Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
Japanese nuclear plant accident in Fukushima (Update: March 24, 2011 12:00)
Because of the numerous incoming data of the CTBTO stations in Japan, California, Alaska and Russia, it is possible to source strengths of the substances iodine-131 and cesium-137 to assess for the first three days of the accident.
During the first two days (March 12 and 13) material was transported to the Pacific Ocean and reached as early as 17 3 . California (see picture below). The highest measured concentration of iodine-131 were 14 000 μBqm -3, with an accuracy of 10 μBqm -3.The measurements were used to estimate the releases from Fukushima. The estimated releases of iodine-131 in this period are 1.3 10 17 Bq / day, for cesium-137 5 10 15 Bq / day.
On March 14 the wind shifted toward the interior, and the cloud reached the CTBTO Takasaki Station (see picture below). May the wind shifted toward the interior, and the cloud reached the CTBTO Takasaki Station (see picture below). There were eventually 15 There were eventually seven μBqm March 15 1.5 10 -3 measured by iodine-131, which is exactly 1000 times in California. The estimated releases of iodine-131 were 1.2 10 17 Bq / day. This corresponds very well to the estimates using the U.S. data. For cesium-137 is the calculated release 4 10 16 Bq / day. For cesium-137 is the calculated release 4 10 16 Bq / day. This is much higher than the end result of the U.S. measurements.
Peachtree Pam wrote:Can anyone online post it?
URGENT: Radioactive water at No. 2 reactor due to partial meltdown: Edano
TOKYO, March 28, Kyodo
The government believes highly radioactive water detected at the No. 2 reactor of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant is due to a partial meltdown of fuel rods there, its top spokesman said Monday.
Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano told a news conference that the government believes that the meltdown was only temporary.
BOSTON — Trace amounts of radioactive iodine linked to Japan's crippled nuclear power station have turned up in rainwater samples as far away as Massachusetts during the past week, state officials said Sunday.
http://enenews.com/fukushima-probably-exceeds-chernobyl-and-there-is-no-end-in-sight-nhk-video
NHK: Fukushima probably exceeds Chernobyl and there is no end in sight (VIDEO)
March 27th, 2011 at 06:29 AM
NHK, March 27, 2011 at 6:20 am EDT:
At 3:00 minutes in
…Fukushima probably exceeds Chernobyl and there is no end in sight…
Read more:
* TEPCO admits No. 1 and No. 2 reactors suffered more damage than originally believed
* NHK confirms 10 million times usual levels in reactor No. 2 (VIDEO)
The idea that a threshold exists or there is a safe level of radiation for human exposure began unraveling in the 1950s when research showed one pelvic x-ray in a pregnant woman could double the rate of childhood leukemia in an exposed baby.3 Furthermore, the risk was ten times higher if it occurred in the first three months of pregnancy than near the end. This became the stepping-stone to the understanding that the timing of exposure was even more critical than the dose. The earlier in embryonic development it occurred, the greater the risk.
Written on March 26, 2011 at 9:58 am by alpineski
Filed under Uncategorized no comments
By Dr. Brian Moench-
Administration spokespeople continuously claim “no threat” from the radiation reaching the US from Japan, just as they did with oil hemorrhaging into the Gulf. Perhaps we should all whistle “Don’t worry, be happy” in unison. A thorough review of the science, however, begs a second opinion.
That the radiation is being released 5,000 miles away isn’t as comforting as it seems. The Japanese reactors hold about 1,000 times more radiation than the bombs dropped over Hiroshima..1 Every day, the jet stream carries pollution from Asian smoke stacks and dust from the Gobi Desert to our West Coast, contributing 10 to 60 percent of the total pollution breathed by Californians, depending on the time of year. Mercury is probably the second most toxic substance known after plutonium. Half the mercury in the atmosphere over the entire US originates in China. It, too, is 5,000 miles away. A week after a nuclear weapons test in China, iodine 131 could be detected in the thyroid glands of deer in Colorado, although it could not be detected in the air or in nearby vegetation..2
The idea that a threshold exists or there is a safe level of radiation for human exposure began unraveling in the 1950s when research showed one pelvic x-ray in a pregnant woman could double the rate of childhood leukemia in an exposed baby.3 Furthermore, the risk was ten times higher if it occurred in the first three months of pregnancy than near the end. This became the stepping-stone to the understanding that the timing of exposure was even more critical than the dose. The earlier in embryonic development it occurred, the greater the risk.
A new medical concept has emerged, increasingly supported by the latest research, called “fetal origins of disease,” that centers on the evidence that a multitude of chronic diseases, including cancer, often have their origins in the first few weeks after conception by environmental insults disturbing normal embryonic development. It is now established medical advice that pregnant women should avoid any exposure to x-rays, medicines or chemicals when not absolutely necessary, no matter how small the dose, especially in the first three months.
“Epigenetics” is a term integral to fetal origins of disease, referring to chemical attachments to genes that turn them on or off inappropriately and have impacts functionally similar to broken genetic bonds. Epigenetic changes can be caused by unimaginably small doses – parts per trillion – be it chemicals, air pollution, cigarette smoke or radiation. Furthermore, these epigenetic changes can occur within minutes after exposure and may be passed on to subsequent generations. 456
The Endocrine Society, 14,000 researchers and medical specialists in more than 100 countries, warned that “even infinitesimally low levels of exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals, indeed, any level of exposure at all, may cause endocrine or reproductive abnormalities, particularly if exposure occurs during a critical developmental window. Surprisingly, low doses may even exert more potent effects than higher doses.”7 If hormone-mimicking chemicals at any level are not safe for a fetus, then the concept is likely to be equally true of the even more intensely toxic radioactive elements drifting over from Japan, some of which may also act as endocrine disruptors.
Many epidemiologic studies show that extremely low doses of radiation increase the incidence of childhood cancers, low birth-weight babies, premature births, infant mortality, birth defects and even diminished intelligence.8 Just two abdominal x-rays delivered to a male can slightly increase the chance of his future children developing leukemia.9 By damaging proteins anywhere in a living cell, radiation can accelerate the aging process and diminish the function of any organ. Cells can repair themselves, but the rapidly growing cells in a fetus may divide before repair can occur, negating the body’s defense mechanism and replicating the damage.
Comforting statements about the safety of low radiation are not even accurate for adults.10 Small increases in risk per individual have immense consequences in the aggregate. When low risk is accepted for billions of people, there will still be millions of victims. New research on risks of x-rays illustrate the point.
Radiation from CT coronary scans is considered low, but, statistically, it causes cancer in one of every 270 40-year-old women who receive the scan. Twenty year olds will have double that rate. Annually, 29,000 cancers are caused by the 70 million CT scans done in the US.11,12 Common, low-dose dental x-rays more than double the rate of thyroid cancer. Those exposed to repeated dental x-rays have an even higher risk of thyroid cancer.13
Even properly functioning nuclear plants emit a steady stream of radiation into nearby water and atmosphere, which can be inhaled directly or ingested from soil contact, plants or cows milk. Many studies confirm higher rates of cancers like childhood leukemia, and breast and thyroid cancer among people who live in the same counties as nuclear plants, and among nuclear workers.3
Beginning with Madam Curie, the story of nuclear power is one where key players have consistently miscalculated or misrepresented the risks of radiation. The victims include many of those who worked on the original Manhattan Project, the 200,000 soldiers who were assigned to eye witness our nuclear tests, the residents of the Western US who absorbed the lion’s share of fallout from our nuclear testing in Nevada, the thousands of forgotten victims of Three Mile Island or the likely hundreds of thousands of casualties of Chernobyl. This could be the latest chapter in that long and tragic story when, once again, we were told not to worry.
RADIATION levels that can prove fatal were detected outside reactor buildings at Japan’s Fukushima No.1 plant for the first time, complicating efforts to contain the worst disaster since Chernobyl in 1986.
Water in an underground trench outside the No.2 reactor had levels exceeding one sievert an hour, a spokesman for plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company said.
Thirty minutes’ exposure to that dose would trigger nausea and four hours might lead to death within two months, according to the US Environmental Protection Agency.
Fukushima's "Chernobyl moment" could be fast approaching
Mike Whitney
by Mike Whitney | March 26, 2011 - 11:39am
The calamity at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant is deteriorating and the nightmare scenario is becoming more likely. The levels of radioactive iodine in the seawater beyond the plant have soared to 1,250-times above normal contaminating the fish in the area and turning the coastal waters into a nuclear wasteland. At the same time, the prospect of a full-core meltdown still looms-large with no remedy in sight. Brave workers have put their lives on the line with no meaningful sign of improvement. The lights are still "blinking red".
Arjun Makhijani, president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research in Maryland, details the toxic cocktail that will emerge if there's an explosion at Fukushima:
“The mechanisms of the accident would be very different than Chernobyl, 4 where there was also a fire, and the mix of radionuclides would be very different. While the quantity of short-lived radionuclides, notably iodine-131, would be much smaller, the consequences for the long term could be more dire due to long-lived radionuclides such as cesium- 137, strontium-90, iodine-129, and plutonium-239.” (Libya, Oh What a Stupid War; Fukushima, Cover-Up Amid Catastrophe, Alexander Cockburn, Counterpunch)
If the spent fuel rods catch fire from lack of coolant, the intense heat will lift radiation plumes high into the atmosphere that will drift around the world. At present, the pools are in danger because two of the three stricken reactors have lost their cover due to hydrogen explosions. The risks are unparalleled and the remedies uncertain. A full damage assessment is still pending. There is no "quick fix".
The media has flipped into full "BP Oil Spill-mode", making every effort to minimize the disaster and to soothe the public with half-truths and disinformation. The media's goal is to conceal the scale of the catastrophe in order to protect the nuclear industry. It's another case of profits over people. Still, the truth is slipping out in dribs and drabs. Radiation has popped up in the Tokyo water supply, imports of milk, vegetable and fruit from four prefectures in the vicinity of Fukushima have been banned, and the evacuation zone around the plant has widened to an 18 mile radius. This is news that the public can use to prepare themselves as they see fit. The rest is propaganda.
Monitors have detected tiny radioactive particles which have spread from the reactor site across the Pacific to North America, the Atlantic and Europe...
According to Reuters: "It's only a matter of days before it disperses in the entire northern hemisphere," said Andrea Stahl, a senior scientist at the Norwegian Institute for Air Research."
The Japanese government has been downplaying the crisis to make it look like they have matters under control. But it's all a sham. The only real change has been the way the gov-media have shaped the information to pacify the public. It's shameless. Rather than sweeping it under the rug, the government should be taking extra precautions to save lives. This is from the Union of Concerned Scientists website:
"Our assessment is that the Japanese government is squandering the opportunity to initiate an orderly evacuation from larger areas around the site–especially of sensitive populations, like children and pregnant women. It is potentially wasting valuable time by not undertaking a larger scale evacuation at this time."
Naturally, the government is covering up as much as possible for the powerful nuclear lobby. President Obama has continued flacking for the industry even while clouds of radiation still rise from Fukushima. It's not the public that politicians are worried about, but their big money constituents who fill the campaign coffers. Still, the truth is observable for those who wish to see. The Japanese have employed desperate measures to mitigate the accident, but to little effect. The prospect of a meltdown, a fire, or another apocalyptic explosion grows more likely by the day. Fukushima's Chernobyl moment could be fast approaching putting tens of thousands at risk of thyroid cancer, childhood leukemia and other potentially life-threatening ailments.
Don't believe the media's lies.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests