Meanwhile, there are these stories from Japan today

[robdogbucky]

Radioactive dust from Fukushima plant hit N. America soon after meltdown: researchers

Radioactive materials spewed out from the crippled Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant reached North America soon after the meltdown and were carried all the way to Europe, according to a simulation by university researchers.

The computer simulation by researchers at Kyushu University and the University of Tokyo, among other institutions, calculated dispersal of radioactive dust from the Fukushima plant beginning at 9 p.m. on March 14, when radiation levels around the plant spiked.

The team found that radioactive dust was likely caught by the jet stream and carried across the Pacific Ocean, its concentration dropping as it spread. According to the computer model, radioactive materials at a concentration just one-one hundred millionth of that found around the Fukushima plant hit the west coast of North America three days later, and reached the skies over much of Europe about a week later.

According to the research team, updrafts in a low-pressure system passing over the disaster-stricken Tohoku region on March 14-15 carried some of the radioactive dust that had collected about 1.5 kilometers above the plant to an altitude of about 5 kilometers. The jet stream then caught the dust and diffused it over the Pacific Ocean and beyond...

http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20110623p2a00m0na006000c.html



Water treatment system not working as expected

TOKYO (Kyodo) -- Tokyo Electric Power Co. said Wednesday that part of a newly installed radioactive water treatment system at its crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant is operating only at 10 percent of its expected decontamination capacity.

The utility said that although the system as a whole is performing above the minimum targeted decontamination level, it is investigating the cause of the insufficiency of a cesium-absorbing device developed by Kurion Inc. of the United States.

During recent trial operations, the installation of the device reduced the level of cesium-134 and cesium-137 in toxic water to one hundredth, although a reduction to one thousandth of the level had been anticipated...

...The 6.1 meter-deep water in the basement may be contaminated due to the effects of damage to the reactor as radiation doses of 430 millisieverts per hour have been found in the stairs of the building, a TEPCO official said.


(Mainichi Japan) June 23, 2011

http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20110623p2g00m0dm015000c.html



Valve likely set incorrectly from the beginning

The operator of the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant says it was unaware of an incorrectly opened valve that caused another disruption in its ongoing test run to filter radioactive water.

Tokyo Electric Power Company found on Wednesday that a US-made device attached to the water treatment system had lowered concentration of radioactive cesium by just 10 percent the planned amount...

...The amount of contaminated water on site is growing by about 400 tons a day, as fresh water is injected into reactors to cool them. The rainy season threatens to raise the water levels further.

The test-run was interrupted on Tuesday after a pump to send water into French-made decontamination equipment stopped, also due to the wrong setting of a valve.

Thursday, June 23, 2011 19:40 +0900 (JST)

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/23_34.html




Water filters at Fukushima still not working

The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant is still struggling with a malfunctioning water-decontaminator---the key to dealing with highly-radioactive water accumulating at the site. The new water decontaminating system was shut down only 5 hours after it went into operation on Friday.

Tokyo Electric Power Company says an irregular flow of the water in the system could have hampered the system from working properly, causing it to malfunction.

The utility says it discovered on Wednesday that a US-made device in the system only succeeded in lowering the concentration of radioactive cesium in the water to one percent of the previous amount, instead of 0.1 percent as initially expected.

The device has 6 absorbent chambers lined up in a row. The utility says radioactive readings in the lower chambers surged to 15 millisieverts per hour on Wednesday from 3 millisieverts per hour on Tuesday...

Thursday, June 23, 2011 06:11 +0900 (JST)

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/23_04.html




Care to debunk any of these stories?

[MineralMan]

1. Those all seem quite accurate.

It's not surprising that particles from Fukushima made it across the Pacific, giving the wind patterns at the time of the incident. Thankfully, the quantities were very, very small, as measured by the EPAs monitors and testing.

The other stories seem to indicate that the situation in Fukushima is still very, very serious, and that mistakes continue to be made, as they have been made from the very beginning of the incident, and even before.

Nuclear power generation is not safe. It has never been safe, and cannot be made to be safe. Accurate information helps everyone understand that better.

[BeFree]

2. Indeed.. accurate would be nice

Even though the monitors detected trace amounts, in cumulative the amounts spread from Japan all the way to Europe are quantified in the tons.

So, to say that """the quantities were very, very small" is inaccurate at best. Tons of radioactive particles are now roaming free. Tons more than on 3/11/11. Tons that are not natural, and as far as we can tell, quite deadly even in minute concentrations.

It's like this... if each of those monitors was a human, each of those monitors are now at great risk of being made sick. Right? Accurate or inaccurate assumption?

[MineralMan]

3. Based on the measurements in the US, the risk of illness

from what reached here is quite low, if exposure charts are correct. Since I have no way to judge those exposure charts, and since no countering information has appeared, I'd have to say that It wouldn't concern me much if I lived on the west coast. Here in Minneapolis, we saw a brief increase in radioactive nuclides in our monitoring as well. I saw the monitor and lab figures. They're not realy that worrisome, and I've spent some time researching exposure since I used to handle radioactive materials as part of my business of selling mineral specimens to collectors.

Fukushima should not have happened. In fact, the plants should never have been built, especially where they were built. They were built, however, and the earthquake and tsunami did occur. Due to the original error of their building radioactive materials have been released. That's patently not a good thing.

The actual risks, however, to people in the United States are very, very small, thanks to the distance and the short duration of atmospheric release to altitudes where the particulate matter and gaseous isotopes could enter the jet stream. Current monitoring results show no increase and a return to normal levels, following the brief increase.

Is there reason for concern here in the US? Perhaps at a very low level. However, what has occurred has occurred. The situation is what it is. The whole business could have been prevented. Sadly, it was not.

Nuclear power generation is not safe. It has never been safe and cannot be made to be safe. I've been saying that since 1959. I did not prevail. I'm still saying it. I still do not expect to prevail. I'll keep saying it.

The thing is that the accurate information is bad enough. It is alarming and should alarm everyone. The problem with inaccurate information, speculation, and deliberate distortion of these events and their risks is that such information is easily debunked and diminishes the arguments against nuclear power generation when people discover that inaccuract information was distributed by those who oppose nuclear power generation. It makes it all the harder to make a case.

[uppityperson]

6. What a good post, thank you mm

[BeFree]

8. It was sweet

Didn't answer any of my questions tho.
Oh well. Celebrities get a pass from some, eh? lol

[uppityperson]

10. mm is a celebrity? huh, missed that. I do see mm answered your question

about "if each monitor were human...great risk of being made sick though.

[MineralMan]

14. I think that's reference to a poll I put in GD about celebrities.

I'm not sure how it applies in this thread, though.

[BeFree]

7. Each monitor is based on human inhalations

So, the question is... what danger would the monitors be in having breathed in these amounts were they human.

From what I have seen, the experts say breathing a particle in is the worst way of being radiated.

Since the EPA has totally ignored that question, we have every right to speculate about just what and how much we breathed in and what that will do to our health. One would think the EPA would have already answered that. Maybe they don't know? If they don't know - why don't they know? And if they do know, why are they not telling us the whole truth? Why is it they leave us to speculating about the dangers to our health?

[MineralMan]

11. You're left to speculate because nobody really has the answers

you're looking for. They're not ignoring the question. They're reporting numbers they can measure. Frankly, we simply don't have the data that demonstrates just how much radiation causes how much illness. There's some data, based on past incidents, but radiation, and yes, breathing particles, often doesn't cause disease for decades, and the long-term longitudinal studies simply have not been done, due to the difficulty of assembling the group of exposed persons and controls.

You can find some studies that appear to present some percentages and illnesses per 100,000 data for some exposures and some diseases, but the fact remains that we know very little about these effects, even now, some 60+ years after radiation exposure became an issue. Given the long-term nature of the risks, it's going to take a long time before we have enough data to provide accurate estimates.

So, yes, you're forced to speculate. If you have deep concerns about low level exposure, then you should locate where that exposure will be unlikely. If, however, you're like me and in your late 60s, it's less of an issue, really. Other factors will probably determine my life expectancy, since I was born just before Hiroshima, and have seen the entire history of nuclear power.

So, the answer is that they really don't know. Since they don't know, they can't tell you what the precise risks are. They can, however, and do tell you what the exposure is. They know that. So they make those figures public. Interpreting them is as difficult as always.

Radioactivity is not a healthful thing. That's why nuclear power generation is not safe, and why it has never been safe, and why it cannot be made to be safe.

Sadly, it is here, and is likely to continue to be here. Make whatever adjustments you can. Despite years of opposition to it, nothing has changed so far, and the plants are still in operation. My decision is to adapt to what I cannot change, while continuing to work toward change. It's not much fun, but it's practical.

[BeFree]

13. Yepp

Just read where the EPA said that a human breathing in as much particles as the monitors did that day is damn sure likely to f you up. No. I didn't. Not from my EPA. But others have said as much. Real health experts.

So, how many people got f'd up that day? Is the republican controlled congress going to release any funds for the science needed?

[MineralMan]

15. Links?

If you just read that, please see if you can find the link to the place you read it. The EPA publishes measurement. They don't normally publish health information, except based on standard exposure charting. If you have experts who said that the levels at those monitoring stations were sure to cause health problems, then I'd like to see that information.

The fact is that the Fukushima incident happened. That can't be changed. Radioactive isotopes were released. Some reached the US, and beyond. Some is still circulating in the upper atmosphere. Those facts are not in dispute here. I wish it had not happened. If I had my way it could not have happened, because we'd not be using nuclear power to generate electricity.

What is not established, however, is how much risk Americans are under due to the radioactive material that made it here. I don't have any figures for that, although I can access raw figures from the EPA, based on their monitoring of what they measured. Those still have to be interpreted to determine what the real risks are for people living in those areas. The EPA has essentially said that the levels were not high enough to be alarming. Were they wrong? You're going to have to show me some real information from real people who actually know before I can discount the EPA. If you have that information, a link would be great. I'll go to it and assess what is there. BTW, Arnie Gunderson is not a radiation health issue expert, if that's who you're planning to link to.

[BeFree]

23. Eh?

You want a link about how radiation is bad for you?


Quoted from you: "Those {EPA data} still have to be interpreted to determine what the real risks are for people living in those areas. The EPA has essentially said that the levels were not high enough to be alarming."

So, you are saying the EPA is an expert on how radiation effects people? No, they are not. And the EPA has still to run the data to "determine", but they say don't be alarmed. How the fuck can they say don't be alarmed if they are not health care professionals and they haven't crunched the data?

This radiation is brand new. Never happened before. Yet the idea is that there is nothing to worry about? Give me a break.


What is not established is how much risk Americans are under due to the radioactive material that made it here. Please, quit acting like you know wtf is going down. Because you don't know.

[uppityperson]

21. Do you have a link to that assertion? Thanks.Which "real health experts" said that where?

[BeFree]

4. My mind goes back to the first explosion

A ball of something like gas mushroomed upwards from the structure at 500(?) miles an hour.
Lets see, the atmosphere is about 5 miles deep. Didn't take long for all that material to hit the ceiling.

[MineralMan]

20. That 500 mph was the initial speed.

It slowed down very quickly as it went upward, you know. Very quickly. Gravity and friction does that. It didn't go up 5 miles. Not even close.

Further, the atmosphere is much thicker than five miles. The exact thickness depends on what density the atmosphere has where you draw the line.

Think about your last airline flight. You probably flew at about 37,000 feet. That's about 7 miles, and you were still in dense enough atmosphere to support a jet plane. Sorry.

[WhiteTara]

9. +1million!

[robdogbucky]

12. I do trust Arne on this, even though this was from June 12

Hot Particles From Japan to Seattle Virtually Undetectable when Inhaled or Swallowed

A 5:59 minute video explaining what the revised estimate of releases by TEPCO and what the folks in Japan are reporting experiencing:

http://www.fairewinds.com/updates

"Original estimates of xenon and krypton releases remain the same, but a TEPCO recalculation shows dramatic increases in the release of hot particles. This confirms the results of air filter monitoring by independent scientists. Fairewinds' Arnie Gundersen explains how hot particles may react in mammals while escaping traditional detection. Reports of a metallic taste in the mouth, such as those now being reported in Japan and on the west coast, are a telltale sign of radiation exposure."




RECOMMENDED NEWS SOURCES

The independent watchdog Nuclear Information and Resource Service has the best regularly updated information about the Fukushima disaster:
http://www.nirs.org/fukushima/crisis.htm

It also has an excellent general site with vital, up-to-date info about nuclear issues in North America:
http://www.nirs.org/

The Low Level Radiation Campaign offers good updates on the Fukushima situation, with helpful resources to understand why official claims of the safety of “low-level’ nuclear fallout is a sham. Also has good information on the distortions in recent documentaries and news accounts claiming that the Chernobyl and Three Mile Island accidents were not really as bad as people think they were. On their home page there is a link to two important videos debunking this claim, and a recent book from original Russian sources documenting how much worse the Chernobyl disaster was (and continues to be with ongoing health effects) than claimed by the revisionist history now offered by the nuclear industry: http://www.llrc.org/

European Committee on Radiation Risk has an excellent website with valuable information and downloads, such as a free downloadable copy of the book Chernobyl: 20 Years On which is a comprehensive rebuttal of recent documentaries claiming that the health toll of Chernobyl was much less than the public thinks. It also has an important transcript of a debate in which a spokesperson for the ICRP (regulatory body which sets radiation limits and policies) admits that the model it uses (and promotes in the media to support predictions of no health effects from fallout) is highly inaccurate and its recommendations cannot be applied to post-accident situations (although the public is told they do.) http://www.euradcom.org/

The Union of Concerned Scientists has excellent information about North American nuclear issues. Despite the extremely strong scientific accreditation of those in this organization, you will rarely ever hear an interview with them in the mainstream media due to the media’s preference for government/nuclear industry spokespeople.
http://www.ucsusa.org/





The nature of radiation makes it very easy to convince people there is nothing to be afraid of, when in fact there actually very well maybe lots to worry about. Just because it won't be known for some years does not dispell the possibility that it is happening to us now. It is invisible, maybe not tasteless, huh? With our agencies all saying nothing to see here, etc., one only has to look at all of the other misrepresentations made in furtherance of the agenda of the power elite, in this case, the industry/government/UN/politicians all lined up telling us not to worry, be happy, to harbor some small suspicions that we are getting the same treatment all over again.

Sorry, sometimes gut reactions won't go away.




Just my dos centavos


robdogbucky

[MineralMan]

19. Arnie Gunderson sometimes offers good information.

Sometimes, though, his strong advocacy leads him to offer information that isn't quite as accurate. Whenever information comes from anyone or any agency with a strong advocacy position, it needs to be looked at closely before simply accepting it as factual.

[flamingdem]

5. Fishermen unload at Chiba port to avoid Fukushima label (Adding to your list)

http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/national/archive/news/2011/06/22/20110622p2a00m0na005000c.html

IWAKI, Fukushima -- Fishermen from this city changed their destination for the unloading of 17 tons of bonito from a port here to one in Chiba Prefecture after brokers warned them that customers wouldn't buy fish with a Fukushima label.

"I had predicted there would be an effect, but I was shocked to hear that Fukushima fish won't sell at all," said Tetsu Nozaki, president of the company that caught the fish.

According to Nozaki, the bonito catch was made around 300 kilometers off Ibaraki Prefecture on June 19, and the unloading was planned for Onahama Port in Iwaki on the morning of June 21. It was to be the first bonito landing of the season at the port, which reopened on June 16.

Ahead of the landing, however, brokers at the port contacted others in charge of markets in different regions and were warned that since an unloading at Onahama Port would give the fish a label saying it was from Fukushima Prefecture, consumers would likely avoid the product. Brokers at the port judged that if the fish were unloaded at Onahama, they wouldn't be able to find buyers.

"It's a shame because we caught the fish in an area allowed by the Fisheries Agency and made sure that the water and air at Onahama did not have any unusual radiation readings, "said Nozaki, who is also chairman of a prefectural fishermen's association.

[robdogbucky]

16. Michio Kaku on CNN: Fukushima - "They Lied to Us" - June 21, 2011

Is there anything Kaku says here untrue?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQa2Ivz8i8I


Just wondering what all the quick-hit authorities hereabouts have to say, aside from trying to smear the source. We have all heard about how unreliable folks like Gunderson and Kaku are. Yet, what have they said that is untrue compared to the stream of nonstop lies and disinformation from the authorities? For three straight months!


Cripes, when will people get a clue?



Tick tock

[robdogbucky]

17. The human cost. So sad, so preventable

Cracking under the strain: Japan suicide rates jump after disaster

June 23, 2011 – TOKYO – The Japanese Government has warned of an epidemic of depression and suicide as a result of mental trauma caused by the earthquake, tsunami and ongoing nuclear disaster. The country already has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, but new figures show that the number of deaths has risen almost a fifth compared with a year ago. In Miyagi, the region worst hit by the March 11 tsunami, the figures are especially alarming, with suicides up 39 per cent. A government report is now warning that the stoicism of many victims in the early weeks of the disaster may mask post-traumatic stress disorder. This week a dairy farmer from the town of Soma, in the Fukushima region – near the crippled nuclear plant – was found to have hanged himself after being forced to sell his herd because of a ban on the sale of milk from the area. “It is a characteristic of the Great East Japan Earthquake that, as well as stress caused by large and sudden changes to daily life and the traumatic experience of the earthquake and tsunami, there are feelings of grief and loss resulting from the huge number of people missing and killed,” the Government said in the report. “As well as grief, survivors also experience guilt because, although they tried to escape together, only some were saved. Then there is the shock of identifying bodies, for aid workers as well as victims, resulting in chronic depression or prolonged grief disorder.” The observations appear to be reflected in the new figures, which show an 18 per cent national increase in suicides. In May, 3,281 people killed themselves, 499 more than the same month in 2010. Suicides in Tokyo were up 27 per cent. –The Australian

http://theextinctionprotocol.wordpress.com/2011/06/23/cracking-under-the-strain-japan-suicide-rates-jump-after-disaster/

[MineralMan]

18. While the Fukushima nuclear plant disaster was preventable,

the earthquake and tsunami were not. This wave of suicides has more than one cause, really. Which suicides were due to which cause isn't quantified.

The whole thing is very sad, but not all the suicides were due to the radiation release, by any means.

[Kurovski]

22. K&R. (nt)