What Separates Chernobyl from Three Mile Island and Fukushima
By Jim Geraghty
June 5, 2019 2:43 PM
One of the dumber responses to HBO’s just-completed Chernobyl miniseries — discussed by Kyle Smith on the homepage today – is that somehow it’s unfairly picking on the Soviet Union. “Where’s the miniseries about Three Mile Island? Where’s the miniseries about Fukushima?â€
This argument amounts to, “I’ve heard about two other nuclear power plant disasters, thus all three must be the same.â€
As I wrote back in February, even a cursory study shows the three situations were all different. The partial meltdown and radiation leak at Three Mile Island in 1979 was serious — but the public was informed quickly, if not terribly clearly. Three Mile Island forever tainted the image of nuclear power in the United States; no new plants were opened for 30 years after the accident. The effects of the radiation leak were, thankfully, mild. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission summarized:
In the months following the accident, although questions were raised about possible adverse effects from radiation on human, animal, and plant life in the TMI area, none could be directly correlated to the accident. Thousands of environmental samples of air, water, milk, vegetation, soil, and foodstuffs were collected by various government agencies monitoring the area. Very low levels of radionuclides could be attributed to releases from the accident. However, comprehensive investigations and assessments by several well-respected organizations, such as Columbia University and the University of Pittsburgh, have concluded that in spite of serious damage to the reactor, the actual release had negligible effects on the physical health of individuals or the environment.
more
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/what-separates-chernobyl-from-three-mile-island-and-fukushima/