Have You Heard About Fukushima?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Fukushima is the cancer that's killing PD.

I just shot chai out my nose.

Ouch.

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

Fukushima is the cancer that's killing PD.

I just shot chai out my nose.

Ouch.

NEWSFEED

The bottom line right now is that we actually don't know the scope of the Fukushima disaster, and probably will not know for years.

I know that the West coast of the US has experienced elevated radiation levels from Fukushima for several months. That data is not officially available anywhere, and that in combination is not a very good sign.

Yeah...I just keep bumping into "IT'S NOT THAT BAD!"

Probably need a geiger counter for the produce section...

[East Coast Hustle]

The general direction of the prevailing surface-level winds would make that more of a concern if you lived in Korea or eastern Russia. I have no idea if the radioactive particles released would make it high enough into the atmopshere to catch the polar jet stream, which would be of some concern (particularly for those of us who live in Oregon). It's my understanding that the really dangerous isotopes are too heavy to be carried across the Pacific by the ocean currents very effectively which also makes me think that they would be unlikely to make it all the way up to the polar jet stream, though I'm certainly no scientist and could be misinformed about that.

That said, I'm not buying tuna from Japan or the western Pacific anytime soon.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

The general direction of the prevailing surface-level winds would make that more of a concern if you lived in Korea or eastern Russia. I have no idea if the radioactive particles released would make it high enough into the atmopshere to catch the polar jet stream, which would be of some concern (particularly for those of us who live in Oregon). It's my understanding that the really dangerous isotopes are too heavy to be carried across the Pacific by the ocean currents very effectively which also makes me think that they would be unlikely to make it all the way up to the polar jet stream, though I'm certainly no scientist and could be misinformed about that.

That said, I'm not buying tuna from Japan or the western Pacific anytime soon.

AZ is already radioactive as fuck.  A little more can't hurt.

[East Coast Hustle]

Thinking about it more, the evidence from Chernobyl seems to bear that out, as the fallout was spread west and north by surface-level winds and NOT east by the jet stream.

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

I heard early on that the rain would catch it in the atmosphere and carry it down, and to avoid streams and the like in the western states.
Not sure how they irrigate crops... 

[East Coast Hustle]

I'm open to any scientific evidence that it could make it across the Pacific in the atmosphere, but until then it seems highly doubtful for the reasons I posted. Surface winds tend to blow southeast to northwest across that part of Japan. And given how frequent the storms in the Pacific are, it seems likely that rain would flush it out before it reached the west coast even if the prevailing winds turned around long enough to theoretically carry it that far. I'm pretty sure that I'm exposed to more radiation due to how frequently I fly in a year than I would be in a lifetime of Fukushima.

Of course, my opinion is strictly based on what we know NOW about the disaster and not on any possible future further worsening of the problem. And like I said, I could be wrong, but for now I'm not buying in to the fear.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

The general direction of the prevailing surface-level winds would make that more of a concern if you lived in Korea or eastern Russia. I have no idea if the radioactive particles released would make it high enough into the atmopshere to catch the polar jet stream, which would be of some concern (particularly for those of us who live in Oregon). It's my understanding that the really dangerous isotopes are too heavy to be carried across the Pacific by the ocean currents very effectively which also makes me think that they would be unlikely to make it all the way up to the polar jet stream, though I'm certainly no scientist and could be misinformed about that.

That said, I'm not buying tuna from Japan or the western Pacific anytime soon.

AZ is already radioactive as fuck.  A little more can't hurt.

I just learned that if you lived in my hometown between 1950 and 1970 and you contract any kind of cancer during your lifetime, there is some government program that will cause Uncle Sam to write you a check for between $50,000 and $100,000 just for proving you lived there during those years.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I'm open to any scientific evidence that it could make it across the Pacific in the atmosphere, but until then it seems highly doubtful for the reasons I posted. Surface winds tend to blow southeast to northwest across that part of Japan. And given how frequent the storms in the Pacific are, it seems likely that rain would flush it out before it reached the west coast even if the prevailing winds turned around long enough to theoretically carry it that far. I'm pretty sure that I'm exposed to more radiation due to how frequently I fly in a year than I would be in a lifetime of Fukushima.

Of course, my opinion is strictly based on what we know NOW about the disaster and not on any possible future further worsening of the problem. And like I said, I could be wrong, but for now I'm not buying in to the fear.

All I know is that UC Davis and, allegedly,  the EPA (which, oddly, I can't find official records of online even though they have a website specifically for that data) measured significantly elevated radiation levels (about five times normal) on the California coast in February, and that there is no official government data publicly available at this time, despite the supposed-to-be-publicly-available quarterly milk, rainwater, drinking water, and atmospheric readings done routinely by the EPA. It is unusual.

[East Coast Hustle]

http://www.epa.gov/radnet/radnet-data/index.html

If you go to the envirofacts link, you can find all the milk/precipitation/surface water/drinking water data.

[East Coast Hustle]

I didn't look up every single isotope in every single medium, but even though there were upticks in certain isotopes a few months after Fukushima (Cesium-137 in precipitation, for example), the levels aren't anywhere near high enough to be alarming. I'm assuming that the EPA is publishing accurate data, otherwise the conversation descends into CT territory and there's no point in having it.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I didn't look up every single isotope in every single medium, but even though there were upticks in certain isotopes a few months after Fukushima (Cesium-137 in precipitation, for example), the levels aren't anywhere near high enough to be alarming. I'm assuming that the EPA is publishing accurate data, otherwise the conversation descends into CT territory and there's no point in having it.

I work with the EPA fairly regularly.  I've never known them to tolerate a cover up.  Note that this is NOT saying that such cover ups cannot happen, just that I have never seen any evidence of it.

I also now assume that the "stay indoors from X to Y time" warnings during Chernobyl was a bunch of shit, given the wind information supplied by ECH.  Given that it took place during the Reagan years, I am now amazed that I never questioned it before.

[East Coast Hustle]

I didn't look up every single isotope in every single medium, but even though there were upticks in certain isotopes a few months after Fukushima (Cesium-137 in precipitation, for example), the levels aren't anywhere near high enough to be alarming. I'm assuming that the EPA is publishing accurate data, otherwise the conversation descends into CT territory and there's no point in having it.

I work with the EPA fairly regularly.  I've never known them to tolerate a cover up.  Note that this is NOT saying that such cover ups cannot happen, just that I have never seen any evidence of it.

I also now assume that the "stay indoors from X to Y time" warnings during Chernobyl was a bunch of shit, given the wind information supplied by ECH.  Given that it took place during the Reagan years, I am now amazed that I never questioned it before.

Depends. If you were stationed in Germany, those warnings would have had some merit at the time. And again, I'm only speculating that the heavy isotopes would be unlikely to make it up into the jet stream in substantial concentrations, that doesn't mean I might not be wrong. But if you were in the states and they told you to stay indoors, even if there WAS some scientific rationale for it, I can't imagine how it would have been confined to a particular time of day.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I didn't look up every single isotope in every single medium, but even though there were upticks in certain isotopes a few months after Fukushima (Cesium-137 in precipitation, for example), the levels aren't anywhere near high enough to be alarming. I'm assuming that the EPA is publishing accurate data, otherwise the conversation descends into CT territory and there's no point in having it.

I work with the EPA fairly regularly.  I've never known them to tolerate a cover up.  Note that this is NOT saying that such cover ups cannot happen, just that I have never seen any evidence of it.

I also now assume that the "stay indoors from X to Y time" warnings during Chernobyl was a bunch of shit, given the wind information supplied by ECH.  Given that it took place during the Reagan years, I am now amazed that I never questioned it before.

Depends. If you were stationed in Germany, those warnings would have had some merit at the time. And again, I'm only speculating that the heavy isotopes would be unlikely to make it up into the jet stream in substantial concentrations, that doesn't mean I might not be wrong. But if you were in the states and they told you to stay indoors, even if there WAS some scientific rationale for it, I can't imagine how it would have been confined to a particular time of day.

I went in in 1987.  At the time of the Chernobyl fire, I was in Naperville, Illinois.

[East Coast Hustle]

Well then I'd say Reagan gave you good advice anyway, just for the wrong reason. I mean, who wants to be out and about in Naperville? It's just as bad as Joliet or Rockford, just for the opposite reasons.