SCSS S4G3 SS PRELIMS 2024 QP

SWISS COTTAGE SECONDARY SCHOOL SECONDARY FOUR/FIVE PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION O Name: ( ) Class: HUMANITIES Paper 1 Social Studies Additional Materials: Writing Paper 2260/01, 2261/01 2263/01,2264/01 2272/01,2273/01, 2274/01 26 August 2024 Monday 1 hour 45 Minutes READ THESE INSTRUCTIONS FIRST Write your answers on the writing paper provided. Write your name, class and index number on all the work you hand in. Write in dark blue or black pen on both sides of the paper. Do not use highlighters or correction fluid. Section A (35 Marks) Answer all Questions. Start each question on a fresh page of writing paper. You are advised to spend no more than 70 minutes on this section. Section B (15 Marks) Answer all Questions. Start each question on a fresh page of writing paper. You are advised to spend no longer than 35 minutes on this section. At the end of the examination, fasten your answers for Sections A and B separately. The number of marks for each part question is given in brackets [ ] at the end of the question. This document consists of 9 printed pages. Setter: Ms Rose Nabilah & Ms Kelly Tan Vetter: Mdm Serene Tang [Turn over Home of Thoughtful Leaders: Serve with Honour, Lead with Humility

2 SECTION A (Source-Based Case Study) Answer all questions. Exploring Citizenship & Governance Study the Background Information and the sources carefully, and then answer all the questions. You may use any of the sources to help you answer the questions, in addition to those sources which you are told to use. In answering the questions, you should use your knowledge of the issue to help you interpret and evaluate the sources. 1 Study Source A. What can you learn from Source A about the impact of the release of the Fukushima wastewater on China? Explain your answer. [5] 2 Study Sources B and C. How far does source B agree with source C ? Explain your answer, using details from the source. [6] 3 Study Source D. How useful is this source as evidence that the risk of contamination from the release of Fukushima wastewater is low? Explain your answer. [7] 4 Study Sources E and F. Does Source E make Source F surprising? Explain your answer. [7] 5 ‘The Japanese government was right to release the Fukushima wastewater into the Pacific Ocean.’ Using the sources in the case study, explain how far you would agree with this statement. [10]

3 What are the implications of the release of the Fukushima wastewater into the Pacific Ocean? BACKGROUND INFORMATION Read this carefully. It may help you answer some of the questions. An earthquake of magnitude scale 9.1 hit Japan on 11 March 2011. The most powerful earthquake ever recorded in Japan triggered a tsunami that caused the meltdown of three nuclear reactors from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, where heat is used to generate electricity. The inability to sufficiently cool these nuclear reactors caused the release of radioactive contaminants into the surrounding environment. Since the disaster, TEPCO, the operator of the nuclear powerplant has been pumping in water to cool down the reactors and accumulating this wastewater into its more than 1000 storage tanks, where it was treated to reduce most contaminants, except for the radioactive element – Tritium. On 24 August 2023, the Japanese government approved the discharge of this treated wastewater into the Pacific Ocean, a process that could take nearly 30 years. The decision to release this water has faced concerns and criticisms from international organisations and other countries such as China and South Korea. Study the following sources to find out the implications of the release of the Fukushima wastewater into the Pacific Ocean. Source A: An excerpt from an online news article, published on 29 August 2023. China banned the import of all aquatic products from Japan just hours after wastewater began to be released. That decision caused a major overhaul in the sourcing of seafood across China — a leading importer of Japanese fish. "Of course, the discharge should be opposed!" prominent nationalist commentator Hu Xijin wrote on Weibo, a popular Chinese social media platform . "It's polluting oceans and creating known long-term risks that we don't quite understand." As of March 2022, about 12.1 trillion yen (S$112 billion) had been spent on efforts responding to the Fukushima disaster, including compensation, decommissioning* and decontamination. Many Chinese accused the Japanese government of only being concerned about the costs and called the release of the wastewater irresponsible. *process of making it inactive

4 Source B: A Chinese cartoon about the Japanese government’s decision to dump nuclear-contaminated wastewater, published in July 2023.

5 Source C: A cartoon published on a Chinese editorial page about TEPCO , published in November 2023. TEPCO is Japan’s largest power company group and the operator behind the Fukushima nuclear plant.

6 Source D: An infographic on TEPCO’s website. *ALPS: The Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS) is a system that removes various radioactive materials from contaminated water. *Tritium: Radioactive element that could endanger animals and humans. The assessment of reliability

7 Source E: A statement published on the website of Greenpeace Japan, an international organisation pledged on environmental protection, 22 August 2023. Greenpeace Japan criticises the Japanese government’s announcement of the radioactive water discharges from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear station into the Pacific Ocean. The decision violates the human rights of communities in Japan and the Pacific region and is non -compliant with international maritime law. More importantly it ignores its people’s concerns, including fishermen whose livelihood depends on the pristine condition of the ocean. The Japanese government itself admits that there is sufficient water storage space in Fukushima Daiichi. Instead of engaging in an honest debate about this reality, the Japanese government has opted to engage in deliberate radioactive pollution of the marine environment. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)* has completely ignored the highly radioactive fuel debris which continues every day to contaminate ground water – nearly 1000 cubic meters every ten days. Furthermore, they have failed to conduct a comprehensive Environmental Impact Assessment, as required by its international legal obligations. *Agency that endorses the release of wastewater to be safe. Source F: From a report published by the International Atomic Energy Agency in April 2024. The International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) comprehensive report issued on 4 July 2023 found Japan’s plan for handling the treated water to be consistent with international safety standards and that the release as planned would have a negligible radiological impact to people and the environment. Today, the IAEA experts have confirmed that the tritium * concentration in the latest batch of diluted treated water, which Japan’s Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) started discharging today, is far below the country’s operational limit. The standards constitute the worldwide reference for protecting the public and the environment from harmful effects of ionizing radiation. The IAEA is here, an