Chernobyl Accident 1986

The Chernobyl accident in 1986 was the result of a flawed reactor

design that was operated with inadequately trained personnel. The
resulting steam explosion and fires released at least 5% of the
radioactive reactor core into the atmosphere and downwind – some
5200 PBq .Two Chernobyl plant workers died on the night of the
accident, and a further 28 people died within a few weeks as a result of
acute radiation poisoning. UNSCEAR says that apart from increased
thyroid cancers, "there is no evidence of a major public health impact
attributable to radiation exposure 20 years after the accident."
Resettlement of areas from which people were relocated is ongoing. In
2011 Chernobyl was officially declared a tourist attraction.1

The April 1986 disaster at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant

in Ukraine was the product of a flawed Soviet reactor design coupled
with serious mistakes made by the plant operators. It was a direct
consequence of Cold War isolation and the resulting lack of any safety
culture.

1
https://www.world-nuclear.org/
The accident destroyed the Chernobyl 4 reactor, killing 30 operators
and firemen within three months and several further deaths later. One
person was killed immediately and a second died in hospital soon after
as a result of injuries received. Another person is reported to have died
at the time from a coronary thrombosisc. Acute radiation syndrome
(ARS) was originally diagnosed in 237 people onsite and involved with
the clean-up and it was later confirmed in 134 cases. Of these, 28
people died as a result of ARS within a few weeks of the accident.
Nineteen more workers subsequently died between 1987 and 2004,
but their deaths cannot necessarily be attributed to radiation
exposured. Nobody offsite suffered from acute radiation effects
although a significant, but uncertain, fraction of the thyroid cancers
diagnosed since the accident in patients who were children at the time
are likely to be due to intake of radioactive iodine falloutm,9.
Furthermore, large areas of Belarus, Ukraine, Russia, and beyond were
contaminated in varying degrees. See also sections below
and Chernobyl Accident Appendix 2: Health Impacts.2
The Chernobyl disaster was a unique event and the only accident in the
history of commercial nuclear power where radiation-related fatalities
occurrede. The design of the reactor is unique and in that respect the
accident is thus of little relevance to the rest of the nuclear industry
outside the then Eastern Bloc. However, it led to major changes in
safety culture and in industry cooperation, particularly between East
and West before the end of the Soviet Union. Former President
Gorbachev said that the Chernobyl accident was a more important
factor in the fall of the Soviet Union than Perestroika – his program of
liberal reform.

2
Source-www.world-nuclear.org
What Led to the Disaster?
The reactor unit 4 was to be shut down for routine maintenance on 25
April 1986. But, it was decided to take advantage of this shutdown to
determine whether, in the event of a loss of station power, the slowing
turbine could provide enough electrical power to operate the main core
cooling water circulating pumps, until the diesel emergency power
supply became operative. The aim of this test was to
determine whether cooling of the core could continue in the event of
a loss of power.
Due to the misconception that this experiment belongs to the non-
nuclear part of the power plant, it was carried out without a proper
exchange of information between the testing department and the
safety department. Hence the test started with inadequate safety
precautions and the operating personnel were not alerted to the
nuclear safety implications of the electrical test and its potential
danger.3

The 1986 Chernobyl accident

On 25 April, prior to a routine shutdown, the reactor crew at Chernobyl
4 began preparing for a test to determine how long turbines would spin
and supply power to the main circulating pumps following a loss of
main electrical power supply. This test had been carried out at

Source- www.tutorialspoint.com
3
Chernobyl the previous year, but the power from the turbine ran down
too rapidly, so new voltage regulator designs were to be tested.
A series of operator actions, including the disabling of automatic
shutdown mechanisms, preceded the attempted test early on 26 April.
By the time that the operator moved to shut down the reactor, the
reactor was in an extremely unstable condition. A peculiarity of the
design of the control rods caused a dramatic power surge as they were
inserted into the reactor.
The interaction of very hot fuel with the cooling water led to fuel
fragmentation along with rapid steam production and an increase in
pressure. The design characteristics of the reactor were such that
substantial damage to even three or four fuel assemblies would – and
did – result in the destruction of the reactor. The overpressure caused
the 1000 t cover plate of the reactor to become partially detached,
rupturing the fuel channels and jamming all the control rods, which by
that time were only halfway down. Intense steam generation then
spread throughout the whole core (fed by water dumped into the core
due to the rupture of the emergency cooling circuit) causing a steam
explosion and releasing fission products to the atmosphere. About two
to three seconds later, a second explosion threw out fragments from
the fuel channels and hot graphite. There is some dispute among
experts about the character of this second explosion, but it is likely to
have been caused by the production of hydrogen from zirconium-steam
reactions.

Immediate impact of the Chernobyl accident

The accident caused the largest uncontrolled radioactive release into the
environment ever recorded for any civilian operation, and large
quantities of radioactive substances were released into the air for about
10 days. This caused serious social and economic disruption for large
populations in Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine. Two radionuclides, the
short-lived iodine-131 and the long-lived caesium-137, were particularly
significant for the radiation dose they delivered to members of the
public.
It is estimated that all of the xenon gas, about half of the iodine and
caesium, and at least 5% of the remaining radioactive material in the
Chernobyl 4 reactor core (which had 192 tonnes of fuel) was released in
the accident. Most of the released material was deposited close by as
dust and debris, but the lighter material was carried by wind over
Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, and to some extent over Scandinavia and
Europe.
The casualties included firefighters who attended the initial fires on the
roof of the turbine building. All these were put out in a few hours, but
radiation doses on the first day were estimated to range up to 20,000
millisieverts (mSv), causing 28 deaths – six of which were firemen – by
the end of July 1986.4

Environmental and health effects of the Chernobyl

accident

Several organisations have reported on the impacts of the Chernobyl

accident, but all have had problems assessing the significance of their
observations because of the lack of reliable public health information
before 1986.
In 1989, the World Health Organization (WHO) first raised concerns
that local medical scientists had incorrectly attributed various biological
and health effects to radiation exposureg. Following this, the
Government of the USSR requested the International Atomic Energy

4
Source- www.world-nuclear.org
Agency (IAEA) to coordinate an international experts' assessment of
accident's radiological, environmental and health consequences in
selected towns of the most heavily contaminated areas in Belarus,
Russia, and Ukraine. Between March 1990 and June 1991, a total of 50
field missions were conducted by 200 experts from 25 countries
(including the USSR), seven organisations, and 11 laboratories3. In the
absence of pre-1986 data, it compared a control population with those
exposed to radiation. Significant health disorders were evident in both
control and exposed groups, but, at that stage, none was radiation
related.

Paths of radiation exposure

In February 2003, the IAEA established the Chernobyl Forum, in
cooperation with seven other UN organisations as well as the
competent authorities of Belarus, the Russian Federation, and Ukraine.
In April 2005, the reports prepared by two expert groups –
"Environment", coordinated by the IAEA, and "Health", coordinated by
WHO – were intensively discussed by the Forum and eventually
approved by consensus. The conclusions of this 2005 Chernobyl Forum
study (revised version published 2006i) are in line with earlier expert
studies, notably the UNSCEAR 2000 report which said that "apart from
this [thyroid cancer] increase, there is no evidence of a major public
health impact attributable to radiation exposure 14 years after the
accident. There is no scientific evidence of increases in overall cancer
incidence or mortality or in non-malignant disorders that could be
related to radiation exposure." As yet there is little evidence of any
increase in leukemia, even among clean-up workers where it might be
most expected. However, these workers – where high doses may have
been received – remain at increased risk of cancer in the long term.
Apart from these, the United Nations Scientific Committee on the
Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) says that "the great majority of
the population is not likely to experience serious health consequences
as a result of radiation from the Chernobyl accident. Many other health
problems have been noted in the populations that are not related to
radiation exposure."
The Chernobyl Forum report says that people in the area have suffered
a paralyzing fatalism due to myths and misperceptions about the threat
of radiation, which has contributed to a culture of chronic dependency.
Some "took on the role of invalids." Mental health coupled with
smoking and alcohol abuse is a very much greater problem than
radiation, but worst of all at the time was the underlying level of health
and nutrition. Apart from the initial 116,000, relocations of people were
very traumatic and did little to reduce radiation exposure, which was
low anyway. Psycho-social effects among those affected by the
accident are similar to those arising from other major disasters such as
earthquakes, floods, and fires.

Chernobyl today

Unit 4 containment
Chernobyl unit 4 was enclosed in a large concrete shelter which was
erected quickly (by October 1986) to allow continuing operation of the
other reactors at the plant. However, the structure is neither strong nor
durable. The international Shelter Implementation Plan in the 1990s
involved raising money for remedial work including removal of the fuel-
containing materials. Some major work on the shelter was carried out
in 1998 and 1999. About 200 tonnes of highly radioactive material
remains deep within it, and this poses an environmental hazard until it
is better contained.
Destroyed Reactor Unit 4 at Chernobyl Nuclear Power Station, Ukraine
The New Safe Confinement (NSC) structure was completed in 2017,
having been built adjacent and then moved into place on rails. It is an
arch 110 meters high, 165 meters long and spanning 260 meters,
covering both unit 4 and the hastily-built 1986 structure. The arch
frame is a lattice construction of tubular steel members, equipped with
internal cranes. The design and construction contract for this was
signed in 2007 with the Novarka consortium and preparatory work
onsite was completed in 2010. Construction started in April 2012. The
first half, weighing 12,800 tonnes, was moved 112 meters to a holding
area in front of unit 4 in April 2014. The second half was completed by
the end of 2014 and was joined to the first in July 2015. Cladding,
cranes, and remote handling equipment were fitted in 2015. The entire
36,000 tonne structure was pushed 327 metres into position over the
reactor building in November 2016, over two weeks, and the end walls
completed. The NSC is the largest moveable land-based structure ever
built.

The Chernobyl Shelter Fund, set up in 1997, had received €864 million
from international donors by early 2011 towards this project and
previous work. It and the Nuclear Safety Account (NSA), set up in 1993,
are managed by the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development (EBRD). The total cost of the new shelter was in 2011
estimated to be €1.5 billion. In November 2014 the EBRD said the
overall €2.15 billion Shelter Implementation Plan including the NSC had
received contributions from 43 governments but still had a funding
shortfall of €615 million. The following month the EBRD made an
additional contribution of €350 million in anticipation of a €165 million
contribution by the G7/European Commission, which was confirmed in
April 2015. This left a balance of €100 million to come from non-G7
donors, and €15 million of this was confirmed in April 2015.

Chernobyl New Safe Confinement under construction and before being moved into
place (Image: EBRD)
Long-term impacts
The impact of the disaster on the surrounding forest and wildlife also
remains an area of active research. In the immediate aftermath of the
accident, an area of about four square miles became known as the “Red
Forest” because so many trees turned reddish-brown and died after
absorbing high levels of radiation.

Today, the exclusion zone is eerily quiet, yet full of life. Though many
trees have regrown, scientists have found evidence of elevated levels of
cataracts and albinism, and lower rates of beneficial bacteria, among
some wildlife species in the area in recent years. Yet, due to the exclusion
of human activity around the shuttered power plant, the numbers of
some wildlife, from lynxes to elk, have increased. In 2015, scientists
estimated there were seven times more wolves in the exclusion zone than
in nearby comparable reserves, thanks to humans’ absence.

The Chernobyl disaster had other fallout: The economic and political
toll hastened the end of the USSR and fueled a global anti-nuclear
movement. The disaster has been estimated to cost some $235 billion in
damages. What is now Belarus, which saw 23 percent of its
territory contaminated by the accident, lost about a fifth of its
agricultural land. At the height of disaster response efforts, in 1991,
Belarus spent 22 percent of its total budget dealing with Chernobyl.

Bibliography
● https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-
of-plants/chernobyl-accident.aspx

● https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/topics/reference/chernobyl-
disaster/

● https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-
security/safety-of-plants/chernobyl-accident.aspx