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 Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Octafish

(55,745 posts)
50. Researchers find plutonium contamination from Fukushima in Europe...
Thu Feb 6, 2014, 04:57 PM
Feb 2014

in this report:



J Environ Radioact. 2011 Dec 27. (Epub ahead of print)

Radionuclides from the Fukushima accident in the air over Lithuania: measurement and modelling approaches.

Lujanienė G, Byčenkienė S, Povinec PP, Gera M.

Source : Environmental Research Department, SRI Center for Physical Sciences and Technology, Savanoriu 231, 02300 Vilnius, Lithuania.

Abstract

Analyses of (131)I, (137)Cs and (134)Cs in airborne aerosols were carried out in daily samples in Vilnius, Lithuania after the Fukushima accident during the period of March-April, 2011. The activity concentrations of (131)I and (137)Cs ranged from 12 μBq/m(3) and 1.4 μBq/m(3) to 3700 μBq/m(3) and 1040 μBq/m(3), respectively. The activity concentration of (239,240)Pu in one aerosol sample collected from 23 March to 15 April, 2011 was found to be 44.5 nBq/m(3). The two maxima found in radionuclide concentrations were related to complicated long-range air mass transport from Japan across the Pacific, the North America and the Atlantic Ocean to Central Europe as indicated by modelling. HYSPLIT backward trajectories and meteorological data were applied for interpretation of activity variations of measured radionuclides observed at the site of investigation. (7)Be and (212)Pb activity concentrations and their ratios were used as tracers of vertical transport of air masses. Fukushima data were compared with the data obtained during the Chernobyl accident and in the post Chernobyl period. The activity concentrations of (131)I and (137)Cs were found to be by 4 orders of magnitude lower as compared to the Chernobyl accident. The activity ratio of (134)Cs/(137)Cs was around 1 with small variations only. The activity ratio of (238)Pu/(239,240)Pu in the aerosol sample was 1.2, indicating a presence of the spent fuel of different origin than that of the Chernobyl accident.

SOURCE: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22206700



And another one:



Plutonium bioaccumulation in seabirds

Dagmara I. Strumińska-Parulska, Bogdan Skwarzec, Jacek Fabisiak

University of Gdańsk, Faculty of Chemistry, Analytics and Environmental Radiochemistry Chair, Sobieskiego 18, 80-952 Gdańsk, Poland

Received 7 April 2011. Revised 5 July 2011. Accepted 16 July 2011. Available online 23 August 2011.

The aim of the paper was plutonium (238Pu and 239+240Pu) determination in seabirds, permanently or temporarily living in northern Poland at the Baltic Sea coast. Together 11 marine birds species were examined: 3 species permanently residing in the southern Baltic, 4 species of wintering birds and 3 species of migrating birds. The obtained results indicated plutonium is non-uniformly distributed in organs and tissues of analyzed seabirds. The highest plutonium content was found in the digestion organs and feathers, the smallest in skin and muscles. The plutonium concentration was lower in analyzed species which feed on fish and much higher in herbivorous species. The main source of plutonium in analyzed marine birds was global atmospheric fallout.
Highlights

► We determined 239+240Pu in seabirds living in northern Poland at the Baltic Sea. ► We noticed plutonium was non-uniformly distributed in organs and tissues of seabirds. ► We found the highest plutonium content in the digestion organs and feathers. ► We found Pu content was lower in birds feeding on fish and higher in herbivorous.

SOURCE: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0265931X11001676



So, given that, I find it most disheartening to learn that research on fallout from Fukushima, does not get funded in the United States -- even after radioactive sulfur from Fukushima was monitored in Southern California.



Ocean water off La Jolla coast being monitored (and not) for Fukushima radiation

By Pat Sherman
La Jolla Light, Feb. 4, 2014

EXCERPT...

In 2011 Thiemens and a crew of UCSD atmospheric chemists reported the first quantitative measurement of the amount of radiation leaked from the damaged nuclear reactor in Fukushima, following the devastating earthquake and tsunami there.

Their estimate was based on radioactive sulfur that wafted across the Pacific Ocean after operators of the damaged reactor had to cool overheated fuel with seawater — causing a chemical reaction between byproducts of nuclear fission and chlorine ions in the saltwater.

Thiemens has, for the past several years, unsuccessfully sought to obtain grant funding to follow-up his research, first reported on Aug. 15 2011 in the online edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

However, he said neither the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Environmental Protection Agency, California Air Resources Board or National Academy of Sciences (of which he is a member) were interested in funding additional research to measure the Fukushima fallout.

“It’s probably one of these things that just fell through the cracks,” Thiemens said. “It doesn’t quite fall under classical (research criteria).”

CONTINUED...

http://www.lajollalight.com/2014/02/04/ocean-water-off-la-jolla-coast-being-monitored-for-fukushima-radiation/



So, there's that.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Thank you for posting valid science and not the crap we get from sources like "ENEnews". NYC_SKP Jan 2014 #1
hehehe.... SidDithers Jan 2014 #6
It is bad enough Gunderson has been spending time nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #9
Hahaha, skip RobertEarl Jan 2014 #30
As I mentioned in that thread, I hadn't seen the original when I wrote the reply. NYC_SKP Jan 2014 #32
10% more radiation? RobertEarl Jan 2014 #2
Because we all know these signs and symptoms nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #11
There is a line of extremely high ambient radiation Art_from_Ark Jan 2014 #39
People living in that area should be concerned highly nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #41
I eat the new TUNA fish. RobertEarl Jan 2014 #42
A poor attempt at sarcasm am afraid nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #44
Don't be afraid RobertEarl Jan 2014 #45
So what is the price of tea in china? nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #46
Hey Art RobertEarl Jan 2014 #43
Thanks for the New Year's greeting Art_from_Ark Jan 2014 #48
suggest you read again nilram Jan 2014 #25
It's time for Fuku to go in Creative Speculation. n/t ChisolmTrailDem Jan 2014 #3
That's weird RobertEarl Jan 2014 #4
It was done here to 9/11. Why not Fuku for the same reason? n/t ChisolmTrailDem Jan 2014 #7
It is well known how it happened RobertEarl Jan 2014 #8
You've misread it FBaggins Jan 2014 #10
Quote "...roughly one tenth the average daily dose " RobertEarl Jan 2014 #13
Wrong. Read the paper for yourself. X_Digger Jan 2014 #15
Notice what's missing from the quote? FBaggins Jan 2014 #16
Nice try zappaman Jan 2014 #17
For those wondering about FB RobertEarl Jan 2014 #27
Of course I would. I would also like to know if the presidency was stolen from Al Gore and ChisolmTrailDem Jan 2014 #12
You can't even read a quote in context right. *sigh* X_Digger Jan 2014 #14
Bananas? RobertEarl Jan 2014 #28
Bananas are bioaccumulators of potassium, including natural radioisotopes. X_Digger Jan 2014 #29
Bananas are healthy and good to eat, Digger RobertEarl Jan 2014 #31
I'm comparing radiation to radiation- you know, the part that actually harms you. X_Digger Jan 2014 #34
Radiation RobertEarl Jan 2014 #35
Oh for fuck's sake.. here.. X_Digger Jan 2014 #36
So I look at that page RobertEarl Jan 2014 #38
A highly charged particle *IS* ionizing radiation. X_Digger Jan 2014 #40
+1... SidDithers Jan 2014 #47
If it ever becomes a full-on DU drama-fest issue, I'll agree. 1000words Jan 2014 #24
DU rec for science... SidDithers Jan 2014 #5
No mention of Hot Particles. Octafish Jan 2014 #18
Nor should there be FBaggins Jan 2014 #21
Really? So how do you explain the plutonium found 25 miles from Fukushima? Octafish Jan 2014 #22
Does "minimal" now equal zero? FBaggins Feb 2014 #49
Researchers find plutonium contamination from Fukushima in Europe... Octafish Feb 2014 #50
Nope FBaggins Feb 2014 #51
The three articles are sourced. Why you can't see that is your business, not mine. Octafish Feb 2014 #52
You need to learn to understand what you read FBaggins Feb 2014 #53
I worry that coal and fracked natural gas are worse than nuclear power. hunter Jan 2014 #19
exactly... Takket Jan 2014 #37
Information, rather than speculation. MineralMan Jan 2014 #20
I did like the facts about the core meltdowns RobertEarl Jan 2014 #33
Thanks for posting 1000words Jan 2014 #23
That might change if another strong earthquake occurs near the reactor complex. ... spin Jan 2014 #26
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Fukushima; What You Shoul...»Reply #50