Some tuna caught off California is showing evidence of radiation poisoning. (RT photo)
Like a slow-motion train wreck, the Fukushima nuclear plant disaster
is still causing damage long after the world’s media has left the news
story behind.
On March 11, 2011, the most powerful earthquake ever to hit Japan
triggered a tsunami with waves that reached as high as 144 feet. These
waves swamped the Fukushima nuclear power-plant complex, causing a
resulting shutdown leading to the world’s worst nuclear incident since
the 1986 Chernobyl disaster.
The accident has been rated a level 7, on a scale of 1 to 7, on the
International Nuclear Event Scale.
As a result of this disaster, the complex’s coolant pumps failed to
operate and the power plant reactors overheated, leading to a release of
radionuclides directly into the ocean exceeding that from any previous
accident.
Water is currently being pumped into the reactors in an attempt to
keep them cool and prevent further explosions, but handling the water is
becoming a problem.
The contaminated cooling water is being released directly into the
ocean and is making its way into the ecosphere. Water from the storage
tanks has also seeped into the groundwater and from there, into the
ocean. Efforts to use a various barriers to prevent contamination have
not completely stopped the leakage.
In another effort to stem the radioactive water from reaching the sea, Japan has pledged to spend $470 million to construct an
“ice wall”
around the reactors to contain the water. Under the Japanese plan, a
wall of frozen earth will be constructed around the reactors to prevent
the water being used to cool the fuel rods from comingling with the sea.
“The world is closely watching whether we can dismantle the
(Fukushima) plant, including the issue of contaminated water,” said
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. “The government is determined to
work hard to resolve the issue.”
This is quite a change from previous statements the prime minister
has made. In a speech Sept. 7 in front of the International Olympic
Committee in Buenos Aires, Abe stated categorically, “Let me assure you
the situation (the contaminated groundwater problem) is under control.”
Six days later, Tokyo Electric Power Co., the operator of the plant,
disputed the prime minister’s claim at a meeting in Koriyama, Fukushima
Prefecture.
“We regard the current situation as not being under control,” said Kazuhiko Yamashita, a senior official at Tepco.
Tokyo was awarded the 2020 Olympic Games following Abe’s speech.
“The quantities of water they are dealing with are absolutely
gigantic,” said Mycle Schneider, an independent consultant who has
previously advised the French and German governments and has consulted
widely for a variety of organizations and countries on nuclear issues.
“What is worse is the water leakage everywhere else – not just from the
tanks. It is leaking out from the basements, it is leaking out from the
cracks all over the place. Nobody can measure that.”
It is clear that the repercussions from this disaster are far from over.
There has been a debate over the size of the Pacific Ocean and the
quantity of the contamination. Some say that even though the U.S. is
directly across the ocean from the accident, the volume of the water
will easily disperse the contaminants.
Others say the particular isotopes from the reactor do not disperse
easily and don’t sink to the bottom. They remain in the water column,
from top to bottom.
In this last scenario, sea life has a much greater chance of
contacting and carrying the suspended radiation. They either breathe it
or eat it in others. Scientists are watching carefully for any signs of
contamination in the ocean’s biosphere.
According to
Maxim Shingarkin,
deputy chairman of Russia’s State Duma Committee for Natural Resources,
“Currents in the world ocean are so structured that the areas of
seafood capture near the U.S. northwest coast are more likely to contain
radioactive nuclides than even the Sea of Okhotsk, which is much closer
to Japan. These products are the main danger for mankind because they
can find their way to people’s tables on a massive scale.”
This is an issue of significant importance to the United States since, according to the
National Marine Fisheries Service, the U.S. imported almost 45 million pounds of fish from Japan in 2012.
There is evidence the radioactive water emanating from the plants
starting two years ago has made its way into the ocean currents and will
soon start to affect the ecosystems in North America as early as the
spring of 2014.
Some say it is already here.
Reports are coming in that the North American food supply is already being affected by Fukushima.
Bluefin tuna caught off the San Diego coast is showing evidence of
radioactive contamination. This is the first time that a migrating fish
has been shown to carry radioactivity 3,000 miles from Fukushima to the
U.S. Pacific coast. It is a nutrition source that accounts for
approximately 20,000 tons of the world’s food supply each year.
According to the
report
published by the National Academy of Sciences, “We report unequivocal
evidence that Pacific Bluefin tuna, Thunnus orientalis, transported
Fukushima-derived radionuclides across the entire North Pacific Ocean.”
“We were frankly kind of startled,” said Nicholas Fisher, one of the
researchers reporting the findings online Monday in the Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences.
“That’s a big ocean. To swim across it and still retain these radionuclides is pretty amazing,” Fisher said.
To rule out the possibility the radiation found in the tuna was
carried by ocean currents or dropped into the ocean through rainfall
from the atmosphere, the team also analyzed Yellowfin tuna, found in the
eastern Pacific, and Bluefin that migrated to Southern California
before the nuclear crisis. They found no trace of cesium-134 and only
background levels of cesium-137 left over from nuclear weapons testing
in the 1960s.
The report went on to say: “The levels of radioactive cesium were 10
times higher than the amount measured in tuna off the California coast
in previous years. But even so, that’s still far below safe-to-eat
limits set by the U.S. and Japanese governments.”
The results were surprising enough to conduct further tests this
coming summer with a larger sampling of migratory fish. The tuna that
were the subject of the previous study were exposed to radiation from
Fukushima for approximately one month. The upcoming study will be
looking at fish that have been swimming in radioactive waters for a
longer period.
They will also be expanding their study to cover other migratory species including sea turtles, sharks and seabirds.
There have been many other
reports
of fish and sea-creature populations dying in the Pacific. Also, there
have been many discoveries of cesium–137 in high concentrations in
seafood caught in the Pacific and sold in North America. There have also
been many reports of unexplained deaths among wildlife:
- There is an epidemic of sea lion deaths due to starvation along the
California coastline. The question is: why are they starving? Has the
food chain been disrupted?
- Along the Pacific coast of Canada and the Alaska coastline, the population of sockeye salmon is at a historic low
- Something is causing fish all along the west coast of Canada to bleed from their gills, bellies and eyeballs
- Experts
have found very high levels of cesium–137 in plankton living in the
waters of the Pacific Ocean between Hawaii and the west coast, affecting
the food chain in a process called “biomagnification”
As of now, there has been no direct correlation between these events
and Fukushima, but the timing of the events and some contributing
factors are giving scientists pause and are giving substance for calls
for more studies.
While the evidence may circumstantial at this point, it is enough for countries to take action.
Due to radiation fears, Fukushima Prefecture fishermen have had to
dump most of their catch. Two years into the nuclear disaster, South
Korea still bans Japanese fish and seafood imports from eight Japanese
prefectures. The ban covers an area of Japan that exported 5,000 metric
tons of fishery products, or about 13 percent of the 40,000 total tons
imported last year to South Korea.
In eastern Japanese ports outside of the prefecture, hundreds of
pounds of fresh fish are sent to Onjuku, a small town a few hours away
from Tokyo.
Once they arrive, samples of the fish are checked for radiation in a
move to restore the world’s confidence in Japan’s food supply in the
wake of Fukushima.
Japan’s Marine Ecology Research Institute, or MERI, operates out of
Onjuku and is charged with the testing. MERI was established in the mid
1970s to certify that fish supplies remain safe despite wastewater
discharge from the nuclear plants. It is now working overtime to assure
the world that Japan’s fish are safe to eat.
Even with these assurances, many buyers are not sure just how much to
trust the quasi-government laboratories. The U.S. has recently banned
agricultural and fishery imports from 14 prefectures in Japan, up from
the eight that South Korea banned.
Leung Ka-sing, an associate professor at Hong Kong’s Polytechnic
University’s department of applied biology and chemical technology, has
stated his country should expand its ban on fish products from the
current conditional ban on eight prefectures to all of Japan. This is in
response to public fears of contamination from ongoing leaks at the
Fukushima nuclear plant. He said the ban would act as a preventive
measure and address fears over radiation.
The events in the Pacific Rim do not seem to be isolated incidents.
They may not be provocative. The oceans are large, and they contain a
massive population of species that get sick from time to time. But they
are in numbers that warrant an in-depth discovery and full disclosure.
Radiation is found everywhere in the world, so some radiation in food
can be expected. How much is a safe level seems to vary over time.
Immediately following the World War II atomic bombings of Nagasaki and
Hiroshima, American military construction crews were sent into the
cities to clear irradiated rubble, telling the crews that the work was
safe.
Only years later did they find out it wasn’t safe, and that serious, permanent injury resulted from working in the area.
Gordon McDonald, Ph.D, executive director of Research for the Koinonia Institute, contributed to this report.
by
Posts
