July 10 & 27, 2015 – Added Nuance and word of caution: Upon further scrutiny of the raw data, some of the radioisotopes listed as “de facto detected” need to be scrapped. I’m not sure if the final conclusion (re. ongoing fission) is incorrect, but the below contains errors: misinterpretations due to my amateur level of understanding, and continuing to learn as I go. I will link HERE ( TBA ) when I write more about what I’ve learned. Please go to the comment section to contribute to increasing my ability to better interpret the raw data. Thanks.
I have made all raw data publicly available and invite experts to scrutinize it for signs of anything unusual:
Blog post otherwise left (full of errors!) as-was
[with some notes added to reduce spreading misinformation]:
There was an atmospheric jet stream pattern on June 14, 2015, with a local slow-down condition, which I suspected would make it possible to test my hypothesis right here where I am in Southern Colorado: that the Fukushima-Daiichi Nuclear Catastrophe Site on the edge of the Pacific Ocean is still having actual nuclear fission reactions. If that were the case, then that jet stream would likely deliver at least a few fission-tell-tale traces of radioisotopes, I reasoned. So I had rainwater, sampled at that specific moment, analyzed in a professional lab. The detected amounts are what’s technically called “non-detect” (below the Minimum Detectable Amount), but the mixture of isotopes identified to be present in that sample is beyond disturbing:
The raw data of gamma spectroscopy of this June 14, 2015 Colorado rainwater sample show clearly that specific radioactive decay energies were detected,
indicating [suggesting] the presence of Americium-241, Cerium-144, Cesium-134/137, Cobalt-60, Europium-152/154/155, Iodine-131, Manganese-54, Niobium-94/95, Ruthenium-106, Zink-65 and various other troubling synthetic radionuclides. [While the energy detections are above background in several cases, 1) this is not the case for all of them, and 2) even the positive ones are all <MDC, meaning they are statistically not relevant.]
I’m sharing in this blog post what I discovered and learned from this, with all sources linked.
Read my Disclaimer & Limited Sharing Request. Please don’t copy-paste the content. If you feel inspired to share, please instead quote a small excerpt, and link here @ http://wp.me/puwO9-3N5 Thanks.
DISCLAIMER: “For Entertainment Purposes Only” (Sorry, we live in a slightly crazy world…) NOTICE: As always, there’s a lot of room for other possibilities. I’m a self-thought amateur, not an expert. My interpretations are not underwritten by any institution, government agency or credentialed expert at the time of posting. As long as you’re interested in getting to the truth of the matter, please DO be critical and skeptical of my allegations and ponderings, and point out parts you suspect to be wrong and why. I’ve never claimed this blog to be anything more than the sharing of my own journey to understand what’s really happening. And, though what I suspect is the case is unbelievably troubling (one might say, “gloomy and dire”), I only bring this up because I have faith in humanity’s potential to overcome even the greatest of challenges, when the truth is known.
That being said… Rolling:
- Wind pattern at jet stream height at time of sampling:
Over the past months and years, I’ve documented that jet-stream slow downs (@ 250 hPa) rather often corresponds with data gaps in the American and European radiation monitoring networks, curiously so when that northern jet stream had recently passed over the Fukushima region in Japan. The perfect condition appeared to find out more:
You can watch the animated version of this above screenshot @ Nullschool, with TCW (Total Precipitation Water) included and zoomed in to North America: http://earth.nullschool.net/#2015/06/14/2100Z/wind/isobaric/250hPa/overlay=total_cloud_water/orthographic=-108.79,32.32,1024
As you may be able to imagine… with as fascinated and passionate I am about getting to the truth about what’s really going in the Fukushima-Dai-ichi rubble, I simply couldn’t resist to test out my hypothesis:
- 1) Fukushima-Daiichi (F1) is still fissioning, or at least having fission flare-ups, down in the rubble underground.
- 2) Those fission and neutron activation products are very hot and thus, if they escape the site, probably quickly rise to the upper troposphere (to “jet stream height”); and
- 3) In those areas where the jet stream slows down further downwind, some of those synthetic radioisotopes descend and can be detected at ground level, many thousands of miles away.
If I were “delusional” (a far more comforting possibility), then, apart from natural Be-7, K-40, some Thorium-232 and Uranium-235/238 (common in the Rockies), and their decay products (Bi-212/214, Pb-212/214, etc.), and apart from perhaps a little bit Cesium-137, there really shouldn’t be anything synthetic radioactive in this rain…
Last month, May 2015, I shared my conviction that what was detected in Finland (Cs-134, Cs-137, I-131, Nb-95, Ru-106) originated somewhere deep underground Fukushima-Daiichi NPP. If that were truly the case, and actual fission is on-going, then I should be able to detect at least some of these “fingerprint radioisotopes” too, right at a time when such a jet stream patterns were in place ánd there’s precipitation at my location. Right?
(Amazingly, every single one of those Finnish curious radioisotope detections was apparently present here in the rain in the USA too!)
The rain arrived to my location (Crestone (roughly between Alamosa and Salida), Colorado, USA – see it on the Nullschool map at the top) in the afternoon around 3pm Mountain Time. At the time it started, I was at the Tibetan “Stupa of Enlightenment” and retreated to my car when the downpour began.
It turned into quite the impressive thunderstorm that June 14 Sunday afternoon, with lots of lightning inside the clouds (not so many air-to-ground strikes), and a torrential downpour, which went on for a few hours. Ionizing radiation is known to increase the conductivity of air. (See also concerns over the effect of Krypton-85 on climate, a major nuclear industry pollutant.)
In addition, I’ve heard (conversationally) about radioactively contaminated clouds showing slightly different colors, and wondered if what I was witnessing would be a case of that. It was definitely slightly odd, I must admit. I’ve heightened the colors (without changing them otherwise) a bit in this photo to better show some of the observed:
I sat in my car watching it. I looked online at the few ground strike locations at http://www.lightningmaps.org/realtime and began to wonder some more if ionizing radiation (natural or combination natural-synthetic) was somehow contributing to the impressive lightning higher up, as it wasn’t even particularly warm that day.
(Later on that evening.) The ominous scene for my sadly-not-so-futuristic radiation sci-fi scene came with gloomy pink-purple clouds with rich yellow accent and lots of thunder…
So… I went outside and took a rain swipe with a paper towel on my windshield, and I put my Medcom Inspector Alert Geiger Counter on it:
I do these every now and then and they rarely ever go over 1 µSv/hr. The previous such rain test record, May 3, 2015 @ 6.1 µSv/hr almost pales in comparison:
!-> A new record for my rain measurements: June 14, 2015 @ 10.2 µSv/hr upon contact!!!
Crackling with radioactivity… Dang…
Rather impressed with that measurement, I had a look (via Online Radiation Monitors –> at USA EPA Radnet @ https://cdxnode64.epa.gov/radnet-public/query.do) at the US governments’s official online radiation monitor in Albequerque, NM, just to the south of here: Turned off. Bummer. Then I looked at the two nearest ones in Colorado: Colorado Springs and Denver.
The large distances (between here and an official monitor) makes looking at this almost absurd, as even just places a few miles from here in the same valley were not affected by that specific thunderstorm, just as other storm cells that week hit other areas. Nevertheless, looking at data from the same week can give clues of whether or not something was unusual, or not, I reckon:
- The nearest monitor to the North is Colorado Springs, which had just had two data gaps in the preceding 48 hours You can still see them in the secrecy surrounding the Beta radiation measurements, but the gamma has since been filled in:
The grey line indicates the approximate time of my rainwater collection.
The grey line marks the approximate time I sampled the rain a hundred miles to the south-west, during a rain-out event that would undoubtedly have left a major spike on such a monitor (or, more likely, a gaping Beta hole…)
- On the Denver monitor (a little further north), the gamma data wasn’t all filled in later:
Those two monitors are much closer to each other than I am to either of them, and you already see clearly how there’s some significant differences.
Now, I’m very curious about what specifically makes these monitors go silent… I suspect it may be very specific energy bands of synthetic isotopes that primarily decay by Beta or Alpha decay.
To collect a sample, I cut the top of a 3 liter (10 oz.) spring water bottle and collected the rain that was falling on my car:
Then I poured that water into an empty ‘Arrowhead’ spring water bottle of the same size.
After the storm had passed, I also collected a zip-lock bag full of various types of mostly lichens. (It takes so much time to research that I don’t know when I’ll get to the second sample.) I labeled them so the lab wouldn’t get confused which samples this were and drove to town with them the next day:
14 hours after sampling, and right before the samples were packed for shipping, I re-tested the zip-locked wet paper towels: the radioactivity had already decreased by 97%, indicating its radioactivity was due to almost all very short-lived (likely primarily all-natural, I believed) decay products, such as typical mountain radioisotopes like those of Thorium, Lead, Bismuth and Radon.
There’s lots of natural Uranium and Thorium in the ground in this region and the recent flooding brings out the decay products from the ground, which then are brought back down with the rain. So the seemingly unusually radioactive rain is not per se an indication of anything being abnormal. So please don’t freak out over the “OMG! radioactive rain”. Rain being radioactive in areas with such minerals in the region is a natural phenomenon that’s been going on for eons.
The jet stream pattern with wind “from Japan”, the official data gaps, the unusual amount of inner-cloud lightning, the cloud colors, and the extremely high radioactivity of the rain itself all together convinced me that if there was ever a moment to test the rain for Fukushima-fingerprint radioisotopes, this was it.
Nevertheless, it were “nonlinear impressions”, from consulting oracles on the matter that inspired me to push forward. Among the tools for divination, I used the ‘Medicine Cards™: The Discovery of Power Through the Ways of Animals’ authored by Jamie Sams and David Carson, illustrated by Angela C. Werneke, as described in the non-linear time section of my blog post, Linear, Cyclical & Non-Linear Dream Time on the ‘i3T (Interactive Three Times) Watch': Providing Diversified ‘Timely Signs’.
So, engaging the situation non-scientifically with my shamanic know-how for a moment, I tracked along time lines to explore different outcomes for different choices. And I ended up with a strong feeling that if I didn’t send this to a lab, I would continue to feel that I really ought to do this. One of the cards drawn was ‘Antelope’. Aside from reminding me of the tragic and “mysterious” (May 2015) mass die-off of over 135,000 endangered Saiga Antelope in Kazakhstan, it also came with the message:
“Say what should be said. […] “Do it now. Do not wait any longer.” Antelope knows the way, and so do you. Take courage and leap; your sense of timing is perfect. […]”
I sat with that, and decided, back in the pragmatic physical realm, to spend the hundreds of dollars it would take to get some scientific data about his rain.
And thus I had my samples packed for shipping:
Due to what would have been astronomical shipping costs, I didn’t find a suitable lab until the next day. So I FedEx’ed my two samples to a lab here in Colorado on the 16th, to get there the 17th:
Mainly because of the distance (in-state) and the speed of replying to emails, I picked ALS Global this time. Last time (mainly Japanese kelp samples) I went with EMSL on the east coast. Click ALS’ Radiochemistry section to learn more about their capacities: http://www.alsglobal.com/Our-Services/Life-Sciences/Environmental/Capabilities/North-America-Capabilities/USA.aspx
I really wish the gamma-energy releases from the sample could have been counted for much longer than that lab’s 1000 minutes (about 16 hours) to get much lower MDAs (minimum detectable amounts). But, luckily, I also requested ‘the raw data’, which includes a list of what was detected*.
*: NOTE regarding the below listed radioisotopes: This will possibly lead to having ‘expert scientists’ discount the point I’m making, but it must be understood: The radioisotope “detections” (listed below) were not strong enough to be called “true detections” by certain definitions, as the margin of error is larger than the detected amount. A count needs to be about 5 times above the critical level for it to become quantifiable. If it can’t be quantified (“below Minimum Detectable Amount or Concentration”, abbreviated as <MDA or <MDC), it’s considered “non-detect” (ND).
However…, the fact that specific gamma rays’ kilo-electron-Volt (keV) energy releases were identified and counted above background at all does suggest
without any doubt actually that the only reason they are being discounted is because the lab test only runs the standard length of such a test, 1000 minutes (about 16 hours). If the sample’s radioactive decay energies had been measured for many days or even weeks, perhaps the data could have been as robust as the Finnish data. (On a paranoid day, I wouldn’t even be surprised if those typical lab standards were set by the industry to make independent ‘true detections’ of trace amounts of highly suspicious radioisotopes unlikely, so that the CTBTO can maintain a monopoly on such data and keep that a secret at the request of all its members.) (–> That’s my lab results positive confirmation bias, compounded by a very negative impression of the nuclear industry’s integrity, showing through right there...)
I told myself that “If I detect absolutely nothing in this rain, maybe I’m simply wrong about this Fukushima-still-fissioning hunch.” Sadly… The tiniest of traces of [some of] these below listed radioisotopes were
all coming down with the rain in that Colorado thunderstorm. The “amazing” thing about these rainwater lab results is thus not the amounts (near-zero), but the fact that this long list of ‘de facto detected’ radioisotopes includes a surprising large number of synthetic radioisotopes, some of ’em ‘darn strange’…
The lab protocols may call all this “nothing detected”, but the raw data clearly show that the sensors did pick up little blips of keV levels corresponding with very specific radioisotopes, which suggest tiny traces of these radioisotopes
were in fact present could have been present in that rain, which arrived to this beautiful pristine North-American region by the fast-moving jet-stream, which in the preceding week had moved right over the Fukushima-Daiichi Nuclear Catastrophe site…
Here’s what I initially believed to have been de facto detected: [This is really just the list of what was tested for, not actually the list of what was found! I didn’t realize that when I first posted about this… ;-/]
Natural, but could also be “enhanced natural” (as some naturally occurring isotopes are also supplied by nuclear accidents):
For sure SYTHETIC (fission event, or activation product formed in the neutron-bombardment of a fission event):
keV energy levels flagged by the lab as ‘UNKNOWN’, identified by myself by researching the specific keV detections. (Details on my identifications further below.) ALL SYNTHETIC as well: [This attempt at identifying unknown energy levels has major flaws to it and should not be taken seriously!]
- Platinum-196 (stable, but excited by neutron-activation…?)
- Potassium-40 (excited due to neutron activation…?)
+ 5 more yet-to-be-identified ‘unknowns…
- 98.49 keV
- 252.97 keV [Holmium-153 ? (synthetic) – See comments]
- 408.59 keV
- 416.98 keV
- 962.84 keV [Americium-238, a decay product of synthetic Californicum-256 ? – See comments]
All relevant raw data is shared further below.
– — —- ——- ———– ——— —— —- –
This wind pattern where there’s the jet stream passing over Fukushima on the one hand, and without much of a diffusion, there’s also a significant slow-down right where I am doesn’t happen very often. From observing this quite a bit in the past year, my impression is that such slow-downs are more common over the ocean, especially over the Northern Pacific; (Hence my suspicion that radioactive fallout needs to be investigated as a possible factor in recent spate of Fin Whale and other sea life die-offs). Over land, however, that pattern tends to occur more often further north (Alaska, Canada,…), and often not even until that jet stream reaches Eurasia. That’s why I jumped on “the opportunity” to collect a rain sample for radioisotope analysis:
(repeat of shown above)
Save for perhaps a few small university research reactors, there aren’t even active nuclear power plants in Colorado, Utah, Nevada, Northern California or Oregon! And, upon zoom-in scrutiny, the wind was clearly not blowing in directly from the Hanford Nuclear Reservation (part of the Manhattan Project that set this nuclear mess in motion…) in Washington state, either.
The fact that the wind pattern was in place that I suspected might bring down some fingerprint radioisotopes from the ongoing Fukushima nuclear catastrophe… makes me consider the most plausible source for these radionuclides is indeed Fukushima. [If, of course… they were present in the first place, which turns out not to be the case for many…]
Observations, Data & Notes:
Only a few natural radioisotopes were present enough to show (visually) on the scintillator graph: Beryllium-7, Bismuth-214, Lead-212 & Lead-214 and Potassium-40 (circled in green squares, below). All the other peaks were background peaks:
NATURAL or “Enhanced Natural”: Potassium-40 is part of naturally occurring Potassium. Beryllium-7 is made in primarily created in the upper atmosphere by the interaction of cosmic rays and oxygen or nitrogen. Bismuth-212, Lead-212, Actinium-228 and Thorium-227 are all intermediate decay product of naturally occurring (or unnaturally added) Thorium-232. In turn, Bismuth-214, Lead-214 and Thorium-234 are intermediate decay product of naturally occurring (or unnaturally added) Uranium-238. Naturally occurring (or unnaturally added) Uranium-235, as well as Thorium-232 and Uranium-238 are commonly found in the rocks and soils of this part of the American Southwest & Rocky Mountains.
!-> “Technically”, however, if going by the lab definition of what constitutes a true detection, these weren’t detected either: All “< MDA“, hence the rainwater sample is technically called “non-detect” AS IF there was nothing detectable in it. Obviously that’s not the quite case. All kinds of things were DETECTED (by the sensors), they just can’t be quantified. By the lab definition, even the Beryllium-7, Bismuth-214, Lead-212 & Lead-214 and Potassium-40 were “non-detect”. To me this only illustrates how silly the industry’s definition of a “true detection” is.
First a look at background radiation, which includes the decay energies present due to cosmic rays, as well as various trace amounts of radioactive elements. The two main peaks visible on the below background radiation scintillator graph are 511 keV and Potassium-40’s decay energy. 511 keV is typical ‘annihilation radiation’. Read more about that at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annihilation_radiation
Without knowing your background levels, you can’t find out what stands out above background. The raw data from one of several background scans (= no sample):
Next: Then 1 liter of the rainwater sample was placed in the gamma-spectrometer and whatever blips of certain keV levels were detected were counted:
Then the background-detections were subtracted from the sampled-detections for the energy levels that overlap:
And finally what’s left gets identified by the computer’s data base that links the specific energy levels to specific radioisotopes:
So, as you can see, they are ALL below the MDA (minimum Detectable Amount), with the uncertainty often also being greater that the measured. In other words: Nothing can be said about the amounts, except that they are simply so tiny that they are unquantifiable.
But what cán be said is that at least a tiny bit of some of
all these identified radioisotopes were PRESENT in thát specific rainwater.
The Known Unknowns…
Next I will share my sources for why I think the energy detections flagged as ‘UNKNOWN’ correspond with the magenta-pink isotopes listed at the beginning, or here listed in my summary of the unknowns: These might all be incorrect. As an added note I encourage the reader the take this with a grain of salt.
- 66.21 keV … ? The only place where I found this odd energy level mentioned was in a document, http://web.ornl.gov/info/reports/1976/3445604466254.pdf, or here, “DORNL-5114 3 4456 04qbb25 4 Nuclear Decay Data for Selected Radionuclides” by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (another corner stone of the Manhattan Project):
In which I found the energy level mentioned: As you can see, that specific 66.32 keV decay energy is extremely unlikely to be detected, as usually Neptunium-239 decays differently. No wonder it was flagged “unknown”: Most of NP-239’s decay is by Beta radiation, but apparently some odd decay modes include X-rays and Gamma rays too. Neptunium’s-239’s half-life is only 2.36 days.
There’s several decay paths to end up with Np-239, including from enriched Uranium and isotopes of Plutonium. And there’s a couple different decay routes after that, which by way of intermediate decay products like Polonium-210, Bismuth-210, Lead-210, etc., ending in stable lead.
An excerpt of http://periodictable.com/Isotopes/093.239/index2.full.prod.html illustrates the concept of “enhanced natural”, showing isotopes that occur naturally are also part of the decay chains of highly unusual synthetic radioisotopes created in fission reactions:
CLICK IMAGE to see complete decay chains
Interestingly, both Plutonium-239 and Neptunium-239 were detected together in 2011 in “the first 100 hours” of the Fukushima nuclear disaster too… (Source: via Paul Langley’s blog):
https://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2013/10/12/fukushima-npp-pu-239-and-np-239-releases-first-100-hours-source-tepc-2011/, which links to these two sources: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-lM5qg9ztErNGUyMzFkMGUtYTY0NC0 and http://www.datapoke.org/blog/89/study-modeling-fukushima-npp-p-239-and-np-239-atmospheric-dispersion/
Also, from Wikipedia – Isotopes of Uranium: “Uranium-239 is an isotope of uranium. It is usually produced by exposing U-238 to neutron radiation in a nuclear reactor. U-239 has a half-life of about 23.45 minutes and decays into neptunium-239 through beta decay…”
In the summary at the beginning, it states Pd-100’s Production Mode: charged particle reaction.
At Theodore Grey’s http://periodictable.com/Isotopes/046.100/index2.full.prod.html you can see it in the decay chains it can be part of, originating with either Iodine-108, Tin-100 or Tellurium-105, all very super-short-lived fission products:
As you can see, these isotopes almost all decay in Alpha and Beta modes, so a gammaspectroscopy tends to not even detect these, save for the few freak gamma decay energies picked up here and there…
It’s half-life is only 36.7 minutes, so this detection is only possible because one or more of its possible parent radioisotopes was present. To see its place in several possible decay chains, see http://periodictable.com/Isotopes/084.203/index2.full.prod.html:
- 416.98 keV … still flagged as unknown also in my table above, is another truly weird one, which I’ve found in reference to neutron-activated Potasium-40. You read that right. Referenced in this University of Ottawa document, http://www.courseweb.uottawa.ca/phy3902/Spectroscopie%20gamma.pdf: “416.98 keV of 40K, from neutron- activated source,“ which leaves me wondering if it were created like Beryllium, or artificially. Given it was flagged ‘unknown’, chances are high it originated in the same neutron bombardment environment of Fukushima’s fissioning molten cores underground… Normally Potassium-40 has a véry long half-life, but in this case it seems it would decay quickly? If it decayed with a speed of “half-life 54 minutes”), how could it still be detected several days after leaving the neutron bombardment environment it likely originated in? Mystery…
K-40 decays to Argon-40: http://periodictable.com/Isotopes/019.40/index.full.prod.html
If synthetic K-40 and strangely altered synthetic neutron-activated K-40 is added to the atmosphere, it will change regular Potassium’s intrinsic K-40 content, raising it above its normal 0.012 %. K-40 by itself is comparable to Cesium-137, but mere doses can’t be compared as such when part of regular Potassium, due to Potassium’s metabolism role, including its cancer-fighting qualities. For more on that see my blog post Cesium-137 versus Potassium-40.
With a half-life of only 7.6 minutes, it was just a short-lived intermediate decay product in the decay chains of Francium-201, Radon-197, Astanine-197 or Polonium-189, all unusual fission products.
The decay chain possibilities: http://periodictable.com/Isotopes/080.189/index2.full.prod.html
At-206’s place in decay chains is shown @ http://periodictable.com/Isotopes/085.206/index2.full.prod.html Screenshot:
The “parent isotopes” Protactinium-218, Uranium-218, Protactinium-214 and Thorium-210 all decay super-fast and no matter which route one takes to end up with Astatine-206, it would only take a few minutes at the most. Unless it came from a fission reaction much closer by, to detect the tiniest hint of a trace of At-206, with a half life of just over half an hour… indicates that fissioning must have been happening right at the time the jet stream blew over, leaving almost nothing of these radioisotopes after a few days traveling across the Pacific at high speed.
The Decay Calculator can help estimate what’s left if you enter a source term and time period for a specific isotope: @ http://crpk.ornl.gov/decay.cfm
Perhaps it would be interesting to research the rain content of non-radioactive (stable) decay end products, such as isotopes of mercury and lead, both heavy metals and not a good idea to add to the environment either…
- 558.42 keV … I think it may have come from the decay of Platinum-196 (Pt-196), even though Pt-196 is “observationally stable” (Wikipedia – Isotopes of Platinum), because that specific energy level is emitted when Pt-196 returns to stability after being activated with thermal neutrons. 558.42 keV is references in “Thermal Neutron Capture Gammas – Target 196Pt” @ https://www-nds.iaea.org/capgam/byn/page237.html Screenshot:
Stable Platinum-196 is at the end of these decay chains: http://periodictable.com/Isotopes/078.196/index2.full.prod.html. To end up with a blip of 558.42 keV decay energy, it would have to have been subjected to heavy neutron bombardment, though.
Samarium-153 is another tell-tale sign of very recent fissioning. Here’s the decay chain, with the half-life times of the parent isotopes written next to them: If you need a clue as to where the original parent radioisotope, Barium-153 (half-life: 80 milliseconds) might have come from, see it listed under “Intensities from n-induced fission” @ http://pro.ganil-spiral2.eu/spiral2/spiral2-beams/radioactive-ion-beams-of-spiral2/low-energy-desir-isol-rib-beams-available-for-the-day-1-spiral2-phase-2-experiments/intensities-from-n-induced-fission
See its place in the possible decay chains @ http://periodictable.com/Isotopes/086.207/index2.full.prod.html Screenshot: So it originated with U-219, Th-211 or Pa-215. Uranium-219 is a type of depleted uranium, and like Thorium-211 and Protactinium-215, is synthetic as well.
Unfortunately my research leaves little room for doubt: I jumped the gun.
One or more molten reactor cores underneath the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear catastrophe site is still fissioning, June 2015. [July 26, 2015 — Note: Actually, there’s plenty of room for doubt about my initial conclusions, as well as about many of the isotopes I at first thought were de facto detected, but that might not have been present at all. Read all comments, scrutinize the raw data yourself; please leave comments with things you find in the data and why, with extra information links if possible. In the future, hopefully this summer (2015), I will write a new blog post with details on what I’ve learned.]
This means [If my initial conclusion were still correct, then this would mean:] that besides decay heat, fission heat is also created, and the rubble is subjected to heavy neutron bombardment. There is no containment. An artificial mini-sun of possibly many thousands of degrees hot is creating new untold amounts of radiotoxins into the groundwater and the Pacific. Most of these fission and activation product radiosiotopes are extremely health-hazardous and aren’t even being tested for. [While it was well worth the try, I was unable to proof this beyond the shadow of a doubt, though.]
The unbelievably misguided secrecy that the Japanese government, as well as its IAEA-aligned cohorts in the US, Russia and Europe, have wrapped this troubling reality in hinders the emergency mobilization of creativity needed to address the situation at hand. This situation, physically on-site and socio-politically internationally, has the potential to absolutely ruin the ecological balance and long-term health of the Pacific Ocean, and by extension of this entire planet. The seriousness of this situation cannot be underestimated.
Read Comments for viewpoints that could help interpret the raw data.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
!-> Additions / changes after posting:
- Nuances / additional disclaimer added at the beginning.
- July 8, 2015: My estimated travel time for the (suspected Fukushima-) radioisotopes to have reached the sampling location is 2.5 days. If it went just a tiny bit higher and faster, 48 hours is not impossible. Most conservatively, it is between 3 and 4 days max, as suggested by my wind speed scribbles of the jet stream path from F1 to the June 14, 2015 sampling location. Adjustments for the days traveled were not done for this, so this is just a rough estimation:
- July 21, 2015: I changed part of the headline from Fukushima’s Fissioning Mini-Sun on the Edge of the Pacific Ocean is COMPLETELY OUT OF CONTROL to Fukushima’s Fissioning Mini-Sun on the Edge of the Pacific Ocean COMPLETELY OUT OF CONTROL ? due to the uncertainties.
- July 26 & , 2015: Several edits in the main article. + See comments !
If you are viewing this page on any website other than allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/ it may be plagiarized. Please let me know. All content is copyright © Michaël Van Broekhoven, administrator of the Allegedly Apparent Blog. Content cited, quoted etc. from other sources is under the respective rights of that content owner. For more details, see my Disclaimer, Share Policy and Fair Use Notice. If you wish to reproduce any of my content in full or in more than a paragraph or quote, please contact me first to (maybe not) obtain permission.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —