This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Fukushima's Legacy: Understanding The Difference Between Nuclear Radiation & Contamination

Tyler Durden's picture


Submitted by Chris Martenson of Peak Prosperity,

Are fish from the Pacific safe to eat?  What about the elevated background radiation readings detected in Japan, and recently in California? Are these harmful levels?

Should we be worried? And if so, what should be done about these potential health threats? What steps should we take to protect ourselves?

As many of you know, I'm a scientist by training. In this report, I'll lay out the facts and data that explain the actual risks. I'll start by pointing out that Fukushima-related fears have been both overblown as well as heavily downplayed by parties on each side of the discussion.

Much of this stems from ignorance of the underlying science. But some of it, sadly, seems to be purposefully misleading. Again, on both sides.

To assess the true risks accurately, you need to know about the difference between radiation and contamination.  The distinction is vital and, unfortunately, one of the most glossed-over and misused facets of the reporting on nuclear energy.

Starting With The Bottom Line

All of my research and understanding of the risks of radiation at this point indicate that people living in the west coast of the US or in Hawaii are currently not in danger from the radiation released in the wake of the Fukushima tragedy. 

While the background levels are elevated somewhat, those detected so far remain well within what I consider to be a safe zone.  However, should there be another accident at the damaged facility leading to the release of another large plume of radioactive matter, then this assessment could, understandably, change.

The exception to this assessment is for those living within a hundred kilometers of Fukushima. For those people, my analysis points to serious risks, especially for those living with a kilometer or two of the coast, extending 100 kilometers in either direction. The details behind my assessment are contained in the full report below.

The intent of this report is to help readers understand the likely implications of the Fukushima situation with more clarity, as well as to provide a useful framework for identifying the risks posed by any future nuclear incidents and what your response to them should be.

The most important takeaway from this analysis should be this: Radiation, itself, is less a threat than most people imagine. But radioactive contamination is an entirely different and far more dangerous beast. 

While both deliver a ‘dose’ of radiation, it's contamination -- especially ingested contamination -- that has the greatest odds of delivering a concentrated dose to human tissue in a way that can lead to serious acute and/or chronic damage.

The difference between these two will be explained in detail. For those who chose not to read the full report and just want the punchline, it's this: Contamination is the process of acquiring radioactive particles that then become lodged on, or more dangerously in, your body. Do all you can to protect yourself against it.

Should you find yourself nearby during a nuclear accident, your first order of business is to avoid breathing or ingesting any contaminated particulate matter.  This usually involves sheltering in place and is when duct tape and plastic sheeting become your best friends.  While it may sound silly to use such a dime-store defense against a nuclear hazard, it is in fact both remarkably effective and entirely necessary. Merely keeping you and your family away from the fallout for a matter of 2-3 days, possibly a bit longer depending on conditions, can make an enormous difference in your survival odds. 

For now, the levels of radiation that have been detected and reported outside of Japan are between two and three orders of magnitude below what I would personally consider to be worrisome. And there’s no concrete evidence the the bigger concern, contamination, has traveled to countries outside of Japan.

And within Japan, the story takes on its own complexity (just as happened in the areas surrounding Chernobyl), where local wind patterns in the days after the accident created a complex quilt of danger and (relative) safety.  

For those who wish to engage with the context and details of the post-Fukushima world, the journey begins by understanding what ‘radiation’ actually is. 

Radiation Types

What do we mean when we say 'radiation'?  It turns out, that word can mean any number of things. 

You are bathed in radiation every day: from sunlight, radio waves, wifi, etc. Some radiation is electromagnetic (in the case of light) and some is composed of particles (matter).

When we hear about ‘radiation’ in the press, what’s typically being referred to are potentially harmful forms of energetic emissions, both electromagnetic and particulate, that can damage biological organisms.

The main distinction between harmful and benign radiation lies in the ability of the radioactive wave or particle to ionize a molecule in your body. Technically, 'ionizing' means "to create an ion", which involves forcibly stripping an electron off of a molecule or atom. This leaves the molecule or atom in a charged state (referred to as 'ionic form'), and thus can cause the affected particle to break apart or otherwise not work as it did before. 

For example, the hemoglobin in your blood is a very complex molecule. Breaking even one of its internal bonds can completely destroy its ability to carry oxygen.  

Every cell in your body is an enormously complex machine with thousands of different molecules each with a crucial function. Wreck enough of these molecules through the process of ionization and the cell dies. Destroy or disrupt the DNA at the center of the cell, and malfunction will result; one dramatic form being the loss of the ability to self-regulate its growth, which we call cancer. 

Radioactive substances emit various forms of energy. Some of the energetic releases are in the form of photon waves (such as gamma or X-rays) while some are in the form of actual fast moving particles (such as alpha and beta particles, and neutrons).

We lump them all together and call them ‘radiation’. But when it comes to their impact on living organisms, not all forms of radiation are created equally. Some are far more effective 'disrupters of life' than others.

The basic types of radiation you would encounter as a consequence of a nuclear accident like Fukushima are:

  • Alpha particles.  These are fast moving nuclei of helium, meaning they consist of two protons and two neutrons.  The electron shell is missing, so these are charged particles in search of electrons to strip from some other hapless molecule or atom. In the subatomic world, these are very large particles and so are the most easily stopped. They cannot penetrate even a single sheet of paper or the layer of dead skin cells on the outside of your body. As a result, they are quite easy to protect against with minimal effort. However, we shouldn't take total comfort in this fact. The deadly toxin Polonium 210, the one used to kill various enimies of the Russians over the years, emits alpha particles and is quite effective as a poison. The reason for this lies in the fact that, once ingested, it works its damage in close proximity to a person's cells. On the outside of a body, alpha particles bump into already-dead skin cells, so no harmful damage results.  On the inside, they careen straight into living cells and are quite damaging.
  • Beta particles.  These are electrons that have been ejected through a radioactive decay process (technically, it's when a neutron decays yielding both a proton and an electron).   Beta radiation can penetrate a sheet of paper easily, and requires something along the lines of an aluminum plate a few millimeters thick to stop it. Beta particles have medium ionizing power and medium penetrating power, but there is a very wide spectrum of potential power intensities depending on exactly which radioactive substance is emitting the beta particle. One very common radioactive substance found in nuclear plants, tritium, is a beta emitter.
  • Gamma rays.  These are high-energy photons with strong penetrating power and high ionizing potential.  In the past, they were distinguished from x-rays on the basis of their energy potential, but they are really the same thing (they are both high-energy photons). Although, what we call an x-ray generally carries a lot less energy than a gamma ray. That is, an x-ray is at the low end of the energetic spectrum while a gamma ray is at the higher end. This is exactly analogous to the difference between visible sunlight and UV rays, which are the radiation (composed of high-energy photons) that burn your skin.  Just place gamma rays a lot further along that same spectrum all the way at the point where, instead of being stopped by your underlay of skin, the gamma rays can create an equivalent ‘sunburn’ on tissues all the way through your body. Gamma rays vary in strength and actually occupy a spectrum of energies (not unlike how white light includes the spectrum of all the colors of the rainbow), so we need to know more about the specific gamma rays in question to know how damaging they might be. 
  • Neutrons.  Neutrons are the bad boys of the radiation story; and are only found as a consequence of a nuclear reaction (controlled or uncontrolled).  Their penetrating power is extraordinary, requiring several meters of solid substance to stop them. They work their harm by indirect ionization, which is not unlike a pool ball smashing into a lamp. A typical example would be the capture of a neutron by a hydrogen nucleus consisting of a single proton, which is then ripped away from its position by the kinetic energy contained by the neutron, and then, like our billiard ball, careens about breaking things, ionizing some atoms/molecules, or shattering the bonds between atoms. In terms of biological damage, neutrons are horrific -- roughly ten times more damaging than beta or gamma radiation on a per unit of energy basis.

Of course, there's a lot of complexity buried within each of these 'buckets' of radiation types; especially given the uncertainty that each bucket has a range of energies associated with it. 

To help clarify this, imagine that we're talking about radiation as if it were vehicles traveling on a highway. It's not really possible to predict how destructive it would be to collide with 'a vehicle' because that answer depends on knowing factors like the vehicle’s size, weight and speed.

Bumping into a small car traveling slowly in your same direction will be far less damaging than slamming head-on into a large fully-loaded Mack truck going 80 mph.

The way this is technically measured is by the energy that each type of radiation carries, measured in units called 'electron volts' (eV).  Think of the eV rating as combining both the speed and the mass of the vehicle we are trying to rank. 

To the eV designation, we'll add the scientific shorthand of K for 'kilo' signifying 1,000 and M for Mega signifying 1,000,000. So 1 KeV = 1,000 eV, and 1 MeV = 1,000,000 eV

Along our radiation 'highway' we find that x-rays carry the least energy and are in the vicinity of 1.2 KeV.  They are small, light cars. Think Fiat.

Gamma rays are not a single vehicle type because they can have energies anywhere from a few KeV all the way up to 25 MeV.  They are everything and anything from tiny TR-6s to massive, fully loaded, Peterbuilt double trailer trucks traveling 80 mph. For reference, the gamma rays emitted by Cesium 137, a very common byproduct of nuclear reactors and a main component of the Fukushima releases, is 700 KeV, hundreds of times more energetic than your typical dentist x-ray, but not nearly the most potent gamma ray you could encounter.

Some common gamma emitters are cesium-137, cobalt-60 and technetium-99.  Also, about 10% of the radioactivity of iodine-131 is gamma, the rest is beta (making this is a mixed radioelement).

Alpha particles have very high kinetic energies standing at about 5 MeV. However, they have exceptionally poor penetrating power, so we might think of them as very large steamrollers that can lurch forwards violently, but only for a few feet. If you are right next to it, you're in big trouble; but otherwise you're safe.

In years years,  a potent alpha emitter, polonium-210, was used to assassinate both Yasser Arafat and Russian critic Alexander Litvinenko. Because polonium-210 only emits alpha particles, you could carry it in a glass vial in your pocket and slip though radiation detectors at any facility because none of the alpha particles would make it through the vial wall (and even if they somehow did, they’d be stopped by the fabric of your pants pocket). In fact, you could merrily rub it on your skin and suffer no ill effects. 

But if ingested? Just a few milligrams, a speck the size of a small grain of salt, would be sufficient to kill. All those gigantic lurching steamrollers would be positioned right next to your living cells, crashing into them and destroying your tissues one cell at a time.

Common alpha emitters include radium, radon, polonium, uranium and thorium.

Beta particles are electrons ejected during proton decay, and they travel at high speed. They can range anywhere between 5 KeV and 20 MeV. For our purposes, the isotopes most commonly associated with nuclear reactions are in the range of 19 KeV (tritium) to 600 KeV (iodine-131 and strontium-90) to 2.3 MeV (yttrium-90).  So these range from medium-sized cars to tractor trailers in our analogy.

Beta particles have medium penetrating power and they can easily get through your skin to the living tissues beneath. Think of them as being able to give you a very harsh sunburn from the outside-inwards if you were exposed long enough. Again, their worst effects come if ingested, where they can cause lots of damage.

Some common beta emitters are strontium-90, yttrium-90, iodine-131, carbon-14, and tritium.

Neutrons are a very wide topic, so we'll just talk about them in terms of a nuclear reactor. The moderate to fast neutrons emitted as a product of fission are extraordinarily dangerous and can penetrate lead shields and many meters of concrete. They are most readily stopped by interacting with hydrogen, so water and wax (and human bodies)-- which contain lots of hydrogen atoms -- are better at stopping neutrons than concrete. 

Neutrons are not part of the radioactive release from Fukushima. They really aren't ever an issue unless you somehow find yourself near an open, uncontained source of fission -- like inside the containment shell of an operating reactor, or in the vicinity of an exploding nuclear bomb. Then neutrons are a BIG problem.

Of note: in the early stages of the Fukushima meltdown, neutron 'beams' were detected 13 times from outside the reactors. This understandably caused the TEPCO workers a lot of worry and slowed their response efforts. This was a certain indication that there was spontaneous fission happening outside of a sealed containment vessel, something that TEPCO was busily assuring the world had not happened. They were still claiming that the vessels were intact and full of pumped cooling water. 

The bottom line is that the topic of radioactivity is complex. If we want to make intelligent decisions, then we need to know which type of radiation we are talking about. 

For example, there are folks walking about with mail-order radiation detectors and reporting ‘counts per minute’ readings. But counts of what exactly?  Is each ‘count’ a low-energy beta particle or a high-energy gamma ray? There’s a world of difference between the two.

So we owe it to ourselves to dig into the context before coming to conclusions. To determine how concerned we should be about any new data, we have to translate ‘counts’ of any particle into their potential health effects. 

Radiation's Effect On Our Health

Okay, here's the thing most people don't know about radiation: we are surrounded by it and have evolved with it over billions of years. The body can deal with exposure to a certain amount of ionizing radiation without any difficulty at all. Naturally occurring radioactive elements such as uranium and radon and carbon-14 have been a part of life since the very beginning. Gamma rays rain down from the celestial heavens every day.

So radiation alone is not a cause for concern for me.  Even temporary radiation levels that are significantly above my normal background baseline, as much as ten or twenty times, are not a concern of mine as a healthy adult.

But as our vehicle analogy above showed, first we have to know what kind of radiation we are talking about. Is it alpha, beta, or gamma?  How much energy is it carrying?

We also need to know about the person being exposed to the radiation. Tolerance levels for what's "safe" will be lower for kids, the old, and the frail.

For these reasons, science has struggled to come up with a universal measurement for the health impact caused by radiation. As a result, we have several different measurement methodologies parked into a few slightly different, but essentially related, scales. Each attempts to combine the acute effects of radiation exposure into a single 'dose' that is a measure of both the intensity and the duration of the exposure.

As mentioned previously, some radiation has the ability to travel right through our bodies entirely without being absorbed. So, the ‘dose’ reading needs to focus on the amount of any specific radiation type that will be absorbed (or stopped) by the body and thereby have opportunity to impact the molecules in that body.

The radiation absorbed dose is measured in the Gray, rad, rem and Sievert

Rads and Grays are related to each other. One Gray is a huge dose; and the rad just breaks the Grays down into finer units. One Gray = 100 rads (rad stands for Radiation Absorbed Dose). These measure the amount of energy that ionizing radiation imparts to matter.  This matter could be anything: a block of cement, or a human.  

Sieverts and rems are likewise related. One Sievert = 100 rems, but these are adjusted to provide a measure of the impact of the absorbed dose of ionizing radiation on biological tissue. To equate the two systems, the absorbed dose in Grays or rads is multiplied by a 'quality factor' that is specific to each type of radiation to account for their different biological impacts: the result is Sieverts or rems.  Thus, using our vehicle analogy from before, our small sedans get an adjustment factor of 1, while heavier vehicles get an adjustment factor as high as 10-20 times greater. 


Based on this table, it's no wonder that polonium-210 is such a devastating radiological poison, because alpha particle get an adjustment factor of 20(!) making them twice as deadly as fast neutrons even. But, again, the alpha particles have to be ingested to have that impact; whereas neutrons can travel through ten feet of concrete and still be dangerous.

Keep in mind this table is a huge simplification of a very complicated field of study. For example, it also matters which tissues are being exposed, as they have very different sensitivities to radiation. 

However, if we are talking about an episode of external exposure to radiation, like a worker at Fukushima might get, then we care about the Sievert or rem scale:

  • 1 Sievert (or 1 Sv), or 100 rem, will induce nausea and reduce the white blood cell count
  • 5 Sv, or 500 rems, would cause death for 50% of those exposed in a matter of months
  • 10 Sv, or 1,000 rems, is 100% fatal within weeks

The above table leaves out the element of time, so if you are standing near a source of ionizing radiation that is hitting you at the rate of 1 SV per hour, after ten hours you will have received 10 Sv, a fatal dose.  If you stand next to that source for an hour you will get nauseous, and destroy some of your white blood cells.  If you only stand there for ten minutes, you'll receive something like 100 mS (the maximum yearly allowed dose for US nuclear workers) and likely not feel any adverse effects.

Thus, dose is a function of intensity and time. You may recall seeing the grainy footage of Chernobyl ‘workers’ ducking out from behind cover and racing to move a single wheelbarrow of rubble from point A to point B. In those few seconds, they may have received a lifetime maximum dose of radiation and were (hopefully) sent home after accomplishing that one task.

The average global background radiation is 0.27 microS/hour (that's millionths of a Sievert). If we multiply that number by 24x365, it yields an average yearly dose of 2.4 mS/yr.  TEPCO workers are permitted to receive 250 mS/yr, while US nuclear worker standards are 100 mS/yr, which is roughly 25 times greater than background.

The average airport security screening device delivers a dose of 0.25 microS, or the equivalent of a full day's background radiation.  If that alarms you, just know that during the actual flight you take, the average exposure is ten times higher than that -- providing 2.7 microS per hour of flight at cruising altitude, or ten times normal background. So a 5-hour flight at cruising altitude will provide you with a dose of gamma radiation that measures 54 times more than you get at the airport screening itself, or two full days worth of background radiation.

Again, at these levels I am not even remotely concerned.  It there were something to worry about then the epidemiological data from flight attendants and pilots would have long ago revealed a health concern. That's one reason why I'm not worried about periodic episodes of 10x normal background radiation.

Of course, the Sievert is a very crude scale, developed a long time ago. One might argue that the biological impact of airport screeners and whole-body gamma irradiation might be more subtle and complex due to differences in tissue responses and how the radiation is concentrated on the surface of the skin by airport scanners.  All of that remains an open question to me, but no enough of one to concern me.

Still, the point here is that we are surrounded by radiation all the time and we absorb a yearly dose no matter where we live, but Denver-ites get a lot more than people living in Miami due to the altitude (less atmospheric protection from extra planetary gamma arrays).

Here's a link to a super useful graphic that visually shows the Sievert doses of both ordinary life and the Fukushima accident in relation to each other.

Based on this chart, plus all of the information above, even if your background radiation goes up by a factor of ten or twenty, I wouldn't be concerned.

Contamination Is The Real Danger

But radioactive contamination?  That's a whole different beast. 

By "contamination", I mean ingesting some radioactive isotopes or particles that become lodged in the body somehow.  Perhaps it's a small speck of radioactive dust that gets lodged in the lung where it will persist (like coal dust and asbestos do), or perhaps it's a substance that our bodies try to accumulate because it resembles a biologically useful element (as is the case with iodine or strontium).

In Part II: The Contamination Threat, we examine in depth the threats posed by radioactive contamination, including the most prevalent contaminants to be wary of, and the compounding effects of bioaccumulation and biomagnification. One of the most nefarious aspects of contamination is how it uses Nature's processes against itself.

For the record, we are aware of no imminent public health threat from nuclear contamination outside of already-identified "hot zones". But for those who wish to better understand the risks and prudent protection measures related to the real dangers of a similar Fukushima-type event in the future (or an unfortunate escalation of the current Fukushima situation), being forewarned is forearmed.

Click here to access Part II of this report (free executive summary; enrollment required for full access).


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tue, 02/11/2014 - 22:55 | 4426542 Boris Alatovkrap
Boris Alatovkrap's picture

Boris is explain nuclear radiation and difference of contamination...

Radiation is stand in front of refrigerator with door open. Contamination is store mayonnaise next to Cesium 137 and then is spread on sandwich.

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:04 | 4426579 wretch
wretch's picture

Nice article.  The early explosions in the Fukushima reactors spewed plutonium into all over the place, for miles.  And into the atmosphere.  One atom of plutonium can disrupt cellular behavior, cause cancer.  Lots of organisms continue to ingest it, and it bioaccumulates.

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:29 | 4426582 JohnnyBriefcase
JohnnyBriefcase's picture

Nope. Sorry, they said it was safe.

They wouldn't lie to us to protect their multi billion dollar investments.

They care about you and me.

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:41 | 4426698 Fukushima Sam
Fukushima Sam's picture

Don't worry!  Everything is just fine!

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:55 | 4426727 wee-weed up
wee-weed up's picture



"Are fish from the Pacific safe to eat?  What about the elevated background radiation readings detected in Japan, and recently in California? Are these harmful levels?

Should we be worried? And if so, what should be done about these potential health threats? What steps should we take to protect ourselves?"


There's not a government on earth with nuclear plants on its soil which will answer those questions honestly.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 00:12 | 4426787 Mister Kitty
Mister Kitty's picture

All that radiation is killing the sushi market.  Bitches.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 00:17 | 4426807 Gankfest
Gankfest's picture

Well written, and informative!

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 04:10 | 4427196 X_mloclaM
X_mloclaM's picture

bioaccumulation in "hot area" sells "hot" tea "hot" exports with "hot" particle, u injest, and u see no threat to Japanese people outside your special ring? No threat to those injesting your gamma decaying particles sucked up the stems of plants?

Many will come to regret the sentiment expressed in first few lines of this piece

Hottest items in decending order of danger to human life (excuse me... future human life risks)


Green Tea and mushrooms grown in Japan

N Japanese dairy and green leaf vegetables grown in north

Japanese regional fish (their NE/E coast obviously being the worst)

North and Central American fish & mushrooms

North American green leaf vegetables and milk (not at risk, but can be 'prepped')

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 04:57 | 4427219 zhandax
zhandax's picture

"All that radiation is killing the sushi market."

Means it gets cheaper.  I realized early on that irradiated fish may have a shortened lifespan, and contain contaminants in it's stomach, but should not pose harm to those consuming the flesh.  Not far removed from irradiated vegetables intended to eliminate harmful bacteria.  Pacific seafood may become extinct, which is bad enough, but it shouldn't kill those enjoying the last of it.  I have also noticed that shortly after Fukishima, my Kroger starting importing fish from the Honolulu fish market.  Those imports have been interrupted frequently this winter, and I wonder how much of this is weather and how much is diminution of supply?

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 00:03 | 4426766 SafelyGraze
SafelyGraze's picture

contamination is cesium *in* the mayonnaise

when it's merely next to the mayonnaise, you just have some irradiated (but non-radioactive) sandwich spread

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 00:49 | 4426896 Boris Alatovkrap
Boris Alatovkrap's picture

Da, da, you are correct, but Boris is not so stupid as put Cesium 137 in mayonnaise. Boris is not KGB.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 02:04 | 4427030 Urban Roman
Urban Roman's picture

For another example, suppose you have one of those little radiation meters everybody carries around in Japan these days.

Further suppose you were there in the restaurant with Litvenenko that day. You could wave your meter over the fatal cup of tea and it would show nothing. Just the odd click or two now and then from cosmic rays or natural radioactivity. Those little meters can't pick up alpha radiation.

If you had the right kind of detector, and hold it right over the teacup, almost getting it wet, it would show a lot of radiation. If the speaker were on it would roar.

But again, move it ten inches away from the teacup and it would sense nothing. Alpha particles don't go that far in air.

Just don't drink any of the tea.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 03:50 | 4427176 Whalley World
Whalley World's picture

Radchick on youtube has a gallery of mutated plant life going back to 2012 here in Canada and USA

I won't paddle in the Pacific anymore as i have watched the jellyfish melt on the surface last summer and all of the starfish are gone.

Obama said their was no chance of the radiation from Fuku hitting N America, but he scooted off to Brazil when the plant blew

check out the chernobyl diet and look up the benefits of dandelion,

this is a nightmare that has no end, this article is in support of the nuke industry which has to go

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 04:18 | 4427201 X_mloclaM
X_mloclaM's picture

however, to credit, did do the Corexit EC9500A and Corexit EC9527A dip with the fam

A good man doin that there for Gulf sentiment

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 13:26 | 4428421 Clycntct
Clycntct's picture

If I recall it wasn't in contaminated waters but inlet or alcove?

Visual propaganda.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 21:34 | 4430494 tyrone
tyrone's picture

wretch said: The early explosions in the Fukushima reactors spewed plutonium into all over the place

WRONG!   reactors at Fukushima are "BOILING WATER REACTORS" and as such, they use enriched uranium as fuel. The long-lived radioactive decay products produced by those Fukushima reactors which escaped into the earth's atmosphere were Cesium-134 and Cesium-137 which have lives of 2 years and 30 years respectively.  Other short-lived radioactive decay products including Iodine-131, Iodine-132, Technitium-132, Xenon-133, and Lanthanum-140 were also in the released material but have lives measured in days or hours. Obviously, the life of a radioactive product and the detected amounts are the important concerns here.

The "other kind" of commercial power reactors in common use are called "BREEDER REACTORS" and THOSE ones use plutonium as fuel.

Thu, 02/13/2014 - 01:33 | 4431314 Tijuana Donkey Show
Tijuana Donkey Show's picture

But did they reload the reactors? To build options for weapons? (Yes, they did) That is the hidden issue here.

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:28 | 4426661 EmmittFitzhume
EmmittFitzhume's picture


Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:43 | 4426696 verbot
verbot's picture

i like how much attention is paid to syntax .. boris.... and thanks zh for another fukushima story link.. you all are my heros...

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 00:50 | 4426902 Boris Alatovkrap
Boris Alatovkrap's picture

You are very thank you! Boris is take great care of exactness in syntax.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 01:00 | 4426928 Radical Marijuana
Radical Marijuana's picture

The way Boris writes is so classically amusing, that I keep on suspecting that he is doing it on purpose?

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 01:23 | 4426979 Boris Alatovkrap
Boris Alatovkrap's picture

To quote great playwright Anton Chekhov, "if there is gun on mantle in first act, is better go off by third act." Boris is to do everything with much purpose.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 03:55 | 4427183 Pool Shark
Pool Shark's picture



You're not planning on 'going off' are you Boris?

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 05:08 | 4427227 Boris Alatovkrap
Boris Alatovkrap's picture

Boris is alway to be just little bit off.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 00:37 | 4426866 Droel
Droel's picture

The correct terminology is radiation exposure vs contamination. An easy analogy is dog shit. If you smell it, you've been exposed, if you step in it, you're contaminated.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 01:30 | 4426994 Boris Alatovkrap
Boris Alatovkrap's picture

Is remind Boris of funny Russia army joke. General and corporal are walk along and General is stop. Is look down. "What is this!?" as point to ground. "Is look it like canine feces", is respond corporal. "Please to smell", General is command. "Is smell it like canine feces", respond Corporal "Please to touch", General is command. "Is feel like canine feces", respond Corporal. "Please to taste", General is command. "Is taste it like canine feces", respond Corporal. General is step around and is saying, "Good thing we are not step in."

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 03:45 | 4427172 Jadr
Jadr's picture

Boris, you have all the answers, do you know where the original Tyler's went? Did they stop writting entirely or can we find them somewhere else?

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 04:20 | 4427203 X_mloclaM
X_mloclaM's picture

disagree, td iz here

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 13:58 | 4428587 Jadr
Jadr's picture

Even assuming you lurked here long before registering (your account is only 7 weeks old), I doubt you were here long enough to really notice the difference in writing styles and content.  I've been here a lot longer than my account age and my account is over 3 years old.  I agree with the idea that the site was sold based on what I have seen, which is sad because this was my favorite source of information for so long.  It is still good in my opinion but it was not where it once was in quality.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 03:52 | 4427181 Canoe Driver
Canoe Driver's picture

Boris' explanation is more valuable than the article posted, especially if we are going to be hit up for "enrollment" at the end. What kind of person does a bait and switch with potentially life-saving information, and does it for money?

Thu, 02/13/2014 - 01:34 | 4431318 Tijuana Donkey Show
Tijuana Donkey Show's picture

Ayn Rand

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 22:59 | 4426564 max2205
max2205's picture

So I shouldn't under cook my salmon

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 00:03 | 4426767 El Oregonian
El Oregonian's picture

Don't worry your salmon has all ready been nuked (pre-cooked).

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 01:12 | 4426951 Boris Alatovkrap
Boris Alatovkrap's picture

Boris is prefer smoke salmon, but is much difficult with soggy rolling paper.

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:05 | 4426567 Son of Loki
Son of Loki's picture

"Your Sushi May Be Impacted by Fukishima.  If you live within the area impacted by Radiation, your safety and the viability of your Family are important to us. We can  assure you, these fish are safe to eat despite their faint glow.

What you can't see can't hurt you."

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:03 | 4426575 Moe Hamhead
Moe Hamhead's picture

Can't something be contaminated with radiation ?

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 00:41 | 4426870 prmths2
prmths2's picture

Neutron capture can cause a stable atom (e.g., gold) to become an unstable isotope that subsequently decays at some point, releasing radiation. On the other hand some atoms can capture a neutron and remain stable (e.g., boron).

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 03:57 | 4427187 Canoe Driver
Canoe Driver's picture

Some non-emitter substances can become temporarily radioactive from exposure. A good idea to research this.

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:04 | 4426580 suteibu
suteibu's picture

2 things...

1)  Disclosure.  What is your exposure to the nuclear industry and its supply chain.

2)  It might be more instructive to describe what has been "overblown as well as heavily downplayed by parties on each side of the discussion."  in order to put this information in context to the actual and ongoing event.

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:07 | 4426583 LetThemEatRand
LetThemEatRand's picture

The only thing anyone needs to know on this subject is that the nuclear plants were deliberately built at great expense to avoid any radioactive waste entering the ocean, because any nuclear scientist who doesn't work for GE knows that would be bad.  And to get beyond the few who give a shit, those who built said plants had to convince regulators that it would never happen.   But now we're told "no big deal" that radioactive water is pouring in the ocean in great quantities.  Daily.  Now we're told the ocean is big.  And apparently "containment" buildings were just built for fun.

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:11 | 4426591 dexter_morgan
dexter_morgan's picture

In the old days the saying was "dilution is the solution to pollution" - that line of thinking is making a comeback apparently

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:09 | 4426593 wretch
wretch's picture

Convinced the regulators it would never happen?  The NRC is mandated to support and promote the nuclear industry.


No.  They told us it would never happen.  No convincing really happened.  Meanwhile, they all got insured against any disasters -- those are the public's problem now.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 04:32 | 4427208 X_mloclaM
X_mloclaM's picture

ya know right, ya think the author'da mentioned the fact TEPCO says they 'have to' dump Tritium (unfiterable) into the Pacific as tank building (s)pace/$?? not enough. So yes, they're gunna be polluting much more than merely the uncaptured ground water cooling the reactions flowing into the ocean. It was announced. Surrounding comments are correct. Why?

So no water municipal water intakes are near that portion of the ocean? Tokyo?

As author mentions, neutrons are/were a risk! for TEPCO workers near the reactors with corium out of primary containment as a lack of water brings about an acceleration -- thus they keep em pumped full, and thus the contaminated water goes on. What isn't mentioned, is how this circlular issue of cooling rogue cores to pollute the ocean, will be tapered, then wound down


Wed, 02/12/2014 - 04:40 | 4427211 X_mloclaM
X_mloclaM's picture

Tritium not removable, recco dump it:

Seawater Strontium downplay'd:

Tritium in groundwater on the rise (not the decline)

Total tritium released will exceed Japanese "solution to pollution is dilution 'standards':

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 04:42 | 4427214 X_mloclaM
X_mloclaM's picture

I'm sure some reader (or the author) would warn of hyping every article on that site, however, I'd say in return to focus back on those 4 and my 'claims' in the paragraph above.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 11:38 | 4427950 TuPhat
TuPhat's picture

Why would municipalities pump seawater into their water systems.  Do Japanese drink saltwater?  Is any of your post correct?

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:10 | 4426596 Judge Crater
Judge Crater's picture

Radiation is akin to listening to Obama as he tells you what he is going to do to make your life better.  Contamination is believing him.

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:13 | 4426605 suteibu
suteibu's picture

Actually, I believe that contamination can occur even if you don't believe him.  You still have to live with his EOs.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 00:42 | 4426885 Droel
Droel's picture

Same as the dog shit analogy.

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:12 | 4426600 fonzannoon
fonzannoon's picture

"The planet is fine... earth's not going anywhere....WE ARE....we're goin away folks...."

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:26 | 4426651 chump666
chump666's picture

You got it Fonz, we will only destroy ourselves.  The planet has been deflecting cosmic radiation on a daily basis.  We contaminate ourselves down here with our sh*t, it (earth) will still be doing it's thing. 

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 00:08 | 4426775 Took Red Pill
Took Red Pill's picture


Wed, 02/12/2014 - 03:46 | 4427174 Cast Iron Skillet
Cast Iron Skillet's picture

And the good part is that we probably won't manage to kill all life on Earth. We should be able to evolve back up from amoeba in a billion years or so ... even faster with help from the additional radiation.

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:20 | 4426601 Yenbot
Yenbot's picture

So what you are saying is that Carl Sagan and Nuclear Winter were horse shit and we should've nuked the poo out of any tinpot dictator that ever irked the crap out of us because the equivalent of thousands of nuclear weapons worth of radionuclides released into the environment is harmless, unless we eat an oyster off the Fukushima jetty? Gee, who would thunk it!

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:14 | 4426616 blindman
blindman's picture

the future of mankind hinges on the impending curling match
between the usa and denmark, scheduled to begin in less than two
hours, and no one is anticipating this momentous event.
what the f....?

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:22 | 4426642 Spastica Rex
Spastica Rex's picture

Curling gets a bum rap.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 01:19 | 4426969 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

I've watched curling for over 40 years and saw something I have never seen before today...

Great Britian (actually Team Scotland) put up a 7 point end today against the US... Now that is what is known as a bitch slapping...

BTW, Eve Muirhead is definately a cutie...

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:34 | 4426675 dexter_morgan
dexter_morgan's picture

curling is underrated

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 01:16 | 4426956 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

There I knew we could agree on something....

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 02:27 | 4427085 Colonel Klink
Colonel Klink's picture

Not if it's a pint at a time!

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 06:07 | 4427281 Catch-22
Catch-22's picture

… is there tailgate parties at curling events ?

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 09:01 | 4427452 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

There is pretty much always a beer garden...

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 06:28 | 4427295 Shigure
Shigure's picture

Housework on ice!

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:26 | 4426649 dexter_morgan
dexter_morgan's picture

I saw a show on tv (so u know it must be true) about the bimini atoll where a lot of above ground nuke testing was done, and there was really no trace of the nuclear events EXCEPT in the coconuts because some radiation in the soil was absorbed by the palm trees. Fish were fine, animal life was ok, etc. so long as they laid off the coconuts.

Is that the difference between readiation and contamination? Or am I misunderstanding this stuff, which is higly probable?

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 02:06 | 4427059 Paveway IV
Paveway IV's picture

That would have been the U.S. government testing and what they would have reported is there wasn't dangerous levels of radioactivity remaining (which is a lie). Everything there is still contaminated. The fact that coconut trees and some scrub grasses are capable of growing there doesnt' mean much. You could never eat anything grown on those islands. The entire ecosystem was wiped out and will never be back. None of the test islands will ever be inhabitable. The dead coral reefs will be gone in a few more decades and the islands themselves will disappear. 

The Rongalese and Urkit that were rounded up and forcebly relocated from the 'test' atolls to barren atolls were irradiated in just about every one of the five dozen or so atomic tests there. They have mostly died off from every type of cancer on earth. The ones that were not rendered sterile by the tests had a grossly disporportinate number of stillborn or horribly deformed 'jelly babies'. Every one of the Rongalese remaining on the inhabitable islands have been sick most of their lives. Think if it as a paradise similar to a mini-Haiti, except your deformed or live in pain.

The U.S. denied any responsibility for this genocide and the Atomic Energy Commission forbid the worthless U.S. media from reporting on those victims for decades. National security and all. They offered some token medical care in the 70's, but insisted the effects the islanders were experiencing were mostly imagined or due to stress. Sound familiar?

Most people today think Bikini Atoll and the other test atolls were never inhabited. One thing for damn sure: they never will be inhabited by human beings again.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 13:38 | 4428493 Clycntct
Clycntct's picture

Thanks for that bitch slap, I needed that.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 02:35 | 4427097 TradingTroll
TradingTroll's picture

Fukushima is the equivalent of 2000 500 kiloton bombs


Bikini was at most 25 tests, the largest 365 kilotons, some as low as 1 kiloton


Apples and Oranges, or should I say tumors and cysts, mate.



Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:37 | 4426687 Flying Wombat
Flying Wombat's picture

Japanese media NHK produced a documentary on radioactive water that's eye opening.  It was released last month.


Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:47 | 4426710 Darksky
Darksky's picture

So Xrays = QE1
Gamma particles = QE2
Alpha particles = Operation Twist
Beta particles = QE3
Neutrons = QE4eva

Fuck it this is confusing I'm just gonna go stand next to an open, uncontained source of fission.

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:47 | 4426716 A. Buttle
A. Buttle's picture

If Chris ain't worried, then far be it for me to make any fuss. Tempest in a teapot. Mountain out of molehill. Much ado about nothing. Don't worry I won't cum in your mouth.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 01:55 | 4426729 mrmister
mrmister's picture

"Im a scientist" so were the guys that built FUKUSHIMA. GE scientists by the way.

Jim Cramer's gang over at The Street trying to cover their GE position.

Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:57 | 4426737 TomGa
TomGa's picture

For all news Fukushima....... ENENEWS.COM



Tue, 02/11/2014 - 23:56 | 4426738 DFCtomm
DFCtomm's picture

Neutrons are the bad boys of the radiation story; and are only found as a consequence of a nuclear reaction (controlled or uncontrolled). 


Not accurate. There are small particle accelerators in nearly every city either for nuclear pharmacudical purposes, cancer treatment, or medical research, and they produce some neutron radiation. You cut and paste this from wiki? Anyway, I got 44 mR day before yesterday because of a cooling leak, but it's funny to listen to ZH panic over something they don't even fully understand.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 00:55 | 4426917 prmths2
prmths2's picture

I invite you to read the entry on "nuclear reaction" in Wikipedia and explain why the neutron source you seem to be referring to does not rely on a "nuclear reaction."

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 00:11 | 4426791 ISEEIT
ISEEIT's picture

Well, this is pretty sad. Hopefully the Japanese will decide to become progressives. Progressives wouldn't have allowed this. They would have made regulations that would make sure nuclear power was forbidden.

If enough Japanese people survive this then I bet they'll decide to become progressives and if they do then at least they'll begin learning how to be the way they should be.

Unregulated free market capitalism has really done a number on these poor Japanese people. Instead of building nuclear reactors, they should have built their infrastructure and focused on removing their debt ceiling.

If they would only get over the whole 'xenophobia' issue....Maybe throw in some immigration reform and a couple shots of 'monetary easing'......

Oh well Krugman was right again.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 00:28 | 4426835 juicemoney
juicemoney's picture

This is more like crony capitalism... a large corporate interest manipulating government to bend to it's will (plutocracy). I doubt free market capitalism has ever existed anywhere in an enduring form.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 01:22 | 4426972 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

It is more like Japan has to import every BTU....

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 05:00 | 4427223 X_mloclaM
X_mloclaM's picture

more like regulations, needed more

progressives and new aged republicans alike can handle that.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 00:19 | 4426817 ThirdCoastSurfer
ThirdCoastSurfer's picture

So the danger in radiation is when it affixes itself to you in some way and it is dangerous becuase it just sits there and continues to radiate. It's like a particle, a speck of dust, that is extemely hot and burns and destroys all it comes in contact with, which is what radition is anyway. 

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 00:37 | 4426859 apberusdisvet
apberusdisvet's picture

It seems that quite a few are in denial.  The reality is that all Pacific marine life are dying and what that means for the Pacific Islanders who live off the ocean is pure disaster.  One tiny microscopic speck of cesium either ingested or inhaled will give you a 80:20 chance of getting cancer within a decade.  So, for the time being, forget about sushi, salmon, anchovies, California produce and berries and, within 5 years, all beef and pork that grazes on contaminated Western US grain and grass.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 01:09 | 4426940 GunsKillRandomly
GunsKillRandomly's picture

There is no safe dose of radiation. Further, I understand that epidemiological studies do show a linear correlation between radiation exposure and risk.

Interesting discussion regarding energy and such but given the choice between a cesium tainted tuna fish sandwich and a banana, I choose the banana. By the way Did you forget to mention bananas?

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 05:04 | 4427225 X_mloclaM
X_mloclaM's picture

There is no safe dose of radiation. Further, I understand that epidemiological studies do show a linear correlation between radiation exposure and risk.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 01:18 | 4426967 Ancaeus
Ancaeus's picture

A welcome and necessary discussion.

However, a minor correction:  The claim that Arafat was killed by polonium was investigated and refuted.  His body was exhumed and examined.  That does not explain the traces of polonium that were found on his effects, long after his death.  This contamination could have occured at any time since his death.  Or, he could have handled polonium in his lifetime (e.g. as a weapon). Or, he could have been the target of an unsuccessful assasination attempt.

We should adhere to the facts.


Wed, 02/12/2014 - 01:24 | 4426976 derryb
derryb's picture

It's simple:

Contamination is the pile of dog poop. Radiation is the smell that it emits. 

Both radiation and contamination are bad for human tissue because both zap the tissue with harmful rays. Invisible radiation exposure can normally be reduced by time spent near it, distance from it and shielding between you and the source. The problem with contamination (something that emites radiation) is that the contaminated (radioactice) particles can be small enough to be inhaled or ingested. . . this is the real danger to humans. 

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 02:12 | 4427053 merchantratereview
merchantratereview's picture

CHRIS MARTENSEN, for you U i have just 3 words....



Wed, 02/12/2014 - 05:10 | 4427229 X_mloclaM
X_mloclaM's picture

Only people inside Chris' ring will eat: "total Cesium contamination in all food, including fisheries products, where the food was over the Japanese limit of 100 bq/kg ... averaged 512.44 bq/kg, or over 500% of the Japanese legal limit."

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 02:17 | 4427072 kurt
kurt's picture

Be honest: who read the whole thing? Did you start to skip ahead when he wrote "hemoglobin" or "Sv"? 

Weren't you hoping to be told to eat the fish?

Will you wait for the author to tell you when it is contaminated versus radioactive?


Wed, 02/12/2014 - 03:20 | 4427145 cbxer55
cbxer55's picture

To get that additional info, you have to become a paid member. I hate these articles like this. They lead you in with part I, then tell you you have to subscribe to get any follow-on info.

Basically a big commercial for his website.

Fuck that! Gonna have to remember not to read anything from Chris Martenson on this site, ever again. See his name, move on to the next subject.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 02:20 | 4427077 TradingTroll
TradingTroll's picture

Vitapect just analyzed the Dec 2013 food data out of Japan


'Over-The-Limit' food, ie over 100 bq/kg, (and therefore not fit for Japanese consumption but possibly exported to the US) came in at over 500% of the limit

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 03:07 | 4427127 hookah
hookah's picture

Gotta love that scientifically illiterate conspiracy theorist love the article which destroys their beliefs...

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 05:16 | 4427237 dreadnaught
dreadnaught's picture

go on then!  Drink a glass of seawater from around Fukushima- or eat some Tuna from the are the illiterate TOOL of the industry, LOL


No? why not? put your money where your mouth is.....haha

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 06:47 | 4427305 hookah
hookah's picture

Sry I dont live near Fukushima as most of the earth population.

But go ahead and grow your own food and shield it from cosmic radiation and add air filters to the plantation.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 07:19 | 4427338 X_mloclaM
X_mloclaM's picture



The principle of 'chisan-chisho' or 'consuming the food pro- duced locally' was widely encouraged in Fukushima to the point where municipalities encouraged or decreed the use of local Fukushima products in school lunches.32, 33,34 Additionally, there is the nationwide govern- mental campaign 'tabete ouen shiyou', which promotes the purchase and consumption of food produced in Fukushima as an act of solidarity.



  1. "Investigative Report on Fukushima City and Koriyama City Fact-finding mission conducted on November

    26 and 27, 2011" Human Rights Now, December 2011, p. 19.

  2. 33  "Tabete ouen shiyou", Ministry of agriculture, forestry and fisheries (MAFF)

  3. 34  Fukushima-Minyuh Newspaper February 25th, 2013.


Wed, 02/12/2014 - 05:10 | 4427231 Rising Sun
Rising Sun's picture

Get some Obamacare and everything will be fine.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 07:13 | 4427329 X_mloclaM
X_mloclaM's picture

ay I'm not doctor, but these co-authored the quoted area below

Physicians for Social Responsibility, USA

International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Germany

Physicians for Social Responsibility / IPPNW, Switzerland

Association of Doctors for the Prevention of Nuclear War, France

Association of Doctors for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Italy

Society of Nigerian Doctors for the Welfare of Mankind, Nigeria

Physicians for Social Responsibility, Malaysia

Dutch Association for Medical Polemology, The Netherlands


Even though most of Japan was luckily spared major radioactive fallout, it was not just Fukushima Prefecture that was affected. People all over Japan came in contact with airborne or ingested radionuclides and will continue to do so – mainly through contaminated food

Even green tea plants as far away as Shizuoka Prefecture, 140 km south of Tokyo, were found to be contaminated by radioactive fallout.9

In the long run, these leaks into groundwater and the ocean will lead to an increase in internal exposure in the general population through radioactive isotopes from water and the food chain. This scenario is a realistic assessment, considering that all over Eastern and Central Europe, even in places like Bavaria, radioactive cesium-137 contained in mushrooms and wild game still poses a public health concern, even 25 years after the Chernobyl nuclear meltdown.13, 14 

UNSCEAR relies mostly on a study by Kawamura et al from August of 2011, which determined the total amount of marine contamination to be 68 PBq from iodine-131 and 9 PBq from cesium-137.17

While these estimates provide a good overview of the possible extent of marine contamination after the nuclear meltdowns at Fukushima, there are a few sources of error that have to be considered: regarding radioactive discharge before March 21st, Kawamura states that “no direct release into the ocean was assumed before March 21st because the monitoring data were not available during this period.“18  

Most incomprehensibly, however is the fact that all radioactive discharge after April 30th, 2011 is ignored, despite TEPCO's recent revelation that since the beginning of the disaster, about 300 tons of radioactive discharge reached the ocean every day, amounting to a total of about 290,000 tons during the past 31 months. Even Kawamura et al concedes that “it will probably be necessary to estimate the source term on oceanic and atmospheric releases more accurately at some point in the future.“20

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 07:19 | 4427340 TNTARG
TNTARG's picture

Reactors 1, 2 and 3 coriums are molten, gnarly deformed octopus-looking blobs somewhere in and/or below the basements. They're forming a constant surface 'crust' of extremely radioactive elements, which is just as quickly washed off by the water flowing over and around them, and on out to the ocean.

SFP 4 has been spewing into the atmosphere for 3 years. Here is a picture of reactor 4…everyone can draw their own conclusions.

(Enenews posters, French reports, etc.)

It's noy a matter of semantics, it's Physics, Chemistry, Biology.

Because of nuclear radiation everything gets contaminated. If only the marine life could talk! If the press was free to talk!

You can only buy some time in places were the the ocean currents and jetstreams give you some protection, but the readionucleids in the atmosphere and worst, in the troposphere are gonna reach us all, sonner or later.

We can deal with that reality or live in denial. The 1% is gonna have to face it as well, at least they have another planet to move to.

Me, I prefer to ackwnoledge the facts and act consequently, no matter what.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 12:11 | 4428064 TNTARG
TNTARG's picture

One minus?

I know why! They have another Planet ready to go to!!!

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 14:41 | 4427343 fuu
fuu's picture

"While the background levels are elevated somewhat, those detected so far remain well within what I consider to be a safe zone.  However, should there be another accident at the damaged facility leading to the release of another large plume of radioactive matter, then this assessment could, understandably, change."


Chris talks like Fukushima was a one and done and skips right over the fact that three cores have escaped containment and continue to bury themselves deeper into the bedrock under the station. Hundreds of tons of contaminated ground water are released every day. During the typhoon in 2013 the water containment tanks were dumped into the ocean over flooding fears. Tepco admits they have not even begun to get a handle on the situation. The underground dams have failed. The cooling system was rotted by the salt water they tried to use early on. This station is a complete disaster to this day.

Just another guru whore writing an article full of helpful advice you have to pay to read.

Free the Fukushima Fifty! or at least exhume and test the bodies



Wed, 02/12/2014 - 10:29 | 4427714 F em all but 6
F em all but 6's picture

There is no such thing as safe nuclear energy on this planet. Too many variables. Massive EMP burst from solar flares, ect. wiping out primary and secondary systems. Reduntant safeguards become irrelevant. All nuclear power should be dismantled and never used again. To do otherwise is to all but guaruntee that this planet will become uninhabitable.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 13:10 | 4428352 MSimon
MSimon's picture

You also need to cover radiation hormesis.

Wed, 02/12/2014 - 13:14 | 4428361 MSimon
MSimon's picture

Speaking of ingesting particles. Uranium is in everything. Naturally.

Thu, 02/13/2014 - 12:50 | 4432598 noguess
noguess's picture

2012 study by the European Commission, based on 2011 data:

Possibly 56.000 km2 (20,000 sq miles) contaminated, effecting the lives and health of some 43 million people, including the Tokyo area.

EC: IAEA models underestimate effects by a multitude (5x). Considering continuous radioactive leaking (spewing would be a better word) since the 2011 data till today indicate that it might even be (much) worse than the EC says.

See report:


Sun, 02/16/2014 - 18:41 | 4443049 Old Poor Richard
Old Poor Richard's picture

All ionizing radiation causes damage.  The idea that low levels are harmless is a hoax perpetrated by the radiators-in-chief, the USGOV.   So while TSA x-ray scanners may be a low dose and cause few cancers, even low doses statistically cause some cancers--cancers which are completely preventable because the x-ray screening is fraudulent security theater which does nothing to prevent terrorism.


Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!