Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
96. Your link, jeff, is about mussels
Thu Oct 23, 2014, 05:26 PM
Oct 2014

Last edited Fri Oct 24, 2014, 06:59 PM - Edit history (1)

Not sea stars.

The item in question is about is the Dept. of Energy's results of sampling of mussels in the Aleutians, where increased amounts of plutonium were found above the 2004 tests. It also found cesium 134 in increased amounts and that was described as being from Fukushima. But hey, you know that Fukushima is spread around the N. Hemisphere.

From my journal is this about that testing:

http://www.lm.doe.gov/Amchitka/Sites.aspx

Title: Department of Energy: Biological Monitoring at Amchitka Appears to Show Impacts from Fukushima Dai-ichi Incident.

The U.S. Department of Energy Office Legacy Management (LM) has a long-term stewardship mission to protect human health and the environment from the legacy of underground nuclear testing conducted at Amchitka Island, Alaska, from 1965 to 1971. Atmospheric monitoring in the United States showed elevated cesium activities shortly after the nuclear incident. LM scientists anticipated that atmospheric transport of cesium would potentially increase the cesium activities in the 2011 biological samples collected near Amchitka. Because cesium-134 has a relatively short half-life of 2 years and indicates leakage from a nuclear reactor, it is a clear indicator of a recent nuclear accident.

Because the Amchitka 2011 sampling event occurred soon after the Fukushima nuclear accident, the biota impacted by atmospheric precipitation showed the greatest impact (e.g., species that live in freshwater or shallow ocean waters) when compared to marine biota living in deeper water. This is because ocean currents are a slower transport process than wind currents. LM scientists anticipate that the marine biota will show the impacts of Fukushima during the next sampling event, currently scheduled to occur in 2016.

(One snip from report about the amounts found pg 226)

* Plutonium-239 — 4.194 pCi/kg Horse Mussel tissue

Too late. zappaman Oct 2014 #1
He will be here soon enough to educate us... snooper2 Oct 2014 #2
That's ok, the radiation went back in time and killed us all already. jeff47 Oct 2014 #5
No, we all died during the Y2K disaster. MineralMan Oct 2014 #7
Sounds like progress. It's good to have some actual information MineralMan Oct 2014 #3
Safety is relative jeff47 Oct 2014 #4
Indeed FBaggins Oct 2014 #8
Very good, jeff RobertEarl Oct 2014 #79
Yes, the time traveling radiation has wiped out all life in the northern hemisphere jeff47 Oct 2014 #81
Huh? RobertEarl Oct 2014 #82
It's your theory. jeff47 Oct 2014 #83
Not my theory RobertEarl Oct 2014 #84
Already posted a link. From your topic in January jeff47 Oct 2014 #85
Close RobertEarl Oct 2014 #86
"The best I've ever done" being a thread I was in in January. jeff47 Oct 2014 #87
Now you are just rambling RobertEarl Oct 2014 #89
Nope. You're projecting, yet again. jeff47 Oct 2014 #90
So that is a yes. RobertEarl Oct 2014 #91
I did post a link in that post. jeff47 Oct 2014 #93
There was no link about RobertEarl Oct 2014 #94
Yes, there was. But might as well skip it, since you don't like it. jeff47 Oct 2014 #95
Your link, jeff, is about mussels RobertEarl Oct 2014 #96
Heh RobertEarl Oct 2014 #98
>99% <> 100% Orrex Oct 2014 #6
Listen to me. We've traced the radiation... it's coming from inside the house! FSogol Oct 2014 #23
Well, if you can't believe Tepco, who can you believe? gratuitous Oct 2014 #9
A few corrections FBaggins Oct 2014 #10
So, your information is outdated or bad, but my reading comprehension is poor? gratuitous Oct 2014 #12
Nope to the first... and yes to the second. FBaggins Oct 2014 #13
DU rec... SidDithers Oct 2014 #11
Ah... the classics. nt FBaggins Oct 2014 #14
So, in other words, a global catastrophe. NuclearDem Oct 2014 #15
Hey now... don't go putting words in their mouths. FBaggins Oct 2014 #16
ENENews RobertEarl Oct 2014 #17
An excellent example of how enenews twists reality in their reporting (sic) FBaggins Oct 2014 #21
How do you explain how the entire pacific coast has been radiated and even dolphins in the Atlantic zappaman Oct 2014 #29
Active imagination? FBaggins Oct 2014 #44
UN and Greenpeace say RobertEarl Oct 2014 #56
ENENews!!!! zappaman Oct 2014 #24
As expected. longship Oct 2014 #31
Took long enough zappaman Oct 2014 #32
Well, my friend. Sometimes the only appropriate response to ideology is ridicule. longship Oct 2014 #33
Good News. Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #18
Fukushima butterflies RobertEarl Oct 2014 #19
Not sure why you thought that was relevant to the thread... FBaggins Oct 2014 #20
It was debunked two years ago? RobertEarl Oct 2014 #22
Because it was written before and ENENews just decided to rerun it again for the gullible. zappaman Oct 2014 #26
Actually there has been a new study Generic Other Oct 2014 #38
Topic is removal of fuel rods RobertEarl Oct 2014 #41
Correction FBaggins Oct 2014 #42
It was just posted this year? FBaggins Oct 2014 #36
It's worse than you realize. Orrex Oct 2014 #25
LOL! zappaman Oct 2014 #27
Why do you hate science? RobertEarl Oct 2014 #28
Ironic post of the year! zappaman Oct 2014 #30
this one is indeed fabulous ProdigalJunkMail Oct 2014 #53
Here's a fabulous link RobertEarl Oct 2014 #63
My notions and emotions? Orrex Oct 2014 #35
They will fall for just about anything, won't they? FBaggins Oct 2014 #37
OMFG! First the sea stars, and now the butterflies! longship Oct 2014 #46
I was waiting for a post from you. LOL. nt Logical Oct 2014 #65
As we all were. zappaman Oct 2014 #68
First good Fukushima news we've heard Generic Other Oct 2014 #34
That's really the first you've heard? FBaggins Oct 2014 #39
You really think there has been "good news" coming out of Fukushima? Generic Other Oct 2014 #40
Certainly FBaggins Oct 2014 #43
You can't determine the magnitude of the problem Generic Other Oct 2014 #52
They have already come to a conclusion RobertEarl Oct 2014 #60
I have to agree with you here, Robert Generic Other Oct 2014 #74
Never heard of so much sickness & death in such a short period RobertEarl Oct 2014 #45
Please keep that FDS nonsense in creative speculation where it belongs. FBaggins Oct 2014 #47
The plural of anecdote is not data. longship Oct 2014 #48
"I would be building a bunker to hide in" zappaman Oct 2014 #49
Heh heh heh! longship Oct 2014 #50
The same. Always spewing the same crap. longship Oct 2014 #51
You are in violation of the TOS -- za RobertEarl Oct 2014 #55
Uh huh. zappaman Oct 2014 #57
And another: Libel RobertEarl Oct 2014 #69
Time to lawyer up I guess. zappaman Oct 2014 #70
So you've stopped denying that's you? LeftyMom Oct 2014 #59
It is? zappaman Oct 2014 #62
Xema and I were playing the Doomsday Preppers drinking game and saw him. LeftyMom Oct 2014 #64
Heh RobertEarl Oct 2014 #54
" Anyway, these report items are words for the wise. The rest of you, well, you're on your own." zappaman Oct 2014 #58
UN and Grenpeace say RobertEarl Oct 2014 #61
Please don't copypasta stupid crap all over the thread. LeftyMom Oct 2014 #66
Please share your credentials with us Generic Other Oct 2014 #77
I prefer an anti-nuke "hack" site Generic Other Oct 2014 #75
Who said everything's hunky dory? longship Oct 2014 #92
LOL, your usual source. nt Logical Oct 2014 #67
Source is RobertEarl Oct 2014 #71
Enenews nt Logical Oct 2014 #72
Post your sources RobertEarl Oct 2014 #78
Here's the thing RobertEarl Oct 2014 #73
Robert you don't have to defend yourself for caring Generic Other Oct 2014 #76
Thank you, Generic Other RobertEarl Oct 2014 #97
our eternal problem n/t librechik Oct 2014 #80
In short, nuclear power plants are too dangerous brentspeak Oct 2014 #88
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Fukushima - Unit 4 spent ...»Reply #96