From 1946 through 1993, thirteen countries used ocean disposal or ocean dumping as a method to dispose of nuclear/radioactive waste with an approximation of 200,000 tons sourcing mainly from the medical, research and nuclear industry.[1]
The waste materials included both liquids and solids housed in various containers, as well as reactor vessels, with and without spent or damaged nuclear fuel.[2] Since 1993, ocean disposal has been banned by international treaties. (London Convention (1972), Basel Convention, MARPOL 73/78). There has only been the disposal of low level radioactive waste (LLW) thus far in terms of ocean dumping as high level waste has been strictly prohibited.
"Ocean floor disposal" (or sub-seabed disposal)—a more deliberate method of delivering radioactive waste to the ocean floor and depositing it into the seabed—was studied by the United Kingdom and Sweden, but never implemented.[3]
Data are from IAEA-TECDOC-1105,[2] pages 3–4.
Data are from IAEA-TECDOC-1105.[2] Summary of pages 27–120:
Disposal projects attempted to locate ideal dumping sites based on depth, stability and currents, and to treat, solidify and contain the waste. However, some dumping only involved diluting the waste with surface water, or used containers that imploded at depth. Even containers that survived the pressure could physically decay over time.
The countries involved – listed in order of total contributions measured in TBq (TBq=1012 becquerel) – were the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, the United States, Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Japan, Sweden, Russia, New Zealand, Germany, Italy and South Korea. Together, they dumped a total of 85,100 TBq (85.1x1015 Bq) of radioactive waste at over 100 ocean sites, as measured in initial radioactivity at the time of dump.
For comparison:
| Country | dumped (unit TBq=1012 Bq） | period | num of sites, volume, etc.* | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arctic | Atlantic | Pacific | Total | ||||
| 38,369 | 0 | 874 | 39,243 | 1959–1992[11] | Arctic 20 sites, 222,000 m3 and reactor w or w/o spent fuel; Pacific Ocean (mainly sea of Japan) 12 sites, 145,000 m3 | ||
| 0 | 35,088 | 0 | 35,088 | 1948–82 | NE Atlantic 15 sites, unknown number of containers, 74,052 tons and 18 sites off coast of British isles more than 9.4 TBq | ||
| 0 | 4,419 | 0 | 4,419 | 1969–1982 | NE Atlantic 3 sites, 7,420 containers, 5,321 tons | ||
| 0 | 2,942 | 554 | 3,496 | 1946–70 | Mid/NW Atlantic (9), Gulf of Mexico (2) total 11 sites, 34,282 containers, unknown quantity; Mid/NE Pacific Ocean, total of 18 sites, 56,261 containers, ? tones | ||
| 0 | 2,120 | 0 | 2,120 | 1960–1982 | NE Atlantic 6 sites, 55,324 containers, 23,100 tons | ||
| 0 | 354 | 0 | 354 | 1967–1969 | NE Atlantic 2 sites, 46,396 containers, 14,300 tons | ||
| 0 | 336 | 0 | 336 | 1967–1982 | NE Atlantic 4 sites, 28,428 containers, 19,200 tons | ||
| 0 | 0 | 15.08 | 15.08 | 1955–1969 | South of Honshu, 6 sites 15 times, 3,031 containers, 606,000 m3 | ||
| 0 | 3.2 | 0 | 3.2 | 1959,61,69 | Baltic sea 1 site, 230 containers, 64 tons; NE Atlantic 1 site, 289.5 containers, 1,080 tons, | ||
| 0.7 | 0 | 2.1 | 2.8 | 1992–93 | Arctic 3,066 m3; Pacific Ocean 6,327 m3 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 1.04 | 1.04 | 1954–1976 | East coast of New Zealand, 4 sites, 9 containers, 0.62 m3 | ||
| 0 | 0.2 | 0 | 0.2 | 1967 | NE Atlantic 1 site once, 480 containers, 185 tons | ||
| 0 | 0.2 | 0 | 0.2 | 1969 | NE Atlantic 1 site, 100 containers, 45 tons | ||
| 0 | 0 | no data | 1968–1972 | Sea of Japan, 1 site 5 times?, 115 container, 45 tons | |||
| Total | 38,369 | 45,262 | 1,446 | 85,077 | Subtotal of all volume reported is 982,394 m3. | ||
| |||||||
Data are from IAEA-TECDOC-1105.[2]
| Waste type | Atlantic | Pacific Ocean | Arctic | total | note | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reactors with spent fuel | Nil | Nil | 36,876 | 36,876 | ||
| Reactors w/o fuel | 1,221 | 166 | 143 | 1,530 | ||
| Low level solid | 44,043 | 821 | 585 | 45,449 | ||
| Low level liquid | <0.001 | 459 | 765 | 1,223 | ||
| Total | 45,264 | 1445 | 38,369 | 85,078 |
Data are from IAEA-TECDOC-1105.[2] There are three dump sites in the Pacific Ocean.
Mainly at the east coast of Novaya Zemlya at Kara Sea and relatively small proportion at Barents Sea by the Soviet Union. Dumped at 20 sites from 1959 to 1992,[11] total of 222,000 m3 including reactors and spent fuel.
Dumping occurred from 1948 to 1982. The UK accounts for 78% of dumping in the Atlantic (35,088 TBq), followed by Switzerland (4,419 TBq), the United States (2,924 TBq) and Belgium (2,120 TBq). Sunken Soviet nuclear submarines are not included; see List of sunken nuclear submarines
There were 137,000 tonnes dumped by eight European countries. The United States reported neither tonnage nor volume for 34,282 containers.
The Soviet Union 874 TBq, US 554 TBq, Japan 606.2 Tonnes, New Zealand 1+ TBq. 751,000 m3 was dumped by Japan and the Soviet Union. The United States reported neither tonnage nor volume of 56,261 containers.
Dumping of contaminated water at the 2011 Fukushima nuclear accident (estimate 4,700–27,000 TBq) is not included.
The Soviet Union dumped 749 TBq. Japan dumped 15.1 TBq south of main island. South Korea dumped 45 tonnes (unknown radioactivity value).
Data are from IAEA-TECDOC-1105.[2]
Joint Russian-Norwegian expeditions (1992–94) collected samples from four dump sites. At immediate vicinity of waste containers, elevated levels of radionuclide were found, but had not contaminated the surrounding area.
Dumping was undertaken by UK, Switzerland, Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Sweden, Germany and Italy.IAEA had been studying since 1977. The report of 1996, by CRESP suggests measurable leakages of radioactive material, and, concluded that environmental impact is negligible.
These sites are monitored by the United States Environmental Protection Agency and US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. So far, no excess level of radionuclides was found in samples (sea water, sediments) collected in the area, except the sample taken at a location close to disposed packages that contained elevated levels of isotopes of caesium and plutonium.
The joint Japanese-Korean-Russian expedition (1994–95) concluded that contamination resulted mainly from global fallout. The USSR dumped waste in the Sea of Japan. Japan dumped waste south of the main island.
The first conversations surrounding dumping radioactive waste into the ocean began in 1958 at the United Nations Law of the Sea Conference (UNCLOS).[12] The conference resulted in an agreement that all states should actively try to prevent radioactive waste pollution in the sea and follow any international guidelines regarding the issue. The UNCLOS also instigated research into the issues radioactive waste dumping caused.
However, by the late 1960s to early 1970s, millions of tons of waste were still being dumped into the ocean annually.[13] By this time, governments began to realize the severe impacts of marine pollution, which led to one of the first international policies regarding ocean dumping in 1972 – the London Convention. The London Convention's main goals were to effectively control sources of marine pollution and take the proper steps to prevent it from happening, mainly accomplishing this by banning specific substances from being dumped in the ocean.[14] The most recent version of the London Convention now bans all materials from marine dumping, except a thoroughly researched list of certain wastes. It also prohibits waste from being exported to other countries for disposal, as well as incinerating waste in the ocean. While smaller organizations like the Nuclear Energy Agency of the European Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development have produced similar regulations, the London Convention remains the central international figure of radioactive waste policies.
Although there are many existing regulations that ban ocean dumping, it is still a prevalent issue. Different countries enforce the ban on radioactive waste dumping on different levels, resulting in an inconsistent implementation of the agreed upon policies. Because of these discrepancies, it is hard to judge the effectiveness of international regulations like the London Convention.