Turn on thread page Beta

Radioactive Sea to Ocean - Concern or NOT ? watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I heard in news today that there is a radioactive water leak from one of the plants.

    Would it be a concern if the sea water joins the Ocean ? And would the ocean currents play a role in carrying the radioactive particles around the world ?

    All views are welcomed
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Part of them would definitely make it to Atlantic Ocean, but IMO as it happened in Chernobyl crisis, the particles would have to 'settle down' at some point somewhere.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Of course there would be some radioactive particles entering the ocean, but not enough for it to realistically be an issue. You may end up with bad fishing in the locale but it's not really that big a problem. We definitely won't be ending up for five headed fish appearing in the english channel (more's the pity really :-p). If you think about it, it's quite similar to homeopathy, you have a small about amount of radioactive material going into a huge body of water, it's diluted so much it essentially becomes negligible.

    And tbh if there was that much of a risk posed by it they wouldn't be doing it, or at the very least wouldn't be announcing they were doing it. If the risk was too much they would just be filling up empty tankers with the contaminated water
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    you know how big the ocean is? ok now recognize how deep it is too... you're a lot more likely to be affected by that smokestack on the horizon than if they were INTENTIONALLY pouring all their nuclear material into the sea.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FailWhale)
    you're a lot more likely to be affected by that smokestack on the horizon than if they were INTENTIONALLY pouring all their nuclear material into the sea.
    um, if they were INTENTIONALLY pouring thier nuclear waste into the sea we would defo have a problem
    but there shouldnt be a problem for us because of pollution from the disaster or we would have found out about it by now
    mind you, i wouldnt like to be in japan - i think they picked up radioactive fish in tokoyo


    (Original post by charlietheunicorn)
    And tbh if there was that much of a risk posed by it they wouldn't be doing it, or at the very least wouldn't be announcing they were doing it. If the risk was too much they would just be filling up empty tankers with the contaminated water
    you have to think about how they would weigh the risks of five headed fish in a couple of months agaisnt the risk of immedate nuclear explosion - i wouldnt put it past any government to know it was a risk and do it anyway, especially considering the state the country was in
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jendra9311)
    um, if they were INTENTIONALLY pouring thier nuclear waste into the sea we would defo have a problem
    but there shouldnt be a problem for us because of pollution from the disaster or we would have found out about it by now
    mind you, i wouldnt like to be in japan - i think they picked up radioactive fish in tokoyo




    you have to think about how they would weigh the risks of five headed fish in a couple of months agaisnt the risk of immedate nuclear explosion - i wouldnt put it past any government to know it was a risk and do it anyway, especially considering the state the country was in
    Of course you are right, if the risk of explosion were high they probably would vent straight into the sea, as if the explosion took place the sea would still be contaminated anyway.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jendra9311)
    um, if they were INTENTIONALLY pouring thier nuclear waste into the sea we would defo have a problem
    how do you figure? you realize all nuclear reactors use some form of water as a moderator and in turbines and make that water slightly more radioactive, which adds up to quite a bit over the 50-75 years a reactor can run? also sea water naturally has way more radioactive isotopes in it than all the nuclear reactors on earth combined? you never dropped dye into water? until you are putting in like 0.1% of volume being dye there's no change to the volume at all. 0.1% of the oceans is an absolutely unfathomable volume greater than everything on the surface of the earth combined.

    point is unless you're in japan or nearby its not going to matter.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    I took random sentences from the bbc news website;

    4 April 2011 Last updated at 12:58
    Japan nuclear plant releases radioactive water into sea
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12954664
    Workers at Japan's quake-hit nuclear plant have begun dumping water with low levels of contamination into the sea to free up room to store more highly radioactive water leaking at the site. About 11,500 tonnes of water will be released into the sea at the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. Water with a higher level of radioactivity leaking from the No 2 reactor can then be stored. Workers face a dilemma - they must keep feeding water into the reactors to stop them overheating, but must then deal with the accumulation of waste water. Top government spokesman Yukio Edano said that there was no choice but to release some water. "We are already aware that the water at the No 2 unit is highly radiated," he said. "So as to prioritise to stop the leakage of this water into the sea... we will release the water stored in the exterior building of the unit, which also unfortunately contains radioactivity but far lower than the highly contaminated water." The water to be released into the sea contains some 100 times the legal limit of radiation - a relatively low level, says the BBC's Roland Buerk in Tokyo. "As it is not harmful to people's health and as it is necessary to avert an even bigger danger, we decided it was inevitable," said Hidehiko Nishiyama of Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (Nisa).

    30 March 2011 Last updated at 08:13
    Radioactive traces from Japan reach Ireland
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-12903573
    However, the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland (RPII) said the trace amounts of radioactivity from the Fukushima plant were very low. The RPII said the amount of radio-iodine found in Ireland did not have public health implications.

    24 March 2011 Last updated at 15:40
    Japanese imported vegetables in Singapore 'radioactive'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12834153
    Singapore has reported finding low levels of radioactivity in four vegetable samples imported from Japan. Parsley, rapeseed, mustard and perilla were found to be affected, although the levels were far from life-threatening. The radiation levels mean that an adult would have to eat 3.5kg to get the same exposure as from a single x-ray.

    sweet dreams
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FailWhale)
    how do you figure? you realize all nuclear reactors use some form of water as a moderator and in turbines and make that water slightly more radioactive, which adds up to quite a bit over the 50-75 years a reactor can run? also sea water naturally has way more radioactive isotopes in it than all the nuclear reactors on earth combined? you never dropped dye into water? until you are putting in like 0.1% of volume being dye there's no change to the volume at all. 0.1% of the oceans is an absolutely unfathomable volume greater than everything on the surface of the earth combined.

    point is unless you're in japan or nearby its not going to matter.
    yeah, but when its realeased slowly over 50-75 years there is at least a chance that some of the radition can decay or whatever it does, and it doesn't build up much, but in an explosion or other nuclear event the rods melt and release a lot of radition very quickly, which goes straight into the water and food chain, which we then consume

    and you wouldn't need 0.1% of the ocean to be radioctive to cause problems becuase it wouldnt sink straight away, it would hang around for a bit, then sink, possibly being consumed by fishand entering the food chain in the meantime
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jendra9311)
    yeah, but when its realeased slowly over 50-75 years there is at least a chance that some of the radition can decay or whatever it does, and it doesn't build up much, but in an explosion or other nuclear event the rods melt and release a lot of radition very quickly, which goes straight into the water and food chain, which we then consume

    and you wouldn't need 0.1% of the ocean to be radioctive to cause problems becuase it wouldnt sink straight away, it would hang around for a bit, then sink, possibly being consumed by fishand entering the food chain in the meantime
    the fastest decaying large isotope in a reactor has a halflife of 24,000 years...

    as for its distribution, yes the food chain is a concern and not consuming things that concentrate it. but even in a global nuclear war 90% of the fallout will settle to the surface within 2 weeks, and within 90 days 99% will be down. a plant exploding really isn't that big a deal unless you are in the same country as it.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Nah, by the time any radiation gets here it will have spread out so much as to be below background level.
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

2,240

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?
Useful resources
AtCTs

Ask the Community Team

Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

Welcome Lounge

Welcome Lounge

We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.