徐永智
By Xu Yongzhi
4月13日，日本政府不顾国内外质疑和反对，未经与周边国家和国际社会充分协商，单方面决定将福岛核废水排放入海。日方这种极其不负责任的做法，将严重损害国际公共健康安全和周边国家人民切身利益，引起国际社会尤其是周边国家的强烈反对。
On April 13, the Japanese government unilaterally decided to dump the Fukushima radwaste water to the sea in defiance of questions and objection at home and abroad and without consulting neighboring countries or the international community. Such an extremely irresponsible practice has triggered vehement opposition from the international community, especially surrounding countries, as the move will seriously threaten global public health security and the immediate interests of people living in its neighbors.
福岛核事故是迄今全球发生的最严重核事故之一，对海洋环境、食品安全和人类健康产生了深远影响。由于需要继续冷却融毁的核燃料块，目前核电站每天产生约140吨核废水。截至今年3月，核废水总量已高达125万吨，暂时储存在水罐内。
Meltdowns at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in 2011 are one of the catastrophic nuclear disasters that have happened in the world so far, exerting far-reaching impacts on the oceanic environment, food safety, and human health. The continued cooling of the melted nuclear fuel generates about 140-ton radwaste water every day, which had amounted to 1.25 million tons by March this year and was stored in tanks.
日本政府给出的向海排放理由是福岛核电站内缺乏空间存放核废水，且没有更好的方式处理。然而，这一借口明显站不住脚。自民党综合能源战略调查会会长代理山本拓表示，核电站内很多建筑已长期未使用，可以腾出更多空间储存废水。而且，福岛有大量空地可供新建储水罐。
The Japanese government cited the lack of space at the Fukushima nuclear power plant (NPP) for storing radwaste water as the reason for releasing the water into the sea, adding that there is no better way of disposal, but this excuse obviously doesn’t hold water. Taku Yamamoto, Chairperson of the Research Commission on Natural Resources and Energy Strategy of Liberal Democratic Party of Japan (LDP), said that many buildings at the NPP have been left idle for many years and can make room for storing the wastewater, plus there are large clearings at Fukushima where new water tanks can be built.
另据日本专家委员会的报告，将废水加入水泥固化后埋藏、或注入地下2500米的地层封存的处理方式在技术上完全可行。只是所需费用为1.6至36亿美元不等，且可能影响周边旅游业与农业。相比之下，采取排放入海的方式只需要花费1500万至3000万美元。不难看出，日本选择向海排放核废水的一个重要动机就是想省钱。
According to a report by an expert panel, it is technically feasible to solidify the wastewater with cement and bury it, or directly release it 2,500m underground, but that costs USD160 million to 3.6 billion with possible effects on surrounding tourism and agriculture. In comparison, it costs only USD15 to 30 million to discharge the water into the sea, which is why Tokyo opted for it – to save money.
然而，日本政府的这种做法与立场，与其在上世纪90年代处理类似案例的态度和核事故后对国际社会的承诺完全背道而驰，体现出赤裸裸的双重标准。
But this practice and stance of the Japanese government contradicted its attitude toward similar cases and commitment to the international community in the 1990s and revealed stark double standards.
1993年，俄罗斯向日本海倾倒千余吨核废水，放射性活度约为福岛核废水的1/10。日本政府以“民众对核辐射敏感”为由强烈反对“向远东海洋排放低放射性污染物”，且与美国等七国集团其他成员联合起来，迫使俄罗斯最终放弃倾倒。
In 1993, Russia planned to dump to the Japan Sea over 1,000-ton radwaste water with about 1/10 the radioactivity of the Fukushima water. The Japanese government, bolstered by the US and other G7 members, strongly opposed “releasing low-radioactivity pollutants to Far East seas” on the grounds that “the public is very sensitive to nuclear radiation”, forcing Russia to give up the plan finally.
为防止类似行为重演，日本还与多国倡导出台了《伦敦倾废公约》1996年议定书，规定“即使不存在废弃物产生影响的确凿因果关系，只要存在带来危害的可信嫌疑”，就应当禁止将其向海倾倒。如今，这一曾被日本引以为傲的案例却被选择性遗忘。日本甚至荒谬地辩称，虽然“搭载于船只倾倒”违反议定书，但“经排水管排放核废水”不属于议定书管辖范畴。
To prevent the recurrence of similar situations, Japan and several other countries jointly issued the 1996 Protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, or the London Protocol, which states, “Contracting Parties shall apply a precautionary approach to environmental protection from dumping of wastes or other matter… when there is reason to believe that wastes or other matter introduced into the marine environment are likely to cause harm even when there is noconclusive evidence to prove a causal relationship between inputs and their effects.”Now Japan has selectively forgotten this protocol in which it used to take pride. In all ridiculous fallacy, it even argued that while dumping from boats is against the protocol, releasing radwaste water from water pipes falls out of its mandate.
2011年福岛核事故后，日本政府曾在《伦敦倾废公约》缔约国会议上向国际社会承诺，会研究“把向海流出的放射性物质控制在最小限度”的方法。然而，东京电力公司曾多次对外界隐瞒事实，核废水真实状况仍有待查清。
After the Fukushima nuclear disaster in 2011, Tokyo committed to the international community at a conference of contracting parties to the London Protocol that it would study and seek a way to “minimize the radioactivity leaked to the sea”. But the fact is that Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings (TEPCO), the operator of Fukushima NPP, has lied to the outside many times, and the actual situation of the wastewater remains to be clarified.
面对国际社会的质疑与担忧，日本政府却以“尽可能避免本国渔民因‘谣言’而利益受损”为理由，拒绝与周边国家协商。然而，日本国内对核废水排放入海反对态度最坚决的就是渔民团体。10年前的核事故本就让福岛海产品的销售一落千丈，福岛渔业协会今年4月初才刚刚解禁对当地渔民捕捞频率的限制，然而这一决定作出之后，渔民的生计又成了问题。
In the face of the doubts and concerns of the international community, Tokyo, on the excuse of “preventing domestic fishermen’s interests from being harmed by rumors as much as possible”, has refused to consult with neighboring countries. Yet, it is the domestic fishermen groups that voiced the strongest opposition to dumping the wastewater into the sea. The nuclear accident 10 years ago has plunged Fukushima’s aquatic product sales on a nosedive, and Fukushima Fishing Associationhas just loosened the restriction on fishing in April this year; now, the government’s decision will once again put the fishermen’s livelihood at stake.
海洋是人类的共同财产。福岛核电站事故核废水处置问题不只是日本国内问题。日本政府应当认清自身责任，秉持科学态度，履行国际义务，接受有周边国家参与的核查，在确定可信的放射性物质含量及危害的基础上，协商如何处理核废水，而非粗暴地向大海“一倒了之”。
The sea is a common property of humanity. How to dispose of the radioactive wastewater at Fukushima NPP is not only Japan’s domestic issue. Tokyo must face up to its responsibilities, fulfill its international obligations in a scientific spirit, and accept examinations participated by surrounding countries. On the basis of ascertaining the content and harm of radioactive substances, it should consult with all stakeholders on the wastewater disposal instead of just dumping it into the sea with no consideration for the consequences.
（作者单位：中国现代国际关系研究院东北亚研究所）
(The author is from the Institute of Northeast Asian Studies, China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations.)
