Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

*Vanity* Fukushima Radiation likely to arrive on West Coast next month.
me | March 9, 2014 | Bushwon

Posted on 03/09/2014 6:32:40 PM PDT by bushwon

Drudge posted an article (from a banned source) which stated that very low levels of Fukushima radiation will likely reach the West Coast next month.

Incredibly, the article states that there is no federal agency which currently samples Pacific Coast seawater for radiation.

I find it disturbing that:

1. There is money being spent for many frivolous activities, yet three is no monitoring for radiation on the West Coast?

2. The EPA is monitoring puddles on people's private property, yet there is no monitoring of radiation on the West Coast!


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Food; Health/Medicine; Science
KEYWORDS: fukushima; geigercounter; halflife; ohnoez; radiation; tinfoil; westcoast
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-136 next last
Thoughts?

In all seriousness, does anyone have a recommendation for an accurate, reliable, affordable Geiger Counter?

1 posted on 03/09/2014 6:32:40 PM PDT by bushwon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bushwon

Geiger Counter will do exactly what for you?


2 posted on 03/09/2014 6:34:08 PM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Test water near the beach? If I I catch crab, scallops, salmon, etc. test it. If government is not testing, perhaps I should.


3 posted on 03/09/2014 6:38:30 PM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

“1. There is money being spent for many frivolous activities, yet three is no monitoring for radiation on the West Coast?

2. The EPA is monitoring puddles on people’s private property, yet there is no monitoring of radiation on the West Coast!”

How do you know there is no monitoring?


4 posted on 03/09/2014 6:38:59 PM PDT by TexasGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

Do you know why they use water to cool nuclear reactors ?


5 posted on 03/09/2014 6:39:36 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I just messed up my tagline. Sorry for the inconvenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

How much ya’ wanna spend?

This might be more of what you would like to have...

http://www.seintl.com/radiationalert/rad_60.html

It is good for stand alone conditions and for tracking personal dose.


6 posted on 03/09/2014 6:40:42 PM PDT by EBH ( The Day of the Patriot has arrived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

In the realm of things to worry over, this ranks around dragons and aliens.


7 posted on 03/09/2014 6:40:48 PM PDT by EEGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

Because it is fairly good conductor of heat and readily available?


8 posted on 03/09/2014 6:41:39 PM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

Because it works better than dirt?


9 posted on 03/09/2014 6:41:41 PM PDT by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

I’m pretty sure the answer to that is no.


10 posted on 03/09/2014 6:41:48 PM PDT by EEGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

Water is one of the things they talk about using to shield crews from radiation during long space voyages.


11 posted on 03/09/2014 6:42:19 PM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

I highly doubt the lo levels of radiation that “arrives” will be of any consequence due to dissipation. However, if you’re worried, don’t go to the beach and if you do, stay out of the water.

One thing you won’t be able to avoid is any radiation that has been swept up into the atmosphere and precipitates down onto you. However, that has been and issue since the radiation spread into the Pacific long ago.

At our location, odds are you’d find nothing more than normal background radiation levels if you have a Geiger Counter, but I suppose I could be wrong.


12 posted on 03/09/2014 6:42:35 PM PDT by Pox (Good Night. I expect more respect tomorrow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

Serious question; how many crabs, scallops and salmon have you caught on the west coast?


13 posted on 03/09/2014 6:43:10 PM PDT by jazusamo ([Obama] A Truly Great Phony -- Thomas Sowell http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3058949/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bushwon
Thoughts:




14 posted on 03/09/2014 6:43:49 PM PDT by arderkrag (An Unreconstructed Georgian, STANDING WITH RAND.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasGator

The article (link on Drudge) stated that no federal agency currently samples Pacific seawater for radiation.


15 posted on 03/09/2014 6:44:07 PM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: EEGator

Not if you live on the beach.


16 posted on 03/09/2014 6:44:50 PM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Some crab, plenty of Salmon.


17 posted on 03/09/2014 6:46:15 PM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: bushwon
Incredibly, the article states that there is no federal agency which currently samples Pacific Coast seawater for radiation.

Maybe no federal agency samples seawater but lots of private companies, universities (e.g. University of Washington) and even national laboratories partially funded by the federal government (e.g. PNNL) do from time to time. Certainly they'll be out there in the coming months.

18 posted on 03/09/2014 6:46:42 PM PDT by steve86 (Some things aren't really true but you wouldn't be half surprised if they were.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

Fukushima radiation is an issue to be sure.

But compared to all the radiation we unleashed in the 40’s,50’s and 60’s I wonder if its not just “more of the same”

http://fukushima-diary.com/

The above often gets way more detailed than I need/want but it sure does track this issue without letting up.


19 posted on 03/09/2014 6:47:03 PM PDT by wonkowasright (Wonko from outside the asylum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EBH

Thanks for the information. I appreciate it.


20 posted on 03/09/2014 6:47:55 PM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: bushwon
I want you to consider all the nuclear testing that has happened in the Pacific. PLEASE, enough with the OH NOES! OMG! EVERYBODY PANIC! stuff.


21 posted on 03/09/2014 6:50:26 PM PDT by Rodamala
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

In that case, Sharknado.


22 posted on 03/09/2014 6:50:40 PM PDT by EEGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: wonkowasright
But compared to all the radiation we unleashed in the 40’s,50’s and 60’s I wonder if its not just “more of the same”

Yeah, having grown up adjacent to Hanford in the 50s and 60s and living here to this day, I'm having trouble getting that worked up about it.

23 posted on 03/09/2014 6:51:19 PM PDT by steve86 (Some things aren't really true but you wouldn't be half surprised if they were.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: steve86

I’m probably immune by now.


24 posted on 03/09/2014 6:52:44 PM PDT by steve86 (Some things aren't really true but you wouldn't be half surprised if they were.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

“The article (link on Drudge) stated that no federal agency currently samples Pacific seawater for radiation.”

Read this ...

http://www.epa.gov/japan2011/index.html


25 posted on 03/09/2014 6:54:04 PM PDT by TexasGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: wonkowasright

Thanks for the links. I can’t compare with the 40s 50s, 60s.

They did go from testing in the Pacific in the 40s to testing underground....

No idea about radiation amounts from those tests compared to Fukushima, but 3 reactors blew up, still leaking.

I just would feel better if I can do some baseline tests and then continue to test in future....I would like to test stuff I catch.


26 posted on 03/09/2014 6:54:30 PM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: steve86

Good point.


27 posted on 03/09/2014 6:55:56 PM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

Ya. Thank blogger btw has been at it since day one almost.

IMHO Fukushima is as bad or worse than Chernobyl but for some reason its downplayed. Maybe its because the company that makes the reactors owns a good bit of US press too.


28 posted on 03/09/2014 6:56:48 PM PDT by wonkowasright (Wonko from outside the asylum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: bushwon
If you're worried about that, don't ever get in an airplane or go to Denver.

It will be so diluted by the time it gets here it won't be 10% of having an X-ray.

29 posted on 03/09/2014 6:57:02 PM PDT by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

Don’t need a geiger counter. If it’s preceded by a squad of giant cephalopods (squid) you can bet it is imminent...


30 posted on 03/09/2014 6:57:08 PM PDT by Texicanus (Texas, it's a whole 'nother country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasGator

Thanks, I did. That is the article that prompted me to post this. I could not do a USA post on FR.


31 posted on 03/09/2014 6:57:29 PM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

“I just would feel better if I can do some baseline tests and then continue to test in future....I would like to test stuff I catch.”

Even during the worst discharges, it was barely detectable in the water offshore from Japan. Imagine the zillions of gallons of seawater dilution before reaching our coast.


32 posted on 03/09/2014 6:57:34 PM PDT by TexasGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: wonkowasright; bushwon
But compared to all the radiation we unleashed in the 40’s,50’s and 60’s I wonder if its not just “more of the same”

You might find this interesting. After watching this (about 20 minutes and TURN UP THE SOUND), you'll wonder why the entire west coast of the US doesn't glow in the dark.

A Time-Lapse Map of Every Nuclear Explosion Since 1945

Here's the same thing at 3X speed.

A Time-Lapse Map of Every Nuclear Explosion Since 1945 - 3 Times Faster

33 posted on 03/09/2014 6:58:04 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I just messed up my tagline. Sorry for the inconvenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: bushwon
I use a Mazur-PRM 8000. Its $450.08 on Amazon with Prime. They have a PRM-9000 but its $562.00. I know they are pricey but the 8000 is more rugged albeit not as sensitive as the 9000. They both are good professional grade instruments. You probably will need the accessory cord to download the data that they can log. Follow the comments for getting and setting up the software, its free. Download the user manual and set it up in a 3 ring binder to get used to using the Mazur. Do your own study on units and exposure limits so you don't get prematurely excited.

I am curious by nature and always wanted one. Its sort of a hobby. Oh btw you don't have to wait till next month. The videos regarding some beaches in CA seem to be accurate. Something is here. The source is unclear insomuch as there is a nuclear waste the dump south of the Farralone Islands.

http://www.amazon.com/Mazur-Instruments-PRM-8000-Handheld-Radiation/dp/B005TDE3X8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1394415934&sr=8-1&keywords=prm+8000

http://www.amazon.com/Mazur-Instruments-PRM-USB-Geiger-Counter/dp/B006T6T398/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&qid=1394416129&sr=8-9&keywords=prm+8000

34 posted on 03/09/2014 6:59:01 PM PDT by Polynikes (What would Walt Kowalski do. In the meantime "GET OFF MY LAWN")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

OR and WA fish and game regularly check for shellfish toxins and close seasons if toxins are found.

I may be wrong but I would think they’d be checking for elevated radiation levels as well with all the fuss about Fukushima.


35 posted on 03/09/2014 6:59:32 PM PDT by jazusamo ([Obama] A Truly Great Phony -- Thomas Sowell http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3058949/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: wonkowasright

I guess time will tell regarding Fukushima and its comparison to Chernobyl—seems Fukushima is not finished leaking....

Interesting comment about the reactors, and my husband, who has PhD in science field, feels we should be more concerned than is being reported.


36 posted on 03/09/2014 7:03:45 PM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Polynikes

Thanks so much for the links. This is exactly the information I am seeking. We have talked about getting one for at least a year, and think now is as good a time as any—Yes, plan to do study...would like to get baseline readings and see how they change over time.


37 posted on 03/09/2014 7:07:27 PM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Rodamala

thanks. clever.


38 posted on 03/09/2014 7:08:02 PM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

“The article (link on Drudge) stated that no federal agency currently samples Pacific seawater for radiation.”

The article also states several state agencies do and also says the studies predict essentially minimal detectable radiation will reach our coast.


39 posted on 03/09/2014 7:08:16 PM PDT by TexasGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

I’m at over 9,000 feet on the Rockies and probably get much more natural radiation than you’ll get there.


40 posted on 03/09/2014 7:09:19 PM PDT by familyop (We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of corruption smelled around the planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasGator

True, I read the article, but I don’t have property in Cali or Oregon, so I am still concerned. Also, it states models predict....If you live on the coast and consume substantial ocean life, then probably more concerned than someone in other areas of the country.


41 posted on 03/09/2014 7:16:32 PM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

The key phrase is “very low levels”. I was sort of mildly concerned about this since I live in Oregon, and read some of the sky is falling articles that are out there about it. I asked my cousin and my number 2 son about what they are hearing. Cousin is a former Navy Nuke and works in the industry. Son is a current Navy Nuke training on a reactor in New York. Neither of them are particularly concerned about the levels of radiation we are likely to see.


42 posted on 03/09/2014 7:16:42 PM PDT by Busywhiskers ("Once you have wrestled, everything else in life is easy" -Dan Gable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Busywhiskers

Thanks, that is helpful and good to hear!


43 posted on 03/09/2014 7:18:13 PM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Pox

The problem is, that a detector one could reasonably afford isn’t going to detect this.


44 posted on 03/09/2014 7:21:50 PM PDT by The Antiyuppie ("When small men cast long shadows, then it is very late in the day.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: EEGator; Red Badger; AceMineral; Aevery_Freeman; a fool in paradise; Alex Murphy; Altariel; ...
In that case, Sharknado.

You rang???


45 posted on 03/09/2014 7:25:08 PM PDT by null and void ( Obama is Law-Less because Republican "leaders" are BALL-LESS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: The Antiyuppie

Well, I guess depends on the definition of afford. But I agree, that it would be pointless to get one that does not accurately measure the Cesium 134, 137 and iodine 131.

I will check and see if there is any private monitoring being done in my area too.


46 posted on 03/09/2014 7:26:26 PM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: null and void
You rang???


47 posted on 03/09/2014 7:30:21 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (The Texas judge's decision was to pave the way for same sex divorce for two Massachusetts women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

Gov Brown will see that the legislature bans it from reaching the shore.


48 posted on 03/09/2014 7:31:54 PM PDT by ThePatriotsFlag ("There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide." - Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

Yep, this is a conservative site, but note how quickly so many call for government action at such a time as this. Gonna have to go looking for nuclear regulation in the Constitution.


49 posted on 03/09/2014 7:36:03 PM PDT by lurk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

This inane Fukishima radiation panic amuses me to no end. There is about 352,670,000,000,000,000,000 gallons of water in the world’s oceans. Let’s conservatively just take the water attributed to the Pacific ocean. That is 187,000,000,000,000,000,000 gallons. About 300,000 tons, or 72,000,000 gallons, of contaminated water (most of it very low level radioactive) were released by Fukushima. If you do the math, that is one part in 2.6 billion. In reality, it is much much smaller than that, because only a tiny amount of radioactive particles were in that water.


50 posted on 03/09/2014 7:37:24 PM PDT by Scutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-136 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson