As winds shift to Tokyo from Fukushima dosimeter readings go up

[flamingdem]

http://falloutphilippines.blogspot.com/

Much higher readings in parts of Tokyo vs a few days ago
According to a recent update from that facebook dude with his own personal geiger counter:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=206282886069917&set=a.203482939683245.49237.196845207013685&type=1&theater

"2011-04-26 15:13: 0.716 micro-Sieverts/h. Location: Roof of Metropolis Office, Minato-ku, Tokyo. Conclusion: Elevated, but not dangerous."
His Digilert 100 unit is one of the most reliable geiger counters on the market. His readings are 18 times higher than Tokyo historical norms. On a yearly basis, this would yield 630 millirem from local background alone. People have to remember that the sources of these high readings are from inhalable and ingestible fission products - not from a temporary visit to a high mountaintop. They should be avoided as much as reasonably possible, and every action should be taken to prevent these levels of exposure from reaching young children and infants.

It looks like the recent change in wind directions really are starting to manifest in higher readings. I don't remember Tokyo reading this high since the initial massive discharge back in mid-March. Something tells me Tepco has been losing the fight big time recently but is not disclosing accurate dispersion and exposure data.

[Marblehead]

1. just a matter of time...

[flamingdem]

3. I think they have about 2-3 weeks unti the typhoon season begins

and I wonder why this is not being discussed more.

[Someguyinjapan]

10. Because it's scaring

The shit out of the government and just about everyone else. It's only going to take one good typhoon to suck all that crap up from Fukushima and dump it all over northern Honshu.

However, your timing is off; first it's rainy season (June) then typhoon season starts afterwards. A minor point-delaying the inevitable by a few weeks.

[FBaggins]

2. "go up" to a whopping .7 micro-Sieverts/h

On a yearly basis, this would yield 630 millirem from local background alone.

Do you really think it's reasonable to convert the highest single reading to an assumption that it's now the average dose over the course of a year?

Was some part of "not dangerous" too complicated?


On a yearly basis, this would equate to a tad over six millisieverts. Taking out background radiation, it would take 20 years at that level before health physicists would expect to be able to statistically identify an increased cancer rate.

[flamingdem]

4. They are ahead of you in knowing ingestion is the issue nt

[FBaggins]

7. They aren't in a position to make that determination.

All that was reported was a momentary level... not what elements made up the exposure.

It makes a difference. You may not know that... and "they" may not know that. But the people who said it wasn't anything to be concerned about do understand it.

None of which changes the fact that you can't take the highest single reading and assume that it lasted for the entire hour... let alone the entire year.

Nor... frankly... do people tend to eat/drink from the sewer and other drains. "They" dishonestly tried to spin it as an airborn level caused by a shift in the wind.

A blocked drain is not an indicator of higher radiation levels as I have measured many and only found 2 of interest.

[ReturnoftheDjedi]

5. Radiation is good for you.

Oh, and thanks for going around getting my posts deleted but still being too cowardly to post in the thread because you cannot refute the evidence being discussed.

[FBaggins]

6. Nope... but insignificant amounts are... well... insignificant.

Oh, and thanks for going around getting my posts deleted

???

So your paranoia is not limited to nuclear materials? What a shock. :sarcasm:

[ReturnoftheDjedi]

8. right, someone else had my post deleted for questioning your "authority"

Who else would care?

[FBaggins]

9. Sorry... I don't even know what post you're talking about.

Given your past track record, I seriously doubt a post was deleted for merely questioning whether someone knows what they're talking about.

Feel free to ask the mods what their concern was... but be sure to let the rest of us know. :)

I haven't alerted in weeks and weeks (likely since before fukushima entirely) and it was always for extreme vulgarity and personal attacks on someone other than me.

[Someguyinjapan]

12. Insignificant amounts

An insignificant amount of iodine 131 is quite a bit different than an insignificant amount of plutonium. Of course due to it's nature one could argue there is no such thing as an insignificant amount of plutonium.

[FBaggins]

13. True... but on what basis would we guess that's what it is?

The highest measure he's had in weeks and rather than assume it's one of the far more abundant emissions, we wonder if it's one that so far hasn't been detected at levels high enough to clearly associate with Fukushima?

It's almost certainly iodine or cesium.

[intric8]

11. Re: "go up" to a whopping .7 micro-Sieverts/h

Its helpful to gauge current doses in yearly terms so we can have an idea what our doses would be in case those levels persist. Even you went with those numbers to have some basis for analysis.

"Not dangerous" is not an assessment any random person without qualifications, in possession of a gc or not, can make. Keeping ones dose as low as reasonably achievable is a highly personal decision that each person is entitled to. If you feel comfortable carrying on with your life with surroundings clocking that background level, great. You should not presume to pass your concept of 'safe' exposures on to others, especially those who are pregnant or nursing. 6 mSv/yr originating solely from I-131 that gets into the placenta and persistently occupies a developing fetal thyroid can have devastating consequences.

Smoke one pack a day for a year, and you receive about 20 millisievert on a yearly basis from polonium emissions originating from tobacco. You dont really get cancer from the tar. Its the radioactivity that ultimately causes the cancer. 6 mSv/year can be viewed as smoking a third of a pack per day, taking solely absorbed dose into account. So i ask you, is that amount really so harmless? Each photon, electron or alpha particle striking tissue in or on our body is a probability based event in itself, with a wide range of possible outcomes.

btw - One corner of reactor 4 at dai-ichi is reading at about this level/hour on average - the lowest DR on the map.

[flamingdem]

14. Good information

and we should all be informed about isotopes and levels so we can make decisions.

Right now there are plenty who are pregnant and unaware of what it might mean to consume milk even in the USA now.

Welcome to DU!

[FBaggins]

15. What's the highest level detected in milk anywhere in the U.S.?

How much evidence does it take to convince you?

and we should all be informed about isotopes and levels so we can make decisions.

You ARE being informed. You just refuse to listen.

Here's some recent reporting from Hawaii: It gives the detected levels in milk and the information you need in order to make decisions.

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/hawaiinews/20110419_radiation_no_problem.html

[flamingdem]

16. Hello... It is cumulative, and we don't know when the releases will end

Look on the UC Berkeley cite, cesium is going up in milk and water HELLO

[FBaggins]

17. Calories are cumulative too. But you can still say that something with .002 calories...

...isn't going to harm your diet.

Look on the UC Berkeley cite, cesium is going up in milk and water HELLO


Is there some reason that you're dodging the question? What is the highest level detected anywhere in the U.S.?

and we don't know when the releases will end

We do, however, know that the current release is NOTHING compared to where it started. It would be dishonest to pretend that things will just get worse and worse because the emissions haven't stopped completely.

In reality, the levels in MOST places have only been declining. There's milk actually from Fukushima that has been safe to drink for over three weeks now.

And you're worried about milk from in the U.S.?

Look on the UC Berkeley cite

Ok... let's see... "Please note that though all I-131 activities have increased due to this revision, the levels are still very low -- one would have to consume at least 1,900 liters of milk to receive the same radiation dose as a cross-country airplane trip."

You know lots of pregnant moms drinking 1,900 liters of milk, do you?

The highest cesium reading was less than half of one Bq/L.

[flamingdem]

18. Many physicians are confirming the danger of low level radiation

so maybe you could spend some time researching that instead of excusing what should not be in our milk, food and water.

[FBaggins]

19. When did physicians become physicists?

I suppose since they're spelled similarly you think they're interchangeable?

There are physicians who still claim a connection between vaccines and autism. That doesn't make it so. There aren't any true experts in the field who fall for the LLR BS. That's the creation science branch of physics.

so maybe you could spend some time researching that instead of excusing what should not be in our milk, food and water/

What? You mean you send me to a source as authoritative and them dump them like a used tissue when you realize that they don't support your BS?

What a shock!

You didn't by any chance notice their message from yesterday did you? They're shifting from daily reporting on their air measurements to once every 2-3 days because levels have fallen too low for them to detect with only 24 hours worth of measurement.

[flamingdem]

20. Go ahead and trust Tepco to tell you the truth

and distrust doctors who deal with people impacted by low level radiation, we all reach our own conclusions on this disaster, some have more background than others, some are more reckless.

[FBaggins]

21. Lame spin

Nobody needs to "trust Tepco". They can trust the Health-Physics society... they can trust the source you were happy with until ten seconds ago at UC Berkely. They can trust their own ability to do basic arithmetic and compare a given level to reference material levels that they run into every single day.

You could start by assuming that if you need to find your source from an online UFO site... you're gone pretty far around the bend. :rofl:

and distrust doctors who deal with people impacted by low level radiation

Oh bull. There are no doctors who deal with patients who can be identified as "impacted by low level radiation". That's the point of it being called "low". They can dishonestly CLAIM that there's an impact, but there are no valid studies showing that.

[flamingdem]

22. It's a two way street, since cancer takes years to develop it's easy to dismiss

low level radiation, but the long term studies on Chernobyl show it's extensive and not only cancer producing but debilitating in other areas as well.

In Japan it is certain we'll see the effects, but there is plenty of time to dismiss them by those who attempt to protect nuclear power since they don't develop immediately.

Just like the problem with nuclear waste, the attitude is to sweep it under the carpet and not worry about it now -- because those lining their pockets will be old before the results of their irresponsiblity show up