BRAWM Team: Collaboration With Govt. Agencies & Universities
Hello BRAWM Team,
I've been curious about how much collaboration there has been between UCB, the various govt. agencies and other universities. Has there been any sharing of data, analysis, processes or equipment?
I believe early on someone on the BRAWM team mentioned collaborating with a university in Japan. And there was a very brief exchange between UCB and WPI regarding americium. But, I haven't seen any collaboration other than that.
The BRAWM team has said that they were not familiar with how the Calif. Dept. of Public Health was gathering or analyzing their samples. I don't know how bureaucratic the CDPH is, but it would seem that they would be the easiest (due to proximity) to collaborate with. And there are many other state agencies that were performing measurements. As well as many other universities with nuclear engineering departments (no idea how those departments compare with UCB's). Surprisingly, even someone from the EPA responded to a post on this forum a few days ago and answered a some questions. So, there may be an opportunity to collaborate with them.
Anyway, I'm just curious how much collaboration there has been. And if none, why not? No value seen? Bureaucracy? Territorialism?
As always, thanks for all the great work to date. I really appreciate it.
Collaborations
We have been doing this monitoring "freelance" as an educational opportunity for ourselves and the public. Collaborations so far have mostly been with folks at UC Berkeley and Lawrence Berkeley Lab and have mostly been focused on how to make the measurements. It turns out that between UCB and LBL there is a ton of knowledge and experience that relates to these measurements. For example, we worked with Dr. Smith at LBL's Low Background Facility to learn how to make these measurements (he has been doing air monitoring for over 50 years!), and he measured one of our air filters so that we could "cross-calibrate" with his measurements. Prof. Norman in UCB Nuclear Engineering also made a measurement of one of our air filters, and he told us how to calibrate our water and food testing setup. (Incidentally, Prof. Norman has written a paper about his own rainwater measurements, available here, and had also measured fallout from Chernobyl in 1986.) Prof. Morse, who also made Chernobyl measurements, lent us some air pumps and air filters early on before we started using our shop vac and HEPA filters.
Another LBL connection was Dr. Tom McCone, who is an expert in health physics and helped us understand how to make proper dose conversions.
From the UCB NE department, we have also worked with one of Prof. Vujic's students who calculated how much of each fission product would have been present in the Fukushima reactors. Our measurements of the releases are in good agreement with their calculations.
As for other UCB and LBL connections, we currently trying to find some people to help us understand and test for "hot particles" in our samples, but that hasn't happened yet.
We collaborated with industry through a contact we have at ORTEC. He provided us with a mechanically-cooled germanium detector that we used for most of our milk measurements, and he also suggested the original idea of measuring HEPA filters on our cylindrical germanium detector.
The connections with Japan that you mentioned were some personal connections between professors in the NE department here and at the University of Tokyo. I was not privy to too much of their communication.
Collaboration with government agencies has not yet really happened. However, we may get to have discussions with some agencies in the future about communication to the public in the aftermath of a nuclear disaster.
This is all I can think of right now; other team members might have more information to add that I have overlooked.
Mark [BRAWM Team Member]
Great Info
Thanks for taking the time to list all of the collaboration and providing links to additional info. I think it's good to let everyone know what goes into providing all the information the BRAWM team has to date.
It should now be clear that, in addition to the knowledge and experience of the BRAWM team, a wide range of expertice has been tapped. It looks like there's well over a century of combined knowledge/experience behind the info. And, if actually all added up, it would exceed two centuries. That kind of foundation simply can't be ignored.
One last comment regarding the government collaboration. While collaborating on better communication to the public in the aftermath of a nuclear disaster is obviously the right thing to do, I REALLY hope it remains purely an academic exercise and is NEVER needed in the future.
Thanks for all BRAWM team has done and continues to do.
Wise words
Hi Mark, these are wise words: "However, we may get to have discussions with some agencies in the future about communication to the public in the aftermath of a nuclear disaster." I cannot think of anything that is more needed. You tell 'em. And some of us would have some things to add to such a discussion, too. For now, thank you for the data and for your unending patience with us lay people thru all the fear, anger, and heaven knows what else. You are the best.
Bumping again to keep it on the radar screen
Bumping
Any information on this?
Hi BRAWM team,
Can you please give us some insight into this?
Bump
Really curious about this. I find collaboration between the various universities and government agencies an interesting subject in general. Even more so on this topic.
Really Curious About This
Bump
I'm really curious about this. I find collaboration amongst the universities and agencies an interesting subject in general. Even more so on this subject.
Thanks
Progress
This is an exceptional and wonderful post. Thank you.
Definitely the question of
Definitely the question of the day. I would settle for them collaborating within their own University for starters. There is no friggin way physicists should even be commenting on the health effects, yet I guess they think they know more than doctors, epidemiologists, etc. I guess better to just forget that and fool the 99% non science majors with this worthless data/analysis.
They said they did consult within UCB
I remember in one thread the BRAWM team said they had consulted at least one health physicist. I believe within UCB. They've steered clear of the health and epidemiological aspects and stuck with their own sample analysis and statistics. I don't think they are trying to fool anyone. They state what they have observed within their area of expertise. Which is far from worthless.
Really? It doesn't seem that BRAWM has done that at all-
"They've steered clear of the health and epidemiological aspects and stuck
with their own sample analysis and statistics."
Really? It doesn't seem that BRAWM has done that at all- from the very
outset. These are some of the earliest posts:
From Dr. Chivers:
http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/node/1931
"These amounts will not have
Submitted by dchivers on Wed, 2011-03-23 23:54.
These amounts will not have any measurable health effects on pregnant women
or the fetus. I would be more worried about anxiety of the mother rather
than the insignificant exposure. I have two children myself and I
understand the worry, but the risk is insignificant when compared to other
issues that may occur during a pregnancy. If you are really worried, please
contact your obstetrician and he/she should set your mind at ease. Good
Luck!"
Here is the reply:
"Thanks for the response
Submitted by W Hunt (not verified) on Thu, 2011-03-24 02:03.
Pretty sure that you all have better info re exposure and dosage than the
avg doctor does for a situation like this!"
(There was never an additional reply to that response stating the contrary)
Dr. Chivers DOES have a 'DR.' in front of his name, yes?
I do understand that Dr. Chivers referred the poster to an Obstetrician,
AFTER he gave his 'health effect assessment'.
_______
Here is another by Dr. Chivers:
http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/node/1951
By all means, eat your
Submitted by dchivers on Fri, 2011-03-25 00:02.
By all means, eat your vegetables (and some wine, too). I share your hope
and optimism for the people of Japan.
_______
Another: http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/node/1948
We'll keep you posted. I'm
Submitted by dchivers on Thu, 2011-03-24 07:55.
We'll keep you posted. I'm sure the positive health effects of drinking the
milk more than outweigh the exposure risk.
_______
Another: http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/node/3514
Your concern is
Submitted by dchivers on Mon, 2011-04-25 02:10.
Your concern is understandable as we all want to protect our kids from risks and allow them to grow up healthy and strong. My wife and I have not changed our routine and we continue to eat local produce from our local farmer's market. I normally tell people that stress and anxiety will have a greater effect on your health than this small amount of exposure.
_______
It seems to me that BRAWM (certainly Dr. Chivers) has been 'normally'
giving out health advice and rarely has it erred on the side of caution.
Health Physicist Statement
I knew I saw it somewhere:
http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/node/4116#comment-8317
=======================================================================
I'm sorry you don't find our
Submitted by aucott (not verified) on Sun, 2011-05-22 00:18.
I'm sorry you don't find our dose calculation convincing (even though we provided a full discussion of how we did the analysis and confirmed our results and comparison with a health physicist), but that's why I also compared the level of dose to what the average person gets from radon -- this is in the air that you breath, so it what you would think of as an "internal dose".
As for the possibility of increased levels of fallout, while I can't predict the future, we're pretty sure that there won't be any further releases seen here in the US. The cores have been melting down for quite some time now (which is why they had the releases in the first place months ago). We will continue to monitor, but in the meantime I will continue to drink milk and eat tomatoes from the plant sitting outside my front door.
Tim [BRAWM Team Member]
=======================================================================
I wonder if the health
I wonder if the health physicist in question was good old Kirk Smith?
Quoted from here
http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2011/03/17/radiation-fears-unfounded-camp...
Q: Some people have been buying potassium iodide tablets as protection against possible radioactive iodine in the plume. Is that advisable?
A: That is a really bad idea. Like any medication, potassium iodide has side effects. They can be as mild but unpleasant as nausea, but you also can die from potassium iodide side effects, though it is rare. If you live near a nuclear reactor and something happens, yes, take potassium iodide to protect yourself from radioactive iodine. But we are 8,000 kilometers away from the Japanese reactors, and by the time any radiation gets to us, there will be no radioactive iodine. It will have decayed – its half life is only eight days – or dissolved in water and fallen into the ocean.
Could have been
But, I'm not going to dwell on that article. It's gotten a lot of forum time lately. It was early on in the crisis and I have no idea what information he had at that time. Or what he actually meant by "there will be no radioactive iodine". He did also say:
"We will be able measure whatever radiation gets here, no question. The nuclear engineering department has monitors on its roof to measure the radiation. But just because you can measure it doesn’t mean it’s dangerous"
So, "there will be no radioactive iodine" *could* mean it's "effectively not here" because the levels are so low. Or he could have literally meant that it would never make it here. If it's the latter, he was obviously wrong. And since I don't know what the basis of that statement was, I'm not going to BBQ him for that. If we BBQ everyone that makes a mistake, we'll all be a bunch of crispy critters :-)
So, "there will be no
So, "there will be no radioactive iodine" *could* mean it's "effectively not here" because the levels are so low.
Lmao @ VB. The wood legs you stand on would make good kindling. Are they mesquite?
I think it's clear that he
I think it's clear that he is saying no radioactive iodine would make it here due to the 8 day half life and the ocean.
The difference in BBQing me and this guy is, I'm not holding myself as an expert. There is no major university touting my incorrect statements as if they are true(still to this day).
It's funny you guys want to hold Busby and Gundersen up to such a high standard just because they disagree with the industry line, but this guy? Well I am glad you don't want to dwell.
I'm not saying we BBQ everyone who makes a mistake but the "experts" who push incorrect propaganda...
I'm not going to dwell on it because I don't care
The situation with iodine is pretty clear. Either he didn't mean that or he was flat out wrong. There is nothing to debate about that. And it really doesn't matter to me. I haven't been looking to him for information. And nobody has been regularly touting him as someone to follow (constant articles, statemetns and videos) that I know of. Only 1 article that's 3 months old. In fact, I'd never heard of him until someone posted the article on this forum. If he becomes a major source of info, I'll take a harder look. And I'll question anything I don't understand or disagree with. And ask for more information regarding any vague statements. Until then, he's just someone who made an incorrect statement.