If you get the chance to watch this.It really gives you a feel for the edge of the abyss. An insight into communist russia at its very worst Chernobyl, Sky Atlantic, review: ‘The most unmissable show on TV’ Chernobyl disaster - Wikipedia
i thinks its on amazon prime NRC: Backgrounder on Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant Accident Event Radiation reading, millisievert (mSv) Single dose, fatal within weeks 10,000.00 Typical dosage recorded in those Chernobyl workers who died within a month 6,000.00 Single does which would kill half of those exposed to it within a month 5,000.00 Single dosage which would cause radiation sickness, including nausea, lower white blood cell count. Not fatal. 1,000.00 Accumulated dosage estimated to cause a fatal cancer many years later in 5% of people 1,000.00 Max radiation levels recorded at Fukushima plant 15 March 2011, per hour 400.00 Exposure of Chernobyl residents who were relocated after the blast in 1986 <100.00 Recommended limit for radiation workers every five years 100.00 Lowest annual dose at which any increase in cancer is clearly evident 100.00 CT scan: heart 16.00 CT scan: abdomen & pelvis 15.00 Dose in full-body CT scan 10.00 Airline crew flying New York to Tokyo polar route, annual exposure 9.00 Natural radiation we’re all exposed to, per year 2.00 CT scan: head 2.00 Spine x-ray 1.50 Radiation per hour detected at Fukushimia site, 12 March 2011 1.02 Mammogram breast x-ray 0.40 Chest x-ray 0.10 Radiation levels now | The Chernobyl Gallery
If this is anything like the documentary I saw a few years ago, it is a chilling but fascinating program.
it is very chilling and very well produced but it shows how cheap life and process was seen by the russian hierarchy
I got this from it " Chernobyl was “more about lies, deceit and a rotting political system than... whether nuclear power is inherently good or bad.” The rotting system runs true comrade
Putin's Russia are making its counterstroke, one must remeber that this is from one of our tabloids, the more serious one. Venäjä teki oman ”vaihtoehtoisen” Tshernobyl-sarjansa – tarinan keskiössä CIA-agentti: ”Saanut käskyn sabotoida” Russia made its own "alternative" Chernobyl series - at the heart of the story a CIA agent: "Got an order to sabotage" According to the manuscript, the KGB Ukrainian Department has received an tip about an US CIA agent who has managed to penetrate the Prypjat nuclear power plant city. The KGB even knows the name of the agent - Albert Lents - but does not know his exact appearance and his exact whereabouts. However, it is known that his mission is to spy on Chernobyl and to sabotage. The events of the series start with this setup when Soviet military intelligence sends Lieutenant Colonel Andrei Nikolayev (Igor Petrenko) to Prypja to find and eliminate the enemy. Director Muradov has also had to explain to the public why the CIA story has been built into the historical series. According to Muradov, the agent pattern is central to the plot, but the series doesn't just tell about it. - Nuclear power stations are objects that are always of interest to agents of intelligence services, so this plot pattern is fully justified. I can't reveal all the details now, but we don't put any stamps on anybody, Muradov explained to the Vkurse site. According to Muradov, there is also another grounds for the CIA reference. - There is a hypothesis that the Americans intervened in the operation of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, Muradov said to Komsomolskaya Pravda. - Many historians have not ruled out the possibility of an enemy secret service agent on the nuclear power plant on the day of the explosion. It has still not been clarified whether his activities were related to an explosion, Muradov continued. According to Muradov, the series will look quite thoroughly with the timeline and the real fate of the people, but the series also includes artistic freedoms. The struggle between the two agents is obviously one of such artistic interpretations, because at least in the official history writing, Chernobyl's accident is in no way connected to the confrontation between the great powers.
Chernobyl housed the "Leningrad" reactors,the RBMK type reactor design that had disadvantages in the design,a design which would never have been accepted by the west.Consequently there were a number of plants having this design of reactor in Russia and it's satellites.I think that they are now few,if any modified RBMK reactors operating in the Russian Federation and the SU former satellites. After the events of April 26 1986,the EU headed a project to upgrade the security of the reactor safety systems for the reactors to operate until a programme of decommissioning could be established over several years.I had a colleague who was involved in this programme. An inherent design fault was the reactor possessed a positive coefficient which meant it was unstable at little reactor output.This was the situation which unfolded in the tests that were being conducted over 24 hours from 25 April 1986 when it was attempted to demonstrate that the reactor would be capable of generating its own auxiliary power with the generator disconnected from the grid.However the reactor power output required was so small that the reactor control rods had to be controlled in a control zone which required the reactor safety to be compromised by defeating the control rod interlocks....disaster...Western designed reactor systems are incapable of being defeated.If an attempt was made to defeat the control rod safety interlocks,the system would fail safe and the control rods would trip,ie,slam shut to cease nuclear fission. With the Chernobyl case,the reactor having a positive coefficient, an adjustment of the control rods was made and within milli seconds,the reactor heat output increased to 200 MWs to create a hydrogen bubble.An explosion followed which caused the external release of a significant fraction of the reactor core to result in widespread health and environmental effects.Here again there was a deficiency in design in that western designed reactors are enclosed by a reactor concrete shield to contain any reactor disturbance while the Russian types were not. As regards,the instruction to carry out the test,it came from a non technical director and I would think that the Shift Manager, given the hierarchical structure of the SU organisational management in force,I would expect that challenging such an instruction may have been seen as a disciplinary case...insubordination Advanced technology such as that in nuclear industry requires first class safety systems with layers of redundancy to achieve ultimate safety and welfare for its operating staff,continental populations and the environment.Clearly the RBMK reactor design would not meet the standards set in the west,something,I would think that the Russians have learnt from their experience.The EU were quick to aid insofar as the incident affected western Europe and humanity as a whole. (Incidentally after US postwar atomic development and the US government clearance to develop civil nuclear electricity generation,it was said that generating companies only went into nuclear generation from the fear that the US government would establish their own nuclear generation division.) Looking at recent technology safety system failures,one has to only consider the Boeing 737 Max where ultimate safety was an additional cost option.I have to say that it highlighted a deficiency in safety engineering design philosophy where flying within the envelope of operational design was not covered by layers of redundancy in the anti stall equipment. Its interesting to consider the reporting nuclear incidents.It's an internationally based (IAEA) scale of 1 to 7 with 7 being the worse type of incident....taking a few reported examples. 1957. Windscale Pile (old fashion name for a nuclear reactor).Status 5...Release of radioactive material to the environment following a fire in a reactor core. 1979 Three Mill Island.Status 5.Severe damage to the reactor core.Cause reactor coolant relief safety valve lifted reducing coolant capacity within the reactor.Hydrogen bubble created but did not explode and initiate a meltdown. Emergency coolant valve found to be disabled for maintenance but operational status note covered by plaque. 1986 Chernobyl .Status 7 as discussed 2005 Sellafield.Status 3.Release of large quantity of radioactive material contained within the installation. 2011 Fukushima Status 4 Reactors shutdown after Sendal earthquake and tsunami.Failure of electrical supply from tsunami water caused failure of emergency cooling causing an explosion.Water flood levels on site prevented emergency diesel pumps being brought in. Incidents always give rise to review and solutions.One of the lessons learnt from Fukushima is that future reactor design will adopt natural circulation cooling in the event of loss of emergency cooling pumps. I have not seen the TV series but somewhere I have a technical account of the incident as investigated by the Nuclear Division of the CEGB.
My wife tends to see the '80's through rose-tinted glasses. She passes this enthusiasm onto our teenage girls. I then tell them about all the bad stuff in the '80's like Chernobyl, bad hair, the threat of nuclear war and Kajagoogoo. I thought Chernobyl was a great series. I'd have to fall out with anyone who suggested otherwise.
