Koreans protest Fukushima water release

Good! They should. Tepco is going to poison the ocean.

Nine people? Or were there more?

Dump it in the Sea of Japan and blame it on the North Koreans.

From the same LDP that wants to cut emissions and save the environment and The LDP want to do this.

Have respect for this planet, its oceans, and its ecosystems this an absolutely disrespectful and horrible thing Japan is doing. Every country has a right to protest this hanious decision by the LDP and their absolute disrespect for hunanity, sea life, and the environment.

If you are so confident in its safty realese it in Tokyo bay!

If you are so confident in its safty realese it in Tokyo bay!

Sorry, I don't get the point of that argument. Tokyo Bay is already happily receiving the waste water of 30 million people, it probably wouldn't make much of a difference. But other than making every single aspect of the release needlessly complicated, what would that prove or disprove about the water's safety that we don't already know? You know we can measure the water's quality, right?

Is treated radioactive water still radioactive?

The water has been treated and tested, and is safe to be released.

According to Tepco, the contaminations other than tritium are all removed by the ALPS. In that sense the released water is comparable to that other countries have released so far. That's their theory... I don't want to doubt about it... The release would continue for 100 years. We will see if they are right...

the released water is comparable to that other countries have released so far

Not really, other countries are much, much worse. With the waste water, TEPCO is planning to release some 22 Terabequerel worth of tritium per year. That's just about 0.2% of what La Hague is dumping into the English Channel, or what Sellafield is dumping into the Irish Sea, each year. Those two sites and their constant monitoring are actually how we know that the waste water release from Fukushima will have no meaningful impact on the environment.

the released water is comparable to that other countries have released so far

I believe this is worst.

It's been in direct contact with naked nuclear reactor cores.

No other country has ever done that.

It's been in direct contact with naked nuclear reactor cores. No other country has ever done that.

Just out of curiosity, what do you imagine nuclear reactors are usually cooled with? Palm fronds?

Literally every single nuclear reactor in the world does it like that: Water cools the reactor core, water gets contaminated, water is treated, water is released and diluted into the environment. Why do you think they are usually built near the sea or near big lakes?

In a nutshell:

You get different layers of protections and pipes not to get in direct contact.

Using special liquids to avoid chemical reactions.

You never, EVER, bath a nuclear reactors' cores in sea water.

They should also protest the Korean reactor (Kori) that releases more tritium every year than the total planned release from Fukushima over a 10-year period.

Is it hypocrisy or ignorance?

@Thunderbird2

Is treated radioactive water still radioactive?

Yes.

You get different layers of protections and pipes not to get in direct contact.

Naturally. But there is still water in direct contact with the rods, and that primary coolant cannot be recycled endlessly and has to be replaced from time to time (more often with BWRs than with PWRs). Same with the water in the spent fuel storage pools, where the rods spend up to a decade or two. That water will be treated and released, just like with Fukushima's water. Just not in the same amounts of course.

You never, EVER, bath a nuclear reactors' cores in sea water.

Of course not, that was an emergency measure.

Thank you for reassuring my point.

We agree that Fukushima's water is far worse than any other country.

Not comparable.

Dump it in the Sea of Japan and blame it on the North Koreans.

Once the oceans get contaminated, who's at fault don't really matter. We all pay.

We agree that Fukushima's water is far worse than any other country.

Sorry, I'm not trying to be contrarian for the sake of it, but it really isn't. Fukushima may be the worst waste water release from a (damaged) reactor, but other countries' fuel reprocessing sites are by far worse offenders than Fukushima's planned release. I mentioned La Hague and Sellafield before, they dump 400 to 500 times the amount of radioactivity into the sea every year, Fukushima's release is barely a fart compared to what those sites release every year.

I mentioned La Hague and Sellafield before, they dump 400 to 500 times the amount of radioactivity

got sources?

is it a real, measurable, fact?

AFAIK we have no data of Fukusima's waste from a 3rd party organization.

TEPCO doesn't allow people take samples in site. TEPCO facilitates the samples, you can't get any near to the real tanks.

You literally cannot compare it to any other country.

Yes you can. Tritium is released in far greater concentration and quantity in Canada, UK, South Korea and other countries every year than the total to be released in Fukushima.

Just because some people don’t know something doesn’t mean everyone doesn’t know it.

sources?

Fresh Water or Seawater

http://www.asahi.com/special/yoshida_report/en/2-1.html

TEPCO doesn't allow people take samples in site. TEPCO facilitates the samples, you can't get any near to the real tanks.

As per the IAEA's latest report, from November 2022:

"IAEA’s independent sampling and analysis (...) will be performed to corroborate the data from TEPCO and the Government of Japan associated with the ALPS treated water discharge. Samples will be analysed by IAEA laboratories as well as independent third-party laboratories"

The Japanese government agreed to this in 2021, in writing. It is unclear whether that independent sampling already happened, two reports on exactly this topic are still to be released. But since no release will happen without the IAEA's independent sampling, there is nothing to be gained for TEPCO from falsifying samples beforehand.

In the very same report you are mentioning.

[Question]

Will the Japanese side allow experts from the relevant countries to sample the nuclear contaminated water discharged into the sea on site?

[Answer]

Samples to be analyzed by TEPCO and its outsourcing contractors

src:

https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/publications/documents/infcircs/2022/infcirc1007.pdf

In the very same report you are mentioning.

Nope, I am referencing a different report:

https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/3rd_alps_report.pdf

"Report 3: Status of IAEA’s Independent Sampling, Data Corroboration, and Analysis"

It clearly and specifically addresses the worries you are voicing. To save you from reading the whole document, here's the relevant part taken verbatim from page 11 (the whole page may be a good read for you):

*"For the corroboration of source monitoring, samples of ALPS treated water that is considered by TEPCO to be ready for dilution and discharge – pending final confirmation by analyses – are being collected from tanks at FDNPS. For the corroboration of environmental monitoring, samples of seawater, sediment and marine biota are being collected from locations on the east coast of Japan around FDNPS. Sample collection and pre-treatment activities undertaken by TEPCO, and relevant Japanese authorities will be facilitated and observed by the IAEA. The homogeneity of all samples will be ensured. These samples will be split, and sub-samples will be provided to the laboratories participating in the ILCs for the analysis of the activity concentrations of a range of relevant radionuclides."*

(Emphasis mine.)

Thanks! You are reassuring my statement that no 3rd party organization can take samples in site.

I still remember when Fukushima exploded and the radiation spread all over the Kanto region.

TEPCO was the only source for tracking the radiation.

And they conveniently placed al the Geisser counters 2m over the ground.

Nobody trusts TEPCO on taking samples, no more.

After the 3/11 nuclear reactor explosions several civil groups monitored the radiation, like Greenpeace, Safecast, and others. Safecast is still monitoring.

The numbers broadcasted on TV where from TEPCO.

When you looked up in internet the numbers were very different.

Remember that the J-Gov prohibited the sale of Geisser counters.

It was a dystopia.

Safecast made and provided Geiger counters. People were warned in 2011 about fake counters in Akihabara. Sold under the brand name of Shanghai Ergonomics Detecting Instrument Co.

The demand for Geiger counters outstripped the supply.

https://www.reuters.com/article/japan-geigercounter-idINL3E7GP07L20110526

The radiation levels inside the No2 reactor are 10-15 SIEVERTS per hour due to a dislodged reactor cap.

The moral of the story is that TEPCO's numbers are not to trusted.

Thanks! You are reassuring my statement

You keep saying that, even when I'm not. That's a bit rude.

that no 3rd party organization can take samples in site.

Why would that be necessary if the IAEA is literally observing the taking of the samples? You're moving the goalposts, again.

You are assuming malice from TEPCO, which is fair considering their track record. But your opposition to any evidence to the contrary is immutable to reason or evidence. You outright dismiss anything the IANA -- the arbiters of public concerns itself -- says, out of hand, no consideration given. And that's neither a good basis for a constructive conversation ... nor a healthy state of mind.

Why would that be necessary if the IAEA is literally observing the taking of the samples?

Here you got it wrong.

Read it more carefully.

IAEA will observe the samples. Not the sample taking activity.

You outright dismiss anything the IANA -- the arbiters of public concerns itself -- says

No. I don't dismiss what IAEA says. They are the only ones we can trust.

And they try hard to be allowed to take samples on site.

Ask yourself why TEPCO is not letting them.

Read it more carefully. IAEA will observe the samples. Not the sample taking activity.

Seriously?

*"Sample collection and pre-treatment activities undertaken by TEPCO, and relevant Japanese authorities* will be facilitated and observed by the IAEA."

Let me spell that out for you: Sample collection. Will be facilitated and observed by the IAEA.

Honestly, at this point I'm not sure whether you're actively misreading things to make them fit your preconception ... or whether you're leading me on to get a rise out of me.

Try to read it the way I do:

*"Sample collection and pre-treatment activities undertaken by TEPCO, and relevant Japanese authorities** will be facilitated and observed by the IAEA."*

The IAEA is not allowed to collect samples.

It's very much emphasizing that only TEPCO can get any near the water tanks.

Ask yourself Why.

I'm solely interested in people's health and self-preservation.

I can't understand what drives you to justify the dumping of radioactive waste to our oceans.

Why would you?

Try to read it the way I do:

No. Sorry. At some point we have to agree on how the English language works, and that if someone writes that they "will observe the sample collection", that means they will observe the sample collection. I'm truly sorry if that doesn't fit your preconceived notion of "TEPCO will not allow independent sampling", but I refuse to join your mental acrobatics.

I can't understand what drives you to justify the dumping of radioactive waste to our oceans.

It is justified because there's simply no viable alternative, and literally every single item of applicable research shows that it will be inconsequential, in both absolute and relative terms.

Does that mean I am happy about it? No it doesn't. Do I wish they didn't have to do it? Yes, of course. But you know what they say about wishes and horses.

What really despairs me, besides TEPCO's lack of transparency , is that there is a viable alternative.

here:

https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Canadian-technology-offers-Fukushima-tritium-optio

Both of your arguments are leaking.

This catastrophe is not comparable to any other country.

What really despairs me, besides TEPCO's lack of transparency , is that there is a viable alternative.

Ah yes, I was afraid you would bring up the detritiation process. What you were linking to is a fluff piece, a marketing news release by Laker TRF. Notice that they don't say how long it would take to bring up a detritiation plant at Fukushima, and what volume it can process. Can you guess why they don't say that, and why outside of a small news blip on a website run by an association to promote nuclear energy(!) they haven't been heard of since 2019?

Detritiation works, but only in laboratory size quantities right now. It is completely unfeasible for the volume of waste water stored in Fukushima.

This catastrophe is not comparable to any other country.

Sigh. We have been through this before. You've now moved the goalposts so often and so far, you didn't notice they ended up where they started?

There are much better alternatives.

Plural? What are the others?

1

I keep saying that we got no official numbers to compare with other countries. Unless TEPCO give us full transparency we got nothing, only selected samples taken from TEPCO officials.

In other words: we cannot compare.

2

Not only that one in Canada, but other companies in the rest of the world are offering their Tritium filter services.

There's no official justification not to use one of the many Tritium filtering services.