gamma energy range 8 pink graph on radnet- what particles does that represent as it has spiked the last 3 days
Does anyone know what particles the gamma energy range 8 have as depicted on each radnet monitoring http://www.epa.gov/japan2011/rert/radnet-sacramento-bg.html it has the slightly pink color and is sustained elevated in the LA, Riverside, San Bernardino and elevated in Sacramento and San Francisco?
Is it iodine, cesium or something else? Thanks.


Yes. 9/10
Yes. 9/10
Cosmic rays. Those energy
Cosmic rays. Those energy levels are not man-made.
We've been having a lot of solar storms recently.
There are a few variables I
There are a few variables I believe when it comes to the graphs but I believe its the bottom 2 that are the ones of concern. Maybe a professor can correct me if I am wrong.
The range 9/10
Good question
I've been trying to find out just what isotopes, EXACTLY, the "Gamma Energy Ranges" (2-10) monitored at EPA's RADNET sites ARE, for DAYS... IF that information is online at all, I sure can't find it (and I'm pretty good at doing research on the Web).
I believe there is NO DESIRE on the part of the EPA / U.S. Government to provide this information to the general public... "Transparency", riiight.
The UCB Lab folks have so much on their plates... But I wonder if they can possibly help us figure this out. Like the person who posted above, I, too, suspect that the Ranges that tend to gather at the bottom two-thirds of the graph are the really important ones... And Ranges 9 and 10 (gray and maroon) have spiked in Dallas since March 24, and have yet to abate.
Information without context is meaningless, EPA. Is that what you actually INTEND? Because just watching a collection of brightly colored, anonymous lines jump up and down isn't giving ME ANY helpful data AT ALL.
http://www.epa.gov/japan2011/rert/radnet-dallas-bg.html
Rick Cromack.
Allen, Texas
www.facebook.com/lonestarplano
Gamma Ranges
The below information was provided freely and openly to me by a radiological expert at EPA. So, that should put an end to the criticisms and conspiracy theories. Range 3 and 5 represent caesium isotopes:
RadNet Fixed Monitor Energy Ranges
Hourly data files are transmitted from each fixed monitor to computer databases at NAREL. The data include gross gamma counts per minute from ten contiguous energy ranges which are defined in the following table.
Energy Ranges Energy Range Number Gamma Energies (keV)
1 Reserved by software for instrument stabilization
2 100-200
3 200-400
4 400-600
5 600-800
6 800-1000
7 1000-1400
8 1400-1800
9 1800-2200
10 2200-2800
Energy Range information
Thank you CJ for your information. I believe you are correct. My physics ain't too bad as I worked for INEL (as a biologist) and taught Physics at the High School level for years. I'm not a nuclear physicist (wish I had been) but the lower KeV values indicate the more dangerous readings (indicate particle presence). We are mostly interested in the mutagenic energy levels. The "cooking" energies are the "right now damage" and they are indicated in the upper bands. Each form of radioactive decay has its own signature but it isn't in our government's interest to have half baked scientists running around screaming the sky is falling. Also, the damage that nuclear exposure in "mutagenic" range is not something that can be quantified. One person gets cancer and another doesn't. This is true with high dose exposure as well as chronic low dose exposure. We know that particle uptake by the body is a serious threat as it locally exposes cells to DNA damage and sooner or later, that damage will be replicated and poof, cancer. As you will see, this environmental release will bump up the mortality levels a little bit in the wind shadow. Reactor #3 had plutonium and will be an issue for Japan. Other releases will be significant but will barely register worldwide. Look at Chernoble(sp) and project Seahorse in Alaska for long term morbidity studies. Yes, the government will act as it does in any major catastrophitic event "control, contain, continue." Not a bad plan if it ain't you in harm's way. Bruce White, Ketchikan, AK PS: anyone willing to clean up and/or correct what I've said?
Yep, me too. I have looked
Yep, me too. I have looked and the CDX manuals, dug for it. Cant find a damn thing.
The lack of information...
The lack of information / explanation is so TOTAL, and the public interest and relevancy so complete, that I CANNOT BELIEVE this is accidental. I have NEVER gone in for conspiracy theories... But these are strange days we are living in, and getting stranger.
It's funny -- every ten minutes I'm bombarded with a Mesothelioma commercial, for a disease that is certainly worrying, but affects only a fraction of the U.S. population. But there's hardly a WORD out there about Japan, much less U.S. reports of radiation, and NOTHING AT ALL about the health risks to us. And it's been that way for WEEKS. Unbelievable.
Rick Cromack.
Allen, Texas
www.facebook.com/lonestarplano
I know. Me neither not a
I know. Me neither not a conspiracy person. But this is just too blatant and there are to many indications suggesting this isn't the no big deal they say it is.I posted a comment on the new Data.Gov site (that just looks pretty btw), asking if they would admit that they had been presumptuous in saying there was nothing to worry about when they didnt know the levels coming out of Japan, that we had never had an accident with this duration of constant exposure etc.
You know, at the very least they could have told us they didnt know for sure. That the levels may be serious enough that we should take some precautions until we had more facts. Stay indoors as much as possible and out of that damn rain we had that brought that first plume, get the family vitamins with iodide in them to keep the thyroid as healthy as possible.
They have allowed people to run around out in this stuff like its nothing and its not nothing. If it was nothing then people wouldn't get cancer from it.
The dog that didn't bark....
The lack of coverage of this continuing disaster by the media is very troubling. Things must be much worse than I would have expected...