Marje
(15 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-11 11:41 AM
Original message |
Worldwide Radiation Movement from Fukushima |
|
Edited on Wed Apr-20-11 11:52 AM by Marje
UPDATING ANIMATION: Here is a link from the Department of Atmospheric and Climate Research, The Norwegian Institute for Air Research (NILU) http://transport.nilu.no/browser/fpv_fuku?fpp=conccol_Xe-133_;region=NHIf the above link doesn't work, try this one by Bitly http://bit.ly/ffH8Ws
|
flamingdem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-11 11:48 AM
Response to Original message |
1. Good links. Time to eat some Kelp! nt |
Buzz Clik
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-11 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. Kelp? You might check it for radioactivity first. |
flamingdem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-11 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. There is crap in kelp probably, but I bought it pre 3/11, no iodine/cesium nt |
Buzz Clik
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-11 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. Well, no radioactive iodine for sure. |
|
Radioactive Cs? Not so sure -- Chernobyl, TMI, various atmospheric nuclear tests. Probably some Cs-137 in there, but not much.
|
flamingdem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-11 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. Cesium is showing up all over the world now, and wasn't before |
|
EPA test results show the exact dates where it begins to show up as the plume reached the USA.
Otherwise it was below detectable in terms of EPA equipment.
I do not think the case can be made that it's no big deal cesium is spread all over due to the catastrophe in Japan, but nice try!
|
Buzz Clik
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-11 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
6. Let me put this gently: |
|
Edited on Wed Apr-20-11 12:45 PM by Buzz Clik
I was making no case at all, but your response is pure bullshit. Unadulterated bullshit. Read this, and reconsider your position. http://ssfl.msfc.nasa.gov/documents/technical/Natural_Variations_of_Cesium-137.pdf
|
flamingdem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-11 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. I don't click links with no idea what they are about |
|
so please summarize.
Obviously there are people in this forum that are pro-nuke and otherwise I did not see the point of your comments.
|
Buzz Clik
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-11 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
8. Background concentrations of Cs-137 in soils post Chernobyl/TMI -- 1994 |
|
All detectable.
The interesting thing about detecting radioisotopes: if you're simply measuring radioactivity, you can just about always get a detection. Just keep reading. If EPA was reporting non-detects, they were either lying or incompetent. I'd love to see the link to your supporting data.
|
flamingdem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-11 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
9. Go on the epa site, they are posting everything |
Buzz Clik
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-11 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
|
... anything that says that background levels of Cs-137 are below detection limits.
|
SpoonFed
(801 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-22-11 05:25 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
|
I think it's a bit misleading to talk about Chornobyl-created radioactive isotopes as background, they are the nuclear fission power industry and accidents pollutants. Not like stuff in bananas and outerspace, or in naturally occurring ore deposits in the ground.
Since the Chornobyl disaster, they have unfortunately been spread far and wide like what is happening with Fukushima, and yes, that means the baseline measurements for this crap has increased in places.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 10:16 PM
Response to Original message |