Chernobyl containment structure complete.

[mtdoc]

Apparently the largest ever land-based movable structure. Pretty impressive engineering achievement.

[CatalinaWOW]

Hopefully it lasts longer than the last attempt.

[Ampera]

Job well done. It's good they finally got that over the building and completed.

[M4trix]

Hopefully it lasts longer than the last attempt.

The construction will last approx. 100 years. The Chernobyl's 'Elephant foot' (melted plutonium) has a half-life of 24,000 years which means
comparing to a humans life... is eternity. Probably the homosapiens will extinct before the radiation comes down to safe levels. Besides, during
those 24,000 years, they will have to rebuild this sarcophagus 245 times. Bravo for human stupidity ! 

[rob77]

Hopefully it lasts longer than the last attempt.

The construction will last approx. 100 years. The Chernobyl's 'Elephant foot' (melted plutonium) has a half-life of 24,000 years which means
comparing to a humans life... is eternity. Probably the homosapiens will extinct before the radiation comes down to safe levels. Besides, during
those 24,000 years, they will have to rebuild this sarcophagus 245 times. Bravo for human stupidity ! 

if you call doing the best we can stupidity, then you must be thinking you're the smartest person in known universe and well beyond....

[sleemanj]

if you call doing the best we can stupidity, then you must be thinking you're the smartest person in known universe and well beyond....

I expect that M4trix was referring not to the engineering of the new sarcophagus, or the old sarcophagus, or the bravery and sacrifice of the original clean up and containment crew, but instead of the people at the root of this whole catastrophe, be they politician, technician, or engineer.

Regardless of your view of the cause some people cocked up that bit of the planet for thousands of years.

[rob77]

if you call doing the best we can stupidity, then you must be thinking you're the smartest person in known universe and well beyond....

I expect that M4trix was referring not to the engineering of the new sarcophagus, or the old sarcophagus, or the bravery and sacrifice of the original clean up and containment crew, but instead of the people at the root of this whole catastrophe, be they politician, technician, or engineer.

Regardless of your view of the cause some people cocked up that bit of the planet for thousands of years.

fully agree with you. and unfortunately such a stupidity is still present.. back in the time of chernobyl it was stupid political pressure , nowadays it's "financial pressure" all over the world, because the greedy bastards want more and more profit and they don't give a shit about impact... if nothing changes in near future, then humanity will wipe itself out.

[Ampera]

if you call doing the best we can stupidity, then you must be thinking you're the smartest person in known universe and well beyond....

I expect that M4trix was referring not to the engineering of the new sarcophagus, or the old sarcophagus, or the bravery and sacrifice of the original clean up and containment crew, but instead of the people at the root of this whole catastrophe, be they politician, technician, or engineer.

Regardless of your view of the cause some people cocked up that bit of the planet for thousands of years.

fully agree with you. and unfortunately such a stupidity is still present.. back in the time of chernobyl it was stupid political pressure , nowadays it's "financial pressure" all over the world, because the greedy bastards want more and more profit and they don't give a shit about impact... if nothing changes in near future, then humanity will wipe itself out.

Ahh, the capitalist manifesto.

[NurdRage]

Hopefully it lasts longer than the last attempt.

The construction will last approx. 100 years. The Chernobyl's 'Elephant foot' (melted plutonium) has a half-life of 24,000 years which means
comparing to a humans life... is eternity. Probably the homosapiens will extinct before the radiation comes down to safe levels. Besides, during
those 24,000 years, they will have to rebuild this sarcophagus 245 times. Bravo for human stupidity ! 

Actually the whole point of the structure is to allow them to safely dismantle the reactor and properly separate and package all the waste for shipment off-site to permanent storage. 100 years is sufficient for this task and the structure itself will no longer be needed at all. It too will be dismantled at some point in the future. There will be no need to rebuild.

But hey, if starting on a permanent solution is "stupid" then i have no idea what you think was supposed to be done.

[M4trix]

if you call doing the best we can stupidity, then you must be thinking you're the smartest person in known universe and well beyond....

I expect that M4trix was referring not to the engineering of the new sarcophagus, or the old sarcophagus, or the bravery and sacrifice of the original clean up and containment crew, but instead of the people at the root of this whole catastrophe, be they politician, technician, or engineer.

Regardless of your view of the cause some people cocked up that bit of the planet for thousands of years.

+1

Sorry for misunderstanding me guys. Like sleemanj said, I was talking about the stupidity of those who caused the catastrophe. Heck, I never mentioned
the engineers who built the new sarcophagus and especially those people who lost their lives ! Am I writing English that bad ? Why so much hate ?       

[rob77]

if you call doing the best we can stupidity, then you must be thinking you're the smartest person in known universe and well beyond....

I expect that M4trix was referring not to the engineering of the new sarcophagus, or the old sarcophagus, or the bravery and sacrifice of the original clean up and containment crew, but instead of the people at the root of this whole catastrophe, be they politician, technician, or engineer.

Regardless of your view of the cause some people cocked up that bit of the planet for thousands of years.

+1

Sorry for misunderstanding me guys. Like sleemanj said, I was talking about the stupidity of those who caused the catastrophe. Heck, I never mentioned
the engineers who built the new sarcophagus and especially those people who lost their lives ! Am I writing English that bad ? Why so much hate ?       

my apologies for misunderstanding you. i got an impression you're referring to the fact it has to be rebuilt 245 times, but i was wrong. and actually i'm happy i was wrong

[M4trix]

Next time I will be more specific. 

[TerraHertz]

Relevant: http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/brave-hero-chernobyl-nikolay-timofeyevich-antoshkin/ri17953

Other thoughts:
http://everist.org/Fukushima/20120430_Message_of_Fuku3.htm
http://www.everist.org/archives/links/__Chernobyl_woodpecker_article.txt
http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-russian-woodpecker-2015

[AntiProtonBoy]

The Chernobyl's 'Elephant foot' (melted plutonium)

It's mostly slag, containing quite a bit of debris, such as molten concrete. Approx 30% of that is actual core melt. But it's not plutonium. They used zirconium-uranium-oxide fuel cells.

[Kleinstein]

The good thing about the Chernobyl reactor is that is was quite new when it blew up - could have been worse if the core had been older (but the new fuel also contributed to the accident to happen at all). The radiation from the long lived plutonium and uranium and other long lived isotopes is not that bad, the longer the live the lower the radiation. So Pu with its 25000 years decay time is only about 1/1000 as strong as the same  amount of material with a 25 years decay time. Due a following decay chain and the rather high energy per decay of Pu there can be a little more radiation per Pu atom by maybe a factor of 10 compared to fission products. Still the Pu is not such a strong radiation source - with relatively new fuel elements there is also only a relatively small amount of Pu. Things are worse at Fukushima in this respect.

Currently (and the next 100s or years) the critical isotopes are still caesium and strontium isotopes, that decay to half in about 30 years. So in 100 Years the radiation is down by a factor of about 8 from today. Already now the radiation is considerably lower than initially, as the short lived isotopes are down a lot. So it absolutely makes sense to wait with a final disposal for some time - not 20000 years but maybe another 20 years.

For now the main function of the new structure is to keep dust in and thus avoid further emissions.

[VK3DRB]

Hopefully it lasts longer than the last attempt.

The construction will last approx. 100 years. The Chernobyl's 'Elephant foot' (melted plutonium) has a half-life of 24,000 years which means
comparing to a humans life... is eternity. Probably the homosapiens will extinct before the radiation comes down to safe levels. Besides, during
those 24,000 years, they will have to rebuild this sarcophagus 245 times. Bravo for human stupidity ! 

245 times and each one bigger to encapsulate the old one unless a new technology is created to clean up the mess. 24,000 years is the half life of the plutonium. It is still lethal long after. This sarcophagus has only bought the former Soviet knuckleheads time to try to come up with a better solution within the next 100 years or so. Concrete decays at a fast rate when bombarded with radioactivity. In 5,000 years people might just forget what lies at Chernobyl.

If you want to see human stupidity demostrated, the movie "Fail Safe" (1963) is worth seeing. It is quite feasible, even today. Especially with Trump having absolute, unquestioned power to launch a nuke within THREE MINUTES of him making the decision. If Trump ever decides to "press the button", the only thing that can stop him is mutiny. Having that sort of power at the hands of someone who is psychologically unstable like Trump is extremely dangerous. Trump will have an aid near him at all times who can assist him in carrying out an order to have nuclear missiles launched. By the way, President does not have a physical button, but a well defined process in which to launch a nuclear attack.

These nine irresponsible countries are not going to give up their nukes without a fight... http://www.icanw.org/the-facts/nuclear-arsenals/

[rob77]

The good thing about the Chernobyl reactor is that is was quite new when it blew up - could have been worse if the core had been older (but the new fuel also contributed to the accident to happen at all). The radiation from the long lived plutonium and uranium and other long lived isotopes is not that bad, the longer the live the lower the radiation. So Pu with its 25000 years decay time is only about 1/1000 as strong as the same  amount of material with a 25 years decay time. Due a following decay chain and the rather high energy per decay of Pu there can be a little more radiation per Pu atom by maybe a factor of 10 compared to fission products. Still the Pu is not such a strong radiation source - with relatively new fuel elements there is also only a relatively small amount of Pu. Things are worse at Fukushima in this respect.

Currently (and the next 100s or years) the critical isotopes are still caesium and strontium isotopes, that decay to half in about 30 years. So in 100 Years the radiation is down by a factor of about 8 from today. Already now the radiation is considerably lower than initially, as the short lived isotopes are down a lot. So it absolutely makes sense to wait with a final disposal for some time - not 20000 years but maybe another 20 years.

For now the main function of the new structure is to keep dust in and thus avoid further emissions.

actually the fact the reactor was new design was one of the triggers.... it was a new reactor design without well defined boundaries.. and they happen to cross one of the unknowns... had it be the VVER reactor design, it would never happen...

but it was pretty common back in the days a experimental reactor was built and tested or oven put into production... there is nothing wrong with that approach (how else would you test 100s of megawatts energy production... right ?), the problem were the security standards and political pressure. they should have shut down the bloody thing at the first sight of problems, and not continue being afraid of getting punished for not finishing the test on the reactor.

i live near a nuclear power-plant - there used to be an experimental reactor as well (but new blocks of the power plant were built with VVER reactors in late 70's) - but after few close calls on that experimental one (they were not talking publicly about close calls back in those times) the block with that experimental reactor was shut down and decommissioned.

[Kleinstein]

The reactor in Chernobyl was not an experimental one or a very new type. It was just new build and thus with new fuel and they had to do some safety tests on it - that went really wrong due to human errors and a poor design. The new and thus rather reactive fuel allowed the controllers to make the big mistake. The type of reactor is rather unsafe too - but some of those are still in operation in Russia, though with some improvements but still the major weak points.

Doing a similar experiment and violating safety regulation in a similar manor could also cause a disaster with other reactors (like VVER or western types) - though maybe not that bad and not that easy.

It was not the first (or last) major accident in an nuclear power plant - they had some before in England and the US (Three mile island and a small prototype in the 1950s). So other types of reactors can fail too, even if they have fewer principle problems.

[dmills]

The RMBK was an 'interesting' design, graphite moderated, water cooled, with a large positive void coefficient, what could possibly go wrong?

Add to that extremely slow control rod response due to closely fitting water filled tubes that the rods traveled in, and a climate in which reporting the operational problems was politically impossible and it was not so much a case of if they would have a power excursion, but when.

The reason the thing was designed that way was to allow it to run on very slightly enriched uranium (But the direct water cooling was still an 'interesting' decision) and to make it a good machine for the production of Pu (There are isotopic issues if you leave Pu in the reactor for too long if you are tying for weapons grade stuff, so being able to refuel without shutting down is helpful).

Sub critical masses of Pu (Or U) are toxic heavy metals and that is a FAR bigger issues then the radiation from those materials, Sr90 is both hot, medium half life, and in the same group of the periodic table as Calcium which has unfortunate consequences for anything with bones.

The RMBK was a 1970's design, and there are quite a few out there, some still in service (They modified a few things after the accident).

The UK dodged a bullet at Calder Hall, those filters that saved the north of the country were a late addition by a very paranoid designer, it was a graphite moderated AIR cooled reactor strictly for Pu production, and yea, hot carbon plus air, the core caught fire.

Regards, Dan.

[rob77]

The reactor in Chernobyl was not an experimental one or a very new type. It was just new build and thus with new fuel and they had to do some safety tests on it - that went really wrong due to human errors and a poor design. The new and thus rather reactive fuel allowed the controllers to make the big mistake. The type of reactor is rather unsafe too - but some of those are still in operation in Russia, though with some improvements but still the major weak points.

Doing a similar experiment and violating safety regulation in a similar manor could also cause a disaster with other reactors (like VVER or western types) - though maybe not that bad and not that easy.

It was not the first (or last) major accident in an nuclear power plant - they had some before in England and the US (Three mile island and a small prototype in the 1950s). So other types of reactors can fail too, even if they have fewer principle problems.

ok agree, it wasn't literally experimental , but it was the RBMK graphite moderated design which was not widely used... and it was a type designed to be simple and operated with natural uranium... the low amount of reactors in service means it wasn't the industry standard. and the Chernobyl disaster is the proof it's operation wasn't fully understood either. (instabilities at low power, negative effect of moderating rods under some specific conditions...)   currently there are only 11 nuclear power plant blocks with active RBMK reactor design (Russia and former USSR countries).  the VVER was the industry standard back then and the many installations (still active) in aprox 18 countries is the proof. and actually the VVER design meets today's safety standards (with modernized control systems of course).

[Towger]

A couple of weeks ago the new president of the Philippines announced he wants to fuel their 40 year old mothballed nuclear power plant, which was never used.  Now that's a potential disaster in the making.  I can only assume they would build a new modern reactor and use the existing turbines and generators...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bataan_Nuclear_Power_Plant

[TerraHertz]

Besides, during those 24,000 years, they will have to rebuild this sarcophagus 245 times. Bravo for human stupidity ! 

245 times and each one bigger to encapsulate the old one unless a new technology is created to clean up the mess.

Actually, the shield structure is a rather clever design. It's on rails, specifically so they can build new sections and slide them over the reactor as anything goes wrong with the existing structure. It's designed to allow continual incremental replacement.

Given the state of the Ukraine government, I'm surprised this quite massive engineering project was ever finished at all.
Don't take this as me supporting the use of nuclear fission power reactors, to which I'm strongly opposed.

Especially with Trump having absolute, unquestioned power to launch a nuke within THREE MINUTES of him making the decision. If Trump ever decides to "press the button", the only thing that can stop him is mutiny. Having that sort of power at the hands of someone who is psychologically unstable like Trump is extremely dangerous.

Sigh. You should watch less CNN. It's sad to see how effective the anti-Trump demonization propaganda has been with some, and the resulting hysteria. This "Trump will start nuclear WWIII" stuff is particularly ironic, given his opponent's publicly stated intention to go to war with Iran, and the present War Party's incessant efforts to grind down/provoke Russia and foment 'regime change' in many countries. Not to mention the whole ISIS/Syria fake puppet show, and what many (myself included) deduce from putting together Hillary's past behavior patterns, her definitely grave health problems, and who is supporting her bid for the presidency. Do you know anything at all about Soros, his past, what he does and what he wants?
You might also google 'Clinton body count'. That getting boosted from dozens (if you don't count recent wars, or hundreds of thousands if you do) to billions seems a realistic risk.

Also google 'trump ends regime change'.  Ah, but I suppose since you claim he's unstable, his intentions to _end_ US global warmongering won't mean anything. Except bad news for certain groups. Sure that's not why you are upset?

http://everist.org/archives/links/    __Hillary_info.txt   __Clintons_links.txt   __Trump_info.txt

A couple of weeks ago the new president of the Philippines announced he wants to fuel their 40 year old mothballed nuclear power plant,

Oh great.      

[Ampera]

Besides, during those 24,000 years, they will have to rebuild this sarcophagus 245 times. Bravo for human stupidity ! 

245 times and each one bigger to encapsulate the old one unless a new technology is created to clean up the mess.

Actually, the shield structure is a rather clever design. It's on rails, specifically so they can build new sections and slide them over the reactor as anything goes wrong with the existing structure. It's designed to allow continual incremental replacement.

Given the state of the Ukraine government, I'm surprised this quite massive engineering project was ever finished at all.
Don't take this as me supporting the use of nuclear fission power reactors, to which I'm strongly opposed.

Especially with Trump having absolute, unquestioned power to launch a nuke within THREE MINUTES of him making the decision. If Trump ever decides to "press the button", the only thing that can stop him is mutiny. Having that sort of power at the hands of someone who is psychologically unstable like Trump is extremely dangerous.

Sigh. You should watch less CNN. It's sad to see how effective the anti-Trump demonization propaganda has been with some, and the resulting hysteria. This "Trump will start nuclear WWIII" stuff is particularly ironic, given his opponent's publicly stated intention to go to war with Iran, and the present War Party's incessant efforts to grind down/provoke Russia and foment 'regime change' in many countries. Not to mention the whole ISIS/Syria fake puppet show, and what many (myself included) deduce from putting together Hillary's past behavior patterns, her definitely grave health problems, and who is supporting her bid for the presidency. Do you know anything at all about Soros, his past, what he does and what he wants?
You might also google 'Clinton body count'. That getting boosted from dozens (if you don't count recent wars, or hundreds of thousands if you do) to billions seems a realistic risk.

Also google 'trump ends regime change'.  Ah, but I suppose since you claim he's unstable, his intentions to _end_ US global warmongering won't mean anything. Except bad news for certain groups. Sure that's not why you are upset?

http://everist.org/archives/links/    __Hillary_info.txt   __Clintons_links.txt   __Trump_info.txt

A couple of weeks ago the new president of the Philippines announced he wants to fuel their 40 year old mothballed nuclear power plant,

Oh great.      

Ah crap, political discussion.

It think we can all agree that Donald Trump is an orange bag of bolts, and Hillary Clinton is a white bag of bolts.

There hasn't been a single politician that has done everything right in the history of human nature, and there never will be. All governments are flawed, it's only a matter of how and how much, and until we all band together, though bigotry and social differences, a process to never happen, we will all quarrel over useless arguments just because one person doesn't like another person for some innumerably tiny thing that they've been taught to hate for no good reason.

I think through whatever crap the Soviet Union did in it's bold attempt at a utopian society, ultimately ruined by idiots who took the hammer and sickle so close to heart it pierced through and came out the other side, we can be glad the problem not solvable by applying blame is now one step closer to becoming something of the past we don't need to worry about anymore. Amen.

[VK3DRB]

Especially with Trump having absolute, unquestioned power to launch a nuke within THREE MINUTES of him making the decision. If Trump ever decides to "press the button", the only thing that can stop him is mutiny. Having that sort of power at the hands of someone who is psychologically unstable like Trump is extremely dangerous.

Sigh. You should watch less CNN. It's sad to see how effective the anti-Trump demonization propaganda has been with some, and the resulting hysteria.

What CNN? We only watch CNNNN here.

Actually it is ANY President of the USA who has the absolute power to launch nuclear weapons that cannot even be vetoed by the Secretary of Defence. Trump will soon be in the driver's seat. And he is unstable. He changed his tune on getting Hillary jailed. He changed his tune on building a wall to keep the Mexicans out and getting Mexico to pay for it.

Miraculously, he "changed" just after he won the election. I heard him. He is a liar. He is full of . and sells. Politicians should be made accountable for their election promises. If they lie to get elected, they should be disqualified from serving.

Can you imagine trump taking the place of JKF during the Cuban missile crisis? .

[Ampera]

Especially with Trump having absolute, unquestioned power to launch a nuke within THREE MINUTES of him making the decision. If Trump ever decides to "press the button", the only thing that can stop him is mutiny. Having that sort of power at the hands of someone who is psychologically unstable like Trump is extremely dangerous.

Sigh. You should watch less CNN. It's sad to see how effective the anti-Trump demonization propaganda has been with some, and the resulting hysteria.

What CNN? We only watch CNNNN here.

Actually it is ANY President of the USA who has the absolute power to launch nuclear weapons that cannot even be vetoed by the Secretary of Defence. Trump will soon be in the driver's seat. And he is unstable. He changed his tune on getting Hillary jailed. He changed his tune on building a wall to keep the Mexicans out and getting Mexico to pay for it.

Miraculously, he "changed" just after he won the election. I heard him. He is a liar. He is full of . and sells. Politicians should be made accountable for their election promises. If they lie to get elected, they should be disqualified from serving.

Can you imagine trump taking the place of JKF during the Cuban missile crisis? .

If we held every politician to consequences for what they promise during their campaign, we would have to retrospectively punish every single president we've ever had. Not even Honest Abe would be safe.