3rd release of treated water from Fukushima nuclear plant ends safely, TEPCO says

they'll be issuing these announcements for the next..... how many decades? then they can start the decommissioning....

The process is expected to take decades.

Why? Decommissioning the plant will, but the release of the water in no way should take that long. They have already done 3 dumps, which would mean that they are planning on at least 6 or more per year. It shouldnt take decades!

Monday’s completion of the release of the third batch of wastewater brings the total to 23,400 tons. TEPCO plans a fourth release by the end of March 2024. That would only empty about 10 of the approximately 1,000 storage tanks at the Fukushima plant because of its continued production of wastewater, though officials say the pace of the discharges will pick up later. 

> The tanks currently hold more than 1.3 million tons of wastewater, most of which needs to be retreated to meet safety standards before release.

It just become another "routines" announcement now. China who really reminding J Govt and public that, this thing ain't routines.

While the corium or melted fuel remains in reactor 1,2&3 it will require cooling water. It is still unknown when and if it can be removed. The wastewater will continue to accumulate for decades.

The spent fuel remains in reactor 1&2. That needs to be removed before the corium. The internal radiation level inside the No 2 reactor is about 10-15 SIEVERTS because the reactor lid is ajar. Will be very difficult to remove the spent fuel with everything needing a remote control.

The Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) said a huge amount of radioactive materials apparently had attached to shield plugs of the containment vessels in the No. 2 and No. 3 reactors. Removing those without exposing the radiation will be very difficult.

Yubaru

Its highly diluted before its pumped out so maybe thats most of the tonnage?

How much more wastewater will accumulate over the next 40 years?

Ends safely...yeh sure....

And what percentage of the released water is fresh sea water?

In other words, is this 7,800 ton batch 'treated' tank water, i.e. pre dilution?

Excellent news. All going to plan. China's opposition and seafood ban is, as stated many times, purely political and not at all based on science.

diagonalslipToday 07:04 am JST

they'll be issuing these announcements for the next..... how many decades? then they can start the decommissioning....

The decommissioning is already ongoing, and has been for many years. The overall process will take decades, but it's wrong to say it hasn't started. The information, such as the Roadmap, is here:

https://www.meti.go.jp/english/earthquake/nuclear/decommissioning/index.html

Like anyone trusts what TEPCO says...

I'd rather ask my dog for his opinion on nuclear safety matters

So many comments about science this and science that and it’s safe, coming from people who said covid vaccine was fake and corona/covid was fake etc. We trust science or we don’t. I for one don’t think this is about science. It’s about trust. And if you trust TEPCO then your dilute-itional. They caused this issue and the world is paying for it. As for China ban, Japan wouldn’t do it in a heart beat if it were reversed? Anyway this whole topic is mute because they will do what they want and produce any report needed to claim it’s safe even though common sense clearly says different.

リッチToday  10:07 am JST

So many comments about science this and science that and it’s safe, coming from people who said covid vaccine was fake and corona/covid was fake etc. We trust science or we don’t.

This is a rather fallacious statement to say the least. The way you put it, we either trust "The Science™" or we reject it wholesale - an idea that completely rejects all nuance and relative risk. Based on the evidence available, the controlled release of the water presents a low risk due to the dilution effect. To put this in perspective, consider Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Both cities were rebuilt right after the war, and aside from the people who were directly affected by the blast and the fallout shortly afterward (including the cancers that emerged in them due to that fallout), there's been little if any lingering effect. So there is some real-life science that can be applied to Fukushima to indicate that in the initial period after the disaster the risk is high, it recedes quickly. Otherwise Hiroshima and Nagasaki would be uninhabitable. That doesn't mean there's no risk at all, just that it's very low.

With the COVID jabs, millions did not suffered adverse effects, but millions did due to the way the spike proteins interacted with their body, some mildly, some seriously, and some fatally. The risk to most people was/is lower from the virus than from the jabs, which is why many countries have banned them from certain age groups.

You are right, though, about trust, and when it comes to large organisations like governments and big corporations, they tend to have a pretty tenuous relationship with truth if the truth threatens their position/income. We saw this with TEPCO and the Japanese government with Fukushima, and numerous governments and their institutions, the jab makers, and a complicit media for COVID, when they were papering over unfavourable information when it came to questionable safety and efficacy of the jabs. They've trashed the trust we had in them, and that's tough if not impossible to restore.

GaijinmunkeyToday 09:59 am JST

Like anyone trusts what TEPCO says...

You don't have to. That's why the IAEA is monitoring it also.

Corporation who says "safe" no matter how it is danger, that is japan's deceptive nuclear industries including TEPCO.

Last month, they tried to make radioactive waste liquid scattering incident looks smaller than actual state.

Last month, they tried to make radioactive waste liquid scattering incident looks smaller than actual state.

When, where, who, how, why?

When was that informatioin uncovered?

Where did that happened, you said in Japan, but where especifically.

Who, uncovered that? and Who was the responsible for the "liquied scattering incident"?

How did they covered up? how the discovering party discovered?

Why did they covered up? But most importantly, why only you have that information and is not have been published in any other media? By the way I check on daily basis a wide range of media including South China Post and Aljazeera and none of them has mentioned this news you say.

Let's see if this will be tackled at the London convention meet

TEPCO says TEPCO did something right.

Stop the press.

Anyone else remember when TEPCO announced that there wasn’t a meltdown at all, and the explosion we had just seen on tv was simply steam escaping?

The risk to most people was/is lower from the virus than from the jabs, which is why many countries have banned them from certain age groups.

Misrepresenting the reality means you understand you are being antiscientific but want to pretend otherwise, there is no group where vaccines represent more risk while active transmission is present. Not indicating further boosters at times where transmission lowers enough by other measures (and the person is already protected) is definetely not the same as "banning" them for age groups, specially when authorities still say they will support vaccination once the risk increases again because of the season.

You are right, though, about trust, and when it comes to large organisations like governments and big corporations

The whole point of the inspections is that nobody has to trust TEPCO for anything, international experts are being in charge to confirm whatever is being said.

virusrexToday  05:28 pm JST

The risk to most people was/is lower from the virus than from the jabs, which is why many countries have banned them from certain age groups.

Misrepresenting the reality means you understand you are being antiscientific but want to pretend otherwise, there is no group where vaccines represent more risk while active transmission is present. Not indicating further boosters at times where transmission lowers enough by other measures (and the person is already protected) is definetely not the same as "banning" them for age groups, specially when authorities still say they will support vaccination once the risk increases again because of the season.

You are right, though, about trust, and when it comes to large organisations like governments and big corporations

The whole point of the inspections is that nobody has to trust TEPCO for anything, international experts are being in charge to confirm whatever is being said.

All I can say is LOL.

I'm sure the local surfers are elated that it 'ended safely'.

All I can say is LOL.

That is the point, claiming something and then being completely unable to defend that claim means you already understand the claim is false.