Radioactve Iodine linked to Japan found in Glasgow

[Lollybrolly]

Sky news reporting now!

news.sky.com/skynews/

On TV too.

In no doubt absolutely tiny quantities that have no health impact. But let's not let that get in the way of a screaming headline.

I was reading on wiki about Chernobyl, this morning. I'd suggest anyone who is worried about this does the same...it puts it massively into perspective

Found traces at RAL Harwell now Here

"the UK is now beginning to see the minutest traces of iodine - 131 associated with events at the Fukushima nuclear facility. Measurements taken at HPA's monitoring station in Oxfordshire yesterday (28 March) using very high volume air sampling techniques found trace levels of iodine - 131 in the air. The levels were extremely low at 300 micro-becquerels per cubic metre."

What a blooming mess from one factory. I ask you...is it worth it? If we're clever enough to put people on the moon (which is seeming more and more like it was faked, in this context!) then surely we can find other ways of renewing energy.

Do they measure quantities of caesium, strontium and plutonium in this country? They are much more worrying than iodine.

Oh there's higher radioactivity from Chernobyl in Scotland. But I am in Glasgow and I do have a mushroom growing in my fridge

It is a mess but let's put this piece of news into context.

The iodine found is miniscule. It's more the scientists showing their equipment off on how sensitive it is rather than any suggestion there's a health risk.

Besides which, Iodine-131 has a half life of 8 days so will disappear in a few weeks completely.

A total non-story really

I wouldn't mind a nice steel dome to put over my house in case of future accidents.

I wish I could grow mushrooms in my fridge. Would save me buying them.

Move to Glasgow

All I can says is.... their monitoring is very, very good to be able to detect that minute quantity.

5 July 2010 | By William Surman

THE last Scottish sheep farm affected by the 1986 Chernobyl disaster has been released from movement restrictions imposed by the Food Standards Agency (FSA).

For nearly a quarter of a century Scottish sheep farmers have been under restriction after an explosion at a nuclear power plant in the former USSR (now Ukraine) resulted in radioactivity being deposited on upland areas across the UK.

But tests last month revealed the levels of radioactivity in Scottish sheep have finally dropped below the safety limits allowing the FSA to lift all restrictions on the movement, sale and supply of sheep.

There are still bans in Wales and Cumbria however.

It has been said, by some cynics, that the farms affected by Chernobyl have been quite happy to keep receiving their government subsidies as they got up to four times more income over a certain period than they would have done if they'd have been selling the animal products as normal in that period.

The finding of any radioisotopes anywhere a large enough release anywhere in the world is not a surprise - it circulates around the planet in the sea & atmosphere & we have good measuring systems. It is better to be able to measure it to such tiny levels to confirm it is indeed at those tiny levels.

With respect, Elvisgirl, I don't really care how happy the farmers are about the remuneration aspect.

I do however recoil from the fact that there was a 24 year restriction due to a nuclear accident hundreds of miles away. And within safety limits doesn't mean it's not still radioactive.

I've had it up to here with nuclear power, nuclear everything really. It's a bunch of crap.

x rays are Ok I suppose.

But with respect Ingrid, if we want to continue with our current and future energy requirements, we actually need MORE nuclear power, not less.

The simple truth is that green energy such as wind farms don't generate anywhere near enough power for our current needs and the costs are so high that its not worth it. You could cover your own roof in solar panels and it won't provide enough power for your needs. You'd be lucky to get a tank of hot water.

Coal is a finite resource, needs a lot of mining, transporting and ultimately importing. The power stations are not exactly green either. You only have to look at the miner's who regularly get trapped and die in mines to see that coal isn't safe either.

The current generation of nuclear power plants are way safer than Chernobyl and I read somewhere that the next would be even better. Apparently even if the core breached, in the new power plants, gravity itself would keep the radioactive material in. No idea how that works, cleverer people than me know I expect.

The worst aspect of the disaster hasn't been the reactor breach which as awful as it is, was handled far better than I bet the UK would have responded. In my opinion, the worst is the scaremongering from the press reporting.

Whipping up hysteria over nuclear power will just mean more reluctance from our MP's to build more plants. Then as our existing plants (both nuclear & traditional) reach their end of life, we won't have anything viable to replace it with.

Where did I read the other day that in 20 years we'll have enough green energy going on to satisfy everyone's needs? But it's all hush hush because of the financial stuff bound up in nuclear power.

Could have been biased gibberish but I'd like to believe we could manage on the resources we have without using this dirty, impossible to clean up, poisonous nonsense...if we're that clever. And if we're not that clever we shouldn't be fecking about with nuclear power anyway.

Sounds optimistic to me but I do hope you are right. Personally I can't see it happening unless there's some major leap forward in green technologies.

i didnt read the iodine presence as being scare mongoring as such,just that i'm left wondering how its going to escalate. tiny levels have made their way over here,so far,whats next??

it shows that it indeed can affect us.

X rays are OK when necessary. You shouldn't have any more of them than you have to.

Ingrid I agree with you and always have. My teenaged son and I were behind a car yesterday with a sticker objecting to wind farms

I can't believe people wouldn't prefer to cut our energy consumption. Not that hard, is it? Better than being subjected to radioactive particles in the blimmin air we breathe.

"Could have been biased gibberish"

It is biased gibberish. Anyone that has to claim that there's some great conspiracy holding them down is usually lying or unable to face the reality of their position.

The ITER project has no problem ploughing ahead despite the fact that if it succeeds it will make the entire existing nuclear industry obsolete.

If anything the nuclear industry should be trying to desperately kill the ITER project while throwing support at the alternative energy plans. ITER will kill them, where as green power will keep them in business for years they will always need a reliable backup source of power for when it's cloudy, non-tidal or windless.

"I'd like to believe we could manage on the resources we have"

Nuclear power is a resource that we have and it's certainly not "nonsense".

Japan has 55 nuclear reactors. It's been hit by the biggest earthquake in years and then a tsunami. Four reactors have had problems, and despite being older designs no longer in use they haven't caused a catastrophe. Meanwhile an oil refinery along the coast did blow up. So what causes more damage? What is "dirty"? What is "poisonous"?

So far this has been a big success for the nuclear industry.

If anyone should be embarrassed it's the press and the green parties who are cynically using the politics of fear to abuse the public and gain political power.

"i didnt read the iodine presence as being scare mongoring as such"

Reporting on the particles is scientifically interesting.

Trying to pretend there's any health risk is scare mongering.

Granite Kitchen worktops will probably give you a higher dose of radiation than those particles and over many years rather than the handful of days it takes the iodine to decay to half it's potency.