ScribbleLive

@fitter I also believe whatever we "pass through" out of hose should be scrutinized carefully. There have been a number of issues raised here, that have merit, but no evidence. I would prefer that they stay with our discussion, not someone elses.

Posted earlier ibid. Radiation levels rise in seabed near Japan

Posted on 04 May 2011 by GGS News

Japan,(GGS NEWS) 04 May 2011 :Seabed samples collected some 15km from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant contained 1400 becquerels of radioactive caesium-137 per kilogram, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) said. The level is more than 600 times higher than a maximum 2.3 becquerels per kilogram detected in the past off the northeastern prefecture of Fukushima. The samples, taken on Friday, also contained 1300 becquerels of caesium-134 and 190 becquerels of iodine-131, according to a TEPCO statement issued late on Tuesday after the first analysis of seabed soil since the March 11 disaster. Levels of the two materials were too low to be gauged in the past, a TEPCO spokeswoman said. The company did not say whether the levels were considered harmful.

Samples taken at another spot 20km away from the plant also showed similarly high radiation levels.

TEPCO said it would continue to examine radiation levels.

“We cannot say anything definite after just one probe. We will conduct more sample examinations and keep a watch,” the spokeswoman said.

The samples were taken 20-30 metres deep and three kilometres from the coast.

The Fukushima plant has leaked radiation into air, soil and ocean since it was severely damaged by the massive quake and tsunami.

Greenpeace said on Tuesday it had begun independent tests of water samples from the ocean near Japan’s crippled for radiation contamination.

The samples will be collected outside Japan’s 12-mile territorial waters in line with government rules, Greenpeace said. http://www.ggsnews.com/17840/world-news-updates/radiation-levels-rise-in-seabed-near-japan And in a somewhat related story: By Andy Choi
Princeton Security Technologies has secured a design contract from a leading robot developer to produce radiation isotope identifiers for radiation tests Japan’s nuclear crisis area. The client produces high endurance Underwater Unmanned Vehicle (UUV) that measures salinity, temperature and several other parameters in the ocean and sends the information back using global satellite telemetry.

The UUVs can function as nuclear detection devices using Princeton Security Technologies’ radiological isotope identification hardware. These UUVs are supplied to clients across the world, including the U.S. Navy, research firms and government agencies.

The UUVs will be installed on the shores of Japan's Fukushima reactor. Princeton Security Technologies, through its subsidiary Princeton Gamma-Tech Instruments, declared that revenue from the contract will commence during the Q2 of 2011.
www.azosensors.com

@fitter I'm not sure what you are refering to, do you mean Hanford plant?

Hanford has indeed been a mess: en.wikipedia.org

Ocean contamination is now the story. It takes a longer amount of time to show up, but it is now. Monitoring of Alaska shores should be stepped up.

@Nancy should read "after you subtracted the background counts" instead of "minus". The intensity of the radiation weakens with the distance from the source according the inverse square law.

@Peter Melzer Thanks,, I saved that. I remember reading something at Berkley that discussed how they do their testing and it was rather complex. I think some of the frustration people are having is not having any testing between them and their food supply. The only real tool available are geiger counters to the average person. Also don't want people getting a false sense of security with tools like a geiger counter and thinking that is a definitive test.

The second French EPR could be stopped in Le Monde translate.google.fr

@Jim Carver thanks, there has been info about what produce is more or less suceptible to uptake of radiation. I have also seen pretty universal cautions to wash thoroughly all produce to try to knock off dirt and dust. I think the mention about water testing in Alaska might now be worth pushing for. I understand some of the reasoning why the US doesn't want to do tons of testing. Those places highly likely or the first place it will show up should get tested. Same with seafood, test the species most likely to be contaminated and start testing right before the estimated time to work through the food chain. IE: high up the food chain fish that have broad travel patterns. Salmon, tuna etc.

@Markfm @rbeamer @jim adn peter and all.... What i am trying to get an answer to but have to keep drilling into an other diffention that i am totally confused and need help form some of the proffesional... will do the question sepearte

@fitter If you are talking about what was done in the 50's, 60's and even 70's, I'm not a big critic. We (the US) were at war, so releases ocurred. The world is a different place today, and we are trying to clean up the messes of the past. Superfund, et al, should be fully funded to repair the mistakes of the past. These enviornmental degradations belong to all americans in the pursuit of peace and superiority over communism.

@fitter I really didn't understand any question there, your comment 11:39

@Peter Melzer True, interesting you mentioning the membrane also. When Rutherford did his experiments at the turn of the last century, as I recall he had to use a vacumn chamber so the alpha particles would not be caught by air molecules before hitting the gold foil.

@fitter I read that three times and still don't get it.

bbl

@Nancy, the counts owing to radioactive decay distribute in a Poisson distribution which stipulates its own statistical math. For the inclined, This site explains it quite nicely: stattrek.com and lets you play with numbers. I may emphasize that if count rates are very low compared to the background, you may have to count a long time, perhaps 10 - 20 minute/sample, to ensure the statistically significance of a change in count rate. Then, you may have to sample over quite a large number of samples and they have to be representative in order deliver a reliable result. One sample of rainwater for example is not going to be enough for your region. In sum, the mere counting of all samples may already take a day or two. Hence the delay in reporting. By contrast air sampling like in these phone column-shaped detectors they seem to use around Fukushima is continuous. I frankly do not know how they determine a significant change. That may not be a consideration because rates and changes are much greater.

@Nancy It's unfortunate that virtually the entire Berkeley NUC program is at a conference this week. The last milk testing, which was the worst of them, was for milk with a Buy By Date of 5/2. That tells you how long it's been. And it had been all upward until they stopped testing.

There's a lot of common sense stuff. No frilly veggies that sit and accumulate. Broccoli may have protective properties (when cooked) but think of it. If it rains while it's flowering... Large-leafed things are bad mostly if you live in I-131 range, because it imgests easily through the leaves. That kind of thing. Flat parsley, not curly.

@RBeaner I agree with what you are saying, to a point... not in refernce to the 50's (and the superfund and it is Underfuned) but some of what is permmisable today... is not due to war or ignorance... I eat oyster form the downstream side of our NPP, they move them to a cleaner river for "a regulated lenth of time" then are sold... when the NPP here when off line from the tornado I was looking at some of the data.. its there if you look hard... but think I will give up or lower my consuption of Oyster.. I have grown them in the past becaue they are such a great natural fitler.. then they are turned over to be put on a bed in the bay....

@fitter, as to the Hanford tanks, I understand nobody knows the content of some so they have difficulty in telling what chemical reactions are going on. As to contamination, I am sure they take samples of the sludge, the groundwater and the soil surrounding the tanks and run spectra to figure out what's in them. Similar strategy needs to be applied to debris, sludge and other waste in Fukushima so that it can be decided how to deal with it.

@Peter Melzer (this is only from menory, don;t want to be guilty of what i was just saying)... but the one article that I drilled into from the NRC stated that they have done bore testing on the sludge... 2) a different Book article claims.... that the residule "heat" creates hydrogen gas and Nitrous Oxide, the book then claims this is explosive and flammible... and needs to be vented.... when i google nitrous oxide it states it is not flammable but it is concerdered to be an oxidizer.... could you explain what they mean by oxidizer "inlaymans term.... not in Atoms...

@LM I hope they would keep west coast air filters doing the daily testing. Those will alert to increased levels or if the constant low levels could indicate build up of longer living isotopes. I could see them changing what they are testing but just stopping isn't good either.