Concern in Beijing and Seoul as agency green lights dumping of radioactive waste by Tokyo

People rally in Seoul, South Korea, on July 1 against Japan’s plan to dump nuclear wastewater into the sea. (PHOTO / XINHUA)

Concerns remain in Beijing and Seoul after a report from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) granted Japan approval to dump radioactive water into the ocean.

China expressed regret on July 4 over the IAEA report that could enable Japan to begin releasing more than 1.3 million metric tons of radioactive contaminated water into the sea this summer from the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, which was ravaged by a massive earthquake-triggered tsunami in 2011. Once started, the process will take decades to complete.

In a statement, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson said the report failed to fully reflect the views of experts who participated in the review, and the IAEA’s conclusion was not shared by all experts.

“Due to its limited mandate, the UN nuclear agency failed to review the justification and legitimacy of Japan’s ocean discharge plan, to assess the long-term effectiveness of Japan’s purification facility, or to corroborate the authenticity and accuracy of Japan’s nuclear-contaminated water data. Therefore, the conclusion is largely limited and incomplete,” the spokesperson said.

IAEA Director-General Rafael Mariano Grossi handed a review report to Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida in Tokyo on July 4. In a foreword to the report, he said “controlled, gradual discharges of the treated water” into the Pacific Ocean “would have a negligible radiological impact on people and the environment”.

In response, the Chinese ambassador to Japan denounced the report, saying the assessment cannot be used as a “license” by Japan to dump radioactive water.

“The IAEA is an international organization that promotes the safe, reliable, and peaceful use of nuclear technology from a functional perspective, so it is not an appropriate organization to assess the long-term impact of nuclear-contaminated water on marine environment and biological health,” Wu Jianghao, China’s ambassador to Japan, told a news conference in Tokyo.

“It should also be noted that Japan has limited the authorization of the IAEA working group and refused to accept the assessment of alternative disposal methods,” Wu added.

The IAEA assessment immediately drew harsh criticism as Japan’s dumping plan has long provoked serious concerns from neighboring countries and sparked public protests in several cities across Japan and South Korea. 

While the South Korean government announced that it accepted the IAEA’s report, ahead of a trip by the agency’s chief to Seoul, the decision was in stark contrast to the popular mood in the country.

“(The) IAEA’s report should not become a ‘get out of jail card’ (for Japan) to release contaminated water to the sea. The Japanese government should immediately withdraw its discharge plan,” said South Korea’s main opposition Democratic Party, or DP, in a statement on July 5. 

Despite continued opposition from the public, the South Korean government said that it respects the IAEA’s report on Japan’s wastewater discharge plan. 

“It has been the government’s longstanding stance to recognize the IAEA as a prestigious internationally agreed-upon agency, and we hold respect for its findings,” said Park Ku-yeon, the first deputy chief of the Office for Government Policy Coordination, on July 5.

But the DP said there are obvious limitations in terms of safety verification of the discharge plan. 

“The IAEA’s final report neither verified the performance of the Advanced Liquid Processing System nor checked how many radionuclides are contained in the contaminated water,” said the DP, noting it failed to meet the justification and optimization requirements of the agency’s general safety guidelines. 

The Advanced Liquid Processing System, or ALPS, is a filtering technology used by the plant’s operator Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) to purify the contaminated water. TEPCO said it will dilute the water to bring radioactive tritium particle levels to below regulatory standards before discharging. 

The DP said the IAEA’s report shows the increasing need for internationally-recognized validation and parliamentary-level hearings.

Members of South Korea’s liberal Justice Party protested against Japan’s discharge plan, with a rally outside the Japanese consulate in the southern port city of Busan on July 4. 

As of July 4, Justice Party leader Lee Jeong-mi had been staging a hunger strike in front of the Japanese embassy in Seoul for nine days. 

In a Facebook post on July 5, Lee said the Japanese government has full responsibility to answer the questions raised by the international community and scientists. 

According to South Korea’s Yonhap News Agency, IAEA Director-General Rafael Mariano Grossi is expected to visit Seoul from July 7-9 to discuss the agency’s safety review with officials. 

His visit was set to include a meeting with the head of the Nuclear Safety and Security Commission, the country’s nuclear safety watchdog. He will also meet with South Korean Foreign Minister Park Jin. 

“The IAEA director general should clarify his position on the principle of ‘justification’ when he visits South Korea,” said Lee, noting the “irresponsible” report failed to mention South Korea, China, and Pacific Island nations, countries for which socioeconomic losses due to the discharge plan are clear. 

Lee said her party will push for parliamentary hearings to examine the dangers and illegality of the discharge plan, including the IAEA’s report. 

Civil groups gathered on July 5 at Seoul’s Gwanghwamun Square to oppose the IAEA’s report and demand that the Japanese government not dump nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the sea. 

At the news conference, the group Joint Action of Japan Radioactive Contaminated Water Marine Speculation Prevention said the report was “unacceptable”. 

The Korea Christian Environmental Movement Solidarity for Integrity of Creation organization told the news conference that no matter how small the radioactivity level is, it should not be allowed to enter the ecosystem. 

The Korean Federation for Environmental Movements, one of the country’s largest environmental groups, said on July 4 that the report is tantamount to giving Japan’s wastewater discharge plan “a pass” and it called on South Koreans to join a protest on July 8 to oppose the plan. 

According to the federation, a total of 152 councils, or more than half of the 244 local councils in South Korea, are concerned about Japan’s discharge plan. A survey conducted by South Korea’s Hankook Ilbo and Japan’s Yomiuri Shimbun newspapers also showed 84 percent of South Korean respondents oppose the planned release of the wastewater. 

In June, the Committee against Ocean Discharge of Contaminated Water from Japan’s Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant said South Korea should actively oppose the discharge plan, but the government response has been ambiguous.

The committee in South Korea asked the government to join neighboring Asian countries to sue Japan before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.

Back home, Japan’s plan faces opposition from a majority of locals and members of the country’s fishing industry.

“The water must not be released without the consent of all those involved was the promise of the government, but now they are doing exactly the opposite,” said Tetsu Nozaki, head of Fukushima Prefectural Federation of Fisheries Cooperative Associations.

Hisae Unuma, a Fukushima resident who has been unable to return to her home since the 2011 disaster feels betrayed. 

“Dumping toxic water is contrary to the government’s pledge of rebuilding my hometown of Fukushima. It is like a double blow on our community. I just don’t know what to say. This is real helplessness,” she said.

Meanwhile, the credibility of the IAEA report has been questioned after South Korean media revealed the Japanese government has made a political donation of more than 1 million euros ($1.1 million) to the IAEA to resolve differences of opinion between the IAEA and third country experts conducting the review.

The reports quoted unidentified sources as saying the Japanese government had obtained the draft final assessment from the IAEA’s working group in advance and proposed substantive amendments to exert undue influence on the final verdict.

Both the Japanese government and the IAEA have yet to give a response to the reports, experts said.

Contact the writers at wangxu@chinadaily.com.cn