British researcher blasts U.N. report on Fukushima cancer risk as unscientific


A British scientist who studied the health effects of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster panned a United Nations report that virtually dismissed the possibility of higher cancer rates caused by the 2011 Fukushima nuclear crisis.

Keith Baverstock, 73, made the comments during a visit to Tokyo at the invitation of a citizens group related to the Fukushima disaster.

In response to questions from The Asahi Shimbun, Baverstock said a report released in April by the U.N. Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) was “not qualified to be called ‘scientific’” because it lacked transparency and independent verification. He added that the committee should be disbanded.

The U.N. report said any increase in overall cancer rates among residents of Fukushima Prefecture due to fallout from the accident was unlikely.

However, Baverstock, former head of the radiation-protection program at the World Health Organization’s Regional Office for Europe, said radiation levels shown in the report were enough to cause a spike in cancer rates.

For example, the report said nearly 10,000 workers at the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant were exposed to radiation levels exceeding 10 millisieverts over about 18 months following the outbreak of the crisis in March 2011.

Baverstock said such an exposure level was enough to cause an increase in cancer among about 50 of the workers.

After studying the health effects from the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, Baverstock was the first to point out an increase in thyroid cancer among residents of areas hit by radioactive fallout.

He also questioned UNSCEAR’s neutrality, given that members are nominated by nations that have a vested interest in nuclear power. He noted that such nations provide funds to the committee.

Baverstock also suggested a conflict of interest, as committee members are not required to disclose their history working in the nuclear industry or sign pledges stating that no conflict of interest exists in evaluating radiation risks.

Baverstock said that when he was working for the WHO, he felt constant pressure from the International Atomic Energy Agency, a major promoter of nuclear power. He also questioned why it took more than three years for UNSCEAR to release its Fukushima report.

Referring to what he called inside information, Baverstock raised the possibility that the delay was caused by criticism about the report’s conclusion and the influence of other U.N. agencies, such as the IAEA.

‘Chernobyl Disaster City’ captured for first time in incredible drone footage


Incredible drone footage has been released that shows the abandoned remains of Pripyat, a Ukrainian city that was completely evacuated in the aftermath of the Chernobyl Disaster.

Pripyat once boasted 49,000 residents, 25 shops and 10 gymnasiums. However, it was completely abandoned after the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant suffered an explosion in 1986.

Drone footage captured by British photographer Danny Cooke provides a harrowing insight into how Pripyat looks nearly thirty years later.

The footage shows a ghost city that has been frozen in time, still displaying much of the Soviet iconography that embodied the USSR during the Cold War period.

It also shows how the city has become a place of neglect with many of the streets and buildings overrun by trees.

The eerie images show a fairground littered with rusty dodg’ems, a disused ferris wheel, a room filled with gas masks and rows upon rows of abandoned blocks of flats.

Devon-based documentary maker Cooke was able to film the footage, titled Postcards from Pripyat, while filming a 60 Minutessegment for the American news network CBS.

Cooke used his spare time to go out and fly his DJI Phantom 2 drone and camera to capture aerial shots of the empty city.

Commenting on the footage, Cooke wrote on Vimeo: “Chernobyl is one of the most interesting and dangerous places I’ve been.

“There was something serene, yet highly disturbing about this place,” he added. “Time has stood still and there are memories of past happenings floating around us.

“The nuclear disaster, which happened in 1986 (the year after I was born), had and effect on so many people, including my family when we lived in Italy. I can’t imagine how terrifying it would have been for the hundreds of thousands of locals who evacuated.”

The Chernobyl disaster in April 1986 was one of the world’s worst nuclear accidents. The explosion and subsequent fire led to a number of harmful radioactive particles being released into the air and contaminating much of the surrounding areas with lethal levels of radiation, leading to acute radiation syndrome and long-term illnesses such as thyroid cancer.

Pripyat, which is situated just nine miles away from the Chernobyl Power Plant, was completely evacuated within days of the disaster, with the majority of the city’s residents being re-housed in the city of Slavutich.

The town has been largely empty since 1986 due to fears of lingering radiation. Recently however, it has been deemed safe for those that are visiting for short periods of time.

watch the video. URL:  http://vimeo.com/112681885

Data proves Fukushima has exceeded Chernobyl in radiation release.


The cumulative amount of radiation released from Fukushima already exceeds that of the infamous 1986 Chernobyl disaster, says a new study published in the journal Nature — and the damage, of course, is still ongoing.

Chernobyl

Scientists from Japan, after testing radiation concentrations in various spots throughout the Pacific Ocean and on land, found that at least 120 petabecquerels (PBq), or 120 quadrillion becquerels (Bq), of radioactive cesium-134 (Cs-134) and cesium-137 (Cs-137) have been released by Fukushima just into the world’s oceans.

This figure is 11 percent higher than the total amount of radioactive cesium released by Chernobyl on both land and water, illustrating the true severity of the Fukushima disaster that the mainstream media is concealing from the public.

According to the study, researchers analyzed data collected at numerous measuring stations located throughout the North Pacific Ocean and elsewhere where Fukushima radiation was released. Though incomplete, this data was used to come up with radiation release estimates that account for the spread of contaminated water via ocean currents.

Based on these models, it was determined that up to 46 PBq of Cs-134 was released into the North Pacific Ocean following Fukushima. However, the study also says that the 6 PBq of Cs-134 definitively identified in the study area may represent as little as 10 percent of the overall release, bumping this figure to 60 PBq of Cs-134.

Combined with the total estimated release of Cs-137, the study authors concluded that up to 120 PBq of both types of radioactive cesium were released just into the North Pacific Ocean following the Fukushima disaster. Compared to the 108 PBq of radioactive cesium released during Chernobyl, this represents an 11 percent greater amount.

Fukushima: hands-down the worst nuclear disaster in history

But it is important to note here that the 108 PBq figure for Chernobyl includes radiation deposited on both land and sea. In the case of Fukushima, the 120 PBq figure only accounts for radiation released into water, and specifically water circulating in the North Pacific Ocean — the total amount of Fukushima radiation released on both land and sea is likely orders of magnitude higher than this figure.

“A report by the Nuclear [Energy] Agency states that when more detailed deposition data eventually became available, the United Nations estimated the total Chernobyl release of 137CS at 70 PBq,” explains ENENews.com.

“134Cs is estimated to have been 53.7% of the 137Cs — approximately 38 PBq of 134Cs — resulting in a total of 108 PBq. Unlike the Fukushima total… this does include all 134Cs and 137Cs releases from Chernobyl — not just what was deposited in the ocean.”

The implications of this are astounding, as Chernobyl has long been regarded as one of the worst nuclear disasters in history. The exclusion zone surrounding Chernobyl is still mostly deserted, having displaced hundreds of thousands of people, and readings still show high levels of radiation near the plant.

And yet the Chernobyl disaster clearly pales in comparison to Fukushima. Not only is Fukushima far more of a threat to humanity due to its direct proximity to the ocean, but the most credible data we have shows that, in the aftermath, Fukushima is spreading far more radiation across the globe than Chernobyl ever could.

Even worse is the fact that the 120 PBq figure does not take into account all the other radioactive isotopes like strontium, plutonium and uranium that have been spreading through the air and water since 2011 when the disaster occurred. Taking all these other contaminants into account paints an even more dire picture of what the world has to look forward to.

Sources:

http://www.nature.com

http://enenews.com

http://triblive.com

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/047053_Fukushima_Chernobyl_radiation.html#ixzz3EoIeU9Gl

Fukushima cleanup efforts put northern hemisphere on alert.


At an estimated cost of $150 billion, the Fukushima nuclear power plant ‘cleanup’ efforts have suspicious ties to organized crime and many on-site workers lack the required expertise to handle such nuclear disasters safely or effectively. With over 7 layers of poorly-supervised sub-contractors, like Tepco, Kajima and Obayashi Corp. – workers are routinely being exposed, in less than 1 hour, to deadly levels of radiation. But, there’s more to this story and the truth needs to be told.

An unprecedented threat to humanity is about to unfold – in the next 18 months. Contractors, already proven to be incompetent, plan to move a huge stock-pile of damaged (highly-radioactive) fuel rods to ‘safer’ ground. Once you understand the magnitude of this project – you quickly realize what’s at stake.

On the next NaturalNews Talk Hour – we expose the unspoken truth about Fukushima and what you can do to protect yourself from radiation exposure. This important health show includes a comprehensive 4-step program to protect you from radiation damage. Don’t ignore the risks – learn more now.

Chernobyl is warning humanity about the dangers of nuclear power

Medical epidemiologists have already documented that Chernobyl’s total radioactive release – over 20 years (1986-2006) – killed about one million people and injured eight million more. We now know, from confirmed data, that the Fukushima accident has already released 6 times the radiation of the entire Chernobyl event – to date. This highly-toxic radiation has gone into the east-Asian aquifer (Japanese water table and the northern Pacific Ocean), as well as the atmosphere of the northern hemisphere.

27 years later, the Chernobyl nuclear meltdown continues to contaminate the food supply of unsuspecting consumers and has laid waste to huge areas throughout Eastern Europe. Most of the devastating effects have not even been reported – until now – and, no doubt Europeans will suffer the health consequences for hundreds of years. In terms of the Fukushima disaster, it’s almost unimaginable what the fallout will be to all life on this planet.

Get the facts about Fukushima and how to protect yourself from radiation poisoning. Visit: http://www.naturalhealth365.com and enter your email address for show details + FREE gifts!

It’s time to wake up – the Japanese people (and the world) are in for a big surprise

Humanity seems to have an insatiable need to feel ‘normal’ – especially after horrible events like 9/11 and Fukushima. But, as noble as it may appear to put terrible episodes behind us, we can’t neglect even bigger threats ahead of us. For generations to come, highly-toxic radioactive particles like, Cs-137 and Strontium-90 will cause a staggering number of cancers, injury and death to millions of people – worldwide. Those ‘in the know’ must do everything in their power to protect themselves and share this news with family and friends.

On an individual level, I encourage you to consume adequate amounts of selenium, clean sources of seaweed, non-GMO vitamin C, melatonin, bee pollen, chlorella, mushroom extracts plus, naturally, lots of fresh, raw and organic vegetable juices. If you live in the northern hemisphere – these preventative measures are a must and, if you suffer from health problems, seek immediate help from a qualified healthcare professional with experience in ‘regenerative medicine’.

The next NaturalNews Talk Hour features one of the most intelligent and compassionate healthcare providers in the United States. This is our strongest health alert of the year – join us for a life-saving event.

This week’s guest: John Apsely, MD(E), DC, ND – an expert in regenerative medicine

Find out how to protect yourself from radiation exposure – Sun. Nov. 10

Dr. John Apsley holds degrees in medicine – MD(E), chiropractic – DC, and nutrition – BS. His board certifications include: Acupuncture and Meridian Therapy, Spinal Disability Evaluator (CSDE), and Insurance Claims Reviewer (IRC). He is also a qualified instructor of Electrodermal Scanning as well as Darkfield Microscopy.

Dr. Apsley has written or co-authored five books, including a best seller entitled – The Regeneration Effect and, his latest work, Fukushima Meltdown and Radiation: Protecting Ourselves and Future Generations. Additionally, he has published and lectured extensively on the clinical applications of human regenerative techniques in medicine (Applied Colloidal Therapeutics? – ACT?).

This is an urgent wake-up call for humanity! In the next 18 months, Fukushima workers plan to move huge stock-piles of highly radioactive fuel rods to ‘safer ground’. This never-before-attempted work holds the fate of humanity in their hands. On the next NaturalNews Talk Hour, learn the truth about Fukushima – like you’ve never heard plus ways to protect yourself from radiation poisoning.

Source: naturalnews.com

Fission Power: The Pros, the Cons, and the Math.


The process of nuclear fission was first discovered in 1938; however, it wasn’t fully explained until a year later. Today – less than 100 years after its initial discovery – it is the poster child of the ‘green energy’ movement (and not in a good way) that is sweeping across the globe.  Most of what we hear about the pitfalls of using fission technology are sensationalist, but there is no doubt that this process has led to nuclear disasters. Recently, reports have stated that the radioactivity level spiked to a level 6,500 times higher than the legal limit at Fukushima, and issues continue to presist in that area. This process has also been linked to  non-localized devastation. During Chernobyl, the Soviet government evacuated about 115,000 people from the most heavily contaminated areas in 1986; however, another 220,000 people had to be evacuated from surrounding areas in subsequent years.

Credit: U.S. NRC

Now, there is a huge debate amongst people as to whether governments world-wide should pursue the continuation of developing safer nuclear power plants, or if it should be scrapped  all together in place of something that is perceived as “safer.” Given the overall importance of the debate to the environment and to our exponentially growing energy needs, everyone should have a proper understanding of the topic; however, for the most part – very few people have more than a very basic understanding of the science and mathematics behind the process. In this article, I want to attempt a more thorough explanation than you may have read before.

Atomic Fission:

Nuclear Fission (Source)

As most of you will hopefully be aware of, nuclear fission is a chain reaction involving large, unstable nuclei. This chain reaction ignites when a neutron collides with another neutron, resulting in it becoming even more unstable – before one nucleus  divides into two ‘daughter’ nuclei and (on average) 3 more neutrons. After which, the additional neutrons go on to initiate another fission reaction with those they come in contact with. Those neutrons then incite a reaction between other neutrons and so on and so forth (like the domino effect). The most common fuel used for fission is Uranium -235 (that’s 92 protons and 143 neutrons), and the 2 products (plus neutrons) of this reaction could be a range of sized nuclei.

As with any reaction/equation, when broken up, the final number must still sum to what you started with, and this is also true of fission reactions. Ultimately, the total number of nucleons (protons and neutrons) after fission, in whichever new combinations, must still add up to the original number.

hamster15n-1-web

So what good is fission to us? Well it produces energy of course! But where does this energy actually come from? I mentioned that the number of protons and neutrons remains the same, and that they are just rearranged into more stable combinations; this is true. However, when adding up the total masses before and after, you will find that the mass will DECREASE. Said decrease in mass is the answer to our question, as the lost mass is converted into pure energy.

With a little prior knowledge (and a very familiar equation), we can calculate the amount of energy produced. An example goes as follows… (warning, complicated math is contained below)

Let us take this reaction:

1 neutron + Uranium-235 à Strontium – 98 + Xenon – 136 + 3 neutrons (Rounded values in relative atomic mass)
  • Mass before = 236.053u
  • Mass after = 235.840u
  • Mass change = 0.213u

To convert this result into kilograms, we multiply the number by 1.661×10^-27 (the mass in kilograms of a nucleon). So:

0.213 x (1.661×10^-27) = 3.538×10^-26kg

Next, using E=MC^2 we can convert this mass into energy (using the rounded value for C)

(3.538×10^-26) x (3×10^8)^2 = 3.18×10^-11J

This isn’t a very large amount of energy – but remember that this is just for a single atom of Uranium! So suppose we could persuade it to fission completely, how much energy would be produced for one gram of Uranium? Since we know how much energy is produced by one atom of uranium, to find the energy produced by one gram, all we need to do is know how many atoms are in a gram. To figure this out, we use Avogadro’s constant, which is equal to the number of atoms of any element in one mole of that element. That number is 6.022×10^23, and we use it in the following equation (probably more familiar to chemists than physicists)

Number of atoms = (mass x Avogadro’s no.) /molar mass Therefore the number of atoms in a gram of Uranium can be calculated as:

(0.001kg x 6.022×10^23)/0.236053 = 2.55×10^21

Now we can multiply this number by the amount of energy produced by a single fission reaction and we get:

(2.55×10^21)x(3.18×10^-11) = 8.11×10^10J

This is a HUGE amount of energy for just a single gram of fuel. Especially when compared to the amount of energy generated by coal or oil, and remains the reason why Uranium is so widely used (despite the potential dangers). Ultimately, The amount of free energy contained in nuclear fuel is millions of times the amount of free energy contained in a similar mass of chemical fuel, such as gasoline. Moreover, the process of decomposition produces a huge amount of heat, a large volume of heavy element atoms, and a lot of neutrons. In addition to these products, the nuclear fission also produces a big volume of radioactive waste. Obviously, this waste needs to be disposed of, as it could cause serious destruction to the environment, should it leak. Proper storage is extravagantly expensive.

But of course, there are a number of advantages to this kind of power. Getting rid of our dependence on fossil fuels is probably the biggest advantage of nuclear power. Power plants that burn coal are highly destructive to the environment (whereas nuclear fission is really only destructive if there is a leak or meltdown). Moreover, the mining process destroys vast swatches of Earth, including a number of diverse habitats. There is also the issue of oil spills (we all probably remember the infamous BP contamination of the Gulf). More importantly, the nuclear fuel used is much more efficient and found in abundance. Large reserves of uranium are spread in many parts of the world. Scientific estimates suggest that the rate at which the fossil fuel are being used today, their reserves are bound to become empty by the end of this century. Yet, the byproducts of the fission process remain radioactive for thousands of years and can cause serious harm to living beings. Although the chances are rare, a nuclear power disaster can decimate a habitat/ecosystem (depending on the size and nature of the disaster).

In the end, it is each individual’s responsibility to acquire the knowledge necessary to make decisions and be informed. Hopefully, this post helped you start (or continue) this journey of discovery.

Chernobyl’s legacy recorded in trees.


Exposure to radiation from the 1986 Chernobyl accident had a lasting negative legacy on the area’s trees, a study has suggested.

Researchers said the worst effects were recorded in the “first few years” but surviving trees were left vulnerable to environmental stress, such as drought.

 

They added that young trees appeared to be particularly affected.

Writing in the journal Trees, the team said it was the first study to look at the impact at a landscape scale.

“Our field results were consistent with previous findings that were based on much smaller sample sizes,” explained co-author Tim Mousseau from the University of South Carolina, US.

“They are also consistent with the many reports of genetic impacts to these trees,” he told BBC News.

“Many of the trees show highly abnormal growth forms reflecting the effects of mutations and cell death resulting from radiation exposure.”

Prof Mousseau, who has been carrying out field studies since 1999 within the 30km (19-mile) exclusion zone around the site of the 1986 explosion, said it was the first time that a study of this scale – involving more than 100 Scots pines (Pinus sylvestris) at 12 sites – had been conducted.

“There was one similar study conducted before but it only looked at a total of nine trees and was mainly interested in wood structure, not growth,” he said.

“Another study was performed in the 1950s but it was for a different tree in the US and it used a single external gamma source suspended above the ground to show growth effects for a very limited number of trees.”

For this study, the team took core samples from Scots pine trees for a number of reasons, such as the species is found across Europe and well dispersed within the Chernobyl region.

“They are also a favourite for silviculture and have enormous economic value,” Prof Mousseau added.

“Also, based on past work and our own observations, they appeared to be a good target for radioecology as they showed signs of being impacted by the fallout.

“In fact, one of the first ecological observations at Chernobyl was the death of the so-called red forest: a stand of these pines which very quickly died and turned red following the disaster.”

Scots pines’ tree rings were also easier to read than other species, such as birch, found in the study area, he explained.

Prof Mousseau and his team hope to follow up this study by carrying out similar work in the Fukushima region in Japan, where logging also had considerable economic importance and pine trees were widely dispersed.

“Based on our limited field observations in the most contaminated regions of Fukushima prefecture, there did not appear to be a major die off as seen in Chernobyl for Scots pines,” he said.

“However, anecdotally, we have noticed significant die off of growing tips and branches in some areas that suggests that there could be impacts on growth.

“This is worth further investigation.”

Source: BBC