392 nSv/hr today in South Korea (VIDEO)

Published: June 16th, 2011 at 1:14 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
31 comments


Thurs 16 June PM! Measure radiation levels, tteuahak! 392 nSv / h, 금.TV, June 16, 2011:

Google Translation

Video, while raising 428 nSv / h climbed up. So amazing.

He went to a radiation detector placed next to me today, too often, 300 nSv / h is used a lot of the terms of your nerves.

Video of the day Thurs, 16 June 2011 was taken around 18:05. [...]

Measurement locations Korea, South Chungcheong Province is specifically. [...]

Published: June 16th, 2011 at 1:14 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
31 comments

Related Posts

  1. ‘Breaking News’: South Korea bans 35 Japanese seafood products due to Fukushima radiation fears June 27, 2012
  2. Cesium-137 hotspot detected in Seoul, South Korea — Emitting 1,000% normal background radiation — 1,200 km from Fukushima November 3, 2011
  3. South Korea: Radioactive store-bought seaweed measures 0.81 microSv/hr (VIDEO) January 4, 2012
  4. AFP: Cracks found in South Korea nuclear reactor November 9, 2012
  5. Asahi: Incident at nuclear plant systematically covered up by South Korea — Official first learned of ‘mishap’ at local restaurant March 16, 2012

31 comments to 392 nSv/hr today in South Korea (VIDEO)

  • ocifferdave

    No comment.


    Report comment

  • willow

    Didn’t think I’d see a Korean video clip here…just in case someone got curious, ‘tteuahak’ is like, ‘What the Fuck?’ :-)

    MSM here says Korea’s been always recording high radiation doses, because lots of mountains, lots of granite, so lots of natural radioactivity.

    Someone tell me this is BS. I’m suspecting radioactive particles have been flying to South Korea from China and North Korea, well before the Fukushima crisis.


    Report comment

  • Anthony Anthony

    Confusing – are they saying this is the radiation level in S Korea FROM Fukushima?


    Report comment

  • tony wilson

    if that is radiation from japan that is a declaration of war.
    the positive aspect is the koreans are even bigger conformists than the japanese.
    so they will get ill nice and quite and not make much noise.apart from death howls.


    Report comment

  • Anthony Anthony

    FROM SQUARE ONE / High price of going nuclear-free

    The Yomiuri Shimbun

    This year, Japan will produce extra electricity from natural gas, oil and other fuels at an additional cost of 2.4 trillion yen, according to Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry estimates. The extra expense is due to reduced usage of nuclear power, as a number of nuclear plants have been shut down for regular inspections or due to emergency concerns.

    From next year, the added annual costs are expected to total 3 trillion yen.

    http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/20110614dy01.htm


    Report comment

    • Pallas89juno Pallas89juno@yahoo.com

      Don’t despair, fight your government. There is micro CYLINDER wind power that could very easily, cheaply and within less than a year fully replace 90% of all the lost energy from the most ridiculous and stupid way of boiling water known to man, nuclear energy. Some combination of the following, given Japans natural resources of adequate rainfall, plentiful wind in certain location and other conditions provide plenty of opportunity to do what we all must do now, due to runaway global warming and anthropogenic mass extinctions, at the very least:

      CYLINDER wind power, large municipal projects, but easily instituted houss-by-house (see HomePower Magagazine from Oregon)
      Wave Power
      Micro-Hydro, also one can institute this in an ad-hoc fashion. Not rocket science. None of this is rocket science. Don’t panic about what needs to be done, REVOLT (organized panic) over the status quo, of course.
      Solar
      Fuel Cell
      Steam electricity or drive trains for cars (believe it or not, around for more than 100 years and exceedingly efficient, many thousands of times more efficient, and safer, than nuclear power)
      Ion exchange in sea water. Japan has plenty of back bays where this is possible.
      Tidal Power. Remember that this was to be the new “wave of the future” for power generation in the UK, until 1985 when the international and UK nuclear business consortiums forcibly scuttled this far more intelligent strategy for meeting perpetual daily power needs in a dependable way.
      Heat Pump technology, particularly useful in Japan given the enormous urbanization of the Japanese population. There’s plenty of energy in buildings and body heat! This last strategy will also come in handy, coupled with Japanese sun-pipe (Nippon: “Sunflower”) technology, as you will, as will the rest of the world, need to begin growing vegetable foods INdoors, as the rain everywhere in the Northern Hemisphere, in particular, is only going to grow increasingly more contaminated with radiation.

      All this advice goes for all Americans, as well.


      Report comment

      • Pallas89juno Pallas89juno@yahoo.com

        If I recall, I believe the Japanese also have methods for producing power from WATER (simple H2O) as a fuel, as well as from pressurized air, and many other methods. These are not just concepts. The solutions to power loss are the LEAST of your worries. It is, as ever in all history, the filthy despotic status quo hierarchical controllers, including in Japan, who are NOT doing their job and who actively prevent all the known technologies that have existed for more than four decades in complete form in most cases.


        Report comment

  • FML

    That looks like microsieverts/hr not nanosieverts/hr.


    Report comment

    • Pallas89juno Pallas89juno@yahoo.com

      That would make sense as the nanosieverts would be virtually nil. It’s very difficult for many, at this point, to keep track of all the different ways, intentionally made difficult from the Manhattan Project days, of describing nuclear energy radiation measurements (cpm, dpm, bequerels, sieverts, roentgens, curies, grays, rems, and many others I can’t recall at the moment.) Why we all need to read (all, meaning especially people not in this blog)


      Report comment

  • chrisk9

    The scale does look like micro severts, but since it is less than “1″ on the scale you could say it is point .392 milliseverts or 392 nanoseverts. This seems like a normal type background radiation reading from my experience as a radiation protection tech. Background radiation readings will be different in different locations normally. IE more background radiation in the Colorado mountains than Denver. Also background readings differ with different atmospheric conditions-temperature inversions. As a side note the detector does appear to be an economy model.
    But since no one is letting people know the real story we are left guessing about a lot of things.


    Report comment

  • fjn

    0.392 mSv is 392 uSv
    0.392 uSv is 392 nSv

    0.392 mSv is not 392 nSv

    milli micro nano


    Report comment

    • .392 mSv/h = .392 mSv/h x 24 h/day x 365.25 days/yr

      = 3436.72 mSv/y

      About 3 and half thousand times over the limit, no? Or, for a nuclear worker (@ 250 mSv/yr) it would be about 14 times the allowable limit.

      Think of it this way, if you’re only allowed 1 mSv per year, you’ve already got about half your dose in only an hour. So in just over two hours you’ve got your yearly limit.

      Am I right?


      Report comment

      • NOPE – I’M WRONG

        .392 µSv = .392 x 10^-6 Sv = .000392 mSv

        So, the yearly dose should be:

        .000392 mSv/h = .000392 mSv/h x 24 h/day x 365.25 days/y

        = 3.436272 mSv/year

        Compared to the normal of 1 mSv/year.


        Report comment

        • FML

          The average exposure in the US is 6.2 mSv/year not 1 mSv/year.


          Report comment

          • Sounds like a lot.

            I meant the safe allowable maximum exposure per year – often quoted as 1 mSv/year. I’ve seen it bumped up to 5 mSv/year in some charts.

            6.2 mSv/year sounds like a little too much – espcially for an average – some readings would be higher in different parts of the country.


            Report comment

        • hp

          To get a lifetime dose of radiation you’d have to stand on that hotspot for …er… a lifetime.


          Report comment

        • The average “background” radiation dose globally is generally listed as between 2 and 3 mSv/year. The WSJ article from yesterday (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303499204576389094076351276.html) says the average is 2.4 mSv/year:

          “The average person world-wide receives radiation totaling 2.4 millisieverts per year, or 2,400 microsieverts, from all sources–from natural sources to radon, but not from exposure from X-rays and airplane flights …”

          However, it is generally accepted that this number is higher for the average person in the US (104 nuclear power plants, plus all the bomb tests in the mid-20th century) and is often stated as somewhere between 3.0-3.6 mSv/year.

          In a discussion of pre-1945 and post-1945 levels of “background” radiation (http://www2b.abc.net.au/science/k2/stn/newposts/5111/topic5111323.shtm) is a link to a page (http://ratical.org/radiation/inetSeries/wwc1.txt) that states:

          “U.S. estimates of background radiation dose were 0.1 rem (1 mSv) per person per year before 1945, about 0.17 rem (1.7 mSv) per person per year in the 1960′s, and 0.36 rem per person per year in 1988 (U.S. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement Report 92, 1987).”

          It is definitely NOT 6.2 mSv/year from “background” radiation sources alone (even in the USA) – that number, which I have also seen in an article somewhere in the past few days, is the TOTAL average radiation dose including “background” radiation as well as x-rays, plane flights and the rest.


          Report comment

      • FML

        No, because it is .392 uSv/hr not .392 mSv/hr. And you’re not only allowed 1 mSv per year. That is the limit for exposure from a public man made facility. The average “normal” radiation exposure in the US is 6.2 mSv/year and the hourly is .34 uSv/hr.

        .392 uSv/hr equates to 3.44 mSv/year which is quite “normal”.


        Report comment

      • Anthony Anthony

        PU239, I think it was you previously who remarked that it was the TYPES of toxins ultimately that was the real point of the contamination issue, right? I mean, I think the levels are one thing, but the deeper danger for everyone has to also be the non-disclosure and testing for the dozens of types of radiation released upon us since 311. We don’t even know what we need to know yet.


        Report comment

  • Anyone know if Rocky is holding on?

    Heard a rumour he was sick and dying.


    Report comment

  • Well, one this for sure, they certainly got a dose, Korea, south, and the DPNK are very mountainous and this may have protected certain areas from fallout, or at least it may have been absorbed en-route to the major cities, hopefully. With the ongoing disaster and the culmative properties of the continually spewing radiation, we are all in for a long ride and the effects, and disclosure are yet to be seen.


    Report comment

  • pg

    Spin the meter around. I would like to confirm there isn’t a piece of gummite taped to the back.

    Trust no one but your selves, and …yourself.


    Report comment