Tepco considers discharging Tritium to the Pacific after dilution

Note : If you are from the international mass media, Don’t read this site before taking a contact with me.


Tepco’s vise president Aizawa stated they consider discharging radioactive water Tritium after dilution, in the press conference of 10/28/2013.

Even if they dilute Tritium, the total volume is not decreased.


Having the contaminated water cluelessly increasing, Tepco is planning to introduce the new filtration system that is supposed to remove β and α nuclides. However, radioactive water Tritium can’t be removed. There is no technology to remove Tritium from this volume of contaminated water that keeps increasing.


Aizawa commented they would expect to obtain the approval from the local stakeholders.




I reject the international mass media to read this site without taking a contact with me.I know some of the mass media corporations read Fukushima Diary to understand the trend so they know when to report about Fukushima as if they were independently following it for a long time.
In short, they make you individual readers pay for this site while they pay nothing, and when they publish the “authorized news”, you pay for the “secondhand news”, which is nothing new for us.
This site is free for the individual readers, but not for corporations.In the world, this site is nearly the only source about Fukushima. I came here alone without any supporting organizations, background or anything. I’m not pleased to be exploited by the corporations that didn’t even properly report about Fukushima when 311 took place. I demand them to take a contact with me BEFORE reading this site whatever the purpose is.


Français :

Tepco envisage de déverser le tritium dans le Pacifique après dilution
Note : Si vous êtes de la grande presse internationale, ne lisez pas ce site sans avoir préalablement pris contact avec moi.


Au cours de la conférence de presse du 28 octobre 2013, M. Aizawa, le vice-président de Tepco, a affirmé qu’ils envisagent de déverser les eaux à tritium radioactif en mer après dilution.
Même s’ils le diluent, le volume total n’en change pas.

Tepco prévoit de mettre en place le nouveau système de filtration qui est supposé retirer les nucléides β et α des eaux extrêmement radioactives en augmentation constante (ALPS). Cependant, les eaux radioactives en tritium ne peuvent pas être épurées. Il n’existe pas de technique capable de retirer le tritium sur un tel volume d’eaux contaminées en perpétuelle augmentation.

M. Aizawa a déclaré qu’ils espéraient obtenir l’aval des parties prenantes locales.


J’interdis à la grande presse internationale de lire et d’utiliser ce site sans préalablement prendre contact avec moi. Je sais que certaines grandes sociétés de presse lisent le Fukushima Diary pour comprendre la tendance et trouver quand rendre compte de la situation de Fukushima comme s’ils la suivaient indépendamment depuis longtemps.
En résumé, ils vous font payer à vous, simples lecteurs, ce qu’ils prennent gratuitement dans ce site et lorsqu’ils publient des “nouvelles de première main” vous payez pour des “nouvelles resucées”, qui n’ont rien de nouveau pour nous.
Ce site est gratuit pour les lecteurs individuels, pas pour les sociétés. Ce site est pratiquement la seule source au monde sur Fukushima. Je viens ici seul sans aucun soutien d’organisation quelconque, ni références, ni rien. Je n’apprécie pas de me faire exploiter par ces sociétés qui n’ont même pas été foutues de relater correctement ce qui se passait à Fukushima quand a eu lieu le mois de mars 2011. Je leur demande de prendre contact avec moi AVANT de lire ce site dans quelque but que ce soit.

    1. I take these local stakeholders to be Abe and his spin doctors. Any delay in releasing a decision, or any data is a sign that Toyoko does not yet have the correct political engineering solution.

      Physics and engineering as the rest of the world knows it, plays a part in the solution, but is always second in importance to political science.

  1. There’s a fixed amount of tritium, cesium and strontium at the fukushima site that was produced when the reactors were running.

    If they dilute, the total volume of contaminated water goes up but the concentration goes down. Since they have only a limited space to store water it’s going to have to go in the ocean eventually. Removing the cesium and strontium from the water and then dumping the tritium contaminated water into the ocean is the best they can do with the available technology.

    1. V. I. (Village Idiot) Diemos writes only foolishness, nescience, pseudo-science, myths, propaganda, despair, deceptions and outright lies.

      (1) Flushing the Fukushima nuclear toilet is a deliberate SOVEREIGN ACT, by the Japan Government.

      (2) TEPCO is a bankrupt entity that exists SOLELY at the pleasure of the Japan Government.

      (3) The Japan Government has refused to purchase sufficient ALPS redundancy to process out the removable radionuclides such as cesium and strontium.

      (4) The Japan Government has failed (refused) to construct a subsea tank farm, to safely store the tritiated water. Fifty years will be sufficient to half-life the tritiated water to insignificance.

      (5) The relative silence of the Japanese People and the International Community are contributing to this DELIBERATE and continuing degradation of the Pacific fishery.


      Bill Duff

      1. It can be reasonably concluded that Nuke/MOX corrupted USA politicians such as Barack Obama and Lindsey Graham are ‘good with this’ continued radionuclide dump into the Pacific Ocean.

        In such matters, ‘Silence is Consent’.

        Not one USA politician has said a gawdamn thing. Not one Canada politician has said a gawdamn word.

        Nor France, Germany, England, Spain, Brazil, Mexico, South Africa …

        Silence is consent


        Bill Duff

        1. Republican Senators whoring for corporate welfare

          The South Carolina & Japan MOX plants are uneconomic, poorly designed, unnecessary, ill-conceived, over-budget, behind-schedule, and inordinately dangerous. IMHO

          http www postandcourier com/ (article/20130517/PC16/130519356) By MEG KINNARD Associated Press Posted: Friday, May 17, 2013 12:01 a.m.

          Graham, Scott, Georgia senators push for continued MOX funding

          U.S. Energy Secretary Daniel Poneman said the administration has been clear that it needs to see whether there is a better way to honor the disposition agreement. “We are looking at all options, including MOX,” Poneman said.

          Sens. Lindsey Graham and Tim Scott of South Carolina and Sens. Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson of Georgia wrote in a letter … “Your decision violates the commitments that were made to South Carolina,” the senators wrote.

          The MOX plant is under construction at the Savannah River Site, a sprawling complex saddling the South Carolina-Georgia border where nuclear weapons components were once made. The plant is about 60 percent complete, but the project has undergone years of cost overruns and delays. Last month the Government Accountability Office said the plant is $3 billion over budget, now costing an estimated $7.7 billion. Construction began in 2007, and the GAO also forecast that the MOX facility wouldn’t be oprable until 2019, three years later than originally planned.

  2. FUKUSHIMA PHRASEBOOK: A Guide to Tepcobabble

    Decommission: Defuse
    Decontaminate: Disperse
    Stress: Radiation sickness
    Ocean: Repository
    No immediate danger: Cancer unlikely to develop in short term
    Containment vessel: Facade
    Cold shutdown: Reactor cores melted through to groundwater
    Under control: Under control
    Control: Information management
    Leak: Harmful rumour
    Harmful Rumour: Truth

  3. Since the fission seems to be ongoing at Fukushima..the TRITIUM increases..its not staying stable. So the comment about ‘status quo’ of that radioactive product is misleading.

    By ‘stake holders’ being local..guess that means the rest of the world does not count?

  4. This has always been their end game. “Not above legal limits”, has always been their war cry. Japan is now looking for an entire generation of workers for decontamination, with a short break to sell Coke and Fries at the Olympics.

  5. Repeat after me:

    “Dilution is no solution to nuclear pollution.”

    It ignores the effects of Bio-accumulation.

    Also, what do they plan to dilute with?
    Why, other contaminated water, naturally.

    Tritium can be removed. However; it is an energy-intensive process, whatever the process. Freeze it, for instance. Tritiated water has a higher freezing point than regular water. They lie when they say there is no way to seperate Tritium from water. Electrolysis splits water molecules. Once again, it is an energy-intensive process.

    These criminals have killed the Pacific Ocean.

    1. Have to throw in some zebra mussels, or blue mussels, or some local bivalves with a good feed of algae and nutrients, something to soften the water….
      The little blighters did very well in the groundwater, rivers, cooling ponds at Chernobyl. They are the biofouling, bioharzard specialists in the intake pipes at US nuclear reactors.
      Bivalves with aragonite in the ‘mother of pearl’ lining in their shells trap heavy metals.
      Good luck to all, fingers crossed, best wishes to the workers.

      1. Helen,

        ALL the bivalves on earth, dropped into the Fukushima harbor and nearby regions, would have no measureable effect upon the tritium releases from the FDNPP.

        So, WHY do you continue to waste our time with this ‘hippy’ drivel?

        It is not a solution.


        Bill Duff

        1. I have 24 grandchildren around the Pacific.
          How many congenitally deformed babies are you prepared to look after?

          The Fukushima plant is an open environmental catastrophe that can’t be put back in a box.
          There are many scientist globally working their guts out to look at bioremediation strategies.
          The lack of any such dialog on this site is disturbing in itself.
          The entire focus on engineering as a solution, is only part of a solution, because a considerable amount of contamination, as is noted constantly on this site, is uncontained.

          I have survived mercenaries, psychopaths, and egotisitcal engineers with multiple design awards, and degrees from MIT with delusions of grandeur.
          My family was involved in starting Greenpeace when global warming was a laughing matter in the 1980s.
          I retain the right to freedom of speech, support Iori in his quest for a safe place for Japanese people, and am not in the slightest bit intimidated by you.

          1. You have the right to ignorantly shoot your mouth off; and you are apparently going to continue to do so.

            Your half-baked, ill-considered notions of Fukushima/Pacific bivalve, pseudo-bioremediation are of no value.

            I have, since the early 1970s, considered that the odds of a pending iceage, exceed the chances of a warming planet. The climate data/evidence remains equivocal. Stridency in the absence of knowlege is merely applied ignorance; which regularly describes Greenpeace. The unproven global warming scaremongering is a DRIVING FORCE FOR MOX and the so-called ‘Nuclear Rennaisance.


            Bill Duff

            1. Bill, your ad hominem attacks on Helen are uncalled for and advance neither your credibility nor the chances of finding a lasting solution to this crisis. You may be right that bivalves would have no measurable effect, but I doubt if anyone could make such a statement with certainty. Given that the Fukushima crisis threatens the entire Pacific rim, and ultimately all humanity – given moreover that no one has the final answer on how to solve this crisis – not only has Helen every right to suggest a possible corrective measure, but we would wise to welcome such suggestions and be open to (or at least accept with respect) suggestions that may at first sound left-field and even bizarre. To dismiss bioremediation as ‘hippy drivel’ is really inexcusable, since bioaccumulation is an established scientific fact.

              I respect your insights into the Fukushima crisis and welcome your contribution to this site. I hope that my challenging you in this matter will not sabotage our chances of engaging in further discourse, in good humour and with mutual respect. But there is a broader issue here. Your response to Helen’s comment dripped with condescension and disrespect: qualities that have contributed to the global insanity in which we find ourselves. If we want to create a better world we need to develop not only technological fixes, but a different culture of human relationship.

              Martin Hawes

          2. There is ZERO advantage to wasting time, money and effort on non-functional DREAMWORLD schemes. Helen ignorantly proposes idiotic, costly and time-consuming lunacy. Tritium bioaccumulation has NOT been observed, much less established.


            Bill Duff

            http www irsn fr/ (EN/Research/publications-documentation/radionuclides-sheets/environment/Pages/Tritium-environment) aspx

            It is now accepted that the transfer of HTO to aquatic organisms quickly leads to equilibrium between HTO in the exposure environment and free tritium in biological tissue; exchange involving organic forms of tritium is still unknown. More particularly for salt and fresh water fish which constitute the compartments for which there are most in situ data, as well as marine invertebrates, concentration factors [OBT]organism/[HTO]water greater than 1 have been found in various situations; it appears that such observations are in rapport with the origin and physicochemical form of incorporated tritium (ingestion of tritiated organic molecules). In these conditions, the observation of concentration factors greater than 1 for the water in the surrounding environment cannot be interpreted as representative of a bioaccumulation phenomenon and the concentration factor of OBT in the animal organism should be determined using the measurement of tritium contained in products consumed by the animals.

            To date, no phenomenon of tritium bioaccumulation has been observed in marine organisms on the French Channel coast.

            Results obtained in the Channel for crustaceans, molluscs and fish do not differ significantly from those for algae, whether it be in terms of concentration or the [OBT]species/[HTO]seawater ratio: 0.7 – 1.9. The results show no bioaccumulation effect and reflect the chemical form HTO that indicates industrial discharge. As soon as the number of available measurements is sufficient to allow robust use together with dispersion models, calculation of transfer kinetics between seawater and living species will be possible.

            1. OK, Helen is ‘fact-challenged’ or if you prefer ‘reality-disadvantaged’. I personally prefer the term ‘stupid’, but suit yourself. It would be ‘handy’ to have some shred of evidence from somewhere, prior to dumping a zillion tons of perfectly healthy bi-valves into a toxic, radioactive Fukushima effluent stream.

              http enochthered wordpress com/ (2008/03/17/bioconcentration-and-biomagnification-of-radionuclides-of-biochemically-significant-elements/)

              2nd hand (Extracts from Nuclear Power is Not the Answer)

              So, does bioconcentration of tritium in the food chain occur?

              Bioconcentration or biomagnification of tritium in the form of tritiated water in biological systems does not occur at all, although it can occur with some other radionuclides. This is due, in part, to the relatively small biological half-life for water in biological systems, and the large concentration of light water in the environment, which results in massive isotopic dilution of tritium entering the ecosphere. Tritium is simply hydrogen, and your body cannot tell one hydrogen atom from the next – whilst large volumes of water are constantly being taken into the body, and passed out of the body, the total amount of hydrogen within ones body remains essentially constant, as is also the case for the various other chemical elements which make up the human body.

  6. Yes and No!

    You are correct, tritium can physically be separated from mixtures of: HHO, HDO, DDO, DTO, and TTO. Oh and the oxygen also has several isotopes, to further complicate the task. It is not however likely to be economically possible to separate this amount of tritium, on the combined budgets of Japan, USA, China, Russia, England, Germany, Taiwan, Brazil and France. It is therefore NOT feasible to SEPARATE the tritium.

    In reality, the VOLUME is quite SMALL relative to the capacity of a single super tanker. And the tritium half-life is VERY short. And the radiation emissions from tritium are relatively EASILY shielded.

    Hence a multi-wall tank farm, removed some distance from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant (FDUNPP).

    Internal contamination of plants, bacteria, viruses, animals and people is FAR more hazardous than the consequences of tritium stored, in shielded containers, a mile away. “The perfect is the enemy of the good.”


    Bill Duff

    1. At 300 tons per day a medium sized oil tanker would be full after a year.

      I think it’s a far better idea than trying to build tank farms on-site. Especially since they are retiring oil tankers all the time.

      1. Crew problems with HOT water.

        The tritium Beta decay is easily shielded; however the XRay (bremsstrahlung) emissions are going to kill the ship’s crew.

        Perhaps Pirate Captain Jack Sparrow could recruit an ‘undead’ crew for a voyage to nowhere.

        This ‘HOT’ water is a health hazard at the FDNPP.


        Bill Duff

        1. What about some kind of offshore tank farm. Tanks made of several layers some kind of flexible, super-tough, super-durable material, 25mm thick neoprene or something of that nature, with an exterior hard shield (stainless steel mesh?). A bit like aquaculture pens but with the pens/tanks waterproof and entirely enclosed. Each tank could hold 50,000 tons of contaminated water, plus enough air to stop the tank from sinking (although mostly submerged of course). A big advantage over an onshore installation is that it could easily be made earthquake proof. Risks of course. Just throwing ideas around.

          1. The biproduct of radioactive tritium disintegration is (non-radioactive) Helium Gas. The outgassing of helium would leave an OH ion, so a subsea floating tank farm would be a bouyancy challenge.

            There are Beta emissions and X-Rays (bremsstrahlung), which would tend to degrade most plastics.

            There have been some recent dramatic plastics failures in nuclear applications. One recent debacle was the AREVA inflatable dam which failed during the Missouri River flooding.

            There may be some need for plastics INSIDE a solid metal vessel, such as a pressure bladder or the like. Still, the potential for failure seems to be unacceptably high, for this application. Some plastics have been metal coated, which MIGHT be a design consideration.


            Bill Duff

            1. Plastic Hell

              Intended to mention the helium bubbles are the bouyancy issue. The OH ions are a ph (chemsitry) issue. Then there are the Gamma (XRays) and Beta emissions.

              The described environment would be pretty rough on most plastics.

              The heavily tritiated water would be ‘Plastics Hell’, IMHO.

              316 Stainless Steel is probably a good material starting place for 50-year storage of tritiated water. The isotope industry and weapon groups haved likely settled on something more perfectly suited to the application.

              Tritium has replaced radium as a weapons (scope) passive illumination material.


              Bill Duff

              1. Then perhaps floating/subsurface stainless steel tanks are an option? A bit like supertankers but without the trimmings and crew. Possible advantages over situating such tanks on dry land are that they could be larger, have a lighter construction and be much less prone to damage by earthquake, land subsidence etc. They would have to withstand the stresses associated with storms and tsunamis. I’ve seen footage of fuel silos clunking around on the 2011 tsunami, so this shouldn’t be difficult if the tanks are suitably designed and moored. Can you say more about the buoyancy issue? Couldn’t the helium be bled off and captured for industrial use? Of course a stainless steel tank farm would cost big money, but the Japanese government is going to have to get used to spending $$$$$$ if it wants to tackle this crisis.

                1. Small air bubbles under high pressure conditions expand significantly as they approach the surface. The increased gas volumes increase the bouyancy of the container, The container accelerates to the surface. This phenomenon is used for subsea cruise missile launches.

                  Water is virtually incompressible, so the water volume change with pressure increases is mostly due to the expansion of the metal container and bolt stretching. The gas volume expands rapidly, according to the rather well known PVT ‘gas law’ relationships.

                  Emergency personnel evacuation of pressurized areas, involves constant exhaling, to prevent lung explosions and eardrum ruptures.

                  So, yes, cautious bleed-off of the non-radioactive helium gas accumulation is advisable, or more accurately CRITICAL.

                  There is a LOT of tritiated water to store. Some assortment of sea depths and moorings is probably a good research project; and quite possibly a good plan.


                  Bill Duff

    1. Well, just so long as the LENDERS ‘get paid’, well then, ‘it’s all good’.

      Barack Obama has vast compassion for stockholders, speculators, lenders and underwrters. He also has demonstrated a VAST indifference and indeed a tangibled hostility toward all other considerations.

  7. Biomitigation

    Let us consider the term biomitigation. as it might be applied to the ongoing Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant disaster region. Birds and Marine species are drawn to the Fukushima area in a search for food and shelter.

    Perhaps it may be advisable to transplant noxious land and marine species to the Fukushima area. Poisonous plants and animals, from ‘Red Plankton’ through oleander, scorpions and the like would reduce the likelihood that future humans, birds, whales and the like; would tarry long near the Fukushima contamination region. It might reduce the temptation to return to commercial fishing operations.

    The INVISIBLE radioactive hazard could be made more tangible, in such as fashion. This could be viewed as analogous to the mostly poisonous environment as one approaches the Dead Sea.

    Warnings are a good thing.


    Bill Duff

Comments are closed.

About this site

This website updates the latest news about the Fukushima nuclear plant and also archives the past news from 2011. Because it's always updated and added live, articles, categories and the tags are not necessarily fitted in the latest format.
I am the writer of this website. About page remains in 2014. This is because my memory about 311 was clearer than now, 2023, and I think it can have a historical value. Now I'm living in Romania with 3 cats as an independent data scientist.
Actually, nothing has progressed in the plant since 2011. We still don't even know what is going on inside. They must keep cooling the crippled reactors by water, but additionally groundwater keeps flowing into the reactor buildings from the broken parts. This is why highly contaminated water is always produced more than it can circulate. Tepco is planning to officially discharge this water to the Pacific but Tritium is still remaining in it. They dilute this with seawater so that it is legally safe, but scientifically the same amount of radioactive tritium is contained. They say it is safe to discharge, but none of them have drunk it.


October 2013