Jump to content

Discharge of radioactive water of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Water is stored in three types of facilities though there are occasional leaks.[1] Two varieties of above-ground water tanks are seen at the back, and the workers are working in an underground storage pool.[2]

Radioactive water from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan began being discharged into the Pacific Ocean on 11 March 2011, following the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster triggered by the Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami. Three of the plant's reactors experienced meltdowns, leaving behind melted fuel debris. Water was introduced to prevent the meltdowns from progressing further. When cooling water, groundwater, and rain came into contact with the melted fuel debris, they became contaminated with radioactive nuclides, such as iodine-131, caesium-134, Caesium-137, and strontium-90.[3][4]

Over 500,000 tonnes of untreated wastewater (including 10,000 tonnes released to free up storage space) escaped into the ocean shortly after the accident. In addition, persistent leakage into groundwater was not admitted by the plant operator until 2013. The radioactivity from these sources exceeded legal limits.[5][6]

Since then, contaminated water has been pumped into storage units and gradually treated using the Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS) to eliminate most radionuclides,[3][7] except notably tritium with a half-life of 12.32 years.[8][9] In 2021, the Japanese cabinet approved the release of ALPS-treated water containing tritium.[10][11] Because it is still radioactive immediately after treatment, the solution will be diluted by sea water to a lower concentration before being discharged.[12]

A review report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) shows that the plan of discharging diluted ALPS-treated water into the sea is consistent with relevant international safety standards. It also emphasizes that the release of the treated water is a national decision by the Government of Japan and its report is neither a recommendation nor an endorsement of the decision.[13]

On 24 August 2023, the power plant started releasing the treated portion of its wastewater into the Pacific Ocean. At the time, its storage units held over a million tonnes of wastewater in total. Because new wastewater is constantly being formed and even treated water must be discharged slowly by diluting it with more sea water, the entire process could take more than 30 years.[14] The decision to release this water into the ocean has faced concerns and criticism from other countries and international organisations.

As of the fourth round of discharge in March 2024, no abnormal tritium levels have been detected in nearby waters.[15][16]

Initial atmospheric release

[edit]
Caesium-137 concentration in the air, 19 March 2011

Radioactive materials were dispersed into the atmosphere immediately after the disaster and account for most of all such materials leaked into the environment. 80% of the initial atmospheric release eventually deposited over rivers and the Pacific Ocean, according to a UNSCEAR report in 2020.[17] Specifically, "the total releases to the atmosphere of Iodine-131 and Caesium-137 ranged generally between about 100 to about 500 PBq [petabecquerel, 1015 Bq] and 6 to 20 PBq, respectively. The ranges correspond to about 2% to 8% of the total inventory of Iodine-131 and about 1% to 3% of the total inventory of Caesium-137 in the three operating units (Units 1–3)".[17]

Deposition on river

[edit]

The indirect deposition to rivers come from the earlier direct discharge to the atmosphere. "Continuing indirect releases of about 5 to 10 TBq [terabecquerel, 1012 Bq] of Caesium-137 per year via rivers draining catchment areas", according to the UNSCEAR report in 2020.[17]

Discharge to ocean, untreated water (2011)

[edit]
Sea water sampling supervised by IAEA staff (left).

On 5 April 2011, the operator of the nuclear plant, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), discharged 11,500 tons of untreated water into the Pacific Ocean in order to free up storage space for water that is even more radioactive. The untreated water was the least radioactively contaminated among the stored water, but still 100 times the legal limit.[18][19] TEPCO estimated that a total of 520,000 tons of untreated radioactive water had escaped into the ocean before it could place silt fences to contain further spills.[6]

The UNSCEAR report in 2020 determined "direct releases in the first three months amounting to about 10 to 20 PBq [petabecquerel, 1015 Bq] of Iodine-131 and about 3 to 6 PBq of Caesium-137".[17] About 82 percent having flowed into the sea before 8 April 2011.[20]

Discharge to soil and groundwater by leakage

[edit]
Abukuma River was banned from fishing for 10 years for radioactivity reasons. It reopened in April 2021.[21]

Scientists suspected that radioactive elements continued to leak into the ocean. High levels of caesium-134 were found in local fish, despite the isotope's comparatively shorter half-life. Meanwhile, radiation levels in the nearby sea water did not fall as expected.[5] After repeated denials,[22] the operator of the nuclear plant, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), finally admitted on 22 July 2013 that leaks to groundwater had been happening.[5][23] Some groundwater samples contained 310 Bq/L of cesium-134 and 650 Bq/L of cesium-137, exceeding WHO's maximum guideline of 10 Bq/L for drinking water.[5]

It was later determined that some of the leaks came from the storage tanks for wastewater.[1] Since then, TEPCO has had a record of being dishonest on its figures and has lost the public trust.[24][25][verification needed] For instance, in 2014, TEPCO blamed its own measuring method and revised the strontium in a groundwater well in July 2013 from 900,000 Bq/L to 5,000,000 Bq/L, which is 160,000 times the standard for discharge.[26]

While soil naturally absorbs the caesium in groundwater, strontium and tritium can flow through more freely.[27] At one time, nearly 400 tonnes of radioactive water was being formed every day (150,000 tonnes per year). TEPCO has since tried to stem or divert the inflow of groundwater to the damaged reactor sites and prevent contaminated water from escaping into the ocean.[5]

The UNSCEAR report in 2020 concluded "Direct release of about 60 TBq [terabecquerel, 1012 Bq] of caesium-137 in ground water draining from the site up to October 2015, when measures were taken to reduce these releases, and about 0.5 TBq per year thereafter".[17]

In February 2024, a leak at the power plant was detected by a contractor and eventually repaired by TEPCO. The company estimated that 5.5 tonnes of water, which potentially contained 22 billion becquerels of radioactive materials such as caesium and strontium, had escaped from an air vent, pooled outside and seeped into the surrounding soil, but did not leave the plant compound. It said this was caused by 10 out of 16 valves being left open when they should have been closed for flushing.[28][29]

Discharge to ocean, treated water

[edit]

Advanced Liquid Processing System (2013–)

[edit]
"Metric ton" and "cubic meter" are used interchangeably here.
One of the three types of water storage facilities at the power plant.[2]

To prevent the reactor meltdowns from worsening, a continuous supply of new water is necessary to cool the melted fuel debris. As of 2013, 400 metric tonnes of water was becoming radioactively contaminated each day. The contaminated water is pumped out and combined into the reactor-cooling loop, which includes stronium–cesium removal (KURION, SURRY) and reverse osmosis desalination processes.[30][31]

In October 2012, TEPCO introduced the "Advanced Liquid Processing System" (ALPS, Japanese: 多核種除去設備), which is designed to remove radionuclides other than tritium and carbon-14.[8][32][33] ALPS works by first pre-processing the water by iron coprecipitation (removes alpha nuclides and organics) and carbonate coprecipitation (removes alkali earth metals including strontium elements). The water is then passed through 16 absorbent columns to remove nuclides.[34]: §1.1 [31]

Wastewater is pumped to ALPS along with the concentrated saltwater from desalination.[30][31] As some tritium still remains, even treated water would require dilution to meet drinkable standards.[9][35] Although carbon-14 is not removed, the content in pre-treatment water is low enough to meet drinkable standards without dilution.[36]

Japan's Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) approved the design of ALPS in March 2013. ALPS is to be run in three independent units and will be able to purify 250 tons of water per day.[7][37] Unit "A" started operation in April. In June, unit A was found to be leaking water and shut down. In July, the cause was narrowed down to chloride and hypochlorite corrosion of water tanks; TEPCO responded by adding a rubber layer into the tanks. By August, all systems were shut down awaiting repair. One unit was expected to come online by September, with full recovery planned by the end of 2013.[38]

By September 2018, TEPCO reports that 20% of the water had been treated to the required level.[39]

By 2020, the daily buildup of contaminated water was reduced to 170 metric tonnes thanks to groundwater isolation installations.[9] TEPCO reports that 72% of the water in its tanks, some from early trials of ALPS, needed to be repurified.[40] The portion of ready-to-discharge water raised to 34% by 2021,[41] and to 35% by 2023.[42]

Some scientists expressed reservations due to potential bioaccumulation of ruthenium, cobalt, strontium, and plutonium, which sometimes slip through the ALPS process and were present in 71% of the tanks.[10]

Japanese approval and monitoring (2021-)

[edit]
Prime Minister Suga holding a bottle of treated radioactive water and was affirmed "after diluting it would be drinkable". Fukushima plant, 2020.[43][44]

Since the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, the nuclear plant has accumulated 1.25 million tonnes of waste water, stored in 1,061 tanks on the land of the nuclear plant, as of March 2021.[45] It will run out of land for water tanks by 2022.[45] It has been suggested the government could have solved the problem by allocating more land surrounding the power plant for water tanks, since the surrounding area had been designated as unsuitable for humans. Regardless, the government was reluctant to act.[46][47] Mainichi Shimbun criticized the government for showing "no sincerity" in "unilaterally push[ing] through with the logic that there will no longer be enough storage space"[48]

On 13 April 2021, the Cabinet of Prime Minister Suga unanimously approved that TEPCO dump the stored water to the Pacific Ocean over a course of 30 years. The Cabinet asserted the dumped water will be treated and diluted to drinkable standard.[49][50] The idea of dumping had been floated by Japanese experts and officials as early as June 2016.[7]

In April 2023, Japan's NRA announced a Comprehensive Radiation Monitoring Plan, in which the concentration of radionuclides in food (land and sea), soil, water, and air will be continually monitored across Japan. NRA also set up a system to monitor the radionuclide concentration in ALPS-processed water in order to verify TEPCO's readings.[34]: §3.5.2 [51]

International testing

[edit]

An IAEA task force was dispatched to Japan in 2021, and they released their first report in February 2022.[52] Among other findings, TEPCO has demonstrated to IAEA that their pump setup thoroughly mixes waters in tanks.[34]: §3.3.2 

In May 2023, 3 IAEA laboratories and 4 national laboratories participated in an interlaboratory comparison to verify TEPCO's testing of ALPS-treated water.[34]: §4.1  Out of the 30 radionuclides TEPCO regularly tests for, 12 were found to be above detection limits. 52 out of 53 results were found to agree with the combined result; the only problematic result was of I-129, where Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety reported a value too low compared to the weighted average. TEPCO's methology was found to be fit for purpose: although it is less sensitive for actinides than some participating labs, the detection limits were far enough from regulatory limits, and the alpha-emission screening test appears accurate enough. TEPCO's testing method for Am-141 may require additional review.[53] The same sample was tested by Japan's NRA with no disagreements found.[34]: §3.5.2 

The tritium that is not filtered out has a radioactivity of 148,900 Bq/L, compared to 620,000 Bq/L before treatment. TEPCO intends to dilute it down to 1,500 Bq/L or less before release.[12]

Discharge into the Pacific Ocean (2023–)

[edit]
Prime Minister Kishida visiting the Fukushima plant in August 2023; Kishida's government continued with the planned water discharge.

On 22 August 2023, Japan announced that it would start releasing treated radioactive water from the tsunami-hit Fukushima nuclear plant into the Pacific Ocean in 48 hours, despite opposition from its neighbours.[54][55] Japan says the water is safe after the use of Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS), which removes nearly all traces of radiation from the wastewater, with tritium being the primary exception to this. As a result, Japan has committed to diluting the water in order to bring levels of tritium below the regulatory standards set by the International Atomic Energy Agency. This plan has been approved by the International Atomic Energy Agency.[56] But critics contend that more studies need to be done and the release should be halted.[57] On 24 August, Japan began the discharge of treated waste water into the Pacific Ocean, sparking protests in the region and China to expand its ban to all aquatic imports from Japan.[58] Over 1 million tonnes of treated wastewater will be released by Japan over the next thirty years as per the plan.[59]

On August 25, TEPCO reported that the amount of tritium in seawater around Fukushima has remained below the detection limit of 10 Bq/L.[60] The Japanese Fishery Agency reported that fish caught 4 km away from the discharge pipe contained no detectable amounts of tritium.[61]

In March 2024, the discharge was suspended temporarily after the Fukushima coastal region experienced another 5.8-magnitude earthquake. No abnormalities were detected with the wastewater treatment.[62]

Reactions

[edit]

Official nuclear science panels

[edit]
  • The Japanese expert panel "ALPS subcommittee", chaired by nuclear scientist Ichiro Yamamoto, released a report in January 2020 which calculated that discharging all the water to the sea in one year would cause a radiation dose of 0.81 microsieverts to the locals, therefore it is negligible as compared to the Japanese' natural radiation of 2,100 microsieverts per year.[63] Its calculations were verified by International Atomic Energy Agency to be correct.[64]

Japanese public

[edit]
  • A panel of public policy professors pointed out the lack of research on the harmful effects of tritium. It also criticized the government being insincere on accepting alternative disposal proposals as the proposals were always shelved after "procedural" discussion.[24]
  • A survey by Asahi Shimbun in December 2020 found, among 2,126 respondents, that 55% of Japanese opposed dumping and 86% worried about international reception.[65] Opposition is strongest among fishers and coastal communities.[59]
  • The Fukushima Fishery Cooperatives was given written promises by TEPCO's CEO Hirose Naomi in 2015 that TEPCO would not dump the water before consulting the fishery industry.[66] The Cooperatives felt bypassed and betrayed by the government's decision.[7]
  • In August 2023, fisheries minister Tetsuro Nomura called the treated radioactive water "contaminated" but later apologised and retracted the statement after receiving an instruction from Prime Minister Fumio Kishida.[67]

International reactions

[edit]
Opposed to discharge
On July 8, 2023, South Koreans held a rally to condemn Japan's dumping plan, reported by CNS
  • The South Korean government has been concerned since 2019 that Japan's release of radioactive water from Fukushima could be non-compliant with Article 2 of the London Protocol to protect the marine environment, but the Japanese government says the release is not applicable because it is a land-based pollution.[68]
  • In June 2020, Baskut Tuncak, United Nations's Special Rapporteur on toxics and human rights, wrote on Japan's Kyodo News that the communities of Fukushima have the right not to be exposed deliberately to additional radioactive contamination."[69] Greenpeace and five other UN Rapporteurs (including Clément Nyaletsossi Voule) issued condemnation echoing those sentiments.[70][71]
  • Various governments have voiced concerns, including the governments of South Korea,[72] North Korea,[73] Taiwan,[74] China,[75] Russia,[76] Germany,[77] the Philippines,[78] New Zealand,[79] Belize,[80] Costa Rica,[80] Dominican Republic,[80] El Salvador,[80] Guatemala,[80] Honduras,[80] Nicaragua,[80] Panama,[80] and Mexico.[81]
  • In June 2021, at least 70 U.S. civic groups condemned Japan's wastewater discharge plan, and 17 civic organizations from various countries held protests in Berlin.[82][83]
  • In January 2023, the U.S. National Association of Marine Laboratories expressed their opposition to the plan and stated that "there was a lack of adequate and accurate scientific data supporting Japan's assertion of safety".[84]
  • In June 2023, South Korean shoppers rushed to buy up salt and other items prior to the expected release of the treated discharge. The South Korean government had banned seafood from the waters near Fukushima and says it will closely monitor the radioactivity level of salt farms.[85] A similar salt rush occurred in China, after the discharge began.[86][87]
  • In the months leading up to the start of discharge, over 80 per cent of South Koreans surveyed opposed the dumping, and over 60 per cent indicated intention to avoid seafood products after the release begins.[88][89]
  • In August 2023, the Green Party of the United States issued a press release opposing the discharge.[90]
  • In the same month, Shaun Burnie, senior nuclear specialist for Greenpeace, accused the Japanese government and TEPCO of diverting attention away from the radiation levels in the waste water from the nuclear plant by emphasizing tritium, arguing that various other harmful radionuclides, including strontium-90, iodine, ruthenium, rhodium, antimony, tellurium, cobalt, and carbon-14, will remain present even after filtration.[91]
  • On 24 August, protests against the discharge erupted in South Korea, Hong Kong and Tokyo. According to the organisers, about 50,000 people gathered in Seoul. Some attempted to storm the Japanese embassy there.[92][89]
  • Japanese shops reported receiving spam calls from China, prompting the Japanese government to summon a Chinese diplomat in response.[93] A man threw stones into a Japanese school in Qingdao, and eggs were thrown into one in Suzhou, with no confirmed damage.[94] Social media campaigns in China called for a boycott of Japanese products.[95] This drove a 14% single-day stock price decline for luxury cosmetics conglomerate Shiseido.[96]
  • Chinese state media outlets ran paid ads denouncing the water release on Facebook and Instagram in multiple countries and languages.[95][97] Analysts labeled it part of a concerted disinformation campaign.[98]
  • The Chinese government, Hong Kong, Macau, and the South Korean government have banned aquatic imports from some or all regions of Japan.[99]
In support of discharge
Mixed
IAEA report
  • On 23 March 2021, Rafael Grossi, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), reached a consensus with the Japanese government three weeks before its announcement of decision to release water from the damaged power plant.[7]
  • In February 2023, Robert H. Richmond, a marine biologist consulting for the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF), expressed doubts about the data behind Japan's plan. He pointed out that whereas the PIF is focused more on people and the ocean, the IAEA "has a mandate to promote the use of nuclear energy" and "there are alternatives" to discharging the water.[107]
  • In July 2023, the IAEA released its conclusion that Japan's plans to slowly discharge the treated wastewater are in accordance with the relevant international safety standards[108] but stopped short of endorsing the decision, which is for Japan's government to make.[109]
  • Arjun Makhijani, president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, criticised the IAEA for not looking into its own safety principle of justification, that is, whether an action's benefit outweighs its cost, because the IAEA was approached to make a report after Japan had already decided to discharge the water.[109]
  • On 10 July 2023, New Zealand expressed confidence in the IAEA report.[110][111]
  • On 9 August 2023, during a Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) committee, Australia,[112] France, Italy,[113] Malaysia, United Kingdom, and the United States expressed support for the IAEA report.[114] Australia said it was "independent, impartial and science-based" and trusts it completely, the UK also said it can be trusted, and the US said the report was impartial.[114][112] South Korea requested that the IAEA inspect every step of the discharging, while China said the report was insufficient and urged Japan not to proceed with its plan.[114][112] Australia expressed confidence in the IAEA report again on 23 August.[115]
Pacific Islands Forum
  • In April 2021, the Pacific Islands Forum expressed deep concerns and urged Japan to rethink its decision on the discharge of the ALPS Treated Water.[116]
  • In August 2023, a panel of five independent experts consulting for the Pacific Islands Forum was split on the issue of discharge. Some had no issue with it, saying it would not harm the Pacific. Two of them said trying to obtain information from Japan was difficult and its data had "red flags".[117] The panelists wrote that more study is needed on the contaminants inside the water tanks, that TEPCO only took small samples from a quarter of the tanks, which showed large variations in readings, and used commercial pellets, not tritium-exposed fish, as food source for its experiments.[118][119][120] Ken Buesseler, a scientist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), does not expect widespread direct health effects across the Pacific but said contaminants missed by ALPS could accumulate near the shore in Japan and ultimately hurt fisheries in local areas. He recommended keeping them on land instead and mixing into concrete, for example, which would have been easier to monitor.[121][122]

Environmental effects

[edit]
See also: Radiation effects from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster

Initial discharge

[edit]

A large amount of caesium entered the sea from the initial atmospheric release (see above). By 2013, the concentrations of caesium-137 in the Fukushima coastal waters were around the level before the accident. However, concentrations in coastal sediments declined more slowly than in coastal waters, and the amount of caesium-137 stored in sediments most likely exceeded that in the water column by 2020. The sediments may provide a long-term source of caesium-137 in the seawater.[123] According to Buesseler, the release of strontium-90 could be more problematic because, unlike some of the other isotopes, it gets into a person's bones.[5]

Data on marine foods indicates their radioactive concentrations are falling towards initial levels. 41% of samples caught off the Fukushima coast in 2011 had caesium-137 concentrations above the legal limit (100 becquerels per kilogram), and this had declined to 0.05% in 2015.[123] United States Food and Drug Administration stated in 2021 that "FDA has no evidence that radionuclides from the Fukushima incident are present in the U.S. food supply at levels that are unsafe".[124] Yet, presenting the science alone has not helped customers to regain their trust on eating Fukushima fishery products.[25]

2023 discharge

[edit]

The most prevalent radionuclide in the wastewater is tritium. A total of 780 terabecquerels (TBq) will be released into the ocean at a rate of 22 TBq per year.[36] Tritium is routinely released into the ocean from operating nuclear power plants, sometimes in much greater quantities. For comparison, the La Hague nuclear processing site in France released 11,400 TBq of tritium in the year of 2018. In addition, about 60,000 TBq of tritium is produced naturally in the atmosphere each year by cosmic rays.[36][125][126]

Other radionuclides present in the wastewater, like caesium-137, are not normally released by nuclear power plants. However, the concentrations in the treated water is minuscule relative to regulation limits.[126]

"There is consensus among scientists that the impact on health is minuscule, still, it can't be said the risk is zero, which is what causes controversy", Michiaki Kai, a Japanese nuclear expert, told AFP.[127] David Bailey, a physicist whose lab measures radioactivity, said that with tritium at diluted concentrations, "there is no issue with marine species, unless we see a severe decline in fish population".[120]

Ferenc Dalnoki-Veress, a scientist-in-residence at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, said regarding dilution that bringing in living creatures makes the situation more complex.[122] Robert Richmond, a biologist from the University of Hawaiʻi, told the BBC that the inadequate radiological and ecological assessment raises the concern that Japan would be unable to detect what enters the environment and "get the genie back in the bottle".[120] Dalnoki-Veress, Richmond, and three other panelists consulting for the Pacific Islands Forum wrote that dilution may fail to account for bioaccumulation and exposure pathways that involve organically-bound tritium (OBT).[119]

Presenting the science alone has yet to gain public trust, as the government's attitude was deemed insincere by the public.[48][24][25][128]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ a b Shozugawa, Katsumi; Hori, Mayumi; Johnson, Thomas E. (2020). "Landside tritium leakage over through years from Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant and relationship between countermeasures and contaminated water". Scientific Reports. 10 (1): 19925. Bibcode:2020NatSR..1019925S. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-76964-9. PMC 7669847. PMID 33199807.
  2. ^ a b "TEPCO's Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station (02813326)". IAEA Imagebank. 2013-04-17. Archived from the original on 2021-04-19. Retrieved 2021-04-19.
  3. ^ a b external. "The plan, the science and the safety: Discharging ALPS treated water". www.ft.com. Retrieved 2023-08-28.
  4. ^ "Fukushima Daiichi ALPS Treated Water Discharge - FAQs Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS)". International Atomic Energy Agency. 27 April 2022.
  5. ^ a b c d e f Kiger, Patrick J. (2013-08-09). "Fukushima's Radioactive Water Leak: What You Should Know". National Geographic News. Archived from the original on 2021-06-18. Retrieved 2021-04-13.
  6. ^ a b "TEPCO drowning in dealing with tons of radioactive water". The Asahi Shimbun. 16 May 2011. Archived from the original on 16 May 2011.
  7. ^ a b c d e "漁業者「国も東電も信用できない」 6年前の約束はどこへ 福島第一原発の汚染処理水海洋放出" [The Fishery industry says both Japan and TEPCO are not trustworthy. Written promises made 6 years ago were broke]. Tokyo Shimbun. 2021-04-13. Archived from the original on 2021-04-13.
  8. ^ a b Nogrady, Bianca (2023-06-22). "Is Fukushima wastewater release safe? What the science says". Nature. 618 (7967): 894–895. Bibcode:2023Natur.618..894N. doi:10.1038/d41586-023-02057-y. PMID 37349553. S2CID 259232632.
  9. ^ a b c McCurry, Justin (2020-10-16). "Japan to release 1m tonnes of contaminated Fukushima water into the sea – reports". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 2021-06-29. Retrieved 2021-04-13.
  10. ^ a b Normile, Dennis (13 Apr 2021). "Japan plans to release Fukushima's wastewater into the ocean". Science.
  11. ^ "Fukushima nuclear disaster: Japan to release treated water in 48 hours". BBC News. 2023-08-22. Retrieved 2023-08-27.
  12. ^ a b "Tritium found beyond safe limits in treated Fukushima wastewater". www.koreaherald.com. 2023-06-01. Archived from the original on 2023-06-08. Retrieved 2023-06-08.
  13. ^ "IAEA Comprehensive Report On The Safety Review Of The Alps-treated Water At The Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station" (PDF).
  14. ^ "Fukushima: China retaliates as Japan releases treated nuclear water". BBC News. 2023-08-24. Retrieved 2023-09-01.
  15. ^ "IAEA Conducts Its First Seawater Sampling After Japan's Discharge of ALPS Treated Water, Finds Tritium Level Below Limit". IAEA. 8 September 2023.
  16. ^ "Japan completes 4th round of Fukushima treated water discharge". Kyodo News+. Mar 17, 2024.
  17. ^ a b c d e "Levels and effects of radiation exposure due to the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station (Annex B Advance Copy)" (PDF). United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. November 2020. pp. 104–105. Archived (PDF) from the original on 16 March 2021. Retrieved 14 April 2021.
  18. ^ Westall, Sylvia (4 April 2011). "Japan to dump 11,500 metric tons of radioactive water The wastewater facility had 11,500 tons of water stored (by 10 April 8900 tons had been pumped into the sea)". Reuters. Archived from the original on 5 August 2021. Retrieved 10 July 2021.
  19. ^ Radiation fallout from Fukushima plant will take "months" to stop Archived 2011-04-08 at the Wayback Machine. Asahi.com (4 April 2011). Retrieved on 30 April 2011.
  20. ^ Institut de radioprotection et de sûreté nucléaire (26 October 2011). "Synthèse actualisée des connaissances relatives à l'impact sur le milieu marin des rejets radioactifs du site nucléaire accidenté de Fukushima Dai-ichi" (PDF) (in French). Archived (PDF) from the original on 18 December 2011. Retrieved 3 January 2012. La valeur ainsi obtenue est de 27.1015 Bq, la majorité (82 %) ayant été rejetée avant le 8 avril. [2.7 × 1016 Bq of caesium-137 (about 8.4 kg) entered the ocean between 21 March and mid-July 2011, about 82 percent having flowed into the sea before 8 April 2011]
  21. ^ "阿武隈川で10年ぶり釣り解禁 国の出荷制限解除の魚種". NHK. 2021-04-01. Archived from the original on 2021-04-01.
  22. ^ Adelman, Jacob. (7 August 2013) Abe Pledges Government Help to Stem Fukushima Water Leaks. Bloomberg. Retrieved on 6 September 2013. Archived 2 December 2013 at the Wayback Machine
  23. ^ Fukushima Plant Admits Radioactive Water Leaked To Sea. Huffingtonpost.com. Retrieved on 6 September 2013. Archived 17 April 2014 at the Wayback Machine
  24. ^ a b c Ōshima, Kenichi; Mitsuta, Kanna; Gotō, Masashi (2021-04-11). "福島第一原発のALPS（多核種除去設備）処理汚染水海洋放出問題についての緊急声明". 原子力市民委員会 [Citizens' Commission on Nuclear Energy]. Tokyo. Archived from the original on 2021-04-11.
  25. ^ a b c 千葉雄登 [Chiba, Yuto] (2021-04-13). "処理水の海洋放出はいつから？安全なの？漁業への影響は？知っておくべき3つのポイントと専門家の願い". Buzzfeed News Japan. Archived from the original on 2021-04-16.
  26. ^ "TEPCO to review erroneous radiation data". NHK World. 9 February 2014. Archived from the original on 9 February 2014.
  27. ^ Hsu, Jeremy (2013-08-13). "Radioactive Water Leaks from Fukushima: What We Know". Scientific American. Archived from the original on 2021-05-06. Retrieved 2021-04-13.
  28. ^ "Contaminated water leak at Fukushima Daiichi". World Nuclear News. 7 February 2024.
  29. ^ Yamaguchi, Mari (8 February 2024). "The ruined Fukushima nuclear plant leaked radioactive water, but none escaped the facility". The Independent.
  30. ^ a b "Japan seeks outside help for contaminated water". World Nuclear News. 26 September 2013. Archived from the original on 2 April 2014. Retrieved 18 September 2019.
  31. ^ a b c TEPCO (June 25, 2012). "Multi-nuclide Removal Equipment (ALPS) Confirmatory Testing, Installation and Characteristics of Radioactive Waste" (PDF).
  32. ^ 多核種除去設備の設置について (PDF). 東京電力. 2012-01-23. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2021-01-21. Retrieved 2017-03-28.
  33. ^ 多核種除去設備 (ALPS). 東京電力. Archived from the original on 2021-01-05. Retrieved 2017-03-28.
  34. ^ a b c d e International Atomic Energy Agency (July 4, 2023). IAEA COMPREHENSIVE REPORT ON THE SAFETY REVIEW OF THE ALPS-TREATED WATER AT THE FUKUSHIMA DAIICHI NUCLEAR POWER STATION (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on August 9, 2023. Retrieved August 25, 2023.
  35. ^ "Japan: UN experts 'deeply disappointed' by decision to discharge Fukushima water | UN News". news.un.org. 2021-04-15. Archived from the original on 2021-04-27. Retrieved 2023-01-26.
  36. ^ a b c "Basic policy on handling of the ALPS treated water" (PDF). Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. 13 April 2021.
  37. ^ 原子力规制委员会 東京電力福島第一原子力発電所多核種除去設備（A系）のホット試験開始に関する評価について（案） 平成25年3月19日
  38. ^ 東京電力(株)福島第一原子力発電所多核種除去設備(A系)のホット試験開始に関する評価について (資料2-1) (PDF). 2013-04-05. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-05-30.
  39. ^ Agency for Natural Resources and Energy [資源エネルギー庁] (2018-10-25). "安全・安心を第一に取り組む、福島の"汚染水"対策①「ALPS処理水」とは何？「基準を超えている」のは本当？". Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, Japan. Archived from the original on 2021-04-21. Retrieved 2021-04-21.
  40. ^ "ALPS Treated Water Q&A / METI Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry". Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. 2020-04-12. Archived from the original on 2021-04-14. Retrieved 2020-04-13.
  41. ^ "The Handling ALPS Treated Water | Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings, Incorporated". www.tepco.co.jp.
  42. ^ "Current ALPS Treated Water, etc. Conditions | Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings, Incorporated". www.tepco.co.jp. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-08-26.
  43. ^ 大月規義 (2020-11-03). "原発の処理水、菅首相「飲んでもいい？」 東電の説明は" [Prime Minister Suga asks if the treated radioactive water is drinkable. Here is TEPCO's response]. Asahi Shimbun. Archived from the original on 2021-04-14. Retrieved 2021-04-13.
  44. ^ 佐藤侑希 (2020-09-26). "福島視察の菅首相「飲めるの？」 多核種除去設備で処理した汚染水を渡され". Sankei Biz. Archived from the original on 2021-04-20. Retrieved 2021-04-20.
  45. ^ a b "Government OKs discharge of Fukushima nuclear plant water into sea". Japan Times. 2021-04-13. Archived from the original on 2021-04-15. Retrieved 2021-04-15.
  46. ^ Clark, Aaron; Stapczynski, Stephen (2021-04-13). "Why Japan Is Dumping Water From Fukushima in the Sea". Bloomberg News. Archived from the original on 2021-04-13. Retrieved 2021-04-14 – via Washington Post.
  47. ^ "One million tons of nuclear sewage from Fukushima, Japan will be discharged into the Pacific Ocean? International organizations warn". YCNews. 2020-10-25. Archived from the original on 2021-04-13. Retrieved 2021-04-13. Translated from "大海是生命的摇篮，不是垃圾箱，福岛核污水入海或损害人类" [Ocean is the cradle of life, not a rubbish bin]. 中央广电总台央视新闻客户端 [China Central Television News Channel app]. 2020-10-25. Archived from the original on 2021-04-14.
  48. ^ a b "Editorial: Japan's decision to release Fukushima plant water into sea leaves many doubtful". Mainichi Shimbun. 2021-04-14. Archived from the original on 2021-04-14.
  49. ^ "Fukushima: Japan approves releasing wastewater into ocean". BBC. 2021-04-13. Archived from the original on 2021-04-14. Retrieved 2021-04-13.
  50. ^ a b Clark, Aaron (2021-04-12). "U.S. Friends Join China in Ripping Japan Plan on Fukushima Water". Bloomberg News. Archived from the original on 2021-04-15. Retrieved 2021-04-13.
  51. ^ Government of Japan. Comprehensive Radiation Monitoring Plan April 2023 [1].
  52. ^ "IAEA Task Force Makes Progress in Safety Review of Japan's Plans for Discharge of Water Stored at Fukushima Site". www.iaea.org. 18 November 2022.
  53. ^ International Atomic Energy Agency (May 2023). "AEA Review of Safety Related Aspects of Handling ALPS Treated Water at TEPCO's Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station: FirstInterlaboratory Comparison on the Determination of Radionuclides in ALPS Treated Water" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2023-07-05. Retrieved 2023-08-25.
  54. ^ "Japan to release radioactive water into sea despite warnings". The Independent. 2023-08-22. Archived from the original on 2023-08-22. Retrieved 2023-08-22.
  55. ^ Inagaki, Kana; Ho-him, Chan (2023-08-22). "Japan's release of radioactive water from Fukushima angers China". Financial Times. Archived from the original on 2023-08-22. Retrieved 2023-08-22.
  56. ^ "IAEA Finds Japan's Plans to Release Treated Water into the Sea at Fukushima Consistent with International Safety Standards". www.iaea.org. 2023-07-04. Archived from the original on 2023-08-15. Retrieved 2023-08-25.
  57. ^ "Fukushima nuclear disaster: Japan to release treated water in 48 hours". BBC News. 2023-08-22. Archived from the original on 2023-08-22. Retrieved 2023-08-22.
  58. ^ "Seafood/Fukushima: waste water release threatens export trade". Financial Times. 2023-08-23. Archived from the original on 2023-08-23. Retrieved 2023-08-24.
  59. ^ a b "Fukushima: China retaliates as Japan releases treated nuclear water". BBC News. 2023-08-24. Archived from the original on 2023-08-24. Retrieved 2023-08-24.
  60. ^ "Announcement Regarding Analysis Results of Tritium Concentration in Seawater Sampled After the Start of Discharge of ALPS Treated Water". METI. 2023-08-25.
  61. ^ 福島第一周辺の魚類からトリチウム検出されず...水産庁、処理水の放出後初の検査結果. 読売新聞 (in Japanese). 2023-08-26. Retrieved 2023-08-27.
  62. ^ "Japan suspends Fukushima water release after quake as precaution". CNA. 15 Mar 2024.
  63. ^ "The subcommittee on handling of the ALPS treated water report" (PDF). Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. 10 February 2020. pp. 12, 16, 17, 33, 34. Archived (PDF) from the original on 22 December 2020. Retrieved 10 April 2020.
  64. ^ "IAEA follow-up review of progress made on management of ALPS treated water and the report of the subcommittee on handling of ALPS treated water at TEPCO's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station" (PDF). International Atomic Energy Agency. 2 April 2020. p. 8. Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 November 2020. Retrieved 10 April 2020.
  65. ^ "処理水海洋放出、反対55％ 風評被害に不安、86％ 朝日新聞社世論調査". Asahi Shimbun. 2021-01-03. Archived from the original on 2021-04-14. Retrieved 2021-04-13.
  66. ^ Naomi, Hirose (2015-08-25). "東京電力(株)福島第一原子力発電所のサブドレン水等の排水に対する要望書に対する回答について" [Reply to the list of demands regarding the water discharge of Fukushima Daiichi Plant] (PDF). Tokyo Electric Power Company. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2015-10-17.
  67. ^ Murakami, Sakura; Kaneko, Kaori (2023-08-31). "Japan PM tells fisheries minister to apologise for calling Fukushima wastewater 'contaminated'". Reuters.
  68. ^ Kim, Young-Sok (2022-09-30). "A Review of the Application of the London Protocol to the Japanese discharge of Fukushima Radioactive Contaminated Water into the Sea". Ewha Law Journal. 27 (1): 167–187. doi:10.32632/elj.2022.27.1.167. ISSN 1226-2005.
  69. ^ Tuncak, Baskut (2020-07-08). "Fukushima nuclear waste decision also a human rights issue". Kyodo News English version. Japan. Archived from the original on 2020-07-13.
  70. ^ Greenpeace International (13 April 2021). "The Japanese government's decision to discharge Fukushima contaminated water ignores human rights and international maritime law". Greenpeace. Archived from the original on 15 April 2021. Retrieved 15 April 2021.
  71. ^ Two statements issued by United Nations's Special Rapporteur:
  72. ^ 나운채 (2021-04-13). "정부, 日 후쿠시마 오염수 방류에 "일방적 조치...강한 유감"" [The South Korean government express regret to Japan's unilateral decision to dump treated radioactive water]. JoongAng Ilbo. Archived from the original on 2021-04-14.
  73. ^ "N. Korea slams Japan over decision to released contaminated Fukushima water". Korea Herald. 15 April 2021. Archived from the original on 2021-04-15. Retrieved 2021-04-15.
  74. ^ "日本政府2021年4月13日閣僚會議後決定將福島含氚廢水分批排入海中，原能會表示遺憾". Atomic Energy Council of Taiwan. 13 April 2021. Archived from the original on 13 April 2021. Retrieved 14 April 2021.
  75. ^ McCurry, Justin (13 April 2021). "Fukushima: Japan announces it will dump contaminated water into sea". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 15 April 2021. Retrieved 14 April 2021.
  76. ^ Guenot, Marianne (14 April 2021). "Russia joins China and South Korea in expressing 'serious concern' at Japan's plan to release waste water from the Fukushima nuclear disaster". Business Insider. Archived from the original on 15 April 2021. Retrieved 15 April 2021.
  77. ^ "Japan says G7 welcomes release of Fukushima wastewater, Germany objects". english.hani.co.kr. Archived from the original on 2023-05-16. Retrieved 2023-05-16.
  78. ^ Panti, Llanesca (15 April 2021). "Palace calls on Japan to follow laws on releasing wastewater into ocean". GMA News. Archived from the original on 15 April 2021. Retrieved 15 April 2021.
  79. ^ 오석민 (2021-05-11). "S. Korea, New Zealand share concerns over Japan's Fukushima water release plan". Yonhap News Agency. Archived from the original on 2021-05-12. Retrieved 2021-05-12.
  80. ^ a b c d e f g h 김승연 (2021-04-23). "S. Korea, Central American countries express 'deep concerns' over ocean discharge of harmful materials". Yonhap News Agency. Archived from the original on 2021-04-28. Retrieved 2021-04-28.
  81. ^ "S. Korea, Mexico share concerns about Japan's Fukushima decision". www.koreaherald.com. 2021-04-24. Archived from the original on 2021-04-28. Retrieved 2021-04-28.
  82. ^ Ji-hye, Shin (2021-06-15). "70 US civic groups condemn Fukushima water release". The Korea Herald. Archived from the original on 2021-11-20. Retrieved 2021-11-20.
  83. ^ 황석주 (2021-06-09). "Multinational protest against Fukushima discharge". Yonhap News Agency. Archived from the original on 2021-11-20. Retrieved 2021-11-20.
  84. ^ "Despite opposition, Japan may soon dump Fukushima wastewater into the Pacific". www.science.org. Archived from the original on 2023-01-25. Retrieved 2023-01-26.
  85. ^ Hyun Young Yi (2023-06-29). "South Korea shoppers buy up salt before Japan's Fukushima water dump". Reuters. Archived from the original on 2023-07-01. Retrieved 2023-07-01.
  86. ^ "China is stoking anger over Japan's release of nuclear wastewater". The Economist. 2 September 2023. ISSN 0013-0613. Retrieved 2023-09-02. A few Chinese cities have experienced a salt-buying frenzy, with people queuing for hours to purchase a bag. Some seem to think that salt may become tainted or that it is useful in treating radiation sickness (it is not).
  87. ^ "China urges shoppers not to hoard salt after Fukushima discharge". Reuters. 25 August 2023.
  88. ^ Kim, Hyung-Jin (24 August 2023). "In Japan's neighbors, fear and frustration are shared over radioactive water release". Associated Press News.
  89. ^ a b Kim, Do Gyun; Jung, Jimin (26 August 2023). "South Korean protesters call for government action on Fukushima water". Reuters.
  90. ^ "Green Party Statement on Fukushima". Archived from the original on 2023-08-17. Retrieved 2023-08-17.
  91. ^ "Fukushima nuclear water release: How safe is it? – DW – 08/23/2023". dw.com. Retrieved 2023-08-28.
  92. ^ "Fukushima: China retaliates as Japan releases treated nuclear water". BBC News. 2023-08-24. Archived from the original on 2023-08-24. Retrieved 2023-08-25.
  93. ^ 迷惑電話で中国側に遺憾伝達 外務省局長「憂慮している」. 47News (in Japanese). 共同社. 2023-08-27. Retrieved 2023-08-27.
  94. ^ "Stones, Eggs Thrown at Japanese Schools in China". Yomiuri Shimbun. 27 August 2023.
  95. ^ a b Davidson, Helen (2023-09-04). "State-backed disinformation fuelling anger in China over Fukushima water". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2023-09-06.
  96. ^ Matsuyama, Kanoko (2023-11-13). "Shiseido Posts Biggest Drop in 16 Years After Forecast Cut". The Business of Fashion. Retrieved 2023-11-13.
  97. ^ Rich, Motoko; Liu, John (2023-08-31). "China's Disinformation Fuels Anger Over Fukushima Water Release". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2023-09-01. Beijing may have a broader agenda. As the global order has shifted drastically, with China and the United States increasingly seeming to divvy up the world into an us-versus-them framework, experts say China is seeking to sow doubts about Japan's credibility and cast its allies as conspirators in malfeasance.
  98. ^ "Fukushima: China's anger at Japan is fuelled by disinformation". BBC News. 2023-09-02. Retrieved 2023-09-03.
  99. ^ Murakami, Sakura (2023-08-24). "Fukushima wastewater released into the ocean, China bans all Japanese seafood". Reuters. Archived from the original on 2023-08-24. Retrieved 2023-08-25.
  100. ^ "S.Korea, U.S. show differences over Japan's Fukushima plans". Reuters. 2021-04-18. Archived from the original on 2021-05-02. Retrieved 2021-04-18.
  101. ^ Fox, Liam (June 19, 2023). "Palau's president supports Japan's discharge plans after Fukushima visit". ABC Pacific. Archived from the original on 2023-07-12. Retrieved 2023-07-12.
  102. ^ "Palau Shows Understanding for Fukushima Water Release". Jiji Press. June 14, 2023. Archived from the original on 2023-07-12. Retrieved 2023-07-12.
  103. ^ "Stop fear mongering on Fukushima issue: Fiji PM Rabuka". Pacific News Service. 23 August 2023. Archived from the original on 29 August 2023. Retrieved 29 August 2023.
  104. ^ "Micronesia slams Japan's plan to release Fukushima water into sea". Nikkei Asia. Archived from the original on 2022-09-23. Retrieved 2022-09-23.
  105. ^ Geddie, John; Murakami, Sakura (February 2, 2023). "Micronesia drops protest over release of Japanese radioactive water". Reuters. Retrieved 2023-09-05.
  106. ^ Masheter, Peter (February 3, 2023). "Micronesia president says "transparency" eased Fukushima water concerns". Kyodo News. Retrieved 2023-09-05.
  107. ^ "The New Nuclear Concern for Pacific Islands". Time. 2023-02-07. Retrieved 2023-09-15.
  108. ^ "IAEA Finds Japan's Plans to Release Treated Water into the Sea at Fukushima Consistent with International Safety Standards". www.iaea.org. 2023-07-04. Archived from the original on 2023-08-15. Retrieved 2023-08-25.
  109. ^ a b Lewis, Lydia; Persico, Christina (7 July 2023). "PIF panelist hits back at IAEA 'Fukushima is safe' decision".
  110. ^ Rovoi, Christine (11 July 2023). "Nuclear watchdog gets New Zealand government support amid concerns over Japan's Fukushima plan". Stuff. Archived from the original on 30 August 2023. Retrieved 11 September 2023.
  111. ^ Craymer, Lucy (10 July 2023). "New Zealand confident about IAEA advice on Fukushima water release plan". Reuters. Archived from the original on 24 August 2023. Retrieved 11 September 2023.
  112. ^ a b c Kanenari, Ryuichi (August 9, 2023). "処理水放出、中国だけ「中止するべきだ」 欧米は理解、NPT会合で". The Asahi Shimbun (in Japanese). Retrieved 2023-09-05.
  113. ^ "処理水放出に理解示す声相次ぐ 中国は反対、NPT準備委". 47NEWS (in Japanese). August 10, 2023. Retrieved 2023-09-05.
  114. ^ a b c Nakanishi, Kenji (August 9, 2023). "China Continues Opposition to Planned Treated Water Discharge at NPT Talks". The Japan News. Retrieved 2023-09-05.
  115. ^ "Statement on the release of ALPS treated water from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant". Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. 23 August 2023. Archived from the original on 7 September 2023. Retrieved 11 September 2023.
  116. ^ "Statement by Dame Meg Taylor, Secretary General of the Pacific Islands Forum, Regarding the Japan Decision to Release ALPS Treated Water into the Pacific Ocean – Forum Sec". 13 April 2021. Archived from the original on 2021-04-29. Retrieved 2021-04-29.
  117. ^ Lewis, Lydia (23 August 2023). "Pacific leaders split over Fukushima nuclear wastewater release". Radio New Zealand. Archived from the original on 23 August 2023. Retrieved 29 August 2023.
  118. ^ "More data needed before ocean release of Fukushima water". The Japan Times. 2022-08-26. Retrieved 2023-09-04.
  119. ^ a b Edwards, Chris (2022-09-02). "More data before Fukushima water released". Inside Water. Retrieved 2023-09-04.
  120. ^ a b c Navin Singh Khadka (2023-08-26). "The science behind the Fukushima waste water release". BBC.
  121. ^ Brumfiel, Geoff; Lonsdorf, Kat (24 August 2023). "5 things to know about Japan's Fukushima water release in the Pacific". NPR.
  122. ^ a b "Can Scientists Stop Japan from Dumping Fukushima Water into the Ocean? | Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey". www.middlebury.edu. 2023-06-13. Retrieved 2023-09-04.
  123. ^ a b "Levels and effects of radiation exposure due to the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station (Annex B Advance Copy)" (PDF). United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. November 2020. p. 34. Archived (PDF) from the original on 16 March 2021. Retrieved 14 April 2021. In 2011, 41% of samples exceeded 100 Bq/kg. [...] In 2012, the percentage exceeding 100 Bq/kg decreased to 17% and in 2015 to 0.05%
  124. ^ "FDA Response to the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Facility Incident". U.S. Food and Drug Administration. April 14, 2021. Archived from the original on April 15, 2021. Retrieved April 15, 2021.
  125. ^ Smith, Jim (2023-01-23). "Fukushima to release wastewater – an expert explains why this could be the best option". The Conversation. Retrieved 2023-09-02.
  126. ^ a b Baraniuk, Chris (2023-10-07). "Fukushima's Radioactive Water Is Going to Be Pumped Into the Ocean—and That's Fine". Wired. Retrieved 2023-09-02. Despite this, the water is extremely safe because the concentrations of radionuclides are so low [...]
  127. ^ "Understanding the plan to release treated Fukushima water". Agence France-Presse. 2021-04-13. Archived from the original on 2021-04-15. Retrieved 2021-04-15 – via France 24.
  128. ^ "（社説）処理水の放出 納得と信頼欠けたまま" [(Editorial) The discharge of treated water moves forward without the trust and convincement of the public]. Asahi Shimbun. 2021-04-14. Archived from the original on 2021-04-13.
[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Discharge_of_radioactive_water_of_the_Fukushima_Daiichi_Nuclear_Power_Plant&oldid=1260698760"