Storage tanks for radioactive water are seen at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Okuma town, Fukushima Prefecture. Photo: REUTERS file
national

TEPCO will have to dump radioactive Fukushima water into Pacific, minister says

128 Comments

Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO) will have to dump radioactive water from its destroyed Fukushima nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean as it runs out of room to store it, the environment minister said on Tuesday.

TEPCO has collected more than 1 million tons of contaminated water from the cooling pipes used to keep fuel cores from melting since the plant was crippled by an earthquake and tsunami in 2011.

"The only option will be to drain it into the sea and dilute it," the minister, Yoshiaki Harada, told a news briefing in Tokyo. "The whole of the government will discuss this, but I would like to offer my simple opinion."

The government is awaiting a report from an expert panel before making a final decision on how to dispose of the radioactive water.

Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga, in a separate press briefing, described Harada's comments as "his personal opinion".

TEPCO was not in a position to decide what to do but would follow the policy once the government made a decision, a spokesman for the utility said.

The utility says it will run out of room to store the water by 2022. Harada did not say how much water would need to be dumped into the ocean.

Any green light from the government to dump the waste into the sea would anger neighbors such as South Korea, which summoned a senior Japanese embassy official last month to explain how the Fukushima water would be dealt with.

"We’re just hoping to hear more details of the discussions that are under way in Tokyo so that there won’t be a surprise announcement,” a South Korean diplomat told Reuters, requesting anonymity due to the sensitivity of bilateral ties.

South Korea's foreign ministry said in a statement said it had asked Japan "to take a wise and prudent decision on the issue".

Relations between the East Asian nations are already frosty following a dispute over compensation for Koreans forced to work in Japanese factories in World War Two.

Coastal nuclear plants commonly dump into the ocean water that contains tritium, an isotope of hydrogen that is hard to separate and is considered to be relatively harmless.

TEPCO, which also faces opposition from fishermen, admitted last year that the water in its tanks still contained contaminants beside tritium.

"The government must commit to the only environmentally acceptable option for managing this water crisis which is long term storage and processing to remove radioactivity, including tritium,” Shaun Burnie, senior nuclear specialist with Greenpeace Germany, said in an email.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2019.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

128 Comments
Login to comment

"Brb, just going to do that thing we said wouldn't need to be done"

16 ( +18 / -2 )

The utility says it will run out of space by 2022.

They can buy more land and increase the size of the disaster site. They will need more land to store all the nuclear waste in dry casks for many decades. The land around the disaster is contaminated and the people can't return.

Just as the land is being used to store millions of plastic bags of the removed contaminated soil. Do they intend to put that in the ocean too?

The water can be removed from the disaster site and stored in the likes of disused oil refinery tanks.

12 ( +13 / -1 )

Fish is actually labelled where it's landed, not where it's caught.

12 ( +14 / -2 )

Of course they are going to dump it into the Pacific. That has been their plan all along. They knew from day one this inevitability would come and they have been sitting on this for over 8 years. They have not even tried to find a suitable alternative. They stated that the 'group of experts' in charge of finding an alternative had an 8 month break, which finished just a few weeks ago and they come straight out and say it has to be dumped in the ocean. Tritium can be removed from water, but it's easier just to dump it in the ocean. However, they have also stated the water contains some heavier isotopes as well, which are the real concern. I'm quite sure Japan is not ready for the extreme measures that will be taken against them by the international community if they go ahead with this hideous plan. This water should be pumped into more secure and long lasting tanks further inland away from the coast. They have another 20 square kilometers of land that can never be lived in again. This should be ample for their contaminated soil and water for the next 20 odd years. This is a huge slap in the face to every environmental group and environmentally conscious person in the world. The backlash from the decision will be huge!

12 ( +15 / -3 )

How stupid can one get? The idiotic idea of dumping radioactive waste into the ocean to dilute the toxicity is about as unscientific and unsafe for ocean life leading to contamination for all sea type foods would be laughable, if not so ignorant. If TEPCO does indeed dump waste into the precious ocean, I'd want to feed Harada, and all TEPCO employees and all their family members the fish caught from the areas where the dumps are to occur, if he so freely believes TEPCO has no other answers.

11 ( +15 / -4 )

"How stupid can one get?"

Sunfunbun@...assuming that your question is rhetorical, I will posit a reponse: Boundless, endless, bottomless and limitless stupidity. TEPCO will save themselves before the environment, every time.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

is anyone surprised?

they have been working towards announcing this for years. The decision was made (mad) long ago.

all under control claimed Shinzo.

my only question is will they dump before or after the 'precious' Olympics.

9 ( +12 / -3 )

Couldn't they just buy more land, reuse the water think about or something else besides dumping the water into the ocean? Not only will they ruin the fishing industry of surrounding areas, but probably destroy the environment for generations and countless people who'll get sick.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

https://37sakana.jp/fukushima/

"Let's eat fish from Fukushima.

 Fish is delicious there."

This kind of thing should be blamed.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

Modular Detritiation System (MDS®): An Advanced Separation Technique for Tritium is out there but expensive but I believe that TEPCO has to burden most of the cost for this because of their slow response

8 ( +8 / -0 )

joyridingonthetitanic

the fact remains that if you do that you will destroy the land it placed upon and be unable to use it effectivley for centuries. 

Much of the land around the nuclear disaster site is already contaminated beyond human use for decades. Have you also seen the sites for the contaminated soil?

The water wouldn't be spread on the land, it would require storage in tanks.

http://www.simplyinfo.org/?p=15068

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Wonder who will be the first to catch a three eyed fish.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

The whole of the government will discuss this, but I would like to offer my simple opinion."

Impossible! This is just a comment to spread the blame among everyone! There is no way in hell he is going to get the whole government to agree with this!

6 ( +10 / -4 )

The current flows north-east, so korea doesn't have to worry. But say sayonara to Fukushima fisheries. They will never recover.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

A final government decision on disposing of the tainted water awaits a report from an expert panel.

You mean the report will only be with experts from Japan. This is an issue which needs expert opinion from outside of Japan. Reuters reporting this? Good, I'll be forwarding the information to the international media.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Shouldn’t they keep this under wraps until the Olympics is over? An announcement like this will attract world wide attention and that will mean being forced to at least try and answer the difficult questions. Especially with the already strained relationships with their neighbors. I hope the TEPCO and the government are up to the task. Best strategy at this stage would be the cold, hard and sincere truth. Not the watered down version.

If emptying the tanks into the ocean is not as dangerous as they say, then please explain it to us in no uncertain way. Not some monotone guy with his eyes down and a combover reading from a statement; someone that knows what he is doing and understands the gravity of the message.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

@minello7 Surely the scientific comunity should have come up with a solution by now to neutralize the contaminated water...

The contaminant is radioactive material. Radiation cannot be neutralised. It just deceases over time, as it decays to other materials or isotopes, some which in turn are also radioactive, and also decay over time. Just look up 'decay series'

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Make more space. So much undesirable land thanks to TEPCO's incompetence. Buy it up and use it.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Well, what a tremendous surprise.

And of course, somehow the bill for this most basic of processes will be hundreds of millions of yen.

Money down the drain. What an utter disgrace.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Maybe, just maybe, nuclear power isn't such a great idea eh.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Akie

you seem confused.

Following the 2011 nuclear disaster the government set up a 20km exclusion zone around the site which was then increased to 30km and a special exclusion zone in the shape of a cigar going NW from the site. All people within those zones were evacuated. Many parts of those areas have contamination too high to allow people to return,

They don't need any international laws?

5 ( +5 / -0 )

If the water is cleaned from radioactive particles, only tritium will be released. Like it is done by any other nuclear power plant around the world - of which some release more Bequerel than now planned at Fukushima. The undertaking is basically nothing but an image problem which of course will be exploit by some countries (for whose we all know will do enhance the blame game).

Here is a neutral fact report about it: https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww1.wdr.de%2Fwissen%2Ftechnik%2Ffukushima-radioaktives-wasser-meer-100.html

The other famous video https://youtu.be/IyrO1UjfJX0?t=99 from enviromental activists is excessively exaggerated. It only shows surface water, negelcting 3D and the numbers are so low it could not be even detected. It just colors the ocean on a scale like peeing in the water. They should do this with other nuclear power plants around the world, all oceans would be deeply red in a matter of seconds.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

It was obvious they going to dump it to the Ocean!!

4 ( +4 / -0 )

What does this even mean? What is 'neutralizing' radioactive water? Neutralizing generally refers to bringing something out of PH balance to a neutral state between acidity and baseness. But radioactivity is not something that has a positive or negative...direction? that could be neutralized.

And I'm curious what the comment even meant. Do you think that the scientific community is just being lazy? Or even more nefariously, do you think they're repressing this information? What exactly was the point of your comment?

@Strangerland - thank you for writing this - it saved me from doing it and you wrote it much better than I would. He basically asked why can't we just wave a magic wand and make the problem of nuclear waste disappear. Just like that.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Zichi,

The nuclear power project has also been a huge cash cow for those behind it, both in the US and their LDP collaborators.

Meanwhile normal citizens brace for the 10% tax rate next month, and word is it will be raised appreciably more in the years to come.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

sunfunbun, I empathise, but realistically, they have no other choice. All paying attention would know that it would have come to this eventually.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

@Beer4Me

You say that TEPCO has to burden most of the cost, but of course they do not, we do! The way that the power companies were set up, TEPCO and the rest of Japan’s ten electric power companies are allowed to pass electricity costs, fuel costs, personnel costs, costs of facility maintenance, and OTHER expenses—plus profit— on to the consumer: this system is known as an ‘overall base-price scheme’. Whatever they do, they cannot lose money.

https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=KkD9AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA73&lpg=PA73&dq=tepco+price+system+expense+plus+profit&source=bl&ots=AmiA8Oo9h-&sig=ACfU3U2T6qlMT4zOgqgpyx9mjchpmoecgA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwig1JLI78XkAhWM_qQKHb00DNwQ6AEwDHoECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=tepco%20price%20system%20expense%20plus%20profit&f=false

3 ( +4 / -1 )

According to nuclear law, in the event of a nuclear disaster at a power plant, the owner of the plant has limited liability of ¥120 billion.

With the level 7 nuclear disaster, that is only a drop in the ocean. The final cost will exceed more than ¥100 trillion, paid by the taxpayer.

TEPCO will have to pay the full costs of decommissioning the second Fukushima plant Daini and also any other reactors at its Niigata plant.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Dinesh

Back up your claim with scientific links and evidence, that the nuclear disaster has already contaminated two thirds of the world's oceans and seas. Show us the levels and amounts of the contamination that can be directly linked.

If that were true, which it isn't then there's really no need to worry about releasing this water into the ocean since the contamination is already done.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

After 61 Years, U.S. Testing Site For Nuclear Weapons Still 10 Times More Radioactive Than Chernobyl

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidbressan/2019/07/25/after-60-years-u-s-testing-site-for-nuclear-weapons-still-10-times-more-radioactive-than-chernobyl/#343e871526be

Ocean currents

https://www.oceanblueproject.org/ocean-current-maps.html

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Yeah! What the hey!

Dump it!

Not our problem!

(Sarcasm)

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I’m guessing that you can’t just boil off the water because some if not all of the tritium (a isotope of hydrogen) is in the form of HTO, where one of the hydrogen atoms in a water molecule is replaced by a tritium atom, or even T2O where both have been. And presumably they have similar boiling points to regular H2O.

So you’d just be releasing tritium into the atmosphere ready to re-condense and rain back down.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

zichiToday 04:17 pm JSTThe utility says it will run out of space by 2022.

They can buy more land and increase the size of the disaster site. They will need more land to store all the nuclear waste in dry casks for many decades. The land around the disaster is contaminated and the people can't return.

Just as the land is being used to store millions of plastic bags of the removed contaminated soil. Do they intend to put that in the ocean too?

The water can be removed from the disaster site and stored in the likes of disused oil refinery tanks.

Japan' s now facing a dilemma that has been grappled with by the United States and Russia for decades. Of course, those nations are huge countries with great expanses of forests and deserts with large areas that are not so populated. Japan isn't so 'lucky'.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Akie

zichi, Japan doesn't have any sovereign right over the exclusive zone, as simple as that.

"nuclear exclusion zone", not the "exclusive zone"

3 ( +3 / -0 )

The water is of course not radioactive, the contaminants are.

The water is radioactive if it contains tritium (a hydrogen isotope). And as others have mentioned, it's quite normal to dump water containing tritium at sea. The article is unclear about distinguishing between "contaminated water" (water containing other radioactive materials) and tritiated water. I think if they are able to remove contaminants, then it should be OK to dump the tritiated water at sea.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Around the world there are about 450 nuclear plants. Fukushima and Chernobyl are only the tip of the iceberg. The reality is that humanity is using a VERY dangerous technology that it can't fully control, and this tell us a lot about how much idiots we can be as species. The only truth is that it is very useful for military purpose. So, I don't accept the "pointing finger" game used by some Countries against Japan, if those Countries are nuclear powers too. We know that you can't properly handle a very severe nuclear accident. Not in Japan, not in Russia, not in the US, not in France, not in China, not in South Korea, and so on. So, except for the Countries nuclear free, all the others should shut up, because they are not in the position to give any moral lesson.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

WTF ! TEPCO again shows how unable they are to rectify the situation. I showed my extreme dissatisfaction by changing my supplier to Tokyo Gas. It was easy to do. Afterwards I got a telephone call from TEPCO asking why I had terminated my account : so I told the sales guy it was because I considered TEPCO a criminal organization lacking all responsibility for the aftermath of the Fukushima disaster. Furthermore I wish more foreign visitors to Japan could be made more aware of how weak and irresponsible this giant company is for so much ongoing trouble. Yet the official view is that fish caught in this area is fit for human consumption! The whole thing is a rather deadly ongoing f***ing joke.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

starpunk

Japan' s now facing a dilemma that has been grappled with by the United States and Russia for decades. Of course, those nations are huge countries with great expanses of forests and deserts with large areas that are not so populated. Japan isn't so 'lucky'.

There is a lot of land within the 20 km exclusion zone to increase the size of the nuclear disaster site which will have to be increased to store the hundreds of cask containing nuclear waste.

There is enough land around the site to increase ten times.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The water is used for cooling so why couldn't they reuse cooled contaminated water ie. closed loop?

Granted, the concentration of contaminants would increase with every cycle but there would be less water volume to manage.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

zichi, how can one not confused by your confusing statement ?

His statement was clear English. If you are having troubles understanding it, that's on you, not him.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

This is just his "personal opinion" but then will be official policy once the report is released. They are preparing the public for the inevitable.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Bottled water from Fukushima Springs with a pretty label coming to a store near you. All the electrolytes you need PLUS the energy boosters tritium, cesium, and strontium! Good marketing will no doubt prevail.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

@voiceofokinawa: I am already reading some articles by scientists worldwide that explain why this water is basically harmless, since it will be dumped slowly, and it's a very small quantity compared to the total water in the ocean. You don't know the nuclear village power. Probably they aren't completely wrong, since they remember how nuclear experiments had way more impact, but they tend to minimize any kind of nuclear pollution, not only in this case, because it's a huge business with heavy military implications.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

awaits a report from an expert panel

Expert Panel Japan seems to never embody "neutral", more... internal.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Vaporize the water with technology and not dump H2O + nuke substance to the sea. Find way to make it to steam. Why isn't that a solution?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

The current flows north-east, so korea doesn't have to worry. 

@Laguna - You over-simplify the issue. It won't affect SK initially, but it will over time.

The following is a simulation from a teach of German researchers:

https://youtu.be/IyrO1UjfJX0?t=99

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Can you imagine if this were China or South Korea contemplating doing this......it would be on the news until Christmas.In Japan......anything unpleasant has and will always be swept under the carpet.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Surely the scientific comunity should have come up with a solution by now to neutralize the contaminated water

What does this even mean? What is 'neutralizing' radioactive water? Neutralizing generally refers to bringing something out of PH balance to a neutral state between acidity and baseness. But radioactivity is not something that has a positive or negative...direction? that could be neutralized.

And I'm curious what the comment even meant. Do you think that the scientific community is just being lazy? Or even more nefariously, do you think they're repressing this information? What exactly was the point of your comment?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Please tell what radioactivity we are talking about (alpha, beta, gamma), half life of radioisotops that would be released and the estimated radioactivity dose per liter once supposedly diluted.

After knowing that, I can have an opinion.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

What I find interesting is that the whole nuclear industry worldwide is based on obvious LIES. The article explained that all nuclear plants dump water contaminated with tritium in the oceans as ordinary procedure. This happens because it is very difficult to remove tritium. Since we haven't developed a way to remove tritium yet, they tell us the narrative about tritium not being very harmful. But if you read something about it, you discover that while external exposure to tritium isn't actually very harmful, the internal exposure brings high chances to develop cancer. Since all nuclear plants normally dump tritium in the oceans just because they can't remove it, we can assume that a lot of seafood everywhere can contain high quantity of tritium. Basically, what I am saying is that the nuclear village tell us that tritium isn't very dangerous just because they haven't the technology to remove it yet, not because it isn't dangerous. I think most of people not even know that nuclear plants dump tritium in the oceans all the time. In the case of Fukushima, the problem is worse because tritium isn't the only isotope in the water. But I think it's important to notice how the nuclear industry in general is based on LIES. Basically, their narrative is "it's not harmful, if they can't remove it".

1 ( +2 / -1 )

"The whole of the government will discuss this, but I would like to offer my simple opinion."

[translation] = "There is no need for discussion because the decision (to dump contaminated cooling water) has already been made and is not negotiable."

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Nuclear energy.......what could go wrong?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

It seems to me most commentators never thought about the concept of dilution. 10 million tons is the equivalent of 10 large tankers... the proverbial drop in the ocean. Seeing that the tritiujm water is already diluted, I do not see how that would make even a measurable difference to the natural tritum content in the ocean, which there anyway (tritium is produced constantly in the atmosphere).

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Alex80,

Certainly, it may be a drop in the ocean. The contaminated water will be diluted in the mass of ocean waters in years and become harmless, as you quote scientists as saying. But will waters off Fukushima be as harmlessly diluted as waters off California or in the Atlantic Ocean?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Please read about what is in that water besides tritium, if you haven't yet. The reports on this came out in late 2018, and nothing much has changed.

https://allthatsinteresting.com/fukushima-water-dumping

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I suspect when the next big earthquake that hits the region. Will see news about ruptured substandard water tanks and the typical (shoganai desu yo) cover story. As all the water seeps into the soil. Which will all flow in the ocean anyways. You'll see.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

cover the entirety of Japan with tanks, and start stacking them vertically if you have to. But don't make other countries pay for Japan's mistakes. That contaminated water is Japan's responsibility, and it should never leave Japanese borders.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Other than Japan, UK, US, Canada, France and South Korea is dumping radioactive water for the same reason that it is safe enough. For example SK dumps 8 times more radioactive water than Japan.

If anyone think it is dangerous, contact point is ASN,

Autorité de sûreté nucléaire

Seems like that’s where safety standard is being defined for international community.

https://www.meti.go.jp/meti_lib/report/H28FY/000744.pdf

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The melted fuel rods or corium has its now called is very radioactive and needs to be cooled but also kept under water to prevent the release of the radiation into the atmosphere. Reactors 1-3 have melted fuel in the rector vessel and also on the base of the steel and concrete containment vessel.

Those containment vessels and also the suppressions rings around the base are cracked from the earthquake/ explosions. Water is pumped in but leaks out from the cracks and into the reactor basements.

Further more, underground water also leaks into those reactor basement mixing with the radioactive cooling water. This is the water pump out and cleaned and stored in the tanks. Some of that water goes back for further cooling/covering the corium.

The lid on the No 2 reactor is slightly off the top. Without the water covering the high levels of radiation would also leak out. The radiation in that building is 15 SIEVERT per hour. Would kill any worker.

The radiation inside the reactor vessels is probably about 300-500 SIEVERTS.

The No 4 reactor is empty of all fuel. The spent fuel is being removed from the No 3 reactor and could take a couple of years. Then probably reactor No 1 and then No2.

Then TEPCO/Japan needs to find a way to remove the melted fuel from reactors 1-3. Never done before.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

There is ZERO harm produced by this solution, neither for humans nor fishes nor the environment. The ocean itself is already immensely more radioactive than the water contained in those tanks. People, really, go read what scientists say about this solution and you will be much more relaxed about it. The best nuclear experts in the world are suggesting this solution since years already.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

IAEA Fukushima Daiichi Status Updates Sept 2019

https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/focus/fukushima/status-update

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Longtermer:

Ive often wondered how this radiated water might affect the seaweed aquaculture in Japan.

It won´t.

They harvest this stuff right out of the sea, CNN showed a harvester telling us it was so oishi, and fresh.

It is.

Being that its bathed in this Sea of Japan water, wonder how it might be affected?

The sea of Japan is on the other side of this country.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Never buy food from Fukushima.

Jp media say saying this is wrong.

Well, what's wrong with YOU?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Ocean contamination

Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

https://www.whoi.edu/know-your-ocean/ocean-topics/pollution/fukushima-radiation/

0 ( +1 / -1 )

If the water is cleaned from radioactive particles, only tritium will be released. Like it is done by any other nuclear power plant around the world - of which some release more Bequerel than now planned at Fukushima. The undertaking is basically nothing but an image problem which of course will be exploit by some countries (for whose we all know will do enhance the blame game).

@saitama - In other words, Fukushima is all under control and dumping of radioactive waste into the Pacific Ocean is safe? Now where have I heard that before?

Some nuclear power plants release more radioactive waste than is planned at Fukushima? You seem to know exactly how much radiation is contained in Fukushima, so why don't you share what you know and allay everyone's concerns?

I mean you should be fronting the reporters and concerned representatives from each country rather than sharing your gems of knowledge just here on JT..

0 ( +4 / -4 )

dump radioactive Fukushima water

Who writes these headlines? The water is of course not radioactive, the contaminants are. And while I wish they were able to remove them completely, apparently that is not feasible. However, I have always wondered why the can´t close the existing harbor there and turn that in a long-term open air storage? That should make for huge amount of space.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Bad idea? But came back the contaminated water...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And we are trying to find a cure for cancer.

The fish eat it and we eat the fish. Duh....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shouldn’t they keep this under wraps until the Olympics is over? An announcement like this will attract world wide attention and that will mean being forced to at least try and answer the difficult questions.

Bravo... a very typical Japanese approach to problem solving.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Before, during, or after opening ceremonies?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

It's a disaster, 8 years ago,today and ongoing for a generation or two or more. It's Japan takes several generations to fix anything.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Yoshiaki Harada is just one idiot running his mouth. I think everyone needs to relax until they actually come to a decision.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

world's top expert in the field of radiation from doctors

Novell- Peace Prize nominee Helen Caldicott said:

"Japan has eliminated most of the substances, such as cesium and stromtune 90, so there is no problem with contaminated water discharge. That is not what a radiological expert can say. Radioactive contaminated water does not become clean.

There are many carcinogens in radioactive materials,

Among them, a large amount is called tritium.

Tritium, a cancer-causing substance, can't be eliminated because it combines with hydrogen.This must be acknowledged by Japan."

Japan hides the incidence of cancer patients due to radiation caused by nuclear power damage. In addition, cancer patients that are currently identified are not radioactive damage, referring to the incubation period of cancer. After all, only those who die are unhappy.

I do not understand.

Why do you want to do it this way, rejecting the help of other advanced countries?

Do Pacific ocean waters only travel in the Pacific?

Sea waters roam all over the earth.

Do you have a conscience in Japan?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Novell- Peace Prize nominee Helen Caldicott said:

The same so called expert who said in 2011 that tens of millions of people in the Northern Hemisphere were going to get cancer and die with the radiation released from the nuclear disaster.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

rialswlss:

Tritium, a cancer-causing substance, can't be eliminated because it combines with hydrogen.

What does that even mean? Tritium IS hydrogen (an isotope of it), and it is not particularly harmful.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Dilution is the solution.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What you all fail to realize is that they already dumped tons of contaminated into Pacific Ocean a long time ago before they built the tanks to hold the damn water. The Government has been keeping this quiet because the Olympics and tourism. The fisheries are already suffering so don’t eat any of that stuff from Tohoku Region.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The waste water entering the sea at the time of the nuclear disaster was well reported and can be found online.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It’s really OK if Japan dumps radioactive water into the ocean.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2019/09/12/its-really-ok-if-japan-dumps-radioactive-fukushima-water-into-the-ocean/

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I hope TEPCO, Japan, will be treating the contaminated water, filtration, etc. to the maximum extent possible before dumping it into the Pacific Ocean.  Possibly, radio active waste from treatment processes can be brought to other uninhabited parts of the world.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

a bit confused by this; so they are still cooling the reactor? or is this water collected, now that the reactor has cooled? If they are still cooling the reactor, why not just keep reusing the radioactive water to cool with?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I remember watching the TV and Kan ordering the heli hose solution for the meltdown; it seemed to be a totally inept and incompetent bunch. It rained soon after that event, I was riding my bike, I guess I got my lifetimes dose of plutonium or at least, celcium, as they said the plutonium didnt leave that area, who knows.

So this is still going on? or has the reactor been removed?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

wow, that seems like a perpetual problem

0 ( +0 / -0 )

seems like there would be some kind of technology or solution where a slurry was pumped in to displace the water and that solution would set or harden, entombing the whole thing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

oh you got to keep it cool, thus the water. nasty dilemma. seems they could entomb the thing while cooling it

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Entombing the 1-4 reactors like at Chernobyl is probably impossible. Different set of problems.

Would have to build a tunnel under the reactors first. Problem is the flowing underground water. The reactors are in an earthquake zone which Chernobyl isn't. There's no fuel left at Chernobyl just burnt highly radioactive debris.

First remove the spent fuel from the reactor cooling pools. 5-10 years.

Then TEPCO can decide about the melted fuel/corium.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There is an ultimate solution. With technology advancing so quick, I hope in 5 years Scientists can find a cheap alternative way to dump all this waste into Space and Beyond.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ive often wondered how this radiated water might affect the seaweed aquaculture in Japan. They harvest this stuff right out of the sea, CNN showed a harvester telling us it was so oishi, and fresh. Being that its bathed in this Sea of Japan water, wonder how it might be affected?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Radioactivity is not alien to the natural environment. It is all around us anyway. The hysteria by some is astonishing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Sea of Japan water"

The Sea of Japan is on the other side of the country between Japan/Korea/Russia. The sea on the nuclear disaster side is the Pacific Ocean.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

still, wonder how much of that seaweed and other aqua crops are immersed in it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Radioactivity is not alien to the natural environment. It is all around us anyway. The hysteria by some is astonishing.

Try saying that while standing in the No2 reactor building with radiation levels at 15 SIEVERTS/hour or the base of the No2 stack which is more than 1 SIEVERT/hour and is now being dismantled using remote controlled equipment.

There is ground water run off into the sea but at lower volumes than perviously and the levels of radiation not above permitted levels as outlined in the IAEA report I linked to.

It's not surprising what people should have fears of radiation when we have atomic bomb testing, atomic bombs dropped on Japan, Chernobyl, Sellafield, Three Mile Island.

The Japanese government and TEPCO have done a poor PR job of explaining the radiation problems.

The Japanese limit for cesium in drinking water is 10Bq/litre. The international standards followed by America and the EU are even higher.

The radiation levels of the underground water reaching the sea is less than 1Bq/litre.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The irony is laughable.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Dump it near all those disputed islands.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

It is what it is.

Quite. We should get used to and accept a major nuclear disaster every now and again. We might as well embrace them. We can put these in your 'Earth's Natural Cycle' bucket if it helps.

All is for the best, in the best of all possible worlds.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

In 20,000 years the half-life of this isotope will be safe and a mute point. The solution to this is dilution. I wouldn't eat anymore sea food from eastern Japan any longer.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Hope Japan doesn't get to upset and threaten other countries again when they boycott more products. They've had plenty of time to come up with solutions, and have had plenty more handouts and bailouts from government. What have they done with it?

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

zichi, define your "nuclear exclusion zone" using international laws.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Maybe the waste water will melt the plastic in the ocean.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I wonder if there's a way to at least pipe it out into a current away from shore so it will dilute quicker...

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Come on what's another 1 million tons of contaminated water (includes tritium) dumped into an already polluted ocean anyway. The microbials and plankton will love it. Fish will grow twice the size perhaps like Gojira, and two fish heads is better than one for soup. As for image issues, its already there anyway what's a few more barrels gonna cost more damage anyway. Dump it everyone else does it anyway.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

So they have finally given up. You can't keep installing tanks there to contain endlessly flowing radioactive water. If TEPCO dumps the water into the ocean, the world community would not be reticent and condone it.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

What a stupid idea !! Can’t believe all these years went bye and this what they come up with it !? Sound like a money problem!? Can’t imagine the environmental impact !? God help us.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

voiceofokinawa:

But will waters off Fukushima be as harmlessly diluted as waters off California or in the Atlantic Ocean?

Over time, of course. And even the undilated water they are storing has only very low radioctivity.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Japan will dump Fukushima Daiichi water into Pacific. Chernobyl Sarcophagus over Fukushima Daiichi is next. Problem solved. Oops. Fukushima aquifer will continue through ice wall to drain radioactive water into ocean. Do you remember TEPCO saying we will contain and store Fukushima Daiichi water? Why is TEPCO flip flopping? Is 182 years of Twist Drilling Fukushima Daiichi triple meltdowns to expensive?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

If the reactors were entombed could the ground/rock/cliff take the weight. What if there were another powerful earthquake would the entire structure collapse into the sea along with the melted fuel. All hell to pay then. And the constant flow of ground water getting into the reactors being radioactive contaminated and out intio the sea?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Fukushima aquifer dumps invisible radioactivity into ocean daily. Read IAEA.org Fukushima Daiichi Status Reports for evidence. TEPCO tanks are visible containers of radioactive water. Once Japan begins visible dumping TEPCO tanks radioactive water into ocean congruence with invisible aquifer dumping will be achieved. Bringing the world to accept Sarcophagus solution a reality.

Thank you Japan.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

ZiCHi

The ocean contamination from the nuclear disaster site is solely into the Pacific Ocean and not the other oceans and seas. The level of contamination isn't even equal to all that released from the atomic bomb testing.

Just another of the dumb conspiracies, there are so many of them.

Have you ever studied about water current in school?..

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

This problem is more serious.

Report: North Korea uranium plant may be sending toxic waste into river

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2019/08/16/Report-North-Korea-uranium-plant-may-be-sending-toxic-waste-into-river/6831565962348/

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

I wonder if it would be possible to reduce the volume of contaminated water by removing the water and leaving the contaminants, similar to what happens during the distillation process?

If so, they could substantially reduce the amount of space required for storage.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Where is the justice ? Where are the human surviving rights ?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

I still don't understand why they do not freeze the water. As long as they made sure it could remain frozen, they could build hightech facilities underwater to store it. All those scientists can't figure a way to do it?

Peace.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Heckleberry:

I mean you should be fronting the reporters and concerned representatives from each country rather than sharing your gems of knowledge just here on JT..

Don't worry, I already did so and some newspapers took down the scare/blame monger article or rewrote it so it fits the actual situation especially in comparison to other disposals. I actually received some thank yous from editorial offices, especially the smaller ones which usually just take over articles from Reuters&Co - although some also pointed out they'd rather have headlines and readers and didn't change the one sided information. So don't worry, I'll do my best despite the fact it is difficult especially if you have certain countries against it which rather do anything to drag on the blame game.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Why they do not bottle it and make mineral water to sell or distribute during the Olympics...

If it is diluted, as they are going to say, until underneath the minimum, they can even earn money by it. Isn't it the same? The same works also for plutonium and all the rest of the radioactive crap they have there? Beside tritium will be absorbed by bodies and it will not get dispersed into the environment. Once dead, ashes and bodies are stored in cemeteries (for which others pay the bills...). That would certainly be a more viable solution.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

What about sending the water containers into orbit? Maybe in a few decades there will be a method of cleaning and reclaiming it.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Strontium and Caesium 134, 137 etc has been found all across the pacific ocean, and the sea life has been drastically affected since the accident. Plus, a few years back it was announced that to keep the reactors cooled, they were going to pump seawater onto them and let that flow back into the ocean because they couldn't keep filling tanks on land! So now they want to dump the highly contaminated stored water into the ocean.... from what I've heard the levels found in tiny crabs etc is thousands of times higher than usual (WHOI) and sea life on Canad and the USA shores has all but disappeared, seal populations have halved and pups are returning to shore starving again after been released weeks before. The seriousness of this ongoing threat to all life in the Pacific, and the humans dependant upon it, cannot be underestimated!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Surely the scientific comunity should have come up with a solution by now to neutralize the contaminated water so that it can be released into the Pacific without causing a potential catastrophic political division with its close neighbors.

-3 ( +6 / -9 )

Interesting how people disagreed with the link I posted above:

https://youtu.be/IyrO1UjfJX0?t=99

The lead researcher for the simulation is Dr Erik Behrens, a German oceanographer based in Wellington, New Zealand.

I wonder if your own scientific simulation suggests otherwise? I would love to see your findings.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

If the radiation is lower than the normal background radiation I don´t see why this would be so dangerous. Normally they dump the water from nuclear plants so why not now. The radioactive dose from Fukushima is yeardoses of 120 mSv which increase the risk for lungcancer with one percent while smoking do increase it with 1 500 percent. 200 mSv yeardose was earlier allowed for workers in nuclear plant. This is the natural exposure from crowded area in India. Never visit countries aboard before accurate detection of each contries normal background radiation. Even at flight the radiation is indicated with Geigermessuring device. With no detection on several places within a nuclear plant,

The dangereness in connection with nuclear have to be considered in a realistic way.

You are radioactive yourself so the exhaust from Harrisburg correspond to the exposure of four persons. What are you afraid of. Everything alive is radioactive and probably low dose radiation have an vaccination effect.

Areas in Sweden with higheast background radiation have also the longeast life length and treating cancer you do it with radiation. More people will be alive as effect of radiation than them that will be killed.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

This is a lie.

°

Normally, they create a pool to keep them under water.

Or they create a cavern that will keep them far from the surface. But this need, to have them sealed correctly.

Here, TEPCO is admitting not doing the job right and try to hide the real level of contamination. Tey even can't pay for the storage in a foreign country.

Japan could be ban from international commerce on that one. Pacific is not their dumpster. California cost down to the Chily is neither.

So I expect the ASIAN coalition to do its jobs and blok TEPCO otherwise Whale trade will be the least of Japan Problem.

This ministerial corruption under Abe and the emperor foirst year is a bad omen for all Japan and those having to live with them in power of nuclear technology in the world. Clearly this is a big NO for atomic bomb in Japan. Corruption will lead to atomic war in Asia to hide black money trade and falls report.

Grrrr

°

NadAge

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

zichi, Japan doesn't have any sovereign right over the exclusive zone, as simple as that.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Abe govt is stupid to even think about it. Where is the democratic value by releasing radio active water into the resource of humanity and pollute it ?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Dinesh

Already Japanese comtamanited 2/3 Rd of oceans in the world due to 2011 disaster, keep on continuing your good job to environment..

The ocean contamination from the nuclear disaster site is solely into the Pacific Ocean and not the other oceans and seas. The level of contamination isn't even equal to all that released from the atomic bomb testing.

Just another of the dumb conspiracies, there are so many of them.

-5 ( +6 / -11 )

Maybe, just maybe, nuclear power isn't such a great idea eh.

It's either nuclear or burn more fossil fuels. So-called renewables can't make up for the total loss of nuclear.

It is what it is.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Already Japanese comtamanited 2/3 Rd of oceans in the world due to 2011 disaster, keep on continuing your good job to environment..

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

why don't they just put all this waste from nuke or plastic or whatever and lunch it to space or to the sun and everyone is safe

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Simply buying more land is not going to make the problem go away, so called quick fixes, while popular in the age of buy it now are not sustainable in the long term. While it may seem logical and easy to place this waste in the next avaliable plot, the fact remains that if you do that you will destroy the land it placed upon and be unable to use it effectivley for centuries. Yes its already slightly contaminated but you can just keep dumping more radioactive watse ontop of more waste, it wont work! Not to mention the cost of such an enterprise and the long term political implications, all of which add up to a troubling state of affairs.

Yes it sucks what has to be done and those that are resonsible for the whole debacle will have to live with that for the rest of their lives but short of any other solution, what do you expect them to do! A lot of this will depend on what quantities of water they plan to dump and if that water will be treated with anything before hand to dilute it further. Im not condoning it, im simply putting forth the catch 22 situation that Japan is faced with, and in that instance you have to look at what is the lesser of 2 evils? In this case i would suggest its the sea dump as a land based storage is not practical.

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

U.S. contaminated the Pacific Ocean many times near Bikini Atoll despite the protests of Japan. The ocean is already contaminated. This is our time to do it. Keep your mouth shut.

-10 ( +4 / -14 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites