They finally admited that vancouver island might be in trouble

reply to post by Phage

If the venting only occurred for a short period of time. Why would cesium 134 detected in soil samples be deemed "dangerous" in 2014. The fact that they already downplayed the initial fallout in 2011 is bad enough. [Link]


The levels of cesium 137 being low is the the issue here.

A more persistent danger to people and marine life is radioactive Cesium 137, which has a half-life of 30 years, and bioaccumulates in the food chain.

It is the long term affects of its presence in the environment, mixed with the already damaging affects of the initial fallout.

reply to post by vkey08


WOW I said subtropical........ Temperate rainforest.......

reply to post by HiMyNameIsCal

Why would cesium 134 detected in soil samples be deemed "dangerous" in 2014.

Source?

It is the long term affects of its presence in the environment, mixed with the already damaging affects of the initial fallout.

As I pointed out, in a low concentration environment, cesium does not bioaccumulate. Around Fukushima cesium is bioaccumulated (mostly by bottom feeding fish). That is why fish from the area will not be edible for a very long time.

The farther you get from Fukushima the less bioaccumulation there is. Far enough a way there is none.

reply to post by Phage

Well my source would be the original article. Granted the term dangerous is never used, but anything that I should be concerned about my health over sure sounds dangerous to me. Now I know that sounds a lil weak of me but the forest where I live was in big trouble before this disaster, and I'm very concerned for its wellbeing.

reply to post by HiMyNameIsCal

As I first said, it has been known for quite a while that low levels of contamination would be reaching the west coast this year. There is no reason to expect it to reach dangerous levels but there are at least two independant monitoring programs.

I don't know why you think a forest would be at risk due to contaminated sea water.

reply to post by Phage


Could the nuclides be taken up as sea water evaporates over the Pacific and then fall as rain in the Americas?

No idea... just asking.

reply to post by masqua

Yes I believe you are correct.

Some radionuclides attach to soil particles and migrate immediately into groundwater and streams and become a part of Earth’s water cycle. These can get deposited right back into the soil through evaporation and then rain.

I just did a quick search, there might be a better source.

US EPA

reply to post by HiMyNameIsCal


I'm sure someone else has already pointed this out, but radiation levels are LAUGHABLY low due to Fukushima. .5 bequerels is an INFINITESSIMAL amount. The Potassium naturally occurring in a human body puts out approximately 1000 bequerels. That is how absurd the notion is that RADIATION is killing sealife. For reference, the exclusion zone around Chernobyl has FLOURISHING wildlife completely typical of a place where humans just simply do not inhabit.

OCEAN ACIDIFICATION is a far, far, far more likely explanation.

reply to post by masqua

No. Water evaporates, leaving salt (including cesium) behind. If cesium were to evaporate it would have done so in the three years since the disaster.

Seawater does throw up sea spray though, and contamination can be carried inland in this manner. But again, with low concentrations in sea water, the concentration in sea spray is also low.

How low? In 2013 the plume of contaminated sea water about 500 miles off Vancouver was found to have a concentration of about 0.6 Bq/m3. In Curies that's 1.621621621622e-11 Ci/m3. That is a very tiny amount of radioactive material. We can covert that to an estimate of the actual concentration of cesium (1 Ci of 137Cs = 27 mg) and come up with 0.000195 ng/m3. A nanogram is one billionth of a gram. An unbelievably tiny amount! I had to check my numbers a few times to make sure because it is such a tiny number. By comparison, "normal" salt in sea water has a concentration of about 30 kg/m3. So, if you gather up 66 pounds of sea salt from the land near the beach, you're going to have about 2 ten thousandths of a billionth of a gram of cesium in it. I wouldn't worry about it. That 66 pounds of salt is going to take a while to build up and the whole time it is the cesium is becoming less radioactive.

So yes, some contamination will wind up onshore from sea spray. A completely insignificant amount.

reply to post by Phage


I thought Wikihow had been discredited due to its close connection with the CIA on the "internet map"



The internet map: close connection between Wikihow and the CIA

So, let me ask this basic question.

If the cores of two or three reactors have not been found and not been contained, they will or have already melted through all the containment, and be in contact with groundwater, this would explain the almost constant steam releases from the plant.

By definition, this contaminated groundwater will enter the ocean, being only dozens of yards from it, and this is expected to happen for at least another four or five decades.

We know the Pacific Asian currents travel westwards, this is just basic science.

So how could receiving this contamination for the next forty to fifty years not possibly contaminate the whole North American West coast?

Also, for those who don't know, one of the only reliable sources of news on the Fukushima situation and its after effects:

ENE news - the only truthful source on Fukushima

reply to post by PlanetXisHERE

That link was about the method used to calculate the mass of a radioactive substance. Rather, it was about how to calculate how radioactive a substance is based on it's mass. I'm looking for one that's easier to follow. But here it is, there's not really anything in it to dispute, it's just math.
www.wikihow.com...


enews does provide some good information. The trouble is, it just sort of provides all the information and some of it is garbage. Including this one

Fox News Anchor: “What a fantastical incredible lie” gov’t told about Fukushima, and now it’s reached shores of North America — “We knew… and simply could not prove” it (VIDEO)

Which was discussed here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...=

reply to post by Phage


Thank you for that. I also did some research into the matter of contaminated sea spray and came to the same conclusion.

Sucks for life in the Pacific, but does not cross the Rockies or Imperial Valley in the form of precipitation..

Phage
Cesium from Fukushima was dectected in rain and on the ground in North America soon after the disaster.

Even if Cesium was detected, how do you know it was from Fukushima?

reply to post by Alekto

There are not many options when it comes to selecting a source.

This does not surprise me in the least! All that Radiation had to go
somewhere and expecting we would not see any of it ever again is
extremely ignorant and arrogant! We have a responsibility to protect
not just ourselves but other species on this world, who haven't taken any
actions to make them deserve what we have done thus far! It is arrogant
on an immense level, to believe this world is ours, to do with as we wish!
It has been a cooperative effort of all man kind that has brought us to
becoming the apex predator on this planet, which also means it should
be a cooperative effort which insures its safeguard!

This world should be shared with all species and none should be exploited
just to fatten our bellies. If we continue down this road taking shortcuts, to
save money for the benefit of profit over safety, than how do we expect to have
any future for ourselves and our children? How can we say we care for our children
when we refuse to take responsibility for the actions of all? Those actions we now
choose to ignore, pretending like it's not detrimental to the future of our children
is more than just irresponsible it's a crime against God, humanity and nature!

Who are the ones that benefit by our ignorance and how do we reverse this trend?
When will our society begin to take a look down the road and see the harm being
done to our ecosystem? If we don't choose to take responsibility for the actions of
all then we are as guilty as those that have caused the problems thus far! There has
to come a day where we are willing to draw a line in the sand to further prevent any
more ecological disasters! If we fail to insure the protections of species across our
ecosystem then it is us and our children whom will pay a steep price in the end!

reply to post by Phage


After Fukushima, they raised the "safe" levels if i recall correctly. I think you are making up the part about ingesting less than your body can deal with. Prove that our bodies metabolize cesium -137.

Also how is the number of particles in the atmosphere going down? As far as i know the corium is still active and unaccounted for. This is not a bomb, more like a smoke bomb. The fact that i haven't seen any readings from the west coast since 2011 tells me we are all in deep #.

yosemite.epa.gov...!OpenDocument

that is the last thing i have seen worthy to hold a candle to regarding radiation levels in North America. Specifically this part.
"Collectively, these levels amount to a level of approximately 0.0002 disintegrations per second per cubic meter of air (0.2 mBq/m3). Specifically, the level of Iodine-131 was 0.165 mBq/m3, the level of Iodine-132 was measured at 0.03 mBq/m3, the level of Tellurium-132 was measured at 0.04 mBq/m3, and the level of Cesium-137 was measured at 0.002 mBq/m3."

Alekto

Phage
Cesium from Fukushima was dectected in rain and on the ground in North America soon after the disaster.

Even if Cesium was detected, how do you know it was from Fukushima?

because it was found alongside iodine-131 yosemite.epa.gov...!OpenDocument
Which would could not have came from another source, -wikipedia- "Iodine-131 (131I), also called radioiodine, is an important radioisotope of iodine. It has a radioactive decay half-life of about eight days." Notice my source is dated 7 days after.
Iodine-131 was 0.165 mBq/m3 (half life of 8 days)
Tellurium-132 was 0.04 mBq/m3 ( half life of 3 days)
Numbers add up now...
Also,
" On Saturday, November 21, 1981, Ben Abruzzo with Larry Newman and Ron Clark of the USA and Rocky Aoki of Japan as crew became the first to cross the Pacific Ocean in a balloon. They launched in the Double Eagle V from Nagashim, Japan on November 10 and landed in Covelo, California in 84:31 hours, also setting a new world flight duration record."

I love when there is (arguably) the worst, ongoing & escalating nuclear disaster by way of where it is and what it is & there will always be people that say its fine. Levels being with safe limits? 300,000 gallons + of highly irradiated water being dumped into the sea just being a drop in comparison to to total volume of the worlds oceans. Perhaps if it went on for just a week, month or year. Remember, this is very bad, continually getting worse and no end in sight.
I am putting it out there, within the next 2 years cancers and birth defect are going to sky rocket. It scare the crap out of me to watch my German Shepherd to lie down in the snow and mack out on it. I would love nothing more than to be wrong about my "predictions"...we will see.

reply to post by stirling


So when and where will you start to address these problems and start making life better for everyone?