Higher Nuclear Radiation From Japan Detected in California, Other Western Region States

By Dennis Romero Mon., Mar. 28 2011 at 1:10 PM

Fukushima.

Don't bite down on that suicide pill just yet, but the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says radiation levels at West Coast monitors are up slightly.

The readings follow last week's arrival of radiation from Japan's ailing Fukushima nuclear reactors, which are in dire straights and which still could be sending bad air via the jet stream to California.

Here's what the EPA states:

During detailed filter analyses from 12 RadNet air monitor locations across the nation, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identified trace amounts of radioactive isotopes consistent with the Japanese nuclear incident. Some of the filter results show levels slightly higher than those found by EPA monitors last week and a Department of Energy monitor the week before. These types of findings are to be expected in the coming days and are still far below levels of public health concern.

The New York Times

The jet stream in action.

Monitors that measured the higher-than-average radiation included at least one in California as well as monitors in Alaska, Alabama, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, Saipan, Northern Mariana Islands and Washington state.

Should you be alarmed? Guess not.

The good news is that the jet stream from Japan is no longer hitting Southern California quasi-directly this week: It's predicted that a high-pressure system will keep it to the north.

Still, if you're concerned, keep an eye on LA Weekly contributor Michael Collins' Santa Monica monitor:

Streaming live video by Ustream

Tags:

California, EPA, Fukushima, Japan, Michael Collins, nuclear, radiation, U.S. EPA

We Recommend

Rwolf

Japan's leaking radiation will become a serous accumulating problem for U.S. food and air quality if Japan's reactors are not soon encased in cement.

In most cases nuclear reactors have to be subsidized by taxpayers. When nuclear reactors leak as shown in Japan, it can be hugely expensive; consider Japan’s conservative damage estimates at $330 Billion; more if damaged reactors melt down spreading high levels of radiation. In the U.S. too many nuclear reactors are close to large U.S. populations; 300 miles is close where communities are downwind. In addition to catastrophic health costs, a leaking reactor could for decades destroy the value of real estate of entire cities and shutdown industries. The potential risks of building more nuclear reactors and continuing to operate old reactors in the U.S. cannot be justified considering the potential catastrophic downside of long-term health and financial costs to U.S. Citizens. From a military standpoint, U.S. enemies would only have to target the 100 U.S. plus nuclear reactors to spread deadly radiation to large cities. Nuclear reactors are a losing bet when you consider the downside.

SungFow

Dude no way, this is like the coolest thing ever.www.privacy-online.it.tc

Louis LaGuerre

I find this info very useful since I live 40 miles from Los Angeles. I view "EnviroReporters" live broadcast daily.

Beavis .uh

Beavis..cool, cool put hundreds of tons of water on the Nuke plants..uh..uhno threat to public health...uh ..huh..huh contaminated, radioactive uh...huhhuh..uh..Butt-head yoou Dumbass.. huh..huh..uh