nuclear-news

Sellafield smoke stack incident – 20 October 2012 – Picture-repost

USA -Study will assess cancer risks -Flawed methodology? Media ignoring other studies?

the top industry trade group had argued against it, saying the study is “unlikely to produce scientifically defensible results.”

Will the methodology use qualitative research (real data) or quantitative research (statistics and mathematical formula)?

The USA budget for radiation monitoring has been reduced by 40 percent even before the study has begun. is this a coincidence? Therefore NO real data!

The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) is a jointly staffed agency within the Department of Homeland Security. DNDO is the primary entity in the U.S. government for implementing domestic nuclear detection efforts for a managed and coordinated response.

[…]

Occupy the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) WTF??? WHY ARE WE CUTTING THE DNDO BUDGET BY 40%??? Shouldn’t we be INCREASING the detection of radiation in our country b/c there’s an ongoing nuclear disaster in Japan and the prevailing winds are in OUR direction?? It rains down in OUR crops, contaminates OUR food supply, and gets in OUR air and water!! Would someone please explain that to the people in charge!!! Never mind the fact that many of our own 104 aging nuclear power plants also leak and when they do the leaking is invisible. Shouldn’t we be spending MORE on monitoring all of this instead of cutting the budget by 40%?? In the middle of an ongoing nuclear disaster it seems really stupid to be slashing the radiation monitoring budget.

[…]

https://nuclear-news.net/2012/10/23/usa-cuts-the-budget-for-the-domestic-nuclear-detection-office-dndo/

Methodology of NPP cancer study

“Geographic areas to use in the study (e.g., county, zip codes, census tracts, or annular rings around the facility at some nominal distances)”

The use of annular rings or nominal distances is a farce as the fallout from the tall chimney stacks can travel some way before it touches ground.”

Here is a quote from a report on atmospheric effects on stack emissions  The idea is to loft the emissions up and get them to travel far.
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

“..In most problems one must estimate the effective stack height, H, at which the plume becomes essentially level. Rarely will this height correspond to the physical height of the stack, h. If the plume is caught in the turbulent wake of the stack or of buildings in the vicinity of the stack, the effluent will be mixed rapidly downward toward the ground (aerodynamic downwash). If the plume is emitted free of these turbulent zones, a number of emission factors and meteorological factors influence the rise of the plume….”

http://archive.org/stream/workbookofatmosp026353mbp/workbookofatmosp026353mbp_djvu.txt

A good example i noticed was reported as a UFO but was actually a smoke ring from the Sellafield Stack. It is likely they had a chimney fire and a sudden release creating this perfect circle of dense and highly radioactive smoke. high dosage enough to kill birds perhaps Picture here;

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2220103/Man-photographs-UFO-dead-birds-appear-neighbours-garden.html#ixzz29uaiYwLm

The rain that fell in London was radioactive though not as bad as some other releases this year and last. London is about 240 miles and the fallout probably travelled 350 miles to get here (about 500 km)

And this post from the comments at Enenews

We’ve had up to 0.25 microsievert/hr in the rain on Friday and up to 0.15 microsievert/h on Saturday

Air reading taken 1 meter of the ground

radon etc from waste processing

and on Saturday night we had a very intense sunset

———————————————————————-

Here is a video of the sunset taken by a north London blogger

No Sun ALL day..then this (beautiful) Chemical Sunset?

From jamnoise72

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGDuDFyyELU

Also, the BBC reported that this week we might get red rain. They say it would be from the Sahara . last weekend the rain left dust on the vehicles though but not heavy,, likely Pb210 from radon that came from Sellafield to London  the low level winds came from the north but a circulating force took the emissions across north England to be caught by the south heading winds in the north sea. We had a red dust left after the rain a few times this year and always with measurable increases in the radiation levels and releases from NPP`s and nuclear waste processing sites.

The major point here though is that the study will not look at where the contamination comes down if it uses the above listed methodologies. This was a point made also by Prof. Chris Busby. It is very hard to trace even given new techniques and technologies.

The study will be flawed if the stack releases and downwind positions are not monitored with real people instead of statistics  The same trick has been used concerning the children of Fukushima where the World Health Organisation released a mathematical projection that the children would have no harm given the releases from Daichi but then a few weeks later the real test results came out and refuted the World Health reports claims. too late though as all the health professionals and media had already published the flawed WHO report.

Here is the Study Task for the research in full

The National Academy of Sciences will provide an assessment of cancer risks in populations living near U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission-licensed nuclear facilities. This assessment will be carried out in two consecutive phases:

A Phase 1 scoping study will identify scientifically sound approaches for carrying out the cancer epidemiology study that has been requested by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. It will address the following tasks:

1. Methodological approaches for assessing off-site radiation dose, including consideration of:

• Pathways, receptors, and source terms
• Availability, completeness, and quality of information on gaseous and liquid radioactive releases and direct radiation exposure from nuclear facilities
• Approaches for overcoming potential methodological limitations arising from the variability in radioactive releases over time and other confounding factors
• Approaches for characterizing and communicating uncertainties

2. Methodological approaches for assessing cancer epidemiology, including consideration of:

• Characteristics of the study populations (e.g., socioeconomic factors, all age groups, children only, and nuclear facility workers)
• Geographic areas to use in the study (e.g., county, zip codes, census tracts, or annular rings around the facility at some nominal distances)
• Cancer types and health outcomes of morbidity and mortality data
• Availability, completeness, and quality of cancer incidence and mortality data
• Different epidemiological study designs and statistical assessment methods (e.g., ecologic or case-control study designs)
• Approaches for overcoming potential methodological limitations arising from low statistical power, random clustering, changes in population characteristics over time, and other confounding factors
• Approaches for characterizing and communicating uncertainties

The results of this Phase 1 scoping study will be used to inform the design of the cancer risk assessment, which will be carried out in Phase 2.

http://dels.nas.edu/global/nrsb/CRSOT.xml

This is the CNN report

Do you live near a nuclear power plant? Study will assess cancer risks

March 23, 2013 - Posted by arclight2011 | Uncategorized