カテゴリ :スポンサー広告 トラックバック(-) コメント(-)




Transformative changes are needed in our food, agriculture and trade systems in order to increase diversity on farms, reduce our use of fertilizer and other inputs, support small-scale farmers and create strong local food systems. That’s the conclusion of a remarkable new publication from the U.N. Commission on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).

The report, Trade and Environment Review 2013: Wake Up Before it is Too Late, included contributions from more than 60 experts around the world (including a commentary from IATP). The report includes in-depth sections on the shift toward more sustainable, resilient agriculture; livestock production and climate change; the importance of research and extension; the role of land use; and the role of reforming global trade rules.


The report links global security and escalating conflicts with the urgent need to transform agriculture toward what it calls “ecological intensification.” The report concludes, “This implies a rapid and significant shift from conventional, monoculture-based and high-external-input-dependent industrial production toward mosaics of sustainable, regenerative production systems that also considerably improve the productivity of small-scale farmers.”

The UNCTAD report identified key indicators for the transformation needed in agriculture:

Increasing soil carbon content and better integration between crop and livestock production, and increased incorporation of agroforestry and wild vegetation
土壌炭素、収穫物と家畜生産のよりよい統合を増強し、アグロフォレストリー (樹木を植栽し、樹間で家畜・農作物を飼育・栽培する農林業)と山菜の取り込みを強化

Reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of livestock production

Reduction of GHGs through sustainable peatland, forest and grassland management

Optimization of organic and inorganic fertilizer use, including through closed nutrient cycles in agriculture

Reduction of waste throughout the food chains

Changing dietary patterns toward climate-friendly food consumption

Reform of the international trade regime for food and agriculture

IATP’s contribution focused on the effects of trade liberalization on agriculture systems. We argued that trade liberalization both at the WTO and in regional deals like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) had increased volatility and corporate concentration in agriculture markets, while undermining the development of locally-based, agroecological systems that better support farmers.

The report’s findings are in stark contrast to the accelerated push for new free trade agreements, including the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the U.S.-EU Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), which expand a long discredited model of economic development designed primarily to strengthen the hold of multinational corporate and financial firms on the global economy. Neither global climate talks nor other global food security forums reflect the urgency expressed in the UNCTAD report to transform agriculture.

In 2007, another important report out of the multilateral system, the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD), with contributions from experts from over 100 countries (and endorsed by nearly 60 countries), came to very similar conclusions. The IAASTD report concluded that “Business as Usual is Not an Option,” and the shift toward agroecological approaches was urgent and necessary for food security and climate resilience. Unfortunately, business as usual has largely continued. Maybe this new UNCTAD report will provide the tipping point for the policy transformation that must take place “before it’s too late.”























原発事故からの教訓 ~ 国は国民を守らない

First Nations call for radiation tests

Effects on marine life from Fukushima fallout a concern

John Gleeson / North Shore News

February 14, 2014 12:00 AM

B.C.'s grand chief and First Nation leaders on the Sunshine Coast are supporting a call for Ottawa to "systematically and properly" study the full impact of Fukushima radiation on the West Coast fishery.

Radiation from the March 2011 nuclear accident arrived off the B.C. coast last year, Robin Brown, ocean sciences division manager with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, said Feb. 4. "According to our observations, the radiation from Fukushima was detected in B.C. coastal waters in June 2013. Barely detectable, but detectable," Brown said.

【Radionuclide Transport from Fukushima to Eastern North Pacific】

Presented at North Pacific Marine Science Organization Annual Meeting in Nanaimo, BC, October 15, 2013

Pacific Sta.

Levels of 137Cs equal to 0.3 Bq/m3 measured at Sta. P26 in 2012 represent leading edge of Fukushima plume.
2012年にP26地点で測定されたセシウム137のレベルは0.3 Bq/m3で、福島プルームの最先端であることが分かる。

pacific prum

Distribution of 137Cs from Fukushima on Line P in June, 2013 shows highest levels at Sta. P26 decreasing eastward to values
< 0.5 Bq/m3 at Sta. P1.
福島からのセシウム137の値は2013年6月の直線Pでは、P26地点が最高値を示し、東のほうが低くなり、P1地点では0.5 Bq/m3以下である。

Pacific Line P

137Cs levels in upper 1000 m at Stas. P4 and P26 in June, 201 consistent with background levels in North Pacific from atmospheric nuclear weapons tests.

Fukushima 134Cs was detectable in upper 50 m at Sta. P26 in June, 2012, but not at Sta. P4 or at arctic stations.

134Cs was detectable along the entire Line P in June, 2013. Highest levels of 0.9 Bq/m3 were measured at Sta. P26.
2013年6月直線P上全ての地点でセシウム134が検出された。最高値はP26地点の0.9 Bq/m3。

To see the whole presentation please go

Although the federal government tested food samples, including some domestic fish species, in 2011 and early 2012, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency said last week (Feb. 5) that "further testing of imported or domestic food products for the presence of radioactive material is not required."

Last month, Tahlton Central Council president Annita McPhee wrote national Chief Shawn Ain-chut Atleo, urging him to press Ottawa for action amid growing concerns by members of the Tahltan Nation in northwestern B.C. "We cannot sit by and watch and wait to see what the full impacts of the Fukushima disaster will be on our salmon and our way of life," McPhee wrote. "To date, we have not seen or heard of Canada taking this issue seriously and working in a real way to address it."
先月、Tahlton中央評議会長のアニータ・マックフィーはカナダ先住民会議ショーン・Ain-chut Atleoチーフに、BC州北西部のTahlton部族のメンバーに懸念が広がっているので、オタワに行動を起こすことを求めるよう手紙を書きました。「私たちはただ座って眺めて、福島災害の全影響が私たちのサーモン、私たちの生活に及ぶのを見ているわけにはいきません。」


The letter called on Atleo to "raise this issue at the highest levels of the federal government, and demand action."

In an interview, McPhee said news reports about Fukushima have bred fear in her community.


"Some people are not eating their fish because they're scared. Some people don't want to feed it to their kids. We don't want to get cancer. We already have lots of cancer up in our area. I mean, lots," McPhee said.

"The Tahltan people have been very concerned about what's going on. We get our fish from the Stikine River, but it comes from the Pacific Ocean," she said. "As First Nations, we've got to come together and address this, force the government's hand. We have a right to know if our fish is safe to eat."
「Tahltanの人々は今起こっていることを大変心配しています。私たちは魚をスチキン川から獲ってきます。しかしそれは太平洋から来るのです。 先住民族として、私たちは共にこの問題に取り組み、なんとしてでも政府に行動してもらいます。私たちには魚が食べても安全かどうか知る権利があるのです。」

B.C. Grand Chief Stewart Phillip echoed that view, calling the federal government's inaction "highly irresponsible.

"I think it's certainly a legitimate concern," Phillip said. "Other jurisdictions - other countries - realize there is a very real potential for contamination. Unfortunately, Canada doesn't seem to be taking any steps whatsoever to acknowledge this as a potential threat."

Instead, Phillip noted, DFO has been downsized, representing "a significant disinvestment" in the West Coast fishery.

"It's not only unacceptable, but it's very negligent of the government of Canada," he said.

For Tsleil-Waututh Nation member Rueben George, radiation concerns are just one more aggravating aspect in an increasingly threatened environment.


"I think overall it's been progressively worse and worse and worse, and that's just one of the destructive factors," he said.

Personally hesitant about eating fish from the region, George said questions about escalating cancer rates need to be addressed.

Reuben George

"Already there's so many questions that I think our society needs to know. At what level is it too dangerous?" he asked.

On the Upper Sunshine Coast, Sliammon Chief Clint Williams said he fully backs McPhee's call for testing and full disclosure.


"Our people really cherish salmon, it's always been part of our culture, so we absolutely encourage that. We want to make sure our food is safe. And it's not just salmon either - it's clams, geoducks, sea urchins," Williams said. "I'm sure those concerns are shared all up and down the coast here."

Former Shíshálh (Sechelt) Nation chief Calvin Craigan concurred, saying that any contamination of natural foods from the sea will affect coastal Native communities.

"If that's going to happen in the long term, and it is, all First Nations have to get together and call for testing," Craigan said.

Last October, a report by five DFO scientists concluded that, due to ocean currents, "the inventory of Fukushima radioactivity will almost entirely shift from the western to the eastern North Pacific during the next five years."

The report, released during the North Pacific Marine Science Organization annual meeting in Nanaimo, presented two widely different study models. One model suggested ocean contamination would exceed levels of maximum fallout from nuclear tests and previous accidents such as Chernobyl, while the other model said levels would equal the amount of contamination that existed in 1990.

"These levels are still well below maximum permissible concentrations in drinking water for cesium-137," the report said. "Not an environmental or human health radiological threat!" Despite that caveat, the report cited "many reasons for study," including human health and marine biota.

Brown, one of the co-authors of the report, acknowledged that neither study factored in ongoing discharges from Fukushima after the March 2011 release.

"But there are several lines of evidence," he added, "to suggest that the ongoing releases, while serious, are small compared to the initial release and will not impact arrival time or peak concentration."

DFO will continue to test water samples from a line of monitoring stations in the Pacific, Brown said, stressing the low levels that have been detected to date.

"These levels are in the barely detectable range. They are extremely low," he said.

Asked if West Coast marine life was being tested, Brown said: "I know Health Canada is doing some kind of research mode measurements. I know they are measuring concentrations in fish."

When contacted, however, Health Canada referred Coast Reporter to the CFIA, which said tests were conducted on some

species in August 2011 and February 2012, and all test results were below Health Canada action limits.

"Based on our test results, as well as our ongoing assessment of information from a variety of expert resources, further testing of imported or domestic food products for the presence of radioactive material is not required," the agency said in an email response.

"The CFIA continues to monitor events in Japan and assess any potential impacts on Canada's food supply," the agency added. "Information from Japanese officials, Canadian government partners, Canada's foreign embassies and international authorities are considered as part of our assessment."

with files from Jeremy Shepherd

© North Shore News













6 February, 22:31

Fukushima catastrophe: Japanese gene pool affected by radiation, morbidity to rise

Thirty thousand people who took part in the works to liquidate the consequences of the accident at the Fukushima 1 nuclear power plant will be examined in Japan. Doctors have already examined Nineteen thousand liquidators. The data received are disappointing.


In order to precisely determine how the accident affected the people, specialists took into account information about their lifestyle. For example, they took into account whether a person smoked and what the ecology in the region of his residency was. About two thousand liquidators who received the radiation dose of over 100 millisieverts have already been detected. It is a dangerous dose, explains Maksim Shingarkin, deputy chairman of the natural resources committee at the Russian State Duma.

"If they received the total dose in the course of a year, those people definitely were exposed to excessive radiation above the established norm. They are to remain under the doctors observation for the rest of their lives. The mere fact that such levels of radiation energy are registered means that inside a person certain processes have already been set off. And it is impossible to predict when and in what form of disease this will show".

Neither the liquidators, nor the local population have so far developed diseases directly caused by the accident. However, there is a debate regarding what caused cancer that killed Masao Yoshida, the head of the commission to estimate the size of the damage at the Fukushima power plant.
作業員でも、地域の住民でも今のところ直接事故が原因で発病した人はいません。 しかし、福島原発の損傷の規模を推測する任務の長であり、癌で亡くなった吉田昌郎所長の原因が何あったのかは議論されています。

For the sake of comparison, after the Chernobyl disaster 29 people died in the course of two months. That primarily includes those who got many times the lethal dose of radiation while working on the roof of the destroyed energy unit. According to witnesses, people felt a metallic taste in their mouths, which was a sign of a very high radiation level. Other Chernobyl victims experienced a of diseases 5-6 years later. According to Andrey Dyomin, president of the Russian Association for Public Health, the same is to be expected in Japan.

"We cannot say that the problem would disappear in five years. The rise of morbidity will continue as the general gene pool has been damaged. Next generations will carry the burden of that catastrophe".

The peculiarities of the Japanese national cuisine focused on fish and seafood are one of the risk factors. Of course, it is not necessarily true that all of the food will be poisoned by the radiation coming from the Fukushima spills, but the risk of getting radiation poisoning through food is rising. At the end of last year 40 km from the power plant a fish was caught, in which the level of dangerous elements exceeded the norm by a hundred times. Scientists assume that the poisoned water from the power plant was carried by the sea streams to California. How else would one explain that every blue tuna fish caught near the coast of the state has signs of radioactive poisoning, while brown kelp containing the radioactive iodine level that exceeds the norm by 200 times has been detected on the shore? According to the Bloomberg web site, this year a "squad" of radioactive jellyfish is to be expected at the US West Coast. Californians are worried. It is unclear how the situation will develop in the future, says Prof. Alexey Yablokov, an advisor at the Russian Academy of Sciences and ecologist.

"The fact that so far from the Fukushima plant fish contains radionuclides shows that our view of the circulation of radionuclides spilt into the ocean has proved to be false. Radioactivity in tuna fish has been detected on the American side of the ocean. It turns out that the Fukushima spillage affects the life of the world ocean. I see no other way out other than to establish a constant and very careful radiation control of all seafood caught in the Pacific Ocean without exception".

According to some experts, until the reactors are dismantled, which can be done only in 20 years, the disaster is not over. Spillage of radioactive water into the sea via the ground waters is possible. It appears that one cannot expect an improvement of the ecological situation around Fukushima in the decades to come.


Professor Vsevolod Kortov, Ural Federal University, academician of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences and leader of the school of solid-state radiation physics

"20 millisievert a year is the lower borderline when evacuation of the population begins, according to recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. It is a very significant problem for the Japanese because thousands of people still live in places of temporary stay. People live in severe conditions posing a huge burden for the budget. For this reason the government means to return people to their homes as soon as possible.


I spoke at a press-conference in Fukushima City and offered explanations and some criticism. 20 millisievert a year is the occupational radiation dose for adults. I mean people employed at nuclear power plants 6 hours a day who afterwards go to a clean environment. And here it was planned to send both youngsters and old people to spend 24 hours in such radioactive zones. The results of the research carried out in Ukraine for 25 years after the Chernobyl disaster prove that living even in slightly contaminated areas for long periods of time is more harmful than receiving a one-time large radiation dose. For the second case an effective treatment has been developed but living on territories with even weak radioactivity for decades is extremely dangerous because internal radiation develops, immunity suffers and genetic problems occur. I said that this does not comply with standards accepted in Russia and Europe."








Citizen scientists can fill info gaps about Fukushima effects



AN INTERNET SEARCH turns up an astounding number of pages about radiation from Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant meltdown that followed an earthquake and tsunami in March 2011. But it’s difficult to find credible information.


One reason is that government monitoring of radiation and its effects on fish stocks appears to be limited. According to the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, “No U.S. government or international agency is monitoring the spread of low levels of radiation from Fukushima along the West Coast of North America and around the Hawaiian Islands.”

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s most recent food testing, which includes seafood, appears to be from June 2012. Its website states, “FDA has no evidence that radionuclides from the Fukushima incident are present in the U.S. food supply at levels that would pose a public health concern. This is true for both FDA-regulated food products imported from Japan and U.S. domestic food products, including seafood caught off the coast of the United States.”

The non-profit Canadian Highly Migratory Species Foundation has been monitoring Pacific troll-caught albacore tuna off the B.C. coast. Its 2013 sampling found “no residues detected at the lowest detection limits achievable.” The B.C. Centre for Disease Control website assures us we have little cause for concern about radiation from Japan in our food and environment. Websites for Health Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency yield scant information.

But the disaster isn't over. Despite the Japanese government’s claim that everything is under control, concerns have been raised about the delicate process of removing more than 1,500 nuclear fuel rod sets, each containing 60 to 80 fuel rods with a total of about 400 tonnes of uranium, from Reactor 4 to a safer location, which is expected to take a year. Some, including me, have speculated another major earthquake could spark a new disaster. And Reactors 1, 2, and 3 still have tonnes of molten radioactive fuel that must be cooled with a constant flow of water.

A radioactive plume is expected to reach the West Coast sometime this year, but experts say it will be diluted by currents off Japan’s east coast and, according to the Live Science website, “the majority of the cesium-137 will remain in the —a region of ocean that circulates slowly clockwise and has trapped debris in its center to form the ‘Great Pacific Garbage Patch’—and continue to be diluted for approximately a decade following the initial Fukushima release in 2011.”

pacifice gyle

With the lack of data from government, the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution is asking the public for help. In January, Ken Buesseler, senior scientist and director of the Center for Marine and Environmental Radioactivity at the U.S.-based non-profit, launched a fundraising campaign and citizen science website to collect and analyze seawater along North America’s West Coast.


“Whether you agree with predictions that levels of radiation along the Pacific Coast of North America will be too low to be of human health concern or to impact fisheries and marine life, we can all agree that radiation should be monitored, and we are asking for your help to make that happen,” Buesseler said in a news release.


Participants can help fund and propose new sites for seawater sampling, and collect seawater to ship to the lab for analysis. The David Suzuki Foundation is the point group for two sampling sites, on Haida Gwaii and at Bamfield on the west coast of Vancouver Island. Data will be published at How Radioactive Is Our Ocean?, and will include an evolving map showing cesium concentrations with links to information about radioactivity in the ocean and what the levels mean.


The oceans contain naturally occurring radioactive isotopes and radiation from 1960s nuclear testing. Buesseler doesn’t think levels in the ocean or seafood will become dangerously high because of the Fukushima disaster, but he stresses the importance of monitoring.

The Fukushima disaster was a wake-up call for the potential dangers of nuclear power plants, especially in unstable areas. North Americans may have little cause for concern for now, but without good scientific information to determine whether or not it is affecting our food and environment we can’t know for sure. The Woods Hole initiative is a good start.


UPDATES January 28, 2014
2014年1月28日 の最新情報

San Diego CA

Point_Reyes CA

Grayland WA

Sequim Bay, WA

The first results from seawater samples come from La Jolla and Point Reyes, Calif., and Grayland and Squium, Wash. Four samples from these three locations show no detectable Fukushima cesium. We know this because Fukushima released equal amounts of two isotopes of cesium: the shorter-lived cesium-134 isotope (half-life of 2 years) and the longer-lived cesium-137 (half-life of 30 years). Cesium-137 was found at levels of 1.5 Bq per cubic meter (Bq/m3), but this was already detectable prior to releases at Fukushima and came primarily from nuclear weapons testing in the Pacific during the 1950s and 1960s.

This so-called "negative" result has two immediate implications. First there should be no health concerns associated with swimming in the ocean as a result of Fukushima contaminants by themselves or as a result of any additional, low-level radioactive dose received from existing human and natural sources of radiation in the ocean (existing levels of cesium-137 are hundreds of times less than the dose provided by naturally occurring potassium-40 in seawater).

Secondly, and just as important from a scientific perspective, the results provide a key baseline from the West Coast prior to the arrival of the Fukushima plume. Models of ocean currents and cesium transport predict that the plume will arrive along the northern sections of the North American Pacific Coast (Alaska and northern British Columbia) sometime in the spring of 2014 and will arrive along the Washington, Oregon, and California coastline over the coming one to two years. The timing and pattern of dispersal underscores the need for samples further to the north, and for additional samples to be collected every few months at sites up and down the coast.

For this reason, we are also pleased to report that funds are already in hand to continue sampling at both the La Jolla and Pt. Reyes locations thanks to the foresight and generous donations of the groups who volunteered to adopt these sites. We expect levels of cesium-134 to become detectable in coming months, but the behavior of coastal currents will likely produce complex results (changing levels over time, arrival in some areas but not others) that cannot be accurately predicted by models. That is why ongoing support for long-term monitoring is so critical, now and in the future.

mer update
7.4 bq/kg 米国EPAが定める飲料水の最大値
1 bq/kg チェルノブイリ事故よる海中(バルト海)での最高値
12 bq/kg 海中のカリウム40の量
10,000 bq/kg 放射線による健康被害、魚が死に至る量








【自然放射能と人工放射能 Natural radiation and man made radiation】





≪ トップページへこのページの先頭へ  ≫

presented by 地球の名言


Blue Dolphine

Author:Blue Dolphine
ボア君 22歳
ラビ君 18歳
エリー 9歳
(ラブラドール犬 ♀)



にほんブログ村 海外生活ブログ カナダ情報へ

にほんブログ村 環境ブログ 原発・放射能へ

にほんブログ村 犬ブログ ラブラドールへ



01 | 2014/02 | 03
- - - - - - 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 -