Fukushima / Chernobyl

Open. Chernobyl is stable, Fukushima is not.

File: 69739923.png (43KB, 759x685px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 759x685px

Chernobyl was worse. The type of reactor in Chernobyl doesn't really have a containment vessel, so when it blew up the reactor core was out in the open. The graphite in the reactor caught fire and the smoke transported radioactive material high into the atmosphere, allowing it to spread over a wide area.

I don't know as much about Fukushima, but AFAIK the reactors shut down after the earthquake, but the cooling system was destroyed. That means that a lot of hydrogen gas is generated in the still hot reactor, and they had to vent it out in order to avoid an explosion. This radioactive steam contaminated the area around it, but didn't spread very far and there was less radioactive material released overall.

>>8529403
Chernobyl was by far worse but this is also true.

Give it 30 years and ask again I guess.

>>8529508
Unfortunately, at Fukushima they couldn't get permission/were unable to vent the hydrogen at first, causing a couple of the reactor buildings (not the reactors themselves) to blow up.

>>8529374
>It is my understanding that the Chernobyl core melted out of the containment vessel

>Chernobyl
>containment vessel

>>8529513

Chernobyl does not have a river/lake/OCEAN right beside it where the corium has gone down into the final concrete layer of protection which is badly damaged perhaps even breached allowing radiation to get into the ground water and the ocean water itself.

This video explains it very well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMaEjEWL6PU

>>8529581
Isn't water a really effective radiation shield, though? So we wouldn't have to worry much about them becquerels (ignoring the material's toxicity when ingested)

>>8529604
Water does shield radiation, but that doesn't help you when you drink it.
If you drink contaminated water, some amount of the radioactive materials within will settle somewhere in your body and damage you.


Aren't they continually cooling the remains of the core though? I'm not massively worried about that stuff breaching the concrete then.

positive void coefficient

File: 1480623422986.png (315KB, 424x365px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 424x365px

>Secret Nip illuminati members have meeting with Godzilla
>Godzilla agrees to attack the United States as revenge for Hiroshima and Nagasaki
>Asks for gamma radiation in exchange (since it makes him stronger)
>Nips engineer the Fukushima disaster, and allow it to leak radioactive material into the environment

I don't know very much about Chernobyl, but I can tell you that the Jews had a direct role in it.

Since when made to fail engeneering is accident?

>>8529604

You still don't want that stuff leaking into the ocean.

You pols aren't trying to somehow link this to /tv anymore
>>>/pol/

>>8531101

What did he mean by this?

>>8529689
You could probably get quite far on some boards with that theory, sadly. Insert Hillary and /k/ and /pol/ would go apeshit and start #FukushimaGate

File: 220px-Radioactive.svg_.png (6KB, 220x193px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 220x193px

USSR 1957
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyshtym_disaster
UK 1957
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windscale_fire
USA 1952/1958
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chalk_River_Laboratories
USA 1979
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile_Island_accident

>>8529374
Chernobyl was worse. No earthquakes and it still failed on it's own.

File: sfsfsdf.jpg (9KB, 174x260px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 174x260px

mildly relevant

Chernobyl killed people. Fukushima as of yet hasn't. Plus like >>8533358 said, even with all the issues Fukushima had, it was still hit by an earthquake and tsunami while Chernobyl from what I remember was during some test and was completely human error/incompetence.