Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chernobyl’s Hot Mess, “the Elephant’s Foot,” Is Still Lethal (2013)

nautil.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 126 posts

Re: Chernobyl’s Hot Mess, “the Elephant’s Foot,” Is Still Lethal (2013)

#81

Post by demallien »

chii wrote: post #34
afterburner wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ditch both.

and freeze to death in winter? not cook your food and eat it raw? walk/cycle for 3 hours to commute to work?

Actually, for anyone living in an actual city, bikes and cars are generally roughly equivalent in terms of trip time. For example, I have an 8km commute on the outskirts of Paris - it takes about 45mins, regardless of whether I run, ride a bike, take public transport, or drive a car. (Ok, to be more precise, in includi the time to change into sports gear for the bike / running. Without this the bike takes about 30mins. Running does actually take 45 mins run time.)

Re: Chernobyl’s Hot Mess, “the Elephant’s Foot,” Is Still Lethal (2013)

#82

Post by vidarh »

happyscrappy wrote: post #76
vidarh wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The radioactivity released by coal plants still dwarf the sum output of all recorded nuclear incidents many times over.

This makes Germany's switching from nuclear to coal quite ironic.

Well, I think it's stupid of them, though they're of course "not" switching to coal. They're switching off their nuclear, and just haven't been able to replace the coal yet.

But it's not a given that their rollout of alternatives will be better/safer than nuclear either.

Re: Chernobyl’s Hot Mess, “the Elephant’s Foot,” Is Still Lethal (2013)

#83

Post by KMag »

andyjdavis wrote: post #50
chii wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and freeze to death in winter? not cook your food and eat it raw? walk/cycle for 3 hours to commute to work?

>and freeze to death in winter? This is off topic but I always find statements like the above rather bizarre. Why must humans insist on living in places where the environment is hostile to human life? I guess its because I grew up in a place where heating is very rarely necessary, without cooling of any kind and have spent most of the last three years traveling around countries where you could theoretically walk arou…

I grew up a bit farther than 45 degrees north of the Equator. I've been living in the tropics, about 22 degrees north, for 3 years now. I love my life here, but I still prefer the weather back home. You can always put on more clothes and/or walk more quickly, but you can't wear negative clothes.

Re: Chernobyl’s Hot Mess, “the Elephant’s Foot,” Is Still Lethal (2013)

#84

Post by Xylakant »

andyjdavis wrote: post #50
chii wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and freeze to death in winter? not cook your food and eat it raw? walk/cycle for 3 hours to commute to work?

>and freeze to death in winter? This is off topic but I always find statements like the above rather bizarre. Why must humans insist on living in places where the environment is hostile to human life? I guess its because I grew up in a place where heating is very rarely necessary, without cooling of any kind and have spent most of the last three years traveling around countries where you could theoretically walk arou…

> This is off topic but I always find statements like the above rather bizarre. Why must humans insist on living in places where the environment is hostile to human life?

Because by an unlucky twist of nature (physics and chemistry combined) the richest soils are found in temperate regions, so the lands that historically were capable of sustaining a high population density are in the colder regions, the ones where you need heating at least in winter.

Even now, with advances chemistry and fertilizers we'd not be able to sustain the worlds population if we all moved closer to the equator and gave up on regions that require heating at least in winter.

Re: Chernobyl’s Hot Mess, “the Elephant’s Foot,” Is Still Lethal (2013)

#85

Post by adrianN »

mohawk wrote: post #78
beloch wrote: post #73

While the article does contain some interesting details, I fundamentally disapprove of it's anti-nuclear moralizing. It's the constant trickle of articles like this that maintain public paranoia about nuclear power. This matters, because nuclear power allows us to meet today's power demands with today's technology without releasing CO2 into the environment. Alternative power sources are still some ways from meeting h…

I don't like fear-mongering either. But nuclear only looks cheap because a lot of costs are externalised. Prudent calculation of costs of insurance against accidents and waste storage for centuries make it unprofitable. Improvements in reactor safety often leads to humans behaving more carelessly. It is a penny-wise, pound-foolish technology, especially in densely populated areas.

Similarly, coal and other fossil fuels only look cheap because currently nobody is paying for the climate change they cause.

We have to choose between evils. I think nuclear power is better, because nuclear waste is relatively easy to contain until we figure out what to do with it (for example burn it up in breeder reactors), whereas the world's climate is a system we don't fully understand and meddling with it can cause irreparable damage.

Re: Chernobyl’s Hot Mess, “the Elephant’s Foot,” Is Still Lethal (2013)

#86

Post by adrianN »

Zardoz84 wrote: post #45
vidarh wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what magically safe alternative? (no, you don't avoid all deaths with hydro, wind or solar either; in fact hydro has historically been one of the deadliest power sources thanks to the Banqiao accident where a dam failure killed 171,000 - even excluding that, though, hydro is far from free of deaths) EDIT: Since I was being a bit snarky: The point is last I heard the number of deaths from installation of rooftop s…

Fusion. Every ten years, plasma physics say that we would have fusion on the next ten years. :D

Maybe if we funded it appropriately. Actual funding has been really low:

https://imgur.com/sjH5r

Re: Chernobyl’s Hot Mess, “the Elephant’s Foot,” Is Still Lethal (2013)

#87

Post by pluma »

demallien wrote: post #81
chii wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and freeze to death in winter? not cook your food and eat it raw? walk/cycle for 3 hours to commute to work?

Actually, for anyone living in an actual city, bikes and cars are generally roughly equivalent in terms of trip time. For example, I have an 8km commute on the outskirts of Paris - it takes about 45mins, regardless of whether I run, ride a bike, take public transport, or drive a car. (Ok, to be more precise, in includi the time to change into sports gear for the bike / running. Without this the bike takes about 30min…

I think the biggest difference in mindsets between the US and Europe (other than the isolationism/socialism divide and religion) arises from their different scales.

Europe is far more densely populated. The cities are generally much closer to each other. There often isn't the equivalent of American "suburbs", instead there are more (and smaller) cities. Most people living in cities get around by walking or use the public transit.

Re: Chernobyl’s Hot Mess, “the Elephant’s Foot,” Is Still Lethal (2013)

#88

Post by kabdib »

illumen wrote: post #57
cjslep wrote: post #4

I think this article is very well-written overall. However, there are still a point that could use clarification. > During a routine test on April 26, 1986, reactor Number 4 at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant experienced a power surge that triggered an emergency shutdown. It did not work. Calling the incident a routine test greatly mischaracterizes what they were doing. This wasn't some sort of daily safety checkli…

They were doing things in their routine. Thus it's routine. You're misrepresenting things.

No, the actions leading up to the explosion were anything but normal and routine. The operators went far outside the safety envelope of the reactor by deliberately disabling the mechanisms designed to prevent mishaps.

Chernobyl was caused by irresponsible and reckless behavior. You can't paint this as everyday operation, it's not even close.

Re: Chernobyl’s Hot Mess, “the Elephant’s Foot,” Is Still Lethal (2013)

#90

Post by NamTaf »

brazzy wrote: post #62
NamTaf wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't use 'common sense' and talk about how they design bombs and core reactors when you have no physics education. But hey, I'll humour you with as crude comparison as I can string together in a few minutes. This link [1] roughly compares Chernobyl to a Fat Man equivalent, which had a 21kT yield, or 0.021 MT. That's 0.003% of the total yield of all the atomic tests mankind has conducted (545MT total [2]). So…

Only 217 Mt of tests has been from fission bombs; fusion bombs contain a much smaller amount of radioactive material relative to their yield.

That's a very fair point.
Post reply on HN