Chernobyl Nuclear Incident During The Thesis

Length: 19 pages Sources: 3 Subject: Drama - World Type: Thesis Paper: #21872488 Related Topics: Apocalypse Now, Hiroshima, Endocrine System, Coal Mining
Excerpt from Thesis :


Some experts say that limits of 500 picocuries are harmful, especially to developing fetuses. When we have conflicting information at this level, then it becomes hard to know what information is the best information. To ere on the side of caution, however, when one is facing harmful radiation levels, would logically be the course of action to follow. Except for cleanup at Chernobyl, there was nothing to be done about the accident. The question is, what kind of oversight was done to ensure that Chernobyl was cleaned up?

Chernobyl was not the first nuclear reactor the world has experienced. The first such accident happened in the United States, at Three Mile Island (TMI). In early 1979, a nuclear reactor in Pennsylvania was the site for the worst (known) accident in American history. Today, that reactor remains closed down, and the site at Three Mile Island, stands as a stark reminder to the American public of what happens when, for whatever reason, things go horribly wrong at a nuclear energy site.

A the worst accident in the history of commercial nuclear power in the United States occurred at the Three Mile Island (TMI) Nuclear Generating Station in Pennsylvania. "Like certain other functional structures on the modern American landscape -- the bridge at Selma, Alabama; the Watergate complex; the Texas Schoolbook Depository in Dallas -- the towers at 'TMI' have slipped into an unprojected half-life as reminders of steep depressions in our national lifeline, " a report on the accident observed in 1980. "Three Mile Island is a big deal; something important happened here. " 5 Few would question this assertion; judging the response to and evaluating the effects of the "something important" that happened are matters of greater ambiguity."

Three Mile Island is visible to the public, and if the reactor were to be started again, the public would be aware of it. In its aftermath, there was an intense campaign to cover up the extent of the damage - and, ostensibly, the potential harm to the public.

In March 1979, Metropolitan Edison, the owner of the Three Mile Island nuclear reactor, tried in every possible way to cover up the extent of T.M.I.'s radiation releases-- so much so that seven years later Pennsylvania's Republican Governor, Richard Thornburgh, would compare their behavior to that of Mikhail Gorbachev during the Chernobyl crisis."

After TMI, there should have been a conference of every reactor owner and site where one existed around the globe to conduct a study of what happened, and how to prevent that from happening again. Nuclear reactor meltdown should have received as much attention, and corrective action, and rehearsal for corrective action as possible. This is not what happens, at least not in America, where the public was, and is, already weary of nuclear energy. The downplay of the harm caused by Chernobyl, and the harm that would befall the public and the planet for decades following the incident, are not an issue that has been extensively dealt with. Nuclear energy is an energy source that has been forced upon the world, and it stands as an ominous warning as to how vulnerable we are, and as a reminder of how the public is consistently misled by the government and business in the name of profit. The public saw, in California, what happens when people try to inform the public of the dangers of nuclear energy. It is the life and demise of Jack Goodell, the nuclear engineer, whose death served as the story behind the acclaimed film, the China Syndrome. Following a near accident at a nuclear power plant in California, Goodell was killed by a swat team when he locked himself inside the plant control room and threatened to flood it with radiation unless he was given access to news people to tell his story - which was that he was so concerned about the vulnerability of the plant that he was willing to do anything to prevent it going back online.

At the time of the T.M.I. near-meltdown, however, Thornburgh's Secretary of Health, Gordon MacLeod, warned that pregnant women...


But Thornburgh was unwilling to "create a panic' by ordering an immediate evacuation. It was not until two days after the accident that he did so, and by then it was too late to avoid the worst of the health hazards.

MacLeod was later fired for being an "alarmist.' Since his departure the state's Department of Health has scoffed at studies by Sternglass and others indicating that the infant death rate in the Harrisburg area had tripled in the months after the accident. More recent research by Jane Lee has shown that the cancer rate in certain areas downwind of the site is five times what would have been expected if the accident had not occurred. Such studies have also been given short shrift by state authorities."

What this suggests, is that Chernobyl, which has been declared by scientists as a worse disaster than TMI, is probably more harmful to the planet and to the life inhabiting the planet than anyone is willing to tell us. Of course, informing us about the potential disaster from the disaster would serve little purpose; because there is no way that we can comb the atmosphere and remove the harmful radiation from it. What informing us would do, however, is to make the public more diligent about not supporting the building of additional nuclear power plants.

Five years after Chernobyl, there was a thirty kilometer zone that was forbidden to anyone to access. Referred to as the "Forbidden Zone," it is as close as anyone is perhaps willing to come to make a statement as to the severity of the Chernobyl meltdown. Where once there stood a forest at the parameter of the facility, there is now empty space where the radiation intensity remains so high that it prevents growth of plants, or other life.

A in April 1986, the most intensely radioactive smoke and vapor cloud in history drifted over and into that forest, roasting it to death not with heat but with awesome amounts of nuclear radiation. Remote-controlled bulldozers and hundreds of thousands of young soldiers labored during the weeks and months following the disaster to do the only thing that could be done: every tree and every twig lies buried beneath the desolate surface of that plot of tortured land."

From the first leaks of the news of the disaster to the public, Soviet officials began downplaying the severity of the incident at Chernobyl. It was more aggressive a denial of facts than in the United States following TMI. It is ironic when a government uses the term "control" to describe the aftermath of an incident that is a reflection of a lack of control. The Soviets said that the radiation danger to cleanup workers was under control, and that their risk was minimal.

The radioactive plume rose an estimated 8 kilometres, and the graphite core burned for days. Five thousand tons of quenching materials were dropped from helicopters but increased the temperature of the nuclear core and spread the radioactive cloud over an even vaster area. Eighteen days later, Gorbachev acknowledged the accident on Soviet television. Tens of thousands of people had by then been exposed to radioactive iodine-131, resulting in a massive incidence of thyroid cancers, many of which might have been avoided had iodine pills been distributed in the first week. In the years that followed, more than 600,000 military and civilian personnel were put at risk in the course of clean-up operations and the construction of a 'sarcophagus' to entomb the reactor, which is now surrounded by a 30-kilometre exclusion zone. Nearly 9 per cent of the territory of Ukraine (and 23 per cent of neighbouring Belarus) is considered contaminated; around 5 per cent of its population (3.5 million people) are classified as 'sufferers' and more than half a million were resettled. Estimates put the death-toll from Chernobyl-related illness between 1993 and 1996 at over 100,000."

Five years after Chernobyl, and the poorly designed reactors that were used only in the Soviet Union, continued to operate. "The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSGEAR) was established in 1955, with a mandate from the United Nations General Assembly to assess and report levels and health effects of exposure to ionizing radiation." UNSGEAR did not issue a report that directly addressed Chernobyl until 2000. Before this time, the UN, like other governments and reporting bodies around the world, was forced to accept the official Soviet statements on the accidents and the conditions afterward. It was never really necessary to rely on the Soviets for information at all, since every major power in Europe and in North America has the ability to monitor the actual data. When we say the Soviets covered up the…

Sources Used in Documents:

Works Cited

Baverstock, Keith, and Dillwyn Williams. "The Chernobyl Nuclear Catastrophe: Baverstock and Williams Respond." Environmental Health Perspectives 115.5 (2007): 239+. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008


Blankenship, Steve. "The Battle of Chernobyl." Teaching History: A Journal of Methods 33.1 (2008): 43+. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Chandler, William. Energy and Environmental Policies in the Transition Economies: Between Cold War and Global Warming. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2000. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Cohen, Jacob, and Patricia Cohen. Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1983. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Corum, Richard. Understanding Hamlet a Student Casebook to Issues, Sources, and Historical Documents. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1998. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Eckberg, Douglas Lee. "The Physicians' Anti-Abortion Campaign and the Social Bases of Moral Reform Participation." Social Forces 67.2 (1988): 378-397. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Feshbach, Murray, and Alfred Friendly. Ecocide in the U.S.S.R.: Health and Nature under Siege. New York: Basic Books, 1992. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Hartnagel, Timothy F. "Public Opinion and the Legalization of Abortion." Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 22.3 (1985): 411-430. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Holm, Lars-Erik. "Fifteen Years Later. Living after Chernobyl." UN Chronicle Winter 2000: 14. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Jagger, John. The Nuclear Lion: What Every Citizen Should Know about Nuclear Power and Nuclear War. New York: Plenum Press, 1991. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Low, Nicholas, ed. Global Ethics and Environment. London: Routledge, 1999. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Norrander, Barbara, and Clyde Wilcox. "Public Opinion and Policymaking in the States: The Case of Post-Roe Abortion Policy." Policy Studies Journal 27.4 (1999): 707. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Nussbaum, Rudi H. "The Chernobyl Nuclear Catastrophe: Unacknowledged Health Detriment." Environmental Health Perspectives 115.5 (2007): 238+. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Orme, John G., and Cheryl Buehler. "Introduction to Multiple Regression for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables." Social Work Research 25.1 (2001): 49. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Parry, Jonathan P. "Life Exposed: Biological Citizens after Chernobyl." Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 10.1 (2004): 213+. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Quarantelli, E.L., ed. What Is a Disaster? Perspectives on the Question. London: Routledge, 1998. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Reiffel, Leonard. "Chernobyl Five Years Later." National Review 13 May 1991: 24+. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Rothstein, Donna S. "An Economic Approach to Abortion Demand." American Economist 36.1 (1992): 53+. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Rubin, Eva R. Abortion, Politics, and the Courts: Roe v. Wade and Its Aftermath. New York: Greenwood Press, 1987. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Rudig, Wolfgang, ed. Green Politics One: 1990. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 1990. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Wasserman, Harvey. "Chernobyl Fallout; Time to Dispel the Nuclear Cloud." The Nation 24 May 1986: 721+. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Wasserman, Harvey. "In the Dead Zone: Aftermath of the Apocalypse; Chernobyl Ten Years after - a Persisting Fallout of Death, Disease and Danger." The Nation 29 Apr. 1996: 16+. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Wister, Owen. Salvation Gap and Other Western Classics. Ed. Frederic Remington and Richard W. Etulain. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1999. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Worley, Norman, and Jeffery Lewins, eds. The Chernobyl Accident and Its Implications for the United Kingdom. London: Elsevier Applied Science, 1988. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008
Yablokov, Alexey V. "Chernobyl Postmortem: Unresolved Obstacles Continue to Plague the Nuclear Industry." Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy 14.1 (1999): 109+. Questia. 5 Dec. 2008

Cite this Document:

"Chernobyl Nuclear Incident During The" (2008, December 07) Retrieved December 9, 2021, from

"Chernobyl Nuclear Incident During The" 07 December 2008. Web.9 December. 2021. <>

"Chernobyl Nuclear Incident During The", 07 December 2008, Accessed.9 December. 2021,

Related Documents
Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster and Writers
Words: 1079 Length: 3 Pages Topic: Family and Marriage Paper #: 60384702

It is quite clear that their attitudes toward the event are expressed in their words and photos, and that their hearts linger with the children of Chernobyl, the children with brain tumors, hydrocephalus, birth defects, cancer, and numerous other ailments that have been tied to the radiation that permeates the area. These children are the unsung victims of the disaster, and people no longer think of them, or their

Chernobyl Liquidators
Words: 1426 Length: 4 Pages Topic: Government Paper #: 76186567

Chernobyl Liquidators: An Analysis of Government Response and Deployment When the Chernobyl nuclear accident took place, the government responded with Chernobyl Liquidators. Their effectiveness has been questioned, and the way they have been treated after the fact has also been questioned. As with most disasters that are cleaned up by human beings, people who were on that team often get sick at a later date. There is sometimes no rhyme or

Chernobyl: The Disaster and Its
Words: 1097 Length: 3 Pages Topic: Energy Paper #: 65528433

In contrast, nuclear systems today are planned to respond to disasters. Even the Japanese power plants had extensive fail-safe mechanisms. The problem was, that while the Japanese had prepared for the possibility of an earthquake, they had not prepared for the danger of a tsunami following shortly afterward: "all the affected reactors initially managed to shut down automatically as planned, and begin emergency cooling operations. None of the reactors,

Chernobyl Disaster of 1986
Words: 1392 Length: 5 Pages Topic: Genetics Paper #: 41299773

Chernobyl Disaster The Chernobyl nuclear disaster is one of the worst ever catastrophe to strike the world. On April 26, 1986 the unit 4 reactor of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Ukraine was totally destroyed by the explosion that was triggered by the sudden surge in the power output. Radioactive material got scattered all over the place leading to severe radiation hazard which was not restricted to Ukraine and the

Chernobyl Disaster the Disaster That
Words: 4354 Length: 15 Pages Topic: Energy Paper #: 19957247

Regions of overlapped accountability and authority wanted to be obviously recognized previous to any disaster. A lasting infrastructure needed also to be in place and upheld for any proficient completion of defensive actions. Such an infrastructure had to comprise quick communications systems, involvement teams and observation networks. Mobile ground observation teams were needed, as was airborne observation and tracking of the plume. Many countries reacted to this need by

Nuclear Power. Need Write Assessment Pros Cons
Words: 577 Length: 2 Pages Topic: Energy Paper #: 29881295

nuclear power. Need write assessment pros cons nuclear power generate electricity, give opinion increase decrease dependence nuclear power. Nuclear energy -- pros and cons There has been a lot of controversy regarding nuclear power during recent years, as even though it represents an impressive source of energy, the facts that it is highly unstable and difficult to control make it difficult and almost impossible for particular bodies to accept its importance.