'Absolutely logical' Japan's Fukushima water release draws interest: IAEA chief

Protesters march toward the Japanese Embassy during rally against the Japanese government's decision to release treated radioactive water from the damaged Fukushima nuclear power plant, in Seoul, South Korea, Saturday, July 8, 2023. (AP Photo/Ahn Young-joon)

09 Jul 2023 

SEOUL: It is "absolutely logical" that Japan's plan to release treated radioactive water from its Fukushima nuclear plant is attracting great interest in the region, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Rafael Grossi, said on Sunday (Jul 9).

Grossi also said he understands concerns remain over the plan but added that a review by the IAEA released last week found it was "in conformity with international safety standards" if executed according to plan.

Grossi met with South Korea's opposition Democratic Party members on Sunday who expressed strong public concerns over Japan's plan and criticised the IAEA's findings.

"The issue at hand today has attracted a lot of interest, and this is absolutely logical because the actions and the way in which Japan will be addressing this ... have important implications," Grossi said in the meeting.

Students wearing masks featuring Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Rafael Grossi attend a protest against Japan's plan to discharge treated radioactive water from the tsunami-wrecked Fukushima plant into the ocean, in Seoul, South Korea, Jul 7, 2023. (Photo: Reuters/Yonhap)

A Democratic Party member who chairs a special committee on the issue said the IAEA's findings had "shortcomings", and the widespread public concerns over safety in the country were "legitimate and reasonable".

"We deeply regret that the IAEA concluded Japan's plan to discharge contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant meets international standards," Wi Seong-gon, the committee chairman, told Grossi.

Grossi was met with angry protests by civic groups as he arrived in South Korea on Friday from Japan and drew street rallies on Saturday criticising the plan.

South Korea's government said on Friday it respected the IAEA's report and that its own analysis had found the release will not have "any meaningful impact" on its waters.

Protesters stage a rally against the Japanese government's decision to release treated radioactive water from the damaged Fukushima nuclear power plant, in Seoul, South Korea, Jul 8, 2023.

 (Photo: AP/Ahn Young-joon)

Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin on Wednesday criticised the move towards discharging the water and threatened action if the plan should move ahead.

North Korea also criticised IAEA's backing of Japan's plan, calling it "unjust" and a demonstration of double standards, citing the UN nuclear watchdog's work to curb Pyongyang's nuclear programme.

North Korea has faced UN Security Council sanctions for its six underground nuclear tests.

South Korea: IAEA chief discusses Fukushima water concerns

Rafael Grossi traveled to South Korea to advocate for Japan's plan to release water from the Fukushima nuclear plant amid harsh criticism from the South Korean public and opposition party.

IAEA Chief Rafael Grossi was met by protesters upon arrival in South Korea

YONHAP NEWS AGENCY via REUTERS

Rafael Grossi, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), arrived in South Korea following his trip to Japan, in an attempt to allay concerns about Japan's plan to release treated radioactive water from the Fukushima nuclear plant.

Grossi's three-day visit included meetings with South Korea's foreign minister and a top nuclear safety official.

Demonstrators criticized the IAEA for not being able to verify environmental standards

Yonhap/picture alliance

Upon arriving in South Korea, Grossi was met by protesters at Gimpo Airport in Seoul. Hundreds of protesters took to the streets in central Seoul, criticizing the IAEA's review as inadequate. Demonstrators held signs criticizing the IAEA and Japan's plan, with one stating, "IAEA is not qualified to verify environmental standards."

There had been "no disagreement" among experts involved in the review that gave the go-ahead for the decades-long project, the IAEA chief said in an interview with South Korea's Yonhap news agency.

"This is the final comprehensive report... No experts have come to me saying he or she disagrees on the contents," he said.

"It was a very thorough process."

Japan to release treated Fukushima wastewater into Pacific  02:43

Opposition wants to put halt to the plan

South Korea conducted an independent review of the plan and concluded that Japan would meet or exceed international standards, with the release having minimal environmental consequences.

During a press conference held in Japan, Grossi expressed his intention to also meet with South Korea's opposition party, which had been critical of the discharge plan.

The leader of the opposition Democratic Party, Lee Jae-myung, has urged the government to try to stop the plan, suggesting that it be taken to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.

The South Korean government stated that it respected the IAEA's report. President Yoo Suk Yeol's administration has been cautious in its stance on Japan's proposal, aiming to foster better ties with Tokyo.

Nevertheless, the plan has sparked anger and concern among South Koreans, leading some individuals to stock up on sea salt. Despite South Korea giving its approval to the discharge plan, a ban on food and seafood products from the Fukushima region will remain active.

los/ab (AFP, Reuters)

South Koreans protest against Japan’s Fukushima water release plan during IAEA chief’s visit

Editorial by SCMP 

No room for mistakes with release of water from Fukushima

As Japan prepares to put plan at wrecked nuclear power station into action, the radiation concerns of neighbouring countries must be addressed

Published:  8 Jul, 2023

People gather near the Japanese Embassy in Seoul on Friday to protest against Japan’s plan to release treated radioactive water from the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the sea. 

Photo: Kyodo

Radiation cannot be seen or felt, so it is often feared regardless of whether it exists at benign natural levels or dangerous doses.

It is understandable that grave concern has been raised by Japan’s plans to release radioactive water from its wrecked Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant into the Pacific Ocean.

The water was contaminated while cooling three reactors that melted down after a massive 2011 earthquake and tsunami that hit the country’s coast killing thousands of people. For 12 years, the waste liquid has been stored on-site in 1,000 huge tanks that are now nearly full.

Japan has proposed resolving the crisis by filtering and diluting the water before releasing it through an underwater tunnel that stretches 1km (0.6 miles) into the ocean.



Why fears remain about Japan's plan to release treated Fukushima nuclear plant water into the sea

Tokyo insists that radiation levels in the water will be below international safety standards, an assessment supported by the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Neighbouring countries are far from convinced. Pacific island nations fear the water will contribute to nuclear contamination of the so-called Blue Pacific.

South Korea is on edge with panicked consumers buying sea salt, and seafood markets stepping up the frequency of radiation tests. The Seoul government, however, said yesterday that it respected the IAEA review.

China has extended its ban on edible imports from 10 Japanese prefectures, including Fukushima, and will require full screening of all shipments from other regions instead of spot checks.

Customs officials said Tokyo “failed to fully reflect expert opinions” and “all necessary measures” must be taken ensure the safety of Chinese consumers, who are already boycotting cosmetics from Japan.

IAEA did not fully consult experts in Fukushima report: Chinese researcher
7 Jul 2023


Yesterday, Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu said the government was considering an outright ban on food from high-risk areas. Hong Kong currently does not allow imports of live or frozen aquatic products from Fukushima and four neighbouring prefectures without a certificate showing they are free of radiation.

Such action will deepen concerns among those in Japan’s fishing industry who have already voiced opposition to the plan saying it will only increase reputational damage from the initial disaster.

The liquid is too dangerous to simply leave in place, so it seems unlikely that Japan will change its plans.

But since releasing more than 1 million tonnes of water may take two to three decades, Tokyo must diligently monitor the discharge for as long as it takes.

It is imperative that those authorities concerned act responsibly and provide clear, transparent details about how such hazardous waste is being handled, since failure to get it right may have a profound impact on public health.

China imposes ban on Japanese seafood over Fukushima water release plan

JAPAN

No tritium found in fish after treated Fukushima water release

Simon Druker
Sat, August 26, 2023 

Fish samples from the ocean around Japan’s Fukushima nuclear complex are registering normal and do not contain radioactive contaminants after the discharge of treated wastewater from the plant, officials said Saturday. File Photo by Keizo Mori/UPI


Aug. 26 (UPI) -- Fish samples from the ocean around Japan's Fukushima nuclear complex are registering normal and do not contain radioactive contaminants after the discharge of treated wastewater from the plant, officials said Saturday.

The Japanese government did not detect any amount of tritium in the first fish samples taken in the water around the damaged plant.

Japan's Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries tested fish caught within five miles of the discharged water, the Kyodo News Agency reported.

The declaration comes after Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings said Friday none of the radioactive element was detectable in seawater samples.

The company expects to gradually release up to 22 trillion becquerels of tritium per year from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station over the next 20 or 30 years.

An aerial picture of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant and its tanks containing radioactive water in Okuma, Fukushima Prefecture, Japan, the day before treated water began being released into the ocean. Photo by JiJi Press/EPA-EFE

Officials on Thursday began releasing treated water from the damaged nuclear plant into the ocean, amid strong environmental pushback from the fishing industry and neighboring countries.

China on Thursday suspended all seafood imports from Japan ahead of the water discharge, citing the possibility of tritium contamination.

The radioactive isotope of hydrogen is considered unstable and radioactive. Tritium occurs naturally but can also be produced as a byproduct of nuclear reactors.

The United Nations nuclear watchdog has said the procedure aligned with global safety standards.

Groundwater around the stricken nuclear facility has been contaminated since a catastrophic explosion crippled the site in March 2011.

Testing is taking place within a 25-mile radius of the water discharge site.

More than 1 million tons of water have already been stored for treatment and eventual discharge.

Last year, Tokyo Electric said it would raise seafood at the Fukushima site in order to dispel rumors about contamination.

Officials will continue measuring tritium levels in both water and fish each time treated wastewater from the Fukushima plant is released into the ocean.

Volunteer moms are distressed about the water being discharged from the Fukushima nuclear plant

Janis Mackey Frayer and Larissa Gao
Sat, August 26, 2023


IWAKI, Japan — In a laboratory on the third floor of a nondescript building here, a group of volunteers pour water from plastic jerry cans through filters into large round-bottomed vessels. Others chop up dried fish and other foods and put them into small blenders about the size of a coffee bean grinder.

These people aren’t trained scientists. They’re mothers who are worried about the legacy being left for their children after the decision to release treated radioactive water from the wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant into the Pacific Ocean.

The gradual discharge of an estimated 1.3 million metric tons of wastewater began Thursday, after repeated assurances from the Japanese government and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog, that it is safe.

But around 40 miles away, in the lab where they test water samples drawn off the shore near the plant, the lab’s manager, Ai Kimura, said she was worried that the discharge might ruin the ecosystem in this area on Japan’s central-eastern coast.

“I worry about the negative legacy, which is the contamination,” Kimura, 44, told NBC News Thursday, adding that it was a “negative legacy to our children.”

Ai Kimura. (Arata Yamamoto / NBC News)

The water being released, enough to fill 500 Olympic-size swimming pools and still building, has been used to cool fuel rods in the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant’s reactors since a 9.0-magnitude earthquake and tsunami in 2011 set off a meltdown that spewed radioactive particles into the air in the world’s worst nuclear accident since Chernobyl in 1986, in what was then the Soviet Union.

Though the water is filtered and diluted to remove most radioactive elements, it still contains low levels of tritium, an isotope of hydrogen that is difficult to strip out.

Fukushima shoreline. (Arata Yamamoto / NBC News)

The Japanese government and the plant’s operator, the Tokyo Electric Power Co. (Tepco), have said that the water which they say will be released over the next 30 to 40 years and is being held in hundreds of tanks on land, must be removed to prevent accidental leaks and make room for the plant’s decommissioning, more than a decade after the disaster.

Tepco, which has in the past been accused of a lack of transparency, has vowed to put safety first and stop the discharges if problems arise.

Shortly after the first batch of Fukushima water was discharged on Thursday, the IAEA said that its on-site analysis confirmed that the levels of tritium were “far below” the operational limit.

State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said Friday that the United States was also satisfied with Japan’s “safe, transparent, and science-based process.”

There have nonetheless been loud objections from neighboring countries, including China, where customs authorities announced an immediate ban on all imports of Japanese “aquatic products,” including seafood, to “comprehensively guard against the risk of radioactive contamination to food safety caused by nuclear-contaminated water discharges.”

Although the South Korean government reiterated this week that it sees no scientific or technical issue with the water’s release, police in the country on Thursday arrested 16 protesters accused of trying to break into the Japanese Embassy in the capital, Seoul.

Dolly Peng, 23, looks at sushi in a Hong Kong store that has a sign saying it is from Norway, Argentina and Canada. (Cheng Cheng / NBC News )

But according to data posted online by the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, water with much higher levels of tritium has been discharged by nuclear facilities in countries including China, South Korea, Canada and France in line with local regulations.

In the area around the Fukushima plant the impact of the disaster is eerily clear. Three miles away, in the town of Futaba, many of the abandoned houses look like they haven’t been touched since the day of the earthquake.

Curtains flap through broken windows, pictures and clocks are still on the walls and debris is strewn all over. Cars and bicycles are covered in dust.

Back in the lab, which operates as a nonprofit called Tarachin and funds its state-of-the-art equipment with donations, Kimura said that its testing had confirmed that radiation levels in agricultural products and the ocean in the accident region had been decreasing gradually.

But she said she feared the discharge might ruin the promising future of this area’s ecosystem.

“If the treated water is once again discharged, we believe that the same tragedy from 12 years ago will be repeated,” she said.

Janis Mackey Frayer reported from Fukushima, and Larissa Gao from Hong Kong.

This article was originally published on NBCNews.com

At Fukushima Daiichi, decommissioning the nuclear plant is far more challenging than water release

MARI YAMAGUCHI
Sat, August 26, 2023

This aerial view shows the treated water diluted by seawater flowing into a secondary water then into a connected undersea tunnel for an offshore discharge at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Fukushima, northern Japan, Thursday, Aug. 24, 2023. For the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, managing the ever-growing radioactive water held in more than 1,000 tanks has been a safety risk and a burden since the meltdown in March 2011. The start of treated wastewater release Thursday marked a milestone for the decommissioning, which is expected to take decades. 

(Kyodo News via AP, File)

FUTABA, Japan (AP) — For the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, managing the ever-growing volume of radioactive wastewater held in more than 1,000 tanks has been a safety risk and a burden since the meltdown in March 2011. Its release marks a milestone for the decommissioning, which is expected to take decades.

But it's just the beginning of the challenges ahead, such as the removal of the fatally radioactive melted fuel debris that remains in the three damaged reactors, a daunting task if ever accomplished.

Here's a look at what's going on with the plant's decommissioning:

WHAT HAPPENED AT FUKUSHIMA DAIICHI?

A magnitude 9.0 quake on March 11, 2011, triggered a massive tsunami that destroyed the plant’s power supply and cooling systems, causing three reactors to melt and spew large amounts of radiation. Highly contaminated cooling water applied to the damaged reactors has leaked continuously into building basements and mixed with groundwater. The water is collected and treated. Then, some is recycled as cooling water for melted fuel, while the rest is held in tanks that cover much of the plant.

WHY RELEASE THE WATER?

Fukushima Daiichi has struggled to handle the contaminated water since the 2011 disaster. The government and the plant operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings, say the tanks must be removed to make way for facilities needed to decommission the plant, such as storage space for melted fuel debris and other highly contaminated waste.

WILL THE WASTEWATER RELEASE PUSH DECOMMISSIONING FORWARD?

Not right away, because the water release is slow and the decommissioning is making little progress. TEPCO says it plans to release 31,200 tons of treated water by the end of March 2024, which would empty only 10 tanks out of 1,000 because of the continued production of wastewater at the plant.

The pace will later pick up, and about 1/3 of the tanks will be removed over the next 10 years, freeing up space for the plant's decommissioning, said TEPCO executive Junichi Matsumoto, who is in charge of the treated water release. He says the water would be released gradually over the span of 30 years, but as long as the melted fuel stays in the reactors, it requires cooling water, which creates more wastewater.

Emptied tanks also need to be scrapped for storage. Highly radioactive sludge, a byproduct of filtering at the treatment machine, also is a concern.

WHAT CHALLENGES ARE AHEAD?

About 880 tons of fatally radioactive melted nuclear fuel remain inside the reactors. Robotic probes have provided some information but the status of the melted debris remains largely unknown.

Earlier this year, a remote-controlled underwater vehicle successfully collected a tiny sample from inside Unit 1’s reactor — only a spoonful of the melted fuel debris in the three reactors. That’s 10 times the amount of damaged fuel removed at the Three Mile Island cleanup following its 1979 partial core melt.

Trial removal of melted debris using a giant remote-controlled robotic arm will begin in Unit 2 later this year after a nearly two-year delay. Spent fuel removal from Unit 1 reactor’s cooling pool is set to start in 2027 after a 10-year delay. Once all the spent fuel is removed, the focus will turn in 2031 to taking melted debris out of the reactors. But debris removal methods for two other reactors have not been decided.

Matsumoto says “technical difficulty involving the decommissioning is much higher” than the water release and involves higher risks of exposures by plant workers to remove spent fuel or melted fuel.

“Measures to reduce radiation exposure risks by plant workers will be increasingly difficult,” Matsumoto said. “Reduction of exposure risks is the basis for achieving both Fukushima's recovery and decommissioning.”

HOW BADLY WERE THE REACTORS DAMAGED?

Inside the worst-hit Unit 1, most of its reactor core melted and fell to the bottom of the primary containment chamber and possibly further into the concrete basement. A robotic probe sent inside the Unit 1 primary containment chamber found that its pedestal — the main supporting structure directly under its core — was extensively damaged.

Most of its thick concrete exterior was missing, exposing the internal steel reinforcement, and the nuclear regulators have requested TEPCO to make risk assessment.

CAN DECOMMISSIONING END BY 2051 AS PLANNED?

The government has stuck to its initial 30-to-40-year target for completing the decommissioning, without defining what that means.

An overly ambitious schedule could result in unnecessary radiation exposures for plant workers and excess environmental damage. Some experts say it would be impossible to remove all the melted fuel debris by 2051 and would take 50-100 years, if achieved at all.

10 years after Fukushima, safety is still nuclear power's greatest challenge


Najmedin Meshkati,

 Professor of Engineering and International Relations, 

University of Southern California

 Kiyoshi Kurokawa,

 Professor Emeritus, University of Tokyo

Fri, March 5, 2021

An International Atomic Energy Agency investigator examines Reactor Unit 3 at the damaged Fukushima Daiichi plant, May 27, 2011. Greg Webb, IAEA/Flickr, CC BY-SA

Ten years ago, on March 11, 2011, the biggest recorded earthquake in Japanese history hit the country’s northeast coast. It was followed by a tsunami that traveled up to 6 miles (10 kilometers) inland, reaching heights of over 140 feet (43.3 meters) in some areas and sweeping entire towns away in seconds.

This disaster left nearly 20,000 people dead or missing. It also destroyed the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station and released radioactive materials over a large area. The accident triggered widespread evacuations, large economic losses and the eventual shutdown of all nuclear power plants in Japan. A decade later, the nuclear industry has yet to fully to address safety concerns that Fukushima exposed.

We are scholars specializing in engineering and medicine and public policy, and have advised our respective governments on nuclear power safety. Kiyoshi Kurokawa chaired an independent national commission, known as the NAIIC, created by the Diet of Japan to investigate the root causes of the Fukushima Daiichi accident. Najmedin Meshkati served as a member and technical adviser to a committee appointed by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences to identify lessons from this event for making U.S. nuclear plants safer and more secure.

Those reviews and many others concluded that Fukushima was a man-made accident, triggered by natural hazards, that could and should have been avoided. Experts widely agreed that the root causes were lax regulatory oversight in Japan and an ineffective safety culture at the utility that operated the plant.

These problems are far from unique to Japan. As long as commercial nuclear power plants operate anywhere in the world, we believe it is critical for all nations to learn from what happened at Fukushima and continue doubling down on nuclear safety.

Failing to anticipate and plan

The 2011 disaster delivered a devastating one-two punch to the Fukushima plant. First, the magnitude 9.0 earthquake knocked out off-site electric power. Next, the tsunami breached the plant’s protective sea wall and swamped portions of the site.

Flooding disabled monitoring, control and cooling functions in multiple units of the six-reactor complex. Despite heroic efforts by plant workers, three reactors sustained severe damage to their radioactive cores and three reactor buildings were damaged by hydrogen explosions.

Off-site releases of radioactive materials contaminated land in Fukushima and several neighboring prefectures. Some 165,000 people left the area, and the Japanese government established an exclusion zone around the plant that extended over 311 square miles (807 kilometers) in its largest phase.

For the first time in the history of constitutional democratic Japan, the Japanese Parliament passed a law creating an independent national commission to investigate the root causes of this disaster. In its report, the commission concluded that Japan’s Nuclear Safety Commission had never been independent from the industry, nor from the powerful Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry, which promotes nuclear power.

For its part, plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company, or TEPCO, had a history of disregard for safety. The company had recently released an error-prone assessment of tsunami hazards at Fukushima that significantly underestimated the risks.


Events at the Onagawa Nuclear Power Station, located 39 miles (64 kilometers) from Fukushima, told a contrasting story. Onogawa, which was owned and operated by the Tohoku Electric Power Company, was closer to the earthquake’s epicenter and was hit by an even larger tsunami. Its three operating reactors were the same type and vintage as those at Fukushima, and were under the same weak regulatory oversight.

But Onogawa shut down safely and was remarkably undamaged. In our view, this was because the Tohoku utility had a deep-seated, proactive safety culture. The company learned from earthquakes and tsunamis elsewhere – including a major disaster in Chile in 2010 – and continuously improved its countermeasures, while TEPCO overlooked and ignored these warnings.
Regulatory capture and safety culture

When a regulated industry manages to cajole, control or manipulate agencies that oversee it, rendering them feckless and subservient, the result is known as regulatory capture. As the NAIIC report concluded, Fukushima was a textbook example. Japanese regulators “did not monitor or supervise nuclear safety….They avoided their direct responsibilities by letting operators apply regulations on a voluntary basis,” the report observed.

Effective regulation is necessary for nuclear safety. Utilities also need to create internal safety cultures – a set of characteristics and attitudes that make safety issues an overriding priority. For an industry, safety culture functions like the human body’s immune system, protecting it against pathogens and fending off diseases.

A plant that fosters a positive safety culture encourages employees to ask questions and to apply a rigorous and prudent approach to all aspects of their jobs. It also fosters open communications between line workers and management. But TEPCO’s culture reflected a Japanese mindset that emphasizes hierarchy and acquiescence and discourages asking questions.

There is ample evidence that human factors such as operator errors and poor safety culture played an instrumental key role in all three major accidents that have occurred at nuclear power plants: Three Mile Island in the U.S. in 1979, Chernobyl in Ukraine in 1986 and Fukushima Daiichi in 2011. Unless nuclear nations do better on both counts, this list is likely to grow.
Global nuclear safety grade: Incomplete

Today there are some 440 nuclear power reactors operating around the world, with about 50 under construction in countries including China, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates.

Many advocates argue that in light of the threat of climate change and the increasing need for carbon-free baseload electricity generation, nuclear power should play a role in the world’s future energy mix. Others call for abolishing nuclear power. But that may not be feasible in the foreseeable future.

In our view, the most urgent priority is developing tough, system-oriented nuclear safety standards, strong safety cultures and much closer cooperation between countries and their independent regulators. We see worrisome indications in the U.S. that independent nuclear regulation is eroding, and that nuclear utilities are resisting pressure to learn and delaying adoption of internationally accepted safety practices, such as adding filters to prevent radioactive releases from reactor containment buildings with the same characteristics as Fukushima Daiichi.

Man in protective radiation suit and respirator.

The most crucial lesson we see is the need to counteract nuclear nationalism and isolationism. Ensuring close cooperation between countries developing nuclear projects is essential today as the forces of populism, nationalism and anti-globalism spread.

We also believe the International Atomic Energy Agency, whose mission is promoting safe, secure and peaceful uses of nuclear energy, should urge its member states to find a balance between national sovereignty and international responsibility when it comes to operating nuclear power reactors in their territories. As Chernobyl and Fukushima taught the world, radiation fallout does not stop at national boundaries.


As a start, Persian Gulf countries should set aside political wrangling and recognize that with the startup of a nuclear power plant in the United Arab Emirates and others planned in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, they have a common interest in nuclear safety and collective emergency response. The entire region is vulnerable to radiation fallout and water contamination from a nuclear accident anywhere in the Gulf.

We believe the world remains at the same juncture it faced in 1989, when then-Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. made this perceptive argument:

“A decade ago, Three Mile Island was the spark that ignited the funeral pyre for a once-promising energy source. As the nuclear industry asks the nation for a second look in the context of global warming, it is fair to watch how its advocates respond to strengthened safety oversight. That will be the measure of whether nuclear energy becomes a phoenix or an extinct species.”

This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It was written by: Kiyoshi Kurokawa, University of Tokyo and Najmedin Meshkati, University of Southern California.

Read more:

The demise of US nuclear power in 4 charts


A decade after the Deepwater Horizon explosion, offshore drilling is still unsafe

Kiyoshi Kurokawa, MD, MACP, is Professor Emeritus at the University of Tokyo and Professor at the National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies, Tokyo. He served as Chairman of the National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission, which released its official report in July 2012. The English translation of his book, Regulatory Capture: Will Japan Change? is expected to be released in 2021.

Najmedin Meshkati, Ph.D., CPE, is a Professor of Civil/Environmental, Industrial & Systems Engineering, and International Relations at the University of Southern California (USC). He teaches and conducts research on technological systems safety and has visited many nuclear power stations around the world, including Chernobyl (1997), Mihama (1999), and Fukushima Daiichi and Daini (2012). He served as a member and technical advisor on the U.S. National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council Committee on Lessons Learned from the Fukushima Nuclear Accident for Improving Safety and Security of U.S. Nuclear Plants.

Detrimental secondary health effects after disasters and pandemics

Researchers from Osaka University showed an increase in major non-communicable diseases after the Fukushima disaster and COVID-19 outbreak

Peer-Reviewed Publication

OSAKA UNIVERSITY

 

IMAGE: FIG. (A) CHANGE IN PREVALENCE OF DISEASES AFTER THE FUKUSHIMA DISASTER (FUKUSHIMA PREFECTURE); (B) CHANGE IN PREVALENCE OF DISEASES AFTER THE COVID-19 OUTBREAK (THE WHOLE OF JAPAN). ERROR BARS REPRESENT 95% UNCERTAINTY INTERVALS. view more 

CREDIT: MICHIO MURAKAMI, SHUHEI NOMURA: ANNUAL PREVALENCE OF NON-COMMUNICABLE DISEASES AND IDENTIFICATION OF VULNERABLE POPULATIONS FOLLOWING THE FUKUSHIMA DISASTER AND COVID-19 PANDEMIC,INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DISASTER RISK REDUCTION,2022,103471, HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.1016/J.IJDRR.2022.103471.

Osaka, Japan - Disasters and pandemics can affect the physical and psychological health of the people involved even after the events have occurred. These effects can include non-communicable chronic diseases. Now, researchers at Osaka University have identified the similarities and differences in secondary health effects in people who have experienced disasters and pandemics.

After the devastating Great East Japan Earthquake and the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station accident in Japan in 2011, non-communicable diseases have increased since that time. In a seven-year follow-up after the Fukushima disaster, a previous study revealed the age-adjusted prevalence of diabetes in both evacuees and non-evacuees significantly increased. Similar concerns existed regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and its potential impact on chronic illnesses. This meant many restrictions were implemented to ensure the safety and health of the people of Japan. To stop the spread of infection, people were encouraged to stay at home and work from home. Perhaps as a result of this, increased body weight among certain populations and mental disorders were observed.

In this study, the changes in the prevalence of diseases in Japan, including hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and mental disorders, before and after the Fukushima disaster and the COVID-19 pandemic were reviewed using a health insurance dataset over a long period of time. First, the changes in the prevalence of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and mental disorders over nine years following the Fukushima disaster were analyzed. Second, the changes in prevalence before and after the COVID-19 pandemic were examined. Results were examined by age and sex to determine the most significantly affected groups.

Results of this study showed that the prevalence of all four diseases increased in Fukushima Prefecture after the Fukushima disaster and in the whole of Japan after the COVID-19 outbreak as well. The increased rates of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and mental disorders were higher in females aged 40-74 years after the Fukushima disaster. However, after the COVID-19 outbreak, the increase in prevalence rates of all four diseases was higher among males aged 0-39 years.

“This study has shed some light on identifying the vulnerable populations involved and assessing the secondary effect of disasters on the mental and physical health of these people” says lead author, Michio Murakami.

The importance of supporting secondary health effects after disasters and pandemics are now being recognized and can lead to improved post-disaster policies and recommendations that focus on health promotion and effective prevention strategies.

###

The article, “Annual prevalence of non-communicable diseases and identification of vulnerable populations following the Fukushima disaster and COVID-19 pandemic,” was published in the International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction at DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.103471

About Osaka University

Osaka University was founded in 1931 as one of the seven imperial universities of Japan and is now one of Japan's leading comprehensive universities with a broad disciplinary spectrum. This strength is coupled with a singular drive for innovation that extends throughout the scientific process, from fundamental research to the creation of applied technology with positive economic impacts. Its commitment to innovation has been recognized in Japan and around the world, being named Japan's most innovative university in 2015 (Reuters 2015 Top 100) and one of the most innovative institutions in the world in 2017 (Innovative Universities and the Nature Index Innovation 2017). Now, Osaka University is leveraging its role as a Designated National University Corporation selected by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology to contribute to innovation for human welfare, sustainable development of society, and social transformation.

Website: https://resou.osaka-u.ac.jp/en

---

JOURNAL

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction

DOI

10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.103471 

METHOD OF RESEARCH

Observational study

SUBJECT OF RESEARCH

People

ARTICLE TITLE

Annual prevalence of non-communicable diseases and identification of vulnerable populations following the Fukushima disaster and COVID-19 pandemic

Residents and fishermen file a lawsuit demanding a halt to the release of Fukushima wastewater

MARI YAMAGUCHI
Fri, September 8, 2023 



 TV screen shows a news report on the release of the treated radioactive water of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant on Aug. 24, 2023, in Tokyo. Fishermen and residents of Fukushima and five other prefectures along Japan’s northeastern coast filed a lawsuit Friday, Sept. 8, demanding a halt to the ongoing release of treated radioactive wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant into the sea.

(AP Photo/Norihiro Haruta, File)

TOKYO (AP) — Fishermen and residents of Fukushima and five other prefectures along Japan’s northeastern coast filed a lawsuit Friday demanding a halt to the ongoing release of treated radioactive wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant into the sea.

In the lawsuit filed with Fukushima District Court, the 151 plaintiffs, two-thirds from Fukushima and the rest from Tokyo and four other prefectures, say the discharge damages the livelihoods of the fishing community and violates residents’ right to live peacefully, their lawyers said.

The release of the treated and diluted wastewater into the ocean, which began Aug. 24 and is expected to continue for several decades, is strongly opposed by fisheries groups that worry it will hurt the image of their catch even if it's safe.

Three reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant melted after a magnitude 9.0 earthquake and tsunami in 2011 destroyed its cooling systems. The plant continues to produce highly radioactive water which is collected, treated and stored in about 1,000 tanks that cover much of the plant complex.

The government and the plant's operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings, say the tanks need to be removed to allow the plant's decommissioning.

The plaintiffs are demanding the revocation of safety permits granted by the Nuclear Regulation Authority for the wastewater's release and a halt to the discharge, lawyer Kenjiro Kitamura said.

The government and TEPCO say the treated water meets legally releasable levels and is further diluted by hundreds of times with seawater before being released into the sea. The International Atomic Energy Agency, which reviewed the release plan at Japan’s request, concluded that the release's impact on the environment, marine life and humans will be negligible.

“The intentional release to the sea is an intentional harmful act that adds to the (nuclear plant) accident," said another lawyer, Hiroyuki Kawai. He said the ocean is a public resource and it is unethical for a company to discharge wastewater into it.

TEPCO said it could not comment until it receives a copy of the lawsuit.

China banned all imports of Japanese seafood in response to the release, while Hong Kong and Macau suspended imports from 10 prefectures including Fukushima. Groups in South Korea have also condemned the discharge.

China is the biggest importer of Japanese seafood, and its ban has hit the industry hard.

Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida's Cabinet on Tuesday approved a 20.7 billion yen ($141 million) emergency fund to help exporters hurt by the Chinese ban. The fund is in addition to 80 billion yen ($547 million) that the government previously allocated to support fisheries and seafood processing and combat reputational damage to Japanese products.

Kishida said while attending a summit of Southeast Asian leaders in Indonesia that China’s ban contrasts sharply with a broad understanding of the release shown by many other countries.

China’s Concern About Nuclear Wastewater May Be More About Politics Than Science

Chad de Guzman

TIME
Fri, September 8, 2023 


Chinese newspapers report on the release of treated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant into the Pacific, describing the discharge as "extremely irresponsible" and "an atrocity," in Beijing on Aug. 30, 2023. Credit - Yomiuri Shimbun/AP

Have you considered that “man-tall crabs” or “Cthulu-esque octopuses” could emerge from the sea in 30 to 40 years? China is apparently upset that Japan hasn’t, according to a recent state media report.

In the last two weeks since Japan began releasing into the Pacific Ocean treated wastewater that had been used to cool the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant that was damaged by a tsunami in 2011, a seemingly coordinated campaign has been waged on social media and Chinese news media to vent outrage and hysteria about the dangers of radiation imposed by China’s neighbor to the east.

China isn’t the only critic of Japan’s discharge, but it is perhaps the loudest. China’s foreign ministry called Japan “a saboteur of the ecological system and polluter of the global marine environment.” And Chinese customs authorities banned all aquatic products coming from Japan since the wastewater release began on Aug. 24, despite being the biggest market for Japanese seafood exports before then. Reports of harassment of Japanese citizens in China soon followed.

In reality, most scientists agree that the health effects of the wastewater on the marine environment and consumers of seafood from the region are negligible. Some observers have even pointed out that similar discharges have been occurring for years by operators of nuclear power plants across the world—including in China.

After nuclear wastewater is treated, including the water released by Japan, typically what radioactive elements remain are tritium (a hydrogen isotope) and carbon-14, which are both already abundant in nature. The water is then diluted to an acceptable limit so as not to be harmful, though there is no common international standard. It’s then common practice to dispose of the treated water by releasing it into the ocean. TEPCO, the operator of the Fukushima plant, dilutes wastewater to a radioactivity of around 15% the World Health Organization’s maximum level for drinking water.

TEPCO has pledged to release no more than 22 trillion becquerels—a unit of emitted radiation—of tritium per year. For reference, the Diablo Canyon Power Plant in California released liquid effluents containing around 95 trillion becquerels of tritium in 2022, and the Heysham B Power Station in England released about 396 trillion becquerels of tritium in 2019.

While the U.S. and the U.K. have supported Japan’s release plan as safe, as has the International Atomic Energy Agency, China has pressed forward with demonizing Japan. At the same time, the latest China Nuclear Energy Yearbook by the nonprofit non-governmental organization China Nuclear Energy Association shows that plants there have discharged water with much higher radioactivity levels in 2021, the last year for which data are available.

Not all of the numbers are decipherable, but at least 10 nuclear plants in China in just a year discharged liquid effluents containing more than 4.5 quadrillion becquerels of tritium—more than 200 times the self-imposed annual limit for Fukushima’s wastewater release.

When presented with charges of hypocrisy earlier this summer, Chinese officials denied that the situations are comparable. “In fact, there are essential differences between the nuclear-contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan and the normal liquid effluents from nuclear power plants worldwide,” the National Nuclear Safety Administration said in a statement. Foreign ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin also said during an August press briefing that “there is a fundamental difference between the nuclear-contaminated water that came into direct contact with the melted reactor cores in the Fukushima nuclear disaster and the water released by nuclear power plants in normal operation.”

That’s not necessarily true. A range of different radioactive isotopes can be present in nuclear wastewater before its treated, but after treatment, the ultimate risk posed by the tritium that remains is not actually affected by how the water was originally contaminated, says Jim Smith, a professor of environmental science at the University of Portsmouth who has extensively studied the impact of radioactive pollutants on the environment. “Basically, it's all been through reactors, or at least the tritium has come from reactors, and the other radionuclides come from reactors,” he tells TIME, “so I don't really see a difference.”

But if not for a legitimate concern for health and science, why else might Beijing be so determined to paint Japan as a villain? Some have speculated that the wastewater issue offers a politically convenient distraction for China, which is facing domestic turmoil—giving citizens something else to be angry about instead of the unexpectedly slow economic growth, record-high youth unemployment, dwindling resources for an aging public, and a real estate sector in crisis. China has already had an historically fractured relationship with Japan due to the latter’s past colonial rule of the former. And just this year, as the geopolitical rivalry between the U.S. and China has continued to intensify, Tokyo has strengthened its military partnership with Washington.

China’s state media has even reckoned with questions about why it cares so much about this issue. “Some U.S. media outlets even claimed that China would be the last to be affected from the perspective of ocean circulation. So why is China stepping up?,” an anonymous source quoted in the Global Times asked, before credulously answering: “Because what China has been doing is for the sake of being responsible to humanity and the country really cares about environmental protection.”

—Koh Ewe contributed reporting.

Explainer | What to know about Japan’s plan to release treated radioactive water from Fukushima nuclear plant into the sea

The plan to dump treated radioactive waste water from a nuclear plant into the sea has stirred debates in South Korea, and led to boycotts of Japanese goods in China

Japanese fishermen, whose livelihoods could be severely impacted, have also vehemently opposed the waste water disposal plan


Amy Sood

SCMP
29 Jun, 2023

Environmental activists denounce the Japanese government’s plan to start releasing treated radioactive water from the wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant into the Pacific Ocean. Photo: AP

As Japan prepares to release treated radioactive waste water from the wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant into the sea, opposition to the controversial plan continues to simmer across the region.

The country’s nuclear regulator on Wednesday began a final inspection of the water which is currently stored in about 1,000 huge tanks. It will be filtered and diluted before being released through an underwater tunnel that stretches one kilometre into the ocean.

But while Tokyo has sought to do its due diligence – seeking approval from its domestic nuclear regulator and ensuring the water meets international safety standards – the venture continues to spark controversy.

A Greenpeace statement expressed concerns that the released radioactivity could alter human DNA, and Pacific Island nations have stated their worries that the move could contribute to nuclear contamination of the Blue Pacific.

The matter has also stirred debates in South Korea, and led to a consumer boycott of Japanese cosmetics in China.

Why the worry over Japan’s nuclear waste plan? France has done it ‘for decades’
21 Mar 2023

In Hong Kong, Secretary for Environment and Ecology Tse Chin-wan said on Wednesday that if the discharge went ahead as planned, the city would immediately prohibit the import of aquatic products from the coastal prefectures in proximity to Fukushima and impose “stringent import control” on other such goods from elsewhere in Japan.

Local fishing communities in Fukushima are still suffering from bans on their produce, and many oppose the plan fearing reputational damage bringing financial losses to their business.

But the Japanese government maintains the water is safe, and is hoping to get a green light from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which is set to release its final report on the safety of the Fukushima plan soon.

The United Nations and nuclear experts in Japan have also said the treated waste water poses no threat.

The science

A massive earthquake and tsunami that hit the Japanese coast in 2011 melted down three reactors at the Fukushima plant and killed thousands of people.

Twelve years later, the damaged reactor cores still need to be cooled with water. But space to store this liquid is running out.

According to Associated Press, the tanks containing the treated water will reach their capacity in 2024. Last month, the storage tanks reached 97 per cent capacity, prompting Japan to move ahead with its plan to filter, treat and dilute the contaminated water before discharging it into the Pacific Ocean this summer.

Under the plan spearheaded by the nuclear plant’s operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco), more than 1.3 million tons of water will be gradually released over two to three decades.

That proposal, as well as the safety of the treated water, has been questioned. Liu Guangyuan, the Commissioner of China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Hong Kong has argued that if the water is truly safe, it should be released off the coast of Japan rather than building a seabed tunnel to discharge it into the ocean.

I think there is an understandable perception that all radioactive materials are dangerous, particularly radioactive and liquid waste, but this is not the caseTony Irwin, nuclear engineer

The water is being treated on-site to remove most of its radioactive materials, but will still contain trace levels of tritium – a radioactive form of hydrogen that is difficult to separate from water. Scientists say there is no viable technology to remove the negligible concentrations of tritium from this volume of water.

“I think there is an understandable perception that all radioactive materials are dangerous, particularly radioactive and liquid waste, but this is not the case,” said Tony Irwin, an honorary associate professor at the Australian National University’s nuclear physics department.

Irwin pointed out that Japan is meeting international standards for safe levels of tritium, and is in fact choosing a conservative limit to release over a fairly long stretch of time.

‘I would be willing’: South Korean PM offers to drink treated Fukushima water
14 Jun 2023

“The Fukushima water discharge is not a unique event or without precedent, because nuclear power plants worldwide have been routinely discharging water containing tritium for over 60 years without harm to people or the environment.

“And in most of these cases, there is tritium at higher levels than what is planned with Fukushima,” he added.

Experts believe the real danger could be the continued storage of contaminated water in the event of a spill from another natural disaster or human error.

Tanks containing water from the disabled Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant. Photo: Reuters

Fishing communities


However, there are still concerns that certain dangerous radionuclides – like cobalt and strontium – might slip through the filtering and water treatment process. Many scientists and environmentalists have also said there is a lack of knowledge about the long-term effects of exposure to even low doses of tritium.

To this point – Irwin asserted that the independent inspection by the IAEA provides confidence that only water with safe levels of tritium will be discharged.

“Samples of the water were tested by Tepco and seven other independent labs [globally], and the results showed a high level of agreement that there was no additional radioactive nuclides at significant levels at all,” he said.

Japan must also continually monitor the water quality once it has been discharged into the sea, and invite independent bodies and scientists to do so too, experts added.

But Japanese fishermen – whose livelihoods could be severely impacted – have vehemently opposed the waste water disposal plan.

A member of an environmental group places signs symbolising the Fukushima nuclear disaster during a rally against Japan’s disposal of radioactive water, outside the Japanese embassy in Seoul, South Korea. Photo: EPA-EFE


The industry’s reputation suffered greatly following the 2011 nuclear disaster, when dozens of countries banned imports of produce from Fukushima and other nearby prefectures. The United States and the European Union only eased their restrictions in 2021.

“We cannot support the government’s stance that an ocean release is the only solution,” said Masanobu Sakamoto, president of JF Zengyoren, or the National Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives, according to the Associated Press.

“Whether to release the water into the sea or not is a government decision, and in that case we want the government to fully take responsibility,” he added.

Tokyo has said that it will set up a fund to promote Fukushima seafood and provide compensation to fishermen in case sales fall due to safety concerns.

South Korean lawmaker challenges Japan officials to drink Fukushima water
16 May 2023

Diplomatic dilemmas

The issue has become a hot topic in the parliament of South Korea, Japan’s neighbour separated only by a body of water.

The country’s main opposition, the Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) is seeking collective action with Pacific nations against the Japanese plan, but the government is seeking a more diplomatic approach – urging the public and the opposition to await the results of safety reviews.

The political divide comes as no surprise as South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol has been trying to mend the country’s historically troubled relationship with Japan to deepen military ties.

In May, a 21-member South Korean delegation was welcomed by Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida to visit the Fukushima plant to examine safety concerns.

Like in Japan, members of the ruling party are also making efforts to alleviate public concerns about produce safety in South Korea, visiting seafood markets and vowing to support businesses who fear a drop in sales.

Activists gather in Seoul to protest against a planned release of water from the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant. Photo: AFP

Opposition lawmakers, however, maintain that the ruling party is prioritising diplomatic relations over public safety.

In China, viral social media campaigns are spreading on Weibo and Chinese lifestyle platform Xiaohongshu, with users listing Japanese brands and questioning their safety.

Major Japanese cosmetic company Shiseido saw its largest weekly stock plunge in nearly 10 months, and a 6.8 per cent drop in its shares, according to Bloomberg.

But some observers suggest this might be a short-lived phenomenon.

“I don’t think there will be a huge material impact in the long-term,” said Jeanie Chen, a senior equity analyst at Morningstar in Japan.

The outcry on social media might have some immediate impact on the sales of Japanese goods, but unless the Chinese government makes a strong line or bans the products, it will not be substantial, she added.

Additional reporting by the Associated Press