Where am I going with this post? Simple, to find a way to easily estimate bio-accumulation of radiation in plants and animals.
Actually, I start with 13 Bq/M3 and end up with 10.7 Bq/kG in porpoises.
So the rule of thumb is that it almost an equal quantity for higher echelon animals
For plants, the conversion is "about half"
And of course, the Bq/kG is for the whole animal, whereas rads
congregate in specific organs, etc. 10.7 in the whole animal could be
50 Bq/kG in the heart….a proven danger level.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Usually radiation in water is measured in Bq/Meter Cubed, or Bq/L
The meter cubed number is 1000 times larger than the L based unit, because there are 1000 Liters per Meter Cubed.
Scientists use a "concentration factor" to express how various animals /plants on the food chain bioaccumulate various toxins.
CF=Concentration Factor= Bq/kg Wet Weight divided by Bq/Liter of Seawater
Manipulating this equation (multiply both sides by Bq/L) gives
Bq/kG Wet Weight = CF * Bq/L
or
Bq/kG Wet Weight = CF *Bq/M3 (Meter Cubed)/ 1000
from the Charts Below, a good rule of thumb is to take wet weight and divide by 5 for fish, divide by 8 for plants to get dry weight.
Usually it is Dry Weight Bq/kG reported in flora and fauna because you can't measure the radiation until you remove the water first.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our Most Important Formulas Then Become
Bq/kG Dry Weight = CF * Bq/L * 5 (Animals)
Bq/kG Dry Weight = CF * Bq/L * 8 (Plants)
or
Bq/kG Dry Weight = CF * Bq/M3 (Meter Cubed)* 5 (Animals) /1000
Bq/kG Dry Weight = CF * Bq/M3 (Meter Cubed)* 8 (Plants) /1000
the CF Concentration Factor is what we need to get from scientific studies, per the below, its around 10 for krill, around 165 for porpoises
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample Calculation, using CS-137 at 13 Bq/M3 per Kenny Boy Buessler in 2015
Porpoise
165 * 13 *5 /1000 = 10.7 Bq/kG
stock here---now you folks can easily deal with bioaccumulation issues.
This study from 2003 shows significant Concentration Factors even when in a "dilute solution" of CS-137
The contents of (137)Cs in the different organisms were generally low
(<1 Bq kg(-1) wet weight), but a marked bioaccumulation was apparent:
The concentration of (137)Cs was about 10-fold higher in the harbour
porpoise Phocoena phocoena, representing the upper level of the food
web, than in the amphipod Themisto sp., representing the lower level of
the food web. The Concentration Factors (CF=Bq kg(-1) wet weight/Bq
l(-1) seawater) increased from 10+/-3 for a mixed sample of krill and
amphipods to 165+/-5 for harbour porpoises.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12527234
Plenty of studies of bioaccumulation
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16154620
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10507144
Here is one source on conversion of wet weight to dry weight
Here is one from Amchitka and Kiska
Here is a 2011 summer report from DOE on Amchitka
https://app.box.com/s/rt4g13nxvqyljfqxmdxt
They set off 3 bombs on Amchitka (after open air testing was stopped)
----------------------------------------
Per oldster, selenium in diet can reduce retained mercury in fishes
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es202565g?src=recsys&journalCode=esthag&
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goddard sure is getting a lot of exposure. Its not helping the anti
nuke cause. With his well done videos and seemingly good science,
Goddard 'debunks' Caldicott and Busby and Mangano. The LNT model is not
good, the science not inclusive. Its very convincing to look at charts
like that. But for example,
the bystander effect can kill 50 times as
many cells as those which received an actual radiation track exposure.
Its very complex.
Busby reveals another effect, the 'Secondary
Photoelectron Effect Theory'.
There is genomic instability which is not
seen in dose response graphs. Goddard's well done videos show us what
we are up against. Linear thinking, linear logic, wrong logic….
CodeShutdown
yes stock.
I have been meaning to follow up in two ways. Somewhere there is a
mother trove of bioaccumulation data, a large paper. Secondly, there is a
paper from Buesseler et al that shows bioaccumulation measurements for
plankton. It appears much less than I expected. The problem is that
even with the bioaccumulation, it isnt enough to account for the massive
die off which is being seen. We've discussed that the dead stuff falls
to the bottom leaving an apparently cleaner water and less contaminated
plankton that take their place. But the total path must be very
complicated. I used the analogy that you cant shoot somebody and expect
the damage to remain isolated to the bullet wound…even though the
tissues far away would remain clinically free from damage.
Bioaccumulation is one factor, but the form of the fallout is another. A
large percent is in the form of alloyed nano particles, giving point
source radiation and heavy metals in a form that can lodge deep in lung
and body tissue. Im sure there are other factors never considered.
Water has a way of forming information loaded super molecules
surrounding everything. One cant isolate a biomolecule or any molecule
from the water around it which is forming a kind of liquid crystal with
changes in the hydrogen bond angle. Such a thing is theorized to
underlie homeopathic remedies.
Science is not smart enough to
understand homeopathy but it works.
A study from some east European country where they do a lot of
investigation into this kind of thing showed bio-information transfer on
magnetic fields. Disease and or repair bio signals can be transferred
from one organism to another via magnetic fields. One cant isolate, as
is our propensity, one thing from another in the vast web of life on
earths biosphere. Poison one part of the earth and the whole thing will
be affected in ways known and not known. Its the unknown ways that
egocentric man has a hard time accepting. Your way around it is
epidemiology. But cause and effect is the difficulty there. If science
cant see the connection, they will throw out cause and effect. I'm
afraid man is in over his head with global poisoning of our little
planet. Hubris and greed and small mindedness is the wall which I think
will obscure the truth well into the destruction of the ecosphere,
perhaps sealing our fate. On the other hand, there is a tendency for
anti nukers to throw up their hands and say everything is poisoned to
the ELE degree. I believe that if nuclear was ended here and now, the
biosphere could self remediate to some degree and life go on…albeit an
earth permanently wounded
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CodeShutdown
stock
The models suggests that in 30 years, Cesium 137 levels in the whales
will exceed the Canadian guideline of 1,000 becquerels per kilogram for
consumption of seafood by humans — 10 times the Japanese guideline.
Steady State Bioaccumulation Model: “Concentrations of 137Cs
predicted in the male killer whale were approximately three orders of
magnitude higher relative to its major prey, Chinook salmon, and >
13,000 times higher compared to phytoplankton.”
Authors: Prof. Frank Gobas, Simon Fraser Univ.; Prof. Juan Alava, SFU
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/233869698_Modeling_the_Bioaccumulation_Potential_of_Cesium_137_in_a_Marine_Food_Web_of_the_Northwest_Pacific_Canada
stock, one of the better papers for release estimate and effect on human and animal
http://www.npsag.org/upload/reports/00-004/00-004%20Castle%20Meeting%202011%2009%20-%20Paper.pdf
paper estimates at least 220,000,000 kg of sea life will die.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
stock here: what is amazing is how much is actually known, compared to the low quality lies that are apparently good enough to sway not only the masses, but some otherwise "smart" people.
Heart of the Rose
Ever wonder what's with the IAEA supposed kindly interest in toxic algae blooms?
http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/TE-1729_web.pdf
Guest article: selective biomagnification of metals and radionuclides in marine food chains.
http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/Newsletters/MEL_NL_03-1.pdf
Pg 2.
