Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Early US Atomic Energy Commission-WHOI research is found below, indicating that Ken Buessler (WHOI) and Jay Cullen’s testing is not thorough enough. Their research is clearly inadequate to evaluate the impact of the ongoing Fukushima nuclear disaster on life in the Pacific. Given their funding-ties to the nuclear-military industrial complex, should one be surprised? They are getting a lot of governmental funding, and in the case of WHOI, foreign partnerships-funding, including the University of Tokyo! Of course, Jay Cullen’s funding source frequently “partners” with Cameco, which co-owns a major, newly opened, uranium mine with TEPCO at Cigar Lake. (See details at bottom of page). Remember TEPCO? TEPCO is owner-operator of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station. It is worth noting that Ken Buesseler’s dissertation focused on plutonium testing. And, yet, his current focus appears to be on Cesium 134, half-life of 2 years in seawater and sometimes fish.

WHOI’s “Our Radioactive Ocean .org” “help us” – “Our Radioactive Ocean Sampling Demo” features Ken Buesseler saying at around 1.45 minutes that the water should not have sediments or seaweed in it, http://www.ourradioactiveocean. org/helpus.html, whereas the article by WHOI, below, suggests that sediments, plankton, seaweed and organisms feeding in sediments is the place to look! Dana Durnford pointed this out on Sept. 30th, a little over a month before he was arrested for allegedly frightening Jay Cullen and someone at WHOI – apparently Ken Buesseler, and his videos removed. Despite all of their partnerships and sponsors, WHOI, wants around $600.00 per sample to test in a machine that costs $75,000 (see around 3.20 min), meaning that citizen scientists would be better served to buy or rent their own! 125 samples would pay for the machine and many more than this would be needed, making this a shake-down to boot. One or two thousand samples would be a good start, and that would cost the citizen scientist 1.2 million $ for 2,000 samples at $600 a pop.

The following study was sniffed out by HillbillyHoundDog (Nov. 5, 2015) and AGreenroadBlogSpot.[1]:

A few excerpts:
In general plutonium concentrations are higher in organisms feeding on sediment or on surfaces than in those drawing largely on the water itself. There is some evidence that plutonium concentrations are higher In organisms of higher trophic levelsWhen the much higher relative biological effectiveness of alpha versus beta or gamma radiation is considered, plutonium isotopes now contribute more than either Sr 90 or Cs 137 to the artificial radiation of marine Invertebrates.

… plutonium isotopes are being introduced to the aquatic environment from nuclear fuel reprocessing Installations(Kelleher 1969, Mitchell 1969, Templeton and Preston 1966), detected periodically in air, water and soil samples near plutonium fabrication facilities (Anon. 1970), and released following accidents involving nuclear devices (Aarkrog 1970).

We need only to acknowledge the growing use of plutonium in the nuclear industry to realize there is a need to understand the behavior, fate and transfer of plutonlum within the aquatic environment.

[Note that Starfish are often called Sea Stars, since they are not fish.]
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE - WHOI cover p. 0
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE - WHOI Abstract, p. 1
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE - WHOI, p. 2
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE - WHOI, p. 3
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE - WHOI, p. 4
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE - WHOI, p. 5
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE - WHOI, p. 7
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE - WHOI, p. 6
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE - WHOI, p. 8
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE - WHOI, p. 9
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE - WHOI p. 10
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE - WHOI, p. 11
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE - WHOI p. 12
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE - WHOI, p. 13
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE - WHOI, p. 14
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE - WHOI, p. 15
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE - WHOI, p. 16
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE - WHOI, p. 17
Plutonium in North Atlantic Ocean Organisms; Ecological Relationships” by Victor E. Noshkin et. al. USDOE – WHOI
Fig.1. Location of samples, referred to in Table I, collected from the area of Cape Cod, Massachusetts.
Authors:
Noshkin, V.E. ; Bowen, V.T. ; Wong, K.M. ; Burke, J.C.
Publication Date:
1971-01-01
OSTI Identifier:
4695964
Report Number(s):
NYO–2174-130; CONF-710501–55
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Resource Relation:
Other Information: From 3. national symposium on radioecology; Oak Ridge, Tenn. (10 May 1971). UNCL. Orig. Receipt Date: 31-DEC-72
Research Org:
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Mass.
Sponsoring Org:
USDOE
http://www.osti.gov/scitech/biblio/4695964

“Partners” seems to be a new euphemism for funding, although in some of these instances, it may be cooperation (e.g. universities). Sponsors is clearly funding: Partners of the the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

But, first look who is head of “Foundations and individual giving”: a former Navy man: “Rear Admiral Richard F. Pittenger USN (Ret.)”.

What’s the difference in a featured and non-featured Partner-Sponsor?
[Emphasis our own.]
Featured Partners & Sponsors
GOVERNMENT: UNITED STATES
National Science Foundation
Department of Defense
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin. (NOAA)
National Aeronautics and Space Admin. (NASA)
U.S. Geological Survey Department of Energy (USGS)
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Oh, it’s not just US taxpayer money at work! Look what other governments fund or partner with WHOI!
GOVERNMENT: INTERNATIONAL
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Ecuador’s Naval Oceanographic Institute
French Research Institute for Exploration of the Sea
India’s Coucil of Scientific and Industrial Research
Pakistan’s National Institute of Oceanography
Vietnam Academy of Science and Technology

And, then there are the universities, within the US and without:
ACADEMIC
Alexandria University
Cape Breton University
Cornell University
Dalhousie University
Korea Maritime University
Marine Biological Laboratory
Masachusetts Institute of Technology
National Oceanograhy Centre,
Southampton Naval Postgraduate School
Oregon State University
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
Shanghai Ocean University
Universidad de Concepción
University of Tokyo

And, then, there are the corporations:
INDUSTRY
Chevron Flatley Discovery Lab
James Fisher Defense
Kongsberg Hydroid
Raytheon
Schlumberger Doll Research
Sonardyne
Teledyne Technologies

NON GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS
Boston Museum of Science
Cape Abilities
Conservation International
Consortium for Ocean Leadership New England Aquarium
Smithsonian Institution
Waitt Institute
Woods Hole Research Center

http://www.whoi. edu/main/partners-sponsors
The above link was pointed out by agreenroadblogspot.com who apparently had the good sense to look for “partners” or “sponsors” rather than “funding” as we did: http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2014/08/why-whoi-woods-hole-and-ken-buesseler.html

Jay Cullen’s funding for the Pacific water testing is from MEOPAR, established in 2012, and which is funded by the “Government of Canada’s Networks of Centres of Excellence Program”, itself “An initiative of CIHR, NSERC and SSHRC”. NSERC partners with the nuclear industry and especially with uranium mining giant, CAMECO. CAMECO owns the Cigar Lake uranium mine along with TEPCO, AREVA, and a Japanese company with ties to Mitsubishi. Partner appears to mean joint funding in the case of NSERC (see more below). He’s also received about a dozen other grants from NSERC. He has also done research on offshore BC fish-farming. http://web.uvic.ca/~jcullen/CullenLab/People_files/Cullen_CV_2014Jan_web.pdf

Cullen has received $630,000 from MEOPAR to monitor the Pacific for Fukushima radiation from 2014 to 2017. MEOPAR stands for Marine Environmental Observation Prediction and Response Network (MEOPAR). http://communications.uvic.ca/releases/release.php?display=release&id=1427 Dr. Robert Walker, Chairman of the Board of MEOPAR has been deeply involved in the nuclear industry. He was simultaneously President and CEO of Canadian Nuclear Laboratories, until almost the exact day that Dr. Richard Wilcox called foul about Dr. Walker’s ties. You can see in the internet archive, Wayback Machine, that Walker was still listed as both MEOPAR Board Chair AND President & CEO Canadian Nuclear Laboratories on Sept. 21, 2015: https://web.archive.org/web/20150921042733/http://meopar.ca/about-meopar/board-of-directors/ According to Walker’s Linkedin page, he became CEO of Canadian Nuclear Labs starting in November of 2014. However, before that he was President and CEO of the AECL (Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_Energy_of_Canada_Limited from Oct. of 2011 to March of 2015. Before that he was Sr. VP, Nuclear Labs, AECL (11-2010 to 09-2011) and before that he was CEO of Defence Research and Development Canada (from 2005 to 2010) and was also Assistant Deputy Minister, Dept. of National Defence in the same period. Thus, he’s occupied important positions at Defence Research and Development Canada since 1994.

These are some partnerships-chairs involving NSERC and the nuclear industry – NSERC, Candu owners, AREVA, Cameco:
Department of Medical Physics and Applied Radiation Sciences
McMaster University
Chair Title
NSERC/Candu Owners Group/AREVA Resources Canada, Cameco Corp. Industrial Research Chair in Effects of Ionizing Radiation on Non-Human Biota
http://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/Chairholders-TitulairesDeChaire/Chairholder-Titulaire_eng.asp?pid=617

M. James Hendry
Department of Geological Sciences
University of Saskatchewan
Partners
Cameco Corporation
Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan
http://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/Chairholders-TitulairesDeChaire/Chairholder-Titulaire_eng.asp?pid=284

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
http://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca
Alphabetical Search by Partner Name
Cameco Corp.
Cameco Corporation
http://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/Chairholders-TitulairesDeChaire/AlphaSearch-RechercheAlpha_eng.asp?p=1&src=C

SAS partners: http://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/_doc/NSERC-CRSNG/FactSheets/SK_Factsheet_EN.pdf

Soo Hyun Byun
Department of Medical Physics and Applied Radiation Sciences
McMaster University
An Industrial Research Chair in effects of ionizing radiation on non-human biota has been established by NSERC, CANDU Owners Group, AREVA Resources Canada and Cameco to support the research programs in radiation biology and radiation physics at McMaster.
http://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/Chairholders-TitulairesDeChaire/Chairholder-Titulaire_eng.asp?pid=880

http://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/Media-Media/NewsRelease-CommuniqueDePresse_eng.asp?ID=372

https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2015/04/07/us-plutonium-expert-buesseler-forgets-expertise-212-times-more-plutonium-from-fukushima-than-global-fallout-in-japan-says-german-research/

[1] http://enenews.com/headline-millions-salmon-mysteriously-disappear-west-coast-literally-2-days-disappeared-crashed-never-explain-one-worst-seasons-disturbing-serious-trouble-very-dramatic/comment-page-2#comment-719831
http://agreenroad.blogspot.ch/2014/08/why-whoi-woods-hole-and-ken-buesseler.html

[2] From Dr. Wilcox: “In his introduction Jay Cullen did not reveal that the nuclear industry is one of the funding sources for his research. It is outrageous that the Board Chair for Meopar, the organization that oversees Cullen’s research on this issue, is also the president and CEO of Canadian Nuclear Laboratories: http://meopar.ca/about-meopar/board-of-directors/
http://www.activistpost.com/2015/09/vancouver-aquariums-radioactive-cover-up.html