"Statement: We strongly condemn the decision by the Japanese government to begin releasing ALPS-treated (but still contaminated) water into the ocean -"Understanding of the relevant parties" has not been obtained", 22 August 2023

...the Japanese government made the decision to initiate the discharge of ALPS (Advanced Liquid Processing System) –treated, yet still contaminated water, stored in tanks at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, into the ocean as early as August 24th. The decision-making process has been pushed forward without proper discussion, imposing a predetermined conclusion of "ocean release," without exploring potential alternative solutions... We strongly condemn this decision, which dismisses numerous opposing opinions and apprehensions...

1. Imposing 'Understanding' to Align with Predetermined Policy

...On August 20th, Prime Minister Kishida visited the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant and engaged in discussions with TEPCO executives, yet he did not meet with officials from the Fukushima Prefecture Fisheries Federation. On August 21st, following a meeting with the National Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives (hereafter National Fisheries Federation), Prime Minister Kishida remarked that " a certain level of understanding has been achieved."

Making unilateral decisions without meeting local fishermen is not acceptable...

This decision-making process is nothing more than setting policy first and compelling stakeholders to understand them

2. Discussion as a Formality with the Assumption of “Ocean Release”

...the exploration of alternatives was carried out in a very cursory manner, serving only to steer towards the predetermined conclusion of the "ocean release" option...

Furthermore, the suggestions of "large tank storage" and "mortar solidification," presented by the Citizens’ Commission on Nuclear Energy, which includes engineers and researchers, were entirely omitted from public discourse, despite their realistic and practical nature.

3. Total Amount of Radioactive Material Contained in the Water is Unknown

...there has been no indication from TEPCO regarding the types and amounts of radioactive materials that will remain in the water after the secondary treatment. Another concern is that TEPCO has conducted comprehensive radioactivity measurements only in three tank groups, which constitute less than 3% of the total water volume.

...specifics of what and how much will be discharged will only be determined shortly before the actual release. Furthermore, the complete quantity of radioactive materials to be discharged will remain uncertain until all the tank water has been released...

4. Muzzling Discussion with the Label of 'Reputational Damage'

...Fundamentally, the nuclear accident was the result of human error, attributing responsibility to both the government and TEPCO. However, the government's emphasis remains on 'reputational damage', a perspective echoed by the media, which labels any mention of the consequences and dangers of releasing radioactive material into the sea as synonymous with harming the reputation...

5. Intentional and Additional Release of Radioactive Materials is Unacceptable

...The planed discharge represents an intentional and additional release over and above the existing contamination.

The principle of radioactive material management is to centralize control and avoid releasing them into the environment...