China Faces Backlash and Hypocrisy Accusations Over Nuclear Plant Wastewater Release
China’s controversial move to impose a seafood ban on Japan has ignited a fiery debate following the release of over a million tonnes of radioactive water from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean.
Amidst cries of hypocrisy and diplomatic tensions, scientists have raised questions about the discrepancy between China’s own nuclear practices and its accusations.
The scientific community has raised a pertinent observation regarding China’s own nuclear power plants, highlighting that they emit wastewater containing higher levels of tritium than the discharge observed in Fukushima.
Remarkably, these levels remain well within the safe thresholds for human health, thereby prompting questions about the rationale behind the outrage.
On Thursday, Tokyo Electric Power (Tepco), the corporation responsible for managing the Fukushima plant, initiated the process of discharging water laden with radioactive tritium into the ocean.
This extensive wastewater disposal endeavor is anticipated to span over three decades.
The endeavor has garnered approval from multiple authoritative bodies, including the United Nations’ atomic monitor, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and the Japanese government.
China’s response to this situation has been unequivocal. The customs agency has voiced concerns about the potential “radioactive contamination of food safety,” branding the discharge as an “extremely selfish and irresponsible act.”
Fumio Kishida, Japan’s Prime Minister, has diplomatically requested China to rescind the seafood ban, emphasizing the importance of scientific discourse in guiding decisions.
Curiously, China’s Fuqing power plant, nestled in Fujian province, releases nearly triple the volume of tritium into the Pacific Ocean in comparison to the planned Fukushima discharge. Beijing’s stance seems to hinge on the premise that the source of Japan’s release stems from a nuclear disaster.
The differentiation between Fukushima’s radioactive water, which directly contacted melted reactor cores, and the routine operations of nuclear power plants is the crux of the argument.
Wang Wenbin, a spokesperson for China’s foreign ministry, underscored this point, highlighting the distinct nature, sources, and sophistication levels required to handle the released waters.
Hong Kong has weighed in on the matter, stating that its ban on Japanese seafood stems from unique circumstances due to the presence of other radioactive substances.
Similar sentiments were echoed by South Korea, which criticized the Fukushima decision but ultimately aligned with the IAEA’s safety assessment.
Scientific consensus aligns with the IAEA’s assertion that the radiological impact on humans and the environment from the release remains “negligible.”
Dr. David Krofcheck, a senior lecturer at the University of Auckland, asserts that the discharge of tritium-laden water from Fukushima is unlikely to result in detrimental effects. Tritium is a naturally occurring element that finds its way into the oceans through various natural channels.
While Greenpeace raises concerns about unassessed radiological risks and biological repercussions associated with tritium, carbon-14, strontium-90, and iodine-129, Tepco and the Japanese government maintain that the filtration process will eliminate strontium-90 and iodine-129.
Additionally, the concentration of carbon-14 in the contaminated water falls significantly below regulatory discharge standards.
Amidst these debates, the Citizens’ Nuclear Information Centre, headquartered in Japan, points out that insufficient information exists about the long-term implications of introducing tritium into the ocean.
They argue that a comprehensive understanding of the environmental impact remains elusive, a sentiment shared by other critics.
The dispute’s ripple effects are evident, with Chinese fishmongers grappling with depleted shelves as high-quality Japanese imports disappear.
Similar to the aftermath of the 2011 Fukushima disaster, baseless rumors about iodine in salt preventing radiation poisoning have led to a surge in salt demand within Chinese supermarkets.
Against this backdrop, the China National Salt Industry Corporation seeks to assuage fears of salt contamination due to Japanese nuclear pollution. The situation has ignited nationalist fervor, with Weibo polls reflecting public opinions on the matter.
Meanwhile, trending topics centered around Japan and Fukushima highlight the digital discourse’s resonance.
Radiation Concerns Fuel Cosmetic Boycotts
On Friday, six out of the top 10 trending topics revolved around Japan and Fukushima, with one particularly eye-catching theme calling for Mount Fuji’s eruption.
On Weibo, Chinese netizens have initiated the sharing of lists boycotting Japanese cosmetics, driven by concerns over radiation exposure.
China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs faced inquiries regarding the exclusion of seafood imports from Japan while expressing concerns about water contamination in regions like Russia and South Korea.
Spokesman Wang’s response refrained from addressing the query directly, instead reiterating accusations that Japan has adversely impacted the ecological system and oceanic health.
Read Next: Legal Battle: Oil Companies Take U.S. To Court Over Gulf Auction Changes For Whale Protection
Source: The Guardian
