Home | About | Donate

Five Years After Fukushima, 'No End in Sight' to Ecological Fallout


#1


#2

Are there still apologists for nuclear energy??


#4

Too cheap to meter, too risky to insure. Taxpayers foot the bill and take the risk. It's the Single Prayer Option. Alas.


#5

This is a good report except that it also conveys the covert assumption that damage is reserved for Japan and vicinities close to Fukushima.

Where is the research about the Pacific Ocean? And since ocean and air currents move around the globe, the impacts Fukushima's streams of radiation are having on the U.S.... particularly its West Coast?

While sea lion populations have radically decreased, no one in the media connects that with the detritus streaming over from Fukushima.

And what about infants born since 2011? Is any entity doing any epidemiological research on increased Thyroid (or other) Cancer rates in children?

The news blackout on this dangerous subject leads many to assume there is no looming threat.


#6

The NRC exists solely to protect the nuclear industry, NOT the people or environment!

The NRC is the definition of corruption and official misconduct in service to a deadly outdated technology and the corporations that profit! In all these decades there still is no way to deal with the deadly nuclear waste, and the industry is attempting to evade returning those nuke-plant sites to pre-industrial condition via the "safstor" scam, no clean-up for up to 60 years. Great dangers from ocean rise flooding/storms and permanently deadly areas - grave threats into the far future!

"Entergy: Nuke plant closing costs not covered past 60 years"

"An Entergy Corp. official said Wednesday the company is offering no guarantees it will pay to decommission its retired Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant if the job’s still not done by the end of a 60-year period.
Entergy Vice President Michael Twomey told members of two Vermont legislative committees that if decommissioning isn’t done by the end of the period, known in the nuclear industry as “SAFSTOR,” he expects there would be litigation, with the state and Entergy taking different positions."


#7

There's always a solution to a nuclear disaster. Post-Hiroshima, the solution was to ignore the radiation problem, minimize U.S. troop exposure and let the hospitals handle the extra casualties. Post-Fukushima, the solution was to make it look like something was being done, not do much, send the Japanese government the bill after bankruptcy, let the hospitals handle the extra casualties and make it a Japanese felony under the secrecy act to report anything bad about Fukushima.

We shall eventually find that after both disasters people died, not like flies, no, much more slowly. That's what's leaking out. Also, outsiders wouldn't marry Japanese survivors of Hiroshima because they were afraid of future birth defects.

You really don't want this to happen at, say, the Indian Point nuclear reactor.


#8

Thank you CD for picking at this scab here. An interesting news aggregator, enenews.com, is a good source to stay abreast of some of the impacts of 3/11/11. There are some (perhaps planted) kooks that chime in, but there are a lot of threads to pull--some of pure silk.


#9

I still can't tell which is worse..

Having the Rat Bast_rds lie straight to your face
or
Having a dumbed-down population believe and reelect them.

That is assuming Diebold is counting the votes correctly.


#10

The Pacific Ocean off the coast of North America has collapsed as a food source. I see three prime suspects in the lineup:
1. Climate change, massive overheating of the ocean
2. Trillions of little bits of plastic shopping bag junk floating in the ocean
3. Radioactive cesium and plutonium isotopes from Fukushima.

To my way of thinking, climate change did at least 95% of the deed. Ocean temperatures of up to ten degrees Fahrenheit above normal could wreak the havoc that we've seen all the way up and down the food chain, from kelp to whales. An analogy can be found in the world's half-dead forests, where the trees' natural predators and the droughts have run wild and turned the forests into giant dead stick plantations waiting for a forest fire.

Culprit number 2 would be the plastic, because we're regularly pulling this plastic out of dead sea creatures' stomachs.

The ocean within ten miles of Fukushima shows telltale signs of ecological disaster from massive radiation, so we can catalog the telltale signs of that particular type of ecological disaster. That's not what we're seeing near California.

The final question is, are North Pacific Ocean fish safe to eat? I can't answer that one yes or no, it's a nonzero but low risk of cancer for you. Pick fish that are lower on the food chain, as the top predators concentrate radioactive isotopes in their bodies.


#12

Yeah they will be here soon to claim all of these mutations, higher levels of radiation and lesser number of birds and the like are due to "better measuring technology".

Added to that all the Governments will do is allow higher limits of radiation and the problem will be solved!


#13

Nuclear profits NO ONE! Only Sociopathic criminals.


#15

Apparently the IAEA plays a similar role worldwide...


#16

One fundamental problem with your sound advice to "wait a bit," is that the culture of technological development and operationalization under the rule of capital - (not just nuclear technology) - has imposed a paradigm on society of investor, entrepreneur, and official "freedom" to innovate and exploit.

MANY technologies currently rolling out or under development (for example, speaking of "World War Mentality," the industrial warfare model of agriculture) merit a wise "pause" to assess risks and options. Not gonna happen.

And so, together we experience this accelerating technological ride toward, frankly, dis-integration, gross simplification and reduction of all that is ecological...

EDIT: To elaborate, a clip from my earlier comment in the LRAD thread:

"At the level of social discourse in this masterfully degraded Western culture in disintegration, we cannot even begin to have a useful discussion about risks and detriments of this rising and accelerating wave of sophisticated technology. Let alone, imagine that we might structure society, politics and technology under popular democracy, so that we determine when to apply the brakes to development or deployment of technologies, or pause for assessment of impacts, or restrain based on humanistic or ecological imperatives."


#17

Please include: Overfishing, industrialized "fishing" and habitat destruction.


#18

We were on the West Coast last fall and I was horrified to see the beautiful tide pools devoid of life. I hadn't walked the beaches or collected sea weed there for years and 20 years ago they were teeming with life.

Being bee keepers and hearing the bullshit about pesticides not having much to do with the bee die offs, I immediatly thought of Fukushima.

I found no end of stuff on line re there being no connection. And a few more like this.
http://www.infowars.com/pollyannaville-dying-starfish-article-never-once-mentions-fukushima-or-radiation/

I'm sure I'm just imagining things.


#20

Oh, I don't know that "space exploration" is necessary and as far as "planetary protection" goes it strikes me the earth was doing just fine until western technological society decided to play the magician's apprentice.


#21

Prophecy: The Pacific Ocean Will Die. from newmessage.org.
Humanity.


#22

From the Revelation, The Great Warning". ...."It will be a time of increasing difficulty & emergency. Do not be surprised that this is occurring, for you have changed the conditions of life here so sufficiently that this could be sufficiently that this could be forseen. For people do not realize they are living in a global state of emergency, the early stages of this where much can be done. " from the newmessage.org.


#23

Nuclear power was sold to the public with the lie that the risks of a serious accident are less than one in a million.

Out of roughly 500 civilian nuclear power reactors that have been operated we have had 4 meltdowns (Chernobyl & 3 at Fukushima), at least 4 partial meltdowns (Fermi 1, Lucens, Lenningrad 1, 3 Mile Island) and many lesser accidents and close calls. And there have been serious accidents at plants that process the fuel, ones that reprocess the fuel, ones that make weapons from reprocessed fuel and at waste storage sites.

If one considers how few reactors are 100% safely decommissioned and how little of the spent fuel is 100% safely stored away forever, instead of claiming the risk as 1 in a million, 1 in 3 is probably closer to the truth.

Much spent reactor fuel is in temporary on site storage at the nuclear power plants. This practice greatly increased the severity of the Fukushima disaster.

Our leaders are escalating international tensions which could lead to a major war. Even a minor war could lead to nuclear accidents that dwarf Chernobyl and Fukushima. The orchestrated coup in the Ukraine has lead to an unstable situation in a country with many more reactors of the Chernobyl design with even more years of accumulated spent fuel. A country now bankrupt that was unable to properly manage their nuclear affairs when solvent and stable. There have been reports of recent close calls, such as one triggered by the destruction of the power lines to Crimea, resulting in a emergency excess power episode for multiple reactors.

How many more years can we keep piling up spent fuel? How many years do we have until a financial meltdown, civil insurrection or international war turn nuclear power assets into a nuclear nightmare?

If we can't deal with it now when times are relatively good how are we going to manage when things get rough?


#24

All this Genetic Damage---and people are surprised?? A rise in Human Cancer and people are surprised?
All the Biotech research into Cancer is just that Research.... There will be no cure to cancer with medicines,, just a significant deception and a huge waste of resources. Look at the prices of the Cancer Drugs, huge?..And who pays for it --You Do--YOur Tax dollars first fund the research, the Life Science Research, which is actually a eupheism for Genetic Engineering...Then You pay a 2nd time thru high healthcare which then covers the cancer drugs.... Who gains at your expense?..... The Drug companies, the Big Pharma....and the Big Research Academic universities..... THe only cure to cancer is Prevention and a Clean Ecological Support System..... When was the last time that a True Epidemiological Study of cancer clusters was conducted around Nuke Power Plants..???....no suprise there.....