Our team of radiation specialists in Japan brought back their findings for the day.
(See the whole thing here)
Here's a map of the measurements that the team made yesterday and today:
View Map of Radiation Measurements by Greenpeace team in a larger map
Radiation experts at work in Japan
Got Twitter? Help us get the facts out about renewable energy: Tweet the Energy [R]evolution. No Twitter? Sign up for action alerts.
Latest updates via our Twitter stream.Our Q and A on the Fukushima nuclear crisis Main Fukushima nuclear crisis page
Brian Fitzgerald is a Story Advisor at Greenpeace International.
(Unregistered) Claudia says:
So good to bring out the real radiation for the people in Japan and all over the world...i wished for all people safe energy and no nuclear plants!
Posted 27 March, 2011 at 22:45 Flag abuse Reply
To post a comment you need to be signed in.
(Unregistered) marie-anne says:
Do displace and thus save the inhabitants living in an area as far asructsa 50 km from Fukushima.
Posted 27 March, 2011 at 23:36 Flag abuse Reply
(Unregistered) shawn says:
I am glad to finally hear independent assesments of the situation as we know governments & corporations have their own agendas & believe that...
I am glad to finally hear independent assesments of the situation as we know governments & corporations have their own agendas & believe that we are not intelligent enough to make our own minds up,,,but the world is awakening to their madness so keep up the good work & thank U
Posted 28 March, 2011 at 0:52 Flag abuse Reply
(Unregistered) biologist says:
I was appallaed at first by this article and sent mails to swedish media about it. But you talk about MICRO sievertz here, not MILLI Sievertz. Am I co...
I was appallaed at first by this article and sent mails to swedish media about it. But you talk about MICRO sievertz here, not MILLI Sievertz. Am I correct that 1 milliSievertz is 1/1000 Sievert and that one microSievert is 1/1000 000 Sievertz? 10 microS would mean 0,01 millS per hour if my math is not completely wrong. (10/1000). A converter on Internet said 0,1 mS, though, so I can be wrong there. Anyway: The annual maximum dose for nuclear plant worker in Sweden is 50 milli Sievertz. In Japan it is 250 mS. So how can this mean people in the area will reach the maximum yearly dose in a few days? Don´t misunderstand me, I am following the nuclear accident hour by hour and is very concerned.
Posted 28 March, 2011 at 1:24 Flag abuse Reply
(Unregistered) Woolly says:
One millisievert (1 msv) = One thousand microsieverts (1,000 usv). Greenpeace's reading was reported as 10 micro sieverts per hour (10 usv/h). In 2...
One millisievert (1 msv) = One thousand microsieverts (1,000 usv). Greenpeace's reading was reported as 10 micro sieverts per hour (10 usv/h). In 24 hours, a resident would be exposed to 240 usv. In 10 days, a resident would be exposed to 2,400 usv which is 2.4 msv. As a comparison, a north american is typically exposed to 4.0 msv in an entire year. Of this 4.0 msv, a portion (3.0 msv) is normal background radiation. The remaining 1.0 msv is considered the annual maximum for other "voluntary" radiation such as x-rays, etc. It is true that for radiogoly technicians, the annual maximum of 1.0 msv is increaed to 50 msv. And for emergencies, nuclear plant personnel have a limit of 100 msv per year. With readings of 10 usv/h, they should be evacuated.
Posted 28 March, 2011 at 2:06 Flag abuse Reply
(Unregistered) JPJP says:
Since the readings released by the government actually show larger numbers one can assume that they are giving us the accurate information, correct? ...
Since the readings released by the government actually show larger numbers one can assume that they are giving us the accurate information, correct? Although I do agree that the evacuation zone should be largened.
Posted 28 March, 2011 at 2:10 Flag abuse Reply
jaberane says:
@ Wooly: Yes, internationally recommended maximum dose of ionizing radiation from artificial sources, for members of public, is 1 mSv (milliSievert) p...
@ Wooly: Yes, internationally recommended maximum dose of ionizing radiation from artificial sources, for members of public, is 1 mSv (milliSievert) per year. With the dose rate of 10 microSievert, you reach 1 mSv in 100 hours = 4 days. Note that this is only external gamma radiation dose rate, those people are explosed to internal contamination as well, by breathing air with dust, eating food, drinking water, all containing increased levels of radioisotopes from Fukushima. So the real, combined dose they receive could be up to several times higher. We need to be also aware that even the 1 mSv, as maximum annual dose, does not guarantee it is safe! Especially with large numbers of populations are exposed to it, even if within this limit, there will be some health impacts and even fatalities. The risk factor, given by ICRP (International Commission for Radiological Protection) is 5 % per 1 Sv of accumulated dose, and agrees on linear, non-threshold theory. Thus, if 10 million Japanese people receive 1 mSv of additional dose, you can expect 500 fatalities.
Posted 28 March, 2011 at 2:29 Flag abuse Reply
(Unregistered) Michael says:
Can you post the actual data (time, weather, device that took the reading) with location data. Without that the google maps data is useless for compar...
Can you post the actual data (time, weather, device that took the reading) with location data. Without that the google maps data is useless for comparison with government data. Also you should be measuring in the same place as the government sensors to make sure they are reporting real numbers.
(Unregistered) rih says:
Fucking retarded Jap government continue covering up the catastrophe thanks to westerlies that sweeps most of nuclear poison from Fuck-shima to vast p...
Fucking retarded Jap government continue covering up the catastrophe thanks to westerlies that sweeps most of nuclear poison from Fuck-shima to vast pacific ocean to be slowly diluted over time. I urge greenpeace to gauge radiation level on the sea east of fukushima.
Posted 28 March, 2011 at 6:32 Flag abuse Reply
(Unregistered) Scientist says:
Why are you not taking any measurements of the Pacific Ocean in various places (Do you not have ships)? More importantly, why are you not measuring le...
Why are you not taking any measurements of the Pacific Ocean in various places (Do you not have ships)? More importantly, why are you not measuring levels of Strontium 90, Plutonium 239, Caesium 137, etc...? (I.e. the radio nuclides that contaminate the environment for the next 30 - 24000 years) It's not the immediate radiation exposure we should be worried about, it's the long term (chronic) exposure to an increased "low" level of radiation. Regular ingestion of relatively low level radioactive waste is by far more dangerous (inhalation as well as eating / drinking through contaminated food and water supply). Perhaps of interest is this scientific review on cancer rate following Chernobyl. http://carcin.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/11/1821.full.pdf+html Note that there are many diseases related to long term exposure of Ionising Radiation, including various genetic disorders in future generations, it's not just cancer...For people that process information better through visual stimulation, the following site might be of interest http://inmotion.magnumphotos.com/essay/chernobyl
Posted 28 March, 2011 at 12:53 Flag abuse Reply
1 - 10 of 42 results.
Are you sure to remove this comment?
Are you sure to report this comment as abuse?