- #176
Gary7
- 90
- 10
Hi Tsutsuji, that last link is broken. Either that or the story was pulled.
Gary
Gary
mikefj40 said:Here we are, 5 months post event and they are just starting to survey the Puget Sound for contamination. Would the data have been too scary if they tried this back in March?
http://www.doh.wa.gov/Publicat/2011_news/11-105.htm
Gary7 said:Hi Tsutsuji, that last link is broken. Either that or the story was pulled.
Gary
Jim Lagerfeld said:50,000+ Bq/Kg radiocesium in a soil sample collected from Kashiwa City in Chiba, on the eastern border of the Tokyo metropolis
http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2011/07/13/52547-bqkg-cesium-radiation-soil-tokyo-135-miles-south-fukushima-34691/
Azby said:I've been hunting high and low for a post-Chernobyl contamination map of Kiev (the city itself, not the whole region) and haven't been able to find one. I think it may hold lessons for Fukushima City and Tokyo. Does anyone have one or know where one is? Extra points for one that shows changing contamination levels over time!
tsutsuji said:Here is one :
[PLAIN]http://mail.menr.gov.ua/publ/kiev2003/atlas03_u/tnkart50.jpg
"Cesium- 137 pollution of urban area's soils (for 1.01.2001.) Atlas "
Large size : http://mail.menr.gov.ua/publ/kiev2003/atlas03_u/kart50.jpg ; source : http://mail.menr.gov.ua/publ/kiev2003/zemlyproe.htm (English); http://mail.menr.gov.ua/publ/kiev2003/atlas03_u/atlaskiev.htm ecological Kiev atlas (in Ukrainian).
Azby said:I'm not sure how to read the scale
NUCENG said:RPI presentation to ANS on Fukushima Daiichi Accident dose consequences.
http://www.ans.org/misc/FukushimaSpecialSession-Caracappa.pdf
Cancer deaths due to accumulated radiation exposures: can’t be ruled out –conservative risk estimates ~100s cases, against an expected ~10 million cases
page 27 http://www.ans.org/misc/FukushimaSpecialSession-Caracappa.pdf
tsutsuji said:http://www.asahi.com/national/update/0723/TKY201107230678.html The count of cows from 9 prefectures that were fed with contaminated straw and delivered to the meat distribution market is now 2570.
http://mytown.asahi.com/tochigi/news.php?k_id=09000001107240003 (Tochigi local page) A dairy farmer bought 38 straw rolls as compost straw through an acquaintance, from which he sold 16 rolls to a livestock farmer. Dairy farmer : "I sold the rolls saying they were exposed to radiations. I didn't know he was feeding cows with them". Livestock farmer : "I wasn't told. If I had been told, I would not have bought them". Acquaintance : "I thought I had told they couldn't be used to feed cows. If he says so, perhaps he wasn't told. I don't remember very well".
I found the source for the maps page 8 and 9 : http://cerea.enpc.fr/fr/fukushima.html
I think this is the first time I see someone risk an estimate for the Fukushima cancer risk. I have no idea whether it is accurate (or whether it requires updating in order to take into account the beef crisis), but the 800-1800 person-Sv, compared to Chernobyl's 255,000 person-Sv and TMI's 20 person-Sv, page 25 is also interesting.
NUCENG said:I posted the link to the RPI study to spark comments on that very point. We are getting a lot of claims based on sources that have been questioned for being fear-mongering. If this study is correct it will be nearly impossible to link any deaths to the accident.
Because the Fukushima Daichi accident involves four reactors and complete failures of containment, I find that hard to square with what I have read about Chernobyl. I have started with the premise that Fukushima would remain a tragedy due to the fear and dislocation unnecessarily added onto the back of the earthquake and tsunami, even if it didn't result in any latent cases of cancer. Based on what I have read, early onset of thyroid cancers may be the first measureable result if there will be significant consequences. Has anybody got a timeframe for the time of onset in Chernobyl?
I can see that some additional deaths of elderly patients evacuated from the exclusion area may need to be considered accident-related even if they had nothing to do with radiation.
I have a harder time blaming heat stroke on the accident, because the fact is the power reductions are voluntarily exceeding the targets set to avoid rolling blackouts. We are having heat-related deaths in the US with no reactor accidents to blame.
Suicides are another tough nut to crack. If the accident was a part of the cause, was it worsened by the devastation of the earthquake and tsunami? How much of the fear and depression was a result of learning that TEPCO and the Japanese government were lying to the people?
Sounds like a discussion worth having!
Luca Bevil said:I agree, I would add people that were in need of rescuing, becuase of the earthquake/tsunami consequences, inside the evacuation zone in the earthquake/tsunami aftermath and that if in fact there were any, would have been unable to get help.
I am unsure however about if any and in case how many people could have been rescued in abscence of the Daiichi incident.
NUCENG said:I see that, but have no idea how this could ever be quantified. There is no way to determine whether a specific body would have been rescued in time had the accident not happened. I have seen YouTube films of reporters driving around with their dosimeters in the area that became the exclusion area, so it may also be due to some government decisions about where to send rescuers. It wouldn't be accurate to blame the thousands still missing from the earthquake and tsunami on the accident.
NUCENG said:I posted the link to the RPI study to spark comments on that very point. We are getting a lot of claims based on sources that have been questioned for being fear-mongering. If this study is correct it will be nearly impossible to link any deaths to the accident.
Because the Fukushima Daichi accident involves four reactors and complete failures of containment, I find that hard to square with what I have read about Chernobyl. I have started with the premise that Fukushima would remain a tragedy due to the fear and dislocation unnecessarily added onto the back of the earthquake and tsunami, even if it didn't result in any latent cases of cancer. Based on what I have read, early onset of thyroid cancers may be the first measureable result if there will be significant consequences. Has anybody got a timeframe for the time of onset in Chernobyl?
I can see that some additional deaths of elderly patients evacuated from the exclusion area may need to be considered accident-related even if they had nothing to do with radiation.
I have a harder time blaming heat stroke on the accident, because the fact is the power reductions are voluntarily exceeding the targets set to avoid rolling blackouts. We are having heat-related deaths in the US with no reactor accidents to blame.
Suicides are another tough nut to crack. If the accident was a part of the cause, was it worsened by the devastation of the earthquake and tsunami? How much of the fear and depression was a result of learning that TEPCO and the Japanese government were lying to the people?
Sounds like a discussion worth having!
zapperzero said:Sellafield MOX reprocessing facility closing down as a direct consequence of Fukushima.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/aug/03/sellafield-mox-plant-close
Forty-five percent of children tested in the region around Japan's stricken nuclear plant were found to have traces of radioactive elements in their thyroid glands, an official said Thursday.
The official said that the iodine concentrations -- found in tests that the government carried out about five months ago in Fukushima prefecture -- were not considered alarming in terms of their health impact.
"The government's official position is that none of the children showed radiation levels that would be problematic," he told AFP.
tsutsuji said:Radiations may increase 10-fold between locations separated by only 100 m.
cumulative radiation in the town of Namie, 22 km northwest of the plant, was estimated at 115 millisieverts over the five-month period, the highest among locations outside the zone and equivalent to 229 millisieverts over a 12-month period.
zapperzero said:http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20110820p2g00m0dm013000c.html
Words cannot express my anger.
alpi said:Would it be better to forcibly evacuate more people despite what is said here http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,780810,00.html ? Don't think so.
zapperzero said:http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20110820p2g00m0dm013000c.html
"cumulative radiation in the town of Namie, 22 km northwest of the plant, was estimated at 115 millisieverts over the five-month period, the highest among locations outside the zone and equivalent to 229 millisieverts over a 12-month period."
Words cannot express my anger.