2023-08-25 05:48:53
Naveen Singh Khadka Environment Correspondent, BBC World Service
an hour ago
Japan has begun discharging radioactively contaminated water from the Fukushima power plant into the Pacific Ocean 12 years following the nuclear accident.
China imposed an embargo on fishery products from Japan and pushed ahead with the release even as protests broke out in Japan and South Korea.
The UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said the discharge was safe and would have “negligible” impacts on people and the environment. But how safe is it?
Photo credit: Getty Images
picture explanation,
Japan has begun discharging radioactively contaminated water from the Fukushima power plant into the Pacific Ocean 12 years following the nuclear accident.
How and why did the discharge take place?
An earthquake following the tsunami in 2011 caused the Fukushima nuclear accident. The cooling system was destroyed and the reactor core overheated, contaminating the facility’s water with high concentrations of radioactive material.
Since then, TEPCO has been injecting cooling water to cool the reactor fuel rods. As a result, contaminated water is being produced at nuclear power plants every day. This is stored in regarding 1,000 tanks, enough to fill over 500 Olympic swimming pools.
Photo credit: Getty Images
picture explanation,
TEPCO has been injecting cooling water to cool the reactor fuel rods. As a result, contaminated water is being produced at nuclear power plants every day. This is stored in regarding 1,000 tanks, enough to fill over 500 Olympic swimming pools.
Japan says it needs the land occupied by the tanks to build a new facility to safely dismantle the nuclear plant. Concerns have also been raised regarding the followingmath of damage to tanks caused by natural disasters.
Japan is discharging wastewater into the sea step by step with IAEA approval. Four releases are scheduled by the end of March 2024, and the first release was carried out this time. The full release is expected to take at least 30 years.
If Japan had been able to remove all radioactive material from the wastewater before discharging it into the sea, there would not have been such a controversy that sparked protests and embargoes.
However, a radioactive isotope of hydrogen called tritium is problematic. Currently, there is no technology that can remove this element from contaminated water, so dilution, not removal, is in progress.
Will it be safe?
Not all scientists agree on its impact, but the prevailing opinion among experts is that the discharge is safe.
Tritium can originally be found in water on Earth. Many scientists claim that the effect is negligible at low tritium concentrations. However, there are also critical opinions that more research is needed on the effects of tritium on the seabed and marine life.
The IAEA, which has a permanent office in Fukushima, said an “independent on-site analysis” found that tritium concentrations in the discharged water “were well below the discharge limit of 1500 becquerels per liter (Bg/L)”.
This upper limit is six times lower than the World Health Organization’s (WHO) upper limit for drinking water of 10,000 becquerels per liter.
James Smith, professor of environmental and geology at the University of Portsmouth, said that when the wastewater is stored, it has already been treated and diluted, so “in theory you can drink this water”.
David Bailey, a physicist who runs a radioactivity measurement laboratory in France, agrees, saying that since “it is the amount of tritium that matters”, “as long as fish populations are not severely reduced, for example, that concentration is not a problem for marine life.” said.
But some scientists are concerned.
Photo credit: Getty Images
picture explanation,
Korean civic groups held a rally once morest the discharge of contaminated water at Gwanghwamun Square on the 24th.
voice of criticism
In December 2022, the US National Institute of Oceanography issued a statement saying that Japan’s data might not be accepted verbatim.
University of Hawaii marine biologist Robert Richmond told the BBC: “It appears that the radiological and ecological impact assessments were inadequate. “The concern is that there’s no way to remove it. Once it’s out, you can’t put it back in the bottle.”
Environmental groups such as Greenpeace made more specific claims, citing a paper published by scientists at the University of South Carolina in April 2023.
On the biological effects of tritium on plants and animals, Sean Bunny, senior nuclear expert at Greenpeace East Asia, said ingestion of tritium had “direct negative effects” including “reduced fertility” and “damage to cellular structures such as DNA.”
China banned imports of Japanese aquatic products in protest of the wastewater discharge. Some commentators who have appeared in the press believe the move might be a political response. In particular, some experts say there is no scientific basis to support concerns regarding seafood because the concentration of radioactive materials is so low.
But many people who live in the Pacific every day cannot hide their concerns.
Korean haenyeo also expressed their anxiety in an interview with BBC Korea.
Kim Eun-ah, who has lived as a haenyeo for six years in Jeju Island, said, “I have to go to the sea to live, but now going to the sea itself is another threat and I feel unsafe.”
Experts say the discharged wastewater can be spread by ocean currents, particularly the Kuroshio Current that crosses the Pacific Ocean.
Fishermen told the BBC that they fear a permanent loss of trust and that they are concerned regarding their jobs.
Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) president and Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown said he, like the IAEA, believed the release “meets international safety standards”.
He urged all countries in the region to “scientifically evaluate” these “complicated” issues, although they may not agree.
However, Professor Emily Hammond of the United States, an expert in energy and environmental law at George Washington University, said: “The difficulty with radionuclides is that they raise questions that science cannot fully answer. That is, what is the criterion for being ‘safe’ when exposed to very low concentrations?”
“Even if one has great confidence in the IAEA, at the same time it can be recognized that compliance with the standards does not mean “zero” environmental and human impact.”
1692948682
#safe #discharge #contaminated #water #Fukushima
