Anticipation of Fukushima’s Nuclear Wastewater Discharge Alarms Residents

As Japan’s beach season ushers in plentiful seafood for vacationers and bustling business for shop owners, the picture in Fukushima looks grim.

The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, devastated by the tsunami, is poised to commence the contentious release of treated radioactive wastewater into the sea in a matter of weeks. This plan, met with fierce opposition within and beyond Japan’s borders, is a source of deep concern for the local inhabitants.

Residents fear that this discharge, happening 12 years post the nuclear catastrophe, could tarnish Fukushima’s reputation further and adversely impact their livelihoods and businesses.

Related headlines include AP’s exclusive coverage of Fukushima nuclear plant as it readies to discharge radioactive water, and Hong Kong’s potential ban on additional Japanese products if radioactive water is indeed released. A minister’s visit to the plant saw Japan defending the IAEA report’s impartiality regarding the Fukushima water release plan.

“I need a clean ocean to make a living,” stated Yukinaga Suzuki, a septuagenarian who runs an inn at Usuiso beach in Iwaki, located about 30 miles south of the plant. The government has yet to specify when the water discharge will commence.

Officials argue that potential harm might be confined to mere rumors, but its eventual impact on the local economy is uncertain. Residents express a sense of “shikataganai” or helplessness.

Suzuki urges the officials to delay the plan until the swimming season ends in mid-August.

When asked about his stance on the water release, Suzuki opposed it but felt powerless as the government unilaterally shaped the plan. “The timing of the water release coinciding with the swimming season is entirely inappropriate, even if it poses no harm.”

The beach he mentions lies in the path of the treated water moving southwards via the Oyashio current off the coast of Fukushima Daiichi. This area is where the cold Oyashio current intersects with the warm, northbound Kuroshio current, creating a fertile fishing spot.

The government and the plant’s operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings (TEPCO), have grappled with managing the immense volume of contaminated water generated since the 2011 nuclear calamity, and announced plans to release it into the ocean during the summer.

The plan involves treating the water, diluting it with more than a hundred times the seawater, and then discharging it into the Pacific Ocean through a subsea tunnel. They argue this approach surpasses national and international safety standards.

However, Suzuki is not entirely persuaded by the government’s campaign emphasizing safety. “We cannot yet ascertain its safety,” he remarked, “We won’t know until much later.”

Before the disaster, the Usuiso area was home to over a dozen family-run inns. Now, only Suzuki’s Suzukame, a 50-year-old inn passed down from his parents, has managed to survive post the tsunami and remains in business. Suzuki now chairs a safety committee for the area and operates the only beach house there.

Suzuki’s inn guests, while canceling their bookings, won’t bring up the water issue. “I provide my guests with fresh local fish, and the beach house offers a place for visitors to relax. The ocean is my livelihood’s source.”

On March 11, 2011, an earthquake and tsunami obliterated the Fukushima Daiichi plant’s cooling systems, causing three reactors to melt and pollute their cooling water. This contaminated water has continually leaked ever since, and is currently stored in approximately 1,000 tanks, expected to reach full capacity in early 2024.

The government and TEPCO assert that the water needs to be removed to allow for decommissioning and to avert potential leaks from the tanks, given much of the water is still contaminated and requires re-treatment.

Katsumasa Okawa, who operates a seafood business in Iwaki, is more troubled by the tanks containing contaminated water than by the treated water’s release. He wishes to see them removed sooner rather than later.

A leak would mean “the final blow… It will cause actual damage, not reputation,” Okawa opines. “The release of the treated water seems inevitable.” He admits it’s unnerving to live near the damaged plant for decades.

Fukushima’s economy, fisheries community, and tourism industry are still recuperating. The government has dedicated 80 billion yen ($573 million) to assist the struggling fisheries and seafood processing sectors, and to counter potential reputation damage following the water release.

Meanwhile, Hong Kong has threatened to ban import of aquatic products from Fukushima and other Japanese prefectures if Tokyo proceeds with the treated radioactive wastewater discharge. This has made the issue not only political, but also a diplomatic matter. Japan is urging Beijing to respect science amidst suspended fishery exports from Japan at Chinese customs.

Despite concerns, TEPCO official Tomohiko Mayuzumi asserts, “Our plan is scientific and safe, and it is crucial to strongly communicate that and gain understanding.” The International Atomic Energy Agency’s final report, released this month, supports the method as it meets international standards and asserts its environmental and health impacts would be insignificant.

Yet, some scientists call for more focus on the dozens of low-dose radionuclides that persist in the water, citing insufficient data on their long-term effects on the environment and marine life. Professor Katsumi Shozugawa from the University of Tokyo emphasizes that trust can only be built if TEPCO strictly adheres to the planned procedures.

Though Japanese officials attribute the treated water issue to tritium, it also carries several other radionuclides that leaked from the damaged fuel. Experts urge that these radionuclides, though filtered to legally releasable levels, warrant close scrutiny.

Takayuki Yanai, a local fisheries cooperative executive, points out that forcing the water release without public support only leads to reputational damage and hampers the recovery of Fukushima fisheries. “Public understanding is lacking due to distrust towards the government and TEPCO,” he added. “Safety is born out of trust.”

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Fukushima radioactive wastewater release

More about Fukushima radioactive wastewater release

• Fukushima’s Struggle with Radioactive Waste
• What the Fukushima Water Crisis Entails
• Understanding the Environmental Impact of Radioactive Discharge
• Japan’s Plan to Release Fukushima Wastewater into the Sea
• Effects of Fukushima’s Radioactive Water Release on Seafood Industry