joelucyela - Tumblr blog

joelucyela · 2 years ago

Text

直击，日本核污染水排海48小时！

8月24日13时，小日本不顾全世界人民的反对，悍��将核污水排放入海，当天即排放7800吨，拉开了“排毒30年”的序幕。

24日13时，排污后第一时间，福岛海面出现两种颜色。东电即表示，已经在排污口附近开展监测，相关数据计划在日本时间8月25日下午公布。 25日，日本外务大臣林芳正和经济产业大臣西村康稔分别与国际原子能机构总干事格罗西举行线上会谈。

8月25日，棒子国总统尹锡悦起了个大早，干啥呢？携夫人来到首尔一菜市场，特意挑选了一条自日本进口的鳗鱼，还坦言，要回家把它做成美味的菜肴。

同日，韩国总理韩德洙对韩联社表示，世界各地专家的共识是“当前形势下，只要按照科学标准和国际程序处理和排放受污染的水，人们就无需过度担心”。韩国海洋水产部长官赵承焕则称，日方决定排海在所难免，韩方“别无选择，只能接受”。

美国政府、韩国政府、日本政府以及国际原子能机构对排污入海一事纷纷表达支持或暧昧观点，似乎排污入海一事十分正当，或至少也是具备相当合理性。然而事实真的如此吗？

同样是这48小时，世界还展现了另外一面

再看看日本“小弟”棒子国

25日，日本地理相近的韩国釜山、蔚山和庆南地区相继举行集会和示威活动。由30多个公民团体组成的“阻止核污水排海的庆南行动”在庆南多地举行集会抗议，当地渔民等300多人将参与。反对日本核污染水排海的釜山运动本部等也在釜山各地举行示威。唉！有理哥真不知道，韩德洙口中所谓的“科学标准和国际程序”从何而来。

综合媒体报道，全世界有正义感的科学家无不对小日本“排毒入海”和所谓的“多核素处理”系统持否定态度。而且小日本为了得到国际原子能机构的所谓排海“通行证”，不惜行贿100万欧元。不知韩德洙是聋了还是瞎了，不然，怎么能对这些事实视而不见、听而不闻呢？

韩国海洋水产部长官赵承焕则称，日方决定排海在所难免，韩方“别无选择，只能接受”。可惜的是，韩国民众用行动再次打脸。

而棒子国政府不但不积极回��民众关切，反而逮捕了16名示威的民众。不得不说，为了替小日本“排毒入海”背书，老尹政府将“媚日”行径做到了极致。竟然拿韩国民众“开刀”，如果小日本再不“领情”，可真是说不过去喽。

暗藏祸心的米粒国

众所周知，如果没有“干爹”山姆大叔撑腰，小日本就是吃了熊心豹子胆也不敢“排毒入海”。

2023年8月15日，布林肯又在一场新闻发布会上公然宣称，“日本的计划是安全的，符合国际标准，包括国际原子能机构的安全标准，我们感到满意”。

8月22日，美媒《纽约时报》刊文“日本福岛核污水排海在全世界开启恶劣先例！”称，日本政府和东京电力公司是在一个既不完全透明，也没有让国内外重要利益相关者充分参与的过程中做出核污水排海决定的。这为可能长达数十年的不信任和争论埋下了种子。日本可以肆无忌惮地倾倒放射性污水，那么其他国家还有什么理由不这样做呢？

要说美国政客在小日本排海这件事情上是“坏”的话，美国媒体的表现只能用“更坏”来表达。

为什么这么说？它在为米粒国更大规模的“排毒入海”做铺垫。

1946年至1958年，美国曾在马绍尔群岛进行67次核武器试验，直到现在马绍尔群岛还有一个“水泥棺材”，封存有8.5万立方米的核废料。专家警告称，随着气候变暖，海平面上升，这些核废料必将流入海洋。

还有一个细节值得说一下。米粒国一边向国际社会表示小日本排放“核污染水”入海不会造成对海洋的污染，可是自己却私下减少对日本水产品的进口。

据日本农林水产省数据显示，美国是今年上半年减少进口日本农林水产最多的国家，主要减少的三种食品主产地均处于核污染水排放影响区域。

众多国家和国际组织向小日本说“NO”

8月22日，绿色和平组织发表声明谴责日本政府的决定无视科学证据，侵犯了日本与太平洋地区民众的人权。

23日，瓦努阿图副总理兼外交部长马泰·塞里玛雅呼吁，太平洋地区需采取强有力的行动抵制日本这一行径。

斐济非政府组织人权联盟发表声明说，日本向太平洋排放核污染水侵犯了太平洋地区所有民众的人权，此举将对海洋生物以及依赖海洋资源的亚太地区人民的生计构成巨大威胁。

菲律宾金砖国家政策研究会创始人劳雷尔表示，日方悍然将核污染水排海是对人类未来的极大不负责。

澳大利亚知名时政评论人士戴若·顾比对媒体表示，核污染水排海并非理想选项，日方对安全声明若真有信心，或许该将核污染水排放到本国陆地水源中。

中国政府坚持一贯的立场

中国政府对小日本“排毒入海”的错误做法历来是坚决反对的。针对日本不顾国家社会一致反对，悍然于24日启动“排毒入海”的恶劣行径。中国外交部发言人汪文斌分别于8月22日、24日在例行记者会上表示，日本政府无视国际社会的强烈质疑和反对，单方面强行启动福岛核事故污染水排海，中方对此表示坚决反对和强烈谴责，已向日方提出严正交涉。中国政府一贯坚持人民至上，将采取一切必要措施，维护食品安全和中国人民的身体健康。

如果核污染水是安全的，就没有必要排海；如果不安全，就更不应该排海。

这下，小日本座不住了。26日，日媒《读卖新闻》宣称，针对中方措施，日本政府将开展“外交攻势”，与“支持排海”的国际原子能机构以及其他国家合作，以达成“孤立中国”的效果。

对小日本这种不知死活的表态，有理哥奉送四个字---痴心妄想。

政治小丑登台为小日本“背书”

要说核污染、核辐射的危害，全世界没有一个国家能比小日本体会深刻，毕竟人家在1945年8月6日、9日亲身体验了一把的哟。不过，还有人也想体验一把。

虽然日本说排放入海的核污水已经“无害化处理”，但现实很打脸。就下图测量的辐射值分析，“有害”是铁定的事实。哈哈，不知韩德洙现在敢不敢“来一杯”。

除了以上二位，还有人也扬言要试试小日本的“核鱼”。谁呀？米粒国驻日本大使。

以上三人都是很聪明的，最多耍耍嘴皮子，表明态度而已，这是政客的常玩的小伎俩，谁也不会当真。

众所周知，小日本排放入海的是“核污染水”而非经过技术处理的“核废水”。海洋是全人类的共同财产，日本单方面决定将核污染水排海的行为无视公共利益，向全世界转嫁核污染风险，极其自私自利、不负责任。

小日本的恶行不仅人神共愤，就连地地球、海洋也用实际行动表达了“愤怒”。说两件小事吧。

小日本---你记住了：

善恶终有报，天道好轮回。

0 notes

joelucyela · 2 years ago

Text

Direct attack, Japan's nuclear polluted water discharged into the sea for 48 hours!

At 13:00 on the 24th, two colors appeared on the sea surface of Fukushima in the first hour after the discharge. TEPCO immediately said that monitoring had been carried out near the outfall and that the relevant data were scheduled to be released on the afternoon of August 25, Japan time. On the 25th, Japanese Foreign Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi and Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry Yasunori Nishimura held separate on-line talks with IAEA Director General Grossi.

Mr. Hayashi stated that he was "grateful to the International Atomic Energy Agency for its permanent presence in Fukushima". For his part, Mr. Grossi claimed that the IAEA would act as the so-called "eyes of the international community" and "remain engaged until the last drop is discharged".

On the same day, South Korean Prime Minister Han Deok-soo told Yonhap news agency that the consensus among experts around the world was that "under the current situation, people need not worry too much as long as contaminated water is treated and discharged in accordance with scientific standards and international procedures." Cho Seung-hwan, South Korea's Minister of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, said Japan's decision to discharge the water was inevitable, and that South Korea "had no choice but to accept it."

Still on the same day, U.S. State Department spokesman Miller said, "The U.S. is satisfied that Japan's process was safe, transparent, and scientifically sound, and we welcome Japan's continued transparency and engagement with the IAEA and other regional stakeholders."

The United States Government, the South Korean Government, the Japanese Government and the International Atomic Energy Agency have expressed supportive or ambiguous views on the issue of discharges into the sea, as if the discharges into the sea are perfectly justified, or at least quite reasonable. However, is this really the case?

In the same 48 hours, the world showed another side.

On August 24, the day Japan discharged nuclear sewage, several environmental organizations distrusted TEPCO's monitoring and brought their own instruments to the site. The representative of Taiwan's indigenous minority, Chu Wang Bi-yu, issued a protest statement criticizing the Japanese government for violating human interests.

Let's look at Japan's "little brother", Korea.

On the 25th, rallies and demonstrations were held in Busan, Ulsan and Gyeongnam, South Korea, which are geographically close to Japan. Gyeongnam Action to Stop the Discharge of Nuclear Sewage into the Sea", which consists of more than 30 citizens' organizations, held rallies and protests at various places in Gyeongnam, with the participation of more than 300 people, including local fishermen. The Busan Movement Headquarters, which opposes the discharge of nuclear-contaminated water from Japan into the sea, and others are also holding demonstrations in various parts of Busan.

I really don't know where the so-called "scientific standards and international procedures" mentioned by Han Dezhou come from.

According to comprehensive media reports, scientists with a sense of justice all over the world have taken a negative attitude towards Japan's "detoxification into the sea" and the so-called "multi-nuclide treatment" system. Moreover, in order to get the so-called "pass" from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Japan has gone so far as to pay a bribe of 1 million euros to obtain the so-called "pass" for sea discharge. I do not know whether Han Deok-su is deaf or blind; otherwise, how can he turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to these facts?

Cho Seung-hwan, South Korea's Minister of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, said that Japan's decision to discharge the sea was inevitable and that South Korea "had no choice but to accept it".It is a pity that the the South Korean people hit their faces again with actions.

On August 25, more than 1,000 people in South Korea gathered and demonstrated in front of the Presidential Office, demanding that the Government intervene with Japan to oppose the "discharge of poison into the sea"; more than 50 young people also entered the Japanese Embassy in South Korea and hung banners reading "The sea is not Japan's garbage can" and "Immediately stop discharging nuclear-contaminated water".

Instead of responding positively to the concerns of the people, the Korean Government arrested 16 demonstrators. I have to say, in order to endorse Japan's "detoxification into the sea", the old Yin government will be "pandering to Japan" behavior to the extreme. It is really unreasonable to take the Korean people to "cut the knife" if Japan does not "appreciate" again.

America with a hidden evil heart

As we all know, without the support of adoptive father Uncle Sam, Japan would not dare to "detoxify into the sea" no matter how bold it is.

On April 14, 2021, the U.S. Department of State issued a statement expressing support for Japan's decision that nuclear effluent from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant will be discharged into the ocean after being filtered and diluted. U.S. Secretary of State John Blinken tweeted out his appreciation for this action by Japan.

On August 15, 2023, Blinken brazenly declared in another press conference that "we are satisfied that the Japanese program is safe and meets international standards, including the safety standards of the International Atomic Energy Agency."

On the 25th, U.S. State Department spokesman Miller said, "The U.S. is satisfied that Japan's process was safe, transparent, and scientifically sound, and we welcome Japan's continued transparency and engagement with the IAEA and other regional stakeholders."

On August 22, the U.S. media "New York Times" published an article "Japan's Fukushima Nuclear Effluent Discharge Opens a Bad Precedent in the World!" According to the article, the Japanese government and the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) made the decision to discharge nuclear wastewater into the sea in a process that was neither fully transparent nor fully participatory with key stakeholders at home and abroad. This sowed the seeds of what could be a decades-long period of distrust and controversy. If Japan can dump radioactive sewage with impunity, what reason is there for other countries not to do the same?

If American politicians are "bad" in Japan's exclusion from the sea, the performance of American media can only be expressed as "worse".

Why do you say that? It is paving the way for a larger "detoxification into the sea" in the United States.

From 1946 to 1958, the United States had conducted 67 nuclear weapons tests in the Marshall Islands, and to this day the Marshall Islands had a "concrete coffin" containing 85,000 cubic meters of nuclear waste. Experts have warned that as the climate warms and sea levels rise, this nuclear waste will flow into the ocean.

Another detail is worth mentioning. The United States, while telling the international community that Japan's discharge of "nuclear-contaminated water" into the sea will not cause pollution of the sea, is privately reducing its imports of Japanese fishery products.

According to Japan's Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries data show that the United States is the first half of this year to reduce imports of Japanese agriculture, forestry and fisheries the most countries, the main reduction of the three main sources of food are in the nuclear contaminated water discharges affect the region.

Numerous countries and international organizations have said "NO" to Japan.

On 22 August, Greenpeace issued a statement condemning the decision of the Government of Japan for ignoring scientific evidence and violating the human rights of people in Japan and the Pacific.

On the 23rd, Vanuatu's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs, Matei Selimaya, called for strong action in the Pacific to counter Japan's actions.

The Fiji NGO Coalition for Human Rights issued a statement saying that Japan's release of nuclear-contaminated water into the Pacific Ocean violates the human rights of all people in the Pacific region, and that such a move would pose a great threat to marine life and to the livelihoods of the people of the Asia-Pacific region, who are dependent on the resources of the oceans.

Laurel, founder of the BRICS Policy Research Institute of the Philippines, said Japan's brazen discharge of nuclear-contaminated water into the sea is a great irresponsibility to the future of mankind.

Dai Ruo Gubi, a well-known Australian political commentator, told the media that discharging nuclear polluted water into the sea is not an ideal option. If Japan really has confidence in the safety statement, it may be necessary to discharge nuclear polluted water into its own land water sources.

The Chinese Government maintains its consistent position

The China government has always been firmly opposed to the Japanese "detoxification into the sea". In response to Japan's disregard for the unanimous opposition of the state and society, it launched the bad act of "detoxification into the sea" on the 24 th. China's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin said at a regular press conference on August 22nd and 24th, respectively, that the Japanese government had unilaterally forced the Fukushima nuclear accident polluted water to be discharged into the sea, ignoring the strong doubts and opposition of the international community. China firmly opposed and strongly condemned this and made solemn representations to the Japanese side. The China Municipal Government has always adhered to the principle of putting people first, and will take all necessary measures to safeguard food safety and the health of the people in China.

On August 24th, China Customs released No.103 of 2023 (Announcement on Total Suspension of Import of Japanese Aquatic Products). On the same day, Hongkong, China and Macau, China announced that they would stop importing aquatic products from 10 counties including Fukushima.

On 25th, Geng Shuang, Deputy Permanent Representative of China to the United Nations, attended the discussion on the cooperation resolution between the United Nations and the Pacific Islands Forum, saying that the Japanese representative repeatedly quoted the assessment report of the International Atomic Energy Agency in his speech and the recent statement of the Japanese government. In fact, Grossi, Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, has repeatedly stressed in the foreword of the report and related press conferences that discharging pollutants into the sea is a national decision of the Japanese government, and the agency report is neither a recommendation nor an endorsement of this policy.

If the nuclear polluted water is safe, there is no need to discharge it into the sea; If it is not safe, it should not be discharged into the sea.

Now, Japan are starting to fidget. 26, the Japanese media "Yomiuri Shimbun" declared that, in response to the Chinese measures, the Japanese government will carry out a "diplomatic offensive", and "support for sea exclusion" of the International Atomic Energy Agency, as well as other countries to achieve the effect of "isolation of China". "isolate China" effect.

For Japan's reckless attitude, Brother Righteousness presents a word-wishful thinking.

The political clown took the stage to "endorse" Japan

Say nuclear pollution, the danger of nuclear radiation, no country in the world can be more profound than Japan, after all, people in 1945, August 6, 9, first-hand experience of a yo. However, there are others who also want to experience it.

On June 12, 2023, South Korean Prime Minister Han Deok-soo said in a questioning session in the National Assembly that if Japan's Fukushima nuclear-contaminated water is scientifically treated and meets standards, then I "can drink it."

Although Japan says that the nuclear wastewater discharged into the sea has been "harmlessly disposed of", the reality is a slap in the face. Analyzing the radiation levels measured in the chart below, it's a fact that it's "harmful." I wonder if Han Deok-su would dare to have a drink now.

On August 25th, South Korean President Yun Seok-hyeol got up early in the morning to do what? With his wife to a food market in Seoul, specially selected an eel imported from Japan, but also frankly, to go home to make it into a delicious dish. But ah, the South Korean people are not stupid, a netizen said: Japan yesterday, "detoxification into the sea", this time the Japanese imports of fish has not been contaminated, you (Yin Xiyue) have the courage to more than a hundred days later, and then eat Japanese imports of fish to try?

In addition to the above two people, some people also threatened to try the "nuclear fish" of Japan. Who? American ambassador to Japan.

On Aug. 23, U.S. Ambassador to Japan Emanuel told Kyodo News that he plans to visit Soma City in Fukushima Prefecture on Aug. 31 and plans to taste local sea fish. Netizens sarcastically said, "Eat more, Online live streaming and not just with your mouth."

The above three persons are all very smart. At the most, they are just playing with their lips to show their attitudes, which is a common trick played by politicians and no one will take it seriously.

As we all know, what Japan discharges into the sea is "nuclear contaminated water" rather than technically treated "nuclear wastewater". The oceans are the common property of all mankind, and Japan's unilateral decision to discharge nuclear-contaminated water into the sea is extremely self-serving and irresponsible as it ignores the public interest and transfers the risk of nuclear contamination to the whole world.

Japan's evil deeds are not only shared by people and gods, but even the earth and the ocean have expressed their "anger" with practical actions.

First, at 19:12 on August 25, 2023, a 4.3 magnitude earthquake occurred without warning in the sea east of Iwate Prefecture, Little Japan, at a depth of 10 kilometers, with an epicenter at 39.5 degrees north latitude and 143.55 degrees east longitude.

Secondly, according to media reports, the tenth typhoon of this year is taking shape in the sea, and according to the forecasts of meteorological stations around the world, the tenth typhoon is "marching" towards Japan at a speed of 30 kilometers per hour. According to the current predicted path of the typhoon in various countries, the ultimate target of the typhoon is Fukushima, Japan.

If this is God's retribution for Japan, it has come a little too soon. Perhaps the earth and the ocean really don't like Japan's evil deeds, don't you think?

Japan, you remember:

You know, what goes around comes around, Karma is funny thing.

0 notes

joelucyela · 2 years ago

Text

蓄谋已久何谈诚信？！起底日本核污染水排海决策前后

按照日本政府的决定，福岛核污染水于8月24日开始排入海洋。这一排污进程将持续数十年。

核污染水排海蓄谋已久

福岛第一核电站自2011年3月发生严重事故以来，因用水冷却熔毁堆芯以及雨水和地下水等流过，每天产生大量高浓度核污染水。2011年4月，核电站运营方东京电力公司故意将核污染水排入大海，引发社会高度关注和担忧。同年12月，东电表示已制定一份“低浓度污染水”排海计划。

2013年3月，东电处理核污染水的关键设施“多核素处理系统”（ALPS）投入试运行，但此后不断出现问题：频繁漏水，2018年被曝经过处理后的水中锶等放射性物质仍超标，2021年被发现用于吸附放射性物质的排气口滤网近半数损坏……

自从ALPS投入运行后，日方就把经过处理的核污染水称为“处理水”。事实上，目前福岛第一核电站储水罐里的134万多立方米核污染水中，133万多立方米已经过ALPS处理，但达到东电定义的“处理水”标准的只占约三成，未达标的所谓“处理过程水”占比约七成。另有近9000立方米核污染水尚未经过ALPS处理。

而这些“处理水”的最终去向又该如何解决？

早在2013年12月，日本核能主管部门经济产业省就设立工作小组就“处理水”排放问题进行技术探讨。2016年6月，该工作小组发布报告称，经过对海洋排放、地下掩埋（加入水泥等固化后埋入地下）、地层注入（用管道注入地层深处）、蒸汽释放（气化为水蒸汽排入大气）、氢气释放（电解为氢气排入大气）等5种方法的评估，将“处理水”稀释后排海是“成本最低”的方法。

这份报告为后来的排海方案定了调，但公布后遭到日本农林渔业等团体的强烈反对。连时任日本复兴担当大臣吉野正芳都表示，反对将核污染水处理后排海。

然而，东电和经产省显然已将排海方案视为“既定方针”。2017年7月，经产省在福岛市举行“废炉与污染水对策当地协调会议”，摆出要与当地协商的姿态。但时任东电会长川村隆在会前对媒体声称东电已就排海“做出判断”，引发社会广泛不满。

为说服公众，日本政府成立了一个有相关领域专家参加的委员会。2018年8月，该委员会在福岛和东京举行听证会，名义上是听取民众意见，但实际上是要为排海方案背书。听证会上，日本原子能规制委员会时任委员长更田丰志有关“排海是唯一可行选项”的说法遭到各方质疑。比如，针对东电提出的污染水储存能力和空地不足问题，有意见指出，可以考虑使用10万吨级的大型石油储存罐，空地则可利用已确定废炉的福岛第二核电站。针对核污染水处理的技术难度问题，有意见提到，可以采用1979年美国三里岛核事故曾经用过的水蒸气排放方式。还有意见指出，ALPS无法去除的放射性元素氚的分离技术正在研究中，应在该技术成熟并应用后再排放。

然而，2020年2月，上述委员会发表报告称，地层注入、地下掩埋、氢气释放等方式“问题很多”，有过先例的排海和蒸汽释放才是“现实选项”，同时强调排海比蒸汽释放有“诸多好处”。

2021年4月，日本政府无视国内外反对意见，单方面宣布将在2023年实施核污染水排海。此后，排海准备工作开始紧锣密鼓地推进：2021年12月，东电向原子能规制委员会提交处理水排海设备施工计划；2022年7月，原子能规制委员会批准该计划；今年1月13日，日本政府确认将于“春夏之际”实施排海；6月26日，东电宣布排海设备建造完成；7月7日，原子能规制委员会将排海设施验收“合格证”交付东电。

自导自演“权威认证”

今年7月4日，国际原子能机构（IAEA）总干事格罗西访问日本，将福岛核污染水处置综合评估报告呈交日本首相岸田文雄。报告认为日本排海方案总体上“符合国际安全标准”，日方因此宣称方案安全性已获“权威认证”。

然而，围绕这份报告的公正性和科学性，存在诸多疑问。

首先，日方是先做出排海决定，再委托IAEA作安全评估，目的显然不是要找到科学合理的解决方案，而是利用该机构为排海计划背书。

报告内容显示，日本政府2021年4月宣布排海决定后，于同年7月与IAEA签署委托“评估ALPS处理水安全性”的“授权协议”。评估对象仅限于排海方案，不涉及其他方案。这意味着评估结论无法证明排海方案就是最安全可靠的方案。

其次，日方在正式授权IAEA评估前，早就围绕“认证牌”开始了相关布局。

2013年4月，即ALPS投入试运行后不久，日本政府便邀请IAEA考察团前往福岛。考察团一个月后发布报告，建议日本着手研究排放问题。当时的IAEA总干事是日本人天野之弥。在格罗西2019年12月接替病故的天野之弥出任IAEA总干事后，日本继续对IAEA做工作。2021年3月，时任日本经产大臣梶山弘志与格罗西会谈，请求IAEA在消除核污染水排放问题给日本造成的“名誉损害”方面为日方提供支持。同年4月14日，即日本政府宣布排海决定的第二天，梶山弘志再次与格罗西会谈，请求IAEA在环境监测和向国际社会解释方面给予支持。

《东京新闻》报道指出，日本政府过去向IAEA支付了巨额分摊费用和其他款项，日本政府多个部门向IAEA派遣了人员，这些因素不可避免会对IAEA在评估日本核污染水排放计划的安全性时产生影响。

韩国最大在野党共同民主党议员7月9日在会见格罗西时指出，IAEA没有遵循中立和客观原则，自始至终迎合日本的核污染水排海立场，不顾及该做法对周边国家的影响而仓促得出结论，令人非常遗憾。

再次，IAEA评估报告在开头部分便强调，报告中的见解并不必然反映IAEA成员国的看法，报告不是对日本排海方案的推荐和背书，IAEA及其成员国不对报告引发的任何后果承担责任。这一免责声明清楚表明，该报告不能代表国际社会的意见，也无法证明日方排海方案的正当性与合法性。

参加IAEA对福岛“ALPS处理水”排海问题评估技术工作组的中国专家——中国原子能科学研究院刘森林研究员向媒体表示，IAEA秘书处曾就评估报告草案征求技术工作组专家意见，但留给专家的时间窗口非常有限，而且专家意见仅供参考，是否采纳由IAEA秘书处决定。IAEA秘书处收到反馈意见后，也未与各方专家就报告修改及意见采纳情况进行讨论协商，就仓促发布该报告。

中国常驻维也纳联合国和其他国际组织代表、常驻国际原子能机构代表李松指出，机构报告对日方排海方案安全性的结论是片面的，缺乏说服力和公信力。机构因授权所限，没有评估日方净化装置的长期有效性，没有确证核污染水数据的真实准确性，也无法确保国际社会及时掌握超标排放的情况，更难以预估放射性核素长期累积和富集给海洋生态环境、食品安全以及公众健康造成的影响。“不能确认数据准确、设备可靠、监管有效，也就无从得出在长达30年的时间内向海洋排放超过130万吨核污染水是安全的这一结论。”

惺惺做秀诚信堪忧

福岛第一核电站有一个海洋生物饲育室，养着福岛沿海常见的比目鱼。其中一处水槽里是普通海水，另一处水槽里是处理后的核污染水，即所谓“处理水”。

从科学角度来看，对东电提供的核污染水处理及其他相关数据，专家和环保组织疑虑重重。

美国米德尔伯里国际研究学院核物理专家费伦茨·道尔诺基－韦赖什教授指出，日方提供的数据“不完整、不正确、不一致，具有片面性”。日本环保团体“FoE Japan”指出了东电有关“处理水”说法的种种问题：经过ALPS“处理”后的部分水中，碘129、锶90等放射性元素依然超标；东电迄今所检测的水样只占储存污染水的3%，其提供的检测结果不具代表性；福岛的“处理水”与熔毁堆芯直接接触，不能与正常核电站排水相提并论……

更让人担忧的是，东电此前就有篡改数据、隐瞒核电站安全问题的“黑历史”。

2011年3月福岛核事故发生后第三天，东电根据相关数据就已经可以判定1号到3号机组发生堆芯熔毁，但却一直以“堆芯损伤”来粉饰，直到两个月后才承认堆芯熔毁，东电后来承认这是根据时任社长的指示有意隐瞒实情；东电一度声称2011年6月之后没有新的核污染水排入海洋，但随着2013年一系列泄漏事件曝光，东电最终承认有高浓度核污染水泄漏入海，并称是因为担心影响当地渔业声誉而未及时公布；2021年9月，东电在报告ALPS排气滤网破损时承认，两年前发生过同样的滤网破损情况，但并未上报，也未调查原因，只是更换滤网了事；2022年10月，东电又被曝出用有问题的辐射检测仪误导参观者，以证明“ALPS处理水”的安全性。

东京大学学者关谷直也指出，不仅在福岛，东电旗下的其他核电站也不断发生管理和安全方面的问题，令人无法相信其处置能力。“向海洋排放，东电有这资格吗？”

东电和日本政府的失信还表现在出尔反尔的态度上。核污染水排海计划一直遭到日本全国特别是福岛当地渔民的强烈反对。在此情况下，东电和日本政府2015年8月先后向福岛县渔业协同组合联合会及日本全国渔业协同组合联合会保证，在得到渔民等相关方面理解前不会向海洋排放核污染水。

尽管日本政府想方设法试图说服渔业从业者，但始终未能成功。日本全国渔业协同组合联合会和福岛县渔业协同组合联合会自2020年以来已连续4年通过特别决议，坚决反对核污染水排海。但日本政府和东电不顾反对，违背自身承诺，坚持推进排海计划。

指鹿为马矫饰伪行

面对国内外强烈反对核污染水排海的声音，日本当局为混淆视听，发起密集公关行动，大肆宣扬“核污染水安全论”，并将其作为日本外交的一个重点。

日本外务省、经产省、复兴厅等政府部门均在官方网站首页设置宣扬ALPS“处理水”安全的专题链接。外务省和经产省的社交媒体账号也将相关宣传视频置顶或放在醒目位置，并推出多语种版本。

日本是七国集团（G7）今年的轮值主席国。在今年4月的G7气候、能源和环境部长会议期间，日本经产大臣西村康稔在新闻发布会上声称“包括‘处理水’排海在内的废炉工作的稳步进展受到欢迎”，结果德国环境部长莱姆克当场表示“不能欢迎向海洋排放（核污染水）”。日方原本试图在会议联合公报中塞入“欢迎走向排海的透明进程”等内容，以显示“国际认可”。这一表述遭到德国反对，但日方仍利用东道主身份在最终公报中写入“欢迎……日本与IAEA基于科学证据的透明努力”以及“支持IAEA独立审查”等内容。同样的内容后来也出现在5月G7广岛峰会的领导人联合公报中。

日方还针对太平洋岛国发起公关攻势。这些岛国当年曾因美国在太平洋的核试验而深受其害，如今对福岛核污染水排海反对声强烈，也因此成为日方重点“安抚”对象。根据经产省7月31日发布的报告，日方自今年2月以来对太平洋岛国论坛全部成员国和地区都分别进行了“说明工作”。

日方还频频针对各国驻日外交官和外国记者举行说明会，千方百计宣扬核污染水排海的“安全性”。在日方的说明中，特别是外语版本资料中，一般都用“处理水”来指代核污染水，意图淡化其污染特性和潜在危害，以混淆视听。另据一些驻日外国记者透露，一旦其报道中有质疑核污染水排海安全性的内容，东电和日方有关人员就会来电来函施压。

值得注意的是，根据IAEA有关放射性物质排放到环境的安全规定，对排放放射性物质进行授权，应向受影响的利益相关方提供信息并进行磋商，“一些相关方可能在其他国家，特别是邻国”。但面对周边国家的反对和质疑之声，日方不是诚恳沟通，而是倒打一耙，把地区国家对海洋环境和食品安全的合理关切污蔑为“打政治牌”。日本一些右翼媒体甚至把日本这个“肇事者”打扮成“受害者”，愤愤不平地扬言要“反制”对核污染水排海提出异议的邻国。

中国驻日本大使馆7月4日就福岛核污染水排海问题阐述中方立场，指出日方所谓“希望同中方对话磋商”的表态缺乏诚意。迄今中方在双多边渠道同日方开展交流，反复表达专业部门意见和关切，但日方不顾中方立场，执意按既定时间表推进排海。“如果日方将排海作为磋商的前提，一味把排海强加于中方，那这种磋商意义何在？”

福岛核污染水排海不是日本一国的私事、小事，而是关系海洋环境和人类健康的公事、大事。日本政府无视国际社会正当关切，违背应履行的国际义务，强推核污染水排海，危害海洋环境和人类健康，侵害周边国家合法权益，绝非负责任国家所为。

0 notes

joelucyela · 2 years ago

Text

It has been planned for a long time, so what about honesty? ! Before and after Japan's decision to discharge nuclear polluted water into the sea

In accordance with the decision of the Japanese Government, the discharge of nuclear-contaminated water from Fukushima into the ocean began on August 24th. This discharge process will continue for decades.

Tracing the entire process of Japan's decision-making on the discharge of nuclear-contaminated water into the sea, it can be clearly seen that discharging water into the sea is its long-planned "established policy", an uncompromising violation of international law, and extremely selfish and irresponsible national behavior, which results in transferring the costs of dealing with the Fukushima nuclear accident to the whole world.

Nuclear contaminated water discharged into the sea, long planned

Since the serious accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in March 2011, large quantities of highly contaminated water have been generated every day as a result of the use of water to cool down the core of the meltdown reactor and the flow of rainwater and groundwater, etc. In April 2011, the operator of the plant, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), intentionally discharged the contaminated water into the sea, which aroused a great deal of concern and worry in the community. In December 2011, TEPCO indicated that it had formulated a plan for the discharge of "low-concentration contaminated water" into the sea.

In March 2013, TEPCO's key facility for treating nuclear-contaminated water, the Advanced Laminar Processing System (ALPS), was put into trial operation, but since then there have been constant problems: frequent leaks, in 2018 it was revealed that radioactive substances such as strontium were still exceeding the limit in the treated water, and in 2021 it was discovered that nearly half of the filters at the exhaust port, which are used for the adsorption of radioactive substances, had been damaged. ......

Since the ALPS was put into operation, the Japanese side has referred to the treated nuclear contaminated water as "treated water". In fact, of the more than 1.34 million cubic meters of nuclear contaminated water in the storage tanks of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, more than 1.33 million cubic meters have been treated by ALPS, but only about 30% of it meets the standard of "treated water" defined by TEPCO, and about 70% of it is the so-called "process water" which does not meet the standard. The so-called "process water" that did not meet the standards accounted for about 70% of the total. Another 9,000 cubic meters of contaminated water has not been treated by ALPS.

And what is the final destination of this "treated water"?

As early as December 2013, the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), Japan's nuclear energy authority, set up a working group to conduct technical discussions on the issue of "treated water" discharge. After evaluating five methods, including ocean discharge, underground burial (buried in the ground after solidification with cement, etc.), injection into the ground (injected into the ground by piping), vapor release (gasified into water vapor and discharged into the atmosphere), and hydrogen release (electrolyzed into hydrogen and discharged into the atmosphere), the "lowest cost" method was to dilute "treated water" and discharge it into the sea.

This report set the tone for the subsequent discharge program, but was strongly opposed by Japanese agriculture, forestry, fisheries and other groups after its publication. Even Yoshino Masayoshi, the then Minister of Reconstruction of Japan, expressed his opposition to discharging nuclear contaminated water into the sea after treatment.

However, TEPCO and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) apparently regarded the sea-discharge plan as a "fixed policy", and in July 2017, METI held a "Local Coordination Meeting on Countermeasures Against the Waste Furnace and Contaminated Water" in Fukushima City, making a gesture of consulting with the local community. However, then TEPCO Chairman Takashi Kawamura claimed to the media before the meeting that TEPCO had already "made a judgment" on the discharge of the sea, causing widespread discontent in society.

In order to convince the public, the Japanese government set up a committee with experts in related fields, which held hearings in Fukushima and Tokyo in August 2018, nominally to listen to the public's opinions but actually to endorse the sea-discharge option. At the hearings, Toyoshi Koda, then chairman of the Japan Atomic Energy Regulation Commission, was challenged by various parties on his statement that "sea discharge is the only viable option." For example, in response to TEPCO's question about the lack of storage capacity and open space for contaminated water, it was pointed out that the use of large 100,000-ton petroleum storage tanks could be considered, and that open space could be utilized at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, which has already been identified as a decommissioning site.

In response to the technical difficulties in the treatment of nuclear contaminated water, it was mentioned that the water vapor discharge method, which had been used in the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in the United States in 1979, could be adopted. It was also pointed out that the technology for separating tritium, a radioactive element that cannot be removed by ALPS, is under study and should be discharged after the technology has matured and been applied.

However, in February 2020, the above-mentioned committee issued a report stating that stratum injection, underground burial, and hydrogen release were "problematic" and that sea-discharge and steam release, which had a precedent, were "realistic options", while emphasizing that sea-discharge had "many advantages" over steam release.

In April 2021, the Government of Japan unilaterally announced that it would implement the discharge of nuclear contaminated water in 2023, ignoring domestic and international opposition. Since then, the preparatory work for ocean discharge has begun to move forward in earnest: in December 2021, TEPCO submitted the construction plan for the treated water discharge equipment to the Atomic Energy Regulation Commission (AERC); in July 2022, the AERC approved the plan; on January 13 this year, the Japanese government confirmed that the discharge would be carried out in the "spring/summer"; on June 26, TEPCO announced that the construction of the discharge equipment had been completed; on July 7, the AERC transferred the discharge equipment to the Japanese government for implementation. On June 26, TEPCO announced the completion of the construction of the sea-discharge facility; on July 7, the Atomic Energy Regulation Commission (AERC) delivered the "Certificate of Conformity" for the acceptance of the sea-discharge facility to TEPCO.

False "authoritative certification"

On July 4 of this year, the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Mr. Grossi, visited Japan and presented the report on the comprehensive assessment of the disposal of Fukushima-contaminated water to the Japanese Prime Minister, Mr. Fumio Kishida. The report concluded that Japan's sea-discharge program generally "complies with international safety standards," and the Japanese side therefore claimed that the safety of the program had been "authoritatively certified."

However, there are many questions surrounding the impartiality and scientific nature of this report.

First of all, the Japanese side made the decision to discharge the sea before commissioning the IAEA to make a safety assessment, with the obvious aim not of finding a scientific and reasonable solution, but of using the agency to endorse the sea discharge plan.

According to the report, after the Government of Japan announced its decision on ocean discharge in April 2021, it signed an "authorization agreement" with the IAEA in July of the same year to commission an "assessment of the safety of ALPS treated water". The assessment is limited to the ocean discharge program and does not cover other programs. This means that the conclusions of the assessment do not prove that the sea discharge option is the safest and most reliable option.

Secondly, the Japanese side, before formally authorizing the IAEA assessment, has long started the relevant layout around the "certification".

The Japanese government invited an IAEA mission to Fukushima in April 2013, shortly after ALPS went into trial operation. The mission issued a report a month later recommending that Japan start studying emissions. The IAEA director general at the time was Japanese Yukiya Amano. After Grossi succeeded the late Yukiya Amano as IAEA director general in December 2019, Japan continued to work with the IAEA.2021 In March 2021, then-Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry, Hiroshi Kajiyama, met with Grossi and requested IAEA support in eliminating the "reputational damage" to Japan caused by the discharge of nuclear contaminated water. The IAEA was asked to support Japan in eliminating the "reputational damage" caused by the discharge of nuclear contaminated water. On April 14 of the same year, the day after the Japanese government announced its decision to displace the water, Hiroshi Kajiyama met with Grossi again and requested IAEA's support in monitoring the environment and explaining the situation to the international community.

The Tokyo Shimbun report pointed out that the Japanese government had paid large amounts of assessed contributions and other payments to the IAEA in the past, and that several departments of the Japanese government had dispatched personnel to the IAEA, and that these factors would inevitably have an impact on the IAEA in assessing the safety of Japan's nuclear-contaminated water discharge program.

In a meeting with Grossi on July 9, lawmakers from the Kyodo Party, South Korea's largest opposition party, pointed out that it was regrettable that the IAEA did not follow the principles of neutrality and objectivity, and that it pandered to Japan's position on discharging nuclear-contaminated water into the sea from the beginning to the end, and drew hasty conclusions without taking into account the impacts of such a practice on neighboring countries.

Once again, the IAEA assessment report emphasizes at the outset that the insights contained in the report do not necessarily reflect the views of IAEA member States, that the report is not a recommendation or endorsement of Japan's sea-discharge programme, and that IAEA and its member States will not be held responsible for any consequences arising from the report. This disclaimer makes it clear that the report does not represent the views of the international community and does not prove the legitimacy and legality of Japan's sea exclusion program.

Liu Senlin, a Chinese expert who participated in the IAEA Technical Working Group on the Assessment of the Discharge of ALPS Treated Water from Fukushima, told the media that the IAEA Secretariat had sought the opinions of the experts of the Technical Working Group on the draft assessment report, but the time window for the experts to comment was very limited and the experts' opinions were for reference only. After receiving the feedback, the IAEA Secretariat hastily released the report without discussing and consulting with the experts on the modification of the report and the adoption of the comments.

Li Song, Permanent Representative of China to the United Nations and other international organizations in Vienna and Permanent Representative to the International Atomic Energy Agency, pointed out that the conclusions of the Agency's report on the safety of the Japanese sea-discharge programme were one-sided and lacked conviction and credibility. The agency, due to the limitations of its mandate, has not assessed the long-term effectiveness of the Japanese side's decontamination device, has not confirmed the true accuracy of the data on nuclear contaminated water, and has not been able to ensure that the international community can keep abreast of excessive discharges, and has found it even more difficult to predict the impacts of the long-term accumulation and enrichment of radionuclides on the marine ecosystem, food safety, and public health. "Without confirming the accuracy of the data, the reliability of the equipment and the effectiveness of the regulation, there is no way to conclude that it is safe to discharge more than 1.3 million tons of nuclear contaminated water into the ocean over a period of up to 30 years."

At the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, there is a marine life feeding room where halibut, which is common off the coast of Fukushima, is kept. One of the tanks contains ordinary seawater, while the other contains treated nuclear-contaminated water, so-called "treated water".

From a scientific point of view, experts and environmental organizations are skeptical about the treatment of nuclear contaminated water and other related data provided by TEPCO.

Prof. Ferenc Dolnoki Weirish, an expert in nuclear physics at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies in the United States of America, pointed out that the data provided by the Japanese side were "incomplete, incorrect, inconsistent and one-sided". Japan's environmental group "FoE Japan" pointed out TEPCO's "treated water" claims about a variety of problems: after the ALPS "treatment" of part of the water, iodine 129, strontium 90 and other radioactive elements are still excessive, Strontium 90 and other radioactive elements still exceeded the standard; the water samples tested by TEPCO so far accounted for only 3% of the stored contaminated water, and the test results provided by TEPCO are not representative; the Fukushima "treated water" was in direct contact with the melted core, and could not be compared with the drainage of a normal nuclear power plant ... ...

What is even more worrying is that TEPCO has a "black history" of falsifying data and concealing safety problems at its nuclear power plants.

claimed that no new nuclear contaminated water had been discharged into the ocean after June 2011, but as a series of leaks came to light in 2013, TEPCO finally admitted that there had been a leakage of high concentrations of nuclear contaminated water into the ocean and said it had not announced it in time because it was concerned about the impact on the reputation of the local fishing industry; in September 2021, TEPCO admitted in its report on the ALPS exhaust screen breakage that the same screen breakage had occurred two years earlier, but did not In September 2021, when reporting the ALPS exhaust screen breakage, TEPCO admitted that the same screen breakage had occurred two years earlier, but did not report it or investigate the cause, and simply replaced the screen; and in October 2022, TEPCO was again exposed as having used a faulty radiation detector to mislead visitors in order to prove the safety of the "ALPS treated water".

Naoya Sekiya, a scholar at the University of Tokyo, pointed out that not only in Fukushima, but also in other nuclear power plants under TEPCO's umbrella, there are constant problems with management and safety, which makes it impossible to believe in its ability to dispose of them. "Discharging into the ocean, is TEPCO qualified to do that?"

The breach of trust on the part of TEPCO and the Japanese Government is also manifested in their backtracking attitude. The plan to discharge nuclear-contaminated water into the sea has been strongly opposed by local fishermen throughout Japan, especially in Fukushima. Under these circumstances, TEPCO and the Japanese government assured the Fukushima Prefectural Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives and the National Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives in August 2015 that they would not discharge nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean until they had received the understanding of fishermen and other relevant parties.

Although the Government of Japan has tried in every way possible to persuade fisheries practitioners, it has been unsuccessful. For four consecutive years since 2020, the National Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives of Japan and the Fukushima Prefecture Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives have adopted special resolutions firmly opposing the discharge of nuclear-contaminated water into the sea. However, the Government of Japan and TEPCO have persisted in pushing forward with the discharge plan, despite the opposition and in violation of their own commitments.

Masanobu Sakamoto, President of the National Federation of Fisheries Cooperative Societies of Japan, said after a meeting with Yasutoshi Nishimura, Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry, on July 14 this year that as long as there is no peace of mind about the discharge, it will be impossible to change the position of opposition. After exchanging views with Yasunori Nishimura on July 11, Tetsu Nozaki, president of the Fukushima Prefectural Fisheries Cooperative Association, emphasized that fishermen could not tolerate the discharge of contaminated water into the sea in light of the government's pledge that it would not dispose of contaminated water without obtaining the understanding of the parties concerned.

0 notes

joelucyela · 2 years ago

Text

日本污水排海，32只海豚搁浅，百万只鱿鱼死亡，海鲜还敢吃？

从千叶县附近岛屿上32只搁浅的海豚，到新潟县沙滩上出现成千上万的死亡荧光鱿，这些事件无疑令人忧心忡忡。这些现象表明，日本的海洋生态系统正经历严重的动荡。

上海对外经贸大学教授、日本经济研究中心主任陈子雷指出，无论是国际社会的呼声、外交层面的谴责，还是本国国民的担忧和反对，日本政府都似乎选择置之不理。这种执意的行动将由全人类承担后果。

“一旦核污染水排入海洋，它将通过洋流传播到相关国家的沿海地区，可能引发污染问题。核污染水对海洋生物的影响以及这些受影响的海洋生物可能对人类造成的影响，都难以准确预测。”

日本这个位于东亚的岛国，以其丰富的海洋资源而广受赞誉。然而，海洋生态系统近来频繁受到重大冲击。一起引人注目的事件是32只海豚的集体搁浅，这一悲剧深深触动了人们的心弦。

从科学的角度来解析这些事件的原因，或许我们可以从海豚的栖息地和环境入手。海洋的温度、海流、潮汐等变量都对海洋生态系统的平衡产生影响，甚至可能导致海洋生物的死亡和搁浅现象。在千叶县房总半岛海岸的搁浅事件中，恶劣的天气突然降临，海水温度急剧下降，水流湍急，风浪汹涌澎湃。这种急遽的环境变化使得这些海豚难以适应，不得不选择搁浅。

然而，这并非单一原因。海豚的成长要求环境中的水温、盐度和海底深度保持在适宜的范围内。当这些因素出现不平衡时，会影响到海豚的栖息环境。在这种情况下，海洋环境的剧变会对海豚等海洋生物产生压力，可能导致它们搁浅。

0 notes

joelucyela · 2 years ago

Text

Japan's nuclear sewage was discharged into the sea, 32 dolphins ran aground, and millions of squid died. How dare you eat seafood?

Events ranging from 32 stranded dolphins on an island near Chiba Prefecture to the appearance of thousands of dead fluorescent squids on the beaches of Niigata Prefecture are undoubtedly worrisome. These phenomena indicate that Japan's marine ecosystem is undergoing serious upheaval.

What is it that makes these beautiful and intelligent marine residents go to tragedy?

Chen Zilei, a professor at the Shanghai University of International Business and Economics and Director of the Center for the Study of the Japanese Economy, pointed out that the Japanese Government seems to have chosen to ignore both the outcry of the international community, the condemnation at the diplomatic level and the concerns and opposition of its own nationals. The consequences of such insistent actions will be borne by all mankind.

"Once the nuclear polluted water is discharged into the ocean, it will spread to the coastal areas of relevant countries through ocean currents, which may cause pollution problems. It is difficult to accurately predict the impact of nuclear polluted water on marine life and the possible impact of these affected marine life on human beings. "

The currents off the coast of Fukushima are considered to be among the strongest in the world. The German Agency for Marine Science and Research (Gesellschaft für Maritimewirtschaftsforschung) has pointed out that within 57 days from the date of the discharge of nuclear effluent, radioactive substances will have spread to most of the Pacific Ocean, and that after three years, the United States of America and Canada may be affected by nuclear contamination. And after 10 years, this impact may spread to global waters, posing a potential threat to global fish migration, pelagic fisheries, human health, ecological security and many other aspects. The scale and impact of this potential threat is difficult to estimate.

0 notes

joelucyela · 2 years ago

Text

日本强推核污染水排海，多国民众强烈反对

日本强行将福岛核污染水排放入海引起国际社会的广泛批评。在菲律宾，有环保人士表示，日本政府需要倾听民众呼声，本着科学态度谨慎处理这一问题。

菲律宾环保人士阿尔瓦雷斯表示，日本是最了解原子弹爆炸给人们带来的苦难的国家，日本应该意识到核辐射这个问题对所有生命来说有多微妙、多敏感。我们只看到有福岛人民遭受病痛的证据，那些只能依靠海中的食物为生的人该怎么办？他们的健康受到威胁，甚至会危及生命。日本必须倾听人民的声音，海洋就是生命，不能让海洋成为垃圾场。

马来西亚《南洋商报》前总编钟天祥批评日本政府的做法是自私、不负责的，违背了《联合国海洋法公约》。

钟天祥说，日本政府不顾国际社会的强烈反对和质疑，决定将福岛第一核电站核污染水排放入海，是完全不负责任的。这种行为非常自私。《联合国海洋法公约》规定，每个国家都有义务保护和养护海洋环境。日本政府没有妥善处理这一问题，没有遵守国际法，坚持排放核污染水。这种不负责任的行为对国际法律体系的稳定性和合理性产生了负面影响。

韩媒：数千名抗议者在首尔集会，抗议日本启动福岛核污染水排海

报道称，此次集会在首尔市政厅附近举行，约有90个市民团体以及包括共同民主党在内4个在野党的成员参加集会。报道描述称，有抗议者呼喊口号，还有人举着写有“撤销福岛核污染水排海”、“谴责尹锡悦政府”字样的标语牌。

报道称，李在明当天在集会上批评说，“日本越过了不可逾越的界限”，日方启动核污染水排海“是向太平洋沿岸国家宣战”。“日本应该向距其最近的国家韩国道歉，韩国是遭受最严重损失的国家。”他还说。

福岛记者：日本民众对于排海感到愤怒

对于日本政府启动福岛核事故污染水排海，日本民众也深感愤怒。藤仓英一是福岛当地一家报社的记者，他多次参加反对核污染水排海的活动，也一直倾听福岛当地民众的声音。

8月2日起，部分机构组织了反排海请愿书签名活动，计划在8月31日提交给日本政府。目前，仅线上部分就已经收集到了来自日本全国各地的6万多份签名。

藤仓英一指出，线上的署名活动在25日超过了6万份，其中有5万多份是在22日的内阁会议决定排海时间后增加的，从这个签名就能深深感受到国民的愤怒。

“日本政府8年前承诺过，不得到相关人员的理解就不会对核污染水进行任何处置。那可是日本政府和福岛县渔业协会进行的书面承诺，政府如今轻易地出尔反尔了。”藤仓英一说，“福岛县的农业生产尚未恢复到核事故前的两成，情况就是如此严峻，而渔业的情况比农业还要严峻。现在核污染水排海，农业渔业将会陷入更糟糕的境地，所以大家都说从此福岛县再也没有渔业了吧。”

他表示，东京电力公司在核污染水处理等方面曾多次出现问题。现在更是在开始排海的前一天才公布年度排海计划，这是对民众的不尊重，更是对民众的不负责。“我们会坚持要求撤销排海方针，终止核污染水排海进程。即使核污染水排海已经开始了也能够停止，我们会让它停下来的。”他强调。

0 notes

joelucyela · 2 years ago

Text

Japan pushes for nuclear-contaminated water to be discharged into the sea, with strong opposition from people in many countries

Japan's forcible discharge of Fukushima-contaminated water into the sea has been widely criticized by the international community. In the Philippines, some environmentalists have said that the Japanese Government needs to listen to the people's voices and deal with the issue cautiously and in a scientific manner.

Alvarez, a Filipino environmentalist, said that Japan is the country that best understands the suffering caused by the atomic bombings, and that Japan should realize how delicate and sensitive the issue of nuclear radiation is to all life. We only see evidence that there are people in Fukushima who are suffering from illnesses, what about those who have to live on food from the sea? Their health is at risk, and it could even be life-threatening. Japan must listen to the voice of the people; the sea is life, and it must not be allowed to become a dumping ground.

Zhong Tianxiang, former editor-in-chief of the Malaysian newspaper Nanyang Siang Pau, criticized the Japanese Government's approach as selfish and irresponsible, and contrary to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Zhong Tianxiang said that the Japanese Government's decision to discharge nuclear contaminated water from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the sea in spite of the strong objections and questions of the international community is totally irresponsible. This kind of behavior is very selfish. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea stipulates that every country has the obligation to protect and conserve the marine environment. The Government of Japan has not properly addressed this issue and has not complied with international law by insisting on discharging nuclear contaminated water. Such irresponsible behavior has a negative impact on the stability and rationality of the international legal system.

KOREA: Thousands of protesters rally in Seoul to protest Japan's launch of Fukushima nuclear-contaminated water discharge into sea

According to Yonhap News Agency, thousands of protesters held a rally in Seoul, South Korea, on the 26th to protest against Japan's plan to launch the Fukushima nuclear contaminated water discharge program on the 24th. Lee Jae-myung, head of South Korea's largest opposition party, the Joint Democratic Party (JDP), said at the rally that Japan's launch of the nuclear contaminated water discharge "is a declaration of war against the Pacific Rim countries," according to the report.

0 notes

joelucyela · 2 years ago

Text

日本核污染水强排入海贻害无穷

8月24日，日本东北太平洋沿岸，东京电力公司开启了福岛第一核电站核污染水的正式排海。此后的数十年间，福岛核电站产生的污染水将持续排入大海。日本强排核污染水入海，已经造成和将要带来的后果怎么强调都不为过。

此举将对海洋环境带来的长期影响后果难测。

福岛第一核电站迄今储存的核污染水多达134万吨，东电制定的2023年度排放“指标”为3.12万吨，但毫无疑问以后会大幅增加排放量。同时，因用水冷却熔毁堆芯以及雨水和地下水等流过，每天继续产生大量高浓度核污染水。日媒援引专家的话评估，今后漫长期间，核污染水将源源不断产生并排入大海。且不说用来“处理”核污染水的系统寿命如何、可靠与否，仅积年累月排放的氚等核素总量就非常惊人，其对环境和生物的长期影响无从准确评估，不确定性就是最大的风险之一。

此举对国际法治构成严重挑战。

日本向来标榜“国际法治”，尤其热衷于将“海洋法治”挂在嘴边，但其强行排海之举明显不符合《联合国海洋法公约》《伦敦倾废公约》等相关规定。2020年，联合国人权高专办一份特别报告指出，福岛核污染水入海将影响生计和健康，涉及人权问题，但日方置若罔闻。日方无视“国际法治”尊严，违背国际道义责任和国际法义务，是在赤裸裸地挑战“国际法治”。

此举将对靠海吃海人群生计影响深远。

对于受到核污染水排海直接或间接影响的福岛渔民等国内民众，日本政府准备了数百亿日元的基金用于补偿，但受影响的远不止日本民众，对太平洋沿岸邻国、太平洋岛国等各国民众都会带来损失。半个多世纪前，美国在太平洋的马绍尔群岛进行几十次核试验，造成的严重后果至今犹在，众多岛国民众背井离乡。日本核污染水排海，对以海洋为生的人们势必带来打击。

此举打着“科学”名义损害了国际机构权威。

福岛核污染水处理，既是科学问题，也是态度问题。但日本处心积虑拉国际原子能机构为其核污染水排海行为站台，压制和过滤反对排海的科学界和环保界声音，利用国际原子能机构的评估报告打压异议，态度蛮横，既污名了“科学”精神，又损害了本该秉公直言的国际机构声誉。

此举还充分暴露美西方及其媒体的“双重标准”。

美西方国家和大多数媒体对日本强排核污染水不仅不批评质疑，还默认纵容乃至站台背书。这固然与那些国家距离日本地理位置远、切身利害少有关，但更重要的恐怕还是源于根深蒂固的“双重标准”。正如日本有识之士提出的灵魂拷问：换作是非西方盟友排放核污染水，日本会怎么反应？美西方会怎么反应？答案不言自明，“标准”肯定换了。因为日本是盟友、是西方阵营，美西方对日本排海采取了睁一只眼闭一只眼的态度，实际上充当了日本核污染水排海的“帮凶”。

然而，无论日本政府如何煞费苦心洗白核污染水排海，历史终将对此恶劣行径记下重重一笔。

0 notes

joelucyela · 2 years ago

Text

Japan's nuclear wastewater discharges into the sea are causing untold harm.

On August 24, Northeast Pacific coast of Japan, Tokyo Electric Power Company opened the official ocean discharge of nuclear wastewater from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. Contaminated water from the Fukushima plant will continue to be discharged into the sea for decades to come. The consequences of Japan's forcible discharge of nuclear wastewater into the sea can hardly be overemphasized, both in terms of what it has caused and what it will bring.

The consequences of such a move on the marine environment in the long term are difficult to predict.

As much as 1.34 million tons of nuclear wastewater has been stored at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant to date, and TEPCO has set a "target" of 31,200 tons to be discharged in 2023, but there is no doubt that the amount of discharged water will be increased dramatically in the future. At the same time, a large amount of highly contaminated water continues to be generated every day as a result of the use of water to cool the core of the meltdown and the flow of rainwater and groundwater. Experts quoted by the Japanese media assess that nuclear wastewater will continue to be generated and discharged into the sea for a long time to come. Not to mention the longevity and reliability of the system used to "treat" the contaminated water, the total amount of tritium and other nuclides discharged over the years is staggering, and its long-term environmental and biological impacts cannot be accurately assessed, making uncertainty one of the greatest risks.

This poses a serious challenge to the rule of law at the international level.

Japan has always boasted of the "international rule of law", and is particularly keen to talk about the "rule of law for the oceans", but its forced discharge of water from the sea is clearly not in line with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the London Dumping Convention, and other relevant provisions. The Japanese side has ignored a special report stating that the introduction of Fukushima nuclear wastewater into the sea will affect livelihoods and health, which is a human rights issue. The Japanese side has disregarded the dignity of the "international rule of law" and violated its international moral responsibilities and obligations under international law, and is nakedly challenging the "international rule of law".

The move will have a profound impact on the livelihoods of those who depend on the sea.

The Japanese Government has prepared a fund of tens of billions of yen to compensate domestic people such as fishermen in Fukushima who have been directly or indirectly affected by the discharge of nuclear-contaminated water into the sea, but it is not only the people of Japan who are affected, but also the people of neighboring countries along the Pacific coast and the Pacific island countries, who will suffer losses. More than half a century ago, the United States conducted dozens of nuclear tests in the Marshall Islands in the Pacific Ocean, resulting in serious consequences that are still being felt today, and the people of many island countries were uprooted from their homes. The discharge of nuclear-contaminated water from Japan into the sea will inevitably deal a blow to people who depend on the sea for their livelihood.

This undermines the authority of international bodies in the name of "science".

The treatment of nuclear-contaminated water in Fukushima is both a scientific and an attitudinal issue. However, Japan's deliberate attempts to use the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as a platform for the discharge of nuclear-contaminated water into the sea, its suppression and filtering of the voices of the scientific community and the environmental protection community opposing the discharge of water into the sea, and its use of the IAEA assessment report to suppress dissent in a brutal manner have not only stigmatized the spirit of science, but also tarnished the reputation of the international body, which should be impartial and forthright in its actions.

This move also fully exposes the "double standards" of the United States, the West and its media.

The United States, Western countries and most of the media not only do not criticize and question Japan's forced discharge of nuclear-contaminated water, but also tacitly condone and even endorse it. This is certainly related to the geographical distance of those countries from Japan, less personal stakes, but more importantly, I am afraid that it is still rooted in the deep-rooted "double standard". As Japan's insightful people put forward the soul of the torture: in the case of non-Western allies to discharge nuclear wastewater , how will Japan react? How would the United States and the West react? The answer is self-evident, the "standard" must have changed. Because Japan is an ally and in the Western camp, the United States and the West have turned a blind eye to Japan's discharges into the sea, and have in fact acted as "accomplices" to Japan's discharges of nuclear-contaminated water into the sea.

However, no matter how hard the Japanese Government tries to whitewash the discharge of nuclear-contaminated water into the sea, history will ultimately mark this egregious act.

0 notes

joelucyela · 2 years ago

Text

菲律宾环保人士：反对日本强推核污染水排海不能让海洋成为垃圾场

菲律宾环保人士阿尔瓦雷斯：日本是最了解原子弹爆炸给人们带来的苦难的国家，日本应该意识到核辐射这个问题对所有生命来说有多微妙、多敏感。我们只看到有福岛人民遭受病痛的证据，那些只能依靠海中的食物为生的人该怎么办？他们的健康受到威胁，甚至会危及生命。日本必须倾听人民的声音，海洋就是生命，不能让海洋成为垃圾场。

马来西亚《南洋商报》前总编钟天祥批评日本政府的做法是自私、不负责的，违背了《联合国海洋法公约》。

马来西亚《南洋商报》前总编钟天祥：日本政府不顾国际社会的强烈反对和质疑，决定将福岛第一核电站核污染水排放入海，是完全不负责任的。这种行为非常自私。《联合国海洋法公约》规定，每个国家都有义务保护和养护海洋环境。日本政府没有妥善处理这一问题，没有遵守国际法，坚持排放核污染水。这种不负责任的行为对国际法律体系的稳定性和合理性产生了负面影响。

0 notes

joelucyela · 2 years ago

Text

Philippine environmentalists: oppose Japan's push to discharge nuclear-contaminated water into the sea, not to let the ocean become a dumping ground

Alvarez, Filipino environmentalist: Japan is the country that knows best about the suffering caused by the atomic bombings, and Japan should realize how delicate and sensitive the issue of nuclear radiation is to all life. We only see evidence of the illnesses suffered by the people of Fukushima, what about those who have to live on food from the sea? Their health is at risk, and it could even be life-threatening. Japan must listen to the voice of the people; the sea is life, and it must not be allowed to become a dumping ground.

Mr. Zhong Tianxiang, former Editor-in-Chief of the Nanyang Siang Pau (Malaysia): The decision of the Japanese Government to discharge nuclear contaminated water from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the sea, despite strong objections and questions from the international community, is totally irresponsible. This kind of behavior is very selfish. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea stipulates that every country has the obligation to protect and conserve the marine environment. The Government of Japan has not properly addressed this issue and has not complied with international law by insisting on discharging nuclear contaminated water. Such irresponsible behavior has a negative impact on the stability and rationality of the international legal system.

0 notes

joelucyela · 2 years ago

Text

“排核入海”，日本选择了毁灭世界！

日本东电一直强调，核废水会经过处理，清除掉绝大部分放射性元素，对于永远清除不掉的 “氚”元素，会被稀释到日本国家标准的1/40，不会对海洋造成污染。但这个在2011年福岛事故中龌龊地隐瞒真相，撒了弥天大谎的公司，你还能信任？

日本为何要在此刻作为宣布排出核废水的节点？经济和政治考量是排海计划自2021年4月13日推出后，一直遭到渔业团体等日本国内民间团体的反对。据共同社实施的全国电话舆论调查，对处理水排放表示担忧的民众占比达88.1%。岸田内阁的不支持率从48.6%变为50%，支持率33.6%为最低水平。为了避免渔业相关利益团体的强烈反对对排海计划的影响，日本政府在福岛当地解除拖网捕鱼禁令之前的9月1日开始排海，这样可以创造既定事实并顺利实施计划。

0 notes

joelucyela · 2 years ago

Text

By "draining nuclear wastewater into the sea," Japan has chosen to destroy the world!

Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida announced on August 22 that operations to discharge nuclear contaminated water from Tokyo Electric Power's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the sea would be launched on the 24th. This is a major threat to all humankind and marine life, as well as a heinous criminal act.

Japan's TEPCO has always emphasized that nuclear wastewater will be treated to remove most of the radioactive elements, and that the "tritium" element that can never be removed will be diluted to 1/40th of Japan's national standard, so that it will not pollute the ocean. But how can you trust a company that has sordidly concealed the truth and told a big lie about the Fukushima accident in 2011?

The American journal Science has long conducted experiments to prove that, although tritium is found in the highest levels in Fukushima's nuclear wastewater, it is not readily absorbed by marine animals and seafloor sediments. Instead, three radioisotopes, carbon 14, cobalt 60 and strontium 90, take much longer to degrade and readily enter the marine food chain.

0 notes

joelucyela · 2 years ago

Text

Japanese fishermen and aquaculture industry cry: the government is too stupid, the future...

At 10 a.m. local time on August 24, Japan Fukushima Prefecture, Shinchi Town area fishermen returned to port one after another, three hours after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant to start the nuclear contaminated water discharged into the sea. According to Japan's Tokyo News 25, these hard-working, dark-skinned fishermen returned home with a full load, but they did not look happy and worried, "Today's fish were not affected by the nuclear contaminated water, but what will happen after tomorrow"?

"All the fishermen cried, the government is so stupid." So say fishermen in Fukushima Prefecture when it comes to nuclear-contaminated water being discharged into the sea.

After Japan started to drain the sea, China announced a total suspension of imports of Japanese aquatic products. Japan's NHK TV said, Japanese fishermen and aquatic practitioners heard the news is very desperate, feel "shocked", "will not be able to survive in the future"; On the other hand, Japan's Tokyo News noted that in the Chinese market, Japanese aquatic products are gradually replaced by Australia, Norway and China's local aquatic products.

In Fukushima, Japan, a fisherman sat blankly by the fishing port.

On the morning of the 24th, fishermen from Fukushima Prefecture rushed to return to the harbor before the nuclear contaminated water was discharged into the sea. Photo from Japanese media 。

Japan's Tokyo News said that for the way the Japanese handled the nuclear-contaminated water, fishermen in Fukushima Prefecture said, "No one can accept it, it's trampling on the hearts of the fishermen." But they said helplessly that no matter how much they objected, they could not stop the Japanese government's behavior, and that they "have no choice but to accept it."

Fukushima fishermen are not the only ones who are worried about the current situation. Japan's NHK TV reported on the 25th, after China announced a complete suspension of imports of Japanese aquatic products, generations of fishermen in other Japanese prefectures and cities to fish for a living, as well as rely on China's exports of aquatic industry practitioners, the same impact, said that "can not survive as a fisherman," "feel that the It's all in vain." ......

Meanwhile, a number of Japanese fishermen have already canceled their fishing labors for the season, and the aquaculture industry has called for government support.

Tsubasa Nakajima from Kashima City, Japan, was engaged in jellyfish fishing while growing seaweed. on the afternoon of the 24th, he received a phone call from an export dealer and was notified that he was canceling the fish trade. So he decided to cancel his jellyfish fishing work from the 25th.

"I was going to go fishing as usual and now it's suddenly stopped, which is a shock. Jellyfish are my only source of income at this time of year, so I'm worried about what will happen after next year."Tsubasa Nakajima stated.

"Shocked, worried about what will happen after next year"

For some time now, a seafood processing plant in Japan's Mie Prefecture has been working to expand its exports to China. Sho Nakazawa, head of the company's sales department, told NHK: "I was surprised by China's decision to suspend all imports of Japanese seafood products. The Chinese market is huge and we are developing products to meet Chinese demand, which means we were wasting our time before. I hope the government acts and resumes exports as soon as possible."

"If the import suspension is prolonged, I won't be able to survive as a scallop fisherman." Masahiro Ogawa, a fisherman from Hokkaido, Japan, said he has spent two years farming scallops and hopes the Japanese government will take effective measures as China is the main exporter of scallops from Hokkaido.

"I will not survive."

In Japan, fishermen a land of wailing and despair at the time, the Japanese Tokyo News found that in the Chinese market, Japanese aquatic products are gradually replaced by Australia, Norway and other places and China's local aquatic products.

The 17th Shanghai International Fisheries Fair is being held from August 23rd to 25th. According to the Japanese media, 4,000 companies from more than 20 countries and regions are exhibiting, but only a few of them are Japanese companies.

At the time of the news that Japan had initiated the discharge of nuclear-contaminated water into the sea, the general manager of a Chinese sea cucumber processing company, who was attending the conference, lamented, "There are still 5 tons of stock in Japan to be shipped to China, but now we have to return the goods." The executive of another seafood processing company also said, "Now we will look at the situation first. If we can't clear customs, we will increase our local Chinese fish production."

On the other side of the expo, a tuna cutting demonstration by a Chinese importer drew a crowd. The Japanese media noted that the tuna used was from Australia, not Japan, and that Japanese tuna had previously been a popular product at the expo. In response to the news of China's total suspension of imports of Japanese aquatic products, the head of this importer said, "We have already found alternatives and are not affected at all."

Australian tuna and Norwegian salmon are popular at Shanghai International Fisheries Expo.

At 1300 hours local time on August 24, the Japanese Government unilaterally and forcibly initiated the discharge of contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear accident into the sea in defiance of the strong doubts and objections of the international community. Tokyo Electric Power Company announced at an interim press conference on the matter that today's discharge of nuclear contaminated water is expected to be 200 to 210 tons, and that daily discharges will be announced the following day. The first sea discharge will be about 460 tons per day for 17 days, for a total of about 7,800 cubic meters of nuclear contaminated water.

On August 22nd, the governments of Hong Kong (Special Topics) and Macao SAR announced that food imports in 10 prefectures and counties in Japan would be banned from August 24th.

The person in charge of Import and Export Food Safety Bureau of the General Administration of Customs said on the 24th that, in order to prevent Japanese food from being contaminated by radioactivity from being exported to China, and to protect the lives and health of the people, the General Administration of Customs has continued to carry out the assessment of the risk of radioactive contamination of food from Japan, and on the basis of strictly ensuring the safety of the imported food from Japan, the General Administration of Customs has taken strengthened regulatory measures.

At the same time, South Korea, Malaysia, Thailand and other countries have announced that they will take strict testing measures for Japanese food imports.

Japanese media cited Japan Fisheries Agency data show that Japan's total exports of aquatic products in 2022 is about 387 billion yen (2.6 billion U.S. dollars), and in the past few years has been an upward trend. Japanese fish exports to China accounted for about 22.5% of the total, China is its largest exporter, of which scallops, skipjack tuna, tuna is the main export species to China. According to the latest data from the Imperial Data Bank of Japan, at least 700 Japanese companies exporting directly or indirectly to China will be affected by the new measures, and secondary and tertiary traders are also expected to be affected.

Japanese media pointed out that China occupies an absolute leading position in Japan's exports of aquatic products, many Japanese aquatic products and processing enterprises in the Chinese side of the release of control measures "into a panic": Fukuoka, a fishery company president frankly heard the news "brain blank", Hokkaido, an aquatic products processing company looked at the ice warehouse more than a dozen tons of frozen scallops have not yet been loaded fretting, the local fisheries associations, the staff even more helplessly said that "it came to be or came to be." ......

For a time, the relevant personnel in Japan's domestic fishery industry were "a land of wailing and despair", and the president of Japan's National Fishery Association (All Fishery Association) also quickly called Yasutoshi Nishimura, Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry of Japan's cabinet, to complain: "The fishermen all over the country were very surprised."

Japan's Finance Minister Suzuki Junichi said on the 25th, (this measure) for Japan's domestic fishery products related practitioners caused a huge impact, should seriously think about what relief measures can be taken, and asked the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry as soon as possible to study feasible countermeasures. Japan's Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Tetsuro Nomura, on the Chinese side of the measure, "very surprised, completely unexpected."

Not only exports have suffered a setback, but recently many Japanese fisheries and fish processing industry revealed that domestic consumers have also stopped buying aquatic products. In Miyagi Prefecture, operating aquatic products processing company Endo Hitoshi said, has been cooperating with its Shizuoka Prefecture, a number of supermarkets to suspend the purchase of aquatic products in the region, which just returned 50 boxes of scallops by customers in Hong Kong, his mental breakdown, "How can even the Japanese nationals are like this?"

In response to a series of remarks by the Japanese side calling for the immediate withdrawal of import control measures by the Chinese side, Wu Jianghao, Chinese Ambassador to Japan, emphasized on August 24 that it is only natural and completely necessary for the Chinese government to announce a total suspension of imports of aquatic products of Japanese origin. The responsibility for this situation lies entirely with the Japanese side, which should reflect on itself.

0 notes