Rain Appears to be ‘Back to Normal’ – Or, wait, maybe not… – (May 4 & 5, 2015 Geiger Counter measurements) + Further investigation of Radioactive Rain Events

Crestone, Colorado, USA – 8,000 ft. — May 5, 2015 — Pouring rain (earlier).

In this blog post:  My Geiger Counter ‘notes’ from the past day, followed by a closer look into what happened on May 3 (is it Tritium or Tritiated Water?  COuld it be pollen?.  All this mixed with some photos (for my own sanity.  ;-) ).  I also added some more photos to last couple blog posts.   DISCLAIMER

May 6 insert: + important additions in comments.  Tritium ruled out.  Likely short-lived radioisotopes of Radon / Bismuth / Lead /… coming down in a rain-out of (mostly or all?) natural radioisotopes.  – End insert]


May 3’s freakish  6.1 µSv/hr  rain water... put me “on alert”.   So to speak, I guess.  Not that anyone cares that rain can be – apparently – thát radioactive, or that I’m not going walk through the rain and enjoy life, but…  It made me curious.

Because ‘they’ (NOAA) predicted late (May 4) afternoon possible thunderstorms again and rain later on (into May 5 and beyond), I started taking measurements long before a rain drop fell, to check on the difference if there were any.

The weather in the USA zone of this part of North America this morning, Cinco de Mayo:


We’ve been so blessed with all this moisture lately.   ;-)

  • Geiger Counter (Medcom Inspector Alert) measurements:

Afternoon May 4, 2015  – 8200 ft., vertical;
12:55 -14:55 = 2 hrs = 120 min
6856 counts   =>  57.13 CPM

Front car seat, windows cracked open, Beta window upwards, horizontal;
End of measuring period:   8:28 pm  on  May 4, 2015
24-> 20:53 = 3hrs7min = 187 min
Counts:   12,910   => 69.04 CPM, dose rate fluctuating around 0.150 µSv/hr (normal at 8000 ft.)

Horiz. versus Vertic.. = 20.8 % difference.   (See also march 22, 2015,  More Geiger Counter Measurements Confirm: Angle of Pancake Tube Matters, also at Ground Level.  (due to cosmic rays)

RAINING (just started) – May 4, 2015  8:28 pm

5 minutes, vertical on dashboard, windows closed:
Counts:  293     => 58.6 CPM    (same as no rain)

8:34pm  – 45 degree angle, beta window against window upwards, propped up with dry towel to hold it there.   Time:  24–>  23:39
1429 count in 21 minutes =>  68.0 CPM   (normal)

—-> that means:  practically no unusual Gamma radiation in this rain.

Let’s see about Beta radiation (which is shielded by the windshield).

Toilet paper swipe of rainwater off car window:  The dose rate this time was “only” fluctuating around 0.67 µSv/hr (between 0.5 and 0.8 µSv/hr), about 10% of yesterday, May 3, 2014’s measurement.)

1st minute:  280 CPM;  2 minutes:  513 / 2 = 256.5 CPM;  – pressed the GC a bit into the wet – went up to 0.8 µSv/hr;   4 min:  1081 /4 =>  270 CPM;   5:min:   1377 / 5 = > 275.4 CPM    ;    7 min. avg. (1882 counts / 7)  =>   269 CPM  (about 4x normal background for this location)    Dose rate, when I stopped, fluctuated ( 5 minute observation) around 0.7 µSv/hr,  between 0.651 and 0.826 µSv/hr.   This rain lasted only 10 minutes, if that.  Very brief event.   Quick test @ 8200 ft; ended:  9:17 pm May 4, 2015

—> Clearly the rain still emits a significant amount of beta radiation, but not nearly as bad as on May 3 in the evening.


May 5, 2015  —  Lots of rain this past night.   This morning inside my car around 8am: normal dose rate (around 0.170 µSv/hr (horizontal, normal at this 8200 ft altitude)

paper towel swipe made it rise to 0.350 µSv/hr.  (horizontal)  Less, again, than the day before.  A quick 3 minute test averaged 749 counts in 10 minutes => 74.9 CPM  (–> pretty much normal).

Was at a meeting between 9 and 9:50;  during this time I left the GC counting in horizontal position by the car window:   3730 count in 55 minutes => 67.8 CPM  (completely normal)

Horiz_DashB_rainAfter that I measured 5 minutes on hat I just walked through the rain with:  387 counts in 5 min. => 77.4 CPM (the extra +10 CPM could be from dust in the hat too, will test it when dry some other time); in any case, nothing unusual nor alarming today.

onHatTook some swipes off the car hood and windshield with my handkerchief to check, same thing:  barely any difference.

I suppose that further confirms that Sunday’s incredibly radioactive rain was highly unusual.

Of course I could be wrong, and I’ve been very wrong before, but given my observations of the past year, my #1 suspicion of what the cause might be goes to Fukushima’s massive Tritium releases.  Yet it could be from many other nuclear industry sources as well.  Perhaps even WIPP in New Mexico, although if it were from WIPP, then I would also see a gamma radiation uptick, I think, and there isn’t much, if any, of that in this rain at all.  Could also be something natural that I have yet to learn about.

So, I’m simply going to try to find out what caused the uptick(s) in beta-emitting rain-water.   (See further below).

DSCN3216US Radiation Monitors @ https://allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/radioactivity/current-radiation-levels-monitors/united-states-usa/

First something curious and in my experience quite unusual: The EPA Radnet filled in the data gaps for Colorado Springs:  Nothing unusual to be seen in the new data.

On a nearby Radmon monitor you can see a small (gamma) spike, however.  Yet when looking at longer-period data, that spike does not stand out as particularly unusual:

composite_1Albuquerque kept its big gap on April 29-30, but sometime later on May 5 the tiny gaps dissapeared.  Last I check Albuquerque’s graph was this, below, showing nothing particularly unusual (and it’s receiving rain from the same storm):

Maybe… maybe the Beta can turn the monitor off, but in places where Beta is kept secret to begin with, the gamma data can be filled in if those are not indicative of something being highly unusual…   Albequerque is on of those stations that still reports the Beta radiation.  (Except when it matters, of course…)

You can do a query yourself at https://cdxnode64.epa.gov/radnet-public/query.do  -> pick what you want to know (I generally pick G3, G5 and Beta, and begin/end time measurement.  Then, when eventually you get the data, to graph it…

TheEPAatItsBest...I’ll show it for data for Salt Lake City, Utah:    So when you get the table with data, “for some bizarre reason…” the US government set the default in such a way that you have to manually change the x-axis to the time, and also move the data columns from the left to the y-axis’ “Selected Columns” (except for the time!).  And thén you can plot a graph that makes sense.

SLC_thePath_to_graphingRadnet_May5_2015Nothing unusual this week in Salt Lake City:

Radnet_SaltLakeCity_Utah__1 week_preMay5_2015_G3G5

Anyways, IF I assume that that rain in the evening of May 3rd, 2015 was loaded with Tritiated Water (HTO or HTO), or another Fukushima- or other manmade release – related radioisotope, of a véry unusual high concentration, could I figure out from where precisely this moisture came?    That is the puzzle for the remainder of this blog post: track the origins of those specific radioactive clouds that day…

But I’ll get to this later, ’cause I got to go now.

Added Later: 

It’s 3:30 pm Tuesday afternoon.  It’s been raining a lot again.  So much actually that I need to hold off on some outdoor work project.  So, sitting in the Bliss Café to stay dry.

Test #1 – No swipes rain test

Before:  Dry paper towel on table, horizontal, 8000 ft indoors:  864 counts in 12 minutes = 72 CPM with the dose rate fluctuating between 0.17 – 0.26 µSv/hr

After:  Left the dry paper towel outside on a table (no swiping of any surface, just collecting fresh clean-air rain).  3:47pm -> 6:09 pm = 2hrs22min = 142 minutes; brought it in and tested it:  411 Counts in 5 minutes => 82.2 CPM

–> Only +10 CPM (just like my hat) from some rain exposure.

Test #2 – Took another swipe of the rain drops on my car (Afternoon May 5, 2015)

Using a clean dry coffee filter, swiping the same surface (front windshield of my car), véry different result from yesterday’s this morning’s a several tests:  23520 counts in 52  minutes => 452.3 CPM  (over 6x normal local background radiation), with the dose rate going as high as 1.8 µSv/hr.

Not like Sunday, but I find this impressive nonetheless.  Apparently this is not a steady on-off phenomenon.  It fluctuates heavily, and clearly the major beta-uptick wasn’t isolated to May 5th evening rains.

I have no idea if this is a natural phenomenon.  Can’t rule it out. 

Natural or Man-made radioactive Rain?

Basically:  still no clue.  All I know is that previous times I’ve done tests like this, in this same area, it was just like this morning:  Only an insignificant difference.   An article on LiveScience, “Radioactive Rain Across the US Is Natural” read,

“[…] Following a recent downpour in Toronto, one man detected thousands of radiation particles per minute in the area around his house, telling YouTube viewers, “Where this is coming from, I don’t know. Fukushima? They’re spiking the clouds with radioactive isotopes to do climate modification? I have no idea, but this is ridiculous.”

Is there cause for alarm? In fact, radioactive rain is not a new health threat or evidence of a cover-up by the nuclear industry, but rather is indicative of just how many naturally occurring radioactive particles there are in Earth’s atmosphere. […]”

Well, if the EPA hadn’t stopped their regular testing for Tritium levels in air and rainwater (in 2012), or insert all kinds of ‘data gaps’,  we’d be able to tell if it was just normal, wouldn’t we?  I do not have data from rain pre-2011 with the same kind of sensitive handheld Geiger Counter (a model that did not exist yet then anyhow).  How can the off-hand claim that “this is natural”, without having comparable data (!), be called ‘scientific’?  It’s just as much make-belief as to claim that it is”from Fukushima”.  Maybe it is completely natural.  Maybe it has a big man-made factor to it.. I DO NOT KNOW.  (See also my Disclaimer: this blog is not authorative.  It is part of merely expressing my journey of seeking more understanding on various levels.)

If you look at Tritium levels over the decades, however, you can see that the nuclear bombing era had a major effect: http://www.irsn.fr/EN/Research/publications-documentation/radionuclides-sheets/environment/Pages/Tritium-environment.aspx

Source: IRSN (France) @ http://www.irsn.fr/EN/Research/publications-documentation/radionuclides-sheets/environment/Pages/Tritium-environment.aspx

Changes in tritium concentrations in rainwater in the Northern Hemisphere between 1945 and 2008 (values given in red are for natural background levels in 1945 before nuclear testing and for levels in 2008 — Source: IRSN (France) @ http://www.irsn.fr/EN/Research/publications-documentation/radionuclides-sheets/environment/Pages/Tritium-environment.aspx

Here’s another one, marking the bomb test, with what limited data there is from before and after, plucked from here, which sourced the data back to a page at the University of Ottawa that can no longer be found…:

image368 tritium_precip-> The (logarithmic scale!) y-axis is in ‘Tritium Units’, where 1 TU is defined as the ratio of 1 tritium atom to 1018 hydrogen atoms.   [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tritium]

So, levels came down under 100 TU by the early 1990s.   And in 2008 the concentration was 1 to 4 Bq/liter.  In August 2013, they reached 68 Bq/l H3 in the Fukushima-Daiichi NPP port’s ocean water. (Source: Asahi Shimbun, Aug. 24, 2013, “High-level radioactive tritium found in seawater at Fukushima plant port“)

Also from the IRSN 2008 document: “In the marine environment, tritium emitted during nuclear tests has been totally “diluted” in cosmogenic tritium and concentration levels at the surface have remained around 0.1 to 0.2 Bq/L. These concentrations are not as high at the sea bottom.

 In the atmosphere, the concentration level of 1 to 2 Bq/L measured in water vapour corresponds to an activity concentration of 0.01 to 0.02 Bq/m of air.

 In biological matrices, total tritium concentration is 1.5 to 2.5 Bq/kg wet in the continental environment, with a variable proportion of free and bound forms (Figure 2). In the marine environment, it is generally less than 2 Bq/kg wet. For example, it is less than 0.5 Bq/kg wet in Mediterranean mussels. […]”  SOURCE:  http://www.irsn.fr/EN/Research/publications-documentation/radionuclides-sheets/environment/Pages/Tritium-environment.aspx    Screenshot of excerpt with graph:

IRSN2008_Tritium_Excerpt2How about in the ground there at the Fukushima-Daiichi site?  Maybe that can give a clue to what’s flowing into the Pacific somehow…

From Fukushima Diary (by Iori Mochizuki): (My emphasis added, and date format changed):  

“From Tepco’s report published on 2/18 and 2/21/2015, Tritium density reached the highest level at 3 of 12 bypass wells almost at once.  The sampling dates were  Feb. 16 and Feb. 19, 2015.   The contaminated groundwater pumped up from these wells are to be discharged to the Pacific.   These wells are located in the south of the rest of the wells and next to each other. It suggests the groundwater contaminated by Tritium is forming an underground stream.  The readings were 120,000 Bq/m3, 810,000 Bq/m3, and 860,000 Bq/m3. Each of them was the highest reading measured in each bypass well.”

Data source documents:  http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/fukushima-np/f1/smp/2015/images/pump_well_15021801-j.pdf  and  http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/fukushima-np/f1/smp/2015/images/pump_well_15022101-j.pdf.

A month later, relayed on March 22, 2015, also by Fukushima Diary: Tritium density rose up 17 × in groundwater:

“[…]  In one of the boring wells, Tritium density was 200,000 Bq/m3 on 3/10/2015 but it jumped to 3,400,000 Bq/m3 on March 17, 2015.  […] On 3/20/2015, Tritium density of the next boring well jumped from 300,000 Bq/m3 to 2,500,000 Bq/m3 within just one day. […]”

PS:  http://fukushima-diary.com/, which in the past seemed like it was a bit on the overly alarmist side, in my opinion, has been an important part of independent research nonetheless and has become more objective over the years it seems.  It’s listed in my top 5 of Nuclear News links, which is in need of many more additions…)

Anyhow, Where are these Tritium levels now?  How much of these extremely high Tritium concentrations have been leaking into the Pacific and into the atmosphere?  How much is coming down with the rain?  Is it reaching North America?   And how does a Geiger Counter respond to normal versus elevated Tritium levels?  (And why the hell is it so hard to find answers to such simple questions…?) 

Whether or not this recent radioactive rain here in the United States has anything to do with Tritium levels, or with Fukushima for that matter, actually remains a mystery to me.  I truly don’t know yet.  But I want to know. 

Still raining…  still radioactive that rain…


6 pm – stopped raining in the past hour (ish).  A swipe of a dry car’s hood (just dust & pollen, no water) measured up to 1.792 µSv/hr (!).  A 3 minute test, 1705 counts,=>  568.3 CPM.

Interesting new twist, as dust in previous days seemed highly contrasted (less radioactive) than wet samples…   Hm… what if it’s the pollen?

Flashback to 2011:  The Japan Times Online, Nov. 1, 2011: “Cesium in pollen not viewed as health risk” (via ENEnews)  Excerpts:

“In June, the education and science ministry studied cedar leaves in the town of Kawamata, located about 45 km from the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant, and determined the cesium-134 and -137 levels ranged from 54,300 to 177,600 becquerels per kilogram.

“The Forestry Agency used those results to estimate the radiation exposure from pollen grains. If the level of contamination was 177,600 becquerels per kilogram and the concentration of pollen grains — a gauge of pollen density that shows how many grains are floating in 1 cu. meter of air — was 2,207, the exposure would be equal to 0.000132 microsievert per hour.” 

[Note: Supposing they suspended in air, not concentrated in a rain-out…]

“On average, the concentration of pollen grains is 89 in the Kanto region, but the calculation used 2,207, the highest figure recorded in the region in the past eight years.”   “Hiroki Matsumoto, an official at the agency, said cedar pollen is so light it can fly hundreds of kilometers, meaning it can reach densely populated Tokyo and surrounding areas.”  “Weather conditions could bring pollen from Fukushima, he added.”

Well, not sure what to make of this yet.   My findings of 1.8 to 6.1 µSv/hr is definitely of a whole other magnitude than a mere 0.000132 µSv/hr (which I wouldn’t even be able to measure)… .

I might collect some pollen this week and see if I learn anything new from that.  Until I’ve looked at that potential factor (and the possibility that pollen are high in Potassium, for instance (???)), I’m going to skip the Nullschool investigation, which can be very time consuming.

Slightly confusing mystery…  Anyhow.  I aim to figure this one out too…

For what it’s worth…

— — — — — — —

— — — — — — —

Disclaimer and Do NOT Share Policy

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.

 Last Updated: May 7, 2015

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Rain Appears to be ‘Back to Normal’ – Or, wait, maybe not… – (May 4 & 5, 2015 Geiger Counter measurements) + Further investigation of Radioactive Rain Events

  1. Kay says:

    Thank you for another interesting blogpost.

    The EPA apparently tests Precipitation for the following radioisotopes: Barium133, Barium140, Beryllium7, Bismuth212, Cerium144, Cesium134, Cesium137, Cobalt60, Iodine131, Lead 210-211-212, Plutonium238-239, Potassium40, Radium224-226-228, Ruthenium106, Thallium208, Thorium232-234, Tritium, Uranium234-235-238, Zinc65, Zirconium95, Zirconium/Niobium95

    I ran queries in the EPA “Envirofacts” for Colorado rain from 2011-2015 for all of the radioisotopes they test for. (Their results only went up to 2013)

    The results won’t link but basically here they are:

    * Beryllium7 – Denver – 2011-2012-2013
    * Bismuth212 – Denver – April 2011
    * Cesium137 – Denver – 2013
    * Cobalt60 – Denver – 2011, 2012, 2013
    * Iodine-131 – Denver – April 2011
    * Lead211 – Denver – 2012
    * Lead212 – Denver – 2011,2012
    * Potassium40 – Denver – 2011,2012,2013
    * Radium228 – Denver – 2011,2012,2013
    * Thallium208- Denver – 2011, 2012
    * Tritium – Denver – 2011

    So, at least that gives you an idea of what has been found in Colorado rain, for what it’s worth…maybe this info will help in solving the mystery of what’s in the rain you tested, or at least it’s documented here in case it might be of use in the future.

    • Tx, Kay. Checked Envirofacts (@ http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/erams_query_v2.simple_query )

      –> Tritium in Denver as averaged (1978-2011) @ 4.37 Bq/L, with peak value recorded at 22.2 Bq/L on July 15, 1980. Indeed, no records after Dec. 2011, (when the last reported, 0.074 Bq/L, was much smaller than the margin of error).

      Now, given what I know about Potassium’s effect (my hottest kelp with 5000 Bq/kg of K-40) only sent my GC to 0.8 µSv/hr, and Tritium’s beta particle is said to be a very weak one… that either means that IF it were Tritium, its concentration would be off the charts in the many thousands of Bq/L; OR that IF it’s due to another radioisotope, that concentration would have to be very high in any case. And it has to be a radioisotope that does not emit gamma (or so little it’s negligible).

      – Beryllium-7 decays by electron capture (would affect my GC), ruled out
      – Bismuth-212 decays with alpha and Beta decay (half-life only about an hour) -> I’ll put a rain swipe sample in a ziplock bag and check back after x number of hours)
      – …
      (I’ll see how many more can be eliminated);

      Tx for the tip!

  2. pavewayiv@gmail.com says:

    I see you’ve fallen off the wagon already, Michael. We might have to arrange one of those group intervention things for you.

    The tritium/no tritium measurements can be performed in a crude way with your coffee filters. Put one on a clean surface before a rain, then do your measurements wet. Let the filter dry off and repeat the measurements. Nothing is going to decay that fast to make a difference, but the dry filter should have almost no tritium – the evaporating water molecules carry it away. The difference should tell you something.

    Your results will be compounded by radon and xenon gasses, for example. Both noble gasses will be picked up by the rain, and both should evaporate along with the water. If the dry measurements are not much different from wet measurements, then you have mostly dissolved or particulate radionuclides. Glass (silica) will kind of attract the positive actinide ions (like cesium) – no idea if that makes a difference here but using a window as a surface for the filter might affect the sample. That property of actinide ions is actually a good thing, because activated charcoal water filters are good at pulling them out of drinking water.

    There’s also kind of a ghetto decay analysis you can do that *sometimes* gives you a clue as to the radionuclide or particular isotopes that may have been deposited. That involves nothing more than repeating the alpha, beta and gamma measurements of the same spot on the filter every 24 hours for a few days and plotting them. Lots of shorter-lived isotopes are uncommon, so you shouldn’t see much decay over a few days – which would be a good (or at least a ‘less bad’) thing.

    If you can manage to locate the Lost Spanish Gold Mine up in the Sangre de Cristos, you will be able to afford a proper HPGe gamma-ray spectrometer and maybe a good mass spectrometer as well. An old Indian guy in Colorado told me that you just had to learn to talk to the trees – they know were all the gold is in the mountains. I have not had any success so far using that method – not enough spirit energy I guess.

    • Thanks Pav.,

      A quick wet surface swipe last night measured 135. CPM (3 minute average, dose fluctuating between 0.30 and 0.45 µSv/hr); I put it in a ziplock + added a piece of dry paper on top and got pretty much the same result. That ruled out alpha particles (and thus most Plutonium, etc. – wondered for a sec if WIPP should be entertained as a contributor – guess not this far) and it also hints that the Beta radiation may not be so weak. This morning, 7hrs36min (456 minutes) later, I tested again, and the same wet sample measured only 70 CPM, background already, with the dose not reaching over 0.27 µSv/hr. So it’s NOT TRITIUM. (Half-life 12.3 years) It has to be something fast-decaying. Even Radon-222 wouldn’t decay away that fast. (half-life of 3.8 days);

      Bi-212 is a candidate (half life only 60.55 minutes, mostly through beta decay), for instance. Bi-214 would be interesting, if it were a part of this mix as well, See https://allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/2015/05/02/bismuth-214-in-fallout-chernobyl-fukushima-zaporizhia/

      I’ll explore some more. But it doesn’t look like it will rain today, so I will likely catch up on the work I couldn’t do in the pouring rain the past 2 days instead. And see if I can crawl back on the “done with nuclear blogging” wagon… – lol. Yeah, fell off into deep warm blogging mud. ;) Hard to resist sometimes…

      So much metal in these mountains here… And trees that can give much better advice than that. Any excuse to go hiking is a good one, though. :) I’ve been waiting for the snow line to move up a bit, but looks like, this morning May 7, that it came back down below 10,000 ft. Pretty. That idea of much better equipment to properly investigate stuff like this will definitely be entertained once I’m housed. (I’m working towards the latter. Goal is to have my own place before winter snows return somewhere in October) I’ll be looking into grants and perhaps crowd sourcing when that time comes. The no-blogging wagon is very slippery. I’m bound to fall back off many more times. ;-)

  3. Pingback: Wow, That is some Damn Radioactive Rain… (A Geiger Counter Measurement from Southern Colorado, May 3, 2015) | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  4. I left a comment at the ENEnews Forum “Post Your Radiation Monitoring Data Here” @ http://enenews.com/forum-post-radiation-monitoring-data-april-30-2012-present/comment-page-75#comment-667994

    I received very helpful input from Vital1 in Australia (copy-past verbatim of ENEnews comments):

    ——- ——– ——– ——- ———
    May 6, 2015 at 4:30 am Log in to Reply

    Michael we has had report here up to ~10 uSv/hr in 2013.

    Alert level late January 2013 rain swab tests report, (09/02/2013). Tested the Alert level +++ rain swabs collected at a private monitoring station on the east coast of northern New South Wales Australia. They were collected in late January, during a flooding rain event that had come down the east coast of Australia, from the tropics.

    Here is the test chart results of these rain swabs. There were small traces of Uranium U-235 detected in this test result, plus the signature of the fallout isotope/isotopes, at around 492 keV.

    Here is a theory put forward by the people running the Nimbin monitoring Station, for the large Radon washout events detected in the Nimbin and Mullumbimby areas during January 2013. The area had been in a dry period, and the underground aquifers were low. A flooding rain event came through and quickly forced a large amount of radioactive Radon gas into the atmosphere, that had built up during the dry period, in the aquifer layers.

    ——- ——– ——– ——- ———
    May 6, 2015 at 4:33 am Log in to Reply

    The Radon daughter isotopes were then washed out of the atmosphere during the rain event, and detected on the rain swabs. It is not uncommon to get large radon washout events happening anywhere in the world during rain events. Radon is in small amounts is in the air we all breath. Radon daughter isotopes decay very quickly.

    Even so, in an event like this, with such high multi uSv/hr levels of detection, it would advisable to stay out of the rain!

    ——- ——– ——– ——- ———
    May 6, 2015 at 4:42 am Log in to Reply

    Here is a 8th December 2014 rain swab off the bonnet of a car. The activity was ~ 1,600 CPM using the Theremino SBT-10 Pancake Geiger counter kit. The rain swab was immediately placed it in the scintillator test chamber. Lots of Radon-222 decay daughter activity Pb-210, Pb-214 and Bi-214 were detected. Look to the top of the chart to see the isotope peak, identification markers.

    The grey line at the bottom of the page is test chamber background. This is a good example of a typical Radon washout scintillator test chart. There could be other isotopes present, but until the radon decays you may not be able to detect them.

    ——- ——– ——– ——- ———
    May 6, 2015 at 4:57 am Log in to Reply

    Measure your swabs with the Geiger counter after a few days. The Radon should have decayed by then. After this time lapse, if you do detect anything higherthan background with the Geiger counter, then there maybe other isotopes present.

    Without better testing equipment, it is just a guess using a Geiger counter.

    ——- ——– ——– ——- ———
    May 6, 2015 at 5:09 am Log in to Reply

    Here are a couple more theories that have been put forward to explain the very large Radon washout events, that were detected all over the world after Fukushima.

    Radon Theory One

    50 times more Uranium than normal was detected in air over Hawaii on the 21.03.2011.


    All this extra Uranium that has been aerosolized into the air from the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster into the Northern Hemisphere atmosphere, is constantly releasing extra Radon gas. This would explain the increase in radioactive Radon gas coming across the equatorial boundary from the Northern hemisphere.

    Also, there are constant steam releases from the underground super heated melted Nuclear reactor cores, hitting ground water. This releases a lot of extra Radon that is in the cores and soil at Fukushima. Watch this video from the 30.10.2012 to see a live shot of ground venting at the Fukushima site, from the underground Nuclear reactor cores. This is a common occurrence there.

    ——- ——– ——– ——- ———
    May 6, 2015 at 5:14 am Log in to Reply

    Radon has a half life of 3.82 days so it is around for at lease 38 days. You multiply the half life of an isotope by 10 to get the effective life of it in the environment. If a sufficiently large enough extra amount of Radon is continually being produced in the Northern Hemisphere atmosphere, there is plenty of time for it to get here, and be detected, if the weather conditions are favourable.

    Radon Theory Two

    Increasing Radon levels have nothing to do with Fukushima. Increasing global temperatures, or seismic activity in the world has increased its release from the Earth.

    Any increase in background radiation levels, or Radon levels is not good. Radon is the second biggest cause of lung cancer, after smoking.

    ——- ——– ——– ——- ———
    Michael V.B.
    May 6, 2015 at 11:30 am Log in to Reply

    Tx Vital 1 – Very helpful, all of that. Thank you. It was the first major wet precipitation (all the other significant precipitation having been frozen since late October 2014, here above 8000 ft.) The combination of pushing radioactive isotopes out of the ground and then bringing them back down would explain it. It could be completely natural, I personally just had never measured it. And the reason I hadn’t seen it is probably because I hadn’t tested here (in these Uranium and Thorium rich mountains) in any spring.

    I’ll add your comments links to my blog post from yesterday (in which I ruled out Tritium as a factor, as the radiation in the water was gone in only 8 hours; leaning towards Bismuth isotopes, for example, (from Thorium decay perhaps), MAYBE enhanced by a man-made contribution. (?) Yeah, its guess work without the proper equipment, but still a fun puzzle to solve, nonetheless.


    ——- ——– ——– ——- ———

  5. Pingback: Fresh snow higher up. Gorgeous. [Photos] | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  6. Now here are some interesting things to ponder.

    h/t obewanspeaks @ ENEnews thread http://enenews.com/forum-post-radiation-monitoring-data-april-30-2012-present/comment-page-75#comment-668144
    —— —— —– —— —– —–
    May 6, 2015 at 12:21 pm · Reply

    Interesting topic! Radon!

    Notice how the Nuclear Testing fallout map almost mirrors the U.S. radon distribution maps. Strange isn’t it?
    —— —— —– —— —– —–

    To which I replied:
    —— —— —– —— —– —–
    May 6, 2015 at 3:44 pm · Reply

    @OB1speaks – Very strange. Err, ‘very interesting…’. 3:)

    Dang man… if they went that far to cover up the effects of fallout… That would a véry interesting vein of investigation to dig through. The correlation is a bit too striking.

    tx for the links.
    —— —— —– —— —– —–

    (I’m copy-pasting) these verbatim, with links to the original (all public) as it would be a shame if these suggestions were lost if I can’t access ENEnews for reason again. – MVB

  7. Pingback: Spring Snows, Lightning, Radiation Data, Moving ut of my Car, & Ancient Tree Healing Energies… | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  8. Pingback: Radon Spike in Italy: Highest since 2013 ; Cyprus blocks out Cs-137/I-131 data… (May 16, 2015, a snapshot of a few EURDEP monitors) | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  9. MVB says:

    Rain pattern at that time made a counterclockwise movement, the air/clouds passing over the Wet Mountains (one ridge further east) first before they passed over this area. the Wet Mountains contain one of the richest Thorium deposits:

    – Geology and Thorium Deposits of the Wet Mountains, Colorado A Progress Report
    @ http://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/1072h/report.pdf

    – The Geologic Story of Colorado’s Sangre de Cristo Range
    @ http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1349/pdf/C1349.pdf

Thank you for commenting. Your comment won't show until approved. Sometimes that can take awhile. - mvb

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.