Japan to release contaminated Fukushima water into sea after treatment

Skybird · 04-13-21, 06:33 AM

And from the - far left-leaning - Süddeutsche Zeitung:

https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/...hima-1.5263211

Quote:

In an intact nuclear power plant, the cooling water runs in a closed circuit. Put simply, its heat is used to generate steam, which drives the turbines to generate electricity. But in Fukushima Daiichi the reactor pressure vessels in units one, two and three are broken. There is no longer a cycle. After coming into contact with the highly radioactive scrap from the reactors, the water runs through various leaks into the basement of the reactor building and the adjacent machine houses.

This contaminated water has to go somewhere. It is pumped out and some of it is used again for cooling. The rest has to be stored: up to 60,000 cubic meters of water are added every year. Some of this water can be purified, including with the ALPS (Advanced Liquid Processing System) system. 62 different radionuclides - types of atoms that are radioactive due to their unstable nucleus - can be extracted from the water by this system. Only tritium cannot be extracted from the water on a large industrial scale.

But tritium is such a low-emitting radionuclide that experts do not find it to be a cause for concern. According to information from the Japanese government, 30 percent of the cooling water stored in Fukushima Daiichi is treated in such a way that it falls below the limit values for all nuclides except for tritium. The Japanese only want to channel this water into the water.

The International Atomic Energy Agency IAEA is accompanying the process. Its general director Rafael Grossi says: The solution with cooling water in the sea is not new. "There is no scandal here." The US government praised Japan for "weighing options and effects" and "appears to have taken an approach in line with globally recognized nuclear safety standards".

Catfish · 04-13-21, 06:59 AM

The Sueddeutsche Zeitung is rather "liberal" than "left", it just does not equal your point of view, and from this point everything must be politically 'left'

It is not only Tritium though, and what exactly is being done with the filters after the water has been "cleaned"?
As your link provided: 30 percent of the water is being "cleaned, that leaves 70 percent i guess. And the whole water cooling system has cracks everywhere, so water flows through the ruins, all the time since 2011, and is being exchanged with sea water.
As they just found out the central off limits section is still too "hot" to come near it, except for robots.

Catfish · 04-13-21, 07:17 AM

"[...] that caused huge amounts of radioactively contaminated water to be released, which the operators of the nuclear power plant subsequently had to clean up.

One of the methods they used was reverse osmosis but it wasn't particularly effective. Although it is possible to purify up to 70 percent of the contaminated water this way, radioactive elements accumulate in the remaining 30 percent.

Some of these elements are highly radioactive and remain so for thousands of years. As things stand, the Japanese government is planning to dump this water—over one million liters in total—in the Pacific Ocean come 2022."

Maybe if they employ a new filter system like mentioned in the link/article below, but still what do you do with the filters.

https://phys.org/news/2020-09-filter...-elements.html

Platapus · 04-13-21, 07:19 AM

If they do a long time duration dispersal over large areas of the ocean, the risks can be limited.

Tritium is not very radioactive and its decay is mostly beta particles. It also has a half-life of about 12 years and decays into H3.

There is no perfect solution to disposing of any radioactive material. But there are ways to mitigate the risks.

If, for example, they take 10,000 gallons of the already diluted and filtered waste water and evenly disperse that over, say, 100 sq miles of ocean away from the continental shelves, away from the major currents, and the risks to marine life should be minimal.

Do that 100 times in different open ocean zones over 20-30 years and you have taken care of a million gallons.

A controlled dispersal schema over deep oceans over a decade or three may be the best solution. Not a perfect solution, but I can't think of any other solutions that will work better.

In cases like this, they may just have to choose the least worst solution.

Rockstar · 04-13-21, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

If they do a long time duration dispersal over large areas of the ocean, the risks can be limited.

Tritium is not very radioactive and its decay is mostly beta particles. It also has a half-life of about 12 years and decays into H3.

My lensatic compass uses Tritium to illuminate the dial and needle at night. It requires replenishment every twelve years.

Skybird · 04-13-21, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catfish

The Sueddeutsche Zeitung is rather "liberal" than "left", it just does not equal your point of view, and from this point everything must be politically 'left'

SZ and FR are equally lefty. Only the TAZ is even more lefty. Die Zeit has moved left as well, but not as far as SZ and FR.

Personally I currently prefer Swiss NZZ, American NBC, sometimes British BBC, and to less extend German FOCUS, it sometime sis good, bot often too populistic.

I like Helmut Schmidts comment according to which he would rather read the NZZ straight away instead of the intel reports by the BND.

Commander Wallace · 04-13-21, 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catfish

Good that reactors are secure, can never explode and never "release radioactivity" in the environment (read: in your place)

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-d...-idUSKBN2BZ2U3

Seriously, how do they want to contain this at all?

- The contaminated earth has been "removed" over square miles, so where is it now? You cannot "decontaminate" radioactivity as any schoolboy will tell you.
You can maybe (if you are lucky, and not in Chernobyl of course) decontaminate an area, by moving the radiating stuff somewhere else, where it will then still radiate and contaminate another place then for millenia to come.

In Fukushima, all the contaminated steel and iron and fuel rods have been dumped into so-called "cooling ponds" open to the atmosphere, where they will continue to "cool" (read: radiate) for some hundred thousand years to come.

The water of those ponds will now be released into the sea, saying it would be "filtered" beforehand.

1. Can any physicist please explain how you want to "filter" radioactive water?

2. Then fresh water will have to be added to the "cooling" ponds. Which will be contaminated and have to be released again in a few years. And so on and so on.

Who do they think they are fooling?

Great breakdown Catfish. Considering the half life of the radioactively contaminated materials, I seriously doubt anything can be filtered out. These are of course the dangers in harnessing and releasing nature, in this case Uranium and Plutonium among other elements. Another reason why extreme care is needed and then, not even that is enough.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

Very devious imho....the food chain in the sea will grow x10 in terms of individual specimen size and the traders in the fish markets will make a fortune.
On the other hand, did they consider the effect on Godzilla?

Godzilla isn't anything to mess with.

Consider this my entry in today's music thread, Jim.

04-13-21, 06:59 AM	#2
Catfish Dipped Squirrel Operative Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: ..where the ocean meets the sky Posts: 17,799 Downloads: 38 Uploads: 0	The Sueddeutsche Zeitung is rather "liberal" than "left", it just does not equal your point of view, and from this point everything must be politically 'left' It is not only Tritium though, and what exactly is being done with the filters after the water has been "cleaned"? As your link provided: 30 percent of the water is being "cleaned, that leaves 70 percent i guess. And the whole water cooling system has cracks everywhere, so water flows through the ruins, all the time since 2011, and is being exchanged with sea water. As they just found out the central off limits section is still too "hot" to come near it, except for robots. __________________ >^..^<*)))>{ All generalizations are wrong.

04-13-21, 07:17 AM	#3
Catfish Dipped Squirrel Operative Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: ..where the ocean meets the sky Posts: 17,799 Downloads: 38 Uploads: 0	"[...] that caused huge amounts of radioactively contaminated water to be released, which the operators of the nuclear power plant subsequently had to clean up. One of the methods they used was reverse osmosis but it wasn't particularly effective. Although it is possible to purify up to 70 percent of the contaminated water this way, radioactive elements accumulate in the remaining 30 percent. Some of these elements are highly radioactive and remain so for thousands of years. As things stand, the Japanese government is planning to dump this water—over one million liters in total—in the Pacific Ocean come 2022." Maybe if they employ a new filter system like mentioned in the link/article below, but still what do you do with the filters. https://phys.org/news/2020-09-filter...-elements.html __________________ >^..^<*)))>{ All generalizations are wrong.

04-13-21, 07:19 AM	#4
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,386 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	If they do a long time duration dispersal over large areas of the ocean, the risks can be limited. Tritium is not very radioactive and its decay is mostly beta particles. It also has a half-life of about 12 years and decays into H3. There is no perfect solution to disposing of any radioactive material. But there are ways to mitigate the risks. If, for example, they take 10,000 gallons of the already diluted and filtered waste water and evenly disperse that over, say, 100 sq miles of ocean away from the continental shelves, away from the major currents, and the risks to marine life should be minimal. Do that 100 times in different open ocean zones over 20-30 years and you have taken care of a million gallons. A controlled dispersal schema over deep oceans over a decade or three may be the best solution. Not a perfect solution, but I can't think of any other solutions that will work better. In cases like this, they may just have to choose the least worst solution. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.