www.sciencealert.com/chernobyl-ecosystem-population-health-years-later
"In the words of University of Portsmouth researcher Jim Smith, "This doesn't mean radiation is good for wildlife, just that the effects of human habitation, including hunting, farming, and forestry, are a lot worse." "
What the F happened to those ships/boats? where they in direct line to the explosion?
But to see nature returning...just beautiful, how plant life can overcome the toxic air...very strange
Select to expand quoteTonz said..
What the F happened to those ships/boats? where they in direct line to the explosion?
But to see nature returning...just beautiful, how plant life can overcome the toxic air...very strange
Nah, there was no damage outside of the immediate building.
There was a pretty big exclusion zone though so everything was just abandoned and no one ever went back.
Radiation is not like a toxic haze. Generally the area is quite liveable and has been since not long after the event. No one wants to go back and live there though so no effort has been made to clear any lingering high radiation sources.
Very earie footage, thanks for sharing, and apparently due to the heigh level of radiation and long half life, it won't be habitable for about another 20,000 years.
Select to expand quotejuicerider said..
Very earie footage, thanks for sharing, and apparently due to the heigh level of radiation and long half life, it won't be habitable for about another 20,000 years.
....."apparently" 20,000 years. But only if you want to renovate the old reactor itself of course....
There are people living there full time now (against advice) and the remaining reactors (there were 4 all up) operated for up to 15 years after the event, so people kept working at the plant for a long time and continue to do so without much drama.........
There are also organised tours through the area and the estimated exposure you get on a tour is about the same as you get sitting on the plane on the flight there.
The background radiation is elevated for sure. But the base background levels there are about the same as the highest inhabited naturally occurring radiation on the planet. ie there are people living in places on earth with the same natural background radiation levels.
I'm not saying it should be opened up for resettlement as there are dangers with spots of higher radioactivity that are definitely not desirable to be near longer term, but it is far from a toxic death zone.
I heard that afterwards locals came back and pillaged airconditors, fridges and other appliances they could sell to people who wouldn't realise they bought a radiated air conditioner..
Select to expand quotejuicerider said..
Very earie footage, thanks for sharing, and apparently due to the heigh level of radiation and long half life, it won't be habitable for about another 20,000 years.
Not true. Close in is very dangerous- but you can walk through the building for up to an hour or so as long as you don't breathe the dust.
Its not as bad as the anti-nuke lobby would have you believe as they have a vested interest.
NEW tech nuclear with better controls than dodgy Soviet crap is the way forward in a world where renewables wont keep up with us.
Select to expand quoteMark _australia said..
NEW tech nuclear with better controls than dodgy Soviet crap is the way forward in a world where renewables wont keep up with us.
Yes, despite all the renewables we're still setting PBs most years for emission of CO2. 2018 was up 1.6% on 2017. A good chance 2019 will be another planetary best.
www.wri.org/blog/2018/12/new-global-co2-emissions-numbers-are-they-re-not-good
Select to expand quotejbshack said..
What is with the big fence system
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duga_radar
I saw a vid a few years back of a someone who flew a racing drone through and around it.
EDIT: found it, 5.30 is an awesome vertical dive through it.
