Japan nuclear agency upgrades Fukushima alert level

[Cidersomerset]

Thanks Pan I'm not up to speed with this thread as I'm tied up else where,
though I post what articles come up to keep the thread upto date....

This one is from Natural News that usually do some good article......



Fukushima ‘ice wall’ can’t get cold enough to stop radioactive water flow

Wednesday 9th July 2014 at 07:42 By david-icke






Wednesday, July 09, 2014 by: David Gutierrez, staff writer
Tags: Fukushima, ice wall, radioactive waste

(NaturalNews) A Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) project to freeze radioactive
water to prevent it from further contaminating surrounding areas and the Pacific
Ocean has hit a major snag: the water won't freeze


‘A Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) project to freeze radioactive water to prevent
it from further contaminating surrounding areas and the Pacific Ocean has hit a
major snag: the water won’t freeze.

In March 2011, a massive earthquake and tsunami triggered multiple meltdowns at
the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. One of the major obstacles to
decommissioning the failed reactors and removing their spent fuel rods is the large
quantities of radioactive water that have been accumulating at and beneath the
plant. This water not only poses a safety threat to workers on site, but has also
been leaching into groundwater and flowing into the ocean.’

Not freezing, and behind schedule

Recently, TEPCO launched two related programs to contain existing contamination
and limit the flow of new water into the contaminated area. Both consist of digging
trenches for pipes, then filling the pipes with an aqueous solution of calcium
chloride cooled to -30°C (-22°F). The goal of the first, smaller project is to freeze
11,000 metric tons of radioactive water that has pooled beneath two of the failed reactors.

This project is widely seen as a pilot project for the much larger, more ambitious
plan to use pipes to actually freeze the soil and create a 1.4 km (0.9 mile) "ice
wall" to prevent more groundwater from infiltrating down into the underground
reactors and becoming radioactive.

But on June 17, TEPCO announced that even the smaller project was having
difficulties.

"We have yet to form an ice plug because we can't get the temperature low enough
to freeze the water," a company spokesperson said.

The company also said that fluctuating water levels were making it difficult for the
water to actually freeze.

"We are behind schedule, but have already taken additional measures, including
putting in more pipes, so that we can remove contaminated water from the trench
starting next month," the spokesperson said.


Cleanup plagued with gaffes and errors

The recent setback added weight to criticisms of the larger ice wall plan by
scientists, environmentalists and politicians. Although the ground-freezing
technique has been successfully used before in the construction of tunnels near
waterways, critics have noted that the technology has never been tested on a
geographic or time scale as large as that needed for TEPCO's plans.

Meanwhile, TEPCO continues with other plans designed to slow the buildup of
radioactive water. The company has been pumping radioactive water out of the
basements of the reactors and into giant temporary containment tanks. It has also
been dumping both radioactive and non-radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean -
the former pumped out of the basements, and the latter out of the ground upslope
from the nuclear plants, to prevent it from reaching the reactors and becoming
contaminated.

Even with all of these measures, an estimated 300 tons of water still flow into the
plant and become radioactive every single day.

A complete decommissioning of the failed plant is expected to take decades, and
experts have warned that some previously residential areas may have to be
permanently abandoned due to persistent radioactive contamination.

Recently, Japanese environment minister Nobuteru Ishihara came under public fire
after making comments that critics interpreted as downplaying the plight of people
who are still unable to return their homes. The minister had suggested that most
people would be willing to accept permanent storage of radioactive waste in their
communities, as long as the government paid them enough money.

"It was extremely regrettable," Fukushima Governor Yuhei Sato said. "The remarks
rode roughshod over the feelings of residents who are longing for their hometowns."

Sources for this article include:

http://www.japantimes.co.jp

http://gizmodo.com

http://www.zerohedge.com

http://af.reuters.com/article/energy...0OY08A20140617

http://www.ibtimes.com

http://rt.com/news/166412-fukushima-ice-wall-failing/

http://www.focus-fen.net

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/045914_Fu...#ixzz36z3wgnVW




Read more: Fukushima 'ice wall' can't get cold enough to stop radioactive water flow

http://www.davidicke.com/headlines/

http://www.naturalnews.com/045914_Fu...ive_waste.html

[Cidersomerset]

Physicists Say Fukushima Reactors Pose Eternal Threat to Humanity

Tuesday 26th August 2014 at 04:30 By david-icke






Physicists Say Fukushima Reactors Pose Eternal Threat to Humanity




MOSCOW, August 23 (RIA Novosti) - The three molten cores at Fukushima plant,
each weighing a hundred tons, are so radioactive, that no one can approach them,
including robots, which melt down immediately, Dr. Helen Caldicott, the 1985
Nobel Peace Prize nominee, physician and anti-nuclear advocate, states in an
interview to Radio VR:

“And no one ever will, and the contamination will go on for hundreds of years,
” Ms. Caldicott cites top physicists as saying.

Initially, TEPCO, the Japanese power provider wanted to erect an ice wall around
the perimeter of the Fukushima complex, as ground water underneath the
reactor is absorbing radiation and then flowing into the ocean.

An ice wall is a silly idea given the circumstances, remarks the expert, as it would
have to last at least a hundred years. Moreover, you would have to have electricity
running all the time to keep the ground frozen, explains Ms. Caldicott.

Surprisingly enough, TEPCO is not consulting with anyone, says the expert, neither
with Russia, after it survived the Chernobyl catastrophe, nor Bechtel, a US major
engineering company. It is, conversely, “saving money, using paper coming from
homeless shelters”, and the Japanese mafia Yakuza is hiring people to do this work.

The expert stresses they are witnessing an absolute catastrophe: 300-400 tons of
radioactive water pour daily into the Pacific, and this has been going on for over
three years now contaminating the ocean and its ecology.

Radiation cannot be diluted, as many isotopes, namely strontium, are concentrated
in food chains, in algae for instance. The contamination then passes on to bigger
fish typically caught on the east coast from Fukushima. Radiation in the ocean and
its ecology has been detected as far away as the America West Coast. TEPCO has
stated more than once, the expert says, that they know radioactive water is seeping
into the ocean, however, they keep assuring that it is not at levels high enough to
cause a significant threat.

Another VR expert, Thomas Drolet, who is Chairman, CEO and President at GreenWell
Renewable Power Corporation, sounds less pessimistic, stating the radiation can
essentially be done away with as time passes:

“As a technician and nuclear reactor engineer I can say that they will eventually succeed.”

Conditions on the site are difficult, though, he adds. Two big problems arose from the
very start: for one thing, there’s water that originated in the reactor, which flowed
through the damaged fill and went to the lower levels. Secondly, there is the ground
water that naturally flows from higher elevations to the west, through the ground
system, picks up radioactivity around the basement areas of the damaged reactors
and flows on to the sea and to the bottom parts of the damaged reactors, Mr. Drolet says.

“The way it can eventually be solved is that of removing the water that is in the basement
areas of the turbine building (and they are working on unit 2 right now) and getting it
pumped out,” points out Mr. Drolet citing sophisticated filtration systems now being employed.
“They can absorb the radiation and hold it.”

Engineer brigades are currently aiming to block a particular pass so that work could be done
inside the building to get the contaminated water sucked out.

Still, the complex radiation fields make the surrounding environment hard enough to handle,
with people at all times wearing thick suits to protect them from “external radiation inhalation”.
This further complicates specialists’ day to day life on the site. Mr. Drolet clearly differentiates
between the site as is and the exclusion zone, comprised of small towns and roads lying nearby,
within 18 kilometers from the place. The latter can be cleaned up in the next several years, the
expert argues. The work consists in finding hot spots in terms of increased radiation, taking
off the top layer of the soil, in other words, “taking down some of the radioactivity near the
surface and on the surface” and rehabilitating that exclusion zone.

The reactor itself is by far “the most difficult issue,” Mr, Drolet states. Each of the three d
amaged reactors has two main areas of broken fuel: in the spent fuel base, which is up high,
and the reactor core. “Slowly and identically they have to remove that fuel, some of it damaged,
some of it whole”, using the robotic equipment to a great extent, and move it off site to the
repository. Only once the excessive fuel is removed can they move to what the expert calls
“nitty gritty of decommissioning” of the reactors themselves, which might span for another
decade, before the engineers could turn the site to the so-called brown field condition.
As compared to the green field condition, it means the area is safe, clean and cannot be
reused, the expert concludes.

A 9.0 magnitude earthquake swept across the Japanese coast in March 2011, triggering a
devastating tsunami and killing more than 15,000 people and injured 6,000. The Fukushima
Daiichi nuclear power plant consequently faced meltdowns at three reactors heavily damaged
in the tsunami, which led to masses of contaminated water pouring into the ocean.

http://en.ria.ru/analysis/20140823/1...Threat-to.html

[Cidersomerset]

Fukushima court rules against Tepco in suicide case

Thursday 28th August 2014 at 04:33 By david-icke





‘The Fukushima District Court ruled Tuesday that Tokyo Electric
Power Co. was responsible for a woman’s suicide following the
March 2011 nuclear disaster, ordering the utility to pay ¥49
million in damages in a landmark ruling that could set a
precedent for other claims against the utility.’

=====================================




Lawyers representing the family of a woman who committed
suicide in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear disaster show
off banners saying 'Victory' and 'Tepco is guilty' after a court
ruling in favor of the plaintiffs Tuesday in front of the
Fukushima District Court. | KYODO

National

Fukushima court rules against Tepco in suicide case
Kyodo, Reuters
Aug 26, 2014
Article history


FUKUSHIMA – The Fukushima District Court ruled Tuesday
that Tokyo Electric Power Co. was responsible for a woman’s
suicide following the March 2011 nuclear disaster, ordering
the utility to pay ¥49 million in damages in a landmark ruling
that could set a precedent for other claims against the utility.

It was the first ruling on a lawsuit in which compensation has
been sought over a suicide linked to the disaster that created
serious radiation contamination. Some 125,000 Fukushima
residents continue to live as evacuees.

Mikio Watanabe’s civil suit claimed that the plant operator
was to blame for the July 2011 death of his 58-year-old wife,
Hamako, who doused herself in kerosene and set herself on
fire after falling into deep depression.

The district court in Fukushima ruled in favor of Watanabe,
a court official told reporters.

The husband of the woman and three other relatives had
filed the lawsuit with the district court, requesting about
¥91 million in compensation.

In handing down the ruling, Presiding Judge Naoyuki Shiomi
said Watanabe’s mental anguish was “huge,” citing the
despair she felt in the face of an uncertain future as an evacuee.

Tepco said it will study the content of the ruling and
respond to it “sincerely.”

The court decision is the latest blow for the utility, which was
bailed out with taxpayer funds in 2012 and expects to spend
more than $48 billion in compensation alone for the nuclear disaster.

Tepco has settled a number of suicide-related claims through
a government dispute-resolution system, but has declined to
say how many or give details on how much it has paid.

According to the written indictment, the area in the town of
Kawamata where Watanabe’s home stands was designated
as an evacuation zone on April 22, 2011, about a month after
the crisis was triggered by a huge earthquake and tsunami
that struck the Tohoku region.

The home was located about 40 km away from the Fukushima No. 1 plant.

Watanabe and other family members evacuated to an apartment
in the city of Fukushima in June, but she burned herself to death
with gasoline on July 1 when she temporarily returned to her home.

The plaintiffs said Watanabe’s mental state deteriorated because
she was not able to foresee when she could return home and the
chicken farm where the couple was working closed in June.

Tepco has admitted the nuclear accident had placed a severe
psychological burden on Watanabe. But the utility also noted that
other factors could have affected her, citing that she had trouble
sleeping before the accident and was on medication.

After the ruling, Mikio Watanabe said he was “very happy” that
the court showed understanding of the family’s struggle.

An attorney for the plaintiffs called the ruling a “full victory” and
added, “This is going to be extremely significant for future
nuclear compensation issues.”

Tepco had previously agreed to pay damages to the bereaved
family of a farmer who committed suicide at age 64 on March
24, 2011, through an out-of-court settlement.


==========================================

A Fukushima-Sized Problem

Friday 29th August 2014 at 05:24 By david-icke





‘As aftershocks of the 6.0 Napa earthquake that occurred Sunday in
California continued, the Associated Press revealed a secret government
report pointing to major earthquake vulnerabilities at the Diablo Canyon
nuclear plants which are a little more than 200 miles away and sitting
amid a webwork of earthquake faults.’

Read more: A Fukushima-Sized Problem


http://www.enn.com/sustainability/ar...ews+Network%29

[Cidersomerset]

How Badly Is Fukushima Radiation Damaging the Pacific Ocean?

Sunday 31st August 2014 at 09:09 By david-icke





‘Over the past year we’ve read many news stories about mass die-offs of marine
species in the Pacific Ocean and other regions. One hypothesis in the alternative
media is that the massive radiation released from the Fukushima nuclear disaster
is the cause. Others blame over-fishing, pollution or climatic events.

My opinion is that if the die-offs are unusual and “man made” then it is a combination
of factors, but Fukushima is probably one of them. The Earth is under many human
threats — we are an industrious species — Fukushima is doing the ocean only harm,
and following that logic, at a minimum the health of local species and perhaps wider
ecosystems are being affected in a reverse synergy whereby organisms have
surpassed the limits they can endure.’

Read more: How Badly Is Fukushima Radiation Damaging the Pacific Ocean?

http://www.activistpost.com/2014/08/...radiation.html

[Snowflower]

At Chernobyl, life is continuing. Birds, insects, animals continue to live; some changing, some developing tumors and surviving or not. But, overall, they are adapting and surviving. Humans? Well, either we adapt or we don't.

[Sidney]

My personal belief is that thr big F is the elephant in the room that not too many people will acknowledge, until they are tripping over their own thyroid tumors.
By seeing the track of the radiation on that map, it seems to me that it was deliberately aimed at the U.S. Not that it matters at this point because this catastrophe IMO will be the eternal nail in the coffin(planet). It is obviously at this point, the gift that keeps on giving. It simply cannot be stopped.
Earthlings, big and small, will continue to sicken and die. Yet, nobody is talking about. Its really very strange,sad, surreal.

[Cidersomerset]

The Fukushima Disaster Continues to Worsen

Thursday 4th September 2014 at 04:27 By david-icke





‘Nobody in the world knows how to dispose of radioactive waste safely
and permanently. That’s a given. The Japanese central government is
presumably aware that anything it does with still the unmeasured but
vast amount of radioactive waste from Fukushima’s six nuclear power
generators will be temporary. Leaving it in place is not an option. So
Tokyo announced on August 29 that the Fukushima waste would be
stored for 30 years in Fukushima prefect, in an ” interim facility” to
be built probably in nearby Okuma or Futaba ( now evacuated).

“We’ve screened and confirmed safety and regional promotion measures
as offered by the state,” Fukushima prefect governor Yuhei Sato said
when announcing the decision. The temporary plan was proposed by
the environment minister in late 2013, an offer few thought the
Fukushima officials could refuse.’

Read more: The Fukushima Disaster Continues to Worsen

http://www.alternet.org/world/fukush...ntinues-worsen

[TargeT]

Posted by Sidney (here)
My personal belief is that thr big F is the elephant in the room that not too many people will acknowledge, until they are tripping over their own thyroid tumors.
By seeing the track of the radiation on that map, it seems to me that it was deliberately aimed at the U.S. Not that it matters at this point because this catastrophe IMO will be the eternal nail in the coffin(planet). It is obviously at this point, the gift that keeps on giving. It simply cannot be stopped.
Earthlings, big and small, will continue to sicken and die. Yet, nobody is talking about. Its really very strange,sad, surreal.

you know why no one is talking about it?

because this entire issue (in its current form ) is a complete NON-ISSUE I have a piece of uranium ore that is polished and I have worn around my neck 24x7 for a year and a half now, this rock is more radioactive than the water being released into the ocean, its more radio active than ANYTHING on the fukashima compound that isn't with in 100 feet of the actual reactor.

Radiation and the level at which it becomes an issue is one of the biggest "conspiracies" out there, I can't believe threads like this continue to go on when there is conclusive proof that low levels of radiation are GOOD for you, that radiation; like everything else is beholden to the commonly known saying "toxicity is dose dependent" and this applies to E V E R Y T H I N G.

so, if you read that and are still wondering why no one is talking about this situation; then your belief in this situation is strong enough that you will ignore evidence, facts and logic. This makes the group that will talk about it rather small.

Posted by Cidersomerset (here)
The Fukushima Disaster Continues to Worsen

‘Nobody in the world knows how to dispose of radioactive waste safely
and permanently. That’s a given.
Read more: The Fukushima Disaster Continues to Worsen

http://www.alternet.org/world/fukush...ntinues-worsen

So when the very first sentence of an article is completely wrong, do you continue reading?

we DO know how to dispose of radioactive waste safely and permanently........ and it's not just a theory, in fact Hitachi is developing a reactor to do this very thing right now..

In popular imagination, nuclear waste is a wildly radioactive goo that glows like the back end of a lightning bug. But in real life, the real problem of nuclear waste isn't the "hot" stuff, but the mildly radioactive elements with atomic numbers greater than 92. That’s because highly radioactive elements have short half lives. That is, they burn themselves out very quickly – sometimes in a matter of minutes or even seconds.

On the other hand, mildly radioactive elements, such as plutonium, have half lives measured in tens of thousands or even millions of years. That makes storing them a very long-term problem, and is a particular difficulty in countries like the United States that don’t recycle transuranium elements by fuel reprocessing or fast-breeder reactors.

Mildly radioactive.... remember that Toxicity is dose dependent, and low level/mild radioactive radiation has been shown to be good for people.

so.....

[Roisin]

Is anyone here watching that show "Manhattan"? What I have found so amazing about that show is that back in the 40's, even the top scientists in the world were ignorant of the real dangers of radiation. And here I'm talking about the ones who were working on the Manhattan Project. And one of the wives of those scientists, who's a biologist, was scratching her head on why all of the bee's died in her bee hive and why her crysanthiums were white instead of red regardless that those scientists on the base where they all lived were working on the bomb and doing experiments with plutonium.

[TargeT]

Posted by Roisin (here)
Is anyone here watching that show "Manhattan"? What I have found so amazing about that show is that back in the 40's, even the top scientists in the world were ignorant of the real dangers of radiation. And here I'm talking about the ones who were working on the Manhattan Project. And one of the wives of those scientists, who's a biologist, was scratching her head on why all of the bee's died in her bee hive and why her crysanthiums were white instead of red regardless that those scientists on the base where they all lived were working on the bomb and doing experiments with plutonium.

but they did know about the dangers, they knew about high dose exposures. the ONLY thing that changed was the low dose regulation... nuclear power plants have less radiation than central park, they have less radiation than 1/3 of the united states has NATURALLY out doors due to the extreme regulation.

the world has adopted a no-safe-limit policy on radiation that has D R A M A T I C implications.... did you know that taking a long air plane flight is the same as getting a chest Xray?

Air line workers are routinely exposed to more radiation than the people in Japan are experiencing.

[Cidersomerset]

So when the very first sentence of an article is completely wrong, do you continue reading?

we DO know how to dispose of radioactive waste safely and permanently........ and it's not just a theory, in fact Hitachi is developing a reactor to do this very thing right now..

up to you mate, I'm not an expert on this so I'm just really updating the thread
with articles from David Ickes site. I understand your point and I hope they can
store radio active waste,as I only live 4/5 miles from Hinckly point nuclear power
station which is on the River severn estuary coast.......

===================================================





Graphic shows how high-level waste is stored in a cooling tank for several years,
then mixed with glass and poured into metal cannisters to solidify, then stored
above ground and may finally be buried indefinitely 300m - 2km deep underground.


Spent nuclear fuel is stored in a cooling pond at Sellafield

1. High level waste: Waste from reprocessing spent fuel.

2. Spent fuel: Mix of uranium, plutonium and fission products.

3. Plutonium: Radioactive element, by-product of uranium fission. Can be used in
bombs.

4. Intermediate wastes: Nuclear fuel casing, reactor components, sludges.

5. Uranium: Radioactive element used as reactor fuel. Must be enriched using hi-
tech process to be used in bombs.

Spent nuclear fuel is stored in a cooling pond at Sellafield

Nuclear waste

Radioactive waste is one of the biggest problems the nuclear industry faces.

The greatest concern is the small proportion of nuclear waste that is "high-level
waste" - waste so radioactive that it generates heat and corrodes all containers,
and would cause death within a few days to anyone directly exposed to it.

In the UK this accounts for less than 0.3% of the total volume of nuclear waste but
accounts for about half the total radioactivity.

No man-made container could survive the tens of thousands of years it will take for
high-level waste to decay to safe levels.

No country has yet implemented a long-term solution to this problem, although
Finland and the US have plans to build repositories deep underground in areas
identified for their geological stability. This solution is one of those under
consideration in the UK.

Spent nuclear fuel is highly radioactive, but can be reprocessed to extract the
remaining usable uranium and plutonium, a process which reduces the need to
mine fresh uranium and cuts the volume of waste.

In countries where reprocessing takes place, high-level radioactive waste is the
waste left behind after the uranium and plutonium have been extracted. In the UK,
this is treated as shown in the graphic above.

In these countries, spent fuel, uranium and plutonium are not currently categorised
as wastes (because they can be used), although they must be stored like
radioactive wastes - and there is the added security concern that plutonium can be
used to make nuclear bombs.

If reprocessing is not part of the cycle, the spent fuel itself is high-level waste.
Intermediate level wastes are mixed with concrete and stored in tanks, drums and
vaults at the sites where they are created.

If the UK's reactors all operate to their current shutdown dates and no more are
built, there will be an estimated 36,590 cubic metres - enough to fill 14 Olympic-
sized swimming pools - of intermediate and high level waste in the UK.

Most of the country's low-level waste is stored in sealed concrete vaults at a
purpose-built store in Drigg, Cumbria, although some is considered safe enough to
go into hazardous waste landfill sites.

The Drigg store currently contains 960,000 cubic metres - equivalent to 384
Olympic swimming pools - of waste.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/h...l/nn3page1.stm

[TargeT]

Posted by Cidersomerset (here)

So when the very first sentence of an article is completely wrong, do you continue reading?

we DO know how to dispose of radioactive waste safely and permanently........ and it's not just a theory, in fact Hitachi is developing a reactor to do this very thing right now..

up to you mate, I'm not an expert on this so I'm just really updating the thread
with articles from David Ickes site. I understand your point and I hope they can
store radio active waste,as I only live 4/5 miles from Hinckly point nuclear power
station which is on the River severn estuary coast.......

well the waste fuel wouldn't be kept at the reactor site anyway, currently it's all shipped by truck to Mt Yucca; which I find funny because all of that spent nuclear "waste" is HIGHLY sought after, France has been trying to take it off our hands for YEARS, they have reactors that burn waste fuel..we won't budge (Probably because we know that stockpiling this stuff is a great idea, it can be used for future power production and other applications (lots of war related stuff), I'm sure the same reason that we don't develop our oil resources applies here.


Unfortunately David Icke is just as susceptible to confusion and bad research as the rest of us, Critical thinking is needed for every piece of information you consume, like condoms at a brothel, no matter how good of an idea it is to use them; people mostly go with out (critical thinking takes effort, you must cross reference and analyze the information & we humans seek the easiest path in all we do, even when detrimental).

[Sidney]

I do understand your point TargeT, but it is clear to me that it is no coincidence of the enormous ocean dead zone,sea life die offs happening SINCE the FUKU disaster.
Im sorry, but maybe some radiation is harmless, and some is. The planet is in trouble, and it is my opinion that fukushima is a killer.
I respectfully agree to disagree with you.

[TargeT]

Posted by Sidney (here)
I do understand your point TargeT, but it is clear to me that it is no coincidence of the enormous ocean dead zone,sea life die offs happening SINCE the FUKU disaster.
Im sorry, but maybe some radiation is harmless, and some is. The planet is in trouble, and it is my opinion that fukushima is a killer.
I respectfully agree to disagree with you.

Let me correct you on one thing, then let me know what you think.


Ocean die offs have been happening for millions of years (as far as we can tell), they are a natural phenomenon of an ecosystem we are CLUELESS about.

Death due to natural causes is far more common than human negligence or intentional polluting. Oxygen depletion and natural life cycles occur much more often than other causes such as a release of toxins into the water.

http://aquaviews.net/ocean-news/3-massive-fish-dieoffs/

Is the sea floor littered with dead animals due to radiation? No.

http://deepseanews.com/2014/01/is-th...-radiation-no/

cientists have been working for months to find out what’s causing the massive die-off and now Harvell and others have evidence that an infectious disease caused by a bacteria or virus may be at the root of the problem.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/...fish-die-offs/

etc etc etc....

Information processing/parsing and critical thinking are key here

[panopticon]

Just an update on the fuel transfer process from SFP of #4 to the common pool and general information.

The transfer process resumed on 4th September 2014 and now stands at 1188 assemblies having been transferred:


Source

Current radiation levels @ Fukushima are consistent with past levels and official levels are available here, here and here (there is no indication that these ambient measurements are overly inaccurate and have been mostly verified by civilian non-government testing, the problems to do with testing have largely been related to onsite water/soil testing procedures [which were very inaccurate allegedly due to a machines calibration fault] and TEPCO/Japanese governments choice of ambient sampling devices that lowered the results by a very small amount).

So far any level of Cs-134 detected in the North Eastern Pacific Ocean (not that I've heard of any) is not consistent with a plume from Fukushima having arrived on the West Coast of the US. Investigations appear to indicate that much of the surface water contaminant sank to the 300 metre level during the winter of 2011-2012 and has been further diluted due to current movements at that depth (source1 & source2).

Posted by Roisin (here)
This is not a quote, just attracting Roisin's attention

Roisin, you're a radiographer (if I remember correctly) and I'd appreciate if you can have a look at a journal article for me if you get a chance:
BABYSCAN: a whole body counter for small children in Fukushima

From the papers conclusion:

BABYSCAN, a whole body counter for small children was developed, and the first unit has been installed at a hospital in Fukushima. The radiocaesium detection limit of BABYSCAN is better than 50 Bq/body, which has been realized by a careful ergonomic design, optimized detector geometry and reinforced shielding. Even with this low detection limit, radiocaesium was not detected in any of the first 100 Fukushima children, while, as expected, 40K was detected in all subjects. The results of larger-scale measurements with the BABYSCAN will be reported in our forthcoming publications.

Curious for your opinion on this device and results indicated.

-- Pan

[panopticon]

For an interactive map of "dead zones" from the period 1850 - 2010 try here:
http://www.wri.org/media/maps/eutrop...ullscreen.html

It's a very informative tool which shows hypoxic and eutrophic zones as well as areas that are in recovery (due mostly to human intervention or rather by limiting negative human interaction).

It also shows that marine dead zones existed long before nuclear radiation and are largely due to fertilizer run-off & other pollutants.

Very short video explaining marine dead zones (particularly Gulf of Mexico) here:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=8jjN36nwXzU

More on dead zones and a short segment on New Zealand's recovery:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=UZgcQoXmu9Y

Low level alpha & beta emitting radionuclides are likely harmless if they are not ingested/inhaled or otherwise introduced to the internals of organic life. The main danger is from alpha & beta high emission radionuclides that are inhaled/ingested or from being near an unshielded high level gamma emitting source.

For an interactive animated run down on the varying effects of different types of radioactive particles and how differing levels of radiation exposure can effect organic systems try:
http://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/feature/heath-risks

For a bit more information on radionuclides try:
http://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/feature/...-radioactivity

I hope this is useful.

-- Pan

[TargeT]

Posted by panopticon (here)
It also shows that marine dead zones existed long before nuclear radiation and are largely due to fertilizer run-off & other pollutants.

-- Pan

no that's just completely incorrect. Dead zones existed long before fertilizer run offs and other pollutants; I literally just posted this:

Posted by TargeT (here)

Posted by Sidney (here)
I do understand your point TargeT, but it is clear to me that it is no coincidence of the enormous ocean dead zone,sea life die offs happening SINCE the FUKU disaster.
Im sorry, but maybe some radiation is harmless, and some is. The planet is in trouble, and it is my opinion that fukushima is a killer.
I respectfully agree to disagree with you.

Let me correct you on one thing, then let me know what you think.


Ocean die offs have been happening for millions of years (as far as we can tell), they are a natural phenomenon of an ecosystem we are CLUELESS about.

Death due to natural causes is far more common than human negligence or intentional polluting. Oxygen depletion and natural life cycles occur much more often than other causes such as a release of toxins into the water.

http://aquaviews.net/ocean-news/3-massive-fish-dieoffs/

Is the sea floor littered with dead animals due to radiation? No.

http://deepseanews.com/2014/01/is-th...-radiation-no/

cientists have been working for months to find out what’s causing the massive die-off and now Harvell and others have evidence that an infectious disease caused by a bacteria or virus may be at the root of the problem.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/...fish-die-offs/

etc etc etc....

Information processing/parsing and critical thinking are key here

[sheme]

Deep sea Methane gas bubbles- the release of massive proportions will replace the oxygen in the water and cause die off of marine life in the area of release. As the warming atmosphere causes the release of methane gas plums sea life is inevitably destroyed, what a shame we cannot find a way of harnessing this vast energy resource.

[panopticon]

Posted by TargeT (here)

Posted by panopticon (here)
It also shows that marine dead zones existed long before nuclear radiation and are largely due to fertilizer run-off & other pollutants.

-- Pan

no that's just completely incorrect. Dead zones existed long before fertilizer run offs and other pollutants; I literally just posted this:

Posted by TargeT (here)

Posted by Sidney (here)
I do understand your point TargeT, but it is clear to me that it is no coincidence of the enormous ocean dead zone,sea life die offs happening SINCE the FUKU disaster.
Im sorry, but maybe some radiation is harmless, and some is. The planet is in trouble, and it is my opinion that fukushima is a killer.
I respectfully agree to disagree with you.

Let me correct you on one thing, then let me know what you think.


Ocean die offs have been happening for millions of years (as far as we can tell), they are a natural phenomenon of an ecosystem we are CLUELESS about.

Death due to natural causes is far more common than human negligence or intentional polluting. Oxygen depletion and natural life cycles occur much more often than other causes such as a release of toxins into the water.

http://aquaviews.net/ocean-news/3-massive-fish-dieoffs/

Is the sea floor littered with dead animals due to radiation? No.

http://deepseanews.com/2014/01/is-th...-radiation-no/

cientists have been working for months to find out what’s causing the massive die-off and now Harvell and others have evidence that an infectious disease caused by a bacteria or virus may be at the root of the problem.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/...fish-die-offs/

etc etc etc....

Information processing/parsing and critical thinking are key here

Hi Target,

I'm referring to marine dead zones (caused by hypoxia) which in almost every instance in the modern period is due to nutrient rich run-off from farm lands, city sewage and industrial pollutants.

For more on dead zones see here:
http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/deadzone.html

Of course there are non-human related reasons that dead zones can occur (which is why I said 'are largely due to fertilizer run-off & other pollutants.') but the vast majority of examples where these dead zones occur (in the present age) is from human created nutrient rich pollutants moving through water ways. This leads to an algae bloom (much bigger than normal blooms due to the increased nutrient), the algal bloom eventually dies (mostly eaten and excreted) and falls to the ocean floor leading to a lack of oxygen because of decomposition processes.

That is the nature of many (but probably not all) dead zones around the world.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=5cj0JK_sipg

Please visit the interactive map I linked to. If you click on one of the many dots on the map (each one represents either a dead zone or an area with high nutrient levels being watched for signs of hypoxia) the reason for the hypoxia/eutrophication is given. The vast majority are due to nutrient rich run-off of fertilizer, industrial waste (including groundwater run-off from industrial areas entering waterways), sewage waste or a combination of the above.

Here's the link again to the interactive map I was talking about:
http://www.wri.org/media/maps/eutrop...ullscreen.html

This hasn't got much to do with chemical pollution, bacterial or viral infections leading to marine die-off's. That really is a separate issue and while they can be linked it kind of muddies things a bit. Also, I notice the MBARI research being mentioned in one of your links. Good to see it back again. We were talking about the alleged die-offs @ Station M in the North East Pacific Ocean back in January (see my posts here and here). At the time I thought we had all thoroughly debunked the claims of a 98% die-off in the North Pacific Ocean. For those who missed it here are the links to the MBARI articles that say it's rubbish (it was the misrepresentation of their research that led to the widely held incorrect belief that the entire Pacific is poisoned, so they have a right to set the record straight):

• MBARI debunks misleading stories related to the MBARI News Release
• Feast and famine on the abyssal plain

Maybe this video from Fall of 2012 (this is where nuclear fisharggedon was supposed to have occurred) will help those who missed it:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=bxL3Q3kVMt4

I hope this was useful.

-- Pan

[TargeT]

Posted by panopticon (here)
Hi Target,

I'm referring to marine dead zones (caused by hypoxia) which in almost every instance in the modern period is due to nutrient rich run-off from farm lands, city sewage and industrial pollutants.

For more on dead zones see here:
http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/deadzone.html

Of course there are non-human related reasons that dead zones can occur (which is why I said 'are largely due to fertilizer run-off & other pollutants.') but the vast majority of examples where these dead zones occur (in the present age) is from human created nutrient rich pollutants moving through water ways. This leads to an algae bloom (much bigger than normal blooms due to the increased nutrient), the algal bloom eventually dies (mostly eaten and excreted) and falls to the ocean floor leading to a lack of oxygen because of decomposition processes.

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree then.

from what I've found on this topic I would confidently state that dead zones occur largely (almost always) due to natural causes; every time a deadzone is given a real look (due dilligence, core samples from the ocean floor etc... REAL science) this is what they find.

when the EPA funds a study with a "we are looking for the anthropomorphic causes" approach of COURSE the data can be aranged to look like it by only looking for that data, yet it is proven wrong over and over, like in the Gulf of mexico (where we thought for years that the run offs were the cause, but it was shown that it's been happening for 1000's of years before modern agriculture). It MAY be getting a boost from agriculture, but since our documented records on gulf algae blooms only go back to 1985 how would we know?


again, this is an eco system we BARELY understand....


but then, I don't see humans as the big bad wolf either; and I'm not a self hating one trying to blame every problem on us either.