nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Do right by the whales

Beyond Nuclear International 6 Aug 23

No environmental study has ever been conducted of the impact of the North Atlantic right whales’ protected birthing waters being occupied by the massive Kings Bay naval station

Nuclear sub base expansion ignores precious species; missiles could destroy us all

Background: The U.S. Navy has released a Draft Environmental Assessment for the homeporting of the Columbia Class submarines at Naval Submarine Base (NSB) Kings Bay.

The Navy proposes to establish facilities and functions at NSB Kings Bay to support the homeporting of Columbia Class submarines as replacements for the retiring Ohio Class submarines currently homeported at NSB Kings Bay. Under the Proposed Action, the Navy would construct eight facilities, modify five facilities, and demolish three facilities across three locations on NSB Kings Bay. 

Facility changes and development activities would be phased over a period of five years and completed coincident to the first Columbia Class submarines in 2028. 

Nuclear Watch South has prepared comments opposing this development. The following article is drawn from their statement and comments recently submitted to the U.S. Navy.

Georgia’s 100 miles of Atlantic Ocean coastline is a globally unique, fertile, and fragile marshland environment of barrier islands, freshwater tidal forests, maritime forests, and endangered longleaf pine forest. Georgia’s vast salt marshes support a staggering diversity of plant and animal life nurturing the eggs and hatchlings of countless sea creatures and providing significant nesting and migration habitat for 200 bird species.

Kings Bay, near the Georgia-Florida state line, is home base for six Trident submarines and deploys 25% of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. A Trident submarine is the most expensive and deadly nuclear weapons system on Earth. The only other nation to possess a similarly powerful system is the United Kingdom, a longtime United States ally. The Trident has been controversial since its inception as it upsets the so-called MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) power balance, fueling a dangerous and costly international arms race.

The Navy conducted an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in 1977 when Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base was first proposed. The EIS was performed to fulfill environmental and public accountability requirements of the newly instituted National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) of 1969. 

In 1979, construction began on Kings Bay. In 1984, it was first discovered that the base had unwittingly intruded upon the (previously unknown and apparently only) birthing waters for the critically endangered North Atlantic right whales in the Cumberland Sound.

Kings Bay base began operations in 1989. The Soviet Union dissolved in 1991. At the same time, the U.S. nuclear weapons manufacturing complex, occupying vast reservations in more than a dozen states from Washington to South Carolina, was shuttering its reactors and facilities amidst revelations of widespread nuclear contamination and vast inventories of poorly managed radioactive wastes. 

The nuclear weapons complex suddenly and belatedly became subject to environmental law and NEPA has since proved to be a difficult filter through which to permit new nuclear weapons manufacture. 

For example, the U.S. Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security Agency have failed in five attempts over the past 30 years to establish a plutonium pit production facility at the Savannah River Site (SRS) on the South Carolina/Georgia state line.

Nuclear weapons manufacturing has languished since 1990 in all nuclear-armed nations and limited nuclear treaties have greatly reduced nuclear stockpiles. All nuclear testing ceased in 1992. Trident submarines now carry fewer nuclear weapons, but each Trident submarine currently can deploy the explosive power of 1,825 Hiroshimas.

In 2021, the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons entered into force, presently counting 68 nations as parties. The treaty begins by expressing the parties’ concern for “the catastrophic humanitarian consequences that would result from any use of nuclear weapons, and recognizing the consequent need to completely eliminate such weapons, which remains the only way to guarantee that nuclear weapons are never used again under any circumstances.”

This landmark, game-changing treaty sets forth as international law that it is illegal to “develop, test, produce, manufacture, otherwise acquire, possess or stockpile nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.”

The North Atlantic right whale population rebounded from near extinction when hunting the whales was outlawed in 1935. The whales encountered new hazards, however, with the industrialization of shipping and fishing. Ship strikes and entanglement in fishing gear are held responsible for mortality events which are now decimating the whale population. 

The current population of the critically endangered North Atlantic right whale has crashed to fewer than 350 animals. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) estimates 50 births per year are required to avoid extinction of these ancient, magnificent marine mammals. In 2022, only 15 North Atlantic right whales were born. 

No environmental study has ever been conducted of the impact of the North Atlantic right whales’ protected birthing waters being occupied by the massive Kings Bay naval station.

Despite the moribund state of nuclear weapons manufacture, in 2022, the U.S. spent $83,000 per minute on nuclear weapons. This budget includes items such as the redundant Columbia class submarine, which this environmental study narrowly contemplates. 

Earth’s inhabitants now face extreme dislocation from climate change in addition to living under the Damocles sword of nuclear annihilation for the previous three generations. Clearly, resources now squandered on nuclear weapons can be converted to the task of making the lifestyle changes required to retain our planet’s life-supporting atmosphere.

It is the pleasure and duty of the public to participate in important decisions as framed and codified by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. Nuclear Watch South lists here the pertinent portions of the Act upon which these comments rely.

Comments

An Environmental Assessment is inadequate. An Environmental Impact Statement should be performed…………………………………………………………………………….

Before 1984, it was unknown where the critically endangered North Atlantic right whales gave birth to their calves. Nuclear Watch South believes that the construction activities of the naval base forced the whales into open waters during a most vulnerable part of their life cycle, which led to the death of the baby calf discovered in 1982 and puts ongoing pressure upon the dwindling population of this critically endangered, protected species. Kings Bay’s presence must be counted among the human-created hazards driving the North Atlantic right whale to extinction.

The reasonably foreseeable impact of nuclear weapons is wholesale environmental destruction

NEPA requires analysis of all foreseeable impacts from the proposed activity. The environmental impact from use of the nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons system housed at Kings Bay must be contemplated in an EIS. It is the nature of the SSBN (Sub-Surface Ballistic Nuclear) program that it is capable of destroying the whole Earth. The whole Earth is stakeholder…………………………………………………

Kings Bay impacts on unique Georgia coastal environment are absent from EA and must be considered in an EIS 

Kings Bay is a complex and unique site with environmental impacts from 30 years of Kings Bay operation in the sensitive Georgia coastal eco-system. Kings Bay’s previous environmental impacts, some of which are highlighted below, must be included in an EIS……………………………………………………………….

The sound where whales have given birth for previous millennia is regularly dredged to accommodate the five-story Trident submarines. In addition, U.S. Navy sonar testing has been shown to harm sea turtles and marine life, including the large marine mammals, whales, and dolphins. The impacts of Kings Bay on the dwindling North Atlantic right whale population’s southern range must be considered in addition to its impacts on other sea-life……………………………………………………………..

We are at a cultural crossroads that requires contemplation of whether to continue planet-killing nuclear arms roulette or to denuclearize and end the Atomic Age to avert annihilation. The NEPA process provides for a public and transparent exploration of the “big picture” with respect to large projects. Indeed, NEPA was borne out of the previously unforeseen environmental misadventures of the military industrial complex and instituted as a method to avert disaster with experience and deep foresight.

An alternative to continued “business as usual” at Kings Bay would be to remove the submarine killing machines and nuclear weapons from this sensitive, fragile, and vital eco-system and instead maintain a presence of national defense in the coastal marsh with a Coast Guard base and marine wildlife sanctuary. 

This serves as a more benign project for our national defense that will also defend our wildlife and restore a healthy atmosphere to our planet.

Nuclear Watch South is a grassroots, statewide direct action environmental organization founded in 1977. Nuclear Watch South’s three-fold mission is 1) phase out nuclear power and promote conservation and sustainable energy sources such as wind and solar, 2) halt the proliferation of nuclear materials and abolish the global threat of nuclear weapons, and 3) promote the formation of ethical environmental policies for nuclear waste handling and containment.  https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2023/08/06/do-right-by-the-whales/

August 8, 2023 Posted by | oceans, USA | Leave a comment

Failed Fukushima System Should Cancel Wastewater Ocean Dumping

The global ban on ocean dumping of radioactive waste adopted in 1993 applies only to barrels. It has allowed Britain and France to pump billions of gallons of radioactive wastewater into the Irish Sea and the North Sea respectively, for decades.

BY JOHN LAFORGE, 25 July 23  https://www.counterpunch.org/2023/07/25/failed-fukushima-system-should-cancel-wastewater-ocean-dumping/

From the Fukushima-Daiichi triple-reactor meltdown wreckage, Japan’s government and “Tepco,” the owner, are rushing plans to pump 1.37 million tons (about 3 billion pounds) of radioactive wastewater into the Pacific.

Their record is poor. Their lies are documented. This is not safe, at all.

To keep the three meltdowns’ wasted fuel from melting again, Tepco continuously pours cold water over 880 tons of “corium,” the red-hot rubblized fuel amassed somewhere under three devastated reactors. “That water leaks into a maze of basements and trenches beneath the reactors and mixes with groundwater flowing into the complex,” Reuters reported Sep. 3, 2013.

Most of this water is collected and put through Tepco’s jerry-rigged mechanism dubbed ALPS, for Advanced Liquid Processing System, which it turns out hasn’t processed much of anything.

Tepco, Japan’s Nuclear Regulatory Authority, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and much of the media endlessly repeat that ALPS removes over 62 radioactive materials from the ever-expanding volume of wastewater. Reports regularly claim the planned dumping is routine, safe, and manageable.

This unverified PR loop has fooled a lot of people, but the ALPS is a fraud. As early as 2013, the filter system stalled and the IAEA reported that April that ALPS had not “accomplished the expected result of removing some radionuclides,” Reuters reported.

In September 2018, the ALPS was revealed to have drastically failed, forcing Tepco to issue a public apology and a promise to re-filter huge volumes of the waste.

According to Reuters, Oct. 11, 2018, documents on a government committee’s website show that 84 percent of water held at Fukushima contains concentrations of radioactive materials higher than legal limits allow to be dumped.

Among the deadly isotopes still in the waste are cesium-137, strontium-90, cobalt-60, ruthenium, carbon-14, tritium, iodine-129, plutonium isotopes, and more than 54 more.

In a June 14, 2023 op/ed for the China Daily, Shaun Burnie, the Senior Nuclear Specialist at Greenpeace East Asia, reported that the ALPS “has been a spectacular failure,” and noted:

“About 70 percent or 931,600 cubic meters of the wastewater needs to be processed again (and probably many more times) by the ALPS to bring the radioactive concentration levels below the regulatory limit for discharge. Tepco has succeeded in reducing the concentration levels of strontium, iodine, and plutonium in only 0.2 percent of the total volume of the wastewater, and it still requires further processing. But no secondary processing has taken place in the past nearly three years. Neither Tepco nor the Japanese government has said how many times the wastewater needs to be processed, how long it will take to do so, or whether the efforts will ever be successful. … none of these issues has been resolved.”

Tepco says it will re-filter more than 70 percent of the wastewater through ALPS again, a process that itself leaves massive amounts of highly radioactive sludge that must be kept out of the environment for centuries.

Hoping to slow the rush to dump, Professor Ryota Koyama from Fukushima University, said in an interview with China Media Group last May, “If the Japanese government or the Tokyo Electric Power Co. really wants to discharge contaminated water into the sea, they need to explain in more detail whether the nuclides have really been removed.”

International law governing state-sponsored or corporate pollution of the seven seas is relatively useless in challenging Tepco’s outrageous transfer of private industrial poison into the public commons. The global ban on ocean dumping of radioactive waste adopted in 1993 applies only to barrels. It has allowed Britain and France to pump billions of gallons of radioactive wastewater into the Irish Sea and the North Sea respectively, for decades.

July 27, 2023 Posted by | Fukushima continuing, oceans, wastes | Leave a comment

To the Pacific islands, the West’s support for Japan’s Fukushima nuclear waste ocean dumping is hypocrisy

Having been used for nuclear tests and dumping by the US and France, the Pacific islands deeply oppose Japan’s plan and see it as a ‘nuclear legacy’ issueThat the likes of Australia and the US support Japan’s plan just ups the region’s geopolitical stakes – and gives China a trump card

Kalinga Seneviratne, SCMP, 18 Jul 23

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director general Rafael Mariano Grossi, after travelling to Tokyo earlier this month to present a report endorsing Japan’s approach to discharging Fukushima’s treated nuclear waste water into the Pacific, has been trying to convince Japan’s sceptical Pacific neighbours of the authenticity of the report’s findings.

The IAEA, which has opened the door for Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco) to dump about 1.3 million tonnes of contaminated water into the Pacific Ocean, insists the controlled, gradual release would have a “negligible radiological impact on people and the environment”.

But the small island nations of the Pacific remain deeply concerned about Japan’s intention to dump nuclear waste into the ocean. They see this as not merely a nuclear safety issue but a “nuclear legacy issue” – the Pacific has been used as a nuclear weapon testing and dumping site since the end of the second world war………………….(Subscribers only) more https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3228154/pacific-islands-wests-support-japans-fukushima-nuclear-waste-ocean-dumping-hypocrisy

July 21, 2023 Posted by | OCEANIA, oceans, wastes | Leave a comment

Japan to Release 1.3 Million Tonnes of Water Used During Fukushima Nuclear Accident

The water used to cool damaged reactor cores from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident in March 2011.

David Krofcheck, The Wire 16 Jul 23

“…………………………………………This year the Japanese government plans to release 1.3 million tonnes of water – used to cool the damaged reactor cores from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident in March 2011 – into the Pacific Ocean

Between 2011-2013, approximately 300,000 tonnes of untreated wastewater had already flowed into the ocean off Fukushima. These first two years were the most dangerous time because long-lived heavy nuclei, like cesium-137, strontium-90 and shorter-lived iodine-131, from nuclear fission in the reactors ended up in the ocean.

Since 2013, the stored water has also accumulated flushed seawater goundwater which leaked into the three damaged reactor cores.

The big challenge is how to manage 1.3 million tonnes of unsafe radioactively-tainted water………………………………………………………………………….

“As Low As Reasonably Achievable” or ALARA – filtering out the nuclear fission nuclei from the stored wastewater may be the best that can be done. The ALARA approach to reduce nuclear fission nuclei released resulted in a 2013 effort to develop and employ an advanced liquid processing system, or ALPS. A series of filters was designed to remove 62 fission nuclei leaving both tritium and carbon-14 in the water.  It only partially worked.

 Potentially, this water could be run through more cycles of the ALPS before extra dilution and later release into the ocean.

The other 30% of treated water could also be diluted with seawater by factors of several hundred to one thousand and then released into the ocean. Any remaining tritium from the Fukushima reactor may find its way into the food chain as organically bound tritium via build-up in underwater plants and organisms.

The second option for managing the Fukushima water was to hold it on site in an ever-increasing number of tanks.

If the water is properly filtered to leave only tritium and carbon-14, then the natural decay of tritium can be used to reduce overall radioactivity.  Since the radioactive half-life of tritium is 12.4 years, holding the water in tanks for seven half-lives, about 85 years, would reduce the tritium content to less than 1% of its current value. This option leaves the carbon-14 which would still roughly have the same radioactivity due to its 5,730-year half-life.

However, storing a tremendous volume of water for an entire human lifespan has never been tried. Even more water and storage tanks would need to be added as decommissioning the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactor cores proceeds. This is problematic.

A third option was to evaporate the water on land near Fukushima.

A 1979 nuclear accident at Three Mile Island Nuclear Station in the United States resulted in a similar radioactive water storage problem. About 9,300 tonnes of tritiated water, about 140 times less than that currently held in the Fukushima storage tanks, was electrically evaporated over two years. The tritium was released into the atmosphere, resulting in a radiation dose to people in the surrounding area of about one-hundredth of the natural background radiation. 

Japan and TEPCO would need to deal with even larger amounts of water and tritium emitted into the atmosphere if the 30-year timeline for the reactor core clean-up is followed……………….. https://thewire.in/environment/japan-to-release-1-3-million-tonnes-of-water-used-during-fukushima-nuclear-accident

July 18, 2023 Posted by | Fukushima continuing, oceans, Reference | 1 Comment

UN report on Japan’s Fukushima water plans fails to placate opponents

“The concern is not over external exposure,” Burnie said. “It is internal exposure to organically bound tritium that is the problem – when it gets inside fish, seafood, and then humans. When tritium gets inside cells, it can do damage.

“Tepco and the Japanese government are making a conscious decision to increase marine pollution with radioactivity, and they have no idea where that will lead.”

While South Korea offers official support, China and other voices in region continue to express concerns over discharge from nuclear plant

Justin McCurry in Tokyo, 7 July 23  https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/07/un-report-on-japans-fukushima-water-plans-fails-to-placate-opponents

The publication this week of the UN nuclear watchdog’s positive assessment of Japanese plans to pump more than 1m tonnes of water from the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the ocean has failed to placate opponents.

China is fiercely opposed to the plans, despite a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) backing the scheme, while the support of the government of South Korea has failed to quell widespread public opposition to the idea in the country.

The government in Seoul said on Friday that it “respected the IAEA’s review of plans by Japan and the plant’s operator, Tokyo Electric Power (Tepco), to pump water from the plant into the Pacific over the next 30 to 40 years”.

The discharge would have “negligible consequences” for South Korea, it said in an attempt to win over a deeply sceptical public. The country’s ban on food and seafood products from the Fukushima region will remain in place, however.

But South Korea, whose conservative president, Yoon Suk Yeol, is attempting to mend diplomatic fences with Japan over the countries’ wartime legacy, is a lone voice of support in the region.

On the same day, China announced a ban on food imports from 10 of Japan’s prefectures over “safety concerns”, and said it would conduct stringent radiation tests on food from the rest of the country.

“The Japanese side still has many problems in the legitimacy of sea discharge, the reliability of purification equipment and the perfection of monitoring programmes,” Chinese customs said.

Japan’s top government spokesperson, Hirokazu Matsuno, responded to criticism of the plan by saying that Fukushima Daiichi would pump far less tritium into the ocean than Chinese and South Korean nuclear facilities.

Japan’s standard for the release of tritium, at below 22tn becquerels a year, is far stricter than that of its neighbours, Matsuno said.

According to Japan’s trade and industry ministry, the Yangjiang nuclear plant in China discharged about 112tn becquerels of tritium in 2021, while the Kori power station in South Korea released about 49tn becquerels.

That is unlikely to placate opponents in Fukushima, where fishing communities have warned the water discharge will undo more than a decade of work to repair the damage the meltdown inflicted on the reputation of the region’s seafood, which is subject to one of the world’s strictest radiation testing regimes.

“We here in Fukushima have done absolutely nothing wrong, so why do they have to mess up our ocean?” said Haruo Ono, a fisher in Shinchimachi, 34 miles north of Fukushima Daiichi. “The ocean doesn’t belong to only us humans – and it isn’t a rubbish tip.

“It’s been 12 years [since the meltdown] and fish prices are rising, so we were finally hoping to really get down to business. Now they’re talking about releasing the water and we’re going to have to go back to square one again. It’s unbearable.”

Fisheries cooperatives in three prefectures were due to submit a petition with 33,000 signatures on Friday expressing their opposition to the water discharge.

While their government has given Japan breathing room, many South Koreans remain sceptical of Tokyo’s safety assurances. Some are panic-buying salt amid contamination fears, while a Gallup poll conducted in June found 78% of South Koreans were either “very worried” or “somewhat worried” about potential harm to the marine environment.

“It’s much more difficult to make sales now, as customers are asking more questions as they worry a lot,” said Jin Wol-sun, a stallholder at Seoul’s Noryangjin market, where market officials carried out random radiation tests on seafood in an attempt to reassure shoppers.

Rafael Grossi, the head of the IAEA, conceded there had been a lack of unanimity among the IAEA scientists, who come from 11 countries, including China, involved in the safety review. One or two “may have expressed concerns” over the plan, he said in an interview with Reuters. “I heard that being said … but again, what we have published is scientifically impeccable.”

China’s state-run Global Times newspaper on Thursday said Liu Senlin, a Chinese expert in the IAEA’s technical working group, was disappointed with the “hasty” report and had said the input from experts was limited and only used for reference.

Other experts openly voiced concerns about the impact the discharge could have on marine and human life, and accused Tepco and the IAEA of cutting corners.

“We have repeatedly pointed out to Tepco and IAEA substantive concerns we have with Japan’s approach and flaws in their methodology,” said Ferenc Dalnoki-Veress, an adjunct professor at Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey in the US.

Dalnoki-Veress, a member of a panel of scientists that advised the Pacific Islands Forum, cited Tepco’s controlled tritium-exposure experiments on fish, which he said included only three species that were being fed on commercial fish pellets rather than exposed smaller fish, which would normally be their food source.

“We have repeatedly offered to help advise on how to conduct these experiments, but each time Tepco rejected them,” he said. “We take as proof that they are not truly interested in collecting relevant data that may demonstrate and confirm concerns regarding their present plans.”

The “dumping” of treated water into the ocean, he said, would cause potentially irreversible damage to the local fishing industry.

“When we think about the effect of radiation we can’t just think about the effect on the environment, we have to consider the effect on cultures, societies and peoples who suffer psychological effects, a sense of fear, and reputational damage. Trust has been broken, and it will be difficult to repair.”

Shaun Burnie, a senior nuclear specialist with Greenpeace who regularly visits Fukushima, said claims that tritium posed no risk to human health were “scientifically bankrupt”.

“The concern is not over external exposure,” Burnie said. “It is internal exposure to organically bound tritium that is the problem – when it gets inside fish, seafood, and then humans. When tritium gets inside cells, it can do damage.

“Tepco and the Japanese government are making a conscious decision to increase marine pollution with radioactivity, and they have no idea where that will lead.”

July 9, 2023 Posted by | Fukushima continuing, oceans | Leave a comment

Russian K-278 sub sank 30 years ago but continues to leak radiation

By Boyko Nikolov On Jul 7, 2023  https://bulgarianmilitary.com/2023/07/07/russian-k-278-sub-sank-30-years-ago-but-continues-to-leak-radiation/

Imagine a Russian nuclear submarine, resting at the bottom of the Arctic sea for over 30 years, still leaking radiation. It may sound like a plot from a sci-fi movie, but according to Norwegian researchers, this is indeed reality. 

For several years, a joint team of Russian and Norwegian scientists has been investigating this phenomenon. They found that the water around the K-278 Komsomolets submarine is 100,000 times more radioactive than uncontaminated water. The results of their research revealed in 2019, raise alarming questions about the potential short and long-term effects of radioactive water surrounding the vessel beneath the Barents Sea. 

An essay in The Drive from 2019 suggests that the submarine may now be actively leaking radiation. This could be from its reactor or a pair of nuclear-armed torpedoes, both having remained submerged in the Barents Sea for over three decades. 

The researchers collected samples from 5,500 feet below the sea surface, around 100 miles southwest of Norway’s Bear Island. This incident, and its potential long-term effects, highlight the importance of managing and disposing of radioactive material responsibly. This is even more crucial given the current geopolitical tensions between the US and Russia. 

The submarine, known as Soviet Project 685, is believed to be leaking radiation either from its reactor or from its nuclear-armed torpedoes. This leakage is likely due to the submarine’s prolonged stay at the bottom of the Barents Sea. 

The contaminated water was collected by the Egir 600, a Norwegian-designed remotely operated submersible. The research was carried out by Norway’s Institute of Marine Research and Norway’s University of Bergen. 

One of the samples showed a significantly elevated radiation level. While the findings were preliminary, researchers stressed the need for continued monitoring of the sunken submarine. The ongoing analysis likely examines the extent of potential contamination and its possible impact on wildlife, ships, and coastal regions. The currents, water flow, and concentrations of radioactive material were probably scrutinized to minimize damage and contamination. 

In conclusion, a plan was likely set in motion to mitigate the leakage of radioactive materials. Perhaps the nuclear-armed torpedoes were safely removed, or the contaminated materials were disposed of in a manner that would prevent any further leakage.

July 9, 2023 Posted by | oceans, radiation, Russia | Leave a comment

Japan claims that China and South Korea both pour radioactive waste-water , worse than Japan’s, into the oceans

Japan said Thursday that China and South Korea have both discharged liquid
waste containing high levels of tritium, a radioactive material, countering
Beijing’s criticism of Tokyo’s plan to release treated water from the
Fukushima nuclear power plant. Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirokazu Matsuno
also said Japan will explain to China “based on scientific perspectives”
the planned water discharge into the sea from the nuclear complex, crippled
by a devastating earthquake and ensuing tsunami in March 2011. Japan’s
standard for the release of tritium, at below 22 trillion becquerels per
year, is far stricter than that of other nations including its neighbors
China and South Korea, Matsuno, the top government spokesman, said at a
regular press conference.

In 2021, the Yangjiang nuclear plant in China
discharged around 112 trillion becquerels of tritium, while the Kori power
station in South Korea released about 49 trillion becquerels of the
radioactive material, Japan’s industry ministry said.

Japan Today 6th July 2023

https://japantoday.com/category/national/japan-says-china-s.-korea-released-water-with-high-levels-of-tritium

July 9, 2023 Posted by | China, oceans, radiation, South Korea | Leave a comment

Japanese regulator greenlights discharge of nuclear waste from Fukushima plant.

(Rafael Grossi – the consummate hypocrite)

Grossi, however, stressed that the report does not signify support for Japan’s decision to discharge the nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean.

‘IAEA’s conclusion largely limited, incomplete, fails to respond to international community’s concerns,’ says China

AA, Necva Taştan  |07.07.2023, ISTANBUL 

Japan’s nuclear regulator Friday approved the release of treated radioactive water from the crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant, thus allowing the country to begin discharge of the waste into the sea this summer.

The plant’s operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc., received certification from the Nuclear Regulation Authority of Japan after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) approved Japan’s water discharge plan through a comprehensive assessment, Tokyo-based Kyodo News reported.

Neighboring China has fiercely opposed the plan and on Friday imposed a ban on the import of seafood from Japan’s 10 regions.

However, the IAEA its two-year-long safety review report concluded the discharge of nuclear waste will have a “negligible” impact on people and the environment.

However, Beijing disagrees.

The report was submitted to Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida early this week by IAEA chief Rafael Grossi.

“The IAEA conclusion is largely limited and incomplete and failed to respond to the international community’s concerns over Japan’s plan to dump nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the ocean,” said Wang Wenbin, a spokesman for China’s Foreign Ministry, Beijing-based Global Times reported.

Grossi, however, stressed that the report does not signify support for Japan’s decision to discharge the nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean.

Wang said Grossi’s remarks that “one or two experts” of the IAEA team had concerns over the agency’s report on Japan’s nuclear waste, “once again prove the report was hastily released and failed to fully reflect views from experts who participated in the review.”……….

“China urges Japan not to take the report as the greenlight,” but suspend the dumping plan and dispose of the nuclear-contaminated wastewater in a responsible way, Wang added.

Grossi is now traveling to South Korea, New Zealand, and Cook Islands, which is the current chair of the Pacific Islands Forum, to “address concerns, hear views, clarify IAEA role” on Japan’s nuclear waste, the IAEA chief said on Twitter.

Japan’s water discharge plan, announced in April 2021, faced significant criticism from China, South Korea, North Korea, Taiwan, and international organizations, including the UN.

The US supported the proposal, following years of discussions on dealing with over 1 million tons of water stored at the Fukushima nuclear complex since the 2011 disaster.

Despite the pressure, Japan last month initiated the injection of seawater into a drainage tunnel at the damaged Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, marking the initial stage of releasing treated radioactive wastewater into the ocean.  https://www.aa.com.tr/en/asia-pacific/japanese-regulator-greenlights-discharge-of-nuclear-waste-from-fukushima-plant/2939518

July 8, 2023 Posted by | Fukushima continuing, oceans, wastes | Leave a comment

IAEA chief Rafael Grossi says he’s satisfied with Japan’s plans to release Fukushima wastewater

[Ed note. In this IAEA’s internal document the IAEA is seen coaching TEPCO about what to tell and what not tell to the public regarding the « treated » water to be soon discharged into the Pacific Ocean.

One thing that can be drawn from that document’s content is that the IAEA and TEPCO have no intention to be fully transparent about the radioactive contamination of the said « treated water », only the one to cushion insidiously the real facts to the public eyes.]

BY MARI YAMAGUCHI, July 5, 2023

FUTABA, Japan (AP) — The head of the U.N. atomic agency toured Japan’s tsunami-wrecked Fukushima nuclear power plant on Wednesday and said he is satisfied with still-contentious plans to release treated radioactive wastewater into the Pacific Ocean…………………………………

The wastewater release still faces opposition in and outside Japan.

Earlier Wednesday, Grossi met with local mayors and fishing association leaders and stressed that the IAEA will be present throughout the water discharge, which is expected to last decades, to ensure safety and address residents’ concerns. He said he inaugurated a permanent IAEA office at the plant, showing its long-term commitment.

The water discharge is not “some strange plan that has been devised only to be applied here, and sold to you,” Grossi said at the meeting in Iwaki, about 40 kilometers (25 miles) south of the plant. He said the method is certified by the IAEA and is followed around the world…………………….

Local fishing organizations have rejected the plan because they worry their reputation will be damaged even if their catch isn’t contaminated. It is also opposed by groups in South Korea, China and some Pacific Island nations due to safety concerns and political reasons.

Fukushima’s fisheries association adopted a resolution on June 30 reaffirming its rejection of the plan.

The fishery association chief, Tetsu Nozaki, urged government officials at Wednesday’s meeting “to remember that the treated water plan was pushed forward despite our opposition.”

Grossi is expected to also visit South Korea, New Zealand and the Cook Islands to ease concerns there. He said his intention is to explain what the IAEA, not Japan, is doing to ensure there is no problem.

In an effort to address concerns about fish and the marine environment, Grossi and Tomoaki Kobayakawa, president of the plant operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings, signed an agreement on a joint project to determine whether they are impacted by tritium, the only radionuclide officials say cannot be removed from the wastewater by treatment.

In South Korea, officials said in a briefing Wednesday that it’s highly unlikely that the released water will have dangerous levels of contamination. They said South Korea plans to tightly screen seafood imported from Japan and that there is no immediate plan to lift the country’s import ban on seafood from the Fukushima region.

Park Ku-yeon, first vice minister of South Korea’s Office for Government Policy Coordination, said Seoul plans to comment on the IAEA findings when it issues the results of the country’s own investigation into the potential effects of the water release, which he said will come soon.

China doubled down on its objections to the release in a statement late Tuesday, saying the IAEA report failed to reflect all views and accusing Japan of treating the Pacific Ocean as a sewer.

“We once again urge the Japanese side to stop its ocean discharge plan, and earnestly dispose of the nuclear-contaminated water in a science-based, safe and transparent manner. If Japan insists on going ahead with the plan, it will have to bear all the consequences arising from this,” the Chinese Foreign Ministry said.

Grossi said Wednesday he is aware of the Chinese position and takes any concern seriously. “China is a very important partner of the IAEA and we are in close contact,” he said………………….  https://apnews.com/article/japan-fukushima-radioactive-water-a4dcc4457c95f15ac7636fde4aca1df3
—

July 7, 2023 Posted by | Fukushima continuing, oceans, PERSONAL STORIES, politics international | Leave a comment

Fukushima: Anxiety and anger over Japan’s nuclear waste water plan

By Tessa Wong, Asia Digital Reporter, BBC News, 6 July 23

A controversial plan by Japan to release treated waste water from the Fukushima nuclear plant has sparked anxiety and anger at home and abroad.

Since the 2011 tsunami which severely damaged the plant, more than a million tonnes of treated waste water has accumulated there. Japan now wants to start discharging it into the Pacific Ocean.

The UN nuclear watchdog the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), has published a report endorsing Japan’s plan.

But since it was announced two years ago, the plan has been deeply controversial in Japan with local communities expressing concerns about contamination.

Fishing and seafood industry groups in Japan and the wider region have also voiced concerns about their livelihoods, as they fear consumers will avoid buying seafood.

And Tokyo’s neighbours are not happy either. China has been the most vocal, accusing Japan of treating the ocean as its “private sewer”. On Tuesday it criticised the IAEA report, saying its conclusions were “one-sided”.

So what is Japan’s plan and how exactly has it churned the waters?

What does Japan plan to do with the nuclear waste?

Since the disaster, power plant company Tepco has been pumping in water to cool down the Fukushima nuclear reactors’ fuel rods. This means every day the plant produces contaminated water, which is stored in massive tanks.

More than 1,000 tanks have been filled, and Japan says this is not a sustainable long-term solution. It wants to gradually release this water into the Pacific Ocean over the next 30 years, insisting it is safe to be discharged.

Releasing treated waste water into the ocean is a routine practice for nuclear plants – but given that this is the by-product of an accident, this is no ordinary nuclear waste.

Tepco filters the Fukushima water through its Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS), which reduces most radioactive substances to acceptable safety standards, apart from tritium and carbon-14……………………………………….

What do critics say?

UN-appointed human rights experts have opposed the plan, as have environmental activists. Greenpeace has released reports casting doubt on Tepco’s treatment process, alleging it does not go far enough in removing radioactive substances.

Critics say Japan should, for the time being, keep the treated water in the tanks. They argue this buys time to develop new processing technologies, and allow any remaining radioactivity to naturally reduce.

UN-appointed human rights experts have opposed the plan, as have environmental activists. Greenpeace has released reports casting doubt on Tepco’s treatment process, alleging it does not go far enough in removing radioactive substances.

Critics say Japan should, for the time being, keep the treated water in the tanks. They argue this buys time to develop new processing technologies, and allow any remaining radioactivity to naturally reduce.

There are also some scientists who are uncomfortable with the plan. They say it requires more studies on how it would affect the ocean bed and marine life.

“We’ve seen an inadequate radiological, ecological impact assessment that makes us very concerned that Japan would not only be unable to detect what’s getting into the water, sediment and organisms, but if it does, there is no recourse to remove it… there’s no way to get the genie back in the bottle,” marine biologist Robert Richmond, a professor with the University of Hawaii, told the BBC’s Newsday programme.

Tatsujiro Suzuki, a nuclear engineering professor from Nagasaki University’s Research Center for Nuclear Weapons Abolition, told the BBC the plan would “not necessarily lead to serious pollution or readily harm the public – if everything goes well”.

But given that Tepco failed to prevent the 2011 disaster, he remains concerned about a potential accidental release of contaminated water, he said.

What have Japan’s neighbours said?

China has demanded that Japan reaches an agreement with regional countries and international institutions before it releases the water.

Beijing has also accused Tokyo of violating “international moral and legal obligations”, and warned that if it proceeded with the plan, “it must bear all consequences”.

The two countries currently have a prickly relationship, with Japan’s recent military build-up and China’s provocative moves around Taiwan raising tensions.


Tokyo has engaged in talks with its neighbours, and hosted a South Korean team of experts on a tour of the Fukushima plant in May. But it is not certain how far it would commit to getting neighbouring countries’ approval before it goes ahead with the plan.

In contrast to China, Seoul – which has been keen to build ties with Japan – has soft-pedalled its concerns and on Tuesday it said it “respects” the IAEA’s findings.

But this approach has angered the South Korean public, 80% of whom are worried about the water release according to a recent poll.

“The government enforces a strong no-littering policy at sea… But now the government is not saying a word (to Japan) about the wastewater flowing into the ocean,” Park Hee-jun, a South Korean fisherman told BBC Korean.

“Some of the officials say we should remain quiet if we don’t want to make consumers even more anxious. I think that’s nonsense.”

Thousands have attended protests in Seoul calling for government action, as some shoppers fearing food supply disruptions have stockpiled salt and other necessities.

In response, South Korea’s parliament passed a resolution last week opposing the water release plan – though it is unclear what impact this would have on Japan’s decision. Officials are also launching “intense inspections” of seafood, and are sticking to an existing ban of Japanese seafood imports from regions around the Fukushima plant.

To assuage the public’s fears, prime minister Han Duck-soo said he would be willing to drink the Fukushima water to show it is safe, while one official said last week that only a small fraction of the discharge would end up in Korean waters.

Elsewhere in the region, several island nations have also expressed concerns with the Pacific Islands Forum regional group calling the plan another “major nuclear contamination disaster”.

How has Japan responded?

Japanese authorities and Tepco have sought to convince critics by explaining the science behind the treatment process, and they would continue to do so with “a high level of transparency”, promised prime minister Fumio Kishida on Tuesday.

In materials published on its foreign affairs ministry website, Japan also pointed out that other nuclear plants in the region – particularly those in China – discharge water with much higher levels of tritium. The BBC was able to verify some of these figures with publicly available data from Chinese nuclear plants.

But the biggest vindication may lie with the IAEA report, released by the agency’s chief Rafael Grossi while visiting Japan…………………………

On Tuesday, Mr Grossi said the plan would have a “negligible radiological impact on people and the environment”.

With the world’s nuclear watchdog giving its stamp of approval, Japan could start discharging the Fukushima water as early as August, according to some reports – setting the stage for an intensified showdown with its critics.

Additional reporting by Yuna Kim and Chika Nakayama.  https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-66106162

July 6, 2023 Posted by | Japan, oceans | Leave a comment

Fukushima: China calls for suspension of Japanese plan to release radioactive water into sea.

Guardian, 4 July 23

Comments come as IAEA boss visits Japan to deliver results of safety report on planned discharge of nuclear-contaminated water

China has called for the suspension of a Japanese plan to begin releasing radioactive water from the tsunami-wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant into the sea, ahead of a UN report that is expected to give its approval to the scheme.

Beijing denounced the plan as “extremely irresponsible” when it was announced in 2021 and reiterated its opposition on Tuesday, as International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief, Rafael Grossi, begins a four-day visit in which he is set to deliver the results of the body’s safety review.

Through its embassy in Japan, China said the IAEA’s report cannot be a “pass” for the water release and called for it to be suspended.

Last week a spokesperson for the country’s foreign ministry said Beijing urged Japan to “take seriously both international and domestic concerns, stop forcibly proceeding with its ocean discharge plan” and “subject itself to rigorous international oversight”.

……… Local Japanese fishing communities have also objected to the plan, saying it will destroy more than a decade of work rebuilding their industry, with consumers likely to shun their catch and send prices plummeting.

Japan has not specified a date for the water release, which would take place over 30 to 40 years pending the IAEA’s final review and official approval from the national nuclear regulatory body for Tokyo Electric Power (Tepco). The regulatory body’s final word could come as early as this week………………… https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/04/fukushima-china-calls-for-suspension-of-japanese-plan-to-release-radioactive-water-into-sea
—

July 5, 2023 Posted by | China, oceans | 2 Comments

International community cannot tolerate Japan’s nuclear-contaminated water dumping.

By Global Times, Jul 03, 2023 ,  https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202307/1293596.shtml

Japan is making final preparations for dumping nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the sea. According to local media reports, Japan’s nuclear regulator finished inspecting a newly completed system to release radioactive water from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant into the sea, presenting a posture that everything is ready. Rafael Mariano Grossi, director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), will visit Japan from Tuesday to Friday, and the IAEA’s final assessment report on Japan’s dumping plan will soon be released. Will Grossi’s attitude, or the IAEA’s final assessment, change Japan’s decision to dump wastewater into the sea? It seems unlikely.

In fact, the Japanese side officially approved the dumping plan as early as July 22 last year. Since then, it has been working intensively on implementing the plan. At the same time, it has been spending a lot of effort on public relations, never taking seriously of the strong concerns at home and abroad, and failing to conduct adequate and well-intentioned consultations with stakeholders. And the IAEA is being targeted by the Japanese side as a priority in networking. Although the organization cannot give Japan a “license” and a “talisman” for dumping nuclear-contaminated water into the sea, the Japanese side may make an issue of how the IAEA writes its assessment report and draws its conclusions.

We still urge the IAEA to uphold the principles of objectivity, professionalism and impartiality, develop an assessment report that can stand the test of science and history, and not endorse the Japanese side’s dumping plan. Tokyo’s calculation is to force the international community to accept that what’s done is done. Japan hopes that after resisting the pressure for some time, perhaps the international community’s attention will turn to other areas, and the opposition to dumping nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the sea will weaken. We cannot let such a scheme succeed.

Now we need to be particularly vigilant that some governments and the Japanese side have reached a political deal over the issue of the wastewater dumping plan, which is a colluded betrayal of the public interest of mankind and marine ecology. Washington was the first to give Tokyo the green light for geopolitical reasons and then persuaded its other allies. The South Korean government has also started to release ambiguous messages frequently despite strong opposition from the public. To dispel the public’s doubts, some lawmakers from the South Korean ruling party even went to the seafood market in groups to drink seawater from the breeding pond, and “even the fish in the pond found it ridiculous.” Some European governments have also relaxed their attitude over the issue.

There have been concerns, objections, and questions about the discharge of nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the sea from ASEAN countries, Pacific Island countries, and others including Japan. Although the US and Japanese governments have tried to marginalize such voices, they have never disappeared. China’s position as a major power is clear and has remained unchanged. The discharge of nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the sea is a matter of common interest for the international community, not a private matter for Japan. So China urges the Japanese side to stop pushing forward with the dumping plan, effectively dispose of the nuclear-contaminated water in a scientific, safe and transparent manner, and accept strict international supervision. This is a voice from a scientific and all-human perspective, which is justified and couldn’t be alone.

In order to promote the safety of seafood from Fukushima, the Japanese government once attempted to use Fukushima’s seafood in the meals of primary and secondary schools in the prefecture. However, all schools in Fukushima prefecture rejected this proposal. According to reports, content of Cs-137 in fish recently caught in the harbor of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant is 180 times that of the standard maximum stipulated in Japan’s food safety law, which is extremely alarming.

In this situation, claiming that the contaminated wastewater is safe is nothing but a lie. As officials from Pacific island countries have said, if the so-called “treated water” meets the standards and can be discharged, why doesn’t Japan use this contaminated wastewater in its own country, especially in its agricultural sector?

Japan does have other more appropriate choices. The Japanese government has considered five different treatment options, but it ultimately chose the cheapest and easiest one, which is to discharge the contaminated wastewater into the ocean. From a technical standpoint, this is the solution with the lowest economic cost to Japan, but it releases the highest amount of radioactive substances into the global environment. Japan is unwilling to spend money on safely treating the contaminated wastewater but is willing to invest in public relations. According to recent reports from South Korean media, Japanese officials made political donations worth over EUR 1 million to the staff of the IAEA Secretariat and there has been no response to this matter so far.

According to a German marine scientific research institute, with the world’s strongest currents along the coast of Fukushima, radioactive materials could spread to most of the Pacific Ocean within 57 days from the date of discharge. However, Japan has failed to provide a comprehensive and systematic monitoring plan for the disposal of nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the sea. The current monitoring scope is small, with few sampling points and low frequency, making it difficult to timely detect abnormal situations such as discharging pollutants in levels that exceed the stipulated standards. In short, Japan’s forceful disposal of nuclear-contaminated water into the sea is illegal and violates a series of international legal obligations, constituting a crime against all of humanity. China and the international community’s forces of justice stand together against such behavior and will never compromise or tolerate it.

July 3, 2023 Posted by | 2 WORLD, Fukushima continuing, oceans | Leave a comment

Is Fukushima wastewater release safe? What the science says

Radiation in the water will be diluted to almost-background levels, but some researchers are not sure this will be sufficient to mitigate the risks.

Bianca Nogrady Nature, 22 June 23

Despite concerns from several nations and international groups, Japan is pressing ahead with plans to release water contaminated by the 2011 meltdown of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean. Starting sometime this year and continuing for the next 30 years, Japan will slowly release treated water stored in tanks at the site into the ocean through a pipeline extending one kilometre from the coast. But just how safe is the water to the marine environment and humans across the Pacific region?

How is the water contaminated?

The power station exploded after a devastating earthquake and subsequent tsunami crippled the coastal plant, overheating the reactor cores. Since then, more than 1.3 million cubic metres of seawater have been sprayed onto the damaged cores to keep them from overheating, contaminating the water with 64 radioactive elements, known as radionuclides. Of greatest concern are those that could pose a threat to human health: carbon-14, iodine-131, caesium-137, strontium-90, cobalt-60 and hydrogen-3, also known as tritium.

Some of these radionuclides have a relatively short half-life and would already have decayed in the 12 years since the disaster. But others take longer to decay; carbon-14, for example, has a half-life of more than 5,000 years.

How are they treating the water?

The contaminated water has been collected, treated to reduce the radioactive content and stored in more than 1,000 stainless steel tanks at the site. …………………………

Will radioactivity concentrate in fish?

Nations such as South Korea have expressed concern that the treated water could have unexplored impacts on the ocean environment, and a delegation from the country visited the Fukushima site in May. Last year, the US National Association of Marine Laboratories in Herndon, Virginia, also voiced its opposition to the planned release, saying that there was “a lack of adequate and accurate scientific data supporting Japan’s assertion of safety”. The Philippine government has also called for Japan to reconsider releasing the water into the Pacific.

“Have the people promoting this going forward — ALPS treatment of the water and then release into the ocean — demonstrated to our satisfaction that it will be safe for ocean health and human health?” asks Robert Richmond, marine biologist at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. “The answer is ‘no’.”

Richmond is one of five scientists on a panel advising the Pacific Islands Forum, an intergovernmental organization made up of 18 Pacific nations including Australia, Fiji, Papua New Guinea and French Polynesia. The panel was convened to advise on whether the release of the treated water from Fukushima was safe both for the ocean and for those who depend on it. Richmond says they have reviewed all the data provided by TEPCO and the Japanese government, and visited the Fukushima site, but there are still some unanswered questions about tritium and carbon-14………………………………….

TEPCO says fishing is not routinely conducted in an area within 3 kilometres of where the pipeline will discharge the water. But Richmond is concerned the tritium could concentrate in the food web as larger organisms eat smaller contaminated ones. “The concept of dilution as the solution to pollution has demonstrably been shown to be false,” Richmond says. “The very chemistry of dilution is undercut by the biology of the ocean.”

Shigeyoshi Otosaka, an oceanographer and marine chemist at the Atmospheric and Ocean Research Institute of the University of Tokyo says that the organically bound form of tritium could accumulate in fish and marine organisms. He says international research is investigating the potential for such bioaccumulation of the radionuclides in marine life, and what has already happened in the waters around Fukushima after the accidental release of contaminated water during the tsunami. “I think it is important to evaluate the long-term environmental impact of these radionuclides,” Otosaka says……………………………….  https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-

June 25, 2023 Posted by | Japan, oceans, wastes | Leave a comment

Japan urged to halt release of toxic water

By Xu Weiwei in Hong Kong and Karl Wilson in Sydney, China Daily : 2023-06-19 

Impact of Fukushima nuclear plant discharge plan seen as catastrophic

Environmental and social experts from across Asia have called on Japan to refrain from contaminating the sea with radioactive wastewater after it began test running the equipment to discharge toxic water from a crippled nuclear power plant into the Pacific.

The nuclear-contaminated wastewater from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant will contain traces of tritium, a radioactive isotope, and possibly other radioactive traces such as carbon-14, scientists said.

“Nobody wants to dump (radioactive substances) into the ocean,” said David Krofcheck, senior lecturer in the faculty of science at the University of Auckland in New Zealand.

“We need to be aware of the difference between tritium and carbon-14, on one hand, and the radioactive fission products which tend to remain in the human body,” he said, adding that tritium could still enter the food chain throughout its buildup in underwater plants.

“This organically bound tritium still decays with a half-life of 12.3 years, and it stays in the human body for about 10 days, the biological half-life, before excretion.”

Instead of pumping the wastewater into the sea, Japan can dispose of it safely, Krofcheck said, offering an alternative for managing the Fukushima water: to hold it on site in an ever “growing number of water tanks”.


“If the water is properly filtered to leave only tritium and carbon-14, the natural decay of tritium can be used to reduce its radioactivity.

“Since the radioactive half-life of tritium is 12.3 years, holding the water in tanks for seven half-lives would reduce the tritium content to less than 1 percent of its current value.”

This option still leaves the carbon-14 that would still roughly have the same radioactivity because of its 5,730-year half-life, he said.

The potential impact of releasing treated radioactive water from the Fukushima plant into the ocean remains a subject of contention and concern among stakeholders, said Anjal Prakash, clinical associate professor (research) and research director of the Bharti Institute of Public Policy at the Indian School of Business in Hyderabad.

“The ocean release decision itself has sparked opposition, leading to ongoing debates on alternative water management strategies. The decision-making process weighs safety, public perception, regulations and potential impacts on industries and trade.”

While the Japanese government and the Tokyo Electric Power Company, operator of the crippled plant, say there is minimal risk, differing opinions persist, Prakash said, adding that factors such as ocean currents, distance, dilution and treatment efficacy will determine the impact on neighboring areas, including South Asia, Pacific Island countries, Australia, New Zealand and the rest of the world.

Long-term effects and bioaccumulation concerns remain, he said. “Evaluating the precise impact is complex, necessitating considerations of various factors and ongoing scientific research.”

Despite continuing opposition from domestic experts, civic groups and fishery organizations, Japan has been rushing to dump the nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean, which has also spurred protests from neighboring countries and communities within the Pacific Islands.

Firm opposition

In April the Fijian government reaffirmed its opposition to Japan’s plan to discharge nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the Pacific Ocean.

Fiji’s Deputy Prime Minister Manoa Kamikamica said earlier that the Pacific Ocean should not be seen as an easy and convenient dumping ground for unwanted and dangerous materials and waste that larger countries produce but do not want to use in their own ecosystem, local media reported.

“The social and economic impact of this irresponsible behavior is catastrophic, particularly on our vulnerable communities,” he said.

Environmental groups have argued that the move sets a bad precedent and poses a serious danger to Pacific communities that depend on the ocean for their livelihoods…………….

Many people are asking why, if the wastewater treated by Japan’s Advanced Liquid Processing System is so safe, Japanese are not using such water for alternative purposes, in manufacturing and agriculture for instance.

According to a report issued by Tokyo Electric Power Company on June 5, the radioactive elements in the marine fish caught in the harbor of the Fukushima plant far exceed safety levels for human consumption. In particular, the content of cesium-137, a radioactive element and a common byproduct in nuclear reactors, is said to be 180 times that of the standard maximum stipulated in Japan’s food safety law.

Kalinga Seneviratne, a visiting lecturer at the University of the South Pacific in Fiji, said: “The contamination will affect the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty (adopted in 1986) areas as well when it eventually flows there. Also, since fish stocks are migratory, contaminated fish could be caught within the treaty area.”…………………………. https://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202306/19/WS648f8421a31033ad3f7bce66.html

June 20, 2023 Posted by | ASIA, oceans, politics | 1 Comment

Macao SAR to suspend Japanese food import after nuclear-contaminated wastewater discharge

An official at the Municipal Affairs Bureau (IAM) of the Government of Macao Special Administrative Region (SAR) said on Tuesday that it will immediately suspend food import applications from Japan’s nine prefectures, if the country releases nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the sea.

O Lam, acting chairman of the IAM, said in an interview that import suspension will be expanded to the country’s nine “highest-risk prefectures,” including Tokyo Metropolis and Chiba prefectures.

Products to be suspended will include aquatic products, vegetables and fruits.

Fresh and live food imported from other prefectures may be asked to attach a certificate on radiation monitoring and pass inspection before entering Macao SAR, she added…………………………more https://news.cgtn.com/news/2023-06-13/Macao-to-suspend-Japanese-food-import-after-nuclear-wastewater-release-1kBLwicliP6/index.html

2

June 18, 2023 Posted by | China, oceans | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »