*NSFW* Joe Rogan Experience, Dec. 18, 2013 (at 1:59:30 in):
Joe Rogan, host: How bad is Fukushima?
Shane Smith, journalist and CEO of VICE (Forbes: ‘One to Watch’ on Forbes 400 list. Est. Net Worth: $400 million): Bad, very bad. […] If you look at Fukushima, it’s a perfect example of the problem with nuclear power. […] The levels of radiation have not f****** gone down. We have a crew there shooting right now. The levels of radiation in the area are through the f****** roof. [...]
Rogan: I did see a piece on the fish — on tuna’s being 3% [actually around 1,000%, see below] more irradiated than before¹. That’s a big number, 3% after a couple years when you’re dealing with something that’s going to be radiating the ocean for hundreds of thousands of years if it’s still leaking. [...]
Smith: There’s a lot of stories now coming out that the Japanese government kept it under wraps, didn’t want to tell anybody. The food around the whole region was irradiated. People in Tokyo were showing increased signs, etc. etc. It’s going to be bad for quite some time. What do you expect?
Rogan: And how the f*** are they ever going to stop it? [...] Are they still leaving it up to Japan? [...] It’s just unbelievably incredible that they never thought that it would be able to get shut off — that they just built this crazy power plant with no ability to cool it down. [...] What really scares me is I don’t think I’ve heard one person come up with any way that makes sense as to how to contain it. Not just hot to contain it, but how to stop it, how to clean the area up — It’s almost just not even discussed. How the f*** do they clean that? [...]
Eddie Huang, chef, restaurant owner, TV host: I’m guessing they can’t — that’s why they don’t talk about it.
¹It’s about 1,000% higher, not 3% — Fox News, AP: “The levels of radioactive cesium were 10 times higher than the amount measured in tuna off the California coast in previous years.” The ’3%’ figure came from people comparing this nuclear waste (e.g. cesium-134, -137) to the natural background radiation levels (e.g. potassium-40) in the fish. This comparison is rejected by pro-nuclear scientists, and has been labelled ‘propaganda’.
Published: January 4th, 2014 at 11:43 pm ET