Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Fukushima
FYI:

(*Snipped - More at link)

http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/24810...tion-risks


HONOLULU (HawaiiNewsNow) -
Scientists revealed the results of a comprehensive study relating to the levels of radiation in the Pacific Ocean as a result of the Fukushima nuclear disaster.

As it relates to Hawaii, the findings were positive.

"So far, we're not seeing the isotopes of cesium on the beaches here at all," said Ken Buesseler of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute.

Not only have there been no measurable amounts of cesium 134 in Hawaii, but when it finally does arrive, Buesseler says it will be later than when it hits the US west coast, and in much smaller amounts.

"A thousand miles north of here is the core of the plume. So it's not going to make it back to Hawaii until it reaches the US west coast and returns as a return flow, where it slowly kind of spreads out as part of a dispersion process" he explained.

He said that radiation isn't expected in Hawaii for two to three years.

When it comes to sea life, it's harder to predict the amount of radiation present. Cesium 134 has a half life of approximately 50 days, so depending on when and where a fish may swim, its radioactivity will change.

Certain blue fin tuna harvested from the waters off San Diego measured for radiation, but Buesseler said the levels were safe for human consumption.

"They were certainly considered far below, 10-times below the Japanese limits for seafood, and about 100-times below the US limits".

Buesseler also addressed tsunami debris. He said it was an inaccurate tool for gauging the arrival of radiation because debris moves faster than radiation.

"That debris is blown by the wind as well as mixed by the currents" he said. He also noted that ocean debris is not radioactive.

The study was completed through a public crowdsourcing campaign. For more information as well as how to make a donation, go to http://ourradioactiveocean.org.
Reply
Fukushima was a horrible natural disaster and the people that try to capitalize it for their own paranoid agendas are low lifes, at best.

The ocean currents have been charted pretty well, and if there had been any intensified radiation concentration that came out of the main current would have brushed the north leeward side of the islands. This isn't happening, so if this imagined radiation clump was traveling in the current, it would go up against the west coast of the mainland and circle back to come straight into the east side. It would very diluted and nothing near hazardous. Even that it isn't happening. It is a tragedy this radiation is getting into the ocean but it will raise background radiation by only a small amount where it is concentrated, mainly off the coast of Japan.

"This island Hawaii on this island Earth"
*Japanese tourist on bus through Pahoa, "Is this still America?*
Reply

retroactive data adjustment......

Tokyo Electric Power Co. (9501) is re-analyzing 164 water samples collected last year at the wrecked Fukushima atomic plant because previous readings “significantly undercounted” radiation levels.

The utility known as Tepco said the levels were undercounted due to errors in its testing of beta radiation, which includes strontium-90, an isotope linked to bone cancer. None of the samples were taken from seawater, the company said today in an e-mailed statement.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-25...cmpid=yhoo
Reply
Canadian scientists have detected radiation reaching the west coast. There is also a simulation of the radioactive plume. It looks ominous but at its peak, is still well below safety minimums, less than a dental x-ray. A lot of people forget Fukushima had a sea wall for a 30 foot tsunami, only problem is the tsunami was over 40 feet. If there is a massive quake in Chile, or the big one finally hits California, this east side is just as likely to see the same, like the ones that have wiped out Puna several times in the past. Waa-waa and Kapoho would be history, just like the villages that were there in the past. The threat and risk of a tsunami is far higher than detrimental effects from radiation.

http://www.ibtimes.com/fukushima-radiati...il-1557857
Fukushima Radiation Reaches Waters Off the Coast Of Canada, Expected To Reach U.S. In April

"This island Hawaii on this island Earth"
*Japanese tourist on bus through Pahoa, "Is this still America?*
Reply
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26329323

documented radiation map. I wonder how they can track it in such detail? I assume it will eventually get lower into our area. Time will tell.
Reply
Huffington Post wrote an article on Ken Buesseler and the research project he founded.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/26...59603.html

Buesseler is asking for donations to help fund locations, or sponsor new ones,

information in this link http://ourradioactiveocean.org/

Under current locations, the Big island has a monitoring station that needs funding, the funding goal is $550.00 so far they have raised $130.00.

http://ourradioactiveocean.kintera.org/faf/donorReg/donorPledge.asp?ievent=1092921&supid=400674931
Reply
Well...after reading the end of that link I posted.

“What we have to go by right now are models, and as John Smith showed these predict numbers as high as 30 of these becquerels per cubic metre of water,” he told reporters.

“It’s interesting: if this was of greater health concern, we’d be very worried about these factors of ten differences in the models. To my mind, this is not really acceptable. We need better studies and resources to do a better job, because there are many reactors on coasts and rivers and if we can’t predict within a factor of 10 what caesium or some other isotope is downstream - I think that’s a pretty poor job"

Maybe it would be wise to fund a few stations around hawaii to test our water ever week or so. Hmmm...

http://ourradioactiveocean.kintera.org/faf/donorReg/donorPledge.asp?ievent=1092921&supid=400674931

Here is a good station to donate too.

Money Raised to Date: $150.00


Reply
"But scientists stress that even the peak measurements will be well within the limits set by safety authorities."

Have any of you read the sentence that I posted just above this sentence ??

It comes from this link,I have better things to worry about !!

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26329323
Reply
"We need better studies and resources to do a better job, because there are many reactors on coasts and rivers and if we can’t predict within a factor of 10 what caesium or some other isotope is downstream - I think that’s a pretty poor job"


some strontium 90 readings would be nice as well

factor of ten a pretty big window .... like working in the dark imho

some issues in new mexico as well - its not being a good year for the nuke operators
Reply
NUCLEAR POWER AND CHILDREN
A Beyond nuclear fact sheet

http://www.beyondnuclear.org/storage/rad...dchild.pdf
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 9 Guest(s)