People chant slogans against the government's decision to start releasing massive amounts of treated radioactive water from the wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant into the sea, during a rally outside the prime minister's office in Tokyo on Tuesday. Photo: AP/Eugene Hoshiko
national

Gov't decides to release water from Fukushima nuclear plant into sea in 2023

61 Comments

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

© KYODO

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

61 Comments
Login to comment

Then why the alarmist reports that they would soon be out of room to store it, if they can wait another 2 years? Or will it take that long to obtain "sufficient understanding" by doling out more tax money?

14 ( +19 / -5 )

How convenient, just throw it to the sea. Japan has been such a disgrace in the gestion of this since already the first reactor blew up.

27 ( +33 / -6 )

Why not right now?

Let Olympic athletes swim in radioactive water and eat food caught from sea off Fukushima if Japanese government is so confident of their safety.

32 ( +37 / -5 )

I don’t understand the necessity to intentionally speed up that process. It is ‘safer’ and more time distributed if they would wait until the containers rust or burst in many years later and only a few liters of one container after the next flow into the sea then. Of course the very final result is the same, but it is more thinned on a time scale. And if the space there is not sufficient, why not build the next container ‘village’ at another neighboring site and pump the treated radioactive water there?

-13 ( +3 / -16 )

The good news is that you don't need to worry about the poor fishermen of Fukushima: Whatever they catch will just be relabelled as caught somewhere else and, yes, you will be eating it.

ITADAKIMASU!

16 ( +18 / -2 )

How convenient, just throw it to the sea. Japan has been such a disgrace in the gestion of this since already the first reactor blew up.

Is there any other solution? The company handled it very badly to start with. Execs should have been arrested and company nationalized. But now it's done, I think the only solution is to decontaminate the water as well as possible, release it into the sea and then pump the newly contaminated water into the tanks for decontamination.

-11 ( +5 / -16 )

@Ego Sum Lux Mundi

Whatever they catch will just be relabelled as caught somewhere else

After the radioactive water release in 2023, all seafood from Japan will be banned outside of Japan. WTO already ruled it's legal to ban Japanese seafood based on radioactivity concerns.

The issue is Japanese buying seafood in Japan.

15 ( +20 / -5 )

having determined it poses no safety concerns to humans or the environment

Where can the public find the results of the testing done to determine releasing millions of tons of radioactive water into the ocean poses no danger to humans or the environment. Has there been any field testing done? We’re international experts consulted? Sadly, this is a decision made behind closed doors by bureaucrats whose only interest is economics. Tritium can be removed from water and there are scores of square kilometers of unlivable land within Fukushima that this tainted water can be stored on. The world should not allow this release of millions of tons of radioactive water to happen.

14 ( +16 / -2 )

Is there any other solution?

I would first fund serious serious studies on the real environmental impact on the fauna and flora which are poorly understood. They had ten years to do that, they did not.

Another possibility would have been of course to try to pursue other routes, the most credible being searching for a site for deep burring of the containers. That's Japan trash, Japan should deal with it on its land. Japan could have ask for the expertise and help for such technologies to countries which are developing it like France. The reason why they are throwing it to the sea is that it's the cheapest solution.

12 ( +15 / -3 )

Unfortunate.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

The water is safe to be released. What is the fuss? Its a standard process for normally operating plants too.

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/02/27/national/iaea-chief-fukushima-water/

-18 ( +5 / -23 )

All is nice what I'm seems.

-16 ( +2 / -18 )

So in the end will all the nuclear waste be dumped in the ocean?

12 ( +13 / -1 )

I would first fund serious serious studies on the real environmental impact on the fauna and flora which are poorly understood. They had ten years to do that, they did not. Another possibility would have been of course to try to pursue other routes, the most credible being searching for a site for deep burring of the containers. That's Japan trash, Japan should deal with it on its land. Japan could have ask for the expertise and help for such technologies to countries which are developing it like France. The reason why they are throwing it to the sea is that it's the cheapest solution.

I see. Well you seem to know much more about the science than me. Wouldn't burying the tanks create a ticking time bomb for the ground water? I'd like to think that if Japan had a large area of in-arable land, the ruling regime would have disposed of in Japan. Of course the mountains are in-arable but the water runs off them into the cities and farms.

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

Its a standard process for normally operating plants too.

No the process water that enters the reaction chamber operates on a closed loop. The only water discharged to the environment in a normal functioning plant is the cooling water which never comes into contact to any highly radioactive part. What we are talking about here is precisely the water that has come directly into contact to the radioactive fuel.

17 ( +18 / -1 )

Don't trust the government.

Liars.

Disgraceful LDP.

19 ( +20 / -1 )

Why wait? Start today. Or will they use that time to educatr people on the lack of danger in those tanks?

-14 ( +1 / -15 )

@Paul

Of course this technology has still a few open questions and research is ongoing. But again that's Japan's trash and it owes the world to investigate this method too. Concerning the site, actually Japan has been constructing two underground experimental sites for that purpose, one in Mizunami in a crystalline medium at 1000 m depth; the other one in Horonobe (Hokkaido) in a sedimentary clay medium at 500 m depth.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

Let me re-post the comment I posted on the thread of “Suga vows swift decision on release of Fukushima radioactive water” (JT: Oct 22, 2020):

Storing contaminated radioactive groundwater in tanks is like a goose trying to drain a river by drinking up the water. It’s been apparent that, sooner or later, efforts to contain the contaminated groundwater by installing tanks after tanks would come across a grave problem, which we are witnessing now.

Why is TEPCO, the power company that caused this grave accident and inflicted so much damage on people and environment, is still operating, kicking and alive.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

As long as it has been checked and verified by the relevant non-Japanese authorities, what's the issue?

-14 ( +2 / -16 )

eat food caught from sea off Fukushima

This is the common ignorance. Like airborne radiation stops at the prefecture border or Covid19 stops at 8pm.

In reality, this mass amount of radiative liquid will enter into the sea. The Oyashio Current will take it down the Japanese Coast to Tokyo Bay where it will meet the Kuroshio Current coming from the South. This sea current has a couple of major rotating sub currents that will spread the radioactive water from Tokyo past Nagoya and the other, Shikoku, Osaka and eastern Kyushu. Basically the whole west coast of Japan.

where these two currents meet around Tokyo area, the Kuroshio Currents off past Hawaii to the West Coast of America and Canada.

13 ( +15 / -2 )

"The process removes most radioactive materials including strontium and cesium but leaves behind tritium, which poses little risk to human health in low concentration."

"The International Atomic Energy Agency has backed the move, with Director General Rafael Grossi saying it is scientifically sound and in line with standard practice in the nuclear industry around the world."

OK then. Go ahead. Can't see what the problem is. It is safe. Too many experts in the thread.

-15 ( +0 / -15 )

It DOES pose safety concerns! Why do you think the US Navy dumps anything radioactive into the ocean beyond 100nm from the shore? They do it because by the time it reaches shore (if) it has been dilluted and is safe..smh Japan J-Govt. Now not only will there be a crazy high number of COVID cases, but cancer numbers will be rising as well.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

Experts warn centuries of damage to ocean and lives as Japan to decide on dumping Fukushima highly contaminated water.

This is an unwelcome if not unacceptable decision. Japan has completely ignored the feeling of neighboring countries.

Is IAEA agreeable to such move?

12 ( +13 / -1 )

From Oct. 23rd, 2020 article in New Scientist:

“A more serious matter is other, potentially more dangerous radionuclides in the water, including strontium-90 and iodine-129. TEPCO first published a list of contaminants in 2018. While filtering has reduced their concentrations, around 70 per cent of the water has yet to go through a secondary filtering process.”

(Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2258055-should-japan-dump-radioactive-water-from-fukushima-into-the-ocean/#ixzz6rsqHc3Gs)

If there has been further filtering of the strontium 90 and iodine 129 recently, it would be good to see a reference to it if a claim such as the one in the 4th paragraph of this article is going to be made.

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

From Kyodo:

U.S. backs Japan's decision to release Fukushima plant treated water

https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2021/04/6789babe1165-breaking-news-fukushima-water-release-in-line-with-intl-safety-standards-us.html

q

I think it'd be fine to be worried or critical over the issue, it may be a natural reaction for humans. But then why remaining ignorant or silent about the fact that almost all active nuclear plants around the world have been releasing tons of the treated water into sea, quite regularly? Fukushima's water will be diluted sufficiently or even more than equivalents from other plants.

The current water storage is also risky to contingencies and inhibiting to smooth dismantling and reconstruction work.

Without valid reason and fair-assessment, many Fukushima critics would be regarded or downgraded as hypocrite or science-illiterate.

-12 ( +0 / -12 )

Name a better solution. Or, downvote it and move along like usual.

-15 ( +2 / -17 )

No the process water that enters the reaction chamber operates on a closed loop. The only water discharged to the environment in a normal functioning plant is the cooling water which never comes into contact to any highly radioactive part. What we are talking about here is precisely the water that has come directly into contact to the radioactive fuel.

that is why they used the ALPS thingy, no? only Tritium remains. Since tritium is a low energy beta emitter, it is not dangerous externally (its beta particles are unable to penetrate the skin)

As for the concentration of C-14 in this water is similar to that naturally occurring in food products or the human body. Doubts are raised by Shaun Burnie on YouTube and elsewhere, a nuclear technology specialist , but he cooperates with the German branch of Greenpeace and presents the official position of an organization that has openly opposed the use of nuclear energy for years, promoting alternative energy sources.

-11 ( +1 / -12 )

Imagine if it was China or South Korea doing this! The Japanese Government and other countries for that matter would have been up in arms opposing it. But because it’s Japan they seem to be getting a free pass especially from the US!

15 ( +17 / -2 )

Invisible threats such as radiation, viruses, airborne carbon, and cyber monitoring will divide people since many will believe in conspiracies and many will be crippled with fear. This all despite not having a full understanding of any of these issues. In this case they are releasing "treated" water as has been done numerous times in nuclear plants around the world. Not saying it is 100% safe but obviously this is a decision that has been thought through carefully.

-14 ( +1 / -15 )

It DOES pose safety concerns! Why do you think the US Navy dumps anything radioactive into the ocean beyond 100nm from the shore? They do it because by the time it reaches shore (if) it has been dilluted and is safe..smh

10 ( +10 / -0 )

As for the concentration of C-14 in this water is similar to that naturally occurring in food products or the human body

poppycock.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

"According to the government's plan, the tritium will be diluted to less than 1,500 becquerels per liter, one-40th of the concentration permitted under Japanese safety standards and one-seventh of the World Health Organization's guideline for drinking water."

What a waste! There are countries without any drinking water! At least pump some for washing hands in the toilets !

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

What are they going to do with all the empty tanks?

11 ( +11 / -0 )

As for the concentration of C-14 in this water is similar to that naturally occurring in food products or the human body

poppycock.

"The concentration of C-14 in this water is similar to that naturally occurring in food products or the human body. Here we are talking about 2 to 220 Bq / l. Assuming 60 Bq / kg for meat and its consumption by an average Japanese at the level of 30 kg per year, the Japanese eat 225 GBq C-14 annually in the meat alone "- says Dr. Eng. Paweł Gajda from the Department of Sustainable Energy Development, Faculty of Energy and Fuels, AGH in Krakow.

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

U.S. backs Japan's decision to release Fukushima plant treated water

Now we know it's definitely a public health hazard but cheap. The super-rich only drink bottled water from Switzerland and eat salmon imported from Norway.

-14 ( +0 / -14 )

“It's filtered water, so relatively clean. The activity of C-14 alone in the human body is approx. 40 Bq / kg, so also in this water. Suggesting that this concentration is dangerous to health is nothing more than unnecessarily driving fear ”- adds Dr. Gajda.

As the scientist points out, the threat exists only theoretically, under the impossible conditions. “If one person consumed all this C-14 (these 63 GBq), they would receive a dose of about 37 Sv, which is several times the lethal dose. But how to quickly drink hundreds of millions of liters of water? " - he asks rhetorically.

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

I trust the experts whom are to advising the governing LDP.

-13 ( +1 / -14 )

Great, the sea will be like a hot bath with a green glow and full of 3 eyed fish.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

Contrary to the misunderstanding of the public, dilution with seawater is the only and the best solution.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2019/09/12/its-really-ok-if-japan-dumps-radioactive-fukushima-water-into-the-ocean/

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

People should boycott the Olympics over this.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

SJ: "Contrary to the misunderstanding of the public, dilution with seawater is the only and the best solution."

Actually, not using nuclear power is. But since it's already too late, too expensive, and has destroyed that area for centuries to come, it should be mandatory that if TEPCO wants to release the irradiated water into the ocean, they should have to close down and all their nuclear plants and never start another one. Nope. So, get ready for more of the same, with the should shrugs and Shouganais.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

In any case, Japan is already no doubt crying foul as other nations no doubt -- and justifiably so -- start talking about bans on Japanese imports. All nations should stop using any seafood from Japan, and also things like the Olympics should be boycotted on this decision alone.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Do you really want to become a pariah and still promote coal and nucs as a business model?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

David Brent,

Probably, you want to say the release of contaminated water into the Pacific Ocean by No. 1 Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant is like a drop in the ocean, which will be diluted thin and harmless eventually.

It may be diluted in the vast oceans around the globe all right, but how many years do you think it will take? Until then, the contaminated water will remain undiluted off the coast of Fukushima for many years to come.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

They are going to dump into the sea water that is you boiled down to 1/7 of its volume would be safe to drink by WHO standards. And yet the posters on this site are still worried. You chaps really have a lot more to fear than this benign isotope.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

"" treated radioactive""

What does this mean??

It will not Kill you but it will ruin you living life, your ocean, and all living species around you.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Instead of this UGLY 14 meters high 400KM long sea wall, Japan should have been building more tanks to hold this water.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The US government supports Japan's decision to dump the radioactive water into the sea.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Fukushima has suffered enough in service to Tokyo's power supply. Bring around a super-tanker and pump all the waste water into it and drive it down to Tokyo Bay and dump it there. 1. It will be kind to the poor people of Fukushima. 2. It will be dumped where the people who use the electric power that caused the problem live. 3. The gov't will make absolutely sure that it's safe to dump (unlike in Fukushima – where we really can't trust that they will actually do what they say they will do). Win win!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Won't begin for another 2 years so plenty of time for another course of action.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Does facts matter when judging Japan?

UN nuclear agency supports Japan decision to release the WATER. Normal standard practice.

Other countries have done the same. They don't report it, then don't ask the opinion of the world, haters.

Water has been filtired many times, the risk has been lowered to worldwide standards. Does it matter? Not if your bias against Japan.

Been dealing with this issue for over a decade. Running out of space, waste of money, land, energy. We will have to get rid of this water at some point. Even if it's 50 years from now. Should have done it sooner rather then later!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Please watch this PBS report about Fukushima nuclear disaster ,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtwNyUZJgw8

0 ( +0 / -0 )

venze

Experts warn centuries of damage to ocean and lives as Japan to decide on dumping Fukushima highly contaminated water.

Firstly, this is NOT highly contaminated water, and secondly, which experts are you referring to?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan's Suga government and TEPCO mere chose cheaper way than buying new places and making new radioactivity tanks.

They call dangerous radioactive contaminated water as "treated water" and insists its "safe".

but they avoid to release at other places except Fukushima, avoid also to transport it to other place, avoid to also use to other purpose.

besides, they broke promise that they never release radioactive contaminated water to the sea without approval of fishery workers.

Japan's government and TEPCO emphasize "treated water containing tritium" "reputational damage" only, and pretense as if damage to health or as if radioactivity except tritium are nothing at all.

Obedient major media of Japan only follow such deception.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan's Suga government and TEPCO mere chose cheaper way than buying new places and making new radioactivity tanks.

They call dangerous radioactive contaminated water as "treated water" and insists its "safe".

But they avoid to release at other places except Fukushima, avoid also to transport it to other place, avoid to also use to other purpose.

Besides, they broke promise that they never release radioactive contaminated water to the sea without approval of fishery workers.

Japan's government and TEPCO emphasize "treated water containing tritium" "reputational damage" only, and pretense as if damage to health or as if radioactivity except tritium are nothing at all.

Obedient major media of Japan only follow such deception.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What are they going to do with all the empty tanks?

They won't stay empty. Groundwater continues to infiltrate the broken reactors through big cracks. That water becomes contaminated from the reactor. It must be treated to remove all the other nuclear particles that are filterable and stored somewhere. TEPCO has been building a new tank every four days. They are rapidly running out of room for new tanks.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

It DOES pose safety concerns! Why do you think the US Navy dumps anything radioactive into the ocean beyond 100nm from the shore?

Where do these sea stories come from. Can you document this claim? The US Navy was sloppy about this until 1973 but since then is very much more careful handling its radioactive wastes.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Hideomi Kuze

They call dangerous radioactive contaminated water as "treated water" and insists its "safe".

I understand the water is treated and radioactive contaminants removed. The issue is Tritium, wich can not be removed. But Tritium no only occurs naturally, but is routinely released into the environment by nuclear plants everywhere, without being made a big issue of.

Do you have other information?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

This is from a GAO report of releases of radioactive water from US Navy nuclear powered ships. The discussion on tritium applies to the situation at Fukushima.

"Tritium is a radioactive isotope of hydrogen. Trace amounts of tritium are formed in

reactor coolant systems when neutrons interact with deuterium (a non-radioactive

isotope of hydrogen), which is naturally present and comprises about 0.015 percent of

hydrogen atoms in seawater. Although tritium does have a half-life of 12 years, the

radiation it produces is of such low energy as to be environmentally insignificant. In

fact, the safety guidelines issued by the International Commission on Radiological

Protection, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, the U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and other standard-setting agencies permit the

presence of 100 times as much tritium as cobalt-60. The tritium produced by naval

nuclear reactors is in the oxide form, chemically indistinguishable from water. Unlike

other radionuclides, tritium neither concentrates significantly in marine life nor collects

on sediment.

Tritium occurs naturally in the environment, generated by cosmic radiation in the upper

atmosphere. According to reference 17, cosmic radiation produces about 4 million curies

of tritium per year. This means that there is a global inventory of about 70 million curies of

tritium at any given time, about 45 million curies of which are in the oceans (reference 18).

In comparison, the amount of tritium released each year from all U.S. naval nuclear powered ships and their supporting tenders, bases, and shipyards has always been less than 200 curies—and virtually all of that was released into the ocean more than 12 miles from shore. This amount is less than the tritium released annually to the environment by a single commercial nuclear power station (reference 19). Further, the amount of

tritium in water released within 12 miles of shore by U.S. naval nuclear-powered ships

and their support facilities is less than one curie.

Because the amount of tritium occurring naturally in the environment is so large, the

amount produced by U.S. naval reactors is too small to have any measurable effect on

the environment. Therefore, tritium has not been combined with data on other

radionuclides in this report. "

2 ( +2 / -0 )

It may be diluted in the vast oceans around the globe all right, but how many years do you think it will take? Until then, the contaminated water will remain undiluted off the coast of Fukushima for many years to come.

You have a very poor understanding of ocean currents and convection.

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