[R. Cromack] Ran across this and thought it was interesting...
http://arthurzbygniew.blogspot.com/
...Scroll down a bit and you'll see some links to information being put out there by the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization... I think it's safe to call them biased, if that's the word you want to use, AGAINST nuclear power and FOR increased monitoring / responsibility. (I'm saying that because I don't want anyone confusing me, or them, with a "shill" or whatever.)
According to their own estimations of Cesium-137 concentration (which I interpret to mean, "deposition") in the Western United States... Found HERE:
http://www.bfs.de/de/ion/imis/ctbto_aktivitaetskonzentrationen_caesium.gif
...We're looking at a TOTAL U.S. WEST COAST DEPOSITION OF ABOUT 0.001 bequerels/cubic meter.
...Now, I realize this is only one estimation, and that it may, in part, be reliant on (suspect) estimates and data coming out of TEPCO, NISA, JAIF, the IAEA, Japan's NSC, etc. And I also "get" that this is just one organization's "best guess", and that it's unlikely we're going to get anywhere NEAR the "full" story... for years, perhaps decades, if ever, on how much contamination there's been.
I also understand that their estimates may well be about AIRBORNE CONCENTRATION ONLY, and NOT GROUND ACCUMULATION / DEPOSITION, and that this may make a HUGE difference in the final tally. And I further understand that this is ONLY C-137 we're talking about, here, not any of the other lovely isotopes that have been added into the mix.
However... Think about that. 0.001 Bq.
Let's assume that ACTUAL GROUND CONCENTRATIONS are three orders of magnitude greater than that. That's still just 1 Bq/meter.
Remember -- I posted a map a couple weeks ago showing TOTAL DEPOSITION OF CESIUM-137 ACROSS EUROPE, post-Chernobyl. That map was in kBq/m^2 -- KILObequerels per square meter. Most of Europe was estimated to have received AT LEAST 2 kBq/m^2 of C-137.
Now, take a gander at the IAEA's own report:
http://www.iaea.org/inis/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/31/056/31...
...Scroll down to Page 5 of the .pdf.
So. With the exception of Portugal, EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY IN EUROPE is estimated to have received something on the order of 400 to 2000 kBq/m^2 as a result of Chernobyl. There have certainly been health-related effects from that disaster, beyond the reported few thousand thyroid cancer deaths normally attributed to that meltdown. However... Life expectancy across Europe continues to rise.
This cesium got into the entire continent's food chain, no question. They're still there, folks. Life has continued, except for a few hundred square miles in Ukraine and Belarus.
I'm not trying to minimize things, here. I'm just trying to gain some perspective. Even if you multiplied these early estimations of (presumably) airborne cesium-137 West Coast contamination by SIX ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE (1,000,000), you'd STILL be doing better than the entire Warsaw Pact, as well as just about the entirety of Western Europe apart from the coastal Iberian Peninsula, most of England and Scotland, western France and about one-third of Italy, plus some of coastal Greece and a narrow portion of the former Yugoslavia.
Am I saying, "Don't worry, be happy"? Of course not. Two months ago no one could have convinced me that a Chernobyl-sized outcome for North America would be a "good" outcome. But, this is the hand we've been dealt.
I realize I may be making all sorts of assumptions here, reaching inappropriate, perhaps desperately stupid, conclusions. I realize this is just one group's early estimation. I realize I'm no expert. (I would LOVE BRAWM's input on this, btw, though not at the expense of other, more pressing concerns.)
And I also realize that I'm very much a whore to hope at this point.
However... IF I have some notion of how to read / interpret these data, and IF I'm in the ballpark... Then maybe, just maybe, we can take a look at this and realize: SO FAR AT LEAST, MAYBE IT AIN'T THE END OF THE WORLD.
As I said in another thread: There's a LOT that can still go wrong. There may be an inevitability to this process that cannot be avoided. This is an incredibly delicate situation... EVERYTHING needs to go in our favor, from here on out, because once just ONE of those Reactors or Spent Fuel Pools or whatever the Hell else they've got over there starts boiling over... Well, game over, folks. One goes, they'll ALL go.
But we ain't there yet. Recent signs are encouraging. And maybe, just maybe, despite all our fears and concerns and the ominous, apathetic, unconcerned behavior of our Government... Maybe we CAN pull through this.
Again: This is a disaster. This is ongoing. There WILL be health ramifications. I don't think ANYONE would argue those points.
But... Well, decide for yourself. It's just my opinion, folks, and I'm no expert, not by ANY stretch of the imagination. Again -- BRAWM, if you have time, I'd LOVE to hear what you have to say about this. ESPECIALLY if I'm wrong. I don't want to be one of the Pied Piper's rodents, any more than I want to be some sort of Armageddon cheerleader.
Rick.
I hate to Break this to you, Rick
But the total depositions based on the CTBTO OBSERVATIONS (actual measurements) show an accumulation of wet and dry deposits of cesium 137 contamination at between 1-10 Becquerels per square meter (of ground). To get PICOCURIES per square meter you multiply by 27.
So what the Comprehenive Test Ban Treaty has OBSERVED at their monitoring stations through today is between 27 (TWENTY SEVEN) and 270 (TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY) PICOCURIES per square Meter.
That is the total for what has fallen (or been deposited) on MOST of the United States in the rain and in the air since the plumes arrives here (and keep arriving as the jet stream makes second third and fourth rounds of the northenr hemisphere.
UP TO TWO HUNDRED AND SEVENTY PICOCURIES OF RADIATION THAT LASTS FOR 300+ YEARS ON ALMOST EVERY SQUARE METER IN THE UNITED STATES. On cars, rooftops, swimming pools, playgrounds, streets, trees, flowers, gardens, swamps, rivers, parking lots, etc etc etc. HAS ALREADY BEEN DETECTED!!!
Now a square meter is a little bigger than a a sguare yard. Nearly 4 ft by 4 ft.
It is, as we speak, decaying and emitting radiation on every place that it landed.
Someone please tell me that I am wrong.
This data is confirmed by the CTBTO and is based on ACTUAL observations.
We can see from the graphs and charts here (scroll to the bottom):
http://db.eurad.uni-koeln.de/prognose/radio.html
that the FINAL results and graphs (on the right) show a steady measurement of cesium 137 in the air in the US beginning shortly after the diaster in Japan. Hawaii's levels are the highest, then the West Coast. BUT what is confusing about the graph is that while the levels measured in the air on each day go up and down over time and seem to be diminishing, the reality is that these are ACCUMULATING levels on the ground so that ONCE it is detected in the air at ground level it is likley deposited nearby and COLLECTS. On any given day it may SEEM low or lower in the air or rain but it is COLLECTING on the ground, in plants, in cows, etc so that the final totals get up to these VERY HIGH levels of UP TO 270 PicoCuries in every damn square meter. Some is washed awau by clean rain into the rivers and sewers. Some is absorbed by plants or thr plants are eaten by cows and other things and it is moving through the food chain. In a standing Puddle, when you test it in its totality, it may only SHOW 3 picocuries in a liter (or ten or twenty or more as many EPA tests have shown). If you collect it FOR ONE DAY it may show low levels. BUT IT ACCUMULATES and that
is why the wet deposition maps and dry deposition maps and the graphs all have to be looked at in their totality: the TOTAL depositions (which are ongoing) are still unknown. And SURE if there was a major blast as there was at Chernobyl, the local areas would get HUGE amounts. just as the regions around Fukushima have.
But low levels can kill and mutate fetuses and kill babies too.
Don't let your guard down too quickly, Rick. 270 PicoCuries on most every square meter of land in the US is a LOT! It is about 20 (TWENTY) Picoccuries per square foot. Right on the surface. Emitting radiation for the next 300 years!
Bill: Thanks for the accumulation / deposition info!
Yeah... As the event is ongoing (and will be for the foreseeable future), accumulations / depositions will DEFINITELY continue to increase. It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if the eventual TOTAL accumulation was double, even treble, current estimated totals. This is going to keep on producing for awhile, although at pretty minimal levels -- 1% or even less of emissions at the crisis's peak. I wonder if we've seen levels fall as much as they're going to, for awhile. (Air and rainwater I mean, not milk or food chain levels, which may continue to increase for some time yet.)
I would like to see how those picocuries/m^2 compares to European levels, post-Chernobyl.
Thanks again for running this info down. Your continued hard work is needed & very greatly appreciated!
Rick.
A Time-Lapse Map of Every
A Time-Lapse Map of Every Nuclear Explosion Since 1945
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLCF7vPanrY
Rick, thanks for the links.
Rick, thanks for the links.
To contrast, the University of Cologne Eurad project is predicting around 10 Bq/m2 total Cs-137 deposition on the west coast.
It will be good to see if Eurad updates their data with CTBTO readings, and what the eventual differences are.
Please could you provide a
Please could you provide a direct link showing the EURAD predictions?
Thanks.
These have been discussed
These have been discussed several times already:
http://db.eurad.uni-koeln.de/prognose/radio.html
Scroll down to the last row of images and the leftmost and middle images are total Cs-137 deposition for dry and wet conditions. Add them together for the total.
Is anyone able to read the
Is anyone able to read the Vancouver figures for these maps?
Thanks.
Very helpful estimate and analysis Rick
I'm just wondering how this can be compared/contextualized with the actual soil readings BRAWM has taken or the actual data from the Sierras (700 pCi/kg of Cesium-137).
Christine
Rick, Your analysis looks
Rick,
Your analysis looks quite reasonable. Deposition is indeed a tricky beast to analyze, so I can appreciate your order of magnitude estimate. While this accident is certainly not a good thing, we are trying to encourage everyone through our monitoring that this is still not as bad as Chernobyl (which, as you point out, Europe has survived). Of course, we in the US are much farther from Japan compared to the distance between Ukraine and the rest of Europe!
Tim [BRAWM Team Member]
Quick correction...
That should have read:
"With the exception of Portugal, EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY IN EUROPE is estimated to have received something on the order of 400 to 2000 Bq/m^2 as a result of Chernobyl." NOT "kBq/m^2". BIG difference, there.
Rick.
Another correction.. This one's pretty important.
Okay, so that should have read, "0.01", NOT "0.001". Sorry -- tired.
So, we're talking about five, instead of six orders of magnitude, less than most of Europe's minimum C-137 contamination from Chernobyl. Maybe.
I'll let someone else take it from here, before I make an even bigger ass out of myself tonight. I've hit my limit -- I have to throw the rest back and come back another day.
Rick.
If u rely on these agency
If u rely on these agency for the data( TEPCO, NISA, JAIF, the IAEA, Japan's NSC,)I pity the fool.Did u rely on bp for there oil release estimates too.I ain't saying your post is wrong .just a reminder it's not in the interests of these corporations or agencies to be transparent.if it was we would see a daily radiation release readings from air above plant period .
No, I get what you're saying, Anonymous...
...An analogy I've been known to make on these boards goes like this: Having TEPCO provide data on environmental contamination, is a little like having the fox provide reports on how many chickens reside in the henhouse. ...Still... You know, there just aren't all that many governments / agencies / institutions / academic or research concerns / private organizations doing ANY sort of testing or compiling ANY manner of estimations, presently. I'm with you: The further out from Japan, geographically, economicallly, and politically, the more likely I am to "trust" their data sets and projections / predictions. Note, I do NOT mean, "BLIND trust" -- in the words of one of my less-favorite presidents, I have embraced a philosophy of "trust, but VERIFY". That's what I'm trying to do with this information.
CTBTO is far from an "honest broker" -- they most certaivnly have a dog in this fight, neing, as I said earlier, very straightforward in their anti-nuclear proliferation "bias"... But, as far as this sort of thing goes, for the moment, at least, I think their bias is in a useful direction... They are clearly not aligned with, say, TEPCO's interests in this matter. That may change, but, given the dearth of information out there at present, I'll take it... With the caveat that there is much that has not yet, and perhaps WILL NOT, see the light of day regarding the Fukushima nuclear event... And that EVERYTHING can still change, in a flash.
Still... I'm encouraged, some. At this point, I'll take a Chernobyl-sized outcome for North America.... and all that it entails. But we should bear in mind that we're getting off EASY, compared to the population of Japan. While we stress and rage and bicker over (comparatively) tiny exposures -- even in the aggregate, so far anyway -- the numbers the Japanese people are living with, in their stoic, quietly heroic manner, are shockingly more robust. While we freak out over numbers barely detectable using the most advanced equipment and rigorous testing regimens available, THEIR reality is far more in-your-face, obvious and irrefutable... Yet, all over those islands, life goes on. Is it naivety or maturity? Apathy or resolve? Poignant determination, or absolute tolerance even in the face of extinction? Each of us must decide... But, for whatever it works, I'm putting it down to courage, and a steadfastness born of long generations of hardship, struggle and suffering most Americans can scarcely imagine. Many people I know have taken to calling the Japanese in this crisis robots, zombies and lemmings. I disagree. These are people who look into the abyss every single day. They do not flinch, cower or try to run away and hide. They simply stare back, as if to say: You may kill me, destroy the land of my ancestors and make the country unpassable. But you will not beat me. You will have to wrest my life away from me with both hands... and even then I will fight you. I will not run away, no matter what manner of Hell is unleashed upon me. I will stand and fight for my life, merely by continuing to live it. I will honor my country, by refusing to abandon it. I will validate the faith of my ancestors, by pushing back against the darkness that would claim this generation, that would have me weep and cringe and beg for mercy.
Here we make our stand. The radiation will come. It will bring cancer with it. But I will NOT permit the cancer of despair, of hopelessness, of resignation. Here we stand. Here we fight. Here we live.
We Americans could learn a lot from the Japanese people.
Rick.
Grand yes. Do you think we
Grand yes. Do you think we have a right to put our children in harm's way?
What an odd question.
...Not exactly what I expected to hear after my little paean for calm, reason, discernment, and something approaching grudging respect for the resiliency of the Japanese people.
I suppose you interpret my desire for measured concern, reasonable dread and informed discussion regarding the ongoing Fukushima nuclear event as some sort of wanton, devil-may-care, Slim Pickens-in-"Doctor Strangelove"-esque disregard for the safety and future of our children... Mine included. As if throwing the door open to my house, setting myself on fire and running screaming through the streets yelping, "Run for your lives! The sky is falling! We're doomed!" has helped matters any -- and don't think I haven't noticed that there are some here who have done exactly that, day in, day out. Some have even encouraged this sort of apocalyptic behavior. I daresay there are one or two who chuckle gleefully at others' fervent approximation of same, and sprinkle a few more drops of gasoline on the bonfire too.
But, since you mention it: Well, YES, actually. The people who are alive right now, who are actually living in the world and who have some measure of control, individual and corporate, over what occurs in it, DO have a "right" -- a God-given freedom, inviolable for the time they are in existence on this planet -- to do all manner of things, good and bad, that will in some way affect the course of the future, the state of the world the young and the unborn inherit, and the quality of their lives. Much the same "right" that beavers living in the year 2011 have to affect the rivers and streams that fish born in 2012 will have to swim in. Anyone who refuses to acknowledge the power, and the peril, of this particularly profound corporeal "I-was-here-first" doctrine is simply not living in the world.
Now, I THINK the question you're actually meaning to ask, is more: "Do you think we have a MORAL right to put our children in harm's way?" The answer, of course, is the same: YES. But, remember, it cuts both ways, folks. We can use our temporal primacy of position in this world to ensure, or at least positively affect, the safety of the next generation; or we can use it to saddle future humanity with the debris, disease and other various unhappy consequences of our undisciplined, unprincipled and unrestrainedly retarded stewardship of the gifts, blessings and assets we ourselves inherited, in a somewhat more unspoilt state, from our own forebears.
Interesting, though, that in encouraging calm and rationality, I have somehow, in your eyes, become the sort of man who would pitch his own child into a cesspool for the sake of my own ease and peace of mind. I guess there is truly NO reasonable middle ground, here. Pity.
Make your own judgments. My conscience is pretty clear.
Rick.
Computer modeling can predict cesium depositions
http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/2/825/2002/acpd-2-825-2002-print.pdf.
Modelling transport and depositions Cesium and iodine from The chernoble accident using the dream model.
Effect of soil potassium And calcium On caesium and strotonium
Uptake by roots/ study involves lettuce looks promising..
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VB2-3YGV2XH-8...