Today (26th April, 2016) marks the thirtieth anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster, which remains the world’s worst nuclear power accident.
Three decades on, efforts are still underway to deal with the legacy of the events of April 1986 and make the site safe.
Much of this activity – including the construction of a giant shield that is being rolled into place above the damaged reactor – has been led by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD).
Released by the EBRD to mark the 30th anniversary of the accident, this video, which features stunning drone footage of the site, looks at the continuing work to help secure the site and manage the power plant’s legacy.
And in 100 years, someone is going to have to pay for it all to be done again.
With most nuclear plants built by the sea and with rising sea levels, even if the risk from geological action is minuscule (convince me of that!) , eventually, given enough time (and we are talking centuries rather than decades), there will definitely be another accident. Or a terrorist attack on a nuclear facility (sure we can stop that too). But will today’s generators pay for that?
No way. When the promoters claim nuclear is “cheaper and greener ” than large scale renewables, even with dispatchable power, not one of them factors in the cost of a disaster in the price of today’s nuclear power, or even uses a realistic cost for waste disposal. Because then we would all see how expensive nuclear really is.
Looks like Rob and I saw different videos: to me this was a great cause of optimism and engineering success. The economics are regularly debated and if the fear could be quantified better it would certainly help.
Nuclear power is a very significant contributor to world energy and its future growth. I’m not involved in the industry in any way, but am convinced that the risk is entirely manageable: that is not to say it should ever be ignored.