Independent: Why Fukushima is worse than Chernobyl; “Now the truth is coming out” — 72,000 times worse than Hiroshima & 1 million+ cancer deaths, says professor

Published: August 29th, 2011 at 2:15 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
33 comments


Why the Fukushima disaster is worse than Chernobyl, Independent, August 29, 2011:

Japan has been slow to admit the scale of the meltdown. But now the truth is coming out. David McNeill reports from Soma City

[T]he triple meltdown [...] has elevated Japan into unknown, and unknowable, terrain. Across the northeast, millions of people are living with its consequences and searching for a consensus on a safe radiation level that does not exist. [...]

Some scientists say Fukushima is worse than the 1986 Chernobyl accident [...]

[M]any experts warn that the crisis is just beginning. [...]

Some scientists predict that one million lives will be lost to cancer. [...]

Chris Busby, a professor at the University of Ulster:

  • “[Busby] said the disaster would result in more than 1 million deaths. ‘Fukushima is still boiling its radionuclides all over Japan [...] Chernobyl went up in one go. So Fukushima is worse.’”
  • “Professor Busby says the release is at least 72,000 times worse than Hiroshima.”

Professor Tim Mousseau, a biological scientist who has spent more than a decade researching the genetic impact of radiation around Chernobyl:

  • “[Mousseau] worries that many people in Fukushima are ‘burying their heads in the sand.’”
  • “His Chernobyl research concluded that biodiversity and the numbers of insects and spiders had shrunk inside the irradiated zone, and the bird population showed evidence of genetic defects, including smaller brain sizes.”
  • “[T]here are very likely to be very significant long-term health impact from prolonged exposure.”

h/t Anonymous tip

Published: August 29th, 2011 at 2:15 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
33 comments

Related Posts

  1. Professor: Fukushima certainly worse than Chernobyl — Similar quantities of radioactivity released, but more people affected in Japan disaster (VIDEO) September 21, 2011
  2. Nuclear Expert: Fukushima 10 times worse than Chernobyl March 12, 2012
  3. Experts: “Fukushima is going to kill 200,000 from increased cancers” — “It’s worse than Chernobyl” April 15, 2011
  4. Scientists: Chernobyl resulted in 985,000 deaths worldwide as of 2004 — 500 percent more cancer fatalities when using MOX March 22, 2011
  5. Professor: Radioactive particles from Fukushima like “poison gas” — Except it is going to kill you in a few years, not immediately (VIDEO) August 27, 2011

33 comments to Independent: Why Fukushima is worse than Chernobyl; “Now the truth is coming out” — 72,000 times worse than Hiroshima & 1 million+ cancer deaths, says professor

  • Noah

    Travel to Fukushima has been linked to deaths among unlikely age groups, some relatively young.

    A Japanese medical doctor recently sent me a translation of a blog in Japanese that talked about someone who lost three of his colleagues in two days. His translation stated that, “They were all involved in moving cars out of the evacuated areas early on at the request of evacuated families before the area became restricted. They were 32, 34, and 44, and first two died on August 9 and the third on August 10, all of heart attacks. (Not sure if it was really heart attacks or arrhythmia, since there was no autopsy done and the bodies were cremated.)
    - Quote from IMVA, 28Aug11


    Report comment

    • Noah

      The toll from the 311 event seems to always be measured in cancer deaths. However, practical experience with radiation exposure demonstrates that cancer is not the only consequence.

      What about Heart Attacks & Arrhythmia?


      Report comment

      • Steven Steven

        I think the nuclear power industry gets a free ride with respect to public reaction to the health threat. I just watched one of those rampant deadly virus movies, no question those nasties scare the pants off us, we’ve been doing batle with them for eons.

        Unfortunately the human race has no genetic marker for radiation; this is recent, nothing for us to latch on to at the instinctive level. So the general public fails to recognise the threat. Can you imagine if Fukushima Daiichi was a biological weapons lab? Now that would get everyone’s attention.


        Report comment

        • lam335 lam335

          See this article–such evidence may be starting to emerge:

          http://insciences.org/article.php?article_id=10136

          “Fingerprint of Radiation Exposure Discovered in Thyroid Cancer”

          Neuherberg– Scientists from the Helmholtz Zentrum München have discovered a genetic change in thyroid cancer that points to a previous exposure of the thyroid to ionising radiation. The gene marker, a so-called „radiation fingerprint“ was identified in papilliary thyroid cancer cases from Chernobyl victims, but was absent from the thyroid cancers in patients with no history of radiation exposure. The results are published in the current issue of PNAS. . . .

          . . . The team compared the genetic information from these tumours to that found in the same type of tumour that arose in children born more than one year after the explosion, after the radioactive iodine had decayed away. The number of copies of a small fragment of chromosome 7 was found to be increased only in the tumours from the irradiated children, establishing this as one of the first genetic markers that indicate a radiation aetiology of cancer.

          This breakthrough is the first time since the reactor accident in 1986 that scientists have been able to discriminate between the cancers caused by the radioactive contamination and those that arise naturally. . . .


          Report comment

      • moonshellblue moonshellblue

        And pneumonia.


        Report comment

  • Fall out man!

    I saw a couple of good documentary videos on Chernobyl. There is such a thing as “Chernobyl heart” , “Chernobyl lung” and “Chernobyl stomach”. The radiation affects every organ in the body. In one lecture to the Japanese Professor Busby estimated (based on Chernobyl data) that those living within 200km of the Fukushima plant could expect an average 10 year reduction in life span. As far as Chernobyl itself goes, prior to Chernobyl 80% of kids in the Ukraine were free from any health problems in school. Now they say only 20% are free from health problems, e.g., allergies, asthma, and worse.

    Given radiation damages the genome, those problems will be carried from generation to generation. Its absolutely evil that such plants continue to exist.

    Yeah, so agreed. In a sense cancer is a side track. People think if they don’t get cancer they will be ok. But most die of other fall out related health problems. Its very easy for the powers that be to dismiss all other problems and pretend they don’t exist. Sadly, it is highly likely that the general public will never realize what has happened to them.

    Note that Synthroid (synthetic thyroid hormone replacement) was at one stage the third most commonly prescribed drug in the USA! It was only after becoming familiar with the effects of fall out (as a result of this Fukushima crisis) that I realized why that is. The nuclear testing, and releases from correctly operating plants across the USA have done untold damage to people’s health.

    The health effects of Nuke power and associated accidents are devastating. Cancer is a side track. Its other things that will get many people first. In fact that was a point that Busby made. Many will die of other diseases related to radiation before they can even get cancer.


    Report comment

    • Noah

      Good Comment Fallout Man

      The loss of length of life and the huge list of disease is staggering!

      What got me about the three guys who died after they visited Fuku was how quickly and suddenly they died after the visit.


      Report comment

      • Noah

        I remember an article about several thousand people who went to visit Fuku Dai-ichi to see if their fellow workers were alright.

        I wonder how many people are visiting their relatives in Fukushima to see if their loved ones are alright.

        I know three families who went to Fukushima to do just that, I warned one who is now planning to go.


        Report comment

  • Fall out man!

    Oh, one more side point. Fluoride damages the thyroid as well (and causes cancer). Fluoridation will account for part of the high thyroid hormone replacement usage in the USA as well. It was the Manhattan project (Nuke industry) that helped get fluoridation started in the USA. A good short video is available about that little known bit of history. Here is an article about it by Christopher Bryson, a big name investigative journalist who has worked for the BBC…
    http://www.fluoridation.com/atomicbomb.htm

    The nuke industry brought us fluoridation, as well as fall out, three mile Island, Chernobyl, and now Fukushima. It does appear that they genuinely see reducing the population as a “benefit”.


    Report comment

  • Your thoughts… Is there a Fukushima artificial radiation belt?
    Artificial radiation belts are radiation belts that have been created by high altitude nuclear explosions.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artificial_radiation_beltsList of artificial radiation belts
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    List of Artificial Radiation Belts

    Explosion Location Date Yield (approximate) Altitude (km) Nation of Origin
    Hardtack Teak Johnston Island (Pacific) 1958-08-01 3.8 megatons 76.8 United States
    Hardtack Orange Johnston Island (Pacific) 1958-08-12 3.8 megatons 43 United States
    Argus I South Atlantic 1958-08-27 1-2 kilotons 200 United States
    Argus II South Atlantic 1958-08-30 1-2 kilotons 256 United States
    Argus III South Atlantic 1958-09-06 1-2 kilotons 539 United States
    Starfish Prime Johnston Island (Pacific) 1962-07-09 1.4 megatons 400 United States
    K-3 Kazakhstan 1962-10-22 300 kilotons 290 USSR
    K-4 Kazakhstan 1962-10-28 300 kilotons 150 USSR
    K-5 Kazakhstan 1962-11-01 300 kilotons 59 USSR

    The table above only lists those high-altitude nuclear explosions for which a reference exists in the open (unclassified) English-language scientific literature to persistent artificial radiation belts resulting from the explosion.

    The Starfish Prime radiation belt had, by far, the greatest intensity and duration of any of the artificial radiation belts.

    The Starfish Prime radiation belt damaged the United States satellites Ariel 1, Traac, Transit 4B, Injun I and Telstar I. It also damaged the Soviet satellite Cosmos V. All of these satellites failed completely within several months of the Starfish detonation.

    Telstar I lasted the longest of the satellites damaged by the Starfish Prime radiation, with its complete failure occurring on February 21, 1963.

    In Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory report LA-6405, Herman Hoerlin gave the following explanation of the history of the original Argus experiment and of how the nuclear detonations lead to the development of artificial radiation belts.

    “Before the discovery of the natural Van Allen belts in 1958, N. C. Christofilos had suggested in October 1957 that many observable geophysical effects could be produced by a nuclear explosion at high altitude in the upper atmosphere.

    This suggestion was reduced to practice with the sponsorship of the Advanced Research Project Agency (ARPA) of the Department of Defense and under the overall direction of Herbert York, who was then Chief Scientist of ARPA. It required only four months from the time it was decided to proceed with the tests until the first bomb was exploded. The code name of the project was Argus.

    Three events took place in the South Atlantic. … Following these events, artificial belts of trapped radiation were observed.
    “A general description of trapped radiation is as follows. Charged particles move in spirals around magnetic-field lines.

    The pitch angle (the angle between the direction of the motion of the particle and direction of the field line) has a low value at the equator and increases while the particle moves down a field line in the direction where the magnetic field strength increases. When the pitch angle becomes 90 degrees, the particle must move in the other direction, up the field lines, until the process repeats itself at the other end.

    The particle is continuously reflected at the two mirror points — it is trapped in the field. Because of asymmetries in the field, the particles also drift around the earth, electrons towards the east. Thus, they form a shell around the earth similar in shape to the surface formed by a field line rotated around the magnetic dipole axis.”

    Illustration of the motion of a charged particle trapped in the Earth’s magnetic field.

    In 2010, the United States Defense Threat Reduction Agency issued a report that had been written in support of the United States Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse Attack.

    The report, entitled “Collateral Damage to Satellites from an EMP Attack,” discusses in great detail the historical events that caused artificial radiation belts and their effects on many satellites that were then in orbit.

    The same report also projects the effects of one or more present-day high altitude nuclear explosions upon the formation of artificial radiation belts and the probable resulting effects on satellites that are currently in orbit.

    NOW Russian cargo ship for space station crashes, rocket accident may delay launch of next crew
    http://www.newser.com/article/d9paj7300/russian-cargo-ship-for-space-station-crashes-rocket-accident-may-delay-launch-of-next-crew.html
    A spacecraft carrying nearly 3 tons of supplies failed to reach orbit Wednesday and crashed into Siberia.

    NASA’s space station program manager, Mike Suffredini, says next month’s planned launch of a new crew may be delayed. That’s because the upper stage of the Soyuz rocket that failed is similar to the ones used to launch astronauts.

    Suffredini says three of the six space station astronauts who are due to return to Earth in two weeks, might end up staying longer. NASA wants to keep the outpost fully staffed with six to keep research going.

    As for supplies, the space station has plenty to last until spring.

    THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP’s earlier story is below.

    MOSCOW (AP) _ An unmanned Russian supply ship bound for the International Space Station failed to reach its planned orbit Wednesday, and pieces of it fell in Siberia amid a thunderous explosion, officials said.

    A brief statement from Roscosmos, Russia’s space agency, did not specify whether the Progress supply ship that was launched from the Baikonur cosmodrome in Kazakhstan had been lost. But the state news agency RIA Novosti quoted Alexander Borisov, head of a the Choisky region in Russia’s Altai province, as saying pieces of the craft fell in his area some 1,500 kilometers (900 miles) northeast of the launch site.

    “The explosion was so strong that for 100 kilometers (60 miles) glass almost flew out of the windows,” he was quoted as saying. Borisov said there were no immediate reports of casualties.

    The ITAR-Tass news agency quoted Choisky’s Interior Ministry as saying the space ship crashed in a vast Siberian forest that contains small villages. Yuri Shmyrin, the chief of Karakoksha, one of those villages, told Interfax news agency that the search operation for the wreckage is not likely to start until Thursday morning.

    The Russian Emergencies Ministry could not be reached for comment. A Roscosmos media officer who refused to be identified said the agency had no immediate comment.

    Roscosmos said the third stage of the rocket firing the ship into space failed a few minutes into the launch. The ship was carrying more than 2.5 tons of supplies, including oxygen, food and fuel. Since the ending of the U.S. space shuttle program this summer, Russian spaceships are a main supply link to the space station. It was the 44th Progress to launch to the International Space Station.

    Roscosmos said the accident “would have no negative influence” on the International Space Station crew because its existing supplies of food, water and oxygen are sufficient.

    Interfax cited a Russian space analyst, Sergei Puzanov, as saying those supplies could last two to three months and that “the situation with the loss of the Progress cannot be called critical.”

    In the United States, NASA said the rocket appeared to function flawlessly at liftoff, which occurred right on time, but there was a loss of contact with the vehicle just over five minutes into the flight.

    On NASA TV, Russian officials said the upper stage did not separate from the supply ship and that on two subsequent orbits controllers tried to contact the supply ship _ in vain. Two hours after the mishap, Russian Mission Control told the space station crew: “We’ll try to figure it out.”

    NASA is counting on Russia as well as Japan and Europe to keep the orbiting outpost stocked, now that the space shuttles are no longer flying. The shuttle program ended in July with the Atlantis mission; a year’s worth of food and other provisions were delivered.

    Late this year, a commercial company in California plans to launch its own rocket and supply ship to the space station. NASA is encouraging private enterprise to make station deliveries.

    There are six astronauts aboard the International Space Station, which orbits 350 kilometers (220 miles) above the Earth. They are Russians Andrei Borisenko, Alexander Samokuyayev and Sergei Volkov, Americans Michael Fossum and Ronald Garan and Satoshi Furukawa of Japan.

    “The supplies aboard the space station are actually pretty fat” after the resupply mission by space shuttle Atlantis in July, NASA spokesman Kelly Humphries said from Houston. “So we don’t anticipate any immediate impact to the crew.”

    Humphries stressed that NASA was waiting to get more details from Russian space officials on what actually happened.

    In July of 2010, a Progress supply ship failed in its first automatic docking attempt due to equipment malfunction, but was connected with the orbiting laboratory two days later.
    Marcia Dunn contributed from Cape Canaveral, Florida.

    Why did they fail to reach orbit>>>?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOCZSUxNy1o
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuQgVGDENbU

    http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=zMAeAAAAIBAJ&sjid=bMoEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6524,883916&dq=nuclear+dangerous+radiation&hl=en

    Tacomagroove
    August 29, 2011 at 1:48 am Log in to Reply
    Notice in bold that they are NOT sending another rocket with people and supplies…

    Imagine why…

    Tacomagroove
    August 29, 2011 at 1:53 am Log in to Reply
    I would assume fukushima can now be categorized as a high altitude nuclear explosion…

    Being it was a nuclear explosion…
    That went 30,000 feet into the air…

    The only part you need to be concerned about is
    its anywhere between 168 and 70,000 tests taken at the same time…

    as insignificant as that is…


    Report comment

    • VanneV anne

      There were 21 high altitude nuclear bomb tests, but only 9 man-made radiation belts.
      Also, just because radioactive particles reached the jet stream, it doesn’t mean they went 10 miles high. I don’t see how anyone can postulate that another radiation belt has been created.
      The lowest man-made radiation belt was at 26.7 miles up. As far as we know none of the particles from Fukushima reached that high. It certainly exploded at ground level. The problem for space travelers doesn’t begin until 400 miles up. And there were problems last year before Fukushima.
      I don’t think you can count Fukushima as a high altitude nuclear explosion for any angle. Maybe someone with more expertise can shed light on this conjecture.


      Report comment

    • VanneV anne

      Also, the high altitude nuclear test explosions were much, much, much larger than the Hiroshima bomb. Certainly, Fukushima is not equal to 2,000 high altitude nuclear tests. And 70,000 is completely an outlandish figure.


      Report comment

  • well the article above quoted 72,000 Hiroshima’s. Which if Hiroshima was 1/4th of a high atmosphere test bomb.
    That would still equal 72,000 times worse than Hiroshima would still be equal to a some odd 18,500 High atmosphere nuclear test devices…

    Also
    Another big factor to consider is that the jet stream may only be 10 miles high; In physics a single mass cannot share the same space as another single mass. So although the test was executed at a much higher altitude;

    The larger low level releases at Fukushima took place in only a weeks time. So each of the three previous masses likely pushed each other in all directions.

    Seeing as googles and googles of isotopes, all came barreling out of these three reactors within a weeks time It is now probably safe to be skeptical that the radiation was expelled in both girth (internationally) and height, (the upper atmosphere). Almost instantly you more likely, than not; with geiger counter in hand have been able to detect Fukushima’s radiation in space.

    So I will agree to disagree that Fukushima’s likely a candidate for reasons the shuttles stage two rockets did not engage… (an electric failure); which is ‘common’ when entering an ‘artificial radiation belt’…

    I will also disagree that fukushima is more than likely detectable (anywhere you look) starting as low as 27 miles. And ranging to 400+


    Report comment

    • VanneV anne

      The 9 high altitude artificial radiation belts were 9.904 megatons, so on average one high altitude nuclear bomb explotion was 1.1 megatons.
      The Hiroshima Bomb was 9700 lbs.
      So the Hiroshima Bomb was 9700 lbs. / 1.1 megatons
      .0000097 / 1.1
      So the Hiroshima Bomb was 0.00000881818 of a high altitude nuclear explosion
      So if you multiplied by 72,000 (even though the radiation hasn’t come out all at once in an explosion, you get 0.634909 of a high altitude explosion.
      And if, as you say, the radiation keeps going up and up out to space, how much is left to come down on the ground?


      Report comment

  • I’m not saying any of that at all.
    I’m saying its relevant that when a shuttle crashes during a nuclear meltdown its probably important to factor in such an event…

    Its very ironic timing.
    have any satellites fallen lately? Sadly these are the consequences of nuclear radiation in the atmosphere… Are they not…

    YA see… These are things that I imagine going along with evaporating appearance of the birds and the bees. Are they not? Waves of unknown energy are floating around in our atmosphere are they not…

    Im not saying anything other than this….

    Gesturing with the FINGER POINTING like in the camera…

    `Fukushima is the biggest Nuclear Test bomb in the entire world…` At this point in time: It is by far the most epic release of nuclear radiation in the entire history of mankind. It is likely fukushima + every nuclear weapons test in history to have happened all at once…

    Chernobyl is fukushima’s Bitch now To put it simply.

    This is the biggest amount of nuclear contamination to have ever occurred on our planet.

    “In the last 150 days… Tepco managed to half way built a tent. while, They still haven’t found a clue” Oh wait. don’t these things usually go all to hell. And if and when they do… Cant they explode? And if all the contamination is neatly piling up in that tent. and its going to explode and the bio-accumulation fills it up Like it already has but just a little more…and then all a sudden you cant go in…. What then?

    Has anyone felt this IDK. call it a lack of speed in containing this crisis?
    Im pretty scared at this point…

    Its either…
    A its no big deal or….
    B. its a huge ordeal…

    Now if its a huge ordeal (which we think it is) and they are taking their time which they are… were probably already beyond fucked, This obviously means alot of us are going to die and there is nothing we can do about it.

    But if its “no big deal” and they are taking their time…
    well:
    The prime minister wouldn’t have quit.
    We would be shipping massive aid to the island…
    we wouldn’t be paranoid.
    They wouldn’t have to spend millions of dollars to hide the situation…
    people in japans hair wouldn’t be falling out, with the addition of nose bleeds. and failed birth rates….
    Online radiation networks would be available online real time.
    The seattle mapping would be public information
    need I go on…

    If its still a bigger event now than the japanese the iaea and tepco are even willing to let you in on…

    I mean christ After all this time…

    Well then god damnit jim
    I really don’t think you can handle the truth.

    All we can really go on from here is: Were in uncharted territory. No nuclear leak has ever matched fukushima.

    Your one atmospheric test is a joke compared to chernobyl is it not?


    Report comment

    • VanneV anne

      The meltdowns happened in March, and over half the radiation from Fukushima including all the future happened in March. (This is in one of Arnie’s videos) The supply shuttle accident happened 5 months later.
      Of the high altitude explosions listed by Wikipedia, there are only 3 high altitude explosions that are either 1.4 megatons and 3.8 megatons large. The others are 300 kilotons or smaller. 1 kiloton equals 0.001 megatons. So these are approximately 1000 times smaller.
      “List of Artificial Radiation Belts
      Explosion Location Date Yield (approximate) Altitude (km) Nation of Origin
      Hardtack Teak
      Johnston Island (Pacific)
      1958-08-01 3.8 megatons
      76.8 United States

      Hardtack Orange
      Johnston Island (Pacific)
      1958-08-12 3.8 megatons
      43 United States

      Starfish Prime
      Johnston Island (Pacific)
      1962-07-09 1.4 megatons
      400 United States

      “sThe table above only lists those high-altitude nuclear explosions for which a reference exists in the open (unclassified) English-language scientific literature to persistent artificial radiation belts resulting from the explosion.

      “The Starfish Prime radiation belt had, by far, the greatest intensity and duration of any of the artificial radiation belts.[1]”
      http://agriculturedefensecoalition.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/26E_1958_List_of_Artificial_Radiation_Belts_Created_by_High_Altitude_Nuclear_Explosions_1958_1962_Wikipedia.pdf

      But here again we see that the distance from the earth at which the explosion occurred is crucial in terms of the intensity and duration of any of the artificial radiation belts.
      The largest of the explosions, both 3.8 megatons, were much closer to the earth, than the 1.8 megaton explosion of Starfish Prime at 1.4 megatons.
      The largest 3.8 magaton explosions were at 76.8 km and 43 km from the earth.
      Starfish Prime explosion was at an altitude of 400 km.

      The explosions at Fukushima happened at ground level.


      Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        If we compare the new figures for radiation release from to the largest of the high altitude nuclear test bomb explosions, we have Hiroshima Bomb at 9700 lbs., and Fukushima at 72,000 Hiroshima Bombs = 698400000 lts.= 0.316788911208 megatons.
        0.316788911208 megatons divided by 3.8 megatons = 0.08336
        So, not even considering that not all that radiation was released at the time of the meltdowns in March, at best Fukushima is only 0.08336 of the largest high altitude nuclear test explosions.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        The natural radiation belts are the Van Allen radiation belts.

        “The Van Allen radiation belt is a torus of energetic charged particles (plasma) around Earth, which is held in place by Earth’s magnetic field. It is believed that most of the particles that form the belts come from solar wind, and other particles by cosmic rays.[1] It is named after its discoverer, James Van Allen, and is located in the inner region of the Earth’s magnetosphere. It is split into two distinct belts, with energetic electrons forming the outer belt and a combination of protons and electrons forming the inner belts. In addition, the radiation belts contain lesser amounts of other nuclei, such as alpha particles. The belts pose a hazard to satellites, which must protect their sensitive components with adequate shielding if their orbit spends significant time in the radiation belts…”
        “The large outer radiation belt extends from an altitude of about three to ten Earth radii (RE) or 13,000 to 60,000 kilometres above the Earth’s surface. Its greatest intensity is usually around 4–5 RE….”
        “The inner Van Allen Belt extends from an altitude of 100–10,000 km[8] (0.01 to 1.5 Earth radii) above the Earth’s surface, and contains high concentrations of energetic protons with energies exceeding 100 MeV and electrons in the range of hundreds of keV, trapped by the strong (relative to the outer belts) magnetic fields in the region.
        “It is believed that protons of energies exceeding 50 MeV in the lower belts at lower altitudes are the result of the beta decay of neutrons created by cosmic ray collisions with nuclei of the upper atmosphere. The source of lower energy protons is believed to be proton diffusion due to changes in the magnetic field during geomagnetic storms.[9]…”
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Allen_radiation_belt

        The supply shuttle that failed would have been shielded against the Van Allen radiation belts.
        There are wonderful pictures in the article on Van Allen radiation belts in Wikipedia cited above.


        Report comment

  • RAH

    One of the scariest videos I’ve ever watched.
    A graphic representation of every nuclear detonation on this planet since 1945.
    The US of A is the clear winner.
    We were all screwed before we were even born.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6M6Iq9wyTE


    Report comment

  • pg

    If they say 1.000,000 that really means up to 20,000,000


    Report comment

  • patb2009

    TacomaGroove

    The russian boosters don’t use a lot of electronics they prefer mechanical sequencers and they have a design base around vacuum tubes.

    Also most boosters are hardened against ionized gases and to handle cosmic radiation and solar flares.

    I suspect the russians have QC problems, it happens occasionally, but i’ll keep an open mind.

    I’d say the bigger issue is Fukushima is such a large emitter, that people in the northern half of japan east of the mountains have to be in great danger.

    It is shameful the government did not call for an immediate evacuation of millions within 100 KM range.


    Report comment

  • bfly

    After reading Tacos theory,My mind went here. So i am absent of any scientific way to connect this dot….Yet the Hopi nation has been right about so many things that have come to pass.Perhaps this could bring about the 9th sign.The one in which a space station crashes to earth…..http://youtu.be/PnJnWnFxaPU.


    Report comment

    • Jebus

      Space station may be abandoned during probe of Soyuz failure

      The failure of a Soyuz rocket to send a supply ship into space last week may mean that the International Space Station will have to be temporarily abandoned for the first time since 2000, Florida Today reports.

      Russian space vehicles are the only means of ferrying crews and supplies to the station now that the U.S. space shuttle program has ended.

      Last week, the third-stage failure of a Soyuz rocket sent an unmanned Progress supply ship crashing into Siberia.

      As a result, plans to launch a new crew to the station Sept. 21 have been postponed indefinitely while Russian officials investigate why the rocket failed.

      Mike Suffredini, NASA’s program manager for the space station, says two factors could force the temporary abandonment of the station, the newspaper reports.

      First, is the imminent expiration date of the “certified orbital lifetimes” of two Soyuz “lifeboats” attached to the station. The second involves flight rules that call for crews to return to Earth during daylight.

      Three of the crewmembers aboard the station — two Russians and an American — have already delayed their planned Sept. 8 return by a week while the probe continues.

      They will probably return before Sept. 19 — the last daylight landing opportunity that month in the central steppes of Kazakhstan, Florida Today reports.

      The next opportunity would not come until Oct. 27, about 10 days beyond the 200-day “certified orbital lifetime” of their Soyuz taxi back home.

      The remaining three crewmembers need to return before Nov. 19 — the last daylight landing opportunity that month.

      Otherwise, the certified life of their Soyuz spacecraft will expire before the next daylight opportunity rolls around in late December, the newspaper says.

      http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2011/08/space-station-may-be-abandoned-temporarily-during-probe-of-soyuz-failure-/1


      Report comment

  • Toni Reita ND

    It doesn’t take any serious math to rough guess how much worse Fukushima is:

    Chernobyl 3 months old and no fuel rod storage
    1 Reactor that burned only 10 days
    1 million deaths according to scientists in 25 years
    roughly 100,000 deaths, over 25 years, for every day it burned

    Fukushima 40 years old & piles of stored reactors
    3 Melt through reactors +++
    still burning almost 180 days later

    The math is too awful to contemplate, isn’t it?

    Could it be at least 3 times as bad as Chernobyl or 300,000 deaths per day, over 25 years, for every day it burns?

    That would be 54 million.

    Yet, even Hiroshima had survivors.

    http://www.natural-health-home-remedies.com/radiation.html


    Report comment