The Continuing Cost of Chernobyl

“The Australian” newspaper published the following on 15 Dec 2010:

HISTORY OF CHERNOBYL
– On April 26, 1986, a power surge during an unauthorised systems test at Chernobyl’s reactor number 4 sparked explosions and ruptured a reactor vessel. A plume of radioactive fallout drifted over large parts of the western Soviet Union and much of Europe

– The Chernobyl disaster is considered the world’s worst nuclear power plant accident and is the only level-seven event on the International Nuclear Event Scale

– By December 2000, 350,400 people were evacuated and resettled after the disaster, which released the destructive potential of at least 100 atomic bombs. The UN says 56 people died soon after the accident and that thousands are likely to die from radiation contamination

– About 600 power station employees as well as firefighters and soldiers, who were sent to clean up the site, suffered (and still suffer) from conditions including lung cancer and leukemia, cardiovascular diseases and inflammation of the digestive tract

– Between 1986 and 1990, Ukraine recorded an increase in miscarriages, premature births and stillbirths, as well as three times the normal rate of deformities and developmental abnormalities in newborns

– Belarus: Almost a quarter of Belarus remains contaminated.

– The damage for the republic is estimated at $US235 billion, about 60 times the annual national budget

– Ukraine: About 6 per cent of the country remains contaminated. Ukraine still spends about 7 per cent of the national budget dealing with the consequences

– Russia: About 1.5 per cent remains contaminated

This is completely at loggerheads with the crap Bobby Scott (Lovelace Institute, contractor to the US DOE) has published. His apparent main beef about the disaster is the number of voluntary abortions performed in Europe in the aftermath. An ascertain which is demolished by qualified articles to the contary. Chernobyl has and had a huge human and economic toll.

As usual with nuclear sites, there are moves to turn it into a tourist destination.
One wonders when Hanford will be thus similarly treated. Perhaps visitors can feast on traditional Native American tucker such as radioactive rabbits.

The Australian continues:Chernobyl to become tourism hotspot
* James Marson* From: The Australian* December 15, 2010 8:28AM

UKRAINE’S government wants to turn Chernobyl, the site of the world’s worst nuclear accident, into a tourism hotspot.

Ukraine’s Emergency Situations Ministry said it was working on a plan to open the area around the defunct plant – where a reactor exploded on April 26, 1986, spreading radiation across the then Soviet states of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia – to visitors starting next month.

The ministry said radiation levels in certain parts of the so-called exclusion zone, which stretches 30km around the exploded reactor, were now returning to normal levels, The Australian reports.

Visitors will be able to take in views of the nuclear plant, as well as towns and villages that were abandoned in the disaster’s aftermath.

Official tour operators would have to meet strict criteria to be allowed to operate, said Yulia Yurshova, a spokeswoman for the Emergency Situations Ministry, as straying from the route can be dangerous because of the threat of collapsing buildings and varying radiation levels.

“The Chernobyl zone isn’t as scary as the whole world thinks,” Ms Yurshova said.
“We want to work with big tour operators and attract Western tourists, from whom there’s great demand.”
About 2500 people still maintain the plant.

Tours to Chernobyl and the sealed area around the plant – many of which are run illegally, according to Ms Yurshova – attract about 6000 visitors a year and cost about $150.70 for a day trip.
Ms Yurshova said official tours would begin next month.
UN Development Program leader Helen Clark supported the plan.

“There is an opportunity to tell a story here and of course the process of telling a story, even a sad story, is something that is positive in economic terms and positive in conveying very important messages,” she said.

Work on a new sarcophagus to seal the reactor is expected to be completed by 2015, the ministry also announced.

The shield, made of metal and concrete, will cost $US1.2 billion and will be financed by Ukraine and international donors.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/travel/world/chernobyl-to-become-tourism-hotspot/story-fn302659-1225971300611

4 Responses to “The Continuing Cost of Chernobyl”

  1. radio bikini, atomic bomb, Bikini, Radio | see how an atomic explosion looks like Says:

    […] Related Atomic Bomb Footage Products Additionally you can check out: http://blogs.howstuffworks.com/2010/12/13/how-fusion-power-works-and-where-fusion-research-stands-today/ For more on this read: https://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2010/12/16/the-continuing-cost-of-chernobyl/ […]

  2. preventive maintenance period | chernobyl nuclear power plant | chernobyl nuclear power | nuclear power station | nuclear power plant | electrical demand | public backlash | plant officials | Ignalina | Nuclear | Power | Plant Says:

    […] Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant is a two-unit RBMK-1500 nuclear power station in Visaginas, Lithuania. It is named after a larger nearby town Ignalina. Unit #1 was closed in December 2004, as a condition of Lithuania’s entry into the European Union; the plant is similar to the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in its lack of a robust containment building. The remaining unit, as of 2006, supplied about 70% of Lithuania’s electrical demand. Unit #2 is scheduled for closure at the end of 2009. According to an Ignalina NPP press release, on 6 June 2009 at 9.15 AM (local) the automatic reactor protection system was actuated and Unit #2 was shut down. No radiation was released. Plant officials decided to keep it off-line for thirty days, performing the annual preventative maintenance in June, instead of 29 August- 27 September as orginally scheduled. The preventive maintenance period is scheduled to continue until 5 July 2009. Plans to build a third and fourth reactor at Ignalina were never finished because of the public backlash against nuclear power following the Chernobyl accident of April 1986: the partially completed Unit #3 was later demolished. en.wikipedia.org Video Rating: 5 / 5 On the same subject: https://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2010/12/16/the-continuing-cost-of-chernobyl/ […]

  3. Roger Springer Says:

    “Work on a new sarcophagus to seal the reactor is expected to be completed by 2015. The shield, made of metal and concrete, will cost $US1.2 billion and will be financed by Ukraine and international donors.”

    Why isn’t this cost the responsibllity of the world nuclear industry??

  4. Truthurts Says:

    Roger Springer:

    There is no ‘world nuclear industry’.

    There are lots of little companies like EDF (electricity De France) who build these suckers all over the northern hemisphere with the backing of other countrie’s governments (EDF are currently trying to build new power plants along the East coast of England – google Sizewell).

    I think you may be referring to the IAEA (international atomic energy agency) which was set up, in the words of Hans Blix: because at the time of Chernobyl nobody in ukraine or anywhere else in the world believed a word of the Soviet Government – much like Japan now.

    They are not here to regulate the nuclear industry – they are here to prevent panic. Plain and simple.

    The cost will be met by the taxpayer. Not one nuclear power plant has proper, private insurance because no-one is insane enough to insure them. So the governments will pay any cleanup costs with tax money, or avoid the cleanup altogether (BP) (fukushima).

    My Advice to all (especially UK) : start protesting/demonstrating that we do not want any more dangerous nuclear. check out ‘BoycottEDF.com’ and CND.com

    Thanks

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: