Every day, fisher Charlie Maleb takes his string lines and his nets out of Wala Island, Vanuatu, into the Pacific Ocean.
The 54-year-old flies his net around 5 am and waits an hour before pulling it out, hoping to catch sardines, poulet and mangrove fish. Later in the day, maleb drops a line attached to a traditional fishing rod, fashioned out of a long tree branch.
The stick falls down and I have to hurry up to pull in the catch, he says.
Many people living on Wala Island eat fish, much of the catch is for them to eat, while a small amount is sold for money to pay for goods and medicine.
We use the catch for our daily source of protein, we make sure we have enough before we sell, he said.
Maleb is among 2.3 million people living in the Pacific Islands and rely on the ocean for food and income, many of whom are worried about Japan's plans to release more than 1 m metric tonnes of treated radioactive waste into the sea.
The water was used to cool reactors after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant was hit by an earthquake and tsunami in 2011 that led to meltdowns in three of its reactors, the worst nuclear accident since Chornobyl 25 years ago. The water is being stored in nearly 1,000 tanks, which will soon reach full capacity.
Japan has said the water is safe and the head of the UN nuclear agency will visit the country to deliver its final report on the discharge plan. It has not been set for a release date, but it is expected to be released in the next few months.
The water is being treated to remove most radioactive components but it will still contain tritium, a naturally occurring radioactive form of hydrogen that is technicalally difficult to separate from water.
Japan says the water will be diluted to safer levels than international standards and will be released gradually into the ocean over decades, making it harmless to people and marine life.
Some scientists have argued that the long-term effects are unknown and the release should be delayed. But others say it s safe, though there is still a need for transparency, and independent experts must be allowed to sample, monitor and look at the data.
Some in the Pacific are not fully informed about Japan's plans. Despite their distance from Japan, fishermen such as Maleb say they are concerned about the effects of the discharge.
I have no idea what Japan is preparing to do, we have been depending on seafood for almost my entire life, we have been living to feed on fish every day and it s our source of income for us, he said.
Harry Farhall spearfishes in the coral reefs off Papua New Guinea's New Ireland province, which he says are a breeding habitat for tuna and a migratory path for whales migrating up north and down south. He says everyone in the region relies on the ocean and is worried about the release of water.
We can 't risk the environment and the people impacted by it,' he said. He adds that we are not prepared to deal with the effects of nuclear waste.
The PIF, the peak intergovernmental organisation representing the Pacific Islands, has been consulting with Japan over the release for the past two years, and in January said it had grave concerns over the plans. Last month the PIF raised concerns about international laws against dumping nuclear waste in the Pacific Ocean.
We do not have anything to gain from Japan's plan but have much at risk for generations to come, said PIF Secretary General Henry Puna.
It is clear in my mind that more work and dialogue is needed to ensure that we all come to a common understanding on this issue, Mr. Puna said in a statement.
Puna said the path forward should include comprehensive international consultation particularly with affected states last month. Many have shown greater support in recent years. In June, Palau president Surangel Whipps Jr. said he was not opposed to the plan to discharge the water after a visit to the Fukushima plant. We have made a decision that what they re doing is right and we should support them, he said.
Japan has sought the support of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for ensuring global standards are met. In 2022, the IAEA, the UN's nuclear watchdog, carried out missions to Japan.
Japan's authorities have begun final inspections on the system to be used to discharge the water last week, after plant operator Tepco installed the final piece of equipment needed for the release.
Maleb wants his government to do more to inform him about the plan and the possible risks.
I don't have any information, and I would like to know more, he said. I don t know, but I think it will affect us if Japan pushes through.
The generations to come will also be influenced by our beautiful reefs and unique sea creatures that will be available to feed on.
9 Comments
Micluxo
Potential health risks: While Japan claims that the water will be harmless to people, there is still uncertainty about the long-term health effects of exposure to tritium.
Friend
Environmental risks: The release of treated radioactive wastewater into the ocean poses significant environmental risks to marine life. Even if the water is diluted to safer levels, there is still a possibility of long-term ecological damage.
Micluxo
Precautionary principle: Given the potential risks involved, it is important to take a precautionary approach and delay the water release until further research and analysis can be conducted.
Katchuka
Lack of long-term plan: The gradual release of the water over decades may not provide a clear long-term plan for managing the potential risks. There should be a comprehensive plan in place for monitoring and mitigating any adverse effects.
KittyKat
Economic impacts: The Pacific Islands heavily rely on the ocean for food and income. The potential contamination of marine life could have significant economic impacts on these communities.
Eugene Alta
Lack of consent: The affected states should have a say in the decision-making process. It is important to respect the sovereignty of these nations and involve them in comprehensive international consultations.
Katchuka
Lack of transparency: Many people in the Pacific Islands, like Fisher Charlie Maleb, feel uninformed about Japan's plans. There should be more transparency and open dialogue about the potential impacts of the water release.
Muchacha
Alternative solutions: Instead of releasing the water into the ocean, Japan should explore alternative solutions for storing and disposing of the wastewater, such as further treatment or finding alternative storage methods.
Mariposa
Global responsibility: The release of radioactive wastewater into the ocean is a global issue, not just a local one. It is crucial to involve independent experts and international organizations to ensure the safety of the ocean and its inhabitants.