Fukushima: The Ticking Nuclear Bomb. Over 800 Tons of Radioactive Material Pouring into Pacific Ocea

[King Claus]

Is this real?

And i never eat fish

[Graham]

They say you should limit, how much Tuna you eat, due to Mercury contamination. The Seas were already Toxic, to begin with.

[Windischer]

Yes of course they are different.. the nuclear fallout from for example the Chernobyl NPP disaster is only at the very least many more hundred times than that of an atomic bomb.

reactors dont explode like a bomb does, for example
calling fukushima "the ticking nuclear bomb" requires a tr00 dumbo.

[Baluarte]

The title of the article is evidently figurative. It's not meant as a literal ticking bomb.

If it displeases so much though, you're welcome to contact Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey and explain to him why the title of his piece should be modified.

[Virtuous]

Sad.

[Windischer]

The title of the article is evidently figurative. It's not meant as a literal ticking bomb.

If it displeases so much though, you're welcome to contact Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey and explain to him why the title of his piece should be modified.

yea sure. nuclear bombs actually dont tick.
a small correction: the title of the article is a sensationalist bait.

[Scandalf]

They say you should limit, how much Tuna you eat, due to Mercury contamination. The Seas were already Toxic, to begin with.

Very true. There has been an accident in Japan by the way back in the 60's I guess that dealt with heavy metal (mercury) poisoning in a Japanese fisher's village. It resulted from the dumping in the sea by a firm.
The problem with heavy metals is that they accumulate in living beings and the biological mechanisms to eliminate them (like other wastes) aren't so efficient.
Plus, worst of all, since they almost can't be eliminated their quantity increases the more we move up to the tip of the food chain.
That is: krill or plancton have a certain amount (incredibly low), some small fish eat large amounts of plancton (they have to, food chain/bio-energy mechanics) acting as "sponges" who "filter out the other stuff" while accumulating heavy metals, they get ate by makerel which gets eaten by tuna which gets eaten by man, etc...

[Baluarte]

Regarding North America:
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Fukushima Radiation Levels Will Concentrate in Pockets at Specific US and Canada West Coast Locations

500 people assembled on October 19th on Ocean Beach in San Francisco and formed the letters with their bodies to demonstrate their growing concern about eventual fallout on the west coast.

Credit and More Information: FukushimaResponse.org

Experts at Canada’s Vancouver Aquarium say they are puzzled by what is causing thousands of sunflower starfish, or sea stars, to die in the waters of Vancouver Harbor and Howe Sound.

What is even more startling is the way the creatures perish — by quickly dissolving in a phenomenon the aquarium has dubbed Sea Star Wasting Syndrome.

“They have disintegrated, and now there is just goo left,” says research diver and taxonomist Donna Gibbs.


Radiation Levels Will Concentrate in Pockets at Certain West Coast Locations

An ocean current called the North Pacific Gyre is bringing Japanese radiation to the West Coast of North America:



The leg of the Gyre closest to Japan – the Kuroshio current – begins right next to Fukushima:



While many people assume that the ocean will dilute the Fukushima radiation, a previously-secret 1955 U.S. government report concluded that the ocean may not adequately dilute radiation from nuclear accidents, and there could be “pockets” and “streams” of highly-concentrated radiation.

Physicians for Social Responsibility notes:

An interesting fact for people living on the US west coast is also included in the UNSCEAR [United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation] report: only about 5% of the directly discharged radiation was deposited within a radius of 80 km from the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power station. The rest was distributed in the Pacific Ocean. 3-D simulations have been carried out for the Pacific basin, showing that within 5–6 years, the emissions would reach the North American coastline, with uncertain consequences for food safety and health of the local population.

The University of Hawaii’s International Pacific Research Center created a graphic showing the projected dispersion of debris from Japan.

Last year, scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory and 3 scientists from the GEOMAR Research Center for Marine Geosciences showed that radiation on the West Coast of North America could end up being 10 times higher than in Japan:

After 10 years the concentrations become nearly homogeneous over the whole Pacific, with higher values in the east, extending along the North American coast with a maximum (~1 × 10−4) off Baja California.
[...]

With caution given to the various idealizations (unknown actual oceanic state during release, unknown release area, no biological effects included, see section 3.4), the following conclusions may be drawn. (i) Dilution due to swift horizontal and vertical dispersion in the vicinity of the energetic Kuroshio regime leads to a rapid decrease of radioactivity levels during the first 2 years, with a decline of near-surface peak concentrations to values around 10 Bq m−3 (based on a total input of 10 PBq). The strong lateral dispersion, related to the vigorous eddy fields in the mid-latitude western Pacific, appears significantly under-estimated in the non-eddying (0.5°) model version. (ii) The subsequent pace of dilution is strongly reduced, owing to the eastward advection of the main tracer cloud towards the much less energetic areas of the central and eastern North Pacific. (iii) The magnitude of additional peak radioactivity should drop to values comparable to the pre-Fukushima levels after 6–9 years (i.e. total peak concentrations would then have declined below twice pre-Fukushima levels). (iv) By then the tracer cloud will span almost the entire North Pacific, with peak concentrations off the North American coast an order-of-magnitude higher than in the western Pacific.
[...]

In May, a team of scientists from Spain, Australia and France concluded that the radioactive cesium would look more like this:



A team of top Chinese scientists has just published a study in the Science China Earth Sciences journal showing that the radioactive plume crosses the ocean in a nearly straight line toward North America, and that it appears to stay together with little dispersion:

On March 30, 2011, the Japan Central News Agency reported the monitored radioactive pollutions that were 4000 times higher than the standard level. Whether or not these nuclear pollutants will be transported to the Pacific-neighboring countries through oceanic circulations becomes a world-wide concern.
[...]

The time scale of the nuclear pollutants reaching the west coast of America is 3.2 years if it is estimated using the surface drifting buoys and 3.9 years if it is estimated using the nuclear pollutant particulate tracers.
[...]

The half life of cesium-137 is so long that it produces more damage to human. Figure 4 gives the examples of the distribution of the impact strength of Cesium-137 at year 1.5 (panel (a)), year 3.5 (panel (b)), and year 4 (panel (c)).
[...]

It is worth noting that due to the current near the shore cannot be well reconstructed by the global ocean reanalysis, some nuclear pollutant particulate tracers may come to rest in near shore area, which may result in additional uncertainty in the estimation of the impact strength.
[...]

Since the major transport mechanism of nuclear pollutants for the west coast of America is the Kuroshio-extension currents, after four years, the impact strength of Cesium-137 in the west coast area of America is as high as 4%.

Bluefin tuna on the California shore tested positive for radiation from Fukushima, and there are reports of highly radioactive fish in Canada.

The CBS show The Doctors warned that we should be moderate with our fish intake, and children and pregnant women should be especially careful

Read more at http://www.realfarmacy.com/scientist...wwPGVWlBqds.99