It seems more and more as if we're not going to be allowed to see this sort of thing in print, but will be forced into the linear strictures of video in order to acquire information conveyed principally in language. I'm still resisting. As valuable as the video in the previous post (from Fukushima) is, the interview format in this one is just a waste of time, even for a slow reader like me.

Not to be too picky, but the gentleman being interviewed, Marco Kaltofen, is not a nuclear scientist, nor does he represent himself as one. He is a civil engineer with an MS in Environmental Engineering. His CV is available here: http://bostonchemicaldata.com/bio.html His consulting firm "provides technical support for environmentally-related organizations and for litigation". He is also on the Board of Directors of Hanford Challenge. http://www.hanfordchallenge.org/

I am not at all qualified to comment on the accuracy of his statements in the video; they may well be correct. However it's important to know that Mr. Kaltofen is not an unbiased academic. He is an advocate for a certain point of view.

So what?

Would you feel differently if he were a consultant to G.E. with identical credentials?

Jack referred to Marco Kaltofen as a nuclear scientist in his post, which he is not. To his credit he also makes that clear in the video. That's all. He may very well be correct in everything that he is saying. I am certainly not at all qualified to judge the accuracy of his claims.

Mister Tee - I would be equally interested to know if he were a consultant to G.E., or TEPCO for that matter. It's useful to know if someone presenting themselves as an expert on a subject has a dog in the fight, so to speak.