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
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumPost-Fukushima, Japan's irradiated fish worry B.C. experts
--- from 2011 would love to know the latest numbers
http://www.straight.com/life/post-fukushima-japans-irradiated-fish-worry-bc-experts
In June, 56 percent of Japanese fish catches tested by the Japanese government were contaminated with ce-sium-137 and -134. (Both are human-made radioactive isotopesproduced through nuclear fissionof the element cesium.)
And 9.3 percent of the catches exceeded Japans official ceiling for cesium, which is 100 becquerels per kilogram (Bq/kg). (A becquerel is a unit of radioactivity equal to one nuclear disintegration per second.)
Radiation levels remain especially high in many species that Japan has exported to Canada in recent years, such as cod, sole, halibut, landlocked kokanee, carp, trout, and eel.
Of these species, cod, sole, and halibut, which are oceanic species, could also be fished by other nations that export their Pacific Ocean catch to Canada.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 1408 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (1)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Post-Fukushima, Japan's irradiated fish worry B.C. experts (Original Post)
flamingdem
Mar 2013
OP
If you check DU there were posts last week regarding the levels not going down
flamingdem
Mar 2013
#2
Gregorian
(23,867 posts)1. Holy shit. That's far worse than I ever imagined it would be.
So we can probably expect a rise in cancer.
edit- oops, I see it's from 2011. Well, it would be interesting to see current numbers. I'll just leave my rec, even though this doesn't reflect on present contamination levels.
flamingdem
(39,308 posts)2. If you check DU there were posts last week regarding the levels not going down
because the leaks continue.
Nothing so specific as this article, I'll post again if I find something.
FBaggins
(26,721 posts)4. There were "posts" that said that... but not facts.
Not the "because" part.
The scientists gave a couple possibilities for why the level hasn't come down. "Continued leaks" is only one of them (and it doesn't make sense).
For someone who must have posted 100 statements including "bioaccumulation"... you don't seem to actually believe in it.
FBaggins
(26,721 posts)3. Seriously? Then you need to adjust your imagination.
What would you imagine the bq/kg radiation rate is on a normal fish that's never exposed to any nuclear fission byproducts?