[Statement]: 15 Years Since the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Disaster-Toward a Peaceful and Sustainable World Free from Nuclear Threats

March 5, 2026

Statement: 15 Years Since the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Disaster– Toward a Peaceful and Sustainable World Free from Nuclear Threats

Fifteen years have passed since the Great East Japan Earthquake and the subsequent Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. The disaster is far from over, and its impacts continue to unfold. Communities have been profoundly transformed. Those who evacuated, those who returned, and those who have newly settled in the region all face ongoing and complex challenges.

Despite the pain, suffering, and unresolved contradictions left in the disaster’s wake, the Japanese government is pressing ahead with policies to revive nuclear power, committing vast amounts of public funding to this effort. At the same time, under the banner of “development assistance,” industrialized countries are promoting nuclear expansion in developing nations through financing from institutions such as the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank, which are primarily funded and owned by member countries, including Japan and the United States.

These developments disregard the hard lessons of the Fukushima disaster. They also overlook the enormous costs and risks of nuclear power, the unresolved problem of radioactive waste, and the continuing threat of nuclear proliferation. Across Japan and around the world, grassroots movements continue to resist these trends with persistence and determination.

Unaddressed Responsibility and the Uncertain Future of Nuclear Waste

In February this year, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO)—the company responsible for the Fukushima Daiichi disaster—restarted Unit 6 of the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant in Niigata Prefecture. The legal responsibility of TEPCO’s executives for the Fukushima disaster remains largely unaddressed. Meanwhile, the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant has been plagued by repeated scandals, misconduct, and technical problems.

Restarting nuclear reactors inevitably generates more spent nuclear fuel. Fuel from Kashiwazaki-Kariwa is slated to be transported to an interim storage facility in Mutsu City, Aomori Prefecture. Yet its ultimate fate remains unclear. The government plans to send it to the Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant, but the completion of that facility has already been postponed 27 times, raising concerns that the plant may be aging even before it begins operation. Even if Rokkasho does become operational, no final disposal site has been decided for the vitrified high-level radioactive waste it would produce.

The government has offered substantial subsidies to economically struggling communities in exchange for accepting preliminary literature-based surveys for potential final disposal sites. In many cases, these initiatives have deepened divisions within local communities.

We must not forget that nuclear power continues to impose disproportionate burdens on economically vulnerable regions and communities.

Nuclear Power and Human Rights

Nuclear power raises serious environmental and human rights concerns at every stage of its lifecycle—from uranium mining and fuel processing to plant operation, waste management, and decommissioning. Workers involved in plant operations and decommissioning face radiation exposure. Uranium mining and nuclear waste facilities have often been concentrated on Indigenous lands, forcing Indigenous peoples to bear the disproportionate burdens of national energy policies.

History shows that in past nuclear disasters, the scale of damage has often been underestimated and critical information concealed. Those who suffer most are frequently the most vulnerable. Victims of the Fukushima disaster not only lost their homes and communities; many continue to endure social discrimination and marginalization.

The Expanding Cost of Nuclear Power and the Use of Public Funds

The cost of nuclear power continues to rise, making it one of the most expensive sources of electricity generation. Nevertheless, the Japanese government continues to portray nuclear power as economically competitive.

For example, the government estimates the cost of constructing a new nuclear reactor at 720.3 billion yen (nearly USD 5 billion) . In reality, recent nuclear construction projects overseas have cost several trillion yen per reactor (about USD 13-19 billion).

The government’s latest estimate for the costs of decommissioning, compensation, and decontamination related to the Fukushima disaster stands at 23.5 trillion yen (about USD 150 billion). This figure does not include the costs of managing the vast quantities of radioactive waste generated during decommissioning. To support TEPCO, the government established the Nuclear Damage Compensation and Decommissioning Facilitation Corporation, allowing public funds and contributions from other nuclear operators to be channeled to TEPCO.

Today, nuclear operators are struggling with escalating maintenance and safety upgrade costs, making it increasingly difficult to sustain reactor operations. In response, the government has introduced complex financial mechanisms—such as “decarbonized power auctions”—to secure revenue for nuclear operators. It is also considering new systems to facilitate public financing for new reactor construction through the Organization for Cross-regional Coordination of Transmission Operators (OCCTO), along with government-backed debt guarantees.

These measures effectively shift the financial risks and costs of nuclear power onto ordinary citizens.

The Uncertain Future of Decommissioning

In November 2024, TEPCO conducted a trial retrieval of melted nuclear fuel debris from the Fukushima Daiichi plant. After repeated delays and technical difficulties—and with worker radiation exposure—the amount retrieved was less than one gram. Nevertheless, TEPCO declared this to mark the beginning of full-scale debris removal under Phase 3 of its decommissioning roadmap.

However, critical questions remain unanswered: how will approximately 880 tons of melted fuel debris be removed? Where will it be stored, and how will it ultimately be treated or disposed of? While debris removal has been presented as an unquestioned priority, we should pause and engage in a broader public debate about the most responsible path forward.

TEPCO has accumulated large volumes of contaminated water on site. This water consists of groundwater and rainwater that enter the reactor buildings and mix with water used to cool the melted fuel debris. It has been treated using the Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS). Although treated, it still contains radioactive substances such as tritium, iodine-129, strontium-90, and carbon-14. Since August 2023, TEPCO has begun diluting this water with seawater and discharging it into the ocean.

Alternatives—such as long-term tank storage or solidification and controlled land-based storage—were given little serious consideration.

The accident also caused widespread soil contamination. Large quantities of contaminated topsoil were removed during decontamination and transported to interim storage facilities near the plant. The Ministry of the Environment has since reclassified this material as “recycled soil for reconstruction” and issued ordinances allowing its reuse in public works projects nationwide.

Radioactive materials should be strictly contained and managed, not dispersed into the environment. Yet those who voice concerns are often labeled as “spreading harmful rumors” and portrayed as obstructing recovery efforts. Significant public funds are being spent to promote the narrative that the ocean discharge of ALPS-treated water and the reuse of contaminated soil are both safe and necessary for reconstruction.

The “Peaceful” and “Military” Uses of Nuclear Technology

On February 28, the United States and Israel launched large-scale military attacks on Iran, resulting in numerous civilian casualties, including children. We strongly condemn these attacks.

At a time when U.S.–Iran negotiations over nuclear issues were ongoing, this sudden use of force in disregard of international law has drawn strong criticism worldwide. The principle that “Any unilateral attempt to change the status quo by force must not be tolerated,” widely invoked in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, must be applied consistently to all nations.

As French President Emmanuel Macron stated in December 2020, “Without civilian nuclear power, there is no military nuclear power; and without military nuclear power, there is no civilian nuclear power.” Civilian nuclear power and nuclear weapons are fundamentally interconnected. This relationship helps explain why many countries are reluctant to abandon costly and high-risk nuclear programs. Iran’s nuclear development has likewise been justified under the banner of the “peaceful use” of nuclear energy.

Moreover, as Russia’s attacks on Ukraine have demonstrated, nuclear facilities themselves can become targets of military operations, further increasing the risks associated with nuclear technology.

Conclusion

Fifteen years after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, people are still living with its consequences. Governments must not repeat the mistakes of the past. Instead, they should accelerate the transition away from exploitative systems of mass production and consumption, and to safe and sustainable renewable energy. 

Addressing the climate crisis is an urgent global priority. But reviving nuclear power—an energy source that is costly, slow to deploy, and entails radioactive environmental contamination and human rights violations from uranium mining to waste disposal—will not deliver the rapid and just energy transition the world needs.

FoE Japan remains committed to confronting the full reality of the Fukushima disaster and its ongoing consequences. Together with people across Japan and around the world, we will continue working toward a sustainable and democratic energy future—one that is free from nuclear power and nuclear threats.