Fukushima Radiation Measured In Pacific Ocean by IAEA Sponsored And Paid For Scientists

/ AGR Free Press



Fact; 150,000 sq. kilometers of the Pacific ocean have been contaminated with Fukushima radiatioactive material. Fukushima is still ‘leaking’ radioactive materials into the air and ocean today. This disaster is not over. It is just beginning.

Bottom line, a HUGE amount of radiation has contaminated all Pacific ocean water from the surface to a depth of 400 foot. The surface of the ocean is where 99.99% of all sea creatures spend their time and get their food. The surface of the ocean is where the radioactive contamination is the worst. The amount of radiation released from Fukushima is unprecedented and the effects will not be fully known for many years, possibly never. 

According to ENENews; “Recently, large quantities of radioactive materials were released to the atmosphere and coastal waters following a nuclear accident at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant (NPP), which increased 137Cs concentrations in coastal seawater off Fukushima. […]

[…] the measured 137Cs concentrations in surface waters ranged from 1.8mBq L−1 to 3500mBq L−1, up to 3500 times higher than the global fallout background, although the cruise track did not go closer than 30 km from the coast. […] The elevated 137Cs levels covered an area of around 150 000 km2 (south of 38°N and west of 147° E). […] Scientists “measured 137Cs concentrations in surface waters – ranged from 1.8mBq L−1 to 3500mBq L−1, up to 3500 times higher than the global fallout background.”
If we stop with just the data provided above, Fukushima caused radiation readings of  0.0018 to  3.5 Bq of Cesium per Liter of Pacific ocean water. There was ZERO Cesium in ocean water before nuclear testing, so saying levels went up 3,500 times ‘normal background’ does not make any sense. If you go from zero to 3.5 Bq per liter, that is HUGE, way more than 3,500 x normal, more like BILLIONS of times natural background radiation, which is actually ZERO for things like cesium, uranium, tritium and plutonium. In addition, man made radioactive Cesium is bio-accumulative, while radioactive potassium in bananas is not.
http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2013-04-01/fake-science-alert-fukushima-radiation-can%E2%80%99t-be-compared-bananas-or-x-rays 
The pro nuclear apologists like to point out that the ‘natural background’ level of radiation in the North Pacific before March 11 Fukushima nuclear disaster was around 10 to 15 Bq per Liter, primarily due to potassium-40, a naturally occurring isotope, with much smaller contributions provided by fallout from Cold War-era atmospheric nuclear weapons testing. 
If one goes no further than the study released above, and one does nothing but compare potassium to cesium, it looks like these scientists are saying that the radiation levels in the ocean went DOWN since Fukushima, by HUGE orders of magnitude. Nothing to worry about, right? WRONG!
Fukushima was a HUGE nuclear accident that was at least between 10 to 100 times larger than Chernobyl in both scale, scope and time. Here is one independent expert, who says Fukushima was 10 times bigger than Chernobyl. 


“The liquid releases — I really haven’t had time to even talk about them — but they’ll continue for years and years into the future. ….We already know that the liquid releases are ten times Chernobyl.

Certainly the pro nuclear apologist conclusions reached in the study above are faulty, for many reasons. Let us dive into the murky world of pro nuclear apologist radiation testing and reporting, shall we?
The IAEA reports that; “results confirm that the dominant source of anthropogenic radionuclides in the marine environment is global fallout. The total 137Cs input from global fallout was estimated to be 311 PBq for the Pacific Ocean, 201 PBq for the Atlantic Ocean, 84 PBq for the Indian Ocean and 7.4 PBq for the Arctic Ocean. For comparison, about 40 PBq of 137Cs was released to the marine environment from Sellafield and Cap De La Hague reprocessing plants. The Chernobyl accident contributed about 16 PBq of 137Cs to the sea, mainly the Baltic and Black Seas, where the present average concentrations of 137Cs in surface water were estimated to be about 60 and 25 Bq/m3, respectively, while the worldwide average concentration due to global fallout is about 2 Bq/m3”

200 Bq/m3 = 5.4 pCi/liter. There are 1,000 liters in 1 cubic m3 of ocean water. Any radiation exposure is cumulative, so the fact that the IAEA admits that these nuclear reprocessing plants and accidents did increase the normal background radiation, says something. It used to be that no uranium, cesium or tritium was found in ocean water. Now huge quantities of cesium, uranium, tritium and other toxic contaminants are being found.

The IAEA and pretty much all pro nuclear apologists make the claim that Fukushima released only 10% of the radiation compared to Chernobyl, so using the above figures translates into Fukushima releasing only  1.6 PBq of 137C’s. Anyone with common sense will know is laughably ridiculous, because Fukushima had 3 nuclear reactors melt down, and at least two, possibly three melted through, with corium exiting the reactors and going down into the ground. In addition, at least 3 spent fuel pools burned up, releasing ALL of their ‘hot’ load into the atmosphere.  


The activities used in the table below are from 1971 Radioactivity in the Marine Environment, National Academy of Sciences:
Natural Radioactivity by the Ocean
Nuclide Activity used
in calculation		 Activity in Ocean
Pacific Atlantic All Oceans
Uranium 0.9 pCi/L
(33 mBq/L)		 6 x 108 Ci
(22 EBq)		 3 x 108 Ci
(11 EBq)		 1.1 x 109 Ci
(41 EBq)
Potassium 40 300 pCi/L
(11 Bq/L)		 2 x 1011 Ci
(7400 EBq)		 9 x 1010 Ci
(3300 EBq)		 3.8 x 1011 Ci
(14000 EBq)
Tritium 0.016 pCi/L
(0.6 mBq/L)		 1 x 107 Ci
(370 PBq)		 5 x 106 Ci
(190 PBq)		 2 x 107 Ci
(740 PBq)
Carbon 14 0.135 pCi/L
(5 mBq/L)		 8 x 107 Ci
(3 EBq)		 4 x 107 Ci
(1.5 EBq)		 1.8 x 108 Ci
(6.7 EBq)
Rubidium 87 28 pCi/L
(1.1 Bq/L

There is a problem with this ‘natural’ background radiation report, in that most if not all of these radioactive items are the result of the nuclear and military, not Nature. Cesium is not even listed as being on the Pacific ocean by the IAEA, because the amount was too low to register, according to them. These 1971 figures were calculated after years of nuclear bomb testing and fallout into the oceans of the world. How much of this stuff was there BEFORE all of this nuclear testing and accidents?

First, we have to remember that almost all scientists working on measuring ocean radiation levels are relying on figures  and testing methods as provided by the IAEA, which is a marketing arm of the nuclear industry. The IAEA has a built in bias against reporting any ‘harmful’ information about any nuclear accident, or about the harmful effects of low dose radiation in general. We will see later on in this article how this same positive ‘result’ is generated in the study above…

IAEA, WHO, NRC And Others; A Web Of Deception?  via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/05/iaea-who-and-others-web-of-deception.html

This same basic fact of “radiation is good for you” by labeling just about everything found as ‘natural background radiation’ applies to the entire nuclear and medical industry, plus government agencies such as the NRC as well. These industries and regulators are little more more than puppets of the nuclear industry due to revolving doors in and out of the nuclear industry from and to these government agencies and medical institutions. Bottom line, they all hold the radioactive glowing ‘line’, that all low level radiation is good for you, unless it kills you in ten minutes and only then is it bad for you, but not for long, because then you will be dead, so you really have NOTHING to worry your head about. Thus, all radiation is safe.

The Atomic Energy Commission was shut down and abolished for the very same corruption, cover ups and secrecy that is happening today. But the corruption of the nuclear industry, the medical industry and government regulators like the NRC remains to this day.

Why else would the EPA and NRC not report and warn people about invisible radiation levels after they rose to unsafe levels in US based foods and drinks after Fukushima? If you don’t believe this can happen in the ‘greatest’ country on Earth, you had better research this subject a little bit further.

According to the Ventura County Reporter; “NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, suspended testing the Pacific for Fukushima radiation last summer after concluding that there wasn’t any radiation to be detected…. the California Department of Public Health halted monitoring of Fukushima fallout when its Radiologic Health Branch issued its last report on Oct. 10, 2011. Why would they stop testing, when at the exact same time, radiation levels were RISING to alarming and dangerously high levels?

That report shows an alarming rise in cesium-137 in Cal Poly San Luis Obispo dairy farm milk beginning June 14, 2011, when it tested 2.95 picocuries per liter (pCi/l) and steadily rising in four subsequent tests until it was 5.91 pCi/l. The hot milk was at twice the allowable amount of this radionuclide in drinking water, according to the EPA’s 3.0 pCi/l limit….http://www.vcreporter.com/cms/story/detail/?id=9886
Why are all of the regulators not testing for radiation anymore, when radiation bioaccumulates up the food chain, especially when radiation is still being released by Fukushima?  For more information, click on the following link…


Plutonium And Cesium Bio-Concentrates 26,000 Times In Ocean Algae, Up To 5,570,000 Bq/Kg in Land Algae; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2013/04/plutonium-and-cesium-bio-concentrates.html

Radioactive Seaweed Found With 40,000,000 Bq per Kilogram – Seaweed Put Into Many Food Products; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2013/04/radioactive-seaweed-found-with-40000000.html

Why is everyone covering up the fact that reactor or spent fuel pool #3 blew up in a criticality explosion, spreading it’s load of ‘hot’ fuel for 1- 3 kilometers in all directions, including the ocean bottom? Would you like some proof?


Fukushima 5 Minute Summary Of Events 2011 to 2012; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/06/fukushima-5-minute-summary-of-events.html

Total Fukushima Radiation Released Into Ocean, Air, Groundwater, Storage Tanks; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/02/total-fukushima-radiation-released-into.html

Radioactive ‘Death’ River; 430,000 Bq per Kg From Fukushima Cesium in River Bottom Sediment, via @AGreenRoad

http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2013/04/radioactive-death-river-430000-bq-per.html

Fukushima Spewing Equivalent of 112 Hiroshima Nuclear Bombs Worth of Radiation Every Hour; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/12/fukushima-spewing-equivalent-of-112.html

At Fukushima Daichi, 3 Coriums Left Containment Compared To 1 At Chernobyl; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2013/01/at-fukushima-3-coriums-left-containment.html

Dr. Paolo Scampa Reports That Fukushima Released 3,000 Billion Lethal Doses Of Radiation; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/09/dr-paolo-scampa-reports-that-fukushima.html

Comparing Contaminated Zones Around Chernobyl And Fukushima Ocean Radiation Released; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/05/comparing-contaminated-zones-around.html

What really happened at Fukushima? via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/02/what-really-happened-at-fukushima.html

How Dangerous Is 400-600 Pounds Of Plutonium Nano Particle Dust Liberated By Fukushima? via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/03/how-dangerous-is-400-600-pounds-of.html


So what is the effect of these radioactive rods being blown out into the ocean? What is the effect of constant, never ending leaks of highly radiocative water from the basements and coriums into the ocean? 


The graph above shows radiation in the ocean measured at 100 MILLION BQ per cubic meter. According to TEPCO, the levels of radiation in the ocean have been reduced to 1,000 Bq per cubic meter. The highest levels reached in any ocean were 10 Bq per cubic meter after the Chernobyl accident. Of course, TEPCO seems to minimize and cover up high radiation readings, so if these figures are minimized, we can only wonder what the real radiation figures are. 

” … Around 95 terabecquerels of radioactive caesium has found its way to the sandy ocean floor near the plant. How it got there, Kanda says, no one is sure … Whether originating from plankton or sediment, the contamination is finding its way into the food chain. Bottom-dwelling fish in the Fukushima area show radioactivity levels above the limit of 100 becquerels per kilogram set by the Japanese government. Greenlings, for example, have been found to have levels as high as 25,000 becquerels per kilogram.…Second, the plant itself is leaking around 0.3 terabecquerels (1012 becquerels) per month, he estimates.”

Source: Ocean still suffering from Fukushima fallout. Continuing leaks and contaminated sediment keep radiation levels high. Geoff Brumfiel 14 November 2012

Meanwhile, here in the supposedly free and democratic USA, the EPA stopped testing for radiation in US food and drink as well, at about the same time as the US Health Dept. above. Are you starting to see a pattern here yet? Fill in the rest of the dots by reading some of the other articles linked to in this one. See if you start to form a conclusion after you watch a few of the videos and read a few articles, while keeping an open mind. 
The lies and deception in the nuclear industry generally and around the IAEA and other organizations specifically are detailed below. 
The Art of Deception: The Cult of Nuclearists, Uranium Weapons and Fraudulent Science; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/03/primer-in-art-of-deception-cult-of.html

Ann Harris; Exposes TVA, NRC, And NEI Corruption And Coverups; via A Green Road http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/11/ann-harris-exposes-tva-nrc-and-nei.html

Greg Palast; The Lies and Fraud Behind Nuclear Plant Emergency Diesel Generators; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/11/greg-palast-lies-and-fraud-behind.html

Gorbachev; Chernobyl Nuclear Accident Was Real Cause Of The Collapse of Soviet Union; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/12/gorbachev-chernobyl-nuclear-accident.html

30 Ways The Nuclear Industry Deceives Everyone; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/03/primer-in-art-of-deception-cult-of.html

Human Radiation Experiments Performed Without Consent Or Knowledge; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/09/human-radiation-experiments-performed.html

Truth Telling And Nuclear Radiation Experts/Specialists; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2013/03/truth-telling-and-nuclear-radiation.html

The Nuclear Industry And Cognitive Dissonance; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-nuclear-industry-and-cognitive.html

Now that we have established that the basic ‘facts’ released by IAEA, TEPCO, EPA, WHO, NRC and other pro nuclear apologists about Fukushima are for the most park false, minimized and are based on misleading assumptions and theories or false data, we can get to what really happened at Fukushima by reading a few of the following articles. 

Nuclear Accidents, Recycling Nuclear Weapons/Fuel
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/p/nuclear-accidents-around-world.html

If we go no further than this, we can use common sense and see that the ocean water close to the Fukushima plant was and still is being polluted with an outrageous amount of radiation, without doing any ‘official’ measurements, conversions, computer studies or fancy math. But let us go a step further. What happens to radiation that gets into the Pacific ocean?

According to Ventura County Reporter; “Scientific studies from the United Kingdom and Europe show that sea water infused with radiation of the sort spewing out of Fukushima can travel inland from the coast up to 300 kilometers….In the 2008 report “Sea to land transfer of radionuclides in Cumbria and North Wales, the greatest average concentration of cesium-137 and plutonium-239 in soil at a depth of 0 to 15 centimeters was found 10 kilometers from the coast. The highest average amounts found at 15 to 30 centimeters deep were 5 kilometers away from the sea illustrating the unpredictability of radiation fallout.
A 62-page UK study released in December 2011 found that sea spray and marine aerosols created from bubbles forming and popping when the sea is choppy or waves break have increased concentrations of radioactive “actinides.” Actinides are chemically alike radioactive metallic elements and include uranium and plutonium. 

One actinide infused the spray with an 812 times greater concentration of americium-241 than normal amounts of Am-241 in ambient seawater. The report cited information that sea-spray-blown cesium 137 was found 200 kilometers from the discharge source in the New Hebrides islands in northern Scotland. 

Another UK study found that the Irish Sea has a micro layer on top of it, perhaps only thousandths of a millimeter in thickness, that can become imbued with fine particulate material and its absorbed radiation. These concentrations of plutonium and americium are four to five times their concentrations in ambient seawater. Plutonium concentrates by 26,000 times in floating algal blooms at sea, says the report.

Do we have any other proof about where radiation concentrates in the ocean, leading us to where we should test for it, if we are truly interested in impartial scientific results? The answer is; yes. 

Pollution in the open ocean: A review of assessments and related studies. November 2009. Page 20 section 3.2 Atmospheric Inputs 3.2.1 

“Gaseous and particulate substances present in the atmosphere can deposit and/or exchange directly on the ocean surface, and they can also be incorporated in precipitation.

3.2.2 Heavy Metals: Introduction

“A number of heavy metals are transported in the atmosphere from the continents to open ocean regions…” such as mercury, lead, cadmium, arsenic, nickel and copper.

“Anthropogenic sources dominate for those observed in the remote marine atmosphere, particularly in the Northern hemisphere…There is clear evidence that human activities have severely altered the atmospheric cycling of mercury. (p. 21)….Studies suggest that the concentrations of dissolved gaseous mercury are often supersaturated in surface waters, resulting in a significant flux of elemental mercury to the atmosphere in those regions (Fitzgerald et al 2007). Indeed, there is evidence that the fluxes of mercury from the ocean to the atmosphere globally are similar to the level of anthropogenic emissions” (p. 22)

So now we know that radiation levels will be found to be the highest in the surface micro layer up at the top of the surface of the ocean, and near shore. The highest concentrations will be found close to the source, in the Fukushima harbor. 

We also know that 26,000 higher levels of radiation will bio -concentrate in algae, starting with whatever is found in the ocean water. So the best place to test for radiation from Fukushima is in the Fukushima harbor, using the micro surface layer and dried algae collected there, correct? Now we have a problem Houston…

TEPCO will not allow anyone to do testing closer than 30 miles away. Their own scientists are not allowed to do testing any closer than 5 kilometers from the plant. The only people ‘allowed’ to test for radiation in the harbor of Fukushima is TEPCO, a private, for profit company..Talk about giving the keys to the henhouse to the fox. The company responsible for the biggest nuclear disaster in history is also setting the ‘rules’ for who is ‘allowed’ to test for the radiation contamination that they caused. This is like a murderer telling the police that they can only test for evidence of the crime, at least 30 miles away from the crime scene, and the further away, the better. 

Not allowing anyone to test close to Fukushima will greatly reduce the amount of radiation found, and TEPCO knows this. 

If the nuclear industry really wanted to get artificially low levels of radiation measurements in ocean water, they would test only the deep and very deep ocean water far away from the Fukushima source, not the surface ‘scum’ or micro-layer on top of the surface near Fukushima, because as the article above shows, the top micro layer of the ocean is where the highest concentrations of radioactive materials end up. Testing only the deepest ocean water far away from the source, will make the Fukushima accident look like it never happened. 

Testing the micro surface layer in the Fukushima harbor  will show the true impact and radiation levels deposited and settling out of the air in the form of particles that stick to the surface ‘layer’ on top of the ocean water. So far, none of the Pacific ocean testing by scientists have measured this surface layer, or the bottom sediment where the heavier radioactive elements could have settled, near the source of this disaster. The scientists admit that they PURPOSELY avoided the near shore areas, by staying 30 miles or further out in the ocean to do their ‘official’ testing for radiation. 

Total radiation levels in ocean water can and is further lowered by filtering out the algae plus microscopic sea creatures, fish and seaweed, plus all of the solid heavy materials, including radioactive elements and actinides. Could it be that the pro nuclear folks know this too, so they create ‘rules’ in order to not measure these living things, especially not in the Fukushima harbor, where radiation levels will be found to be the highest? 

Because ocean creatures and plants absorb radiation OUT of the ocean water by acting as ‘sponges and filters’ of radioactive  and other materials, scientists who have a pro nuclear bias could theoretically get much lower radiation levels in ocean water when these living things  and solid materials are excluded OUT of the total radiation measurement. 

Another way to reduce the radiation being found if one is measuring radiation in animals, is to measure these sea creatures when they are ‘wet’. Wet tissue samples test lower in radiation by many orders of magnitude than dried specimens, so scientists can manipulate the radiation data results this way too. Which way are the scientists doing testing on algae performing their tests?
Filter feeders such as mussels, clams and living reefs can ‘clean’ ocean water to the point where they have removed and filtered out 99.999% of EVERYTHING in the ocean water, especially in tidal estuaries and around islands with living reefs. Unless scientists measure the radiation levels of clams, algae and other filter feeders found in reefs, the true extent of the radiation load of the ocean will never be known. Of course, testing ocean water where there are lots of filter feeders is a good place to test ocean water for radiation, because the filter feeders have taken out most of the radiation, (as long as they are still alive.) 

Another way that the pro nuclear apologists reduce the total amount of radiation ‘found’ in ocean water is to distill, redistill and then distill the the ocean water again a third time, after taking out all living matter such as algae. 

The radiation containing algae and the heavy, solid radioactive containing elements and actinides are taken out, making the total radiation levels seem even lower, because the only things left will be the gases and lighter than air radioactive elements such as Tritium, which is another name for radioactive Hydrogen. (Yes, triple distilling is THE ONLY  method that the pro nuclear IAEA sanctioned scientists use to measure radiation in ocean water.) Does this not sound odd to you?

So even if most toxic and highly radioactive levels can be measured because they are present in the surface scum and in living creatures swimming on highly contaminated ocean water as a result of the Fukushima accident, it WILL NEVER BE FOUND  by IAEA scientists using the triple distillation method, because they use far off shore deep ocean water, sampling  only triple distilled ocean water with everything filtered out of it. This is a good way to ensure that only low radiation levels will be found, no matter what there REALLY may be in there.

Bottom line, you can now see that the study we started to look at in the beginning of this article could possibly be thrown out. The study may be almost completely worthless, because it purposely DOES NOT LOOK FOR RADIATION, where it can be found in the highest levels and amounts. The study also excludes almost all radiation, through the filtering, deep ocean and distillation method.

Is it possible to see how the conspiracy of non reporting radiation could be happening consistently? Instead of using the surface micro layer or dried algae taken from near shore or close to the Fukushima site, where radiation levels will be the highest, the pro nuclear hired guns test only way out in the ocean, in deep water and get rid of anything that may show high levels of radiation. Bingo, the nuclear accident never happened, and everything is clean and close to ‘normal’. 

Now they can state with great assurance and pompous certainty, that Fukushima only released 10% of the total radiation released by Chernobyl.. See, look at all of this PROOF. In the computer industry, they call this garbage in = garbage out. 

But at the same time, behind the scenes, the nuclear industry is pushing hard through their government owned agencies to RAISE the legal limits of radiation in food and water. Why would radiation limits be raised without any public hearings or debates in Congress, if Fukushima is only 10% of Chernobyl? If it really was this small of a non event, then there is no need to raise the radiation limits. 

The EPA recently raised radiation limits in food and drink by HUGE amounts. Why would they be doing this? And this is NOT the first time that this has happened. 


PA NOMINEE DECLINES COMMENT ON CONTROVERSIAL NUCLEAR INCIDENT GUIDE


“Asked to comment on concerns that the guide references drinking water guidelines nearly 30,000 times less stringent than EPA rules, Gina McCarthy remained silent following her Senate confirmation hearing. An aide said “no comment” and pushed a reporter out of the way.”


“Called a protective action guide for radiological incidents, the new document references International Atomic Energy Agency guidelines suggesting intervention is not needed until drinking water is contaminated with radioactive iodine 131 at a concentration of 81,000 picocuries per liter. This is 27,000 times less stringent than the EPA rule of three picocuries per liter.”
Could it be that they KNOW that radiation levels are rising in food and water all across the world due to the Fukushima accident? Could it be that they do not want this discovered and have a huge public relations nightmare? 
If the pro nuclear apologists can change the ‘rules’ of the game, even if they are discovered, they can point to the newly revised rules that were changed in the darkness of night and no disclosure to the public and say; “The radiation found is within legal limits and thus, cannot cause harm”.

This also means no one can sue anyone for any harm or deaths caused, because it is all legal now.  Lawsuits will be thrown out of court. Of course, they will NEVER admit that the levels of ‘safe’ radiation used to be 27,000 times lower, and before that, they safe radiation levels used to be ZERO. 

In other words, the nuclear industry, and the military industrial complex both get are getting a free stay out of jail card. They also get to keep all of the money and transfer all of the risk and suffering plus deaths to humanity when their toxic byproducts pollute the whole planet. They are trying not to be held responsible for polluting the the oceans, as well as the air, drinking water and food around the world.

Because the nuclear industry will only pay for studies done ‘their way’ and in their chosen spots, it may happen that the average person will never find out the true scope and scale of these nuclear mega disasters. It is actually rather easy to cover up and hide the worst nuclear disaster in history, in plain sight. 

Because the radiation is invisible, and almost no one owns a Geiger counter, plus the fact that water and food is very difficult to measure for radiation, it seems that up to now anyway, that they are getting away with it. Who knows how long they will continue in this way? How many more times will the ‘safe’ radiation levels in food and drinking water be raised in the future? How many millions or billions of people will have to get cancer, birth deformities or suffer from one of 2,500 genetic diseases caused by low level radiation, before something changes for the better? 
Fukushima Radiation Measured In Pacific Ocean by IAEA Sponsored And Paid For Scientists; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2013/05/fukushima-radiation-measured-in-pacific.html

More links to articles about radiation in the Pacific;

Study: Up to 47 quadrillion becquerels of cesium-137 released into Pacific from Fukushima — Nearly 50 times original Tepco estimate March 12, 2013 
Tokyo Professor: Radionuclides are being released continuously into ocean from Fukushima plant — Coming from somewhere around reactor housings (CHART) March 4, 2013 
Study: Fukushima plutonium in Pacific Ocean from ‘liquid direct releases’? February 4, 2013 
Study: Up to 900 trillion becquerels of strontium-90 into ocean from Fukushima plant — “Direct discharges of cooling water” March 23, 2013 
New highly radioactive leak from pipe at Fukushima plant — Expert: Nuclear material may be flowing from “damaged pipes or drains” into Pacific April 11, 2013
Study: North America’s West Coast to be most contaminated by Fukushima cesium of all regions in Pacific in 10 years — “An order-of-magnitude higher” than waters off Japan (MAPS)
More Fukushima nuclear pollution to hit U.S. starting in 2015 — Study: Impact strength of Cesium-137 on West Coast to be as high as 4 PERCENT
IAEA expert predicts radioactive cesium will be carried across Pacific to West Coast of U.S. and Canada in one or two years
Study: Contaminated water from Fukushima reactors could double radioactivity levels of US coastal waters in 5 years — “We were surprised at how quickly the tracer spread” (PHOTO & VIDEO)
MIT: Radiation-contaminated seawater could reach U.S. west coast in as little as 5 years