http://sccc.org.au/monthly-report-on-the-local-background-radiation-levels

More Technical Information and Charts

This short animation of Northern, and Southern Hemisphere air circulation, shows why we can get detections so far south.

Comparing the month and day average, (Chart links are provide below.)

a. There is definitely a seasonal variation in local background levels. A seasonal variation very clearly shows in all the monthly average charts.

b. The considerable variation in month averages indicates there is more Northern Hemisphere to Southern Hemisphere air flow break through in the warmer summer months, than in the colder winter months.

c. January 2012 day average chart shows whatever was in the air was not mixed as well as in 2013 and 2014. This can be seen by the dramatic swings in the day averages for 2012, when you compared with the day average charts of 2013 and 2014.

d. Something major must have occurred at Fukushima in late 2012 and early 2013, to have caused such a dramatic month average increase for January 2013. Note that for January 2013 most of the month was dry, drought conditions here. The drought was broken by a significant rain event around the 26th January.

my old physics teacher set up the Geiger counter up when he found out about Chernobyl

the meter soared when the radioactive cloud passed over and dumped radioactive isotopes on wales and Scotland – there are still parts that can’t be farmed because of it I believe.

wookiemeister said:

there are still parts that can’t be farmed because of it I believe.

I haven’t heard anything about this. Could you provide a ref?

Witty Rejoinder said:

wookiemeister said:

there are still parts that can’t be farmed because of it I believe.

I haven’t heard anything about this. Could you provide a ref?

not off the top of my head, it was mentioned in the media in Britain ten years ago or more.

at the time milk was pulled off the shelves due to the contamination being too high

not everything is on the internet – I remember seeing a figure in a book perhaps 20 years ago that mentioned that in the year 2000 the british gov would be spending 4 billion pounds just dealing with radioactive waste from powerstations.

Witty Rejoinder said:

wookiemeister said:

there are still parts that can’t be farmed because of it I believe.

I haven’t heard anything about this. Could you provide a ref?

not off the top of my head, it was mentioned in the media in Britain ten years ago or more.

at the time milk was pulled off the shelves due to the contamination being too high

not everything is on the internet – I remember seeing a figure in a book perhaps 20 years ago that mentioned that in the year 2000 the british gov would be spending 4 billion pounds just dealing with radioactive waste from powerstations.

periodically this might pop up on radio and a small doco made about the problem – then it disappears for another ten years

ROFL.
For starters, the changes in atmospheric radiation are largely due to radon gas. And radon gas, as we all know, comes from the decay of natural uranium.

The tragedy of Fukushima is the tidal wave – the natural gas fires – and the diseases that followed decomposition. The death toll from the tidal wave is so large that it will never be known accurately.

Witty Rejoinder said:

wookiemeister said:

there are still parts that can’t be farmed because of it I believe.

I haven’t heard anything about this. Could you provide a ref?

People are now moving back, illegally but permanently, into the exclusion zone around Chernobyl. The vegetation there has grown very lush so it has become a haven for wildlife. Tour guides to the Chernobyl exclusion zone have a hard time finding any residual radioactivity. What they do find could be cleaned up easily, but then they wouldn’t get the tourist income.

Tsunami, please.

Even journalists now realise that “tidal wave” is an exceedingly poor descriptor.

Michael V said:

Tsunami, please.

Even journalists now realise that “tidal wave” is an exceedingly poor descriptor.

Is “harbour wave” any better?

The Rev Dodgson said:

Michael V said:

Tsunami, please.

Even journalists now realise that “tidal wave” is an exceedingly poor descriptor.

Is “harbour wave” any better?

Well, we’ve all seen video of a Tsunami in Japan…no one’s seen video of a tidal wave… ;)

The Rev Dodgson said:

Michael V said:

Tsunami, please.

Even journalists now realise that “tidal wave” is an exceedingly poor descriptor.

Is “harbour wave” any better?

Considering that “tsunami” is the correct scientific term for the phenomenon, then yes, yes it is much better.

no one’s seen video of a tidal wave…

what a bore.

:)

Good work!

:)

Fukushima suffered massive explosions

This would have flung a cloud of radioactive crap into the sky

At the time of Chernobyl the Russians didn’t tell anyone. It’s common practice in the nuclear industry to tell no one that an incident had happened ( the chemical industry is the same – there have been recent leaks in Sydney and it could be days before bring reported)

The Rev Dodgson said:

Michael V said:

Tsunami, please.

Even journalists now realise that “tidal wave” is an exceedingly poor descriptor.

Is “harbour wave” any better?

Mexican wave?