The pictures are lovely and the reflections profound. But much of the cited data here appears wrong. For instance, the article states (italicized): "six hundred helicopter pilots were killed" and yet it was only 600 helicopter pilots who _flew_ liquidator missions[1], two of which were killed in an piloting accident and none were registered killed from immediate radiation exposure[2], though at least one eventually died from cancer likely from this exposure[3]. Similarly a claim of "Over six hundred thousand people were directly involved in dealing with the aftermath of the Chernobyl explosion" is not supported by the evidence[4].
I don't mean any of this to lessen the enormity of what happened and the tremendous, noble effort made by the liquidators to remediate what was there at great personal cost. It's just good when making specific claims for those claims to be substantiated.
I think there's a lot of uncertainty in talking about Chernobyl, since most of the information published by the Soviet authorities was intentionally incorrect or misleading, designed to downplay the significance of the accident.
One thing I've found interesting in talking about Chernobyl is that advocates of nuclear power are often willing to accept the Soviet numbers as fact, since they confirm the idea that nuclear power is still relatively "safe" even in case of disaster.
I don't know what the exact numbers are, and I'm not sure if any of us will ever know for sure, but one of the documentaries I like is Discovery's "Battle of Chernobyl," since it includes a lot of interviews with people who were actually there and participated in the events. They interview Nikolay Antoshkin, the colonel general in charge of the helicopter operations there, which is where the 600 pilot deaths number comes from. I'm more inclined to believe that account than what the state published.
Exactly this, the numbers of casualties and description post disaster and the heroics during the disaster are not corroborated by the data.
Given the secrecy of the old Soviet system about such "embarassing" events I doubt we'll ever know exactly how many people died but the massive casualty rates that get casually flicked around make for a good story but aren't supported by any external documents at all. Perhaps we'll find a mass grave somewhere full of radioactive bodies of dead workers but barring that, most data based consensus puts the total death toll from all radiation effects at less than 1,000 and usually less than 100. But even that brings out the challenge right? So if person dies because they fell off an earth mover that was building an earthen berm to shield an area, that is clearly a death, it wasn't due to radiation and it could have happened on any worksite (like building a levy) but happened because this person was working at this disaster, does that count? Do you see how it gets complicated?
What is perhaps most interesting about the exclusion zone has been how effective it has been at recovering its natural state. It it certainly not a "radioactive wasteland" and there are numerous reports of people hunting (and eating) some of the now abundant wildlife there. It isn't the picture "post nuclear disaster" that most people have been given.
> It's just good when making specific claims for those claims to be substantiated.
After watching the Chernobyl miniseries last week, I dug deep into Wikipedia articles related to the accident. One thing I found interesting was the following: to empty the bubbler pools, three men dived below to reactor to open valves: Alexei Ananenko, Valeri Bezpalov and Boris Baranov. In western media, it was reported that as soon as they emerged from the water, they were told it was a suicide mission and they died a few days later, implying of course that the Soviet Union knowingly send them to death.
However, according to Wikipedia:
> Research by Andrew Leatherbarrow, author of Chernobyl 01:23:40, determined that the frequently recounted story is a gross exaggeration. Alexei Ananenko continues to work in the nuclear energy industry [...]. While Valeri Bezpalov was found to still be alive, the 65-year-old Baranov had lived until 2005 and had died of heart failure. [0]
This is a great reminder that propaganda always happens on both sides.
For a better-researched, well-sourced and grounded write-up of a visit to Chernobyl — with tons of background on the incident itself — see Andrew Leatherbarrow's Chernobyl 01:23:40, which is available as a blog as well as an e-book:
Knowing many Belarusians, they recommend reading book by Aleksievich which is a written down summary of 500 individual discussions with first hand eye witnesses/victims of the event.
Estimates seem to vary wildly — which makes sense given the variety of agents and agendas. It's not really fair to hammer him on facts without acknowledging that the ground truth is far from certain.
Heck, even your fourth citation writes:
> Figures for the number of liquidators involved vary greatly from several hundred thousand to nearly a million people. It is likely that at least 300,000 – 350,000 people were directly involved. A report by the Nuclear Energy Agency quotes a figure “up to 800,000”. The International Conference “One Decade After Chernobyl” refers to “about 200,000 ‘liquidators’ who worked in Chernobyl during the period 1986-1987 and estimating the total number of people registered as involved in activities relating to alleviating the consequences of the accident at between 600,000 to 800,000.
You seem to have cherry picked sources that have a lower estimate for all these figures, i.e., "propaganda numbers".
I think the best source for these numbers is the Wikipedia article "Deaths due to the Chernobyl disaster" [1]. From the article, Russia claims "estimates ranging from 4,000" while scientific and environmental organizations claim "no fewer than 93,000". It's clear that Russia wants to downplay the enormous human and environmental toll this has had and will continue to have.
Although I do not really like the decision to reduce the entire engineering team to a single character. I get that it simplifies the writing and casting, but it just perpetrates the lone scientist myth. It could have been really compelling to take the time to show the group effort.
Agreed, it's brilliant and imho the best series in years. The last TV episode that left me as speechless and uneasy as the first episode of Chernobyl (the shift worker looking down into the open reactor from the roof!) was the now legendary Ozymandias episode of Breaking Bad.
I don't get the feeling it's very accurate, but it is very entertaining.
EDIT: the accuracy I am referring to is about the actual sequence of events of the plot, which I understand to be simplified as people replying have pointed out :)
Can anyone explain why the Pripyat hospital in the first episode was so dirty and old? It had only been running for about 15 years at the time of the disaster.
I'm confused, did they legally entered the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone? I was told that biking into the Chernobyl Zone, e.g., is forbidden due to the risk of contamination when you exit.
Edit: Indeed it was not. From Instagram, “we spent the night tiptoeing around razor wire fences, coasting through sleeping security checkpoints, and riding frantically away from some surprisingly alert and vigilant guard dogs.” This validates what I know from Ukraine. Entering the exclusion zone is a very lucrative touristic business, with prices around $100-200 for a single day trip in a group.
There are plenty of videos about this nowadays. Here's a series of videos of a Ukrainian youtuber from this winter, biking into the exclusion zone, etc:
Loved this story! Also good timing as a lot of us are watching the HBO mini-series now. I especially liked this quote: "The reason it's so beautiful and so peaceful is precisely because we can't consume it. Like, perhaps, all real paradises everywhere."
When discussing the safety of nuclear power most comments seem to focus on the number of deaths. While death count is tragic in itself, it doesn't capture the full extent of human drama.
Consider this
Fukushima
"the nuclear accident was responsible for 154,000 being evacuated"
"In December 2016 the government estimated decontamination, compensation, decommissioning, and radioactive waste storage costs at 21.5 trillion yen ($187 billion), nearly double the 2013 estimate."
Chernobyl
"In 2005, the total cost over 30 years for Belarus alone was estimated at US$235 billion; about $301 billion in today's dollars given inflation rates."
"between 5% and 7% of government spending in Ukraine is still related to Chernobyl"
> Standing in the bleachers, listening to the Pripyat municipal overture of resounding bird song, the only thing we could do was stare out at the trees and wonder "how long until New York looks like this?"
I'm curious what the author meant by this. Does he mean how long would it take NYC to look like Chernobyl after a similar nuclear/natural accident happened? Or do they have a fatalistic outlook on the future due to some environmental, economic, or political worldview?
Also the end of the story mentions there are no obvious monuments to the people who worked to help rescue people but there is one in the very city he was reporting from dedicated to the firefighters and others involved: https://oddviser.com/ukraine/chernobyl/memorial
Used to be a fan of Bald until his bizarre fake fight video with Harald Baldr. Then I started to notice other little things he was doing that were a bit off-putting and how creepy and exploitative some of his videos felt. Ended up unsubscribing after that.
Q for ppl more knowledgeable - How exaggerated is this claim? :
> would have ignited a second reaction that would have been the equivalent of a 5 megaton explosion. It would have leveled Kiev and Minsk, and would have ejected the nuclear material from the other 3 Chernobyl reactors with a force that would have rendered much of Europe uninhabitable for hundreds of years
(I can imagine it is exaggerated, but I am not an expert so can't tell the magnitude. I meant 5 megatons is not that much, the tested "Tsar Bomba" was estimated at 50+ megatons. And even will tones of material spread around, most of it would have settled on the ground on a smallish area, right?)
It seems extremely exaggerated, such explosions require complicated bomb design, otherwise the first stages of the explosion throw the reacting matter away and it won't react completely.
However, 5 megatons can destroy city completely, and if it explodes close to ground, it will create lots of contamination. Then it is up to the winds. Bad wind will make this contamination a major catastrophe thousands of kilometers away.
The last time someone posted pictures claiming they rode their motorcycle through the forbidden zone it caused a stir because that is expressly forbidden because of the risk of picking up contaminated dust. Enclosed tour vehicles only for this reason. Then apparently, in the case of kiddofspeed, we find out she rode her motorcycle to the standard meeting place and took the standard tour. While carrying her helmet along with her for effect.
I watched a documentary on the new concrete sarcophagus that they built to contain the reactor.
Its amusing that the EU had to invest billions into the project. Hell even the US put in money and expertise despite being an ocean away. Where was Russia? It was their powerplant that blew up!
"When that material then started to smolder downwards out through the floor of the chamber, it threatened to come into contact with a large amount of water that had pooled there as a result of early firefighter attempts to put it out with hoses. This would have ignited a second reaction that would have been the equivalent of a 5 megaton explosion. It would have leveled Kiev and Minsk, and would have ejected the nuclear material from the other 3 Chernobyl reactors with a force that would have rendered much of Europe uninhabitable for hundreds of years. With only days to stop it, Alexei Ananenko, Valeri Bezpalov, and Boris Baranov went into the ruins of the plant, knowingly facing almost certain death from that level of radiation exposure, to release valves that would drain 5 million gallons of water."
Is this really true? Are there better sources than this blog post?
If you are talking about the New Safe Containment structure, then the plan is to disassemble the original sarcophagus and remove as much as can be done safely. Its not merely a static entombment structure (though that is its failsafe function).
Not so long ago there was a submission about visit of Arkadiusz Podniesiński in Fukushima. Before that, though, he was visiting the zone multiple times and made two long movies about it. Here's a trailer of second one. Worth a look as the visuals are quite nice.
The book, 'Chernobyl, History of a Tragedy' by Serhii Plokhy gives a very good account of the accident. Days preceding, the burning days ,and political and social repurcussions there after.
[+] [-] dweekly|6 years ago|reply
I don't mean any of this to lessen the enormity of what happened and the tremendous, noble effort made by the liquidators to remediate what was there at great personal cost. It's just good when making specific claims for those claims to be substantiated.
[1] https://www.rotorandwing.com/2016/04/26/chernobyl-anniversar...
[2] http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Chernobyl_pilots_knew_risk...
[3] https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-07-04-mn-106-st...
[4] http://www.chernobylgallery.com/chernobyl-disaster/liquidato...
[+] [-] moxie|6 years ago|reply
One thing I've found interesting in talking about Chernobyl is that advocates of nuclear power are often willing to accept the Soviet numbers as fact, since they confirm the idea that nuclear power is still relatively "safe" even in case of disaster.
I don't know what the exact numbers are, and I'm not sure if any of us will ever know for sure, but one of the documentaries I like is Discovery's "Battle of Chernobyl," since it includes a lot of interviews with people who were actually there and participated in the events. They interview Nikolay Antoshkin, the colonel general in charge of the helicopter operations there, which is where the 600 pilot deaths number comes from. I'm more inclined to believe that account than what the state published.
[+] [-] ChuckMcM|6 years ago|reply
Given the secrecy of the old Soviet system about such "embarassing" events I doubt we'll ever know exactly how many people died but the massive casualty rates that get casually flicked around make for a good story but aren't supported by any external documents at all. Perhaps we'll find a mass grave somewhere full of radioactive bodies of dead workers but barring that, most data based consensus puts the total death toll from all radiation effects at less than 1,000 and usually less than 100. But even that brings out the challenge right? So if person dies because they fell off an earth mover that was building an earthen berm to shield an area, that is clearly a death, it wasn't due to radiation and it could have happened on any worksite (like building a levy) but happened because this person was working at this disaster, does that count? Do you see how it gets complicated?
What is perhaps most interesting about the exclusion zone has been how effective it has been at recovering its natural state. It it certainly not a "radioactive wasteland" and there are numerous reports of people hunting (and eating) some of the now abundant wildlife there. It isn't the picture "post nuclear disaster" that most people have been given.
[+] [-] lqet|6 years ago|reply
After watching the Chernobyl miniseries last week, I dug deep into Wikipedia articles related to the accident. One thing I found interesting was the following: to empty the bubbler pools, three men dived below to reactor to open valves: Alexei Ananenko, Valeri Bezpalov and Boris Baranov. In western media, it was reported that as soon as they emerged from the water, they were told it was a suicide mission and they died a few days later, implying of course that the Soviet Union knowingly send them to death.
However, according to Wikipedia:
> Research by Andrew Leatherbarrow, author of Chernobyl 01:23:40, determined that the frequently recounted story is a gross exaggeration. Alexei Ananenko continues to work in the nuclear energy industry [...]. While Valeri Bezpalov was found to still be alive, the 65-year-old Baranov had lived until 2005 and had died of heart failure. [0]
This is a great reminder that propaganda always happens on both sides.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster#Steam_explo...
[+] [-] atombender|6 years ago|reply
https://leatherbarrowa.exposure.co/chernobyl.
Edit: Posted to HN here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20033770.
[+] [-] rdslw|6 years ago|reply
Highly recommended.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voices_from_Chernobyl
[+] [-] 3JPLW|6 years ago|reply
Heck, even your fourth citation writes:
> Figures for the number of liquidators involved vary greatly from several hundred thousand to nearly a million people. It is likely that at least 300,000 – 350,000 people were directly involved. A report by the Nuclear Energy Agency quotes a figure “up to 800,000”. The International Conference “One Decade After Chernobyl” refers to “about 200,000 ‘liquidators’ who worked in Chernobyl during the period 1986-1987 and estimating the total number of people registered as involved in activities relating to alleviating the consequences of the accident at between 600,000 to 800,000.
[+] [-] iooi|6 years ago|reply
I think the best source for these numbers is the Wikipedia article "Deaths due to the Chernobyl disaster" [1]. From the article, Russia claims "estimates ranging from 4,000" while scientific and environmental organizations claim "no fewer than 93,000". It's clear that Russia wants to downplay the enormous human and environmental toll this has had and will continue to have.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaths_due_to_the_Chernobyl_di...
[+] [-] xtracerx|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gukov|6 years ago|reply
[1] https://www.imdb.com/chart/toptv/
[+] [-] legitster|6 years ago|reply
Although I do not really like the decision to reduce the entire engineering team to a single character. I get that it simplifies the writing and casting, but it just perpetrates the lone scientist myth. It could have been really compelling to take the time to show the group effort.
[+] [-] bitL|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lqet|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] SomeOldThrow|6 years ago|reply
EDIT: the accuracy I am referring to is about the actual sequence of events of the plot, which I understand to be simplified as people replying have pointed out :)
[+] [-] asah|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] KONAir|6 years ago|reply
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt2934916/ https://youtu.be/Xe8ptlQ1_FQ
[+] [-] yakshaving_jgt|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] theNJR|6 years ago|reply
Still, the show is amazing.
[+] [-] unknown|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Cynddl|6 years ago|reply
Edit: Indeed it was not. From Instagram, “we spent the night tiptoeing around razor wire fences, coasting through sleeping security checkpoints, and riding frantically away from some surprisingly alert and vigilant guard dogs.” This validates what I know from Ukraine. Entering the exclusion zone is a very lucrative touristic business, with prices around $100-200 for a single day trip in a group.
[+] [-] zzzcpan|6 years ago|reply
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=199KDKgO1Uc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5knVD0AnTFw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DePsh2OFNVc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hi9rhMn6qTU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qY3jyNbbEHY
[+] [-] orblivion|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nimnio|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thesmok|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aquamo|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] perfunctory|6 years ago|reply
Consider this
Fukushima
"the nuclear accident was responsible for 154,000 being evacuated"
"In December 2016 the government estimated decontamination, compensation, decommissioning, and radioactive waste storage costs at 21.5 trillion yen ($187 billion), nearly double the 2013 estimate."
Chernobyl
"In 2005, the total cost over 30 years for Belarus alone was estimated at US$235 billion; about $301 billion in today's dollars given inflation rates."
"between 5% and 7% of government spending in Ukraine is still related to Chernobyl"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disa... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster
[+] [-] dmix|6 years ago|reply
I'm curious what the author meant by this. Does he mean how long would it take NYC to look like Chernobyl after a similar nuclear/natural accident happened? Or do they have a fatalistic outlook on the future due to some environmental, economic, or political worldview?
Also the end of the story mentions there are no obvious monuments to the people who worked to help rescue people but there is one in the very city he was reporting from dedicated to the firefighters and others involved: https://oddviser.com/ukraine/chernobyl/memorial
[+] [-] gk1|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cycrutchfield|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hackermailman|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rasz|6 years ago|reply
https://www.youtube.com/user/bionerd23/videos
[+] [-] poisonarena|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nnq|6 years ago|reply
> would have ignited a second reaction that would have been the equivalent of a 5 megaton explosion. It would have leveled Kiev and Minsk, and would have ejected the nuclear material from the other 3 Chernobyl reactors with a force that would have rendered much of Europe uninhabitable for hundreds of years
(I can imagine it is exaggerated, but I am not an expert so can't tell the magnitude. I meant 5 megatons is not that much, the tested "Tsar Bomba" was estimated at 50+ megatons. And even will tones of material spread around, most of it would have settled on the ground on a smallish area, right?)
[+] [-] effie|6 years ago|reply
However, 5 megatons can destroy city completely, and if it explodes close to ground, it will create lots of contamination. Then it is up to the winds. Bad wind will make this contamination a major catastrophe thousands of kilometers away.
[+] [-] dmpanch|6 years ago|reply
https://imgur.com/gallery/uIOOz1p
Btw, you can easily visit it, because of lots of tours here, it cost about $100-$150 per day. I used this company https://www.chernobyl-tour.com/english/48-one-day-trip-to-th...
[+] [-] saul_goodman|6 years ago|reply
The last time someone posted pictures claiming they rode their motorcycle through the forbidden zone it caused a stir because that is expressly forbidden because of the risk of picking up contaminated dust. Enclosed tour vehicles only for this reason. Then apparently, in the case of kiddofspeed, we find out she rode her motorcycle to the standard meeting place and took the standard tour. While carrying her helmet along with her for effect.
[+] [-] 4043D|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dTal|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kyledrake|6 years ago|reply
The train stories in particular made me recall reading Days of War, Nights of Love in a really good way.
[+] [-] Tsubasachan|6 years ago|reply
Its amusing that the EU had to invest billions into the project. Hell even the US put in money and expertise despite being an ocean away. Where was Russia? It was their powerplant that blew up!
[+] [-] cambaceres|6 years ago|reply
Is this really true? Are there better sources than this blog post?
[+] [-] wyldfire|6 years ago|reply
What are the maintenance costs for The Object? Is it monitoring/auditing or is there active construction/repair?
[+] [-] vonmoltke|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wst_|6 years ago|reply
Alone in the Zone 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdCBQA7Z1Y0
[+] [-] dzonga|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] yesprabhu|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tedunangst|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] creeble|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] latchkey|6 years ago|reply
5 * 8.34 * 3 = 125.1 lbs
[+] [-] arpa|6 years ago|reply