navitron
 
Renewable Energy and Sustainability Forum
UK's most popular Renewable Energy Forum May 25, 2012, 03:30:10 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Anyone wishing to register as a new member on the forum is strongly recommended to use a "proper" email address - following recent spam/hack attempts on the forum, all security is set to "high", and "disposable" email addresses like Gmail, Yahoo and Hotmail tend to be viewed with suspicion, and the application rejected if there is any doubt whatsoever
 
Recent Articles: UPDATE ON DECC APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL TO THE SUPREME COURT | Yingli Green Energy's PV Module Ranks No.2 in TUV Rheinland Energy Yield Test | Navitron Solar Showers at Glastonbury for Year 5!
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: After Fukushima, fish tales  (Read 437 times)
billi
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5405



« on: January 14, 2012, 03:02:30 AM »

Quote
After the world’s worst nuclear accident in 25 years, authorities in Canada said people living here were safe and faced no health risks from the fallout from Fukushima.

They said most of the radiation from the crippled Japanese nuclear power plant would fall into the ocean, where it would be diluted and not pose any danger.

Dr. Dale Dewar wasn’t convinced. Dewar, a family physician in Wynyard, Sask., doesn’t eat a lot of seafood herself, but when her grandchildren come to visit, she carefully checks seafood labels.

She wants to make sure she isn’t serving them anything that might come from the western Pacific Ocean.

Dewar, the executive director of Physicians for Global Survival, a Canadian anti-nuclear group, says the Canadian government has downplayed the radiation risks from Fukushima and is doing little to monitor them.

“We suspect we’re going to see more cancers, decreased fetal viability, decreased fertility, increased metabolic defects – and we expect them to be generational,” she said.

And evidence has emerged that the impacts of the disaster on the Pacific Ocean are worse than expected.

Since a tsunami and earthquake destroyed the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant last March, radioactive cesium has consistently been found in 60 to 80 per cent of Japanese fishing catches each month tested by Japan’s Fisheries Agency.

In November, 65 per cent of the catches tested positive for cesium (a radioactive material created by nuclear reactors), according to a Gazette analysis of data on the fisheries agency’s website. Cesium is a long-lived radionuclide that persists in the environment and increases the risk of cancer, according to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, which says the most common form of radioactive cesium has a half-life of 30 years.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency, which monitors food safety, says it is aware of the numbers but says the amounts of cesium detected are small.

“Approximately 60 per cent of fish have shown to have detectable levels of radionuclides,” it said in an emailed statement.

“The majority of exported fish to Canada are caught much farther from the coast of Japan, and the Japanese testing has shown that these fish have not been contaminated with high levels of radionuclides.”

But the Japanese data shows elevated levels of contamination in several seafood species that Japan has exported to Canada in recent years.

In November, 18 per cent of cod exceeded a new radiation ceiling for food to be implemented in Japan in April – along with 21 per cent of eel, 22 per cent of sole and 33 per cent of seaweed.

Overall, one in five of the 1,100 catches tested in November exceeded the new ceiling of 100 becquerels per kilogram. (Canada’s ceiling for radiation in food is much higher: 1,000 becquerels per kilo.)

“I would probably be hesitant to eat a lot of those fish,” said Nicholas Fisher, a marine sciences professor at the State University of New York at Stony Brook.

Fisher is researching how radiation from Fukushima is affecting the Pacific fishery. “There has been virtually zero monitoring and research on this,” he said, calling on other governments to do more radiation tests on the ocean’s marine life.

“Is it something we need to be terrified of? No. Is it something we need to monitor? Yes, particularly in coastal waters where concentrations are high.”

Contamination of fish in the Pacific Ocean could have wide-ranging consequences for millions.

The Pacific is home to the world’s largest fishery, which is in turn the main source of protein for about one billion people in Asia alone.

In October, a U.S. study – co-authored by oceanographer Ken Buesseler, a senior scientist at the non-profit Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Woods Hole, Mass., – reported Fukushima caused history’s biggest-ever release of radiation into the ocean – 10 to 100 times more than the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear catastrophe.

“It’s completely untrue to say this level of radiation is safe or harmless,” said Gordon Edwards, president of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility.

Edwards, who is also a math professor at Vanier College, said Fukushima has highlighted how lackadaisical Canadian authorities are about radiation risks – the result, he says, of the influence of Canada’s powerful nuclear industry.

“The reassurances have been completely irresponsible. To say there are no health concerns flies in the face of all scientific evidence,” said Edwards, who has advised the federal auditor-general’s office and Ontario government on nuclear-power issues.

Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/After+Fukushima+fish+tales/5994237/story.html#ixzz1jOhAwPg2




More here
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/After+Fukushima+fish+tales/5994237/story.html

Logged

Guinness no Grid comes near

1.6 kw and 2.4 kw   PV array  , Outback MX 60 and FM80 charge controller  ,24 volt 1600 AH Battery ,6 Kw Victron inverter charger, 1.1 kw high head hydro turbine as a back up generator , 5 kw woodburner, 36 solar tubes with 360 l water tank, 1.6 kw  windturbine
pdf27
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


« Reply #1 on: January 14, 2012, 09:22:50 AM »

Overall, one in five of the 1,100 catches tested in November exceeded the new ceiling of 100 becquerels per kilogram. (Canada’s ceiling for radiation in food is much higher: 1,000 becquerels per kilo.)
I'd have to check, but I think that's somewhere close to the UK level for stuff that's been exposed to radiation being declared to be not radioactive at all. I try to avoid getting too involved with Health Physics at work, but I do come across some absurdities - for instance IIRC until recently our permitted discharge of Tritium in water was lower than the safe limit for drinking water.

Note also that a significant fraction of the radiation will be natural - Brazil Nuts for instance naturally contain up to 250 Bq/kg, so presumably would become illegal in Canada if the Japanese seafood limit were introduced for all food as this chap seems keen on. Even bananas are ~60 Bq/kg so would have to be checked by batches to see if they were safe for import!

Note: I work for the UK Atomic Energy Authority as an engineer so may have somewhat pro-nuclear views due to my experience.
Logged
billi
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5405



« Reply #2 on: January 14, 2012, 10:09:09 AM »

I know   100 becquerels per kilogram  sounds low , but has this something to do with the fact , that  more and more radiation is added to the environment ?

After Fukushima  the EU-Commission increased limits for food imports from Japan ( about double  now)

They can change the limits more easy  since Chernobyl ...  and they need to , cause if they could not adjust the limits to a higher level
Their usual comment "No no health risk to humans  " would not work  Roll Eyes
Logged

Guinness no Grid comes near

1.6 kw and 2.4 kw   PV array  , Outback MX 60 and FM80 charge controller  ,24 volt 1600 AH Battery ,6 Kw Victron inverter charger, 1.1 kw high head hydro turbine as a back up generator , 5 kw woodburner, 36 solar tubes with 360 l water tank, 1.6 kw  windturbine
pdf27
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


« Reply #3 on: January 14, 2012, 11:56:42 AM »

A large part of it is simply the fact that detectors are **much** more sensitive now than they used to be. Part of that is terrorism - everyone is on the lookout for potential dirty bombs, and the number of false positives from the detectors (a container load of Brazil nuts for instance will show up very strongly) has made people more aware of the high levels naturally present in food.

The other part of it is that they are extremely risk averse when setting levels - for instance my permitted annual dose rate is several hundred times lower than the lowest dose rate they have any evidence for increased mortality rates for. They work on the assumption that the rate of mutation is linearly proportional to the total radiation dose absorbed, but what evidence there is rather suggests otherwise. It should probably be noted here that life on earth evolved in a much more radioactive environment (mostly cosmic rays) and appears able to deal quite well with low level radiation.

As has been mentioned before, places like Cornwall will have much higher rates of absorbed radiation, largely due to high levels of Radon gas in homes. Cancer rates aren't 2-3 times higher than in the rest of the UK, suggesting either that the linear model is overly simplistic or radiation is a very small effect on cancer/similar diseases.
Logged
billi
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5405



« Reply #4 on: January 14, 2012, 08:46:06 PM »



It does not  sound to me , that the information strategy changed since Chernobyl (when i read articles like this) ,  and that more  sensitive  measurements   are in place ,  same in Fukushima  the actual  Radiation fallout numbers  are increasing   , i suppose  it is hard to find real figures , but it sounds as business  as usual , clamp numbers and information down as much as possible

Like figures  of real casualties  from Chernobyl   still vary   from conservative numbers of 8930  from WHO and International Atomic Energy Agency IAEA  ( they had times they estimated 50 casualties )  to  over 1.4 Million casualties worldwide  (Professor Alexey V. Yablokov, Councilor of the Russian Academy of Sciences and former environmental advisor to Russian President Boris Yeltsin)
In between  there are other studies like the "The Other Report on Chernobyl" (Torch) talking  of about up to  60000 cancer  casualties

So I personally  can t say , but would certainly stay away from the low numbers , cause underestimating is fooling 

So i assume , that this article just brings up some idea  , that radiation ,that is dumped into the sea  does not mean its gone , but it seems many officials like to  hope so ...

And as far as i am aware  the release of radioactive  quantity  into the sea  (up to now) is not  much smaller than the release  into the Air, decades back in Chernobyl

The Cornwall example  and Background radiation is not much help or more or less misleading  and has not much to do with this   increasing radiation  made by mankind and its Nuclear industry

In the US  according to wikipedia 
Quote
Radon is thus the second leading cause of lung cancer after smoking, and accounts for 15,000 to 22,000 cancer deaths per year in the US alone.[

But there is a difference  between driving a car against  a wall and die      and being run over , even if the risk ,that  this happens is the same

Billi
Logged

Guinness no Grid comes near

1.6 kw and 2.4 kw   PV array  , Outback MX 60 and FM80 charge controller  ,24 volt 1600 AH Battery ,6 Kw Victron inverter charger, 1.1 kw high head hydro turbine as a back up generator , 5 kw woodburner, 36 solar tubes with 360 l water tank, 1.6 kw  windturbine
rt29781
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 775


WWW
« Reply #5 on: January 15, 2012, 11:24:44 AM »

The really bad thing about Fukushima and the contamination going into the sea and/or water table is that the contamination will be ingested and then the creatures at the top of the food chain ( ie us) will get the most contamination unless we rigorously screen the food ( unlikely).  We have stopped eating any food from Japan but I suspect that is not sufficient and certainly will not help the poor Japanese people.
Logged

billi
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5405



« Reply #6 on: January 16, 2012, 01:42:31 PM »

Radioactive Concrete


http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/01/radioactive-concrete-is-latest-scare-for-fukushima-survivors/

Logged

Guinness no Grid comes near

1.6 kw and 2.4 kw   PV array  , Outback MX 60 and FM80 charge controller  ,24 volt 1600 AH Battery ,6 Kw Victron inverter charger, 1.1 kw high head hydro turbine as a back up generator , 5 kw woodburner, 36 solar tubes with 360 l water tank, 1.6 kw  windturbine
dimengineer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 674


« Reply #7 on: January 16, 2012, 10:29:23 PM »

Just out of interest, I was looking up about radioactive cesium today. Some of the more serious incidents have been with medical sources, where the medical device has been scrapped and gone into a batch of steel. There was one incident in Brazil which caused 4 deaths where an X ray source got scrapped and sold off as luminous "toys" (for want of a better w ord)
OK, so they are all produced in nuclear reactors, but there's more nuclear waste isotopes out there than just from nuclear accidents.
Logged

21 tube Kloben Panel/250L Megaflow, 1.68kWp Solar PV - 7 x 240W Sanyo Panels
billi
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5405



« Reply #8 on: January 16, 2012, 10:36:36 PM »

Quote
but there's more nuclear waste isotopes out there than just from nuclear accidents

Yes we can!    do it and increase it ,    f$$ck them ,  who ever will pay  fingers crossed!
« Last Edit: January 16, 2012, 10:40:50 PM by billi » Logged

Guinness no Grid comes near

1.6 kw and 2.4 kw   PV array  , Outback MX 60 and FM80 charge controller  ,24 volt 1600 AH Battery ,6 Kw Victron inverter charger, 1.1 kw high head hydro turbine as a back up generator , 5 kw woodburner, 36 solar tubes with 360 l water tank, 1.6 kw  windturbine
dimengineer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 674


« Reply #9 on: January 17, 2012, 08:52:53 AM »

Quote
but there's more nuclear waste isotopes out there than just from nuclear accidents

Yes we can!    do it and increase it ,    f$$ck them ,  who ever will pay  fingers crossed!

Thats NOT what I was saying.... fume
Logged

21 tube Kloben Panel/250L Megaflow, 1.68kWp Solar PV - 7 x 240W Sanyo Panels
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!