Chernobyl Aftermath

Mythopoeika

I am a meat popsicle
Joined
Sep 18, 2001
Messages
35,314
Likes
21,133
Points
309
Location
Inside a starship, watching puny humans from afar
#61
Sad loss but he enjoyed himself, he rang me one day and out of the blue said
he was saying good by as he had been given 10 days to live, we live a distance
apart and I heard nothing so thought he had passed, about 2 years later I get
a phone call and it's him, after I had told him he was supposed to be dead and
it was dam inconsiderate of him not to be he invited us to his wedding, what a
good do it was to, last time I saw him was at a Hill clime and he was feeling
fine, it was only a year back when I saw another friend and he mentioned he
had passed than I knew he had gone.
At least he had some time (longer than 10 days) in which to catch up with friends.
 

RaM

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Mar 12, 2015
Messages
1,286
Likes
1,930
Points
154
Location
NW UK
#63
I still haven't got my head round "Half Life" if it means that at half life it
will no longer be a danger that's fine, but if it means that if say it would be
powerful enough to kill you 10 times over when released but at half life it
is only strong enough to kill you 5 times over I don't find that very reassuring.
:Givingup::reap:
 

INT21

Antediluvian
Joined
Jul 18, 2016
Messages
5,098
Likes
3,625
Points
229
#65
RaM

An example. Uranium decays to lead.

If you want to examine an interesting decay process, look up the Thorium cycle for nuclear reaction.

I recommend 'Superfuel' by Richard Martin.

It will also make clear why the powers that be will not build Thorium power stations.

INT21

(There are a couple of experimental Thorium fueled power stations though)
 

Mythopoeika

I am a meat popsicle
Joined
Sep 18, 2001
Messages
35,314
Likes
21,133
Points
309
Location
Inside a starship, watching puny humans from afar
#66
If you want to examine an interesting decay process, look up the Thorium cycle for nuclear reaction.

I recommend 'Superfuel' by Richard Martin.

It will also make clear why the powers that be will not build Thorium power stations.
Probably because Thorium reactors can't be used to produce Plutonium.
 

INT21

Antediluvian
Joined
Jul 18, 2016
Messages
5,098
Likes
3,625
Points
229
#67
..Probably because Thorium reactors can't be used to produce Plutonium...


And this can't be used to produce bombs.

So a much safer nuclear technology is sidelined because the war pigs are afraid they won't be able to produce more killing machines.

INT21
 
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Messages
48,087
Likes
19,562
Points
284
Location
Eblana
#69
It's a tourist hotspot.


“YOU GUYS READY to get some radiation?!”

It’s 8:00 a.m., and we’re next to a McDonald’s in the center of Kyiv, huddled around a cluster of tour vans. “CHERNOBYL,” one reads, along with the yellow-and-black symbol for radiation. “Trips all your friends will be jealous of.”

Misha is our bro-ish, affable tour guide, wearing a T-shirt and track pants, and his jokes about radioactivity will become a common motif of the trip. “You guys all eat meat?” he asks, planning our lunch break. “Radioactive meat?”

We have each paid $299 for a two-day, all-inclusive tour of Chernobyl, the site of the worst nuclear accident in history. In 1986, a reactor at Chernobyl’s nuclear plant exploded, spewing radiation into the sky. The authorities tried to cover it up for several days until they were forced to admit there was a problem. They then hastily evacuated 200,000 people from the vicinity. A 30-kilometer area around the plant, known as the “exclusion zone,” remains off-limits to anyone without special permission. It probably will stay that way forever.

https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/letter-from-chernobyl/
 

AlienView

"Stargate Explorer"
Joined
Aug 11, 2017
Messages
176
Likes
111
Points
44
Location
Cyberspace
#70
And is anyone considering the consequences? - Like war humanity never learns and will try again
- maybe the next time the good guys will win?

Since Chernobyl we have the "
Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster"

Some say this disaster it still happening - Supposedly the Japanese Government
says it is under control - and .......


And the next one - a terrorist attack maybe?

How many other nuclear plants are operating in the World today?

Should they all be shut down?
 

gordonrutter

There must be a set character limit to this opt...
Staff member
Joined
Aug 3, 2001
Messages
1,771
Likes
1,465
Points
184
#75
But remember this includes several different types of reactor and whilst they all produce nuclear waste and have the potential to release radioactive material there are potential problems unique to each design, and similarly safeguards unique to each design. The Chernobyl accident for example was a result of the type of reactor coupled with negligence and bad luck.
 

OneWingedBird

Beloved of Ra
Joined
Aug 3, 2003
Messages
15,617
Likes
6,574
Points
284
#76
We've also got this delightful effort - massively contaminate site of multiple bomb tests was cleaned up and all the nasties put in one of the test craters and sealed up... ineffectively it seems.

The US military filled the bomb crater on Runit island with radioactive waste, capped it with concrete, and told displaced residents of the Pacific's remote Enewetak atoll they could safely return home.

But Runit's 45-centimetre (18-inch) thick concrete dome has now developed cracks.

And because the 115-metre wide crater was never lined, there are fears radioactive contaminants are leaching through the island's porous coral rock into the ocean.
Phys.org
 

AlienView

"Stargate Explorer"
Joined
Aug 11, 2017
Messages
176
Likes
111
Points
44
Location
Cyberspace
#77
Just heard on the news the Russians are not happy with the TV series
- A new Russian version of the disaster is coming out that claims the CIA was responsible ?!?!

Gorbachev has claimed that the Chernobyl Disaster was one reason for the collapse of the
Soviet Union.

What do you think ?
 

GNC

King-Sized Canary
Joined
Aug 25, 2001
Messages
27,194
Likes
11,782
Points
284
#78
Well, I don't think the CIA were behind it! It's not in the USA's interest to wipe out most of Europe and Russia, which is what would have happened had the emergency been ignored. It's a miracle that it was not worse. This new TV series will be treated with scepticism by most Russians, I suspect.
 

Mythopoeika

I am a meat popsicle
Joined
Sep 18, 2001
Messages
35,314
Likes
21,133
Points
309
Location
Inside a starship, watching puny humans from afar
#79
Just heard on the news the Russians are not happy with the TV series
- A new Russian version of the disaster is coming out that claims the CIA was responsible ?!?!

Gorbachev has claimed that the Chernobyl Disaster was one reason for the collapse of the
Soviet Union.

What do you think ?
Gorbachev is probably right. One of the few sensible Russian politicians to have lived.
But... the CIA? Why can't Russians just deal with the fact that they cocked up, big time? Accept it, take it on board, etc.
 

AlienView

"Stargate Explorer"
Joined
Aug 11, 2017
Messages
176
Likes
111
Points
44
Location
Cyberspace
#80
Gorbachev is probably right. One of the few sensible Russian politicians to have lived.
But... the CIA? Why can't Russians just deal with the fact that they cocked up, big time? Accept it, take it on board, etc.
I don't think any country wants to accept that they had borderline incompetents and design errors
in a huge nuclear reactor that blew-up and created one of the World's great disasters.

For that matter have the Japanese accepted responsibility for the
Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster ?

Some say that problem is still ongoing and the government over there is keeping
it under wraps.
 

RaM

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Mar 12, 2015
Messages
1,286
Likes
1,930
Points
154
Location
NW UK
#81
The US did just short on 1000 nuclear tests in the Nevada Dessert,
enter Sedan Crater, Nevada, USA in google earth and have a look
at all the craters, the Sedan was the biggest.
It is now a tourist attraction.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Messages
48,087
Likes
19,562
Points
284
Location
Eblana
#82
Maybe Sky would do a series about Windscale?

Over 60 years ago, Britain flirted with a nuclear catastrophe that could have resulted in a tragedy worse than Chernobyl.

The Windscale Fire remains the UK’s worst ever nuclear accident - but its chilling memory is mostly consigned to the history books.

A catastrophic meltdown was averted by the heroic actions of a few people but a subsequent 'cover up' by authorities meant they were not properly recognised for their efforts.

On October 10 1957, uranium fuel at the Windscale plant in Cumbria overheated and caught fire, setting in motion a terrifying series of events.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/windscale-fire-britains-chernobyl-covered-15774677
 

RaM

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Mar 12, 2015
Messages
1,286
Likes
1,930
Points
154
Location
NW UK
#83
We live on Morecambe bay and on about 3 occasions have seen people in full protective suits
searching the fore shore with geiger counters, not seen them for a few years now but maybe I
have not looked at the right time, they could just be monitoring Heysham nuclear station thats
only 8 miles away, seems a bit odd they are dressed like the beach will glow green at night
wile kids play in the sand at the side of them.

:dunno:
Still light up a cig withing 50 yards and they would hit the panic button, if only they knew.
 

Schrodinger's Zebra

Waiting and watching and seeking a sign..
Joined
Mar 8, 2018
Messages
2,062
Likes
3,787
Points
154
Location
.. in the wilderness
#86
Genuine question.

Why has animal- and plant- life thrived at Chernobyl since the disaster? I've tried googling, and I've found plenty of sites such as this one...
https://allthatsinteresting.com/chernobyl-animals-red-forest

... which tells us that there are animals living there, seemingly quite happy and normal, but I haven't been able to find anything that provides an explanation for it.

Are these animals somehow immune to the radiation, in the sense that they've come into the world surrounded by it and therefore their bodies have somehow inexplicably adapted to it in a way that makes them resistant to it? (I don't think that's possible, is it?)

Do they indeed succumb to radiation effects / cancer as one would expect, but because they manage to breed before this point, the generations continue on? (This still wouldn't explain why they are seemingly normal animals and not genetic mutants though).

So what is the answer? Or do we - by which I mean scientists - simply not know and therefore don't address the issue?
 

Naughty_Felid

No longer interesting
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
6,056
Likes
6,501
Points
294
#87
Genuine question.

Why has animal- and plant- life thrived at Chernobyl since the disaster? I've tried googling, and I've found plenty of sites such as this one...
https://allthatsinteresting.com/chernobyl-animals-red-forest

... which tells us that there are animals living there, seemingly quite happy and normal, but I haven't been able to find anything that provides an explanation for it.


Are these animals somehow immune to the radiation, in the sense that they've come into the world surrounded by it and therefore their bodies have somehow inexplicably adapted to it in a way that makes them resistant to it? (I don't think that's possible, is it?)

Do they indeed succumb to radiation effects / cancer as one would expect, but because they manage to breed before this point, the generations continue on? (This still wouldn't explain why they are seemingly normal animals and not genetic mutants though).

So what is the answer? Or do we - by which I mean scientists - simply not know and therefore don't address the issue?
There' no humans killing them off. Yes there are genetic mutations but most don't live long enough to grow cancers.

That would be my guess.
 

CarlosTheDJ

Antediluvian
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
5,715
Likes
5,078
Points
294
Location
Sussex
#88
There' no humans killing them off. Yes there are genetic mutations but most don't live long enough to grow cancers.

That would be my guess.
Agreed - IIRC there are thriving communities of wild dogs that are the descendants of Pripyat's pets (the ones that avoided "episode 4") but they generally don't live past five or six years old.
 

EnolaGaia

I knew the job was dangerous when I took it ...
Staff member
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
12,075
Likes
13,386
Points
309
Location
Out of Bounds
#90
Now that the second-generation containment structure is in place the original "Sarcophagus" is going to be dismantled.
Workers to dismantle crumbling 'sarcophagus' at Chernobyl by 2023

The destroyed reactor No. 4 is seen at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Station in Ukraine on April 26, 1986. UPI Photo/INS/File | License Photo

Aug. 9 (UPI) -- The hastily constructed "sarcophagus" originally built to prevent radiation leaking from the destroyed reactor at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Station is crumbling and will be torn down within four years, officials said.

SSE Chernobyl NPP, the Ukrainian company that manages the plant, has contracted Ukrbudmontazh to disassemble the dome-like structure that was built around reactor No. 4 after its catastrophic core meltdown on April 26, 1986.

The sarcophagus was expected to last for 30 years, but began to fail in less than half that time, requiring a series of reinforcements in the years that followed the disaster. A stabilization project a decade ago extended its maximum "end-of-life" service deadline to 2023.

Recent studies determined the likelihood of total collapse is "very high." ...
FULL STORY: https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-...agus-at-Chernobyl-by-2023/2221565309600/?ls=3
 
Top