If I ingest a grain of sand size piece of the Chernobyl Reactor No.4 core • Hacker News Board

Re: If I ingest a grain of sand size piece of the Chernobyl Reactor No.4 core

#41

Post by AaronFriel » Sun, Jun 02, 2019, 8:50 PM UTC

goatlover wrote: post #30

AaronFriel wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. There was an explosion (edit: two explosions) that began the incident which destroyed the reactor and ejected matter a significant distance. 2. Chernobyl, IIRC, isn't really so dangerous to visit but you should avoid eating or drinking anything in the exclusion zone. Cesium-137 and Strontium-90 will poison you from the inside out. The latter ends up bio-accumulating in bone.

Wouldn’t that also apply to all the wildlife in the area? Are there no animals inside the exclusion zone? I get that cancer rates and birth defects would go up, but that’s a bit different from being poisoned, the implication a lack of survivability.

The radionuclides I described won't kill you quickly, but over a period of decades, and, well, it's more of a stochastic death as opposed to a definite one.

It may be that shorter lifespan wildlife just aren't as significantly affected, but I've no idea to be honest.

Re: If I ingest a grain of sand size piece of the Chernobyl Reactor No.4 core

#42

Post by atemerev » Sun, Jun 02, 2019, 8:53 PM UTC

This is purely hypothetical, as like he noticed, the fuel particle is not soluble in gastric acid. The damage would be much less than that.

Inhaling the similar amount of finely powdered radioactive dust is another story, though.

Re: If I ingest a grain of sand size piece of the Chernobyl Reactor No.4 core

#43

Post by mikeash » Sun, Jun 02, 2019, 8:57 PM UTC

CydeWeys wrote: post #11

lisper wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the interesting thing: it's not really very hazardous, but it is awfully annoying.

To be fair, it has had several decades to decay, and the most dangerous radionuclides are the ones with short half-lives and thus high output. It's pretty amazing that it's still that dangerous given it's had over 30 years to decay.

And it’s really tiny. Lots of serious poisons would be harmless at that dose.

Re: If I ingest a grain of sand size piece of the Chernobyl Reactor No.4 core

#44

Post by dasil003 » Sun, Jun 02, 2019, 9:36 PM UTC

rmdashrfstar wrote: post #26

soundpuppy wrote: post #25

If we were to make an analogy between radiocative matter entering the body, and toxic information entering the mind, what metrics do we use to measure the dangerous effects of the information? How long it lasts or how deeply it can modify conscious/subconscious brain processes?

There's no such thing as dangerous information, only truth and not truth.

There's a difference between facts and information.

Re: If I ingest a grain of sand size piece of the Chernobyl Reactor No.4 core

#45

Post by Kortaggio » Sun, Jun 02, 2019, 9:40 PM UTC

rmdashrfstar wrote: post #26

soundpuppy wrote: post #25

If we were to make an analogy between radiocative matter entering the body, and toxic information entering the mind, what metrics do we use to measure the dangerous effects of the information? How long it lasts or how deeply it can modify conscious/subconscious brain processes?

There's no such thing as dangerous information, only truth and not truth.

You may be interested in reading this paper from Nick Bostrom, where he outlines the dangers present in certain types of truthful information: https://nickbostrom.com/information-hazards.pdf

Re: If I ingest a grain of sand size piece of the Chernobyl Reactor No.4 core

#46

Post by jhayward » Sun, Jun 02, 2019, 9:54 PM UTC

rmdashrfstar wrote: post #26

soundpuppy wrote: post #25

If we were to make an analogy between radiocative matter entering the body, and toxic information entering the mind, what metrics do we use to measure the dangerous effects of the information? How long it lasts or how deeply it can modify conscious/subconscious brain processes?

There's no such thing as dangerous information, only truth and not truth.

> There's no such thing as dangerous information, only truth and not truth

Please submit some proof of this extra-ordinary claim. There is a lot of evidence to the contrary. And we're not even yet talking about whether 'Truth' is a binary value.

Re: If I ingest a grain of sand size piece of the Chernobyl Reactor No.4 core

#47

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Jun 02, 2019, 9:58 PM UTC

ducttape12 wrote: post #12

lisper wrote: post #3

Gotta love the conclusion: "In summary, it is preferable to not eat spent nuclear fuel."

Now you tell me! What are you going to tell me next, that yellowcake isn't made from flour?

[deleted]

Re: If I ingest a grain of sand size piece of the Chernobyl Reactor No.4 core

#48

Post by microwavecamera » Sun, Jun 02, 2019, 10:05 PM UTC

lisper wrote: post #9

DuskStar wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was interesting to see that it truly was only "preferable" and not "mandatory" or "this will kill you" IMO

That's the interesting thing: it's not really very hazardous, but it is awfully annoying.

Sort of not really? There's some specifics to this hypothetical situation that minimize it's effects. In this scenario you're consuming a solid piece of radioactive material that passes through your body and is quickly expelled. When you have a Chernobyl type disaster or a nuclear explosion the radioactive material is atomized and spreads through the air. As you breath in the radioactive particles they pass directly into your blood stream.

Re: If I ingest a grain of sand size piece of the Chernobyl Reactor No.4 core

#49

Post by dopamean » Sun, Jun 02, 2019, 10:17 PM UTC

DuskStar wrote: post #21

beaner wrote: post #13

Couple naive questions: 1. How does a piece of spent fuel end up in a "grassy bit of ground" outside the reactor? Thought it would have all melted in one big clump in the same spot? 2. Why is Chernobyl still so dangerous if literally ingesting the spent fuel isn't super bad? Or is Chernobyl no longer dangerous?

For #1, about 5% of the reactor core was spread outside the building through a series of explosions. (which is a large part of why reactors in the western world all have containment structures) So while most of the core is in a couple of mounds within the reactor building, quite a bit got spread around. Regarding #2, this is a very small fragment, and there are a lot of them around. Eating this wouldn't do much to yo…

Who would be eating that much of it 10 times a day for a year?

Re: If I ingest a grain of sand size piece of the Chernobyl Reactor No.4 core

#50

Post by DuskStar » Sun, Jun 02, 2019, 10:28 PM UTC

dopamean wrote: post #49

DuskStar wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For #1, about 5% of the reactor core was spread outside the building through a series of explosions. (which is a large part of why reactors in the western world all have containment structures) So while most of the core is in a couple of mounds within the reactor building, quite a bit got spread around. Regarding #2, this is a very small fragment, and there are a lot of them around. Eating this wouldn't do much to yo…

Who would be eating that much of it 10 times a day for a year?

If you were living in that area and eating local food, such levels wouldn't be impossible to hit - especially if you account for the fact that 'grain of sand sized solid chunk' is pretty close to minimally bioavailable, and so you could hit equivalent dosages with significantly less material.