|
 |
||
|
 |
|
|
||
|
Excellent colour photo of Chernobyl, right after the explosions. I believe the circular vessel lid is visible in the centre of the debris.
|
||
|
From: Medivh (Wed Feb 2 03:57:01 2005) thx, this site helped me complete my projekt got a 9+ nice site |
||
|
From: ADMAN (Wed Feb 16 04:26:38 2005) What were the operators thinking!! |
||
|
From: Steven (Mon Feb 28 07:36:01 2005) I agree with ADMAN What in the world were those people thinking? |
||
|
From: bboccieri@sbcglobal.net (Mon Feb 28 13:23:27 2005) Why did they use so many little safety procations with such a big disaster at stake? |
||
|
From: Chris (Mon Feb 28 13:28:36 2005) When I watched this on the National Geographic channel, they said that this guy named Boris put to much hot water in the boiling tube, which caused reactor number four to blow. Boris survived, so I would have him arrested and put in jail for life! |
||
|
From: I@I (Tue Mar 22 23:13:47 2005) all of you idiots, NOW, after the disaster you KNOW wtf is radiation! do you think that people who took these photos were informed? |
||
|
From: Reyna (Wed Mar 23 09:34:04 2005) The goddamned bastards. |
||
|
From: Guy (Wed Mar 23 16:17:05 2005) What happened was they were running safety tests and they didnt want to cut power from the town. When they did the tests the power dropped and they removed too many control rods in an effort to keep the power up. There was supposed to be a minimum of 30 rids in and they had 6. It built up so much steam the lid blew. |
||
|
From: person (Sat Mar 26 15:01:55 2005) not quite. they were conducting a test to test the electrical backup suply that allows the operators to run the core safely in the event of a power loss before the gas generators came online. during the test they lowered the power output from the core from 3.2 GW down to a safer 700 MW. for an unknown reason the actual ouput of the core dropped down to around 30MW. the RBMK-1000 reactor (chernobyls design) is unstable at low power, and the opperators only had a very imperfect understanding of how it works at low power. since they were going to shut down the core after the exparament, they could have stoped here, but they didn't, they were under pressure to complete the exparament. at this low power level ammounts of Xeon-135 built up and started stopping the reaction (Xeon 135 is a nutron absorber) to counteract this they pulled out the control rods WAY further then they should of. they thought they had the core stableized, but they didn't, however, there was no way they could have known this. the insterments they had did not reflect this in any way. now they started with the exparament, which called for shutting off 4 of the 8 cooling pumps. when this happened the water in the 4 cooling chanels turned to steam. The reactor had very large ammounts of somthing called Positive Void Coeficeint. i wont go into the technical details, but basicly this means that in the absence of coolent the reactor's power output grows very far very fast. the opperator then conducted a scram, (full insertation of the control rods), however, since they were hollow tiped, the water level in the reactor increased, futher increasing the reaction. the reactors power output jumped to over 30 GW and the water in the cooling channels got so high in pressure that it caused an explosion. (a steam explosion) then the fule rods melted and worked their way down to another pool of water, causing a second explosion 2 minits later. also, since the core was graphite moderated, when the first explosion occured air got in and set the control rods on fire, further spreading radioactive matereal. |
||
|
From: Pointy Tail (Sun Mar 27 12:16:50 2005) The people in this helicopter likely died within weeks, BTW. |
||
|
From: sionnach (Mon Mar 28 05:15:34 2005) thank you for enlightening me on the actual goings on within the plant. i wasnt so clear on that. i think ignorance played a huge part in the disaster on all levels. the public were not suitably informed of the consequences of nuclear power should such a disaster occur, which did. the authorities swept it under the carpet as if it wasnt such a major issue, offering no information on how to deal with the radiation. they hadnt thought out a back-up plan and thorough safety tests dont seem to have been in place. the workers in this plant didnt seem to have the knowledge of the severe effects radiation. overall i think people need to be informed to deal with radiation risk should the worse case sinario occur. radiation damage is too serious to be misinformed about it. i have met and cared for kids and teenagers sticken by the reactors evil cloud and it is truly horrific, even these kids didnt understand how they had become to be so ill. on another note, i'm making a video project on radiation, and its effects for secondary school kids in ireland. i need some footage/ pictures of Chernobyl. could i use the images from this site? if anyone could lead me to others i'd appreciate it. |
||
|
From: mickey (Wed Mar 30 13:09:42 2005) OMG i think this will really help me wit my project peace out ( gggggg-unit |
||
|
From: person (Thu Mar 31 08:57:50 2005) ya, the public didnt even know that a nuclear reactor could be dangerous! the soviat unioun told them that they were completly safe! the liquidators, (the people who faught the fires, and helped clean up the place) didn't even have radiaiton protection for a while! about 30 firefighters died putting out the graphite fires. i know green peace has some pics of kids in hospitals because of radiation. you also have to remember though that our reactors are much safer then the rbmk-1000 design (chernobyls design). ours are MORE stable at low power, unlike chernobly which is LESS stable at low power. an RBMK-1000 design has never been sold to any other country, and it could never be licenced in the US because it is so unsafe. however, as long as you follow the safty procedures, the rbmk-1000 design can be opperated saftly. |
||
|
From: person (Sat Apr 2 15:34:34 2005) just a note, those energy ammounts i gave you in the description about what happened are in thermal output, not electrical. |
||
|
From: b-force (Sun Apr 10 09:25:48 2005) human error is a terrible thing when coupled with the ridiculous communist regime and it's protocol & leadership |
||
|
From: Wilson (Thu Apr 14 23:29:15 2005) This is a photo of the wound of the planet Earth, not just a single country. To those pioneer of science, pls think more about humanitarian aspects before you play god. We hv taken too much, and this is what we hv to pay. |
||
|
From: person (Sat Apr 16 17:19:04 2005) i really dont think its fair to generalize all scientists that way. also, i dont think its fair to say the scientist are playing god just because you dont understand the consepts. Nuclear power is a proven consept that can be very safe. it boils down to the fact that the opperators were making a bounch of desicions that would never ever have been aloud in the west, or even at the chernobyl plant (this probly wouldn't have happened if the safty officers knew what was going on. they violated a bounch of safty precotions created for safe opperation of the plant.) another thing to remember is that this plant was a comercial one. it wasn't controled by the comunists. |
||
|
From: wiggy (Thu Apr 21 06:11:55 2005) thank you this site helped me greatly with y reseach into nucleur disasters! |
||
|
From: Icia (Sun Apr 24 05:56:14 2005) People were such idiots. I go to a Ukrainian school and I hacve been learning about the tragady since first grade. Now I have to write a report on the accident(if that is what you want to call it). The pictures really helped! |
||
|
From: lkarlov (Sat Apr 30 08:11:48 2005) Could a western type dome contain the explosion? Or, if all the coolant was lost (released by a high pressure emergency vent), and there was no exlplosion, could the dome contain melted fuel? |
||
|
From: Daniel Tebar DTebar@Mad.Scientist.Com (Sun May 1 06:47:10 2005) Hi! Could anyone well-informed tell me which are the most affected cities? |
||
|
From: person (Mon May 2 19:17:19 2005) 1. western reactors have a very strong containment that the chernobyl one didn't have. these containment structures are so strong that even if a 747-400 flying at 510mph directly into it the fule would still be safe. however, as you can see that was a massive steam explosion. the dome probly couldn't contain all of the explosion, but it would have contained it MUCH better then at the chernobyl plant. it would probly crack or cave into the core. it would have realieased ALOT less radioactive substances because of it. also, at the chernobyl plant they used graphite for moderation which burns. that caused ALOT of the dammage also, and helped spread most of the radioactivity. western plants dont use graphite, or anything like that that would burn. for your second question it depends. it can go through, but it would have to gather enough heat before destroying the actual reactor, because once it looses that water it cant fission anymore, so it creates significantly less heat. at chernobyl some of the melted core matereal was found in the basement of the reactor (see the 'elephants foot' picture) so it really depends. 2. the two towns were 1. the small town of chernobyl (about 5,000 people) this was closest to the reactor and 2. Pipryat [no were near how to spell it :p ) and that was a semi major city of around 50,000. this is where all the people who worked at the plants lived. |
||
|
From: person2 (Mon May 2 19:51:35 2005) The dome plays an important roll. However a nuclear reactor accident can very well rupture a dome. Therefore, what’s most important is a reactor design which prevents such an accident. The Chernobyl (RBMK) reactor design inherits fundamental problems which ultimately lead to its destruction when coupled with bad operator decisions. Please read the following webpage which I found to be very insightful regarding Soviet built reactor problems: http://www.ecn.cz/private/c10/uni.html |
||
|
From: lkarlov (Tue May 3 03:39:22 2005) Pripyat is closest town to the plant (about 2km). Chernobyl is not so close. I don't know about chernobyl's population, but as you said (person), Pripyat had about 50000 people. But I don't get this. The number of plant's workers is larger than 5000. I don't know where I've read this. Why that much??? I get it, there were 4 reactors in operation and 2 in construction, but still... When I was last time in a nuclear plant, I could barely count 10 people in complex.... Including guy who was cutting grass outside. Ok, it is only one reactor plant, but still... |
||
|
From: person (Fri May 6 21:02:37 2005) pipryat held almost 50,000 not 5,000. alot of people are needed to operate pumps and stuff, also the familys of the peopel who worked there lived there too. |
||
|
From: lkarlov (Sat May 7 14:51:28 2005) About this picture: What is this "tower" used for? (one with horizontal red and white lines). And is this room next to that tower, closer to the camera, control room? |
||
|
From: person (Sat May 7 16:10:56 2005) that tower is the cooling tower! when the water that condenses the water that ran through the turbine goes through the condensing tank it gets really hot. some of it turns to steam, the water that doesn't turn to steam is fed back to the river. the reason our cooling towers look so cool is because it sets up a convection current through the tower, so more of that water is turned to steam. that way the water taht goes back to the river is as cold as possible, that way it conforms to enviermental regulations. |
||
|
From: lkarlov (Sun May 8 05:54:54 2005) I thought that could be cooling tower, but I've never seen one looking like this... OK, part of water turns to steam, but water that doesn't turn to steam is very hot to return it to the river, I don't think this cooling tower is efficient enough... |
||
|
From: person (Wed May 11 20:34:18 2005) i think it probly isn't. but i dont know for sure. |
||
|
From: Dave (Thu Jun 23 17:01:13 2005) Where do you think all the reactor fragments went when the Soviets cleaned the stuff up? A big, hastily designed shallow pit designated for high level nuclear waste, not sealed properly or designed with long term effects in mind. That is still a major danger at the moment, as well as the crumbling sarcophagus around Chernobyl |
||
|
From: B-man (Mon Jun 27 17:43:45 2005) this sitegotme an A+ and I would like tothank you , Thanks |
||
|
From: Neo (Sun Jul 3 22:46:20 2005) What really blows my mind is that this whole compound was suddenly evacuated few people have gone since. Everything left in it's same order. since the melt down. I think their should be more research done on the plant. And did anyone see the special on HBO on chernobyl. Great information. you should check it out. Oh, and for my high school senior project im traveling to chernobyl with 4 other people and a scientist from CSU. We will be deploying a robot fixed with a camera into the plant to take photos and video of accident. Very dangerous but we're also trying to solve the most likely false accusation the the Soviet union gov. intentionally melted down the plant. anyways ill check back with the findings. |
||
|
From: Spetsnaz (Fri Aug 12 13:04:59 2005) For all of you/ City spelled correctly is Pripyat. And useful website for you in both english and russian languages is http://www.pripyat.com/en/ (for eng). I see u a interested in so common guys go and get it. (knowledge =) |
||
|
From: Spetsnaz (Fri Aug 12 13:05:21 2005) http://www.pripyat.com/en/ |
||
|
From: Point (Mon Oct 3 05:58:36 2005) Remember this was not a thermonuclear explosion, but a steam explosion that resulted in the core meltdown thus resulting in radiation being allowed to flow into the atmosphere and surrounding area. In case you didint know the difference between a nuclear meltdown and a thermonuclear explosion (ICBM) types. |
||
|
From: Alan P (Tue Jan 24 03:49:46 2006) knowing me Alan P, knowing you Chenobyl, aha. aha. so.ummmmm disaster. looks bad from a height and from the ground. not v nice. bi now alan p, thanx 4 the site btw, was lovely |
||
|
From: airsick cookie (Wed Mar 15 16:24:14 2006) Nice pics, helped me out on a construction of the chernobyl powerplant(after the disaster) awsome |
||
|
From: [] (Wed Apr 5 10:34:57 2006) Just a answer to the first comments. Why this happened? Look back into history and you'll see some imbecilic slavonic nuckleheads starting WWI. Its the balkanian mentallity. This message has been written by a balkanian... either I'm under the Chernobyl radiation or I hate my own kind :) |
||
|
From: hernan (chile) (Wed Apr 5 17:19:24 2006) El desastre de chernobyl es para q reaccionemos en el daño q nos causa tener plantas nucleares. |
||
|
From: Sharkyjones (Tue Apr 18 19:59:50 2006) Someone mentioned western reactors don't use graphite cores. Some did, winscale in UK used a graphite core that caused a fire. Additionally some reactor types in design I think pebble bed reactors ? use a pyrolitic graphite like windscale, but this is very high temp stuff that shouldn't burn. I believe the problem in windscale was that the radiation causes dislocations and stresses in the graphite which can later release energy unless annealed / heated to release it. WIKIPEDIA has loads on reactor designs. |
||
|
From: HB (Wed Apr 26 06:50:56 2006) The tower in the picture isn't a cooling tower. I think it's an air ventilation stack for the reactor hall. The plant was cooled by water from the nearby cooling pond. |
||
|
From: guardiangirl (Wed Apr 26 06:55:47 2006) I do believe this is a picture from a video from a news reporter(or at least the other pictures) days after the explosion where he said in Russian "This is the sound of radiation". After that you hear the Geiger monitor clicking insanely fast. Subsequently, the reporter would die a few days later due to acute radiation poisioning. |
||
|
From: lk (Wed Apr 26 11:23:03 2006) yes, you are right, it is a ventilation stack. all RBMK-s have it. |
||
|
From: Szein (Thu Apr 27 01:07:53 2006) I once heard a story, a story i didnt bealive was true but i had wrong, terrible wrong. A guy named Pauoul were one of the workers at Chernobyl, he was watching the process from the control panel at reactor 4. He then helped them to put out the fire and just hours later he felt sick, he was dying without knowing it. But somehow he didnt wanna give up. He lied at hospital in Moskov for a week when he then was sent out of the city to a private area somewhere in Russia. His brother came to visit just 2 days before he died. At that visit had pauouls face had lost all the skin wich were a terrible vision. His skin on hands, arms, face, legs had fallen off. His feets had bin amputated because of the high radioactive level that could have killed him. the last day he was in life he nearly couldnt speak because of that allmost every muscle in his body was either dead or paralised of the radioactive level in his body. But he could say the last words in his life: "Remember me, brother and take care of my daughter" Then at 05:35 his heart stopped. They tried for 25 minets to start it again but they failed. He died just 42 years old with a 7 year old daughter and his wife that was 36 years old. This is a true story about people starting a nuclear test of a reactor that went wrong. What really caused this trouble isnt really discovered even what they have found so far isnt the end of this question. The workes looked like murderers or betrayers but after the heroic help they were seen like heros that helped to save the planet even if their own life should be the price. Now when the sacrophagus is there it stops abit radioactive mass to get out. My country: Sweden sent over 30 milion swedish krowns to russia to help them build the sacrophagus. Chernobyl: A perfect example of the stupid humans power of mass destruction. If we do something like this once or twice again, then we will erase all life on this planet! |
||
|
From: duralinux@gmail.com (Thu Apr 27 08:42:10 2006) Yeah what a sad story... and all of it was preventable. It all happened because of polotics... because an engineer wanted to impress his superiors. The History Channel had a show on just last night (aniversery date) on the disaster called Zero Hour. My God... I got sick watching how the events played out during the last hour of the reactors operation. I can't imagine... and I don't want too. |
||
|
From: Jack (Thu May 4 05:16:19 2006) Chris, They did arrest the operators. In fact, I read somewhere that one of them was sentenced to 14 years in prison, but died three weeks later. |
||
|
From: Sen (Sun May 7 18:47:41 2006) I believe that the graphite core has a positive temperature coefficient of reactivity right? In that case, the hotter the graphite got, the higher power levels that were obtained, hence the huge spike in power levels. I don't know for sure, but most plants if not all now-a-days use water as their moderator, since it has a negative temperature coefficient of reactivity, meaning as temperature goes up, power goes down. Even today the radiation levels are rediculously high in the nearby towns and ground zero... I read, depending on where you were, that the general radiation levels just outside the plant were in upwards of 3 R/hr, thats rediculuous... I can't even imagine that. Anyways, if anyone has any insight to my mentioning of the moderator, please let me know. |
||
|
From: Johny (Thu Mar 1 14:21:42 2007) This site really helped me with my project.It was the only site that helped me figure out what caused the meltdown thanks.=) P.S. Enjoy my monkey. 0(*.*)0 |
||
|
From: Project Due Tommorow!!!!!!!* (Wed Mar 28 18:48:37 2007) Wow this picture is so good... I couldn't find any other one like it! And my poster is due tommorow, uggghhhh..... ,middle school!!!! |
||
|
From: The'Joker (Thu Apr 26 03:29:46 2007) the operators? they were trying to increase output more to the point what was the pilot thinking |
||
|
From: Scott (Thu May 10 18:38:42 2007) I can't wait to go to Europe and see this for myself. |
||
|
From: Luke (Thu Jun 14 09:35:39 2007) Scott: You won't be allowed to travel near enough to the reactor to see it in this much detail for another 300 years at least. What shocks me is that they kept on operating the remaining 3 reactors at the site for years after -- the last one to shut down in 2000, Chernobyl 3, was located in the same building as the meltdown. |
||
|
From: Darkbimmer56 (Tue Jul 31 14:18:09 2007) The most affected cities are Cernobyl although it is nearly 14 miles from the plant it is still affected,Kopachi, Lelev, Novosheplichi, and the most affected is Pripyat a very large city is has been abondoned for nearly 20 years you can see the reactor from pripyat, no one will ever be able to safley live in any of these cities until approx. 4000 a.d. before you enter here you pass through a gate called the alienation zone this some 30 miles is contaminated the forests are filled with dead trees there is no power in any houses some people still live here however there minds and bodies are twisted and cancerous. The plants are dead and they all have a redish colur becaues of the radiactive air they had absorbed |
||
|
From: Darkbimmer56 (Tue Jul 31 14:18:09 2007) The most affected cities are Cernobyl although it is nearly 14 miles from the plant it is still affected,Kopachi, Lelev, Novosheplichi, and the most affected is Pripyat a very large city is has been abondoned for nearly 20 years you can see the reactor from pripyat, no one will ever be able to safley live in any of these cities until approx. 4000 a.d. before you enter here you pass through a gate called the alienation zone this some 30 miles is contaminated the forests are filled with dead trees there is no power in any houses some people still live here however there minds and bodies are twisted and cancerous. The plants are dead and they all have a redish colur becaues of the radiactive air they had absorbed |
||
|
From: nick (Wed Aug 15 16:58:08 2007) I cant belive that happened all those people dead aye. this will help thanks |
||
|
From: dtebar@mad.scientist.com (Tue Aug 28 23:35:49 2007) Is it possible nowadays to design a nuclear reactor that cannot go critical? Even in the absence of any cooling? I read about a technique where the fuel is made into pellets which never reach sufficient density... I wish the US could break its dependency on petroleum and coal... --DTebar |
||
|
From: enthropia(at)gmail.com (Mon Jan 21 07:03:31 2008) You can see two cranes at this pictures, and this means, that this picture was NOT made ''right after the explosions'', but about 8-9 weeks later, when the building of Sarcophagus had been starting. The first pictures after the explosion was made by Igor Kostin, who survived. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igor_Kostin |
||
|
From: bsimic@fesb.hr (Sun Jan 27 19:37:56 2008) To dtebar: yes, there are reactors which cannot melt down. The germans did it first: they deliberately stopped the cooling, the reactor warmed up to 3000 degrees celsius and remained at that for several hours. It only requires to build some reactor parts to be able to withstand temperatures of 3000 degrees. |
||
|
From: timi (Wed May 14 16:41:51 2008) they where fucken coal workers that didnt know waht they where doing |
||
|
From: Rich (Wed May 21 08:13:30 2008) Some good pictures at this site http://www.kiddofspeed.com/chernobyl-revisited/ |
||
|
From: twitter.com/mccaw (Wed Feb 25 02:52:02 2009) Follow me on Twitter! Thanks for the http://www.pripyat.com/en/ website! :-) |
||
|
From: Andy (Tue Sep 15 07:12:08 2009) Kidd of Speed faked some of her story, check this guys Chernobyl stuff out - http://firesuite.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=54&Itemid=58 |
||
| [add comment] | ||
|
|||||||||
|
Album:
|