A power plant that produces 1/4000th of the output of the CNPP when the sun shines brightly. It's just a stunt.
best part is nobody is going to run away with them.
Erm, solar panels are quite low yield, but we should be focusing on renewables as well as nuclear power.
A (extremely slow) step in the right direction to say the least.
Is it possible to even have the area become habitable again?
Tens of thousands of years later, yeah
That's a cool piece of graffiti.
Maybe sooner if all the soil gets replaced but that would be a monumental task.
Having written a few papers on the Chernobyl disaster, it's actually quite interesting how the area has turned out lately.
More modern research has determined the majority of the radioactive ejecta (iodine, strontium, and caesium) only have half-lives of 8 days, 29 years, and 30 years respectively. So while it's probably above regulation levels and could lead to an increased risk of certain illnesses, the IAEA have actually determined the disaster had no net ecological impact, and that the land is pretty much safe due to the speed at which the radiactive material has decayed. The exclusion zone is actually a lot safer than you'd assume (so long as you avoid the reactor itself), it's actually to the point that researcher going into the exclusion zone have found that, even with the radiation material and the assumed toxic environment, the wildlife of the exclusion zone is on average healthier and more abundant in the exclusion zone than outside, due to the fact that there's not as much conventional pollution, or human impact on the area nowadays.
Don't have any direct links, but here's the source I used for my university paper on it that's relevant to the exclusion zone, supplied by the IAEA.
International Atomic Energy Agency 1992, The Chernobyl Accident: Updating of the INSAG-1, IAEA, Vienna.
International Atomic Energy Agency 2006, Chernobyl’s Legacy: Health, Environmental and Socio-Economic Impacts, p.29-30, IAEA, Vienna.
Afaik isn't the biggest health risk consuming any plant or animal that has lived in the exclusion zone since they would contain much higher concentrations of radioactive particles from absorbing nutrients from their environment?
That and the roofs of all the buidings.
Its definitely possible for the area to be made liveable by removing hotspots but at the end of the day its in Ukraine, they don't exactly have a lack of space that they would need to start moving people into the exclusion zone.
Funny how after one of the worst environmental disasters, the nature that resides directly around it is healthier than nature around active civilization.
It was an almost sure thing to happen, yeah, but it sure shits on us by saying "you're worse than your own nuclear catastrophes"
I thought the main issue with chernobyl besides the hot stack of melted reactor was the radiactive dust that has settled inside the buildings and other places dust tends to accumulate
While this is technically true, there is a lengthy list of things I would much prefer over someone building another RBMK type reactor.
don't be fooled people, the sun is the biggest nuclear reactor in the solar system. tapping into it for power is just waiting for another disaster to happen
Why there though? Im sure theres areas in ukraine which are more accessible for maintainance and better guarded for vandalism.
Because its essentially just a big load of unused space. Not like you can put much else at Chernobyl and nobody with a brain is going to enter the zone just to vandalise a solar panel.
slavic gopniks don't need brains to vandalize shit for the sake of it
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.