Study: Fukushima fallout at Canadian embassy in Tokyo was 225,000 Bq/m² — Far in excess of limit set for radiation control zones

Published: March 22nd, 2013 at 11:28 am ET


Title: The ambient gamma dose-rate and the inventory of fission products estimations with the soil samples collected at Canadian embassy in Tokyo during Fukushima nuclear accident
Source: Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry
Author:  Weihua Zhang, Judah Friese, Kurt Ungar
Date: April 2013, Volume 296, Issue 1, pp 69-73

In this study, soil samples were collected at Canadian embassy in Tokyo (about 300 km from Fukushima) on 23 March and 23 May of 2011 for purposes of estimating concentrations of radionuclides in fallout, the total fallout inventory, the depth distribution of radionuclide of interest and the elevated ambient gamma dose-rate at this limited location. Some fission products and actinides were analyzed using gamma-ray spectrometry, alpha spectrometry and liquid scintillation counting. The elevated activity concentration levels of 131I, 132I, 134Cs, 137Cs, 136Cs, 132Te, 129mTe, 129Te, 140Ba and 140La were measured by the gamma-ray spectrometer in the first sample collected on 23 March. Two months after the accident, the 134Cs and 137Cs became only detectable nuclides. A mass relaxation depth of 3.0 g/cm2 was determined by the activities on the depth distribution of 137Cs in a soil core. The total fallout inventory was thus calculated as 225 kBq/m2 on March sampling date and 25 kBq/m2 on May sampling date. […]

Also from Tokyo: “Cesium detected was 230,000 becquerels per square meter, 6 times as high as the limit set for the radiation control zone to restrict one from taking an item out of the control zone.”

Published: March 22nd, 2013 at 11:28 am ET


Related Posts

  1. Highest fallout levels in Tokyo since soon after Fukushima crisis began April 27, 2013
  2. Japan Study: Fukushima fallout “unlike the past nuclear accidents” — Radioactive silver prominently observed March 27, 2013
  3. Study: Much of Japan’s east, northeast likely contaminated — Yet included NO radiation data before March 19, when explosions spread massive amount of fallout November 17, 2011
  4. Study: Contamination in Tokyo suburb 3 times higher than area 1 mile from Fukushima Daiichi — Nuclear Scientist: Significant contamination in Tokyo, a serious problem (AUDIO) September 23, 2013
  5. Gov’t confirms 57.7 microsievert/hr near Tokyo is linked to Fukushima meltdowns — “Highly likely” it came from rain tainted with radioactive fallout October 23, 2011

32 comments to Study: Fukushima fallout at Canadian embassy in Tokyo was 225,000 Bq/m² — Far in excess of limit set for radiation control zones

  • weeman

    To the Canadian government are you not going to recommend that your nationals leave Japan at the earliest possible time since levels are to high or is it to late for them as they have already been highly radiated.
    It is your responsibility to inform and protect your flock.
    Funny we have not heard anything from the American embassy and don't tell me they are not monitoring.
    Who is responsible for the future health care of our nationals, the tax payers of Canada.
    Thank Canada for the information but you are two years to late to assist our nationals, shame on you, I would expect this from north Korea but not from the free nations of the world.

    The winds of change are blowing strong and soon your house of cards will tumble down and the beginning of the new renaissance will soon dawn.

  • hbjon hbjon

    It's really not clear exactly what level of external exposure will start to show effects the soonest. Researchers have determined in Chernoby what is a dangerous area to live in based on overall contamination. Internal exposure cannot possibly be avoided within a certain distance of radiological releases. The level of internal exposure will diminish as the distance increases. Tokyo is very rarely in the path of the plumes, so if they have evacuated, can you imagine what level of contamination is north and east of the plumes origin. Fishermen and sailors must wear some sort of protection out there imho.

  • Sickputer

    Not surprising considering the Canuck nuclear whores running CANDU-land. They've got GE Canada shilling their death traps to India, Pakistan, Argentina, South Korea, Romania and China and uranium mining to boot.
    It's a chilling bunch of Big Brother nucleocrats ranking right up there with their partners in death south of the 49th Parallel of Latitude.

    I really don't know who to give the nod to for being the biggest stone cold genocidal killer of the nuclear fraternity, but the Canucks certainly get my vote for inclusion in the top five.

    • weeman

      True enough we had the first nuclear melt down, I believe at chalk river, we're did the uranium come from to build the first bomb, etc.
      The true north stong and free.
      But not free of the nuclear madness and our complicity is culpable.
      I ask you Canada we are supposed to be a nuclear free nation, we may not have the bomb unless you consider nuclear waste to be a time bomb with a fuse that will be active for millions of years, just another perspective for your consideration.
      I am Canadian and proud.

    • weeman

      I don't believe anyone has ever bought a candu reactor as of now, only in Canada you say, the trillium release is quite substantial from this design, although better in other parameters.
      Canada had to increase levels of trillium allowable to compensate, I am glad we were consulted on that fact?

      • That's right – Canada is the biggest uranium exporter in the world. The other two are Australia and Kazakhstan.

        Tritium releases are a big problem in the rivers and Great Lakes:

        • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar anne

          A Canadian company owns the rights to mine uranium very near Fort Collins, CO. The additives to our gasoline in Colorado is demanded by a Canadian company. California paid a lot of money to get rid of these additions in their gasoline. These destroy life and the environment. Colorado did pay out any money to protect. It is because of NAFTA that Canada is allowed to kill us all off. There are no environmental protections in NAFTA. Hillary campaigned to put environmental protections into NAFTA. The Democrats who controlled the nomination blocked her nomination. Obama has done nothing to add environmental protections into NAFTA. Canada is also allowed to ship their nuclear waste to be stored in Colorado. Canada has so much empty, uninhabited land. Why should Americans be forced to store their waste? NAFTA and the global nuclear industry.

      • unincredulous unincredulous

        Trillium is a flower. Do you mean tritium?

  • bwoodfield bwoodfield

    Hey Sick.. FYI, I'm Canadian. Lumping all Canadian into one basket is no different than stating that everyone in the US is pro-nuke. And if you want to get finger-pointing, start comparing the number of reactors in Canada vs the number in the US.

    Corporations know no political boundaries, and it's them who are causing this nuclear proliferation that is killing us. Blame GE Canada all you want, they are a subsidy of GE US. I'm sure they are selling out of Canada because of a trade regulations and tax incentives.

    • Sickputer

      Sorry if you took my comments personally against the Canadian people as a whole.

      My harsh comments were addressed only to the Canadian nucleocrats. I have many Canuck friends.

      Like America your country once was a healthy and safe place to raise a family, but both countries fell victim to the insane government scheme of "cheap" energy from nuclear plants. That argument is the biggest lie of the past 70 years. Nuclear plants leak highly toxic poisons during "normal" operations. It is a lethal weapon…nothing more…nothing less.

      There is no price tag on the health of a society. I didn't sign up my family or neighbors or future descendants to drink polluted water and breathe air that can kill you with a tiny speck emitted from their Dr. Frankenstein machines.

      The nucleocrats may never answer in our lifetime for their crimes against humanity, but they will not escape the verdict of history. Future humans will regard them with disgust. Hitler's Holocaust pales in comparison.

      • Nice comments on the Canucks. (I happen to hold Canuck citizenship, and British, and Kiwi as well, but I rather think of myself more as a monkey-shaped earthling than anything else.

        Both the nucleocrats and the citizenry are complicit – one deliberate and the other through wanton stupidity, if you'll excuse my french.

        Nuclear contamination does not stop at the border.

        I do believe our thinking on this ought to be more cosmopolitan, or global but the Yanks and Canucks are definitely to be faulted for deliberate murder and genocide.

        May as well call it like it is, and screw the nationalists and flag-wavers.

        • weeman

          Radiation has no regard for borders and the citizens of any one nation are not to blame but the governments and the Multi national companies pulling the strings.
          Let us not forget we are here for one common goal that bonds us.

    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar anne

      The USA has nearly 10 times the population as Canada:
      313,914,040 to 34,482,779.

      The US has 104 nuclear power plant reactors.

  • bwoodfield bwoodfield

    I just finished sending emails to my Premier (like a US Governor) and the Government of Canada Foreign Affairs to find out if anything is going on regarding the recent readings.

  • bwoodfield bwoodfield

    Emailed CBC news room with links to the posted articles.

  • J.

    I think the key to raising public awareness of the risks of nuclear power lies in explicating the "fuel flea" or "hot particle" issue. Thinking about the disaster in these terms really focuses the mind. See this:

    Marco Kaltofen seems to be the leading researcher in this area. If his work makes clear that all of us are exposed to particles that are inhalable and ingestible, and that persist in the environment and our bodies, this may be the foundation of more effective anti-nuclear education efforts.

    Persistent, inhalable/ingestible ionizing particles: PIIIPs. If we can demonstrate that PIIIPs are a risk on the streets, in our homes, in playgrounds and beaches, the false notion that nuclear plant disasters are subsequently "controlled" and "contained" is proven false.

    Someone needs to do publish more research in an accessible way, devoid of tech-speak and other jargon. We need to see experts doing studies in various locations, chosen at random, subjected to testing for PIIIPs of of various radionuclides. One can imagine the educational value. For example: "In this pail of sand from a popular beach, we find approximatel X particles of plutonium, strontium, uranium, and cesium." There are very few persons with the expertise and equipment able to do this work. I hope that they are able to make their research more accessible and…

  • TheBigPicture TheBigPicture

    Many people are gonna die, thanks to nuclear.

  • gottagetoffthegrid

    For those with a tough stomach here is an interview and some photos of DU babies in Iraq. This is Japan's future.

    do not look at this unless you are cool with seeing multilegged infants with insides on the outside.

    • J.

      The situation in Fallujah is horrendous, and probably not comparable to Fukushima. In any case, prenatal screening is ubiquitous in Japan, and abortion is widely available. We may eventually start reading about this, though privacy issues may prevent the full truth from ever emerging.

      • kintaman kintaman

        Physical deformities will be weeded out at birth and not reported but the other non-visible illnesses will appear later in life.

        Those responsible MUST be held to full justice for their crimes. They AND their families MUST be put at Fukushima Daiichi for life to clean up. This is the only true justice.

        • J.

          We have to hope that the responsible medical professionals in Japan keep proper records, and collaborate with like-minded colleagues. There are always a handful of upright men and women who will do the right thing.

  • wagamama

    I don't understand the difference between bq/m² and bq/Kg. How to compare these figures?

    • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar anne

      They are measuring different things. kg is a measurement of weight (kilogram). m^2 is a measurement of area (meters squared)

      Bq by weight p. 26 (kg)
      Bq by volume (m^3)

      External exposure
      Bq by area (m^2) p. 27

      BECQUEREL (Bq): a less unwieldy measurement of radioactivity than curies: one disintegration per second (d.p.s.). A picocurie is 0.037 d.p.s. or 0.03 Bq. The most common reporting unit outside the United States for radionuclide air concentrations is µBq/m3 (microbecquerels).

      Features: Depleted Uranium

    • gottagetoffthegrid

      Bq/m2 is a measure of contamination in an area
      Bq/kg is a measure of contamination in a thing, like a fish for instance.

      There is a conversion factor for soil, but I don't recall it ATM.

      The unit Bq is also confusing. It is used for counts-per-second or as a proxy for the mass of a nuclide present.
      The confusion is intentional ; code-speak for "exprts" if you will.

      • weeman

        Yes it is confusing and I am glad you brought this to light, I am sure 99 percent of people do not understand, just another strategy to confuse the population.
        It still does not tell us what level DNA damage occurs, why is there no definitive study that determines a unsafe level to a safe level, to many variables.
        Please correct me there are three kinds of radiation alpha, Bata and gamma all cause damage at some level, so you are not just exposed to just one and I must presume that the levels of each vary from location to location and this makes it impossible to tell you X level of any one radiation level is danagerious, but something tells me that exposure to high levels of all three types of radiation is very dangerious?
        Just a freshman.

        • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar anne

          There is no safe level for radiation. Even small amounts or exposures can cause double strand breakage (i.e., non-repairable breakage) to the DNA. This is especially true for the man-made radionuclides that have never existed in nature.

  • unincredulous unincredulous

    It's not so important how you destroy the world, but how witty you are going about it. Jolly good show old boy. A pat on the back and a membership in the dead genius club for the Playnuke centerfold models!