1986
DOI: 10.1038/322690a0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Radionuclide deposition from the Chernobyl cloud

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

1987
1987
2005
2005

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 56 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While most of the released material was deposited close to the site of the accident in northern Ukraine, southern Belarus and Russia's Bryansk region (Stone, 2001), strong winds carried a plume towards Finland and Sweden (ApSimon and Wilson, 1986;Mould, 2000). By May 2, the plume had reached the UK and Japan, and by May 6, Canada and the United States (Ayoama et al, 1986;Smith and Clark, 1986;Mould, 2000). Even though 137 Cs was detected in the atmosphere in several regions of the United States following the accident (Larsen et al, 1986;Feely et al, 1988;Holloway and Liu, 1988), no record of a clear Chernobyl 137 Cs peak is observed in sediments from Florida (Robbins et al, 2000), Massachusetts (Spliethoff and Hemond, 1996), California (Fuller et al, 1999) or other locations in the country (Van Metre et al, 1997).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…While most of the released material was deposited close to the site of the accident in northern Ukraine, southern Belarus and Russia's Bryansk region (Stone, 2001), strong winds carried a plume towards Finland and Sweden (ApSimon and Wilson, 1986;Mould, 2000). By May 2, the plume had reached the UK and Japan, and by May 6, Canada and the United States (Ayoama et al, 1986;Smith and Clark, 1986;Mould, 2000). Even though 137 Cs was detected in the atmosphere in several regions of the United States following the accident (Larsen et al, 1986;Feely et al, 1988;Holloway and Liu, 1988), no record of a clear Chernobyl 137 Cs peak is observed in sediments from Florida (Robbins et al, 2000), Massachusetts (Spliethoff and Hemond, 1996), California (Fuller et al, 1999) or other locations in the country (Van Metre et al, 1997).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…This was due to the weather conditions prevailing during the passage of the radioactive cloud over the British Isles. It has been reported (Smith and Clark, 1986) that the first radioactive material reached southern England during the morning of 2 May. While dry deposition may account for a small amount of radioactive contamination, the high levels reported from the north of England and Wales were associated with heavy rainfall washing the material out of the atmosphere (Fry et al, 1986).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…While dry deposition may account for a small amount of radioactive contamination, the high levels reported from the north of England and Wales were associated with heavy rainfall washing the material out of the atmosphere (Fry et al, 1986). Smith and Clark (1986) suggest that Devon and Cornwall were not contaminated during the initial passage of the cloud. In addition there was no rain at North Wyke between midnight on 1 May 1986 and 23.30 h on 3 May 1986, by which time the cloud had passed well clear of southern England.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This separation was favored by the meteorological conditions at the end of April 1986, when a long period of high pressure over central Europe induced temperatures above-average and allowed the fallout cloud to drift westward (Smith and Clark, 1986). This separation was favored by the meteorological conditions at the end of April 1986, when a long period of high pressure over central Europe induced temperatures above-average and allowed the fallout cloud to drift westward (Smith and Clark, 1986).…”
Section: The Flux Of Chernobyl Cs and Ru Into Sedimentation Trapsmentioning
confidence: 99%