It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russian wildfires and another Chernobyl event

page: 5
70
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 02:14 PM
link   
RT news reported earlier, that the military were being called in to dig a trench around the plant, to try and divert the fires if they approached the immediate area..




posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 02:17 PM
link   
Oh and here are three articles (out of many) from mainstream popular sources that prove that wild life in and around Chernobyl is not only perfectly fine but thriving.

news.nationalgeographic.com...

www.washingtonpost.com...

news.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 02:17 PM
link   
One of the articles even talks about a 73 year old lady who lives right near Chernobyl in the "contaminated zone" she grows her own vegetables and eats fish from the Chernobyl "contaminated" river and is 73 and fine and healthy. You'd think she'd be long dead huh?

And there's tons of birds that have nestled and roost eggs INSIDE the damn nuclear sarcophagus. Amazing huh. Terrible accident yes but mother nature is more resilient than anyone gives it credit for.

[edit on 7-8-2010 by rufusdrak]



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by rufusdrak
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
I'm not saying Russia did not have involvement in Chernobyl as I'm sure Russia administered a lot of the goings on there, but the simple fact is that the power plant is in UKRAINE not Russia, period.


Ok.



On the 2nd point, you are wrong. No nuclear explosion ever took place at Chernobyl PERIOD.


Can we agree to call it a massively huge vertical explosion with huge amounts of radioactive particles that contaminated regions all the way to the U.K. then? If so, ok.


And lastly, if you ask me the effects of Chernobyl are greatly exaggerated anyway. Someone said that woman who went to Pripyat is fake. Are you kidding me? There are guided tours that you can pay for and go to Pripyat yourself probably a mile or two away from the reactor and you are fine there with only slightly elevated but still safe levels of radiation. The only truly DEADLY zone is going within a few feet of the reactor itself or INSIDE of it.


Actually the tours go right up to the reactor.

I think we’re in violent agreement and I don’t know where you got the idea that I think the Chernobyl area, outside of the reactor area, is dangerous in the immediate, even though it is contaminated. I just don’t want to subject myself knowingly to increased levels of radiation because I get enough in my daily life activities as it is.


Let's not exaggerate things, there are dozens of sites on the internet where people have gone to Pripyat and taken pictures and they are all fine.


Question 1: Which would you prefer to eat... deer that's been grazing on the contaminated grasses of the Chernobyl area (outside of the reactor area), or deer that's been grazing on normal grasses?

Question 2: Why?



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Double post

[edit on 7/8/2010 by Iamonlyhuman]



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by rufusdrak
One of the articles even talks about a 73 year old lady who lives right near Chernobyl in the "contaminated zone" she grows her own vegetables and eats fish from the Chernobyl "contaminated" river and is 73 and fine and healthy. You'd think she'd be long dead huh?

And there's tons of birds that have nestled and roost eggs INSIDE the damn nuclear sarcophagus. Amazing huh. Terrible accident yes but mother nature is more resilient than anyone gives it credit for.


A little critical thinking is in order here:


"A lot of birds are nesting inside the sarcophagus," he adds, referring to the steel and concrete shield erected over the reactor that exploded in 1986.

"Starlings, pigeons, swallows, redstart - I saw nests, and I found eggs."


1. How are the birds getting in and out of the sarcophagus? Is it in that bad shape that there are holes big enough? If so, then it's worse than I thought.

2.) How did this man see nests and eggs inside the sarcophagus? Is he superman?



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by rufusdrak
One of the articles even talks about a 73 year old lady who lives right near Chernobyl in the "contaminated zone" she grows her own vegetables and eats fish from the Chernobyl "contaminated" river and is 73 and fine and healthy. You'd think she'd be long dead huh?


I’ll quote myself:


I think we’re in violent agreement and I don’t know where you got the idea that I think the Chernobyl area, outside of the reactor area, is dangerous in the immediate, even though it is contaminated. I just don’t want to subject myself knowingly to increased levels of radiation because I get enough in my daily life activities as it is.



Question 1: Which would you prefer to eat... deer that's been grazing on the contaminated grasses of the Chernobyl area (outside of the reactor area), or deer that's been grazing on normal grasses?

Question 2: Why?



I'd really like to get back on topic now.

[edit on 7/8/2010 by Iamonlyhuman]



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by smash_the_system
 


Is this what you're talking about? If so, it's a different facility. Keep watching!

Troops defend top Russian nuclear research center from fires


Some 500 servicemen are working to extinguish wildfires near the city of Sarov, where a nuclear research center is located, a spokesman for Russia's Railway Troops said on Friday.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 03:55 PM
link   
BTW, anyone knows when they gonna install a new sarcophagus around the Chernobyl reactor?

Last time I checked, they were supposed to install a new one soon since the old one had a ``life of about 25-30 years`` to be effective...

I heard that in a documentary about Chernobyl a few years ago...



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 



Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman

Originally posted by sigil23
this article seems to reference a new stadium sized shelter to be completed in 2008:


Yes, that is when the new shelter was supposed to be completed. I've heard it's somewhere around 10 years behind schedule. However, of course, when looking around web, in general, and the IAEA website, I can find no schedule status documents... can't actually have accountability, you know.
Governments and international agencies are very good at planning things...


If you can find a statused schedule you're doing better than me. I've looked everywhere.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Theres no way that this doesn't prove that on a large scale, Humans are only adept at one thing, which is inept at everything else. Wonder when our lords and ladies will start building the "beehive" cities and re-claiming the face of the rest of the planet as always, for our "own" good.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 04:44 PM
link   
Chernobyl is greatly exaggerated in every possible way. Did you know that Chernobyl power plant continued to operate up until only a few years ago?

Yes, dozens if not hundreds of workers continued to work literally next door to THE meltdown reactor in the Chernobyl zone on other functioning reactors. They never even closed the place down because they needed the power from it too much. Yes the town of Pripyat was evacuated but there was a train running workers to the 'contaminated' reactor for 20 years after the accident.
Scientists also worked INSIDE the reactor building for years without dying. Keep in mind they worked there with very minimal protection. Cotton masks on their face and that's about it.

I just feel many people have this impression that Chernobyl as the stigma would have it is so deadly that even going in the same country as the accident you will instantly die. As can be seen by the videos many people posted here you can go INTO the reactor itself and come out quite alive and unharmed. Hell scientists literally were walking on top of and picking up pieces of the radioactive fuel with their bare hands and still lived.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


The only date I've seen is 2013... for now.

The cost would be around 1.4 billion $, paid mostly by the US.

Hell if the US can give 3 billion a year to Israel, they sure as hell can give 1.4 billion to help for this...

BTW, from documents I've seen, the sarcophagus is already leaking, there's cracks up to 100 square meters... right now.

The whole thing could collapse anyday. There's 216 tons of radioactive material in there... probably enough to give everyone on earth a killing dose of radiation...

The whole thing is also sinking in the ground, which if it hit water, would turn the water into steam and cause a big explosion, sending radioactive material all over and of course blowing up the sarcophagus... it would probably be the worst catastrophe in human history... Just waiting to happen.

According to those who installed the sarcophagus, it was made for about 20-30 years. 2013 will be 27 years after the fact...



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


The only date I've seen is 2013... for now.

The cost would be around 1.4 billion $, paid mostly by the US.

Hell if the US can give 3 billion a year to Israel, they sure as hell can give 1.4 billion to help for this...

BTW, from documents I've seen, the sarcophagus is already leaking, there's cracks up to 100 square meters... right now.

The whole thing could collapse anyday. There's 216 tons of radioactive material in there... probably enough to give everyone on earth a killing dose of radiation...

The whole thing is also sinking in the ground, which if it hit water, would turn the water into steam and cause a big explosion, sending radioactive material all over and of course blowing up the sarcophagus... it would probably be the worst catastrophe in human history... Just waiting to happen.

According to those who installed the sarcophagus, it was made for about 20-30 years. 2013 will be 27 years after the fact...


sigh..... more wild exaggerations and fear mongering. There's enough to give the entire earth a lethal dose, yet there are scientists working every day for years INSIDE of the reactor, literally walking on top of the nuclear waste and picking it up with their hands and they were fine for the most part (not all of them of course). Yes it's highly radioactive and dangerous but much of it also dissipated greatly in the initial explosions that sent it all over the place in the atmosphere etc.

And if you guys watched the videos posted, the sarcophagus always had giant holes in it not from cracking but for whatever purpose I don't know, large enough to drive a car through, and many of them, that's where the birds come in from and roost inside the sarcophagus.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   
oh and may I remind you that Chernobyl never even had a nuclear explosion, the U.S. detonated probably 500-1000 nuclear BOMBS with millions and billions times of force of chernobyl all in the Nevada desert, yet Nevada itself and the world is fine, but one tiny power plant will threaten the existence of the human race according to you? Come on let's get real guys, the human race, nature, mother earth, is far more resilient than that.

Just think about it, we detonated THOUSANDS OF NUKES in the Nevada desert. Does it look uninhabitable to you? Just ask yourself this question.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   

There's enough to give the entire earth a lethal dose, yet there are scientists working every day for years INSIDE of the reactor, literally walking on top of the nuclear waste and picking it up with their hands

That's utter BS.

Yes people worked inside the Chernobyl installation until 2000. Yes some are still working in there to put out of commission the other reactors.

It won't be complete for at least another 20 years.

But come on now. No way in hell there's scientists going in Reactor 4 and picking up nuclear waste with their hands, UTTER BS.


the sarcophagus always had giant holes in it not from cracking but for whatever purpose I don't know, large enough to drive a car through

Any link/pics for that statement?



Just think about it, we detonated THOUSANDS OF NUKES in the Nevada desert. Does it look uninhabitable to you? Just ask yourself this question.

Yeah thousands of nukes...with 10 kg of enriched uranium with 90% of it transforming into energy...leaving almost nothing in the air/ground.

There you have 216 tons of radioactive material that won't be to safe levels for thousands of years.

[edit on 7-8-2010 by Vitchilo]



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   
Wow you are truly brainwashed by media propaganda and fear mongering huh? How's this for you wikitravel.org...


please read the "stay safe" section.

It shows in scientific numbers the amount of radiation experienced on a trip to Chernobyl. The levels experienced are so negligible as for "risk to be nonexistent" as the article states.

A lethal dose is 500 roentgens, and going even up to the sarcophagus got them only as high as a few MILLIROENTGENS per hour which is not even ONE roentgen let alone 500. That means you'd need literally thousands to millions times the dose for it to be fatal.

Point is for the most part (although obviously not advised) you can even go INSIDE the bloody reactor naked and still be fine. You really need to stop being brainwashed by propaganda and actually do some research. There are hundreds of people currently living just fine in the "contaminated zone" and people were working in the power plant literally DOZENS OF FEET away from the #4 reactor that melted down, for up to 20 years after the accident.
And you think this can end the whole human race? Get real pal.

One tiny reactor doesn't equal thousands of nukes being blasted off in the same spot.

[edit on 7-8-2010 by rufusdrak]



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 05:34 PM
link   
First of all a big hi to othere members of ATS. I have lurked for just over a month or two an decided to take the plunge and sign up.

Thanks OP for this, I was wondering when a topic about the recent worry of the forest fires reaching the Bryansk region where contaminated material is (Trees, sub soil etc)

Watching a Russian news channel I saw the map of where the fires were and noticed how close they crept to the Ukrainian border, And Chernobyl itself. Not only is the possibility of the trees burning (pine is notoriously combustable) and releasing long lasting elements back in to the atmosphere such as Ceasium 137 and Strontium 90 but the flames reaching the CHNPP (Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant).

The Sarcophagus itself did have some slight work carried out on it recently to strengthen the front wall with two piers (The yellow structures in more recent photos) but it is not enough. There is the promise of the "Ark" being constructed which is a huge arch to be built a few hundred metres away (Distance is my estimate so maybe a little wrong) This distance is to minimise overall dose rate for construction workers. When this is finally completed it will be pulled / pushed over unit 4 and sealed like an airfield hanger so cleanup can be started in a semi clean enviroment. Other buildings for these new tasks have already been built. I just hope the financial means are met very soon. As time is eventually running out and with 200 or so tons of radioactive dust inside it's like holding a heavy stone above a bowl of flour


current measurements from the CHNPP website as of 07/08/10 is

Radiation background in the Administrative building area is in average 65 microrentgens per hour, in the Shelter object's Observation pavilion area - 1,08 myllyrentgens per hour.
Controllable parameters of the Shelter object are within the limits established by Operational Regulations. According to monitoring systems data the maximal value of gamma - radiation rate inside the object has made 3403 Rontgens per hour, temperature near to Fuel Containing Materials is +29 degrees on Celsius. Exceeding of control levels of Shelter object condition parameters is not fixed.

Link for above text is new.chnpp.gov.ua/eng

I recently had the chance of meeting and making friends with a former resident of Pripyat. So many questions I want to ask yet I feel like I'm prying into something that is quite a sensitive subject


Anyway that's my two pennies worth


S&F OP


Edit of my fingers being unresponsive to grammar


[edit on 7-8-2010 by Ctankep]



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by smash_the_system
RT news reported earlier, that the military were being called in to dig a trench around the plant, to try and divert the fires if they approached the immediate area..


When did they mention about the plant?

I heard that efforts were being "stepped up" to prevent the fires reaching the contaminated sections of Bryansk.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by rufusdrak
 




It shows in scientific numbers the amount of radiation experienced on a trip to Chernobyl. The levels experienced are so negligible as for "risk to be nonexistent" as the article states.

Yeah if you stay away and on the road.


And you think this can end the whole human race? Get real pal.

By that I meant that if you take the 216 tons of uranium and plutonium and divided it for each human to breath, each one would have a lethal dose.



One tiny reactor doesn't equal thousands of nukes being blasted off in the same spot.

Since the invention of nuclear weapons, 2053 tests have taken place. So ``thousands of nukes`` give me a break. The US did 1054 of them. The total radioactive elements weigh of those nukes is probably in the 200-300 tons. And most of it, around 90% transforms into heat and radiation. 10% stay behind.

I was just saying that 216 tons inside the reactor is as much if not more than all US nuke test actual residual radioactive material.




top topics



 
70
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join