Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Japan expected to announce it will release radioactive water from crippled Fukushima nuclear plant into ocean
OregonLive ^ | 10/19/2020 | Douglas Perry

Posted on 10/19/2020 2:29:38 PM PDT by Rio

The Japanese government is planning on releasing millions of gallons of contaminated water into the ocean starting in 2022, according to international news reports.

“170 tons of new radioactive wastewater is generated each day [at Fukushima] and is stored in 1,000 specially designed tanks,” Forbes reports.

The government would begin to release the contaminated water into the ocean when the tanks being used to store it reach capacity. The final decision about whether or not to implement the plan is expected to be announced by November. The water is being treated to “reduce radioactivity,


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; US: Oregon
KEYWORDS: donteattheshrimp; fukushima; japan; ocean; oceanrelease; radioactive; radioactivewater; seafood
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-77 last
To: CIB-173RDABN
In the 1950s we were testing nuclear weapons on islands in the Pacific. I am pretty sure some of that radiation got into the ocean...are we all dead yet.

No way, it all got swept up and buried, didn't it? Might explain the liberal mania on the West Coast. By the way, a lot of the ships transporting nuclear materials to and from the tests in the Pacific went through SF Bay, a lot of radiated materials ended up at Treasure Island Naval Station. They're still cleaning up radiation there after they built low-income housing on top of it, 60 years after testing.

61 posted on 10/19/2020 5:00:47 PM PDT by roadcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

“Actually both of us are misstating it slightly. “

LOL!

“Tritium is more rare than deuterium, but it decays into deuterium relatively quickly. “

Zero for two!


62 posted on 10/19/2020 5:00:51 PM PDT by TexasGator (Z1z)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: oldplayer
The ocean is huge. This amount of radioactive water is only going to be detectable with the most sensitive of instruments. So long as it is done gradually, there will be no adverse impacts.

Don't hydrothermal vents release significant amounts of radioactivity into the water pretty much constantly?

63 posted on 10/19/2020 5:08:38 PM PDT by Charles Martel (Progressives are the crab grass in the lawn of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Rio

No, they have very expensive filtration equipment which essentially leaves just water. The heavier elements, radioactive or not I presume, are separated out and managed separately. The only thing they can’t remove is the tritium. Whether the hydrogen one the water molecules has zero, one or the radioactive two neutrons it filters the same. There already is lots of tritiated water in the ocean. And 40% of that created in the accident has already decayed away.


64 posted on 10/19/2020 5:16:20 PM PDT by JohnBovenmyer (Waiting for the tweets to hatch.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: seowulf

So a massive deionized water operation. Makes sense. Tritium is dissolved in the water? Or T2O?


65 posted on 10/19/2020 5:17:49 PM PDT by Rio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: servantboy777

What reason?


66 posted on 10/19/2020 5:28:11 PM PDT by TexasGator (Z1z)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Rio
So a massive deionized water operation. Makes sense. Tritium is dissolved in the water? Or T2O?

Pretty much. The tritium is as water. That's why it is hard to remove. It can be done slowly and expensively using centrifuge, distillation, or mass spectrometry. You could never do it on a scale like Fukushima.

67 posted on 10/19/2020 5:42:18 PM PDT by seowulf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Rio

Dilution is the solution?

See there? We’re not contaminated any more.


68 posted on 10/19/2020 6:14:41 PM PDT by Delta 21 (Get off your ass and earn it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seowulf

Thus, a tritium-infected fish might be damaged, but would not be radioactive if consumed by a human. Correct?


69 posted on 10/19/2020 6:40:44 PM PDT by Rio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: volunbeer
"... vulnerabilities that the newer reactors do not."

In the mid seventies the head of R&D for one of the large technology companies stated that nuclear reactors were reliable enough that one should expect only one serious accident in 10,000 years. That was the consensus of people supporting nuclear power. His prediction was off by several orders of magnitude.

The problem appears to be that the vulnerabilities of any given design are not apparent until AFTER such vulnerabilities are allowed to create significant problems.

70 posted on 10/19/2020 6:53:53 PM PDT by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: William Tell

“In the mid seventies the head of R&D for one of the large technology companies stated that nuclear reactors were reliable enough that one should expect only one serious accident in 10,000 years. “

Which company?


71 posted on 10/19/2020 8:23:04 PM PDT by TexasGator (Z1z)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: roadcat

No way, it all got swept up and buried, didn’t it?


How do you sweep up the radioactive dust particles in the air or settled into the ocean?

As far as that goes what about all the test in the desert a few miles from Las Vegas?


72 posted on 10/20/2020 4:33:44 AM PDT by CIB-173RDABN (I am not an expert in anything, and my opinion is just that, an opinion. I may be wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Rio

It wouldn’t even be damaged.

The beta from tritium is so low energy that it causes less damage than sunlight. Of course it’s always there. It comes and goes as the fish exchanges water with the environment, i.e. biological half-life. If the tritiated water is dilute enough, no problem.

Back in the old days, treated reactor coolant was routinely dumped in the ocean by the navy outside the 10 mile limit.

That has not happened for many decades.


73 posted on 10/20/2020 7:13:52 AM PDT by seowulf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: TexasGator

Ok ok. It decays to helium but 12 years is short!


74 posted on 10/20/2020 10:15:45 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: CIB-173RDABN
How do you sweep up the radioactive dust particles in the air or settled into the ocean?

I thought the sarcasm tag was unnecessary! You detonate a nuke in the ocean, the radioactivity is in the water (and everywhere else)! As for Las Vegas, people there did get exposed to the radioactivity. Next time I'll put the /s tag!

BTW - I mentioned elsewhere that they're still cleaning up radioactivity on Treasure Island in San Francisco Bay. City "leaders" got the great idea of putting low income housing there after the Navy turned it over to SF. During the late 1940s into the 1950s they detoxed ships used in nuke testing in the Pacific. Well, the Navy supposedly swept up tons of dirt. As of the last couple years, the city is still finding radioactive clumps at doorsteps of housing. The low-income residents filed a multi-billion dollar lawsuit recently. Never should have put housing there. My dad worked at Alameda Naval Air Station in the 1950s and 1960s, and often took me to Treasure Island because of the base there. Beautiful place, but toxic! I didn't know, didn't care.

75 posted on 10/20/2020 1:07:55 PM PDT by roadcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: roadcat

Next time I’ll put the /s tag!

Always a good idea /s


76 posted on 10/20/2020 3:25:10 PM PDT by CIB-173RDABN (I am not an expert in anything, and my opinion is just that, an opinion. I may be wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

Epsom salt stores seven H2O molecules per MgSO4 molecule in solid form, so it’s mostly solid water. If buried deep enough that takes it out of circulation. Putting nuclear waste INTO circulation seems like the worst option.


77 posted on 10/20/2020 3:45:24 PM PDT by Reeses (A journey of a thousand miles begins with a government pat down.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-77 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson