Research Articles Index
Underground Nuclear Power Plants
Several Underground Nuclear Power Plants
(UNPPs) have been operated since the early 1960s in
Europe and the Soviet Union.
Russia is studying plans to build more underground
NPPs using small "mini" naval reactors....
Chernobyl on the Hudson
In September 2004 the Union of Concerned
Scientists published a report into the Indian Point
nuclear power station, located on the Hudson River
35 miles north of New York....
"Directly out of the business of nuclear weapons
came the business of nuclear power, heralded in
our country with the slogan, Atoms for Peace. Even
that innocent-sounding slogan is part of the endless
pattern of public deception that surrounds..."
In 2002, the paper "Study of Traces of Tritium at the World Trade Center" was presented at
the American Chemical Society National Meeting.
This paper is well known in the "911 Truth Movement" for its presentation of anomalous
levels of Tritium discovered at the WTC site 10 days after the attacks.
Of the 51 water samples analysed from the WTC complex, Manhattan, local reservoirs and
Brooklyn (mainly), two samples from the basement of WTC 6 showed anomalously high
levels of Tritium activity.
The levels measured were 3.53 ± 0.17 nCi/l and 2.83 ± 0.15 nCi/l of Tritium activity in this
We will use the units of Becquerels for the rest of this analysis because it is a much less
disingenuous unit. 1 Bq = 1 radioactive disintegration per second. 1 nCi is 37 Bq.
In Becquerels, the WTC 6 basement Tritium levels equate to 130.6 Bq/l and 104.7 Bq/l.
The WTC storm sewer also showed somewhat raised levels of 0.164 ± 0.074 nCi/l (6.1 Bq/l)
but according to figures cited by the authors this would be within normal background
levels of Tritium in water in the US, cited at 0.1 - 0.2 nCi/l or 3.7 - 7.4 Bq/l.
The authors postulate that this Tritium in the WTC 6 basement came from two sources:
Radio Luminescent Exit signs on board the two 767s which crashed into the towers and
from Tritium night sights fitted to weapons stored at the site.
Before I comment on their very interesting analysis, I will present some key data from the
recent report by Dr. Ian Fairlie "Cernavoda 3 and 4: Environment Impact Analysis: Report
for Greenpeace" which "examines the existing releases of tritium, the radioactive isotope of
hydrogen, from the Cernavoda 1 Candu reactor in Romania".
The Canadian CANDU reactor is known as a Heavy Water Reactor (HWR) because it uses
deuterated water (heavy water) as the coolant and moderator. The deuterium atoms in the
water capture neutrons from the core to moderate the reaction and become Tritium.
Tritiation of ordinary un-deuterated coolant water also occurs to some extent in the
widespread PWR and BWR reactor designs but to a much lower degree since H atoms will
have to capture two neutrons to tritiate, while heavy water contains many D atoms that
only require one more neutron to form Tritium (T).
CANDU reactors are therefore well known for being the most polluting reactors in terms of
Tritium production, which is released into the surrounding environment in increasing
amounts as time goes on from all reactors of this type.
Dr. Fairlie presents data on the levels of background Tritium present in the local
environment around the Cernavoda reactor before it started operation in 1996 and
compares it to the levels found in 1999. (Upper and Lower limits removed for clarity.
Units: Bq/l or Bq/kg).
Cernavoda Environment - Tritium Levels (Bq/l)
It can be seen that while the level of Tritium found in the WTC storm sewer of 6.1 Bq/l is in
the range of background Tritium levels at Cernavoda and background US levels of 3.7 - 7.4
Bq/l, the amount of Tritium in the WTC 6 basement samples of 131 and 105 Bq/l are two
orders of magnitude higher on the Becquerel scale than normal background and are three
times higher than the concentration of Tritium found in Danube river water (40 Bq/l)
downstream of the Cernavoda CANDU reactor, the reactor type which is the most Tritium
polluting of all reactor types.
It can reasonably be deduced that the water in the WTC 6 basement has indeed been
significantly tritiated by an artificial source, which can only occur by:
* contamination from a source of tritium, postulated at the WTC in the above study to be
RL Exit signs and gunsights;
* or by neutron irradiation of water and tritiation of Hydrogen atoms into the radioactive
During the power excursion and core meltdown of the reactors, the water in the primary
cooling system, the ECCS and the WTC air conditioning system (absorption chillers under
the Plaza) would have been irradiated leading to the production of deuterated and tritiated
The presence of these high tritium levels in water samples from the basement of WTC 6 is
consistent with the hypothesis of the prior occurrence of nuclear fission explosions and is
further corroborative evidence that this occurred – tritium is what one would expect to
find in water at the site of a nuclear explosion.
We will now discuss the very interesting paper "Study of Traces of Tritium at the World
Trade Center" which at first glance appears to present the case that the source of the
anomalous Tritium levels in the WTC 6 basement was the RL Exit signs in the aircraft and
gunsights on law enforcement weaponry stored at the site. In reality, this is a carefully
worded document to communicate what really occurred without saying so in as many
The team analysed 51 water samples in total from the local area including downwind of the
WTC (mainly Brooklyn) but only found tritium levels above background in the samples
from the WTC 6 basement (two orders of magnitude higher than background).
"All results were zero within detection limits" for these areas, including the South
Manhattan water distribution system which is closed to atmospheric deposition.
The study calculates that the two aircraft would have contained a total of 34 Ci of Tritium
in their RL Exit signs at the time of impact. The authors first comment on what the T2 in the
aircraft would have undergone on impact:
"Considering the jet fuel explosion and high-temperature fires at the WTC, T2 was
efficiently oxidized to HTO, based on weapons-testing data (37), as well as laser heating
experiments (38). This oxide immediately vaporized due to the intense heat. Most of the
HTO would be transported in the vapor phase with the wind, since the weather was dry on
9/11/01 (18). One cannot accurately determine how much HTO condensed on building
surfaces and deposited on the ground with the collapse of the buildings, but this would
have been a small fraction of the 34 Ci available. One indication is the low 0.164 ± 0.74
nCi/L from the WTC sewer, collected two days after the attack. Since the initial source was
small, it is consistent that the environmental samples collected downwind over seven
weeks after the attack contained no tritium (Section 3)."
Therefore they imply that the WTC sewer tritium level of 0.164 nCi/l (6 Bq/l) measured on
9/14/01 may indicate the actual tritium deposition from the aircraft, this being two orders
of magnitude lower than the actual observed level in the WTC 6 basement.
Even though the vast majority of the tritium must have oxidised and been dispersed as
HTO vapour in the plume, no tritium that could be distinguished from background levels
was detected locally downwind of the site.
The paper goes on to make an important comparisons with other fires involving tritium
containing objects that have occurred:
"It is important to compare this small release of tritium in the fire with two other incidents
caused by fire and involving the release of molecular tritium. One incident involved a fire
in a community building at Council, Alaska, on 9/6/87, where 12 RL light panels for
airport runway marking were stored, totaling 3000 Ci of tritium (39). It was a free-burning
fire, which consumed the building in 1 hr. Tritium assessment was done 11 days after the
accident. The remaining GTLS tubes were mostly undamaged but disfigured, indicating that
all tritium had escaped. No air-borne tritium was detected. All tubes were carefully wiped
on surfaces, and the HTO activity from the wipes amounted to 6.5×10-8 of that originally
present. No HTO was found in bioassay or environmental samples. The release scenario at
the WTC from the airplanes is consistent with this accident. However, the Twin Towers
collapsed before their complete burning, so the fraction of tritium deposited at the WTC
might be larger. Another incident, involving containers with tens of thousands CI of
tritium, was a fire on a C-124 airplane on the ground at the Wright-Patterson Air Force
Base, Dayton, OH, on 10/12/65 (40). That fire was actively extinguished. Elevated levels of
HTO were found in bioassay samples, on emergency and fire equipment, clothing, in the
debris, as well as in the soil and water from nearby samples. In comparison with the Alaska
incident, the active fire fighting contributed to capture of some of the HTO on site.
Therefore in the situation at Council, Alaska, a small building containing 3000 Ci of tritium
(as opposed to 34 Ci in the WTC 767s) left no detectable trace of Tritium afterwards. It took
an aircraft fire with tens of thousands of Ci of T to leave detectable traces.
The authors then go on to present a simple model of how the HTO from the aircraft could
have percolated down into the WTC 6 basement.
"Using c2=3.18 nCi/L, t=10 days, and the values s1 and f2 given above, we obtain A0=0.86
Ci from Eq. (3). Taking the total tritium activity of 34 Ci from the two airplanes implies an
upper limit for the HTO deposition fraction of 2.5%. This fraction, although the right order
of magnitude, is high by a comparison with the two tritium fire incidents described in
Section 5, indicating that the airplane source alone was insufficient.
Therefore the authors conclude that from the two RL fire accidents they analysed, the
scenario of 2.5% of the 34 Ci of tritium in the two aircraft percolating into the bottom of the
bathtub is too high a deposition rate. "Therefore, the source term from the airplanes alone
is too small to explain the measured concentrations, and another missing source is needed"
The only other source postulated is weapons equipped with tritium sights slowly releasing
T2 into the debris, it being oxidised to HTO and washed down into the basement of WTC6.
This would have required 6.1 Ci of activity, from 120 weapons with 50 mCi each - not
unreasonable at first sight but they conclude this is too high again since it would require
complete destruction of the guns, complete T capture and complete conversion to HTO. In
reality many of the guns were retrieved with only minor damage and intact sights, so there
was only very limited Tritium release from this source and insufficient to account for the
Tritium levels by itself.
In the conclusion they state:
"There is evidence that weapons belonging to federal and law-enforcement agencies were
present and destroyed at the WTC. Such weapons contain tritium sights by design. The
exact activity of tritium from the weapons was not determined. The data and modeling are
consistent with the tritium source from the weapon sights (plus possibly tritium watches)
in the debris, from which tritium was slowly released in the lingering fires, followed by an
oxidation and removal with the water flow. Our modeling suggests that such a scenario
would require a minimum of 120 equipped weapons destroyed and a quantitative
capturing of tritium, which is too high, since many weapons were found with only minor
damage and tritium sights are shielded in a metal. Therefore, such a mechanism alone is
not sufficient to account for the measured HTO concentrations. This indicates that the
weapons/watches are consistent with the missing source, which would have
complemented the airplane source".
The authors have effectively discounted the weapons as a source of tritium almost entirely
in the conclusion by saying they were found with minor damage and protected sights - but
then baldly contradict themselves in the next sentence to say "this indicates that the
weapons/watches are consistent with the missing source" - when they have just stated that
120 weapons would have been required but that is too high because the guns found were
undamaged - and earlier stated that the 2.5% capture rate from the aircraft was too high -
so without any quantification, they imply that since the tritium could only have come from
both the aircraft and the gunsights together at less than 2.5% capture rate from the aircraft
and at less than 120 guns, that must have de facto accounted for the tritium. Absent is any
quantification of the actual contribution from each source.
Looking back at the two accidents they cite, a fire involving 3000 Ci of tritium in Alaska,
no tritium was detected anywhere in the area 11 days later. The initial amount of T2
present was two orders of magnitude higher than from the WTC aircraft and concentrated
into one relatively small building yet no tritium was found afterwards.
Therefore if an accident involving 1000 times as much tritium in a small building led to no
tritium being found 11 days later, we would not expect to find any tritium 10 days later in
the enclosed basement of the WTC 6 from an incident involving 1000 times less tritium in a
fireball hundreds of metres above, from whence any HTO formed or T2 gas released would
have dispersed away into the atmosphere. And in fact none was found downwind in the
So in reality this means the aircraft source can be entirely discounted, from comparing it
to the fire in Council, Alaska and that leaves only the gunsights. 120 such gunsights would
have been required but the guns were mostly found undamaged and therefore these could
not have accounted for the tritium source either.
The correct implication of the paper therefore is that a third unknown source supplied the
high levels of tritium activity detected in the basement of WTC 6 some 10 days later. If it
was not another contaminant from some other tritiated source, it can only have occurred
by in situ tritiation of water by neutron bombardment.
Website Themes by CoffeeCup Software
Killing our Own
"Through the release of atomic energy, our
generation has brought into the world the most
revolutionary force since the prehistoric discovery
of fire. This basic power of the universe cannot be
fitted into the outmoded concept of narrow..."
In 2002, the paper "Study of Traces of Tritium at the
World Trade Center" was presented at the American
Chemical Society National Meeting. This paper is
well known in the "911 Truth Movement" for its
presentation of anomalous levels of Tritium...
1700 Designated Ground Zeroes
The National Security Archive Electronic Briefing
Book "New Evidence on the Origins of Overkill"
describes the US military nuclear policy to bring
devastating nuclear power to bear against over
1700 targets in China, the Sviet Union..
The Last Wave from Port Chicago
The first Atomic Test of the modern age took place
at the US Naval Dockyard of Port Chicago, 30 miles
north of San Francisco, at 10.30pm on the 17th July
Environmental Studies of the WTC Area
This link is to the Forensic Data which proves that
the WTC was subjected to intense nuclear
explosions. On September 17th and 18th 2001, two
scientists from the USGS collected samples of dust
from Lower Manhattan...
In the 1950s Project Gabriel was a project to
determine how nuclear fallout from US atomic
bomb tests is distributed across the world and the
biological uptake of fallout products.
The Trouble with Steven E. Jones' 911 Research
This is an article by Morgan Reynolds on Professor
Steven Jones and his well known “thermite” theory for
the destruction of the Twin Towers. There are some
very interesting photographs, of the streets being
Controlled Demolition Inc.
Controlled Demolition Inc. are by now well known
in the 911 Truth Movement as the world leading
experts on the subject of controlled demolitions.
Many have inferred that their involvement in the
clean-up operation after 911 is evidence...