Archive for February, 2012

Fukushima Year in review 2. How to be an idiot. Dr Grimes at the Dentist.

February 29, 2012

Year in review – an idiot covers up what was in the cloud, reducing Tony Jones, the interviewer, to the status of a dentist working with pliers and a weak grin, Its like pulling teeth folks. Main question: what was in the cloud? thats what people want to know?

A bit closer to the truth:
Deposition of fission and activation products after the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant accid



Fukushima Year in Review 1 – or How to be an idiot.

February 29, 2012

More notable quotes from industry inspired hack slag heap coming up.

At the time British & Australian “nuclear experts” in 3/11 were saying Fukushima safe, Japanese experts were fleeing the scene.

February 29, 2012

The chief British scientist and Dr Grimes of Imperial College and Australia’s foremost cell phone seller and former (thankfully) head of ANSTO Ziggy S and others all claimed, on the basis of their immense knowledge that the Fuk reactor disaster was a bit of a technical glitch and nothing much to worry about. Other pronukers claimed that the reactors would be back on line in 12 months. Best in the world. Ziggy did modify his statements a bit as time passed. However, here’s what Japanese business think. They are talking about the JGov’s demand that the TEPCO board be sacked and be replaced by newbies. (Who’s gonna train them up? The old board probably. Bombadiers still in charge of public health.) The Gov should rip up the entire nuclear culture in Japan, which is something out of the 1950s and that includes itself. Sell the whole nuke system to Sweden and let them run it until it is physically dismantled brick by brick and control rod by control rod.

The Mainichi Daily News Japan

Hiromasa Yonekura, head of the Japan Business Federation (Nippon Keidanren), has criticized the government for its response to the crisis at the tsunami-hit Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant.

“The accident was caused not by problems involving the management of Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) but by the massive natural disasters. In particular, I think the government’s response was very wrong,” Yonekura told a news conference on Feb. 27.

“Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) workers stationed near the plant escaped shortly after the accident. However, TEPCO workers did their best to bring the crisis under control without fleeing,” he said. “The government should apologize saying, ‘We’re sorry about NISA workers fleeing the scene.'”

Yonekura referred to the fact that NISA inspectors stationed near the power plant evacuated to an off-site center on March 12, immediately after the crisis broke out.

The government’s fact-finding panel on the nuclear crisis stated in its interim report in December that questions remain as to whether the inspectors’ decision to evacuate at the time was appropriate.

Yonekura also expressed his understanding of TEPCO’s plan to raise electricity rates for corporate customers. “TEPCO is required to import extra crude oil because it can’t operate its nuclear plants, costing itself trillions of yen. Electric power companies would go bankrupt if they were told not to raise their rates under these circumstances.”

His remarks, which can be interpreted as defending TEPCO from criticism, could stir controversy. end quote. The bit that interests me, and which we remember well because then PM Kan threatened TEPCO when it weakened and wanted to pull its workers out is the bit I have highlighted in bold. Unknown to us at the time was the Gov projections which showed worst case. These projections were hidden. And actually, by any reasonable reading, meant the death of Japan as a modern state. Kan was on the verge of evacuating Tokyo. Not do able in any sensible way. The sensible way to evac Tokyo would have been to do it prior to the reactors being built.

The keeping of people in hot zones in Japan is a way of denying the reality – that is , while worst case is discounted, so is best case (no problem, just a glitch) so what is the real case? Somewhere between worst case and best case and the children of the molten cores are the window dressing to portray “all is well”. As Avon Hudson and Roger Cross said re Australia in the 50s “Beyond Belief”. Beyond belief that a national government would risk the health of its children and would and is sacrificing then on the alter to the phony god “nuke is safe and economic”. It aint.

ITS NOT LIKE A CT SCAN. ITS MORE LIKE A RADIO-CHEMICAL DISASTER AND THAT IS WHAT IT IS. People arent dumb. There never was a CT scanner floating over Tokyo. There were clouds of powdered fuel rod dust drifting and depositing over wide areas of Fukushima Prefecture, adjoining Prefectures and Tokyo and the hemisphere.


That’s fact Ziggy. Nukes are not zero emissions. Where’s the fission product tax?

Thyroid Monitoring of Children and recent reports from Fukushima

February 29, 2012

ABC AUSTRALIA Fukushima children checked for thyroid problems
North Asia correspondent Mark Willacy

Updated October 10, 2011 11:17:38

Japanese health authorities have begun checking hundreds of thousands of children from the Fukushima prefecture for thyroid problems.

It is feared many of them have health problems that have developed after exposure to radiation.

The ultrasonic thyroid examinations will be conducted on every child who was aged 18 or under when the reactors at the Fukushima nuclear plant melted down in March.

A total of 360,000 children will be examined to see if they have any pathological lesions.

They will have follow-up exams every two years until they turn 20.

Radioactive iodine tends to accumulate in children’s thyroid glands more than those of adults, placing them at greater risks of diseases such as cancer.


子ども26人に良性のしこり 甲状腺「事故の影響なし」


2012/01/25 19:58


“No effect of the accident” in human benign thyroid lump of 26 children

Received the first nuclear accident in Fukushima Prefecture Fukushima Tokyo Electric Power Company, which promoted the examination of human thyroid approximately 360,000 children under the age of 18 is 25 days, open a review by an expert committee, 3,765 people in the area of evacuation was carried out leading out, and a lump was found in 26 people of a certain size, a summary of the results that you were all benign. Has been Vice President Shunichi Yamashita, Fukushima Prefectural Medical College is the Chair of the committee considered “malignant change associated with the nuclear accident will not be watched.”

I organized the results are, Namie-machi, Iidate Village, in children of district Yamakiya town Kawamata that is specified in the area evacuation planned areas and vigilance in the nuclear accident, the results of diagnostic imaging by ultrasound, the human 3739 anomaly is not found did not.

END GOOGLE TRANSLATE. clear as mud. What was the expected rate of thyroid change? Same problem as with Chernobyl. No pre accident data. What’s normal?

In years to come, this will be a growing concern. Heaven forbid that authorities watch for malignant change lest they skew the stats.

As the anniversary of the ongoing Fukushima disaster nears, watch the Japanese bloggers

February 29, 2012

the crisis is ongoing, the nuke plant is unstable and emergency responses to changed conditions in the complex seem regular.

People are getting sick with symptoms which approximate those experienced by people who have recieved treatment doses of external ray therapy. However the problem in parts of Japan is not external photons but an ongoing accumulation of internal emitters from various vectors, including external environment and food. The plants are still venting fission products. It will take 30 years to dismantle the reactors and associated buildings. Where will they be buried?

Though the media has been relatively mute, this is an unmitigated disaster. Its consequences will be felt for decades and people will have shortened lives, premature disease and there will be, as has been reported, immediate illness.

Link to my other nuke related blog

February 29, 2012

Set up as means with which to aim some facts at people who hold a different view.

ie it was ammo against people who hold nuke is good for you and that nuke is a way of halting climate change.

As Fukushima Disaster ends its first year…misc links.

February 29, 2012

Fukushima Nuclear Plant: Japan leaders Feared ‘Devil’s Chain Reaction’

The entire MSM echochamber is suddenly abuzz with Fukushima stories. It is as though somebody flipped a switch. The stories are virtually identical to each other, and they all refer to the disaster in the past tense. Like article above, it states that “the reactors were stabilised by December”. Those of us who have paid attn know this isn’t true. Just today Nuckelchen posted this

new Video of Reactor 3 belching smoke.

Expect The Echo Chamber to explode as we get closer to 3/11.


From Whoopie in Seattle: Real simple to comment. Let’s tell Japan Times how we feel, shall we?

Did you know?
Every remaining nuclear power plant is a disaster waiting to happen. Twenty-three of these in the U.S. are the same design as those that are melting down at Fukushima Daiichi.

Did you know?
After President John F. Kennedy signed the 1963 treaty banning above-ground atom bomb tests, there was an immediate and drastic decline in U.S. infant deaths and cancer in young children.

Did you know?
One in six of our population living within 50 miles of a nuclear reactor. All forms of cancer can be induced by radiation. The incidence increases with cumulative dose, and younger aged individuals – human, animals and plants alike – are more sensitive to ionizing radiation than adults. It is not only cancer that is of concern, but genetic damage, birth defects, over-all health and loss of intellectual capacity, the latter absolutely essential for survival.

Did you know?
Since the Fukushima disaster, only two of 54 Japanese reactors are operating – the rest closed for inspection and upgrades. Germany and Switzerland have pledged to phase out their reactors, and other nations are considering the same.

Did you know?
66 Years Ago Today: The Nuclear Age Arrived—an­d the ‘Cover-up’ Began

“You can deny reality,…but you CAN NOT escape the consequences of a denied reality”



demons dancing on a pin head in Fukushima. Grams per Curie.

February 29, 2012

A Facebook exchange.

Paul Langley
How many demons dance on the head of a pin?
The difference between the natural radioisotopes and the artificial ones – the fission products boil down to counting demons emitted per second from equal weights of the radioisotopes. 1 gram of radium = 1 curie . 1 curie = how many emissions of radiation tracks per second? 1 gram of strontium 89 = 27,800 curies. therefore 1/27,800 th of a gram …See More
Like · · about an hour ago

Ray Masalas likes this.
Brett Burnard Stokes you rang?
about an hour ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley can you work it out? if 1 gram of ra = 1 curie, and 1 gram of Sr89 = 27,800 curies, how much sr89, in fractions of a gram, is needed to produce 1 curie?
about an hour ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley ‎1/27,800 th of a gram right ?
about an hour ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley Now Ive forgotten where I was.
about an hour ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley oh yea, but Sr89 is beta and ra is alpha, so using the Sievert quality factor, (8 for alpha) to find out the equivalent mass of Sr89 to have the same biological effectiveness of radium, the 1/27,800 has to be multiplied by 8. The give the equivalent mass in fractions of a grams, of strontium to that of 1 gram of radium. 1 gram of radium internalised is lethal.
about an hour ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley Can you draw the amount of strontium 89 to scale Brett? it would be smaller than a pin prick.
about an hour ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley way smaller.
about an hour ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley I m runninhg off to find my Pauling book. He gives the number of radiation tracks emitted per second per cuire.
about an hour ago · Like
Brett Burnard Stokes hey …
from above, multiply by 8 as well to get ….
8/(2.78 times 10 to the 4th)
= approx 3 times 10 to minus 4 grams
= .0003 grams
about an hour ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley This is the fundamentally scary part about all this stuff. the weenie weenie amounts that can kill. Not like an oil spill.
about an hour ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley How are you Brett anyway?
about an hour ago · Like · 2
Paul Langley ripper. .0003 grams of Sr89 has the same biological effect when in the body as 1 gram of radium. And noone would say 1 gram of internalised radium is survivable. Not even Marshall Brucer.
about an hour ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley I ower Brett a lump of sugar.
about an hour ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley Ill bring it around in the form of a can of coke.
about an hour ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley The next party trick is to find out what the equivalent mass of Srontium 89 is equal to Robley Evan’s supposed safe tolerance dose for radium. It gonna be something like .00000003 grams. Trying measuring that out with a teaspoon.
about an hour ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley I cant find my Linus Pauling book.
about an hour ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley answer (wiki) 1 curie = 1 Ci = 3.7 × 1010 decays per second.
about an hour ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley ‎.0003 grams of Sr89 = 1 curie which is 3.7 x 1010 beta emissions per second. which is equal in count to 1 gram of radium. If the Sievert Q factor of 8 alpha and 1 for beta is right. And that is another source of decpetion, for they given the Q for gamma as 1 as well. I dont believe gamma is as effective an ioniser as beta. I think alpha should 40, beta 10 and gamma 1. imo. who knows.
about an hour ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley
Curie – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is roughly the activity of 1 gram of the radium isotope 226Ra, a substance …See More
about an hour ago · Like ·
about an hour ago · Like · 2
Paul Langley the lethal amounts of the fission products are TOO SMALL TO SEE OR COMMONLY MEASURE.
about an hour ago · Like
Paul Langley nuclear pollution = the quantum realm interacting with the macro world. v
about an hour ago · Like
Paul Langley photons = em energy with no mass and no size. eg light, and when of high enough energy, capable of ionisation eg gamma, X rays. particulate radiation – high speed particles eg alpha, beta. alpha, beta – not like a ct scan, more like the particles fired at CERN and Fermilab;
about an hour ago · Like
Paul Langley confusing thing: small particles of radioactive material can fire both photons (eg cesium gamma, beta) and particles (alpha, beta). Pu specks fire alpha, the fission products mainly fire beta.
about an hour ago · Like
Paul Langley So the number of demons is 3.7 x 1010. (easy to remember, because you put osx on a dell 1011 but not on a 1010.
about an hour ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley EVACUATE FUKUSHIMA. !!!!!!
about an hour ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley cant resist it. Have to sling off at hormesis. How much strontium 89 is a supposedly beneficial dose? .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 of gram ? BULLSHIT, but PROVE it Barry Brooks.
about an hour ago · Like
Paul Langley ANYHOW HOW ARE THEY GONNA DOLE IT OUT IN THE REAL, POLLUTED WORLD? they cant control the dose in grams or fractions of a gram. they rely on chance (quantum realm interacting with macro world) and hide behind statistics. when that doesnt world, they cook the books.
about an hour ago · Like
Paul Langley ‎”predictable but unforeseeable” as to when and how for the individual. (adaptation of Heisenberg
Uncertainty principle – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In quantum mechanics, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle states a fundamental …See More
59 minutes ago · Like ·
Paul Langley anyway, the LEGAL use of CT scans ALWAYS mandates INFORMED CONSENT. for it is illegal use CT scanners outside of the medical setting. And several entire Prefecture in Japan cannot be considered a medical facility. Unless the nuke industry is running an experiment. Which they are.
51 minutes ago · Like · 1
Paul Langley If I bought a CT scanner (noone would sell me one) and set it up in my garage, and zapped mice with it to see what happened, I’d be arrested for 1. zapping mice 2. owning the machine. Lethal Twits who own NPPs can do whatever and say whatever they like apparently. So there is a new board comming in. New heads, same hydra.
49 minutes ago · Like · 1
Ray Masalas You guys are amazing. Good night bro’s. 3:30 in the ole am here. So it’s illegal to zap mice there eh? Aha Ha Ha Ha Ha ha. Night guys.
36 minutes ago · Like

As for that radiologist in Adelaide who has told the public that he deliberately exposes himself to radiation, well, check this out dude.

And I for one wont be getting ANY medical assistance from that radiologist even if he were the last radiologist with the last machines on the planet. I would rather die alone and untreated. Adelaide Radiology Centre SUCKS BIG TIME because it does not, going by the public comments of its staff, value the concept of INFORMED CONSENT. The people of Fukushima didnt give their consent for their current, accumulating, body burdens of Tepco’s fission and fuel products.

Official Transcript of Proceedings -NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Title: Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi ET Audio File FOIA

February 25, 2012

A few notable quotes:


PAGE 20 LINES 20-25


Look at page 63 and you will read about Chairman Jaczko asking about his employees who were enroute to Japan and he wants to know did they get their Ki (potassium iodide). Seems NRC employees knew to take and were provided this thyroid cancer supplement, but screw the rest of the world.

Thanks Whoopie in US.

Interesting that the guardians of that leaky Grail “Nuclear Safety” turn out to be believers in Hormesis. That’s a theory obviously just to be applied to ordinary people.

I deeply regret ever attempting to rationally debate that particular religion in this blog and weeding, removal and incineration of my offending and gormless posts – mainly knocking it, so I wont buy a sword to fall on.


Save the date says the caption (photo of date palm tree on beach) . The poster: an ad for an hormesis conference in Rio this year. Save the date? Save the planet from these fanatics!!!

Boosting the body’s repair mechanism is not proof of benefit. It is proof harm response. That’s all.

Home Office records: HO228 Scientific Advisers’ Branch; reports (Z Series), 1948-1966

February 25, 2012

King’s College London
Liddell Hart Centre for Military Archives

Nuclear History Database
Records held at the Public Record Office Kew

Home Office records:
HO228 Scientific Advisers’ Branch; reports (Z Series), 1948-1966

36 files

The Scientific Advisers’ Branch of the Home Office was established in 1948 with responsibility for advising all government departments concerned with civil defence, and advising other divisions of the Home Office on scientific matters generally.

Reports dealing with the effects of possible nuclear war on the civil population and measures intended to mitigate these effects. The majority of pieces are collections of papers given to Civil Defence Regional Scientific Advisers at conferences or meetings. See also HO225-HO227, HO229, HO338 and HO45.

HO228/2 1948

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: USA Naval Technical Mission to Japan; extracts and notes on atomic bombs, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

HO228/3 1948

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: crater debris; report.

HO228/4 1948

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: note on sampling method.

HO228/5 1948

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: radiation hazards from atomic bombs; report.

HO228/6 1948

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: some thoughts on the fire problem from atomic bombs; report.

HO228/7 1949

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: notes on the distribution of the population of Greater London.

HO228/8 [1949]

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: the effect of window opening on the fire risk in domestic property; report.

HO228/9 1950

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: the hydrogen bomb; draft note for the director general of training.

HO228/10 1950

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: the resistance of concrete to explosions and projectiles; report.

HO228/11 1950

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: papers read at the meeting held on 12 Apr 1950 between the staff of the Civil Defence Staff College, the Civil Defence Schools and the Scientific Advisers’ Branch on radioactive ground contamination and civil defence; shelter policy and atomic casualties; problems of civilian morale; the potentialities of nerve gas as a chemical weapon agent.

HO228/12 1949

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: the zoning of towns for fire susceptibility; report.

HO228/13 1951

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: papers read at the meeting held on 6-8 Nov 1950: deaths from the explosion of an atomic bomb more or less powerful than that used at Nagasaki; debris, its distribution and the means of negotiating it; the zoning of towns for fire susceptibility; mustard gas on cities; social and economic effects of German air raids on the UK in World War II; estimates of homeless from atomic, explosive and incendiary bomb attack; the possible economic effects of atomic attack on centres of UK population; the risk of inhaled or ingested fission products compared with the external radiation risk; a problem connected with fallout.

HO228/14 1951

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: summary of papers read at the meeting held on 16-17 May 1951; paper on possible trend of future developments in atomic weapons; experimental developments in air raid warnings; regional scientific advisers and technical aspects of reconnaissance; decontamination; some aspects of the debris problem arising from an airburst atomic bomb assumed to burst over Trafalgar Square; respirators and protective clothing for civil defence personnel; an appreciation of radiological hazards in time of war; nerve and mustard gas; the atomic bomb as a fire raiser; memorandum on the use of radiation metering instruments in civil defence operations and training; discussion on practical monitoring and the present position regarding policy and organisation.

HO228/15 1952

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: papers read at the meeting held on 7-9 Apr 1952 on lessons from incendiary attacks on Hamburg; fireguards, to be or not to be; assessment of an attack on a city area with mustard gas; shadowgraphs; influence of the height of burst on the effects of an atomic bomb; some chemical warfare problems; combined operations; obstruction by debris in city streets after an atomic attack.

HO228/16 1953

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: report of a conference of the Regional Scientific Advisers for Civil Defence held at the Civil Defence Staff College, Apr 1953; papers on strategic assumptions for Civil Defence; Civil Defence aspects of the Monte Bello trial; warning systems and the general public; some factors affecting shelter design and policy; the allowable radiation dose in wartime and its implications; civilian behaviour under air attack; implications of FP (fission products) deposition.

HO228/17 1954

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: report of a conference of the Regional Scientific Advisers for Civil Defence held at the Civil Defence Staff College, 1-3 Jun 1954; papers on impact of hydrogen bomb on civil defence; a theoretical evacuation study; expected scale of types of attack; thermal effects of the British atomic bomb trials; gamma ray penetration at the Woomera tests; Admiralty gamma ray measurements at Monte Bello and Woomera; the work of the Scientific Advisers in the regions; training of radiac officers; radioactive training grounds; biological warfare; hazards of radioactive contamination from a water burst; agricultural problems resulting from a water burst; recent trends in radiac instrumentation.

HO228/18 1955

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: report of a conference of the Regional Scientific Advisers for Civil Defence held at Civil Defence Staff College, 23-25 May 1955; papers on the consequences of a thermonuclear explosion; fallout from a groundburst bomb; the characteristics of residual radioactivity; the fallout and the meteorological problems; the physiological effects of radiation; the contamination of water supplies; hazards to grazing animals in the period immediately following a nuclear explosion; hazards from fallout to vegetation immediately following a thermonuclear explosion; monitoring and plotting of fallout; problems in the fallout area; technical reconnaissance; leader equipment; concluding discussion.

HO228/19 [1956]

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: the radiation dose to human tissues from natural sources.

HO228/20 1957

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: report of a conference of the Regional Scientific Advisers for Civil Defence held at the Civil Defence Staff College, 4-6 Jun 1957; papers on civil defence policy; fallout prediction from meteorological information; the work of the Radiobiologist Research Unit; introductory talk on fallout plotting; aerial survey and possible applications to civil defence; report on tests on structures, of atomic trials; radiological work during the BUFFALO atomic trial; thermal radiation; chemical warfare-training of radiac officers.

HO228/21 1957

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: report of a course given to university physics lecturers at the Civil Defence Staff College, 8-11 Jul 1957; papers on nuclear weapons and their effects; blast from nuclear weapons; thermal radiation; biological effects of nuclear radiation; radiological control in the damaged area; control of civil defence forces; protection afforded by buildings against gamma radiation from fallout; meteorological aspects of radioactive fallout; fallout plotting; public control in a fallout area; introductory talk on fallout plotting; problems of water contamination; effects of nuclear weapon attack on agriculture and food; radiological decontamination; trends in radiac instrumentation; radiac fallout simulator; assessment of the protection afforded by buildings against gamma radiation from fallout.

HO228/22 1959

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: report of the conference of the Regional Scientific Advisers for Civil Defence held at the Civil Defence Staff College, 20-22 May 1958; papers on the travel and deposition of radioactivity in the Windscale accident; fallout-an analysis of the most recent data; meteorology and the fallout prediction; fallout plotting and reporting up to the regional level; new plans for the control of civil defence operations; the regional scientific organisation in relation to new operational plans; the effects of ionising radiation on human beings; radiation hazards.

HO228/23 1959

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: report of a conference of the Regional Scientific Advisers for Civil Defence held at the Civil Defence Staff College, 12-14 May 1959; papers on operation of the scientific team at region; training of scientific intelligence officers; local authority training and exercise “Arc”; radiation tolerance doses in civil defence; deployment of civil defence forces into the damaged areas contaminated by fallout; survey of protection against fallout afforded by houses and other buildings; radioactive decontamination; proposed food monitoring organisation; study of “Torquemada” fire problems after a megaton explosion.

HO228/24 1961

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: report of a conference of the Regional Scientific Advisers for Civil Defence held at Civil Defence Staff College, 10-12 May 1960; papers on measurement of deposition and decay rates; food monitoring; the treatment of casualties from heavy dosage; effects of radiation on fertility; structural research for civil defence; display of fallout information in Central Government Headquarters; account of recent trials; the decay of fallout radiation; information derived from nuclear radiation injury from accidents.

HO228/25 1962

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: report of a conference of the Regional Scientific Advisers for Civil Defence held at Civil Defence Staff College 15-17 May 1962; papers on Soviet strategic air threat to the UK; blast effects of high yield weapons; effects of high yield weapons-interference with communications and electrical equipment; high explosive trails at Suffield, Canada; dispersal policy; modern concepts for chemical and bacteriological weapons; local authority controls-ventilation and other problems; training of scientific intelligence officers; planning assumptions for the assessment of food and water hazards. Retained.

HO228/(26) 1963

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: report of a conference of the Regional Scientific Advisers for Civil Defence held at the Civil Defence Staff College, 28-30 May 1963. (Missing)

HO228/27 1964

Report on conference of the Regional Scientific Advisers for Civil Defence held at the Civil Defence Staff College 12-14 May 1964: papers on resource evaluation for resource management; damage assessment; emergency planning for continuity of Government; methods of resource analysis in Canada; exercise CINLOG 1965; post attack problems; post attack problems of farming and agriculture in the UK, fallout predictions by probability; biological hazards of exposure to blastwaves; ionising radiation in leukaemia. Retained.

HO228/28 1966

Report of a conference of Regional Scientific Advisers for Civil Defence held at the Civil Defence Staff College 13-15 Sep 1965: papers on warning and monitoring organisation; communal shelters survey results; communal shelters; leadership; biological warfare implications for civil defence; chemical weapon defensive equipment; development of improved nuclear burst detector; discussion on training of scientific intelligence officers; use of scientific manpower; ERDs (effective residual doses) and their application to public control; discussion on combined hazards of external and internal radiation; application of input and output economic models.

HO228/36 1951

Scientific Advisers’ Branch: report of a conference of the Regional Scientific Advisers for Civil Defence held at the Civil Defence Staff College, 16-17 Oct 1951.

Next Section