[HN Gopher] Radiation spikes in Chernobyl
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Radiation spikes in Chernobyl
        
       Author : stiray
       Score  : 260 points
       Date   : 2022-02-25 12:45 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (twitter.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (twitter.com)
        
       | pvaldes wrote:
       | So we will have another massive die-off of endangered saiga
       | antelopes this spring.
        
       | overflyer wrote:
        
       | perihelions wrote:
       | Tangentially, if you appreciate being able to read raw,
       | unfiltered OSINT like OP (@OAlexanderDK) dug up, you'd be
       | interested to know Twitter mistakenly suspended his account twice
       | in the past three days [0] -- one among a large number of
       | legitimate OSINT people covering Ukraine. The existence of this
       | kind of HN thread is fragile.
       | 
       | You can also read Twitter Site Integrity's apology and response
       | [1], or independent reporting about this [2].
       | 
       | [0] https://twitter.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1496513006657839108
       | 
       | [1] https://twitter.com/yoyoel/status/1496544199478583297
       | 
       | [2]
       | https://www.ft.com/content/5b23938b-49b8-426f-97af-640ba40c9... (
       | _" Twitter admits it mistakenly removed Ukraine open-source
       | intelligence accounts"_)
        
         | ComputerGuru wrote:
         | > You can also read Twitter Site Integrity's apology and
         | response [1]
         | 
         | What apology? Vague explanation but no even "sorry for the
         | inconvenience" at the link you shared:
         | 
         |  _We're closely investigating -- but mass reporting is not a
         | factor here._
         | 
         |  _A small number of human errors as part of our work to
         | proactively address manipulated media resulted in these
         | incorrect enforcements. We're fixing the issue and reaching out
         | directly to the affected folks._
        
           | perihelions wrote:
           | The "reaching out" part included directed apologies. (Is this
           | really the important part?)
           | 
           | https://twitter.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1496452673008279552
           | ("...we apologize for any inconvenience this may have
           | caused")
        
             | ComputerGuru wrote:
             | > Is this really the important part?
             | 
             | I'm not sure if I'm understanding you right, but if you're
             | asking whether I think it's important that twitter either
             | apologized or at least "apologized," I do indeed.
             | 
             | The major social media institutions have touted themselves
             | to be champions of getting the word out and a replacement
             | for all other avenues of communication, leading to the
             | demise of self-hosted (or, at least, self-moderated) blogs,
             | websites, irc, regular discussion forums, and everything in
             | between. But they continually screw up this responsibility
             | at the times when it matters most, and we have to hold them
             | accountable for this. Look at how all of Facebook,
             | Instagram, and Twitter accidentally blocked OSINT coming
             | out of Israel and Palestine after similarly being DDOS'd
             | with "report this tweet/image/post" from either employees
             | of intelligence agencies, paid shills, or just "the other
             | side" to hide the ground truths.
             | 
             | It's not OK for this to happen. It keeps happening. The
             | lack of remorse indicates that regardless of intention or
             | motive, there's no real vested interest in actually keeping
             | avenues of grassroot journalism open on these platforms
             | (it's probably not the kind of content that makes them
             | muchmoney, so no surprise there).
             | 
             | In this case, there was no public apology (or "apology") -
             | the "sorry for the inconvenience" was in one-on-one
             | correspondence with the blocked OSINT account.
        
         | capableweb wrote:
         | To add to the list of unfiltered OSINT straight from
         | Ukraine/Russia, Telegram channels/groups are invaluable (but
         | treat everything as unconfirmed rumors until confirmed
         | elsewhere):
         | 
         | - https://t.me/uniannet
         | 
         | - https://t.me/ukrpravda_news
         | 
         | - https://t.me/istorijaoruzija
         | 
         | - https://t.me/dumskaya_net
         | 
         | - https://t.me/idelator
         | 
         | Beware, some of these are literally Russian propaganda, so
         | again, don't take anything being said/shared as truth until
         | verified elsewhere.
         | 
         | In case you need a translation service for the channels, I
         | wrote a Telegram bot that translates anything you send to
         | it/forward to it to English (via DeepL, so higher quality
         | translations than Google Translate), accessible here:
         | 
         | - https://t.me/transtel_bot - Source:
         | https://codeberg.org/CapableWeb/transtel
        
           | reitanqild wrote:
        
             | lostlogin wrote:
             | > I understand why my dad urged me to not go voluntarily to
             | artillery.
             | 
             | Can you explain this further?
        
               | reitanqild wrote:
               | He told me that armour is not protection.
               | 
               | It is instead a death trap:
               | 
               | It is loud, valuable for the enemy and if they shoot at
               | you using shape charges you'll be roasted alive.
        
             | isoprophlex wrote:
             | What the actual flying fuck happened there, that's
             | intensely horrible. War is hell.
        
               | reitanqild wrote:
               | What happened is Russian soldiers, either cocky or
               | terrified depending on how much they knew came driving
               | down the road and suddenly the entire thing shook
               | violently,
               | 
               | (the rest is my best understanding based on things I
               | learned years ago):
               | 
               | temperature rose quickly to become unbearable as the
               | missile stuck the the armour and the warhead sent a
               | payload of molten brass (or something) through the solid
               | metal. As the poor blokes try to escape it seems like
               | something more has gone ablaze as you can see they are
               | frozen while trying to run.
               | 
               | Russians going into Ukraine should just as well put
               | sunflower seeds in all pockets and write "this side up"
               | on the front, then at least the grave can look nice in
               | the summer.
               | 
               | It's insanely ugly and I have tears in my eyes even if
               | this is the best outcome.
               | 
               | Edit: read for yourself, seems the Javelin missile kills
               | the tank crew somewhat more humanely by just sending a
               | multi atmospheric shockwave into the box instead of how
               | these seems to have had time to fear and try in vain to
               | escape.
               | 
               | Edit 2: My bigger point is, if you can somehow avoid
               | being part of the attempted invasion of Ukraine it might
               | be worth going some distance to avoid it.
        
               | User23 wrote:
               | > temperature rose quickly to become unbearable as the
               | missile stuck the the armour and the warhead sent a
               | payload of molten brass (or something) through the solid
               | metal. As the poor blokes try to escape it seems like
               | something more has gone ablaze as you can see they are
               | frozen while trying to run.
               | 
               | Sounds like a shaped charge[1]. I know a man who was
               | drafted during the Korean War and at first he thought it
               | would be lovely to be in a tank protected from harm. Then
               | he got trained on using shaped charges on old German
               | panzers and decided he was happy to be infantry.
               | 
               | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaped_charge
        
               | reitanqild wrote:
               | Exactly. I had forgotten the name. And yes, the man you
               | knew probably had learned the same lessons as my dad.
               | 
               | Again, this was years ago and I was never equipped with
               | one of these but based on what little I learned and what
               | I see it seems those poor guys where roasted, not knocked
               | dead.
        
             | KarlKemp wrote:
             | I fail to see what purpose posting gore such as this
             | serves. Nobody needs proof that war is bad.
        
               | dijonman2 wrote:
               | It needs to be shared and break through cognitive
               | dissonance.
               | 
               | So many people sit comfortably in their chairs at home
               | opining and spew thoughts online without any real idea of
               | how bad things really are.
               | 
               | This is real life.
        
               | reitanqild wrote:
               | I'm afraid a lot of people have no clue. Their only idea
               | is action movies and FPS games.
               | 
               | I don't have much more myself.
               | 
               | But I do care deeply and this - while tragic for the poor
               | souls and their poor parents back in Russia - isn't that
               | bad.
        
           | jazzyjackson wrote:
           | > don't take anything being said/shared as truth until
           | verified elsewhere.
           | 
           | Then what is the possible value of following it? I spent an
           | hour or so trying to get updates on twitter and spent the
           | whole time flagging the same fake videos posted over and
           | over.
        
         | mzs wrote:
         | I support OSINT but this particular person has repeatedly been
         | wrong and alarmist - plus he toots his horn for being right
         | even when he's wrong:
         | 
         | https://twitter.com/badc0fee/status/1495914223427276804
         | 
         | This particular case is likely armor kicking-up radioactive
         | dust, and since the ground is wet it's not much of a problem:
         | 
         | https://twitter.com/badc0fee/status/1497253041854025728
        
       | BlinkenBlinken wrote:
        
       | nuccy wrote:
       | Russians came from Belarus and with their tanks disrupt the
       | radioactive soil and create dust [1]. The internal systems and
       | the reactors themselves are in nominal state without changes.
       | 
       | 1. https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-says-chernobyl-
       | radia...
        
         | awb wrote:
         | What are the environmental / health risks of this radioactive
         | dust getting kicked up?
        
           | deutschewelle wrote:
        
             | swamp40 wrote:
             | >> if Russia is kicked off SWIFT, it would be removing any
             | sort of restraint they've displayed so far.
             | 
             | I don't think they care much about that. They have already
             | assumed they would be. There are several other options for
             | them. It most hurts Europe and their investments/payments,
             | as well as our intelligence tracking of high net worth
             | individuals.
        
             | leephillips wrote:
             | > There is blame on both sides
             | 
             | Say what now?
             | 
             | > One thing I understand about Western European culture is
             | that they will never tell you no outright as it is rude to
             | do so.
             | 
             | Generally speaking, no, this is not one thing you
             | understand about W. E. culture.
        
               | chefkoch wrote:
               | You have never been to western europe?
               | 
               | Berlin is famous for this.
        
               | leephillips wrote:
               | Guess I encountered the wrong German ladies, then.
        
               | deutschewelle wrote:
               | and HN is the epitome of Dunning-Kruger effect
        
             | tejohnso wrote:
             | > Japan is the worst outright making you question even a
             | solid yes mixed with non-subtle and impossible to read
             | vocal/posture
             | 
             | How can it be both non-subtle and yet impossible to read?
        
               | traviscj wrote:
               | Seems like GP means it's noticeable but difficult to
               | interpret?
        
             | iSnow wrote:
        
             | Denvercoder9 wrote:
             | > One thing I understand about Western European culture is
             | that they will never tell you no outright as it is rude to
             | do so. Any sort of hesitancy is to be construed as a no and
             | unlike America/East Germany or Scandinavian countries tough
             | to get a straight answer most of the time.
             | 
             | This is a ridiculous overgeneralization. If you compare
             | e.g. the Dutch with the Southern U.S., you'll find the
             | Dutch are much more eager to directly tell it how it is.
        
               | deutschewelle wrote:
               | well as long as the contrasts are obvious, generalizing
               | was the intent
        
           | nuccy wrote:
           | Unless there is a strong wind it likely will settle back,
           | especially since it is a thick forest around the station.
        
             | ornornor wrote:
             | I don't know about where you live but here in Europe there
             | have been storms warnings with pretty strong winds in the
             | last week. Not a meteorologist and I have no idea how that
             | would impact radioactive dust spread.
        
               | awb wrote:
               | Are the prevailing winds are typically West to East?
        
               | ornornor wrote:
               | According to https://www.meteoblue.com/en/weather/history
               | climate/weathera... they're blowing from the West to the
               | East so it's blowing from Europe towards Pripyat, so at
               | least there is that.
        
         | yumraj wrote:
         | So, the Russian soldiers are all probably breathing this dust
         | and their equipment will spread it to where ever they deploy in
         | Ukraine? That doesn't sound good at all.
        
           | pjc50 wrote:
           | There's an invasion on, nothing about it sounds good!
        
           | petters wrote:
           | Compared to the other things the soldiers will likely be
           | doing, this sounds like an irrelevant problem.
        
           | ajsnigrutin wrote:
           | Considering that they're mostly just passing by, and that the
           | levels are not really high, it won't be that bad.
           | 
           | I didn't do the math, but the radiation levels for driving
           | past there, or staying there for a day or two, would probably
           | be very low, and comparable to a lot of other stuff we do
           | without thinking (plane rides, xrays etc.)
        
             | DominikD wrote:
             | They aren't just passing by. There's an ongoing fight for
             | the control over this terrain. And, in the unlikely event
             | of Russian troops retreating, I wouldn't put past Russia
             | bombing it.
        
             | contravariant wrote:
             | The problem with breathing the stuff is that it may stay
             | with you for quite a while. This isn't the worst thing with
             | gamma radiation since most radiation will just pass through
             | the body, but beta or alpha radiation could be worrying if
             | that's still present (I don't know if it is, but disturbing
             | the ground in Chernobyl and breathing the resulting dust
             | doesn't sound like the safest way to find out)
        
             | temac wrote:
             | They will breath the dust and get some internal radiation
             | though. Not really a problem for the others if they move
             | after that, but not very good for them.
        
               | connordoner wrote:
               | One might argue that's a price you pay when murdering
               | innocent civilians in land that isn't yours, no?
        
               | yumraj wrote:
               | Yeah, but Putin's not the one breathing it - the foot
               | soldiers are.
        
               | belval wrote:
               | Not to be a apologist of what Russia is doing (really
               | really against the current invasion/occupation) but from
               | what we've seen around social media, it's not clear that
               | the actual soldiers on the ground understand that they
               | aren't "liberating" the Ukrainians from actual Nazis.
               | They are fed misinformation on a daily basis and at least
               | some of them see themselves as the "good guys".
               | 
               | It does not excuse anything really, but I wouldn't wish
               | them pulmonary cancer.
        
               | mdoms wrote:
               | > Not to be a apologist of what Russia is doing [...
               | apologism]
        
               | ajsnigrutin wrote:
               | Eh, the soldiers know... it's for power and against nato,
               | and to get a bit more of the land.
               | 
               | Look at every past conflict, every american soldier in
               | iraq knew, that they were going in to get the oil,
               | everything else was just propaganda for the taxpayers.
        
               | mywittyname wrote:
               | It's typical that troops are kept in the dark about
               | mission details.
        
         | Eduard wrote:
         | According to
         | https://www.timeanddate.com/weather/ukraine/chernobyl/histor...
         | , there was light rain in Chernobyl since Thursday. This should
         | reduce the dust hypothesis, no?
        
           | ch4s3 wrote:
           | It depends on the particular isotopes, most aren't water
           | soluble but some would precipitate out of the air on rain. So
           | it's hard to say.
        
         | G3rn0ti wrote:
         | The thing with radioactivity is: it may be invisible but it is
         | luckily very well detectable. Gamma ray spectrometers are
         | _super_ sensitive but that does not mean the detected levels
         | are actually posing a threat to humans.
        
           | avs733 wrote:
           | nice of them to leave breadcrumbs everywhere.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | sschueller wrote:
       | What strategic purpose would taking Chernobyl have other than
       | maybe securing the site and preventing someone from blowing a
       | hole in the sarcophagus?
        
         | eouw0o83hf wrote:
         | The Chernobyl complex still houses a key power distribution
         | center for the Ukrainian power grid, so it does hold
         | strategic/logistical importance.
        
         | ornornor wrote:
         | Isn't it still generating electricity (with the reactors that
         | didn't melt down) for the region despite everything? I guess as
         | an invader, you'd want to control the power plant.
        
           | bluGill wrote:
           | That was shutdown a few years ago. Though I suspect that
           | there is other infrastructure still in/through the area.
        
           | adrianmonk wrote:
           | Wikipedia says all the other reactors were used for some time
           | after the accident, some for quite some time, but now all
           | reactors at the site have been shut down.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_Nuclear_Power_Plant#.
           | ..
        
         | keewee7 wrote:
         | The posh ruling elite in Moscow and StP want to deceive the
         | West into thinking Russia is a mad dog that is too dangerous to
         | bother. They want to scare the West from imposing total
         | economic sanctions. They want to scare the West from supplying
         | the Ukrainian resistance.
         | 
         | Always remember Russia is a rational actor no matter how much
         | Putin and Lavrov are fear mongering about sanctions leading to
         | a nuclear WW3. The French foreign minister was the first to
         | call out their bluff yesterday. I hope more Western leaders
         | will follow.
        
           | AnotherGoodName wrote:
           | I'd point out that being irrational in order to scare the
           | west into thinking you're irrational is still an example of
           | being irrational.
           | 
           | We can only call their bluff so many times before they feel
           | the need to demonstrate that they are indeed willing to be
           | crazy. Which they've done here with this whole Ukraine
           | situation.
        
           | Jeff_Brown wrote:
           | I wish I knew how to tell.
           | 
           | In game theory there are games that the crazy person wins.
           | "Chicken" is the most famous. If both players are crazy, both
           | lose. Unfortunately the discipline offers no way of
           | diagnosing insanity. Committing to what looks like a crazy
           | plan can be rational. Putin's speech on Monday certainly
           | seemed unhinged, but he might be a good actor.
        
         | clord wrote:
         | It is "high ground" in the sense that it can not be safely
         | assailed.
        
         | tokamak wrote:
         | Building fear in the West.
        
           | adventured wrote:
           | That removes fear in the West in the context of battles
           | raging around it. Russia has enormous nuclear capabilities,
           | they don't need Chernobyl for anything other than to secure
           | it from being used against them in some manner (whether stunt
           | propaganda, or some kind of radiation threat). Chernobyl
           | being secured by Russia relieves that risk for the West.
        
         | newsclues wrote:
         | You hold a position to launch attacks from that are hard to
         | counter attack.
         | 
         | Setup your artillery there and they can't just shell the area
         | back out of fear of causing a nuclear disaster.
         | 
         | IMO, the UN should have stepped in and taken control of the
         | nuclear zone. There is a global risk here.
        
           | yaris wrote:
           | From some russian sources I've read that Chernobyl has been
           | taken by Belarus soldiers, not russians. Because Belarus guys
           | are sensitive to anything going on around Chernobyl and want
           | to secure the site.
        
             | jwandborg wrote:
             | Isn't Belarus a dictatorship? If so, that's such a nice
             | thing for a dictator to do.
        
               | 8note wrote:
               | Self interest. Belarus is one of the places that will
               | feel the worst effects if anything happens at chernobyl
        
             | newsclues wrote:
             | The Russias attack Kiev came from Belarus.
             | 
             | If Belarusian soldiers are involved that is a greater
             | escalation that simply allowing Russia to invade another
             | nation through their territory.
             | 
             | Belarus being a Russian pawn at the moment anything is
             | possible I guess
        
               | dillondoyle wrote:
               | I've read both reports that Belarusian military is in
               | Ukraine, and also not. I can't find a legitimate top AP
               | or similar report. The not sources seem to be repeating
               | video put out from Russia so I wouldn't buy any side
               | right now.
               | 
               | Either way Belarus are defacto participants having done
               | military drills, allowing tanks to move through their
               | checkpoints into Russia.
               | 
               | Regardless of whether they are or are not shooting right
               | now, Belarus is 100% a pawn of Russia.
               | 
               | That is the model Putin is trying to create in Ukraine.
        
           | etiam wrote:
           | Well put.
           | 
           | Also, take the following with more than a grain of salt as
           | I'm in no way really knowledgeable about such systems, but I
           | would imagine both the area itself and temporarily disturbing
           | it could be valuable as cover for nuclear weapons. One
           | valuable tool for keeping track of them involves detecting
           | and analyzing escaped isotope traces, and that's going to be
           | harder to pick out and make sense of against that noisy
           | background.
           | 
           | As I understand it, nuclear weaponry still features
           | prominently in Russia's military doctrine and it's worth
           | noting that not only the military but Russia's whole
           | citizenry have been trained and prepared for nuclear fallout,
           | to a much greater extent than most nations seem to prioritize
           | today.
           | 
           | In addition to artillery I imagine for instance certain kinds
           | of anti-air systems might be attractive to put on a site like
           | that. Any further suggestions? They could have taken weeks to
           | bring equipment in during the "military exercise" with
           | Lukashenko's troops, so I guess few things are truly off the
           | table.
        
             | ClumsyPilot wrote:
             | "could be valuable as cover for nuclear weapons"
             | 
             | You can't hide a nuclear blast, we have satellites in orbit
             | that detect the flash. Chech the vela incident -
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vela_incident
             | 
             | "Russia's whole citizenry have been trained and prepared
             | for nuclear fallout, to a much greater extent than most
             | nations seem to prioritize today."
             | 
             | That's not been the case for like 40 years
        
         | UnlockedSecrets wrote:
         | Chernobyl has a nice road that happens to be the shortest road
         | between Kyiv the Ukraine capital and Russia. It also still has
         | several active reactors only 1 of them melted down so that
         | gives some strategic merit byt the road is 99% of it.
        
           | jaywalk wrote:
           | All reactors at Chernobyl have been shutdown since 2000. I
           | have been amazed lately at how many people are unaware of
           | this and think Chernobyl is still an operating nuclear power
           | plant.
        
             | netsharc wrote:
             | A few weeks ago there's a cartoon where a guy sits in front
             | a computer, and a speech bubble above him says "After 2
             | years of being an epidemiological expert, I am now a geo-
             | political expert."...
        
             | vlovich123 wrote:
             | I had the opposite perception and thought no reactors were
             | active since the explosion.
        
               | brimble wrote:
               | It was long one of those "surprising fact" sorts of
               | things.
        
             | blablabla123 wrote:
             | It's quite crazy though that they left it running for 14
             | years after making the area around it inhabitable and
             | causing fallout over whole Europe
        
               | jaywalk wrote:
               | It is pretty crazy. I would assume that they really
               | needed the energy it was producing, although I admit that
               | I don't have much further knowledge on the topic.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | altgoogler wrote:
         | Take a look at the map. Chernobyl sits right on the border of
         | Belarus, 130km to Kyiv on the western side of Dnieper river.
         | 
         | They didn't take Chernobyl to take the reactor, they took it
         | because it is extremely strategic if the goal is to assault
         | Kyiv.
        
           | Symmetry wrote:
           | Also, it's a pretty unpopulated region and for that reason
           | easier to move large forces through without trouble.
           | 
           | And as a minor consideration, "We captured Chernobyl,
           | protecting you good Russians from Ukranian nuclear threats"
           | can be used as propaganda.
        
           | seanw444 wrote:
           | This is most certainly the correct answer. It's the shortest
           | shortcut to the enemy's capital, despite being an exclusion
           | zone.
        
         | teeray wrote:
         | It still has functioning reactors, so I'd imagine it's the same
         | as the time-old military strategy: secure the supply lines. In
         | modern times, electricity is vital to an enemy's defensive
         | capabilities, so depriving them of it forces them to use
         | generators with exhaustible fuel supplies.
        
           | yabones wrote:
           | The last reactor to shutdown was Unit 3 in December 2000. The
           | whole facility has been undergoing cleanup and
           | decommissioning since.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_Nuclear_Power_Plant#.
           | ..
        
             | throwawayboise wrote:
             | Drifting slightly off topic but it always seemed amazing to
             | me that they kept the other reactors running even in the
             | immediate aftermath of the Unit 4 explosion. Literally just
             | down the hall, units 1, 2, and 3 ran for years afterwards.
             | These were all manually controlled reactors that needed
             | humans in the control room. No "working from home "on
             | these.
        
               | ols wrote:
               | Unit 3 was just behind a wall, but 1 and 2 were quite far
               | away (300-500m).
               | 
               | They all had multiple serious incidents before and after
               | the Chernobyl Disaster (1982 - partial core meltdown at
               | #1, 1984 - incidents at #3 and #4, 1991 - fire at the
               | turbine hall of #2). This was the most unsafe nuclear
               | power plant in the whole USSR and the operators were in
               | grave danger all the time.
        
               | throwawayboise wrote:
               | There are still 8 reactors of the same type (RBMK) active
               | in Russia, though they have been retrofitted with changes
               | to reduce the risk of another Chernobyl scenario.
        
               | yabones wrote:
               | I think the main reason they did that, was there was
               | simply not money in Ukraine to build replacement power
               | plants during the 90s after the USSR collapsed. They had
               | no other option than to keep the plant running, or risk
               | their entire grid collapsing. Very scary to think about
               | having to make that decision.
        
       | ineedasername wrote:
       | Does someone have any insight on why Russia would expend
       | resources taking this site? AFAIK it doesn't have anything useful
       | or produce any power, except maybe the possibility that
       | mishandling it could invoke the terror of regional disaster.
       | (Unless that's the point?)
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | borgchick wrote:
       | So are soldiers from both sides, either on foot or in vehicles in
       | full radiation suits??? If not, aren't they at severe risk of
       | radiation poisoning (in addition to rapid on set lead poisoning)?
       | 
       | Not to mention if they continue past chernobyl into other
       | regions, aren't they just gonna carry all that radiation with
       | them?
        
         | justinpombrio wrote:
         | > If not, aren't they at severe risk of radiation poisoning?
         | 
         | The Chernobyl exclusion zone extends miles outside the reactor,
         | and gets tourists. I think the danger level is more like "don't
         | live here or you'll get cancer" than "don't walk here or you'll
         | die". And don't pick up sketchy looking things because they
         | might give you cancer. Inside/near the sarcophagus is a
         | different story (that I don't know, but assume is much worse).
         | 
         | For example, the local wildlife is apparently doing better now
         | than it was before the meltdown, because of lack of human
         | activity. Not counting right next to the reactor where things
         | died.
         | 
         | Hopefully the Russian troops don't interfere with ongoing
         | cleanup efforts...
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_Exclusion_Zone#Radio...
        
         | Accujack wrote:
         | >aren't they at severe risk of radiation poisoning
         | 
         | No. Radiation effects are based on time and exposure level, and
         | even with dust kicked up they're not likely to spend enough
         | time there that it makes them sick at all.
         | 
         | Breathing in radioactive material from the dust is a bit more
         | of a problem, but I'd expect they're wearing at least basic
         | masks outdoors.
         | 
         | No radiation suits, though.
         | 
         | They'll carry some dust with them wherever they go, but like
         | dust from anywhere else, it will slowly be dispersed on roads
         | and in rain gutters. It's not "instant death dust" so while it
         | will increase background radiation somewhat where it lands,
         | unless someone eats or breathes a lot of it, they won't be
         | affected.
         | 
         | So, still not a good thing, but not something that's a huge
         | problem compared to flying bullets.
         | 
         | Now, if they punch a hole in the new safe confinement and a lot
         | of water gets in, that will be much more of a problem.
        
       | hereforphone wrote:
       | Be careful out there S.T.A.L.K.E.R.
        
       | skywal_l wrote:
       | Could they be deploying nukes? Chernobyl would be the perfect
       | cover.
        
       | perihelions wrote:
       | - _" Data from the automated radiation monitoring system of the
       | exclusion zone, which is available online,"_
       | 
       | Where is this official source?
        
         | elil17 wrote:
         | Not the source shown, but the Ukrainian Parliament has tweeted
         | a similar radiation map:
         | https://twitter.com/ua_parliament/status/1497108007863435279
        
           | perihelions wrote:
           | Yes, that's the tweet I quoted and am asking about.
           | 
           | (It's the tweet that's double-RT'd by the tweet that's the HN
           | submission).
        
             | elil17 wrote:
             | Oops, my bad. But I would think that most people would
             | consider the Parliament of Ukraine an official source -
             | surely they have direct access to radiation data?
        
               | perihelions wrote:
               | That doesn't terminate my curiosity.
        
         | mtmail wrote:
         | One of the screenshots is
         | https://www.saveecobot.com/en/radiation-maps#11/51.3463/30.1...
         | (related discussion
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30461521)
        
           | perihelions wrote:
           | This HN comment says archive.org never saw that radiation map
           | before yesterday:
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30462247
           | 
           | I tried some further searches: Google didn't crawl the
           | subdomain /en/radiation-maps before 2022, nor did the see the
           | string "saveecobot.com/en/radiation-maps" anywhere on the
           | internet.
        
             | mtmail wrote:
             | Their twitter account is 5 years old and has a screenshot
             | showing they launched a radiation map 2020. https://twitter
             | .com/SaveEcoBot/status/1339958096232329216/ph... So it
             | didn't appear recently, maybe it was not popular enough to
             | be indexed or linked to since launch (only 22 Twitter
             | followers).
        
               | perihelions wrote:
               | I see the "gamma-radiation monitoring" on this
               | 2020-timestamped tweet. Good find!
        
             | capableweb wrote:
             | > That site is suspect. The "radiation map" page did not
             | seem to exist before today: https://web.archive.org/web/202
             | 20224230609/https://www.savee...
             | 
             | Just because it wasn't in the Archive.org's archive doesn't
             | mean it didn't exist. Many websites are not indexed until
             | someone links to them (shocker), and since no one really
             | cared too much about Chernobyl until yesterday/today, it's
             | not that weird that they (Archive.org) didn't come across
             | the website until today.
        
           | tastroder wrote:
           | The other side is from www.srp.ecocentre.kiev.ua (currently
           | down)
        
         | dottedmag wrote:
         | https://dazv.gov.ua/en -- UA state agency for management of the
         | exclusion zone.
         | 
         | Their online map seems to be... offline:
         | http://www.srp.ecocentre.kiev.ua/MEDO-PS/index.php?lang=UKR
        
         | capableweb wrote:
         | Other comments mention some sources, here are two more:
         | 
         | - EU-EC JRC - Radioactivity Environmental Monitoring -
         | https://remap.jrc.ec.europa.eu/Advanced.aspx (not granular
         | enough to detect anything)
         | 
         | - SafeCast -
         | https://map.safecast.org/?y=51.361&x=30.123&z=11&l=0&m=0 (does
         | detect high levels right now)
        
           | jka wrote:
           | The Safecast link displays higher radioactivity levels within
           | some of the core road network in and around Chernobyl
           | relative to road networks further away - that's to be
           | expected, I think? If so, it doesn't necessarily indicate
           | (nor disprove) an upwards trend.
           | 
           | The EU-EC JRC map does provide visibility into recent
           | historic data and trend charts; currently neither of the
           | three nearest stations (UA33231, BY33124, UA33236) seem to
           | indicate an upwards trend in the surrounding environment over
           | the past 48 hours.
           | 
           | As you say, granularity is important - perhaps there's
           | something going on at a very localized level in-or-around the
           | sensors at the Chernobyl nuclear storage facility; whatever
           | it is doesn't yet seem to indicate any broader effect, as far
           | as I can tell. It's certainly worth staying wary, but also
           | worth being careful about how the situation's communicated
           | and how people react to the news.
        
           | perihelions wrote:
           | I had checked those already, but neither have the Chernobyl
           | dataset. (They don't have any recent data either -- nothing
           | that could independently confirm stuff).
           | 
           | - _" (does detect high levels right now)"_
           | 
           | Those aren't recent measurements: right-click on the map to
           | see their timestamps ("Query Safecast API Here").
        
         | xaerise wrote:
         | https://www.saveecobot.com/en/radiation-maps#14/51.3880/30.1...
        
       | c7DJTLrn wrote:
       | This is ridiculous panic. They haven't cracked open the NSC or
       | anything like that. It's just dust. Long lived radionuclides
       | kicked into the air that emit alpha and beta radiation -
       | practically harmless unless you're playing around in it like a
       | sandpit. Please don't let your attention be diverted from the
       | matter at hand.
        
       | pleb_nz wrote:
       | Imagine this for a movie plot
       | 
       | Russia stages the invasion as a cover to recover something from
       | deep under Chernobyl
       | 
       | What do you think that thing might be....
        
         | ge96 wrote:
         | They bored straight into hell (an actual recent movie that came
         | out The Superdeep)
         | 
         | edit: that's not a spoiler btw, the plot is pretty neat
        
         | jl6 wrote:
         | Chernobyl was a geo-nuclear power plant sited on top of a
         | natural column of subcritical fissile material that extended
         | down deep into the Earth's crust. The plan was to seed the
         | column with just enough nuclear fuel to bring the upper part to
         | critical mass, and thence draw material upwards into the
         | reaction zone, thus creating a virtually unlimited supply of
         | fuel and energy.
         | 
         | Unfortunately, the accident caused a meltdown which is still
         | going, three decades later. When it hits the mantle, its energy
         | output will begin to grow exponentially as it consumes the
         | greater concentrations of nucleotides at that depth.
         | Eventually, it will explode, triggering global supervolcanism,
         | which will destroy most of human civilization, and potentially
         | drop ash on Putin's car. He's only just had it washed, so he
         | sends in the troops to retrieve the melting core, and save the
         | world.
        
       | anshumankmr wrote:
       | There's a followup tweet with a possible explanation:
       | https://twitter.com/WillyWaugh/status/1497157722663391233
       | 
       | Though I am not 100% sure of this since the USSR had removed the
       | topsoil back then but I suppose more of it could have spewed back
       | in to the soil over time.
        
         | dtx1 wrote:
         | I was in chernobyl, you could pick up reactor core debris
         | everywhere there by just looking for it with a dosimeter for a
         | few minutes.
        
           | anshumankmr wrote:
           | Even now?
        
             | dtx1 wrote:
             | I was there 2019, I assume not much has changed since then
        
         | ugjka wrote:
         | I don't think they removed the top soil for the whole exclusion
         | zone, that'd be an insane feat
        
           | sp332 wrote:
           | From 1986: https://www.upi.com/Archives/1986/12/02/Workers-
           | have-removed... They removed the topsoil from Pripyat. It
           | wasn't perfect, but they pushed it into 800 trenches.
           | https://xcdsystem.com/wmsym/archives//2013/papers/13526.pdf
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-02-25 23:01 UTC)