Can BRAWN Team tell based on plume models if increases are likely? (From Bill)
Do you folks use any plume models to track the plumes coming here to get a guesstimate of whether increases can be expected or do you ignore these as unreliable and simply rely on what you test for?
A lot of the plume models are kind of scary but some of the results in France and elsewhere seem to indicate that they have some reliability.
Especially the ones that actually correlate observed amounts via testing with what the plume models predict.
Do you use them or find they might be useful?
If there is, as reportedly likely, more steam releases and venting, or, god forbid, a hydrogen explosion, wouldn't such plume models be useful in anticipating when the highest results might be found?
very cool, thanks and yikes
wow - thanks for the fast response.
the idea that they reflect cumulative sums over decades is really a wow. I have been confused by all the modles and projections but the French models at least correlate to actual detected amounts at the end of their anlysis.
I just saw some reports and anlysis of milk and rain from Ireland (posted today) which can be found here although I plan to post it for you guys in its own thread.
http://www.rpii.ie/Emergencies/Nuclear-accident-in-Japan.aspx
your quick and apt response is appreciated. This is interesting stuff despite how much it worries me for my kids.
Amazing that a small country
Amazing that a small country like Ireland can actually measure and put up the data for public review, whereas here in the US, we have to rely on the good intentions of a University department to get data that our government should be providing to us...
I'm not a fan of the EPA but ...
they have been releasing some hard data...see, e.g.
http://www.epa.gov/japan2011/docs/rert/RadNet-Drinking-Water-Data-Public...
http://www.epa.gov/japan2011/docs/rert/radnet-precipitation-final.pdf.
http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/1e5ab1124055f3b28525781f0042ed40/8aca5fe3d1d30ebc852578630074eaff!OpenDocument
Great link
Thanks for the link Bill!
WH
Your welcome and thank you!
With all you have to do, googling for milk and other results and links is probably not efficient. Bt I am always looking so when and if I find more (the French results are exceptional in my opinion too which I posted earlier in this forum) I'll send them along.
appreciate the feedback.
btw I worked on NRC and Congressional hearings on safety issues and worked in the industry on health and safety issues very briefly (I resigned after learning too much and my consicne could not allow me to continue. Bad choice economically but good one morally/ethically for me).
My own view is that no nukes can ever be safe and that this disaster is more proof than the world will ever need that they cannot be made safe, espcially given the spent fuel rods which remain vulnerable for aeons to attack, fire, disasters etc.
But right now my priority is minimizing exposure to my kids so more data and info I have the more I feel secure I can make good decisions.
You folks are really amazing and doing a great job.