national

Fukushima nuclear plant starts 2nd release of treated radioactive wastewater into the sea

26 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

26 Comments
Login to comment

any international supervision of process there?

just wanted to know,say chinese,korean,russian specialists...?

-8 ( +11 / -19 )

IAEA.

11 ( +18 / -7 )

Japan government shouldn’t be setting up the funds. The funds should come from the CEOs and Management Salaries. They should be making nothing based on their decisions of the past.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

Japan's LDP Govt and TEPCO with Japanese obedient major media call contaminated water "treated water", emphasize only tritium, pretend safe by impressing as if it's same to drainage from other not-wrecked nuclear plants toward mainly Japanese general public.

But that vast liquid dumped from Fukushima directly cooled melted radiation debris, and contain many kinds of radioactivity such as iodine129, strontium90, ruthenium106, technetium99, cesium137, plutonium239, carbon14, cadmium113m even after filtering. For example, Strontium90 25 million Becquerels, Iodine129 240 million Bq, Carbon14 1.7 billion Bq, Cesium137 49 million Bq, Plutonium239 73000Bq seem to be dumped during per year.

LDP Govt and pro-Govt media of Japan using name of IAEA to justify radioactive contaminating the ocean, but IAEA excuse that "We do not endorse the plan or recommend this to be done" about dumping contaminated water from Japan at their report.

Opposition from other area like Pacific islands besides neighbouring countries or dissents from domestic experts or another practicable option that can continue to storage contaminated water on the ground or long-term bioconcentration risk have been ignored or not known in Japan completely. Because major media of Japan where press freedom index is around 70th still avoid even reporting about them.

Betrayal by Japan's Govt and TEPCO against agreement with sufferers of Fukushima nuclear disaster has been completely forgotten at Japanese society, and now changed to "China issue".

-9 ( +9 / -18 )

I hope this isn't affected by the possible tsunami

0 ( +7 / -7 )

any international supervision of process there?

Yes. The IAEA has approved the plan every step of the way.

Follow the science, not internet "nuclear experts".

7 ( +15 / -8 )

Yes. The IAEA has approved the plan every step of the way.

The IAEA does not have the authority to approve anything, and they are against the plan.

"We do not endorse the plan or recommend this to be done. We say this plan is consistent with the standards," Grossi said.

-12 ( +5 / -17 )

IAEA do not approve or disapprove.

We agree that this statement is a fallacy:

Fighto!Today  03:11 pm JST

Yes. The IAEA has approved the plan every step of the way.

-8 ( +5 / -13 )

No, the statement "We do not endorse the plan or recommend this to be done" implies a negative stance towards the plan. While it doesn't explicitly state, "We are against the plan," it does convey a lack of support and a suggestion that the plan should not be carried out, which is typically indicative of being against it.

-9 ( +4 / -13 )

No, the statement "We do not endorse the plan or recommend this to be done" implies a negative stance towards the plan

No, that is not correct, it just implies the plan is not particularly endorsed by the IAEA, that is not the same as being against it, if that were the case an explicit disapproval would be necessary.

It conveys that the plan is not one the agency brought forward or recommended, but that conforms with the standards, they are distancing themselves from the measure without saying it is wrong or that it should not be done.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

No, the statement "We do not endorse the plan or recommend this to be done" implies a negative stance towards the plan.

The statement was in response to China's statement that the IAEA should not endorse the plan. I think the important part is, "We say this plan is consistent with the standards".

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Agreed.

I do not think it is the role of the IAEA to endorse, approve or recommend, but to remain neutral and objective, and to make sure that standards are observed and upheld. If there had been a problem, I feel sure that they would have called foul, and issued a directive or two.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

TEPCO have bought the AIEA advice. We know this release will be a problem. This is not far enough from Japan stream. it is a problem in Dane. China is right to ban those product. Japan never recognised time to time problem of contamination on some Fukushima product sent to China. If there is a problem with Fukushima, it will be impossible to prove and you will accuse China to lie when she was not.

If there is no room for casual human mistakes in your diplomacy with China, there is no room for Japan product in China. This need to be intelligent made on your border and not savage USA influence made on your border. This is how you cut yourself from your neighbours too. TEPCO have isolate Japan from Asia. Don’t think USA wouldn’t have made AIEA said YES to this solution which is the worse economic and diplomatic choice in the world.

USA like Britain need an isolate Japan from Asia more than you can guess and expected. Without Japan, they need to leave Asia. They lost Taiwan and South Korea in the same stride. Biden is not even able to have a polite talk with Vietnam without insulting them. They are really racist, and this was never a communist problem but a race problem. Communist is just a word to insult asian and asian friends, and orientals, and white that is not « pure blood ». Always have been.

Is Japan need to be saved from America ? China is preparing to save Taiwan. And honestly, we all laught hearing this before Ukraine war. But now, we do no more. This is an honest question.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

lunaticToday 04:14 pm JST

The IAEA does not have the authority to approve anything, and they are against the plan.

No, the IAEA is certainly not "against the plan." Its report says very clearly that the plan is consistent with relevant international safety standards. It's there in black and white, on page III (Director General's Foreword), along with many other places that confirm the plan's safety.

https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/iaea_comprehensive_alps_report.pdf

...

Based on its comprehensive assessment, the IAEA has concluded that the approach and activities to the discharge of ALPS treated water taken by Japan are consistent with relevant international safety standards. Furthermore, the IAEA notes the controlled, gradual discharges of the treated water to the sea, as currently planned and assessed by TEPCO, would have a negligible radiological impact on people and the environment.

...

You can assert that the IAEA's words are "typically indicative of being against it" all you want, in a vain attempt to advance your agenda. But you will be wrong, and it will not work.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Hideomi KuzeToday 12:41 pm JST

But that vast liquid dumped from Fukushima directly cooled melted radiation debris, and contain many kinds of radioactivity such as iodine129, strontium90, ruthenium106, technetium99, cesium137, plutonium239, carbon14, cadmium113m even after filtering. For example, Strontium90 25 million Becquerels, Iodine129 240 million Bq, Carbon14 1.7 billion Bq, Cesium137 49 million Bq, Plutonium239 73000Bq seem to be dumped during per year.

You've already tried this line several times on other threads, and I've already called it out as disinformation. Here is the reply yet again, and I will continue to post this until you stop spouting this disinformation.

...

Other radionuclides are removed/reduced to well within safe levels by ALPS. Here's a basic overview:

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2359217-fukushima-the-inside-story-of-the-alps-treated-water/

And here's more information on the TEPCO site:

https://www.tepco.co.jp/en/decommision/planaction/alps/index-e.html

3 ( +6 / -3 )

TEPCO have bought the AIEA advice

If you want to use this claim as an argument you need to prove it, else it can be ignored as baseless.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

MToday  05:59 pm JST

We know this release will be a problem.

Who is “we?”

8 ( +9 / -1 )

MToday 05:59 pm JST

If there is a problem with Fukushima, it will be impossible to prove and you will accuse China to lie when she was not.

If China doesn't trust Japan or the IAEA, then China can check the information at the source, by participating in the international framework to which it has been invited. However, China has refused this, as it wants to use the situation purely as political leverage.

https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20230905/p2g/00m/0in/045000c

Biden is not even able to have a polite talk with Vietnam without insulting them.

If Biden is insulting them, why have they just upgraded their relationship to a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership?

https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20230911_04/

They are really racist, and this was never a communist problem but a race problem. Communist is just a word to insult asian and asian friends, and orientals, and white that is not « pure blood ».

Then, how do you explain the fact that the US, and other Western countries, have good relations with basically all countries in Asia apart from China, North Korea, and the Myanmar junta (though not the Burmese people themselves). To me, the racism is on the Chinese side, due to people like Wang Yi:

https://apnews.com/article/china-japan-korea-race-controversy-b1fb99824d31b3f88a0893cacf6f54f0

Returning to the topic of Fukushima, China isn't concerned about food safety in the slightest (after all, it has some of the world's poorest levels of safety, regulation, and enforcement), and it isn't concerned about pollution (as it is the world's biggest polluter). It is only interested in politics.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

There is solar power, wind power, you can harvest power from the sea through the tides and through the difference of potential between seawater at the ocean floor and at the surface. There are abundant hot springs in Japan.

So why use nuclear in the first place?

If you factor in the immense cost of repairing the damage, surely nuclear power isn't cost effective.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

BertieWoosterOct. 5  10:35 pm JST

There is solar power, wind power, you can harvest power from the sea through the tides and through the difference of potential between seawater at the ocean floor and at the surface. There are abundant hot springs in Japan.

So why use nuclear in the first place?

All of those combined could not supply the demand for electricity.

Nuclear has zero carbon emissions and the human cost in fatalities and injuries is the lowest of all other forms of power generation.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Some scientists say, however, that the continuing release of low-level radioactive materials is unprecedented and needs to be monitored closely.

Hmmmm looks like it is not as safe as some would try to spin it...!!!

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Hmmmm looks like it is not as safe as some would try to spin it...!!!

The text you quoted do not contradict the claim that there is no evidence of risk, monitoring on things being done do not automatically means they are inherently risky, confirming the safety is still a valid reason to do it.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Many can’t understand that logic, because they’re just anime kids surfing about Japan on the Internet.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

BertieWooster

There is solar power, wind power, you can harvest power from the sea through the tides and through the difference of potential between seawater at the ocean floor and at the surface. There are abundant hot springs in Japan.

So why use nuclear in the first place?

Because none of the ones you mentioned is a realistic replacement of reliable and consistent fossil or nuclear energy, and all of them end up as toxic waste after a relatively short lifetime. And while fossile fuels will run out in the foreseeable future, nuclear does not. You are welcome.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

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