No detectable amount of tritium has been found in fish samples taken from waters near the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant, where the discharge of treated radioactive water into the sea began a month ago, the government said Monday.

Tritium was not detected in the latest sample of two olive flounders caught Sunday, the Fisheries Agency said on its website. The agency has provided almost daily updates since the start of the water release, in a bid to dispel harmful rumors both domestically and internationally about its environmental impact.

The results of the first collected samples were published Aug. 9, before the discharge of treated water from the complex commenced on Aug. 24. The water had been used to cool melted nuclear fuel at the plant but has undergone a treatment process that removes most radionuclides except tritium.

    • blindbunny@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      29
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This here is capitolist FUD, but I’m sure in all your great wisdom think humans can be trusted not to fuck up a 5th time.

      • osarusan@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        All you said that was humans mess up everything we do, as if that were something meaningful to say. That is not an argument against nuclear. That’s an argument against absolutely everything humans do. It’s meaningless. Look:

        I don’t doubt solar power works. I just know how humans work. Everything we build we also destroy. Let’s not take the planet with us.

        I don’t doubt coal power works. I just know how humans work. Everything we build we also destroy. Let’s not take the planet with us.

        I don’t doubt hydro power works. I just know how humans work. Everything we build we also destroy. Let’s not take the planet with us.

        I don’t doubt steam power works. I just know how humans work. Everything we build we also destroy. Let’s not take the planet with us.

        All of those are exactly as meaningless as what you wrote. So don’t go on snarkily about my “great wisdom” like you’ve made any point at all. Nuclear is safer than oil and coal and gas, which is where the majority of the world’s energy comes from right now. Fossil fuels are actively destroying our planet right now, and you’re spreading nuclear FUD about things that haven’t happened. That’s not helpful, and it doesn’t match the reality we live in.

            • blindbunny@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              Aww you caught me 🤭

              I have no facts to give you other then humans are too dumb and fickle to be trusted with something as temperamental nuclear power when solar and wind exist.

              😳 thanks for noticing

          • osarusan@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Anyway, I’m done with you. You sound like a shill.

            Lol.

            The famous last words of someone who has no point to make but can’t even admit it to themselves.

            I wrote an honest reply to you and I even bothered to Google some sources for you to refer to. You didn’t even reply to what I said and just came back spouting more non sequitur garbage.

            It’s shameful. You should do better than this. Be better than this.

      • Roboticide@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s nothing more capitalist than pushing coal and oil.

        And any rational green energy advocate knows it’ll take us decades to build enough solar/wind to fill the fossil fuels gap, but would only take us a couple years to fill that demand with nuclear and also produce fewer emissions. That’s simple numbers.

        So are you just irrational or a coal-snorting capitalist yourself?

        • blindbunny@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          Show me this “fossil fuel gap” when it takes a decade for a nuclear power plant to run at full efficiency.

          • Roboticide@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Best case scenario estimates are a complete replacement by 2050 if energy consumption doesn’t change. This requires aggressive investment in renewable production.

            However, that’s unlikely to happen, as energy consumption is increasing, especially as vehicles across the globe abandon oil-based fuel for electricity from the grid.

            The largest hurdle to nuclear power is simply regulatory. We could have nuclear plants built by 2030 with a ~30+ year life that would guarantee us the ability to fully phase out fossil fuels in favor of renewables by 2050 even as demand increases.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        ???

        The USSR and Russia were huge players in nuclear technology and contributed a lot to the field. I actually can’t think of an energy source that has a closer connection to communism.