1. Mackdog

    Mackdog Active Member

    [Admin: debunked at: http://geigercounter.com/california-beach-radiation-fukushima/ and below]

    The recent reports of slightly higher than normal radiation levels on a beach in San Francisco have been investigated by geigercounter.com, and they found that it's naturally occurring radioactive material, like granite. It's demonstrably not from Fukushima, because it has a different signature.
    http://geigercounter.com/california-beach-radiation-fukushima/
    [​IMG]
    This is the spectra from the beach sample

    [​IMG]
    Sample of deck material from contaminated area of Fukushima Prefecture

    [/ex]
    The picture below is a geiger counter measuring the activity in a sample bag of the sand. The radiation level is elevated, but roughly equivalent to some granite counter top material from Brazil.

    ... see http://geigercounter.com/california-beach-radiation-fukushima/
    [/ex]

    [Admin: Debunk above added for promoted post, OP Follows]

    I don't know if this is the proper spot to post this but if not I apologize. Recently I have been hearing that Fukishima radiation is reaching the west coast. I feel it is probably bunk, but I wanted to see if anyone else can help break this down and find out if there is any truth to it. Maybe its because this guy was in the sun and the detector picked up more background radiation that way. Mick I know you live in California so I wanted to see what you had to say.

    http://www.infowars.com/has-fukushimas-radioactive-wave-already-hit-california/


    Of course it's our good friend Alex Jones who is pushing this, and I'm sure there is absolutely no way that he will use this to sell more nascent iodine, he just wants to warn everybody in the world because he cares so much...I'm sure his motives are pure.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 6, 2014
  2. hemi

    hemi Active Member

    Well, for starters, it's 500% above of what's considered the normal background level ("five times the typical amount found in the environment" as it says in the article), not above 'safe' levels.

    Basically, five times of not much is still not much.
     
  3. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Debunked here: Basically it's naturally occurring radioactive material, like granite. It's demonstrably not from Fukushima:
    http://geigercounter.com/california-beach-radiation-fukushima/
     
  4. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    See also current radiation map.
    http://radiationnetwork.com/
    [​IMG]

    One high-ish reading in SF, but low readings as well, and nothing of note for the entire West Coast.
     
  5. Trigger Hippie

    Trigger Hippie Senior Member

  6. Joe

    Joe Senior Member

  7. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    From your second link, some educated guesses at the sources:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Joe

    Joe Senior Member

    could be true or not . As they said in the first report Ground Zero was also considered safe . Who would trust a pathological liar ? You think they tell Californians if Fukishima radiation was to blame ? I doubt it very much . I have no faith in government and you have way too much faith in Government .
     
  9. SR1419

    SR1419 Senior Member


    Except neither Hirsch or Sythe- the ones quoted in the article- are "the Government".
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Joe

    Joe Senior Member

    try again
     
  11. SR1419

    SR1419 Senior Member

    Why? neither Hirsch or Sythe- the quoted in the article- are "the Government".

     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    The topic is the claims of Fukushima radiation reaching the West Coast of the US. Please stay on topic.
     
  13. Thorium is natural and expected , where you have thorium you are going to find radium as it is a decay byproduct of thorium. To find it in a blackened layer of sand is typical since it blackens on contact with the air.
     
    • Like Like x 5
  14. Joe

    Joe Senior Member

    still seems high
     
  15. Without seeing a control test and a properly conducted background screen it is impossible to glean any useful knowledge from the above video. A CPM count is misleading in it doesn't really tell you much except that there are registrations occurring, I would like to see a video showing a background radiation zero, and then an area sweep showing the readings from 1", 2", 4", 8", and 16 Inches. If the readings do not change as expected then I can confidently discount the measurement as operator error. In my opinion an improper test is no test at all.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  16. Joe

    Joe Senior Member

    really ? there were other people as well that tested it including the county health dept . Guess they were all wrong ?
     
  17. Joe, who was there has no relevance unless the individual doing the test did so correctly. Just because someone works for the health dept. does not automatically qualify them to operate a Geiger Counter in a controlled and proper manner. I fail to understand the difficulty or inability of individuals demonstrating their methodology as well as their results unless they know that their methodology will produce false results or they don't know what the proper methodology is which with produce false results.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. JRBids

    JRBids Senior Member

    What does post removed for Reason: PG mean?
     
  19. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Posting Guidelines violation. It was a bit of a rant.
     
  20. Joe

    Joe Senior Member

    Ok Ill buy that :)
     
  21. Something everyone needs to remember is a CPM (counts per minuet) is for Alpha/Beta reading which pose NO external danger. Alpha and Beta Radiation can only travel thru air 3-4 INCHES and is easily blocked by a single sheet of paper or your skin. The only way for alpha or beta radiation to endanger you is if you inhale the particles or eat the material. For an accurate reading to determine a "safe" or acceptable level you need to know the Dose Rate which you will usually find expressed in Micro or Mili Severts /
    Roentgen. The fact that they are focused entirely on CPM while using an SE INternational Inspector which is fully capable of displaying dose rate tell me that this individual understand neither the methodology of testing or the basic tenants of radiation. I would be the first one to defend a properly conducted test.
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Informative Informative x 1
  22. Joe

    Joe Senior Member

    You seem to know a bit about the subject ? Is it your field ?
     
  23. It is one of my areas of specialty in the Fire Service. I am Weapons of Mass Destruction Radiological/Nuclear Instructor
     
    • Like Like x 1
  24. Cairenn

    Cairenn Senior Member

    • Like Like x 1
  25. My Favorite Quote :
    As you can see in this article when talking about radiation levels and exposure they refer to mRem per hour not counts per minuet . My second favorite quote :
    That comes from the Health Department
     
  26. solrey

    solrey Senior Member

    I attended a cookout in late summer 2012 with a couple of researchers who tested Pacific albacore for radionuclides from Fukushima. One of them, Jason, was the host who is a fisheries researcher and the other, Delvan, was a PhD student in radiation health physics. Jason grilled up some of the tuna he caught for the research which was served to everyone including his family. I spoke at length to Delvan about radiation in general and what they found in their research. While they did find some cesium from Fukushima it was barely detectable. We also talked about radiation in general and how the radionuclides from Fukushima are in such minute quantities that they are not detectable above background rates even with the best geiger counters. I also confirmed how to properly test samples over time to compare against radon decay rates. Those people on youtube with their geiger counters just flat out don't know what they're doing.

    To put it into perspective, one banana contains a radiation dose of about 0.01 millirem due to potassium 40, while one pound of the highest dose tuna they tested was at 0.0007 millirem. It would take just under 15 pounds of that tuna to equal the radiation dose of one banana.

    http://oregonstate.edu/ua/ncs/archi...ly-detectable-fingerprints-fukushima-disaster

    http://www.triplicate.com/News/Local-News/Tuna-safe-despite-Japan-radiation-leak-researchers-say

    http://ne.oregonstate.edu/sites/ne.oregonstate.edu/files/fall_neutron_online.pdf
     
    • Like Like x 1
  27. M Bornong

    M Bornong Senior Member

    This story was reprinted in my local newspaper, this morning. http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/santacruz/ci_24880766/state-rebuffs-radiation-concerns-at-beach

     
  28. Mackdog

    Mackdog Active Member

    The discovery channel did a short piece on the Fukashima radiation. What scares me is all of the CT'ers commenting and how many likes/thumbs up they got. How dumb have these people gotten?

     
  29. Chew

    Chew Senior Member

    Every time they provide a link to how dire the situation is it is always to infowars, naturalnews, or enenews.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  30. Defacto

    Defacto New Member

    I've begun to view this kind of thing not so much as a measure of how dumb people are but rather as a barometer of what people want to hear, want to buy into and want to believe.

    Fear has really become entertainment/addiction. (i.e. "Fear Porn" )
     
    • Like Like x 3
  31. RFMarine

    RFMarine Member

    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 22, 2014
    • Useful Useful x 1
  32. Joe

    Joe Senior Member

    Are you saying that we shouldnt worry about Fukishima at all ? or Chernobyl ? Maybe this is all hype but Im sure its not over quite yet .
     
  33. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

    You can worry about it if you want, go over there and help the clean up, or donate money or materials. You shouldn't worry about it directly affecting your local environment though.
     
  34. Chew

    Chew Senior Member

    The worst-case plume study predicts a maximum concentration of 30 Bq/m³ of Cs-137 should be arriving off the west coast of the US about now. To figure out what that will do to people we can ask the people living by the Baltic Sea what 30 Bq/m³ did to them. But we'll have to wait 16 years to ask them because right now the level in the Baltic Sea is at 45 Bq/m³.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  35. Chew

    Chew Senior Member

    The libertarian in me wants the price of seafood to drop because I love seafood but the tree-hugging hippie in me doesn't want the fishermen to lose income.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  36. Joe

    Joe Senior Member

    I not worried about my local environment over this just Japans .
     
  37. Joe

    Joe Senior Member

    I do plenty as it is . Spent a day off packing food for Haiti and donated a good sum of money . Regardless of what you might think I am very charitable . https://www.facebook.com/pages/Missionary-Flights-International/49515122019
     
  38. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

    That's good, but my point is it's really only something to be concerned about if you are involved with that community in some way, or if the issue of radioactive fallout anywhere in the world is something you've devoted your life to helping with.
    I guess it's something to be concerned about in the sense of being concerned about other's problems, but much less so in that those problems might become ours. (barring some unforeseen escalation in the situation that is)
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  39. Mackdog

    Mackdog Active Member

    Well I doubt we have to worry about Chernobyl, unless you are in Ukraine where it happened...it was in 1986. But I just think that people are over reacting again. If the radiation was that bad you could take a radiation detector out to any spot on the beach and get a high reading. California has probably 1,000 miles of coastline so if people want to 'expose the truth' about the radiation then they should go up and down the whole coast and take readings and then tell us all about it on the internet or whatever. The only thing, IMO, that we have to worry about with Fukishima is the fish that migrate through the waters off the east coast of japan and then travel here to be caught in fishermans nets...other than that I am not worried.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  40. Joe

    Joe Senior Member