Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Jeezus.....Simulation Map of Cesium-137 Deposition Shows High Contamination Levels on West Coast

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
 
TalkingDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 06:09 PM
Original message
Jeezus.....Simulation Map of Cesium-137 Deposition Shows High Contamination Levels on West Coast
http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/2011/08/map-of-cesium-137-deposition-across.html



Animated Map

http://cerea.enpc.fr/en/fukushima.html

Sirocco's Maps
http://sirocco.omp.obs-mip.fr/outils/Symphonie/Produits/Japan/SymphoniePreviJapan.htm

"SIROCCO has performed, at the request of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), simulations using the 3D SIROCCO ocean circulation model to investigate the dispersion in seawater of radionuclides emitted by the Fukushima nuclear plant. The model uses a stretched horizontal grid with a variable horizontal resolution, from 600m x 600m at the nearest grid point from Fukushima, to 5km x 5km offshore. The initial fields (T,S,U,V,SSH) and the lateral open boundary conditions are provided by the Mercator PSY4V1R3 system (one field per day, horizontal resolution 1/12 ° x 1/12 °). At the sea surface, the ocean model is forced by the meteorological fluxes delivered every 3hours by ECMWF. The tidal forcing at the lateral open boundaries is provided by the T-UGO model, implemented for this purpose by the SIROCCO team on the Japanese Pacific coast."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 06:17 PM
Response to Original message
1. Have a luscious strawberry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TalkingDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Rational reasons for not being afraid aside
Yes, I freely admit the irrationality of my fears.... I haven't knowing bought any fruit or veg from CA since this happened.

Sorry. But if the farmers feel the squeeze, they have more money and power than I do to get nuclear industry to step back.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 06:20 PM
Response to Original message
2. I think we need a special dungeon for Fukushima related stories..
Anyone else remember that OP from a few days ago?

Hmmm?

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missy Vixen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. We live 30 miles east of Seattle
If we just don't talk about it, will it go away?

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
7wo7rees Donating Member (913 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #2
11. I remember...
Can we keep these important scientific threads out of the dungeon?

We'll put the speculative, nasty, negative ones in the dungeon. And you can poo-poo them there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. Speculation runs rampant in the absence of hard information..
Tepco and the Japanese authorities have certainly given the rather strong impression that they're not being totally forthcoming about events at Fukushima, that's what leads to a lot of the nasty negative posts.

Keep people in the dark and feed them bullshit and the mushrooms of speculation run rampant.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saras Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. The "absence of hard information" at this point is a PROFOUND piece of hard information
It's an inexcusable failure, worthy of criminal charges in and of itself.

For me, it's enough in and of itself to make any judgments I need to as to the competence and morality of the decision-makers involved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. Yep, "The dog that did not bark in the night"...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Blaze

Gregory (Scotland Yard detective): "Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?"
Holmes: "To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time."
Gregory: "The dog did nothing in the night-time."
Holmes: "That was the curious incident."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
7wo7rees Donating Member (913 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. Then we agree. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Ah, but you appear to place the blame on those who speculate..
Not those who refuse to release the information, or even worse, release misleading or deliberately inaccurate information.

I see it as being the second group that drives the activities of the first one.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
7wo7rees Donating Member (913 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Not placing blame
I just wish we knew more and more sooner and sooner.
I suspect we were being mushroomed and still are.
I also suspect some of my worst fears will come out to be true by using models like this one.
There will be more concrete evidence later but this is enough for now to let me freak out accordingly.

I don't always jump to the negative conclusion, but it has been right most of the time.
I don't believe that dismissing "speculative" data is useful in getting a gestalt reading. I want to hear it all.
I am not speculating; I am reading everything. I am relating my feelings.

My gut tells me this model in the OP is useable, reliable and valid. And represents what I feared.

Who covered it up and how they should pay is unimportant to me. I do care how much harm this will cause.

Peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. In your OP the other day you weren't advocating for more and better information..
You were advocating having the small amount of information we do have being buried where very few would see it.

Or at least that's the way I took your OP anyway.

:shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Electric Monk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Perhaps you meant RC's thread? Link here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HCE SuiGeneris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #2
22. No shit. Too tough to wrap your mind around through exploratory questions, send it to the dungeon.
It pisses me off to end that we are so limited by the fear.

kudos to you, fumesucker.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yo_Mama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 06:24 PM
Response to Original message
4. High?
Edited on Thu Sep-01-11 06:36 PM by Yo_Mama
That's in becquerels - 2.4 becquerels (seems to exceed max West Coast levels) is not "high".

We still have residual cesium 137 contamination nuclear fallout, as does every other country.

Here's a NASA document about a cleanup effort. Note the cesium discussion:
http://ssfl.msfc.nasa.gov/documents/technical/ELV_Soil_Disposal_Info_Sheet_20100510.pdf

27 picoCuries = about 1 becquerel, but the NASA doc is discussing picoCuries/grams.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bananas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. That's why we stopped open-air testing - because it's not good for you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yo_Mama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. To me "high" means harmful
Edited on Thu Sep-01-11 07:00 PM by Yo_Mama
And these are not harmful levels. (edit to add "Although I certainly wish it hadn't happened!") The reason why they are not harmful is that they will not change people's background exposure levels net.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TORCH_report#Contamination_range

The IAEA/WHO and UNSCEAR considered areas with exposure greater than 40 kBq/m²; the TORCH report also included areas contaminated with more than 4000 Bq/m² of Cs-137. The TORCH report might be alarming but 4 kBq/m² of Cs-137 only gives an external gamma dose of 56 μSv per year (which is close to nothing, a 1 in 356000 chance of death due to cancer). The internal dose will depend greatly on the diet of the person and the degree to which simple countermeasures such as Prussian blue are used in animal farming. <2>.

To sum these properties up

* The dose rate due to external irradiation from uniform contamination of the ground by 137Cs is 1.6 x 10-12 Sv hr-1 Bq-1 m2.
* The internal dose for ingestion is 1.2 x 10-8 Sv Bq-1
* The internal dose for inhalation is 8.7 x 10-9 Sv Bq-1

Note that 4 kBq/m² is the minimum level which is considered by the TORCH report. The TORCH report does not consider contamination under that threshold, but contamination levels between 4 and 40 kBq/m², which are ignored by the Forum's report. The lower limit for 137Cs which the authors of the TORCH report used is exceptionally low, all soil contains radioactive isotopes which are natural, the most important of these is 40K. For example a randomly chosen soil, From the Trinity test site, has about 1000 Bq kg-1 of radioactivity. <3> which results in a square meter of soil having about 100 KBq in the top 10 cm. It is important to note that radioactivity is present everywhere (and has been since the formation of the earth).

According to the IAEA, one kilogram of soil typically contains the following amounts of the following three natural radioisotopes 370 Bq 40K (typical range 100-700 Bq), 25 Bq 226Ra (typical range 10-50 Bq), 25 Bq 238U (typical range 10-50 Bq) and 25 Bq 232Th (typical range 7-50 Bq).<4>.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. RADnet is still operating..
http://www.epa.gov/radnet/radnet-data/index.html#states

There is also the results of milk testing as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 06:35 PM
Response to Original message
6. This has been suspected for quite a while now, but nobody of importance seems to care nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
10. You get more radiation microwaving popcorn.
Or so I was told here by a number of " experts"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saras Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. Your "experts" have some awesomely defective microwaves, and will soon have cataracts, if not worse
There's no reason for a microwave oven to EVER produce ANY ionizing radiation. They produce microwaves.

So to get a reasonably measurable dose of radiation out of one, you have to hack it until the microwave tube is an x-ray generator instead of a microwave tube. You might be able to do this by running the tube at a substantial overvoltage (say 3:1), but you'd have to watercool it. Not likely to happen by accident.

Oh, and you also have to damage the door without triggering the safety switches that detect a damaged or misaligned door.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 07:43 PM
Response to Original message
12. We're destroying the planet.
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 Tue Apr 30th 2024, 06:31 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