What's new

Chernobyl

Not meaning to make light of that and all, but how does that compare to fallout from above ground atomic tests? Some of us here are from that era, and probably had Strontium 90 in our bones.

All i can tell you, is that in Italy, there has been afterwards a rise in tumours, particularly of thyroid gland tumours in young ages and birth malformations. Not that there has been some systematic study, as there was no political interest to do so and after some years everything was "forgotten". And we weren't one of the particularly involved countries (mostly the northeast was).

From what i recall, much like @Cumberland Sausage said, the worst case, was for people who were exposed for long under rain and even worse, for those who ate food (especially vegetables and fruits) that were under the rain in these days, because through them, you were introducing radioactive particles inside your organism, which was worse than taking radiation from the outside, because i think most of the alfa particles couldn't penetrate the skin when irradiated from distance, but once inside, they could cause damage alright.

I don't know how it compares to radiation after an atomic bomb test, but i would be surprised, if every time you had a bomb test, there was a radioactive cloud covering the entire US and people were just going their business like nothing happened.
 
Last edited:
All i can tell you, is that in Italy, there has been afterwards a rise in tumours, particularly of thyroid gland tumours in young ages and birth malformations. Not that there has been some systematic study, as there was no political interest to do so and after some years everything was "forgotten". And we weren't one of the particularly involved countries (mostly the northeast was).

From what i recall, much like @Cumberland Sausage said, the worst case, was for people who were exposed for long under rain and even worse, for those who ate food (especially vegetables and fruits) that were under the rain in these days, because through them, you were introducing radioactive particles inside your organism, which was worse than taking radiation from the outside, because i think most of the alfa particles couldn't penetrate the skin when irradiated from distance, but once inside, they could cause damage alright.

I don't know how it compares to radiation after an atomic bomb test, but i would be surprised, if every time you had a bomb test, there was a radioactive cloud covering the entire US and people were just going their business like nothing happened.

Regarding cancer among Italians, I found this: Thyroid disease in northern Italian children born around the time of the Chernobyl nuclear accident
 

This is from 2011. The cases of italian thyroid gland tumours were double than those expected in the "Chernobyl generation". Period where the cases were registered: 2001-2005. It also mentions the previous study you mention. Unfortunately the bad news came with chronological delay.

https://www.medicinaepersona.org/ol...ide_raddoppiano.R.Rossi.-(L_Unit_)-260411.pdf

(Unfortunately in italian...)
 
All i can tell you, is that in Italy, there has been afterwards a rise in tumours, particularly of thyroid gland tumours in young ages and birth malformations. Not that there has been some systematic study, as there was no political interest to do so and after some years everything was "forgotten". And we weren't one of the particularly involved countries (mostly the northeast was).

From what i recall, much like @Cumberland Sausage said, the worst case, was for people who were exposed for long under rain and even worse, for those who ate food (especially vegetables and fruits) that were under the rain in these days, because through them, you were introducing radioactive particles inside your organism, which was worse than taking radiation from the outside, because i think most of the alfa particles couldn't penetrate the skin when irradiated from distance, but once inside, they could cause damage alright.

I don't know how it compares to radiation after an atomic bomb test, but i would be surprised, if every time you had a bomb test, there was a radioactive cloud covering the entire US and people were just going their business like nothing happened.

IIRC from the ancient days at college, an alpha particle is essentially a helium nucleus. Pretty big, as such things go.

The situation of people in the US going about their business during above ground nuclear tests is exactly what happened. Look for an old news reel story of a town in Nevada close enough to see the flash from tests. Different era. But such things tend to circle the globe, which was a big reason for underground tests. So it was that fallout from tests spread far and wide, and strontium 90 ended up in bones because stronium is similar enough to calcium for the body not to notice the difference.

If you want an extreme story, look into what happened to the cast of The Conqueror, a John Wayne film in the 1950s.
 
I found also an italian article, giving a brief explanation to the question: "How come Hiroshima and Nagasaki are inhabited, while Chernoby isn't"?

1) The Chernobyl cloud, because it wasn't a "bomb", caused heavy contamination with radioactive iodium, caesium and strontium. Some of these enter the food chain. This wasn't the case in Japan.
2) Quantity. Little boy had 64kg of uranium, Fat boy 6kg of plutonium. Chernobyl had about 160 tons of radioactive fuel.
3) Efficiency of the reaction: Only 1 kg of Little boy reacted with high efficiency. Also, only 1 kg of Fab boy achieved nuclear fusion. In Chernobyl 7 tons of radioactive material was released into the atmosphere and because of the fusion of the core, a large quantity was volatile radioisotopes, of which, 100% of the xenon and krypton, 50% of the iodium and between 20% and 40% of caesium.

Perché si può vivere a Hiroshima e Nagasaki ma non a Chernobyl?

Pardon me for translation mistakes, i hope it is understandable.
 
IIRC from the ancient days at college, an alpha particle is essentially a helium nucleus. Pretty big, as such things go.

The situation of people in the US going about their business during above ground nuclear tests is exactly what happened. Look for an old news reel story of a town in Nevada close enough to see the flash from tests. Different era. But such things tend to circle the globe, which was a big reason for underground tests. So it was that fallout from tests spread far and wide, and strontium 90 ended up in bones because stronium is similar enough to calcium for the body not to notice the difference.

If you want an extreme story, look into what happened to the cast of The Conqueror, a John Wayne film in the 1950s.

Helium nucleus, yes, big, low penetration, thanks to skin. Higher penetration if from inside (no skin). I believe the small query i posted above, explains the difference between bomb and leak.
 
I don't know how it compares to radiation after an atomic bomb test, but i would be surprised, if every time you had a bomb test, there was a radioactive cloud covering the entire US and people were just going their business like nothing happened.

Note: it's radiation, to be sure, but it's the radioactive materials itself that are the problem, such as the aforementioned cesium 137. Moments ago, I did look into how it compared to above ground nuclear testing, and rather than sound dismissive about Chernobyl (because I'm not dismissive about it at all), I'll only mention that the information is out there, and we should keep in mind that Chernobyl was lengthy in comparison to an above ground test. Haven't checked into how the Chernobyl fallout compared to the fallout of above ground nuclear tests, but that's likely a factor, too. Remember concern about strontium 90 because it can end up in bones, but that was just one of the materials.

FWIW, I think strontium 90 has a half-life of 28 or 29 years. A check shows cesium 137 has a half life of 30 years.
 
Note: it's radiation, to be sure, but it's the radioactive materials itself that are the problem, such as the aforementioned cesium 137. Moments ago, I did look into how it compared to above ground nuclear testing, and rather than sound dismissive about Chernobyl (because I'm not dismissive about it at all), I'll only mention that the information is out there, and we should keep in mind that Chernobyl was lengthy in comparison to an above ground test. Haven't checked into how the Chernobyl fallout compared to the fallout of above ground nuclear tests, but that's likely a factor, too. Remember concern about strontium 90 because it can end up in bones, but that was just one of the materials.

FWIW, I think strontium 90 has a half-life of 28 or 29 years. A check shows cesium 137 has a half life of 30 years.

Sir, in Italy it was a political choice to stay without nuclear weapons or reactors. So, my knowledge about atom bombs, is only encyclopedical. I was more interested on the subject due to Chernobyl events, because i lived them. So i am at the limits of my knowledge, i am sure you Americans know your "bomb tests" better than others.

All that i can say, is that Chernobyl's food is still radioactive:

30 years after Chernobyl, food still radioactive, Greenpeace tests show | The Japan Times

The best part, Ukraine kept exporting huge quantities of wheat after Chernobyl, i have found articles about ships blocked in italian ports with massive quantities of "radioactive" wheat going from 1988 to 2017.
 
I believe this is what you mean by "fallout", correct? This is the first days:

Evolution.gif


In Italy we had a referendum about the use of nuclear power in 1987. Of course, the "no" won. We had one more referendum in 2011. And of course, the "no" won again (it was after Fukushima). Which is why i prefer calling it a political choice, because you can't decide to have referendum after nuclear accidents and hope that "yes" will prevail.
 
Last edited:
Sir, in Italy it was a political choice to stay without nuclear weapons or reactors. So, my knowledge about atom bombs, is only encyclopedical. I was more interested on the subject due to Chernobyl events, because i lived them. So i am at the limits of my knowledge, i am sure you Americans know your "bomb tests" better than others.

All that i can say, is that Chernobyl's food is still radioactive:

30 years after Chernobyl, food still radioactive, Greenpeace tests show | The Japan Times

The best part, Ukraine kept exporting huge quantities of wheat after Chernobyl, i have found articles about ships blocked in italian ports with massive quantities of "radioactive" wheat going from 1988 to 2017.

I remember the issue of nuclear tests simply because I lived through them. There was an incredible innocence about fallout in the early days. I knew a US veteran sent to Nagasaki not long after the bombing, and described hair loss he suspected was from radiation. From what I remember from Civil Defense manuals, fallout was seen more as a short term problem, at least initially. Then radioactive materials from fallout started showing up in the food chain. Even in the mid 1950s, no one saw a problem filming The Conqueror where they did, or hauling the soil to California for more filming.

Where it connects with Chernobyl is that I remember some in the US who had forgotten those days, and were amazed at the possibility that radioactive material could go global, spread by the winds.

Not surprised that foods are still picking up cesium 137, and I see from the link that strontium 90 is in it, too. With a half-life of 30 years for cesium 137, and I think 28 for strontium 90, it's not surprising that it's still showing up. Half-life just means that half has decayed by that point. Another 28 and 30 years, and half that remains has decayed, and so forth and so on.
 
I remember the issue of nuclear tests simply because I lived through them. There was an incredible innocence about fallout in the early days. I knew a US veteran sent to Nagasaki not long after the bombing, and described hair loss he suspected was from radiation. From what I remember from Civil Defense manuals, fallout was seen more as a short term problem, at least initially. Then radioactive materials from fallout started showing up in the food chain. Even in the mid 1950s, no one saw a problem filming The Conqueror where they did, or hauling the soil to California for more filming.

Where it connects with Chernobyl is that I remember some in the US who had forgotten those days, and were amazed at the possibility that radioactive material could go global, spread by the winds.

Not surprised that foods are still picking up cesium 137, and I see from the link that strontium 90 is in it, too. With a half-life of 30 years for cesium 137, and I think 28 for strontium 90, it's not surprising that it's still showing up. Half-life just means that half has decayed by that point. Another 28 and 30 years, and half that remains has decayed, and so forth and so on.

I wouldn't want to be one of those soldiers... As a matter of fact i never intend to travel anywhere close to the Nevada desert, because if i am not mistaken, that's where you test all your "toys".

Yes. The term comes from radioactive material mixed with dirt and dust picked up by the fireball and "falls out" downwind. Different mechanics with Chernobyl, but the same principle.

I see. Thank you for the explanation.
 
Not meaning to make light of that and all, but how does that compare to fallout from above ground atomic tests? Some of us here are from that era, and probably had Strontium 90 in our bones.
Actually its interesting how the nuclear testing has enabled radio carbon dating of live human tissues. Decent article on the Smithsonian's site: Nuclear Bombs Made It Possible to Carbon Date Human Tissue | Smart News | Smithsonian

But back to the original question....

Yes, been watching it from the start and have been largely impressed. If even remotely accurate the bumblefarckery of the Soviet political machine is simply mind numbing. First two episodes were great, number three was a little soft but still very good.

Also looking forward to the upcoming Hot Zone miniseries. I read the non-fiction book when it came out in the mid-90's and its fantastic. Based on some of the trailers I think they may have taken quite a few liberties to bring it to the small screen.
 
Thanks for the heads up on that. I really found that book interesting (and scary).
Welcome & likewise. If you enjoyed Hot Zone Preston has another similar book The Demon in the Freezer which is about smallpox and anthrax.

IMO mankind isn't going to kill off mankind and its not going to be something large & catastrophic like a meteor or caldera. Its going to be a bug, likely a virus but maybe a bacterium or maybe a biologic pathogen that's entirely new. Obviously the movie Contagion had a bunch of faux science but when the end comes I think it will be similar to that....including the lunatic Jude Law type characters
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Episode 3 wasn't without its lighter moments.

I loved it when the miners messed up the Official's
immaculate light blue suit and said "now you look like the minister of coal".
 
Welcome & likewise. If you enjoyed Hot Zone Preston has another similar book The Demon in the Freezer which is about smallpox and anthrax.

IMO mankind isn't going to kill off mankind and its not going to be something large & catastrophic like a meteor or caldera. Its going to be a bug, likely a virus but maybe a bacterium or maybe a biologic pathogen that's entirely new. Obviously the movie Contagion had a bunch of faux science but when the end comes I think it will be similar to that....including the lunatic Jude Law type characters.

The Cobra Event is another entertaining read by Preston.

For something a little more scientific I’d recommend Spillover by David Quammen.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I wouldn't want to be one of those soldiers... As a matter of fact i never intend to travel anywhere close to the Nevada desert, because if i am not mistaken, that's where you test all your "toys".

No real risk to visiting the Nevada test sites these days. I have a friend who has gone . . . radiation is minimal, and the historical nature of the sites is very interesting. One thing the United States does VERY well is locate these very interesting "historical sites" and museums in various places throughout the country. There is a small museum in Louisiana (iirc) that documents the history and development of the landing craft used on D-Day and elsewhere in WW2. Another (New Mexico?) documents the history of rocketry in the Air Force. These small gems are scattered across the country.
 
Top Bottom