GP Worldwide

Creative Commons

Email Print

International Energy Agency Report on Nuclear Power - Greenpeace Response

7 Nov 2006
Solar panels beside Sizewell B Nuclear Plant
Solar panels beside Sizewell B Nuclear Plant
Responding to a report today by the IEA calling for a programme of new nuclear power stations, Sarah North of Greenpeace said:


"The IEA's thinking on energy has lacked imagination for as long as it has existed and its analysis perpetuates antiquated thinking. Investing in nuclear power is a sure way to lose the battle against climate change. It costs up to ten times as much as energy efficiency measures to get the same carbon savings and creates huge security and environmental threats that will last for tens of thousands of years."

She added:
"Nuclear sucks crucial investment from genuine solutions, like decentralised energy, renewables and energy efficiency. Global warming needs a global solution, but unless we want every dictator in the world to have access to enriched uranium, nuclear power can't be that solution."

The IEA report is flawed because:

  • Nuclear power only produces electricity, and thus only marginally deals with our need for services such as hot water and central heating, and doesn't meet our energy needs for transport at all. Instead of focusing solely on electricity production, governments need to address the energy system as a whole.
  • US researchers from the respected Rocky Mountain Institute have estimated that for the same investment, energy efficiency can achieve up to ten times more carbon savings than nuclear power.
  • Climate scientists warn we have ten years to act. A new build programme is not a timely response to the immediate need to act on implementing the energy systems required to reduce CO2 emissions. A new build programme would come on-line in 2025-2030.

 

 

Email Print

Health impact of Chernobyl 'grossly underestimated' says Greenpeace

18 Apr 2006
Chernobyl power station and the sarcophagus around the exploded reactor. Ukraine, September 1996

Chernobyl power station and the sarcophagus around the exploded reactor. Ukraine, September 1996

In the run up to the 20th anniversary of the Chernobyl catastrophe (26 April), Greenpeace today issues a major study on the consequences of the accident on human health.

The report, drawing on the contributions of more than 50 research scientists, including research never before published in English from Belarus, Russia and Ukraine, seriously challenges official estimates about the number and scale of human casualties resulting from the disaster.

Despite wide variations in available data, results of recent studies included in the report estimate that over a quarter of a million additional cancers will be caused by the accident, or which nearly 100,000 will be fatal. Epidemiological data from the Russian Academy of Sciences suggests that some 60,000 people have died in Russia alone as a result of Chernobyl and that including the other highly affected countries of Ukraine and Belarus would take the total death toll to date to 200,000.

The report condemns earlier claims, most notably that of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in last September's Chernobyl Forum report which predicted 4,000 additional deaths attributable to the accident, as a 'gross simplification of the breadth of human suffering'.

Twenty years after the explosion at Reactor 4 at the Chernobyl Nuclear Plant which discharged radiation more than 250 times that released by the Hiroshima bomb, several million people, by various estimates from 5 to 8 million, still reside in contaminated areas closest to the disaster site in Belarus, Russia and Ukraine.

Although early casualties from the immediate blast were relatively small - 31 plant workers, firemen and rescuers or 'liquidators' as they came to be known were killed in the days following the explosion, hundreds of thousands of people have suffered repeated ill health and many more have died earlier than they might have done had the accident not occurred.

In addition to causing cancer, radiation also impacts on the body's immune and endocrine systems, leads to accelerated ageing, cardiovascular and blood diseases, causes respiratory and digestive problems ,chromosomal aberrations and an increase in foetal abnormalities and birth defects. Studies included in this report acknowledge that as well as the direct impact of radiation, health conditions in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia were also seriously affected by a complex set of socio-economic factors resulting from the loss of land, relocation of 300,000 people, economic crisis, lack of access to information and political factors.

Greenpeace recognises that the wide range of estimates into this 'excess mortality and morbidity' resulting from the Chernobyl accident spans an extremely wide range depending upon precisely what is taken into account. It concludes that rather than being a time to close the book on the disaster, more and better coordinated research into the longer-term health consequences needs to be carried out.

Key findings from the report include:

  • Cancer has increased sharply in Belarus, Ukraine and Russia. Between 1990 and 2000, there was a 40% increase in all cancers in Belarus and a 52% increase in the Gomel region. In Ukraine there was a 12% increase and in the Zhytomir region morbidity increased almost 3-fold. In the Russian Bryansk region, cancer increased 2.7 times.
  • It is estimated that the Chernobyl accident will cause some 270 000 excess cancers worldwide, of which 90,000 will be fatal. Some 14,000 of these deaths will be from thyroid cancers, 8,000 from leukeamias and 71,000 from solid cancers.
  • Thyroid cancer has seen the most dramatic increase of all cancers with far more and far more aggressive cases than originally predicted. It is expected to peak for youngsters in the period 2001-2006 but new cases are expected to appear for the next 30 years.
  • Chromosomal aberrations have increased by a factor of 2-6 in the higher contaminated regions of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia

 

Blake Lee Harwood, campaigns director at Greenpeace UK says

"This Greenpeace report shows that there is a very wide range of fatal casualty estimates for the Chernobyl disaster with credible scientific observers giving figures that number in the hundreds of thousands. It's clear from the wide range of estimates, the many holes in the data set and the variability in potential health effects that no hard and fast conclusions can be reached at the moment. However, it's likely that the true human cost of the Chernobyl disaster will be many times greater than that estimated by the International Atomic Energy Authority.

"It is shocking that the IAEA should have attempted to end the debate over Chernobyl impacts by claiming a final figure of four thousand cancer deaths. The IAEA should be stripped of its responsibilities in relation to civil nuclear power and there should be a coordinated international scientific effort to establish a better assessment of the true impacts of Chernobyl."

The Greenpeace report is issued as a new photography exhibition opens in London to mark the 20th anniversary of Chernobyl. Fallout: The human cost of nuclear catastrophe held at the Oxo Gallery on London's South Bank, features poignant images of individuals and families whose lives have been devastated by Chernobyl and other nuclear disasters.

Lee Harwood continued: "These photographs are a timely reminder that behind the statistics are human lives, families and individuals, who have paid the ultimate price in the name of nuclear power. Anyone unconvinced about the dangers of nuclear power as a solution to our future energy needs should see this show, and then make up their mind."

Notes

The full report and executive summary of 'Chernobyl Catastrophe: Consequences on Human Health' can be downloaded here.

Or contact the Greenpeace press office on 020 7865 8255.

Email Print

Former Environment Ministers call on UN to drop nuclear support

12 Apr 2006
Chernobyl fallout exhibition - Annya

Chernobyl fallout exhibition - Annya

Ten former Environment Ministers from across Europe, including MP Michael Meacher, are today (11 April 2006) calling on the United Nations to drop its support for nuclear technology in the run-up to the twentieth anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster.

In a letter to Secretary-General Kofi Annan and Mohamed El-Baradei, Director of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency, the politicians called for a reform of the IAEA's "conflicting and outdated mandate".

This demand highlights the contradictory roles the IAEA plays in the international arena. On one hand, the IAEA is tasked with stopping the spread of nuclear weapons and providing technical assistance to support the nuclear disarmament process. On the other, the IAEA's mandate promotes nuclear power. The former environmental ministers are calling on the UN to propose amendments to the IAEA statute at the forthcoming IAEA Board of Governors and General Conference in mid September.

Satu Hassi, Member of European Parliament and former Finish Environmental Minister, said: "The risk of nuclear arms proliferation seems to be growing rapidly. To be able to function effectively, the IAEA should end its schizophrenic role.

"It cannot effectively prevent nuclear arms proliferation when it, at the same time, promotes nuclear energy technology, which produces material for bombs. Therefore the time has come to make end of this double role of IAEA."

Felicity Hill, Nuclear Political Advisor for Greenpeace, said: The United Nations should dedicate this reform to the thousands of people in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus whose lives were scarred forever on the morning of the 26th of April 1986.

"The 20th anniversary of the biggest nuclear disaster in history is an opportunity to remove the threat of nuclear disasters from the planet, starting with reforming the IAEA. Atoms for Peace sounds like a nice ideal, but we all know that the reality of atomic energy is anything but peaceful."

Dominique Voynet, Senator and former French Minister for the Environment, said: "The IAEA acts as a true promoter for the nuclear industry worldwide. By deliberately ignoring the interlink between civil and military nukes, it contributes to the proliferation of fissile materials.

"Nations are also responsible in this dangerous interaction. France particularly, must end its sales policy of nuclear materials and technologies to whomever is willing to pay. This trade jeopardizes world peace."

Notes:

Signatories of the Ministers' letter are the following former Environmental Ministers:

  1. Former Ukrainian Minister of Environment and Natural Resources, Sergiy Kurykin
  2. Former Russian Minister of Environment, Victor Danilov-Danilian
  3. Former Belarusian Minister of Environment, Anatolii Dorofeev Anatolii Dorofeev
  4. Former Italian Minister of Environment, Edo Ronchi
  5. Former Danish Environment and Energy Minister, Svend Auken
  6. Former Belgian Minister of Environment, Magda Alvoet
  7. Former Czech Minister of Environment, Ivan Dejmal
  8. Former Finish Minister of Environment and Development Cooperation, Satu Hassi
  9. Former French Minister of Environment and Regional Planning, Dominique Voynet

Click here to read the Ministers' letter.