Chernobyl (HBO Mini Series)
Discussion
Worth reading up on the Goiânia accident as well. The main individual received a dose of 800 roentgens but survived whereas others with much lower doses died. This seems to be similar to Chernobyl where some survived doses far in excess of that deemed fatal but others succumbed to lower exposures.
There are so many factors involved that it makes estimating a fatal level very difficult. It really depends on how the exposure occurs. In general, if it is external then it may be bad but survivable. Internal (mostly through inhalation) then not much can be done.
There are so many factors involved that it makes estimating a fatal level very difficult. It really depends on how the exposure occurs. In general, if it is external then it may be bad but survivable. Internal (mostly through inhalation) then not much can be done.
Pesty said:
So you’re saying she could eat it
Actually what would happen if she did, nothing or what happened to that Russian spy?
As the previous reply says, lots of factors involved.Actually what would happen if she did, nothing or what happened to that Russian spy?
A very back of the envelope calculation (with a shed load of assumptions and simplifications) suggests dose from ingesting it could be something like a 1/4 of a sievert. Which wouldn't kill you, but would increase your cancer risk by a percent or more. It is something like 100 years worth of background radiation in the UK. Drop in the ocean vs Litvinenko, using the same method; over 1000 times higher dose + with polonium being an alpha emitter it was particularly harmful once inside him. BTW - one of the many assumptions in the 1/4 Sievert is that there is only the caesium 137 there; I didn't have the patience to watch to the end her second video on a low resolution gamma spec of the particle; anything else in the particle could add to the dose. But on the basis of measurements we made whilst I was out there; it was mostly/exclusively caesium that we were eating (food from elsewhere in Ukraine).
If there is interest in continuing this sort of discussion, might be better to resurrect an old one or start a new thread on the accident/area/issues as we're drifting somewhat from the TV programme!
Pesty said:
LaurasOtherHalf said:
Welshbeef said:
A question If those two chaps had not turned on the water what would have happened? “Meltdown” but what really would that mean in that location
Nothing. It was a pointless exercise that had no result (not that they were completely aware of that).They believed, or were forced to believe the reactor was still there and somewhat functioning.
It was certainly heroic. Just completely unnecessary.
llewop said:
confucuis said:
Surely, that cannot be real? Would she not be feeling the effects immediately?!
Not really, the dose rates she mentioned were not really scary, so wouldn’t cause immediate effects. It seemed very localised, which was why she was faffing about to get the particle. I think the highest dose rate she called out was a couple of millisieverts per hour. If that was more uniform, it would be about the same dose in an hour as most of us get in a year. But with it being a hot particle more likely, if she handled it a lot, would be some affect on her hand(s), distance is the key, very high levels in close, not so much of an issue a metre away.
To get immediate effects you are talking much higher levels, orders of magnitude higher. Doesn’t stop it being dim and avoidable.
I have a huge "love" for the incident, so far this seems to be focused on the human part/causes of the disaster and no technical causes (which is a good thing I think, it'd bore "normal" people). Plus how the various staff made it worse.
RBMK reactors had seen issues (such as the effect of the graphite tips on the rods) before but all been covered up by the government, so failures which never made it to other reactor control people.
It's also worth noting that at the time of the accident, the people who had designed the test which was running were already at home, as were the shift after them. The people in the plant were just the overnight ghost staff.
RBMK reactors had seen issues (such as the effect of the graphite tips on the rods) before but all been covered up by the government, so failures which never made it to other reactor control people.
It's also worth noting that at the time of the accident, the people who had designed the test which was running were already at home, as were the shift after them. The people in the plant were just the overnight ghost staff.
Lazadude said:
I have a huge "love" for the incident, so far this seems to be focused on the human part/causes of the disaster and no technical causes (which is a good thing I think, it'd bore "normal" people). Plus how the various staff made it worse.
RBMK reactors had seen issues (such as the effect of the graphite tips on the rods) before but all been covered up by the government, so failures which never made it to other reactor control people.
It's also worth noting that at the time of the accident, the people who had designed the test which was running were already at home, as were the shift after them. The people in the plant were just the overnight ghost staff.
Why would anyone conducting such a significant test pop off home for bye byes. RBMK reactors had seen issues (such as the effect of the graphite tips on the rods) before but all been covered up by the government, so failures which never made it to other reactor control people.
It's also worth noting that at the time of the accident, the people who had designed the test which was running were already at home, as were the shift after them. The people in the plant were just the overnight ghost staff.
We’re they utterly inept shooting from the hip or had they been worn down with the magnificent USSR iron curtain.
Welshbeef said:
Lazadude said:
I have a huge "love" for the incident, so far this seems to be focused on the human part/causes of the disaster and no technical causes (which is a good thing I think, it'd bore "normal" people). Plus how the various staff made it worse.
RBMK reactors had seen issues (such as the effect of the graphite tips on the rods) before but all been covered up by the government, so failures which never made it to other reactor control people.
It's also worth noting that at the time of the accident, the people who had designed the test which was running were already at home, as were the shift after them. The people in the plant were just the overnight ghost staff.
Why would anyone conducting such a significant test pop off home for bye byes. RBMK reactors had seen issues (such as the effect of the graphite tips on the rods) before but all been covered up by the government, so failures which never made it to other reactor control people.
It's also worth noting that at the time of the accident, the people who had designed the test which was running were already at home, as were the shift after them. The people in the plant were just the overnight ghost staff.
We’re they utterly inept shooting from the hip or had they been worn down with the magnificent USSR iron curtain.
So if you shift ends - you go home, no questions asked.. nothing could possibly go wrong.
The bit about the gauges only read 3.8... but 3.8 is not too bad was another example of this.
Edited by Steamer on Friday 10th May 15:30
I'm enjoying it, I really like how it digs into the organisational/cultural failings - to a certain extent, the actual mechanics of how bits of powerplant failed aren't that important, it's about how everything to do with people and processes was working in this skewed reality of black is white because the man above me said so.
The nuclear accident story that really got to me was a guy named Hisashi Ouchi, victim of an accident at a Japanese power plant. I think his is meant to be the highest level of radiation exposure a human has ever experienced: https://www.reddit.com/user/willowoftheriver/comme...
The nuclear accident story that really got to me was a guy named Hisashi Ouchi, victim of an accident at a Japanese power plant. I think his is meant to be the highest level of radiation exposure a human has ever experienced: https://www.reddit.com/user/willowoftheriver/comme...
It was very good and I'm looking forward to the rest of it.
I have my own Chernobyl story in that a couple of months after the disaster my mother was in Eastern Poland for a while and on her return brought with her some cheese which my science teacher had agreed to test to try and determine the level of contamination.
I think it had a high level of Strontium something or other, my science teacher didn't seem overly concerned but advised against eating it.
Different times I guess and carrying bits of nuclear fallout around school was not only entirely normal but apparently encouraged.
I have my own Chernobyl story in that a couple of months after the disaster my mother was in Eastern Poland for a while and on her return brought with her some cheese which my science teacher had agreed to test to try and determine the level of contamination.
I think it had a high level of Strontium something or other, my science teacher didn't seem overly concerned but advised against eating it.
Different times I guess and carrying bits of nuclear fallout around school was not only entirely normal but apparently encouraged.
RalphyM said:
Worth reading up on the Goiânia accident as well. The main individual received a dose of 800 roentgens but survived whereas others with much lower doses died. This seems to be similar to Chernobyl where some survived doses far in excess of that deemed fatal but others succumbed to lower exposures.
There are so many factors involved that it makes estimating a fatal level very difficult. It really depends on how the exposure occurs. In general, if it is external then it may be bad but survivable. Internal (mostly through inhalation) then not much can be done.
Which is why we use the Sievert, it has qualitive factors taken into account such that it accounts for the difference in how its taken up and given in effective dose or committed dose for ingested dose.There are so many factors involved that it makes estimating a fatal level very difficult. It really depends on how the exposure occurs. In general, if it is external then it may be bad but survivable. Internal (mostly through inhalation) then not much can be done.
Even then we have different dose limits for the lens of the eye to whats allowed for whole body dose.
I had a lifetime dose of 6mSv until I went to Smolensk RBMK. Managed to double it in a week.
However, the Sievert is only really effective for low doses, big doses are still measured in Grays which is a measure of the actual energy absorbed and at high energy's its a good measure of the actual damage to the cells.
Been about 20 years since I did my Senior Authorised Persons Nuclear Radiations training, but I still have my authorisation.
Also remember when it happened, people at work were walking across the road to the reactor building through puddles, working in the reactor building but then being unable to get out through the monitors due to the contamination they picked up walking through the rain puddles.
Confused everyone, especially when it was run through the liquid scintilation and revealed isotopes we just don't create.
Confused everyone, especially when it was run through the liquid scintilation and revealed isotopes we just don't create.
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff