Washington Post: What Isn't Reported About Fukushima Is As Important as What Is Being Reported

Today the Washington Post has an article stating that workers were able to enter one of the reactor units at Fukushima.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/workers-enter-damaged-japanese-reactor-building-for-1st-time-since-right-after-quake/2011/05/04/AFRxlItF_story.html?nl_headlines

What the article does not say is what unit they were able to enter.

The article does say that reactor 1 is going to be flooded and that they hope to flood reactors 2 and 3.

So, that leaves 4, 5 and 6 as possible buildings that were entered.

Well, reactor #4 had no fuel at the time of the earthquake because the fuel had been removed to the spent fuel pool. The pool at unit 4 is now believed, but not verified, to be smoking (it could be steam).

Reactors 5 and 6 never had significant problems according to the official account. So, if the workers just entered reactors 5 or 6 for the first time, can we then presume that they both did, in fact, have unreported problems?

Also disconcerting in the story is the report about the radiated debris in the ocean that are going to hit the US west coast in 2 years. Here is an excerpt from the story:

"In Vienna, International Atomic Energy Agency expert Hartmut Nies predicted traces of Cesium 134 and Cesium 137 leaking from the plant will be carried by the Pacific’s Kuroshio current to the North American coast within two years.


“We expect that in one or two years it might be measured at the coast of Canada or California,” Nies told reporters.


But the detected levels would be “very low” and there were no specific concerns, said Denis Flory, an IAEA deputy director general.

Majia Here: Please note that the person who says that the detected levels would be very low when reaching the US (Denis Flory) is not the same person as who was quoted as making the prediction about when the debris would hit the west coast (Hartmut Nies).

For me, that means that Nies probably disagrees with that conclusion and would not go on the record making it so that meant that the director of the IAEA, a very pro-nuke agency, had to step up to make the reassuring prediction.

UPDATE: THE LA TIMES IS REPORTING THAT THE WORKERS WENT INTO THE BUILDING OF REACTOR #1 http://www.latimes.com/news/la-fgw-japan-nuclear-20110506,0,4578180.story

If that is true, those workers were probably risking their lives. Consider this Bloomberg report from 8 days ago:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-27/tokyo-water-radiation-falls-to-zero-for-first-time-since-crisis.html
"Radiation readings at Japan’s Fukushima Dai-Ichi station rose to the highest since an earthquake and tsunami knocked out cooling systems, impeding efforts to contain the worst nuclear crisis since Chernobyl.

"Two robots sent into the reactor No. 1 building at the plant yesterday took readings as high as 1,120 millisierverts of radiation per hour, Junichi Matsumoto, a general manager at Tokyo Electric Power Co., said today. That’s more than four times the annual dose permitted to nuclear workers at the stricken plant...."