Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

*Vanity* Fukushima Radiation likely to arrive on West Coast next month.
me | March 9, 2014 | Bushwon

Posted on 03/09/2014 6:32:40 PM PDT by Freedom56v2

Drudge posted an article (from a banned source) which stated that very low levels of Fukushima radiation will likely reach the West Coast next month.

Incredibly, the article states that there is no federal agency which currently samples Pacific Coast seawater for radiation.

I find it disturbing that:

1. There is money being spent for many frivolous activities, yet three is no monitoring for radiation on the West Coast?

2. The EPA is monitoring puddles on people's private property, yet there is no monitoring of radiation on the West Coast!


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Food; Health/Medicine; Science
KEYWORDS: fukushima; geigercounter; halflife; ohnoez; radiation; tinfoil; westcoast
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-136 next last
To: Scutter

You may be amused, but if you live on the beach and eat a lot of fish, ocean life, etc. you might be more concerned.

Is the issue of mercury poisoning in fish inane too? I don’t know why it couldn’t be potentially similar. I am not amused.


61 posted on 03/09/2014 8:00:23 PM PDT by Freedom56v2 ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
Do you know why they use water to cool nuclear reactors ?

Do you know what the phrase "containment vessel" means?

62 posted on 03/09/2014 8:01:14 PM PDT by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

I wouldn't worry about Fukushima too much...

That said, if we had a government that wasn't wasting trillions of dollars on bullshit, I wouldn't mind some monitoring of stuff like this.

63 posted on 03/09/2014 8:05:39 PM PDT by Wayne07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steve86
Yeah, having grown up adjacent to Hanford in the 50s and 60s and living here to this day, I'm having trouble getting that worked up about it.

Lucky you. Read up on the term "downwinder."

64 posted on 03/09/2014 8:06:01 PM PDT by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Talisker
Do you know what the phrase "containment vessel" means?

Certainly.

65 posted on 03/09/2014 8:07:57 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I just messed up my tagline. Sorry for the inconvenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

No problem with asking. The issue is what is really the “truth”, and who is qualified to “pronounce” said “truth”. Consensus is a useful tool, but in this day and age, it is difficult if neigh impossible to acquire such, IMO.


66 posted on 03/09/2014 8:08:32 PM PDT by Pox (Good Night. I expect more respect tomorrow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Talisker

Parents worked at Hanford since mid-40s. I drank the milk here, of course. No cancer in family; in fact I have known only one person with cancer in my lifetime.


67 posted on 03/09/2014 8:09:19 PM PDT by steve86 (Some things aren't really true but you wouldn't be half surprised if they were.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: bushwon; jazusamo

Salmon is reasonably high on the food chain such that it might concentrate radionuclides in the water. I must admit I’d like to think that someone in the Federal Colossus was checking something as basic as that.


68 posted on 03/09/2014 8:09:26 PM PDT by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: bushwon
Because it is fairly good conductor of heat and readily available?

That is a very good answer. Another reason is that water does not 'retain' radiation. Particles in the water might, but the water itself does not.

69 posted on 03/09/2014 8:14:08 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I just messed up my tagline. Sorry for the inconvenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kidd

Kidd, my husband has a PhD in science area and he is concerned, tho his area is not nuclear engineering, physics or dilution effects. Do you have a PhD? Are you a nuclear engineer?

If you have something to add, I would appreciate it.
I did not know FR has become a libertarian site.

I believe the Federal Government should protect our borders. That is why we have a Coast Guard. We are spending bunches of money for all kinds of crap.. such as Barry’s junket to FLorida this weekend....monitoring the water is not unreasonable and outrageous....

I don’t know...that is why I asked, and I appreciate the thoughtful comments.

So you are basically saying, don’t ask questions, trust that it is no big deal, don’t worry, and btw, I should not expect the government to monitor nor should I monitor myself...Got it.


70 posted on 03/09/2014 8:15:07 PM PDT by Freedom56v2 ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: ThePatriotsFlag

Gov Brown will see that the legislature bans it from reaching the shore.


LOL then he would be good for something ;)


71 posted on 03/09/2014 8:15:58 PM PDT by Freedom56v2 ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: MrShoop
I believe such monitoring is readily available and still untainted by the hand of bureaucrats.

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/swcrc/37/chap2.htm

http://www.bikiniatoll.com/whatrad.html

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/02/bikini-atoll-nuclear-test-60-years

It's still claimed to be unlivable after 60 years, but I would take that with a grain of salt if you consider Hiroshima and Nagasaki with the caveat the both Japanese sites were actively “decontaminated” while the Bikini Atoll was not.

72 posted on 03/09/2014 8:17:38 PM PDT by Pox (Good Night. I expect more respect tomorrow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: kidd
This vanity post is also an example of what fearmogering can do. You are a Freeper. And you are now wondering why the government isn’t taking care of you better. And now you are looking to spend a bunch of money (on a Geiger counter?) which will only tell you that you have background radiation all around you.

Well make up your mind - is he wondering why the government isn't taking better care of him, or is he willing to spend the money to buy the equipment to find out for himself? And if both, how then is your insult not internally contradictory?

That this vanity post is a tremendous display of ignorance of:
- radiation
- health physics
- dilution effects

And your insult is a tremendous display of ignorance of CONCENTRATION VECTORS, such as algae, kelp, shellfish, FISH, fishING, EATing FISH, the FOOD CHAIN, ocean oxygenation vulnerabilities, and related BIOLOGICAL and INDUSTRIAL FACTORS.

But I must say, the absolute brazenness of your absolute trust in absolute Statism in the name of rejecting absolute Statism is matched only by the nastyness of your personal insults. But the insults make sure no one notices your hypocrisy, so I guess that's pretty slick on your part. Staying hidden, I mean. Lots of training behind that kind of technique. Impressive skill.

73 posted on 03/09/2014 8:18:46 PM PDT by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Cold Heart

I checked a month ago, nobody, fed or state is checking seafood for radiation.


I see this as a problem.

So we have agencies that are tasked with safety of the food supply and wildlife, which we pay for, yet they are not doing this.

We pay for all kinds of outrageous projects, yet we don’t have a coordinated effort on this.


74 posted on 03/09/2014 8:19:37 PM PDT by Freedom56v2 ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: bushwon
I would have thot it would be OK to ask the question. I don’t think it is ever wrong to seek truth.

You thot correctly.

: )

75 posted on 03/09/2014 8:19:38 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I just messed up my tagline. Sorry for the inconvenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

Because it is fairly good conductor of heat and readily available?

That is a very good answer. Another reason is that water does not ‘retain’ radiation. Particles in the water might, but the water itself does not.


Well, that is good to know about the water itself, but then I wonder about plankton, fish, kelp, etc....


76 posted on 03/09/2014 8:21:51 PM PDT by Freedom56v2 ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
Certainly.

So you've got a plan for a nuclear reactor without a containment vessel? I mean, since it's redundant, right? Since opem free-flowing waterdirectly connected to the ocean itself is more than enough to dissipate any radioactivity?

Or am I missing something in the reason for your certitude?

77 posted on 03/09/2014 8:22:40 PM PDT by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster

Salmon is reasonably high on the food chain such that it might concentrate radionuclides in the water. I must admit I’d like to think that someone in the Federal Colossus was checking something as basic as that.


Well, given all the guidelines regarding fish consumption as it relates to mercury, I do wonder why there could not be a potential risk to fish in the Pacific.


78 posted on 03/09/2014 8:24:01 PM PDT by Freedom56v2 ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: steve86
Parents worked at Hanford since mid-40s. I drank the milk here, of course. No cancer in family; in fact I have known only one person with cancer in my lifetime.

Like I said, lucky you (and yours). Nevertheless, look up the term "downwinders."

79 posted on 03/09/2014 8:24:04 PM PDT by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: bushwon
Fukushima Radioactivity a Complete Non-issue

Be sure to check out his links under "More resources".

80 posted on 03/09/2014 8:25:10 PM PDT by No One Special
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-136 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson