It's been 25 years since the worst nuclear disaster in history occurred at Chernobyl's Reactor 4 in the Ukraine took the lives of more than 40 who worked at the plant and emergency responders and affected the lives of millions living downwind and in the zone of exclusion set up around the stricken plant.
The explosion, caused by human error combined with poor design, killed several workers instantly. The RBMK reactor design had a fatal flaw when operating at low power, and when workers were conducting a test, they entered that low power state without necessary backups in place and output spikes became uncontrollable and ultimately led to the destructive explosion of the core. Without the kind of containment in place for reactors common around the rest of the world, the core ruptured the reactor building and exposed the surrounding region to heavy doses of radiation and radioactive debris was flung into the air.
It further killed several dozen of the firefighters and liquidators who came in to put out the fire and to seal up the exposed reactor with a concrete sarcophagus:
The health consequences for those liquidators is still up in the air, and health experts debate just how many more deaths can be linked to the disaster in the affected population downwind of the reactor.
Efforts to build a new containment structure have been hamstrung by a lack of funds, and the most recent effort came up nearly $200 short for the expected $1 billion project.
Ultimately, the disaster may have helped spark the breakup of the Soviet Union and exposed just how bad the country's infrastructure and technological prowess truly was.
Showing posts with label Ukraine. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ukraine. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Ukraine Falls Short In Fundraising Effort To Build New Containment System for Chernobyl
The existing containment sarcophagus that surrounded the badly damaged Chernobyl reactor needs to be replaced and the proposed new containment structure is likely to cost more than $1 billion and foreign donors are needed to get this critical structure built.
Despite the critical need, the effort came up short. Only $790 million was raised. With the world's attention focused on the ongoing Japanese nuclear emergency at Fukushima and the crises compared to each other, it's worth remembering just how deadly and dangerous Chernobyl was and that a containment structure is critical to managing future risk from radioactive contamination.
The original Chernobyl sarcophagus was built hastily and water leaks in, posing an ongoing threat to the water table. Equipment is in place to collect and treat the radioactive water, but earthquakes can cause further damage and highly radioactive materials within the sarcophagus could shift or collapse, causing further releases of radioactive particles into the environment. The new containment structure would not only protect the existing sarcophagus, but allow crews the ability to better stabilize and fortify the structures.
Despite the critical need, the effort came up short. Only $790 million was raised. With the world's attention focused on the ongoing Japanese nuclear emergency at Fukushima and the crises compared to each other, it's worth remembering just how deadly and dangerous Chernobyl was and that a containment structure is critical to managing future risk from radioactive contamination.
The original Chernobyl sarcophagus was built hastily and water leaks in, posing an ongoing threat to the water table. Equipment is in place to collect and treat the radioactive water, but earthquakes can cause further damage and highly radioactive materials within the sarcophagus could shift or collapse, causing further releases of radioactive particles into the environment. The new containment structure would not only protect the existing sarcophagus, but allow crews the ability to better stabilize and fortify the structures.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Russia Continues Georgia Invasion Despite Cease Fire
President Bush has announced that the US will send humanitarian aid to Georgia aboard C-17 transport aircraft. Those transport aircraft aren't going to go in alone, as they will likely have fighter escorts and AWACS planes monitoring the Russians at every step.
There are good reasons why the US will not engage in a direct confrontation with the Russians - to avoid a war that could potentially set the whole world ablaze. The US continues to adhere to the same military doctrine from the Cold War that enabled the world to avoid a nuclear conflagration - avoid direct military conflict between Russian (Soviet) and US forces at all costs. Proxy wars are okay, but keep them from getting into direct entanglements.
That's why you're not going to see the US get into a direct war with the Russians. The stakes are simply astronomical should that come to pass.
The US has limited options, but let's be clear here - no matter how much the US provided military training and equipment to the Georgians, the Russians could overwhelm them with sheer numbers, which is exactly what they've done to this point.
This isn't like the US taking on the Russians directly. The Russians exploited the situation in South Ossetia to expand their power at the expense of one of our allies. It hits our prestige and influence in the region, but there are ways to restore the situation and to make Russia think twice.
One - grant membership to the Ukraine. Ukraine tells Russia to pound sand and vacate their base in Sevastopol. It would make the Russians think twice since they'd lose a key Black Sea port, and expose their flank.
Two - grant membership to Georgia. Use that as a means to demand Russia's exit and return status quo ante or else face NATO firepower.
It ups the stakes, but does so in a way that gives Russia an out before shooting starts between NATO/US forces and the Russians. Russia doesn't think much of NATO or Europe and probably think they will not lift a finger to help Georgia. Disabusing them of that thinking is crucial to regional stability of the sort that provides fertile ground for democracies. Russia doesn't like democracies on its borders since they're far more likely to look westward than towards Russia.
The moral relativists and leftists are quick to condemn the US role in this, but excuse the Russians. Funny how that happens (especially when the moral relativists are leftists).
Meanwhile, the Georgians continue to suffer at the hands of the Russians as villages are burned. Cease fire? What cease fire? Russian troops push deeper into Georgia, and appear more than willing and capable of cutting the country in half. If they're looking to engage in a ceasefire, then advancing away from South Ossetia is the wrong direction - they're pushing deeper into Georgia.
Once again, the facts show that Russia had every intention of causing a conflict to erupt in Georgia and use it as a pretext to eliminating a nascent democracy along its borders. You cannot prepare a military action such as the one currently undertaken by the Russians without significant preparations and planning. These moves were decided long ago by Putin and the Russian government.
The BBC plays winners and losers, even though the fighting isn't over, and the situation is still far from decided. However, I would tend to agree that the truth and facts are a loser in all this. The Russians have played the ethnic cleansing and genocide card from the earliest moments of the fighting, but they have steadfastly refused to allow anyone access to the region to see what they've done (or found). The BBC also claims that the Georgians fired indiscriminately on South Ossetia with rockets, which is plausible, but again, who fired first - the South Ossetians who provoked the Georgian response.
That BBC article also posits a few additional possibilities for how the West can thwart or undermine Russian objectives, including telling the Russians they lost their shot at joining the WTO or kick them out of the G-8.
UPDATE:
The first C-17s have landed in Tbilisi, the Georgian capital, and there are now reports that the Russians are only minutes away from entering the city. Things could get very hot very quickly. I suspect that the Russians are moving quickly to establish a hold on the city before the US humanitarian aid can get going - since the aid comes in the form of US peacekeepers.
Or, will the Russians claim that the US aren't peacekeepers but a military operation to support their Georgian allies? That's what you can expect, but that is precisely what the Russians have done throughout this whole sorry episode.
There are good reasons why the US will not engage in a direct confrontation with the Russians - to avoid a war that could potentially set the whole world ablaze. The US continues to adhere to the same military doctrine from the Cold War that enabled the world to avoid a nuclear conflagration - avoid direct military conflict between Russian (Soviet) and US forces at all costs. Proxy wars are okay, but keep them from getting into direct entanglements.
That's why you're not going to see the US get into a direct war with the Russians. The stakes are simply astronomical should that come to pass.
The US has limited options, but let's be clear here - no matter how much the US provided military training and equipment to the Georgians, the Russians could overwhelm them with sheer numbers, which is exactly what they've done to this point.
This isn't like the US taking on the Russians directly. The Russians exploited the situation in South Ossetia to expand their power at the expense of one of our allies. It hits our prestige and influence in the region, but there are ways to restore the situation and to make Russia think twice.
One - grant membership to the Ukraine. Ukraine tells Russia to pound sand and vacate their base in Sevastopol. It would make the Russians think twice since they'd lose a key Black Sea port, and expose their flank.
Two - grant membership to Georgia. Use that as a means to demand Russia's exit and return status quo ante or else face NATO firepower.
It ups the stakes, but does so in a way that gives Russia an out before shooting starts between NATO/US forces and the Russians. Russia doesn't think much of NATO or Europe and probably think they will not lift a finger to help Georgia. Disabusing them of that thinking is crucial to regional stability of the sort that provides fertile ground for democracies. Russia doesn't like democracies on its borders since they're far more likely to look westward than towards Russia.
The moral relativists and leftists are quick to condemn the US role in this, but excuse the Russians. Funny how that happens (especially when the moral relativists are leftists).
Meanwhile, the Georgians continue to suffer at the hands of the Russians as villages are burned. Cease fire? What cease fire? Russian troops push deeper into Georgia, and appear more than willing and capable of cutting the country in half. If they're looking to engage in a ceasefire, then advancing away from South Ossetia is the wrong direction - they're pushing deeper into Georgia.
Once again, the facts show that Russia had every intention of causing a conflict to erupt in Georgia and use it as a pretext to eliminating a nascent democracy along its borders. You cannot prepare a military action such as the one currently undertaken by the Russians without significant preparations and planning. These moves were decided long ago by Putin and the Russian government.
The BBC plays winners and losers, even though the fighting isn't over, and the situation is still far from decided. However, I would tend to agree that the truth and facts are a loser in all this. The Russians have played the ethnic cleansing and genocide card from the earliest moments of the fighting, but they have steadfastly refused to allow anyone access to the region to see what they've done (or found). The BBC also claims that the Georgians fired indiscriminately on South Ossetia with rockets, which is plausible, but again, who fired first - the South Ossetians who provoked the Georgian response.
That BBC article also posits a few additional possibilities for how the West can thwart or undermine Russian objectives, including telling the Russians they lost their shot at joining the WTO or kick them out of the G-8.
UPDATE:
The first C-17s have landed in Tbilisi, the Georgian capital, and there are now reports that the Russians are only minutes away from entering the city. Things could get very hot very quickly. I suspect that the Russians are moving quickly to establish a hold on the city before the US humanitarian aid can get going - since the aid comes in the form of US peacekeepers.
Or, will the Russians claim that the US aren't peacekeepers but a military operation to support their Georgian allies? That's what you can expect, but that is precisely what the Russians have done throughout this whole sorry episode.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)