High concentrations of plutonium from the soil of rice field 50 km from Fukushima Plant

[flamingdem]

http://jbpress.ismedia.jp/articles/-/7890?page=2


* Someone did private testing and this is being reported in Japan Business Press today:

High concentrations of plutonium from the soil of rice field 50 km or more distant primary, Japan Business Press, May 14, 2011:

Google Translation


Additionally, a certain food manufacturing company conducted a survey by themselves. In a rice field is more than 50kms away from the Fukushima power plant, it was found that there was very high radiation that is very different to what the government released.

High density plutonium is in the rice field that was mentioned previously.

According to this food manufacturing company, they currently don’t announce these results due to the large influence* that this rice field has high concentration of plutonium.

* Note: It is not mentioned what the influence is but it implies they do not currently release the information as it may have an impact on the media/public.

[FBaggins]

1. No report on what "high" means? n/t

[jpak]

7. Anything above 0 Bq is "high" with Pu

yup

[FBaggins]

8. Nonsense.

And certainly not in Japan.

[jpak]

11. clue: Pu contamination is not safe at any level

try again

[FBaggins]

13. Clue: It doesn't matter whether or not you think it's safe...

...there's tons and tons of the stuff all over the globe.

Particularly in Japan. The stuff does have a half-life in the tens of thousands of years you know?

The last time plutonium was detected near Fukushima, the "high" levels weren't distinguishable from the background levels already found all around the country. I'm merely trying to find out whether this event is any different.

[Someguyinjapan]

14. It's not if we "think" plutonium is safe or not...

My understanding is it isn't. Even in small amounts. But I may be mistaken, so can you-as a physicist-provide me with conclusive evidence to the contrary? Since you-as a physicist-would know better than most which source material I could consult regarding the risks and dangers of plutonium, or if I am wrong, kindly direct me to whatever academic journals you recommend.

[FBaggins]

15. The stuff ISN'T "safe", but I think you're missing the point.

It isn't an issue of how relatively "safe" or "dangerous" the stuff is. If fire ants are dangerous and you have 1,000 of them in your home... then you hear about a jar breaking down the street with some undetermined number of fire ants in it...

...what value would there be in seeing a fire ant in your home? You wouldn't know whether it came from the broken jar or was in the home already.

A similar case exists here. Japan has more plutonium already in the environment than most of the world (you may remember a couple bombs?). It isn't a good thing or "safe", but it is reality. Now when someone detects plutonium in the soil... all I'm asking is whether the concentration is high enough to even know whether it came from Fukushima. We can be certain that there has been SOME release of plutonium over the last couple months... the question is how much.

[Someguyinjapan]

16. Specific answer please.

Comparing fire ants to plutonium is a useless analogy. Be that as it may...

I would like to know exactly how much plutonium a human needs to be exposed to in order for it to consitute a health risk. What is the amount? You-as a physicist-should be able to answer that question. So what is it? A gram? A microgram? A nanogram?

Once again, Bilbo: how much plutonium exposure-based on your knowledge as a physicist-constitutes a health hazard for humans? I require specific amounts, or references I can determine this for myself.

[FBaggins]

19. There is no "specific answer"

I would like to know exactly how much plutonium a human needs to be exposed to in order for it to consitute a health risk. What is the amount?

There isn't an exact amount. You've probably read posts claiming that one microgram is a fatal dose. That's just so much nonsense. The problem is that even such a tiny amount CAN be a health risk with just the wrong combination of events. Is it ingested? Inhalled? or just exposed to the skin?

The amount that's entirely "safe" is "zero".

Again, this is entirely beside the point. "Zero" isn't an option. Japan was shafted with this stuff decades ago. I'm trying to find out whether this recent claim demonstrates that Fukushima has added to the problem in a measurable way. You can claim that the analogy is useless, but you're simply wrong. We can easily demonstrate that Plutonium is dangerouse stuff... AND that the amount detected is bad news... BUT it isn't relevant to the current discussion if the stuff that was detected has been sitting there since the mid-40s.

I require specific amounts, or references I can determine this for myself.

Knock yourself out. :)

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/doe/lanl/pubs/00818013.pdf
http://library.lanl.gov/cgi-bin/getfile?00326640.pdf

[jpak]

18. 239-Pu is not natural

it's presence is due to environmental release from nuclear facilities

and it is not good

yup

[FBaggins]

20. Wrong yet again.

239-Pu has a half-life of ~2400 years not "tens of thousands of years"

It's 24,000 years actually.

and it is not natural

So? That doesn't mean that it isn't part of the environment now. The question isn't whether it belongs in that field (it doesn't)... the question is whether (and to what extent) it got there due to Fukushima.

[FBaggins]

21. Did you want me to edit out my response for you as well?

Maybe nobody else noticed?

But it's still wrong unless you can spin "nuclear facilities" to include nuclear bombs (the primary source of plutonium contamination in Japan).

Need to get your act together before DU updates to the version that will track all of your posting changes. Then you can't hide by editing the embarassment away after getting caught. :)

[snagglepuss]

2. So what is the upshot? I thought one ounce of plutonium was enough

to kill everyone on Earth.

[kristopher]

3. That's a misstatement of an illustrative example

The original is that one pound of plutonium is enough to cause cancer in every human IF, repeat IF it were distributed equally.

The point is to demonstrate the extreme effects that minute amounts can have if inhaled or ingested, it isn't meant to be taken literally.

[snagglepuss]

4. Thank you for the clarification. nt

[caraher]

6. Yet it gets repeated without these caveats

To me it's similar to using the natural radioactivity of bananas for comparison. Both can be illustrative examples within their respective limits, but frequently get stretched beyond that either to exaggerate or minimize a threat.

[SpoonFed]

17. Sorry not yet

The nuke industry is still perfecting the delivery mechanisms so that everyone gets their fair share. Japan may have to build 12 units in a row on a fault line for this to come to poisonous fruition

[CoffeeCat]

5. I am happy to see that outside sources...

...are taking their own readings of the soil.

The cover up by TEPCO is criminal. It is so disgusting, not to mention stupid as hell.

How long do they think they can cover up this catastrophe?

These people are so damn short sighted and f'n selfish. Yay, let's stick with saving face
operating under some kind of cultural pride paradigm that will cause untold suffering and
death. Someone needs to tell these complete fools to get their heads out of their asses.

I'm beyond angry.

[flamingdem]

9. I think this that this will break, or is breaking as a major scandal

Once the real readings become available from independent sources the government will be held accountable.

Saving face will be the least of their worries then!

[CoffeeCat]

10. This is what I am waiting for flamingdem...

...for the public to discover the catastrophe that Fukushima is; and to also understand the
dangerous risks we in the United States face due to exposure to the radioactive isotopes.

When does the truth come out and how?

The EPA stopped testing milk, ground water, tap water and other produce after those initial
alarming readings were found. They said that there was no need, and they would take more
readings in three months. I guess we have two months to go! In the meantime, they've
probably changed their "dangerous levels" guidelines. So high and dangerous readings may
be once again waved off.

I'd like to get a Geiger counter, but they are pretty pricey.

I just wish the breaking point would happen--where it is no longer possible to hide this disaster and
they danger that we are in.

Too bad that radiation is invisible. We desperately need the a situation like we had with the BP spill,
where there is a camera down in the ocean, filming the steady release of this poison. Until something
like that happens, they can lie all they want.

I guess we rely on Physicians for Social Responsibility, Arne Gunderson, average citizens with Geiger
Counters and other research bodies/scientists who dare to come forward and ring the alarm bells.

This really is nonsense.

[flamingdem]

12. UC Berkeley labs is still testing luckily

You can write on their blog and encourage them to keep going. As science people they are pretty good at answering questions but also in the "no harm to human health" camp for the most part. Public support is needed or they'll quit too! The cesium is dropping slightly in homogenized milk but there was a new release last week and who knows what the melts will lead to, we need to know, Hillary Clinton cut some kind of deal when she went to Japan to supress this information, right after that EPA announced they will only test quarterly, so irresponsible - we pay them to know things that effect our health.

http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/UCBAirSampling


http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/node/2174