via Accident on Russian nuclear sub suffocates 20 – Yahoo! News

There should be international concern that if any safety system on a Nuculear submarine is not well built, as it constitutes a global safety issue. Deterrence is only good only if it perpetuates radiologic safety, not encourages environmental potential detriment.

It’s not the destroyer that the pirates have to worry about: Its the allied submarine that is 12 miles away armed with a full bank of traditional warheads. Ah yes the wonder and joy of underwater diplomacy. Game over!

MOGADISHU, Somalia – A U.S. destroyer off the coast of Somalia closed in Saturday on a hijacked Ukrainian ship loaded with tanks and ammunition, watching it to ensure the pirates who seized it do not try to remove any cargo or crew….US destroyer watching hijacked ship off Somalia – Yahoo News.I

Related: Somalia: World can use force against pirates.

Related: U.S. commandos get U.N. go-ahead to hunt pirates on land.

Today CNN reported that “Water with trace amounts of radioactivity may have leaked for months from a U.S. Navy nuclear-powered submarine as it traveled around the Pacific to ports in Guam, Japan and Hawaii, Navy officials told CNN on Friday.”

“The total amount leaked while the sub was in port in Guam, Japan and Hawaii was less than a half of a microcurie (0.0000005 curies), or less than what is found in a 50-pound bag of lawn and garden fertilizer, the officials said.”

Who can we trust here? I discovered online that the SSN Houston was supposed to be decommissioned around the year 2000.

Somebody in the goverment is sandbagging information away from the public.

Maybe it was cheaper just to sail the submarine to Japan and not worry the about it falling apart and having to absorb the cost of storing toxic waste? So how much will it cost the American public to float this thing back to San Diego?

We need to read between the lines I guess. CNN said the submarine may a have been leaking for months. How many 50 lbs bags for fertilizer radiation is that equivalent to over several months? Time to re-calculate. Something is missing here. News writers typically liken the amount radiation exposure to “so many hours of a ride in an airplane”, not a bag of fertilizer. Why the change?

Here’s a little know finding: according to the EPA Fertilizer is know to contain Uranium, plus decay product including Radium and Thorium

I can only believe that trace amounts of radiation going somewhere has to manifest some environmental impact.

Goverment Foul Up or Fear of Fertilizer?

Perhaps gardening with fertilizer qualifies as hazardous activity now? Corporations have historically used the word “trace” to minimize media response of quantities of toxic PCB’s in soil and nicotine presence in cigarettes. What does trace really mean? Reading the nutritional information on a bag of organic potato chips, an essential ingredient is often listed as “trace minerals sea salt.” Regardless of the amount, you can still taste trace sea salt. Do you want your grandchildren help you distribute trace radiation in the veggie garden? Want to eat a bag of potato chips that has submarine flavored sea salt? Something to think about anyway!

I’m going to be more careful when I’m in the garden now! My guess reason is they didn’t use the airplane trip analogy is because the truth is fertilizer may offer more radiation exposure than an airplane trip or an an Xray.

I think twice now before I plant my petunias, and eating organic sea salt potato chips. I think I’ll stick with Lays.