Chernobyl balance sheet, cost, maps and contamination (France)

Oil, gas, coal, nuclear (PWR, EPR, hot fusion, ITER), gas and coal thermal power plants, cogeneration, tri-generation. Peakoil, depletion, economics, technologies and geopolitical strategies. Prices, pollution, economic and social costs ...
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)




by izentrop » 15/11/16, 17:01

Hello,
Terremoto wrote:Thyme and rosemary from Provence have since the "accident" shown high concentrations of cesium 135. A severely radioactive element which has a half-life of 30 years (cesium 135 issued by Chernobyl has now lost half of its radioactivity! Let us rejoice!). It's up to you to draw conclusions about this year's thyme and rosemary from Provence
Give links in plain text, rather than hints.
it is short-lived radioelements like iodine-131 (and not cesium) that contributed to the dangerousness of the 1986 cloud. http://www.laradioactivite.com/site/pag ... rnobyl.htm
cesium 137. : Wink:
0 x
Earthquake
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 78
Registration: 17/10/16, 14:53
x 15

Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)




by Earthquake » 15/11/16, 18:42

You are right, I would have done better to inform myself well before writing nonsense!

Here is an interesting study, Chernobyl, 30 years later:
[Url] tchernobyl30.eu.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/BILAN-TCHE30.pdf [/ url]

Mushrooms (boletus, chanterelles, mutton feet ...) are currently among the most affected (p. 23), while almost no plant shows contamination yet (after having been highly contaminated in 1986 by the direct fallout of the cloud from Chernobyl). On the other hand, cesium 137 is concentrated in certain animals according to their lifestyle and diet (eg wild boar).
0 x
The keyword of our survival, that's life because we do not eat pebbles, then kill them with respect and discernment!
moinsdewatt
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5111
Registration: 28/09/09, 17:35
Location: Isére
x 554

Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)




by moinsdewatt » 15/11/16, 19:36

Usine Nouvelle is posting a short time lapse of the start of the arching process!

http://www.usinenouvelle.com/article/a- ... ce.N464048

below the cylinders:

Image
0 x
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)




by izentrop » 15/11/16, 23:09

Terremoto wrote:You are right, I would have done better to inform myself well before writing nonsense!

Here is an interesting study, Chernobyl, 30 years later: http://tchernobyl30.eu.org/wp-content/u ... TCHE30.pdf

Mushrooms (boletus, chanterelles, mutton feet ...) are currently among the most affected (p. 23), while almost no plant shows contamination yet (after having been highly contaminated in 1986 by the direct fallout of the cloud from Chernobyl). On the other hand, cesium 137 is concentrated in certain animals according to their lifestyle and diet (eg wild boar).
Study made by activists who have chosen their sampling locations. And why did you choose Bq / kg dry when IRSN quantifies in Bq / m² Image http://www.irsn.fr/FR/connaissances/Ins ... CuFw_SS_Zc

To get an idea: In the human body, radioactivity is naturally 120 Bq / kg. http://www.connaissancedesenergies.org/ ... ite-unites
Typical natural radioactivity of granites: 1 Bq / kg https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Becquerel
0 x
Earthquake
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 78
Registration: 17/10/16, 14:53
x 15

Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)




by Earthquake » 16/11/16, 20:23

izentrop wrote:...
Study made by activists who have chosen their sampling locations. And why did you choose Bq / kg dry when IRSN quantifies in Bq / m²
...

Ouch, answer to the cookie cutter!

I recall the link to the ACRO study: http://www.tchernobyl30.eu.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/BILAN-TCHE30.pdf

ACRO is a citizen organization created in response to state disinformation. After the Three Miles Island accident in 1979, one could read in certain newspapers that "human error did not exist" in French nuclear installations, a profession of faith which would only contradict itself if it happened ... he French nuclear industry is not, however, immune to accidents: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_d%27accidents_nucl%C3%A9aires. In the days following the announcement of the Chernobyl disaster, we could read from a government source that France was spared the radioactive cloud ... Certainly, I cannot provide you with links, that dates from before the Internet and my searches to find this info have yielded nothing!
But we can still ask ourselves questions: http://www.pseudo-sciences.org/spip.php?article151.
ACRO is therefore perhaps not useless as an independent source of information ...

ACRO, "activists who have chosen their places of sampling"?
ACRO's report "Chernobyl, 30 years later" is based on a public call for sample collection, free but also led by calls to external scientific bodies to designate what kinds of samples might offer useful data .
Izentrop, do you have any impartial indication that ACRO would have "chosen their collection sites" or selected the samples received according to unspeakable criteria?

"And why did you choose Bq / kg dry when IRSN quantifies in Bq / m²" ... ACRO asked for deep soil samples on two horizons (0-10 cm and 10-20 cm; p . 10 of the pdf), knowing that since 137 the cesium 1986 of Chernobyl had slowly percolated into the soil. Therefore, it becomes more relevant to evaluate them in Bq / kg dry rather than in Bq / m², no? I have vague memories of field physics which whisper to me that the power of an emission source decreases with the square of its distance, so why surface measurements?

Finally, the conclusions of this study say that nuclear tests and Chernobyl have lastingly contaminated the soil, and that:
"Through their living environment and their diet, some animals are exposed to chronic contamination by cesium-137, sometimes leading to significant contamination of their flesh. Occasional consumption of these foods induces a health risk, a priori limited."

Do you find this too alarmist, inappropriate, completely false?

Also, "activists" seems to have a negative dimension in your lines, what are you thinking? Are we not all "activists" to defend "truths" that touch us, and to fight the claims of those who deny them?

Is there nothing good in activating, or in activating only in a very specific area?

Reread your messages in certain threads, to me, it seems to me that you are an activist ... at least in certain very specific fields.

Ooh, ugly!
2 x
The keyword of our survival, that's life because we do not eat pebbles, then kill them with respect and discernment!
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963

Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)




by Ahmed » 16/11/16, 22:13

In the days following the announcement of the Chernobyl disaster, we could read from government sources that France was spared the radioactive cloud ...

It's the prof. Pellerin who was in charge of "communication" during this affair and he constantly minimized the consequences of the event, however he is not at the origin of the fable "of the cloud which stops at the border", whose origin is journalistic (weather forecast from A2).
2 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Earthquake
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 78
Registration: 17/10/16, 14:53
x 15

Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)




by Earthquake » 17/11/16, 06:11

Thank you Ahmed for these details that I could not bring.

At the time, I laughed yellow at the border fable ...
0 x
The keyword of our survival, that's life because we do not eat pebbles, then kill them with respect and discernment!
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)




by izentrop » 17/11/16, 09:30

Terremoto wrote:Ouch, answer to the cookie cutter!
... ACRO is a citizen organization created in response to state disinformation.
... But we can still ask ourselves questions: http://www.pseudo-sciences.org/spip.php?article151.
ACRO is therefore perhaps not useless as an independent source of information ...
Thank you for the clarification. At least you also quote the controversy.
all of the soil samples analyzed in France and in Europe show cesium-137 contamination, due both to the fallout from atmospheric nuclear tests and to the Chernobyl disaster. http://www.tchernobyl30.eu.org/wp-conte ... TCHE30.pdf
The title of the ACRO study should have been "measurement of cesium-137 remains" without specifying Chernobyl given the lack of a precise protocol. http://www.bag.admin.ch/themen/strahlun ... ml?lang=fr
0 x
Earthquake
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 78
Registration: 17/10/16, 14:53
x 15

Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)




by Earthquake » 18/11/16, 16:16

izentrop wrote:The title of the ACRO study should have been "measurement of cesium-137 remains" without specifying Chernobyl given the lack of a precise protocol. http://www.bag.admin.ch/themen/strahlung/12128/14756/index.html?lang=fr


Do you want to suggest that the emissions from the Swiss nuclear power station Mühleberg (see your link), which apparently contaminated the sediments of Lake Biel (20 km) in 2000 and a few other times, should be taken into account in the cesium 137 pollution study from all over France?

It is quite clear that atmospheric nuclear tests perpetrated on the other side of the world (Pacific, North America, Arctic), small local accidents, or even the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs, could only have contributed at homeopathic dose to radioactive contamination of metropolitan French soil.

Thus, Chernobyl is the main and almost unique contributor to their marked cesium-137 pollution, so why wouldn't the study make it its title?

The only interesting thing, would it be the technical prowess of containment of the Chernobyl and Fukushima reactors? The establishment of a dome? Who will have the biggest?

Through stupidity, arrogance and the pursuit of profit, the world is faced with the requirement to confine crashed reactors, to monitor them and to declare exclusion zones for hundreds or thousands of years (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_d'exclusion_de_Tchernobyl#Radioactivit.C3.A9). It would not be this legacy that we make to future generations, the important thing?

The Belle Epoque, during which we slipped garbage under the corner of the carpet (http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2012/07/11/des-dechets-radioactifs-francais-ont-aussi-ete-immerges-dans-l-atlantique_1732418_3244.html) is hopefully over, but where are the long-term safe solutions promised during campaigns to convince the public that nuclear power was a solution for the future ... radiant or irradiated!
1 x
The keyword of our survival, that's life because we do not eat pebbles, then kill them with respect and discernment!
moinsdewatt
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5111
Registration: 28/09/09, 17:35
Location: Isére
x 554

Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)




by moinsdewatt » 19/11/16, 12:33

Terremoto wrote:It is quite clear that atmospheric nuclear tests perpetrated on the other side of the world (Pacific, North America, Arctic), small local accidents, or even the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs, could only have contributed at homeopathic dose to radioactive contamination of metropolitan French soil.
...


Not on the other side of the world for some Russian tests, in particular the largest atomic explosion in atomic history: the Tsar bombed.

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba

Tsar Bomba (in Russian: Царь-бомба) is a hydrogen bomb developed by the nuclear industry in the Soviet Union. With 57 megatons, it is the most energetic weapon of mass destruction ever used1. Dropped by a modified Tupolev Tu-95 bomber (made watertight, stripped of part of its tanks, covered with reflective paint, and opened underneath to be able to transport the bomb) at an altitude of about 13 km, it exploded on October 30, 1961, about 3,7 km2 above "site C" of the Novaya Zemlya archipelago in the Russian Arctic, then Soviet. It was released after a two-year hiatus from atmospheric tests "following a tacit agreement with the United States and Great Britain" 3 and represents the height of the nuclear arms race which, with the crisis missiles from Cuba, leads to "Relaxation".


the New Zemble is not really the other side of the world for us in Frane:

Image

Image

The distance from Paris to the New Zemble is similar to Paris - Vorkouta and on the Web we find 4017 km away!
https://www.flightpedia.org/distance-pa ... rkuta.html

This explosion made as much power as Hiroshima 3000 times! 4000 km from France / Paris
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 236 guests