Russian, Ukrainian & FSU Information & Discussion Forums

Information & Chat About the Former Soviet Union => Russian, Ukrainian and FSU Towns & Cities => Topic started by: mirror on August 29, 2009, 08:02:56 AM

Title: Chernobyl - Чернобыль - При́пять - Pripyat
Post by: mirror on August 29, 2009, 08:02:56 AM
Maybe I missed a thread about Chernobyl (at При́пять/Pripyat) but I think it is important to tell to newbies about it again.

I hope you know that Kiev was in a zone of radiating defeat.



[attachimg=1]




[attachimg=2]




[attachimg=3]
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: TwoBitBandit on August 29, 2009, 11:19:04 AM
This is a great site from a woman who likes to ride her motorcycle through the Chernobyl zone and take pictures:

http://www.angelfire.com/extreme4/kiddofspeed/chapter1.html
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: Herrie on August 29, 2009, 11:58:30 AM
This is a great site from a woman who likes to ride her motorcycle through the Chernobyl zone and take pictures:

http://www.angelfire.com/extreme4/kiddofspeed/chapter1.html
Yes that site is very interesting!
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: alenika on August 29, 2009, 12:20:14 PM
Yes, very interesting. Thanks TwoBit.
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: 2tallbill on August 29, 2009, 12:22:23 PM
This is a great site from a woman who likes to ride her motorcycle through the Chernobyl zone and take pictures:

http://www.angelfire.com/extreme4/kiddofspeed/chapter1.html

Good info two bit

I like the way she writes and describes things example:

"All of this happy horseshit was for the May 1st Labor Day parade."

Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: Manny on August 29, 2009, 02:15:44 PM
I read that site a couple of months ago.

I have driven nearby that area, and it is quite chilling even today. Wiki says this:

Quote
The Chernobyl Disaster was a nuclear reactor accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine, then part of the Soviet Union. It is considered to be the worst nuclear power plant disaster in history and the only level 7 instance on the International Nuclear Event Scale. It resulted in a severe release of radioactivity following a massive power excursion which destroyed the reactor. Two people died in the initial steam explosion, but most deaths from the accident were attributed to radiation.

On 26 April 1986 01:23:45 a.m. (UTC+3) reactor number four at the Chernobyl plant, near Pripyat in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, exploded. Further explosions and the resulting fire sent a plume of highly radioactive fallout into the atmosphere and over an extensive geographical area. Four hundred times more fallout was released than had been by the atomic bombing of Hiroshima.

The plume drifted over extensive parts of the western Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, Western Europe,and Northern Europe, with light nuclear rain falling as far as Ireland. Large areas in Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia were badly contaminated, resulting in the evacuation and resettlement of over 336,000 people. According to official post-Soviet data,[3] about 60% of the radioactive fallout landed in Belarus.
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: skiingandrunning on August 29, 2009, 04:03:07 PM
OK, I have a man who works for me who is a big game addict and he mentioned the following game "STALKER: Shadow of Chernobyl" and he said that it's very accurate in regards to what you'll see in the exclusion zone based on what he's seen from the actual imagery. 

Also, there is a very good documentary on this: 

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e5f_1201032645

I think there is another one as well, but I do not have the link for it.

Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: skiingandrunning on August 29, 2009, 05:21:23 PM
The post explosion is called "Battle for Chenobyl" and it's a little more riveting.  Unfortunately, these are only clips from them.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=5ab_1178102816
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: Boris on August 29, 2009, 07:01:24 PM
My driver for my first trip to Kharkov was a physics student when the disaster hit. He was rousted out at 3AM from his university to work at the site. Now he has a special Chernobyl veteran parking pass that allowed him to park almost anywhere. Some fringe benefit....
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: mirror on August 29, 2009, 08:08:41 PM
Infection zone radioactive caesium-137.
You can see there Belarus (Homel,Mogilev,Bryansk) also.
Have a look where does your girl live.
I hope everybody knows that a radiation is the biggest factor for a genetic anomalies.
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: TwoBitBandit on August 30, 2009, 01:12:27 AM
Infection zone radioactive caesium-137.
You can see there Belarus (Homel,Mogilev,Bryansk) also.
Have a look where does your girl live.
I hope everybody knows that a radiation is the biggest factor for a genetic anomalies.

I always make sure I pay careful attention to FSU girls the first time I'm alone with them in the dark if I think she may have ever lived near the Chernobyl zone.  If they glow in the dark, that's it: the relationship is over.  I don't date radioactive girls!
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: mirror on August 30, 2009, 03:40:31 AM
Good for you.

It is interesting that there some more anomaly natural zones.If you see trees like that then you ,maybe,know that it is anomaly zone.



[attachimg=#]
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: Boris on August 30, 2009, 05:33:23 AM
http://www.angelfire.com/extreme4/kiddofspeed/imag2.1.jpg
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: Markje on August 30, 2009, 03:24:17 PM
Infection zone radioactive caesium-137.
You can see there Belarus (Homel,Mogilev,Bryansk) also.
Have a look where does your girl live.
I hope everybody knows that a radiation is the biggest factor for a genetic anomalies.

The winds blew most of the Radioactive cloud towards western Europe. In Netherlands it was forbidden to grow spinach due to the high iron content up until 2002!!!
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: skiingandrunning on August 30, 2009, 05:29:17 PM
Quote
nfection zone radioactive caesium-137.  You can see there Belarus (Homel,Mogilev,Bryansk) also.
Have a look where does your girl live..

True, and I remember a lady I went to see a couple of times (she lived in Minsk in 1986 and now living in Moscow) telling me a story of how everyone in Minsk was dusting off shoot falling from the air that came from the reactor accident.  But, I'll be honest, as it came to her health I was more concerned about the fact that she was a heavy smoker for most of her life. 

Mirror, I'll also say that it's not just the fallout zone, but other areas you need to be concerned with as I visited Karabash which has an active population living in a valley where nothing grows and the drinking water for the city of Chelyabinsk is fed from a stream that flows through that city (tributary of the Mias River).  Even Perm (I think that is your city)  has problems with Hydrogenic Heavy Metals Pollution in the soils.  And lastly, I have been told by a Russian that American reliance on genetically modified food will cause huge portions of the population to become sterile in a few generations (my response to her was, "with the levels of pollution in Russia, do you not think the food supply is becoming mutated without science").  Anyways, I think most people going to the former FSU realize that the environment is not always pristine, but I do not think it should keep anyone from deciding to visit or meet someone from there as the human race has used the world as a trash can for a long time and it's not just a Russian problem (e.g. I was in Hong Kong last in 2006 and I was amazed at how bad the smog (from the industrial plants in China) had become since my first visit in 1995). 

Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: mendeleyev on August 30, 2009, 09:59:56 PM
The small closed city of Chernobyl sits next to При́пять (Pripyat), a city formerly of about 50,000 built to house power plant and military families. Chernobyl was also home to a large military radar station for the Soviet Union.


[attachimg=1]


[attachimg=2]


Nuclear power stations were presented as being an achievement of Soviet engineering, where nuclear power was harnessed for peaceful projects. The slogan мирный атом (peaceful atom) was popular during those times.

Initially the plant was intended to be built only 25 km from Kiev, but the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences, among other bodies, expressed concern about the station being too close to the city, and so the station, together with Prypiat, were built in their current location — about 100 km from Kiev. After the disaster was reluctantly admitted by the Soviets, the Soviets claimed that the city of Pripyat had been evacuated in two days.

Well not really in two days. It was five days after the accident before local residents were evacuated. But one must count the five days of inaction. If we're willing to accept the truth that residents were evacuated on days 6 and 7, then I guess one could claim that it only took 2 days for the evacuation.

Truth: only after radiation levels set off alarms at the Forsmark Nuclear Power Plant in Sweden did the Soviet Union admit that an accident had occurred, but authorities attempted to conceal the scale of the disaster. To evacuate the city of Pripyat, the following warning message was reported on local radio: "An accident has occurred at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant. One of the atomic reactors has been damaged. Aid will be given to those affected and a committee of government inquiry has been set up."

The government committee formed to investigate the accident, led by Valeri Legasov, arrived at Chernobyl in the evening of 26 April. By that time two people were dead and 52 were in hospital. Nobody had yet been evacuated.


[attachimg=3]
Evac vehicles left because of radiation.


The local firemen and power plant crew who took the lead in fighting the fire were sick within hours. Two men died of smoke inhalation at the scene. The others were first treated by the medical officer of the plant, then the only Pripyat ambulance was called to the station. After the examination the staff members were sent to the city hospital where the first "liquidator" died. The Soviets gave the name "liquidators" to those who responded and worked at the disaster site.


[attachimg=4]


The majority of the firefighters were soon sent to a special clinic in Moscow via Kiev. Most of them died in the month of May and are buried in Moscow (Mitino cemetery). The first casualty died at Pripyat hospital and was kept in the hospital morgue for some time after the evacuation.

Several safety zones have been set up, but the main one is now called the "Zone Alienation." There are zones marking the Kilometer Zone, The Exclusion Zone, The Fourth Zone, or simply The Zone around the disaster site.


[attachimg=5]


The radiation danger zone today in 2009 still includes the northernmost parts of Kyiv and Zhytomyr and adjoins the country's border with Belarus. A separately administered Belarusian zone continues across the border.

Surprisingly people still live in Chernobly! Most of the residents are elderly with no families elsewhere. One Orthodox church remains active with a priest from Kyiv coming each Sunday. The remaining inhabitants reside in houses marked with signs stating that the "Owner of this house lives here". Workers on watch and administrative personnel of the Zone of Alienation are stationed in the city on a long term basis.


[attachimg=6]
Chernobyl church still functions.
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: mendeleyev on August 30, 2009, 10:04:54 PM
[attachimg=#]


Jeremy Page from Moscow, The Times (UK)
London, United Kingdom, Saturday, April 22, 2006

20 years on, the first firefighter at the scene says the human cost is
being whitewashed, writes Jeremy Page from Moscow...

It was 1.40am when Viktor Birkun woke to the sound of his doorbell ringing.

He knew that something serious had happened as soon as he opened the door
and saw one of his colleagues from the fire station. But it was only as
they drove out of his home town of Pripyat, Ukraine, that he realised the
scale of what is still considered the worst man-made disaster in history.

Fourteen minutes earlier, at 1.26am on April 26, 1986 -20 years to the day
on Wednesday -Reactor 4 at the Chernobyl nuclear plant had exploded,
releasing 100 times the radiation of the atomic bomb that had exploded over
Hiroshima.

"There was only the light from the fire -black and red flames and lumps of
molten material everywhere," Mr Birkun said.

"The reactor's roof had blown off, throwing asphalt, concrete and graphite
upwards and outwards. Where the graphite landed it turned everything to lava."

As the plant managers and technicians fled or frantically tried to contact
Moscow, the firefighters rushed straight into the inferno. With only a
cotton uniform to protect him, Mr Birkun drove his fire truck over the
reactor's metal roof, now lying on the ground, and up to 15m (50ft) from
Reactor 4.

Using his bare hands he lowered the engine's siphon into the nearest
cooling pool to suck up water for his colleagues as they battled 300 fires
around the complex.

Within seconds he began to feel the effects of the gamma rays that were
bombarding his internal organs.

He started vomiting about every 30 seconds. He grew dizzy and weak. After
two hours he could not stand.

Doctors later gave him a certificate indicating that he had received 260
ber (biological equivalents of roentgen), equivalent to 1,000 years of
background radiation.

But experts estimate that the radiation that he absorbed was even higher,
and enough to cause acute radiation sickness (ARS).

"I'm amazed he survived," Michael Repacholi, the top radiation expert at
the World Health Organisation, said.

"It was a hugely heroic effort, and I suspect anyone who understood how
much radiation was there would never have gone in."

Twenty years on Mr Birkun knows he is lucky to be alive and living in
Moscow with his wife, Nadezhda, and his daughters, Lyudmila and Valentina.

Of the 134 "liquidators" with a diagnosis of ARS, 28 died in 1986,
including at least six firefighters. Mr Birkun, now 56, is proud of the
sacrifice that his team made to reduce the cloud of smoke that spread
radioactive particles across Europe and even as far as Japan.

"These were the people who saved Europe," he said, fingering a
black-and-white photograph of his former colleagues. "If they had not done
what they did, the fire would have spread to Reactors 1, 2 and 3."

But he and many others among the 600,000 liquidators who cleaned up
Chernobyl are infuriated by what they see as official attempts to whitewash
the human cost of the disaster.

Last year the United Nations issued a report saying that the number of
deaths caused by Chernobyl was fewer than 50 -far lower than previous
estimates. The report by the UN's Chernobyl Forum said that the eventual
number of radiation- related deaths among the 600,000 liquidators would be
about 4,000.

In the West the report has restarted a bitter debate over the dangers of
the nuclear industry. Greenpeace, the environmental group, accused the UN
this week of whitewashing the disaster.

It issued its own report, based on statistics from Belarus, predicting that
the number of terminal cancer cases caused directly by Chernobyl would be
93,000.

And it extrapolated from demographic statistics that 200,000 people had
already died of radiation-related illnesses in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus.
Nuclear power is now far less controversial in those countries; Russia is
planning to build 40 reactors by 2030.



[attachimg=#] Abandoned apartment house
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: mendeleyev on August 30, 2009, 10:12:36 PM
Interview with Mikhail Gorbachev
[attachimg=#]


BBC NEWS, United Kingdom, Saturday, April 22, 2006

Mikhail Gorbachev had been Soviet leader for only 13 months when the
Chernobyl nuclear accident happened. He describes how the authorities
responded and reflects on the lessons from the disaster.

I received a call at 0500 on 26 April 1986, informing me that a major
accident, followed by a fire, had just occurred in the fourth block of the
Chernobyl nuclear power station, but that the reactor was still intact.

In those early hours, until the evening of 26 April, we had not yet realised
that the reactor had actually exploded and that there had been a huge
discharge of radioactive materials into the atmosphere.

Nobody had any idea that we were facing a major nuclear disaster. Naturally,
we can regret, today, after the fact, that we did not grasp everything more
quickly.

[At the time], I was astounded: how was such a thing possible? Nuclear
scientists had always assured the country's leadership that our nuclear
reactors were completely safe.
                                  
Immediately after the accident, the management of the station gave the order
to flood the reactor with water, because they were not aware that the
reactor had exploded and there was nothing left to extinguish. Finally, the
pool under the reactor and some underground locations were filled up with
water.

Scientists were afraid that if the hot mass of nuclear fuel and graphite
were to rupture the bottom of the reactor's tank and fall into radioactive
water, this would create the conditions for a further nuclear explosion.

We were not panicking... but we urgently needed to pump out this water. This
was completed at the beginning of May. In this way, such an explosion,
however slight its probability, was effectively prevented. There were other
threats that needed to be eliminated with the utmost urgency.

Firstly, there remained the danger that the mass at the heart of the reactor
would rupture its tank and even blast through the foundations of the
building housing the reactor, so coming into contact with the soil and
leading to a major contamination of groundwater.

We also had to prevent the radioactive waste and debris from around the
plant from contaminating the waters of the Dnieper and Desna rivers. This
required operations on a massive scale...

But, of course, our main concern was to evacuate the population from the
most contaminated areas.

On 27 April we performed an exemplary operation: in just three hours the
entire population of Pripyat, located very close to the power station, was
evacuated.

And in the early days of May, we evacuated everybody living within a 30km
radius of the power station, in dozens of localities: a total of 116,000
people.
                                    
Quite simply, in the beginning even the top experts did not realise the
gravity of the situation.

We needed several weeks to obtain precise evaluations and to draw up maps
of the contamination. Certainly, I will not exclude the possibility that
certain functionaries, who were afraid of being accused of not having taken
the correct measures, had a tendency to embellish their reports.

But, for the most part, I believe that I was kept informed in good faith by
my representatives. We did not cancel the May Day parades [in Kiev and
Minsk] because we still did not have information on the full extent of the
disaster.

I confess that we were afraid of panic - you can imagine for yourselves the
consequences of a terrible panic in a town of several million inhabitants. I
admit that it was a grave mistake.

We published the first information on the accident on 28 April, in Pravda,
but to speak to the people, I needed a more substantial and precise
analysis. That is why I waited almost three weeks before speaking on
television.
                                  
Nowadays, experts think that our fears over the possible contamination of
groundwater were exaggerated, and that it was not worth the trouble of
installing a "cushion" [concrete slab] underneath the reactor.

The construction of the sarcophagus, all the measures for aquatic
protection, most of the measures aimed at decontamination - these were good
decisions, even though some of the deactivation did ultimately prove to be
superfluous.

We decontaminated areas which were later evacuated. Nobody knew, for
instance, that Pripyat, that beautiful modern city, would find itself
forever uninhabitable.At first, scientists thought that the population of
Pripyat would be able to return to the city around the end of May or
beginning of June. People left leaving their fridges full of food, without
even unplugging them, since they expected to return quickly.
                                  
The explosion at Chernobyl showed that we are capable of contaminating the
planet for the long term, and of leaving a terrible legacy for future
generations.

Today, mankind faces a challenge so huge that, by comparison, the Cold
War appears like an incongruous vestige from the past.

Chernobyl clearly demonstrated that each disaster is unique and that no
country can be prepared for every eventuality. That is why we must deploy
the maximum amount of effort to prevent disasters. One must not compromise
on nuclear safety. The social, ecological and economic consequences of these
kind of disasters are much too heavy in every sense of the word.



[attachimg=#]


Mendeleyev note:
The account as related by Mr Gorbachev don't quite match the facts as revealed by reality, especially in the long delay in announcing to the Soviet people what had happened, in warning neighboring countries, and in evacuation times.

There are many things to admire about this former Soviet leader. The actions of the government during the crisis in no manner matches anything close to admiration.
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: mendeleyev on August 30, 2009, 10:19:26 PM
In addition to the deer, wolves and small animals enjoying the area, fish are spawning in the former cooling channels.


[attachimg=1] 



[attachimg=2]
Some fish are really big!



[attachimg=3]
Old bottled water dispenser.



[attachimg=4]
Old Kvas kiosk.



[attachimg=5]
Chernobyl memorial square.



[attachimg=6]
Tulips in spring.



[attachimg=7]
Area tourists use for photos.

Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: mirror on August 31, 2009, 03:57:54 AM
skiingandrunning ,

You can't compare Chernobyl with any other Environmental contaminations.In this competition Chernobyl is a number one in a meaning of a danger.

I think we need an expert opinion in this question.Maybe some experts-here?

(I don't live in Perm by the way).
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: mirror on August 31, 2009, 04:07:16 AM

The winds blew most of the Radioactive cloud towards western Europe. In Netherlands it was forbidden to grow spinach due to the high iron content up until 2002!!!


Because of Chernobyl?
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: mirror on August 31, 2009, 04:09:52 AM
I wrote several lines that would make a longshoreman
run away blushing but then I deleted them.

Mirror isn't going to change because I write a scathing
post pointing out her various short comings.



What would you like to know more about? Chernobyl? Anomaly zones?
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: Markje on August 31, 2009, 08:30:37 AM

The winds blew most of the Radioactive cloud towards western Europe. In Netherlands it was forbidden to grow spinach due to the high iron content up until 2002!!!


Because of Chernobyl?

Yep, background radiation was upto 20 times higher 2 days after the explosion. Spinach absorbs much iron and therefore caught much more radiation than was safe to consume.
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: skiingandrunning on August 31, 2009, 09:45:15 AM
Quote
You can't compare Chernobyl with any other Environmental contaminations
.

This is very true and your comments are valid!  I talked to a doctor about a year ago who worked in Chenigov and her comments supported everything you have said and wanted others to become aware of. 

Still we are altering our world in such ways that we'll be dealing with the consequences well into the future and these much smaller environmental contamination's are spiking cancer rates and other diseases in the affected areas (I think you probably know this much better than myself).   So my comment was not to say you are wrong, more to say that we should not use where a person grew up (e.g. in the area affected by radiation) as a basis of suitability as we can find similar worrisome anomalies all over our world today.
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: mirror on August 31, 2009, 07:27:19 PM
skiingandrunning,

don't say that your lady is from Chernobyl ,pls.You will break my heart.
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: mirror on August 31, 2009, 07:30:54 PM
Yep, background radiation was upto 20 times higher 2 days after the explosion. Spinach absorbs much iron and therefore caught much more radiation than was safe to consume.


People in Kiev and other near Chernobyl areas were eating fat for long time after 1986 because fat was only one food what didn't contain Cesium. 
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: Zabikol on December 04, 2009, 03:08:11 AM
Have a look where does your girl live.
I hope everybody knows that a radiation is the biggest factor for a genetic anomalies.

I actually did check out a fallout map like that years ago when we first started dating. Nastja is from the south of Ukraine though so I was home safe. Until like I think our 3rd vacation together when I found out her dad works at a nuke plant in the South and the city she grew up in; in essence just exists around the power station.

Oh well, here's hoping my future offspring have cool super powers, no emo spiderman crap.

I visited her folks Oct/Nov this year and got to get a little tour of the plant (no restricted places though and no photos), It was absolutely awesome and terrifying it all looked so old and I kept thinking of the enormous destructive power.


PS locals don't like Armageddon jokes, too soon.
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: WestCoast on December 04, 2009, 03:25:55 AM
Have a look where does your girl live.
I hope everybody knows that a radiation is the biggest factor for a genetic anomalies.

I actually did check out a fallout map like that years ago when we first started dating. Nastja is from the south of Ukraine though so I was home safe. Until like I think our 3rd vacation together when I found out her dad works at a nuke plant in the South and the city she grew up in; in essence just exists around the power station.

Oh well, here's hoping my future offspring have cool super powers, no emo spiderman crap.

I visited her folks Oct/Nov this year and got to get a little tour of the plant (no restricted places though and no photos), It was absolutely awesome and terrifying it all looked so old and I kept thinking of the enormous destructive power.


PS locals don't like Armageddon jokes, too soon.


Chernobyl and Three Mile Island are the reasons that there won't be any nuclear plants in BC, Canada although Ontario might get a new one if the provincial government has its way. 

The French on the other hand don't seem all that bothered by the problems with Chernobyl and Three Mile Island.  They are happily building nuclear power plants and doing it quite safely. 

Don't know who's right, just as long as I have to turn on a light to read a newspaper in a dark room instead of glowing in the dark.  :laugh: 
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: Markje on December 04, 2009, 06:31:25 AM
Last month in the news, it seems Netherlands, in the year 2001, narrowly escaped a nuke-meltdown in the city of "Petten" , also due to human error.

Luckily, the computer still corrected the error and prevented the meltdown.

It was kept firmly under the lid, until the (now retired) director of the plant wrote his memoires.

For those who understand dutch, it is named 'darwin meets einstein'
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: ldelo on December 04, 2009, 09:48:48 AM
Infection zone radioactive caesium-137.
You can see there Belarus (Homel,Mogilev,Bryansk) also.
Have a look where does your girl live.
I hope everybody knows that a radiation is the biggest factor for a genetic anomalies.

The winds blew most of the Radioactive cloud towards western Europe. In Netherlands it was forbidden to grow spinach due to the high iron content up until 2002!!!


Actually, as the initial minutes and hours of the event dragged on into days and then weeks, the plume shifted directions dramatically and much of it went first north and west,. then pretty much north, and finally swung around to the north east. At least that's how I recall it.

Just after the initial event, a very large amount of the heavier elements in the very dense/thick/heavy plume, which had been ejected forcefully and then held aloft because of the intense heat, pretty much cooled and descended together in one giant "patch". Unfortunately Gomel was pretty much right in the middle of that patch.

Bryansk also took a pretty big dose because of similar circumstances.

However, it's fair to say that much of north-eastern Ukraine, south and particular south-east Beloruss, and west-south-west Russia took the brunt of it.

But the tragic thing is that for all that Chernobyl was bad, it was just the tip of the iceberg as far as how tragically, inhumanly, unfathomably, staggeringly coldhearted and cruel and just plain evil the Soviets were in terms of irradiating huge swaths of the FSU and Rodina Mat (and her peoples) in their pursuit of keeping up with the west.

From Mayak to Kyshtym to "Lake" Karachay to Omsk to Tomsk (7) to Krasnoyarsk to any number of the cities along the rail lines that carried the nuclear materials to and fro and all the cities/towns/villages near or downstream from all those same things plus many of the atomnaya electrostantsia, on and on and on, not to mention the Tekka, Ob, Khennisey (spelling?) rivers and the many tributaries and lakes and streams and etc...

And also the very "hot" spent nuclear navy reactor cores and other parts/pieces/liquids/etc the Soviet navy simply dumped in the ocean waters to the north for lack of anything better to do with them. There have been incidences of highly toxic and radioactive reactor core components showing up in fishing nets and washing up on shores.

The Soviets did the same thing with biological weapons (which were accidentally released in Ekaterinburg and allegedly elsewhere and which they openly experimented with in above-ground unisolated tests on open ground in Kazahkstan), chemical weapons, and the industrial/chemical/nuclear wastes produced by all the industries that produced all those WMDs.

It is a tragic history of staggering proportions and unspeakable inhumanity that is Stalins' and the Communists' legacy, involving the calloused and intentional irradiation (to staggering levels) of arguably a million or more people for no better reason than because they just didn't care.

For all that Russia (and by extension, the FSU) is the single largest landmass in the world, it also has the distinction of being one with arguably the largest percentage of it's overall surface area and population having been irradiated. And if not in terms of fractional size, then in terms of sheer numbers of people and square kilometers, there is no place that comes anywhere close. Not even close.
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: ldelo on December 04, 2009, 10:05:20 AM
skiingandrunning ,

You can't compare Chernobyl with any other Environmental contaminations.In this competition Chernobyl is a number one in a meaning of a danger.

I think we need an expert opinion in this question.Maybe some experts-here?

(I don't live in Perm by the way).

I am no expert per se, but have degrees in math and physics and have made nuclear power and weapons, and the entire set of industries that support those and etc, an unofficial study and passion of mine.

That being said...

Chernobyl is the worst single event.

However, there were a number of other incidents (or long running practices) that are similarly bad. And they were all uniquely Soviet. Nowhere else in the world can come anywhere close to what the Soviets did.

The Lake Karachay incident is generally considered to be Chernobyl-like.

As was Kyshtym.

As was the wholesale dumping of low, mid, and high level radioactive waste into rivers for years on end.

As was the use of open-cycle cooling systems on reactors (that is, they pumped water out of a convenient body of water or river, through the reactor as coolant, and then just dumped that coolant - radioactivity and trace heavy metals and toxins and all - back into the body of water or river.)

And the wholesale dumping of spent navy nuclear reactor cores and etc into the oceans to the north.

And if the incredible amounts of nuclear waste pumped into the earth near Krasnoyarsk ever starts to leak out of the geologic formations they were pumped into...
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: ldelo on December 04, 2009, 10:24:31 AM

The winds blew most of the Radioactive cloud towards western Europe. In Netherlands it was forbidden to grow spinach due to the high iron content up until 2002!!!


Because of Chernobyl?

Yep, background radiation was upto 20 times higher 2 days after the explosion. Spinach absorbs much iron and therefore caught much more radiation than was safe to consume.


[ Emphasis added by moi... ]

Markje, I am not aiming my comments at you, but I believe this needs to be addressed...

The way I understand it and having looked over the radiological (versus time) maps of the event...

It is an exaggeration to say that Europe took most the hit. Europe *was* hit, and non-trivially at that.

As I've already said elsewhere, non-trivial parts of the Ukraine, Beloruss, and Russia took the bulk of the fallout, and while what happened to Europe (and to a lesser extent the rest of the northern hemisphere as the fallout circled the globe) was tragic, it was also nowhere near as bad.
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: ldelo on December 04, 2009, 11:14:54 AM

Chernobyl and Three Mile Island are the reasons that there won't be any nuclear plants in BC, Canada although Ontario might get a new one if the provincial government has its way. 

The French on the other hand don't seem all that bothered by the problems with Chernobyl and Three Mile Island.  They are happily building nuclear power plants and doing it quite safely. 

Don't know who's right, just as long as I have to turn on a light to read a newspaper in a dark room instead of glowing in the dark.  :laugh: 

Last month in the news, it seems Netherlands, in the year 2001, narrowly escaped a nuke-meltdown in the city of "Petten" , also due to human error.

Luckily, the computer still corrected the error and prevented the meltdown.

It was kept firmly under the lid, until the (now retired) director of the plant wrote his memoires.

For those who understand dutch, it is named 'darwin meets einstein'


Here's my understanding...

Caveat: I have degrees in math and physics but make no claim to be a nuclear power/reactor engineer or physicist. If I err or am incorrect in what follows, please do correct me but leave out the ad hominem attacks...


Unless the Netherlands uses antiquated graphite-moderated reactor designs (ie typical Soviet designs) instead of typical western water-moderated core designs...

A core meltdown (like Chernobyl and Three Mile Island) is not the same kind of event and one cannot happen with the other design.

Water-moderated reactors used in the west are much more fail safe in the sense that *if* there's a loss of coolant (the water) then by definition the moderator (the water) also is lost (because the water is both the coolant AND moderator) and the reactor core moves towards nominal (low) power levels.

In other words, losing coolant means essentially and at least partially shutting down the reactor.

Also, in at least the western designs that I know of, the reactor cores are generally and at least partially fail-safed geometrically.

That is because the voids in the core (gaps between the fuel and control rods, etc) are filled with water which, being a liquid, will flow (even *if* as superheated high-pressure steam) and allow the core geometry to change, and that change in geometry will move the reactors back towards nominal power levels.

Conversely, loss of coolant in a graphite-moderated reactor does NOT equate to a loss of moderator.

Worse yet, because the moderator (which fills the voids in the core) is a solid (graphite), it actually prevents (at least initially and in the absence of some horrendously energetic event) geometric changes in the core.

So if a loss of coolant event is accompanied by physical damage that hampers physically removing the solid (graphite) moderator or various control elements, then the reactor is left in whatever power state it was last in with no coolant and no way to remove the moderator or control elements (and thus no way to lower the reactivity level or control the reactivity at all.)

At that point the reactor will runaway thermally and sooner or later, kaboom!

There's another element of graphite-moderated reactor core behavior that I've been told contributed to the Chernobyl accident (I believe it's known as a negative power coefficient), but I am not well read about that.

Anyways, in a general sense and ignoring the particular details that's what happened at Chernobyl and that's why a Chernobyl-like accident is not really possible in the west.

Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: ldelo on December 04, 2009, 11:33:25 AM
This is a great site from a woman who likes to ride her motorcycle through the Chernobyl zone and take pictures:

http://www.angelfire.com/extreme4/kiddofspeed/chapter1.html

I've gone over her stuff multiple times.

It is very interesting in it's own right, however...

What is stunning to me is the casual attitude and apparent lack of concern she has when she's walking around with her Geiger counter showing off all the readings that are way, way above background!!!!

When I went through my radiation safety and training classes for the particle accelerator projects I worked on, we were taught (amongst other things)...

Females are at much greater risk of harm from radioactivity than males are, because females are born with their eggs (all future potential offspring) intact.

So, when a female is irradiated, so are those eggs and thus each and every potential future offspring (kid) she might produce.

Males on the other hand do not store sperm and in fact they are replaced every handful of days, so when a male is irradiated so is his sperm, but within a few days those sperm have died and with them the trace effects of the irradiation on them goes away as well.

It is cruel and if nature can be accused of being sexist, then it is that as well. But that makes it no less true.
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: el_guero on December 04, 2009, 11:52:29 AM
m m m m . . . .

Humanism, not communism, was the core ethos which led the Soviets to play god.

And before we claim the Stalinists as the worse in history, it might do well for us to ask WHY there are at least 5 frozen granaries preserving pre-mutated seed stock . . .

What current humanism is doing will make the Soviet era seem benevolent.

imho that is.



Infection zone radioactive caesium-137.
You can see there Belarus (Homel,Mogilev,Bryansk) also.
Have a look where does your girl live.
I hope everybody knows that a radiation is the biggest factor for a genetic anomalies.

The winds blew most of the Radioactive cloud towards western Europe. In Netherlands it was forbidden to grow spinach due to the high iron content up until 2002!!!


. . .


But the tragic thing is that for all that Chernobyl was bad, it was just the tip of the iceberg as far as how tragically, inhumanly, unfathomably, staggeringly coldhearted and cruel and just plain evil the Soviets were in terms of irradiating huge swaths of the FSU and Rodina Mat (and her peoples) in their pursuit of keeping up with the west.

. . .

The Soviets did the same thing with biological weapons (which were accidentally released in Ekaterinburg and allegedly elsewhere and which they openly experimented with in above-ground unisolated tests on open ground in Kazahkstan), chemical weapons, and the industrial/chemical/nuclear wastes produced by all the industries that produced all those WMDs.

It is a tragic history of staggering proportions and unspeakable inhumanity that is Stalins' and the Communists' legacy, involving the calloused and intentional irradiation (to staggering levels) of arguably a million or more people for no better reason than because they just didn't care.
. . .

Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: ldelo on December 04, 2009, 12:54:20 PM
m m m m . . . .

Humanism, not communism, was the core ethos which led the Soviets to play god.

And before we claim the Stalinists as the worse in history, it might do well for us to ask WHY there are at least 5 frozen granaries preserving pre-mutated seed stock . . .

What current humanism is doing will make the Soviet era seem benevolent.

imho that is.

Well, I'd agree that it was not communism per se (as a philosophical ideal) that led to the attrocities.

I was just using the titles those peoples self-identified themselves by.

As to the rest, and not that I necessarily agree or disagree, but that's all conjecture. What the Stalinists did *is* however historical and factual.

Then again, even Stalins' brutality does not match what Mao and the Maoists did, but again that's not the point of the thread.
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: WestCoast on December 04, 2009, 01:20:32 PM

Chernobyl and Three Mile Island are the reasons that there won't be any nuclear plants in BC, Canada although Ontario might get a new one if the provincial government has its way. 

The French on the other hand don't seem all that bothered by the problems with Chernobyl and Three Mile Island.  They are happily building nuclear power plants and doing it quite safely. 

Don't know who's right, just as long as I have to turn on a light to read a newspaper in a dark room instead of glowing in the dark.  :laugh: 

Last month in the news, it seems Netherlands, in the year 2001, narrowly escaped a nuke-meltdown in the city of "Petten" , also due to human error.

Luckily, the computer still corrected the error and prevented the meltdown.

It was kept firmly under the lid, until the (now retired) director of the plant wrote his memoires.

For those who understand dutch, it is named 'darwin meets einstein'


Here's my understanding...

Caveat: I have degrees in math and physics but make no claim to be a nuclear power/reactor engineer or physicist. If I err or am incorrect in what follows, please do correct me but leave out the ad hominem attacks...


Unless the Netherlands uses antiquated graphite-moderated reactor designs (ie typical Soviet designs) instead of typical western water-moderated core designs...

A core meltdown (like Chernobyl and Three Mile Island) is not the same kind of event and one cannot happen with the other design.

Water-moderated reactors used in the west are much more fail safe in the sense that *if* there's a loss of coolant (the water) then by definition the moderator (the water) also is lost (because the water is both the coolant AND moderator) and the reactor core moves towards nominal (low) power levels.

In other words, losing coolant means essentially and at least partially shutting down the reactor.

Also, in at least the western designs that I know of, the reactor cores are generally and at least partially fail-safed geometrically.

That is because the voids in the core (gaps between the fuel and control rods, etc) are filled with water which, being a liquid, will flow (even *if* as superheated high-pressure steam) and allow the core geometry to change, and that change in geometry will move the reactors back towards nominal power levels.

Conversely, loss of coolant in a graphite-moderated reactor does NOT equate to a loss of moderator.

Worse yet, because the moderator (which fills the voids in the core) is a solid (graphite), it actually prevents (at least initially and in the absence of some horrendously energetic event) geometric changes in the core.

So if a loss of coolant event is accompanied by physical damage that hampers physically removing the solid (graphite) moderator or various control elements, then the reactor is left in whatever power state it was last in with no coolant and no way to remove the moderator or control elements (and thus no way to lower the reactivity level or control the reactivity at all.)

At that point the reactor will runaway thermally and sooner or later, kaboom!

There's another element of graphite-moderated reactor core behavior that I've been told contributed to the Chernobyl accident (I believe it's known as a negative power coefficient), but I am not well read about that.

Anyways, in a general sense and ignoring the particular details that's what happened at Chernobyl and that's why a Chernobyl-like accident is not really possible in the west.



ldelo is the nuclear material from the newest reactors in the west less radioactive for periods less than tens of thousands of years?  Not from any reports that I've read.

We've still got to dispose of the radioactive material and nobody wants to live next to that dump.  Hence no new nuclear reactors will be built without considerable opposition.
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: el_guero on December 04, 2009, 01:29:59 PM
Conjecture?

With governments spending that kind of money?



m m m m . . . .

Humanism, not communism, was the core ethos which led the Soviets to play god.

And before we claim the Stalinists as the worse in history, it might do well for us to ask WHY there are at least 5 frozen granaries preserving pre-mutated seed stock . . .

What current humanism is doing will make the Soviet era seem benevolent.

imho that is.

Well, I'd agree that it was not communism per se (as a philosophical ideal) that led to the attrocities.

I was just using the titles those peoples self-identified themselves by.

As to the rest, and not that I necessarily agree or disagree, but that's all conjecture. What the Stalinists did *is* however historical and factual.

Then again, even Stalins' brutality does not match what Mao and the Maoists did, but again that's not the point of the thread.

Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: ldelo on December 04, 2009, 01:40:32 PM
Conjecture?

With governments spending that kind of money?

Conjecture in that it hasn't happened yet.
Title: Re: Chernobil (Чернобыль).
Post by: ldelo on December 04, 2009, 02:17:18 PM
[ ... huge snip ... ]
ldelo is the nuclear material from the newest reactors in the west less radioactive for periods less than tens of thousands of years?  Not from any reports that I've read.

We've still got to dispose of the radioactive material and nobody wants to live next to that dump.  Hence no new nuclear reactors will be built without considerable opposition.

All true, but that has nothing to do with the relatively safety of Soviet era/design reactor technology versus the west and whether or not a Chernobyl-ish accident can happen in the west.

I just tire of the uninformed (or willfull/disengenuous/intentional) tying of Chernobyl to the nuclear situation in the west. It is at best willful ignorance or - given that the facts are so readily available to the very people who claim to be so concerned - cheap rhetoric.

As to the rest, I have read that assuming typical western leakage/spill rates and so on, a coal fired power plant actually puts more radiocativity into the environment per gigawatt than a nuclear plant.

So, we can all collectively lie to ourselves and base important political/social/energy/economic decisions on nothing more than empty rhetoric, or we can have an informed debate.

Personally I'm not overly concerned either way. I have no dog in the hunt and I don't worry a whole lot about nuclear waste (at least as it's handled in the west) nor coal power plants.
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: ldelo on December 04, 2009, 02:44:36 PM
True, and I remember a lady I went to see a couple of times (she lived in Minsk in 1986 and now living in Moscow) telling me a story of how everyone in Minsk was dusting off shoot falling from the air that came from the reactor accident.

[ Shudder... ]

Oh man, that is horrid, aweful in ways I can't find words to describe. Hideous. Monstrous.

That soot was likely at least in part composed of either aerosolized graphite from the reactor core or the byproducts of the graphite combusting and reacting with other materials (including the nuclear fuel) and then carrying *that* around with it.

Man, it just breaks my heart in ways I can't even describe to know what's been done to those hapless people...

I can't dwell on it too long or I end up in tears that just won't stop and even when I've cried myself out my heart still aches in ways that words can't describe.

It's a very long story but that's what initially led me to get involved with things Russian and through that and via a long sequence of events, meeting my ex wife and so on...

Mirror, I'll also say that it's not just the fallout zone, but other areas you need to be concerned with as I visited Karabash which has an active population living in a valley where nothing grows and the drinking water for the city of Chelyabinsk is fed from a stream that flows through that city (tributary of the Mias River).  Even Perm (I think that is your city)  has problems with Hydrogenic Heavy Metals Pollution in the soils.

The two times I was in Russia and for all my travels and all the many people I saw, a major fraction of them had a condition wherein their cuticles and the skin in the corners of their mouths and eyes were all darkened, almost like it was stained or something.

I know it wouldn't wash out/off and it wasn't normal dirt or oils (etc) from manual labor (for example.)

Upon returning to the US I asked various friends etc connected to the medical community about that. While none were willing to say definitively what it is, most of them suggested that it was some form of heavy metal toxicity.

And lastly, I have been told by a Russian that American reliance on genetically modified food will cause huge portions of the population to become sterile in a few generations (my response to her was, "with the levels of pollution in Russia, do you not think the food supply is becoming mutated without science").

Hmmm... I can't imagine a mechanism by which eating foodstuffs derived from genetically modified plants could cause sterility, but that's all outside my depth.

How the toxins and radioactivity and so on in the FSU *could* effect them however is rather self-evident.

Anyways, I think most people going to the former FSU realize that the environment is not always pristine, but I do not think it should keep anyone from deciding to visit or meet someone from there as the human race has used the world as a trash can for a long time and it's not just a Russian problem (e.g. I was in Hong Kong last in 2006 and I was amazed at how bad the smog (from the industrial plants in China) had become since my first visit in 1995). 

I just read recently where China is now discovering tens of thousands of children each in some/many of their more industrialized cities with critically high lead levels.

It's rather unfathomable to me that with a prime example of what unfettered environmental damage can do just to the north and west of them (they need go no further than Chita, for example), the Chinese are nonetheless following a modern version of the Soviet path to industrialization.

[ Edit ] And not to single out the Chinese either. Truth be told and outside the west (including Europe) and relatively few other countries/places/etc, this is the path by which much of the world is industrializing/"modernizing".
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: el_guero on December 04, 2009, 04:04:09 PM
WestCoast

Safer than coal fired plants?

Just more empty rhetoric . . .

Safer than coal fired plants?

Tell that to property owners around Two Mile Island.

 :coffeeread:
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: ldelo on December 04, 2009, 04:28:02 PM
WestCoast

Safer than coal fired plants?

Just more empty rhetoric . . .

Safer than coal fired plants?

Tell that to property owners around Two Mile Island.

 :coffeeread:

I don't understand the reference to WestCoast.

Was the rest aimed at me???

If so, my responses would be

Safer than coal fired plants?

Not necessarily safer, just that from what I've read they release no more radiation.

Just more empty rhetoric . . .

Within context, that was in reference to people using hyperbole about Chernobyl to create fear when discussing nuclear issues in the west.

However, given that a Chernobyl-like incident is not possible with western-design water-moderated reactors and anyone who claims to be concerned and informed about nuclear issues should know that, that makes those references (by definition) empty rhetoric.

Tell that to property owners around Two Mile Island.

To the best of my knowledge there has never been a reactor facility in the US named Two Mile Island.

If you are referring to Three Mile Island, that incident just makes my point.

In general terms, what happened inside the reactor at TMI (coolant loss, partial core meltdown) was pretty much what happened at Chernobyl.

The difference is that at TMI once the core partially melted down and so on, uhhh... nothing happened. QED.

If by the property owners you are referring to property values around TMI, that has nothing to do with the TMI incident per se and how safe the reactors are except for the irrational fear people have driving real estate prices down.

 :coffeeread:
I'm up for the coffee/read...

 ;D
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: skiingandrunning on December 04, 2009, 06:13:02 PM
Quote
The Lake Karachay incident is generally considered to be Chernobyl-like.

Idelo, nice addition to the thread as it contained some good information.  I had to smile at the above quote as I was thinking of the poor city of Chelyabinsk as it has so many infamous tourist attractions nearby  :scared0005:.  
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: ldelo on December 04, 2009, 06:35:54 PM
I hope the point isn't lost in all this that Chernobyl - and more generally what the Soviets did to the FSU and her peoples - was staggeringly horrific.

Mendy's posts in the Belarus/Gomel thread states the President of Belarus claims there are no lingering/residual effects in the Belarus part of the Exclusion Zone, and is on record as saying that Belarus is going to start relocating citizens into the zone.

In a just world before that would happen, the President would be required to live in dacha deep in the "hottest" parts of Belarus Exclusion Zone for a couple years!!
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: ldelo on December 04, 2009, 07:02:12 PM
Quote
The Lake Karachay incident is generally considered to be Chernobyl-like.

Idelo, nice addition to the thread as it contained some good information.  I had to smile at the above quote as I was thinking of the poor city of Chelyabinsk as it has so many infamous tourist attractions nearby  :scared0005:.  

Thanks (I think?)

I did post some other ramblings over in the Chelyabinsk area.

I believe you posted over there as well, I was curious how you (or whomever it was who had spent time in Chelyabinsk) perceived the situation over there.

I believe the Karachay incident irradiated on the order of 500,000 sqaure kilometers and there were tens, if not hundreds of thousands of people involved and irradiated.

At Mayak and the related facilities in that general area they simply dumped their nuclear wastes into the local river(s) for a long time, until they were more or less pressured into stopping that practice.

At which point they started using Karachay instead of the rivers, which (combined with a drought that dried up Karachay) is what caused the Karachay incident.
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: skiingandrunning on December 04, 2009, 08:17:47 PM
Quote
I was curious how you (or whomever it was who had spent time in Chelyabinsk) perceived the situation over there.

I would say that they have the typical Russian resignation that comes with not really liking the situation, but realizing they can not do anything to change it.  I remember the reaction of my friends mother when she told her she was going to drive me up to Karabash (it was something similar to, "are you crazy, why would anyone want to see that"). 
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль
Post by: ldelo on December 16, 2009, 02:31:59 PM
I meant to come back here and post an apology and correction.

MarkJe (you are/were) correct in part about parts of western Europe being irradiated somewhat disproportionately.

And of course the converse is, I was wrong (to some extent.)

What happened is that the plume tended to dump the heavier particulate matter and some other stuff relatively close to Chernobyl. That's what dosed and contaminated large swaths of the Ukraine, Beloruss, and parts of western Russia.

And those were and are far and away the most heavily dosed/contaminated areas.

However, once having shed the heavier/larger particulate load, the plume was blown about with the prevailing winds and tended to only "dump" radioactive materials when rain passed through the plume and carried the material downward.

Thus certain areas rather remote from Chernobyl received a disproportionate dosing even though the plume had already passed over other areas with little effect.

Hmmm... crow doesn't taste good no matter what anyone says, and no salt does not improve the taste...
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль - При́пять - Pripyat
Post by: Slumba on December 04, 2014, 01:09:45 PM
An American photographer took a camera drone into Chernobyl:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=E8FW1SIGZsM

more on the story, here:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-12-04/stunning-video-footage-chernobyl-devastation-captured-drone
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль - При́пять - Pripyat
Post by: GuppyCaptain on December 04, 2014, 03:01:10 PM
Awesome. Thanks for posting, Slumba. It was eerie to see it from the ground but it's even eerie from the air.
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль - При́пять - Pripyat
Post by: AvHdB on August 18, 2019, 09:14:13 AM
Not really sure where to pst this. This seems as good as any other thread.

https://www.unian.info/world/10655013-u-s-declassifies-intel-report-on-estimates-of-chornobyl-incident-fatalities.html
Title: Re: Chernobyl - Чернобыль - При́пять - Pripyat
Post by: andrewfi on August 18, 2019, 10:49:52 AM
Not really sure where to pst this. This seems as good as any other thread.

https://www.unian.info/world/10655013-u-s-declassifies-intel-report-on-estimates-of-chornobyl-incident-fatalities.html


This was referring to immediate fatalities, not longer-term. The event took place on 26th April 1986. This memo is dated May 86 (I can't figure the date from the timestamp) and is concerned with the immediate events and not the aftermath.

While the memo claims the fatality claim of 2 is preposterous, the article itself confirms that there were only two deaths at the time of the event.

Quote
In fact, the number of people on the night shift was minimal and actual fatalities did total two on the first day of the accident.

So, the claim made at the time was not preposterous, but accurate.