edit: changed title from 'False Fukushima Fears' to 'Exaggerated Fukushima Fears', sacrificing my lovely alliteration as others have pointed out that it would be too much to say that the fears of radiation leakages are unfounded, but merely to say that this is the least bad option given previous precedent as cynesthesia has pointed out.

Image is of the large array of water storage tanks holding the tritium-contaminated water.

This week's preamble is very kindly provided by our beautiful poster @cynesthesia@hexbear.net, with some light editing. In periods where not much of earth-shattering importance is happening in the news, I hope to do this more often!


In 2011, the Fukushima nuclear incident occurred. Since then, water has been used to cool radioactive waste and debris, which contaminates the water with radioactive isotopes. Currently, TEPCO, the Japanese energy company that is reponsible to Fukushima, is storing about 1.3 million m3 of contaminated water (equivalent to about 500 Olympic swimming pools for our American friends) in about 1000 tanks. Approximately 100,000 m3 of contaminated cooling water is generated per year to this day. TEPCO doesn't want to store escalating volumes of nuclear waste for decades until half-lives are spent. This would mean adding substantial storage capacity every year at increased cost and risk of tank spills.

The contaminated water includes heavier isotopes like caesium as well as hydrogen's isotope, tritum. Caesium is a big atom at 137 molar mass (we love our tremendous atoms, folks) while tritium is heavy hydrogen and has only a molar mass of 3 (pathetic, low energy). The TEPCO people are using water treatment to remove heavy isotopes from water, but not tritium. The large adult isotopes are easy to remove with treatment but tritium is incorporated into water, so it blends in with the others. The treated Fukushima water contains low levels of the big isotopes but still contains tritium.

Isotopes release radiation that damages the body's cells. The longer an individual molecule containing an isotope is in a body, the more likely it is that the isotope will go BRAZAP and release radiation that fucks up the cells. Bioaccumulation is a toxicology term for how certain contaminants can accumulate in the food cycle. For example, algae eat contaminants, then the algae is eaten by bugs, then bugs by fish, then fish by people. Isotopes that are bioaccumulative like our large adult son caesium are more hazardous. Tritium is not bioaccumulative because it is effectively part of water. Water cycles through bodies quickly - that's why you sweat and pee and get thirsty. spray-bottle

Fukushima water would be treated and then then mixed with seawater at a ratio of 1:800 before it is pumped 1km offshore. Each year approximately 166,000 m3 of treated water will be released, which will draw down the volume of contaminated water being stored over a few decades. Real-time stats associated with the release are found here. At the point of discharge, water contains about 207 Bq/L of radioactivity, about 16 times greater than the 10-15 Bq/L background level in the ocean overall. Drinking water guidelines for tritium radioactivity range from 1,000-10,000 Bq/L, if one were to drink seawater.

In wastewater treatment terms, this is a small amount of dilution in a very large body of water. It is unlikely to have any measurable impact per the terms of Western science. In the context of mother nature taking yet another one for the team and environmental distress, this sucks. In the context of making the best of a shitty situation, the Fukushima water release is peanuts compared to the many other environmental liabilities that are not addressed. For example, the Hanford Site is an example of a nuclear wastewater storage facility gone/going wrong in Oregon.


Ending note by 72: By far the biggest impact of the release of this water won't be its direct effects, but those on commerce and international relations. Almost half of Japanese aquatic exports go to China, comprising 8% of all Japanese firms shipping goods to China, and they have now been cut off due to their anger at Japan. Perhaps this reaction and the cancellation of imports was inevitable, as nuclear power and radiation in general is a poorly understood, frightening, and thus easily exploitable topic in every country. China is not the first country to use a misunderstanding of radiation risk to try and achieve a goal - Germany seems very pleased with itself - and they will not be the last.

In all: it is unequivocal that China is massively exaggerating the risks of this water's release. However, the bellicose rhetoric and actions of Japan, South Korea, and America are a much greater danger to the region, and none of the three seem to be in any hurry to try diplomacy instead of increasing military budgets and gearing up for war.


It's that time again - every two months I give myself a week off, to rest and recalibrate. Your regularly scheduled programming will resume next week.

Here is the map of the Ukraine conflict, courtesy of Wikipedia.

Links and Stuff

The bulletins site is down.

Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists

Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict

Add to the above list if you can.


Resources For Understanding The War


Defense Politics Asia's youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.

Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.

Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.

Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don't want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it's just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.

On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists' side.

Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.


Telegram Channels

Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.

Pro-Russian

https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR's former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR's forces. Russian language.

https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.

https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.

https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster's telegram channel.

https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.

https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.

https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.

https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.

https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a 'propaganda tax', if you don't believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.

https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.

Pro-Ukraine

Almost every Western media outlet.

https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.

https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.


Last week's discussion post.


  • SeventyTwoTrillion [he/him]
    hexagon
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    My comment from yesterday, edited a little:

    Nature:

    The contaminated water has been collected, treated to reduce the radioactive content and stored in more than 1,000 stainless steel tanks at the site. The power-station operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), so far has used what it describes as an advanced liquid-processing system (ALPS) to treat the water. TEPCO says the water undergoes five processing stages of co-sedimentation, adsorption and physical filtration. The plan for disposing of the radioactive waste created in the ALPS process will be “gradually revealed as the decommissioning process progresses”, according to communication the Permanent Mission of Japan to the International Organizations in Vienna sent to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

    The ALPS process removes enough of 62 of the 64 radionuclides to bring their concentration below Japan’s 2022 regulatory limits for water to be discharged into the environment. These limits are based on recommendations from the International Commission on Radiological Protection.

    But that process does not remove carbon-14 and tritium, so the treated water needs to be diluted further to less than one part per 100 parts of seawater. TEPCO says that the resulting concentration of tritium is around 1,500 becquerels (a measure of the radioactivity of a substance) per litre — around one-seventh of the World Health Organization’s guidelines for tritium in drinking water. The company suggests that the concentration of tritium will drop to background ocean levels within a few kilometres of the discharge site. The carbon-14 in the tanks is currently at concentrations of around 2% of the upper limit set by regulations, TEPCO says, and this will reduce further with the seawater dilution that takes place before the water is discharged.

    Jim Smith, an environmental scientist at the University of Portsmouth, UK, says the risk this poses to nations around the Pacific Ocean will probably be negligible. “I always hesitate to say zero, but close to zero,” he says. “The nearest Pacific island is about 2,000 kilometres away.” He argues that a greater risk is posed by keeping the treated water on-site. “The risk of another earthquake or a typhoon causing a leak of a tank is higher, and they’re running out of space.”

    The article then talks about tritium's potential for bioaccumulation, but aside from a couple studies on specific organisms, I can't find anything that would suggest this to be the case and cynesthesia's explanation is correct. Looking around, in the documents and articles, the argument is essentially Greenpeace saying "Yes it does! Look at all these studies!" and TEPCO saying "No it doesn't! Look at all these studies!" At high concentrations, of course tritium will be bad for the environment and humans. At current concentrations in the wastewater, and with the relatively small volume of water being released even relative to a small area of the ocean, I'm finding it difficult to imagine it having a significant impact. The Pacific Ocean contains 8.4 kg of tritium at any moment - Japan is releasing 0.06 grams of tritium every year. Japan has quite rightfully pointed out that:

    China’s Fuqing plant released 52 trillion Bq of tritium in 2020, and South Korea’s Kori facility near its second largest city released 50 trillion Bq in 2018ーmore than double Japan’s plan.

    As for carbon-14, obviously that is indeed a bioaccumulating element. Greenpeace cites a document (page 49) that states a process by which carbon-14 can be removed from aqueous waste. I do not know why Japan isn't doing this, given that they're pulling the other 62 radionuclides out; this article states that "For technical reasons, ALPS cannot remove tritium or carbon-14." That same article says that Japan is releasing 1 gram of carbon-14 into the Pacific Ocean, to join the 18 million grams already in the ocean - the absolute quantity being released is surprisingly absent from Greenpeace's statements on the release of wastewater. I don't mean this to dunk on Greenpeace necessarily, because I'm having trouble finding precisely where the article gets the figure of 18 million grams vs 1 gram, so I don't know if that's correct or not, but the absolute amount of isotopes being released, and how that compares to already existing radiation in the ocean, is a key fact that I can't seem to find many sources for.

    It's worth noting that alongside tritium, as Japan has pointed out, nuclear power plants regularly release carbon-14 as part of operations. A study has suggested that the amount of radiation you would be exposed to by a Fukushima fish diet over your entire life would be less than a dental x-ray; if you're a regular eater of bananas you're actually probably worse off than some hypothetical Japanese seafood eaters that insist, for some bizarre reason, to only eat fish from within a kilometer of the pipe outlet. And, at the end of the day, something like 99% of oceanic radiation comes from mostly naturally occurring potassium and rubidium, and most of the rest is uranium. Carbon-14 and tritium make up a fraction of a percent of oceanic radioactivity in the first place. This is truly a drop in the ocean.

    • SchillMenaker [he/him]
      ·
      1 year ago

      If anything this is going to fuck up some archaeology study in 5000 years when they discover some thousands-year extinct whale bones that are measuring younger because it was exposed to modestly more C14 than the normal background.

      • TrashGoblin [he/him, they/them]
        ·
        1 year ago

        There's a correction curve in use for post-1945 radiocarbon dates, but it could easily be lost along with other knowledge in the future, of course.