hankyoreh

IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi delivers his agency’s final report on the discharge of contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear power station to Prime Minister Fumio Kishida of Japan at the latter’s residence in Tokyo on July 4. (Reuters/Yonhap)

As expected, after spending the last years verifying Tokyo’s plan to release irradiated water from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the ocean at the behest of the Japanese government, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has come out with its final report containing the assessment that the plan is “consistent with international safety standards.” The countdown has now begun for the Japanese government to dump 1.33 million metric tons of radioactive water whenever it wishes.

On Tuesday, IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi met with Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, delivering to him the agency’s final report. During a press conference that followed, Grossi announced the agency’s conclusion that Japan’s plan to release contaminated water is reliable from a technical standpoint. As the IAEA reviewed the case upon the request of the Japanese government from the very beginning, providing the country consultations to support the release of the wastewater, this conclusion was well expected.

It is clear that a report cannot grant moral justification to the act of dumping huge amounts of wastewater generated from a nuclear accident into the sea for decades upon decades. It is also clear that a report cannot grant the right to demand affected neighboring countries to accept the risk involved. The Japanese government and the IAEA propound “science,” but there are many important questions left unanswered.

It is expected that the nuclear-contaminated water will be released over the course of at least 30 years, but concerns such as the prospect of the Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS), already known for frequent breakdowns, overloading won’t fade away. They say the concentration of tritium, which the ALPS cannot filter, will be diluted by seawater to a concentration far below the safety limit, but no one can be sure of the biological influence such radioactive substances may have as they build up within the food chain.

Japan, which plans to begin releasing the wastewater this summer, is expected to make final efforts at persuading domestic fishers and the international community on the basis of the report. Grossi will be keeping pace, visiting countries where public opposition is fierce — South Korea, New Zealand and the Cook Islands, for example — to turn the tide of popular opinion.

What’s important is our government’s response. Seoul said it would determine its final position by taking into account both the IAEA’s final report and the result of last month’s field visit by an “expert inspection team” of ours, but we all know what kind of conclusion it will reach. The administration and the ruling party have proactively defended the wastewater release plan, putting on a spectacle of public seafood consumption, calling 85% of the public who oppose the release of the irradiated water conspiracy theorists.

Nevertheless, the public remains anxious. This is because the government cannot instill trust in the people.

The government should take into consideration the public’s concerns and clearly weigh the problems, holding off the enforcement of the discharge as long as possible and demanding that Japan come up with a solution. This should be communicated to Grossi, who will be visiting South Korea, as well. South Korea should prepare provisions to the highest possible standard in case the discharge is enforced regarding the management of domestic waters and seafood safety.

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