In 2011, the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant was damaged by a massive earthquake in eastern Japan.
Nuclear power plant reactor core meltdowns, radioactive material leakage, the need for constant water cooling, in addition to the core of groundwater and rainwater inflow, these contaminated water pumped out after filtering treatment to remove the radioactivity.No matter what you do with it, an element called tritium (chuan), an isotope of hydrogen, remains.
When the media talk about the recent Fukushima disaster, they often talk about “nuclear waste water”.Japanese officials don’t think so: “nuclear wastewater” is contaminated water that washes over reactors.And that water is being cleaned out, except for excess tritium, which is not the same thing as real “nuclear waste” (like reactor cooling water).
The Japanese government called the nuclear waste water “tritium water” at first, but later renamed it “nuclear treated water” after it was found to contain excessive levels of other elements (with a long half-life and little effect on fish).
According to this definition, the “nuclear wastewater” discussed in this paper is called “nuclear treatment water”.It may seem superfluous, but it is more accurate and helps to clear up misunderstandings.
What to do with this “nuclear water”?This has been a headache for the Japanese government for the past decade.
One treatment is evaporation.The treated water is distilled in a special device and then the residue is buried.Nuclear power plants generally treat “nuclear waste water” in the same way, while Japan USES landfills to treat the contaminated soil at Fukushima.
But adding 170 tonnes of “nuclear treated water” a day would be too expensive for evaporative cooling to happen.This method, used in tritium retained “nuclear treatment water”, is so inefficient that scientists have long since abandoned it.
A contaminated soil landfill near Japan’s Fukushima nuclear power plant
Can “treated water” be taken to the open sea for dumping?As wicked as it sounds, consider this.Japan has huge merchant ships that use “treated water” as ballast water and take it to the high seas in exchange for it, almost “throwing rubbish away”.
Every year, Japanese merchant ships use hundreds of millions of tons of ballast water and add more than 1 million tons of “nuclear treated water”. Why is it so difficult?
South Korean media and nationalist lawmakers have been among the most vocal critics of Japan’s dumping of “nuclear disposal water” in commercial vessels.They vividly depict Japanese merchant ships docked in South Korean ports to exchange “ballast water” and poison South Korea.
In 2019, South Korea’s Ministry of Fisheries and the Atomic Energy Agency teamed up to test Japanese merchant ships, which turned out to be false.Think also know, The Japanese government really to overseas “dump garbage”, why go to South Korea port?
Given the degree of openness of Japanese society, it is almost impossible to organize merchant ships to dump “treated water” on the high seas, even if the Japanese government transfers several ships to secretly carry out the mission of “dumping garbage” on the high seas.
The Japanese government has no control over the media and the private sector. If it wants to do all the dirty work without being noticed, individuals and the government have to work together. Can the Japanese government do it?Conspiracy theories by the South Korean media and legislators only prove their blackness.
Landfills are not, and dumping is not. The 170 tonnes of “nuclear-treated water” produced every day at Fukushima are stored by Tepco, the Japanese utility.They built POTS and pans to hold water.
As of September 17 this year, the number of storage tanks for “nuclear treated water” at Fukushima had reached 1,044, with 1.23 million tons of water.
A storage tank for “nuclear treatment water” near Fukushima, Japan
New “nuclear-treated water” is being added by 170 tons a day, and storage tanks are piling up.Japan’s Tepco says it can’t let go.How to deal with it, the Japanese government you decide quickly.The Japanese government also felt that the matter could not be delayed any longer.
Someone might say, “There aren’t enough storage tanks. We can rebuild them.Just keep building until new technologies come along that solve the problem of tritium purification, right?”
Indeed, tritium is medically useful and expensive, and more than 1m tonnes of “nuclear treated water” is equivalent to a tritium bonanza.But the cost of extracting it from “nuclear water” is astronomically high, even with the advent of new technologies that would require tens of thousands of tons of “nuclear water” to be purified.
Even the newly built tanks are a headache for the government.
Japan is a country with many natural disasters. There are typhoons every year, and it is impossible to say when the big earthquake will come.There are thousands of storage tanks. What if a natural disaster strikes?
If these “small reservoirs” break down, it will affect nearby residents, and even more people will suffer when “nuclear treated water” flows into inland waters offshore.Therefore, to solve the problem of “nuclear water treatment” in Fukushima is also a livelihood issue in Japan.
After nearly a decade of delay, the Japanese government has finally made up its mind.It is true that Tepco has complained bitterly that it will have no storage space by 2022.On the other hand, as the prime minister yoshihide Suga takes office.
It is easy to understand why Suga, as an interim figure to succeed Shinzo Abe, is determined to solve difficult problems.
According to Japanese media reports, on October 16, the Japanese government held a cabinet meeting to discuss the solution of fukushima “nuclear treated water”.“Into the Pacific” became the most likely scenario.The decision is expected by the end of October.
As the news spread across the Pacific Rim, international environmental groups said they would oppose the Japanese government’s decision in full.
This is the whole process of Japan’s dumping of nuclear waste water into the Pacific Ocean.When I read the news and related comments online, it was a unanimous condemnation.
The Chinese swear, the Koreans swear even more, and even some Americans worry about west Coast security.Doubts are understandable. People talk of “nuclear” in shades of grey. No one wants to fish and swim here.There are protests. It’s normal.
On the Japanese government’s side, however, it is not hard to imagine how difficult it would be.It’s been nearly a decade since Japan was hit by a massive earthquake and the Fukushima nuclear meltdown, so much “nuclear water” has to be dealt with, right?Protesters can protest, of course, but they don’t give an answer.
The further they delay, the greater the risk that locals will take — and for the Japanese, the more serious and urgent, who CARES for people thousands of kilometres away?
The Japanese government has been dragging its feet for nearly a decade. They are responsible to the international community, but more importantly to their own people.Otherwise, who will be held responsible if the accumulated “nuclear water” leaks out?
In the wake of the Fukushima disaster, international solidarity with the world’s most concerned, but when it comes to self-interest, people shun it and do not worry about the risks to the Japanese people.The Japanese government must also be weighing its responsibilities at home and abroad.
When news of the Japanese government’s “dumping of sewage into the Pacific” broke, international opinion erupted, with environmentalists playing a role in the process.
Before the decision was made, they drew a terrible curve of “nuclear contamination limits” in the Pacific Ocean.Bright red curves from Japan spread to the U.S. and Canadian coasts, as if resident Evil were just months away.
Greenpeace describes the consequences of “Japanese pollution”
This kind of “research” is nothing more than exaggerating and frightening.
In this case, the Japanese government decided to “dump” the pollution into the Pacific Ocean, instead of pouring it directly, diluting it 40 times and then slowly injecting it over a period of 30 years.Tritium has a half-life of 12.5 years, or half of its radioactivity every 12.5 years.
More than two decades have passed since the first batch of “nuclear treated water” entered the sea in 2011 (or 40 years by the time the treatment is complete), and the damage has been greatly reduced.
Schematic diagram of Japan’s “Blowdown to the Pacific” process
In the wake of the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, environmental groups painted a doomsday scenario.Which Pacific nation has come forward today to complain about the consequences of the Fukushima nuclear disaster?
Even in Fukushima prefecture, the epicentre, life has returned to normal.Fukushima Prefecture, one of Japan’s most famous agricultural counties, saw its agricultural exports fully recover in 2018, reaching an all-time high.
The extent of radiation contamination from the fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant leak
This time, the Japanese government has not announced the exact location of the “dumping of sewage into the Pacific Ocean,” but it can be identified in the east of Japan in the Pacific Ocean offshore.If there are big risks, Japan must bear the brunt.
If, as some environmental groups say, the United States and Canada are at risk 20, 000 kilometers away, isn’t there no grass at all in Japan?Is the Japanese government inverted “nuclear treatment of water”, or national suicide?
This shows that the opposition of many environmental groups is so unscientific and uncommon-sense that it should not be taken seriously.
For now, governments around the Pacific rim, with the exception of South Korea, are watching cautiously.Not that governments are careless with human life, but that the situation is not, as the environmental groups put it, “the end is nigh”.
From an international legal perspective, there is little other country can do to object to Japan’s offshore dumping of nuclear waste, let alone hold it accountable – at best to express concern.
After all, disposing of “nuclear sewage” is an internal affair of Japan, and it is only speculation that it harms the interests of other countries.Environmental groups oppose it on the grounds of protecting the planet and Marine life, but they don’t seem to be doing anything about it.
Environmental groups could raise money to build huge storage tanks in Japan that would store “nuclear treated water” for decades or hundreds of years until tritium was deemed safe enough to be released — so far, environmental groups have not paid a cent, let alone kept the tanks safe.
The Japanese government, taking responsibility, has clearly run out of patience.They feel safe enough not to listen to these guys who are not taking responsibility.
Finally, let’s talk about the impact that Japan’s “dumping of pollutants into the sea” will have on China.The East Sea of Japan is far from China, with a barrier of islands that cannot be reached by ocean currents.Therefore, the possibility of nuclear contamination in China is extremely low.There was panic at Fukushima when it happened, but it turned out to be unnecessary.
The size of the ocean and its ability to discharge pollutants is greater than many people think.What’s more, this “nuclear treatment water” is not “nuclear waste water”. Before entering the sea, it has been treated for many times, with reduced radioactivity and the dose of nuclear material is already very small.We need to watch the progress of Japan’s nuclear emissions, but there is no need to panic.
The spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Ministry commented on the Nuclear discharge incident in Japan. I think it is appropriate and worth writing down.
Hope that the Japanese government adheres to its own nationals and neighboring countries and the international community highly responsible attitude and further evaluate the plant contains the possible impact of tritium wastewater treatment scheme, active, timely to strictly accurate disclosure of information, open and transparent way, on the basis of full consultation with its neighboring countries, careful to make a decision.
Like other countries, The Chinese authorities have neither condemned nor objected, but have remained concerned, urging the Japanese government to conduct a strict assessment, act prudently and communicate fully.Such an attitude is necessary in dealing with nuclear-related substances.
Ignoring risks and exaggerating risks are undesirable attitudes.
Reprint indicated source：Shine Trader Limited Live information