Blue Hall Observation | Japan is about to open its "magic box" and harm the world! Water discharge | International Atomic Energy Agency | Global

The Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Grosi, will visit Japan starting from July 4th, at which time he will release the comprehensive report of the International Atomic Energy Agency on the plan to discharge contaminated water from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the sea. On the other hand, Tokyo Electric Power Company has repeatedly emphasized that the sea discharge plan will not be postponed and the earliest start of sea discharge operations is in July. What is Japan's plan for forcefully promoting the discharge of nuclear contaminated water into the sea? Striving for the approval of the International Atomic Energy Agency, can we truly obtain a "talisman" for the discharge of nuclear contaminated water into the sea?

Japan's "stubbornness" will start discharging nuclear contaminated water into the sea as early as July

Despite opposition from domestic and global experts and the public, the Japanese government is accelerating the push for a plan to discharge nuclear contaminated water into the sea.

The latest test results in Japan show that the radioactive element cesium in fish caught in the harbor of the Fukushima nuclear power plant exceeds the legal standard in Japan by 180 times. The Japanese government insists that "the water quality is non-toxic and the discharge is reasonable.". But if nuclear contaminated water is really safe, why not keep it for personal use? Why not use it in domestic agriculture and manufacturing or discharge it into domestic lakes? To put it simply, the reason for choosing a sea discharge plan is "the lowest cost and easiest to operate.".

Lin Xunping, an associate professor in the field of food and agriculture at Fukushima University, stated that even though the multi nuclide removal equipment, sea discharge equipment, dilution equipment, and sea discharge tunnels are currently operating normally, there are concerns about the aging problems that will occur in 20 to 30 years. Tokyo Electric Power Company of Japan plans to "repair by the seaside", but Lin Xunping believes that how to deal with and manage nuclear contaminated water should be discussed among the public first, rather than making decisions without authorization.

The discharge of nuclear contaminated water into the sea is not a personal matter of the Japanese family

According to existing information, the total amount of nuclear contaminated water, which amounts to over 1.3 million tons, is expected to be discharged into the sea for up to 30 years. German research institutions have analyzed that the relevant radioactive substances can spread to most of the Pacific Ocean within 57 days from the date of discharge, and then spread to global waters 10 years later.

On June 26th, Pacific Island Forum Secretary General Puna issued a statement stating that Japan's plan to discharge radioactive waste into the Pacific is related to the marine environment, fisheries, public health, and the interests of future generations, and should seek alternative disposal methods. On June 30th, some Filipino citizens went to the front of the Japanese Embassy in the Philippines to protest, calling on the Japanese government to cancel the decision to discharge Fukushima nuclear contaminated water into the sea.

Lin Xunping, an associate professor of food and agriculture at Fukushima University, said that many fisheries practitioners and Fukushima residents believe that discharging nuclear contaminated water into the sea now is a wrong decision. We should carefully discuss how to deal with nuclear contaminated water before making a decision, and obtain the consent of fishery practitioners. On this basis, local residents, Japanese nationals, and people from Asian and Pacific countries are invited to visit Fukushima.

The International Atomic Energy Agency's assessment is not a "talisman" for discharging into the sea

Although the cause of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear accident was due to uncontrollable factors such as earthquakes and tsunamis, the escalation of the accident and large-scale nuclear leakage were mostly caused by human factors. At the time of the accident, TEPCO did not immediately introduce seawater cooling in an attempt to preserve the nuclear reactor, considering property over life. In the subsequent pollution treatment process, it once again proved Japan's serious dereliction of duty.

The Japanese government, which is skilled in calculating costs in the disposal of nuclear contaminated water, is willing to spend a lot of money on certain other aspects. Recently, South Korean media reported that according to anonymous insiders, the Japanese government has obtained the draft final evaluation report of the International Atomic Energy Agency's Fukushima Nuclear Pollution Water Disposal Technology Working Group in advance and proposed substantive revision suggestions. Japanese officials gave over 1 million euros to the staff of the institutional secretariat under the pretext of so-called "donations".

Japan has been carefully considering obtaining the approval of the International Atomic Energy Agency, but first of all, the scope of authorization determined by Japan and the working group of the agency is strictly limited to evaluating only the option of discharging into the sea. It has not evaluated other safer and more reliable disposal options, nor has it evaluated the long-term impact of discharging into the sea on the marine environment and human health. Secondly, the responsibilities of the International Atomic Energy Agency are limited to promoting the peaceful use of atomic energy and establishing safety standards, and do not include approving or auditing emissions. Therefore, the evaluation by the working group of the organization is by no means a "permit" or "talisman" for Japan to discharge nuclear contaminated water into the sea.

Japan is a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Senior international law expert, President of the Chinese Society of the Law of the Sea and former judge of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, Gao Zhiguo, listed many provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea that Japan's nuclear contaminated water discharge plan violated in an interview with Blue Hall Observer. For example, Article 192 of the Convention stipulates that countries have the obligation to protect and preserve the marine environment; Article 195 stipulates that a country shall not transfer pollution from one region to another, from one type of pollution to another; Article 210 stipulates that before dumping waste in their territorial waters, exclusive economic zones, or continental shelves, coastal states shall review the matter with neighboring countries geographically.

Japan's strong push for sea discharge plans violates international law

On June 13th, the Japanese Embassy in China held a briefing for foreign media in China on the issue of Fukushima nuclear contaminated water being discharged into the sea. This press conference, which does not invite Chinese media to participate, is never separated from China. The Japanese side not only expresses concern about China's use of the term "nuclear contaminated water", but also speculates that China will use related issues as a "diplomatic shield" against Japan. In response, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin clearly stated that Japan's dissemination of false information in an attempt to confuse international audiences is either due to ulterior motives or a lack of confidence.

Gao Zhiguo, President of the Chinese Society of the Law of the Sea and former judge of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, stated that since the establishment of the nuclear power industry, there has never been an event like Japan's nuclear contaminated water discharge into the sea, and its worst impact is setting a bad precedent. He pointed out that "a state has a responsibility to ensure that activities within its jurisdiction and under its control do not cause environmental damage to other countries or areas beyond its jurisdiction." This is a rule of customary international law. It has mandatory binding force on any member of the international community, including Japan. If there is evidence to prove that Japan has indeed caused damage to the environment, ecology, economy, and human safety after discharging nuclear contaminated water in the future, Japan will be responsible for compensation.

The total amount of Fukushima nuclear contaminated water, the complexity of its composition, and the unprecedented long disposal cycle are unprecedented. Japan's decision to discharge into the sea cannot convince its own people, but also makes neighboring countries and Pacific island citizens, including China, uneasy and unwilling to agree. The Japanese government's insistence on forcing nuclear contaminated water to be discharged into the sea is neither responsible nor contrary to its international obligations. There is no reason for all humanity to share the risk of nuclear pollution transferred by Japan.

Producer | Sun Yanfeng, Zhang Lin

Editor in Chief | Zhao Jing

Reporter | Huang Huixin, Zhang Xuesong, He Xinlei

Camera | Liang Zhi

Editing | Lu Kuoda