"STATEMENT ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE SPOKESPERSON FOR THE SECRETARY-GENERAL
ON THE 24TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CHERNOBYL DISASTER
New York, 26th April 2010

"Today we mark the 24th anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster and honour the sacrifices made by those who died, and those who survived.

We remember the hundreds of emergency workers who responded to the accident; the more than 330,000 people who were uprooted from their homes; the thousands of children who later contracted thyroid cancer.

We commemorate the heroic efforts of those who took on the task of clearing up after the disaster; and the bravery of millions of people in the surrounding area, who have lived with a legacy of fear for their health and livelihoods for more than two decades.
The UN’s strategy to address the lingering consequences of Chernobyl is aimed at fostering the region’s long-term development and providing people with the information they need to lead safe and healthy lives. The Secretary-General reaffirms the commitment of the United Nations to the Decade of Recovery and Sustainable Development for Chernobyl-affected regions proclaimed by the General Assembly, which began in 2006, and to the UN Chernobyl Action Plan.
The Secretary-General also welcomes the initiative of Ukraine, co-sponsored by Belarus and the Russian Federation, to convene an international conference on the 25th anniversary of the accident in April 2011, to mark progress towards the goal of a return to normal life.
One of the most important global lessons of the Chernobyl disaster is the importance of strengthening the safety and security of nuclear material and facilities. The Secretary-General welcomes the renewed commitment of world leaders to this issue, seen at the Nuclear Security Summit meeting in Washington DC last week.

Communities affected by Chernobyl are demonstrating resilience in coping with the consequences of the disaster, but they continue to need our support.

The UN stands ready to do everything in its power to further the region’s revival. The Secretary-General calls on the international community to support the full recovery of all those affected by the Chernobyl disaster.

Is it too much to ask that 'something' be decided. While everyone here seems to be coming down on the side of nuclear, and is it too much to ask the government to actually make a decision for the long term? Perhaps they don't see themselves here for the long term and are unable to do so? Any political decision from either party would do. People in NSW are thoroughly fed up with procrastination on rpovision of power.

RaeBee say "any port in a storm", but:

"Chernobyl Radiation Killed Nearly One Million People: New Book
NEW YORK, New York, April 26, 2010 (ENS) -

"Nearly one million people around the world died from exposure to radiation released by the 1986 nuclear disaster at the Chernobyl reactor, finds a new book from the New York Academy of Sciences published today on the 24th anniversary of the meltdown at the Soviet facility.

"The book, "Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment," was compiled by authors Alexey Yablokov of the Center for Russian Environmental Policy in Moscow, and Vassily Nesterenko and Alexey Nesterenko of the Institute of Radiation Safety, in Minsk, Belarus.

"The authors examined more than 5,000 published articles and studies, most written in Slavic languages and never before available in English.

"The authors said, "For the past 23 years, it has been clear that there is a danger greater than nuclear weapons concealed within nuclear power.

"No citizen of any country can be assured that he or she can be protected from radioactive contamination. One nuclear reactor can pollute half the globe," they said. "Chernobyl fallout covers the entire Northern Hemisphere."

"Their findings are in contrast to estimates by the World Health Organization and the International Atomic Energy Agency that initially said only 31 people had died among the "liquidators," those approximately 830,000 people who were in charge of extinguishing the fire at the Chernobyl reactor and deactivation and cleanup of the site.

"The book finds that by 2005, between 112,000 and 125,000 liquidators had died."

& more
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/apr2010/2010-04-26-01.html

Sir Vivor

Re your last post to RaeBee - do you have an opinion on your link yourself?

You appear to be discounting Gen IV (much better) reactors altogether.

qanda,
I am opposed to GenIV reactors. This opinion is consistent with my prior links, for example to Rocky Mountain Institute, in a previous post. I think Amory Lovins argues the case against Gen IV reactors much more authoritatively than I. Check back for the link if you wish

Each reactor has security issues, radioactive fuel and waste transport issues, proliferation and life cycle legacy issues. Generation IV reactors, however gee-whiz they may be, are not an exception to the rules. The more reactors you have, the more issues. Each one is a potential disaster, particularly in an unstable geopolitical environment like our planet. If you target any one of these reactors with a nuclear device, however delivered, the disaster is multiplied, obscenely. Again, check my previous links.

Amory Lovins and his then partner, Hunter Lovins, wrote convincingly of the unbreakable links between nuclear electricity and nuclear weapons about 30 years ago, in Energy/War. The current sabre rattling toward Iran and its nuclear electricity program is very strong evidence of his point of view.

Ok, thanks Sir Vivor for the clarification.

Unfortunately, there are currently over 500 nuclear reactors in the world today.

China and India are building many more.

Russia is about to do the same.

USA is re-instituting their nuclear power program.

Notwithstanding the reasons or the sabre rattling you point to - for some inexplicable reason, the world is embarking on an ever increasing nuclear power program.

Given this IS happening and nothing will change that (despite protestations to the contrary), it would seem rational (if not logical) that we develop and do it with Gen IV (it won't happen over night).

We could increase the roll out of other high and low end energy alternatives, while at the same time decommissioning the older style nuclear reactors.

And the big CO2 emitters will slowly wean themselves off ol' King Coal.

And every country that has them will decommission their nuclear armaments.

Well, perhaps the last point is asking too much :)