12 May 19
@sonhouse saidI don't have a subscription. Which mammal?
https://www.ft.com/content/8eabe848-3597-11e9-bd3a-8b2a211d90d5
Here is one. Gone forever. But with your limited fund of empathy, it won't matter to you EVER.
@metal-brain saidSub? You can't link to what I posted?
I don't have a subscription. Which mammal?
Ah, sorry, it seems to be the wrong link.
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/06/first-mammal-extinct-climate-change-bramble-cay-melomys/
13 May 19
@sonhouse saidSea level rise is being blamed, but that has been happening for over 200 years. Isn't it fair to say it is GW (from natural causes) and not necessarily AGW (man made)?
Sub? You can't link to what I posted?
Ah, sorry, it seems to be the wrong link.
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/06/first-mammal-extinct-climate-change-bramble-cay-melomys/
It isn't solely GW that is being blamed though. It is also storms which are normal and not related to GW which makes it difficult to blame GW with certainty.
That claim is a real stretch.
13 May 19
@sonhouse saidGood point.
But the randomness of such dilution can still make for pockets of higher concentration and there is the problem of the lowest levels of the food chain collecting such radioactive material just by sucking up the water when getting its own nutrients and thereby concentrating those contaminants when higher predators eat the lower ones and THAT set of predator then gets eaten by ...[text shortened]... st in the open ocean.
That is well proven also, and not confined to just radioactives. @wildgrass
https://bgr.com/2019/05/09/nuclear-pollution-bomb-carbon-study/?fbclid=IwAR3cEQ_HFcvt_zZbGxjqHj1sRokc_3HSqb4NhnhPFqJyWzbfduOPE2xWw30
13 May 19
@wildgrass saidIs it just radioactive caesium or are there other radioisotopes?
Your point is well taken.
The concentration of pollutants can increase, and often does increase, in fish relative to the water. In this case, gobs and gobs of Fukushima radiation has already been released into the Pacific Ocean by accident. So we have an experiment. Obviously it is being monitored very closely by governments, clean up teams and scientists to ensure that ...[text shortened]... the-fukushima-radiation-found-in-bluefin-tuna-actually-help-save-the-imperiled-species/#1ba9dde12ac1
13 May 19
1 edit
@deepthought saidIts a good question, and I don't have a complete answer. Yes, there are other radio-isotopes but discerning them from natural radiation, or anthropogenic radiation from other sources, is not possible. The background is too high. Cesium appears to be the preferred read-out for Fukushima radiation at this time based on it's half life and solubility in water, but even those samples have some remaining contamination from weapons testing and Chernobyl. As indicated earlier, it is way below radiation overall. Many naturally-occurring isotopes are orders of magnitude higher. I think ocean K40 is naturally >100x higher than Japan's Cesium upper limit.
Is it just radioactive caesium or are there other radioisotopes?
Fun fact for the fogies: If you were born in the 50's your body contains elevated weapons-testing Carbon-14. Worldwide atmospheric C14 was 2X higher than normal in 1965.
@wildgrass saidI wonder if archaeologists factor that in doing carbon dating? Does the extra C14 skew the results?
Its a good question, and I don't have a complete answer. Yes, there are other radio-isotopes but discerning them from natural radiation, or anthropogenic radiation from other sources, is not possible. The background is too high. Cesium appears to be the preferred read-out for Fukushima radiation at this time based on it's half life and solubility in water, but even those sa ...[text shortened]... ins elevated weapons-testing Carbon-14. Worldwide atmospheric C14 was 2X higher than normal in 1965.
13 May 19
@wildgrass saidIt wouldn't effect C14 readings in the field?
There aren't too many archaeologists studying the 1950's, but certainly it is used as a biomarker.
15 May 19
1 edit
Are we done here? Every self-described environmentalist agrees that nuclear power is an essential part of our emissions-free future? Agree that we need more of it not less? Agree that it's not nearly as dangerous as it's imagined to be? Agree that coal is the worst?
More reading material:
http://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2018/4/12/new-jersey-votes-to-subsidize-solar-at-rate-18-to-28-times-greater-than-subsidy-for-nuclear
https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/nuclear-power-most-reliable-energy-source-and-its-not-even-close
16 Jun 19
@metal-brain saidThe point of the piece was reliability. Nuke works no matter the weather while solar, wind and such needs energy storage as part and parcel of the deal to run reliably.
Nope. This article says the government subsidies nuclear waste storage. It is too expensive in the long term.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-14/[WORD TOO LONG]
I imagine only geothermal would be as reliable as nuclear.
That is separate from the nasty problem of waste fuel and storage of that spent nuclear fuel.
I see some work done where the fuel is incorporated in a glass meaning there will NEVER be a leaching of the bad stuff into local water supplies but don't know if that effort went to industrial scale.
Nuclear is just plain dangerous for sure. We already have Fukushima, 3 mile island, and the worse of them all, Chernobyl.
Not only that but no doubt very bad also is the dumping of old nuke sub reactors in the Black sea by the soviets decades ago. I think something like 75 used reactors dumped overboard that way. Real smart.
16 Jun 19
@sonhouse saidBurning fossil fuels is reliable. We have plenty of coal here in the USA
The point of the piece was reliability. Nuke works no matter the weather while solar, wind and such needs energy storage as part and parcel of the deal to run reliably.
I imagine only geothermal would be as reliable as nuclear.
That is separate from the nasty problem of waste fuel and storage of that spent nuclear fuel.
I see some work done where the fuel is incorporat ...[text shortened]... soviets decades ago. I think something like 75 used reactors dumped overboard that way. Real smart.