Fukushima radiation moving in seawater across Pacific Ocean, according to consulting company

Oceanic radiation from last year's Fukushima nuclear disaster is approaching northern Hawaii, according to the latest tracking by ASR Limited.

The coastal-management consulting company has created a map that follows the movement of radiation in seawater since the Japanese earthquake on March 11, 2011.


>

ASR Limited suggests radiation is crossing the Pacific Ocean.

Last April, Japanese officials claimed that they had halted the release of radioactive radiation from the crippled nuclear reactors at Fukushima.

On December 5, however, the Los Angeles Times revealed that "45 tons of highly radioactive water" had been released from the plant on the previous weekend.

Greenpeace has also reported finding highly radioactive sea life off the Japanese coast.

Meanwhile, ASR Limited has also released a map showing how far the floating island of Japanese debris has travelled since last year's earthquake.

It's expected to reach the B.C. coast in 2013.


A huge amount of debris is headed toward British Columbia.

Follow Charlie Smith on Twitter at twitter.com/csmithstraight.

Comments (21) Add New Comment
Ron S,
So much for the safety of Nuclear Power. I don't believe it was a earthquake that caused all that devistation either.
21
22
Rating: -1
Moodier
I am not denying that there is potential for a spread of nuclear radition, but this video is fear mongering at its finest. Amazing how there are no other sources of radition in the entire world.
25
27
Rating: -2
DavidH
In the same way that we demand science-based decision making from our governments, let's be sure that we demand the same standard of ourselves.

There is NO scientific consensus that radiation from Fukushima represents any threat to North America. Quite the opposite - the consensus is that there is no threat to human health.

If we are going to respect the consensus on issues like climate change, perhaps we should do the same in this instance. Eh?
25
27
Rating: -2
Plum Duff
I really, REALLY hope you two are right.
25
26
Rating: -1
Pat Johnstone
Less than seeking consensus, you should at least check your source.

I went to the ASR website, and found this under their description of the animated map you present above (the Allcaps copied from the source):
"THIS IS NOT A REPRESENTATION OF THE RADIOACTIVE PLUME CONCENTRATION."
So, just about the exact opposite of your headline.


21
27
Rating: -6
Charlie Smith
It was dealing with radiation in the ocean, not the plume in the sky.
Charlie Smith
19
20
Rating: -1
TP Snyders
Anyone who bothers to check the source here would find that this is simply a map of where particles will have spread to by now, generated by data on ocean currents. The company that generated this mapping makes very clear that it is not an indication of amount of radiation present, simply where it's likely spread to, so save the comments about fear-mongering for the scientifically illiterate.

Those who do have an understanding of the potential quantity and types of radioactive matter dispersed can come to their own conclusions about the potential harm already caused and likely to occur in future, but in reality it will be decades before we know for sure.
27
25
Rating: +2
what?
@Ron S.......elaborate....!?
Tell us why you feel that.
99
22
Rating: +77
Plum Duff
I was first to comment in this thread with a remark that Rex should stay in Alberta to be our canary in the coal mine.

My post seems to have disappeared.

Care to comment, Charlie?
24
21
Rating: +3
adam g
The comment about the debris reaching BC also seems pretty speculative, as Im pretty certain the movement of the Pacific Ocean would carry Japanese debris towards some oceanic dead zone north of Hawaii. At the same time, we shouldnt be so quick to shrug off such a danger. It seems like the majority of human beings have this feeling of invincibility regarding environmental threats to our health. Ignorance is bliss.
19
32
Rating: -13
Mea
Have you no concern about the fish that are caught in this area, not to mention the health of other marine animals?
25
23
Rating: +2
Charlie Smith
Dear Plum Duff,

You're in the wrong story. Your Rex Murphy comment was posted below this article, where you placed it:

http://www.straight.com/article-638461/vancouver/cbc-cross-country-check...

Charlie Smith
21
29
Rating: -8
Michael Castanaveras
Actually, ASR's caveat is not in reference to airborne vs seaborne radiation.

"THIS IS NOT A REPRESENTATION OF THE RADIOACTIVE PLUME CONCENTRATION."

This means they are not trying to model the concentration of the seaborne radiation. Rather, they are strictly modelling it's path. And note that this is a MODEL. There are no measurements or data over the course of the modeled path.

The importance of the story is not the creep of radiation. Rather, it's still unknown how radiation will move through the food chain. And this model demonstrates just how far that impact may spread.
23
20
Rating: +3
Plum Duff
Thanks, Charlie.

In my defense, I will say the comments in both threads were almost identical at that point....

25
22
Rating: +3
Casper
All I want to know is can I still eat fish this year?
23
25
Rating: -2
Bruce Conway
Airborne radiation for the West Coast is above Chernobyl evacuation limits in some places of B.C. - especially the Cascades and the Rockies. The ocean is massively contaminated and fish are not safe to eat - especially salmon and tuna - anything near the top of the chain where bioconcentration is greatest. Portland and L.A. also got hit hard. Hawaii is also hugely contaminated: farmers are dumping boron on their crops for mitigation. (Kauai is especially bad - heavy rainfall and nearer Fukushima). Three melt-thru's - continually emitting, no solution, no government figures, news blackout - figure it out folks, or check all my statements over at enenews - where you'll see that things are much worse than I've indicated. Watch out for the hot particles, and stay out of the rain. No beachcombing, no gardening.
20
20
Rating: 0
Plum Duff
In a word, Casper:

NO.
24
19
Rating: +5
RadTechNo
What's a millirem? What's a millisievert? How many are in the potassium in bananas? Why haven't the bananas killed us all off? Does ANYONE here actually UNDERSTAND radiation? Would someone at the Straight please explain to me the true risk of one millirem?
20
16
Rating: +4
Nunya Biznis
Uhm, that's a cute little graph of OCEAN CURRENTS people! Where do you all think the rain water has been coming from for the last 365 days? You there, without the wet newspaper hat! You're fukked!
21
23
Rating: -2
Zoned out
It is frightening for sure and so is taking tar sands and water, mixing them together and then shaking them as hard as it can get. They'll never become friends no matter how hard politicians try to sell tar oozing pipelines in a earth quake zone.
22
22
Rating: 0

Pages

Add new comment
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.