Meta, the parent company of Facebook, announced on January 19 that the company no longer considers Ukraine’s Azov Regiment to be a “dangerous organization.” The far-right paramilitary group grew out of the street gangs that helped topple Ukraine’s president in the US-backed 2014 coup. Originally funded by the same Ukrainian oligarch that backed President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s rise to power, Azov was on the front lines of civil war in Eastern Ukraine, and was later fully integrated into the Ukrainian national guard.
The main outlet to report on this move was the Kyiv Independent (1/19/23), a Ukrainian newsroom closely linked to Western “democracy promotion” initiatives. These ties are reflected in its coverage of Facebook’s move. Take the description of the Azov Regiment:
The group has sparked controversy over its alleged association with far-right groups—a recurring theme used by Russian propaganda.
The “association” with “far-right groups” has been far more than “alleged,” and is well documented and openly acknowledged by members of the organization. Even the use of “far-right” downplays the fact that they have regularly been seen sporting Nazisymbols and even making Nazi salutes. NATO was forced to apologize after tweeting a photo of the regiment, circulated as part of public relations for the war, in which a soldier was wearing a symbol from the Third Reich (Newsweek, 3/9/22).
Even the logo of the Regiment is a variant of a popular Nazi symbol. Another Nazi symbol affiliated with Azov was printed on the Christchurch, New Zealand, shooter’s jacket as he opened fire on multiple mosques in 2019.
The founder of the regiment once asserted (Guardian, 3/13/18) that Ukraine’s mission was to “lead the white races of the world in a final crusade…against Semite-led Untermenschen.”
Even the US Congress, who was funding the Ukrainian military years before the war, acknowledged the regiment’s neo-Nazi affiliation. In 2018, it passed a law restricting those funds from going to Azov fighters (The Hill, 3/27/18). However, officials on the ground acknowledged that there was never any real mechanism preventing the aid from reaching Azov (Daily Beast, 12/8/19).
.
The Kyiv Independent article was republished in the US press by Yahoo News (1/19/23)—with a note appended with a link to the Independent’s Patreon fundraising account.
The Washington Post (1/21/23) also reported on the move, suggesting that the “Azov Regiment” is now separate from the “Azov Movement,” since the Regiment is now formally under the control of the Ukrainian military. The Post, which called the Regiment “controversial,” did not criticize Meta’s move, and instead highlighted Mykhailo Fedorov, Ukraine’s minister of digital transformation, who praised the decision.
The tech news site Engadget (1/21/23) noted that “the change will allow members of the unit to create Facebook and Instagram accounts.”
Backing NATO PR
The emblem of the 2nd SS Panzer Division (left) compared with those of the Azov Battalion (center) and Azov Regiment (right) (FAIR.org, 10/6/22).
This isn’t the first time that the platform’s policies were used to promote US public relations objectives. In February 2022, Facebook announced that it would carve out an exception to its policy against praising white supremacy to accommodate the Azov Regiment (Business Insider, 2/25/22). In March 2022, Facebook announced it would allow posts calling for violence against Russians within the context of the invasion (Intercept, 4/13/22). This included allowing users to call for the death of Russian President Vladimir Putin, and even Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko.
Facebook encouraged even more ethnic hate against Russians by relaxing policies on violent or hateful speech against Russian individuals. Materials reviewed by the Intercept (4/13/22) showed that Facebook and Instagram users were now allowed to call for the “explicit removal [of] Russians from Ukraine and Belarus.” In sharp contrast with its policy against allowing graphic images of the victims of Israel’s attacks on Palestine, the platform began to allow users to post such images from Russia’s invasion (Intercept, 8/27/22).
All of this has contributed to the normalization, or even embrace of neo-Nazis in the US. Early in the war, Western media uncritically promoted an Azov publicity event while making no mention of the group’s Nazi ties (FAIR.org, 2/23/22). In October, the New York Times (10/4/22) wrote a laudatory article about “Ukraine’s celebrated Azov Battalion” that completely ignored the group’s Nazi ties (FAIR.org, 10/6/22). An Azov soldier with a Nazi tattoo was even welcomed to Disney World by liberal icon Jon Stewart (Grayzone, 8/31/22).
All of this comes as US media promote ostensible concern about the growth and influence of the far right at home. This blind spot is especially egregious, given the numerous accounts of US white supremacists going to Ukraine to train with the Azov Regiment in preparation of a new US civil war (Vice, 2/6/20).
The Biden administration is being urged to fast-track research into submarines that do not use weapons-grade uranium, as four Democratic politicians warn the Aukus deal with Australia makes the task “even more pressing”.
Australia’s deputy prime minister, Richard Marles, arrived in the United States for crucial talks with the defense secretary, Lloyd Austin, on Friday (US time), amid renewed congressional concerns about aspects of the flagship Aukus project.
With March looming as the deadline for key decisions on how Australia acquires at least eight nuclear-powered submarines with help from the US and the UK, all three countries maintain the work remains on track.
But in the latest sign of congressional jitters, four politicians from Joe Biden’s party have sounded the alarm about broader risks to the global nuclear non-proliferation system.
A newly published letter coordinated by Bill Foster, a physicist serving as US representative for an Illinois congressional district, asks the Biden administration to ramp up research into alternatives to using weapons-grade uranium to power submarines.
It adds to concerns already raised by experts that if the Australian submarines are powered by highly enriched uranium (HEU), other countries may seek to follow the precedent – even though they will not be armed with nuclear weapons…………………….
in a letter to the administrator of the NNSA and the navy secretary, the politicians formally requested a detailed report on “the feasibility and performance impact of a Virginia-Class replacement SSN(X) nuclear-powered attack submarine” that is fuelled by a low-enriched uranium (LEU) reactor with a life-of-the-ship core.
They said previous reports indicated it “may be feasible for the navy to use LEU fuel for naval nuclear propulsion, as France and China already do”……………….
“Minimizing the global presence of HEU by reducing its use in military applications would reduce the risks associated with making and transporting HEU and demonstrate significant leadership on nonproliferation,” the letter said…………….
James Acton, a co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, has previously argued that Aukus depends on “a glaring and worrying loophole in IAEA safeguards” that could be exploited by others.
This loophole allows non-nuclear weapon countries to remove the fissile material they need for the submarine reactors from the stockpile monitored by the IAEA………………………………………………..
The US embassy in the Solomon Islands reopened on Thursday, decades after being shut down as redundant, amid concerns in Washington about the South Pacific archipelago’s overtures to Beijing.
The mission in Honiara will consist of a charge d’affaires, a “couple” of State Department employees and a “handful” of locals, according to Associated Press, which described the reopening as part of an effort to “counter China’s push into the Pacific.”
In a pre-recorded statement, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said that through its new embassy, Washington will be “better positioned” to advance democracy and “tackle shared challenges.”
Located about 1,800 kilometers northeast of Australia, the Solomons last hosted a US diplomatic mission in 1993, when the State Department decided to downsize due to the end of the Cold War. The US had played a key role in liberating the archipelago from Japanese occupation during the Second World War, in the bloody Guadalcanal campaign.
In 2019, however, Honiara decided to transfer its diplomatic relations with China from the nationalist exiles in Taiwan to the Communist government in Beijing. The decision touched off riots in Guadalcanal, with protesters targeting Chinese businesses and setting fire to the prime minister’s residence.
In 2022, Honiara signed a security agreement with China, causing further alarm in the US and Australia. The State Department informed Congress that reopening the embassy was a priority given China’s “growing influence” and fears of a military build-up in the Solomons.
The US had told the Solomons that Washington would have “significant concerns and respond accordingly” to any “permanent military presence, power-projection capabilities, or a military installation” by China.
The Australian government said any kind of Chinese naval base in the archipelago would be a “red line” for Canberra, while some commentators even called for invading the islands.
In response to those concerns, Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare said that Australia remains the “security partner of choice,” and issued assurances that there would be no Chinese military base, insisting the security pact with Beijing “had solely domestic applications.”
France leads push for EU to boost nuclear-produced hydrogen
By Kate Abnett 4 Feb 23, BRUSSELS, Feb 3 (Reuters) – France is leading a campaign for the European Union to recognise low-carbon hydrogen produced from nuclear power in its renewable energy rules, but some member states oppose the idea for fear of undermining efforts to quickly scale up wind and solar.
Ministers from France, Poland, the Czech Republic and six other EU countries wrote to the European Commission this week urging it to open up EU renewable energy targets to include hydrogen produced from nuclear energy.
EU countries and lawmakers have been preparing for negotiations next week on the law, which will guide the pace of Europe’s renewable energy expansion this decade.
EU Parliament’s lead negotiator has asked for next week’s talks to be delayed because the European Commission has still not published rules to define “renewable” hydrogen more clearly, which were scheduled for late last year, EU officials said on Friday……………
PARIS, Feb 3 (Reuters) – France has approved looking into the possibility of extending the lifespan of nuclear reactors to 60 years and beyond if safety rules allow it, the French Presidency said.
The Presidency announced the move in a statement after President Emmanuel Macron, who has announced plans to build at least six new reactors by 2050, on Friday chaired the first of a series of meetings on nuclear policy.
France historically has relied on nuclear power for around 70% of its energy, although the share is likely to have fallen last year as the nuclear fleet suffered repeated outages.
A public debate about the six new EPR2 nuclear reactors is set for the end of February.
The commissioning schedule for the new reactors will be established by a bill that will determine the speed of the procedures near the existing nuclear sites and the operation of the existing facilities, the statement said.
The bill is expected to reduce delays in administrative procedure and allow for progress on the construction sites.
The statement also announced plans for the construction of the first pilot of a small advanced nuclear reactor by the 2030s.
The extension of the plants will also require the launch of an examination of the issue of the fuel cycle, including the waste management, the statement said.
Several studies are set to be launched on the matter and presented at the next meeting of the nuclear council in June 2023, the statement said. The presentation of the studies is expected to be followed with a debate in Parliament on the development of energy and climate laws.
“……………………………………… If NASA’s going to get to Mars, it needs to find a way to get there much faster. Which is one of the reasons it said last week that it is partnering with the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency on development of thermonuclear propulsion technology.
………………. DARPA, the arm of the Defense Department that seeks to develop transformative technologies, has been working on the program since 2021, when it awarded three contracts for the first phase of the program to General Atomics, Lockheed Martin and Blue Origin, the space company founded by Jeff Bezos. (Bezos owns The Washington Post.) A nuclear-powered rocket would use a nuclear reactor to heat propellant to extreme temperatures before shooting the fuel through a nozzle to produce thrust.
………………….. The program is called DRACO, for Demonstration Rocket for Agile Cislunar (or in the vicinity of the moon) Operation……………………..
The agencies hope they’ll be ready to demonstrate their work with a spaceflight in 2027.
NASA is also working with the Department of Energy on a separate project to develop a nuclear power plant that could be used on the moon and perhaps one day on Mars.
But getting to Mars is exceedingly difficult, and despite claims from NASA for years that it was gearing up to send astronauts there, the agency is nowhere close to achieving that goal.
One of the main obstacles is the distance. Earth and Mars are only on the same side of the sun every 26 months. But even at their closest points, a spacecraft would have to follow an elliptical orbit around the sun that, as Tory Bruno, the CEO of the United Launch Alliance, wrote in a recent essay, will require “a great sweeping arc of around 300 million miles to arrive.”
Defense NewsFebruary 3, 2023 US pledges longer-range ‘small-diameter bomb’ for Ukraine The U.S. announced Friday it will send Ukraine the ground-launched small-diameter bomb, a weapon that can double Kyiv’s strike range…. The package’s GPS-guided GLSDB from Boeing has a range of 93 miles and can be launched from mobile artillery systems like the High Mobility […]
Three internal review documents of the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA), which are conspicuously blacked out, in Minato Ward, Tokyo, on March 3.
February 3, 2023 On February 3, the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA), the secretariat of the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA), released documents on its review process in response to the issue of undisclosed information exchange between the NRA and officials of the Agency for Natural Resources and Energy of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) over the review of nuclear power plant operation periods. The Agency did not disclose any of the materials it had provided to the Regulation Authority, and most of the internal review materials were “blacked out” with only three pages. The Agency’s backward-looking attitude toward information disclosure was conspicuous, and it was not clear whether the views of the Agency, which promotes nuclear power generation, had any influence on the regulatory system. ◆The Regulatory Agency reiterated that it had “exhausted all necessary explanations. What was made public was the status of internal studies at the Regulatory Agency for reviewing the operating period, which was stipulated to be “40 years in principle, with a maximum of 60 years. Although the Regulatory Agency received from the Ene Agency an imaginary diagram of the revision of the law and other materials, it did not disclose any of the materials prepared by the Ene Agency, saying that the Ene Agency, the preparer, should decide whether or not to disclose the information. Although the Regulatory Agency’s internal study materials were believed to envision multiple patterns of legal revision related to the operation period and describe the advantages and challenges of each, the majority of the materials were not disclosed. At the press conference, Yoichiro Kurokawa, director of the Regulatory Agency’s General Affairs Division, explained, “The documents contain the views of the person who prepared them and are far removed from the views of the organization, so disclosing them would cause confusion among the public. When asked by the media about the content of the blacked-out section, Mr. Kurokawa stated that in the section on the advantages of the proposed amendment of the articles to the minimum necessary, it was stated that “on the surface of the text, it looks almost unchanged,” and added, “In the first place, since we are changing the regulations for the operation period, it is inappropriate to say that ‘almost unchanged’ is the case. There were expressions that seemed embarrassing, and we determined that it was not appropriate to disclose them.” At the press conference, a number of people pointed out that the disclosure was insufficient, but Section Chief Kurokawa reiterated that “we have done all the necessary explanations. Before the Regulatory Commission ordered a review of the regulatory system regarding the operation period in October of last year, the Regulatory Agency had met with EneAgency officials at least seven times between July and September to exchange information. (Nozomi Masui) https://www.tokyo-np.co.jp/article/229204
Member states of the United Nations have urged Japan to resolve issues surrounding the wartime sexual slavery and forced labor issues as well as its planned release of radioactive water from the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant into the ocean.
Such calls were made during the UN Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review of Japan in Geneva on Tuesday, with countries from Europe and other regions urging the Japanese delegation to immediately suspend and abolish the death penalty and ban discrimination against sexual minorities.
Recommending that improvements be made in universal human rights issues, the member nations cast light on Japan’s wartime atrocities, with Beijing urging Tokyo to responsibly reflect on its wrongdoings against the sexual slavery victims and to offer compensation.
Yoon Seong-mee, the deputy chief of the South Korean mission in Geneva, advised Tokyo to closely cooperate with Seoul to restore the victims’ honor and dignity and pay attention to helping heal their psychological wounds.
The member states also raised concerns over Tokyo’s planned Fukushima water release starting this year, with Pacific Island Countries calling for a comprehensive investigation into its impact and the disclosure of the findings.
Japan, in response, maintained its position that the sexual slavery issue was resolved in a 2015 agreement between Seoul and Tokyo. As for the water release, it said the radioactive level is far below the upper threshold of international safety standards and that the International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) is monitoring the purification process.
Mind you this article is from Japan News Yomiuri the mouthing the official lines of the Japanese government, which is of course for dumping the Fukukushima accumulated radioactive water in the Pacific ocean and which would want us to believe that it is filtered “absolutely pure”….
TEPCO plans to gradually reduce the treated water over the next several decades during the decommissioning period.
K4 tank group for discharging treated water
February 2, 2023
TOKYO – The Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant will soon mark the 12th anniversary of the unprecedented meltdown that resulted from the Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami of March 11, 2011. The most pressing issue at present is the discharge of treated water into the ocean, as the on-site storage capacity is approaching its limit.
The government, during a ministerial meeting held on Jan. 13, projected that the discharge would begin in the spring or summer this year. However, local fishermen concerned about reputational damage and Pacific island nations are opposed to the ocean discharge.
Treated water, according to Tokyo Electric Power Co. Holdings, is that which has been purified “until the concentration of radioactive materials, with the exception of tritium, falls well below regulatory standards for safety.”
To find out more, I visited TEPCO’s Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant, where decommissioning work is expected to take 30 to 40 years.
My visit on Jan. 26 was my first to the site in about 10 years. Compared to the last time, when it was stuffy being in protective clothing with a full face shield, I was surprised to find that I could move around most of the area with a helmet and disposable mask.
Subcontracted workers were busy here and there, and in the parking lot, vehicles that had been used to move within the premises after the accident were still parked there. The vehicles are no longer in use more than a decade after the accident, but because they are radioactive and cannot be disposed of normally, they remain on the site, having served their purpose.
The four tips of a structure jut out of the sea. The water outlet is right beneath this point.
“It’s right over there,” said a TEPCO Holdings official, pointing offshore from the quay in front of reactors No. 5 and No. 6, which were spared from the accident.
Under a clear sky, I could see the four tips of a tower that jutted out of the sea. The tower is located 1 km offshore. The treated water will be discharged into the ocean through a water discharge outlet located on the seafloor approximately 12 meters undersea where the four tips are seen.
The installation of the water discharge outlet caisson has already been completed. Currently, work is underway to backfill the excavated seafloor around the outlet with concrete and mortar, and it is expected to be completed by the end of June.
“The days when the work can be done are limited due to severe sea conditions, such as waves and wind,” explained the official in charge at the site.
The shielded tunnel boring machine stopped excavating about 830 meters along the 1-km-long undersea tunnel to the water discharge outlet and is waiting for the connection from it.
The water intake tank almost in its final stage
Work is also progressing on the shore near the quay wall. Water tanks connecting to the tunnel were under construction. There are two tanks: the upstream tank, which is wide, and the adjacent downstream tank, which is about 16 meters deep. The upstream tank, divided by concrete walls that create channels, appeared to be almost complete, revealing its full extent. The system has been created so that treated water, diluted with seawater, enters the upstream tank, flows through the channels, then overflows into the downstream tank.
Once the discharge begins, TEPCO will directly confirm that the tritium concentration in the treated water has been diluted to below the target level through the mixing with seawater at this location, which can be considered the final point before the water is discharged.
Safety Considerations
K4 tanks are used for receiving, measuring/confirming, and discharging treated water on a rotating basis.
The Pacific Islands Forum, an organization of nearly 20 countries and regions including Australia and New Zealand, has called for a postponement of the ocean discharge. The PIF is of the opinion that the discharge into the ocean would have a significant negative impact on the fishing industry, given the lingering effects of past atomic bomb tests and other factors. China and South Korea have also expressed concern.
Local fishing cooperatives and other groups in Japan are also opposed. The government plans to seek their understanding by using funds totaling ¥80 billion set up to support the local fishing industry and to counter reputational damage.
Contaminated water is being generated at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant because water is used to cool nuclear fuel that melted and solidified in reactor cores that were involved in the meltdown. This water is purified of 62 nuclides, including cesium and strontium, using an advanced liquid processing system (ALPS) and other equipment. However, since tritium cannot be removed by ALPS, it must be diluted with a large amount of seawater to a concentration of 1,500 becquerels per liter or less before being discharged into the ocean. Tritium is a radioactive isotope of hydrogen with three particles rather than the usual one.
Tritium produced from reactor operations is being released by nuclear power plants around the world. It does not arise only from plants that have experienced accidents.
Japan’s regulatory concentration limit for tritium in water is 60,000 becquerels per liter, and the World Health Organization’s drinking water standard guideline is 10,000 becquerels per liter. TEPCO’s aim for 1,500 becquerels per liter is 40 times more stringent than the national standard.
Treated water processed by ALPS is clear and colorles
Moving to higher ground, 33.5 meters above sea level, I found a group of huge white tanks called K4. There are 35 such tanks with a capacity of 1,000 metric tons each. Thirty of these tanks, or 30,000 metric tons, are used to release treated water. From here, the treated water flows through transfer pipes toward the sea, being diluted with seawater along the way. The transfer pipes have two shutoff valves that stop the flow in the event of an earthquake, tsunami, or other emergency.
“Thirty tanks are divided into three groups of 10 tanks,” explained the TEPCO official. “Each group has a role of receiving, measuring/confirming, and discharging, and these roles are rotated.
“The treated water is stirred in the tanks to make it homogeneous, then the concentration of radioactive substances is measured,” the official added. “If it meets the government’s regulatory standards, it is discharged.”
From there, through further dilution with seawater, the treated water will have tritium concentrations at TEPCO’s stricter standard.
Measurements of the treated water are conducted by TEPCO and an outside inspection agency. TEPCO will disclose all such figures to the public and seek their understanding of the safety of the water.
Race Against Time
Storage tanks for treated water fill the southern part of the Fukushima No.1 nuclear power plant site.
Looking around the site from a window on the seventh floor of a large rest area, I saw a row of tanks lining the south side of the premises. These tanks store treated water. There are approximately 1,000 tanks, currently storing approximately 1.32 million cubic meters. The total capacity of the tank complex is 1.37 million cubic meters, which means that 96% of the tanks are already filled. Based on the calculation that 140 cubic meters of treated water is generated per day, the tanks will be full around this summer or autumn.
Why does this treated water continue to be generated in the first place? Inside the meltdown-affected reactors, fuel that melted and solidified is called fuel debris, which needs to be cooled by circulating water. Water that comes in contact with fuel debris becomes contaminated with radioactive substances. If this cooling water continues to be circulated without any increase in volume, there is no problem with using it in the reactor. The problem is that rainwater and groundwater continue to enter the damaged reactor buildings, causing a surplus of contaminated water. This excess contaminated water is processed by ALPS, generating treated water.
In the ALPS facility, the HIC, a special container that stores the slurry waste removed from the pre-processing step, is being exchanged for a new one.
Initially, about 540 cubic meters of treated water was generated per day, meaning one tank was filled in two days. Later, the amount was reduced to 130 cubic meters per day in fiscal 2021 through the use of facings to prevent rainwater from seeping into the ground and by building an ice wall underground to surround the building to reduce the amount of groundwater flowing in. Last year, when only June and October had much rain, the amount was below 100 cubic meters per day.
The discharge of treated water into the ocean, however, would have to be greater than the amount generated in a single day to decrease the overall amount. So how much is planned to be released per day? According to calculations based on the performance of the seawater pumps, 500 cubic meters per day could be released.
The TEPCO official denied this, saying, “That will never happen.”
He explained: “It will take time to measure radioactive substances before the discharge. We have received comments from various parties that it would be better to take our time and release the water in a way that would have as little impact or cause as little change as possible.”
TEPCO plans to gradually reduce the treated water over the next several decades during the decommissioning period.
Ensuring safety, making public disclosures, and gaining domestic and international understanding of the oceanic release: The decommissioning of the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant is approaching one of its climaxes this year, with a great many difficult challenges ahead.
February 2, 2023 The Japanese government has decided to revise its basic policy for the first time in eight years toward the final disposal of high-level radioactive waste (so-called “nuclear waste”) generated by nuclear power generation.
The government has decided to implement “geological disposal,” in which a final disposal site will be established and buried deeper than 300 meters below the ground. However, the number of target areas has not increased since then, and there are calls from local residents to expand their interest nationwide.
Against this backdrop, the government has decided to revise for the first time in eight years its basic policy outlining the details of its efforts to realize final disposal, and has compiled a new draft basic policy.
The draft clearly states that “the government will work together and under its own responsibility toward the final disposal of the waste,” and it also states that the government will take a front-loaded approach to the issue.
The proposal also includes a new initiative to hold discussions with the heads of local governments where nuclear power plants are located, among other things.
The operator of the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant says it has retrieved samples from inside the No. 1 reactor containment vessel. It says the samples are likely to contain fuel debris.
The plant suffered a triple meltdown in the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami.
Its operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company, or TEPCO, said on Wednesday that underwater robots successfully sucked water out from two locations inside the vessel.
The company has been examining the inside of the No.1 reactor containment vessel. It says the accumulated matter at the bottom is thought to contain fuel debris.
The project to collect samples initially began early last month, but was suspended due to technical errors. It was resumed on Tuesday.
Experts hope that a close analysis of the samples will help lead to successful removal of fuel debris — one of the greatest challenges in the plant’s decommissioning process.
TEPCO said it will try taking samples from two other locations inside the vessel. It also said it will spend about a year identifying the types and amounts of chemical elements contained in the samples.
The company also plans to send robotic cameras inside the pedestal, a structure that props up the reactor.
Pacific island nations, neighboring countries in Asia, scientists, and others criticized an international organization’s endorsement of plans to dump tens of thousands of tons of contaminated wastewater from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the ocean. The plan to schedule the discharge of approximately 1.3 million tons of water on an ongoing basis for the next three decades has alarmed the Pacific community because of possible adverse impacts on nearby marine ecosystems and their way of life.
Following a January 2023 visit to the Fukushima nuclear facility to receive updates on plans to dispose of the contaminated water, Gustavo Caruso, a Director within the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Department of Nuclear Safety and Security and Chair of the Task Force, voiced support for the plans. As an international association, the IAEA says it promotes the “safe, secure and peaceful use of nuclear energy,” which includes the disposal of nuclear waste.
“[Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority] prepared thorough evidence of how they are aligning the regulatory plans related to […] treated water discharge with the IAEA safety standards,” said Caruso in a statement following the visit. According to the IAEA statement, “Before any water discharge begins – scheduled for this year – the IAEA will issue a comprehensive report containing the collected findings and conclusions of the Task Force across all aspects of the review conducted as of that time.”
In March 2011, an earthquake and tsunami resulted in a nuclear disaster in Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. After power was disrupted and emergency generators failed, three nuclear reactors onsite lost cooling capabilities and experienced a core meltdown.
Water used to cool the reactors, along with groundwater below the complex, became contaminated with radioactive materials. This water has been collected, treated, and stored onsite since 2011 in dozens of massive storage tanks that now crowd the nuclear complex.
Since 2021, the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) has been preparing the infrastructure for the “safe” release of Fukushima’s treated water through a process called the Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS). In August 2022, TEPCO announced the installation of facilities that will allow for water discharge after consulting with Japanese authorities and local residents. It vowed to cooperate with various stakeholders in explaining the systematic release of water and its scientific basis:
We will continue to do our utmost to increase the understanding of people of Fukushima and society at large regarding the handling of ALPS treated water as part of the decommissioning work, by focusing on our efforts to disseminate information based on scientific evidence to parties within and outside Japan in an easy-to-understand manner and taking every opportunity to listen to the concerns and opinions of the public and explain our approach and response.
But Henry Puna, the secretary general of the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF), reiterated the regional opposition to Japan’s plan of releasing Fukushima’s treated water into the Pacific Ocean:
Based on our experience with nuclear contamination, continuing with ocean discharge plans at this time is simply inconceivable and we do not have the luxury of time to sit around for four decades in order to ‘figure it out.’
The decision for any ocean release is not and should not only be a domestic matter for Japan, but a global and transnational issue that should give rise to the need to examine the issue in the context of obligations under international law.
I am asking today, what our Pacific people did not have the opportunity to ask decades ago when our region and our ocean was identified as a nuclear test field.
PIF enumerated alternative options such as “safe storage and radioactive decay, bioremediation, and use of treated water to make concrete for special applications.”
During a conference held at New Zealand’s University of Otago in November 2022, participants described Japan’s plan as a manifestation of “nuclear colonial violence”:
TEPCO and the Japanese government’s plan to discharge radioactive wastewater into the Pacific shows direct disregard for the sovereignty and self-determination of Pacific peoples and the ocean their livelihoods depend upon.
We condemn attempts by the Japanese government and TEPCO to trivialise the nature and extent of the damages the radioactive wastewater discharge will cause to the people, ocean life, and places of the Pacific.
Speaking on behalf of Pacific civil society groups, Noelene Nabulivou of DIVA for Equality urged Japanese authorities to consider the perspectives of Pacific communities:
Japan’s internal process of approval for this construction needs to consult the Pacific, as it threatens the livelihood of Pacific peoples and the environment we depend heavily on. This is all happening in the context of massive loss and damage from the climate emergency, that is also not of our making.
The Chinese foreign ministry called Japan’s decision to go ahead with its controversial plan “irresponsible” and “self-serving. Meanwhile, the US National Association of Marine Laboratories cited the “lack of adequate and accurate scientific data supporting Japan’s assertion of safety.” Robert Richmond, a marine biologist at the University of Hawaii, Manoa, noted that “there is a strong consensus internationally that continued use of the ocean for dumping waste is simply not sustainable.”
Local opposition to the contaminated water discharge has been supported by Sato Kazuyoshi, a municipal councilor in Iwaki, a city neighboring the Fukushima nuclear complex. In a Facebook post, Sato said:
On January 13, near the entrance to Onahama Port, Iwaki City, we held a rally, ‘Iwaki Citizens Against the Release of Contaminated Water from Nuclear Power Plants into the Ocean.’ The beginning of this year’s standing. On earlier that day, there were reports that government ministers had confirmed the release (of contaminated water) ‘from spring to summer.’
Since June 2021, we have been holding a this rally on the 13th of every month: ‘Don’t pollute the sea any more!’
At noon, I stood with an illustration banner by Eisaku Ando, a sculptor who moved from Iwaki to Nara, and a placard saying ‘Don’t pour contaminated water into the sea!’ Nearly 20 participants from their respective standpoints said that they would not allow contaminated water to be released into the ocean! and impassioned speeches. A Japanese citizen who had returned from Canada for a visit also joined us, showing the international spread of opposition to the ocean release of contaminated water.
TEPCO is working closely with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which has been releasing regular reports about the safety procedures being done at Fukushima. IAEA assured the public that it will release its comprehensive report before the actual discharge of treated water in about three months’ time.
Residents (foreground, left) speak out against Namie Town and the national government’s decision to lift the restrictions on the lifting of the restrictions, questioning the resumption of their farming operations.
January 31, 2023
On March 30, Namie Town, Fukushima Prefecture, held explanatory meetings for local residents in Fukushima and Sendai cities in preparation for the lifting of the evacuation order for the specific reconstruction and revitalization center (reconstruction base) located in the difficult-to-return zone. In response to the government’s claim that the requirements for lifting the evacuation order have been met, participants raised questions about the continued high radiation levels and the resumption of farming operations.
According to Namie Town’s plan for reconstruction centers, decontamination and infrastructure development will be completed in March of this year. Therefore, the evacuation order for the base is expected to be lifted by the end of March.
The lifting of the evacuation order requires three conditions: (1) a decrease in radiation levels, (2) decontamination and infrastructure improvement, and (3) sufficient consultation with local residents. Briefing sessions for residents were held at seven locations until February 5, and consultations have only just begun, but on February 30, the government decided that “the requirements for lifting the evacuation have been met as a result of a comprehensive assessment of the efforts made to restore the area.
Mayor Eiki Yoshida said, “There are 80% of the town’s land outside of the base, which is called ‘white land. We will strive for the lifting of the restrictions on the outside areas while keeping a close eye on the lifting of the restrictions at the end of March.
There are 302 households and 818 residents who can live in the recovery centers. As of March 25, there are 9 households and 18 people who have applied for accommodation in preparation for the lifting of the restrictions. The number of demolitions of houses and other structures has reached 310, and many people are worried that they do not have a home to return to, even if they want to stay in preparation or return home.
Akio Kanno, 71, who evacuated to Hyogo Prefecture and attended the Sendai meeting, said, “It is not reconstruction if there are almost no residents returning and no buildings. What are we going to do with the original community?
At a briefing in Fukushima City, many participants expressed concern about radiation exposure.
The government and the town explained that the radiation dose was below the evacuation standard of 20 millisieverts per year and that the results of demonstration cultivation showed that six crops, including spinach, komatsuna, and cabbage, were below safe standards.
However, Motoharu Shiga, 75, the head of a ward in the Suemori area, one of the reconstruction sites, and an evacuee to Fukushima City, said, “Root vegetables that were not subject to the demonstration cultivation are still highly radioactive. After returning home, we will not be able to eat only foods that are below the standard,” he pointed out. (Editorial board member Noriyoshi Otsuki) https://www.asahi.com/articles/ASR1Z7K7QR1ZUGTB004.html?iref=pc_photo_gallery_bottom
Tell Congress: Prevent Nuclear Catastrophe in Iran
Read the Public Inquiry Report, the Commissioners’ report, Surrendering Australia: The AUKUS Deception is available to download for free at aukuspublicinquiry.com. Or just watch the replay of the National Press Club Luncheon.
19 November – Webinar – The Reality of Reprocessing
Time: 11:00 AM Pacific Time (US & Canada) / 2:00 PM Eastern / 7:00 PM UK / 8:00 PM CET
