Commentary 23/10/19 What's fueling concerns over Fukushima wastewater release?

[성기화 요셉]

What's fueling concerns over Fukushima wastewater release?

It’s a stark reminder of the dangers inherent in modern information consumption within like-minded echo chambers

A South Korean man holds a placard in front of a building housing the Japanese embassy in Seoul on Aug. 24, as protesters gather to demonstrate against Japan's discharge of treated wastewater from the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant. (Photo: Jung Yeon-je / AFP)

By Cristian Martini Grimaldi

Published: October 19, 2023 12:19 PM GMT

The release of treated water from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean has sparked widespread concerns and fears among the public in recent months.

Despite scientific evidence supporting the safety of this disposal method, misconceptions and fears regarding the potential dangers incredibly persist.

One of the challenges faced in managing the aftermath of the disaster is the large volume of water used to cool the damaged reactors and stored on-site.

Over the years, the water has been treated to remove most radioactive contaminants, leaving only tritium — a radioactive isotope of hydrogen — present at low levels.

Get the latest from UCA News. Sign-up to receive our daily newsletter

However, the treated water at the Fukushima Daiichi plant underwent an advanced treatment process that effectively removed the majority of radioactive isotopes. The remaining tritium, which cannot be effectively removed using current treatment technologies, is diluted to levels below regulatory limits before being released into the ocean.

Therefore the dilution process significantly minimizes the potential risk to the environment and human health. The tritium levels fall well below internationally accepted limits set by regulatory authorities such as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the World Health Organization (WHO).

Numerous scientific studies and assessments by international organizations support the safety of the proposed release of treated water into the Pacific Ocean.

The IAEA, after reviewing the plans and facilities in place, has affirmed that this method of disposal meets international safety standards and is a commonly accepted practice in the nuclear industry.

The WHO also concluded that the release of the treated water would not pose a significant risk to human health or the environment. The tritium levels in the released water would quickly disperse and dilute in the vastness of the Pacific Ocean.

Despite all this, and in the face of compelling scientific consensus and reassurances from esteemed international organizations, it is indeed perplexing that public perception remains skeptical, to say the least.

Misinformation, fear, and emotional reactions are persistently fueling concerns about the safety of releasing treated water from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the ocean.

I recently had interactions with people from Europe and Asia who have revealed deeply ingrained misconceptions and even resentments towards Japan for what they label as “dumping nuclear waste” into the ocean.

What's even more astonishing is the unwavering persistence in these beliefs despite attempts to clarify the situation. Not only that, but these individuals never cite a single scientist who asserted that the dumping of treated water will be dangerous to humans.

They simply remained steadfast in their convictions. One answer I often got was, “Sure the water is claimed to be clean but certainly ‘something’ radioactive always remains.” And there goes out of the window the scientific concept of “international safety limits.”

The people I talked to were esteemed professionals, not some poorly informed “men of the street.” 

This phenomenon illustrates a disconcerting reality – the power of propaganda to shape public opinion, regardless of the scientific facts and evidence available.

The implication of this phenomenon is indeed alarming. It underscores the significant influence of sensationalist narratives and politically biased sources, which can lead individuals to formulate biased opinions on complex issues without engaging with scientific proof.

It is a stark reminder of the dangers inherent in modern information consumption, particularly when it occurs within echo chambers of like-minded sources.

Consider, for instance, individuals relying solely on headlines from ideologically motivated outlets, such as certain segments of Chinese media.

When such one-sided sources present skewed information shaping narratives that generate fear and prejudice, the end result is a distorted understanding of complex subjects.

As a consequence, the credibility of scientific proof is often undermined or disregarded once individuals have entrenched themselves in a particular viewpoint.

This disconnect between scientific consensus and public perception highlights the need for transparent and effective scientific communication. Scientists and experts must bridge the gap between specialized knowledge and the general public by disseminating accurate, easily understandable information.

The Fukushima water release issue underscores the importance of critical thinking and media literacy in a world inundated with information. It is a poignant reminder that public discourse should be guided by facts and sound science rather than sensationalism and political agendas.

In an age where information can be weaponized, promoting rational, evidence-based discourse is essential for addressing complex challenges and ensuring that fear and prejudice do not eclipse scientific truth.

*The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official editorial position of UCA News.