NBC: Up to 30 Bq/m3 of Fukushima cesium to hit U.S. and Canada — Contamination transported to coast for next 6 years — Concern about impact of strontium-90 (VIDEO)

Published: September 2nd, 2013 at 2:44 pm ET
By

58 comments


Title: Fukushima’s radioactive ocean plume due to reach US waters in 2014
Source: NBC News
Author: Jeremy Hsu, LiveScience
Date: Aug 31, 2013

[…] The team [at the University of New South Wales in Australia] focused on predicting the path of the radioactivity until it reached the continental shelf waters stretching from the U.S. coastline to about 180 miles (300 kilometers) offshore. About 10 to 30 becquerels (units of radioactivity representing decay per second) per cubic meter of cesium-137 could reach U.S. and Canadian coastal waters north of Oregon between 2014 and 2020. (Such levels are far below the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s limits for drinking water.)

By comparison, California’s coast may receive just 10 to 20 becquerels per cubic meter from 2016 to 2025. That slower, lesser impact comes from Pacific currents taking part of the radioactive plume down below the ocean surface on a slower journey toward the Californian coast […]

See also: [intlink id=”upi-fukushima-plume-to-hit-u-s-shores-early-next-year-will-see-measurable-increase-in-radioactive-material-study-prolonged-exposure-for-californian-coast-to-last-10-years-contamination-to” type=”post”]{{empty}}[/intlink]

Watch The Weather Channel’s video on the predicted impact and concern over strontium-90

Published: September 2nd, 2013 at 2:44 pm ET
By

58 comments

Related Posts

  1. Physicians: ‘Interesting fact’ for West Coast in new UN report, 95% of Fukushima discharges transported in Pacific; Contamination to impact N. America with ‘uncertain consequences’ for public health — Chemist: Concern over recent releases, “They’re changing in character” (VIDEO) October 26, 2013
  2. TV: Officials near San Francisco to monitor Fukushima plume, concerns for environment and food supply — Supervisor: The risks to Californians are concerning — Commissioner: We can’t rely on Japan or Tepco — Will waves of cesium and strontium pollute coast? (VIDEO) December 6, 2013
  3. Radio: I’m afraid impact of Fukushima contamination on west coast of N. America will be downplayed, it could impact so much — Professor: This is a concern (AUDIO) September 20, 2013
  4. Gundersen: Radioactive plume to impact West Coast in a year — Not going away after it hits… likely to only get stronger — Fukushima will keep releasing contamination for years to come — Must demand officials test fish and make data public (AUDIO) August 27, 2013
  5. CBC: Gov’t scientists are now detecting Fukushima’s radioactive plume offshore of Canada — Professor: It’s headed to our coast, I think monitoring rainfall over next couple years is prudent (AUDIO) November 27, 2013

58 comments to NBC: Up to 30 Bq/m3 of Fukushima cesium to hit U.S. and Canada — Contamination transported to coast for next 6 years — Concern about impact of strontium-90 (VIDEO)

  • newsblackoutUSA newsblackoutUSA

    The Weather Channel video cannot be accessed; but I just want to say I have studied all the current modeling presented by the scientific communities (mostly European), and they are based on the flawed assumption radioactive releases stopped in 2011, therefore 2 more years of all the nasty goodies coming out of Fukushima Daiichi need to be addressed.

  • Mats

    After Tschernobyl the ground in Bavaria reached averaged 20.000 Bc/m², up to 173.000 Bc/m².

    It´s still there.

    Now there are averaged 15.000 Bc/m².

    Abstract

    Spatial and temporal trends of birth defects and perinatal mortality in Germany and Europe and in least and most contaminated regions have been investigated. In numerous data sets, especially from northern and eastern Europe, positive and significant trend disturbances in temporal association with the Chernobyl accident and in spatial association with regional fallout have been found. A surprisingly consistent picture evolves of significantly escalated stillbirth rates after Chernobyl of ca. 5% in Poland, ca. 10% in parts of Germany and Sweden, ca. 20% in Denmark and Finland, and up to ca. 30% in Iceland and Hungary. Lower and higher contaminated regions show weaker or stronger effects, respectively. The additional relative risks for birth defects are in the same order of magnitude than are the additional relative risks for stillbirth, namely 0.5%-2.0%/kBq*m^2. Using well-known conversion coefficients, the excess relative risk of 1%/kBq*m^2 translates theoretically to a preliminary relative risk of 1.6/mSv*a. The incidence of thyroid carcinoma among children affected by Chernobyl fallout has partly increased dramatically. Less evidence exists for a similar effect among adolescents and adults. The cancer registry of the Czech Republic provides an opportunity to study various determinants of the occurrence of…

  • nuckelchen nuckelchen

    @ newsblackoutusa: you point it perfect!!!

  • jec jec

    Reading this article, says 25% of the 'released' material can leave the ocean gyre (big circular N. Pacific current) and travel to W. Coast America. Now –if its PBQ – over a trillion bq –in the materials..that is HUGE. What values did the researchers plug into their models? Current info or the lies from TEPCO up to today? Garbage in Garbage out.

    Remember the Italian scientists sentenced to jail for being "experts" on earthquakes? People believed their 'no immediate danger' comments/reports/media announcements–did not relocate following tremors. Later, the scientist were charged and sent to jail for six yrs. Did they serve time,have no idea, BUT giving expert and legal scientific advice has consequence–you too can get a backlash…

    Do any of the authors of the above mentioned article want to be held responsible for their statements of scientific fact? If their figures of ,for example, 10-20 BQ ARE not correct..if increase is 100-2000 BQ of radiation in the water, if the bioaccumulation raised the levels(gee..was that even mentioned??).. Can someone file legal action against their company or institution for malpractice?

    And saying "under USA EPA safety limits", safety limits that are being continually raised to keep everyone quiet, is wrong as well. There are problems with programs who try and protect the current establishment or government! Don't raise safety limits just to keep people happy and quiet. YOU PROTECT THEM..tell them the truth

  • Jebus Jebus

    (Such levels are far below the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s limits for drinking water.)

    EPA Relaxes Public Health Guidelines For Radiological Attacks, Accidents

    " For example, the new EPA guide refers to International Atomic Energy Agency guidelines that suggest intervention is not necessary until drinking water is contaminated with radioactive iodine 131 at a concentration of 81,000 picocuries per liter. This is 27,000 times less stringent than the EPA rule of 3 picocuries per liter.

    “This is public health policy only Dr. Strangelove could embrace,” Jeff Ruch, executive director for the watchdog group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, said in a statement Monday, referring to Peter Sellers’ character in the Stanley Kubrick film of the same name. "

    http://www.nextgov.com/health/2013/04/epa-relaxes-public-health-guidelines-radiological-attacks-accidents/62381/?oref=ng-dropdown

    It used to be 3 picocuries per liter.

    Do you want your drinking water standards re evaluated by an agency who suggests their assumptions are true?

    • yogda yogda

      That was a great movie.

      81.000 picocuries per L = death.

    • raddog

      The proposed protective action guideline for water is for temporary drinking during emergencies, not a replacement for long term standards.

      The assumption is that the water will only be drunk for a few days following a release at that level, so total exposure will be limited. I131 has a half life of only 8 days, so that is a pretty good assumption.

      • Jebus Jebus

        It is a terrible assumption that the focus is only on I131.

        What about the other 2000+ radionuclides and noble gasses?

        It is criminal to impose any increased levels of risk upon the general population.

        Assumptions and probabilities are what have placed the planet in the peril that it is in right now.

        If you can not work towards lowering the level of risk, then the source of the potential risk must be eliminated or replaced with an alternative, no matter the cost.

        There is no safe level of ingested radionuclide or noble gas exposure, period.

  • UncleCrusty

    Spinspinspinspin….Till the sheep are dizzy and compliant. I read the Article. About 80% crap. I informed the author of this as well. It's old news to the ENEnews folks.

  • jec jec

    IF you use the ocean for making drinking water..you know..the Reverse Osmosis systems with filters is this of danger? Does the cesium or other XXX nuclear products get into your drinking water that way? Will it be filtered out? And if so..what does it do to the filter membranes? Can they become super contaiminated as they can pump hundreds or thousands of gallons a day. For example, we do 700 gallons a day in our RO system–or can. I ask, because most drinking water on many offshore vessels in the Pacific use RO systems–so any experts here with warnings? Suggestions? The others, capture rain water to drink offshore….is this safer?

    • Sickputer

      Jec: (what filtering seawater into fresh water?)

      SP: Nuclear aircraft carriers use RO from ocean water because they need lots of freshwater to cool their reactor. That converted water is also their drinking water for 4500 service personnel.

      So guess what happened off Fukushima coast in March 2011? The water was contaminated and filtering it did not remove the worst radiation.

      "At one point, the carrier's commanding officer announced that there was some radiation in the ship's drinking water supply, and "I know everybody went down to the vending machines to grab (a) bottle of water," Duke said."

      What a feel good piece from the navy:
      http://www.navytimes.com/article/20110325/NEWS/103250303/Reagan-crew-limits-contamination-on-carrier

      SP: Any bets on who had first dibbs on the last bottles of uncontaminated drinking water?

    • HoTaters HoTaters

      Hi jec,

      There was a lot of discussion in the Forum about water purification in the first several months after 3/11. If I remember correctly, there was a lot of discussion between August, 2011, and November, 2011. You might want to have a look at the archived comments. Some of the users had links to peer reviewed research articles, and other good researched materials.

      If you don't find what you're looking for, e-mail me here, and I'll send you a document with links to all the comments and research articles.

      HoTaters@hush.com

  • Jebus Jebus

    Now the potential issue of seriously contaminating the Pacific West Coast is real.

    Everything that mother natures washing machine spits out upon the shores.

    Every sand dollar will have some level of contamination…

    • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

      Seems like I am hearing some banter/fear about an underground explosion potential and/or even volcanic like responses from our now missing cores.

      If anything blows up under this plant complex wouldn't the initial blast/spark have the potential to expand exponentially with all those hundreds of storage tanks sitting right over these errant nuclear mad as hell cores?

      Sounds like that is probably why we should not be storing all this nuclear material in the same square mile of earth..

      • truthseek truthseek

        Hey OBE, That is what I what sort of touching on… liberation or greater detonation of materials on site. I think that the shock wave of such a scale would have the "force" to tip the scale, but certainly liberate or disperse :-/ the ridiculous volumes stored locally.

  • moonshellblue moonshellblue

    The levels spike every couple of days thus how can you get an accurate reading or indication as to the extent of contamination. When they say the limits are well below US standards that does not give me a warm fuzzy feeling as the EPA has spiked the allowable limits like cesium at 1200 vs Japan at 100.

    • We Not They Finally

      Exactly so, moonshellblue. And we need to keep putting that out there. In some respects, the U.S. food supply is LESS protected than the Japanese. And the raising of "acceptable" limits by the EPA is both shameful and dangerous.

      People will die because of what they've done. But we can all use some common sense precautions, like no West Coast fish period.

  • TheBigPicture TheBigPicture

    Based on Chris Busby's findings, (proven data not speculation), the west coast of U.S. and Canada is not a place I'd want to be.

  • mairs mairs

    Does anyone take into account the scattered fuel from the explosion of unit 3? If it was found kilometers away on the land side, surely it fell into the ocean as well and is continually polluting the ocean.

    • We Not They Finally

      Yes, AND… we're saturated with plutonium anyway from what exploded in the air into the atmosphere. There is an excellent article on agreenroad blog that that sent THREE THOUSAND BILLION lethal doses spinning around the Earth.

  • weeman

    Only speculation and best estimate from current data available, to be updated as new data becomes available, year after year or untill we are unable to retrieve data.

  • Heart of the Rose Heart of the Rose

    What is the impetus for the cesium contamination to stop after six years?

    • We Not They Finally

      The way it's going, there is no impetus for ANY radionuclide to stop. More fissioning, more radioactivity. And many radionuclides they are finding there now as we speak, like I-131, are the product of new fissioning, not what happened 2-1/2 years ago.

  • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

    There is None!

  • We could just sample the oceanic front in America

  • The Man Who Saved the World From Global Nuclear War (MAD): Free Full Movie via @AGreenRoad
    http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-man-who-saved-world-from-global.html

    Are they getting us ready for nuclear war?

    By threatening the Russians with nuclear missiles on their borders, we are repeating what almost got us into World War III back in 1962.

    • We Not They Finally

      What's scariest about that question ("Are they getting us ready for nuclear war?") is that we already know what is escalating and it's horrifying and seems to be unstoppable. And it seems common for governments to knee-jerk and do diversions when the likes of this happens. Or to keep scapegoats in reserve.

  • mairs mairs

    Posted elsewhere on a Fukushima thread:

    "We California health professionals are already seeing a thyroid crisis that has upped its game since the fall of Fukushima. We are seeing it in children and teens and everybody else. If anyone thinks the West coast is a safe haven, think again."

  • We Not They Finally

    I don't think that cesium estimates that low will turn out to have any basis in reality. So no, I'm not reassured.

  • Sol Man

    Predictions and assurances by Phd.'s or any of the alphabet agencies of the government offer no sound basis for anything.
    Those are the things that have delivered all to the unfortunate position that we collectively find ourselves in right now.
    A basis in WHAT reality?!

  • Sol Man

    The reality of genome rearrangement across all of creations beings?
    Or, that of the fact that miniscule particles land on the tissues of the sinus, esophagus lungs, GI tract, with each breath or drink?!

    The reality is that we are all vulnerable as the winds and rains deliver their charge to all.

  • Johnny Blade Johnny Blade

    Hello ENEwser's; I've only got a few minutes online before I have to go back and administer the liquid Morphine & Ativan to the members of my household already in hospice for their cancers while my own grows closer to putting me in bed with a effin' diaper on 🙁 …. So I'll make my quick entry & exit by putting it simply that;"They're FULL OF SHIT!! not PLAIN shit,but radioactive shit spewing from the a-hole(s) mounted on their shoulders & between their ears aka "TPTB's Cesium-encrusted talking bungholes"!!! THANKS GE,TEPCO & the military/industrial complex!-for making my life a bowl of (Fukushima)cherries! 🙁 TAKE CARE HoTaters & the enewser group,I hope this post finds all of you doing better than I am lately! Over & Out

    • norbu norbu

      Johnny Blade, Hello I am sorry for you and your family and the world. I will pray for your well being. Are you in California? Stay strong and keep a positive vibe.
      Peace
      N

  • mopar69 mopar69

    Why measure the concentration in m^2 instead of m^3 as is usually used for determining concentration within a specified volume? Just curious but using m^2 gives a much lower number obviously. 30 m^2 is 164 m^3. If the head line used m^3, it may be perceived as more frightening to those unfamiliar with said units of measure. Just a thought.

  • What's really going on at Fukushima? Thousands of cars, trucks, buses, what are they working on. Trucks and trains all day and night removing radioactive waste, from where?…to where?….

    Recent Report by Yoichi Shimatsu…Radio Interview Aug 26th

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1an7TQKDmL4

    Transcript http://wyynd.tripod.com/Shimatsu.txt

    Secret Facilities, Thousands Dead…