you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 29 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (2 children)

So I googled what the background level of Tritium is in seawater. The general consensus is that this various based upon where in the world you are, but it's typically around 500 - 750 becquerels of tritium per m^3^. The amount they're releasing is 190 becquerels of tritium per m^3^, or in other words, they're reducing the average tritum radioactivity of the water...

So why is this news? Why haven't the journalists gone, "Stupid people don't understand how radioactivity and volumetrics work, and are complaining about the Japanese releasing water that is so highly treated it's cleaner than the ocean average."?

--edit-- Not going to edit the above, but @zifk@sh.itjust.works correctly pointed out I'd got my units wrong... and then they got their units wrong replying. And that's why we need good journalism who can actually look into this fucking stuff properly, and give reasoned responses!

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    Actually we both screwed up by a factor of 1000, the article states 190 becquerels of tritium per litre, not cubic meter.

    Seems like you have the right order of magnitude, but the sources I've seen gives the ocean close to 0.5-2 TU, or "Tritium Units" which correspond to 180 Bq/m^3. So I wouldn't call the water being released as cleaner, just basically on average with the ocean already.

    https://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/fac/etg.tmp/text/woce_method.html https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969718348034

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    This is why I should stick to computing ;) Thanks for the update.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments