hankyoreh

Yoo Guk-hee, who lead the Korean inspection team on its trip to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, gives a presentation on May 31 on the results of the team’s inspection upon returning to Korea. (Yonhap)

A team of experts inspecting radioactively contaminated water from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan announced Wednesday that it had obtained “raw materials” after an analysis of contamination concentrations at the intake and output sections of the Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS) multi-nuclide removal system used to eliminate radioactive material from the water.

But critics are raising questions over how credible the analysis can be when it is based on analysis solely of raw materials provided by the Japanese government, without the inspection team conducting an examination based on samples it collected itself.

“Through our inspection, we saw that major equipment was installed on site according to the design, and that there were means of stopping the release of contaminated water in the event of an irregular situation,” explained the team’s leader, Nuclear Safety and Security Commission (NSSC) Chairperson Yoo Guk-hee, in a briefing Wednesday at the central government complex in Seoul.

At the same time, he stressed the need for “additional analysis and confirmation for a comprehensive assessment of the major equipment’s performance suitability and long-term operation potential.”

“We plan to carry out analysis and confirmation for different equipment and areas through our inspection findings, information that we receive in the future, and question-and-answer exchanges with Japan, and we will announce findings from a comprehensive assessment of the contaminated Fukushima water based on that,” he added.

Over a six-day period starting on May 21, the team conducted a focused investigation on seven areas, including ALPS (a key component of the process of releasing the contaminated water into the sea); the K4 tanks used to confirm whether discharge standards are met; equipment for transportation, dilution, and release; the central monitoring and control room; and the chemical analysis wing (radioactivity analysis laboratory).

In particular, the team said that it conducted a “focused examination on the ALPS radioactive nuclide removal performance and the potential for stable long-term operation.”

The raw materials received by the team included annual analyses of concentrations of 64 radionuclides at the ALPS intake and output sections between 2019 and 2022, along with weekly measurements for roughly a dozen radionuclides that had been frequently detected. The team explained that by acquiring raw materials for analyzing radioactivity concentrations before and after passing through ALPS, it was able to verify the state of the water and the system’s performance.

Yoo explained that in addition to its “precision analysis of the acquired data,” the team also “plans to acquire additional information about the ALPS maintenance and management plan to conduct a comprehensive confirmation of its performance.”

He further said it plans to “comprehensively verify the ALPS radioactive nuclide capabilities by referring to the analysis findings of the Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety (KINS), which is taking part in an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) evidence monitoring program.”

The same evening, the IAEA published an analysis report on samples of ALPS-treated waters, determining the water to be safe for Japan to release after completing the radionuclide removal process.

In the report published on its website Wednesday evening, the IAEA wrote that the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) had “demonstrated a high level of accuracy in their measurements and technical competence.”

“Neither the IAEA, nor the participating third-party laboratories, detected any additional radionuclides (i.e., radionuclides beyond what is included in the source term) at significant levels,” the report said.

The agency cross-checked its Fukushima water samples with three affiliated institutes and laboratories in four countries, including South Korea’s KINS as well as others in the US, France, and Switzerland.

The report was the sixth published in the IAEA’s process of examining the safety of the plan to release contaminated water from Fukushima. A final report containing all of the examination findings to date is reportedly to be published later this month.

Experts and environmental groups cautioned that there are limits to what can be determined about accuracy and credibility based solely on raw materials provided by Japan, without the inspection team collecting and analyzing its own samples.

“There isn’t a lot of significance to be gleaned from data gathered by TEPCO,” insisted Ahn Jae-hun, energy and climate change director for the Korean Federation for Environmental Movements.

Even in Japan, the conclusions of the data’s author TEPCO are taken with a grain of salt after revelations of the company’s false claims, including its insistence that “all radioactive materials apart from tritium have been removed” from ALPS-treated equipment.

Suh Kune-yull, an emeritus professor of nuclear engineering at Seoul National University, said the inspection team “appears to be trying to use the IAEA as a shield to avoid responsibility.”

By Kim Jeong-su, senior staff writer; Key Min-do, staff reporter

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]