The Story of Chernobyl

  • Thread starter Thread starter grotto
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

grotto

Guest
A new series has begun on HBO-GO, Mondays at 9 p.m. It is historically based on the horrific nuclear powered meltdown in the Soviet Union. Having learned as much as was revealed back when it happened, it was shocking and still is! Because the lid was on so tight about the disastrous consequences, this will be extremely interesting to see how it is presented.

Nuclear power - we do live with the threat.
 
Been looking forward to that one too. The stories of Chernobyl and Fukushima are both incredibly interesting and incredibly horrifying. Both their immediate impact (and the heroes at both that kept a region altering disaster from being even worse) and the long term devastation they’ve caused. Nuclear power at first glance seems to be a solution to the world’s power problems in light of global warming. But then you see what happens when it goes wrong (and it does go wrong). Makes me glad California has shut down our last two nuclear plants.
 
Other than building bombs, the Soviets were not much good at technology and other things like building nuclear power plants.
Their plant designs were flawed.
It is amazing that there were not more disasters like Chernobyl.
Even when you have a good design, there is the possibility of something like what happened in Japan.
 
Communists were good at propaganda.
Sounds like some of what you have written. 🤣
If they were to good at technology, etc., why did the Russian communists fail?
 
A new series has begun on HBO-GO, Mondays at 9 p.m. It is historically based on the horrific nuclear powered meltdown in the Soviet Union. Having learned as much as was revealed back when it happened, it was shocking and still is! Because the lid was on so tight about the disastrous consequences, this will be extremely interesting to see how it is presented.
I suggest reading “The Truth About Chernobyl”, by Grigori Medvedev. As former Deputy Chief Engineer at the plant and Deputy Director in the Soviet Ministry of Energy, due to his expertise he was sent as special investigator immediately after it happened, and wrote an incredibly compelling book about it. There is no better resource to learn about the event.

His evaluation of the cause is brutally honest; he makes it clear that the accident was primarily the result of pervasive bureaucratic incompetence in the Ministry. It’s been over 25 years since I read it, but I vividly remember my emotional response to it. In fact, I’m going to buy a copy of it right now - you can find it at abebooks.com for ten or eleven bucks.
 
Last edited:
This series may impact a large appreciation for the number of nuclear powered countries there are or have access to nuclear powered weapons - consider the cultures and promises of these countries, especially Iran, NoKo, also India and Pakistan. Then consider the “wannabees” like Iran Imagine if we had a weak, loser, as our President - shudder! The US had Three Mile Island, PA, that was close to the core meltdown and all that goes with it on March 28, 1979. April 26, 1986, Chernobyl happened. So seven years later the nuclear power demands were too much for their operation safely. Not an encouraging scenario. In the case of Chernobyl, such a runaway disaster, the death total has not actually be determined because of the radiation affect that lingers and kills. It will be interesting to see how the “during and after” is going to be revealed. So much was kept hidden.
 
I watched the first episode the other night.
It was good.
 
So seven years later the nuclear power demands were too much for their operation safely.
Ummm… no. That’s not at all what happened.

In the event of an emergency shutdown, diesel generators would turn on to power the cooling pumps. But the pumps took a full minute to get up to speed, and they were running a test to see if there would be enough residual energy left in the nuclear system to bridge the gap.
 
Sorry, you are wrong. The evidence concluded that the human operators were not able to grasp the event (given that it was probably humanly impossible to do anything about it).
 
Sorry, you are wrong.
Nope. The nature of the test they were perfoming is well established, and it was what I said it was.
The evidence concluded that the human operators were not able to grasp the event (given that it was probably humanly impossible to do anything about it).
Medvedev specifically said that the operators were thrown under the bus; they followed their training, it’s just that their training was wrong. Bureaucratic incompetence.

You’ll forgive me for deferring to the opinion of the most qualified person in the world.
 
Last edited:
So what part of not being able to grasp the event lends you to suggest they were thrown under the bus - that side of the matter means nothing - incompetence by bureaucrats or security guards has nothing to do with it either. They had a NUCLEAR SYSTEM that EXPLODED - the only thing that could be said in a criticism is: they were not able or equipped to operate a NUCLEAR SYSTEM.
The after the tragedy is a recounting of how human suffering was ignored, abused, increased, spread long range, and continued until who knows.
The series is an education that adults need because we live with possibles.
 
So what part of not being able to grasp the event lends you to suggest they were thrown under the bus - that side of the matter means nothing - incompetence by bureaucrats or security guards has nothing to do with it either
Again, you’ll forgive me for deferring to the testimony of the one man in the world most qualified to explain what happened and why, rather than someone who knows no more about it than he can gather from the internet or television.

I can only suggest that you read his report.
 
Last edited:
One individual report isn’t going to “solve” Chernobyl. One individual’s opinion or view on this event wouldn’t by itself be worth a single review and acceptance. Does it make common sense to follow in depth investigation and scientific ongoing research? That is a solid approach.
 
I would also suggest “Chernobyl: The History of a Nuclear Catastrophe” by Serhii Plokhy which came out last year. It is really good.

https://www.amazon.com/Chernobyl-Hi...ay&sprefix=chernob,aps,182&sr=8-1-spons&psc=1

It was certainly the result of beueaucratic incompetence, but it was also the result of the Soviet non-open society. They had actually had a reactor of the same design get out of control before hand. All the engineering training was to insert the control rods in to the core to lower the power. But they had already found that if they were only inserted part way, the opposite result occurred. They understood why. But the KGB would not allow the flaw to be known. So all they did was release a memo to all of the other sites which told them to not insert them part of the way. No importance was attached to the memo and engineers at various sites pretty much ignored it because it went against all of their training. During the cascade of events (most of them due to stupid bureaucratic incompetence) that led to the disaster, they did exactly what they should not have done: insert the rods only partially into the core.

The tests they were preforming was part of an attempt to fix design flaw which would have kept the design from being used in any Western nation.

I don’t get HBO, but I really want to watch the miniseries.
 
Last edited:
Does it make common sense to follow in depth investigation and scientific ongoing research?
It certainly is common sense to take seriously the report of the lead investigator on scene, who spent years on the work, the one man in the world most qualified to say what happened and why, especially when all of his findings have been confirmed in the thirty years since he made his report.

I find it amazing that people who know nothing more than what they read on the internet can be so arrogantly dismissive of the world’s foremost expert.
 
Last edited:
Its hard for some people to get over the fact that they cannot be absolutely sure of what is simply claimed and retold to anyone that is interested. This series will be interesting and it may or not be totally acceptable to believe - positive or negative. Many accounts have been recorded by victims and survivors - scientific data studied and continues. The area of the disaster remains dangerous to life.
 
Last Monday’s episode revealed the immense harm over the whole continent of Europe and completely wiping out the Ukraine and the Baltic countries. It is very sobering and reminds every adult that lived during that time. We knew they had the accident but NOT the compounded reactions that were happening. After the episode ending they offer further commentary on making the series and provide further facts. One such “fact” was that approx 250 scientists came from all over the USSR to help with the crisis. This does not sound true IMO because the ‘word’ would have gotten out if that were the case. The sealing off the site and surrounding the large population was very tight.
The hospitals and medical personnel were in a hopeless situation and ended in fatalities.
Mr. Gorbachev and all the “kings men” were totally lost. Its a good look at what was not seen at the time.
 
More modern technology is designed so that there is not enough nuclear material for that to occur.

And it’s easy to say it’s dangerous when some people die all at once. But how many people die slowly from emissions reduced from other sources of power production? Since it’s slow and not all at once, it tends to be ignored.
 
In the US, nuclear power is one of the most heavily regulated industries. Many, if not most, of the anti-nuclear groups here in America have never set foot in a nuclear plant, don’t understand how they operate, or have seen too many Hollywood dramatizations of nuclear accidents which affect how they view nuclear. There are some anti-nuclear folks who know their stuff, but use that knowledge to try to persuade the general public that every nuclear plant is a disaster waiting to happen. When progressive “green” types start talking about their ideas on powering the planet using only “clean” wind and solar, I can only laugh at their unrealistic pipe dream.
 
I agree with unrealistic expectations for wind and solar - solar is relative to cloud cover and wind is when it blows and the blades are a hazard for all things that fly!
The USA had Three Mile Island and other not as well know nuclear incidents. No claim to being a nuclear scientist here but history is a good teacher. The world is not full of the potential disasters through accident or demonic insanity on purpose. IMO taking a realistic look at the horrors of such history is not for the faint of heart.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top