IAEA team in Japan for final review before discharge of Fukushima nuclear plant water


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 This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2023 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

IAEA do not have the legal authority to absolve Tepco from civil liability

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

And guess how far offshore they will be dumping this tainted water-

100 km? No. 50 km? No! 10 km? Haha, No!! 5 km!? NO!

……..1 km?? YES!

-9 ( +5 / -14 )

Some scientists say the impact of long-term, low-dose exposure to radionuclides is unknown and the release should be delayed.

Delayed until when and why?

The same vague, unsupported line, again, by the same reporter.

There are probably just as many “scientists” who say that the earthquake and tsunami was caused by aliens, and the aliens are irradiating the planet in preparation for colonizing earth.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

If the Japanese government was being truthful with the world, dumping this water in Japans' lakes and rivers would be just fine. However, the water is not clean and will cause devastation and health issues for years to come, globally.

-6 ( +5 / -11 )

The main purpose of the IAEA is to promote nuclear energy not stop it.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Michael MachidaToday  09:25 am JST

If the Japanese government was being truthful with the world, dumping this water in Japans' lakes and rivers would be just fine. However, the water is not clean and will cause devastation and health issues for years to come, globally

You might want to think a little more deeply about the concept of dilution.

Oh, and what “devastation” and “health issues for years to come” are there. Please be specific.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

IAEA has a tough decision to make.

Just imagine if it doesn't go as planned and it destroys incommensurable bio fauna in the ocean.

It will be an ugly position for the IAEA.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

IAEA is just nuclear energy thrusting organization, They had tried to make harmfulness of nuclear disaster looks small, not only Fukushima.

Calling contaminated water that directly cooled melted nuclear reactors and contain many kinds of radioactivity as “treated water” is deception.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

I am sure that the IAEA will be super conscious of their own image. In such a sensitive matter as this, with so many different interest groups watching every move with bated breath, they will not casually rubber stamp something that does not look right.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

If you analyze the article, you'll notice that there's nobody behind it.

Japanese officials say [...]

There is no institution or person supporting the plan.

Nobody to blame if it does not go as planned.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

IAEA, cannot shield Tepco from liability,some lawyers in the US are waiting for this water to be released to file a case against Tepco

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The US has no case against TEPCO.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Unless I'm missing something (??), this scenario has been "locked in" for some years now:

a. "Tech giant" Japan can't think of anything to do with the radioactive water other than dump it in the ocean.

b. The rest of the world looks on aghast, but is powerless to do anything about Japan's policy.

c. IAEA dudes rack up air miles and resort weekends to no purpose, other than pleasing themselves.

d. Onlookers get steadily more sickened and pessimistic about the future.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

And what happens if they don’t approve of the release? Nothing, of course. Japan let this water build up to a point where they have no other choice than to dump it in the ocean.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

American courts don't work in Japan.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

There is so many things that do not add up...


The only problem is the Tritium, ignoring more than 200 unknown radioactive elements.


Tritium filters do not exist.


Filtered water can be dumped but not reused for cooling down.


There is a 1 Km underwater tunnel for the dumping.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Oct 2020

Stemming the tide 2020

The reality of the Fukushima radioactive water crisis

Shaun Burnie

Greenpeace Germany

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

What do you mean by "unknown"? All radioisotopes are known.

The tests that TEPCO uses are very limited, cannot detect more that 100 variants.

there is no such thing as a "tritium filter".

Industrial Tritium filter providers: Croft Filters, from UK. Veolia, from USA. NucleanTech, from Spain. etc.

It is being reused several times.

Why stop reusing it?

1 Km underwater tunnel for the dumping.

If the waste water it's safe will dilute the same at 1m or at 1Km

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

So they should detect more than those 100

the radioactive carbon-14 and strontium-90 are more than 100 times the regulatory standards. But conveniently ignored.


Alright! Just use it! It exists for a reason!

All other contaminants that pile up aside, we know it contains tritium

Are there contaminants or not? You are sending opposite messages.

why would you want to dilute it directly at the coastline if you have the choice?

Why not? You say it's safe, you would swim on it, drink it, shower with it... don't you?

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

the radioactive carbon-14 and strontium-90 are more than 100 times the regulatory standards.

nice! we agree on this one.

Alright! Just use it! It exists for a reason!

nice! you agree that there are industrial Tritium filters.

there's also fairly mundane ones[contaminants] that cause corrosion and other damage.

nice! you agree that the waste water is contaminant.

Sigh. Yes, it's safe.

Previously we just agreed that there are contaminants, and carbon-14, and strontium-90 more than 100 times the regulatory standards.

But you still insist that its safe.

You're so contradictory. Can't understand.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Twinkle toes all over the comment section here. Tapity tap! Meanwhile nameless faceless trying to blame the water taking up space. How convenient since before the water its was probly penny pinchers and corner cutter suit guys who said scrw this anshin anzen, keep the extra change and hey, its just a few nuke reactors.

Now hes trying to make like its water tanks fault for bein there. 12 years later… "water storage made me do it. Now I gotta throw radioactive water under the sea cus accidents happen ya know, and icy dirt walls melt in the summer! 12 yrs.

Japanese officials say the water stored in the tanks needs to be removed to prevent accidental leaks in case of another disaster and to make room for the plant’s decommissioning.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

There is a large area of nuclear wasteland around the nuclear disaster site.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

85% of Koreans oppose Japan’s plan to dump Fukushima wastewater into ocean

72% said they would cut their consumption of marine products if Japan goes through with the release of contaminated water from Fukushima

Yoon faces an immense public pressure to expand the Japanese seafood ban to the entire eastern coast of Japan, and will be punished by angry voters in next year's general elections.

The ruling party is trembling in fear as this looks worse than the 2008 protest against US beef imports.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Wallace, your Shaun Burnie link above was good. It has expanded my view somewhat of this hugely complicated subject. Thanks.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Great. At least now I know that sensationalism and conspiracy nonsense for the sake of clicks is the business model.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

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