Sun, Apr 18, 2021 page6

• Dumping of Fukushima water risks biosphere

  • By Weng Yu-chi 翁御棋
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Last week, the Japanese government announced a plan to release 1 million tonnes of treated water into the ocean from the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant, which went into meltdown following an earthquake and tsunami in 2011. The plan has caused concern in neighboring countries and perhaps around the world.

  When it comes to the release of treated wastewater, three scientific principles generally apply. The first principle is concentration control, as the concentration of toxic elements in the water should meet effluent standards.

  The next is total quantity control. In terms of long-term release, in addition to the concentration of toxic elements, there should also be a limit on the total quantity of them. This concept was only brought up in academic circles in the 1980s, and apart from standards for acid rain, ozone and greenhouse gases, most countries still have not defined a comprehensive standard.

  Finally, there is the precautionary principle and the “no-regret policy”: For things that cannot be determined by today’s technology, actions with excessively high uncertainty should be prohibited to protect future generations and the survival of other creatures.

  However, with the exception of the protection of endangered animals, this often remains a mere ethical appeal in the world today, and that hardly affects decisionmakers’ efforts to push for economic development or modernization.

  Judging from the data published on the matter, the radiation level of the wastewater to be dumped into the ocean seems to be much lower than in discharge water and even drinking water. In terms of total quantity control, the Japanese government said that the annual collective radiation dose in the release is close to the amount in the release of water before the nuclear disaster.

  If that is the case, opposition to the plan should be based on the second principle of total quantity control or the third principle of the precautionary and no-regret approaches, as governments communicate with Japan from the perspective of global opinion or international organizations.

  Close attention should be given to the fact that although the authority in charge of the discharge says that the radiation levels in the wastewater is much lower than the standard, whether it meets the standard during routine monitoring might be a big challenge.

  Moreover, as there have not been many nuclear disasters, some of the radiation exposure factors are actually estimated based on figures from the two atomic bombings during World War II and from the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster in then-Soviet Ukraine. Whether such outdated factors are still applicable remains unknown, but there are not many other options.

  Therefore, the precision of the base value and assessment factors should be updated constantly, but, due to the lack of professional talent and the difficulty in obtaining data, such updates are difficult, which would lead to a high degree of uncertainty in the results of the risk assessment.

  Although the arguments made by the Japanese government and contractors are reasonable and convincing to a degree, many scientific uncertainties are out of reach of current laws and regulations, and that is the reason opposition to the plan is also heard within Japan.

  The issue is more than just a risk assessment. For the sake of the health of future generations and the safety of the biosphere, the international community must demand that the Japanese government handle the matter cautiously.

  Weng Yu-chi is director of the Research Institute for Sustainable Civilization.

  Translated by Eddy Chang
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Palmeiras hopes for club cup win

  • 2

    Magnitude 6.4 earthquake hits Hualien County

  • 3

    Taiwan to see nine extended holidays in 2026

  • 4

    Hegseth outlines Chinese threat

  • 5

    Pegatron ranks last in Greenpeace report