Wow... Interesting comparison data!
I hope everyone reading this understands that I am NOT (in any way) trying to suggest ANY data gathered is true or false. If I seem "curt" at times it is because of my frustration in verifying the numbers associated with the station in question.
And (by the way) any lack of credible data only serves those that would cover up (not saying they would), create unnecessary panic and/or dismiss the readings even if they are actually accurate.
As of the writing of this response I see no corroborating evidence of a accident or other release in that area from any local power plant on (or anytime close to) the dates shown. Does't mean that this is the case by any stretch of the imagination... Or even if this is the source of the reads.
For example...
http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2014 ... ommission/WE are all volunteers and I wish to express my sincere appreciation for everyone that is involved with this critical endeavor.
What are we lacking at this time?
The BIGGEST needs we have right now for these independent systems are to have safety and verification protocols in place when something like this happens.
Someone "in the know" needs to "chime in" and state safety/cataloging procedures as well as how to verify this type of reading quickly so we can take actions should the need arise.
The immediate dangers?
Number 1 (of course) is to be able to know quickly if these high readings are true or false.
Number 2 is the fact that if high readings are true and the operator handles the filter unit that person may be closely exposed to the material(s) involved.
Number 3 is the fact that without sufficient data these reads can be easily dismissed. This last one will (not only) hurt the credibility of this network and the movement as a whole, if no action is taken within a short time it won't matter anyway...
Conclusions?
These filters need to be analyzed to determine what materials (if any) caused these readings (is anyone setup to do these tests?).
Did the operator follow any evidence based protocols and did the operator take safety precautions when handling these filters and the units involved?
If these readings are false (and I hope and pray they are) then we have a perfect opportunity to prove (or disprove) it and establish a system to do so...
These types of situations can result in the positive growth of our volunteer participants to "step up" and keep in place procedures to handle, and verify or dismiss these incidences.
If these reads are false, this particular situation can be a great positive opportunity to improve our knowledge, procedures, preparedness and awareness.
There are a few people out there that do this kind of testing quickly and independently...
AntiProtons:
https://www.youtube.com/user/antiprotonsTom is a great independent source of information for this and may accept the filters and test them quickly.
I included Tom because of his knowledge and equipment, his dedication to this subject and his independent status.Tom would be a prime candidate for initial testing and could easily forward the filter(s) elsewhere for verification!
Chris Busby:
In case you don't know who this is...
http://www.ask.com/wiki/Christopher_Busby?lang=enTested many filters from Japan after the accident. Many results are on youtube and elsewhere on the net...
Busby obtained a BSc in Chemistry with First Class Honours from the University of London and holds a PhD in chemical physics.
Chris is well known for his abilities and his willingness to accept air filters for testing.
Fairwinds:
I think everyone here knows of or has at least heard of "Arnie" Gundersen.
http://www.ask.com/wiki/Arnold_Gundersen?lang=enAs Arnie is a "expert witness", he is "the top of the ladder" when it comes to independent, evidence based protocols in the US...
My personal hope is that we can find someone to test these filters for individual isotopes and put in place solid protocols to catalog (and handle) the filters and units (safely and accurately) in the very near future.
And remember... In order for our stations not to "cry wolf" we must be prepared to evaluate any reading quickly and accurately. WE NEED testing in order to say with ANY certainty if we have a real problem or not.
I hope this helps and look forward to hearing from anyone on this topic...
...and don't forget that accuracy (and proof) is king when it comes to radiation.
(admin.... You may want to start a new topic on this.)
manalan wrote:
Regardless of the opinions being expressed here, try watching this 14 minute video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jNbcV-7BJI to appreciate how one woman is documenting the radiation around the Chicago area that she has personally experienced.
Based on her analysis in this video, I believe public warnings about the radiation danger should be issued throughout IL and adjacent states.
PS: My personal "squeal point" on Gamma is 300 or above and Beta is any read over 150 (with beta 100 is cause for concern to me) and I've seen both on several occasions here locally this past year from the EPA sites...
Here is the official operating information that you can use to find out what's going on with the power plants in your area:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-colle ... 130ps.htmlHere is a quick list of the (changing) officials...
http://www.nei.org/News-Media/News/TransitionsHere's a couple of sites relating to the Byron plant...
http://allthingsnuclear.org/exelons-full-fixes/https://www.facebook.com/pages/Byron-Nu ... 7880177290