|
|
| Fig. 1: Chernobyl and Pripyat, 2010. (Source: Wikimedia Commons) |
On April 25, 1986, the Chernobyl reactor located in northern Ukraine experienced a power surge, destroying Unit 4 of its nuclear plant, seen in Fig. 1. [1] From the start, this reactor was doomed. Due to a design flaw in the rods, the test caused a dramatic surge in heat as the rods were lowered into the reactor. These rods then fragmented, delivering searing fuel into the reactor, flashing water to steam and increasing the pressure rapidly. This steam spread throughout the core. Within seconds, the reactor blew its top, releasing massive doses of radioactive material into the surrounding environment. [1]
The release of nuclear fuel caused 28 human casualties on the 1st day, mainly firefighters deployed to the plant. [2] For the next 10 days, the fuel continued discharging into the air, and the surrounding town of Pripyat was evacuated. Despite such tragedy, the long-term damages have been ascertained as remarkably small. The majority of the five million residents in the surrounding areas received radiation doses comparable to background radiation. In addition, today's evidence does not connect the accident to radiation-induced cases on leukemia, pregnancy complications, stillbirths, or overall health complications of those living in even the most contaminated areas. [1]
In fact, the psycho-social effects of relocation caused more damage than any medical or environmental turmoil from Chernobyl itself. Much of this distress - which continues to this day - is better modeled by psychological factors. [3] Chronic myths and misperceptions about the threat of radiation exposure contributed to a culture of dependency and loss of individual agency in local communities. Today, alcoholism, depression, and anxiety in these populations poses a much larger hazard than any radiation. [1]
Admittedly, the long-term consequences of radiation are hard to measure and may not appear for some time, so it is imprudent to assert full confidence in the seeming insignificance of these effects.
The nuclear effects of Chernobyl have clear negative impacts on the surrounding environment. The fallout of the reactor has shown minor genetic damage in testing, and a higher rate of structural deformities in juvenile birds. [4] However, the abandonment of the area surrounding Chernobyl by humans has led to a larger, positive change in the ecology of the environment, outweighing the consequences of nuclear fallout. [5] Notably, there is now greater biodiversity and an increased numbers of species in the exclusion zone, rendering the area a sanctuary for nature. [6] There are common sightings of moose and lynx, rare in other parts of Europe. [4] Overall, the net effect appears to benefit the ecology and wildlife.
The immediate consequences of nuclear accidents such as Chernobyl understandably negatively impacted the world population's view of nuclear power. However, the extensive and now decades-long scientific testing and review of the lasting results of Chernobyl serve to illustrate that the initial outcry of permanent nuclear concerns was uninformed. While acknowledging that there are potential environmental and human costs associated with nuclear energy, so too are there such costs with all energy sources, especially fossil fuels. Nuclear energy's reputation urgently needs to addressed as this source of power is comparatively safe and should be considered for much greater adoption throughout the world.
© Will Hooks. The author warrants that the work is the author's own and that Stanford University provided no input other than typesetting and referencing guidelines. The author grants permission to copy, distribute and display this work in unaltered form, with attribution to the author, for noncommercial purposes only. All other rights, including commercial rights, are reserved to the author.
[1] "Backgrounder on Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant Accident," U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, August 2018.
[2] S. Plokhy, "The True Cost of the Chernobyl Disaster Has Been Greater Than It Seems," Time, 26 Apr 18.
[3] E. J. Bromet et al., "A 25 Year Retrospective Review of the Psychological Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident," Clin. Oncol. 23, 297 (2011).
[4] D. Birch, "Chernoby Area Becomes Wildlife Haven," Washington Post, 7 Jun 07.
[5] R. J. Baker and R. K. Chesser, "The Chornobyl Nuclear Disaster and Subsequent Creation of a Wildlife Preserve," Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 19, 1231 (2000).
[6] A. Vaughan, "Wildlife Thriving around Chernobyl Nuclear Plant Despite Radiation," The Guardian, 5 Oct 15.
.jpg){kind=link}