The first article addresses deliberate radiation contamination of the ocean, a type of pollution not addressed by the London Convention when it occurs from shore and is sanctioned by the domestic government:
Chris Busby. December 2, 2016. No to Bradwell's 'secret' radioactive discharges to the sea. The Ecologist. http://www.theecologist.org/campaigning/2988382/no_to_bradwells_secret_radioactive_discharges_to_the_sea.htmlThe second article is an academic analysis of the risks of nuclear power operations. I cannot get access to the article for some reason so here is the citation alone:
Magnox has applied to dissolve spent nuclear fuel canisters and release the liquid into the sea near Bradwell nuclear power station in Essex, writes Chris Busby. This will wash radioactivity onto mudflats in a populated area already suffering from excess cancers, however the publicly available documents ignore this key fact. We must make sure this dangerous application is refused.//
Magnox has decided to deal with the spent nuclear fuel canisters, made of Magnesium alloy, by dissolving them in concentrated nitric acid, neutralising the acid in caustic soda, and pumping the resultant mixture into the Blackwater at high tide.
The radioactive hazard arises not so much from the canisters themselves, as from residual particles, dust and other contamination remaining from the highly radioactive fuel elements they stored. So the discharges to the Blackwater will bear radioactive isotopes both in solution and as insoluble fine particles...
Philip Johnstone,Benjamin K. Sovacool, Gordon MacKerron,Andy Stirling (2016). Nuclear power: Serious risks Science 02 Dec 2016: Vol. 354, Issue 6316, pp. 1112 DOI: 10.1126/science.aal1777, http://science.sciencemag.org/content/354/6316/1112.1