Fukushima, the Hidden Side of the Story
“The Fukushima Disaster, The Hidden Side of the Story,” is a just-released film documentary, a powerful, moving, information-full film that is superbly made. Directed and edited by Philippe Carillo, it is among the strongest ever made on the deadly dangers of nuclear technology.
It begins with the words in 1961 of U.S. President John F. Kennedy: “Every man, woman and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles, hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable of being cut at any moment by an accident, or miscalculation or by madness.”
It then goes to the March 2011 disaster at the Fukushima Daichi nuclear power plants in Japan after they were struck by a tsunami. Their back-up diesel generators were kicked in but “did not run for long,” notes the documentary. That led to three of the six plants exploding—and there’s video of this—“releasing an unpreceded amount of nuclear radiation into the air.”
“Fukushima is the world’s largest ever industrial catastrophe,” says Professor John Keane of the University of Sydney in Australia. He says there was no emergency plan and, as to the owner of Fukushima, Tokyo Electric Power Company, with the accident its CEO “for five nights and days…locked himself inside his office.”
Meanwhile, from TEPCO, there was “only good news” with two Japanese government agencies also “involved in the cover-up”—the Nuclear Industry Safety Agency and Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry.
“Japanese media was ordered to censor information. The Japanese government failed to protect its people,” the documentary relates.
Yumi Kikuchi of Fukushima, since a leader of the Fukushima Kids Project, recalls: “On TV, they said that ‘it’s under control’ and they kept saying that for two months. The nuclear power plant had already melted and even exploded but they never admitted the meltdown until May. So, people in Fukushima during that time were severely exposed to radiation.”
Arnie Gundersen, a nuclear engineer and now a principal of Fairewinds Energy Education in Burlington, Vermont, speaks of being told by Naoto Kan, the prime minister of Japan at the time of the accident, that “our existence as a sovereign nation was at stake because of the disaster at Fukushima Daichi.”
Kan then appears in documentary and speaks of “manmade” links to the disaster.
The documentary tells how Kan, following the accident, became “an advocate against nuclear power….ordered all nuclear power plants in Japan to shut down for safety” and for the nation “to move into renewable energy.”
But, subsequently, “a nuclear advocate,” Shinzo Abe, became Japan’s prime minister.
Yoichi Shimatsu, a former Japan Times journalist, appears in the film and speaks of “the cruelty, the cynicism of this government.” He speaks of how in the accident’s aftermath, “nearly every member of Parliament and leaders of the major political parties” along with corporate executives, “moved their relatives out of Japan”
He says “Shanghai is the largest Japanese community outside Japan now…while these same people” had been “telling the people of Fukushima go home, 10 kilometers from Fukushima, go home it’s safe, while their families are overseas in Los Angeles, in Paris, in London and in Shanghai.”
“If it’s safe, why they left?” asks Kikuchi. “They tell us it’s safe to live in Fukushima, and to eat Fukushima food to support Fukushima people. There’s a campaign by Japanese government…and people believe it.”
Gundersen says: “At Fukushima Daichi, the world is already seeing deaths from cancer related to the disaster…There’ll be many more over time.” He adds that there’s been a “huge increase in thyroid cancer in the surrounding population.”
“Unfortunately,” he goes on, “the Japanese government is not telling us al the evidence. There’s a lot of pressure on the scientists and the medical community to distort the evidence so there’s no blowback against nuclear power.”
There is a section in the documentary on the impacts of radioactivity which includes Dr. Helen Caldicott, former president of Physician for Social Responsibility, discussing the impacts of radiation on the body and how it causes cancer. She states: “There is no safe level of radiation. I repeat, there is no safe level of radiation. Each dose of radiation is cumulative and adds to your risk of getting cancer and that’s absolutely documented in the medical literature.”
“The nuclear industry says, well,” Dr. Caldiott, continues, “there are ‘safe doses’ of radiation and even says a little bit of radiation is good for you and that is called the theory of hormesis. They lie and they lie and they lie.”
Maggie Gundersen, who was a reporter and then a public relations representative for the nuclear industry and, like her husband Arnie became an opponent of nuclear power, speaks of how nuclear power derives from the World War II Manhattan Project program to develop atomic weapons and post-war so-called “Atoms for Peace” push.
Gundersen says in becoming a nuclear industry spokesperson, “the things I was taught weren’t true.” The notion, for example, that what is called a containment at a nuclear plant is untrue because radioactivity “escapes every day as a nuclear power plant operates” and in a “calamity” is released massively.
As to economics, she cited the claim decades ago that nuclear power would be “too cheap to meter.” The president of Fairewinds Energy Education, she says: “Atomic power is now the most expensive power there is on the planet. It is not feasible. It never has been.” Regarding the radioactive waste produced by nuclear power, she says “there is literally no technology to do that…It does not exist.”
As to international oversight, the documentary presents the final version of a “Report of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation” issued in 2014 which finds that the radiation doses from Fukushima “to the general public during the first year and estimated for their lifetimes are generally low or very low….The most important effect is on mental and social well-being.”
Shimatsu says it is not only in Japan but on an international level that the consequences of radioactive exposure have been completely minimized or denied. “We are all seeing a global political agreement centered in the UN organizations, tie IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency], the World Health Organization…All the international agencies are whitewashing what is happening in Fukushima. We take dosimeters and Geiger counters in there, we see a much different story,” he says.
In Germany, says Maggie Gunderson, “the politicians chose” to do a study to “substantiate” that no health impacts “happened around nuclear power plants….But what they found was the radiation releases cause significant numbers of childhood leukemia.” A summary of that 2008 study comes on the screen. The U.S. followed up on that research, she says, but recently “the [U.S.] Nuclear Regulatory Commission said it was not going to do that study,” that “it doesn’t have enough funding; it had to shut it down.” She said the real reason was that it was producing “data they don’t want to make public.”
Beyond the airborne releases of radiation after the Fukushima accident, now, says the documentary, there is the growing threat of radioactivity through water that has and still is leaking from the plants as well as more than a million tons of radioactive water stored in a thousand tanks built at the plant site. After the accident, TEPCO released 300,000 tons of radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean. Now there is no land for more tanks, so the Japanese government, the documentary relates, has decided that starting this year to dump massive amounts of radioactive water over a 30-year period into the Pacific.
Arnie Gundersen speaks of the cliché that “the solution to pollution is dilution,” but with the radiation from Fukushima being sent into the Pacific, there will be “bio-accumulation”—with vegetation absorbing radiation, little fish eating that vegetation and intensifying it and bigger fish eating the smaller fish and further bio-accumulating the radioactivity. Already, tuna off California have been found with radiation traced to Fukushima. With this planned further, and yet greater dispersal, thousands of people “in the Pacific basin will die from radiation,” he says.
Andrew Napuat, a member of the Parliament of the nation of Vanuatu, an 83 island archipelago in the Pacific, says in the documentary: “We have the right to say no to the Japan solution. We can’t let them jeopardize our sustenance and livelihood.” Vanuatu along with 13 other countries has signed and ratified the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty.
As the documentary nears its end, Arnie Gundersen says that considering the meltdown at the Three Mile Island nuclear plant in Pennsylvania in 1979, the meltdown at the Chernobyl nuclear plant in Ukraine in 1986, and now the three Fukushima meltdowns in 2011, there has been “a meltdown every seven years roughly.” He says: “Essentially, once every decade the world needs to know that there might be an atomic meltdown somewhere.” And, he adds, the “nuclear industry is saying they want would like to build as many as 5,000 new nuclear power plants.” (There are 440 in the world today.)
Meanwhile, he says, “renewable power is no longer alternative power. It’s on our doorstep. It’s here now and it works and it’s cheaper than nuclear.” The cost of producing energy from wind, he says, is three cents a kilowatt hour, for solar five cents, and for new nuclear power plants 15 cents. Nuclear “makes no nuclear economic sense.”
Maggie Gundersen says, with tears in her eyes: “I’m a woman and I feel it’s inherent for us as women to protect our children our grandchildren, and it’s our job now to raise our voices and have this madness stop.”
Philippe Carillo, from France, who worked for 14 years in Hollywood and who since 2017 has lived in Vanuatu, has worked on several major TV documentary projects for the BBC, 20th Century Fox and French National TV as well as doing independent productions. He says he made “The Fukushima Disaster, The Hidden Side of the Story” to “expose the nuclear industry and its lies.” His previous award-winning documentary, “Inside the Garbage of the World,” has made changes regarding the use of plastic.
“The Fukushima Disaster, The Hidden Side of the Story” can be viewed at Amazon, Apple TV, iTunes, Google Play and Vimeo on demand. Links are: iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/movie/the-fukushima-disaster/id1672643918?ls=1 Apple TV: https://tv.apple.com/us/movie/the-fukushima-disaster/umc.cmc.3rfome5kj2hfpo2q9fwx5u0y0 Amazon UK: www.amazon.co.uk/placeholder_title/dp/B0B8TLPZ9K/ref=sr_1_1Amazon USA: https://www.amazon.com/Fukushima-Disaster-Yoichi-Shimatsu/dp/B0B8TLSRN4/ref=sr_1_1 Google Play: https://play.google.com/store/movies/details?id=vehqb5ex-L8.P&sticky_source_country=US&gl=US&hl=en&pli=1 Video on demand: https://vimeo.com/ondemand/thefukushimadisaster
Also, extra footage and interviews not in the film are at www.exposurefilmstrust.com
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.
Japan Set to Pour Fukushima Water Into Pacific, Irking China

- IAEA to give decision on proposal to discharge Fukushima waste
- Ocean isn’t “Japan’s private sewer”: China’s foreign ministry
By Shoko Oda and Isabel Reynolds, July 3, 2023 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-07-02/japan-is-set-to-pour-fukushima-wastewater-into-pacific
Japan is set to win approval to discharge more than a million cubic meters of treated water from the Fukushima nuclear disaster site into the Pacific Ocean, a contentious plan that’s soured ties with neighbors including China.
The International Atomic Energy Agency’s Director General Rafael Grossi will visit Japan from Tuesday to deliver a final report on the safety of the process and meet with officials including Foreign Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi. A domestic nuclear regulator is also set to issue a crucial assessment.
Both studies are poised to give backing to Tokyo Electric Power Co. to begin releasing the water — equivalent in volume to about 500 Olympic-size swimming pools — into the sea, a step that’s needed to allow full decommissioning of the Fukushima site following the 2011 earthquake and tsunami that triggered the world’s worst atomic disaster since Chernobyl.
Japan has assured other nations that the release of the water is safe, is in line with standard industry practice and that it’s necessary, because about 1,000 storage tanks at Fukushima will hit capacity early in 2024. Other countries with nuclear plants already safely discharge similar diluted waste offshore, according to the IAEA.
It also comes as Japan joins a wider global reappraisal of nuclear power, with several nations seeking to boost energy self-sufficiency by reviving idled reactors, adding plants or investing in new technology. Prime Minister Fumio Kishida is aiming to build on improving domestic support for the energy source, and Japan’s efforts to complete the closure of the Fukushima site are seen as a crucial in inspiring confidence.
Despite Japan’s diplomatic push, the discharge plan is complicating some global relationships.
The ocean is “not Japan’s private sewer,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said last month, warning the proposed release carries risks for the country’s neighbors and Pacific Island nations. Wang called it a selfish move “that puts the common interests of all humanity in jeopardy.”
Japanese cosmetics brands have been targeted by a viral campaign tied to the issue that spread unproven safety allegations on Chinese social media platforms. In South Korea, demand for sea salt has rocketed as consumers stockpile the condiment amid worries the release of wastewater could taint future supplies.
While the central government in Seoul hasn’t pushed back against Japan’s plans publicly, a survey by the Yomiuri newspaper and South Korea’s Hankook Ilbo conducted in May found 84% of respondents opposed the discharge. A separate poll found almost three-quarters of South Koreans surveyed didn’t trust a delegation of experts sent from Seoul to review Japan’s preparations.
The Pacific Islands Forum, a group of 18 nations including Fiji, Papua New Guinea and Australia, has urged Japan to consider alternatives and called for additional discussions on the risks.
“People’s fears and uncertainties in the region are real, however safely the release will be handled, and however minimal the risk is,” said Nancy Snow, a reputation security consultant in Tokyo and author of a book on Japan’s public diplomacy. “Their concerns cannot be taken lightly or dismissed.”
Japan announced in 2021 it planned a gradual release of about 1.3 million cubic meters of treated wastewater from the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant that has accumulated at the site since 2011. Tepco cycles in water to keep debris and fuel at the wrecked nuclear reactors cool, and the contaminated liquid — along with other groundwater and rain — is processed to remove most radioactive elements. The treated water, which still contains tritium, has been collected and stored.
Tepco expects the fleet of about 1,000 storage tanks to reach maximum capacity between February and June next year and the utility has argued it cannot continue to clear space for additional vessels because that’s needed for other parts of the decommissioning process. Storing the water also carries risks of leaks, which are amplified by the nation’s status as one of the most earthquake-prone countries.
In one of its preliminary reports in April, the IAEA said Tepco had taken into account issues raised in previous safety reviews and had “made significant progress to update its plans,” signaling the agency is likely to grant final approval. Grossi will visit Fukushima during his trip to Japan and open an IAEA office at the site, the agency said Friday.
Tepco plans to mix the treated fluid with seawater to dilute the concentration of tritium to “well below” both Japanese government and World Health Organization guidelines, before discharging it into the ocean over the course of as long as 40 years through an undersea tunnel. Tritium has a radioactive half-life of a little over 12 years, according to the IAEA.
Japan’s government has not yet set any specific date to begin releasing the water, and has said it will continue to hold talks with local communities, including the fishing sector, to try to alleviate their concerns.
Releasing water from nuclear power plants is a standard practice and most operations globally release small amounts of tritium and other radioactive material into rivers and oceans, the IAEA said previously.
— With assistance by Ben Westcott
Charming optimism, as a Japanese non-profit group plans for bunkers for the community to be OK in a nuclear war.

2 NPO pushes nuclear bunkers in Japan amid growing security threats
TSUKUBA
Amid growing security concerns over Russia’s nuclear threat and North Korea’s missile ambitions, a nonprofit organization in Japan has built a model nuclear shelter near Tokyo to raise awareness and encourage people to consider digging a doomsday bunker of their own.
While not yet open to the public, the underground concrete structure opened on May 10 in a parking lot opposite the Japan Nuclear Shelter Association’s office in Tsukuba, Ibaraki Prefecture. It has already hosted about 40 tours by construction professionals, national and local politicians, government agencies and the media.
The association says it aims to see shelters built in Japan to established standards. Interest in its activities has exploded last year, it said, with its membership rising from just two companies to around 30 in over a year.
“We were thinking about building this even before the (Russian) invasion of Ukraine, but decided we really had to from spring last year,” said director Takahiro Kawashima.
The facility is built to specifications from Switzerland, where 1960s legislation at the height of the Cold War required shelters be made available to all citizens.
The structure can withstand a blast like the 1945 atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, provided it is just under a kilometer or more from the explosion’s center, according to the association.
It says the underground shelter can house a family of four adults, three children and one pet for a maximum of two weeks. While the entire space is about 48 square meters, its living area is around 25.6 square meters……………………………….
it remains unclear how much a system like the one the association is showcasing would cost if it became a national standard.
Construction of the model shelter came in at a total of around 40 million yen ($277,000) to build and outfit but the organization maintains that a more standard price would be around 20 to 30 million yen per unit, not inclusive of the land on which it is constructed…… https://japantoday.com/category/national/npo-pushes-nuke-bunkers-in-japan-amid-growing-security-threats
Japan’s nuclear regulator finishes inspection of Fukushima radioactive wastewater release system
Japan’s nuclear regulator has finished inspecting a newly completed system to release radioactive wastewater from the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the sea, local media reported.
The Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) checked for leaks and other abnormalities on Friday by passing water through the system and inspected the emergency shut-off valves to make sure they function properly, public broadcaster NHK reported.
NRA officials have reported no particular problem with the facility’s overall performance. The nuclear regulatory body is due to draw up a report on the results in about a week, it said.
If the NRA issues a certificate to the plant’s operator Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), the system will be ready to operate, it added.
The NRA wrapped up three days of final on-site inspections on Friday. TEPCO completed the construction of the wastewater discharge system on Monday.
Despite continuous opposition from its neighbors and the Pacific Island Countries, Japan has been rushing to carry out its plan of dumping treated radioactive wastewater from the crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant into the Pacific.
What is the new ‘returning zone’ to be created in disaster-hit Fukushima?
June 24, 2023 (Mainichi Japan)
The Mainichi Shimbun answers some common questions readers may have about the new residence zones that will be created in parts of Fukushima Prefecture that have become uninhabitable as a result of the 2011 nuclear power plant accident.
Question: I heard that people who were unable to return to their hometowns due to the March 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster will be able to do so. Is it true?
Answer: Due to the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, parts of seven municipalities in Fukushima Prefecture have been designated as so-called “difficult-to-return zones” where residence is restricted due to high radiation levels. Within these zones, new “specified returning residence zones” will be established to allow those who wish to return to do so.
Q: How will this work?
A: This system is based on the revised Act on Special Measures for the Reconstruction and Revitalization of Fukushima enacted by the Diet on June 2. The new returning residence zones are set to includes homes, roads and meeting places deemed necessary for the daily lives of those who wish to return to the “difficult-to-return” zones. Decontamination will be carried out to reduce radiation levels in these areas, and then the evacuation order over the areas will be lifted………………………………………..
When the Great East Japan Earthquake hit, there were about 16,000 people living in the areas. However, only about 200 people reside there now — an apparent result of many past residents already having shifted their base of livelihood to other locations due to their prolonged displacement.
Q: How far will the scope of the new returning residence zones extend?
A: Reconstruction bases were set up in clusters of private homes and around train stations, but in the case of the new returning residence zones, the setting is likely to be limited to areas around the homes of those who wish to return. Since it remains difficult to live in an area when an evacuation order has only partially been lifted, there is strong demand for unconditional decontamination throughout the entire area.
(Japanese original by Shuji Ozaki, Minamisoma Local Bureau) https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20230623/p2a/00m/0op/028000c
Japan urged to face up to legitimate international concerns on dumping nuclear-contaminated water into ocean

By Global Times Jun 23, 2023
Japan was urged to face up to the legitimate concerns of the international community on dumping nuclear-contaminated water into ocean at the 53rd session of the United Nations Human Rights Council on Thursday. Japan’s moves are passing on the risk of nuclear pollution to all mankind that are seriously endangering the right to health of people of all countries, the Chinese representative to the council said.
The Chinese representative said that Japan’s dumping of nuclear-contaminated water into the sea violated its obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and Japan has so far failed to prove that the dumping of nuclear-contaminated water into the sea is safe and sound. The data released by Japan itself also shows that nearly 70 percent of the treated nuclear-contaminated water still fail to meet the standards.
The dumping plan is not the only way to deal with the Fukushima nuclear-contaminated water, nor is it the safest and most optimal means of disposal. However, the Japanese side chose to discharge the nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean based on economic cost, and in doing so is passing on the risk of nuclear pollution to all mankind, and is seriously endangering the right to health of people of all countries.
The Chinese representative pointed out that Japan has not followed the principle of consultation on the dumping plan of nuclear-contaminated water, and has repeatedly tried to mislead the international community, trying to cover up the uncertain risks of nuclear-contaminated water dumped into the sea under the disguise of “treated water.”………………………………….
This is not a matter for Japan alone. The Japanese side must face up to the strong opposition voices at home and abroad and the reasonable concerns of the international community, honestly fulfill its international obligations, and dispose of the nuclear-contaminated water in an open, transparent, and safest way, so as not to cause irreversible consequence, the representative noted. https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202306/1293022.shtml
Chinese Boycott Over Fukushima Nuclear Plant Water Release Sinks Japanese Cosmetics
A consumer boycott in China over a planned release of water from the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant is threatening to hurt Japanese cosmetics makers.
The viral campaign began earlier this month when largely unproven allegations that water discharges from the plant are hazardous to ……………………………..(subscribers only) https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-06-23/china-boycott-over-fukushima-nuclear-plant-water-release-sinks-japan-cosmetics#xj4y7vzkg
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-
China joins the rush to market nuclear power to Turkey

Türkiye in contact with China for planned 3rd nuclear plant’, BY DAILY SABAH WITH REUTERS, JUN 23, 2023
Türkiye is in contact with China regarding the construction of a planned third nuclear power plant (NPP) and is surveying sites for a fourth, a top ministry official said.
Russia’s Rosatom is building the country’s first nuclear power plant, Akkuyu NPP, in its southern Mersin province, with the first reactor expected to go online next year……………
Chinese astronauts install radiation-exposure experiment outside Tiangong space station
By Andrew Jones, 21 June 23, https://www.space.com/astronauts-install-radiation-experiment-china-tiangong-space-station
China plans to conduct radiation experiments on plant seeds, microorganisms and small animals.
China is running a biological radiation exposure experiment outside its space station.
The country’s Shenzhou 16 astronauts — Jing Haipeng, Zhu Yangzhu and Gui Haichao — installed the experiment outside the Tiangong space station‘s Mengtian science module on June 10, China’s National Space Science Center (NSSC) announced in a statement.
The experiment was deployed using Mentian’s dedicated payload airlock and attached to an external payload adapter using the space station’s small robotic arm.
The experiment payload contains 13 sample box units loaded with biomaterials. These are designed to study the impact of cosmic radiation and microgravity on organisms, the origin and evolution of life and the development of space radiation mutagenic resources.
The equipment can be used for in-orbit experiments on biological samples, including plant seeds, microorganisms and small animals, according to NSSC. The temperature inside each sample container unit can be adjusted to suit the organisms it is hosting.
On-orbit medical research involving space radiation biological exposure is of great significance to supporting China’s human spaceflight program. That program is ambitious, with plans to launch long-term crewed missions in Earth orbit and send people to the surface of the moon, the Chinese-language outlet Science and Technology Daily reported.
The experiment payload was developed jointly by the NSSC and Dalian Maritime University. It is intended to operate for five years and is planned to be used for several scientific projects.
The Shenzhou 16 crew arrived at Tiangong on May 30 and will remain aboard the space station until November.
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
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
US nuclear-powered submarine arrives in South Korea
By Hyunsu Yim, June 16 2023 https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/8237042/us-nuclear-powered-submarine-arrives-in-south-korea/
A US nuclear-powered submarine has arrived at a port in the South Korean city of Busan, the South Korean military says.
It is the first time a submarine classified as “SSGN” by the US Navy, or a cruise-missile submarine, has stopped off in South Korea in almost six years.
The USS Michigan’s arrival on Friday comes after North Korea fired two short-range missiles off its east coast on Thursday and follows a failed attempt by Pyongyang to launch a spy satellite last month.
In April, South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol and US President Joe Biden agreed in Washington to “further enhance the regular visibility of strategic assets” on the Korean Peninsula.
The leaders also agreed a US Navy nuclear-armed ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) would visit South Korea for the first time since the 1980s to help demonstrate Washington’s resolve to protect the country from a North Korean attack.
There was no timetable given for such a visit.
South Korea begins public briefings to address concern over Fukushima water
South Korea’s fisheries ministry held the first of a series of nationwide
briefings for the public on Tuesday regarding seafood safety amid Japan’s
plan to release treated radioactive water from the disaster-hit Fukushima
nuclear power plant into the sea.
The Oceans and Fisheries Ministry said
Monday the briefings will continue until late June to provide scientific
information on the treated water at the Fukushima No. 1 plant that Japan
plans to start discharging in the summer.
The first event was held in the
southern port city of Busan with about 40 people — all working in the
local fisheries industry — in attendance, a ministry official said. Song
Sang-keun, the vice fisheries minister, said Monday, “(The ministry)
plans to meet face-to-face with the public, especially those working in the
fisheries industry, to explain how safe our marine products are, based on
scientific and objective facts. “There is no way that inappropriate
marine products will get to the table of our people,” Song added.
Japan Times 14th June 2023
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2023/06/14/national/south-korea-briefings-fukushima-water/
-
Archives
- March 2026 (76)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS





