1. Chernobyl Nuclear Plant Explosion - April 24-25, 1986 Dick Clapp EH780 April 6, 2009 Dick Clapp EH780 April 6, 2009

2. Chernobyl background  Soviet nuclear program began in Cold War in reaction to Hiroshima and Nagasaki  Close connection between nuclear weapons and nuclear energy programs  “Nuclear reactors are regular furnaces, and the operators who run them are stokers.” N. Sinev, State Committee on the Utilization of Nuclear Energy, 1980  Soviet nuclear program began in Cold War in reaction to Hiroshima and Nagasaki  Close connection between nuclear weapons and nuclear energy programs  “Nuclear reactors are regular furnaces, and the operators who run them are stokers.” N. Sinev, State Committee on the Utilization of Nuclear Energy, 1980

3. Chernobyl chronology  1949 - Soviet Union explodes nuclear bomb  1954 - First power station built in Obninsk  1957 - Accident at Mayak weapons plant  1977 - Unit 1 RBMK reactor built at V.I. Lenin plant in Pripyat (Chernobyl), Ukraine  1978 - Unit 2 built  1983 - Unit 4 completed (two more units planned but never built)  1949 - Soviet Union explodes nuclear bomb  1954 - First power station built in Obninsk  1957 - Accident at Mayak weapons plant  1977 - Unit 1 RBMK reactor built at V.I. Lenin plant in Pripyat (Chernobyl), Ukraine  1978 - Unit 2 built  1983 - Unit 4 completed (two more units planned but never built)

4. Chernobyl chronology (cont.)  1986 - April 24, Unit 4 shutdown began in unusual way; plan was to see if declining momentum of turbines could still generate enough power to keep pumps working until back-up diesel generators took over  April 25, at midnight, Unit 4 was at very low power, but steam pressure fell, leading to uncontrollable instabilities, explosions and fire at 1:23 a.m.  1986 - April 24, Unit 4 shutdown began in unusual way; plan was to see if declining momentum of turbines could still generate enough power to keep pumps working until back-up diesel generators took over  April 25, at midnight, Unit 4 was at very low power, but steam pressure fell, leading to uncontrollable instabilities, explosions and fire at 1:23 a.m.

5. Chernobyl chronology (cont.)  April 26, continuing fire in core and surrounding graphite, in presence of water, released radioactive clouds of dust and steam. Dyatlov erroneously reports core intact, instructed to keep core cool  April 27, first helicopter flights dropped sand, boron and lead on exposed core; Pripyat (~50,000) was evacuated  April 26, continuing fire in core and surrounding graphite, in presence of water, released radioactive clouds of dust and steam. Dyatlov erroneously reports core intact, instructed to keep core cool  April 27, first helicopter flights dropped sand, boron and lead on exposed core; Pripyat (~50,000) was evacuated

6. Chernobyl chronology (cont.)  April 28, radiation alarms went off in Sweden, leading to TASS announcement  April 29, radiation dose estimate of 2.2mrem/hr in Kiev, beyond 30 km exclusion zone  Other countries report unusual dose rates of Cs and I; Poland institutes potassium iodide (KI) program  April 28, radiation alarms went off in Sweden, leading to TASS announcement  April 29, radiation dose estimate of 2.2mrem/hr in Kiev, beyond 30 km exclusion zone  Other countries report unusual dose rates of Cs and I; Poland institutes potassium iodide (KI) program

7. Chernobyl chronology (cont.)  May 1, Chernobyl Commission formed by Premier Ryzhkov  Experts and “liquidators” sent to quench fires  Liquid nitrogen pumped into core and releases dropped from 8 million curies to 150,000 Ci/da  Contamination detected 300 km north, so temporary protection standards set at 10 rem whole body and 30 rads to thyroid per year  May 1, Chernobyl Commission formed by Premier Ryzhkov  Experts and “liquidators” sent to quench fires  Liquid nitrogen pumped into core and releases dropped from 8 million curies to 150,000 Ci/da  Contamination detected 300 km north, so temporary protection standards set at 10 rem whole body and 30 rads to thyroid per year

8. Chernobyl Health Effects  Accident trauma and burns (3 deaths)  Acute radiation sickness (237 hospitalized, 28 deaths)  Congenital malformations  Immunologic effects (studies unclear)  Cardiovascular disease (mostly anecdotal reports)  Accident trauma and burns (3 deaths)  Acute radiation sickness (237 hospitalized, 28 deaths)  Congenital malformations  Immunologic effects (studies unclear)  Cardiovascular disease (mostly anecdotal reports)

9. Chernobyl health effects (cont.)  Benign thyroid disorders (especially in contaminated areas in Russia)  Other non-malignant disorders, including reproductive system disorders, poor neonatal health, “vegetative dystonia” in children  Psychological disorders, fear, concern about future  Benign thyroid disorders (especially in contaminated areas in Russia)  Other non-malignant disorders, including reproductive system disorders, poor neonatal health, “vegetative dystonia” in children  Psychological disorders, fear, concern about future

10. Cancer and leukemia  Thyroid cancer - several positive studies and trend analyses; on-going case-control studies  Leukemia - childhood leukemia study in Ukraine, with positive dose-response data (Moysich, et al., 2000)  Excess bladder, colon and lung cancer in liquidators, 1997-2000 (Okeanov, et al., 2004)  Other solid tumors in coming decades  Thyroid cancer - several positive studies and trend analyses; on-going case-control studies  Leukemia - childhood leukemia study in Ukraine, with positive dose-response data (Moysich, et al., 2000)  Excess bladder, colon and lung cancer in liquidators, 1997-2000 (Okeanov, et al., 2004)  Other solid tumors in coming decades

11. Other Possible Health Effects  Cataracts, in liquidators and children exposed  Chromosome damage in circulating lymphocytes  Mortality in wildlife, conifers, plus reproductive loss in plants and animals 20- 30 km from reactor.  Cataracts, in liquidators and children exposed  Chromosome damage in circulating lymphocytes  Mortality in wildlife, conifers, plus reproductive loss in plants and animals 20- 30 km from reactor.

12. Estimates of cancer deaths  IAEA, 2005 - 4,000 radiation-induced cancer deaths in highly exposed; another 5,000 deaths among 6 million less exposed  Shcherbak, 1996 - 32,000 deaths from all causes by 1996, although “it is hard to know”  Gofman, 1986 - predicts 475,500 Chernobyl- induced fatal cancers and a similar number of non- fatal cancers worldwide  U.S. DOE and NRC, 1987 - 14,000 to 28,000 cancer deaths  IAEA, 2005 - 4,000 radiation-induced cancer deaths in highly exposed; another 5,000 deaths among 6 million less exposed  Shcherbak, 1996 - 32,000 deaths from all causes by 1996, although “it is hard to know”  Gofman, 1986 - predicts 475,500 Chernobyl- induced fatal cancers and a similar number of non- fatal cancers worldwide  U.S. DOE and NRC, 1987 - 14,000 to 28,000 cancer deaths

13. Political Impact of Chernobyl  Became a political issue undermining previous government in Soviet Union  Ecological clubs supported glasnost and Gorbachev reforms  Ukraine currently spends ~5% of its total budget on support for victims  “Group of 7” agreed to fund decommissioning; completed in 2001  Became a political issue undermining previous government in Soviet Union  Ecological clubs supported glasnost and Gorbachev reforms  Ukraine currently spends ~5% of its total budget on support for victims  “Group of 7” agreed to fund decommissioning; completed in 2001

14. Political Impact (cont.)  “Worst reactor accident by far in nuclear history”  Decision to suspend construction of numerous planned reactors  Opposition, until recently, to plans for new reactors, including “pebble bed modular reactor” in South Africa  Sweden plans phase-out of reactors by 2010  “Worst reactor accident by far in nuclear history”  Decision to suspend construction of numerous planned reactors  Opposition, until recently, to plans for new reactors, including “pebble bed modular reactor” in South Africa  Sweden plans phase-out of reactors by 2010

15. Nuclear Accident Planning  Lessons about thyroid cancer and use of KI as preventative in Poland  Stockpiling of KI pills in schools, pharmacies, evacuation centers in U.S. after Sept. 11  Potential for new regulations about decommissioning, thyroid dose limits  BEIR VII report (2005) references thyroid data  Lessons about thyroid cancer and use of KI as preventative in Poland  Stockpiling of KI pills in schools, pharmacies, evacuation centers in U.S. after Sept. 11  Potential for new regulations about decommissioning, thyroid dose limits  BEIR VII report (2005) references thyroid data

16. Chernobyl Forum and Greenpeace Reports, 2006  The IAEA, WHO, UN, World Bank and other experts in the Chernobyl Forum estimated 4-9,000 radiogenic cancer deaths  “not so significant... as first considered.”  Greenpeace authors (Stringer, Johnston, Yablokov, Clapp, et al.)  Unique, complex catastrophe whose full consequences are unlikely to be known for years  The IAEA, WHO, UN, World Bank and other experts in the Chernobyl Forum estimated 4-9,000 radiogenic cancer deaths  “not so significant... as first considered.”  Greenpeace authors (Stringer, Johnston, Yablokov, Clapp, et al.)  Unique, complex catastrophe whose full consequences are unlikely to be known for years

17. Plans for new nuclear plants  Fourteen license applications filed  New plants in Georgia, Florida, to add to existing capacity on same site  Justification regarding carbon emissions  Claims of “carbon-free” operation  Fuel cycle and waste repository issues remain  New mining in Grand Canyon area being explored  One Yucca Mountain every 5-10 years would be needed to meet projected waste generation  Fourteen license applications filed  New plants in Georgia, Florida, to add to existing capacity on same site  Justification regarding carbon emissions  Claims of “carbon-free” operation  Fuel cycle and waste repository issues remain  New mining in Grand Canyon area being explored  One Yucca Mountain every 5-10 years would be needed to meet projected waste generation

18. Additional security concerns  “Loose nukes” and “dirty bombs” on the agenda since 2001  Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty concerns  Parallels between weapons development and power generation programs  Current debate about Iran, North Korea programs  “Loose nukes” and “dirty bombs” on the agenda since 2001  Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty concerns  Parallels between weapons development and power generation programs  Current debate about Iran, North Korea programs