An image from a model of the progression of a radioactive plume coming across the Pacific following the Fukushima nuclear meltdown. (via BBC News)A radioactive plume released from the Fukushima meltdown is expected to reach the west coast of the U.S. in April, said a panel of researchers in Honolulu Monday. However, without any federal or international monitoring, scientists are bereft of "actual data," guessing at the amount of radiation coming at us.
Monitors along the Pacific U.S. coast have yet to detect any traces of cesium-134, said Ken Buesseler, a chemical oceanographer at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI),speaking on a panel at the meeting of the American Geophysical Union's Ocean Sciences. However, sampling undertaken by Dr. John Smith at the Bedford Institute of Oceanographyhas helped develop models that forecast the "probable future progression of the plume."
According to Buesseler, initial traces should be detectable along the Pacific coast in April.
One of the radioactive isotopes that is formed during a nuclear accident is cesium-134. With a short half-life of two years, any traces of it detected by monitoring instruments can be specifically attributed to the Fukushima nuclear accident.
Another isotope, cesium-137, decays very slowly with a half-life of 30 years. Though traces of cesium-137 have been detected in the world's oceans, their source may be attributed to previous nuclear-weapons tests.
One shortcoming of the current models available to the scientists is that lack of solid data is creating varying predictions about the amount of radiation and when it is expected to reach the west coast. And though the estimated levels fall far shorter than acceptable drinking water concentrations, according to the WHOI, the concern is not direct exposure but rather the "uptake by the food web and, hence, the potential for human consumption of contaminated fish."
"To my mind, this is not really acceptable," said Buesseler, speaking of the variation between the predictive models. "We need better studies and resources to do a better job, because there are many reactors on coasts and rivers and if we can’t predict within a factor of 10 what cesium or some other isotope is downstream—I think that’s a pretty poor job."
Without any federal or international agencies currently monitoring ocean waters from Fukushima on this side of the Pacific, Buesseler and the WHOI have had to recruit volunteersto collect seawater at 16 sites along the California and Washington coasts and two in Hawaii and ship the samples back to the Cape Cod, Mass. laboratory.
"We need to know the real levels of radiation coming at us," said Bing Dong, a retired accountant and one of the volunteers with the WHOI project. "There's so much disinformation out there, and we really need actual data."
More Blacklisted News...
Calling for Contributors!Got something to say?
We want to hear from you.
Submit your article contributions and participate in the world's largest independent online news community today!