Page 1 of 1

Chernobyl 25 Years On, and on, and on . . . .

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 5:41 pm
by Oscar
Chernobyl, 25 years on: cash plea for new roof to contain deadly remains

[ http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... tish-funds ]

Britain urged to contribute £43m of £640m cost as Ukraine marks anniversary of world's worst nuclear accident

Terry Macalister in Chernobyl
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 27 February 2011 17.53 GMT

Britain is coming under increasing pressure to provide Ukraine with an extra €50m (£43m) to construct a new contamination shield over the top of the stricken Chernobyl nuclear plant before the old one collapses.
Officials from the European commission said governments around the world were being urged to find €750m to help build a more sophisticated roof over the burnt-out reactor and storage for 200 tonnes of highly radioactive fuel.
Jean-Paul Joulia, from the commission's nuclear safety unit, admitted the cost of just this aspect of the Chernobyl clean-up was running at €1.5bn – double the original estimate – partly due to "some delays" to some projects.
But he said he was confident that foreign governments would stump up the money needed for the shield, even in today's financially difficult climate. "I am optimistic the international community is committed to this. It is important for a number of reasons," he said.
The disaster at Chernobyl, on 26 April 1986, is recognised as the world's worst nuclear accident. One of the power station's reactors exploded and the subsequent fire spewed a radioactive cloud across Europe.
The accident claimed the lives directly of at least 50 people, mainly fire crews and nuclear workers who tried to fight the fire on the fateful night.
Radioactive fallout is believed to have caused many other deaths from thyroid cancer and related illnesses, with an eventual death toll estimated at anywhere between 4,000 and 200,000.
- - - - SNIP - - -
Fallout over UK
Nuclear workers in Sweden were the first to detect the radioactive material that was thrown into the atmosphere from Chernobyl. The fallout from the accident in the early hours of 26 April 1986 crossed over Europe, and deposited the radioactive isotope caesium-137 in mainly upland areas of Wales, Scotland and England.
The disaster, which released at least 100 times more radiation than the atom bombs dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, forced the government to put 9,700 farms and 4.2 million sheep under restriction across the UK.
Restrictions were lifted in Northern Ireland in 2000. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs confirmed yesterday that the last time the government updated the public on the restrictions was in 2009 when the then health minister Dawn Primarolo revealed 369 farms and 190,000 sheep were still affected.
Of those farms, 355 are in north Wales, with nine in Cumbria and seven in Scotland. Farmers in these areas must have their livestock scanned before they are able to move them.

= = = = = = = =

Chernobyl 20 Years On

ECRR - Chernobyl: 20 Years On

Health Effects of the Chernobyl Accident European Committee on Radiation Risk

Documents of the ECRR 2006 No1

Edited by C.C.Busby and A.V.Yablokov

The report, Chernobyl 20 years on, is available on-line, now.

The cover-up after the Chernobyl reactor explosion, has been systemic.

The International Atomic Energy Agency and others involved in promoting the use of nuclear power for civilian and military means have been exposed in this book.

Here is the link:

[ http://www.euradcom.org/publications/chernobylebook.pdf ]

It is 259 pages of scientific and statistical data put together by independent researchers.

The big lie - Chernobyl

PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:55 am
by Oscar
The big lie

Alla Yaroshinskaya

http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2006-0 ... ya-en.html

The secret Chernobyl documents

In 1990, journalist Alla Yaroshinskaya came across secret documents about the Chernobyl catastrophe that revealed a massive cover-up operation and a calculated policy of disinformation. The state and party leadership had knowingly played down the extent of the contamination and offered a sanitized version to the outside world. In 1991, five years after the accident, a series of laws was adopted to protect the victims of radiation; now, scientists have begun to find serious flaws in these too. As recent studies show, the human and environmental damage shows no sign of abating.
- - - - -
Published 2006-04-21
Original in Russian
Translation by Vera Rich
First published in Index on Censorship 2/2006: "The Hidden Histories of Chernobyl" (forthcoming)
Contributed by Index on Censorship
© Alla Yaroshinskaya/Index on Censorship
© Eurozine
- - - - - - - -
Despite the changes brought about by Mikhail Gorbachev's vaunted perestroika and glasnost, the catastrophe at Chernobyl remained a classic Soviet cover-up, one that survived the collapse of the USSR in 1991. The number of people radically affected by the explosion was kept secret and the result was far greater mortality and suffering. Only in recent years have researchers and scientists begun to uncover the full truth of Chernobyl.

Related Articles:

Eurozine News Item
Remembering Chernobyl in 2006

http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2006-0 ... em-en.html

Guillaume Grandazzi
Commemorating the Chernobyl disaster: Remembering the future

http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2006-0 ... zi-en.html

Alla Yaroshinskaya
The big lie. The secret Chernobyl documents

http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2006-0 ... ya-en.html

Christine Daum, Igor Kostin
"The vodka was supposed to cleanse our thyroid glands". Igor Kostin on his Chernobyl photos

http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2006-0 ... in-en.html

Dzianis Ramaniuk
Rites, rituals, and cemeteries

http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2006-0 ... uk-en.html

Anatol Klashchuk
Children of Chernobyl

http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2006-0 ... uk-en.html

Editorial: Osteuropa 4/2006
Chernobyl: Legacy and obligations

http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2006-0 ... ed-en.html

Miriam Elder - The Independent
Russians fear worst as fires reach Chernobyl fallout zone

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/
europe/russians-fear-worst-as-fires-reach-chernobyl-fallout-zone-2050130.html

What happened to research on Chernobyl?

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 4:03 pm
by Oscar
What happened to research on Chernobyl?

http://pgs.ca/wp-content/uploads/2008/0 ... -email.pdf

Turning Point Vol XVI, No. 3 Fall 2010 – Page 6

The link between the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) and the WHO (World Health Organization)
In 1956, the WHO convened a study group that concluded: “…genetic heritage is the most precious property for human beings. It determines the lives of our progeny, healthy and harmonious development of future generations. As experts, we affirm that the health of future generations is threatened by increasing development of the atomic industry and sources of radiation…. We also believe that new mutations that occur in humans are harmful to them and their offspring.” (WHO, Genetic effects of radiation in humans. Report of a study group convened by WHO, Geneva, 1957, p. 183.)
In 1958, another report was tabled: “The genetic heritage is the most precious property for human beings. It determines the lives of our progeny, healthy and harmonious development of future generations. As experts, we affirm that the health of future generations is threatened by increasing development of the atomic industry and sources of radiation.” (Technical report No. 151, p. 59, WHO, Geneva, 1958).
After 1959, the WHO made no more pronouncements about radiation and health. It had been silenced by an agreement with the IAEA wherein the WHO relinquished its authority on health effects of radiation to the IAEA.
The IAEA reports to the Security Council of the UN and hence is hierarchically dominant to the WHO which reports only to the Economic and Social Council.
Four months after the explosion in Chernobyl, in August 1986, the IAEA convened the first conference in Geneva to examine the accident and its consequences. Western observers of the disaster had already decided upon a final “reassuring figure of 4,000” for the death toll. Soviet representatives had concealed (or denied) the extent of the disaster from their own citizens but, at this meeting, they presented data that would have been the death knell of the nuclear industry.
Meetings of the working groups in Vienna were held in camera but leaked information indicated that Academician Vasily Nesterenko and Professor Valery Legassov presented a voluminous report with an annex of 70 pages devoted entirely to medical and biological problems. Without dosimetry figures, the Soviets predicted by mathematical calculations an additional 40,000 cancer deaths in the 75 million inhabitants.
Equally abstract, and also without evidence, Westerners considered the figure to be too high. Mr. Beninson, president of the ICRP (International Committee for Radiation Protection) and head of Atomic Energy in Argentina, released a media report stating that the Soviet figures were “extremely overestimated”. Director of security of the IAEA, Mr. Rosen, set the upper limit of 25,000 deaths.
Over the next five years, through negotiation instead of scientific research, the number of deaths was consistently lowered until the “International Chernobyl Project” report, presented in Vienna in May 1991, put the number of deaths at 4000 and asserted that “radiation had no effect on population health”.
Subsequently, research linking radiation and health has been under-funded, extensively and unfairly criticized, and frequently simply ignored. Whistle-blowers have been harassed, fired from their jobs and in Russia, Israel and India, jailed.
Established three years ago, a vigil outside the WHO emphasizes this nefarious link and demands change. Someone has been present every working day; international volunteers are welcomed. The cart contains handouts in a wide variety of languages and is equipped with clothing for rain, extra mitts besides the well-used posters.
Going to Geneva, anyone?
Check www.independentwho.info

Chernobyl was lesson in nuclear peril: Gorbachev

PostPosted: Sat Mar 05, 2011 8:37 am
by Oscar
Chernobyl was lesson in nuclear peril: Gorbachev

http://www.nuclearpowerdaily.com/reports/
Chernobyl_was_lesson_in_nuclear_peril_Gorbachev_999.html

by Staff Writers Paris (AFP) March 1, 2011

QUOTE: "Gorbachev described Chernobyl as "a warning sign" for countries dependent on nuclear power or keen to turn to it."

The upcoming 25th anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster is a brutal reminder of the dangers of nuclear power, proliferation and terrorism, former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev said on Tuesday.
"The true scope of the tragedy still remains beyond comprehension and is a shocking reminder of the reality of the nuclear threat," Gorbachev said in an essay published by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, a watchdog organisation on nuclear security.
The April 26 1986 explosion at the Soviet power plant in the Ukraine, caused by an unauthorised test that went wrong, unleashed a reactor fire and radioactive fallout that contaminated swathes of the former Soviet Union and Western Europe.
The death toll ranges from a UN 2005 estimate of 4,000 to tens or even hundreds of thousands, proposed by non-governmental groups.
Environment problems include long-term contamination of water resources and soil and damage to wildlife that is still unclear, while the economic cost has been put in the hundreds of billions of dollars.
Gorbachev described Chernobyl as "a warning sign" for countries dependent on nuclear power or keen to turn to it.
"As the global population continues to expand, and the demand for energy production grows, we must invest in alternative and more sustainable sources of energy -- wind, solar, geothermal, hydro -- and widespread conservation and energy efficiency initiatives," he said.
He voiced concern about the risk of terror attacks on nuclear reactors, storage barrels of radioactive waste and fuel-rod pools and of the theft of fissile material.
"While the Chernobyl disaster was accidental, caused by faulty technology and human error, today's disaster could very well be intentional," Gorbachev wrote.
Gorbachev was secretary of the Soviet Communist Party at the time of the disaster.
In his essay, Gorbachev said he first heard of the incident on the morning of April 26 1986 through a report to the Kremlin by the Soviet Ministry of Medium Machine Building.
The ruling Politburo held an emergency meeting but the gravity of the incident remained unclear.
"Initial reports were cautious in tone, and only on the following day, April 27, did we learn that an explosion had taken place at the nuclear power station, at least two people had been killed, and radioactive material had been released downwind," Gorbachev said.

Fears over new leak at Chernobyl spark plea for radiation sh

PostPosted: Sun Mar 06, 2011 5:46 pm
by Oscar
Fears over new leak at Chernobyl spark plea for radiation shield

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/
fears-over-new-leak-at-chernobyl-spark-plea-for-radiation-shield-2227550.html

Shaun Walker in Chernobyl, The Independent, Monday, 28 Feb. 2011
Fears that the destroyed nuclear reactor at Chernobyl could collapse and again leak deadly radiation have prompted European agencies to seek hundreds of millions of pounds to fund the construction of a vast steel building to encase the site.

For a graphic view and for more information on the structure, see:

http://www.nuclearpowerdaily.com/reports/
Work_begins_on_new_sarcophagus_for_Chernobyl_reactor_999.html

As the 25th anniversary of the worst nuclear accident in history approaches, there is a funding shortfall of �740m (�631m) for projects to build a "shelter" over the destroyed reactor and to safely store nuclear fuel from the other nuclear reactors at the site.
The new shelter for the destroyed reactor is being funded by the European Union and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development in co-operation with the Ukrainian government, but European officials say they urgently need countries to pledge money
for the project, which is under way but underfunded. They hope that a conference in April, ahead of the anniversary of the disaster, will see governments donate the missing funds.

MORE:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/
fears-over-new-leak-at-chernobyl-spark-plea-for-radiation-shield-2227550.html

WATCH: Reconstruction of Radioactive Plume from Chernobyl

PostPosted: Sun Mar 06, 2011 6:00 pm
by Oscar
WATCH: Reconstruction of Radioactive Plume from Chernobyl (takes a minute for film to download)

http://zerodegreeburn.com/chernobyl/

This is a reconstruction of the Chernobyl radioactive plume by the French Government's official agency on radiation and nuclear matters, the Institut de Radioprotection et Surete Nucleaire.
It is based on weather patterns for the time period April 26 to May 6 when the fire was burning inside the stricken reactor, and on known Cs-137 measurements.
It is a remarkably graphic illustration of the huge extent of the radioactive contamination of East and West Europe (and eventually the rest of the Northern Hemisphere) by the Chernobyl catastrophe.
After you have opened this page please wait for 1 or 2 minutes while the film (15 MB) is downloaded to your computer: it then starts automatically. Link to file.

Premier Wall's reply would be..... RE: Chernobyl was lesson

PostPosted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:41 am
by Oscar
RE: Chernobyl was lesson in nuclear peril: Gorbachev

March 8, 2011

Elaine Hughes (tybach@sasktel.net)

Dear Ms. Hughes:

Thank you for your email of March 5, 2011, regarding government support for uranium value-added opportunities; and, the attached article.

Saskatchewan is a world leader in uranium production. Our province has over one billion pounds of identified uranium resources, second only to Australia. We want to ensure that the people of Saskatchewan are benefitting from this resource as much as possible.

As you know, our government extensively studied the possibility of nuclear power for Saskatchewan with the help of expert consultations and a series of public meetings in 2009. Based on recommendations and cost considerations, our government has decided to not go ahead with the construction of a large-scale nuclear reactor for the province at this time. For more information on our government’s strategic direction for uranium development in Saskatchewan, please visit the Government of Saskatchewan website: www.er.gov.sk.ca/uranium-development.

It is clear, however, that our growing province faces an increased demand for electricity in the years ahead. At this time, we continue to direct SaskPower to include nuclear power in the range of sustainable energy options available for the province’s long-range energy mix beyond 2020. This will be in addition to evaluating a wide range of renewable electricity supply alternatives, including wind and hydro. As part of our government’s innovation agenda, we are also encouraging investment in nuclear research, development and training opportunities, specifically in the areas of mining, neutron science, medical isotopes, small scale reactor design, and enrichment.

Earlier this month, our government announced $30 million in funding over seven years to establish a new centre for research in nuclear medicine and materials at the University of Saskatchewan. It is our hope that the new research centre will be a step toward re-establishing our province as an international leader in nuclear science and nuclear medicine.

This investment builds on January's announcement of $12 million in funding to build a new linear accelerator and support research into the production of medical isotopes at the Canadian Light Source in Saskatoon. Together with our March 4, 2011, announcement to bring PET-CT scan services to Saskatchewan, our government will continue to work hard to ensure the science and technology of innovation contributes to better health and quality of life for all Saskatchewan residents.

I have forwarded your email to the Honourable Rob Norris, Minister Responsible for Innovation, for his consideration.

Thank you for writing.

Brad Wall, Premier

cc Honourable Rob Norris,

Minister Responsible for Innovation

= = = = =

From: Elaine Hughes

Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2011 8:54 AM

To: Council of Canadians ; SK Premier Wall

Cc: Sask EcoNetwork ; Sask Environmental Society ; Pembina Institute ; GlobalResearch.ca ; Environmental Defence ; Ecologist ; Ecojustice ; David Suzuki Foundation ; Greenpeace ; Prime Minister Harper ; Breitkreuz, G. MP ; SK Green - Leader - Larissa Shasko ; SK Liberal - Leader - Ryan Bater ; SK NDP Caucus ; SK Party Caucus

Subject: Chernobyl was lesson in nuclear peril: Gorbachev

Premier Wall

Why do you persist in the craziness of anything to do with uranium and its high-risk, lethal, outdated industry: its greed and insatiable need for evermore money, the risk to the environment, wildlife and the health of those who work in the mines or live near power plants (regardless of size!), and the nightmare of transporting and storing nuclear waste?

We need nothing from uranium - nothing for a 'centre of excellence', nothing for electricity, nothing for 'added value' - nothing!!! We all know that there are alternatives which come without the multi-million year risks.

We also know that Responsible Governance means protecting those you govern.

It does not mean placing them at risk while playing into the manipulating, grasping hands of corporations with the exciting media events and back-slapping.

Why, when you are aware of the risk, do you persist in putting all of Earth's inhabitants in its path?

Please ponder Mr. Gorbachev's words in the article below and tell us, Premier Wall: What part of the horrendous lessons of Chernobyl do you not understand?????

QUOTE: "Gorbachev described Chernobyl as "a warning sign" for countries dependent on nuclear power or keen to turn to it. "

Elaine Hughes
Archerwill, SK

= = = = = = =

Chernobyl was lesson in nuclear peril: Gorbachev

http://www.nuclearpowerdaily.com/reports/
Chernobyl_was_lesson_in_nuclear_peril_Gorbachev_999.html

by Staff Writers Paris (AFP) March 1, 2011

The upcoming 25th anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster is a brutal reminder of the dangers of nuclear power, proliferation and terrorism, former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev said on Tuesday.

"The true scope of the tragedy still remains beyond comprehension and is a shocking reminder of the reality of the nuclear threat," Gorbachev said in an essay published by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, a watchdog organisation on nuclear security.

The April 26 1986 explosion at the Soviet power plant in the Ukraine, caused by an unauthorised test that went wrong, unleashed a reactor fire and radioactive fallout that contaminated swathes of the former Soviet Union and Western Europe.

The death toll ranges from a UN 2005 estimate of 4,000 to tens or even hundreds of thousands, proposed by non-governmental groups.

Environment problems include long-term contamination of water resources and soil and damage to wildlife that is still unclear, while the economic cost has been put in the hundreds of billions of dollars.

Gorbachev described Chernobyl as "a warning sign" for countries dependent on nuclear power or keen to turn to it.

"As the global population continues to expand, and the demand for energy production grows, we must invest in alternative and more sustainable sources of energy -- wind, solar, geothermal, hydro -- and widespread conservation and energy efficiency initiatives," he said.

He voiced concern about the risk of terror attacks on nuclear reactors, storage barrels of radioactive waste and fuel-rod pools and of the theft of fissile material.

"While the Chernobyl disaster was accidental, caused by faulty technology and human error, today's disaster could very well be intentional," Gorbachev wrote.

Gorbachev was secretary of the Soviet Communist Party at the time of the disaster.

In his essay, Gorbachev said he first heard of the incident on the morning of April 26 1986 through a report to the Kremlin by the Soviet Ministry of Medium Machine Building.

The ruling Politburo held an emergency meeting but the gravity of the incident remained unclear.

"Initial reports were cautious in tone, and only on the following day, April 27, did we learn that an explosion had taken place at the nuclear power station, at least two people had been killed, and radioactive material had been released downwind," Gorbachev said.

BOOK: Chernobyl: The Consequences of the Catastrophe for Peo

PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2011 9:27 am
by Oscar
Chernobyl: The Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment

- - - - -

QUOTE: “Alice Slater, representative in New York of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, comments: "The tragic news uncovered by the comprehensive new research that almost one million people died in the toxic aftermath of Chernobyl should be a wake-up call to people all over the world to petition their governments to put a halt to the current industry-driven "nuclear renaissance.' Aided by a corrupt IAEA, the world has been subjected to a massive cover-up and deception about the true damages caused by Chernobyl."
Further worsening the situation, she said, has been "the collusive agreement between the IAEA and the World Health Organization in which the WHO is precluded from publishing any research on radiation effects without consultation with the IAEA." WHO, the public health arm of the UN, has supported the IAEA's claim that 4,000 will die as a result of the accident.
"How fortunate," said Ms. Slater, "that independent scientists have now revealed the horrific costs of the Chernobyl accident." ”


- - - - - -

Chernobyl: The Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment


http://www.globalresearch.ca/
index.php?context=va&aid=23745

by Alexey V. Yablokov and Vassily B. Nesterenko and Alexey V. Nesterenko
Global Research, March 16, 2011
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment
Written by Alexey V. Yablokov (Center for Russian Environmental Policy, Moscow, Russia), Vassily B. Nesterenko, and Alexey V. Nesterenko (Institute of Radiation Safety, Minsk, Belarus). Consulting Editor Janette D. Sherman-Nevinger (Environmental Institute, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Michigan).
Volume 1181, December 2009 335 Pages

Full Text (To purchase)
https://www.nyas.org/
Login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%252fannalfulltext%252fjump.ashx%253faid%253df3f3bd16-51ba-4d7b-a086-753f44b3bfc1%2526isid%253dnyas.2009.1181.issue-1%2526code%253d1181%2526ref%253d9781573317573%2526doi%253d10.1111&aid=f3f3bd16-51ba-4d7b-a086-753f44b3bfc1&isid=nyas.2009.1181.issue-1&ref=9781573317573

This is a collection of papers translated from the Russian with some revised and updated contributions. Written by leading authorities from Eastern Europe, the volume outlines the history of the health and environmental consequences of the Chernobyl disaster. According to the authors, official discussions from the International Atomic Energy Agency and associated United Nations' agencies (e.g. the Chernobyl Forum reports) have largely downplayed or ignored many of the findings reported in the Eastern European scientific literature and consequently have erred by not including these assessments.

Posted 4/28/2010
NEW YORK—“Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment,” Volume 1181 of Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, published online in November 2009, was authored by Alexey V. Yablokov, of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Alexey V. Nesterenko, of the Institute of Radiation Safety (Belarus), and the late Prof. Vassily B. Nesterenko, former director of the Belarussian Nuclear Center. With a foreword by the Chairman of the Ukranian National Commission on Radiation Protection, Dimitro M. Grodzinsky, the 327-page volume is an English translation of a 2007 publication by the same authors. The earlier volume, “Chernobyl,” published in Russian, presented an analysis of the scientific literature, including more than 1,000 titles and more than 5,000 printed and Internet publications mainly in Slavic languages, on the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster.
The Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences issue “Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment”, therefore, does not present new, unpublished work, nor is it a work commissioned by the New York Academy of Sciences. The expressed views of the authors, or by advocacy groups or individuals with specific opinions about the Annals Chernobyl volume, are their own. Although the New York Academy of Sciences believes it has a responsibility to provide open forums for discussion of scientific questions, the Academy has no intent to influence legislation by providing such forums. The Academy is committed to publishing content deemed scientifically valid by the general scientific community, from whom the Academy carefully monitors feedback.
----------------------
REVIEW BY KARL GROSSMAN
published in September 2010
This past April 26th [2010] marked the 24th anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear plant accident. It came as the nuclear industry and pro-nuclear government officials in the United States and other nations were trying to "revive" nuclear power. And it followed the publication of a book, the most comprehensive study ever made, on the impacts of the Chernobyl disaster.
Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment was published by the New York Academy of Sciences.

It is authored by three noted scientists:

Russian biologist Dr. Alexey Yablokov, former environmental advisor to the Russian president;
Dr. Alexey Nesterenko, a biologist and ecologist in Belarus; and
Dr.Vassili Nesterenko, a physicist and at the time of the accident director of the Institute of Nuclear Energy of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus.

Its editor is Dr. Janette Sherman, a physician and toxicologist long involved in studying the health impacts of radioactivity.
The book is solidly based -- on health data, radiological surveys and scientific reports -- some 5,000 in all.
It concludes that based on records now available, some 985,000 people died, mainly of cancer, as a result of the Chernobyl accident. That is between when the accident occurred in 1986 and 2004. More deaths, it projects, will follow.
The book explodes the claim of the International Atomic Energy Agency-- still on its website that the expected death toll from the Chernobyl accident will be 4,000. The IAEA, the new book shows, is under-estimating, to the extreme, the casualties of Chernobyl.
Alice Slater, representative in New York of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, comments: "The tragic news uncovered by the comprehensive new research that almost one million people died in the toxic aftermath of Chernobyl should be a wake-up call to people all over the world to petition their governments to put a halt to the current industry-driven "nuclear renaissance.' Aided by a corrupt IAEA, the world has been subjected to a massive cover-up and deception about the true damages caused by Chernobyl."
Further worsening the situation, she said, has been "the collusive agreement between the IAEA and the World Health Organization in which the WHO is precluded from publishing any research on radiation effects without consultation with the IAEA." WHO, the public health arm of the UN, has supported the IAEA's claim that 4,000 will die as a result of the accident.
"How fortunate," said Ms. Slater, "that independent scientists have now revealed the horrific costs of the Chernobyl accident."
The book also scores the position of the IAEA, set up through the UN in 1957 "to accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy," and its 1959 agreement with WHO. There is a "need to change," it says, the IAEA-WHO pact. It has muzzled the WHO, providing for the "hiding" from the "public of any information "unwanted" by the nuclear industry.
"An important lesson from the Chernobyl experience is that experts and organizations tied to the nuclear industry have dismissed and ignored the consequences of the catastrophe," it states.
The book details the spread of radioactive poisons following the explosion of Unit 4 of the Chernobyl nuclear plant on April 26, 1986. These major releases only ended when the fire at the reactor was brought under control in mid-May. Emitted were "hundreds of millions of curies, a quantity hundreds of times larger than the fallout from the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki." The most extensive fall-out occurred in regions closest to the plant--in the Ukraine (the reactor was 60 miles from Kiev in Ukraine), Belarus and Russia.
However, there was fallout all over the world as the winds kept changing direction "so the radioactive emissions" covered an enormous territory."
The radioactive poisons sent billowing from the plant into the air included Cesium-137, Plutonium, Iodine-131 and Strontium-90.
There is a breakdown by country, highlighted by maps, of where the radionuclides fell out. Beyond Ukraine, Belarus and Russia, the countries included Bulgaria, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Poland, Sweden and the United Kingdom. The radiological measurements show that some 10% of Chernobyl poisons "fell on Asia"Huge areas" of eastern Turkey and central China "were highly contaminated," reports the book. Northwestern Japan was impacted, too.
Northern Africa was hit with "more than 5% of all Chernobyl releases."
The finding of Cesium-137 and both Plutonium-239 and Plutonium-240 "in accumulated Nile River sediment is evidence of significant Chernobyl contamination," it states.
"Areas of North America were contaminated from the first, most powerful explosion, which lifted a cloud of radionuclides to a height of more than 10 km. Some 1% of all Chernobyl nuclides," says the book, "fell on North America."
The consequences on public health are extensively analyzed. Medical records involving children--the young, their cells more rapidly multiplying, are especially affected by radioactivity--are considered. Before the accident, more than 80% of the children in the territories of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia extensively contaminated by Chernobyl "were healthy," the book reports, based on health data. But "today fewer than 20% are well."
There is an examination of genetic impacts with records reflecting an increase in "chromosomal aberrations" wherever there was fallout.
This will continue through the "children of irradiated parents for as many as seven generations." So "the genetic consequences of the Chernobyl catastrophe will impact hundreds of millions of people."
As to deaths, the list of countries and consequences begins with Belarus. "For the period 1900-2000 cancer mortality in Belarus increased 40%," it states, again based on medical data and illuminated by tables in the book. "The increase was a maximum in the most highly contaminated Gomel Province and lower in the less contaminated Brest and Mogilev provinces." They include childhood cancers, thyroid cancer, leukemia and other cancers.
Considering health data of people in all nations impacted by the fallout, the "overall mortality for the period from April 1986 to the end of 2004 from the Chernobyl catastrophe was estimated as 985,000 additional deaths."
Further, "the concentrations" of some of the poisons, because they have radioactive half-lives ranging from 20,000 to 200,000 years, "will remain practically the same virtually forever."
The book also examines the impact on plants and animals. "Immediately after the catastrophe, the frequency of plant mutations in the contaminated territories increased sharply."
There are photographs of some of these plant mutations. "Chernobyl irradiation has caused many structural anomalies and tumorlike changes in many plant species and has led to genetic disorders, sometimes continuing for many years," it says. "Twenty-three years after the catastrophe it is still too early to know if the whole spectrum of plant radiogenic changes has been discerned. We are far from knowing all of the consequences for flora resulting from the catastrophe."
As to animals, the book notes "serious increases in morbidity and mortality that bear striking resemblance to changes in the public health of humans--increasing tumor rates, immunodeficiencies, and decreasing life expectancy."
In one study it is found that "survival rates of barn swallows in the most contaminated sites near the Chernobyl nuclear power plant are close to zero. In areas of moderate contamination, annual survival is less than 25%." Research is cited into ghastly abnormalities in barn swallows that do hatch: "two heads, two tails."
"In 1986," the book states, "the level of irradiation in plants and animals in Western Europe, North America, the Arctic, and eastern Asia were sometimes hundreds and even thousands of times above acceptable norms."
In its final chapter, the book declares that the explosion of the Chernobyl nuclear plant "was the worst technogenic accident in history." And it examines "obstacles" to the reporting of the true consequences of Chernobyl with a special focus on "organizations associated with the nuclear industry" that "protect the industry first--not the public." Here, the IAEA and WHO are charged.
The book ends by quoting U.S. President John F. Kennedy's call in 1963 for an end of atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons."The Chernobyl catastrophe," it declares, "demonstrates that the nuclear industry's willingness to risk the health of humanity and our environment with nuclear power plants will result, not only theoretically, but practically, in the same level of hazard as nuclear weapons."
Dr. Sherman, speaking of the IAEA's and WHO's dealing with the impacts of Chernobyl, commented: "It's like Dracula guarding the blood bank." The 1959 agreement under which WHO "is not to be independent of the IAEA" but must clear any information it obtains on issues involving radioactivity with the IAEA has put "the two in bed together."
Of her reflections on 14 months editing the book, she said: "Every single system that was studied -- whether human or wolves or livestock or fish or trees or mushrooms or bacteria -- all were changed, some of them irreversibly. The scope of the damage is stunning."
In his foreword, Dr. Dimitro Grodzinsky, chairman of the Ukranian National Commission on Radiation Protection, writes about how "apologists of nuclear power" sought to hide the real impacts of the Chernobyl disaster from the time when the accident occurred. The book "provides the largest and most complete collection of data concerning the negative consequences of Chernobyl on the health of people and the environment...The main conclusion of the book is that it is impossible and wrong "to forget Chernobyl.”
In the record of Big Lies, the claim of the IAEA-WHO that "only" 4,000 people will die as a result of the Chernobyl catastrophe is among the biggest. The Chernobyl accident is, as the new book documents, an ongoing global catastrophe.
And it is a clear call for no new nuclear power plants to be built and for the closing of the dangerous atomic machines now running -- and a switch to safe energy technologies, now available, led by solar and wind energy, that will not leave nearly a million people dead from one disaster.
Karl Grossman is a professor of journalism at the State University of New York/College at Old Westbury and host of the nationally syndicated TV program Enviro Close-Up

LINKS are at URL above:
Global Research Articles by Karl Grossman
Global Research Articles by Alexey V. Yablokov
Global Research Articles by Vassily B. Nesterenko
Global Research Articles by Alexey V. Nesterenko

VIDEO: Caldicott: NUCLEAR FACTS: Not heard on the news!

PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2011 9:07 am
by Oscar
Caldicott: NUCLEAR FACTS: You won't hear this on any mainstream news!!!
----- Original Message -----
From: Elaine Hughes
To: Uranium News ; SK Premier Wall ; Sask Environmental Society ; Sask EcoNetwork ; Breitkreuz, G. MP ; Council of Canadians
Cc: SK Party Caucus ; SK NDP Caucus ; SK Liberal - Leader - Ryan Bater ; SK Green - Leader - Larissa Shasko ; Sierra Club - US ; Sierra Club - Can. ; SDWF ; Sask. Wildlife Fed. ; Safe And Green Energy ; Rideau Institute ; Polaris Institute ; Pollution Probe ; Pembina Institute ; Parkland Institute ; Ontario Clean Air Alliance ; Cdn. Parks & Wilderness ; Cdn. Wildlife Federation ; Nature Canada ; Mining Watch.ca ; Ignatieff M. - Lib. ; Layton, J. NDP ; Mosset, Kandi ; Gearon, Jihan ; Cobenais, Marty ; Goldtooth, Tom ; Dr. Gordon Edwards ; Greenpeace ; Friends of the Earth ; Environmental Defence ; Ecojustice ; Ecologist ; David Suzuki Foundation
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 9:01 AM
Subject: MUST WATCH: Caldicott: NUCLEAR FACTS: You won't hear this on any mainstream news!!! (Nuclear Fallout)


Mr. Wall


Thanks, Cameco.


Elaine Hughes
Archerwill, SK

= = = = = = = =

WATCH: You won't hear this on any mainstream news!!! (Nuclear Fallout)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMXvpWoHzeE

April 18, 2011

Nuclear Facts A very clued-in professional who will not be bought or intimidated into silence: Dr Helen Caldicott, true to style, tells it as it is. As she sees it, you wont usually hear the truth so listen up.. Nuclear fallout from Japan and Canada, You won't hear this on the news!

WATCH: Chernobyl Catastrophe: 25th Anniversary

PostPosted: Fri Apr 29, 2011 9:12 am
by Oscar
Chernobyl Catastrophe: 25th Anniversary of World's Worst Nuclear Accident

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/4/26/
chernobyl_catastrophe_25th_anniversary_of_worlds

Democracy Now April 26, 2011

As Japan continues to deal with its nuclear crisis at the Fukushima Daiichi power facility, memorials are being held in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia today to mark the 25th anniversary of the nuclear meltdown at Chernobyl. On April 26, 1986, an explosion at the power plant sent a cloud of radioactive fallout into Russia, Belarus and over a large portion of
Europe. Soviet officials attempted to cover up the accident, but eventually 50,000 people living in Chernobyl's immediate surroundings had to be evacuated. A vast rural region near the plant remains uninhabitable. Until the crisis in Japan, Chernobyl was the world's only Level 7 "major accident" nuclear disaster, the most severe designation issued by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Guests:

Dr. Jeff Patterson, the immediate past president of Physicians for Social Responsibility and has visited the Chernobyl disaster site. Physicians for Social Responsibility has just released a new Nuclear Reactor Accident Evacuation Zone Mapping Tool

Dr. Janette Sherman, specialist in internal medicine and toxicology. She edited the book Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and Nature. She recently wrote the article, Chernobyl, 25 Years Later

Lessons from Chernobyl 25 years on

PostPosted: Sun May 08, 2011 6:49 pm
by Oscar
Lessons from Chernobyl 25 years on

[ http://www.leadershiponline.co.za/artic ... ar-dangers ]

Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan - Updated and adapted from an article in Der Spiegel )

May 3, 2011

On 26 April it was the 25th anniversary of the night-time explosion at the Soviet Union's Chernobyl nuclear power station. To this day it should serve as a warning that even the slightest risks associated with nuclear power developments will remain too high to tolerate.

Work on the new sarcophagus meant to contain Chernobyl's reactor 4 is a decade behind schedule. But significant problems will remain even once it is complete. For one, it is only meant to last for 100 years. For another, no one knows what to do with the vast quantities of radioactive waste left behind.

The world would probably be all too pleased to forget about Chernobyl and the surrounding villages, and with them all their problems: thousands of square kilometers of contaminated soil, radioactive seepage, the crumbling existing sarcophagus, all the past mistakes and the ongoing lack of funding. The global community has argued over the future of the contaminated area at four donor conferences since 1997.

'Substantial Project Risks'

Before the 25th anniversary of the disaster on April 26, experts met once again in Kiev. Still under the impression of the massive nuclear disaster in Japan, the European Union and the governments of 28 countries have now promised to provide E550 million ($780 million) to build a new containment facility, although E190 million is still needed for the new shell.

It is designed to cover the old sarcophagus the Soviets built in only 200 days in 1986.

So far, engineers have had great difficulty preventing the collapse of the dilapidated ruin. If it did collapse, another cloud of radioactive dust would rise up from the site. But will these funds truly help prevent this from happening?

Some E864 million had previously been pledged for the construction of a new containment, and much of that money has already been used up. The German Environment Ministry warns in a report of "substantial project risks" and criticizes the lack of transparency in the use of funds. Most critically, there is no long-term plan for dealing with a radioactive legacy that will remain for several millennia.

Work on the new sarcophagus hasn't come far. Surveillance cameras and three rows of barbed wire protect the construction site. All photography and filming is forbidden, "out of fear of terrorist attacks," explains project manager Viktor Salisezki. Some 500 employees of Novarka, an international consortium, are currently preparing the site for the planned construction of the new structure.

Men in white overalls are driving one of the 396 piers that will form the foundation of the massive structure 25 meters (82 feet) into the contaminated ground. The new semi-circular shelter will be 105 meters high, 150 meters long and 257.5 meters wide -- a hangar four times as large as Hamburg's main train station.

Not a Long Time

Salisezki's men are assembling 18,000 tons of steel, more than was used for the Eiffel Tower in Paris, for the frame alone. To protect the workers from radiation, the construction site is located several hundred meters from the reactor. The project manager hopes that the sarcophagus will be ready by the fall of 2015, which would be 10 years later than
originally planned. It will then be pushed over the reactor along special rails. Moving the steel structure alone will take two weeks.

"The new shelter will last 100 years," says Vladimir Rudko of the National Institute for Nuclear Power Plant Safety. And that, he adds, isn't a very long time.

Rudko has already devised a timeframe for the complete disassembly of the ruined reactor. "First we have to develop the necessary technology," he says, "and then we'll need another 40 to 50 years for the salvage operation."

However, Rudko adds, no one knows where the radioactive wreckage of the ruined reactor and the roughly 30,000 tons of material containing fuel are to be stored. In eastern Ukraine, where there are many mines and tunnels, the population is strongly opposed to a permanent repository. As an alternative, Rudko proposes drilling a deep shaft in the restricted zone.

He doesn't like temporary solutions, perhaps because he himself is still working in a temporary location.

Rudko's office is where the data taken from the interior of the old sarcophagus is collected. Hardly anyone is more familiar with the countless cracks and holes in the old shell than Rudko. But he also knows that 40% of the reactor's interior still hasn't been investigated. How far down into the concrete foundation has the nuclear lava penetrated? How great of a threat is it to groundwater? No one knows the answers.

20,000 Radioactive Fuel Rods

"We have to disassemble and dispose of the reactor. We owe that much to our grandchildren," says Rudko. So far, however, there is neither a plan nor funding for such an undertaking.

Instead, short-term measures to limit the damage will have to suffice for the time being. To prevent the radioactivity from continuing to spread, members of the fire department stand guard on high observation towers in the summer. Forest fires could release radioactive materials that have accumulated in the ground and in plants.

In 1992, for example, a large fire blew radioactive particles all the way to the Lithuanian capital Vilnius, about 500 kilometers away. The fine particles are highly carcinogenic if they enter the human body.

The fuel rods from the still-intact Chernobyl reactors 1 to 3 present another problem. About 20,000 radioactive fuel rods have been kept in temporary cooling ponds for years. The nuclear experts with Greenpeace Russia fear that these wet-storage facilities are now more dangerous than the ruined reactor itself.

The French nuclear company Areva was building a new storage complex until 2003. But the concrete began to crumble in the first Ukrainian winter, and cracks had to be filled with plastics. Furthermore, the storage facility had already proven to be too small for the old fuel elements. And the facility has been empty for years, a memorial to the costly planning errors at Chernobyl.

A US company is now set to build a new temporary storage facility at an estimated cost of at least $300 million. "It's become something of an international sport to blow as much money as possible on Chernobyl," says Vladimir Chuprov, a nuclear expert with Greenpeace Russia.

Wolves and Bears

Meanwhile, the water problem remains unresolved. Each month, 300,000 liters of radioactively contaminated water have to be pumped out of the plant. Some of it is precipitation that enters the sarcophagus through cracks and holes. And some of it is groundwater, which has risen artificially as a result of the 22-square-kilometer cooling water reservoir.

Alexander Antropov, 53, a Chernobyl veteran, is charged with pumping out this basin. He worked in the nuclear power plant for three years, and until the day of the disaster he lived in a prefabricated building on the "Street of the Heroes of Stalingrad" in the nearby city of Pripyat. Now he is worried that radioactivity could be flushed into the Pripyat River.

"We have to lower the water table, or else cesium-137 and strontium-90 could percolate into the groundwater," he warns.

Through the Pripyat, these substances could reach the large Dnieper Reservoir north of Kiev, which provides drinking water to the Ukrainian capital Kiev 90 kilometers away.

Meanwhile, a small group of Chernobyl tourists is walking along the streets of the abandoned city of Pripyat, now overgrown with trees. The head of the Chernobyl Interinform agency advises his charges not to stray from the group. But his concern does not stem from radiation but from the predators that now hunt amid the ruins. "The people have left," he says. "Pripyat is now the territory of wolves and bears."

BOOK: Chernobyl Consequences of the Catastrophe for People

PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 4:26 pm
by Oscar
BOOK: Chernobyl Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment

NOW AVAILABLE AT GREATLY REDUCED PRICE!!!

by Alexei V. Yablokov, Vastly B. Nesterenko and Alexey V. Yesterenko.
Consulting Editor: Janette D. Sherman-Nevinger. 327 pages.

Originally published in 2009 by the New York Academy of Sciences at $150.00,
the right to reprint has been transferred to the authors and is now available for $10.00, plus postage. This includes a separate index that was not part of the original book.

This book is "...a comprehensive presentation of all the available information concerning the health and environmental effects of the low dose radioactive contaminants, especially those emitted from the Chernobyl nuclear power plant." - quoted from Dr. Sherman's website: http://janettesherman.com/books/

Please order directly from:
GREKO PRINTING
260 W. Ann Arbor Rd.
Plymouth, MI 48170
734-453-0341 (9 to 5, Mon. to Fri., EDT)

e-mail: TONY@GREKOPRINTING.COM <javascript:void(0)>
Include credit card number and expiration date, number of books and address where they are to be sent.
Orders from foreign countries welcome postage will be additional.

Re: Chernobyl 25 Years On

PostPosted: Sat Mar 21, 2015 4:56 pm
by Oscar
Chernobyl Safe Confinement nears final stage, but funds need boost

[ http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR-Ch ... 31502.html ]

World Nuclear News, March 17, 2015 [ http://tinyurl.com/kdel675 ]

Construction of the Chernobyl New Safe Confinement on the site of the 1986 nuclear accident is entering its final stage, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) said yesterday.

The London-headquartered bank also said that there is a E100 million funding gap which the international community, whose contributions the EBRD is administering as manager of the Chernobyl decommissioning funds, is aiming to close.

The New Safe Confinement will make the old Chernobyl shelter and remnants of the damaged reactor safe and environmentally secure. Completion of the project is scheduled for the end of 2017. The total cost of the Shelter Implementation Plan, of which the New Safe Confinement is the most prominent element, is estimated to be around E2.15 billion ($3.09 billion). The New Safe Confinement alone accounts for E1.5 billion.

The giant structure has been erected over the past four years in a secure area near the damaged reactor in two pieces which are about to be joined together.

Meanwhile, a sophisticated ventilation system which will keep the structure corrosion-free during its lifespan is being installed, a technological building as the future control centre is being constructed and the arch will also be fitted with fully-automated cranes, tools for deconstruction and other auxiliary systems. Once complete, the structure will be slid over the Chernobyl shelter that houses the reactor damaged in the accident.

The purpose of the New Safe Confinement - which will have a height of 110 metres, length of 165 metres and an arch span of 257 metres - is to protect the environment from radiation releases and provide the infrastructure to support the deconstruction of the shelter and nuclear waste management operations. The new structure has a lifespan of at least 100 years and will provide a timeframe within which to develop and implement mitigation strategies for dealing with the long-term legacy of the Chernobyl accident.

Under the Shelter Implementation Plan, which sets out a roadmap for how to transform Chernobyl into a safe and secure state, the shelter was stabilised, the site was cleared for construction of the New Safe Confinement and facilities were created to "guarantee highest health and safety standards for the protection of the workforce on site", the bank said.

During the peak period of construction about 1200 workers from more than 27 nations are working on the site. "They are regularly checked and the project has an excellent track record in terms of health and safety," the bank said.

MORE:

[ http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR-Ch ... 31502.html ]