
Chernobyl: Environmental dead zone or eco-haven? - raphar
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe/01/14/chernobyl.nature.radiation.debate/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_world
======
knowtheory
False Dichotomies: Pinnacle of the written form or brain killing mind poison?

------
onteria
For those interested, this PDF from the Institute of Plant Genetics and
Biotechnology Slovak Academy of Sciences mentioned in the article provides a
short exert on the process they used:

[http://pribina.savba.sk/ugbr/tl_files/download/COST%20FA603....](http://pribina.savba.sk/ugbr/tl_files/download/COST%20FA603.pdf)

The section in question is titled "Comparative proteomics of seed development
of soybean in Chernobyl area" and is located on page 41 of the PDF.

------
roc
> _"paradoxically become a unique sanctuary for biodiversity."_

Personally I see the apparent 'richness' of Chernobyl's nature as more of a
reflection on how humans are using the surrounding areas than how well nature
is truly doing inside the zone.

------
beefman
"over 40 different types of radioactivity were released after the accident"
LOL

~~~
burgerbrain
It likely means "over 40 different _radioactive isotopes_ were released". What
can you expect from CNN (or any other 'mainstream' news?

~~~
beefman
Yes indeedy. On an issue central to the future of energy policy, I feel I can
expect a bit more.

------
VladRussian
1.for animals, between two evils - humans or radioctivity - the radioctivity
seems to be a much lesser evil.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-UOHn9PvJ0>

2\. can't not to mention the "Roadside Picnic" (though written long before the
Chernobyl)

~~~
Groxx
1: Well yeah. Humans can be immediately seen to do harm (stimulus-response),
radiation can't unless it's at _phenomenally_ dangerous levels that the harm
can be detected immediately. And by then there's likely been enough damage to
kill the animal anyway. Animals (us included) aren't very good at connecting
hugely-delayed effects to their causes. _We_ get by with society and science.

------
srean
Question: when you think of a significant industrial disaster, or say the
worst industrial disaster does Bhopal come to your mind ?

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster>

Among the many tragedies of Bhopal one id that it has very little mind share.
Except for the affected of course.

Here is an anecdote that I learned from a friend of mine who is Bulgarian.
Fish markets there make it a point to tell you that their fish isn't fresh.
Their major water body is the Black sea and rivers have been driving Chernobyl
effluents into it. Fishes concentrate the poisons in their system. So fish,
unless it is imported, is considered unsafe.

Edit: Heard in 2004 and he was living in the US then.

~~~
vlado
As a Bulgarian living in Bulgaria I can say that what your friend has told you
about fishmarkets is not true. Maybe it has been at some point, but it must be
twenty years since.

------
bmalicoat
Can any normal tourist get inside of the area? What are the health risks of
spending an afternoon there (~3 hours)? Seems like a very unique place to
visit if possible and not too dangerous.

~~~
civilian
Here's a site with pictures from a motorcyclist who went through Chernobyl:
<http://www.kiddofspeed.com/chapter1.html>

~~~
bobds
Wasn't that a well-crafted hoax?

