| ||||
Personal page Around the investigation of the reasons for Chernobyl emergency was formed not less myths than around emergency itself. They are extended only not in the media, but in the Internet. The details of investigation are little interesting for the general public, it consist of the technicalities, which are incomprehensible and dull. Everyone waits answer only to main age long questions "who it is guilty?" and "what to do?" The first question was answered immediately: operational personnel are guilty. But who even to your mind can be guilty? Well, and concerning the second question, the answer was a gigantic work on overcoming of the consequences of emergency. And what else questions could be asked after this? There are no questions, then there are myths. Myth the first. There were many different commissions and they gave many different conclusions This is not so The sense of the Commissions of Inquiry of emergencies is such exactly, this commission must be always one and only one. Its conclusion is the last truth, which has the official, including juridical sence. Everything else - is some of hypothesis, assumption, opinion and so forth, them it can be as much as desired. Official commission is obligated to name the concrete direct cause for emergency at least as most probable (if unambiguously this reason was impossible to establish). Such official Commission of Inquiry of the causes for Chernobyl accident was. However, this was government Commission of very high level, created in the first hours after emergency for explaining of its reasons and elimination of its consequences. It is another matter that this commission dealt mainly with overcoming consequences, but its first task, the explanation of reasons, did not manage. The result of the work of commission were even two resolutions, different both in the form and in essence, and this means that in reality there was no one. One resolution, for the external consumption, by the name "information about the emergency on Chernobyl NPP and its consequences”, prepared for the IAEA [Y2] (see also [Y1]), this is in realty not a resolution, but scientific and technical report which is furthermore very tendentious. Another resolution for the especially internal use. It is called so as it supposed "the resolution of the government Commission of Inquiry of the reasons for emergency on Chernobyl NPP". This document is so secret that no one, besides attorneys and judges saw it, and about it is difficult anything to say, but it is known that it differs significantly from the first. Commission did not make the main thing, they don’t determined the most probable reason for emergency and don’t named its initial event. Under the conditions for irreconcilable contradiction between participants in the investigation these questions so hanged in mid-air for many years. Repeated attempts to solve them (in the scientific and engineering plan) created the impression of the set of commissions, many conclusions and conducted investigations. In reality truth was known to all already long ago, but each elucidated it on his own’s. Myth of the second. Investigation is not finished and will continue for long. This is erroneous. In reality the true reasons for Chernobyl accident became clear during the first two weeks, and investigation was real finished within a month. Further (following a month - one-and-a-half month) investigation as such was no longer conducted, but was performed the simulation of emergency by calculation and were made the attempts to arrive at the agreement between investigators from the different organizations (IAE, NIKIET, VNIIAES and other) apropos of the facts of emergency and their interpretation, in order to form unitid opinion and conclusion of government commission. This attempt did not succeed, and the results of the work of commission were substituted with the solutions of the Politbureau of the CC CPSU. All lined up, but each remained with its opinion. And there were only two opinions in the long run: the opinion of VNIIAES (that the initial event of emergency was the introduction of positive reactivity by reactor protection system) and the opinion of NIKIET (that the initial event of emergency was stopping of the coolant circulation through the reactor core). Entire further for the next two years there was creation of models more and more precisely describing the initial phase of emergency and more and more intensified study of the circumstances of emergency. This cannot be in no way named as accident investigation, because reasons were clear either way to each of the researchers, and the purpose of studies was not the disclosure of these reasons, but the substantiation of everybodys own approach to intepretation and estimation of the events of emergency. The formation on the line of all researchers of Chernobyl emergency began to be decomposed in proportion to weakening the grasp of the Politbureau and after withdrawal from his post the minister of Atomic Industry E.P.Slavskyj in 1988. They addressed into the firm voice, and since 1990 when materials on the investigation of Chernobyl accident ceased to be secret, as a matter of fact came complete freedom in the consideration of different versions of emergency. But all this even less approached under the concept of investigation, and in reality it was the propaganda of the knowledge (about the Chernobyl accident), which the majority of scientific community did not have. Since special interest in the Chernobyl emergency became apparent only once every five years on the anniversary dates, then this process of education is passed very slowly, and it continues, until now. Myth the third. Many new facts appeared and it radically changed the version of the emergency There are no new facts appeared in the investigation (study) of the reasons for Chernobyl emergency since 1986. The basic (and only noncontradictory) version of Chernobyl emergency was and is always one and the same. But this version was not audible from the second rank of "unanimous chorus"of investigators. But when this "chorus" began to be decomposed into the individual "choristers", then appeared not new facts but new tratment to the same old facts. If to say roundly, then they ceased simply to lie and ceased to hide some very essential facts. But as the IAEA was implicated in this, the matter looked so, as if some new facts appeared. These new facts could came from nowhere. Who wanted it to know, he knew it already since 1986. Myth the fourth. Most important data on the emergency remained classified This is error. There are no and it cannot be secrets whatever relative to events and facts of Chernobyl' emergency. They all are familiar and studied far and wide. To hide here simply nothing is possible. But the reasons for emergency are established only on these facts. So that here from the declassification to wait something. Are secret the materials of operationally investigation work, but this [sledovatelskaya] “kitchen”, it is secret always and everywhere. But the main thing, that we should know, we know: of diversion and there was no fraudulent intent. Possibly from the surplus of zeal someone classified organizational- capable documentation within the sufficiently long run, which precedes emergency. But hardly its declassification anything to us will give, that- that in this matter there was [bardak], we so know, but for the investigation of the concrete technical reasons for emergency this gives nothing. There are, of course, the secret documents, which are of great interest, but not from the point of view of some new facts or conclusions about the reasons for the Chernobyl' emergency, which they could report, but entirely from another point of view. This is the first conclusion of judicial- technical examination, also, in the second complete protocols of judicial sessions in the part of the questions, which were assigned by defendant. It surrenders to me, that this never will be published, it is very shameful it would be shameful this to read (see here). This is what there can be sometimes they will publish, this resolution of government commission about the reasons for Chernobyl' emergency, which the attorneys read, but we no. to sitemap |
