Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Hideous Legacy Of Chernobyl

Discussion in 'The Pub' started by pro-pilot, Nov 15, 2007.

  1. Holy crap.

    And good old Johnny reckons it's the way forward for us here. :roll:
  2. Thats disgusting.

    All that pain and suffering cos some stupid prick wanted to perform some tests at the plant, even after being advised not to and that it was extremely dangerous.

    Makes me sick.
  3. Chernobyl is one of the places that i really want to visit to see for myself the real effects of what happened. I've always found it facinating. There was a girl on a bike that apparently went around taking photos there (some said it was bs, others said it was real, who knows on teh internetz :p ), does anyone have that link? i seem to have lost it

    *edit* thanks pp!
  4. Here
  5. That was moving and saddening :(

    Even though I've seen reports on Chernobyl accident before, this presentation had a deep impact on ... human and professional.

    I'm an engineer in a petrochemical plant. We have robust procedures that require plant changes to be proceduralised and reviewed and authorised. These procedures are a pain in the arse, but are there for good reason.

    We're a conservative bunch too... no project goal or plant configuration test is worth striving for when there are precursor signs that things may start going pear shaped... reset, review and reconsider. The first sign of something we didn't consider... means we stop and take 5.

    Importantly, we have a whole seperate set of protocols and procedures for when we defeat safety critical instrumentation and systems.

    Safety critical means the last line of defense. These systems/instruments avoid catastrophic failures and only come into play when safe operating windows are exceeded... we never disconnect them without an alternative back up plan which provides a similar level of protection... or unless the plant is entirely shut down.

    To me, the reason for these controls and these procedures are self evident.

    ...how the engineers at Chernobyl didn't think the same way is beyond me...

    Thanks for the link PP.
  6. that was a good link OP. very moving.

    Having said that, I think nuclear is still one of the best ways forward. No, perhaps we don't want it next door to us, but it is going to be integral to australia in the future.

    nuclear technology has increased enormously. look at european countries. we have the worlds largest supply of uranium.......you do the math.

    all we can do is pray that lessons have been learnt from chernobyl, and i think they have.
  7. To me, the reason for these controls and these procedures are self evident.

    ...how the engineers at Chernobyl didn't think the same way is beyond me...

    ..... because in that political and social climate, Rob, only the State was important, and the needs of the workers and the citizens were irrelevant.

    Think of what the remaining reactors must be like now with the KGB now the Russian Mafia, and profits now more important than safety. I wonder how long it is since the reactors in the Soviet Bloc countries have had independent inspection???

    How something that happened in a socially and morally backward country 21 years ago has nay reference to what we might do in Australia in 2007 bewliders me; but then any opportunity for hysterical political commentary has always been seized upon by the anti-nuclear lobby.....
  8. I hear ya Hornet, but that's self defeating. How much money are they making from a reactor that's no longer functioning??? How much did it cost them for a reactor that blew up?

    There are good FINANCIAL reasons for safety measures too.
  9. ^with the appropriate clothing, yes?
  10. Yes Ktulu...with appropriate clothing :p

    I also want to go. Along with Auschwitz etc. So many important historical events in so many different places...would love to visit them all :)
  11. i'm planning the birthday suit, no?
  12. Now, I'm not saying that it wasn't an horrific event, with dire consequences for many people, but...

    I also think that quite a lot of what we hear about Chernobyl and the figures about actual death numbers etc tend to be inaccurate and grossly over-exaggerated.

    I saw a doco (i know i know, so it must be true, blah blah) a few years back where they stated the actual death toll, and from memory, it was in the hundreds, rather than 1000s. They also went on to show, among other things, how many small mammals are actually thriving in the 'hot zone' where they should be the most affected due to their small size. These animals were quite healthy with very few deformities (no more than in a non-radiation affected area).

    I didn't watch the whole of the video in the O.P. but the bit I saw was based inside an asylum where a man was describing all the bizarre behaviour of these kids, and he was also showing pics of people with deformities. I hate to state the obvious, but you go to ANY asylum and you'll see a lot of strange behaviour, radiation or not. And there people who become/are born deformed for reasons other than radiation.

    Again, I'm not saying that it wasn't horrible and that people weren't affected by it, but, as has been alluded to in an earlier post, anti-nuclear lobbyists tend over-dramatise this event to the point of not looking at all sides of the equation.

    I'm guess saying that maybe, just maybe, it wasn't/isn't quite as bad as the anti-nuclear lobbyists would like you to believe.

    (Going to put on my radiation and flame-proof suit now)
  13. Right, show me the asylum with the same kind of deformities and patients in Melbourne? In fact anywhere in Australia.

    I get your general point, but I think your caution is misplaced. It's akin to saying that the Jewish death camps were exaggerated.

    The actual death figures are probably shouded in Russian propaganda. The death figures from increased cancer though are less shrouded since the medical folk want the world to know, and it's in the thousands... unusually high for a single region, and claimed to be a step change different before the explosion versus after.
  14. can of worms.... while nobody debates that a lot of people died, the exact numbers are often exaggerated...( more died in Russia than Germany) but you rarely hear about Soviet Union Anti-Semitsm)

    it is the nature of the beast, the winners of war write the history- anything that can be used as a point of argument to further a point especially in a disaster like this,

    i have to agree with mcbigg on this- these event always have a political edge to it...
  15. remember the facts are always debated and nobody can really know the true number of deaths.. just that it should have never happened
  16. Political which way? The politics of the state obscuring the size of the disaster, or the politics of those that care/environmentalists/clean power advocates trying to highlight something that might equate to the real number of deaths????

    The problem with radiation is that it sticks around for a long long time. Increased cancer rates for many many years mean many deaths. We might never truly know the total... but it's only part of the picture. There are other impacts from radiation.

    Mcbigg suggests the doco was biased and flawed because it focussed on an asylum.

    Show me an asylum any where in the world, without a radiation hotspot in the vicinity, that has the same number and density of abnormalities?

  17. Many years back I saw the russian starlifter here in australia , also a few of there other aircraft , the Hind and more.
    The one thing I noticed , they were rusted , un kept , in major poor state of repair.
    Talking to one of the Piliots he said that because of the countrys econmic state that they couldnt repair , fix or even order parts for many things.
    They were lucky if they were even paid .

    a reactor in australia and one that was in chenobil are in 2 differant countrys , 2 differant economic situations and 2 very differant nick picking media .
  18. If you remember at the time there was about 4 days of denial that ANYTHING had happened, then a trickle of 'Oh, it's not that serious' kinda stuff and it was weeks before the Soviet authorities admitted to the scope and seriousness of the disaster. I seem to recall that satellite photos showed the huge damage that had been done, and that these were pubished while they were saying that it was just a minor water spill, or something.
    Anyways, since it was a unique event it's impossible to compare it with anything elese, in any aspect. In the Three Mile Island event no-one died, and the level of radiation in the area was less than the yearly background radiation to which anyone who spends some time outdoors is exposed. Extensive follow-up studies have shown no increases in cancers and no birth deformities, etc. As I have already said, Cherynobyl was less about a nuclear accident and much more about the contempt for human life shown by a selfish and godless government.
    Anyone seeking to make an anti-nuclear energy case out of these two events is seriously barking up the wrong tree. Try preaching to the thousands of families whose fathers and uncles and sons die each year in the dodgy coal mines in that other shining example of the communist system, China :roll:.