Any Thorium-231 in Fukushima Fallout ?

Feb. 7, 2016 Beautiful warm day…

Some music before I get rolling… “Blogpost Soundtrack”:

Well, this morning after coffee, somewhere in the middle of sweeping the floor, an urge arose out of the dust clouds: “Have a second look at the very first data!   Wondering what that could be about, I did so:   I went back to that old blogpost, (June 5, 2013) “Radioisotope Analysis Results for sampled Seaweed, Soil & Mushrooms – (Northern Humboldt County, California),” which at the time had alleviated my concerns about local soil contamination (specifically where I briefly lived at that time).  I pondered over the data… (shown again below)   Ponder… ponder…

While the Cs-134 presence confirmed both the soil and the compost soil I had lab-tested contained Fukushima fallout, the Cesium-134/137 levels were not particuarly alarming.   Actually, although higher than some official data, they were still on the low side of what I expected.  The suspected hotspots are likely much more to the south in California, is what I concluded.

Something in the compost’s gamma spectroscopy results prompted me to do a couple searches.  I added some colors to highlight what I had not given a second thought before:

emsl_testresults_4samples_nohum_may2013_mvb_table_annotated2_2016look.gif

The “soil sample #3” was just store-bought compost soil, meaning that whatever was in there was in there because the vegetable food scraps the compost was made with contained it, and thus most of it likely came from South and Central California’s food growing regions.   The black arrows point at the radioCesium.  Highlighted in magenta, are two radioisotopes not detected in the regular soil:

  • 0.726 pCi/kg Radium-226
    • (= 0.026862 Bq/kg, rounded down to 0.026 Bq/Kg Ra-226)
  • 0.291 pCi/kg Thorium-231
    • (= 0.010767 Bq/kg, rounded down to 0.01 Bq/kg Th-231)
  • No detectable concentrations of any Uraniums

Only now do I realize that those COULD be pointing at something unusual…

  • Radium-226:

Could be entirely natural.  Yet, there also could be an “enhanced natural” factor at play.  Ra-226 could, for instance, be contamination from hydrolic FRACKING:   !-> See, “How Fracking Is Exposing People to Radioactive Waste, by Tara Lohan, originally published by Alternet | May 5, 2014”  Excerpt (my emphasis):

“[…] Another problem is that it’s really hard to keep track of all the stuff that may become tainted by radioactive materials in the drilling process. Millions of gallons of soupy wastewater that flow back from wells after drilling and fracking can end up in a number of places. Sometimes the wastewater is simply left in lined or unlined pits to either evaporate or sink back into the ground. Other times it is sent to water treatment plants and eventually released back into rivers and streams. At times it is simply spilled or illegally dumped. It also ends up contaminating drilling mud (a more solid waste from the process), storage tanks, and equipment.

Radionuclides in these wastes are primarily radium-226, radium-228, and radon gas,” reports the Environmental Protection Agency. “The radon is released to the atmosphere, while the produced water and mud containing radium are placed in ponds or pits for evaporation, reuse, or recovery. […]

I’ll leave it that for Ra-226.    Th-231, however is actually quite strange…

  • Thorium-231

That’s the one that caught my attention.  I used to think all Thoriums are “only natural”, and literally ignored this detection.  So it goes as an amateur at times…  As per my DISCLAIMER,  I insist you think for yourself.  I’m merely interested in this topic, but have no formal training and zero academic credentials.  You are invited to consider everything I write “for entertainment purposes only”.   Yet… maybe there’s something of value in my rambles after all…  If there is, it would actually be pretty disturbing.  

Th-231 is the decay daughter of U-235, which is an extremely rare form of Uranium, only comprising about 0.72% of natural Uranium.  Unlike the predominant isotope uranium-238, it is fissile, i.e., it can sustain a fission chain reaction.

Interestingly, no other tpes of uranium were even listed, and U-235 (possibly listed due to the presence of Th-231), however, was not detected (<MDA).   Double odd.

There isn’t all that much to be found on Th-231… In https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_thorium#Thorium-231 it says:

231Th has 141 neutrons.  It is the decay product of uranium-235.  It is found in very small amounts on the earth and has a half-life of 25.5 hours.  When it decays it emits a beta ray and forms protactinium-231. It has a decay energy of 0.39 MeV.

Maybe I’m really just putting my own ignorance on display, but it seems odd to detect Th-231, and neither its parent, U-235, nor its decay product Pa-231…

Wondering if I had already mentioned Th-231 before, I did a search on my own blog and to my own surprise found 1 blog post… which lead me down memory lane…

The rain/lichen samples I had lab-tested last summer (June 2015)…

Remember when the jet stream was blowing in straight from Japan, to meet its first significant slow-down over Colorado in June 2015 (last year)?

Nullschool_250hPa_June14_2015AfternoonInColorado

It doesn’t happen very often like that.  And it just so happened to  coincide with thunderstorms dumping unusually radioactive rain…  Just natural Radon progeny, or was there more to it?  To test my hypothesis re. ongoing releases from Fukushima,  I sent 2 samples to a lab, as some of you might recall:  1 with rainwater that fell from that ominous sky at the time this jet stream pattern was in place, and 1 with (rained-on) lichen, because lichen soak up what comes down with the rain and (due to bioaccumulation) might be able to show radionuclides otherwise missed.

-> See my originally overly alarmist blog post, (July 6, 2015) “Gamma-Spectroscopy Results of Colorado Radioactive Freak Rain: Fukushima’s Fissioning Mini-Sun on the Edge of the Pacific Ocean COMPLETELY OUT OF CONTROL ?“, which was later nuanced (Aug. 1, 2015) to “Synopsis / Improved Version: ‘Mainland USA June 14 2015 Radioactive Rain & Lichen Data Revisited’.“.

Turns out…  the lichen data’s UNKNOWN-flagged detections (See July 10, 2015: “An Attempt to Identify the ‘Unknown’-Flagged keV Decay Energies in the Lichen Sample Gammaspectroscopy”) did show this peculiarity:

338 Net Counts (+/- 227 Counts Uncertainty; and with “Critical Level @ 184 Counts) above a background of 1713 Counts at the specific decay energy of 84.13 keV in Address Channel 171.96.  338 counts is almost double the C.L., and when deducting the uncertainty margins (338-227) then there’s still 111 Counts above background…  Sound like there was at least a trace of something in there that emitted that gamma energy…

knownunknowns_lichensample_th231

Thorium-231 BETA-decays, with a decay energy of 0.39 MeV, which would not be picked up in a GAMMA spectroscopy.   Aside from the main decay energies, there’s many other ones, including gamma rays, that comprise a tiny fraction of its decay energies as well.   I searched for what might have caused the 84.13 keV  and found Th-231 back then.  To repeat from that blog post, the only thing I found on that decay energy was this:

  • ” 84.13   keV    —>  Thorium-231  (Th-231)  ?

SOURCES:

So, to recap:

  • Over the course of a few years, I sent two soil samples, one of which contained Th-231, Cs-134 & Cs-137, but no uranium or other artificial gamma emitters.
  • Then I sent a bunch of seaweeds from Japan to a lab and one happens to contain Co-60, but nothing else (except an enormous amount of K-40).
  • And to add to the list now, apparently right after it rained, my backyard’s lichen sample just happened to have contained a trace of Th-231, as well?

It leaves me with a bit of a wondering, “What are the odds?”  

And then I stumbled upon this little Wilmington, North Carolina Star-News news snippet from June 23, 1957: (added emphasis)

A Japanese physicist said today the Soviet nuclear weapon exploded on April 16 [1957] “was apparently a thorium bomb.” […] “based on analysis of atomic fallout collected here April 17, which contained no uranium at all but thorium-231 among other elements.

SovietThoriumBomb_Th231

Thorium-231 without uranium…    Like my compost soil sample?  …which was most likely made primarily from food grown in South and Central California… …where higher depositions of Fukushima fallout were modeled to be likely (See Jan. 18, 2015 (with a very important nuance editted in after posting, “UCLA: “California Thyroid Cancer Incidence Well Above National Average”. — FUKUSHIMA FALLOUT the most obvious cause!

Hm…

Could these two apparent Th-231 detections be yet another puzzle piece, just like the “beyond forgotten” mysteriously high concentrations of Cobalt-60 in Fukushima fallout?    Like Co-60, ‘Th-231 without Uranium’, is apparently more associated with nuclear bomb fallout as well…

What if these are little bread crumbs that, especially when all taken together, imply things that are not officially admitted?

Add to this what I mentioned in comments last week:

  • Thorium-232

And what if those Th-232 detections I mentioned a few weeks ago aren’t so “natural” either… What if they are “enhanced natural” is some way?

-> See (Jan. 30, 2015), “Bits and Pieces of Recent Radiation Data, incl. Cs-137/Th-232/Be-7 Uptick in Finland, Spikes & Data Gaps on EURDEP & Radnet”

To quote and expand upon an [edited] excerpt from something I wrote in the comment section under that post:

“[…] that dreadful third possibility, namely that Thorium was actually in use at Fukushima and is part of what gets released.

But thát will not be possible to discuss beyond speculation, unfortunaly, because there would really only be one reason why Japan had Th-232 in use in its neutron-spewing reactor complex:  to bombard it with neutrons to create Uranium-233, a fissile material..    And then we’d get into the territory of why they passed the Secrecy Act in the first place.  (See (Nov. 28, 2013,  ‘Orwellian Japan 2013‘)

Unless they were playing around (also in secret) with Thorium reactor designs on the side, or… I mean… WHAT?

Had a look at the Thorium Nuclear Fuel Cycle, an alternative to the more common Uranium and Plutonium reactors…   Wikipedia on the Thorium fuel cycle does mention a neutron-activation process that leads to the creation of fissile U-233, which mentions the similarity to a process that parallels the process in URANIUM BREEDER REACTORS:

ThoriumFuelCycleWikipedia_Feb7_2016

Just noting things.  And wondering some more…

‘Cause all you can find about significant Th-232 detections in relation to the Fukushima fallout cloud in 2013 are a handful or obscure mentions referring to documents that can no longer be found online… Such as these:

The source for this is gone: http://blog.susanaromeroweb.com/?p=9232&lang=en
But this is what it claimed, excerpt:

Experts from the Ministry of Defense of Russia studied aerosol samples obtained after the accident at Fukushima-1 2011 and concluded that the Japanese nuclear plant nuclear activities took place not stated, agency reports scientific information FIAN-Inform.

Experts who analyzed the radioactive cloud that 17 March 2011, six days after the accident at the plant, Read the Russian city of Petropavlovsk-Kamchatski, claimed that thorium concentrations detected in the samples confirm the intention of the Japanese to obtain uranium-233 (fissile component of nuclear weapons) in pure form and in excess of those agreed in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons in the cycle of uranium-thorium amounts.

On the surface of the aerosol particles investigators found the 238U and 232Th isotopes relative atomic concentrations in the tens (in the case of uranium) and hundreds (in the case of Thorium) times higher than those corresponding to the average content of the element in the earth’s crust.

Similar to this allegation, found @ http://forummsk.info/english/material/eng_news/10361787.html

Ministry of Defense of RF Confessed That Japan Has Been Accumulating Nuclear Weapons Materials – 3 Years on”    Quoted excerpt (seems perhaps not the best translation from Russian), follows:

17.05.2014 – The group of the Russian scientists from the department of the Ministry of Defense investigated tests of aerosols taken after accident on the nuclear power plant “Fukushima-1”. Method of Seсondary-Ion Mass Spectrometry (SIMS) which allowed not only to estimate condition of active zone and scale of discharge of radionuclides in the air, but also to make a conclusion about not declared nuclear activity taking place before accident took place was used for the first time for analysis.

The values of concentration of thorium measured testify, according to the scientists, about intention to receive uranium-233 in pure form in quantities which exceed concentration stipulated in the Treaty of Non-Proliferation of the Nuclear Weapon in uranium – thorium cycle.

– In no less than 3 years the scientists of the Ministry of Defense understood that Japan was accumulating weapon fissionable substances, – the editor-in-chief of FORUM.msk Anatoly Baranov got delighted. – If the Russian Federation so “quickly” reacts to nuclear threat, I have nothing to say. Especially in present situation in the world which strongly changed towards probability of the third world war. After all I and Alexander Shabanov, the specialist in this problem from the Moscow State University, spoke about it right after accident on Fukushima. All, probably including scientists from the Ministry of Defense, laughed at us very loudly…

http://forum-msk.org/english/material/eng_news/6085558.html

– We spoke about it openly, without equivoques in simple Russian, – Anatoly Baranov continued. – For some reason there was no reaction of official circles. If they didn’t want to offend nuclear Japan with its not conventional nuclear weapon? While it’s possible not to listen to us, we understand nothing…

So perhaps Cobalt-60 ánd Thorium-232 ánd Thorium-231 are all three little bread crumbs pointing at…  At what precisely?

  • That the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power complex is played some role in a top secret Japanese nuclear weapons research program ???
  • That perhaps the “conspiracy fringe” allegation that the mega-earthquake was triggered intentionally (not by HAARP, but) with a nuclear bomb deep-underwater as part of some geopolitical terrorism blackmail scheme, is not entirely nonsense ???
  • That during the meltdown super-criticalities occured, similar to an actual nuclear explosion, which is why there’s aspects of the fallout that are more reminiscent of nuclear bomb fallout ???
  • That the molten corium(s), which most likely is comprised of a mixture [of regular Uranium fuel + MOX fuel (which contains more Pluonium) + spent fuel (also contains Plutonium and lots of activation products), some of it super-hot, + as well as various radionuclides that were formed during the massive neutron bombardment (like Antimony-124/125, Cobalt-60, Manganese-54 and Tritium), + the regular soup of radioCesiums, + ever-increasing levels of Strontium-90 leaking into the Pacific, etc.] … is a mixture that perhaps has come to resemble an underground quasi-“breeder reactor”, recurring criticalities and all ???
  • Or perhaps a combination of some of the above?

All those possibilities are extremly disturbing…

Or maybe it all means nothing. 

Right… 

There’s always thát. 

How was the Super Bowl?

— — — — — — —   — — — — — — —

Disclaimer, Do Not Share in full, Fair Use Statement

FlagMVB

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.
| Leave a comment

Complete Radon (220/222) Record for Sveti Kriz, Croatia

Coatia_RnMonitor.leftOneLocation: Sveti Kriz, Croatia.  Data accessed via EURDEP Public “Advanced” Map, most data not per se validated.  See also my DISCLAIMER.

No annotations.  You can figure it out.

Pay particular attention to the blue graph.

  • Black graph: Radon-222
  • Blue graph: Radon-220

This is the compete record from its beginning in late November 2009 until today, Feb. 5, 2016; (most recent data at the end):

1_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA2_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA3_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA4_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA

Significant disturbances (w/ Rn-220) are apparent by the end of 2010 here as well:

5_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA6_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA

No much to be seen right after the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear catastrophe began, but a record peak value in mid-July 2011 is apparent:7_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA8_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA9_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA

Major Radon-220 upticks February, March, into the onset of April 2012:

10_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA11_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA12_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA13_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA14_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA15_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA16_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA17_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA18_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA19_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA20_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA

THe ZNPP fiasco shows here in major data gaps in the first half of December 2014, very interestingly: for Rn-220 only!:

21_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA22_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA23_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA24_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA25_Radon_Sveti.Kriz_CROATIA

–> The late January 2016 uptick of Rn-220-EEC, at the end of a data gap reached to nearly 1.6 Bq/m^3, the highest value since spring 2012, and as high as what was measured there in April 2011.

Extra information that could possibly help in “resolving this mystery”…

Rn220Rn222

Just passing along some “parts of the puzzle”…  Just look at the previous post for a clue of where the jet stream wind was coming from…

— — — — — — —   — — — — — — —   — — — — — — —

SHUT DOWN THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY !

— — — — — — —   — — — — — — —   — — — — — — —

 

On a side-note: Great points etc. aside, YouTube anti-nuclear crusader-artist Kevin Blanch, in his second Feb 5, 2016 video, seems to suggest (right?) that I too might be engaging in somehow dangerous activity or something.

Nope, just calling Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration out for the cowardous nuclear puppets they have PROVEN THEMSELVES to be.   Their arrogant hypocrisy is not my doing.  I’m entitled to my opinion… and being “that fool/nutter/…” pointing at the obvious.  Everyone’s free to ignore what I think about whatever.   I have no illusions about how on top of their game the nuclear industry is.

In that light, I think I am merely providing entertainment.  They got it covered.  If need be, like when I was ON IT documenting the Zaporizhia radioactive cloud, they just cut my blog traffic anyhow.  So: no worries.

Freedom of Speech has never been safer.

It’s possible no one can hear me, but that’s another matter.  “;-)”

— — — — — — —   — — — — — — —   — — — — — — —

Disclaimer

FlagMVB

If you are viewing this page on any website other than allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/ it was 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  Apart from just linking here, 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.
| Leave a comment

Unusually High Radiation Spikes in the Alps. A Close Look @ Spittal/Drau, Austria (EURDEP/Nullschool)

Friday Feb. 5, 2016 – Disclaimer

A new piece of art in my ‘time wasting’ series:

What gives‘, mixed unvalidated data on blank pixels, Feb. 2016…

I was sampling some monitors through the EURDEP Public Map (via my Online Radiation Monitors page) and noticed quite a bit of “Standard Deviation” upticks for the past few days, particularly in the Alps (Italy, Switzerland, Austria, Slovania,…).

2Days_standardDeviation_gamma_EURDEP_Feb5_2016.gif

Rather randomly, I decided to see if the spike above 0.210 √Sv/hr at Spittal/Drau (Austria) was unusual.

Spittal_1mo_Feb5_2016

As you’ll see in the below record, it turns out to be rather unusual for winter.  You have to go back to 2012 to find any spike reach over the 210 nSv/hr level (nanoSievert/hour – See Radiation Units & Conversions for help with that aspect), and then it was in summer when such spikes occur more often, and may be due to merely naturally ocurring radiation.

A look at Nullschool (at the end of this post) shows this as yet another example of “the pattern” I’ve been observing over the years: a slow-down in the jet stream, coinciding with wind slow-downs, as well as roughy the same wind directions, in the air layers underneath often coincides with ground level radiation upticks.

Strikingly, almost every time I’ve found this to be the case, wind patterns in the Northern Hemisphere just happen to be such that the jet stream was passing directly over Northern Japan.   Are they venting super-hot radioactive gasses from the molten coriums, that rise quickly (and thus remain undetected at ground level in the vincinity in Japan?), that cool down in the upper troposphere, to cause upticks on monitors on the other side of the planet?  Or what?  Or is this just a lot of cosmogenic Be-7 or so coming down?   I don’t know if this is related to Fukushima.  No idea actually.  I just find it just slightly peculiar that I keep seeing this very same pattern.

I’ll start with the radiation record.  As is now becoming “my usual”, I pasted 3 months together per line, and added some comments.  The most recent data is at the end.  The record of this monitor starts in December 2002, but the data is initially just day or 12-hour averages, which hides significant spikes.  Data gaps can be found in these early records too, though, such as this example from late May 2006:

SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_39

Late September 2007 is when the record as it shows today begins.   I’ve marked data gaps and values over the somewhat rare 210 nSv/hr (0.210 µSv/hr) dose rate level (gamma only).  This record begins with a couple of such high values of over 0.210 µSv/hr, at the end of summer 2007:

SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_34SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_33SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_32SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_31SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_30SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_29SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_28SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_27

We see the high values again two years later in August 2009:

SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_26SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_25SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_24SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_23

And again in August 2010:

SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_22SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_21

–> As seen on many other records as well, it looks like something very significant happened in 2010, as suggested by unusually long and widespread data gaps.  Part of what’s interesting about (well, *I* find that interesting…) is that the ecological upheavel observed on the coasts of North America, and especially the Pacific Coast, including sea star wasting syndrome, reportedly began pre-Fukushima, in 2010.  I can’t rule out that it’s all coincidence, but there’s also a possibility that a serious nuclear accident was covered-up, with only ecological clues on one hand, and data gaps on the other hand, hinting of this possibility.  The possible effects of one disaster would end up compounding that of the next one.

March 11, 2011 marked:

SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_20SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_19SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_18

–> As seen in many places: A relatively small spike shortly after March 11, followed by spikes that cannot be differentiated from what is most likely mainly natural variability (dust, some with Cs-137 in it, and Radon progeny coming down with precipitation, as well as Be-7, K-40, etc.).  But then significant upticks in the following months, particularly by autumn 2011 (and again in autumn 2012 as well in many places).

When the US EPA Radnet declared the disaster over and returned to routine monitoring on May 3, 2011, they must have known something, ’cause it after this date that the upticks become more pronounced on European monitors that do not show data gaps.

Marked above (the one with the green text in it), the highest value on record for this monitor was in mid-September 2011, when it reached just above 0.240 µSv/hr.  (I had to adjust the scale for that month and paste it together.

Continued:

SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_17SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_16SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_15

Summer 2012 saw more and many high upticks (more so than in the summers of the preceding half decade), including a second-highest late Oct. 2012:

SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_14SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_13SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_12SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_11SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_10SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_9SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_8SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_7SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_6

A likely signal of the major radioactive cloud from the troubled Zaporizhia NPP in Ukraine is visible here too. This was one of the only times that a major spike somewhere (in that case in Latvia) did not trace back to Japan. For documentation on that nuclear accident, one that officially (still!) never happened, see the links in my post (Jan. 12, 2015) Cover-up of Zaporizhye Nuclear Accident Near-Certain:

SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_5SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_4SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_3

The very recent disturbances (see my Nuclear Blog Posts Archive for various blogposts documenting those, and accompanying data gaps from late summer 2015 into this winter), also shows here in short data gaps:

SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_2

And last but least, the uptick above 0.210 µSv/hr this week that compelled me to look at the long-term record to put it in perspective:  That’s the highest such spike on record for winter time:

SPittal_Drau_Austria_3Mo_PreFeb5_2016_1

WIND

A quick look at Nullschool for wind data showed one of several possible contributors to this unusual spike:

At 850 hPa, you see that the monitor (approximate location marked with little green circle) is sitting in an area with little wind near the ground:

http-:earth.nullschool.net:#2016:02:04:0900Z:wind:isobaric:850hPa:orthographic=31.51,45.80,1024:loc=13.502,46.720

A little ligher up you see that this slow-down lies in the extension of the jet stream reaching Europe from over the UK:

http-:earth.nullschool.net:#2016:02:04:0900Z:wind:isobaric:700hPa:orthographic=31.51,45.80,1024:loc=13.502,46.720

At 500 hPa, just below fast jet-stream height, the pattern is most strikingly clear: the monitor is right where the jest stream slows down and spreads out:

http-:earth.nullschool.net:#2016:02:04:0900Z:wind:isobaric:500hPa:orthographic=31.51,45.80,1024:loc=13.502,46.720

Jet stream height @ 250 hPa:

http-:earth.nullschool.net:#2016:02:04:0900Z:wind:isobaric:250hPa:orthographic=31.51,45.80,1024:loc=13.502,46.720

When tracing that wind patterns upwind…

http-:earth.nullschool.net:#2016:02:04:0900Z:wind:isobaric:250hPa:orthographic=-38.33,91.16,265:loc=13.733,46.895

— — — — — — —   — — — — — — —   — — — — — — —

Disclaimer

FlagMVB

If you are viewing this page on any website other than allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/ it was 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  Apart from just linking here, 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.
| Leave a comment

Photos Northern SLV (Southern Colorado, Feb. 4 , 2016)

“You ask me why I dwell in the green moun­tain;
I smile and make no reply for my heart is free of care.
As the peach-blossom flows down stream and is gone into the unknown,
I have a world apart that is not among men.”

– Li Bai, legendary Chinese poet

Feb3_2016.gif

After I add a log to the wood stove in my under-construction DUSTY home before bed time, I go outside and crawl into my sleeping bag in my super-clean-air fancy deepfreezer bedroom…  :-)  Always nice to enter the still-toasty home in the morning, though.

 San Luis Valley (SLV), South-Central Colorado, 8,200 ft.

It was – 22 Celcius last night.

Looks like it will warm up again, with a “heat wave” next week:

Crestone_Feb4Forecast.gif

The winter storm at the beginning of the week dumped about a meter of snow higher up, but only 12 cm (or so) where I live.  I had hoped for three times as much, but it’s something.  So, as is apparently “the usual” here, the storm was hyped again.

The mountains look extra gorgeous, though.  Couple more photos taken this week:

Heading into Crestone from tha Baca:

DSCN9875

Looking towards the Sangre de Cristos from the valley on my way to Moffat:DSCN9884DSCN9888DSCN9886DSCN9891

Snow-covered sand dunes…

DSCN9890

Flashback to a very recent past when I still lived almost exclusively out of my car, and camped in a múch smaller tent, less than a year ago: (Feb. 28, 2015) Winter Camping in the Sand Dunes (Southern Colorado PHOTOS).

Most recent other blog posts with mainly photos in:

— — — — — — —   — — — — — — —   — — — — — — —

Disclaimer

FlagMVB

If you are viewing this page on any website other than allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/ it was 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  Apart from just linking here, 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.
| Leave a comment

Hillary Clinton’s Email (March 12, 2011) Re. Fukushima Nuclear Catastrophe: “STAY INDOORS, WEAR MASK, SHOWER IMMEDIATELY AFTER COMING HOME,…”

See also http://nuclear-news.net/2016/02/02/fukushima-iodine-131-risk-hidden-from-us-same-as-flint-michigan/ and additional links in comments (some of which provide additional info).

Here’s some recently released-in-part emails that Hillary Clinton received, which warned her about the dangers approaching the US:

ABCDEF

PDF. SOURCE: https://cryptome.org/2016/02/hrc-fukushima.pdf

As the even more damning documents found in Plume Gate and the NRC FOIA documents (5 Years Later.) show beyond the shadow of a doubt:  The pro-nuke Obama administration knew véry well that the Fukushima nuclear disaster was on such a scale that it warranted issuing health warning for much of the US.

Those warnings could have included:

Stay indoors.  Wear a mask.  Wear a hat. Keep doors and windows closed.  Run air purification filters indoors.  Cover vegetable gardens / soils used for growing food.  Shower immediately after walking outside, especially in case of precipitation.  Do not use rainwater for drinking water.  And then the specific data of the core of the cloud should have been shared, with advisories for hot spot zones where taking Potassium Iodine (KI, to prevent what will now likely turn into thousands of extra future thyroid cancers) should have been recommended.  And so forth.

!-> IN FACT, France, much further downwind and less affected, did issue some such warnings, as I relayed one month after it all began (April 13, 2011), “Above or Below “levels of concern”: USA vs. France”

But what did the US goverment do?

While plume models showed the US getting hit, it wasn’t yet known to most of the public what the corresponding concentrations of various radionuclides were, and if it posed any health risk.  That would depend on “the source term”: how much gets released from the accident site.

Radiation_plumePath_3dayForcast

Relative & logarithmic legend.  Significance depends of ‘source term’.

The US government knew the source term was enormous. 

fiveworstcases_foia_fukushima

Based on the best data and on-the-ground intel available, they ran dispersion models. 

That’s just for 96 hours.  Nearly five years later, the releases have yet to come to an end…

And yet, these eloquent well-dressed taxpayer-paid cancer-sowing military-industrial-complex-serving  bastards, told everyone that there was “nothing to be concerned about“, which to this day they have continued to repeat.  Nuclear-industry frontman & Liar-in-Chief Barrack Obama on March 17, 2011:

“[…] I know that many Americans are also worried about the potential risks to the United States.  So I want to be very clear:  We do not expect harmful levels of radiation to reach the United States, whether it’s the West Coast, Hawaii, Alaska, or U.S. territories in the Pacific.  Let me repeat that:  We do not expect harmful levels of radiation to reach the West Coast, Hawaii, Alaska, or U.S. territories in the Pacific.  That is the judgment of our Nuclear Regulatory Commission and many other experts. […]”

— US President Barack Obama, March 17, 2017

The guy is an unbelievably skilled liar.  You can’t tell from just listening to this that at that time he already knew that the situation had deteriorated beyond any nuclear catastrophe ever before.   The Plume Gate documents show this beyond the shadow of a doubt.

195-cali-doses-5annot

They told the public explicitly NOT to take KI pills.  They conceiled what they knew (Again, see the Plume Gate docs), they even pushed the permitting process to build the first new nuclear power plants in the US in over 30 years, and rather than expand, the EPA actually scaled back the radiation monitoring.  While leaking continued, all monitoring returned to a dismal ‘routine levels’ before summer 2011.  They even brought an end to monitoring for Tritium in rainwater (in 2012).

Anyhow, the Plume Gate docs are more damning, but these declassified Hillary Clinton emails do illustrate what was known by certain individual political higher-ups.  They took the health risk to themselves very seriously, all while they kept the public in the dark about that.

Other recent posts that might interest you:

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

Disclaimer

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

FlagMVB

If you are viewing this page on any website other than allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/ it IS plagiarized.  Please let me know.  All original 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 probably obtain no such permission.
| 4 Comments

Plume Gate and the NRC FOIA documents 5 Years Later

Passing this along from ‘Hatrick Penry’:

More background on PlumeGate:

My own (embarrassingly overdue… ;-/) post on PlumeGate, see (Dec. 2, 2014),  PLUME GATE – Internal NRC Communications Released under Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) proof deliberate Cover-Up of Severity of global Fukushima Fallout in 2011. Recent SFP4 News May Have Been Part of Cover-Up

See also some of his previous videos:

 

!-> More @ Hatrick Penry’s channel on YouTube:  https://www.youtube.com/user/HatrickPenry/videos

Note:  Most of the people that ‘Hattie’ claims are most likely part of some kind of “controlled opposition” network are listed in my Nuclear News Links.  Having been gullible myself and having repeated stuff that I now no longer believe, I’m hesitant to label anyone “controlled opposition” just for not having grasped the significance of what ‘Hattie’ has been pointing at for so long.

The reason I repeat referring to this is because I think deserves to be seen and studied much more than it has.

Possibly related:

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

Disclaimer

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

FlagMVB

If you are viewing this page on any website other than allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/ it IS plagiarized.  Please let me know.  All original 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 probably obtain no such permission.
| 4 Comments

Photos Northern SLV (Southern Colorado, Jan. 30, 2016)

DSCN9820

A herd of elk, in the Northern San Luis Valley, Colorado, Jan 30, 2016

 ” Clouds come floating into my life,

no longer to carry rain or usher storm,

but to add color

to my sunset sky. ” 

Rabindranath Tagore

DSCN9828

As the day’s last light plays with the clouds, building over the ridges,…  the sight of a large herd of elk:

DSCN9850

Hundreds

The elk or wapiti (Cervus canadensis) is one of the largest species within the deer family in the world, and one of the largest land mammals in North America…

Often hear about their presence in the area (sometimes they take over the road), but I hadn’t seen that many together in one meadow before.  Awesome.

A zoom-in (with my cheapo pocket camera):

DSCN9846.JPG

South of GG, North of AA, just east of Hwy. 17,  Jan. 30, 2016

DSCN9856Last light on Mount Blanca…

DSCN9861

New Mexico on the southern horizon

I’ve been coming here for 11 years now, and after spending most of the past 2+ years here, I guess it’s becoming my home base…

Amidst spectacular wildlife, some three dozen spiritual centers, including ashrams, Tibetan stupas, meditation retreat centers, and so forth,…  Yet also: deepfreezer winter nights, raging winds, week-long spring sand storms, major wildfire danger, a ‘mosquito season’ at the onset of summer,… mountain lions, bears, coyotes, periodic mice infestations (depending on pine nut abundance),…  not to mention the reasons (not all as entertaining as it may sound) that have given the Crestone area the regional reputation of resembling a “free-range insane asylum”…

Rumor has it that of all the people that move to this unique part of Colorado (just north of the Great Sand Dunes National Park, south of Salida), over 50% leave within 3 years…enterTheValley.gif

…and that ‘street statistic’ doesn’t even include the resident and transient alien populations…  ;-)

-> Enter the Valley:  “Renowned Ufologist Chris O’Brien blew the lid off the San Luis Valley-now he takes you even deeper into the world’s most mysterious locale:  The picturesque patch of land that stretches from Southern Colorado into Northern New Mexico, known as the San Luis Valley, has been home to some of the most astounding occurrences in North American history. More strange sightings have been reported within the SLV’s radius that in any other part of the country. Shrouded in mystery, a brave few have dared to explore the vast territory-Chris O’Brien is one of those people. He first took us there in his classic work, The Mysterious Valley [which was a very entertaining read when I first came here a decade ago]. […]

DSCN9864

… wobb wobb wobb …  ;-)

I’m trying to make the best of living in this strange intense energy vortex of sorts…  Yet at times I wonder…  I don’t quite know what I’m doing here…  Yet, regardless, as challenging as it can be at times… I wouldn’t want to be anywhere else…

DSCN9862.JPG
Home …something about it… home.

Winter Storm Watch in effect

Sat.Jan31_2016_130am.gif

National Weather Service Statement as of 8:25 PM MST on January 30, 2016:   Snow accumulation… 8 to 12 inches for the valleys… and one to two feet for the mountains… and 6 to 12 inches along the I-25 corridor. […] If you must travel in or through the watch area during the time of the watch… take along a winter survival kit.

;-)

| 1 Comment

MUST WATCH: Nuclear Controversies (full length documentary) 核電爭議 (附中文字幕)

Not well-known, but this documentary goes to the heart of the matter:

Millions of people ought to see this.

| 2 Comments

Bits and Pieces of Recent Radiation Data, incl. Cs-137/Th-232/Be-7 Uptick in Finland, Spikes & Data Gaps on EURDEP & Radnet

Beautiful sunny day, the calm before the storm… Jan 30, 2016

I’ll start with the part I deleted, yet had received a comment on (for that comment, see previous post):

  • RadioIsotope-specific data from Kotka, Finland:

I looked at some EURDEP stuff (see Online Radiation Monitors), and harvested this one interesting correlation of an uptick in Cs-137, with an uptick in Be-7 and a (relatively rare) detection of Th-232, @ Kotka, just east of Helsinki, in Southern Finland:

Kotka_1month_Jan29_2016_Cs137_Th232_Be7_noI131

No measurable I-131 in this whiff

It had been lightly snowing there that week, and the the time of the peak of the uptick coincides with the snowiest day, as seen in this Helsinki [1 past year precipitation, pre Jan. 30, 2016 – via my METEO page -> Historical Weather Data]:

precipitation_reports_hours_h

So the idea that this is “just some surface dust” seems unlikely to me. Allow me to elaborate:

Surface dust can indeed include traces of Cesium-137 (in Finland that would be mainly from the 1986 Chernobyl accident  On the Chernobyl radioCesium fallout maps for Europe, you can see that Finland received a relatively high amount (due to precipitation at the time the radioactive cloud was moving that way)).  Beryllium-7, which is released from nuclear sites as well (during refueling, maintenance, leaks or an accident), but is more associated with the upper atmosphere, where it is created naturally through cosmogenesis.  Thorium-232 could be in dust as well, although it is rarely detected.  In the past few years curious detections of Iodine-131, Cobalt-60, etc. have coincided with detections of Th-232 during the same week.  Th-232 occurs naturally, yet, like Be-7 can also be “enhanced natural” in the sense that it can be added to the environmental mix through artificial means as well (such as a leaking reactor, mining activities, etc.).  One of those ways for it to be added is as a decay product of various artificial radioisotopes.  Some examples from http://periodictable.com/Isotopes/090.232/index2.full.prod.html (excerpt):

TH232_potentialParents

Since it has been snowing and “resuspencion of local dust” can thus practically be ruled out, I had a look at the wind patterns to see if there were a chance it could have come from that place that I suspect is still leaking like a sieve…

(Short answer: It’s not impossible.)

At that peak of the uptick, Jan. 24, 2015, the jet stream had a nice narrow slow-down zone that passed over that area…

Following the wind lines upwind, without making wind-speed time-adjustments (to cover the couple days it would have taken for the fastest air to make the journey; so very roughly:) the higher-up wind came from…

b_http-:earth.nullschool.net:#2016:01:24:1200Z:wind:isobaric:250hPa:orthographic=25.90,86.46,271:loc=24.590,60.297.gif

Nah… coincidence.  From somewhere else probably.   It can’t just always be Fukushima…  Like the Swiss data from a few posts ago, it surely has to be Chernobyl-polluted fire wood here too.  Burn enough of it and the Thorium-232 will start to ooze out as well. :-)  Beryllium-7-enriched fire wood – lol- sure, why not.  ;-)   [sarc.  Sorry…]

‘Cause… See… if it really came from “thát far”, then… just following the windlines upwind to get a rough idea…

Then after its fast Pacific Ocean crossing, it would have made landfall in that slightly less pronounced slow-down zone off the North-American coast…  as “the cloud that perhaps only exists in my mind” passed between the US EPA Radnet monitor @ the Juneau, Southern Alaska and those in Washington state, like Richland, Washington, in the Cascades.  Wouldn’t those at least show a little spike  in gamma and/or beta in the Jan 20-22 period?

Let’s see … Juneau, AK…  data for Jan. 1 through Jan. 30, 2016… (waiting…)

Juneau_AK_Jan2016

Hm… did it cut off the last week?  Zoom in… Jan 18 through Jan 30… (waiting):

  • Juneau, AK, Jan 18-30, 2016:  See, nothing to see (sarc.  Yeah… “haha”: LITERALLY): just some data gaps  in that Jan. 20-22 window…:

Juneau_AK_LastWeekJan2016

  • Richland, WA, Jan 18-30, 2016, to the south and a bit higher elevation, same 12-day period… (…waiting…) Ah, there it is:  Oh good [sarc.], REALLY “nothing to see here”:

RichlandWA_lastweekJan2016

Another place I could look at is downwind in the 250 hPa’s slow-down zone much further to the south of Kotka on the above-shown Nullschool map, including places in Eastern Europe, or perhaps also at higher elevations in central and even Western Europe…  A sampling:

At Botev Peak in Bulgaria, where I expected to see something, there’s no evidence of a higher elevation fallout cloud moving over:

BotevPeak_Bulgaria.gif

Yet in the mountains of Macedonia, @ Negotino, just a bit more to the west, however, there is a very significant uptick right at the same time:

Negotino_Macedonia.gif

Not a fluke, as you can see from the (not as pronounced but still strikingly around the same time) data from Kicevo, Macedonia to the west:

Kicevo_Macedonia.gif

On a side-note, and “also probably completely unrelated”, that same week also saw the second-highest Bismuth-214 levels on record at this Magdeburg monitor in central Germany (the record was broken in early Nov. 2015, part of a series of widespread upticks and data gaps (mainly in Oct-Nov-Dec. 2015), of which documentation can be found in my Nuclear Blog Post Archive.):

2ndHighest_MagdeburgDeutschland

@ Zwerndorf, Austria, I found this massive (+1.2 µSv/hr) uptick within the same 24-hour period, albeit with its peak at the beginning of Jan. 25, 2016.  As seen in some other locations, it shows what I call, ‘a typical fallout pattern‘:

Zwerndorf_Oostenrijk

!-> EDUCATE YOURSELF:   If you think that a 1.2 µSv/hr uptick is somehow insignificant, I suggest you look at the post-Chernobyl data that show that planes that flew directly through the thick of the radioactive cloud measured just 0.8 µ Sv/hr over Finland in that disastrous spring 1986.

The monitor at Bischofeshofen, on the other hand, “got creative with that spike” (courtesy data processing software the IAEA was involved in writing…? Hm…) and -wooptidoo- forced the values of the beginning and end of it to zero, and left a gaping data hole for all of us to think happy thoughts of:

Bischofshofen_Ostenreich

That that coincided with a significant spike in ground-snow-sealed Temelin, Czech Republic does underscore that whatever caused these upticks came down from higher up with the precipitation:

Temelin

Volos, Greece:

Volos_Greece

On the vast majority of monitors there is nothing peculiar to be seen, though.  And even if there could be, there isn’t.   It get’s old.  Same old, same old.  It;s see-through by now:  the radiation monitoring networks are rigged to hide the most significant data when it matters.  If there’s a major accident, you’re unlikely to be able to figure it out from the data that’s shared with the public.

And for closing, here’s my country of origin’s “watchdog”, FANC,’s version of giving Belgians the middle finger, with “greetings from Mont-Rigi, Belgium” (near Spa):

MontRigi_Belgique

I’m wasting my time.  They got it covered…

My point remains the same:  If it were “all-natural”, it would be in the nuclear industry’s interest to show how high natural spikes go.  Of that little we’re allowed to see, I conclude (and have documented like no one else, as far as I know) that upticks 1) are becoming more frequent when viewed over multiple years since 2011, even in winter, and 2) they continue to go higher and higher, with records set all over the place in 2015.  That makes no sense for “natural”.

I welcome alternative explanations, but until I come across something convincing, my impression remains that a massive cover-up is taking place in plain sight.  I suspect it is related to the ongoing crisis at the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear complex in Japan, but I cannot prove that.  It could be one cover-up compounding another cover-up (a la what has become apparent in the California Thyroid Cancer surge).  But you have to be semi-obsessed with getting to the bottom of this nuclear mess, almost like a worshipper of truth “going to church” religiously, to even ‘get it’ that the monitoring and oversight systems are rigged.   The fox is guarding the hen house.  There is no nuclear safety oversight.   It’s a giant IAEA-orchestrated scam.

Just kidding.  [sarc.]

— — — — — — —   — — — — — — —

Disclaimer & Fair Use Statement

FlagMVB

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.
| 4 Comments

Snow in the forecast

8,200 ft (2500 m) elevation, Northern Sangre de Cristo Mountain range, last Friday evening of January 2016 — Some 24 hours before the onset of a snow storm that could bring up to 39 cm (15 inches) of snow to this area.  Yay!

The radiation-related parts of this post were deleted within 12 hours. Disclaimer: ‘Cause I reserve the right to do whatever I feel like doing with this blog of mine.  

!-> The main part has been added onto and has been given its own seperate post, (Jan 30, 2016) Bit and Pieces of Recent Radiation Data (EURDEP, Radnet), incl. (from partly deleted previous post) Cs-137/Th-232/Be-7 Uptick in Kotka, Finland, Data Gaps in the US Pacific Northwest, Etc.

These storms often lose their punch over the Sierras in California and the over the main ranges of the Rockies, before they get to the Sangre de Cristos.  (This is mainly a high desert for a reason…)   This forecast, however, saw some ‘upgrades’ rather than downgrades as the storm is approaching:

  • From 5 days ago:

in5days.gif

  • From Friday evening:

24hrsBeforeImpact

And one from Saturday morning (1/30/2016), 10 am:

Sat10amforcast

Barely froze last night, and already above freezing by 9:30am.

— — — — — — —   — — — — — — —

Disclaimer & Fair Use Statement

FlagMVB

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.
| 3 Comments

Allegedly Apparent Blog now on Twitter

@AllegedlyApparent‘ didn’t fit, so I called the channel @AptlyAlleged.  A first test tweet was sent into the twether (or whatever one would call the twitter equivalent of ether):

Twitter_AptlyAlleged.gif

Not that it matters much, but it bring in a handful viewers to my previous post, https://allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/2016/01/26/any-significance-to-cobalt-60-in-fukushima-fallout/.

Why?  I don’t know if this is a good thing, but I suppose when a blog post can sit around for many hours after posting without even 1 view, perhaps it’s okay to leave a comment at ENEnews (somewhere amongst all the commentors who obviously find it more important to call eachother names rather than take the challenges at hand seriously), and get my own Twitter account as well, making it easier for more active tweeters to pass something along, etc.

Maybe I’ll end up using it for quick data posts that I don’t want to put into a blog post.

A la,”Calibration effect, or unusual radiation upticks, or perhaps both?  3 months data from Aydin Kusadasi, Turkey.” with a pic:

a_aydin

Stuff like that?  Perhaps.

Not sure yet how I’ll use it yet.  But it’s there now.  Cheers.

| Leave a comment

Any Significance to Cobalt-60 in Fukushima Fallout?

 ♫ “…Big in Japan    ooh…  the eastern sea’s so blue” ♫

Colorado Rocky Mountains (USA) — Tuesday, January 26, 2016, 3:33 pm

[Disregard the above “blog post soundtrack”, this post was actually written while listening to Goa Trance mixes ;-)]

 — Notice ‘Expert opinions’ may diverge: DISCLAIMER —

This blogpost is not really intended as “mere entertainment,” though,  even if I’ld claim otherwise, otherwise.  Some of the dots that could be connected, are not per se (spelled-out-) connected for you.  This is an overview of aspects that I find ‘interesting‘.

The measurable presence in Fukushima fallout of artificial neutron-activation product, radioisotope Cobalt-60, is far more significant than has been stressed by researchers and commentators, I think.

(…It’s just a thought. 

Like clouds, thoughts come and go. 

It’s a cobalt blue cloud, though,

so captivating…

  with irridescent edges even,

More pink fog

and yellow rain

in the forecast…)

As you might already have noticed, ;-P …  I’ve been on a wee bit of a quest to better understand what really happened in March-April 2011, and beyond, on the Fukushima Coast, Japan, and what is currently happening inside the molten-down coriums underneath the Fukushima Cauldrons of Hell. 

Where exactly are all those coriums anyway, TEPCO / IAEA ? 

Where exactly in the Earth’s crust underneath Japan’s Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear catastrophe site (F1)… is information that has not been shared with the public yet, that I know of.

2_no_fuel.jpg

(echo) “…U2 ex-vessel, U4 zirc fire SFP, catastrophe…” (echo)

Now almost five years after the disaster began, the official line is that they still don’t know where exactly the coriums are.  All they claim to know is that, for the most part, they’re NOT in the containment vessels.  At least, that’s what muon photography revealed in regards to Reactor #2: it is EMPTY (Click on image for related article about this).

In this blogpost I will rehash some Co-60-related observations (just to put it all together in 1 blog post).  The Fukushima puzzle is likely to give any independent amateur researcher the cobalt blues at some point, I reckon…  Cobalt-60’s significance fits into the picture somehow.  How exactly I don’t know yet, but this compilation at least offers some clues.  At the end I offer some additional ponderings.

In short, in this blog post:

I start out with documenting the various detections of Co-60, with bits and pieces of its possible relevance, as well as the (somewhat strange) absence from scientific literature and common media narratives (which talk of Cs-134/137 and I-131 mainly, yet rarely mention all the other significant radiosiotopes):

  • Documenting Fukushima’s Cobalt Release(s):   Massive releases of Co-60, not like any other nuclear accident ever before
  • EURDEP: European Cobalt-60 Detections (in 2011 and beyond)
  • US EPA Radnet & Cobalt-60
  • Now get this:  US EPA:  Cobalt-60 much more associated with NUCLEAR BOMB Fallout…
  • TEPCO’s very own data show strangely large amounts of Cobalt-60 in Fukushima’s waste water and debris
  • More Fukushima Co-60 News, from all over
  • My Very Own Co-60 Data from a Japanese kelp sample’s Gamma Spectroscopy
  • Anything in my Lab-Analyzed June 2015 Colorado Rainwater.
  • Co-60, a RadioIsotope BEYOND ‘FORGOTTEN’ ?

I finish the blog post with additional information:

  • ADDITIONAL Cobalt-60 RELATED INFORMATION, particularly pertaining to Radiological Dispersion Devices and Extreme Neutron Flux

To offer my conclusive ponderings at the end @

  • Conclusion?

…  ROLLING …

PostTsunamiTree_blueannot

  • Documenting Fukushima’s Cobalt Release(s):   Massive releases of Co-60, not like any other nuclear accident ever before.

First, I’d like to put some folks (such as those few weird deniers, as well as belittlers, who claim that Co-60 is somehow not a, or not a significant aspect, of the Fukushima disaster’s early and continuing fallout, in their place with some solid data (from EURDEP, TEPCO themselves, Greenpeace, news reports, EPA info, academic papers, and even my own data of Japanese Kelps (2013)…

I had read in articles about Chernobyl that its fallout did not contain Co-60. (Such as found in The French IRSN (Institute de Radioprotection et de Sureté Nucléaire), “Cobalt-60 and the environment

“[…] The atmospheric fallout from nuclear weapons testing and the Chernobyl accident contains no Co-60. Consequently, this radionuclide is not responsible for any ‘environmental background’, unlike 90Sr, 137Cs and the plutonium isotopes. Its presence in the environment is therefore for the most part related to nuclear facilities. […]”)

That turned out to be incorrect. Co-60 was definitely a significant part of nuclear bomb testing.  And regardless of how small the trace concentrations were,  Mn-54, Nb-95 and Co-60 were in fact part of the fallout cloud from Chernobyl as well:

Following the April 26, 1986 Chornobyl disaster (about which, by the way, I had a premonition dream as an 11-year-old), Cobalt-60 was detected even in Japan and North America.  However, because it was such a trace of a trace and only detected here and there, it is often not even included in the list of radioisotopes that the Chernobyl accident sent into the air.

The main Chernobyl fallout radioisotopes consisted of varying concentrations of these wicked scorcerers’ brew’s ingredients, with the more famous ones in bold:

  • Krypton-85
  • Strontium-89, 90
  • Zirconium-95
  • Molybdenum-99
  • Ruthenium-103, 106
  • Iodine-131, 133, 135
  • Tellurium-132
  • Xenon-133
  • Cesium-134, 136, 137
  • Neptunium-139
  • Lanthanum-140
  • Barium-140
  • Cerium-141, 144
  • Plutonium-238, 239, 240, 241
  • Curium-242

SOURCE:  Many sources, including this table 1.5 from http://www.amfir.com/AmFirstInst/Symposia/Chernobyl/1986_Chernobyl_Nuclear_Catastrophe_index.html  Screenshot:

Chernobyl_primary_radioisotopes_emitted_1996

In the same document, however, it is also mentioned that in Eastern Canada, during a Chornobyl fallout whiff that came from over the Arctic, that however-tiny-trace upticks in Berylium-7, Iron-59, Niobium-95, Manganese-54, Cobalt-60 and Zink-65 were also detected as part of the Chernobyl fallout cloud:                NorthAmerica_Chernobyl1986_88_inclCo60 I find that interesting, because the fallout whiffs that have been detected in Finland, even as recent as 2015, contained Mn-54, Co-60 and Nb-95 as well.  They were releases “from somewhere” that can not be dismissed away as having something to do with “medical or resource exploitation” use.  Not in thát mixture.  They are indicative of NUCLEAR FALLOUT.  And around the same time Zr-97 was also detected in Germany a few times.  (See list of related blogposts shortly further below)

Regarding Berylium-7: I had assumed that upticks in Be-7 would suggest that it’s coming from higher up in the atmosphere (such as can occur during high pressure times when some air from higher up in the Be-7-rich stratosphere descends to ground level).  Higher up Be-7 is made naturally through interactions with cosmic rays, but… it can ALSO be added artificially (through the same proces of high-energy neutron bombardement), thus complicating figuring out where radioisotopes may have come from that coincide with Be-7 upticks.

Now, Cobalt-60 was detected shortly after the Fukushima-Daiichi disaster began.  This is solidly documented.  Scrutinizing the data a little more, however, reveals that Co-60 is a véry significant aspect of Fukushima fallout and environmental contamination.

Here are many examples that document Co-60 being part of the Fukushima-Japan fallout all the way as far as Europe:

  • EURDEP: European Cobalt-60 Detections

Sola, Norway You can see how data from this monitoring station is kept conceiled right after the accident until mid-April. Be-7 concentrations fluctuate normally, while Cs-134, Cs-137 and I-131 starting coming down from their pressumed late March-early April spikes:

SOLA_Norway_Cs134.137_3monthsAfter_March15_2011SOLA_Norway_I131.Be7_3monthsAfter_March15_2011

NOT coinciding with the peaks of Cesium or Iodine, Lead-210 (decay product of Radon / Uranium, detected April 14-15), neutron-activation product Cobalt-60 was solidly detected during an April 20-26 sampling period:

Pb210_Co60_3moPreJun2011

This detection of Co-60 comes shortly after the spike in Cs-134, Cs-137 & I-131, etc.

This interesting and somewhat strange detail is also apparent in the data from CERN, Switzerland, shared in the previous blogpost (repeated here):

CERNs_FUKUSHIMA_CO60_SmokingGun

The likely reason the detection limit spiked is a loss of precision due to more frequent sampling (see comments previous blogpost).   Regardless of the MDC spike, a solid quantifiable detection was made that spring 2011, shortly after the larger spikes in Cesium and Iodine.

–> A zoom-in on the days surrounding the quantifiable detection of Co-60 shows that right as Co-60 was detected, the most known fallout radioisotopes, (Cs-134, I-131, and even Cs-137) were NOT detected.  Hence the argument that,  “if it doesn’t contain Cs-134/Cs-137, then it has nothing to do with Fukushima”, simply doesn’t hold up to scrutiny, especially when studied within a multi-week or multiple months context.  Different isotopes move differently through different media (air, water, ground), and this make a case for Co-60 illustrating that:

comboCERNZoomin.jpg

As I’ve brought up before, it seems just purely logical that these particles and gasses do not all move the same through air,  water or ground layers.  There are distinct differences due to their distinct properties.   And thus, it is not surprising that a detection of Kobalt-60 is TIMED just slightly DIFFERENTLY compared to the detections of Cs-134, Cs-137 & I-131, which seem to move in a much more closely correlated pattern.

If it were just one or two isolated instances of Co-60 being detected in the month after, and far beyond the March 11, 2011 F1 catastrophe, perhaps a case could be made for “coincidence”, but the fact of the matter is that Co-60 was detected in many places all across the Northern Hemisphere.   In many cases, the peak time for Co-60 does not line up with peak times for radioCesiums, at least not in the data I’ve seen.    More examples:

Here’s our good ol’ monitor in HELSINKI, Finland, showing a significant uptick in Co-60 at the very end of March, begin of April 2011.  Right at that time Cs-137 is strangely not tested for, or data is kept undisclosed.  Yet when Cs-137 spikes again that following week in April, Co-60 is not detected in a quantifiable amount:

Helsinki_Cs137_Co60_1mo_April17_2011

Over a month later, disturbances are still drifting around the planet, showing upticks of various Fukushima radioisotopes.  Also @ Helsinki, in the weeks prior to June 15, 2011, we see detections of Co-60 amidst upticks of Cs-137, I-131 and Be-7:

Helsinki_Cs137_Co60_1mo_June17_2011Helsinki_I131_Be7_1mo_June17_2011

–> You can see how the peak value for Cs-137 does not coincide with the peak values for I-131 and Co-60, but it is also obvious that it is part of an apparent fallout cloud passing over during that week.  In this case, the correlation with a Be-7 uptick is strong.

Pay attention to both y and x-axis.  The y-axis is often adjusted to show more detail.  At the moment of the strongest Co-60 detection that week,  the concentrations of the other shown radioisotopes compare as such:

  • Co-60:  5.13E-07  (= 0.000000513) Bq/m^3
  • I-131:  7.94E-07  (= 0.000000794) Bq/m^3
  • Cs-137:  1.66E-06  (= 0.00000166) Bq/m^3
  • Be-7: 7.31E-03 (= 0.007.31 which is not unusual, as Be-7 is naturally just below 0.01 Bq/m^3 anyhow)

In other words, for that June 10-13, 2011 sample, the aerial concentration of Cobalt-60 was in the same order of magnitude as that of Iodine-131.   

They may be technically “trace amounts”, but they seem significant trace amounts: Adding to the fascinating details, the I-131 concentration at that sample time, was just a bit less than half of that of Cs-137.

Interestingly, also, is that Cs-134 was not detected in this time period, AT THIS LOCATION. (It was picked up during that period at other locations, example below).  The detection of  Cs-137 @  1.66E-06  (= 0.00000166) Bq/m^3 at the moment of the Co-60 detection is actually too low to be considered “part of the same fallout cloud”, because if we look at the Cs-137 levels at that location BEFORE Fukushima began, we see that these levels were reached quite often.

Before the Fukushima accident, in a 3-month period shortly before, Cs-137 concentrations stayed well below 0.00001 Bq/m^3:

Helsinki_Cs137_PREfukushima

The only significant Cs-137 detection that week, was the little spike that licked that red line in the above image, seen a couple data points before the Co-60 detection in the images before.

And what about that IODINE-131, thát late, still?

On a sidenote, one could of course also repeat the question, “what the hell was Iodine-131 still doing in the air in Europe a full 3 months after the accident began?”  (Well, of course…  pressuming these detections were from Fukushima…

sfp-4-zirc-fire-catastrophe-march-15th

March 15, 2011: “I couldn’t sleep again last night.  Michelle was doing a shift in the Ops center (protective measures team). She texted me “U2 ex-vessel, U4 zirc fire SFP, catastrophe”  Click screenshot for more in my Plume Gate post.

… then that can only be explained because one of more of the molten-down reactors and/or zirconium-inferno-destroyed spent fuel pools did not stop fissioning as hoped.  That’s why…

Even the IAEA folks have scratched their heads over that one; See the (bad audio, accessible via WHOI @ http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=108196&cl=87413&article=141569&tid=5122), but the ENEnews transcripts are correct) admission 3 full years after the facts: “[ENEnews, Oct. 27, 2014] – Watch: Nuclear experts confront Japanese scientists — IAEA says Fukushima reactors “might still be active” long after meltdowns — “Changes completely” our idea of what happened — “Very surprised… extremely high” Iodine-131 levelsMeans fission reactions lasted for weeks or months“.    Or years…?

If that concerns you, also check out my post, (Nov. 20, 2015)  Debunking the ‘Impossibility’ of Ongoing Criticalities at Fukushima-Daiichi, as well as my post, (May 29, 2015) Land of the Sinking Sun…

 To get almost as much Iodine-131 as Cobalt-60, on the other side of the planet no less, and no significant amount of Cs-134?  Hm…  That gived me the impression that Co-60 might be quite significant…  More examples:

Also in May-June 2011, at Kotka, Finland, just to the east of Helsinki:

Co60_I131_Cs137_Cs134_KOTKA_MayJune2011

–> Again, clear evidence that Co-60 was part of the Fukushima fallout clouds.  About half as much Co-60 as I-131, about 1/3rd Cs-134 as Cs-137…    After I-131 detections dropped down to “lower than lowest detectable”, whiffs with CO-60 in it, alongside (so-called) “Fukushima signature” Cesium-134 continued into summer 2011 at this location:

Kotka_JulyAugust2011_Co60_Cs134_Na22_Be7

Natrium-22, like Be-7, are activation products that can be natural or “enhanced natural”.

–> One of the things I gather from this is that to get insights on a moving fallout cloud, the more monitors you have, and all testing for as many specific radiosiotopes as possible, the better.  One monitor may not get the whiff of Cs-134, while another may only get the I-131, or only the Co-60.  Or one week will show a set of specific upticks, while the next week the mix looks distinctly different.  Taken together you get an idea of what’s moving overhead and only here and there touching ground monitors.

In spring 2013, Co-60 and Nb-95:

Kotka_Finland_Co60_Nb95_AprilMay2015

In late August 2014, also @ Kotka in Southern Finland, we see a detection of not only Co-60, but also Co-58 (!), at the same time as a Cs-137 uptick:

Kotka_Finland_Co60_Co58_AugSept2014Kotka_Finland_Cs137_Be7_AugSept2014

–> Co-58 is interesting as well, as its half-ife is only 77 days (about 2.5 months).  Its detection in the second half of August 2014 seems weird.  If it’s from Fukushima, it suggests ongoing intense neutron-activations.  Co-58 is normally created inside a nuclear reactor through neutron bombarment of natural Nickel.  If one were to want to create pure Co-58 on purpose, threshold side-reactions would give rise to impurities, including traces of Co-57, Co-59 & Co-60 (See Production of Co-58 in a nuclear reactor under particular consideration of interfering nuclear reactions, by H. J. Lincke, Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry  November 1984, Volume 87, Issue 5, pp 311-315).

But to get lots of Co-60, if not made intentionally through neutron activation of Ni-59, then it comes from the bombardment of Iron-58 (present in trace amounts in all steel), through a double neutron uptake.  This is why the RPVs (Reactor Pressure Vessel) steel structure will contain significant amounts of Co-60 after decades of use.

Side-note:   Co-59 can turn into Co-58 by a neutron activation reaction, followed by a double neutron release: “59Co (n,2n) 58Co”; as well as: Co-59 can turn into Co-60 by a neutron activation, followed by Co-60’s gamma decay: “59Co (n, γ ) 60Co” — Source: IAEA Activation data data @ http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/te_1285_prn/te_1285p1_prn.pdf .

To detect both at the same time, alongside a Cs-137 uptick suggests an unintentional release from a spewing meltdown site, no?  As in, “Somewhere”.   Fukushima?  I don’t know, but…  If it’s from Fukushima, this seems very serious.  If it’s not Fukushima, that seems very serious.

WHERE are this recurring upticks of highly concerning radiosiotope mixtures coming from, year after year, since 2011?  Not an unreasonable question to seek an answer to, in my opinion. 

Some more:

In Dec. 2014, a detection of Co-60 happens about a week apart from a Th-232 detection:

Kotka_Finland_Co60_TH232_NovDec2014

There more, some of which I’ve documented in these blogposts:

  • US EPA Radnet & Cobalt-60:

If you go to my Online Radiation Monitors page and pick United States, there’s a few options under EPA.  You can search the EnviroFacts database for different regions for different isotopes, via http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/erams_query_v2.simple_query

For Region 9 (which includes California and Hawai), the Cobalt-60 results show primarily data that suggests likely “detections,” yet of the kind than can’t be quantified with high-confidence, or even don’t qualify as a detection whatsoever (negative values, or negative values + margin of error below minimum detectable concentrations, etc.).  This is just a random snapshot, to give an idea:

EPA_Region9_1_2_3

–> You see that that some results  have values that even if you deduct the combined margin of error, the value’s in the positive.  325px-Standard_deviation_diagram.svgI interpret that as “a for-sure detection”.  However, due to the complexity of deducting background noise, what can be called a detection in part depend on the level of certainty you want for the given value of the measurement.   If you want  high certainty, you’ll need a very strong signal that stands out from background signals.

So, for instance, that last shown result above, 0.666  +/- 0.318 Bq/L Co-60 in precipitation in Berkeley, CA on Sept 15, 1985, seems like a very clear detection (on the tail end of an insane spate of nuclear bomb tests), but I’m not sure what level of certainty the margin of error delineates here.

In any case, likely trace remnants from the nuclear bomb testing era, trace detections continue to show up until the early 1990s.  For Berkeley, California, the testing gets sloppy, with many years of no testing, and even after March 2011, there’s nothing to be seen (no testing).  Other areas show post-2010 data:

EPA_Region9_4_5EPA_Region9_6

–> What you can see, however, is the widely fluctuating Minimum Detectable Concentration, with the highest MDCs in spring and summer 2011.  Rather than intentional concealment, this may again be due to shorter sampling periods giving rise to a more blurry background, which would require a stronger-than-usual specific decay energy signal to ‘detect’ (with a reasonable level of confidence) the specific radioisotope.

Now, what’s also interesting is how most results are ND, Non-Detect, from those early 1990s all the way until 2011, when values (positive or negative) begin to appear again amongst the NDs, suggesting “detections” that may be too weak to be quantified, but that give nevertheless the suggestion that slight upticks in gamma energies specific to Co-60 decay were being registered above background.  Why otherwise wouldn’t the result be described as ‘ND’?

EPA_Region9_7

–> As far as the negative values go, a simple good read:

“Reported sample results are sometimes  negative values. When a sample has little  radioactivity, the analytical results should  have a normal distribution of positive  and negative results around zero. When  a sample result is subtracted from that  of the system’s background and the sample value is less than that background,  the result is a negative value.  A  negative  result simply indicates that the radionuclide activity in the sample is low—so low  that it approaches that of the analytical  instrument’s system background.”

– From “Radiological Lab Results Don’t Have to Be Confusing @ http://www.phillywatersheds.org/doc/OpFlowRads.pdf

  • Now get this:  US EPA:  Cobalt-60 much more associated with NUCLEAR BOMB Fallout…

Far more interesting than the EPA EnviroFacts data above, are bits and pieces in more detailed studies from through searching the EPA Archives for ‘Cobalt-60 fukushima’:  one result I will quote from:

!-> Particle Transport of Radionuclides: a Literature Review and Summary http://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_file_download.cfm?p_downl&#8230;

“Take a deep breath”:  It takes small particles YEARS to settle down.  But more interestingly is the difference between fallout associated with a nuclear bomb versus fallout from a nuclear accident like Chernobyl.

So check out these excerpts (partial screenshot, annotated):

ParticleTransport

And re. a major nuclear accident, the main Chernobyl fallout compares as such:

ParticleTransport_2DepositionRatesNear_vs_far

So, to summerize the difference (my emphasis):

  • BOMB Fallout: Cs-137, I-129, Sr-90, Co-60, Eu-154, Eu-152, Pu-238/240, and Am-241
  • CHERNOBYL Fallout: Te-132, Cs-134, Cs-137, Mo-99, Ru-103, Ru-106, Ba-140, Zr-95, Ce-141, Ce-144, Sr-89, Sr-90

Isn’t that strange?  Co-60 is not a significant part of a normal meltdown.   Yet Co-60 is obviously a very significant aspect of the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe…  How can this be?  Why?

(More data first.  It is important that the fact is estabished firmly with as much documentation as possible that the presence of CO-60 in Fukushima fallout is highly unusual.  Why that might be is a whole other matter.  I’ll get to that after establishing the facts more firmly first.   Hang in there, reader of this blog post.  You may the only person reading this.  ;-)   )

  • TEPCO’s very own data show strangely large amounts of Cobalt-60 in Fukushima’s waste water and debris:

Proof that Fukushima is releasing very significant quantities of Cobalt-60 is found throughout TEPCO’s frequent press releases.   But you have to search for “Co-60” (543 results), and not “cobalt-60” (1 result).   I used to think that one result was the only time TEPCO brought up Cobalt-60 and wondered if that data accidentally slipped in. (Ha.  Yeah… Seeking truth can be a humbling embarassing journey at times…   Joke’s on me.)

Anyhow, thát document does actually show véry high levels:

  • 1.2 Bq/cm^3 Co-60 , or about 1,200 Bq/L   =  1,200,000 Bq/m^3   of  Co-60
  • 1.9 Bq/cm^3  Mn-54
  • 71 Bq/cm^3   Sb-125

A spill of 300 tons of that processed waste water contained a whopping 1,200 Bq/L  Co-60. 

TEPCO_CO60_1result

The details of this press release: http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/water/13082101-e.html screenshot:CO60_WaterContaminationMeasured_Aug2013_TEPCO

100 Bq/cm3 Cs-137    +    46 Bq/cm3 Cs-134   +   1.2 Bq/cm3 Co-60

Anyhow, so…: in that one spill some 360,000,000 Bq Co-60 was spilled.  And that’s just one spill.  This does not give any idea about how much is being stored in the massive water tanks, how much has been flushed out into the Pacific, how much has escaped into the atmosphere, how much is in the ground on-site, where deposition hot spots may be, etc.  It’s just one tiny peek into what’s happening.

H4TankArea.gif

Do other tanks contain more Cobalt-60, or less, or is 1200 Bq/L a fairly average value for the Cobalt-60 water contamination concentration?  Some of the additional bits and pieces of data from news reports show that it’s “in that ballpark”, basically.

In any case, Co-60 is surely just a percent, or less, of all the Cesium, Strontium, and slough of other heavy metal decay products… But it is apparently, very much unlike Chernobyl, a very significant pollutant at Fukushima.  To get an idea of the mounting problem, here’s a look at the growing water tank farm:

F1WaterTanks

Asahi_Sept5_2015_700000tonsOnSIte

If those 300 tons offer any clue, then there would be, aside from Strontium and Cesium, also be unusually amounts of Co-60, Mn-54, Sb-125 and other lesser-known radioisotopes in the mix.

  • More Fukushima Co-60 News, from all over :

This is undoubtedly very incomplete, but I picked a few bits and pieces of news that caught my attention from here and there, including news aggregators.  I chose those that shed additional light on the fact that Cobalt-60, for reasons to be explored further, is a véry major component of Fukushima fallout.    In no particular order:

Example: Nearly 3 years after the disaster started,  contamination of undergound water reached record levels, @ 770 Bq/L Co-60, for instance, as relayed by ENEnews (Feb.19, 2014) “Record level of Cobalt-60 detected in groundwater at Fukushima — Hundreds of times above any measurement ever published for underground water“.  Also covered @ Nuclear News.

This and many other such reports give a basic idea of the widespread Cobalt-60 presence and strangely high concentrations of this specific activation product.

  • Greenpeace in August 2011 reported 0.83 Bq/kg of Co-60 found in a seaweed that originated only 30 km from Fukushima. See these  Greenpeace Sample data, Page 5/6, of which this is a screenshot from Scribd mirror:

CO60_Greenpeace_Seaweed_August2011.gif

–> Manganese-54 & Cobalt-60, in an activity that is just less than 1% of the activity of the always-mentioned radioCesiums 134 & 137.   No Iodine-131 was detected (<MDC) in that sample, while the reverse is true the sample 2 columns to the right (I-131 detected, while Cesium levels were actually lower, and neither Mn-54 nor Co-60 detected (<MDC).

June20_2011_ExSKF

Excerpt from the translation:   “[…] Another thing that the survey team paid attention to was the types of nuclides that were detected in the park. They detected cesium-134, cesium-137, and cobalt-60.

Professor Kazuhiko Kudo of Kyushu University (nuclear engineering) says, “Cobalt-60 does not exist in nature. It has a half-life of 5.3 years. That cobalt-60 was detected in Fukushima City, 60 kilometers from the plant, proves that a certain amount of cobalt-60 was released from the reactor meltdown. […]”

The blogger was obviously surprised by this finding.  The RPV (Reactor Pressure Vessel), made of steel, will always contain some Cobalt-60.  If the RPV were blown to smithereeens, fragements would show elevated Co-60 levels.

But was it from the RPV?  You’d have to turn solid steel into rather tiny particles for them to fly 60 kilometers…

  • Marco Kaltofen of the Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering at Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA., noted in APHA (Oct 31, 2011) that, “[…] Soils and settled dusts were collected from outdoor surfaces, interior surfaces, and from used children’s shoes. The Japanese filters contained cesium 134 and 137, as well as cobalt 60 at levels as high as 3 nCi total activity per sample. […]”[3 nCi/sample = 111 Bq/sample]

Clearly not from an exploded RPV in this case, is it?

3000Bq.L_AsahiShimbun_July20_2014.gif

  • Iori Mochizuki’s Fukushima Diary has a couple interesting ones (he often does):

Fukushima Diary, Dec. 14, 2013:   Water leakage from air-conditioning duct of reactor4, Tepco: “It’s rain water, not from SFP”,  contains this: “Tepco immediately denied the possibility that the water is from SFP because it doesn’t include cobalt-60 and hydrazine.  In SFP of reactor4, 2.5E+5 Bq/m3 of cobalt-60 and 3ppm of hydrazine are supposed to be contained. […]”   –> 250,000 Bq/m^3 Co-60

A search for Co-60 @  Fukushima Diary resulted in 10 articles.  I picked these to highlight some more peculiar data:

“According to Tepco, significantly high level of Co-60 was measured from the piece of debris taken from SFP4.  They measured 1,400,000,000 Bq/Kg of Co-60 (half-life 5.3 years).  The surface dose was 1 mSv/h.   The sample was 4g. It was taken when they washed the new fuel assembly removed from the spent fuel pool in reactor 4. (8/29/2012)   Tepco states it felt like grit. Some parts were broken into sand, which couldn’t be collected.

They also collected debris from between the fuel assemblies when they removed the channel box of the new fuel from SFP4.   They measured 830 million Bq/Kg of Co-60 from the piece of sample as well. […]”

Related to this article… (my emphasis and commentary)  “Ag-110m [radioactive Silver] detected from gas sample of reactor1 and 3, “The boiling point is 2,164℃” [URL]   According to Tepco, they also detected Co-60 from the gas samples of reactor 1, 2 and 3. 

They state it’s “a main corrosion product made from activation of structure material”.

[Yes… but every nuclear reactor has a general similar structure as far as materials go (concrete, steel, lead, zirconium cladding, etc …), so why these extremely high levels of Co-60 at Fukushima leaking out in the water, in on-site off-gassing and carried far away through the atmosphere? ]

“From the concentrated water of reactor3, they also measured 98,000 Bq/m3 of Mn-54 (Half-life : 312 days), which is also a corrosion product. Tepco announced the corrosion products from structural material activation, Co-60 and Mn-54 are detected from retained water as well.    Data:

  • Reactor 1 : Co-60, 0.57 Bq/m3 from particulates filter
  • Reactor 2 : Co-60, 68,000 Bq/m3 from concentrated water
  • Reactor 3 : Co-60, 420,000 Bq/m3 from concentrated water
  • Mn-54, 98,000 Bq/m3 from concentrated water […]”

–> The closer to the Reactor 3 / SFP 4, the higher the Co-60 concentrations???  (Just wondering…)

This next one is quite telling in regards to the importance of Co-60 at F1:

“5 sorts of nuclide density reached the highest readings in a boring hole located in the seaside of Reactor 2 again. […]  Those 5 sorts of nuclides are all that Tepco reports about to consist of Cs-134, Cs-137, Mn-54, Co-60 and all β nuclides

[Note: “all β nuclides” is believed to consist to a large extent of Strontium-90 and  Tritium].

!!!->  Regarding Strontium-90, see also my post (Sept. 25, 2014), Strontium-90 skyrocketing in Fukushima’s On-Site Groundwater. German meltdown model that predicted this suggests worst is yet to come.

!!!-> The US EPA suspended all testing from Tritium in precipitation in 2012!  Included in my post (April 10, 2015)  Fingerprints of an ongoing Cover-Up? EPA data makes Fukushima look over 1000% less serious than Chernobyl…

“Variety sorts of nuclides marked the highest density on 10/9/2014. (cf, Various nuclides density marked the highest level in groundwater from multiple locations of Fukushima plant [URL])  This is from the same boring hole and the record was already broken:

(10/9 → 10/13, Bq/m3)

  • Cs-134 : 17,000,000 → 61,000,000
  • Cs-137 : 51,000,000 → 190,000,000
  • Co-60 : 2,100,000 → 3,600,000
  • All β : 2,100,000,000 → 7,800,000,000   […]”
  • (Mn-54 data was not listed in that article)”

!–>  If that doesn’t drive home how extreme the Cobalt-60 aspect of the Fukushima disaster is, I don’t know what could.

What do Cobalt-60, Manganese-54 and Tritium have in common, if anything?  They are all three neutron-activation products. What do you need to create massive amounts of neutron activation products?  A steady stream of free neutrons. How do you get those?  From nuclear fission reactions (criticalities). Were all these activation products created in March-April 2011, or are they still being produced?  [crickets…]

– Related ponderings in my post (sorry for the repetition) (Nov. 20, 2015)  Debunking the ‘Impossibility’ of Ongoing Criticalities at Fukushima-Daiichi

http-:enenews.com:food-products-heavily-contaminated-fukushima-found-30000-pcikg-cesium-cobalt-60-antimony-124-seaweed-green-tea-10000-pcikg-fda-found-fukushima-contamination-food-supply-during-routine-monitoring.gif

Dr. Metzger’s presentation on the contamination of food imports in the early days of the Fukushima accident presented at the American Chemical Society Annual Meeting in New Orleans can be found here (a Powerpoint presentation; The Co-60 mention is on page 18).

On page 17, by the way, is another interesting piece:

The first observed food import that had observable contamination was found on March 30. One species of seafood in a Sushi import was found to be contaminated with 131I only.” 

–>  This adds weight to my impression that when a sample doesn’t test positive for Cs-134/Cs-137, that that DOES NOT automatically mean that “the detected radiosiotope didn’t come from the Fukushima-Daiichi disaster.”

And on that note…:

  • My Very Own Co-60 Data from a Japanese kelp sample’s Gamma Spectroscopy

!-> From my Jan. 19, 2014 report,  SUMMARY of my ‘Independent LAB TEST RESULTS’ (Hokkaido Kelp, etc.):, with added emphasis:

9samples_kelp_nori_tea_herring_emsl_overviewtable_k40included_mvb2014_annot2016

This independent scientific investigation of mine was not why I went to Japan.  It resulted from not knowing that seaweeds, and kelps more specifically, can contain véry high levels of Potassium, much higher than bananas or certain nuts.  (All natural Potassium (K)  contains a trace of K-40, to which Geiger Counters are apparently just as sensitive as to radioCesiums).  For more on that see, my original reports, as well as these two blog posts:

The only reason I spent the money on those lab tests I did was because I thought is would reveal contamination that was being suppressed.  I learned a lot from doing this.  Mainly about Potassium (see links above).  But perhaps my intuition was on to something after all.  Out of the 6 kelp samples, NONE contained Cesium-134 nor even Cesium-137.

However, and perhaps this was ultimately worth all the trouble:  Spectacularly, one kelp sample from Southern Hokkaido did contain 1.4 Bq/kg Cobalt-60.  And, also not given any further thought at the time: Of the 3 samples I had additional tests done on, 1 of these 3 also contained an unknown Alpha-radiation source @ 132.2 Bq/Kg.

The fact remains:  The high strangeness of massive quantities of Co-60 in Fukushima’s fallout and water contamination is not being reported on much.  This is all the more reason to research it more.

  • Important remark:   WE KNOW that 1) Bomb Fallout contains more Co-60 than Nuclear Reactor Accident fallout.  So how does 1.4 Bq/kg (dry) compare to detections during the height to nuclear bomb tests in the Pacific Ocean (1960s-1970s)?

Answer:  It’s a relatively very significant level of contamination.

–> This document, Concentrations and Concentration Factors of Several Anthropogenic and Natural Radionuclides in Marine Vertebrates and Invertebrates from 1984 (revised, 1985), EPA 520-1-84-028, gives some specific values for liver tissues of salmon and tuna (my annotations added in red):

Nepis_EPA_co60_page73_page77

Which makes the following all the more odd…

  • Co-60, a RadioIsotope BEYOND ‘FORGOTTEN’ ?

In my last (July 11, 2015) correpondence with Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) marine biologist Ken Buesseler – [originally shared in my post, (Nov. 8, 2015) Another Round of Looking into Recent Radiological Disturbaces.], I started out with a response to another top-scientist, Georg Steinhauser, author of (2014) Fukushima’s Forgotten Radionuclides: A Review of the Understudied Radioactive Emissions), an interesting document, for sure, which Dr. Ken Buesseler referred me to.

First, most of the letter (again), then the reason I bring this up.

  • Anything in my Lab-Analyzed June 2015 Colorado Rainwater?

Not really.

In another round of humbling learning rounds [hence, again, my DISCLAIMER, folks, seriously: I’m just a volunteer amateur “laptop-wielding mountain dweller” blogger, with zero academic credentials.   I beg you to think for yourselves.  I’ve been WRONG enough to have ‘gotten a clue’ about how complex this topic gets], what began with an admitedly overly alarmist (July 6, 2015), “Gamma-Spectroscopy Results of Colorado Radioactive Freak Rain: Fukushima’s Fissioning Mini-Sun on the Edge of the Pacific Ocean is COMPLETELY OUT OF CONTROL“, was nuanced just 4 days later with, “Upon further scrutiny of the raw data, some of the radioisotopes listed as “de facto detected” may need to be scrapped”, and resulted in a far less alarming post, (Aug. 1, 2015) “Synopsis / Improved Version: ‘Mainland USA June 14 2015 Radioactive Rain & Lichen Data Revisited’.

I my non-expert opinion, the MDC’s were simply too high to get the kind of precision data I was looking for.  Not the lab’s fault, I just had to learn some things the hard (expensive)  way. ;-/   I guess…

Side-note:  I was going to have Dr. George Steinhauser (also very kind and professional in our communications, and at that time just north of me and in the same area as the lab I worked with last, at the Ft. Collins branch of Colorado State University in in Northern Colorado) have the rainwater sample re-tested with much múch higher precision, but -alas- things got “a little delayed” at the lab.    (Otherwise… wouldn’t thát have been interesting? …)

But, as I said, ALAS:   First the extremely helpful and fast-responding assistant at the lab, who had sent me the raw data before the final results were in, emailed me that, “I have resigned my position with ALS” (no clue why, but I thought it was a little strange that a customer was given this information in the midst of a testing);  and then, by that time in direct correspondence with the very knowledgeable and also helpful lab manager, the sample-release delay was eventually explained to me (by the lab manager himself), when I asked why it was taking so long:   “I have this on my list, but I was out all last week on emergency leave (my house burned down)“.  

That was that.   Shit happens…   I guess.  :-/     Of course, an entire 2 months after, 1) getting the sample retested was no longer in the cards (as George had moved back to Germany), and 2) any short-lived radioisotope, like I-131, would have become undetectable anyhow.   End of story.  

The evidence for Cobalt-60 data in my rainwater sample was weak. Other hints of Cobalt radioisotopes are less weak, but still too weak for me to find significant.  The only truly notable data “of significance” (if that…) pertained mainly to Sb-124, also an activation product:   Repeated from (Aug. 1, 2015)  Synopsis / Improved Version: ‘Mainland USA June 14 2015 Radioactive Rain & Lichen Data Revisited’.  (EXCERPT):

Antimony-124 (Sb-124), half-life: 60.2 days, fission-activation product.  See it in its decay chain @ http://periodictable.com/Isotopes/051.124/index2.full.prod.html

Sb-124 in the rain sample:   Yes, near-certain:

Sb124_Rain_corr!–> One of the two measurement values is 2.5x higher than the Method Blank, outside the Method Blanks’s margin of error, ánd above MDC, and its margin of error does not go below the MDC.  (The average of the two measurement values is just above both MDCs too.)

Sb-124 in the lichen sample:   Yes, likely:

Sb124_Lichen_corr–> Both (uncertain) measurement values are higher than the Method Blank, one even more than 21x higher.  (The average of the two tests is also 11x more than the Method Blank.)

Sb-124 does not occur in nature, it is an activation product of Sb-123, created in heavy neutron bombardments, such as in an active nuclear reactor.  It’s been linked to releases from Fukushima, see here and here, but it is generally more associated with nuclear bomb fallout (caused by the sudden massive neutron bombardment of a nuclear detonation), see here.

See more in the original reports.

–> Interesting, not?  Sure, no Co-60 signal in the noise, and yet… isn’t it peculiar to detect a trace of Sb-124, which, like C0-60, is more associated with nuclear bomb fallout?

  • ADDITIONAL Cobalt-60 RELATED INFORMATION

  • Co-60 potential use in Radiological Dispersion Devices (RDDs, aka “Dirty Bombs”)

Since the medical trade is well-regulated and there is no shortage of this medically used radiosiotope, the only reason to build a ridiculously large stockpile of Cobalt-60 would be as part of a secret weapons program.

I don’t think this was the case at Fukushima (because I think the CO-60 was released through the massive SFP4 zirconium fire, mega-blast at Unit3, and through massive neutron flux bombardment of the Fe-58 in the rubble of one or more full-on-still-fissioning meltdowns), but the available literature on RDD’s does actually contain little bit of information that actuualy could be relevant for the dispersion of Cobalt-60:

CO-60 is listed as one of a handful of radioisotopes considered ideal for use in an RDD [Radiological Dispersal Device, a.k.a. Dirty Bomb] including Cesium-137, Strontium-90, Americium-241, and Cobalt-60.” ( CIA report: Terrorist CBRN: Materials and Effects)

The beforementioned EPA document (Particle Transport of Radionuclides: a Literature Review and Summary ) goes into some details about it, including some aspects that could apply to the Fukushima disaster.  Excerpts (with my emphasis):

RDD_1b

-> that excerpt just mentioned Co-60.  The below excerpts, however, contain some possible relevant information:

RDD_3

–> What if the explosion in Reactor 3 (the one that may have been a supercriticality, rather than a mere hydrogen explosion), what if it also caused ‘phase changes’, causing certain radioisotopes to remain airborne for longer periods?

fukushima-explosion-pic

KABOOM went Unit 3…   An unintentional RDD?

What if Fukushima, due to its large amounts of (Highly radioactive) Spent Fuel involved, as well as MOX-fuel in use (containing a higher amount of Plutonium) was in fact a combination of 1) multiple reactor meltdowns and 2) what essentially could be viewed as “a dirty bomb” (not by design, but by consequence)?

The typical “heterogeneous patterns” of such fallout dispersion could perhaps be part of why certain radioisotopes were detected without radioCesiums present.

Anyhow, thought thats an interesting possibility.

As I wrote in early 2014, “Was Fukushima also producing (highly profitable) medical Cobalt-60 in the reactor at the time of the explosions?  Was there that much neutron bombardement of steel happening in the rubble to create this much Co-60?  Had it already been made for medical applications and was it being stored on site (like spent fuel rods, piling up largely unprotected, in ridiculous quantities)?  Or – one never knows, right? (Fits the State Secrets Act narrative and Japan’s apparent re-militarization road map…) – could they have been researching, or even unlawfully and secretly building Cobalt Bombs?”

TimRiffat_Co60_ramble

–> On the issue of Cobalt-60 for military uses, Tim Rifat (a controversial figure desribed as “an expert on Remote Viewing, Influencing, & Psychic warfare, among other things“) discussed his take on the significance of Cobalt-60, pre-Fukushima-disaster (radio show from 2010!), on the (and take-it-with-a-grain-of-salt) Jeff Rense Show, Sept. 22, 2010.), calling it “the perfect weapon” for opponents of NATO to use, and making various claims along those lines, all without providing any evidence.  Is this just talk?    Maybe there’s something to it, I don’t know.   Worth a listen, though.

There’s an article, “The Never-Tested Doomsday Bomb, From Bill Hamilton, also on Rense, @ http://rense.com/general40/dooms.htm, that touches on the same idea:

“[…]  The Co-60 fallout hazard is greater than the fission products from a U-238 blanket because many fission-produced isotopes have half-lives that are very short, and thus decay before the fallout settles or can be protected against by short-term sheltering; many fission-produced isotopes have very long half-lives and thus do not produce very intense radiation;the fission products are not radioactive at all. The half-life of Co-60 on the other hand is long enough to settle out before significant decay has occurred, and to make it impractical to wait out in shelters, yet is short enough that intense radiation is produced. […]”

  • Massive Neutron Flux ?

Apart from the above speculation, perhaps far more likely is that Cobalt-60 was 1) released through vaporiation of the Co-60-containing reacture structure, and 2) created by massive neutron bombardment in the rubble.  

This is where the mathematics of key calculations get a bit over my head.  You have to be familiar with nuclear neutron cross sections (expressed in the unit, barns) and know some parameters to work with, such as:

  • the amount of steel targetted with neutrons (likely unintentionally as part of the still-fissioning meltdowns in march 2011, and perhaps even ongoing, as I’ve alleged off and on over the years), and
  • have an estimate of how much (total) Cobalt-60 was actually released,
  • –> to calculate the likely required neutron flux to have resulted in that amount of Co-60 created.

It’s one thing to create Co-60 intentionally through directing a neutron beam to pure (natural, stable) Cobalt-59, the likelihood of creating massive quantities of Co-60 through a DOUBLE neutron uptake by Iron-58 is significanly lower.  The main ingredient of steel, iron, consists of various iron isotopes, with Fe-58 only comprising 0.282% of regular iron.  Steel of reactor pressure vessels become realtively rich in Co-60 only due to LONG-TERM neutron exposure.  Given Co-60 was not a significant component of other nuclear accidents, my guess is that the Co-60 already present in the reactor structure is highy unlikely enough to explain the (above documented significant & global) detections of Co-60.

Therefor, a scientific case can likely be made for EXTREME neutron fluxes and extremely high heat to have occured to explain the creation of otherwise inexplicable Co-60 concentrations. 

Such a case would likely be similar to the calculations made that explain highly unusual extreme levels of Chlorine-38, data of which was later redacted to “<MDC”, as documented and explained well in this article, “What Caused the High Cl-38 Radioactivity in the Fukushima Daiichi Reactor #1?  福島第一原発の1号機(タービン建屋)から検出された高濃度放射性塩素38の原因は何か

Screenshot of its opening (much more in artice itself):
APJ_Chlorine38_fukushima

Given Co-60’s association with Nuclear bombs, my guess is that supercriticalities truly did occur at Fukushima-Daiichi, and that this aspect is being covered-up, in part through ignoring smoking-gun evidence of this:  Extremely unusual Cobalt-60 releases.

And given that very peculiar fallout clouds CONTAINING COBALT-60, hitherto unexplained, have continued to drift over the few public monitors that report this sort of data (namely a couple European monitors, which also included tiny trace whiffs of Iodine-131, and even Zirconium-97 in Germany, within 2 weeks of the Co-60 + Cs-134/I-131, etc detections), this suggests having originated from a leaking reactor or disaster site with very recent fission.   If from Fukushima, still my #1 suspect due to lack of knowledge of any other major recent nuclear accident, that would mean “inadvertent transient criticalities”  happened as recent as 2015.

I’ve documented some of these odd detections in many blogposts, including these from 2015:

  • Conclusion?

Conclusion is too strong of a word.  There’s too many unknowns.   But these things I feel reasonably confident about:

  • fun-science-extrapolateFukushima’s Cobalt-60 releases, in 2011 near & distant airborne detections, as well as ground water, cooling water, debris fragments, soil and seaweed samples, go far beyond what could have resulted from an ordinary meltdown. 
  • Cobalt-60 is a significant tracer for Fukushima radiological pollution.  Its lack of mention and study in establishment scientific literature is suspect. 
  • Post-2011 atmospheric fallout detections that included Co-60, such as seen in the examples shown (including the 2 above links from 2015) suggest the possibility of ongoing criticalities at Fukushima-Daiichi.  If that’s the case, then that aspect is actively being coverd up as well.

Why does this matter?  Well, for starters, if it’s determined that fully-IAEA-approved, so-called “safe” reactor complexes can continue fissioning years after a meltdown, with no technology in existence to stop such a polluting mess, then ALL existing nuclear fission reactors would, as such, be proven UNSAFE.  Period.  My sense is that this is the case, and ALL new construction ought to be stopped immediately, and all existing still-operational reactors ought to be turned off immediately.

The nuclear cartel’s gamble’s odds may seem “reasonable”, but the worst-case scenario holds far too extreme consequences to be allowed.  Period.

SHUT THEM ALL DOWN NOW !

 

fiveworstcases_foia_fukushima

Click image for more: from the Freedom of Information Act – released documents…

— MAY PEACE PREVAIL ON EARTH —

Sweet dreams, everyone…  ;-)

DISCLAIMER, Fair Use Statement, and DO NOT Share Policy. <<<

Last edited & updated:  Jan. 26, 2016

4hoursLOL

Popular blog…   “Thanks, Google”

.

| 24 Comments

A Mix: Music Videos, Radiation Data, Ponderings: Cs-137 increases in Winter? / Cobalt-60 as a Fukushima Tracer: CONFIRMED , Some Finnish DATA / + (!!!) Complete Cs137/Cs134/I131/Co60/K40/Be7 Record for Radiation Monitor @ CERN, Switzerland

Greetings!   

Another mix of a blogpost… An important one, if I may say so…

On the media surface of things, it sure resembles something awefully TOTALITARIAN sometimes… This “United States of America” (the only country whose constitution I’ve actually read…), or what’s left of it.

WOW just WOW…     Holy shit…  LOL.  Check this out…

 (— Excuse me for starting with a little throw-up session –

It’s FOR PRACTICE PURPOSES ONLY. ;-D  —

//// The video I had here got pulled (due “copyright infringement”, etc.), but if you search for the “Donald Trump Music Jam” or “Freedom Girls”, you’ll find it.  ////

…talk about psychopathic hollow populist nationalistic propaganda bullsit… Damn close to North Korea , if you go by this Donald Trump rally jam…

Because “making it disappear” is being actively pursued, people have made spoof versions and mixed it, so as to create “original content that can’t be pulled as easily, like this one:

LOL..

Anyhow.  Let me change the tone just a bit back to sanity…

Here:  Masters of War, by Bob Dylan:

— — — — —

From my at times quite radioactivehermitage’*…

…in the Colorado Rocky Mountains – Jan. 20, 2016

Home

If you know where to look for a tiny white dot in the trees at the foot of these majestic Sangre de Cristo mountains (Southern Colorado near New Mexico), you can see where I’m writing this from.  ;-)     (Yeah… I’ve been called, “Emperor of Recriticalities” ( “再臨界帝王”, by Twitter user @kokikokiya), but, more recently, in Japan, now I’m [*] also known as a “Hermit Blogger in Colorado” ;-)  (@ Invent Solitude, http://inventsolitude.sblo.jp).    Thanks, folks.  That’s funny.  ;-)    .)

ROLLING…

  • Blogpost Soundtrack:  Ashes to Ashes, by David Bowie

“[…] The shrieking of nothing is killing me
Just pictures of Jap girls in synthesis
And I ain’t got no money and I ain’t got no hair
But I’m hoping to kick but the planet is glowing

Ashes to ashes, funk to funky
We know Major Tom’s a junkie […]”

R.I.P.   What an artist…  What a life…  What a loss…   And yet another one… killed by cancer
  • Seasonal Fallout Upticks?

Something quite odd was brought to my attention recently (tx/ Pvwiv):  an apparent seasonal pattern in Cesium-137 detections, with upticks centered around New Year’s (January & December).  At this location (in a valley in the Swiss Alps near the border with Italy), a less pronounced uptick seems to also occur in-between the higher spike times.   This patterns doesn’t show up thís clearly on other monitors (or not at all), but is visually immediately apparent at the Cadenazzo monitor in Switzerland. See below.

I access European data through EURDEP, but each country usually has its own portal too; in contrast to most other countries the Swiss site is at least as good, if not better, than EURDEP’s.  Here’s an annotated sceenshot of the strangeness:

HappyNewYearReleases_Cadenazzo_CH

Unfortunately, the data here only began in mid-2012, so it cannot be ascertained whether or not this is a long-term thing, or if perhaps it began or became more pronounced since spring 2011 as a result of Fukushima’s spewing Cauldrons of Hell.

What makes it double-odd is that in winter soils tend to be sealed with snow.  Thus it seems unlikely that old-time deposits of Cs-137 (from pre-Fukushima accidents like Chernobyl (1986) and the Cold War militaries bomb testing era (1945-1992)) are whipped up more in winter.  To the contrary, I would think.  But perhaps there is a wind or precipitaion pattern that could explain this? [Added from the comment section: A very good possibility for explaining this odd pattern is wood burning in winter with wood from Chernobyl-contaminated forests. The minor summer upticks could be due to wildfires.  This would also explain the increased values in spring 2015, when wildfires in the highly contaminated  Chernobyl  region were ranging.}

In this blogpost, I’ll look at data from a few longer records to see if I can find any clues to whether or not this is a post-2011 thing, or something that’s been that way, for some reason, since Cesium-137 was added to the environment since the mid-1940s.

Let’s see…

Currently, looking at ‘past week’ data on EURDEP, it’s been oddly quiet as far as radioisotope detections go. (Odd because of the many gamma, alpha and beta upticks observed in the past month(s)- see examples  in my Nuclear Blog Posts Archive.).  This past week, there have been Cs-137 detections at 6 out of 7 monitors in snowed-over Finland, though.    And also @ both monitors in Croatia.  Cyprus, not shown here, always detects some Cs-137, though not in abnormal concentrations lately (on the low side, actually).    (Also: For some reason, most monitors aren’t monitoring, which is why there’s so little data now.  But that aside…)

Jan19_2016_Cs137_EuropeNorth_1week

At one of the most-northern monitors in Finland, @ IVALO, the record started in May 2011, and shows the tail end of elevated Iodine-131 & Cesium-137 detections, following the Fukushima-Daiichi meltdowns in mid-March 2011:

IVALO_Suomi_May22_2011_3monthsAfter_Cs137_I131_EURDEP

2011 data

As you can see in the record, the I-131 levels drop to below minimum detectable concentrations quickly (only LLD values, though at times the LLD levels are set higher than the spike levels of spring 2011… get the data details via EURDEP for more).  For the next composites, I left the y-axis the same is in the 2011 graphs above.

Shown next, the only I-131 detections AT THIS MONITOR occurred in January-February 2012, and, very peculiar, a significant uptick in March & April 2015 (part of a wave of “strange” upticks, which, that following May 2015 also included detections of Manganese-54, Niobium-95, Cobalt-60, Cesium-134 & others  – as I documented in posts such as Pink Unicorns beach themselves on the shores of Lake Dystopia, and many more found in my Nuclear Blog Posts Archive.

At Ivalo, Finland, these were the I-131 detections (and Cs-137 concentrations in the top black line) since 2011, which only occurred in these 3 month periods:

AllPost2011_I131_detections_pre2016_Ivalo_Suomi

2012 & 2015 data

Have you heard about the investigation into those peculiar spring 2015 detections, how the investigative journalists and researchers followed various clue trails to their most likely source?   Was it a comforting conclusion?  [Sarc.]  [Yeah…, the whole thing – poof – just disappeared from the news, I guess ’cause “them weird upticks” didn’t come from anywhere near the Finnish monitors and “them experts” couldnt figure it out…   Uh-huh… Yeah…   Gotcha.]

Those Spring 2015 upticks in both Cs-137 & I-131 were also the last time that Cs-137 reached that high of a concentration until this past week.

Cesium-137 (black line in the graphs), however, rarely passes above that first 6E-07 Bq/m^3 concentration.  Albeit without I-131 detections so far, it just did this past week:

Jan20_2016_3pastmonths_Cs137_I131_EURDEP

You dont think that’s even “a little weird” in as snowed-under landscape, where old-time Cs-137 deposits are near-certain to be NOT A FACTOR??

At this monitoring location, the fluctuations are small; and I can’t spot a seasonal pattern over the years either .

The Cs-137 (and Pb-210) upticks recently were more pronounced in far-northern Norway and Finland, as relayed in my recent post, HELSINKI, Finland: Data Confirms Something’s Up: Highest Cesium-137 Detections in Years.  No Cs-137 seasonal pattern can be seen at the Helsinki monitor either.   Let’s look at some more stuff…

One of the longest records closer to the Cadenazzo monitor is the Swiss monitor right near CERN.  So…  Here it is, the complete…

  • Cs-137 + Cs-134 + I-131 + Co-60 + K-40 + Be-7 Radiation Record for CERN, Switzerland

Strangely… right this past summer (2015), when the first signs of highly unusual upticks began to show up on monitors as mere ‘disturbances’ (which became far more pronounced in November-December 2015 and continue at the onset of 2016), the monitor @ CERN, Switzerland  appears to have GONE SILENT, or more accurately: Switzerland stopped relaying its data via EURDEP… :-/

(Why? I don’t know… Um… ‘Cause Europe is in deep trouble, and even the Swiss Army Chief is calling people to *GET ARMED*, claiming that, “the basis for Swiss prosperity is in danger”???…  Nevermind… )

So, I’ll look at CERN radiation data via the Swiss site instead, @ http://www.radenviro.ch/en-GB/measures/3#measures-graph, showing “a nice decade of data”:

Cs-137:

CERN_SwissData_FullRecord_Cs137

Notice how the ‘gaps’ dissapeared?

Alright… If you look very closely you do already see some kind of upticks here too around the change of calendar years.   Because the spike throws off the y-axis, here’s the same data, minus the F1 event,  RIGHT BEFORE:

CERN_SwissData_FullRecord_Cs137Before-F1

Higher than usual upticks in early Winter 2004-2005, and again, more pronounced in winter 2006.  Not extreme, but those rise above the following 4 winters’ levels.

What is véry striking, though, that there is very clearly an Cs-137 WINTER UPTICK PATTERN visible in the pre-Fukushima data record.

Hm… Likely a high pressure versus low pressure + fluctuating jet stream position thing…  Or maybe a precipitation aspect…  Just noting things.    Interesting… 

And here’s the RIGHT AFTER:

CERN_SwissData_FullRecord_Cs137_AFTER-F1

The winter 2011-2012 uptick is higher than usual still, but not extraordinarily.  The Winter uptick pattern persists, and NOT in a more than pre-Fukushima way.  Why this is, I have no idea.  Some kind of seasonal wind / precipitaion / ???  pattern?   Anyhow, it is hereby now known that upticks in winter ought to be studied even more closely, so it can be understood why this is the case.

[Grad students, GO AT IT, I have no issue with ideas I BRING UP being followed up upon.   And as long as it is done genuinely and helpful, no credit is due.]

Cs-134:

CERN_SwissData_FullRecord_Cs134.gif

See that?  Yup: There’s a reason that they say that if Cs-134 (Half-life only 2 years, while Cs-137 has a half-life of about 30 years) is being detected that it is a ‘for sure’ a sign of having come from Fukushima. 

It REALLY is not that common of a detection, not even on Switserland’s or Finland’s super-sensitive sensors.    Allow me to offer a tiny diversion in this Cesium-134 vein…

This past month, there is only 1 monitor reporting Cs-134 detections in Europe, in Northern Czech Republic.   (Oh.. good ol’ Czech Republic… the memories… ;-)  … )

Cs134_2016_1.20_1mo_EURDEP

Alright, here’s something extremely striking I had not spotted before: in late Summer (Aug.-Sept) 2014, this monitor SPIKED in its Cs-134 detections, going a magnitude (x10) over what was observed shortly after Fukushima:

2_composite2011_2014_Hradec_Kralove-Piletice_CzechRepublic

Tnen no Cs134 was detected at this monitor UNTIL 2015.    In the past half year, Cs-134 detections were about one hundred TIMES below those levels (compare y-axis):

2015-2016_Cs_Cz_monitorHradec.K.P

Constant leaking from Europe’s multitude of nuclear reactors is the most likely cause of this near-constant detection of Cs-134 here.

I-131:

CERN_SwissData_FullRecord_I131

The only period with as many I-131 detections as right after March 2011…  sucks to say, but that has been in 2015.  :-/

Co-60:

CERNs_FUKUSHIMA_CO60_SmokingGun.gifWell well well… If that is not the SMOKING GUN of neutron bombardment activation product Cobalt-60 being a tracer for Fukushima-specific radioisotope releases (!!!), I don’t know what is.

Interesting, too, ISN’T IT ?, how a “detection limit” can spike…

I do not suspect Fukushima as the most likely culprit of “bizarre” trace radioisotope upticks all the way in Europe for no reason.   I weigh my words, and I “waste my time” researching this topic almost “as I were an insomniac”, as if there were no tomorrow.  ‘Cause I’ve seen stuff, felt stuff, that …if I take myself seriously… convinces me that, if things are not turned around radically, thát’s not that far from what’s upon us.   Us, meaning including future generations, of course.

There’s less and less data, but that little we still have do tell a story:  SOMETHING REALLY UNUSUAL IS HAPPENING.   And the fact that not even one mainstream media outlet has looked into this in earnest is troubling in and of itself.   Some samples:

Oct. 28, 2015 Detected in Helsinki Finland in October 2015: Cesium-134 & 137, Actinium-225 & 227, Cobalt-60. + Detected in Hamburg, Germany: Zirconium-97.

Aug. 1, 2015Synopsis / Improved Version: ‘Mainland USA June 14 2015 Radioactive Rain & Lichen Data Revisited’.

June 6, 2015Pink Unicorns beach themselves on the shores of Lake Dystopia (spring 2015 data, including Co-60 detections in Finland, anno 2015 ! Wind patterns make Fukushima a most likely culprit…)

Thinking I was going to blow the lid off a cover-up, I spent a small fortune on lab tests of unusually radioactive seaweeds I had gathered during my time traveling around Japan (Nov.-Dec. 2013):

One sample, mentioned in (written from Kyoto, Japan, on Nov. 18, 2013) “A Visit to Fukushima, Cut Short. With PHOTOS and Reflections.“, bought at a beach store just outside the Fukushima evacuation zone, north of Iwaki, Fukushima Prefecture, very interestingly contained Cobalt-60 (!!!), as reported in detail in (Jan. 19, 2014),  Independent LAB TEST RESULTS: RadioIsotope Analysis of Hokkaido Kelp and other Samples – (Store-sampled in Japan Nov-Dec 2013)

Alongside my corresondence with WHOI researcher Ken Buesseler, (the end (thus far) of thát conversation can be read mid-way in one of my monster-long blog posts, HERE), I was in touch with Georg Steinhauser, known among other research for his peer-reviewed scientic paper,  Fukushima’s Forgotten Radionuclides: A Review of the Understudied Radioactive Emissions.

!-> That paper DOES NOT MENTION COBALT-60 !, and Georg, who called me up after I emailed him, back then, went out of his way to call it both a ‘spectacular’ finding, and, at the same time, that there was -get this:- ‘no way’ it could be from Fukushima, “due to lack of radioCesium”.

Non-expert without credentials as I roll, I beg to differ, still:    I think what happened is very much what NOBODY anywhere involved in the nuclear industry wants to acknowledge:  super-criticalities can occur in worst case scenarios, which come with extremely intense neutron-bombardments, which in turn can change the radioisotopic make-up of the coriums during their meltdowns.

I kid you not, there’s even a good chance Fukushima is still fissioning. 

   ‘Cause to acknowledge what really happened… would mean, in no uncertain terms, the end of industrial-scale nuclear power generation.  THE ONLY REASON we have giant nuclear power stations is because the folks that pushed for it LIED.  THEY LIED!  That’s the only reason they exist.

It’s SO RISKY, you have to be either 1) in complete denial of the risks, or 2) know the risks but be so mesmerized by money, that you care less about the well-being of future generations; to the point as to qualify as a psychopath.

Yes, those two options are IT.

May  we all be spared the cobalt blues…

K-40:

CERN_SwissData_FullRecord_K40.gif

Be-7:

This record very clearly shows an up-down pattern, most likely corresponding with high-pressure / low-pressure changes.  Interestingly, though, around New Year’s, the Be-7 data tends to  DIP:

CERN_SwissData_FullRecord_Be7

Interesting.

I’m sure that more detailed data & study could reveal more clues as to why some isotopes fluctuate in strangely regular patterns.

I’ll leave it at this for now.  Comments welcome

Salmon_Walmart_Jan2016.jpg

Empty shelf space @ a nearby Wallmart.  Is SALMON suddenly só popular, or are supplies beginning to slow down?  Just wondering….

Blog post is long enough as it is…

Nite!

 

— — — — — — —   — — — — — — —

Disclaimer, Mrrrreow, & Fair Use Statement

FlagMVB

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.
| 9 Comments

Wake the eF up California! The Nuclear Cartel is MURDERING You!

Yes, it IS thát serious. 

Jan. 20, 2016 – Sharing a video from a livid Kevin Blanch:

Kevin Blanch: “WHY IS California protecting THE BIGGEST CRIME syndicate in HISTORY” ?!!!

For awhile, Kevin has been one of my many sources listed in my Nuclear News Links list.

I may disagree with the styles or antics, etc. of many, if not most, other activists, I may even question their ultimate allegiance at times, and to boot: I prefer a Truth & Reconciliation type of process to bring this just-beginning long-term mega-health-crisis disaster… to a place from which we, as a dignified humanity caring for each other and all our relations, have a fighting chance to tackle the massive challenges ahead, BUT…  – 4 points – MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT: 

1) I’m not a part of anyone’s “imaginary little army”.  I answer to no one but my own inner compass.  I worship Truth.   {On a sidenote, I DID receive [2]  ‘dead threats’ in the past half year.  They were vague and weird, but they did scare the hell out of me at the time, last autumn (2015).  It is why, after contemplating the situation, I first turned off, and eventually turned my blog BACK ON a few months ago, after “I though I was DONE BLOGGING.”   Perhaps delusional, but I still think “they” [?]  are merely entertained by me, but “they”, whatever that means,  may underestimate me too….

  • 2) For the record:   – & All my good friends knów this -:   If I end up dead, IT WOULDN’T BE SUICIDE.   I LOVE LIFE!    But don’t worry:  I know… thanks to ever increasing manipulative powers, blog access blocking and all, I know how marginal this blog is… ‘a joke’, almost.  It just needed to be said once.}
  • 3) I care A LOT less about activist tactics and strategy differences than that I stand by ANYONE genuinely fighting for the long-term biological quality of life of this incredibly beautiful precious planet.  If, however, I get CERTAIN that anyone’s truly a part of the ‘controlled opposition’…    Grrrr… [“Run, f*ckers, run!”]  But don’t get alarmed if you’re one of ’em, ’cause perhaps to the benefit of the bastards, given the nature of reality at the deepest percepual levels,  I consider ‘certainty’ pretty close to absurd. And ‘f*cking up’ IS human.  Finding compassion is challenging at times, but in a person-to-person situation, where all kinds of contributing factors to someone’s moral derailment get context…  COMPASSION, true relating from the heart, is boundless.
  • 4)  WE WILL BRING A PEACEFUL END TO THE MISGUIDED NUCLEAR ERA !!!

‘nough said.

Some added nuance & observations in (Jan. 18, 2016),

!!!_-> UCLA: “California Thyroid Cancer Incidence Well Above National Average”. — FUKUSHIMA FALLOUT & SOMETHING COVERED-UP the most obvious cause! 

See much more, including documentation of véry peculiar RECENT radiation upticks, in my Nuclear Blog Posts Archive.

Hell… Goodness…  I hope we can do it peacefully…  ‘Cause my nonviolent stance is not shared by all…

2ndAmendmentCarSticker

…As seen on a pick-up truck in Colorado this winter…

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

A list of other nuclear-related posts can be found in chronological order in my Nuclear Blog Posts Archive.

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

Disclaimer

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

FlagMVB

If you are viewing this page on any website other than allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/ it IS plagiarized.  Please let me know.  All original 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 probably obtain no such permission.
| 2 Comments

(I’m) ‘NUCLEAR’ (I’m wild…), by Mike Oldfield

From the Kojima video game,  Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain E3‘s trailer’s theme song, ‘Nuclear’, by English musician and composer Mike Oldfield (of Tubular Bells fame).  In the music video, below, the song is put to archival footage from a nuclear test at the Nevada Test site:

Here’s an accoustic cover, by Anna Gabriella:

Peace –

| Leave a comment

“You can’t see it, You can’t smell it either”, By Rankin Taxi & Dub Ainu Band, 2011

Japanese Reggae artists MC Rankin and Dub Ainu Band delivered this cautionary message about radioactive material in the 2011 music video, “You Can’t See It, and You Can’t Smell It Either.” ( 誰にも見えない、匂いもない 2011- )

 

| Leave a comment

The Rose Grower, by Attacco Decente

‘The Rose Grower’ is about Hilda Murrell, a professional rose grower, who was also an anti-nuclear campaigner.  She was murdered in March 1984.  It is one of the few songs banned from receiving airplay in the UK.  

Hilda Murrell was the aunt of Robert Green, a former Naval Intelligence officer who reportedly was one of only a few people who knew about the details of the sinking of the Argentinian ship, General Belgrano, during the 1982 Falklands (UK – Argenina) conflict.  The song tells the story of Hilda Murrell’s murder. The song is also an expression of love, respect, admiration and solidarity.  The song was released in 1988 on the album ‘The Baby Within us Marches on’ by Attacco Decente.

On March 18th 2012, The Guardian newspaper reported that Michael Mansfiled QC demanded a fresh police inquiry to establish what the British intelligence services knew about the murder: http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/ma…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/ma…

| Leave a comment

Nuclear Madness, by Joseph Lee Hooker

A Short Music Video concerning some of the serious issues we are facing. This song was featured on the artist’s album Hello World.  Words and Music © Joseph Lee Hooker, 2011. Come Alive Music: www.comealivemusic.com

| Leave a comment

DATA: ‘Fallout’

Video by DATA of their single ‘Fallout’ from the album ‘Opera Electronica’- 1979. Words and Music by Georg Kajanus: http://www.kajanus.com

| 2 Comments

Colorado Radiation Data: Massive Data Gaps since Summer 2015

The following “blogpost soundtrack” might help you with interpreting the significance of the data gaps:

Jan. 19, 2016

Since I live in Colorado, I figured that instead of constantly pointing at all the crazy-high radiation upticks and data gaps all over the European radiation monitoring scene these past few months (see dozens of posts in the Nov.-Dec. 2015 & Jan. 2016 period in my Nuclear Blog Posts Archive), perhaps its time to look at the data from a little closer to home…

If this gorgeous state had the monitor density of Germany, Belgium or The Netherlands, there would be well over 1,000 monitors.  Well, 3 it is…     There are only 3 EPA Radnet monitors in all of Colorado:

  • Grand Junction
  • Denver
  • Colorado Springs

On the upside, that makes it possible to share ’em all in 1 blog post.  I picked the second half of July as a starting point so you can see the massive data gap on the Grand Junction record.   The EPA Radnet’s system will not show more than 400 data points per graph, nor does it allow one to set the y-axis details yourself, making this a far more time-consuming and somewhat annoying process even for relatively short periods.

For what it’s worth, here are the data since July 2015:

  • Grand Junction, Colorado: 

A massive DATA GAP that spans all the way from the second week of August 2015 until the first week of January 2016:

GrandJunction_DataGapStretchesFromMid-August2015Till2016.gif

A zoom-in on the  data right before  this giant data gap/abyss:

7.21GrandJunction

And right after the daya gap:  Note that the levels (y-axis) are elevated compared to the graph above:

GrandJunction_Jan1_18_2016

  • Denver, Colorado:

A massive data gap also here, which starts about the same time as in Grand Junction, in early August 2015, at the end of this graph:

Denver_July20_Aug30_2015

But it ends significantly sooner.  After 2 data points in the long data gap period, this monitor comes back online in the second half of October, starting out with what looks like the tail end of a major fallout pattern:

DENVERcomesBackOnlineSooner

A zoom-in on the period right after the data gap, chopped in pieces (per 400 data points, as per EPA let’s-annoy-the-hell-out-of-researchers policy) to show more detail:

2Denver

Note the height of this spike (compare y-axis) in the second week of November 2015:

3Denver.gif

4Denver.gif

12.12Till1.4_Denver.gif

And the past 2 weeks:

endDenver

  • Colorado Springs, Colorado:

Sprinkled with data gaps throughout:

AfterJuly21

AUg2015_CS.gif

Sept2015_CS.gif

Oct2015_CS

11.01-24CS

11.24_12.12_ColoS

after12.12_ColoS.gif

And the past 2 weeks:

ColoS_end.gif

Spot anything interesting, please leave a comment.

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

A list of other nuclear-related posts can be found in chronological order

in my Nuclear Blog Posts Archive.

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

Disclaimer

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

FlagMVB

If you are viewing this page on any website other than allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/ it IS plagiarized.  Please let me know.  All original 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 probably obtain no such permission.
| Leave a comment

Spate of Mysterious Radiation Upticks (and Data Gaps) Continues. 3 months of data from Steinfort, Luxembourg

Steinfort_Luxembourg_Jan18_2016_3month_1

Also:  A “glitch dot” (data “not validated”) in France coincided, within hours in the same extended region of North-Eastern France with a data gap:

Jan18_2016_glitchDot_France

This is a small addition to documentation of a major radiological release.

See also the recent posts:

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

A list of other nuclear-related posts can be found in chronological order

in my Nuclear Blog Posts Archive.

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

Disclaimer

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

FlagMVB

If you are viewing this page on any website other than allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/ it IS plagiarized.  Please let me know.  All original 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 probably obtain no such permission.
| Leave a comment

UCLA: “California Thyroid Cancer Incidence Well Above National Average”. — FUKUSHIMA FALLOUT the most obvious cause!

Colorado Rocky Mountains – Jan. 18, 2016

[NOTE: This post was edited later in the day after posting. -mvb]

!!!–> Shortlink for sharing on social media:  https://goo.gl/cgWu6N

 The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who,

in times of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality.” 

Dante Alighieri

If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention. 

FUKUSHIMA FALLOUT is starting to cause statistically significant cancer increases in the USA.  Chernobyl data suggests much worse is yet to come.  This blogpost offers documentation to back up that assertion.

For the long-term quality of life, it is of utmost importance that the misguided nuclear industry is shut down and an all-hands-on deck is declared to face the massive challenge of decommissioning all of the worlds large nuclear fission reactors and find long-term fool-proof solutions for the increasing piles of nuclear waste.

  – DISCLAIMER

 [h/t Kevin Blanch]  — The news came out a months ago, Dec. 9, 2015, see UCLA newsroom @ http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/ucla-study-finds-advanced-thyroid-cancer-rate-in-some-california-counties-is-well-above-national-average. The study was published online by the Journal of Surgical Research.

Screenshot excerpt [Click image for full article]:

UCLAstudy

It was picked up by ABC Los Angeles, which aired the gist of it in their Jan. 14, 2017 report, @ http://abc7.com/1159674/  : thyroid cancer cases have recently risen significantly above the national average, and that there’s likely “an environmental factor”.

In what looks like an irrational apparent negative bias towards the most obvious, the researchers are apparently mainly looking at pesticides as a possible cause, might look at ‘radon’, and recommend quitting smoking tobacco products…  [Click image to watch video at ABC):

ABC_LosAngeles.gif

ABC: “While radiation is a known risk factor, Dr. Harari is now looking into whether pesticides might be behind California’s higher numbers.  [Harari:] “I believe, based on the geographic difference that there’s something environmental.

Um… What about Fukushima?  Seems like the most likely culprit.  Why?

Straight from the UCLA news report, a detail not quoted by ABC, highlighted by me in this excerpt:

THE ONLY KNOWN ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR

FOR THYROID CANCER

IS RADIATION EXPOSURE. 

OnlyKnownFactor

Get that:  The only known environmental factor for thyroid cancer is radiation exposure.   Okay?  Got it?  Why they would consider this factor “unlikely to fully explain the phenomenon” is rather baffling.

{IMPORTANT NUANCE added after original posting:

Because the ABC Report that caught my attention first only mentioned, “Harari studied 10 years of information.”, and not the more detailed fact that these UCLA scientists examined county-by-county data “from the California Cancer Registry for 27,000 people who had been diagnosed with thyroid cancer from 1999 to 2008,” I admit I jumped the gun.  To a point.  The correlation with Fukushima fallout, however, is so outright weird that I -sorry- lean towards this being part of a long term cover-up strategy.  You may roll your eyes all you want.  It’s darn weird that 10 years of data would find a correlation with fallout that hadn’t happened yet.

IF… -(This is not certain.  Few things are certain)- IF there is a strong statistical correlation with Fukushima fallout deposition (Indications shared further in this post suggest this is the case), then there’s a few possibilities. 

1) Pure coincidence. 

2) Not impossible: There’s some correlation with fallout from OTHER nuclear accidents, which due to roughly similar precipitation patterns and topological features settled in roughly the same areas.  The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (“SONGS”) is a likely culprit for pre-Fukushima radioIodine releases. 

(See http://sanonofresafety.org/radiation-monitoring/ and http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/07/13/san-onofre/, etc. See also my hindsight afterthoughts at the end of this post and in the comment section)

Conspiracy3) Also not impossible, and in combination with (2), I’d say this may be the most likely case, especially given this is a UCLA study (the very university that kept Iodine-131 kelp data secret for an entire year following the Fukushima accident (see below), and then waited until most radioisotopes had decayed away or dispersed through the ecosystem to be part of launching “Kelp Watch” in 2013, to come to the conclusion, which had already been announced (talk about biased!) before any data was in: that Fukushima had no measureable effect on the California coast’s ecosystems.  (They accomplished this by focussing on radioCesium, for which mysteriously forgot to test in 2011… Or so we’re supposed to believe…). And for some untold mystery, -now, in the post-Fukushima era-, they chose to study data from 1999 to 2008, (what about a 2011-2016 trend?), which, to boot “almost hokus spokus” becomes ‘news’ almost a decade after those data were already known…   A little strange, I’d say.  

With so many people concerned about Fukushima, that does actually leave some “pondering space”, to say the least, for this being part of an actual conspiracy.   Also, the fact that ABC LA spoke of “recent research”, yet did not point out the period they were talking about is suspect.  

The Plume Gate documents PROVE an elaborate conspiracy IS actually being carried out (links included below).  You have to be asleep at the wheel to not have caught on to that yet.  

So, in that vein of possibility, this UCLA report very well might fit into a conspiracy.  Although this may not even be necessary, data used by scientists can be altered before they reach the scientists..  Statistical tricks can further bend results in favor of preferred outcomes, etc.  The National Cancer Registry is unlikely immune to manipulations.  It is not neccessary for the scientists involved to be consciously aware of a long-term cover-up plan. 

One thing that adds to my suspicion that this official academic report, which is given attention by an (in general) extremely pro-nuclear-biased media (most of it owned by corporations heavily invested in nuclear technology…), is that it makes a significant effort to off-hand dismiss radiation, and stresses tobacco smoking as the #1 cancer cause.  Further research will focus on pesticides and radon…

Thát right there is a smoking gun (to me, and I admit to my bias.  But don’t let my bias get in the way of giving this a serious consideration) that this fits into a larger scheme.  This added commentary continues at the end of this post.  I may add additional thoughts in the comment section.

I’ll leave the rest of this post as-posted-originally, because I suspect there’s more to this than made the report or the news…}

Let me highlight some information pertinent to this situation, including fallout maps and other absolutely relevant clues.

For starters: WE KNOW from the Plume Gate documents that the west coast was heavily hit with radiation and we know that the US government went all-out to cover up the severity of this disaster.  For some basic documentation of the cover-up, see:

Also, WE KNOW that Southern California specifically was blasted with massive amounts of Iodine-131.  Instead of immediately alerting the public, the data was conceiled until well after the hot iodine-laden radioactive clouds had long passed over.  Barely any extra testing.  And very limited testing.  Hush hush…  Example:

ScientificAmerican_Excerpt_March30_2012

Where precisely the fallout hotspots were on land was either never determined, or kept secret, possibly to prevent massive financial damage to California’s gigantic aggricultural industries.

Screenshot of Fukushima Diary article (screenshot taken on Jan. 18, 2016; Also notice the recent headlines to the right):

FukushimaDiary_CaliforniaPistachio

  • And then there’s the modelled (not measured) fallout, which may at least give a hint of areas that might have received more fallout than others.

What did the fallout deposition models show right after the March 11, 2011 Fukushima-Daiichi Nuclear Catastrophy began? 

Well… In short: they make it overly clear that if an uptick in cancer incidence were to show up in the US,  the West Coast,  and parts of Central and Southern California in particular, is the most likely place where this may be observed.

(Other areas where upticks are more likely, based on the extremely limited data we do have, might very well include pockets throughout the Rocky Mountain region, from Calgary, Alberta, to places in Idaho, Utah, Colorado and Kansas); See (Jan. 23, 2012) Fukushima Fallout in Calgary (Alberta, Canada) was among highest in North America, too. and (April 16, 2011)  Highest I-131 Radiation Fallout in US from Fukushima: in Utah, Idaho, California and Kansas.)

To borrow from my blog post, (May 1, 2012), Fallout Maps for the United States:

  1. The extremely limited precipitation sample testing from the USGS showed that for both I-131 and Cs-137, California showed peak measurements.  When you keep in mind that fallout settled very erratically, it is near-certain that the hottest hotspots were missed, due to lack of sampling spots in both time and space:

usgs_i131only_bqpersqmetermap_usa

What’s striking is that the second-highest I-131 measurement is right around the area listed as having the highest aggressive thyroid cancer uptick.  Look further below for the locations of Alpine, Amador, Calvaderas, Sutter Counties marked on map.

That’s Iodine-131 data above, and Cesium-137 data, below:

cs137_usgs_mappage241

In this case, the highest Cs-137 measurement was found roughly between Santa Barbara and Imperial Counties.  Most areas were left untested.

Deposition can vary greatly over very short distances.  In Japan, it was found that there were incredible differences sometimes even between two sides of the same street.  (see the archives of Fukushima Diary.)  It’s thát erratic.  So, as a consequence, these USGS detections just show very general clues to where far worse deposition might have occured.

As I pointed out in my Fallout Maps of the United States blogpost, a comparisson between detailed maps of initial Iodine-131 deposition in Northern Japan and the few USGS data points show that some parts of the North-American West coast were hit harder than areas just hundred of kilometers from the spewing Fukushima molten-down & exploded-out reactor complex in Japan:

This is a map of early I-131 deposition in Japan:

wa98sample_inperspectivewith_iodine131_speedi_march25_map

Marked in red on the map legend above is the record level found on the US West Coast.

japan_usa_map_i131related

 For more, see that blogpost.

!–> In that light, the fallout deposition simulation (not measurement!) by the French CEREA remains interesting:

Click to see the animated version at http://cerea.enpc.fr/en/fukushima.htm

The California counties mentioned inthe UCLA study with elevated aggressive thyroid incidence:

california-county-map.jpg

Combined:

WestCoastZoom_colorAccen_withThyroidCancerUptickCountiest__Accumulated_total_deposition_ground_fukushima-2.gif

The actual deposition may match the thyroid cancer upticks far more accurately.  In fact, the cancer increases are probably our best clue to where the hotspots actually are/were.  (!-> Remember: this is MODELLED, not measured.  The US government went out of their way to not monitor the situation publicly.)

Obviously, to off-hand declare radioactive fallout “unlikely” to fully explain this is clearly an irrational bias against what is actually quite evident:

Fallout is causing cancers far outside Japan!

Except for Imperial County near the US Mexican border, 5 of the 7 counties with aggressive thyroid cancer upticks happen to fall smack in the thick of, or véry close to, the modelled fallout deposition areas.  The worst affected areas are in a part of the Sierra Nevada foothills and mountain range, which according to that French model is exactly where the worst fallout would be expected.  Also striking is that the south on the coast, Santa Barbara is close to where the kelp was found with extremely high I-131 content.

FukuBeach.jpg

People in San Francisco trying to get the government to stop putting its head in the sand re. Fukushima fallout, in 2013.  The consequences are beginning to become undeniable.

San Francisco is a bit of a borderline case as far as matching the modelled fallout map.  But in the case of San Francisco, it also not impossible that it may be affected by migration to the city from worse-hit regions.  (It is also not uncommon for people with medical needs to move to an area with better care.)

In that train of thought, I’d like to draw attention to the curious case of New York having seen upticks in thyroid cancer DECADES after the Chernobyl nuclear accident in the Ukraine in 1986:

NY Times (April 20, 2006) reported that Ukraine immigrants caused leap in New York  Thyroid cancer cases.  (And it’s not that New York is full of Ukrainians…)  So for those who will doubt anything that doesn’t get the stamp of approval from the industry-embedded “regulatory” agencies (IAEA, NRC, JAIF, etc.), try expaining all this with the dominant ICRP model (see @ Radiation Exposure Effects) …

!–> And this graph, below, from Belarus (Sourced from http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2015/11/graph-of-day-thyroid-cancer-incidence.html) shows that right around now is indeed when we would expect to begin seeing the first statistically significant consequences of radioactive fallout.  I’ve inserted the years since 2011 to give an extra clue, just in case your’re one of those baffled scientists on which the obvious is somehow lost:
Thyroid_cancer-incidence-belarus_image%255B5%255D_annot1MVB

 

Now, why would they then want to focus on ‘pesticides and radon’?

Radon can be both natural and what they call “enhanced natural”, meaning it was added artificially, as part of the decay chains of various kinds of Uranium and Plutonium, both which were (and likely still are being) released in massive quantities by the ongoing Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear catastrophe.  So upticks in radioIodine are likely going to be accompanied by upticks in “enhanced natural” Radon and Radon progeny (which includes the highly carcinogenic Polonium-210 in its decay chain).

!->  Very pertinent to this issue are the links embedded in this illuminating article by Dr. Mercola, @ http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/02/10/radioactive-fertilizer.aspx  Connect the dots if you dare:

!-> Feb. 10, 2014,  Radioactive Fertilizer—The Surprising Primary Cause of Lung Cancer in Smokers.  Screenshot excerpt:

Mercola_Po210

So, consider the following:   Areas around Santa Barbara, as well as parts of the California Sierra Nevadas have ALWAYS had elevated Radon levels.  They did not cause elevated thyroid cancers.  They don’t just start causing thyroid cancers all of a sudden.  The thyroid concentrates Iodine (radioactive or not), NOT Radon.

SO check this out, for a little additional background:

us-radon-map

Do you see how PERFECTLY this matches with Uranium concentrations found on geology maps [sarc.]:

uranium_concentrations

Now…, if consider the Iodine-131 fallout, you can “fill in the non-correlation”…  The below maps shows the Iodine-131 fallout  (by now that i131 has all  long radiodecayed away) directly caused by the Nevada Test Site, where in the period 1945-1992, just north of Las Vegas in Southern Nevada some 1,000 nuclear bombs were exploded:

oe_map

Get it?    Yes, they’re thát sick:  you can use Radon as a scapegoat to blame cancer clusters on, because Radon is also going to increase in areas with increased fallout deposition.

There are no such detailed maps of Radon predating the nuclear bomb testing era.

To boot, as I pointed out in my April 14, 2014 shredding-nuclear-propanda blogpost, “Reality Check: Debunking The Wall Street Journal’s “Radiation Reality Check””:

“In 1997, the National Cancer Institute reported that the Cold War detonations at the Nevada Test Site had polluted nearly the whole of the country with drifting airborne radioactive iodine, creating somewhere between 10,000 and 75,000 cases of childhood thyroid cancer. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that of the nearly 600,000 Americans dying of cancer every year, 11,000 will be because of those tests.”

“Ha ha…” Yeah…  Nuclear falout is harmless alright [sarc.], IF you ignore the tens of thousands of childhood thyroid cancers, that is…  Not to mention all the rest.

According to the US EPA themselves, http://www.epa.gov/radon/health-risk-radon, “Radon is responsible for about 21,000 lung cancer deaths every year.  About 2,900 of these deaths occur among people who have never smoked.

By the way… (Sept. 13, 2013) – Slow-motion Nuclear War: 2.5 years of Fukushima released 1 Hiroshima Cesium Fallout Equivalent EVERY 7 HOURS.

[Sigh…] 

  • EXTRAS:

To get a better idea of how far the deception goes, also consider some of these posts I put together over the years:

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

ADDED AFTER POSTING:

SO… If you’ve read all of the above, and explored the links… Allow me to continue my added commentary in the vein of a possible, if not likely (given the players (both academic and media-wise), conspiracy.  I’m not claiming this is “The Truth”.  It’s just a thought:

  If your aim were to solidify, “backed by scientific data”, the official assertion that Fukushima fallout had zero harmful effects on North America (as the Obama administration announced while initial findings already indicated that the opposite was more likely – See Plume Gate), then it makes sense to somehow “mysteriousy” find increases in thyroid cancer PREDATING Fukushima in exactly those areas hardest hit with Fukushima fallout. 

If you can then find a statistical correlation with persticides (and where pesticide use is heavy, fertilizer use is most likely more prevalent too… thus more Po-210, etc…), and along with that you focus on Radon (which you can make sound to be “all-natural” (a la the way Ken Buesseler makes Polonium-210 sound all-natural), then you’ve set the stage to dismiss further evidence of the effects of Fukushima fallout.  Would be pretty clever.  

I don’t think that the fact that they stress tobacco smoking as the #1 cancer cause, in the same breath as they’re annoucing they going to look at “pesticides and radon”, if a coincidcence, when the issue presented is THYROID CANCER.

SOme more on Po-210:   Polonium-210 and lung cancer: http://www.hindawi.com/journals/jo/2011/860103/

“The alpha-radioactive polonium 210 (Po-210) is one of the most powerful carcinogenic agents of tobacco smoke and is responsible for the histotype shift of lung cancer from squamous cell type to adenocarcinoma. According to several studies, the principal source of Po-210 is the fertilizers used in tobacco plants, which are rich in polyphosphates containing radium (Ra-226) and its decay products, lead 210 (Pb-210) and Po-210.  Tobacco leaves accumulate Pb-210 and Po-210 through their trichomes, and Pb-210 decays into Po-210 over time. With the combustion of the cigarette smoke becomes radioactive and Pb-210 and Po-210 reach the bronchopulmonary apparatus, especially in bifurcations of segmental bronchi. In this place, combined with other agents, it will manifest its carcinogenic activity, especially in patients with compromised mucousciliary clearance. …”

I bet they’ll find a “until now unknown” correlation between Radon and thyroid cancer.  Given how they’ve played this game of deception so far, something that far-fetched wouldn’t surprise me anymore.   

So, for now, I’ll nuance my stance:  The link between these aggressive thyroid cancers and fallout isn’t ‘obvious’, as I stated above.  It’s a mystery.   Very weird mystery indeed.   But I can already tell from the direction they’re taking this research, that they will come to a véry predictable outcome, one that will be helpful to dismiss “nutters like myself”.

  • CONCLUSION (ADDED, Jan. 19, 2016):

The most likely case (see also my later comments) is that there was a major radiological release at least 4 years prior to 2008, possibly a covered-up accident in California itself (like a major leak from San Onofre’s NPPs, or another facility somewhere), that due to precipitation and geography was deposited in regions that overlap with where the cancer upticks will show (or already beginning to show as well) due to the Fukushima fallout. 

Take it however you will. 

Additional links:

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

I can only hope that somehow “wasting my time” putting this all together is helpful…

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

A list of other nuclear-related posts can be found in chronological order

in my Nuclear Blog Posts Archive.

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

Disclaimer

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

FlagMVB

If you are viewing this page on any website other than allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/ it IS plagiarized.  Please let me know.  All original 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 probably obtain no such permission.
[Last updated (meant to be final, except for typos I might spot later]: conclusion added:  Jan. 19, 2016, 12:00 noon (Colorado) Mountain Time.]
| 18 Comments

Unprecedented Radiation Spikes in Eastern TURKEY (Jan. 2016)

Jan. 17, 2016

This is part of what has become a series of blog posts looking into widespread recent radiation upticks. See previous blog posts for much more. I’ll look at some peculiar Turkish data: 6 months of data from Maldin near Syria, and the complete record for Van Caldiran near Iran.

VanCaldiran)Mardin)Turkey_onMAPAbove image: Marked on map: the locations of that gamma radiation monitors @ VAN CALDIRAN, Eastern TURKEY near the border with Iran, as well as @ MARDIN, also in Turkey, but closer to the border with Syria.

For Mardin, I look at just the past half year, just to show that the very pronounced uptick higher up in the mountains at Van Caldiran also affected some lower elevation monitors, albeit not as pronounced and with somewhat different timing.  Note the data gaps also found around spike and other data gap times elsewhere in Europe.

MARDIN, TURKEY:

{most recent data at end of this 6-month composite:}

MALDIN_Turkey_halfyear_Jan17_2016

And here, below, is the complete record, as found on the *mostly unvalidated data* Public Access “Advanced Map” of EURDEP (See Online Radiation Monitors)”.  The first part is with ‘Polyline’ off, the second part is wíth ‘Polyline’ (in the graphing settings).

VAN CALDIRAN, TURKEY (2007-2016)

[oops, my mistake… Must have gotten sleepy last nite. NOTICE: this time the most recent data is at the top:]

1

->Apart from a shorter and less intense uptick period in the second half of January 2015, seen further below, this most recent spate of upticks is unprecedented.

What’s going on?2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

Comments:

I don’t know what the data gaps may be hiding, but as far as available data goes, it is instantly clear from at all these years of data that the upticks of the past few months are highly unusual.  I’m trying to figure out WHERE the massive radiation upticks of the past few months may be coming from.  Is a major nuclear meltdown being covered up?  WHERE is this happening?    Or is Fukushima spiraling thát badly further out of control?

Anyone know what’s going on, please leave me a clue.  Thanks.

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

A list of other nuclear-related posts can be found in chronological order in my Nuclear Blog Posts Archive.

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

Disclaimer

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

FlagMVB

If you are viewing this page on any website other than allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/ it IS plagiarized.  Please let me know.  All original 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 probably obtain no such permission.
| 6 Comments

Aberdeen Airport, SCOTLAND – May 2004 – Jan. 2016 Radiation Graphed: Recent Uptick Among Highest On Record

Colorado Rocky Mountains — Jan. 17, 2016

I’ve added some annotations to highlight irregularities.  Some of those could be natural, or a mix of natural with fallout.  For more background, see previous blog post, (Jan. 16, 2016),  Highest Radiation in a Decade @ Exeter, U.K. (Jan. 2016 ) and the dozen+ posts before listed in my  Nuclear Blog Posts Archive.

Here’s the complete record (minus the notorious data gaps, that is, and with much of the data *not validated* – See their disclaimer), from mid-May 2004 to mid-Jan. 2016, for

DYCE (Aberdeen Airport), SCOTLAND (U.K.):

434241403938

[Note: Long DATA GAP here]

3736353433323130292827262524232221201918171615141312111098765

–> For that mid-November 2014 uptick, see also documentation of that radiological event (which included massive spikes in I-131 and Cs-137 @ Cyprus) in the blog posts, (Jan. 31, 2015),  DATA of ‘Fallout Signatures’ on Radiation Monitors Suggest Fukushima Still Going Re-Critical Underground At Times. Airborne Fallout Continues To Come Down Across the Northern Hemisphere.  and (Jan. 24, 2015),  Did Germany just get a Massive Amount of Fukushima Fallout and “No One Noticed”? (A Eurdep-Nullschool investigation of the Nov. 16, 2014 radiation Upticks…).

continued…

4321

Comments:   In the 6+ years before March 11, 2011, there were 3 upticks above 180 nSv/hr (0.189 µSv/hr) at this location.  There have been 9 since then.  One of the most significant ones was just this past week.  This monitor’s recent data isn’t as unusual as some others, but some of the significant upticks of late are visible on the graphs at this location as well.

Previous blog posts contain more background.

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

A list of other nuclear-related posts can be found in chronological order in my Nuclear Blog Posts Archive.

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

Disclaimer

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

FlagMVB

If you are viewing this page on any website other than allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/ it IS plagiarized.  Please let me know.  All original 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 probably obtain no such permission.
| Leave a comment

Highest Radiation in a Decade @ Exeter, U.K. (Jan. 2016 )

Colorado Rocky Mountains – Saturday, January 16, 2016

While the Belgian government is discussing the recommendation of the nuclear regulator FANC to start the distribution of Potassium Iodine pills to the entire population for when, err “just in case” Doel or Tihange NPPs might ruin much of western Europe with radioactive fallout

…I graphed some more radiation data for you, to further illustrate that something unusual is going on RIGHT NOW.  Fallout of some sort is circling the globe and “somehow” it’s not making “the news”…  (whatever that still means…)

In this blog post, I’ll look at an entire decade of data for just 1 monitor, just to illustrate that that uptick this past week is darn unusual.   (I should have titled it, “Highest UNVALIDATED Radiation DATA in a Decade, unknown spikes during data gaps excluded, @ Exeter, U.K.  (Jan. 2016 )”, but those known unknowns, I suppose, won’t become knowns any time soon…)

EXETER, U.K. – Location marked on this map:

StandardDeviation

Starting way back in mid-May 2004, when this data set begins, I pasted 3-months together per line to save space.  There’s only a few annotations, such as the beginning of the Fukushima-Daiichi Nuclear Disaster, is marked.  

As you’ll see, the effects of Fukushima on this monitor are benign at first and become more pronounced (albeit still tiny as far as dose rate goes) by the end of 2011 and especially later in in 2012. (On that matter, it seems relevant that the “US was hit with worst fallout THE YEAR AFTER Fukushima began” [See links via ENEnews, Oct 1, 2014])

One reason there’s little to be seen on UK monitors (and Turkish monitors, for that matter) is because hourly averages tend to mask the effects of fallout on monitors, at least that’s my impression from years of watching these networks.  (Russia, still stuck in the era of daily averages, is still worse, but that aside.)  This does, however, make tiny upticks potentially extra significant.  

In the record below, you’ll see little shifts, particularly in Summer 2014… something changes.  It gets more erratic, the upticks are more frequent.  Then look at the last 3 months, and this past week in particular (scroll all the way down for the most recent data). 

It strangely fits with observations I’ve shared in various previous posts:  Something’s up.   More commentary below the data.

EXETER, U.K. DATA:

12345678910111213141516171819202122232425_F12627282930313233343536373839404142434444b_45

 Comments

I picked Exeter, UK, simply because it showed a minor Standard Deviation uptick on the EURDEP “Advanced map”.  I decided to look back at its entire record (shown below), and it turns out, the detections this week break all records, even those from 2011-2012.

Data sourced from the UK government via EURDEP (Public “Advanced Map” – Note their disclaimer:  most data is ‘not validated’ – That and other options via my page Online Radiation Monitors).

As far as I can tell, something REALLY is going on that falls outside mere “natural variability”.   It’s been building for months, it shows up in waves, affecting different monitors in many far-apart places differently, and if you take the time to take the US’s and Europe’s *unvalidated*, *integrity-free*, and in all cases “never-ever-indicating-anything-of-concern” data seriously anyhow (See EURDEP’s and Radnet’s all-encompasing disclaimers), even if you do so just “for entertainment purposes only” (See MY DISCLAIMER), I think you might agree that this environmental development needs to be investigated

What ís going on?  Where is this coming from??  IS IT coming from Fukushima???  If not… which meltdown is the nuclear industry trying to cover up???? 

I don’t mean to cause “undue alarm”, but…  As documented in the last dozen posts (just hit ‘Home’ and scroll down for the Dec. 2015 – Jan. 2016) posts, or check my Nuclear Blog Post Archive (to be updated soon), I’m under the impression that there has been a MAJOR radiological release, major enough to affect radiation monitors worldwide, particularly pronounced in the past 3 month. 

The fact that upticks in Cesium-137 (See the Norwegian & Finnish data a few posts back) are detected alongside also-possibly-natural radioisotopes like Radon progeny Lead-210 and Bismuth-214 (See German data from a few posts back), to name a few, indicates that the upticks are unrelated to volcanic activity, nor caused by some methane leak here or there.   Cs-137 is one of the main ingredients of artificial fission events. 

Very curious shorter-lived synthetic radionuclides were also detected at the onset of this mystery (See Oct. 28, 2015 Detected in Helsinki Finland in October 2015: Cesium-134 & 137, Actinium-225 & 227, Cobalt-60. + Detected in Hamburg, Germany: Zirconium-97.), just as they were in spring 2015 (See, June 6, 2015Pink Unicorns beach themselves on the shores of Lake Dystopia). 

Is a major nuclear meltdown being covered up?  WHERE is this happening?    Or is Fukushima spiraling thát badly further out of control?

Anyone know what’s going on, please leave me a clue.  Thanks.

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

A list of other nuclear-related posts can be found in chronological order in my Nuclear Blog Posts Archive.

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

Disclaimer

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

FlagMVB

If you are viewing this page on any website other than allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/ it IS plagiarized.  Please let me know.  All original 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 probably obtain no such permission.

| 2 Comments