This spike in radiation was detected on the 8th January 2012, on the Sunshine Coast, Australia. The wind direction was NNE at 22degrees. Geiger Counter Alarm starting going off at around 6.30 pm. Raised radiation levels lasted until around 9.45 pm.
The Gammascout Geiger Counter alert alarm was set to go off at 0.50 uSv/Hr, and to record data every 10 minutes. I was shocked to hear the Geiger alarm going off. Visual observations showed actual peaks reaching 0.80 uSv/Hr. Even though this chart of the downloaded 10 minute interval recorded data is not showing the true peaks that occurred, it is still dramatic.
If the maximum visual observed peak had been recorded, the peak on this chart would be over twice as high!
The beginning of the chart would be considered average background for our area. Background radiation levels here, with 4 years of recorded data to refer to, has averaged around 0.10 uSv/Hr. The background radiation level was peaking 8 times above average during this event!
Either some of the radioactive fall out from Fukushima has briefly reached us, or there is some seismic activity N/NE of our location in the Pacific Ocean which has released a spike in radon gas. Just a theory.
The dramatic drop in background reading just before the spike is also interesting. Anyone have any ideas?
I promised members that I would post any unusual radiation data, I just didn't expect to be doing this so soon.
Here is an article at The Sunshine Coast Daily, the local paper on this event, plus an interview on New Zealand radio station GreenplanetFM. Click the play button next to the speaker icon, to listen to the radio interview, that starts after a bit of an introduction on synchronicity.
I have since had a report from someone in New Zealand. He detected 0.33 uS/Hr. He had wiped down a small area of a wet car, and then tested the cloth. He indicated that this was above their normal background level. This was 2 days after my report.
"Hello Peter!
I carried out a swab of a car windscreen after our first rain in weeks. I've been doing this every so often out of curiosity after seeing many videos on youtube showing results.Well, after 4-5 weeks of northerlies, and no serious rain (as well as stinking hot weather) a quick swab test of 0.4m^2 of windscreen yielded 0.33 microSieverts per hour ... outside background here averages 0.12 microSieverts per hour ...
Using the front foil, it appeared to be alphas and betas ...
What ever you were detecting blew this way, and precipitated in the rain.
I'm in Dunedin NZ. Almost 46 South
Best Regards and Wishes,"
Here are four theories on what caused the spike in radiation.
Theory One
My theory is that there was an event at Fukushima around late December 2011 - new years 2012 that released a large amount of radiation. The weather conditions where similar to those of March / April 2011. The (NILU), Norwegian Institute for Air Research had run simulations which predicted the creation of world wide radiation fallout clouds from the Fukushima nuclear disaster for March / April 2011. One of these simulations for March / April 2011 indicated that a radiation cloud would form off the east coast of Australia. This year the cloud formed again but blew inland, and didn't stay off the coast.
Here is the NILU map of the March /April 2011 radiation cloud off Australia's east coast.
See all the Fukushima radiation cloud simulation maps for 2011 by NILU here.
http://globalcooperative.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/radiation-map-analysis-europe-australasia/
TheoryTwo
Potrblog have gone to a lot of trouble, and put a detailed youtube video analysis of the Caloundra radiation spike event on the Internet. These people have done similar analyses of American radiation fallout events. This is their theory.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=C5wGLK06kZg
Theory Three
Paul Langley
Theory Four
HAARP and how Fukushima radiation beamed down to Australia, by Yoichi Shimatsu, former General Editor - The Japan Times Weekly
http://rense.com/general95/haarp1.html
Here are new background radiation level charts that show raised radiation levels for January 25th, 27th and February 25th 2012.
This week starting January 23/01/2012, we have had over 300 mm of rain. Rain troughs have been coming from the Australian northern tropics constantly for days now. It would appear that our average daily background radiation is increasing since the spike event on the 8 January 2012, (see chart above).
I am now recording local background radiation every minute, so I am more likely to record those spikes. You will notice that the dark blue radiation average for 24 hours line in the new charts has crept up above 0.15 uSv/Hr to 0.18 uSv/Hr over the two days. Radiation spikes are now going above 0.3 uSv/Hr, plus background readings are much more volatile. Up until the 8th January 2012, I have not seen spikes go above 0.2 uSv/Hr at my location. These charts represents the highest average so far for the 4 years of data I have collected on local background radiation levels. Our average local background over four years has been around 0.10 uSv/Hr!
Another radioactive cloud passes over on the 25 February 2012, 24 hour chart - one minute sampling.
The highest recorded peak was 0.34 uSv/Hr at 7.33 am. More spikes of 0.30 uSv/Hr between 7am to 8am in the morning. Dark blue line in the 24 hour chart is the daily average, 0.146 uSv/Hr. This all happened at the end of a significant local rain event. Some local areas received 340 mm of rain in 24 hours.
I looked at the local weather radar at the time and the rain event came in off the ocean from the north north east. The same direction as the radiation cloud that I detected passing over the east coast of Australia on January 8th 2012.
Another radioactive cloud passes over on the 5th March 2012, 24 hour chart - one minute sampling.
The highest peak was a visual observation of 0.63 uSv/Hr after the Geiger alarm went of, lots more spikes of 0.30 uSv/Hr and above falling off in the late afternoon . Dark blue line in the 24 hour chart is the daily average, 0.185 uSv/Hr. This all happened during a significant local rain event.
I looked at the local weather radar at the time and the rain event came in off the Pacific Ocean in a strange spiral pattern from the north.
Radioactive cloud detections on the 20th and 21st of April
So far. all our radioactive cloud detections have occurred when the wind has come from the northern tropics. From my observations of the weather radar at the time, on the 20th and 21st, two air masses, a northerly and southerly, meet just north of Caloundra. The Geiger Counter alarm sounded on numerous occasions, indicating radiation levels went above 0.50 uSv/hr multiple times. These above 0.50 uSv/hr events where brief and were not recorded by the Geiger Counter data logger. My theory is that when the northerly pressure system pushed a little bit south, we got the radiation detections. When the northerly air mass was pushed north background went back to normal. The radioactive cloud detections are a result of the huge amounts of radiation released by the still active Fukushima Nuclear disaster, breaching the Northern and Southern hemisphere air circulation barrier.
Radioactive cloud detections on the 23rd of April
Here is the chart for the 23rd, peaks not as high as the 20th and 21st April, but the days overall average radiation level was higher.
Other related articles on radiation from Fukushima
Nuclear Power Technology, an extinction level event.
http://sccc.org.au/archives/2186
Fukushima and safe radiation levels
http://sccc.org.au/archives/428
Radiation Cloud detected over South Island of New Zealand 29th January 2012
http://sccc.org.au/archives/2517
Radiation Cloud detected over Melbourne Australia 26th February 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q74OAsV2yPU
Disclaimer: This is a amateur volunteer run service. Human error can provide incorrect information, and equipment malfunction can produce false readings. Do not rely on, or take action upon information presented on this web site, without further research. Views expressed in the pages or images on the SCCC Inc., site maybe the personal opinions of the relevant writers, and are not necessarily representative of those of SCCC Inc.
Must see video
http://beforeitsnews.com/health/2014/03/radcon-4-washington-dc-as-fox-news-admits-us-government-lied-about-fukushima-2525214.html
– you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to know that radio active material from the nuclear fallout from Fukushima will never disappear it will only be absorbed into the worlds oceans , rain clouds & food chain -the worst hit will be the countries and islands of the pacific ocean – the marine & bird life of the world – this will and is effecting Us All- Governments are acting like ostriches with their heads in the sand ! Don’t be the same – self preservation in a society of ignorance is the only solution – keep safe
But you do need to know something about radiation to make statements like you just have. Clearly, you do not understand radiation. You are definitively wrong because by definition, radioactive materials disappear (or rather, become something non-radioactive).
Take Xe-133 as the example. It is only a product of uranium and plutonium fission and is not found naturally in the environment. When it’s detected in the environment at any level, either a nuclear bomb or, like Japan, a reactor has split it guts to the atmosphere because there in no other known source.
Xe-133 has a half-life of ~5 days. That means, regardless of how much Xe-133 you start with, in ~5days, half of it will be gone. In another ~5 days, the amount you have will be half as much again. From your original amount, after 2 months, you probably won’t be able to detect any Xe-133 at all. It will have irradiated away to nothing more than a pile of completely non-radioactive caesium dust.
The tsunami that hit Fukushima was on the 11th of March, 2011. The reactors where shut down immediately after the earthquake. By the time the tsunami actually hit the power-plant, fission had stopped. No more Xe-133 was being produced before the tsunami even hit the coastline. By mid May 2011, all the Xe-133 had irradiated away. It no longer exists. I have no opinion on whether the radiation cloud in this article was real or not, but if it was real, Xe-133 from Fukushima had nothing to do with it.
Radioactive materials with the shortest half-life are the most dangerous, because they are the most radioactive, but disappear quickly. Therefore, radioactive material from the nuclear fallout from Fukushima WILL disappear and most the most dangerous will disappear the quickest.
The Norwegian Institute for Air Research (NILU) map of the March /April 2011 radiation cloud off Australia’s East Coast, was use as an example to show that it was possible for the radiation from the Fukushima Nuclear disaster to reach this location.
We don’t know what isotopes were in the radioactive clouds that passed over Australia and New Zealand. There were numerous independent radiation cloud Geiger counter detections here, and in New Zealand at the time. These prove radioactive clouds did pass over the area numerous times!
http://sccc.org.au/archives/2517
This study released on the 4th March 2014 indicates that Fukushima is ongoing and has not stopped.
Radioactivity release from the Fukushima accident and its consequences
Abstract
The Fukushima accident in March 2011 caused by the massive earthquake and tsunami led to hydrogen explosion, core meltdown, and the subsequent release of huge radioactivity both into the atmosphere and the Pacific Ocean. In the case of volatile fission products such as 137Cs and 131I, the release fraction of the core inventory of the units 1–3 into the atmosphere is estimated to be 1.2–6.6% and 1.1–7.9%, respectively.
As for gaseous fission product 133Xe, it is estimated that nearly 100% of the core inventory might have been released into the atmosphere. In addition, about 16% of the 137Cs inventory flowed into the sea when the contaminated water used for cooling the decay heat of the units 1–3 overflowed the reactors. Therefore, even though almost three years have passed since the accident, it is still having a tremendous impact not only on Japan but all over the world as well.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149197014000444
where the strontium ends up. http://nuclearhistory.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/srbone.jpg Cesium is a muscle and soft tissue seeker. During pregnancy and nursing, the substances move according to the biological demand. Both cross the placenta.
Australian Journal of Science, Vol 24 No, 16 April 1962 Strontium 90 in the Australian Environment 1957 to 1960. Bryant, Dwyer, Moroney, Stephens and Titterton (ie the Atomic Wespons Test Safety committee). Food monitoring in Australia. Cesium was present in the food also. Marston's report of radio-Iodine in sheep thyroids was suppressed for a period. Marston predicted that the strontium in the foodchain would end up in the bones of Australians. Subesquent disclosures proved him to be correct. http://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2011/07/16/food-safety-in-australia-1962-titterton-et-al-aust-journal-of-science/ Such food monitoring is not currently being conducted in an adequate fashion anywhere today.
See also Comar "The Movement of Fallout Radionuclides through the Biosphere and Man. http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.ns.15.120165.001135
though these documents are old, they remain relevant to the current situation. The biological knowledge has not changed, the modern emphasis was in earlier times replaced by direct measurement. Stohl uses many direct measurements, The Fukushima emissions will obviously end up in the food chain globally.
correct link for Stohl et al "Xenon-133 and caesium-137 releases into the atmosphere from the
Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant: determination of the
source term, atmospheric dispersion, and deposition" is
http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/12/2313/2012/acp-12-2313-2012.html
The authors use exenon (gas) and cesium (particulate) as key emissions. From these the ratios of other radionuclides can be calculated.
Cesium is a severe internal hazard. After fallout plumes have ceased, Cs 137 and other biologically significant isotopes persist in the foodchain. Long after groundshine has largely diminished, cesium and strontium remain in soil. See Australian Journal of Science 1962 (Titterton et al) and various ARPANSA reports regarding Strontium and Cesium in the Australian environment from nuclear weapons testing. eg see http://books.google.com.au/books/about/Strontium_90_and_caesium_137_in_the_Aust.html?id=-cC7HAAACAAJ&redir_esc=y and this as a backgrounder to the past events. http://www.publish.csiro.au/?act=view_file&file_id=SR9800119.pdf
Stohl et. al. is most important. The readings were probably Fukushima , but I ainlt letting local emitters off the hook, The situation is grim, the airborne stuff is grim. The seaborn stuff is grim. The monitoring of the seaborn stuff has been limited, the latest being one solitary private organisation. NOAA seems to contest Stohl et al's airborne plume findings. NOAA uses pure modellingwith fractionation as the basis. Fractionation applies to instanteous bomb emissions, not continuous reactor emissions. Stohl uses measurements from Japan, US, Europe plus modelling. Stohl et al: http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/12/2313/2012/acp-12-2313-2012.html I'm glad I'm down here for the moment. At minimum, the situation is twice as bad as authorities let on. Not that they let on much.
Joe ntiheer you or I are being exposed to anything. Radioactive isotopes are measurable to very low levels. Tell you what, I will eat all the Japanese beef you can fedex to me. I am not concerned. Reply
the record, the smramuy of Appendix D of BEIR VII is considerably less absolute than calling hormesis a failed hypothesis. The committee concludes that the assumption that any stimulatory hormetic effects from low doses of ionizing radiation will have a significant health benefit to humans that exceeds potential detrimental effects from the radiation exposure is unwarranted at this time.The smramuy and research needs section of the main document also indicates that there is more uncertainty about the existence of hormesis than you have stated:HormesisThe possibility that low doses of radiation may have beneficial effects (a phenomenon often referred to as “hormesis”) has been the subject of considerable debate. Evidence for hormetic effects was reviewed, with emphasis on material published since the 1990 BEIR V study on the health effects of exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation. Although examples of apparent stimulatory or protective effects can be found in cellular and animal biology, the preponderance of available experimental information does not support the contention that low levels of ionizing radiation have a beneficial effect. The mechanism of any such possible effect remains obscure. At this time, the assumption that any stimulatory hormetic effects from low doses of ionizing radiation will have a significant health benefit to humans that exceeds potential detrimental effects from radiation exposure at the same dose is unwarranted.Research Need 4. Identification of molecular mechanisms for postulated hormetic effects at low doses Definitive experiments that identify molecular mechanisms are necessary to establish whether hormetic effects exist for radiation-induced carcinogenesis. Reply
Paula: I purchased the GammaScout via US but as German I rang the German producer guy.He seems to have developed this item very thoroughly and with great investment effort.Since it had to be GERMAN legally tested it should be allright.He told me about the many factory tests and the enourmous financial investment to “get there”.Still,despite his good manual ,I am not so sure whether I do all right.It is a bit a “fashion” statement for me than science.
Anyway,trusting Governments…NEVER EVER ANY…and NOT the Australian ones.
What does the wider population know about the nuclear residues of the 60’s Nullabor tests,in WA on this island,the French Polynesian tests??? I heard that at one test the wind changed and all direct clouds went over the Australian EastCoast.No wonder ,Australia is one of the mosty cancer ridden countries,before Tschernobyl.
Wonder what others think but lacing drinking water with fluoride as in Australia by Government FORCE is one of the worst dictatorial crimes a Government can do.It is totally useless.Fluoride may help youngsters up to puberty.But this could be covered with tablets supplied in school,toothpaste.NOT by forcibly on all people.I have the response of the German Government on my request to this: because there is the individuell use of fluoride toothpaste and fluoride occurs naturally,the German Government abstains from supplying it to all forcibly in general drinking water.THIS I CALLL FREEEDOM.Freedom of choice und education to self responsibility.I collect rainwater,drink it mostly since 1992.Bugger the Government.
You probably know that Australia is one or the most overfed continent with agricultural poisons,household poisons.For one of many examples :Domestos has been banned in Germany for at least 25 years.Here it is on the shelf.
So what could anyone expect in terms of “honesty” about any other issue here ,in terms of nuclear fallouts now. We get showered with lies and lies and lies…and the majority of the people is not “research” trained.They get trained as “believers” of propaganda….
And…after Japan I was told by a Sunshine Coast friend that Aqueous Iodine Solution APF(by Craig) was sold out at all Chemists.Supposedly small intake protects the thyroid…..surely no one here could give you any explanation..panic fear..or cover up.
Hi Peter can you let me no where I can buy a Geiger Counter in Australia ? Thanks.
Also I found the following info interesting:
Symptoms of acute radiation (dose received within one day):
0 – 0.25 Sv (0 – 250 mSv): None
0.25 – 1 Sv (250 – 1000 mSv): Some people feel nausea and loss of appetite; bone marrow, lymph nodes, spleen damaged.
1 – 3 Sv (1000 – 3000 mSv): Mild to severe nausea, loss of appetite, infection; more severe bone marrow, lymph node, spleen damage; recovery probable, not assured.
3 – 6 Sv (3000 – 6000 mSv): Severe nausea, loss of appetite; hemorrhaging, infection, diarrhea, peeling of skin, sterility; death if untreated.
6 – 10 Sv (6000 – 10000 mSv): Above symptoms plus central nervous system impairment; death expected.
Above 10 Sv (10000 mSv): Incapacitation and death.
Paula,
I purchased mine from Gammascout, available from the USA or Germany.
http://www.gammascout.com
The Australian suppliers tend to have more expensive models available for industrial purposes. Be aware Geiger counters are useful for measuring background radiation but not so good for detecting radiation in food. You need specialized equipment to do that. They will show contamination in food if is of a signification amount.
Large parts of the Northern Hemisphere have been contaminated with radioactive fall out. Particularly parts of Japan, Alaska, Canada, western and central USA, plus parts of Eastern Russia. That is why our governments should be doing food testing, and publishing the results.
Look at this map of radiation fallout created by French CEREA for March / April 2011, it is much worst than this now!
http://cerea.enpc.fr/HomePages/bocquet/Doc/cumulated_total_deposition_ground_fukushima.png
Thanks Peter. I don’t think we can trust our government when it comes to being open and transparent on important matters such as this.
bofree, you should submit this to one of your local newspapers!! Well written and informative info.
Daniel wrote:There are dozens of ceitis in the world where the surrounding radioactivity is above 200 millisieverts per year. Ramsar, Iran tops the list at 650.@Daniel. You are overstating these exposures. A single house in the Ramsar region has an annual exposure dose of 640 mSv (here). The region as a whole has a mean average annual full body dose of 6 mSv (from indoor and outdoor exposures combined). Summarizing from one study: Ramsar has a population of 60-70,000, though only about 1000 people reside in the HNBR areas. The annual effective doses received by the inhabitants from external exposures (indoors and outdoors) range between .07 and 133 mSv with a mean of 6 mSv (p. A31). We have cytological studies on chromosomal aberrations for area, but no substantive epidemiological studies (since the region is a bit hard to access and medical data is scarce and inconsistent). From the same study (looking at several populations living in HNBR areas): studies in other (non-radon) HNBR areas have provided little information, relying mainly on ecological designs and very rough effective dose categorizations (Abstract). It doesn’t sound to me like the example of Ramsar with rough effective dose categorizations and no credible epidemiological research to date should cause us to significantly revise our conservative radio-protective guidelines (and perhaps place populations at risk, especially those who haven’t resided in HNBR areas for multiple generations). Early research suggests residents of Ramsar have developed adaptive biological responses to high levels of background radiation developed over many generations. This is not the case with populations in Japan.
This does not take into account the 1,000 or more dangerous radioactive isotopes released during the nuclear meltdown of a nuclear reactor. These highly radioactive isotopes can be blown across vast distances. Look at this French CEREA simulation of the highly radioactive cloud that engulfed North America from the Fukushima nuclear accident for March and April 2011. This is just one isotope caesium-137 and for one month!
http://sccc.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/cumulated_total_deposition_ground_fukushima.png
http://cerea.enpc.fr/en/fukushima.html
The real danger is bio-accumulation and ingestion of these dangerous isotopes via air, water and food. Ingested radiation from the contaminated air, water and food radiates body cells with high doses of radiation for long periods of time. Once ingested you can’t get away from it. It is far more dangerous than what a person is subjected to, from elevated background.
The cells next to these ingested radioactive isotopes are subject to large doses of radiation. Each isotope will be drawn to different parts of the body depending on its chemical affinity. This means a much more shortened life for the men, women and children who ingest this type of internal radioactive contamination.
Everyone is biologically different. Children, and fetuses in a mother’s womb, are much more sensitive to increases in radiation than adults because their cells are dividing much more quickly, and they don’t have well developed immune systems.
As a sub group, young girls are 5 times more sensitive that young boys.
Thanks for this information. For what it’s worth, my view of the ARPANSA aspect of the reporting of Mr Daley’s readings are here:
http://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2012/01/21/arpansa-responds-to-a-citizens-detection-of-a-radiation-spike-in-queensland-january-2012/
I might be wrong, I might be right, who knows? Please note the ANSTO refuel cycles and the dates which may be relevant to Mr Daley’s meter. It’s ARPANSA’s duty to report. In the absence of that, it’s up to us to agitate for full disclosure. Whatever the source/s..
It is most disturbing to learn that NZ has detected alpha/beta residue.
Goes without saying my blog is a blog, not a thesis. The situation needs as many different eyes on it as possible. Please consider looking at the ANSTO power cycles and refuel and restart schedule data and consider keeping an eye out for whatever contribution that source may or may not make in Feburary.
Best regards
Paul Langley
Radiation Cloud over SE Queensland
After seeing media reports about this radioactive cloud I thought that this might have been air-borne radiation from Fukushima, as there are unconfirmed reports that due to a 7.0 earthquake on 1/1/12 Reactor 4 was at risk of going into meltdown (http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/01/reactor-4-spent-fuel-pool-boiling-without-water-after-112012/).
But it took 5 weeks for the air borne radiation from the 11/3/11 meltdown to reach Darwin, so this is unlikely.
So I googled and found this video on You Tube.
http://youtu.be/C5wGLK06kZg from http://www.Potrblog.com
I reckon the author of this video is on the money. It is most likely radioactive contamination from Fukushima, but not direct air borne contamination.
1) Contaminated Water Being Released Into The Ocean
Wikipedia reports that “On 4 April, it was reported that the “operators of Japan’s crippled power plant say they will release more than 10,000 tons of contaminated water into the ocean to make room in their storage tanks for water that is even more radioactive.”[149] Measurements taken on 21 April indicated 186 Bq/l measured 34 km from the Fukushima plant, Japanese media reported this level of seawater contamination second only to the Sellafield nuclear accident.[150]
On 11 May, TEPCO announced it believed it had sealed a leak from unit 3 to sea, TEPCO did not immediately announce the amount of radiation released by the leak.[151][152] On 13 May, Greenpeace announced that 10 of the 22 seaweed samples it had collected near the plant showed 10,000 Bq/Kg or higher, five times the Japanese standard for food of 2,000 Bq/Kg for iodine-131 and 500 Bq/kg for radioactive caesium.[152]
In addition to the large releases of contaminated water (520 tons and 4,700 TBq[63][81]) believed to have leaked from unit 2 from mid-March until early April; another release of radioactive water is believed to have contaminated the sea from unit 3, because on 16 May TEPCO announced seawater measurements of 200 Bq per cubic centimeter of caesium-134, 220 Bq per cubic centimeter of caesium-137, and unspecified high levels of iodine shortly after discovering a unit 3 leak.[153][154]
At two locations 20 kilometer north and south 3 kilometers from the coast TEPCO found strontium-89 and strontium-90 in the seabed soil. The samples were taken on 2 June. Up to 44 becquerels per kilogram of strontium-90 were detected, which has a half-life of 29 years. These isotopes were also found in soil and in seawater immediately after the accident. Samples taken from fish and seafood caught off the coast of Ibaraki and Chiba, did not contain radioactive stontium.[155]
Source -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_effects_from_Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster#Discharge_to_seawater_and_contaminated_sealife
In addition to known releases of contaminated water into the ocean, are those leaks that are not reported in the main stream media or remain unconfirmed.
“12/4/2011 11:30AM, a sub-contractor worker found highly radioactive water was leaking from water purifying system. It was from the water conversion section.
The worker reported that 45 tons of contaminated water leaked but potentially 220 tons of polluted water had leaked out.
It contains 45,000 Bq/L of cesium, which is 300 times much as some kind of a “safety limit”, and it contains 1 million times much strontium as some kind of a “safety limit”.
As to Strontium, Tepco does not announce the actual amont contained in the water.
The water purifying system can not filter out strontium, which is water soluble.”
Source – http://fukushima-diary.com/2011/12/220t-of-highly-radioactive-water-leaked-and-a-part-of-it-leaked-to-the-sea/
And furthermore is the most recent release reported on 5th December 2011.
“5.8 trillion becquerels of strontium leaked from Fukushima over weekend”
At 11:33 am on December 4, workers found that there was puddle water inside the barrier around the evaporative condensation apparatus (estimated volume of water was approx. 45 m3 [1 cubic meter of water = 1 metric ton]).”
NHK: “The water is believed to have contained 130,000 becquerels per cubic centimeter of radioactive strontium.”
New York Times: “Tepco said a check on Saturday had found no sign of the leak, suggesting that it began Saturday night or early Sunday morning. The company said it was exploring ways to stop any more water from escaping.”
45 metric tons = 45,000 kg = 45,000,000 cubic centimeters * 130,000 becquerels per cubic centimeter of strontium = 5,850,000,000,000 Bq strontium
See also:
• WSJ: New Leak Detected at Fukushima Plant — Asahi: Strontium at 1,000,000 times gov’t limit?
• Japan Times: Tepco’s decontamination system doesn’t remove strontium — Media butchers details on latest Fukushima leak
Source – http://enenews.com/just-in-5-8-trillion-becquerels-of-strontium-leaked-from-fukushima-over-weekend
2) Contamination Of The Ocean From Air Borne Radiation
During the Fukushima meltdown and for much of the time thereafter, the winds in Japan were blowing from the east, depositing the air borne radiation over and into the Pacific Ocean. Radiation made it to the USA within weeks and was then detected all over the Northern Hemisphere within the month and then finally in Australia 5 weeks later. Airborne radiation comes to ground when it rains. Radiation fallout and forecasts are reported here: http://youtu.be/gSojJU7o5_o (Note that radiation continues in January 2012, despite “cold shutdown in December”.
3) Contamination From Dust Or Other Sources
The wind directions at Maroochydore on 8/1/12 were from the North at 9km/hr at 9am and then from NNE at 33km at 3pm. A possible source of radiation from dust is from sand mining. Fraser Island lies north of Caloundra, however sand mining ended there in 1971, but radioactive deposits may have been left exposed, though unlikely. However if this were the case, you would expect that over the last 4 years of radiation data being collected at Caloundra that similar weather conditions would have occurred and this would have been detected earlier. Even further north is Gladstone and it’s industrial facilities. The likelihood of radioactive particles travelling this far south seems remote, and the morning wind speeds were not that great compared to the afternoons.
4) Contamination In NZ
And from your own website is the observation below, which supports ocean sourced contamination.
“I have since had a report from someone in New Zealand. He detected .33 uS/Hr. He had wiped down a small area of a wet car, and then tested the cloth. He indicated that this was above their normal background level. This was 2 days after my report.
“Hello Peter!
I carried out a swab of a car windscreen after our first rain in weeks. I’ve been doing this every so often out of curiosity after seeing many videos on youtube showing results. Well, after 4-5 weeks of northerlies, and no serious rain (as well as stinking hot weather) a quick swab test of 0.4m^2 of windscreen yielded 0.33 microSieverts per hour … outside background here averages 0.12 microSieverts per hour …”
Source: (http://sccc.org.au/archives/2490)
5) Movement of Radioactive Materials In Ocean Currents
Potrblog claims that sulphur 35 from water released at Fukushima made it to the US West coast in 18 days. He claims that this occurs due to a combination of current movement and evaporation, rain bringing the radiation down back into the ocean and then many possible repeats of this pattern can result in the radiation to ‘hop, skip and jump’, moving long distances over short periods of time and into areas that would not otherwise be expected.
The last big spill from Fukushima occurred 4th December 2011. That’s 35 days to 8th January 2012. So it is even plausible that this spill, let alone the accumulated build-up from all past ocean releases and air borne contamination, could be responsible.
The Potrblog video hypothesises that due to the high temperatures and humidity on 8th January, the contaminated water, stuck in stagnant currents off the SE Queensland coast, has evaporated off the ocean and blown into the Sunshine Coast/Brisbane areas with 33km/h NNE winds.
6) Determining The Source Of Radiation
The source of the radiation may be able to be determined from a rainwater sample collected from a rooftop after the first rainfall in the areas where the cloud travelled through.
Potrblog estimate the location of the contaminated water is in the ocean approximately100km NNE of Caloundra. Collecting ocean water samples for analysis from this area could also be worthwhile.
Here are some radioactive elements that could be tested for. One of the releases of contaminated water at Fukushima returned the following results (from link above):
Strontium90 (29 year half life) – had a reading of 110 million Bq/L which is 3.66 million times higher than the legal limit,
Strontium89 (50 day half life) – had 49 million Bq/L which is 160,000 times higher than the legal limit, and
Cesium134 (2 year half life) – had 12,000 Bq/L which is 200 times higher than the legal limit.
NOTES
1) The Chronicle printed this as the lead to the article
“A RADIOACTIVE cloud lingering off the Sunshine Coast on Sunday was not dangerous, according to the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency.”
Source: http://www.thechronicle.com.au/story/2012/01/14/radiation-cloud-not-harmful-sunshine-coast/
Potrblog’s retort to this is “We think that is irresponsible, especially if anybody is caught in the rain that filtered through this ADEX cloud and we believe this is long half-life radiation”.
How can this claim be made when no test has been done to determine what type of radiation the cloud contains? And the statement is not true anyway. The cloud was not ‘lingering off the Sunshine Coast’, it was blowing inland to Caloundra, where it was detected, on 17-33km/hr NNE winds, which means it was also blowing towards and over Brisbane.
http://rense.com/general95/haarp1.html
I too find the drop in background level quite fascinating. Under conventional physics, this should not be possible.
Presumably there’s no possible way the detector could have been somehow shielded, coincidentally just at this moment?
If not, then there is one interesting relevance. Google ‘variations in isotopic decay rates’.
This seems to be an ongoing story – recent discovery that there are small variations in isotopic decay rates, that correlate with Earth, Sun & Moon cycles. Yes, should be impossible, I know. But it’s been verified and published in peer reviewed journals.
My guess is there’s a whole new Physics on the verge of (public) discovery, involving a ‘weird science’ topic known as Scalar Waves. And that these can influence the statistics of nuclear decay, hence nuclear decay rates – possibly dramatically.
In which case, the above observation of a dip then peak in background radiation level _might_ be due to someone experimenting with a scalar wave transmitter. Even more hypothetically, that _might_ have something to do with the HAARP installation.
thanks for your post and the update from NZ. Please keep posting regularly your rad levels on ene. cheers mate
PS: Sorry, i saw the message by POTRBLOG too late… sounds plausible to me. Nevermind. 🙂
Thanks. I think the main problem is that most people are unaccustomed to hearing about nuclear technology outside of disaster or war.
Good to read your input again. Positivity, research, and facts. You hit the nail on the head with #3 dated 07/16/2011. I rehraecsed the once advertised RadSeeker systems and found that you would have to sell your Prius to get the bottom of the line unit at 24K, the unit you and the rest of us need is the RadSeeker 2, which comes in at a hefty 35K. These are what are needed to get true readings of the panoply of radio active spew that is covering the earth. It’s hard to live with a government For The People that we know is covering up all of the many active poisons that the generic counters do not register. Not demanding that this information is put out for all, the full truth, is unpatriotic and ill willed, as goes our fellow man. This is where our responsibility lies, as the true Patriots of this land and the world as a whole. This gift so blatantly abused, is our only home. ( Earth ) Here we have the modern day call for the recommitted mind set that brought forth this Nation. If you are not seeking truth and remedies, then you are the Benedict Arnold of our day!!! Cpm shows nothing as regards what’s coming down and will be for Cpm is showing Japan via The Radiation Network to have counts of 12-20, and a click shows Hawaii with it’s wealthy populous and health awareness coming up in the 40 plus continuously. They don’t even have the top of the line readers, just better than most. The equipment that the EPA stopped using as a full disclosure would be more than our poor pea brains could deal with. Note: cpm also peaks at midday. Just that little bit of knowledge is a catalyst in the thought processes born in the evaluation of radiation levels as they exist in relative and relevant fact. Why a midday peak if it’s from Japan’s fallout? It should be an irrelevant factor. Day, night; absolutely nothing to do with the actions of fallout dispersal Love to all: May that which Is, look over us in this life with kindness. Survive-All Best wishes and thanks to our host’s Be healed Now
Hello Sunshine Coast Computer Club Inc.!
“The dramatic drop in background reading just before the spike is also interesting. Anyone have any ideas?”
Hum, difficult task… i thought about it for two hours and i still can’t find a satisfying explanation. Did you already sort something out? How can it be possible, that a “normal natural background” can drop for some significant time and in a significant amount (see graphic above) before spiking signifikantly UP because of an extra dose of radioactive particles?! o_O
Let’s stay on this topic – it seems to be quite interesting. 😉
And congratulations for the valuable work, that you all did and for sharing your measurements with us.
Greetings,
Matthias
PS: Can you display the region from 4:43 to 8:03 in some better (= the best possible…) resolution? That would be interesting to see. Maybe you can further enhance the resolution by adding information from your notes taken during visual observation? That would most certainly shed some more light on the mystery.
I was hoping that you could cocatnt a lab who is willing to take soil samples in the San Clemente area at various distances from the San Onofre plutonium generator plant stacks. It is very likely that thus far significant contamination has accumulated near the plant that diminishes with distance from it. We sorely need this quantitative information.Dr. Richard Sauerheber
The POTRBLOG team has been tracking similar events in the USA; the causation in our case is the Northern Jet Stream pumping in fallout from Fukushima. We took a quick look at the jet stream and ocean currents in your location; if your event is Fukushima related, it likely would likely be ocean current driven and local weather deposited.
You are located in near the perfect spot for such an event. If you check your local wind/weather conditions at the time of the event we suspect you will see a shift in wind direction from off shore that explains both the drop and peak in radioactivity you detected. Look for Low or High pressure areas which moved through the area recently, especially those that would have pulled in contamination from the ocean.
Check wind directions over Australia and note location of all open pit uranium mines. This has all the earmarks of uranium dust blowing around. If such dust is inhaled it will be like having a CT scan forever – since the ionizing radiations will barbacue from within.
Check out “Exit Australia” if you don’t want to suffer a lingering radiation poisoning death.
Thanks for this Peter. Please keep us updated with information on these spikes. From what I have been learning people all around the world are being effected (we are not being told about it) and it looks to become a whole lot worse than what any of us are prepared for.