new air and rain samples
While I am relieved to see that the new air and rain samples do no longer contain I131, it makes me feel a little worried, that after all, we have no official EPA source to compare it to, since they decreased the frequency of testing. Meaning, although we all trust the BRAWN team, the reality could be, that this could just be part of the "official lie" meaning the Brawn team shows no detection and we as citizens do not have official websites, like EPA or European cites to compare it to since they decided the accident is essentially over. Just a thought.
Sudden rise in radioactivity at No. 3 reactor at Fukushima
NHK World Japanese online news reports
"Radiation level at No.3 reactor water intake rises
The operator of the damaged nuclear power plant in Fukushima has reported a sharp rise in the concentration of a radioactive material in samples of seawater near the Number 3 reactor.
Tokyo Electric Power Company says it detected 110 becquerels of radioactive cesium-134 per cubic centimeters in seawater samples taken on Wednesday morning.
The level is 1,800 times the national legal limit, compared to 550 times, which was reported the previous day.
The utility also found 120 becquerels of cesium-137, 1,300 times higher than the limit.
Last Wednesday at the same location near the water intake of the Number 3 reactor, water contaminated with highly radioactive substances was found flowing into the sea from a pit. TEPCO says it detected cesium-134 at 32,000 times the legal limit.
In its latest announcement, TEPCO said the concentration of radioactive iodine in seawater samples from the same location fell from 1,900 times the limit on Monday to 630 times on Tuesday.
The utility also said it detected radioactive materials at levels higher than the national limit at 2 of the 4 survey points along the shoreline near the plant.
It says cesium-134 with a concentration level 1.8 times the limit was found at a point 330 meters south of the water drainage gates of the Number 1 to 4 reactors.
Thursday, May 19, 2011 02:57 +0900 (JST)"
http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/18_37.html
**BRAWM- How do you interpret this sudden rise in radioactive levels at Fukushima reactor #3? Any implications for near future problems that could impact the West Coast?
Sorry, posted this under the
Sorry, posted this under the wrong section. Will try again....
In the absence of information....
It's easy for the mind to try to fill in the gaps, and often in creative ways.
It's not just the lack of testing, but also the lack of public discussion on the topic that breeds suspicion.
While I think there are LOTS of gaps that need to be filled in, the BRAWM team, I'm guessing, is not only doing this as a public service, but as part of their research, to gain knowledge in their field, as this is a "real time" experiment.
What is interesting to me is that we haven't heard more about the differences in types of measurements done on each of the coasts, UCB and WPI. Different types of measurements may lead different types of results?
One Agency To Compare To
Calif. Dept. of Public Health
http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/Pages/RHB-RadReport.aspx
There are links to additional state public health results in the
following post as well.
http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/node/4093