Dragon TV: It was reported yesterday that TEPCO started trial operation of the nuclear-contaminated water discharge facility at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, which will take two weeks. Japanese media assessed that the Japanese government will complete all preparation work for the discharge by the end of June and launch the discharge after the IAEA Task Force releases the final review report. What is your comment?
Wang Wenbin: The Japanese government has begun the trial operation of the nuclear-contaminated water discharge facility. This means that Japan has taken another step towards pushing through the discharge despite international opposition. The discharge of nuclear-contaminated water bears on the global marine environment and public health and is by no means a domestic matter of Japan. What Japan has done in disregard of strong domestic and international opposition is both irresponsible and unlikely to get support.
No matter how Japan tries to justify its discharge plan, it will not hide its attempt to shift risks. The discharge violates Japan’s obligations to protect and preserve the marine environment as outlined in UNCLOS and other international instruments. Discharge into the ocean is not the only option—and certainly not the safest and most optimized way—for treating the nuclear-contaminated water. By choosing this option out of consideration for economic cost, Japan is in fact spilling the risks of nuclear pollution to humanity all over the world.
No lip service can change the reality. Japan has yet to prove that the discharge is safe and harmless. Data released by Japan shows that close to 70 percent of the treated water is not up to standard. However, Japan has created the pseudo-scientific term “treated water” in an attempt to cover up the unidentified risks of the plan. What consequences will it bring to the ecological environment, food safety and public health in Pacific rim countries if millions of tonnes of nuclear-contaminated water is dumped into the ocean? Japan has not fully provided scientific evidence and data in this regard.
No blueprint can guarantee a project’s viability. The effectiveness and maturity of Japan’s treatment facility has received no third-party assessment or certification, and has repeatedly malfunctioned. The discharge will last 30 years or even longer. In the future, a huge amount of new nuclear contaminated water is expected to be created. Japan has been unable to prove the long-term reliability of the treatment facility, neither has it provided a systematic and comprehensive environment monitoring plan. Its current monitoring plan covers a very small area with few locations and low frequency of monitoring, which makes it difficult to promptly identify abnormal situation such as when the discharged water is not up to standard.
I also want to stress that Japan cannot use the final review report of the IAEA Task Force as a “shield” from critics or “greenlight” for the discharge. As early as July 22 last year, the Japanese government officially approved the discharge plan and has since declared multiple times that it would not postpone the implementation of the plan. In fact, the Task Force has a very limited mandate as agreed between Japan and the IAEA, and is not authorized to evaluate other options than the discharge into the ocean. Therefore, no final report shall be used as an excuse for Japan to dump the nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean.
China strongly urges Japan to faithfully fulfill its international obligations, stop pushing through the discharge plan, fully explore and evaluate the alternatives to ocean discharge to ensure that the nuclear-contaminated water is handled in a scientific, safe and transparent manner, and agree to rigorous international oversight. We hope Japan will stop taking the wrong steps in time. Spilt water cannot be gathered up again.
CCTV: The G7 Hiroshima Leaders’ Communiqué issued on May 20 underlines that the highest standards of nuclear safety and security are important, and notes that the leaders support the IAEA’s independent review to ensure that the discharge of Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS) treated water will be conducted consistent with IAEA safety standards and international law and that it will not cause any harm to humans and the environment. Do you have any comment?
Mao Ning: There is no precedent in the world for discharging nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean. Without fully assessing all potential options and finding the safest one, Japan decided on the ocean discharge plan simply for saving cost, which will spill risks to the rest of the world. Over the past two years, Japan has been pushing through the ocean discharge plan in disregard of the legitimate concerns and opposition from various quarters, and even attempted to rope other countries into supporting the plan and downplay or cover up the harm it will cause. The world needs to stand together against such an irresponsible, beggar-thy-neighbor approach.
The international community also needs to guard against Japan’s attempt to use the IAEA’s evaluation and review process to get a greenlight for the discharge and give the impression that the discharge may be safe and harmless. The fact is, the IAEA Task Force was invited by the Japanese government and has a strictly limited mandate. It only evaluates whether the discharge plan accords with the IAEA’s safety standards. It does not have the mandate to evaluate other treatment plans for the nuclear-contaminated water.
Japan’s discharge of the nuclear-contaminated water will last as long as 30 years or even longer. Many experts have pointed out that the water had direct contact with the reactors’ cores melted during the Fukushima nuclear accident. It contains dozens of radionuclides, many of which cannot be treated effectively with existing technologies. Some long-lived radionuclides may spread with ocean currents and form a bioconcentration effect, which will multiply the total amount of radionuclides in the environment, causing unpredictable hazards to the marine environment and human health.
What Japan needs to do now is to face up to the legitimate concern of the international community, have thorough and meaningful consultations with stakeholders including its neighbors, fully explore and assess the alternatives to ocean discharge to ensure that the nuclear-contaminated water is handled in a scientific, open, transparent and safe manner, and minimize the likelihood of imposing unpredictable risks on the international community.
Beijing Daily: It was reported that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Task Force visited Japan again from January 16 to 20 to review the disposal of nuclear-contaminated water from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station and the relevant report will be published within three months. However, the Japanese government unilaterally announced on January 13 that it will start discharging nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean around spring or summer this year. Do you have any comment?
Mao Ning: China is closely following Japan’s disposal of nuclear-contaminated water from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station. We support the IAEA and its Task Force in reviewing and assessing the disposal plan, and hope the Task Force will carry out its work in an objective, just and science-based way and strictly implement the IAEA nuclear safety standards in order to ensure absolute safety of the disposal of the nuclear-contaminated water. We look forward to the report of the Task Force and will take a close look at the report.
It is important to note that there is no precedent for discharging nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean as planned by the Japanese side, and the discharge will last as long as 30 years. Japan is yet to provide ample scientific and factual proof to support the validity of its plan and has not addressed the international community’s concerns over the legitimacy of the discharge plan, the reliability of data, the efficacy of the treatment system and the uncertainty of environmental impact. Last year’s review reports by the IAEA Task Force show that Japan’s discharge plan is not fully consistent with the IAEA safety standards.
We have noted with concern that in July last year, Japan officially approved the ocean discharge plan when the IAEA Task Force’s review and assessment mission was still ongoing. Not long ago, the Japanese side announced unilaterally, ahead of the IAEA Task Force’s review trip to Japan, that the ocean discharge would start in spring or summer this year. Such willful behavior cannot but put a question mark over Japan’s respect for the authority of the IAEA and its Task Force. Is Japan imposing a deadline on the Task Force’s review and assessment process? Has Japan set its mind to executing its plan of releasing the nuclear-contaminated water into the sea regardless of what the final assessment says? Japan needs to offer responsible answers to these questions.
We once again urge the Japanese side to take seriously the legitimate concerns of all parties, dispose of the nuclear-contaminated water in a science-based, open, transparent and safe manner, place itself under strict monitoring and take credible steps to protect the marine environment and the health rights and interests of all those concerned. Japan must not start discharging nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean before having full consultation with neighboring countries and other stakeholders as well as relevant international agencies.
Follow the latest news on Google News
