Marine Chemist: ‘The reactors are still leaking’ — ‘Why aren’t the fish getting cleaner?’

Published: May 31st, 2012 at 2:10 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
58 comments


Does Radioactive Tuna Mean Fukushima Was Worse than Expected?
AccuWeather.com
May 31, 2012; 10:58 AM ET

Radioactive isotopes from Japan’s Fukushima nuclear disaster turned up in bluefin tuna caught off California in August, a new study reports.

[...]

This raises the question: Was the fallout of the Fukushima nuclear disaster worse than predicted?

Even 15 months out, it’s hard to say. “A lot of questions remain,” said Ken Buesseler, a marine chemist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. “One gaping question is how much radioactivity was released. Another is related to the continued leak at Fukushima and another is the level of contamination of seafood and sediments — whether that will change over time or continue for decades.”

[...]

And the damage to the oceans isn’t done yet. “The reactors are still leaking,” Buesseler told Life’s Little Mysteries. “The release has been stable for several months, but there are still radionuclides being released on shore.” As a consequence, fish off the coast of Japan are continuing to exhibit elevated levels of contamination, and some bottom-dweller species around Fukushima are still unsafe to eat. “The fact that the level of contamination is not going down, that they have fish that are above legal limits, is of concern,” he said. “Why aren’t the fish getting cleaner?”

[...]

Published: May 31st, 2012 at 2:10 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
58 comments

Related Posts

  1. NYTimes: Contamination levels not declining off Japan — Chemist: Fukushima reactor site leaking into ocean? October 25, 2012
  2. NPR: There’s been a melt-through, there’s cracks… Fukushima reactors not likely to stop leaking into ocean anytime soon — Levels in fish still as high as 2 years ago (AUDIO) April 29, 2013
  3. Jiji: Tepco Finds Most Polluted Fish since Fukushima Nuclear Accident — New record of 740,000 Bq/kg March 15, 2013
  4. Fukushima Worker: Nothing left we can do — Zero plan/idea how to manage leaking reactors — Tepco begins reducing # of workers November 23, 2011
  5. “Big Problem”: Cracked floors in Fukushima reactors leaking into groundwater that’s rising and rising and rising due to Tepco wall — “Can no longer be stopped from getting in ocean” — “Worse than that… buildings now on mushy land” (AUDIO) August 28, 2013

58 comments to Marine Chemist: ‘The reactors are still leaking’ — ‘Why aren’t the fish getting cleaner?’

  • Is this something like pouring gasoline on a fire and wondering why the fire gets bigger?


    Report comment

    • Fukushima quake/tsunami disturbed upper atmosphere – NASA
      http://www.trust.org/alertnet/news/fukushima-quaketsunami-disturbed-upper-atmosphere-nasa
      (reuters)
      WASHINGTON, May 30 (Reuters) – The massive earthquake and tsunami that hit Fukushima, Japan, last year wreaked havoc in the skies above as well, disturbing electrons in the upper atmosphere, NASA reported.

      The waves of energy from the quake and tsunami that were so destructive on the ground reached into the ionosphere, a part of the upper atmosphere that stretches from about 50 to 500 miles (80 to 805 km) above Earth's surface.

      The ionosphere is the last, thinnest part of the atmosphere, where solar ultraviolet radiation breaks up molecules and leaves a haze of electrons and ions.

      (Continued on link provided at top)…


      Report comment

  • Heart of the Rose Heart of the Rose

    Dear Marine Chemist,
    Not WAS released..IS being released.
    .Heart.


    Report comment

  • odylan

    The amount of radiation released may never be known. Some say it is 85 times more than Chernobyl.

    Gundersen speaks of "whole pieces of nuclear material" being found 2 kms away from one explosion.

    But that's on the land. The majority of this stuff went into the sea.

    And it must have been a hell of a lot. For instance the aircraft carrier Ronald Reagan turned away some hundreds of miles before Japan so as not to become contaminated. What does that say?


    Report comment

  • odylan

    And of course it's still going on . . .


    Report comment

  • TheBigPicture TheBigPicture

    It's creepy ..nobody know's whats next. And no way of knowing what sea creature might get through this nuclear nightmare. Or land creature.


    Report comment

    • Bubbha

      So it begins. What's next is the food chain will become contaminated, remember, fish is used as fertilizer.
      We have three possibilities
      1. Anarchy as we starve.
      2. Eat and die.
      3. Spf4 will answer those two questions.

      And the fantasy answerior the 4th possibility… Superman exists.


      Report comment

  • AGreenRoad AGreenRoad

    Total Fukushima Radiation Released Into Ocean, Air, Groundwater, Storage Tanks; via A Green Road Blog http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/02/total-fukushima-radiation-released-into.html


    Report comment

  • AGreenRoad AGreenRoad

    The FACT that NO ONE knows how much radiation has been released into ocean, tanks, underground, air, etc… indicates the possibility of an IMMENSE COVERUP, on a GLOBAL scale.

    ONE YEAR after the accident and still, NO ONE KNOWS.

    How deep might a coverup have to be, to be able to say that?

    Either that, or the depth of the denial of all scientists, researchers, experts, journalists and the quiet, complacent sheeple is so HUGE, that NO ONE wants to face the truth of what has and is still happening here…

    What if Armageddon just started? Who would DARE to report it?

    It may be much easier to just stay quiet and die with a whimper, rather than to be a nail that goes up above everyone else, just to be hammered down because that news would be way to awful, and the blowback would be intense.. possibly loss of job, career, etc.

    What use is there in reporting something when everyone will die anyway, worst case scenario?

    We all know the depth of denial is VERY deep.. but exacccttttllllly how deep?

    The depth of denial is about like trying to measure the total amount of radiation released by FUKU..


    Report comment

  • StPaulScout StPaulScout

    “Why aren’t the fish getting cleaner?” Is this guy for real? Did he just come out of a coma? At least he is aware of this, "Another is related to the continued leak at Fukushima". How can he know that and ask such a dumb question? I am getting the feeling that most 'experts' are dumber than mule shit….


    Report comment

    • What-About-The-Kids

      Or they are hand-selected stooges to help with the S.O.P: Deny, downplay and defend?

      Mr. Buessler, it is simple math: X amount of radiation + more radiation from leaking reactors and gvt.-led dumping of radioactive ash into Tokyo Bay = more contamination of fish, not less.

      /sarc

      Did anyone notice that Nathalie Wolchover, staff writer for Life's Little Mysteries, seems hand-picked as well to write articles that deny, downplay and defend?

      Take her Feb. 23, 2012 article: "Radiation in Rain is Natural":

      http://www.lifeslittlemysteries.com/2181-radioactive-rain-natural.html

      (snip):

      "Radioactive rain is not a new health threat or evidence of a cover-up by the nuclear industry, but rather is indicative of just how many naturally occurring radioactive particles there are in Earth's atmosphere."

      /snip

      W-A-T-K: Why should we continue to be amazed at the "seeming" (feigned?) ignorance of such "experts", after witnessing this same S.O.P. for the past 14 months? We know the score.

      But I still can't help feel offended and indignant that TPTB would purposefully continue to keep the public in the dark, especially when the fallout of Fuku will affect ALL of us for who knows how long…

      Shaking my head in disbelief, after 14 months and counting…


      Report comment

      • This report fails to mention naturally occuring plutonium raining down on american citizens…

        Citing the epa admission's that indeed It was released into the environment * yet cough * below levels of health concern…

        it depends on what theis definition of " level of concern ", is I'd suppose…

        I for one am concerned that the U.S. Gov. finds any of these dangerous isotopes an acceptable / non threating event towards american citizens…

        But who knows maybe the government will come around in the next 100 years. Being the plutonium will be here for centuries upon centuries to come…


        Report comment

        • What-About-The-Kids

          Ah, yes, the forbidden "P" word, Taco.

          Have you ever tried to find out what the levels of "P" are in Washington State or Oregon drinking water lately, Taco? Living in Seattle, I would love to know if there is anything there, wouldn't you?

          EPA's searchable online RADNET database shows they found small amounts in Seattle and Portland drinking water back in the 1980s, and the levels seemed to be slightly rising in the year after Chernobyl.

          However, RADNET only shows two test years for Seattle, and stopped all plutonium test results reporting in RADNET after 1988 (two years after Chernobyl), just after they reported a slight (tiny) increase in Seattle's drinking water that year.


          Report comment

          • What-About-The-Kids

            (continued from above):

            Here's what I found for both Plutonium-238 and Plutonium-239 below. My questions are: Why did they stop reporting data for plutonium in our drinking water after 1988? Where is the more current data? Surely they are continuing to test for Plutonium in our drinking water, especially post-Fuku?

            Plutonium-239:

            http://oaspub.epa.gov/enviro/erams_query_v2.simple_output?Llocation=EPA+Region&subloc=10&media=DRINKING+WATER&radi=Plutonium-239&Fromyear=1978&Toyear=2012&units=Traditional

            PORTLAND, OR DRINKING WATER 01-JUL-78 Plutonium Plutonium-239 0.032 — pCi/L
            PORTLAND, OR DRINKING WATER 01-JUL-79 Plutonium Plutonium-239 0.0178 — pCi/L
            PORTLAND, OR DRINKING WATER 01-JUL-80 Plutonium Plutonium-239 0.0068 — pCi/L
            PORTLAND, OR DRINKING WATER 01-JUL-88 PU-AUTO Plutonium-239 -0.0005 — pCi/L
            RICHLAND, WA DRINKING WATER 01-JUL-88 PU-AUTO Plutonium-239 0.0083 — pCi/L

            Note that they only show test results for Seattle for two years, 1985 and 1988 (skipping the two years immediate following Chernobyl, interestingly enough):

            SEATTLE, WA DRINKING WATER 01-JUL-85 PU-AUTO Plutonium-239 0.0026 — pCi/L
            SEATTLE, WA DRINKING WATER 01-JUL-88 PU-AUTO Plutonium-239 0.0043— pCi/L


            Report comment

            • What-About-The-Kids

              (continued)…

              Plutonium-238:

              http://oaspub.epa.gov/enviro/erams_query_v2.simple_output?Llocation=EPA+Region&subloc=10&media=DRINKING+WATER&radi=Plutonium-238&Fromyear=1978&Toyear=2012&units=Traditional

              Note that results for Portland went up slightly the year after Three Mile Island, and were not reported for two years immediately following Chernobyl), and at times, were a bit higher than levels in Richland's water, near Hanford:

              PORTLAND, OR DRINKING WATER 01-JUL-78 Plutonium Plutonium-238 0.048 — pCi/L
              PORTLAND, OR DRINKING WATER 01-JUL-79 Plutonium Plutonium-238 0.0048 — pCi/L
              PORTLAND, OR DRINKING WATER 01-JUL-80 Plutonium Plutonium-238 0.0153 — pCi/L
              PORTLAND, OR DRINKING WATER 01-JUL-88 PU-AUTO Plutonium-238 0.0097 — pCi/L
              RICHLAND, WA DRINKING WATER 01-JUL-88 PU-AUTO Plutonium-238 0.042 — pCi/L

              Again, they only show test results for Seattle for two years (skipping the years immediate following Chernobyl):

              SEATTLE, WA DRINKING WATER 01-JUL-85 PU-AUTO Plutonium-238 0.0136 — pCi/L
              SEATTLE, WA DRINKING WATER 01-JUL-88 PU-AUTO Plutonium-238 0.03 — pCi/L


              Report comment

      • strAtum5

        This lady, Natalie Wolchover, is clueless to say the least. Read this gem of hers from said article:

        "As it decays [about Radon, n.a.], transforming into less-radioactive elements, it emits alpha and beta radiation. Rain washes these particles down to the ground."

        Boy, I never knew that alpha and beta radiation stays in suspension in the air !!! And how on Earth are they then even measured by the Geiger counters ?!? :-) ))) Do they have to "rain on" the device to be captured ? So if there is no rain, then you cannot measure alpha and beta particles I guess. Or rather, in the absence of rain, do you have to wave the Geiger through the air to "hit" those hanging particles ?

        Such a sheer quantity of stupidity must be given an award !!!

        Then we read:

        "In particular, there is a large amount of uranium present in soil and rock, he [Ward Whicker, professor emeritus, n.a.] said."

        Hmmmm, last time I read about it, it wasn't that large at all …


        Report comment

        • I am unable to produce any data showing the levels of radioactivity in our area…

          So I mainly drink imported / east coast products… However I am concerned about the milk sources in my area… Its very likely that there is low to medium level contaminates in our produce…

          I am very happy to report that we haven't had anymore severe nose bleeds since may of 2011. But the cloud cover consistently shows a smog that is certainly consistent with each reactor episodes that we are able to view on the tepco camera… Its about a 2-5 day trip from japan to here so each time she smokes I often stay in doors and avoid the rain… We also have a very large supply of pre fukushima food and water in the house should there be an emergency that would require us to stay indoors for some time. However at this rate I assume I will be developing cancer in my life time due to this crisis… It is something I gather is unavoidable at this point with the bio accumulation and all…

          I assume things will get much worse in time… So, Theres not too much I can do but wait until the situation develops and counter the data with action…

          I will keep you all posted if any data suffices related to your query though;)


          Report comment

          • What-About-The-Kids

            Thanks, Tacoma. I read that sheltering in place is only so effective anyway…and as it is, the big dousing we got last year has already landed here, a gift that will no doubt keep on giving, in addition to new, ongoing releases coming our way…

            I asked Marco Kaltofen last year about what he thought were the biggest concerns and he said it was the "resuspension" of the initial radioactive fallout that fell/rained down upon us during the major plume that hit the West Coast and beyond.

            But as far as I know, he never acknowledged any ongoing emissions into the air (or water?) in his study of the fallout, so not sure what his stance would be on that at this point, so many months and TEPCO admissions (and emissions) later…

            Waiting to hear what Arnie will report on next, after the latest BlueFin Tuna findings. He initially thought it would be (I think I remember correctly?) 3 years before the fish on the West Coast would be affected to the point of no longer being safe to eat. Wonder if these findings have changed his mind?

            We're no longer eating seafood, sad to say. Never know where its from…and even if not from the Pacific, hard to say how safe any of it is…

            Hmm…wonder if some fast thinking entrepreneurs are farming fish in radiation-free, enclosed ponds somewhere, waiting to be THE first "Radiation Free!" fish on the market…? Then maybe, just maybe, we'd consider eating it again…after first double checking it with a Geiger Counter! ;-D LOL


            Report comment

            • What-About-The-Kids

              Just to clarify, I don't think Arnie meant ALL West Coast fish would be affected; I think he was specifically speaking of those fish who migrate from Japan to the PNW, and mentioned salmon and tuna specifically, I believe.

              But I don't want to misquote him or put words into his mouth, so I am hoping he may have an update on his thoughts about this. I realize he is not a biologist or oceanographer, but he likely has friends who are who might offer their advice on whether eating fish or other sea life caught in the Northern Pacific waters would still be safe to eat.


              Report comment

              • What-About-The-Kids

                That is, before the plume of radiation continuously being dumped into the waters of the Pacific off of Fukushima, that is heading towards us, arrives in our fishing zones here…

                At that point, then its all bets off. Farm fishing will be the only viable way to know one's fish is safe to eat…But then there's the humanitarian aspect of farm fishing to be concerned about. :-(


                Report comment

          • MoonlightEmpire MoonlightEmpire

            Hey Tacoma. I've been here since the beginning and value your participation on ENE. Thank you and to all the other regulars.

            I mostly post in the Rad monitoring forumn, but you made a comment about getting water from the east coast. I'm in New Jersey and have been using an Inspector+ Geiger for a few months now. I average .114 microSv/hour inside my home.

            Tonight I took a reading on the external surface of the intake vent on a dehumidifier in my basement. It levelled off at about 1.2 microSv/hour (which is almost 9 milliSv/year).

            If you're on the west coast, then maybe you're better off getting drinking water here, but my readings are showing that we have our own fair share of contamination.

            P.S. I am someone who wants to make a positive difference in this post-fukushima world. Should I report this filter reading to county officials? What can be done? How can I organize a true group of people who know what is going on and can make significant, measurable progress?

            I want us all here at ENE (and those who don't know) to succeed. I believe in our human potential.

            If there's anything I can offer, it's that we can all determine whether or not our houses are supplied with nuclear power, and if so, we can switch providers. If it catches on, we could have them shutting down their own plants–safely–in no time (and they will WANT to do it) because the money incentive will no longer be there.

            Thank you to you all who have contributed.


            Report comment

  • CB CB

    "Was the fallout of the Fukushima nuclear disaster worse than predicted"? What prediction? What is the reference?
    There is a distinct difference between natural, and unnatural radiation.
    The Kelp off the Western US coast is contaminated, why would one assume the Tuna needed to travel from Japan to get contaminated.


    Report comment

  • What-About-The-Kids

    Someone needs to educate Nathalie Wolchover, the article's author, on the dynamics of a half-life:

    "Scientists thought the fish would have purged radionuclides from their bodies by the time they reached the U.S. Pacific coast, but they contained a clear "fingerprint" of Fukushima, an isotope called cesium-134 that decays in just a few years."

    Actually, Nathalie, while it may "decay" somewhat in a few years, it only decays by one half its original radioactivity. Cesium-134 will then decay again by one half in four years, and by one half again in 6 years.

    A good rule of thumb is to multiply the half-life number (i.e. 2 years) by 10: So to correct Nathalie's error in her statement, cesium-134 would decay completely in 20 years, or so…not a "few."

    So if it is injested and gets embedded in cells and does not get excreted, it will continue to do its damage to surrounding cells for 20 years.

    Natalie forgot to mention that Cesium-137, with a half-life of 300 years, would continue to do damage for 300 years (or in the case of humans, for the rest of their lives…) Downplay, deny, defend…


    Report comment

    • HoTaters HoTaters

      2 WATK, yes, you're right about the half-life issue. It takes effectively 10 half life cycles to reduce the isotope level down to where it isn't of concern (or something like that). I'm not sure what the exact wording is that I've seen on discussion of half-life.

      We do know no safe levels of internal emitters, esp. alpha emitting particles, is safe.

      Thank you for your intelligent and well-reasoned comment.


      Report comment

      • HoTaters HoTaters

        That is, it's not safe if you accept the Linear No-Dose Threshold model of internal emitter exposure.


        Report comment

        • Morgan, W. (2003). Non-targeted and delayed effects of exposure to ionizing radiation. Radiation Research 159, 567-580.

          "The results indicate that a single alpha [symbol in article] particle can induce genomic damage in cells that were not irradiated.

          Since a cell cannot receive a lower dose of radiation during exposure to alpha particles than a single traversal, these data suggest that at very low radiation doses the genotoxic risk may be significantly underestimated" p. 573

          Majia here: I'll post more on this later but the research is showing that an alpha particle can produce enough genomic instability to break the double helix, even when cells are not directly hit by irradiation due to the bystander effect.

          This has significant implications for ingesting a single alpha particle in tuna or in the air or anywhere else.


          Report comment

          • What-About-The-Kids

            Thanks, Majia. I remember reading about that too.

            If most people knew the truth, that exposure to radiation, especially internal contamination, at ANY level, could be that "magic bullet" that initiates a disease process in one's body, they would stand up and demand that their nations end their reliance on nuclear energy and shut down the entire nuclear cycle, from uranium mining and transport, processing, fission, reprocessing, waste storage, etc, etc..

            Starting by shutting down all nuclear waste generating stations (NPPs) would be an excellent start. Looks like California may take the lead in that effort (they usually are the most progressive in terms of environmental issues, and others states follow suit shortly thereafter…)

            Hope this proves to be the case, sooner than later. There is NO time to waste! Our children and future generations (if we are to have the viable future generations after such genetic poisoning!) are counting on us!


            Report comment

          • Dr. Wellington Yueh

            Also, outright breakage is not necessary to cause problems. Tweaking a single atom out of joint changes the information conveyed by a gene. And then there's the mostly-unknown, newly discovered epigenetics that happen external to the genes themselves, that seem to be responsible for 'gene maintenance' operations.

            It's taken so long for evolution to produce such smart monkeys…and shattering to think we're going to be blasted back a couple million years, if we survive this.


            Report comment

            • What-About-The-Kids

              Thank you for your input on this, Dr. Yueh. Several of us here have been reading up on epigenetics. Fascinating!

              I asked a researcher recently about his work studying possible treatments for pediatric brain cancers. I asked what he thought might be possible causes. I don't think he has read much about epigenetics. He seemed pretty convinced pediatric brain tumors, because they are so rare, are simply anomalies, or "accidents" of "Nature."

              Any thoughts on this?

              P.S. I then briefly enlightened him on Fuku, which he had not been following since 3/11; and the fact that the PNW, where he does his research, received the highest levels of radioactive fallout from BOTH Fuku AND Chernobyl, of any other place in the U.S.

              I suggested he might consider this, and possible subsequent children's exposure to such radiation, as well as the fact that Hanford is the #1 most polluted EPA SuperFund site in the U.S., formerly home to the Manhattan Project, as one possible cause of pediatric brain cancers.

              He listened and smiled politely, but I was not sure if I helped make any new synaptic connections in his brain that day… ;-) But one can hope…


              Report comment

              • Dr. Wellington Yueh

                "Oh, I'm not a doctor!" – My pseudonym is, of course, a Dune reference. I'm just a programmer with a voracious reader's appetite.

                Not much more that I can say on the topic of epigenetics. I read several articles about it a while ago, and it's been a point of concern especially when reading about GM foods. Yeah, they have the genomes coded, but what about factors external to the actual genome? I keep thinking "What happens after you modify the genes? Does the epigenetics attempt to repair the 'damage' or maybe self-destruct?"

                Herbert (wrote Dune) is one of my fav authors, and he did considerable writing on genetics. 'The Eyes of Heisenberg' is particularly good on this topic, and on the topic of hubris of the elites.


                Report comment

      • What-About-The-Kids

        Thank you, HoTaters. :-)

        I did a quick search trying to find reports on the issue of biological half-lives vs. external, etc., and the fact that scientists are now discovering cesium in Chernobyl seeming to last longer than its assumed half-life…but instead, I found this article written about the Chernobyl disaster on its' 10 year anniversary:

        "Chernobyl: Half-Lives and Half-Truths":

        http://www.ratical.org/radiation/Chernobyl/Chernobyl@10p2.html

        As you'll see, there is an eerie similarity to the way things have gone post-Fukushima…It is as if the Japanese gvt. and nuke industry borrowed the "playbook" from the Russians (and the IAEA, WHO, etc, etc…), downplaying and obfuscating the total amount of radiation released, focusing only on the short half-life I-131 and ignoring the other dangerous radionuclides and actinides released, etc, etc…

        Here's what the author says about cesium, strontium and half-lives:

        "Cesium's Genetic Assault: the 300 Years War"

        "Cesium-137 contamination is probably Chernobyl's most devastating and ominous consequence. The body can't distinguish cesium from potassium, so it's taken up by our cells and becomes an internal source of radiation. Cesium-137 is a gamma emitter and its half-life of 30 years means that it stays in the soil, to concentrate in the food chain, for over 300 years. While iodine-131 remains radioactive for six weeks, cesium-137 stays in the body for decades, concentrating in muscle where it…


        Report comment

        • What-About-The-Kids

          (continued from above):

          "…cesium-137 stays in the body for decades, concentrating in muscle where it irradiates muscle cells and nearby organs.[16]

          "Strontium-90 is also long-lived and, because it resembles calcium, is permanently incorporated into bone tissue where it may lead to leukemia.

          "The Soviets acknowledged in 1986 that the influence of cesium-137 on cancer death rates would be nine times that of iodine-131. They said that the effects of strontium-90 would "perhaps have, along with cesium-137, the most important meaning."[17]

          "Early Findings Go from Bad to Worse"

          "Exposure to radiation more often results in genetic and reproductive damage than cancer. These hereditary disorders are unlimited in time, since they pass from generation to generation in the sperm and ovum. So, as geneticist Soyfer points out, Chernobyl's enduring biological legacy will be that of inherited diseases, deformities, developmental abnormalities, spontaneous abortions and premature births."


          Report comment

    • Atomicrod sez:

      "Nearly all of the people in the area around the Fukushima power station had been evacuated before any releases were allowed. No member of the public was exposed to any significant level of radiation." ~(wow)~

      and:

      " [...] the radiation dose rate delivered by the cesium in the tuna was 30 times less than the radiation dose rate from potassium 40 that is a natural part of the tuna and 200 times less than the radiation dose rate that comes from polonium-210 in normal tuna. Fortunately, Richard Harris from NPR read enough of the paper to carefully provide that information to his generally more thoughtful and curious audience."

      ~ an audience whose curiosity is generally more easily satisfied, rather.
      chemical, radiological – this ain't no "Aftermath"- this is Ever-Aftermath, anyhow.

      http://atomicinsights.com/2012/05/radioactive-tuna-versus-chemical-aftermath.html


      Report comment

  • doctorwhowhatwhere doctorwhowhatwhere

    I was going to give Dr. Buesseler some amount of a pass and say that since his specialty is marine chemistry he may be lacking in knowledge concerning radionuclides in the marine environment, but I looked at his profile first:

    "Upper-ocean biogeochemical cycles and POC export fluxes; studies of scavenging and particle cycling processes using anthropogenic and naturally occurring radionuclides; geochemical studies of the Black Sea using Chernobyl radio tracers; plutonium isotopes and the behavior of fallout Pu in seawater and groundwater; use of radium isotopes and other tracers of submarine groundwater discharge."

    So he has no excuse whatsoever for some amazingly thick-headed and obfuscatory comments… unless his excuse is that WHOI and MIT receive large amounts of grants funding from the Department of Energy (extremely pro-nuclear) and other pro-nuke organizations.


    Report comment

    • arclight arclight

      hi doctor
      if i remember correctly it was christmas that the funding applications were being made for research grants.. given the recession, the applicants had to tow the line.. imo

      if i remember correctly there was some issue about funding to collate data on an undersea dump site off alaska.. the funding had strings attached, as it always does..

      i think the scientists were worried about concussion blasting for sonar oil exploration/fracking, damaging the metal barrels

      the pressure was on the rest of the scientific community too! described in busby and bobs video quite nicely..

      the release of the info , like the gulf bhopal etc will be "guided" by big PR .. its a proven strategy that will unravel because the experimentation on the children of fukushima will not be allowed by the japanese people and hopefully more scientists and doctors will step forward, i hope .. i cant believe the international community is going to repeat of the chernobyl studies that the japanese have data for and are not sharing with imperial college london or anyone according to geraldine thomas anyway..)


      Report comment

      • doctorwhowhatwhere doctorwhowhatwhere

        Arc, that pretty much sums it up. And even when a scientist decides to break with the herd, the mainstream media tend to give him or her no forum from which to be heard. Or if they do cover the scientist's dissension they'll generally try to paint the scientist as a fringe quack.

        I don't have much love for Michio Kaku, but because of his popularity and name recognition among the public the media were unable to paint him as either fringe or a quack, so at least he put Fukushima on the front page and the nightly news.


        Report comment

    • What-About-The-Kids

      Ah, yes…Good find, DoctorWWW. Gotta love instant access to information, thanks to the Internet. ;-)


      Report comment

  • doctorwhowhatwhere doctorwhowhatwhere

    WATK, I was around long before the internet — these days it feels sinfully delicious to get information within a few clicks that a few decades ago would have taken phone calls and answering machine tag and trips to libraries. I've become an armchair academic ;-)


    Report comment

    • What-About-The-Kids

      Me too, DoctorWWW! For those of us who love learning, the Internet has been an incredible gift. :-)

      I jokingly say that by now, many of us here who have been following the Fuku Fiasco since 3/11 surely would qualify for some kind of certificate in "The Environmental and Health Hazards of Nuclear Radiation," with a minor in "Nuclear Physics 101, or: What Not to Do to the Planet". LOL :-D


      Report comment

      • doctorwhowhatwhere doctorwhowhatwhere

        WATK, since discovering this site a number of months ago I've watched the "information sophistication" levels here climb steadily, not only on the practical side of nuclear energy production but on the theoretical aspects of the physics behind it, as well. I've been impressed by you all. And one delight is that all of you are so focused on spreading the word about the dangers of nuclear energy production — many otherwise intelligent people still don't realize how bad Fukushima is, and it takes people like you, who do realize it and who are willing to keep posting everywhere possible and preaching to everyone possible for months on end, to let the world know why nuclear technology is fatally flawed and why we absolutely must not allow nuclear power plants to continue to exist.

        As far as I'm concerned, you do indeed qualify for your certificates, not only in the areas you mentioned but also in "How to Serve as Examples for Humanity."


        Report comment

        • Sam

          How about a nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize to
          ENENews

          for" spreading the word about the dangers of nuclear energy production — many otherwise intelligent people still don't realize how bad Fukushima is, and it takes people like you, who do realize it and who are willing to keep posting everywhere possible and preaching to everyone possible for months on end, to let the world know why nuclear technology is fatally flawed and why we absolutely must not allow nuclear power plants to continue to exist."
          doctorwhowhatwhere

          How can Obama deserve the prize when he told the American people there was no danger
          from Fukushima. and now he is overseeing and executing a kill list of "terrorists"


          Report comment

        • What-About-The-Kids

          Well, thank you, DoctorWWW. I agree, enenewsers have "heart" and really do care about helping try to make a difference and stop the nuclear insanity, each in her or his own way. It is inspiring to be a fellow witness and participant in their efforts. :-)

          I think if we didn't care (including even the most cynical and hardened sounding of the group), we wouldn't be here, continuing to share this information (no matter how difficult it is at times to report or read about…)

          I continue to hold out hope for our Humanity. I believe people are basically good, and if treated with respect, dignity and compassion, and not "dumbed down" by too much exposure to mind-numbing MSM inanity, they would choose to "do the right thing," if given the choice, which in this case is shutting down nuclear power plants and lending a helping hand to your neighbors and the innocent children of the world.

          We all have to "go" one day, one way or another. In the meantime, let us be kind to one another, as Tumrgrwer so nicely reminds us from time to time, and make whatever time we do have left on this Earth an enjoyable one, filled with love, and acts of kindness and compassion for our fellow human beings and the innocent animals.


          Report comment

  • trinityfly trinityfly

    If the shit was going to hit the fan: I think one way to tell would be to watch the Japanese stock exchange and possibly where "important people" were situated? Are they moving, and where are they going? Where are the what we would think "the people in the know" be moving to?? The worlds economy is just a charade with nothing be real. So when the rug gets pulled out, the governments would be afraid of widespread chaos, hence the U.S government beefing up home defense and widespread purchasing of ammunition. The elite can not afford for us to wake up on mass and panic. That is why they pump out all the lies and downplay everything. Just saying….


    Report comment

  • blackrain66

    “The fact that the level of contamination is not going down, that they have fish that are above legal limits, is of concern,”

    legal limits are of concern.

    that a 'legal limit' exists says it all

    happy uranium jubilee!


    Report comment

  • Max1 Max1

    When the kelp on the West Coast showed iodine and caesium…
    … The scientists should have known about bioaccumulation.

    "Shocked I tell you. To see gambling going on in this establishment."
    … It's either that or they're slackers.


    Report comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.