Can We Say, He’s Lying?: UC Berkeley Prof.: “We did indeed see high… fairly… I mean… some… level of radiation”

Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, research project funded by the Korean gov’t, published 2014 (emphasis added):  … even though almost three years have passed since the [Fukushima] accident, it is still having a tremendous impact not only on Japan but all over the world… [Fission products] are easily dispersed in the atmosphere [and] transported very easily by winds… [O]nce they are released into the atmosphere, their consequences are enormous from the viewpoint of the public health…

[A] high concentration of 137Cs arrived in western North America on 17 March 2011… [The] release of large amounts of radioactivity into the environment poses a global risk… [F]ission products… can be easily transported to any places in the world [and] not just be deposited locally but globally… Recently, computer simulations revealed that on average only 8% of the 137Cs airborne particles are expected to deposit within an area of 50 km around the accident site and about
50% of the airborne particles would be deposited outside a radius of 1000 km…Due to this radioactivity release into the environment, the Fukushima accident has had a tremendous impact not only on Japan but all over the world as well… radioactive material knows no national boundary…

Martin Wright, Radiation Protection Sr. Engineer at Diablo Canyon nuclear plant, 21st Annual RETS/REMP Workshop

• Air in San Luis Obispo (between LA & San Francisco),Mar 20-21, 2011: Iodine-131 @ 5.07 E-12 μCi/cc
• Equivalent to 5.07 pCi/m³, over 5 times (563%) Nuclear Regulatory Commission reporting level of 0.9 pCi/m³
• Equivalent to 187,590 microBq/m³, which would rank #5 out of 70 daily measurements at Japan’s only CTBTO monitoring station (Gunma Prefecture, bordering SW Fukushima)

Interview with Prof. Kai Vetter, UC Berkeley Department of Nuclear Engineering, Apr. 15, 2011 (at 3:30 in): Even for us, it’s not really clear what happened, and what is still ongoing. Overall the message is, indeed, it’s better… our information right now is it’s much better controlled than 3 weeks ago, when we did indeed see high… fairly… I mean… some… level of radiation, and since then, declining… There are still continued releases from the environment there — not as much 3 weeks ago — but there’s still some releases. >> Full interview here

See also: During worst Fukushima releases, region in California hit hard by plume had NO radiation monitors — Email reveals EPA ‘decided’ not to deploy RADNET to area — Only one that was working ‘broke’ as radioactivity began to spike — “No clue” about exposure levels