History of 1976 radioactive cloud from china that hit west coast

More transparency back then?

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 2011-04-30 19:46.

Thanks for newspaper link

At least back then they were told where the radioactive cloud would go:

“An 'initial prediction' of the cloud's passage across the United States was issued Friday evening by EPA on the basis of work done by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).”

And another article told how the radioactive cloud disbursed:

“The radiation carried along by high altitude winds, had broken into three distinct clouds before reaching the Atlantic coast, EPA said. One cloud passed over Washington, another over North Carolina, and the third was spread over the Southeast as far south as Lousiana.”

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=aIBIAAAAIBAJ&sjid=T20DAAAAIBAJ&pg=4...

We're not hearing anything like that now and are left to rely on Europe's projection maps.

History and learning

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 2011-04-30 10:49.

Article states cloud was 160,000sq miles and was:due to 4megaton nuclear bomb detonated by china the largest ever tested by china .the us had detected radiation from tests 20times smaller at the time biggest exposure risk was milk .so not much has changed...The biggest concern was rain washout over pasture land.has any one heard this in reference to current catastrophe, u can learn a lot from a historic article .

c_andrewes@hotmail.com

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 2011-04-30 11:37.

This article mentions where they found radioactivity from the Chinese cloud.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=bYVQAAAAIBAJ&sjid=3xEEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5...

Interesting note on that

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 2011-04-30 13:20.

Interesting note on that article u posted it states EPA only detected radiation from china detonation in some locations.this means localisezed hot spots are not out of question for current fallout.

EPA data on 1976china weapons testing and effect on us food chai

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 2011-04-30 10:57.

http://www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/docs/er/520-5-77-002.pdf

Thank you for providing the

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 2011-04-30 12:33.

Thank you for providing the link to this document. I found this to be a good historical document for providing some perspective with regard to the results being posted now by UC Berkeley.

Highest level in dary was

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 2011-04-30 11:26.

Highest level in dary was 1000 Pci/per liter in 1976 see page 46for more on this

just when I was thinking

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 2011-04-30 16:48.

just when I was thinking this was a small disaster comparatively(2000nuclear bomb tests) i find this..

http://www.radiation.org/press/pressrelease110407.html

Article is slanted

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 2011-04-30 18:21.

That article is slanted to make things sound worse than they currently are.
For example, they keep saying "xxx times above the normal level in the
U.S.". There is no "normal" level. I-131 doesn't exist in the air or
rain water unless something has happened. So, the article is basically
saying "I-131 was detected". Which we already know. The only actual data
it provides is that the current levels they are referencing were approx. 50% of the Chernobyl peak. I haven't verified that. So, I'll take their
word for it.

And Riverside is not near San Francisco. They are approx 375 miles apart.

Levels

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 2011-04-30 13:01.

Well, that works out to 37 piC. Lots higher than seen so far from Fukushima. I guess I'm glad I'm still here after drinking all that milk when I was 12.