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.
Andrew Davies says:
Yes, particulates are extremely dangerous, and I think our team does plan to measure for them. Not sure about plans for ocean testing. ...
Yes, particulates are extremely dangerous, and I think our team does plan to measure for them. Not sure about plans for ocean testing. Sounds like a good idea, if logistically feasible/safe. (Don't want to end up with a radioactive ship.) And thanks for sharing this photo essay. It is important for people to remember.... http://inmotion.magnumphotos.com/essay/chernobyl
Posted 28 March, 2011 at 13:20 Flag abuse Reply
To post a comment you need to be signed in.
(Unregistered) trojan horus says:
The JAEA is posting figures as high as 45uSV/h at places 30k from Fukushima's power station at this link http://goo.gl/lLnIP
The JAEA is posting figures as high as 45uSV/h at places 30k from Fukushima's power station at this link http://goo.gl/lLnIP That's less than 24 hours to reach annual dose
Posted 28 March, 2011 at 13:37 Flag abuse Reply
(Unregistered) evacuation to Sovjet Sahalin! says:
I wrote in last thursday to Finland minister Sauli Niinistö and asked him to make contact to Russian leaders and recomend Russians give immediat...
I wrote in last thursday to Finland minister Sauli Niinistö and asked him to make contact to Russian leaders and recomend Russians give immediatly Sahalin district to Japanese for evacuation place. This would be only possible place for Japanese to go by big group.
Posted 28 March, 2011 at 14:12 Flag abuse Reply
(Unregistered) physicist says:
1.If the radiation comes from Iodine-131 with a half life of 8days, itś not much to worry about. Normal background radiation is 1microSv/h, so the tot...
1.If the radiation comes from Iodine-131 with a half life of 8days, itś not much to worry about. Normal background radiation is 1microSv/h, so the total dose (without evacuation) would be around an extra year under normal circumstances. We need the source to make decisions.. 2.Caesium-137 got widespread over Scandinavia in -86, but it doesnt take 24000years before it sinks back into the ground along with normal uranium-minerals. It was just some years to avoid certain meats and vegetables. Should ofc be avoided, but the danger is overhyped. 3. Who says radiation is much lower on the 50km barrier, or the 100km? Should we evacuate all of Japan to save 1 person from cancer? or 10, or 100? Where is the limit? Tough questions.
Posted 28 March, 2011 at 15:34 Flag abuse Reply
(Unregistered) ChristianNippon says:
Could you please verify the location of the plant with the trouble in the map. Somehow you have the plant "Daini" marked and not plant "...;
Could you please verify the location of the plant with the trouble in the map. Somehow you have the plant "Daini" marked and not plant "Daiichi" which right now has the most problems. The plant "Daiichi" is the one with 6 reactors; 1-4 close in a line, 5&6 a bit on the side. I know, also the local press here in Japan often show the way you show; maybe I'm wrong; please just verify. Thanks for your independent work though; much appreciated
Posted 28 March, 2011 at 17:18 Flag abuse Reply
(Unregistered) eva, biolog says:
I can see my former comment has been deleted from this diskussion. Whas my math wrong? What I want is a neutral diskussion on the actual risks. The a...
I can see my former comment has been deleted from this diskussion. Whas my math wrong? What I want is a neutral diskussion on the actual risks. The accident is so severe that we don´t need any exaggeration. 10 microSievert/hour equals a year dose of 87,6 milliSievert (10x24x265/1000). Correct me if I am wrong. Of course it is not good, especially for pregnant women and babies, but it is no cause to raise absolute panic. 250 mS is the dose thet is considered safe for a nuclear workers in Japan. 50 mS in Sweden. We need more information on the cause of radioation (which isotopes?). Yes, we had Cecium downfall in Sweden and for Cecium it takes 30 years to reduce the radioation with 50 %. The fungus and berries in the worst affected areas are still not advisable to consume. But what are we dealing with in Japan?I am as concerned as anyone, but we need solid facts and scientific evaluation!!!
(Unregistered) Connie-Ger says:
Good to hear reliable results & facts. Please do everything possible, to illustrate the massive danger to the Japanese civilians - especially the...
Good to hear reliable results & facts. Please do everything possible, to illustrate the massive danger to the Japanese civilians - especially the dangers for children. Thank you very much.
Posted 28 March, 2011 at 17:21 Flag abuse Reply
(Unregistered) mek says:
If you guys what know where the broken reactors actually are maybe the rest of these results would also be more reliable?
Posted 28 March, 2011 at 17:43 Flag abuse Reply
(Unregistered) chris g. says:
What about the two other Tepco plants within the 20km zone!!!: nuclear power plant Fukushima dai-ni: 37°18'58.24"N, 141° 1'26.55...
What about the two other Tepco plants within the 20km zone!!!: nuclear power plant Fukushima dai-ni: 37°18'58.24"N, 141° 1'26.55"E Hirono thermal power station, 37°14'14.80"N, 141° 0'55.21"E what about operating those plants within the 20km zone??
Posted 28 March, 2011 at 18:07 Flag abuse Reply
FIRSTGREEN says:
corea is not safe too!! i'm so scared!
Posted 28 March, 2011 at 18:30 Flag abuse Reply
11 - 20 of 42 results.
Are you sure to remove this comment?
Are you sure to report this comment as abuse?