Prepare for a slow and agonizing death

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

I understand you are all frightened and feel impotent against such real and horrific dangers, but your attempts at "humor" only highlight and expose your defeatism and servitude.

Meanwhile, in the real world...

Fukushima failure: Decontamination system stops functioning

The operator of the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant, TEPCO (Tokyo Electric Power Company) has stopped using its systems to decontaminate radioactive water at the facility, Japanese broadcaster NHK reported.

The Advanced Liquid Processing System, or ALPS, has been utilized to liquidate radioactive substances from contaminated water stored at the plant.

The crane to get rid of the container from the ALPS ceased working on Tuesday.

On Wednesday, TEPCO stopped operating all 3 ALPS systems at the facility. The company officials say the system may take a long time to restart.

The container where the radioactive substances are stored has to be replaced when it fills up.

TEPCO, the operator of the Fukushima Daiichi plant, crippled in the 2011 earthquake and tsunami, said that the company plans to decontaminate all radioactive water stored in the tanks by March 2015, NHK reported.

That’s despite the company officials telling The Japan Times a month ago that the radioactive water will be decontaminated by the end of fiscal 2014.

It’s not the first time that the ALPS system has experienced trouble: at the beginning of December, the system was reported to have broken down during trial operations.

The Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS) consists of 14 steel cylinders, through which the contaminated water is filtered. After the filtering, waste materials like the absorbent and remaining sludge are transferred to high-integrity containers (HICs) that are transported to a temporary storage facility.

The ALPS can remove 62 different types of radionuclides, including strontium and cobalt from contaminated water.

The year has started off badly for the Fukushima Daiichi plant: a few days ago, a Japanese worker, who participated in the mending of the plant to avoid further radiation leaks, has revealed that adhesive tape had been used to deal with the issue of sealing in radioactive water.

The 48 year-old, Yoshitatsu Uechi, an auto mechanic and tour-bus driver, was one of the 17 workers to be sent to the crippled facility to make more containers to store the contaminated water.

On New Year’s Day, plumes of strange steam rose from the Fukushima Daiichi plant, with TEPCO failing to provide details on the emissions of steam – in all probability radioactive.


On the international scene, the picture hasn’t been very bright, either.

At the end of 2013, a video emerged showing a beach in California, displaying seemingly high radiation levels on the coast. However, local health officials told residents not to worry, after they had carried out an investigation into the matter.

Plus, over the last year, around 130 Japanese cars have been denied access to the Russian border over radiation concerns. The consumer watchdog agency, Rospotrebnadzor, has pointed out that the strict control of all cargo arriving from Japan will continue in 2014.


http://rt.com/news/fukushima-decontamination-system-stops-352/


OK if you're so scared about it, do something. Oh, and thanks for sharing your concerns, but honestly, who cares? Apparently not many. We're all gunna die at some point...
 
Fukushima represents the example the law of 7ps. Prior proper planning prevents piss poor performance.

Having no real backup power available was indeed a colossal failure. Nearly 30 years before the Fukushima event the Japanese Banks upgraded their systems to make ready for point of sale support. This included a new processing center with the a data sharing pair of guad mainframes on a floor deemed to be above potential flood exposure. The backup power was also up there, and the backup to that was on trucks located on the high ground.

Then the data center was backed up through IMS FastPath Hot Standby support by another like kind processing center located in on another Island.

This was deemed to be 747 proof and earthquake proof. So far so good. the Nuc guys should have talked to the bankers, their plan was open to failure apparent to any dim witted analyst.
 
OK if you're so scared about it, do something. Oh, and thanks for sharing your concerns, but honestly, who cares? Apparently not many. We're all gunna die at some point...

Why do you think they call it Fukushima?
 
...did Brian say he was in the Navy? Either way, what is THIS all about?

Toll of U.S. Sailors Devastated by Fukushima Radiation Continues to Climb

The roll call of U.S. sailors who say their health was devastated when they were irradiated while delivering humanitarian help near the stricken Fukushima nuke is continuing to soar.

So many have come forward that the progress of their federal class action lawsuit has been delayed.

Bay area lawyer Charles Bonner says a re-filing will wait until early February to accommodate a constant influx of sailors from the aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan and other American ships.

Within a day of Fukushima One’s March 11, 2011, melt-down, American “first responders” were drenched in radioactive fallout. In the midst of a driving snow storm, sailors reported a cloud of warm air with a metallic taste that poured over the Reagan.

Then-Prime Minister Naoto Kan, at the time a nuclear supporter, says “the first meltdown occurred five hours after the earthquake.” The lawsuit charges that Tokyo Electric Power knew large quantities of radiation were pouring into the air and water, but said nothing to the Navy or the public.

Had the Navy known, says Bonner, it could have moved its ships out of harm’s way. But some sailors actually jumped into the ocean just offshore to pull victims to safety. Others worked 18-hour shifts in the open air through a four-day mission, re-fueling and repairing helicopters, loading them with vital supplies and much more. All were drinking and bathing in desalinated water that had been severely contaminated by radioactive fallout and runoff.

Then Reagan crew members were enveloped in a warm cloud. “Hey,” joked sailor Lindsay Cooper at the time. “It’s radioactive snow.”

The metallic taste that came with it parallels the ones reported by the airmen who dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, and by Pennsylvania residents downwind from the 1979 meltdown at Three Mile Island.

When it did leave the Fukushima area, the Reagan was so radioactive it was refused port entry in Japan, South Korea and Guam. It’s currently docked in San Diego.

--> FULL ARTICLE
 
The navy doesn't use geiger counters? Seems like a joke to me.
 
I'd be interested in Brian's take. There are 71 sailors suing TEPCO for illnesses due to radiation exposure. That's 71 out of a crew of 3200 (my understanding of the crew size). EDIT: 5000 reported on the ship - see the article below.

It was hard to find any mainstream news sources (CNN, etc.) reporting on the story other than the case was thrown out of US court, refiled making less conspiratorial claims, and is ongoing.

For one thing, the sailors claim they didn't turn on the extensive radiation detection systems so it wasn't detected. Does that sound like something the US Navy would do: Send a nuclear powered ship into a nuclear accident situation with radiation detection systems turned off?

Secondly, the claim is the radiation entered the ship's water supply and all 3200 bathed in the water, drank it, brushed their teeth with it, etc. Seems to me that if the radiation was significant enough, more than 2% of the crew would have been affected.

The Reagan is stationed in SD. The local paper had this article:

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/Jan/12/are-sailors-symptoms-from-radiation/

But, contrary to what these sailors are experiencing, studies have found largely nondangerous radiation levels since the 2011 spill. Only workers at the nuclear facility have exhibited radiation amounts high enough to make them even slightly sick, scientists consulted for this story said.

One UC San Diego toxicology expert said that acute illness usually comes on quickly — in days or weeks — after massive exposure. Signs include nausea, vomiting and diarrhea.

Unless there are fatalities, people feel better within a few months. So, with typical radiation sickness, these Reagan sailors wouldn’t still have symptoms today.

Long-term illnesses, such as cancer, may result from a smaller amount of radiation exposure, but the amount required to cause them is unclear. And that type of ailment wouldn’t come on this soon, less than two years after the incident, said Dr. Richard Clark, director of UCSD’s medical toxicology program.

“What I imagined happened in this case is these people developed a few symptoms and they started to get worried about it because they were told there was some higher radiation,” Clark said. “They scrubbed off the (Reagan’s) deck — that is normal procedure if there is fallout. But that fallout doesn’t mean you were exposed to levels of radiation that were dangerous.”

At a Health Physics Society conference last year at the National Press Club, a panel of radiation scientists predicted that illness from Fukushima will be far less than from the 1986 Chernobyl reactor disaster.

...

Less than 150 of 17,000 workers at the Fukushima plant showed slightly elevated levels of radiation, according to figures from cancer specialist Dr. John Boice, a member of the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. The doses detected might increase their lifetime risk of cancer by 2 percent, he said at the Press Club conference.

On the Reagan, the crew was ordered to close hatches and vents to prevent outside air from entering. They were also told not to drink the ship’s potable water.

...

With more than 5,000 people aboard, the Reagan was operating at sea about 100 miles northeast of the power plant following the earthquake.

...

At the time, the Reagan’s skipper, Capt. Thom Burke released a statement reassuring crew families that “as a nuclear-power aircraft carrier, we have extensive technical expertise onboard to properly monitor such types of risks.”
 
Monitor such risks = experiment with such risks, on sailors.
 
There's no experiment to perform. The effects of radiation on humans is well known.

In fact, they gave thyroid medicine to pilots before they flew over the plant. I've not seen that any of them have reported issues.
 
colZxyN.jpg
 
Study: Fukushima Radiation Has Already Killed 14,000 Americans

http://www.radiation.org/reading/pubs/HS42_1F.pdf

The Nuclear Industry and Health
ANUNEXPECTEDMORTALITYINCREASEIN
THEUNITEDSTATESFOLLOWSARRIVALOFTHE
RADIOACTIVEPLUMEFROMFUKUSHIMA:
ISTHEREACORRELATION?
Joseph J. Mangano and Janette D. Sherman
The multiple nuclear meltdowns at the Fukushima plants beginning on
March 11, 2011, are releasing large amounts of airborne radioactivity that has
spread throughout Japan and to other nations; thus, studies of contamination
and health hazards are merited. In the United States, Fukushima fallout
arrived just six days after the earthquake, tsunami, and meltdowns. Some
samples of radioactivity in precipitation, air, water, and milk, taken by the
U.S. government, showed levels hundreds of times above normal; however,
the small number of samples prohibits any credible analysis of temporal
trends and spatial comparisons. U.S. health officials report weekly deaths by
age in 122 cities, about 25 to 35 percent of the national total. Deaths rose
4.46 percent from 2010 to 2011 in the 14 weeks after the arrival of Japanese
fallout, compared with a 2.34 percent increase in the prior 14 weeks. The
number of infant deaths after Fukushima rose 1.80 percent, compared
with a previous 8.37 percent decrease. Projecting these figures for the entire
United States yields 13,983 total deaths and 822 infant deaths in excess of
the expected. These preliminary data need to be followed up, especially in the
light of similar preliminary U.S. mortality findings for the four months after
Chernobyl fallout arrived in 1986, which approximated final figures.
We recently reported on an unusual rise in infant deaths in the northwestern
United States for the 10-week period following the arrival of the airborne radio
-
active plume from the meltdowns at the Fukushima plants in northern Japan.
This result suggested that radiation from Japan may have harmed Americans,
thus meriting more research. We noted in the report that the results were
preliminary, and the importance of updating the analysis as more health status
data become available (1).
Shortly after the report was issued, officials from British Columbia, Canada,
proximate to the northwestern United States, announced that 21 residents had
died of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) in the first half of 2011, compared
with 16 SIDS deaths in all of the prior year. Moreover, the number of deaths
from SIDS rose from 1 to 10 in the months of March, April, May, and June 2011,
after Fukushima fallout arrived, compared with the same period in 2010 (2).
While officials could not offer any explanation for the abrupt increase, it coincides
with our findings in the Pacific Northwest.
Any comparison of potential effects of radiation exposure must attempt to
examine the dose-response relationship of the exposure of a population. In the
United States, the principal source of dose data (i.e., environmental radiation
levels) is the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Health data are the
responsibility of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),
which provides weekly reports on mortality in 122 U.S. cities. These are
preliminary data, but are the most useful at a date so soon after an event such
as Fukushima.
The goal of this report is to evaluate any potential changes in U.S. mortality
resulting from exposure to the Fukushima plume, using EPA and CDC data.


BACKGROUND:
POST-CHERNOBYL HEALTH TRENDS
A quarter of a century before the Fukushima disasters, the meltdown at Chernobyl
and the presence of environmental fallout presented a similar challenge for
researchers to assess any adverse health effects. The discussion that began after
the April 26, 1986, meltdown is still very much a current one, with varying
estimates. A recent conference concluded that 9,000 persons worldwide survived
with or died from cancer (3), while a compendium of more than 5,000 research
papers put the excess death toll (from cancer and all other causes) at 985,000 (4).
In the United States, Chernobyl fallout was detected in the environment just
nine days after the meltdown. Gould and Sternglass (5) used EPA measure
-
ments of environmental radiation post-Chernobyl (6) and found elevated levels
of radioactivity in air, water, and milk. For example, EPA data indicate that
from May 13 to June 23, 1986, U.S. milk had 5.6 and 3.6 times more iodine-131
and cesium-137 than were recorded in May–June of 1985 (see Appendix Table 1,
p. 60). In some cities, especially those in the harder-hit Pacific Northwest, average
concentrations were as much as 28 times the norms, while some individual
samples were much higher.
Gould and Sternglass (5) also studied preliminary mortality data, to analyze
any potential impact from fallout. Using a 10 percent sample of all U.S. death
certificates, they found that during the four months after Chernobyl (May–August
1986), total deaths in the United States rose 6.0 percent over the similar period
in 1985 (see Appendix Table 2) (7; estimated deaths based on a 10% sample
of death certificates, minus the New England states, for which data were
incomplete at the time).
Eventually, final figures showed an increase of 2.3 percent, which exceeded
the 0.2 percent decline in the first four months of the year (8). The number of
excess deaths, or the difference between the actual and expected death totals,
is 16,573. To date, the cause of this unusual pattern remains unknown, and no
research testing hypotheses for causes other than Chernobyl has been published.
This difference has a very high degree of statistical significance; there is a less
than 1 in 10 to the 9th power probability that it occurred by random chance.
The change in deaths for infants was also analyzed. Preliminary data showed
an increase of 3.1 percent in U.S. infant deaths in the first four months after
Chernobyl, 1985 versus 1986. The final increase was 0.1 percent, compared with
a 2.3 percent decline in the four months before Chernobyl. The 1985–1986
differences in infant death rates were –2.9 percent (January–April) and +0.4
percent (May–August). These gaps amounted to excess infant deaths of 306
and 424, and differences were significant at
p
< 0.08 and
p
< 0.055.
The stillbirth, neonatal, and prenatal mortality increased in England and
Wales within 11 months after Chernobyl’s initial release (9, 10), and in Germany
(11). In two Ukrainian districts with increased levels of cesium-137 ground
contamination, there was a significant increase in stillbirths (12).
U.S. publications offered evidence that Americans may have suffered harm
from Chernobyl, especially damage to fetuses and infants. Reports covered ele-
vated levels of various radiation-related disorders, including newborn hypothy-
roidism (13), infant leukemia (14), and thyroid cancer among children (15).
Gould and Sternglass (5) showed that trends using preliminary data were
rough approximations of the final data. Because of the lengthy delay in generating
final statistics—2011 data will probably not be published on the CDC website
until 2014—we believe that analyzing preliminary health data at this time is a
useful exercise that can approximate final mortality patterns and help guide
future research on the effects of fallout from the Fukushima meltdowns.


Read the results at the link.
 
Last edited:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Fukushima_and_Chernobyl_nuclear_accidents

Maximum level of radiation detected
Fukoshima: 72,900 mSv/h (Inside Reactor 2)
Chernobyl: 300,000 mSv/h shortly after explosion in vicinity of the reactor core

Radiation released
Fukoshima: As of 2014, a peer reviewed estimate of the total was 340 to 800 PBq, with 80% falling into the pacific ocean.
Chernobyl: 5,200 PBq

Area affected
Fukoshima: Radiation levels exceeding annual limits seen over 60 kilometres (37 mi) to northwest and 40 kilometres (25 mi) to south-southwest, according to officials.
Chernobyl: An area up to 500 kilometres (310 mi) away contaminated, according to the United Nations

Direct fatalities from the accident
Fukoshima: 2 crew members (gone to inspect the buildings immediately after the earthquake and before the tsunami) due to drowning
Chernobyl 31 (64 confirmed deaths from radiation as of 2008, according to the UN)

Note that it is 22 years after Chernobyl.

Prepare for a long and agonizing thread full of paranoia
 
Sorry Denny, there have been no accurate radiation levels released to the public in reference to Fukushima. All lies, baseless guesses and deliberate misdirection.

3 years now, and we continue to catch Tepco lying, lying, lying...




Fukushima farce reveals nuclear industry's fatal flaw

Keeping the lid on costs when the task is to keep the lid on a slow motion atomic explosion is an impossible challenge



Once upon a time, when the nuclear industry was shiny and new, it simply burned uranium. Now, old and tarnished, it burns money. From the promise of nuclear electricity being too cheap to meter, we now have costs that are too great to count.

At the site of the Fukushima meltdown in Japan, the government is being forced to spend over £200m on a fanciful-sounding underground ice wall in the latest desperate attempt to halt the radiation-contaminated water that is leaking into the sea.

When mere stopgaps cost this much, it is clear any real solution will cost the earth. Japanese taxpayers have already had to bail out the operator Tepco to the tune of £6.5bn. The final clean up will cost tens of billions and take 40 years.

Yet supporters maintain that nuclear power offers affordable low-carbon electricity and is a vital tool in the fight to curb climate change. The UK government, already spending most of its energy budget on nuclear clean up, has crashed through deadline after deadline in a fruitless search to find anybody willing to build new nuclear power stations at reasonable cost.

The only serious players left in the game are those backed by the French, Chinese and Russian states, whose interest in power is as much political as electrical. Commercial companies have fled the scene.

The fundamental reason why the price of nuclear power climbs each day as surely as the rising sun is a straightforward one. Keeping a lid on costs is impossible if the task in hand is keeping the lid on an exploding atomic bomb.

For that is what a nuclear reactor is, a slow motion detonation. That intrinsic danger means that as each new risk to reactors is discovered, more and more expensive measures need to be put in place as mitigation. When accidents happen, as they will over a half century or more of operation, the intrinsic risk of radioactive materials means more money is piled on the bonfire to ensure the risk to the public is limited.

The answer from the nuclear industry to all these criticisms is always the same: it will be different next time. But the rolling farce in Fukushima proves yet again the opposite. The only reliability the industry can offer is consistently breaking promises and busting budgets.

Today, it was revealed that radiation levels by the tanks of contaminated cooling water at Fukushima are 2,200 millisieverts an hour - a level that could kill an unprotected person in hours – and 22 times higher than previously thought. Why were previous measurements so useless? Because, Tepco belatedly admitted, they were taken using equipment that could not record radiation levels above 100 millisieverts an hour.

When you remember that this crass disregard for safety is occurring in one the most technologically advanced democracies in the world, the prospect of reactors proliferating around the world is alarming.

But perhaps this time it really can be different. Just two of Japan's 50 working nuclear reactors are currently in operation and both are expected to be offline for maintenance by 15 September. That will leaving Japan without nuclear energy for only the second time in almost half a century. The UK government may at some point have to admit defeat in its attempts to start a nuclear renaissance.

As the false nuclear dawn fades, a new brighter horizon may be revealed, where the intrinsically safe and therefore ultimately cheaper technologies of energy efficiency and renewable energy can used to build a power system fit for the 21st century, not one harking back to the 20th.


http://www.theguardian.com/environm.../sep/04/fukushima-farce-nuclear-industry-flaw

http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2014_...on-mishandle-disaster-nuclear-regulator-3740/
 
Your article says the radiation is 5% of the number on WikiPedia. Good find!
 
Your article says the radiation is 5% of the number on WikiPedia. Good find!

Wiki's number is highest recorded (relying on proven liar TEPCO) and has been completely discredited.

My article's number is hourly release, so multiply it by 24 (hrs) and then multiply it again by about 1, 000 (days). And add it to the new total each hour for the rest of our lives...
 
If you want to fix WikiPedia, go for it. Be sure to edit the 72,900 mSv/h value and put in the 2,200 one you think is worse or more accurate or whatever.
 
If you want to fix WikiPedia, go for it. Be sure to edit the 72,900 mSv/h value and put in the 2,200 one you think is worse or more accurate or whatever.

Maybe you should stick to naming emoticons after me. With your inability to grasp math and English, funny animations are more your speed.
 
2200 is less than 79,000. The units are the same - PER HOUR.

You're ranting on and on as if 2200 were the bigger number.

:MARIS61:
 
http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=83397&tid=3622&cid=94989

Is radiation exposure still a concern?

I stood on a ship two miles from the Fukushima reactors in June 2011 and as recently as May 2013, and it was safe to be there (I carry radiation detectors with me) and collect samples of all kinds (water, sediment, biota). Although radioactive isotopes in the samples and on the ship were measurable back in our lab, it was low enough to be safe to handle samples without any precautions. In fact, our biggest problem is filtering out natural radionuclides in our samples so we can measure the trace levels of cesium and other radionuclides that we know came from Fukushima.

Will radiation be of concern along U.S. and Canadian coasts?

Levels of any Fukushima contaminants in the ocean will be many thousands of times lower after they mix across the Pacific and arrive on the West Coast of North America some time in late 2013 or 2014. This is not to say that we should not be concerned about additional sources of radioactivity in the ocean above the natural sources, but at the levels expected even short distances from Japan, the Pacific will be safe for boating, swimming, etc.
 
The brave man stood on a ship which passed at its closest 2 miles for a few minutes. The brave man lived to brag about it. Hallelujah. Did he drink from the water supply passing under Ground Zero? Is he willing to be one of the hundreds of thousands of security guards who will prevent people from getting any closer than 2 miles over the next 10,000 years?
 
Last edited:
A little radiation is great for your skin and overall health. - Ann Coulter
 
The brave man stood on a ship which passed at its closest 2 miles for a few minutes. The brave man lived to brag about it. Hallelujah. Did he drink from the water supply passing under Ground Zero? Is he willing to be one of the hundreds of thousands of security guards who will prevent people from getting any closer than 2 miles over the next 10,000 years?

Brave man? The guy is perhaps the leading expert on the spread of radiation from both Chernobyl and Fukushima. Ken Buesseler of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.

But yeah, take Maris' word instead.

Or maybe there's a movie you can point to as if it were a documentary. Chernobyl Diaries, perhaps?

EDIT: My bad, you already did point to a work of fiction. Nice!
 
Now you're attacking the American motion picture industry? The industry which is our last hope to solve the Reagan-induced problem in our nation's balance of trade deficit? Here's an American-made movie which I, and all American people I knew back when respect and honesty reigned unmolested, enjoyed on the magnificent big screen, regardless of your squalid protests.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Day_of_the_Triffids_(film)
 
Now you're attacking the American motion picture industry? The industry which is our last hope to solve the Reagan-induced problem in our nation's balance of trade deficit? Here's an American-made movie which I, and all American people I knew back when respect and honesty reigned unmolested, enjoyed on the magnificent big screen, regardless of your squalid protests.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Day_of_the_Triffids_(film)

The movie biz is fine. It's people thinking fiction is fact that's a problem.
 
The Fukushima nuclear plant is a relentless disaster. Another plume of radioactive water — the biggest in the last six months — has escaped from the plant, its operator Tepco announced Thursday. The 100-ton spill was traced to two valves left open by mistake, Tepco said.

Each liter of escaped water contains an average of 230 million becquerels (a unit of radioactivity) of particles emitting beta radiation, the New York Times reports. Half of the particles are likely strontium 90, which means the leak contains 3.8 million times the legal limit for drinking water. Strontium 90 can cause bone cancer and leukemia, and is absorbed by the human body much like calcium, the Times reports. That’s 46 times more radioactive than the groundwater near the plant, where contamination was disclosed earlier this month.

It is hard to comprehend the number of radioactive water accidents at Fukushima since an earthquake and tsunami crippled the plant in 2011. At a point last August, the Japanese government announced that roughly 330 tons (about 80,000 gallons) of radioactive water leaked into the Pacific Ocean from the Fukushima plant every day. The same month, experts feared that a vast underground reservoir of radioactive water was perilously close to reaching the ocean. The following October, radioactive water leaked while workers transferred water between two tanks. A few days later, Tepco announced a smaller amount of radioactive water had leaked into the ocean after workers miscalculated the capacity of the tank due to it sitting on a slope. The list goes on...

More people have died of stress and other related conditions than from immediate injuries in the 2011 disaster...70 U.S. sailors and Marines who were deployed to Japan in 2011 to aid tsunami victims have joined a billion-dollar lawsuit against Tepco...say they’ve suffered from debilitating thyroid issues, are sure their time in Japan was the cause. Navy Officer Steve Simmons, another plaintiff in the case, lost all control of his legs a year after the mission...

http://www.newsweek.com/another-day-another-spill-radioactive-water-fukushima-229840
 
http://fabiusmaximus.com/2013/12/24/fukushima-cesium-60694/

Summary: As usual, the internet buzzes with fear-mongering about the radiation released from the Fukushima reactors. Here’s a note from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute that puts this in context.

...

“Dilution due to ocean mixing should be enough to cause a decrease in concentration down to background levels within a short period of time,” Buesseler told his audience at the Fukushima and the Ocean conference in November 2012. “Yet all the data we have show that measurements around the site remain elevated to this day at up to 1,000 becquerels per cubic meter.”

“A thousand becquerels is not a big number for cesium. Just for comparison, that’s lower than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s limit for drinking water. At that level, Buesseler stressed, the cesium in Japanese coastal waters is safe for marine life and for human exposure.

“It’s not direct exposure we have to worry about, but possible incorporation into the food chain,” he said. That, and the ongoing high levels of radioactive cesium. “The fact that they have leveled off and remained higher than they were before the accident tells us there is a small but continuous source from the reactor site.”

http://www.livescience.com/38844-fukushima-radioactive-water-leaks.html

"For fish that are harvested 100 miles [160 kilometers] out to sea, I doubt it’d be a problem," said Nicholas Fisher, a marine biologist at Stony Brook University in Stony Brook, N.Y. "But in the region, yes, it's possible there could be sufficient contamination of local seafood so it'd be unwise to eat that seafood."

The overall contamination of ocean life by the Fukushima meltdown still remains very low compared with the effects of naturally occurring radioactivity and leftover contamination from U.S. and Soviet nuclear weapons testing in the 1960s. Fisher said he’d be "shocked" if the ongoing leaks of contaminated water had a significant impact on the ocean ecosystems.
 
Of course it is dangerous to be right at the spot where the radiation is. I'm not at all claiming that there is that sort of safety. The good news is that the people who are near the radiation are trained to deal with it; the rest have long been evacuated.

The National Academy of Sciences published this in their June 2013 newsletter:

http://www.pnas.org/content/110/26/10670.full.pdf+html

This study shows that the committed effective dose received by humans based on a year’s average consumption of contaminated PBFT from the Fukushima accident is comparable to, or less than, the dose we routinely obtain from naturally occurring radio- nuclides in many food items, medical treatments, air travel, or other background sources (28). Although uncertainties remain regarding the effects of low levels of ionizing radiation on humans (30), it is clear that doses and resulting cancer risks associated with con- sumption of PBFT in eastern and western Pacific waters are low and below levels that should cause concern to even the most exposed segments of human populations. Fears regarding envi- ronmental radioactivity, often a legacy of Cold War activities and distrust of governmental and scientific authorities, have resulted in perception of risks by the public that are not commensurate with actual risks.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top