The Japanese government has said that in several years, the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant is to begin releasing wastewater containing traces of the radioactive hydrogen isotope tritium into the ocean.
Opponents of the plan are concerned that this would pollute the ocean.
Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO) has said that the radioactive water would first have been run through a complex chain of filters that would remove 62 types of radionuclide, but not tritium.
Prior to its release, the radioactive water would be diluted to bring the concentration level to one-40th of the Japanese national standard and one-seventh of the WHO standard for drinking water.
These assurances have not prevented neighboring nations from expressing their concerns and objections.
The Great Tohoku Earthquake and tsunami on March 11, 2011, inflicted serious damage on the power plant and cold water is still being pumped into the reactors to cool them down.
That water is treated, and a portion is recycled and used to continue cooling the reactor, while the rest is kept in more than 1,000 huge storage tanks on the site.
As the volume of wastewater increases and fills the tanks, it is increasingly difficult to find the space for new tanks. Japan needed to come up with a solution.
No one solution to the problem of the radioactive wastewater will satisfy everyone. Tokyo has had to choose between releasing the water into the atmosphere, pumping it into the soil or releasing it into the ocean.
It is a difficult decision to make.
In addition to censuring Japan over this situation, Taiwanese must reflect on the safety of their own nuclear power plants.
The narrative surrounding nuclear safety says that the Fukushima Dai-ichi accident could not happen in Taiwan.
However, the world said that it had learned its lesson after the 1979 Three Mile Island accident in Pennsylvania, and that such an accident would never be allowed to happen again.
The Chernobyl nuclear disaster in 1986 was followed by similar assurances of lessons learned and promises of an accident-free future.
Then, the Fukushima Dai-ichi accident happened.
Nuclear power remains very risky. Obstinate assurances that nuclear power is no reason for concern intentionally ignore that an unexpected natural disaster can lead to inconceivable consequences.
Questioning Japan’s decision to release radioactive wastewater into the ocean, while simultaneously supporting the restart of construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, requires an imaginative leap of logic.
People who think that disastrous consequences could not result from an unfortunate event happening at an operating Fourth Nuclear Power Plant are simply trying to have their cake and eat it.
Advocates of nuclear power saying that Taiwan has progressed and that such an accident could no longer happen does not mean that a different type of natural disaster would not jeopardize the safety of the plant.
Saying that the issue of whether Taiwan should use nuclear power needs to be debated scientifically is fine, but then the issue of Fukushima Dai-ichi’s wastewater must be debated in the same spirit. At the same time, we need to face the fact that nuclear power necessarily comes with risks.
Wang Chih-chien is a distinguished professor in National Taipei University’s Graduate Institute of Information Management.
Translated by Paul Cooper
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
RSS