Why are you saying no? This seems naive and overly optimistic. Explosions at nuclear plants in that area could absolutely spread across Europe unless Russia is extremely careful, and probably even then.
If the Russians cause a meltdown, it will almost certainly be more like Three Mile Island than Chernobyl. i.e. the radioactive mess will be completely contained inside the giant lead impregnated concrete box that surrounds the giant steel pressure chamber that contains the reactor.
That was the lesson of Chernobyl, build a giant ass containment system to soak up an internal explosion. This is why the plant has survived being shelled by the Russian multiple times.
So no, there won't be a giant cloud of radioactive material. There's a containment vessel to keep it all inside, and more importantly, reactors are designed to not explode anymore. Turns out you can design them to just melt instead.
It's still going to be a bitch to clean up, but unless the Russians specifically plant bombs in and around the containment vessel, and then trigger those bombs after a melt down is in progress, the plant will likely contain all radioactive material.
The worst effects on the region as a whole will be the loss of power, and a site that cannot be used to rebuild a plant without tearing the entire thing to the ground and starting over, with added clean up needed at every step of the process.
Depends on how it's done. If they do it the dirty bomb way and winds are unfavorable, sure it could happen, but they'd have to basically set off their own nuke in the plant to make a cloud that would significantly affect anyone outside Ukraine. If they just let it melt down, probably not but it'll wreck the plant and the area immediately nearby.
Still, couldn't hurt to pick up a pack or two of iodine tablets just in case.
Yes and no. Yes, it could release radioactive particles across western Europe. No, it wouldn't just affect Europe - it would likely also spread fairly quickly around the world depending on the damage and atmospheric conditions.
That's part why them fucking about at Chernobyl was highly concerning.
Nature and soil in that area have absorbed much of the damaging materials, if Russia were to set fire to the forests there, all that would be released and spread across a wide area.
The one thing holding them back is that depending on the wind, this fallout can just as easily contaminate Russia as it can the rest of Europe.
Same with this instance, especially since the nuclear plant is also close to Russia. They may try to disable it to sabotage the electricity, but damaging it in a way that creates fallout will pose as much a risk to their own land as it does to Europe.
And then you realize that Russia doesn't give a shit about its own people or apparently any territory outside Moscow and Saint Petersburg.
And you realize those considerations are rational and Russia and its leadership can't be considered a rational actor at any point anymore.
You can donate directly to Ukraine through the governments preferred channels here, or here if you'd like some choice in what your money buys (active campaigns change with time).
Well based off the draft resolution passed by the senate a few days ago, a nuclear accident that sends nuclear clouds into a NATO countries airspace would trigger article 5.
So you’re right, it would definitely open that door.
Fallout on NATO territory would likely be considered article 5 worthy. At least that's what I keep reading. Pentagon officials, members of Commons Defense Committee in the UK, ...
Although, I suspect we'll escalate with air power. No fly zone and/or air strikes.
Of course, if that happens, all bets are off and it's likely it all cascades out of control.
A modern nuclear plant is not a bomb, and cannot be made into a bomb without a lot of work.
Just laying down mines and structural charges might not actually be enough to spread radioactive material outside the plant. See, modern nuclear plants are designed in such a way that they can survive a direct strike from a small missile without breaking containment. The reactor itself will be inside a giant steel tank, which is surrounded by a 3-meter thick, lead impregnated concrete wall.
What it will do is render the plant inoperable, meaning that there will be no power, and there will be a long, expensive cleanup of the plant itself.
There's a lot of sensitive shit that can easily be broken. Turbines, cooling lines, that reactor casing itself, the inside of the reactor if anyone is brave or stupid enough to put a bomb there, and all sorts of other places that would render the building into a scrap heap.
As a note, a bomb inside the reactor itself would be bad, but not necessarily "cause a meltdown" bad, not unless the people planting the bomb knew exactly how to set things up.
That said, trashing the inside of the reactor would make things incredibly difficult to recover from. Like, do a full cleanup, tear the plant down to the ground and rebuild it from there. (because of that steel pressure chamber and massive concrete block).
Anyway, the tldr; this is bad, but not regionally bad unless you live in the region and get electricity from this plant. It will also suck balls to clean up.
I'm aware it's not a bomb. I was in the radiation affected area in Japan when the power plant melted down. It doesn't need to be a bomb to release radiation.
Yea, isn't a nuclear power plant fucked, when they destroy the means to cool it down? I just think there are a lot of ways to fuck with a power plant. pls correct me if I'm wrong :)
Don't perpetuate the fear-mongering bullshit. Educate yourself. There is no reason to fear nuclear power. The entire world should be running on nuclear power right now.
No, there are a lot of ways to fuck shit up, but the main point of how these things are built is to make sure that the radiation stays inside.
A modern plant can have a full meltdown and not release anything outside the plant.
Three Mile Island comes to mind. It was a full melt down of one of the reactors (there were several reactors in the plant) and no radiation escaped the building.
The absolute worst case here would take actual knowledge of the plant's systems to bomb things at the right times in the right order to create a half-assed dirty bomb.
The more likely is another Three Mile Island style meltdown, but with added radiation hazards inside the plant itself.
Apparently Zaporizhzhia's different and safer than Chernobyl, but the IAEA have reportedly warned of the potential for a catastrophic nuclear disaster. Fallout across Europe.
I don't think any of us are experts in soviet era nuclear power plants, but given Russia almost certainly blew up Kakhovka dam, I don't think you need to be an expert on Russia to know what they're capable of.
Add comment