• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

RadNet Air Monitoring Data from the U.S. West Coast

Re: RadNet Air Monitoring Data from the U.S. West Coast

Thanks for posting this, AD. They've done a good job getting this accessible.
 
Re: RadNet Air Monitoring Data from the U.S. West Coast

The mobile unit that was placed in Dutch Harbor, Unalaska - in the Aleutian chain may be the westernmost monitor for the US - not shown on the list above.

However, it's currently being battered by a storm so I don't know how well it's holding up. Winds there today were 75-90 mph with gusts to 115 mph! The winds blew a cargo container off the dock into the ocean. Those storms from Japan can be fierce.

If you read the readings from Richland, Washington, it just goes to show how elevated levels near atomic plants must be normal.

.
 
Re: RadNet Air Monitoring Data from the U.S. West Coast

I was wondering about Richland, too. They say readings can vary with elevation and this citizen Geiger counter network shows Denver higher, usually, than the coast.

http://www.radiationnetwork.com/

But they might have plants there, too.

By the way, I read that Hanford is wanting to use plutonium fuel.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2014539881_plutonium19m.html

I think that one is a 24,000 yr half life and there is concern that plutonium is more carcinogenic than other radioactive elements. One of the reactors in Japan was using 'mox' which has plutonium and they are working very, very hard on cooling that reactor.

Hanford is supposedly a much bigger facility than the one in Japan that is in trouble.
 
Re: RadNet Air Monitoring Data from the U.S. West Coast

Radiation-tracking jet sent to Alaska


Military officials say an Air Force jet used to track radiation has been temporarily assigned to Eielson Air Force Base in response to the nuclear crisis in Japan. Air Force spokesman Sgt. James Stewart said the U.S. Pacific Command requested a WC-135 last week as a "prudent measure to support possible contingencies."

Stewart said the aircraft will support U.S. humanitarian operations in Japan
Read more: http://www.adn.com/2011/03/20/1766823/radiation-tracking-jet-sent-to.html#ixzz1HGjwoL6F

.
 
Re: RadNet Air Monitoring Data from the U.S. West Coast

.............By the way, I read that Hanford is wanting to use plutonium fuel.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2014539881_plutonium19m.html............

Hanford is supposedly a much bigger facility than the one in Japan that is in trouble.

Hanford was established in 1943 as part of the Manhattan Project. It was home to the first plutonium production reactor in the world. That plutonium was used for the first atomic bomb.

During the Cold War, the project was expanded to include nine nuclear reactors and five large plutonium processing complexes, which produced plutonium for most of the 60,000 weapons in the U.S. nuclear arsenal.[2][3] Nuclear technology developed rapidly during this period, and Hanford scientists produced many notable technological achievements. Many of the early safety procedures and waste disposal practices were inadequate, and government documents have since confirmed that Hanford's operations released significant amounts of radioactive materials into the air and the Columbia River, which threatened the health of residents and ecosystems.[4]

The weapons production reactors were decommissioned at the end of the Cold War, but the manufacturing process left behind 53 million U.S. gallons (204,000 m?) of high-level radioactive waste that remains at the site.[5] This represents two-thirds of the nation's high-level radioactive waste by volume.[6] Today, Hanford is the most contaminated nuclear site in the United States[7][8] and is the focus of the nation's largest environmental cleanup.[2] While most of the current activity at the site is related to the cleanup project, Hanford also hosts a commercial nuclear power plant, the Columbia Generating Station, and various centers for scientific research and development, such as the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and the LIGO Hanford Observatory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanford_Site

In 1943, the existing towns (white Bluffs and Hanford) were seized and residents give hours to days to relocate. Even the graves were moved. My father grew up in White Bluffs, and my grandparents and great grandparents were some of the bodies that were "reburied" elsewhere.

.
 
Re: RadNet Air Monitoring Data from the U.S. West Coast

This site below is a very good history of the types of short and long-term contamination that can happen in a large nuclear facility, especially when not applying current standards. Back in 1943 and for the next 20+ years, there clearly were insufficient safety precautions. The long term implications are well described. I believe there might be some similarities to many nuclear reactor sites in Russia.

I read they give tours, so when I'm nearby there this summer, I think I'll go see the place.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanford_Site#Early_history

.
 
Back
Top