South Korea is becoming anxious as Japan prepares to release wastewater
A nuclear power plant release of tritium into the ocean: Why do nuclear power plants do not want to conduct a nuclear fuel process in the Pacific?
Smith points out that releasing tritium-contaminated water is part of the usual operating procedure for nuclear power plants. He says that both the Heysham nuclear power station and Sellafield nuclear-fuel-processing plant in the United Kingdom release between 400 and 2,000 terabecquerels of tritium into the ocean each year. “Overall, because it’s such a weak β-emitter, it’s not really that radiotoxic,” Smith says.
But human skin partly blocks ionizing radiation, Richmond says. If you eat a radioactive contaminated food, your cells inside will be exposed.
Nations such as South Korea have expressed concern that the treated water could have unexplored impacts on the ocean environment, and a delegation from the country visited the Fukushima site in May. A lack of adequate and accurate scientific data supporting Japan’s claim of safety was one of the reasons that the US National Association of Marine Laboratories objected to the planned release last year. The Philippine government wants Japan to rethink releasing water into the Pacific.
Does the ALPS process have any consequences for the ocean? A marine biologist’s perspective on the Fukushima disaster and its implications for the environment
Some of the radionuclide would have already decayed in the 12 years since the disaster, due to a short half-life. But others take longer to decay; carbon-14, for example, has a half-life of more than 5,000 years.
The ALPS process removes enough of 62 of the 64 radionuclides to bring their concentration below Japan’s 2022 regulatory limits for water to be discharged into the environment. These limits are based on recommendations from the International Commission on Radiological Protection.
“Have the people promoting this going forward — ALPS treatment of the water and then release into the ocean — demonstrated to our satisfaction that it will be safe for ocean health and human health?” asks Robert Richmond, marine biologist at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. The answer is no.
Richmond is one of five scientists on a panel advising the Pacific Islands Forum, an intergovernmental organization made up of 18 Pacific nations including Australia, Fiji, Papua New Guinea and French Polynesia. The panel was convened to advise on whether the release of the treated water from Fukushima was safe both for the ocean and for those who depend on it. Richmond says they have reviewed all the data provided by TEPCO and the Japanese government, and visited the Fukushima site, but there are still some unanswered questions about tritium and carbon-14.
The IAEA, which has been supervising the clean-up and management of Fukushima, is expected to release a final report on the site and the plan for the wastewater release later in June.
TEPCO says there will be continuous monitoring of sea life and sediments around the area, which will be done by TEPCO, the Japanese Nuclear Regulation Authority and the IAEA.
According to Otosaka, in Japan the nuclear power plants had discharged more than 50 Terabecquerel of tritium annually before the accident. It’s believed that less than 22 terabecquerels of tritium will be released each year. Otosaka says the release rate of the tritium is controllable.
Japan recently completed construction of an underwater tunnel, through which the treated and diluted water will flow into the ocean for the next 30 years. The test run of the tunnel is expected to end this week.
South Koreans are Outraged by Fukushima’s Water Release and Implications for the Economy and Civil Society of South Korea
A recent survey by South Koreans Hankook Ilbo and Japan’s Yomiuri Shimbun newspapers showed that 80% of the people disapproved of the release.
As some Koreans rushed to buy salt before the release, out of concerns about potential health risks, the number of retail orders at the National Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives branch in Sinan county, which produces 80% of the nation’s sea salt, jumped a hundredfold in recent days compared to a year ago.
As of June 23, the average retail price for sea salt rose to 14,562 Korean won (slightly more than $11) for 5 kilograms, from 11,224 won (about $8.60) last year, according to data compiled by the Korea Agro-Fisheries and Food Trade Corporation.
The government of South Korea attributes the price hike to the decline of salt production because of the heavy rains this spring.
When asked if she’ll buy any salt, Yang said she bought them in bulk last year. She says that she purchased them in advance so she wouldn’t be late for this year’s Kimchang, a ritual in which salt is used to cure vegetables.
Lee Yoon-jae works at his father’s dry goods store at the Gwangjang market. He says the news of the upcoming Fukushima water release has not significantly impacted the price of dried seaweed and salt at the store.
“You can’t help but feel frightened if you think the water is contaminated,” Lee says, referring to water as one of the most basic resources. “But if it is scientifically proven to be safe, I hope people trust that.”
Since the disaster of 2011, the South Korean government has held regular briefings to assure the nation of its commitment to safety. If the procedure fails to meet regulatory standards, it will oppose the water release.
“In South Korea, you’re either on our side or on their side. Half of the people trust the government, and the other half are against it, he says. The political stance of people is believed to be the reason why the protest is taking place.
Two Japanese companies were ordered to pay compensation to Korean victims of forced labor. South Koreans began a boycott of Japanese products after the ruling, and Japan imposed trade restrictions.
Surviving victims and civil activists opposed the plan, but it led to resumption of summits between Yoon and his Japanese counterpart, Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, and promises for closer cooperation in security and economy.
The United States, which wants to strengthen its partnerships with its allies in containing China, welcomed the move. At a trilateral meeting in May, President Biden “commended Prime Minister Kishida and President Yoon on their courageous work to improve their bilateral ties, noting that our trilateral partnership and the Indo-Pacific are stronger because of their efforts,” according to a White House readout.
And the level of trust toward each other is not as high as their assessment of the current state. 42% of Japanese people said they could trust South Korea, while 25% of South Koreans said they couldn’t.
According to a Japan specialist at the Think Tank Asan Institute, public opinion surveys show that the basis for the ongoing rapprochement is not firm.
“Because the Fukushima issue is directly related to people’s safety and health, even those who do not hate Japan or those who are understanding of Japan’s position on historical issues still express concerns about the Fukushima issue,” she says.
At the root of the fear are mistrust and anxiety about invisible, long-term impacts, Choi analyzes. “People are mistrustful not because it’s Japan, but because it’s a region where the accident happened,” she says, adding South Koreans would have been just as anxious with a different neighboring country.
In order to soothe the anxiety, Choi says what happens after the water discharge starts is important. South Korea should seek a promise from the Japanese government for continued involvement in inspection and monitoring and for hazard control measures.
Source: https://www.npr.org/2023/06/27/1184267924/japan-south-korea-fukushima-nuclear-wastewater
South Korea’s Choi Jeong-Hee: Implications for Water Discharge and Trade-off Between Korea and South Korea Using ALPS
The method Japan has chosen is feasible and in line with international practice according to the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Its plan is to purify the water using a filtering system called Advanced Liquid Processing System, or ALPS, and dilute it with more than 100 times’ quantity of sea water.
The rapprochement between the two countries that began earlier this year was threatened by the impending water discharge.
In the heart of South Korea’s capital city, Choi Jeong-hee has been selling seafood for 30 years. He might have to switch to another business in July.
