And this was the worst nuclear accident in history
-----------------
Madi Hilly
@MadiHilly·
Aug 10
WHAT ABOUT CHERNOBYL? Chernobyl the accident shows that, even in a worst-case scenario, the health and environmental risks of nuclear are small. Chernobyl the cultural phenomenon shows how dangerous nuclear can be. Here’s what you need to know:
Late at night on April 25, 1986, the reactor crew at Chernobyl 4 disabled the system’s automatic safety mechanisms and simulated an emergency to see what would happen to the plant’s safety in an emergency. An hour after midnight, about 1 AM on April 26, things went wrong.
The test resulted in a massive surge of power, followed almost immediately by a steam explosion and, a few seconds later, a second explosion caused by what experts now believe was the ignition of flammable hydrogen gas.
When people imagine nuclear meltdowns or worst-case scenarios, they’re imagining Chernobyl: a glowing reactor exposed to the environment and on fire, spewing radioactive particles.
In the days and weeks after the accident, an estimated 118,400 people were evacuated from a 30 kilometer radius of the plant. Eventually, about 350,000 people were relocated after the accident.
Gerry Thomas is a molecular pathologist and the director of the Chernobyl tissue bank. A few years ago, she walked me through the United Nation’s report on the health impacts of Chernobyl.
Here’s the breakdown of deaths from Chernobyl: - 3 deaths from the initial steam explosion - 28 firefighter deaths from acute radiation syndrome (ARS) - 15 deaths from thyroid cancer in the first 25 years after the accident
Those are the deaths that’ve already occurred. What about future deaths? The report estimates an additional 145 deaths may occur, from thyroid cancer. Dr. Thomas says this number may be on the high side based on the data collected from case histories of people affected.
There have not yet been any increases in other types of cancer. There were no effects on infant mortality, malformations, or fertility. These scientific findings represent the widest divergence between popular and scientific understanding of Chernobyl.
What are the environmental impacts of Chernobyl? The United Nations has been tracking this for more than 30 years. Its findings were summarized in 2016 by EU researchers:
www-ns.iaea.org (I changed t.co link to direct link)
“[A]fter the environmental stress caused by irradiation, ecosystems close to Chernobyl have recovered and are now 'flourishing'. It concludes that the exclusion zone has become a 'wildlife sanctuary' as a result of the large availability of food and the absence of human activity”
If there’s a silver lining in people living near Chernobyl being kicked off the land, it’s the accidental experiment in rewilding. The Exclusion Zone is the 3rd largest nature reserve in Europe. Lynx, wolves, bison, and deer all thrive in its forests.
wired.com
Because of the mythology around radiation and Chernobyl, few people realize that the other three Chernobyl reactors continued to operate after the accident.
In fact, for three years in a row, the plant improved its performance, up to 18.7 TWh in 1989.
The true human tragedy of Chernobyl is the aftermath of fear and stigma around the accident.
Association with Chernobyl led to significantly increased rates of alcoholism, mental health issues, and suicide for those who were forced to leave or clean up the site.
Widespread fear of Chernobyl radiation across Europe led to an increase in elective abortions.
There was no medical justification for these abortions.
Nevertheless, this fear was reflected in a reduction in total births.
The region around Chernobyl suffered a major economic setback when the plant was forced to shut down at the end of 2000 to satisfy European pressure.
Ukraine refused to do it until they got $4.5 billion (USD 2022) in part to fund the completion of two more nuclear reactors.
From @nytimes
: “Some workers at Chernobyl signaled their opposition to the shutdown by wearing black ribbons on their jumpsuits…workers unfurled banners that called the shutdown a tragedy and declared, ‘No!’ to the closing.”
nytimes.com
The stigma of Chernobyl had significant consequences outside of Ukraine as well.
It led to the loss of almost all of Lithuania’s electricity production. Again, under immense pressure from the EU, the country went from 90% nuclear to 0% nuclear overnight.
Chernobyl surged back into popular culture with the release of HBO’s Chernobyl miniseries.
The show — ostensibly about how lies caused Chernobyl — itself lied about the potential stakes of the accident, inflating it upward by orders of magnitude.
HBO’s success shows how special Chernobyl is compared to other deadly accidents: the fascination looms far beyond the event's death toll and physical impact.
The reverse is true for other industrial accidents, which are nearly unknown outside industry and local communities.
Many people who point to Chernobyl as the ultimate reason to condemn nuclear don’t know or care that Ukraine has gotten more than half of its electricity from nuclear since 2015, or that the country wants to build more.
War-torn Ukraine is even offering to send more nuclear electricity to Germany, which is having an energy crisis in part due to their own fear-driven nuclear phaseout.
spiegel.de
Similarly, antinuclear campaigners don't really discuss that reactors of the same design and size (RBMKs) are still operating near large European cities.
There are 8 of them left and, having been retrofitted after the 1986 accident, are still producing carbon-free power.
Chernobyl-the-Accident can’t be repeated.
The remaining reactors of the type that were built at Chernobyl have been altered to prevent the triggering sequence, and most of the world’s operating reactors were never at risk of this type of explosive accident.
But to prevent another Chernobyl-the-Cultural-Phenomenon, we must revisit the accident, the people, and the wildlife of the Exclusion Zone to understand and address our fear and anxiety.
twitter.com
marginalrevolution.com |
