nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Buesseler and other scientists are calling for more monitoring of Pacific Coast radiation

water-radiationhighly-recommendedScientists: Test West Coast for Fukushima radiation Tracy Loew, USA TODAY March 9, 2014 SALEM, Ore. — Very low levels of radiation from the Fukushima nuclear disaster likely will reach ocean waters along the U.S. West Coast next month, scientists are reporting.

Current models predict that the radiation will be at extremely low levels that won’t harm humans or the environment, said Ken Buesseler, a chemical oceanographer at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution who presented research on the issue last week.

But Buesseler and other scientists are calling for more monitoring. No federal agency currently samples Pacific Coast seawater for radiation, he said.

“I’m not trying to be alarmist,” Buesseler said. “We can make predictions, we can do models. But unless you have results, how will we know it’s safe?”……………

There are three competing models of the Fukushima radiation plume, differing in amount and timing. But all predict that the plume will reach the West Coast this summer, and the most commonly cited one estimates an April arrival, Buesseler said.

A report presented last week at a conference of the American Geophysical Union’s Ocean Sciences Section showed that some Cesium 134 has already has arrived in Canada, in the Gulf of Alaska area.

Cesium 134 serves as a fingerprint for Fukushima, Buesseler said.

“The models show it will reach north of Seattle first, then move down the coast,” Buesseler said.

By the time it gets here, the material will be so diluted as to be almost negligible, the models predict. Radiation also decays. Cesium 134, for example, has a half-life of two years, meaning it will have half its original intensity after that period.

In Oregon, state park rangers take quarterly samples of surf water and sand at three locations along the coast. The water is analyzed for Cesium 137 and iodine 131. Both of those already exist in the ocean at low levels from nuclear testing decades ago.

The monitoring began in April 2012, when tsunami debris began arriving along the Oregon coast. So far, all of the tests have shown less than “minimum detectable activity,” or the least amount that can be measured.

Results of the most recent samples, taken in mid-February, won’t be available until mid-March, Oregon Health Authority spokesman Jonathan Modie said.

Washington does not test ocean water for radiation.

“We have none happening now and we have none planned,” said Tim Church, communications director for the Washington State Department of Health. “Typically that would be something that would happen on the federal level.”

California regularly samples seawater around the state’s nuclear power plants to determine whether the plants are impacting the environment. Those results all are below minimum detectable activity.

Some citizens and scientists are taking sampling into their own hands. Cal State Long Beach marine biologist Steven Manley has launched “Kelp Watch 2014,” which will partner with other organizations to monitor kelp all along the West Coast for Fukushima radiation.

And Buesseler recently offered the services of his lab at Woods Hole in Massachusetts.

His project — titled “How Radioactive Is Our Ocean?” — will use crowd-sourced money and volunteers to collect water samples along the Pacific Coast, then ship them across the country to be analyzed.

So far, results are in for two locations in Washington and three in California. They show that the plume has not yet reached the coast.

Meanwhile, West Coast states are winding down their tsunami debris response efforts.

Oregon’s coastline is seeing less debris from the tsunami this winter than in the past two years, Oregon State Parks spokesman Chris Havel said.

If that doesn’t change, officials likely will disband a task force that was mobilized to deal with the debris.

Last year, Washington suspended its marine debris reporting hotline.

Loew also reports for the (Salem, Ore.) Statesman Journal http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/03/09/scientists-test-west-coast-for-fukushima-radiation/6213849/?utm_content=buffer51957&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

January 5, 2015 Posted by | oceans, radiation, USA | Leave a comment

Fukushiama radiation reaching USA West Coast – at this stage, not a health problem

Media Silent on Fukushima Radiation Impact in U.S.highly-recommended

“My take home is always, don’t trivialize it or dismiss it, but also don’t exaggerate what the effects might be,” says Woods Hole’s Ken Buesseler.

Radiation from Fukushima is reaching the West Coast — but you don’t need to freak out, WP  By Chris Mooney December 29 “…….many Americans have been concerned — sometimes overly so — that radiation from Fukushima, traveling through the vast Pacific ocean, would eventually make its way to the waters off the West Coast of the United States and Canada. And according to a new scientific paper just out in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, that has indeed happened.

The paper, by John N. Smith of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (a government agency) and several colleagues, is the “first systematic study…of the transport of the Fukushima marine radioactivity signal to the eastern North Pacific,” and concludes that radiation reached the continental shelf of Canada by June of last year, and has increased somewhat since.

But– and here’s the good news — the levels of radiation are very low, well below levels that public health authorities cite as grounds for concern. The radiation “does not represent a threat to human health or the environment,” reports the paper.

The new study is not the first to reach that conclusion.  Continue reading →

December 31, 2014 Posted by | oceans, radiation, Reference, USA | Leave a comment

USA: EPA now allows much higher, much less safe, radiation levels in drinking water!

text-EPA-Nuclear-ProtectionObama Increases Allowable Levels of Radiation in Drinking Water “Dramatically”http://www.globalresearch.ca/obama-increases-allowable-levels-of-radiation-in-drinking-water-dramatically/5420787

In Time for Massive New Dumping of Daiichi Radiation

Global Research, December 20, 2014 A Japanese government official has reported, “I was overwhelmed by the amount of contaminated water coming from the reactors, we must dump it in the ocean.” This isn’t such great news for the US since President Obama and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently gave their approval for “dramatically raising permissible radioactive levels in drinking water and soil following “radiological incidents,” such as nuclear power-plant accidents and dirty bombs.”

The Nuclear Industry calls this their “new normal,” according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).

The EPA has issued radiation guides called Protective Action Guides or PAGs which allows more radiation than any American has ever been exposed to. Within the guides, are instructions for evacuations, shelter-in-place orders, food restrictions and other actions following a wide range of “radiological emergencies.”

Wouldn’t the massive break down of reactor number one at Fukushima be considered a ‘radiological emergency?”

Shunichi Tanaka, the chairman of the Nuclear Regulation Authority, made the comment Dec. 12 about dumping radioactive waste into the ocean.

The US governments PAGs allow long-term public exposure to radiation in amounts as high as 2,000 millirems. This would, in effect, increase a longstanding 1 in 10,000 person cancer rate to a rate of 1 in 23 persons exposed over a 30-year period. Many experts are expecting elevated cancer rates due to these “allowable” levels of radiation exposure.

The PAGs are the work of Gina McCarthy, the assistant administrator for air and radiation whose nomination to serve as EPA Administrator was only approved by the Senate a few months ago.

It is suggested that these PAGs have been in the works for over two years and are just recently available for public view.

PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch said:

“This is a public health policy only Dr. Strangelove could embrace. If this typifies the environmental leadership we can expect from Ms. McCarthy, then [the] EPA is in for a long, dirty slog.”

“No compelling justification is offered for increasing the cancer deaths of Americans innocently exposed to corporate miscalculations several hundred-fold.”

December 20, 2014 Posted by | politics, radiation, USA | Leave a comment

Less radiation for breast cancer makes sense for some patients

BREAST-CANCERFor Some, Less Radiation for Breast Cancer Makes Sense Live Science Dr. Lucille Lee, North Shore-LIJ Cancer Institute   |   December 18, 2014 Dr. Lucille Lee is an attending physician in the Department of Radiation Medicine at North Shore-LIJ’s Cancer Institute and is a board-certified radiation oncologist specializing in the treatment of breast and prostate cancer. She specializes in multiple techniques including partial breast irradiation and breast hypofractionation. She contributed this article to Live Science’s Expert Voices: Op-Ed & Insights.

Once physicians are accustomed to practicing in a certain way, changing that paradigm can be difficult to embrace — even when scientific evidence increasingly supports the change.

That’s likely what’s holding back more radiation oncologists in the United States from implementing a shorter course of radiation therapy for early-stage breast cancer patients who’ve undergone breast-sparing lumpectomy surgery. New research published in the Journal of the American Medical Association indicates that two-thirds of these U.S. patients are still receiving six to seven weeks of radiation therapy after a lumpectomy instead of a shorter course of radiation that’s been shown to be just as effective………

How can early-stage breast cancer patients find out they’re eligible for the shorter course? Increasingly educated on medical matters, patients need to speak up and ask their doctors. And physicians themselves need to accept that feeling comfortable about how they have practiced medicine for so long doesn’t justify holding on to outdated ideas.

In this case, it’s quite clear that fewer radiation treatments can be just as effective for early-stage breast cancer patients as the “traditional” longer course. When patients receive more therapy than they actually need, it’s no longer therapeutic — it’s simply overdone. http://www.livescience.com/49180-doctors-should-prescribe-less-radiation-for-breast-cacner-treatment.html

December 19, 2014 Posted by | health, radiation | Leave a comment

Unnecessary radiation given to elderly breast cancer patients

BREAST-CANCERMost elderly breast cancer patients receive unnecessary radiation, Medical News Today,  by  8 December 2014 In 2004, a randomized clinical trial supported the omission of radiation treatment in elderly female patients with early-stage breast cancer. Despite this evidence, a new study reports that almost two-thirds of this group of patients still receive this treatment today. The randomized clinical trial – often regarded to be the “gold standard” in evidence-based medicine – demonstrated that the administering of radiation to patients who had received surgery and the drug tamoxifen did not improve 5-year recurrence rates or survival rates in elderly women diagnosed with early-stage tumors.

Radiation therapy has been considered the standard treatment for early-stage breast cancer for many years. However, it appears that practitioners are reluctant to change their ways. In the new study, published inCancer, the authors state that the omission of radiotherapy has not been widely adopted into clinical practice.

They cite a recent assessment of the nation’s largestcancer registry, the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database. Among women aged over 70, 76.5% received radiation treatment, and little change was observed in treatment practice before and after the publication of the 2004 study………

The American Society for Radiation Oncology have recommended against using whole-breast radiotherapy in women aged over 50 for early-stage breast cancer without first considering a shorter treatment schedule.

“Although shorter treatment schedules are more convenient for patients and less costly for the health care system, the omission of radiotherapy in women aged >70 years with early-stage, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer would achieve these goals while sparing patients the potential acute and late toxicities associated with radiotherapy,” write the authors.

Results for the trial published last year indicate that recurrence rates were still low in patients that had not received radiation therapy. …..http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/286539.php

December 10, 2014 Posted by | health, radiation, USA | Leave a comment

Study into effects of chronic exposure to radiation in food: Chernobyl wolves as an example

text ionisingECOVIEWS: Chernobyl wolves reveal radiation’s impact, Tuscaloosa News, December 5, 2014 How do scientists determine what the long-term impacts would be to humans living in a radiation-contaminated environment? An ecological study of wolves in the Ukraine may provide the answer……….

Not being shot, trapped or indirectly affected by humans is the upside for wolves occupying the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone. But what complications might they face from chronic exposure to radiation in the food they eat and where they sleep? Doctors Jim Beasley and Stacey Lance, research ecologists from the University of Georgia’s Savannah River Ecology Lab, say that whereas radiation concentrations immediately after the accident were known to be “extremely high and dangerous, we don’t know what levels of radiation the wolves or other animals are exposed to now.” The researchers and their students are trained to study how human activities and disturbances affect the ecology of wildlife populations.
The CEZ wolves can serve as a proxy for determining the risks to human safety in low-level radiation areas. Among the questions being asked is whether cancer rates in the wolves are above normal levels, which can be determined indirectly with genetic studies. The researchers will also estimate wolf population sizes and distribution patterns across a gradient from high to low levels of contamination to look for demographic impacts. The findings can be applied to how humans might be affected……….http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20141205/NEWS/141209768/1291?p=1&tc=pg

December 8, 2014 Posted by | radiation, Ukraine | Leave a comment

In 1920s fruit fly experiments showed the insidious harm done by ionising radiation

text ionisingMiningawareness, 8 Dec 14 The fruit fly experiments showed that it was dangerous in the 1920s! They were damning enough. It showed that it took multiple generations for the genetic damage to show up, because it was often recessive! But, they knew it was dangerous for people from the advent of x-rays and radium a couple of decades prior. They did human nuclear experiments too. In the 1950s or 60s scientists started worrying about what if radiation impacted intelligence more than fertility so that there was a prolific, dumb population. Is this why no one wonders this anymore? They also worried about radiation damaged DNA of nuclear workers merging into the general population. Why do few wonder anything intelligent anymore? Corrupt academia or damaged DNA, damaged intelligence? Ravens have more sense than the pro-nuclear lobby. Ravens look before they cross the road.

December 6, 2014 Posted by | 2 WORLD, radiation, Reference | Leave a comment

UNSCEAR not independent, and its April report on atomic radiation is not reliable

text-UNSCEARBritish researcher blasts U.N. report on Fukushima cancer risk as unscientific http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201412010036  By MASAKAZU HONDA/ Staff Writer

A British scientist who studied the health effects of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster panned a United Nations report that virtually dismissed the possibility of higher cancer rates caused by the 2011 Fukushima nuclear crisis.

Keith Baverstock, 73, made the comments during a visit to Tokyo at the invitation of a citizens group related to the Fukushima disaster.

In response to questions from The Asahi Shimbun, Baverstock said a report released in April by the U.N. Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) was “not qualified to be called ‘scientific’” because it lacked transparency and independent verification. He added that the committee should be disbanded.

The U.N. report said any increase in overall cancer rates among residents of Fukushima Prefecture due to fallout from the accident was unlikely.

However, Baverstock, former head of the radiation-protection program at the World Health Organization’s Regional Office for Europe, said radiation levels shown in the report were enough to cause a spike in cancer rates.

For example, the report said nearly 10,000 workers at the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant were exposed to radiation levels exceeding 10 millisieverts over about 18 months following the outbreak of the crisis in March 2011.

Baverstock said such an exposure level was enough to cause an increase in cancer among about 50 of the workers.

After studying the health effects from the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, Baverstock was the first to point out an increase in thyroid cancer among residents of areas hit by radioactive fallout.

He also questioned UNSCEAR’s neutrality, given that members are nominated by nations that have a vested interest in nuclear power. He noted that such nations provide funds to the committee.

Baverstock also suggested a conflict of interest, as committee members are not required to disclose their history working in the nuclear industry or sign pledges stating that no conflict of interest exists in evaluating radiation risks.

Baverstock said that when he was working for the WHO, he felt constant pressure from the International Atomic Energy Agency, a major promoter of nuclear power. He also questioned why it took more than three years for UNSCEAR to release its Fukushima report.

Referring to what he called inside information, Baverstock raised the possibility that the delay was caused by criticism about the report’s conclusion and the influence of other U.N. agencies, such as the IAEA.

December 3, 2014 Posted by | 2 WORLD, radiation | Leave a comment

“Radioactive Berkeley: No Safe Dose

radiation-warningfrom Kay, 2 Dec 14 The video of Dr. Gofman is excellent. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xddNmNR0hG4 Someone at ENENEWS transcribed some of what Dr. Gofman had to say, and his words are so important that I think it’s important to post it here, too, for safekeeping. (It’s a little long, sorry)

Dr. John Gofman:

“What’s the order of magnitude of the problem that’s been created by radiation in the 20th century? Today manmade activities added up in total exceed the dose from natural radiation.”

“Every increment that we add to that natural radiation will exact its price in human health, and human health with respect to some very miserable diseases such as the genetic disorders and heart disease and cancer.”

“50% of all cancers in the 20th century have been caused by ionizing radiation of the type we would call low-level.”

“Recently I wrote a book on the subject of breast cancer and stated that my best estimate backed up by considerable evidence is that about ¾ of all the breast cancers of the 20th century were induced by ionizing radiation of one sort or another, including medical. This is not a small problem and we there therefore need to give attention to every source of low-level radiation exposure to the public.”

“In the early days of the post-war period when radioactivity became available in large quantities as the result of the existence of nuclear reactors, many of the people working in the field said, ‘Well, what dose can we allow people to have which will be safe?’

“I wrestled with that question for over 20 years, and in 1986 on a talk about Chernobyl, I presented to the American Chemical Society, my initial calculations which said:

There cannot be a safe dose, because at the lowest possible dose, which is one radiation track through the cell, I have proved that cancer is the result.”

–> Regarding Tritium:

“Many people thinking about Tritium say ‘oh we don’t have to worry about tritium; the energy of the radiation is so low that we don’t even need to think about it.’ But that is a cardinal error! It is true that the energy of each beta particle emitted by tritium is very low, BUT there’s another problem. When you have a very low energy beta particle interact with biological tissue to produce the damage to genes, the damage to chromosomes, and the risk of future cancers, the lower the energy of the radiation, the WORSE it is in terms of biological hazards. Tritium is FIVE TIMES as hazardous as bomb radiation for the same total amount of energy delivered. And that’s a general law, a rule of physics. I don’t think any person who is reasonable at all can doubt that I have demonstrated THERE IS NO SAFE DOSE because I have shown with a multitude of studies that we get cancers down at the lowest doses. Now that’s been resisted… but the United Nations scientific community in 1993 has come out and joined me in exactly the same kind of analysis. Their conclusion: THERE IS NO SAFE DOSE.”

“Children are most sensitive with respect to the generation of cancer and leukemia from radiation. The study of breast cancer in Hiroshima with radiation from the bomb has shown that children under 20, women under 20, are the most sensitive; that from 20 to 40, they are less sensitive to the breast cancer generation, and beyond 40 even less sensitive. That’s not theory. That’s not speculation. That’s a fact. And the sensitivity of the young being greater means we should exercise every precaution that we protect our children from sources of radiation no matter how small.”

December 2, 2014 Posted by | radiation, Reference | Leave a comment

The Invisible Belt That Saves Earth From Radiation

Be Thankful For the Invisible Belt That Saves Earth From Radiation, Gizmodo, 26 Nov 14
Kelsey Campbell-Dollaghan  A NASA-led study of the Van Allen radiation belts has uncovered new information about the invisible “shield” that keeps harmful ultrarelativistic electrons from the Earth.

In a study published in Nature, scientists from MIT and the University of Colorado at Boulder detail their analysis of data from NASA’s Van Allen Probes, which are studying the radiation belts around Earth—just last year, the probes reported the existence of a new, previously-unknown third belt thousands of miles above the Earth. In short, these craft are sending back vital information about the space around our planet. And in Nature this week, we found out even more.

In the study, we learn about the existence of a hard barrier at the bottom of the outermost belt, about 7,000 miles above Earth, and something called “plasmaspheric hiss.” This layer of electromagnetic waves stop the high-energy electrons zinging around the Earth from actually getting close to it. MIT News explains that the “hiss” in the phenomenon’s name is actually due to the sound the waves make over the radio, and that they keep us safe from otherwise quite dangerous radiation:…….http://gizmodo.com/be-thankful-for-the-invisible-belt-that-saves-earth-fro-1663882527

December 1, 2014 Posted by | 2 WORLD, radiation | Leave a comment

Nuclear power promoter DOE to run research into health effects of radiation

Dracula-DOE House passes bill to study low-dose radiation http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/224411-house-passes-bill-to-study-low-dose-radiation
By Cristina Marcos November 17, 2014,The House on Monday passed legislation by voice vote to authorize Department of Energy research on the risks of low-dose ionizing radiation.

Under the measure, H.R. 5544, the Department of Energy’s Office of Science would conduct research on low-dose radiation. Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.), the bill’s sponsor, said there isn’t enough scientific data regarding exposure to low levels of radiation.

 “Sufficient data is not available for experts to definitely conclude whether there are risks from this low dose radiation,” Broun said. “As a medical doctor, and a true fiscal conservative, I recognize that this major gap in understanding is detrimental to the health of Americans and will contribute to the unnecessary economic burdens if we do not deal with it immediately.”

The director of the Energy Department’s Office of Science would be required establish an agreement with the National Academies on a long-term strategy for low-dose radiation research within 60 day’s of the bill’s enactment. Such a study would have to be completed within 18 months.

The measure encountered no opposition during House floor debate.

 

November 19, 2014 Posted by | politics, radiation, USA | Leave a comment

Southern Hemisphere has record levels of ultraviolet radiation

Extreme levels of UV radiation in Arequipa, Peru This Week, By Agnes Rivera, 8 Nov 14  The coming months will bring the levels up to 16, the highest in the world……..According to the Regional Health Management of Environmental Health residents in Arequipa should take extra precaution this season towards UV protection.

Executive director of said agency, Zacarías Madariaga, warns that during the months of November and December, Peru’s southern region could reach radiation levels of 16, which would be the highest in the world.

UV-radiation

“Usually the high rates are 12 and 14. However, at this time of year there are extreme levels,” says Madariaga, as quote

November 8, 2014 Posted by | health, radiation, SOUTH AMERICA | Leave a comment

Human mission to Mars probably impossible, due to killer radiation

radiation-warningMars mission could expose astronauts to deadly levels of radiation while travelling to the red planet, study claims, Daily Mail 

    • A study from the University of New Hampshire suggests missions to Mars might be impossible due to an increased risk of radiation 
    • Research suggests when sun is less active cosmic rays increase
    • This lowers the amount of time an astronaut can safely stay in space
    • It is predicted solar activity will continue to decrease in future
    • This will mean male astronauts can only stay in space for 320 days
    • And for females this is reduced to just 240 days
    • These would be too short for a mission to Mars, particularly for women
    • Both would be susceptible to radiation sickness, cancer and more  

By JONATHAN O’CALLAGHAN FOR MAILONLINE 22 October 2014

Sending people to Mars may be impossible due to an increased radiation risk from cosmic rays, claims a study.

It’s thought that a predicted decrease in solar activity will raise the levels of radiation astronauts are subjected to from cosmic rays on a deep space mission.

This will increase the risk of suffering sickness, cancer and more on lengthy trips to the red planet lasting about a year to levels beyond what is considered safe……

the number of days a human could spend in space before reaching the limit is less than thought……a mission to Mars for a man difficult, but for women it would be all but impossible without them succumbing to serious effects of radiation. ……..http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2802937/mars-mission-expose-astronauts-deadly-levels-radiation-travelling-red-planet-study-claims.html

October 25, 2014 Posted by | 2 WORLD, radiation | Leave a comment

Dental plan to reduce radiation doses to children

medical-radiationDentists urged to ‘child-size’ radiation doses for young patients Wave News  Oct 06, 2014  LOUISVILLE, KY (WAVE) – The saying goes “The world always looks brighter from behind a smile.” But keeping that smile bright at the wrong hands could hurt your child’s long-term health. That’s the idea behind a new campaign being pushed out to dentists and other dental professionals around the country.

The University of Louisville Dental School’s Director of Radiology and Imaging Science is joining a team of doctors across the country to get that word out to dentists who treat your children………

“They’re up to three to five times as sensitive as myself to radiation,” said dr. William Scarfe, director of Radiology and Imaging Science at UofL’s School of Dentistry.

Scarfe is helping lead an awareness campaign called Image Gently. It asks dentists to consider just how much radiation their young patients are getting.

“Is it necessary is always the first question,” said Scarfe. He says switching from film to digital radiology reduces the dose, as does focusing on a specific region instead of the whole head. “We should reduce the dose to what their size is,” Scarfe said “That’s called child-sizing exposure.”

Parents, Scarfe says, should look for a dentist to use a thyroid collar, a preferred, but not mandated method in Kentucky.”That significantly reduces the dose to children whose thyroids are very sensitive by about 50%,” said Scarfe……….

Scarfe says parents can and should ask questions about the reasons and the way their children are having images taken at the dentist.

The six-step Image Gently plan includes:

October 8, 2014 Posted by | children, radiation, USA | 1 Comment

Russia’s nuclear company Rosatom sends third expedition to monitor Fukushima radiation

Russia sends third expedition to Kuril Islands to monitor radiation levels October 7, 2014 Gleb Fedorov, RBTH Radiation from the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant does not threaten Russian territory. However, the consequences of the 2011 accident will be felt for decades to come. RBTH spoke to the scientists involved with the third expedition to be sent to the Kuril Islands in the Russian Far East in order to monitor the radiation.
The scientific expedition vessel Professor Khlyustin, carrying Russian scientists, experts and military personnel, left the port of Vladivostok in Russia’s Far East on September 25 and headed east toward the Kuril Islands of Urup and Simushir, where they were due to take samples of soil, freshwater and silt.
……..In the space of a month, the expedition plans on crossing the Sea of Japan and sailing along the eastern shores of the Kuril Islands, a narrow chain of isles stretching 800 miles from Russia’s Kamchatka Peninsula to the Japanese island of Hokkaido. The scientists’ principal aim is to monitor radiation levels in the area affected by the accident at Japan’s Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant on March 11, 2011. This is the third expedition since the disaster. The first one took place right after the catastrophe, the second – a year later. The new expedition is being carried out under the aegis of the Russian Geographical Society and has been organized by the State Oceanographic Institute. Aboard the vessel are collaborators from state nuclear corporation Rosatom, the Ministry of Defense, the Russian Hydro-Meteorological Institute, the Rospotrebnadzor Monitoring Agency and the marine-food-chainNevelsky Naval University. Results from past expeditions showed that pollution was almost zero and the biggest threat to Russia was the accumulation of radiation in fish.
………The only thing threatening Russia after Fukushima, according to Panchenko, is the accumulation of radiation in various types of commercial fish: “Fukushima’s radioactive discharges polluted the sand in the shallows where we find the little sand eels. Sand eels are caught by fishermen and are eaten by bigger commercial fish, which thus accumulate radiation.”
Source: Russia Beyond the Headlines – http://rbth.com/science_and_tech/2014/10/07/russia_sends_third_expedition_to_kuril_islands_to_monitor_ra_40417.html)

October 8, 2014 Posted by | Japan, radiation, Russia | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »