If you're a fan of J-horror films, you're going to love Fox News, which reports the following: "Japan's 'toxic monster' creeping towards US." The story begins this way:
An enormous debris field is creeping toward the U.S. in the wake of the massive earthquake and tsunami that shook Japan in 2011, killing nearly 16,000 people and launching 1.5 million tons of floating objects into the sea.
That most concentrated part of the junk field is easily broader than Texas and centered approximately 1,700 miles off the Pacific coast, between California and Hawaii…
A Texas-sized toxic monster! Actually, no. Fox is teasing us. Before you can picture something like the photograph above–something extending for a thousand miles–Fox pulls back. It is likely, Fox reports, "that the trash overall is scattered across an area in the ocean about three times the size of the continental United States." That's not exactly a toxic monster. One wonders how much trash is scattered over the continental United States itself–probably far more than what's bobbing in the Pacific.
But wait–there's more! "In addition to physical junk, a wave of slightly radioactive water released from the Fukushima nuclear reactor is predicted to reach shore in 2014!" [Emphasis mine.]
But, but, but…again we're disappointed. "Scientists point out that it is so diluted it is harmless." Sigh. What Fox giveth with one hand, it taketh with the other.
Discover magazine also went with the story, settling for "toxic debris" in lieu of "toxic monster"–an improvement–but was slightly confusing with regard to the size of what it first called a "debris island" but later changed to a "debris field." It's "the size of Texas," but accompanied by "other debris dispersed throughout the ocean."
But here's where the story gets interesting. The Discover post, by Breanna Draxler, links to a statement from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration which says, "Concerns persist that this diverse array of floating materials—everything from boats and building rubble to appliances and consumer products—could wash up on shores in Hawaii, Alaska, the U.S. West Coast, and Canada over the next few years." It goes on to say that its "recently updated" computer model "predicted that some very buoyant debris already may have reached the Pacific Northwest coast as early as winter 2011–2012."
The statement is dated April 12, 2012, but with a note that says a graphic of results of the computer model was updated Nov. 1, 2013–just last week, which makes it reasonable fodder for a story. Discover raises the legitimate concern that non-native species could be transported to the U.S. on the debris, but it borrows that tidbit from the Fox News story.
A few others had fun with this questionable story, including the Daily Mail, which added that a motorcycle has already washed up on the West Coast of the U.S. "as confirmed tsunami debris." Am I the last person to find out motorcycles float?
Before we get too carried away with the silliness in the press, we might want to point a figure at NOAA. Its statement clearly raised concerns about the floating debris. And it has put out not one but two statements this week in which it tried to clarify the issue.
On Tuesday, it released this statement:
We've heard a concern from some of you that there's an island of debris in the Pacific Ocean coming from the 2011 earthquake and tsunami in Japan. For those of you who may be new to this topic, we'd like to address those concerns.
Here's the bottom line: There is no solid mass of debris from Japan heading to the United States. [Emphasis by NOAA.]
Yesterday, it spoke again, reaffirming that its model "does not show that there is a solid mass or 'island' of debris in the ocean." But the statement once again reflects NOAA's concern about the debris.
Are we arguing about the amount of debris and when it might arrive at the U.S., or are we simply arguing over whether "island" is an accurate metaphor?
The truth seems to be that there is plenty of debris, but it's not in a solid mass. Which is fine, except that who would have thought in the first place that litter pulled indiscriminately into the sea by a tsunami would have coalesced into a solid mass?
Oh, and the picture above? I took it from the Discover story, but it comes from NOAA. If I didn't know better, I'd think it looked a bit like–I have to say it–a floating island.
Could NOAA itself have been responsible for what it now says are misguided stories? Here's a hint: The end of the caption on NOAA's photo says, "Debris fields such as these are no longer visible."
Bait-and-switch, anyone?
-Paul Raeburn
Leave a Reply