Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Japan’s plan to dump nuclear waste into the pacific ocean may not be safe

civilbeat.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 184 posts

Re: Japan’s plan to dump nuclear waste into the pacific ocean may not be safe

#81

Post by Aeolun »

credit_guy wrote: post #79
Aeolun wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, yes. But there’s no 5mm of air between tritium you drink and your stomach.

You're probably thinking of getting a speck of a radioactive metal (like Uranium or Plutonium) in your lungs. That gets stuck there, the body has no mechanisms to eliminate it, and it will keep emitting gamma rays all your life. Tritium is very different. It is an isotope of Hydrogen, and a water molecule containing one atom of Tritium is fairly indistinguishable from any other water molecule. The most important thin…

Hmm, if people were worried about ingestion I was certain it had to be alpha particles. I stand corrected.

I’m not sure how much the half life matters a lot if you ingest a lot. To be fair, kinda unlikely from drinking water, but might be if a fish has been gathering Tritium it’s whole life (but then, it’s probably already doing that now for much larger quantities).

Either way, I suppose the 3 X-rays I had today completely obviate any relevance of the tritium.

Re: Japan’s plan to dump nuclear waste into the pacific ocean may not be safe

#83

Post by Pyramus »

janmalec wrote: post #4

Tritium is already present in the ocean naturally and we are not talking about Nuclear Waste, as the title suggests, but clean water. We also cannot compare the tritium with mercury, because tritium, even if released in the ocean, decays away. Mecury, on the other hand, stays forever. The concerns that the water will affect marine life might be well intended but will cause more harm than good. In the worst possible c…

> nuclear power which are and have always been the safest and cleanest way to produce electricity

Definitely not. There's a good argument to be made nuclear power in the 'global North' is relatively safe today. At the same time you will be hard pressed to find evidence that nuclear power was safe in the past or is safe today in politically unstable environments.

Re: Japan’s plan to dump nuclear waste into the pacific ocean may not be safe

#84

Post by WithinReason »

janmalec wrote: post #4

Tritium is already present in the ocean naturally and we are not talking about Nuclear Waste, as the title suggests, but clean water. We also cannot compare the tritium with mercury, because tritium, even if released in the ocean, decays away. Mecury, on the other hand, stays forever. The concerns that the water will affect marine life might be well intended but will cause more harm than good. In the worst possible c…

Also, for another bit of comparison, there's 4.5 Billion metric tons of uranium in the ocean already:

https://www.osti.gov/biblio/6191296

Re: Japan’s plan to dump nuclear waste into the pacific ocean may not be safe

#85

Post by WithinReason »

belter wrote: post #51
janmalec wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I am a researcher and a Ph.D. student in the field of nuclear reactor physics. I regularly operate and do experiments on a research nuclear reactor. My name is in my hn username and I have no problem defending my claims. I also own a popular TikTok account where I do science communication about nuclear reactors. My information about the water discharge comes from reports by IAEA, who is the authority on the matt…

Quoted post unavailable.

After it's been diluted in the planet's oceans, I'm sure he wouldn't mind drinking it.

Re: Japan’s plan to dump nuclear waste into the pacific ocean may not be safe

#86

Post by ceejayoz »

Aeolun wrote: post #70
ceejayoz wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a tritium vial on my keychain. 5 mm of air is sufficient to block it. It’s pretty harmless stuff in the level of dilution being proposed.

I mean, yes. But there’s no 5mm of air between tritium you drink and your stomach.

> But there’s no 5mm of air between tritium you drink and your stomach.

Correct; it's in liquid, which blocks its radiation even more effectively.

The mucous layer in the stomach and intestines will stop it cold. It can't even get past the layer of dead cells that make up our skin.

Re: Japan’s plan to dump nuclear waste into the pacific ocean may not be safe

#87

Post by SECProto »

Pyramus wrote: post #83
janmalec wrote: post #4

Tritium is already present in the ocean naturally and we are not talking about Nuclear Waste, as the title suggests, but clean water. We also cannot compare the tritium with mercury, because tritium, even if released in the ocean, decays away. Mecury, on the other hand, stays forever. The concerns that the water will affect marine life might be well intended but will cause more harm than good. In the worst possible c…

> nuclear power which are and have always been the safest and cleanest way to produce electricity Definitely not. There's a good argument to be made nuclear power in the 'global North' is relatively safe today. At the same time you will be hard pressed to find evidence that nuclear power was safe in the past or is safe today in politically unstable environments.

> At the same time you will be hard pressed to find evidence that nuclear power was safe in the past or is safe today in politically unstable environments.

First of all, that isn't the same claim the post above to you was making. Second, [1]here's a chart showing the cleanest and safest power sources, backing up the claim made in the comment above yours. Nuclear is cleanest, and on safety it's close but falls behind the renewables (still 2-3 orders of magnitude safer than the fossil fuel sources).

[1] https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy

Re: Japan’s plan to dump nuclear waste into the pacific ocean may not be safe

#88

Post by Archelaos »

janmalec wrote: post #4

Tritium is already present in the ocean naturally and we are not talking about Nuclear Waste, as the title suggests, but clean water. We also cannot compare the tritium with mercury, because tritium, even if released in the ocean, decays away. Mecury, on the other hand, stays forever. The concerns that the water will affect marine life might be well intended but will cause more harm than good. In the worst possible c…

> If you want to put your energy into preventing dirt from getting into the ocean, look literally anywhere else.

This line of thinking is what brought about our current environmental clamities. Everybody says: Look, what I am doing to the environemnt is just a tiny, tiny bit of what others are doing. The end result is a massive destruction of the ecosphere. Every dumping of waste into the ocean is a liablity.

> the safest and cleanest way to produce electricity.

Only if you hand pick studies in favour of your opinion. The wast will be around until the end of humanity. No one really knows whether the optimists, who want to store it away "forever", will succeed. If not, ...

Re: Japan’s plan to dump nuclear waste into the pacific ocean may not be safe

#90

Post by jayparth »

jhugo wrote: post #58
pvaldes wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very interesting, thanks. Another silly question. As is known that Tritium is bioaccumulative to the point of probably acting as a persistent organic pollutant, why they don't use biology to concentrate and eventually remove it from the tanks?. Or to keep it safely trapped in the tanks?

> As is known that Tritium is bioaccumulative to the point of probably acting as a persistent organic pollutant Huh? It has a half-life of 12 years.

Biological half life is the more important figure here, by the way, and it’s very short (less than a month)
Post reply on HN