1:29pm Submitted D'un Renard
- ► 2016 (24)
- ► 2015 (459)
- Experts worry that radiation fears are leading to ...
- India seeks Japan's approval to reprocess spent nu...
- Radioactive dust released during Fukushima cleanup...
- Do the Martu peoples want uranium mining?
- Inquest panel calls for indictments against former...
- Govt. subsidies for Fukushima questioned
- Elevated TSH levels among California newborns afte...
- Nuclear waste “flowing out to sea” from undergroun...
- From Jul. 9, 2014 Nuclear Waste Disposal
- From Jul. 16, 2014 Working Conditions at Fukushima...
- "Iitate residents to file for arbitration
- Global nuclear power contribution falls to lowest ...
- "Tochigi town favored as permanent radioactive was...
- Saitama was unaware of 2,400 Fukushima evacuees li...
- Ucluelet West Coast Fishermen ' Fukushima debris w...
- Government offers ¥230 billion over 30 years if Fu...
- Radiation level spiked up over 30 times much in va...
- Cs-134 / 137 density jumped up 12 times much as pr...
- Briefcases Full Of Cash For Japan’s Pro Nuclear Po...
- Ice put into utility tunnels at Fukushima plant
- "Emergency Radiation Exposure Limit May Be Raised"...
- Tahiti memorial commemorating those impacted by Fr...
- "Weak state secrets oversight"
- Operation to halt flow of groundwater into No. 1 r...
- The Nuclear Attacks on Mari Takenouchi: Free Infor...
- Former Kansai Electric Power executive reveals 18 ...
- Fukushima Groundwater Bypass Not Working As Planne...
- REPOST More needed than NRA safety nod
- Iodine distributed to residents near nuclear plant...
- "Plan Dropped For Land Purchases To Host Nuclear D...
- Uncontrolled, Visible Nuclear Chain Reactions
- Radiation measuring field trip in Iitate village, ...
- TEPCO completed 10th bypass release to the Pacific...
- Janick Magne reporting from Kori-machi, Date-gun, ...
- The workings of the ADR system (alternative disput...
- Bypass water discharge didn’t decrease contaminate...
- 2,700,000,000 Bq/m3 of Strontium-90 measured from ...
- Strontium-90 detected from seawater of Fukushima p...
- Increase in leukemia in babies who were in utero w...
- Iitate Village More than 75 Microsieverts/Hour
- TEPCO: Groundwater bypass showing limited effects
- Uranium decay a danger
- Stanford study shows how to power California with ...
- TEPCO using secondhand tanks to store radioactivel...
- Plan for another Fukushima: says a new report by t...
- Prime Minister's Office of Japan Message from Prim...
- New strategy for Fukushima trench water
- Fukushima Daiichi Unit 3 debris removal operations...
- Fukushima plant measures to freeze tunnels doesn't...
- Radioactive pollution endangers cultures of Tohoku...
- Japanese monkeys' abnormal blood linked to Fukushi...
- Chinese radioactive fish in Moroccan dishes calls ...
- Health problems may rise in the whole North hemisp...
- TEPCO to use ice blocks to stem flow of radioactiv...
- Cesium fallout topped 1 trillion becquerels during...
- Japan expert calls for immediate health exams outs...
- Fukushima Daiichi Still Releases 10 Million Becque...
- TEPCO using secondhand tanks to store radioactivel...
- Is the UN report underplaying Fukushima?: IPPNW is...
- Abe Declares He Will Start Japan’s Nuclear Plants ...
- How to Spot Pro Nuclear Pr Firms and Other Boot-li...
- Stigmatized workers quitting Tepco in droves
- Survey: 80% of municipalities eager to promote ren...
- Let's Get Irradiated! - New Poster In Fukushima Ci...
- YOU 'D LIKE A CUP OF WINE?
- Nuclear waste - the unanswered questions that won'...
- Why many of decontamination volunteers died
- The Imperial General Headquaters again? A notice t...
- STILL ONGOING FISSION: Over 1,000 Bq/Kg of I-131 m...
- Reactor 5 pool without coolant system leaked its c...
- Fieldwork 7 or 1.15μSv/h in a Vegetable Field near...
- 370 Bq/Kg of Cesium-134 / 137 from 5 ~ 6 km offsho...
- New radiation measurement method spreads confusion...
- Fukushima city “Eating mushroom protects you from ...
- 67,000 Bq/Kg of Cs-134/137 from Fukushima plant po...
- NRA panel and Diet Commission differ on cause of d...
- Spirulina: The Incredible Superfood You’ve Never H...
- Fukushima Bad and Getting Worse: Global Physicians...
- News Navigator: Who will select special state secr...
- COMMENTARY: Green light for Sendai plant shows les...
- Reactor 5 pool coolant system won’t get back on un...
- Fukushima city “Let’s build radiation resistance b...
- Japan Doctor: “Tokyo should no longer be inhabited...
- Japan Correspondent: It’s very scary, officials tr...
- In the Wake of Fukushima: Stigmatized Nuclear Work...
- Study: Cesium from Fukushima debris removal likely...
- Radiation does not "JUST" cause cancer, it is a br...
- Radiation and our Concerns and Responses Discussio...
- AREVA: Creating a steering committee to deploy the...
- 4 Trillion Becquerels Released Over 4 Hours From U...
- Storage of Radioactive Spent Fuel Rods Still Haunt...
- 74 One Liner Lies of the Nuclear Cartel
- CWS to map radiation hot spots in 50 nurseries and...
- Increased "Backround" Radiation
- Information for Those with Johnny Tubes. Interview...
- Abe’s Nuclear Renaissance Ignores Stiff Opposition...
- Minami-Soma lambastes government, TEPCO for remain...
- Doubts over ice wall to keep Fukushima safe from d...
- Unit 5 Fukushima Remains On Shared Cooling, No Rep...
- Nuclear radiation: There is no safe dose (From Apr...
- ▼ July (140)
- ► 2013 (844)
- ► 2012 (157)
Tuesday, 8 July 2014
2014 - Fukushima Ocean Radiation Compared To Chernobyl and 2,400 Open Air Nuclear Bomb Tests
July 8, 2014 at
1:29pm Submitted D'un Renard
1:29pm Submitted D'un Renard
Fact; 150,000sq. kilometers of the Pacific ocean have been contaminated with
material both by airborne plume after 3/11 and
by sea via radioactive
water emissions. Some parts of the Pacific are
contaminated than others. Fukushima is
still 'leaking’ radioactive materials into the air and ocean today. This
mega nuclear disaster is
not over. It is just beginning, because TEPCO admits
that3 reactors with melted coriums are
leaking highly radioactive water
into the ocean,
starting from 3/11 and continuing to present-day. Fukushima
TEPCO has admitted that at least 3 reactors are 'leaking’ highly radioactive water directly from the coriums into the basements, which then leaks into the Pacific. Some people believe that 3 or more one hundred ton melted down reactor fuel corium actually exited the buildings completely, which would mean groundwater passing by these coriums, and much more radiation leaking into the ocean than just from 3 coriums inside the buildings somewhere.
TEPCO admits it has no idea where these corium are. They seem to have ZERO interest in finding them
TEPCO has made no attempts to find out where these multiple melted down and possibly melted out coriums.
the Soviets assigned a
whole team of nuclear scientists to the task of finding
and researching the corium,
which they did. These
scientists paid a high
price. Many died due to the very high
radiation levels they
had to endure to reach this goal, but they did
it, because they thought they might be saving the world by preventing
the corium from
reaching groundwater and exploding again. Chernobyl
By comparison, after three years, Japanese nuclear scientists are going nowhere near those reactors, and are taking no chances at all. No one is assigning anyone to do anything. The Japanese government is putting no pressure on TEPCO. The military is not involved at all. No other country seems to care either. Japanese courts have refused to even evacuate children from highly radiation contaminated areas, despite a lawsuit filed by 10,000 Japanese citizens.
The TEPCO monitoring wells show a huge increase in all man made radioactive elements going directly into the ocean, at never seen before astronomical radiation levels. The fact that fish cesium levels outside of
not going down confirms that massive amounts
of radiation are
pouring into the pacific from 3/11, until today. No
one knows how much
radiation is pouring into the Pacific, but what is
guaranteed is that
whatever is going into the ocean will continue to
do so for thousands of
years, unless the coriums are
found and the leaks into
the ocean are stopped. The reason why this should be done
is that there is a
good chance that if allowed to continue that it
will result in the
mass die off of all life in the Fukushima Pacific
the long term.
Bottom line, a HUGE amount of radiation went into the Pacific, which came from multiple
meltdowns and spent fuel pool fires both from the air emissions during
the initial stages,
and from radioactive water runoff. This mega
nuclear disaster has
contaminated Fukushima Pacific
ocean water from the
surface to a depth of
400 foot, as well as the bottom of the ocean to
that depth. The only
question is; how high did the radiation levels
go per cubic meter,
and where is that radiation going up the food
chain, to humans?
In Top 400Feet Small Sea
The surface of the ocean is where 99.99% of all sea creatures spend their time and get their food. The micro surface layer of the ocean is where the radioactive contamination is the worst. Sea vegetables and creatures concentrate this radiation because they think these man made radioactive elements are nutritious ‘food', as man made radioactive elements mimic minerals normally found upwelling from the deep ocean. So what do these sea creatures do with this man made radiation?
Plutonium And Cesium Bio-Concentrates 26,000 Times In Ocean Algae, Up To 5,570,000 Bq/Kg in Land Algae; via@AGreenRoad
Radioactive Seaweed Found With 40,000,000 Bq per Kilogram - Seaweed Put Into Many Food Products; via@AGreenRoad
The amount of radiation released from
unprecedented in human
history. The negative effects that this mega nuclear disaster has had
on the ocean and the
rest of the planet will not be fully known for
many years. But there
are some clues as to what is going on, and it
is entirely expected.
Sea organisms are taking up this radiation and
concentrating it, just
like they would normal minerals. Fukushima
14February 2013. - Vertical transport of particulate-associated plutonium and americium in the upper water column of the Northeast Pacific - similar measurements beneath the surface layer showed an overall enrichment of Am over Pu on fine suspended particles with depth. Freshly produced zooplankton faecal pellets and large, fast sinking particles collected in PITS contained relatively high concentrations of Pu and Am. Both transuranic concentrations in trapped particles and transuranic flux tended to increase with depth down to 750 m, suggesting that their scavenging is in the upper water column.
2011- A study showed that 98 percent of the ocean bottom 150 miles offshore in the Pacific was covered with formerly living sea creatures. The normal amount is 1 percent.
2012- Marine Blizzards of
Life Death Feed Deep Sea
In May 2012,tremendous numbers of slaps reproduced on the surface. Slaps are soft-bodied animals that drift along ocean currents. Slaps feed on phytoplankton, so blooms in marine algae fuel salp population booms. After death, the 2012 salp explosion sank quickly and blanketed the seafloor. So many of these tiny creatures fell that they clogged the devices used by the oceanographers to measure marine snow.
What could have caused this? El Niño’s were not happening in 2011, and were also not there in 2012. However, The slaps feed on phytoplankton, which feed on minerals, such as heavy metals. Although no one mentioned radioactive elements, it is fact that a huge amount of radiation was released by Fukushima and all of these heavy metals ended up in the top layer of the ocean, where plankton eat them, because they mimic natural minerals.
Radiation levels jumped to 1,200 Bq/m at the ocean bottom, as these radiation contaminated salps died and fell to the bottom. This is Nature cleaning the ocean of radiation, through a filtering process by way of living organisms. The only problem is that these slaps are also food for small fish, which then get eaten by bigger fish.
No study has looked at the effect of
the sea food chain and how radiation
travels up the food
chain to concentrate at the top. Radiation was
found in tuna off the Fukushima coast
in 2011, but no more tests
were done after that.
Wouldn't it be interesting to find out if
radiation levels are
climbing, levelling off
or dropping in tuna, 3 or
more years after the
3/11 mega nuclear disaster? And what are the
radiation levels in
people, especially children, who are eating these
tuna? Wouldn't that be of interest? Or do people not count at
all? After all, who cares about children? No one, right? (sarcasm) California
The bottom of the shallow ocean near shorelines, especially in the bays and estuaries is where a large part of sea life in the ocean lives, breeds and seeks protection from predators. Almost all filter feeders live close to shore, and they’re VERY efficient at filtering out (and concentrating) very diluted amounts of minerals, including heavy metal minerals that also happen to be radioactive, such as what comes from Fukushima.
Feb.2013 - Cesium-134 deposits were found in marine snow gathered 2000kilometers away from the plant at depths of 5000 meters measuring1,200 Bq/kg. K. Buesseler and Michio Aoyama - ‘
Radionuclides in the
Let's assume this is 'average' level of radiation found across much or most of the
ocean, and not just a hot spot. What impact will this have
on the ocean dwelling species and plants?
One indication of just how bad things are getting in the Pacific is a study showed that 98 percent of the ocean bottom 150miles offshore in the Pacific was covered with formerly living sea creatures. The normal amount was 1 percent.
Levels After =
180 Million Bequerels per
Cubic Meter Fukushima
Fukushima Wildlife Dose Reconstruction Signals Ecological Consequences (pdf): Seawater concentrations of131I reached 180,000 Bq/L [180 million Bq/m³] on March 30, with an associated 47 000 Bq/L [47 million Bq/m³] of 137Cs (measured 330 offshore) […] At such high dose rates, marked reproductive effects, and even mortality for the most radiosensitive taxa are predicted for all marine wildlife groups whose life history characteristics confine them to the near-field, contaminant release area. […] All estimations were performed under the assumption of no additional marine releases after the end of March. Actual releases of unknown quantity appear to have continued past this date, thus our dose estimates may be low. Our estimates of dose rates are also under-predictions because they are based on measured data for only a few radioisotopes among the suite of possible Radionuclides that composed the actual aquatic source terms (e.g., 58Co, 95Zr, 99 Mo, 99mTc, 105Ru, 106Ru, 129mTe, 129Te, 132Te, 134Cs, 136Cs, 132I, 140Ba,140La).
A Second Study Found 'Only' 50 Million Bq/cubic meter
that radiation levels only went up to 50,000,000MILLION Bq per
cubic meter of ocean water. The highest ever recorded
ocean water radiation
level in history was only 1,000 Bq.
per cubic meter,
after 2,400 open air nuclear bomb tests and the MIT Center nuclear power
plant meltdown. Chernobyl
Why would one research study find only 1/3 of the radiation that another did? Curious, isn't it? Now compare this study with the IAEA study, which found much lower radiation levels than this, below.
Pacific Ocean Radiation Levels
Streamed live on Jun 5, 2014 - Join the Vancouver Aquarium for a presentation by Woods Hole oceanographer, Dr. Ken Buesseler, on the radioactive releases from
In his presentation in 2014, Ken also talks about how the world's oceans had a radiation level pre Fukushima of roughly 1 - 2 Bq/m³, with the exception of the Baltic Sea 40 Bq/m³, Mediterranean 1.7 Bq/m³, North Sea 3 Bq/m³, Irish Sea 61 Bq/m³, Black Sea 16 Bq/m³, Pacific ocean1.8 Bq/m³, the S. Pacific .7 Bq/m³, S. Atlantic .7 Bq/m³, N.Atlantic 1 Bq/m³, Indian ocean 1.2 Bq/m³, Antarctic ocean .3 Bq/m³,Arctic ocean 3.2 Bq/m³.
These are the world's ocean's levels of radiation after 2,400 open air nuclear bomb tests, which is the equivalent of a nuclear war. For more information about this, click on;
2400 Global Nuclear Atmospheric Bomb Tests 1945-1998; via@AGreenRoad
These were the radiation amounts in sea water BEFORE
Fukushima and includes , TMI,
30 nuclear plant meltdowns, plus 2,400 open air
nuclear bomb tests.
Remember that before the atomic age, the ocean
radiation levels were
List Of All 30+ Global Nuclear Reactor Melt Downs; via@AGreenRoad
Of course, the pro nuclear apologists will NEVER disclose or talk about all of these nuclear reactor meltdowns, nor will they readily admit to what the radiation levels in the oceans were BEFORE the atomic age, because then their reality will be out in the open for all to see.
Fukushima, , TMI and
2,400 Nuclear Bomb Tests Chernobyl
A reasonable and common sense conclusion just from this measurement alone, would be that
180,000 WORSE than .
Why? Because the amount of radiation measured in the ocean at the peak was
between 180,000 times
more than the amount measured after Chernobyl ,
based on the graph below. But that conclusion is still not taking
into account that Chernobyl Fukushima released
between 600 to 6000 pounds of
plutonium, while released
hardly any. So the actual number
is more than likely
much worse than this, and only time will tell how
much worse, as the
death toll starts adding up, when the incubation
period for the various
cancers starts running out. Chernobyl
According to ENENews; "Recently, large quantities of radioactive materials were released to the atmosphere and coastal waters following a nuclear accident at the
Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear
power plant (NPP),which increased 137Cs concentrations in
coastal seawater off .
Let's take a deeper look at the chart above, because it speaks volumes. At the highest peak of 2,400 nuclear bombs going off, the oceans never got above 100 Bq/m³ at thee peak.
a peak of 1,000 Bq/m³,
a peak of 180
million Bq/m³ on
March 30, 2011. The peak has reduced since
then, but that is not the point being made here. Fukushima
Event Peak Radiation Reading In Bq/m³
2,400 Nuclear weapons testing peak- 100 Bq/m³
It is really worse than that though. Consider this; the radiation levels in the world's oceans were ZERO before the atomic age started, so
really 180 MILLION
times worse than the
normal background radiation levels present in
the ocean, before the
atomic age started, which was ZERO... Fukushima
We’re still not even considering the toxicity of plutonium, which was released in large quantities by
The pro nuclear experts
never mention this,
and avoid all testing or talking about plutonium
being found and
measured all around the world as well. Fukushima
Of course the nuclear industry does not like it when their planetary life killing activities are pointed out in this way, so they sponsor people from various pro nuclear apologist organizations that know how-to paint a very rosy picture and confirm that the Fukushima disaster will have zero effect on plants, animals, sea life, humans and the planet, no matter what amount of radiation was released. They use fancy words, and throw PhD's around to bully people into thinking they know more than the average person with common sense.
The basic message is; if you listen to anyone else, you are stupid, because they are just fear mongers. They then design more 'studies’ and give more talks to confirm that there is zero detectable harmful radiation out there, so you don't have to worry or be afraid of radiation, ok?
Don't you love how good they are, when they paint this mega disaster with rosy pink colored glasses on? They call online articles like this one 'alarmist' or fear mongering, to try and keep people from reading it, and that works on many people actually. Many people want to stay stuck in denial or normalcy bias.
Titanic and Costa Concordia - Example of Normalcy Bias In
Disaster; via @AGreenRoad Fukushima
The Five Stages Of Grief In Response To Trauma, Abuse, Disasters Such as
or Loss; via @AGreenRoad Fukushima
Cognitive Dissonance And The Nuclear Industry; How Reality Refused To Intrude;via@AGreenRoad
Wouldn’t you agree that so far at least, this article is just pointing out the common sense truth of the matter? Let's explore what the IAEA has to say about
radiation, shall we? Fukushima
IAEA Found Radiation 'Only' 3,500 Times Higher Than Nuclear Bomb Fallout Overall
By comparison with MIT results, the IAEA scientists say that "[...] the measured 137Cs concentrations in surface waters ranged from 1.8mBq L−1 to 3,500mBq/L−1, up to 3500 times higher than the global fallout background, although the cruise track did not go closer than 30 km from the coast. […] The elevated 137Cslevels covered an area of around 150,000 km2 (south of 38°N and west of 147° E). [...] Scientists "measured 137Cs concentrations in surface waters - ranged from 1.8mBq L−1 to 3500mBq L−1, up to3500 times higher than the global (nuclear bomb) fallout background."
If we stop with just the data provided above and look at it closely, we can see that
normal ocean radiation readings of .7Bq/m³ (nuclear industry provided
number) of Cesium in Pacific ocean water to
rise to 150,000,000 Bq/m³.
There was actually ZERO Cesium
in ocean water before
nuclear testing and nuclear accidents, so that
is what they should be
using as 'normal background' levels of
radiation in the
When the IAEA says that
Pacific ocean radiation levels
went up 'only' 3,500 times 'normal background', or
that they could only
find 3,500 Bq/cubic litre,
it does not make any
sense. Remember that there was no man made cesium,
tritium, strontium, plutonium, or other toxic, heavy metal poison background
radiation before the
atomic age. So arbitrarily picking a point down
the road and saying
this was the beginning point is very deceptive to
If you go from zero to 150,000,000 Bq/m³, that is HUGE, way more than 3,500 x normal, more like 150 million percent increase from the natural background radiation, which is actually ZERO for things like cesium, uranium, tritium and plutonium, correct? This is another example of how the nuclear industry downplays everything, admitting only 1%, and denying 99%. Are you starting to see how it all works yet? If not, just keep on reading and learning, you will 'get it' soon enough.
Pro Nuclear Apologists Like To Claim That All Radiation Is Natural, Like Potassium
The pronuclear apologists also like to make the claim that the 'natural background' level of radiation in the North Pacific before March 11Fukushima nuclear disaster was around 10 to 15 Bq/m³, primarily due to potassium-40, a naturally occurring isotope, with much smaller contributions provided by fallout from Cold War-era atmospheric nuclear weapons testing. This is a false equivalency argument and should be ignored as the deceptive and misleading logic that it is. Why?
Consider how man made radioactive Cesium, Strontium, Plutonium and Iodine is bio-accumulative plus bio concentrating up the chain of life, as illustrated in the study already shown above, just looking at the smallest sea organisms. All of these highly toxic, radioactive manmade elements are destroying life in the ocean. Potassium in water or bananas does not cause this life destroying reaction.
Meanwhile, radioactive potassium in bananas and in ocean water is not doing anything, because both humans and ocean life keeps this element in homeostasis, and it is not a poison, like the man made artificial elements are. All life on the planet is used to potassium, and has evolved with it for millions of years, but no life is used to or has seen artificial man made radioactive elements like tritium, strontium, plutonium and more.
If one goes no further than the study released above, and one does nothing but compare potassium to cesium, it looks like these scientists are saying that the radiation levels in the ocean went DOWN since
by HUGE orders of magnitude. Maybe everyone
should thank TEPCO for
polluting the ocean with man made radioactive
elements, because it will make all life, including humans get
healthier, via the hormesis theory.
If the pro nuclear apologists are
right, then there is nothing to worry about, right? WRONG! Fukushima
Rachel Maddow - Hormesis Promoting Republican Art Robinson Wants To Sprinkle Radioactive Waste From Airplanes Over Cities? via@AGreenRoad
AGRP estimates that
a HUGE mega nuclear accident that was
orders of magnitude
larger than in
both scale, scope and
time, without adding the additional toxicity of plutonium. Here is
nuclear expert, who says Chernobyl Fukushima was
10 times bigger than .
This is a huge difference from the IAEA, which
claims Chernobyl Fukushima is
only 10% of . Chernobyl
Liquid Radiation Releases From Rivers And
Into Ocean Continue, Getting
"The liquid releases — I really haven’t had time to even talk about them — but they’ll continue for years and years into the future. ....We already know that the liquid releases are ten times
(Notice he does
not even mention AIR
releases, which are also orders of magnitude larger than Chernobyl ?) Chernobyl
Graphic shows 'direct discharge' going from Fukushima Daiichi reactors into Pacific -- Underground flow of contaminated water also indicated(VIDEO)
The rivers are pouring these radiation contaminated materials into the ocean as well, plus TEPCO admitted to a massive
of 400 tons a day of highly radioactive water, since 3/11. As we know by
now, TEPCO seems
to understate things by a
factor of 10 or more,
so the real number is probably much higher. Niagara falls
So how could radiation levels be going down in the Pacific, instead of up? It does not make any logical sense. Dilution does work to some extent in a body of water that large, but pouring in highly toxic, radioactive elements both in air, groundwater, rivers, and dumping without stopping from 3/11 to present day, is another thing entirely.
Certainly the pro nuclear apologists claiming (no harm, everyone is safe, nothing was affected, no one died, no animals were affected) in the study above are faulty, for many reasons. Let us dive further into the murky, deceptive world of pro nuclear apologist radiation testing and reporting, shall we?
IAEA Reports On
From Beginning Of Atomic
Age Total Radiation Ocean
The IAEA reports that; "results confirm that the dominant source of anthropogenic Radionuclides in the marine environment is global fallout. The total 137Cs input from global fallout was estimated to be 311 PBq for the Pacific Ocean, 201 PBq for the Atlantic Ocean, 84 PBq for the Indian Ocean and 7.4 PBq for the
Ocean. For comparison, about 40 PBq of
137Cs was released to the
marine environment from Sellafield and
Cap De La Hague
contributed about16 PBq of
137Cs to the sea, mainly the Baltic and , where
the present average
concentrations of 137Cs in surface water were
estimated to be about
60 and 25 Bq/m3, respectively,
while the worldwide average concentration due
to global fallout is about 2Bq/m3." Black Seas
Converting Bq/m3 to pCi/Liter
200 Bq/m3 = 5.4 pCi/liter. There are 1,000liters in 1 cubic m3 of ocean water. Any radiation exposure is cumulative, so the fact that the IAEA admits that these nuclear reprocessing plants and accidents did increase the normal background radiation, says something. It used to be that no plutonium, cesium or tritium was found in ocean water. Now huge quantities of cesium, uranium, tritium and other toxic contaminants are being found. And if’ natural' uranium was there, it was in parts per trillion, which is almost impossible to measure, because it is such a small amount.
The pro nuclear apologists make a number of very devious, calculating and deceptive claims around the radiation found in ocean water. Let's see how many deceptive things we can find, shall we? This is not complete list, by any means...
1. They say that because these amounts are so low per cubic meter, that no one has to worry their pretty little heads about it. But they make no mention of how this radiation was not there at all before the atomic age. They completely dismiss the possibility that it may have some negative effect.
2.Nor do they mention that this same man made radiation is 100,000times more toxic at even low diluted levels when compared to potassium for example.
Radioactive Potassium In Bananas Compared To Cesium, Plutonium, Uranium And Iodine via@AGreenRoad
3.They don't mention that all of these toxic things concentrate up the food chain, all the way back up to humans. They will never talk about or admit how low dose radiation harms children, specifically.
Fukushima Low Dose Radiation Causing Unusual Changes in Children; via@AGreenRoad
Via Ontological January 3, 2014 "These "findings" of "only" 20 scintillation/sec equate to 1200 cpm beta total per minute dose from the entire mass (cubic meter) of seawater! This will add up quickly in the food chain...
Again these results do not include disintegrations from 1400 or so other daughter isotopes in the fallout. So if the cesium is average as to the contents, then let's say PU/U/Strontium, and Cesium would raise those scintillations to 4800 disintegrations per minute from the total cubic meter, or 4800/1000(litres in the cubic meter of seawater; or4.8 bq/ litre on just those 4 Elements. When this "tiny” amount is bio-accumulated for long, (3 years+ soon)things get ugly fast. Cloaked in a smoke and mirror show, the Elephant in the room seems to be way smaller than it really is by eliminating the rest of the pixels in the picture. Figure out how much water a clam can filter when a clam can filter water, and the reds add up fast the further along the food chain it goes."
4. They don't add together ALL of the hundreds of man made elements together and give a total of all of them, in that same cubic meter. They just pull one of1,00 rabbits out of the hat, count that one rabbit, and then claim there are no more rabbits in the hat.
Pandora's Box Opened;1,946 Lethal Radioactive Man Made Elements Created By Nuclear Industry Coming Out; via@AGreenRoad
To be fair and give a total amount of radiation per cubic meter, wouldn’t you agree that they have to add all of these isolated radioactive elements numbers together, not report them in isolation? After all, if you eat a piece of pie and are counting calories, you do not count just the pie dough and leave out the icing, fruit and sugar, plus the whipped topping and chocolate syrup, do you? Well, that is what 'peer reviewed' scientists do all of the time. They measure one of hundreds of radioactive elements and leave out all the rest, so they may only be measuring .005% of the total amount of radiation in a cubic meter of water. This is not fair and it is not scientific.
5. The loudest nuclear apologists speaking the most on mass media, always seem to quote the lowest numbers and then only by focusing on one of hundreds of man made radioactive elements. Why don't their numbers match or compare with the MIT and French studies? Both of these studies show much larger numbers than what the IAEA reports. The IAEA says peak readings never went higher then coupled thousand times pre
But the MIT study found
"Seawater concentrations of 131I reached 180,000Bq/L [180 million Bq/m³] on March 30, with an associated 47,000 Bq/L[47 million Bq/m³] of 137Cs (measured 330 m offshore) […]"
6.They compare potassium in bananas and seawater to man made radioactive elements, which are pure poisonous heavy metals.
How Poisonous And Radioactive Man Made Elements Mimic Natural Minerals Found In Nature; via@AGreenRoad
If they can deceive the public in this many ways, how many other ways are they deceiving everyone, and about what? Let's dive deeper into the radioactive rabbit hole, shall we?
This is an example of how garbage science studies get published and peer reviewed. These studies than confuse the public and have the effect minimize the nuclear disaster. Expert nuclear speakers go around and say how all radiation is safe, so people can go home and not worry, and just leave the nuclear industry alone.
If one adds together all1,200 radioactive elements coming out of Fukushima, and measures them all separately in the ocean, and then adds them together in a per cubic meter measurement, ALL of these studies above, look like peanuts compared to what is actually happening.
IAEA And Pronuclear Experts Claim
Only 10% of Chernobyl
The IAEA and pretty much all pro nuclear apologists make the claim that
only 10% of the radiation compared to Chernobyl,
so using the above figures translates into releasing
only1.6 PBq of
Anyone with common sense will know that 1.6PBq coming out of Fukushima is a laughably ridiculous fairy tale, because Fukushima had 3 nuclear reactors melt down 100%, and at least two, possibly three reactors melted through with corium exiting the reactors and going down into the ground.
In addition, at least 3 spent fuel pools burned, releasing some, most or ALL of their ‘hot' load into the atmosphere. At least two of them also melted out at least one pool, such as the equipment pool for example. But when your pay check depends on not telling the truth, the nuclear industry is very good at hiding 99%, and admitting only 1% of the truth.
AGreenRoad - TEPCO/Fukushima Lies Exposed Around Building #4,SFP, Core. Equipment Pool, Melt Out; via @AGreenRoad
Then building #3 had a MOX fuel explosion, which released a MASSIVE amount of radiation, much more than
all by itself. Chernobyl
What Really Happened At
And Spent Fuel Pool #3? via@GreenRoad Fukushima
The reality and FACTS created by figures showing peak radiation hint at how much was actually released by
compared to . Chernobyl
Event Radiation In Bq/m³
2,400 Nuclear weapons testing peak reading - 100 Bq/m³
The activities used in the table below are from 1971 Radioactivity in the Marine Environment, National Academy of Sciences (NAS). Members of the nuclear education group at the National Academy of Sciences are made up of people like the following pro nuclear apologists;
SusanM. Stevens-Adams, Sandia National Laboratories
Mark Sutton, Lawrence
National Laboratory Livermore
Keith S. Bradley,
Argonne National Laboratory
Annie B. Kersting,
Ronald L. Boring,
National Laboratory Idaho
Aaron J.Simon, Lawrence
National Laboratory Livermore
National Academies Keck Futures Initiative http://www.keckfutures.org/conferences/advncd-nuclear-tech/aa_Adv_Nuclear_Tech_Team_4.pdf
One of the goals of the National Academy of Science with the National Academies Initiative is to educate the K -12 kids on the benefits of nuclear reactors, and teach all kids all about how safe radiation is, because it is all natural, just like potassium and that no one has ever died or been injured by nuclear radiation... The only problem is that what they teach is not true; it is pro nuclear propaganda, developed by the 'experts' who want to promote the nuclear industry, just like the IAEA.
Natural Radioactivity by the Ocean
Activity in Ocean
6 x 108 Ci
3 x 108 Ci
1.1 x 109 Ci
2 x 1011 Ci
9 x 1010 Ci
3.8x 1011 Ci
1x 107 Ci
5 x 106 Ci
2 x 107 Ci
8 x 107 Ci
4 x 107 Ci
1.8 x 108 Ci
There is a problem with this educational 'natural' background radiation report is that it was created by people working in pro nuclear industry labs and colleges, but then using the National Academy Of Science to promote their business and push more radiation on a trusting public. Most if not all of these radioactive items in the list above are present in ocean water now due to the bombs set off and nuclear accidents created by the atomic scientists. They are not there due to millions of years of Nature. Radioactive things have mostly all decayed away after millions of years of time.
Definitely, Tritium, Carbon 14,Rubidium and Uranium are not natural, and were not in the oceans to any measurable extent before the atomic age. These things are released in massive quantities by all nuclear reactors operating normally, as well as by nuclear accidents and spills.
Individual Radioactive Elements/Isotopes,
Exposure Prevention and
Reversal, Music USA
30Ways The Nuclear Industry Deceives Everyone; via@AGreenRoad
Cesium is not even listed as being on the
ocean by the IAEA, because
the amount was too low
to register, according to them. These 1971figures were calculated after
years of nuclear bomb testing and
fallout into the
oceans of the world. How much of this stuff was
there BEFORE all of
this nuclear testing and accidents? ZERO.
IAEA Is Nothing More Than Corrupt Marketing Arm Of Nuclear Industry
First, we have to remember that most of the nuclear scientists working on measuring ocean radiation levels are relying on figures and testing methods as provided by the IAEA, which is a marketing arm of the nuclear industry. There are only a few PhD nuclear chemists in the
and only a few PhD nuclear scientists, so
it is not hard to
corrupt or control them all via funding and/or job
pressures, even if they don't work for the IAEA directly.
If they told the
truth, the whole nuclear industry would collapse overnight, so they
pretty much have to deny about 99% of what REALLY happens. US
The IAEA has a built in bias against reporting any 'harmful’ information about any nuclear accident, or about the harmful effects of low dose radiation in general. We will see later on in this article how this same positive 'result' is generated in the study above...
IAEA, WHO, NRC And Others; A Web Of Deception? via@AGreenRoad
This same basic fact of "radiation is good for you" by labelling just about everything found as 'natural background radiation' applies to the entire nuclear and medical industry, plus government agencies such as the NRC as well. These industries and regulators are little more more than puppets of the nuclear industry due to revolving doors in and out of the nuclear industry from and to these government agencies and medical institutions.
Via the following links; an ex-World Health Organization employee gives an insider's view of the W.H.O, IAEA, Security Council…and nuclear-radiation policy, conflict-of-interest, and Chernobyl +Fukushima.
Some notes from the interview;
* The WHO works with the IAEA in cover-ups of nuclear disasters
* No independent reports about nuclear disasters can legally be released by the WHO; they’re controlled by the IAEA, which is a marketing arm of the nuclear industry.
* 2 conferences were held on
one in 1995in Geneva,
one in 2001 in –
the final reports were never
published. Why not? What are they so afraid of? Kiev
* People have no national or international authority or group of scientists who are reporting the truth, The only source of reliable information is from independent scientists.
* ICRP members are all from the military or nuclear physicists on 'payroll' or under control of nuclear industry.
* Ionizing radiation always causes mutations at the cellular level, according to WHO Director General, Dr. Chan, in 2011.
* Dr. Chan said ALL radiation causes damage; that there is a difference between internal and external radiation; and she didn't believe herself that only 50 people had died from
* The WHO health report on
(a) WHO ignored thyroid abnormalities in Japanese children (the 44-99% of Japanese children with nodules and cysts)
(b) In charge of sampling food products for levels of Radionuclides; only17 eggs were sampled.
(c) they totally and completely ignored bio-accumulation in fish.
(d) they ignored all problems at the
(e) all 30 authors of WHO report worked for the nuclear establishment; most for the IAEA and many formational regulator and nuclear authorities, such as UNSCEAR and the IRCP which are also 'captured' by the nuclear industry.
For those who want to pursue the corruption and double dealing of the WHOUN organization, here is another link to pursue;
Bottom-line, the pro nuclear apologists at WHO, IAEA, TEPCO, UNSCEAR, Japanese nuclear regulators and the Japanese government all work together to hold the radioactive glowing 'line'. They CLAIM that allow level radiation is good for you, unless it kills you in ten minutes and only then is it bad for you, but not for long, because then you will be dead, so you really have NOTHING to worry your head about. Thus, 99.999999% of all radiation is safe in their eyes.
These pro nuclear experts and apologists all claim that no one died from Fukushima, it is only 10% of Chernobyl, no plutonium came out, nothing melted out, no plutonium MOX fuel explosion happened, and no spent fuel pool fires happened. If you believe all of this, it may be a good idea to go work for the nuclear industry, because this is the cult that believes all of this, despite clear evidence to the contrary about all of it.
Atomic Energy Commission Abolished Due To Same Corruption And Cover Ups Happening Today
The Atomic Energy Commission was shut down and abolished for the very same corruption, cover ups and secrecy that is happening today. But the corruption of the nuclear industry, the medical industry, WHO, and government regulators like the NRC remains even to this day, and things may have even have gotten much worse, because now there are TRILLIONS of Dollars on the table in this industry. We all know that absolute power corrupts absolutely, correct? Wouldn’t Trillions of Dollars be one of the definitions of absolute power?
Why else would the EPA and NRC not report and warn people about invisible radiation levels after they rose to unsafe levels in
foods and drinks after ?
If you don’t believe this
can happen in the 'greatest' country on Earth, you had
better research this
subject a little bit further. Fukushima
According to the Ventura County Reporter; "NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, suspended testing the Pacific for
last summer after concluding that there wasn’t any radiation to be
detected.... the California Department of Public
monitoring of fallout
when its Radiologic
Health Branch issued
its last report on Oct. 10, 2011. The EPA also
stopped all testing,
shortly after 3/11. Why would they stop testing, when at the exact same
time, radiation levels were RISING to alarming
and dangerously high
University Test Shows Alarming Radiation Rise In Milk After
That report shows an alarming rise in cesium-137 in Cal Poly San Luis Obispo dairy farm milk beginning June 14, 2011, when it tested 2.95 picocuries per liter (pCi/l) and steadily rising in four subsequent tests until it was 5.91 pCi/l. The hot milk was at twice the allowable amount of this radionuclide in drinking water, according to the EPA’s 3.0pCi/llimit....
Low-level radiation in food and water effects
Why Are There No Tests Of Children's Internal Radiation Load In US?
Why are all of the regulators or medical authorities not testing for internal total body radiation in children in the
who are the most
vulnerable to a build
up of radiation from low level food and liquid
Radiation bio accumulates and then concentrates up the food chain. We know that from the linked stories above, which provide proof of this. Larger and larger amounts of more deadly radiation is still being released by
For more information on low level
radiation in food and
drinks, click on the following link... Fukushima
Low-Level Nuclear Radiation In Food And Water
Why The Cover Up Of MOX Fuel Explosion at Building #3?
Why is everyone covering up the fact that reactor or spent fuel pool #3 blew up in a criticality explosion, spreading it's load of 'hot' fuel for1- 3 kilometers in all directions, including the ocean bottom? Would you like some proof?
Fukushima 5 Minute Summary Of Events 2011to 2012; via@AGreenRoad
Released Into Ocean, Air, Groundwater, Storage
Tanks; via @AGreenRoad Fukushima
Radioactive ‘Death' River; 430,000 Bq per Kg From Fukushima Cesium in River Bottom Sediment, via@AGreenRoad
Comparing Contaminated Zones Around
Chernobyl And Radiation
Released; via @AGreenRoad Fukushima Ocean
What really happened at
How Dangerous Is 400-600 Pounds Of Plutonium Nano Particle Dust Liberated By
What is the effect of these radioactive rods being blown out into the ocean? What is the effect of constant, never ending leaks of highly radioactive water from the basements and coriums into the ocean?
This article proved that peak radiation in the ocean measured 180 MILLION Bq per cubic meter. According to TEPCO, the levels of radiation going into the ocean have been 'reduced to' 1,000Bq per cubic meter. How can this be possible, when radiation levels in the monitoring wells right next to the ocean are going up stratospherically?
The highest peak levels reached in any ocean were 100 Bq per cubic meter after the
course, TEPCO seems
to minimize and
cover up high radiation readings, so if these figures are minimized,
leaving the public to wonder what
the real radiation
figures are. Chernobyl
High Radiation Levels Found On Ocean Bottom And In Fish
" … Around 95 terabecquerels of radioactive caesium has found its way to the sandy ocean floor near the plant. How it got there, Kanda says, no one is sure …Whether originating from plankton or sediment, the contamination is finding its way into the food chain. Bottom-dwelling fish in the
show radioactivity levels above the limit of 100becquerels per kilogram set
by the Japanese government. Greenlings,
for example, have been found to have levels as high as 25,000becquerels
the plant itself is leaking around0.3 terabecquerels (1012
Becquerel’s) per month, he
Source: Ocean still suffering from
Continuing leaks and contaminated sediment keep radiation
levels high. Geoff Brumfiel 14 November2012 Fukushima
US Government Agencies Stop Testing For Radiation After 3/11
Meanwhile, here in the supposedly free and democratic
the EPA stopped testing for
radiation in USA US food
and drink as well, at about the same
time as the US Health
Dept. above. Are you starting to see a pattern
here yet? Fill in the
rest of the dots by reading some of the other
articles linked to in
this one. See if you start to form a conclusion
after you watch a few
of the videos and read a few articles, while
keeping an open mind.
The lies and deception in the nuclear industry generally and around the IAEA and other organizations specifically are detailed below.
The Art of Deception: The Cult of Nuclearists, Uranium Weapons and Fraudulent Science; via@AGreenRoad
Ann Harris; Exposes TVA, NRC, And NEI Corruption And Cover-ups; via AGreenRoadhttp://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/11/ann-harris-exposes-tva-nrc-and-nei.html
GregPalast; The Lies and Fraud Behind Nuclear Plant Emergency Diesel Generators; via@AGreenRoad
Gorbachev; Chernobyl Nuclear Accident Was Real Cause Of The Collapse of Soviet Union; via@AGreenRoad
30Ways The Nuclear Industry Deceives Everyone; via@AGreenRoad
Human Radiation Experiments Performed Without Consent Or Knowledge; via@AGreenRoad
Truth Telling And Nuclear Radiation Experts/Specialists; via@AGreenRoad
The Nuclear Industry And Cognitive Dissonance; via@AGreenRoad
Now that we have established that the basic 'facts' released by IAEA,TEPCO, EPA, WHO, NRC and other pro nuclear apologists about Fukushima are for the most part false, minimized and are based on misleading assumptions, theories or false data, we can get to what really happened at Fukushima by reading a few of the following articles.
Nuclear Accidents, Recycling Nuclear Weapons/Fuel