Researchers: Continuing radioactive leaks from Fukushima Daiichi — “There must be a source” — 300,000,000,000 becquerels a month thought entering Pacific

Published: November 14th, 2012 at 2:05 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
63 comments


Title: Ocean still suffering from Fukushima fallout
Source: Nature
Author: Geoff Brumfiel
Date: 14 November 2012
h/t Enformable

Continuing leaks and contaminated sediment keep radiation levels high.

[...] New data presented at a conference held on 12–13 November at the University of Tokyo show that levels of radioactivity in the sea around the plant remain stable, rather than falling as expected. [...]

The Fukushima disaster caused by far the largest discharge of radioactivity into the ocean ever seen. A new model presented by scientists from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts estimates that 16.2 petabecquerels (1015 becquerels) of radioactive caesium leaked from the plant — roughly the same amount that went into the atmosphere.

[...] in the region of the ocean near the plant, levels of caesium-137 have remained fixed at around 1,000 becquerels, a relatively high level compared to the natural background. [...]

Researchers at the conference are convinced that something is preventing the radiation levels from dropping. “There must be a source,” says Scott Fowler, an oceanographer at Stony Brook University in New York.

In fact, a fresh analysis by oceanographer Jota Kanda at the Tokyo University of Marine Science [estimates] the plant itself is leaking around 0.3 terabecquerels [0.3 trillion becquerels] per month [...]

Watch: Fukushima plant "to keep contaminating the Pacific Ocean for the rest of time" if fuel can't be removed -- No good solution, must constantly pump out water from under buildings (VIDEO)

Published: November 14th, 2012 at 2:05 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
63 comments

Related Posts

  1. Scientist: Nuclear material “continuing to come from the reactor area” at Fukushima Daiichi — First researchers to test within 5 km of plant (VIDEO) May 14, 2013
  2. Fukushima Mystery? TV: Japan expert says radiation levels in ocean too high to be explained by groundwater flow alone — Must be coming from “other contamination routes” entering Pacific — “Devastating impact” to come? (VIDEO) August 19, 2013
  3. Japan Experts: Up to 93 billion becquerels a day may still be leaking into Pacific from Fukushima plant (VIDEO) March 15, 2013
  4. Radio: Fukushima Daiichi has “contaminated the biggest body of water on the planet” — Radioactive leaks to harm marine and human life — Whole Pacific Ocean likely to have cesium levels 5-10 times higher than at peak of nuclear bomb tests (AUDIO) July 29, 2013
  5. Trillions of becquerels per day still being emitted from Fukushima Daiichi — Radioactive steam continues (VIDEO) May 20, 2012

63 comments to Researchers: Continuing radioactive leaks from Fukushima Daiichi — “There must be a source” — 300,000,000,000 becquerels a month thought entering Pacific

  • aigeezer aigeezer

    Just a little oopsie, "16.2 petabecquerels (1015 becquerels)" is off by a teensie bit because ONE petabecquerel is 1000000000000000 becquerels.

    http://www.aqua-calc.com/what-is/radioactivity/petabecquerel

    I note also that the wording blames the victims:

    "Researchers believe that run-off from rivers, as well as continued leaks from the plant, may be partially to blame. But contaminated sediment and marine organisms also seem to be involved."

    Even when they tell of disastrous events they find ways to minimize them.


    Report comment

    • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

      good catch aigeezer on the "blame the victims" thing…


      Report comment

    • Radio VicFromOregon

      Holy cr–. Someone needs to go back and take a math class! I thought 1015 becquerels looked awfully little given the circumstances. I, personally possess no math abilities but even i knew something wasn't adding up. Good catch Aigeezer, and same for catching the thought process of blaming the environment for failing to decontaminate itself. So, aigeezer. How does one go about getting that number retracted and the correct one in its place?


      Report comment

    • Joe Ebslap Joe Ebslap

      Probably scientific notation – 10 to the fifteenth power. The stupidity of this thing is to the power of infinity.


      Report comment

      • GlowInTheDark GlowInTheDark

        Thank goodness for scientific notation. I get dizzy when I see too many 0s like in Petabequerels or neatly aligned supermarket shelves :(


        Report comment

      • aigeezer aigeezer

        Yes, the "1015 becquerels" almost certainly started out as something like 10E15. Then, through minor human error or mischief or innumeracy, it became the much more innocuous-looking 1015.

        What intrigues me is how often the oopsies err in the direction of minimization. You would think they would balance out, with some minimizing and some inadvertently exaggerating, but they seem always to go in one direction.

        As for the "blame the victim" subtext, someone here drew my attention to that issue in the story a while back about the "monster tuna" that was blamed (BLAMED!) for carrying radiation from Fukushima. I've been watching for such spin – and finding it in abundance – ever since.

        To belabor the point, the sentence with the "1015 becquerels" error also said: "A new model … from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts estimates that … radioactive caesium leaked from the plant". "Leaked", as in past tense, as in "glad that's over".


        Report comment

      • Insight

        PhysOrg reports:

        From March 21 to mid-July, 27.1 peta becquerels of caesium 137 entered the sea, the Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety (IRSN) said. One peta becquerel is a million billion bequerels, or 10 to the power of 15. Of the total, 82 percent entered the sea before April 8, through water that was pumped into the Fukushima's damaged reactor units in a bid to cool them down, it said.

        "This is the biggest single outflow of man-made radionuclides to the marine environment ever observed," the agency said in a press release. Caesium is a slow-decaying element, taking 30 years to lose half of its radioactivity.


        Report comment

    • AGreenRoad AGreenRoad

      They forgot to mention that the radiation is harmless and smiling will deactivate it. Where are those doctors when you need them?

      Breathe deep, and keep eating those glowing thingagingies


      Report comment

  • Sickputer

    Nature.com: "The level of contamination is not likely to pose a significant health risk to humans. But it could have long-term economic consequences for fishermen along Japan's east coast"

    SP: Bullshit. How do you predict no health consequences when the continuing bioaccumulation of nuclear poison is steadily increasing…no end in sight?

    Nature.com: "Octopuses and squid seem to have escaped contamination"

    SP: Must have been a blooming Mother Teresa miracle! I think not.

    Nature.com: "Researchers at the conference are convinced that something is preventing the radiation levels from dropping. "There must be a source," says Scott Fowler, an oceanographer at Stony Brook University in New York."

    SP: Fantasy Island 2012….Boss!! The Corium! The Corium!

    Nature.com: "Around 95 terabecquerels of radioactive caesium has found its way to the sandy ocean floor near the plant. How it got there, Kanda says, no one is sure."

    SP: Bulldozers and cranes pushed hot metal into the lagoon…check the plant videos for the past twenty months and interview a few of the original plant workers. Bring money for incentives…the yakuza respect that kind of interview.

    Nature.com: "Many fisheries remain closed, and because of the persistent contamination "we can't answer the basic question of when these fisheries will be able to open", says Woods Hole oceanographer Ken Buesseler"

    SP: Not in your lifetime Kenny.


    Report comment

  • jedi jedi

    THANK YOU JAPAN , KEEP DUMPING WATER IN TO 1,2,3
    WHERE DOSE IT GO ? IF THE PACIFIC DIES WE ALL GO.
    NEED WORKER LET ALL STOP BUYING FROM JAPAN!
    NO CAR,TV,DVD JAPAN WOULD BE A 3RD WORLD NATION.
    BEAGING FOR FOOD .FIX THE PROBLEM OR THIS MIGHT COME TRUE…


    Report comment

  • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

    “There must be a source,”?! We could start with the self-assured arrogance of the MIC…


    Report comment

  • Anthony Anthony

    The source is the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant.

    Tepco stated they have some 100,000 employees, right?

    You would think with such manpower (and with most not working as normal due to the shutdowns) and the tremendous amount of time spent the last ALMOST TWO YEARS you would at least have an idea of the scope of your problem leading to what's contaminating the ocean.


    Report comment

    • aigeezer aigeezer

      Good reminder, Anthony. As I recall, we read a few days ago that the plan was to conscript those hundred-thousand employees and make them do work at Fukushima. That story seemed weird at the time (clerks, secretaries, PR-flacks, meter-readers… all unwilling conscripts at a nuke disaster site… doing something or other). Anyway, we're now told that they can find nobody at all to work there.

      Something is lost in translation perhaps.


      Report comment

  • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

    would someone please convert 300,000,000,000 becquerels a month into a meaningful toxicity level?

    I once went through the trouble of taking a previously given emission and, dividing into the pacific ocean area, came up with the figure that if the top 5 meters contained the evenly distributed radioactive material it would equal the EPA limit.


    Report comment

    • richard richard

      Levels are called 'we're fkukud'. Dead. Kaput. Screwed.

      Sell the farm. Go party.


      Report comment

    • guezilla

      Bequerels are about as meaningful as it gets, 1 bq = 1 radioactive decay per second. What is missing from this equation is the total volume the 300,000,000,000 is getting dispersed into. As the Moderator notes, it's also not clear whether this is Caesium or something else. At this points Caesium-137 is what most people are talking about.

      I believe I saw TEPCO's own estimate of leaks into ocean just recently, but can't remember where to find it now.

      Whole Pacific Ocean is 622 million cubic km, or 622 * 10 ^ 18 liters. If the caesium were to disperse evenly, it would get about 0.5 * 10 ^ -9 or 0.000 000 000 5 Bq/liter per month.

      Pacific Ocean has an area of area of 165.2 million square kilometres which is 165.2 * 10 ^ 12 square meters, giving a fallout equivalent of 1,82 * 10 ^ -3 Bq/square meter or 0.00182 Bq/square meter.

      The EPA limit for Cesium-137 = 200 picocuries per liter (7.41 Bq/L), so it's pretty apparent the Pacific Ocean is so huge that if the given leaking amount is correct, evenly dispersed it would amount to almost nothing. Obviously it's not evenly dispersed, and I have doubts about the leak rate being correct, either.

      In any case the leak is ongoing, and in as much as it's originating from the coriums, it'll be getting worse overtime for decades.


      Report comment

      • Sickputer

        "so it's pretty apparent the Pacific Ocean is so huge that if the given leaking amount is correct, evenly dispersed it would amount to almost nothing."

        Good math for the leaks…Yes, the "leaking" amount is small, but figure in the massive releases in the fallout falling east of Fukushima the first week and the decimal point moves a few positions.

        If there is another calamity at Daiichi in which the whole plant is lost to fallout and gushing leaks, then the ocean will be in trouble (along with a short death sentence for the Japanese people).

        Right now, Japan citizens and people who eat seafood from that eastern coast are in deep doodoo. It could still worsen.


        Report comment

  • PhilipUpNorth PhilipUpNorth

    "Something is preventing the radiation levels from dropping."
    The "Something" is the three Rogue Nucler Reactors located many feet below Buildings1,2,&3. What is needed is NOT pretty covers for the 4 demolished Buildings. What is needed is a plan to create a Closed Loop Heat Sink For the underground corium. A cofferdam would be built below the level of the corium completely around Buildings1,2,3,&4. Uncontaminated ground water would then flow around the outside of the cofferdam, and into the Pacific Ocean. Inside the cofferdam, hot contaminated water that has cooled the 3 bus-sized 100 ton Rogue Nuclear Reactors in the mudrock under Buildings1,2,&3 would be pumped out of extraction wells located downhill from the reactor buildings. This water would be pumped to cooling towers for cooling, then pumped into injection wells inside the cofferdam, uphill from Buildings1,2,&3. Water would recirculate within this Closed Loop Heat Sink, rather than contaminating the entire Pacific Ocean.

    Japan: Unless you act now, the name of Japan will always be associated with the shame of this failure to stop the destruction of the Pacific Ocean, when you had the opportunity to do so.


    Report comment

  • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

    Or use 16.2 petabecquerels which is only the radioactive cesium leaked and give us some measure of this toxicity. Then, someone should make an estimate of what percent of the total emission was cesium.

    Then these figures should be posted permanently on this site and updated.

    How much ocean water at 1,000 becquerels, say if you drank it (disregarding salt etc) would would compare to "safety limits"? Or how long bathing in it…

    We need a readily accessible and graspable estimate of the magnitude of this event always posted so people who come for quick answers can see it.

    thanks


    Report comment

    • guezilla

      By the way, I'm trying to look for a clearer reference on this, but according to TEPCO themselves, they released 360 petabecquerels of Caesium-137 into the atmosphere during the first three weeks alone. http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/T120523005514.htm

      This would actually be over 4 times the whole release claimed for Chernobyl, so it's hard to tell whether to believe this or not, but Fukushima had almost 10 times the fuel in reactors and cooling pools on top of that. I'm really curious where the "roughly same amount that went into atmosphere" in the news of the topic comes from, and the 16.2 petabecquerels is inexplicably small amount. Logically at least half of the 360 petabecquerels TEPCO claimed would have fallen into the sea (probably more as the winds were claimed to be towards sea, sparing Tokyo) and far more carried by rivers, rain and groundwater. So the news article of the topic appears to be flat out lying.

      http://www.ourfood-news.com/node/115 the conversion ratio for ingested Caesium-137 is 1 Sv = 76 923 076 Bq or 1 mSv = 76 923 Bq. The 1000 bq is most likely per liter, which is the usual measure for liquids, but with no per unit given for the 1000 bq, that's unscientific nonsense again.


      Report comment

  • AGreenRoad AGreenRoad

    So far, they do not care a WHIT about their own millions of children including those not yet born. Why would they care about Billions of strangers around the world?

    Three sources of radiation in ocean that do not take a rocket scientist to figure out

    1. #3 explosion blew HOT radioactive fuel 3 KM out, most into the ocean. Seek and you shall find.

    2. Leaks from temporary pipes. Leaks from basements. Leaks from other buildings and equipment that was damaged. All of it goes into ocean.. Seek and you shall find.

    3. 1-3 hot out of control radioactive underground fires interacting with groundwater, which goes into ocean… Seek and you shall find

    4. Air releases of radiation from whole site.. some of that ends up in ocean.. Seek and you shall find.

    Oh yea, free radiation for EVERYONE, including all the fishies in the sea, which is better than love for you and me. Love – TEPCO


    Report comment

    • Anthony Anthony

      Omg AGreenRoad! I was just going to reply above to aigeezer that as the days grow longer in this disaster, it seems Japan either:

      a) Doesn't know better

      or

      B) Doesn't care

      Not any different I know to our Northern American leadership but Japan IS the SOURCE of the problem.


      Report comment

  • AGreenRoad AGreenRoad

    Fukushima Decommissioning Working Conditions Deteriorating; via A Green Road http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/11/fukushima-decommissioning-working.html


    Report comment

  • razzz razzz

    As Woods Hole oceanographer Ken Buesseler would say…that is a lot of bananas not accounted for.


    Report comment

  • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

    if you compare the suggestion given by PhilipUpNorth above to say the amount of work that went into the panama canal or the 100 mile Suez canal, you know it can be done. Something like this will be done unless they've already written off the planet. Now the banksters and criminals at large have something to do with their money.


    Report comment

  • It's All Lies It's All Lies

    That is a hugeeee amount! The EU limit for food is 500 Bq/kg. Peta is a much higher reading.Regardless of 'doses' or 'levels it would not do you any favours! Counted down its 115,000 disintigrations per second. But hey my local landfill accepts nuclear waste at 200,000 Bq per kilogram but it's 'low level' compared to the cladding in rods and reactor parts etc so it's okay. NOT! Its now dumping until 2016. Woop!


    Report comment

  • TheBigPicture TheBigPicture

    Radiation into the sea and air is continuing. And continuing. Nobody can stop it.


    Report comment

  • arclight arclight

    connected to coastal contamination and the ability of people to use law to force evacuation and monitoring.. and health care support

    i find the beurocrates coming up with this sneaky delaying contact.. and the spotlight is of the UN too!

    ASEAN – deeply flawed Human Rights Declaration – Effects Japans Human rights petitions?

    Wilder Tayler, Secretary General of the International Commission of Jurists. “Balancing human rights with responsibilities turns on its head the entire raison d’être of human rights,”

    The organizations strongly urged in their letter that ASEAN leaders should return the draft text to the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights and send clear instructions to redraft it, in a transparent, deliberate and inclusive process, in full consultation with all stakeholders, so that it does not fall below internationally recognized human rights law and standards.

    http://nuclear-news.net/2012/11/14/asean-deeply-flawed-human-rights-declaration-effects-japans-human-rights-petitions/

    nice catch human rights watch and crin
    good to know we are bringing the fight to the enemy.. ;)

    the US congress needs to ratify the childrens human rights article.. they should be holding their heads in shame!!


    Report comment

  • dosdos dosdos

    16 petabecquerels is low ball figure. There was about seventy times that much released. The total release from Fukushima is around 14.2 extabecquerels, with about 8% being cesium 134 and 137. That gives 1120 petabecquerels of cesium isotopes. Their estimates are extremely conservative.


    Report comment

    • guezilla

      Conservative schmonservative. But as I pointed out aboe, TEPCO themselves admitted to at least 360 petabecquerels of Caesium-137 released into *atmosphere* during first three weeks alone (960 petabequerels of all isotopes). (See my above post for refences). As this number came straight from TEPCO, it can be considered conservative, and doesn't include liquids leaks or anything after first three weeks.

      Back then we were told not to worry because scientists had it all figured out and 80% of the Caesium fell directly into sea, and more would be carried over by rivers, rains and such. http://phys.org/news/2011-11-fukushima-fell-sea.html

      Now, we're being told "16.2 petabecquerels of radioactive caesium leaked from the plant — roughly the same amount that went into the atmosphere". So in a sudden ret-con of TEPCO's own announcement, the atmospheric Caesium release has suddenly fallen into one 60th of TEPCO's announcement?

      And if 80% of the 960 petabecquerels fell into the ocean, then 767 petabecquerels were supposed to have fallen into the ocean from the atmosphere alone, plus any leaking water (hundreds of tons of highly contaminated water were admitted to have leaked into sea) plus anything after the first three weeks. Again, the new report claims a number almost 50th of what TEPCO has already admitted to at the start.


      Report comment

      • guezilla

        Gah, mixed u my 360 and 960 petabecquerels :) As the new report clearly speaks of "radioactive caesium", 360 petabecquerels is the correct comparison value. This means the new report gives numbers one 22th of the admitted atmospheric, and one 18th of the admitted sea release.

        I should also add I doubt the 360 petabecquerels figure, as this seems out of place, but it seems well referenced. It seems http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Fukushima_Fallout_Rivals_Chernobyl.php is a well researched and conducted study from a respected non-affiliated institute, and their results gave 36.6 PBq of Caesium-137, 43% of Chernobyl estimated release and 80% into sea. Again, only atmospheric releases are included.

        This gives 6.4 PBq into Japan and 29.3 PBq into the sea. Caesium-134 would be about same value before half-lives are applied. These numbers seem far more believable than anything else presented, both from the viewpoint of the research backing them, and from comparison to the contamination from Chernobyl.


        Report comment

        • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

          OK Guezilla, Im going to continue with this.
          So you suggest that Tepco actually gave the correct figure but bungled the decimal place and therefor gave a figure 10x the actual one? 36.6 petabecquerels is the "scientific" number. Dosdos comes up with 14.2 extabecquerels. Ill throw in a number here….lets see 376 gazumbabecquerels….

          Dosdos, how do you come up with 14 extabecquerels?

          When I first came to ENEnews, I wanted to find some numbers to get a feel for the magnitude of the situation. Many months later, those numbers seem elusive. I know its my own ignorance, but then again, even some smart people dont want to spend hours fishing for the data. Why cant we have some figures permanently posted?

          I remember Forbes came out with an article corroborating the 5 meter x pacific ocean surface area contamination level, but now I cant find it.


          Report comment

          • guezilla

            I'll have to admit I don't know what's up with those numbers, as I said they seem dubious either way. However, looking further it seems Reuters and Yomiuri may have been referencing:

            http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/2012/1204659_1870.html (May 24)

            This report from TEPCO claims 10 PBq into atmosphere and 3,6 PBq straight into ocean.

            There seems to be multitude of factors at play here, I think Reuters/Yomimuri may have been looking at wrong value and making order-of-magnitude errors, but also, part of the TEPCO report is using "Iodine-converted value of radioactivity" which I think where the larger values originate from. That's quite silly and adds to the obfuscation. But then, TEPCO's official claim are so low I can see why they would pick the bigger ones :)

            The total Cesium-137 inventory at Fukushima is nearly 5 exabecquerels: http://akiomatsumura.com/2012/04/682.html – thus it would be impossible for Fukushima to release 14.2 exabecquerels even if it were all to go up in smoke. Unless that is iodine-equivalent becquerels too.

            But there is of course no reason to think that more than a fraction of the cesium inventory at Fukushima has been released. If it had, it'd be picked up all around the world, 85 times the Chernobyl fallout and all that, and some ENENewsers even feel Chernobyl's numbers were inflated… That 36.6 PBq is based on Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty atmospheric monitoring stations, which is probably as good as you can get.


            Report comment

  • AGreenRoad AGreenRoad

    how do you arrive at this?

    So far, no one seems to be interested in calculating ANYTHING but partial, incomplete or minimized totals for ANYTHING.


    Report comment

  • Sickputer

    If you're on Mountain or Pacific Time, catch the NBC nightly news to see the Brian Williams (and others)spin on the Petraeus/Allen affairs.

    They gloss over Allen, mention the bareshirted FBI agent by name (but neglect to mention his clothing options in emails to Kelley). Both women are getting trashed badly. More to come, because the Kelleys (sis, Doc, and vavavoom Jill) are in deep financial distress.

    The generals come off pretty light in main stream media.


    Report comment

    • PurpleRain

      Who cares! Off topic for sure, but I really don't give a damn about who slept with who, etc. etc, and don't think it should be taking up any minutes or seconds of 'actual' news. They should be reporting on Fukushima or the Sink hole in Louisiana or a million other things. The fact that men and women sleep around and often do get caught is NOT NEWS!


      Report comment

  • razzz razzz

    Woods Hole relied on TEPCO readings to interpret TEPCO's graph of radiation near the plant in the ocean. Start there for numbers. The banana head from Woods Hole discussed the numbers and their meaning ad nauseam.


    Report comment

  • Insight

    Take a look at this Radioactive seawater impact map from
    March 2012.
    http://buzz.naturalnews.com/000021-Fukushima-radiation-Pacific_Ocean.html

    Also please note the blue strawberry to the right.
    They spliced fish genes with a strawberry….fish genes with a strawberry… fish genes with a strawberry and it is blue…does it glow in the dark? If they are showing the public this what have they done that they are not disclosing?


    Report comment

  • Ganxet Ganxet

    Mmm.
    Why they don't use Curies?
    it's like using inches instead miles…
    it smells.


    Report comment

    • guezilla

      Hard to tell if this is sarcasm or not… Becquerels are the SI-unit, so Curies are to Becquerels as Feet are to Meters. I know there are countries out there which really love their feet, but for scientific use nothing beats SI units, and scientific literature or measurements use them almost exclusively. It is also the most intuitive, natural unit for radioactivity.

      Of course, I assume you're referring to the problem that due to its very definition of "One radioactive decay per second", becquerels tend to grow huge fast. This is why the petabecquerels are so fabulous. In fact I would caution against using eksabecquerels which are thousand of petabecquerels. The convention is to write them out like "5200 petabecquerels". The estimated leak of 0.3 terabecquerels is 0,0003 petabecquerels, so there's certainly an argument for using smaller prefixes – the convention here would be 300 gigabecquerels.

      Of courses, where this all starts getting fuzzy is the International Nuclear Event Scale's "Iodine-equivalent Becquerels". Certainly not all radiation is the same, so I can see the motivation for using conversion factors when summing up becquerels from different isotopes. However the resulting numbers are no longer strongly tied to any physical quality, and as the (my?) confusion on this thread indicates, it's a given at least half the news-reports will drop out "Iodine-equivalent". And having separate sieverts and grays didn't seem to work out so well either…


      Report comment

  • Sol Man

    We can count petabecquerels, or we can also estimate the number of terminated births, human mutations, and radiation-linked deaths from this disaster around the world. Are there numbers to share from anyone? Like the radiation it will only increase.


    Report comment

    • GlowInTheDark GlowInTheDark

      The sad fact is that, in 5 years time when the birth rate drops dramatically, when the number of cancer and leukemia patients increase, people are still going to blame something else but radiation. When will people prepare to see the truth as it is!?


      Report comment

  • NewHm

    I'm not sure if I'm right but, all that radioactivity comes from the earth, is concentrated and used or released. Further no one is produced.
    So, diluting all the radioactivity from fukushima in the oceans is not so tragic, by all that water. It is a very small amount compared to what is naturally available in the ground. If we assume that the natural radioactivity is the same in the ground and in the ocean (that is'nt fully correct i know), then the 'natural' radioactivity in all the water of the oceans will increase by about 10 ppm particles of radioactivity (that's just my estimation). I mean the oceans, and the life in it, can support that…


    Report comment

    • GlowInTheDark GlowInTheDark

      Then please answer why highly radioactive fish are caught in Japan now than before? The ocean isn't supporting, it can't cope continuous flush of radioactivity in petabequerels amount!


      Report comment

      • NewHm

        I apologize for my imprecise wording, my english is not so good.
        I wrote about the oceans overall and for the case when, at the end, all the radioactivity is well diluted.
        Unquestionably the problem is different near the source (Fukushima). There, and as long as nobody has a scientific solution, the concentrations will remain very high, about 100 to 100.000 times the natural radioactivity depending on where the measurement is done.
        I'm not trying to diminish the harmful effects of the fallout in the atmosphere, above ground and in the ocean near the source. That, as we all know, remains an absolute disaster.


        Report comment

  • It's All Lies It's All Lies

    The problem (and solution for fuel rods) is that water can easily stop radiation so unless they are testing fish or shores you can't really pick this stuff up unprofessionally.

    I wouldn't be surprised if this amount or close to it has been released, as it's probably 'out of sight, out of mind'. Similar to all the rotting nuclear waste drums sitting in the Pacific :(


    Report comment

  • _ :( _ "…by far the largest discharge of radioactivity into the ocean ever seen."

    Ask yourself,

    …and for how long will this go on?
    …and can it get any worse?
    …and why is this not in the mainstream news?
    …and should I stay silent or speak up?

    -__-

    Since 311:
    1 year 8 months 4 days
    …or
    20 months 4 days
    …or
    615 DAYS!
    http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=march+11+2011


    Report comment

  • JHewes76 JHewes76

    According to the official state Teddy Bear of Japan, we have nothing to worry about as long as we brush our teeth and gargle :D


    Report comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.