Biodiesel and SVO Forums Home
Fukushima Disaster updates

This topic can be found at:

September 11, 2012, 01:14 PM
Fukushima Disaster updates

36 Percent Of Fukushima Children Have Abnormal Growths From Radiation Exposure

October 04, 2013, 02:06 AM
October 24, 2013, 09:47 PM
Occupy Calgary
25 minutes ago
The bring-down of the fuel rods from Fukushima Unit 4 may be the most dangerous engineering task ever undertaken. Every indication is that TEPCO is completely incapable of doing it safely, or of reliably informing the global community as to what's actually happening. There is no reason to believe the Japanese government could do much better. This is a job that should only be undertaken by a dedicated team of the world's very best scientists and engineers, with access to all the funding that could be needed.

The potential radiation releases in this situation can only be described as apocalyptic. The cesium alone would match the fallout of 14,000 Hiroshima bombs. If the job is botched, radiation releases could force the evacuation of all humans from the site, and could cause electronic equipment to fail. Humankind would be forced to stand helplessly by as billions of curies of deadly radiation pour into the air and the ocean.

As dire as Wasserman's warning sounds, it is echoed by fallout researcher Christina Consolo, who told RT that the worst case scenario could be "a true apocalypse." Gunter's warning was dire as well.

"Time is of the essence as we remain concerned that another earthquake could still topple the damaged reactor building and the nuclear waste storage pond up in its attic," he continued. "This could literally re-ignite the nuclear accident in the open atmosphere and inflame it into hemispheric proportions," said Gunter.

Wasserman says that given the gravity of the situation, the eyes of the world should be upon Fukushima:

This is a question that transcends being anti-nuclear. The fate of the earth is at stake here and the whole world must be watching every move at that site from now on. With 11,000 fuel rods scattered around the place, as a ceaseless flow of contaminated water poisoning our oceans, our very survival is on the line.
Fuel Removal From Fukushima's Reactor 4 Threatens 'Apocalyptic' Scenario
An operation with potentially "apocalyptic" consequences is expected to take place a little over two weeks from now at Fukushima's damaged and sinking Reactor 4, when plant operator TEPCO will attempt to remove over 1300 spent fuel rods holding the radiation equivalent of 14,000 Hiroshima bombs from...
November 09, 2013, 04:05 PM
john galt
"...worrying about these traces is like worrying about getting sunburned by the stars at night. Distance and dilution are massive"

... from Pacific Fishing magazine:

but they got one thing wrong in suggesting that the concentration would follow an inverse square law as it spread from Fukushima.

That would assume only surface area dispersion, whereas the dilution is much much greater since it also goes into depth; closer to an inverse cube relationship.

November 15, 2013, 02:55 AM
Yep, If you can't trust the opinion of all the nuke Physicists on staff at Pacific Fishing magazine, who can you trust for a knowledgeable report?? Roll Eyes
November 15, 2013, 04:41 AM
john galt
What scientists are finding in some albacore tuna caught off the Northwest coast is a small dose but far less than an air traveler may absorb, and not even in the ballpark of the total yearly natural radiation dose.

Delvan Neville is a doctoral candidate at Oregon State University. He’s a radioecologist, which makes him perfectly fitted for the Fukushima business. He’s collecting albacore carcasses caught off the Northwest coast to see if he can find Fukushima radioactivity. Not all samples have detectable radiation. Some 60 to 70 percent do. Where it’s found, the amount of radiation is very tiny. The final calculations revealed minor amounts of radioactivity not due to pre-existing weapons testing or Chernobyl — far below any human consumption guidelines, barely a whisper.

Consider your annual dose of natural radiation. “To increase their normal annual dosage of radiation by just 1 percent, a person would have to eat more than 4,000 pounds of the highest [radiation] level albacore we’ve seen,” said Neville. “Radiation and radioactivity can be very unnerving. We can’t see it, taste it, or feel it. But even with tools made to detect it, the trace levels due to Fukushima are extremely difficult to detect because there is simply so little present. It’s so small compared to normal radioactivity, it takes pounds and pounds of albacore for me to even detect it. We’ve been forthcoming with numbers because we know people are worried about it, but these levels are nowhere near the ballpark of food safety.

November 16, 2013, 07:31 AM
For someone that supposedly has me on their ignore list, You sure do post rebuttals to anything I put up that contradicts your views.
Caught out again.

I strongly recommend people read any article Galt quotes extracts from. Inevitably when you do that you find he has taken his quotes completely out of context and they say something quite different.
Or, as it looks in the case of this snippet, the article is just a complete and utter load of ridiculous Bollocks in the first place!
In this case its also an article over a year old.

In this case, the comparison of radioactive particles ingested in food and amounts of radiation one receives on a flights is so out of place it could only be intentional.
You don't pick up hot radioactive particles that sit inside you against your flesh and organs basically cooking you till they do start a cancer which grows and spreads on a flight unless you fly through a radioactive cloud. Like that spewed out when a reactor explodes and burns.

Radiation from different radioactive waves are a totally and utterly different thing to a radioactive particle that is ingested into your body. One is a short time "diffused" exposure, the other is a highly concentrated long term one.
To compare the 2 is either incredible ignorance or absolutely intentional dishonest misinformation and spin doctoring.

Any "radioecologist" as cited as the expert in this article would have to know the difference.

Yet another case of blatant lies and coverups on the seriousness of the situation and damage to the entire planet this Nuke disaster is still Causing.