NHK: There was a melt-through so Fukushima fuel is definitely down with the groundwater, and that’s flowing into Pacific — Americans need to watch, it gets international very quickly — May already be at West Coast — No ‘immediate’ risk (VIDEO)

Published: August 29th, 2013 at 8:22 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
122 comments


Deutsche Welle, Aug. 28, 2013: No immediate risk for humans [...]  “Fish that migrate to less affected waters will gradually lose much of their Fukushima-derived cesium,” [Buesseler] said, adding that there was no immediate risk for humans eating fish from outside the contaminated areas off the Japanese coast. [...] However, scientists remain concerned about the contamination of marine life in the long run. Both Buesseler and M. V. Ramana, a scientist and researcher at the Nuclear Futures Laboratory, Princeton University, warn that while some of the radioactive materials leaked will mix with the ocean water and become diluted, others, like Strontium-90 will get bound up in ocean sediments or accumulate in living creatures at concentrations greater than the surrounding water.

Studying Water off Fukushima (NHK), May 24, 2013 - Ken Buesseler, Wood Hole Oceanographic Institute: That area at the site has been contaminated from the cooling water used to keep the reactors cool during the disaster, and even today. Some of that water certainly is leaking back out to the ocean. These buildings have cracks. There was a melt-through, so there is definitely a contact of the radioactive materials with the groundwater. That groundwater flows into the ocean. I don’t think there is a question there. Those waters move, in about 2 years, from Japan’s coast to the US west coast. So there are questions and we need to be involved as Americans on our side of the Pacific, looking across at what’s happening on this side. So it becomes international very quickly. I think every ocean question almost by nature is international because the waters move across the boundaries, they don’t care whose water they are. So I think we need to be involved [...]

Watch NHK’s broadcast here

Published: August 29th, 2013 at 8:22 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
122 comments

Related Posts

  1. Experts: Fukushima plume headed to West Coast isn’t just going to pass by like smoke, plant continues to spew into ocean; Pacific to be full of contamination, it’s a gigantic experiment — Host: Amazing how many people are in denial (VIDEO) November 15, 2013
  2. TV: Most shocking thing is how US gov’t was “very concerned” about Fukushima radiation hitting West Coast and affecting Americans — Public told that everything fine (VIDEO) February 26, 2014
  3. TV: After seeing that map with massive amount of nuclear waste headed to West Coast… There’s going to be impacts — Reporter: And radioactive water still hasn’t stopped flowing from Fukushima into Pacific (VIDEO) January 27, 2014
  4. 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
  5. Gundersen: Ocean already contaminated from deluge of Fukushima toxic water — Will stop eating fish from west coast — Cesium at 1,000% normal levels in middle of Pacific August 23, 2013

122 comments to NHK: There was a melt-through so Fukushima fuel is definitely down with the groundwater, and that’s flowing into Pacific — Americans need to watch, it gets international very quickly — May already be at West Coast — No ‘immediate’ risk (VIDEO)

  • TheBigPicture TheBigPicture

    Oceans are all connected. And radiation is pouring into them. No one is fixing the problem. All governments that use nuclear technology are responsible.


    Report comment

    • Every human with an IQ over 60 who does not fight against nuclear is responsible for the future.


      Report comment

      • newsblackoutUSA newsblackoutUSA

        Yes, Stock…and we will have the blood of future humanity on our hands.

        Check this video about radiation in Hawaii….all the people are being exposed. The army is burning DU ammo and radiating everyone.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKdi52awdk

        We have to realize that the US government is not a benevolent entity in the world, and the maniacs are going to kill all of us. We have several fronts we have to confront, Nukes as energy, and the military.


        Report comment

        • I have moved out of Hawaii to a nice "Bug In" house with water resources, RO, and defensible.


          Report comment

        • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

          military; trained to kill, thats what we do, thats our job.

          CS; "what er them bombs you got there fer Joe?"
          Joe; "were a global force..for good, SIR"
          CS; "well what do you USE em fer?"
          Joe; "blowing personnel and stuff all to hell …basically. Same as my rifle only a hell of a lot more people get FUBAR in a instant. Its like this; if you dont go to other countries and blow them off the map, you can never have peace"
          CS; "good boy, Joe! Fightin for our freedom. Say you should consider a future in politics son, you got the right stuff"


          Report comment

  • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

    hmmm…"Nuclear Futures Laboratory". Now, there's an oxymoron if there ever was…


    Report comment

  • hbjon hbjon

    Everything advanced society has worked towards has been to improve technology and the lives of citizens. Problems have faced us and we were always up to the challenge. Put a man on the moon, harnessed the atom (sorta), and allow machines to do the physical work for us. Greenhouse gases and fossil fuel pollution was a serious problem that was addressed. The most logical course of action was to expand nuclear and downplay all the associated dangers. The dangers were never fully appreciated by most. The select few that new were discredited and captured by globalist financial interests that needed the economic expansion that nuclear promised.
    This is a really big deal here and if alternative power is insufficient we will need to change our energy consuming ways. Industry, manufacturing, transportation, warehousing, education, and all day to day activities will be drastically curtailed.
    There is no solution to this situation we've found ourselves in. Every NPP can be shut down today and the irradiated and enriched releases into the environment will continue unabated.
    The must use the nuclear energy as a stepping stone to the next power infrastructure which must be wind and solar. This must be done for our children, grandchildren, and the future survival of humanity.


    Report comment

    • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

      excellent thoughts hbjon…


      Report comment

    • We Not They Finally

      hbjon, you think that THAT'S why nuclear energy was expanded?? Good God! It has always been the handmaiden of the DEFENSE industry. It started mushrooming (pun probably intended…) during The Cold War. There was never ANY honest intent to provide cheap energy or clean energy!! If there were, then how come it is ONLY the feds who will ensure the NPP's?

      So no, nuclear power is NOT a stepping stone to other things. It never belonged in the mix of electric power at all!!

      And "the dangers were never fully appreciated by most"? That's crazy-talk. Every time there was a danger, it was covered up!! Like did you know that THE worst nuclear disaster in the U.S. was in 1959 at the Santa Susana Labs in Southern Cal? It's "hot" to this day!

      So I do NOT think that these are "excellent thoughts." I think they need to be re-worked into reality. The reality is that we've been LIED to for 70 years, so governments could produce bombs. Whereas the sunshine and wind have ALWAYS been there.

      Why are you apologizing for ANYTHING this industry has done? There was NEVER any honest intent. I think you are in serious denial about that whole industry!!


      Report comment

      • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

        excellent thoughts we-not-they

        Who was right about nuclear? Us, not them. …I mean Us were right, Them werent. ….oh dang….WE were not wrong, THEY were wrong…FINALLY! …Hey; We Not They, Finally, its perfect grammar! Well the time has come for we to prevail, and time is running out for they. I mean…them pronukers


        Report comment

      • hbjon hbjon

        WNTF. I will not and cannot rework my posts to fit into your preconceived belief of reality. Your right about my defense industry expanding nuclear, just like it had expanded the internet. I grew up in southern Ca. I'm aware of the flatsville computer program that was early internet. My military uses a lot of technology that was conceived in the minds of Americans. It's a safe statement to say that the dangers were never fully appreciated by most, because most people don't even understand the basic nature of the atom to this day(the source of nuclear power). I get it that machines that produce plutonium also produce a lot of heat and waste. But when there are enough bombs to vaporize the earth many times over, it's no longer politically favorable to have military control the machines. The utilities control and run them, the government insures and protects them. Honest intent? Interesting. Profit motive is a better term imho.


        Report comment

      • HoTaters HoTaters

        We Not They,

        You mean insure, right? Not ensure.

        The govt. is the only entity that will insure the nuclear industry ….


        Report comment

    • VanneV anne

      No one HAS TO use nuclear energy. There are plenty of countries that don't use nuclear energy. Their combined GDP is larger now than the GDP of those countries that use nuclear energy.


      Report comment

    • RichardPerry

      Many agree, keep up the fight.
      Can you in lighten us on this probability.
      Russia spent huge amount of money on Cher.. breaking up the country, USA is only country with enough money to solve 3/11, will it be to much for them. The USA may end up bankrupted by the time they finish or give up. This 3/11 cost financially and health wise is going to be very very high and its effects will go on for centuries. Has anyone figured out the saturation point of the pacific if the radiated water can not be stooped and how long till it does?
      When or if fuel sinks into the earth there will be great pressure on the fuel, what effect will this have, will it go critical and blow up or will it keep increasing the amount of radiation as it goes deeper or some thing else? There must be some thing bad or Russia would have let the fuel sink into the earth.


      Report comment

  • weeman

    You can build what ever dam you want, but untill you have control of water input, the dam will overflow, get it.
    It is like negative air pressure if you suck it out then contamination can not escape, that is what we have to achieve, how I don't know but we can figure it out, it is that simple, ha., block the ground water or pump and filter, your choice.
    If it is china syndrome don't even bother.


    Report comment

    • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

      I'm working on a system weeman, which does what you're pointing out. Problem is, it won't be cheap to implement…


      Report comment

    • m a x l i

      Yes, you are quite correct, weeman. Water input equals water output, no matter how big or high a dam you build, it will overflow or circumflow. I never understood what the point of that seaside wall was.

      Some days I have a feeling, TEPCO has been following the last line of your advice from day one.


      Report comment

    • Tumrgrwer Tumrgrwer

      You think if the control of water is what they are after then move upstream, build an aqueduct to move water around the plant before the water gets on the grounds. Building a dam with chems or other materials will never work. I'm not sure anything can work at this time but if they move up the hill above the reactors and stop the water from flowing to the plant then maybe they can make some headway.

      No More Nukes, never.


      Report comment

  • There is no immediate risk. The Titanic has struck an iceberg, but no one has been killed or injured. Please relax in a deck chair and enjoy the music. There is no immediate risk.


    Report comment

  • Mack Mack

    If I read it right, there was an NRC FOIA document that said something like a melt-thru would melt-thru at about 2 inches a minute. I did a rough calculation at 2 inches a minute, and figured the corium would be about 2/3 of a mile downward by now. That's IF it went straight down, of course.

    This is just trivia on my part; not scientific conclusion.


    Report comment

  • wetpwcas1 wetpwcas1

    No Crap! The wind blows filling the morning air with sweet radiation from shore to shore! The more you inhale the faster you die! There will be no more Good Morning America, It will be, Oh, Shit!


    Report comment

  • moonshellblue moonshellblue

    Always dilution didn't they prove that back in the fifties that radiation does not dilute. I just watched a documentary about nuclear ocean dumping in the English Channel and Irish Sea and it does not dilute.


    Report comment

    • 21stCentury 21stCentury

      if it does not dilute, then how did 4.5billion tons of uranium get dissolved into seawater by Mother Nature ??
      ..silly humans think it will automatically dilute in the ocean if you dump insoluble toxic radwaste actinide compounds.

      http://web.ornl.gov/info/press_releases/get_press_release.cfm?ReleaseNumber=mr20120821-00

      uranium munching bacteria need to convert the crap into natural biological uranium before it belongs in the seawater


      Report comment

      • 21stCentury 21stCentury

        there's a lot more natural uranium in the bottom of than Japan Trench than the 2200 tons of toxic crap sitting on the beach at Fukushima…
        ..no, I do NOT recommend ocean dumping.

        But, deep ocean engineered storage can be much better than Yucca style tunnels in a desert mountain.


        Report comment

        • 21stCentury 21stCentury

          Spend a few hours zooming around the planet using google-earth on a zippy computer and you will initially conclude that overpopulation is the cause of ocean deadzones..
          ..but upon reflection I think it's not overpopulation, it overpoopulation…
          …people are too full of shit.

          If people lived more efficiently they would be a lot more invisible on the googearth mapper… with less deadzones in their wake.

          science&balance makes for good ecology


          Report comment

          • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

            Im with you 21C…too many people, not enough tigers. Not like the good old days when there were lots of whales, sharks and elephants. Now its moronic egocentrist man, the dangerous one. We're waiting for big pharma to reduce the population and extremophiles to remedy the rad waste.


            Report comment

          • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

            Pretty sure our rivers are now considered sewage lines but at least they are all not on fire yet! :)

            Every fish I pulled out of Lake Erie had a tumor on it and that was over 30 years ago..

            The largest fresh water "dead zone" is now located in Lake Erie..gee I wonder why?

            Progress has many choices..


            Report comment

      • hbjon hbjon

        Did you know that some uranium undergoes spontaneous fission? Some uranium decays with a very long halflife. One atom of uranium by itself without others around shooting at it with alpha particles, will not undergo spontaneous fission. Larger chunks that have been enriched and irradiated will behave differently. They're much less stable. Ultimately,(you and I won't be around to see it) it will dissolve into the ocean with all its daughter products. What do we want? The uranium to decay or fission? Both are bad from an environmental point of view. A fissioning core will produce the heat of 2000 tons of coal and is only one gram lighter afterwards. It is difficult to dilute enough of a substance into that to make it safe.


        Report comment

        • 21stCentury 21stCentury

          ** It is difficult to dilute enough of a substance into that to make it safe.**

          It's equally difficult to extract that same amount of uranium from seawater..
          ..but what many don't know is some of Japan's uranium inventory was extracted from seawater, produced domestically and not imported from canada or australia.

          A tiny concentration of uranium is found in surface water, much more natural uranium is found in deep trench water and sediments.

          Sealife has evolved to minimize bioaccumulation of actinides bound up in a certain particular catalog of proteins and biominerals. Nature has found a balance with actinides in this way.

          Certain types of bacteria can be very useful in radwaste processing.
          Many of these types of bacteria work best under extreme pressures in hostile environments, like 20,000' deep in ocean bottoms or deep underground..

          Many people are unaware of the enormous size of the global living biomass that lives deep in rock.
          The taxonomy of this rock'n bacteria is really out of this world.


          Report comment

    • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

      even if dilution came into play moonshellblue, bio-accumulation is the real long-term threat to all lifeforms…


      Report comment

    • hbjon hbjon

      Of course it dilutes. The question is if it dilutes to a point that allows for living things to function normally or at all. Cold air dilutes with hot air. Throw a bucket of ice on the Yosemite fire and it dilutes into the heat. Did it make a difference? Radioactive waste consume clean things that are diluted into it. A little goes too long of a way. That is why it makes for a good energy source. Almost unlimited because of the small fraction of mass that is lost when creating all that heat. Where's my pills again.(bump).


      Report comment

    • Jebus

      Uranium is a mineral, all minerals have the ability to be dissolved into seawater.

      But, the unstable isotopes of uranium (fissile type) are being mistaken(?) for natural uranium, of which the unstable shit is miniscule compared to the stable parts.

      The Ocean is not the answer for the manmade processed unstable elements that are proposed.

      If one allows onself to be played through ignorance, who's fault is that?


      Report comment

      • 21stCentury 21stCentury

        yup, I don't disagree…
        there is a natural balance of isotopes in seawater which are bound to a specific catalog of biogens, these are the seawater 1st stage extraction ores before it gets processed further into yellowcake… and then we are stuck with the manmade fissile bred isotopes found in reactors.

        Many (but not all) manmade fissile bred isotopes show the same biochemical properties as the natural ones, so these ones can be reblended & returned.. the problematic exceptions are the isotopes hiding in the woodpile we need to further classify into candidates for vitrification and candidates for transmutation in MSR's.

        For Fukushima this depends on our ability to utilize the uranium mining industry's advanced tech for re-concentrating the contaminated runoff.

        http://web.ornl.gov/info/press_releases/get_press_release.cfm?ReleaseNumber=mr20120821-00

        http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2013/01/23/fracking-for-uranium/

        Instead of crushing our existing uranium mining industry, we need to re-train them for cleaning up this godawful mess.

        After all the radwaste is properly repackaged then we can put it all back where it originally came from, the bottom of the oceans..
        ..the land deposits of uranium were originally ocean bottom too.
        –or shove it back to the earth's core which is a big MSR thorium reactor.


        Report comment

    • nedlifromvermont

      Radiation dilutes in seawater, but biological systems reconcentrate it on the order of 600 to 1,000 times, every step up the foodchain … so from phytoplankton to zooplankton up 100,000 per cent. From zooplankton to small fishes, up another 1,000 times in concentration. From small fish to bigger fish, concentration rises 600 to 1,000 times. Now at the top of the foodchain, bigger fish to dolphins, sea bass, tuna and swordfish, up another 500 to 1,000 times … and pretty soon you have a "hot" product on your plate and it is unsafe to eat …

      All thanks (for this) be to GE …


      Report comment

  • 21stCentury 21stCentury

    Scientifically speaking, it's difficult to conclude comparisons within a broad concept of ocean actinide dilution without including thousands of core samples of ocean benthic deep bottom sediments..

    After a few years of experience with deep oceanography, I have already forgotten more than I learned..
    ..but I'll bet my oysterbed on the feasibility of proper ocean rad-storage.

    [in 1979 I spent a thousand hours assisting the design & development of a robotic core drill for operating at 12,000' deep... we discovered a really really huge silver deposit, and there was some uranium there too]

    …only a freakin idiot would spew it into the ocean without proper processing first.

    It helps to fully understand the expansive biochemistry in the ocean environment


    Report comment

    • hbjon hbjon

      People need to stop mining and drilling into rocks and earth. We have reached the saturation point for toxins in our environment. For what? Look I found a shiny rock I can trade for some fancy paper. We need to embrace the steady state universe before we expand ourselves into extinction. hbjon


      Report comment

  • Don't they love that phrase no immediate risk? But they won't say no risk for then they would be lying. Misinforming is as far as the experts will go. On the surface no immediate risk sounds comforting except doesn't no immediate risk imply impending doom? The NHK video was produced in May. The spectacle of the learned scientist sitting in a ship off the coast of the triple melt through site saying it is puzzling and a mystery why fish are testing with elevated radiation levels. Big mystery eh? Its a mystery to me how educated people sound so dumb. As soon as I hear the word expert my eyes start to roll. All politically correct and over cautious wearing hard hats and life preservers on an ocean going ship. Whats that all about? The radiation is bio accumulating and the experts really haven't a clue so how can they say everything is safe? They admit its a big puzzle and they will need to study the situation for years but please do eat the fish there is no risk. Listen to us we are the experts.


    Report comment

  • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

    There is a word used in this report that sums up the real problem we all have, and this very key word being used is sequestered. Unless you want to return to 6.5 billion years ago…
    http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Nuclear-Fuel-Cycle/Uranium-Resources/The-Cosmic-Origins-of-Uranium/


    Report comment

  • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

    Dilution? Before it gets diluted, sequestered, or eaten by microbes and turned into healthy microbe poop soup, animals of all kinds around the world will be ingesting and suffering. Lets take, just for example, Dr Scampas estimate that three trillion lethal doses were liberated to the environment. Now imagine there is a drone with a machine gun continuously and indiscriminately spraying the ground with ten bullets per second. Or if you like, ten drones each shooting one bullet per second…for the next ten thousand years, 24/7. Thats three trillion bullets. How many animals, human and plant would receive a lethal bullet? Thats 5880 bullets per square kilometer if spread equally over the earth. I would say thats quite a lot of lethal hits, anyway you look at it.


    Report comment

  • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

    Pretty sure all the Manmade Radioactive Isotopes being released and now flying/traveling all over the planet today are not being….squestered!

    Ergo: Thus the anomaly of choice!

    sequester |səˈkwestər|
    verb [ trans. ]
    1 isolate or hide away (someone or something) : Tiberius was sequestered on an island | the artist sequestered himself in his studio for two years.
    • isolate (a jury) from outside influences during a trial : the jurors had been sequestered since Monday.
    • Chemistry [ intrans. ] form a chelate or other stable compound with (an ion, atom, or molecule) so that it is no longer available for reactions


    Report comment

  • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

    lets not forget that Ken Buesseler and Woods Hole came out with
    16 PBq and now we just heard 276 PBq. Off…on the low side…by seventeen times. Not twice, not three times…. adding, no immediate risk, no immediate risk, no immediate risk. How about no instantaneous risk, or of no immediate concern to idiots. Fukushima poses no immediate concern to morons. Imbeciles need not worry. So long as it kills THEM not US, were peachy, so dont worry


    Report comment

    • We Not They Finally

      Yeah, the guy has a good act of posing as trustworthy. He was even in Helen Caldicott's Symposium in New York at the 2nd anniversary. But he just never quite gets to any firm marker, much less any escalation. He acts like everything is under a microscope, not right in our face. He's got to get a lot more real before his words start to MEAN anything. Just my personal opinion.


      Report comment

      • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

        Its people like they that give science a bad name. Science is supposed to LEAD the public in knowledge, not admit it once its already happened then downplay it. I see an insecurity…the enabler type. Hell this is no time for mumbly mouths.

        SCIENCE! they blinded me with science!

        I..I dont believe it!
        There she blows again!
        Shes melted down, and I cant DO anything!
        All my tubes and wires
        and careful notes
        and antiquated notions

        Mmm, but its poetry in motion
        and when she churned her lies to me
        as deep as any ocean
        as creepy sparks do harm to me

        Mmm she Blinded me with SCIENCE

        Oh Ken…youre SO smart!


        Report comment

  • Jebus

    Doublespeak is language that deliberately disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeak

    Telling you how bad it is, and saying "no immediate harm"…

    It is not just about humans, we are the cause of this.

    The rest of life is included and will feel the effect.

    The result off this cause and effect, remains to be seen…


    Report comment

  • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

    Always wanted a little more chaos in my (our) lives…it is and will get worse I am afraid.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory


    Report comment

  • Heart of the Rose Heart of the Rose

    Ernest Moniz says..just tell the people..they'll be compensated..
    Then it's all good..

    United States and France Sign Joint Statement on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage

    "The United States and France agree that such actions by the United States, France and other countries will ensure adequate and equitable compensation for victims of nuclear damage arising from a nuclear accident, and create the worldwide trust necessary for the development of nuclear energy and related industrial activities."

    http://energy.gov/articles/united-states-and-france-sign-joint-statement-civil-liability-nuclear-damage

    France says…Let them eat cake…(yellow cake).
    "Victims of nuclear damage"..?
    What is nuclear damage?

    Adequate and equitable compensation..is not possible…for the lives of my loved ones.
    It seems that for the relatives of Mr.Moniz..life comes cheap..

    END NUCLEAR POWER


    Report comment

  • Kassandra

    The NHK link posted above for the headline is for a segment dated May 24. http://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/newsline/201305242019.html

    Furthermore, the story begins by stating that the rad levels are down significantly.

    Administrator, would you please check the link to verify its going to the right story?


    Report comment

  • 21stCentury 21stCentury

    I'm just as worried about bioaccumulation of radwaste as anybody, it is a very real hazard to the health of humanity; with devastating results.

    Keeping it out of our human biosphere, out of our food supply, out of our clean air, out of our rainbarrel; is much like keeping the kids & pets from tracking mud indoors on the nice new wall to wall carpeting.

    Only the rich-elitist powerfreaks will be able to afford the latest regenerative medicine to correct their reckless management of their radwaste.


    Report comment

    • Jebus

      Again you miss the point of what bioaccumulation means. It is not just a human issue.
      It can and eventually will, destroy the viability of the circle of life, to reproduce with successful results.
      Break the chain, in enough places, and the worry about what's on your plate, becomes moot…
      You got any technology that can fix that?


      Report comment

      • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

        I think they are working on that one too and most of these science people have been taught animals/plants have no souls, thus they unknowingly made a choice.

        None of these things animals/plants are really needed and are often just a bother, since we will soon be your Gods.

        Rather sick process especially when the tax payer unknowingly pays for most of it.


        Report comment

  • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

    This even remote possibility ended for all of us in 1945! Can't be done and the only thing now that can be done is to try to lesson the damage already/currently being done for each of us and projected for the future generations.

    Shut them all down and do it now! Before Planet Earth and all life present (except Fungi) are exterminated!

    "Keeping it out of our human biosphere, out of our food supply, out of our clean air, out of our rainbarrel; is much like keeping the kids & pets from tracking mud indoors on the nice new wall to wall carpeting."

    We human's must make a choice!


    Report comment

  • We Not They Finally

    Are half-truths all that much better than lies, Mr. Buesseler? You act so concerned when you minimize, minimize, minimize. "Cracks," leaks," the water is used to "cool the reactors." It all sounds so organized, antiseptic. What, me worry? Oh, maybe there was a melt-through (or THREE), so maybe some extra drops of water got tainted there? Who bothers to even measure? You say to-MAY-to, I say to-MAH-to….

    This scientifically trained man cannot be that dense. I've watching him from the start, and I think that maybe he is their "gradualism" guy.


    Report comment

    • VanneV anne

      Your attacks on those who can actually bring about the end of nuclear energy seem to me to be ill directed. Why can't you direct those attacks on the nuclear industry itself? Why can't you just keep the dialog on the level of ideas, rather than attacking individuals. Attacks on individuals are the mainstay of the nuclear industry. The ends do not justify the means.


      Report comment

      • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

        anne, good point, and Im guilty! Why, the next time my car mechanic knowingly HIDES the fact the brakes are faulty, and lets them be installed anyway, and the car crashes, with my kids inside, I will remember your words of wisdom, even though it be a small example compared to Fukushima, and I will harbor no contempt.

        Anne, we love you! I truly believe if you were the sole enenews poster, the site would be all the better for it. But how do I stop? Come monday Im casting my trembling typing fingers in a block of concrete…I think that should do it


        Report comment

  • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

    The time for talk is over! I say Ken Buesseler should immediately embark on a two year feasibility study concerning implementation of EPA testing of selected foodstuffs in the U.S. I mean it. After that, study atmospheric and water tests. Are they cost effective? Does any department have a testing device? Will scientists be able to draw meaningful conclusions, or should the public become involved? Tough questions, but we demand to know!


    Report comment

  • Wyakin Wyakin

    Dear WNTF-I sincerely appreciate your many informative and interesting contributions to the ongoing ENE dialog and relate with your frustration over the ongoing Plume-gate, corium in the earth/out of containment, probable ELE cover-up.

    With reference to K. Buessler, it's not clear what "the start" is to which you are referring. KB has had a long and distinguished career in which he has reported the truths of his scientific analysis. I would suggest that before one entirely discounts his credibility, one checks out his testimony and post conference interviews presented at Caldicott's New York Academy Symposium on the Ecological Consequences of the Fukushima Meltdown.

    Perhaps this will change perspective. Please remember many of the professionals who comment on their scientific findings push their legal limits by saying as much as they can without getting legally and financially screwed by the nuclear industry and its cronies, or sectors of the US government which enable the untruths to continue.

    Scientists who disclose meaningful information are increasingly labelled as "leakers" rather than “whistle blowers.” Contemporary examples of the results of being a “leaker” should be evident if one has been awake over the last .1-10 years.

    "Leakers" may be placed indefinitely in confinement. The most recognizable places for confinement are Siberia, Leavenworth, and any place accepting renditions.


    Report comment

    • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

      If our top scientific LEADERS in our most prestigious institutions are afraid to tell the unvarnished truth for fear of indefinite detention, and this may very well be, then we have surely lost any meaningful fight, and the jackboot, ironfisted fascists have clearly dominated our last bastion of hope. But then it would be the worlds biggest conspiracy…..oooops, do you think Ill get in trouble for saying that? Oh hell, damn the torpedos! Im standing by Beusseler; "That area at the site has been contaminated from the cooling water used to keep the reactors cool during the disaster, and even today." (CS; I didnt realize that even today, after the disaster, they still have to cool that area at the site..but sure, it only makes sense that water could slowly taint the local bay or something) " …there is no immediate risk for humans eating fish from outside the contaminated areas" THERE! Powerful words of truth, now, the ball is in their court! Wow! its exciting …right ON Ken!


      Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        All areas of the world are now contaminated with too much radiation. So I haven't eaten fish or meat since 1989 when I almost died of cancer. I ate no dairy since then also except for a little raw milk cheese a couple of years pre-Fukushima, but none since Fukushima.


        Report comment

      • PhilipUpNorth PhilipUpNorth

        Nuclear Catch 22: Nuclear Departments at major universities are funded by the nuclear industry. The equipment for radiation monitoring of air, water, soil, and food are in the care of scientists in the pay of the nuclear industry. (If a "chair" is paid for by a nuclear industry "endowment", the professor is a nuke industry employee). A scientist will not use radiation monitoring equipment in the public interest, nor inform the public if asked.
        From the NEI member roster. (Many thanks to The Bow River!)

        University of Alabama
        University of Alberta
        University of Antofagasta, Chile
        University of Arizona
        University of Bologna
        University of California
        University of Cincinnati
        University of Colorado
        University of Denver
        University of Detroit
        University of Florida
        University of Idaho
        University of Illinois
        University of Maryland
        University of Massachusetts
        University of Michigan
        University of Missouri
        University of Nevada, Las Vegas
        University of New Mexico
        University of North Texas
        University of Notre Dame
        University of Pittsburgh
        University of Rhode Island
        University of South Carolina
        The University of Tennessee
        University of Texas at Austin
        University of Texas of the Permian Basin
        The University of the District of Columbia
        The University of Tokyo
        University of Virginia
        University of Washington
        University of Wisconsin


        Report comment

  • VanneV anne

    Quotation from above article:
    "…others, like Strontium-90 will get bound up in ocean sediments or accumulate in living creatures at concentrations greater than the surrounding water…."


    Report comment

  • minkxy minkxy

    wow a lot of comments. GREAT ! I'm guessing those orpkaned seals showing up on coast would beg to differ. Either their parents dies off or someone did a mass killing/hunting of them . I'll never forget that first explosion at fukushima and those trendies in San Francisco running a marathon right through it. Only the people who pay attention and take correct measures will survive this. We need the fed back out of our states. Reminds me of the salting of lands.


    Report comment

    • MoonlightEmpire MoonlightEmpire

      I'm glad to hear it, and I wish you well. Just remember, though, that an aquaponics greenhouse is not sustainable. Why? Because of all the plastic. Sure, it may be better than conventional farming techniques, but it is still not the solution and shouldn't be thought of as such.

      If you love aquaponics with a passion, then consider designing your own system that uses zero man-made elements (almost impossible, but you can get close). Instead of PVC, use bamboo. But don't buy the bamboo, grow it yourself, onsite. Everything else can be made out of wood (no pressure treating, no paint). If you need to seal the wood, consider pitch or beeswax. But, don't buy it, raise bees or grow and tap pine trees.

      Also remember that aquaponics uses/cycles a lot of water through your plants. Strontium 90 will be a major issue for any such operation (not to mention other radio-nukes and polutants). Lab studies show bio-accumulation in rice at 500 times the levels in the water.

      David Pagan Butler (one word on youtube for his channel) shows the world how a swimming pool is supposed to be. After seeing this, conventional pools should be banned, completely and permanently. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JoQthEBl6U

      If that link doesn't work, just search his name on Ytube. Anyway, you can grow edibles out of that system as well, though it would take some tweaking if you needed lots of veggies. Raise Talapia in there, though, and you'd feast every night.


      Report comment

      • MoonlightEmpire MoonlightEmpire

        Also, with your aquaponics system, are you running pumps? If you are, then you won't be self-sustaining, even if they are running off of solar. Why? Because you will have to purchase the solar panels again at some point, and the manufacturing of those panels is costly and contains toxic materials. Yes, it's the lesser of many evils, but it is not to be confused with an actual solution.

        Also, those panels are running pumps…what are they made of? Metals and/or plastics, right? Boom, non-sustainable. Eventually the pumps will wear out and need to be replaced. You can't grow replacement parts to those pumps. Non-sustainable. Still want pumps? By all means design some that use only organic materials. Or, utilize manually operating pumps, but they too would have to be completely growable.

        There are many more aspects that need to be discussed, but I will stop here for now. Aquaponics greenhouse systems are non-sustainable, but they are the lesser of many evils as well (like solar panels). Nevertheless, a little ingenuity can make them much closer to sustainable than the conventional setups.

        Want to be truly "sustainable"? The solution is beyond sustainable, but each person's methodologies in implimentation are just as important as the final goal, and can easily de-rail the whole purpose if poor methods are employed. Food Forest. Grown entirely from seed.


        Report comment

        • MoonlightEmpire MoonlightEmpire

          No irrigation, no soil amendments, no digging, no tilling, no tractors, no hoses…not even any conventional composting. It will provide everyone with full, healthy diets, and supply all the resources necessary for living happily and well. It's all done by establishing paths and sticking to them. Scatter seeds along the way, every day. No such thing as a weed. No such thing as a pest. All plants/insects are allowed. No natural entity or system is discouraged. Gains happen very quickly, but maturity of the system will not occur for decades or a hundred years. This doesn't mean you have nothing until then, though. The first year you will have more than any garden you've ever done. The second even more. By the fifth year, most if not all of your food will be available. All perennials and/or trees make up the foundation (edible). It is so simple.

          Here's the problem: Everyone has forgotten this. Everyone forgot that an apple tree needs 25-30 or more years to mature from seed. Our parents and grandparents chopped down our lifelines, for no reason but to burn fossil fuels to cut grass. And the grass cutting is done only socially; not for any actual beneficial purpose.

          Look around…even the "farms" have large portions of just grass, only to be mowed. It truly is like the movie, Idiocracy.

          It's about the seeds. It always has been. Everyone better get started, because it takes a long time for the really important things to grow…


          Report comment

  • ftlt

    Early on experts were saying the corium could eat through 6" of concrete a day… Some suggested, it would take weeks not years to eat through the concrete bottom containment – always with the caveat that the containment was not compromised/opened up in the first place…

    This is all SO late, I cannot help being left with the feeling that this flurry of media coverage is the slight of hand tactic to draw attention off the latest military adventure of the Empire forces..

    We here know, this FUFU thingy just didn't get worse in the last 2 weeks…

    Strange how Japan is now being left holding the bag by its encourage-ers now…

    Where is the IAEA now and that crazed Brit lady spokesperson????

    We live in mad times…

    Meanwhile, on the street the NFL season is taking full effect and of course, the pop stars nude photos and their life's traumas get most of the attention per usual…

    The new TV season is always a good time to start a war … Who cares about war or even busted nuke when your favorite reality TV show is about to kick off..

    Why not have a reality TV show in a war or nuke zone??? Think that would be a hit!!!


    Report comment

  • RichardPerry

    When the nuclear fuel sinks into the earth the pressure on the fuel will increase, forcing it to gather. Is this going to cause a bigger problem then already exists, the Russian stopped the fuel from going deeper at a terrible cost, so why? Some one in the know is not telling us, how bad is it then?


    Report comment

  • W8R W8R

    The fuel is mox.. Pu @ at least 6%.
    If it gathers into a relative sphere 1/2 as high as wide
    recriticality can occur, as it has been..


    Report comment

  • 3 subsurface 100 ton MELTED nuclear cores.

    Get the picture…
    – graphic display:
    https://securecdn.disqus.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/598/8623/original.jpg
    ________________________

    Here's a screen shot from netc.com that I took which shows just one of the waves of radiation ALERTS that have been increasing over the past months.

    This is the EPA's own data. Yet no word from them. (?)

    8 ALERTS and 19 Warnings East of the Rocky Mountains.
    From 2 weeks ago. 2013-08-15
    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2099954/Rad%202013-08-15%20netc%20ALERTS%20001.jpg


    Report comment

  • FXofTruth

    We are having a nuclear attack happening to us and all we can do is ignore it?

    Nuclear attacks don't always result in things blowing up! Radiation contamination is radiation contamination….explosion or not.

    Can someone get Obama to stop look EAST and begin looking to our WEST and see that we are being invaded by the Japanese again! This time, a slow moving attack is threatening the ENTIRE country! (No humor here, we are being attacked and there's no defense against it.)

    If Japan was a "friend" it wouldn't have lied for the last 2 1/2 years about what it was doing. It's still fighting World War 2 with us…it's just using different weapons this time…..old hatred dies hard….


    Report comment

  • FXofTruth

    Oh yeah, and here are some stats I found that even if the stats are 50% right, TEPCO has STILL been pencil-whipping their numbers for years!

    Let's do some simple math to check Nuclear statistics.
    Also, we will compare TEPCO's laughable numbers to industry numbers.

    These are facts:
    Water is poured on to a melting core is 30,000 gallons per minute – scientific estimation during emergency meltdown
    – 7 pounds is the weight of a gallon of water.
    – 210,000 pounds of water flow per minute
    – 2,000 pounds equal one ton
    TOTAL WEIGHT of one minute of water flowing over a melted core is 105 tons.

    So, the one-hour flow is equal to 6,300 tons of water flow.
    – 151,200 tons of water flow per 24-hour day, 7 days week.
    – 1,058,400 tons of water flow in a 7-day week.
    In one year, 55,036,800 TONS of water flow over ONE reactor.

    If so, then in one year 165,110,400 TONS OF WATER FLOW OVER THE THREE MELTED CORES.

    There are 3.5 million tons of water in a cubic mile of ocean.
    To keep it simple –
    – 50 cubic miles of water is run over the 3 melted cores a year.

    TEPCO says that 400 tons water flows over 3 melted cores in a day.
    They are only off by 5,900 tons of water flowing per day over one melted core.
    Or added together – 17,700 tons of water flowing over 3 melted cores!

    So they are also saying that 146,000 tons a year are flowing into the Pacific.
    They are only off 54,890,800 tons a year of water flowing.


    Report comment

  • The information about the real activities resulting in soaring radiation levels has been available since apr of 2011 as readable here in this article by Shimatsu…
    The underground nuclear weapons refinement facilities are leaking pure uranium and plutonium into the environment…

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/secret-weapons-program-inside-fukushima-nuclear-plant/24275
    Secret Weapons Program Inside Fukushima Nuclear Plant?
    US – Japan security treaty fatally delayed nuclear worker's fight against meltdown
    by Yoichi Shimatsu Apr 12 2011


    Report comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.