One Year graphed for Cs-137, Be-7, Co-60 & Ru-103 @ Southern Norway (EURDEP radioisotope-specific)

Sept 15, 2016

Like the data-gapped gamma records, monitors that have proven their capacity to detect trace amounts of very peculiar artificial radioisotopes have ceized relaying data.  Has monitoring just ended at Southern Norway’s two radioisotope-specific monitors?

Here’s a partial record for one of the two (the other one, @ Sola, is on the coast), showing just over 1 year record for Cesium-137 and Berrylium-7, with the January 2016 detection of Ruthenium-103 and the May 2016 detection of Cobalt-60 inserted onto the Be7-Cs137 graphs:

Åsteräs (sp?), Norway is just outside of Oslo, starting in summer 2015, (just over) 3 months per line.  (Y-axis (concentration in Bq/m^3) varies from radioisotope to radioisotope:)


–> a spike in August 2015.  Significant relative upticks in Autumn-Winter 2015…


-> Note the data gap after the Ru-103 detection.  (‘Cause when you detect something highly unusual, you make sure you don’t come up with more damning evidence of something having gone seriously wrong somewhere, right?   Amazing, that nuclear logic…)


-> Note the data gap immediately following the Co-60 detection.  (‘Cause when you detect something highly unusual, you make sure you don’t come up with more damning evidence of something having gone seriously wrong somewhere, right?   Amazing, that nuclear logic…)


-> Data gap following the uptick at the very beginning of June 2016.  And then… apparently, no data has been supplied from Southern Norway since early July 2016… in what is now a data gap spanning over two months.

(Cause… Is something highly unusual unfolding and that same “nuclear logic” is being applied?  Hm?  


Also noteworthy:

  • In January, the ratio of Ruthenium-103 to Cesium-137 was about 1:10.  I don’t know if that’s odd or not.
  • I do know, however, that, in May, the ratio of Cobalt-60 to Cesium-137 of about 1:2 was EXTREMELY odd:


Cobalt-60 is véry interesting.    See its significance in regards to Fukushima fallout…

[hint hint…]

All shown Norwegian data was ‘validated’ (V).

Which cannot be said for this past 1 month @ Salt Lake City, Utah (US EPA Radnet data):


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


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


If you are viewing this page on any website other than 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.
This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to One Year graphed for Cs-137, Be-7, Co-60 & Ru-103 @ Southern Norway (EURDEP radioisotope-specific)

  1. Cobalt – schmobalt. Nothing to worry about, Michael. How about joining a fun, nutty club to take your mind off of things? May I suggest “Team Fukushima Pride”?

    Fan club formed to promote Fukushima produce

  2. MVB says:

    When I was watching surfers on the Fukushima coast in Nov. 2013, bit disoriented from the weirdest time on an Amazonian brew… with Japanese fishing boats oddly in the background, having fun in the fishing-ban waters…, I got curious enough to find out what insanity tasted like in a fallout zone …with a crackling Geiger Counter as background music. In a restaurant just outside the exclusion zone between the Cauldrons of Hell and the town Iwaki, gotta say: the seafood soup I had was delicious! ;-)

    ( ‘Cause, you know… “When in Rome…” )

    The only odd thing in my own seaweed samples from Japan was the one with Co-60, devoid of Cs-137/134:

    I found the results so relieving I ate all the samples I had not sent to a lab. Delicious too. :-) And, turns out, I did not turn into a Smurf, a known risk for Belgians consuming unknown amounts of Cobalt-60.

  3. MVB says:

    Joking and curious data aside, originally I did actually have plans to visit one of the Fukushima sake breweries, but I was so ‘out of it’ from “my journey”…, I left the region in a hurry, headed straight to Kyoto next.

    I did actually think it would have been fun to “get drunk on Fukushima” ;-) Seen the commercial? :-)

    If I lived in Japan, I would actually want to support the ecological, economic, health and social-political ‘recovery’ as well. There’s areas that are SO contaminated, even in very populated areas like around Fukushima City, Nihonmatsu and Koriyama, all non-evacuated, which seems very irresponsible (like a highly unethical medical experiment, in fact), especially towards youth…, but contamination is extremely variable with some farms likely being ‘workable’. Given how much I’ve come to distrust “officials” and “experts”, it would be darn expensive to get started as I would undoubtedly first want to have things tested for myself. I’ve thought about it a lot: what would I do if the region I love so much would be contaminated? And Fukushima is só beautiful… If it were ‘home’ for me, I think I would really want to return as well and be part of the solution. Add zeolite to bind the heavy metals, add clay, test products thouroughly until you’re confident you can offer a safe product,… I know it doesn’t show in my blog posts of late, but while I have a very bad feeling about what I think is happening with the coria underground at the Fukushima-Daiichi Site, I do, as do most Japanese I spoke with, have confidence that the challenges CAN be overcome. In that regard, I’m optimistic. But I think there’s one key ingredient without which I sense they’re bound to fail miserably: honesty. They need to foster a radically honest culture in which it is far more honerable to share bad news than to obscure it. The fact that this organization, “Team Fukushima Pride”, trusts the not-neutral Fukushima Prefectural and/or the not-neutral Japanese government(s) to do the testing to safeguard the food to be sold… is suspect to me. THey have a vested interest in promoting their own reason for economic reasons. So, regardless of their integrity (or lack thereof), it’s just not rigorous enough for a highly uncertain situation to grow food crops in, in my view. Both ‘farm-specific’ (both soil, products as well as precipitation & irrigation water) and truly ‘independent’ testing is a must. Ongoing fallout events, erosion changing deposition maps, etc. makes continuous more widespread and independent testing simply a must, in my opinion. But I’m not per se opposed to eating food from Fukushima. I did so when I was there.

    Thanks for sharing the article.

  4. MVB says:

    Radioactive Food And Water The New Normal In Japan, by Richard Wilcox, September 14, 2016


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: Logo

You are commenting using your 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s