- By Tessa Wong
- Asia Digital Reporter, BBC News
2 hours ago
Image source: Getty Images
picture description,
South Korean activists have criticized Japan’s plan, saying it will pollute the ocean
A controversial plan by Japan to discharge treated wastewater from the Fukushima nuclear power plant has sparked concern and anger at home and abroad.
Since the 2011 tsunami, which severely damaged the plant, more than a million tons of treated wastewater have accumulated there. Japan now wants to start discharging it into the Pacific Ocean.
The UN’s nuclear regulator, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), has released a report supporting Japan’s plan.
But since it was announced two years ago, the plan has been hotly contested in Japan as local communities have raised concerns about contamination.
Fisheries and seafood industry groups in Japan and the wider region have also raised livelihood concerns amid fears consumers will avoid buying seafood.
And Tokyo’s neighbors aren’t happy either. China has been the loudest, accusing Japan of treating the sea as its “private sewer.” On Tuesday, she criticized the IAEA report, saying its conclusions were “one-sided”.
So what is Japan’s plan and how exactly did it stir up the waves?
What is Japan planning to do with nuclear waste?
Since the disaster, the power plant group Tepco has been pumping in water to cool the fuel rods in Fukushima’s nuclear reactors. This means that the plant produces contaminated water every day, which is stored in huge tanks.
More than 1,000 tanks have been filled, and Japan says it’s not a sustainable long-term solution. They want to gradually discharge this water into the Pacific Ocean over the next 30 years and insist the discharge is safe.
Discharging treated wastewater into the sea is a routine practice at nuclear power plants. However, since it is the by-product of an accident, it is not ordinary nuclear waste.
Tepco filters the Fukushima water through its Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS), which reduces most radioactive substances to acceptable safety standards, with the exception of tritium and carbon-14.
Tritium and carbon-14 are radioactive forms of hydrogen and carbon, respectively, and are difficult to separate from water. They are widespread in the natural environment, in water and even in humans, since they can form in the earth’s atmosphere and enter the water cycle.
Both emit very small amounts of radiation, but can pose a risk if consumed in large quantities.
The filtered water goes through another treatment and is then diluted with seawater to reduce the concentration of the remaining substances before it is released into the ocean. Tepco says its valve system ensures no undiluted wastewater is accidentally released.
The Japanese government says the final level of tritium – about 1,500 becquerels per liter – is much safer than the level required by regulators for nuclear waste management or by the World Health Organization for drinking water. Tepco has stated that the carbon 14 level would also meet the standards.
Tepco and the Japanese government have conducted studies to show that the discharged water poses little risk to humans and marine life.
Many scientists have also supported the plan. “The released water will be a drop in the ocean, both in terms of volume and radioactivity. There is no evidence that these extremely low levels of radioisotopes have any harmful health effects,” said Gerry Thomas, an expert in molecular pathology who has worked with Japanese scientists on radiation research and advised the IAEA on Fukushima reports.
video caption,
Fukushima fishermen concerned about nuclear water release plan
Human rights experts and environmental activists appointed by the United Nations have spoken out against the plan. Greenpeace has published reports raising doubts about Tepco’s treatment process, claiming that it does not go far enough in removing radioactive substances.
Critics say Japan should leave the treated water in the tanks for now. They argue that this buys time to develop new processing technologies and allows for the natural reduction of the remaining radioactivity.
There are also some scientists who are uncomfortable with the plan. They say more studies are needed into what impact it would have on the seabed and marine life.
“We have seen an inadequate radiological and ecological impact assessment, which makes us very concerned that not only will Japan not be able to detect what is entering the water, sediment and organisms, but that in this case it will “There’s no way to get the genie back in the bottle,” said University of Hawaii marine biologist Robert Richmond, on BBC Newsday.
Tatsujiro Suzuki, a professor of nuclear engineering at Nagasaki University’s Research Center for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons, told the BBC the plan “would not necessarily result in serious environmental pollution or harm the public slightly – if all goes well”.
However, since Tepco failed to prevent the 2011 disaster, it remains concerned about a possible accidental release of contaminated water, he said.
What did Japan’s neighbors say?
China has demanded that Japan reach an agreement with regional countries and international institutions before releasing the water.
Beijing also accused Tokyo of violating “international moral and legal obligations” and warned that it “must face all the consequences” if it goes ahead with the plan.
The two countries currently have an awkward relationship, with Japan’s recent military buildup and China’s provocative moves around Taiwan raising tensions.
Tokyo has held talks with its neighbors and invited a South Korean team of experts to tour the Fukushima plant in May. However, it is not certain to what extent it would commit to getting approval from neighboring countries before going ahead with the plan.
Unlike China, Seoul – which has been interested in forging ties with Japan – has pushed back its concerns, saying on Tuesday that it “respects” the IAEA’s findings.
However, this approach has angered the South Korean public, 80% of whom are concerned about the water release, according to a recent poll.
“The government is enforcing a strict policy to avoid littering at sea… But now the government isn’t saying a word (to Japan) about the sewage going into the ocean,” Park Hee-jun, a South Korean fisherman, told the BBC Korean.
“Some officials say we should remain silent if we don’t want to further confuse consumers. I think that’s nonsense.”
Thousands took part in protests in Seoul demanding government action as some shoppers stockpiled salt and other essentials for fear of food supply disruptions.
Image Credit: Chung Sung-Jun
picture description,
On Tuesday, activists in Seoul protested against the IAEA report and the Japanese and South Korean governments
In response, South Korea’s parliament passed a resolution last week opposing the water release plan – although it’s unclear how that would affect Japan’s decision. Officials are also introducing “intense inspections” of seafood and maintaining an existing ban on Japanese seafood imports from regions around the Fukushima plant.
To allay public fears, Premier Han Duck-soo said he was willing to drink Fukushima’s water to show it was safe, while an official said last week only a small portion of the sewage in would land in Korean waters.
Elsewhere in the region, several island nations have also raised concerns, with the Pacific Islands Forum regional group calling the plan another “major nuclear contamination disaster.”
How did Japan react?
Japanese authorities and Tepco have tried to persuade critics by explaining the science behind the treatment process, and they would continue to do so with “a high degree of transparency,” Prime Minister Fumio Kishida promised on Tuesday.
In materials published on the State Department’s website, Japan also pointed out that other nuclear power plants in the region — particularly in China — emit water with much higher levels of tritium. The BBC was able to verify some of these figures using publicly available data from Chinese nuclear power plants.
However, the greatest justification may come from the IAEA report published by IAEA chief Rafael Grossi during his visit to Japan.
The report, produced after a two-year investigation, concluded that Tepco and the Japanese authorities met international safety standards on several aspects, including facilities, inspection and enforcement, environmental monitoring and radioactivity assessments.
On Tuesday, Mr Grossi said the plan would have “negligible radiological impact on people and the environment”.
According to some reports, with approval from the world’s nuclear regulator, Japan could start draining Fukushima water as early as August – setting the stage for an intensified showdown with its critics.
Additional reporting by Yuna Kim and Chika Nakayama.