Category: Fukushima Radiation



Fukushima Update: “Your Radiation This Week, Nov 28 to Dec 5, 2015″

Saturday, December 5, 2015 14:15

(Before It’s News)

“Your Radiation This Week, Nov 28 to Dec 5, 2015″

By Bob Nichols

B4INREMOTE-aHR0cDovLzQuYnAuYmxvZ3Nwb3QuY29tLy0yRVhuaVU1cjl6by9WaUo5eE9vcklOSS9BQUFBQUFBQmVnVS9Fb1QwemxUQ0dzQS9zMTYwMC9GdWt1c2hpbWElMkJUb3AuanBn

”I didn’t say it would be easy. I just said it would be the truth.”

– Morpheus

(San Francisco) December 5, 2015 – “Good Day, this is “Your Radiation This Week.” These are the recorded Radiation Highs that affected some people this week around the United States. You should compare the Rad numbers directly with the Rad numbers in with my articles listed on the VT Author’s Page here. These are the American cities that exceeded 1,000 CPM this week. Thirty-eight (38) American cities exceeded 1,000 CPM this week; that’s up 6 cities since last week Another eleven (11) cities are clustered between 900 and 999 CPM. Stay Alert and take all appropriate precautions.

The Rad poison has spread all over the country and settled in for the long haul. The most prevalent isotope, Cesium 137, takes a daunting 600 years to decay to infinitesimal levels. It is not even particularly long-lived radiation. The Cesium will remain, though; we won’t.

All Radiation Counts reported are partial Counts. Uncounted types of radiation include Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Neutron and X-Ray radiation. Uncounted radiation, if added, makes the actual Count higher and more dangerous. The highest radiation reporting city is listed first, the least radioactive city reporting is listed last. All reporting cities are above normal. I just could not overlook Washington, DC at 235 CPM subtotal Gamma and Beta for a low and 500 CPM subtotal Gamma and Beta for a High Rad reading. This is not even a low for the District. The low Gamma only reading was 80 CPM. The benefits of living in Washington, DC are never ending and far surpass those of Normal men and women living in other cities – even New York at 785 CPM High this week.

 

Normal Radiation is 5 to 20 CPM. 50 CPM is an alert level.

RADIATION  CPM* TIMES NORMAL BACKGROUND LEVEL CITY, STATE TYPE

1,585 CPM,  317 Times Normal,  Spokane, WA.  Gamma, Beta.

1,506 CPM,  301.2 Times Normal,  Miami, FL.  Gamma, Beta.

1,469 CPM,  293.8 Times Normal,  Bakersfield, CA  Gamma, Beta.

1,457 CPM,  291.4 Times Normal,  Portland, ME  Gamma, Beta.

1,378 CPM,  275.6 Times Normal,  Colorado Springs, CO.  Gamma, Beta.

1,347 CPM,  269.4 Times Normal,  Harrisonburg, VA.  Gamma, Beta.

1,345 CPM,  269 Times Normal,  Little Rock, AR  Gamma, Beta.

1,315 CPM,  263 Times Normal,  Kansas City, KS  Gamma, Beta.

1,278 CPM,  255.6 Times Normal,  Navajo Lake, NM  Gamma, Beta.

1,276 CPM,  255.2 Times Normal,  Raleigh, NC.  Gamma, Beta.

1,287 CPM,  254.4 Times Normal,  Fresno, CA  Gamma, Beta.

1,257 CPM,  254.4 Times Normal,  Reno, NV  Gamma, Beta.

1,269 CPM,  253.8 Times Normal,  Yuma, AZ.  Gamma, Beta.

1,266 CPM,  253.2 Times Normal,  Phoenix, AZ  Totally Gone.

1,250 CPM,  250 Times Normal,  Louisville, KY  Gamma, Beta

1,241 CPM,  248.2 Times Normal,  Worcester, MA.  Gamma, Beta.

1,238 CPM,  247.6 Times Normal,  Pierre, SD  Gamma, Beta.

1,237 CPM,  247.4 Times Normal,  Rapid City, SD.  Gamma, Beta.

1,225 CPM,  245 Times Normal,  Tucson, AZ  Gamma, Beta.

1,218 CPM,  243.6 Times Normal,  Idaho Falls, ID  Gamma, Beta.

1,208 CPM,  241.6 Times Normal,  Amarillo, TX.  Totally Gone.

1,186 CPM,  237.2 Times Normal,  Bismark, ND.  Gamma, Beta.

1,165 CPM,  233 Times Normal,  Madison, WI.  Gamma, Beta.

1,148 CPM,  229.6 Times Normal,  Billings, MT  Gamma, Beta.

1,145 CPM,  229 Times Normal,  Pittsburgh, PA,  Gamma, Beta.

1,124 CPM,  224.8 Times Normal,  Rochester, NY.  Gamma, Beta.

1,110 CPM,  222 Times Normal,  San Diego, CA.  Gamma. Beta.

1,106 CPM,  221.2 Times Normal,  Laredo, TX.  Gamma, Beta.

1,105 CPM,  221 Times Normal,  El Paso, TX.  Gamma, Beta.

1,091 CPM,  218.2 Times Normal,  Wichita, KS.  Gamma, Beta.

1,066 CPM,  213.2 Times Normal,  St George, UT.  Gamma, Beta.

1.058 CPM,  211.6 Times Normal,  Mason City, IA  Gamma, Beta.

1,051 CPM,  210.2 Times Normal,  Anaheim, CA.  Gamma, Beta.

1,041 CPM,  208.2 Times Normal,  Boston, MA.  Gamma, Beta.

1,039 CPM,  207.8 Times Normal,  Hartford, CT  Gamma, Beta.

1,032 CPM,  206.4 Times Normal,  Riverside, CA.  Gamma, Beta.

1,020 CPM,  204 Times Normal,  Denver, CO.  Gamma, Beta.

1,011 CPM,  202.2 Times Normal,  Boise, ID.  Gamma, Beta.

500 CPM,    100 Times Normal,  Washington, DC  High Gamma, Beta.

235 CPM,    47 Times Normal,  Washington, DC  Low Gamma, Beta.

Most Radioactive City in America: Spokane, Washington is the No 1 Radioactive City in America this week! Congrats to Spokane! Miami, Florida and Bakersfield, California are close behind in the CPM race to the end.

Special Gift from the Insane Pro-Nukers: California perennially leads the nation in population.  California is also the First State to have Six (6) Cities above the 1,000 CPM Level of Ionizing Radiation. Congrats, Cali, a real “Not In My Backyard” kind of Honor. The cities are listed here in CPM order: Bakersfield – 1,415, Fresno – 1,409, Anaheim – 1,128, Riverside – 1,049, San Diego – 1,046, Los Angeles – 1,020.

Nuclear Pulse Redo– Target Denver, Colorado. Another nuclear pulse struck in Denver, Colorado November 13, 2015. The rapid increase in measurable radiation had the same Rad signature as the September 30 – October 30 Rad Pulse in Champaign, Illinois reported in YRTW No 23. The governments involved know about it, of course, and have not said a word. Make of that what you will. On September 30 thru October 30, 2015 some unacknowledged source or sources around Lake Michigan spread measurable radiation all over the country. Like a Devil Wind it could be tracked for several weeks. Thousands of people know about it and no one is talking publicly. Three cities – Billings, Denver, and Colorado Springs – have been hit with massive pulses of radiation. After the attacks, the Rad rolled through the unprotected countryside and right through the unaware residents for hundreds of miles. The people were un-warned and had not a clue what hit them when the heart attacks and strokes started.

Which city will be next? I have no way of detecting it or knowing about it till after the Rad strikes. These attacks were launched without warning or any prior indications to civilians. The attacks are launched seemingly At Will and without restraint. The most common Rad effects are heart attacks and strokes. Know anybody who has unexpectedly dropped dead of a heart attack recently? Say “Hello” to Rad as a weapon.

US Abandons St Louis, Missouri: Manhattan Project’s former nuclear laden garbage dump for radiologically contaminated material is in comeback mode in a big way in St Louis. The nuclear laced garbage is directly in the path of a underground fire in a modern city garbage dump.* The US will throw its own residents under the bus rather than jeopardize any part of the nuclear weapons program. The fire is just another example of bad consequences that happen to good people as a result of the US Nuclear Weapons Program. The source of the Uranium was a very rich deposit in Africa. The US killed and maimed hundreds of thousands of people with nuclear weapons made from it. Soon we can add St. Louis, Missouri to the nuclear kill. There are about 2,795,794 people in the St Louis Metro area.

As you will remember from High School Physics class, Uranium is the Metal that Burns. Burning Uranium isotopes can get as hot as 10,832 Degrees Fahrenheit. There is no way for individuals on their own to argue with a burning 10,832 Degree F chunk of Uranium. The only thing to do is get out of the way; leave St Louis!

 

The prudent Missouri State Attorney General’s report advises St Louis’ residents a nuclear dump fire could start December 1, 2015. Nothing has been done to stop the progress of the fire and nothing will be done, because nothing can be done. Like it always does, the US will study, not treat, a few unwitting victims and watch them die. Those people who are able to leave town should do so immediately – escape from St Louis. If you are still in St Louis now, God help you. Stay at your own risk. That is my opinion.

“Radiation Sensors in Major U.S. Cities Turned Off By EPA”: Billings, Montana on Oct 16, 2015 was reading a Combined Beta and Gamma Rad of 1,227 Beta and 703 Gamma for a Combined reading of 1,930CPM. The Beta Rad unit stopped publicly reporting, then four (4) days later on Oct 20, 2015 at 12:37:25 the unit came to life again. It’s… ahh, personality had changed, though. The new Beta and Gamma reading was 926 Beta and 401 Gamma. The new Combined radiation number on Oct 20 was 1,227 CPM Combined. The Combined reading was 603 CPM less than it was 4 days before. There was no Note or Comment on the missing four days. It was a 4 Day Rad Gap and an unexplained disappearance of 603CPM. The disappearing CPM was comprised of 302 CPM Gamma and 301 CPM Beta. In the next 4 Hours the Combined CPM eroded another 550 CPM for a total CPM Loss of 1,153 CPM. Billings, Montana today is barely in the List of cities above 1000 CPM. Billings is now 23rd on the list and reads 1,101 CPM. The missing Radiation remains “Unaccounted For.” Presumably it [the radiation] did not go to the Moon; therefore, it is on Earth somewhere now. (So, they apparently tried to “rig” the system and failed, so instead turned it all off. Just my hunch… – CP)

German Analysis of Certain Isotopes after Meltdown: Hold on to your hat… In 1992 Germany calculated that in reactor meltdowns like Fukushima Daiichi the radioactive isotope Strontium 90 would aggressively poison the environment for 109.2 years and then decline slowly over the next 273 years. Of course, we will ALL be long dead by then. Other deadly Rad isotopes put Strontium 90’s generous life span to shame. The German study is here for those brave enough to tackle it. Source: The IAEA: Dispersion of radionuclides and radiation exposure after leaching by groundwater of a solidified core-concrete melt by Bayer, A.; Tromm, W.; Al-Omari, I. (Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe (Germany)) from 8. International congress of the International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA8)

Isotope Count reporting: These CPM numbers do not represent the actual radiation counts in your radiation weather this week. It is higher [or worse] than these government certified partial reports say. Use these report numbers as your Starting Point in adding up your daily, monthly and annual exposure from your Rad Weather. Most radiation monitors report on the radioactive presence of Cesium 137 at the detector. YRTW will report on “the secrets the Pros use” in estimating the actual Total radiation counts. It is not a pretty picture. Squeamish readers may want to turn to other Veterans Today articles reporting on usual things like wars and people getting blown up by an actual named enemy you can see in pictures.

Day One out of the reactor use a news reported Cesium multiplier of 150 Times. After 15 days outside the reactor the multiplier is still approximately 100 times the Cesium Twins. Take all appropriate Rad precautions. A second Multiplier is for Rad particles that have been outside the reactor for ten years or more. The Total radiation declines to approximately Five (5) Times the Cesium level. The Lethality is still increasing though. Here’s how you can calculate an estimate of your Total Rad today: Use a reported account of the Cesium 137/134 CPM in your area and Multiply Times 5. Another way to say it is:

Cs137/134 CPM X 5.0 = Total Radiation released in CPM

Radiation types commonly measured by radiation monitors include Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Neutron and X-Ray radiation. Only Beta and Gamma are reported by the EPA and here on YRTW. There are 1,944 other individual Rad elements, only a few are ever mentioned in articles. In short: The newer disaster’s Cesium 137/134 radiation CPM that is conveniently echoed by local and national news outlets, tells you right away by simple Multiplication how big the disaster really is, even if they are lying. At least it gets you closer than “There is no danger to the public.” That would be You. Think of it as the insider’s secret code. Multiply away! That’s it. No magic or VooDoo, just the facts as close as you can calculate it. However, provided Cesium 134 is present you are experiencing a recent radioactive release and all bets are off. Why is that? Because the two Rad Isotopes decay at greatly different rates. The relatively long lived Cs 137 is half gone in 30.1 years. The shorter lived Cesium 134 is half gone in only 2.06 years. As a result the Multiplier changes very rapidly. Good Luck.

The Lethality goes up for 35 years; then declines slightly and hangs steady for millions of years, for that release. New releases start a new clock all over again. Regrettably for all normal Humans, that is a bunch of generations. The end result is extinction, of course.  Everybody is included; no one is left out. Truthfully, it is a bummer and I know of no variety of radiation-exempt Human Species.

 

How often do radioactive releases occur? The answer is: Radioactive releases occur almost daily in most reactors. This venting does complicate your health and your estimated Rad readings. May you always have better Rad Weather; but, that’s not likely.

– http://www.veteranstoday.com/

Sources and Notes:

1. The Radiation charts and graphs of the EPA at http://www2.epa.gov/radnet  Don’t skip the “2” in www2.

2. The EPA based reporting of NETC.com, an LLC.

3. * This station’s Radiation equals combined Beta and Gamma Radiation. Note: Not all locations have reporting Beta Radiation Monitors. Gamma Radiation Monitors are functioning at all these locations.

4. “…If you pollute when you DO KNOW there is NO safe dose with respect to causing extra cases of deadly cancers or heritable effects, you are committing premeditated random murder.” – John W. Gofman, Ph.D., M.D. (1918-2007), associate director, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory 1963-1969) — Comments on a Petition for Rulemaking to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, May 21, 1994.

5. CPM. “Although we can’t see it, taste it, smell it or hear it we can measure radiation and observe its effects. One way to measure radiation which the United States Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] has chosen to use on its radiation websites is in Counts Per Minute. Each Count is One Radioactive Decay.” Quote from the ‘Your Radiation, This Week.’” Apr 3, 2015.

6. Digilert 100 Promotional Flyer pdf, “Normal background is 5-20 CPM.”

7. ENENEWS, August 7th, 2015, US Gov’t: “We don’t know what’s going on” in Pacific — Many ill baby seals being abandoned; Dozens of walruses found dead; Dying whales, birds, fish — “Unprecedented things happening” — Experts: “It’s been a very unusual marine mammal year… I’m really worried, very concerned” (AUDIO)
8. Dispersion of radionuclides and radiation exposure after leaching by groundwater of a solidified core-concrete melt by Bayer, A.; Tromm, W.; Al-Omari, I. (Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe (Germany)) from 8. International congress of the International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA8)
9. Resuspension and redistribution of radionuclides during grassland and forest fires in the Chernobyl exclusion zone: part I. Fire experiments., Journal of Environmental Radioactivity 86 (2006) 143e163www.elsevier.com/locate/jenvrad

*10. St. Louis landfill fire could reach radioactive waste in months, September 18, 2015

11.Depleted Uranium Radioactive Waste. By: Evgenia Misenzhnikova, Legislative Intern. (uranium can spontaneously ignite and then burn at temperatures of above 10,832 degrees Fahrenheit) 

“World Health Organization:

Prolonged Exposure to Even LOW Level Radiation Increases the Risk of Cancer”

“Throughout this time the reactors continuously plumed out radiation into the environment. When seen through the refracted gaze of the media, it seemed as though the radioactive plumes that escaped the Daiichi plant were severe, but episodic and limited. In fact, the plumes that made their way into the atmosphere after the venting and hydrogen explosions were peak releases, but they were merely steps above an already elevated level that fluctuated but never stopped. One way to visualize this is to imagine the plume as a spotlight that swept back and forth, continuously pluming out radioactivity in the direction that light was shone: as the wind shifted the plume would move, but it never stopped. The plume was unrelenting (and, arguably, still is today in another mode, as contaminated water leaks into the ocean), and as this radioactivity has been released into the environment, it has incrementally distributed collective, cumulative doses whose consequences for public health were terrifying in the early days of the crisis but may well be even worse in the long-term.”

– http://japanfocus.org/-Kyle-Cleveland/4075/article.html

Aboard the aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan, 100 miles offshore of Fukushima: “During that March 13 phone call, Cleveland wrote, Troy Mueller — the deputy administrator for naval reactors at the US Department of Energy — said the radiation was the equivalent of “about 30 times what you would detect just on a normal air sample out at sea.” “So it’s much greater than what we had thought,” Mueller reportedly warned other American officials after taking samples on the Reagan. “We didn’t think we would detect anything at 100 miles.” After Mueller made that remark, according to Cleveland’s transcript, Deputy Secretary of Energy Daniel Poneman asked him if those levels were “significantly higher than anything you would have expected.” He responded yes. Poneman later asked Mueller, “How do the levels detected compare with what is permissible?” Mueller replied that those on the scene could suffer irreversible harm from the radiation within hours. “If it were a member of the general public, it would take- well, it would take about 10 hours to reach a limit,” he said. “At that point,” Mueller added, “it’s a thyroid dose issue.” If people are exposed to levels beyond the Protective Action Guideline threshold released by the Energy Department, Cleveland acknowledged in his report, radiation could have ravaged their thyroid glands.”

– http://www.rt.com/usa/uss-reagan-fukushima-radiation-979/

So within 10 hours of exposure to 30 times the normal background radiation level “radiation could have ravaged their thyroid glands.” Find the nearest location to you in the listing above. 10 hours? 30 times normal exposure? Remember this is 24 hour a day, 7 days a week exposure for over 4 1/2 years now. Draw your own conclusions…

B4INREMOTE-aHR0cDovLzQuYnAuYmxvZ3Nwb3QuY29tLy1UNFExZVp5ZVNHdy9WYzliSG9MNDNTSS9BQUFBQUFBQmNyTS9PelpOT2RPWUg3by9zMTYwMC9lbmVsb2dvLmdpZg==

Record levels of Fukushima radiation detected off West Coast — Massive plume stretches for more than 1,000 miles — Reuters: Contamination is spreading off U.S. shores — Radioactive cesium reaches 11 Bq/m3 at multiple locations (MAP)

Former Japan Official: “Unstoppable contamination of Pacific Ocean… is seriously menacing US West Coast” — “Fukushima now undeniably a global security issue… can’t be brought under control by single state” — Experts: Wave of radiation will be 10 times more than entire world’s nuclear tests combined

Giant whales found piled up dead on west coast beach — Second largest animals on planet — Official: “It’s never happened… Extremely unusual… Very rare and odd… We want to know why” — Gov’t scientists testing for Fukushima radiation — Backlog at lab due to so many recent deaths (PHOTOS)

Advertisements

Radioactive substances have been found in water samples taken from deep underground layers at the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, reported Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO).

This is the first time TEPCO has admitted to detecting radioactivity in groundwater taken from a layer 25 meters beneath the No. 4 reactor well that faces the ocean, which implies radioactive substances have been leaking into the sea from yet another source.

reactor NO 2 FDINPP
No. 2 reactor buildings at the crippled Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear power plant seen at the center of the above screen dump taken from a news video clip.

Water sample taken on December 17, showed 6.7 becquerels per liter of Cesium 137 and 89 becquerels per liter of strontium and other beta ray-emitting radioactive substances.

“TEPCO officials are putting a new spin over their own report, saying that radioactive substances may have been accidentally mixed during the, according to a report.

Since July, TEPCO has admitted to three major incidents of contaminated water escaping from the power plant into the ocean, including two major leaks of highly radioactive water from storage tanks—a 300-ton spill in August followed by at least 430 liters in October this year.

Meantime, the company reported that density of beta ray-emitting radioactivity in groundwater has been rising since November. On December 19, the activity reached a record 1.9 million becquerels per liter.

[Note: The becquerel, the SI unit of radioactivity, is equivalent to one disintegration per second.]

On November 7, 2013 FIRE-EARTH said:

Scale of potential catastrophe at Fukushima could dwarf a limited nuclear war.

Japan Renews Nuke Ambitions Despite Fukushima, Common Sense

Posted by feww on December 14, 2013

Japan should embrace nuclear power: Government panel

“Nuclear energy is an important and fundamental base energy source that will support the stability of energy demand and supply,” the panel wrote in its report.

The panel is headed by the honorary chairman of Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Corp, Japan’s largest steel maker and one of its heaviest energy consumers, said a report.

Unsurprisingly, the panel’s recommendations are driven by economic incentives alone and have no base in science or reason in common sense.

If Japan Prime Minister Shinzo Abe remains in power his government would almost certainly heed the panel’s advice and expand Japan’s reliance on nuclear energy, despite widespread anti-nuclear sentiment after the 2011 Fukushima triple meltdown.

Ironically, the previous government of the Democratic Party of Japan, decided to abandon to abandon nuclear power following a recommendation from a similar panel.

Nuclear reactors in Japan, one of the world’s most seismic prone countries, provided about a third of electricity before the 2011 Fukushima catastrophe.

Prior to the Fukushima incident, the world’s worst nuclear disaster since 1986 Chernobyl meltdown, the government had considered boosting the contribution of nuclear energy to over 50 percent.

Enough said!

CJ Recommendation

The decision by the government to reactivate Japan’s idled reactors would justify any and all future defensive measures taken by nature to neutralize the additional threats, recommends CJ panel.

 

Record Outdoor Radiation Level Detected at Nuked Fukushima Plant

Record 25 sieverts per hour detected at Fukushima No. 1 reactor: TEPCO

Posted by feww on December 9, 2013

Radiation was detected in an area near a steel pipe that connects reactor buildings and could kill a person in 20 minutes, if exposed, local media reported.

The highest radiation level [so far] was detected at an outdoor location at the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear reactor on Dec. 6, said Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO), the plant’s operator and the utility responsible for the clean-up of the crippled nuclear plant.

The reading of 25 sieverts per hour was taken on steel piping near an exhaust stack for the No. 1 and No. 2 reactors, TEPCO reported.

fukushima
An exhaust stack sits between the No. 1 and No. 2 reactor buildings at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant, March 15, 2011. Source:  TEPCO handout.

In an earlier report, the utility announced high radiation levels of at least 10 sieverts per hour were found on the piping outside the reactor.

“TEPCO measured airborne radiation at eight locations around the piping to calculate surface radiation on two spots with particularly high readings, and found about 25 sieverts per hour and about 15 sieverts per hour, the company said,” local media reported.

Radioactive materials separated from melted fuel may have entered the pipes during venting shortly after the plant was “nuked” in March 2011 and remained there, said a TEPCO official.

The catastrophic mega earthquake that struck the Tōhoku region on March 11, 2011 triggered a major tsunami that inflicted massive damage along Japan’s east coast, paralyzing the Fukushima Daiichi (No. 1) nuclear plant and causing triple meltdown with large-scale radioactive fallout.

More than 400 tons of contaminated water is being produced and stored in hastily prepared, unsuitable containers at the site each day.  The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) proposed last week to consider dumping toxic water into the ocean.

“Regarding the growing amounts of contaminated water at the site, TEPCO should… examine all options for its further management, including the possibility of resuming controlled discharges (into the ocean) in compliance with authorized (!) limits,” said the IAEA in a statement.

Two-thirds of evacuees from Fukushima towns won’t be returning home

A survey conducted in October by  Reconstruction Agency showed that 67.1 percent of respondents from Okuma and 64.7 percent from Futaba  had decided not to return home. The latest figures were up from 42.3 percent and 30.4 percent, respectively from a January survey, which used slightly different wording, said Asahi-Shimbun.

The towns of Okuma and Futaba were turned into ghost town following the mass evacuations that ensued the Fukushima reactor  meltdowns.

At least 73  percent of respondents from Okuma said radiation levelshad   not fallen, while 68 percent of Futaba evacuees said it would take too long before they could return to their hometown.

“The survey covered the heads of 5,043 households in Okuma and of 3,394 households in Futaba,” said the report.

 

Fukushima Fatal Farce Turns Deadlier

Radiation levels near Fukushima ’18 times higher’ than reported: TEPCO

Posted by feww on September 1, 2013

Readings taken near a leaking tank at the nuked Fukushima plant on Saturday showed radiation levels were high enough to prove lethal within about 4 hours of exposure, the plant operator said.

The Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) had originally reported the radiation level near the tank was about 100 millisieverts an hour.

Now, the company says the equipment used for the earlier recording could only read up to 100 millisieverts (mSv).

The new reading, using more sensitive Geiger counters, showed levels of about 1,800 mSv per hour.

Studies of the 1945 atomic bombing at Hiroshima and Nagasaki show that 100 percent of victims whose bodies were exposed to 6,000 mSv (600,000 millirems) died from radiation. About 50 percent of victims who received 4,500 mSv (450,000 millirems) of radiation also died.

TEPCO said it had recorded radiation of 230 mSv an hour at a second tank, which was emitting 70 mSv in July. The company said it had also discovered two additional leaks: a third storage tank emitting 70 mSv an hour; and a pipe connecting two other tanks measuring 230 mSv.

The 2011 triple meltdown at Fukushima Daiichi NPP forced more than 160,000 people to abandon their homes, turning dozens of communities into ghost towns.

IMPORTANT NOTICE:
The Internet Mafia has previously censored Public Health Emergency, global health warnings and any and ALL information posted on this blog concerning nuclear disasters, nuclear energy and the global nuclear mafia. The cabal have specifically blocked or buried blog entrees on Fukushima Daiichi NPP.

What is a lethal dose of radiation from a single Exposure?

Studies of the 1945 atomic bombing at Hiroshima and Nagasaki show that 100 percent of victims whose bodies were exposed to 600,000 millirems (6,000 mSv) died from radiation. About 50 percent of victims who received  450,000 millirems (4,500 mSv) of radiation also died.

(Note: Rem is a unit of ionizing radiation equal to the amount that produces the same damage to humans as one roentgen of high-voltage x-rays.  Source: MIT)

1 rem = 10 mSv or 10,000 µSv  (1 Sv = 100 rem)

Background Radiation in microsieverts per year (µSv/yr)
  • Average background radiation (US):  3,000
  • Higher altitudes (e.g, Denver): 4,000
“Safe Levels” of Radiation (U.S.)

Limits above natural background radiation levels (average 3,000 microsieverts per year) and medical radiation:

  • Occupation Limit: Maximum of 50,000 µSv (the limit for a worker using radiation)
  • Average Natural Background: 3,000 µSv

[Note: Lifetime cumulative exposure should be limited to a person’s age multiplied by 10 millirems, e.g., a 70-year-old person, 70,000 millirems.]

Adults

  • Max single dose for an adult: 30,000µSv
  • Annual total dose: 50,000µSv

Under 18

  • Max single dose for a person aged under 18 years: 3,000µSv (whole body equivalent)
  • Annual total exposure: 5,000µSv

Fetal Exposure

  • Maximum limit for fetal exposure during gestation period:  500 µSv per month above background levels

Medical

  • Single Chest X-ray (the whole body equivalent): 20µSv

Air Travel

  • Coast-to-coast US round trip flight: 120µSv

*Note:  Radiation dose of about 2,000 millisieverts (200,000 millirems) cause serious illness.

Half-life of some radioactive elements

[NOTE: Half-life is the time taken for a radioactive substance to decay by half.]

  • Cesium-134 ~ 2  years
  • Cesium-137 ~ 30 years
  • Iodine-131 ~ 8 days
  • Plutonium-239 ~ 24,200 years
  • Ruthenium-103 ~ 39 days [Ruthenium is a fission product of uranium-235.]
  • Ruthenium-106 ~ 374 days
  • Strontium-90 ~ 28.85 years  [Strontium-90 is a product of nuclear fission and is found in large amounts in spent nuclear fuel and in radioactive waste from nuclear reactors.]
  • Uranium-234 ~  246,000 years
  • Uranium-235 ~ 703.8  million years
  • Uranium-238  ~ 4.468 billion years

Probability of a Nuclear Disaster by Country

The following probability figures  calculated by FIRE-EARTH on April 8, 2011 still hold!

  • Japan (880)³
  • United States (865)
  • France (855)
  • Taiwan (850)
  • Belgium, China, Finland, India,  South Korea, United Kingdom, Ukraine, Russia, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Armenia, Slovenia, Croatia, Romania,  Hungary, Bulgaria, Spain,  Pakistan, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico,  South Africa, Canada (810)
  • Germany, Sweden, Netherlands (800)
  • Switzerland  (750)

Notes:

  1. The list represents a snapshot of events at the time of calculating the probabilities. Any forecast posted  here is subject to numerous variable factors.
  2. Figures in the bracket represent the probability of an incident occurring out of 1,000; the forecast duration is valid for the next 50  months.
  3. Probability includes a significant worsening of Fukushima nuclear disaster, and future quakes forecast for Japan.
  4. A nuclear incident is defined as a level 5 (Accident With Wider Consequences), or worse, on the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale (INES). See below.
  5. Safety issues considered in compiling these lists include the age, number of units and capacity of nuclear reactors in each country/state, previous incidents, probability of damage from human-enhanced natural disasters, e.g., earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic activity, hurricanes, tornadoes, storms, wildfires, flooding…]
  6. The  Blog’s knowledge concerning the extent to which the factors described in (3) might worsen during the forecast period greatly influences the forecast. (Last UPDATED: June 26, 2011)
Related Links (Latest)

The Following Announcements Was Released by TEPCO

News related to TEPCO (Sep 01,2013)
Explanation regarding the high radiation (maximum 1,800 mSv) found at tanks in Fukushima Daiichi NPS on August 31, 2013

We deeply apologize for the great anxiety and inconvenience caused by the recent contaminated water issues at the Fukushima Daiichi NPS, which affects the residents near the power station and the broader society.

Regarding the high radiation (maximum 1,800 mSv) found at tanks in Fukushima Daiichi NPS on August 31, some articles reported that “by simple calculation, if a person is exposed this much radiation amount for four hours continuously, that would lead to death” or “it takes only one minute to reach the annual radiation exposure limit for workers,” etc. We would like to explain more about the 1,800 mSv.

We used measuring equipment that measures both beta radiation and gamma radiation. The 1,800 mSv is the total amount of beta radiation and gamma radiation. Gamma radiation was 1 mSv and most of the 1,800 mSv was beta radiation.

Since 1,800 mSv is approximately 3.5 times higher than the control level of equivalent dose for skin which is 500 mSv/year, we should carefully control radiation exposure. Since beta radiation travels only a short distance, radiation level decreases considerably if we keep a distance. Moreover, since beta radiation is weak and can be blocked by a thin metal sheet such as aluminum, we think that we can control radiation exposure by using proper equipments and cloths.

Additionally, although 1,800 mSv was detected at 5 cm above the floor, the radiation level of 50 cm above the floor was 15 mSv. Thus, 1,800 mSv does not mean the radiation level of the whole nearby place.

Some articles reported that “if a person is exposed this much radiation amount for four hours continuously, that would lead to death” comparing with the radiation level that would result in death (7,000 mSv), or “it takes only one minute to reach the annual radiation exposure limit for workers” comparing with the annual radiation exposure limit for workers (50 mSv). However, we believe that simply comparing the 1,800 mSv with those standard levels is not proper, since the standard levels are accumulation of effective dose (not equivalent dose) that express effects for whole body.

We will find out the cause of this issue and make proper counter measures immediately, and continue to make every effort to secure safety of workers.

 

MERRY XMAS HUMANITY From TEPCO


Fukushima Forever

Posted: 09/20/2013 2:49 pm

 

Recent disclosures of tons of radioactive water from the damaged Fukushima reactors spilling into the ocean are just the latest evidence of the continuing incompetence of the Japanese utility, TEPCO. The announcement that the Japanese government will step in is also not reassuring since it was the Japanese government that failed to regulate the utility for decades. But, bad as it is, the current contamination of the ocean should be the least of our worries. The radioactive poisons are expected to form a plume that will be carried by currents to coast of North America. But the effects will be small, adding an unfortunate bit to our background radiation. Fish swimming through the plume will be affected, but we can avoid eating them.

Much more serious is the danger that the spent fuel rod pool at the top of the nuclear plant number four will collapse in a storm or an earthquake, or in a failed attempt to carefully remove each of the 1,535 rods and safely transport them to the common storage pool 50 meters away. Conditions in the unit 4 pool, 100 feet from the ground, are perilous, and if any two of the rods touch it could cause a nuclear reaction that would be uncontrollable. The radiation emitted from all these rods, if they are not continually cool and kept separate, would require the evacuation of surrounding areas including Tokyo. Because of the radiation at the site the 6,375 rods in the common storage pool could not be continuously cooled; they would fission and all of humanity will be threatened, for thousands of years.

Fukushima is just the latest episode in a dangerous dance with radiation that has been going on for 68 years. Since the atomic bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima in 1945 we have repeatedly let loose plutonium and other radioactive substances on our planet, and authorities have repeatedly denied or trivialized their dangers. The authorities include national governments (the U.S., Japan, the Soviet Union/ Russia, England, France and Germany); the worldwide nuclear power industry; and some scientists both in and outside of these governments and the nuclear power industry. Denials and trivialization have continued with Fukushima. (Documentation of the following observations can be found in my piece in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, upon which this article is based.) (Perrow 2013)

In 1945, shortly after the bombing of two Japanese cities, the New York Times headline read: "Survey Rules Out Nagasaki Dangers"; soon after the 2011 Fukushima disaster it read "Experts Foresee No Detectable Health Impact from Fukushima Radiation." In between these two we had experts reassuring us about the nuclear bomb tests, plutonium plant disasters at Windscale in northern England and Chelyabinsk in the Ural Mountains, and the nuclear power plant accidents at Three Mile Island in the United States and Chernobyl in what is now Ukraine, as well as the normal operation of nuclear power plants.

Initially the U.S. Government denied that low-level radiation experienced by thousands of Japanese people in and near the two cities was dangerous. In 1953, the newly formed Atomic Energy Commission insisted that low-level exposure to radiation "can be continued indefinitely without any detectable bodily change." Biologists and other scientists took exception to this, and a 1956 report by the National Academy of Scientists, examining data from Japan and from residents of the Marshall Islands exposed to nuclear test fallout, successfully established that all radiation was harmful. The Atomic Energy Commission then promoted a statistical or population approach that minimized the danger: the damage would be so small that it would hardly be detectable in a large population and could be due to any number of other causes. Nevertheless, the Radiation Research Foundation detected it in 1,900 excess deaths among the Japanese exposed to the two bombs. (The Department of Homeland Security estimated only 430 cancer deaths).

Besides the uproar about the worldwide fallout from testing nuclear weapons, another problem with nuclear fission soon emerged: a fire in a British plant making plutonium for nuclear weapons sent radioactive material over a large area of Cumbria, resulting in an estimated 240 premature cancer deaths, though the link is still disputed. The event was not made public and no evacuations were ordered. Also kept secret, for over 25 years, was a much larger explosion and fire, also in 1957, at the Chelyabinsk nuclear weapons processing plant in the eastern Ural Mountains of the Soviet Union. One estimate is that 272,000 people were irradiated; lakes and streams were contaminated; 7,500 people were evacuated; and some areas still are uninhabitable. The CIA knew of it immediately, but they too kept it secret. If a plutonium plant could do that much damage it would be a powerful argument for not building nuclear weapons.

Powerful arguments were needed, due to the fallout from the fallout from bombs and tests. Peaceful use became the mantra. Project Plowshares, initiated in 1958, conducted 27 "peaceful nuclear explosions" from 1961 until the costs as well as public pressure from unforeseen consequences ended the program in 1975. The Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission indicated Plowshares’ close relationship to the increasing opposition to nuclear weapons, saying that peaceful applications of nuclear explosives would "create a climate of world opinion that is more favorable to weapons development and tests" (emphasis supplied). A Pentagon official was equally blunt, saying in 1953, "The atomic bomb will be accepted far more readily if at the same time atomic energy is being used for constructive ends." The minutes of a National Security Council in 1953 spoke of destroying the taboo associated with nuclear weapons and "dissipating" the feeling that we could not use an A-bomb.

More useful than peaceful nuclear explosions were nuclear power plants, which would produce the plutonium necessary for atomic weapons as well as legitimating them. Nuclear power plants, the daughter of the weapons program — actually its "bad seed" –f was born and soon saw first fruit with the1979 Three Mile Island accident. Increases in cancer were found but the Columbia University study declared that the level of radiation from TMI was too low to have caused them, and the "stress" hypothesis made its first appearance as the explanation for rises in cancer. Another university study disputed this, arguing that radiation caused the increase, and since a victim suit was involved, it went to a Federal judge who ruled in favor of stress. A third, larger study found "slight" increases in cancer mortality and increased risk breast and other cancers, but found "no consistent evidence" of a "significant impact." Indeed, it would be hard to find such an impact when so many other things can cause cancer, and it is so widespread. Indeed, since stress can cause it, there is ample ambiguity that can be mobilized to defend nuclear power plants.

Ambiguity was mobilized by the Soviet Union after the 1987 Chernobyl disaster. Medical studies by Russian scientists were suppressed, and doctors were told not to use the designation of leukemia in health reports. Only after a few years had elapsed did any serious studies acknowledge that the radiation was serious. The Soviet Union forcefully argued that the large drops in life expectancy in the affected areas were due to not just stress, but lifestyle changes. The International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA), charged with both promoting nuclear power and helping make it safe, agreed, and mentioned such things as obesity, smoking, and even unprotected sex, arguing that the affected population should not be treated as "victims" but as "survivors." The count of premature deaths has varied widely, ranging from 4,000 in the contaminated areas of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia from UN agencies, while Greenpeace puts it at 200,000. We also have the controversial worldwide estimate of 985,000 from Russian scientists with access to thousands of publications from the affected regions.

Even when nuclear power plants are running normally they are expected to release some radiation, but so little as to be harmless. Numerous studies have now challenged that. When eight U.S. nuclear plants in the U.S. were closed in 1987 they provided the opportunity for a field test. Two years later strontium-90 levels in local milk declined sharply, as did birth defects and death rates of infants within 40 miles of the plants. A 2007 study of all German nuclear power plants saw childhood leukemia for children living less than 3 miles from the plants more than double, but the researchers held that the plants could not cause it because their radiation levels were so low. Similar results were found for a French study, with a similar conclusion; it could not be low-level radiation, though they had no other explanation. A meta-study published in 2007 of 136 reactor sites in seven countries, extended to include children up to age 9, found childhood leukemia increases of 14 percent to 21 percent.

Epidemiological studies of children and adults living near the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant will face the same obstacles as earlier studies. About 40 percent of the aging population of Japan will die of some form of cancer; how can one be sure it was not caused by one of the multiple other causes? It took decades for the effects of the atomic bombs and Chernobyl to clearly emblazon the word "CANCER" on these events. Almost all scientists finally agree that the dose effects are linear, that is, any radiation added to natural background radiation, even low-levels of radiation, is harmful. But how harmful?

University professors have declared that the health effects of Fukushima are "negligible," will cause "close to no deaths," and that much of the damage was "really psychological." Extensive and expensive follow-up on citizens from the Fukushima area, the experts say, is not worth it. There is doubt a direct link will ever be definitively made, one expert said. The head of the U.S. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, said: "There’s no opportunity for conducting epidemiological studies that have any chance of success….The doses are just too low." We have heard this in 1945, at TMi, at Chernobyl, and for normally running power plants. It is surprising that respected scientists refuse to make another test of such an important null hypothesis: that there are no discernible effects of low-level radiation.

Not surprisingly, a nuclear power trade group announced shortly after the March, 2011 meltdown at Fukushima (the meltdown started with the earthquake, well before the tsunami hit), that "no health effects are expected" as a result of the events. UN agencies agree with them and the U.S. Council. The leading UN organization on the effects of radiation concluded "Radiation exposure following the nuclear accident at Fukushima-Daiichi did not cause any immediate health effects. It is unlikely to be able to attribute any health effects in the future among the general public and the vast majority of workers." The World Health Organization stated that while people in the United States receive about 6.5 millisieverts per year from sources including background radiation and medical procedures, only two Japanese communities had effective dose rates of 10 to 50 millisieverts, a bit more than normal.

However, other data contradict the WHO and other UN agencies. The Japanese science and technology ministry (MEXT) indicated that a child in one community would have an exposure 100 times the natural background radiation in Japan, rather than a bit more than normal. A hospital reported that more than half of the 527 children examined six months after the disaster had internal exposure to cesium-137, an isotope that poses great risk to human health. A French radiological institute found ambient dose rates 20 to 40 times that of background radiation and in the most contaminated areas the rates were even 10 times those elevated dose rates. The Institute predicts and excess cancer rate of 2 percent in the first year alone. Experts not associated with the nuclear industry or the UN agencies currently have estimated from 1,000 to 3,000 cancer deaths. Nearly two years after the disaster the WHO was still declaring that any increase in human disease "is likely to remain below detectable levels." (It is worth noting that the WHO still only releases reports on radiation impacts in consultation with the International Atomic Energy Agency.)

In March 2013, the Fukushima Prefecture Health Management Survey reported examining 133,000 children using new, highly sensitive ultrasound equipment. The survey found that 41 percent of the children examined had cysts of up to 2 centimeters in size and lumps measuring up to 5 millimeters on their thyroid glands, presumably from inhaled and ingested radioactive iodine. However, as we might expect from our chronicle, the survey found no cause for alarm because the cysts and lumps were too small to warrant further examination. The defense ministry also conducted an ultrasound examination of children from three other prefectures distant from Fukushima and found somewhat higher percentages of small cysts and lumps, adding to the argument that radiation was not the cause. But others point out that radiation effects would not be expected to be limited to what is designated as the contaminated area; that these cysts and lumps, signs of possible thyroid cancer, have appeared alarmingly soon after exposure; that they should be followed up since it takes a few years for cancer to show up and thyroid cancer is rare in children; and that a control group far from Japan should be tested with the same ultrasound technics.

The denial that Fukushima has any significant health impacts echoes the denials of the atomic bomb effects in 1945; the secrecy surrounding Windscale and Chelyabinsk; the studies suggesting that the fallout from Three Mile Island was, in fact, serious; and the multiple denials regarding Chernobyl (that it happened, that it was serious, and that it is still serious).

As of June, 2013, according to a report in The Japan Times, 12 of 175,499 children tested had tested positive for possible thyroid cancer, and 15 more were deemed at high risk of developing the disease. For a disease that is rare, this is high number. Meanwhile, the U.S. government is still trying to get us to ignore the bad seed. June 2012, the U.S. Department of Energy granted $1.7 million to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to address the "difficulties in gaining the broad social acceptance" of nuclear power.

Perrow, Charles. 2013. "Nuclear denial: From Hiroshima to Nagasaki." Bulletin of Atomic Scientists 69(5):56-67.

%d bloggers like this: