Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Fukushima's Radioactive Ocean Water Arrives At West Coast

THE FIRST AMENDMENT IS SPECIFICALLY FOR INFORMING THE PUBLIC.  THIS IS A "PUBLIC NEED TO KNOW!" THIS IS NO TIME TO PLAY GAMES WITH PUBLIC ENDANGERMENT BY  "ANY" NEWS MEDIA AND/OR ETALS!  [VKD]

Fukushima's Radioactive Ocean Water Arrives At West Coast

LiveScience.com
By By Becky Oskin, Staff Writer 8 hours ago
.UC Berkeley Professor Tests Claims Of Fukushima Radiation In Bay Area
Radiation from Japan's leaking Fukushima nuclear power plant has reached waters offshore Canada, researchers said today at the annual American Geophysical Union's Ocean Sciences Meeting in Honolulu.
Two radioactive cesium isotopes, cesium-134 and cesium-137, have been detected offshore of Vancouver, British Columbia, researchers said at a news conference. The detected concentrations are much lower than the Canadian safety limit for cesium levels in drinking water, said John Smith, a research scientist at Canada's Bedford Institute of Oceanography in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia.
Tests conducted at U.S. beaches indicate that Fukushima radioactivity has not yet reached Washington, California or Hawaii, said Ken Buesseler, a senior scientist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute in Woods Hole, Mass.
"We have results from eight locations, and they all have cesium-137, but no cesium-134 yet," Buesseler said. (Isotopes are atoms of the same element that have different numbers of neutrons in their nuclei. In this case, cesium-137 has more neutrons than cesium-134.)
The scientists are tracking a radioactive plume from Japan's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. Three nuclear reactors at the power plant melted down after the March 11, 2011, Tohoku earthquake. The meltdown was triggered by the massive tsunami that followed the quake. [Fukushima Radiation Leak: 5 Things You Should Know]
Cesium signals
The initial nuclear accident from the Fukushima reactors released several radioactive isotopes, such as iodine-131, cesium-134 and cesium-137. Cesium-137 has a half-life of 30 years and remains in the environment for decades. Cesium-134, with a half-life of only two years, is an unequivocal marker of Fukushima ocean contamination, Smith said.
"The only cesium-134 in the North Pacific is there from Fukushima," he said. Cesium-137, on the other hand, is also present from nuclear weapons tests and discharge from nuclear power plants.
View gallery
Radioactive water at Fukushima plant

This Tuesday, Aug. 20, 2013 aerial
photo shows the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant at Okuma in Fuku …

Smith and his colleagues tracked rising levels of cesium-134 at several ocean monitoring stations west of Vancouver in the North Pacific beginning in 2011. By June 2013, the concentration reached 0.9 Becquerels per cubic meter, Smith said. All of the cesium-134 was concentrated in the upper 325 feet (100 m) of the ocean, he said. They are awaiting results from a February 2014 sampling trip.
The U.S. safety limit for cesium levels in drinking water is about 28 Becquerels, the number of radioactive decay events per second, per gallon (or 7,400 Becquerels per cubic meter). For comparison, uncontaminated seawater contains only a few Becquerels per cubic meter of cesium.
Cesium-137 levels at U.S. beaches were 1.3 to 1.7 Becquerels per cubic meter, Buesseler said. That's similar to background levels in the ocean from nuclear weapons testing, suggesting the Fukushima plume has not reached the U.S. coastline yet, he said.
The new monitoring data does not show which of two competing models best predicts the future concentration of Fukushima radiation along the U.S. West Coast, Smith said. These models suggest that radionuclides from Fukushima will begin to arrive on the West Coast in early 2014 and peak in 2016. However, the models differ in their predictions of the peak concentration of cesium — from a low of 2 to a maximum of 27 Becquerels per cubic meter. Both peaks are well below the highest level recorded in the Baltic Sea after Chernobyl, which was 1,000 Becquerels per cubic meter.
"It's still a little too early to know which one is correct," Smith said.
Safety concerns
The impending arrival of radioactive contaminants from Fukushima has raised concerns among coastal residents in the United States and Canada. But oceanographers and radiation experts say the radiation levels will be too low to threaten human health.
"These levels are clearly not a human or biological threat in Canada," Smith said.
Fukushima’s radiation reached coastal Canada first because of the powerful Kuroshio Current, which flows from Japan across the Pacific. The plume will then flow down the coast of North America and circle back toward Hawaii, models predict.
But Buesseler thinks even low levels of contamination merit monitoring, both for human health information and for the wealth of data about Pacific Ocean currents such monitoring could provide. On Jan. 14, he launched a website called "How Radioactive is Our Ocean?", where the public can make tax-deductible donations to support the analysis of existing water samples, or propose and fund new sampling locations along the West Coast.
And at Fukushima, radioactive water continues to escape from the damaged power plant into the ocean. Anew leak was reported last week, although that one did not empty into the ocean.
Email Becky Oskin or follow her @beckyoskin. Follow us @livescienceFacebook Google+. Original article on Live Science.
Copyright 2014 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.



FAIR USE NOTICE
FAIR USE NOTICE. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

2 comments:

Unknown said...

any and all leaks make it into the ocean if its dammed up it still seeps past the beerier slowly but surely ifs bottled up in a tank the tanks leak and go pop sooner or later they will all go pop if left unchecked in their current condition Chernobyl had 1 reactor 1/3 the size that only had a 1/3 melt down japan had 3 reactors that all melted down 100 percent so each reactor is 9 times worse until you include the mox factor then you have the fuel pools that Chernobyl did not have so when they say if/when the fuel pools blow it would be it would be 89 times worse then Chernobyl well the ounce of truth is it was already that bad by and getting worse the only good thing we have going for us is a clear sign of ET intervention or this would be allot worse now the 2 forecasts i bet one of them includes the knowladge of the ET intervention and assumes a steady level of mitigation while the other is based on no mitigation and a constant unmitigated problem i know the technology being used is being refined and was developed for this exact problem and the mitigation will improve that will mean a peek earlier then 2016 and it will mean a much lower peek and this technology can be used to decontaminate people as well with no ill effects just takes time and repeat treatments to be effective being they can not put a notice on the local media be ready to be decontaminated at such and such time they have to do this discretely if they could do this non discretely more effective means exist that could remove all the low level fallout from ones body in less then 30 seconds with zero discorfront but has to be done on a person to person basis i know the rain that fell in chicago the 29th of apr was loaded but its under control not solved the difference is problem is still a problem just not a extreme urgent need the leave the planet now we had preparations for that on stand by and still do and will keep such options on the table for as long as nuclear power is still in use even as we have the means to shut down any localized event before it escapes containment now but we have a backup if that should fail

Anonymous said...

Keep up the superb piece of work, I read few articles on this website and I think that your website
is rattling interesting and has lots of excellent information.