june 9, 2006 | no. 645-646 the chernobyl legacy · tragedy in the ukraine, russia and belarus - the...

THE CHERNOBYL LEGACY"Chornobyl is a word we would all like to erase from our

memory. It opened a Pandora's box of invisible enemies andnameless anxieties in people's minds, but which most of usprobably now think of as safely relegated to the past. Yetthere are two compelling reasons why this tragedy must notbe forgotten. First, if we forget Chornobyl, we increase therisk of more such technological and environmental disastersin the future. Second, more than seven million of our fellowhuman beings do not have the luxury of forgetting. They arestill suffering, every day, as a result of what happened 14years ago. Indeed, the legacy of Chernobyl will be with us,and with our descendants, for generations to come."

Kofi Annan, April 2000

(645-646.5752) Rebecca Harms, MEP- According to the UK's Food StandardAgency, in 2005 there were still 379British farms - covering over 74,000hectares - and a total of 200,000 sheepthat remain under post-Chernobylrestriction orders. Last year I asked theEuropean Commission to confirm thosenumbers and the Commission not onlyconfirmed the impact on British farmers,but also provided other alarminginformation. It stated that over the nextdecade, there would be no significantchange in the degree of contaminationbeing experienced. The farmers willhave no choice but to live with therestrictions for many years to come.

In other European countries likeGermany, Austria, Italy, Sweden,Finland, Lithuania and Poland, thelevels of contamination found in certainmushrooms and berries in some areasstill exceed the permitted maximum.

Many Western European countries stillsuffer notable economic costs from theaccident. In Germany for example, 159million Euros (almost US$194 million)was paid in compensation to milk and

vegetable farmers in 1989 alone. Thetreatment of contaminated whey costanother 35.8 million Euros (US$43.7million) and even now, two decadesafter the accident, Germany is stillpaying compensation to hunters forcontaminated game animals. Overall theeconomic costs to Germany havereached approximately 250 millionEuros (US$305 million).

This example pales into insignificancewhen compared with the ongoingtragedy in the Ukraine, Russia andBelarus - the countries mostly affectedby the Chernobyl fallout. It is difficult tograsp the full impact of the Chernobyldisaster - especially for those of usliving thousands of kilometres awayfrom the exclusion zone.

At the IAEA conference in Vienna lastautumn, World Health Organisation(WHO) expert Dr. Bernett told a storyabout the life in the villages of one ofthe most affected areas. He recalledseeing children on their way to schoolcrossing the street at the exact samespot every morning. When asked why,the children stated that this was quite

JUNE 9, 2006 | No. 645-646

THE CHERNOBYL LEGACY 1

CHERNOBYL - 20 YEARS, 20LIVES 3

CONSEQUENCES OF THECHERNOBYL CATASTROPHE 13

CHERNOBYL, IN BRIEF 15

IN BRIEF 16

2 NUCLEAR MONITOR 645-646

obvious - they had to cross the streetbecause of a contamination hot spot.Dr. Bernett used this example to showthat people are able to cope with theconsequences of the disaster; that theconsequences have become part ofpeople's every day life and that thenecessary changes in behaviour havebeen integrated into their daily routine.Had Dr. Bernett been describingchildren in his own hometown crossingthe street to avoid a contamination hotspot, it is unlikely that he would havepainted quite the same picture.

The message being sent by the IAEAand WHO experts like Dr. Bernett sincethe Vienna conference has been quiteclear. They acknowledge that theChernobyl disaster was the worstnuclear accident in the industrializedworld, and accept that the number ofdeaths is higher than first assumed -probably 4,000 deaths worldwide - orcompared with the assumptions of otherexperts, "only" 4,000 deaths as IAEAputs it. However, their argument is thatalthough this is bad, the time has nowcome to move on and to "Look into thefuture!" - as demanded in the title of theIAEA conference to be held in Kiev onthe 20th anniversary of the disaster. Wecannot and shall not accept that! Thelegacy of Chernobyl does not lie in thepast - it is not over yet.

People are still suffering from theconsequences of the disaster every dayand the lives of many will continue to beaffected for decades and generations tocome. Many of the consequences areonly now starting to emerge as sometypes of cancer and geneticmalformations take years to develop.The large and increasing number ofthyroid cancers, even if many of thevictims survive, shows the severeconsequences of exposure to theradiation released by Chernobyl.

Stress, being uprooted, fatalism andself-abandonment are also among theconsequences of the catastrophe. InBelarus 135,000 people had to leavetheir villages, their homes, right afterthe accident and even recently,evacuation measures still had to betaken. 2.2 million people were living inthe contaminated area before 1989 buttoday the number has gone down to 1.5

million people. These people have notonly left all their possessions behind butalso their former lives, familiarsurroundings and history.

Economic costs

With regard to the economic costsassociated with the Chernobyl nuclearaccident, even the IAEA, whosefunction it is to promote nuclear power,states that the impact of the catastrophewas strong enough to accelerate thebreak up of the Soviet Union. Huge costs were imposed on the SovietUnion and three successor countries,Belarus, Russia and the Ukraine. Thesecosts are impossible to calculateprecisely owing to the non-marketconditions prevailing at the time of thedisaster and the high inflation andvolatile exchange rates of the transitionperiod that followed the break-up of theSoviet Union in 1991. However themagnitude is quite clear - hundreds ofbillions of dollars of costs were incurredas a result of:

· Direct damage caused by theaccident;

· The actions taken to seal off thereactor and mitigate the consequencesin the exclusion zone;

· The resettlement of people and theconstruction of new housing andinfrastructure to accommodate them;

· Social protection and health careprovided to the affected population;

· Research on the environment, healthand the production of clean food;

· The radiation monitoring of theenvironment;

· The disposal of radioactive waste· The losses relating to the incidental

cost of withdrawing agricultural landand forests from use and the closureof agricultural and industrial facilities.

In Belarus, for example, 7,000 km2 wasdeclared blocked or a strict control zoneand 23% of the country's land is stillhighly contaminated - including 40% ofthe land used for agricultural purposes.

The economic damage to the country isestimated to be around 192 billionEuros (US$235 billion) - ten timesBelarus' gross national budget in 1997and approximately six times the yearlystate budget. This figure assumes that

Chernobyl's consequences can beremoved within 30 years but it is highlyunlikely that this will prove to be thecase by 2015 so this projected cost canbe expected to rise.

Belarus' economic situation continues tosuffer and with almost one quarter ofthe population living beneath thepoverty level, according to the WorldBank, life expectance is approximately10 years less than the WesternEuropean average.

In Ukraine the situation is just as bad.30,000 km2 was contaminated and160,000 people were relocated.Ukrainian experts estimate theeconomic damage to be in the region of164 billion Euros (US$201 billion). In1992 15% of the state budget was usedto cope with the catastrophe, and in2003 the sum had been reduced to 6%of the budget. Due to the long economiccrisis in the country, the Ukrainiangovernment still owed almost 115million Euros (US$140 million) to thevictims of the disaster in April 1999.

"Shelter Implementation Plan"

The sarcophagus built - under a lot oftime pressure and in the most difficultcircumstances - to enclose the reactordebris is now dilapidated and fragile.Ukraine and the then G7 countriessigned the "Shelter ImplementationPlan" in 1997 with the aim of stabilisingand improving the sarcophagus. TheEuropean Bank for Reconstruction andDevelopment (EBRD) estimated theoverall costs for this project to beUS$768 million (630 million Euros) andthis amount was subsequently paid intothe "Chernobyl Shelter Fund" by 37countries. In 2003 the Ukrainian energyminister stated that, due to employmentprotection measures, the costs wouldbe higher than expected. Today thecosts are estimated to be close to US$1billion (820 million Euros) - a 30% costincrease. An expert at the RussianNuclear Institute has since suggestedthat the costs will instead be closer toUS$2.5 billion (over 2 billion Euros).

Another Chernobyl?

IAEA experts want us to believe that adisaster like Chernobyl was only

3NUCLEAR MONITOR 643-646

possible under the circumstancesexisting in the Soviet Union in 1986 andwould never happen again.Unfortunately several nuclear incidentsin recent years have shown that theseassertions cannot be relied upon. AWorld Association of Nuclear Operators(WANO) list includes the followingincidents with potentially disastrousconsequences:

· Overheating of radioactive materialoutside the concrete-walled safetycontainment of the Paks reactor inHungary (2003)

· Leaking control rods at the newestBritish reactor Sizewell B (startedoperating in 1995);

· Insufficient boron concentration in theemergency cooling system of thePhilippsburg-2 reactor in Baden-Württemberg;

· Fuel assembly damage of a typenever seen before, in block 3 of theFrench Cattenom power plant;

· A serious hydrogen explosion in a pipeat the Brunsbüttel boiling waterreactor, in the immediate vicinity of areactor pressure vessel;

· Massive corrosion on a reactorpressure vessel at the Davis-Besseplant in the USA, long overlooked,where only the thin stainless steel linerprevented a massive leak;

· Falsification of safety data at theBritish reprocessing facility inSellafield;

· Similar data falsification associatedwith the Japanese operator Tepco

These serious engineering and humanfailures show that a Chernobyl type

disaster could happen again - anywhereand at any time. We must not rely on atechnology that poses these threats tosociety. We have to stop nuclear energyproduction - now!

Rebecca Harms is a German GreenMEP and a member of the Parliament'sCommittee on Industry, Research andEnergy, and the Delegation to the EU-Ukraine Parliamentary CooperationCommittee.

This is an extract from a paperdelivered to the 8th Joint Irish & UKLocal Authorities Conference onNuclear Hazards, City Hall, London,March 23 2006. For a copy of theconference documentation pleasecontact Jo Southall, Nuclear Free LocalAuthorities Secretariat, Town Hall,Manchester, M60 2NY, UK. Email:[email protected]

CHERNOBYL - 20 YEARS, 20 LIVESThe twentieth anniversary of the worst nuclear accident to date has been observed around theworld and reported by all sections of the media yet it would appear that, on the whole, we arestill unable to fully grasp its significance or the impact it continues to have on our lives and ourenvironment.

(645.5753) WISE Amsterdam - Reportshave been released by various globalagencies reassuring us that fears ofwidespread contamination, deaths andlong-term illnesses linked to radiationreleased from Chernobyl have beengreatly exaggerated by hystericalenvironmentalists. We have been toldthat there is no longer any need to bewary of Chernobyl or indeed nuclearpower plants, which we are nowexpected to believe are safe and cleanenough to be re-branded as renewablesources of electricity. We are now beingencouraged to view nuclear power asour greatest ally in the war againstclimate change and if some reports areto be believed, the majority of us arenow willing to accept new nuclearcapacity in order to maintain ourunsustainable lifestyles.

In such a climate, it is more importantthan ever to re-tell the story of theChernobyl disaster from the perspectiveof those who experienced the accidentat first hand, and those who continue tolive with the consequences on a dailybasis. It is more important than ever toremember that two decades on, millions

of people still continue to suffer theconsequences and will continue to doso for the remainder of their lives. April26 marked the twentieth anniversary ofthe explosion but the disaster did notend on that date, there is no end.

The "Chernobyl - 20 Years, 20 Lives"project conceived by Danishphotographer Mads Eskesen is a photodocumentary journey through theexperiences of twenty people whoselives have been forever altered by thedevastating nuclear explosion at theChernobyl nuclear power plant on April26, 1986. The project documents theactivities undertaken by people in orderto adapt to the reality of life after theChernobyl disaster. From villagers inBelarus soaking mushrooms in waterand vinegar to reduce the amount ofradiation they contain to a Welsh farmerwhose sheep must be scanned beforethey can be passed fit for slaughter andhuman consumption. We are introducedto a Belarusian professor whomeasures the accumulated radiation inschool children in the South of Belarusand also to the former director of theChernobyl nuclear power plant who

believes that a positive attitude hasstopped him from becoming sick. Eachperson interviewed expresses their ownviews on the importance of theexplosion and its impacts, somebelieving that Chernobyl ruined theirlives, while others still believe that thehealth effects are negligible. Each wasgiven the same opportunity to havetheir perceptions recorded.

An exhibition based on the stories ofthe twenty has been travelling aroundthe world in an effort to offer someinsight into the fate of a few of the manyvictims and reveal some of the impactsof the continuing catastrophe. Thestories of these 20 people from allwalks of life can help us to absorb thesignificance of the accident and itsimpact on humanity.

The personal stories brought to life inthis project took three years to compileand took Eskesen on a journey throughthe Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Latvia,Sweden, France, and the UK. Thefollowing is a snapshot of each of thetwenty stories featured.


Hanna KozlovaHousewife, Founder of theorganisation 'Marked by ChernobylAtom', Kiev, Ukraine.

"I realised that nobody wasconcerned about us and nobodywould take care of us after thedisaster. It was our own problemand we were the only ones whocould deal with it. At that point Ifelt very lonely. It was only throughme that my child could be heard."

Hanna Kozlova bursts into tears as shetells of her family's misfortune. Sheclearly is marked by Chernobyl.

In the early 1980s Hanna lived inPripyat and her husband worked at thenuclear power plant three kilometresaway. Right after the explosion on April26, Hanna went outside with their four-year-old son Viktor, ignoring a man onthe street who had advised her to stayindoors. She noticed that men wearingmasks were washing the streets andwondered what was going on. Therewas a strange metallic taste in hermouth. Iodine pills were handed out butHanna did not take any. She simplycould not believe that anything seriouscould have happened.

Hanna belatedly came to understandthe events of that night when her sondeveloped thyroid cancer. "When Iheard my son's diagnosis the first time Idid not believe it. It could happen toanyone else but me. I screamed at thetop of my voice. When I was told thatthere was nothing they could do, Irefused to believe it. When my child hadan operation I was told that the resultwas not yet certain. I refused to believe

that too."

Hanna fought courageously in order toget the right medical treatment for herson and decided to form theorganisation 'Marked by ChernobylAtom'. The name referred to the post-operative scars the children have ontheir necks. Many similarly disheartenedmothers contacted her for advice.Hanna and the other womendemonstrated in front of governmentbuildings in Kiev demanding radioactiveiodine treatment and medicine for allchildren. The group also organisedrehabilitation trips abroad for the kidsbut with time it became more difficult toobtain money for all the activities andeventually the organisation wasdisbanded.

Grigoriy SorikovPensioner, Bartolomeevka village,Belarus

"The day after the accident therewas an old aeroplane, an E2 I think,flying very low, about 300 metresabove ground, to and fro, to andfro. It seeded something on theclouds and then it rained here. Imyself saw how it did it. The planeflew to and fro. First there was acloud and then it disappeared. Theclouds fell down to earth as rainand the sky cleared."

Grigoriy rolls a cigarette from a piece oftorn newspaper and his homemadetobacco, leans back and looks out overhis radioactive garden. He is a bornoptimist, and despite the lack ofelectricity he loves living in his peacefulplace. "It costs nothing to live here and

there is water in the well nearby. All thefood is grown in the garden." In theforest there are mushrooms and berriesto be picked and sold to people passingby on the main road.

Bartolomeevka is a village situated insouthern Belarus. It is just ascontaminated as the area around theChernobyl plant 200 kilometres away. Incontrast to the closed zone around thenuclear power plant, access to thevillage is not restricted.

Since 1986 there has been muchsecrecy and mystery concerning thereason why the area is socontaminated. Grigoriy story could offerone explanation as he tells of themorning in April 1986 when he noticedthat the water in the puddles was green- a fighter plane had shot chemicals intothe air so that the radioactive cloudfrom Chernobyl rained down, therebypreventing it from continuing on its wayto populous Moscow.

The radioactive cloud was heading for acity with millions of inhabitants thereforeurgent action was necessary. Thepeople who would instead suffer theconsequences were neither warned noroffered any explanations. At that pointnobody knew that the Soviet Unionwould disintegrate some years later andleave the huge challenge of clearing upto a small totalitarian country withlimited economic means.

It was not until 1989 that the scientificcommunity in the West receivedinformation about how serious thecontamination of southern Belarus was.For many years no one concernedthemselves with the people living there,nobody was analysing the soil and nohuman rights organisations arrived tocomplain about how radioactive rainhad been allowed to fall on the localpopulation.

Igor KomisarenkoDirector of the Komisarenko Institutefor Endocrinology and Metabolism,Kiev, Ukraine

"If you visit different medicalinstitutes here, they will tell you thatthey have noticed an increase insome disease or other. Why is theresuch an increase? You can assumewhatever you like. Chernobyl is justlike a big laboratory in the Ukraine,where people were used as guineapigs."


For Igor Komisarenko time is split intotwo periods, before and afterChernobyl. Before Chernobyl therewere one or two cases of thyroid cancerper year but by 1989 the number hadincreased to up to seven per year. In1991, he saw 21 new cases and by1994, there were around 41 new cases."It was the endocrine organs, e.g. thethyroid gland and reproductive system,that were affected first," Igorremembers. "Also the mucousmembranes, stomach and bowel, bloodand other organs are influenced byradioactivity. We will continue to beaffected out here in this countrybecause we still have many radioactiveelements that are active and influenceour bodies."

The thyroid gland produces vitalhormones that regulate the body. Theyaffect the brain of the foetus, thedevelopment of the skeleton, humanintelligence and so on. After birth thehormones continue to control all thebody's processes. The hormonesproduced by the thyroid gland controlsfundamental aspects of a person's life.They contain iodine but iodine is alsofound in a radioactive form, whichaffects the development of the cells inthe thyroid gland - and this can causetumours. "Several million curies ofradioactive iodine escaped into theatmosphere. We failed to takepreventive measures withsupplementary iodine. The thyroid glandis the very first to be affected" says Igor.Before Chernobyl thyroid cancer did notappear in the statistics and the fewcases that occurred were registeredunder 'other types'. Today it has its owncolumn heading. The latent period isthree to four years for children andseven to ten years for adults. Thereforethe illness manifests itself only severalyears after the exposure.

In 1981 there were 0.05% children withcancer cases, in 1996 this proportionincreased to 0.5%. 50% of all thecancer patients came from the regionsclosest to Chernobyl. A significant risethat is due to the fact that those whowere children and teenagers at the timeof the accident are now adults. Igorexpects the figure to continue rising asthe group ages.

In order for society to be able torespond to the conclusions of thescientific community, you first have to'adapt science to politics', as Igorexpresses it. The increase in thenumber of cases of thyroid cancer wasnot officially recognised as a

consequence of Chernobyl until 1996.

Georgiy ReichmanState Inspector for Radiation Safety,Ukrainian Committee for NuclearRegulation, Slavutich, Ukraine

"When people say that theoperators were not good enough, itis not true. They were experiencedenough to work at the plant undernormal conditions. But the reactorwas in such a state that it wasdifficult to predict anything. Theydid not have enough information toforesee events and makedecisions. It would not be decentof me to say that I would havedone things differently. It is notdecent towards those who diedthat night."

In 1986 there were four reactors at theChernobyl nuclear power plant. The fifthreactor was supposed to start operatingby the end of the year. At that timeReichmann was responsible for trainingnew employees in the control rooms.

Looking back at the accident, he saysthat the reactor should have beenconstructed so that it could not explodeirrespective of the operators' actions. "Ibelieve that the reason for the accidentlies in the design defects. Since such asituation was not predicted, theoperators did not have any chance."As a vice-manager of the fourth reactorReichman coordinated the constructionof the concrete encapsulation of thedamaged reactor. The project has beendescribed as one of the most difficultconstruction tasks ever undertaken.First a tunnel was made under theruined reactor, where a square concreteslab was built. Afterwards, an inner wallseparated the third and fourth reactors.

The high radiation levels impededdetailed inspection of the stability of theexisting structures. Concreteconstructions were lifted into position byremotely controlled cranes. All effortswere put into finishing the 'sarcophagus'as soon as possible. The monstroustask was completed in a record time ofseven months. All the equipment usedwas then transported and dumped withother highly radioactive waste.

A concrete lid was laid over the reactor,but the discussions in the internationalcommunity raged on. Chernobylbecame a discussion forum wherepassions ran high and accusations wereexchanged back and forth. Some

pointed out that the sarcophagus wasnot built well enough. Others accusedthe Ukrainians of using it as a moneymachine. In 1997 the 'ChernobylShelter Fund' was established with thepurpose of building a more permanentcontainment. With the budget of 870million Euros, the plan is to build agigantic self-supporting bow-shapedconstruction that will contain both thedestroyed reactor and the concretesarcophagus.

Reichman's next task is to ensureradiation safety for the employeesworking on this mega project. "If oneincludes all the systems, I believe it willcost about 1-1,5 billion dollars. Whoknows whether it is the right decision?All the constructions that we built in1986 were finished in seven monthsand expected to last 30 years. Thequality could have been better, but after20 years I can say that they were betterthan nothing."

Glyn RobertsSheep farmer, Betws-y-Coed, Wales,United Kingdom

"We were very surprised at the ideathat Chernobyl could influence ushere. The first year was awful. Wecould not sell any of our lamb.Everything came to a standstill. Iwas terrified, as I had startedbreeding sheep only three yearsearlier. We did not get anycompensation until the end of theyear. I was furious. If thegovernment wants to have thatnuclear energy, then it had betterhave some kind of backup-plan forwhen something like thishappens."

Six days after the Chernobyl accident aradioactive cloud reached the BritishIsles, where it rained its contents overWales, Cumbria and southern Scotland.At first the officials believed that thelevel of contamination was low. Farmerscontinued at their own steady pace andthe Welsh sheep kept on eating thegrass that had been showered with asolution of radioactive caesium. It wasthe end of June before it wasdiscovered that in the mountains therewere areas where contaminationexceeded the permitted levels. "I was inthe market, when the announcementfrom the agricultural secretary came."says Glyn. "We were not allowed tomove or sell our animals due to thepossibility of our sheep beingcontaminated".


The restrictions were applied to an areaof 4,100 km2 in northern Wales in orderto prevent further spreading ofradioactive elements into the foodchain. However no information aboutthe Government's long-term plans wasforthcoming.

Sheep farmers were used to sellinglambs when they were ready to beslaughtered but in 1986 they wereforced to keep all their animals andapply for additional bank loans to keepbusinesses going.

Following a meeting between 300 angrysheep farmers and a representative ofthe Welsh Government on September3, a system was established allowingfarmers to scan sheep before sellingthem. However the consumers' faith inWelsh lamb had been shaken and theprices fell by over 50%.

Still, 20 years on, selling or slaughteringsheep is a complicated procedure forfarmers. "I ask for a permit and peoplefrom the Ministry come to count andscan the animals," Glyn explains aboutthe process. "We use red paint to markthe sheep that should be slaughtered.Afterwards we scan them. If the sheepis fine and can be eaten, it gets taggedin the ear." "The problem is the type ofsoil that we have here," says Glyn. "Itcontains a lot of peat. Due to somescientific reason caesium tends tocirculate in that kind of soil."

Vasiliy NesterenkoDirector of the Belarusian Institutefor Radiation Safety, Minsk, Belarus

"I could see that this technologywas very risky. It is not possible tocombine nuclear power withmodern set of ethics. In truth it is atechnology of the future for peoplewith higher morals. It was painfulfor me to acknowledge that. I hadto revise everything I believed inand occupied myself with up tillthen. I decided to work towardsprotecting children fromradioactivity. They were the oneswho suffered most back then."

Vasiliy Nesterenko has enduredconstant pressure from authoritiesbecause of his efforts to help theBelarusian people live with radiation.When the Soviet government begangathering all its specialists to attemptextinguishing the fire at the Chernobylreactor, Nesterenko was taken to thesite of the catastrophe. His institute was

given the task of compiling the first mapon the contamination of Belarus. Justlike other documentation, the populationonly got to see it after 1989.

"We had around 3,700 contaminatedvillages. There were 2,500,000 peopleliving in them. 500,000 of them werechildren," says Nesterenko.In the early 1990s Nesterenkoestablished the independent BelarusianInstitute for Radiation Safety(BELRAD). Its aim was to create anetwork of public centres that couldmonitor foodstuffs, measure theaccumulation of radioactivity in childrenand educate people on how to protectthemselves. 370 centres were openedhowever in 1993 the government cuttheir number to 160. Today only 40remain and western donors now financeall those.

Although the Belarusian governmenthas expressed the desire to deal withthe situation in the country it lacks thecapacity. It has been calculated that thedamage inflicted due to Chernobyl isalmost 32 times the national budgetover a period of 30 years. According toNesterenko the government spends upto 20% of its annual budget on variousChernobyl-related programmes, but thisis equivalent to just 10% of what isnecessary.

Since the population of Belarus isforced to live with a permanently higherradiation level, BELRAD recommends aspecific diet to help improve the healthin the region. The Institute developed adietary supplement powder, based onapple pectin, which it claims cleanses

the body of heavy metals andradioactive nuclides. A child on the dietis advised to take pectin for 15-20 daysevery month. BELRAD states that onthis regime 50-80% of the radioactivenuclides can be eliminated from thebody. The whole treatment cycle costsno more than 110 Euros annually perchild.

Sergey VolkovsLiquidator - clean-up worker atChernobyl, Jecabpils, Latvia

"In the Soviet Union humanscounted for nothing. They werezero to the officials. They couldhave recruited people in theirmiddle age, who already hadfamilies and children. One shouldnot have sent young people like meto Chernobyl. The government putan end to our lives. It destroyed ourfuture."

Sergey's anger about the way theSoviet system treated its people hasturned against Russia nowadays, eventhough his family has Russian roots.After the Chernobyl accident youngpeople from the entire Soviet Unionwere mobilised to help. It is still unclearhow many people participated in theclean up, but estimates suggest severalhundreds of thousands. Many of themcame from the Baltic countries situatednear to Chernobyl.

In May 1986 Sergey became a driver ofan armoured vehicle transporting'reactor guards'. They were militaryengineers who monitored the processesin the reactors. In between thesetransport tasks Sergey patrolled thetown of Pripyat to prevent looters fromrobbing the abandoned houses.After one week in Chernobyl, Sergeybegan feeling disoriented. "Weunderstood everything but reacted veryslowly," he says. When they parkedcars, their feet would not press thebreak pedal at the right time and theywould bump into other cars. Manydrivers experienced the same difficultiesand it became quite dangerous with theintensive traffic in the zone.

Sergey says that the officers hetransported calculated the radiationlevel that he accumulated as well abovepermissible levels. Unfortunately, hissuperior was not interested in hearingabout the high radiation dose or abouthis deteriorating reaction capabilities. Allthe documents registering radiationlevels were discarded.


Initially the soldiers were promisedfinancial support, holidays and shortermilitary service upon their return fromChernobyl. Sergey got free telephoneinstallation, but otherwise received nospecial benefits when he returnedhome.

Today he is 38 years of age with thephysique of a 55 year old. He used tobe a strong young man, but now hegets nosebleeds several times a monthand suffers from serious migraines.Occasionally his breathing stops duringa migraine attack. According toSergey's doctor in Riga, Chernobylliquidators age 10-15 years earlier thanother people.

Sergey cannot get any governmentjobs. It is never stated directly, but assoon as he reveals that he worked atChernobyl, his applications aredeclined. Private companies underpayhim, because they think that he getsmoney from the state and many extrabenefits.

Constantine Checherov,Nuclear Physicist, KurchatovInstitute, Moscow, Russia / Slavutich,Ukraine

"Nobody orders me to do this,nobody forces me to do it. When Ienter the fourth reactor nobodyand nothing can disturb me. Thereare no people around checking theradiation dose that I get there. I amin another world, a world offreedom - of pure euphoria and joy.I was the very first person in theworld to see the reactor from theinside."

Checherov is one of the very fewpeople in the world who makeexpeditions into the exploded reactorencapsulated in concrete at theChernobyl Nuclear Power Plant. In April1986 he and his colleagues from theKurchatov Institute in Moscow wereasked to de-activate the buses used totransport the first victims from Moscowairport to the hospital in the city. Thesick people had made the busesradioactive. In June Checherov arrivedat the scene of the accident, which wasto become his working place for manyyears on.

Based on his own observations of thedestroyed reactor Checherov maintainsthat some of its parts simply melted andturned into plasma. When the plasmaflowed out there was an explosion of

such a force that it blew the reactor'suppermost plate off 15-17 metersupwards. But it was not the only thing tofly out. In contrast to the more 'officialversions', Checherov is convinced thatmost of 'the active zone' was blastedout of the reactor and exploded while itwas in the air. According to him, about95% of the fuel and the products of thenuclear fission came out and werespread across the entire planet. Checherov's version is a 'worst casescenario' and many environmentalorganisations disagree. They believethat more than 97% of the radioactivematerials are still inside the reactor andthat only 3% are dispersed outside.

George LepinNuclear Scientist, InternationalEcological Academy, Minsk, Belarus

"It was a political decision to re-start the third reactor. It waspossible to do so only becausethere were some people, who didthe hazardous work. Someonetried to prove that nothingdangerous happened in Chernobyland that our country could manageeverything. There was even amilitary leader who gathered hisstaff after the accident andinquired how much time theyneeded to re-build the fourthreactor. If it had been physicallypossible, I don't think anyonewould have spared human lives todo it."

Delivering results and following planswithout deviation, no matter what, weremost important to the Soviet system.While Lepin worked as a liquidator atChernobyl, he came across a postershowing when various parts of thepower plant were built and put intooperation. Everything was finishedmuch earlier than planned. The fourthreactor was started three months earlierthan expected. Three months that couldhave been used to check the safety ofthe plant.

In those days Lepin was still a patriot.He heard of soldiers - called 'bio-robots'- working on the roof of the reactor. Insome areas people were only allowedto work for very short periods of timebut even then they still received dosesthat were much higher than permitted.This hazardous and foolhardy work wasdone manually. Soldiers were given alead apron and a shovel. During oneminute they were supposed to shovelas much rubble as possible from the

roof into the open reactor. Most of themgot sick and were taken to the hospital.

Lepin proposed to mechanize thesoldiers' work, but few robots couldfunction due to high radioactivity. Histeam managed to install somemachines but they were never used.The project was stopped, because therewas a rush to report the completion ofthe work. Those places that were stillcontaminated were covered with a thicklayer of concrete. Nevertheless theradiation level in the building did notdecrease and many people were stillworking there. Lepin worked in the zone for six yearsand can relate many stories. He saysthat even before the accident peopleoccasionally noticed that the streets ofPripyat were suddenly washed withsoapy water or that new asphalt wouldbe put on the roads. Later on theasphalt was examined and found toresemble a layer cake, consisting of'clean' and contaminated layers.

"Everything points towards otheraccidents at Chernobyl before April1986" concludes Lepin. "Some yearsago a newspaper published a story thatthere was an accident in Chernobyl in1982. It was revealed that the KGBcontrolled the nuclear power plant andwrote regular reports on the state of theplant. There were indications that oneshould have been especially carefulregarding the plant. But sinceeverything was secret, no actions weretaken."

Galina BandazhevskayaPaediatrician, Minsk, Belarus

"Every scientist must be able topublicise the results of his/herwork so that it can be debated. It isimportant that there are those whoagree or disagree with the work.One should enter into a goodscientific dialogue in order to reachthe truth. Unfortunately this is notpossible for us."

Galina has an ambitious project in mind- to set up an independent researchlaboratory in Belarus. Even though itwould be a modestly sized laboratory, itis a courageous initiative in a country,where everything is managed by theState. She wants to continue with thework for which her husband, YuriyBandazhevsky, was imprisoned.In 1989, while most of the doctors weremoving away from the contaminatedarea in the south of Belarus, Yuriy and


Galina moved there in order to studythe effects of radioactivity on the humanbody.

In a few years their research producedevidence that international norms forradiation exposure were deficient. Theirresearch revealed that the prolongedinfluence of low dose radiation on ahuman body is much more dangerousthan previously believed and that theheart and the kidneys were especiallyaffected by radiation. They found that acontamination level of as little as 50Becquerels of radioactivity per kilo ofbody weight could cause a child serioushealth problems. The research wascritical of the official response toradioactivity contamination.

Shortly after the research waspublished, Galina's husband Yuriy, inhis capacity as Director of the GomelMedical Institute, was arrested. He wascharged and sentenced to eight yearsimprisonment for supposedly acceptingbribes from students.

Amnesty International took up his case,classifying him as a 'prisoner ofconscience', the EU Commission visitedto check on his well being and theCouncil of Europe lobbied for hisrelease. He was transferred to a cellwith only three other prisoners aftersharing with 80.

"Now that my husband and I have beenthrough our system I can say that thereis no justice in this country." Galinalaments. "If a person does not fit intothe system and he says somethingdifferent, then his freedom can be takenaway with no justification. He can beaccused of anything at all and will neverbe able to contradict it or find any kindof justice."

On August 5 2005 Professor YuriyBandazhevsky was released afterserving half his term. He and Galina arenow working on establishing their ownindependent research laboratory.

Volodimir UsatenkoEnergy Engineer, Kiev, Ukraine

"We have a problem - but nobodytries to understand its essence. Ifyou have a destroyed reactor todeal with, you need money - lots ofmoney. 'We can solve the problemonly over 20 years' one would say.But then it is important to revivethe problem at appropriate times. Ifsomeone came along and solved

the problem at once in a verysimple way then only few peoplewould be grateful to him, becausehe might do away with thousandsof jobs."

Before Chernobyl Usatenko was a chiefengineer at a Ukrainian energycompany. The Soviet energy sector wasa high government priority and nuclearpower was seen as the ultimate solutionto the problem of energy supply.

At the beginning of May 1986, Volodimirheard that an accident had occurred atChernobyl but that the radioactive leakwas insignificant and that the reactorhad not been destroyed. However,when he looked through his manualsand found out which type of reactor wasinvolved he immediately realised that itmust have been completely destroyed.The Chernobyl reactor had a layer ofprotection around the fuel elements, butthe protection around the reactor itselfwas very vulnerable and not suited to apowerful increase in pressure.

In October Volodimir was called in andordered to go to the accident area. Histeam was to build a separation wallbetween the third and fourth units. "Iwas a bio-robot who did all sorts ofwork," says Volodimir. "It wasinteresting how the body reacted to highdoses of radiation. First and foremostthe metabolism was stimulatedenormously. When there was a lot ofbeta-radiation we felt it in our eyes. Itfelt like they were being cut. In that waywe had a sense of the doses we weregetting." There were many immediateillnesses in Volodimir's team - intestinal,stomach, heart, eye and toothproblems. It took six years before hehimself felt well again.

As a member of the National RadiationSafety Commission he became involvedin the discussions on what to do withthe radioactive waste at Chernobyl.Volodimir thinks that all the clearing upwork could be done over the course ofabout 12 years. In his opinion all theprocesses should be carefully preparedand then the work should be brought toan end. But if that was done it wouldalso mean the introduction of newnorms for the entire nuclear industryand that would be impossible to getsupport for.

He suspects the people responsible forclean up of stretching the process inorder to keep on receiving funding fromboth national and internationalinvestors. "They know that if they finish

the work there will be no more money.So we hear of various miracles they areperforming over there. The Chernobylproblem has been turned into onefantastic business venture."

Natalia IvanovaDeputy Director, Vesnova Orphanage,Mogilev region, Belarus

"It was terrible having to knock onthe door or window in the middleof the night to tell the parents thattheir children should be evacuatedthe next morning. We said it wasbecause of the radioactivity, whichcould have bad consequences forall of them. We arranged a placefor everyone to gather to be put onbuses. It was a dreadful sight."

On April 26 1986 Natalia was working inthe garden. It was not until the eveningthat the news reached her about theaccident 27 kilometres away. Nataliawas not worried because neither shenor her family knew anything aboutnuclear power and they did not realisethere was any danger.

At midnight two or three days after theaccident, all the employees of theschool were gathered together. Thedirector told them to go round warningpeople in the villages. The childrenwere to be evacuated the next day at 6 a.m.

During the night they managed toassemble most of the children. Theywere put on buses and driven away.Nobody really understood the gravity ofthe situation. "People were panicking. Itwas just like wartime," Nataliaremembers. "We also evacuatedpregnant women, but that was just thefirst evacuation." The last residentswere evacuated from the village sixmonths after the accident.

Natalia got a job in an orphanage formentally and physically handicappedchildren in the town of Vesnova. Therewere 15 nurses and teachers for 150children, of who 87 required constantcare. Approximately 30% of the childrencame from the contaminated areas butthere was no record kept of whatconnection their family had to theaccident.

Today there are more institutionalisedchildren in Belarus than after World WarTwo. The strong increase in congenitaldeformities after the Chernobyl accidenthas meant an increase in the number of


children in orphanages, partly becauseof the rejection of deformed childrenand partly because the economicsituation makes it practically impossiblefor families to look after sick children.

Sergei ParashinFormer Director of the ChernobylPower Station, Kiev, Ukraine

"You can reduce the consequencesif you do not give people negativeinformation about radioactivity. It isa fact that the workers at thepower station who began workingthere before the disaster do not getsick as often as those who cameafter the accident. There areconsequences caused by theradioactivity but most of theconsequences are psychological."

In 1986 Parashin was second incommand at the Chernobyl power plant.Since then he has had many years toanalyse what happened. He isconvinced that such an accident cannothappen again and that society haslearnt from its mistakes. As if toconvince himself, he repeats over andover that there are only a few long-termeffects and that they can be overcomewith a positive attitude towards thefuture.

"The most crucial thing for a person'shealth is their psychological state, whichalso affects the immune system," saysParashin. "The positive and optimisticpeople whom I knew in Chernobyl couldtolerate high doses of radioactivity andremain in good health. People with anegative attitude died much quickerthan others."

Right after the explosion on April 26, allthe managers gathered in a bunkerfrom where the decisions were taken. Itgradually became apparent that thereactor was destroyed, but the extent ofthe disaster did not become clear toParashin until daylight when he wasable to see the enormous craterrevealing the radioactive reactor.

For those who had been there thatnight, the question arose how thingscould have gone so wrong. "There weremany factors at play. The power stationhad many construction faults.Furthermore, we prioritised financialprofit over safety," says Parashin. "Itwas a problem of the whole SovietUnion. Quantity was prioritised overquality".

In 1994 Sergey advanced to theposition of director for the entire powerplant complex. He set out to improveChernobyl's image and had the placespruced up and painted. The workers'canteen got napkins and stainlesscutlery replaced the old Sovietaluminium. The staff received nicerclothing, flowers were planted and afountain was built. Parashin alsomodernised the railway line, which ranto the new town of Slavutich, where theworkers then lived. Cultural events werearranged in the town. Staff moralimproved and productivity rose slightly.In 1995 the Ukraine agreed to closedown the remaining Chernobyl reactorsand that was achieved in 2000.

It is Parashin's view that Chernobylaffected safety at power stations in theWest. "After Chernobyl many countriesstopped the construction of new nuclearpower stations and instead improvedthe safety of existing reactors. I thinkmore money was invested than wasnecessary, but as a result nuclearenergy has become safer. So countriesin the West owe thanks to the Ukraine".

Danilo Vezhichanin,Mayor of the village of Yelno, RivneOblast, the Ukraine

"What is it you need if you live in avillage? You need land, water androads. Then it is a good life! In ourvillage you do not complain ofhaving no gas or the like. Here youhope at least to get some goodland so that you can plant potatoesand get some 'clean' hay. Ourchildren must be able to drink'clean' milk. Now it is contaminatedwith radioactivity. WithoutChernobyl our land would havebeen 'clean'. It would have beeneasier for people to live here."

The village of Yelno, where Danilo lives,is 300 km west of Chernobyl and wasamong the places hardest hit by theradioactive fallout. Danilo explains thatthe village is surrounded by sand andpeat bogs, resulting in a high mobility ofradioactive elements from the soil intothe plants. Scientists believe that 97%of the radioactivity circulates betweenthe peat soil and the plants.

The 700 people living in Yelno were notinformed about the accident in 1986. Awhole year passed before theinformation reached them. Not untilpeople began getting headaches andpains in their joints during the winter of

1987 did they contact the healthauthorities. There was an attempt toevacuate the population, but mostinhabitants soon returned. It is typical ofpeople in Polesie that they areintimately connected with the rhythms ofnature and the land.

Most of the villagers live off their ownproduction of milk, potatoes andvegetables. 80-90% of thecontamination reaches people throughtheir food. Just 5-20% comes fromexternal radiation. Milk is eight to tentimes more contaminated thanpermitted. The same goes for meat andpotatoes.

The cows graze in meadows of grasswith high caesium content. Theradioactivity lies in the upper layers ofthe soil where the roots of the grassare. The IAEA runs a project in Yelno,where fields are ploughed so that theradioactive elements in the upper 5 cmare instead spread over 20 cm. As aresult the concentration of radioactivityis diluted threefold and the food is lessradioactive. In radiobiology there is a rule of thumbthat it takes about 10 half-life periodsbefore a radioactive element is safe.The half-life period of caesium is 30years. Applying this rule of thumbsuggests that it will take 300 yearsbefore the problems of Yelno havedissipated.

Marita Stinnerbom,Reindeer farmer, Klimpfjäll, Lapland,Sweden

"Reindeer farming is our life. Wehave lived off it for hundreds ofyears. I believe we shall continuereindeer farming no matter what.But we also think about what hashappened and what the future willbring. After we began feeding ourreindeer with the special forage,the taste of the meat had changed.It did not have its natural tasteanymore."

Marita drives a cross-country vehicle inthe mountain valley. She throws herlasso into the reindeer flock that hasbeen driven down through the valley."We have managed to keep ourtraditions because we live them. I gotmy first reindeer from my parents, whenI was small. It is impossible to startreindeer farming at the age of 20. Onehas to build up the flock when still achild."


Lapland, the country of the Samies,stretches from northern Russia, overFinland, Sweden and Norway. InSweden, where Marita lives, there areapproximately 20,000 Samies, 10-15%of whom work with reindeer. They donot own the land, but have the right touse it.

In spring 1986, a few days after theChernobyl accident, it rained overScandinavia and large areas gotcontaminated with radiation. Lichen,which comprises the main part of thereindeer's nutrition, became radioactiveand so did the animals. They were allslaughtered and buried in a dump. "The Swedish Government paid us forthe reindeer as it is responsible for thewell-being of the population of itscountry." The Samies werecompensated for the loss and could buynew reindeer in the North. However itwas not just an economic loss that theysuffered. Their indigenous culture wasat stake.

Samies' life had always been centredon the reindeer. After 1986 slaughteringcould only happen at a certain point inthe year. The animals were scanned forradiation and given special forage toprevent them from absorbing too muchcaesium. Everything was to be plannedaccording to a totally new pattern.

The problem with radiation has notdisappeared. In 2003 the amounts ofcaesium in Lapland valleys increasedsuddenly and many Samies had to burytheir reindeer again but on thatoccasion no compensation was given.The scientists believed that the reasonfor the sudden increase was due to thevast number of mushrooms thataccumulated radioactive elements but

the Samies point out that fish were alsoaffected, even though fish do not eatmushrooms.

"We could always eat reindeer meat,but now we have to bury themsometimes and that hurts," says Marita."I cannot stop thinking that caesium isin our bodies and that we pass it over toour children. In 2003 we were veryworried and we are still concernedabout what awaits us in the autumn. Itcan come back any time."

Alexander FilippovRetired school teacher, Babichivillage, Belarus

"Today school children only get fourhours of lessons in radioactivity.Who teaches these four hours? It isusually general class teachers, whoare normally not specialists in thesubject. They can be veryspecialised in mathematics,biology or a million of other things.But there is a high degree ofignorance about radioactivityamong them and even amongstpeople who have high positions insociety, which never ceases tosurprise me."

For many years after the accidentnobody in the affected areas knew whatthey should do in their everyday lives.Courses on radioactivity safety werearranged in the schools, but there wereno teaching materials. Filippov wrotefive manuals on agriculture andradioactivity aimed at teachers in ruralschools. The books were published in alimited edition and the government didnot provide any additional materials.He set up an 'ecological centre' in asmall room at the school with apparatusthat could measure the level of caesiumin foodstuffs. He acquired someinstruments to measure nitrates, pHvalues, potassium and phosphorus. Inthis way he was able to get a ratherdetailed idea of what foods were mostdangerous to eat.

The pupils were involved in identifyingthe cleanest and the most contaminatedzones around the village. Radioactivitylevels of the local forest and nearbyfields were charted on maps. Byknowing where the invisible pollutionwas located, they could recommendwhere berries and mushrooms could begathered more safely.

"All our recommendations were gearedtowards teaching children how to get'completely' clean food from 'relatively'

clean food using technology," saysAlexander of the teaching project, whichwas closed after he retired. No otherteacher was willing to take over thisimportant education.

In southern Belarus radioactivity hasbeen a fixed part of everyday life for thelast 20 years. Alexander thinks that ifpeople in the ministries knew moreabout the subject, then their knowledgewould spread downwards in thisauthoritarian country. "We obey the law.We do the things we are expected todo."

In agriculture, attempts are made toprevent radioactivity getting intofoodstuffs by spreading calcium,dolomite and potassium on the fields.This serves to block strontium andcaesium but, on the other hand, theseelements remain in the soil. Alexander'sopinion is that the soil can becompletely rid of radioactive elementsthrough the use of plants.

An experiment that lasted four yearshas proved that plants from the legumefamily almost completely clean the soil.The problem is that it is not profitable tocultivate legumes and no extern fundingis available therefore the localpopulation continues eating radioactivefood. "Nobody tells us anything and it isdifficult to prove anything. People die ofordinary illnesses. If the authoritiesadmit that a person dies because ofradioactivity then they have to awardcompensation afterwards. Who wants todo that?"

Boris SorochinskiyResearcher, Institute for Cell Biologyand Genetics, Kiev, the Ukraine

"After Chernobyl I studiedbiochemical, physiological, andcytological changes in humanbeings and plants. In officialreports from WHO and IAEA therewere only accounts aboutChernobyl causing an increase incataracts and thyroid cancers. Allother possible consequences wererejected due to the lack of statisticdata or information about thehealth situation prior to theaccident and thus the absence of abasis for comparison."

Sorochinskiy ventures into the unknownin a somewhat messy office in theoutskirts of Kiev, where he explainsabout his research. When scientists


research something new, it can becompared to a trip to outer space.Everything is so different that before thetrip, one cannot imagine what one willencounter.

"To be able to do genetic studies it isnecessary to examine severalgenerations. Right now we have only asecond generation of people since theChernobyl accident. For a long timethere was a popular opinion, which wasalmost regarded as official, that therewere no genetic consequences of thecatastrophe and that one should stopregarding Chernobyl as a possiblesource of danger."

When Boris came to the Chernobylzone for the first time, it was exciting forhim to study the subject of his master'sthesis directly in the field, beyond thelimiting laboratory environment.He noticed deformed and yellowishplants. "Deciduous trees had biggerleaves," he reports. "Some oak treeleaves were ten times bigger thannormal and pine tree needles - three orfour times smaller. I do not have anydoubts that Chernobyl caused somegenetic changes. The question is howto find them." According to Boris thescientists can only say that the problemof genetic mutations exists but are notable to point out the specific ones. It ispossible to examine severalgenerations of plants in the course of arelatively short time. Therefore theyserve as a good model for researchingsome processes that are difficult tostudy among people and animals."People want to see the results at once,but mutations take some time tomanifest. It took billions of years forthese processes to happen on Earth."

Another issue for Sorochinskiy is theconnection between chronic radiationand health. He believes that the effectof long-lasting low doses cansometimes compare to that of highdoses. "If a person experiences achronic dose of one roentgen, it can beequal over time to a radiation dose of100-120 roentgens received at once. Ifthere is funding, it is possible to studythe genetic consequences and the risksassociated with chronic radiation. Ifthere is no money for that, then one canonly say that there exist no problems."

Svetlana PolganovskayaActivist, Chechersk, Belarus

"The administration was 'launderingmoney'. They were funded to

decontaminate the area andevacuate people but they had theirown agenda. Instead of removingthe contaminated villages themoney was spent on somethingelse. The local authorities tried toput me in jail because I invited anindependent commission toexamine what was going on. Itrevealed that four clean villageswith new houses had beenevacuated to Chechersk and otherplaces nearby while the authoritiestransported all the houses to theBlack Sea and sold them asholiday cottages."

After the accident at Chernobyl, theinhabitants of Chechersk noted thatpuddles of rainwater were green incolour. They were told that it was pollenfrom the trees, but did not believe it.They had never seen anything like it.Svetlana went to the localadministration office to get anexplanation but she was told to keepher mouth shut.

That was the beginning of a war shehas been waging for 20 years. Shearranged a sit-in in Moscow and pointedout to international humanitarianorganizations that people in thecontaminated areas of Belarus werebeing ignored. She revealed documentsproving that although the town wassupposed to be evacuated, peoplecontinued living there. Her flat wasburnt down and she was arrestedseveral times.

It was only two years after the accidentthat it was prohibited to eat food fromChechersk district. The military officialscoming from Russia to decontaminatethe area were very surprised to find alively town still functioning.

Svetlana approached the regionaladministration to ask why theneighbouring region of Vetkovsk hadbeen recognized as contaminated,whereas there was no recognisedproblem in Chechersk. She organised agroup of the locals to measure the areafor radiation.

In 1990 Svetlana participated in aninternational Chernobyl conference inKiev and even though Svetlana was notdue to make a speech, she took themicrophone and declared that onlythree regions in Belarus had beenevacuated and that many people stilllived in contaminated areas. People inthe West had believed that all thepopulation evacuation had been done.

The same year she arranged ademonstration in front of the Parliamentin Minsk. For two months they protestedwith posters demanding the evacuationof the zone, better medical treatmentand vitamins for children.

Svetlana managed to bring an IAEAdelegation to the town but the visit itturned into a farce. People had beengathered in the community centre andgiven lots of vodka - villagers played theaccordion and danced in the square. Bythe time the IAEA delegation arrived,everyone was partying and no onebrought forward any complaints.Today, Svetlana cooperates with anIrish humanitarian aid organization.When the lorries filled with aid arrive,Svetlana distributes the aid to thevillage people who need it, but thebureaucracy makes it difficult.

Valentina SmolnikovaPaediatrician, Buda-Koshelevo,Belarus

"It is very lucrative for theauthorities to hide information fromthe public. If nobody knows aboutthe problem, one does not have toinvest any money into solving it. Wegathered lots of data on radiationlevel in people's thyroid gland. Theauthorities said that our data wasincorrect and should be destroyed.Afterwards the scientists inventednew figures. This is the crimecommitted by our government."

Smolnikova heard the news about theaccident only in the beginning of May1986 on the forbidden radio station"Svoboda". As a Soviet medical worker


Valentina was liable to be called up formilitary service in case of war. If theenemy had dropped nuclear bombs, herteam would be the first in the area todeal with the situation. They wereequipped with Geiger counters andvarious military instruments.

Only after the official announcement ofthe accident could the medical teamtravel to the local villages to examinepeople for radiation. Many of thesevillages were later demolished andburied because the radioactivity levelswere too high.

The official scientists never requestedthe results of the examinations - insteadthe results were destroyed and theteam's instruments were confiscated. While the authorities were busyconcealing the scientific resultsValentina was busy as a paediatrician,working with the medical complicationsthat appeared in the years following theaccident. Next to her daily duties shecontinued gathering as much statisticaldata as she was capable of.

She found out that 40% of young menhad illnesses preventing them fromdoing military service. A further 30%were declared partly fit for the service.Since 1986 there has been a constantincrease in the number of invalidsamong the people. In 2003 there was atotal of 477,000 invalids in Belarus,which equated to 4.8% of thepopulation.

"Children should not havecontamination of the body greater than20 becquerels per kilogram. And that isa high figure," says Valentina. "If youaccept a larger dose the numbers ofsick and dying children will increase.We have a large proportion of childrenwho are invalids. Previously we havenever had children aged 14 and 15being declared invalids."

As opposed to many of her colleaguesValentina constantly tries to get thepublic interested in the real problems ofthe country. In August 2004 she ran forParliament to have a chance to debatethe problems that are otherwise notdiscussed in the country's media.

"Chernobyl was the reason for theUSSR falling apart," says Valentina. "Itwas the beginning of the end for theSoviet Union. We knew nothing for fiveyears, even though we were living oncontaminated soil. Nobody said wewere living in an affected area, despitethe fact that the government knew it."

Chantale Garnier Housewife/activist, Jura, France

"In some ways France is 20 yearsbehind other countries. There arestill many censored things here.Even in the medical system. In orderto see a specialist I need to firstvisit the family physician. We havethe right to vote but we're not free.In 2001 my organisation went tocourt. We reported that we hadbeen poisoned. We complained thatour thyroid cancers were Chernobylcollateral damage"

When it became known that an accidenthappened in a nuclear power plant inthe USSR, people in many Europeancountries were advised to stay indoors.In southern Germany cows were notallowed to graze outside. But not inFrance.

"When we heard it on television, theysaid there was no danger. Wewondered why the neighbouringcountries took precautions, while we didnot have to do anything." Garnierrecalls thinking at the time that thoseprecautions elsewhere were an over-reaction. Only when she developedthyroid cancer one year later did sheunderstand that something was wrong.After her thyroid operation it tookGarnier 5 years to regain control of herlife. She wanted to find out why she gotsick at all. She was told that 90% ofcases of the kind of cancer she hadwere caused by radiation. Thereforeshe was convinced that the cause ofher disease was the rain withradioactive particles from Chernobyl.To find evidence of a cover-up Garnierand her colleagues from the Associationof Thyroid Patients filed a complaintwith the French Courts in 2001. "We donot accuse politicians, we accuse thescientists, who were aware of theconsequences of the accident but whowould not say anything."

A contingent of policemen searchedministries and public offices for thedocuments that could identify peoplewho knew the degree of contaminationafter the accident and yet failed to warnthe public. The court wanted to learnabout the decisions that lead to Francenot taking any fallout precautions in1986.

"These documents showed that therewas a falsification of weather forecastsright after the accident" says Garnier."The system denied Chernobyl. All theinformation about the real levels of

contamination was classified." It wasrevealed that the contamination mapFrance submitted to the EU wasfalsified, claims Garnier. It showed 0.5Becquerel in those places where realcontamination was 500,000.

Garnier makes the point that it isdifficult to accept that a country likeFrance, with its fine food traditions,produces its raw products in fields witha high content of radioactive caesium. Itis even harder to understand that one ofthe largest countries in the democraticEuropean Union functioned in wayssimilar to the Soviet system that madethe Chernobyl catastrophe possible."We are still continuing with our worksince we have not achieved our goal.Right now we have only been to thelocal courts, but we are ready to go tothe final French court of appeal or tothe EU if necessary. We will prove thatthe state lied to us."

For information about how to bring theexhibition to your town or city or toorder the book (published in Danishand English) please contact MadsEskesen - profits from the book will bedonated to the BELRAD Institute ofBelarus.

Contact: Mads Eskesen Tel: +45 28880257Email: [email protected]: www.20years20lives.info

WISE AMSTERDAM/NIRS

ISSN: 1570-4629

Reproduction of this material isencouraged. Please give credit whenreprinting.

Editorial team: Tinu Otoki and Peer deRijk (WISE Amsterdam), Michael Mariotte(NIRS).

With contributions from Mads Eskesenand Rebecca Harms.

The next issue (647) will be mailed outon June 16, 2006.

Dear reader,

Apologies for the recent disruption to theNuclear Monitor service. We willendeavour to ensure that we catch youup on the news and stories missed (dueto successive special issues, absenceand illness) over the next few issues.

Best wishes,WISE


The list below is compiled based on data from Children of Chernobyl International, Children of Chornobyl Relief andDevelopment Fund and www.chernobyl.info.

HEALTH

• Shortly after the explosion, thousands of children and adults in Ukraine and Belarus were stricken with acute radiationsickness. Symptoms included vomiting, hair loss, severe rashes; this contradicts the original official public estimates of 100people affected.

• In 1994 experts from the University of Hiroshima analysed data on newborns and 30,000 stillborn foetuses in Belarus;researchers concluded that birth defects have nearly doubled since 1986.

• More than 10,000 Ukrainian children have travelled to Cuba for treatment of leukaemia and other illnesses.

• Overall, oncological illnesses (cancers) among children in Ukraine have tripled since 1986.

• In 2001, a joint Israeli-Ukrainian study published in the Royal Society of Medicine in London found that the children ofChornobyl liquidators born after the 1986 disaster have a rate of chromosome damage seven times higher than their siblingsborn prior to the nuclear accident.

• Fifty percent of all Ukrainian men between the ages of 13 and 29 have fertility problems - the highest rate of infertility in theworld.

• According to radiation health experts most cancers that result from radiation exposure do not develop until 10 - 20 years afterexposure. Therefore no accurate assessment of Chernobyl's overall impact can be made until this period has elapsed.

• A 2001 study by American and Ukrainian scientists identified a significantly higher rate of acute lymphoblastic leukaemiaamong children in northern Ukraine, as compared to the relatively uncontaminated Eastern Ukraine. Blood tests of thechildren showed that they had been exposed to radiation in utero. This study was re-confirmed after several internationalpeer reviews.

• Since 2005, local paediatric oncologists in the northern Ukrainian region of Rivne, have been reporting a noticeable increasein acute lymphoblastic leukaemia among young children. All these children are from the most isolated contaminated villagesalong the Belarusian border.

• In Belarus there has been a 2,400 % increase in the rates of thyroid cancer. Before Chernobyl, on average, there was lessthan one case of thyroid cancer per year.

• In the Gomel region of Belarus, the region closest to Chernobyl, there was a 100-fold increase in thyroid cancer.

• Throughout Belarus, the incidence of thyroid cancer in 1990 was already 30 times higher than in the years before theaccident

• In the Gomel region of Belarus, the incidence of leukaemia increased 50 % in children and adults.

• UNICEF reports that between 1990 and 1994, nervous system disorders increased by 43 %; cardiovascular diseases by 43%; bone and muscle disorders by 62 %; and diabetes by 28 %. UNICEF cautioned that it is difficult to prove whether theseincreases were caused by radiation or another unknown factor.

• A Swiss study shows a 40 % increase in all kinds of cancers in Belarus between 1990 and 2000.

• Tumour specialists fear that a variety of new cancers will only emerge 20 - 30 years after the disaster.

• Five years after the disaster, the Ukrainian Ministry of Health reported three times the normal rate of deformities and

CONSEQUENCES OF THE CHERNOBYLCATASTROPHEEven after 20 years it is still not possible to give an exact account of the effects that Chernobylcaused throughout the world. Much of the available information is subject to heated discussionsrepresenting various views on the accident.


developmental abnormalities in newborn children, as well as an increased number of miscarriages, premature births, andstillbirths.

• Heart disease in Belarus has quadrupled since the accident, caused by the accumulation of radioactive caesium in thecardiac muscle. Doctors report a high incidence of multiple defects of the heart - a condition coined "Chernobyl Heart."

Many radioactive elements are similar to the natural and vital minerals that our bodies need. For example:

• Plutonium is the most toxic substance man has ever produced, and it does not exist in nature. The body treats it as iron, dueto the chemical similarity. It gets distributed by the blood system to feed growing cells. It can cause a variety of cancers andblood disorders.

• Caesium-137 is mistaken for potassium, which is needed by every living cell, by the body. It then concentrates in themuscles.

• Iodine-131 is absorbed by the thyroid gland, which cannot determine whether it is natural or radioactive iodine. The thyroidgland makes important hormones to help the body function. Iodine 131 causes cancer and other disorders in the thyroidgland.

• Strontium-90 fools the body into accepting this element as calcium. It gets distributed throughout the bone structure and cancause leukaemia and a number of cancers, along with numerous other health problems.

ENVIRONMENTAL

• In the first weeks after the explosion excessive levels of radiation were recorded in northern Scandinavia, Wales, Ireland,Northern Italy, Greece and coastal Alaska.

• As a result of prevailing winds and rains, the heaviest radioactive fallout was in southeast Belarus and northern Ukraine.

• In Ukraine, over 4.6 million hectares of some of the most productive agricultural land in the world became contaminated.

• The total amount of radiation released was originally reported as 50 million curies by Soviet authorities. During the pastdecade, subsequent research and new calculations have resulted in revised estimated of up to 260 million curies.

• A permanent zone where human habitation and agricultural use is forbidden was established around the power station.North, east and south of the power plant the 'exclusion-zone' extends about 30 km, and about 60 km to the west.

• Gradual seepage of radiation into the water table, especially the Dnieper River and its tributaries, threatens the water supplyfor millions of people in coming decades.

• Twenty-one percent of prime Belarusian farmland remains dangerously contaminated from the decaying components ofplutonium.

• Radiation concentrated in sediments at the bottoms of lakes and ponds - the population continues to contaminate itself byfishing there. The average concentration of radionuclides in the groundwater has risen 10 to 100 fold.

• Although the air outside the exclusion zone is generally safe, ploughing, summer forest fires, and wind erosion continue toput the air at risk.

• In 2006, veterinarians in Rivne province, Ukraine, issued warnings to the northern contaminated villages that nearly two-thirds of the dairy cows in these villages are suffering from bovine leukaemia caused by radioactive elements, and that milkand other dairy products from these cows should not be consumed.

SOCIAL

• About 500.000 people were evacuated after the accident. 140.000 of them are not allowed to return.

• People from all Soviet Republics were sent to the disaster area between 1986 and 1990 to assist with the clean up efforts.Their tasks included evacuating contaminated villages, bulldozing contaminated houses, and fighting the fires at theChernobyl plant itself. These men unknowingly exposed themselves to horrific amounts of radiation and are now paying aterrible price. It is still unclear exactly how many people took part. Figures vary between 300.000 and 900,000 depending onthe source.

• During the past decade, approximately 40,000 clean up workers have died, mostly men in their 30s and 40s. 1.2 million


people continue to live on lands contaminated by ' low-level ' radiation, outside the exclusion zone; approximately 1,800villages effected.

• After the Chernobyl accident, almost 400,000 were forced to leave their homes as 'environmental refugees'. Over 2,000towns and villages were bulldozed to the ground, and hundreds more stand abandoned.

• Some deserted villages have been reoccupied by refugees from places as far away as Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan andAzerbaijan. These refugees would rather live in a contaminated area than risk being shot in the wars and conflicts in theirown homelands. For the original inhabitants of these villages, seeing people move into their ancestral homes and lands onlyadds to their heartache.

• Many Belarusians live in fear, uncertain about the extent to which their health and that of their children is at risk, and notknowing where to turn for information. This fear is exacerbated by the fact that the extent of the accident was not openlydisclosed for many years. "Radiophobia" makes it hard for many in the community to move on with their lives and helpthemselves.

ECONOMIC

• The Institute of Economics of the Belarusian National Academy of Sciences estimates that the country's economic damageover 30 years (1986 - 2015) will be $235 billion, or over 32 annual national budgets. Chernobyl-related costs accounted for16.8 per cent of the country's national budget in 1991, and in 1996 it was still 10.9 per cent. Currently the republic isinvesting about 6 per cent of its budget in the official Chernobyl programme.

• According to a survey by UNDP and UNICEF, in the contaminated territories of Belarus, 54 large agricultural and forestryenterprises and nine industrial enterprises had to be closed. 22 raw material deposits could no longer be used. In thecontaminated territories of Ukraine, 20 collective farms and 13 companies had to be abandoned.

• Belarus and Ukraine levy an emergency tax, or Chernobyl tax, for dealing with the disaster. Initially, all companies, except forthose in the agricultural sector, had to pay 18 or 19 per cent of their salary costs to the State. This tax is still levied in bothcountries, but has now dropped to only four per cent in Belarus. Russia never levied a Chernobyl tax. There, governmentborrowing funded the State's costs.

• In 1997 the international community entrusted the EBRD with managing the Chernobyl Shelter Fund. The G7 countries, theEuropean Union, Ukraine and other countries have so far pledged approximately € 720 million to the fund. The CSF financesa comprehensive programme to deal with the long-term dangers posed by Chernobyl. Along with constructing the newcontainment shelter, the programme includes stabilising the existing shelter and providing an integrated monitoring system toreport on radiation, structural stability and seismic events, among other things.

CHERNOBYL, IN BRIEF

Russia considers uprating RBMK reactors. Despite universal calls for the closure of these reactors following the explosion atChernobyl, Moscow is said to be deliberating lifetime extensions and uprates for its eleven operating RBMK reactors. Units atLeningrad, Kursk and Smolensk are expected to be uprated by 5%. Since Chernobyl, 'significant' design modifications have beenmade and extensive refurbishment undertakenWNA Weekly Digest, May 5 2006

8,000 Russians killed. Officials at Russia's Ministry of Health have revealed that 7,000 to 8,000 Russians are known to have diedas a result of the Chernobyl accident and some 60,000 have been declared disabled due to the sustained damage to their health.This contradicts UN reports that have suggested that the total number of people expected to die from cancers as a result of thedisaster in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus would be around 9,000.www.ZeeNews.com, April 24 2006

Whitewash. Viktor Bryukhanov, former Chernobyl director jailed for negligence over the explosion, told Russia's Profil magazinethat the world has not learnt the lessons of Chernobyl because scientists covered up details about the design faults and officialinvestigations ended in whitewash to protect the nuclear industry. According to Bryukhanov, this was part of an international coverup of the risks of nuclear power. He also accused the U.S., France, Japan and the UK of hiding the real causes of accidents at theirown nuclear power plants although he did not provide any evidence to support such claims.Reuters, April 26 2006


IN BRIEF

Yucca scientists not charged. Federal prosecutors have decided not to charge several scientists accused of falsifyingdocuments relating to the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site. The U.S. Attorney's office in Nevada discovered a series ofemails dating from 1998 to 2000 suggesting that government hydrologists had falsified dates and other documentation as part oftheir review of technical data before the Department of Energy sought a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. TheDOE is said to be re-creating the technical work done and checking some 14 million emails. Senator Reid from Nevada said, "Thescience that DOE claims is supporting Yucca Mountain is sloppy, and in some cases it's actually false".The Salt Lake Tribune, April 26 2006

Finnish plant behind schedule. The experimental EPR nuclear power plant under construction in Finland has already fallen ninemonths behind schedule - the project started just a year ago. The delays have been caused by safety concerns over the quality ofconcrete used for the base of the reactor. It was discovered that too much water had been used in the cement mix, making theconcrete too porous, and some steel forgings were also found to be of poor quality. The Guardian, April 24 2006

Turkey selects site. The Black Sea province of Sinop has been chosen as the site for the construction of the country's firstnuclear power plants. Within the next three to four years, Turkey plans to build a small pilot reactor of around 100 megawatts.Eventually three power plants with a total capacity of 5,000 MW will be built. Previous attempts to build a nuclear plant in Turkeyhave been thwarted due to strong opposition and costs.Reuters, April 13 2006

UN death toll rejected. The official figures released by the UN in the controversial Chernobyl Forum report released in October2005 predicted between four and nine thousand extra Chernobyl-related cancer deaths but a new report released in April estimatesthe number of deaths to be as high as 93,000. According to Nikolai Omelyanets, deputy head of the National Commission forRadiation Protection in Ukraine, up to 500,000 people have already perished as a result of radiation exposure and 34,499 peoplewho took part in clean up efforts at Chernobyl have also since died - cancer deaths from this group are three times higher than therest of the population and infant mortality also increased by 20-30%. Omelyanets stated that information on cancer deaths weresent to both the IAEA and the World Health Organization (WHO) twice in 2005 but that neither acknowledged the studies. TheScientific Centre for Radiation Medicine in the Ukraine agreed that thyroid cancers, leukaemia and previously unseen geneticmutations have overwhelmed the country since the Chernobyl accident and questioned the reasons why the WHO continues toignore the data. BBC News, April 18 2006; The Guardian, March 25, 2006

4,000 Russian villages contaminated. Russia's chief public health official and member of the Russian Academy of MedicalSciences, Gennady Onishchenko, said that around 4,343 towns and villages in 14 regions remain within the radioactivecontamination zone. Some 1.4 million people live in these villages. Although the 'permissible' level of radiation is exceeded in justfour of the fourteen regions, the population is still forced to risk internal contamination from radionuclides because of contaminatedfoodstuffs.Itar-Tass, April 4, 2006

Infant deaths in UK linked. The results of a study - Chernobyl: How Many Children Died? - conducted by statistician JohnUrquhart were presented to participants at the March 2006 Nuclear Free Local Authorities conference held in London. The studyshowed that infant deaths in areas of the UK hardest hit by radioactive fallout from the explosion increased by 11% between 1986and 1989 - up to 1,000 baby deaths. Radiation carried in the 'black rain' that fell in certain parts of the UK is said to be responsible -it is thought that the rain increased the risk of deadly respiratory problems and cancers in vulnerable infants. Urquhart trackedhealth records and official weather reports and studied 50,000 infant deaths in 11 areas from 1983 to 1992. Prior to the explosion,infant mortality had been declining by around 4% a year. Urquhart's report can be downloaded at www.healthandenvironment.comThe Sun, March 23, 2006

Fallout still affecting British farms. The Department of Health admitted that 200,000 sheep still graze on land contaminated byChernobyl fallout 20 years ago. Emergency orders still apply to 355 Welsh, eleven Scottish and nine English farms - much of thecontaminated land in Wales lies within the Snowdonia National Park. Under restrictions imposed in 1986, no sheep can be movedfrom any of these areas without a special license. Sheep with higher than permissible levels of radiation are marked withpermanent dye and moved to graze on uncontaminated grass for several months before they can be passed fit to enter the foodchain. Farmers were initially told that such restrictions would last for around 30 days but two decades later, there is apparently stillno end in sight. The Independent, March 14 2006


Leak at Rokkasho. Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd broke news of a radioactive water leakage at the Rokkasho nuclear reprocessingplant where the latest round of trail operations started on March 31. Some 40 litres of water containing plutonium and uraniumleaked inside a concrete-lined cell when a worker apparently made a mistake in a remote-controlled process. The JNFLspokesperson said that no radiation was released. The operator had signed safety agreements with Aomori Prefecture and thevillage of Rokkasho before the train run was allowed to begin.Reuters, April 13 2006

China-Australia uranium deal. Australia has signed a bilateral safeguards agreement (Nuclear Transfer Agreement) with China toenable the export of uranium to that country. A nuclear technology agreement was signed at the same time.WNA Weekly Digest, April 7 2006

Canadian nuclear cooperation. Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. (AECL) has joined forces with four other nuclear technology andengineering companies (Babcock & Wilcox Canada, General Electric Canada, Hitachi Canada and SNC-Lavalin Nuclear) to offerfixed-price nuclear power plants on a turnkey basis. The plants will be the 700 MWe Candu 6 and eventually the new 1200 MWeACR-1000.WNA Weekly Digest, March 31 2006

Head of Arab League pushes nukes. The Egyptian head of the Arab League, Amr Moussa, has urged Arab nations to worktoward joining the nuclear club by developing nuclear energy as soon as possible. Moussa's comments came at the League'ssummit meeting aimed at tackling the crises of Iraq and the Palestinian peace process. As yet, no Arab country is thought to have asignificant nuclear energy program and most have shown no interest in taking this route.AP, March 28 2006

UN finds against U.S. The United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has found the U.S. guilty ofviolating the human rights of the Western Shoshone peoples. Western Shoshone ancestral lands - from the south of Snake River,Idaho, across central and eastern Nevada and west through Death Valley in California - host the Nevada Test Site and theproposed Yucca Mountain waste dump site. The UN Committee has urged the U.S. to freeze all plans to privatise WesternShoshone lands and resources, desist from all activities on the ancestral lands that its owners have not been consulted on and tostop all harassment of the people. The U.S. must respond to the Committee's concerns by July 15.CCNS News Update, March 24 2006

Fire at Japanese plant. On March 22, a fire occurred at the Oi nuclear power plant in Fukui Prefecture in western Japan. The firebroke out in a waste disposal unit between the No 3 and No 4 reactors. Officials with the plant's operator Kansai Electric Power Co.said that no radiation was released. Two workers were treated for smoke inhalation.EFN Newsletter, March 23 2006

Mexico plans new capacity. Mexico's Federal Electricity Commission is to spend US$150 million on uprating both 675 MWereactors at the Laguna Verde plant, which currently provides 5% of the country's electricity. The Commission is also planning tobuild a new US$4 billion nuclear power plant by 2020.WNA Weekly Digest, March 24 2006

New Japanese reactor opens and closes. The second unit at Hokuriku Electric's Shika nuclear power plant in Ishikawa,northern Japan started commercial operation on March 15 after initially being connected to the grid in July 2005. But less than twoweeks later, a panel of Kanazawa City judges ruled that the 1358 MWe advanced boiling water reactor, the country's secondlargest, should close because there is a danger of radiation being released following an earthquake. The judges decided thatinadequate precautions had been taken and that those [precautions] were also based on out-of-date science. Chief judge KenichiIdo said, "An earthquake larger than what the electricity company had anticipated could occur, resulting in a nuclear accident andexposing residents to radiation." The plant is situated near the Ochigata fault line and a research committee appointed by theJapanese government has warned that several quakes could occur simultaneously and trigger one reaching 7.6 on the Richterscale, which would severely shake the plant. This is yet another blow to the Japanese nuclear industry which has struggled toimprove its image with the public following accidents that have resulted in the deaths of seven workers in as many years, injuries tohundreds of workers and several falsification scandals. Times Online & BBC News, March 24 2006; Reuters, March 10 2006

Groundwater contaminated by Indian Point, U.S. High levels of radioactive material - almost three times the level permitted indrinking water - were found in groundwater near the Hudson River beneath the Indian Point nuclear complex. The strontium-90reached the Hudson but contaminated groundwater did not enter drinking supplies according to the spokesperson for EntergyNuclear Northeast. Indian Point is about 30 miles north of Manhattan. The contaminated water was first discovered in August 2005.Several wells were dug in efforts to locate the leak and the nuclear complex was found to be the source. In high doses strontium


can cause cancer - tritium, another carcinogen, was also found in samples taken. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission hasannounced an investigation into tritium releases from Indian Point and other plants.AP, March 21 2006

Earthlife Africa appeal denied. An application to the South African High Court made by Earthlife (ELA) for leave to appeal anearlier judgement has been denied. The environmental group was seeking access to board meeting minutes pertaining to Eskom'sPBMR developments under the Access to Information Act. ELA was also ordered to pay all court costs.ELA press release, March 20 2006

Indian group urges end to construction. Following an earthquake in the Kanyakumari district in the south of India on March 19,The People's Movement Against Nuclear Energy and local citizen groups have called for the halt of construction work at theKoodankulam nuclear power plant in the nearby district of Tirunelveti. India's Department of Atomic Energy is building two 1,000MW nuclear power plants using Russian technology at Koodankulam and has announced plans for four more. This despite the factthat the project sits in an earthquake zone and no environmental impact assessments have ever being done - or if they have, theresults have never been publicly released. PMANE wants the government to stop the build and start a public debate about thesafety of the project.PMANE press release, March 20 2006

U.S. firm sued over nuclear spills. A federal lawsuit involving 14,000 residents has been filed charging Exelon Corp. with failingto maintain a pipeline that spilled tritium-laced waste from its Braidwood nuclear plant in Illinois. Exelon has admitted several leaks,two leaks of three million gallons in 1998 and 2000, but has said that, although ground water beyond the plant boundary wascontaminated, there is no significant risk posed to local water wells. Exposure to tritium can increase risk of cancer, birth defectsand genetic damage - tritium is a by-product of nuclear generation and can enter the body through ingestion, absorption orinhalation. Given that the first spillage from the plant occurred in 1996, Exelon has been accused of perpetrating a cover up - thedisclosures came only after the company was pressured to test for contamination by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency.Public records from 2001 and 2002 show that Exelon officials opposed public discussion of tritium, the release of documents abouttritium spills, legislation to mandate groundwater monitoring at nuclear plants and permit reviews.The Tribune, March 19 2006; Reuters, March 15 2006

G8 to push new nukes. A draft of the "G8 Communique on Energy Security" due to be released on July 16 at the G8 Summit tobe held in St. Petersburg, Russia from July 15-17 calls for a huge new global expansion of nuclear power. It also urges trillions ofdollars of new investment to escalate oil, gas and coal production globally. One sentence reads, "We believe that development ofnuclear energy would promote global energy security…" another, "We intend to make additional join efforts to ensure non-discriminatory access to this energy source." [Cue the swift resolution of the Iran 'crisis'…] U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodmanafter a G8 energy ministers meeting in March said, "We are hopeful of a very substantial rebirth for the global nuclear industry." Thepush for new nuclear is reportedly headed by the U.S. and Russia but Germany for one in known to be against the plan.Reclaim the Commons alert, March 17 2006

New reactor for Lithuania. An agreement was signed between power companies from Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania to conduct afeasibility study for a new nuclear reactor to be built at the existing Ignalina site in Lithuania - the Soviet-era unit at the site is due toclose by 2009. The cost of the new reactor is estimated at 2-3 billion Euros and should to be completed by 2015. The move comesafter Baltic prime ministers announced plans to increase independence from Russian energy, integrate energy markets by 2009and connect the Baltic energy networks with other European countries.WNA Weekly Digest, March 10 2006

French nuke deal with Libya. France and Libya signed a cooperation agreement on 'peaceful' uses of nuclear energy on March15 - Tripoli said the deal would allow it to generate nuclear power to desalinate seawater. Libya will need to continue cooperatingwith the IAEA as a condition of the agreement. The country renounced its nuclear weapons programme in December 2003.Reuters, March 16, 2006; The Financial Times, March 7 2006

UK Commission rejects new nuclear. The British government's watchdog on sustainable development issues, the SustainableDevelopment Commission, has said that the UK does not need to build a new generation of nuclear plants to meet future electricityneeds. The government advisory group said that more renewable sources and greater energy efficiency were more favourableoptions than replacing old nuclear plants.Reuters, March 7 2006


EP committee rejects Euratom funding. The European Parliament Environment Committee has voted to oppose public findingfor Euratom nuclear fission and fusion research in support of a proposal from the Greens to limit nuclear research to radiationprotection, waste and safety. Satu Hassi, vice chair of the committee said, "We have to prioritise technology that can have animmediate impact on protecting our climate and cutting emissions, namely energy efficiency and renewables."The Greens/EFA in the European Parliament press release, February 23 2006

Fines for U.S. plutonium leaks. A federal jury has ruled that two Department of Energy contractors allowed plutonium from thenow defunct Rocky Flats weapons plant to contaminate neighbouring land. Dow Chemical and the former Rockwell Internationalwere negligent in their actions and exposed thousands of property owners to plutonium, increasing their risk of health problems.The suite was filed 16 years ago on behalf of 13,000 people. Jurors awarded the plaintiffs US$553.9 million in damages - thegovernment will also face an estimated US$58 million in legal fees. It is thought that state and federal laws will eventually limit thepayout to US$352 million - DOE and the companies are to appeal.AP, February 16 2006

WISE AmsterdamP.O. Box 596361040 LC AmsterdamThe NetherlandsTel: +31 20 612 6368Fax: +31 20 689 2179Email: [email protected]: www.antenna.nl/wise

NIRS1424 16th Street NW, #404Washington, DC 20036USATel: +1 202 328 0002Fax: +1 202 462 2183Email: [email protected]: www.nirs.org

NIRS SoutheastP.O. Box 7586Asheville, NC 28802USATel: +1 828 675 1792Email: [email protected]

WISE Argentinac/o Taller EcologistaCC 4412000 RosarioArgentinaEmail: [email protected]: www.taller.org.ar

WISE Austriac/o Plattform gegen AtomgefahrMathilde HallaLandstrasse 314020 LinzAustriaTel: +43 732 774275; +43 664 2416806Fax: +43 732 785602

Email: [email protected]: www.atomstopp.com

WISE Czech Republicc/o Jan BeranekChytalky 24594 55 Dolni LouckyCzech RepublicTel: +420 604 207305Email: [email protected]: www.wisebrno.cz

WISE India42/27 Esankai Mani VeethyPrakkai Road Jn.Nagercoil 629 002, Tamil NaduIndiaEmail: [email protected];

WISE JapanP.O. Box 1, Konan Post OfficeHiroshima City 739-1491Japan

WISE RussiaP.O. Box 1477236000 KaliningradRussiaTel/fax: +7 95 2784642Email: [email protected]: www.antiatom.ru

WISE Slovakiac/o SZOPK SiriusKatarina BartovicovaGodrova 3/b811 06 BratislavaSlovak RepublicTel: +421 905 935353Email: [email protected]: www.wise.sk

WISE South Africac/o Earthlife Africa Cape TownLiz Mc DaidP.O. Box 176Observatory, 7935Cape TownTel:+27-21-683-5182Email: [email protected]: www.earthlife-ct.org.za

WISE Swedenc/o FMKKBarnängsgatan 23116 41 StockholmSwedenTel: +46 8 84 1490Fax: +46 8 84 5181Email: [email protected]: www.folkkampanjen.sec/o FMKK

WISE UkraineP.O. Box 73Rivne-33023UkraineTel/fax: +380 362 237024Email: [email protected]: www.atominfo.org.ua

WISE UraniumPeter DiehlAm Schwedenteich 401477 ArnsdorfGermanyTel: +49 35200 20737Email: [email protected]: www.wise-uranium.org

WISE/NIRS offices and relays


WISE/NIRS NUCLEAR MONITOR

The Nuclear Information & Resource Servicewas founded in 1978 and is based inWashington, US. The World Information Serviceon Energy was set up in the same year andhouses in Amsterdam, Netherlands. NIRS andWISE Amsterdam joined forces in 2000, creating a worldwide network of information andresource centers for citizens and environmentalorganizations concerned about nuclear power,radioactive waste, radiation, and sustainableenergy issues.

The WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor publishesinternational information in English 20 times ayear. A Spanish translation of this newsletter isavailable on the WISE Amsterdam website(www.antenna.nl/wise/esp). A Russian versionis published by WISE Russia and a Ukrainianversion is published by WISE Ukraine. TheWISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor can be obtainedboth on paper and in an email version (pdf format). Old issues are (after two months) available through the WISE Amsterdamhomepage: www.antenna.nl/wise.

Receiving the WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor

US and Canada based readers should contactNIRS for details of how to receive the NuclearMonitor (address see page 11). Others receivethe Nuclear Monitor through WISE Amsterdam.For individuals and NGOs we ask a minimumannual donation of 50 Euros (20 Euros for theemail version). Institutions and industry shouldcontact us for details of subscription prices.

WIS

E/NI

RS N

UCLE

AR M

ONIT

ORc/

o W

ISE

Am

ster

dam

PO

Bo

x 59

636

1040

LC

Am

ster

dam

Net

herl

and

s

PRIN

TED

MAT

TER

MAT

IERE

IMPR

IME

june 9, 2006 | no. 645-646 the chernobyl legacy · tragedy in the ukraine, russia and belarus - the...

Documents