nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry

80 miles from Sellafield nuclear facility, radiation is found in food

plate-radiationRadiation found in food 80 miles across the border from Cumbrian nuclear-plant Sellafield Daily record, Jan 07, 2015 By Jennifer Hyland

NUCLEAR waste released from the Cumbrian reprocessing site has made fish and shellfish caught off the Dumfriesshire coast radioactive. RADIATION has been found in food 80 miles across the border from a Cumbrian nuclear-plant a report has revealed.

Nuclear waste released from the Cumbrian reprocessing site has made fish and shellfish caught off the Dumfriesshire coast slightly radioactive.

And fish-fans in Dumfriesshire have the highest exposure to nuclear radiation of anyone north of the Border.

Despite Sellafield nuclear station being situated 80 miles away, the new report reveals that the nuclear power station is still having an impact on Scotland, reports the Daily Mail. And although the levels are within safe EU limits, Sellafield and Scottish nuclear power stations have infiltrated the food chain here.

Traces of radiation were found in fruit, potatoes and vegetables near to Dounreay nuclear power station in Caithness, in the far north-east of Scotland .

Whilst in Chapelcross, in Dumfriesshire, nuclear radiation has made its way into the milk.

Where as at Faslane, near Helensburgh, Dunbartonshire, the destination of Britain’s nuclear submarines where liquid radioactive waste is discharged into the Gareloch,

beef has been revealed to contain a small amount of radiation……..

  • The unborn children of pregnant women living within 550 yards of the Hunterston B site, in North Ayrshire – one of Scotland’s two working nuclear power stations -would received the highest dose there.

    Dr Richard Dixon, director of Friends of the Earth Scotland, said: “There is no safe level of radiation. Nuclear technology… poses an ongoing threat to public health.”………http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/health/radiation-found-food-80-miles-4931653

Advertisements

January 10, 2015 - Posted by | environment, health, oceans, UK

1 Comment »

  1. What concerns me about this claim is that there appears to have been no mention of any work having been carried out to identify the radionuclides responsible for the alleged contamination and the energy, and type, of the ionizing radiation m emissions. This is important for identifying the most likely source of the radioactive contamination. It is not helpful merely assuming that its source is the Windscale establishment.

    Comment by Mike Thurgood | January 10, 2015 | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: