Fukushima owner decides to dump nuclear waste into the sea

#1

dduncan4163

Have at it Hoss
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
21,471
Likes
43,976
#1
http://www.rawstory.com/2017/07/fuk...ear-waste-into-the-sea/#.WWpsbhYBUbs.facebook

48704292.jpg


Seriously I cringe when I think of another earthquake and tsunami hitting the area and it's bound to happen at some point relatively soon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#2
#2
5.8 magnitude earthquake, which was the eighth largest ever recorded in Montana and largest in 34 years, comes just weeks after a flurry of smaller earthquakes hit the region. The swarm of activity began June 12, and by the end of the month nearly 900 earthquakes had been recorded near the Yellowstone supervolcano, along the western edge of the park.

http://www.newsweek.com/montana-earthquake-yellowstone-supervolcano-632736
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3
#3
good thing Japan cares about cleaning up the environment and is part of the Paris Accords.

Seriously this may be worth going to war over. I am pretty dang anti China and pro Japan but if China declared war on Japan for the sole purpose of stopping this I would be all for it.
 
#4
#4
The ocean is large. You ingest tritium everyday. As long as it's a controlled release there is no threat. 16k people died from the tsunami. Nobody has died from radiation...yet all we hear about is the nuclear disaster. It's odd.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#6
#6
Doesnt concern me at all...except for Godzilla.
 
#10
#10
good thing Japan cares about cleaning up the environment and is part of the Paris Accords.

Seriously this may be worth going to war over. I am pretty dang anti China and pro Japan but if China declared war on Japan for the sole purpose of stopping this I would be all for it.

MUH Paris

I agree. Nuclear war against these polluters!
 
#11
#11
The ocean is large. You ingest tritium everyday. As long as it's a controlled release there is no threat. 16k people died from the tsunami. Nobody has died from radiation...yet all we hear about is the nuclear disaster. It's odd.

right, because the radiation hasn't killed us all yet lets just in-bide more, what could possibly go wrong.

seriously, you are ok with people dropping in more radioactive elements into your drinking water just because it might still be at harmless levels?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#12
#12
right, because the radiation hasn't killed us all yet lets just in-bide more, what could possibly go wrong.

seriously, you are ok with people dropping in more radioactive elements into your drinking water just because it might still be at harmless levels?

Yes

Tritium is naturally occurring and people are exposed to it daily.

In fact, it's more hazardous to keep at all tanked up like it is now. They need to release it. Slow gradual releases are incredibly more safe than should another earthquake hit and cause a rupture and spill
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#13
#13
right, because the radiation hasn't killed us all yet lets just in-bide more, what could possibly go wrong.

seriously, you are ok with people dropping in more radioactive elements into your drinking water just because it might still be at harmless levels?

Radiation is not dangerous at low levels. If you regulate radiation down to unreasonable levels, you make nuclear more costly. If you make nuclear more costly, you increase use of natural gas. If you increase use of natural gas, you increase your nations dependence on Russia. Your energy security becomes hitched to Russia, you turn a blind eye on chemical weapons use on Syria.

Over-regulation has costs.

Edit: I have no problem drinking more tritium, considering our limits are 1000 times lower than what would potentially cause harm.
 
#14
#14
good thing Japan cares about cleaning up the environment and is part of the Paris Accords.

Seriously this may be worth going to war over. I am pretty dang anti China and pro Japan but if China declared war on Japan for the sole purpose of stopping this I would be all for it.

Oh please. It's tritium, and it's ionizing radiation energy isn't strong enough to penetrate skin.

The is danger in ingesting it, but the body treats it like water an natural metabolism excretes it after a period of time.
More dangerous is tritium mixed into a compound to form solids used on watch, compass, etc, dials and glow in the dark gunsights. Tritium is used in these applications because it is so much safer (radiation wise) than the old radium dials.

Tritium is constantly produced in the atmosphere as cosmic rays strike nitrogen and carried to the earths surface in rain. Tritium is in your water. Always has been.

https://www.britannica.com/science/tritium

It has a half life of about 12yrs4mos.

Tritium safety in US nuclear power plants.

EPA environmental limits review

https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...n-standards-for-nuclear-power-operations#h-46

Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Groundwater Contamination (Tritium) at Nuclear Plants

https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/ops-experience/grndwtr-contam-tritium.html
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#15
#15
Mothra gives me nightmares.

As well it should. You will wake up in the middle of the night dreaming of those nasty wings wrapped around your face with your nose and mouth filled with moth wig dust and you c-a-n-t b r e a t h
 
Last edited:
#16
#16
yeah 10 days of biological activity. no gama radiation, I am familiar with the substance.

still doesn't mean I want more of it in the oceans.

look at some of the freaking fish they are pulling out over there and say "yeah, I would be fine eating a ever so slightly more reactive version of that." how our bodies handle it may not be the same as the fish and other stuff we ingest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#17
#17
and at least part of the reason tritium is relatively harmless is that half life. It doesn't collect anywhere. but know you already have it and your are dumping it in at a rate that is much much faster than the "harmless" naturally produced amounts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#18
#18
I eat about 40 uSv of bananas a year. Equivalent to the yearly tritium drinking water limits. Do you believe eating bananas is risky?
 
#19
#19
I eat about 40 uSv of bananas a year. Equivalent to the yearly tritium drinking water limits. Do you believe eating bananas is risky?

disgusting more than risky. :)

again you are talking about increasing that amount. have we figured out cancer and all the other crap that comes from radiation?

I know it can't be avoided but doesn't mean I want more of it just because it should be harmless as far as we know right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#20
#20
And as far as animal mutations, I doubt the reactivity they are releasing is high enough to cause such things. They saw some at Chernobyl, but Chernobyl was a real nuclear disaster...and really, the biggest threat to animals are people. I'd say Chernobyl was a net positive for wildlife (Don't take this as a writing off of the disaster).
 
#21
#21
disgusting more than risky. :)

again you are talking about increasing that amount. have we figured out cancer and all the other crap that comes from radiation?

I know it can't be avoided but doesn't mean I want more of it just because it should be harmless as far as we know right now.

We don't know everything about cancer and radiation. The long term effects from small doses is undetectable, statistically. The regulatory basis, LNT, is conservative. However there's a growing number of scientists who think low doses are beneficial.

My take is that the studies show that small doses of radiation are less risky than my morning commute. And nuclear power, and the tricky stuff that comes with it, is worth it. This type of release is undesirable, but if you do it in a controlled matter, such that exposures are kept low, then it's not a significant health risk.
 
#22
#22
yeah 10 days of biological activity. no gama radiation, I am familiar with the substance.

still doesn't mean I want more of it in the oceans.

look at some of the freaking fish they are pulling out over there and say "yeah, I would be fine eating a ever so slightly more reactive version of that." how our bodies handle it may not be the same as the fish and other stuff we ingest.

It's not the tritium I worry about. There are plenty other radioactive isotopes more dangerous.

From NOAA:

Fukushima Radiation in U.S. West Coast Tuna

https://swfsc.noaa.gov/textblock.aspx?Division=FRD&id=20593

By the way:
 

Attachments

  • Energy_plot_japantsunami.jpg
    Energy_plot_japantsunami.jpg
    121.6 KB · Views: 2
#23
#23
yeah 10 days of biological activity. no gama radiation, I am familiar with the substance.

still doesn't mean I want more of it in the oceans.

look at some of the freaking fish they are pulling out over there and say "yeah, I would be fine eating a ever so slightly more reactive version of that." how our bodies handle it may not be the same as the fish and other stuff we ingest.

So what should they do with all that water?
 
#24
#24
So what should they do with all that water?

pollute their own water, not the worlds. I know these levels are higher but what do they do with the other water that has tritium? I don't know how it works but can't they reuse it?
 
#25
#25
good thing Japan cares about cleaning up the environment and is part of the Paris Accords.

Seriously this may be worth going to war over. I am pretty dang anti China and pro Japan but if China declared war on Japan for the sole purpose of stopping this I would be all for it.

The Japs have little concern for the environment. It's especially evident in the manner they overfish the seas. I'm convinced Japan will not be happy until every living thing in the oceans has been rolled up in a ball of rice and consumed.
 

VN Store



Back
Top