Reply #66: It doesn't appear these numbers are taken from the ZAMG website

[reorg]

they are from the New Scientist report:

"... iodine-131 is being released at daily levels 73 per cent of those seen after the 1986 disaster. The daily amount of caesium-137 released from Fukushima Daiichi is around 60 per cent of the amount released from Chernobyl. ...

... caesium-137 emissions are on the same order of magnitude as at Chernobyl. The Sacramento readings suggest it has emitted 5 × 1015 becquerels of caesium-137 per day; Chernobyl put out 8.5 × 1016 in total – around 70 per cent more per day."

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20285-fukushima-radioactive-fallout-nears-chernobyl-levels.html

Apparently, the New Scientist interviewed Gerhard Wotawa of Austria's Central Institute for Meteorology and Geodynamics in Vienna and did not base their report on the daily briefings at the ZAMG website.

Note the distinction between the percentage released daily and the total amount of the radioactive elements released.


As to the numbers from IAEA, they publish different readings every day, individual readings from various locations, I suppose. I don't know how they compare to the readings made in Chernobyl. As I mentioned elsewhere, 555,000 Bequerel per square meter were considered "hot spots" by the government in Russia at the time. In some places, the IAEA measured up to 900,000 Bequerel per square meter:

"The IAEA took measurements at additional locations between 35 to 68 km from the Fukushima plant. The dose-rate results ranged from 0.8 to 9.1 microsieverts per hour. The beta-gamma contamination measurements ranged from 0.08 to 0.9 MBq per square metre."

http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/2011/fukushima220311.html