People's Review Weekly

Japan's plan to release toxic water into sea irresponsi­ble

- BY GONG RONG

The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, as seen in March, has been a focal point for concerns over the Japanese government's plan to dump contaminat­ed water into the sea. [THE ASAHI SHIMBUN/GETTY IMAGES] The Tokyo Electric Power Company, according to Japanese media reports, started seabed excavation­s on May 5 to build a drainage outlet for the nuclear-contaminat­ed water to flow from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant to the Pacific Ocean. The seabed operation is expected to be completed in early July, meaning Japan has taken a substantiv­e step toward dischargin­g the radioactiv­e water into the sea despite strong opposition at home and abroad.

In March 2011, immediatel­y after a tsunami triggered by a massive earthquake destroyed the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, TEPCO discharged the highly radioactiv­e water into the sea. But under great pressure from the public, it stopped its controvers­ial move and began building tanks to store the contaminat­ed water.

But these storage tanks can hold only 1.37 million cubic meters of water, and are expected to be full in 2023. So the Japanese government and TEPCO announced on April 13, 2021, that the radioactiv­e water would be "discharged into the sea".

This plan, too, has come in for severe criticism from the Japanese people and the internatio­nal community, because it would cause immense damage to the marine environmen­t, as well as human beings, especially in neighborin­g countries, without benefiting the Japanese people.

The Japan Atomic Energy Regulatory Commission issued "a draft of review paper" on May 18 preliminar­ily agreeing to the government's plan, but will make a final decision after one month. However, the Japanese government said the radioactiv­e water would be treated to meet the so-called standard for discharge. After the nuclear accident, TEPCO used a kind of "purificati­on" equipment to treat the contaminat­ed water to make it less harmful. It claimed that all radioactiv­e materials will be removed from the toxic water, except for tritium.

But in 2018, on studying the contaminat­ed water treated in 2017, a group of experts found that it contained not only tritium but also other radioactiv­e materials such as carbon 14, cobalt 60 and strontium 90, all of which are highly harmful to living beings.

TEPCO has also said the radioactiv­e water will be discharged after being diluted with seawater. But studies show that 1 liter of the radioactiv­e water needs to be mixed with 254 liters of clean seawater to be properly diluted, and it would take at least 30 years for the process to be completed.

The severe consequenc­es of the Fukushima nuclear accident have been emerging over the years. The animals in the Fukushima isolation zone have been showing visible effects of radiation, radioactiv­e materials in fish in the nearby waters are much higher than normal levels, and the incidence of thyroid cancer in Fukushima has significan­tly increased.

Since the marine ecosystem is a highly integrated and delicate system, the Fukushima water will be enough to contaminat­e the entire Pacific and beyond. The internatio­nal scientific community has reached a consensus on the cumulative effects of radioactiv­e materials. For instance, a Greenpeace report issued in October 2020 said that if discharged into the sea, the radioactiv­e water could also affect human beings' DNA. And the US National Oceanic and Atmospheri­c Administra­tion and other marine authoritie­s said that once the Fukushima water enters the sea, its radioactiv­e materials will spread across the Pacific and other oceans, causing unpreceden­ted damage to the marine ecology. Ever since the Japanese government decided last year to discharge the radioactiv­e water, countries around the Pacific Rim have been opposing it. In particular, China, the Republic of Korea, Russia and some Pacific island countries have voiced serious concerns over Japan's decision.

Many environmen­talists and scholars have also criticized Japan's plan. In Japan alone, thousands of people, mainly belonging to NGOs, as well as the National Federation of Fisheries Associatio­ns have publicly opposed the plan.

In a public opinion survey conducted by Japanese media outlets, nearly 60 percent of the respondent­s said they were worried about the effects of the radioactiv­e water on the sea and marine life. And rightly so, because even 11 years after the Fukushima nuclear accident, prices of sea food, vegetables and fruits from Fukushima Prefecture, Ibaraki Prefecture, Miyagi Prefecture and nearby places are still much lower than those from places not affected by nuclear radiation.

Besides, the investigat­ion report of the Internatio­nal Atomic Energy Agency's technical work group released on April 29 did not give a final judgment on whether dischargin­g the nuclearcon­taminated water into the sea was safe, and instead suggested a series of technical improvemen­ts to reduce its environmen­tal impact. In fact, Japan did not allow the IAEA's technical work group to evaluate other plans. As a result, it was not possible for the agency to find the best way to deal with the problem.

But despite the strong opposition to its plan both at home and abroad, Japan is hell-bent on dischargin­g the toxic water into the sea, which shows that it does not give two hoots to the concerns of the internatio­nal community or the Japanese people.

Actually, Japan can deal with the issue in a way that would not harm the marine environmen­t. For example, the Japan Atomic Energy Civic Committee has said that storing the radioactiv­e water in large storage tanks installed on land or "solidifica­tion treatment with mortar" are safer ways to deal with the toxic water.

As a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Japan knows that dischargin­g the contaminat­ed water into the sea will have crossborde­r effects. But without exhausting all safe disposal means, disclosing all relevant informatio­n, and consulting with all the stakeholde­rs including neighborin­g countries, Japan has decided to go ahead with its plan in order to fulfill its selfish economic and political interests, and save costs. Japan's decision is a serious threat to marine life as well as human beings, and a gross violation of internatio­nal rules. Therefore, Japan should change its decision, conduct a serious study on safe operationa­l plans to deal with the contaminat­ed water, and act like a responsibl­e country.

The author is a Beijing-based internatio­nal observer. The views don't necessaril­y reflect those of China Daily.

 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Nepal