Skip to main content

View Diary: Hansen: Nuclear power has prevented 1.8 million deaths (95 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  what is different with fukushima is the (4+ / 0-)

    contamination of the seawater and the release of unknown amounts of radiation into the food chain.  stanford scientists are now tracking bluefin tuna using fukushima isotopes found in that species.  

    we have NO knowledge of how this will affect the ocean population - from reproductive issues in fish and fowl to the ultimate transference to the human population for the long-term.

    from scientific american claims the level is low enough not to be a "danger", yet, what are they going to say - "uh oh! we're FRIED, folks!"   claims the level is low enough not to be a "danger", yet, what are they going to say - "uh oh! we're FRIED, folks!"  from the introduction and widespread use of radiation in the 50s to the now warning to limit exposure due to lifetime accumulation of the smallest amounts, how WILL the impact of radiation found in fish affect us long term?

    Bluefin tuna were struggling before Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant flooded their spawning grounds with radiation. The fish’s popularity on the sushi platter has plunged population numbers. Now traces of radiation from the nuclear disaster are showing up in the muscles of bluefins off the California coast.
    chernobyl fallout was land and airborne.  fukushima is also ocean carried - we do NOT have a good predictor for that disaster.

    considering ocean water was being used as coolant for the melting core and then it flowed back into the sea, there is no accurate model for what transpired.  it will be future generations that will track that disaster and its resultant effect on the environment - human and otherwise.

    unfortunately for all of us, that genie is so far out of the bottle that it will be well past our lifetimes before the result of the disaster is fully understood.

    EdriesShop Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

    by edrie on Thu Apr 04, 2013 at 12:39:50 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  we have about a dozen sailors (0+ / 0-)

      from the Reagan suing over radiation exposure.

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

    •  i would believe SciAm more (0+ / 0-)

      if they hadn't published this article

      http://www.scientificamerican.com/...

      "Nuclear reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi station in Japan are critically endangered but have not reached full meltdown status. "

      when in reality 3 reactors had melted down, and were in the process of breaching containment that day.

      Tepco and the Japanese Government were utterly parsimonious with the truth, and in general weren't on the same planet as the truth.

      Many analysis which use the Tepco source term releases will be critically undervalued, you either need to figure out the real source term which Tepco, JPG, and US Government didn't want to release or you have to look at health effects and back it out, or sample the environment.

      Given the JPG has banned Greenpeace, i think they have a lot to hide.

      •  look at the date on the article. to go to press, (0+ / 0-)

        the article is done ahead of time - sometimes the physical print/publication time for an article will trump content - the earthquake was 3/11/11 and the comments are 3/15/11 - so, at the time of writing, the full ramification of the disaster had yet to occur.

        also, with scientific american, they don't print "rumor" - they print the facts as are at hand at the time of publication.  i prefer it that way - then, update information - but don't speculate - especially in a scientific journal type of publication.

        i agree with you that there is now a whole lot of hiding going on - but to blame scientific american for attempting to present as clear a picture as possible DURING the event is unfair.

        EdriesShop Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

        by edrie on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 11:56:20 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  except what had already happened (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          edrie

          http://en.wikipedia.org/...

          Units 1 2 and 3 had already exploded.

          There are critical analysts and there are stenographers.

          As soon as i saw the first unit explode, I knew they were just doomed, and that evacuation out of the plume was the only choice.  

          I stopped believing any of the industry types when they had someone on TV saying "These plants are designed to do this"
          as if it's a good thing.

          They may have been designed to explode but it was never a good thing.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site