Tsunami, Earthquake and Static Discharge in the UK, no it is not the comeback album from the Sex Pistols. But, it is a strange series of events in the UK. Mostly its strange because of the reports of large build ups of static electricity during the Tsunami. To make it even more strange, now there has been a follow on 3.9 earthquake in the region.
Reports have blamed the static on changes in air pressure; that's a very dubious explanation given that static IN THE WATER made the fish jump out of the water. The Tsunami was also conjectured to have been caused by an underwater land slide; But underwater landslides don't generate static on that scale. However it is possible for geological-scale static to move water and potentially cause a mini-tsunami. A James Bond level villian might even be able to create such an effect; but given the scale of such an effort, it seems less than economically plausible.
So what gives? Possible rapid magma movement, that certainly would help explain today's 3.9 earthquake. But it might also portend a volcano in the making in the Channel. Lets hope not.
Friday, July 15, 2011
The Unresearched Threat of Fukushima Photo-FISSION in Thunderstorms
Nuclear Fission occurring in that thunderstorm over your head?
Yes, it is possible thanks to the Fukushima disaster.
One of the great unknowns out of the Fukushima nuclear disaster is the effect of the long term pumping of high atomic weight elements into the atmosphere. I have previously discussed one such large scale threat, the nuclear spallation of Fukushima fallout (both radioactive and non-radioactive) resulting from Earth directed Coronal Mass Ejections. But, there is another much closer and more frequent nuclear fission source in thunderstorms.
The lightening in thunderstorms actually produces potentially deadly levels of high energy gamma radiation, when that gamma radiation strikes higher atomic weight elements it will cause nuclear fission to occur. That photo-fission effect is not just limited to fissile materials. What makes the situation potentially more deadly is that the high atomic weight fallout from Fukushima may actually seed the formation of thunderstorms resulting in the creation of fresh radioactive materials from photofission. The strong correlation between the Fukushima disaster and the largest out break of thunderstorms / tornadoes in decades may be indicative of this affect.
The first indications of such nuclear fission occurring in the thunderstorms above our heads would be the detections of significant short half life radiation; much like the detection of radioactive fallout SIXTY-TWO TIMES greater than background radiation in the Saint Louis rainfall of 5/25/2011 seen in the videos below.
Yes, it is possible thanks to the Fukushima disaster.
One of the great unknowns out of the Fukushima nuclear disaster is the effect of the long term pumping of high atomic weight elements into the atmosphere. I have previously discussed one such large scale threat, the nuclear spallation of Fukushima fallout (both radioactive and non-radioactive) resulting from Earth directed Coronal Mass Ejections. But, there is another much closer and more frequent nuclear fission source in thunderstorms.
The lightening in thunderstorms actually produces potentially deadly levels of high energy gamma radiation, when that gamma radiation strikes higher atomic weight elements it will cause nuclear fission to occur. That photo-fission effect is not just limited to fissile materials. What makes the situation potentially more deadly is that the high atomic weight fallout from Fukushima may actually seed the formation of thunderstorms resulting in the creation of fresh radioactive materials from photofission. The strong correlation between the Fukushima disaster and the largest out break of thunderstorms / tornadoes in decades may be indicative of this affect.
The first indications of such nuclear fission occurring in the thunderstorms above our heads would be the detections of significant short half life radiation; much like the detection of radioactive fallout SIXTY-TWO TIMES greater than background radiation in the Saint Louis rainfall of 5/25/2011 seen in the videos below.
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Baseline Radioactive Test of Pre-Fukushima Organic NonFat Dried Milk
I took two 10 minute readings from a sealed foil package of 12oz Organic NonFat Dry Milk, non-instant Grade A. The date code on the package was 10351BEXP1111, I believe that corresponds to a packaging date of February 4, 2011.
The procedure was as follows
10 minute timed count from the back of the package; 426 total counts.
10 minute timed background count from the table under the package; 329 total counts.
10 minute timed count from the front of the package; 457 total counts.
10 minute timed background count from the table under the package; 351 total counts.
The result is that the PRE-FUKUSHIMA milk radioactivity read 30% above background
The corresponding average reading from the milk container was 0.0126 mR/hr
The corresponding average background reading was 0.0097 mR/hr
I will update with future readings as I start to use more pre-Fukushima dried milk.
The procedure was as follows
10 minute timed count from the back of the package; 426 total counts.
10 minute timed background count from the table under the package; 329 total counts.
10 minute timed count from the front of the package; 457 total counts.
10 minute timed background count from the table under the package; 351 total counts.
The result is that the PRE-FUKUSHIMA milk radioactivity read 30% above background
The corresponding average reading from the milk container was 0.0126 mR/hr
The corresponding average background reading was 0.0097 mR/hr
I will update with future readings as I start to use more pre-Fukushima dried milk.
UC Berkeley Nuclear: If Its Not Raining Here, Its Not Raining ANYWHERE?
The UC Berkeley Nuclear Engineering BRAWN team seems to have to gone out of their way to rationalize why the detection of radioactive peaches in California is no reason to investigate further. Its the equivalent of telling fire spotters to ignore smoke in the woods during fire season; the public safety implications are obvious. It is easy to conclude that there is bias coming out of the BRAWM team.
It is a troubling bias because these people are responsible for training the next generation of nuclear engineers who will sign off on the safety of nuclear projects. I continue to hope that it is a bias driven out of ignorance / incompetence rather than a desire to keep their entire undergraduate nuclear engineer enrollment from dropping to zero again like it did after Three Mile Island.
The obvious bias aside, people do look to them for information and data; they count on the Berkeley team because of their perceived reputation. Its a reputation that is taking a hit with those who practice science, but much like "Climate Gate" it takes a while for that knowledge to filter down to the public. In that regard, lets examine the smoke and mirrors used to seemingly justify why there should be no further investigation of the radioactive peaches detected in Santa Monica.
The gist of one claim coming out of UC Berkeley is that a Geiger counter with a pancake tube specifically designed to detect contamination is not capable of rapidly detecting the difference between background radiation and 2 times background radiation. They couch that claim by treating that report as if it came out of an instrument that displayed raw data, instead of the 30 second moving average it actually displays. They also ignore that the reported detections were the MINIMUM SUSTAINED READINGS from two different peaches; and that the local background was also read.
That is enough information to make any person who knows the least little bit about Geiger counters to cringe at UC Berkeley's claims. But it gets worse, any good scientist adept at data analysis and collection would cringe when the BRAWN team suggested that a Poisson uncertainty should be applied to data resulting from a moving average. Combine that with their use of such dubious logic as a rationale to avoid further investigation, and you have what I refer to as DOUBLE STUPID.
But the most damning thing straining the credibility of UC Berkeley Nuclear Engineering department is this diddy, 'If it ain't rainy here it ain't raining anywhere, therefore no further investigation is needed'. The actual quote is "There is absolutely no way that fallout from Fukushima could possibly be detected with a handheld radiation meter here in the US. The quantities have been far, far too small for this to be the case." its a statement that should make ANY SCIENTIST OR MATHEMATICIAN CRINGE. That statement is the fundamental equivalent of claiming that because weathermen in the major cities are not reporting any rain that you can't possibly be having rain at your house. Such logic is obviously cringing to ANY person, scientist or not.
I wonder if the BRAWN team member who posted that is willing to back it up by resigning from the nuclear industry if they are wrong. After all, if a nuclear engineering professional is willing to risk the safety of every Peach Eating American-Californian's Health (P.E.A.C.H) on such flimsy mathematically unsubstantiatable logic he/she should not be involved in educating the next generation of Nuclear Engineers who will sign off on the safety of future nuclear projects.
If there is one thing that is abundantly clear to me is that the UC Berkeley Nuclear Engineering Department's BRAWN team is engaging in advocacy analysis, and that they are hedging it against the public health. Why do they go out of their way to make cringing credulity breaking statements to avoid doing a statistically valid sampling of their own local peaches? It is an obviously strange position to take given that there is an on going nuclear fire up wind. Dare I call it "PEACH GATE".
It is a troubling bias because these people are responsible for training the next generation of nuclear engineers who will sign off on the safety of nuclear projects. I continue to hope that it is a bias driven out of ignorance / incompetence rather than a desire to keep their entire undergraduate nuclear engineer enrollment from dropping to zero again like it did after Three Mile Island.
The obvious bias aside, people do look to them for information and data; they count on the Berkeley team because of their perceived reputation. Its a reputation that is taking a hit with those who practice science, but much like "Climate Gate" it takes a while for that knowledge to filter down to the public. In that regard, lets examine the smoke and mirrors used to seemingly justify why there should be no further investigation of the radioactive peaches detected in Santa Monica.
The gist of one claim coming out of UC Berkeley is that a Geiger counter with a pancake tube specifically designed to detect contamination is not capable of rapidly detecting the difference between background radiation and 2 times background radiation. They couch that claim by treating that report as if it came out of an instrument that displayed raw data, instead of the 30 second moving average it actually displays. They also ignore that the reported detections were the MINIMUM SUSTAINED READINGS from two different peaches; and that the local background was also read.
That is enough information to make any person who knows the least little bit about Geiger counters to cringe at UC Berkeley's claims. But it gets worse, any good scientist adept at data analysis and collection would cringe when the BRAWN team suggested that a Poisson uncertainty should be applied to data resulting from a moving average. Combine that with their use of such dubious logic as a rationale to avoid further investigation, and you have what I refer to as DOUBLE STUPID.
But the most damning thing straining the credibility of UC Berkeley Nuclear Engineering department is this diddy, 'If it ain't rainy here it ain't raining anywhere, therefore no further investigation is needed'. The actual quote is "There is absolutely no way that fallout from Fukushima could possibly be detected with a handheld radiation meter here in the US. The quantities have been far, far too small for this to be the case." its a statement that should make ANY SCIENTIST OR MATHEMATICIAN CRINGE. That statement is the fundamental equivalent of claiming that because weathermen in the major cities are not reporting any rain that you can't possibly be having rain at your house. Such logic is obviously cringing to ANY person, scientist or not.
I wonder if the BRAWN team member who posted that is willing to back it up by resigning from the nuclear industry if they are wrong. After all, if a nuclear engineering professional is willing to risk the safety of every Peach Eating American-Californian's Health (P.E.A.C.H) on such flimsy mathematically unsubstantiatable logic he/she should not be involved in educating the next generation of Nuclear Engineers who will sign off on the safety of future nuclear projects.
If there is one thing that is abundantly clear to me is that the UC Berkeley Nuclear Engineering Department's BRAWN team is engaging in advocacy analysis, and that they are hedging it against the public health. Why do they go out of their way to make cringing credulity breaking statements to avoid doing a statistically valid sampling of their own local peaches? It is an obviously strange position to take given that there is an on going nuclear fire up wind. Dare I call it "PEACH GATE".
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
NATIONWIDE EPA BLACKOUT OF REAL TIME RADIOACTIVE MONITORING
On July 1st, we at Pissin on the Roses took aim the EPA's RadNet roses to see if their radiation monitoring had roots in reality; turns out we found lots of data censoring. By July 10th the EPA shut down their RadNet Data page for Saint Louis. As of today, July 12, the EPA has put a NATIONWIDE BLACKOUT ON REAL TIME RADIOACTIVE MONITORING of Beta radiation. The EPA's statement on this fact may be found here
The EPA states:
"Near real-time beta monitoring results frequently do not pass quality control criteria due to local radiofrequency interference. For this reason, near real-time beta monitoring graphs are not displayed on this site."
Of course it would take a Freedom Of Information Act request to see if this action was a result of the Pissin On The Roses detailed expose of EPA's RadNet data censoring, but in the mean time it will suffice to examine EPA's "local radiofrequency interference" claims. One doesn't have to be a Benoit Mandelbrot to look at the chart below tracking EPA's data censoring of Saint Louis Radnet detections to realize that something just ain't right.
The EPA data censoring in Saint Louis coincides with early heavy fallout periods from Fukushima; it also strongly coincides with our very own detections of significant radioactive contamination of the local rainfall. In that light, one can only conclude that the term “RADIOfrequency interference” is pseudo ethical legalistic technical jargon for RADIOactive materials the EPA doesn't want to report. Of course the EPA has a term for that too; they call it "Reviewed and Approved" data. I guess that's a lot like this non-war we're not fighting in Libya.
Maybe we can all at least be thankful that the EPA is not in charge of issuing tornado warnings and censoring radar data, otherwise the people in Joplin might never gotten any tornado warning. Up until 1950 it used to be illegal to give tornado warnings, someone in the government figured more lives would be saved by not panicking people with tornado warnings. Maybe some day in the future after the thyroids have been burned out and the last kid has died of Fukushima Leukemia we won't have to rely on government "Reviewed and Approved" data to safeguard our families.
7/12/11 First Rain Shower of the Day at 5 times Background Radiation
Took a paper towel sample from the hood of my truck after the first rain shower of the day at approximately 6:15 pm; the sample tested at 5 times background radiation: 0.055 mR/hr. The rain came and left quickly leaving behind large drops of water.
Previous testing has shown that the front part of the storms passing through the area typically have the lowest amount of radioactive fallout. It is the trailing edges of storms which have the greatest concentration of radioactive fallout. This distribution is indicative of fallout which is being pulled down from the upper atmosphere. Locally produced naturally occurring Radon washout would follow the opposite pattern.
Previous testing has shown that the front part of the storms passing through the area typically have the lowest amount of radioactive fallout. It is the trailing edges of storms which have the greatest concentration of radioactive fallout. This distribution is indicative of fallout which is being pulled down from the upper atmosphere. Locally produced naturally occurring Radon washout would follow the opposite pattern.
Sunday, July 10, 2011
Fukushima's First Frightening Fruits: Radioactive Peaches in California
Hat tip to Michael and Denise at ENVIROREPORTER.COM for detecting and reporting the July 8th discovery of Radioactive Peaches in a Santa Monica market.
The Peaches had a sustained radioactivity of two times above local background radiation. What makes this discovery especially significant is that the 2X background radioactivity detected in these peaches was likely significantly attenuated by their water content; when eaten the exposure rate may be significantly higher. Even worse, it is likely that the detected radioactivity is from a longer half life radionuclide; which when eaten, would irradiate a person from the inside out for potential years to come.
Unfortunately it is not surprising that the Fukushima's first frighting fruits would be peaches. The explosive growth and transformation from peach blossom to green fruit almost exactly coincides with the Fukushima disaster and the associated radioactive fallout in the United States.
The Peaches had a sustained radioactivity of two times above local background radiation. What makes this discovery especially significant is that the 2X background radioactivity detected in these peaches was likely significantly attenuated by their water content; when eaten the exposure rate may be significantly higher. Even worse, it is likely that the detected radioactivity is from a longer half life radionuclide; which when eaten, would irradiate a person from the inside out for potential years to come.
Unfortunately it is not surprising that the Fukushima's first frighting fruits would be peaches. The explosive growth and transformation from peach blossom to green fruit almost exactly coincides with the Fukushima disaster and the associated radioactive fallout in the United States.
Friday, July 8, 2011
Radioactive Container Truck Spewing Gamma Rays Into Traffic on I-270
7/15/11 UPDATE:
After some research, a person next to a truck legally shipping radioactive materials could expect a dosage between 10 mR/Hr to 200 mR/Hr.
According to the government, a pregnant woman should avoid anything greater than 2 mR/Hr. At max, if she stayed next to such a truck for more than 15 minutes should would be required to wear a dosimeter for the rest of her pregnancy.
At 30 minutes she would have to avoid all other exposure for the remainder of the pregnancy.
The younger the baby is in the gestational period, the greater the risk of miscarriage. A woman early enough in her pregnancy to not know she is pregnant might actually miscarry from a passing "legal" exposure.
As I initially indicated in this post, the lesson learned is to AVOID RADIOACTIVE TRUCKS!
We got stuck next to this truck during the 7pm July 1st holiday traffic on North bound I-270, after seeing the Radioactive warning placards we pulled out the Geiger Counter and Camera. Lesson learned, AVOID RADIOACTIVE TRUCKS!
The Geiger counter samples over a 30 second moving average, updated every 3 seconds. Notice how the reading on the Geiger Counter keeps moving upwards after we pass the truck; had we stayed next to the radioactive truck the readings would have went even higher.
Pray for the truck driver; the source of gamma rays appeared to be located almost directly behind the driver. One would think that these things would be much more heavily shielded, located further away from the driver, and that such materials would be transported when other people are not on the road.
The truck exited I-270 at Lilac Ave.
After some research, a person next to a truck legally shipping radioactive materials could expect a dosage between 10 mR/Hr to 200 mR/Hr.
According to the government, a pregnant woman should avoid anything greater than 2 mR/Hr. At max, if she stayed next to such a truck for more than 15 minutes should would be required to wear a dosimeter for the rest of her pregnancy.
At 30 minutes she would have to avoid all other exposure for the remainder of the pregnancy.
The younger the baby is in the gestational period, the greater the risk of miscarriage. A woman early enough in her pregnancy to not know she is pregnant might actually miscarry from a passing "legal" exposure.
As I initially indicated in this post, the lesson learned is to AVOID RADIOACTIVE TRUCKS!
We got stuck next to this truck during the 7pm July 1st holiday traffic on North bound I-270, after seeing the Radioactive warning placards we pulled out the Geiger Counter and Camera. Lesson learned, AVOID RADIOACTIVE TRUCKS!
The Geiger counter samples over a 30 second moving average, updated every 3 seconds. Notice how the reading on the Geiger Counter keeps moving upwards after we pass the truck; had we stayed next to the radioactive truck the readings would have went even higher.
Pray for the truck driver; the source of gamma rays appeared to be located almost directly behind the driver. One would think that these things would be much more heavily shielded, located further away from the driver, and that such materials would be transported when other people are not on the road.
The truck exited I-270 at Lilac Ave.
Thursday, July 7, 2011
7/7/11 Thunderstorm Fallout at 12X to 23X Background Radiation
The 5-6pm thunderstorms measured 12 to 23 times greater than background radiation. Samples taken from sunroof of vehicle.
Friday, July 1, 2011
Detail Video Analysis: EPA RadNet Data Censoring Radioactive Fallout in St. Louis
The following three part video gives a step by step walk through of where and how the EPA has been data censoring the RadNet air filtration monitoring of radioactive fallout in Saint Louis Missouri. A summary text and graph which plots the radioactive fallout and highlights the data censoring may be found in this earlier blog post.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)