Waiting for Godzilla in 2014 - So Just How Bad Is Fukushima?

by Robert Wilkinson

I put this on my FB page a while ago, and am reposting it here since this is one of the more important articles I’ve found concerning the nuclear menace that is Fukushima. I believe this site can help us get to more of the truth than any other source I’ve found so far.

As I wrote on FB when I posted there, “While some think Wood's Hole is only monitoring radiation to give us all the news the gov’t wants us to know, I figured you would like this report from GREENPEACE, certainly nobody's monkey (to quote Jon Stewart). It seems it's not as bad as the hysterics want us to believe. Not great, but not apocalypse.”

If you want the real story from a trustworthy organization, please go to the Greenpeace article "Yes, things are very bad at Fukushima but it’s not the Apocalypse" and check it out. The Greenpeace marine biologists and radiation specialists have been sampling sea creatures along the Japanese coast since the disaster, and taken independent measurements. Here’s a little from the article:

Most recent have been the stories of rumours about ongoing nuclear reactions inside the crippled Fukushima reactors and vast radioactive contamination of the Pacific Ocean and the west coasts of the US and Canada.

We have checked these stories and our conclusion is clear: these are not stories based in fact. For example, while unprecedented amounts of radioactive cesium have ended up in the Pacific Ocean, significantly contaminating sediments and fisheries along the Japanese coastline, there is no plausible mechanism that could transport significant levels of contamination across the Pacific to reach beaches in the US, Canada or Australia.

Yes, there are detectable traces of those radioactive isotopes in US waters, but they are at very low levels, and their contribution to radiation doses is far below the natural background radiation level.

This does not necessarily mean they are completely safe (no radiation dose is low enough to be 100% safe), but the additional risks they present to living organisms, including humans, are negligible. Certainly, these levels are not causing radiation sickness, deformities or mass deaths of ocean life.

Anyway, go check out the article and all the links you find there if you want to know what Greenpeace has to say about radiation in the Pacific. At this stage in the game, I’d believe them before anyone else putting information out there.

© Copyright 2014 Robert Wilkinson

Comments

[RodJM]

A few days ago, down here in Tasmania, A claimed rare species of giant jelly fish was found washed up on one of the beaches. Scientists were blowm away by the sheer size of it!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-06/giant-jellyfish-found-by-schoolboy-on-tasmanian-beach/5241570

Could freakish organisms like this be linked to radiation in the marine food chain? what else is in the depths of the oceans still not known? Makes me think of Jules Verne's 20,000 leagues under the sea and the monster squid!

[debbie]

One of my closest friends, the husband of my best friend (who passed away 15 months ago) passed last saturday. He has battled lung cancer and brain tumours for a few years now, all due to living in Poland at the time of the Chernobel disaster according to his oncologist. Sending healing prayers to the Japanese people and those in charge of the disaster zone and of course the surrounding people xxx

[Robert]

Hi all - It seems that nerves are a bit frayed out there on this subject. A while back I was taken to task for reporting that Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute had begun monitoring radiation around the Pacific. That person thought I was naive since they believe WHOI has no integrity, being a shill for the powers that be and only reporting what those in charge want us to know. More recently, I've been taken to task for being a doom and gloomer, reporting only bad news and not being part of some "group think" that hopes to wish the problem away.

To the first critic, I noted that WHOI may be a shill, but at least if they're reporting numbers, those numbers can be checked by outside sources. In this regard, any reporting is better than none. If they state there is a certain level of types of radiation at point X, that can be checked and verified. This article specifically addresses that issue, and this report is incredibly positive.

To the second critic, I noted that this article is actually very hopeful. Neither hysterical nor gloomy nor "put on a happy face" nor "it's all gooooood," I'm very encouraged that Greenpeace is stepping in and offering their findings. I'd believe them before TEPCO, government assurances, or hysterics on websites absolutely certain that children in California are dying of diseases directly caused by Fuku.

To me, the only thought form worth creating here is the demand that the world's experts step in and take charge of fixing this mess the best they're able. When enough of us around the world focus our voice on insisting that those who know how to deal with this actually do so, then maybe it will outweigh the Japanese need to save face.

Until then, I'll keep "calling it as I see it." And please don't fall into fear, regardless of what anyone says or believes or asserts. Fear is a useless response to important matters.

This story offers a lot of hope that things are not as bad as many have believed.

[Micheline]

Thank you Robert for this article. I did hear some disturbing news in an podcast created by two Foreogners living here and seems they are married to nationals with children. They are from the Kansai region. The main topic was about the current Governer of Osaka but they revealed some other stuff about how TEPCO is handling Nuke Waste! I posted it on Facebook.

[Mel]

This is better news! Many friends and family along the West coast, Love it. Better than the reports saying the very ground around the reactors was turning to quicksand and visions big booms..