New Study: Aerosolized plutonium from Fukushima detected in Europe — Spent fuel indicated

Published: January 2nd, 2012 at 12:22 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
242 comments


Radionuclides from the Fukushima accident in the air over Lithuania: measurement and modelling approaches – Abstract, Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, Dec. 27, 2011:

Lujanienė G, Byčenkienė S, Povinec PP, Gera M.; Environmental Research Department, SRI Center for Physical Sciences and Technology, Lithuania

  • Radionuclides from the Fukushima accident in the air over Lithuania
  • Activity concentration of (239,240)Pu
  • One aerosol sample
  • Collected from 23 March to 15 April, 2011
  • Found to be 44.5 nBq/m(3)
  • Activity ratio of (238)Pu/(239,240)Pu in the aerosol sample was 1.2, indicating a presence of the spent fuel of different origin than that of the Chernobyl accident

h/t EX-SKF

 

Published: January 2nd, 2012 at 12:22 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
242 comments

Related Posts

  1. Scientists: Plutonium released from Fukushima “is of radiological concern”; Reactor must be source, not spent fuel pool — Study: Plutonium found 120 km from plant; “Pu and non-natural uranium certainly increased in environment” April 21, 2014
  2. Study: High plutonium-241 activity detected over 30 kilometers from Fukushima plant — Additional research suggests “long-distance transport” of plutonium October 8, 2013
  3. Study: Fukushima plutonium in playground 60 km from nuclear plant — “Proves that indeed Plutonium has been emitted by the accident” — Some “in the form of fuel fragments”? — Up to 14 Billion Bq of Pu-239 and-240 released (MAP) June 29, 2014
  4. Nuclear Expert: We found ‘mystery’ Fukushima plutonium; Why it’s there is yet to be understood, this was not expected — US Gov’t Expert: I don’t want to go down the rabbit hole too far… There’s speculation about plutonium fuel and about what other fuel they were using (VIDEO) September 26, 2014
  5. NPR: Scientists test for Fukushima plutonium being transported in Pacific — Study: Plutonium particles found to have “high environmental mobility” — Expert: Fuel materials may be flowing from plant, “What is actually contained in releases?” (AUDIO) February 12, 2014

242 comments to New Study: Aerosolized plutonium from Fukushima detected in Europe — Spent fuel indicated

  • SamsungKorea SamsungKorea

    Is there a possibility that this came from Fukushima???


    Report comment

    • Enenews Admin

      1st bullet point: “Radionuclides from the Fukushima accident in the air over Lithuania”

      Last bullet point: “Activity ratio of (238)Pu/(239,240)Pu in the aerosol sample was 1.2, indicating a presence of the spent fuel of different origin than that of the Chernobyl accident


      Report comment

      • SamsungKorea SamsungKorea

        LOL thank you
        didn’t notice that comment.

        I’m worried about the future of Japan…
        I think many will start to get something like cancer approximately 4years from now, like in Chernobyl.

        Also, i’m not very positive about the future-economy of Japan


        Report comment

        • lokay5

          Welcome SamsungKorea. A stupid question, but are you in Korea or Japan or?


          Report comment

          • SamsungKorea SamsungKorea

            If the ongoing-thing is truly China-Syndrome,

            1)it will blow(explode) for sure in the near-futre
            2)it will also affect South Korea

            What do you think of these two sentences? do you consider all of them true?


            Report comment

            • 1) Not likely
              2) It will affect the entire world


              Report comment

              • VanneV anne

                I don’t think it is inevitable, but it is also quite possible. Only time will tell.


                Report comment

              • Arnie Gundersen says the huge explosions are not very likely. He says it in this interview with Helen Caldicott, posted 26 Dec, 2011:

                http://fairewinds.com/content/arnold-gundersen-fresh-report-fukushima

                Problem is, right after he says the word ASSUME makes an ASS out of U and ME, he says a 7.0 is probably not likely (not sure why he says that). We had a 7.0 on New Years Day. He’s probably trying to indicate that he is not a fearmonger, playing it safe, which is fair enough.

                But, he also says it doesn’t matter because things are very grave (serious) as is.

                Do a search on this site using “south korea” as the search term. I would guess South Korea is not a good place to be and they got hit hard, and are getting hit hard.

                As Michio Kaku says, “A meltdown is forever.”

                Michio Kaku: “A Meltdown is Forever”
                http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okHM-Y1-3L0

                5 mSv/year is the Chernobyl evacuation limit (0.57 µSv/hour), but people were getting very serious symptoms below that.

                Helen Caldicott knows exactly what she’s talking about – she’s a doctor and has to treat the results of radionuclide contamination.


                Report comment

            • Toadmac

              #1 IMO it already happened in the first few days?
              #2 IMO it is affecting the world!

              Melt-through of a reactor vessel may take from few tens of minutes to several hours. During the interaction between corium and concrete, very high temperatures can be achieved. The decomposition temperature of concrete is about 1100 °C. The corium can reach temps of 2800 °C (some scientists and researchers suggest the possibility of much higher temps 4000+). At this temp decomposition of concrete can reach 1m an hour. The possibility of total melt through/out in hours and days, not weeks or months seems likely!
              Contamination only gets worse from this point on!


              Report comment

              • Toadmac

                Questions you may ask:
                Q:Why would I say this?
                A: Masao Yoshida, general manager of the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant, believed the worst-case scenario — the “China syndrome” — might be near and he braced for death during the late-night hours of March 14, three days after the crisis started.
                http://enenews.com/japan-times-fukushima-boss-believed-china-syndrome-reactor-2-top-japan-official-admits-already-happened
                Q: Did anything happen after the night of March 14 that might support my theory?
                A:March 15: A second explosion of reactor 3, An explosion in the “pressure suppression room” causes some damage to unit 2’s containment system, A fire breaks out at unit 4.
                March 16: A TEPCO press release states that workers had been withdrawn because of abnormal noises coming from the reactor pressure suppression chambers.
                I could put up many links and articles to support my opinion but its all old news! I didn’t just take a stab in the dark, I have done my research. 2+2=? Just my opinion.


                Report comment

                • Toadmac

                  Oh…..ok just a couple more comments for laughs amongst friends.
                  Late march report by kyodo news: Ground water contamination at Fukushima #1 nuclear plant up 1000% in one week?
                  A couple of Fuku workers had this to say:
                  “A lot of the cracks came up in the ground,massive steam is coming up from there.It’s too smoggy here,can’t see a thing.It seems like nuclear reaction is happening underground.Now we are evacuating.Watch out for the direction of wind.”
                  “Near the reactors,there are a lot of the cracks in the ground,steam splashed out from there sometimes.and we have detected 10Sv/h at 6 places unlike gov’s announcement.”
                  With all that said and written over the last 9 months I guess I can’t say for sure that there is fission products in the ground water,sea water,sewage and coming up from steaming cracks in the ground with readings higher than 10Sv/hr next to reactor units? Might have to keep on researching to figure it out?


                  Report comment

                  • Toadmac

                    One more thing I would like to clarify is the Northern/Southern hemisphere thing. Anyone that tells the earth is flat would be incorrect. The earth is shaped like a ball and is almost a sphere. There is also a atmospheric composition(oxygen,wind,rain etc) that is included with this circular world we live on. This atmosphere can evaporate,blow and rain all over our lovely round planet. There is NO force field between the northern and southern hemisphere. Contrary to belief the southern parts of Earth breath the same atmosphere as the northern parts. Now that we have that out of the way I will share this with you.
                    June 8 2011 Scientists asking “Why did the radiation spread so quickly to the Southern Hemisphere?”
                    http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110613/full/news.2011.366.html
                    My own findings:
                    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enrLGH-dmvE
                    Recently I have been getting 25% higher background readings with confirmation from contacts with more sophisticated equipment. We live on the same planet and breathe those same particles, albeit a smaller dose maybe.


                    Report comment

          • lokay5

            Well, I was right. It WAS a stupid question.


            Report comment

            • SamsungKorea SamsungKorea

              lol…no it wasn’t…there’s also possibility that i’m not Korean^^it was actually a good question

              is it true now so-called China-Syndrome is ongoing…??

              many people don’t seem to know that Radiation is serious…
              many Koreans go travel to Japan annually and even after the disaster, they still kept going to Japan


              Report comment

          • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

            @SamsungKorea: regarding “…some people even quit eating seafood.” is not stupid at all. One of the things you must keep in mind is how markets have been internationalized. I reside on the east coast of the United States. Though I’m on the ‘far side of the moon’, I’ve stopped consuming fish products. This started long before Fukushima, with the BP/Gulf of Mexico spill, and the resulting contamination of the area with Corexit. After Fukushima, I decided that it wouldn’t be long before the ‘farm raised’ product coming from China and Thailand would be heavily contaminated, as well. Admittedly, none of this is scientific and due more to a deep distrust of those who’d say otherwise…


            Report comment

            • truthseek truthseek

              But, but, but… The entire worlds food supply has been effected. California fruit/vegetable crops, the wine country. The. Midwest grain belt… On and on…

              My god this is astounding…. ALL bets are off. Where do or should draw a line of safety?!? I worry about fish and the oceans… but, but, but.


              Report comment

      • jonjon

        Please stop responding to SamsungKorea.. this is clearly not a serious poster, as you can see from the repetition of the same posts over and over, with the kind of English a korean would simply never use. Please admin, do smth about it, it pollutes the site and make genuine posters turn their back to the site. Thank you


        Report comment

      • Kevin Kevin

        Is it possible that it came from Fuku?

        You may recall the headline you clicked on to enter this thread it read:

        New Study: Aerosolized plutonium from Fukushima detected in Europe — Spent fuel indicated


        Report comment

    • BreadAndButter BreadAndButter

      Your avatar picture disturbs me greatly.


      Report comment

      • bmurr bmurr

        @ – B&B -I agree. But then again, so does the “Asian women for dating” advertisement at the top of the page today.
        I haven’t posted in a while, but I’ve been reading. This thread has brought the site to a new low. I’m still not sure S.korea isn’t just trying to mess with people.
        @ S.Korea -If you are very concerned about China Syndrome, go read the multitudes of expert analysis that has been going on lately concerning the subject. We are all just as in the dark as you about the truth, and can only decide for ourselves what is going on based on how we have educated ourselves.

        Anyway, I think the avatar is inappropriate at best -


        Report comment

    • dharmasyd dharmasyd

      It seems to be … vanished!


      Report comment

      • StPaulScout StPaulScout

        It certainly seems to have vanished. I used to wonder why they didn’t dump water on 3 also, but I came to realize you don’t need to cool what isn’t there.


        Report comment

    • James2

      The photos in the video are good. The narrative is not very accurate.

      I put a description of exactly where the important things to see in another thread today or yesterday.


      Report comment

      • moonshellblue moonshellblue

        I never understood how they could show photos of reactor 3 spent fuel pool as it is nothing but a pile of sticks. I wish someone could show me a photo of where the spent fuel pool is located because since the accident it seems to have been blown around the world.


        Report comment

    • Lee Binder

      I am 99.999% convinced that MOX reactor #3 *completely* blew up in that *massive* black-smoke explosion … MOX plutonium fuel = two million times more deadly than enriched uranium ..

      If it hadn’t blown up, increased levels of Pu etc. would NOT be found all over the world ..

      Since EU is far away, the epidemics in Japan, surrounding countries, Canada & US (esp. West Coast, Cascade Mts. etc.) in the next years and decades will be massive ..

      What I don’t get is why this news (Collected from 23 March to 15 April, 2011) has not made it into public earlier ..


      Report comment

      • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

        @Lee Binder: within the first week, Hillary Clinton was flown out to Japan and they decided to coordinate all media reports, on both sides of the Pacific. This is normal procedure, for events that may present challenge to ongoing control.

        What they hadn’t planned on was the Internet. Prior to the Internet, it would have taken decades for much of this information to see the light-of-day. The flip-side of this lack of information control is that decentralized media is also ‘noisy’. Add to this, the consolidation of MSM venues and you have the answer as to why this information’s taking too long to get out.

        We have moved into an age where we are not only responsible for what we expose our bodies to, but also, what we feed to its most important organ. Given the horrors of Fukushima, the cold-hard truth of enenews offers a chance to assess and (if possible) reduce nuclear power’s impact on our personal lives. For such privilege, we are obligated to guide others to that end…


        Report comment

    • BreadAndButter BreadAndButter

      It’s been quite clear fo a long time that the yellow lid of reactor 3 is missing.
      You can see the massive steaming vessel without lid in the 26th picture down on these old pictures:
      http://cryptome.org/eyeball/daiichi-npp3/daiichi-photos3.htm


      Report comment

    • truthseek truthseek

      Utterly .d.e.m.o.l.i.s.h.e.d.

      Completely FUBAR!!!


      Report comment

  • SamsungKorea SamsungKorea

    Anyone please tell me, is there high-possibility of ‘China-syndrome’ happening in one of the reactors…??? or is it already ongoing..?

    then it will soon explode, not??? could it also effect South Korea?

    i’m new to this forum so i don’t know much about it.


    Report comment

    • SamsungKorea SamsungKorea

      it was

      is there ‘a’(grammatical error LOL)


      Report comment

    • James2

      Tepco says china syndrome hasn’t happened yet.

      Most of us here think it happened several months ago. I wouldn’t worry about the big explosion if I were you. No one knows what will happen now – this has never happened before.

      If I were in Korea, the discharges to the air and the ocean would be the biggest worry for me.

      This will have a huge effect on sea life in your part of the world.


      Report comment

      • jec jec

        Sealife migrates-some rapidly all across the oceans. Some are stationary. But plankton, squid, fish, marine mammals, etc -they are mobile. So yes huge effect, and probably if they keep dumping into the oceans –we will all feel the effects of radiation. We are. Japan should tell the truth about the spread and stop saying all is okay, come visit.


        Report comment

    • HamburgGeiger

      Nobody knows if there is already a china-syndrom. Some may know it, but they don`t tell us. ;-)

      Many of us here on enenews believe that there is already at least one china-syndrom in Fukushima. We saw reports of steam coming from cracks in the earth near the reactors months ago!

      If you ask me, that hot corium has no problem melting through everything. So were does it go? I think it goes vertically down and it has done that a long time ago. But thats just me.


      Report comment

      • arclight arclight

        hi samsung watsh this

        Fallujah: a lost generation? (trailer)
        Plutoinium and Uranium. Whats the problem?
        Iraqi doctor quoted…….

        “I advise the women of fallujah not have more babies”

        This is the trailer to Feurat Alani’s “Iraq: Fallujah’s Sacrificed Children”. Mr. Alani travels to Fallujah unembedded to report on the condition of the city more than six years after it was destroyed by the US military
        Do not watch if you are sensitive!

        lQQk
        you aint funny and this is serious!!


        Report comment

    • moonshellblue moonshellblue

      No One and I mean no one, knows what is happening in the reactors but one fact is known and that is all the water is contaminated and thus it is just like a China Syndrome in that respect. Also everything you read is speculation an nothing more the radiation is so high that robots and humans cannot get close enough to know the exact location of the melted fuel. I personally think it has melted thru the steel and is in the ground but as I stated previously and as Arnie Gundersen has said it really does not matter as the water used to cool the fuel is contaminating the ground water.


      Report comment

    • alasanon

      Hello! I think you are asking exactly the right kind of questions!! I’m sorry that you are close neighbors with Japan in the Pacific. I can understand that could be scary these days! I checked on a map for S. Korea-wow, that is a bit too close for comfort! It impressed me that the Korean govt. ordered children to stay indoors and closed schools during the worst days. At least for you most of the winds from Fukushima go northwest. There are a lot of valuable recommendations on this site on how to take precautions and reduce your intake of radionuclides!! Prevention and detoxification has been proven to work during nuclear disasters… Good luck, Samsung! p.s. I had one of your TVs for years! ;)


      Report comment

  • dharmasyd dharmasyd

    Samsung Korea…


    Report comment

    • SamsungKorea SamsungKorea

      Many Koreans are now worried about Radiation stuff cuz we live so near them…it is so unlucky that we live so near to them…we were also massacred by the Japanese in the near-past…along with more Chinese


      Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        Radionuclides released from Fukushima to the environment in Japan

        “…Silver-110m, half life about 250 days, wouldn’t have been discovered unless the control rods had melted at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant.

        “There was the news in early April that radioactive silver was detected in South Korea. There was no way the same nuclide wasn’t falling in Japan if it could fly all the way to Korea, I thought….”
        http://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2011/08/02/radionuclides-released-from-fukushima-to-the-environment-in-japan/

        The fuel is probably already melting into the ground. No way to know if there will be another explosion.


        Report comment

        • VanneV anne

          It might not explode because the geological formation under the reactors is porous sedimentary rock, and under the turbines is landfill. So although it is seeping down and into the ground water and the ocean, it might not explode. On Dec. 7, the time lapse videos are missing for 4 hours and there was an emergency training going on. After that in the US there were very high beta gross count rates. So for sure a lot of radiation was released.

          They are now losing cooling water out of the Spent Fuel Pool #4 which has live nuclear fuel being stored there with MOX spent fuel and a lot of other spent fuel. This is not a China Syndrome yet as far as we know. But it is very serious if they don’t keep the fuel rods covered. Still no one can say that there will be an explosion.

          They are saying that they will be drilling a hole into reactor #2 in January.

          If you could go to South America it would probably be a good idea. I can’t afford to go and I am old anyway. I just keep hoping for the best to happen.

          Some people have left Japan already. Some are in New Zealand.

          Even if there isn’t another explosion, a huge amount of radiation has already been released. The majority of radiation has come to the US because of the wind currents. But some has gone to Asia. Some one in S. Korea should be monitoring the radiation levels.


          Report comment

          • SamsungKorea SamsungKorea

            and Radiation still leaking right…?

            when they can completely cover up all the reactors…?? to not let the radiation-substances go out to the air.

            there’s really no-hope for now, right???


            Report comment

            • VanneV anne

              If they covered up everything so there was no leakage of radiation, then there would be for sure explosions and even more radiation would be released high into the jet stream for all of the Northern Hemisphere. The tent on Reactor #1 is mostly cosmetic.


              Report comment

            • Calm Down, we have a 5 point action plan to rid the world of nukes. Other than that, take basic precautions now. This will not kill you this year, calm down and think


              Report comment

            • HamburgGeiger

              SamsungKorea,
              yes, radiation is still leaking and will leak forever. There is no way to stop it! We just don`t know if there will be more explosions or if radiation will just leak out “slowly” for centuries to come. Both is very bad. And the radiation will accumulate, so things get more and more radioactive over time everywhere.

              If you want my opinion: There is no hope – not for now and not in the future. We just went too far. Fuku perhaps was the last straw that broke the camels back.


              Report comment

              • many moons

                Sadly Fukushima may have been the FIRST of the straws that broke the camels back. We still have plenty of reactors tick tick ticking away!
                More misery may or as Arnie will say without a doubt waiting to happen.


                Report comment

        • VanneV anne

          In the first place, scientifically, I think there is no completely sure thing that may happen. Although it looks like there will be radiation releases for a million years or more. But not completely sure that there will be another explosion.

          In the second place, I am a Christian. And there is always the possibility that God may intervene.


          Report comment

          • lokay5

            anne,
            Your last paragraph is proof to me that you’re delusional.

            BTW anne- wheres that link to the THIRTY FIVE NUCLEAR DETONATIONS IN THE GULF OF MEXICO…HMmmmm?


            Report comment

            • VanneV anne

              It is 15 or more:

              Replacing Nuclear Power Plants in Germany
              “…British Petroleum’s push to develop Abiotic natural gas in the Gulf of Mexico by the explosion of a nuclear bomb 6 miles under the alluvial fan of the Mississippi River August 19 2009 led to the blow out eight months later. There have been fifteen or more such explosions at depth under the Gulf of Mexico. The floor of the Gulf is leaking hydrocarbons in many areas. All the petroleum companies are positioning themselves to supply natural gas for the turbines….”
              http://educate-yourself.org/zsl/germanynuclearenergyphaseout30may11.shtml


              Report comment

              • HamburgGeiger

                Anne, that connection to Germany and our phase out of nuclear is very far-fetched, imo. Nobody knows if new power plants running on natural gas will be built. I hope so, but it looks more like they plan to ramp up some old coal plants instead. And if we need more natural gas in the future we`ll buy it mostly from russia, I think. There was just a new pipeline built. I don`t see a connection to that Gulf of Mexico issue.


                Report comment

                • lokay5

                  There ISN’T any German/Gulf of Mexico connection. Anne is desperately grasping at straws to defend her untennable position that there were “at least 15 nuclear explosions in the Gulf of Mexico”.

                  (Bible quote comming)

                  (wait for it)


                  Report comment

            • VanneV anne

              Luke 6:21
              Blessed are ye that hunger now: for ye shall be filled. Blessed are ye that weep now: for ye shall laugh.


              Report comment

              • lokay5

                Blessed are blah blah blah


                Report comment

                • lokay5

                  anne

                  Where’s the proof of the 15 NUCLEAR EXPLOSIONS in the Gulf of Mexico mentioned in your post January 1st @ 10:40 PM?


                  Report comment

                  • VanneV anne

                    Replacing Nuclear Power Plants in Germany
                    “…British Petroleum’s push to develop Abiotic natural gas in the Gulf of Mexico by the explosion of a nuclear bomb 6 miles under the alluvial fan of the Mississippi River August 19 2009 led to the blow out eight months later. There have been fifteen or more such explosions at depth under the Gulf of Mexico. The floor of the Gulf is leaking hydrocarbons in many areas. All the petroleum companies are positioning themselves to supply natural gas for the turbines….”
                    http://educate-yourself.org/zsl/germanynuclearenergyphaseout30may11.shtml


                    Report comment

                  • James2

                    In case you are new – don’t bother arguing with Anne

                    Anne adds a very valuable service to the site.

                    Whenever you see what looks like 10 or 12 off-topic and seemingly random or better yet conspiracy notes from anne

                    Then there is something really important right above them that she is trying to bury so nobody sees it.

                    Just find a string of Anne posts and look above. Works every time…


                    Report comment

                  • VanneV anne

                    Transmutation on the Ocean Bottom
                    June 20, 2011

                    “With the large releases of methane under the Gulf of Mexico by deep drilling and nuclear fracking of the basalt plain large quantities of methane ice have piled up on the bottom. Given time the bacteria will eat all the methane keeping the Gulf deep waters cool and making a lot of fish food. The use of Corexit emulsifier sinking the red coloured petroleum to the bottom will in time be transmuted by the bacteria.
                    The radioactivity in the petroleum, fall-out from the August 19 2009 nuclear blast 10 kilometres under the alluvial fan of the Mississippi will also be transmuted by the bacteria. In biological systems radioactivity drops fifteen times faster than in a test tube.
                    “The practise of the US Navy to drop decommissioned nuclear reactors in the ocean depths may be the best solution for long term elimination of such materials. The bacteria eats the iron into “rusticles” as seen on the Titanic at 10,000 feet deep and transmutes toxic radioactive elements fifteen times faster than in underground bunkers.
                    http://educate-yourself.org/zsl/transmutationoean20jun11.shtml


                    Report comment

                  • harengus_acidophilus

                    Interesting answer.
                    Maybe sheeples believe in chemcal solutions for nuclear disasters.
                    Deceivers talk a lot about it…

                    h.


                    Report comment

    • dharmasyd dharmasyd

      Sorry, that cut off. Some here have been calling this a China Syndrome for some time (Tacomagroove in particular). Others say no. I simply don’t know. I can’t put a label on it. It is still unclear what is happening. All I can say is that it looks very bad.


      Report comment

      • SamsungKorea SamsungKorea

        If the ongoing-thing is truly China-Syndrome,

        1)it will blow(explode) for sure in the near-futre
        2)it will affect South Korea

        What do you think of these two sentences..? do you consider all of them true?


        Report comment

        • arclight arclight

          it will affect South Korea

          according to french acro organisation they have done tests on 8 samples in south korea i believe.. for cecium 137, they found cesium 137 in only 1 soil sample! though hot spots are hard to find!! this was a promising start…
          the issue this year and next will be fallout from the stuff kept high in the atmosphere.. looks like plutonium travels too!

          soil contamination will occour as the snow melts and as the air clears of fallout… i have not seen normal for many months on my gieger.. :(

          as for the explosion theory.. dont think that will happen.. but sfp 4 ? flaming poisonous barbque scenario more likely! may go on for some time too!! and a third of the world was made wormwood!!

          thats a bad enough scenario!!

          in south korea you are prone to getting winds at this time of year from japan, and this happens in the summer too! weve had high readings from south australia.. you are at the mercy of the weather , as are we all!!

          peace


          Report comment

          • arclight arclight

            2011 Dec 24. [Epub ahead of print]
            Atmospheric radionuclides from the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear reactor accident observed in Vietnam.

            “Radionuclides from the reactor accident at the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant were observed in the surface air at stations in Hanoi, Dalat, and Ho Chi Minh City (HCMC) in Vietnam, about 4500 km southwest of Japan, during the period from March 27 to April 22, 2011. The maximum activity concentrations in the air measured at those three sites were 193, 33, and 37 μBq m(-3) for (131)I, (13)(4)Cs, and (13)(7)Cs, respectively. Peaks of radionuclide concentrations in the air corresponded to arrival of the air mass from Fukushima to Vietnam after traveling for 8 d over the Pacific Ocean. Cesium-134 was detected with the (134)Cs/(137)Cs activity ratio of about 0.85 in line with observations made elsewhere. The (131)I/(137)Cs activity ratio was observed to decrease exponentially with time as expected from radioactive decay. The ratio at Dalat, where is 1500 m high, was higher than those at Hanoi and HCMC in low lands, indicating the relative enrichment of the iodine in comparison to cesium at high altitudes. The time-integrated surface air concentrations of the Fukushima-derived radionuclides in the Southeast Asia showed exponential decrease with distance from Fukushima.”

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22200554


            Report comment

        • James2

          Nobody knows – not anybody here, not anybody at Tepco – nobody.

          Personally i think if it hasn’t happened already, I’d say unlikely.

          There have been some very large radioactive steam events over the past several months

          The biggest problem now is the Spent fuel pools, which appear to be collapsing one-by-one.


          Report comment

          • many moons

            James I had the same thought about Anne’s comments…that being an important comment is often followed by a string of Anne that don’t address previous comment/topic…..hmmmm


            Report comment

      • jec jec

        CHINA Syndrome or not, the situation is bad. Time will tell…


        Report comment

  • They have already admitted melt throughs on THREE reactor cores. So far, they have not admitted to anything else.

    Watch the video above.. Form your own conclusion.

    Where is the reactor and spent fuel pool(s) in this building?

    The top two floors of this building seem to be missing completely and that is where the reactor and spent fuel pools are.

    Arnie Gunderson says a prompt criticality happened. The NRC says it was not the spent fuel pool, but the reactor core itself that exploded.

    Who do you believe?

    The rest is all guesswork and speculation, because no one can get closer than 100 feet to any of the reactors and NO ONE has released down wind radiation readings since this all happened in March.

    How much total radiation was released? No one knows, but many authorities are guessing based on faulty assumptions.

    How much radiation is being released now? No one knows, because there are no radiation meters downwind, and none on the vent stacks hooked back up to the leaking reactors.

    So now you know as much as anyone.. Care 2 guess what is going on?


    Report comment

  • Tumrgrwer Tumrgrwer

    This is a total clusterf___!!! No one knows, no one knows. B.S… Someone knows, that we are left in doubt continually. No recourse to the law anymore…

    Let us be kind, one to another, for we are each of us together in our pain!


    Report comment

  • Replacant Replacant

    Looking at the info online and these images there is a Star Wars ‘use the force’ disinformation going on – “these are not the reactors you are looking for”
    Some other images this is reactor 4 which show the yellow structure, a piece on whats left of the roof of reactor3 is disturbing http://www.japannewstoday.com/?p=3162
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Rl6I21nZGvY


    Report comment

  • Replacant Replacant

    Of note about reactor 3 & all fuel onsite
    Official NEI time line
    http://www.nei.org/filefolder/11_005_Special_Report_on_Fukushima_Daiichi_MASTER_11_08_11_1.pdf
    Of interesting note they claim the explosion at reactor 3 was hydrogen but looking at the videos below it seems like the fuel pool exploded. Also the part about workers scrounging car batteries and running out of compressed air containers. page 26 March 14th time 1650
    • Reactor No. 1: 50 tons of nuclear fuel
    • Reactor No. 2: 81 tons
    • Reactor No. 3: 88 tons
    • Reactor No. 4: 135 tons
    • Reactor No. 5: 142 tons
    • Reactor No. 6: 151 tons
    Fuel Pool 3
    reactor No. 3. The unit houses MOX (mixed oxide) fuel, which can melt at lower temperatures and could release some of its plutonium, which has a half-life of 24,000 years.
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=nuclear-fuel-fukushima
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KugIrnThul0
    Fuel Pool 4
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=QVqfPCsl2AA


    Report comment

  • SamsungKorea SamsungKorea

    when they can completely cover up all the reactors…?? to not let the radiation-substances go out to the air.

    there’s really no-hope for now, right???


    Report comment

  • SamsungKorea SamsungKorea

    when they can completely cover up all the reactors…?? to not let the radiation-substances go out to the air.

    there’s really no-hope for now, right??


    Report comment

  • westcoastgirl westcoastgirl

    @SamsungKorea,

    I don’t think an explosion is certain. It has been debated, and presented as a possiblity, but it’s not certain where the corium is, how hot it is, etc.

    The good news is that it’s been over nine months, and another explosion hasn’t happened. Maybe it just won’t. There are definitely a lot of unknowns in all of this. What we do know is that there has been a huge amount of water contamination, as well as an unknown, but probably massive, amount of air contamination.

    I am not good at geography or wind currents, so I wouldn’t know how much it would affect S. Korea.

    Great Avatar, by the way… :)


    Report comment

    • westcoastgirl westcoastgirl

      There have been lots of articles written about Fukushima, some true, some not. I don’t think you should take them all at face value. Even the experts have different opinions about the severity and the danger.

      I usually look at the dates, too. i think that article was written in November; it’s now January and it still hasn’t happened.

      I was more worried about it when I read the article a while ago, but decided not to worry about something that isn’t happening, and that I can’t control, anyway. Kind of like worrying about an earthquake while living in earthquake-prone California.


      Report comment

  • westcoastgirl westcoastgirl

    @SamsungKorea,

    Try not ot worry so much. There have been a lot of nuclear bomb tests and accidents over the last 60 (or more?) years, yet there are still more than enough people populating the planet. Maybe not as healthy, but we’re still here.

    And as long as we’re still alive, there’s hope.


    Report comment

    • westcoastgirl westcoastgirl

      Sorry, don’t want to make light of things…this is a bad situation, very bad, probably extremely bad. And being alive is no fun if you are unhealthy.

      It’s just better to not lose hope prematurely…


      Report comment

      • SamsungKorea SamsungKorea

        it’s sad…
        are you from the us???

        i think people there are now indifferent to radiation stuff unlike a few of people like you.

        some even think Japan is now safe


        Report comment

        • westcoastgirl westcoastgirl

          If you are referring to me, yes, I am from the US. I guess there’s a fine line between worrying excessively about it and being indifferent. Sometimes it’s easier to just ignore it. The more aware you are, the more concerned you get.

          I still vascillate between the two attitudes. I never ignore it, but sometimes I don’t care as much. I feel like I’ve come to accept that I may not live as long as I had expected and hoped. But the news articles here continue to alarm me.


          Report comment

  • arclight arclight

    http://enenews.com/forum-post-radiation-monitoring-data-dec-17-2011-present

    information here about the ongoing radiological situation in europe and the world!


    Report comment

  • arclight arclight

    timings good for the russian fire too.. in that dodgy nuclear waste storage area!!

    just saying.. and said it on the rad monitoring forum too!!

    could be getting it from both???


    Report comment

  • arclight arclight

    repost from bobby

    “I’ve been looking at the November radiation readings for Russia:

    http://www.typhoon.obninsk.ru/rus/ipm/lab3/ro.htm

    These are beta readings only. It mentions that man-made radionuclides were detected at Turukhansk”

    and this

    “Chersky had 4 times the air concentration of beta aerosols, and 8 times the total deposition of same vs 2010:

    http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Chersky&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=cEf_TuzbF6rv0gG82IykCA&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=3&ved=0CA0Q_AUoAg

    This is aerosol only (no gas), and it is from gamma spectroscopy, so it does not include strontium-90.”"

    ” The area in Russia with elevated radiation is larger than the contiguous United States. Chersky and Khabarovsk had radiation levels in November similar to Anchorage or Des Moines in March.

    Russia has a big problem too. ”

    “SIAIRDrnov – Drnovo (Slovenia)

    Iodine131

    2011-12-30 19:00 2011-12-30 19:30 8.56E-03
    2011-12-30 18:30 2011-12-30 19:00 9.20E-03
    2011-12-30 18:00 2011-12-30 18:30 9.92E-03

    Cs137
    2011-12-30 19:00 2011-12-30 19:30 8.56E-03
    2011-12-30 18:30 2011-12-30 19:00 9.20E-03
    2011-12-30 18:00 2011-12-30 18:30 9.92E-03

    Cobalt 60

    011-12-30 19:00 2011-12-30 19:30 6.91E-03
    2011-12-30 18:30 2011-12-30 19:00 7.39E-03
    2011-12-30 18:00 2011-12-30 18:30 7.96E-03
    2011-12-30 17:30 2011-12-30 18:00 8.64E-03

    1odine 132

    2011-12-30 19:00 2011-12-30 19:30 1.62E-02
    2011-12-30 18:30 2011-12-30 19:00 1.69E-02
    2011-12-30 18:00 2011-12-30 18:30 1.76E-02

    Cs134

    2011-12-30 19:00 2011-12-30 19:30 2.00E-02
    2011-12-30 18:30 2011-12-30 19:00 2.14E-02
    2011-12-30 18:00 2011-12-30 18:30 2.31E-02″

    he values might be low but it gives you a better idea of whats in the skies of old europe

    inside average london air reading of the ground 1 meter

    0.14 microsieverts/hr average with little variability

    spain, portugal, denmark and iceland monitors swithched off before latest increase.. hmmmmm

    loads of interesting thoughts on the rad…


    Report comment

  • Jebus Jebus

    Here’s another byte from the same site as the thread topic.

    Tracking of airborne radionuclides from the damaged Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear reactors by European networks.

    Abstract

    Radioactive emissions into the atmosphere from the damaged reactors of the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant (NPP) started on March 12th, 2011. Among the various radionuclides released, iodine-131 ((131)I) and cesium isotopes ((137)Cs and (134)Cs) were transported across the Pacific toward the North American continent and reached Europe despite dispersion and washout along the route of the contaminated air masses. In Europe, the first signs of the releases were detected 7 days later while the first peak of activity level was observed between March 28th and March 30th. Time variations over a 20-day period and spatial variations across more than 150 sampling locations in Europe made it possible to characterize the contaminated air masses…

    Sorry Arc, they were sampling all along, just not publicly…

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21809844


    Report comment

    • arclight arclight

      was going to go to sleep … but ……. arghhhhh ! good find!! :)


      Report comment

    • arclight arclight

      “….According to the measurements, airborne activity levels remain of no concern for public health in Europe..”

      ICRP again? :( and they are lying about the real measurements too!


      Report comment

    • Bobby1

      As this plume made its way to northern Europe, the concentrations – of what we think largely contained tellurium-132 – decreased by roughly 50% over the 3-day journey; a large quantity of this tellurium-132 (and iodine-132) may have deposited onto the ground by gravity, or from the forces of precipitation, across the Arctic zones. What other radioisotopes were in it? Recall that a French news organization mentioned in late March that a company in Moscow called ‘Radon’ detected strontium-90 in Moscow’s air from Fukushima. How did it get there? Was strontium-90 in the plume that crossed the Arctic? What about Iodine-131? Consider the results from the testing of three milk samples by the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland in the weeks after the Fukushima explosions. The Irish milk samples collected between March 22 and April 4 measured 0.13, 0.18 and 0.19 becquerels per liter of iodine-131, which translates to a range of 3.5 to 5.1 picocuries per liter. These Irish cows were breathing and consuming iodine-131 from two types of plumes: those that crossed the Arctic and those that traversed the lower latitudes. The lower-latitude plumes were responsible for all continental U.S. milk iodine-131 readings such as the only made-public result by the EPA (of U.S. milk levels in the whole month of March 2011): one sample from shelf-bought milk from Spokane that was measured at 0.8 picocuries per liter of iodine-131; and much higher readings such as those calculated by a lab at a university in Berkeley, Calif., and the State of Arizona’s peak reading of 48 pCi/L from a milk sample collected in Phoenix on March 30th. If the Irish data are the only data available to assess the concentrations within the first plume – that crossed the Arctic and rained out over Ireland – can we assume the plume contained *relatively* high iodine-131 levels? …

      http://www.nuclearcrimes.org/fuku5.php


      Report comment

  • Jebus Jebus

    Here’s another gem…

    Radioactive impact of Fukushima accident on the Iberian Peninsula: evolution and plume previous pathway.

    Abstract

    High activity concentrations of several man-made radionuclides (such as (131)I, (132)I, (132)Te, (134)Cs and (137)Cs) have been detected along the Iberian Peninsula from March 28th to April 7th 2011. The analysis of back-trajectories of air masses allowed us to demonstrate that the levels of manmade radionuclide activity concentrations in the southwest of the Iberian Peninsula come from the accident produced in the nuclear power plant of Fukushima. The pathway followed by the radioactive plume from Fukushima into Huelva (southwest of the Iberian Peninsula) was deduced through back-trajectories analysis, and this fact was also verified by the activity concentrations measured of those radionuclides reported in places crossed by this radioactive cloud. In fact, activity concentrations reported by E.P.A., and by IAEA, in several places of Japan, Pacific Ocean and United States of America are according to the expected ones from the air mass trajectory arriving at Huelva province.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21683442


    Report comment

    • arclight arclight

      that was such a good find.. might come in useful later ;)

      heres one before i crash base line measurements in seafood and marine stuff!! gnight jebus

      PAGE 23 CHART SHOWS ARROGANCE OF JAPAN NUCLEAR

      PAGE 30 GIVES BASE CONTAMINATION FIGURES FOR
      Mussels and Oysters of Unites States. National Status and Trends Program, NOAA, 1990 data
      Ref: Valette-Silver and Lauenstein, 1995. Data in Bq/kg dry-weight.

      AND INTERESTINGLY THIS….

      “The Japan Chemical Analysis Center performs an annual radioactivity survey in Japan (NEWS TO US?) of a wide range of media, including concentrations in tea, soil, fresh water, airborne dust, rain,
      vegetables, milk, freshwater fish, and –

      most importantly for this review – seawater, sea sediment, sea weed, sea fish and shellfish. The marine environment is assessed for Sr-90 and Cs-137.
      Biota Sample sizes are from 3 to 5 kg sea fish, and 3 to 5 kg of shellfish and seaweed. The Sr-90 and Cs-137 data for sea fish (table 11, selected fish) are reported in the units of Bq/kg-wet. Data in theoriginal report (not shown here) are also computed as Bq/g Calcium for Sr-90 and Bq/g potassiumfor Cs-137. Limits of detection limit data are NOT discussed in the JCAC reports.”

      PAGE 32 TO 40 JAPAN UNCOVERED..RADIOLOGICAL BASE FIGURES FROM HAM !! 2005

      LOADS MORE…

      http://www.cresp.org/Amchitka/Amchitka_Final_Report/finalreport/02Append_Background/02_radionuclide_7_25_05BF.pdf


      Report comment

  • James2

    Gosh I hate to admit every one of these predictions that Tacoma has that turns out true. Those that have been here know where that is taking us…

    Just to add to that happy thought, SFP4 appears to be on the verge of collapsing…


    Report comment

    • moonshellblue moonshellblue

      If 4 collapses I think I will head to South America. After living thru TMI and now Fukushima I’ve had enough.


      Report comment

    • BreadAndButter BreadAndButter

      Well, Tacoma “predicted” the collapse of #4′s SFP for June 2011.
      I think it’s great that she posts her thoughts on many issues (just like everyone else here), but she’s not the oracle of Delphi – and doesn’t claim to be, luckily.


      Report comment

  • Jebus Jebus

    “AND INTERESTINGLY THIS….

    “The Japan Chemical Analysis Center performs an annual radioactivity survey in Japan (NEWS TO US?) of a wide range of media, including concentrations in tea, soil, fresh water, airborne dust, rain,
    vegetables, milk, freshwater fish, and –”

    Yep, they know the baseline on almost all things nuclear.

    From Dec 2003,
    Resuspension: decadal monitoring time series of the anthropogenic radioactivity deposition in Japan.

    Abstract

    Monthly atmospheric depositions of (90)Sr and (137)Cs have been observed at the Meteorological Research Institute (MRI), Tsukuba, Japan. This study reports temporal trends and levels of (90)Sr and (137)Cs depositions in the 1990s. Although the current (90)Sr and (137)Cs concentrations declined dramatically, they have been found continuously in the deposition samples throughout the 1990s. During this period, the annual (90)Sr ((137)Cs) deposits at MRI ranged from 70-180 (140-350) mBq/m(2)/year. With a sufficiently long time series, the decreasing trend of the deposition evidently differs from the past stratospheric fallout; it is far slower. Thus, reservoirs other than the stratosphere provide small amounts of (90)Sr and (137)Cs to the atmosphere. A simple calculation clearly refutes the significance of the ocean as a potential source of airborne anthropogenic radioactivity. We will demonstrate that these radionuclides in the deposited materials originate from resuspension processes (soil dust suspension processes).

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15031558

    They know…


    Report comment

  • DukeNukem4ever DukeNukem4ever

    hi samsungkr …

    I too live in SK and have been monitoring the rads:

    http://vimeo.com/33594555

    we have been coated but not as badly as the Japanese … still, I am leaving for good in 2 months … prolly already too late though.

    I ingest HUGE amounts of vitamins and minerals (vit B complex, C, D, E in particular and Ca,Mg … also a comprehensive multi pill)to try and fortify my body and block the Cs and Sr … I stopped eating seafood (there is a story about a Japanese fishing boat having just arrived at Korean shores … so it stands to reason that the rad polluted waters have too) shortly after the catastrophe and do not eat out anymore since the restaurants always try and save money by using inferior ingredients … I try and eat only “organic” produce to at least cut out the pesticides and fertilizer residues and thus lighten my body burden … I also do daily organic coffee enemas (see: Dr. Gerson therapy … check out this docu: http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/dying-to-have-known/) … but what else could one do … so I think we are all done for anyways … my co-workers who do not care nor believe that we should be worried and eat all sorts of “risky” stuff like milk products, sweets (sugar suppresses the immune system) etc. have been complaining about unexplained body aches, low energy and gut issues … so I think that they have accumulated enough of this stuff to start seeing some effects.

    anyways, time will tell if this was indeed an ELE or if most of us can dodge another bullet like Chernobyl before … I am inclined to believe that a great die-off is already in progress and that only a few if any even stand a chance to survive. Remember, that the contaminated food is being imported into the states already so there is NOWHERE to run … and the pacific is reeling with death already … have you seen the pics of those seals?!

    have a nicely depressing but reality filled day and live it like it is one of the last.

    over and out.


    Report comment

    • arclight arclight

      0.70 microsieverts/hr!!! blimey!! thanks for the post!!

      speechless!!

      take care!!


      Report comment

      • HamburgGeiger

        Wow, that is bad. Thanks DukeNuken4ever for ppsting. I think “coated but not as badly as the Japanese” is positive thinking? And please remember, it is ongoing and accumulating…


        Report comment

      • Chernobyl evacuation limit: 0.57 µSv/hour (5 mSv/year).

        Very serious symptoms were noticed at lower levels.

        One million dead, but 7 million “affected” (cancer, leukemia, birth defects, etc.).

        http://useconomy.about.com/od/worldeconomy/a/Chernobyl-Nuclear-Power-Plant-Disaster.htm

        In some way or another, the Chernobyl accident affected 7 million people in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. The disaster immediately exposed 1,000 people to high levels of radiation, while 4,000 children later came down with thyroid cancer from drinking contaminated milk. More than 600,000 emergency workers were also exposed to radiation. Five million people currently live in radiated areas, although the levels of radiation are lower than those received by people who live in some areas of high natural background radiation in India,Iran, Brazil and China.

        I suspect this ongoing disaster will “affect” billions, not millions.


        Report comment

        • arclight arclight

          this poster does not respond to the threads comments.. it would be less suspicious if he responded to questions or matters of advice.. he now has the seaweed story going viral, he has not commented except to post his videos… why has he not posted wether he has contacted ACRO france with info on the seaweed sample??

          just my take here!


          Report comment

  • arclight arclight

    still think the uk is getting hit from the russian fire.. one of the safety bodies mentioned that there couls have been a release of isotopes from there.. a norwegian based radiological survey group…

    the winds show the tragectory to be right for london then scandinavia, denmark has disconnected entirely from eurdep

    eurdep messed with the software i believe on new years eve and you can no longer access the database for pictures of graphs though the system is working ok in most other counties?

    only the netherlands seem to test for beta on eurdep.. lit up but it stops on the borders??

    we have a new background level in london.. at least two or even three times the normal!! we get hit before mainland europe! the gieger has been very steady on these higher readings 0.13 to 0.18 microsieverts/hr.. 2 days so far.. seems different.. no peaks (or very rare)! gentle movements mostly.. definately different from small clouds of gamma bearing something lasting 5 or 10 minutes!! fuku + i think!

    CRIIRAD shows a drop in readings in alpha and beta before christmas that corresponded to the surprise low readings i had here in london.. then we get hit by rain that makes a sheltered air reading jump to 0.13 to 0.18 microsievert/hr dropping to an average of about 0.13 and staying with slow pulses up to 0.16 microsieverts/hr

    hope thats a better summary of my observations…


    Report comment

    • Toadmac

      Just taken a background reading in Melbourne Australia. Outside 1m off the ground in the same sheltered place I have always done background readings from.
      Half hour Average: 0.17 uSv/hr. 1 week ago it was 0.18 uSv/hr, I also had these results confirmed with more accurate equipment from some new friends. My new friends are concerned citizens with a much better understanding of nuclear thingies than I have.
      Three weeks ago the average over the same half hour time was 0.14 uSv/hr. On average over the last few weeks background is up 25%?
      It seems to be a pretty hefty rise IMO? My friends were also concerned but are having difficulty in identifying isotopes with there limited resources.
      What happened over the last month that could cause such a big increase to the background deep in the southern hemisphere?? Hope to get some private data soon.
      Peace.


      Report comment

  • arclight arclight

    lets talk european water supplys and dose coefficients!!

    Radionuclides and Reference Concentrations for drinking water in europe.. ugh!!

    “The additional reference concentrations have been derived in an identical manner to that used by the EC, ie they refer to an adult consuming 730 l of drinking water each year. In addition, they are based on the current dose coefficients published by ICRP (ICRP, 1996), which are identical to those in the EC Basic Safety Standards.”

    “The EC guidance states that if the measured concentration of any one radionuclide exceeds a trigger level of 20% of the reference concentration, or if the reference value for tritium of 100 Bq l-1 is exceeded, then the concentrations of all radionuclides should be determined. Within the system proposed here, if the criteria based on gross activity are exceeded then the next step is to identify the specific radionuclides of interest and to put the necessary analyses in hand.”

    lists the isotopes and levels here… ugh!

    http://dwi.defra.gov.uk/research/completed-research/reports/EA-9-08radiation.pdf

    ICRP again!!


    Report comment

  • arclight arclight

    Lujanienė G, Byčenkienė S, Povinec PP, Gera M.; Environmental Research Department, SRI Center for Physical Sciences and Technology, Lithuania

    HEROES ONE AND ALL!!


    Report comment

  • BreadAndButter BreadAndButter

    The Baltic Sea is one of the most radioactive waters worldwide. It has received lots of fallout from Chernobyl, and as its water is shallow and it has not much tidal activity, the water exchange with the oceans is very slow.
    Fish from the Baltic Sea is 10 times more contaminated than fish from the North Sea, btw.

    Thanks to the Baltic, Finnish and Swedish nuke plants, it’s getting worse. Have a look at slide no.9 to see the hot water releases of those plants seen from space….

    http://www.bsrrw.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Per-Hegelund-BSNGO-2009-mini.pdf


    Report comment

  • lokay5

    B&B

    Here’s some “interesting” (chilling) info on Russia’s abandoned Isotope-powered lighthouses up in the Arctic Circle..

    http://englishrussia.com/2009/01/06/abandoned-russian-polar-nuclear-lighthouses/


    Report comment

    • BreadAndButter BreadAndButter

      Hi lokay,
      ugh, what a lovely idea /sarc.
      I wonder though why the lighthouse is completely equipped with windows & furniture, if it was to go for years without maintenance?
      But I’m not at all surprised to see the whole structure crumbling slowly into the sea – the Russian government didn’t care then and doesn’t care today.
      I never believed all the stories about the “responsible Russians” concerning radioactivity.


      Report comment

      • lokay5

        The lighthouses WERE powered by sources other than nuclear at one time. They were converted to nuclear many years after they were built.
        As far as the Ruskies being responsible about radioactivity, well, it’s like this, after seeing what’s going on in Japan, it’s like;

        “I thought Reagan was a moron, then came GWB”
        Ya know what I mean?

        ;>)


        Report comment

  • lokay5

    There are some real horror stories involving these generators. One is about three scrap metal “collectors(thieves) who stripped the valuable stainless off one of these unit and then decided to take the “hot” core back to camp. They sat around it TO STAY WARM! And lived to tell about it! YIKES!


    Report comment

  • lokay5

    B&B

    It was really nice chattin’ with ya, but I gotta sign off and go ni-nite.

    Talk with you t’morrow,K?


    Report comment

  • Whoopie Whoopie

    NRC Short History – Core Melt & Cooling System failure circa 1960s – the result : Fukushima
    January 2, 2012
    http://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2012/01/02/nrc-short-history-core-melt-cooling-system-failure-circa-1960s-the-result-fukushima/
    Why Fukushima happened. If the AEC had behaved according to its legal mandate in the 1960s and had the NRC recognised its failures in the 1970s, and had the Japanese authoritie­s taken the safe view instead of the AEC view, Fukushima would never have spread its emissions over Japan and half the globe, come what may. The ECCS didn’t work, cores melted and containmen­t failed and it was all foreseen and discounted at the very time Fukushima was being built. To meet US Strategic need. (presumabl­y for a reserve source of plutonium)
    ~big snip~ (ALL excellent HISTORY read)
    Has the plan backfired? Is the world safer or in greater danger as a result of the constructi­on of Japanese reactors? Does this rationale hold for every reactor on the planet? If the constructi­on of one Iranian fuel rod is a threat to the interests of the USA and the West, how big are threat are thousands of fuel rods in existence globally?


    Report comment

    • Whoopie Whoopie

      “Meanwhile the US Navy is on alert in part because Iran has constructe­d a SINGLE reactor fuel rod.
      How many fuel rods does Japan have?

      Where are they and has the plutonium been extracted from spent ones? If yes, WHO HAS IT? Is there a plutonium trail from Japan to other States outside obligation channels? (Apart from the contaminat­ion the AEC approved Fukushima reactors have spread over the planet.)


      Report comment

  • ion jean ion jean

    Demons in the Dark…the Dark Lords of the Atom will fall to ruin now that Lithuania has told the truth…

    Where’s the EPA filter results from that same time period? So if they measured 44nBq of 239/240 and it’s in a 1:2 ratio, that means 22nBq of Pu238 which is 276 times more radioactive/deadly

    Obviously that number for the U.S. Jet Stream pathways would be much higher than Eastern Europe

    HEY UNCLE SAM, DO YOUR DAMN JOB! Enough swillin’ liquor in the broom closet and selling our children off as debt slaves to international banking cartels

    The information superhighway will INFORM the masses, even if it takes years…


    Report comment

  • Whoopie Whoopie

    Fukushima unit 4 Leaking water 5X Faster after Earthquake update 1/1/12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFxx3ESKIcQ&feature=channel_video_title


    Report comment

  • Whoopie Whoopie

    “All aboard!!! The Gravy Train is about to leave the station!!”
    http://antinuclearinfo.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/gravy-train.gif


    Report comment

  • Whoopie Whoopie

    GOT A LIVE ONE AT HP! TROLL IS QUESTIONING LANGLEY’S POST!!
    THAT tells me Paul HIT A HOME RUN!! Love it.
    Hey Undso…wh­at proof do you have that the Kyakusa ARENT diverting nuke materials? Just saying so doesn­’t make it true. Many things are pointing to it.


    Report comment

  • Whoopie Whoopie

    Fukushima shocked governments into reassessing their attitudes towards their favoured methods of power generation http://t.co/5XKhWfvV
    6 minutes ago
    SHOCKED or worried of OUR BACKLASH?


    Report comment

  • Toadmac

    Where did my posts about china syndrome go? Anyone? I know they were off topic but were also in response to another posters questions. They were just my opinion and people were welcome to discredit them if they wished!
    :(


    Report comment

  • The explosions at Fukushima (esp unit 3) Aerosolized between 30 tons and 280 tons of uranium as evidenced by airborne particulate data as presented by Radnet for Guam, Honolulu, Kauai, Seattle, San Francisco.

    Although we don’t know for sure if the spent fuel pools blew up directly, there still is compelling evidence that if uranium was detected in huge quantities, that plutonium must necessarily be travelling with the uranium.
    1) Fukushima was using MOX fuel which mixes plutonium with uranium for higher heat output and to get rid of the plutonium
    2) Uranium reactors produce plutonium as a normal part of their operation

    So no matter what blew up, plutonium was aerosolized and released.

    The uranium detected in air in Hawaii, as one example, was 600% higher than the legal limit for being at the border of a active uranium mine. This data was published shortly before they stopped publishing the data.


    Report comment

  • Kevin Kevin

    164 comments in this thread at the time of writing and this seems to be the only on topic one.

    This post indicates that, despite reams of postulating that PU was 2 heavy to travel far, in fact it has.

    Is this not the worst news imaginable?


    Report comment

    • arclight arclight

      hi kevin
      not much response to the plutonium coming from russia! the timimg of the news and the weather patterns in the arctic/north mid atlantic.. plus this steady high reading ive had for 3 days, might be from there!! it would be a catastrophe if it came from japan!!

      maybe this is just an add on catastrophe for europe/russia :(
      nuclear the gift that keeps on giving!! no studies on monitoring after the raging fires on contaminated grounds either in the summer?

      in any event its a radiological nightmare!!
      thanks for noticing the lack of the word “plutonium” on the thread getting a bit mainstream around here :)


      Report comment

      • Kevin Kevin

        @arclight

        The OP included this

        Activity ratio of (238)Pu/(239,240)Pu in the aerosol sample was 1.2, indicating a presence of the spent fuel of different origin than that of the Chernobyl accident

        Which indicated to me that the study made the distinction of source. If so, this means areosolized plutonium (I am no rocket scientist and dont know what exactly areosolized means, but it does have the word plutonium in it) has travelle great distances. One particle plutonium ingested, well is fatal. The half life is forever. Hence checkmate, no?


        Report comment

    • uranium is also a heavy metal, and they travel just “fine”

      Source doc of aerosolized uranium, official gov test report, before they stopped reporting.

      http://www.box.com/s/vdbe6xpdsh9kspvc90ir


      Report comment

    • aigeezer aigeezer

      Hi Kevin.

      I’ve been intrigued that this thread was pounced on instantly by someone new doing a very good imitation of a troll. You took the bait at 11:51 and Admin went for it at 12:31. That’s not a dig at you or Admin, rather it’s a backhanded compliment to a very effective bit of trolling – you (and others) were trying to be reasonable and informative, but from a troll’s point of view that’s a “gotcha”.

      So was it coincidence, dirty tricks by the industry, and/or is this topic really “the big one” we’ve all been dreading?

      I have no idea. Gotta wait and see.

      Meanwhile: Internet User Tip #463 is “Don’t feed the trolls” (and yes, trolling is in the eye of the beholder). An innocent new visitor is entitled to reply to this with “Who, me?” and a genuine troll will usually do so also, hoping to turn the whole thread into a food fight.


      Report comment

  • kein kein

    I love the smell of plutonium in the morning


    Report comment

  • kein kein

    It’s a play on the quote from Apocalypse Now “I love the smell of napalm in the morning”


    Report comment

    • arclight arclight

      i know , i was just playing the irradiated lemming :) liked the use of the word plutonium though..

      got used here as well

      Jiji Tsushin (5:42PM JST 9/30/2011):

      Ministry of Education and Science disclosed on September 30 that plutonium has been detected from the soil in Futaba-machi, Namie-machi and Iitate-mura in Fukushima Prefecture, which derived from the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant accident. According to the Ministry, it is the first detection of plutonium outside the plant.

      http://enenews.com/first-time-govt-admits-plutonium-238-detected-locations-fukushima-plant

      which now means im arguing with myself :/ time for a tea!! easy on the plutonium topped milk! eh? is it russian? is it japanese? or is it from the netherlands.. a whole host of nuclear establishments.. time to visit the oracle of wisdom on these matters… the iaea… unfortunately they are on a recruitmaent drive, so a response may be delayed!!
      peace


      Report comment

  • Hogweed

    For comparison at Chernobyl the activity ratio of Pu-238/Pu-(239+240) was about 0.5 compared to the 1.2 reported here. Presumably this is why the authors implicate spent fuel because of the high level of Pu-238 present

    Anyone got a link to a free PDF of the report as I’m not about to pay $31 to read it?


    Report comment

    • VanneV anne

      Journal of Environmental Radioactivity
      In Press, Corrected Proof – Note to users
      ________________________________________
      doi:10.1016/j.jenvrad.2011.12.004 | How to Cite or Link Using DOI

      Permissions & Reprints

      Radionuclides from the Fukushima accident in the air over Lithuania: measurement and modelling approaches
      G. Lujanienėa, , , S. Byčenkienėa, P.P. Povinecb, M. Gerab
      a Environmental Research Department, SRI Center for Physical Sciences and Technology, Savanoriu 231, 02300 Vilnius, Lithuania
      b Faculty of Mathematics, Physics and Informatics, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia
      Received 25 August 2011; revised 30 November 2011; Accepted 5 December 2011. Available online 27 December 2011.
      Abstract
      Analyses of 131I, 137Cs and 134Cs in airborne aerosols were carried out in daily samples in Vilnius, Lithuania after the Fukushima accident during the period of March–April, 2011. The activity concentrations of 131I and 137Cs ranged from 12 μBq/m3 and 1.4 μBq/m3 to 3700 μBq/m3 and 1040 μBq/m3, respectively. The activity concentration of 239,240Pu in one aerosol sample collected from 23 March to 15 April, 2011 was found to be 44.5 nBq/m3. The two maxima found in radionuclide concentrations were related to complicated long-range air mass transport from Japan across the Pacific, the North America and the Atlantic Ocean to Central Europe as indicated by modelling. HYSPLIT backward trajectories and meteorological data were applied for interpretation of activity variations of measured radionuclides observed at the site of investigation. 7Be and 212Pb activity concentrations and their ratios were used as tracers of vertical transport of air masses. Fukushima data were compared with the data obtained during the Chernobyl accident and in the post Chernobyl period. The activity concentrations of 131I and 137Cs were found to be by 4 orders of magnitude lower as compared to the Chernobyl accident.


      Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        The activity ratio of 134Cs/137Cs was around 1 with small variations only. The activity ratio of 238Pu/239,240Pu in the aerosol sample was 1.2, indicating a presence of the spent fuel of different origin than that of the Chernobyl accident.
        Highlights
        ► Two observed maxima in radionuclide concentrations were related to air mass transport. ► HYSPLIT backward trajectories were applied for data interpretation. ► 7Be and 212Pb were used to study a vertical transport of air masses. ► The 134Cs/137Cs activity ratio was around 1. ► 238Pu/239,240Pu ratio was different from global fallout and Chernobyl accident.
        Keywords: Fukushima accident; Aerosols; Iodine-131; Caesium-134,137; Plutonium-238,239+240
        Article Outline
        • 1. Introduction
        • 2. Samples and methods

        o 2.1. Sampling
        o 2.2. Modelling
        • 3. Results and discussion

        o 3.1. Modelling of the Fukushima plume
        o 3.2. Radionuclide data
        o 3.3. Comparison with the Chernobyl accident
        • 4. Conclusions
        • Acknowledgements
        • References
        1. Introduction
        On March 11, 2011 a strong earthquake followed by high tsunami and fires damaged three reactors and a fuel pond at the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) in Japan with releases of radionuclides to the atmosphere and the sea. According to the NISA (Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency) report from 1.3 × 1017 Bq to 1.5 × 1017 Bq of 131I and about 6.1 × 1015 to 1.3 × 1016 Bq of 137Cs were released to the atmosphere ( [32] and [Chino et al., 2011] ). The consequences of this accident at the beginning estimated as level 4 were raised to the maximum level of 7 on the INES (International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale) scale (IAEA, 2011), although the amount of discharged radioactive materials comprised approximately 10% of the Chernobyl accident only.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        . Measurements carried out at Tokushima (about 700 km southwest from the Fukushima NPP) indicated the maximum activity concentration of particulate 131I in the air of ∼3 mBq/m3 which was observed on 6 April (Fushimi et al., 2011).
        Worldwide monitoring activities started immediately after the announcement of large radionuclide releases from the Fukushima NPP. The particulate 131I activities of 4.4 mBq/m3 were detected on 19–21 of March in Seattle (USA) (Diaz Leon et al., 2011). According to the CTBTO (Comprehensive Test-Ben Treaty Organization) data the first signs of diluted airborne activities appeared over Europe after 12 days of the Fukushima accident (Wotawa, 2011). The elevated levels of radionuclides on aerosols derived from the Fukushima NPP were detected at several sampling stations in Spain (Lozano et al., 2011), Germany (Pittauerová et al., 2011), Greece (Manolopoulou et al., 2011), Russia (Bolsunovsky and Dementyev, 2011). The most comprehensive radionuclide data over the Europe has been compiled by Masson et al. (2011).
        Anthropogenic radionuclides were introduced into the terrestrial and marine environments primarily after the atmospheric nuclear weapon tests carried out by the United States and the former Soviet Union from the 1940s to the early 1960s (Livingston and Povinec, 2002). Another source of anthropogenic radionuclides is related to nuclear accidents. The most severe of them was the Chernobyl accident when among other radionuclides about 1760 PBq of 131I, 47 PBq of 134Cs and 85 PBq of 137Cs were released into the environment (IAEA, 2006). The consequences of the Chernobyl accident on the environment and human health were estimated as the worst in the nuclear accident history by its rating to the highest level 7 on the INES scale.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        Until 12th March, 2011 the second largest accident was the Kyshtym accident which occurred on 29th September, 1957, when due to problems in a cooling system and followed explosion about 7.4 × 105 TBq of radioactive materials were released into the environment. As a result of this accident, more than 10,000 people received significant radiation doses (Hu et al., 2010).
        The aim of the present study has been to estimate activity concentrations of Fukushima airborne radioactive aerosols over Lithuania with special emphasis on particle transport from Fukushima to Europe (preliminary results were published by Lujanienė et al., 2011), and to compare the obtained results with data gathered during the investigations of the Chernobyl accident.
        2. Samples and methods
        2.1. Sampling
        The ground level air samples were collected in a forested area on the outskirts of Vilnius (54°42′N, 25°30′E). Perchlorvinyl filters FPP-15 (∼1 m2 surface) were exposed in a special building with blind walls at the height of 1 m above the ground. High volume samplers with flow rates from 2400 m3/h to about 6000 m3/h were used. The sampling was carried out continuously. 131I, 137Cs and 134Cs were measured by gamma-ray spectrometry using a HPGe detector (relative efficiency of 42%, resolution of 1.9 keV at 1.33Mev). The precision of 137Cs measurements by gamma-spectrometry was better than ±7% at 2σ level.
        The radiochemical analyses of Am and Pu were performed on monthly samples (total volume ∼2.0 × 106 m3) of aerosol ashes (about 30 g), which were dissolved in strong acids (HNO3, HCl, HF and HClO4). The TOPO/cyclohexane extraction and radiochemical purification using UTEVA, TRU and TEVA resins (100–150 μm) were used for separation of Am and Pu isotopes. 242Pu and 243Am were used as yield tracers in the separation procedure (Lujanienė et al., 2006).


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        The alpha-spectrometry measurements of Pu and Am isotopes deposited on stainless-steel discs were carried out with the Alphaquattro (Silena) spectrometer. Accuracy and precision of analysis were tested using reference materials IAEA-135, NIST SRM No 4350B and 4357, as well as in intercomparison exercises, organized by the Risø National Laboratory (Denmark), and the National Physical Laboratory (UK). The precision of Pu and Am measurements was better than ±8% and ±10%, respectively (at 2σ level).
        2.2. Modelling
        The transport of radionuclides was simulated using a Lagrangian particle model which calculates trajectories of particles that follow the instantaneous flow in the particle position (Závodský, 2011). The output particle velocity is a sum of deterministic velocity and semi-random stochastic velocity, generated by the Monte Carlo technique. The probability density function for the random component, which simulates the atmospheric turbulence, is dependent on the state of the atmospheric boundary layer. The model also takes into account the radioactive decay of particles (e.g. in the case of 131I), as well as their scavenging by dry and wet deposition. For the meteorological input, the Integrated Monitoring System – IMS Model Suite Lagrangian dispersion model (MicroStep-MIS, 2011) has been used. It calculates the spreading of radioactive materials with special regard to changes in atmospheric conditions, especially changes in wind direction. The meteorological input for the dispersion model was a time sequence analysis of atmospheric state in GRIB format (WMO, 2009). The GFS global weather model was used in simulation time span from 12 March to 27 March, 2011. The 3D wind (u, v, vertical velocity) at upper air model levels was needed to simulate dispersion due to large-scale winds.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        A characterization of radionuclide activities with respect to categorized air mass backward trajectories was carried out for estimation of potential location of the radioactivity source. Air mass backward trajectories were generated using the Hybrid Single-Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory (HYSPLIT4) model (Rolph, 2011) with the Final Analyses (FNL, year 2011) and the Global Data Assimilation System (GDAS) meteorological databases at the NOAA Air Resources Laboratory server (Rolph, 2011).
        3. Results and discussion
        3.1. Modelling of the Fukushima plume
        For the assessment of contamination after the accident and prediction of radioactive particle transport the Lagrangian modelling was applied. In order to describe the atmospheric processes realistically, the vertical velocity, particle dissipation and turbulence during the particle trajectory were considered. A single release of 1015 Bq of 137Cs, which occurred on March 12, 2011 from damaged Fukushima NPP was analyzed. The initial plume height, as a result of initial vertical velocity and buoyancy, was kept to be at 2000–3000 m. The meteorological data and simulated trajectories revealed that the arrival times of particles released on 11 March, 2011 and 12 March, 2011 were different, and the particles were transported at different altitudes. It was also obvious that the jet stream affected the transport of emitted particles at upper atmospheric levels. Examples of the trajectories simulated using the Lagrangian dispersion model show (Fig. 1) that the first signs of Fukushima released radionuclides could be detected in the European countries (e.g. Island) on 20 March, 2011.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        The performed simulation indicated that particles released on 11 March, 2011 mainly appeared over Europe on 850 hPa on 13 April, 2011, at 700 hPa on 30 March, 2011 and at 500 hPa on 20 March, 2011. Similar situation was observed for particles released on 12 March, 2011 which arrived to Europe at 700 hPa on 1 April, 2011, at 500 hPa on 21 March, 2011, and the particles at 850 hPa did not reach the European territory. The particle arriving times are in a reasonable agreement with experimental radionuclide data obtained for Vilnius (Lithuania), as discussed later.

        Full-size image (314K)
        Fig. 1.
        http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MiamiCaptionURL&_method=retrieve&_eid=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992&_image=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992-gr1.jpg&_ba=&_fmt=full&_orig=na&_issn=0265931X&_pii=S0265931X11002992&_acct=C000047944&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=918210&md5=85c274e731ce2e66a61e42381b4b661a

        Particles spacing on 20 March, 2011 at 12:00 UTC (top) and on 27 March, 2011 at 18:00 UTC (bottom); shades of red indicate particles in the bottom layer, up to 3 km; black to dark blue indicate the middle layer, up to 6 km height; and light blue indicates the upper layer; the trajectories were simulated using the Lagrangian dispersion model (time of the particles release was on 12 March 2011). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
        3.2. Radionuclide data
        The time course of 131I (aerosol component) and 137Cs concentrations measured in March–April of 2011 in Vilnius is shown in Fig. 2, compared with the course of the cosmogenic 7Be. The activity concentrations of 131I and 137Cs ranged from 2 to 3800 μBq/m3 and from 0.2 to 1070 μBq/m3, respectively. The first traces of 131I in aerosol filters in Vilnius were found on 23 March. A considerable increase in the 131I activity concentrations (up to about 2.4 mBq/m3) was observed during the period of 28 March–1 April.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        The second maximum was detected on 3–4 April, when up to 3.7 mBq/m3 of 131I was measured in the atmosphere. Activities of 137Cs in aerosol during this period increased up to 0.5 mBq/m3 and 1.0 mBq/m3, respectively. In addition to 131I and 137Cs, traces of other radionuclides were detected in the aerosol filters as well. Their concentrations in the most active sample collected on 3–4 April 2011 14:00–06:50 UTC were: 132I – 0.12 ± 0.01 mBq/m3, 132Te – 0.13 ± 0.01 mBq/m3, 129Te – 0.40 ± 0.04 mBq/m3, 129mTe–0.75 ± 0.25 mBq/m3 and 136Cs – 0.080 ± 0.008′mBq/m3.

        Full-size image (36K)
        Fig. 2.
        http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MiamiCaptionURL&_method=retrieve&_eid=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992&_image=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992-gr2.jpg&_ba=&_fmt=full&_orig=na&_issn=0265931X&_pii=S0265931X11002992&_acct=C000047944&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=918210&md5=968fd56b0f5c47d432064b976bf414c5

        Activity concentration of 131I, 137Cs and 7Be in aerosol samples as well as precipitation amount in Vilnius in 2011.
        The variations in the activity concentrations of studied radionuclides can be due to the different arrival time of radioactive particles predicted by the Lagrangian modelling. The particles released on 11 March, 2011, and according to the prognosis they should appear over the Europe at 850 hPa on 13 April, 2011, were not detected in Vilnius. The particles arriving at 700 hPa were detected on 30 March, 2011, while the particles at 500 hPa appearing on 21 March, 2011, were detected in Vilnius on 22–23 March. The particles released on 12 March, 2011 and which were expected over Europe at 700 hPa on 1 April, 2011 were not detected at our sampling station, whereas a clear maximum in activity concentrations of 131I, 134Cs and 137Cs was observed on 4 April, 2011. The particles that were supposed to be over Europe at 500 hPa on 24 March, 2011 were detected with one day delay on 25 March, 2011.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        . It seems therefore that the Fukushima plume which arrived to Europe at high altitudes did not necessarily reach the near-surface level.

        On the other hand, meteorological conditions at the site (e.g. precipitation) could affect the activity concentrations. The amount of precipitation given in Fig. 2 revealed that it could have a certain effect on changes in activity concentrations of studied radionuclides. However, no correlation was found between the 131I, 137Cs and 7Be activity concentrations and the amount of precipitation (R = −0.01, −0.09 and −0.07, respectively), indicating that the influence of precipitation was in general negligible. Nonetheless, from data shown in Fig. 2 it can be seen that the increase in 131I and 137Cs activity concentrations was accompanied by the rise of 7Be activities. In addition, 131I and 137Cs activities well correlated (R = 0.69 and R = 0.75, respectively) with the activity concentration of 7Be (Fig. 3).

        Full-size image (25K)
        Fig. 3.
        http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MiamiCaptionURL&_method=retrieve&_eid=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992&_image=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992-gr3.jpg&_ba=&_fmt=full&_orig=na&_issn=0265931X&_pii=S0265931X11002992&_acct=C000047944&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=918210&md5=4748a2a05b7f471ba649a41daf66cda1

        137Cs and 131I activity concentrations plotted against the 7Be activity concentration in aerosol samples collected during the Fukushima plume episode.

        The cosmogenic 7Be (half-life of 53.3 days) is mainly produced in the lower stratosphere (∼70%) and the rest in the upper troposphere. It has been widely used to study vertical air mass transport (e.g. Lujanas and Lujanienė, 2007).


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        An increase in the 7Be activity concentrations in summer and autumn season was explained by a vertically downward transport within the troposphere (Koch et al., 1996) and by a stratosphere-troposphere exchange ( [Jordan et al., 2003] and [Land and Feichter, 2003] ). The high 7Be activity concentrations in the surface air were also interpreted by the downward and upward atmospheric flows in the troposphere caused by a pair of travelling anticyclone and extra tropical cyclone that passes over Japan in spring and autumn with a period of a few days (Yoshimori, 2005). It was supposed that the air of low temperature flows downward from convergence in the Rossby waves to divergence in the surface anticyclone, and the warm air moves upward from convergence in the surface cyclone to divergence in the Rossby waves. In these studies an increase in the activity concentrations in the near-surface atmosphere was associated with downward movements of air masses. Thus, the positive correlation between the anthropogenic radionuclides and 7Be (Fig. 3) can be an indication of their arrival from the upper layers of the troposphere.

        On the other hand, short-lived radon decay products, such as the terrigenous 210Pb, 212Pb and 214Pb can also be used as atmospheric tracers to study air masses transport (Sheets and Lawrence, 1999). The main source of 212Pb (half-life of 10.6 h) in the air is 220Rn (half-life of 54 s) exhalation from the earth’s surface, therefore 212Pb activity concentrations reflect local conditions (at height of about 1 km), contrary to 222Rn (half-life of 3.82 d) progenies 214Pb (half-life of 26.8 min) and 210Pb (half-life of 22.3 y). The residence times of radon decay products in the ambient air were estimated to be similar to that of 7Be (about 8 days).


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        About 76% of the 214Pb activity and 67% of the 212Pb activity were usually associated with aerosol particles in the 0.08–1.4-μm size range, though a small shift in the aerosol size distribution was observed for 214Pb (Papastefanou, 2009). Seasonal variations of 212Pb and 210Pb isotopes were found to be distinctly different in the lower atmosphere while the behaviour of 214Pb was similar to that of 210Pb. It was concluded therefore that airborne concentrations of 212Pb, contrary to those of 210Pb could be strongly influenced by local emissions (Sheets and Lawrence, 1999). This behavior and shift in the size distribution can be attributed to the variation in half-lives of Pb isotopes and their parents. Both parents are gaseous species but their different half-life under particular local conditions such as exhalation, mixing height and intensity can result in their various vertical and horizontal transports. 222Rn of longer half-life has a higher potential to be more widely distributed vertically and horizontally. On the other hand, due to different half-lives of Pb isotopes, they can serve for indication of events occurring on different time scales. Kownacka (2002) reported that activity concentrations of 210Pb were almost constantly distributed above 1 km, and did not decrease with altitudes. An increase in 210Pb and other natural radionuclide concentrations in the stratosphere was also observed after the large volcanic eruptions. Abe et al. (2010) showed that distributions of the 7Be and 210Pb nuclides were uniform in the range of a few hundred kilometers in the horizontal direction and up to ∼1 km height, whereas 212Pb activity concentrations varied greatly depending on the geographical location and altitude of the observation site. The recent studies indicated a similar behavior of 7Be and 210Pb, and that they cannot be used as independent tracers to study atmospheric processes.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        Although the behavior of 212Pb and 214Pb is not fully understood yet, they can be used as independent atmospheric traces. A weak correlation was found in 7Be and 212Pb records (0.39), while no correlation was observed for 7Be and 214Pb (−0.16), indicating different sources of Pb isotopes. The 212Pb and 214Pb records may therefore indicate different atmospheric processes. Most probably 212Pb is an indicator of horizontal transport at lower heights (up to 1 km), however, a weak correlation showed that this transport was limited. On the other hand, 214Pb represents short time events at our site. An increase in the activity ratios of 7Be/212Pb and 7Be/214Pb, accompanied by an increase in 137Cs and 131I activity concentrations observed during the studied period may indicate that the dominant source of Fukushima originated radionuclides at our site was at higher altitudes. Therefore, an increase in the 7Be/212Pb and 7Be/214Pb activity ratios in this case can be used for an indication of the downward air mass transport.
        The activity concentration of 137Cs as well as the 134Cs/137Cs, 7Be/212Pb and 7Be/214Pb activity ratios in aerosol samples in the studied episode after the Fukushima accident are presented in Fig. 4. The 134Cs/137Cs activity ratio in Vilnius was close to 1 (N = 30, Mean = 0.782, S.D. = 0.345, Median = 0.938). In samples collected on 24 March, and from 26 to 27 March, the activity concentration of 134Cs was below the detection limit. In the most active sample collected on 3–4 April the 134Cs/137Cs activity ratio was equal to 1.00 ± 0.05.

        Full-size image (35K)
        Fig. 4.
        http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MiamiCaptionURL&_method=retrieve&_eid=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992&_image=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992-gr4.jpg&_ba=&_fmt=full&_orig=na&_issn=0265931X&_pii=S0265931X11002992&_acct=C000047944&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=918210&md5=2c611d491749bb83b879963def582172


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        Activity concentration of 137Cs and 134Cs/137Cs, 7Be/212Pb and 7Be/214Pb activity ratios in aerosol samples in Vilnius in 2011.
        Fig. 5 shows the wind speed and wind vectors indicating the jet stream at 500 hPa for 24–25 March which affected the transport of the Fukushima plume to Europe. The strong meanders on the jet stream resulted in the downward air mass transport, as it is indicated by an increase in the 7Be activity concentrations (Fig. 2), as well as by an increase in the activity ratios of 7Be/212Pb and 7Be/214Pb (Fig. 4). A similar increase in the activity concentrations of 131I, 137Cs and 7Be, together with enhanced activity ratios of 7Be/212Pb and 7Be/214Pb observed on 23, 24, 27 and 31 March, as well as on 4 April, can be interpreted as a downward transport of air masses carrying the Fukushima plume radionuclides from higher layers of the troposphere (Fig. 2 and Fig. 4). The low relative humidity over the sampling site (Fig. 5) observed at 500 hPa on 4 April can serve as an additional confirmation of air flow from the upper levels of the atmosphere.

        Full-size image (215K)
        Fig. 5.
        http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MiamiCaptionURL&_method=retrieve&_eid=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992&_image=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992-gr5.jpg&_ba=&_fmt=full&_orig=na&_issn=0265931X&_pii=S0265931X11002992&_acct=C000047944&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=918210&md5=104ce16e6fc68328731ab18643cbc1c9

        The wind speed, wind vectors and relative humidity at 500 hPa for 24–25 March and 3 April, 2011.
        A slightly different pattern of the radionuclide record observed from 28 to 31 March can be explained by the effect of precipitation (Fig. 2) that could remove the Fukushima derived radionuclides and/or preferably wash out aerosol particles carrying cosmogenic 7Be due to their different chemical composition and size distribution ( [Lujanienė et al., 1998] , [Lujanienė, 2000] and [Lujanienė, 2003] ).


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        Another possible explanation can be variations of the transport altitudes and arrival time of the Fukushima radioactive particles. The NOAA HYSPLIT model (Draxler and Rolph, 2011) was used to assess the transport pattern and to explain the deviation in radionuclide activity concentrations found in Vilnius. A large number of air mass backward trajectories were calculated over the time of interest. The most typical trajectories, capable to provide a proper interpretation of the observed radionuclide variations (Fig. 6), show backward air mass transport starting at 500 (red triangles), 3000 (blue squares), and 7000 m (green circles) above the ground level (AGL). Trajectories are labelled every 24 h by a filled symbol. The vertical projection of the trajectories with time is shown in the panel below the map. The air mass backward trajectories calculated for 30 March can serve as an example of complicated pathway of air masses (Fig. 6A). The backward trajectories were calculated for three 500, 3000 and 5000 m AGL for 315 h. The air masses at 500 m were caught up into a cyclonic system, while air masses at 3000 and 5000 m were lifted and rapidly transported over the North America to Europe. It seems that radioactive particles have had a greater chance of being transported at higher atmosphere levels. They can be removed in the lower layer of the atmosphere due to various reasons, e.g. rainfall characteristics, fog formation or growth of aerosol particles and their deposition. Thus, there was a higher probability that activity concentrations of radionuclides found on 28–31 March were diluted by clean air masses, and/or they were reduced by precipitation in the near-surface level and/or marine boundary layer (∼1 km) during their long-range transport from Japan.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        Fig. 6.
        http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MiamiCaptionURL&_method=retrieve&_eid=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992&_image=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992-gr6.jpg&_ba=&_fmt=full&_orig=na&_issn=0265931X&_pii=S0265931X11002992&_acct=C000047944&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=918210&md5=3b4d5977d4eb48bc73d2e5f18b0c985a

        Backward trajectories of air masses transport ending on 30 March, 1 April and 4 April, 2011 in Vilnius.
        The air masses which arrived on 1–2 April were affected both by cyclone and anticyclone systems, and they brought rather clean air to Europe (Fig. 6B). During these days the activity concentrations of 131I and 137Cs dropped to 150–190 μBq/m3 and 8–16 μBq/m3, respectively (Fig. 2), however, on 4 April they again rose up to 2280–3690 μBq/m3 and 609–1026 μBq/m3, respectively. It should be noted that an increase in radionuclide activities was detected in the most European countries (Masson et al., 2011).

        In order to explain the origin of the second maximum in the radionuclide courses (Fig. 2), the air mass backward trajectories were calculated for 1000, 3000 and 5000 m heights. The results showed (i) a direct transfer from Fukushima across the Pacific Ocean, (ii) a transport through the North Pole, and (iii) a pathway through the Greenland and Iceland (Fig. 6. C). The air masses at 1000 and 5000 m were rapidly transported, while the air masses at 3000 m exhibited rather slow transport, and most probably these air masses provided a transfer of contaminated air already present over the Greenland. These results are in good agreement with the prognoses made by the CTBTO (Wotawa, 2011) explaining two maxima of the Fukushima plume observed over Europe.
        We can conclude that the measured activity concentrations at the site of investigation resulted from a complicated air mass transport, arrival time, arrival height, meteorology and downward air mass transport.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        The downward transport was found to be an important factor affecting activity concentrations in the surface air. Higher activities can be transported over long distances at higher altitudes with higher probability, due to the precipitation effect and rather short residence time of water soluble aerosols in the boundary layer.
        3.3. Comparison with the Chernobyl accident
        The consequences of the Fukushima accident were estimated to be close to the Chernobyl accident according to the given level 7 on the INES scale (IAEA, 2011). The long-term radiological impact of the Chernobyl accident on the environment and humans due to released radioactivity, migration, resuspension of deposited radionuclides has been studied over 20 years. During the accident, and the post Chernobyl period, many measurements of gamma, beta and alpha-emitters in aerosol samples were carried out in Vilnius ( [Lujanas et al., 1994] , [Lujanienė et al., 1997] , [Lujanienė et al., 1999] and [Lujanienė et al., 2009] ). A wide spectrum of radionuclides and “hot particles” were detected in Vilnius following the Chernobyl accident, when activity concentrations were there higher by 4 orders of magnitude as compared to the Fukushima accident. The maximum activities in Vilnius during the first week after the Chernobyl accident were 45.2 Bq/m3 for 131I (aerosol fraction) and 27.9 Bq/m3 for 137Cs. The 132Te and 103Ru activity concentrations in April–May, 1986 ranged from 0.1 Bq/m3 to 51.0 Bq/m3 and from 0.1 Bq/m3 to 20.3 Bq/m3, respectively (Fig. 7).

        Fig. 7.
        http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MiamiCaptionURL&_method=retrieve&_eid=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992&_image=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992-gr7.jpg&_ba=&_fmt=full&_orig=na&_issn=0265931X&_pii=S0265931X11002992&_acct=C000047944&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=918210&md5=7a9b5fd336e57dc46209956dca392de1

        Activity concentrations of 131I, 137Cs, 103Ru in aerosol samples in Vilnius in 1986.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        In the Chernobyl plume Zr, Nb, Ru and Ce isotopes were detected in the air as well. In addition, the presence of “hot particles” of 0.37–22.2 μm in size carrying beta-emitters, and “hot particles” of 0.7–2 μm containing alpha-emitters (233U, 234U, 235U, 238Pu, 239Pu, 240Pu, 241Am, 242Cm, 244Cm) in 1986 were also found in aerosol filters collected in Vilnius. The activity ratio of 238Pu/239,240Pu varied from 0.44 to 0.5 and the atom ratio of 240Pu/239Pu ranged from 0.41 to 0.42. The high activities detected in Vilnius after the Chernobyl accident were explained by quite close location (480 km) of the site.
        Furthermore, the Chernobyl accident resulted in contamination of large areas of the Earth’s surface in Europe including six million ha of forested land of the Ukraine, Belarus and Russia (De Cort et al., 1998). The 137Cs surface deposition (Fig. 8) exceeded 1480 kBq/m2 (0.03% of the European territory). The prediction of 137Cs surface deposition after the Fukushima accident was made using a numerical atmospheric chemistry/transport model Polyphemus/Polair3D, and compared with contamination of Europe after the Chernobyl accident (Winiarek et al., 2011). The results indicated obvious differences in the consequences of the Chernobyl and Fukushima accidents, especially at the level of highly contaminated territories. However, a contamination of the marine environment and a deposition to the bottom sediments were not taken into account in this model. It is expected that the main radiological problems will arise from contaminated seafood, while the atmospheric deposition will again trigger discussions on the impact of low-level radiation doses on the public.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        Fig. 8.
        http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MiamiCaptionURL&_method=retrieve&_eid=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992&_image=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992-gr8.jpg&_ba=&_fmt=full&_orig=na&_issn=0265931X&_pii=S0265931X11002992&_acct=C000047944&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=918210&md5=18745f3472e131a99673d9a125baa653

        An example of 72 h air mass backward trajectories ended at Vilnius sampling site at 19 UTC at 20, 500, 1000 m AGL on 29 January, 1997, on 06 June, 1999 and on 03 February, 2001 for 4 analyzed sectors (modified after De Cort et al., 1998).
        Areas with high Chernobyl 137Cs ground depositions located close to Lithuania have been a source of the secondary contamination due to the forest fires and soil resuspension for a long time (Lujanienė et al., 2009). The transport of aerosol particles, which derived from resuspension and/or forest fires in 1997–2001 and 2005–2006 was modelled using the HYSPLIT. The backward trajectories were calculated for 4 selected sectors for 72 h at the heights of 20, 500 and 1000 m AGL (Fig. 8). However, not all calculated trajectories were possible to assign to a particular sector. Very complicated trajectories that did not match any sector were associated with sector 0.
        In both studied periods a weak correlation between the 137Cs activity concentration and height (R = 0.28 (20 m), 0.32 (500 m), and 0.31 (1000 m) in 1997–2001; and for 2005–2006 R = 0.41 (20 m), 0.49 (500 m), and 0.49 (1000 m)) was found for the Chernobyl sector, while for other sectors no correlation was observed. A dissimilar behaviour of Pu isotopes was explained by their different volatility as compared to Cs ones.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        This is again in good agreement with results obtained in 2005–2006 (Fig. 9) where 239,240Pu activities ranged from 2 to 49 nBq/m3, with maxima observed in May (29 and 49 nBq/m3, respectively), and they obviously derived from soil resuspension. The 241Am activity concentrations varied from 1 to 25 nBq/m3 and the highest values were also detected in May. Variations in the 241Am/239,240Pu activity ratios from 0.27 to 0.65 were found in the analyzed samples with the average value of 0.44.

        Fig. 9.
        http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MiamiCaptionURL&_method=retrieve&_eid=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992&_image=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992-gr9.jpg&_ba=&_fmt=full&_orig=na&_issn=0265931X&_pii=S0265931X11002992&_acct=C000047944&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=918210&md5=6dbbfec0d4b756ae18ea615b9fb6177c

        Activity concentrations of 239,240Pu and 241Am in monthly aerosol samples and monthly average activity concentrations of 137Cs in 2005–2006 in Vilnius.

        The 238Pu/239,240Pu activity ratios in aerosol samples collected in Vilnius during the Chernobyl accident were in the range 0.44–0.50, while the 240Pu/239Pu atom ratios in the same samples ranged from 0.41 to 0.42. The 240Pu/239Pu atom ratios in monthly samples in Vilnius in 1995–2003 varied from 0.14 to 0.40, whereas in samples collected during forest fires the ratio was between 0.19 and 0.23. In addition, an exponential decrease in the 240Pu/239Pu atom ratio from 0.30 to 0.19 (mean values) was observed during 1995–2003. The characteristic 238Pu/239,240Pu activity ratio of global fallout is 0.03, while that of the Chernobyl accident is 0.45 (Livingston and Povinec, 2002). The enhanced activity ratios of 238Pu/239,240Pu (from 1 to 3) have been measured in environmental samples derived from industrial nuclear effluents.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        The highest ratio of 238Pu/239,240Pu = 25.3 was reported in October 1982 and was attributed to discharges from the reprocessing plants at La Hague and Sellafield (Martin and Thomas, 1988).
        In order to check the presence of Pu isotopes in samples collected after the Fukushima accident between 23 March and 15 April, 2011 (N = 30, sampling air volume of ∼2 × 106) all samples were combined together to form one sample and Pu isotopes were separated and measured by means of alfa-spectrometry (Fig. 10). The activity concentration of 239,240Pu in this integrated sample was found to be 44.5 ± 2.5 nBq/m3, very close to the value measured in May, 2005 (Fig. 9), and higher than the activity measured in April–May, 2006. The values measured in March, 2006 (12.0 ± 0.6 nBq/m3) and May, 2006 (29.2 ± 1.5 nBq/m3) could serve therefore as reference data for comparison. From the spectrum shown in Fig. 10 it can be seen that the activity of 238Pu is higher than that of 239,240Pu (by a factor of 1.2).

        Full-size image (13K)
        Fig. 10.
        http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MiamiCaptionURL&_method=retrieve&_eid=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992&_image=1-s2.0-S0265931X11002992-gr10.jpg&_ba=&_fmt=full&_orig=na&_issn=0265931X&_pii=S0265931X11002992&_acct=C000047944&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=918210&md5=05cc62771a354ecd090e8f055de29c50

        Alfa-spectrum of Pu isotopes separated from aerosol samples collected between 23 March and 15 April.
        The 238Pu/239,240Pu activity ratios in aerosol samples observed in May 1986 at Tsukuba, Japan ranged from 0.04 to 0.33. The aerodynamic diameter of particles carrying the Chernobyl derived plutonium was estimated to be of 1.1–7 μm and the mean monthly 239,240Pu activity concentration increased only by 0.03 μBq m−3 (Hirose and Sugimura, 1990). This is approximately the same level as observed in the aerosol samples collected in Vilnius.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        The activity ratio of 238Pu/239,240Pu detected at the Fukushima site was reported to be 2 (TEPCO, 2011). Assuming the background ratio equal to the global fallout determined on the basis of the long-term measurements at the Vilnius site (Lujanienė et al., 2009) we can estimate the contribution of the Fukushima plutonium by simple calculations (Hirose and Sugimura, 1990) using the following equation:F(%)=100•(RM−RG)/(RF−RG)where F is the Fukushima originated 239,240Pu fraction, RM, RG and RF are the measured, global fallout and Fukushima derived ratios of 238Pu/239,240Pu, respectively. According to these estimations the contribution of the Fukushima derived 239,240Pu is 59% or 26.4 nBq/m3.
        The mean activity concentration of 137Cs found in Vilnius during the studied period was 118 μBq/m3. The background 137Cs activity concentration can be estimated from the sample collected one week before the accident and it was 0.7 ± 0.1 μBq/m3. From these estimations the mean Fukushima originated 239,240Pu/137Cs ratio could be 2•10−4. The activity ratio of 239,240Pu/137Cs in the Chernobyl originated hot particles was 2•10−2. A fractionation during the long-distance transport may have resulted in the variation of the ratio at different locations ( [Pöllänen et al., 1997] and [Hirose and Sugimura, 1990] ). Further analyses (ICPMS and AMS) are in progress, which will help to explain Pu origin in this sample.
        4. Conclusions
        From the presented data on variations of activity concentrations of studied radionuclides, from the analyses of meteorological situation, and on the basis of the modelling exercises we can conclude that the complicated air mass transport, different arrival time, arrival height and downward air mass transport resulted in two maxima of 131I and 137Cs activity concentrations in the near-surface atmosphere.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        An increase in the 131I and 137Cs activity concentrations up to 3800 μBq/m3 and up to 1070 μBq/m3 was observed on 28 March – 1 April and up to 500 μBq/m3 and up to 1000 μBq/m3 was found on 3–4 April, respectively. In addition to 131I and 137Cs, traces of other radionuclides were detected, and 132I, 132Te, 129Te, 129mTe and 136Cs among them. The comparison of the Chernobyl and Fukushima accidents indicated the higher activity concentration of radionuclides by 4 orders of magnitude and a broader spectrum of radionuclides in the Chernobyl plume as compared to the Fukushima one. Large collected air volumes allowed us to determine for the first time in Europe the activity ratio and concentration of Fukushima derived 238Pu and 239,240Pu isotopes. Approximately twice higher Pu activity concentration as expected, and 238Pu/239,240Pu ratio not typical either for global fallout or the Chernobyl accident was found in the integrated aerosol sample.

        Acknowledgements
        This research was partially supported by the Structural Funds of EU – the Research and Development Operational Program funded by the ERDF (project No. 26240220004). The authors thank students of the Chemical Department of the Vilnius University for technical assistance. The authors gratefully acknowledge the NOAA Air Resources Laboratory (ARL) for the provision of the READY website (http://www.arl.noaa.gov/ready.php) used in this publication.

        References
        Abe et al., 2010 T. Abe, T. Kosako and K. Komura, Relationship between variations of 7Be, 210Pb and 212Pb concentrations and sub-regional atmospheric transport: simultaneous observation at distant locations. J. Environ. Radioact., 101 (2010), pp. 113–121.
        Bolsunovsky and Dementyev, 2011 A. Bolsunovsky and D. Dementyev, Evidence of the radioactive fallout in the center of Asia (Russia) following the Fukushima nuclear accident. J. Environ. Radioact, (2011).


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        Chino et al., 2011 M. Chino, H. Nakayama, H. Nagai, H. Terada, G. Katata and H. Yamazawa, Preliminary estimation of release amounts of 131I and 137Cs accidentally discharged from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the atmosphere. J. Nucl. Sci. Technol., 48 (2011), pp. 1129–1134.
        De Cort et al., 1998 M. De Cort, G. Dubois, Sh.D. Fridman, M.G. Germenchuk, Yu.A. Izrael, A. Janssens, A.R. Jones, G.N. Kelly, E.V. Kvasnikova, I.I. Matveenko, I.M. Nazarov, Yu.M. Pokumeiko, V.A. Sitak, E.D. Stukin, L.Ya. Tabachny, S.Yu. Taturov and S.I. Avdyushin, Atlas of Caesium Deposition on Europe after the Chernobyl Accident, (1998), European Commission report EUR16737, Luxembourg.
        Diaz Leon et al., 2011 J. Diaz Leon, D.A. Jaffe, J. Kaspar, A. Knecht, M.L. Miller, R.G.H. Robertson and A.G. Schubert, Arrival time and magnitude of airborne fission products from the Fukushima, Japan, reactor incident as measured in Seattle, WA, USA. J. Environ. Radioact., 102 (2011), pp. 1032–1038.
        Draxler and Rolph, 2011 R.R. Draxler and G.D. Rolph, HYSPLIT (Hybrid Single-particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectoy), NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Silver Spring, MD, USA (2011) http://ready.arl.noaa.gov/HYSPLIT.php.
        Fushimi et al., 2011 K. Fushimi, S. Nakayama, M. Sakama and Y. Sakaguchi, Measurement of airborne radioactivity from the Fukushima reactor accident in Tokushima, Japan, . J. Phys. Soc. Jpn., (2011) arXiv:1104.3611v2.
        Hirose and Sugimura, 1990 K. Hirose and Y. Sugimura, Plutonium isotopes in the surface air in Japan: effect of chernobyl accident. J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem. Articles, 138 (1990), pp. 127–138.
        Hu et al., 2010 Q.-H. Hu, J.-Q. Weng and J.-S. Wang, Sources of anthropogenic radionuclides in the environment: a review. J. Envirom. Radioact., 101 (2010), pp. 426–437.
        IAEA, 2006 IAEA, Environmental Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident and Their Remediation: Twenty Years of Experience, RARS, Vienna (2006).


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        IAEA, 2011 IAEA, Briefing on Fukushima Nuclear Accident, (2011), http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/tsunamiupdate01.html/ 12 April 2011.
        Jordan et al., 2003 C.E. Jordan, J.E. Dibb and R.E. Finkel, 10Be/7Be tracer of atmospheric transport and stratosphere-troposphere exchange. J. Geophys. Res., 108 (2003), pp. 4234–4247.
        Koch et al., 1996 D.M. Koch, D.J. Jacob and W.C. Graustein, Vertical transport of tropospheric aerosols as indicated by 7Be and 210Pb in a chemical tracer model. J. Geophys. Res., 101 (1996), pp. 18,651–18,666.
        Kownacka, 2002 L. Kownacka, Vertical distributions of beryllium-7 and lead-210 in the tropospheric and lower stratospheric air. Nukleonika, 47 (2002), pp. 79–82.
        Land and Feichter, 2003 C. Land and J. Feichter, Stratosphere–troposphere exchange in a changing climate simulated with the general circulation model MAECHAM4. J. Geophys. Res., 108 (2003), pp. 8523–8532.
        Livingston and Povinec, 2002 H.D. Livingston and P.P. Povinec, Millennium perspective on the contribution of global fallout radionuclides to ocean science. Health Phys., 82 (2002), pp. 656–668.
        Lozano et al., 2011 R.L. Lozano, M.A. Hernández-Ceballos, J.A. Adame, M. Casas-Ruíz, M. Sorribas, E.G. San Miguel and J.P. Bolívar, Radioactive impact of Fukushima accident on the Iberian Peninsula: evolution and plume previous pathway. Environ. Int., 37 (2011), pp. 1259–1264.
        Lujanas and Lujanienė, 2007 V. Lujanas and G. Lujanienė, Application of cosmogenic radionuclides in ozone tracer studies. J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem., 274 (2007), pp. 287–291.
        Lujanas et al., 1994 V. Lujanas, A. Mastauskas, G. Lujaniene and N. Spirkauskaite, Development of radiation in Lithuania. J. Environ. Radioact., 23 (1994), pp. 249–263.
        Lujanienė et al., 2009 G. Lujanienė, V. Aninkevičius and V. Lujanas, Artificial radionuclides in the atmosphere over Lithuania. J. Environ. Radioact., 100 (2009), pp. 108–119.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        Lujanienė et al., 2006 G. Lujanienė, J. Šapolaite, V. Remeikis, V. Lujanas, A. Jermolajev and V. Aninkevičius, Cesium, americium and plutonium isotopes in ground level air of Vilnius. Czech. J. Physiol., 56 Suppl. 4 (2006), pp. D55–D61.
        Lujanienė et al., 1998 G. Lujanienė, V. Lujanas, A. Mastauskas, R. Ladygienė, B.L. Ogorodnikov and K. Stelingis, Influence of physico-chemical forms of radionuclides on their migration in the environment. Radiochim. Acta, 82 1 (1998), pp. 305–310.
        Lujanienė, 2000 G. Lujanienė, Investigation of cosmogenic radionuclide carriers in the atmosphere. Czech. J. Phys., 50 (2000), pp. 321–329.
        Lujanienė, 2003 G. Lujanienė, Study of removal processes of 7Be and 137Cs from the atmosphere. Czech. J. Phys., 53 (2003), pp. A57–A65.
        Lujanienė et al., 1999 G. Lujanienė, V. Lujanas, D. Jankūnaitė, B.I. Ogorodnikov, A. Mastauskas and R. Ladygienė, Speciation of radionuclides of the chernobyl origin in aerosol and soil samples. Czech. J. Phys., 49 1 (1999), pp. 107–112.
        Lujanienė et al., 2011 G. Lujanienė, S. Byčenkienė, T. Ščiglo, P.P. Povinec, M. Gera, J. Bartok and M. Gažák, Radionuclides from the Fukushima Accident in Europe – Modelling the Air Mass Transport, (2011), 26-28 July, 2011, Shanghai, China, pp. 2775–2777.
        Lujanienė et al., 1997 G. Lujanienė, B. Ogorodnikov, A. Budyka, V. Skitovich and V. Lujanas, An investigation of changes in radionuclide carrier properties. Adv. Space. Res., 35 (1997), pp. 71–90.
        Manolopoulou et al., 2011 M. Manolopoulou, E. Vagena, S. Stoulos, A. Ioannidou and C. Papastefanou, Radioiodine and radiocesium in Thessaloniki, Northern Greece due to the Fukushima nuclear accident. J. Environ. Radioact., 102 (2011), pp. 796–797.
        Martin and Thomas, 1988 J.M. Martin and A.J. Thomas, Anomalous concentrations of atmospheric plutonium-238 over Paris. J. Environ. Radioact., 7 (1988), pp. 1–16.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        Masson et al., 2011 O. Masson, A. Baeza, J. Bieringer, K. Brudecki, S. Bucci, M. Cappai, F.P. Carvalho, O. Connan, C. Cosma, A. Dalheimer, D. Didier, G. Depuydt, L.E. De Geer, A. De Vismes, L. Gini, F. Groppi, K. Gudnason, R. Gurriaran, D. Hainz, O. Halldorsson, D. Hammond, O. Hanley, K. Holey, Zs. Homoki, A. Ioannidou, K. Isajenko, M. Jankovick, C. Katzlberger, M. Kettunen, R. Kierepko, R. Kontro, P.J.M. Kwakman, M. Lecomte, L. Leon Vintro, A.-P. Leppänen, B. Lind, G. Lujanienė, P. Mc Ginnity, C. Mc Mahon, H. Mala, S. Manenti, M. Manolopoulou, A. Mattila, A. Mauring, J.W. Mietelski, B.S. Møller, P. Nielsen, J. Nikolick, R.M.W. Overwater, S.E. Palsson, C. Papastefanou, I. Penev, M.K. Pham, P.P. Povinec, H. Ramebäck, M.C. Reis, W. Ringer, A. Rodriguez, P. Rulík, P.R.J. Saey, V. Samsonov, C. Schlosser, G. Sgorbati, B.V. Silobritiene, C. Söderström, R. Sogni, L. Solier, M. Sonck, G. Steinhauser, T. Steinkopff, P. Steinmann, S. Stoulos, I. Sykora, D. Todorovic, N. Tooloutalaie, L. Tositti, J. Tschiersch, A. Ugron, E. Vagena, A. Vargas, A.H. Wershofen and O. Zhukova, Tracking of airborne radionuclides from the damaged Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear reactors by European Networks. Environ. Sci. Technol., 45 (2011), pp. 7670–7677.
        Microstep, 2011 Microstep, 2011. http://www.microstep-mis.com/index.php?lang=en&site=src/products/radiation_monitoring/ims_model_suite, 23.5.2011 [online]..
        NISA, 2011 NISA, 2011. http://www.nisa.meti.go.jp/..
        Papastefanou, 2009 C. Papastefanou, Radon decay product aerosols in ambient air aerosol and air. Qual. Res., 9 (2009), pp. 385–393.
        Pittauerová et al., 2011 D. Pittauerová, B. Hettwig and H.W. Fischer, Fukushima fallout in Northwest German environmental media. J. Environ. Radioact., 102 (2011), pp. 877–880.
        Pöllänen et al., 1997 R. Pöllänen, I. Valkama and H. Toivonen, Transport of radioactive particles from the chernobyl accident. Atmos. Environ., 31 21 (1997), pp. 3575–3590.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        Rolph, 2011 G.D. Rolph, Real-time Environmental Applications and Display SYstem (READY), NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Silver Spring, MD (2011), Website http://ready.arl.noaa.gov.
        Sheets and Lawrence, 1999 R.W. Sheets and A.E. Lawrence, Comparative temporal behavior of radon- and thoron-progeny in surface air over the midwestern U.S. J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem., 242 (1999), pp. 761–767.
        TEPCO, 2011 TEPCO, Detection of Radioactive Material in the Soil in Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, (2011) http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/11032812-e.html.
        Winiarek et al., 2011 V. Winiarek, M. Bocquet, Y. Roustan, C. Birman and P. Tran, Atmospheric Dispersion of Radionuclides from the Fukushima-Daichii Nuclear Power Plant, (2011) http://cerea.enpc.fr/fr/fukushima.html.
        WMO, 2009 WMO, World meteorological organization: manual on Codes. International Codes, Secretariat of the World Meteorological Organization, Geneva (2009), pp.740.
        Wotawa, 2011 G. Wotawa, Accident in the Japanese NPP Fukushima: Synthesis of Our Current Calculations and CTBTO Data Shows Global Spread of Air Masses Originating from Japan, (2011), (Update: 25 March 2011 16:00) http://www.zamg.ac.at/docs/aktuell/Japan2011-03-25_1600_E_2.pdf.
        Yoshimori, 2005 M. Yoshimori, Beryllium 7 radionucleide as a tracer of vertical air mass transport in the troposphere. Adv. Space Res., 36 (2005), pp. 828–832.
        Závodský, 2011 D. Závodský, Editor, Atmospheric Chemistry and Air Pollution Modelling. Leonardo da Vinci Programme, Matej Bel University, Banská Bystrica (2011) pp. 127.

        Corresponding author. Tel.: +370 5 2644856; fax: +370 5 2602317.

        Note to users: The section “Articles in Press” contains peer reviewed accepted articles to be published in this journal. When the final article is assigned to an issue of the journal, the “Article in Press” version will be removed from this section and will appear in the associated published journal issue.


        Report comment

      • VanneV anne

        [cont.]
        The date it was first made available online will be carried over. Please be aware that although “Articles in Press” do not have all bibliographic details available yet, they can already be cited using the year of online publication and the DOI as follows: Author(s), Article Title, Journal (Year), DOI. Please consult the journal’s reference style for the exact appearance of these elements, abbreviation of journal names and the use of punctuation.

        There are three types of “Articles in Press”:
        • Accepted manuscripts: these are articles that have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication by the Editorial Board. The articles have not yet been copy edited and/or formatted in the journal house style.
        • Uncorrected proofs: these are copy edited and formatted articles that are not yet finalized and that will be corrected by the authors. Therefore the text could change before final publication.
        • Corrected proofs: these are articles containing the authors’ corrections and may, or may not yet have specific issue and page numbers assigned.
        Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.


        Report comment

        • Bobby1

          “The activity ratio of 238Pu/239,240Pu detected at the Fukushima site was reported to be 2 (TEPCO, 2011)… From these estimations the mean Fukushima originated 239,240Pu/137Cs ratio could be 2•10−4.”

          That means, if you want to estimate the amount of Fuku plutonium-239/240 in Europe, multiply the amount of Cs-137 by .0002. For plutonium-238, multiply it by .0004.

          I suppose you would have to adjust the Cs-137 for the Chernobyl background first.


          Report comment

  • Jebus Jebus

    From Reuters on Tues. March 15….

    Japan spent fuel pond on fire,radioactivity out-IAEA

    VIENNA, March 15 | Tue Mar 15, 2011 2:44am EDT

    (Reuters) – Japan has told the U.N. nuclear watchdog a spent fuel storage pond was on fire at an earthquake-stricken reactor and radioactivity was being released “directly” into the atmosphere, the Vienna-based agency said.

    The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), citing information it had received from Japanese authorities, said dose rates of up to 400 millisievert per hour have been reported at the Fukushima power plant site.

    “The Japanese authorities are saying that there is a possibility that the fire was caused by a hydrogen explosion,” it said in a statement.

    (Reporting by Fredrik Dahl; editing by Michael Roddy)

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/15/japan-nuclear-iaea-idUSLDE72E04G20110315


    Report comment

  • Jebus Jebus

    Nuke engineer: Fuel rod fire at Fukushima reactor “would be like Chernobyl on steroids”

    Yep, that was Arnie…

    But,

    From this article…

    Along with the rest of the planet, Washington’s looking at the risk of a potential catastrophe. At least when it comes to finding the fuel rods from reactor 1, Washington possesses some unique assets. One asset – the secretive National Reconassiance Office – runs the spy satellites remote sensing devices that enable US national security to spy on planet Earth. The NRO’s slightly less secretive cousin over at the the Pentagon is the Defense Intelligence Agency. The DIA, in turn, controls MASINT “measures and signatures technologies”.

    What is MASINT? FDL’s recent guest Tim Shorrock answered that question a few years ago for CorpWatch:

    MASINT is a highly classified form of intelligence that uses infrared sensors and other technologies to “sniff” the atmosphere for certain chemicals and electro-magnetic activity and “see” beneath bridges and forest canopies. Using its tools, analysts can detect signs that a nuclear power plant is producing plutonium, determine from truck exhaust what types of vehicles are in a convoy, and detect people and weapons hidden from the view of satellites or photoreconnaissance aircraft.

    With assets like the NRO and the DIA’s MASINT capacity, even an Obama administration that couldn’t find out millions of of barrels of Corexit and crude oil would poison the Gulf should be able to help Japan’s Fukushima plant locate their missing fuel rods. And do so before the missing rods – or any of the other pools of fuel rods in Japan’s stricken reactors – ignite Chernobyl on steroids.

    cont….


    Report comment

  • psky

    Is there a possibility that it came from Iran in the future?

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/santorum-says-he-would-bomb-irans-nuclear-plants/

    Santorum Says He Would Bomb Iran’s Nuclear Plants

    Rick Santorum said today that would be in favor of launching airstrikes against Iranian nuclear facilities.

    “We will degrade those facilities through airstrikes, and make it very public that we are doing that,” Santorum said on “Meet the Press.”

    Iran announced today that it had created the country’s first nuclear fuel rod, a key component in a reactor that can also be used to produce weapons grade uranium.

    Several of the GOP candidates have expressed increased concerns over Iran’s nuclear program after the International Atomic Energy Agency released a report that says Iran is making progress….


    Report comment

  • DukeNukem4ever DukeNukem4ever

    @ Toadmac:

    from all I have seen the sea radiation is spreading (or has already done so) all over the pacific and I have seen a color coded map from NOAA a while ago (sorry no link, I only have a screen shot saved) that shows that the rad water has already reached all the way to New Zealand and Northern Australia (and all along the coast of Chile too). Coastal areas receive a lot of fine ocean spray which carries with it anything dissolved in the water … this might be the mechanism by which the stuff travels in-land.


    Report comment

    • NoNukes NoNukes

      DukeNuken4er, I have been looking for this info, and not finding it. How is this not on every front page in the world?! Could you post your screen shot? Thanks for giving us this information.


      Report comment

    • arclight arclight

      concerning the seaweed sample…

      admin might be able to do a story on this and you need to contact ACRO FRANCE to have it analysed! send in a sealed bag! this is important evidence!!

      need more info.. like where it was harvested, when etc

      be nice to get a response as its getting a bit suspicious the no reply posts…?? know what i mean?
      peace


      Report comment

  • I visited some sponsors on this page and found that I feel much better….LOL


    Report comment

  • many moons

    The inhabitable planet is growing smaller each day. Moment by moment we are contaminating the space we live in, making it smaller….and no way to stop it. Forever uninhabitable sea, mountains, forrests, land….


    Report comment

  • W8R W8R

    Really, the sad part is, the explosions dont account for but a part of the aerosolized nucleotides being dispersed.. Fission creates plenty enough heat and reactivity.. So that “smoke” from the cooking corium masses is deadly to us all… Neptunium degrades to Plutonium and many curies worth were, and are, being released…
    And once the fuel is critical, mox or not, you have plutonium..
    We shall all feel the bite of this dragon…


    Report comment

  • unspokenhermit

    My thoughts are that this is all intentional. The US invades countries all of the time claiming they “could” be a threat, and when there’s something actually for real killing Americans on US soil, we don’t hear a word from one single US congress or senate person about doing anything about this situation.

    I recently came across these atmpospheric simulations, produced an American independent organization, that indicate TEPCO vastly under-reported radionuclide emissions from the Fukushima Plant.

    http://www.datapoke.org/blog/8/study-modeling-fukushima-npp-radioactive-contamination-dispersion-utilizing-chino-m-et-al-source-terms/

    http://www.datapoke.org/partmom/a=40

    I’ve suspected for some time that the publicly released emissions data had been manipulated – If the models are correct I suppose this re enforces my hunch. Is there anyone here that can help us explain the implications of this model?


    Report comment