ANALYSIS: Chornobyl story is far from over (06/28/98)

ANALYSIS: Chornobyl story is far from over

by Dr. David R. Marples

The world has forgotten about the disaster at the Chornobyl station in northern Ukraine just over 12 years ago, at least according to Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma. Yet the disaster is far from over, and recent reports from Ukraine suggest that there is a very real threat of new radioactive contamination of the region around the station.

Reactor No. 4 at the Chornobyl nuclear plant was one of four operating reactors out of a planned six. After the explosion of April 26, 1986, a makeshift covering was constructed in perilous conditions (radiation levels went off the scale of geiger counters) over the summer of 1986. The result was dubbed the "sarcophagus," while the roof directly over the destroyed reactor is referred to as the "covering" or the "ukryttia" (in Ukrainian). Soviet engineers at the site, witnessing the reactor's burial, declared that the ukryttia would last "for eternity." In this case eternity has a lifespan of about 15 years. Experts agree that the ukryttia is collapsing.

The weakest part of the ukryttia is its roof. If and when it collapses, radioactive dust will be flung into the atmosphere and carried some 10 kilometers by winds. It is essential, therefore, that scientists monitor the situation closely. However, because of high radiation levels within the covering, many areas cannot be penetrated.

The person responsible for the ukryttia, the Chornobyl station's Deputy Director Valentyn Kupnyi, noted in late April that about 3,000 tons of buried materials, including wood, plastic, and graphite continue to burn within the shelter. Fires are common and constitute a critical threat to the area. In 1992, a fire blazed for three days. Within the reactor itself there are an estimated 50 to 100 tons of fuel. Mr. Kupnyi did not rule out the possibility of a chain reaction - a mini-Chornobyl - under certain circumstances. As the ukryttia was built with ventilation holes, either strong winds or a tornado could cause the release of dust.

In April 1997, Ukraine and the countries of the G-7 agreed on a plan to re-cover the ukryttia, known as the Shelter Implementation Plan (SIP), which is to cost $758 million (U.S.) and will take eight to nine years to complete. Ukraine's portion is $50 million. Once the covering has been stabilized, then the key problem will be to remove the fuel inside the sarcophagus - an operation that will cost billions of dollars.

The enormity of this problem is compounded by the continuing operation of the Chornobyl nuclear power station. In April 1996, Ukraine signed a memorandum with the G-7 to close down the plant by the year 2000. Unit 1, an obsolete first-generation reactor, is out-of-service, but has not been decommissioned. Unit 2 was closed down in 1991 as a result of a fire, but it could be back in service within a year, according to Ukrainian officials.

Thus, Unit 3 has remained the only operating reactor. Last June it was shut down for routine maintenance, and safety experts discovered more than 300 cracks in the welding around the tubes leading to the reactor core. To eliminate them involved more than 700 personnel working for seven months, all of whom received a dose of radiation equivalent to an annual "load" for atomic station workers (or 10 times as much as that permitted for the general public). Last week Unit 3, which shares a building with the sarcophagus, was restarted.

Ukrainian officials have complained bitterly that neither the G-7 nor the European Union have yet provided the required financing for the closure of Chornobyl. Long-time Chornobyl boss Serhii Parashyn maintained that funds are required not only for the closure of the station, but for completion of work on two new reactors in western Ukraine at the Rivne and Khmelnytskyi plants. The cost of this is $1.2 billion. High hopes were placed on the annual meeting of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), which took place in Kyiv in May, but the bank made few commitments other than $130 million toward the costs of repairing the ukryttia.

Ukraine's nuclear industry has also suffered another blow. Mr. Parashyn, its most eloquent spokesperson, and a man who has worked at Chornobyl since 1987, was abruptly fired in early May, evidently for insubordination toward the new nuclear energy authority in the country, Enerhoatom. Mr. Parashyn has maintained that Enerhoatom was established in haphazard fashion and has no license to operate nuclear power stations.

The real story behind the removal of Mr. Parashyn appears to be that the Ukrainian government wished to remove an official who did not display the customary obedience toward the government. President Kuchma dismissed the affair contemptuously as a long overdue action. Others, however, particularly in the Verkhovna Rada, believe that Ukraine has for too long been held hostage over Chornobyl by foreign powers, who have demanded its closure despite Ukraine's energy problems and despite the fact that equally obsolete Chornobyl-type reactors continue to operate in Russia and Lithuania.

The Chornobyl story, therefore, is far from over, and the dangers today are far more apparent than 12 years ago. The nuclear industry is divided and in turmoil; plant personnel are being subjected to high doses of radiation; the Chornobyl plant is not being readied for closure by the promised 2000 deadline; and, most significant, the covering over the destroyed fourth reactor has a lifespan of one to two years before it begins to collapse, according to officials at the site.

Ukraine's view is that the world is not paying sufficient attention to its problems. It cannot pay for the necessary constructions and it cannot do without nuclear energy, which now accounts for 44 percent of its electricity production.

Dr. David R. Marples is director of the Stasiuk Program on Contemporary Ukraine, Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies, University of Alberta. This commentary was published also in the June 15 issue of the Edmonton Journal.