Contact Report 517
• Contact Reports volume: 11 (Plejadisch-plejarische Kontakberichte, Gespräche, Block 11)
• Page number(s): Unknown
• Date/time of contact: Saturday, 19th March, 2011
• Translator(s): Dyson Devine and Vivienne Legg, Tasmania, Australia
• Date of original translation: Monday, 6th June, 2011
• Corrections and improvements made: N/A
• Contact person: Ptaah
Ptaah's commentary on the Fukushima disaster.
This is an excerpt of the contact. It is an authorised and official translation and may contain errors.
… But if it is possible, then I still do have one or two questions?
It is because of the seaquake-tsunami catastrophe in Japan. Around 6:45 am, Central European Time, on Friday, the 11th of March, a massive earthquake, with a strength of 9.0 on the Richter Scale, occurred off the Japanese coast. The earthquake triggered an enormous tsunami which rolled across the coast of the main island of Honshu. The worst affected are three prefectures in the northeast of the country (Fukushima, Iwate, Miyagi) on a 600 kilometer coastline. In Fukushima, a nuclear power plant with six reactors has been seriously affected. In regard to that, it is said that a super worst-possible- case-scenario is possible. But I think that this has already happened, and now an ultra super worst-possible-case-scenario threatens. And it is also the case that the emerging radiation and radioactive water from the reactors will not just pollute large parts of the district, rather perhaps entire tracts of land, and the sea, and that the emerging radioactive particles will also be driven by the wind around the world, thus also to Europe.
Your assumption is right, that the so-called super worst-possible-case- scenario has already occurred, being that, very dangerous and extensive radiation is being emitted from reactor 3, in which the dangerous plutonium is exposed, and which not only spreads over wide regions, rather also spreads out into the sea and seriously contaminates the sea as well as fish and the other sea creatures, which has manifold deadly consequences. It is therefore a deliberate lie, from those in charge, that the disaster has not yet happened in the named form. And the occurrence of the now-threatening, ultra super worst- possible-case-scenario, as you call it, is only a question of time. The measures which are taken for the cooling of the reactors, and so forth, and which are meant to prevent everything, only correspond to useless acts of desperation. But also to bear in mind with this is that the water which is taken, in desperation, from the sea to use for cooling, on the other hand, involves great danger, because the seawater’s salt generates dangerous effects which impair the cooling process. And the radioactive particles, which are blown all over the place by the wind, actually spread around the Earth. We have already been able to detect, two days ago, on March 17th, 2011 - therefore last Thursday - such radioactive particles in the northern area of Europe as well as in Central Europe.
And is Switzerland also affected by that?
That is actually the case, whereby one can assume that the radioactive particles – which have emerged up to this point in low amounts – will manifest in increased quantity.
That is to be feared. But that which interests me is: how great is the possibility – that is to say – is it even possible, to decontaminate areas contaminated with radioactivity, by destroying the radiation? I especially think about contamination with plutonium. The technically most important isotope, an emitter of alpha particles, is plutonium 239, with a half-life of 24,110 years. Plutonium is a silver-white, non-noble, heavy metal, which is primarily artificially produced in nuclear reactors – more precisely, breeder reactors. In nature, it occurs only in very small quantities in uranium ores, where it originates from natural uranium. As a consequence of its high alpha-particle-radiating activity and its propensity for accumulating in the bones of human beings and other living organisms, plutonium has the effect of making the entire body radioactive. It belongs to the most dangerous of known toxins. As a rule, the inhalation of plutonium dust evokes lung cancer, whereby, however, the effect of even a few micrograms can lead to fatal radiation poisoning. At least, those are the most important facts of which I am aware, aside from the half lives of two further plutonium isotopes. Of course, I am no nuclear physicist.
That which you say is naturally correct. But, to your question, I can only explain that there is no possibility at all of eliminating ionising radiation. Therefore, we also know of no effective method in this regard. Only the half-life period can be taken into consideration, during which the radiation decreases by half.
In 24,110 years, half the radioactive substance is present. After a further 24,110 years, there is, once again, half, and so forth. The effective half-life indicates the time after which the radioactivity of a radioactive substance in an organism is reduced by half. The radioactive decay and the excretion from the organism lead to the decrease. I have learnt that plutonium is a radioactive chemical element from the actinide and transuranic group. It is known as a whole range of mostly manmade unstable isotopes, being at least 15, whereby the longest-living - Plutonium 244 - has a half life of 82,600,000 years, and Plutonium 242 with a somewhat lesser longevity, has a half life of 376,300 years.
I found additional half lives in the dictionary, as follows:
2.46 x 105 years
7.04 x 108 years
4.47 x 109 years
All that is also correct, for which reason there is nothing further to explain.