

Chernobyl survivor's message for Japan: Run - entangld
http://www.aolnews.com/2011/03/22/chernobyl-cleanup-survivors-message-for-japan-run-away-as-qui/

======
potatolicious
My first reaction was "but there's no way Fukushima even gets close to
Chernobyl", but then I realized I sound like a nuclear apologist. So I looked
up the most recent news about the plant.

The evacuation zone only covers 20km - and the IAEA just recorded levels of
161 uSv/h in a town that far away. That's 1410 mSv/y, compared to 2.4 mSv/y
normal from background radiation. These are levels high enough to cause health
effects, and one has to wonder why the government has not extended the
evacuation radius if there's proof that health-affecting levels of radiation
has gotten that far into the general environment. It seems like the US NRC's
recommendations are wiser than the Japanese government's. That's a disturbing
thought.

I really wonder how history will look back upon this - a well-executed
response to a unforeseen disaster in the most difficult of circumstances, or
an example of governmental coverup exposing civilians to unnecessary danger?

~~~
listrophy
I'm guessing 161 uSv/h is a local maximum, and that over the course of the
upcoming year, that number is expected to dramatically fall. I suggest
multiplying 161 uSv/h by 24h to see the daily effect: 3.86 mSv/day. That's not
too bad, as long as it starts dropping.

~~~
potatolicious
No doubt the 161 uSv/h figure will drop as the plant becomes more contained,
and it's unlikely sticking around for a full year will net you the full 1400
mSv. That being said, right now we're looking at 3.86 mSv/d, which in and of
itself is not a number to scoff at, and is _well_ above dose limits,
conservative as they are. This is considerably different than when people were
panicking over 50 uSv/d.

When you are in an area that exceeds the _yearly_ dose limit in a single day,
it seems like evacuation is prudent. The fact that the government hasn't
widened the evacuation area despite rising ambient radiation is concerning.

~~~
hallmark
The radiation levels are getting a lot of public scrutiny - because _the
information is public_. I don't see how this compares to a Chernobyl-style
government coverup.

~~~
potatolicious
The numbers are IAEA numbers - not released by TEPCO or the Japanese
government. Certainly this isn't on the order of a Soviet-era coverup, but
from the appearance right now information is as open as it perhaps ought to
be, and preventative/remedial action not as aggressive as might be justified.

It's hard to say in this giant void of information, which is why I wonder how
this will be viewed in time.

------
hallmark
Being a victim does not make you an expert.[1]

It gives you a different perspective, an emotional perspective. There are
surely lessons and warnings to be learned through such anecdotes and
experiences. But the heightened emotions accompanying a victim's portrayal of
an event should give them no more credentials than any other informed,
researched perspective.

All that said, I have severe sympathy for Natalia and all the other victims
and sufferers of Chernobyl and Fukushima.

[1] Being victimized can motivate one to _become_ an expert on a topic by way
of thorough research after the fact.

~~~
varjag
I think an important lesson here is that none of those people are in official
death toll of the incident. They died long enough after the incident to not be
considered radiaton-induced deaths by WHO standard. Yet the fact that only one
of the crew lived to their 50s certainly poses some statistical significance,
one that authorities are inclined to overlook.

Think about it next time you read that Chernobyl had only 40 victims and
that's it.

~~~
hallmark
Nothing I said implied that there weren't a large number of people affected by
the Chernobyl disaster. You are making valid points regarding efforts to
lowball the count, but it also seems as if you misunderstood my previous
comment.

To be clear, many people were afflicted by radiation poisoning long after the
event.

I'm sensitive to the situation in Japan, both in terms of the human tragedy
and the FUD, so I think I'll leave it at that.

------
phlux
I have been watching documentaries recently of the Chernobyl cleanup - it is
stunning. The bravery of the soldiers(or ignorance) is amazing.

The fact that they were called "Liquidators" and "BioRobots" is very
interesting.

It is also interesting that they say they evacuated 100K residents then used
_800K_ liquidators is crazy.

If you haven't seen footage of the accident - check it out. When they first
drilled into the reactor, they were stunned to find that it was empty. The
rods had melted entirely and poured through the bottom of the reactor and
fused with sand to make a massive graphite-fuel-rod-glass blob that was
extremely radioactive.

They got close enough to it to film it.

~~~
varjag
"Biorobot" was mostly an inside joke. "Liquidator" however was, and is, an
official term in former USSR, there are no derogatory connotations with it.

~~~
kemiller
"Robot" is already derived from the russian word for work. Is that connected
or no?

~~~
Detrus
Biorobot refers to the people who cleaned up the reactor roof with shovels
after a remote controlled shoveling car, a "robot" had its electronics fried
from the radiation. The pun is robots are expendable, so are biorobots. It's
not related to the work word origin.

The biorobots wore handmade suits of lead armor, so they were covered in
metal, like robots. I'm getting it from here
[http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5384001427276447319...](http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5384001427276447319#)

Even if you speak Russian it's hard to decipher their puns. "Liquidator" is an
official term, but also has connotations. Not sure, but I remember it's
associated with death squads.

