Prof.T.Shivaji
Rao,
Director,
Center for Environmental Studies, GITAM University, Visakhapatnam
http://tshivajirao.blogspot.in/2011/10/why-nuclear-accidents-are-difficult-to.html
http://tshivajirao.blogspot.in/2012/04/nuclear-safety-experts-qualifications.html
http://tshivajirao.blogspot.in/2012/04/nuclear-safety-experts-qualifications.html
ABSTRACT:
In the wake of the nuclear explosion at Fukushima on 11-3-2011 several
expert committees investigated the sequence of events leading to the catastrophe. Chancellor of Germany Mrs. Angela Merkel discussed in depth with
International experts on Fukushima disaster and concluded that nuclear safety
is a pure myth and she declared phase
out of all German nuclear plants by 2022.
The former Prime Minister of Japan Mr.Kan and the present Prime Minister
Noda also studied the tragic events at Fukushima and declared that nuclear
safety is a myth. In Japan 53 out of 54
reactors are shut down and due to public agitation they are not allowed to
restart operations. From 5-5-2012 Japan is going to be the first
nuclear-free country in the world. But the Indian Prime Minister and the Chief
Minister of Tamilnadu Jayalalitha are bent upon promoting large nuclear plants in Kudankulam in Tamilnadu state
and at other places like Jaitapur in Maharasthra, Kovvada in Andhra Pradesh and
Bhavnagar in Gujarat, inspite of strong public opposition and by violating all
the rules and regulations although there are more inexpensive and safer energy resources like lignite coal in
Tamilnadu which is deny to the state while being exported to Uttara Pradesh for production of more
electricity. There are other alternate energy sources like natural gas and
renewable energy sources to meet the power needs of Tamilnadu. In this context it is proposed to present the Fukushima
nuclear disaster as a case study to prove how it is hundred percent impossible
to guarantee the safety of nuclear
reactors and that to the proposed large size new varieties of reactors proposed
at Kudankulam in Tamilnadu.
2) NUCLEAR PLANTS FOR CIVIL AND
MILITARY PURPOSES:
Nuclear plants were originally
proposed during 1950s when there was a serious cold war between Russia and the
United States. The rivalry between these
countries forced them to take the extreme step of going for a nuclear war to
establish their supremacy in the world politics. For this purpose they had to produce nuclear
weapons which needed enriched Uranium and Plutonium. For obtaining substantial quantities of these
hazardous materials, establishment of nuclear plants became inevitable and for
their establishment the justification was made that they are needed for
production of electricity for civilian purposes and for medical and scientific
applications. Subsequently the nuclear
plant manufacturers found it as a handy instrument to make enormous amounts of
easy and quick money by securing it for a special status by bribing the
Presidents and Prime Ministers, influential politicians, bureaucrats,
officials, pro-nuclear scientists and engineers in several countries.
During the second world war a
Japanese Naval Officer Nakasone looked at the bombing of Hiroshima in August
1945 and said “I saw the nuclear mushroom cloud over Hiroshima”. At that moment, I sensed that the next age
was the nuclear age, he wrote in an essay
in 1960s. Many Japanese were told that nuclear power is the only way for Japan
to become more energy dependant in the aftermath of defeat in world war-II and
it paved the way for eventual development of nuclear weapons because of the
nuclear power links to nuclear arms. Due
to Japan’s close ties with United
States in nuclear matters , the leftist politicians and academicians became
fierce opponents of nuclear power and as a counter measure the rightists groups
automatically assumed the role of proponents of nuclear power by going all the
way to stress on its absolute safety.
Thus the Japanese groups have
developed different attitudes so that each side has stuck to extreme positions
on nuclear power even today. Thus there
is a widespread adoption of the belief called the “safety myth” that Japan’s
nuclear power plants were absolutely safe and such an egoistic attitude made
Japan single mindedly pursue nuclear power even though western countries began
to distance themselves from the inherently hazardous nuclear power.
3) RAMPENT COURRUPT PRACTICES BY NUCLEAR INDUSTRY:
Infact the nuclear establishment in
Japan led by the prominent industrialists and the Ministry of Trade have been spending
since 1970s hundreds of billions of
dollars for advertisement and educational programmes on nuclear safety and the
Government spent $12million per year. After the 1973 oil crisis Japan promoted
nuclear plants under the pretext of energy security and began to spend about
400billion Yen per year for nuclear power while the industries invested 2
trillion Yen per year for nuclear plants.
The Government created many organizations to propagate on nuclear safety
and one of the organization known as Japan Atomic Energy Relations Organization
gets 40% funding from Government and 60% from nuclear plant operators. This organization sends nuclear power experts
to propagate on nuclear safety in the high school and colleges all over the
country. With the result that even the
Chernobyl accident could not raise the consciousness of the people about the
risks of nuclear power. Because the
people became addicted to reflexively trust the Government and its assurances
about the safety of nuclear power even though they were posing the greatest
risk to the nation. The Japanese people
even after the Fukushima accident did not become aggressive in the beginning as
they believed in the false statements on radiation exposure and reactor
explosions presented them by the nuclear plant operators and the
Government. Japanese realized the truth
of the statement by the nuclear reactor pioneer, Alwin Weinberg that “a nuclear
accident somewhere is a nuclear accident everywhere.” But as the damaging impacts were seen and
experienced by the people over a period of time they began to realize the truth that nuclear
safety is a myth. Consequently they are
agitating for closure of all the nuclear plants in Japan and are demanding for
generation of electricity from alternate sources like wind, solar and
geo-thermal energies and other sources like oil and natural gas. Due to public agitations against nuclear
plants, Japan has recently announced that
from 5th May 2012 the country will be free of nuclear power.
4) HUMAN ERRORS MAKE NUCLEAR SAFETY A MYTH:
It is an established fact that the major
nuclear reactor accidents of Three Mile Island in US (1979), Chernobyl reactor
explosions in Russia (1986) and Fukushima reactor explosions in Japan (2011)
are man-made disasters. The reactor
accident resulted in cancers, ill-health and deaths and economic damages worth
about Rs.4 lakh crores. Thus nuclear
reactors are neither safe nor economical as propagated by the nuclear plant
organisations and the concerned Governments.
How nuclear safety is a pure myth can be visualized by the sequence of
events that led to the reactor explosions at Fukushima in March 2011 and how
improper siting, under design of the plants including improper operation and
maintenance and human failures resulted led to an avoidable disaster. Shunichi Tanuka, a former Chairman of Japan Atomic Energy Commission one
said that nuclear promoters were always on guard. He said “If we even mentioned there is a slight
possibility that nuclear plants were dangerous the anti-nuclear advocates
pushed for shutting every plant down and so we just kept on declaring that
nuclear plants were safe. Another
Japanese expert said “we believed Japans nuclear plant were top class. But there was probably a bit of over
confidence there”. Such combination of
over confidence among Japanese experts and trapping themselves with their own
words gradually built up the “Safety Myth of nuclear power plants”. A former nuclear plant operator said “You can
take all kinds of possible situations into consideration but something beyond imagination
is bound to take place like the Tsunami on 11-3-2011 at Fukushima. The possibility of a worst case scenario should
have been assumed and there should have been a reliable system in place with
proper training to keep damage to a minimum.
If safe nuclear plant should not lose all its cooling functions as had
happened at the Fukushima nuclear plant.
5) MAN-MADE EVENTS THAT LED TO FUKUSHIMA REACTOR EXPLOSION:
The massive earthquake of magnitude
9 occurred in the Fukushima region in
the sea at about 2:46 PM on 11-3-2011 and a huge tsunami water wave of about
15meters high occurred 40 minutes
later. 10 hours later at about 1:00 AM
on 12-3-2011 the Prime Minister Of Japan, Mr.Kan was getting worried and wanted to visit the
reactor at Fukushima but he was prevented to do so. At 2:00 AM on 12-3-2011 the Government told
the plant operators to vent steam from the reactor. At about 6:00AM the Prime Minister started by
helicopter and reached Fukushima at about 7:00 AM and enquired if venting was
done even after 5 hours of the direction from the Government. After the Prime Minister left Fukushima at 8:00 AM on 12-3-2011, the plant
manager Yoshida, instructed his workers to carryout venting as he thought that
venting radioactive steam from the reactor was needed to prevent an explosion, although such an action was never taken
before in Japan. At about 9.00 AM 6 workers carried nitrogen
cylinders and batteries over their shoulders and headed for the reactor
building and called their mission their “Last Service”. As per Government orders evacuation of people
within 3kms of the plant was completed by 12:30AM on 12-3-2011. At about 2:00PM
on 12-3-2011 the venting operations were deemed to be successful. Unfortunately one and half hours after steam venting at
about 3:30PM there was a hydrogen explosion at the reactor.
When Yoshida was asked why he
waited for 7 hours delay to order workers to conduct the venting operations he
seems to have cited slowness in evacuation of people in the neighbouring area
as a reason for the delay in carrying out the venting operation. It is speculated that time was wasted in chalking out a
working plan to fight the crisis from 6:30 AM
to 9:00 AM on 12-3-2011 and plant officials faulted the visit of the
Prime Minister as a waste of their time as the Director had accompanied
him. But the Prime Minister is reported to
have said that the plant operators are failed to respond promptly to the
Government instructions to carryout the venting.
a)Police report on reactor accident disbelieved by authorities: 24 hours after the earthquake at 3:36PM on
12-3-2011 Fukushima police station told government crisis management center in
the Prime Minister’s Office that an explosion occurred at Fukushima No.1
nuclear plant. The nuclear safety agency
in the Prime Minister’s office refused to accept this information on Nuclear
reactor explosion by saying “that is not possible”. But 5 hours later at 8:30 PM the Government
accepted the news about hydrogen explosion and at 8:40PM the Cabinet Secretary
told press reporters that the explosion destroyed the reactor building but the
containment vessel containing the reactor has not been damaged and thereby he
cheated the people that the reactor was safe. But the plant operators casually
announced that they were just analyzing the reasons for the accident.
6) GOVERNMENT EXPERTS MISLEAD PRIME MINISTER AND THE PEOPLE:
Special advisor to the Prime
Minister on Nuclear Power Goshi Hosono said “No expert had predicted that
hydrogen explosion would occur at the reactor building”. The Japanese Nuclear Safety Commission Haruki
Madarame said the containment has been refilled with nitrogen, so a hydrogen
explosion would not happen” and this explanation was accepted by the Prime Minister. Most nuclear experts also ignored the risk of
hydrogen explosion because they were imprisoned
by what is called commonsense among nuclear experts which turned out to
be wrong and more like excessive self confidence or over confidence or ego
which is part of human working culture.
A report prepared by the Fukushima plant operators and other nuclear
companies in 2002 on the response measures to be implemented in the case of
core melt down and other accidents stated “ there is no need to take hydrogen
explosion into consideration”. Such a
belief came from the common knowledge that such an explosion will not occur if
the containment vessel was filled with nitrogen which will keep the
concentration of hydrogen at a low level.
Thus the Government safety procedures are based on similar blind
beliefs. Yamada, Director of Nuclear and
Industrial Safety Agency said “the reactor was designed to keep hydrogen from
leaking out of the containment vessel into the reactor building. In the safety screening we assumed that
hydrogen explosion would not occur in the reactor building. Due to this assumption measures to prevent a
hydrogen explosion in the reactor building were not included in the list of
safety measure evaluations.
7) IGNORANCE OF EXPERTS ON HYDROGEN EXPLOSION:
According to the plant management
when nuclear fuel at the No.1 reactor melted 16 hours after the earthquake and tsunami at about 6:46 AM on 12-3-2011
before the Prime Minister reached Fukushima the pressure and containment
vessels became damaged. Hydrogen due to
reaction between Zirconium cladding and
oxygen leaked out and began to accumulate in the reactor building. Workers
failed to prevent a hydrogen explosion at No.3 reactor even on 14-3-2011. The explosion at No.1 reactor has led to
delays in responses to the Nuclear accident.
During reactor operation hydrogen is generated by the radiolytic
decomposition of water and other chemical reactions. Since hydrogen generation was not the cause
of most past reactor explosions adequate attention was not paid to this
phenomena during the Fukushima disaster.
But when cooling malfunction occurred in Three Mile Island reactor in
1979 a hydrogen explosion occurred inside the containment vessel in 10 hours
after the malfunction began. The reactor
building and containment vessel stood
intact inspite of the blast. A few hours
later the cooling system was
restored. But it took 4 days for
eliminating the hydrogen and the catastrophe was avoided. In November, 2001 there was a hydrogen
combustion inside a pipe used for emergency core cooling at Hamawaka nuclear
plant in Shizoka District causing an explosion.
8) REACTOR DESIGN FAULTS:
The Mark-I Boiling Water Reactor
(BWR) has small containment vessels and so the pressure fluctuates causing difficulties in operation
and hence a plant operator at Fukushima said “as Hydrogen accumulates easily, I
felt a potential risk”. In USA experts
realize the vulnerability of Mark-I BWR
reactor to serious accidents but they did not ban them due to their large scale
usage. However since 1970’s as a safety
measure they installed equipment that regenerates water from hydrogen in
turbine buildings and they injected nitrogen in containment vessels. In 1980’s they installed devices like venting
system to reduce pressure in the containment vessel. Mark-I reactors are operating safely in USA as
they added more safety features. But the
reactor manufacturing officials lamented “the biggest problem is the lack of knowledge of the workings of safety measures
and devices that are vulnerable to the total loss of power at the plant. Even the device that regenerate water from
hydrogen cannot work if power is lost”.
According to Fukushima industrial
representative “unexpectedly nuclear engineers are not so familiar with
electrical systems”. “18 hours after the
earthquake the radioactive particles were detected at 6km from the plant at
8:40AM on 12-3-2011. It means that
nuclear fuel attained a temperature of 1000oC or 1632oF
which implies that reactor core got damaged and radioactivity leaked into the
environment. 7 hours later at 3:30 PM on
12-3-2011 a massive hydrogen explosion rocked the Fukushima No.1 reactor.
9)IRRESPONSIBILITIES OF CENTRAL AND STATE GOVERNEMNT OFFICIALS ON PRESENTING RADIATION DOSES TO THE PUBLIC FOR EMERGENCY
EVACUATION:
Although the Japanese nuclear
disaster management planners are supposed to broadcast radiation doses every
hour since 4:00 PM on 11-3-2011 to make evacuation recommendations the
Government failed to inform the public because they were “afraid to inform the
public because they were afraid of triggering a panic”. Surprisingly the national Disaster Response
planners assume that the radiation levels due to an explosion must be done by
local District government officials and that the Central government role is
only supplementing to the duties of the District officials of the state
Government. In Fukushima crisis the
District officials were unable to handle radiation measurement work on their
own and hence on 16-3-2011 the central Government officials were directed to cooperate
with the District officials in analyzing and broadcasting radiation data. Sasaki the concerned Government minister said
“both personnel and equipment were sorely lacking as there was no proper plan
in place for central Government to take the initiative in addressing the
situation.
On 16-3-2011 Moriguchi National Government Minister reported radiation doses of 330 mSv at 20km from the nuclear plant and when questioned about the possible health hazards he said “our duty is confined to providing the public with data”. We have been restricted by the Chief Secretary not to make any comments on the data”. But the Chief Secretary passed an order that evaluations of radiation data could only be done by the nuclear safety commission. But commission never broadcast any safety evaluation because the chief was tied up in advising the Prime Minister and other Government leaders. Surprisingly the Chief Secretary repeatedly told the press that radiation levels would not cause any immediate health damage. On 23-3-2011 the Chief of Nuclear Safety Commission told at his first press conference “we are very sorry, but we cannot make any radiation evaluations because we are very under staffed”.
On 16-3-2011 Moriguchi National Government Minister reported radiation doses of 330 mSv at 20km from the nuclear plant and when questioned about the possible health hazards he said “our duty is confined to providing the public with data”. We have been restricted by the Chief Secretary not to make any comments on the data”. But the Chief Secretary passed an order that evaluations of radiation data could only be done by the nuclear safety commission. But commission never broadcast any safety evaluation because the chief was tied up in advising the Prime Minister and other Government leaders. Surprisingly the Chief Secretary repeatedly told the press that radiation levels would not cause any immediate health damage. On 23-3-2011 the Chief of Nuclear Safety Commission told at his first press conference “we are very sorry, but we cannot make any radiation evaluations because we are very under staffed”.
10) IMPROPER SITE SELECTION AND UNDERDESIGN FOR EARTHQUAKES AND TSUNAMI:
About 1150 years ago a massive
Jogan earthquake and a Tsunami stuck the Tohoku region to the North of Fukushima. The damage was very serious including the
drowning of 1000 people. Research
studies on this earthquake and tsunami conducted by the local University and
the National Institute of Science and Technology confirmed that the Jogan
earthquake had a magnitude of 8.4 and the tsunami was on the same scale as the
one that occurred at Fukushima. Another
study by Tohoku University two tsunami waves equivalent to Jogan tsunami hit
the Sandai plain in the North of Fukushima in the past 3000 years. Although academicians and research workers
warned repeatedly at several National conferences that a massive tsunami could
hit the Tohoku region in the near future the nuclear industry and the Government
never cared for such disaster forecasts. The National Disaster Management Agency and
the Fukushima plant operators deliberately ignored such findings and never used
them in their estimates of the damage that earthquake and tsunami cause to the
nuclear plants in Japan.
11) NUCLEAR INDUSTRY DOWNGRADE THE POTENTIAL EARTHQUAKES AND TSUNAMIS:
Moreover the TEPCO (Tokyo Electric
Power Corporation) argued that there is no evidence of damage by Jogan
Earthquake and it is more appropriate to consider the Shiyozaki Earthquake of
7.9 magnitude that hit Fukushima District in 1938 with much smaller tsunami.
Since the repeated warnings of research scholars were ignored while
designing the Fukushima reactors the disaster of 11-3-2011 at Fukushima is not
a natural disaster and according to Tokyo University Prof.Geller “It is a
man-made disaster”.
Even the Japan Nuclear Energy Safety Organization, a
wing of the National government in its annual reports predicted possible damage
tsunami could cause to Fukushima plant.
The report stated that if a 13-meter high breakwater above sea level was
hit by 15-meter high tsunami all power sources would be knocked out including
outside electricity and emergency power generators. In such a situation the cooling functions
would be lost and the core would cause melt down. But the break water at Fukushima was based on
TEPCO assumption that the Tsunami hitting the reactor would be 5.4 to 5.7m
high. Unfortunately on 11-3-2011 the
tsunami wave was 14m to 15m high. Inspite of all these findings TEPCO officials
said “we gave priorities for preparing for high probability incidents, so we could
not respond to everything”. Wataru of
Kinki University said “from a cost performance perspective it is difficult to
prepare for low probability disasters and prevent all accidents. But by thinking about things after an
accident, it is possible to prevent worse situations. Cost benefit analysis and economic factors
are not the only reasons why nuclear industries are reluctant to take action on
safety measures. The industries also want to avoid losing the
trust of the local residents. Although
several faults were detected since 2002, TEPCO believed that launching repairs to solve these problems would make the
explanations given by the company about the safety of the nuclear power to
local residents ring false. When people
questioned the nuclear industry Minister Why Japan government failed to act on
tsunami warnings? He said that his Ministry had blindly believed “Japan’s
Nuclear Plants were the safest in the world”.
That is why an International Medico Environmental Expert Dr.Rene Dubois
of USA said “a nation which blindly believes in its experts is a nation on its
way to death”.
12) IMPROPER PLANNING OF REACTORS:
According to Dr.Kinichi, a Ph.D
from MIT (USA) Fukushima reactors would
not have failed if only human failures did not actually disabled them. The actual reactor melt down started at 11:00
PM on 11-3-2011. Zirconium alloy used for
fuel cladding reacted with water vapour and produced large quantities of hydrogen and Zirconium oxide which exploded
and blew out the 3 reactor buildings on 12th, 14th and 15th. The tsunami waves soaked the emergency diesel
engines and batteries stored in the basement of these buildings. Out of the 13 emergency generators for the 6
reactors only one air cooled diesel engine was located on the top of the hill
near reactor No.6 as its size was too big to be located in the basement and
this diesel engine was not dependent on
water as a heat sink. This air cooled
diesel engine was the only one that was
not entirely submerged under water and its power was enough to save reactors
No.5 and 6 which were brought down to a cold shut down within a few weeks. That the same earthquake and tsunami destroyed
1 to 4 reactors while reactors No.5 and 6 were intact shows that if only one
can provide a source of electricity through the air cooled emergency diesel
engine located at an elevated place, other reactors could have been saved. It means that we should have multiple sources of
electrical supply and cooling heat sinks instead of blindly arguing that the
massive earthquake and a large tsunami wave were responsible for the natural
disaster, far beyond anything anyone
could have imagined and planned for.
13) INABILITY TO VISUALISE LOSS OF ALL POWER CONNECTIONS:
If an industry wants to operate
nuclear reactor one should not assume anything about potential disaster like
earthquakes, tsunamis, terrorist attacks or an aeroplane crash, internal
sabotage or bombing. If we want to
operate a nuclear reactor no matter what kind of accidents may happen we must find
a way to bring back the reactor to a cold shutdown in any type of emergency
explosions and it needs a hundred percent dependable electric supply and also
heat sinks. One may make any number of
assumptions on the possible causes of nuclear accidents and take engineering
based precautionary measures so that the common people could feel rest assured
by knowing that the reactor is safe.
Japanese also assumed that the probability of loss of external
electrical supply in a country like Japan was very unlikely and hence did not
plan over for prolonged power breakdowns and hence provided only 3 emergency generator sets per
reactors and they never imagined the possibility of breakdown of all external
electrical connections.
14) WAS FUKUSHIMA EXPLOSION AVOIDABLE?:
If only the nuclear plant
authorities provided for external power
generation by solar, wind, gas turbine or even a small gas based power station to
back up the 6 reactors at Fukushima, this disaster could have been avoided even
if the earthquake was of high magnitude and the tsunami wave was large. Even when academicians predicted a massive earthquake and tsunami to happen infrequently the Japanese Government
and nuclear industrial experts failed to realize that what may happen will
certainly happen sometime or the other.
In this world nothing is absolutely safe. The nuclear industry must build reactors that
can reach cold shut down with 100%
certainty no matter what kind of accidents may happen in the nuclear
plants. If an industry has a working
reactor and it is deprived of the last resort of power supply and heat sink the
industry should not have taken the responsibility to operate nuclear plant in
the first place and that is what is the key lesson that the Government and
nuclear industries all over the world must learn from the Fukushima disaster. It means that the emergency power should be
provided from a multiple of means and locations and the heat sink should not be
depended on existing water supply alone but on air and alternate water reservoirs. The industry must realise that none of the
safety measures like emergency core cooling systems, boric acid sprays did not save Fukushima reactors
because even the most critical emergency devices and methods are dependent on
the availability of electrical power supply.
15) FUKUSHIMA EXPLOSION CAN OCCUR
ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD:
Many countries are misleading that
since massive earthquakes and large tsunami waves are specific only to Japan
and what happened to reactors at Fukushima in Japan on 11-3-2011 does not apply
to other countries and that is a very fatal mistake to mislead the people. Instead, the nuclear industry must show how they can
avoid core melt downs under any circumstances by realizing that the industrialists
are being tested by nature and that God will keep testing the industry and the
people and checking to see if the people are ready to ask the right questions
to protect public health, safety of eco-systems and sustainable development of man
and nature in the world.
All these above phenomena that led
to Fukushima disaster clearly prove that nuclear safety is a myth. The nuclear safety considerations are not at
all clearly understood and assimilated by
the nuclear experts who select appropriate sites for location of the industry
the experts who design the plant by underestimating the location features like potential earthquakes and
tsunami and their damaging consequences on the people and their
environment. The specialists who deal
with manufacturing, construction and commissioning of the nuclear plants and
the experts who get involved in the operation and maintenance of the nuclear
plants are not fully informed. The experts who prepare the Environmental
Impact Assessment reports including Risk Analysis, accident scenarios,
emergency response system including timely evacuation to safer places and the
experts who operated and maintained the spent fuel storage tanks, the experts
who are involved in decommissioning the nuclear plants and the experts who
operated and maintained the waste treatment plants and restore the natural resources
free from pollution and the experts who
monitor the radioactive emissions and
ensure the health and welfare of all plant, animal and human population in
different ecological systems are not fully qualified as per section 45 and 51 of the Indian Evidence Act. Hence it is the duty of the general public
and educated people to debate on all these above crucial aspects and stop all nuclear reactors and destroy all
nuclear weapons to save mankind and nature in the interests of leaving this
world in a better condition than what we have inherited from our forefathers in
the interests of our future generations.
COMMENTS OF Dr.Helen Caldicott on this article published in the website : Dianuke.org
COMMENTS OF Dr.Helen Caldicott on this article published in the website : Dianuke.org
www.dianuke.org
On
the occasion of the Chernobyl Disaster anniversary on 26-4-2012,people
in all countries in the world must take an oath to fight against both
nuclear plants and weapons as they are intended to destroy the life and
culture of mankind .The Chernobyl reactor explosion occured on 26-4-1986
in Russia d...
No comments:
Post a Comment