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.

 

60 year old Nuclear Power plant in Moscow BURNS

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 07:12 PM
link   
So now we have another one.

Interesting that there seems to be a lot of these "leaks" lately. Three nuclear power plants THIS PAST WEEK --- Chicago (byron illinois nuclear plant), San Diego (san onofre nuclear plant), and now Moscow Russia -- experimental physics nuclear plant.

www.bellona.org...

A fire broke out on Sunday at a Moscow nuclear research center that houses a non-operational 60-year-old atomic reactor, emergency officials reported as Russia’s nuclear agency Rosatom said the blaze had not been accompanied by any open flames and posed no threat of a radiation leak.

This is the part I find interesting...

There were conflicting reports late Sunday afternoon over whether the fire was in fact out, and the Alikhanov Institute of Theoretical and Experimental Physics in southwestern Moscow refused to take calls, making it impossible to determine whether any nuclear fuel or other radioactive materials were impacted by the blaze.

Many do not follow Dutchsense but he weighs in as well:




edit on 5-2-2012 by jude11 because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 07:17 PM
link   
perhaps this is the natural route for aging nuclear facilities? as time carries on, wouldn't it be expected the amount of facilities encountering problems would accelerate each year?

or maybe human judgement is on the decline as the facilities degrade accelerates, doubling the potential for error.
edit on 5-2-2012 by yourmaker because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 

I found another link with video but due to my location it won't let me watch. Maybe you have more luck?
www.huffingtonpost.com...
Basement on fire does not sound reassuring at all!



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by yourmaker
perhaps this is the natural route for aging nuclear facilities? as time carries on, wouldn't it be expected the amount of facilities encountering problems would accelerate each year?

or maybe human judgement is on the decline as the facilities degrade accelerates, doubling the potential for error.
edit on 5-2-2012 by yourmaker because: (no reason given)


It is a natural route but you would think that something like a nuclear facility would be taken care of more so than an old warehouse for instance.

I'm going with human judgement on this one and adding in a dose of greed with not paying to keep these facilities safe.

Peace



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 


I would throw in a little bit of it being a Russian plant as well. They never had the greatest nuclear record.




posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by jude11
 


I would throw in a little bit of it being a Russian plant as well. They never had the greatest nuclear record.



Come to think about it, there was also that time they accidentally released a ton of anthrax in a village/town.



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 11:28 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 

editted and removed
edit on 5-2-2012 by ludwigvonmises003 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by boncho

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by jude11
 


I would throw in a little bit of it being a Russian plant as well. They never had the greatest nuclear record.



Come to think about it, there was also that time they accidentally released a ton of anthrax in a village/town.


Boncho!

Missed ya!

Couldn't be a ton or the MSM would have been forced to report.

Maybe only 9\10ths of a ton.


Peace



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 


Perhaps it wasn't a ton that was released. I am having trouble finding the number but I do remember reading it (or at least thought I did),

In any event, they were processing tons of anthrax at the facility. Maybe that's why I had that impression.


The Sverdlovsk anthrax leak was an incident when spores of anthrax were accidentally released from a military facility in the city of Sverdlovsk (formerly, and now again, Yekaterinburg) 1450 km east of Moscow on April 2, 1979. This accident is sometimes called "biological Chernobyl".[1]
*


Working in great haste and total secrecy, the scientists in the city of Sverdlovsk transferred hundreds of tons of anthrax bacteria -- enough to destroy the world many times over -- into giant stainless-steel canisters.
*
edit on 5-2-2012 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 11:59 PM
link   
I used to know someone whose job was to work on teams that set up nuclear power plants. He was my mom's boyfriend. He made a crapload of money, and damn near all of it went up his nose. Once the nuclear building boom went away, he was reduced to working a series of demeaning and increasingly menial jobs to support his drug habit, which degenerated to meth, and finally to spray paint. He's currently sleeping on a futon in the broom closet of a bowling alley where he works part time. That's the sort of people who built those plants, so I'm surprised that they aren't exploding right and left.
edit on 2/6/2012 by warpcrafter because: grammar



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 12:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by warpcrafter
I used to know someone whose job was to work on teams that set up nuclear power plants. He was my mom's boyfriend. He made a crapload of money, and damn near all of it went up his nose. Once the nuclear building boom went away, he was reduced to working a series of demeaning and increasingly menial jobs to support his drug habit, which degenerated to meth, and finally to spray paint. He's currently sleeping on a futon in the broom closet of a bowling alley where he works part time. That's the sort of people who built those plants, so I'm surprised that they aren't exploding right and left.
edit on 2/6/2012 by warpcrafter because: grammar


Holy (snip!). Seems like this could be a whole new thread....

Wow....



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by warpcrafter
 


It's funny you mention that because I know of a worker at a plant that is responsible for control systems and I swear it is a feat for the person to tie his shoes in the morning.




posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 12:28 AM
link   
Wel.. I can tell you, that translation is incorrect.

1. The Fire-rescue team was not allowed to enter the building due to secrecy
2. The research institute housed a 40 years old "У-10" nuclear parts accelerator
3. The first data available stated, that fire rose up in accelerator particle collector part
4. Later there are confirmations that incident was actually worse than that
5. The news agency "INTERFAX" told, that y-10 was forced to stop
6. To start again y-10 they will need a huge amount of moneys (or nuclear fuel I guess)
7. Official statement: "There no such thing as nuclear reactor fire, just cables burnt in a lab".

The facility is also known as "ITEP-TWAC Facility" more about this: Low level RF control of ITEP-TWAC Facility

This came up in Lithuanian news papers. Mainly source is from Newsru.com

So the question is: What are they achieved? What really happened?

edit on 2012.2.6 by amfis because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 01:46 AM
link   
Update near habitats reports, that the smoke is seen from far distance, and there is strong chemical smell 500 meters around institute.

"Горел (и горит до сих пор, прошу заметить) институт на Большой Черемушкинской. Дым до сих пор столбом, и невероятный химический запах метров на 500 вокруг." Gazeta RU

Looks like something cookin' and not cables definitely.
edit on 2012.2.6 by amfis because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join