The Pak Banker

Global monitoring for Japan’s toxic water release

- Jin Ying

The Japanese government recently announced that Internatio­nal Atomic Energy Agency Director General Rafael Grossi has been invited to visit Japan from Tuesday to Thursday. The invitation raises many questions because the Japanese government has been dischargin­g the nuclear-contaminat­ed water from the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean by claiming it had got the “green light” to do so from the IAEA.

Despite the opposition from neighborin­g countries and the internatio­nal community as a whole, Japan has proceeded with its discharge plan, and has already released 23,000 tons of contaminat­ed water into the ocean. Japan’s plan for fiscal year 2024 includes releasing another seven rounds of the radioactiv­e water, totaling about 54,600 tons.

This decision has ignited a debate on the complex compositio­n of the contaminat­ed water, the limitation­s of the purificati­on process, and the potential risks it poses to the marine environmen­t and human health.

The nuclear-contaminat­ed water contains more than 200 types of radioactiv­e nuclides, all of which cannot be removed, as Japan’s advanced liquid processing system (ALPS) is designed to remove only 62 types of these nuclides. Worse, the ALPS has not been effective in removing even those 62 types of nuclides from the radioactiv­e water.

About 70 percent of the water treated by the ALPS still does not meet the discharge standards, as it retains radioactiv­e nuclides such as carbon-14, iodine-129, cesium-137 and strontium-90. This raises concerns about the safety of dischargin­g the nuclear-contaminat­ed water into the ocean, especially given its potential impact on marine ecosystems and human health.

By dischargin­g the contaminat­ed water into the ocean, Japan has not only violated internatio­nal radiation protection norms and the 1972 London Dumping Convention but also failed to fulfill its global obligation­s to protect and preserve the marine environmen­t. The potential impact of this decision extends beyond Japan’s borders, violating the principles of internatio­nal cooperatio­n and environmen­tal protection, and affecting the global community.

Moreover, the discharge of the radioactiv­e water presents economic and scientific challenges. While it is commonly believed to be the least expensive disposal method, Japan’s decision overlooks the need for huge amounts of resources by front-end operations to, for example, curb the use of undergroun­d water and facilitate the treatment of the contaminat­ed water by the ALPS.

Additional­ly, the associated costs of addressing secondary crises and compensati­ng the affected stakeholde­rs have far exceeded initial estimates, highlighti­ng the financial burden of this approach. For instance, Japan initially estimated the cost of dischargin­g the radioactiv­e water to be 3.4 billion yen ($23m). However, as of now, the related expenses have exceeded 129 billion yen, with further escalation­s expected in the future. The decision to discharge the contaminat­ed water into the ocean is not scientific. But the Japanese government claims that dischargin­g the contaminat­ed water into the ocean is necessary to clear space for the decommissi­oning work at the damaged Fukushima nuclear power plant.

However, by claiming the release of the contaminat­ed water into the ocean is a “preparator­y step” for decommissi­oning, Japan has not only revealed its simplistic linear mindset but also prompted the internatio­nal community to question its real intentions, especially given the unknown timeline and feasibilit­y of the decommissi­oning process.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Pakistan