|
|
Post by spacemaverick on Jan 7, 2014 0:55:12 GMT -6
intellihub.com/2013/12/30/is-fukushima-decimating-wildlife-in-the-western-portion-of-north-america/"Radiation? Seals, Sea Lions, Polar Bears, Bald Eagles, Sea Stars, Turtles, King and Sockeye Salmon, Herring, Anchovies and Sardines In The Western Part of North America All Suffering Mysterious Diseases At the Same Time" from Intellihub... Bald Eagles have been the latest species added to the list. Is it radiation or some other malady? I am not an expert in this field but it sure makes a person wonder. Is it radiation in the air? Is it radiation through the food chain for the wildlife? The timing sure is suspicious. Or perhaps something else? www.seafoodsource.com/en/news/supply-trade/25101-china-bans-us-west-coast-shellfish-importsChina has closed its doors to all imports of West coast shellfish. Chinese officials tested samples of geoduck clams and found elevated levels of arsenic and a toxin that causes Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning. But this is only shellfish.... Global Research Fukushima Radiation: Japan Irradiates the West Coast of North America www.globalresearch.ca/fukushima-radiation-japan-irradiates-the-west-coast-of-north-america/5305310Fukushima: Diseased Seals in Alaska tested for Radiation www.globalresearch.ca/fukushima-diseased-seals-in-alaska-tested-for-radiation/28392Fukushima: Radioactivity Flowing into the Ocean will Shift towards West Coast of North America, Unpredictable Consequences www.globalresearch.ca/fukushima-radioactivity-flowing-into-the-ocean-will-shift-towards-west-coast-of-north-america-unpredictable-consequences/5362535///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Could the problem be right off the coast of San Francisco? A nuclear waste dump site in the ocean.... www.nuc.berkeley.edu/node/3094telesle.net/blog/2006/02/10/radioactive-waste-and-the-coast-of-san-francisco/socket.kongshem.com/2007/10/farallon-islands-nuclear-waste-dump.htmlsfbayview.com/tag/farallon-islands-nuclear-waste-dump/www.tampabay.com/news/military/effects-of-dumping-radioactive-waste-in-ocean-need-more-study-scientists/2157923////////////////////////////////////////////// NORM - Natural Occurring Radioactive Material - This word is the answer to any question about radiation. If asked about radiation snow, its the NORM. If asked about cancer effects, its the NORM. If asked about oil drilling levels, its the NORM. The NORM was created to explain the radiation in the area where you live. There are many questions about radiation and the causes / effects of exposure to radiation, but the one that is most often asked "What is the NORM level?" The EPAs answer is "Health physicists generally agree on limiting a person's exposure beyond background radiation to about 100 mrem per year from all sources. Exceptions are occupational, medical or accidental exposures. (Medical X-rays generally deliver less than 10 mrem). EPA and other regulatory agencies generally limit exposures from specific source to the public to levels well under 100 mrem. This is far below the exposure levels that cause acute health effects. The millirem (mrem) is a very small measurement of radiation. In Olympia, WA the average NORM radiation is 50 mrem and 100 mrem exposure from all other sources would set the level of concern/watch level at 150 mrem. Nuclear Emergency Tracking Center will alert you when the radiation exceeds the EPA's standards. Please be careful and do not panic. Just be aware of the concern/watch levels in your area. In Tucson, AZ, the average NORM radiation is about 118 mrem, add 100 mrem exposure from all other sources, the concern/watch level equals 218 mrem. ///////////////////////////////////// Here is a site that you can calculate you dosage: www.epa.gov/radiation/understand/calculate.htmlThe amount of radiation exposure is usually expressed in a unit called millirem (mrem). In the United States, the average person is exposed to an effective dose equivalent of approximately 620 mrem (whole-body exposure) per year from all sources (NCRP Report No.160). The dose calculator is based on the American Nuclear Society's brochure, "Personal Radiation Dose Chart". The primary sources of information we relied on are the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements Reports #92-#95, and #100. Please remember that the values used in the calculator are general averages and do not provide precise individual dose calculations. My reading for this past year was 382.319 mrems just from my dosage calculation for my specific area where I live. This is by no means exact but generalized. Florida is low in natural occurring radiation. My home has smoke detectors, no granite but is made of concrete block and so on. This is part of the dosage chart calculation. The Midwest has a lot more natural background as well as those at a high altitude. The higher up you go the more exposure to cosmic radiation and the lower you go the higher terrestrial radiation. ////////////////////////////////////// Is radiation hurting the sea life on the West Coast. This guy says NO. Is the sea floor littered with dead animals due to radiation? No. Posted on January 4, 2014 by Dr. M Deep Sea News "The Pacific Ocean appears to be dying, according to a new study recently published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Scientists from the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI) in California recently discovered that the number of dead sea creatures blanketing the floor of the Pacific is higher than it has ever been in the 24 years that monitoring has taken place, a phenomenon that the data suggests is a direct consequence of nuclear fallout from Fukushima." "The reason I am unfamiliar with a study providing evidence of “Dead sea creatures cover 98 percent of ocean floor off California coast; up from 1 percent before Fukushima” is because no such study exists. Here are the details of the actual study." Dr. M See entire article: deepseanews.com/2014/01/is-the-sea-floor-littered-with-dead-animals-due-to-radiation-no/In the interest of presenting both sides I found this article.
|
|
|
|
Post by skywalker on Jan 8, 2014 15:45:33 GMT -6
Is radiation hurting the sea life on the West Coast. This guy says NO. Is the sea floor littered with dead animals due to radiation? No. Posted on January 4, 2014 by Dr. M Deep Sea News "The Pacific Ocean appears to be dying, according to a new study recently published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Scientists from the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI) in California recently discovered that the number of dead sea creatures blanketing the floor of the Pacific is higher than it has ever been in the 24 years that monitoring has taken place, a phenomenon that the data suggests is a direct consequence of nuclear fallout from Fukushima." "The reason I am unfamiliar with a study providing evidence of “Dead sea creatures cover 98 percent of ocean floor off California coast; up from 1 percent before Fukushima” is because no such study exists. Here are the details of the actual study." Dr. M See entire article: deepseanews.com/2014/01/is-the-sea-floor-littered-with-dead-animals-due-to-radiation-no/In the interest of presenting both sides I found this article. You mean that story was BS? I should have known better than to trust anything posted on the internet. People make up all kinds of stupid nonsense. |
|
|
|
Post by spacemaverick on Jan 8, 2014 16:40:27 GMT -6
Is radiation hurting the sea life on the West Coast. This guy says NO. Is the sea floor littered with dead animals due to radiation? No. Posted on January 4, 2014 by Dr. M Deep Sea News "The Pacific Ocean appears to be dying, according to a new study recently published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Scientists from the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI) in California recently discovered that the number of dead sea creatures blanketing the floor of the Pacific is higher than it has ever been in the 24 years that monitoring has taken place, a phenomenon that the data suggests is a direct consequence of nuclear fallout from Fukushima." "The reason I am unfamiliar with a study providing evidence of “Dead sea creatures cover 98 percent of ocean floor off California coast; up from 1 percent before Fukushima” is because no such study exists. Here are the details of the actual study." Dr. M See entire article: deepseanews.com/2014/01/is-the-sea-floor-littered-with-dead-animals-due-to-radiation-no/In the interest of presenting both sides I found this article. You mean that story was BS? I should have known better than to trust anything posted on the internet. People make up all kinds of stupid nonsense. Skywalker, I really don't know if it is BS. I saw this story and one thing I have learned is that you can find an expert to support any argument you might have. I am not an expert by any means but merely presented this as an alternative. The only real and factual thing are the radiation readings above the background radiation in each persons area, and where are the readings originating that are above the background readings from any given area. Radiation now matter how much or how little is destructive. Radiation in small doses over a period of time can become more destructive to a greater extent. I wish I had more knowledge of radiation. |
|
|
|
Post by spacemaverick on Jan 8, 2014 16:46:17 GMT -6
www.epa.gov/radiation/understand/calculate.htmlYou can use this to calculate background radiation in your particular area. It will be fairly close but not perfect. You could even have radon in your home and not know it. This could increase the background in your house also. If you get a good background reading (baseline), then anything above that will be suspect. From what I have learned that if you try and obtain a reading from something wet that the reading will actually be lower than what it really is because the water absorbs or shields the radiation. Got this tidbit of information off the Fairewinds site.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2014 12:34:23 GMT -6
Tracking The Complete Revolution of Surface Westerlies over Northern Hemisphere Using Radionuclides Emitted From Fukushima
Quote from article : 4. Conclusions The unique global coverage of fallout radiocesium released from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, particularly a fresh injection of 134 Cs and 137 Cs to the ground air provided a rare opportunity to observe a complete, uninterrupted revolution of the mid-latitude Surface West-erlies of the northern Hemisphere in late March 2011. This revolution took less than 21 days. This occurrence was verified for the first time based on the simultaneous global surface air measurements of artificial radionuclides, e.g.,131I 134Cs, and 137 Cs, and using the HYSPLIT model. This work clearly demonstrates how little dissipation occurred during this time due to the nature of the rapid global air circulation system,and the Fukushima radioactive plume contaminated the entire Northern Hemisphere during a relatively short period of time. The westerlies have strengthened and shifted pole ward over the past 50 years probably due to atmospheric warming arising from the increasing concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide (Anderson et al., 2009;Toggweiler, 2009),therefore a close look at the depositional fluxes of Fukushima released radionuclides over the earth surface would help in providing a better understanding of the dynamics of the northern Hemisphere westerlies. clasweb.clas.wayne.edu/Multimedia/Geology/files/Faculty/baskaran/publications2/112-Hernandez-Ceballos%20etal_2012.pdf
|
|
|
|
Post by spacemaverick on Jan 11, 2014 14:00:11 GMT -6
Professor’s Diary: Fukushima radioactive material “has reached the west coast as of June 2013 by ocean transport” — Health risks to be determined by ongoing monitoring An article from enews on Professor Jay Cullen from University of Victoria. He is a professor of marine chemistry. January 4 2014. Fukushima derived Cs has reached the west coast as of June 2013 by ocean transport but [the] concentrations of Cs continue to be well below levels thought to pose environmental or public health threats. There have been a number of popular press articles that [...] report the timing of the arrival of the radionuclides but offer no perspective on the actual levels and the associated risk to residents of the west coast (e.g. link). [...] About 93% of radioactivity in seawater results from the presence of primordial, naturally occurring potassium-40 (K-40) and rubidium-87 (Rb-87). The remaining 7% are radioactive elements deposited to the ocean from past atmospheric nuclear testing. [...] Fukushima derived Cs was detected all the way to the coast in June 2013 with the highest levels of Cs-137 farthest offshore (0.0009 Bq/L or roughly 0.006% of background radiation) and lower levels of 0.0003 Bq/L toward the coast [...] Ongoing monitoring will constrain the likely environmental and health risks posed by ocean transport of Fukushima derived radionuclides. Note the professor changed the units to Bq/L for Cs-134 and -137, instead of using Bq/m3 as in the source document (pdf). The above amounts must be multiplied by 1,000 to get Bq/m3. In addition, the figures provided by the professor appear to be inaccurate: According to the source document, it’s Cs-134, not Cs-137, that measured 0.9 Bq/m3 (or 0.0009 Bq/L if you modify the units like the professor). The professor writes that in June 2013 there were “lower levels of 0.0003 Bq/L toward the coast” — This amount is not in the measurements for 2013, the only mention of it was in 2012: “Levels of 137Cs equal to 0.3 Bq/m3 measured at Sta. P26 in 2012.” Last month in a Vancouver-area newspaper Prof. Cullen wrote: “the natural level of radioactivity on average in the oceans is about 13 Bq/L, against which radioactivity resulting from human activities and disasters should always be discussed.” What is the basis of this claim that “natural radioactivity levels should always be discussed” when “radioactivity resulting from human activities” is mentioned? “In the ocean (and human body) different radionuclides have different fate and toxicity,” according to Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution’s senior scientist Ken Buesseler (who mentions his ability to be quoted in media reports downplaying Fukushima-related data).
Also be aware that fish can bio-concentrate cesium-137 at a rate of 100 times the level found in the surrounding water. For seals and sea lions it’s up to 1,000 times. (Source: IAEA)
This article copied in its' entirety from enews. enenews.com/professor-fukushima-radioactive-material-reached-the-west-coast-as-of-june-2013-by-ocean-transport-health-risks-to-be-determined-by-ongoing-monitoringI can only say this at this point. No matter what the level of radiation, it is destructive. We can do nothing about natural radiation. We can do nothing against cosmic radiation. We as a society can pressure the nuclear industry to crack down on maintaining the nuclear plants now operating. The genie was let out of the bottle in the early years of the atom and it will be hard trying to stuff the genie back in the bottle. The plants are already built and we need to bring pressure to bear on those who regulate the plants. This will only happen if we ban together. The largest influence are people themselves. Zorgon himself brought up the fact of "human tolerance." How much will human beings tolerate? How much will human beings care? Will human beings just sit and write about the problems and not get involved? Our fate is in our hands. What will we do as a species?
|
|
|
|
Post by spacemaverick on Jan 11, 2014 14:23:03 GMT -6
California Official: Information on risk from Fukushima needs to be made public — State in contact with NRC — CBS: ‘Health Scare Over Possible Fukushima Radiation In Pacific-Caught Fish’ enenews.com/california-official-information-on-risk-from-fukushima-needs-to-be-made-public-state-in-contact-with-nrc-cbs-health-scare-over-possible-fukushima-radiation-in-pacific-caught-fish-surferTaken from enews site enenews.com/california-official-information-on-risk-from-fukushima-needs-to-be-made-public-state-in-contact-with-nrc-cbs-health-scare-over-possible-fukushima-radiation-in-pacific-caught-fish-surferThis is what he said on his site: www.asmdc.org/members/a25/press/wieckowski-urges-state-to-post-information-on-fukushima-disaster-s-risk-to-california-beachesWieckowski Urges State To Post Information On Fukushima Disaster’s Risk To California Beaches
SACRAMENTO - Saying that Californians are concerned and seeking information about potential health risks caused by contaminated water coming to the state from the Fukushima nuclear power plant disaster, Assemblymember Bob Wieckowski (D-Fremont) is urging the state’s Department of Public Health to post updated information on the issue to its homepage.
“With newspaper reports, on-line videos and a number of stories about the possible radiation dangers to our beaches, residents are concerned and seeking information from a source they can trust,” Wieckowski said. “I think a lot of people’s questions can be answered if the department would conduct a study or post the results of other studies and monitoring that are already completed to its homepage. The difficulty of finding accurate, current information about the science and the level of risk involved has exacerbated confusion and worry among some in the public.”
Wieckowski said the federal government has suggested Fukushima’s problems pose no risks to California’s coastal and estuarine lands. However, online speculation about contaminated water traveling to California, and higher than normal radioactivity levels on a California beach have increased the public’s concerns.
“Tourism, fishing, agriculture and outdoor recreation are among our most important assets,” Wieckowski said. “Millions of Californians live in communities that are directly impacted by contamination in the ocean. That’s why I think it’s important for the state Department of Public Health to put what information it has in layman’s terms onto its homepage so the public can see it and understand what, if any, risks or concerns are out there.”
Wieckowski represents the 25th Assembly District, which includes San Jose, Santa Clara, Milpitas, Fremont and Newark.
Below from a different source; KSBW, Jan. 10, 2014: Zero threat of Fukushima radiation at California beaches, health officials say [...] there is also no risk of Fukushima radiation hitting the Monterey Bay. John Hodges, Santa Cruz County’s environmental health director, said, “We have no indication of anything that would be unusual here on our beaches.” Santa Cruz surfer Danilo TJ Magallanes disagrees, and said he would never go surfing right now. Half Moon Bay, CA Patch, Jan. 9, 2014: Dean Peterson, Director for Environmental Health Services for San Mateo County [...] forwarded the issue to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and [the California] Department of Public Health to further analyze the radioactivity. “Because the level was higher, it is protocol for us to contact state and federal agencies for further investigation,” he said. CDHP has collected and will be analyzing sand samples from Half Moon Bay. [...] The agency has been in contact with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and they are monitoring the situation with the nuclear reactors in Japan, said [spokeswoman Wendy Hopkins]. Awareness of the situation is now hitting local officials a little bit at a time on the West Coast. I would say bring pressure to bear on your local officials in the city, county and state so they will bring pressure to bear nationally. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2014 14:23:43 GMT -6
Excellent posts, Spacemaverick! Thanks. ____________________________________________ "The amount of radiation exposure is usually expressed in a unit called millirem (mrem). In the United States, the average person is exposed to an effective dose equivalent of approximately 620 mrem (whole-body exposure) per year from all sources (NCRP Report No.160). The dose calculator is based on the American Nuclear Society's brochure, . . . . My reading for this past year was 382.319 mrems just from my dosage calculation for my specific area where I live. This is by no means exact but generalized." Read more: theedgeofreality.proboards.com/thread/2263/radiation-warnings-get-mainstream?page=7#ixzz2q7fx7Ylgand, how much do you retain from the year before??  _____________________________________________ Has anyone done a comparison between the water off of Hawaii and the coast of California? Surely. . . . _____________________________________________ I agree, what can we do? We can show up. I'm talking about people coordinationg their days off work, retirees between doctors appts., etc., and doing some peaceful sit-ins. Hanging out at some nulear plants here at home. For starters. |
|
|
|
Post by spacemaverick on Jan 11, 2014 14:40:09 GMT -6
Excellent posts, Spacemaverick! Thanks. ____________________________________________ "The amount of radiation exposure is usually expressed in a unit called millirem (mrem). In the United States, the average person is exposed to an effective dose equivalent of approximately 620 mrem (whole-body exposure) per year from all sources (NCRP Report No.160). The dose calculator is based on the American Nuclear Society's brochure, . . . . My reading for this past year was 382.319 mrems just from my dosage calculation for my specific area where I live. This is by no means exact but generalized." Read more: theedgeofreality.proboards.com/thread/2263/radiation-warnings-get-mainstream?page=7#ixzz2q7fx7Ylgand, how much do you retain from the year before?? _____________________________________________ Has anyone done a comparison between the water off of Hawaii and the coast of California? Surely. . . . _____________________________________________ I agree, what can we do? We can show up. I'm talking about people coordinationg their days off work, retirees between doctors appts., etc., and doing some peaceful sit-ins. Hanging out at some nulear plants here at home. For starters. How much do you retain from the year before. I don't have a definitive answer but there are variables like diet, blood chemistry, local environment. The body will always be under bombardment of radiation from natural radiation and cosmic radiation. This is called background radiation. Our concern is when that radiation starts spiking above background. Then we need to find the source and if it is manmade then we need to take care of putting that genie back in the bottle so to speak. Regarding the comparison between Hawaii and coast of California I do not presently have an answer. The fact that you are getting involved is fantastic. Each of us can be a tool of sorts. Each with their own talents to do what we can. We have more impact in numbers. My approach is to educate people via the internet and on a personal level. Others might be to bring an awareness publically (in person) and so on. The powers that be will not shut the plants down but pressure can be brought to bear on local, county and state politicians for them to bring pressure on the industry and national politicians to bring the existing plants into a maintenance standard where we do not have issues with parts of a plant spewing this garbage into the environment. Can we do it? Yes, but their needs to be many people involved in order for their voices to be heard. It only takes one person to ignite that spark. I am currently posting across 3 forums almost the same information so people will know. I also do some pasting of information on my Facebook account regarding the Fukushima problem. Kudos to you and the others here for spreading the information. Rod |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2014 16:21:44 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by spacemaverick on Jan 12, 2014 1:26:19 GMT -6
Yachtsman says the Pacific is broken. This is indeed an eyewitness story. www.theherald.com.au/story/1848433/the-ocean-is-broken/IT was the silence that made this voyage different from all of those before it. Not the absence of sound, exactly. The wind still whipped the sails and whistled in the rigging. The waves still sloshed against the fibreglass hull. And there were plenty of other noises: muffled thuds and bumps and scrapes as the boat knocked against pieces of debris. What was missing was the cries of the seabirds which, on all previous similar voyages, had surrounded the boat. The birds were missing because the fish were missing. Exactly 10 years before, when Newcastle yachtsman Ivan Macfadyen had sailed exactly the same course from Melbourne to Osaka, all he'd had to do to catch a fish from the ocean between Brisbane and Japan was throw out a baited line. "There was not one of the 28 days on that portion of the trip when we didn't catch a good-sized fish to cook up and eat with some rice," Macfadyen recalled. But this time, on that whole long leg of sea journey, the total catch was two. No fish. No birds. Hardly a sign of life at all. See more of this article from the New Castle Herald at the above link. THIS IS FROM AN EYEWITNESS TO THE DEBRIS FROM AUSTRALIA TO OSAKA |
|
|
|
Post by spacemaverick on Jan 12, 2014 1:29:28 GMT -6
My friend Cliff has been a cheering section for me even when I was becoming frustrated with forums shutting down for one reason or another and my message being lost. Cliff would pipe up and spur me on in the endeavor. My thanks to Cliff for being the prybar! |
|
|
|
Post by spacemaverick on Jan 12, 2014 12:07:00 GMT -6
UPDATEToll Mounts Among U.S. Sailors Devastated by Fukushima Radiation Harvey Wasserman | January 11, 2014 11:41 am From EcoWatch transforming green 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. the rest of the story; ecowatch.com/2014/01/11/sailors-devastated-by-fukushima-radiation/THIS IS INTOLERABLE WHAT OUR GOVERNMENT AND THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT HAS ALLOWED TO HAPPEN AND NOT TAKE CARE OF THEM.
|
|
|
|
Post by skywalker on Jan 12, 2014 12:52:39 GMT -6
I wonder how the amount of radiation released from this recent Fukushima reactor explosion and leak would compare with all of the nuclear bombs that were tested in the Pacific during the cold war? It would seem to me there was already a huge amount of radiation out there even before this recent disaster happened. If life in the ocean could survive all of those bombs I doubt that one reactor leak will wipe it out. It still needs to be stopped and cleaned up as quickly as possible though. It's hard to believe it's taking them so long to deal with it. The nuclear industry as well as the governments of many countries are way too casual about dealing with the dangers of radiation. They never should have detonated all those bombs and they never should have allowed this recent disaster to occur. BTW, this forum is not going to shut down any time soon so feel free to spread the message.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2014 10:20:42 GMT -6
My friend Cliff has been a cheering section for me even when I was becoming frustrated with forums shutting down for one reason or another and my message being lost. Cliff would pipe up and spur me on in the endeavor. My thanks to Cliff for being the prybar! Yay Cliff! I'm pretty proud that Cliff is a friend of mine, too! |
|
|
|
Post by spacemaverick on Jan 13, 2014 13:50:34 GMT -6
I wonder how the amount of radiation released from this recent Fukushima reactor explosion and leak would compare with all of the nuclear bombs that were tested in the Pacific during the cold war? It would seem to me there was already a huge amount of radiation out there even before this recent disaster happened. If life in the ocean could survive all of those bombs I doubt that one reactor leak will wipe it out. It still needs to be stopped and cleaned up as quickly as possible though. It's hard to believe it's taking them so long to deal with it. The nuclear industry as well as the governments of many countries are way too casual about dealing with the dangers of radiation. They never should have detonated all those bombs and they never should have allowed this recent disaster to occur. BTW, this forum is not going to shut down any time soon so feel free to spread the message. The actual coriums are out of the containment vessels on 3 of the reactors and radiating the ground water. They have not entombed it like Chernobyl. A lot of that got into the atmosphere, into the sea life and the ocean which means it got into the food chain. The same actually happened with Chernobyl where it got into the food chain on land and is essentially the gift that keeps on giving. It least what should have happened is that Japan should have entombed what they could but left it open way too long. Reactor 4 spent fuel pool could cause an even larger problem if they cannot get the spent fuel out safely and store it. This was just not a leak but 3 leaks where the cores are not contained. As far as all the bomb tests versus the Japan reactors and Chernobyl reactors...I don't know which put more into the air. Most tests were underground. The ground acts as an insulator. This is what we were taught in the service that we can insulate ourselves from fallout by digging a nice foxhole, covering with poncho and sealing with dirt. We can't go back and un do what has been done but look forward to what we can do now...... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2014 14:23:33 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by Morgan Sierra on Jan 13, 2014 14:45:46 GMT -6
My understanding of how radioactive fallout works is that only the radioactive particles themselves are radioactive. That means that only dust from the radioactive material itself (plutonium, uranium, etc...) is dangerous. From what I have read about it air and water cannot "absorb" radiation. It could absorb the radioactive particles of dust but not the radiation itself. Living organisms can be affected and mutated by it but inorganic materials like metal, rock, or water can not be. If that is true then the only way radiation from an accident like Fukushima could have an effect on other parts of the world is if there was an explosion that released particles of radioactive material into the air, if superheated radioactive material came into contact with water causing some of the particles to dissolve or flake off, or if living organisms like fish or whatever were to swallow the radioactive particles and in turn be eaten by humans. Even then people would have to actually swallow the radioactive particles themselves, not just meat from the animal that swallowed them. I would think that the bombs that were detonated would put a lot more radioactive dust into both the air and the water because when the bomb was detonated the fissionable material was atomized and dispersed into the air as dust which would then fall down into the oceans. In the case of accidents like Fukushima and Chernobyl the explosions were much smaller and more contained. So as long as there is not another explosion radioactive particles being released from Fukushima should at this point be relatively small. People who are actually working or living close to those areas would have a much greater danger of being affected by the radiation because they are so close to the source of it that the rays themselves are actually reaching them in large numbers. People long distances away or who are on the other side of the planet would not have to worry about that. All we have to worry about is the dust or other particles that may have been dispersed in the atmosphere or sea water and carried over here. Theoretically, because of the vast amounts of air in the atmosphere and water in the ocean those radioactive particles should have become so dispersed and diluted that they should be barely noticeable to continents like the Americas, Africa or western Europe. Of course I am getting most of my information about nuclear radiation and fallout from government sources and we all know how "honest" the government can be.  This is the same government that marched hundreds of thousands of soldiers through nuclear blast zones and needlessly exposed them to dangerous nuclear fallout all in an attempt to convince them that it wasn't dangerous...which it was. The example you gave of being taught to dig a foxhole and covering it with a poncho would protect you from radioactive fallout particles but not from the radiation itself if you were close to the source. It would take a much thicker material than a poncho to block gamma rays. I do know from reading other sources that there are certain types of materials that can become charged by being exposed to radiation. I'm not sure which elements are on that last or to what degree they can be affected though. |
|
|
|
Post by Morgan Sierra on Jan 13, 2014 14:48:23 GMT -6
BTW, I'm skywalker also in case anybody doesn't know. I was just signed in as Morgan when I made that last post because I was working on something.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2014 15:09:40 GMT -6
According to sources, there were three meltdowns over a short period of time at this facility. There were also three explosions ( one of them was claimed to be the lesser hydrogen). Iodine 131 was dispersed along with Strontium, Cesium, etc. The half life of many of these elements will continue to disperse for years to come.The link I posted above clasweb.clas.wayne.edu/Multimedia/Geology/files/Faculty/baskaran/publications2/112-Hernandez-Ceballos%20etal_2012.pdfshows it went global using scientific data. How much is too much? Other concerns is what is happening inside of these reactors now and the long term effects to come. Some of the melted down reactors cannot have equipment enter inside because it cannot handle the effects of exposure so there is really no telling what's happening. The cold shutdown doesn't mean these particles are not active. They will be for generations to come.It may take TEPCO 40 years or more using methods not yet available to get the immediate problems solved. Here is what is happening with the water containment vessels.- fukushimaupdate.com/fukushima-water-tank-radiation-rises/ |
|
|
|
Post by skywalker on Jan 13, 2014 16:10:50 GMT -6
I don't think this situation is as bad as the internet blogs and political activists are making it out to be. I also don't think it is good as the governments and news media is making it out to be. Either way it is still a problem which needs to be eliminated as quickly as possible which nobody seems in any hurry to do. After that they need to clean up the rest of the radioactive crap they have been dumping all over the planet for the past 60 plus years. There's no reason for any radioactive junk to be scattered all over the place.
|
|
|
|
Post by spacemaverick on Jan 13, 2014 23:59:30 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by skywalker on Jan 14, 2014 0:01:52 GMT -6
The media is being paid by the government to report certain stories and ignore others. Obviously the government wants this to be ignored.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2014 15:53:31 GMT -6
According to sources, there were three meltdowns over a short period of time at this facility. There were also three explosions ( one of them was claimed to be the lesser hydrogen). Iodine 131 was dispersed along with Strontium, Cesium, etc. The half life of many of these elements will continue to disperse for years to come.The link I posted above clasweb.clas.wayne.edu/Multimedia/Geology/files/Faculty/baskaran/publications2/112-Hernandez-Ceballos%20etal_2012.pdfshows it went global using scientific data. How much is too much? Other concerns is what is happening inside of these reactors now and the long term effects to come. Some of the melted down reactors cannot have equipment enter inside because it cannot handle the effects of exposure so there is really no telling what's happening. The cold shutdown doesn't mean these particles are not active. They will be for generations to come.It may take TEPCO 40 years or more using methods not yet available to get the immediate problems solved. Here is what is happening with the water containment vessels.- fukushimaupdate.com/fukushima-water-tank-radiation-rises/Mid-and-Long-Term Roadmap towards the Decommissioning of TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station Units 1-4 (May have been revised since time of publication) www.meti.go.jp/english/press/2013/pdf/0627_01.pdfI've read about half of this and am still studying it. |
|
|
|
Post by skywalker on Jan 14, 2014 19:29:13 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by spacemaverick on Jan 15, 2014 13:17:50 GMT -6
In all probability there are more not being reported.
|
|
|
|
Post by lois on Jan 15, 2014 14:45:02 GMT -6
I read about a new site leaking yesterday. I believe it was a power plant in Carolina .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2014 15:36:34 GMT -6
news.yahoo.com/review-39-groundwater-soil-cleanup-working-060746818.htmlupdated review about Texas facility. Quote from article- This may be an older issue, but it was the world's first meltdown that many do not know about. It happened in Semi Hills in Simi Valley, California. Recall the half life of many elements mentioned throughout this thread. Santa Susana Field Laboratories-  en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Susana_Field_Laboratory- Not good at all ! -  I highly recommend for those interested to read about this especially- -Accidents and site contamination -Sodium burn pits -Wildfires and contamination Quote from wiki article-
|
|
|
|
Post by skywalker on Jan 16, 2014 11:26:08 GMT -6
I've been to Three Mile Island. The news media was making a huge deal out of it back in the 70s. I had never even heard about the meltdown in Simi Valley though. Wonder why they reported the heck out of the small one and didn't say a word about the big one? I must do research... |
|
|
|
Post by spacemaverick on Jan 16, 2014 12:36:33 GMT -6
|
|
This is the same government that marched hundreds of thousands of soldiers through nuclear blast zones and needlessly exposed them to dangerous nuclear fallout all in an attempt to convince them that it wasn't dangerous...which it was. The example you gave of being taught to dig a foxhole and covering it with a poncho would protect you from radioactive fallout particles but not from the radiation itself if you were close to the source. It would take a much thicker material than a poncho to block gamma rays.
I highly recommend for those interested to read about this especially-
