-
Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.
Chernobyl Nuclear Plant | March - 2022
- Thread starter Totality 🇺🇦 🇮🇱
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2015
That's probably why the monitoring stations went off line yesterday.
Is this a bargaining chip for the negotiations? it’s definitely an effective fear tactic since Chernobyl is the second thing normal people know about Ukraine besides it being invaded.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2015
I don't know, but it's either a bargaining chip or a terrorist act. See, first, we don't really know how long the incoming power has been down. Depending on how long those rods in the cooling pool have been there will determine in the long run how dangerous it really is. Example--switched from reactor to cooling pool---extremely hot. --over time, the rods do start a cooling down process, but it's very lengthy--I think it's several years. The water is constantly circulated in the pool, and if that stops, it's just like putting a pot of water in a kettle for making coffee or tea, turning on the stove and not taking the kettle off the stove. If the rods are hot enough (which we don't know) yes, they will catch on fire and release huge amounts of radiation.--Not as bad as the reactor was, but damn close. If you remember, that was one of the dangers at Fukushima also, because the cooling pools were boiling off. I'm not one of the anti-nuclear gang, but nuclear energy is a very dangerous form of generating electricity. It's a fragile system--a balancing act and if it goes out of balance, the results can be catastrophic.
jayinuk
Guest
iaea seem to think it'll be ok
This is a very serious situation, yes - hell, maybe the reason they've done this is because of that alleged "dirty bomb" they thought Ukraine were making at Chernobyl.
There's a thread here from a guy with a degree in nuclear physics from Cambridge, I think it does a good job of explaining it.
But still - there's much that could go wrong here. I don't know what to believe anymore.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2021
and plus we have no power at Chernobyl nuclear power plant we have under 36 hrs to get that power back or more fuel for the power generators
JungKneezy
Guest
Overblown in media, people see “Chernobyl” in headlines and freak out.
Chernobyl has three offsite power supplies, local reports indicate they’ve only lost one. EVEN IF those reports are wrong and all three are down, they have another backup of diesel generators that can run for 7 days. After that, they have mobile diesel generators that can keep things going.
The spent fuel in Chernobyl is decades old, so it’s not in a hyper-delicate state that has to be actively cooled lest a runaway explosion happen.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2015
Excuse me????? Decades old???? the last one was shut down in 2015. That's only 7 years buddy. And, the next question is, where in the hell are they going to get replacement fuel???
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2016
lemme weigh in here and clarify some insinuated untruths.... where do nuclear bombs get their needed materials? ANSWER: from a VERY VERY VERY select FEW special reactors known as BREEDER REACTORS, which are carefully controlled, and monitored by MANY agencies around the world.. the VAST MAJORITY of reactors are NOT breeder reactors.. the rods that are left over are not suitable for weapons grade plutonium. TCharley300, PLEASE refrain from stirring up fears unnecessarily. the world is scary enough, we don't need to fear-monger through faulty insinuations.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2015
I agree--I did forget about breeders. Be patient, I haven't had to deal with this crap in over 20 years. Besides in my old district it was a breeder. Now, what needs to be concentrated on is Chernobyl. Why?? Only a 48 hr supply of fuel (diesel) Russian troops supposedly still in area, and with them loosing 60 fuel trucks?? I'll bet money that the fuel for the generators has been stolen or mostly siphoned off for their tanks. And, the agencies involved for breeders is the IAEA. Which most of them (not all but most) are nato members.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2016
- Location
- Indiana, US
Calm down.
Chernobyl is only a *potential* crisis. Let's keep our focus on the *actual* crises we have going on for right now and not add Chernobyl to it until it actually turns into one.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2015
Will do, but remember firefighters are trained to be pro-active, versus reactive. In other words, preventing as much as possible, or being as ready as possible versus taking care of the situation as it happens. We won't have to start sweating Chernobyl for about another 30 hrs or so. Then, unless power is either restored or fuel is replenished we can be in trouble.
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2016
- Location
- Indiana, US
I am also a trained emergency responder, and the first rule of emergency response is not to panic or overreact. "Clinical detachment" is the phrase I drill into people while training emergency response techniques. Not saying it's easy; but it is necessary.
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2017
- Location
- Perth Western Australia
Chernobyl blew up once before. How did effect the world. Bugger all.Japanese reactor blew up aswell. How did it affect the world. Bugger all.Personal safety is not in Danger unless you are in area. Only locals truly were affected. Financial effects means shit. Humans health and safety is more important. Like I said locals concern only truly.
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2018
- Location
- Australia
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2015
Sure,,they're telling the truth for 'right now' but they haven't stated what can happen in about the next 30 hrs. OH yes---let's do everything to keep the panic below sweat stage instead of informing people with the complete truth so they can make up their own minds. sleep---sleep--go to sleep everything's fine. Yea right.
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2021
you need to relax man. chernobyl has literally already blown up it cannot possibly be worse. they are able to be maintained without an energy supply
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2016
- Location
- Indiana, US
Well, that's not entirely true. They didn't "fix" the reactor. They put a band-aid on it back in '86, then put a larger band-aid on it with the new containment building. But that reactor is still a huge problem and there are still potential risks from its existing condition. We just don't have the technology to deal with it yet.
I'm not going to spend a lot of time on this because the odds of anything happening are low, and Russia itself is by far the larger threat for the moment. But to say "it cannot possibly be worse" is going too far in the opposite direction of Charley's overreaction.
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2021
nuclear experts believe otherwise but i digress fingers crossed either way
- Status