The radioactivity in the ocean is not a threat to humans or marine life: A research perspective on nuclear power plant discharges into the ocean

Workers at the nuclear power plant have started releasing radioactive water into the ocean. The plant was destroyed in a 2011 earthquake and massive tsunami, and water has been accumulating ever since.

“The idea of deliberately discharging hazardous substances into the environment, into the ocean is repugnant,” Lyman says. It’s difficult to argue that the impacts would be worse than they are at nuclear power plants, if you look at it from the technical perspective.

But there’s a radioactive isotope that they cannot filter out: tritium. Tritium is an isotope of hydrogen, and hydrogen is part of the water itself (H20). So it is impossible to create a filter that could remove the tritium.

The Japanese government maintains that the radioactive material at the site isn’t as bad as it could be. Its radioactive decay is relatively weak, and because it’s part of the water, it moves quickly through biological organisms. It will be in the environment for twelve years, so unlike elements such as Uranium 235 which have a half life of 700 million years.

The International Atomic Energy Agency believes the plan is in line with international safety standards. The IAEA also plans to conduct independent monitoring to make sure that the discharge is done safely.

The risk is really low. Jim Smith, professor of environmental science at the University of Pompey, said that it was not a risk. He’s studied radioactivity in waterways after nuclear accidents.

“We’ve got to put radiation in perspective, and the plant release — if it’s done properly — then the doses that people get and the doses that the ecosystem get just won’t be significant, in my opinion,” Smith says.

But not everyone agrees that discharging the water is the best option. Ken Buesseler, a senior scientist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute feels it would have been better if the contaminated water could be kept on land. There were options to scyth off it like mixing it into concrete.

Beussler doesn’t think there is a risk from the water. He doesn’t think we will see a lot of direct health effects on humans or marine life. But he does think that non-tritium contaminates missed by the ALPS system could build up over time near the shore.

Beussler consults for the Pacific Islands Forum, a coalition of nations including the Marshall Islands and Tahiti that are also apprehensive about Japan’s decision. He notes that many of these countries were subjected to high levels of radioactive fallout as a result of atmospheric nuclear tests during the Cold War. “There are islands they can’t return to…because of legacy contamination,” Buesseler says.

Moreover, “they’re suffering in many ways from climate change and sea level rise more than the rest of the world,” he says. It’s just one insult, the release into the Pacific by Japan is among others.

The plan by Japan to release the wastewater into the sea has angered China and South Korea, as well as caused anxiety at home. The Chinese government is opposed to the plan and its administration in South Korea supports it; the opposition in South Korea are against the plan. Fishermen’s unions fear that public anxiety about the safety of the water could affect their livelihoods.