The time of the nuclear reactor melt-down at Chernobyl is something I can vividly recall.
Warnings were made regarding the consumption of Welsh lamb, as it appeared that the fallout had impacted regions throughout England and Wales. The lambs were grazing on contaminated grass. A degree of caution was suggested.
In contrast, following the reactor disaster in Japan, no such warnings have been issued, despite the likelihood that the ocean has absorbed harmful doses of radioactive water.
Is there any expectation that the ocean has been scrutinized for the potential damage and contamination affecting the fish populations?
I raise this question due to the peculiar and alarming phenomena reported in the news.
With a significant decline in sea birds and penguins, as well as diminished fish stocks along the eastern coastline, should we consider reducing our seafood consumption?
Furthermore, is it not essential for scientists to investigate the issues that might pose risks for us in the years ahead?
Keep in mind that radioactivity could linger in the ocean for hundreds of years. This adds to the argument against our unreserved move towards a nuclear-powered nation. Our coal supplies are adequate to sustain us for generations. However, if we transition to nuclear energy, we may not have that much time left.
Perhaps it is indeed time for a reassessment.
What are your thoughts on this matter?
Feel free to use the comments section to either ease my concerns or to join me in considering a reduction in our fish consumption.
by TOG
