nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Extremely radioactive particle found in Japan – 300 miles from Fukushima – News banned in Japan

Published on 3 Apr 2014

A highly radioactive particle of suspected Fukushima core material was found in house dust in Nagoya, Japan. This home is 460 kilometers (300 miles) from the accident site. This one microscopic dust particle has enough radioactivity to be a real health hazard.

Advertisement

April 4, 2014 - Posted by | Uncategorized

7 Comments »

  1. OK, What is this the isotope? Alpha, Beta or Gamma emitter (or combination)? Any “real readings” besides the statement that it is a “real health hazard”?

    As long as there is no concrete data and information, the whole thing is malarkey!

    Comment by Hans Wiegert | April 4, 2014 | Reply

    • the mix of isotopes mentioned was cesium 134 and 137 .. there are also other things in the mix but i suspect that high gamma spikes allowed marco to assertain those (they would be giving of similar energies 3 years on) reading the beta heavy isotopes would be difficult.. You sound like a nuclear knowledgable worker so you are aware that the ICRP official laboratories were given a test sample to look at and they got strontium 90 measures wrong. At least 40 percent did get it right though in fairness.. the sample was a slightly modified chernobyl sample.. even the iaea cant find concrete data! would you be happy to eat or breath in this particle? I could arrange that with Marco if you are in the USA Hans.. I suspect you are in Germany though.. I will Pay the flights and as long as you video the process with Marco attending to make sure you eat the particle. What say you? 🙂
      regards Sean McGee (UK)

      Comment by arclight2011part2 | April 4, 2014 | Reply

  2. The video showed a screen shot that was labeled Ce, Zr, Eu, Sm. What isotopes were the elemental Samarium and Europium?

    Comment by Roy Herren | April 5, 2014 | Reply

    • samarium-149, is a strong neutron absorber and is therefore added to the control rods of nuclear reactors. It is also formed as a decay product during the reactor operation and is one of the important factors considered in the reactor design and operation. Other applications of samarium include catalysis of chemical reactions, radioactive dating and an X-ray laser.

      ………………………

      The primary decay mode for isotopes lighter than 153Eu is electron capture, and the primary mode for heavier isotopes is beta minus decay. The primary decay products before 153Eu are isotopes of samarium (Sm) and the primary products after are isotopes of gadolinium (Gd).[9]

      Both from wiki
      I hope that explains tha Sm when melted and blown up (ie reactor 3) forms daughters of the less harmful Eu .. both share a similar atomic number.. The Sm is part of the fuel rods that blew out of reactor 3.. there is likely forms of uranium and because MOX was being used, putonium.. the reason Marco didnt test specifically for uranium etc is that it requires 2 official specialist labs. It is likely that Marco like Busby has been blocked from accessing these services so we have to go with the available spectromatry..
      I think this is a fair comment but please check in other blogs like enenews or you can contact fairewinds for further info..
      regards sean

      Comment by arclight2011part2 | April 5, 2014 | Reply

  3. Could this single hot particle be from rare earth? I received the following from a mailing list, “Rare earths are commonly associated with ThO2 in the mineral Monazite and U-REE is not uncommon”.
    Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monazite

    The very highest element spike is silicon which would seem to be a better fit for this particle having a terrestrial origin than being man made.

    Comment by Roy Herren | April 5, 2014 | Reply

    • hi Roy
      many thanks for your reply. have you tried enquiring with Marco ?? I would like to see the reply.. sorry about the delay in response but it is early here in the UK.. I will try to look further into this today.. but i am a bit busy now.. great point.
      the reality is that these flea particles were found all over the globe especially japan and the USA after the nuclear disaster in bulk. But China could be spraying these particles around as the need for rare earths in the west and by the especially by the military might be causing this.. It would be interesting if rare earths are being found in the air with these levels of Bq.. A serious health hazard.. We would expect that if this is not a fuel flea then this sort of contamination is widespread and we should see great increases of lung cancer if the pollution from China was that bad.. and rare earths mining set to increase in coming decades without having adequate testing of the air for this.. It has never been found in air samples before perhaps? gotta think on this.. the particle is of interest whether it is from mining and pollution or from a reactor..
      Thanks for a stimulating discussion.. i will post here if i find out more.. I might do another updated article.. regards sean

      Comment by arclight2011part2 | April 5, 2014 | Reply

    • The hot particle with the notably high specific activity did not contain any of the normal elements associated with rare earths. It lacked Ca, P, Th, and the usual cast of lanthanides that would be found in monazite minerals. Uranium was likely present given that there was plenty of 226Ra, but it was not observed directly by gamma spectroscopy. You would not expect to see such a long half-life isotope as 238U in gamma peak thicket of such a high specific activity sample. In addition, the presence of so much 134Cs and 137Cs in the high specific activity particle makes it likely the source is an anthropogenic nuclear process, rather than a naturally occurring mineral. While we have occasionally observed rare earth particles in our samples from Japan, they have never approached this level of specific activity. Natural uranium and thorium isotopes just don’t have decay constants big enough to produce that many disintegrations per second. Finally, please note that the study included many samples, and the graphics used in the video come from the the entirety of the dataset.

      Comment by Marco Kaltofen | April 6, 2014 | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: