Double standards over Fukushima wastewater

For at least 30 years after releasing the wastewater, we must constantly check it.

KIM KI-HWANThe author is a business news reporter of the JoongAng Ilbo. The Japanese government’s discharge of contaminated water from the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant is imminent. Not only the economy, but also the environment and food are associated with psychology.

Moreover, the release of the contaminated water to the Pacific is the first of its kind. Even if the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) claims that there is no scientific problem with the discharge, I cannot help feeling uncomfortable.

A majority of Koreans likely share this sentiment. They are caught between two extremes, “the contaminated water treated by Japan will be completely clean” and “if you think the wastewater is safe, drink it.” As much as you have the freedom not to be anxious, you must also accept that others have the freedom to be anxious.

In any case, the evaluation standards should be the same. For instance, China operates 55 nuclear power plants. Twenty-three units are being built and China plans to build 100 more.

Most of those nuclear plants are concentrated on the eastern coast of China across from Korea’s west coast. According to the Nuclear Safety and Security Commission, the total amount of tritium — a radioactive substance emitted by nuclear plants in China — is 1,054 terabecquerels as of 2020. It is 48 times the amount of tritium, 22 terabecquerels, which is scheduled to be discharged annually from contaminated water from the Fukushima plant.

The Chinese current facing the Yellow Sea is close to Korea. Japan’s Fukushima Current flows into Korea after going around the Pacific. Baek Won-pil, president of the Korean Atomic Energy Association, claims that tritium is the least dangerous among radioactive materials. He added that annual tritium emissions from Korean nuclear power plants are 10 times higher than that of the Fukushima nuclear plant.

It sounds awkward to only worry about the danger of treated water from the nuclear plants without addressing radioactive materials emitted by Korean nuclear power plants as well as those in China. If you use double standards, your true intention is under suspect.

Some argue that you cannot compare China and Korea, which have not had nuclear accidents so far, with Japan which may release not only tritium but also other radioactive materials. Even if the contaminated water does not flow into Korea, there are concerns about the effect of the Fukushima current going around the ocean on the marine ecosystem.

But if you are worried, isn’t it more reasonable to pay attention to the already revealed risk from China, rather than the future risk from Japan, which cannot be verified scientifically?

You may find Japan untrustworthy. That’s why Japan is required to treat contaminated water meticulously. For at least 30 years after releasing the wastewater, we must constantly check it. But let’s lean on science rather than conspiracy theories. If the result of appealing to rationality is “Why don’t you first drink the contaminated water?” I must ask at the same level, “Do you drink anything as long as you confirm it’s safe?”