Fukushima Radiation Plume Has Now Hit Hawaii- In a year it’ll Probably Reach U.S. West Coast

From Sott.net, this post reminds us of ocean contamination dangers, seemingly ignored by the MSM and often scorned by members of the public who are in denial about radiation dangers.

Kevin Kamps, Beyond Nuclear, joins Thom Hartmann. California beware! A radioactive wave is headed toward the West Coast of the United States courtesy of the Fukushima nuclear disaster.

KAMPS: And that plume, as you said, it’s taken a year but it has now hit Hawaii. Another year from now it’ll probably reach the West Coast of the US.

This simulation shows the plume approaching Hawaii last month.

About Ken McMurtrie

Retired Electronics Engineer, most recently installing and maintaining medical X-Ray equipment. A mature age "student" of Life and Nature, an advocate of Truth, Justice and Humanity, promoting awareness of the injustices in the world.
This entry was posted in ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, nuclear, radiation, World Issues and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Fukushima Radiation Plume Has Now Hit Hawaii- In a year it’ll Probably Reach U.S. West Coast

  1. DDearborn says:

    one of the richest men in the entire world just spent over 500 million buying a huge island off of Hawaii. Now why would he do that if radiation was actually contaminating the islands as we speak? Billionaires don’t stay that way very long if they spend half a billion buying radiation laden islands now do they.

    • Fair question, this particular post does not go into details of amounts of contamination or levels of danger to ocean life and humans.
      There are other sites referenced in the sidebar under ‘Nuclear Dangers’ which will provide more detail.
      The main point is that the radiation exists and the degree of danger, if known, are not being made public.
      The gentleman purchasing real estate, even if rich and able to arrange research, may not be considering the nuclear contamination potential risks.
      He may consider them as negligible. Many people do not feel threatened, even when they are in known danger areas. What he cannot know are the future levels and dangers of contamination.
      They are unknown but can only be ignored at, in this case, his own risk.
      So, I don’t see any significant connection between his island purchase and the inferred lack of danger.

      On the other hand, his decision might reflect a non-belief in global warming and related, supposed, significantly increased ocean levels.

      Here, I would agree with him.
      Thanks for your comment!

  2. rudy wilson says:

    i need an answer…..i have a ticket to Hilo: dec -mar 2012…..how dangerous is the radiation there NOW ….dec 2012????? please someone who KNOWS tell me…..go or not?

    • Good question Rudy, Because I haven’t closely followed the relevant sources of info recently I cannot answer your question.However, some reader who has recent info may see your question, also I will now check around. No guarantee but will try. Ken

    • After a lot of time, I can offer this. Not conclusive, but a few interesting comments and links. Good luck!
      I hope there is some-one out there who “knows” who can help you, and will respond.

      There is very little meaningful info that I can find, even on the anti-nuclear blogs. The official organizations are ominously lacking in relevant info.
      The source most expected to be helpful is the US government agency, ‘Radnet’, an EPA branch. It does currently show a graph of gamma radiation levels over the period June to Oct 2012 where all Gamma ranges show relatively steady values with time. They claim to include effects from nuclear sources so should be a valid indication of air radiation levels. On the other hand, they also mention Beta radiation and another site states Beta radiation is the more likely to have been generated at Fukushima. (So many unknowns and variables!)
      The gamma ?Range 2 graph sits at above 1000 counts per minute. That would be worth assessing but I have no comparison information.
      The EPA are notorious for doing the opposite of being consumer oriented, e.g. branding CO2 as a pollutant, so are they trustworthy? Here is their site address:
      If you check other areas, both higher and lower readings can be seen.
      What they say about Beta radiation: “You can find reviewed and approved near-real-time beta air monitoring data, for this monitor, using the query tool to search the RadNet database in EPA’s Central Data Exchange. There may be large gaps in these data. Near-real-time beta monitoring results frequently do not pass quality control criteria due to local radiofrequency interference. For this reason, near real-time beta monitoring graphs are not displayed on this site.If that is not a likely cover-up, I will be amazed!

      A couple more interesting articles:
      Debris apparently from Fukushima, not necessarily contaminated, but an indication of ocean currents able to bring ocean borne radiation to Hawaii:
      The dock was one of four that broke loose from the port of Misawa. One of them sunk off the coast of Japan, one was sighted off the coast of Hawaii before being lost again while the last is thought to be still floating in the Pacific“. ref http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/9606667/America-threatened-by-sea-species-hitching-a-ride-on-tsunami-debris.html
      Also, an article from Dr Caldicott, albeit dated.
      A blog local to Hilo looked interesting but has no current useful info. Perhaps you could contact them. Ref: http://hiloliving.blogspot.com.au/2011/03/monitoring-radiation-in-kona-hawaii.html

      Note that besides air pollution, there is ocean, ground surface and objects, seafood and plant food, depending on transport by ocean currents, rainfall, birds and man-made travel.

      The potential danger seems real enough to warrant investigating, but if you are visiting, not living there permanently, a decision to go seems logical because, so far, there is insufficient evidence that your health would be likely to be affected noticeably. Radiation risk to your health is a cumulative process, unless you get high doses.
      This is the way I would look at the issue. Hopefully, you will receive advice that is more positive and more expert than my opinion.

    • Hi Rudy, good to hear from you. (Ref above 14th NOV.)
      An update that should relieve the anxiety, from a private venture which has set up monitoring air radiation pollution all over the US. Currently showing “normal” levels.
      Regards, Ken.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s