World in Danger: Japan Begins to Release Radioactive Water into Sea

Mohamed Wadie

Western media is accused of being double standards, as it downplays Japan's decision to release radioactive water into sea this year.

Tokyo Electric Power Company (better known as TEPCO) started releasing irradiated seawater, last week, into an underwater tunnel that has been built to release Fukushima nuclear contaminated water into the sea, Japan's public broadcaster NHK said.

According to TEPCO, the tunnel has been filled with some 6,000 tons of seawater.

The process, was carried out "secretly", last Monday, because Japan's unilateral decision of dumping more than 1.3 million metric tons of treated but still radioactive water into the ocean provoked consistent protests from neighboring countries, such as China, Pacific Island communities and civil society groups in the most affected prefectures such as Fukushima, Iwate and Miyagi.

And instead of targeting what will be a tangible environmental catastrophe in just days, the hollow and hypocritical virtue signaling talking heads continue droning on about such meaningless drivel as ESG and global warming.

File photo

Also, oddly enough, there has not been a peep about this clear and present ocean disaster from either the original Greta, or her new and improved for mass-consumption replacement, Sophia Kianni, who lately appears to be more focused on building up her scantily-clad, environmentally-fighting image than, well, fighting for the environment.

On her part, Swedish Environmental activist Greta Thunberg demands Russian president to be punished for "ecocide" in Ukraine, but says nothing about Japan's "ecocide" on the environment with the release of radioactive water.

We also hardly heard any condemnation from other environmental agencies too. G7 endorses such actions.

Under Japan's plan, once filled with seawater, the tunnel, which was completed this April, will guide contaminated water from the crippled Fukushima Daiichi power plant to a point about 1 kilometer offshore. And now, the whole release system is almost complete, except for a reservoir that will store those contaminated water before its release. TEPCO said before that all construction work will be done by the end of this month.

If it's done, the release would be sufficient to fill about 500 Olympic-sized swimming pools and the water has been used to cool highly radioactive damaged reactor cores as the massive earthquake and tsunami destroyed the Fukushima plant's cooling systems, triggering the meltdown of three reactors and the release of large amounts of radiation.

File photo

Environmental experts in Southeast Asia have expressed caution over Japan's plans to release nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the Pacific Ocean.

The question is: "If the nuclear contaminated water is really harmless, why not let it stay in Japan?"

Japan has already started to dump contaminated water from Fukushima nuclear disaster into Pacific Ocean. Japan claims that the planned discharge of radioactive water poses no significant threat to the region's environment or people's health.

Japan fails to reflect on its wrong decision to forcibly dump nuclear-contaminated water into the sea, and again spreads misinformation, attempting to confuse the international community, the Chinese Foreign Ministry said on Wednesday, responding to media reports hyping that China has dodged calls for dialogue from Japan.

"The ocean is humanity’s common good, not Japan’s private sewer. Dumping nuclear-contaminated water into the sea might be the cheapest option for Japan, but it is the whole world who will foot the bill. This is extremely selfish and irresponsible.", Chinese FM Spokesperson Wang Wenbin said on Wednesday.

South Korean authorities begin daily press briefings to keep the public informed on the planned release of contaminated water from Japan's disabled Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant.

What exactly do you do with 1,000 tanks of contaminated water?

When the Fukushima nuclear power plant was hit by an earthquake in 2011, three reactors melted down. The molten fuel debris continues generating heat. Workers prevent overheating by pumping 150 tons of water a day, which is stored in tanks on site.

Now TEPCO has 1.3 million tons of contaminated water in 1,000 tanks with more water and claims to be running out of space.

The water volume is 110 cubic meters (110 meters is about the length of an American football field).

So what are the options?

The cheapest one is to dilute and dump the water. That is not unprecedented. Over 400 reactors worldwide release tritiated water into the sea, including in China, Korea, and the U.S.—the countries who have been most vocal against Japan dumping the water.

“But this is not normal operations, and you can’t use the normal playbook,”

The volume of water is massive, and the timeline for release is long. Also, only one-quarter of the tanks have been tested. The dilution plan is focused on tritium, but there are many other compounds in the water. Most concerning is that the tritium doesn’t stay in the water—it gets concentrated as it moves up the food chain.

The scientists have proposed several alternatives. One is bioremediation: pumping wastewater through tanks full of oyster species that consume plankton and incorporate radionuclides into their shells, reducing the time needed for storage.

Another is to make concrete for roads or bridges using the treated water. This has many benefits: accelerating water processing and removal from tanks, not impacting the fishing industry, and being entirely non-transboundary.

This process helps to protect the environment by safely containing tritium inside the concrete, preventing external radiation exposure and saves a significant amount of fresh water, contributing to environmental conservation efforts.

File photo

Another option is to simply wait. Tritium has a 12.3-year half-life for radioactive decay, so in 40 to 60 years, more than 90 percent of it will be gone.

To be honest, everyone should condemn Japan decision to dump their nuclear waste water into the ocean. They can't answer for the irreversible damages at all.