fukushima related matters.

  4. Mark-1 Architecture

    The Fukushima Daiichi Unit 3 architecture is a theoretically defective, and demonstrably failed General Electric Mark-1 ‘containment’ system. Several upgrades were installed by TEPCO, including the equally failed ‘ventilation’ system.

    The Nuclear Reactor is 8″ Thick Stainless Steel, The Metal Shell is 8″ thick nuclear grade steel. The undersized Mark-1 reinforced concrete ‘containment’ structure is typically 8′ thick or 16′ thick. The nuclear power plant has additional structural walls, floors and barriers, particularly on the lower floors of the building.

    These structures failed to contain the FDU-3 supersonic detonation. The blast was characterized by: orange flame, Explosion-Implosion-Explosion sequence, black smoke, supersonic detonation, nuclear fuel vapor release to surrounding area, fuel fragment scattering over a 1,000+ Square Mile Radius; and induced gamma radiation in concrete as well as surrounding nuclear grade structural steel towers and other structures.

    FDU-3 was therefore a nuclear blast.

    1. Mr Bill Duff argues thusly:

      The reactor was made of X and Y. These failed to contain the explosion. Therefore there must have been an explosion. Since there is nuclear power involved, we shall call it a NUCLEAR EXPLOSION!

      This is, of course, completely true. Luckily, everyone was standing at the far end of the room and did not receive permanent injury.

  5. http www military com/ (Content/MoreContent1/?file=cw_nuclear_slotin)

    On May 21, 1946, Dr. Louis Slotin suffered a fatal dose of radiation while he demonstrated the technique of critical assembly and associated studies and measurements to another scientist. The technique, called “tickling the dragon’s tail,” allowed Slotin to calculate critical mass, which would be necessary to detonate in an atomic weapon. The method involved delicately screwing two hollow spheres of beryllium around a mass of fissionable material. Two one-inch spacers between the upper hemisphere and the lower shell provided the only “safety” measure preventing inadvertent critical assembly.

    During Slotin’s demonstration something went terribly wrong. As he slowly allowed the latter edge to approach the lower shell, one hand held the screwdriver while the other hand was holding the upper shell with this thumb placed in an opening. At that time, the screwdriver apparently slipped and the upper shell fell into position around the fissionable material. A “blue glow” appeared; a heat wave moved through the room. “Slotin lunged forward and grabbed the two hemispheres with his bare hands, ripped them apart and took the full brunt of a nuclear detonation right in his stomach,” said Dr. Michio Kaku, an atomic scientist involved in the project.

    Slotin immediately understood what had happened. As a result of the accident he died nine days later, his body decomposing from the massive dose of radiation. During the nine days before he died, he insisted that his physical state be continuously documented so that the effects of radiation could be used for scientific purposes. His assistant had also suffered enough radiation to cause serious injuries and some permanent partial disability. The six others in the room at the time of the accident suffered no permanent injury.

    1. Ahh, ok, now I get it. Mr Bill Duff is talking about the kind of nuclear detonation where the guy at arms lenght gets it in the stomach, but those standing on the other sioe of the room suffer no permanent injury. I guess unit 3 could have had one of those alright.

        1. Niall is a record-breaking dumbass

          Certainly, I am a degreed electrical engineer, having completed the requirements for: General Electrical Engineering, Power and Digital at a Tier 1 University.

          Further, I completed the specialty requirements for the Industrial Engineering specialty at a separate Tier 1 university.

          Further still, I have published in the field, in peer reviewed professional publications. And have been granted a number of patents.

          Niall on the other hand is a stupid, pisspore, lying, piece of dogdung.

          1. Mail order degrees that slipped past your spam filter don’t count. Also, degrees don’t make an engineer.

  6. Reporters and photographs routinely, though unwittingly, provide evidence of the FDU-3 nuclear blast.

    News crews on the Fukushima Daiichi have been shooting pictures on their Gamma-Cams (Γ-cameras) for several years now. The nuclear hotspots for Gamma Radiation are clearly marked on structural metals. These structural metals were irradiated with neutrons, making them highly radioactive, with Gamma (Γ) radiation. The reporter will often label the Gamma-Cam photo, with a caption like, ‘Death in Seconds’ or ‘Fatal Dose in Minutes’.

    Ordinary cameras also react to the high intensity Gamma (Γ) radiation, by a phenomenon known as Gamma Haze. The streaming video and still photos from the Fukushima robots will sometimes display Gamma Haze, in the high radiation environments. The physical process is fairly simple. Transistors are activated by radioactive waves, and turn themselves on, somewhat unpredictably. Older, film based cameras tended to have exposure, with the shutter closed. So cameras have long tattled on radiation events.

    Other materials, such as cement chunks, and copper fittings, also now have induced radiation, and nuclear chemistry changes due to the neutron-flux from the FDU-3 nuclear accident; as they did at the SL-1 military reactor accident in Idaho, years ago. These induced radiation findings are DIRECT evidence of Fission occurring outside the box. They represent definitive proof of neutron flux.


    Bill Duff

    1. Mr Bill Duff says there is routine providing of evidence, but ironically fails to provide any.

  7. Neutron-induced 63Ni in copper samples from Hiroshima and Nagasaki:

    Radiat Environ Biophys. 2007 Nov;46(4):327-38. Epub 2007 Sep 8., Rühm W1, Carroll KL, Egbert SD, Faestermann T, Knie K, Korschinek G, Martinelli RE, Marchetti AA, McAninch JE, Rugel G, Straume T, Wallner A, Wallner C, Fujita S, Hasai H, Hoshi M, Shizuma K. http www ncbi nlm nih gov/ (pubmed/17828415)

    Those inhabitants of Hiroshima and Nagasaki who were affected by the A-bomb explosions, were exposed to a mixed neutron and gamma radiation field. Few years later about 120,000 survivors of both cities were selected, and since then radiation-induced late effects such as leukemia and solid tumors are being investigated in this cohort.

    As a contribution to a large international effort to re-evaluate the A-bomb dosimetry, the concentration of the radionuclide (63)Ni (half-life 100.1 years) has been measured in copper samples from Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These measurements were mainly performed at the Maier-Leibnitz-Laboratory in Munich, Germany, by means of accelerator mass spectrometry. Because the (63)Ni had been produced in these samples by fast A-bomb neutrons via the reaction (63)Cu(n,p)(63)Ni, these measurements allow direct experimental validation of calculated neutron doses to the members of the LSS cohort, for the first time.

    Eight copper samples that had been significantly exposed to fast neutrons from the Hiroshima A-bomb explosion were investigated. In general, measured (63)Ni concentrations decreased in these samples with increasing distance to the hypocenter, from 4 x 10(6 ) (63)Ni nuclei per gram copper at 391 m, to about 1 x 10(5 ) (63)Ni nuclei per gram copper at about 1,400 m.

  8. ROOF, according to the Atomic Energy Commission.

    Two documentary films describe an earlier uncontrolled atomic explosion in a nuclear reactor. There are many documented accounts of this fatal nuclear reactor prompt criticality. Perhaps it is simpler for non-technical readers to watch these military briefing films. It is easy to ‘cut to the chase’ about why the GammaCam readings are ‘proof positive’ of an uncontained nuclear explosion, ie ‘a smoking gun’. To view a description and explanation of this proof, simply fast-forward the film, to the indicated Elapsed Time (ET) [min:s]

    18:46, “Evidence of an uncontrolled chain reaction”
    19:18, “Only neutron capture could have transmuted (metals)”

    http www youtube com/ (watch?v=gIBQMkd96CA&feature=player_embedded#at=817)
    http highpowerrocketry blogspot com/ (2010/11/sl-1-nuclear-reactor-accident-video) html
    http www inl gov/ (proving-the-principle/chapter_15) pdf
    http www id doe gov/ (foia/archive) htm

    U.S. Atomic Energy Commission Idaho Operations Office

    The Stationary Low-Power Reactor Number One (SL-1), was a United States Army experimental nuclear power reactor. On January 3, 1961 the reactor was restarted after a shutdown of eleven days. Maintenance procedures commenced, which required the main central control rod to be withdrawn a few inches; at 9:01 p.m. this rod was withdrawn almost to the top of the core, causing SL-1 to go prompt critical. In four milliseconds, the heat generated by the resulting enormous power surge caused water surrounding the core to begin to explosively vaporize. The water vapor caused a pressure wave to strike the top of the reactor vessel. This propelled the control rod and the entire reactor vessel upwards, which killed the operator who had been standing on top of the vessel, leaving him pinned to the ceiling. The other two military personnel, a supervisor and a trainee, were also killed. The victims were Army Specialists John A. Byrnes and Richard L. McKinley and Navy Electrician’s Mate Richard C. Legg.

    On the night of January 4, a team of six volunteers used a plan involving teams of two to recover the body of Byrnes. Radioactive gold 198Au from the man’s brass watch buckle and copper 64Cu from a screw in a cigarette lighter subsequently PROVED that the reactor had indeed gone prompt critical. Up until the recovery of radioisotopes of uranium, fission products, and the radioactive isotopes from the men’s belongings, scientists had doubted that a nuclear excursion had occurred, thinking it inherently safe. These findings ruled out early speculations that a chemical explosion caused the accident.

    1. Mr Bill Duff posts a lot of text regarding the accident at the SL-1 reactor. Which is has posted previously, and it was not relevant back then either.

  9. Physicists not only detected evidence of fission neutrons, but also determined the dose received by analyzing the amount of radioactive Zinc in Japanese 5 Yen coins in the pockets of workers exposed in the Tokaimura Criticality Accident in 1999.

    It’s possible to determine if there was a criticality accident at Fukushima by detecting radioactive Zinc in e.g. galvanized fences, rivets, washers etc.

    Masuchika Kohno & Yoshinobu Koizumi, 2000. Tokaimura accident: Neutron dose estimates from 5-yen coins. Nature 406, 693, doi:10.1038/35021138

    Lots of references to the Takaimura Criticality Accident

    IAEA, World Nuclear…

    http www nature com/ (nature/journal/v406/n6797/abs/406693a0) html

  10. Indeed.

    Nuclear transmutation can be used to determine if an object has been exposed to a neutron flux.

    And what object outside the containment at fukushima has been shown to have undergone transmutation?

    Oh right. Nothing.

    Oh Bill, you’re so funny.

    1. Lucky Thing That

      Luckily no one must convince the murder defendant, or his lawyer, that the client is guilty.

      We must only convince, the jury, judge and appeals courts; by sufficient evidence, law, precedent and effective argument. The objective, and interested reader has access to the Gamma Cam evidence and the clear explanation of what the Gamma Cam readings mean.

      Trolls, together with shills, and their unsubstantiated mockery are trivial. Their poorly concocted denials, logical fallacies, and lack of evidence, eventually convince the reader, and the court of public opinion, that the facts are established.

      FDU-3 was an atomic explosion; no matter how much money that costs ‘Team Nuke’.

      1. If you mentioned the possibility of a prompt criticality in the fuel pool then we might get somewhere, but using dramatic expressions such as “FDU-3 atomic blast” only sides you with the loonies.

      2. Mr Bill Duff deftly ignores the request for some kind of evidence, and instead resorts to ranting about gamma cams and insulting people. I shall post the question again, and see if Mr Bill Duff avoids it a second time:

        And what object outside the containment at fukushima has been shown to have undergone transmutation?

  11. Translated Quote of article “Deutscher Strahlen-Experte warnt | „Fukushima ist Atombombe im Mini-Maßstab“”:

    “Fukushima was a “kind of atomic bomb in the mini-scale”

    “There was a spontaneous fission – showing that anything can happen, even if some people say it is not likely.”

    . quoted from: http : //www.bild.de/news/ausland/fukushima/fukushima-wie-mini-atombombe-20843412.bild.html
    . thanks to enenews admin & “Bread&Butter”

    1. Mr Bill Duff proves his atomic detonation theory. Luckily, everyone was standing at the far side of the room and did not receive permanent injury.

    2. Dud,

      danke schön

      I had not run across these references previously. Germany, like Japan and several other nations have taken GIANT steps away from civilian nuclear power plants. Germany came to this conclusion quite quickly and apparently discussed it widely. I was able to locate quite a few related publications, by searching for key phrases.

      Japan and the USA are still engaged in tumultuous discussions about future energy priorities. The USA press, has never to my recollection, EVER even referenced these German publications.


      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.


April 2014