Cesium 137 Detected in Virginia Rain: “I have said from the beginning that there is Fukushima fallout in the rain water” — Can’t be detected with geiger counter (VIDEO)

Published: June 24th, 2012 at 10:31 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
53 comments


Cesium 137 Detected in my Rain! (Radioactive Rain Detected)
Published on Jun 24, 2012
Published by antiprotons

As you all know, I have always maintained that there is Fukushima fallout in the rain… but that the levels (even if they are unsafe) are too low for a Geiger counter to detect.

My sensitive Gamma Spectrometer has now (I believe) detected Cs137 in a rain water collection bucket which concentrates, or so it seems, the Cs137.

[...]

At 10:30 in

“… to get approximately somewhere near what the actual result is, and it’s still somewhere around five-tenths of a becquerel per — how much water was this — I guess this was probably a liter… I think I found somewhere around five-tenths of a becquerel”

UPDATE: “I estimated the activity in my video, but the actual activity I have now calculated to 0.248 Bq/liter. Please view the details section of my video for the math used”

Anti-Proton Laboratories

Tom of Anti-Proton.com has now finished the construction of a small laboratory for the purposes of general nuclear and particle physics. The purpose of Anti-Proton laboratories is to pursue the wonderful mysteries of science and to unlock the reality around us.

Owner and amateur scientist Tom lives in Virginia, USA, where he works as a Computer Scientist. Professionally, Tom works with information systems integration and support, as well as information systems architecture and computer programming.

[...]

Published: June 24th, 2012 at 10:31 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
53 comments

Related Posts

  1. Report: 1.68 µSv/hr detected in Canadian rain water sample — Geiger counter display reads “DANGEROUS RADIATION BACKGROUND” July 18, 2011
  2. Japan Journalist: Plutonium escaped Fukushima reactors as gas, it was a colossal 9,000ºF inside — Can’t be detected with Geiger counter — Terrible things are looming for the children, they must be evacuated yet nothing’s done… This is a “criminal nation” — I’m worried (VIDEO) October 16, 2013
  3. Japan Physician: Radiation level was 100 times higher in Fukushima than gov’t reported 50 days after 3/11 — Geiger counter ‘off the scale’ at train station 60km from plant — Blatant concealment of data (VIDEO) October 12, 2013
  4. Top Talk Show: Ever seen those Geiger counter videos from Japan? Fascinating stuff — “Really dangerous levels and all these people are living there“ (VIDEO) May 15, 2013
  5. Off the Scale: Geiger counter goes wild 60-70 km WEST of Fukushima (VIDEO) March 17, 2011

53 comments to Cesium 137 Detected in Virginia Rain: “I have said from the beginning that there is Fukushima fallout in the rain water” — Can’t be detected with geiger counter (VIDEO)

  • Sharp2197 Sharp2197

    Arclight post here about cesium in the rain.


    Report comment

    • AGreenRoad AGreenRoad

      "A nation…cannot survive treason from within…the traitor …wears the face of his victims,…and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation—he works secretly…he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared…"
      - Cicero, 42 B.C.E.


      Report comment

  • arclight arclight

    well done tom!

    so where is the cesium coming from? similar measurements have been found on the eurdep system..

    is this upwind npps or fukushima?
    would need cs 134 to confirm…

    what a cool spectrothingy!! and real gold bricks too :)

    is the "natural" radon from "natural" sources or is at least some from npps or waste burning in the usa?

    more questions than answers here? oh goodie! :)


    Report comment

  • Remember, the Cs137 peak I found is extremely small and on the verge of what I call my minimum reporting levels. We are talking about tenths of a Bq/liter. Additionally, this was accumulation for about two months of water. I have never found a valid detection of Cs137 from fallen plain rain water.

    I posted my video because I was quite amazed to finally find it in the USA. Also, I did not find enough deviation from background to officially note any Cs134, which is a good marker for Fukushima, though this does not disprove that hypothesis.

    In short, with such a small detection, I would run screaming from the rain. =)

    Scientists with access to more powerful equipment (a HPGe detector) on the west coast of the USA have detected Cs137 en masse since Fukushima.

    What bugs me is that I read/watch people claiming to find Cs137 from Fukushima with a wet paper towel and a Geiger counter when the basic facts show that to be effectively impossible (in the USA or Europe). In Japan, I do not doubt such a feat could have been performed in the first month or two.

    The problem is that when you say that the contamination cannot be detected with a Geiger counter at the current levels, you get attacked. You are accused of denying Fukushima or claiming the rain is safe. What an odd leap some people make.

    Anyhow,

    Cheers!


    Report comment

    • pure water

      Congratulations for your work! Have you ever tried the wet towel methodolody? If the rain goes for hours and carries particles, one can not exclude the possibility of accumulation of this particles on a surface. It resembles chromatography, which is one of the most sencitive methods of detection. And it is worth experimenting, as far as Pu is present and emissions and redistribution by burning continue.


      Report comment

    • Jebus Jebus

      Tom, what is your take on the intermittant waves of high CPM readings that I, and others are seeing once in a while? I have seen Radon washout, I think, right as it starts raining, but I have noted times where the waves of high readings (300 to 400 cpm's) are wafting in with the wind, with no rain in sight. Any thoughts?


      Report comment

    • arclight arclight

      hi tom thanks for putting in an appearance

      "…You are accused of denying Fukushima or claiming the rain is safe. What an odd leap some people make…"

      i have had that too… its good to see some good science to keep us on track.. we still have to track fully all the hotspots around the northern hemisphere.. citizen monitors are the way forward..

      liked the video of the fukushima soil sample though and your advice.. definately proves something to me..

      many thanks once again


      Report comment

    • AGreenRoad AGreenRoad

      I think maybe they are testing dust, plus the first rain falling also carries lots of dust with it.

      Maybe this wipe test is actually concentrating the dust samples from a week, plus further dust in the air, all of which can and often is contaminated with low levels of radiation.

      We all know radiation concentrates in rainfall, and it then accumulates and concentrates in the form of dust that flows to the lowest spots.

      After all, having radiation in the air is not a surprise.. So how does it leave the air?

      It has to SETTLE OUT… or get washed out by the rain..

      It does not seem strange to be able to measure this.


      Report comment

  • Oh, one other side note: In the video I qualified the "0.5 Bq/l" with an explanation that the data was fresh and I had not yet determined actual activity. The number was a "ball park" figure I came up with using a calculator during the video. The number was much lower, but I was taking a crack at it using my detector efficiency. If you watch the video, it makes more sense. =)


    Report comment

  • Jebus Jebus

    Given my ignorance of all this and Toms unique interest in trying to sort out what he has found, I am interpreting this as the very smallest amounts detectable over time in his rainwater bucket.
    What my logic tells me is that, with caesium's 30 year half life, and its daughter product being monostable barium 137, he has shown that there is a little bit of Fuku that is everywhere and in everyone of us.
    The big issue that I see as a layman, is the bioaccumulation over time. The caesium mimics potasium and goes to muscle tissue. I'm reading that is not good. We will pay for that later.
    What I don't understand is that barium 137 has a half life of 2.55 minutes, IIRC. Which means that it is around for at most a day or so. From what I read, the monostable barium 137 is very energetic and also not good inside you. Is this why he is seeing so little baruim isotope energies, cause it decays rapidly.
    Why isn't he seeing the caesium then, because it is not as energetic over short periods? Does that mean there are greater quantities of caesium floating around and deposited? I probably don't need an answer to that.
    So all in all Fuku has notched up our backround levels, all around the northern hemisphere. Are we at the levels of the '50's, '60's and '70's?
    Am I seeing any of this correctly? I mean, we are still receiving doses from the early nuclear testing and everything after that. The levels just keep going up and at what backround level, is there no hope for humanity?


    Report comment

  • TheBigPicture TheBigPicture

    It's great that private citizen scientists are detecting and reporting radiation. It will lead to the closing of these plants ..all of which release radiation, on purpose, and/or, by accident.


    Report comment

  • Stacy

    We got stuck in rain near NJ this weekend; I got a fever and was sick and my husband was pretty horrified to realize he got this bizarre, sudden bloody nose. We also witnessed approximatly 4 or more helicopters flying in what looked like a type of grid pattern back and forth on the outskirts of the storm The storm itself reminded us of something out of War of the Worlds, lol. I haven't kept up w/ this site while out of town, but did anyone else see those helicopters or know of any readings near NJ this weekend?


    Report comment

  • Anti-Protons particular location proves cs-137. That would most likely be Fukushima's calling card. His accumulation was for 2 months. What would 16 months be like? How about 36 months? 10 years? What will it be like then?

    What about the West Coast and particular spots like St. Louis? Maybe theirs would be significantly higher?

    One thing we know is that fallout can be random or spotty. Half of a corn field could be contaminated and the other half test okay. So many factors determine how this stuff transports and spreads.

    Another thing we know for certain is that proper testing by our government agencies is beyond lame! It's Either incompetence, neglect or something more sinister. Maybe all of he above.

    We need testing of everything everywhere while simultaneously creating a plan for dismantling these Death Machines.

    We need transparency like never before on the spread of it all. Including the PLUTONIUM and all others.

    Once again without real across the board data, claims of "We didn't know" or "We thought some other agency was checking on that" will come right after "There is no immediate concern".

    Can the low amount he detected affect smaller life forms or plants?
    I would say it 'most likely' does. Maybe a lot to a virus or bacteria. Perhaps even a lady bug which is then eaten by a bird. Fish swim in water, etc…

    Where does it stop? I don't know.
    Where did it start? Nuclear Power
    (high probability – Fukushima)


    Report comment

  • BreadAndButter BreadAndButter

    I apologise in advance if anyone feels offended.
    As much as I admire anti-proton's dedication, I seriously wonder if setting up an amateur "lab for general nuclear and particle physics" while being a former web designer and current IT person is a good thing to do.
    No, actually I just wonder if it's a good thing to brand it as a "laboratory". It might give some people the impression that Tom is a scientist and his findings were to be taken as seriously as let's say CRIIRAD's publishings.
    I know, he says himself "I THINK I found 0.5 bq" – he doesn't sell it as a fact, which is a good thing. But it still might be mis-interpreted by some.
    I think we should leave the interpretation of data to real experts – to have reliable information for ourselves, and to be taken seriously in the "outside world".

    Just my opinion, and again, hopefully no offense taken.
    *peace


    Report comment

    • I want some "real" experts, too! Helloooooooooo? Where are you? Hmm. No answer. Until Arnie shows up with a spectometer we are on our own.

      Current world-wide Fukushima fallout forecasts
      http://realitycheck.no-ip.info/nnn.html

      Other rad monitoring links and mitigation protocols
      http://realitycheck.no-ip.info/forum/index.php/board,24.0.html

      AGreenRoad also has an excellent nuke primer
      http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/p/index.html

      Who YOU gonna call? Maybe they can find some experts to test for us
      http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml
      http://www.usembassy.gov/


      Report comment

      • I agree.

        I would love for real experts… those with Ph. D.'s and HPGe detectors to do this. Why do I have to do this?
        Why should I be doing this? My bachelors degree isn't in physics!?

        But if they won't, someone has to. With all of this fear spread about simile radon washout and the focus from real issues (like the actual meltdown) diverted for some unknown reason, I would like to set things in order.

        Why are people showing car tests of radon washout (know for decades by science) and diverting attention from the actual melted reactors and fuel pool 4? What are they after?
        They say I am the conspirator, but they are diverting the attention from Fukushima, not me.


        Report comment

        • Bobby1

          I don't know why all the high radiation readings in rain are supposed to be from radon. There are probably 1,000 nuclides in it, each with very small amounts… but they may add up to something significant.

          And I don't know why, since radon comes from decay of uranium, and uranium is likely to be part of Fukushima emissions, why radon is always "natural" either.

          And it is a legitimate concern, not fear-mongering.


          Report comment

          • hbjon hbjon

            I think the answers to these technical question are hidden in the fuel rod. Krypton, xenon, and radon must be produced in the fuel rod and we don't see the gases excaping into the atmosphere as long as the rod is not damaged. What boggles my mind is that the gases never build up enough pressure to burst the rods. It's like the gases disappear inside the fuel rods. Can the gases somehow be absorbed back into the uranium? Natural uranium ore will lock the radon inside the rock and alpha emissions never affect biological systems. Radon will decay back into a solid. Does anyone think we should stop digging for Uranium?


            Report comment

      • Sam Stone Sam Stone

        love your site………always


        Report comment

    • Your point is well taken.

      I call it a lab because I have thousands of dollars of high tech equipment, glassware, latex gloves, goggles, spectrometers, Geiger counters, microscopes, etc. =)

      I also take the time in each of my video to carefully, ad nausium, remind folks that I am not an expert… not even close.

      I also get misquoted a lot, which is more of a problem. If you watch the video, I don't say that it's 0.5 Bq/liter, but that's the quote now. lol


      Report comment

      • BreadAndButter BreadAndButter

        Hi Tom, glad you took my comment the way I meant it.
        I'll surely be watching some more of your videos!

        *peace


        Report comment

      • ENENews

        "If you watch the video, I don't say that it's 0.5 Bq/liter, but that's the quote now. lol"

        Updated with exact quote:

        "… to get approximately somewhere near what the actual result is, and it's still somewhere around five-tenths of a becquerel per — how much water was this — I guess this was probably a liter… I think I found somewhere around five-tenths of a becquerel"

        Quote on enenews: "I think I found around .5 becquerels [per liter]"
        Actual quote: "I think I found somewhere around five-tenths of a becquerel [per liter]"

        Is there a difference between .5 and five-tenths?


        Report comment

        • BreadAndButter BreadAndButter

          I can't help but think nobody knows what he might have or not have found…somewhere around…I guess…probably… :-)

          *prefers having no readings over might-have-been-but-not-so-sure results
          *just saying!


          Report comment

          • BreadAndButter BreadAndButter

            Meanwhile: "Radioactive hot spots found in Tokyo park

            Tokyo officials are to start decontamination of a 92-hectare park where high levels of radiation have been detected.
            On Monday, officials tested 14 locations at Mizumoto Park in Katsushika Ward, following reports from the public about radiation hot spots there.
            Thirteen of tested locations registered radiation above one microsievert per hour at one meter above ground, with the highest reading at 1.22.
            According to science ministry guidelines, decontamination is required when radiation is at least one microsievert higher than surrounding areas. Based on these guidelines, 9 of the 14 surveyed places in Mizumoto Park will be decontaminated.
            Since last year's accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, the ministry has received about 150 reports of Tokyo hot spots, as of March.

            http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/society.html


            Report comment

        • Five tenths is 0.5, but that was a "ball park" estimate, as was stated clearly in the video. I have now run the sample against my calibrated Cs137 source to determine a real activity:

          I estimated the activity in my video, but the actual activity I have now calculated to 0.248 Bq/liter. Please view the details section of my video for the math used. This math is Open For Comment, meaning that I am open to suggestions.

          Remember, I am NOT a physicist.


          Report comment

    • daddyfixit daddyfixit

      i often think of this site as an internet lab where we all share our ideas expertise and findings. i have a "lab" here and it is not pretty… in fact, when i was a kid my mother called the cops on me because she found containers outside on the back patio. luckily they were just Xylene and Gasoline. my "lab" was dedicated to doing things like building parabolic reflectors to 1/50" tolerance for wifi hacking and welding BMX bikes together… but lately it has morphed into something a little more focused…

      HEY! when i get a new hot reading should i call the local board of health? http://www.doh.state.fl.us/

      nevermind.


      Report comment

  • Plan Nine

    Anyone who uses salt substitute might want to read this:
    http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/forum/218/brawm-question-testing-food-geiger-counter.2012-06-13#comment-25426

    If you have pre-Fuku salt substitute in your pantry, try comparing it with post-Fuku product. The tester's Geiger counter at the link above seems to be seeing a FIVEFOLD increase, so Fuku Cs137 contamination might just be detectable with a standard Geiger counter, if you know where and how to look.


    Report comment

  • arclight arclight

    Radon-222 in Biologically Produced Gas from A Reactor Cooling Pond

    "Radon-222 is transported into the atmosphere by both physical and biological mechanisms. Radon-222 emanating from sediments in a reactor cooling pond was measured in conjunction with biologically produced gases at various sediment temperatures. The rates of radon-222 flux by biological gassing appear to be less important than that released by physical transport processes from terrestrial systems…."

    http://journals.lww.com/health-physics/Abstract/1978/06000/Radon_222_in_Biologically_Produced_Gas_from_A.20.aspx

    cont…


    Report comment

    • arclight arclight

      Radon Measurements at the Molten Salt Reactor
      Experiment (MSRE) Facility from
      August 1997 through April 1998

      "…The measurements indicated that
      220 Rn was being emitted into parts of the facility from
      various sources of uranium during the measurement period. Areas believed to be primary contributors included the vent-house, the fuel drain tank cell, the reactor cell, and the fuel drain tank pit. The typical concentration of 220
      Rn progeny in the drain tank pit during the
      study was <1% of the derived air concentration (DAC) while the direct
      220
      Rn measurements
      in the same area indicated an average concentration of about 1.2 pCi/L. A considerably higher 220 Rn concentration was observed in the vent house area with maximum levels of almost
      200 pCi/L; however, the progeny concentrations in this area were found to be low—with an average of <1% of the DAC. The results therefore indicated that the air quality at the MSRE was not a health and safety concern for the workers performing remediation tasks, but that
      short term spikes in concentrations warranted follow-up monitoring…."

      http://www.ornl.gov/~webworks/cpr/rpt/103607.pdf


      Report comment

  • Nukites

    Thanks for this info, Tom. I kind if knew where you stood on detectability, but this latest video really shows that staying reasonable during scientific exploration is necessary to avoiding hasty, and in the case of pocket geiger counters, inaccurate detections.

    I am not going to buy a geiger counter now because you have shown that they are not sensitive enough to detect the fallout in the states. I am curious to know, like Jebus above, are these levels now equivalent to levels during above ground bomb testing? Or higher? What can we compare this data to that has already happened? I want to see analogous situations from past data.

    I also agree that, personally, I wish the levels of Cs and other nuclides was set at zero. But now we know that we all, absolutely, have Fukushima in us.


    Report comment

    • I would recommend that everyone owns a Geiger counter and learns to use it. We own smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, etc. You might find radioactive things in your own home! I did.

      Also, your debris washing up on the shores could potentially be much higher in radioactivity.

      My finding was merely in fallen rain, not material washed ashore.

      If nothing more, Geiger counters are a fun and interesting hobby.


      Report comment

  • arclight arclight

    other forms of radon creation… :)

    "…The largest source of nuclear waste is naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM). All substances are slightly radioactive from the decay of naturally occurring isotopes such as carbon-14, potassium-40, uranium-238 and thorium-232. If the radioactive elements are concentrated by natural processes or human industry, they may become concentrated enough to be treated as nuclear waste. Nuclear waste from NORM is not usually highly radioactive, and might be safe to hold, although it may produce dangerous levels of radioactive radon gas.

    The other primary source of nuclear waste is human-built nuclear reactors. After an atom fissions, the two pieces of the nucleus may themselves be radioactive, and may take thousands of years to decay; these pieces are known as fission products. Other sources of nuclear waste include the breeding of new nuclear fuel from uranium, neutron activation of materials in the reactor, and leftover depleted uranium from the enrichment process…."

    http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-nuclear-waste.htm


    Report comment

  • I believe that it would be a mistake to presume that Steve's results were generalizable to any other region of the US given proven variability in radiation fallout.

    I asked a friend who worked at the original nuclear pile near Chicago to evaluate Potrblog's methods. My friend spent much of his life conducting radiation detections.

    His response was that Potrblog's method was rough, but valid. (Of course there is dust in the rain!)

    According to both the USGS and Gunderson, fallout has concentrated west of the Rockies.

    More importantly, studies of radioactivity concentration from the Columbia River demonstrate that if river water assumes a value of 1, the egg yolk of a water bird with be 1,000,000 times that value (Takashi Hirose Fukushima Meltdown p. 73).

    I believe we should all be looking for and reporting anomalies in our surroundings.

    Geiger counters are one way of doing that. Detailed observations and documentations of changes in flora and fauna are another. We have forums dedicated to these projects here.

    We do of course have to be careful to eliminate other explanations for our findings.

    However, our livelihoods may depend upon our ability to detect pockets of significant contamination so that we avoid eating the egg with a million times more concentration than the rain.

    Steve's results given us insight into a particular area, but shouldn't be generalized beyond that.

    :)


    Report comment

  • sonnen.blum.239 sonnen.blum.239

    I was teaching in rehobeth Beach Delaware and then driving back to Wilmington and Up I-295 in that odd and heavy rain last Friday. I saw the blackhawk helicopters more than once. I was also driving right through the Dover AFB so I was not alarmed by the presence of military aircraft, just that they were flying in a nasty lightening storm. I saw some of the weirdest lightening I have ever seen in my 61+ years.

    The rain is so needed, in this badly parched droughted area, but the ends of the pine needles and even some of the plant leaves on houseplants, notably succulents used to drought conditions, did not look very healthy after the rain. I left my geiger counter in StL and did not take on the trip thinking that the PTB and TSA would give me a hard time, so I didn't measure the rain in Jersey. And the measuring would still not identify the isotope, just the hot nature of the rain.

    Surprisingly, a coworker who visited a public swimming pool came down with all sorts of respiratory and cold symptoms. Perhaps there are concentrated isotopes present in pools and tubs, like the buckets of water collected above in this thread. I often wondererd what my pool is holding for me. Regardless, some internal contaminants do bio accumulate. I would stay out of the rain for a variety of reasons. Last summer's rains here in MO produced skin rashes.


    Report comment

  • daddyfixit daddyfixit

    what about sprinkling some NOSALT before the rain, then letting it get moist, then comparing it to the original?


    Report comment

  • survivialoutpost_2012

    "laboratory" Is that anything like a Outhouse You are Full of It.


    Report comment

  • linuxblue

    I have no scientific qualifications at all. But I do know that all soil contains trace amounts of arsenic. All fertilizer contains some natural uranium. So I really need to see some objective science to know what to think.


    Report comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.