What type of apocalypse is the hardest to survive?

Discussion in 'The Apocalypse' started by Vash, May 20, 2016.

What type of apocalypse is the hardest to survive? 5 5 1votes
5/5, 1 vote

  1. Vash

    Vash Member
      18/23

    Blog Posts:
    0
    There are many types of apocalypse. To think about it, there are at least two major categories.

    A. Natural disasters
    Even in this category, there are many possibilities
    1. Ice age or worse
    I have seen plenty of scifi movies about it. Where all the sudden the whole world froze. Only the places where used to be the hottest can still barely have people to survive, and those places are snowing very often with no spring in sight.
    It can totally happen, as the earth indeed goes through cycles of cold period and warmer period.

    One of the worst situation in a movie was that all the sudden some parts of the earth turned to "absolutely zero"... quite impossible in my opinion though.

    2. Age of inferno
    There was at least one movie about it I have seen where somehow the sun was getting slightly closer to the earth, and it resulted in almost everything on the earth were burnt to death. Very few people survived by wearing full protective suits, and they were robbing each other to survive. I think it can happen too if something happens to the sun or the distance between the earth and the sun... or even just the ozone around us.

    3. World of water
    While it is impossible to have the sea level raise so much that cover all land on earth, but what if an entire continent suddenly sink? It has happened before.

    4. Crop production collapsed for whatever reason
    As I have read, on a good year, the surplus food of the whole world can only last extra 45 days or so if all productivity ceases. So what if there is a world wide crop failure?


    B. Man made disasters
    5. Large scale world war
    Even without nukes, it can be really bad. Since a war can severely degrade the normal productivity of food, and consumer goods. Everything we use can be in shortage. A total collapse of a nation/society is also possible, and in that case so is the majority of the production.

    6. Nuclear winter
    What if the nukes are used? All the initial destruction and later the radiation will definitely kill most of the people. The remaining probably will wish they have died quickly. Since the nuclear winter will guarantee starvation.

    7. Skynet ... lolz...
    Please do not rule out this possibility. As militaries around the world are developing more sophisticated drones, and super computers, there is a realistic possibility that eventually we will have fully automated drones which are not remotely controlled by humans. When it happens, what if somehow we lose the control of an entire army of drones? What if they indeed become self-aware and decide no longer take orders from us?
    I have watched a Terminator video game a while back from Youtube. You play as Connor. Everywhere you go, there were tons of T-600, T-800, HK drones, HK tanks shooting at you on sight.

    8. Zombie apocalypse.
    While it quite impossible to reanimate corpse to be the walking (and biting) dead, it is realistic for some secret labs to develop biological weapons that can turn people into rabid crazies. When it happens, it will be like the movie "28 Days later" and "28 weeks later".

    Ok, there can be something else.
    9. Alien invasion
    While I think the possibility is quite low. Since a society would evolve beyond the mindset of wars if they are to be that advanced. But what if it happens?
    There are also movies about alien invaders who could easier take over the entire earth and leaving only isolated resistance / survivors. ex: War of the Worlds, Independence Day, etc. The situations in these two movies were actually not bad enough. There were movies about surviving the aftermath of total alien take over.

    So what do you think? Which one is the hardest to survive?
     
    Last edited: May 20, 2016
  2. lonewolf

    lonewolf Moderator Staff Member
      410/460

    Blog Posts:
    0
    nuclear apocalypse without a doubt.
     
    Keith H. likes this.
  3. Keith H.

    Keith H. Moderator Staff Member
      375/460

    Blog Posts:
    7
    I am with lonewolf, nuclear, absolutely.
    Keith.
     
  4. Arkane

    Arkane Master Survivalist
      275/297

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Hardest to survive would be a very much hotter planet like 20c hotter!
    5c hotter and everything will grow better, might have a few problems with sea level rise but overall good! more rain longer growing seasons less winter ice!
    5C COLDER and we are in deep trouble with approx. 50% crop reductions and deeper chill in winters! starving and freezing!
    A nuclear winter is temporary as in a single decade
    But we are actually returning to a glacial period right now! and have been for several hundred years!
    And that glacial will last the best part of 100k years!
    While most stare at the sun and curse the heat, behind the iceman cometh!
     
  5. Vash

    Vash Member
      18/23

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Some of guys are taking nuclear war as the most serious threat to your own survival? As long as you were not killed in the initial explosion, and not exposed to the radiation, then you are not in immediate danger other than trying not to starve to death. As Arkane said, nuclear winter will only last a decade or so before everything start to go back to normal. It is nothing compare to a long term ice age or "inferno" age which might last for hundreds thousands years or even much longer.

    The other threats from rebelling machines, genocidal aliens, or world wide zombie apocalypse will be lasting until you can somehow end it. Otherwise you will always be in the danger of getting killed violently on the top of having to keep your stomach full.

    Anyway, I believe in a lot of these situations, there will always be the threat from other humans. When everyone is for themselves, they do not care about you or me.

    As for which one do I think is the most dangerous situation, I would put alien invasion and machine rebelling among the top ones when exclude natural disasters. But long period of ice age or extremely hot weather are also very tough to get through. All of which will have only small number of survivors if somehow they can manage.
     
  6. lonewolf

    lonewolf Moderator Staff Member
      410/460

    Blog Posts:
    0
    the main problem in any scenario will be other people.
     
  7. Vash

    Vash Member
      18/23

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Yes, of course you will always have people as enemy when resources are less than plentiful.
    However in some of the scenarios such as alien invasion or machine rebelling, there is a common enemy for the humanity. When there is a common foe, I believe less people will kill each other over unnecessary circumstance. In fact, people will be more likely organized in order to fight off the enemies when it is necessary.

    On the other hand, the only foe in a natural disaster is death by starvation, sickness, or elements. So people will be more likely to fight over resources for their own survival. And some of them might even form gangs to terrorize others in the world of chaos.
     
  8. Keith H.

    Keith H. Moderator Staff Member
      375/460

    Blog Posts:
    7
    When I say Nuclear is the worst scenario, I am talking about being effected by it, having fall-out drifting over us. Remember that episode many years ago when a nuclear cloud drifted over the UK & the Prime Minister got on the media & ate food on TV & told everyone there was no threat? Bullshit!!! Nuclear fall out is nasty stuff, & comes in varying degrees depending on where you are. I stick to my original thoughts on this. I feel that I can survive anything that can be survived, anything that I have some control over. Nuclear I have NO control over! Sure I can tape all our windows & doors up, but then what? What about the garden produce? How long before we can start to collect rain water again? How long before we can actually leave the house?
    No mate, I will take any other disaster in preference to a nuclear one.
    Keith.
     
  9. Arkane

    Arkane Master Survivalist
      275/297

    Blog Posts:
    0
    But keith you are in Australia!
    Bugger all targets worthy of a nuke!
    Bugger all fallout from the northern hemisphere
    Actual effects from a nuke war on Aus are minimal
    Knock on effects will be much worse!

    Refugees armed and unarmed will be a big problem!
    Will be damned lucky they can't just walk here!

    Fallout has a basic 7 hour half-life and after 14 days is no longer a real problem except for a few areas of concentration!
    It will retain very small amounts of radiation for decades/centuries but again very small!
    Only the minute quantaties of the long half-life contaminants will be left!
    Washing down and ploughing in fixes that!
    Worldwide there are still detectable traces of the atmospheric tests of the 40's to 60's with no cleanup involved!

    Any fallout from the north will take so long to get here and be so dispersed as to pose no real short term problem
    Maybe a mild long term problem but a few precautions will stop most of that!
     
  10. Arboreal

    Arboreal Active Member
      36/47

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I know it sounds crazy, but he was actually right - sort of. When the Chernobyl radiation clouds drifted over Western Europe, there was not enough highly radioactive isotopes to really poison the food, especially since stuff you could get in shops was transported there before the disaster. Heck, there wasn't even enough fallout in them to position us on the worse side of the Iron Curtain, although people were then forbidden to pick mushrooms, since they apparently collected the radioactive elements in very high concentration, for some mushroomy reason. But British people don't pick mushrooms, as far as I know, so you guys were actually quite safe.
     
    Keith H. likes this.
  11. lonewolf

    lonewolf Moderator Staff Member
      410/460

    Blog Posts:
    0
    British people DO collect mushrooms, its getting very trendy, but there are far more out there that will kill us than those we can eat, and that was from someone who knew what he was talking about.
    I don't mind the odd mushroom but i'm not mad for them like some.
     
    Keith H. likes this.
  12. John Snort

    John Snort Well-Known Member
      92/93

    Blog Posts:
    0
    The apocalypse that would be hardest to survive: crop production failure. If crops can't grown then obviously all other plants wouldn't be faring any better. If plants can't grow then all animals that feed on them will die. When you have neither plants nor animals as food, starvation will follow soon after unless you live by the sea. Even if you do it won't be long before the oceans run out of fish.
     
    Keith H. likes this.
  13. lonewolf

    lonewolf Moderator Staff Member
      410/460

    Blog Posts:
    0
    there are only 2 reasons why crops/plants would fail, one is pollution and the other is the death of bees and all other pollinators.
    the seas are already over fished.
     
    Keith H. likes this.
  14. ProNine

    ProNine Member
      18/23

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Personally, I'd say the Age of Inferno event would be quite difficult to survive. Having to wear that protective armor all the time can be quite a hassle, and not being able to generate resources as you normally would because of the increased heat can prove to be quite difficult. As for the world of water scenario, there is a decent movie of a similar scenario called Waterworld. It shows you a world where almost everything gets submerged in water, and a lot of people end up building small communities on water.
     
  15. Keith H.

    Keith H. Moderator Staff Member
      375/460

    Blog Posts:
    7
    The Pacific Ocean is already contaminated with radioactivity from Japan. As far as I know it continues to run into the sea.
    Keith.
     
  16. meganisonfire

    meganisonfire New Member
      8/23

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I think that a nuclear apocalypse would be the worst scenario to survive. I think that the nukes can cause major sickness and disease to humanity which would create a lot of problems with survival. The sick would have a harder time taking care of themselves as well as hunting for food. This all depends on what kind of nuke hits humanity and how it affects the human race. If we can better prepare ourselves for such a disaster then we can protect ourselves from this in the future.
     
  17. Arkane

    Arkane Master Survivalist
      275/297

    Blog Posts:
    0
    One of the hardest to survive is a major Antarctic event!
    If something happens down there and a large portion of the accumulated ICE slips into the southern ocean!
    Approximatly 80% of the entire worlds population will be gone inside 24 hours and another 15% will get frozen shortly thereafter!

    95% GONE IN JUST A FEW WEEKS! that's without anyone shooting anyone!
     
  18. meganisonfire

    meganisonfire New Member
      8/23

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I never thought about an Antarctic event! You are absolutely right! I think majority of the population would be gone within 24 hours. It is hard to survive the cold. A person only has limited time to gather resources and stay warm before they freeze to death. I believe that when temperatures get into sub freezing that a person can die within a matter of seconds or minutes. This makes surviving very difficult unless you have high-tech gear that can survive the brutal temperatures.
     
  19. Arkane

    Arkane Master Survivalist
      275/297

    Blog Posts:
    0
    The Antarctic has enough ice on land that if it ALL slipped off into the southern ocean global sea levels would rise 50-60 meters!
    That ICE is at an average of minus 28c and it will be floating in/on an ocean as only +4c
    The amount of heat energy it will suck out of the oceans to melt as melt it will, will plunge the whole world into an "ICEAGE" inside a single year!
    And take a decade or two to stabilise at a new normal!
     
  20. Vash

    Vash Member
      18/23

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Yeah, that's one of the worst scenarios.
    People who live in homes without heat will die quickly.

    At this moment, I am not sure how people who live in the north will fare.
    On one hand, they do have double layer windows and doors. Homes in the north are better protected from the cold. They also have heat. When I used to live in the north, the lowest setting of the heater in the basement will automatically turn on when the temperature is below 45F. As the matter of fact, I always set it so my room was at 73F (about 23C) during the winter. When the outside temperature was -20C.
    On the other hand, if a global ice age takes place, the northern areas will probably become much colder than its usual temperature. So instead of -20C, it might become -50C or even worse. Maybe not even double layer homes and heaters will work. On the top of what if something happens to the gas company... Yep, we used natural gas for heating. People could die within hours in such cold.
     
  21. Arkane

    Arkane Master Survivalist
      275/297

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Whatever percentage of the ice slips there will be huge surges of water similar to tsunamis!
    The surges will approx. 2-5 times the amount of sea level rise!
    A 50% slip will give a 30m sea level rise but depending where it is there maybe up to 100m surges that sweep all before it only to suck most out again!
    How much slippage happens I have no real idea but a large portion of the Antarctic has liquid lakes below them!
    At a 10% slippage you are looking at a permanent 5m/17ft rise in global sea levels with initial surges around 15m/50ft!
    How would you fare? would you get wet? would you become an islander and be cut of from the mainland or whats left of it?
    I am at 34m elevation and protected from a surge but I may have difficulty going anywhere much without swimming! Soon to change though!
     
  22. Sealpikachu

    Sealpikachu Member
      13/23

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I think those revolving around natural disasters would be harder than man made ones. After all, men can rebuild and fix but we can't control nature. Think about it, earthquakes, floods, etc, those take out tons of people each year as it is. If they happened really often due to natural inbalance, we wouls have no way of protecting ourselves against them.
     
  23. Corzhens

    Corzhens Master Survivalist
      277/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I can relate to a man-made disaster particularly the destruction of the atomic bomb. We would be lucky to survive that because the explosion itself can kill thousands in the Metropolis. And then the radiation will kill people slowly. Worse, there is the fallout which are also radioactive. It would be a terrible situation for those who would survive because they may turn mutants.

    But for the sake of this thread, a survivor of that disaster should survive at any rate. First is the search of shelter which I believe would not be a problem for surely there would still be the structures (not all will be demolished by the bomb). Second concern is the food and water which may not be a problem at once since there are stocks in the stores. So maybe survival for one month will be easier than we can imagine. The real problem comes when the effect of the radiation becomes evident. What to do when the skin develops wounds?
     
  24. Arkane

    Arkane Master Survivalist
      275/297

    Blog Posts:
    0
    With a nuke when it go's off there is a blast of radiation about twice as long as the visable fireball! if you are in the open and get a full blast of radiation you are history!
    If you duck under cover quick you can reduce the amount absorbed!
    Now so long as you are outside the actual blast zone you will get sick but will recover
    Once the physical blast is over it becomes basicly safe from the actual bomb!
    Now is surviving the debris fires smoke and all the other dangers of a blast zone!
    Watching the drift of the ash cloud is important here, if it is heading your way move crosswise!
    Now try to at least get double the distance you were away, upwind or crosswind!

    Read up on radiation poisoning symptoms general rule is
    If you get sick in an hour or less you are toast! no one and nothing can help you!
    If it takes 6 hours to get sick you might be the 1% that survives but you probably wont want to and you will never fully recover!
    If it takes a full day you have a reasonable chance not good and you will get really sick for quite a while!
    If it takes more than two days for any symptoms to occur and you started healthy you will get better!

    Fallout!
    Fallout decays quickly at an approx. rate of a seven hour halflife!
    Do what you can to shield yourself from it! the first few days are the most important!
    Between you and the fallout you need mass and distance! 1-2m of dirt/sand/concrete/water works well
    If you are in a crowded shelter the middle surrounded by watery bodies is the best spot but for gods sake shut the fark up about it!
    Cover your mouth and try your best to not breathe any fallout/dust in!
    After two weeks it is relatively safe to exit! steer clear of any dust!
    Long term effects are mainly if you ingest/breathe it in be careful!
    Dust can be washed off buildings and or ploughed into the ground!!
    Do not wash into streams/waterways ! dig sumps/weirs to trap the silt!
    If you can source a detecter do grid search's and fence off any hotspots! and deal with them! or just leave and avoid for as long as possible!

    Dust masks help the full blown masks are not realistic for most!
    A couple dozen or so disposable two dollar masks for each person will suffice!
    When outside move slow and steady avoiding kicking up dust!
    Sleep in shelters if safe to do so afterwards as it will reduce exposure by 30%
    Stay as dust free as you can!
    Any food not contaminated with dust will be safe to eat radiation wise, all normal rules still apply to food!
    You can filter the fallout out of water enough so it is safe to drink!
    The fallout is the source of the residual radiation ! the radiation itself will not contaminate food!
    Any food not contaminated by the dust will be safe to eat!
     
  25. iseeyou

    iseeyou Member
      18/23

    Blog Posts:
    0
    There's really no easy choice, all of them are epic disasters but if i'll have to choose which one is worst, probably Nuclear winter, because it can wipe out an entire country in a second, and if there are survivors, it will be such a huge struggle for them to find food that's not contaminated or if there's even food at all.
     
  26. Arkane

    Arkane Master Survivalist
      275/297

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Nuclear winter will be good food wise! Everything left will be frozen so wont go rotten!
     
  27. lonewolf

    lonewolf Moderator Staff Member
      410/460

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I would have thought everything would be fried?
     
  28. Arkane

    Arkane Master Survivalist
      275/297

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Everything the blast zone yes but everywhere else will chill in the nuclear winter!
    Meat frozen in the field!
    All good until the thaw!
     
  29. lonewolf

    lonewolf Moderator Staff Member
      410/460

    Blog Posts:
    0
    not one i'm looking forward to.
     
  30. Vladimir Logos

    Vladimir Logos New Member
      3/23

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Any kind of apocalypse that causes air to disappear or air itself becomes so toxic that it kills in small doses. I cannot think of anything so extreme (not even nuclear fallout is that nasty). There's no escaping underground as it fills every crack and whole on Earth's crust. Ocean pollution e.g. has little effect on underground water reserves (it becomes a problem with time due to cyclical processes), so we could rely on that if the oceans became toxic. Humans can survive for like 10-15 days without liquid before they die. Lack of air will kill you in a matter of minutes. No air to breathe or toxic air is truly a nightmarish scenario to deal with.
     
  31. joshposh

    joshposh Expert Member
      230/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Look towards history and that will tell you what is the Apocalypse. Zombie movies are childish and I can't believe they have a sub forum for it. The closest thing we have to zombies are long time Meth users.

    An asteroid killed the dinosaurs. The impact of that alone created so much debris in the air that it blocked out the sun and the air was hardly breathable. Vegetation would die out, herbivores would follow, then the carnivorous. The cycle of life is disrupted and those that had the money can bunker down and wait it out for a decade or two before life begins again. But very few people will have the money and patience to last that long.
     
  32. Toast

    Toast New Member
      8/23

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Well, there are some apocalypses that straight up destroy the planet, so I would say those are probably the hardest to survive. If we're talking about ones on a lower scale, I would say a nuclear apocalypse would be up there. In a nuclear apocalypse, not only do you have to deal with all the normal stuff, there's also radiation on top of that. So if you somehow manage to avoid all the explosions, which would just kill you outright, you have to deal with all the after effects. This meaning genetic mutations, skin damage, not being able to breath, and sometimes straight out killed by it.
     
  33. FuZyOn

    FuZyOn Expert Member
      146/173

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I think mostly every apocalypse scenario possible will end the world as we know it so it's pretty hard to survive a disaster like that. I'd say the worst thing that could happen is nature destruction, we wouldn't be able to recover from that and the world will slowly and painfully die, that would be cruel. I don't believe in a zombie apocalypse even though that is the "coolest" option.
     
  34. henryb3rd

    henryb3rd New Member
      1/23

    Blog Posts:
    0
    The worst apocalypse to me has to be "human nature itself". Humans can't work together for anything. Not all at once. And they are quick to panic and riot first, and solve problems later when the dust settles. If any of these Apocalyptic Events ever did happen, humans have the potential to get through them all. Even if it's for the sake of future generations to survive, they could do it. But I don't think they would and everyone would suffer. That's what I'm scared of and would be the hardest to survive.
     
  35. CivilDefense

    CivilDefense Expert Member
      235/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    A full nuclear exchange between the major powers would be "the sum of all fears". Millions would die instantly in the attack. Many more would perish from burns, radiation sickness, and other injuries. Government would be paralyzed or nonexistent. Communication systems would be knocked out in large parts of the country. As the medical and sanitation systems failed, disease would rip through the population. Food production, preservation, and distribution would be disrupted to the point near nonexistence. No semblance of the economy, as we know it, would likely survive. And of course, desperate people do desperate things.

    Beyond that, an EMP strike would be pretty nasty business. A direct impact from something like a comet would also produce some of the effects of the aforementioned nuclear holocaust, though the odds of such an event are small when compared to others.
     
  36. CivilDefense

    CivilDefense Expert Member
      235/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I'd like to hear more about this episode. I'd wager most people were grossly misinformed about the amount of radiation and its effect. There is an unbelievable degree of ignorance on this topic.

    Exceedingly nasty.

    Define degrees. The decay rate of radioactive fallout is a constant regardless of the device.

    Sure you do. You can educate yourself and prepare.

    Taping your windows and doors is better than nothing, I suppose. You need a real shelter though. Remember the protective factors: distance, shielding, and time.

    Depending on the type of plant, there are ways to make them safe to eat. There is a CD video from 1965 that covers that, in case you are interested.

    Even fallout contaminated water can be filtered and be made potable. For a good guide, read Chapter 5 of Life After Doomsday, by Dr. Bruce Clayton and Chapter 8 of Nuclear War Survival Skills, by Dr. Cresson Kearny. There are a bunch of commercially available filters that remove radioactive particles. Note, radioactive elements cannot be removed by boiling or chemical disinfection.

    General, two weeks. Multiple nuclear survival books are now available on this site's resources page in case you wish to read more.

    Cheers.
     
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2016
  37. Old Geezer

    Old Geezer Master Survivalist
      297/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Biological weapons trump nukes. One Japanese man was nuked at both Hiroshima and Nagasaki -- he was so close that he received horrific burns, thermal and nuclear. This man lived to be 90 years old.
    http://www.history.com/news/the-man-who-survived-two-atomic-bombs

    Man-made, genetically engineered, biological weapons are not forgiving in any way. Turns out that the North Korean defector who just made it into the South has antibodies to anthrax. He was a soldier in the N.Korean military. Looks like Kim jong-Un is doing the smartest thing possible in fighting back against the West and that is to go with biologically engineered pathogens.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5213249/North-Korean-defector-ANTHRAX-antibodies-blood.html

    The USSR had an anthrax release back around 1979 at a facility in the Ural Mountains. They killed around 1500 of their own. The blame was placed on "tainted meat" even though the anthrax was pulmonary (airborne) in nature. I remember this well. Let me go looking for an article. Holy crap!, Wiki has an article and they mention the "tainted meat" excuse! Ha ha ha ha
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sverdlovsk_anthrax_leak
    I'm going to read all of this article tonight. It's in Wiki!!!!!!!!!!!!! ha ha ha ha who'd a'thunk it!!!!!!

    For years, I've said that people should watch out for tin-horn dictators, 'cause they gotta go nuke on the cheap, which is to say engineered biologicals. Easy peasy, American Universities crank out heaven only knows how many Masters and Doctorates in biology to foreign nationals each and every year. "We can all hold hands in unity!" So these kids go back to their home countries to work for their military industries, to include biological warfare development.

    People, if we get hit with Anthrax or any of its biological brethren, then one's only survival option is to hole-up and admit ZERO people looking for help. One must assume that ALL outsiders are infected.

    I was looking for anthrax vaccine sources. None, save for those who work these labs and for military personnel designated to receive such. There is anthrax immune globulin, Anthrasil, and let me tell you, this is NOT available to the public until Big Brother sez it will be made available. Thus, one must NOT get exposed to this hellish beast.
     
  38. watcherchris

    watcherchris Expert Member
      135/173

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Hmmmmmmmm


    LOL LOL LOL LOL....ok....interesting...to have a television and movie education.

    And some of these people are actually voters!!!

    Thanks,
    Watcherchris.
     
  39. watcherchris

    watcherchris Expert Member
      135/173

    Blog Posts:
    0
    On a more serious non movie note....

    Have any of you purchased one of these or similar?

    https://www.amazon.com/RADEX-RD1503...TF8&qid=1514374594&sr=8-1&keywords=radex+1503

    I have two of them and been able to check them against a significantly radioactive known sources for operational checks.

    They are not the best but the best can get significantly expensive.

    One is kept in a locker at work and the other right here at home.

    Good comments by someone on the difference in radiation and contamination....and that you don't want to get it internally. Externally it can be washed off..but internally it has to pass through your body to be washed or flushed out and monitored over time.


    Thanks,
    Watcherchris
     
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2017
  40. watcherchris

    watcherchris Expert Member
      135/173

    Blog Posts:
    0
    After making that last post yesterday ..I decided to take out my Radex 1503 counter and load the batteries into it and do an operational check to see if it still works as this check is long overdue.

    I've been doing a lot of repairs around this house so time has been a premium commodity.

    But the readings here are less than .02 mille rems per hour...once the unit stabilized out ...or more accurately .009 Mr/hr.

    What I need to do is take some time ...during my trips about town and bring this Radex 1503..and take readings...like at the parking lot of the grocery store...at Home Depot or Lowes...at my mothers house...the bank...places I am want to frequent...and of course right here at home.

    This serves as a base line...of what would be normal and to be kept in a running log and updated several times a year.

    You use this log as a cross check ..a base line...should anything abnormal happen....you have records going back.

    You also have a way to cross check officials should they try to BS you and your family for political reasons.

    This unit ..the Radex 1500 is about the size of a pack of cigarettes..and uses two AAA type batteries. I will shortly remove the batteries and store them with some extra AAA Batteries in double plastic bags..the unit itself also stored in double plastic bags and both batteries and unit pit into a Plano O ring sealed fishing lure box from Wal Mart. I do not keep the batteries within the unit when not in use.

    Radiation Technicians and or monitors take log readings of the areas in which they are working to establish exactly that ..what the normal readings are there daily....seasonably ....through out the year and also several times a day....as these readings can vary.

    Ok...putting the unit away and back in storage after removing the batteries.

    Thanks,
    Watcherchris.
     
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2017
  41. Old Geezer

    Old Geezer Master Survivalist
      297/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Some notes on radiation measurement

    Geiger counters are not so efficient when measuring some radiation sources. For instance, radon gas as found in the basements of homes built on certain rock types (like black shale) must be collected before being measured. A Geiger counter can measure precipitates, like particulate material gathered in roof guttering, radiation in the soil, radioactive metals, ... .

    "The Pocket Geiger Counter detector can be used to indirectly detect radon gas (it's an alpha emitter). One would do so by concentrating the radon for a few days (1-3) using activated charcoal and measuring the charcoal for any radiation readings. Note this only measures the presence of radon, for accurate pCi/L measurements one can purchase a radon gas detector."
    http://www.radiation-watch.co.uk/faqs

    In the days following the Fukushima power plant catastrophic failure, the world's supply of Geiger counters was sold out. Here is a 2013 article about measurements taken there in Japan:
    https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk...in-fukushima-with-pocket-geigers-and-bgeigies

    Measurement techniques
    http://www.env.go.jp/en/focus/docs/files/20140725-87-5.pdf

    Food contamination:
    http://www.geigercounters.com/FoodContamination/

    Is the radiation alpha beta or gamma?:
    http://www.geigercounters.com/AboutGeigers/

    Building your own "soup can" Geiger counter; actual name, Kearny Fallout Meter


    https://www.youtube.com/profile?ann...feature=iv&src_vid=5bJUHh0ElZc&user=kmomutube
     
  42. watcherchris

    watcherchris Expert Member
      135/173

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Olde Geezer,

    I don't think this counter does Alpha particles...only Beta/Gamma.

    The times I have seen a radiation tech use a alpha counter ...it was the type of wand which made the difference..not the counter machine itself..but the wands on the end of the cord.

    Would like to get a better counter but they start around $400 to 500 for the better ones....plus the correct wand if you want alpha detection systems.

    I've seen the technicians come in to check the Gamma alarms with a small source..in a very shielded container. Interesting evolution to observe. Also seen the radiation techs check their counters with a small source...as part of their PMs.


    Thanks,
    Watcherchris
     
  43. Old Geezer

    Old Geezer Master Survivalist
      297/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I read about your device and I believe it does detect alpha. Your meter was well rated in its class.

    Measuring radiation and radiation exposure is no simple subject. Where I live, there were and still are several industries that expose workers to radiation (heavy arms industry around here, depleted uranium, other nasties; people in S.Appalachia are willing to work seriously dangerous jobs). Therefore, I hear horror stories. Interesting thing is that some people live into their 70's even longer after having been exposed to high radiation levels.

    My father had radiation treatments for a medical condition no longer treated by such. He died long before his time (leukemia got him) due to his treatments. The radiation made his pain go away ... kind'a made him go away also.

    Oh, does everybody have stocks of potassium iodide (KI)?! Better stock up -- especially if you have kids. There is still some potassium iodate (KIO3) being marketed. The latter can be very hard on the gut. The iodate has a longer shelf life, however it is not as effective as the K iodide and the iodate has nasty side-effects for some people (I'd not give it to kids; I have some of the iodate and wouldn't give it to the young -- especially since I bought-up some fresh potassium iodide). The Iosat product (K+ iodide) has a shelf life of 7 years, about as high as one will ever find; the tabs are in aluminum blister packs.
     
  44. watcherchris

    watcherchris Expert Member
      135/173

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Hmmmmmm....Olde Geezer,

    Are you around the TVA...Tennessee Valley Authority. The Navy/DOE has several such facilities out there.


    As to KI..yes..I have several such bottles and need to get rid of older stocks and resupply. I know this stuff began to disappear shortly after Fukashima happened..but I have been keeping this stuff for longer than that but need to resupply. Never opened it. Keep a bottle in my Daily BOB for years now ...even though it is available at work in the form you described. I see them bring it out when they do radiation spill drills.

    I was not aware that counters too began to disappear from the shelves as well. I also have one of the olde D cell Civil Defense counters...big and bulky by comparison bit I think it is more rugged than this modern one .

    I am getting ready to tune up my ham radio to 75 or perhaps 160 meters to find my friend out in Tennessee...some 400 Crow flying miles from here. I use about 500 feet of 12 gauge insulated house wire from Lowes for a loop antenna...olde school.
    Usually less than 100 watts to make the trip.

    It is good to catch up with my olde friend in this manner and save Phone costs. 3.610 MHZ on 75 meters or on 160 meters at 1.993 MHZ.

    Catch up with you later,
    Watcherchris
     
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
Wierd Shovel-type-thingy By Cold Steel Guns, Knives, Tools, Etc. Jan 7, 2018
Strange "assault" Type New Guns Guns, Knives, Tools, Etc. Dec 29, 2017
What types of items to expect in My Survival Forum store? The Hangout Jul 6, 2016
Types Of Animals Easiest To Catch? Wilderness Jun 17, 2016
What Zombie Type Is Most Likely? Zombie Apocalypse Jun 16, 2016
Emergency kit types? Survival Kits Jun 16, 2016
Types of Preppers. The Hangout Jun 12, 2016
What type of shelter do you use to protect chickens? Animal Husbandry Jun 2, 2016
What Type Of Disaster Are You Most Prepared For? General Q&A May 25, 2016
Different Types Survival Gear Apr 28, 2016

Share This Page