Cs 137 usefull for dating wine

My reasoning was this:

1) Assume that the deposition from worldwide nuke testing was roughly homogenous, i.e. not vastly different in Berkeley than in Bordeaux in 1985 or so, i.e. that baseline is not different by an order of magnitude in the two countries.

2) The wine dating plot shows that deposition from Chernobyl in France is about an order of magnitude lower than the peak of the weapons testing deposition in 1965.

3) Your comparison of Cs-134 and Cs137 suggests that the deposition from Fukushima in Berkeley was higher than the weapons testing baseline above.

It follows (unless Assumption 1) is vastly wrong) that the deposition from Fukushima in Berkeley was larger than the one if France from Chernobyl.

On the other hand I think in 3) you were referring to the weapons testing baseline *immediately* prior to Fukushima happening, which was also low in France pre-Chernobyl, so my argument doesn't work in that case.

Deposition maps for western France I've seen only give an upper limit <2kBq/m2, so they don't allow a comparison. I've calculated using rain data and integrating over your Cs-137 concentration data that the deposition here was probably somewhere in the 50-100 Bq/m2 region (wet and dry deposition combined). But this guess could be off by a factor 2-3 because of various systematic uncertainties.

I think probably the scariest and weirdest thing is that the cesium 137 can be detected THROUGH THE WINE BOTTLE GLASS! How powerful is THAT?

I mean, if we eat these substances and they are acumulating in our organs, when they decay they are shooting gamma radiation out of us?

Maybe I misunderstand but it still sems awfully creepy.

I guess I want you guys to test grapes and wine now as they will tell a new story of Fukushima, especially if the cesium levels are "locked in".

I agree that it seems that the radiocesium does "wash out" and get diluted over time as it disperses in the soil and environment (which is a relatively good thing, i guess, as it dimishes the amounts in the wine and grapes etc..

BUT

the most troubling thing remains the failure to have Strontium 90 tests of our foodstuffs as the Swiss have done in their testing. They seem to have fairly high permissible levels as far as I am concerned (and because cancer rates seemt ot be increasing proportionally globally in downwinders according to the Radiation and Public Health Service researchers).

I would add that a critique of Helen Caldicott here a week or so ago saying she had no evidence for claims of continued radiocunclides in Turkey is invalidated by the study on Turkish foodstuff linked here (which I am sre she had some knowledge of before she spoke out abo0ut it).

I am curious to know what KINDS of wild berries were tested as well as there are ground crops like strawberries and raspberries and then bush plants like blueberries which may have less I would guess.

In any case thanks for the interesting links.

NOW can BRAWM test some fresh wine and grapes???

Or are you concerend you might upset the California wine insustry. I NEED to worry now about grape juice for my kids dammit. That sucks and according to the links it takes YEARS before the cesium levels get reduced to near nondetectable levels in the wine and STILL is found in wild berries. That sucks!