Tokyo and Beijing butt heads over Japan’s plans to discharge radiation-contaminated water to the ocean

What happened?

On 3 July, it was first revealed that Japan would most likely receive approval from the IAEA to dump treated water from Fukushima-Daiichi into the ocean after a lengthy review process, and the very next day Japan received its desired approval from the organisation. The IAEA maintained that the discharge would not harm the environment because the proposed water treatment plan met international safety standards.

On 6 July, in response to the IAEA’s ruling, China began prohibiting seafood imports from Japan despite the fact that it formerly was the world’s largest importer of Japanese seafood. Chinese authorities announced that they would begin carefully testing imports from Japan to ensure safety against radiation.

Five days later, on 11 July, a spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Ministry protested Japan’s plans to release treated water from Fukushima into the ocean during his weekly press conference, claiming that the discharge “is against common science”.

On 13 July, China continued to voice its doubts in regard to the irradiated water during an Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit. Representatives of China and Japan clashed due to China’s fears. Despite a number of scientific facts that support the IAEA’s conclusions, China maintains that Japan needs to acknowledge the potential dangers of wastewater from Fukushima-Daiichi. However, China is not the only country that is concerned by Japan’s intentions.

Members of South Korea’s ruling party met with the Director General of the IAEA, lambasting Mariano Grossi for approving the discharge of water from Fukushima-Daiichi, asserting that the IAEA’s review ignored long-term environmental and health concerns.

A Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) lawmaker Woo Won-Shik began a hunger strike as a sign of protest and has already continued it for more than two weeks. Additionally, he stated that if the Japanese government considers the water from Fukushima to be safe, then the government should use it for drinking and agricultural purposes rather than dumping it in the ocean.

In addition, hundreds of demonstrators assembled in Seoul to protest Japan’s plans. Russia also undertook measures to guarantee the safety of seafood imports from Japan by implementing radiation testing for Japanese imports.

Despite the political uproar in the international community in response to Japan’s intentions, one unavoidable problem remains: according to Japanese authorities’ data, by the beginning of 2024 all of the reservoirs that store radioactive water at the Fukushima-Daiichi plant will be filled. Without a solution, soon there won’t be anywhere to store the contaminated wastewater.

Where did the contaminated water come from?

On 11 March 2011, the 9.0 magnitude Tōhoku earthquake caused a tsunami that devastated the Fukushima-Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. As a result, the reactor melted down and polluted the surrounding area with radioactive fallout.

The disaster was classified as a Level 7 (a major accident) on the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale.

Water was used for cooling spent fuel in the reactor at Fukushima-Daiichi, becoming contaminated with radiation in the process.

In addition, water from various sources, such as rainwater and groundwater, that comes into contact with radioactive substances at Fukushima-Daiichi also becomes contaminated.

More than a million metric tonnes of contaminated water is stored at Fukushima-Daiichi, but Japanese authorities are confident that the water is ready to be discharged to the ocean because the water will first be treated by the Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS).

Why is Japan so sure that the water won’t harm the environment?

According to an IAEA report, APLS is an advanced pumping and filtration system that removes 62 radionuclides, special types of radioactive atoms, from radiation-contaminated water. ALPS is not capable of removing one particular radionuclide, tritium, from contaminated water, but according to the IAEA, tritium “has the lowest radiological impact of all naturally occurring radionuclides in seawater”, and therefore does not elicit any special concerns.

Additionally, the IAEA emphasised that Japan’s plans to gradually release treated water into the ocean are consistent with international safety standards.

Grossi published the conclusions of the IAEA’s review in a report, which contends that “controlled, gradual discharges of the treated water to the sea… would have a negligible radiological impact on people and the environment”.

Why is China at odds with Japan?

According to PRC Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Wang Wenbin, the danger associated with contaminated water from Fukushima-Daiichi far exceeds that of contaminated water from normally functioning nuclear power plants. Moreover, he contends that the IAEA cannot guarantee the long-term safety and effectiveness of the ALPS system.

In addition, Wang said that the conclusions of the IAEA’s review were “controversial” and that “experts who participated in the review have expressed views different from the final report”.

Wang concluded his remarks with the following statement: “If some people think that the nuclear-contaminated water from Fukushima is safe to drink or swim in, we suggest that Japan save the nuclear-contaminated water for these people to drink or swim in, instead of releasing it into the sea and causing widespread concerns internationally.”