national

U.N. nuclear agency chief says Fukushima transparency important

36 Comments
By MARI YAMAGUCHI and HARUKA NUGA

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

© Copyright 2022 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.


36 Comments
Login to comment

“I proceed from the principle that every serious honest concern must be taken seriously and every effort must be made to address it,” he said. “For these countries, any countries, what they have every right to demand is that the international standards are complied with, nothing more, nothing less."

Not only the international community have this right, also the locals should be informed and all their concerns addressed adequately, something that has not happened yet. Up to now the only thing of importance is the convenience for the company that was responsible for the disaster, that has to change. Even if the release can be done safely there are obvious negative effects for the local industries that has not been taken into account.

11 ( +13 / -2 )

As fossil fuels become less. and less of an option, we are going to have to make "the alternatives" safe. Hiding the mistakes of Fukushima benefits very few people.

13 ( +14 / -1 )

""maintain transparency ""

How can anyone maintain transparency while looking thru contaminated waters!!! LOL

1 ( +12 / -11 )

Transparency is an anathema in Japans political and business practices.

4 ( +13 / -9 )

Tritium,a byproduct of nuclear power production that is inseparable from the water

No that's a lie ..,Tritium can definitely be separated from water !

You don't have to be a rocket scientist or genius to understand that if you evaporated the water you are left with the Tritium.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

It’s called bioaccumulation….

Make TEPCO reap what it has sown by having to pay to treat the water on land and don’t allow any sea dumping!

6 ( +9 / -3 )

Everybody has concerns and there is no confirming data to support this release will not cause a huge environmental disaster on a scale unseen before. However, nobody is standing up and stopping Japan from doing it. Japan has alternatives and has had ten years to develop suitable storage and treatment of the water. Tritium can be removed from the water but it is expensive. There are hundreds of hectares of land around the plant that can never be lived on again and the water should be stored there. Japan has admitted the water contains more than just tritium due to improper filtering but this fact seems to be ignored and/or accepted. The dumping of this water into the ocean should not be allowed to happen.

7 ( +10 / -3 )

There has never been any fully transparent independent monitoring or investigations before, during and I predict…after.

greenpeace did some reports, but not full, thorough, unimpeaded investigations

4 ( +6 / -2 )

What bothers me is they assume the environmental impact will be minimal but however they don't know exactly how many gallons of water will be created which means not knowing how many gallons will be released over the supposed decades long process.

Impossible to predetermine the environment impact consequences accurately .

There are other more responsible methods for dealing with contamination.

And its not just the seafood that will be affected because the ocean evaporates into clouds that precipitate.

basically a distillation.

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

Well, TODEN and the government have certainly never lied about their endeavors, so we can rest assured they won't here, either.

Kyo wa heiwa dato ne: "Impossible to predetermine the environment impact consequences accurately"

You're right! It might actually help things grow and be beneficial, so why not give the dumping a shot, right? I mean... what could go wrong with nuclear waste? We can never know until we do it. While we're at it, let's set off a nuke deep underground near some farms and see if it helps things grow over the years? I mean, we can't actually predict until we do it.

I say boycott all marine products from Japan, as well as any other imports from them if they do this.

-11 ( +6 / -17 )

Yes, it would be nice if there is transparency.

this is a very good read: Destin d’un homme remarquable d’Hiroshima à Fukushima de Marc Petitjean, it is about Doctor Shuntaro Hida (1917-2017).

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Of course local fishing communities are afraid as fish that consumed tritium is highly dangerous.

I don't care because I don't touch this glowing stuff from Fukushima but what I'm afraid of that the government will actually give it to the kids at school.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

@smithinjapan,

Like nearly always I agree with you entirely.

There should be a ban on all Japanese marine products especially on the Pacific coast side of the country.

Yet in a year or two the G-Gov will be complaining that no country wants to import its ‘safety’ food.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

I trust Japan 100%.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

If it's going to take decades to release all that water i think its reasonable to assume it will negatively impact the sale of any products from the area and all Japanese products, as consumers will lose faith in quality and safety standards.

Seaweeds specifically filter the ocean so that's also a concern for consumption or if the Seaweeds are used in the agricultural industry or as fertilizers.

Ultimately i think the negative impacts of releasing the contaminated water into the ocean far outweigh anything positive .

Quite simply not worth it !

It should be a crime !

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

So, what is Mr Grossi insinuating here?

Is it that Japan is not being up drone about the problems at the plant?

Well, that would not be a first , would it?

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

@Smithinjapan

We can never know until we do it

Ive researched a little on the impact of nuclear waste on living matter and haven't seen and data that says it's condusive to healthy growth.

I assume your being sarcastic.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Up front …

0 ( +1 / -1 )

For those of you who never ever trust Japan and Japanese, what they say and do, IAEA professionals are monitoring/supervising/investigating before/during/after the process. If it doesn't still help you at all,

You boycott Japan by yourself

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Bottle it and drink it if it's safe.

If it's not then don't put it in the sea where our food lives because we'll end up consuming it anyway :(

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Bottle it and drink it if it's safe.

As if every other nuclear power plants in the world are making the people and the staffs drink their treated water before releasing it into the sea.

As if every other chemical factories in the world are making the people and the staffs smoke the exhaust gas before releasing it into the air

We all are consuming them already due to series of experiments of nuclear bombs intentionally exploded in the sea. Remember?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

IAEA reported against the release.

UN nuclear agency claims lack of transparency.

Japan is not being support from anywhere.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

bokudaToday  08:36 pm JST

IAEA reported against the release.

UN nuclear agency claims lack of transparency.

Japan is not being support from anywhere.

You mean this report? Where is it against the release?

https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/report_1_review_mission_to_tepco_and_meti.pdf

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@Kenji

Japan is making “significant progress”

IAEA is saying that is not ready, just a work in progress.

It is scary to read.

They aint giving any support to the plan.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

@bokuda

@Kenji

Japan is making “significant progress”

IAEA is saying that is not ready, just a work in progress.

It is scary to read.

They aint giving any support to the plan.

So You didn't read the report , yet saying IAEA is against the release. We have 1 year yet before the project will commence and IAEA will publish its 2nd official report soon. They took back treated water sample this time for its own research too.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

@virusrex

The difference between a thesis and a theory is just semantics.

Both are only an observation that becomes proven or disproved by science.

Science isn't a correct Science because everything is constantly changing.

If you are so intellectual then you would realize that.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The IAEA is not giving any approval nowhere in the report.

The U.N. nuclear agency chief is stating that there's not enough transparency.

They aint silly, they wont support the trowing of radioactive waste to the ocean.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

bokudaToday  03:52 pm JST

The IAEA is not giving any approval nowhere in the report.

The U.N. nuclear agency chief is stating that there's not enough transparency.

They aint silly, they wont support the trowing of radioactive waste to the ocean.

IAEA is not in the position to approve nor oppose to the actions of every sovereign countries operating nuclear power plants. Every such country as a member of IAEA adheres to the safety operations under the IAEA's International safety standards, where IAEA monitors/advises/warns if needed.

As opposed to your misunderstanding, IAEA is supporting this process. They meant transparency is needed for those misunderstanding like yourself, for which IAEA pledged to help the project throughout the process.

Don't worry, if there're still problems, those experts from China and SK in the team would start claiming it.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

@bokuda

As a sidenote, SK has became a Chair-Nation, for the 1st time, of IAEA. It is not too late for you to complain without updating yourself. We have one year, and Chair-nation would say something for sure.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Makes no sense for any political organisation to support the trowing of radioactive waste to the sea.

It will certainly make them lots of enemies in the future.

As opposed to your misunderstanding, IAEA is supporting this process.

Did I miss something? I'm reading the report very carefully, can't find anything.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

@Bokuda

Yes. You are missing a lot

https://www.yomiuri.co.jp/science/20220520-OYT1T50219/

Let me know if you more links

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@kennyG

Just like Ghosn's after-retirement contract, TEPCO's plan is not agreed yet.

You can see that is still work in progress:

p.18 - TEPCO has proposed amendments to its Implementation Plan

p.40 - TEPCO is required to submit an application to NRA for approval to amend the implementation plan

( https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/report_1_review_mission_to_tepco_and_meti.pdf )

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

@boku

p.18 - TEPCO has proposed amendments to its Implementation Plan

Done already

p.40 - TEPCO is required to submit an application to NRA for approval to amend the implementation plan

Approved the other day by NRA which is not IAEA.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@kennyg

Most likely next month will be approved. Not today.

The NRA plans to make a decision on final approval after a one-month public comment period,

https://www.euronews.com/2022/05/19/us-disaster-fukushima-water-release

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@boku

Most likely next month will be approved. Not today.

The NRA plans to make a decision on final approval after a one-month public comment period,

Yes. for formal approval but it is almost the same thing.

Japan OKs plan to release Fukushima nuclear plant wastewater

Japan’s nuclear regulator on Wednesday approved plans by the operator of the wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant to release its treated radioactive wastewater into the sea next year, saying the outlined methods are safe and risks to the environment minimal.

https://japantoday.com/category/national/japan-oks-plan-to-release-fukushima-nuclear-plant-wastewater

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

If Tritium and water don't mix then how did it get in there ?

They diluted it .

Just un-dilute it and deal with the contaminated water in a responsible manner.

Evaporate or distill out the water .

0 ( +1 / -1 )

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