"But the beasts that roam the deserted zone are normal, save the radiation levels. Indeed, the book suggests that, paradoxically, the dirtiest radioactive site in Europe has become the continentÂ’s biggest animal sanctuary." http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...photography-from-inside-the-zone-8467725.html Yep wildlife is thriving around Chernobyl showing no ill effects except for higher radiation levels. "At the time of the disaster, there were few wild animals living in the region around the nuclear plant. But as the humans moved out in the wake of the catastrophe, large mammals appeared and thrived. While the animals showed incredibly high levels of radiation, they still looked normal. There were no giant wolves or three-headed deer." But no we shall not pursue SAFE nuclear power because of Chenobyl as the anti-nuclear crowd declares.
Just because animals that are living there now, decades later, look normal does not mean that the environment is healthy for them to be in. Showing no ill effects is not a true statement. Many animals in the area died immediately after the incidence, the most others left to survive. Species of both animal and plant life have exhibited and have been found to have higher levels of mutations, some of them negative, like saplings not being able to determine which way to grow. But yeah, humans moving out of an area usually leads to an increase in wildlife.
Nuclear/atomic power is not so dangerous as some think it is & the press tends to sensationalizes such as Fukushima. With Chernobyl, PBS did a show which found that wildlife & plants are growing there with little to no problems. Wolves, foxes, birds, moose, bisons, etc. have been done well in health condions. Almost all the nuclear waste is contained while coal & natural gas waste ends up in the lungs. Here's an article on the dangers of solar panels & the nuclear/atomic topic isn't going away. China villagers protest solar plant pollution - China - Zimbio BEIJING ( Reuters ) - Protesters have camped outside an east China-based solar panel manufacturer accusing it of dumping toxic waste into a river, China's official ... www.zimbio.com/China/articles/8g5TdBJDquQ/China... - Cached
Isn't evolution supposed to be a good thing? This is just accelerated evolution. Sure most of the mutations are bad, but it will ultimately lead to species better fit for survival.
Nothing really - However the more bio diversity you loose, the slower the eco-systems will recover. The key is actually bio-mass. Shed to much of that and you run the chance of the whole planet losing it's ecology.
Bio-mass not really an effective indicator either. What if it was all just a huge clump of green sludge everywhere? The fact is there is no truely objective way to quantify the "health" of an ecosystem. In some situations where an invassive plant species takes over, it actually increases biomass, as there are no animals who can eat it. A temperate rainforest has more biomass than a tropical rainforest, yet the tropical rainforest has higher biodiversity. "Biodiversity" can be difficult to quantify also, more of it is not necessarily a good thing. We could add to the number of species in an area by introducing various new invassive species. That would not mean it was a healthier ecosystem.
Bio-mass gives greater opportunity for mutation species diversification. History shows even if diversity gets smashed, life can come back
