stock here. I have been bird dogging this for years. Amazed that in 2011 summer, they did sampling and found that the radiation levels from Fukushima, in Alaska, had gone up as much as the 3 nuclear bomb tests they did on this island.
Triple nuked by Fukushima.
Then then "plan" was to wait 5 years until 2016 to test the sea plants and animals again.
They made a plan for the plan, and apparently carried out that plan, but now they have failed to report the results.
The results are as I expected, the bio-multiplication, the concentration factor, was so high that they simply had to cover up the results.
------------------------------------
You can see them rehashing the 2011 data in this 2015 conference
Shameful, and criminal in nature.
https://www.lm.doe.gov/Amchitka/S12630_SAP.pdf
You can see "some" of their testing on this general aggregator site....
https://www.lm.doe.gov/Amchitka/Documents.aspx
-------------------------------------- So why the lack of reporting of the 2016 monitoring event? Here is my article on the 2011 monitoring event.
The bottom
line....Fukushima had the same impact from 2000 miles away, that a large
nuclear bomb would have going off at ground zero. Read
it, hard to believe, but true. They did in fact have three large
nuclear bombs go off here, so the comparison is easy, and unusual in the
ability to make the comparison. Sheesh, bombs just have like 16
pounds of uranium and plutonium. Fukushima had over 200,000 lbs.
http://www.nukepro.net/2014/01/further-analysis-on-2011-alaska.html
----------------------------------------------------------
I did find the chief researcher who has since moved, but he put me in touch with the new team leader who explained that a series of problems with the measurement methods and data has pushed back release until late 2018 (for a 2016 survey).
No comments:
Post a Comment
Insightful and Relevant if Irreverent Comments