Working at TEPCO's Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station among underground water storage pools; above-ground storage tanks rise in the background. An IAEA expert team visited the site on 17 April 2013 to review Japan's plans to decommission the facility. Photo Credit: Greg Webb / IAEA
This, recently, from Energy News:
Study shows Fukushima nuclear pollution becoming more concentrated as it approaches U.S. West Coast — Plume crosses ocean in a nearly straight line toward N. America — Appears to stay together with little dispersion (MODEL)
Published: August 20th, 2013 at 9:43 am ET
Title: An ensemble estimation of impact times and strength of Fukushima nuclear pollution to the east coast of China and the west coast of America
Source: Science China Earth Sciences; Volume 56, Issue 8, pp 1447-1451
Authors: GuiJun Han, Wei Li, HongLi Fu, XueFeng Zhang, XiDong Wang, XinRong Wu, LianXin Zhang
Date: August 2013
[...] On March 30, 2011, the Japan Central News Agency reported the monitored radioactive pollutions that were 4000 times higher than the standard level. Whether or not these nuclear pollutants will be transported to the Pacific-neighboring countries through oceanic circulations becomes a world-wide concern. [...]
[...] The time scale of the nuclear pollutants reaching the west coast of America is 3.2 years if it is estimated using the surface drifting buoys and 3.9 years if it is estimated using the nuclear pollutant particulate tracers. [...]
The source link goes to a Springerlink page, asking you to shell out $39.95 for a PDF given away freely by the publisher.
I hate them, by the way. More on why I despise Springer and its kin after the article and download links. Admire my restraint. Thank you.
For your perusal, Gentle Reader: the source PDF, An ensemble estimation of impact times and strength of Fukushima nuclear pollution to the east coast of China and the west coast of America, featured in screenshots of each page. The full text is available, below it, in several formats for download, thanks to Science China Earth Sciences.
Links to download source (right click and open in new tab):
Please advise in comments below should any link prove broken or unreacheable for you.
And now, at last, a little bit on the evil that is Springer, part of a four headed monster feeding off of research.
The Cost of Knowledge
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Before the advent of the Internet, it was difficult for scholars to distribute articles giving their research results. Historically, publishers performed services including proofreading, typesetting, copyediting, printing, and worldwide distribution. In modern times, all researchers became expected to give the publishers digital copies of their work which needed no further processing. [In other words the publishers no longer had to do all the work - they got the researchers to do it for them, usually for free. --ed ] For digital distribution, printing was unnecessary, copying was free, and worldwide distribution happens online instantly. Internet technology [and the significant decrease in copyedit costs --ed] enabled the four major scientific publishers – Elsevier, Springer, Wiley, and Informa — to cut their expenditures such that they could consistently generate gross margins on revenue of over 33%.
A change from status quo
On 21 January 2012, the mathematician Timothy Gowers called for a boycott of Elsevier with a post on his personal blog. This blog post attracted enough attention that other media sources commented on it as being part of the start of a movement. The three reasons he cited for the boycott are high subscription prices for individual journals, bundling subscriptions to journals of different value and importance, and Elsevier's support for SOPA, the PROTECT IP Act, and the Research Works Act.
& hopefully, but perhaps not likely, my intended edits will have remained...
Being as I live almost exactly across from Fukushima, perhaps I give you this post by way of distracting myself from the research itself, which is enough to scare me quite. And I thought I was jaded.
Have a nice week-end, and,
Be seeing you.