Search the Community

Mention "nuclear disaster" to anyone below 40 years of age and most folks will say, "Fukushima". After all, the most recent nuclear power plant meltdown was 15 years ago, following the earthquake and tsunami that hit Japan in March 2011. However, the nuclear disaster I'm more familiar with is the one that took place 40 years ago in Ukraine. Back then, it was still part of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, better known as the USSR or Soviet Union. The Chernobyl power plant in 2009. (Image: Mads Eneqvist, Unsplash) What happened? On April 26, 1986, reactor number 4 at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant exploded, ironically during a safety test. The failure was caused by multiple factors, including the flawed design of the RBMK reactor. The explosion blew the reactor and building open, sending tons of radioactive waste into the atmosphere and scattering contaminated materials around the surrounding area. As you can imagine, the fallout was fatal to plant workers and first-responders – the latter were unaware that the incident they responded to was no ordinary fire. Supposedly, the only indicator that something was very wrong was a "metallic taste". The entire city of Pripyat was evacuated and the surrounding 30km was declared an exclusion zone. Human liquidators were sent to clean up the site and surrounding areas. Pets, along with wildlife, were hunted and euthanised. The exclusion zone will remain uninhabitable for 20,000 years. One can also imagine the aftermath. An untold number died from radioactive exposure. Cancer rates in affected children soared. There are medical and human issues that persist till today. The iconic and eerie ferris wheel in Pripyat, as seen in 2021. (Image: Mads Eneqvist, Unsplash) Learnings Because this disaster occurred when I was a child, I only learnt about it after coming across a magazine article much later. As detailed as the article was, it could never fully encapsulate the tragedy. But the more I read, the larger and clearer the picture grew. And despite some parts being fictionalised, the HBO series did help to underscore the severity of the event. What shocked me, though, was how the Soviet government tried at every turn to save face. No government is ever totally transparent, but given the unfolding humanitarian tragedy, and the fact that this was a nuclear disaster that could have ended the world, this need to save face was appalling. The incident was treated as a minor accident at first. The Soviets initially kept mum, but two days later, when a nuclear power station over 1,000km away in Sweden suddenly detected abnormally high radiation readings, the jig was up. Denying the incident was like trying to block the sun. Still, they persisted. Pripyat, a city located three kilometres from the power plant, was not evacuated till 36 hours later. Even then, residents were told to only pack enough for three days. It was only after the evacuation that they were told they would never return to the city. Also, though the accident was mentioned during a news broadcast, it wasn't even the lead story, but the last item mentioned. In a display of utter depravity, the unfolding disaster was reported as nothing more than a fire, plus something along the lines of "the victims are getting the help they need." I thought only the Chinese were obsessed with "saving face". This abandoned building in Pripyat is one of many silent witnesses that are frozen in time. (Image: Viktor Hesse, Unsplash) Delusions and denials The Soviet government had to play down the incident because it didn't want to cause panic. But the main reason was so that it wouldn't look incompetent, which would lead to questions of legitimacy. After all, during the Cold War, they touted their technological supremacy over the West. Admitting to mistakes was a non-starter. If they could, they would have claimed "fake news" and deny that a meltdown and explosion ever occurred. But the truth kept emerging. In another instance, due to the higher-than-claimed radiation levels, the robots provided by western nations (to help clean up the site) broke down almost immediately. The evidence was irrefutable. Yet despite the deaths and damage wrought by a flawed reactor design, a lack of safety culture, and prioritising face-saving over human lives, the truth will never be admitted. I doubt we will ever have a full account of just how many perished and how many continue to be afflicted due to radiation. The New Safe Confinement Structure. (Image: Roman Chollet, Unsplash) Today A massive effort to contain the radiation resulted in a building of a sarcophagus, which was completed in December 1986 – a mere eight months following the explosion. Over time, climate and other factors caused wear and tear to the sarcophagus and a new solution was needed. In 2010, construction of the massive New Safe Confinement structure began. Six years later, it was moved into place over the sarcophagus. Its purpose is twofold: To prevent radiation leaks, while facilitating the work to decommission/disassemble the reactor. The suppression of facts, the cover-ups, and the attempts to save face despite the enormous evidence – it was too much. Many say Chernobyl is what led to the USSR's demise and the end of the Cold War. The Chernobyl disaster and the events that took place following it continue to haunt the world. It brought to the fore questions about nuclear safety, energy security, sustainability, and most of all, responsibility. Have we answered these questions? Are we even trying to address them? Those involved could kick the proverbial can down the road, but they'll only encounter it again. – Jeremy (Main image: Mads Eneqvist, Unsplash) (Image: Ilja Nedilko, Unsplash)

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/mobile/singapore/agencies-slam-natas-for/1493872.html The Outbound Travel Fair press conference. (Photo: TODAY) A A+ SINGAPORE: Dozens of travel agencies on Tuesday (Nov 25) lashed out at the National Association of Travel Agents Singapore (NATAS) for its lack of transparency over the usage of proceeds from its mega travel fairs and, among other things, its refusal to open the books, at a press conference attended by representatives of 24 tour agencies. The agencies also charged that the association was exploiting its members by not reducing rental rates for the NATAS fair an agency would need to pay between S$100,000 and S$200,000 to participate in the fair despite declining sales over the years that they attributed partly to the lacklustre publicity for the twice-yearly event. Responding to the charges, a NATAS spokesman said that although the cost of renting exhibition halls has steadily risen over the past three years, the association which has been holding its travel fairs at Singapore Expo has not passed on the increases to the exhibitors. He said NATAS has been in discussion with members and exhibitors about their grievances. But we have to accept that NATAS may be unable to satisfy all its members given the diversity of our membership ... Everyone may have a different opinion on how the fair ought to be run, he said, adding that NATAS members include travel agents, tourism organisations, cruise lines and accommodation providers. Last week, TODAY broke the news that the Big Four travel agencies Chan Brothers Travel, CTC Travel, Dynasty Travel and SA Tours were pulling out of the NATAS fair on Mar 27 to 29 and holding a rival fair at Marina Bay Sands (MBS) on the same dates, and were in talks with other agencies to make the switch. BETTER DEALS FOR CONSUMERS At the press conference held at MBS, it was announced that 24 outbound travel agencies in total including Nam Ho Travel, Farmosa Holidays, MISA Travel, Apple Holidays and New Shan Travel will be crossing over to the new fair, tentatively called the Outbound Travel Fair. In contrast to the NATAS fair which charges a S$4 entrance fee, admission to the rival trade show is free. The agencies which will continue to be NATAS members have formed a working committee to organise the rival fair, which will occupy a floor area that is 70 per cent the size of the NATAS fair next year. Booth rental will be up to 30 per cent cheaper. Excess revenue will be channelled to advertising and promotions or refunded to exhibitors. Cost savings will also be passed onto consumers, who will get better deals, the agencies said. They said their dissatisfaction began in 2010. Despite raising the issues repeatedly, NATAS turned a deaf ear. They also submitted a petition last month, but the requests were not met, which was the last straw, they said. The agencies had petitioned for reduced booth rentals, lowering of admission fees, disallowing overseas operators brought in by tourism boards to conduct sales, greater transparency and having representation on the NATAS fair organising committee. The most recent NATAS fair in August saw about 10 per cent fewer visitors, compared with the fair held in August last year. Sales for several participating agencies this year had also fallen by around 10 to 20 per cent, the agencies said. They added that with customers increasingly making bookings via the Internet, holding a fair that charges an admission fee would further deter prospective customers. NATAS RESPONDS Former NATAS group chief executive Robert Khoo, who stepped down last year, dismissed the agencies claims. Customers are (getting fewer) simply because ... everybody is doing their own fair. So they have already stolen a big chunk of the business before the NATAS fair even starts, he said. Mr Khoo said the admission fee raised from S$3 in 2010 was in place for crowd control. Members had fully supported (the) rationale when NATAS explained it to them many years ago, he said. He added that the income earned from the fair is ploughed back into events for members, who can attend them for free. These include NATAS annual dinner and dance, football and golf tournaments, and seminars. The NATAS spokesman said attendance at its fairs may have reached a saturation point in recent years. It is unrealistic to expect growth year-on-year when consumers buying patterns have changed drastically, he said. On the impact of the pullout, the spokesman said NATAS has a membership base of more than 340 travel agents. It will revamp its fairs and try to draw in new exhibitors. In light of the developments, NATAS will meet its members on Thursday. Still, the agencies boycotting the NATAS fair said they will return to the fold if the association addresses their grievances. Mr Anthony Chan, group managing director of Chan Brothers Travel, said: We are all very busy ... we dont want to spend effort organising travel fairs.

Singapore places great emphasis on governance & transparency: PM Lee Channel NewsAsia - Saturday, April 17 SINGAPORE: Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said Singapore places great emphasis on corporate governance and transparency because it needs to set itself apart from other countries. Otherwise, no one would set up banks or base their headquarters in Singapore. In a half