Tokyo, August 22, 2023 – Greenpeace Japan expresses criticism regarding the Japanese government’s latest announcement of arrangements for discharging Fukushima nuclear contaminated water into the ocean. Greenpeace points out that the arrangements for releasing Fukushima nuclear wastewater into the Pacific Ocean ignore scientific evidence, overlook public opinion, and infringe on the fundamental rights of residents in Japan and the surrounding Pacific regions. The Japanese government and Tokyo Electric Power Company’s claim that “ocean discharge is the only viable option” further reflects that the decommissioning plans for the Fukushima nuclear power plant have substantially failed since the 2011 nuclear accident, and the continuously increasing nuclear wastewater has led to a deeper nuclear crisis.
“We are very disappointed and angry,” said Hisayo Takada, Project Manager at Greenpeace Japan. “Despite the repeated concerns and anxieties raised by fishermen, citizens, Fukushima residents, and the international community, especially the Pacific region and neighboring countries, the Japanese government still made this decision.”
Never forget the victims of the Fukushima nuclear accident
On March 11, 2011, the Great East Japan Earthquake triggered a devastating tsunami and nuclear accident. Since March 26, 2011, Greenpeace’s science teams have been regularly visiting Fukushima to conduct nuclear radiation surveys. Over the next eleven years, they have carried out 33 on-site investigations and released multiple environmental sampling reports. Notably, the secondary disasters stemming from the Fukushima nuclear accident are still ongoing today. Many people forced to evacuate still live as refugees. Evacuees have filed collective lawsuits against the government and Tokyo Electric Power Company nationwide, with over 12,000 plaintiffs.
Greenpeace Japan supports sustainable agriculture and fisheries development in Fukushima to help residents rebuild their lives after the disaster. However, the process of residents resuming their livelihoods also relies on the Japanese government continuing to test agricultural products, fully compensating all affected Fukushima communities, and refraining from intentionally discharging nuclear wastewater into the environment.
Violates the spirit of multiple international conventions
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) previously expressed approval of Japan’s discharge plan. However, the IAEA did not conduct a comprehensive investigation of the operation of the ALPS (multi-nuclide removal system), and completely ignored the existence of highly radioactive fuel debris – nearly 1,000 cubic meters of additional contaminated water every 10 days. In addition, the discharge plan failed to conduct a comprehensive environmental impact assessment as required by international law, posing risks of transboundary harm to neighboring countries.
Member states of the UN Human Rights Council and UN special rapporteurs have opposed and criticized Japan’s discharge plan. Japan’s discharge plan also ignores UN Human Rights Council Resolution 48/13 of 2021, which recognizes “a clean, healthy and sustainable environment” as a human right. Moreover, given the significant risk of transboundary harm to neighboring countries, Japan has yet to fulfill its relevant obligations including conducting a comprehensive environmental impact assessment of discharges into the Pacific, as required by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea to “protect the marine environment”.
“Dumping into the sea” is not the only option
Unfortunately, there is indeed no zero-risk approach to dealing with Fukushima’s nuclear wastewater. However, the option with the least environmental impact is long-term storage while waiting for more advanced treatment technologies to become available. This should include measures to remove radioactive tritium, concentrating the radioactivity into immobilized waste forms suitable for long-term storage. This is an alternative Japan has not yet implemented.
In the face of ecological safety, the Japanese government and TEPCO have chosen the most cost-effective option – dumping the nuclear wastewater into the Pacific. After all, long-term storage and processing could cost billions of dollars. Current storage costs are up to 100 billion yen (about $900 million) per year. TEPCO admitted in 2019 that there was additional tank capacity, contradicting the Japanese government’s claim that storage capacity would be exhausted by 2022.
Energy transition requires a sustainable path
Hisayo Takada said: “The decision to dump nuclear wastewater into the Pacific is a consequence of the 2011 nuclear accident and Japan’s decades-long nuclear power policy. The Japanese government has not acknowledged the flaws in the current nuclear plant decommissioning plans, the continuously increasing nuclear wastewater, and the massive public funds needed, but instead plans to restart more nuclear reactors nationwide despite major seismic and safety risks. The Japanese government has failed to choose safe, reliable and sustainable renewable energy sources like wind and solar power, which are truly urgently needed measures to address the global climate crisis.”
As of June 8, 2023, the amount of radioactive wastewater stored in tanks reached 1,335,381 cubic meters, but due to the failure of the ALPS treatment technology, about 70% of the water will need to be reprocessed. Scientists warn that the risks of radiation from the discharge have not been fully assessed, and the effects of tritium, carbon-14, strontium-90 and iodine-129 released in the discharge on organisms have been overlooked.
