nuclear-news

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

The Fukushima controversy.

A well written article. Dr Imran Khalid raises all the important points. Definitely a must read!

Dr Imran Khalid March 04, 2023

The world is watching Japan with bated breath as the country contemplates a controversial move to dump nuclear wastewater from its Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean. This decision has generated intense opposition from neighbouring countries, including China and the 17-member Pacific Islands Forum – turning what was once an “internal” issue into a global concern. The potential hazards posed by radioactive water to marine ecology and marine biology in the Pacific Ocean have now become a matter of global concern. Earlier this year, Japan announced plans to discharge over 1.3 million metric tons of contaminated water into the Pacific Ocean. This decision was met with serious concerns from stakeholders due to the potential for irretrievable damage to marine life. The nuclear waste is a product of the meltdown of the Daiichi nuclear reactors in March 2011. The disaster was caused by a massive earthquake, which triggered a tsunami that inundated the reactors. The resulting nuclear waste was being stored in around 1,000 tanks, which have been reaching their storage capacity limit. The decision to discharge this contaminated water into the ocean is a cause for concern for several reasons. Firstly, it has the potential to cause irreparable damage to the marine ecology and marine biology in the Pacific Ocean. The risk of contamination spreading beyond the Pacific Ocean also means that this issue is not just a local or regional one. It has the potential to impact global ecosystems and biodiversity. Radioactive contamination can have long-term effects on marine life, which could impact entire ecosystems. This could have knock-on effects that would be felt for years to come. Secondly, this decision sets a dangerous precedent that could lead to similar actions being taken in other parts of the world. Thirdly, there are concerns that the decision to discharge the contaminated water into the ocean has been taken unilaterally, without proper consultation with stakeholders. This raises questions about transparency and accountability, and it could undermine efforts to promote responsible environmental management practices. Safe and effective alternatives for disposing of water contaminated by nuclear material from the Fukushima nuclear power plant exist, including evaporation or underground storage. However, the Japanese government has chosen to discharge the water into the ocean, which is the “least expensive” but speedy solution. This decision suggests that Tokyo’s primary focus is not on preventing or minimising harm to human health and the environment.

Moreover, it is essential that there is proper consultation with stakeholders about the best way to manage this situation. This includes engaging with local communities and inhabitant groups in the Pacific Islands, who may have unique perspectives on the potential impacts of this decision. This issue highlights the importance of responsible environmental management practices and the need for greater transparency and accountability in decision-making processes. The decision to discharge contaminated water into the ocean has caused outrage among the international community. Ironically, Japan announced its plans to discharge the contaminated water into the ocean while the IAEA task force was about to visit Japan for a review. This decision has raised concerns about Japan’s transparency and accountability in addressing the issue. Proper consultation and engagement would ensure that all stakeholders are heard and that the most responsible and sustainable solution is chosen. This issue highlights the importance of responsible environmental management practices and the need for greater transparency and accountability in decision-making processes.

The lack of independent verification of data and evidence provided by Japan also raises concerns for the Pacific islands and international organisations regarding the dumping of nuclear wastewater into the ocean. Japan’s disregard for an opposition is a significant concern, as the lack of criticism from the US and the West emboldens Japan to ignore the concerns of its people and the international community. The delegation of the Pacific Island Forum (PIF) Secretariat recently met with Japanese officials to discuss Tokyo’s plan to release contaminated wastewater from the Fukushima nuclear power station. While Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs assures that the water has been treated to meet regulatory standards, Pacific Island countries are deeply concerned about the potential consequences of this release. The Pacific Islanders’ connection to the ocean is fundamental to their way of life. It has molded the cultural and historical essence of their communities, and there exists an indissoluble bond between the ocean. As a result, they feel a strong sense of guardianship over the Pacific Ocean and are rightfully alarmed by Japan’s plan to release contaminated water into it. The same is the case with China and South Korea who have been continuously pursuing this issue and putting all kinds of diplomatic pressure on Tokyo to desist from such a controversial step.

The potential long-term impacts on the marine environment and human health must be considered. Therefore, Japan must get the disposal of the Fukushima wastewater right. Pacific Islanders do not want the dumping of nuclear wastewater into the ocean to become the norm. Japan must take its reservations seriously, given that even its own fishing industry is deeply concerned about the current release plan.

https://www.nation.com.pk/04-Mar-2023/the-fukushima-controversy

March 5, 2023 Posted by | Fuk 2023 | , , , , | Leave a comment

Debate over Fukushima statue takes on a life of its own online

Capture du 2018-08-22 08-06-02.png
Aug 18, 2018
Few topics have proven to be more sensitive online than the present state of Fukushima Prefecture. Years after the earthquake, tsunami and nuclear disaster wreaked havoc in the region, the topic of radiation continues to spark intense debate from all corners. A statue that was unveiled in the prefecture last week has just added plenty of fuel to the fire.
Contemporary artist Kenji Yanobe donated a statue titled “Sun Child” to the city of Fukushima at the beginning of July. The work of art depicts a child clad in something resembling a hazmat suit and holding a helmet. A radiation counter on the child’s chest reads “000.”
The statue was inspired by the Fukushima nuclear crisis. It debuted in 2011, traversing the country (including Fukushima’s airport in 2012) and  generally attracting a positive reception. Even while it was being assembled in its new home, people snapped photos of it and remarked how “cool” it looked.
However, people’s views regarding the statue began to fragment after it was officially unveiled on Aug. 3, with debate intensifying last week.
Fukushima residents started to post negative comments about the statue after a local news organization published a short story on it. Some argued that it was too soon to erect an artwork along such lines in a city still recovering from a nuclear crisis, while others noted that it was scaring children. Yanobe had created the statue to celebrate a nuclear-free future, but it ultimately had the opposite effect and reminded people that this was still far from reality.
After a few days, the issue started to get picked up by national and international news outlets. The questionable science behind the artwork was  frequently brought up, with many arguing that natural radiation alone would prevent any counter from hitting zero, among other complaints.
Many netizens were simply irked at the inclusion of the hazmat suit, arguing that such imagery was misleading.
As serious as all of this sounds, let’s take a quick detour to talk about another aspect of the statue that captured the internet’s attention: its crotch. While plenty of discussion on message boards such as 2chan focused on the lasting impact it could have on the local economy or the general challenge of creating art that has been inspired by tragedy, many zeroed in on the tap extending from the front of its trousers. It carried over to Twitter, too, with one user wondering how effective the statue could ever be if schoolkids were distracted by the contents of its nether regions. Coupled with other jokes and references, it’s a good reminder that memes will always be created online, whether or not the issue is particularly sensitive.
Some of the discussion online focused on the art itself. Yanobe’s “Sun Child” has to date been largely been celebrated by domestic art critics.
Anti-nuclear pieces have been central to Yanobe’s work since the early 1990s — he even went to Chernobyl and documented the fallout from the nuclear disaster there.
By placing his art in the heart of a place that was affected by a nuclear accident, Yanobe changed the way people viewed “Sun Child.” Once the mystery had been stripped from his work, ordinary folks introduced new interpretations, with some slamming the idea of someone hiding behind “artistic license” to dodge criticism.
Fukushima Mayor Hiroshi Kohata claimed the artwork reflected an optimistic view of the future, but noted that art, unlike science, can sometimes be abstract. This latter point, though, has become a tricky matter at times when the majority of conversation online feels reactionary, and not just in Japan.
Some of the opinions voiced about “Sun Child” centered on the challenge of creating political art that doesn’t offend (this is the closest to a real defense of the statue I’ve seen). Others said it might have looked better if Yanobe had actually spent more time in Fukushima, instead of simply “making a cup of tea and leaving.” For his part, Yanobe apologized.
Part of the reason the statue has attracted so much attention online is that Fukushima’s radioactive status remains contentious. A number of sites aim to dispel myths surrounding the perceived lack of radiation safety in Fukushima. Twitter user @nonbeekaeru takes the opposite approach, arguing that radiation is traveling around the world and could envelop the 2020 Olympics or poison K-pop stars. As an example, check out the new Netflix show “Dark Tourist,” which features an episode about Fukushima that paints the prefecture as a nuclear wasteland.
Indeed, this is the real reason this statue has caused a stir online: It’s another reminder that what happened in Fukushima actually lingers over the whole country and continues to shape the way in which people see the prefecture. With social media, though, locals can counter such misinformation, whether or not they use art to do so or not.
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2018/08/18/national/media-national/debate-fukushima-statue-takes-life-online/#.W3mPaRgyXrc

August 22, 2018 Posted by | Fukushima 2018 | , , | Leave a comment