Chernobyl +30 – A Look From the Inside with Lucas Hixson
(April 2016)
Chernobyl +30 is a webnar presentation to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster. In this segment, US nuclear engineer Lucas Hixson briefly summarizes the causes of the Chernobyl accident, the initial clean-up efforts by the Soviets, and the current extent of nuclear contamination in an exclusion zone the size of Rhode Island.
Hixson spent ten days at the Chernobyl site at the end of 2015 for an update on the $1.4 billion* containment dome Bechtel is building to prevent further radiation release. The largest man made structure ever built, the dome will replace the sarcophagus the Soviets placed over the site in 1987. The latter has become contaminated and is emitting gamma radiation. Bechtel’s $1.4 billion dome is predicted to last 100 years.
For me, the most interesting part of the presentation concerns the precautions taken to minimize tje radiation dose experienced by the 3,500 workers who are dismantling the sarcophagus. As Hixson points out, they are all younger workers with no direct experience of the devastating health problems workers and residents experienced after the Chernobyl explosion. It’s his impression they have minimal awareness of the immense hazards of their work.
Hixson’s presentation begins at 5:23.
* Hixson doesn’t mention how Ukraine (which is currently bankrupt and undergoing IMF restructuring) is paying for the containment done. According to the Washington Post, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development is managing the project, which they are funding through international donations. The US has contribution $410 million.
The Most Revolutionary Act 
Reblogged this on auntyuta.
LikeLike
https://thearmageddontimes.com/2016/05/08/mercury-transit-linked-to-biblical-destruction-prophe/
LikeLike
Pingback: Chernobyl’s $1.4 Billion Containment Dome, Webnar and Review | Talesfromthelou
I wonder often how they can invent something that dangerous and not think about the catastrophe that could happen. Blows my mind.
LikeLike
The problem can be summed in this way: it is left up to “physicists,” and not medical professionals who specialize in modelling radiation risks to organisms, to determine what counts or does not count as ‘dangerous’ in terms of radiation exposure.
The current model used to determine radiation risk only considers the effects of “external” sources of emissions and not the far more dangerous and biologically significant risk associated with internally absorbed or metabolized radioactive particles or substances.
See, for example, this reasonably short article written by Chris Busby:
“The ICRP’s radiation risk model is bogus science”
http://www.theecologist.org/blogs_and_comments/commentators/2596275/the_icrps_radiation_risk_model_is_bogus_science.html
For a more in depth discussion, there is this excerpt from another effort by Dr. Busby:
Click to access aspects-of-dna-damage.pdf
A link to archived material by Dr. Christopher Bursby:
http://www.chris.busby.exposed/all-the-videos/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting point, Norman. I’m aware that “long term” workers in the exclusion zone are only allowed there for 15 days at a time and required to bring their own food (with locally grown food contaminated with radioactive cesium and strontium being the major risk). I was really disappointed that Hixson didn’t address this issue in his webnar.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Actually, I thought Hixson’s presentation to be extraordinarily good. It makes plain the incredible complexity that is involved in the business of managing nuclear reactors and their waste, a complexity that itself ultimately exceeds all manageability. Reactors are machines that cannot really be controlled and ultimately end in disasters that are forever.
I guess the point I was trying to make was that because “nuclear physicists” do not really have a grasp on how dangerous “absorbed” radiation is for the ecology of our planet, because they reduce the danger to “external” sources of radiation only, they do not fully appreciate the magnitude of the potential or actual catastrophes that nuclear reactors represent. And they are the professionals tasked with our “radiological protection.”
Ignorance, then, is a big part of the answer to Lara’s question about why “they” appear to be so thoughtlessness or reckless in the deployment of this “technology.”
LikeLike
The really sick thing, Lara, is there are hundreds of them around the world. This is one thing I really like about living in New Zealand. Since the 1980s, it’s nuclear free by statute. They won’t even allow the US Navy to dock in its harbors as the US refuses to specific if they are nuclear powered or carry nuclear weapons.
LikeLike
Since the 1980s, it’s nuclear free by statute? This is excellent! Do you know of any other countries like this?
LikeLike
No Aunty, I don’t know of any other countries. There was a major protest movement in the 1980s to make New Zealand nuclear free. The popular protests brought the government down when National MP Marilyn Waring crossed the floor to join with the opposition: I posted a documentary about Waring a few months ago: https://stuartjeannebramhall.com/2016/03/29/the-refusal-of-global-economists-to-recognize-womens-unpaid-labor/
LikeLike
Thanks for this information, Stuart, Thank you very much!
LikeLike
It’s sick and criminal to not plan for a disaster. I will keep reading on this; thank you Norman and Stuart very much for educating me.
LikeLike
ALL IN THE PLANS:
http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2016/05/09/how-do-we-prove-that-the-un-is-preparing-to-take-over-america-understanding-the-nature-of-intelligence-information/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=how-do-we-prove-that-the-un-is-preparing-to-take-over-america-understanding-the-nature-of-intelligence-information
LikeLike