Horsing around about Chernobyl

My car is old, and the odometer shows quite a few digits.  The dishwasher at home has problems, but it works.  A couple of undershirts (the banians, in the old country language) are a tad frayed.  The pair of brown shoes that I wear to work has the beginnings of holes on the under side.

But, I have no plans to replace any of these, and more, unless the situation compels me to.  For a simple reason--I am crazily concerned about the environment in my own way.

As long as the car gets me around reliably, as long as the dishwasher works, as long as ... replacing them will simply mean material consumption, which is one of the biggest threats to the environment for the future generations.  As I often joke with students, it is really not my problem but theirs, yet I am doing my best to make sure I don't worsen things for them and their children.

On Earth Day, I read this short commentary in the Scientific American about nuclear energy.  The subtitle says it all: "How an award-winning filmmaker who created the definitive Earth Day documentary learned to love nuclear power in an age of global warming."  Of course, I have blogged in plenty that summarily excluding nuclear power from the energy discussions was a huge mistake. But, that ship has sailed, as they say.

The opposition to nuclear power ramped up after the disaster at Chernobyl.  The accident happened thirty years ago--on April 26, 1986.  To mark the thirty years, and in time for Earth Day, National Geographic has a lengthy report.

This year will mark the half-life of cesium-137, one of the most widespread and dangerous of the radionuclides released. That means the amount of cesium has dropped by about half in the 30 years since the accident, decaying into the short-lived barium-137m.

An important milestone in understanding what happens the day after.

Marina Shkvyria watches for animal tracks as she walks toward an abandoned village in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone, the area sealed to the public after a nuclear power plant exploded here 30 years ago, on April 26, 1986. Spotting one, she crouches and runs her finger over the toes of a wolf print in the loose sand.
It may seem strange that Chernobyl, an area known for the deadliest nuclear accident in history, could become a refuge for all kinds of animals—from moose, deer, beaver, and owls to more exotic species like brown bear, lynx, and wolves—but that is exactly what Shkvyria and some other scientists think has happened. Without people hunting them or ruining their habitat, the thinking goes, wildlife is thriving despite high radiation levels.

In our popular imagination, the forbidden zone is not one that we would think as something that supports plants and animals, right?  Yet, it is now a thriving wildlife refuge.  Radiation "is not holding back Chernobyl wildlife populations."

The combined territory of the exclusion zones in Ukraine and Belarus caused by the Chernobyl disaster is a little more than 1,600 square miles, making it one of the largest truly wild sanctuaries in Europe.
But what it means for animals to be rebounding in Chernobyl has become the scientific equivalent of a boxing match, with the latest blow delivered Monday when Beasley put forward a study in the journal Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment.

Beasley's following comment is pretty darn interesting:

“I would argue that for many of those species [the effects of radiation], even if they’re there, probably aren’t enough to suppress populations to the point where they can’t sustain themselves,” says Beasley. In the zone, “humans have been removed from the system and this greatly overshadows any of those potential radiation effects.”
Essentially, this means that human populations have a bigger negative impact than radiation.
... While Beasley stops short of calling the landscape “ruined” by radioactive contamination, he knows that it will be there for centuries or millennia, in the case of plutonium. But, without humans around, his findings show that the wildlife seems to be doing all right.

We humans are a much bigger threat to the wildlife than radiation is!  Now, that's plenty to think about on this Earth Day.

Caption at the Source:
The Przewalski's horse nearly went extinct, but in an effort to save the species it was introduced into the area around Chernobyl in 1998 and to other reserves worldwide. Without humans living in the area, the horse population has been increasing.

My life might be a "C" .. .not because of these "C" places

By April 1986, I had quit my first job straight out of college at Coimbatore. I had spent all of three months on the job in Calcutta and was convinced that I did not want to waste my life in engineering.

Those were the days before the proliferation of phones in India and, therefore, my parents did not know anything about me having quit the job.  And that, as it would turn out later on, I would simply loaf around doing nothing for a few months after that.

My parents lived in a small town called Choudhwar, a little outside of C ttack.    Father was the consulting engineer there for an industrial construction.  I showed up unannounced, with the few belongings that were packed into one suitcase and with a briefcase in another hand.  I told them that I was done with my job in Calcutta and that I needed time to figure things out.

I am sure my parents were worried that I would turn out to be one heck of a loser. (There is a fair chance that they don't think that anymore.  I know the reality that I am a loser!  But, hey, I am in America!!!)

After a few days of puttering around there--nothing much to do in that small town--I headed to Madras.  Yes, it was Madras those days, before it went through the name change to Chennai.

In those old days, newspapers and radio were pretty much all we had, with the Indian television (Doordharshan) news on a competition against itself on how much lamer its soap operas could get.  I recall thinking that the C ernobyl disaster must be a serious one if the Swedes were complaining about the radioactivity detected in the sky above them.

After more loafing around, taking up a job that I quit after three weeks, and then taking up another job in which I lasted for nearly six months, I took off for the US with a conviction that I had figured out what I wanted to do with my life.  I bet my parents were relieved that I was no longer a nasty reminder of a wasted life.

A couple of years after that, the Soviet Union itself was gone.  As more than one commentator, like this one, has pointed out when looking at the events in the rear view mirror of life,

Chernobyl, then, represented a fundamental shift in the relationship between the Soviet citizenry and the state. Before the explosion, most Soviets were not discontented dissidents; they believed in the Soviet system, forgave its flaws, and hoped for a better future within its confines. But after Chernobyl, the system seemed potentially unredeemable—and actively dangerous. In the early days of glasnost, stories of Stalin’s mass murders decades earlier slowly bubbled to the fore, but those generally receded, so far removed were they from everyday life. After Chernobyl, though, every citizen’s safety was at stake.

On this anniversary of that Chernobyl disaster, I am reminded of a dinner from two years ago.  I had invited for dinner a visiting Ukrainian environmental attorney,Olga, and her host, "M,"who is a friend.  Of course, I couldn't wait to ask Olga about Chernobyl, and so after dinner I did.

"Where were you when Chernobyl exploded?" I asked her.

Olga said that they lived in Kiev, which is just about 100 kilometers from Chernobyl.  But, 100 km in the Soviet era was a lot more than the mere physical distance, particularly given the state of telecommunications then.  Thus, they had no news about the disaster for days, and went about their daily business.  Children played outside.  And, children and people marched like they did every year to celebrate May Day.

But then, Olga said, there was one notable absence--the children of senior party and government officials were not in town but had gone away to far away places like Moscow.  A week later, many of them were not present at the rah-rah May Day parades and celebrations.  Only later when the news of the disaster started trickling in did they understand that those with the inside information had scooted away their children to the safer environs of Moscow, far away from potential radiation fallout.

Olga's father was apparently one of the many men who volunteered to go to Chernobyl to help move women and children out of that place.  And, like many of them, he now lives with a thyroid problem as a result.

Chernobyl is, thus, a symbol not only about the huge downsides associated with a careless and reckless use of nuclear energy but also a tragic reminder of the horrible totalitarian state that was in existence up until a mere two decades ago.  The Fukushima event from two years ago is a stark contrast--when the entire world could watch and follow in real time how that nuclear accident was being handled.

Over the years in between Chernobyl and Fukushima, I have certainly figured out what to do with my life.  It was about eleven years ago about this time in 2002 that I submitted my notice to quit the job that I had in California.  Yes, there are plenty of people who would prefer that I am not one of their colleagues where I now work; but, I have no plans to quit what I am doing.  Especially when I live in a place that proudly proclaims that it is a nuclear-free-zone!

Is China's pollution its Chernobyl?

It was not even three weeks ago that I blogged about the unheard of, off-the-charts, pollution levels in China.      Looks like it has not eased up much to make life better:

Dangerously high pollution levels have shrouded Beijing in smog for the second time in about two weeks, forcing airlines to cancel flights because of poor visibility and prompting the city government to warn residents to stay indoors.
The outlines of buildings in the Chinese capital receded into a white mist as pedestrians donned face masks to guard against the thick, caustic air.

Ouch!

The new year--the year of the snake--is only ten days away, and there will be that tremendous volume of vacation traffic.  I shudder, even from the safety of my home, thinking about a traffic jam even half as bad as that horrendous one that lasted for days on.

People are talking about it.  Yes, the Chinese people are!

Public debate over the smog has increased in recent months, with state media taking an active part.
In an editorial on Tuesday, China Daily said that Beijing will not become a liveable city unless it "improves its living environment".
"Of all the things that need improving, cleaner air will be at the top of many people's wish list," it said in a piece that looked at challenges for incoming Mayor Wang Anshun.

A new set of leaders. A humongous problem about which people are not willing to keep quiet.  Could this possibly set the stage for some serious reforms in China?

I am thinking of a parallel of sorts, triggered by this article in Slate:

Fewer than six years elapsed between the meltdown at Chernobyl and the formal dissolution of the Soviet Union—six years marked by suspicion of government, dissatisfaction with public safety, and demands for greater transparency. Could Chernobyl have caused the first, most fundamental crack in the Soviet state and led to its collapse?

An interesting question linking Chernobyl and the Soviet Union.

According to Gorbachev, the Chernobyl explosion was a “turning point” that “opened the possibility of much greater freedom of expression, to the point that the system as we knew it could no longer continue.” Gorbachev introduced his policy of glasnost, or “openness” of ideas and expression, not long before the Chernobyl explosion. It was his remedy for widespread censorship and government secrecy. To Gorbachev, Chernobyl proved the wisdom and necessity of glasnost. The explosion and attendant tumult, he claims, “made absolutely clear how important it was to continue the policy of glasnost.”

Interesting, right?  What I liked even better in that article is the following observation:

Chernobyl, then, represented a fundamental shift in the relationship between the Soviet citizenry and the state. Before the explosion, most Soviets were not discontented dissidents; they believed in the Soviet system, forgave its flaws, and hoped for a better future within its confines. But after Chernobyl, the system seemed potentially unredeemable—and actively dangerous. In the early days of glasnost, stories of Stalin’s mass murders decades earlier slowly bubbled to the fore, but those generally receded, so far removed were they from everyday life. After Chernobyl, though, every citizen’s safety was at stake.

The uncontrolled and growing pollution--not only of the air, but water and the soil, too--could this become China's Chernobyl that will trigger a glasnost?

I turned to my favorite China-watcher: James Fallows. I hoped that he might have some comments there on the pollution crisis and how it might affect the legitimacy of the state.  He didn't have anything on the political dimension, but has a lot about the growing worries over the public health aspects.  Fallows writes:

I do know that the pollution level in China is terrible; that (even) the Chinese press is sounding the warning about the effects; and that in other parts of the world toxins have of course been shown to cause physical and mental defects and diseases. This is a very big problem in China, perhaps even bigger than people there yet know.

Fallows also has this photo there:

Here's a picture posted on Twitter just now from a friend in Beijing, showing the view from the 30th floor out toward our former neighborhood.

Ouch!

BP spill at 60 days, and counting: Worst case scenario?

The BP rig exploded and sank on April 22nd.

My intro class students were just about wrapping up the assignment I had given them--on how the volcanic eruption in Iceland messed up Kenyan farmers who export flowers and, therefore, on the role of transportation in economic growth and development.

I thought that might just about be the only "current news" driven assignment for the term.  But then the BP disaster happened.  My gut instincts were that it was a catastrophe, which was the word I used to describe it when I pulled up photographs of the news story in the class (thanks to the wired "smart rooms" in which we now teach).  So, it was on to the next "current news" driven assignment.

Now, 60 days later, it does not seem like we are anywhere near the end of the story.  In fact, as Lisa Margonelli writes:

The question I'd like to ask Tony Hayward is this: To the best of your knowledge are we near the end of this spill? In the middle? Or perhaps, only at the very beginning?

Back on May 1st, I noted in the post that this was our own Chernobyl.  If I second-guessed myself that I was engaging in hyperbole, well, it sadly seems like I might have even underestimated it--it is even worse than Chernobyl because unlike the nuclear reactor accident, this one has a real probability that it could go on until there is no more oil to ooze out.  One can imagine the horrific economic and environmental consequences .... and we will still be underestimating ...

I was initially a tad suspicious of this Scienceblog post on the worst case scenario about the BP oozathon--that we will never be able to stop it.  But, even Margonelli refers to that, and adds this:

There are legitimate concerns about the integrity of the casing. Yesterday, someone asked Admiral Allen about that. He said that concerns about the integrity of the well bore were part of the decision to stop the "Top Kill" a few weeks ago, indicating that there are significant concerns. On April 23, the Coast Guard was aware that the size of the leak could grow from 8000 barrels a day to 64,000 to 110,000 barrels a day if the well completely blew out. That's quite close to the current spill estimates. Does that mean that the well is nearing a full blow out?   

The reason the casing's integrity matters is that if it's cracked, oil will push out through the cracks and into the surrounding ground, destabilizing the ground around the casing, and bubbling up from the ocean floor. Here's more, with Senator Bill Nelson's interview a week and a half ago saying just that. A seeping well, of course, will be hard to contain. 

Holy crap!
Oh yeah, happy Father's Day!