Japan’s Plan for Fukushima Wastewater Meets a Wall of Mistrust in Asia
The government in Tokyo says criticism of its intention to release treated water into the ocean is unscientific. South Korea has called the proposal “utterly intolerable.”
Part of a roughly 245-mile sea wall near the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. The structure is designed to protect against future tsunamis.Credit...James Whitlow Delano for The New York Times
By Ben Dooley and Makiko Inoue
April 13, 2021
阅读简体中文版閱讀繁體中文版
TOKYO — In late 2019, the Japanese government convened diplomats from 22 countries for a briefing on its handling of more than a million tons of wastewater from Fukushima’s crippled nuclear reactors.
Storage space was rapidly running out, the authorities explained, and they were considering several solutions. Among them was removing the most harmful radioactive material from the water and then gradually releasing it into the ocean. The diplomats raised no objections, the Japanese Foreign Ministry said.
On Tuesday, when Japan officially announced that it would put the plan into action, the knives came out. South Korea denounced it as “utterly intolerable” and summoned the Japanese ambassador. China cited “grave concerns.” Taiwan also raised strong objections.
Japan has dismissed criticism of its plan as unscientific, saying that the treated water is well within safety standards, and pointing out that such releases into oceans are routine around the world. But its argument, as the reaction on Tuesday showed, leaves Tokyo a long way from winning its neighbors’ trust, a challenge made all the more difficult by growing regional tensions on a range of issues.
ADVERTISEMENTContinue reading the main story
While the envoys in the 2019 meeting may have kept their thoughts to themselves, it is no secret that many countries have qualms about Japan’s handling of the nuclear disaster. China and South Korea are among 15 countries or regions that have banned or restricted food imports from Fukushima, despite the Japanese government’s abundant efforts to demonstrate that products from the area, from rice to fish, are safe to eat.
International advocacy groups, like Greenpeace, have also criticized the government’s decision, arguing that it is a cost-saving measure that ignores the potential environmental harms. The group advocates building additional storage facilities for the waste instead.
Even at home, the idea of pouring water, treated or not, from the crippled plant into the ocean is unpopular. In a national poll late last year by the Japanese daily The Asahi Shimbun, 55 percent of respondents opposed the plan.
It is even less welcome in Fukushima itself, where residents fear that the mere perception of risk will destroy the local fishing industry, which has been hoping for a rebound after a decade of self-imposed limits.
Editors’ Picks
Rising Debt, Falling Income: How to Dig Out
How Helen McCrory Shone, Even in a Haze of Mystery
‘The Free World’ Explains How Culture Heated Up During the Cold War
ADVERTISEMENTContinue reading the main story
In announcing its decision on Tuesday, the Japanese government said that it could no longer avoid the wastewater problem. Officials say they spent more than six years considering different options for the water — currently enough to fill 500 Olympic-size pools — before settling on the current plan.
Image
A demonstration in Seoul on Tuesday protesting Japan’s plan to release the treated nuclear wastewater into the ocean.Credit...Lee Jin-Man/Associated PressThe Fukushima plant holds more than 1.25 million tons of wastewater in more than 1,000 tanks. The process of cooling the three reactors damaged in the 2011 earthquake and tsunami generates more than 150 additional tons a day.
Under the plan, powerful filters will be used to remove all of the radioactive material from the water except for tritium, an isotope of hydrogen that experts say is not harmful to human health in small doses. Radiation levels in the resulting product, the government says, are lower than those found in drinking water. Japan intends to start releasing the water in 2023, in a process that is expected to take decades.
In an effort to ease minds at home, the authorities have placed dosimeters around the prefecture to monitor radiation levels and conduct routine screenings of seafood from the region. The government has held public hearings on the plan in Fukushima and in Tokyo.
The authorities say that they have also discussed the issue extensively with other countries and at international forums. In a news briefing on Tuesday, a Japanese official said that the country had held 108 group briefings for diplomats in Japan and had met with representatives from China and South Korea on the day of the announcement to explain the decision.
The United States came out in support of the plan. The International Atomic Energy Agency also endorsed it, saying in a statement that it was “in line with practice globally, even though the large amount of water at the Fukushima plant makes it a unique and complex case.”
The gap between such reassurances and the strident reactions closer to home was striking.
The outrage in the region is “quite understandable,” said Nanako Shimizu, an associate professor of international relations at Utsunomiya University in Japan who is opposed to the plan.
ADVERTISEMENTContinue reading the main story
“If South Korea or China announced the same thing, I’m sure that the Japanese government and the vast majority of the Japanese people would also object,” she said.
Image
Fish being prepared for screening for radioactivity at a lab inside a market in Iwaki, a coastal city in Fukushima Prefecture, in 2019.Credit...Ko Sasaki for The New York TimesGovernments in the region most likely feel domestic pressure to take a strong stance, said Eunjung Lim, an associate professor of international relations at Kongju National University in Gongju, South Korea, who specializes in Japan and South Korea.
Whether their worries are rational or not, many people in the region “are going to be very, very anxious about what would happen if this radioactive material came into our near seas and contaminated our resources,” she said.
Even under the best of circumstances, Japan would find it “really difficult to persuade its neighbors to accept this kind of decision, because obviously, it’s not our fault. It’s Japan’s fault, so why do we have to experience this kind of difficulty?” she added.
Regional tensions have made surrounding countries even less receptive to the plan. In recent years, territorial disputes and disagreements over trade and historical issues related to World War II have strained Japan’s relations with China and South Korea, with spillover effects on government dialogues across a broad range of issues.
China warned Japan on Tuesday against taking any decision without further consultation with the international community, saying that it “reserved the right to take further action.”
ADVERTISEMENTContinue reading the main story
In its statement, South Korea accused Japan of taking “unilateral action” without seeking consultation and understanding with South Korea, which “lies closest to Japan.”
Some in Japan believe that such complaints should be met with more than scientific arguments. Shunichi Tanaka, a former chairman of the Nuclear Regulation Authority, said that the criticism smacked of hypocrisy.
South Korea itself operates four heavy-water reactors that routinely discharge water containing tritium at higher levels than those planned in Fukushima, he said in a recent interview.
“When South Korea makes claims like this, we shouldn’t be quiet, we need to properly refute them,” he said.
Image
Fishing boats in Iwaki in 2019. The Japanese authorities conduct routine screenings of seafood from the region.Credit...Ko Sasaki for The New York TimesBut the challenge Japan faces is not just on the global stage. At home, many are reluctant to trust the government or Tepco, the nuclear plant’s operator.
A parliamentary commission found that the meltdowns had been the result of a lack of oversight and of collusion between the government, the plant’s owner and regulators. And Tepco was forced to retract assertions that it had treated most of the wastewater. In fact, it had completely processed only about one-fifth, a problem that arose from a failure to change filters in the decontamination system frequently enough.
ADVERTISEMENTContinue reading the main story
Ultimately, Japan is in a battle to alter perceptions, whether of the trustworthiness of its own government or of the risk posed by the treated water, said Hirohiko Fukushima, a professor at Chuo Gakuin University specializing in local governance issues.
In Fukushima, the government’s response to local concerns has often come across as highhanded, he said. Changing that view will require the authorities to improve transparency around their decisions and build new relationships, he said.
“From my perspective,” he added, “it’s probably difficult for Japan to convince foreign countries when it can’t even convince its own people.”
Choe Sang-Hun contributed reporting from Seoul. Albee Zhang contributed research from Shanghai.
The Fukushima Disaster
‘There’s No Town Left’: Fukushima’s Eerie Landscapes
March 10, 2021
Japan Wants to Dump Nuclear Plant’s Tainted Water. Fishermen Fear the Worst.
Dec. 23, 2019
Fukushima Wastewater Will Be Released Into the Ocean, Japan Says
April 12, 2021
Ben Dooley reports on Japan’s business and economy, with a special interest in social issues and the intersections between business and politics. @benjamindooley
Makiko Inoue covers news and features in Japan. She reported extensively from the Tohoku area hit by the earthquake and tsunami in 2011. Before joining The Times’s Tokyo bureau in 2002, she worked at the Tokyo bureau of The Los Angeles Times. @imakiky
When the Fukushima incident happened 11 years ago, the radioactivity measured along the Canadian and American Pacific coast was above acceptable level. The Japanese government, even after 11 years, says it is not finished with inspection and analysis of the incident; and that potential new pollution areas and future explosions cannot be ruled out. Japan is acting selfishly not wanting to pay the price of cleanup but to shift the costs to the world. It's a shame and a scandal that our government is putting politics above the health and interest of Americans. There should be congressional hearings with expert scientists testifying. Japan will not dump a single drop of that toxic water into the ocean until we have done our investigation and evaluation.
It is amazing this issue did not get major front page coverage on entire Anglo media. I read this news piece on the Chinese NYT front page, but it is nowhere on the nyt.com. The hypocrisy is astonishing all these media collectively decided this is not an important issue, we have to report it only because other major Asian countries expressed concern, not because it is a bad behavior. Just imagine if it is China does the same thing even with support of IAEA, what they would report.
I am sad to say that for once, the Chinese are correct. If this wastewater is indeed safer than drinking water, the Japanese Parliament and its friends should drink it up. If the water will indeed contain only tritium and none of the other radioactive waste, they would not even need to contemplate dumping all of it in the first place, as tritium's half-life is 12.3 years, and most of it would be decayed in 20-24 years. The Japanese already have 10 years' worth of storage tanks (if they hadn't been secretly dumping the water already), so they would merely need to build another 10-14 years' worth and there would be none of this diplomatic mess. But alas, just the fact that their government has been wanting to dump this water for years, shows that they are in reality unable to filter out all the other nuclear waste. They're just straight up lying. Remember that they had a MELTDOWN, just 10 years ago. And they do not allow independent agencies or foreign scientists into the radioactive zone. And no, they have not human evolution-level breakthroughs on how to clean up nuclear meltdowns in 10 years. They've lied to their neighbors and their own citizens before, and will continue to do so. This stuff that they want to dump is NOT merely tritium-laden water.
US Secretary of State publicly “thanked” japan for transparently deciding to dump nuclear waste water into the ocean. Japan is a monster and US is a hypocrite. US had been condoning genocides, injustice, and now environmental harm Japan had been inflicting in asia in the last century. Those genocide and mess far away may not have had direct consequence on Americans, but environmental pollution certainly will!
Where are our pro-environment and pro-human rights governments in the west? Imagine if China did what Japan has done since the disaster! Japan has never been fully transparent about what exactly happened at the sites of the worst nuclear disasters! We still don't know the full extent of the disaster! Why no international team is allowed to investigate and inspect? An international team of experts should decide if to approve the release of water!
Maybe Japanese parliamentary leaders should down a big glass of this “safe drinkable water” of treated radioactive stuff if they think it’s so safe? I am done with seafood as much as I love it. Feel sorry for fishermen and people who make living out of this They are shooting them selves in the foot- how short sighted can they be?! Not fooling anyone US should not be looking at this like it’s not our business! Water goes everywhere
This is the only argument you’ll ever need against building nukes.
Japanese government said "... the treated water is well within safety standards..." If that is the case, then why not use the "treated water" for Japan's own domestic usages such as planting rice, vegetables, and trees. It can also be used to flush the toilet, etc. The North Pacific Ocean current will carry the "treated water" and circulate clockwise to reach our California coasts. It could affect our fishery and other human related activities.
Sadly, scientists in the public sphere never took elementary classes in human psychology. Humans rarely, if ever, THINK, they feel. And then they rationalize their feelings with facts that justify their fears. This issue is circling the covid-19 vaccination program as well. Scientists keep thinking "oh, if we just show it's safe, people will take it", rather, it seems, they need to just keep doing it and let the facts themselves emerge. It's the familiar "do I ask permission or beg forgiveness problem"? By asking permission, they are implicitly creating doubt (if it wasn't dangerous, why do they need to ask and present so much data that could be questioned?) and doubt leads to fear. The fact that reactor operators have been putting waste water into the ocean for years without incident or protest would seem to argue for just doing it and not announcing it. To be clear 500 Olympic sized pools of water is much, much, much less than a proverbial "drop in the ocean". The oceans contain an estimated 1,450,000,000,000,000,000 tons of water; so this water is It is a molecule in the ocean, a microscopic bit, one part in a trillion. Undersea volcano eruptions likely pour more radioactive isotopes into the ocean hourly than they will a Fukushima.
Tritium is a beta emitter, producing weak radiation incapable of penetrating human skin or even 6mm of air. It is produced naturally in the atmosphere and is found in drinking water across the globe in higher amounts than what is proposed to be released in this plan. You would receive more radiation from eating a banana (from the potassium-40 it contains) than from drinking a glass of the water they plan to release. Fear not this sensible plan but instead the irrationality of your fellow humans that regularly and voluntarily pollute themselves with alcohol, cigarettes and sugar with consequences far worse for their bodies than any pollution they may be exposed to from sources outside their control.
2 REPLIES
@Dan But you don't eat 10 bananas a day. You consume more than 10 glasses of water every day!
The question is if the waste water - details of which have been kept shrouded in mystery by nuclear plant mafia in japan - is so safe like a banana, why don’t they just re-use the water for watering the soil or even grey water for sewers? Why are they trying to emit and dilute it out into the rest of the world?
First of all, we need to know exactly what are radioactive isotopes in the 1.2 million tons of Fukushima nuclear waste tanks that they plan to dump into the Pacific Ocean. Is Tepco willing to be honest and transparent about this? Isotope like carbon-14 takes about 5700 to decay. There's a thing call bioaccumulation. We, humans, are on the top of the food chain. We will be greatly affected. Countries like Russia, Canada, and the U.S. should be very concerned because they are on the down stream of the nuclear waste dump! People should pay attention to this. In great details!
Not enough technical information to fully understand the problems. Is the coolant water fresh or salt? Is it used for cooling a single time or is is recirculated numerous times and filtered? What is the actual radiation level of both the coolant water being stored and that of the ambient seas? Is evaporation currently being used to reduce coolant volume?
Some government officials had already bowed in front of the camera years ago. They appear to feel bad. What else do you want them to do? To solve the problem? To preserve the environment? Come on. /s
1 REPLY
No one has yet solved the problem of nuclear waste; and yet, there are always the demands for more nuke power plants as 'eco friendly' and non-polluting. Yeah, except for the nuclear waste. Which just goes on and on and on . . .
South Korea is correct on this one. There is NO way to safely contain Nuclear Waste. Zero. The fact that Plutonium is 100% lethal for over 250,000 years was known by scientists, and yet ... they allowed "nuclear power" to start up anyway. What to do ? Big barrels buried in salt mines ? What about earthquakes releasing plutonium into the ground water. Put it in a rocket and fire it into the Sun ?? Rockets do blow up on the launch pad sometimes. A bag of Plutonium the size of a loaf of bread is enough to kill every man woman and child in this Country. Japan is in a terrible spot, and, in truth has few to no options. They never should have built the Fukushima Plant in the first place. Good luck to all of the fish and folks living "downstream".
As usual Japan says that the water is within safety limits. If probed in depth and without bias the water will be proven to be dangerously radioactive. Alas the Oecan is always the scape goat on which we throw our misery. Japan, like any other country, is taking the path of least resistance, but the world must say no to Japan and make it a blueprint for future: Dont use the envornment as your garbage dump.
I didn't know that Greenpeace was against decommissioning nuclear power plants. Decommissioning NPPs is not possible without discharging tritiated water, even for plants that hadn't had accidents.
Completely missing in this report is the fact that tritium has a half-life of about 12 years or a decay rate of more than 5% per year. Thus, if they filter the water as indicated, the remaining water will decline in radioactivity relatively quickly.
Godzilla might be happy.
1 REPLY
@wch King Kong may not be happy with fighting a radioactive monster!
The Japanese have no plan, today its take thousands of tons of radiation laced water, filter it and dump into the sea. Within ten years they will stop collecting the water and just let it flow into the sea untreated, unfiltered and never ending. It started with the original, boneheaded design and location for the reactor, everything since is just the unavoidable consequences of that stupidity. The Japanese will shrug their collective shoulders and say "sorry". The corrupt dance between industry and government in Japan is a historical one. The suckers are the Japanese public who pay for it.
Imagine the headlines on all western media if China were to have an accident in one its nuclear power plants and decide to dump "safely treated" radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean.
"Under the plan, powerful filters will be used to remove all of the radioactive material from the water except for tritium, an isotope of hydrogen that experts say is not harmful to human health in small doses. Radiation levels in the resulting product, the government says, are lower than those found in drinking water." it is important to keep risks in scientific perspective. some fish and other seafood already have high levels of mercury and other industrial contaminants. mercury is especially neuro-toxic to fetuses and children, given small body sizes. drinking water in many countries already has various kinds of bacterial and/or industrial contaminants that can kill or sicken many in a year. radon is a naturally occurring form of radiation that can be poisionous. radiation from the sun can cause skin cancer. tobacco cigarettes have many carcinogens and other poisons that already kill or sicken millions each year worldwide. (want to smoke after a plate of sashimi?) it would be better to focus one's political energies and scientific research on these other sources of potential harm. also, scientists from taiwan, the philippines, indonesia and other countries are not quoted in the article. regardless, science is supposed to be an international and objectively verifiable source of knowledge, even though opinions can differ among specialists.
1 REPLY
@thomas bishop "it would be better to focus one's political energies and scientific research on these other sources of potential harm." In your opinion. Many, however, including a number in the scientific community, would beg to differ.
One might put this is a broader context. Humankind has dumped (and continues to dump) an almost unimaginable amount of plastic and other trash in the oceans, to say nothing of chemical waste. The extra CO2 in the atmosphere is changing the ph of the ocean, to the detriment of the mollusk population. And here we're talking about dumping a large quantity of water whose radionuclid content has been reduced to a small amount of tritium, something you'll find in the hands of a night-glow wristwatch. I'd certainly prefer that Japan took their water elsewhere, not that there's an "elsewhere" shy of more storage, but if we're concerned about what goes in the ocean there are other fish to fry.
3 REPLIES
That should not make dumping radioactive waste water into ocean Ok It’s not win for anyone including Japanese fishermen or the world This is simply abhorrent to the environment and oceans
@J I'll go with abhorrent if you'll acknowledge that what else we've done to the ocean is also abhorrent.
Trust? Although the entire history of the nuclear power generation of electricity has been tainted by constant creative lying and misrepresentation by every company and every government regulatory agency we should not overlook the same behavior by other electric generating industries, companies supplying the fossil fuels, and government regulators entrusted to protect the public - not profits.
The Country of Japan should not be allowed to do this. It threatens and harms all sea life as well as making it unsafe for humans. This is where the international community needs to step in. The Japanese do not have the right to dump radioactive material into a shared resource.
4 REPLIES
@macha You are totally right! only the US should have a right to spew contaminants into the world's air for decades (and still largest amount per capita). So rich coming from you guys, no words.
@macha but your summary is incorrect; it doesn't threaten sea life or humans. The water is _less_ radioactive than naturally occurring drinking water so tell us again what the issue is exactly? Other than "radiation BAD!"? You _do_ realize there is background radiation all around, right? And it's at a higher level than this water after filtration...?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.