Aarthi Srinivasan — Chernobyl: The World’s Worst Nuclear Disaster
Chernobyl: The World’s Worst Nuclear Disaster
by Aarthi Srinivasan
by Aarthi Srinivasan
Global warming. Rising seas. Ocean acidification. Ozone depletion. Acid deposition. Whether it's the release of CO2, NOx, or SO2, it is clear that the combustion of fossil fuels and other non-renewable forms of energy is having serious impacts on the environment. A cheaper, more environmentally sustainable solution to the world’s impending energy crisis may be something as simple as utilizing a fundamental piece of matter: the atom. However, nuclear energy has long been the subject of controversy, generating conversation about its potential human health and environmental impacts. The 1986 Chernobyl disaster in Pripyat, Ukrainian USSR, serves as a testament to the catastrophic consequences of a nuclear power plant disaster.
The explosion and subsequent meltdown of the Chernobyl 4 reactor resulted in radioactive material being thrown into the air. Following the explosion, fires continued for eight days while the graphite reactor core released immense amounts of radioactive material into the atmosphere. Approximately 50 emergency workers died of acute radiation syndrome immediately following the disaster, but the long term effects of radiation poisoning and elevated radiation levels were the real killers. According to the World Health Organization, about 3940 local residents and emergency workers suffered from radiation-induced cancer, including thyroid cancer and leukemia. While most sources list only 42 deaths as an immediate result of the accident, these sources also acknowledge that approximately 4000 deaths occurred as a result of the cleanup of the plant.
So, how did the meltdown of Reactor 4 affect the environment? The spread of radionuclides — radioactive forms of chemical elements — not only escaped into the atmosphere, but were spread by wind over Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine. These major releases in surrounding agricultural and pasture land resulted in radionuclide contamination of milk, meat, and crops. This affected not only the animals and vegetation in the surrounding mountain and forest areas, but also the humans who ate contaminated reindeer meat as well. Bioaccumulation in the aquatic food chain resulted in high concentrations of radiocaesium in fish in places as distant as Germany. Radiation decreased the reproduction rates of organisms and decreased the lifespan of trees, invertebrates, and mammals in areas 20-30 kilometers near the explosion site. In fact, 4 square kilometers of pine forest turned reddish brown and died, thus becoming the “Red Forest”.
The extent of destruction caused by the meltdown was, in fact, mitigated by the Soviet government. In effort to prevent the further spread of radiation, a protective shelter — the Sarcophagus — was erected around the faulty reactor. One of the most effective early preventative measures was removing contaminated pasture grasses and monitoring milk for radiation, thus preventing human consumption of such products. Moreover, the Soviet government launched immediate efforts to treat the the land for crops, evacuate the residents of Pripyat and other neighboring areas, and place immediate restrictions on access to forest areas.
However, these clean-up efforts simply may have not been enough. Since the disaster, the Sarcophagus has corroded significantly and is structurally unsound, and the collapse of this protective structure may release radioactive dust in the future. Recently, a new steel structure has been put in place to cover the rapidly deteriorating Sarcophagus. Long-term clean up strategies have yet to be planned, as the high level radioactive waste has been placed in temporary storage that doesn’t meet current safety requirements. And ultimately, the long-term effects on human health may not be known for years, considering only 33 years have passed since the events of the disaster.
The Chernobyl power plant disaster holds the title as the world’s worst nuclear accident; it is, quite literally, the worst case scenario. However, scientists, businesses, and lawmakers must consider the cumulative impacts of fossil fuels as an energy source, especially when compared to the numerous other successful situations in which people harness nuclear power. By learning from the causes and effects of the Chernobyl disaster, scientists of the present can work toward creating more sustainable, less disaster-prone, and more efficient nuclear power plants that have the potential to help resolve our impending energy crisis.
Food for Thought:
- Do you think disasters like Chernobyl cause unwarranted fear about nuclear energy?
- What are some other nuclear disasters that have occurred, and how do they compare to Chernobyl?
- Do you think the effects of Chernobyl could have been further reduced if the disaster had occurred in 2019 (a time with different technologies)?
- What technology/information do we possess today to deal with nuclear power plant meltdowns?
Sources:
Comments