Is Fukushima's Radioactive Water Safe? 

Yay🎉🎉🎉🎉, does this mean Kyle you are not sick? More starfield on the gaming channel? 👀

Hopefully this has nothing to do with you getting sick

Yeah this is way more constructive than getting random YT ads here in Seattle for how great Fukushima's fish is lol.

Kyle. You should cover those Russian Drivers, that where diving at Chenobyl bout a year ago.

Any plans to do more office hours?

He still does let his silly side come out tho. His let's plays and videos on dead space... ohhh all the dead Kevins😅

All of it coming from China, so Kyle has a LOT of misinfo to fight.

And from certain powers with agendas….

@@robolizard222The CCP is gonna shoot itself in the foot when nobody wants to eat or buy ANY seafood for years to come and kills their own fishing industry. At least it should mitigate some of the Chinese fishermen taking fish from Japanese waters, from a lack of demand if nothing else.

@@zeitgeist909 hmm how? How is this video misinformation in any way shape or form ,because wasn't that what this video basically said in general ,and The time stamp is 7:24 if you want to look at it

​@@zeitgeist909 Kyle never said that it was dangerous... But, I can see why you may dislike the way he presented this information. Especially all of the "according to TEPCO" qualifiers that, at least to me, sounded something like "that's what THEY say, but can we really trust THEM?". And while Kyle said that he has no reason to distrust the scientists, I could see some people watching only the first 7 or so minutes of the video and coming away with a wildly different take, than what Kyle intended.

I'd love to get into a job like yours in the future!

@@NickDaGamer1998 Always nice to hear somebody interested in a career in the nuclear industry! What pathway are you looking at for getting in?

Hi Mr Jason. Would it be safe for Asean countries to consume South China Sea's fish as the currents generally flow towards North and South America?

​@@aerix12345 Eating fish would be absolutely fine even if the tritium release water was directed East towards the South China Sea. The levels of tritium are so low and so diluted that it would make no difference to humans. The oceans around the planet already contain natural trace amounts of tritium in them naturally, and this tritium release from Japan will not make a difference. Especially because Japan is not just dumping all of their water all at once, but rather they are doing a gradual release over time, ensuring its safety.

Do you agree with the section at 4:36?

So much to the 'responsible government' and their 'creditability'.

K, must be true if you say so.

@@IzanamiIzanagi-ri1kp how old were you? Didn't you watch and read news back then? The un university (unu edu) article by Figueroa describes this problem about communication and misinformation.

@@talkfacts100 guy's living in a post-evidence delusion

@@talkfacts100 Am just not gullible unfortunately, not a fan of general information without any specifics.

Higher seawall. If the wall was the same height the water could have still gotten to where the generator was supposed to be. If the wall was high enough to prevent water from getting over it in the first place there wouldnt have been a need to put the generator higher. Onagawas wall was high enough and they didnt have problems despite being closer to the epicenter.

one day Kyle will call out the real issue,capitalism

@@whyishoudini "one day Kyle will call out the real issue,capitalism" If you won the lottery Im sure you would give away 100% of it because "the real issue is 'capitalism'"

@@namename9998 you just blow in from stupid ville?

@@whyishoudini Corporate greed doesnt equal capitalism, neither does central banking. If corporations don't act responsible there is no political or monetary system that can prevent social harm. It is them, the corporate and state powers that have the responsibility to act according to the risk assessments, corruption is far worse in socialism/communism than in capitalism. So failure to meet requirements is way higher in non capitalistic systems. Look at China and its downfall at the moment, it says it all.

that there reply above me sure is a real person and not an outdated scam bot

@@toasterhavingabath6980 nah toaster dude I'm actually a real live person, and totally not a chatGPT imposter trying to trick you into liking things :)

Such propagandized bs this is!

Indeed, watching the video have helped me to come to the conclusion that Japan is not trustworthy. Even their own reports speak loudly that they should not dump the toxins into the ocean.

I was about to leave a very similar comment yet alas, you were faster, so I'll just reply (the comment will be pushed to the top more) (I think). But, in short, I agree. I don't have much hands-on experience with the japanese culture itself but I am interested in social stuff in general (a human studies kinda guy) and my good mate is...well, a bit of a japanophile😂. So, basically, the Japanese tend to prefer looking more appealing and likeable to other people rather than doing what we westerners like to call "morally correct" (it is kind of subjective in the world of cultures). The western culture tends to prefer morals while the eastern one tends to focus on the image of one's self in the eyes of others. Reputation, essentially. So, what Kyle experienced might have been tainted with a healthy dose of culture shock😆. But it's immensely good he's talking about it. I am not trying to come out as hateful, it's just how the world works. Aaanyway, sorry for being a nerd but it's late at night and I'm trying to sleep, you know how it is😭. Edit: I am a monkey and don't know how to grammar Edit 2: FUCK, he said it at the end. Whatever, I'll keep this comment up. Always watch the whole video before leaving a comment, kids.

Since you guys love the water so much, just import to America and EU. if not SHHHHHHHHHHH

It's supremely conflicting for me. On one hand we have a world burning down around us largely because nuclear power has such bad PR. Without the oil companies' intervention and the general fear mongering of ignorant (albeit well meaning) people, we could have delayed catastrophic global warming for decades. On the other hand, it's arguably the fault of misleading PR that has lead to the recent uptick of anti-vaxers and nutjobs. If you spend enough time in hospitals you eventually realize there are absolute idiot doctors who don't deserve their license, but which ones? You end up being forced to either get multiple opinions for every issue (expensive as hell and an extreme inconvenience) or use your own ignorant judgement to decide for yourself. And some people have chosen option C, just ignore all science entirely. So basically, my heart tells me, f*ck saving face, Japan needs to pull it's own stupid cultural norms out of its ass and realize this is not the time for games and saving face. But by the same token my mind says, if people are terrified by the truth and don't have the decade of proper education required to fully understand radiation, how can you save nuclear power? Are a few little white lies really so bad in the scope of impending doom for humanity?

Huh, interesting

So that's what you sacrifice if you want to live in a beautiful country, an insulting and dangerous level of good PR.

But so many people don't want facts. They just want to be told who to be angry with.

Except it took 18 mins before he explained that there are only 3g of tritium in all the Fukushima water. And 3g doesnt really mean much to most people since a lot use oz and others dont know what oz or grams looks like. For comparison a 12oz (340g) can of coca cola original taste has 39g of sugar. A medium apple (182g) has 19g of sugar. "The water, 1.34 million tons, has been collected, filtered and stored" "How many gallons are in a ton of water? There are 239.65 US gallons in a US ton of water. For a metric ton of water, there will be 264.17 US gallons" "The average swimming pool takes 18,000-20,000 gallons of water to fill." The amount of water would probably be equivalent to 18000 pools. And at 4:49 he mentions that tritium has a half life of around 12.3 yrs. Except "Tritiated water has a biological half-life of 10 days, but in the body, a small amount binds to proteins, fat and carbohydrates with an average 40-day half-life." This is outside Kyles scope but another comparison "It is estimated that approximately 706 million gallons of waste oil enter the ocean every year, with over half coming from land drainage and waste disposal; for example, from the improper disposal of used motor oil. Offshore drilling and production operations and spills or leaks from ships or tankers typically contribute less than 8 percent of the total. The remainder comes from routine maintenance of ships (nearly 20 percent), hydrocarbon particles from onshore air pollution (about 13 percent), and natural seepage from the seafloor (over 8 percent)." This isnt suggesting that oil is bad and people need to stop using oil. Something would be needed to lubricate wheelchairs, make helmets and other protective gear, etc. Its just comparing one thing to another (and theres more oil in the ocean than radioactive material from nuclear plants. And the radioactive material decays while the oil doesnt)

@@MonkeyJedi99 you're absolutely correct, but hopefully, someday, those who care about the numbers and fact will prevail.

@@gill998 numbers could be fabricated though, do you think the numbers coming out from the chinese government regarding their disposal of nuclear waste is to be trusted? Not to mention they wont let independent researchers come to check with their own equipment & team.

MISTER NAGASAKIIII

He's one of the few creators out here actually giving objective takes while not being completely boring.

Hi! Below is my comment that replied to him, including some aspects that I think this video could be improved. I don't trust information I consumed either, so I've also got some doubts about this video... Thank you for your information! However, I've got some confusions about some of the contents in your video. In 'The Water' section, you put an image (3:16) about the operation of the nuclear plant, and I looked into it. There're two types of water in there and I cared which one was releasing out into the environment, and I saw it's the cooling water in the light blue colour. The image also in this section at 4:07 showed how TEPCO cooled down the reactor after the disaster, where water needed to continuously recirculated into the Primary Contaminated Vessel. This made me think that the cooling water normally released into the environment from the nuclear plant is different from the water that TEPCO is releasing, because cooling water does not flow into the Primary Contaminated Vessel, and that makes me think the water released by TEPCO contains much more radio active substances than cooling water. In your video I feel like the nature of these two waters are mixed up, just to confirm whether my understanding is correct? My second confusion is more simple, about you explaining the dilution, actually I think it's quite misleading. So I wonder, if I want to dilute 1L ink and used 1 ton of water, there's less ink in the diluted solution in one litre (1/1001 concentration), but now I have 1L + 1 ton of solution (1001L), even though 1L of this solution is much clearer, but now I have 1001L in total. In case of releasing treated water, it's the same concept, that it's gonna release 1001L in 30 years instead of release 1L concentrated water in 1 year. In your video explaining about dilution, not only it should consider the concentration, but the total amout as well; if the total amout doesn't change, it's just spending more time to release, but not reducing the amount of nuclear active substance nor radio activity. I generally don't support Japan of releasing the water (whether you call it trater water or contaminated water) into the ocean, because there's lack of transparency and shady acts (e.g. create mascot of Tritium; emphasize Tritium but disregard many more substances like C14 and Se137 that would cause more damage in the long run), and bad reputation of TEPCO that partially caused this disaster in the first place (not wanted to spend money to repair nuclear plant and build safety infrastructures). Also, the IAEA report is questionable as well, about its long disclaimer and the number/range of radio active substances tested. I'm really scared that the water released into the ocean was not as safe as TEPCO stated, but could do nothing about it. As a big influencer like you, please be even more cautious on the content you publish... It really does matter... If there's missing information that might mislead audiences, it would be disastrous...

@@QingxueQi you forget something. I am an average Internet user. I am not going to dig deep into scientific papers and official releases just to form an opinion. If you have your doubts... no problem. I uphold my opinion of him and the work he does

@@QingxueQithe "different" water you are thinking of was very likely already released into the atmosphere as a result of the 3 explosions. the water they are releasing is not the condensate, it is the water they have been using to cool down whats left of the reactors. your fundamental and almost intentional misunderstanding of the situation is not anyone's fault but your own. also your second "concern" is just... nonsense? you are just explaining dilution and saying it is misleading? yes, the amount of tritium being released will be added to the ocean. it is not being absorbed or magicked away. but it is quite literally a drop of water in the ocean.

Honestly,anything is correct,if you believe in it hard enough.Thats how we got religions lol

Unlike the water discharge from other countries, the water from fuckushima had actually in direct contact with the radiative substance, making it far far more dangerous

Hopefully, Japan would take the responsibility and opt for other options and stop dumping nuclear contaminated toxin into our ocean.

​@@KyleA-kq9sy Its not toxin my guy He grabbed a bunch with a bottle lol those anti 5 g pendents you get on amazon are more radioactive

a great science communicator

My fear though is that people who aren't well versed on the subject will watch this video and walk away thinking that Kyle is reluctant to endorse the dumping or that TEPCO isn't to be trusted, which would absolutely be the wrong thing to take away.

I agree, however I do wish that he would add numbers and relations to "safe" dose regulations for nuclear energy workers or the public, instead of very broad statements or stats related to a "dangerous dose". I feel like the type of people watching these videos would love the raw data comparisons to help understand better.

@@Tinil0 He clearly stated that the procedure is safe, and cited other sources on why, and honestly TEPCO is NOT to be trusted. It is trustable now, because it has the eyes of the government and the international organizations of control on its back, and they cannot behave like they did in the past, but they're not a trustable company in general.

@@gill998 Didnt he specify that there wasnt such a thing as a safe dose. Its a combination of time and intensity. If things were so dangerous then it will be right after an event happened and people wont be measuring intensity. Ex, the sun is safe if youre outside for 5 minutes but if you sunbathe for 12 hrs on a sunny cloudless day then the sun is dangerous and youll get radiation burns.

I'm surprised, I feel the opposite. I used to be neutral about it since I knew so little, but the more videos of his I watch, the more certain I am in my distrust of it. Not because of stereotypes of glowing toxic waste, but the real stories he tells of stuff like orphan sources and corporate mismanagement. No matter how 'safe' we think we can make nuclear power, it will always rely on humans not being greedy, lazy, and stupid. Which is to say, that's never going to happen.

I have experienced the same thing as you have.

​​@@StarxLolitaseems a little more like a fear of general radiological sources than nuclear power. Edit: To be fair though, corporate management never seems to come under much scrutiny. Not often than not it doesn't seem to result in consequences

​@@StarxLolita I don't distrust nuclear power, but I will always distrust human beings' ability to be mindful and to handle things appropriately. It is consistently shocking to me how often people will pick their own laziness over safety.

​@StarxLolita that will happen in all circumstances. The problem is greed, not which source we use. If people don't change their hearts, this will cycle through forever.

I would live to see someone knowledgeable on the subject present this comparison.

I would love to see that.

As someone who has been studying Japanese for years, it just sinks in that most people don't realize "dai-ichi" means "the first" (of sorts) and automatically implies there will at least be a "dai-ni" (the second).

Unlike the water discharge from other countries, the water from fuckushima had actually in direct contact with the radiative substance, making it far far more dangerous

Respect for keeping an open mind and not just focusing on the good parts. Few people like this anymore.

Are you staying on the bus?

Nuclear power has killed far less people that fossil fuels, Fukushima killed 1 person, oil and gas are responsible for 10s of thousands of deaths yearly. Most people don't realise that for several decades there have been over 400 nuclear power stations operating around the world without incident.

Nuclear power is dead, globally. The cost of capital is too high and interest rates are rising. Nobody wants to invest 20Billion to build a powerplant which may be finished in 20 years… or not. Where are all the strong proponents coming from lately, a dying industry spreading propaganda about its own greatness?

Kyle...? Any thoughts...🙂

_"this isn't just a matter of science"_ Thank you. This is a statement that we need to hear more often. Science is powerful, but the scope of what it can do on its own is relatively limited. To properly handle issues like the Fukushima wastewater plan, we need to be proficient not only in multiple fields of science, but in ethics, politics, and economics, as well. Too many people attempt to reduce debates over public policy to "the science" even when the most important aspect of the debate lies elsewhere.

I think it's fundamental to understand the science behind these kinds of events, but then you have to use that scientific knowledge to make an informed opinion, and for public communication this is too often overlooked

Can't agree more. S-Tier. Among the very best.

Get over it dude its not gonna change

@@sigmamale4147 unless we change it

@@darksouls_guy1656and we will & we are. Period. We don’t need a government who doesn’t care for their people. We need more people that care for their own & one another.

don't forget to boycott electricity.

​@@sigmamale4147what then?

Indeed. Nuclear could be a good source of power. Just hope Japan can manage to stop dumping nuclear contaminated waste into our ocean, making a level 7 disaster into a level indefinite disaster .

​@@KyleA-kq9sy most of it is tritum It emits beta particals it will be stopped by your skin

I know it’s not your language but if you have the time, and the curiosity, look on RU-vid for the “Avvocato dell’atomo”. They’re an Italian group of graduates in physics and engineers that are doing an amazing job of nuclear education with a tremendous amount of troubles. Italy is one of the most conservatory country about nuclear energy.

You can download books on lots of different topics on the internet. I'm confused.

@@elmojackson6621 sorry of course. I can learn about science, geology, history and all kinds of thinks if we decide to read a bunch of books related to them. But do you really think people would read about something they don’t have to study about? Like honestly as humans we can’t waste time on every little thing and these channels help summarizing information they are specialized and are ment to study about. So not surprised that most people around the world won’t just be downloading science books and actually read them all and come to a understandable conclusion.

@@susukiranThat doesn't mean the information is unavailable... Your post is irrelevant.

You should also watch Kyle's gaming live streams, to further your education.

Thanks for the nostalgia trip. I remember that as well 😁

@@DancingAngelOfSpira some of the best memories of school in my opinion! Lol

"Kyle doesn't need to hear all this. He's a highly-trained professional"

​@@hoovysimulator2518half life fans when they see someone say a scientific word about radioactive decay (its a reference to the famous valve game franchise)

Half-Life 3 when?

@@kngofbng did you just say the number that comes after two and before 4 ???? I'm sorry but Better hide, or start running, for *hes* coming for you

Did his dosimeter read higher or was the alarm point just set lower? I gathered that it was just a lower alarm set point, but I don't think he clarifies one way or another.

What I picked up from the video, was that they weren't told beforehand the radiation levels right at the reactor. And as such, when they were getting closer, he was surprised by the dosimeter going on high alert. But those levels are still completely safe to be there and tour people there as long as you follow the right procedures, it's just bad practice to provide only half of the truth (providing numbers for radiation levels further away from the reactor to make it seem safer). I don't think he clarified, if the dosimeter/Geiger counter on the bus was showing similar values.

That is the difference between a dose counter and a dose rate meter. One tells you roughly how long you were there and the other tells you how long you can be there.

China launched a massive propaganda campeign against it. No wonder its reaching a lot. Thing is, China are the ones releasing plant water that can actually do harm, and loads of it. You can't hide that kind of stuff. Unfortunately that only reached few people. The general public doesn't know about it.

The Pacific Ocean alone has 714 million cubic kilometers of water. I've seen a lot of scare stories along the lines of: 'Yoghurt found to contain xxxxxx, which is known to cause yyyyy" Take a sample of anything, anywhere and you have a good chance of finding same nasty that is known to cause some awful ailment or death. What such alarmist tales fail to mention is how much was found and how much before it starts hurting you. You might want to check out how many bug-parts and hair is allowed in a lot of dry goods like rice. We used to test for heavy metals in the paints that were used on pencils, the kind kids like to chew, adults also. The paint, delivered in large barrels (not unlike oil barrels in size) came as a powder. Even at maximum dose, you would have had to have eaten four of those barrels to even begin to be concerned.

I probably get more natural radiation from the Radon in the rocky mountains than I would were I to mess with the water at Fukushima.

You hope so .. We are relying on data coming from Tepco

@@danevans7460 What other data would you have us look at?

So how did I do

Well as always the worst part is 2 billion in India and china polluting the air which has no dilution, so here we are again, distracted from the real issue.

@@kylehill I think you did a good job. I shouldn't be surprised that TEPCO was communicating so poorly with people taking tours, but I was.

Radioactive water + ocean off Japanese coast = Godzilla. Sweet!!!!! Who doesn't love Godzilla?!

the same goes for gasses, for better or worse. as chemists say, the air is nature's bin

News outlets search the breaking news, not informative news. A sad reality build by humans, in past and present and in future.

Bruh, if one things for sure, NEVER LISTEN TO THE CHINESE NEWS! It’s all propaganda! Always fact check everything you see online 10 times or until no further factual information is out there! I think it’s fucking funny how everyone is concerned about this meanwhile China has many video proof of waste dumping into the ocean.

No. Everyone focused their attention on tritium, and it was not clear what other substances might have.

@@kanlu5199 The other isoptopes could be easily filtered out so theres wasnt a reason to worry about them

@@namename9998 "The other isoptopes could be easily filtered out": Source please.

No no no, its more like me peeing in the pool because my big brother also peed in the pool. Are we gonna get nitrogen poisoning? Probably not but are we swimming in our pee? Wait till China gets its tens of nuclear reactors up and says “well Japan did it so why not us”

Nationalism at play here. It's way worse on the Chinese media.

I live in Korea. I can confirm, many Koreans are quite fearful about it. Also, mamy specifically blame Biden for signing off on it.

why can't they just throw the nuclear waste to space?

​@@yeetboi268expensive

​@@yeetboi268 There is a video on exactly why we don't launch nuclear waste into orbits on RU-vid.

Same. Things aren't so scary and ominous when you have the facts and perspective in order

nuclear is way safer than other forms of energy, provided people follow guidelines and proper procedures, so that’s good!

@@Uberkilltoecheese not to misrepresent the severity of past nuclear disasters, but even when guidelines and proper procedures aren't followed, nuclear is still much safer than fossil fuels and even some renewables. While Fukushima was the 2nd largest nuclear disaster in history, and it caused significant psychological and economic damage to the Japanese people, it didn't actually cause any deaths directly. Compare that to disasters in coal mines, natural gas plants, or hydroelectric dams, where the death tolls of both regular operation and disastrous events are far, far greater than any nuclear accident. Even the death toll of Chernobyl, the worst nuclear disaster in history, pales in comparison to disasters in other industries that don't have the same negative stigma. Hydro dams have a far greater potential to cause catastrophic damage if improperly managed, and such accidents are more common than nuclear accidents as well. The Banqiao Dam failure of 1975 killed between 100,000 and 250,000 people and displaced millions more in a single event, yet hydro power is typically considered very safe by the public.

As a whole, nuclear energy is magnitudes safer than all other traditional energy industries. We're just so used to them and they're old enough we don't really talk about them. Tons of people die directly or indirectly through the burning of fossil fuels, not to mention potential global concerns. Compared to that, even with the few disasters we've had with nuclear it's almost nothing.

I would also like to know.

all the above have been ignored and only emphasize on what the TEPCO and Japanese PR trying to tell. and these videos are so called scientific analysis and report.

Also when he said they exposed them to an unnecessary amount of radiation near the plant. That really says something

Well, my hairs stood up while i heard the Story. Tepco don´t seem to have learned much. This Company does not deserve the benefit of doubt in my opinion.(In fact, companies like Tepco and their involvment in goverments are the main reason im not in favor of nuclear energy production.)

@@Quasimodo-mq8tw Before the incident, there are several scandals took place. Let alone back then, major shareholders are Blackrock and another US company

@@Quasimodo-mq8tw got a better solution? we could kill orders of magnitude more people burning fossil fuels. The safety of nuclear power is rivaled only by solar and wind (neither of which we can rely on for power until energy storage is figured out). I'm starting to think nuclear education should be a mandatory part of high school science classes. This fear of nuclear power does more than anything else to worsen climate change, and it's completely unfounded by facts.

I highly doubt there have been zero accidents . There have been nuclear subs that sank and are at the bottom of the ocean right now .

75 years is not a very long time but that is notable

@@wesleywyndam-pryce5305 I doubt it . There are always human error in any industry . Risk management is always based on incidents prior . There was a submarine that sank to the bottom of the ocean that is nuclear powered .

@richardwalker6004 Let me rephrase: 0 reactor accidents. The subs that have been lost in program history were not lost due to anything going wrong with the power plant. We operate nuclear plants in countries that don't practice nuclear energy themselves. Our allies trust our program so much they send some of their own service members through our program to better their's.

@@wesleywyndam-pryce5305 considering nuclear energy is only around 80 years old, the NNPP has existed nearly as long as we've been harnessing the atom and has been doing it with the best track record

Agreed 🤝

I think it's because YOU specifically are interested in this video, and it is presented well 🤌

The most efficient "green" energy and they ban it...wonder why? It's not about green energy...even though Germany is a huge proponent for the "climate crisis"

It's an incredibly depressing situation. Just shows how difficult it is to assuage peoples' fears of something they don't understand, or outright misunderstand, particularly when it's a topic that's so hard to explain in the first place.

the irony of replacing nuclear with a solution (coal) that puts far more radioactive material in the air is not lost.

Thank you for trying to help others make informed choices, not a lot of people would even bother.

Germany literally shot themself in the balls, and then wen around crying as to HOW COULD THIS HAVE HAPPEND. and all that right befor EVERYONE knew a major power crisis would happen with the just started Ukraine war.

By measuring it yourself

He measured it himself

Smuggle in a dosimeter.

Because if they bring in people to show that it is not dangerous and people die from radiation poisoning it would be a PR disaster, and thats one that they probably cannot afford.

.....you take a device that measures it???? He said that he did. I dont know if I'm misunderstanding your question......since he mentioned that.

One was reported by outside sources since it was found out by outside sources that butted in. The other left the very people that would be fired/arrested care for the cleanup and investigation. Like many other things in japan, their doctrine is to just bury any shameful past and try to divert eyes to nicer things

what dont we know about Fukushima?

@@namename9998 I think they meant that Chernobyl is very well known in the public conscious, to a greater degree than Fukushima

​@namename9998 the nasty "confusing" facts they're hiding because public image is paramount in Japan. We think of the Japanese people as more honorable or noble, but their execs are little different from any other ceo, shareholder or oligarch. They're going to minimize losses, maximize gains, and do everything they can to convince everyone they're the good guys. It's harder to believe they aren't cutting corners or fudging numbers.

@@WhiteWolf-lm7gj I guess. But they were 2 different events. Everything had been contained so what was there to know. And even if people knew about it would they understand whats being told. Like people hear cs-137 and think "Im going to die" except they dont know that "Caesium-137 has a number of practical uses. In small amounts, it is used to calibrate radiation-detection equipment.[10] In medicine, it is used in radiation therapy.[10] In industry, it is used in flow meters, thickness gauges,[10] moisture-density gauges (for density readings, with americium-241/beryllium providing the moisture reading),[11] and in gamma ray well logging devices." Its like when a plane carrying 200 people crashes and everyone dies the world notices but when a plane carrying 2 people crashes and everyone dies it doesnt get the same coverage. And people already knew the effects of radiation because of Chernobyl so there wasnt a need to panic over that.

I don't have problems with nuclear power but have great problem with Japan's nuclear contaminated water - and giving it a fanzy name Japan treated water.

Also, the brochure for the TCS-172 says it can detect X-Rays as well as Gamma, so these instruments (TCS-172 and older TCS-171) may be able to detect Tritium's Beta radiation indirectly via Bremsstrahlung X-rays Beta radiation generates. They may have chosen this low range X-ray sensitive instrument for the demo i.e. they knew what they were doing. See SKK Catalogue Radiation Measurement And RI Facilities. My scintillation detector is sensitive to Bremsstrahlung.

This is a very good addition to everything that I mentioned in the video, thank you. I can only say what I saw. In retrospect, yes, perhaps I took the wrong thing away from the treated water demo. But if I did, I'm guessing many others might as well

And of course, if I get something substantially wrong, please let me know. I didn't go on 20 tours!

Thanks, I definitely got the sense there was way more to the story than was being told here.

The point is not whether the water is safe. It really is still not safe because no one knows what will be the long term impact of releasing the water will be. How about the other radioactive nuclei that has far longer half-lives and also can be easily bioaccumulated? They are choosing this method to get rid of the water not because they are 99% sure it will be safe for the world. They chose this method because IT IS THE CHEAPEST. When you dealing with so many unknown factors, the wisest course is to take the safest way, to err on the side of caution. That's not what we are getting from TEPCO, or the Japanese government and the western backers. What we are getting is they want to cut corners and cheap out and not pay for their own mistakes, of which the first was not building adequate defenses for Fukushima Daiichi against such a tsunami. Because they also cheap out there too. They are cheaping out because that's what capitalists always do: find the cheapest way to get rid of problems and let society deal with the consequences. It is now obvious that the west and their allies cannot be trusted to do proper science and to be truthful. They are committing the same kind of fraud they accuse other non-western countries of committing. At this point, I don't believe anything coming out of western media or opinions. I don't believe a lick of what you said because you people are known to just outright lie for profits. You people always put profits above human lives and the environment. For all I know, the Geiger counter or the dosimeter can be tampered with, because if you people can wants to save billions of dollars, what's a little more than tampering with the equipment? If it is really so safe, why not let the Chinese and Russian scientists examine the water right at the site? Why not open it up to the people who have the most incentives to make sure the water is safe to release? You want me to trust the people who have the most incentives to dump water as it is? We are not morons. We don't trust you people. That is why I find them dumping the water into the ocean to be absolutely hypocritical and morally disgusting.

Pretty certain that this is exactly what the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) does.

From a press release: "IAEA experts are there on the ground to serve as the eyes of the international community and ensure that the discharge is being carried out as planned consistent with IAEA safety standards," said IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi. "Through our presence, we contribute to generating the necessary confidence that the process is carried out in a safe and transparent way."

@@autohmae Fact-check: The IAEA itself in the report clearly claimed that the report does not constitute any endorsement for the discharging plan, and clearly stated that the report is based on the samples and data directly provided by the tokyo Electric company, and we all know how reliable the jpnese companies are in terms of providing true and accurate data given the fact that they were caught lying to the public in regards to the severity of the catastrophe. Also, jpn doesn't allow other countries to do independent sampling and tests so they are forced to use data that only tepco provides. IAEA examines the data provided by jp/tepco, IAEA never collected any sample or data by themselves. IAEA said Japan ONLY request them to test two substances so they ONLY tested and were OK with those two substance. Another fact: jpn/tepco made a political donation in the millions of dollars to the IAEA just before they released their report.

@@blackbelt2000 that does NOT sound good. 😞

​@@blackbelt2000 well ain't that last bit fishy

It's a gift from me to you, all the way across the ocean.

Please enlighten me as to the usefulness of salt water

@@Someone-ry1nh Japan had on of their speaksman dringking a glass of treated nuclear polutated water, so it's clearly usable as normal drinking water and for public day to day use. They proved it themselvs, so i don't know what is your problem here.

@@jerryren748 You do realize that while desalination of a cup of sea water is relatively easy, that desalinating 1.2 millions tons of water is less easy right? And even then, literally every single nuclear power plant dumps tritium water into the nearest large body of water So why is this any different? Edit : the correct amount of water stored in the tanks is 1.25 million tons, not 500 000

@@Someone-ry1nh yes, but first, those were nuclear poluted water that their dunking into the ocean, not just normal cooling water that never made contact with radio active materials. Second dosen't matter how hard it is to treat all those water, it's Japan's problem, Japan is the only country that should be taking responsibilities for that, not the entire world.

Great analysis. Every point is valid and clear. Thank you. Japan dumping nuclear contaminated toxin into the ocean and in such quantity and duration effectuates an extremely serious threat to our ecological system. The long ranging damage cannot be measured or even imagined.

Excellent points. You have pinpointed it. This ALPS device was the First of its kind in the world and had no prior examples, related usage experience, or data to support it. Indeed even according to the very limited reports from TEPCO, the device had failed on so many occasions. And TEPCO had to use the device repeatedly to manipulate the outcome. The fact that there were no relevant experimental analysis reports on this device making Japan's safety claims very lacking. The effectiveness of the device rests solely on the unilateral statements from an entity who had turned the initially low category accident to the biggest radioactive disaster on planet earth.

Good observation. I finally watched the video. Now I can come to my own conclusion that Japan is twisting data about the safety of the ALPS process. Their reports says "The Multi-nuclide removal equipment (made by Toshiba/ALPS) utilizes the chemical and physical attributes of contaminated water to REDUCE the concentrations of 62 types of radioactive maters. " No doubt we can scientifically REDUCE the level of any chemical especially when you dilute it enough. Yet Japan public relationS claim that Toshiba/ALPS machine could "eliminate" ALL radioactive elements except tritium. Reduce and Eliminate are 2 different things.

You comment really help people to see how inadequate ALPS and IAEA reports are. Many people do not read long comments. If you can break down each point that would be great. Many people can learn from and comment on it. The majority of the comments here are blank comments without addressing the content of the video.

私は日本人です。あなたのコメントにいろいろ突っ込みどころはありますが、日本人はそんなこと言わないですよ。ただの偏見では？

I think this is it. Japanese hatred of nuclear energy has a lot to do with it being the cause of the two most shameful events in the last century of Japanese history.

Tbh nowadays I'm being skeptical when consuming information😅including this video...and I've got some confusions/doubts about the info hi's spreading... I replied him: Thank you for your information! However, I've got some confusions about some of the contents in your video. In 'The Water' section, you put an image (3:16) about the operation of the nuclear plant, and I looked into it. There're two types of water in there and I cared which one was releasing out into the environment, and I saw it's the cooling water in the light blue colour. The image also in this section at 4:07 showed how TEPCO cooled down the reactor after the disaster, where water needed to continuously recirculated into the Primary Contaminated Vessel. This made me think that the cooling water normally released into the environment from the nuclear plant is different from the water that TEPCO is releasing, because cooling water does not flow into the Primary Contaminated Vessel, and that makes me think the water released by TEPCO contains much more radio active substances than cooling water. In your video I feel like the nature of these two waters are mixed up, just to confirm whether my understanding is correct? My second confusion is more simple, about you explaining the dilution, actually I think it's quite misleading. So I wonder, if I want to dilute 1L ink and used 1 ton of water, there's less ink in the diluted solution in one litre (1/1001 concentration), but now I have 1L + 1 ton of solution (1001L), even though 1L of this solution is much clearer, but now I have 1001L in total. In case of releasing treated water, it's the same concept, that it's gonna release 1001L in 30 years instead of release 1L concentrated water in 1 year. In your video explaining about dilution, not only it should consider the concentration, but the total amout as well; if the total amout doesn't change, it's just spending more time to release, but not reducing the amount of nuclear active substance nor radio activity. I generally don't support Japan of releasing the water (whether you call it trater water or contaminated water) into the ocean, because there's lack of transparency and shady acts (e.g. create mascot of Tritium; emphasize Tritium but disregard many more substances like C14 and Se137 that would cause more damage in the long run), and bad reputation of TEPCO that partially caused this disaster in the first place (not wanted to spend money to repair nuclear plant and build safety infrastructures). Also, the IAEA report is questionable as well, about its long disclaimer and the number/range of radio active substances tested. I'm really scared that the water released into the ocean was not as safe as TEPCO stated, but could do nothing about it. As a big influencer like you, please be even more cautious on the content you publish... It really does matter... If there's missing information that might mislead audiences, it would be disastrous...

@@QingxueQi In the video, he said that they remove all the other radioactive isotopes except for tritium before releasing the water. As for the over time aspect, if you dumped a huge amount at once, it would take very long for it to get diluted into the rest of the water; it would be similar to dumping a liter of ink into a 1000L tank, where the ink would stay in a plume and take very long to disolve vs. putting the ink in one drop at a time. The overall end result would be the same, but dumping it would make a much higher local concentration for longer.

@@QingxueQi I think your conclusions are mistaken. First, the irradiated water coming out of the reactor is being scrubbed. That is a chemical/physical process that I don't understand. However, the amount of radiation in the water going into the process is irrelevant. What matters is how clean the water is coming out. That water is being monitored by international experts. We are not just taking Tepco's word for it. Think about like a sewage treatment plant. Sometimes the water is coming straight from sewage pipes and is very dirty but other times it is mixed with rainwater and is comparatively less dirty. Either way, it is not safe. However, after treatment, it is all equally clean. Your analogy of ink in water is somewhat accurate but you draw the wrong conclusion. If you have a bottle of ink, it will stain anything it touches black. If you dissolve that ink in a few cups of water, it will only stain certain things gray and may not stain others at all. Dissolve it in a litter of water and you might be able to see that the ink is there but it will stain nothing. Dissolve it in five litters of water and it is invisible and drinkable. In a swimming pool only sophisticated chemical analysis will reveal the ink was ever there at alll. The ocean is an inconceivably large body of water compared to the water being released by Tepco. It is not just sitting there forming a radioactive pool in the ocean. It will take 40 years to drain the tanks precisely so that never happens. Natural currents are carrying it away. Just as they would if you dumped a bottle of ink in the ocean and, if you added that ink drop by drop, you would never even see it. A single radioactive molecule is not dangerous by itself. Not even a dozen, or a thousand of them. Just like a drop of drizzle does not get you wet, or a thousand of them. It takes a raindrop to leave a wet spot and a thousand drops of rain to leave you "soaked." You are already exposed to radioactive particles all of the time every day. Adding a few more to our vast planetary system is unnoticeable.

@@brucetidwell7715 Except the water that's been filtered is NOT being monitored by international experts, the sole assurance we have is TEPCO has kindly provided some samples to IAEA. As anyone w/ a science/engineering/math background knows, results from improper sampling is meaningless, and is the frequent method to fudge data, and the reason for phony scientific reports. Literally the entire premise of this operation the ALPS system is big unknown, Japan, influencers and media likely getting a cut of the billions Japan is spending on PR is to focus on tritium, tritium tritium to distract the masses from the actual concern.

Good point, In US rivers are heavily polluted and there’s no backlash against

The fish of the coats of Alaska and Canada were harmed more from the Exxon-Valdez oil spill than all nuclear waste combined. Yet Alaska continues to pump oil. “Drill baby drill” will become “drill babies killed”

They arent worried about the microplastics tho

ALPS is effective for all but the tritium, so no difference.

Westerns need to recognize the "saving face" when they see it. "Saving Face" can often come with dangerous implications... such as having people stand around in front of a heavily radioactive site...

This is another attempt at misdirection. Tepco intentionally didn't test their filtered water for levels of carbon-14, strontium-90, iodine-129 and many other dangerous nuclides. Even IAEA stated in their report provided by Tepco that they neither recommend nor endorse Japan's decision to release the radioactive water.

​@@theuncomfortabletruth8348 何個もコピペ貼ってんのか？w ごくろーさんw 検査してないワケないだろうが 国連の傘下であるIAEAだって関わってんのに どこの情報だ？それ？ IAEAのサイトも見て確認してこいよ 情報統制されてるから見れないか？ww

Is this based on anything other than, "Well, I don't like it so it's probably like how I think it happened"

@@stansman5461 it’s based on governments continually lying to their own people to the point where we don’t know what is and isn’t true anymore.