Japan to conduct radiation surveys at 600,000 points on seabed off Fukushima


The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2013 AFP

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

The problem with the seabed in the vicinity of Fukushima power plant is that those radioactive isotopes are damn heavy so they fall and settle on the seabed very close to the plant and don't spread in the Pacific like many would like to see that. The 'recultivation' of the seabed near the plant should be Japan's technology number one task for the upcoming 50 years after the leaks will cease.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

What about testing fish?

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Glad to hear they're doing this. I hope they will also test for strontium and plutonium as well while they're at it.

2 ( +2 / -0 )


it's my understanding that the biologic uptake of cesium as a salt replacement in the biosphere is by far the worst consequence and why it will take so long for the damage to be eradicated and why it will be so widespread versus other toxins but which are certainly toxic but less used by biology.

a minute amount can contaminate an area of Central Park, so having released a lot into the biosphere is terrible.

it will also be multiplied as larger organisms eat smaller infected organisms, creating higher concentrations. Hence why the entire Pacific as a fishery will be decimated.

As Japan eats more fish that pretty much any other country this will create a major blowback while other countries move away from contaminated food stocks

check out the audio about the effects from ecoshock podcasts. Titled "FUKUSHIMA NUCLEAR DISASTER - ONE YEAR LATER". This was particularly illuminating and far more informative than any newspaper could ever hope to be.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

that is an INSANELY large number of measuring points. it will take hundreds of people YEARS unless they have some way to deploy massive number of devices quickly.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

and if they will find hot spots, they will start empting Pacific Ocean?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

I would like to see this survey done by an independent body, not by the PMs lapdogs.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Considering past history, I have to wonder what the limits of the new monitoring equipment will be. We have already had one case of monitors that could not read as high as the radiation was. Also remember they keep trying to do this on the cheap, which has been part of the problem in the first place, the cheapest solution, not the best solution. that also assumes that there is a solution, which no one has been able to say so far. We have not had an accident on this scale before.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Well that's fine and dandy. Now what about small organisms and fish that get eaten by bigger fish which move around all over the ocean, which are then caught and get consumed by people? How does this help remedy that little problem?

0 ( +5 / -5 )

As stated above, most of the isotopes stay local, but there are others that don't. It is also conceivable that some fish species are accumulating isotopes further up the food chain, but people have to remember that, the harm done by radiation is by prolonged exposure and accumulated intake, therefor, even if you do eat a fish that has some contamination it will not cause you any harm. However, if you were to eat contaminated fish every day over a period of time then that would be sufficient to cause health problems. I'm not saying there is no need for concern, but there is no need to panic either.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Disillusioned, about half of the small dose of radiation contamination consumed humans get eventually expelled out the body through defecation and urination, within three months. But the other half does not ever. They stay in the body. So even a small intake of contamination is going to be very harmful in the long run, especially if they build up in the body through lifetime of eating contaminated food.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Its about time.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Radioactive isotopes always create cancer cells. X rays, cat scans, ingestion of any sealife. Bad!!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I guess the result of this experiment will be that: "despite the leakage of substancial amounts of irradiated water into the ocean, the representative sample in this extensive research indicates that the radio active elements could not be detected in the ocean and therefore the ocean is healthy and its fauna and flona are safe even to eat. Even if we increased the amount of the irradiated water we pour into the ocean, the water body is too big to be affected".

2 ( +2 / -0 )

this is not the first time radioactive are dumped into the sea. <><>

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I wonder if they'll be using measuring devices that record accurately.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Place your bets on how much of the data from this survey will be doctored and/or redacted, and how much of it will actually be released to the public.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

****Scientific estimates predict that the radioactive plume travelling east across the Pacific will likely hit the shores of Oregon, Washington State and Canada early next year. California will probably be impacted later that year. Because the ongoing flow of water from the reactor site will be virtually impossible to stop, a radioactive plume will continue to migrate across the Pacific affecting Hawaii, North America, South America and eventually Australia for many decades.

We are only talking about ocean currents, however, fish swim thousands of miles and don’t necessarily follow the currents. As noted in Part I, big fish concentrate radiation most efficiently, and tuna have already been caught off the coast of California containing cesium from Fukushima. Seaweed also efficiently concentrates radioactive elements.*****

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites