Chernobyl

[iomegaman]

So I waded through HBO's mini-series "Chernobyl"...pretty well made, they at least got a copious amount of cigarette smoking scenes in...overall decent portrayal as far as I know...I had no idea that the situation was as critical as it got...always sort of though it was purely a Soviet problem and would have affected ONLY them and parts of Europe...

Got me thinking...I live less than 100 miles from a nuclear plant in Arizona...in the freaking desert...there is no large body of water nearby in case they need to cool it down in a hurry (not that that helped Chernobyl, but still...?)...I read an article a few years ago about using Thorium instead of Uranium...it seems like it would be safer and I wonder why these kind of changes never seem to make it to production?

 

[TillM]

I also watched all series. I was pretty impressed.
When I was a child, every year some kids from Chernobyl went to our school for two weeks. (It was especially for children who was affected from Chernobyl, also kids from Belarus)
I remember a blond girl, that was so pretty and I really was crushed in her. But never talked to her. I was 8.
I also remember, that the kids always seams a bit sad to me.
When I asked my mother some time ago about Chernobyl, she told me, that they don't even know it for weeks in the GDR. (I was born in East-Germany).
So everyone in the so called Alliance countries (don't know the English word, sorry, I hope you understand what I mean) change there fields with the grain and so on, but nothing happened in the GDR.
As far as I remember, my parents take notice a week after the crash. The News Papers talked from a accident.
I can just talk from Germany, but it was scandal what the East German government told the people.
In a documentary 30 years after Chernobyl they compare the news from East German and West German media.
On 2.5.1986 a German news paper write "... that the news in western media a just to occupy the UDSSR, everything is a
targeted panicmongering".
After the crash, you could buy lots of fruit and vegetables in the East German supermarkets, also rare stuff.
I think most of the stuff was from West Germany, cause they changed everything after the accident.
What really happened in Chernobyl my parents noticed months later.
I can just speak from the experience from my parents, cause I was to young to realize Chernobyl, so maybe in other parts the East Germany it was different. (And also in West Germany)

Even if just 70% is true in this mini-series, I just was perplex. I never thought that Europe was so near by a outstanding catastrophe.

This series really touched my heart, and even if its sound cheesy, I really start thinking about nuclear energy again.

 

[iomegaman]

Wow, thanks for sharing that TillM, had no idea it came so close to members here...

 

[living sounds]

I was a kid when it happened. I remember the panic back then quite well. We were no longer allowed to play outside, eat fruit we picked ourselves etc. for a while. All the sand in the sandboxes in the kindergarten was replaced. We also had children from Belarus over to recover for a few weeks, but that was in the summer of 1991.

 

[boji]

+1  On the miniseries.

While not a Ken Burns documentary,  it is good stuff.  However i'm afraid it's being touted more as a drama / anti-nuclear story than a powerful argument on the dangers of socialism/communism.  Presumably we want maximal discrimination of persons chosen to maintain and oversee nuclear power stations, based around a ruthless hierarchy of competence that goes all the way to the top. Even then, people's decisions are only as good as the information passed down to them, so the more technologically advanced the infrastructure, the less it should rely on a political chain of command.

My heart goes out to the proletariat who bravely sacrificed themselves for the greater good.  And some choice words to all the leaders, past and present, who put national image, corporate interests, and their own job security ahead of what's best for their citizenry.

 

[[silent:arts]]

... However i'm afraid it's being touted more as a drama / anti-nuclear story than a powerful argument on the dangers of socialism/communism ...

I haven't seen the documentary but too old and dangerous power plants are as dangerous in capitalism since we keep them online too long just because of profit. We have a few very old and dilapidated in Europe not passing stress tests. Belgium now stocks Iodine tablets for their whole population "just in case" ...

 

[boji]

too old and dangerous power plants are as dangerous in capitalism

i agree, a lot of harm has been done in the name of profit too.  Giving corporations the same rights as citizens I think was a big mistake.  A corporation is just a firewall which stands-in for the bad actors in all ways but the possibility of exacting any real justice or arresting of bad behavior.

 

[Script]

Ch. had been much more threatening than F. ever was. And I  really hate to say this...

 

[JohnRoberts]

Ch. had been much more threatening than F. ever was. And I  really hate to say this...

Life tends to give us the test first and answers later... We need to study these generally avoidable man made disasters and make adjustments to our behavior so they do not happen again.

I am personally disappointed that nuclear energy is not more widely embraced, with the latest and greatest technology that would not suffer such failure modes.  A tiny fraction of nuclear power generation around the world is using this latest safer technology, so perhaps another scare movie will help bring attention to this, but an ill informed public rarely draws the correct conclusions (at least the conclusions I would draw). If anything I see more nuclear plants shuttered but not replaced with new nuclear technology.

People of my generation recall incidents like Three Mile Island, and the classic Jane Fonda movie "China Syndrome" 1979 about a fictional nuclear plant melt down. I guess that movie didn't play in Russia. It is a little too easy to blame Chernobyl on the communist system, but it should not have happened.

In my crystal ball, next technology nuclear power generation is still a very good choice for maybe another century. By then we should have more efficient solar cells, and improved ways to transmit power across long distances without wasting so much of it, to make the wind farms and even ocean energy harvesting more practical. 

But what would I know, I can't even predict elections..?

JR

 

[iomegaman]

Hence my question about Thorium, the sad and perhaps most telling fact about changing fission material is Thorium does NOT produce weapons grade by-products, thus it is not as economically viable because (I am assuming here) the governments won't have an extra product to buy from the power plant...

As I peer into the data the real reason Thorium has not replaced Uranium is not the economic factor it is the weapons factor...seems humanity is more red in tooth and claw than nature itself.

 

[boji]

It is a little too easy to blame Chernobyl on the communist system

Yes I would be hesitant to blame the source of the meltdown and the extent of deaths that followed on a form of governance too, if the miniseries did not raise such questions.  Of course it was HBO and not an independent fact-finding panel that produced it, so it's possible the suppression of flaws in the RBMK reactors, the information blackout on the radioactive dangers, political corruption, and heroics of the characters were tailored for western conceits.

 

[boji]

As I peer into the data the real reason Thorium has not replaced Uranium is not the economic factor it is the weapons factor...seems humanity is more red in tooth and claw than nature itself.

I wouldn't believe it if it did not fall in line with our capacity for skulduggery and evil.  :'( :'(
Why must the fear of others or their judgment be the secret motivation that drives all technology? Even musing on a possible better way makes me look naive and childish. My bad...got me feeling the darkness again. 

 

[Tubetec]

Can we give a cast iron guarantee we(as a species)are going to be around for say the next 99.000 years to contain the mess? 
All things going according to plan in the short term a reactor gives good value , theres many saying now that if the full product lifecycle including decomissioning and clean up is factored in its not such a good deal as it seems at first glance.
Lets face it nuclear reactors and the production of nuclear weapons go hand in hand ,always did , theres some lobby group doing the rounds now to build a reactor in Ireland  ;D Its a bit like a time bomb for future generations to have to deal with for the sake of industry now . Look at the Japanese situation where the Fukushima reactor will continue to poison the planet basically forever , who's idea was it to build nuclear reactors in some of the most geologically unstable places on the planet anyway?

"Overcoming popular resistance

In 1954, the Operations Coordinating Board of the United States National Security Council proposed that the U.S. government undertake a "vigorous offensive" urging nuclear energy for Japan in order to overcome the widespread reluctance of the Japanese population to build nuclear reactors in the country. Thirty two million Japanese people, a third of the Japanese population, signed a petition calling for banning hydrogen bombs.[24] The Washington Post called for adopting the proposal to build nuclear reactors in Japan, stating: "Many Americans are now aware...that the dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan was not necessary....How better to make a contribution to amends than by offering Japan...atomic energy."[25] For several years starting in 1954, the United States Central Intelligence Agency and other U.S. government agencies ran a propaganda war targeting the Japanese population to vanquish the Japanese people's opposition to nuclear power.[26][25][not in citation given]

In 1954, Japan budgeted 230 million yen for nuclear energy, marking the beginning of the Japan's nuclear program. The Atomic Energy Basic Law limited activities to only peaceful purposes.[27] The first nuclear power plant in Japan, the Tōkai Nuclear Power Plant, was built by the UK's GEC and was commissioned in 1966."

quote from Wikipedia

 

[iomegaman]

There's a certain pathos you can trace back in most cultures to trauma...in the Soviets it seems to be the harsh cold and hunger combined with war, hence Rachmaninov's  "Isle of the dead/etc" and down that path most of the Japanese Monster films of the early period with Godzilla/etc...all seem to point to nature going berserk after humanity poisons it...even Final Fantasy ends in death (mostly)...the heroes always die in certain genres...(Seven Samurai/etc)...

Even our art is warning us...

 

[JohnRoberts]

I've talked about this a lot over the years and didn't feel the need to repeat it but the new safer nuclear power generation process technology I speak of does not create fissile byproducts.

If anybody thinks Iran is only interested in cheap electricity I have some MS swampland to sell you.  : Dry as a (soup) bone.  8)

AFAIK only India was actively pursuing these next generation reactors but the last time I looked into it was years ago.

In the US every new nuke plant being built was grossly over budget and putting vendors out of business in the process.

JR

 

[Script]

AFAIK only India was actively pursuing these next generation reactors but the last time I looked into it was years ago.

Yes, but India hasn't signed the anti-nuke production treaty yet, so Japanese sales are postponed indefinitely, IIRC.

Nuclear power is
- safe  NO
- clean NO
- cheap NO (decommission & clean-up  in the wake of major accidents)
- fast YES

 

[Phrazemaster]

My father was an electrical engineer and worked for Southern California Edison. He helped design the substation at San Onofre nuclear plant many years ago. He took me to the site while it was still under construction and I got to go into the control room as it was being built.

Soooo many buttons and knobs and switches!

I personally think nuclear is a terrible idea - moronically stupid in fact. Anything that creates toxic substances that takes hundreds/thousands of years to break down, and poses an ongoing danger to all of life, just isn’t worth the risk.

Humanity always reaches for the easy solutions. If we didn’t have nuclear we would have figured something else out.

It’s as simple as that.

 

[living sounds]

I think that as a species we need to make sure there is a reliable source of power in case of a natural catastrophe. For example, a volcanic winter has a high probability of happening within our lifetime.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer

Solar and wind power generators are pretty much useless in this scenario. Fossile fuels cause catastrophic climate change. So building up an infrastructure of modern nuclear reactors (like the upcoming generation IV types) to add to the mix and provide a backup for crisis is the only sensible path, IMO.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_IV_reactor

 

[JohnRoberts]

I think that as a species we need to make sure there is a reliable source of power in case of a natural catastrophe. For example, a volcanic winter has a high probability of happening within our lifetime.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer

Solar and wind power generators are pretty much useless in this scenario. Fossile fuels cause catastrophic climate change. So building up an infrastructure of modern nuclear reactors (like the upcoming generation IV types) to add to the mix and provide a backup for crisis is the only sensible path, IMO.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_IV_reactor

While I can't fully embrace your rationale, I do endorse next generation nuclear technology at least for the next century or so.

Of course any significant technology needs to be managed intelligently

JR

 

[Tubetec]

Im not going to argue against the fact that modern technology could be a lot cleaner , it still doesnt address the question of containing the 'already made' mess for tens of thousands of years . Funny how we pointed the finger to Moskow for its cover up , but now the Japanese are doing exactly the same , and every other government who messed with the atom the story is the same ,cover-up/conspiracy theory depending on which side of the fence your on .
Theres a huge dollop of double standard too , when western countries have themselves messed around with all kinds of inhumane radiological testing which they now seek bury and prevent coming to light , radium coated rods being a prime example of this .

The weapons industry is behind nuclear power , so how can we possibly trust any financial costings as there's always an ulterior motive  at the back end. Buying into nuclear power way back when it started or with the current state of the art its all the same ,its a gamble with peoples(and the entire planets) safety for more and cheaper energy ,which just encourages us to consume more and more of it without thinking .