Tokyo Soil Would Be Considered “Radioactive Waste” In the United States

Zero Hedge ^ | March 25, 2012 | George Washington

[Former Proud Canadian]

We noted in August that some parts of Tokyo have more radiation than existed in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zones. And see this and this.

There are indications that radiation levels are increasing in Tokyo.

Nuclear engineer Arnie Gundersen took 5 random soil samples in Tokyo recently, and found that all 5 were so radioactive that they would be considered radioactive waste in the United States, which would have to be specially disposed of at a facility in Texas:

[Former Proud Canadian]

The meltdown continues?

[Scythian]

Don’t worry, when I think of this I just harken back to all those armchair nulcear scientists here at the FR that assured everyone that there was no danger at all. They said that eating a bananna was more dangerous.

[exDemMom]

I see a lot of fear-mongering language used in the article, but very little in the way of concrete facts. That the level of radiation in Tokyo, over 100 miles away, would be affected by what is happening at Fukushima doesn’t even make sense. What about the radiation at Fukushima? Or the radiation at points in between? If radioactive debris from Fukushima is ending up in Tokyo, the fallout nearer Fukushima should be far more concentrated.

Not that I think there is significant fallout in the first place.

[catbertz]

When I think of hot Japanese girls, this will add a new dimension. Perhaps they will grow real tenticles, or glow in the dark. Jokes aside, I am sad for all those that have and will suffer.

[AmericanInTokyo]

Possible.

[LRS]

Cue Godzilla pic?

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Recall that radiation guidelines were devised before there was any real data on the effect of intermediate doses of radiation. All they had, basically, was the knowledge that background radiation was everywhere, mostly at a low level, and data on catastrophic dosages doing immediate, irreversible damage to tissue. And they just took a “If one’s good, two’s better” approach to radiation regulation, which was initially all that they could do.

Since then there have been incidents of radiation release which unintentionally produced data at intermediate dosages. There was a case where radioactive material was mixed into the metal used in constructing an apartment complex. When the blunder was realized, experts descended on the place expecting to find excess cancer incidence and other deleterious effects - and found only a small protective effect. So maybe we need to avoid panicked overreaction.

[hal ogen]

Uhhhh? But it isn’t in the United States. Isn’t this an indictment of the zany EPA policies here? Oh, by the way...is the sky falling?

[autumnraine]

My thoughts exactly. Denial is a dangerous thing.

[autumnraine]

What makes you think that Fukushima isn’t higher in radiation?

[BCR #226]

A friend of mine was working in Japan on the Fukashima recovery. It’s a LOT worse than is being reported. He left and came back here a couple of months ago because he was concerned with the cavalier attitude of the Japanese Government over the safety of the workers and people in the area.

Before it’s all said and done, Fukashima will most likely be several times worse than Chernobyl in regards to environmental damage and radiation contamination.

[Clara Lou]

It’s obviously a concern if radiation is traveling over 100 miles. How is radiation escaping into the air? What about capping Fukushima, or parts of it, similarly to Chernobyl?

I regret that the Japanese are having to deal with this. The rest of the world needs to learn what can be learned from this incident.

[autumnraine]

Just like the talk show host who mockingly ate Fukushima province food and died of thyroid cancer a couple of months later.

[Larry Lucido]

It’s the zerosense hedgehog blog. Enough said.

[Larry Lucido]

“the meltdown continues”

No but the BS is in full throttle.

[Larry Lucido]

Link?

[palmer]

Before it's all said and done, Fukashima will most likely be several times worse than Chernobyl in regards to environmental damage and radiation contamination.

Maybe. The vicinity in Japan was a lot more populated and they dumped a lot of radiation into the ocean. But as far as the releases go, Chernobyl had a much higher spike of radiation in milk (and obviously in the rainwater and grass). Chernobyl had an open reaction and intense fire, whereas Fukashima had a smaller fire and no open reaction.

[Georgia Girl 2]

When you are right you are right. I got flamed the first few days for expressing concern about the radiation possibilities.

[autumnraine]

My mistake, it was leukemia and he was DIAGNOSED a few months later. Still...

http://enenews.com/japan-tv-host-diagnosed-acute-lymphocytic-leukemia-eating-fukushima-produce-show

Also, leukemia cases are on the rise.

http://fukushima-diary.com/2011/11/acute-leukemia-case-is-spiking-up/

[rawhide]

I do not disagree the EPA rules are sometimes crazy, but it does not explain Ukraine's decision that this area would be declared an exclusion zone. I would not think their 'EPA' rules are nearly as far-reaching and zany as ours?