[Japan's Contaminated Water Discharge] G7's Statement Supporting IAEA Verification Complicates Diplomatic Calculations

Japan's Plan for International Approval Retreats
Controversy Continues Over Tritium Water Discharge Issue
June IAEA Final Report Content Is Key

As criticism has arisen that Japan used the Group of Seven (G7) summit, which concluded on the 21st, as a tool to gain international approval for the discharge of contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant, controversy inside and outside Japan is growing. Contrary to Japan's intentions, the joint G7 statement only included a phrase supporting the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) verification, but Japan's persistent efforts to obtain international approval for the discharge of contaminated water are expected to continue.

In particular, depending on the results of the IAEA's final verification report on the safety of the contaminated water discharge to be released next month, the diplomatic calculations of each country are expected to become more complicated. Some speculate that the Japanese government’s emphasis that most of the components in the contaminated water are “tritiated water,” which is also discharged by existing nuclear power countries such as South Korea, will make it difficult for related countries to launch unilateral criticism of the discharge. Since the discharge standards for tritiated water vary by country, a consistent joint response from the international community is also expected to be difficult.

◆G7 Leaders' Statement Limited to "Support for IAEA Verification"

[Image source=AP Yonhap News]

The joint statement released by the G7 leaders on the 20th included a passage regarding the discharge of contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant, stating, "We support the independent verification by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which will be conducted in accordance with IAEA safety standards and international law to ensure no harm to humans and the environment."

The phrase that the Japanese government originally intended to include, "We encourage Japan to proceed with the plan in an open and transparent manner while closely communicating with the international community," was omitted. This represents a retreat from the original plan to obtain full approval from the international community for the discharge of contaminated water.

Since the G7 Climate, Energy, and Environment Ministers' Meeting held on the 16th of last month, Japan has been pressuring the international community for approval of the contaminated water discharge. At that time, Japan attempted to include a statement welcoming the Fukushima contaminated water discharge in the joint statement but faced criticism from other member countries. The draft statement included a sentence welcoming the transparent process of the discharge and also welcomed progress on the reuse of decontaminated soil.

However, Japan faced strong criticism from countries including Germany, which is pursuing nuclear phase-out, both inside and outside Japan. Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry Yasutoshi Nishimura said at the meeting related to the joint statement, "We welcome progress in decommissioning, including the discharge of contaminated water, and Japan's efforts," but the German Environment Minister attending the meeting immediately responded, "We cannot welcome the discharge of contaminated water." Minister Nishimura later explained that it was a slip of the tongue. Ultimately, the statement only included support for the IAEA's evaluation to ensure no harm to humans and the environment, omitting any message welcoming the discharge.

Nevertheless, Japan made every effort to promote the perception that the contaminated water is safe by serving dishes made with Fukushima-produced ingredients at this G7 summit. Fukushima-produced food products were also placed in the International Media Center, where foreign journalists covering the summit were stationed. Panels and promotional booths informing about Fukushima's reconstruction were also set up.

◆"Could Challenge Other Countries' Discharge of Tritiated Water from Nuclear Plants"

[Image source=AP Yonhap News]

Japan's ability to demand international approval for the discharge of contaminated water despite diplomatic pressure from countries such as Germany is due to the fact that existing nuclear power countries have also discharged tritiated water.

Dr. Tim Muso, an environmental expert at the University of South Carolina, pointed out in an interview with CNN, "If Japan's neighboring countries start to question the Fukushima contaminated water issue, it will spark an international controversy over the tritiated water discharged by nuclear power countries worldwide, including the United States, China, South Korea, and France, over the past several decades. This will make all countries uncomfortable, like opening a can of worms."

China, known to be the most sensitive to the Fukushima contaminated water issue apart from South Korea, has officially expressed opposition but has refrained from sharp criticism. Considering that China is reviewing the construction of more than 100 nuclear power plants along its eastern coast by 2030 due to power shortages and environmental issues, it is unlikely to pick a fight over the contaminated water issue.

Since the permissible levels for tritium discharge vary by country, joint international responses are difficult. The Japanese government's permissible limit is 60,000 becquerels (Bq) per liter, and the average concentration of tritium in the Fukushima contaminated water is 1,500 Bq, which is 1/40th of that limit.

In Australia, which has no nuclear power plants, the permissible limit for tritium discharge is 76,000 Bq, and South Korea regulates it at 40,000 Bq under the Nuclear Safety Act. The tritium concentration in Fukushima contaminated water passes both countries' standards. The World Health Organization (WHO) standard, used as a major international guideline, is 10,000 Bq. However, the United States, which has a much more conservative standard of 740 Bq, and Canada, with 100 Bq, do not allow the Fukushima contaminated water to meet their standards.

In this situation, Japan emphasizes that the water is "treated water," not "contaminated water," and that planned discharge is necessary before the capacity of tanks on the nuclear power plant site reaches its limit. They argue that if a flood or other event causes a sudden release of contaminated water when the capacity is full, it would be much more dangerous. Currently, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) stores about 1.32 million tons of contaminated water in tanks on the nuclear plant site, which is 98% of the total capacity. The Japanese government estimates that the capacity limit will be reached between February and June next year.

Minister Nishimura said during a visit to Fukushima Prefecture on the 13th, "Recently, there has been little rain, so there is some leeway, but heavy rain could occur depending on the weather," and added, "Responding to contaminated water is unavoidable to promote Fukushima's reconstruction and proceed with decommissioning."

◇IAEA's Final Review Report in June Is Crucial... Focus on Whether Discharge Will Be 'Allowed'

[Image source=Yonhap News]

In this situation, when the IAEA's final safety review report on the contaminated water discharge is released next month, it is highly likely that Japan will proceed with the discharge. The Japanese government does not attach much significance to the inspection team dispatched from South Korea. On the 21st, the South Korean government inspection team departed for Japan and is conducting a five-night, six-day schedule until the 26th to check the management status of the contaminated water and conduct on-site inspections. However, the Japanese government repeatedly states that it only recognizes the IAEA's verification as the official procedure.

The IAEA is conducting a two-track review process, including verification by experts from 11 countries such as South Korea, the United States, China, the United Kingdom, and France, as well as separate monitoring by experts from four countries: South Korea, the United States, France, and Switzerland. Only the final verification procedure for the release of the final report next month remains. However, Japan does not appear to be particularly tense ahead of the report's release. The IAEA verification team has expressed in interim reports that the discharge of contaminated water is unlikely to pose significant problems.

On the 4th, the IAEA also announced that it had no problem with Japan's significant reduction in the number of radionuclides measured in the contaminated water from 64 to 30. At a meeting on the reuse of decontaminated soil in nuclear power plant areas held on the 8th, the IAEA stated, "We have been able to confirm the efforts and achievements of the Japanese Ministry of the Environment regarding safety," and did not present any opposing opinions.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.