Computer model predicts seafood off N. American coast to exceed gov’t radioactivity limit
Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 11 months ago to Science
- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
1. This is talking about a computer model of Cesium 137 contamination in marine life.
Major point made was that the gilled life forms (fish) collect more than non-gilled (whales) so the implication is an impact on the food species higher than the rest.
2. The government standards they are referring to are for Canada.
No idea how that compares to the US or anyone else. Nor do I have any idea what the radioactivity levels they are quoting mean to us. Higher than normal background on land? Lower? How much either way?
3. Its a computer modelling exercise, I did not see any mention in that extract of actual sampling having been done to test the model's congruence with reality. Without evidence of that testing I would take the results with a grain of salt.
(There might be something in the full paper about that, but I was unwilling to make an account on there to see)
We are seeing how well the global warming computer models modeled reality.
Not enough context in the extract to tell if its really a health concern or not.
My inclination is to think not given the amount of radioactive material involved Vs the volume of the oceans.
That would hit pets before people I would think
1. Pacific sea life will be impacted more than Atlantic sea life due to proximity to the material.
2. Most of the impact of this, whether it is really significant or not will be in the North Pacific basin.
I think this model might be based on guesswork about contaminated water leakage volume, but I didn't access the whole article. You have to create an account for that.