Chernobyl

[chenobylite]

Since I mentioned in another post I've spent a lot of time there I've had a few folks suggest others might find this an interesting topic so I'm throwing this out to see if it's true. I've visited the area many times and recently spent another month there so I'm very familiar with the station complex and the 30km exclusion zone surrounding it.

There is a lot of myth and misconception about Chernobyl and with the 20th anniversary approaching if any of you have questions about the facility, the accident, the abandoned city of Pripyat, or even about Ukraine in general feel free to ask and I'll do my best to answer them. Otherwise this thread can die on it's own.

 

[T-Keith]

http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=004350#000000
A great post on the subject.

 

[kanling]

What's going on in that area now? What were you there for?

 

[chenobylite]

T-Kieth, I was hoping to avoid dealing with Elena but I suppose it'd have to be faced sooner or later. Her story is a fraud.

She took one of the short and strictly controlled 2 hour public tours that've been offered since 2002 and brought along a helmet. It's rare for Ukrianians to go into the zone, not only because most irrationally fear the place but because the tour is 4 times what an average one earns in a month. She did it though and shortly thereafter pulled a fast one on everybody. She was quickly exposed by many (including myself) but the story lives on.

The very concept of riding a motorcycle in the zone is laughable to anyone who is familar with it's administration. It's simply not possible for various reasons. The folk who run the zone were not amused and tell me Elena will never set foot in it again. It's still a very sore subject with them to this day. I do give her some credit for making the world remember and it is indeed an experinece to visit Pripyat, especially at night and with the full access others have that she didn't. But the rest of her story is a complete fabrication built on deception.

Kanling: What I was there for is complicated to explain but I have full access to the zone even today. Even with permits no one is allowed in without an escort however, aonther thing that made Elena's tale so amusing. The area is far from dead, it's a beautiful place filled with abundant wildlife. Removing the human population had a profound effect on the area and anyone who visits it always remarks on it's beauty.

Work continues on the new processing station so it will be ready when the new "shelter object" is completed and the remaining debris can be removed from Unit 4. That work has been stalled for years but it looks like contruction on thenew cover may actually start sometime next year.

Several pensioners have returned to the 30km zone and have been permitted to remain but no one is allowed within the internal 10km zone centered on station. The last Block was shut down in Dec 2000 but there are still over 1500 workers who travel to the station every day from Slavutich (Pripyat's replacement city) on a special train. It's usually the way I go in too. It's a busy place. Outside the station there is no actvity however as everything is abandoned. I have hours of video and hundreds of photos taken during my exploration of Pripyat and the outlying areas.

Chernobyl town itself (located 7 miles from the station) houses only the research staff and zone administration. The residents were removed but the town remains well cared for. Unlike Pripyat, which is in serious decay and has been looted for the most part.

[ October 18, 2005, 05:35 PM: Message edited by: chenobylite ]

 

[Al]

Are there any units of this type still running in the old USSR? What is being to being done to stabalize the Sarcophagus??

I spent must of my life working in Nuclear Power (Three Mile Island) We followed the accident with great interest.

Whoever asked those brave firefighters to throw the pieces of core graphite back into the building should have been shot. What insanity. Watching some of the footage of recovery work in the months and years after the accident... Health physice and rad con techniques was like 25 years behind the times.

 

[chenobylite]

Al, there are plenty of RMBK-1000s still being operated in the FSU. There are 6 in Ukraine alone. All have been upgraded with (among other improvements) faster control rod drives and better training for the operators. Not to mention the faults of the communist system that greatly contributed to the accident are now history.

The north buttress and the turbine side walls of the sarcophagus have been strengthened and a new anit-corrosion coating applied. As you may know, it's built upn the old building structure of Unit 4. It's still in sad shape though. Has holes in it big enough to drive a car through though and snow/rainwater is a constant problem. The thing has a life of it's own. Birds flying in and out, etc. There can be up to 100 people working inside every day.

Dust remains the biggest problems should it fail. The core vessel is empty, the fire took care of that, and whats left now is solidified fuel containing masses down in the basement and bubbler pool underneath. It looks like lava.

The people you refer to were not firefighters (most were military conscripts) but yes, it was a crazy mission. They were limited to 90 seconds and received a laughable bonus. There is a lot of gallows humor still among the "liquidators", as they're called, and also among plant workers today, many of whom weren't even born when the accident occured.

The robots sent by Europe and the West to recover graphite moderator blocks failed due to the intense ionization on the roof. The old joke is that the German ones lasted 5 minutes. The Japanese ones lasted 10 minutes. The Russian ones lasted two hours. The Motherland's robots were the best! After two hours an announcement was made over the radio they could come down and take a cigarette break...

There is a memorial in Chernobyl town to the firefighters and operators who died. Since the government had no money it was hand built by local firemen with scrounded materials. They did a great job on something few ever visit. I'd post some photos but I don't know how. They were brave men indeed. Without protection and clad only in the coveralls of the typical Soviet firefighter they climb 250 feet to extinguish the fires on the roof of Block Four, stopping their spread to the other three blocks which still in operation and thereby preventing a further disaster of unimaginable proportions. All later died agonizing deaths in a Moscow hospital. They were buried in lead lined coffins over concrete slabs to prevent radionuclides from leeching into the soil.

I'm knowledgable about TMI. You guys dodged a bullet in Unit 2 but you have to admit the press and the NEC made a mess of it. Good thing you had containment. The RMBK-1000 has no containment structure because it would prevent harvesting plutonium for weapons use.

I'll also point otu the effects of the accident from the radiological standpoint were nowhere near what was feared. There is a lot of politics involved and most of the damage continues to be social, pyscological (radiophobia) and economic. Almost all of the things the charities report have been proven to be lies in order to keep the money flowing. There was thyriod issues from the iodine 131 at the time of the accident but 98% have been successfully treated. The truth is Cherno was far from the terrible medical and environmental catastrophe it's been made out to be, at least from a radiological aspect.

[ October 18, 2005, 07:04 PM: Message edited by: chenobylite ]

 

[Al]

Thanks for your insight. Funny about the robots.

I'm glad your other reactors are running. The world needs the energy. I understand that the other 3 units there are not operating??

Yes without those firefighters it would have been a catastrophe of unimaginable proportions.

In a lot of ways TMI was not so lucky. A significant amount of radiation of short lived Zenon managed to escape and caused a lot of needless fear. I think a TMI was bound to happen in this country sooner or later. Unfortunately it killed nuclear power in this country.

I can post any pictures if you want. Just PM me and I will give you my email address and I'll post 'em for you. Thanks for the information.

 

[chenobylite]

You're welcome. Chero is an epic story. It's far more than just an industrial accident and is one reason the USSR finally died.

The remaining blocks at Cherno are shut down and numbers 5 and 6 were never completed. The entire facility is offline these days. Ukraine is hurting from it too. Lots of the station's former workers want it brought back up but that'll never happen.

Yes, the release of Zenon freaked the TMI locals out but you know how it is about ionizing radiation and the uninformed. I also know the H2 bubble fiasco at TMI caused a lot of needless fear even among the "experts". Too bad Cherno happened so soon after. Fission is safe as long as it's handled well regardless of what the loonies from GreenPeace and the anti-nuke movment claim. Still, it's difficult not to refect when one is walking along the abandoned streets of Pripyat or visiting it's schools, shops, and apartments. It can be a very powerful experience and the occasional dosimeter alarms don't help.

Standby, I'll PM you.

 

[H2GURU]

With crude oil supplies costs' going up, it could spell the return of Nuclear Power here in the USA. Sure would like some of that "TOO CHEAP TO METER" electricity they promised us in the 1950'S to offset our high energy costs now!

 

[PandaBear]

So do you think the light water reactors designed by US and France is reliable? I know the French is heavily relying on nuclear and they are the leader in that.

What about reclaiming the MOX fuel in the waste, are there danger in doing so (if done correctly).

 

[chenobylite]

PandaBear: Yes, LWRs are far safer as they employ water as the moderator, as does the Canadian CANDU. Loss of the moderator results in a decrease in reactivity and a reduction of fission. The moderator used in the RMBK is graphite and offers no such behavior. Europe and the West long ago abandoned graphite moderation because of it's inherent risks.

The Soviet RMBK design's chief advantages are that it's cheap to build (as far as such things go) and offers an ability to be refueled without being shutdown. It's this same ability that provides a method of harvesting plutonium for weapons and prevents the use of a containment dome. This was the Soviet's mentality in building them.

Everyone else uses containment, better training, and the systems are much better designed. Remember, the cause of the accident at Chernobyl went far beyond simply inpet operation.
The cause had multiple factors. That the operators took the brunt of the blame was unfair in many ways but history finally vindicated them to the extent they deserved. Not that they were innocent, far from it, but what happened at the Vladimir Lenin Nuclear Power Station on April 26, 1986 was was simply a matter of time.

Now waste, that's another story. It'll continue to be the bugaboo of the industry and is a legitimate concern in the use of fission to generate power. I feel MOX reclaimation is safe and effective when done correctly. It also provides another way to reduce the amount of waste that must be put into deep storage.

As you pointed out the French have a great many of their eggs in the nuclear basket. So far they've proved it can be done without incident. As a former engineer I tend to trust technology as long as it and the people who're watching over it are the best they can be. And remember, there have been far greater industrial accidents than Chernobyl. Bhopal comes to mind.

For the record I'm not a nuclear engineer although I'm versed in many aspects of it. I'm a former industrial engineer turned professional pilot. I'd prefer not to debate the issue of nuclear power safety because it's a complex subject and one not well understood by the public. I will say that becoming involved with Chernobyl has altered my view of it to a certain extent. To see first hand the results of the genie being let of out his bottle will do that to even the staunchest supporter.

At any rate I'll admit the thought of the French running nuke plants make me nervous because well, they're the French, and they're known to do some strange things as engineers. I'm not a big fan of their airliners either. They aren't called Scarebuses in the industry for nothing

I tell ya, if you want to worry about nuke stuff, worry about Iran and North Korea.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Oh come on, it's not like Boeing has a perfectly clean track record either.

 

[chenobylite]

Hey, if it ain't Boeing I ain't going

Fair nuff, but at least the gear comes down straight...

[ October 18, 2005, 10:06 PM: Message edited by: chenobylite ]

 

[XS650]

quote:

---

Originally posted by H2GURU:
With crude oil supplies costs' going up, it could spell the return of Nuclear Power here in the USA. Sure would like some of that "TOO CHEAP TO METER" electricity they promised us in the 1950'S to offset our high energy costs now!

---

Hyperbole is not a recent invention. Particularly when it involves nuclear.

Operation Plowshare

I was briefed on Operation Plowshare when I was in the AF about 1963. I thought it was dumb idea and had the impression the project was being abandoned . The above link looks like it carried on well beyond 1963. Amazing.

Note the idea of digging a sea level canal across Panama.

 

[Shannow]

chenobolyte,
thanks for your input, it's been a great read.

I think that it's time for Australia to seriously start looking at nukes, however, with the corporate culture of the generators down here at present, if my company built one, I'd move to another state.

 

[Gary Allan]

How do they conquer the (approx) 30 year life span problem ...due to neutron bombardment/containment embrittlement

I know that they're (over the last few years) keeping them on line beyond 30 years ..but it wasn't done at one time. Our local nuke, Limrick, is about 30 years old. Is a post TMI version of one in Florida ...the one in Florida allegedly cost 275 million ...ours ..4 billion ..and hasn't paid for itself over alternative natural gas or coal fired power plants ..and we've got to pay for the stranded asset once it goes off line and is decommisioned. Granted this is more of a regulatory issue instead of a safety issue ..but they still would have a hard time paying for themselves ..even at double the cost of fossil fuel generation.

 

[Shannow]

Gary,
I think that the costs are a reflection of how we are underpaying the actual costs of fossil fuels (and foodstuffs etc).

Our fossil fuel costs do not truly represent the costs of defending them, digging them up, the costs of replacing them when they run out and (maybe) the costs of the environmental damage that they may be causing.

Similarly, our foods don't display the true costs of producing them (when we can use 5 times as many calories in fossil fuels as the energy value of food at the table, then we are not representing the value of the food).

If we stop paying taxes to subsidise food and fossil fuels, and start paying the actual value of what we consume, then maybe we wiull be off to a better future.

 

[Al]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Allan:
How do they conquer the (approx) 30 year life span problem ...due to neutron bombardment/containment embrittlement

I know that they're (over the last few years) keeping them on line beyond 30 years ..but it wasn't done at one time. Our local nuke, Limrick, is about 30 years old. Is a post TMI version of one in Florida ...the one in Florida allegedly cost 275 million ...ours ..4 billion ..and hasn't paid for itself over alternative natural gas or coal fired power plants ..and we've got to pay for the stranded asset once it goes off line and is decommisioned. Granted this is more of a regulatory issue instead of a safety issue ..but they still would have a hard time paying for themselves ..even at double the cost of fossil fuel generation.

---

Perhaps someone can answer that question better..but I think the answer is in testing and also adjusting operating parameters. There are specimins of reactor vessel material which are continuously irradiated in a neutran flux and are tested periodically for embrittlement. If this warrants a change..the operating procedures are changed so the heating up is done on a longer time line and the pressures vs temperatures are required to above the embrittlement curve..by a safety factor of course.

 

[Gary Allan]

are we going

here? Sorry.

Good points to ponder, Shannow. This could be just a matter of smoke and mirror perceptions of costs. I don't look forward to the future shock of realization in this, and just about everthing else, in terms of costs.

Thank you, Al. I had the mixed fortune of having an engineer that was doing a mod on Limrick live next across the alley from me for a couple of years. This was about 10 years ago. He brought up that issue (life span) in one of our discussions. Perhaps its now been found cheaper to modify operational parameters than to service the reactor in its decomissioned state ...which I believe is forever

btw- I'm all for nukes. Aside from the problems dealing with residuals and heat ..there's not a whole lot added to the environment. I never figured out why they never made an integrated industrial community that sapped off the waste heat that the facilities produce. We've got dedicated steam generating plants that provide nothing but heat for everything from universities to high rises ..but most nuke plants just suck up river water and vent it off to the atmosphere ...while 1 or 2 miles away ..some plant spends $70k a month on natural gas or low sulfer fuel oil to produce steam ..in addition to $100k a month on electricity

Our nuke plant has, at times, paid coal fired plants that also use the river as a cooling medium (up stream)..not to produce power if the river is too warm (summer, naturally). Why aren't my streets heated in the winter?

 

[PandaBear]

How is the health of general public after the accident? I saw on a previous program on TV in Asia that the cancer rate is much higher and people who went there were losing lots of hair.