Image: AccuWeather.com
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
Serious nuclear incidents that followed Friday's catastrophic Japan earthquake have raised fears of radiation leakage, a weather-dependent matter that could have a far-reaching impact.
Were there to be a significant release of radiation, tracking the fallout would become a meteorological problem.
Japan lies in the mid latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere, as does the United States. Likewise, its weather is dominated by prevailing westerly winds, but with significant variation near the earth surface.
Exactly where a hypothetical "radiation cloud", from either Fukushima Daiichi or Onagawa, would go should depend upon the weather pattern at the time of, and following, the release.
Moreover, it should depend upon how high the cloud rose into the atmosphere. This is because the winds normally vary widely between the near-surface and the upper atmosphere, home to the eastward-flowing jet stream.
Generally speaking, any radioactive cloud rising significantly into the atmosphere would travel essentially eastward and northeastward across the Pacific Ocean, eventually reaching North America anywhere between Alaska and California. The precise details as to timing and path taken would depend upon the state of the atmosphere at the time of the hypothetical radiation release.
Although such a cloud would pose virtually no threat while in the upper atmosphere, the fallout at the ground of radioactive particles from it should be a concern for any monitoring authority.
A hypothetical release of radiation staying near the ground would be subject to low-level winds, which are more prone to varying.
Commonly, during cooler months of the year, surface winds blow off shore, or essentially west to east, in northeastern Honshu. A release of radiation confined to the lower atmosphere should be steered out to sea under such conditions.
Still, there are times when area winds blow on shore, and a hypothetical release amid a setting of onshore wind would undoubtedly be of great concern to authorities in Japan.
Calculated time for radioactive particles to cross the Pacific from the power plants in Japan to big West Coast cities if the particles take a direct path and move at a speed of 20 mph (estimated distance and time):
Anchorage 3,457 miles 7 days
Honolulu 3,847 miles 8 days
Seattle 4,792 miles 10 days
Los Angeles 5,477 miles 11 days
From AccuWeather.com (find the original story here); reprinted with permission.
See what we're tweeting about
10 Comments
Add CommentGiven that uranium and plutonium are too heavy to travel very far in low-level winds and radioactive iodine has a half life of 8 days, given a normal degree of horizontal dispersion in route, I fail to see much threat except possibly cesium, and it would take an awful lot of that to be very dangerous on the U.S. west coast. Anything that got up as high as the jet stream could circle the globe several times before settling out worldwide in a highly diluted state. I'm not particularly worried about it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisChina and Korea should feel fortunate that it's not the hight of the Pacific cyclone season, however. That would be all they need.
Sorry about the typo on height in the second paragraph. It's late and spell check didn't catch it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBut what I haven't heard one word is. if there is a total meltdown through the core. Then hits the water table that hot(about 20 feet max)there will be a geo? thermal nuclear explosion that is unimaginable .. That is just One of who really knows 7? Time to love while you still can.party on
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI was really needing feedback on this.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishank, the China Syndrome is theoretically possible, but I don't think stuff will go all the way up into the Jet Stream in large amounts. Look at Hawaii, they have lava pouring in the ocean all the time, but the steam only goes a few hundred feet up.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHi - generally why is your forecast showing 11 days to California but the New York Times animation from the UN's Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty organization is showing only 6 days? That piece essentially says radiation, however small, could reach California this Friday. (What differences account for the discrepancy in days?)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/17/science/17plume.html?hp
Given that the radioactive iodine (the most likely to be dispersed any distance) has a half life ~8 days . .
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd that it will be . .well dispersed over a large area over that distance . . . I am not seeing the worry or problem here??
oh I forgot an ignorant and rather unschooled public that distrusts all "authority" of any kind but yet does trust?! self-proclaimed ignorants that tend to be just loud and news agencies that only want to entertain then tell factual news.
I in the end people buying iodine pills in the US are Rubes getting fleeced. Talking heads are talking, the news is all about DOOM . . . kind of forgetting that people ARE in need.
West coasters should read a book/go to school and learn something if they do not trust anyone else. The news should tell . . the NEWS. And we all can help the people of Japan.
However, in certain circumstances, excessive consumption of iodine can actually inhibit the synthesis of thyroid hormones, thereby leading to the development of goiter (enlargement of the thyroid gland) and hypothyroidism. Excessive iodine intake may also cause hyperthyroidism, thyroid papillary cancer, and/or iodermia (a serious skin reaction).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn an attempt to prevent these symptoms of iodine toxicity, the Institute of Medicine established the following Tolerable Upper Intake Levels (TUL) for iodine:
• 1-3 years: 900 mcg
• 4-8 years: 300 mcg
• 9-13 years: 600 mcg
• 14-18 years: 900 mcg
• 19 years and older: 1,100 mcg
• Pregnant women 14-18 years: 900 mcg
• Pregnant women 19 years and older: 1,100 mcg
• Lactating women 14-18 years: 900 mcg
• Lactating women 19 years and older: 1,100 mcg
It is important to note that if you have an autoimmune thyroid disease (for example, Grave's disease or Hashimoto's disease) or if you have experienced an iodine deficiency at some point in your life, you may be more susceptible to the dangers of excessive iodine consumption, and may, therefore, need to monitor your intake of iodine more carefully.
What could be the result of seeding the cloud for artificial rains when the clouds are in the midsts of pacific?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think that radiation is a major problem for the whole world. Risk of radiation can be seen in the fear of the Japanese pepople. They were always calm people and it was hard to surprise them. This situation for them is very difficult. Personally, this poses a risk. I got radiation detector for your safety.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI bought it online on web site www.radiationchecker.com.
Just receive it in 2 days ago.