Chernobyl: the nature she already takes her rights?

[izentrop]

In a "no man's land" area around the power station, the animals live less long, but protected from humans, they multiply. Even lynxes, endangered everywhere else, are on the increase.

http://www.dailymotion.com/swf/video/x3t311u

[Obamot]

Hello,
This is a duplicate.

1) The subject already exists. 2) Will we have to go back a week to say what we have said from here:
energies-fossil-nuclear / balance-of-cost-Chernobyl-cards-and-contamination-France-t10653-40.html # p290801
No, this is only appearance, this is based on pure paralogism. Nature can not (re) take its rights, because a nuclear disaster is NOT a natural disaster.

I'll stop there.

PLEASE ANSWER ABOUT HERE:
energies-fossil-nuclear / balance-of-cost-Chernobyl-cards-and-contamination-France-t10653-70.html
(thanks to lock)

[Christophe]

I find this mini report yet interesting, why so much aggression?

And if that can make for a "life-size" experience ... so much the better! It's no worse than what the industry does on animals every day ... and there it advances knowledge of living things!

The animals we see on the video do not look so bad ...

[Obamot]

There is no aggressiveness. This subject is a duplicate.
If you want to go on "opinions" leave it open.
There are already quantities of subjects on nuclear power. If you want to suggest that a nuclear disaster is trivial, let go, it's not my forum.

I will not intervene anymore to report duplicates.

[Christophe]

A duplicate is when we post 2 exactly the same information, has this video already been posted on the other topic? I do not believe...

So no it does not shock me to make a new topic that would speak only animals (see biology in general: vegetation included ... we see a beautiful rose in the background of the interview: who wants to try the jam of tern?) of the ghost town that became Pripiat

ps: this is the forum econology ... for all so before being "mine" ...

[izentrop]

Nature can not (re) take its rights, because a nuclear disaster is NOT a natural disaster.

30 years have passed and it is an interesting in-vivo laboratory. And then the radioactivity also exists in the natural state.

I found it interesting to show documents out of ideology.

To complete the picture, a documentary of 2012 with its lot of tourists of the extreme, perhaps already mentioned also.
Chernobyl or safeguarding the horse of Prevalsky, or wildlife paradise. It is a work of researchers which seems to me most serious:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFYnhPF2m-Y

[izentrop]

Obamot, you're right, there's a lot of duplication, I did not see him sorry. Just that the title was a little more general.

The curve on the analysis of cesium 237 in wines posted by Exnihiloest challenged me energies-fossil-nuclear / balance-of-cost-Chernobyl-cards-and-contamination-France-t10653-40.html # p289377
It shows that there have been other atmospheric fallout well before and much more important.

I tried to find out more http://www.laradioactivite.com/site/pag ... on_vin.htm
It's funny how radioactivity can help us detect fake grand cru without opening the bottle.
Indeed, the Cs137 emits gamma radiation of 662 keV which passes easily through the glass of the bottle and is then detected.

[Christophe]

Obamot, you're right, there's a lot of duplication, I did not see him sorry. Just that the title was a little more general.

Indeed the subject has already been mentioned by minus2watts but that does not mean that it is a pure and hard duplicate (literally = exactly the same message).

The curve on the analysis of cesium 237 in wines posted by Exnihiloest challenged me energies-fossil-nuclear / balance-of-cost-Chernobyl-cards-and-contamination-France-t10653-40.html # p289377

Beware of this kind of curve: where do the samples come from? At the World level? European? Other?

I doubt that the wines stored at pripiat in 1986 are "so little contaminated" ...

Moreover, a nuclear accident is not limited to the pollution of a single radioactive isotope: and in the case of Thernobyl it is a beautiful cocktail of various and varied shits (just like in fukushima ... where in the end more than radioelements were released in nature only at Chernobyl but the Japanese have "diluted" the pollution in seawater).

The distribution of iodine around power stations has, for example, no effect against cesium, but against iodine-131 is one of the most "bad" isotopes for human health (fortunately very short lifespan): http://www.laradioactivite.com/site/pages/liode131.htm

I also believe, by their nature that civil nuclear accidents send more shit into the atmosphere than a military explosion ...

[izentrop]

The cesium 137 is a good indicator of nuclear accidents, it does not exist in its natural state http://www.laradioactivite.com/site/pages/cesium137.htm

Cesium-137 is produced in relative abundance in fission reactions. The importance of this fission product is due to the fact that on the scale of a hundred years, it constitutes the main source of radioactivity in nuclear reactor waste with strontium-90 and plutonium isotopes. In the event of an accident, it is the main source of long-term contamination.


The activity of cesium-137 in the human body has been measured around the Mol laboratory in northern Belgium for almost half a century.

http://www.irsn.fr/FR/Larecherche/publi ... 137_V4.pdf

Atmospheric nuclear explosions
During the 1945-1980 period, atmospheric nuclear tests released
in the environment a quantity of 137Cs estimated at 948 PBq, which has gradually
deposited on the entire planet. The resulting cumulative deposit is evaluated
at 142 kBq.m-2 for the northern hemisphere and 35 kBq.m-2 for the southern hemisphere
(UNSCEAR 2000)

The second source of 137Cs is the fuel cycle. The heart of a reactor
1300 MWe contains at the end of the cycle approximately 4 × 1017 Bq of cesium confined to
inside the fuel. In normal operation, a small fraction of this
cesium is released into the environment. When reprocessing the
irradiated fuel, 137Cs is extracted with other fission products. In 1999,
releases of 137Cs from the La Hague fuel reprocessing plant were
at 1,3 TBq and those of Sellafield at 7,9 TBq, almost all in liquid form (Van
der Stricht and Jansens, 2001). These releases are decreasing: in 2003, they were
0,76 TBq for the La Hague reprocessing plant (COGEMA communication) and
6,24 TBq for Sellafield (CEFAS, 2004).

Accidental releases
In 1957, the accidents at Kyshtym (Tcheliabinsk, Russia) and Windscale
(United Kingdom) resulted in 137Cs releases of respectively 26,64 TBq
(UNSCEAR 2000) and 22 TBq (Agalesdes et al., 2000).
The activity of 137Cs emitted into the environment during the Chernobyl accident is
estimated at 85 PBq. The repository could reach several MBq.m-2 near the site,
whereas in Western Europe, particularly in France, the deposit was of the order of
some kBq.m-2 to a few tens of kBq.m-2. One of the characteristics of this
accident, occurred the 26 APRIL 1986, is the isotopic signature on the show with a
137Cs / 134Cs ratio of the order of 2,00 ± 0,17 (Renaud et al., 1999-a).

I pass.

[Obamot]

The curve on the analysis of cesium 237 in wines posted by Exnihiloest challenged me

Of great importance, cesium 137 (and not 237). Then if you did not immediately realize that it was phony is that you really have no field competence in this area! 15in collaboration with the WHO have at least allowed me not to do this type of blunder!

All this for, as usual, trying to justify a pseudo non-partisan attitude. While the bottom does not mean anything.

I knew it would be necessary to repeat that (in particular):
- cesium cannot disappear from the body as if by magic, it can only be added to it ... (if we want to speak "seriously")
- These curves are totally bogus.
- if we want to talk "seriously" we must also talk about the MOST IMPORTANT, which is low dose irradiation, in statistics with a "low" evaluation probably> 2mios of deaths over 70 years,> 90mios tell us some experts. UNSCEAR figures, like what we can say anything by taking only partial stats (with Fukushima we have not finished counting the dead.)
- if we want to talk "seriously" we must also talk about the MOST IMPORTANT, it is the catastrophe of the pitiful output of nuclear power <1.
- if we want to talk "seriously" we must also talk about the MOST IMPORTANT, that is to say why our economy has created from scratch the "need for nuclear power" to satisfy the industry which is a bottomless pit of wasting resources mining.

I also come from an industrial background but I will not compromise myself in demonstrations that do not hold water. In short, have fun "playing scientist" when you don't have the skills. By making diagrams say what we want them to say, we can make the figures say anything (well, the figures from COGEMA, and others, it's a bit like asking the American administration to to estimate the number of victims of the wars of the gulf, or to the former Nazis the estimate of the deaths in the concentration camps, it is of a credible ...). But it's good for self-esteem, if that's reassuring ....

Bof, make the buzz to defend the indefensible with fake statistics, good for the trash! What interest.