![]() |
Shouldn’t the world have a choice on this?
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-fukushima-water/japan-will-have-to-dump-radioactive-fukushima-water-into-pacific-minister-says-idUSKCN1VV0CC
Companies are required to have plans for chemical spills and other environmental disasters and cleanup, but shouldn’t this be left to world bodies to decide? |
Unreal. Go figure !
|
While I question some of the details of why they need to do this, the reality is that "dilution is the solution". There is a lot of water in the oceans. While it sounds like a bad idea, adding this water will have no measurable adverse consequences. It's more of a political problem than a technical problem.
|
I am dubious that it will have no measurable consequences, as it is already measurable.
|
Tritium is not a big deal (12.3 years half life) but who knows what else is in the water.
Dumping it in the ocean should not be an option. So how do you long term store vast amount of radioactive water? |
...and Godzilla arose from the depths.....
|
NY dumped 80% of it's trash offshore, I believe through the mid 1990's. They didn't consult NJ (where it would wash up on the beaches), let alone the world.
I'm waiting for someone to remember, and figure out how to clean that mess up. |
Quote:
|
Mothra is King ;)
|
Quote:
|
I have a friend who was a nuclear physicist, wrote a book on radiation poisoning, and he keeps saying this fukushima is way overblown and there are enough naturally present radioactive material just in the san francisco bay sea water to make several nuclear bombs - if you could gather it easily. I'm not saying dumping that water is good, it instinctively sounds terrible (mostly because it may not dilute quickly and first affect specific regions and fish population via currents and land on our door step), but it may not make an iota of difference to natural ocean radiation levels once diluted overall. Guess it depends how they go about it, all at once, one place, etc... This topic could use input from an independent scientist that's neither working for Japanese power nor greenpeace. Maybe we got one here ?
|
Quote:
Even if it was highly contaminated, that percentage is so astoundingly low that you'd never see it. We can talk discharge rates, mixing ratios, etc. all day long but the reality is this idea isn't nearly as bad as it sounds. I wouldn't worry about it. You're not dubious - you're just bad at math. ;) |
I did not do any math at all.
It is already measurable on the west coast of the USA. They have been discharging radioactive water since the day it happened. The Cesium and Strontium are more of an issue than Tritium. |
Quote:
|
Clearly Japan needs to build rockets and blast it in to space.
Seriously, just what alternative exists? I'm with Mike on this one. |
When the concentration achieves equilibrium, the dilution factor described applies. It will be more concentrated in the Pacific until that happens.
What could possibly go wrong in the meantime |
Quote:
|
Quote:
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/9bizykuQjfg/maxresdefault.jpg |
The article doesn't say, but I expect that the water that they intend to dump has had as much radioactive materials removed as humanly possible.
Quote:
https://phys.org/news/2016-07-pacific-ocean-fukushima.html Quote:
|
Quote:
http://www.clker.com/cliparts/f/G/Y/...octopus-hi.png https://www.dictionary.com/e/wp-cont...acle-porn3.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DK55NkSVAAAFcVT.jpg |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:10 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2025 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Pelican Parts Website