OpenStax-CNX module: m22331
1
Chernobyl - A breakdown of
communication between scientists
and the public
∗
Jason DeMao
This work is produced by OpenStax-CNX and licensed under the
†
Creative Commons Attribution License 3.0
Abstract
Chernobyl - A breakdown of communication between scientists and the public: Case study designed
for grades 9 - 12
1 Introduction / Background
This is an illustrative case study of the Chernobyl disaster. The focus of the study is the lack of scientic
communication about the dangers of radiation to the public before and after the disaster. The class will
be engaged in an open debate format with the teacher acting as an arbitrator emphasizing key points or
suggesting directions of discussion. Due to the potential anxiety that some of facts and examples of this
disaster may cause, it is recommended that this case history be taught to a class that is mature enough to
respect its seriousness and also be emotionally mature enough to not be frightened by it.
2 Objective
The objective of this case study is to get students engaged in a meaningful discussion about scientists
responsibility to eectively communicate scientic ideas to the public. During this discussion the students
will be introduced to the term civic scientists and the importance of scientic literacy within today's society.
The broader debate about civic scientists will be framed within the example of Chernobyl. Students will
learn about the potential dangers on nuclear energy and radioactive fallout.
3 Classroom Management
The class should begin with a short lecture recounting the events of the Chernobyl disaster. The referenced pictures and videos can be used to draw attention to the magnitude of the disaster, the public's
misunderstanding of the dangers, and the continuing eects of the disaster.
The class can then be let into open debate about the disaster. Suggested questions to get the class started
include:
• Did scientists do an adequate job of communicating the dangers of radiation to the public?
∗ Version
1.1: Apr 22, 2009 8:43 pm -0500
† http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
http://cnx.org/content/m22331/1.1/
OpenStax-CNX module: m22331
•
•
•
•
•
2
Were emergency procedures known to the people living in the cities surrounding the power plant?
Were the dangers of radiation adequately communicated to cleanup workers after the disaster?
Would a more active community of civic scientists have been benecial?
How much of the science would the average resident need to have known?
What role should the government have in communicating sometimes complex scientic ideas that pose
hazards to the public?
Ideas and suggestions should be written on the blackboard to keep of what has already been discussed, and
to reinforce the importance of participation.
4 The Chernobyl Disaster
A nuclear power plant creates energy by way of nuclear ssion. Fission occurs when an atom of Uranium235
absorbs a free neutron. The atom becomes unstable and splits. The split atom releases neutrons, heat,
gamma radiation (fast moving protons), and beta radiation (fast moving electrons). The heat is used to
create steam which turns turbines to make electricity. The neutrons are absorbed by other Uranium235
atoms thereby creating a self sustained chain reaction. (Brian 2000)
The nuclear reactor at Chernobyl was what is called a light water graphite moderated reactor. Uranium
pellets are arranged into rods that are suspended between graphite. Water is used to cool the rods so that
they don't get too hot and melt. Boron Carbide control rods absorb neutrons in order to control the rate of
ssion. (World Nuclear Association 2007) Under normal conditions neutrons escaping split atoms are moving
so fast that they will likely miss the other Uranium atoms. A moderator is needed to slow the neutrons
down to increase their chances of colliding with other atoms in order to continue the reaction. Graphite was
used at Chernobyl as the moderator. (Beegle 1997)
On the night of April 26, 1986 a test was being run at Chernobyl plant number 4. There are conicting
ideas as to what caused the disaster including human error and system error. What is certain is that there
was a large surge in the rate of ssion. Steam was produced so quickly that the top of the reactor was
blown o. When oxygen was allowed to come into contact with the graphite moderators (they are usually
surrounded by inert gasses) the graphite caught re. (Chernobyl.info) The smoke and debris from this re
spread radioactive isotopes over a large area of Easter Europe.
External Image
Please see:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Chernobyl_radiation_map_1996.svg/400pxChernobyl_radiation_map_1996.svg.png
Figura 1:
Wikimedia Commons
The rst people to arrive at the disaster scene were reghters. These men fought the re with no
knowledge of the dangers of radiation. Thirty one of these early responders died soon after the rst night of
the disaster due to the high levels of radiation they were exposed to. They died trying to stop the res from
spreading to the other reactors. After ten hours of trying to put the re out with water it was apparent that
this would not work. For over a week helicopters dumped lead and sand onto the smoldering reactor in an
attempt to extinguish the re. This to did not work. Nitrogen was next used to cool the re and deprive it
of oxygen. Finally on May the sixth the re was brought under control. (Chernobyl.info)
In the rst few days of the accident ocials slow to act. Residents of the nearby city of Pripyat were not
evacuated until two days later. The residents of the town were unaware of the risks of radiation poisoning.
A haunting eyewitness account of the public's response illustrates just how unknowing they were: "I can
still picture the bright raspberry glow; the reactor radiated light from within somehow. I had never seen
http://cnx.org/content/m22331/1.1/
OpenStax-CNX module: m22331
3
anything like it, even in the movies. Or read about it. When it got dark the whole town piled out onto their
balconies, and people who didn't have one went to friends and neighbours who did. We were on the ninth
oor, with great visibility. People took their small children outside, lifted them up and said, "Look, how
beautiful! Don't forget this!" And these were people who worked at the reactor engineers, labourers. And
teachers. Physics teachers. We stood in the horrible black dust ... talking ...breathing... admiring. We did
not know - that death could be so beautiful." (Professional Resources Network, 2005)
After the re was put out there was still radioactive debris spread around the site. Robots were brought
in to carry the radioactive pieces of graphite to the edge of the hole left in the reactor roof and throw them
in. The robots could not operate in the intense radiation though. Instead thousands of military personnel,
volunteers, and paid workers were brought in to clean up. Some knew the dangers of what they were doing
and stayed in order to help prevent the disaster from spreading. Some were there for the pay and did not
fully understand the consequences of their exposure. Many later died or became sick due to their service
(Chernobyl.info)
This is a video of The liquidators1 who helped stop the spread of radiation. If it were not for their
sacrice an already huge disaster would have been much worse.
The Soviet Union only admitted to the international community that there was a nuclear breach after
radiation was detected at a power plant in Sweden. When radiation levels in the nearby town of Pripyat
became too high to ignore, the town was evacuated. Residents were told that the evacuation would be
temporary. As a result, many of the homes were left furnished. This gives Pripyat an eerie feeling of being
a ghost town. (Wikipedia)
Abandoned Kindergarten in Pripyat
External Image
Please see:
http://blog.kievukraine.info/uploaded_images/734-762200.jpg
Figure 2:
Wikimedia Commons
Abandoned House
External Image
Please see:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Deadzone.jpg
Figure 3:
Abandoned House in Pripyat.
The radioactive fallout from the Chernobyl disaster will continue to cause dire health consequences across
the eected area. Large areas will remain contaminated for a very long time. The empty city of Pripyat
will will slowly degrade in testament to the dangers of inadequate safety procedures and a lack of scientic
literacy.
1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OH7ot08Y3ms
http://cnx.org/content/m22331/1.1/
OpenStax-CNX module: m22331
4
5 Citations
1. Beegle, Bill. Bleickardt, Peter. Quirk, Steven. (1997) Chernobyl: A Nuclear Disaster. Retrieved April
18, 2009. From (http://library.thinkquest.org/3426/data/introduction/reactor.analysis.html)
2. Brain, Marshall, and Robert Lamb. "How Nuclear Power Works." 09 October 2000. HowStuWorks.com. (http://science.howstuworks.com/nuclear-power.htm) 18 April 2009.
3. Chernobyl.info (no date). The Explosion of the Reactor. Retrieved April 18, 2009. From (http://www.chernobyl.info/ind
4. Marples, David R. (no date given). The Chernobyl Disasters its Eect on Belarus and Ukraine.
Retrieved April 19, 2009. From (http://www.unu.edu/unupress/unupbooks/uu21le/uu21le0h.htm)
5. Professional Resources Network LLC (2005). The Story Of The Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster. Retrieved
April 21, 2009. From (http://www.pro-resources.net/chernobyl-story.html)
6. Stone, Richard. (2006). National Geographic. The Long Shadow of Chernobyl. Retrieved April 22,
2009. From (http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2006/04/inside-chernobyl/stone-text)
7. Wikimedia (no date)Chernobyl disaster. Retrieved April 22, 2009. From (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disas
8. Wikimedia Commons (2007)Chernobyl_radiation_map_1996.svg Retrieved April 18, 2009. From
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Chernobyl_radiation_map_1996.svg)
9. Wikimedia Commons (1986)Deadzone.jpg Retrieved April 22, 2009. From (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/com
10. World Nuclear Association (May 2007). RBMK Reactors. Retrieved April 18, 2009. From (http://www.worldnuclear.org/info/inf31.html)
http://cnx.org/content/m22331/1.1/