|
Laurence also added that monitoring of soil or plants in areas near the plant could be necessary, and cows might need to be kept from grazing in certain areas to prevent radiation from getting into milk. After the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, which involved a much higher release of radiation, it stayed in soil and got into plants, contaminating milk and meat for decades. Still John Beddington, Britain's chief scientific officer, stressed that even if the worst-case scenario came to pass in Japan
-- with nuclear material shooting 1,640 feet (500 meters) into the air, along with strong winds toward Tokyo and rainfall
-- it would not be as bad as Chernobyl, considered the world's worst nuclear disaster. "The problems with Chernobyl were people were continuing to drink the water, continuing to eat vegetables and so on and that was where the problems came from. That's not going to be the case here," he told the British Embassy in Tokyo. Another nightmare scenario -- contained in a hypothetical projection in a 2000 study by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
-- also seemed unlikely to come to pass. The study predicted that there could be up to 26,000 cancer deaths over a radius of 500 miles (807 kilometers) in the event of a fire in the zirconium cladding of fuel rods in a spent fuel pool. There are concerns about the state of the fuel rods in one of the Fukushima plant's pools after a U.S. official said all the water had drained out. But the study's findings assumed a situation much worse than in Japan, involving more fuel, a bigger reactor and no prior evacuation.
[Associated
Press;
Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
News | Sports | Business | Rural Review | Teaching & Learning | Home and Family | Tourism | Obituaries
Community |
Perspectives
|
Law & Courts |
Leisure Time
|
Spiritual Life |
Health & Fitness |
Teen Scene
Calendar
|
Letters to the Editor