Tuesday, July 12, 2011

Radioactive Food in the US and the US Wants to Build More Nuclear Reactors

Enews is reporting a finding from a California Radiation Station Monitor by EnviroReporter (private monitor) of radioactive peaches. I'm providing both links
http://enenews.com/peaches-in-los-angeles-area-found-with-radiation-at-more-than-double-site-background-levels/comment-page-1#comment-108530

http://www.enviroreporter.com/radiation-station-stats/

I followed Enviroreporter's data and he is very careful and systematic in his methodology. On July 8 he found that 2 peaches registered over 2 times higher than site background radiation:

7/08/11

10:05 pm 10-minute INTERIOR average: 39.9 CPM
9:50 pm 10-minute EXTERIOR average: 45.6 CPM NORMAL

4:00 pm INTERIOR spot reading in Santa Monica market with approximate background of 39 CPM – Two peaches sustained 81 CPM and above or over two times background (208% of site background).

I recall reading a comment made on a Zerohedge story. The comment described measuring high radiation on Washington state apples. After washing the apples they registered normal background levels.

I also recall a comment made by someone who found a high radiation reading from some dust that had settled in his Phoenix office after our dust storm last week. Once he removed the dust the radiation levels returned to normal background levels.

It is clear that we are being exposed to radiation from Fukushima even now. We are exposed to those radionuclides like Cesium and Strontium that were deposited early on in March and April. The EPA found uranium, Cesium, etc in its air cartridge studies, precipitation, and drinking water
http://opendata.socrata.com/Government/Precipitation-RadNet-Laboratory-Analysis/e2xy-undq
http://blogs.forbes.com/jeffmcmahon/2011/04/09/radiation-detected-in-drinking-water-in-13-more-us-cities-cesium-137-in-vermont-milk/

Radionuclides such as Cesium 137 and Strontium have very long half lives and are going to be around for the rest of my lifetime. The EPA even found Plutonium http://opendata.socrata.com/Government/Plutonium-238-Radiation-Data-from-EPA-RadNet-Radia/wxwh-beqe

More data can be found here
http://www.epa.gov/japan2011/rert/radnet-sampling-data.html


When the jet stream is over our head we are exposed to still more radiation deposition from Fukushima, the extent of which depends upon what events have happened (or not) at the plant in the previous 3-6 days. Fukushima is an ongoing disaster and it emits radiation into the air and sea every single day.

How much radiation are we going to inhale or ingest into our bodies? Will it be more than those unfortunate people who were exposed to fallout in the US west in the 50s and 60s because our government cared little for their welfare?

Enews reports that the EPA is conducting a survey of "background" radiation levels in Washington state but that the data will not all be released because it will compromise national security.
http://enenews.com/radiation-data-from-seattle-area-survey-may-be-withheld-by-feds-for-national-security-purposes

Will population mortality statistics be censored also, for the purposes of national security?

Will more nuke plants be authorized in the US because the economic security of GE and Westinghouse are at stake and to hell with the welfare of the population?

Read or View the Materials at the Relevant Links Below and Then Contact Your Congressional rep. in opposition to more nukes....

Watch the latest Arnie Gunderson video, "Why Fukushima Can Happen Here"
http://www.fairewinds.com/

Read the Excellent Al Jazeera report from June 22 again or for the first time: "Fukushima: Its Much Worse Than You Think" http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/06/201161664828302638.html

Read the Intel Hub's summary articles synthesizing a variety of other recent articles
http://theintelhub.com/2011/07/12/radiation-coverups-and-dangers-exposed-worldwide/


Now I'm Reposting Anne's comment at enews http://enenews.com/peaches-in-los-angeles-area-found-with-radiation-at-more-than-double-site-background-levels#comments

PLEASE contact your representative and senators:


6930 Carroll Avenue, #340, Takoma Park, MD 20912; 301-270-6477; nirsnet@nirs.org; http://www.nirs.org

ACT NOW!

ON THURSDAY, SENATE ENERGY COMMITTEE TO TAKE UP BILLS PROMOTING SMALL MODULAR REACTORS, NUCLEAR LOANS, AND MORE

THE LESSON OF FUKUSHIMA IS NOT SMALLER NUKES–IT’S NO NUKES!

July 12, 2011

Dear Friends,

We have learned that on Thursday, the Senate Energy Committee is slated to vote on several bills, including its first post-Fukushima nuclear legislation.

Unfortunately, this legislation (as we noted a few weeks ago) isn’t about nuclear safety; it isn’t about implementing safe, clean alternatives to dirty, dangerous nuclear power; it isn’t following the lead of Germany, Italy and elsewhere in ending the threat of nuclear catastrophe in the United States.

It’s about pretending Fukushima never happened. It’s about building more nuclear reactors in the U.S. And it’s absolutely unacceptable.

Tell the Senate now: We will not accept more nuclear power in the U.S., whether small or large, and we certainly won’t pay for it!

There are three bills the Senate Energy Committee is likely to consider on Thursday:

S. 512 would require the Secretary of Energy to carry out programs to develop and demonstrate two small modular nuclear reactor designs, one of 300 MW maximum and one of 50 MW maximum. By comparison, new reactors being ordered by utilities are 1,000 MW or more, but several problematic early U.S. reactors–like Yankee Rowe, Big Rock Point, LaCrosse and others–were actually smaller than 300 MW. Fukushima Unit 1 was only 460 MW–not a lot larger than these “small modular” reactors.

Here is a factsheet from our friends at IEER & PSR on some of the problems with “small modular reactors.”

S. 1067 would waste $250 million taxpayer dollars over the next five years on a hopeless effort: it would create a new Department of Energy program to try to reduce the manufacturing and construction costs of both large and small new reactors.

And the Committee also may resume consideration of CEDA (Clean Energy Deployment Administration) legislation. This would set up a “clean energy” bank to provide taxpayer loans and loan guarantees to eligible technologies. This legislation does not yet have a bill number, and we haven’t seen the full text yet. While there appears to be some improvement over earlier versions (it may not allow unlimited taxpayer loans), it still perpetuates the fiction that nuclear power and some types of coal are “clean energy.” Until these dirty and dangerous technologies are removed from the definition of clean energy, this type of legislation must be opposed. Otherwise, the “clean energy bank” will simply become another mechanism to channel taxpayer dollars into large, polluting and irresponsible companies that produce lethal radioactive waste, destroy mountains and generally are not deserving of any support.

You can take action here to tell the Senate that none of these bills are acceptable. Note: while only the Senate Energy Committee is considering these bills at this point, we are targeting the entire Senate because Senators do talk to each other…. But if one of your Senators is on the Energy Committee (list below), we encourage you to also call his/her office (202-224-3121) to register your opposition to these bills.

Finally, we want to thank everyone who has taken action over the past few months against President Obama’s proposal for a $36 Billion increase in the taxpayer loan program for new reactor construction (100,000 letters to Congress so far this year!). Your actions have been working: the good news is that the energy appropriations bill approved by the House Appropriations Committee does not contain any increase in the nuclear loan program! We will continue to monitor the situation closely as the bill goes to the House floor and through the Senate and let you know if there is a need to take more action.

Thanks for all you do,

Michael Mariotte
Executive Director
Nuclear Information and Resource Service
nirsnet@nirs.org

http://www.nirs.org/

No comments:

Post a Comment