It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Tuesday, March 07, 2023
CRIMINAL CAPITALI$M
Rio Tinto settles US bribery case linked to Simandou mine
Bloomberg News | March 6, 2023 | Rio Tinto held the licence for the entire Simandou deposit since the early 1990s, but was stripped of the northern blocks in 2008 by a Guinean former dictator. (Image courtesy of Rio Tinto Simandou)
Rio Tinto Group has agreed to pay a $15 million penalty to settle US claims of bribery in Guinea, more than six years after a payment connected to a vast iron ore deposit in the West African nation prompted the mining giant to fire two of its top executives.
The Securities and Exchange Commission said a political consultant working for Rio had tried to bribe a Guinean government official. Additionally, the miner didn’t properly record its payments to the person, the SEC said on Monday, adding that the company had inadequate accounting controls.
Rio Tinto agreed to the penalty without admitting or denying the violations, according to the SEC. The regulator said the conduct was in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
The allegations form part of Rio’s long and turbulent history in Guinea as it tried to get access to the rich iron ore reserves of the Simandou region. Two executives — Alan Davies and Debra Valentine — were terminated in 2016 under then-chief executive officer Jean-Sebastien Jacques, when Rio reported questions over a consultant to the SEC and other watchdogs.
Davies was Rio’s CEO of energy and minerals, while Valentine was group executive of legal and regulatory affairs. Both denied claims of wrongdoing.
Production is yet to begin at Simandou, where Rio now holds a majority stake in two of the four tenements in a joint venture with China’s Chalco Iron Ore Holdings and the Guinean government. The shareholders continue to negotiate details of the project, which Rio describes as the “largest and richest untapped high-grade iron ore deposit in the world”.
Monday’s resolution stems from an investigation into conduct from 2011, when Rio Tinto hired a French investment banker to help with the mining rights issue in Guinea, the SEC said.
The banker, according to the SEC, offered more than $800,000 to a Guinean government official in an attempt to retain the mining rights. Rio Tinto, which was able to keep them, paid the consultant $10.5 million for the work.
The bribery allegations were also investigated by the Australian Securities and Investment Commission, which did not take action, and the UK Serious Fraud Office, which has not reported its findings.
(By Tom Schoenberg and James Fernyhough, with assistance from Clara Ferreira Marques)
CRIMINAL CAPITALI$M
Three British Columbia residents fined $700,000 for role in gold mining Ponzi scheme Staff Writer | March 5, 2023 | Stock image.
The BC Securities Commission (BCSC) has handed out C$956,000 (about $700,000) in penalties to three local residents for their involvement in what it calls “an elaborate fraud” that promised investors large returns on non-existent gold mining operations in Africa and Brazil.
In a ruling issued on March 2, 2023, a BCSC panel ordered Sabrina Ling Huei Wei to pay a C$500,000 administrative penalty, plus a C$90,000 fine, representing the amount she obtained from the scheme. Justin Colin Villarin was ordered to pay a C$200,000 penalty plus the C$15,718 he obtained from the scheme, and James Bernard Law was issued a C$150,000 penalty.
The BCSC also banned the trio from participating in BC’s capital market for varying amounts of time: Wei’s ban is permanent, while Villarin was banned for 25 years and Law for 20 years.
The panel previously found that all three solicited investors, organized events and sold membership units to two US-based companies (Massachusetts-based DFRF Enterprises LLC and Florida-based DFRF Enterprises LLC) between 2014 and 2015. Investors were promised “extraordinarily high, no-risk returns” on supposedly lucrative gold mining operations in Mali and Brazil held by these entities.
“In reality, none of the investments were used for gold mining, DFRF received no proceeds from gold mining, and DFRF’s only source of money was investors,” the BCSC investigation revealed.
The scheme raised over $15 million from more than 1,400 investors, according to the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The BCSC found that 137 BC residents or people connected to the province lost a total of C$1.5 million.
The fraud, described by the SEC as a Ponzi and pyramid scheme, was orchestrated out of the US by Daniel Fernandes Rojo Filho, a Brazilian national who was living in Florida at the time of the scheme, along with other associates, according to BCSC findings.
“None of the funds raised by investors were used for gold mining, and bank records show no proof that DFRF had other legitimate business activities. Filho used more than $6 million of investors’ money for personal expenses and luxury cars,” the BCSC stated.
In 2019, in civil actions brought by the SEC, federal courts entered final judgments against Filho and several others – including Heriberto C. Perez Valdes, a former Florida resident – for fraud and selling securities without being registered. Filho was ordered to pay more than $11 million, and Valdes was ordered to pay $1.2 million.
The enforcement action began in 2015 when BCSC investigators – acting on a tip – posed as investors to attend a presentation for DFRF at a downtown Vancouver hotel. Attendees were told to “expect a monthly return of up to 15% on their membership in interest, and that their principal was guaranteed by insurance,” the investigators noted.
Several days after investigators witnessed the event, the Commission issued an investor alert about DFRF, warning that several claims it was making were “characteristic of investment fraud.”
In October 2022, following several days of hearings, a BCSC panel ruled that Wei, Villarin and Law chose to “enable” Filho’s deceitful acts, and knew – or should have known – that Filho’s claims, and theirs, were fraudulent.
Although they became increasingly aware of red flags surrounding DFRF, including the promise of unreasonably high returns, the lack of details about its finances or mines, and the BCSC’s investor alert, Wei, Law and Villarin continued to promote it to unwitting investors, the BCSC ruled.
Prior to the ruling against the trio, a panel found on April 20, 2021, that two Lower Mainland-based individuals were also involved in the scheme, defrauding 52 BC investors for $331,400 in total proceeds.
Korea Begins Process to Set Strategy to Privatize HMM
South Korea's government is seeking advisors to set the privatization strategy for HMM
South Korea’s state-owned financial institutions are beginning the process toward the privatization of the country’s largest shipping company, HMM. There has been broad speculation for more than two years that the government was seeking an exit strategy based on the improved financial health of the carrier.
Korea Development Bank and the Korea Ocean Business Corporation, both government institutions and the two largest shareholders in HMM, placed a request for proposals to launch an advisor group for the sale of their HMM shares. The process is open till March 20 with the institutions saying the committee would be selected by March 22. The declared objective is to provide comprehensive advice on the overall sale process, including consulting to establish the sale strategy.
Then known as Hyundai Merchant Marine, the company’s financial troubles began in 2013 during a severe downturn in the shipping markets. KDB and the other government institutions stepped in and in 2016 a voluntary agreement was reached under which the institutions began a series of debt-to-equity swaps to restore the financial stability of the shipping company. KDB currently holds just over 20 percent of HMM’s stock while KOBC holds just under 20 percent. Other entities including the National Pension Service and Korea Credit Guarantee Fund hold smaller positions collectively bringing the government’s interest to 52 percent of HMM’s stock.
Driven in part by the strength of the shipping industry, HMM was able to restore its financial health by renegotiating charter agreements while moving forward with a fleet modernization and expansion program. The carrier was a leader in the introduction of ultra large container vessels launching a class of 24,000 TEU ships, followed by a class of 18,000 TEU vessels. This year, HMM announced an order for nine methanol-fueled 9,000 TEU container vessels as part of an $11 billion expansion strategy mapped out in July 2022.
HMM reported strong financial results for 2022 with a record-high profit of $7.8 billion representing a better than 88 percent year-over-year increase. Revenues topped $14 billion. The strength of the container market and the emerging rebound for crude oil tankers also helped the company to dramatically reduce its debt with the debt-to-equity ratio dropping from over 72 percent to 25.6 percent.
Analysts believe the government is anxious to commence the sale because of the softening in the freight markets as well as looming deadlines regarding additional debt and the shipping line’s bonds. HMM issued convertible bonds between 2018 and 2020 to KDB and KOBC. The interest rate on the bonds is due to double in October 2023 while if they were converted the financial institutions’ stake would increase to nearly three-quarters of HMM’s equity.
Korea’s Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries had previously suggested that the strategy might be a phased sale reducing the government's position either by selling the stock or the bonds. Speculation has centered on Korea’s other shipping companies including Hyundai Glovis and SM Merchant Marine as well as various logistics companies as the possible acquirer.
Banking officials told BusinessKorea “Once the advisory group is formed, we will discuss overall strategies and then set a practical schedule for the sale of HMM through consultations with related organizations.”
KDB and KOBC said in their statement that they have continued discussions of various methods for sustaining the growth of HMM and are forming a consensus on the process of selling the management rights for the company. Last year, Korea Development Bank undertook a similar process deciding to sell management control of shipbuilder Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering through a partial sale to Hanwha Group along with a recapitalization of the financially troubled company.
Since 2018, U.S. Attempts at Reshoring Have Had Limited Impact
Busy as ever: Port of Shanghai's Yangshan complex, a hub for exports to the U.S. (SIPG file image)
With the onset of supply chain disruptions during the pandemic, many Western countries launched a reshoring and nearshoring campaign. In the US particularly, reshoring rhetoric has emphasized accelerated investment in domestic manufacturing of semi-conductors, electric vehicles (EVs) and clean energy.
Primarily, the reshoring drive has been driven with a focus on China as the strategic competitor, hence the need to reduce dependence on its supplies. This has seen large capital investments by the U.S government in an attempt to strengthen North American supply chains.
For instance, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) includes almost $400 billion in federal funding for clean energy and special tax credits for EVs manufactured in the region. The Chips and Science Act includes over $50 billion in funding domestic chip manufacturing.
In addition, U.S reshoring plans also hinged on the success of the United States-Mexico- Canada Agreement (USMCA), which entered into force on July 1, 2020. USMCA lays the foundation of expanding investments in the complex and capital-intensive manufacturing and supply chains across North America.
However, with all these subsidies and the North American trade alignment, is it possible to replace fully the supply chains located in China?
While it is still in the early days, David Dollar, a Senior Fellow of the Brookings Institution, in a new report titled USMCA Forward 2023, underscores some evidence to bear the claim that resurgence of manufacturing in the U.S is still not yet visible. Indeed, it is possible to track the effect as reshoring policies have been in place since 2018.
“While generalized reshoring is unlikely, it is still possible to subsidize the expansion of particular industries such as semi-conductors or electric vehicles. But without a change in the macroeconomic stance, it is unlikely that these policies will crowd out other manufacturing sectors, with the result that overall size of U.S manufacturing is unaffected. There is no free lunch, so subsidizing the expansion of say, semiconductors will reduce other consumption and hence lead to some contraction of other manufacturing industries,” noted David Dollar.
In terms of nearshoring to Mexico and Canada as envisaged in the USMCA trade agreement, Dollar adds there is also no evidence of such. The reason is that Canada (being a high-wage economy) is not well suited to producing the kind of products that the U.S imports from Asia. Mexico is a low-wage developing country, but has a lot of weakness in its investment climate.
Additionally, although 25 percent tariffs on Chinese products have been in place for four years, only a modest impact has been achieved on both the volume and value of U.S- China trade. Between 2018 and 2021, China’s share of U.S manufactured imports declined from 24 percent to 20 percent.
But it is important to highlight that the greatest variation occurred by product category, with U.S imports from China of telecommunication equipment now down 50-60 percent. Imports of other products such as computers, agricultural machinery, exercise equipment and furniture have all held up.
Trade figures for 2022 released by the U.S Census Bureau show that U.S- China goods trade hit a record high of $690 billion last year. U.S imports from China grew 6.3 percent to $537 billion, while exports rose 1.6 percent to $154 billion. As David Dollar observes, the economic shift between the U.S and China is more of a tech war than a trade war.
Wendy Cutler, Vice-President of the Asia Society Policy Institute (ASPI), observes that while the untangling efforts between the U.S and China are largely focused on strategic and emerging high-technology goods, the lines are increasingly blurred between what is and what is not strategic.
UN Adopts High Seas Treaty with Protected Zones and Shipping Limits
UN agreed to the first ever high seas treaty which would protect up to a third of the world's oceans
United Nations delegates completed the first-ever high seas treaty after a non-stop two-day marathon session going beyond the declared end for the fifth round of negotiations. The agreement is being hailed by world leaders, scientists, and environmental groups as it sets in place the first framework for managing the use of the oceans beyond national jurisdiction covering the areas beyond the 200 nautical miles boundaries for countries' territorial waters.
The UN’s Secretary-General issued a statement commending the delegates for finalizing the text to ensure the conservation and sustainable use of the oceans. He called the agreement a breakthrough noting that it impacts two-thirds of the oceans, and laying out specific rules for about a third of the world’s oceans.
Agreement among the UN members however was long in coming. Talks toward the treaty began nearly 20 years ago and stem from a 2017 resolution that moves to follow up on a UN recommendation to develop an agreement on the use of global marine resources. The mandate was to extend the United Nations Convention on the Law of Sea, which came into force in 1994, with four prior rounds of negotiations in 2018, 2019, and 2022 before this weekend’s agreement.
Historically, very little of the high seas has been subject to any direct protection. The waters had been open for fishing, shipping, and research with scientists increasingly expressing concern about the impact of these activities and the role the oceans play in combating global warming. They note that the oceans absorb up to 90 percent of excess warming, while environmentalists have also expressed fears that nearly 10 percent of marine species are at risk of near-term extinction.
“Two-thirds of the ocean has just been exposed to the will and want of all,” said Rebecca Hubbard, the director of the High Seas Alliance consortium of nongovernmental organizations during an interview with The Washington Post on Sunday. “We have never been able to protect and manage marine life in the ocean beyond countries’ jurisdictions,” she said. “This is absolutely world-changing.”
Late on Saturday, Rena Lee of Singapore who was president for the session rose and announced “the ship has reached the shore,” receiving a standing ovation from the delegates on news that the agreement had been reached. The draft text calls for placing 30 percent of the world’s oceans into protected areas and putting more money into marine conservation. It includes sections that cover access to these areas and the use of marine resources.
Environmentalists immediately reacted positively to the news saying that the agreement builds on the initiatives launched last December at the UN Biodiversity Conference that called for protecting a third of the world’s oceans by 2030. Greenpeace says that 4.2 million square miles of oceans need to be put under protection in each of the next seven years to meet the 2030 target.
“With the agreement on the UN High Seas Treaty, we take a crucial step forward to preserve the marine life and biodiversity that are essential,” said Virginijus Sinkevicius, the European commissioner for the environment, oceans, and fisheries.
A coalition that included the United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union, and China helped to bring the final agreement together overcoming issues including economic concerns, especially for emerging nations. The EU pledged $42 million to facilitate the ratification of the treaty and its early implementation. Nearly 200 nations approved the final text but to go into force the nations must adopt the treaty, which is expected to take years.
The agreement provides a legal framework along with the establishment of a conference that will finalize details, meet periodically, and enable member states to be held accountable on issues such as biodiversity and governance. It provides for strict limits on fishing activity as well as addressing mineralization and shipping lanes and provides for nations to coordinate on issues such as environmental impact assessments and share resources.
“What happens on the high seas will no longer be ‘out of sight, out of mind,” said Jessica Battle of WWF in a statement. “We can now look at the cumulative impacts on our ocean in a way that reflects the interconnected blue economy and the ecosystems that support it.”
The IMO highlighted that it had been present throughout the negotiations and potentially seeking to calm some of the fears highlighted that “ships plying their trade across the world’s oceans are subject to stringent environmental, safety and security rules, which apply throughout their voyage.” The IMO pointed to more than 50 globally binding treaties and recent efforts at enhancing those efforts such as MARPOL and the ballast water management convention. The IMO also highlighted its efforts at keeping shipping away from whales’ breeding grounds, the Polar Code for the Arctic and Antarctic, and the guidance on protecting marine life from underwater ship noise.
It will take time for some of the impacts of the treaty to become fully apparent to the shipping community. While the treaty provides the tools to create and manage marine protected areas it falls to the newly created commission to complete the definitions and determine elements such as if ships will be excluded from operating entirely in the zones.
Environmentalists are also seeking to use the framework to pursue additional elements such as water pollution from ships and further restrictions on ballast water management. With more elements of discharges even in the deep sea coming under regulation some have suggested that the new treaty can be leveraged to stop the use of open-loop scrubbers.
Another of the areas that the threat seeks to restrict is deep-sea mining. The International Seabed Authority which oversees this emerging area said the treaty means that stringent environmental regulations and oversight would now govern any future efforts at extracting minerals from the ocean floor.
Environmentalists and conservation groups are calling the agreement the first step to protecting ocean life and bringing the oceans into the fight against climate change. They are vowing to keep up the pressure to ensure the treaty is adopted and enforced.
MOL’s Smallest Ship Collects Marine Debris off Bali
MOL demonstrated its debris collection ship in Bali (MOL)
Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, best known for its fleets of dry bulkers and car carriers, has launched possibly its smallest and most unique vessel. The vessel is designed to collect debris from the waters and is part of the company’s environmental efforts.
Named Arika, MOL conducted a demonstration of its marine debris collection vessel off the coast of Bali in Indonesia on March 1. The vessel was apparently developed with a Turkish company EPS Marine which pioneered the concept of converting skinners into boats that could collect debris and trash floating in the water. MOL purchased the vessel through PT MOL Blue Ocean Indonesia, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the MOL Group. In addition to the boat, the company also demonstrated a collection device that is towed across the beach attached to a tractor.
While Bali, Indonesia, has a diverse and rich natural environment, the problem of marine debris is becoming more serious. MOL cites the impact of rapid urbanization and population growth as contributing to the increase in litter.
The marine debris collection ship and coastal debris collection device both feature conveyor belts that collect debris from the water and along the shore.
Starting with a demonstration of marine debris collection in Bali, Indonesia, MOL aims to commercialize the technology and started a feasibility study of the business model for the introduction of a marine debris collection ship in Vietnam. Last year they reported the survey would last about a year and include verification of the business model and evaluations of local shipyards that could build collection ships while also considering cooperation with Vietnamese government ministries and agencies.
MOL cites experts who report that plastic waste accounts for an estimated 70 percent of marine debris, while forecasting by 2050, the volume of plastic waste in the oceans might exceed that of fish. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) lists China, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Vietnam as leading sources of plastic waste. The volume of debris in Southeast Asia they report accounts for the majority of plastic in the oceans, with 700,000 tons, accounting for six percent of the worldwide total, originating in Vietnam and other Asian countries. Vietnam's long north-south coastline makes it more susceptible to debris flowing into the ocean, and the volume of waste is increasing along with rapid urbanization.
Plastic debris floating in the oceans is also thought to contribute to the increase in microplastic particles which are of increasing concern to scientists and environmentalists. MOL previously announced that it was testing a filtration system that could remove microparticles during ballast water operations. Last year they also began testing a centrifugal-type microplastic collection device, which can continuously collect the material while a vessel is underway.
Imabari Builds World’s First Ship Using Kobe's Low CO2 Steel
Japan's Imabari will for the first time use low CO2 steel to build a bulker (Imabari file photo)
Japan’s Imabari Shipbuilding Co. has decided to build a new 180,000 dwt dry bulk carrier using a low CO2 blast furnace steel material commercialized by Kobe Steel Corporation. According to the companies, the project will make Imabari the first shipbuilding company in the world to use low-CO2 steel in a large shipbuilding project.
No specific details were provided on the vessel other than to say it is expected to be delivered in January 2024. The Imabari Shipbuilding Group said the project is part of its efforts to develop methods of construction that not only create environmentally friendly ships but also reduce power consumption in production and the amount of raw materials used in the manufacturing process. The company adopted the product known as Kobenable Steel for its ability to lower CO2 emissions in the shipbuilding process compared to conventional steel products.
Imabari Shipbuilding Group is the largest builder in Japan with the company calculating that it represented a third of the Japanese shipbuilding market in 2021. Globally, Imabari accounted for more than six percent of the world market in 2021 (based on gross tonnage), with Japan having approximately an 18 percent market share. The company said it has decided to use Kobenable Premier, which provides a 100 percent reduction in CO2 emissions using the mass-balance method. The new steel would be a marketing advantage for the shipbuilder going forward as ship owners looking to reduce emissions tired to their operations.
Kobenable Steel, which was introduced in 2022, is manufactured in the same process as the conventional blast furnace method. It utilizes a technology that can significantly reduce CO2 emissions from the blast furnace, which was demonstrated by charging the blast furnace at Kobe’s Kakogawa Works production site to provide a large amount of hot briquetted iron (HBI) manufactured with a natural gas process that can reduce CO2 emissions by 20 to 40 percent.
The mass balance methodology is used in producing the steel product which involves a mix of raw materials to achieve the reduction of CO2. For the ironmaking process, Kobe says it is possible to reduce the amount of coke used and thereby reduce CO2 emissions by replacing a portion of iron ore with HBI. They said the resulting product maintains the same level of high quality as conventional products, but there was no discussion of the cost compared to conventional steel.
The first commercial application of Kobe’s new steel product was announced at the end of 2022 for a large construction project in Tokyo. The calculation method for the CO2 reduction and results are certified by the DNV Business Assurance services, as a third-party certification body. At the time of the sale of the products, Kobe Steel is providing the third-party certificate issued by DNV and a low-CO2 steel product certificate issued by the company. They said the volume of steel that will be able available will depend on the certification body.
Op-Ed: Releasing Fukushima's Radioactive Water Won't Cause Harm
Tank storage for water contaminated with radioactive tritium at Fukushima Daiichi (Tepco file image)
Japanese authorities are preparing to release treated radioactive wastewater into the Pacific Ocean, nearly 12 years after the Fukushima nuclear disaster. This will relieve pressure on more than 1,000 storage tanks, creating much-needed space for other vital remediation works. But the plan has attracted controversy.
At first glance, releasing radioactive water into the ocean does sound like a terrible idea. Greenpeace feared the radioactivity released might change human DNA, China and South Korea expressed disquiet, while Pacific Island nations were concerned about further nuclear contamination of the Blue Pacific. One academic publication claimed the total global social welfare cost could exceed US$200 billion.
But the Japanese government, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and independent scientists have declared the planned release to be reasonable and safe.
Based on our collective professional experience in nuclear science and nuclear power, we have reached the same conclusion. Our assessment is based on the type of radioactivity to be released, the amount of radioactivity already present in the ocean, and the high level of independent oversight from the IAEA.
How much water is there, and what’s in it?
The storage tanks at Fukushima contain 1.3 million tonnes of water, equivalent to around 500 Olympic-sized swimming pools.
Contaminated water is produced daily by ongoing reactor cooling. Contaminated groundwater also collects in the basements of the damaged reactor buildings.
The water is being cleaned by a technology called ALPS, or Advanced Liquid Processing System. This removes the vast majority of the problematic elements.
The ALPS treatment can be repeated until concentrations are below regulatory limits. Independent monitoring by the IAEA will ensure all requirements are met before discharge.
The main radioactive contaminant remaining after treatment is tritium, a radioactive form of hydrogen (H) that is difficult to remove from water (H?O). There is no technology to remove trace levels of tritium from this volume of water.
Tritium has a half-life of 12.3 years, meaning 100 years passes before the radioactivity is negligible. It is unrealistic to store the water for such a long time as the volumes are too great. Extended storage also increases the risk of accidental uncontrolled release.
Like all radioactive elements, international standards exist for safe levels of tritium. For liquids, these are measured in Bq per litre, where one Bq (becquerel) is defined as one radioactive decay per second. At the point of release, the Japanese authorities have chosen a conservative concentration limit of 1,500Bq per litre, seven times smaller than the World Health Organization’s recommended limit of 10,000Bq per litre for drinking water.
Why is it acceptable to release tritium into the ocean?
One surprising thing about radiation is how common it is. Almost everything is radioactive to some degree, including air, water, plants, basements and granite benchtops. Even a long-haul airline flight supplies a few chest X-rays worth of radiation to everyone on board.
In the case of tritium, natural processes in the atmosphere generate 50-70 peta-becquerels (PBq) of tritium every year. This number is difficult to grasp, so it’s helpful to think of it as grams of pure tritium. Using the conversion factor of 1PBq = 2.79g, we see that 150-200g of tritium is created naturally each year.
Looking at the Pacific Ocean, around 8.4kg (3,000PBq) of tritium is already in the water. By comparison, the total amount of tritium in the Fukushima wastewater is vastly smaller, at around 3g (1PBq).
Japanese authorities are not planning to release the water all at once. Instead, just 0.06g (22TBq) of tritium is scheduled for release each year. Compared with the radioactivity already present in the Pacific, the planned annual release is a literal drop in the ocean.
The current levels of tritium radioactivity in the Pacific are not of concern, and so the small amount to be added by the Fukushima water won’t cause any harm.
What’s more, tritium only makes a tiny contribution to the total radioactivity of the oceans. Ocean radioactivity is mostly due to potassium, an element essential for life and present in all cells. In the Pacific Ocean there is 7.4 million PBq of radioactivity from potassium, more than 1,000 times greater than the amount due to tritium.
How do other countries manage the discharge of tritium?
All nuclear power plants produce some tritium, which is routinely discharged into the ocean and other waterways. The amount generated depends on the type of reactor.
Boiling water reactors, such as at Fukushima, produce relatively low quantities. When Fukushima was operating, the tritium discharge limit was set at 22TBq per year. That figure is far below a level that could cause harm, but is reasonably achievable for this type of power plant.
In contrast, the UK Heysham nuclear power plant has a limit of 1300TBq per year because this type of gas-cooled reactor produces a lot of tritium. Heysham has been discharging tritium for 40 years without harm to people or the environment.
Annual tritium discharge at nearby nuclear power plants far exceeds what is proposed for Fukushima. The Fuqing plant in China discharged 52TBq in 2020, while the Kori plant in South Korea discharged 50TBq in 2018.
Each of these power plants releases more than twice the amount to be released from Fukushima.
Are there other reasons for not releasing the water?
Objections to the planned release have been the subject of widespread media coverage. TIME magazine recently explained how Pacific Island nations have been grappling for decades with the legacy of Cold War nuclear testing. The Guardian ran an opinion piece from Pacific activists, who argued if the waste was safe, then “dump it in Tokyo, test it in Paris, and store it in Washington, but keep our Pacific nuclear-free”.
But the Pacific has always contained radioactivity, from potassium in particular. The extra radioactivity to be added from the Fukushima water will make the most miniscule of differences.
Striking a different tone, The Pacific Island Forum commissioned a panel of experts to provide independent technical advice and guidance, and help address concerns on the wastewater. The panel was critical of the quantity and quality of data from the Japanese authorities, and advised that Japan should defer the impending discharge.
While we are sympathetic to the view that the scientific data could be improved, our assessment is the panel is unfairly critical of ocean release.
The main thing missing from the report is a sense of perspective. The public seminar from the expert panel, available on YouTube, presents only a portion of the context we provide above. Existing tritium in the ocean isn’t discussed, and the dominance of potassium is glossed over.
The most reasonable comments regard the performance of ALPS. This is largely in the context of strontium-90 and cesium-137, both of which are legitimate isotopes of concern.
However, the panel implies that the authorities don’t know what is in the tanks, and that ALPS doesn’t work properly. There actually is a lot of public information on both topics. Perhaps it could be repackaged in a clearer way for others to understand. But the inferences made by the panel give the wrong impression.
The most important thing the panel overlooks is that the contaminated water can be repeatedly passed through ALPS until it is safe for release. For some tanks a single pass will suffice, while for others additional cycles are required.
The big picture
The earthquake was the primary environmental disaster, and the planet will be dealing with the consequences for decades. In our view, the release of Fukushima wastewater does not add to the disaster.
It’s easy to understand why people are concerned about the prospect of radioactive liquid waste being released into the ocean. But the water is not dangerous. The nastiest elements have been removed, and what remains is modest compared with natural radioactivity.
We hope science will prevail and Japan will be allowed to continue the recovery process.
Nigel Marks is an Associate Professor of Physics at Curtin University.
Brendan Kennedy is a Professor of Chemistry at University of Sydney.
Tony Irwin is an Honorary Associate Professor in Nuclear Reactors and Nuclear Fuel Cycle at Australian National University.
This article appears courtesy of The Conversation and may be found in its original form here.
The opinions expressed herein are the author's and not necessarily those of The Maritime Executive.
ECOCIDE
Spill From Sunken Tanker Spreads Through Central Philippine Islands
According to local officials, the wreck of the tanker Princess Empress has been located, aiding the effort to contain her cargo of fuel oil and potentially stop the leakage.
The product tanker Princess Empress sank off Balingawan Point on Feb. 28 after losing power in rough seas. The 20 members of her crew were all safely rescued by a good samaritan vessel, and no injuries were reported. However, the vessel was carrying a cargo of about 210,000 gallons of fuel oil, and she began spilling petroleum into the water. By Wednesday, the spill had reached the shoreline near the towns of Pola, Pinamalayan, Barangay Aplaya and Bongabong on Mindoro's eastern coast.
The Philippine Department of the Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) reported Monday that it has found the wreck. The survey ship BRP Hydrographer Ventura found the remains of the tanker in about 1200 feet of water off the coast of Mindoro, northeast of Pola. According to the governor of Oriental Mindoro, Bonz Dolor, the tanker's final resting place is located about 7.5 nautical miles off Balingawan Point. The reported wreck location will help guide ROV inspection efforts, and DENR said that it is working to gain access to an ROV.
The shipowner, identified as RDC Reield Marine Services, has hired two response companies to attempt to control the spill. Harbor Star Shipping Services will provide oil containment and ROV services, while Malayan Towing and Salvage will provide additional support. The ROV equipment should be on scene and operational by the end of the week, according to Rappler.
In the meantime, Philippine officials are concerned at the growing extent of the spill, which has spread into a slick of about 500 yards wide by 15 nm long. Over the weekend, drifting oil pollution reached the Caluya Islands, some 75 nm to the south of the wreck site. The area is just 20 nm west of Boracay, a popular island resort hub known for its white sand beaches.
"If the oil reaches Boracay, the consequences for the island are unpredictable," a regional tourism official told EFE.
The long-term rehabilitation of the affected shoreline on Mindoro will take longer than the immediate spill response, and the damage has not yet been calculated. Dozens of designated marine sanctuaries are at risk of pollution, including mangroves, reefs and seagrass beds, and at least seven named protected areas have already been affected by oil.
Study Sheds New Light on How Reflagging Helps Hide Illegal Fishing
Originally a way for fighting ships to communicate, maritime flags have evolved into a complex international language. There exist flags to indicate to other seafarers which way a ship will turn, to appeal for medical assistance and even to warn that a vessel is on fire.
The most significant flag tends to be flown at the stern. Called an ensign, this shows which country the ship is registered in. Like all allegiances, ships can make, break and change their link to individual countries. And it often suits them to, because it changes the rules they must abide by.
This was a popular tactic during the prohibition period in the US. American operators who wanted to serve alcohol onboard realized they could re-register their vessels as operating from Panama to avoid the unpopular US law. Since then, shipowners have selected which country’s flag to fly based on everything from which regime offered the lowest taxes to which allowed cruise lines to perform weddings at sea. It’s not unusual for a ship to leave port flying one nation’s flag and to return proudly displaying the colors of another.
Fisheries
Fishing vessels are no exception to such reflagging. And this can cause a problem for international efforts to regulate the industry and what its sailors are allowed to catch. While fishing boats are officially allowed to reflag, the rules say a vessel should have a genuine link with the country it selects. But unscrupulous operators often select a flag-of-convenience, choosing to register with a country with more relaxed rules. This can allow them to access new fishing grounds or avoid restrictions and penalties.
“Reflagging is a problem because it allows rogue operators to fly under the radar,” says Gilles Hosch, a fisheries expert at Diatom Consulting in Luxembourg. “It reduces the costs associated with illegal fishing and makes it difficult to identify and penalize the real owners of vessels that fish illegally.”
Research from the international maritime intelligence organization TMT has shown that African coastal states are frequently chosen as flags of convenience by foreign fishing fleets.
Reflagging also makes it harder for the authorities to keep track of a vessel’s identity, especially if it switches often. Vessels that recurrently change their name, flag state or owner are more likely to be involved in illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing. New research now goes some way to addressing this problem. A study led by Global Fishing Watch and published in the journal Science Advances reveals details of how often some fishing vessels change their flags, and offers some clues to their true histories and beneficial owners.
“When an operator or owner sells and buys a vessel, they need to change identity or flags. So that’s quite common. But abusive use of this practice might indicate IUU fishing,” says Jaeyoon Park, a researcher with Global Fishing Watch who led the new study.
The researchers used GPS coordinates beamed from boats fitted with a transponder. Collectively known as the automatic identification system (AIS), these transponders are designed to prevent collisions. They track the locations of some 70,000 vessels, including most fishing boats. The researchers could then work out where and when ships were fishing and visiting ports.
Publicly available AIS data provides some ship details but these are open to manipulation. So the study turned to some 40 different public registries that hold details on vessels including name and call sign, dimensions, tonnage, and fishing authorizations.
Then the researchers used machine learning to link the two data sources together, enabling them to compare identifying information on the AIS (who and what the ship claimed to be) with formal details recorded in the registries. This allowed them to track vessels over their lifetimes, and to map how often fishing boats reflagged.
That number was relatively small, with just 3% of identified fishing boats changing their flag in the last decade. But the same was not true for the support vessels that accompany fishing expeditions to carry away the catch or supply fuel. Some 28% of such ships, the study found, had been reflagged in the previous ten years. And while reflagging involved 116 different flag states, some 20% of these countries took part in 80% of flag-switching. Most occurred in Asia, Latin America, Africa and the Pacific Islands – with Panama the most active.
“This kind of information is useful because it allows us to gain a much better understanding of where global fleets are operating,” says Hosch.
How will this information help?
There are several overlapping initiatives already set up that try to make shipping identities and ownership more transparent. These include the Port State Measures Agreement and the Global Record of Fishing Vessels, Refrigerated Transport Vessels and Supply Vessels. Both of these require countries to more rigorously scrutinize ship movements and identities, and are regulated by the UN FAO (United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization).
The new study results can help these efforts because they can show which ships are known to be playing fair, Park says, which allows the authorities to focus their resources elsewhere.
“Suspicious or illegal activity should be verified by countries and authorities,” he says. “But we can provide some indications so they don’t have to look at everything.”
One possible solution to tracking changes in identity would be to force fishing vessels to carry a unique serial number on their hull, which could be checked and verified. That’s a big step though, and Park says a more practical first step would be to consolidate all the already-available information into a comprehensive and transparent database.
“Only a small portion of fishing activity is suspicious,” he says. “More transparency helps this suspicious behavior stand out and makes it easier to tackle the problem.”
David Adam is a freelance journalist based near London.
This article appears courtesy of China Dialogue Ocean and may be found in its original form here.
The opinions expressed herein are the author's and not necessarily those of The Maritime Executive.
