3 ms·

You're quoting a bunch of year or more old stats... there's been a flurry of recent news coverage because recent measurements have either exceeded past limits,

by KVFinn 13y ago

You're quoting a bunch of year or more old stats... there's been a flurry of recent news coverage because recent measurements have either exceeded past limits, or past measurements are now considered to have been underestimates, with respect to ocean release. Example: http://japandailypress.com/fukushima-bay-radiation-levels-highest-since-measurements-began-2034175/ http://japandailypress.com/fukushima-bay-radiation-levels-hi... >Reports from Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO), operator of the disaster-stricken Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, say that measurements of radioactive tritium in seawater – seeping out of the nuclear complex via groundwater into the sea – show levels at 4700 becquerels per liter, the highest tritium level in the measurement history. The highest tritium levels have come in the past 15 days, the same reports show. It is very very strange to be seeing such Tritium levels this late, it dilutes so quickly. It's so strange it's to even figure out probably causes.

beefman 13y ago
No, I'm not missing recent events. Year-old stats are still valid because almost all the release occurred during the accident sequence in 2011. I'll drink the 4700 Bq/L tritium water too. That level doesn't even exceed the WHO limit for drinking water (10,000) let alone the Finnish one (30,000) or Australian one (76,103). The 4.7kBq measurement was made in the quay in front of the plant, not the open sea. Rising tritium levels there may be a result of leaks of cesium-stripped water from the onsite treatment system, or simply natural variation in groundwater drainage from the site. I don't want to get personal, but the way your post is written as if it comes from a place of knowledge, is a worthwhile example of a larger phenomenon.