What Chernobyl Looks Like In 2010
An anonymous reader writes "The editor of Phoronix.com has toured Chernobyl's Zone of Alienation (the 30km zone surrounding the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant) to see what the area looks like 24 years after the world's largest nuclear disaster. Many photographs from Chernobyl in 2010 have now been published, showing off the power plant and its RBMK reactors, the town of Pripyat, the town of Chernobyl, and the Red Forest. The 24th anniversary of this deadly nuclear disaster will be on April 26."
...really? Does a disaster have to be an accident to be classed as a disaster?
The interesting detail I picked up from this was that Chernobyl continued operation (on other reactors) for 14 years after this disaster.
The popular view of the accident would be that the area was unusable, and most probably lethal - it would seem not.
Of course, the wildlife in the area also shows this, however it is interesting how reality gets buried in popular belief.
... playing one of the Stalker series of games is more fun. Even if the scenery isn't 100% accurate.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0194278/ is quite an interesting documentary about the power plant and its surroundings. and not one of these "ohmygodit'sallsoterriblewon'tsomebodythinkofthechldren"-ones either.
The popular view of the accident would be that the area was unusable, and most probably lethal - it would seem not. Of course, the wildlife in the area also shows this, however it is interesting how reality gets buried in popular belief.
Depends on your definition of "lethal". It is not lethal as in "breath there and suffocate, die within 5 minutes". It is lethal as in "die of a cancer within the year if you eat food and drink water from here" or in "live there several years and lose 10 years of life expectancy". Not a barren land, but not exactly hospitable either.
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
Depends. If you consider just the number of living animal as a metric, I would say that chicken farms are one of the incredible environment that humans created for animals that are indeed more successful than many others.
Yes I am ironic. I heard that in Chernobyl, while one can see wild horses, no bird can be heard as they are very sensitive to radiation. Walking into a silent birdless forest is said to be a very strange feeling.
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
[citation needed]
How we know is more important than what we know.
During World War II, nearly 500,000 Purple Heart medals were manufactured in anticipation of the estimated casualties resulting from the planned Allied invasion of Japan. To the present date, all the American military casualties of the sixty-five years following the end of World War II — including the Korean and Vietnam Wars — have not exceeded that number. In 2003, there were still 120,000 of these Purple Heart medals in stock. There are so many in surplus that combat units in Iraq and Afghanistan and United States are able to keep Purple Hearts on-hand for immediate award to wounded soldiers on the field.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purple_heart
Maybe this means nothing, but I'm guessing the estimated number of casualties from invading the old-fashioned way were what motivated the use of atomic bombs. The Japanese fought tooth and nail even when they were defending a speck of land in the Pacific. How much more so their homeland?
Maybe you should read some real history. The war ending slogan of the Japanese Government was "100 million die together." That doesn't sound like they were looking for a way out. The Japanese Army insisted on fighting to the death. It took the combined shock of the second atomic bomb, and the Russian declaration of war to convince Hirohito to "suffer the insufferable." Hirohito told the Army that Japan should surrender, and they want along with his decision because he was Emperor. The second bomb wasn't gratuitous. It ended the war. The alternative would have been to continue to firebomb Japan's cities, followed by a very bloody invasion. A good book on the war from the Japanese perspective is John Toland's "The Rising Sun."
Your "fair share" is NOT in my wallet.
The Japanese fought tooth and nail even when they were defending a speck of land in the Pacific. How much more so their homeland?
Going back, there were huge numbers of reports of Japanese fanatism.
Off the top of my head:
Kamikaze bombers, Japanese civilians commiting suicide rather than face occupation, suicide attacks by ground forces AND civilians. Reports of civilians being provided arms to resist occupation. Traps and bombs being set up. It was promised to be ugly.
Remember, it was less than a decade ago that they finally convinced the last Japanese soldier to come out of the jungle.
I don't read AC A human right
Funny how everybody has heard of Chernobyl, the place where a nuclear meltdown directly killed around 59 people. How many people have heard of Benxihu? A coal dust explosion killed 1549 in one day. People probably don't know much about any single coal mining accident because they happen all the time. Even now, coal accidents kill thousands a year. The most recent deadly nuclear accident was about 11 years ago in a Japanese plant, where two workers died.
Now, I'm talking nuclear power, not weapons.
Now factoring the relative danger of radiation versus pollution and global warming is pretty difficult. But radiation probably killed a few thousand, whereas coal pollution probably killed millions. Both radiation and carbon will be around for a long time.