Chernoybl: 30 years on

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,782


1986 saw the Chernoybl disaster that is, for all the wrong reasons, one of the iconic events of the latter twentieth century. At the time the Soviets tried to cover up the accident. I include the below Wikipedia extract for more details:

"The Chernobyl disaster, also referred to as the Chernobyl accident, was a catastrophic nuclear accident that occurred on 26 April 1986 in the No.4 light water graphite moderated reactor at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant near Pripyat, in what was then part of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic of the Soviet Union (USSR).

During a hurried late night power-failure stress test, in which safety systems were deliberately turned off, a combination of inherent reactor design flaws, together with the reactor operators arranging the core in a manner contrary to the checklist for the stress test, eventually resulted in uncontrolled reaction conditions that flashed water into steam generating a destructive steam explosion and a subsequent open-air graphite "fire".[note 1] This produced updrafts for 9 days lofting plumes of radioactive isotopes into the atmosphere, in total approximately equaling the quantity of airborne material initially released in the explosion,[1] with practically all of this material then going on to fall-out onto much of the surface of the western USSR and Europe.

The Chernobyl disaster was the worst nuclear power plant accident in history in terms of cost and casualties. It is one of only two classified as a level 7 event (the maximum classification) on the International Nuclear Event Scale, the other being the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster in Japan in 2011.[2] The struggle to safeguard against scenarios which were, at many times falsely,[1] perceived as having the potential for greater catastrophe and the later decontamination efforts of the surroundings, ultimately involved over 500,000 workers and cost an estimated 18 billion rubles.[3] During the accident, blast effects caused 2 deaths within the facility and later 29 firemen and employees died in the days-to-months afterward from acute radiation syndrome, with the potential for long-term cancers still being investigated.[4]

The remains of the No.4 reactor building were enclosed in a large sarcophagus (radiation shield) by December 1986, at a time when what was left of the reactor was entering the cold shut-down phase; the enclosure was built quickly as occupational safety for the crews of the other undamaged reactors at the power station, with No.3 continuing to produce electricity into 2000.

The accident motivated safety upgrades on all remaining Soviet-designed reactors in the RBMK (Chernobyl No.4) family, of which eleven continued to power electric grids as of 2013". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster

The heroic work of the 'liquidators' saved the day, and 29 subsequently died from radiation poisoning, however the shield that they built with literally their blood, wasn't going to last and there has been for some time concerns about radiation leaking from the sealed reactor. "Ukraine unveiled the world’s largest moveable metal structure over the Chernobyl nuclear power plant’s doomed fourth reactor. The gigantic arch soars 108 metres (355 feet) into the sky – making it taller than New York’s Statue of Liberty – while its weight of 36,000 tons is three times heavier than the Eiffel Tower in Paris. The €2.1 billion structure sponsored by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) has been edged into place over an existing crumbling dome that the Soviets built in haste when disaster struck three decades ago. It will later be fitted with radiation control equipment as well as air vents and fire fighting measures. The equipment inside the arch is expected to be operative by the end of 2017, but no timeframe had yet been set for the particularly hazardous work of removing all the remaining nuclear fuel from inside the plant or dismantling the old dome." Giant

I think it is most appropriate that we salute those brave men, the liquidators, who built the original dome in the most trying of circumstances, whilst the city was being evacuated. The 30 mile exclusion zone remains in force, within a handful of old people the exception. It was a disaster of mind boggling proportions, yet could have been so much worse. Chernoybl and Fukishima are the two stand outs for nuclear disasters, cover ups and herculean human efforts to fix the mess are both associated with the two incidents. Yet can we turn our back on nuclear technology, can we reasonably anticipate and design out human flaws/errors and natural disasters, should we even do such, or do we accept that nuclear like oil, gas, coal, has its down side and we just have to live with it? Thoughts?
 


O

Oscurito

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet" Abraham Lincoln.
Oh, I heard this long before the internet.

"The third angel sounded his trumpet, and a great star, blazing like a torch, fell from the sky on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water— the name of the star is Wormwood. A third of the waters turned bitter, and many people died from the waters that had become bitter." (Revelations 8:10–11)

And what's the Russian and Ukrainian word for the wormwood plant: chernobyl.
 

Sotired

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
4,396
Oh, I heard this long before the internet.

"The third angel sounded his trumpet, and a great star, blazing like a torch, fell from the sky on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water— the name of the star is Wormwood. A third of the waters turned bitter, and many people died from the waters that had become bitter." (Revelations 8:10–11)

And what's the Russian and Ukrainian word for the wormwood plant: chernobyl.
Maybe the bible was referring to Absinthe.

The potent ingredient being wormwood.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,782
Cheer up, Belarus almost had a similar melt-down this August when building its first nuclear plant.

They dropped a nuclear reactor shell when installing it but went ahead anyway. When caught out, they invented some safety checks they said had taken place.

This was after the structural frame of the reactor had collapsed, because they poured too much concrete into it, too quickly.

Oh and its 31 miles from the Lithuanian capital of Vilnius. The reactor draws cooling water from the Nevis river, which also supplies drinking water to Lithuania.

Anyone willing to bet this plant will be run to "international standards", as high as Fukushima, say?
 

Fractional Reserve

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2011
Messages
8,158
Cheer up, Belarus almost had a similar melt-down this August when building its first nuclear plant.

They dropped a nuclear reactor shell when installing it but went ahead anyway. When caught out, they invented some safety checks they said had taken place.

This was after the structural frame of the reactor had collapsed, because they poured too much concrete into it, too quickly.

Oh and its 31 miles from the Lithuanian capital of Vilnius. The reactor draws cooling water from the Nevis river, which also supplies drinking water to Lithuania.

Anyone willing to bet this plant will be run to "international standards", as high as Fukushima, say?
Any links to that story
 

ShinnerBot No.32564844524

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2013
Messages
4,043
Cheer up, Belarus almost had a similar melt-down this August when building its first nuclear plant.
The plant isn't online yet. But this is a familiar story in nuclear energy, human failures undermining the technology.

Yet at the same time, we as a species seem to prefer living with the fear of global climate catastrophe as opposed to the invisible voodoo of nuclear radiation. We firmly are rejecting the only true CO2 free technology that can provide energy at scale on a timeline fast enough to prevent further global warming in favor of false hope, the continuation of the oil age and politics(and wars) that go with it, and our own personal sense of being "green"(Whatever that means).

Global warming is and always was a crime being committed on children not born yet, I hold the 70's generation of environmental zealots responsible for denying us the only means by which to have avoided the climate catastrophe we are now witnessing in our lifetime.
 

ShinnerBot No.32564844524

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2013
Messages
4,043
It was a disaster of mind boggling proportions, yet could have been so much worse. Chernoybl and Fukishima are the two stand outs for nuclear disasters, cover ups and herculean human efforts to fix the mess are both associated with the two incidents. Yet can we turn our back on nuclear technology, can we reasonably anticipate and design out human flaws/errors and natural disasters, should we even do such?
YES! WE CAN!



[video=youtube;yx_XoqXNtRM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yx_XoqXNtRM[/video]


Overview

Generation III+ AP1000 reactor.
Though the distinction is arbitrary, the improvements in reactor technology in third generation reactors are intended to result in a longer operational life (60 years of operation, extendable to 120+ years of operation prior to complete overhaul and reactor pressure vessel replacement) compared with currently used generation II reactors (designed for 40 years of operation, extendable to 80+ years of operation prior to complete overhaul and pressure vessel replacement).

The core damage frequencies for these reactors are designed to be lower than for Generation II reactors – 60 core damage events for the EPR and 3 core damage events for the ESBWR[2] per 100 million reactor-years are significantly lower than the 1,000 core damage events per 100 million reactor-years for BWR/4 generation II reactors.[2]

The third generation EPR reactor was also designed to use uranium more efficiently than older Generation II reactors, using approximately 17% less uranium per unit of electricity generated than these older reactor technologies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_III_reactor
GenIII and above have multiple redundant failsafe systems that not even electrical power loss results in meltdown. GenIV plus will bring about technologies such as molten salt which will be infinitely safer again.

Just think of how many reactors are out there built over 40 years ago and working without any safety issues. Just think how much technology and design have advanced since then. Now think that some people think it's better to be running the older plants but not building newer more modern plants despite all this.

Madness in action.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,782
Safety reactors are a myth. An accident can occur in any nuclear reactor, causing the release of large quantities of deadly radiation into the environment. Even during normal operations radioactive materials are regularly discharged into the air and water. The policy of secrecy,which surrounded the development of the Atomic Bomb, was transferred to civil nuclear power projects after World War II and lives on today.

So you wont necessarily get to hear about the crap they pull on the front page of your paper of choice.

That was what my Belarus linkie-poos highlighted.

The reality of nuclear power now is no different than it was when Chernobyl blew - it is inherently dangerous.

The nuclear industry was suffering accidents long before Chernobyl - and afterwards.

In addition to the risk of accident, nuclear plants are highly vulnerable to deliberate acts of sabotage and terrorist attack. Even the International Atomic Energy Agency which promotes the use of nuclear power, admitted that.

Leaving aside the risks posed by aging nuclear reactors, the modern operators are continually trying to reduce costs due to both greater competition in the electricity market and the need to meet shareholder expectations. Are corners cut? Well look at Belarus.

Its all a total ramp. Nuclear power and nuclear safety are a contradiction in terms.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,782
Safety reactors are a myth. An accident can occur in any nuclear reactor, causing the release of large quantities of deadly radiation into the environment. Even during normal operations radioactive materials are regularly discharged into the air and water. The policy of secrecy,which surrounded the development of the Atomic Bomb, was transferred to civil nuclear power projects after World War II and lives on today.

So you wont necessarily get to hear about the crap they pull on the front page of your paper of choice.

That was what my Belarus linkie-poos highlighted.

The reality of nuclear power now is no different than it was when Chernobyl blew - it is inherently dangerous.

The nuclear industry was suffering accidents long before Chernobyl - and afterwards.

In addition to the risk of accident, nuclear plants are highly vulnerable to deliberate acts of sabotage and terrorist attack. Even the International Atomic Energy Agency which promotes the use of nuclear power, admitted that.

Leaving aside the risks posed by aging nuclear reactors, the modern operators are continually trying to reduce costs due to both greater competition in the electricity market and the need to meet shareholder expectations. Are corners cut? Well look at Belarus.

Its all a total ramp. Nuclear power and nuclear safety are a contradiction in terms.
I was watching a documentary on it there and some of the points raised were scary. The design flaw of that type of plant was known, including by the Soviets. Three years earlier an incident happened at the same power plant type at Vilnius in Lithuania, it just so happened that it did not go critical. Then leader Gorbachev only found out from the Swedes several weeks later re Chernoybl. This was a significant factor in his reforms and the soon to be end of the Soviet Union. At an international discussion re Chernoybl, it took one senior scientist to spill the beans with the real data contrary to the wishes of both the Soviets and the international atomic body which lends credence to your claim. Scary stuff.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,782
I was watching a documentary on it there and some of the points raised were scary. The design flaw of that type of plant was known, including by the Soviets. Three years earlier an incident happened at the same power plant type at Vilnius in Lithuania, it just so happened that it did not go critical. Then leader Gorbachev only found out from the Swedes several weeks later re Chernoybl. This was a significant factor in his reforms and the soon to be end of the Soviet Union. At an international discussion re Chernoybl, it took one senior scientist to spill the beans with the real data contrary to the wishes of both the Soviets and the international atomic body which lends credence to your claim. Scary stuff.

We are not capable f understanding how serious this stuff is.

It is not like a coal slag collapsing and injuring workers, bad enough as that is.

A nuclear discharge will alter the DNA of people affected and their descendants, and the radius of the damage is huge. Fall out from Chernobyl reached New York.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20244-briefing-how-nuclear-accidents-damage-human-health/

The impact on the ecosystem and biodiversity is even more significant.

We are playing with very bad stuff here - and we trust ourselves to manage it properly? Go away out of that.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top