Man films his own death: Chernobyl disaster, the first days of clean up inside

Status
Not open for further replies.
#1
:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkjAAzkrXSA

This film shows the terrifying images captured by the Russian filmmaker Vladimir Shevchenko on scene at Chernobyl those dreadful days in April 1986. Shevchenko later died suffering from the radiation he exposed himself to. Sadly, his name is not among the official casualties of the accident.


Just 40 minutes of staying on the roof and human body begin fall to pieces
Filming on the roof. Chevechenko got his lethal dose of radiation
Really haunting footage in color of the first days of Chernobyl disaster. Young soldiers with mere paper-masks ordered to participate in the doomed clean up work. Miners working without protection under the reactor, trying to isolate it. Workers on the Chernobyl roof scoping radioactive graphite under conditions millions times the normal level of roentgen.


We arrived there at 10 or 15 minutes to two in the morning ... We saw graphite scattered about. Misha asked: "What is graphite?" I kicked it away. But one of the fighters on the other truck picked it up. "It's hot," he said. The pieces of graphite were of different sizes, some big, some small enough to pick up ...
We didn't know much about radiation. Even those who worked there had no idea. There was no water left in the trucks. Misha filled the cistern and we aimed the water at the top. Then those boys who died went up to the roof—Vashchik Kolya and others, and Volodya Pravik ... They went up the ladder ... and I never saw them again.[38]
From eyewitness accounts of the firefighters involved before they died (as reported on the CBC television series Witness), one described his experience of the radiation as "tasting like metal," and feeling a sensation similar to that of pins and needles all over his face. (This is similar to the description given by Louis Slotin, a Manhattan Project physicist who died days after a fatal radiation overdose from a criticality accident.)[41]
The radiation levels in the worst-hit areas of the reactor building have been estimated to be 5.6 roentgens per second (R/s) (1.4 milliamperes per kilogram), which is equivalent to more than 20,000 roentgens per hour. A lethal dose is around 500 roentgens (0.13 coulombs per kilogram) over 5 hours, so in some areas, unprotected workers received fatal doses within several minutes.
 
#6
Dreams-Visions said:
Let nuclear war never touch this world.
I so hope that this never happens again indeed. This is some of the sickest stuff I ever watched.

God I don't think any of us is really prepared for a nuclear war or fallout.
 

TheSeks

Blinded by the luminous glory that is David Bowie's physical manifestation.
#7
quadriplegicjon said:
wow. if his cameras were buried due to the radiation that they accumulated, how did they get this film?
Better question is: Wouldn't the radiation have killed the film?
 
#10
The entire setting around Chernobyl is incredibly interesting; From the site itself to the people who still live there to this day. Would love to go there.
 
#12
Chinner said:
The entire setting around Chernobyl is incredibly interesting; From the site itself to the people who still live there to this day. Would love to go there.
Agreed. Chernobyl stuff is just fascinating.

There's a pretty great documentary clip about an elderly couple living very close to the site, growing food, etc. The host even tries irradiated fruit at one point, even though his producer warns him not to.

Another great thing to look up is the "Motorcycle Girl" photos. Girl gets pass to go into Chernobyl with a camera, and the results are amazing.
 
#13
Weren't alot of the deaths reclassified or something because the Soviet Union didn't want to reveal the true number of casualties due to radiation poisoning?
 

TheSeks

Blinded by the luminous glory that is David Bowie's physical manifestation.
#14
MMaRsu said:
Obviously not how else would you be looking at it?
Well, duh. But camera film generally goes bad due to even X-ray levels of radiation, this is beyond that. How did the film survive is the question.
 
#15
TheSeks said:
Well, duh. But camera film generally goes bad due to even X-ray levels of radiation, this is beyond that. How did the film survive is the question.
Might've encased them in lead (best guess) knowing that they were going into a heavily irradiated zone. Don't some cameras have shielding in the chassis for this exact reason?
 
#16
TheSeks said:
Well, duh. But camera film generally goes bad due to even X-ray levels of radiation, this is beyond that. How did the film survive is the question.
his camera case must have been made of lead.

edit: but then again, the film makes the point they didn't really understand radiation so maybe this wasn't and intentional thing?
 
#18
The film says he was carrying 30 kg of lead so maybe it was protected. It also says they were aware of the rotegens they just didn't consider it a lethal dose even tho it was milllion times more than normal
 
#20
At this point I'd just stick a big tube into the sarcophagus and pour molten lead into it.

It's a HUGE sign to mankind of why we need to find new energies.
 

speedpop

Has problems recognising girls
#22
Wow. That's all I can really say.

Dresden said:
nucular is safe.
It certainly is, compared to something like coal. It's simply the method of using uranium that fucks us over. However the safety measures cannot compare to using solar or wind power.
 

subversus

I've done nothing with my life except eat and fap
#25
Messypandas said:
Nuclear is clean and safe. Soviet Union just cut loads of corners building there power stations
No, the station was safe. Human factor. Read the timeline of events.
 
#31
Eteric Rice said:
At this point I'd just stick a big tube into the sarcophagus and pour molten lead into it.

It's a HUGE sign to mankind of why we need to find new energies.
If it weren't for hippies deceiving people into fearing nuclear power, we could have avoided a lot of the issues we have today. (same with DDT)
 

Drkirby

Corporate Apologist
#32
Dresden said:
nucular is safe.
Yeah, modern day reactors are supposed to be much safer then what we are currently running (a ton of 30-50 year old reactors), which them selfs are already much safer then the Chernobyl reactor. What is supposed to happen is the radioactive rods should just melt during a malfunction, like what happened at Three Mile Island, not cause the entire plant to explode.

Disposal of the waste can be some issue, but they did build Yucca Mountain for a Reason (They spent Billions on it, they better use the damn thing and not turn it into some bomb shelter), and with a little bit of luck we will eventually find a way to make the waste not radioactive.

I for one support turning the Nevada Dessert into a big range of Nuclear Reactors, not much else you can do with all that desert land, and you would also be quiet close to Yucca Mountain for disposal.
 
#35
Messypandas said:
Weren't alot of the deaths reclassified or something because the Soviet Union didn't want to reveal the true number of casualties due to radiation poisoning?
Having family and being born in Ukraine myself, I've heard alot of stories. There are rumors that the deaths attributed in some way to the Chernobyl disaster are in the thousands. Family members have told me that they actually heard the warnings and reports from the BBC and not Russian authorities. I also had an aunt(mom's sister, passed away in '07) who's husband was a firefighter in Kiev and was sent in to help.
 
#36
LaserBuddha said:
If it weren't for hippies deceiving people into fearing nuclear power, we could have avoided a lot of the issues we have today. (same with DDT)
That's actually a ridiculously stupid statement.

//edit

Holy shit, I didn't even notice your DDT comment. Super-ridiculous. Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with the concept of Biomagnification. Rachael Carson. Such a hippie. Same with those UC Irvine researchers who discovered the dangers of CFCs. How dare they care?!
 
#37
Chernobyl equals about 10 Hiroshima bombs in radiation depending on who you ask. Over 400 above ground nuclear bombs were set off through out the years a 100 or so miles north of Las Vegas. Although those explosions only lasted a moment, the core of reactor will be deadly for generations.



Here it is folks, the Elephants Foot. Sand and fuel glass.

 
#39
ethic said:
That's actually a ridiculously stupid statement.

//edit

Holy shit, I didn't even notice your DDT comment. Super-ridiculous. Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with the concept of Biomagnification. Rachael Carson. Such a hippie. Same with those UC Irvine researchers who discovered the dangers of CFCs. How dare they care?!




































 
#40
subversus said:
No, the station was safe. Human factor. Read the timeline of events.
A safe nuclear facility does not allow humans to make unsafe decisions.

And Chernobyl isn't fucked for 20,000 more years. It's already safe enough to visit. In a few more decades it'll be fine. Plenty of plants and animals are already thriving there. They've got a few problems, but nothing that's hindering their populations as a whole.

Nuclear is still safer and cleaner than coal, wind, solar, natural gas, etc.
 
#41
subversus said:
No, the station was safe. Human factor. Read the timeline of events.
Oh my god, no it was not safe. The project engineers that worked on Chernobyl had zero to little experience working with nuclear plants. Most of them were former coal plant engineers.
 
#42
Mudkips said:
And Chernobyl isn't fucked for 20,000 more years. It's already safe enough to visit. In a few more decades it'll be fine. Plenty of plants and animals are already thriving there. They've got a few problems, but nothing that's hindering their populations as a whole.

The reactor real estate itself, fucked for 20,000 years.
 

Orin GA

I wish I could hat you to death
#44
I remember watching a special about this on Discovery. I think they said the computers were designed with a failsafe incase this happened but the people who worked there manually overide it. Its was a few years back so im not sure.
 
#46
MetalAlien said:
Chernobyl equals about 10 Hiroshima bombs in radiation depending on who you ask.
Chernobyl and Hiroshima were VERY different. I'm not sure how you could compare them like that.

Hiroshima detonated at a high enough altitude that most of the leftover radioactive materials were sucked into the upper atmosphere and dispersed around the world. There was little radioactive material left behind in Hiroshima, so the danger was really just the burst of radiation from the detonation of the bomb.

In Chernobyl's case, the real problem was all the radioactive materials spread around the local landscape.
 
#48
Messypandas said:
Weren't alot of the deaths reclassified or something because the Soviet Union didn't want to reveal the true number of casualties due to radiation poisoning?
Worse than the accident itself, was the way the Soviet Union dealt with it. They were completely unprepared for what was to come. And, if most of the documentaries and texts I've read are real, the higher-ups seemed to be more worried about taking their asses out of the line and pointing fingers, "fix the problem, no matter what".

If I remember correctly one of the robots used to inspect the core coudn't be retrieved since the radiation fried and busted it. Even the most protected workers would receive letal doses after mere seconds.

And as Drkirby and others said, the stupid tree-hugging fear-mongering won over scientific and technical facts.

MNC said:
This thread piqued my interest and I went on to look for more things Chernobyl

http://todayspictures.slate.com/inmotion/essay_chernobyl/

It depressed me quite a bit; though I recommend going through it in full. It's a slideshow with commentary about chernobyl and its consequences.
:.(
 
#49
FlightOfHeaven said:
Oh god, those photographs.

Nooooo
the crippled kids living on the floor will fuck with me for the foreseeable future.

I've been reading about Chernobyl since my first post in here and trying to understand a lot of the jargon. Interesting case that seems to have been simply a combination of unlikely circumstances (the delayed shutdown causing an unexpected shift to have to handle it), ignorance (lack of appropriate oversight and lack of training), and technical problems with the reactor design (including the graphite tips on the control rods and the poor handling of steam-formation). And of course, the removal of various layers of safety protocol.

Then the issue of the Soviet Union trying to keep it quiet, allowing thousands...and maybe hundreds of thousands to become exposed to extraordinarily high volumes of radiation. Some of the results of the chromosome mutation won't be seen for generations yet to come.

Saddest thing I've read is that many of the leukemia-stricken children could be saved with bone marrow transplants but their parents can't afford them because they're only making about $30/month. So they take out ads in the local paper. These ads are an ever-present reminder.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.