The 0.1 percent talking over the 99.9 percent

So, what was all the fuss about? Why were our politicians stirring up public fear with the radioactive element of less than 0.1 percent?

Kim Hyun-ki

The author is the Tokyo bureau chief and correspondent of the JoongAng Ilbo. I recently joined a TV debate on the hot-button topic of Japan discharging treated radioactive wastewater from the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant into the Pacific. Panelists came from Korea, China, and Japan. A professor representing China sounded like the Korean opposition party. He demanded Tokyo reconsider the release project from the start, as he could not trust Japan nor the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). He used no science to make his points.

An assistant to the secretary general of Japan’s Liberal Democratic Party snapped back. He claimed that the tritium level at the sea near China’s nuclear power plants was 50 times higher than the level found in the waters off Fukushima. I chose to stay neutral until the test results come out. If the results match what Japan had planned and promised, the issue could be silenced, I said.

Although I didn’t say it aloud, I had my own convictions. First, the radiation levels in my body have remained the same no mater how much I ate seafood from Fukushima since the 2011 meltdown. Second, one thing not many may know, or choose not to know, is that the current system won’t go astray. For instance, the discharge cannot take place unless the radioactive chemical levels are under the international safety standards. The authorities are releasing the wastewater through the multiple filtration system. As long as the Tokyo Electric Power Company and the IAEA are scheming together, the wastewater release cannot contaminate the Pacific in any way.

But the radioactive levels in the sea after the discharge of the first batch on August 24 were puzzling. It was too low. The density of tritium in the wastewater before the release was 63 becquerels per liter, or 0.1 percent of the Japanese government-set threshold of 60,000 becquerels per liter. (In other words, it was 99.9 percent lower than the Japanese standards.)

The seawater showed similar results. Out of 10 water samples collected from different locations within 3 kilometers (1.9 miles) off the reactor on the second day after the discharge, the highest level was 8.1 becquerels, just 1.16 percent of the Tokyo-set seawater threshold of 700 becquerels — and only 0.1 percent of the 10,000-becquerel drinkable water standard of the World Health Organization. The tritium level is going down each day, and no tritium was found in the fish — including flatfish and gurnard for sashimi — caught in the waters nearby the plant.

So, what was all the fuss about? Why were our politicians stirring up public fear with the radioactive element of less than 0.1 percent? Do those denying the test results truly care for the safety and health of the people, or were they only worried about the political life of Democratic Party (DP) leader Lee Jae-myung mired in serious judicial risks? Lee likened the discharge to a “second Pacific War.”

Democratic Party leader Lee Jae-myung, center, chants a slogan opposing the discharge of treated wastewater from the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant together with members of the majority party and its supporters at Gwanghwamun Square in Seoul, August 25. [YONHAP]

However, the United States — where the contaminated water is expected to arrive earlier than Korea — rather welcomed the scientific wastewater release. Other Pacific-rim countries are not worried, either. U.S. ambassador to Japan, Rahm Emanuel, visited Fukushima on Thursday to eat seafood. How can all this be explained? During the mad cow scare episode, the demonstrators claimed that the chance of getting mad cow disease from American beef was 99.9 percent. But no one apologized for lying about 99.9 percent over a 0.1-percent chance. It is a déjà vu all over again.

We must not lose our cool heads. Why has China taken the extreme measure of banning Japanese seafood import. It could be a retaliation against Japan for siding with the United States over the Taiwan issue. Beijing also could be feigning a moral support for Korea’s opposition parties and civic groups protesting the discharge so as to disturb the Seoul-Tokyo. China has a knack of capitalizing on Koreans’ anti-Japan sentiment. Beijing sided with Pyongyang and the DP over the North Korean nuclear threat whenever the need arose.

We witnessed the outcome of the tripartite collusion: isolation from the international society. During the controversy over nationalizing history textbook a few years back, a historian said that those who find no problem with the 0.1 percent criticizing the 99.9 percent are not normal. The people and nation must shake off this abnormality. We must hold those stoking the divide accountable for jeopardizing the livelihood of our fishermen.