I live near a nuclear power plant in the UK (Sellafield). It's

File: radcounters.jpg (46KB, 1123x420px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 1123x420px

>>8587139
>Sellafield
Oh, Windscale..

Chernobyl survivor here. Like everybody else I had a Russian RKSB 104. Now I would buy either one of the Gamma Scout versions or a Radex RD1706. Also look into the Radex ONE if you want continuous monitoring and recording (3000 hours on one battery!). And then there is the RadRate basic, which has a solid state sensor rather than a traditional Geiger tube. I'm not aware of any really good AND really cheap product on the market. As usual, you get what you pay for. My Russian/German bias is blatantly obvious so be sure to look for other good products that certainly must be available.

www.quarta-rad.ru/en/catalog/dozimetr-radiometr-radon/
www.gammascout.com/
www.radrate.eu/

>>8587139
>Should I even bother?
No, you shouldn't.

>>8587139
The one in this video is certainly cheap, I don't know how good the quality is though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-5A1jRkfbs

However, I don't know how useful it would even be. Geiger counters aren't sensitive enough to detect small-scale pollution.

>>8587139
>Sellafield
Just move.

File: odlinfo.png (15KB, 755x273px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 755x273px

>>8587623
>counters aren't sensitive enough
Radex Range 0.05 - 1000 µSv/h
GammaScout Range 0.01 - 5000 µSv/h
Current value at my location 0.068 µSv/h (very low)
Pic is from the public monitoring network (1800 stations)
blue graph shows rain/snow, increased Radon

>>8587139
>Should I even bother?

Yes. For 2 reasons:

1: to ensure you are safe.
2: to explore the world around you with your new toy. You'll be amazed what you can learn by pointing a Geiger counter and everyday items.

>>8587623
You can buy them for just about any useful range. Price is really the only factor.

>>8587139
>Should I even bother?

no

i'd be more concerned with figuring out how to get in on the gravy train, sellafield employees have cushy jobs and get paid near-london salaries while living in an area with a laughably low cost of living

>>8587139
You'd be exposed to far more radiation living near a coal power plant, on top of the air pollution. Nuclear power plants themselves give out no additional radioactivity to the surroundings unless the damn thing explodes, which only happens if you're untrained soviets doing a poorly planned safety test or your plant's been hit by a tsunami from the largest earthquake on record in your area.

>>8588453
>Nuclear power plants themselves give out no additional radioactivity to the surroundings unless the damn thing explodes
You should probably look up Sellafield's history.

>>8587139
>Should I even bother?
Only if you want to be arrested by the secret services for revealing state secrets, ending in a tragedy such as a suicide with no weapons behind a locked door.

I remember a news anchor with just the right amount of irony reading the news of a guy who had killed himself with 5 bullets to the head and then hid the weapon under his car (the weapon was initially not found).

File: rad.png (11KB, 249x162px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 249x162px

>>8587139
Irish site
www.epa.ie/radiation/monassess/radmonitor/
There should also be a private monitoring network near Sellafield.

File: radiation.png (12KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 640x480px

Private Tokyo monitor
park30.wakwak.com/~weather/geiger_index.html

B-but /sci/ told me nuclear power plants are totally safe and should be used everywhere.

>>8590156
They are safe, brainlet.

>>8587139
I remember seing a peer reviewd paper that said that even if you lived inside a powerplant, you would get less radiation in your whole life than the radiation you get from eating bananas.

>>8590156
they are, sellafield was the site of the very first commercial energy producing nuclear plant and has numerous other experimental reactors on site, plus it's a major reprocessessing site and has been for decades. despite all this in the past 60 years nobody has actually died there aside from a silly sod who fell off some scaffolding a few years back, or even been shown to have got cancer as a result of working there since the pile fires (back in the late 50s, when nuclear was still a new technology and the effects of radiation weren't really understood so safety wasn't a very high priority)