Dear Mr. G,
Thank you for your message and concern. This is certainly a perplexing problem with many possibilities. We now have some of the tissue and will analyze it by gamma ray spectroscopy, but that will take several weeks to accomplish that task. There are also several agencies with similar concern and we are all working informally to keep each other informed about our contributions to the various tests planned or performed. I appreciate your concern.
Originally posted by SoulVisions
There is a multitude of posts within this thread that are trying diligently to compare the cleanup required at a leaking reactor to that of a nuclear bomb.
Are you all serious? One is in a small, controlled (debatable) area versus the other that spreads a "film" of radioactivity for miles. There is no comparison.
In the past, when the material needed to be cleaned up, the contaminated ground was shoveled, packed into canisters, and then buried. Later on, the areas where these are buried, are then sealed. (Emphasis on the word "sealed")
While the leakage into the water and the habitat of the immediate area concerns me, radiation and it's material just does not work in the way that some here are claiming that it does. Fumes, air pollution even, while not necessarily good, will NOT affect the West coast of the USA in ANY harmful way. Also, unless you order all of your seafood from japan, or somehow an aquatic animal incredibly crosses the entire Pacific ocean to show up (and then likely die) here, the waters here do not suddenly become contaminated.
Again, I can't help but look right back at the thread's title claiming, "Pacific Ocean May Be Lost!"
There is no need for the fear being spread here. Not on the subject matter of contamination. Otherwise, the nations whom we all are purchasing land from in order to store our "used materials" would be on the news every night with the latest reports of terrible atrocities. There are established methods to handle these scenarios and material.
Nuclear Power's Global Expansion: Weighing Its Costs and Risks
Authors: Henry Sokolski; ARMY WAR COLL STRATEGIC STUDIES INST CARLISLE BARRACKS PA
When security and arms control analysts list what has helped keep nuclear weapons technologies from spreading, energy economics is rarely, if ever, mentioned. Yet, large civilian nuclear energy programs can--and have--brought states quite a way towards developing nuclear weapons; and it has been market economics, more than any other force, that has kept most states from starting or completing these programs. Since the early 1950s, every major government in the Western Hemisphere, Asia, the Middle East, and Europe has been drawn to atomic power's allure, only to have market realities prevent most of their nuclear investment plans from being fully realized. With any luck, this past may be our future. Certainly, if nuclear power programs continue to be as difficult and expensive to complete as they have been compared to their nonnuclear alternatives, only additional government support and public spending will be able to save them. In this case, one needs to ask why governments would bother, especially in light of the security risks that would inevitably arise with nuclear power's further proliferation. On the other hand, if nuclear power evolves into the quickest and least expensive way to produce electricity while abating carbon emissions, little short of a nuclear explosion traceable to a peaceful nuclear facility is likely to stem this technology's further spread--no matter what its security risks might be. Adam Smith's Invisible Hand, then, could well determine just how far civilian nuclear energy expands and how much attention its attendant security risks will receive. Certainly, if nuclear power's economics remain negative, diplomats and policymakers could leverage this point, work to limit legitimate nuclear commerce to what is economically competitive, and so gain a powerful tool to help limit nuclear proliferation.
"...every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good."
Smith is often regarded as the father of economics, and his writings have been enormously influential. Nowadays, "invisible hand" explanations are invoked to explain all sorts of phenomena, from scientific progress to environmental degradation. In the modern context, mathematicians study "invisible hand" processes as part of Game Theory, the branch of mathematics that deals with payoffs and strategies (see Game Theory and the Cuban Missile Crisis) in Issue 13 of Plus.
Smith was profoundly religious, and saw the "invisible hand" as the mechanism by which a benevolent God administered a universe in which human happiness was maximised. He made it clear in his writings that quite considerable structure was required in society before the invisible hand mechanism could work efficiently. For example, property rights must be strong, and there must be widespread adherence to moral norms, such as prohibitions against theft and misrepresentation. Theft was, to Smith, the worst crime of all, even though a poor man stealing from a rich man may increase overall happiness. He even went so far as to say that the purpose of government is to defend the rich from the poor.
An IAEA expert mission completed a review of Japan's process for assessing nuclear safety at the nation's nuclear power plants on 31 January 2012.
The 10-member IAEA expert mission began in Tokyo on 23 January and delivered a Preliminary Summary Report to Japanese officials today. The mission was requested by the Japanese government in 2011, following the approval of the Nuclear Safety Action Plan by all IAEA Member States in September 2011.
The Action Plan defines a programme of work to strengthen the global nuclear safety framework, and it calls for nations to promptly undertake a national assessment of the design of nuclear power plants against extreme natural hazards and to implement corrective actions as needed.
"We concluded that NISA's instructions to power plants and its review process for the Comprehensive Safety Assessments are generally consistent with IAEA Safety Standards," said team leader James Lyons, director of the IAEA's Nuclear Installation Safety Division.
The team found a number of good practices in Japan's review process and identified some improvements that would enhance the overall effectiveness of that process. The team will deliver those complete findings when it provides a final report to Japanese officials in several weeks.
The text of the Preliminary Summary Report is available here [pdf].
"IAEA and Partners Fight Cancer"
2 February 2012 | Together with its partners, the IAEA demonstrates its continued commitment to improving cancer control around the globe in its commemoration of World Cancer Day at the IAEA headquarters in Vienna on 2 February 2012
Originally posted by Destinyone
One thing we do have control over as ATSers, is everyone who reads this thread, Flag it. Force it to the front page, and keep it there. U2U your friends here, provide a link to this thread, ask them politely to Please Flag it to help keep vital information in plain view for those who have not seen it. Yes, that is something we can do, the MSM won't do for us.
Out of sight...out of mind. Sadly this is the nature of people these days...An attitude that will probably end up killing us all at some point....
The Japanese government has been obliged to acknowledge that "the severity rating of its nuclear crisis ... matches that of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster". In a bitter irony, however, this tacit admission by the Japanese authorities has proven to been part of the cover-up of a significantly larger catastrophe, resulting in a process of global nuclear radiation and contamination:
"While Chernobyl was an enormous unprecedented disaster, it only occurred at one reactor and rapidly melted down. Once cooled, it was able to be covered with a concrete sarcophagus that was constructed with 100,000 workers. There are a staggering 4400 tons of nuclear fuel rods at Fukushima, which greatly dwarfs the total size of radiation sources at Chernobyl." ( Extremely High Radiation Levels in Japan: University Researchers Challenge Official Data, Global Research, April 11, 2011)
The dumping of highly radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean constitutes a potential trigger to a process of global radioactive contamination. Radioactive elements have not only been detected in the food chain in Japan, radioactive rain water has been recorded in California:
"Hazardous radioactive elements being released in the sea and air around Fukushima accumulate at each step of various food chains (for example, into algae, crustaceans, small fish, bigger fish, then humans; or soil, grass, cow's meat and milk, then humans). Entering the body, these elements - called internal emitters - migrate to specific organs such as the thyroid, liver, bone, and brain, continuously irradiating small volumes of cells with high doses of alpha, beta and/or gamma radiation, and over many years often induce cancer". (Helen Caldicott, Fukushima: Nuclear Apologists Play Shoot the Messenger on Radiation, The Age, April 26, 2011)
What prevails is a well organized camouflage. The public health disaster in Japan, the contamination of water, agricultural land and the food chain, not to mention the broader economic and social implications, have neither been fully acknowledged nor addressed in a comprehensive and meaningful fashion by the Japanese authorities.
Japan as a nation state has been destroyed. Its landmass and territorial waters are contaminated. Part of the country is uninhabitable. High levels of radiation have been recorded in the Tokyo metropolitan area, which has a population of 39 million (2010) (more than the population of Canada, circa 34 million (2010)) There are indications that the food chain is contaminated throughout Japan:
"Radioactive cesium exceeding the legal limit was detected in tea made in a factory in Shizuoka City, more than 300 kilometers away from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. Shizuoka Prefecture is one of the most famous tea producing areas in Japan. A tea distributor in Tokyo reported to the prefecture that it detected high levels of radioactivity in the tea shipped from the city. The prefecture ordered the factory to refrain from shipping out the product. After the accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant, radioactive contamination of tea leaves and processed tea has been found over a wide area around Tokyo." (See 5 More Companies Detect Radiation In Their Tea Above Legal Limits Over 300 KM From Fukushima, June 15, 2011)
The crisis in Japan has also brought into the open the unspoken relationship between nuclear energy and nuclear war. Nuclear energy is not a civilian economic activity. It is an appendage of the nuclear weapons industry which is controlled by the so-called defense contractors. The powerful corporate interests behind nuclear energy and nuclear weapons overlap. In Japan at the height of the disaster, "the nuclear industry and government agencies [were] scrambling to prevent the discovery of atomic-bomb research facilities hidden inside Japan's civilian nuclear power plants".1 (See Yoichi Shimatsu, Secret Weapons Program Inside Fukushima Nuclear Plant? Global Research, April 12, 2011) It should be noted that the complacency of both the media and the governments to the hazards of nuclear radiation pertains to the nuclear energy industry as well as to to use of nuclear weapons. In both cases, the devastating health impacts of nuclear radiation are casually denied. Tactical nuclear weapons with an explosive capacity of up to six times a Hiroshima bomb are labelled by the Pentagon as "safe for the surrounding civilian population". No concern has been expressed at the political level as to the likely consequences of a US-NATO-Israel attack on Iran, using "safe for civilians" tactical nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear state. Such an action would result in "the unthinkable": a nuclear holocaust over a large part of the Middle East and Central Asia. A nuclear nightmare, however, would occur even if nuclear weapons were not used. The bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities using conventional weapons would contribute to unleashing another Fukushima type disaster with extensive radioactive fallout. (For further details See Michel Chossudovsky, Towards a World War III Scenario, The Dangers of Nuclear War, Global Research, Montreal, 2011)
Originally posted by aching_knuckles
Originally posted by kn0wh0w
I don't care wether or not people are too scared to read this but this deserves more attention ATS!
Look at the response to this, and youve got your answers about how much ATSers really care. If the title was "Cop shoots dog!" or "Leftist Death Panels Coming to Abort Your Baby!" it would have 30 pages of replies in 12 hours.
But when Americans start dying in droves and the West is uninhabitable, ATSers will find a way to blame it on Obama, "liberals" and "socialists", I am sure of that.edit on 2-2-2012 by aching_knuckles because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by XtraTL
300 tonnes of nuclear fuel is going to destroy the entire 1000,000,000,000 tonnes of the pacific ocean. I am now rolling around on the floor laughing so hard my sides hurt.
Perhaps at that dilution it will have a homeopathic effect. Let's call it the Pacific Randi effect after the magician Randi who took a fatal dose of homeopathic sleeping pills.
Surely anyone who even breathes the air that has been circulating over the said Ocean will die instantly of radiation poisoning. Only cockroaches will survive.
You do realise that there's about 8 million tonnes of Uranium in just the top foot of topsoil in the US.
Almost all the plutonium occurring on this planet has been produced in nuclear reactors , the rest from nuclear reprocessing.These sources have been well documented. However it is difficult to be definitive as to how much plutonium exists,but it is clear that at least several hundred tonnes have been manufactured.This plutonium occurs in local areas where it is stored under security due to its hazardous nature.
Minute traces of plutonium are usually found in the human body due to the 550 atmospheric and underwater nuclear tests that have been carried out, and to a small number of major nuclear accidents. Most atmospheric and underwater nuclear testing was stopped by the Limited Test Ban Treaty in 1963, which was signed and ratified by the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, and other nations. Continued atmospheric nuclear weapons testing since 1963 by non-treaty nations included those by China (atomic bomb test above the Gobi Desert in 1964, hydrogen bomb test in 1967, and follow-on tests), and France (tests as recently as the 1980s).
Because it is purposely manufactured for nuclear weapons and nuclear reactors, plutonium-239 is the most abundant isotope of plutonium by far.
It is also hypothetically possible for minute quantities of plutonium to be produced by the natural bombardment of uranium ores with cosmic rays.
Animal studies found that a few milligrams of plutonium per kilogram of tissue is a lethal dose.
A commonly cited quote by Ralph Nader, states that a pound of plutonium dust spread into the atmosphere would be enough to kill 8 billion people. However, the math shows that one pound of plutonium could kill no more than 2 million people by inhalation. This makes the toxicity of plutonium roughly equivalent with that of nerve gas.