The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.TEPCO files for approval of Fukushima plant water release
By MARI YAMAGUCHI TOKYO©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.
26 Comments
Login to comment
Mirchy
I bet if China intended to do something like that, half the world would jump to the roof.
Iron Lad
@Mirchy
Both China and Korea have done it with their nuclear reactors.
It's all war of words.
Cricky
Of course they will , not like other parties have a say or there is any real science behind it….dump it all.
Lindsay
The photo gives a good indication of just how much tainted water they intend to release. It’s far beyond a ‘drop in the ocean’.
Sanjinosebleed
TEPCO and especially it's owner should be bankrupted with fines!!!... But we all know who pays the politicians bills . ...
Peter Neil
They should continue to build storage tanks until the entire planet is covered. Then bankrupt TEPCO and stop producing electricity. These ideas are logical and rational.
The Avenger
I don't care if radioactive water has been treated. Releasing it into the ocean is insane.
smithinjapan
Ban ALL Japanese marine products.
badsey3
Titrium was used in many Russian guns (SKS etc) for the sights. = Gives off a nice green glow for 30yrs etc.
You could put up a ton of solar panels for all the money being spent on these nuclear plants.
Samit Basu
I will enjoy Pacific Blue Fin otoro before it becomes uneatable after Fukushima water release.
kurisupisu
I don’t think I approve…
albaleo
Somewhat different from tritium.
I think it can if the water to be released is much the same in terms of tritium content.
albaleo
But is the question not how much tritium there is in the released water?
While looking around, most data seems to focus on the amount of radioactive material per liter and not the total amount of radioactive material released. I'm not sure which is more significant.
I read the following at the link below.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2021/04/12/japan-will-release-radioactive-fukushima-water-into-the-ocean/?sh=43b1010674c4
Chris Case
Not really. The ocean contains 352 quintillion gallons of water
Mark
So much for the fishing industry when people start turning sick and marine life starts dying.
Mark
Their is something about TEPCO that gives me the stomach cramps.
GBR48
It is a measure of last resort and doesn't pose a threat to human health. Compared to all the nuclear tests, the wars we have had and will have, the atomic bombs, Agent Orange, the fertilisers used in agriculture, the oil spills, the sea dumps from large ships, seabed mining, global land mining and farming runoffs, effluent, rubbish, the highly radioactive nuclear waste from Fukushima Daiichi and other plants, the water in those tanks isn't an issue. But it will keep SK/JP and CH/JP politics boiling merrily for another year.
An underground tunnel does seem like a very expensive and quake-vulnerable solution compared to piping it into a container vessel and piping it off at sea. Presumably they are expecting Fukushima Daiichi to be a serious hazard for many years to come.
Peter Neil
Eating all the maguro laced with mercury and other things is probably more dangerous than the plan to release this water over time.
Yohan
The question remains however what else can be done instead of releasing this radioactive water into the ocean.
I see no other way out of this situation. To release it slowly away from the coast and to disperse it into the ocean starting with the oldest water in these 1000 storage tanks is maybe the only realistic solution.