4 ms·

Thanks. So what’s the historical norm on those numbers?

yuliyp 5y ago
Most recent wayback machine sample I could find https://web.archive.org/web/20220226013028/https://www.npp.zp.ua/en/safety/arms https://web.archive.org/web/20220226013028/https://www.npp.z... shows comparable to right now
Gare 5y ago
0.1 microsieverts (uSv) per hour is normal background radiation rate. Right now in my apartment (far from Ukraine) the dose rate is 0.12 uSv/h.
- heavyset_go 5y ago
  Is there a map service you're using to find the radiation levels at your apartment?
  - Gare 5y ago
    Nope, it's from Geiger counter on my desk.
    - dylan604 5y ago
      Good lord, I love the understatedness of this comment.
      - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
        The seem to be like £100 on amazon.
        dylan604 5y ago
        Yeah, but the fact that a Ukranian actually has one. I was going to make an "In Soviet Russia..." style joke, but a quick reading of the room suggested not good timing.
        kortilla 5y ago
        Commenter literally said “far from Ukraine”. What are you talking about?
        dylan604 5y ago
        oh, you're right. i totally missed the word far on initial read. totally changes the everything.
        Gare 5y ago
        To be fair, I am around 500 km from the westernmost border, so not that far in American terms. We were affected by the Chernobyl disaster.
      - kortilla 5y ago
        ? It’s a Geiger counter. It’s cheaper than having an oscilloscope, which wouldn’t be “understated” either.
        dylan604 5y ago
        Do YOU have a geiger counter on your desk?
        JohnBooty 5y ago
        Well, I just ordered one, which was not a thing I expected to do when I woke up today. We'll see if it actually ships; seems lots of people have the same idea right now.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
slimsag 5y ago
Can't say historical, but 1,000 μsv/year is the annual limit / point at which increase cancer risk exists. Fukushima disaster levels were 400,000 μSv/h at peak. Short term dose of 10,000 μSv causes radiation sickness but probably not death. Beyond that it gets worse.
- mianos 5y ago
  I can say historically, background is 1,000-3,000 μsv a year depending where you live.
- isomel 5y ago
  According to the Linear-no-threshold model [1], any level of radiation, no matter how small, causes cancer. According to this model, the 1,000 μsv/year of normal background radiation already cause cancer for 1% of people. And any additional dose increase the risk further. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model However this model is contested. And the analysis on the cancers incidence in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and Chernobyl seems to indicate that this model is flawed. The exact model is difficult to estimate because of the low number of extra cancer is lost in the noise.

Most recent wayback machine sample I could find https://web.archive.org/web/20220226013028/https://www.npp.zp.ua/en/safety/arms https://web.archive.org/web/20220226013028/https://www.npp.z... shows comparable to right now

Gare 5y ago

0.1 microsieverts (uSv) per hour is normal background radiation rate. Right now in my apartment (far from Ukraine) the dose rate is 0.12 uSv/h.

heavyset_go 5y ago
Is there a map service you're using to find the radiation levels at your apartment?
- Gare 5y ago
  Nope, it's from Geiger counter on my desk.
  - dylan604 5y ago
    Good lord, I love the understatedness of this comment.
    - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
      The seem to be like £100 on amazon.
      - dylan604 5y ago
        Yeah, but the fact that a Ukranian actually has one. I was going to make an "In Soviet Russia..." style joke, but a quick reading of the room suggested not good timing.
        kortilla 5y ago
        Commenter literally said “far from Ukraine”. What are you talking about?
        dylan604 5y ago
        oh, you're right. i totally missed the word far on initial read. totally changes the everything.
        Gare 5y ago
        To be fair, I am around 500 km from the westernmost border, so not that far in American terms. We were affected by the Chernobyl disaster.
    - kortilla 5y ago
      ? It’s a Geiger counter. It’s cheaper than having an oscilloscope, which wouldn’t be “understated” either.
      - dylan604 5y ago
        Do YOU have a geiger counter on your desk?
        JohnBooty 5y ago
        Well, I just ordered one, which was not a thing I expected to do when I woke up today. We'll see if it actually ships; seems lots of people have the same idea right now.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

slimsag 5y ago

Can't say historical, but 1,000 μsv/year is the annual limit / point at which increase cancer risk exists. Fukushima disaster levels were 400,000 μSv/h at peak. Short term dose of 10,000 μSv causes radiation sickness but probably not death. Beyond that it gets worse.

mianos 5y ago
I can say historically, background is 1,000-3,000 μsv a year depending where you live.
isomel 5y ago
According to the Linear-no-threshold model [1], any level of radiation, no matter how small, causes cancer. According to this model, the 1,000 μsv/year of normal background radiation already cause cancer for 1% of people. And any additional dose increase the risk further. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model However this model is contested. And the analysis on the cancers incidence in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and Chernobyl seems to indicate that this model is flawed. The exact model is difficult to estimate because of the low number of extra cancer is lost in the noise.