Chornobyl Ten Years Later - The Facts
Dr. David R. Marples, University of Alberta, March 21st 1996
The disaster at Chornobyl on 26 April 1986 contaminated an area
of about 100,000 square miles. This area encompassed about 20% of
the territory of Belarus; about 8% of Ukraine; and about 0.5-1.0%
of the Russian Federation. Altogether the area is approximately
the size of the state of Kentucky or of Scotland and Northern Ireland
combined. The most serious radioactive elements to be disseminated
by the accident were Iodine-131, Cesium-137, and Strontium-90.
Ten years after the event, Chornobyl remains shrouded in controversy
as to its immediate and long-term effects. The initial explosion
and graphite fire killed 31 operators, firemen and first-aid workers
and saw several thousand hospitalized. Over the summer of 1986 and
in the period 1986-90 it also caused high casualties among cleanup
workers. According to recent statistics from the Ukrainian government,
over 5,700 "liquidators" have died, the majority young men in their
20s. A figure of 125,000 deaths issued by the Ukrainian ministry
of health appears to include all subsequent deaths, natural or otherwise,
of those living in the contaminated zone of Ukraine.
According to specialists from the WHO, the only discernible health
impact of the high levels of radiation in the affected territories
has been the dramatic rise in thyroid gland cancer among children.
The comment appears unwarranted in light of regional research. In
Belarus, for example, a study of 1994 noted that congenital defects
in the areas with a cesium content of the soil of 1-5 curies per
square kilometer have doubled since 1986, while in areas with over
15 curies, the rise has been more than 8 times.
Among liquidators and especially among evacuees, studies have demonstrated
a discernible and alarming rise in morbidity since Chernobyl when
compared to the general level among the population. This applies
particularly to circulatory and digestive diseases, and to respiratory
problems. Less certain is the concept referred to as "Chernobyl
AIDS," the rise of which may reflect more attention to medical problems,
better access to health care, or psychological fears and tension
among the population living in contaminated zones. Rises in children's
diabetes and anemia are evident, and again appear much higher in
irradiated zones. The connection between these problems and the
rise in radiation content of the soil have yet to be determined.
To date, the rates of leukemia and lymphoma—though they have
risen since the accident—remain within the European average,
though in the upper 75th percentile. One difficulty here is the
unreliability or sheer lack of reporting in the 1970s. The induction
period for leukemia is 4-15 years thus it appears premature to state,
as have some authorities, that Chernobyl will not result in higher
rates of leukemia.
As for thyroid cancer, its development has been sudden and rapid.
Today about 1,000 children in Belarus and Ukraine have contracted
the disease and it has yet to reach its peak. One WHO specialist
has estimated that the illness may affect one child in ten living
in the irradiated zones in the summer of 1986, hence ultimate totals
could reach as high as 10,000. Though the mortality rate from this
form of cancer among children is only about 10%, this still indicates
a further 1,000 deaths in the future. Moreover, this form of cancer
is highly aggressive and mestastasizes rapidly if not operated upon.
The correlation between thyroid gland cancer and radioactive fallout
appears clear and is not negated by any medical authority today.
Turning to the question of the Chernobyl reactor itself, it continues
to pose enormous problems for newly independent Ukraine and for
the nuclear industry in general. In the spring of 1984, eight years
after Chernobyl, the IAEA belatedly declared the reactor unsafe.
G-7 pressure has forced Ukraine to agree to the closure of the station
by the year 2000, but Ukraine's price tag—some $4.4 million
to shut down Chernobyl and to construct a new thermal power station
in the vicinity—has been offset by only about 50% from G-7 subsidies
and loans. Both the director of the Chernobyl plant, Serhii Parashyn,
and former director Mikhail Umanets, have vocalized their view that
the station's lifespan is only 50% complete and that Chernobyl today
is safer than other Soviet-made RBMK (graphite-moderated) reactors
at Ignalina (Lithuania, an RBMK-1500); and the Russian stations
of Sosnovyi Bor (near St. Petersburg), Kursk, and Smolensk.
Both Ukraine and Belarus face significant energy crises and have
been reliant on expensive imports of oil and gas from Russia and
Turkmenistan. Both have turned back to the nuclear option. Yet the
industry remains short of skilled personnel; adequate and well-paid
safety regulators; and reliable reactor units. Several potentially
serious mishaps have occurred in Ukraine, including two recent accidents
that involved leakages of radiation at Zaporizhzhya-4 (April 1995)
and Chornobyl-1 (November 1995, now acknowledged to have been a
Class 3 accident on the international scale rather than Class 1
initially reported).
In addition to such a serious dilemma, the funding of a new sarcophagus
over the destroyed reactor has not been determined. The current
structure, which cover some 20 tons of radioactive fuel and dust,
is cracking and is not anticipated to last more than a further 10-15
years. Though plans have been formulated to re-cover the original
concrete shell, the financial backing for such a structure is problematic.
Moreover, the present plan will likely entail the permanent closure
of Chornobyl-3 and as such is regarded with skepticism by those
of Ukraine's energy sphere who wish to continue reliance upon nuclear
power.
It is fair to say that the dangers presented by former Soviet nuclear
power stations today exceed those of one decade ago. In the meantime
some 3.5 million people live in contaminated zones. Even evacuees
are known to be dissatisfied with their new homes. From a necessary
panacea, evacuation of those living in zones with high soil contamination
today has become an unpopular and slow-moving process.
Finally the lack of consensus on the effects of the Chornobyl disaster
helps no one. It does not help the economically floundering governments
of Ukraine and Belarus; it places a serious impediment on the work
of charitable and humanitarian organizations; and the one-sided
statements to the effect that morbidity and diseases may have causes
other than Chornobyl; or that they are caused by "radiophobia";
detract from the prime need, which is to provide aid for a population
facing an acute health crisis with inadequate resources.
Ultimately, it will be seen that Chornobyl has compounded a health
crisis of extraordinary dimensions. Thyroid gland cancer is proof
of the relationship between the 1986 disaster and Belarus and Ukraine's
dilemmas today.
David R. Marples, University of Alberta, Canada, 3-21-96
Document Information
Document URL:
http://www.infoukes.com/history/chornobyl/marples/index.html
Copyright © 1996 Dr. David R. Marples
Originally Composed: Tuesday August 20th 1996.
Date last modified: Friday
March 21st 1997.
|