Japan Today
national

S Korean experts visit Fukushima nuclear plant before treated water is released into sea

40 Comments
By Mari Yamaguchi

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

40 Comments
Login to comment

There are four operating nuclear power plants in S Korea, three of which are on the east coast of the Korean Peninsula facing Japan across the Sea of Japan or what the Koreans call the East Sea.

Are these protesters confident that Korea's atomic power plants are absolutely accident-free with no regard to force majeure or what?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The purpose of the visit is to relieve anxiety of S. Koreans to minimize the damage to the domestic fisheries industry by panic. People around the world are not so much rational or scientific. At least the S. Korean government does not instigate and try hard to relieve the fear of Koreans, which is in contrast with the Japanese government 30 years ago:

Japan demanded a permanent halt to the dumping, but Moscow said it has nowhere to store the waste, mostly low-radiation cleansing fluid and coolant from a ship-repair facility near Vladivostok for its aging fleet of nuclear-powered submarines.

A Japanese government study last year found that Russia’s previous ocean dumping had had no effect on Japan or the surrounding marine environment.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1993-10-19-mn-47464-story.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Japanese nuclear disaster in question was a disaster in waiting. Today a group of South Korean experts are trying to help save Fukushima as best as they can. While the article mentioned nothing negative about the South Korean efforts, Japanese right-wing discontent managed to raise its ugly head in the feedback column. This is a perfect example of a very sick bigotry---one that could well hurt the effort to restore Fukushima.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Perhaps some people didn’t get the replies they hoped for? I leave you with one thought.

Some people are woefully unarmed in a battle against science and facts.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

YrralToday  03:11 am JST

Google Radioactive California Fukushima Fish

Sure. They're all from 2011-2013.

Thank you for validating my points.

Heres a quote from some from the most damning places, like HuffPost, from 2013:

While the report notes that the levels present in the fish are well below what public health officials would deem dangerous...

Or how about MotherJones in 2013:

But compared to what’s there naturally…and what’s established as safety limits, it’s not a large amount at all.

How about the Lo Angeles Times article from back then?

Scientists to eaters: Don’t freak out over Fukushima fish

> The team reported that a 7-ounce, restaurant-size serving of Pacific bluefin tuna contaminated with cesium at the level recorded in fish caught off the coast of San Diego in August 2011 delivered a 7.7 nanosievert dose of radiation -- about 5% of the dose one would get from eating a garden-variety banana

2 ( +2 / -0 )

deanzaZZRToday  01:49 am JST

You think a company is going to catch fish outside of waters near Fukushima and then bring it to a port in Fukushima for processing and labeling?

All fish in the prefecture are screened.

It was the Japanese government that banned catching, selling and exporting of all seafood products from Fukushima immediately after 3/11, not any other country to start with.

Since then, imports of seafood from Fukushima have been lifted in most of the world. That’s because of something we call testing. Let’s use the old, but true comparison: a banana has more radioactivity than seafood caught anywhere near Fukushima.

The only countries with a strict ban now are S Korea, Hong Kong, China, Taiwan and Macau. No politics there, right?

And the WTO has ruled that the bans are unscientific and against trade rules.

Good enough for scientists throughout the world, but not good enough for some here.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

You think a company is going to catch fish outside of waters near Fukushima and then bring it to a port in Fukushima for processing and labeling?

Fish is labeled where it is landed, not where it is caught.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Fish from Nagasaki may be contaminated with contaminated water from South Korea's nuclear power plant, right?

And South Korea, which does not properly follow the London Convention, did not dispose of excrement until recently, loading it on ships and discharging it directly into the sea.

As a result, eutrophication has occurred, and Echizen jellyfish and other large outbreaks have been detected, and coliform bacteria hundreds of times higher than the standard value have been detected in fish such as flatfish.

In addition, tons of garbage written in Hangul arrive on the coast of Shimane Prefecture every year.

Unfortunately, the Sea of Japan is polluted by Russia and South Korea.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Fish is labeled where it is landed, not where it is caught.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Since the fish from Fukushima was tested, and the one from Nagasaki are not, you should go with the one tested to be safe.

The untested one is a crapshoot for all kinds of things.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

You want to grill some fish for dinner. You see two good looking choices. One is labeled that it's from Nagasaki. The other is from Fukushima. Which one do you choose?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The contaminated water is filtered through the ALPS system many times, not once, until the three radionuclides of Cesium-137, Strontium-90 and Iodine-129 are far below international standards.

They are 10 to 1,000 times less than the international concentration standards.

Then it is diluted again another 100 times in seawater before release.

Any exposure to the remaining nuclides is 1,000 times less than one airline flight across the Pacific and 10 times less than a dental X-ray.

Tritium does not concentrate in the body of any animal or humans. It is excreted quickly.

Japanese standards for tritium concentration in drinking water (it’s in all drinking water) are more stringent than international standards.

If you’re worried about tritium, stop drinking all water and stay out of the rain. Rainfall is exposing you to more tritium than anything anything else on the planet.

And don’t be in any country with nuclear power because they all release more tritium in one year than the total of all to be released from Fukushima over a couple of decades.

Somehow, you have survived in spite of all of this tritium, haven’t you?

3 ( +5 / -2 )

@kyushubillToday

Aim their message to Japan. Yet the signs are in ... wait for it ... Korean.

Actually their messages are aimed at angry Korean voters who are eager to vote down Yoon's party in next year's general election.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

@TaiwanIsNotChinaToday 

So these Koreans think that Japan should just build ever more containment vessels until the whole country is containment vessels?

Actually the Koreans are demanding that Japan adopt Korean processing technology based on nuclear desalination. Instead of being released into the sea with Plutonium and Cesium, the radioactive water is put through the desalination plant where water containing just the tritium is collected and released into the sea, while the heavy radioactive elements like Plutonium, Cesium, and Uranium are collected to be disposed of.

It's the heavy radioactive element that ALPS cannot remove that Koreans are concerned about, not tritium. The Korean processing technology guarantees that processed water is free of heavy radioactive element, unlike TEPCO's ALPS.

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

No matter what scientific basis there is, it is absolutely impossible for Koreans to be convinced. This is because they believe that Japan is evil and that they can falsify numbers as much as they want.

Koreans do not choose any means when trying to get the other party to accept their demands. This includes even illegal means.

And we blindly believe that because we are, others will too. Explaining things to someone like that is like watering the desert.

However, such Korean nuclear power plants have frequent accidents and are discharging contaminated water as they are. And they don't accept IAEA inspections like Japan does.

Fearing that the truth will be exposed is the same as China's nuclear power plants.

In a few years, they will make a fuss that the Sea of Japan is being polluted.

Even if the cause is contamination from a South Korean nuclear power plant, it is predictable that Japan will claim that it is because of the treated water released.

Because that's what it means to be Korean.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

These people are just looking for something to complain about, something to be "victimized by Japan" about. We have lots of perpetual victims here in the US, so I know a bit about the subject.

This water is very low in radiation, and as it's said, "the ocean is a great diluter". The water is obviously being released on the wrong side of Japan to pose a risk to Korea, and even if currents somehow bring some of it over that way, it's going to be just about as dangerous as adding a single glass of mildly tainted water to an entire drinking water reservoir. It really is a non-issue.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

I'm glad that SK is making this subject into the news.

Japanese just roll over and stick their heads into the sand.

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

All power companies with nuclear power plants are also covered by the Nuclear Liability Law which limits the amount paid for a nuclear disaster which is ¥120 billion. The taxpayer picks up the tab, and in this case, a very big tab.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Japan should never have accomodated this bilateral request from South Korea. They should have been invited to a joint inspection with the IAEA.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

China and Korea also release massive amounts of radioactive water every year.

China’s Fuqing plant released 52 trillion Bq of tritium in 2020, and South Korea’s Kori facility near Pusan city released 50 trillion Bq in 2018 and the Wolseong Nuclear Power Plant roughly 80 kilometers away has been releasing another 25 trillion Bq into the sea and 110 trillion Bq into the atmosphere.

(The becquerel (Bq) is an internationally-accepted unit for measuring the strength and volume of radioactivity.)

I do hope that Japanese officials will ask Korea on how it handles their radioactive water release. Because their reactors in Pusan are much closer to Japan than Fukushima is to Korea.

8 ( +11 / -3 )

This is the reason why all nuclear plants in Japan should be turned off and decommissioned!

TEPCO should be made pay for the expensive option a store and deal with this deadly poison on land!

-7 ( +4 / -11 )

One collective culture signalling to itself, inside another collective culture ( that wants none of it ). Good luck with that guys.

The broader narrative;

Activism; making complex problems and divisions worse yet again. Neighbours that simply don’t wanna be friends.

Signs of the Times, pun very intended! Hope its all worth it guys. Not quite sure what the end game is though.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

The US government do not have the authority to give Tepco immunity from civil liability

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

not one of those people in the pic look like they have a job

2 ( +8 / -6 )

The IAEA do not release them from international liability,they sued in US court

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

This article don't mention that Fukushima "treated water" containing many kinds of radioactivity such as strontium or ruthenium or cesium even after two times filtering.

-8 ( +7 / -15 )

Aim their message to Japan. Yet the signs are in ... wait for it ... Korean.

9 ( +13 / -4 )

including that Japanese official names contaminated water that directly touched radiation debris "treated water" as if It's same to drain from other nuclear plants, nuclear policy of Japan has many falsehood and deception.

-8 ( +7 / -15 )

@Peter Neil -

The water to be released, if it were desalinated, will be of a higher standard than the water you’re buying from Costco.

Brilliantly stated.

It should also be used on rice farms around Japan - if not diluted with sea water. I'd have no trouble drinking it if it was bottled.

Too much anti-Japan hatred from this "progressive" Jinbo party of Korea.

7 ( +16 / -9 )

Some scientists say the impact of long-term, low-dose exposure to tritium and other radionuclides is unknown and the release should be delayed.

This paragraph sums up this scenario very well. At first there will be several million tons of radioactive water released to clear the stockpile. Then, the water will continue to be released daily until the plant is fully decommissioned, which could take another fifty years. Nobody knows what effects this will have on the environment. I thought gambling was illegal in Japan. This is a huge gamble on a global scale. Has anybody asked the question, what happens if they are wrong?

-5 ( +10 / -15 )

Some scientists say the impact of long-term, low-dose exposure to tritium and other radionuclides is unknown and the release should be delayed.

Who says that? What other radionuclides? Should the Pacific be drained and the existing tritium be put into a pail and then a baggie?

For about the 600th time, the Kori reactor in S Korea releases more tritium every year than the entire amount to be released from Fukushima over the course of two decades.

Reactors in the UK and Canada release more tritium every year also.

The drinking water in Japan and the rest of the world has had more tritium for decades than the concentration to be released.

The water to be released, if it were desalinated, will be of a higher standard than the water you’re buying from Costco.

People wallow in ignorance because they’re too lazy to learn.

6 ( +16 / -10 )

Simply more political window dressing.

The water will be released regardless of whether the team has anything to object to, which they won't as this part of the "we're all friends now" performance.

4 ( +11 / -7 )

*Koreans in the photo

-1 ( +10 / -11 )

So these Koreans think that Japan should just build ever more containment vessels until the whole country is containment vessels? Talk about hostility...

1 ( +15 / -14 )

Why should they be allowed to visit? The water will not be released into the Japan Sea towards Korea. It will be released into the Pacific Ocean towards the United States.

-3 ( +11 / -14 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites