[ransomnote]

From the comments:

Anonymous said...

So, let me get this clear. Extremely contaminated water you store in tanks that has a life span UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES of 5 years... Was it a sale or so? Get 4 tanks for the price of 3?
What was the plan behind this deciscion to use these tanks? Is there actually any plan or vision from Tepco?
I read that these huge tanks are filled in about 3 days and if you have to keep doing that for the next 40 years, you need 4800 of these tanks, with a life span of max 5 years... How is Tepco going to deal with that?

Why are these questions never asked ( by journalists ) to Tepco?
August 20, 2013 at 2:30 AM

[RS_Rider]

Any chance the water in these thanks is being recirculated through the area it is providing cooling to?

[Procyon]

We don't know what the half-life spans are of the isotopes because they are not identified. They talk about Beta-decay products (including nasty Strontium-90) of 80 million Bq/L which only gives the current decay rate and not any half-lifes. So I don't know the level of worry. How much of the decay is not Strontium-90?

I'm not clear on where this water came from and if it will be recirculated. I'm guessing (because it had to be desalinated) that this comes from the sea water that they drowned the reactor in as an emergency cooling measure. What was the total volume of sea water used to fill the reactor and containment vessel? We don't get the straight doper from TEPCO and are forced to rely upon the anti-nuke greenies or media sensationalists. Where do we go for unbiased expert opinion?