It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Holiday in Chernobyl: Ukraine to lift restrictions on disaster site!

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 11:52 PM
Well how is being above normal radiation safe for anyone. I wonder how many 2 headed frogs are in the area?

Here is the link on the story.

Background radiation in the accident zone is still well above normal. But far from being a wasteland, wildlife has rebounded in the exclusion zone and trees are reclaiming the ghost city of Pripyat, said Mary Mycio, author of "Wormwood Forest," a 2005 book on the area.

posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 12:04 AM
think they should keep that place close four ever

posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 12:51 AM
I would LOVE to photograph it. That place is fascinating and screaming for some great photojournalism.

posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 12:52 AM
reply to post by Secretrelishjelly

I agree! They are apparently giving tours to small groups now! I will never be in that line to see it.

posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 02:04 AM
here is another link

but i cannot work out from reading the articles what exactly is going to change

and this :

A few firms now offer tours to the restricted area, but the government says those tours are illegal

baffles me

posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 09:31 AM
Here's a trip report to Kiev with a visit at Chernobyl.

By far the best report I've ever seen.


posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 09:23 PM
Thanks for the link C0bzz that was an interisting tour...

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 03:06 AM
Lol WOw.
I recently just read that the level of radiation is still too deadly for normal trips.
I predict cancer and death in the future...
I wouldn't mind visiting though... in 10 years

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 02:37 PM
reply to post by Secretrelishjelly

what for? radiation levels have already dropped a lot since 1986 and will fall to ambient levels in a few centuries at the most.

transuranic contamination is likely rather low (due to to their lower volatility) and most fission products have half lives to the tune of years and decades.


it might shock you that sooner or later the exploded reactor itself will have to be dismantled once reduced radiation levels and advances in technology permit it, because it has got to be a cheaper option than building dome over dome over dome - forever

if the nuclear industry were serious about public perception and dismantling capability, they'd be all over this project, because it would put to rest this notion that all things nuclear are 'forever' while demonstrating a very useful technology that might come in handy in Three Mile Island.or for re-opening geological deposit sites.

for reasons to do so, click here or consider the value of rare earth metals and residual fuel ($100k / kg)
edit on 2010.12.16 by Long Lance because: correction

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 10:36 AM
reply to post by Long Lance

hey thanks for the link very interisting !

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 10:43 AM
reply to post by sugarcookie1

Back when the internet (and myself) were younger I came upon a website by a Russian photographer who rode her motorcycle into the disaster area and took a lot of photos. She had a Geiger-counter with her and she wrote that as long as she stayed on the roads the radiation levels weren't too dangerous. Wish I knew how to get back to the site, I'm sure it's still out there somewhere.

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:44 AM
reply to post by totalmetal

The photos and information on that website you're talking about is not very good, and to top it off the entire backstory she used was fabricated. In reality, she did not ride her motorcycle through the zone, she took a tour of the zone with a guide, then took some photos of her and her motorcycle outside of the area, claimed she rode through it with a load of incorrect information.. probably for her ummm.. e-peen. Please can we stop mentioning that website... (that I shall not name).

Check these out:

Also when they're standing outside the sarcophagus they're getting about 65 microsieverts per hour, basically it would take them 48 hours of standing there to get as much radiation as an average person would in a year... certain diagnostic (medical) imaging procedures will give you more radiation. Probably not 'dangerous' although staying there especially for longer periods of time would have risk. So you wouldn't want to live there. Consuming food grown on the site (or breathing in dust) would be dangerous, because it may accumulate in your body constantly radiating for the rest of your life (that's why they have masks etc..)

There's also tons of videos on youtube, and I'm sure you can find even more trip-reports. You can get tours through the area, after all.
edit on 19/1/11 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)

edit on 19/1/11 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 12:15 PM
reply to post by totalmetal

she was a brave soul i wouldnt have gone anywere near that place!

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 12:21 PM
reply to post by C0bzz

thanks for the videos i will have to go check out what utube has to offer..Its still just not a place id want to go see would rather go on a nice cruise to some place warm

new topics

top topics


log in