April 6 Fukushima forecast shows Northwest US under threat (Norwegian Institute for Air Research)

[stockholmer]

Run time: 00:24 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wJninXiYIM   Posted on YouTube: April 02, 2011 By YouTube Member: OilFlorida Views on YouTube: 498   Posted on DU: April 02, 2011 By DU Member: stockholmer Views on DU: 9113

 
April 6 Fukushima forecast shows Northwest US under threat (CLOSEUP)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKUW1_PAjIE&feature=player_embedded



Norwegian Institute for Air Research (source site) go here for other geo-areas and radioactive fissile material tracking vectors

http://transport.nilu.no/products/fukushima

Cesium 137 map tracker from Rhenish Institute for Environmental Researchat the University of Cologne, Germany (EURAD)

http://www.eurad.uni-koeln.de/index_e.html





Relatively high concentrations of radioactive xenon isotopes are also found emanating from nuclear reactors due to the release of this fission gas from cracked fuel rods or fissioning of uranium in cooling water. The concentrations of these isotopes are still usually low compared to naturally occurring radioactive noble gases such as 222Rn.

Xenon Xe 133 Gas - Clinical Pharmacology
Xenon Xe 133 is a readily diffusible gas which is neither utilized nor produced by the body. It passes through cell membranes, freely exchanges between blood and tissue, and tends to concentrate more in body fat than in blood, plasma, water or protein solutions. In the concentrations recommended for diagnostic studies, it is physiologically inactive. Inhaled Xenon Xe 133 Gas will enter the alveolar wall and the pulmonary venous circulation via capillaries. Most of the Xenon Xe 133 Gas that enters the circulation from a single breath is returned to the lungs and exhaled after a single pass through the peripheral circulation.



Xe-133 Fact Sheet (PDF)
http://www.nordion.com/documents/products/Xe-133_Can.pdf



Indirect Radio-Cesium Exposure Is A Long-Term Concern - So Too Are Indirect Effects Of CO2

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/03/indirect-radio-cesium-exposure-long-term-concern-to-are-indirect-effects-co2.php
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Radioisotope Brief: Cesium-137 (Cs-137)

http://emergency.cdc.gov/radiation/isotopes/cesium.asp
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


remember, radiation is bio-culmulative, and this is going to be going on for some time

[gateley]

1. Gotta Rec this - I"m one of the ones who believes there is cause for concern. nt

[CountAllVotes]

2. me too

Whopppeeee we're all gonna die if you look at those maps and see where the toxic plumes are going!

:scared:

[TheWraith]

6. Don't worry--there actually ISN'T a cause for concern.

This is one of those situations where people can use statistics to lie to you. That second graphic which shows Becquerels per square meter? The Becquerel is literally the smallest measurement of radioactivity it is possible to have, one atomic decay per second. That map which shows some areas in Japan with ten Becquerels per square meter? The potassium in the human body--yours, mine, your spouse's--produces 4,000 Becquerels per person, continuously. A dangerous level of radiation is measured in hundreds of thousands of Becquerels per square meter.

This is like the old internet fad about scaring people with the dangers of "dihydrogen monoxide."

[Newest Reality]

7. There is radiation,

and there is radioactivity.

I am concerned about radioactive particles in any amount. When they are inhaled or ingested via the air or via food and water supplies, they continue to emit radiation within the body at a steady rate for a long time.

In that case, the more particles inside the body, the worse the exposure, but in any case, there is a concern about having continual radioactivity emitting radiation in your body for, possibly, a lifetime.

There are many forms of background radiation from natural and artificial sources, so I am making a distinction here.

[TheWraith]

10. Being concerned about "radioactive particles in any amount" is rather like being concerned...

...about "any amount" of food causing obesity. In enough concentration, anything is bad for you. Even water and oxygen will kill you dead if you get too much of them. Right now, you have radioactive particles in your body, in many thousands of times the abundance of any dose that you would receive from contamination out of Fukushima. And without those radioactive particles, you'd be dead.

The fact of the matter is that there are safe doses of many things which are harmful in greater quantities. 10 REM of radiation is of minimal concern; 1,000 will kill you in a very nasty way. In the same way, you can eat the core of an apple, whose seeds contain cyanide, without any harm. There is a "safe dose" of apple seeds, and a safe dose of radiation, or radioactive particles.

So realistically, no, you don't need to be worrying about a couple particles crossing an ocean. You've likely picked up much more than that from leftovers of atmospheric nuclear testing back in the 1950s. It hasn't done you any significant harm, nor will it.

[stockholmer]

8. 3.7 million becquerels per square meter (Cesium-137) found 25 miles from Fukushima (New York Times)

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/31/world/asia/31japan.html?src=mv

WASHINGTON — A long-lasting radioactive element has been measured at levels that pose a long-term danger at one spot 25 miles from the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, raising questions about whether Japan’s evacuation zone should be expanded and whether the land might need to be abandoned.

The isotope, cesium 137, was measured in one village by the International Atomic Energy Agency at a level exceeding the standard that the Soviet Union used as a gauge to recommend abandoning land surrounding the Chernobyl reactor, and at another location not precisely identified by the agency at more than double the Soviet standard.

snip

Japan, experts noted, is far more densely settled than the Chernobyl region of Ukraine, where a reactor explosion in 1986 contaminated large areas.

The international team, using a measure of radioactivity called the becquerel, found as much as 3.7 million becquerels per square meter; the standard used at Chernobyl was 1.48 million.

[jimlup]

15. While I agree with part of your analysis

I disagree about 10 rems being "safe"(0.1Sv in SI units popularly in use these days). 0.1 Sv is ten times the occupational safe dose for radiation workers in the United States and Japan under normal circumstances. 0.5 Sv will make you radiation sick. No, I would like my exposure to be very close to measurable background thank you very much. I certainly wouldn't volunteer to take a dose of 0.1 Sv unless it were an emergency that I could mitigate as a result.

If there is measurable radiation in the United States, it starts to become a concern. Your post excludes the fact that radiation acts at the cellular level. As I explained to my physics class eating a banana is minimal exposure to radiation (0.1 microSv) but if 1 million people each eat a banana, on average, one will contract cancer as a result. There is no safe dose of radiation. Granted the background from Fukashima is currently negligible. But it is worth following carefully as we have no idea where or when this catastrophe will end.

If you don't believe my banana example, google Banana Equivalent Dose.

[stockholmer]

16. I never commented on 10 rems being safe, I think that was another poster

cheers

[jimlup]

25. OH, woops, I intended to respond to a poster higher up in the thread

Cheers!

[Thunderstruck]

33. Yea, radioactive fall-out has been given an unfair rap since the dawn of the Nuclear Age...

Breathe deep, people. It's going to be ok.

[tavalon]

52. Dihydrogen monoxide!

That's cute in a nerdy sort of way.

[WheelWalker]

4. Roger that.

[axollot]

27. right there with you. n/t

[swishyfeet]

3. I think the rain should help

Since this type of radiation is particle-based, I would think rain should help clear it from the air.
...and it's been raining non-stop here in the Northwest. I think we got rained on 30 of 31 days in March here in Portland (ugh).

[dixiegrrrrl]

11. A month of rain?

As in every day????
Unusual even for the rainy season up there.

[freshwest]

12. We get sunbreaks. But we knew we were downwind, anyway.

[tavalon]

13. I guess it's been awhile since you've been to our verdant land

Pretty much everyday, all day for all of the winter months. It's gloomy but it's our gloomy!

[freshwest]

28. I love the rain. All sun and no rain makes a desert.

[tavalon]

44. I used to like the rain until the Fukushima disaster

Now, I try to stay indoors as my dosimeter is telling me that we are being hit by far more fallout than we're being led to believe.

[freshwest]

50. A dosimeter, huh? I haven't heard of those. No one around me seems to know or care about it.

And I still think the rain is a good thing in this situation.

Eventually evrything goes into the soil, water, food, animals, etc. That's a given.

While this thing is still making a mess, I'd rather put that off and not be breathing it in. Perhaps it will slow down and get out of the air somewhat.

Remember too, that everyone that was alive or born in the years after Cherynobl has it inside their bodies, not just the ones who died from acute radiation or cancer later. The whole world bears witness..

Eventually, there is nothing anyone can do about it here in the Americas. It's up the to Japanese to fix this.

[tavalon]

51. Oh, goody, that means I won the trifecta

I'm a downwinder and of course, therefore, was alive for Chernobyl and now this. Oh, and Hanford is up here too.

[freshwest]

54. I have a friend who's a Hanford downwinder, been fighting it all her life, it's very bad.

Can you move east of the Rockies, maybe?

It might be the best thing for you.

I'm not being facetious.

Besides, I'm old and can't move even if it would be good.

[tavalon]

55. Actually, I'm a downwinder from the early 60s

Born in Las Vegas but lived in Beatty. My dad worked for the military.

[dixiegrrrrl]

40. Yep. In Feb. of 1986 I was on Whidbey Island, starting at yet another gloomy grey day,

and said, out loud, I won't last another winter in this climate,I need sun.
Had spent all my life in that area.

By Dec. I was in Florida.
Have not been back except for 2 visits since.
The "kids" love it there still, refuse to leave.

[freshwest]

53. I grew up in the south and began to dread the summers as much as some dread winter here.

In my case, I had an overdose of heat, humidity, bugs and air pollution from the oil and chemical industry. I find this delightful.

But I know people who have lived on the west coast in the rainy regions all their lives and loathe the winter. To each his own.

I'm glad you found the place you love to live. So did I.

[Matariki]

14. No, It's not unusual at all.

Here is a wonderful guide to Seattle weather. The only thing that is incorrect is in Summer there should be complaints that it's "too hot". We have a joke here - Summer was great this year, it happened on a Saturday.

http://theoatmeal.com/blog/seattle_weather

[Cetacea]

20. " The most rainy days on record for any March in Portland."

Among other records.

http://www.brucesussman.com/climate-patterns/la-nina-wet-record-cool-march-spring/

[Quantess]

36. Remember May-June in 2010?

It rained every single day, some days dumping water from the sky, until it finally cleared up right around June 20th.

[tavalon]

21. Yup

I must be a native now as I complain about any weather over 80 degrees.

[dixiegrrrrl]

42. I got hypothermia, summer in Seattle in 1973. No joke.

Was at the Hydroplane races, the fog/mist was so thick the tv cameras could not find the boats in the far turn,
and after all day there, I was practically frozen.

[suffragette]

31. It's been extra soggy here

even by our standards.
And it's still winter-type rain, the cold big drop type instead of the spring more diffused kind.

:hi:

[safeinOhio]

5. My question

is this the end or start of the fall out?

[stockholmer]

9. as long as the reactors are in meltdown,bleeding radioactive fissile materials,fallout will continue

:(

[Enjay in E MT]

17. Can we just Duck & Cover?

Even after inhaling micro-amounts -
it will rain on us,
get into our food chain,
and water supply

[Tanelorn]

18. Listen to Nuclear Physicist Adrian Byrne

Click on this link Media Meltdown then click the blue button
on the left to hear an Australian Physicist talk about the
Japan situation. It is calm , reasoned and factual.

http://www.abc.net.au/correspondents/content/2011/s3180579.htm

[N_E_1 for Tennis]

26. Thank You ...

for this link. Rational, thoughtful, non-scary. The way news should be presented.

Thanks again.

Welcome to DU

[FourScore]

19. Damn. Karma's a bitch. Now we're getting radiation from Japan. n/t

[Karenina]

22. Oh dear, I laughed at that!

[blackbart99]

23. dare I say what comes around goes around.....n/t

[jtuck004]

24. I have heard that all my life but this is the first time I have seen a map of it. eom

[freshwest]

29. Many Americans died from our fascination with testing nuclear weaponry after that.

I'd say the lesson to be learned is as you say, what goes around...

What happens to one happens to all, one way or the other.

Welcome to DU.

[abqmufc]

35. And mining uranium (Navajo Nation)....n/t

[Raksha]

43. Karma, huh? That's funny...in a sick sort of way.

[WillyT]

30. K & R !!!

:kick:

[BobbyBoring]

32. Sooooooooooooooo

Should I panic or not?

[suffragette]

34. Really appreciate your posts on this stockholmer

Most of what we are receiving here is after-the-fact info delivered in a Commerce-Chamber-type messaging.

Since we're not that far from Canada, I was hoping to find independent verification from there, but it looks like that won't happen:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x687628

And, if anything, they're being more restrictive up there despite demands from their own milk association, for example, for more specific info:

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Canadian+inspection+agency+refuses+test+milk+radiation/4548777/story.html
"There will be no testing of milk," Alice Danjou, a spokeswoman for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, said Friday.

The news came as a disappointment to Robin Smith, executive director of the BC Milk Producers Association, which earlier this week called on the agency to test the milk in an effort to prove to the public the levels are low enough to consume.

Here's a fairly typical way the info is being reported (from the same article above):
In a joint statement Wednesday, the United States' FDA and Environmental Protection Agency said radiation findings are to be expected in the coming days, and "are far below levels of public health concern, including for infants and children."

It looks to me like they are already predicting - "are to be expected" - that the results will be what they will later be reporting "are far below levels of public health concern." I can only guess that what they are expecting is what we see from the map you posted.


And I don't find it reassuring that 8 of the 18 monitors for the west coast recently underwent "quality review,” especially since the explanation for the reasons were left rather fuzzy:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-21/some-radiation-tracking-air-monitors-may-not-be-working-properly-epa-says.html

The U.S. hasn’t detected levels higher than what a person receives from exposure in the normal environment and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has said it doesn’t expect harmful levels of radiation to reach the U.S. from Japan.

Monitors are listed as undergoing review if they report an abnormal reading, Fraass said. Scientists then evaluate the reason, Fraass said.

An abnormality might mean that the monitor isn’t working correctly, or the device measured a spike in radiation levels attributable to an environmental change, Fraass said. For example, higher temperatures can cause higher levels of naturally occurring radon gas, he said.


It might mean this, it can mean that? Did the readings not match their expectations? I don't find this reassuring.

[CoffeeCat]

37. K&R...

...as we all try to understand what all of this means.

If we assume that our corporagovernment is being as honest and forthcoming
as they were during the BP scare--then we all must play arm-chair nuclear
physicist and gather our own research to know what in the hell we're supposed
to do--and what this means for ourselves and our children.

:mad:

[suffragette]

41. Exactly

It's looking both like BP and like BSE:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2741212



Which is why I've been trying to pull together the info from this and the info from Generic Other's thread to see what those relationships, if any, are.

And we are having to infer some of the information due to the manner in which it's presented.

For example, from the article about the 8 out of 18 monitors measuring radiation in air (almost half) needing "review":
The reasons given are vague and leave out the readings that were in question.
The reasons are all, however, posited from the point of having received a higher reading or spike.


That sounds like almost half of the monitors registered a higher reading than what is being reported. Instead the monitors were reviewed and what?
Recalibrated? Fixed?

Within days of that, UC Berkeley measured a spike in radiation in rainfall.

Is this coincidence?
Is this related?

Is this a spike in the type of radiation that will dissipate quickly or not?

[CoffeeCat]

48. Thank you for asking these questions...

I think they're most likely playing games.

They can get away with it, with many disasters. However, they won't
get away with it this time.

There are too many professional, decent and mindful nuclear physicists, researchers
and those who work in this area - who will inform the public. They will talk.

This is just too big. They won't be able to hide this, if it does get worse
and if the situation does become life-endangering or life-threating.

I am incredibly pissed off that I have to put the pieces together and
that corporate profits trump the health and well being of every person
in this nation!

Thank you for your attention to this issue!

[suffragette]

49. I hope you are correct

and appreciate the points you raise.

[intheflow]

45. I hadn't read that bloomberg article before.

Thanks. It is rather stinky that reports not matching official expectations have to go through a review process seemingly to find some other explanation than the elephant in the room.

[suffragette]

46. That's certainly the way it looks to me

and I agree, it stinks.

I would also like to know what happened to those 8 monitors and how adjustments to them, if any were made, have or will affect readings.

[caseymoz]

38. This is really confusing for people who don't know what they're looking at.

Xenon 133 decays with a half-life of five days, only into Cesium-133, which is an absolutely stable, non-radioactive isotope. So, Xe-133 won't be an actual problem.

Cesium-137 is much more problematic, but I have absolutely no idea what that scale at the bottom is measuring, in what units, and what it means. Without that, your information is useless. What does B/M^3 mean? Is that dosage, is that concentration? Really, you've given and left out just the just enough information to enable panic and nothing else. While you're at it, what does the scale on the side of your Xenon map mean?

Yes, I know radiation is cumulative. Scary, but how exactly does it connect with these maps?

[caraher]

39. Bq/M^3 is Becquerel per meter cubed

In other words, that's what their model says the activity per unit volume of air should be for a given isotope. You can't take it too seriously because it relies on a fairly uncertain estimate of how much of each isotope was released when, but it at least gives an order-of-magnitude estimate.

Ultimately, a little bit of Cs-137 from this incident will be detectable almost everywhere. But it would be a mistake to view the swirls of color as depicting levels of radioactivity that are likely to harm any individual - if you stay indoors for fear of the Cs-137 you better know your house doesn't have a radon problem if your main goal is minimizing radiation exposure!

I'm not saying there's zero harm from this, just that there's no need for anyone in the continental US to vary their routines in response to this release.

[caseymoz]

47. No need to change our routines yet.

This isn't getting better though.

Thank you.