PRIPYAT, Ukraine -- The ruins of a city call up questions in the mind,  and this high-rise ghost town where the Chernobyl nuclear power plant  workers once lived raises a daunting number of them.
How many people have died, or may die in the future, because of the  April 26, 1986, reactor explosion that spewed radioactive fallout across  much of the Northern Hemisphere?
The only clear answer is "too  many" - the number is still hotly debated.
Will the effects of  the world's worst nuclear accident ever go away? In time, maybe, but in  this generation, the Chernobyl consequences can seem like an endless run  of rapids as studies detect possible new problems.
Perhaps the  only question with a possible concrete answer is how much it will cost  to make Chernobyl reasonably safe. At least 1.6 billion euros ($2.27  billion) - but 740 million euros ($1.05 billion) of that has yet to be  found.
If any of the troubled nuclear reactors in Japan go into  full meltdown or explode like the one here did 25 years ago, one lesson  from Chernobyl is that the consequences are likely to be breathtakingly  expensive, unimaginably complicated and traumatic for decades to come.
Japan  may not have fully learned Chernobyl's clearest lessons - that candor  about a catastrophe is key. Authorities there are coming under  increasing criticism from the international community as well as their  own people for failing at full disclosure.
Still, the Japanese  have been more forthcoming than Soviet officials, who were variously  secretive, defensive and bewildered about the plant in what is now  Ukraine.
There was no official acknowledgment of the blast until  three days later; the first indications of trouble came from a Swedish  nuclear plant where unusual levels of radiation were detected on  workers' clothes.
"At that time, for a day and a half we did not  know anything about what had happened," Mikhail Gorbachev, who was then  Soviet leader, said Tuesday.
Even in Pripyat, few knew what had  happened when the plant's No. 4 reactor blew up around 1:30 in the  morning.
Andrei Glukhov, a reactor operator, heard the explosion  in his apartment when he was up late entertaining friends visiting from  Moscow, but didn't think much of it.
The next morning he called  that reactor's unit to find out and there was no answer. He called a  colleague at another reactor's control room, who told him "everything  went OK."
"When I asked him what was the condition of unit 4, he  made a pause and said, 'Look out the window.' That was my first feeling  that something serious had happened," he said recently during a trip to  the town arranged for reporters. Glukhov now works for one of the  organizations involved in building a new shelter over the reactor.
Buses  were still running and Pripyat's residents waited for them outside,  unaware that fallout was sprinkling down on them. But within 36 hours,  the city was dead, its 49,000 residents moved out in a mass evacuation.
Eventually,  some 120,000 people were taken out of a zone extending 30 kilometers  (19 miles) around the plant.
Pripyat now is an eerie relic, its  abandoned white apartment towers slowly disintegrating and half-hidden  behind trees uncut in a quarter-century. Weeds and brush choke the  town's main square, overlooked by a derelict hotel and a rusting sign  bearing the emblem of the long-gone Soviet Republic of Ukraine.
A  Ferris wheel that never carried a customer looms on the horizon - it  was to have opened the week after the explosion.
When Soviet  authorities finally admitted publicly that something had gone wrong,  they spoke in vague terms. The delay and opaqueness appear to have  hindered protective measures Ukrainians could have taken.
Many  first heard advice to take iodine to try to stave off thyroid cancer on  Voice of America broadcasts they listened to clandestinely.
It's  difficult to assess whether the delay led to sicknesses. Scientists are  even deeply divided on how many have died as a result of the Chernobyl  explosion, which released about 400 times more radiation than the U.S.  atomic bomb dropped over Hiroshima.
Radioactive material stayed  in soil and got into plants, and because livestock ate the vegetation,  milk and meat were contaminated for many years. Thousands of children  developed thyroid cancer from radiation exposure, and scientists are  still working to document other possible health problems.
Even  now, people who were children and teens at the time of the accident are  still developing thyroid cancer, the U.S. National Cancer Institute said  Thursday in a new research study.
That indicates these cancers -  among the most curable when treated in a timely manner- can develop  over a long time after exposure from drinking contaminated milk and no  protection from potassium iodide pills.
In 2005, the Chernobyl  Forum - a group comprising the International Atomic Energy Agency and  several other U.N. groups - said fewer than 50 deaths could be confirmed  as being connected to Chernobyl.
It also said the number of  radiation-related deaths among the 600,000 people who helped deal with  the aftermath of the accident would ultimately be around 4,000.
The  U.N. health agency, however, has said about 9,300 people are likely to  die of cancers caused by radiation. Some groups, including Greenpeace,  have put the numbers 10 times higher.
The ecological effects are  also open to debate. Wildlife has returned to the region despite high  radiation and even thrived - biologists even report seeing lynx and  moose there.
Some researchers say that emptying the zone of  people helped halt the destruction of habitat. Others say the animals  appear to be suffering deformation and other ills.
The trees in  Pripyat have grown big enough to almost block the abandoned apartment  towers from view, but they're stunted in other parts of the zone.
They're  growing, "but clearly they don't feel comfortable here," said Volodymyr  Holosha, head of the Ukrainian agency that manages the so-called  "exclusion zone."
Parts of the zone are apparently safe for  short-term human habitation. The town of Chernobyl, about 15 kilometers  (10 miles) from the plant, houses workers constructing a new shelter for  the destroyed reactor's building - but they stay there only two weeks  at a time.
They have years of work ahead, constructing a shelter  resembling a gargantuan Quonset hut (Nissen hut) that is to be rolled on  rails over the building housing the destroyed reactor.
The  structure is intended to block any radioactive emissions as the reactor  is disassembled. The so-called "sarcophagus" that was hastily built to  cover the reactor has already exceeded its life expectancy, and the  shelter won't be completed until at least 2014.
But the project,  directed by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, is  still far short on money. The bank hopes a donors' conference coinciding  with the explosion's 25th anniversary will bring pledges for the euro  740 million ($1.05 billion) still needed to complete the shelter and a  waste storage facility. International donors already have put up euro864  million.
Most of the donors are highly developed nations whose  budgets have been sapped by financial crises. One of the biggest donors  is Japan, now facing its own costly nuclear crisis. There is quiet  anxiety about where the rest of the money will come from.
"I'm  confident we will get the full amount. But you have to recognize that we  are living in difficult financial circumstances," said Jean-Paul Joulia  of the European Commission's Nuclear Safety Unit.
Even when the  shelter is completed, there's no consensus on whether the area around  the plant will ever be habitable.
That's a blow for Pripyat  loyalists like Glukhov, who remembers the town as a model of enlightened  planning, with good services, a cinema and a stirring central plaza.
Glukhov  eventually moved to the United States, but "despite the fact that I  live in Washington (state), I would come back."
A few hundred of  the people who were sent out of the zone after the explosion have come  back, despite warnings from the Ukrainian government to stay out. But  they can't be seen as harbingers of a better future.
"They just  want to finish their days in the areas they were born in, close to the  graves of their relatives," said Holosha.
 
No comments:
Post a Comment