1. How many people fell ill, and out of how many?

2. What percent of Ukraine's power is generated by the two reactors still working in the Chornobyl plant?

3. About how many burial sites are there in the 30 kilometer Chornobyl zone?

5 Questions For The Panel

1. What proof do you have that supports your side?
2. For safe: Will it ever become unsafe again?
3. What would it take to persuade you to believe it is unsafe/safe?
4. How many tests were conducted to prove your side?
5. Do you believe EVERYTHING you read/write about your side?

8/30/10 Catalyst

1. The "wet season in 1977 caused the stuff in the canal to ooze up out of the ground.

2. Some of the health hazards are birth defects and diseases.

3. Streams, creeks, and other bodies of water are affected by the love canal because the chemicals were seeping out of the containment and going into the water.

Article/Video Thoughts

In the article, it says that the oil is becoming less dangerous because there's less of it, but I'm not so sure about that. See, I think the oil is still just as dangerous, there's just not as much. And, in my opinion, I don't think it's even going away completely if we use chemical dispersants, because chemical dispersants just break the oil up, they don't make it go away. And even if it is going away, I still don't think it's becoming less dangerous, because it's still oil, and it's still hurting our oceans and the animals in and near it.

8th grade DLC reflection

Are they dangerous to the animals in the ocean?
When the oil spill is done, will the ocean animal's population be able to go back up to what it was before?
Are there more pros than cons with using chemical dispersants, or more cons than pros?