Sunday, May 10, 2015

The Ocean Radiation Is Here. Assuming We Ever Find A Way To Stop Fukushima, What's Next?

Be sure to watch the video at the very bottom of this post. Between here and there are some depressing observations about the situation the planet is in due to the nuclear industry and more specifically Fukushima. First is a well done story from Statesman Journal that lays out where we are and that the governments of the world aren't actually doing much to help or test for radiation. 
Here is the information up to this point from the StatesmanJournal dot com. In November, Buesseler reported that Fukushima radiation had been identified in 10 offshore samples, including one 100 miles off the coast of Eureka, California.
Here is a story link from enews about the dead animals from the pacific being tested at US universities. If you want the more scientific stuff see this.

And then there is this from Arnie Gunderson at the World Uranium Symposium  also a link at enenews.
Here's a snippet:
Arnie Gundersen, Chief Engineer at Fairewinds Energy Education, World Uranium Symposium — Fukushima Workshop, April 2015 (emphasis added):
  • At 7:30 in — Last week, Woods Hole announced a study that showed that about… 7 becquerels per cubic meter [has reached the west coast of North America].
  • They called it ‘trace amounts’. I don’t call 7 Bq/m^3 a ‘trace amount’… that’s significant and measurable, and it’s just the beginning of the onslaught.
  • There was a study in 2012 that predicted how much radiation was going to get to the west coast of B.C. … [It] was 29 times lower than what [Woods Hole] actually measured.
  • So scientists have no clue how to measure what’s transporting through the ocean. Studies two years ago are already wrong by essentially a factor of 30.
  • The scientists’… real goal was to downplay the significance of the damage to the Pacific Ocean. It is in fact 29 times worse than predicted.
Here is a link to video of the event.

Then there is the explosion in New York  at the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant this weekend that should put people on notice that this type of power generation is always subject to scary scenarios due to that fact that it is not always controllable.  

On the bright side, if we ever figure out how to stop Fukushima, New Mexico, Chernybol and all of the other reactors and waste dumps from destroying all life on earth there is this. Elon Musk, CEO at Tesla which makes electric automobiles and sports cars has a new invention that allows wind and solar to make nuclear power obsolete. 
Read about his new battery here and here

Or see another video, this one from Elon Musk launching the product that has now made nuclear power obsolete. Stored sunlight. . It's a beautiful thing. This would seem to be the answer to many of our power problems because it is the power bank that has never existed before.  One that gives us the possibility to transform the planet for the better. 

I hope we embrace this technology and from what I can see, that is exactly what is happening. It is being accepted and funded. This changes the whole equation for us currently and those that follow us on planet earth. It is possible for them to say to the nuclear industry, "we don't need your dangerous technology anymore, we have wind, solar and wave generation. When that isn't sufficient, we have gas, oil, hydro-electric and coal. You have become too dangerous and therefore, obsolete. 

We however must not stand by and wish for the best, we must demand that the powers that be are held accountable to the rest of us for destroying an entire ocean and who knows how many countless lives of humans and other creatures in the ecosystem that we depend on for our own lives. 

For the first time in a long time, the banksters may see things our way and get behind this future that could exist. This is a remarkable achievement considering the future that they have currently been funding. 


  1. Sobering game-changer, shhhh!

  2. At 7 bq/m3 that's 0.007 bq/kg which is 1000 times lower than EPA safe drinking water standards.And I looked at the seal and walrus health poster which while interesting, had nothing to do with radiation other than the fact that when walruses eat higher trophic level prey, the indicator of that is an increase in Nitrogen 14 and 15 levels. It had nothing to do with environmental radiation contamination. Instead it was more focused on global warming and its effects on wildlife. Enews has an interesting lack of reading comprehension, or maybe a deliberate misunderstanding to make things more DRAMATIC!!!?

  3. Interesting. Are you talking about Tritium being 1000 times lower than EPA safe drinking water standards because you weren't any clearer than Enews. Since you seem to be such an expert Glenn, perhaps you can give me your take on this video explaining the same numbers.

  4. In case I haven't made it perfectly clear, I am a reporter and not a nuclear scientist. I just happen to live where radioactive water has just been detected. It's not a lot but it is just getting here. It isn't going to become less. It will only grow. This is the beginning of more than 4 years of constant contamination. We'll see how things look 4 years from now when things become more concentrated. To Glenn, our resident expert, you have not spoken about the turning off of the air monitors here on the west coast by the epa. Does that not bother you?

    You also have not spoken of the complete lack of any water monitoring by the EPA or any US federal government entity. Yet you seem so sure about the few numbers we have gotten from volunteers. Projections are that it will take decades or even hundreds of years to stop this radioactive pollution. What makes you so comfortable knowing that this can't be stopped with any technology that currently exists on earth? What is it that you know Glenn that we don't know that keeps you from believing that this is a problem? Please enlighten us that we may also become unconcerned as you are.

  5. I'm sorry Tom, I should have left off of commenting here. Unlike you, I am a scientist and stupidly didn't realize that it was pointless to try to introduce facts and rationality to this post. You deal in secondary and tertiary sources. Primary sources are what I read. You let someone else interpret what you didn't read in the first place. I look stuff up and form my own opinions.

    I promise not to do this again on your blog. It will be better for all involved. Hopefully I haven't introduced any cognitive dissonance that will linger and haunt your readers.

    Carry on.

  6. Thanks for clarifying for us the answers to all of my questions. When you made your comment on enenews about contamination, you failed to explain which radioactive isotope you were talking about. I figured a scientist could help the regular people that live on this planet but I guess they only want to talk to other scientists. Thanks for nothing Glenn. I was looking forward to some answers but you are just like the rest of the main stream press and our government. Your response makes it seem as though you are running away from the tough questions. I thought if anyone could help us lay people understand this better, it would be a scientist willing to have a conversation with non scientists. I will give you the benefit of the doubt that perhaps you weren't trying to mislead us. I will say though that I am disappointed in your response. If you know of any honest nuclear scientists that would like to have a conversation with ordinary people, send them this way. We would love to talk to them. Until then, good day to you Glenn.

  7. Meanwhile, critters continue to wash up onto beaches from Eureka to Canada.



US Senator Joe Liberman, WTC 7 Did Not Occur