Thursday, January 30, 2014
Wednesday, January 29, 2014
Apex Predators in Hawaii are OUT OF CONTROL, Shark Attacks up 500% as Fukushima Radiation Rolls In
And I don't mean the lawyers.....
I had to update this on Dec 15 when the numbers of attacks increased from 11 to 14 with Nov and Dec attacks. Here is the new chart! Out of control Tiger Sharks!
And here, apparently the Big Gov of Hawaii has told the site to stop updating any more shark attacks, as it is not good for the crucially important winter tourism. Very odd, don't you think?
Shark attacks approaching 1 per month in Hawaii, 300% to 400% higher than prior to Fukushima.
The food chain is really being hit hard.
It is always risky when you kill the largest ocean on the HOME PLANET
And this article about 4 attacks in Maui in one week, IS NOT THE 4 attacks in the last 2 weeks, its from August!
http://www.eturbonews.com/37064/fourth-shark-attack-maui-past-two-weeks
Check out the chart below.
Maui is seeing a shark attack on an average of 1 every 2 months
Source data
Also take note of all the nasty algae. Maui has seen explosive growth and excessive amounts of fertilizers and pesticides. Many of the "old school" landowners on the ocean simply rebuild their cesspools on the sly without permit, as a more modern, even a $30,000 aerobic septic system may be required. Also the tour boats that go to Molokini simply dump their human waste into the ocean because for a while they were outside the 3 mile limit. The people of Maui are literally shitting out their ocean. That creates the algae, and if you do kayak or paddle board on the Makena side, you will quite often see fairly new feces floating in the water.
And here is another news story of a Nov 31 shark bite in Maui.....somehow the story was disappeared, even though 2 mile of prime beach was closed. hmmmm I guess when the bites start coming back to back days, they just have to "do something". Shark bites not good for business.
And check out this video, a huge shark jumps at the kayak fishermans fish, just feet from his kayak.
I had to update this on Dec 15 when the numbers of attacks increased from 11 to 14 with Nov and Dec attacks. Here is the new chart! Out of control Tiger Sharks!
And here, apparently the Big Gov of Hawaii has told the site to stop updating any more shark attacks, as it is not good for the crucially important winter tourism. Very odd, don't you think?
Shark attacks approaching 1 per month in Hawaii, 300% to 400% higher than prior to Fukushima.
The food chain is really being hit hard.
It is always risky when you kill the largest ocean on the HOME PLANET
And this article about 4 attacks in Maui in one week, IS NOT THE 4 attacks in the last 2 weeks, its from August!
http://www.eturbonews.com/37064/fourth-shark-attack-maui-past-two-weeks
Check out the chart below.
Maui is seeing a shark attack on an average of 1 every 2 months
http://www.hawaiisharks.com/incidents.html |
And here is another news story of a Nov 31 shark bite in Maui.....somehow the story was disappeared, even though 2 mile of prime beach was closed. hmmmm I guess when the bites start coming back to back days, they just have to "do something". Shark bites not good for business.
Monday, January 27, 2014
Plutonium is NOT NATURAL, it kills with a radiation/heavy metal 1-2 punch
Another classic lie of the pro nuke pimps: Plutonium is natural, therefore no need to be scared by it. Even though it kills 155 of 155 test Beagles in 2 to 5 years. But don't worry, it's Natural.
AGreenRoad did a great debunk of this. Text below, FULL credit to AGreenRoad, link below, visit that site.
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2014/01/is-there-natural-plutonium-and-are.html
Did plutonium exist in Nature in the recent past? The answer is a realistic NO. Are there 'natural' fission reactors on Earth? The answer is a realistic NO. We have to go back 1.7 billion years to find any plutonium or fission reactions on Earth, and then it occurred only in one place on Earth, and no where else, and at no other time.
AGreenRoad did a great debunk of this. Text below, FULL credit to AGreenRoad, link below, visit that site.
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2014/01/is-there-natural-plutonium-and-are.html
Did plutonium exist in Nature in the recent past? The answer is a realistic NO. Are there 'natural' fission reactors on Earth? The answer is a realistic NO. We have to go back 1.7 billion years to find any plutonium or fission reactions on Earth, and then it occurred only in one place on Earth, and no where else, and at no other time.
According to Wikipedia; "Trace amounts of at least three plutonium isotopes (plutonium 239 in a few parts per trillion, and its decay products are 'naturally' found ONLY in some concentrated ores of uranium,[43] at the ancient but dead natural nuclear fission reactor in Oklo, Gabon.[44]
Oklo is the only known location for this in the world and consisted of self-sustaining nuclear fission reactions that took place approximately 1.7 billion years ago, and ran for a few hundred thousand years, averaging 100 kW of thermal power during that time.[2][3]
This underground nuclear reaction happened 1.7 BILLION years ago, way before there was any human life on Earth. This underground, invisible and undetectable nuclear reaction stopped way before human living beings inhabited the planet, so for all intents and purposes, there has been no 'natural' fission happening, and no plutonium has been around since humans walked the Earth, contrary to what pro nuclear apologists claim. All of the plutonium generated by this underground reaction has decayed away. If any is left, that miniscule amount is still found underground, only in the one location, at Oklo, Africa, where almost no one lives.
Primordial plutonium-244 has a relatively long half-life of about 80 million years.[46] These trace amounts of 239Pu originated in the following fashion: On rare occasions, 238U undergoes spontaneous fission, and in the process, the nucleus emits one or two free neutrons with some kinetic energy. When one of these neutrons strikes the nucleus of another 238U atom, it is absorbed by the atom, which becomes 239U. With a relatively short half-life, U-239 decays to neptunium-239 (239Np), and then 239Np decays into 239Pu.
Since the relatively long-lived isotope plutonium-240 occurs in the decay chain of plutonium-244 it should also be present, albeit 10,000 times rarer still. Finally, exceedingly small amounts of plutonium-238, attributed to the extremely rare double beta decay of uranium-238, have been found in natural uranium samples.[47]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutonium
With an 80 million year half life, all of the measurable plutonium that happened from the fission process below ground in Oklo, disappeared in 800 million years. This is still a couple hundred million years before people even walked on the planet. Bottom line, anyone who says that large amounts of plutonium were lying around all over the place naturally before the atomic age covered the Earth with it is either lying, or trying to deceive someone into believing that plutonium is 'safe' or 'natural' somehow.
Some pro nuclear apologists even go so far as to claim that because plutonium is 'primordial', it is safe and 'normal' to be around. The only problem with this theory, is that for all practical purposes and intents, plutonium cannot be found in Nature, because the amounts are so small, so buried, so hard to find, so difficult to get to, that for all realistic and practical medical purposes, plutonium did not exist in the human environment. Whatever 'primordial' plutonium exists in nano particle amounts, is only associated with uranium deposits and is locked into those rocks. No one was stupid enough to dig up these very toxic and deadly elements before the atomic age. That miniscule amount of plutonium found in 'primordial' uranium did not register on any medical tests and no one died from it.
Parts per trillion of plutonium inside uranium rocks are so hard to find, it takes special nuclear physics lab equipment to even detect it. Effectively, before the atomic age, no human exposure to plutonium was possible, and plutonium was not detectable in humans before the atomic age.
In addition to the above, uranium or thorium deposits were widely made taboo by indigenous tribes globally. These 'hot' rocks or sands were called 'bad medicine', to be avoided at all costs. American Indians and indigenous peoples around the globe were told by their shamans and chiefs not to disturb the soil or rocks where uranium was present. People were told to avoid going into these areas. These ancient wise people KNEW 'natural' uranium deposits were dangerous and so they made it taboo, to be around any soil or rocks containing uranium.
Since plutonium was 'discovered' in 1940 through initiating nuclear fission in labs, it has been produced artificially in weapons labs and nuclear reactors by nuclear scientists intent on being masters of the power of the sun.
Due to numerous accidents and releases of plutonium via pyrophoric plutonium fires in atomic bomb weapons labs, as well as the 'testing' of 2,400 atomic bombs globally, plus the 'accidental' dropping and exploding of hydrogen bombs where the high explosives went off, crashing plutonium satellites, plutonium is now present in detectable amounts in the global environment as a man made radioactive pollutant and toxic heavy metals. Plutonium has gone all around the world.
Cesium and strontium are now commonly and usually found in the human body due to the 2,400 atmospheric and underwater nuclear tests that have been carried out, as well as due to a small number of major nuclear accidents, such as Santa Susana, Three Mile Island, Fukushima and Chernobyl. Plutonium may also be found in some locations.
"Most atmospheric and underwater nuclear testing was stopped by the Limited Test Ban Treaty in 1963, which was signed and ratified by the United States, the United Kingdom, theSoviet Union, and other nations. Continued atmospheric nuclear weapons testing since 1963 by non-treaty nations included those by China (atomic bomb test above the Gobi Desert in 1964, hydrogen bomb test in 1967, and follow-on tests), and France (tests as recently as the 1990s). Because it is deliberately manufactured for nuclear weapons and nuclear reactors, plutonium-239 is the most abundant isotope of plutonium by far."[32]
What is the take away? For all practical and medical intents and purposes, plutonium is an known and toxic heavy metal and radioactive cancer initiator in the human body, nothing more. There is no known positive and health giving use for plutonium, uranium, thorium or radon. There is no 'natural fission' (except in the sun), and there is no 'natural plutonium'. Even low doses of radiation from radon cause lung cancer. In the same way, low doses of plutonium cause cancer as well.
Plutonium mimics iron in the body, replacing it, and then doing damage where ever it ends up going. Iron concentrates in the bone marrow and liver, so that is where most of the damage done by plutonium occurs, but cancers of all kinds are possible, including lung, brain, liver, bone, blood, and more.
End
Is There 'Natural' Plutonium And Are There 'Natural' Fission Reactions? via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2014/01/is-there-natural-plutonium-and-are.html
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2014/01/is-there-natural-plutonium-and-are.html
Saturday, January 25, 2014
Real Data on Fallout in USA from Fukushima from the initial blasts
This shows real data on Radioactive contamination. Primarily they were measuring I131, CS134, CS137
Of course we know from this article that up to 180 TONS of uranium and plutonium were also aerosolized. Much deposited into the ocean no doubt. But the EPA air samples in this linked study make it totally plain that much of it deposited on US cities and farms.
http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/p/uranium-aerosolized-into-atmosphere.html
And to talk about the Strontium....the real bogeyman. It was found in milk being delivered to kids in Hawaii, then it was hushed up.
But never the less, the below is a good report on a partial "fess up".
Ask George Carlin what the powers that be think about you.....
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Credit to source document here
http://nadp.isws.illinois.edu/fukushima/
Measurement of Radioactive Fallout from the March 2011 Fukushima Nuclear Reactor Incident
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) collaborated with the National Atmospheric Deposition Program in an effort to monitor North American precipitation samples for the presence of nuclear fallout in response to the Japan Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Station incident that occurred on March 11, 2011. Specifically, excess precipitation and filtrate (insolubles suspended in precipitation) from National Trends Network sites and selected Mercury Deposition Network sites were analyzed for the presence of radiological fallout for samples collected during the March 8th to April 5th, 2011 sampling period. NADP samples were provided to the USGS's TRIGA Nuclear Facility in Denver Colorado, where the radiological determinations were made.
Atmospheric back trajectories from sites where radioactive fallout was measured in NADP wet deposition samples. NOAA's HYSPLIT model was used for this analysis (click to enlarge).
The study found concentrations (activity) and fallout (deposition) of radioactive iodine and radioactive cesium in significant number of samples. Detectable quantities of Iodine-131, Cesium-137, and Cesium-134 were observed at 21% of the 167 tested locations. Concentrations of I-131 detected in 5 samples ranged from 29.6 to 1090 picocuries per liter (pCi/L). Concentrations of Cs-134 detected in 23 samples ranged from 0.4 to 55 pCi/L. Concentrations of Cs-137 in 33 samples ranged from 0.70 pCi/L to 39 pCi/L.
Detections and measurable fallout from wet deposition was observed primarily at NADP sites located along the West Coast of the US, the central Rocky Mountain region and northern Great Plains, the central and upper Mississippi River Valley and eastern mountainous regions ranging from Virginia northward through Vermont. Deposition was also observed at NADP sites in Alaska (see figure).
NADP sites where USGS measured 137Cs in precipitation samples. Dot size represents relative deposition amounts (0.8 – 240 Bq/m²) (click to enlarge).
As is the standing policy of the USGS and the NADP, data from the study is freely available for others to use. The observations of radiological deposition from this project are available at the USGS website, dedicated to the Fukushima incident. Data are tabulated by NADP site and week (http://bqs.usgs.gov/fukushima/ ). Full results from the sampling and analysis were published in the USGS Open File report, which is available online:
Fission Products in National Atmospheric Deposition Program Wet Deposition Samples Following the Fukushima Dai-Ichi Nuclear Power Station Incident, March 8 - April 5, 2011, U.S. Geological Survey Open- File Report 2011-1277, 2011, 34p., Gregory A. Wetherbee, Timothy M. Debey, Mark A. Nilles, David A. Gay, and Christopher M.B. Lehmann.Additionally, the analysis was reported and published in Environmental Science and Technology:
Wet Deposition of Fission-Product Isotopes to North America from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Incident, March 2011, Environmental Science and Technology, doi:10.1021/es203217u, March 6, 2012, Gregory A.Wetherbee, David A. Gay, Timothy M. Debey, Christopher M.B. Lehmann, and Mark A. Nilles.A University of Illinois news release and video interview about the study is available at http://go.illinois.edu/Fukushima.
The study demonstrated the flexibility and ability of the NADP's network to respond to an international tragedy. The samples routinely collected by NADP at locations across the U.S. can be utilized by scientists to detect many different and additional types of pollutants in the precipitation of North America that are not routinely measured by NADP
For more information about the study, please contact one of the following:
Friday, January 24, 2014
Fukushima WAS a Nuclear Explosion, Here Is The Proof
If you like this stuff, sign up as a follower.
The only way that the tens of tons of uranium and plutonium shown by US EPA air samples could occur was if the explosion came from within the reactor vessel, and/or spent fuel pool. So clearly the explosion was a nuclear type of explosion from within. Nuclear promoters have long stated that nuclear plants can't blow up in a nuclear explosion. We know this to be a lie. In fact Chicago's own Argonne National Lab has video from back in the day when it was "cool" to perform open air tests to blow up reactors to prove the nuclear chain reaction can blow up the reactors. The special type of Nuclear Explosion is called a "prompt moderated criticality".
A blast from a "hydrogen explosion" would come from a wide area where hydrogen would be, Hydrogen is the lightest element, so it would float up and fill the reactor building from the top down. If it truly was a hydrogen explosion, and it wasn't, then the blast would come from the top down. The fuels would be compressed into their deep containments, not launched thousands of feet into the air as did occur.
I am going to stop calling these things reactor vessels, and instead call them "Radiation Cannons"
Here is the Argonne National Lab proof of concept Even Arnie Gundersen chimed in to clarify the nature of the Prompt Criticality
Here is his whole email on the subject
Gundersen Email
Now we do know that tens of tons (at least) were launched into the air and effectively aerosolized by the Radiation Canon (aka reactor vessel). Simply using the density of the uranium and plutonium in the air as presented by EPA air sampling tests that are data mined to reveal their dirty little secrets. All that data and the simple calculations to calculate mass using known density and area/volume of dispersion are HERE-
http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/p/uranium-aerosolized-into-atmosphere.html
Read the link above, its important. It is the smoking gun. Here is a excerpt table from the calcs in the link above, from EPA data
One thing to note, the nuclear promoters know that plutonium is a dirty word, and many laymen know how dangerous plutonium is. In the table above, EPA states ND supposedly for "None Detected" but in reality, that is a lie as the real story was "not tested". 3 facts: in reactors, as uranium burns, it turns into some percentage of plutonium. Also any "spent fuel" will therefore also contain plutonium. And finally in Reactor, aka Radiation Canon 3, they were using MOX fuel which is a uranium with highly concentrated Plutonium.
The nuclear promoters try to lie to cover up their dirty little secrets, to protect "their precious".
Bottom line....if there is uranium in the air, there is plutonium in the air.
Below you find 3 separate sources proving the Plutonium detected in USA and even as far as Lithuania.
Plutonium Admission by EPA
Just today, ENENEWS broke an article showing plutonium in New Mexico with the Fukushima "signature"
http://enenews.com/facility-director-we-saw-fukushima-plutonium-out-in-the-new-mexico-desert-local-and-regional-contaminations-of-plutonium-in-the-environment-have-resulted
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22206700
And just for good measure, here is the video of Radiation Canon 3 exploding. Note the huge chunk of steel/concrete that was launched upward, and the apex, it falls off to the left.
Wouldn't it be better to remove the Radiation Cannons from your Backyard? Remove them all from the HOME PLANET.
Per blogger "AGreenRoad"----http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2013/10/fukushima-plutonium-detected-in.html
Toxicity of both Uranium and Plutonium are functions of their radioactivity AND even more importantly, they are highly toxic heavy metals. Their One-Two punch is a killer.
A 1996 testing of 144 Beagles given inhaled Plutonium killed 141 of the dogs within 1.5 to 5.4 years. Bone tumors killed 93, Lung tumors killed 46, and liver tumors killed 2 (although liver tumors were found in 20 dogs, just that the Bone and Lung killed quicker).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8927705
Maybe we ought to stop putting this stuff into Radiation Cannons?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES SIR!!!! Reactor 3 was most defiantly a PC ( Prompt Criticality) event!!!
All one has to do is look at the photographic, video and levels of rad contamination to show that this actually happened, text book true!
MOX is the deriding factor in this one and it's a "no brainer" if you honestly look at it with any complicated blinders off. Look up the factual time line and the years of research data that support this conclusion!!!
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/03/15/mox-the-toxic-fuel-inside-japans-fukushima-daiichi-nuclear-plant.html
Unit 3 WAS a PC detonation, proven fact…
https://youtu.be/9k3Ofs6R9cg?list=PLLfJBw2ISt4jSr3L7hj18igTYkeY0OID7
https://youtu.be/Wc4KZoevt10
A simple explanation of the evidence (and the truth).
https://youtu.be/B9lv5foUItM
Unit 1 in question? The explosions in unit one were what's called a deflagration. in other words the explosion did not travel faster than the seed of sound, blew outwards versus upwards and was comprised of white smoke versus black dirty smoke indicating a hydrogen explosion from a fuel pool or the reactor venting water that "split" into hydrogen and oxygen. The difference between 1 and 3 are night and day…
https://youtu.be/AAW7rMKXPDA
Not only are these events possible, they have happened (now very provable) real world in Japan without doubt and for sure!!!!!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering support for the Energy Required to create the Explosive Effect at Reactor 3 (from a reader)
Yes it was a nuclear explosion. We did the math here on March 31, 2011 and showed in the Fukushima Mega-thread that a nuclear detonation occurred.
How much energy is required to raise both the refueling crane and reactor vessel cover to a height of 450 feet?
It would require 10,968,750 horse power (HP); by assuming the height of the hydrogen vent tower to be 150 feet, the reactor containment vessel top appears to have gone two and one-half times higher or 450 feet; The top of the reactor vessel weighs 2000 tons. It requires 12.1875 HP to raise one ton in one second.
So we needed 10,968,750 HP to raise 2000 tons 450 feet in one second.
1 HP = 0.000641615568281 tons of TNT or we have 7037.7 tons of TNT.
7 kilotons of TNT just to lift the top of the containment vessel off
You have further force required to raise the refueling crane to that same 450 feet of height.
It was instantly obvious to any observer with a rudimentary knowledge of Physics that this was an explosion possessing force that could in no way be the result of a steam explosion.
--------------------------------------------------------------
and froM ENE
The released happened from the 3/14 nuclear detonation at Unit #3, the big one, the one I keep describing.
Short version: MOX core melts, accumulates in layers on the concrete pad, distinct layers of each isotope in the molten mass by specific gravity. Uranium and plutonium layers hugging each other across the pad. And the shockwave from hydrogen deflagration, instantaneous mixture of the uranium and plutonium along the horizontal plane. Horizontal criticality with massive neutron pulse at sea level along the plane of cascade detonation. Xe 133 is made in vast quantities, exabequerels of it, and mortared up into the atmosphere, carrying along with it the uranium, plutonium, cesium, iodine, strontium and the rest of the layers in vapor or gas form.
Add to the the effect this criticality had on the SFP, adding the
second volley, which was mostly cesium, iodine, strontium and other
byproducts. Afterwards, both the reactor and the SFP were seen emitting
gasses hotter than 250°F. This was also mostly cesium, iodine, and
strontium class. Most of the Xe 133 was created and delivered from the
criticality.
Stations in the US were spiking like crazy with the xenon, in the 100kbq > 1mbq range from 4/16 to 4/20. No one in the US was spared exposure. It went everywhere.
Bang Bang Bang… You nailed it dosdos.
Instantaneous energy release.
Instantaneous transmutation of elements.
Instantaneous reactor excursion.
On film…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGhOW3DLlow
History can not be changed…
The only way that the tens of tons of uranium and plutonium shown by US EPA air samples could occur was if the explosion came from within the reactor vessel, and/or spent fuel pool. So clearly the explosion was a nuclear type of explosion from within. Nuclear promoters have long stated that nuclear plants can't blow up in a nuclear explosion. We know this to be a lie. In fact Chicago's own Argonne National Lab has video from back in the day when it was "cool" to perform open air tests to blow up reactors to prove the nuclear chain reaction can blow up the reactors. The special type of Nuclear Explosion is called a "prompt moderated criticality".
A blast from a "hydrogen explosion" would come from a wide area where hydrogen would be, Hydrogen is the lightest element, so it would float up and fill the reactor building from the top down. If it truly was a hydrogen explosion, and it wasn't, then the blast would come from the top down. The fuels would be compressed into their deep containments, not launched thousands of feet into the air as did occur.
I am going to stop calling these things reactor vessels, and instead call them "Radiation Cannons"
Here is the Argonne National Lab proof of concept Even Arnie Gundersen chimed in to clarify the nature of the Prompt Criticality
This Prompt criticality doubles in power every millionth of a second and causes incredibly rapid power increase that is the destructive nature of a bomb. The second type of prompt criticality is called a prompt MODERATED criticality, which is what I believed happened at Fukushima.
Here is his whole email on the subject
Gundersen Email
Now we do know that tens of tons (at least) were launched into the air and effectively aerosolized by the Radiation Canon (aka reactor vessel). Simply using the density of the uranium and plutonium in the air as presented by EPA air sampling tests that are data mined to reveal their dirty little secrets. All that data and the simple calculations to calculate mass using known density and area/volume of dispersion are HERE-
http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/p/uranium-aerosolized-into-atmosphere.html
Read the link above, its important. It is the smoking gun. Here is a excerpt table from the calcs in the link above, from EPA data
One thing to note, the nuclear promoters know that plutonium is a dirty word, and many laymen know how dangerous plutonium is. In the table above, EPA states ND supposedly for "None Detected" but in reality, that is a lie as the real story was "not tested". 3 facts: in reactors, as uranium burns, it turns into some percentage of plutonium. Also any "spent fuel" will therefore also contain plutonium. And finally in Reactor, aka Radiation Canon 3, they were using MOX fuel which is a uranium with highly concentrated Plutonium.
The nuclear promoters try to lie to cover up their dirty little secrets, to protect "their precious".
Bottom line....if there is uranium in the air, there is plutonium in the air.
Below you find 3 separate sources proving the Plutonium detected in USA and even as far as Lithuania.
Plutonium Admission by EPA
Just today, ENENEWS broke an article showing plutonium in New Mexico with the Fukushima "signature"
http://enenews.com/facility-director-we-saw-fukushima-plutonium-out-in-the-new-mexico-desert-local-and-regional-contaminations-of-plutonium-in-the-environment-have-resulted
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22206700
And just for good measure, here is the video of Radiation Canon 3 exploding. Note the huge chunk of steel/concrete that was launched upward, and the apex, it falls off to the left.
Wouldn't it be better to remove the Radiation Cannons from your Backyard? Remove them all from the HOME PLANET.
Per blogger "AGreenRoad"----http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2013/10/fukushima-plutonium-detected-in.html
Now, why do you think that they are claiming nothing happened at Fukushima, and nothing harmful came out? They cannot afford to let you know the horrible truth of what happened.
Toxicity of both Uranium and Plutonium are functions of their radioactivity AND even more importantly, they are highly toxic heavy metals. Their One-Two punch is a killer.
A 1996 testing of 144 Beagles given inhaled Plutonium killed 141 of the dogs within 1.5 to 5.4 years. Bone tumors killed 93, Lung tumors killed 46, and liver tumors killed 2 (although liver tumors were found in 20 dogs, just that the Bone and Lung killed quicker).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8927705
Maybe we ought to stop putting this stuff into Radiation Cannons?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES SIR!!!! Reactor 3 was most defiantly a PC ( Prompt Criticality) event!!!
All one has to do is look at the photographic, video and levels of rad contamination to show that this actually happened, text book true!
MOX is the deriding factor in this one and it's a "no brainer" if you honestly look at it with any complicated blinders off. Look up the factual time line and the years of research data that support this conclusion!!!
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/03/15/mox-the-toxic-fuel-inside-japans-fukushima-daiichi-nuclear-plant.html
Unit 3 WAS a PC detonation, proven fact…
https://youtu.be/9k3Ofs6R9cg?list=PLLfJBw2ISt4jSr3L7hj18igTYkeY0OID7
https://youtu.be/Wc4KZoevt10
A simple explanation of the evidence (and the truth).
https://youtu.be/B9lv5foUItM
Unit 1 in question? The explosions in unit one were what's called a deflagration. in other words the explosion did not travel faster than the seed of sound, blew outwards versus upwards and was comprised of white smoke versus black dirty smoke indicating a hydrogen explosion from a fuel pool or the reactor venting water that "split" into hydrogen and oxygen. The difference between 1 and 3 are night and day…
https://youtu.be/AAW7rMKXPDA
Not only are these events possible, they have happened (now very provable) real world in Japan without doubt and for sure!!!!!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering support for the Energy Required to create the Explosive Effect at Reactor 3 (from a reader)
Yes it was a nuclear explosion. We did the math here on March 31, 2011 and showed in the Fukushima Mega-thread that a nuclear detonation occurred.
How much energy is required to raise both the refueling crane and reactor vessel cover to a height of 450 feet?
It would require 10,968,750 horse power (HP); by assuming the height of the hydrogen vent tower to be 150 feet, the reactor containment vessel top appears to have gone two and one-half times higher or 450 feet; The top of the reactor vessel weighs 2000 tons. It requires 12.1875 HP to raise one ton in one second.
So we needed 10,968,750 HP to raise 2000 tons 450 feet in one second.
1 HP = 0.000641615568281 tons of TNT or we have 7037.7 tons of TNT.
7 kilotons of TNT just to lift the top of the containment vessel off
You have further force required to raise the refueling crane to that same 450 feet of height.
It was instantly obvious to any observer with a rudimentary knowledge of Physics that this was an explosion possessing force that could in no way be the result of a steam explosion.
--------------------------------------------------------------
and froM ENE
The released happened from the 3/14 nuclear detonation at Unit #3, the big one, the one I keep describing.
Short version: MOX core melts, accumulates in layers on the concrete pad, distinct layers of each isotope in the molten mass by specific gravity. Uranium and plutonium layers hugging each other across the pad. And the shockwave from hydrogen deflagration, instantaneous mixture of the uranium and plutonium along the horizontal plane. Horizontal criticality with massive neutron pulse at sea level along the plane of cascade detonation. Xe 133 is made in vast quantities, exabequerels of it, and mortared up into the atmosphere, carrying along with it the uranium, plutonium, cesium, iodine, strontium and the rest of the layers in vapor or gas form.
Report comment
Stations in the US were spiking like crazy with the xenon, in the 100kbq > 1mbq range from 4/16 to 4/20. No one in the US was spared exposure. It went everywhere.
Report comment
Instantaneous energy release.
Instantaneous transmutation of elements.
Instantaneous reactor excursion.
On film…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGhOW3DLlow
History can not be changed…
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
Monday, January 13, 2014
Trolls create Sock Nauseum, funny stuff.
I can't get my message out when even comment is capped by a troll.
I am going to leave my blog up for historical purposes, and so those interested can link to some fresh facts rather than regurgitated stuff, but for the most part I got better things to be doing than getting shouted out by an ignoramous.
Nuke Pro Out
Report comment
-
A couple new ones have shown up to work in unison. You have to read the comments early to see if there is anything of interest, after that it just gets polluted.
I haven't made several comments due to it and find myself just skimming the articles.
Beginners will get turned off to it.
It was useful for awhile but it's only going to get worse. If you find another site start up that finds a way to screen out the govt trolls try to let it known. (But then I probable won't see the post anyway)
Report comment
-
I have been here for two or so years and it's the nature of the game I have just started posting I the past month feeling way too stupid to join in and still do at times . But I feel we need each other in this most horrible mess humans have got us into . Not to mention the info .
Me as far as forums go , I feel this is one of the best sites for this information plus the folks here I have grown abit fond of . I do not feel we run the risk of scaring new folks off . So if your new welcome and keep coming . Your faith may be tested. At times but that's a good thing .
Report comment
-
-
dang, a trusted voice…say it ain't so…you are needed here…hope you get that message…I like your blog but here you kinda keep things in order…so come back a.s.a.p.
Report comment
-
We'll miss you. Stock.
Take a break…I've posted over 150,000 times in 25 years. Sometimes even I need to take a walk about. But not now. I'm on a fact revealing mission for my family and yours. I walk through Forum flames with my bathing suit on…untouched.
"But I've never touched nothin'
That my spirit couldn't kill.
You know I've seen a lot of people walking 'round
With tombstones in their eyes.
But the nuke pusher don't care
If you live — or if you die."
Report comment
-
can't tell you what to do, Stock, but putting it on the side is the last thing you should be doing. Regardless what anyone else may think or say, I've long considered you an invaluable guide and resource. There are obviously other ways of dealing with those we differ with, than walking off the set…
-
Folks, keep in mind the limited benefits of responding to trolls. His main purpose now is to right a book and use the more "extravagent" of responses to discredit the anti-nukes.
Report comment
-
-
Really freakin laughing out loud.
Ya der eh, Govspeak thinks they can discredit the truth. Gosh golly we are so confused….
lol
-
-
Sunday, January 12, 2014
Anne's Research on Fukushima Infrared, Exposes TEPCO Lies
More of Anne's Research on Fukushima Infrared.
Pulls down the genes on the Reactor 4 Mox Load
Infrared Imagery Fukushima
http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/temp.html
I went through all 25 of these files:
You can see the heat signature of fuel in the core of reactor #4 at a red level on the thermal image for # 3, 4, 8, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22.
Pulls down the genes on the Reactor 4 Mox Load
Infrared Imagery Fukushima
http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/temp.html
I went through all 25 of these files:
You can see the heat signature of fuel in the core of reactor #4 at a red level on the thermal image for # 3, 4, 8, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22.
-
I went through all 25 of these files:
You can see the heat signature of fuel in the core of reactor #4 at a red level on the thermal image for # 3, 4, 8, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22.
1. Apr. 26 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230426.pdf
2. Apr. 24 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230424.pdf
3. Apr. 20 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230420.pdf
4. Apr. 18 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230418.pdf
5. Apr. 16 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230416.pdf
6. Apr. 14 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230414.pdf
7. Apr. 12 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230412.pdf
8., Apr. 10 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230410.pdf
9. Apr. 8 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230408.pdf
10 Apr. 6 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230406.pdf
11. Apr. 5 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230405.pdf
12. Apr. 4 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230404.pdf
13. Apr. 3 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230403.pdf
Report comment
-
14. Apr. 2 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230402.pdf
15. Apr. 1 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230401.pdf
16. Mar. 31 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230331.pdf
17. Mar. 30 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230330.pdf
18 Mar. 29 . http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230329.pdf
19. Mar. 28 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230328.pdf
20. Mar. 27 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230327.pdf
21. Mar. 26 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230326.pdf
22. Mar. 25 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230325.pdf
23. Mar. 24 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230324.pdf
24. Mar. 23 http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230323.pdf
25 Mar. 20 . http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/defense/saigai/tohokuoki/kanren/230320.pdf
Below a nice explanation of R4 Meltout, Infrared smoking guns
https://www.facebook.com/notes/troy-livingston/reactor-4-not-all-what-you-excepted/10151758695293097
========================================added per comment
Fukushima Building #4 Timeline Of Events; Equipment Pool Melted Out, Multiple SFP Fires, Multiple Explosions, TEPCO Lies Exposed
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2013/12/agreenroad-tepcofukushima-lies-exposed.html
-
Asteroids Expected through the next week ISON
Earth is flying through the debris tail of ISON.
The think tank "experts" state that all the debris will be fine "dust" that won't even burn up in the atmosphere, it might glow a bit, and then will drift down over years as dust.
The "experts" stated that the Russia Asteroid that injured 2000 people was completely unrelated to the other Asteroid that was being watched.
I calculated the odds that the events were completely coincidental. There is one chance in 539 Million that it was a coincidence. But because it took the experts by surprise, they want to pretend it was just coincidence. We did a warning about "Debris Field In Front Of Asteroids"
http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/2013/02/debris-field-in-front-of-asteroids.html
Also did you know that the Great Chicago Fire and the Peshtigo fire were not caused by a cow kicking a lantern, but was in fact a massive meteor attack, that created 15 major fires over a period of 4 days. The year was 1871. I have the world best compilation of evidence on this attack here.
http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/2013/03/meteor-coincidence-methinks-not.html
After the Russia meteor strike there were additional strikes in Cuba and San Fran that didn't make the news.
So as we fly through ISON debris anything is possible. Picture what a large blast over Chicago would do. But the experts predict "fine dust" only. The experts say that ISON was spewing 112,000 pounds of "dust" every minute. And that at no time would a large chunk come off. Say an 8' boulder couldn't come off.
I built an Asteroid Calculator, which is here, its a free download as Excel. Enter the size of your space rock, and the calculator turns it into an equivalent amount of nuclear bombs. Yes they really do have that energy. Maybe I should make it into an equivalent amounts of Reactor 3's filled with MOX.
Asteroid Calculator in Excel
Oh, by the way....just in case its not all dust, that 8' rock has the energy of 60% of an average atomic bomb.
The think tank "experts" state that all the debris will be fine "dust" that won't even burn up in the atmosphere, it might glow a bit, and then will drift down over years as dust.
The "experts" stated that the Russia Asteroid that injured 2000 people was completely unrelated to the other Asteroid that was being watched.
I calculated the odds that the events were completely coincidental. There is one chance in 539 Million that it was a coincidence. But because it took the experts by surprise, they want to pretend it was just coincidence. We did a warning about "Debris Field In Front Of Asteroids"
http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/2013/02/debris-field-in-front-of-asteroids.html
Also did you know that the Great Chicago Fire and the Peshtigo fire were not caused by a cow kicking a lantern, but was in fact a massive meteor attack, that created 15 major fires over a period of 4 days. The year was 1871. I have the world best compilation of evidence on this attack here.
http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/2013/03/meteor-coincidence-methinks-not.html
After the Russia meteor strike there were additional strikes in Cuba and San Fran that didn't make the news.
So as we fly through ISON debris anything is possible. Picture what a large blast over Chicago would do. But the experts predict "fine dust" only. The experts say that ISON was spewing 112,000 pounds of "dust" every minute. And that at no time would a large chunk come off. Say an 8' boulder couldn't come off.
I built an Asteroid Calculator, which is here, its a free download as Excel. Enter the size of your space rock, and the calculator turns it into an equivalent amount of nuclear bombs. Yes they really do have that energy. Maybe I should make it into an equivalent amounts of Reactor 3's filled with MOX.
Asteroid Calculator in Excel
Oh, by the way....just in case its not all dust, that 8' rock has the energy of 60% of an average atomic bomb.
Fukushima Nukes Alaska and the Pacific
From a poster on ENENEWS
I found an article and some scientific studies about the oceanic distribution of Fukushima radiation. For everyone's info here are the links.
Ana in Sacramento
http://blog.safecast.org/2014/01/fukushima-across-the-pacific/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=fukushima-across-the-pacific&utm_reader=feedly
http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Meetings/PDFplus/2013/cn207/Presentations/1028-Aoyama.pdf
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/7/3/034004/article?v_showaffiliations=yes%C2%A0
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096706371300112X?np=y
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/03/26/1120794109.full.pdf
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/338/6106/480.summary
My comments
From the second link, its a Japanese guy, and in this depth chart, he is using CS134! He is showing the fast decaying Cesium! Half life of 2 years, not the CS137 with half life of 30 years! What a pimp. Nuff said.
Now we also know these science apoligist lie through their teeth, but they are reporting 25 Bq/m3, whereas the top link is modeling .004 Bq/L. There are 1000L in one M3, so they are modeling 4 Bq/m3....or missing the reported CS134 amount only by 600%
However, the CS134 fell by 50% in 2 years (half life), so the original amount was double. And the CS 137 was about 1.2 times the CS134 at the onset. So the CS134 at source was 50 Bq per M3, and the CS137 was therefore 60Bq/M3, a total of 110 Bq/M3
So the model in reference 1 is stating 4, but reality (if they are not lying low, and they always do) is 110, for a mismatch of over 2700% lie
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't have time to debunk all these, but you can see how easy it is.
Finally the last link is a subscription site. That is of no general use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majia has her own take on the Pacific Contamination
http://majiasblog.blogspot.com/2014/01/will-fukushima-daiichi-kill-vast.html
_____________________________________________________________
OK the come on "nukes Alaska" it is really true.
Fukushima raised the radio nuclides in Alaska islands, the same amount as Atom bombs that were tested on Alaska (at the time those bombs were set off, not after now, decayed)
Proof here
http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/2014/01/further-analysis-on-2011-alaska.html
http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/2014/01/cd134-cs137-ratio-and-food-chain-in.html
I found an article and some scientific studies about the oceanic distribution of Fukushima radiation. For everyone's info here are the links.
Ana in Sacramento
http://blog.safecast.org/2014/01/fukushima-across-the-pacific/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=fukushima-across-the-pacific&utm_reader=feedly
http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Meetings/PDFplus/2013/cn207/Presentations/1028-Aoyama.pdf
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/7/3/034004/article?v_showaffiliations=yes%C2%A0
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096706371300112X?np=y
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/03/26/1120794109.full.pdf
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/338/6106/480.summary
My comments
from the first link, deniers,------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These scientists conclude that the the Cs137 levels in the waterborne Fukushima radiation now reaching the North American Pacific coast will peak at between about 0.004 and 0.010 Bq/L using a "model"
My own calculations show that in a 5000 x 5000 square mile area of the Pacific, the upper 200' of water (where 95% of the radioisotopes remain per real boat measurements, not models) will be 47 to 470 Bq/CF depending on how much TEPCO is lying, and that is only with releases to date, future releases which are assured, will increase this amount.
From the second link, its a Japanese guy, and in this depth chart, he is using CS134! He is showing the fast decaying Cesium! Half life of 2 years, not the CS137 with half life of 30 years! What a pimp. Nuff said.
Now we also know these science apoligist lie through their teeth, but they are reporting 25 Bq/m3, whereas the top link is modeling .004 Bq/L. There are 1000L in one M3, so they are modeling 4 Bq/m3....or missing the reported CS134 amount only by 600%
However, the CS134 fell by 50% in 2 years (half life), so the original amount was double. And the CS 137 was about 1.2 times the CS134 at the onset. So the CS134 at source was 50 Bq per M3, and the CS137 was therefore 60Bq/M3, a total of 110 Bq/M3
So the model in reference 1 is stating 4, but reality (if they are not lying low, and they always do) is 110, for a mismatch of over 2700% lie
I am become death, destroyer of oceans
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't have time to debunk all these, but you can see how easy it is.
Finally the last link is a subscription site. That is of no general use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majia has her own take on the Pacific Contamination
http://majiasblog.blogspot.com/2014/01/will-fukushima-daiichi-kill-vast.html
_____________________________________________________________
OK the come on "nukes Alaska" it is really true.
Fukushima raised the radio nuclides in Alaska islands, the same amount as Atom bombs that were tested on Alaska (at the time those bombs were set off, not after now, decayed)
Proof here
http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/2014/01/further-analysis-on-2011-alaska.html
http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/2014/01/cd134-cs137-ratio-and-food-chain-in.html
Saturday, January 11, 2014
Spark Detector for Alpha Particles
Uploaded on May 22, 2011
This video documents a simple but
surprisingly effective detector for alpha radiation. (I'm indebted to
Tim Raney of Richmond, Virginia for the hard work of re-discovering this
concept from old technical literature, and for preliminary efforts to
optimize its practical construction using modern techniques.)
Alpha particles and other ionizing particulate radiation of high linear energy transfer leave a dense wake of ionization following their passage through the air, which can trigger electrical breakdown (i.e. sparking) in the presence of suitably strong electric fields. In this detector, a close relative of the Geiger "point counter," an array of four thin tungsten wires at ground potential passes over an aluminum plate that is biased at ~6-8 kV negative with respect to ground. The wire-to-wire spacing is 0.2 inches, the wire-to-cathode spacing is 0.1 inches, and the tungsten wire is standard, unstraightened 0.003-inch (0.07-mm) diameter.
A current-limited power supply must be used that will not burn out the wires during discharges. I suggest a series resistance of 20 megohms in the cathode lead, made of resistors that are rated to handle the voltage of the supply (e.g. Caddocks). It is also important to limit the cable length attached to the wires (suggested length is one meter or less) so that capacitively-stored energy doesn't produce damaging sparks or damaging HV transients by reflection.
Sources of alpha radiation demonstrated in the clip include a 5-millicurie Po-210 source, a ~60-microcurie Am-241 source, and a 10-microcurie Ra-226 source. Other effective but less-dramatic sources include natural ambient radon (patience is required!) and uranium ore. Pure beta emitters, gamma emitters, and x-rays do not trigger this kind of detector.
Alpha particles and other ionizing particulate radiation of high linear energy transfer leave a dense wake of ionization following their passage through the air, which can trigger electrical breakdown (i.e. sparking) in the presence of suitably strong electric fields. In this detector, a close relative of the Geiger "point counter," an array of four thin tungsten wires at ground potential passes over an aluminum plate that is biased at ~6-8 kV negative with respect to ground. The wire-to-wire spacing is 0.2 inches, the wire-to-cathode spacing is 0.1 inches, and the tungsten wire is standard, unstraightened 0.003-inch (0.07-mm) diameter.
A current-limited power supply must be used that will not burn out the wires during discharges. I suggest a series resistance of 20 megohms in the cathode lead, made of resistors that are rated to handle the voltage of the supply (e.g. Caddocks). It is also important to limit the cable length attached to the wires (suggested length is one meter or less) so that capacitively-stored energy doesn't produce damaging sparks or damaging HV transients by reflection.
Sources of alpha radiation demonstrated in the clip include a 5-millicurie Po-210 source, a ~60-microcurie Am-241 source, and a 10-microcurie Ra-226 source. Other effective but less-dramatic sources include natural ambient radon (patience is required!) and uranium ore. Pure beta emitters, gamma emitters, and x-rays do not trigger this kind of detector.
Strontium-90 and DNA damage
Full credit to Bobby1 and his blog. Archiving here.
http://optimalprediction.com/wp/strontium-90-and-dna-damage/comment-page-1/#comment-21053
Strontium-90 and DNA damage.
Strontium-90 levels are rapidly increasing in groundwater near the reactor 2 turbine building at Fukushima Daiichi. Enenews has the story:
Xinhua: Very high radioactivity levels were detected in groundwater from an observation well at the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, said the plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) Wednesday. [...] The observation well was set up on the Pacific side of the plant’s No. 2 reactor turbine building last December to find out the reasons why radioactivity levels in seawater near the plant remained high. The company said the sampled water could be from the contaminated water that seeped into the ground.
Reuters: Testing of groundwater showed the reading for strontium-90 increased from 8.6 becquerels to 1,000 becquerels per litre between Dec. 8, 2012 and May 24
BBC News: High levels of a toxic radioactive isotope have been found in groundwater at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant, its operator says. [...] Strontium-90 is formed as a by-product of nuclear fission. Tests showed that levels of strontium in groundwater at the Fukushima plant had increased 100-fold since the end of last year, Toshihiko Fukuda, a Tepco official, told media.
And Fukushima Diary has a story about huge amounts of tritium and strontium-90:
On 6/19/2013, Tepco announced they measured 500,000,000 Bq/m3 of Tritium and 1,000,000 Bq/m3 of Sr-90 from the groundwater taken from the east side of reactor2 turbine building. The sample was taken on 5/24/2013.
The radiation level in seawater doesn’t decrease. In order to investigate it, Tepco drilled 3 observation holes on the east side of the reactor1~4 turbine buildings.
These radionuclides are going to end up in the seawater, no matter what Tepco says. It is also likely that they have been released into the atmosphere in significant amounts. This is due to re-criticalities that have and are continuing to occur this year. They are occurring in the underground coriums and in at least one aboveground site.
Tepco has minimized the strontium deposition until recently. I know strontium-90 was released into the Pacific in early 2011, because the Chinese government announced that it had been found in Pacific squid. Not only that, I had just eaten some of it. The worst thing I have ever eaten.
Strontium-90 is a particularly dangerous radioactive toxin. It causes bone cancer, leukemia, and immunological damage. It collects in bone and is more dangerous the younger you are.
I received an email today from Richard Bramhall at the Low-Level Radiation Campaign. Chris Busby has written a review of evidence that ingesting and inhaling radionuclides is causing DNA damage to people, and how the nuclear industry’s ICRP model grossly underestimates the dangers to human health.
The evidence shows that ICRP’s use of “absorbed dose” is invalid for many radionuclides when they are internal… The review defines and discusses situations where genetic damage is massively more likely than from external radiation at the same “dose”; 1) biochemical affinity for DNA, 2) transmutation, 3) hot particles, 4) sequential emitters (“Second Event Theory”), 5) low energy beta emitters, and 6) the “Secondary Photoelectron Effect”:
1. Some substances (for example Strontium-90 and Uranium) have high biochemical affinity for DNA so a large proportion of what is inside the body will be chemically bound to DNA. For this reason the radiation events associated with them are massively more likely to damage DNA structures than the same dose delivered externally.
Sr-90 binds to DNA, and is far more dangerous for this reason that nuclides that are simply in cytoplasm. Uranium is also very dangerous for this reason.
2. Transmutation, where the radioactive decay of a radio-element changes it into a different element (e.g. Carbon-14 changing to Nitrogen), has mutagenic effects far greater than would be expected on the basis of “absorbed dose”. This has been known since the 1960s but it has been ignored by risk agencies such as ICRP, UNSCEAR and BEIR.
DNA is made from Carbon, Oxygen, Hydrogen and Nitrogen. Carbon-14 and tritium (radioactive hydrogen) become incorporated into DNA through eating and drinking contaminated products. When the carbon-14 atom in the DNA decays into nitrogen, the chemical bond is broken, and DNA damage results. Similarly, tritium decays into helium. This goes for plants, as well as animals and humans.
3. Hot particles, especially those which emit very short-range alpha radiation, have obvious implications for high local doses to tissue where they are embedded.
It should be added that due to the bystander effect, dozens of times more DNA molecules are affected than those which are directly affected by this alpha radiation. This is due to the release of inflammatory cytokines such as TNF-alpha. These cytokines are also themselves associated with cancer, heart disease, strokes, and autoimmune diseases.
4. The “Second Event Theory” concerns the decay sequences of some radionuclides which decay to a short-lived daughter. Strontium 90 decaying to Yttrium 90 is an example; the Yttrium 90 has a half-life of 2½ days so the theory is that the first event (decay of Strontium 90) may damage a cell’s DNA which then sets about repairing itself. The repair process is known to be very radiosensitive and there is a finite probability that the second event (the subsequent Yttrium decay) inflicts further damage which cannot be repaired.
Sr-90 decays into the vastly more energetic Y-90, which last around 3 weeks. As the DNA repair process in underway due to the Sr-90, an atom turns into Y-90 which screws up the repair process, which itself is a radiosensitive function. It ends up with misrepaired DNA strands that go into random configurations.
5. A good example of a low energy beta emitter is Tritium. (Tritium is projected to account for 99.8% of the radioactivity in discharges from the “generic” design of reactor planned for the UK). The review compares Tritium with Caesium-137. The very low decay energy of Tritium means that delivering the same absorbed dose as the Caesium requires 90 times as many radiation tracks from Tritium. This density of events occurring at low doses suggests a mechanism to explain experimental results that show Tritium is a greater mutagenic hazard than ICRP would expect.
The is an immense amount of tritium going into the Pacific, which gets evaporated and becomes rainfall over North America. Again here, the ICRP grossly underestimates the health impacts of this dangerous radionuclide, which affects all life.
6. Elements with large numbers of protons (e.g. Uranium, Plutonium) absorb external gamma radiation efficiently, re-emitting it in the form of very short-range photoelectrons indistinguishable from beta radiation. This is known as the Secondary Photoelectron Effect (SPE). The review criticizes papers which used Monte Carlo methodology in attempts to minimise the importance of SPE after New Scientist [3] published a report on it in 2008…
It is bad enough when uranium and plutonium bind to DNA and cause damage via alpha radiation. When there is gamma radiation in the environment, say, during a global nuclear catastrophe, like right now, the uranium and plutonium absorb it, and emit photons which act just like a beta particle.
The review shows that enhancement factors arising from the mechanisms above can theoretically be as high as 10,000-fold. It lists epidemiological evidence where such enhancements are required to explain clear effects which are denied by the industry, regulators and government on the basis of low average doses. One of these is the recent KiKK study which, if the doubled risk of childhood leukaemia near NPPs in Germany is caused by radioactive discharges, implies a 10,000-fold error in ICRP risk estimates. KiKK is at one extreme of such evidence; at the other, the Seascale cluster implies an error of 200.
All the crap about “safe radiation levels” and “no immediate effect” is just that, crap. Reality is at least 200 times worse and as much as 10,000 times worse than the crap models that the radioactive polluters use.
Xinhua: Very high radioactivity levels were detected in groundwater from an observation well at the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, said the plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) Wednesday. [...] The observation well was set up on the Pacific side of the plant’s No. 2 reactor turbine building last December to find out the reasons why radioactivity levels in seawater near the plant remained high. The company said the sampled water could be from the contaminated water that seeped into the ground.
Reuters: Testing of groundwater showed the reading for strontium-90 increased from 8.6 becquerels to 1,000 becquerels per litre between Dec. 8, 2012 and May 24
BBC News: High levels of a toxic radioactive isotope have been found in groundwater at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant, its operator says. [...] Strontium-90 is formed as a by-product of nuclear fission. Tests showed that levels of strontium in groundwater at the Fukushima plant had increased 100-fold since the end of last year, Toshihiko Fukuda, a Tepco official, told media.
And Fukushima Diary has a story about huge amounts of tritium and strontium-90:
On 6/19/2013, Tepco announced they measured 500,000,000 Bq/m3 of Tritium and 1,000,000 Bq/m3 of Sr-90 from the groundwater taken from the east side of reactor2 turbine building. The sample was taken on 5/24/2013.
The radiation level in seawater doesn’t decrease. In order to investigate it, Tepco drilled 3 observation holes on the east side of the reactor1~4 turbine buildings.
These radionuclides are going to end up in the seawater, no matter what Tepco says. It is also likely that they have been released into the atmosphere in significant amounts. This is due to re-criticalities that have and are continuing to occur this year. They are occurring in the underground coriums and in at least one aboveground site.
Tepco has minimized the strontium deposition until recently. I know strontium-90 was released into the Pacific in early 2011, because the Chinese government announced that it had been found in Pacific squid. Not only that, I had just eaten some of it. The worst thing I have ever eaten.
Strontium-90 is a particularly dangerous radioactive toxin. It causes bone cancer, leukemia, and immunological damage. It collects in bone and is more dangerous the younger you are.
I received an email today from Richard Bramhall at the Low-Level Radiation Campaign. Chris Busby has written a review of evidence that ingesting and inhaling radionuclides is causing DNA damage to people, and how the nuclear industry’s ICRP model grossly underestimates the dangers to human health.
The evidence shows that ICRP’s use of “absorbed dose” is invalid for many radionuclides when they are internal… The review defines and discusses situations where genetic damage is massively more likely than from external radiation at the same “dose”; 1) biochemical affinity for DNA, 2) transmutation, 3) hot particles, 4) sequential emitters (“Second Event Theory”), 5) low energy beta emitters, and 6) the “Secondary Photoelectron Effect”:
1. Some substances (for example Strontium-90 and Uranium) have high biochemical affinity for DNA so a large proportion of what is inside the body will be chemically bound to DNA. For this reason the radiation events associated with them are massively more likely to damage DNA structures than the same dose delivered externally.
Sr-90 binds to DNA, and is far more dangerous for this reason that nuclides that are simply in cytoplasm. Uranium is also very dangerous for this reason.
2. Transmutation, where the radioactive decay of a radio-element changes it into a different element (e.g. Carbon-14 changing to Nitrogen), has mutagenic effects far greater than would be expected on the basis of “absorbed dose”. This has been known since the 1960s but it has been ignored by risk agencies such as ICRP, UNSCEAR and BEIR.
DNA is made from Carbon, Oxygen, Hydrogen and Nitrogen. Carbon-14 and tritium (radioactive hydrogen) become incorporated into DNA through eating and drinking contaminated products. When the carbon-14 atom in the DNA decays into nitrogen, the chemical bond is broken, and DNA damage results. Similarly, tritium decays into helium. This goes for plants, as well as animals and humans.
3. Hot particles, especially those which emit very short-range alpha radiation, have obvious implications for high local doses to tissue where they are embedded.
It should be added that due to the bystander effect, dozens of times more DNA molecules are affected than those which are directly affected by this alpha radiation. This is due to the release of inflammatory cytokines such as TNF-alpha. These cytokines are also themselves associated with cancer, heart disease, strokes, and autoimmune diseases.
4. The “Second Event Theory” concerns the decay sequences of some radionuclides which decay to a short-lived daughter. Strontium 90 decaying to Yttrium 90 is an example; the Yttrium 90 has a half-life of 2½ days so the theory is that the first event (decay of Strontium 90) may damage a cell’s DNA which then sets about repairing itself. The repair process is known to be very radiosensitive and there is a finite probability that the second event (the subsequent Yttrium decay) inflicts further damage which cannot be repaired.
Sr-90 decays into the vastly more energetic Y-90, which last around 3 weeks. As the DNA repair process in underway due to the Sr-90, an atom turns into Y-90 which screws up the repair process, which itself is a radiosensitive function. It ends up with misrepaired DNA strands that go into random configurations.
5. A good example of a low energy beta emitter is Tritium. (Tritium is projected to account for 99.8% of the radioactivity in discharges from the “generic” design of reactor planned for the UK). The review compares Tritium with Caesium-137. The very low decay energy of Tritium means that delivering the same absorbed dose as the Caesium requires 90 times as many radiation tracks from Tritium. This density of events occurring at low doses suggests a mechanism to explain experimental results that show Tritium is a greater mutagenic hazard than ICRP would expect.
The is an immense amount of tritium going into the Pacific, which gets evaporated and becomes rainfall over North America. Again here, the ICRP grossly underestimates the health impacts of this dangerous radionuclide, which affects all life.
6. Elements with large numbers of protons (e.g. Uranium, Plutonium) absorb external gamma radiation efficiently, re-emitting it in the form of very short-range photoelectrons indistinguishable from beta radiation. This is known as the Secondary Photoelectron Effect (SPE). The review criticizes papers which used Monte Carlo methodology in attempts to minimise the importance of SPE after New Scientist [3] published a report on it in 2008…
It is bad enough when uranium and plutonium bind to DNA and cause damage via alpha radiation. When there is gamma radiation in the environment, say, during a global nuclear catastrophe, like right now, the uranium and plutonium absorb it, and emit photons which act just like a beta particle.
The review shows that enhancement factors arising from the mechanisms above can theoretically be as high as 10,000-fold. It lists epidemiological evidence where such enhancements are required to explain clear effects which are denied by the industry, regulators and government on the basis of low average doses. One of these is the recent KiKK study which, if the doubled risk of childhood leukaemia near NPPs in Germany is caused by radioactive discharges, implies a 10,000-fold error in ICRP risk estimates. KiKK is at one extreme of such evidence; at the other, the Seascale cluster implies an error of 200.
All the crap about “safe radiation levels” and “no immediate effect” is just that, crap. Reality is at least 200 times worse and as much as 10,000 times worse than the crap models that the radioactive polluters use.
Thursday, January 9, 2014
Nice calculator Bq to grams
This is a super smart calculator, you just type in your request in fairly normal english, and it figures out what you want to calculate, and then calculates it, AND presents more useful related data also.
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=mass+of+26%2C000%2C000%2C000+Bq+of+Cesium-137
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=mass+of+26%2C000%2C000%2C000+Bq+of+Cesium-137
From American Phoenix, a Quick Comparison of Chernobyl and Fukushima, The Big Picture
1986 Chernobyl – 195 days till containment. A single uranium powered
nuclear plant without plutonium (MOX) fuel and NO spent fuel pools,
located far from any ocean in the middle of what was then the Soviet
Socialist Republic of Ukraine was running at low power had a partial
meltdown, exploded and burned for ten days until an army of half a
million “liquidators” buried it and entombed it in a concrete
sarcophagus. It sent a plume of radioactive particles 2 kilometers into
the atmosphere – equivalent in toxicity to 400 Hiroshima bombs. It
contaminated forty percent of Europe and Central Asia. A thousand
kilometers in all directions are permanently contaminated. It has slowly
killed a million people and destroyed the DNA of millions more.
vs
2011 Fukushima – 1034 days still no containment. Three uranium and plutonium powered nuclear plants and four large spent fuel pools, located on the shores of Eastern Japan were running at full power, had triple "China Syndrome" meltdowns, exploded and two hundred tons of radioactive fuel burned up into the atmosphere and burned down into the groundwater aquifer that empties into the Pacific Ocean. For over two and a half years an army of ten thousand down on their luck contract workers have tried to mop it up and then filter and save the mop water. It didn’t work. It can never be stopped. It sent a plume of radioactive particles 5 kilometers into the atmosphere – equivalent in toxicity to 6000+ Hiroshima bombs. It has permanently contaminated 50 percent of Japan and portions of East Asia. Three thousand square kilometers of the Pacific and growing are permanently contaminated. It has begun to slowly kill millions of people in the northern hemisphere and destroy the DNA of billions more for generations to come.
sources and citations intentionally withheld to irritate banana suckers.
Also you can see here what happens when you go to a pro-nuke site and try to drop a comment, LOL
vs
2011 Fukushima – 1034 days still no containment. Three uranium and plutonium powered nuclear plants and four large spent fuel pools, located on the shores of Eastern Japan were running at full power, had triple "China Syndrome" meltdowns, exploded and two hundred tons of radioactive fuel burned up into the atmosphere and burned down into the groundwater aquifer that empties into the Pacific Ocean. For over two and a half years an army of ten thousand down on their luck contract workers have tried to mop it up and then filter and save the mop water. It didn’t work. It can never be stopped. It sent a plume of radioactive particles 5 kilometers into the atmosphere – equivalent in toxicity to 6000+ Hiroshima bombs. It has permanently contaminated 50 percent of Japan and portions of East Asia. Three thousand square kilometers of the Pacific and growing are permanently contaminated. It has begun to slowly kill millions of people in the northern hemisphere and destroy the DNA of billions more for generations to come.
sources and citations intentionally withheld to irritate banana suckers.
Also you can see here what happens when you go to a pro-nuke site and try to drop a comment, LOL
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)