If I'm reading it correctly, they can date wines based on the amount of radiation given off by them, and line it up with a chart for amount of radiation the atmosphere took in during events.
How could you properly date a bottle if it was in Fukushima during the event, vs a 1960's bottle during the Cuban Missile Crisis?
> the levels of cesium-137 are barely detectable, and even then, only if the wine is destroyed.
The article seems less about the toxicity of the cesium levels, and more about their use as a signature in dating the wine, which I find is still interesting.
The article seems less about the toxicity of the cesium levels, and more about their use as a signature in dating the wine, which I find is still interesting.
And rightly so, by far the most toxic thing in these bottles is alcohol, not vanishingly small traces of cesium.
If the bottle was sealed, it won't pick up measurable cesium. That arrives via atmospheric transport, being picked up by rain water and eventually grape plants.
The unit of measure in this are mBq/l; millibecquerel per liter. The paper reports 14 mBq/l in CA wine immediately after Fukushima. So the common 750ml bottle of 2011 CA wine will average one cesium-137 decay event every 53.5 seconds.
How could you properly date a bottle if it was in Fukushima during the event, vs a 1960's bottle during the Cuban Missile Crisis?
> the levels of cesium-137 are barely detectable, and even then, only if the wine is destroyed.
So nothing to see here, move along.