This week, the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) released a major report about the health effects of the Fukushima disaster; in fact, I think the report was released on April Fool’s Day, which seems quite appropriate. I say this because it’s highly reminiscent of the somewhat infamous United Nations Chernobyl Report, originally published in 2005, which stated: A total of up to 4000 people could eventually die of radiation exposure from the Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident (here). There’s a mountain of peer reviewed studies that show this statement to be completely mendacious, everything from the 2006 TORCH Report, which stated that there would be up to 60,000 cancer deaths, to Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment, which draws on thousands and thousands of studies and concludes there will be up to 1,000,000 deaths.
Incidentally, all these estimates are only short term, because many of these man-made radionuclides remain lethal for 10s of thousands, 100s of thousands, millions, and even billions of years. They don’t go away or ‘disapear’, and will keep killing living things over and over again, ad infinitum. This is the crap that the loons and psychos, otherwise known as the Nuclear Priesthood, are releasing into our environment.
But let’s get back to this latest report from UNSCEAR, which states that there will be very little extra cancer deaths as a result of the Fukushima disaster. This statement is so patently ridiculous that it’s barely worth responding to. The problem is, the mainstream media give head to these bare-faced lies and propagate them (you can find an example from Reuters here). So, bods like me have to try and counterbalance the narrative. The UNSCEAR report is more than 300 pages long (you can find it here). Here’s a paragraph from page 47 of the PDF document:
Terada et al. estimated the release rates of 131I and 137Cs as a function of time. These two radionuclides, together with 134Cs, made by far the largest contribution to the exposure of the public. Other radionuclides that could have contributed significantly were also included in the source term and comprise other radioisotopes of iodine and caesium, 132Te and 133 Xe. The release rate pattern for the other radionuclides was derived in general by considering the amounts of these radionuclides relative to 131I or 137Cs in the estimated inventories of the three reactors and their relative levels in environmental measurements. A large number of radioisotopes of other elements would also have been released, with their relative amounts determined by their volatility. For example, the volatilities of strontium, barium and plutonium are much lower than those of iodine and caesium; consequently, their releases were relatively much lower. This was confirmed by measurements of their levels in the environment (14).This contrasts markedly with the Chernobyl accident, where much larger fractions of the less volatile elements (e.g. strontium and plutonium) were released directly to the atmosphere.
The footnote in the above paragraph is this:
14. The release of each of three radionuclides, 238Pu, 239Pu and 240Pu, has been estimated to be about 1 GBq [Z5]. Their contribution to exposure of the public would have been insignificant.
131I = iodine 131, whilst 137C = cesium 137, etc, and the ‘Pu’ in the footnote stands for plutonium. ‘1GBq’ is 10 billion Becquerels (that’s 10,000,000,000), and this figure is given here without much context (per kilogram? per litre? per metre? per what?). The ‘Becquerel’ is a unit that counts the number of disintegrations per second (the more disintegrations, the more radioactive something is). As a rough guide, 1 Becquerel gives off enough energy to flip over a single grain of sand. Here’s the final 6 minutes of a 17 minute video released by Fairewinds Energy Education, obviously timed to coincide with the UNSCEAR report. The Fairewinds video is called ‘The Hottest Particle’, presented by Marco Kaltofen, and highlights the most radioactive particle found so far in Japan (at least as far as the public knows). The video explains it all, but bear in mind the figure of 10,000,000,000 Becquerels given in the UNSCEAR report. The particle that Marco Kaltofen analysed was disintegrating at 40,000,000,000,000,000,000 Becquerels per kilogram, and it was collected 300 miles / 400 Km from the Fukushima plant. If this kind of crap gets inside your body your chances aren’t good. Remember, one Becquerel has the energy to flip a single grain of sand. Imagine what damage trillions of Becquerels would do to your cells…
The complete video can be found here.
You’ll notice that in the above quote from the UNSCEAR report they say: This contrasts markedly with the Chernobyl accident, where much larger fractions of the less volatile elements (e.g. strontium and plutonium) were released directly to the atmosphere. This is the meme with the nuke brigade, that Fukushima is never as bad as Chernobyl, despite the fact that it’s quite apparent that the opposite’s the case. It’s as though they can’t admit to the concept that neoliberal radiation can be worse than communist radiation; but the nuke brigade have always been a psychiatrist’s dream.
I’ll finish with a BBC news piece from 14th March 2011, which was three days after the Fukushima disaster began. In this post you can find models of the Fukushima radioactive plumes from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). It was bad, folks, yet the lies that the nuke shill comes out with in this broadcast have continued right up to the present day…