SOS from Local Official: I can’t take it any more! “Black dust” over 5.5 million Bq/kg — They’re going to do what? Spring athletic meets? Swimming pool opening?

Published: May 10th, 2012 at 9:46 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
19 comments


Measurement results… Beyond Bq 550 Man! Spreading around the world! (Google Translate)
Koichi Oyama Minamisoma City Councilor
May 10, 2012

Oyama’s findings summarized by EXSKF:

Ooyama says he went and collected soil samples (what he calls “black dust”) in locations in Minami Soma, including several in Odaka District after the no-entry zone designation was lifted. He had them tested by the city’s laboratory for radioactive cesium, and the result, as posted on his blog (5/10/2012) is shocking.  The maximum is 5,570,000 becquerels/kg of radioactive cesium in soil in Odaka District. In the same district, half a million becquerels/kg of cesium in cow dung was also found. [...]

Assemblyman Ooyama screams, “And they’re going to do what? Spring athletic meets? Swimming pool opening? I can’t take it any more!”

Screenshot of Oyama's blog (Google Translation)

h/t InfoPest

Published: May 10th, 2012 at 9:46 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
19 comments

Related Posts

  1. Mistake? Local Gov’t: 330 Million bq/km² of radioactivity found yesterday 50 mi. from Tokyo — Had been ‘not detected’ for weeks — Now at March levels (CHART) September 22, 2011
  2. Local Official: They found plutonium in every sample — Radiation-absorbing bacterium is everywhere on paved surfaces June 4, 2012
  3. Local Official: 5,000,000 Bq/kg and no decontamination — We can’t eat food grown here, but we are forced to live here June 3, 2012
  4. 1,000,000 Bq/kg of cesium detected at Fukushima school… after being ‘decontaminated’ — “It’s obvious they will just leave it” – Local Official July 13, 2012
  5. 10,000,000 Bq/kg of cesium detected in Minamisoma soil sample -Local Official May 16, 2012

19 comments to SOS from Local Official: I can’t take it any more! “Black dust” over 5.5 million Bq/kg — They’re going to do what? Spring athletic meets? Swimming pool opening?

  • Gotham

    Barbacueing from without and barbacueing from within.


    Report comment

  • arclight arclight

    ACROS MARCH 2012 FINDINGS

    Comments :

    The contamination is very large and comparable to the environment of Chernobyl.
    The Maeda field of Iitate-mura is the most contaminated place.
    Iodine contamination is the largest and it is better to evacuate the population.
    On the long time range, cesium 137 is the most worrying element because it has a half-life of 30 years.

    Regarding the results expressed in Bq/kg of soil, most of them are higher than the limit fixed by the Japanese authorities at 5 000 Bq/kg for agriculture. Rice cannot be cultivated.

    The data expressed in Bq/m² can be compared to the definition of the zones in Byelorussia after the Chernobyl disaster (law of 1991) :
    185 000 – 555 000 Bq/m²: migration allowed
    555 000 – 1 480 000 Bq/m²: right to rehousing

    Most of the results are higher than one of these limits.

    - Read the press release in French (11th of April 2011)
    - Download the analysis report for the first samples

    http://www.acro.eu.org/OCJ_en.html#result%201st%20camp


    Report comment

    • Bobby1

      5.5 million Bq/kg = 357,500,000 Bq/m²

      241 times the mandatory Chernobyl evacuation limit.


      Report comment

      • fireguyjeff fireguyjeff

        GAAAAAK!!
        This is killin' me!!! (no pun intended)

        Bobby1….How do you equate weight to area???

        If possible, please explain how your conversion works.

        Unless there is some industry/scientific standard "assumption"
        (which I doubt is really there) you know about.

        And just to clarify for everyone here (I have a numbers sort of mind set) that if the Japan limit is 5000 Bq/kg then the headline, if accurate, means that the soil sample is 1114 times more than the food limit.

        So just to hedge conservative, lets call it a thousand times over.


        Report comment

        • Bobby1

          There was a topic here a few months ago where the admin quoted that you multiply Bq/kg by 65 to get Bq/m2. I don't have it in front of me though. If I am wrong, someone should correct me on this.


          Report comment

          • fireguyjeff fireguyjeff

            Bobby1…
            OK, now it makes more sense.
            Thank you for clarifying for me!

            I am very confident that Admin got something mixed up
            or were told they could convert with just a multiplier by some one who got it mixed up badly.
            Which is easy to do in this game unless one is immersed in the details as a life style.

            The fundamental physics of converting Bq/kg in to Bq/m^2 makes no sense at all.

            It is much like some one saying they lost 3 acres on their new diet.

            Or that some one says the next town is 5 pounds away.

            Another way to make my point here is that if the black dust covered a sheet of plywood, would it be any more radioactive than is it was covering a same sized sheet of newspaper?
            Of course not.

            Measuring Bq/kg would offer 2 very different results.
            Which does not relate to surface area.

            I think that the Bq/m^2 we see reported so often is the digital readout from a hand held Gieger counter (with an assumed distance from the source) and that the Bq/kg is from a lab assessment based on actual mass of the sample, independent of volume.


            Report comment

            • Bobby1

              The thing is that, since cesium binds to soil, most of it ends up in the top 5 centimeters of the soil sample. The soil below that has little or no cesium in it. So it's not a straight conversion. I saw an IAEA document about this a year ago, so the math for converting it is out there.


              Report comment

              • arclight arclight

                hi bobby
                to confirm there is a formula and it made my head hurt when i saw it… i think it was more complicated than the conversion above.. in any event ACRO of the ICRP club has made a very strong statement above in comparing the exclusion zone of the chernobyl accident to this contaminated areas they found.. ACRO have only done some limited testing, as time moves forward we will find more hotspots and be able to work out who can live where!!

                this should have started using the industry and scientific laboratories that have largely been testing car parts etc as the trade organisation promised they would do for the international corporations…

                they have the equipment to test lots of food! and they havent mobilised it and the laboratories largely havent offered!!

                shame!


                Report comment

  • openeye openeye

    http://www.naturalnews.com/035813_Ron_Wyden_Fukushima_radiation.html “[We are all in an] idiotic catch-22, where governments refuse to address a problem that threatens the world unless and until the problem explodes in their faces, at which point it is too late to address it…..Denial will be the harbinger of our ultimate destruction at the hands of "scientists" who promised us life but delivered us unto death.” Mike Adams

    He will host the Alex Jones show tomorrow 5-11 & interview Arnie.


    Report comment

  • Bleifrei Bleifrei

    cesium is not only there
    im sure there is some other

    it is to much for only cesium ( older Post here they found some other )
    maybe it is higher than 137 with a longer live.
    any various substances create by a blow-out like this
    TOXICJAPAN they diversify more and more
    helpless Folks must wake up soon or it is to late for more and more


    Report comment

  • BreadAndButter BreadAndButter

    If he's got it tested by the city's local lab as he claims, there MUST be some kind of official reaction to those findings!!


    Report comment

  • Bobby1

    These radiation hotspot measurements around Minamisoma, Namie and Iitate are phenomenal. They are increasing at a rate of something like one Chernobyl a week.


    Report comment

    • alasanon

      Yes–I've been following Fukushima Diary, where they report the readings & local observations direct from Japanese translation. It reveals a steadily overwhelming increase. The only conclusion is that the radioactivity is incredibly intense and it reflects at least 3 fully-stocked open-air nuclear meltdowns, ongoing… Many of the measurements near populated regions are simply not fit for human contact!!!

      It's astonishing, mindboggling, gabberwocking'ly BAD!!


      Report comment

  • These ereas, as far as Tokyo, should have been evacuated long time ago. Results come out with soils considered as radioactive wastes useless for farming, domestic water unsweetable for bathing… There is nothing understandable going on in Japan any more.


    Report comment

  • andii

    and if anybody needs to be reminded of the truth about #3
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLr5_UxhoTA


    Report comment

  • glowfus

    what is the character of the cow dung nuclides? was it from injestion or fallout? that's a lot of radioactivity in that dung.


    Report comment

  • chicofrito

    just set the safety limit to 10 million Becquerels/mcg and say its below the limit


    Report comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.