Deaf ear ill befits bid for Japan’s global status: China Daily editorial
February 27, 2023
Should Japan discharge nuclear waste water from its crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean? This is a question for the international community as a whole to answer, the islands in the Pacific Ocean in particular, not just the Japanese government.
The decision to dump the contaminated water into the ocean is not just a domestic issue of Japan when there is potential danger that the radioactive water may cause lasting damage to the marine ecology and marine resources all over the world.
Earlier this year, Japan unilaterally announced that it would start discharging the radioactive water in spring or summer, just before the International Atomic Energy Agency’s task force arrives in Japan for a review.
There are alternative ways to dispose of the nuclear contaminated water rather than just dumping it in the sea, which is an irresponsible choice by the Japanese government, cheap for Japan but expensive for the world. That is what has made the international community so outraged, as dumping such a large amount of nuclear waste water into the ocean is not the only feasible way to solve the problem.
Rather than taking into consideration the possible serious consequences dumping the toxic water into the ocean may cause the marine environment, which will hurt the fisheries the Pacific island countries rely on, and heeding the calls of the international community to reconsider its decision, the Japanese government is stubbornly rushing ahead regardless.
Given that related data and evidence provided by Japan are far from independent or verified, Pacific islands and international organizations have enough reasons to voice their concern about the matter and their opposition to what the Japanese government has decided to do.
Erring on the side of caution is essential in this matter, as it will be too late when the dumped nuclear wastewater causes serious damage to the marine ecology worldwide. It is more than necessary for the Japanese government to think twice about its decision to dump the water into the Pacific Ocean. It should heed the concerns of the Pacific island countries and the rest of the international community.
Japan should seek as much assistance as possible from other countries to find a safer means of disposing of the radioactive water in a cost-effective manner. Japan needs to take a global and long-term perspective on this matter and dispose of the water in a way that causes the least environmental impact, so as to set a good example and precedent for dealing with similar nuclear accidents elsewhere. If so, what Japan has done can be a contribution to humanity.
https://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202302/27/WS63fbfb9aa31057c47ebb0f18.html
Fukushima residents feel left out in TEPCO’s water plan
Four pillars stick out of the sea 1 kilometer offshore from Tokyo Electric Power Co.’s Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant on Jan. 24. Treated radioactive water will be released from outlets at the bottom of these pillars through an undersea tunnel.
February 26, 2023
As Tokyo Electric Power Co. moves closer to discharging tons of stored water from its stricken Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant, local opposition has intensified and cries of betrayal are being heard.
The Nuclear Regulation Authority in July 2022 concluded that “there are no safety issues” with the water being released into the sea. The water will be treated to eliminate most of the radioactive substances and diluted to government safety standards.
TEPCO has been steadily moving ahead with the water-discharge plans since the NRA’s assessment.
Locals now feel that their opinions do not matter anymore, even though the water-discharge plan could negatively affect their livelihoods for decades to come.
SPRING OR SUMMER RELEASE
A TEPCO employee on the shore pointed out toward the water and said: “Can you see them?”
Four pillars were sticking out from the sea surface about 1 kilometer offshore of the Fukushima plant.
The employee explained that water discharge outlets are located at the bottoms of these pillars.
Workers in January were digging the final 200 meters of an undersea tunnel that will be connected to the outlets. The drilling work is scheduled to finish this spring.
The water stored at the plant can then be discharged from the tunnel in spring or summer.
TEPCO says it has no other choice to deal with the water-storage problem at the plant.
The tsunami generated by the March 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake knocked out the cooling system for the plant, leading to a triple meltdown.
Water used to cool down the nuclear fuel in the reactor buildings become contaminated with radioactive materials. Compounding the problem was the continuous flow of groundwater and rain into the damaged reactor buildings. This contaminated water also had to be stored for treatment.
After most of the radioactive materials were removed, the water has been stored in tanks on the compound.
Around 1.32 million tons of water is now stored at the plant, more than enough to fill the Tokyo Dome, according to TEPCO.
About 1,000 storage tanks line the compound. The utility said 96 percent of their capacity is already filled, and they will all be full by autumn.
‘TAKING OPPOSITE STANCE’
In April 2021, the administration of then-Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga decided to discharge the treated water into the sea.
The government and TEPCO reached an agreement with the Fukushima Prefectural Federation of Fisheries Co-operative Associations in 2015 that “the treated water will not be released without the understanding of people involved.”
The fishermen see TEPCO’s unceasing progress on the plan as backing out of that promise.
Tetsu Nozaki, head of the associations, and local fishermen had a meeting with economy minister Yasutoshi Nishimura in Iwaki, Fukushima Prefecture, on Feb. 25.
“(The government) made the promise (in 2015). Now you are taking an opposite stance,” Nozaki said to Nishimura.
“We have no choice but to repeatedly and thoroughly explain the plan,” Nishimura said.
Toshimitsu Konno, 64, head of the Soma Futaba fishery cooperative association in the prefecture, said, “What makes the government and TEPCO think that we have agreed?”
The group is the largest in Fukushima Prefecture, with 846 members.
They oppose the water release, saying it may spark harmful rumors about local marine products.
However, Konno has mixed feelings, especially when he thinks about the next generation of fishermen.
About 100 people joined the local fisheries industry after the 2011 nuclear accident.
Konno believes that only the complete decommissioning of the plant will end the reputation damage once and for all.
The government and TEPCO have said the water release is crucial for the decommissioning process.
“That’s why we cannot simply oppose the plan,” Konno said.
TEPCO expects to discharge up to 500 tons of treated water per day. At that rate, it will take at least 30 years to empty all of the tanks.
“We must live with the situation for 30 or 40 years until the plant is decommissioned. No matter what we do, there will always be problems,” Konno said.
He is struggling over what needs to be done now to proceed with the decommissioning and create a future for the fishing industry.
“We have our own distress as residents,” Konno said.
CAN’T STOP WATER FLOW
TEPCO has been unable prevent groundwater and rainwater from becoming contaminated by the damaged reactors.
The utility tried to block the flow of groundwater by creating a 1.5-km-long frozen soil wall around the No. 1 to No. 4 reactor buildings at the plant.
Workers set up cooling pipes underground carrying a refrigerant of minus 30 degrees. The idea was that the frozen soil would create a barrier to divert the water away from the reactor buildings.
The barrier system cost around 34.5 billion yen ($253 million) to build. It began operation in March 2016.
However, the ice wall has had a series of problems, including underground temperatures exceeding zero degrees in some areas and the refrigerant leaking from the pipes.
TEPCO initially planned to complete its countermeasures against water leaks at reactor buildings and finish operations of the ice wall around March 2021.
The ice wall is still in use, but the water flow to the reactor buildings has continued.
According to TEPCO, the amount of treated water generated per day decreased from 540 tons in 2014 to 130 tons in 2021.
The utility expects the amount to drop to 100 tons by fiscal 2025 and between 50 and 70 tons by fiscal 2028.
“It is difficult to reduce the amount of contaminated water to zero at this point,” a TEPCO official said.
(This article was compiled from reports by Shoko Rikimaru, Hideki Motoyama, Takuro Yamano and Ryo Sasaki.)
World Insights: Science should guide Fukushima wastewater release plan, Pacific leaders say
File photo taken on Oct. 12, 2017 shows huge tanks that store contaminated radioactive wastewater in Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, in Fukushima Prefecture, Japan
– Civil society groups in Japan and many international organizations have voiced objections to the Fukushima wastewater release plan, citing a lack of a practical demonstration and its potential threat to society and marine ecology.
– Analysts believe that Japan should not ignore the concerns and livelihoods of Pacific islanders.
SUVA, Feb. 26 (Xinhua) — Pacific leaders on Friday wrapped up the two-day Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) Special Leaders’ Retreat in Fiji, where Japan’s Fukushima wastewater release plan was in the limelight.
The PIF rotating chair underlined in a statement that science and data should guide political decisions on Japan’s proposed discharge of treated radioactive wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant into the sea.
The outgoing chair and Fiji’s Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka, together with other PIF leaders, believes the decision is not as simple as a domestic issue of Japan, but concerns the South Pacific island countries and beyond.
Given that related data and evidence provided by Japan are far from independent or verifiable, the PIF has called on the country repeatedly to delay the discharge plan.
People rally to protest against the Japanese government’s decision to discharge contaminated radioactive wastewater in Fukushima Prefecture into the sea, in Tokyo, capital of Japan, April 13, 2021.
CRITICISM FROM INT’L COMMUNITY
Civil society groups in Japan and many international organizations have also voiced objections to the plan, citing a lack of a practical demonstration and its potential threat to society and marine ecology.
Over the past years, fishermen in neighboring countries have staged several rallies, calling for immediate stop to the “grave criminal act” of releasing radioactive water into the sea. Within Japan, local civic groups have organized protests outside the government house of Fukushima Prefecture.
Japan’s unilateral push to discharge radioactive wastewater from its crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean is irresponsible and harmful, South Korean green activists have said.
“The Pacific Ocean is not the sea of Japan, but the sea of everybody … Pollutants will flow to neighboring countries in a situation that a lot of radioactive materials have already been released and contaminated (the marine ecosystem),” Ahn Jae-hun, energy and climate change director at the Korea Federation for Environment Movement, told Xinhua.
The Japanese government’s decision to discharge the contaminated water into the sea when there are alternatives such as long-term storage violates the precautionary principle recognized by the international community, Greenpeace Seoul Office has said. Greenpeace is an independent global campaigning network for environment protection.
“We must prevent action that will lead or mislead us toward another major nuclear contamination disaster at the hands of others,” said PIF Secretary General Henry Puna.
Take a look at how Japan proceeded with that.
The Japanese government decided in April 2021 to release more than one million tons of treated wastewater into the Pacific Ocean this spring.
Three months later, Japan greenlit the discharge plan while the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)’s task force was still conducting the review mission.
Earlier this year, Japan unilaterally announced that it would start discharging the radioactive water in spring or summer, just before the agency’s task force arrives in Japan for review.
A poster to boycott Japanese products is seen in a supermarket to protest against Japan’s decision to dump radioactive wastewater from the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean, in Seoul, South Korea, April 14, 2021.
PACIFIC OPPOSITION
Pacific island countries unanimously oppose Japan’s release plan for multiple reasons, citing ecological fragility, economic dependence on the fisheries industry, and the devastating effects of radioactive pollution caused by Western nuclear testing.
First, Pacific island countries are concerned that the released radioactive substances will spread with ocean currents and tides, risking contaminating fish. As more than half of the world’s tuna comes from the Pacific Ocean, a potentially contaminated environment could hurt the fisheries that those countries rely on.
Second, the Pacific Ocean’s delicate ecology may come under threat. If the wastewater release leads to an ecological disaster, the vulnerable island residents will leave their homes, causing an ecological and survival crisis that will deal a heavy blow to the entire Pacific region.
Last, Western countries have conducted a dazzling array of nuclear tests in the Pacific since the mid-20th century, resulting in shocking radioactive pollution and ecological disasters. These have left painful memories for islanders, who have been sensitive to the wastewater issue.
Analysts believe that Japan should not ignore the concerns and livelihoods of Pacific islanders. Neither should it dump the wastewater into the sea until disputes are settled over the legitimacy of the discharge plan, the reliability of radioactivity data, the effectiveness of purification equipment and the uncertainty of environmental impact, they added.
https://english.news.cn/20230225/1aa34ef7e18444c99e8a1e84a8b691b7/c.html
Academic speaks out against Japan’s wastewater plan for Pacific
At the heart of this special leaders’ retreat is the unity and strength of our one BluePacific, says outgoing forum chair and Fijian Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka.
Feb 24 2023
A leading Pacific voice in academia is speaking out against Japan’s plan to dump contaminated water into the Pacific Ocean.
University of Auckland associate dean Pacific Sir Collin Tukuitonga is vehemently opposed to the decision to release 1.25 million litres of treated wastewater from the damaged Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant.
“While the science of this issue could perhaps be argued either way, it is completely unacceptable to be dumping contaminated wastewater into our Pacific Ocean,” Tukuitonga said.
“Pacific peoples rely on the ocean for our livelihoods and to feed our families. We are the guardians of the largest and most precious ocean in the world. There is absolutely no way that the Pacific should be the dumping ground for this waste.”
An earthquake in March 2011 followed by a tsunami caused major damage to the plant and knocked out its cooling system.
The nuclear power plant is now defunct but to keep the reactors from overheating hundreds of tonnes of water are pumped through the reactors every day.
University of Auckland academic Sir Collin Tukuitonga has joined the chorus of Pacific voices opposed to a plan to dump treated wastewater from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the Pacific Ocean.
As Japan is running out of space to store this contaminated water, it plans to dump the treated wastewater directly into the Pacific.
Despite protests the dumping is expected to start some time this year and continue for 30 to 40 years.
Many Pacific nations have voiced opposition to the plan including Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown, who is leading a delegation to Japan to present the case against the proposal.
Tukuitonga said it was important that larger Pacific nations such as Aotearoa New Zealand use their voices to oppose the dumping.
“New Zealand has a responsibility to its partners in the region to stand up to Japan for its lack of consideration for Pacific peoples living in the region who heavily rely on the ocean for their livelihoods,” he said.
The matter was high on the agenda at the Special Pacific Leaders Retreat in Fiji on Friday.
World dreads Japan’s date with disaster
2023-02-24
Photographs and videos from the site of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant in northeastern Japan, showing workers preparing to release nuclear wastewater into the ocean, are flooding social networking sites.
Japan plans to start dumping nuclear waste water into the ocean this spring. Twelve years after the meltdown at the plant, caused by a deadly tsunami triggered by an earthquake, Japan is all set to inconvenience the world for its own convenience.
It is clear from developments how Japan prepared for this move. Although Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings, which owns the now defunct nuclear plant, promised in 2015 that it would not dump nuclear waste water into the ocean, it “found” evidence of new radioactive contamination amid the ruins in March 2021. A month later, TEPCO claimed the tanks in which it was collecting nuclear contaminated water would get filled up by the autumn of 2022, necessitating its dumping into the ocean.
The Japanese Nuclear Regulation Authority, a highly “independent “agency, approved TEPCO’s plan in July 2022. On Feb 22, it approved the reviewing documents for the plan, which will officially pass after soliciting public opinion.
But the seemingly legal procedures do not make Japan’s move legitimate. On the contrary, if the nuclear waste water is “safe” after processing, as it claims, why can’t Japan find a use for it? Its leaders make apologetic gestures, but don’t want to prevent more damage from being done.
Maybe the countries and regions that are going to be affected should sue Japan in international courts, sanction the companies responsible, and even boycott products from Japan for safety’s sake. And do it while being polite all the time.
https://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202302/24/WS63f7f644a31057c47ebb08c4.html
Japan not only dumps wastewater but also morality
Illustration: Chen Xia/Global Times
Feb 23, 2023
Although Japan’s plan to dump nuclear-contaminated water into the sea has been strongly opposed by the international community, Tokyo is still going its own way and speeding up the plan to make the rest of the world pay for it.
According to the Japan Times, government sources said on Wednesday that Japan will seek the endorsement of the G7 nations for its plan to discharge nuclear-contaminated water from its crippled nuclear power plant in Fukushima Prefecture into the Pacific Ocean when it hosts a meeting of the group’s energy ministers in April.
On March 11, 2011, a 9.0-magnitude earthquake occurred off the coast of northeastern Japan and triggered a tsunami, resulting in a nuclear leak at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. Faced with many options for dealing with nuclear-contaminated water, the Japanese government chose to dump it in the ocean because it takes the shortest time and costs the least.
Japan’s attempt to draw other G7 members over to its side is through hosting a G7 meeting, a platform where it is easiest to reach consensus. Tokyo’s aim is very obvious. This is also a kind of public opinion manipulation to cover up its own wrongdoing.
Dumping nuclear-contaminated water into the sea has not only sparked controversy within the country, but also met with strong opposition from neighboring countries such as China, South Korea, and Russia. Therefore, Tokyo wants the Western camp to endorse it in order to find legitimacy for its actions.
If the “treated water” claimed by the Japanese government is really safe, why is it being dumped into the Pacific Ocean? Today, when water resources are so tight, the Japanese government can use “treated water” for irrigation, breeding, or other purposes. Similarly, the Japanese government insists that the dump of nuclear-contaminated water is under the supervision of the international community, but why did it arbitrarily decide before the International Atomic Energy Agency completed its supervision? Tokyo’s guilt is self-evident.
After the Fukushima nuclear disaster, China, Russia, South Korea, and other countries were the first to give Japan a helping hand. However, Japan returned their kindness by ignoring the lives, health, and safety of people in neighboring countries.
The US, which claims human rights come first, is turning a blind eye to Japan’s move. The US is also a victim of the accident. A large amount of pollutants have drifted from west to east to the US coast due to ocean circulation along the North Pacific Current. Nevertheless, in order to maintain the alliance between the US and Japan and achieve the goal of dominating East Asia, Washington continues to tolerate Tokyo.
Indeed, it is not just the US that turns a blind eye to Japan on certain issues; Japan does the same with the US on many things. For instance, the whole world is paying close attention to whether Washington planned the Nord Stream explosion, but the Japanese government, which has always been actively involved in international affairs, has kept a low profile this time. In a sense, Japan and the US are covering up each other’s scandals. In order to maintain the bond of the so-called alliance between them, they do not hesitate to ignore facts and violate science.
After the nuclear-contaminated water is dumped into the sea, it will quickly spread to most parts of the Pacific Ocean, thereby affecting the global oceans. According to marine biologists, radiation will be absorbed by marine organisms and enter the human body along the food chain, which is a major threat to the Pacific Rim countries and the ecosystem on which all human beings depend.
It is not a matter that relates to a single country. Rather, it is a matter of the security of neighboring countries and sustainable security of the international sea food chain, and the health of future generations. Therefore, it deserves high attention from the international community. Some said Japan’s dumping of nuclear-contaminated water has got the approval from its big brother, the US. However, this is both a scientific and humanitarian issue. Japan should explain it to the world, not Washington, in an open and transparent manner. It should also work with relevant international organizations and scientists from neighboring countries.
G7 are not in a position to give scientific evaluation of Japan’s discharge of Fukushima contaminated water. If they do agree on a statement that endorses Japan’s plan, they have to bear the responsibilities for what Japan should bear.
Japan’s attempt to mislead international public opinion and woo the Western bloc is irresponsible and will not work. Japan is not only dumping nuclear-contaminated water, but also its morality too. A Japan that tampers with its history of aggression, a Japan that disrupts the international order, and a Japan that harms the homeland of mankind, will never be able to stand up with dignity.
The article was compiled by Global Times reporter Liu Zixuan based on an interview with Liu Jiangyong, vice dean of the Institute of Modern International Relations at Tsinghua University. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn
Trials to reuse decontaminated soil around Tokyo postponed
Feb. 24, 2023
Japan’s government is postponing trials in the Tokyo area to reuse soil that was decontaminated following the 2011 nuclear accident due to complaints from residents. They would have been the first of their kind outside Fukushima Prefecture.
The trials were set to start by the end of March in Tokyo’s Shinjuku Ward and Tokorozawa City in neighboring Saitama Prefecture.
But Environment Ministry officials say residents complained and raised concerns at briefing sessions in December.
They say some people questioned why their neighborhood was chosen, and that others complained about a lack of information.
The mayor of Tokorozawa has also been hesitant, as the majority of a local community group opposes the plan.
Ministry officials say they will consider when to start the trials after providing thorough explanations to the residents.
Soil exposed to radioactive fallout from the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant has been cleansed and stored.
The government plans to reuse it for public works projects, as long as the concentration of radioactive substances meets certain safety standards.
Science should guide Fukushima wastewater release plan, Pacific leaders say
2023-02-26
SUVA – Pacific leaders on Friday wrapped up the two-day Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) Special Leaders’ Retreat in Fiji, where Japan’s Fukushima wastewater release plan was in the limelight.
The PIF rotating chair underlined in a statement that science and data should guide political decisions on Japan’s proposed discharge of treated radioactive wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant into the sea.
The outgoing chair and Fiji’s Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka, together with other PIF leaders, believes the decision is not as simple as a domestic issue of Japan, but concerns the South Pacific island countries and beyond.
Given that related data and evidence provided by Japan are far from independent or verifiable, the PIF has called on the country repeatedly to delay the discharge plan.
CRITICISM FROM INTL COMMUNITY
Civil society groups in Japan and many international organizations have also voiced objections to the plan, citing a lack of a practical demonstration and its potential threat to society and marine ecology.
Over the past years, fishermen in neighboring countries have staged several rallies, calling for immediate stop to the “grave criminal act” of releasing radioactive water into the sea. Within Japan, local civic groups have organized protests outside the government house of Fukushima Prefecture.
Japan’s unilateral push to discharge radioactive wastewater from its crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean is irresponsible and harmful, South Korean green activists have said.
“The Pacific Ocean is not the sea of Japan, but the sea of everybody … Pollutants will flow to neighboring countries in a situation that a lot of radioactive materials have already been released and contaminated (the marine ecosystem),” Ahn Jae-hun, energy and climate change director at the Korea Federation for Environment Movement, told Xinhua.
The Japanese government’s decision to discharge the contaminated water into the sea when there are alternatives such as long-term storage violates the precautionary principle recognized by the international community, Greenpeace Seoul Office has said. Greenpeace is an independent global campaigning network for environment protection.
“We must prevent action that will lead or mislead us toward another major nuclear contamination disaster at the hands of others,” said PIF Secretary General Henry Puna.
Take a look at how Japan proceeded with that.
The Japanese government decided in April 2021 to release more than one million tons of treated wastewater into the Pacific Ocean this spring.
Three months later, Japan greenlit the discharge plan while the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)’s task force was still conducting the review mission.
Earlier this year, Japan unilaterally announced that it would start discharging the radioactive water in spring or summer, just before the agency’s task force arrives in Japan for review.
PACIFIC OPPOSITION
Pacific island countries unanimously oppose Japan’s release plan for multiple reasons, citing ecological fragility, economic dependence on the fisheries industry, and the devastating effects of radioactive pollution caused by Western nuclear testing.
First, Pacific island countries are concerned that the released radioactive substances will spread with ocean currents and tides, risking contaminating fish. As more than half of the world’s tuna comes from the Pacific Ocean, a potentially contaminated environment could hurt the fisheries that those countries rely on.
Second, the Pacific Ocean’s delicate ecology may come under threat. If the wastewater release leads to an ecological disaster, the vulnerable island residents will leave their homes, causing an ecological and survival crisis that will deal a heavy blow to the entire Pacific region.
Last, Western countries have conducted a dazzling array of nuclear tests in the Pacific since the mid-20th century, resulting in shocking radioactive pollution and ecological disasters. These have left painful memories for islanders, who have been sensitive to the wastewater issue.
Analysts believe that Japan should not ignore the concerns and livelihoods of Pacific islanders. Neither should it dump the wastewater into the sea until disputes are settled over the legitimacy of the discharge plan, the reliability of radioactivity data, the effectiveness of purification equipment and the uncertainty of environmental impact, they added.
https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202302/26/WS63faa2fca31057c47ebb0e4b.html
Tokyo, Saitama residents say ‘no’ to living near Fukushima soil
The flower bed in Shinjuku Gyoen National Garden where decontaminated soil from Fukushima Prefecture will be reused
February 25, 2023
Residents of Tokyo and Saitama are up in arms at an Environment Ministry plan to reuse decontaminated soil from Fukushima Prefecture in their midst, including a major park in the capital’s Shinjuku district.
They formally submitted requests on Feb. 24 asking to suspend the plan to distribute the soil that was formerly contaminated from radioactive fallout due to the 2011 triple meltdown at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant.
The plan, announced in December, is aimed at reducing the volume that would go to the final storage site.
One potential test site is Shinjuku Gyoen National Garden in the heart of Tokyo.
At a meeting on Feb. 24 between about 50 local residents and Environment Ministry officials, a request was submitted asking to cancel the plan as well as holding explanatory meetings about the project.
After the meeting, one of the residents, Kunikazu Hirai, 70, said, “We are angry at the danger of having soil that was once contaminated with radiation brought right next door to us.”
According to Environment Ministry officials, there were about 1.2 million visitors to Shinjuku Gyoen National Garden in fiscal 2021, although annual visitors numbered about 2 million prior to the novel coronavirus pandemic.
The two other candidate test sites are the National Institute for Environmental Studies in Tsukuba, Ibaraki Prefecture, and the National Environmental Research and Training Institute in Tokorozawa, Saitama Prefecture.
All three sites are managed by the Environment Ministry and officials believe that consent of local residents is not needed to proceed with their plan.
However, Saitama residents not only attended the Feb. 24 meeting with Environment Ministry officials but also submitted their own request to stop the project.
The unpopularity of the plan is understandable. A proposal to reuse soil in two municipalities in Fukushima Prefecture went nowhere after local residents raised strong opposition.
Only soil decontaminated to levels below 8,000 becquerels per kilogram will be used in the trial runs.
The plan for Tokyo calls for reusing the soil in a flower bed in an area of Shinjuku Gyoen National Garden that would be off-limits to the public. The flower bed would be 10 meters by 3 meters with a hole dug 1 meter deep.
A plastic sheet will be placed in the hole before about six cubic meters of decontaminated soil covers it. A 50-centimeter layer of soil will be placed on top of the decontaminated soil.
The water collected in the sheet will be moved to an adjacent tank and measured for radiation levels. If the levels are under government standards, the water would be released into the sewage system.
The Environment Ministry held an explanatory meeting on Dec. 21, but only 28 people showed up, in large part, because notification of the scheduled meeting was given at the last minute.
Shinjuku Mayor Kenichi Yoshizumi said while the project was completely in the hands of the central government, he expressed dissatisfaction at the explanation and documents presented by the Environment Ministry, which he called “difficult to understand.”
Tokorozawa residents raised objections at an explanatory meeting held in their community in January, and Mayor Masato Fujimoto said it would be difficult for the project to proceed if residents were opposed.
Kenichi Oshima, a professor of environmental economics at Ryukoku University in Kyoto, said the ministry likely wanted to conduct the trial in Tokyo to attract more attention and gain understanding.
But he added, “What has to be paid attention to is not to create a dispute between various regions by having the central government pressuring localities with comments such as, ‘Are you saying you will not cooperate to help Fukushima Prefecture?’”
Decontaminated Soil Planned for Shinjuku Gyoen, Japan “Aware of Safety” Opposition in Various Locations
Image of flower beds using decontaminated soil
February 25, 2023
On February 24, some residents of Shinjuku Gyoen (Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo), one of the candidate sites for a demonstration project by the Ministry of the Environment to reuse decontaminated soil from the decontamination process following the accident at TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, submitted a request to the ministry to stop the project. The Ministry said, “We want as many people as possible to know the safety of the project. The gap between the two parties has not been closed.
A citizens’ group consisting of local residents handed a letter to ministry officials at the House of Councilors building (Chiyoda Ward, Tokyo), demanding the suspension of the project, a detailed explanation of the project, and the holding of a public meeting to explain the project. About 50 people attended the meeting.
According to the ministry, the number of visitors to Shinjuku Gyoen was approximately 1.2 million in FY2021, and before the Corona disaster, the number had remained at approximately 2 million.
After the offer was made, Shintaro Fujii, Assistant Counselor in charge of the Ministry’s Environmental Restoration Project Office, told the press, “We will answer questions and opinions politely and consider holding additional explanatory meetings in consultation with Shinjuku City.
Kunikazu Hirai, 70, one of the sponsors of the citizens’ group, told the press, “We are angry about the danger of radioactive soil coming to our neighborhood. The group was joined by a group that is working against the project in Tokorozawa City, Saitama Prefecture, another candidate site for the project.
Last December, the ministry announced that it was considering starting the project at three facilities under its control, including Shinjuku, Tokorozawa, and Tsukuba City in Ibaraki Prefecture. At Shinjuku Gyoen, where public access is restricted, the ministry plans to reuse decontaminated soil with a radioactivity level of less than 8,000 becquerels per kilogram to create flower beds. The start date has not yet been determined.
https://www.asahi.com/articles/ASR2S66V9R2SOXIE009.html?iref=pc_photo_gallery_bottom
Fukushima nuclear disaster: Japan set to dump contaminated water in Pacific – a million tonnes
Beside the dangerosity of various radionuclides on our environment, our food chain and our health, we must also consider the fact that TEPCO is not trustworthy for its “transparency”, it has lied repeatedly numerous times during the past 12 years, and that the IAEA itself being for the nuclear industry it has shown well its tendency if not its policy to minimize the radiation risks if not to cover things up.
22 Feb, 2023
Outrage is growing over an “unjust” plan to dump more than a million tonnes of contaminated wastewater on Australia’s doorstep – within months.
In 2011, Japan was rocked by the Fukushima nuclear disaster – the worst of its kind since Chernobyl in 1986.
Responders scrambled to stop damaged reactors at Fukushima’s Daiichi nuclear plant from overheating by pumping massive amounts of water through them, with the contaminated water then being stored in massive tanks at the site.
But now, Japan has run out of space, and in 2021, announced plans to dump 1.3 million tonnes of the contaminated wastewater into the Pacific Ocean.
The water would be treated before being released over a period of several decades, with Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga saying at the time it was “a realistic solution”.
“We will do our utmost to keep the water far above safety standards,” he vowed.
In the almost two years since, Japan has been working out the finer details of the release, which is now due to begin as soon as the northern hemisphere’s spring or summer – Australia’s autumn or winter.
Countries across the Pacific are furious.
‘Catastrophic harm’
Writing for The Guardian soon after the plan was first announced, youth advocates from the region Joey Tau and Talei Luscia Mangioni described it as an “unjust act”.
“To Pacific peoples, who have carried the disproportionate human cost of nuclearism in our region, this is yet another act of catastrophic and irreversible trans-boundary harm that our region has not consented to,” they wrote.
They were referring to the long history of the Pacific being used as the world’s nuclear waste dumping ground, with hundreds of nuclear tests being carried out across the region in the decades since World War II.
High-profile individuals and groups from across the Pacific – including from Vanuatu, Fiji, the Marshall Islands and French Polynesia – have also spoken out against Japan’s plan for months on end.
“If it is safe, dump it in Tokyo, test it in Paris, and store it in Washington, but keep our Pacific nuclear-free,” Vanuatu stateswoman and veteran activist of the Nuclear Free and Independent Pacific (NFIP) movement Motarilavoa Hilda Lini said soon after Japan’s plan was unveiled.
“We are people of the ocean, we must stand up and protect it.”
In another moving statement released last year, environmental advocacy group Youngsolwara Pacific likened the release to “nuclear war”.
“How can the Japanese government, who has experienced the same brutal experiences of nuclear weapons in both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, wish to further pollute our Pacific with nuclear waste? To us, this irresponsible act of trans-boundary harm is just the same as waging nuclear war on us as Pacific peoples and our islands.”
But their pleas have fallen on deaf ears – and a string of experts have even voiced support for Japan’s controversial move.
‘Best option’
Writing for The Conversation recently, Jim Smith, professor of environmental science at the University of Portsmouth, said releasing the wastewater was the “best option”.
Prof Smith – who has worked on the impacts of radioactive pollutants in the environment for more than three decades – explained that before the water is stored in the first place, “the wastewater produced at Fukushima is treated to remove almost all of the radioactive elements”.
“These include cobalt 60, strontium 90 and caesium 137. But tritium – a radioactive form of hydrogen – is left behind,” he explained.
“When one of the hydrogen atoms in water is replaced by tritium, it forms radioactive tritiated water. Tritiated water is chemically identical to normal water, which makes separating it from wastewater expensive, energy intensive and time consuming. A review of tritium separation technologies in 2020 found that they are unable to process the huge volumes of water required.
“But as radioactive elements go, tritium is relatively benign and its existence as tritiated water reduces its environmental impact. Chemically identical to normal water, tritiated water passes through organisms like water does and so does not strongly accumulate in the bodies of living things.”
Meanwhile, a South Korean government study released this month also found the release of the wastewater would have little impact on South Korean waters.
“That change would be too small to detect,” an official at the Korea Institute of Ocean Science and Technology said, according to Reuters.
And the nation of Micronesia has also recently dropped its opposition to the release of the water, with president David Panuelo telling reporters he was no longer worried.
But for many critics of the plan, plenty of concerns remain.
“We must prevent actions that will lead or mislead us towards another major nuclear contamination disaster at the hands of others,” the former prime minister of the Cook Islands Henry Puna said just last month, as the deadline for the release looms. –
Seoul wary of reduced disclosure of radioactive elements in Fukushima wastewater
Prime Minister Han Duck-soo
Feb 22, 2023
Japan’s nuclear regulation authority tentatively confirmed plans Wednesday to narrow the scope of radioactive elements to be monitored in the radiation-contaminated water from quake-stricken Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, the South Korean Prime Minister’s Office said in a statement Wednesday.
The types of nuclides under the monitoring has been reduced from 64 to 30, according to Prime Minister Han Duck-soo’s office.
The Seoul government pledged to place the Korean people’s safety as the priority and ensure that the wastewater is treated according to international standards. Moreover, the government will continue to be engaged in the scientific and technological review of Tokyo Electric Power Co.’s plan, as well as the International Atomic Energy Agency’s wastewater analysis.
This came after the Ministry of Foreign Affairs raised the possibility of the narrowing down of the scope of radioactive elements earlier this month. A spokesperson at the Foreign Ministry said on Feb. 10 that such a decision came upon the request of the IAEA.
Tokyo unveiled plans to release the wastewater by as early as this spring.
Japan has claimed that the contaminated water was treated by its own nuclide removal system called Advanced Liquid Processing System. The IAEA has endorsed Japan’s claims that the release meets international standards.
Some 1.3 million tons of wastewater — enough to fill about 500 Olympic-size swimming pools — was used to cool down the quake-hit nuclear reactors, and is being stored at the site. Tokyo announced plans to release the water in 2021.
Recent research jointly conducted by the Korea Institute of Ocean Science and Technology and the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute indicated some of the nuclides, in particular tritium, could potentially reach South Korean waters within the next four or five years. The impact of it, however, could be “hard to detect,” with about 0.001 becquerel per cubic meter 10 years after the release, research results indicated. A becquerel is a unit of measurement for radioactivity, with even one full becquerel being a tiny amount as relates to human health.
The deadly tsunami in 2011 broke down the nuclear reactor cooling system and melted down three reactors in the Fukushima nuclear power plant in eastern Japan.
Japan slammed for loosening test standards on Fukushima radioactive water
Tokyo Electric Power Company shows a bottle of radioactive water from Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan which has been filtered by ALPS, Feb. 18. The filtering measure is, however, drawing criticism from experts in different countries as its radioactivity-cleansing feature has not been fully verified.
2023-02-23
Seoul urged to respond firmly to Tokyo’s move
By Ko Dong-hwan
Korean environmental activists condemned Thursday, the Japanese government’s latest move to discard radioactive water from their own soil which is now stored at the tsunami-hit nuclear power plant in Fukushima.
Filtered and planned for discharge into the Pacific Ocean this year, the water, according to the Japanese government, has been tested for concentration levels of radioactive nuclides that would pollute the maritime environment.
What concerns the activists is that the Japanese government recently reduced the list of radioactive nuclides to measure and verify their safety levels from 64 to 30.
The list has been shortened to more than half because the Japanese government believes some radioactive nuclides have half-lives that are so short that their radioactivity would thin out to a concentration level minuscule enough to be almost unmeasurable and non-influential to the environment.
But the activists said the move is only an additional problem to the Japanese government’s “doubtful” actions in dealing with the water, largely due to the questionable veracity of the data shared by the government with the world.
“Some radioactive nuclides have very short half-lives, like iodine-131 which has only eight days. Cesium-134, which has a half-life of two years, will also be watered down almost flat in a couple of years,” Choi Kyoung-sook, the coordinator from Korea Radiation Watch, a Seoul-based civic environmental activist group, told The Korea Times.
“But the biggest problem with Japan’s discharge plan is that the water’s potential biological effect on maritime species in the ocean hasn’t been fully tested yet. The Japanese government just got started with that experiment earlier this year, putting halibuts and other fish in an aquarium containing 1 becquerel of cesium to see what happens to the creatures.”
Choi said the Japanese government’s explanation advocating the safety of the discharge is only based on its own belief that the water “appears clean enough” after being filtered by the advanced liquid processing system (ALPS) that the Japanese government claims it has used to treat the water before its discharge planned this spring.
Kim Kyoung-ok from the Korea Institute of Ocean Science and Technology explains the result of a simulation carried out by his institute which demonstrates how discharged radioactive water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan could affect Korean waters, at Ramada Plaza Jeju Hotel, Feb. 16.
“It’s like they pour one liter of milk into 1,000 tons of water and say, ‘Hey, the water doesn’t look opaque at all,'” Choi said. “ALPS cannot filter out tritium. Carbon-14 has a half-life of 5,000 years. Who can possibly be so sure that radioactive water containing those radioactive particles is safe enough to discharge into the ocean?”
The Korean government has not been as critical of Japan as it should be, Choi said. She said the authority appears to be neglecting to demand sufficient scientific proof from its neighboring country that ensures the safety of the discharge.
“There isn’t any reliable scientific proof whatsoever to what the Japanese government has released to argue the discharge is safe,” Choi said. “Our government should make sure with Japan that there is no harmful biological effect from the discharge and the environmental assessment claimed done by Japan was based on reliable data.”
Choi, alongside other experts concerned with the discharge, proposed the radioactive water be stored for a longer period of time in Japan until it is diluted enough to be safely discharged.
It was found that Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Agency, earlier this year, approved the latest shortlist of radioactive nuclides to be tested, which was proposed by Tokyo Electric Power Company. The list removed 39 types from the original list and added five new ones.
The agency claimed the removed nuclides have half-lives short enough to be dissolved clean into sea waters to the level of not causing any harmful effect on humans and thus do not need to be tested further.
The Japanese authorities have been arguing that their decision-making adhered to the guidelines of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which has been supporting the country’s discharge of the water.
The Korea Institute of Ocean Science and Technology and the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute last week released the results of a simulation of the discharge they had been studying.
The simulation, designed specifically to track tritium after the water is discharged, showed the water, after circling the Pacific for two years and reaching Korean waters, is expected to have only a negligible amount of the nuclide left. The Ministry of Oceans and Fishery, however, said the simulation was only carried out during a preliminary stage of the study and further simulations are required.
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/2023/02/371_345995.html
800,000 cubic meters of new radioactive waste to be generated as a result of decommissioning of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant
February 20, 2023
At the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, buildings around the reactor buildings will be dismantled in preparation for the removal of fuel debris.
TEPCO has released an estimate of 450,000 cubic meters of radioactive waste to be generated as a result of this work.
In addition to this, 805,000 cubic meters of radioactive waste is expected to be generated during the decommissioning work over the next 10 years.
The waste will be stored at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, but the amount is expected to increase further in the future.
https://www.fukushima-tv.co.jp/localnews/2023/02/2023022000000013.html?fbclid=IwAR3uLGcmRWtk6l-2k2GSGfXnxjmdsYaaC3EcjiIr93m4l7 HHPFMFDCvp4PM
1 This Month.
5 January -Webinar-What is Trump’s Golden Dome?
REGISTER AT Massachusetts Peace Action Education
New book – https://www.amazon.com/dp/1923372157?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- December 2025 (236)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
- January 2025 (250)
-
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
nuclear-news 