RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Brown writes: "In believing that the Chernobyl zone safely contained the accident, we fall for the proximity trap, which holds that the closer a person is to a nuclear explosion, the more radioactivity they are exposed to. But radioactive gases follow weather patterns, moving around the globe to leave shadows of contamination in shapes that resemble tongues, kidneys, or the sharp tips of arrows."

Chernobyl nuclear accident site. (photo: Sergei Supinsky)
Chernobyl nuclear accident site. (photo: Sergei Supinsky)


Chernobyl's Disastrous Cover-Up Is a Warning for the Next Nuclear Age

By Kate Brown, Guardian UK

04 April 19


Before expanding nuclear power to combat climate change, we need answers to the global health effects of radioactivity

n 1986, the Soviet minister of hydrometeorology, Yuri Izrael, had a regrettable decision to make. It was his job to track radioactivity blowing from the smoking Chernobyl reactor in the hours after the 26 April explosion and deal with it. Forty-eight hours after the accident, an assistant handed him a roughly drawn map. On it, an arrow shot north-east from the nuclear power plant, and broadened to become a river of air 10 miles wide that was surging across Belarus toward Russia. If the slow-moving mass of radioactive clouds reached Moscow, where a spring storm front was piling up, millions could be harmed. Izrael’s decision was easy. Make it rain.

So that day, in a Moscow airport, technicians loaded artillery shells with silver iodide. Soviet air force pilots climbed into the cockpits of TU-16 bombers and made the easy one-hour flight to Chernobyl, where the reactor burned. The pilots circled, following the weather. They flew 30, 70, 100, 200km – chasing the inky black billows of radioactive waste. When they caught up with a cloud, they shot jets of silver iodide into it to emancipate the rain.

In the sleepy towns of southern Belarus, villagers looked up to see planes with strange yellow and grey contrails snaking across the sky. Next day, 27 April, powerful winds kicked up, cumulus clouds billowed on the horizon, and rain poured down in a deluge. The raindrops scavenged radioactive dust floating 200 metres in the air and sent it to the ground. The pilots trailed the slow-moving gaseous bulk of nuclear waste north-east beyond Gomel, into Mogilev province. Wherever pilots shot silver iodide, rain fell, along with a toxic brew of a dozen radioactive elements.

If Operation Cyclone had not been top secret, the headline would have been spectacular: “Scientists using advanced technology save Russian cities from technological disaster!” Yet, as the old saying goes, what goes up must come down. No one told the Belarusians that the southern half of the republic had been sacrificed to protect Russian cities. In the path of the artificially induced rain lived several hundred thousand Belarusians ignorant of the contaminants around them.

The public is often led to believe that the Chernobyl exclusion zone, a depopulated 20-mile circle around the blown plant, safely contains Chernobyl radioactivity. Tourists and journalists exploring the zone rarely realise there is a second Chernobyl zone in southern Belarus. In it, people lived for 15 years in levels of contamination as high as areas within the official zone until the area was finally abandoned, in 1999.

In believing that the Chernobyl zone safely contained the accident, we fall for the proximity trap, which holds that the closer a person is to a nuclear explosion, the more radioactivity they are exposed to. But radioactive gases follow weather patterns, moving around the globe to leave shadows of contamination in shapes that resemble tongues, kidneys, or the sharp tips of arrows.

England, for example, enjoyed clear weather for several days after the Chernobyl accident, but rain started on 2 May, 1986 and fell heavily on the Cumbrian fells – 20mm in 24 hours. On the uneven, upland terrain, radioactive fallout pooled in rivulets and puddles. The needles on radiation detectors at the Sellafield (formerly Windscale) nuclear processing plant went upwards alarmingly, 200 times higher than natural background radiation. From 5 becquerels a square metre, radiation levels in topsoil spiked to 4,000 bq/m2. Kenneth Baker, the then environment secretary, issued assurances that the radioactive isotopes would soon be washed away by rain.

Two months later, however, levels rose yet higher to 10,000 bq/m2 in Cumbria and 20,000 bq/m2 in south-western Scotland, 4,000 times higher than normal. Scientists tested sheep and found their levels of caesium-137 were 1,000 becquerels per kilogram – too high for consumption. In the midst of general anxiety, the Ministry of Agriculture, Fish and Food (MAFF) issued temporary restrictions on the sale of meat for 7,000 farms.

The early predictions of caesium being washed from upland soils proved optimistic. The mineral-starved native plants efficiently drank up radioactive isotopes. Tiny micro-fungi moved caesium-137 from the roots to plant tips, where grazing sheep fed.

Researchers added months, then years, to their predictions of how long the radioactive caesium would linger in the environment. Eventually, restrictions remained in place for 334 farmers of north Wales for 26 years.

As researchers monitored Chernobyl radioactivity, they made a troubling discovery. Only half of the caesium-137 they detected came from Chernobyl. The rest had already been in the Cumbrian soils; deposited there during the years of nuclear testing and after the 1957 fire at the Windscale plutonium plant. The same winds and rains that brought down Chernobyl fallout had been at work quietly distributing radioactive contaminants across northern England and Scotland for decades. Fallout from bomb tests carried out during the cold war scattered a volume of radioactive gases that dwarfed Chernobyl.

The Chernobyl explosions issued 45m curies of radioactive iodine into the atmosphere. Emissions from Soviet and US bomb tests amounted to 20bn curies of radioactive iodine, 500 times more. Radioactive iodine, a short lived, powerful isotope can cause thyroid disease, thyroid cancer, hormonal imbalances, problems with the GI track and autoimmune disorders.

As engineers detonated over 2,000 nuclear bombs into the atmosphere, scientists lost track of where radioactive isotopes fell and where they came from, but they caught glimpses of how readily radioactivity travelled the globe. In the 1950s, British officials detected harmful levels of radioactive caesium in imported Minnesota wheat. The wheat became radioactive from US bomb tests in Nevada, 2,500km from the Minnesota wheatfields. But over the years, scientists failed to come to an agreement on what the global distribution of radioactivity in the food chain did to human health. When the Chernobyl accident occurred, experts in radiation medicine called for a long-term epidemiological study on Chernobyl-exposed people. That study never occurred. After Fukushima, Japanese scientists said what Soviet scientists asserted after Chernobyl – we need 20 years to see what the health effects from the accident will be.

Fortunately, Chernobyl health records are now available to the public. They show that people living in the radioactive traces fell ill from cancers, respiratory illness, anaemia, auto-immune disorders, birth defects, and fertility problems two to three times more frequently in the years after the accident than before. In a highly contaminated Belarusian town of Veprin, just six of 70 children in 1990 were characterised as “healthy”. The rest had one chronic disease or another. On average, the Veprin children had in their bodies 8,498 bq/kg of radioactive caesium (20 bq/kg is considered safe).

For decades, researchers have puzzled over strange clusters of thyroid cancer, leukaemia and birth defects among people living in Cumbria, which, like southern Belarus, is an overlooked hotspot of radioactivity from cold war decades of nuclear bomb production and nuclear power accidents.

Currently, policymakers are advocating a massive expansion of nuclear power as a way to combat climate change. Before we enter a new nuclear age, the declassified Chernobyl health records raise questions that have been left unanswered about the impact of chronic low doses of radioactivity on human health. What we do know is that as fallout from bomb tests drifted down mostly in the northern hemisphere, thyroid cancer rates grew exponentially. In Europe and North America, childhood leukaemia, which used to be a medical rarity, increased in incidence year by year after 1950. Australia, hit by the fallout from British and French tests, has one of the highest incidence rates of childhood cancer worldwide. An analysis of almost 43,000 men in North America, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand, showed that sperm counts dropped 52% between 1973 and 2011.⁠

These statistics show a correlation between radioactive contaminants and health problems that are similar to those that materialised in Chernobyl-contaminated territories. A correlation does not prove a causal link. These statistics do, however, invite a lot of questions; questions that scientists and stakeholders should tackle before we enter a second nuclear age.

Email This Page

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+18 # DongiC 2019-04-04 13:52
Nuclear stuff is bad stuff, indeed. Cancers of several kinds, hormonal imbalances, immune deficiencies all especially dangerous to children whose bones and organs are still developing. We need solutions to our environmental problems but, I don't think radioactive ones are what we require. We need solutions that do not endanger us. Solar, wind, hydro, hot water can provide the energy which is clean. This is where our scientists and engineers should be focused. Not on manufacturing the tools of war but the instruments of peace.

It's a big, big problem. But, we can meet it, make the switch and obtain peace in the process. Clean energy, efficient batteries, improved transmission lines and, maybe desalination of sea water too. We will need lots of water too.

So let's get the leaders and the programs to save our planet. Everyone involved; Russians, Chinese, Iraq, Iran, Israel, Palestine, NATO, of course, S. America, N. America, Asia, Africa and, of course, the USA; prepared to lead and sacrifice and deliver for everyone. This is a mission worthy of us. This will make us truly great.

Is Trump prepared to lead? Or is he just wind and bluster? Come on, Donald, where do you stand? And, if you fail to lead, we shall find someone who will. So help us God.
 
 
+1 # Robbee 2019-04-05 11:12
Quoting DongiC 2019-04-04 13:52:
Come on, Donald, where do you stand? And, if you fail to lead, we shall find someone who will. So help us God.

- at the end of your fine comment, you mystified me!

you lost me at - "Is Trump prepared to lead? Or is he just wind and bluster?"

didn't you get the memo?

in a thousand ways, on a thousand days, dickhead has told us where he stands! - earth environment is perfect "as is"! with no help from any government! beyond socializing the cost of all risks to earth environment!

in other words government socializes all costs! - for-profit corporations privatize all gains!

doesn't to change his mind in his lifetime take a miracle intervention? like a visit from three spirits of christmas? -
isn't dickhead remarkably resistant to intervention?

naturally i ask -

1) do you have a plan to intervene?
2) does your plan aim to effect change before inauguration day, 2021?
3) does your plan involve kidnap? or brainwash?
4) do you know something we don't?
5) if god doesn't help you, will youe sue organized religion, as in evangelical churches, for "act of god"?
5) how do you intend to communicate to dickhead?
7) what makes you think dickhead responds to your threats?
8) is your plea here to dickhead purely rhetorical flourish? as one might say "just wind and bluster?

the rest of your comment i give a hearty thumbs up!
 
 
+3 # tedrey 2019-04-05 05:37
The nuclear industry as it exists is built upon deceit and the shuffling of all cost and risk onto the public. If there were true transparency and accountabilty in the industry and its regulators, it wouldn't be tolerated for a moment.
 
 
+1 # Kootenay Coyote 2019-04-05 08:34
Childhood Leukaemia was an exceedingly rare disease until the mid-1950s, when it became mildly epidemic in the USA, directly caused by aerial testing of nuclear weapons. & note a recent RSN article also:

https://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/55817-rsn-three-mile-islands-murderous-legacy-still-threatens-us-all
Three Mile Island's Murderous Legacy Still Threatens Us All
 
 
+5 # tedrey 2019-04-05 11:00
My father carried out a study for the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission in the 1950s to examine the effects of the atomic bombs on the children of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. After three years there were several negative findings, the most decidedly significant being increased leukemia (and eye cataracts.) Further planned research was abandoned, the findings were given a top-security rating, and for years the government kept telling the public no evidence had ever been found of any link between nuclear radiation and leukemia. (Incidentally, my father never again got a job in government or in academia.)

Tell me again who are the good guys?
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN