Since the start of the NATO-Yugoslavia war on March 24, 1999, IEER has received numerous inquiries about the ecological and health effects of the NATO bombing of industrial facilities and power transformers, which resulted in toxic chemical compounds being released into the air, soil, and water. One example is the bombing of the Pancevo chemical complex, located on the Danube River (see map). IEER has no independent data on the types and amounts of chemicals present at Pancevo or other facilities that have been bombed, but has compiled the best available information to respond to these queries. The information sources we have used include are news reports, chemical industry data, health and environmental data on the chemicals, and claims of Yugoslavian authorities. The latter claims were checked against industry data in the United States for reasonableness to ensure that the types of chemicals alleged to be present would be found at the types of facilities that were bombed. The industrial uses of the chemicals reportedly present at Pancevo and their potential health effects are detailed in Table 2, along with effects of PCBs which were present in electrical transformers struck by NATO.

Pancevo

The Pancevo complex, a combined petrochemical, fertilizer and polyvinyl chloride manufacturing complex, was bombed repeatedly in April, 1999. Chemical storage tanks there reportedly released into the air, soil, and water large amounts of ammonia, ethylene dichloride, and vinyl chloride (see Table 2). Also reportedly released were 100 tons of mercury, 800 tons of hydrochloric acid, 3000 tons of caustic soda, and 250 tons of liquid chlorine. (The New York Times, July 14, 1999, p. A1)

The bombing of the plant sent toxic fumes into the air of the city of Pancevo and nearby areas. Favorable winds appear to have prevented large-scale immediate casualties. The plant premises are apparently so contaminated that western journalists who inspected the rubble more than a month after the bombings "became violently sick from breathing in the Pancevo air." (May 24 National Public Radio report). The New York Times reported on July 14 that people in Pancevo have suffered a "surge of unexplained symptoms," like headaches, skin rashes and increasing miscarriages.

Since toxic fumes from large fires typically travel quite far, they could affect a wide region, including some of the member countries of NATO. Further, since the fires can last for hours or days, the spread of the toxic fumes would likely be along many wind directions, rather than in one elongated pattern in a single principal direction characteristic of a short-term accidental release.

In order to prevent large-scale poisoning of the air in the area, the plant authorities released some of the chemicals, including highly toxic ethylene dichloride, into a nearby channel that flows into the Danube River. As of May 24, the ethylene dichloride was at the bottom of the canal and had not yet entered the river (ethylene dichloride is insoluble in and denser than water). The Danube is the source of drinking water for millions of people downstream in Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Moldova. Pollutants in the river water may also cause increased damage to ecosystems in reservoirs downstream, created by two dams, known as Djerdap Dam I and Djerdap Dam II. The generating systems are partly owned by Yugoslavia and partly by Romania.

Transformers and Depleted Uranium

NATO bombed electrical transformers in Yugoslavia as a way of disrupting that country's power system. Some of these transformers contained polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Because of their persistent toxicity, the manufacture and use of PCBs are now widely banned.

NATO used armor-piercing depleted uranium (DU) munitions in Yugoslavia. DU munitions were also used in Iraq. Depleted uranium is a radioactive and toxic heavy metal. DU munitions can catch fire and be converted to an aerosolized oxide. The oxide powder could be breathed in by people in the vicinity resulting in radiation doses to their lungs. In both Yugoslavia and Iraq, DU munitions were used in the context of chemical pollution. About one-seventh of the US armed forces personnel who served in the 1991 Gulf War have been afflicted with one or more of the complex of symptoms, collectively called Gulf War Syndrome. While all these symptoms could not have been caused by depleted uranium alone, DU may have played a role. The combination of contaminants, including potential synergistic effects between chemicals and between combinations of chemicals and depleted uranium, is worrisome.

Nuclear Safety and Proliferation

The NATO bombing also increased nuclear safety and proliferation risks. First, a small nuclear research institute located near Belgrade has two research reactors (the larger one has been shut for years) and significant quantities of stored nuclear waste (see Table 1). An errant bomb could have had serious environmental and public health consequences if it hit the site, particularly the waste storage area. Furthermore, weapons-usable highly enriched uranium (HEU) is still present at the site. During the bombing, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) suspended inspections of the facility which are conducted to ensure that the approximately 60 kg of HEU (enough for one or two nuclear bombs, depending on design) are not diverted.

The second nuclear danger is associated with the six nuclear power reactors in Bulgaria. The Kozloduy station is downriver from Yugoslavia along the Danube (see Tables 3 and 4). There exists the potential for operational problems due to contaminants in the Danube interfering with the condenser cooling systems of the power plant. For instance, ethylene dichloride could foul the reactor's cooling water intakes or pumping systems. Four of the reactors are of an older design (VVER 440-230) that is especially vulnerable to accidents. The National Academy of Sciences noted in a 1995 report that the VVER 440-230 reactors

... do not have containments, a major difference in safety from international standards. The early models (VVER 440-230) were not designed to withstand major earthquakes or the level of cooling water losses which Western reactors are designed to survive, have less redundancy in their safety systems, lack emergency operating procedures and training simulators to assist operation in responding to upset conditions, and otherwise fall far short of internationally accepted safety standards, such as those of the IAEA ... As a result, some of the VVER 440-230s have been shut down (in Russia and Armenia and also in eastern Germany). [NAS, Management and Disposal of Excess Weapons Plutonium: Reactor-related Options (National Academy Press: Washington, DC, 1995, p. 136)].

In addition to the inherent design flaws of the reactors, over $100 million dollars has been spent on Kozloduy units 1-4 since the early 1990s to try to remedy serious deficiencies in the physical condition and operation of the reactors. International assistance paid for upgraded safety and other physical systems and improvements in operations and management. Despite this, the European Union has been pushing for the early shutdown of the reactors. This would mean closing the first two units by 2002 or earlier and units three and four a few years ahead of their scheduled 2010 and 2012 closures.

Sources: National Public Radio, All Things Considered, May 24, 1999; Federation of American Scientists Public Interest Report, May/June 1999, p.12; Chris Hedges, "Serbian Town Bombed by NATO Fears Effects of Toxic Chemicals," The New York Times, July 14, 1999.