DOCSLIB.ORG

Present and Future Environmental Impact of the Chernobyl Accident

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Present and Future Environmental Impact of the Chernobyl Accident IAEA-TECDOC-1240 Present and future environmental impact of the Chernobyl accident Study monitored by an International Advisory Committee under the project management of the Institut de protection et de sûreté nucléaire (IPSN), France August 2001 The originating Section of this publication in the IAEA was: Waste Safety Section International Atomic Energy Agency Wagramer Strasse 5 P.O. Box 100 A-1400 Vienna, Austria PRESENT AND FUTURE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE CHERNOBYL ACCIDENT IAEA, VIENNA, 2001 IAEA-TECDOC-1240 ISSN 1011–4289 © IAEA, 2001 Printed by the IAEA in Austria August 2001 FOREWORD The environmental impact of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident has been extensively investigated by scientists in the countries affected and by international organizations. Assessment of the environmental contamination and the resulting radiation exposure of the population was an important part of the International Chernobyl Project in 1990–1991. This project was designed to assess the measures that the then USSR Government had taken to enable people to live safely in contaminated areas, and to evaluate the measures taken to safeguard human health there. It was organized by the IAEA under the auspices of an International Advisory Committee with the participation of the Commission of the European Communities (CEC), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the International Labour Organisation (ILO), the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). The IAEA has also been engaged in further studies in this area through projects such as the one on validation of environmental model predictions (VAMP) and through its technical co-operation programme. The project described in this report was initiated after a proposal by Belarus to the 38th regular session of the IAEA General Conference in September 1994 to convene an international group of high level experts to review the information drawn from the long term * studies of the Chernobyl accident and its consequences . After other relevant international organizations had been consulted, it was agreed that the IAEA would formulate a project focusing on the environmental impact of the Chernobyl accident. France responded favourably to the IAEA's invitation to help finance this study, supporting it through the Institut de protection et de sûreté nucléaire (IPSN). The IPSN provided the head of the project, D. Robeau, assisted by a group of technical advisers. The technical investigation of the material reviewed and the drafting of the working document necessary for the compilation of the final report were carried out by specialists in fields including radioecology, radiation protection, rehabilitation and recovery, economics and sociology from Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine. The work was based on the national reports and additional material including experimental data obtained and analysed by experts from these three States by 1996. The work was supervised by a project supervisory committee made up of senior experts nominated by the Governments of Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine, one expert from France and a chairman, P. Hedemann Jensen, from Denmark. This committee approved the final report after considering comments from five renowned experts who formed an international peer review committee. * "We propose that the IAEA, UNESCO, the World Health Organization and other interested organizations together with the scientists and specialists from Russia, Ukraine and Belarus will analyze and generalize the results of ten years study of the Chernobyl accident. For this reason it seems advisable to form an international group of high-level experts. There is no such necessity at all for this group, as a rule, to go to the contaminated areas and carry out the investigations there. Its task is to study and generalize the material having been already accumulated. In this case the Republic of Belarus is ready to present all the necessary materials. The result of such a work could be the publication of a special final report." (Taken from the Statement of the Head of the Delegation of the Republic of Belarus Mr. A. Mikhalevich at the XXXVIII Session of the IAEA General Conference, 1994). The project had to be completed within a very short time. Its successful completion was only possible with a substantial contribution from the IPSN and the commitment shown in Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine. These and other contributors, listed at the end of the report, are gratefully acknowledged. A draft of this report was originally during the EC/IAEA/WHO International Conference, "One Decade after Chernobyl: Summing up the Consequences of the Accident", held in Vienna, 8–12 April 1996. Comments of the Peer Review Committee and of others have been taken into account in the final version of the report. The efforts of P.J. Waight in unifying the terminology and ensuring clarity of expression are gratefully acknowledged. The IAEA officers responsible for this publication were M. Balonov and M. Gustafsson of the Division of Radiation and Waste Safety. EDITORIAL NOTE The use of particular designations of countries or territories does not imply any judgement by the publisher, the IAEA, as to the legal status of such countries or territories, of their authorities and institutions or of the delimitation of their boundaries. The mention of names of specific companies or products (whether or not indicated as registered) does not imply any intention to infringe proprietary rights, nor should it be construed as an endorsement or recommendation on the part of the IAEA. CONTENTS SUMMARY................................................................................................................................1 1. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................2 1.1. Background...................................................................................................................2 1.2. Objective and scope......................................................................................................2 1.3. Structure........................................................................................................................2 2. CURRENT RADIOLOGICAL SITUATION AND PROGNOSIS FOR THE FUTURE........................................................................................4 2.1. Soil contamination with radionuclides .........................................................................4 2.1.1. Release of radionuclides and contamination of territories ...............................4 2.1.2. Vertical migration of radionuclides in the soil ...............................................11 2.1.3. Radioactive contamination of water bodies....................................................13 2.2. Radioactive contamination affecting agriculture ........................................................15 2.2.1. Soil-to-plant transfer.......................................................................................15 2.2.2. Levels of contamination in agricultural products ...........................................18 2.3. Radioactive contamination of forest...........................................................................24 2.3.1. Tree contamination.........................................................................................24 2.3.2. Contamination of mushrooms and berries......................................................27 2.4. Individual annual doses and lifetime doses to the population ....................................28 2.4.1. Doses to the thyroid........................................................................................28 2.4.2. External dose ..................................................................................................29 2.4.3. Internal dose from long lived radionuclides ...................................................30 2.5. Dose rate reduction with time.....................................................................................33 References to Section 2 ........................................................................................................36 3. FACTORS AFFECTING LIFE IN THE CONTAMINATED REGIONS...........................40 3.1. Features common to the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS)......................40 3.1.1. Effects on the well-being of the population....................................................40 3.1.2. Effects on industrial and agricultural production ...........................................40 3.1.3. Changes in agricultural practices in the contaminated areas ..........................41 3.1.4. Conditions for safe living ...............................................................................41 3.2. Situation in Belarus.....................................................................................................42 3.2.1. Effects on the well-being of the population....................................................42 3.2.2. Effects on industrial and agricultural production ...........................................43 3.2.3. Changes in agricultural practices in the contaminated areas ..........................46 3.2.4. Conditions for safe living ...............................................................................48 3.2.5. Perspectives for the future ..............................................................................49
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2.5 Ukraine Waterways Assessment
    2.5 Ukraine Waterways Assessment Ukraine has high potential navigable rivers - over 4 thousand km: there are traditional waterways Dnipro - 1,205 km and its tributaries (Desna- 520 km, Pripyat - 60 km) and Dunay - 160 km, Bug - 155 km, and other so-called small rivers. Dnipro River and its major tributaries Desna and Pripyat carried out to 90% of total transport. The remaining 10% are Dunai and other rivers (Desna, Dniester, Southern Bug, Seversky Donets, Ingulets, Vorskla, etc.). Since Ukraine gained independence in 1991, length of river waterways decreased almost twice (from 4 thousand. Km to 2.1 thousand. Km). At the same time the density of river shipping routes reduced 1.75 times; intensity of freight transport - in 4,3 times, and passenger transportation - 7.5 times The volume of traffic fellt to 60 mln. MT in 1990 to 12 mln. MT in 2006, and then - to 5 mln. MT in 2014. Over the past two or three years, inland waterway transportation is only 0.2 - 0.8% of all the cargo traffic. The main categories of goods that are transported via inland waterway – agricultural products (mainly grain), metal products, chemicals. Company Information Only few companies operate on rivers. First, it is a private company "Ukrrichflot" http://ukrrichflot.ua/en/ , declares the presence of about 100 vessels of various types and their ports and other elements of the port infrastructure. The second important market player - Agrocorporation "NIBULON" http://www. nibulon.com/ . The company owns a private fleet and private river terminals. Dnipropetrovsk River
    [Show full text]
  • General Assembly Distr.: General 27 September 2019
    United Nations A/74/461 General Assembly Distr.: General 27 September 2019 Original: English . Seventy-fourth session Agenda item 71 (d) Strengthening of the coordination of humanitarian and disaster relief assistance of the United Nations, including special economic assistance: strengthening of international cooperation and coordination of efforts to study, mitigate and minimize the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster Persistent legacy of the Chernobyl disaster Report of the Secretary-General Summary The present report is submitted in accordance with General Assembly resolution 71/125 on the persistent legacy of the Chernobyl disaster and provides an update on the progress made in the implementation of all aspects of the resolution. The report provides an overview of the recovery and development activities undertaken by the agencies, funds and programmes of the United Nations system and other international actors to address the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster. The United Nations system remains committed to promoting the principle of leaving no one behind and ensuring that the governmental efforts to support the affected regions are aimed at achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals. 19-16688 (E) 041019 151019 *1916688* A/74/461 I. General situation 1. Since the Chernobyl nuclear plant accident on 26 April 1986, the United Nations, along with the Governments of Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine, has been leading the recovery and development efforts to support the affected regions. While extensive humanitarian work was conducted immediately after the accident, additional recovery and rehabilitation activities were conducted in the following years to secure the area, limit the exposure of the population, provide medical follow-up to those affected and study the health consequences of the incident.
    [Show full text]
  • Environment International 146 (2021) 106282
    Environment International 146 (2021) 106282 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Environment International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envint Current radiological situation in areas of Ukraine contaminated by the Chornobyl accident: Part 2. Strontium-90 transfer to culinary grains and forest woods from soils of Ivankiv district I. Labunskaa’*, S. Levchukb, V. Kashparov b,c, D. Holiakab, L. Yoschenkob, D. Santilloa, P. Johnston a a Greenpeace Research Laboratories, Innovation Centre Phase 2, Rennes Drive, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK b Ukrainian Institute of Agricultural Radiology (UIAR) of National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine, Mashinobudivnykiv str.7, Chabany, Kyiv Region 08162, Ukraine c CERAD CoE Environmental Radioactivity/Department of Environmental Sciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, 1432 Aas, Norway ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Handling Editor: Olga Kalantzi Some of the highest 90Sr activity concentrations recorded beyond the Chornobyl Exclusion Zone occur in the Ivankiv district of Ukraine, located approximately 50 km south of the power plant, an area which nonetheless Keywords: remains important for agricultural production. Although characterized by soils with low exchangeable calcium 90Sr values, which can enhance the bioavailability of certain radionuclides, information on the transfer of 90Sr to food Grain contamination crops and trees in the region has remained limited to date. Analysis of 116 grain samples (wheat, rye, oat, barley Wood contamination or Triticale) collected from fields in 13 settlements in the region between 2011 and 2019 revealed 90Sr and 137Cs The Chernobyl accident Effective dose activity concentrations above Ukrainian limits in almost half of those samples, with annual averages exceeding Transfer factor this limit in four of those nine years (most recently in 2018) and with no clear evidence for a declining trend over time.
    [Show full text]
  • Chornobyl Center for Nuclear Safety, Radioactive Waste and Radioecology the Report Prepared in a Framework of GEF UNEP Project &
    Chornobyl Center for Nuclear Safety, Radioactive Waste and Radioecology The report prepared in a framework of GEF UNEP Project "Project entitled "Conserving, Enhancing and Managing Carbon Stocks and Biodiversity in the Chornobyl Exclusion Zone" (Project ID: 4634; IMIS: GFL/5060-2711-4C40) Revision and optimization of the systems of routine and scientific radiological monitoring of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems in the ChEZ Slavutich - 2016 1 Analysis by Prof. V. Kashparov Director of UIAR of NUBiP of Ukraine Dr S. Levchuk Head of the Laboratory of UIAR of NUBiP of Ukraine Dr. V. Protsak Senior Researcher of UIAR of NUBiP of Ukraine Dr D. Golyaka Researcher of UIAR of NUBiP of Ukraine Dr V. Morozova Researcher of UIAR of NUBiP of Ukraine M. Zhurba Researcher of UIAR of NUBiP of Ukraine This report, publications discussed, and conclusions made are solely the responsibility of the au- thors 2 Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................... 8 1.1 System of the radioecological monitoring in the territory of Ukraine alienated after the Chernobyl accident 8 2. Exclusion Zone....................................................................................................................................... 11 2.1 Natural facilities11 2.2 Industrial (technical) facilities 12 2.2.1 Facilities at the ChNPP industrial site.....................................................................................12 2.2.2 Facilities
    [Show full text]
  • Late Lessons from Chernobyl, Early Warnings from Fukushima
    Emerging issues | Late lessons from Chernobyl, early warnings from Fukushima 18 Late lessons from Chernobyl, early warnings from Fukushima Paul Dorfman, Aleksandra Fucic and Stephen Thomas The nuclear accident at Fukushima in Japan occurred almost exactly 25 years after the Chernobyl nuclear accident in 1986. Analysis of each provides valuable late and early lessons that could prove helpful to decision-makers and the public as plans are made to meet the energy demands of the coming decades while responding to the growing environmental costs of climate change and the need to ensure energy security in a politically unstable world. This chapter explores some key aspects of the Chernobyl and Fukushima accidents, the radiation releases, their effects and their implications for any construction of new nuclear plants in Europe. There are also lessons to be learned about nuclear construction costs, liabilities, future investments and risk assessment of foreseeable and unexpected events that affect people and the environment. Since health consequences may start to arise from the Fukushima accident and be documented over the next 5–40 years, a key lesson to be learned concerns the multifactorial nature of the event. In planning future radiation protection, preventive measures and bio-monitoring of exposed populations, it will be of great importance to integrate the available data on both cancer and non-cancer diseases following overexposure to ionising radiation; adopt a complex approach to interpreting data, considering the impacts of age, gender and geographical dispersion of affected individuals; and integrate the evaluation of latency periods between exposure and disease diagnosis development for each cancer type.
    [Show full text]
  • Chernobyl: Chronology of a Disaster
    MARCH 11, 2011 | No. 724 CHERNOBYL: CHRONOLOGY OF A DISASTER CHERNOBYL; CHRONOLOGY OF A DISASTER 1 INHOUD: 1- An accident waiting to happen 2 2- The accident and immediate consequences ( 1986 – 1989) 4 3- Trying to minimize the consequences (1990 – 2000) 8 4- Aftermath: no lessons learned (2001 - 2011) 5- Postscript 18 Chernobyl - 200,000 sq km contaminated; 600,000 liquidators; $200 billion in damage; 350,000 people evacuated; 50 mln Ci of radiation. Are you ready to pay this price for the development of nuclear power? (Poster by Ecodefence, 2011) 1 At 1.23 hr on April 26, 1986, the fourth reactor of the Cherno- power plants are designed to withstand natural disasters (hur- byl nuclear power plant exploded. ricanes, fl oods, earthquakes, etc.) and to withstand aircraft The disaster was a unique industrial accident due to the crash and blasts from outside. The safety is increased by scale of its social, economic and environmental impacts and the possibility in Russia to select a site far away from bigger longevity. It is estimated that, in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia towns." (page 647: "Zur Betriebssicherheit sind die Kraftwerke alone, around 9 million people were directly affected resulting (VVER and RBMK) mit drei parallel arbeitenden Sicherheit- from the fact that the long lived radioactivity released was systeme ausgeruested. Die Kraftwerke sing gegen Naturka- more than 200 times that of the atomic bombs dropped on tastrophen (Orkane, Ueberschwemmungen, Erdbeben, etc) Hiroshima and Nagasaki. und gegen Flugzeugabsturz und Druckwellen von aussen ausgelegt. Die Sicherheit wird noch durch die in Russland Across the former Soviet Union the contamination resulted in moegliche Standortauswahl, KKW in gewisser Entfernung van evacuation of some 400,000 people.
    [Show full text]
  • Systems Mutations Revealed in the National Collection of Chernobyl Mutants of Common Wheat
    Systems mutations revealed in the national collection of Chernobyl mutants of common wheat Burdenyuk-Tarasevych LA1, Zlatska AV2, Korol LV 2, Shytikova Yu V 2 1 Bila Tserkva Division of Research and Breeding, Kyiv region, Mala Vilshanka 09175 Ukraine. 2 Ukrainian Institute for Plant Varieties Examination, 15 Henerala Rodimtseva Str., Kyiv 03041, Ukraine. e-mail: [email protected], [email protected] INTRODUCTION collected from the fields, near the Chernobyl` Reactor in 1988. 2000 M4-M12 mutant lines were derived from those 239 accessions. The huge genetic diversity of wild and cultivated wheats has attracted interest from scientists all over the world. Methods. Pedigree analysis was performed for a Evolution events leaded to speciation in genus Triticum selection of the mutants. Genetic analysis (analysis of L. were caused by spontaneous hybridisation and crosses) of the mutant lines was performed to investigate environmental influence. All these events over the the genetic control of the particular phenotypic centuries have developed the current genetic diversity of characteristics. Acid-PAGE electrophoresis [2] was used wheat. In this process of evolution a key role has been to check the purity of lines and accessions and to played by mutations, without which it would be difficult confirm their pedigree. to explain the existence of a number of species, varieties and lines of the genus Triticum L [1]. It is known that in nature mutations occur quite rarely. In order to develop RESULTS AND DISCUSSION new mutants for research and breeding chemical mutagens and ionizing radiation have been utilised. The varieties Bilotserkivska 47, Poliska 70, Myronivska 808 and Kyianka had stable morphological characteristics before exposure to ionizing radiation.
    [Show full text]
  • PDF: Transforming Chernobyl
    The works to transform Chernobyl into a safe and on the ground. Total costs for the Shelter secure state are nearing conclusion. The New Implementation Plan – of which the NSC is the Safe Confinement (NSC), a gigantic steel arch, most prominent element – were estimated to be has been erected and is now being equipped €2.1 billion in 2014, leaving a large funding gap with systems and tools to make the site safe for of €615 million. generations to come. The EBRD shareholders’ decision in November Impressive progress has been made and we are 2014 to commit an additional €350 million confident that the NSC will be completed and (from the Bank’s reserves) for the NSC and operational by the end of 2017. an anticipated €165 million from the G7/ European Commission have significantly The Chernobyl project would not have been reduced the funding gap. However, a shortfall of possible without the active involvement and €100 million remains. generous contributions of the international community and Ukraine. The fact that to date Ukraine is currently in a vulnerable state and more than 40 countries and the EBRD have cannot be left to bear this uniquely hazardous provided funds speaks for itself. burden alone. The EBRD welcomes the leadership of the G7 to secure the full funding As the project is now far-advanced it is possible of the project. to make a reliable cost estimate based on the final design of the NSC and the progress Suma Chakrabarti, EBRD President PART OF A LARGER The New Safe Confinement (NSC) is a structure intended to the international community’s work together with Ukraine cover the destroyed reactor unit 4 at Chernobyl, the site of got under way.
    [Show full text]
  • The Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant Accident : Its Decommissioning, The
    The Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant accident : its decommissioning, the Interim Spent Fuel Storage ISF-2, the nuclear waste treatment plants and the Safe Confinement project. by Dr. Ing. Fulcieri Maltini Ph.D. SMIEEE, life, PES, Comsoc FM Consultants Associates, France Keywords Nuclear power, Disaster engineering, Decommissioning, Waste management & disposal, Buildings, structures & design. Abstract On April 26, 1986, the Unit 4 of the RBMK nuclear power plant of Chernobyl, in Ukraine, went out of control during a test at low-power, leading to an explosion and fire. The reactor building was totally demolished and very large amounts of radiation were released into the atmosphere for several hundred miles around the site including the nearby town of Pripyat. The explosion leaving tons of nuclear waste and spent fuel residues without any protection and control. Several square kilometres were totally contaminated. Several hundred thousand people were affected by the radiation fall out. The radioactive cloud spread across Europe affecting most of the northern, eastern, central and southern Europe. The initiative of the G7 countries to launch an important programme for the closure of some Soviet built nuclear plants was accepted by several countries. A team of engineers was established within the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development were a fund was provided by the donor countries for the entire design, management of all projects and the plants decommissioning. The Chernobyl programme includes the establishment of a safety strategy for the entire site remediation and the planning for the plant decommissioning. Several facilities that will process and store the spent fuel and the radioactive liquid and solid waste as well as to protect the plant damaged structures have been designed and are under construction.
    [Show full text]
  • CHERNOBYL DISASTER a Further Systematic Literature Review, Focus Group Findings, and Future Directions
    Selected Health Consequences of the CHERNOBYL DISASTER A Further Systematic Literature Review, Focus Group Findings, and Future Directions Jonathan M. Samet, MD, MS Sonny S. Patel, MPH Professor and Flora L. Thornton Chair Research Associate Department of Preventive Medicine Department of Preventive Medicine Keck School of Medicine of USC University of Southern California Director, USC Institute for Global Health [email protected] [email protected] Selected Health Consequences of the Chernobyl Disaster: A Further Systematic Literature Review, Focus Group Findings, and Future Directions April 25, 2013 Jonathan M. Samet, MD, MS Professor and Flora L. Thornton Chair Department of Preventive Medicine Keck School of Medicine of USC Director, USC Institute for Global Health [email protected] Sonny S. Patel, MPH Research Associate Department of Preventive Medicine University of Southern California [email protected] UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA • GLOBAL HEALTH This document was prepared by Jonathan M. Samet, MD, MS and Sonny S. Patel, MPH. The authors thank and acknowledge support from Green Cross Switzerland. In addition, the authors thank Dr. Gluzman of the Ukrainian Psychiatric Association and Dr. Kostyuchenko of the Kyiv City Clinical Psychiatric Hospital for their input and contribution to this report. Photos were supplied by the authors, Green Cross International, Green Cross Switzerland, and Green Cross Belarus. Special Thanks To: Green Cross Switzerland, Green Cross Ukraine, Green Cross Belarus, Ukrainian Psychiatric Association, Kyiv
    [Show full text]
  • Group Multi-Day Tour (*.Pdf)
    The explosion at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant is an example of human negligence that has made impact on the lives of millions of people. If you want to feel like a part of the modern life of the Exclusion Zone, and to listen to the stories of local residents, join our multi-day tour to Chernobyl. The tour program covers all the important places associated with the catastrophe and its consequences, and allots enough time to each location for feeling the atmosphere of the modern zone. Multi-day tours allow not only to study deliberately such key objects as Pripyat, Chernobyl 2, the Red forest, the buried village and the remains of the NPP infrastructure, but also to communicate with the employees who are now eliminating the consequences of the disaster, and local residents. After a walk around the ghost city, you can spend a night at a local hotel, have a dinner in the Chernobyl NNP refectory, and buy groceries at a local store. Our multi-day tour provides an opportunity to discover more secrets of the past of the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone, and study its current life. Languages: English, Ukrainian, Russian (Polish, French, Spanish on request) Inclusions: Transportation from our office in Kyiv, insurance policy, accommodation, complete package of documents allowing a visit to the Exclusion Zone, permission for photo / filming, and tour guide services. 1 Approximate Itinerary (may be changed up to the CEZ administration request) Day 1 07:30 am • Come to the meeting point at Shuliavska Street, 5 (Metro Station Polytechnic Institute), Kyiv for check-in 08:00 – 10:00 am • Road to the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone 10:05 – 10:40 am • "Dytyatky" checkpoint.
    [Show full text]
  • The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities
    THE CONGRESS Appendix OF LOCAL AND REGIONAL T�e Sl�vut��� Appe�l AUTHORITIES l�un��ed �� t�e Inte�n�tion�l �onfe�en�e “��e�no��l 20 �e��s on lo��l �nd �egion�l �ut�o�ities de�ling wit� dis�ste�s” Resolution 215 (2006)1 Slavutych (Ukraine), 2-4 March 2006 on ��e�no��l 20 �e������s on lo��l We, �nd �egion�l �ut�o�ities de�ling wit� dis�ste�s The participants in the International Conference “Chernobyl, 20 years on: local and regional authorities dealing with disasters”, local and regional elected representatives, parliamentarians and representatives of . The date of 26 April 2006 marked the 20th anniversary governments, international and non-governmental of the unprecedented catastrophe in the history of mankind organisations and experts, which took place at the Chernobyl nuclear power station. Meeting in Slavutych on the 20th anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster, 2. The consequences of the Chernobyl disaster have long been a subject of speculation and the issue is a no less Resolve to adopt an appeal, which will be forwarded to the topical subject today, which is why the Congress decided to Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council hold a conference on “Chernobyl, 20 years on: local and of Europe and to other interested organisations. regional authorities dealing with disasters” in Slavutych in Ukraine, from 2 to 4 March 2006. Here in Slavutych, some 50 kilometres from Chernobyl and twenty years after the worst technological disaster in the history of humankind, we feel the need to solemnly 3.
    [Show full text]