Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Arnie Gundersen: "average person in Seattle breathed in 10 hot particles a day"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
flamingdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 04:45 PM
Original message
Arnie Gundersen: "average person in Seattle breathed in 10 hot particles a day"

http://www.chrismartenson.com/blog/exclusive-arnie-gundersen-interview-dangers-fukushima-are-worse-and-longer-lived-we-think/58689

* This is a new audio interview, his main concern is that the situation worsens and unit 4 topples etc
This is NOT over.

Arnie Gundersen: Well, I am in touch with some scientists now who have been monitoring the air on the West Coast and in Seattle for instance, in April, the average person in Seattle breathed in 10 hot particles a day.

Chris Martenson: What? I did not know that.

Arnie Gundersen: Well, the report takes some time to make its way into the literature. The average human being breathes about 10 meters a day of air, cubic meters of air. And the air out in the Seattle area are detecting, when they pull 10 cubic meters through them, this is in April now, so we are in the end of May so it is a better situation now. That air filter will have 10 hot particles on it. And that was before the Unit Four issue. Clearly we all can’t run south of the equator to our second homes in Rio or something like that. But it will stay north of the equator for anyone who has a Leer jet and can get out. But I guess what I am advising at that point is keep your windows closed. I would definitely wear some sort of a filter if I was outside. I certainly wouldn’t run and exercise until I was sure the plume had dissipated. This isn’t now. This is, as you were saying, this is worst case. If Unit Four were to topple, I would close my windows, turn the air conditioner on, replace the filters frequently, damp mop, put a HEPA filter in the house and try to avoid as much of the hot particles as possible. You are not going to walk out with a Geiger counter and be in a plume that is going to tell you the meter. The issue will be on the West Coast, hot particles. And the solution there is HEPA filters and avoiding them.

There is also potentially some medical issues Maggie and I have been working with a couple of doctors to look at ways to mitigate to help your body cleanse particles if you know you have been exposed to them. But that is a little bit premature to go into much more detail on that.
=============================

"I have said it's worse than Chernobyl and I’ll stand by that. There was an enormous amount of radiation given out in the first two to three weeks of the event. And add the wind blowing in-land. It could very well have brought the nation of Japan to its knees. I mean, there is so much contamination that luckily wound up in the Pacific Ocean as compared to across the nation of Japan - it could have cut Japan in half. But now the winds have turned, so they are heading to the south toward Tokyo and now my concern and my advice to friends that if there is a severe aftershock and the Unit 4 building collapses, leave. We are well beyond where any science has ever gone at that point and nuclear fuel lying on the ground and getting hot is not a condition that anyone has ever analyzed."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
RandomThoughts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 04:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. How will that effect that I am due beer and travel money?
It is not relevant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamingdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Can you afford a Hepa filter?
I'm getting Hepa Filter ads with this post!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
InkAddict Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Methinks we're already well into getting the "many experiences" n/t
PS: I'd prefer Merlot to beer, but the travel money would be nice enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 04:49 PM
Response to Original message
3. scary stuff.. but one minor quibble
Edited on Sun Jun-05-11 05:03 PM by SoCalDem
If you are going to go out of your way to include a specific reference, it;s best to make sure it's spelled correctly:evilgrin:


Learjet
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
InkAddict Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Did you mean "scary"?
Spelling nazi, LOL.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. petard----------> SCD
:rofl:

in all fairness it really was just a typo on my part :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamingdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. Correct spelling is screwed, I hope everyone knows Arnie G. is No.1 expert speaking on Fukushima nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
5. 10? That's tiny compared to the C-14 and P-40 natural radio-isotopes in our bodies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamingdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Here come the justifiers. Cancer levels will increase due to this nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. I wasn't justifying anything.
This is really bad for folks in Japan, but it's not going to increase cancer levels all the way over here. seriously, in the natural scheme of thinks 10 radioactive particles in a break of air is nothing, NOTHING. There are 1000,000s of c14 atoms in each breath we take, for fuck's sake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamingdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Our bodies have adapted to that but NOT to the radioactive particles from Nuke plants nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. alpha and beta particles are alpha and beta particles, the source doesn't matter.
a helium nucleus or an electron shot out of an unstable atom is the same not matter what atom it comes out of.

the identical-ness of all electrons was a part of a little speculative joke by Richard Feynman back in the late 40s when he joked to his advisor, John Wheeler, that "they are all the same electron!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamingdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. I don't think you've done any medical research on this at all
If so you could discuss the statistics of those who live in high background radiation areas vs. those exposed to nuclear products similar to what is happening in Fukushima.

But you're not interested in that kind of information.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sirveri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #19
23. not quite, since you're ignoring energy strength.
Co-60 is worse than He-3 decay because it shoots out a pair of 2.5 MeV gammas compared to a average intensity x-ray (I'd look up the strength but I'm sleepy).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. I don't know that, thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sirveri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #7
15. by .0001%, if it's even that high. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamingdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Chicago - Italian oncologists unite to back the anti-nuclear referendum.
18:52 04 GIU 2011

(AGI) Chicago - Italian oncologists unite to back the anti-nuclear referendum. From the ASCO congress in Chicago, the world's most important oncology summit, AIOM (Italian association of medical oncology) urges the people to vote 'yes' at the referendum to be held on 12 and 13 June. "Nuclear radiation is the most carcinogenic thing that exists - said AIOM president Carmelo Iacono - and it cannot be kept under control, as the Fukushima tragedy proved. Let's drop the nuclear plants project and let's start staking on alternative energy, which pollutes much less and which, unlike nuclear energy, does not pose a threat for health". . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sirveri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #16
25. 10-12 particles is basically nothing, it's totally irrelevant from a health standpoint.
Yes, radiation can increase your risk, but the levels that have been mentioned in this thread are laughable. The only reason to mention them is for purposes of using them as scare tactics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow mix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. oh good, we get to choose which particles we breathe.. scratch the plutonium off my list
thank goodness!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
animato Donating Member (126 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Plutonium is one of my least favorite radioactive particles
Iodine 133 is preferable considering you only lose your thyroid gland.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. plutonium is dangerous more because it's a heavy metal, not because of it's radioactivity.
Edited on Sun Jun-05-11 05:13 PM by Odin2005
Plutonium has a fairly long half-life, C-14 is far more radioactive, it's half life is only 5,000 years.

The shorter the half-life the more intensely radioactive it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamingdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. Chicago - Italian oncologists unite to back the anti-nuclear referendum.
18:52 04 GIU 2011

(AGI) Chicago - Italian oncologists unite to back the anti-nuclear referendum. From the ASCO congress in Chicago, the world's most important oncology summit, AIOM (Italian association of medical oncology) urges the people to vote 'yes' at the referendum to be held on 12 and 13 June. "Nuclear radiation is the most carcinogenic thing that exists - said AIOM president Carmelo Iacono - and it cannot be kept under control, as the Fukushima tragedy proved. Let's drop the nuclear plants project and let's start staking on alternative energy, which pollutes much less and which, unlike nuclear energy, does not pose a threat for health". . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. Since when are oncologists versed in nuclear physicis?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamingdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. They know about cancer, you don't nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bananas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #20
26. Oncologists? Quite a bit.
Edited on Sun Jun-05-11 06:21 PM by bananas
They have to understand the causes of cancer - which includes radiation exposure,
they have to use radiological diagnostics - and know the risks and proper procedures,
they have to use radiological therapies - and know the risks and proper procedures of those, too.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamingdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. Yes, they know the impact on the human body nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pa28 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-11 05:35 PM
Response to Original message
18. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 09:55 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC