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.

 

"New York Times" reporting possible radioactive smoke from Chernobyl fires...

page: 1
22
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:04 PM
link   
The paper reporting 20 minutes ago, of the possibility of radioactive smoke from russian fires near Chernobyl... link to follow.... this is breaking news...




posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:28 PM
link   
Been watching for news of this type to come out since i heard the wildfires were reaching that area.

Thanks for the notice, will keep an eye out for more info as it comes.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by freetree64
 


Your Link, my friend...

www.nytimes.com...

Just curious: It says radioactive fallout from Chernobyl coated on trees & grass which is burning is the concern. The fallout did not kill these living things? (Forgive if this is a stupid question! I seek understanding.)



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   
some one posted a thread one here a day or two saying the foreign embassy's were being evacuated but kept pretty hush can anyone tell me if that's true? there was also a very good thread about the possibilities of this happening. www.abovetopsecret.com...
I think this whole fire situation is going to get allot worse before it gets better. my thoughts are with the people of Russia right now radiation or no radiation.


[edit on 10-8-2010 by danielhanson420]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by new_here
 


Thank you for that link, i'm on my mobile, and wanted to get that posted right away, due to interest on the subject...



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Moscow. Evacuation process has started of those wives, children and elder people from the Bulgarian Embassy in Moscow, who asked so, press centre of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced. Some of them will arrive this evening in Sofia on a regular fly of Bulgarian Air company.


source


A hasty evacuation of diplomatic staff from foreign embassies, like a stampede, began in Moscow. Many embassies are trying to hide the evacuation for political reasons. Mass evacuation of the embassies of Canada and Poland was officially reported at night on August 7.


source

read the above article it will give good understanding of the threat involved.



[edit on 063131p://f26Tuesday by plube]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by plube
 


sorry mate im not overly keen on those sources but at the same time i understand if they are evacuating the embassy's there not gonna shout it from the roof top's and cause a massive panic.
I also have a feeling the death toll is much higher than we have been lead to belive. of coarse that is speculation on my part.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 06:31 PM
link   


[edit on 8/10/2010 by this_is_who_we_are]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by new_here
reply to post by freetree64
 


Your Link, my friend...

www.nytimes.com...

Just curious: It says radioactive fallout from Chernobyl coated on trees & grass which is burning is the concern. The fallout did not kill these living things? (Forgive if this is a stupid question! I seek understanding.)


How damaging radiation is depends on the dose. The average person on this planet gets exposed to approximately 300 millirem per year, mostly from natural sources, followed by medical sources. You're unlikely to be affected in any way from this radiation, simply because it is so small, even if it were having a negative effect. A minority of trees close to the plant were actually killed by radiation however the vast majority of the plants in the region survived simply because, although it is possible for some damage to occur, they're not being exposed to a huge amount of radiation. If burned, then the radioactive substances will be released into the atmosphere, and will be breathed in by people. How much of an effect it has, again, depends on dose.


[edit on 10/8/2010 by C0bzz]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by C0bzz
 


Thanks for the info - I just read yesterday that plant and animal life is thriving very well in these areas. So when you say that when the trees are burned the radiation will get into the air - are you saying they are contaminated on the inside and not contaminted with radiation on the outside?



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by crazydaisy
reply to post by C0bzz
 


Thanks for the info - I just read yesterday that plant and animal life is thriving very well in these areas. So when you say that when the trees are burned the radiation will get into the air - are you saying they are contaminated on the inside and not contaminted with radiation on the outside?



To my understanding the radionuclides from Chernobyl have been absorbed into the environment - so the dirt is contaminated, the trees are contaminated, and the animals are contaminated. The average person worldwide gets approximately 35 millirem of radiation per year from absorbed isotopes such as Potassium-40, Carbon-14, Uranium, Thorium, Radium, Polonium, and Tritium. Like I said, how harmful it is depends on the dose (there's some evidence that suggests that small amounts of radiation is beneficial) - it seems nature can cope with the increased radiation in the area of Chernobyl relatively well. I always thought burning wood from the area was strictly prohibited because it would release radionuclides into the atmosphere, which would then be swept by the wind to populated areas. I don't know how much of an effect there would be if the trees were burned though, it's not my specialty. I wouldn't it expect to be that bad, especially since smoke is fairly dilute and the radiation levels have gone down significantly since 1986, but that's my opinion.

[edit on 10/8/2010 by C0bzz]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:38 PM
link   
Probably as radioactive as eating a banana. If the residual fallout is being released in smoke that comes from living trees and grass catching fire it's clearly

A. Not very potent
B. A big story mainly because the word 'radioactive' is included.

R U SCARED YET?

BOOGA!



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:43 PM
link   
as far as i know u can get pretty close to that reactor now if u have the clearence, but the main area still high in radioactivity, as for trees and stuff burning in the survivable areas probably not much of a problem still best not inhale



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 04:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Loki
 

Trees, plants, animals and humans all differently react to radiation. Besides, our life span is much longer (than it should be), so with age we get far more susceptible to cancer, which is only accelerated with smallest radioactive particles.

Current smoke which is in Moscow will greatly increase cancer rate, let alone radioactive smoke. It is bad as it is, smoke from Chernobyl won't help too much.

But of course, I agree, there is always a decent dose of fear-mongering in these articles.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 07:54 AM
link   
Isn't Chernobyl in the Ukraine?
I don't know how a Russian fire got there? Russians and ukrainians aren't the bests of friends you know.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 07:58 AM
link   
So when MSM reports on something catastrophic you want to hear it's true, but when its not what you want to hear it's a lie?



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheOracle
Isn't Chernobyl in the Ukraine?
I don't know how a Russian fire got there? Russians and ukrainians aren't the bests of friends you know.


Does fire recognize and obey border signs and care if the next place it burns is friends with the last place it burned?



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Well all I know is from growing up in Western New York, where the Manhatten Project was actively conducted. Many areas around here are still fenced off because of the radiation still present and our cancer rates are through the roof, coincidence? Plus there is a reason why the Roswell Cancer Institute is located in Buffalo N.Y. So the people that want to claim that radiation from an nuclear accident that happened in the 80's is so minimal now that you can safely go parading around the area, sorry I have to laugh at your ignorance. Perhaps you are right maybe they are just a little more cautious over here and our readings are different because we didn't face a total nuclear meltdown and the area was only subject to the effects of radiation. But I would have to bet that either the "experts" claiming that most the area over there is safe really aren't experts, or someone is trying to minimize the truth to this situation. Lets see radiation from the 40's is still present in high concentrations in our area even though no "nuclear bomb drop" tests were done here let alone a meltdown of a reactor, but in Chernobyl everything is ok and life is almost back to normal???? Once again just don't buy it.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Looks like Fox news are reporting on this.

www.foxnews.com...

This could get really bad! Anyone know how far this radition could spread?



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 09:57 AM
link   
It may be burning Radioactive areas, but we really have no need for concern unless it reaches the Zole of Alienation, a 19 Mile (30KM) zone around the power plant.







 
22
<<   2 >>

log in

join