11. SOCIAL ASPECTS OF NUCLEAR LEGACY OF THE FORMER USSR

11.1 Organizational principles of public relations and results of the sociological studies in the Russian Federation

In the USSR there were no organizational institutions for providing timely and relevant information on emergencies and social problems in nuclear power industry, as well as in industry and on transport as a whole, till 1986. Such institutions were considered unnecessary. The mass media were under the strict control of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU). The mass media censorship was executed by the Department of State Secrets Safeguard. It assigned the specific characteristics of the nuclear power industry, information on failures and accidents, which took place in the USSR, to the confidential category. Any special institutions for public relations and providing information on nuclear problems were not necessary. The Chernobyl NPP accident on April 26, 1986 coincided with the so called period of "glasnost" development. Therefore, the Soviet government was obliged to make a special brief statement on this matter, which was made after some delay on April 28, 1986. The prolonged silence by the USSR on the fact and consequences of failure resulted in a great number of myths and rumours both abroad and inside the country.

In 1987-1991 the USSR was shocked by a series of catastrophies and accidents - the earthquake in Armenia, marine ships collisions, a number of explosions on gas pipelines, in mines and others. The censorship about such events was destroyed. During the long electioneering in the USSR at the end of 1988 certain political leaders (B. Nemtsov, S. Shushkevich, A. Adamovich, A. Yablokov, and others) actively kindled and used the antinuclear set of mind, provoked by the Chernobyl accident, in their political struggle for leadership. They organized pressure from the community to the government to stop the Power Production Program execution and succeeded in stopping design and construction of nuclear power units with a total capacity of 109 MW. The amount of damage, caused by drastic mistakes in public relations and information, ran up to several dozens of billions of USA dollars. The country was put to the eve of energy crisis. In this situation the USSR government was compelled to organize a wide-scale activity on informing the community about all problems of nuclear power industry. In 1989 the USSR government founded the Interdepartmental Council on Information and Public Relations on Atomic Energy (Fig. 11.1). The Public Information Centre (PIC) on Atomic Energy (staff - 60 persons) became the Working Body of the Interdepartmental Council. The Regional Public Information Centres were organized in some regions of the Soviet Union. The USSR Nuclear Society (NS) was established in 1989 and located at the Kurchatov Institute. It actively entered into public information process. The "Complex Program on Modification of Public Opinion on Nuclear Power Acceptance in the USSR" was worked out by the Public Information Centre and the USSR NS. Its fulfilment was successfully started.

The fundamental documents of the Complex Program realization are displayed in fig. 11.2. The Program had been operative up to the moment of the USSR’s disintegration. For example, as a result of numerous measures, executed within the framework of the Complex Program, the shut-down of operating nuclear power units and nuclear fuel cycle (NFC) plants had been prevented, with exception of 2 power units of Armenian NPP. This occured despite the prolonged pressure and demands of nuclear power opponents to the USSR government. After the USSR disintegration the above mentioned structures remained. They continue to function in Russia and some other CIS countries in slightly changed forms.

The existence of independent and prosperious Russia in foreseable future is impossible without broad introduction of nuclear technologies into the national economy, use of nuclear power plants and maintaining nuclear weapons fighting efficiency. The social acceptance of nuclear power industry can be achieved only by the participation of numerous federal ministries and government departments, commercial and public organizations in explanatory activities and spreading of knowledge. Taking into account the above mentioned factors the RF Government established the Interdepartmental Coordinating Counsil on Information and Public Relations (ICC-IPR) in 1992 and commited the organization of these activities to it. The block diagram of ICC-IPR (on January, 1997) is shown in fig. 11.3. On the ICC-IPR meetings, which take place at least twice a year, the main results are discussed, the tasks of public relations on the forthcoming period are formulated, and the reports of Counsil members on the results of activities in ministries and government departments are heard.

STRUCTURE OF IDC - IPR (1989)

Fig. 11.1

The main trends of implementation of Complex Program of USSR public information on nuclear power industry, carried out by Public Information Centre in the framework of the following basic documents.

Fig.11.2

STRUCTURE OF ICC - IPR

Interdepartmental Coordinating Council on Information and Public Relations on Atomic Energy

Fig.11.3

The working body of ICC-IPR is the Public Information Centre (PIC). The Regional Public Information Centres are founded in regions of Russia (fig.11.4). The information groups and information centres are organized at NFC plants and NPPs.

The problem of public information is successfully solved both by governmental institutions and by Russian Nuclear Society. The Board of RF Nuclear Society was established and located at the Kurchatov Institute in Moscow in 1996. At present it has 5 regional and 2 municipal departments. The interaction with Nuclear Societies of Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belorussia is one of the main functions of Russian NS (fig. 11.5).

The further extensive applications of nuclear power in national economy considerably depend on the solution of radioactive wastes problems and on spreading of information and knowledge in this field. The problem of organization of such activity was stated in the RF Government Act "On Primary Works in the Field of Radioactive Wastes and Waste Nuclear Materials Management" (# 824, August 14, 1993).

ICC-IPR and RF NS actively entered into the Act #824 realization. According to the Order of Minister on Atomic Power (#72 of December 6, 1993) the "Agency of Public Information Support and Educational Activity on the Problem of Radioactive Wastes Management and Radiation Safety" was established in the PIC structure. The problem of radioactive wastes management turned into one of the main tasks of the Ecological Service founded in the RF Ministry of Defense. The realization of the tasks outlined in Act #824 of August 14, 1993 is also the duty of "Radon" regional special combines, which solve problems of radioactive wastes formed in medicine, industry and other branches of national economy (Chapter 10 of this report).

The legislative regulation of activity in the field of nuclear power applications is based on the RF Constitution anf federal laws. The main federal laws, draft laws, which are under consideration in the RF Parliament or at the stage of elaboration are listed in Table 11.1.

REGIONAL CENTRES ON PUBLIC INFORMATION ON ATOMIC ENERGY (RPIC)

Fig.11.4

Fig.11.5

Table 11.1

Legislative Regulation

The sociological studies are the tools for monitoring public attitudes towards nuclear power applications. For the first time such investigations were carried out in 1988. They showed that 10% of respondents supported nuclear power applications in the USSR national economy and 60% activelly opposed it. The large program of sociological studies was executed in 1992 - 1994. The all-Russian polls based on the same technique were carried out in several RF regions: Moscow, Leningrad, Northern, North-Western, Central, Central-Chernozyomny, Volgo-Vyatsky, Povolzhsky, Ural, West Siberian and Far Eastern.The sample size in each region was 2100 persons. In 1995 the studies were carried out in the regions of Leningrad, Kostroma, Rostov, Ekaterinburg, Murmansk, Kursk, Voronezh and Arkhangelsk. The results of the polls are demonstrated in figures 11.6-11.11 (the totals are more than 100% because each respondent could mark several answers in the question).

The above represented data analysis shows that:

• At present the problems of nuclear power in the public consciousness are far behind the economic and political instability problems (fig. 11.6).
• The percentage of Russian citizens, who think that the radiation effect is the main ecological hazard to be abated (Fig.11.7).
• Comparison of polls in 1993 and 1995 ascertained that the number of supporters of new NPPs construction was constant; the number of those, who support only keeping the existing level of nuclear power production, slightly increased; the number of respondents, who have no concrete opinions on this problem, decreased; the percentage of nuclear power applications opponents remained the same (Fig. 11.8).
• The percentages of nuclear power supporters were the highest in the following groups of population: people under 30; higher educated persons; engineers, technicians and students; men. The greatest quotas of nuclear power opponents were observed in the groups: people over 50; persons with unfinished secondary education; pensioners (retired persons) and housewifes.
• The quota of people, who don’t oppose NPP’s accommodation (construction) not far from their residence, slightly increased (fig. 11.11, tables 11.2, 11.3)
• The number of respondents, who pay especial attention to the information in mass media on nuclear power problems, remained constant.
• The people of 31-49 years old; with higher education; engineers, technicians and white collars feel the deficit of information on nuclear power most of all.
• The prospective favourable situation, characterized by probable growth of number of people, who have positive or indifferent attitude towards NPPs, remains stable. It could be connected with aggravation of adverse economic situation, that makes people to take an interest in some increasing of living standards by means of NPPs operation and prospect of privileges and compensation payments for residents of the zones of NPP’s nonessential affect.
• The young RF citizens, who have no secondary or higher education at present (students of schools, technical schools, colleges and higher educational establishments) form the numerous reserve of supporters of NPPs and NFC plants, as the sources (objects) of living standards increasing, including the improvement of population electric power supply. Therefore, the active purposeful work should and would be carried out with these groups of population.

Table 11.2

Problems which evoke public anxiety most of all

Table 11.3

Main factors of ecological hazard

Distributions of answers to the question: "What problems from listed below, to your mind, worry people most of all?"

Fig.11.6.

Distributions of answers to the question: " What factors produce the utmost ecological hazard for the population of your region?"

Fig.11.7.

Distributions of answers to the question: "What is your attitude towards nuclear power production?"

Fig.11.8.

Distributions of answers to the question: "What do you think about probability of a new serious NPP accident in Russia?"

Fig.11.9.

Distibution of answers to the question: "Whose information on the problems related to NPP operation can be trusted?" (1995)

Factors:

1 - water pollution by processing wastes;	5 - radiation affect;
2 - landscape modification;	6 - deforestation;
3 - air pollution by plants discharges;	7 - ozone depletion;
4 - foodstuff quality change for the worse;	8 - climate alteration.

Fig. 11.11

Fig. 11.11(a)

The above represented data characterize the public attitude towards nuclear energy applications in Russian Federation on the whole. It is obvious that in various RF regions many of the attitudes are the same but still depend on specific conditions of the region at the same time. The results of studies carried out in Voronezh region are described below. About 60 % of electrical energy consumption in this region of Central Russia are provided by successfull operation of Novovoronezhsk NPP.

There are 3 nuclear installations in the area, which form the attitude of Voronezh citizens and region residents towards atomic energy applications:

• Primarly, it is the operating Novovoronezh NPP with 5 light-water nuclear power units. Two of them were shut down because of the expiration of their guaranteed operation. The active zones of these power units were unloaded and their dismantling has been executed.
• Secondly, the construction of two new VVER-1000 power reactors (#6, #7) was begun on the production site.
• Thirdly, the unaccomplished construction of heat-production nuclear plant with AST-500 reactors is situated 15 km from the precincts of the regional centre. The first unit of this plant was 80-85 % constructed in 1990. The construction was stopped as the result of regional referendum. 97 % of region’s residents voted for construction discontinuance. It coincided with persons opposing nuclear energy joining the Voronezh municipal and regional authorities.

Obviously, the attitude of Voronezh region residents towards nuclear energy depends greatly on the political situatuion and psychological state. The investigations of all above the mentioned problems were executed by the Voronezh Regional Public Information Centre. Some results of the polls are represented in Tables 11.4 - 11.9. The percentage totals are more than 100% (Tables 11.4, 11.9) in cases when respondents were allowed to mark several answers in one question.

Table 11.4

Factors of social worry

Table 11.5

Estimation of self psychological state by Voronezh region residents

Obviously, the facts revealed by these studies have an influence on the psychological state of the people (Tab. 11.5), that do not produce a favourable attitude towards atomic energy.

The rich native experience, especially of the last ten years, proves that the construction of nuclear installations could cease and the development of nuclear power production could be stopped without the community’s comprehension of its necessity. Therefore, there would be no public acknowledgement of the need and assistance to produce nuclear power. Thus, the problems of forming positive public opinion on nuclear power have strategical importance both on the all-Russian and on regional levels.

The studies revealed that some significant changes in public attitude towards nuclear power in Voronezh region have occured in the last 7 years (Tab. 11.6).

Table 11.6

Dynamics of public opinion on the RF nuclear power industry development in the Voronezh region (%).

Three main conclusions about the situation in Voronesh region should be noted without the detailed analysis of given data:

1. The negative attitude towards nuclear power industry development is the predominant but not the unanimous in the Voronezh region. For the first time the quota of respondents with negative attitude towards nuclear power industry reduced from 59% to 40% for the 7 years, i.e. by 19%.
2. The quantity of nuclear power supporters doesn’t change, it is less than a third part of all respondents.
3. The group of people with indifferent attitude enlarged greatly. The future for nuclear power now belongs to those who are hesitating.

Some qualitative characteristics of public opinion on nuclear power are represented in Table 11.7.

Table 11.7

Opinions of Voronezh region residents on the development of nuclear power industry in Russia (1997)

However, the attitude towards nuclear power on the whole is only a background for the formation of attitude towards specific nuclear installation in the specific region.

One of the public opinion regularities was revealed in the executed studies. The public opinion is more tolerant to nuclear power industry as a whole. But in the case of prospective nuclear plant construction in the adjacent area people begin to display excessive anxiety, and unacceptance.

In accordance with the above mentioned regularity the attitude towards construction of 6-th and 7-th units of Novovoronezh (NV) NPP was formed (Tab. 11.8).

Table 11.8

Dynamics of public opinion of NV NPP 30-km zone residents on construction of the 6-th and 7-th units (%)

The given data show that the attitude towards construction of 6-th and 7-th NPP units has been more negative than the attitude towards nuclear power industry as a whole.

At the same time the changes in public opinion on NV NPP-2 construction have taken place. For the 7 years the percentage of NPP-2 opponents have reduced from 66% to 50%, i.e. by 24%. The number of supporters has remained inalterated. The quota of people with indifferent attitude has enlarged from 14% to 30%. The reduction in number of opponents of 6-th and 7-th units construction has been observed in all areas adjoining NV NPP-2.

As a result a principally new ratio of forces is arising. The position of opponents is not so powerfull as it was formerly. Their views are shared by less than 50% of residents. It is an unstable majority because its social basis, formed by opponents of nuclear power industry as a whole, has abated significantly.

The reduction of number of opponents is realized by transition of some part of the people into the group of hesitants. This process raises the importance of the last group, and proves the necessity of correction of public relations strategy and tactics.

The attitude of the population towards NV NPP-2 correlates with zone of residence. The people living nearer to NV NPP-2 have the higher level of social acceptance of the plant.

The conditions of positive attitudes towards nuclear power production according to the opinion of respondents are given in Table 11.9.

Table 11.9

Conditions of positive attitude towards nuclear power production.

These data show that the basic factor of positive NPP attitude forming is its accidentless operation. The conviction of NPP danger is in the basis of nuclear power industry opponents motivation.

Thus, the results of the researches confirm that the level of NV NPP-2 social acceptance has risen for 7 years but it is still insufficient for providing necessary public support for 6-th and 7-th units construction.

For the present it is impossible to say with confidence how stable is the tendency of NV NPP-2 construction opponents to decrease. The continuation of public opinion social monitoring is necessary for this purpose.

The results of the studies show that prediction of most probable public opinion on NV NPP 6-th and 7-th units construction needs still more confirmation.

At the same time, it is necessary to bear in mind that the unstable socio-economic and political conditions both in country as a whole and in the region can quickly change the situation.

11.2 Health of NFC plants personnel and population living in the regions of their accommodation

The sanitary-epidemiologic situation and the average annual exposure of personnel are indicated in Table 11.10. The data on staff external exposure and radionuclide uptake by the nuclear plants personnel are given in Table 11.11. Data of Table 11.11 show, that four workers of "Rosenergoatom" Concern have been irradiated above the tolerant dose of 5 cSv/year. These persons have been irradiated with the dose which is less than 10 cSv ( 2 - Kurskaya NPP, 1 - Smolenskaya NPP and 1 - Kolskaya NPP).

The contamination of operational premises’ air with radioactive substances did not exceed their permissible concentrations on the substantional majority of enterprises in 1995. It has been manifestated by only 5 workers from 32493 controllable persons who exceeded permissible radionuclide uptake into the lungs. This is stipulated by the fact that in 1995 in the nuclear industry there were no significant releases of radioactive gases and aerosols into the air of working compartments.

The plutonium and uranium contents in the body of 206 operational workers (had been working at the same production type of the enterprise more than 20 years) exceeded permissible levels, including: "Mayak" - 127 persons, Siberian Chemical Combine - 56 persons, MCC - 4 persons, for 1995.

The general working environment of RF Minatom enterprises are characterized by data given in Table 11.12. The exposure doses (cSv/man) for population living in the regions of NFC plants are given in Table 11.13.

The changes in the correlation of birth and death rates of closed areas residents for 10 years ( 1985-1995 ) are given in Table 11.14. The data registered in Table 11.14 show the annual reduction of birth rate and growth of death rate from 1986. This is stipulated by aging of population of closed areas and, at the same time, by sharp decline of life expectances, which has last years taken place in RF as a whole. In 1995, as the reasons of death show, the first place was taken with illnesses of the circulatory system (51,2%), the second one - traumas and poisonings (17,3 %) and the third one - malignant tumors (17,1 %).

The data given Table 11.15 permit one to compare the disease incidence of Minatom enterprises' staff, Minatom cities and settlements adult population with the disease incidence of the RF population in 1995.

The indicators of state of health of Russia’s Minatom enterprises personnel and residents, living in area of their accomodation show a little better situation than in the Russian Federation as a whole.

At the same time the reduction of quantity and quality of scientific, sanitary, medical-prophylactic and medicinal services for nuclear branch personnel will increase the danger of unfavourable health consequences, will cause the growth of workers’ diseases and deaths, ecological damage and financial losses, incommensurable with costs of health protection and can have a major effect on RF Minatom enterprises operation. The growth of disease incidence in closed areas (Table 11.15) has caused anxiety of the Federal Authority of Medical & Biological and Extreme Problems of the Ministry of Health Care of Russia. Presently the situation is being analyzed by specialists.

Table 11.10

Average annual external exposure of personnel of atomic undustry enterprises, 1993-1995 (cSv)

Table 11.11

External exposure of personnel of atomic industry enterprises, 1993-1995

Table 11.12

Occupational health situation of atomic industry enterprises on the date of 31.12.1995

Table 11.13

Integral exposure doses (cSv/man) for population living in areas of accomodation of nuclear industrial enterprises

Table 11.14

Natural growth of closed areas population, 1985-1995

Table 11.15

Total disease incidence of adults on classes and groups of illnesses and certain ailments in Minatomenergoprom , closed areas, NPPs, 1993-1995

11.3 Ecological movement in Russia

The rise of public ecological consciousness is the most significant phenomenon marked in the last decade. Towards the beginning of 1989 in the USSR the mass ecological movement had been formed. Public organizations began to appear which had rather dynamic organizational structure. Many of organizations have turned out to be short-lived. They either disappeared or been merged with those similar to them. All this rather hindered their registration and identification in the political life. At the same time the ecological movement authoritative position enhanced, leading to the growth of ecological consciousness of the population, despite its ecological education inadequacy. There were registered 560 nongovernmental nature protective organizations in the RSFSR in 1991, that is about 67 % of such communities in the USSR. The reference data about some nongovernmental ecological organizations are given in Table 11.16.

The most significant feature of the present ecological movement in Russia is that state, public, commercial and self-organised communities act as a part of its structure. To specify exact quantity of ecological organizations acting in Russia is practically impossible, as there are no state statistical reports on them.

Many of ecological organizations have nopermanent staff and frequently change their organizational structures. Their ideologists and chiefs, struggling for movement leadership, proceed from different approaches to tackling ecological problems. They vary in philosophy of forms and methods of work and prospects of ecological movement development. It should be specified that the majority of ecological organizations to some degree, touch upon the questions of radiation safety, radioecology and etc..

The RF State Committee of Environment Protection ("Goscomecologiya") heads the work of state ecological organizations. (Address: 123812, Moscow, 46 B.Gruzinskaya street, phone: 254-76-83)

The State Committee directs and coordinates the work of territorial nature protection bodies, federal services of natural resources utilization, supervising organizations and inspections, as well as nature and animal protection communities, academic scientific communities, and nature protection bodies of trade unions.

Various student nature protection teams, ecological unions and funds can be related to the self-organized ecological movement. Since 1988 in Russia there has been a movement for establishing "green" party as a political organization. The constructive-ecological movement "Kedr", having made no noticeable success, has campaigned in the last elections for the State Duma and President. The political character of ecological movement has been manifistated in Samara Region and in the cities of Norilsk, Kursk, Zheleznogorsk, Kurchatov and others.

In the last years in ecological movement the organizations of commercial character have occured, such as the association "Noosphera". They tackle their problems together with the Russian union of industrialists and businessmen, Unicombank and other commercial structures. And at last, the cultural-creative ecological organizations should be underlined in the ecological movement - the ecological sections of unions of writers, journalists, foundations of culture and their departments.

The work of ecological organizations of Russia is essentially affected by the international ecological movement and, particularly, such organizations as "Green Peace", "Bellouna", "Rainbow", "Golubka".

As a whole, at the present stage the Russian ecological movement is a rather complicated formation having complex way of functioning. As Goscompriroda Department of interaction with the state authority bodies and public organizations evaluated, more than 1000 nongovernmental public organizations acts in Russia. In Table 11.16 the reference data about some nongovernmental ecological organizations engaged in radiation problems are given.

Table 11.16

Reference data about some nongovernmental ecological organizations