Dosis sola facit venenum.

Do you have any education about radiation hazards and how to interpret them? You're acting like an expert yet failing to respond to the points at all.

You're arguing dishonestly and cherrypicking a tiny part instead of responding to the actual point - the total radiation dose. Do you know that you have quite a lot of radioactive potassium in your body? Tiny amounts are completely negligible and their effect is included in the radiation dose calculations. That's why I posted them. The target release level is below the food safety maximums set by the WHO, even if you drank the released water without further dilution.

Even in the worst case the effect is miniscule. Ffs, learn a thing about radiation and the units used to determine exposition.

>The latest committed effective dose coefficient of tritium incorporated into the body via the oral route in adults is 1.9 × 10−8 mSv/Bq for the soluble form, and that of the biogenic form is 5.1 × 10−8 mSv/Bq

this is already that worst case. And it's as minor as it gets. Do you think everybody knowing anything about radiation at all is an utter moron?

I'm sick of people who don't know anything trying to act educated but failing to grasp the most basic things.

And, again - this discharge is already being done and confirmed harmless.

Respond to my individual points please and stop the cherrypicking. It's obvious and dishonest.

You are deliberately trying to make it sound dangerous while conveniently ignoring actual radiation doses.

And, again, it's 2.2g of tritium. In france alone about 30g are released every year and there is no evidence of any damage at all.

>The latest committed effective dose coefficient of tritium incorporated into the body via the oral route in adults is 1.9 × 10^−8 mSv/Bq for the soluble form, and that of the biogenic form is 5.1 × 10^−8 mSv/Bq. Source

>wastewater will be diluted from hundreds of thousands of Bq per liter of tritium in the storage tanks to 1,500 Bq per liter in discharge water. [...] The maximum estimated dose from Fukushima's discharged water will be 3.9 microsieverts per year. This is much lower than the 2,400 microsieverts people receive from natural radiation on average each year. source

>As of April 2021, total amount of tritium stored in Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant is about 860 terabecquerels (TBq). In comparison to the discharge of tritium from nuclear facilities across the world, see the table below. In 2018, La Hague reprocessing plant in France discharged 11,460 TBq of tritium, which is more than 13 times the total amount of tritium stored in Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant.[57] From 2010 to 2020, nuclear power plants in South Korea discharged a total of 4,362 TBq of tritium, which is more than 5 times the total amount of tritium stored in Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. Source

Of course. But what's meant with "considered" is not about thoughts of those individuals, it's about their actions within the government.

A decision in a government isn't reached by thinking a bit. There are many, many processes to be followed, reports to be written, meetings to be organized. In this context "considering" means, those are already happening, but no consensus has apparently been reached yet.

After all, nobody can look into people's heads. At least not in a way that lets you see thoughts.

Governments aren't people.

In the context of a government, "considering" implies meetings on the topic, long documents being written, decisions being prepared, etc.

Nobody is talking about thoughts in the head of individuals. Imagining ongoing processes within a government as thoughts is a categorical mistake.

Tritium occurs naturally, just saying. There's always a tiny amount in your drinking water. It's such a weak beta-emitter, that there's almost no danger from it.

What's being released here, over 7 years, is a total of 2.2g. While the total emission into the seas is about 30-40 grams/year, without any issues so far.

Because of the short half life, there's also no reason to expect long-term accumulation.

It's tritium, which is practically rather harmless. And only ~2.2g of it. Even locally that's not going to have any serious impact.

La hague in france releases about 13 times that much, every year.

This is a complete non-issue.

Use the old reddit design via https://old.reddit.com , then you can set up filters on the subreddit via the side bar.

Something that only gets claimed by random people on the internet, but not by people actually familiar with the details.

This move is absolutely not unprecedented, no matter how often you guys claim it is. And thankfully, european legislators are aware of that.

To properly contextualize this comment:

It's a low-karma account active in russia-related threads, primarily being in a spiteful pro-russian position. They for example said:

>Great for you on the food mate, I couldn't care less. Most people in Europe will starve and freeze. Deserved imo.

No further engagement neccessary I guess.

I think you are conflating several points here.

I doubt anybody loves the veto - it's a terrible solution and a better one would be welcome.

The big problem here is: The EU works by essentially taking some sovereignity from its members. However, still pretty much everything the EU decides has to be codified into national law by the member countries. You need the active help of every involved country to truly get something passed.

That's why the veto is there - it's incredibly hard to get a sovereign country to put something into law which they didn't decide on.

The only real alternative would be something akin to a federalized state - but good luck getting countries to completely give away all their sovereignity.

The veto isn't there because it's great, it's there because nations like to decide things they codify into national law.

The EU is still an associaton of countries, not a giant single country.

And if poland wouldn't protect hungary, the veto wouldn't even be an issue. Just saying. It's poland's veto that is the problem, not hungary's.

Switzerland isn't in the EU.

Not true, seizing assets has been done for as long as there was money.

This is not a new concept, there's a reason the majority of countries have laws for that on the books already.

Are you trying to allude to something about that being weird?

Obviously those viruses get insanely bad during those times, that's when the birds in the northern hemisphere fly south during the winter.

Which is also why bird flu is so problematic, since birds are basically plane passengers.

Oil price is a very different thing and the pricing doesn't really have anything to do with reality. It's priced as high as the market can pay - no matter if a tanker goes down or not. Especially since they are typically similarly changed worldwide, which a tanker simply doesn't affect.

Oil is a disgusting example of what happens when international cartels have the power over a commodity.

Side note, regarding "what the market can pay": In germany, we're currently paying 1.75€ per liter. Something like 7€ per US gallon. That's what will arrive in your country at some point too, so better get ready now and change to an electric car and heating via heatpump if possible.

I really doubt this helps the CCP in any way. In english the stuff is still easily available, and chinese know very well how to get around the tricks their government uses. So not sure if this is impacting anything at all.

It really shows that the CCP is scared shitless of their citizens though.

I meant that more narrowly.

To my knowledge, the situation was that a massive amount of kurds helped cut down ISIS. Then, after the deed was done, they got abandoned.

I think the minimum here would have been to make sure the active fighters and their families are safe. That doesn't neccessarily include an own country, even offering refuge would have been at least something.

The overall politics in that area regarding statehood of minorities are completely fucked up, it's far too complicated and nuanced for me to understand even half of it. So not commenting on that.

Just to get a bit more detail into this, the germany-russia-thing is not really primarily based on cheap energy.

It's much, much deeper.

Don't forget, something like a third of germany was basically russia for half a century. The people in east germany were forced to learn russian, generally were culturally extremely close. And tons of pipelines and general trade relations were built during that time.

Additionally, a large share of the german populations are "(spät)aussiedler" - people from ex-soviet areas, culturally mostly russian, with german heritage.

They'd have been stupid to not utilize the connections back then. At least until crimea. I think that was the point when we should have started to shut it down completely - but sadly, merkel's cdu (merkel grew up in the east) wasn't having any of it.

Many of the current relations grew out of the east-german closeness. By far not all, west germany even received gas/oil during the cold war. But it got much more after 1989.

Does that excuse any of it, especially the support of russia after their annexation of crimea? Nope. I just think it's important to understand context and motivations, and a "cheap energy" just doesn't offer that.

> "We got bored with this war, so we'll pull the plug. I guess all you will just die. Goodbye and good luck".

Please don't act as if "the west" was a single bloc. Letting the kurds die was primarily a US-thing, heavily criticized by everybody else.

"The west" is something that only seems to be seen as a real thing by americans (who think everybody is culturally just like them) and those trying to build a "counter-west".

Well obviously, because a significant part of the world population remembers either directly or culturally what happened in the name of christianity and/or islam.

Here in germany for example we still have monuments and official holidays/festivities directly made after the 30-year-war 1648. We also still have towers standing where "witches" used to be imprisoned. And so much more.

This kind of living history is a thing in many parts of the world. Just because christianity got comparably tame in the last 100 years or so, doesn't mean that it doesn't count. The relative impotency of the christian churches in europe was paid for with blood. Lots and lots of blood.

Americans lack this kind of living history, because they don't really have any. But elsewhere this is quite normal to be in the cultural consciousness.

This is so reductive as to be quite useless I think.

The "holy" books are all highly problematic, no disagreement. However, all those books can be read in many, many different ways. There is no single "correct" interpretation - especially since those books contain so many consistency and logic issues, that a logically sound direct reading is pretty much impossible.

I think religion has to be kept on a short leash. But so directly labeling their books as terrorist just increases hate on all sides and leads to even deeper divides.

With enough education, the worst parts of religion will solve themselves, as we have seen in almost all highly educated regions except the US.

Until then, I'd recommend to be less... direct. Because a deeply antagonized group is closer knit and much harder to break into.