Quote:
Originally Posted by Maynard
Let's hope Fukashima doesn't end up turning the Pacific into the new chart-topper.
|
I think Fukushima is worse than Chernobyl. Not that having bragging rights here is something to wear as a badge of honor. Chernobyl involved a single reactor failure which for the most part is stable excluding the issues with the sarcophagus.
With Fukushima, there was a meltdown of 3 reactors. The situation is far from stable at the moment. No one has been able to locate where exactly the melted reactors are. Robotic equipment sent in to do a detailed survey of the damaged reactors have been largely failures due to the extreme radiation frying the robots. There is clear evidence of ground water contamination running through the facility on top of the sea water being pumped into the reactor vessels and spent fuel rod pools to keep what's left of the reactors stable. That contaminated sea water is also leaching back into the ocean. To compound things sea water being thrown into the reactor vessel is also not good for the long term viability of any structures in there.
There has been talk about freezing the ground under the facility to prevent the water run off into the sea which would have to be done for a pretty indefinite period as no one knows how they're going to get in there to clean up the mess.
I don't want to diminish the sacrifices made by the men from the Russian military along with the fire fighters nicknamed the liquidators. Can't imagine walking out on top of the reactor building with protective gear that did basically nothing to protect them to shovel/push radioactive material back into the pit/crater. Not even the crew in the helicopters circling above dropping material to suppress the fire were spared from the effects of the radiation. And not to forget the civilians that were harmed/died from the event.