Tuesday, July 14, 2015

JAPAN BUSTED MANIPULATING RADIATION READINGS

In Japan they have been caught placing lead backup batteries near the radiation sensors to shield them, placing the monitoring equipment high off the ground, only decontaminating an area around monitoring stations, plus altering the monitoring equipment so it shows much lower readings. 

 A lot of evidence points to Government run monitoring 

systems in Japan, USA, Canada, and Europe being 

manipulated to protect the Nuclear industry. 

High detections are explained away by equipment 

malfunctions, or they just turn the monitoring equipment 

off during an event.

WHILE JAPAN AND TEPCO HAVE ADMITTED TO SOME OF THESE CHARGES, INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISTS HAVE UNCOVERED MOUNTAINS OF EVIDENCE THAT JAPAN HAS DECIDED NOT TO DO ANYTHING BEYOND MAKE A SHOW OF TRYING TO STOP THE CONTAMINATION OF OUR PLANET.
QUITE FRANKLY, THEY SIMPLY PUT THEIR ECONOMY ABOVE HUMAN LIFE.

RECENT LIVE CAM VIDEOS THERE SHOW THEY ARE BURNING CONTAMINATED DEBRIS OFFSHORE IN THE DEAD OF NIGHT TO AVOID THE HIGHER COST OF DISPOSING OF IT PROPERLY. 

AND THIS LIVE CAM SHOT...

WE KNOW FROM THE RECENT WILDFIRES NEAR CHERNOBYL THAT BURNING RELEASES AN INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF RADIOACTIVITY INTO OUR ATMOSPHERE, AND CONTAMINATES SOIL, CROPS, WATER, AND HUMANS ANEW AS THE ASH SETTLES EVERYWHERE.

JAPAN HAS HAD HELP COVERING UP THE TRUE EFFECTS ITS CONTINUAL LEAKAGES ARE HAVING ON OUR ENVIRONMENT, BUT THINGS ARE BEGINNING TO BE UNCOVERED, AND MAYBE SOON THE WORLD WILL BE ABLE TO SEE ENOUGH TRUTH TO DEMAND THE CLEANUP, THE REAL EFFORT TO CONTAIN THE RADIATION AND STOP ALL THE LEAKS, AND FIND THE "MISSING" REACTOR CORES ALL BE TAKEN AWAY FROM JAPAN AND HANDED TO THOSE WHO CAN AND WILL PUT AN END TO THE FUKUSHIMA NIGHTMARE.


“It’s very, very difficult to interpret radiation levels detected from Fukushima and translate them into standards. It’s a nightmare,” said Arjun Makhijani, an electrical and nuclear engineer and president of the Takoma Park, Maryland–based Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, in a phone interview.
And that’s not a coincidence, said Vanier College’s Gordon Edwards. “To me, it’s a way of obscuring the impacts. It’s a smoke screen.”
Dale Dewar agrees. “The government always downgrades the results. They want to soft-pedal the extent of the accident because it will threaten our own nuclear industry,” said Dewar, a family physician and the executive director of Canadian antinuclear group Physicians for Global Survival.
One of the highest post-Fukushima radiation readings in North America came on March 27 in rainwater in Boise, Idaho. It contained 14.4 becquerels of iodine-131 per litre—130 times the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s maximum contamination level of 0.11 becquerels per litre.
EPA officials said in media reports that the high levels didn’t pose a health threat. For the agency to sound an alarm, it says, a person would have to exceed its maximum level for an entire year, drinking two litres of the contaminated water each day.
But nobody seemed to investigate how long the rainwater in Boise remained radioactive. Inexplicably, the EPA stopped monitoring Boise’s rainwater after the extremely high reading on March 27. 
The agency’s only other reading for the city was on March 22.
That day, the iodine-131 level hit nine becquerels per litre.
In fact, if the two readings are averaged out and stayed just as elevated over the entire six-day period from March 22 to 27, a person drinking the Boise rainwater during this time would have exceeded the EPA’s annual ceiling by 75 percent.
In B.C.’s Lower Mainland, iodine-131 in the rainwater hit almost the same level as in Boise. It also seems to have exceeded the EPA’s ceiling.
On March 19, the iodine-131 level in rainwater in Burnaby suddenly spiked from zero to nine becquerels per litre. The next day, it rose even further, to 13, according to data collected and released by Krzysztof Starosta, an associate professor of chemistry at SFU, and others.
The iodine-131 levels remained well above the background level (which is close to zero) for 12 days.
The average level of radioactive iodine was seven becquerels per litre over the 12 days. That means a person drinking two litres of the rainwater per day would have consumed 166 becquerels of iodine-131 during that period.
That’s more than double the maximum amount that the EPA says a person can drink in an entire year, which is 81 becquerels.
Starosta did not respond to phone and email messages seeking comment.
Starosta issued a statement on March 28 saying the levels were safe because they were lower than levels detected after the Chernobyl disaster.
AND AS WE HAVE SEEN, CHERNOBYL IS STILL KILLING PEOPLE AND CAUSING HORRIFIC BIRTH DEFECTS, NOR DOES IT MATTER THAN AN INTERNATIONAL GROUP OF SCIENTISTS HAVE WARNED OVER AND OVER AGAIN THAT FUKUSHIMA IS FAR WORSE THAN CHERNOBYL!

WHATEVER IT TAKES, AND I DO MEAN WHATEVER, THAT IS WHAT MUST BE DONE!
THE FOLLOWING SHOWS HOW FAR JAPAN AND ITS NUCLEAR ENERGY PROPONENTS ACROSS THE GLOBE ARE WILLING TO GO SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE OUT THE EXPENSE TO SHUT DOWN THE CRUMBLING, LEAKING NUCLEAR INSTALLATIONS THEY IMPOSED ON HUMANITY AND GET RID OF THEIR ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE.


THEY WILL SACRIFICE HUMAN LIFE AND HEALTH, THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT AND EVERY BIT OF LIFE IN IT NOT TO BE OUT THE MONETARY EXPENSE TO JUST RID THE WORLD OF THEIR KILLING MACHINES.
THEY CREATED A MONSTER AND THEN IT ESCAPED THEM!



A study by several researchers, including Health Canada [the department of the government of Canada with responsibility for national public health] monitoring specialist Ian Hoffman, reveals a sharp spike in radiation over southwest B.C. on March 20, 2011.

WHAT WE AREN'T TOLD WOULD FILL VOLUMES!
FOR EXAMPLE, THE CONFUSING NUMBERS, RENDERED IN SO MANY TERMS IT MAKES ONE'S HEAD EXPLODE!
WHICH READING MEANS WHAT?
WHY NOT USE ONE INTERNATIONAL VALUE FOR RADIATION LEVELS AND NOT GO BY EVER-GROWING "BACKGROUND RADIATION" LEVELS?
EVERY BOMB DROPPED, EVERY "NUCLEAR TEST", EVERY RADIOACTIVE LEAK HAS ELEVATED THAT DAMNED "BACKGROUND LEVEL", AND HOW DOES "AVERAGE CITIZEN" KNOW IF WHAT WE'RE TOLD IS FACTUAL?
AN EXAMPLE:


"All monitoring systems are subject to malfunctions at times. Two or more monitoring stations in close proximity  indicating an increase in background level is statistically an indication of a genuine event.

Various live radiation monitoring station networks operate Geiger Counters or other detection equipment, that can have different sensitivities. 

Meaning, two  different Geiger counter models using different Geiger counter tubes placed at the same location would show different counts per minute (CPM).  

One could show 12 cpm, while an another 120 cpm.  

If they used a scintillator for detection purposes, which is even a more sensitive Gamma radiation detector, it could be in the thousands of counts per minute. 

Monitoring station counts per minute measurement all depends on the type of detection equipment the monitoring station is using.

uSv/hr or uRem/hr measurements are a way of defining human exposure dose rates independent of Counts Per Minute (CPM) equipment sensitivities.

You can only compare  detections of a  monitoring station against it's average background for that location.
 If it usually averaged around 12 cpm, 0.10 uSv/hr or 10uRem/hr at that particular location, this would be considered the average background level at that location.

 It may not be unusual to get a very brief detection three times this. If it stayed 3x or more background for any length of time, then something more serious is possibly happening."

HOW EASY TO MANIPULATE DATA WHEN CERTAIN DEVICES ARE USED!
HOW CONFUSING WHEN READINGS ARE GIVEN IN ONE TERMINOLOGY FROM ONE STATION AND ANOTHER TERMINOLOGY FROM ANOTHER STATION!

In 2011, investigative journalist Alex Roslin reported in the Georgia Straight that a Health Canada monitoring station in Sidney had detected radioactive iodine-131 levels up to 300 times normal background levels.
For 22 days, a Health Canada monitoring station in Sidney detected iodine-131 levels in the air that were up to 300 times above the normal background levels. Radioactive iodine levels shot up as high as nearly 1,000 times background levels in the air at Resolute Bay, Nunavut.
Meanwhile, government officials claimed there was nothing to worry about.
“There have been massive radiation spikes in Canada because of Fukushima,” said Gordon Edwards, president of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility.
“The authorities don’t want people to have an understanding of this. 
The government of Canada tends to pooh-pooh the dangers of nuclear power because it is a promoter of nuclear energy and uranium sales.”

“It’s not the risk to an individual that’s the problem but how much society is at risk. When you are exposing millions of people to an insult, even if the average dose is quite small, we are going to see fatal health effects,” he said.
“There has been a dismissiveness about the long-term hazards of nuclear power,” said Dr. Curren Warf, adolescent-medicine division head at B.C. Children’s Hospital.
Warf was on the board of the Nobel Peace Prize–winning U.S. antinuclear group Physicians for Social Responsibility before he moved to B.C. in 2009.
“These were some of the most advanced nuclear power plants in the world. But a natural earthquake and tsunami rendered their safety measures completely meaningless,” he said in a phone interview.
Similarly, the Nelson Daily reported in 2012:
The Green Party of Canada said despite public concern over fallout from the nuclear disaster in Fukushima, Health Canada failed to report higher than normal radioactive iodine levels in rainwater.
It has now been revealed that data were not released from a Calgary Health Canada monitoring station detecting levels of radioactive iodine in rainwater well above the Canadian guideline for drinking water.
This isotope was known to be released by the nuclear accident and also showed up in tests in Vancouver, Winnipeg and Ottawa. 
 Lower levels of contamination resulted in a don’t-drink-rainwater advisory in Virginia.
“In effect, Health Canada has not allowed Canadians to take any preventative steps to reduce our exposure to this radiation.”
THE SAME IS TRUE ACROSS THE GLOBE, WITH EVERY GOVERNMENT THAT HAS ITS THUMB IN A "NUCLEAR PIE" PROTECTING THEIR OWN INTERESTS OVER PROTECTING ITS CITIZENS!
Dr. Erica Frank agrees. “The main concern I’ve had is we are not paying attention to Fukushima as a warning sign. Given the catastrophic long-term issues and what to do about nuclear waste, I had hoped it would be more of a wake-up [call] than it was,” said Frank, a professor of population and public health in UBC’s faculty of medicine and a past president of Physicians for Social Responsibility.
She called on Canada to follow Germany’s lead, which, in response to Fukushima, decided in May to phase out all of its nuclear power plants by 2022. “If Germany can do it, we can too,” she said .
"With 450,000 people homeless, fallout across much of Japan, and a damages bill estimated at $300 billion, Fukushima is the “biggest industrial catastrophe in the history of mankind”.
Even the Tokyo Electric Power Company, which owns the Fukushima plant, has acknowledged that the disaster may surpass the 1986 Chernobyl catastrophe. “The radiation leak has not stopped completely, and our concern is that the amount of leakage could eventually reach that of Chernobyl or exceed it,” a TEPCO official said in an April media release.
In the case of Chernobyl, radiation caused 985,000 deaths worldwide—including almost 170,000 in North America—between 1986 and 2004, according to a Russian study published by the New York Academy of Sciences in 2009. Fallout contaminated about 100,000 square kilometres of land. And 25 years later, five to seven percent of government spending in Ukraine is still devoted to dealing with the disaster’s health, environmental, and other after-effects.
The impacts of Fukushima are still in the earliest stages of being determined, especially since the nuclear plant is still spewing huge amounts of radiation. On Monday, TEPCO reported detecting record-high radiation levels at the plant—double the previous record set in early June. The new level—at least 10 sieverts (10,000 millisieverts) per hour—could cause death or incapacitation within a few seconds’ exposure.
Japan’s prime minister, Naoto Kan, said in July that decommissioning the plant would take “several decades”.
Fallout has contaminated food and water across Japan. 
In July, officials reported that Japanese consumers had eaten meat contaminated with radioactive material. Cattle feed at one farm had levels of radioactive cesium 57 times higher than the government ceiling.
Japanese investigators later determined that almost 3,000 cattle had eaten radioactive feed before being shipped to market. 
Prices of Japanese beef collapsed after 23 out of 274 beef samples exceeded government radiation limits.
In Tokyo, radioactive iodine in tap water reached double the government ceiling in March. Meanwhile, TEPCO reported in April that a seawater sample near the Fukushima plant contained 7.5 million times what was described as the legal amount of iodine-131.
TEPCO released 11,500 tons of radioactive water from its storage tanks into the Pacific Ocean on April 4.
One aspect of the fallout and seawater contamination that remains unclear is how it might affect fish stocks, especially migratory species like salmon that could pass through poisoned areas of the ocean, eat irradiated prey, or have radioactive water dumped in their home ranges by Pacific currents.
Of the five species of Pacific salmon that are native to western North America, the sockeye is the most commercially prized. It also has the most wide-ranging migration route through the North Pacific, swimming for two to three years—as far as just northeast of the top of Japan—before coming back to its natal streams in Alaska, B.C., and the U.S. Northwest.
This year’s returning sockeye are just starting to be caught off Vancouver Island’s west coast. So far, there is no word as to whether or not these fish will be tested. According to an April 17 story in the Anchorage Daily News, U.S. federal officials have already stated that there is no need to even test Alaskan salmon."
NO NEED TO SPEND THE MONEY TO TEST THEM!
IT'S ALL ABOUT THE $$$$$$$$$$$$!
AND WE, DEAR READERS, ARE ON OUR OWN!
MORE ON THIS LATER....







X
at

No comments:

Post a Comment