Thursday, February 20, 2014

DEADLY WARNING! Nearly ELEVEN THOUSAND Becquerels per Cubic Meter of Radioactive Pu239 + Am241 Air Released In New Mexico

The WIPP plant likely released a combined Plutonium and Americium Radioactive Cloud measuring approximately 10,541 Becquerels per Cubic Meter of Air during the supposedly "brief moments" that unfiltered air was being released from the WIPP facility. We took "brief moments" to mean 30 seconds.

Obviously this value is significantly higher than what has been reported, the massive low ball 'error' in reported values stems from the fact that air filter sampling measurements are averaged over the entire time period since the air filter was last checked. The filter in question had been sampling from 2/11/14 - 2/16/14, a total of 5 days over which the calculated released values would have been smoothed across.

However, according to public officials DOE's filtering system kicked in very quickly after the alarms went off. Assuming that to be truthful, the radioactive release of Plutonium and Americium would have occurred over a relatively short 30 second period (OR LESS). 

Ratioing out the actual 30 second  interval minute release of radioactive contamination vs the 5 days over which it was mathematically peanut buttered out, the result is that the contamination was nearly 14,400 times greater than was reported. How such an engineering blunder of time unit mismatch occurred, we'll leave to the reader to ponder; but don't discount that values and units may have been erroneously assumed on either their part or our part.  None the less, for risk mitigation purpose the 10,541 Becquerel measurement is what we go by. Nor do we by any means consider the current situation either safe or stable. The source of the radiation alarm was reported to be Panel (tomb 7) Room 7.  WIPP's permitting documents indicate that Room 7 is where explosive gases are expected to be at their highest concentrations. All indications are that this was a radiation induced explosion of  Hydrogen, Methane, and/or VOC produced from radioactive wastes which are too radioactive to handle, which also happen to be coated with hazardous waste.

It is within DOE's power to release the raw data and let the fact fall where they may, but don't expect that to happen as the situation is a matter of National Security from a military radioactive disposal perspective.
We don't think it is coincidence that DOE originally reported there was 'no release' yet prevented people from going on site to recover air measurement filters. That recovery delay serves to reduce the total reported amount of contamination as those values are averaged over the entire time period the test filters are sampling.

The locations of greatest Airborne danger is a swath of the United States directly North and West of the WIPP plant. Airflow patterns during the event concentrated and directed the radioactive dispersal toward Colorado, normal weather patterns would have then dumped the Fallout over the Midwest Farm Belt.

Wind Map



  1. How far do you think this airborne stuff likely travelled across neighboring states, and how quickly do you think it would have moved across them (i.e., how many hours/days to do so)? How far do you think it could get before it dispersed to concentrations similar to the regular background (i.e., post-1940s background) levels of these isotopes.

    I'm guessing that these releases didn't go high up into the atmosphere since the explosion happened deep underground? If so, does that make a difference for how far/quickly it would've been transported?

  2. It was likely driven by a hydrogen, methane explosion, it was directed and shot high into the sky via the vent and salt stacks. Best quick guess is in the first 24 hours that surface level stuff made it somewhere near Denver, the higher level stuff moved towards the Houston and New Orleans

    So draw a line between WIPP and Denver, then movie it westward towards Houston and you get the general idea.
    Unfortunately the first rainout looked like it happened over Missouri on 2/17

    The surface level stuff stayed in a tight band, but probably stretched out some

  3. Can you please specify where you are getting the "Air Filter Reading" data in your chart? I'm having trouble finding it in your source links. thanks.

    1. Your question went into the spam folder for some reason.
      The "Air Filter Reading" was reported by Zack Ponce of the Currentargus newspaper. It was part of the original twitter conversation linked in the sources. But to make it more clear, the tweet with the those reported values has been updated into the sources section of this posting