Japan Earthquake

Japan Earthquake | Page 952

@bo I don't know where on the map the spikes were, but I have a couple of ideas...
by marie rich 5/3/2011 3:45:32 AM

@Marie Rich they show up in the 4 day monitor graphs for most of the sites in western Japan near Osaka, I haven't tracked it in eastern Japan or further into Kyushu but just noticed when I scanned these monitors.
by bo 5/3/2011 3:47:54 AM

There were several eartquakes on the 30th Apr, but nothing all that big. I suspect it might have been that tepco ran a test on 28April by increasing injection of water into unit one, from 6tons to 10 tons. That caused pressure and temp to drop enough that they stopped the test.
by marie rich 5/3/2011 3:48:12 AM

It would prob take a couple of days to get there then? I'm ignorant of the lie of the land..
by marie rich 5/3/2011 3:49:04 AM

They stopped the test 'cause they were afraid the pressure loss would allow oxygen to seep into containment. Since the rods may still be exposed at any given time (they admit the water level gauge is dicey), they could oxidize hydrogen and cause another explosion. That's what they said. I have an opinion on that, but it's just speculation
by marie rich 5/3/2011 3:52:29 AM

@Marie Rich they don't show up on the monitors in Northern Japan, where the spikes seem to be on the 24th or so. It could take that long to cross the mountains into western Japan I suppose. They don't show up on the monitors showing cps but instead on the ones measuring nGy/h.
by bo 5/3/2011 3:53:05 AM

Also, we are currently experiencing what the Japanese call Kosa, which is a lot of particulates in the atmosphere supposedly from yellow sand in China being blown into the air. It results in a very thick, soupy atmosphere and very low visibility. I am wondering if there is an increased likelihood that airborne fallout can attach to the yellow sand in the atmosphere and descend in larger amounts because of the weight of the sand. FYI: en.wikipedia.org
by bo 5/3/2011 3:56:17 AM

I'd have to check the weather, that would help. I'll check things out tonight and meet you tommorow with any results. HA! Definitely that kind of wind stirs up things. Snow is the best precipitate of rad, rain is next, dust is third
by marie rich 5/3/2011 3:57:37 AM

I'll do more checking and let you know what else I find, if anything. Same time?
by marie rich 5/3/2011 3:59:35 AM

@Marie Rich thanks. The yellow murkiness of the atmosphere adds to the perception of the presence of contaminants in the air!
by bo 5/3/2011 4:00:12 AM

@Marie Rich will do. Will be away from the computer at this time tomorrow, but will be around earlier and later.
by bo 5/3/2011 4:00:43 AM

ok, I'll chk both times, and ask others to pass on anything, just in case. Hang in there, bo.
by marie rich 5/3/2011 4:01:36 AM

New info???? From physicsforum... "Looks like they posted new monitoring data today (5/2) for Fukushima www.mext.go.jp and Miyagi www.pref.miyagi.jp (I'm going to miss those oysters...).

It looks like they aren't filling in the historical blanks and just starting with current readings. I'd like to see data for isotopes other than "radioactive iodine" and "radioactive cesium" too.
by Panserbjorne9 5/3/2011 4:02:54 AM

@Marie Rich a good suggestion. Check this from the wikipedia article about kosa:
by bo 5/3/2011 4:03:49 AM

Sulfur (an acid rain component), soot, ash, carbon monoxide, and other toxic pollutants including heavy metals (such as mercury, cadmium, chromium, arsenic, lead, zinc, copper) and other carcinogens, often accompany the dust storms, as well as viruses, bacteria, fungi, pesticides, antibiotics, asbestos, herbicides, plastic ingredients, combustion products as well as hormone mimicking phthalates. Though scientists have known that intercontinental dust plumes can ferry bacteria and viruses, "most people had assumed that the [sun's] ultraviolet light would sterilize these clouds," says microbiologist Dale W. Griffin, also with the USGS in St. Petersburg. "We now find that isn't true."
by bo 5/3/2011 4:03:51 AM

@bo Now you can add a light dusting of rad. sheesh. Radioactivity has more effect when ingested or inhaled. I'm sure it is 'not immediately harmful to human health', but you won't look crazy if you where a mask there, so why not, eh?
by marie rich 5/3/2011 4:06:36 AM

@Marie Rich good suggestion. Many people where masks here, and more lately. My buddy is convinced that making decorative ones with animal noses would yield a fortune.
by bo 5/3/2011 4:08:10 AM

Thanks for the link to the Physics Forum. I forget to check it occasionally. I you hadn't linked it I might have missed this: Side by side comparisons of R1 and R3 explosions.
by radioguy 5/3/2011 4:16:36 AM

mdn.mainichi.jp
Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) is struggling to carry out its plans to fill the containment vessel of the Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant's No. 1 reactor with water to control radiation emissions, it has emerged.
by radioguy 5/3/2011 5:08:04 AM

Physics forum thinks the SPEEDI data will go here www.nsc.go.jp
by radioguy 5/3/2011 5:09:17 AM

@bo @marie rich Archival wind-borne spread maps here: www.nsc.go.jp
by radioguy 5/3/2011 5:13:01 AM

Tears od Prof. Kosako infrench: sciencepourvousetmoi.blogs.sciencesetavenir.fr in english: translate.google.fr
by Olivier 5/3/2011 5:15:15 AM

Fukushima: employers want the Japanese government compensate residents in Le Monde www.lemonde.fr in english: translate.google.fr
by Olivier 5/3/2011 5:18:21 AM

Am I seeing this correctly? 20 mSv per year is the new "annual limit" for children, and it's showing 10 mSv already for big swathes outside of the no-go zone- for INDOORS?
by Panserbjorne9 5/3/2011 5:31:42 AM

@Panserbjorne9 Holy crap, I was just looking at that and saying the same thing!!
by marie rich 5/3/2011 5:34:25 AM

And 100 mSv for infant thyroid exposure, waaaaaay outside of the no-go? Good god.
by Panserbjorne9 5/3/2011 5:36:54 AM

@Panserbjorne9 they don't mean indoors, idt. they mean internal dose- omg. poor japanese
by marie rich 5/3/2011 5:38:07 AM

And all this time, people with infants could have relocated temporarily... Yes, I know they had other things to worry about I'm sure... But they should have had the choice.
by Panserbjorne9 5/3/2011 5:40:29 AM

so, around the plant 10000msv, =10 sieverts, right?
by marie rich 5/3/2011 5:40:37 AM

Yes... But that chart is specifying infant internal iodine exposure... Not sure what the difference is compared to the other chart with lower Sv
by Panserbjorne9 5/3/2011 5:42:25 AM

@Panserbjorne9 And we can be pretty sure they factored out the "more rigorous" models.
by marie rich 5/3/2011 5:48:42 AM

Did they evacuate the babies w/in 3km fast enough? Those are high numbers, admittedly over time, but the worst releases were within hours, iirc.
by marie rich 5/3/2011 5:57:35 AM

I have to admit I didn't expect the numbers to be so...substantial...stupid, isn't it? After all my watching, I'm a bit shocked.
by marie rich 5/3/2011 5:59:13 AM