Thread: Chernobyl disaster (the grim anniversary)

Strangely, nobody is discussing it here. If anybody wants to express his/her opinion, come on. My point of view is somethink like:

- Is Chernobyl disaster a argument against nuclear energetics in general? No.

- Is it the argument against total idiots in control of nuclear facilities? It is.

Gorbachev about Chernobyl, trying to white himself as hardly as he can:

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/gorbachev3

I think there was some brief discussion of it somwhere on the General section of the forum...

I hardened to the view in two subjects:
1) Innefficiency and stupidity of various soviet leaders.
2) Self-sacrifice of soviet people and ability to acts of bravery.

I was shocked when I knew that people of injured cities and villages had known about the tragedy one day later. Officials really didn`t kow what to do and couldn`t organise evacuation of nearby cities. Many people got large doses of radiation because didn`t know about the danger of disaster and came to the reactor to see the place of explosion. Maybe officials were afraid of panic, but people would panic before such danger any way. They could minimize the level of possible panic.

I admire the people who tried to minimize the aftermath of tragedy and lost their health. They are true heroes and it`s a great pity that officials and our people have already forgotten their acts of bravery

The experience of Chernobyl doesn`t stop the developing of nuclear energy and expansion of nuclear plants but I hope it warned our nuclear staff against experiments with the operational nuclear reactor.

Originally Posted by Scorpio

Gorbachev about Chernobyl, trying to white himself as hardly as he can:

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/gorbachev3

I think he should keep silence after all and don't even try to vindicate himself so frantically. Virtually nobody respects him and his opinion in Russia.
Long time ago I had a talk about Chrnobyl with a professor of nuclear power plant faculty and he told me that they had just played with nuclear reactor making some stupid experiment on it.

Also, people are always talking about Ukraine and Chernobyl', when most of the radiation went into Belarus', and Belarus' is thought to have the highest number of affected people. Chernobyl' is practically on the border between Ukraine and Belarus' and unfortunately for Belarus', the wind was blowing north.

Originally Posted by TATY

Also, people are always talking about Ukraine and Chernobyl', when most of the radiation went into Belarus', and Belarus' is thought to have the highest number of affected people. Chernobyl' is practically on the border between Ukraine and Belarus' and unfortunately for Belarus', the wind was blowing north.

... and the rivers flowing south back to the Ukraine...

Originally Posted by kalinka_vinnie

Originally Posted by TATY

Also, people are always talking about Ukraine and Chernobyl', when most of the radiation went into Belarus', and Belarus' is thought to have the highest number of affected people. Chernobyl' is practically on the border between Ukraine and Belarus' and unfortunately for Belarus', the wind was blowing north.

... and the rivers flowing south back to the Ukraine...

...and the free-range alligators that roam back north into Belarus... I don't think it's really necessary to say one side got it worse than the other. The fact of the matter is that they both got clobbered and that really, really sucks, fictious alligators aside.

But the worst on this fact is, the west countries are scared. Here, in Slovakia, no country from former "west block" do not allow us to use nucler power plants in our counntry, they say because Chernobyl. But their saying about Chernobyl is only saying under colour of they plan to sell us the energy - so they are trying (they are trying very good - Austia exspecially) to prohibite "no so safety reactors" as is ours.

Originally Posted by Pejko

But the worst on this fact is, the west countries are scared. Here, in Slovakia, no country from former "west block" do not allow us to use nucler power plants in our counntry, they say because Chernobyl. But their saying about Chernobyl is only saying under colour of they plan to sell us the energy - so they are trying (they are trying very good - Austia exspecially) to prohibite "no so safety reactors" as is ours.

Skin them. "Give us money or we'll ask Russians to build us a nuclear power plant."
Frankly, all these cries about the ecology - it's just an excuse to forbid you to have an energy of your own in order to make you purchase it from them. They HAVE nuclear plants you don't. Moreover - nuclear power is one of the most "pure" kinds of energy. Everything works in a closed cycle, nuclear power produces no pollution at all. Of course, when a disaster like Chernobyl happens people suffer, but no power - no industry, no industry - no money.
No money - we may celebrate the birth of yet another banana republic.

P.S. I sorrow deeply for all those who had died because of that catastrophe but it happenned mostly due to a human idiocy, not mere some technical malfunction.

Virtually nobody respects him and his opinion in Russia.

Gorby dealt with the Soviet legacy. And now, as the soviet power is again coming to its own, those who have taken part in liquidation of the aftermath are comletely forgotten by the state.

Ramil, you have got it.

Let's live bannanas, VIVA la bannanas, VIVA nucler-free bannanas at all.

Originally Posted by Ramil

Originally Posted by Pejko

But the worst on this fact is, the west countries are scared. Here, in Slovakia, no country from former "west block" do not allow us to use nucler power plants in our counntry, they say because Chernobyl. But their saying about Chernobyl is only saying under colour of they plan to sell us the energy - so they are trying (they are trying very good - Austia exspecially) to prohibite "no so safety reactors" as is ours.

Skin them. "Give us the money or we'll ask the Russians to build us a nuclear power plant."
Frankly, all these cries about the enviroment - it's just an excuse to forbid you to have energy of your own in order to make you purchase it from them. They HAVE nuclear plants, you don't. Moreover - nuclear power is one of the most "pure" kinds of energy. Everything works in a closed cycle, nuclear power produces no pollution at all. Of course, when a disaster like Chernobyl happens, people suffer, but no power - no industry, no industry - no money.
No money - we may celebrate the birth of yet another banana republic.

P.S. I am deeply sad for all those who had died because of that catastrophe, but it happenned mostly due to a human idiocy, not merely because of some technical malfunction.

1) Nuclear reactor produce pollution. It is called nuclear waste, which is almost impossible to process. Current method is to dig it down and let it be there for 100000 years until it is harmless.
2) According to the sources I read about the Chernobyl disaster, a design fault was also a contributing factor to the disaster. Not just human idiocy.http://www.chernobyl.co.uk/ "The RBMK reactor type used at Chernobyl suffers from instability at low power and thus may experience a rapid , uncontrollable power increase. Although other reactor types have this problem they incorporate design features to stop instability from occurring."

the disaster was caused by the incompetence of comunisim

Originally Posted by patriot

the disaster was caused by the incompetence of comunisim

Where does Comunisim lie on the Periodic table? Certainly, you couldn't have meant "communism."

вот тут неплохой сайт есть на эту тему: http://www.angelfire.com/extreme4/kiddo ... icles.html
На iXBT его обсуждали...

Originally Posted by kalinka_vinnie

Originally Posted by Ramil

Originally Posted by Pejko

But the worst on this fact is, the west countries are scared. Here, in Slovakia, no country from former "west block" do not allow us to use nucler power plants in our counntry, they say because Chernobyl. But their saying about Chernobyl is only saying under colour of they plan to sell us the energy - so they are trying (they are trying very good - Austia exspecially) to prohibite "no so safety reactors" as is ours.

Skin them. "Give us the money or we'll ask the Russians to build us a nuclear power plant."
Frankly, all these cries about the enviroment - it's just an excuse to forbid you to have energy of your own in order to make you purchase it from them. They HAVE nuclear plants, you don't. Moreover - nuclear power is one of the most "pure" kinds of energy. Everything works in a closed cycle, nuclear power produces no pollution at all. Of course, when a disaster like Chernobyl happens, people suffer, but no power - no industry, no industry - no money.
No money - we may celebrate the birth of yet another banana republic.

P.S. I am deeply sad for all those who had died because of that catastrophe, but it happenned mostly due to a human idiocy, not merely because of some technical malfunction.

1) Nuclear reactor produce pollution. It is called nuclear waste, which is almost impossible to process. Current method is to dig it down and let it be there for 100000 years until it is harmless.

Waste != Pollution
Nuclear reactor doesn't pollute environment. What I cannot say about some other energy sources. And those several barrels of nuclear waste doesn't make all that difference compared to pollution produced by cars for example.

2) According to the sources I read about the Chernobyl disaster, a design fault was also a contributing factor to the disaster. Not just human idiocy.http://www.chernobyl.co.uk/ "The RBMK reactor type used at Chernobyl suffers from instability at low power and thus may experience a rapid , uncontrollable power increase. Although other reactor types have this problem they incorporate design features to stop instability from occurring."

Source:
http://stopatom.slavutich.kiev.ua/1-2-1b.htm

Here's some excerpts:
2.1.6.1. Выводы комиссии, представленные на совещании экспертов МАГАТЭ в августе 1986 г.
Изложенные ниже выводы были первым официальным документом, в котором на основании анализа хода событий, предшествовавших аварии, сделана попытка выделить основные ее причины. Такой анализ показал, что происшедшая авария была связана с вводом избыточной реактивности. Отмечено, что конструкция реакторной установки предусматривала защиту от подобного типа аварий с учетом физических особенностей реактора, включая положительный паровой коэффициент реактивности. Технические средства защиты и управления должны были обеспечить безопасность реактора при превышении мощности и уменьшении периода разгона, при появлении различных неисправностей в его работе.
Кроме технических средств защиты, имелись также строгие правила и порядок ведения технологического процесса на АЭС, определяемые регламентом эксплуатации энергоблока. К числу наиболее важных правил относятся требования о недопустимости снижения оперативного запаса реактивности ниже 30 стержней.
В процессе подготовки и проведения испытания турбогенератора персонал отключил ряд технических средств защиты и нарушил важнейшие положения регламента эксплуатации, касающиеся безопасного ведения технологического процесса. Основным мотивом в поведении персонала было стремление быстрее закончить испытания. Нарушение установленного порядка при подготовке и проведении испытаний, нарушение программы испытаний, небрежность в управлении реактором свидетельствуют о недостаточном понимании персоналом особенностей протекания технологических процесса в ядерном реакторе и о потере чувства опасности.
Вместе с тем, разработчики реакторной установки не предусмотрели создание защитных систем безопасности, способных предотвратить аварию при имевшемся наборе преднамеренных отключений технических средств защиты и нарушений регламента эксплуатации, так как считали, что такое сочетание событий невозможно.
Сделан вывод, что первопричиной аварии явилось крайне маловероятное сочетание нарушений порядка и режима эксплуатации, допущенное персоналом энергоблока. Катастрофические размеры авария приобрела в связи с тем, что реактор был переведен персоналом в такое нерегламентное состояние, в котором существенно усилилось влияние положительного коэффициента реактивности на рост мощности.
Таким образом, в изложенных выводах основная вина за аварию возлагается на персонал АЭС. Перечислен ряд нарушений, допущенных операторами в ходе испытания турбогенератора, впервые упомянуто о существовании положительного коэффициента реактивности реактора. Однако оставлен в стороне вопрос о том, почему оказалось возможным такое "крайне маловероятное сочетание нарушений порядка и режима эксплуатации" [1] реактора и кто несет за это ответственность.

The first and last cause of accident was the "human factor" (e.g. the idiotic experiment they were conducting).

Maybe some design faults were present, but I don't think it's important factor. I'm not an expert in nuclear energetics, but there's a lot of RBMK-1000 nuclear reactors still working in Russia and other countries -- and there is nothing wrong with them. If operated properly, they are absolutely safe.

About the posiible reasons of "Chernobyl histeria" Pejko wrote above:

But the worst on this fact is, the west countries are scared. Here, in Slovakia, no country from former "west block" do not allow us to use nucler power plants in our counntry, they say because Chernobyl. But their saying about Chernobyl is only saying under colour of they plan to sell us the energy - so they are trying (they are trying very good - Austia exspecially) to prohibite "no so safety reactors" as is ours.

-- absolutely correct.

Originally Posted by Ramil

Source:
http://stopatom.slavutich.kiev.ua/1-2-1b.htm

Спасибо за источник, потом почитаю внимательно.

Вдобавок к изложенному: от одного, вроде бы информированного человека, я слышал, что с реактором все-таки было что-то не так (избыточное содержание какого-то изотопа йода, или что-то в этом роде). Это послужило еще одной *косвенной* причиной аварии -- из-за этого как раз "разогреть" реактор как следует не удавалось, поэтому персонал решился на отключение АЗ. Это, понятно, не оправдание их идиотизму, но хоть какая-то попытка его разумно объяснить.

Originally Posted by Ramil

Однако оставлен в стороне вопрос о том, почему оказалось возможным такое "крайне маловероятное сочетание нарушений порядка и режима эксплуатации" [1] реактора и кто несет за это ответственность.

Как говорили герои бессмертного романа, тоже мне бином Ньютона. Уверен, что очень хотели порадовать начальство и побыстрее (наверное, к 1-му Мая) отрапортовать об успешных испытаниях турбогенератора. Порадовали.

Originally Posted by Scorpio

Вдобавок к изложенному: от одного, вроде бы информированного человека, я слышал, что с реактором все-таки было что-то не так (избыточное содержание какого-то изотопа йода, или что-то в этом роде).

Это называется йодная яма, вот очень хорошая ссылка, рассказывающая про принципы действия реактора РБMК и причины аварии в Чернобыле:
http://ufolog.nm.ru/chernob0.htm

Там, чуть-ли не посекундно восстановлены события 26 апреля 1986 г.

Как говорили герои бессмертного романа, тоже мне бином Ньютона. Уверен, что очень хотели порадовать начальство и побыстрее (наверное, к 1-му Мая) отрапортовать об успешных испытаниях турбогенератора. Порадовали.

Именно отрапортовать. И именно к 1 мая.