Monday, December 5, 2011

European Iodine 131 IZOTOP Blame Game Does Not Explain Airborne Fission Products

The airborne detections of Cs-134, Ru-103, Co-60, and Ce-144 are NOT explained by the IZOTOP Iodine 131 release.

The IAEA has blamed the Institute of Isotopes Co., Ltd (IZOTOP) for the recent European Iodine 131 detections; IZOTOP claims that they could not have been the sole source for the Iodine 131.

The publicly available data tends to support IZOTOP's position. A report from the Hungarian National Atomic Energy Agency verifies that IZOTOP was producing Iodine 131 by adding a neutron to Tellurium. That process would not create the fission products detected, nor would it explain the presence of Cobalt-60.

The detections of Cs-134, Ru-103,and Ce-144 indicate a high temperature fission process. Since these are fission products, the presence of Iodine 131, Te-132, I-132, Cs-137 would also be expected in the airborne detections. The 39 day half life of Ru-103 and its AIRBORNE detection makes an APRIL 2011 direct Fukushima release source questionable. An ongoing Fukushima release would be plausible, but it would also be readily directionally attributable.

One would expect IZOTOP's manufacturing process to avoid the creation of these extra fission elements as they would be expensive to remove from the medical Iodine 131 they were creating (not to mention the disposal costs). Moreover, the additional detected fission elements are not volotiale at room temperature like Iodine 131. Those other radioactive materials would have had to come from a high temperature source in order to be volatilized and found airborne. There is much more going on with the European Iodine 131 detections than has been let on by the authorities; the reasons why one can only guess at.

The POTRBLOG SWAG has been that the cosmogenic spallation of high atomic weight Fukushima fallout is a possible source of such distributed fallout. Much like the European fallout detection, it would be very difficult to pinpoint a specific point-source location for such fallout. Unfortunately we lack the tools and budget to quantify the likelihood of such a cosmogenic spallation event; HOWEVER, we find it very interesting that early on during the event someone in authority did let slip to the British media that a cosmogenic event was responsible.

see our previous video for more info


  1. Ms. X,

    Are you referring to the picture in the of the Tarantula Nebula in the Daily Mail? The first time I read the article I thought that the information from NASA was totally unrelated - like an error laying out the newspaper.

  2. Aaron Datesman,
    It would have to be a two stage error in that case
    (1) Include the Nasa photographs
    (2) Incorporate the information from the photographs into the story.

    The story actually says "producing intense radiation and powerful winds, believed to be the cause for the detection in the atmosphere" That inclusion as the 2nd sentence of the I-131 story would tend to preclude a "lay out error"

    It looks more like someone the reporter trusted as a source (hence the top placement in the story) gave them a clue the event was linked to radiation from space, and the Daily Mail ran with what ever recent space radiation story/photo they had to support it.

    In someways it is not unlike the clue that was given out that the O-rings were the cause of the 1st space shuttle disaster.

  3. Ms. X -

    I agree. It's wicked strange, though. A good catch on your part.

    I know about the Challenger disaster, Feynman's appendix to the Tower Commission Report, and the O-rings, but I don't know about the clue you refer to. (I was young then.) Can you enlighten me?

  4. Aaron Datesman,

    From memory; the key people "in the loop" were aware that the SRB o-rings were a high risk item because of the low temperatures, and thusly refused to give a go to the launch. They were signature over ridden via fax machine out of Huntsville.

    One of the people "in the loop" dropped a hint to one of the investigators, via friendly banter. He casually mentioned to the investigator that his lawn mower was leaking fuel earlier in the cold morning because of stiff o-rings, and in passing mused if something similar had happened to the shuttle. The investigator took it from there; the investigator was unaware that he was receiving subtle but poignant inside information.