By Abby Harding – 

Arguments surrounding nuclear disasters typically concern humans and the effects accidents could and do have upon them, however the consequences for wildlife should also be considered. Nuclear power, although more sustainable for the environment, still possess’ a risk factor, and potential accidents can have detrimental consequences both locally and globally[1].

Over the past 70 years, despite measures in place, numerous accidents have still occurred, resulting in the release of radioactive substances into the environment[2]. Chernobyl is in fact the most severe of these (7 on the International Nuclear Event Scale[3]); the accident was damaging for both humans and wildlife, with many effects ongoing today.

Wildlife thrived with depopulation of Chernobyl but, many species mutated or were harmed by the radiation.
Image: Jorge Franganillo. CC BY 2.0

On April 26, 1986 the Chernobyl power plant exploded, releasing radioactive debris, toxic fumes and more[4]. Although it is understood this led to deaths and evacuation of the area, reviews show limited studies explored how wildlife was impacted, with many impacts even being ignored. From the 521 studies reviewed, 91% were conducted within proximity of Chernobyl, where radiation would naturally be higher[1] – not exploring the global consequences. Also, generally the information available from studies is considerably lacking, arguably suggesting bias between humans and wildlife, and how human information is prioritised. Is this selfish of us?

Although there’s insufficient studies to properly display this, it’s recognised that elevated radiation levels varied and still vary from species to species. For example, in Chernobyl bats, they range from between 3,000 to 50,000 Bq/kg (Becquerels/ Kilogram). As a result of species experiencing elevations in radiation, some also underwent biological changes[1]. A study in 2011 showed a correlation between relative brain size of a range of bird species and the level of background radiation; animals contaminated by Chernobyl’s radioactive material suffered from ‘increased oxidative stress’ and ‘low levels of antioxidants’ leading to this developing[5]. The accident physically caused change and deaths of species, with many consequences still unknown [Figure 1].

During the accident, radioactive material including Caesium-137 was emitted, contaminating natural ecosystems, particularly forests (each absorbing it differently). Foliage absorbs Caesium through photosynthesis as rainfall transports it from the air, radionuclides then accumulate within leaves, later falling to the ground, concentrating the soil[2] Caesium is transferred through this soil to vegetation, which is then consumed, entering the food chain. For some species, biological accumulation through food chains may increase elevated radiation level exposure and resultantly lead to greater likelihood of biological changes[1].

On a more positive note, the accident didn’t solely negatively affect the wildlife. The depopulation that accompanied evacuating Chernobyl, for example, allowed wildlife to thrive and roam freely, despite the radioactive climate they must endure[1].

There is the constant risk of endangering wildlife with nuclear reactors, with each impact mentioned being generally representative of nuclear disasters in some way, not just Chernobyl. The limited recognition of this demonstrates human negligence towards wildlife, biodiversity, and the natural world. So maybe humans are selfish when it comes to prioritising needs but, is that right?

References:

[1]Wehrden, H. von, Fischer, J., Brandt, P., Wagner, V., Kümmerer, K., Kuemmerle, T., Nagel, A., Olsson, O. & Hostert, P. (2012) Consequences of nuclear accidents for biodiversity and ecosystem services. Conservation Letters, 5(2), 81-89. 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2011.00217.x

[2]Middleton, N. (2019) The Global Casino. 6th ed. Abingdon: Routledge.

[3]The International Atomic Energy Agency (ND) The International Radiological Event Scale. https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/ines.pdf [27.11.20].

[4]Lallanilla, M. (2019) Chernobyl: Facts about the Nuclear Disaster. Available at: https://www.livescience.com/39961-chernobyl.html [27.11.20].

[5]Møller, A. P., Bonisoli-Alquati, A., Rudolfsen, G. & Mousseau, T. A. (2011) Chernobyl Birds Have Smaller Brains. PLoS One, 6(2), p.e16862. 10.1371/journal.pone.0016862

[6]Franganillo, J. (2017). Chernobyl (Ukraine). Wikimedia Commons. Available at: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chernobyl_(38365891522).jpg [28.01.21].