Trump White House Chief Economic Advisor Declares War on Coal

Clicked wrong Reply…sorry…

Bunk on you. You have no evidence for any of your bizarre claims.

Research http://www.enenews.com. You’ll find everything you need there. The massive and bizarre wildlife die offs that no one can explain have been happening for years since Fukushima, but you don’t hear about them do you?
As far as evidence goes, you’re correct. That’s why I said “most likely”. Evidence is hard to come by when everyone refuses to study it. But nobody really wants to study it, do they, because they know they wouldn’t be able to deal with what they find. But realistically, radiation is the most logical answer for the big uptick in Pacific wildlife die off since Fukushima, except of course, to those who are in denial. You can’t dump hundreds of millions of gallons of highly radioactive water into the ocean without consequences. It doesn’t just magically disperse into nothingness, but follows ocean currents.

I came I saw I left,I lie like hell writes,
“Nuclear is potentially far dirtier and deadly than coal. They’re chitting their pants right now in Hanford because they sense an imminent radiological disaster. Life in the N Pacific is collapsing most likely due to the initial explosions at Fukushima and the continued leakage of approx. 70,000 gallons of highly radioactive water into the ocean every day, among other things.”
I happen to live right next the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, have been since 1964. There have been minor problems over the years that are being taken care of with the billions of dollars a year clean up process. Most of the single walled tanks are now gone,the leaks are being contained on the reservation itself, Contaminated soils removed,building razed,even the small underground plume heading toward the Columbia river have been monitored for many years. There have been efforts being to contain it:
“LIQUID WASTE
Of the liquid wastes generated at Hanford, much of the waste that is currently stored in the underground tanks on the Site will ultimately be transformed into a stable, glass product in a process called vitrification. In order to vitrify the waste, it is mixed with glass forming materials and then introduced to high heat in order for the waste to bond with the glass. A facility is being constructed at Hanford which will perform this vitrification work. Once the vitrification process has taken place, the molten, glass-like material is poured into cylinders where it will cool and become solid. Ultimately, cylinders containing the most hazardous vitrified waste will be taken to a national repository for permanent burial. The cylinders with less hazardous waste are candidates for disposal in an Integrated Disposal Facility, or IDF. The development of an IDF at Hanford is currently being evaluated in the Draft Tank Closure & Waste Management (TC&WM) Environmental Impact Statement. Alternatives in the EIS evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with locating an IDF in the 200-West Area of the Hanford Site, or alternatively in the 200-East Area. No final decision will be made on the IDF (and no wastes will be disposed there) until after the final EIS has been issued and a Record of Decision (ROD) is published. The IDF would be regulated by the State of Washington Department of Ecology and/or US Environmental Protection Agency, based on the types of wastes that would be managed there to ensure that any waste disposed of at the IDF would not pose unacceptable impacts to the environment.
The liquid waste that had been poured onto the ground or held in ponds or trenches has long since evaporated or soaked into the soil on the Site. In doing so, the waste did contaminate some of the soil and is thought to have also created underground “plumes” of contaminants. A “plume” is kind of like an underground river where the contaminants join with the water that exists beneath the surface of the Earth. Many of these plumes move in varying speeds and move toward the Columbia River. Hanford employees are actively involved in projects designed to prevent any more of the contamination from reaching the river. Several different strategies are being used in that effort.
One strategy is simply to block the groundwater contamination from getting to the Columbia. Various kinds of barriers are placed in the ground which allows the clean groundwater to move through, while chemically altering any harmful contamination into a non-toxic form as it passes through. Another strategy is called “pump and treat”. Through this process, contaminated groundwater is pumped out of the ground and treated with chemicals. These chemicals serve to change the chemical makeup of the contaminants which render them harmless to the environment. Once the treatment of the groundwater is complete, the cleansed water is pumped back into the ground. Yet another strategy in dealing with groundwater contamination is called “biostimulation”. This is a new technology where crews pump materials like molasses and vegetable oil into the ground where tiny microorganisms in the soil eat the molasses and vegetable oil. The microorganisms then reproduce, and in doing so, they alter the chemistry of the groundwater and render the contaminants harmless to the environment. The process also prevents the contamination from moving any closer to the river.”
https://energy.gov/em/hanford-site
=============================================
The 70,00 gallons of radioactive water into the ocean is a pure lie since an alleged leak that big would have long made international news with truck loads of environmentalists screaming loudly about it…..
Your wildlife collapse claims are lies since we have had overabundance of Elk living there and around Rattlesnake Mt.,Had to round up many to reduce the population of the herd. There have been Cougars in North Richland,along with Deer, I have personally seen an INCREASE in Bald Eagles in North Richland at Leslie Groves park,where they perch in the tallest trees,saw 3 at one time just last spring.There are two dozen semi tame Ducks living year around at the park,with hundreds to thousands of Geese, living in the Tri-City area.
The region has many Skunks,with hundreds of birds seen in the air every day,fishing is doing well there too as hundreds of fishers are amazingly reeling in a lot of fish. The Columbia river are dotted with hundreds of boats and Jet Skis every summer amazingly unaware of the disaster….
You are so full of crap,that I think you are paid to push this stupidity.
=====================================================
One of the claims is the Fukushima radiation in significant amounts reaching the West of America is so mindbogglingly stupid, since it has to cross a few THOUSAND miles of ocean undiluted, but since the main amount of radioactive material released was staying within a few miles of the coast, it couldn’t remain in sufficient concentration to be a minimal threat.
“Managing contaminated water, marine effects
Supplement to information in main paper:
A four-year international survey assessing radiological pollution of the marine environment near the plant commenced in July 2011, under IAEA auspices and led by Australia, South Korea and Indonesia. In September 2011, researchers at the Japan Atomic Energy Agency, Kyoto University and other institutes estimated that about 15 PBq of radioactivity (I-131 and Cs-137) had been released into the sea from late March through April, including substantial airborne fallout. In August 2013 Tepco estimated that 20 to 40 TBq of tritium might have leaked into the sea over 28 months since May 2011, which it compared with 22 TBq/yr discharge limit from the six-unit plant normally. The nine-month estimated releases from December 2012 for Sr-90 and Cs-137 were 0.7 and 1.0 TBq respectively, compared with 0.22 TBq/yr combined discharge limit. This is going into the 30 hectare inner harbour area, which is barricaded from the open sea. The radioactive contamination in the sea adjacent to the plant has remained much the same since early 2012, however, at harmless levels. Beyond the barricaded inner harbour, sampling out to 15km has indicated no detectable contamination since December 2011. (In 2013, Cs-134 levels of 0.9 Bq/m3 from Fukushima – 8000 times less than drinking water standards – were detected offshore Vancouver, enabling helpful study of ocean currents.) Radioactive Isotopes from Fukushima Meltdown Detected near Vancouver, Scientific American, 25 February 2014”
http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/appendices/fukushima-radiation-exposure.aspx

“Several investigations were done, some give no more cancer than average in Japan, others show significantly less cancer…”
You’re kidding me? You link to a study done in 1992, and Fukushima happened in 2011. There has been a tremendous increase in cancers and other anomalous health issues in Japan following Fukushima. Genetic defects take decades to manifest. No one talks about it much openly because the Japanese government will throw your ass in jail.

“The 70,00 gallons of radioactive water into the ocean is a pure lie since an alleged leak that big would have long made international news with truck loads of environmentalists screaming loudly about it…..”
Ya’d think… That figure (300 tons per day actually) is per Tepco. It’s actually on the low side considering everything else that’s happening..

I came,I saw, I left my rational thinking at the door writes:
“Btw, it would be more accurate to say that I have no proof. That’s true. No one does because proof can’t exist without studies, which haven’t been done. But evidence clearly exists:
* Chitin is a fundamental building block of some crucial lower order marine life (e.g., krill, algae)
* Chitin bioaccumulates radio isotopes
* Ionizing radiation destroys chitin bonds
So if sea-borne Fukushima radiation is in fact destroying marine chitin on a large scale, then we have a big, big problem. Like mass starvation in higher order marine life. Which is what appears to happening in some of the massive marine die offs (i.e., empty stomachs).”
========================================
You admit that you have no proof, but you know evidence exist…..
Your marine die offs connected to radiation damage claim would be easy to spot by now, but you offer no evidence……
How many empty bottles litter your bedroom floor?

I came,I saw, I try to over blow the claims,writes:
“Ya’d think… That figure (300 tons per day actually) is per Tepco. It’s actually on the low side considering everything else that’s happening..”
But as usual no evidence to support your misleading assertion. I looked it up,here is what they really say,that you left out:
“More than 1,000 tanks brimming with irradiated water stand inland from the Fukushima nuclear plant. Each day 300 tonnes of water are pumped through Fukushima’s ruined reactors to keep them cool. As the water washes through the plant it collects a slew of radioactive particles.
The company that owns the plant – The Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco) – has deployed filtration devices that have stripped very dangerous isotopes of strontium and caesium from the flow.
But the water being stored in the tanks still contains tritium, an isotope of hydrogen with two neutrons. Tritium is a major by-product of nuclear reactions and is difficult and expensive to remove from water.”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/13/is-it-safe-to-dump-fukushima-waste-into-the-sea
if you read the rest of the link, you will learn that the concerns is are being overblown,yes some local effects would happen if they do what they want, dump the water into the ocean. But people like you habitually distort or lie about it,thus create skeptical attitudes that sometimes doesn’t help the environment in the long run.
Stick with the truth is better, then the concerns will be better addressed, with a lot less B.S.

“Completely irrelevant”
No, because in your study it’s radon; Fukushima offered so much more (e.g., iodine 131/137).
“… the incidence of thyroid cancer is approximately 230 times higher than normal in Fukushima Prefecture…”
http://enenews.com/nuclear-experts-1000000-cancers-could-result-fukushima-already-hundreds-times-thyroid-cancers-tip-iceberg-worst-enormous-spikes-cancer-devastating-health-effects-video

Oops… previous comment said 230 times, not percent.

Even if all of the contaminated water is currently stored in tanks (which it isn’t), it will eventually end up in the ocean because 1) they have no where to put it, and 2) earthquakes will eventually destroy the tanks. They already have problems with leaks because there was little quality control when they rushed to build them. Thus millions of gallons of tritium contaminated water will end up in the Pacific.

Now the eco loony troll tries to lie he way through the thread with claims from a eco loony website.
Here is what real experts say:
IFL SCience
September 16,2016
Has Fukushima Led To An Increase In Cancer Rates?
“What they found was staggering: Almost half of the 300,476 children so far tested had cysts on their thyroids, while over 100 were later diagnosed with cancer, a much higher rate of the disease than had previously been recorded.
Predictably, this data has been seized upon by those wanting to prove the dangers of nuclear power, yet scientists have come out strongly against interpretations that indicate the increase in thyroid cancer diagnoses are due to radioactivity exposure. Instead, they think this increase in rates is simply due to sampling.
As the study examined more children than had ever been looked at previously, they simply found that cysts and nodules on the thyroid are far more common than was previously believed. “The evidence suggests that the great majority and perhaps all of the cases so far discovered are not due to radiation,” Dillwyn Williams, a thyroid cancer specialist from Cambridge University, told Science.”
http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/has-fukushima-lead-increase-cancer/
Or,
Slective excerpt,
From the WHO:
FAQs: Fukushima Five Years On
“5. What are the health implications of the Fukushima Daiichi NPS (FDNPS) nuclear accident?
In 2013, WHO published a health risk assessment from the FDNPS accident. It included an evaluation of the risks of cancers, non-cancer diseases as well as public health considerations. The following year, UNSCEAR published a report on the levels and effects of radiation exposure due to the accident. In 2015, UNSCEAR released a white paper that evaluates new information in the peer-reviewed literature.
Health risk assessment from the nuclear accident after the 2011 Great East Japan earthquake and tsunami, based on a preliminary dose estimation
WHO publication 2013
Sources, effects and risks of ionizing radiation
UNSCEAR 2013 REPORT Vol. I
Developments since the 2013 UNSCEAR Report on the levels and effects of radiation exposure due to the nuclear accident following the great east-Japan earthquake and tsunami
UNSCEAR Fukushima 2015 White Paper
There were no acute radiation injuries or deaths among the workers or the public due to exposure to radiation resulting from the FDNPS accident.
Considering the level of estimated doses, the lifetime radiation-induced cancer risks other than thyroid are small and much smaller than the lifetime baseline cancer risks. Regarding the risk of thyroid cancer in exposed infants and children, the level of risk is uncertain since it is difficult to verify thyroid dose estimates by direct measurements of radiation exposure.
For the twelve workers who were estimated to have received the highest absorbed radiation doses to the thyroid, an increased risk of developing thyroid cancer and other thyroid disorders was estimated. About 160 additional workers who received whole body effective doses estimated to be over 100 mSv, an increased risk of cancer could be expected in the future although it will not be detectable by epidemiological studies because of the difficulty of confirming a small incidence against the normal statistical fluctuations in cancer incidence.
6. Is there a risk of radiation-induced thyroid cancer among children of Fukushima prefecture?
Given the exposure to radioactive iodine during the early phase of the emergency, WHO specifically assessed the risk of thyroid cancer. The greatest risk was found among girls exposed as infants (i.e. < 1 year old) in the most affected area in the Fukushima prefecture. Even if those levels of risk might not be clinically detectable, WHO anticipated that the thyroid ultrasound screening programme being conducted in Fukushima prefecture was likely to lead to an increase in the incidence of thyroid diseases due to earlier detection of non-symptomatic cases.
There have been recent reports about thyroid cancer cases being diagnosed among children exposed to low doses of radioactive iodine as a result of the Fukushima accident. These reports should be interpreted with caution. A large excess of thyroid cancer due to radiation exposure, such as occurred after the Chernobyl accident, can be discounted because the estimated thyroid doses due to the Fukushima accident were substantially lower than in Chernobyl. Nevertheless, the highly-sensitive thyroid screening of those under 18 years old at the time of the accident is expected to detect a large number of thyroid cysts and solid nodules, including a number of thyroid cancers that would not have been detected without such intensive screening. Similar or even slightly higher rates of cysts and nodules were found in prefectures not affected by the nuclear accident. The substantial number of cases that have already been observed in the Fukushima Health Management Survey have been considered likely due to the sensitivity of the screening rather than to radiation exposure. Further analysis of epidemiological data being currently collected in Japan will be necessary to evaluate a potential attribution of thyroid cancer to radiation exposure."
http://www.who.int/ionizing_radiation/a_e/fukushima/faqs-fukushima/en/
=====================================================================
I have more like this.
See why I think you are full of crap, you lie or distort what is really happening. Eco loonies like you have a bad habit of greatly over blowing environmental incidences, with misleading claims and outright lies.

ICISIL,
Only in the case of thyroid cancer in Tsjernobyl, there was an increase because the governement didn’t give any warning and people were evacuated days after the disaster neither did receive ana iodide pills. In Fukushima that was much better controlled, as Sunsettommy (thanks!) showed with realistic figures…
Even overblown, as probably more Japanese died from the stress of the forced removal (really terrible for eldern in Japanese culture) from their homes than there ever will be from radiation if they just had stayed at home.
Indeed radon is not the same as radioactive iodine or cesium or strontium, as radon works via the lungs, while Cs works via blood and Sr via the bones. But all have in common that they can give some DNA damage, which in general can be repaired.
Think about the following: many cancers are cured (in part) with high doses of radiation, which kill the cancer cells. The cells around the cancer cells in general survive that treatment, although they receive thousands times more high level radiation than anyone will receive in his whole life. Despite that still with high survival rates…
What is crystal clear is that the website you have all your “knowledge” from is a fanatic anti-nuclear group of persons, whoever may be behind them. Not really the most objective news site about nuclear…

I’m done with this because it’s too long and cumbersome to read, mainly due to the spamming with large walls of text by a few., But I read this and had to comment because it’s so funny:
“First you said it was 70,000 gallons leaking into the ocean waters:…FALSE!…after you were called on it, you reduced it too 300 tons per day:”
70,000 gal is my conservative calculation; TEPCO uses tons. 300 tons = 72,000 gals (approx). Actually, it’s probably closer to 80,000 gals because Japan probably uses metric tons (10% higher).
So yeah you caught me. I reduced it from 70,000 gals to 300 tons. (:rolls eyes: :snickers:)

Steve, back off on the Hyperbole since that is what low quality Journalists does.
Coal will still be around for decades to come,but probably at a lower level,since there are other energy sources getting a bigger slice of the market.
Saying Coal is dead in America, is dumb.