999-

"Lights back on in reactor three" doesn't mean that the pumps, valves, motors necessary to run what's left of Unit 3 are functional. Yes, it's a positive step but not one that should reassure anyone who is concerned about the safety of the entire complex.

I apologize if I'm taking this event too seriously but then I'm been trained by my parents since 1969 not to take the nuclear industry for granted. There's more to be learned from the accident, and I'm well aware that most people will forget the lessons learned in a few short years, as they did with Three Mile Island and Chernobyl.

I also share Donuel's respect for the Union of Concerned Scientists. Reviewing what they post every day in their transcripts of the media teleconference is crucial to understanding how this accident happened and what its impact may be. It's a tedious process and I have yet to see a report published anywhere that indicated that a reporter had digested the information provided. They do occasionally ask the right questions.

Case in point: how many people noticed that a high proportion of the radioactivity coming from the stricken reactors at Fukushima 1 nuclear complex is in the form of Iodine 131, instead of cesium 137? That's an important fact. If the radioactivity were coming primarily from the spent fuel pools it would be predominately cesium 137. That's because the iodine 131 has a much shorter half-life and has already dissipated in the spent fuel pool. Therefore, it's reasonable to conclude that the iodine 131 has come from the reactors, either from venting or primary containment ruptures.

Charley Noble