thanks a lot - great pics :thumbsup

did you have to get a shower or something like that when you left?

You get rad-tested on the way out. In all the years of tours, only one person has ever been stopped for being over.

The radiation dose of taking the trip is quite low.

great pics, i learned a lot about chernoybly when i went out there a while back, horrible situation

little video to the helicopter that crashed into the reactor, as you mentioned

https://youtube.com/watch?v=aw-ik1U4Uvk

One of the coolest things of the trip that I remember was completely unrelated: I got to see a 'Woodpecker' of Chernobyl 2 [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Woodpecker ]
If you've played S.T.A.L.K.E.R - you've seen this ;)

http://pix.fine.kiev.ua/egor/pic/00024fgh

:thumbsup gotta watch that

amazing photos quantum-x. do you have a website or anything showcasing your excursions? you remind me of this guy a bit: http://www.opacity.us/

poorly updated, http://pxt.in :)

Awesome thread! It remembered Resident Evil city...

amazing pictures :thumbsup

i think people like John McCain and those who push for nuclear reactors all over the US must have never heard of Chernobyl.

I think nuclear is a viable option. The main risk is dealing w/ the waste, but there are advances in this field - even last week it was demonstrated that special kilns can vaporise waste by up to 99% - leaving a much more manageable problem.

There were many, many issues with Chernobyl- a very faulty system design, an idiot at the helm who was personally responsible for creating the initial explosion, etc.
Not to say it could never happen again, but considering that to be the only major blight in the history of nuclear generation, it's something.

The problem with 'greener' alternatives, such as wind, solar, etc - apart from efficiency, is that they take huge amounts of fossil fuels and 'dirty' power sources to manufacture. There's no magic bullet.

Even geothermal heating, and wave based generations have inherent problems with efficiency. Geothermal: if everyone taps in, and don't put back what they pull out, it's ruined - and not viable in an urban construct. Wave is limited to the amount that can be pulled out, and there are environmental considerations.

Considering that the emissions of a nuclear plant are steam, I'd say that's a fairly decent trade off. A vast portion of europe runs on nuclear.

MaDalton when you go visit, bring me back a cute CCCP shirt, thank you

you have some cool photos

That's why you guys are smarter than we are in the U.S. While we haven't built a new reactor in decades...you guys have been on the cutting edge of technology with it.

And there ARE plenty of nuclear reactors in the U.S. already. But they are all old and need to be replaced in my opinion. When I lived in Ft. Pierce, Fla. in the early 1980's there was a nuclear power plant nearby. And I just moved from S.C. where there was also a nuclear power plant close by.

So yeah, they are here and have been for a long time. But we've fallen behind the rest of the world.

Doesn't France get the majority of their electricity from nuclear?

I believe so..

Germany will switch off all nuclear power plants until 2025 i think. which i consider a good thing on one hand but pretty pointless on the other since they are among the most safe and the country is surrounded by countries that will remain to have nuclear plants. i would prefer everyone switches them off since man has always proven that nature cannot be dominated. but i don't see that in my lifetime. i wished, they would invest the money they need to spend on disposing nuclear waste in researching alternative energy though.

holy shit, crazy pics

But that's the thing. It's easy to say: Hey man, they should switch of nuclear power plants!

Where is the power going to come from?
Solar: It's too inefficient at present. Won't work in the Northern Hemisphere w/ winters.
Wind: Sure, but that takes a lot of space, is noisy, can't provide for the entire country, and requires vast amounts of fossil fuels to manufacture.
Tidal? GeoThermal? See above.

Are *you* going to be the person who steps up and reduces their power consumption by half? Are *you* going to be the person who changes to solar?

Everyone is an idealist until they realise they have to make lifestyle changes.

I am absolutely for alternative energy, but one has to recognise that it requires active participation.

Nuclear seems to be a pretty viable option. It takes one huge problem out: C02 and greenhouse gas [and other chemical emissions] - it can provide vast quantities of power.
There's obviously an issue with waste, but with breakthroughs such as http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.../01/30/1415200
that's pretty exciting. Still - uranium is a finite resource. Until we work out how to move off those completely, I think it's a step in the right direction.

BTW, I'm not totally hypocritical - I lived 100% on solar power, 100% off the grid for 5 or 6 years.

sure

you want me to visit any relatives while i'm there? does your aunt still want to make some extra money? :pimp

No
My Aunt does not take German monies since the War
You don't have enough ruble in the bank of Germany to afford my Aunt
Uncle Nikolai does not take well to mans who come to their home from GFY who wear tights & watch cartoon porn....

She is a doll. Bought me a coffee when I came to visit her. As I said, she is a doll :2 cents:

You can not stay in the city for more than a few minutes at a time.. I saw a thing on discovery about it. The guy and the crew went to the plant can could spend exactly 1 min there before the levels of radiation would begin to effect them.

If you notice in some of the photos she is holding a rad meter in one it shows a .708 I believe that anything over a .010 can be deadly to people and animals with any prolonged exposure.


For sure a place I would LOVE to see, but wont for fear of what could happen.