1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SCI.MILITARY.NAVAL

  • Japan Radioactive Water Release.

    From Douglas Eagleson@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 9 11:13:07 2023
    A sensible IAEA report fails. It says basically "If it is filtered as claimed, it is OK to release." In the real world the release protocol has to be tested to prove it allowable.

    The key concept is to put a calibrated radio-tracer in a test tank, begin filter operation and scientifically measuring the filtration efficiency. Japan then needs to also prove a laboratory valid calibration.

    The key is to define the proper water sampling.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Keith Willshaw@21:1/5 to Douglas Eagleson on Wed Jul 12 13:06:57 2023
    On 09/07/2023 19:13, Douglas Eagleson wrote:
    A sensible IAEA report fails. It says basically "If it is filtered as claimed, it is OK to release." In the real world the release protocol has to be tested to prove it allowable.

    The key concept is to put a calibrated radio-tracer in a test tank, begin filter operation and scientifically measuring the filtration efficiency. Japan then needs to also prove a laboratory valid calibration.

    The key is to define the proper water sampling.



    Incomplete rubbish. What leaked, where, when and who would would be a
    start !

    What - Water stored after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear incident.

    Where - Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station.

    Treatment - An advanced liquid filtration system removed all radioactive materials except trace levels of tritium .

    Result - the IAEA assessed the plan and approved it.

    With tritium having a half life of 12 years and being a weak beta
    emitter this seems eminently reasonable, it is after all released at
    such levels by many nuclear power plants. I would be very surprised if
    much larger amounts were released with the loss of USS Thresher and I
    know the Russians have simply dumped nuclear submarines on the beach in
    the past !

    A March 1993 Russian government report acknowledged that during the
    period from 1965 to 1988, the Northern Fleet had dumped four reactor compartments with eight reactors (three containing damaged fuel) in the Abrosimov Gulf in 20 to 40 meters of water.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Douglas Eagleson@21:1/5 to Keith Willshaw on Tue Jul 18 13:13:47 2023
    On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 8:07:00 PM UTC+8, Keith Willshaw wrote:
    On 09/07/2023 19:13, Douglas Eagleson wrote:
    A sensible IAEA report fails. It says basically "If it is filtered as claimed, it is OK to release." In the real world the release protocol has to be tested to prove it allowable.

    The key concept is to put a calibrated radio-tracer in a test tank, begin filter operation and scientifically measuring the filtration efficiency. Japan then needs to also prove a laboratory valid calibration.

    The key is to define the proper water sampling.


    Incomplete rubbish. What leaked, where, when and who would would be a
    start !

    What - Water stored after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear incident.

    Where - Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station.

    Treatment - An advanced liquid filtration system removed all radioactive materials except trace levels of tritium .

    Result - the IAEA assessed the plan and approved it.

    With tritium having a half life of 12 years and being a weak beta
    emitter this seems eminently reasonable, it is after all released at
    such levels by many nuclear power plants. I would be very surprised if
    much larger amounts were released with the loss of USS Thresher and I
    know the Russians have simply dumped nuclear submarines on the beach in
    the past !

    A March 1993 Russian government report acknowledged that during the
    period from 1965 to 1988, the Northern Fleet had dumped four reactor compartments with eight reactors (three containing damaged fuel) in the Abrosimov Gulf in 20 to 40 meters of water.
    My concern is the need to independently measure the filtration capacity. Assessment is not to be done by simply reading a report.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Keith Willshaw@21:1/5 to Douglas Eagleson on Sun Jul 23 15:21:24 2023
    On 18/07/2023 21:13, Douglas Eagleson wrote:

    My concern is the need to independently measure the filtration capacity. Assessment is not to be done by simply reading a report.

    It was assessed by the IAEA ( theInternational Atomic Energy Agency)
    which was formed in 1957 and ratified by President Eisenhower.

    It has laboratories specializing in nuclear technology in Vienna,
    Seibersdorf, Austria which opened in 1961, and another in Monaco.

    It was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2005 when the committee issued a statement which it said was for.

    "their efforts to prevent nuclear energy from being used for military
    purposes and to ensure that nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is used
    in the safest possible way."

    Sorry but Eagleson Associates didnt make the cut.

    PS I have worked on nuclear power projects with EdF (Electricite de
    France) , the UK Nuclear Submarine design (the PWR 2 project) and the
    CEGB on the Dungeness B Nuclear Power station so I have the best part of
    40 years experience in the field.

    Most nuclear operators would simply release this tritiated water but the Japanese are very meticulous when it comes to such things.

    Meanwhile the USA is actively producing tritium as a key requirement for maintaining the US Nuclear Arsenal. Ask your congressman about the
    safeguards in place.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)