It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Scientists Assess Radioactivity in the Ocean from Japan Nuclear Power Facility

page: 1
10

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 09:04 PM
link   
From Science Daily: Scientists Assess Radioactivity in the Ocean from Japan Nuclear Power Facility

A little about the vague numbers they provide as well as an investigation into the people and politics behind this article (I mean, who can you really trust nowadays! Sadly investigating the source's sources are part of common research these days).

Assessment of Radioactivity in the Ocean off Japan for the 4 months following the 3/11 Disaster


The study was conducted by Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution chemist Ken Buesseler and two colleagues based in Japan, Michio Aoyama of the Meteorological Research Institute and Masao Fukasawa of the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology.


(BS warning)

Their study finds that the levels of radioactivity, while high, are not a direct threat to humans or marine life, but cautions that the effect of accumulated radionuclides in marine sediments is poorly known.


Few actual facts and data were provided in the article (see below under politics), but here's ONE:
Concentrations of cesium-137 where the plants discharged into the ocean were at 50 million times normal/previous levels

A little more from the article:

The scientists also found that the releases decreased in May by a factor of 1,000, "a consequence of ocean mixing and a primary radionuclide source that had dramatically abated," they report.

While concentrations of some radionuclides continued to decrease, by July they were still 10,000 times higher than levels measured in 2010 off the coast of Japan.

This indicates that the plants "remain a significant source of contamination to the coastal waters off Japan," the researchers report.

"There is currently no data that allow us to distinguish between several possible sources of continued releases," says Buesseler.


Oh good! Data!

The study used data on the concentrations of cesium-137, cesium-134 and iodine-131 as a basis to compare the levels of radionuclides released into the ocean with known levels in the sea surrounding Japan prior to the accident.


and...
the numbers weren't included in the article... although, they provide the name of the originally published article which I can't gain access to. Here's a link to the Abstract and the article if you're able to get access. Impacts of the fukushima nuclear power plants on marine radioactivity. (Buesseler K, Aoyama M, Fukasawa M.)


The Politics of Publication and the Power of Money

I don't mean to paint such an awful picture of the lack of data. There seem to be some very reliable, reputable scientists involved in this research. However, the data was RELEASED BY TEPCO, the Japanese Energy Company that has already many times been caught lying about this incident. The American group that performed the research is Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute; founded by a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation.

The current Director and President of the Institute, Susan K. Avery, PhD seems to be on the up-and-up with a very reputable background in Science and Engineering from non-Elite Educational facilities, she also has a long history as an educator and Administrator with much positive community involvement. There also happen to be some pretty ominous names behind this possible ruse however... enter Christopher J. Winslow.

Christopher J. Winslow, CFO and Vice President for Finance and Administration for Woods Hole just took on a new job, as of November this year, to start Jan 1st...

CNA today announced the hiring of Christopher J. Winslow to serve as the not-for-profit research and analysis organization's Chief Financial Officer, senior vice president and Treasurer. Reporting to Robert Murray, CNA President and CEO, Winslow will assume his duties at CNA on January 1, 2012.

Source

So he went from being in charge of the money of Woods Hole research (investigating things like the Fukushima disaster and climate change) to being the new guy on the block for CNA who "applies its efforts to a broad range of national security, defense and public interest issues including education, health care and public health, homeland security, human capital management, and air traffic management."

is there a Bilderberger everywhere you look??



The lack of data could likely be due to the publication being for purchase but after a little investigation it seems much more likely this is just the same old BS we've come to expect from our friendly world controllers.

I recommend Arnie Gundersen of Fairewinds Associates for actual data on the disasterous event.




posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Here's the latest video from Arnie Gundersen's site: New Video of Scientist Kaltofen Presenting to American Public Health Association. It's on Vimeo so not sure it can be embedded here...

vimeo.com...

Kaltofen discusses the amount of "hot particles" measured around the Northern Hemisphere and from itmes such as kids' shoes, playground dust/dirt, food, plaed air filters, and car air filters.

We are breathing in hot particles EVERY day and the people in Japan should be much farther away than the government provided 12 mile safe zone.

Education can save lives in this case!



edit on 10-12-2011 by Thermo Klein because: added short synopsis of video



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 10:58 PM
link   
I sure its bad locally but worldwide it wont have much effect. Dont worry



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Thermo Klein
 

Hey TK... remember you from Fukushima Node? Excellent dig for sediments on here. Which we don't much know much about, like you say. How hard would it be to ride a boat and dump a 4" pipe overboard on a string to collect some?


I recommend Arnie Gundersen of Fairewinds Associates for actual data on the disasterous event.

I trust him to relate the data. How about the Sea Shepherds in their Zodiacs to collect it? There's a chain of custody I can believe in.



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by intrptr
 


I was really impressed by Susan Avery, PhD from the OP. I'd love to get her take on all this! Also if someone has access to the full article we may find there's more empirical data published. I may be able to access it at my alma mater but won't be out that way for a while.



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 11:13 PM
link   
The article you're discussing does not mention any specific article but rather all of the written work of J. Garnier-Laplace including this one copied and pasted in its entirety from www.radioprotection.org. The only thing I changed is the spacing.

Radioprotection
Volume 44, Number 5, 2009
ECORAD 2008 - Radioecology and Environmental Radioactivity

Page(s) 903 - 908
DOI dx.doi.org...

Published online
06 June 2009

Radioprotection 2009, Vol. 44, n° 5, pages 903 à 908
A Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment and ranking method for liquid radioactive and chemical mixtures released by nuclear facilities under normal operating conditions


J. Garnier-Laplace1, K. Beaugelin-Seiller2, R. Gilbin3, C. Della-Vedova4, O. Jolliet5 and J. Payet6

1 Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN), Service d'Étude du Comportement des Radionucléides dans les Écosystèmes, DEI/SECRE, Bât. 159, Centre de Cadarache, BP. 3, 13115 St. Paul-les-Durance, France
2 IRSN, DEI/SECRE, Laboratoire de Modélisation Environnementale, Bât. 159, Centre de Cadarache, BP. 3, 13115 St. Paul-les-Durance, France
3 IRSN, DEI/SECRE, Laboratoire de Radioécologie et d'Écotoxicologie, Bât. 186, Centre de Cadarache, BP. 3, 13115 St. Paul-les-Durance, France
4 Magelis, 6 rue Frédéric Mistral, 84160 Cadenet, France
5 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2029, USA
6 École Polytechnique de Lausanne, EPFL, 1015 Lausanne EPFL, Switzerland


Abstract

Ecological Risk Assessment is used to evaluate the potential hazards to the environment that are attributable to emissions of pollutants from industries. There is guidance available regarding the general ecological risk assessment process including problem formulation, exposure and effect analyses, and risk characterization. In a first step, the Screening-Level Ecological Risk Assessment (SLERA) is used to evaluate whether the emissions can put the receptor ecosystems at risk or not. Concerning releases from nuclear facilities under authorization, any SLERA is a challenging task because of (1) the large number of substances, (2) the various quantities that may be emitted to the aquatic ecosystems and (3) the various environmental situations to be considered. This task must be performed for two categories of pollutants, radionuclides and chemicals, each exhibiting specificities in terms of concentration in media or dose-effect relationships. Since these relationships for radioactive substances are based on the tissue-absorbed dose in Gray, the first step is to express critical exposure values to radionuclides in a consistent way with the critical concentration used for chemicals. We describe here the screening and ranking method that was developed and an application to the electronuclear sites along the Rhône River.

© EDP Sciences, 2009



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 11:15 PM
link   
Great post. Life is a very fluid and responsive thing. While it's very true that radiation levels are high and dangerous life will adopt to those falling levels and continue on. Some things will mutate and species go extinct as well as deaths or mutations of humans.

For the short time we'll need fission nuclear power whether we like it or not but let us hope that the process of fusion power is found and quickly implemented. Only then can we permanently bury the dangerous fission reactors. My best,



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 11:22 PM
link   
I know that the article I posted does not contain any actual data either, it does demonstrate that there is an established criteria for collecting said data.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 12:34 AM
link   
reply to post by WilliamTheRed
 


not sure what you're looking at but the article I based the OP on is from Science Daily: Title: Scientists Assess Radioactivity in the Ocean from Japan Nuclear Power Facility

Within that Science Daily article is the following paragraph:

The resulting paper, Impacts of the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plants on Marine Radioactivity, is published in the current issue of the journal Environmental Science & Technology.


It is also linked in my op, as found in PubMed (which I can't access beyond the abstract):
Impacts of the fukushima nuclear power plants on marine radioactivity.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 01:22 AM
link   
To add to background info on this one, when they first decided to go on this 'cruise' I posted an ATS thread about it, found where the university of Hawaii was hiding their captains reports and posted their travel positions on my website. I have taken that map down now, but the ATS thread is still there Research Cruise - Fukushima area radiation monitoring in the Pacific Ocean

Fukushima Fallout, Impact on Ocean Still Murky


A new study has found that discharges from the defunct Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear power plants peaked one month after a March 11 earthquake and tsunami brought on the nuclear accident, and continued through at least July.

The study was conducted by Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution chemist Ken Buesseler and two colleagues based in Japan - Michio Aoyama of the Meteorological Research Institute and Masao Fukasawa of the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology.


I emailed a couple of people including Prof Buesseler to ask for more information at the time, but (obviously) did not receive a reply.

Hope you have better luck than I did with downloading this talk by Ken Buesseler from www.marine.univie.ac.at

Impacts of the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plants on Marine Radioactivity (pdf 5 pages)

More from the same source pubs.acs.org
Lessons from fukushima (1 page)

Fukushima Wildlife Dose Reconstruction Signals Ecological Consequences

Nuclear Accident Like Fukushima Unlikely in the Rest of the World?



edit on 11 Dec 2011 by qmantoo because: pdf links



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:01 AM
link   
reply to post by qmantoo
 


Great info! Thanks for sharing. I'll look into getting his talk.



new topics

top topics



 
10

log in

join