UPDATE: There is also a 3X AIRBORNE detection in San Francisco, see blog comment section below
!MAXIMUM ALERT! AIRBORNE RADIOACTIVITY 5 TIMES GREATER THAN BACKGROUND RADIATION in Saint Louis @ 4:39 pm 6/4/12
We noticed elevated AIRBORNE radioactivity after a super cell thunder storm moved near our location. The heaviest part of the storm had passed approximately 15 minutes prior to the readings you will see in the video.
These are the highest airborne radioactivity readings we have ever measured in Saint Louis. The airborne readings can be seen at the start of the video and at approximately 5:20 minutes into the video. At the 5:20 minute mark we retrieved two additional pancake Geiger counters to confirm the measurements. These two additional Geiger counters were set to record 6 minute averages but visually update more frequently; one of them had the Beta shield removed. The original Geiger counter was recording on a 30 second moving average.
i live 1 hour north of San Francisco near the coast and our airborne radioactivity today was 3 times greater than normal background radiation. we also had rainfall last night with scattered showers thru out the day today.
ReplyDeleteThats highly unusual for California; the commonality is that we both had the Jet Stream directly overhead. Looks like a direct hit from the Fukushima Jet Stream. We just shared your info over on www.Enviroreporter.com, as they have a large California contingent.
DeleteLet just say if this is all true then its easy to verify.
ReplyDeleteThe multiple Geiger results speak for themselves, but if there is some easy additional verification methodology that would be most helpful.
DeleteAccording to the EPA's radnet page, there was a three digit spike in beta counts around that time in St. Louis (the times listed are in Universal time, which is basically Greenwich time, so you have to subtract a few hours to get local time):
ReplyDeletehttps://cdxnode64.epa.gov/radnet-public/query.do
Thanks for the link.
DeleteThe EPA "reviews and approves" their data. See our previous post "Detail Video Analysis: EPA RadNet Data Censoring Radioactive Fallout in St. Louis" http://pissinontheroses.blogspot.com/2011/07/detail-video-analysis-epa-radnet-data.html
That said, they can't hide everything. From the download you linked, the data shows that the reading from 2012-06-04 14:16:19 is out of chronological order by two hours, which means the EPA likely altered the data for that time period. Still it shows a radioactive "cloud" came through on 6/4/12 lasting about 5 hours, from 3am local time to 8am local time. Our reading took place at 4:39pm after a lone super cell thunderstorm moved through the area .
Our SWAG is that the storm pulled down the high Jet Stream radioactivity and that is what we measured in the air; it would appear that the highest radioactivity in the Jet Stream was earlier in the morning. It was high enough that the EPA could detect it at ground level using their powered air filters. Had it stormed at our location during those morning hours, our airborne readings would likely have been much higher.
We'll probably have to make a seperate blog post about this subject.
NEMO, thanks for your contribution in bringing the data to our attention.
Urgent Alert!? Radiationnetwork.com is showing a 6,928 number tops (so far), then 3,000 now 1,000 with fluctuation back up to 5,000u. There is no message about what's going on yet. It looks like a plant in Michigan on the border of Indiana is in a radiation release event of some sort. Please advise. God Bless you for your work- :)
ReplyDeletehttp://radiationnetwork.com/USA.JPG
Sorry, I meant to say 5,000 CPM. Actually it's now gone up to 7,000 CPM and monitor is still bouncing up and down.
ReplyDelete@brioche,
ReplyDeleteIts reported as being a false reading, but there are indications that it was real.
Looking at their hourly graph at blackcatsystems, and comparing it to the wind speeds and directions for the same time period in South Bend, Indiana, the detection started when the windspeed dropped to calm and stopped when the windspeed changed direction and picked up 4 hours later. They were also located at the terminal edge of the jet stream where one would expect the delta in winds speed to lead to some fallout.
On the other hand reading the reports, the station owner seems to have indicated that the circuit lost power and was operating off of a back up power supply. IF that is the case they should be able to replicate the fault and make it happen again.
Frankly their failure explanation does not make much sense to us, but maybe the blackcat people can explain how such an issue would make a device powered of it serial bus fail in such way.
Overall my gut does not want to believe that such a high reading was real, but I do still have some nagging questions. I think I'll file it under probably not real but none-the-less noteworthy of reexamination.
For what it's worth, I live in South Bend, and as soon as I learned of that alert I grabbed my geiger counter and turned it on. The readings I found in my apartment were all basically normal, ranging from the mid-20s to the 40s in CPM, with a stray 50 or 60 appearing just once in a while. Even when I went close to the window, the numbers did not seem to increase at all (I'm on the third and top floor of my building--not sure if that is relevant). I kept the GC on all night, checking it periodically, and it generally remained in the 20 to 40 range.
ReplyDeleteIf fallout registering as high as 7000 CPM were in the vicinity, wouldn't my GC have been able to pick up at least some noticeably elevated readings indoors? Later this morning, I took it outside and did a 10-minute average, and the average I found was in the low 30s in CPM.
What kind of readings should one expect to find indoors if a plume with extremely high CPMs is floating by outside?
Fallout is like weather, it can be spotty; but you report strongly reinforces my gut feeling that it was NOT a "real" event. What ever it was, the people responsible need to investigate it.
DeleteIf it was real (and not staged), we only know it was hot; we don't know how wide spread it was. Around 3am the wind start blowing toward the east at 5mph. Picture smoke spreading from a fire under that kind of wind, that would be the first place to look for other detections. It would be nice to have greater location detail of the incident.
However, the important lesson was that you were prepared and could make your own assessments and risk mitigation decisions. Few people had that capability from a radiological standpoint before Fukushima, I'm glad more people have it now. I'm especially glad your willing to share information.