On 31 October 2011 a scientist of the Worcester Polytechnic Institute Marco Kaltofen presented his findings on the releases of radioactive isotopes from the Fukushima accidents at the annual meeting of the American Public Health Association (APHA). Airborne dust contaminated with radioactive particles was released from the reactors into the air. This dust was found in Japanese car filters: they contained cesium-134 and cesium-137, and cobalt at levels as high as 3 nCi total activity per sample. Materials collected during April 2011 from Japan also contained Iodine 131. Soils and settled dusts were collected from outdoor and inside homes, and also from used children's shoes. High levels of cesium were found at the shoelaces. US air filter and dusts samples did not contain hot particles, except … http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_effects_from_Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster#Plutonium_isotopes
Could it be the ashes of 410 sites of waste disposal facilities burning waist injecting it also into the air onto the grounds again and in new places as the winds blow, plus accumulation accruing !?
Disposal of radioactive ash
Due to objections of concerned residents it became more and more difficult to dispose of the ashes of burned household garbage in and around Tokyo. The ashes of waste facilities in the Tohoku, Kanto and Kōshin'etsu regions were proven to be contaminated with radioactive caesium. According to the guidelines of the Ministry of Environment, ashes with 8,000 becquerels per kilogram or lower, could be buried. Ashes with caesium levels between 8,000 and 100,000 becquerels should be secured, and buried in concrete vessels. A survey was done on 410 sites of waste disposal facilities, on how the ash disposal is proceeding. At 22 sites, …
It's amazing to me nuclear plant workers were allowed to be exposed to 100mSv per year, and they upped the limit to 250,000mSv. And the WHO says 500,000mSv per year is acceptable! Astonishing given the "low level" exposures linked to the development of cancers.
Makes me want to find some stats on how many of these workers have developed cancers, not to mention all the other health issues that go along with radiation exposure.
Oops! I added some zeroes to the mSv's! I can't believe I did that. I was thinking about how many times the mSv's would go into a Sievert, and did a typical Lyme-brain thing (typed what I was thinking about). 250mSv or 500mSv exposures are not acceptable, IMHO!
That's like saying "take this exposure and possibly die at your own risk because we determined it's safe."
Below are links to epidemiological studies of nuclear workers over periods of 13 to 25 years that show a definite correlation to certain cancers at previous 'allowable' dose levels of ≤20 mSv per year, or ≤100 mSv over 5 years. Back in those old days 'allowable' doses to the general public from nuclear operations was *1 mSv per year*. Fukushima has altered that forever, and of course the nuclear industry and its several powerful lobbying groups likes to pretend that there is no evidence that links ionizing radiation to cancer, but that's a bald-faced lie and always has been.
Please take a moment to sign the following petition demanding that President Obama commission the Fukushima International Scientific Advisory Team, save Spent Fuel Pool #4, and stop Fukushima. It only takes a couple of minutes: you just need to register a WhiteHouse.Gov account using your name, email, and phone number. We 25,000 signatures in the next 30 days in order to receive an official response from the Administration. Once you've signed it, share the link far and wide. The future depends on you.
@cschlote:
Good catch!
However, what I see is 7 LED back lit scale indicators.
Based on what I can see they are
100
300
1000
3000
10k
30k
100k
Which is a common engineering instrumentation scaling scheme.
It is not clear to me that the x100 is actually lit up, as I can also see the 10k, 30k and 100k scaling factors too.
Also, I am color blind, so you may be able to see something in the x100 that I can not see in terms of determining that it is actually lit up.
Regardless, the indication is disturbing, to say the least.
Well now.
Good thing I opted for an alternative!
I am read-green color blind.
Eye doctor checked me for it.
When we were done, I asked him
"How bad?"
He replied "Couldn't be worse".
So thanks for the heads up!!!!
Amazing what the rest of you get to see in this world.
@fireguyjeff Hmm, I never expected that red-green blindness is influcencing sight that much. But I'm sure
even a r/g blind can distinguish between a lighting and non-lighting LED, if you sit in front of it
Some other points:
- If I would be a pro-nuke troll, I would say: "Look, these guys can't even measure radiation correctly and spread baseless rumors!"
- Is this device indeed a alpha radiation detector only or does it also detect beta/gamma?
The acceptable levels of exposure for members of the public are 1 mSv per year from non natural sources*. ie medical, equipment etc.
Of course, these cannot be easily attained in some situations, but you can work that back with your known background, and work out a rate that should raise alarm bells. That's about 0.3 microSieverts per hour.
Nuclear worker limits were going to be limited to 20 mSv per Lifetime* – but this decision was knocked down.
Current limits are based upon poor understandings of exposure and biology – and are flawed. The ICRP acknowledges this, but it is impossible in some plants for workers to complete some tasks.
ie at Barlett, it was common for some workers to get 1 mSv changing out old valves.
Clearly, there are problems in Japan as the populance is experiencing radiation at levels in excess of most nuclear workers whom usually die of cancer.
Am concerned the person using the probe is properly shielding his probe from contamination. It looks like he's setting it dow directly on the metal w/o any shielding such as a plastic bag. If so, this may be a no-no unless he has a special apparatus he can clean afterward, which doesn't accumulate radiation. Otherwise he'll be getting skewed readings, i.e., operator and instrument error in the readings.
It appears he's doing multiple measurements in different locations. Is this the same person who posted the really high readings at an official's home a couple of days ago?
Is anyone familiar with instruments using this type of probe? Just curious.
Your identity will not be made public unless you request it
Receive Occasional Enenews Newsletters
sending...
SUPPORT ENENews
ENENews receives no funding from anyone or anything, except 1) People who donate via the button below, and 2) Google, who pays for the two ad spots. Thanks to all who have donated or are planning on doing so, it's nice to know people appreciate your work.
sending...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minamis%C5%8Dma
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minamis%C5%8Dma,_Fukushima
Report Comment
Radioactive Dust-particles
On 31 October 2011 a scientist of the Worcester Polytechnic Institute Marco Kaltofen presented his findings on the releases of radioactive isotopes from the Fukushima accidents at the annual meeting of the American Public Health Association (APHA). Airborne dust contaminated with radioactive particles was released from the reactors into the air. This dust was found in Japanese car filters: they contained cesium-134 and cesium-137, and cobalt at levels as high as 3 nCi total activity per sample. Materials collected during April 2011 from Japan also contained Iodine 131. Soils and settled dusts were collected from outdoor and inside homes, and also from used children's shoes. High levels of cesium were found at the shoelaces. US air filter and dusts samples did not contain hot particles, except …
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_effects_from_Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster#Plutonium_isotopes
Report Comment
Could it be the ashes of 410 sites of waste disposal facilities burning waist injecting it also into the air onto the grounds again and in new places as the winds blow, plus accumulation accruing !?
Disposal of radioactive ash
Due to objections of concerned residents it became more and more difficult to dispose of the ashes of burned household garbage in and around Tokyo. The ashes of waste facilities in the Tohoku, Kanto and Kōshin'etsu regions were proven to be contaminated with radioactive caesium. According to the guidelines of the Ministry of Environment, ashes with 8,000 becquerels per kilogram or lower, could be buried. Ashes with caesium levels between 8,000 and 100,000 becquerels should be secured, and buried in concrete vessels. A survey was done on 410 sites of waste disposal facilities, on how the ash disposal is proceeding. At 22 sites, …
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_effects_from_Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster#Plutonium_isotopes
Report Comment
It's amazing to me nuclear plant workers were allowed to be exposed to 100mSv per year, and they upped the limit to 250,000mSv. And the WHO says 500,000mSv per year is acceptable! Astonishing given the "low level" exposures linked to the development of cancers.
Makes me want to find some stats on how many of these workers have developed cancers, not to mention all the other health issues that go along with radiation exposure.
Grrrr!
Report Comment
Oops! I added some zeroes to the mSv's! I can't believe I did that. I was thinking about how many times the mSv's would go into a Sievert, and did a typical Lyme-brain thing (typed what I was thinking about). 250mSv or 500mSv exposures are not acceptable, IMHO!
That's like saying "take this exposure and possibly die at your own risk because we determined it's safe."
Report Comment
Below are links to epidemiological studies of nuclear workers over periods of 13 to 25 years that show a definite correlation to certain cancers at previous 'allowable' dose levels of ≤20 mSv per year, or ≤100 mSv over 5 years. Back in those old days 'allowable' doses to the general public from nuclear operations was *1 mSv per year*. Fukushima has altered that forever, and of course the nuclear industry and its several powerful lobbying groups likes to pretend that there is no evidence that links ionizing radiation to cancer, but that's a bald-faced lie and always has been.
From 2005
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4629461.stm
From 2000
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1638302/pdf/envhper00309-0099.pdf
Report Comment
Minamisoma is SOOO contaminated. So sad. So many worrisome reports coming from there.
Report Comment
Greetings, ENENEWSers.
Please take a moment to sign the following petition demanding that President Obama commission the Fukushima International Scientific Advisory Team, save Spent Fuel Pool #4, and stop Fukushima. It only takes a couple of minutes: you just need to register a WhiteHouse.Gov account using your name, email, and phone number. We 25,000 signatures in the next 30 days in order to receive an official response from the Administration. Once you've signed it, share the link far and wide. The future depends on you.
http://wh.gov/QUi
Report Comment
There are some LEDs above the scale indicating the multiplicator for the scale value. On the photo the 100x is lighting.
It might help to choose a different measurement range… the maximum multiplicator is 100000x (100k)
So this device should be able to display CPM 1000 times higher.
Report Comment
@cschlote:
Good catch!
However, what I see is 7 LED back lit scale indicators.
Based on what I can see they are
100
300
1000
3000
10k
30k
100k
Which is a common engineering instrumentation scaling scheme.
It is not clear to me that the x100 is actually lit up, as I can also see the 10k, 30k and 100k scaling factors too.
Also, I am color blind, so you may be able to see something in the x100 that I can not see in terms of determining that it is actually lit up.
Regardless, the indication is disturbing, to say the least.
Report Comment
@fireguyjeff & schlote…The 100 is lit up, and it is in bright red. If you can't see red, this may be the problemo!
Report Comment
Well now.
Good thing I opted for an alternative!
I am read-green color blind.
Eye doctor checked me for it.
When we were done, I asked him
"How bad?"
He replied "Couldn't be worse".
So thanks for the heads up!!!!
Amazing what the rest of you get to see in this world.
Report Comment
@fireguyjeff Hmm, I never expected that red-green blindness is influcencing sight that much. But I'm sure
even a r/g blind can distinguish between a lighting and non-lighting LED, if you sit in front of it
Some other points:
- If I would be a pro-nuke troll, I would say: "Look, these guys can't even measure radiation correctly and spread baseless rumors!"
- Is this device indeed a alpha radiation detector only or does it also detect beta/gamma?
This article should be fixed.
Report Comment
http://www.aesj.or.jp/publication/pnst001/data/248.pdf
Detector: ZnS(Ag) (alpah survey meter)
Model (Supplier): TCS-232 (ALOKA, Japan)
Averaged discrepancy: 10% for 241Am
Report Comment
The acceptable levels of exposure for members of the public are 1 mSv per year from non natural sources*. ie medical, equipment etc.
Of course, these cannot be easily attained in some situations, but you can work that back with your known background, and work out a rate that should raise alarm bells. That's about 0.3 microSieverts per hour.
Nuclear worker limits were going to be limited to 20 mSv per Lifetime* – but this decision was knocked down.
Current limits are based upon poor understandings of exposure and biology – and are flawed. The ICRP acknowledges this, but it is impossible in some plants for workers to complete some tasks.
ie at Barlett, it was common for some workers to get 1 mSv changing out old valves.
Clearly, there are problems in Japan as the populance is experiencing radiation at levels in excess of most nuclear workers whom usually die of cancer.
Report Comment
Am concerned the person using the probe is properly shielding his probe from contamination. It looks like he's setting it dow directly on the metal w/o any shielding such as a plastic bag. If so, this may be a no-no unless he has a special apparatus he can clean afterward, which doesn't accumulate radiation. Otherwise he'll be getting skewed readings, i.e., operator and instrument error in the readings.
It appears he's doing multiple measurements in different locations. Is this the same person who posted the really high readings at an official's home a couple of days ago?
Is anyone familiar with instruments using this type of probe? Just curious.
Report Comment
setting it down, that is. Typing on my laptop. Sometimes do typos.
Report Comment