ScribbleLive

@Hank Scorpio Hi there. There were a couple of articles this week looking at #1's meltdown, both suggesting the meltdown process had begun even before the tsunami hit, e.g. www.independent.co.uk
The 'official' sequence of events is here (see Ch.4 in particular), in the Report of Japanese Government to IAEA Ministerial Conference on Nuclear Safety - Accident at TEPCO's Fukushima Nuclear Power Stations: www.iaea.org

@lillymunster

This is part 4 of a 4 part series
...
Milk that was contaminated with iodine 131 is estimated to have caused 13,500 people to have doses of over 33 rem (330 mSv) to their thyroids during 1944 to 1947. 4,000 people may have accumulated up to 100 rem (1,000 mSv or 1 Sv) in their thyroid and some may have accumulated more than 2,500 rem (25,000 mSv. or 25 Sv). Up to 5% of the people in the region around Hanford had significant radiation doses. Children had the highest exposures and milk was thought to be a major source of contamination.
...

People who ate fish from the river would have received 100 – 200 additional millirems per year. Those who ate fish caught caught near Richland, closer to the plant, would have an added dose of 1,300 millirems per year. People were also exposed by drinking water taken from the river, swimming, boating or even being near the shore downriver from the plant.
...

A CDC study was conducted in 2002 that attempted to go back and determine the likely accumulated radiation doses forpeople near Hanford. The average estimated thyroid radiation dose was 174 mGy with .0029 mGy being the lowest and 2,823 mGy being the highest. The differences were due to the person’s location, age, milk consumption, outdoor activities and other variabiles that would expose them to more radiation at Hanford.
...

The National Academies of Science Reviewed the CDC study and made a series of comments about the study. They state that the thyroid cancer link to iodine 131 exposure has been known for 45 years and it directly relates to the exposure and dose someone receives. The estimated releases from Hanford used in the CDC study were 30% lower than they should have been. They also stated that the CDC put too much weight on general global fallout’s role, again skewing results. Of the over 3,000 people in the study, 250 had some form of thyroid disease. 20 people had thryoid cancer but only 14 of those lived in the region during the time period of exposure.

...

Some pieces of information have been found that raise more questions about the releases at Hanford. Earnest Sternglass mentions in his book Secret Fallout, that in 1946 a 19% spike in infant mortalities was found in North Dakota. It correlated with atmospheric data in an Atomic Energy Commission publication “Meterorology and Atomic Energy”. This showed the large releases from Hanford at the time being carried by the documented weather patterns to North Dakota.

...

“there was in fact a significant increase among girls zero to 19 years of age. Among this group there was a total of ten cases for 1958-62, as compared to four cases expected. For young women aged 20 to 29 years old, the number was twenty as compared to nine expected. Still more significant, the rate of thyroid cancers per 100,000 young women under age 30 in Utah had increased almost 400 percent—from 0.6 in 1948-52, before the Nevada tests, to 2.3 in 1958-62.”

Sternglass also questioned the Utah study’s claim of no increase in leukemia so he looked at US vital statistics.

” For the age group 5 to 14 years, there were large percentage rises in leukemia deaths exactly three to five years after each ofthe major test series that deposited fallout in the Utah area. Between 1949 and 1967, the annual number had increased four-fold in successive peaks from 1.5 to 6.2 per 100,000 children. But since leukemia rates for children 5 to 14 years in New York State and elsewhere also went up when fallout became widespread, although not as much as in Utah, a statistician could perhaps say that there was”no unusual increase of leukemia” in Utah”

...

@Lilly mainly rain, looks like fuku npp might lie just on the edge of a 35-40kt boundry which will lie along the coast....iffy on what it might actually see in the way of winds or gusts??? Sorry I couldn't be of more help on that one....and here's a question for any other weather watcher or google nut here....does anyone know if Japan met has a doppler somewhere, preferably close to the NPP??? I personally have no idea but one with a link would be awesome!

@lillymunster

here's a small contrib for you 4 Hanford pages
please copy and remove this post just as well

-------------------
all inter-links and Titles have a ';' instead of :'
e.g.: Hanford to Fukushima; Part 3


these hints might be dispensable now (?):
Check back tomorrow for part 2/3/4 ...

suggestion: here I would have liked a link to the next part, so one needn't scroll all the way down

about the link-list:
it's fine on the first page, but from the second page on several of the links miss a 'blank' between TEXT and LINK so some texts break unwanted
-------------------

@Vivre cheers for the links, links I mentioned are here- fukushimafaq.wikispaces.com
@Elaine No worries, it's about all I got these days.....

@elainekirk Your vitriolic fervour never fails to astound me. Gee, there's so much hatred and ugliness on this planet :(

Fukushima radiation alarms doctors english.aljazeera.net

@Vivre no worries. Your contribution is friggin awesome.... @Everyone this link is very good and it still has dispersion modelling! www.kachelmannwetter.de will add it to fukifaq later.....for now @PB9 is here which means it's way past my bed time! @All stay well!

@Lilly @all - re the Tepco video the source page is here www.tepco.co.jp (it is the last item). Lucky Windows types can right click and <save target as> and it will download - just done it. 44MB tho!

@Thunder ta
have enlightening dreams ;)

Taking a break see you later