Remember

[Suff]

How I went on and on and on about Fukushima and how it was not over and how the press just dropped it....

Now, we hear that one of the "temporary" tanks used for cooling the 3 destroyed reactor cores has leaked 300 tonnes of highly radioactive water into the ground.....

But, I must ask myself, how secure are these 1,000 tanks, full of 1 million tonnes of highly radioactive water, should a tsunami hit the shore? Not unknown in this area of Japan.

And the 3 reactors? Well they're seriously damaged and the radioactive material can't be removed from them. I wonder how long they're going to keep cooling them?? 50 years? 100 Years? The chances of another quake in that time or a tsunami?

Why do the press not report this? It's no longer "news" because it's not actively leaking into the atmosphere or the sea. YET. When it does, they report it. However, are the news not supposed to be reporting the Potential for a leak? isn't that their function?

Apparently not.

[pederito1]

I understand it is already leaking into the sea. The only option I can see is to bury everything very deep.

[Workingman]

The dual tasks of cleaning up after the disaster whilst keeping the reactors stable was always going to be a difficult one and I accept that some leaks were inevitable.

What I find unacceptable are the delays and the denials and the secrecy.

If TEPCO is having problems the Japanese government should step in. If Japan is having problems it should bury its pride and ask for International help - it would not be denied them.

[KateLMead]

I don't think one can "clean the sea" It is full of poisons, radioactive leaks and other substances, we know fish and marine life are affected. I do not eat fish any more and do not cook it for my children or grandchildren

[Workingman]

I still eat fish Kate, but I understand your concerns.

It would be an interesting exercise, if it could be done, to compare a selection of samples of sea water from around the world from, say, 1750, 1875 and the present day.

[Suff]

I read an article which suggested that eating Pacific Crab, could be a bad idea. For about the next 200 years....

Cleaning up heavy elements like strontium is possible, but would require them to, quite literally, dredge and sift the entire sea bed for thousands of square miles and put it through a sand lift and a cleaner.

Not something they would want to do in the best of times and these are not the best of times.

[KateLMead]

I have had concerns for my grandchildren and daughters swimming in the sea, Yasmin and her family go off abroad The red sea. (now unlikely to go there again!) they have just come back from a holiday in Wales, never out of the sea.
What I say regarding that makes no difference. However the fish concerns seems to have hit home.

[Suff]

For this kind of contamination it's not really so much the fish. More those seafood which live on the sea floor. As this kind of contamination is heavier than water and falls to the sea bed.

I'm guessing the main issue with Japan is Tuna, fish wise, although they don't tend to feed on anything which might have ingested the radioactive material.

Whilst it's concerning, so long as you are sensible panic is not really needed.

[cruiser2]

Theere has been no mention in the news of the number of Nuclear power stations in Japan. In the early 1960's I worked for a firm who were designing the first nuclear power station to be built in Japan. One of the design criteria was it had to withstand a force 9 earthquake.
One newscaster did mention the strength of the leak and it was three with ten being the maximum.

[Suff]

The main point is that these temporary structures are going to have to sit there for decades right on the shoreline.

But the news organs are only interested in this leak. Not the fact that this won't be over any time in my lifetime and that the risk is very, very, high of a repeat performance with a million tonnes of vulnerable and contaminated water just sitting there waiting for a disaster to come along.

There is no hones reporting these days.