Our future - or my paranoia?
Reach
Posts: 107
Should I be paranoid?
Why most of the population on the planet are still living life like nothing happened baffles me. This Fukushima disaster is either no big deal meaning I am paranoid or people are very ignorant, I seems to think the later.
Everyone I know calls me paranoid when I speak about the possible outcome of this disaster and tend to think the disaster is nothing to worry about. So to help with my slight paranoia I want to build a device that detects contamination's and I ask is it possible to do so?
Can I detect radiation in the fish that I catch, can I detect contaminated water / air? What sensors can I integrate into a device cheaply to detect toxins? What should I study - I have started reading about Geiger counters.
I know there are devices scientist use but I am a humble "sailor girl" living on the ocean - any ideas and or comments would be appreciated.
Thanks
Reach~
Why most of the population on the planet are still living life like nothing happened baffles me. This Fukushima disaster is either no big deal meaning I am paranoid or people are very ignorant, I seems to think the later.
Everyone I know calls me paranoid when I speak about the possible outcome of this disaster and tend to think the disaster is nothing to worry about. So to help with my slight paranoia I want to build a device that detects contamination's and I ask is it possible to do so?
Can I detect radiation in the fish that I catch, can I detect contaminated water / air? What sensors can I integrate into a device cheaply to detect toxins? What should I study - I have started reading about Geiger counters.
I know there are devices scientist use but I am a humble "sailor girl" living on the ocean - any ideas and or comments would be appreciated.
Thanks
Reach~
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Living just north of the Philippenes, I am a bit short of optimism today as a passing typhoon took an estimated 10,000 lives. I wonder a bit how Kaohsiung would have held up to such a storm. Probably better as we have heavy concrete buildings and more infrastructure.
You can chose to upset yourself with what life isn't, or find great joy in contributing what you can to making it better. But there will always be another disaster of some sort. Nuclear power may have seen its peek in the world, but we do require energy resources to make life more pleasant for everyone. And all have an environmental impact. You cannot just say, "Stop the world, I want to get off." Can you?
Paranoid doesn't do oneself any good. Neither does resentment. But being sincere is admirable. Being vigilant is prudent.
People are living longer than ever and able to test pollutants in smaller and smaller amounts. We are seeing alot of new information and guessing what it all means. Some of the guessers just see harbingers of doom in all of it. Others see the need for change and greater cooperation.
If you desire to measure radiation in fish or pollution in other things, try to sensibly process the information.
I have two books here that you may be familiar with. "The Sea Around Us." and "Silent Spring". While you may recognize the author, the first was written when she was ambitiously curious about the world and nature and is excellent. But the second was written as she was dying from cancer and becomes a distorted rant of paranoia. While in many ways she was right, she just goes too far and into things that may never happen. Banning ddt may have been best for the environment, but also has killed millions of people in poorer parts of the world via malaria and other mosquito borne diseases, people that would have survived otherwise. River blindness and the tsetse fly in the Congo are terrible paracites that are tough to kill..
The greatest gift you can give the world is your well-balanced mature spirit. What happens will just unfold.
Detection is fun, lots to learn. Google is a grate place to start. I started buying detectors the day it happened. I flew around at 12,000' with cotton balls stuck in my airplanes outside air vents and bagged them, took them home and measured them. Turns out there is lots of radiation, even the real bad stuff, pretty much everywhere. There didn't seem to be any risk associated with the airborne radiation from Fukushima. There were also sensors that cost a lot of money, and I went with the general online consensus for that information.
The ocean over there is another story, most sources are saying that fish caught have no radiation to detect. Personally I feel like the outcome may not involve directly contaminated fish. It could come many years from now in "mystery" problems that effect the entire ecosystem.
Loopy, I'm glad you pointed out the "Silent Spring" I started my entomology work as a medical entomologist and I guarantee that you will never find a medical entomologist who isn't sadden when they hear that book.
@anyone who will listen
Silent Spring and the banning of DDT is the perfect example of good intentions having truly terrible consequences. (The man who realized the insecticidal properties of DDT was awarded the 1948 Nobel Prize in Medicine http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/1948/muller-bio.html ) The science that condemned DDT is now considered flawed, but even if it wasn't, is it worth the lives of 3 million people who die each year from malaria that is transmitted by mosquitoes? Not to mention all of the other insect born pathogens like the ones Loopy mentioned? I won't go into the details, but none of those deaths from insect pathogens are quite or painless and none of the survivors are not disfigured or crippled.
No, you should not be paranoid, however being concerned is a good thing. The majority of people are ignorant when it comes to radiation and nuclear energy. Very few take the time to become informed about the technology or the risks associated with it.
The majority reaction is to ignore the issue and continue with their lives. The minority become anti-nuclear activists. Unfortunately most of the anti-nuclear activists seem to be even more ignorant than the majority.
Yes, it is possible to build home brew devices that detect radioactive contamination, but they would generally not be sensitive enough to be worth the effort. To detect low levels of radiation in foods would require shielding against the normal background and cosmic radiation we are surrounded by.
FYI, I spent many years installing, servicing, and calibrating radiation measuring devices in hospitals, research labs, and nuclear power stations so I do have some knowledge and experience in this area.
If you fish near the coastal waters of Fukushima, you will already be warned what you can catch and what you should not. Otherwise, just keep in mind fish you catch in most any open waters will contains more mercury that can hurt you than radiation. There are testers for mercury, though many of us simply get by limiting our intake of those fish that tend to have higher mercury concentrations. (Women who are pregnant are advised to avoid many types of fish altogether.)
Judging by your age in your profile picture, by the time you were born there had already been over *400* atmospheric tests of nuclear weapons, which spread contamination far deeper and far wider than the Fukushima meltdown. The US conducted massive underwater tests that were significantly more "dirty" in the release of radiation, killing millions of fish, and poisoning entire islands. In other words, you came in to an already radioactive world. I was born at a time and place fairly close to all the Nevada nuclear tests in the 1950s. Made me what I am today!
Seriously, radiation is just ONE thing we're all worried about. Change can come slowly. Above-ground nuclear tests are now banned by treaty, and have been for a long time. But just because it's not constantly on everyone's lips doesn't make it unimportant. I think most of us realize we live in a risky world, and the best we can do is try to manage best we can.
http://xkcd.com/radiation/
http://blog.xkcd.com/2011/03/19/radiation-chart/
So true. While DDT did have some undesirable side effects those could have been mitigated by limiting its use rather than banning it altogether. Sadly, the same thing seems to be happening in the nuclear energy arena. There are new designs that promise to be much safer but they may never get built due to the anti-nuclear hysteria and the exorbitant cost of getting permits.
The worst part is that when everything is taken into account nuclear is actually safer than coal. Far more people have died from mining accidents, cancer due to air pollution, and now extreme weather due to global warming, than have ever died from radiation.
Living within 50 miles of a nuclear power plant for a year 0.09 uSv
Living within 50 miles of a coal fired power plant for a year 0.3 uSv
So living near a coal plant would expose you to more than three times as much radiation as living near a nuclear plant, as well as increased risk of lung cancer from inhaling the microscopic particulates emitted by the coal fired plant.
Xanadu - It’s reassuring to know others are concerned. The experiment you preformed is awesome, but what did it do for you? Do you feel positive about it personally or did it affect you in anyway? I would be a little mad!
Vanmunch – I agree and disagree respectfully. Correct me if I am wrong but are you suggesting that too much radiation could be okay?
Kwinn – So detecting this radioactive matter imbedded in flesh is much more difficult than I realize. Looks like I have a lot of work to do. I just hope I have time and brainpower to accomplish what I want to do. I feel it’s important to be informed.
GordonMcComb – Well Olympia is my home port but just to clarify I am a drifter, living off grid, in a sailboat learning creating devices to help better the world and fund my adventures. In a nutshell, I travel often, so this disaster hits close to home so to speak, heck in three weeks’ time I may be in Mexico or the Philippines. My sailboat is my lab, my home, and I get to live in nature seeing amazing things the internet cannot provide, something different I suppose.
I am also aware of the past as you describe (400 blasts). I have researched a little and know about the “Milk” perhaps this is the cause of so much cancer in today’s world. I have a good understanding of the old world as I sail and meet very old people that describe the past to me in first person. It’s amazing!
Also Gordon I respectfully disagree about these 400 or so blast being far worse. And I disagree in two ways; one Fukushima is concentrated to one region making it far more toxic and two its giving our wildlife more to play in. Of course I could be completely wrong.
Proof – Very nice link thank you. I am now just glancing at it and noticed the Chernobyl incident. For 10 minutes of exposure it’s more toxic than the other entire event in the natural world combined and if I am interrupting it correctly the Fuckushima should have “thy cup overflow” with the joys of radioactive matter. Not very promising if it continues dumping into my backyard!
For the US alone, nearly all of its above-ground and underwater tests were at the same locations -- Marshall Islands, Nevada -- so I'm not sure what your point is. Locations downwind or down-current from these test spots experienced higher fallout, and studies throughout the years have shown they've resulted in increased incidence of thyroid and other cancers.
Again, this is not to say that Fukushima isn't an important lesson, but it's a blip in the scheme of things considering the enormous fallout from nuclear tests. This is why the public world over protested over the tests, and they were eventually stopped. Since Fukushima, design and construction of many nuclear plants have been altered to take into account lessons learned. At least partially because of Fukushima, and the potential dangers of earthquake and tsunami damage to coastline reactors, the San Onofre nuclear plant in Southern California has been deemed unsafe following a maintenance upgrade, and is now permanently shut down. So, people have been and will continue to be concerned.
For you, sailing near the eastern waters of Japan, I'm sure the incident takes on more importance, to be sure. But that doesn't mean others don't care.
Even when thousands of miles away from Japan, I'm sure you already take into account the risks of a seafood-rich diet and mercury poisoning, which I'd personally feel is the more present danger to anyone living off the sea.
As an aside, a friend of mine recently purchased a radiation detector from eBay and was showing it off. On a whim, I had him check my wristwatch, which has a Swiss movement but a stainless steel housing made in China. It was hot! I'd worn this thing for seven years. So I had him check my bare wrist and compare it with the other one. There was a definite difference between the two. 'Still waiting for the Super Powers to kick in!
As a second aside, I once had a dental hygenist who immigrated from Ukraine near Chernobyl. She said that after the accident there, everyone bought radiation detectors to take to the grocery to check fresh produce.
-Phil
Again Gentleman thanks.
I think the people saying we can dilute the radiation in to low levels are largely right about it now. My real concern is the very long time periods involved. There are people who are not even born yet, who will have kids, and their kids not born yet, who will be dealing with that problem.
So my worry is making the most of the optimal time, which is right now. Decisions made now can impact things, and the engineering we will need now, and on a very long term basis, requires the best, consistently to really manage things right. In a way, it's our problem, not just theirs, and I don't see enough "us" working on things, more like just "them."
Do keep reading and learning. I am too. This kind of thing worries me deeply too and I find continuing to learn about what is happening as well as the outcome from other sites, etc... is a good outlet for that worry.
Holy cow Phil! What kind of watch is that? I just read your post. Now, I'm itching to check everything... I know, go looking for trouble and find it, but still.
Oh, and welcome! Great crowd here. You've not made many posts yet. Jump in and that can change! I think very highly of my peers here.
It's a Torgoen T6:
I liked it because it has a circular slide rule built in. But I've ditched it for the time being, for a cheap self-winder I bought back in 1972.
-Phil
Best to be paranoid, just in case:)
But if you are going to read both, please read quite a bit of biographic material about Rachel Carson herself, and follow up on the biochemistry that she was so against in "Silent Spring". It wasn't just DDT that she damned so heavily, but other pesticides, like Malathion. Washington State, and actually all the West Coast fruit producers rely on Malathion to some some extent to bring flawless product to market. It has a very short half-live and a lot of economic benefits.
News media tend to be very compelling in what they put before the public, but some of that compelling force of their writing is to sell their attention getting abilities to advertisers, and some is to endorse a party-line political position..
Real solutions take a lot of reading and listening and lie somewhere in between the presentations at the extremes. Rachel Carson seems to have swung from almost a religious appreciation of nautical nature to extreme condemnation of anything the chemical industry might do. The truth lies somewhere between. Be wary of compelling argument from anyone as it often is trying to compel you to not think for yourself. What you discover through your own thoughts and research may prove to be far more of value to all of us than anything that thematically latches on to public concern for the limelight.
Paranoid people rarely try to test their understanding… the paranoid idea is somehow too meaningful to challenge. So, to begin with, you aren't paranoid.
But you are also worrying about the wrong issue. Take a look a very contentious issue… the health effects of non-ionizing radiation. Non-ionizing radiation is all around us… it is increasing in complexity and magnitude and we are still not quite sure what it does to us or what to do about it.
Although it is very dated, let me highly recommend Paul Brodeur's book…"the Zapping of America." It is out of print and hard to find, but well worth the effort. Your library can probably get a copy.
Although it at first appears to be about microwaves, it is in fact a discussion of all kinds of signals and sources.
The issue is global and the history of concerns goes back to the dawn of radio. I find it fascinating that when government's first struggled with the issue of how much non-ionizing radiation could be permitted, Western governments selected levels based on microscopic evidence of cellular damage. Russian regulations specified levels below which behavioral changes in animals could be detected, and the Chinese decided a level one thousand times lower than the Russians should be used.
Rich
Mmmmm salmon. Grilled, sprinkled with crumbled gorgonzola, covered with swiss.
Sauce made of basil, parmesian, mayonaise (not miracle whip), powdered chinese mustard, dash of lemon, drop of tabasco
On lightly toasted bagette or italian bread, which ever is right size for a sandwich.
I guess I'm dead. Been nice talking to youse!
At fist glance that seems like swapping one worry for another that has even less evidence to back it up.
The answer, of course, is to convert seafood into lighting fixtures.
No electricity necessary.
We all receive natural sources of ionizing radiation all the time. We have cellular repair mechanisms, which deal nicely with this low level exposure.
Eating ionizing sources is not a good idea. I am from radium city Ottawa, Illinois. My aunt Jerry worked for the radium dial corporation before WWII. She painted the dials, pointing the brushes with her lips. She died a horrible death in the early 1950's from cancer in the lining of her lungs(mesothelioma). We all drank radium, because our water was contaminated with the stuff and we were lied to about it. I am not saying not to think about it and plan for it, I'm just saying that after a lifetime of considering it all, non-ionizing sources, which are now everywhere concern me more.
A scandinavian study showed that the simple act of electrifying an area cause a 2-fold increase in the incidence of nearly all regulatory diseases.
that's a lot of diseases. Can't remember the study:)
Rich
You hear about this stuff more and more these days. They get metals from any old source for cheap, and just smelt them all down. For all anyone knows the stainless steel used in your watch came from some housing for the cobalt in some oncology machine.
Did this radiation detector have the usual GM tube inside? If your friend returns with it, try measuring your watch again, this time with maybe a dozen sheets of paper in front of the detector opening. This will tell you the main type of the radiation: no clicks means it's alpha particles; clicks mean it's beta or gamma. Alpha will affect skin but won't pass through it. Beta penetrates farther, gamma farther still.
If you're concerned, you can have the watch tested to see if it's within acceptable levels. If not, a letter to the manufacturer, citing the test results, would be in order.
They have decided nuclear energy if done correctly is much better for the planet than using carbon based fuels. Sorry I don't remember the movie title.
Seems a bit better answer at first glance. I'm kind of negative on nuke based power because of the long time scale and extreme hazards we deal with when it goes bad. When it is good, it is good. And waste...
I am inclined to think inversely towards this statement. Everyone seems to think we need to create more power well not me I am all for a "spend down" - slowing consumption in favor of becoming more efficient. The developed nations consume toooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much - why not become more efficient and enjoy what we have already?
a little off topic, well maybe not but
Everyone I know has multiple cars, dozens of gadgets, all in the same 2 houses with 6 kids living with no respect for the dirt we call earth and are on drugs to compensate for the lack of stuff they can have or for the pain they get derived from making this stuff! okay that's a stretch but seriously count how many shoes most women have laying around the closets.
I mean what ever happened to just having a good family and working with your hands from things that are around you? Taking time to enjoy building things.
I'm not a tree huger but I am aware that if one continues to fart in a closed jar at some point you start smelling the fart - in this case Radioactive matter!
Thank you. There are lots of concerned people out there. There are some live monitoring sites online with great hardware as well.
I've never had an experiment not do anything for me, Im sure you know how that is. I was pretty floored when it happened. I was glued to the internet and TV for a few days. I was a little mad but that only fueled the desire for my own answers. The GeigerMüller tube had that mysterious play with me look to it as well. It was a learning experience. As you can see from the conversation unfolding in this thread the rabbit hole goes pretty deep.
I didn't experience anything as bad as what we subject ourselves to on a regular basis. Im not sure if that is a good outcome or not. It put my mind at ease. I talked to the people around me with facts and not hearsay, people like that.