Four Years Since The Phoronix Chernobyl Expedition
Phoronix: Four Years Since The Phoronix Chernobyl Expedition
Today is the 28th anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster within the Ukraine. With this being a light news weekend, if you weren't a Phoronix reader four years ago, we took a trip out to Chernobyl and Pripyat and you can see a horde of our photos...
Thanks Michael, that is one poignantly enduring photo shoot. Those interested in What Went Wrong might wish to browse WNA's article: Chernobyl Accident 1986.
Typical BS from rival reactor manufactures (spoiler: Russian reactors bad, American are good). "Good" american reactor: Fukushima Daiichi, hi-end industry dancing robots, boston dynamics amasing mule, toilets with chips since ~1980, blabla.
Originally Posted by pipe13
Bad Russian reactor = Chernobyl
Originally Posted by storm_st
increase in reactivity when control rods initially inserted (the primary reason for the accident)
no secondary containment (should they had serious secondary containment, it would have contained the consequences of the first problem)
crappy medical system fails to distribute iodine tablets to the people exposed
Good US reactor = Fukushima
reactor operating for 45 years successfully
when the earthquake hit it shutdown itself successfully like many times before
reactor building tsunami defenses calculated 13 meter walls, tsunami waves were 14 meters
all 3 diesel generators for each reactor in the basement, generators flooded and stopped, should just one generator for each reactor have been placed in the ceiling the problem might have been avoided
should one of the reactors have been restarted in a low power setting to provide power for safety systems the accident could also have been prevented
TEPCO had receiver reports warning about both the tsunami wall being potentially to small and the placement of the diesel generators, but did nothing about it (not fault of nuclear reactor supplier but that of TEPCO)
So please go a head and apologize for talking all of this nonsense. You have no idea what you are talking about on nuclear matters. I have completed an 8 week intro course on nuclear power that allows me to understand all of this stuff you have no idea about.
Today even in Russia nuclear energy should be safe, after the cold war ended, and the Chernobyl experience, free exchange of ideas brought Russia to adopt most international nuclear safety rules.
This anti USA view of the world is so stupid. I'm from Brazil and lived in the USA, so I know the difference. You are so wrong, it's not even funny to show how wrong you are.
Nonsense. Those power plants are planned, built, maintained and operated by humans. Mistakes will be made and disastrous accidents will happen in the future, as they happened in the past, no matter how safe you think those reactors are, simply because humans make mistakes.
Originally Posted by macpacheco
Let's see, USA nuclear plant operators undergo training every 6 weeks. So every single procedure is so deeply ingrained in their minds, it's unlikely for any significant mistake to be made.
Originally Posted by Vim_User
Plus computers monitor every remotely important reactor parameter, with all data monitored by quadruple probes, and action only taken when at least 2 probes show something wrong (preventing a single bad probe from triggering wrong safety action).
Three Mile Island and Chernobyl could have been prevented with computers analyzing parameters and all failure modes programmed into monitoring software (for best recommendations).
The only parallel I see in human endeavours in large aircraft, with their triple or quadruple everything.
I also know quite a bit about jet aircraft being a private pilot with instrument ratings and a junkie of large aircraft technology.
I strongly suggest you go learn about this before making some uninformed criticism.
Nuclear power has enough people criticizing it out of malice, please don't criticize out of ignorance.
Russia and other former USSR states did learn a lot from Chernobyl, don't think for a second that they didn't. Plus almost every nuclear plant in the world is subject to IAEA inspections plus national regulatory inspections. After radiation from Chernobyl hit Europe serious countries, it became very clear to the whole world that what one country does with nuclear power matters to every other country when the subject is safety.
So which points in this article are incorrect? Please enlighten us.
Originally Posted by storm_st
The part where it pretends that our species is intelligent, mature, and responsible enough to develop technology that safely harnesses the energy released by nuclear fission.
Originally Posted by log0
The *species* is sufficiently intelligent / mature / responsible (at least a sufficient subset is), but we haven't developed societal and reward models which encourage the right behaviour yet. Availability of relatively cheap fossil fuels puts an upper limit on the amount we are willing/able to spend to make reactor installations safe and implement something closer to a "closed loop" fueling/reprocessing model that limits or eliminates the nuclear waste problem.
Originally Posted by russofris
I remember hearing someone suggest that drilling a sufficiently deep hole to dump nuclear waste into the earth's molten core (assuming we still believe the earth has one) would "solve the problem", hey what could go wrong ? Seems to me that radioactive volcanoes would be even worse than sharks with lasers.